News Stories

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

I don't see the point in doing that when it's already capable of tracking its target even behind a wall. By the sound of it, it has pretty good chances of hitting the enemy, so there's really no need for it unless you want to add closer range combat features to the weapon. But tbh, I'd prefer it to stay as a situational weapon because adding that little feature would imply it can be used anywhere, and there's soldiers who're quite trigger happy. A weapon like this is best left to people trained specifically for it, not unlike snipers.

exactly.
using it at a target 100m away from you is great.
using it on a target 10m away is crazy.
i'd prefer a weapon of this caliber be used as a rifle rather then just an RPG-esk weapon.

i'd think that this last part would be a given.
after all, its not a standard iron sight weapon anyway.
any gun that has an actual fire-control system, means that you need a specifically trained person for using it.
not even standard grenade launchers are given to just anyone.
its a squad weapon.

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

exactly.
using it at a target 100m away from you is great.
using it on a target 10m away is crazy.
i'd prefer a weapon of this caliber be used as a rifle rather then just an RPG-esk weapon.

i'd think that this last part would be a given.
after all, its not a standard iron sight weapon anyway.
any gun that has an actual fire-control system, means that you need a specifically trained person for using it.
not even standard grenade launchers are given to just anyone.
its a squad weapon.

If you want it to be mass produced and used by the military as a whole, then adding it to a rifle would be ideal but as I said, the weapon is too dangerous to be held by just anyone. It's better off kept on its own and left in the hands of specialists who're proven to be responsible with it, people with experience at the very least. Since standard grenade launchers are given to a select few, then it's better to replace some of these standard launchers with the new version.

[Kagayaki]

Update on the NASA press release:

Washington (CNN) -- Scientists have discovered a form of bacteria that can thrive on arsenic -- an element generally considered toxic -- dramatically expanding both traditional notions of how life is sustained and the range of where it might be found in the universe, NASA funded-researchers said Thursday.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/02...ef=storysearch

two analyses that seem fairly accurate and balanced:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/no...-about-aliens/
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/20...tm_medium=link

and the official press release:
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010...oxic_Life.html

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

If you want it to be mass produced and used by the military as a whole, then adding it to a rifle would be ideal but as I said, the weapon is too dangerous to be held by just anyone. It's better off kept on its own and left in the hands of specialists who're proven to be responsible with it, people with experience at the very least. Since standard grenade launchers are given to a select few, then it's better to replace some of these standard launchers with the new version.

but those "standard" versions are just underslang on rifles.
you can still use the weapon as a rifle, and use the grenade launcher only when needed.
its a gun+a grenade launcher.

if you need to have a completely stand alone weapon to use this new feature, then you either limit one soldier in the company exclusively to a support role, or you just say "nevermind then" and not take it.
which is a terrible waste.

[don_Durandal]

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

If you want it to be mass produced and used by the military as a whole, then adding it to a rifle would be ideal but as I said, the weapon is too dangerous to be held by just anyone. It's better off kept on its own and left in the hands of specialists who're proven to be responsible with it, people with experience at the very least. Since standard grenade launchers are given to a select few, then it's better to replace some of these standard launchers with the new version.

Unlike the stereotype image of expendable grunts, infantry soldiers are all highly trained specialists in their role (at least in those countries that'd afford such a system). It wouldn't be used by "just anyone".

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

but those "standard" versions are just underslang on rifles.
you can still use the weapon as a rifle, and use the grenade launcher only when needed.
its a gun+a grenade launcher.

if you need to have a completely stand alone weapon to use this new feature, then you either limit one soldier in the company exclusively to a support role, or you just say "nevermind then" and not take it.
which is a terrible waste.

I agree that it would be a waste now that someone has created it. That being said, then I'd rather allow one specific soldier in the company to carry the weapon and serve as support. So long as only a few people who can be proven responsible with the weapon are selected to carry it, then it shouldn't supposedly be a risk to innocents implicated in the battle.

Originally Posted by don_Durandal

Unlike the stereotype image of expendable grunts, infantry soldiers are all highly trained specialists in their role (at least in those countries that'd afford such a system). It wouldn't be used by "just anyone".

Like I mentioned earlier, I never said all infantry units are irresponsible and expendable, but there are always those who are and that's the reason I believe extra attention should be placed on choosing who can carry that kind of weapon.

[SaintessHeart]

I never liked carrying the launcher because it add weights to the rifle. However, the good thing is that you usually aren't the one doing the flanking, you are always at the back of your teammates trying to dye the enemy position red.

[ganbaru]

WikiLeaks moves site to Switzerland amid U.S. fury
http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNew...6B224P20101203

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

WikiLeaks moves site to Switzerland amid U.S. fury
http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNew...6B224P20101203

and Switzerland allows them to continue operating ?
pull the plug already.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

and Switzerland allows them to continue operating ?
pull the plug already.

why? It is not breaking Swiss law.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

why? It is not breaking Swiss law.

and ?
just because something is technically legal, doesn't mean that its right, and doesn't mean it should be allowed.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

and ?
just because something is technically legal, doesn't mean that its right, and doesn't mean it should be allowed.

it is call freedom of speech.

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

it is call freedom of speech.

its also called reckless endangerment
and unlawful provocation
vandalism
slander (prove they didn't make stuff up)
theft of intellectual property (in a way).
illegally publishing another persons work without their express permission to do so.
trust me, where there is a will there is a lawyer.
finding the legal justification for a cease and desist is easy.
and if WikiLeak's people have a problem with it, they can spend the next 5 years in the court systems arguing about it.

besides, if its possible to ban showing pictures of Mohammad so as to not offend people.
banning publishing sensitive materials is easy.

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

it is call freedom of speech.

A phrase that has been completely taken out of context over the years...

[bladeofdarkness]

i kept saying that this stupidity is life threatening, now i've found the perfect example.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...srael-1.328521

Lebanon defense minister 'offered invasion advice for Israel'
Elias Murr advised U.S. diplomats on how Israel could 'clean out' Hezbollah from southern Lebanon, WikiLeaks cable shows.

this was an opinion he expressed privately because publically taking an anti-hezbollah or pro-israeli stand in Lebanon is an excellent way to get killed.
what happens to this guy who this leak has now exposed.
how long do you figure he's got left to live.

if something happens to this guy (Lebanon's defense minister mind you) then its directly the result of these leaks.

[Hooves]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

i kept saying that this stupidity is life threatening, now i've found the perfect example.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...srael-1.328521



this was an opinion he expressed privately because publically taking an anti-hezbollah or pro-israeli stand in Lebanon is an excellent way to get killed.
what happens to this guy who this leak has now exposed.
how long do you figure he's got left to live.

A good.... 20 minutes?

[bladeofdarkness]

Originally Posted by Hooves

A good.... 20 minutes?

and who would be to blame we're he to come to an untimely death ?

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

i kept saying that this stupidity is life threatening, now i've found the perfect example.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomac...srael-1.328521



this was an opinion he expressed privately because publically taking an anti-hezbollah or pro-israeli stand in Lebanon is an excellent way to get killed.
what happens to this guy who this leak has now exposed.
how long do you figure he's got left to live.

if something happens to this guy (Lebanon's defense minister mind you) then its directly the result of these leaks.

Originally Posted by Hooves

A good.... 20 minutes?

A moment of Silence for Mr. Murr

[bladeofdarkness]

in all honesty, this isn't a joke or anything.
people have been talking about how the leaks might expose potential collaborators whos lives might be put in danger as a result.

this isn't far from that scenario.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

in all honesty, this isn't a joke or anything.
people have been talking about how the leaks might expose potential collaborators whos lives might be put in danger as a result.

this isn't far from that scenario.

he can always take a trip to the US for medical reason. I mean it would be bad for his health to stick around Lebanon