Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Toxn

Forum Nobility
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,789

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    59

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Toxn

  1. Toxn
    How much would you like to bet that the presentation for that idea included the words 'platform' and 'monetization'?
  2. Toxn
    We're not even sure if it would be possible to conceive in space, let along worry about things like bone density. And no, I haven't bothered to watch the video yet
  3. Toxn
    Now for something completely different: This is the Solaris infinite duration drone. With four electric motors (KAX), a gargantuan battery system and a bunch of solar panels stuck everywhere except the most obvious spot (too much bother), it is currently being tested to determine total flight time. With luck, the results will never be in. Update: Okay, so the Solaris is a failure on all counts. I'm going to try and fit more panels, wing and battery onto this bird and try again.
  4. Toxn
    I too have been playing WT more of late - when I play anything, that is. Usually RB ground and air. I'm still a bit ambivalent about the planes, because damage is just so random - add in certain aircraft getting to feel the touch of the dev's favour and you start getting pretty grumpy about the whole thing.
  5. Toxn
    Where did you find this?
  6. Toxn
    Supercriticality was touched upon recently here. It's the for-dummies version, but still.
  7. Toxn
    More like the Chinese are moving with the times by having so many launcher options.
  8. Toxn
    GPC seconded as something only sperglords could get erect about.
  9. Toxn
    http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R2vBZuLI3oI
  10. Toxn
    Oh ye of little faith. We have not even begun plumb the depths of silliness.
  11. Toxn
    Typical Americans! Don't you know that superior teutonic rifles have butt plates made of Krupp Steel for increased efficiency as clubs?
  12. Toxn
    Too much of a pansy to handle .50, eh?
  13. Toxn
    Ah... Machine finishes chart, not machine finishes chart. I was confused there, for a second.
  14. Toxn
    Please stop being a nub. Everyone knows that long ranged bayonet kills can only be achieved by blades in the 12.5mm range. Everything else is just wimps complaining about how their limp wrists can't handle the force of a real man's weapon!
  15. Toxn
    I've wondered about this as well: from what I've heard the evolution in insurgent small arms (which represent a sort of support-free version of infantry tactics) has been towards squads with more RPGs and machine guns than rifles (something along the lines of 2-4 RPG gunners, 1-2 ammo carriers with ARs, 1-2 LMG gunners and perhaps a dedicated marksman). If this trend is accurate, then the future might involve rifles being used in the same capacity as SMGs or DMRs - as relatively specialised weapons meant to complement the core firepower provided by other weapons. I'd also put money on cheap guided munitions coming into their own in a big way, making something like a small missile launcher the default infantry weapon.
  16. Toxn
    30. Love his later stuff (especially year zero) more than his earlier stuff.
  17. Toxn
    We should start a sad old-person club or something.
  18. Toxn
    A nine inch one, perhaps? I dunno; I like Trent Reznor, but I feel so alone in it these days.
  19. Toxn
    Perhaps as a general argument. But we're talking about America as it is now, fighting the wars it is currently fighting. If the American Empire conducts a successful campaign to conquer asia minor under the firm hand of the Bush-Clinton dynasty, then I will be sure to applaud it politely from the safety of my bunker. Edit: alas, the rebellious quote function rises up against me. Please hold on while I conduct a lengthy police action.
  20. Toxn
    'The ship without a rudder is always going in the right direction' and all that.
  21. Toxn
    I will say this, though: governments (like any organisation) tend to be much more efficient where their interests are concerned. There is a good argument to be made that the middle east simply isn't seen as being that important to the US gov as a whole (the long war certainty hasn't fucked too hard with the budget, for instance). In which case clueless flailing is entirely expected.
  22. Toxn
    Thanks for the explanation. The thing is, micro scale stuff (stretching the term) doesn't count. Nobody sees the minutia of interdepartmental politics, we just see the sprawling entity known as the United States flailing around in the middle east (et al). Arguing that the goals which got set at the beginning of a conflict could only be achieved by installing a military dictatorship (or whatever) is a pretty strong admission of military failure from where I stand.
  23. Toxn
    Perhaps you are making a more nuanced argument here, and I'm just reacting to the aforementioned 1000 times in which I get to hear the bar-room version recited above. Yup, looks like it's me. So now I'll try and make a more nuanced argument. The reference to 'lack of political will', when combined with the denial of 'military failure', evokes a mindset in which 'conflicts' have separate and distinct military and political components. They do not. 'Conflicts' are fully and wholly political, in that they further (or fail to further) political aims. When casting an eye over the second Iraq war, it is clear that lack of political will to prosecute the war is not a problem. Instead, lack of a coherent and sustained strategic goal, as well as a clear understanding of the approach needed to reach that goal, is to blame. This is a political failure in as much as military organisations are the tools of politicians. But it is clearly a military failure in as much as politicians (as the masters of military affairs) are the drivers of strategy. To somehow divorce (inherently political) strategic concerns from their function as the arbiters of successful military interventions is to create a false dichotomy whose sole purpose is to deflect and diffuse blame. That so many people buy wholeheartedly into this narrative (often for social or political reasons) is proof that there is a fundamental misunderstanding concerning the nature and prosecution of war amongst the public at large.
  24. Toxn
    I know exactly what he said, because I've heard the argument a thousand times. It's still semantic wankery of the highest order to somehow separate the military and political components of your war so that you can claim victory. It's akin to the losing team blaming the coach - because, god dammit, we totally have better players! I mean, every time we run a play we score! So the fact that we spent half the game sitting with our fingers up our butts because the guy in charge of running us was schizo shouldn't count! We won, by god, even if the score had us 20 points down at the finish! Hell, I bet if we'd replaced the coach and carried on the game for another 10 minutes (five minutes even!) we would have wiped the floor with them!
  25. Toxn
    That is semantic wankery of note.
×
×
  • Create New...