Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9729970" data-attributes="member: 18">Yeah it's important to avoid the temptation of thinking in straight lines about "the most efficient" or "most direct" method to dealing with stuff, when that's never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, all the back into antiquity been how humans have carried out warfare.Instead we constantly engage in "what we thought was a good idea at the time" and get pushed back by "turns out that wasn't a good idea actually!!!" and "oh that thing we doctrinally decided was rubbish, actually we need that back now!".Aerial bombing is a great example of this - targeted strikes on specific things is proven to be pretty effective, so long as you can actually hit and damage those things (two separate issues which have often been huge problems - i.e. the bombs were on target, the target is essentially undamaged, or we dropped all the bombs, but none of them hit the target), but through a lot of the 20th and now parts of the 21st century we've instead being using saturation bombing of civilian targets or just dropping so many bombs that are "targeted" (sure, sure...) that it might as well be, based on doctrines and ideas that have consistently failed - particularly the idea that you can cause civilians to want to give up or want to and actually do overthrowing their regime by saturation bombing, which has been tried out countless times, at the cost the cost of probably millions of lives, and has absolutely never worked!Yet people keep doing it, because it's satisfying to the attacker, and checks a lot of boxes, and you get a lot of pictures of fallen-over builds, so surely you're doing something, right?</blockquote>

Verification