4 ms·
Regardless of the outcome, we will still need to train with and use these weapons so long as adversaries are willing to do so. Otherwise we will simply lose. U
by quantified 1y ago
Regardless of the outcome, we will still need to train with and use these weapons so long as adversaries are willing to do so. Otherwise we will simply lose.
Unless new tech like drones obviate them, analogous to how guns made armor obsolete.
- sokoloff 1y agoAbsolutely the armed forces need to train with and use these. The intent of the study is (presumably) to figure out how to train more safely by understanding the impact, choosing smart limits, and educating leaders and medics as to the symptoms to look out for.
- t-3 1y agoFor certain values of "we". For nuclear-armed states the threat of invasion is 0 and there's no danger of losing anything more substantial than face and whatever they've invested in foreign adventures.
- quantified 1y agoIsrael is nuclear-armed. They seem pretty concerned about invasion. Nukes are a very large hammer and your toe might be too close for comfort. The US is more expeditionary, anyway. So long as Mexico is kept weak and Canada friendly, invasion isn't a worry. But we have allies and friends all over the place.
- conception 1y agoWho are they concerned about invading them?
- quantified 1y agoBesides Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt? I'm not Jewish, but they seem to be concerned about their existence.
- t-3 1y agoIsrael has currently invaded both Syria and Lebanon, they are obviously not very afraid of them.
- protonbob 1y agoMost soldiers wear ceramic armor. But I know that’s not what you many.
- quantified 1y agoNow they do, certainly. I should have mentioned that it has taken hundreds of years to create effective armor for the more common calibers.
- zug_zug 1y agoWell obviously if it's harmful for people they'll find way to reduce the intensity of the shockwaves. Compared to inventing the LCD that's child's play.