At 00:17 15-8-01 -0400, Gautum Mukunda wrote:
>The fact that the website you cited
>doesn't distinguish between hypothetical platforms that might (or might
>not) be delpoyed in the future and those currently in the American arsenal
>does not exactly speak well to its credibility.
Those BAT gliders were just one example; the entire paragraph reads:
"The allies first put landmines into Korea 50 years ago to slow enemy tanks
and troops so that the weapons of the day could kill them. Since then, the
United States has developed weapons that can kill tanks and troops on the
move - weapons that will not pose a threat to our own soldiers and that do
not, like our landmines, hamper our own ability to maneuver effectively and
rapidly. These "smart weapons" include the 13 Brilliant Anti-Armor
Technology (BAT) gliders that are carried to the battlefield by just one
missile. The gliders hover over a tank formation, divide up the targets,
and fire explosively-formed projectiles into each one with remarkably high
kill rates."
Am I now supposed to believe that in the last 50 years, the US has been
developing such "smart weapons" without ever actually getting one into
active service? That wouldn't exactly inspire faith in the US military
techies, now would it?
As for credibility: read this guy's resume
(http://www.calebrossiter.com/cv.html) and biographical sketch
(http://www.calebrossiter.com/biosketch.html). What more does a guy have to
do before you will accept him as "credible"?
Jeroen
_________________________________________________________________________
Wonderful World of Brin-L Website: http://go.to/brin-l
