NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, it seems as if the "terrorists" will be in for a big surprise soon! The U.S. Military is goin to start mass production of one of its newest weapons, and though I can see a few minor flaws in its design (at least in my humble opinion) I'm sure that they will be worked out quickly, and we could see our casualty rate decline steeply in armed conflicts! Guess all you conspiricy theory nuts who warned of the draft didn't think of just building soldiers! HEHEHE Look out Iran, we just might be sendin them to a town near you! :upyours:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/talon.htm

Yeah...let's dehumanize the already inhumane practice of war by killing the enemy with robots instead of having the balls to go in there ourselves.

I'm sure that will endear us to the fence-sitting Muslims, who see "righteous" suicide-bombers on one side, and cowardly robot users on the other.

No way could using robots possibly strengthen the enemies numbers or resolve in any way.

[/sarcasm]

*Shakes head*

Do we really need another machine designed to kill people? Can we really trust Dubya with this sort of technology?

Needs more Russian death orb.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8614082&postcount=4

I'm sorry, Usaforever, but using the "upyours" and "sniper" smiley completely negates what you were saying.

Yeah...let's dehumanize the already inhumane practice of war by killing the enemy with robots instead of having the balls to go in there ourselves.

I'm sure that will endear us to the fence-sitting Muslims, who see "righteous" suicide-bombers on one side, and cowardly robot users on the other.

No way could using robots possibly strengthen the enemies numbers or resolve in any way.

[/sarcasm]

Ya know what? I'm frankly sick and freakin tired of people tellin me that we "create " more terrorists by our actions! They are the ones with the fuckin choice! They can either go to work, and to their mosques, and the market, and school, and live their lives, In which case our job is done and we LEAVE, or they can shoot at us and blow up innocent civilians, in which case we send in mechanized infantry to blow there ass's to hell! YES, I said hell! You kill innocents on purpose, you go to hell! You whiny fucks are just lucky Dubya is president, at least he has a little commpassion. I'm slowly losing mine! If I were president, I'd have 200,000 of those little bastards in there right now!

Ya know what? I'm frankly sick and freakin tired of people tellin me that we "create " more terrorists by our actions! They are the ones with the fuckin choice! They can either go to work, and to their mosques, and the market, and school, and live their lives, In which case our job is done and we LEAVE, or they can shoot at us and blow up innocent civilians, in which case we send in mechanized infantry to blow there ass's to hell! YES, I said hell! You kill innocents on purpose, you go to hell! You whiny fucks are just lucky Dubya is president, at least he has a little commpassion. I'm slowly losing mine! If I were president, I'd have 200,000 of those little bastards in there right now!

If you cannot conduct yourself in a reasonable manner on this forum I shall simply revoke your access to it.

You whiny fucks are just lucky Dubya is president, at least he has a little commpassion. I'm slowly losing mine! If I were president, I'd have 200,000 of those little bastards in there right now!
I thought i would never say this, but yes, for once i am happy that Mr. Bush is president of the US. If the alternative is some loudmouthed angry teenager who is even less informed and more slanted in his worldview, that is.
Piece of advice, see above.

I thought i would never say this, but yes, for once i am happy that Mr. Bush is president of the US. If the alternative is some loudmouthed angry teenager who is even less informed and more slanted in his worldview, that is.
Piece of advice, see above.

LOL. Nothing more to add.

I thought i would never say this, but yes, for once i am happy that Mr. Bush is president of the US. If the alternative is some loudmouthed angry teenager who is even less informed and more slanted in his worldview, that is.
Piece of advice, see above.
Where to start?
Ok, first, Im not a teenager. Second, did you say my views are slanted? Whose aren't? Your just mad because they're not slanted your way! I'm glad you got the jist of it though. Everyone talks obout George Bush like he's the anti-christ, yet no one on the left ever (well, rarely) admits that he's not so bad compared to most! And Myrth, how about explaining to me just excactly what you found so offensive, instaed of blanket statements??

Where to start?
Ok, first, Im not a teenager. Second, did you say my views are slanted? Whose aren't? Your just mad because they're not slanted your way! I'm glad you got the jist of it though. Everyone talks obout George Bush like he's the anti-christ, yet no one on the left ever (well, rarely) admits that he's not so bad compared to most! And Myrth, how about explaining to me just excactly what you found so offensive, instaed of blanket statements??

Howdy, well I guess I would agree with you on a few thing but a word of advice, watch out for the Myrth man/woman. I too get steamed by the constant insults hurled at GW, they seem motivated more from pure hatred rather than reasoned arguements. He is apparently to blame for all that is bad in the world.
Just take a deep breath and laugh because, you know, we are winning the political battle in the states right now. They can insult and attack and wish the death of our prez all they want and he still beats them everytime. Like water off a ducks back. I don't even bother to respond most of the time.

If you cannot conduct yourself in a reasonable manner on this forum I shall simply revoke your access to it.
:p awesome putdown

well i fundamentally disagree with the stance Usaforever obviously has... being a pacifist and all :D


and i seem to remember watching a bit on this robot on Tomorrow's World (TV show in the UK) a few years back. the fact that it will be engaging in battle now is a mixed blessing - i wouldn't mind war if it were fought only with robots and not people :)

We leap ahead, we maintain the edge so far in advance that most people are not even aware.
You see, the things we are shown, the tech they release for public view is nowhere near the cutting edge weapons they are creating.
And yet we dehumanize and that is in itself a danger for if we can fight with little danger to ourselves than what stands to stop us from fighting all the time. So while I admire the tech, I worry about the consequences.

Where to start?
Ok, first, Im not a teenager. Second, did you say my views are slanted? Whose aren't? Your just mad because they're not slanted your way! I'm glad you got the jist of it though. Everyone talks obout George Bush like he's the anti-christ, yet no one on the left ever (well, rarely) admits that he's not so bad compared to most! And Myrth, how about explaining to me just excactly what you found so offensive, instaed of blanket statements??

Myrth is a moderator. Try not to offend them, for they rule this forum. You, and myself, are here at their pleasure.

Just a heads up.

Originally posted by Usaforever

Ya know what? I'm frankly sick and freakin tired of people tellin me that we "create " more terrorists by our actions! *snip*

You know what? If you seriously think that the actions of US forces that have resulted in the deaths of innocent people have not been creating terrorists, then you are without a doubt the dumbest person I have yet seen on this board.

For every one that, despite the grief, continues to support us, there is another who will sacrifice his own life to try to make us leave...

Grow a brain-cell....seriously, just one...I don't want you to strain yourself

OK *taking deep breaths*
I'm mellow now guys! Sorry for the outbursts and insults. I was just tryin to highlight the robot, but it seems the crack about Iran hit a few nerves. Consider it withdrawn. But the robot is pretty amazing, and if it says our military boys from harm, I'm all for it!

No probs man! :)

I do not wish to see robots employed in the war in Iraq, or any other terror campaign, other than logistical/reconaissance purposes, for the reasons I have stated.

The idea of using them in all out conflict, however, kicks ass to no end! :D

I'm really interested in the new rifle the Marines are developing. The one with the bullets that explode once traveling a set distance.

Hah, this is cool. Cool beyond words. From a purely technological/sci-fi lovers point of view, as well as one which supports the US War on Terror. Although in actuality, I support the idea of Marvellous Mechanized Men fighting wars instead of us, so even if only one side has them, it's better than nothing.

So yeah, that Russian Death Orb might be even cooler.

Either way, this kicks butt.

Brings a whole new meaning to 'Mech. Infantry' xD

Robots. IMO good idea. Depends on how much it'll cost though.

But then again, supporting a soldier in battle isn't that cheap idea.

Where to start?
Ok, first, Im not a teenager.
Sorry, my fault. You just have the communication skills of one. Better?
And Myrth, how about explaining to me just excactly what you found so offensive, instaed of blanket statements??
I aint Myrth, but, e.g., "you whiny fucks" is considered offensive by some.

AHAAHAH THATS A WEAPON

A good hit with cricket bat would brain that complete.

Not to metion 'terroists' as you put it could easyily made an emp spike out of a transformer and just set that off whever thouse things came calling

Crap idea

AHAAHAH THATS A WEAPON

A good hit with cricket bat would brain that complete.

Not to metion 'terroists' as you put it could easyily made an emp spike out of a transformer and just set that off whever thouse things came calling

Crap idea

If I remember correctly, one TALON was right next to an IED when it exploded. The TALON went airborne, flew off the road, and landed in a river. The soldiers drove it out within 10 minutes. :p

If I remember correctly, one TALON was right next to an IED when it exploded. The TALON went airborne, flew off the road, and landed in a river. The soldiers drove it out within 10 minutes. :p

Could just have squads of men with sacks full of door nobs and bin lids as shields walking around taking them out.

again, crap

I think one of the intended uses of this robot was to be the "first through the door"- in other words, it could be deployed into the unknown area for a first look,hopefully reducing the risk to a human soldier. Demonstrations I saw showed that it has several cameras and other detection equipment-infra red, thermal, etc... I dont think the intended purpose was to create a platoon of these that will march into battle spraying ordinance toward the enemy.
Its still very early to tell how well the thing will work. If it saves soldier's lives, its worth a try. If it intimidates the enemy, its worth a try. I know in some police/swat instances, it allows the police to talk directly to the criminal as it can be rigged with a radio.
they arent indestructable-bullets and grenades will damage/destroy them, but less so than a human. And the average foe certainly is not used to fighting one yet, so there is the element of the unknown and surprise.
In war, every advantage should be utilized to its fullest extent.
These dont remove the human completely-the operating range is still in the hundreds of feet-a human would still be in a dangerous territory, but less likely to have an AK-47 aimed at his head as he breaches a door way.

Could just have squads of men with sacks full of door nobs and bin lids as shields walking around taking them out.

again, crap

So you'd charge a robot (one that is apparently quite impervious to small-caliber weaponry and blunt objects) that is carrying a .50 Caliber Heavy Machine Gun?

I must say, that takes courage, and a certain amount of stupidity. It's equivalent to trying to tackle an M1A2 Abrams SEP with a T-34.

I doubt that this will reduce US casualties by much, for one reason. The operator has to be within one kilometre of it to control it, meaning that they will still be inside the combat zone and therefore they will still be in danger. With a greater operating range I can see that this would be useful, but unless that is fixed it will not be the wonder weapon that some people seem to think.

Well, it seems as if the "terrorists" will be in for a big surprise soon! The U.S. Military is goin to start mass production of one of its newest weapons, and though I can see a few minor flaws in its design (at least in my humble opinion) I'm sure that they will be worked out quickly, and we could see our casualty rate decline steeply in armed conflicts! Guess all you conspiricy theory nuts who warned of the draft didn't think of just building soldiers! HEHEHE Look out Iran, we just might be sendin them to a town near you! :upyours:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/talon.htm
They've had those for a while now. They use them in reconnaissance missions, rescuing hostages, etc.

The fact that they're mass-producing them is insane. I mean, look at the cost.

They've had those for a while now. They use them in reconnaissance missions, rescuing hostages, etc.

The fact that they're mass-producing them is insane. I mean, look at the cost.

Are you aware of how much it costs to train and equip a single infantryman, to supply him with food, to get him transportation, to keep him connected to his family, etc.? How much it costs to give him a proper burial, or to treat his wounds at a hospital?

Though these robots aren't substitutes for infantry, for the roles they're designed for, they can significantly affect the battlefield.

So you'd charge a robot (one that is apparently quite impervious to small-caliber weaponry and blunt objects) that is carrying a .50 Caliber Heavy Machine Gun?

I must say, that takes courage, and a certain amount of stupidity. It's equivalent to trying to tackle an M1A2 Abrams SEP with a T-34.

Bah its still do-able, I bet those things perform shitty in an terrain that guerrillas would operate in any way.

Be useless in wooded hills,

Sorry, my fault. You just have the communication skills of one. Better?

I aint Myrth, but, e.g., "you whiny fucks" is considered offensive by some.
Well, if you aren't Myrth, than mind your own business about it, and as for the communication skills comment, I'm quite sure even a teenager wouldn't be ignorant enough to keep being a dick after someone apologizes, so I guess we're in the same boat, buddy!

So when will we have those cool Terminator T101 robots?

So when will we have those cool Terminator T101 robots?
Monday

Monday
Neat. I'm going to name mine Mr. Nibbles.

Are you aware of how much it costs to train and equip a single infantryman, to supply him with food, to get him transportation, to keep him connected to his family, etc.? How much it costs to give him a proper burial, or to treat his wounds at a hospital?

Though these robots aren't substitutes for infantry, for the roles they're designed for, they can significantly affect the battlefield.
Then why did you just use that analogy? :confused:

I'm not arguing against producing them. I'm saying mass-producing them is a waste of money. This is one step towards building Terminators. How convenient! Now, we can kill people, and not even lose any soldiers!

It's dangerous, philosophically. The only thing preventing nations like the U.S. from invading various countries are the fact that they'd face immense casualties. With robots, that possibility is eliminated. It encourages war. Because then, the only thing to lose is money.

Sweet! Self-Propelled Small Arms!

I'm saying that these robots can replace soldiers for many difficult and dangerous roles, but that they'r enot total substitutes. Furthermore, mass-production doesn't mean that we're replacing entire divisions with robots. It means we've got them supplementing our forces.

Sweet! Self-Propelled Small Arms!
What he said.

I'm really interested in the new rifle the Marines are developing. The one with the bullets that explode once traveling a set distance.
Dude that rifle is awesome. You can shoot around corners and such. Everything will be much safer. I even heard that in the helmate came there is some sorta thing that tracks the bullet.

They've had those for a while now. They use them in reconnaissance missions, rescuing hostages, etc.

The fact that they're mass-producing them is insane. I mean, look at the cost.
Maybe they can be outsourced to China.

Then why did you just use that analogy? :confused:

I'm not arguing against producing them. I'm saying mass-producing them is a waste of money. This is one step towards building Terminators. How convenient! Now, we can kill people, and not even lose any soldiers!

It's dangerous, philosophically. The only thing preventing nations like the U.S. from invading various countries are the fact that they'd face immense casualties. With robots, that possibility is eliminated. It encourages war. Because then, the only thing to lose is money.

We already have a much lower casualty rate.

The advent of Interceptor body armor (the standard) makes it exceedingly difficult to do much more than wound a US soldier - you have to miss the plates.

We had a death rate eight times higher during the Vietnam War - and Defense Department estimates were that we would suffer even greater casualties in places like Fallujah, where fighting would be in an urban area against fanatics.

As an example, Israel lost 10 soldiers killed for every Hezbollah fighter killed - they fought to the death, and the Israeli soldier's lack of effective body armor was telling.

Now, if you close with US soldiers in order to prevent their use of high powered artillery and smart bombs, it's suicide - because you won't be able to kill US soldiers in the rush of close combat - and you'll lose ALL your men just trying to kill a few.

The loss ratio in Fallujah was 26 insurgents killed for every 1 US soldier. That's not only a considerable improvement on Vietnam, it's a considerable improvement on the Israeli experience - and they supposedly wrote the book on how to fight Arab insurgents.

Think about how hardcore this could be, we could have little robot wars to settle disputes! It would be like that show on TV...battlebots!

(sorry, I'm in a silly mood)

It is already demoralizing enough for the potential insurgent.

Think about it.

In Vietnam, insurgents killed 6111 US soldiers per year. More than enough to make the US public demand a pullout.

In Iraq, insurgents kill about 750 US soldiers per year. Not enough to achieve the desired political effect.

Insurgents that engage US soldiers in direct fire with rifles and RPGs end up getting killed. Insurgents that hole up and stand their ground get killed. And the trade in US soldiers killed is not favorable to the insurgents.

Now imagine a war where a large portion of the US forces are robots.

You can't hold a robot hostage. You can't cut his head off on Al-Jazeera for shock effect (no pun intended). And no US voter cares if a robot gets turned into scrap.

On the other hand, a true combat robot would not sleep. It would probably be more aware than a human, and more reliable as a sentry. The idea also has psychological value - imagine being hunted at night by something that isn't human.

BTW, Sandia has a neat "autonomous mine" called Fire Ant. It's truly disposable. http://www.sandia.gov/isrc/fireant.html

Johnny 5, is alive!

Muhahaha

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:

THIS CAN'T POSSIBLY END WELL.

Johnny 5, is alive!

Muhahaha

You damn bastard! Screw You! :sniper: :sniper: :mad: :mad:

I was about to post that :p

Well, to oppose the robots, we have the typical "trained terrorist"...

http://www.comics.com/comics/pearls/archive/images/pearls2091550050405.gif

Well, to oppose the robots, we have the typical "trained terrorist"...

http://www.comics.com/comics/pearls/archive/images/pearls2091550050405.gif

While I disagree with most of your posts, that is a great cartoon. :D

Ya know what? I'm frankly sick and freakin tired of people tellin me that we "create " more terrorists by our actions! They are the ones with the fuckin choice! They can either go to work, and to their mosques, and the market, and school, and live their lives, In which case our job is done and we LEAVE, or they can shoot at us and blow up innocent civilians, in which case we send in mechanized infantry to blow there ass's to hell! YES, I said hell! You kill innocents on purpose, you go to hell! You whiny fucks are just lucky Dubya is president, at least he has a little commpassion. I'm slowly losing mine! If I were president, I'd have 200,000 of those little bastards in there right now!

The USA is agravating people by invading all over the place. If the USA wasnt so agressive, the terrorists wouldnt be so agressive.

So your saying that if the US did not start invading the middle east, the terrorist would not fly planes into our buildings? I think your timeline of events are a little screwy.

The USA is agravating people by invading all over the place. If the USA wasnt so agressive, the terrorists wouldnt be so agressive.

You need a history lesson. Want to know why Bin Laden and al-Qaeda came from? Why they were upset at the US? They wrote it all down in a public document.

Bin Laden and most of the al-Qaeda men were connected with the insurgency in Afghanistan against the Soviets. The US paid them and trained them.

After the war in Afghanistan was over, they wanted to repeat their success - they were emboldened by their win against the USSR. They even took credit for the fall of the USSR.

At the time, we were helping liberate Kuwait - which Bin Laden thought was OK, even though he thought that Arab states should do the job themselves. He even liked the fact that we kicked Saddam's ass and left afterwards.

What he didn't like was that during the whole thing, we stationed troops in Saudi Arabia. Note that we did not invade. We were invited. So Bin Laden declared the Saudi government to be apostate, and declared jihad on the US for setting foot (invited or not) on Muslim holy ground.

That's it. That's the WHOLE rationale behind the World Trade Center attacks.

He liked us for helping him and his men in Afghanistan. What he didn't want was any non-Muslim setting foot in Saudi Arabia.

You will note carefully that we did not "invade" Saudi Arabia.

More to the point, he got what he wanted. We don't have anyone stationed in Saudi Arabia anymore - we vacated all of the bases we were using.