Technology vs grunts (13 Nov, 2017)

Have your say on today's Aardvark Daily column

Technology vs grunts (13 Nov, 2017)

Postby aardvark_admin » Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:30 am

This column is archived at:

Is the more clinical and sanitised "hi-tech" wars that countries like the USA fight today really a better thing than the bloody low-tech wars of the 20th century?

Could a lack of empathy and a detachment from the actual killing process bring about a dangerous mindset within first-world nations?

And does all this hi-techery actually become a massive vulnerability when rogue nations develop nuclear capabilities with the potential to deliver powerful EMPs to strategic locations and then put huge numbers of boots on the ground so as to become an overwhelming force of old-school power?

You tell me.
Site Admin
Posts: 3241
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Technology vs grunts (13 Nov, 2017)

Postby goosemoose » Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:35 am

The ultimate weapon against the US is a dodgy looking brownish bloke. They're terrified of them.
Posts: 556
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 1:05 pm

Re: Technology vs grunts (13 Nov, 2017)

Postby Muz » Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:39 am

We just had war games in our wee town of Havelock. One thing that we discovered is that Malaysians are terrified of dogs (no matter how small). It was hilarious watching battle hardened soldiers fleeing before a tiny fox terrier.
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:15 am

Re: Technology vs grunts (13 Nov, 2017)

Postby Muz » Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:42 am

When the enemy outguns you with superior technology, the only way to fight them is to infiltrate their cities and blow up the local population.
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:15 am

Re: Technology vs grunts (13 Nov, 2017)

Postby roygbiv » Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:22 am

When actioned, it is definitely a bad thing, the mutually assured destruction of a nuclear war created a peace of sorts - the cold war. The use of technology to replace grunts on the ground will have the same effect as the use of technology of WW1. The needless slaughter of thousands of soldiers by industrialising warfare. Winning will be a high price, outright victory still unachievable as the goalposts keep moving.
User avatar
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Technology vs grunts (13 Nov, 2017)

Postby phill » Mon Nov 13, 2017 9:46 am

we stated divorcing some of our forces from the carnage they inflicted a long time ago ( ballistae / trebuchet / catapult / arrows )
so all we have done in the last 2k years is increase the range and get a better visual of the down range targets
high level bombing further removed the inflicter from having to see the scene of carnage
to the point there was a well known tshirt design you could buy in the Philippines in the 60s/70s that said
join the airforce
go to exotic new countries
and drop bombs on them

now we have drones
the enemy of choice hate em
they do one thing that took millions of grunts lives to do in the major conflicts
take out the leaders and decision makers leaders with little loss to anyone else .. and way less loss to the innocent ( those near the target when it gets neutralized are very rarely completely innocent )

does it take a lot of the humanity from war and atrocities .... yup
does it stop escalation of wars .... probably
does it work ... fuk yehh

can it be disabled .. probably yes .. but most likely wont be as those capable of disabling the system will be wanting to use their own
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )
User avatar
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: Technology vs grunts (13 Nov, 2017)

Postby par_annoyed » Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:11 am

IMHO both types of warfare are horrific, but in different ways. Both involve massive loss of life (across the whole conflict) and the idea of high-tech somehow 'sanitising' war to me is just like calling mass casualties "collateral damage".
The idea of a 'clinical strike' ignores the downstream consequences and loss of life by other means (starvation, disease etc). And then, your war turns into what we have now - desperate 'terrorist' activities, probably because there is no other way to fight back and make a big media splash, vs. drone and remote bombing. I ask you, which has the bigger media focus ??
Posts: 557
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 8:03 am

Re: Technology vs grunts (13 Nov, 2017)

Postby Kiwiiano » Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:07 pm

But sooner or later they have to put boots on the ground and they are vulnerable to improvised explosive devices or suicide bombers. Their victims are costing the US military dearly or would be if the powers that be gave a tinkers cuss about that collateral damage.
~ Kiwiiano
“I'm right 98% of the time, so who gives a damn about the other 3%?"
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 5:36 pm

Re: Technology vs grunts (13 Nov, 2017)

Postby hagfish » Tue Nov 14, 2017 7:15 am

Years ago, the USA passed a grim milestone where veteran suicides since the Gulf War surpassed the number killed in the September 11 attacks. it gets them off the books, I suppose..
Posts: 677
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 10:28 am

Return to Today's column

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests