Your lack of understanding of the true implications of my points
have led you again to sweeping statements, unproductive
stonewalling and of course, the all important asccusation that I am
engaging in sturbomess. Sadly, there is little solution in response
but to keep reiteriating the facts and truth into a form you can
better understand.
However, I have noticed you finally begin to see some logic, but
you have not seen the paridigm shift.
These are points I understand completely. But what I am trying to
point out to you, and is something you are apparently unwilling to
see is that in the near future (within twenty years), UCAVs are
going to take the roles I have suggested, well, actually not me, I
am just rehasing the points the people who came up with such
concepts did.
In short, the F-22 will probably be the one of the last
generations, if not the last of manned air combat aircraft. If you
see it this way, you can see how near the end of the line is.
The difference is, you think that UCAV replacement of pilots is a
chancy thing, but for me, it is unavoidable.
But then again, you lack the proper information ammunition to
engage in this debate, as most of the people here have. Go and read
up about emergent technologies, grasp the new paridigm, before
going on to debate from your old point of view, which is what you
are doing now.
The difference between me and you is that I see both sides of the
picture, while you appear to have only a hazy view of the unmanned
side.
I am like a person trying to explain the merits of an M-16 when to
a person who only knows katanas, which is you. Unless you are
completely aware of how the M-16 will change the way you fight. If
not, even if you had the M-16, you would view it, and use it like a
katana!
In short, if we transpose this debate over to the M-16 vs Katana,
your arguments would go:
"There is no subsitute in warfare for the slashing of the
katana."
"The M-16 cannot slash like the katana."
"We can only use it to kill targets far away, most other things we
rely on the katana."
"There is no subsitute for actually using your arms to move the
weapon to slash, you can't kill just by aiming down a straw-eye
view of the sight and squeezing the trigger."
"What you say about the M-16 over the katana insults us sumurai and
our abilities, we are upset."
"The M-16 can never replace us when it come to war."
"Do you trust your own hands, or some chemical charge in that
bullet?"
"Unlike a katana, the M-16 will jam and fail and miss, you are
being optimistic by claiming that these problems can ever be
overcome in the near future and that these things will become more
then a battlefield noveity."
"To pull a trigger over slashing a sword with martial arts? That's
a devolution in warfare, if you ask me."
