Able Danger and Radar.
Wretchard at the Belmont Club discusses the nature of the technological war in Iraq. He is convinced (as am I) that at the end of the day the terrorists are fighting a losing battle in that war. Of course this does not mean they lose every battle.
If one looks at the history of weaponry the invention of a new kind of weapon is often hailed as the magic weapon to slay all others or that will make war obsolete. That prediction while common has yet to pan out with any weapon. The weapon is studied and countermeasures are developed.
I observed as much as the technological aspect of measure-countermeasure it is also important to have good men working those systems and technologies.
I commented:
My comment elicited a follow up from doug:
Indeed.
If one looks at the history of weaponry the invention of a new kind of weapon is often hailed as the magic weapon to slay all others or that will make war obsolete. That prediction while common has yet to pan out with any weapon. The weapon is studied and countermeasures are developed.
I observed as much as the technological aspect of measure-countermeasure it is also important to have good men working those systems and technologies.
I commented:
I hope everyone here has visited Michael Yon's site recently. He shows an example of one of these detonators with some close up pix. His latest piece is an extremely riveting read. [link added to this blog, seriously read Michael's blog]
The one pictured uses a talkabout like we all use to communicate with our group when we go skiing (we all ski here, right?) No need for cell phone technology even.
None the less, I would think such devices are every bit as vulnerable to the correct countermeasure.
One last note, add the tank to the list of weapons. Some thought tanks would be the ultimate wonder-weapon.
The most important thing is no matter the technology having soldiers who are aware and observant. After all if the operator does not pick up on what his device is telling him the device does not work. E.g. the radar picking up the incoming Japanese planes on a December morning in 1941. [Emphasis added]
Source: The Belmont Club commentary by Marcus Aurelius.The one pictured uses a talkabout like we all use to communicate with our group when we go skiing (we all ski here, right?) No need for cell phone technology even.
None the less, I would think such devices are every bit as vulnerable to the correct countermeasure.
One last note, add the tank to the list of weapons. Some thought tanks would be the ultimate wonder-weapon.
The most important thing is no matter the technology having soldiers who are aware and observant. After all if the operator does not pick up on what his device is telling him the device does not work. E.g. the radar picking up the incoming Japanese planes on a December morning in 1941. [Emphasis added]
My comment elicited a follow up from doug:
Marcus,
The Army's "Able Danger" was the Radar, the Army operators knew exactly what it meant, and the Gorelick Lawyers in DC refused to take the message.
3,000 died, no big deal.
Retain traitors in DC, keep the borders unguarded, and eliminate the enemy worldwide.
Source: The Belmont Club commentary by Marcus Aurelius.The Army's "Able Danger" was the Radar, the Army operators knew exactly what it meant, and the Gorelick Lawyers in DC refused to take the message.
3,000 died, no big deal.
Retain traitors in DC, keep the borders unguarded, and eliminate the enemy worldwide.
Indeed.
posted by Marcus Aurelius at 12:07 PM
<< Home