Subject:
|
Re: Newspeak 2003
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:25:49 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
215 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Fredrik Glöckner writes:
> "richard marchetti" <blueofnoon@aol.com> writes:
>
> > So what have I missed? Are we not at war with Iraq? If we kill them
> > we are "liberating" Iraq, or "engaging" the enemy. If they kill us
> > it is "terrorism."
>
>
> No way! Are you saying that the word "terrorism" is misused to
> discredit the enemy? I am shocked!
>
>
> Another interesting term is "precision bombing". The US government has
> officially apologized to the Iranian government for US missiles hitting
> Iranian soil. They were obviously intended for Iraqi targets.
> Apparantly, some have hit Saudi Arabia as well. I think that to apply
> the word "precision" to a weapon system makes little sense, when some
> war heads don't even hit the correct country.
Didn't some of those missiles (GPS guided) go awry while GPS jammers (sold
and serviced by Russian companies, as it turns out... probably because they
underbid the French) were being deployed? You can't fault the missiles
directly for that.
You certainly can fault firing them, though, if it was known GPS jammers
were operational, I suppose. But forgive the military planners that assumed
that a putative ally wouldn't allow such sales to an enemy... Silly them.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
| (...) I think I read somewhere that the Russians claimed that the U.S. forces were just looking for an excuse as to why their overrated and expensive weapons were failing in their intended use. This excuse could give them good mileage when it comes (...) (21 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | GPS JAMMERS
|
| (...) My understanding was that it was claimed GPS "jammers" made no impact. In fact, [IRC] it was claimed a GPS weapon was used to destroy them ... I only wonder why they were destroyed if they had no impact? ;) The best estimate I've read is that (...) (21 years ago, 2-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Whose side are you on, anyway?
|
| More questions about the Russian role are raised in this UPI article: (URL) went to the iraqwar.ru site mentioned (URL) I did not see the information given but I wasn't looking very hard. Does anyone else? (21 years ago, 2-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Newspeak 2003
|
| (...) No way! Are you saying that the word "terrorism" is misused to discredit the enemy? I am shocked! Another interesting term is "precision bombing". The US government has officially apologized to the Iranian government for US missiles hitting (...) (21 years ago, 1-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
