Well, we're going to war, so POST AWESOME MILITARY PICS

[JCG]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Deterrence is the fundamental purpose. We spend hundreds of billions developing and deploying weapons to deter the USSR after WW2. We didn't have to kill them, and they didn't kill us.

That's about the only "good" thing Nuclear weapons ever did....

A deterred enemy may become a future ally, or at least someone tolerable for co-existence. A dead enemy is a lot less useful.

It's interesting how, if things had turned out a little differently, that could well have been the case with Iraq....Oh well.

[ThePlagueRat]

I glorify medieval combat, but since this thread is so heavily restricted I guess I will have to create another thread.

[Master Zen]

Actually your pics PlagueRat were some of the only decent ones on this thread

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

Deterrence is the fundamental purpose. We spend hundreds of billions developing and deploying weapons to deter the USSR after WW2. We didn't have to kill them, and they didn't kill us.

You built those weapons to fight the USSR if it had ever turned into a hot war. Deterrance was a natural consequence of said buildup but each weapon is made to kill. Deterrence is a political tool, a weapon's lethality is a physical scientifical fact. And this is a weapons thread not a political thread if I recall...

[Spiffor]

The best was undoubtedly the firefighter one

[Aro]

Originally posted by Master Zen
Actually your pics PlagueRat were some of the only decent ones on this thread

Mine weren't so bad...

But you're right, PlagueRat rocks!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Master Zen

And this is a weapons thread not a political thread if I recall...

Actually, it's a weapons pics threat, but thank you for acknowledging that it isn't a political thread. I take it your attempts at political commentary are now finished?

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

the primary purpose of a weapon isn't to kill

Jeez - really?

You're starting to sound like Donny Rumsfeld (and I wouldn't take that as a compliment).

[ThePlagueRat]

Originally posted by Master Zen
Actually your pics PlagueRat were some of the only decent ones on this thread

Thanks man.
Including some other who are even better than mine too.
Like that swiss navy, by zopperoni.(and his avatar)

[Verto]

I will resist the urge to join the debate, and instead post this:

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


Jeez - really?

You're starting to sound like Donny Rumsfeld (and I wouldn't take that as a compliment).

How often are weapons/armies used as a deterent, vs. how often they are actually used to kill?

[Aro]

From the Malvinas War:
(It's the "Antelope")

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
How often are weapons/armies used as a deterent, vs. how often they are actually used to kill?

The "deterence" of a weapon is a direct function of how well it kills. As such, it is a secondary -not primary- purpose.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Actually, it's a weapons pics threat, but thank you for acknowledging that it isn't a political thread. I take it your attempts at political commentary are now finished?

My point has been made.

[Drake Tungsten]

Here's a weapon that won't be hurting anyone; an Iraqi Mirage fighter...