Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Israel in Lebanon 1983

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by MikeH View Post
    So this lesson was about proving the modern ROE are wrong?

    And great to see Lieutenants thinking that with a small group of marines they'd want to open fire on 3 tanks. Thank god for NCOs.
    They had anti-tank assets.

    And it's hard to not justify escalation of force when people are pointing weapons at you and/or firing rounds in the ground 30m from your position. You wouldn't feel sufficiently threatened to retaliate or do you only escalate force when (British) are killed?
    "Flutie was better than Kelly, Elway, Esiason and Cunningham." - Ben Kenobi
    "I have nothing against Wilson, but he's nowhere near the same calibre of QB as Flutie. Flutie threw for 5k+ yards in the CFL." -Ben Kenobi

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Al B. Sure! View Post
      They had anti-tank assets.

      And it's hard to not justify escalation of force when people are pointing weapons at you and/or firing rounds in the ground 30m from your position. You wouldn't feel sufficiently threatened to retaliate or do you only escalate force when (British) are killed?
      I'm sure I'd feel massively threatened.

      I guess this is why it's so vital that even lowly squad leaders understand the geopolitical implications of returning fire, and presumably why they are training you about this incident.
      Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
      Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
      We've got both kinds

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by kentonio View Post
        Hmm, I'm sure the Israelis who have faced several existential wars over the last century were just ****ting themselves over a mouthy marine with a pistol.
        QFT
        If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
        ){ :|:& };:

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Al B. Sure! View Post
          They had anti-tank assets.

          And it's hard to not justify escalation of force when people are pointing weapons at you and/or firing rounds in the ground 30m from your position. You wouldn't feel sufficiently threatened to retaliate or do you only escalate force when (British) are killed?
          From Amritsar to Bogside, the British policy has always been to shoot only when their enemies can't shoot back.
          John Brown did nothing wrong.

          Comment


          • #20
            Oh tell me, what anti-tank weapons did they have? The LAW?

            I remember reading a 1980s Army report on the M72 LAW, M47 Dragon, and BGM-71 TOW, which read some thing along the lines of "few soldiers have confidence in the M47 to defeat modern armor threats, and none have confidence in the LAW."

            This, along with the pathetic performance of the Viper missile, is what led to us adopting a Swedish anti-tank rocket that actually works.

            The chance that their shoulder-launched missiles would have penetrated the armor of an Israeli tank, even at close range, approaches zero.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Felch View Post
              From Amritsar to Bogside, the British policy has always been to shoot only when their enemies can't shoot back.
              US policy has always been the equivalent of Nuke them from orbit.
              Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
              Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
              We've got both kinds

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by regexcellent View Post
                Oh tell me, what anti-tank weapons did they have? The LAW?

                I remember reading a 1980s Army report on the M72 LAW, M47 Dragon, and BGM-71 TOW, which read some thing along the lines of "few soldiers have confidence in the M47 to defeat modern armor threats, and none have confidence in the LAW."

                This, along with the pathetic performance of the Viper missile, is what led to us adopting a Swedish anti-tank rocket that actually works.

                The chance that their shoulder-launched missiles would have penetrated the armor of an Israeli tank, even at close range, approaches zero.
                That's what I learnt playing Twilight 2000...

                Unless their anti-tank assets was a flight of A-10s...
                Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
                Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
                We've got both kinds

                Comment


                • #23
                  We didn't do that in Grenada or Panama (or Afghanistan, even the initial invasion). We did do that in the 1991 Gulf War though. 2003 Iraq War is debatable.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I was just countering his preposterous claim.
                    Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
                    Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy.
                    We've got both kinds

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by MikeH View Post
                      US policy has always been the equivalent of Nuke them from orbit.


                      Maxim 37: There is no 'overkill'. There is only 'open fire' and 'time to reload'.
                      No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Thing is, overwhelming firepower is actually a central tenet of US Army strategy and always has been since the days of Sherman.
                        If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
                        ){ :|:& };:

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by DinoDoc View Post
                          That should probably tell you the regard people hold Lebanon and other countries in the area in.
                          Lebanon has great food and skiing. What is there not to love?
                          "I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
                          'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by MikeH View Post
                            a flight of A-10s...
                            To us, it is the BEAST.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              People say the A-10 looks unsexy but I think it is the monster truck to the Lamborghini that is the F-22. It oozes masculinity. It spurts hot semen 30mm out of its massive phallus cannon.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Obama wants marines to wear girly hats.



                                No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X