I don't drink.. so I have go subnet some ipv6 prefixes ..... Regards.
Faisal Imtiaz Snappy Internet & Telecom 7266 SW 48 Street Miami, FL 33155 Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] > From: "Mathew Howard" <[email protected]> > To: "af" <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 1:57:15 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering > Does work involve bourbon? > On Apr 4, 2016 12:44 PM, "Faisal Imtiaz" < [email protected] > wrote: >> Let's get back to work !.... >> :) >> Faisal Imtiaz >> Snappy Internet & Telecom >> 7266 SW 48 Street >> Miami, FL 33155 >> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] >>> From: "Josh Reynolds" < [email protected] > >>> To: [email protected] >>> Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 1:39:52 PM >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering >>> Faisal, you're really ruining all my fun today. I haven't had enough >>> bourbon for >>> this discussion. >>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Faisal Imtiaz < [email protected] > >>> wrote: >>>> Aren't they all connected ? >>>> You are presenting a technical argument, which does not match up to >>>> factual data >>>> from the field is put next to it... >>>> The comment about war and profiteering was in reply to your comment >>>> regarding >>>> 'all life '. >>>> Regards >>>> Faisal Imtiaz >>>> Snappy Internet & Telecom >>>> 7266 SW 48 Street >>>> Miami, FL 33155 >>>> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >>>> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] >>>>> From: "Josh Reynolds" < [email protected] > >>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>> Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 1:06:52 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering >>>>> There's quite a bit of strawmen in your post Faisal. We went from talking >>>>> about >>>>> weapons systems to civilian casualties, and then when the points about the >>>>> strides made in minimizing civilian casualties was brought up, you turned >>>>> it >>>>> from there to a political and philosophical rant on the nature of warfare >>>>> and >>>>> those who profit. >>>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 12:03 PM, Faisal Imtiaz < [email protected] >>>>> > >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Yes, yes, yes... you can make any argument you like, it is easy to >>>>>> justify the >>>>>> weapons and their efficiency on a relative scale... >>>>>> However, if you take into account the views from the other side, on the >>>>>> ground >>>>>> and a dose of reality.... even the most sane person has to rethink the >>>>>> argument... >>>>>> this is just one example of what I am talking about..... >>>>>> http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2012/09/25/national/drones-terrorising-pakistan-civilians-experts/ >>>>>> (read the expert opinion.... and ask yourself the question of who were, >>>>>> are the >>>>>> other 98% killed ) >>>>>> And when these nut cases come back and kill kids in schools as a >>>>>> retaliation... >>>>>> the folks there pay the price, again for so called 'precision bombs'. >>>>>>> If you want to make an argument that all life is precious, I disagree - >>>>>>> there >>>>>>> are some individuals out there that the world would be better off had >>>>>>> they not >>>>>>> been born... a lot of them, sadly. It is tragic when non-coms get >>>>>>> caught in the >>>>>> > crossfire. >>>>>> Ok, lets go with this argument, the question is who is going the be >>>>>> judge and >>>>>> jury for them ? Whose laws are you going to judge someone by, ours ? >>>>>> Theirs ? >>>>>> .... >>>>>> If we are so right and correct in everything we do ....Then why is it >>>>>> that we >>>>>> simply cannot allow open public trial of the detainees in Guantanamo ? >>>>>> War is a dirty business, everyone looses .... except for those who >>>>>> profit from >>>>>> it ! >>>>>> Faisal Imtiaz >>>>>> Snappy Internet & Telecom >>>>>> 7266 SW 48 Street >>>>>> Miami, FL 33155 >>>>>> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 >>>>>> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] >>>>>>> From: "Josh Reynolds" < [email protected] > >>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 11:35:58 AM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering >>>>>>> " The point is, modern fighting machines are much more destructive, and >>>>>>> are >>>>>>> indiscriminate killing machines .. they don't know the difference >>>>>>> between >>>>>>> solders and civilians... It might be sexy to talk about their >>>>>>> destructive >>>>>>> power, but one has to realize that destructive power is far more >>>>>>> reaching to >>>>>>> human beings....... and this is why we don't officially keep track of >>>>>>> civilian >>>>>>> deaths.... >>>>>>> " >>>>>>> Indiscriminate killing machines, yes. Always have been, and likely >>>>>>> always will >>>>>>> be. More destructive? Not necessarily. The initial Call For Fire for >>>>>>> artillery >>>>>>> given a map and compass has a "mean error" of 500m. It's still just as >>>>>>> bad now >>>>>>> as it was during World War I, maybe with slightly better numbers due to >>>>>>> better >>>>>>> mapping data. Fire a single Excalibur round out of one of the said >>>>>>> artillery >>>>>>> pieces however, and you can place the round inside a window multiple >>>>>>> stories >>>>>>> off the ground floor and even have a good understanding of possible >>>>>>> building >>>>>>> and collateral damage before the round is ever fired. >>>>>>> Which one would you rather fire in a city? >>>>>>> The same goes for carpet bombing. It's vastly fallen out of favor due >>>>>>> to it's >>>>>>> expense and mass damage, and the fact that for point targets a single >>>>>>> 500-2000lb JDAM can have the precise effect. For moving targets, they >>>>>>> now have >>>>>>> laser guided JDAMS - GPS until near target, then switches to IR >>>>>>> tracker. This >>>>>>> means you're much more likely to have positive effects on target (EOT) >>>>>>> than >>>>>>> using a shotgun approach. >>>>>>> Basically, CEP (Circular Error of Probability) went from 500m to single >>>>>>> digit >>>>>>> meters to centimeters now, depending on the weapons system. >>>>>>> Understanding of >>>>>>> collateral damage (persons / structures) is also much better. >>>>>>> TLDR: Yes, we have some weapons systems capable of massive destruction. >>>>>>> We've >>>>>>> also come a long way in creating systems that have outstanding accuracy >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> lower round expenditures, create positive EOT, and minimize civilian and >>>>>>> structural casualties. >>>>>>> If you want to make an argument that all life is precious, I disagree - >>>>>>> there >>>>>>> are some individuals out there that the world would be better off had >>>>>>> they not >>>>>>> been born... a lot of them, sadly. It is tragic when non-coms get >>>>>>> caught in the >>>>>>> crossfire. >>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Faisal Imtiaz < >>>>>>> [email protected] > >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >> Perspective is a powerful thing. >>>>>>>> Agreed.. >>>>>>>>>>. Not as high as the loss of life would have been if we were running >>>>>>>>>>at one >>>>>>>>>>another with swords and bows, not as high as lining up in front of >>>>>>>>>>one another >>>>>>>>>>taking turns to load and shoot, and not as high as it would be had we >>>>>>>>>>been >>>>>>>>>>forced from our trenches into the waiting maw of the enemy with the >>>>>>>>>>dull smell >>>>>>>> >>of onions in the air behind us. >>>>>>>> Hmm... opinion based on which account one has read... Most of those >>>>>>>> battles >>>>>>>> ended in one day or within a short amount of time, the battle field >>>>>>>> was always >>>>>>>> contained .... to soldiers. >>>>>>>> The point is, modern fighting machines are much more destructive, and >>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>> indiscriminate killing machines .. they don't know the difference >>>>>>>> between >>>>>>>> solders and civilians... It might be sexy to talk about their >>>>>>>> destructive >>>>>>>> power, but one has to realize that destructive power is far more >>>>>>>> reaching to >>>>>>>> human beings....... and this is why we don't officially keep track of >>>>>>>> civilian >>>>>>>> deaths.... >>>>>>>> Faisal Imtiaz >>>>>>>>> From: "Josh Reynolds" < [email protected] > >>>>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 10:03:07 AM >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering >>>>>>>>> Not as high as the loss of life would have been if we were running at >>>>>>>>> one >>>>>>>>> another with swords and bows, not as high as lining up in front of >>>>>>>>> one another >>>>>>>>> taking turns to load and shoot, and not as high as it would be had we >>>>>>>>> been >>>>>>>>> forced from our trenches into the waiting maw of the enemy with the >>>>>>>>> dull smell >>>>>>>>> of onions in the air behind us. >>>>>>>>> Citizens of London, Stalingrad, Berlin, Nagasaki and Hiroshima would >>>>>>>>> appreciate >>>>>>>>> how "civilized" we have become from a certain point of view. >>>>>>>>> Citizens of cities who have been invaded by ISIS/ISIL... Probably not >>>>>>>>> so much. >>>>>>>>> Perspective is a powerful thing. >>>>>>>>> On Apr 4, 2016 8:09 AM, "Faisal Imtiaz" < [email protected] > >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> No offense meant to anyone.... >>>>>>>>>> But let me ask you one question:- >>>>>>>>>> What was the cost in human lives paid for that adventure ? >>>>>>>>>> (Both sides, good, bad, ugly...... human cost ?) >>>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>>> Faisal Imtiaz >>>>>>>>>>> From: "David Milholen" < [email protected] > >>>>>>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, April 4, 2016 8:24:36 AM >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [ot] battleship engineering >>>>>>>>>>> I got to sit between two units on my M1A1 tank that had a fire >>>>>>>>>>> mission into >>>>>>>>>>> Kuwait and Iraq. >>>>>>>>>>> The unit I called the BIg Ear sat up on the forward berm to >>>>>>>>>>> identify targets of >>>>>>>>>>> opportunity. >>>>>>>>>>> These so called targets were other artillery that were firing on >>>>>>>>>>> its own troops >>>>>>>>>>> for desertion. >>>>>>>>>>> By late evening the star clusters that littered the sky soon died >>>>>>>>>>> down to one or >>>>>>>>>>> two after the MRLS missions were done. >>>>>>>>>>> On 4/4/2016 12:11 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> My dream fire mission was MLRS :) >>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2016 10:23 PM, "Cameron Crum" < [email protected] > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm all for precision guided munitions, but nothing says we've >>>>>>>>>>>>> come to kick some >>>>>>>>>>>>> ass like shelling an enemy position with the 16in guns from a >>>>>>>>>>>>> battleship. Talk >>>>>>>>>>>>> about demoralizing the enemy. >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Josh Reynolds < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected] > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Systems like that don't exist so much... At least, there are no >>>>>>>>>>>>>> guns of that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> size on a battleship that I'm aware of (16"). >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know there are much smaller systems now for certain classes of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> warships. When >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was going through my joint fires naval training we talked >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about a bunch of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> systems (that are now public knowledge). One of the newer naval >>>>>>>>>>>>>> guns has a 40+ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> nautical mile range and GPS guided round - similar to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Excalibur artillery >>>>>>>>>>>>>> round. Those are mostly automated systems. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If I remember right, a full battery salvo from an Iowa class >>>>>>>>>>>>>> battleship on a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> surface target could spread out the round impact locations to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> create a 1Km x >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1Km "casualty box". I always wanted the opportunity to employ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that system :P >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2016 10:23 AM, "David Milholen" < [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What an AWEsome piece of history. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I wonder how many of those systems are completely automated and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how much faster >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reload time is ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/3/2016 1:59 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://youtu.be/_wT1xkRpCKk I love this stuff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>> --
