Do we rely on technolgy too much?

[freeandfun1]

I believe that we are relying way too much on technology in our war on terrorism. Do you?

Technology alone will not help us if the Chinese decide to take Taiwan and the Syrians, et al decide to attack Israel and the NK's try to take the south. Frankly, I believe we need to look at implementing the draft and mobilizing our best natural resource, OUR PEOPLE!

JMHO - your comments are welcome and desired!

 

[Zhukov]

I think we did previously, prior to 9/11. I think now we are doing what we can to strengthen our human resources. Freeing people and doing the right thing is undoubtedly providing us with countless allies in the Middle East who admire us and want to help.

That young boy who lost a father or brother to Saddam and waved to the U.S. soldiers as they rolled into Baghdad will help us in the future so long as we do not betray his trust.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by freeandfun1
Technology alone will not help us if the Chinese decide to take Taiwan and the Syrians, et al decide to attack Israel and the NK's try to take the south. Frankly, I believe we need to look at implementing the draft and mobilizing our best natural resource, OUR PEOPLE!

Most of the military top brass have stated they don't want a drafted military again. Furthermore, people won't defeat the Chinese. Only one specific piece of technology can defend us against the belligerent hordes that seek to dominate and terrorize the rest of the world.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by Zhukov
Most of the military top brass have stated they don't want a drafted military again. Furthermore, people won't defeat the Chinese. Only one specific piece of technology can defend us against the belligerent hordes that seek to dominate and terrorize the rest of the world.

True, true. Then I suggest the politicos start trying to outwardly and publicly appeal to the masses to volunteer for military service in the interest of serving their country.

I find it interesting how quiet they are being in regards to our shortage of personnel. Sure, the enlistment numbers are good, but only because we have the numbers "needed" set so low. But then again, maybe technology is the key, but in close combat technology is not going to help. Only overwhelming numbers will!

 

[5stringJeff]

The military is trying to beef up its HUMINT (HUMan INTellegence) resources. But a good mix of both HUMINT and technical intel is needed for a good intellegence picture.

 

[Zhukov]

What we need are battle droids.....

 

[KLSuddeth]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
The military is trying to beef up its HUMINT (HUMan INTellegence) resources. But a good mix of both HUMINT and technical intel is needed for a good intellegence picture.

That would be balance...what is it I scream about ALL the time?
Balance.

We need a good dose of common sense and balance in every issue
(my 2 cents thats worth at LEAST a dollar lol) :

 

[walwor]

Exactly what technology are we relying on too much?

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by walwor
Exactly what technology are we relying on too much?

Planes, trains and automobile.

Aircraft and missiles and not enough "boots on the ground".

 

[Annie]

I'll go with the consensus, think the government is beginning to see a need for Humint, but not fast enough, especially regarding Arabic speakers.

But damn, those special ops guys really get the Muslim look down, especially in Afghanistan.

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by Kathianne
But damn, those special ops guys really get the Muslim look down, especially in Afghanistan.

Yes, they sure do! The only problem that I have heard of them having is that they tend to be too tall and it gives them away! :

 

[Annie]

Tell me about it! I teach 7th grade and every boy in the class is taller than me, not a great feat at 5'2".

 

[walwor]

Hmmmm. I think we need troops on the ground, no doubt about it, but we need to support them with every bit of technology we've got, the more advanced the better. There are geodesic-enabled PDA's that can show location, give information on enemy and friendly troops, and survive a fall from a height of 6 feet onto concrete. There are robotic exoskeletons that enable troops to march further without getting tired. Spotters in Afghanistan directed bombers at altitudes far above radar and anti-aircraft ranges to precisely drop bunker busters. There are goggles controlled by laptops which troops can carry in their backpacks, that show photographic images from around objects so the soldier can see and shoot without sticking his head out. All these, as well as planes and tanks, need to be used to protect the lives of our soldiers. Sorry, can't go along with your premise.

 

[KarlMarx]

Wars have been won or lost by technology (or the lack of it).

The American colonies won the Revolutionary War partly because their troops used guns with interchangeable parts, as opposed to the British who didn't.

Radar and long range bombers helped to shorten World War II and helped the Allies win it (not to mention the A-bomb).

Technology actually saves lives in a war.

For instance, in World War II, it took a fleet of bombers each manned with about a dozen men to take out a target. The reason was that bombs of that time were not accurate, nor were the means of targetting.

Today, all it takes is one cruise missile and no people to take out a target.

In fact, today's smart weapons are many times more accurate than the ones used during Desert Storm in 1991.

If you haven't noticed the number of casualties on the coalition side is small in comparison to casualty figures from other conflicts. The reason is mostly because of technology.