• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Rules of War...?

Rek3030

OneSiccSix
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Location
Free!
Moto(s)
nekkid '07 GSX-R 600
Name
Ian
Soo.... no killer gas... land mines are a big no no, and now cluster bombs? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7423714.stm

Its funny how the country's that cant afford to R&D their own bombs are banning the use for those who can.

Using the excuse that it kills to many civilians. So normal 500lb-5ton bombs dont? Cruise Missiles? How about bullets, rpgs and other HE's? I guess it some what falls under: http://fletcher.tufts.edu/multi/texts/BH790.txt CONVENTION ON PROHIBITIONS OR RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF CERTAIN CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS WHICH MAY BE DEEMED TO BE EXCESSIVELY INJURIOUS OR TO HAVE INDISCRIMINATE EFFECTS AND PROTOCOLS (1980) So pretty much anything that will kill anything that comes near it, and not just the attended targets are banned.


I just think its ridiculous to try and ban certain weapons, "making war safer" what kind of bs is that? If its so nasty, and horrible and people die who shouldnt die, then why do it at all? (dont answer that Razz) We are now in a world that allows fighting and killing between armies (dont bother looking at iraq), but as long as the weapons are controlled by people and are being fired upon those individuals of the opposing force. (if you look at iraq, then you've got to see, this rule is in place because WE (USA and allied forces) are killing to many citizens, so these rules are put in place to protect them from us, but good luck to get the terrorists or for that matter anyone who wants to win to follow the "rules of war")

So a great weapon for taking out large enemy forces, convoys, or enemy bunkers/emplacements is now deemed too dangerous to use, because it can/may cause harm to people who come across them later.

I guess its for the best, but these rules of war just make me laugh.


Biography:
http://fletcher.tufts.edu/multi/warfare.html
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/20th.htm

Had to just throw my 2cents out there, I just came across that bbc article days ago, and I guess they pushed it as quickly as possible. heh.
 
Yes I agree. The world would be a much better place if we had more minefields and unexploded cluster ordnance littering our ground. We just need to have a more "glass-half-full" outlook; afterall, If you lose a leg, you usually still have 1 left right?
 
Rules of war are only for humans Cardassians have no such problems.

ds9dukat03.jpg
 
there was a great article in the contra costa times about the age old debate on which rifle was the best and how the soldiers using the m16 in the war currently dont believe the bullets have enough stopping power, there were even testomonies from soldiers who watched as they shot someone 5 or 6 times at close range and the bullets just passed right through them and the victim kept on fighting till they bleed to death:wtf

so the solution was brought up to use hollow tip bullets, but as it turns out it's against a treaty that the us never signed back in the early 1900's but we still follow it:wow

ill see if i can find the article:thumbup
 
ahh here it is, but before i post it always seems funny to me that the people who never see the battlefield and arent using the weapons afe the first ones to say that the weapons are more then adequate and that the soldiers just need better aim:wtf

US uses bullets ill-suited for new ways of war
By RICHARD LARDNER Associated Press Writer
Article Launched: 05/26/2008 07:17:22 AM PDT

WASHINGTON—As Sgt. Joe Higgins patrolled the streets of Saba al-Bor, a tough town north of Baghdad, he was armed with bullets that had a lot more firepower than those of his 4th Infantry Division buddies.

As an Army sniper, Higgins was one of the select few toting an M14. The long-barreled rifle, an imposing weapon built for wars long past, spits out bullets larger and more deadly than the rounds that fit into the M4 carbines and M16 rifles that most soldiers carry.

"Having a heavy cartridge in an urban environment like that was definitely a good choice," says Higgins, who did two tours in Iraq and left the service last year. "It just has more stopping power."

Strange as it sounds, nearly seven years into the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, bullets are a controversial subject for the U.S.

The smaller, steel-penetrating M855 rounds continue to be a weak spot in the American arsenal. They are not lethal enough to bring down an enemy decisively, and that puts troops at risk, according to Associated Press interviews.

Designed decades ago to puncture a Soviet soldier's helmet hundreds of yards away, the M855 rounds are being used for very different targets in Iraq and Afghanistan. Much of today's fighting takes place in close quarters; narrow streets, stairways and rooftops are today's battlefield. Legions of armor-clad Russians marching through the Fulda Gap in Germany have given way to insurgents and terrorists who hit and run.

Fired
Advertisement
at short range, the M855 round is prone to pass through a body like a needle through fabric. That does not mean being shot is a pain-free experience. But unless the bullet strikes a vital organ or the spine, the adrenaline-fueled enemy may have the strength to keep on fighting and even live to fight another day.

In 2006, the Army asked a private research organization to survey 2,600 soldiers who had served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Nearly one-fifth of those who used the M4 and M16 rifles wanted larger caliber bullets.

Yet the Army is not changing. The answer is better aim, not bigger bullets, officials say.

"If you hit a guy in the right spot, it doesn't matter what you shoot him with," said Maj. Thomas Henthorn, chief of the small arms division at Fort Benning, Ga., home to the Army's infantry school.

At about 33 cents each, bullets do not get a lot of public attention in Washington, where the size of the debate is usually measured by how much a piece of equipment costs. But billions of M855 rounds have been produced, and Congress is preparing to pay for many more. The defense request for the budget year that begins Oct. 1 seeks $88 million for 267 million M855s, each one about the size of a AAA battery.

None of the M855's shortcomings is surprising, said Don Alexander, a retired Army chief warrant officer with combat tours in Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Somalia.

"The bullet does exactly what it was designed to do. It just doesn't do very well at close ranges against smaller-statured people that are lightly equipped and clothed," says Alexander, who spent most of his 26-year military career with the 5th Special Forces Group.

Paul Howe was part of a U.S. military task force 15 years ago in Mogadishu, Somalia's slum-choked capital, when he saw a Somali fighter hit in the back from about a dozen feet away with an M855 round.

"I saw it poof out the other side through his shirt," says Howe, a retired master sergeant and a former member of the Army's elite Delta Force. "The guy just spun around and looked at where the round came from. He got shot a couple more times, but the first round didn't faze him."

With the M855, troops have to hit their targets with more rounds, said Howe, who owns a combat shooting school in Texas. That can be tough to do under high-stress conditions when one shot is all a soldier might get.

"The bullet is just not big enough," he says. "If I'm going into a room against somebody that's determined to kill me, I want to put him down as fast as possible."

Dr. Martin Fackler, a former combat surgeon and a leading authority on bullet injuries, said the problem is the gun, not the bullet. The M4 rifle has a 14.5 inch barrel—too short to create the velocity needed for an M855 bullet to do maximum damage to the body.

"The faster a bullet hits the tissue, the more it's going to fragment," says Fackler. "Bullets that go faster cause more damage. It's that simple."

Rules of war limit the type of ammunition conventional military units can shoot. The Hague Convention of 1899 bars hollow point bullets that expand in the body and cause injuries that someone is less likely to survive. The United States was not a party to that agreement. Yet, as most countries do, it adheres to the treaty, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross.

The Hague restrictions do not apply to law enforcement agencies, however. Ballistics expert Gary Roberts said that is an inconsistency that needs to be remedied, particularly at a time when so many other types of destructive ordnance are allowed in combat.

"It is time to update this antiquated idea and allow U.S. military personnel to use the same proven ammunition," Roberts says.

In response to complaints from troops about the M855, the Army's Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey assigned a team of soldiers, scientists, doctors and engineers to examine the round's effectiveness. The team's findings, announced in May 2006, concluded there were no commercially available rounds of similar size better than the M855.

But Anthony Milavic, a retired Marine Corps major, said the Army buried the study's most important conclusion: that larger-caliber bullets are more potent.

"It was manipulated," says Milavic, a Vietnam veteran who manages an online military affairs forum called MILINET. "Everybody knows there are bullets out there that are better."

Officials at Picatinny Arsenal declined to be interviewed. In an e-mailed response to questions, they called the M855 "an overall good performer." Studies are being conducted to see if it can be made more lethal without violating the Hague Convention, they said.

Larger rounds are not necessarily better, they also said. Other factors such as the weather, the amount of light and the bullet's angle of entry also figure into how lethal a single shot may be.

Heavier rounds also mean more weight for soldiers to carry, as well as more recoil—the backward kick created when a round is fired. That long has been a serious issue for the military, which has troops of varied size and strength.

The M14 rifle used by Joe Higgins was once destined to be the weapon of choice for all U.S. military personnel. When switched to the automatic fire mode, the M14 could shoot several hundred rounds a minute. But most soldiers could not control the gun, and in the mid-1960s it gave way to the M16 and its smaller cartridge. The few remaining M14s are used by snipers and marksman.

U.S. Special Operations Command in Tampa, Fla., is buying a carbine called the SCAR Heavy for its commandos, and it shoots the same round as the M14. The regular Army, though, has invested heavily in M4 and M16 rifles and has no plans to get rid of them.

A change in expectations is needed more than a change in gear, said Col. Robert Radcliffe, chief of combat developments at Fort Benning. Soldiers go through training believing that simply hitting a part of their target is enough to kill it. On a training range, getting close to the bulls-eye counts. But in actual combat, nicking the edges isn't enough.

"Where you hit is essential to the equation," Radcliffe says. "I think the expectations are a little bit off in terms of combat performance against target range performance. And part of that is our fault for allowing that expectation to grow when it's really not there at all."

The arguments over larger calibers, Radcliffe says, are normal in military circles where emotions over guns and bullets can run high.

"One of the things I've discovered in guns is that damned near everyone is an expert," he says. "And they all have opinions."
 
It wouldn't be an issue if 100% of them exploded when deployed, but these things can lie dormant for decades, and then go off when disturbed. Many are no larger than golf balls with a kill radius of 5M or more, and kill and maim thousands of people a year, long after the conflicts have ended. And these aren't just countries that can't afford R&D. These are ours (and other allies) that sell them to "friends".

I had to recover missile flight hardware that we had launched at White Sands, and walking around out there was nerve wracking as there were all of these little "golf balls" laying around, some just barely peeking above the sand. Who knows how many I walked on that I couldn't see. Many were inert, but many weren't.
 
sigh.

http://www.cpi.org/casestudies/archives/000043.php

14 year old kid lost his leg to a cluster bomb dropped in Vietnam over 30 years ago.

You drop 10,000 bombs and 5% are duds, you're potentially cleaning up 500 bombs, which sucks, but it's possible.

drop 10,000 cluster payloads, say, a BLU-3 (360 bomblets per payload, look it up) with a 5% dud rate and you're looking at cleaning up 180,000 bombs. This isn't going to suck, it's just not going to happen at all. Nobody is going to even start a program to clean those up unless it's someplace rich and first world. but cluster bombs don't get dropped on first world cities, so who gives a fuck, right?
 
Last edited:
Winning a war is about total war. Yes, that means you submit the civilian population if it's easier than the military population.
 
rules of war seem odd to me. if i were going to write the war rule book it would look like this:

RULE #1: no killing people.

RULE #2: all disputes will be settled in online video game tournaments.
 
Cluster bombs?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbfZHUbFRno



while traveling last month i totally used the
"Swwwweeeeeeeeet" after finding out my delay in Detroit wouldn't make me miss the connecting plane in Denver because it was delayed as well...
 
Winning a war is about total war. Yes, that means you submit the civilian population if it's easier than the military population.


Exactly!
Civilians should be fair game because with out a doubt U.S. civilians will be fair game to any of our enemies. If you take out the civilian population you are essentially taking out the entire war machine because a military cannot function without the support of their civilian population.

I have said it before, there is no second place in war. If you lose you are the mercy of the victors.
 
Exactly!
Civilians should be fair game because with out a doubt U.S. civilians will be fair game to any of our enemies. If you take out the civilian population you are essentially taking out the entire war machine because a military cannot function without the support of their civilian population.

I have said it before, there is no second place in war. If you lose you are the mercy of the victors.



and...

Any population that accepts and allows the dictates of their government should expect to NOT be immune to the effects of any war that government engages in.

Example: CCCP and US citizens that allowed their respective governments to develop and deploy the vast arsenal of atomic weapons that exist today can't cry foul when the nukes start raining down on their heads.

I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing. We need to raise a nation of warriors and develop a national sense of self preservation because the "other guys" are doing exactly that. We aren't going to be able to survive when all the heroes are gone and all that is left are the wimps and cowards.
 
There are only two reasons why the United States has not been attacked by another nation since we developed the atomic bomb:

1. We still have the upper hand.
2. M.A.D.

Once we lose either of those advantages you better hide because hell will be upon you before you know it.
 
1. If the enemy is in range, so are you.
2. If its stupid, but it works, it ain't stupid.
3. You are not Superman [ Marines & Fighter Pilots take note ].
4. Never draw fire, it irritates everyone around you.
5. When in doubt, empty the magazine.
6. Never share a fighting hole with someone who is braver than you.
7. There is always a way, Thinking of it before you need to is the trick.
8. If you can't remember, the Claymore is pointed toward you.
9. All 5 second grenade fuses are 3 seconds.
10. If the pin is pulled, Mr. Grenade is *not* our friend.
11. It is generally unadvisable to eject directly over the area you just bombed.
12. The enemy diversion you are ignoring is the main attack.
13. If your short on everything but enemy, you're in combat.
14. Incoming has right of way.
15. Body Count --- 4 Pigs + 3 Cows + 1 Enemy = 99 KIA's.
16. No combat ready unit ever passed inspection.
17. No inspection ready unit ever passed combat.
18. Teamwork is essential, it gives them more people to shoot at.
19. Tracers work both ways.
20. The only thing more accurate than incoming enemy fire is incoming friendly fire.
21. Try to look unimportant, they may be low on ammo.
22. Radios will fail as soon as you need fire support.
23. If they're shooting at you, it's a high intensity conflict.
24. A sucking chest wound is nature's way of telling you to slow down.
25. If at first you don't succeed, call for artillery.
26. Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl.
27. When artillery doesn't work, call for an air strike.
28. Close only counts in horse shoes, hand gernades, and nukes.
29. No battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy.
30. Friendly fire --- Isn't.
31. The most dangerous thing in the combat zone is a 2nd Lieutenant with a map.
32. The problem with taking the easy way out is that the enemy has already mined it.
33. The buddy system is essential to your survival, it gives the enemy somebody else to shoot at.
34. The further you are in advance of your own positions, the more likely your artillery will shoot short.
35. If your advance is going well, you are walking into an ambush.
36. The quartermaster has only two sizes, too large and too small.
37. If you really need an officer in a hurry, take a nap.
38. The only time suppressive fire works is when it is used on abandoned positions.
39. There is nothing more satisfying than having someone take a shot at you [ and miss ].
40. Don't be conspicuous. In the combat zone, it draws fire. Out of the combat zone, it draws sergeants.
41. If the Gunny can see you, so can the enemy.
42. Never worry about the bullet with your name on it. Instead, worry about shrapnel addressed to 'occupant'.
43. All battles are fought at the junction of two or more map sheets --- printed at different scales.
44. All battles are fought uphill.
45. All battles are fought in the rain.
46. Logistics is the ball and chain of armoured warfare.
47. Military intelligence is a contradiction of terms.
48. What gets you promoted from one rank gets you killed in the next rank.
49. A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow.
50. If orders can be misunderstood, they will be.
51. War is like love. To triumph, you must make contact.
52. Boldness becomes rarer, the higher the rank.
53. Never reinforce failure. Failure reinforces itself.
54. Only 5% of an intelligence report is accurate. The trick of a good commander is to isolate the 5%.
55. Tactics are for amateurs; professionals study logistics.
56. When a front line soldier overhears two General Staff officers conferring, he's fallen back too far.
57. It isn't necessary to be an idiot to be a senior officer, but it sure helps.
58. No captain can do very wrong who places his ship alongside that of the enemy.
59. Always know when it's time to get out of Dodge.
60. Always know how to get out of Dodge.
61. Always remember, your equipment was made by he lowest bidder.
62. Priorities are made by officers, not God. There's a difference.
63. Always honour a threat.
64. The weight of all of your equipment is proportional to the length of the time you have been carrying it.
65. Hell hath no fury like a liberal non-combatant.
66. Fighter pilots make movies; Attack pilots make history.
67. There are two kinds of naval vessels: submarines and targets.
68. A lost battle is a battle one thinks one has lost.
69. Surprise is an event that takes place in the mind of a commander.
70. All warfare is based on deception.
71. A little caution outflanks a large cavalry.
72. If you take more than your fair share of objectives, you will have more than your fair share to take.
73. Professional soldiers are predictable, but the world is full of amateurs.
74. Parade ground inspections are to combat readiness as mess hall food is to cuisine.
75. Cold and snow are not neutral.
76. The tank is a monument to the inaccuracy of indirect fire.
77. Diplomacy has rarely been able to gain at the conference table what cannot be gained and held on a battlefield.
78. War is the unfolding of miscalculations.
79. Perfect is the enemy of good enough.
80. Good enough --- Isn't.
81. He who wants do defend everything defends nothing.
82. Mine fields are not neutral. They attack anyone.
83. The effective radius of a hand grenade is always greater than the distance you can jump.
84. The effective radius of a hand grenade is greater then the average grunt can throw it.
85. Your mortar barrage will put exactly one round on the intended target. That round will be a dud.
86. The mortar team will always have the correct number of safety pins to prove they armed all the rounds.
87. To ensure this, the mortar team carries extra pins.
88. There is no such thing as a convenient fighting hole.
89. Odd objects attract fire. You are odd.
90. More aircraft are incapacitated by a shortage of spare parts than by enemy action.
91. Beer Math --- 2 Beers X 12 Grunts equals 49 Cases.
 
Rules in war? War is about survival. When I need to survive, I use every advantage I have to WIN. What else am I supposed to do? So the enemy says I can't use cluster bombs? The fuck I can't. What are you gonna do about it? Who are you going to tattle to? War is nasty. If you don't want to lose life to protect your interests, surrender.
 
ahh here it is, but before i post it always seems funny to me that the people who never see the battlefield and arent using the weapons afe the first ones to say that the weapons are more then adequate and that the soldiers just need better aim:wtf

<snip>
the biggest issue IS with the rifle, not the ammo. 50 yard fragmentation range is nowhere near enough. 200 yards (like you get out of an M16 as opposed to an M4) isn't great, but is far better.
 
they aren't following any rules, so you can't expect them to start following new ones. targeting civilians isn't allowed.

however, if we droop to their level, are we really any better than them?
 
Back
Top