The wording of the St Petersberg Declaration is any projectile under 400 grams. Can't find the weight of this "bullet" anywhere though.
Well let's consider something: this is not a bullet.
If I recall correctly, the round is programmed just as it leaves the weapon. It is fire and forget, not fire and program along the way as implied in the article and OP.
I think I've seen this before
is it really radio controlled or is it a timed fuse?
is it really radio controlled or is it a timed fuse?
The CMD could be corrupted on the weapon itself. The operator is tricked into believing its correct.
If this was ever used to shoot someone directly, it seems it might be illegal under the Hague Convention or the St. Petersburg Declaration, depending on the weight of the projectile.
The nations represented were Austria-Hungary, Bavaria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Great Britain (representing the British Empire), Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, the North German Confederation (i.e., Greater Prussia), Russia, Sweden and Norway, Switzerland, the Ottoman Empire, and Württemberg.[1] The United States, not considered a major power at the time, was not invited, took no part in the convention, and has never acceded to it.
There are no rules against using large caliber rounds or grenade launchers against individuals. It's an urban legend that gets retold over and over again.
The standard is proportionality.
There are no rules against using large caliber rounds or grenade launchers against individuals. It's an urban legend that gets retold over and over again.
The standard is proportionality.
You won't win with that or current ROEs but hey nice tech.
Proportionality is every war. It is preferable than going back to an age of total warfare.
If you like wasting men money and material. Then sure. I'd target women and children like in Dresden instead of avoid them. Don't feel like doing that? maybe war not a good idea.
Throw away everything written in last 50 years of fail. Wars are won when people have no faith in their own militants to protect them. Every war was the same, US civil, Second Boer war and WW2 prime example. The Germans had no problem sending off 7 million German boys to die it was only when you hit their enablers, the people, they surrendered.Dresden wasn't half as bad as you think it was.
It was upped so badly because of the later nuclear attacks to show that conventional weapons caused more casualties, everyone outside of the US knows that already and everyone also knows that civ casulties have been higher elsewhere since Dresden.
The problem with killing family members but not entire families is that you create more enemies for ground troops to fight than you kill when you bomb them, that's been a real problem in Iraq, the greatest converters to terrorism among the genpop have been us, for two reasons. 1. We really had no idea what to bomb so we bombed the shit out of here and there and 2. We didn't lay the groundwork properly at initial invasion.
You're in Afghanistan?
Throw away everything written in last 50 years of fail. Wars are won when people have no faith in their own militants to protect them. Every war was the same, US civil, Second Boer war and WW2 prime example. The Germans had no problem sending off 7 million German boys to die it was only when you hit their enablers, the people, they surrendered.
You'll never prevent stuff like this with that weapon in OP or without changing hearts and minds (and I'm not talking about building schools either)
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/30/world/asia/30afghan.html?ref=world
You're 100% right, A few civilian casualties is counter productive, making them fear extinction is not.
Yeah.
And as for causing the round to explode in the weapon, I'm sure the same safeguards of current grenade launchers would apply and the round wouldn't arm until a certain number of rotations or distance is reached.
Bah, when are they going to come out with this?