asymetric warfare

Bernardz wrote:

:In article ,
says...
: Bernardz wrote:
:
: :In article ,
: says...
: : Bernardz wrote:
: :
: : :In article ,
: : says...
: : :
: : : We've now added invisible anti-aircraft installations
: : :
: : :Never said it would be invisible.
: : :
: : :What I said is that because there will not be time to clear the anti-
: : :aircraft equipment in this case the planes would be flying into them.
: :
: : And why is that?
: :
: :Missiles and artillery are hitting the city. We must move immediately.
:
: So, as the Elbonian leader, upon the start of a US invasion you are
: going to missile your own people on the presumption that US forces
: will commit suicide to save your people from you? Pretty unlikely.
:
a)
:I never said my own people. I said some neighbour that is an ally of the
:US.

You're assuming that one exists and that it has high value targets in
range of your cheap magical cruise missiles. Such situations are
going to be rare - probably limited to being North Korea.

You're also assuming that attacking your neighbor unprovoked is
somehow going to win you points somewhere.

: And I would suggest that said medium sized country would need a fair
: number of wizards to produce that much magic.
:
:No. Germany in WW2 could do it almost 60 years ago. Even the
:Palestinians today have managed to put together some similar type
:system.

Cite? Because I don't think we're talking about the same thing at all
anymore.

: I will note that most folks think that V1 attacks on London were a
: waste of effort for Germany that could have been applied elsewhere. I
: will further note that for the thousands of V1 and V2 weapons fired at
: Britain, relatively few people were killed by them.
:
:Look at the thread London Blitz vs V1. Most people do not seem to be
:saying that at all.

I'd suggest you get an education on this somewhere other than Usenet.
History books would be a good start.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn