ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

[Dj_Jestar]

The barrel bombs being dropped by Assad's army were indiscriminate, dumb devices literally thrown out the back of a helicopter by hand over heavily populated areas with the intent of causing terror and harm to civilians. It is impossible to say that they were targeting the jihadists because they were barely capable of targeting even a whole city accurately.

And Palestine has nothing to do with this.

 

[Tefal]

so israel bomb palestine people say hamas are using civilians as shields etc but when the moderate jihadists in syria use civilians as shields it's assads fault for civilian casualties

wut?


who mentioned civilians as shields?


Israel drops a targeted very expensive guided missile on a specific building, after delivering various warnings even a specially developed knock knock round or missile to clear any people on the roof or in the building



syrian air force fill an old tank with explosives and light, yes light, a fuse and kick it out the back of a helicopter so high they cant really distinguish buildings just a city below.


you want to tell me that was a target attack or just a big indiscriminate bomb dropped on and targeted at civilians?

 

[Freakbro]

The barrel bombs being dropped by Assad's army were indiscriminate, dumb devices literally thrown out the back of a helicopter by hand over heavily populated areas with the intent of causing terror and harm to civilians. It is impossible to say that they were targeting the jihadists because they were barely capable of targeting even a whole city accurately.

I do think we over egg the term "smart weapons" and the pejorative use of "barrel bomb"

A 'barrel bomb' is a metal container with explosives in it....sounds just like any other bomb to me. And until very recently all ordnance was dumb and just dropped out the back of an plane - and tbf, most of it still is.

All this smart technology, which isn't as good as the propaganda would have you believe, is technologically advanced and expensive, so you can hardly condemn most countries for not having it.

 

[Werewolf]

I do think we over egg the term "smart weapons" and the pejorative use of "barrel bomb"

A 'barrel bomb' is a metal container with explosives in it....sounds just like any other bomb to me. And until very recently all ordnance was dumb and just dropped out the back of an plane - and tbf, most of it still is.

All this smart technology, which isn't as good as the propaganda would have you believe, is technologically advanced and expensive, so you can hardly condemn most countries for not having it.

Even 1940's bombs were more accurately delivered than the barrel bombs, for one thing they were designed to at least try and land inside a targeted area and had an aerodynamic shape to assist in that.

Barrel bombs, no attempt at even 1940's level of accuracy.

 

[Orionaut]

wut?


Israel drops a targeted very expensive guided missile on a specific building, after delivering various warnings even a specially developed knock knock round or missile to clear any people on the roof or in the building

syrian air force fill an old tank with explosives and light, yes light, a fuse and kick it out the back of a helicopter so high they cant really distinguish buildings just a city below.

And the reason why Israel has access to such technology (And Syria doesn't is......??)

 

[RoboCod]

And the reason why Israel has access to such technology (And Syria doesn't is......??)

Their defence budget and their surprisingly good R&D in arms.

Or is this a loaded question so you can say the evil West arm them.

 

[RoboCod]

I do think we over egg the term "smart weapons" and the pejorative use of "barrel bomb"

A 'barrel bomb' is a metal container with explosives in it....sounds just like any other bomb to me. And until very recently all ordnance was dumb and just dropped out the back of an plane - and tbf, most of it still is.

All this smart technology, which isn't as good as the propaganda would have you believe, is technologically advanced and expensive, so you can hardly condemn most countries for not having it.

No, but we can condemn most countries for using antiquated, dumb and indiscriminate weapons.

 

[NickK]

All this smart technology, which isn't as good as the propaganda would have you believe, is technologically advanced and expensive, so you can hardly condemn most countries for not having it.

Hmm the modern 'smart bomb' (JDAM) is a bomb with a changeable smart fins set - not like the paveway. Like all bombs - it has a blast diameter. All bombs are going to kill everything in an area.

The problem is that most sadistic organisations place their installations within densely populated areas - effectively making a human shied including their homes etc.

Civilians are often work in organisation areas doing mundane service tasks because that's possibly the only money paying job there is. The only thing that can be done is prewarn the area with leaflets - but then that means all the essential equipment and military people scatter..

So you're correct - the question is: are bombs the correct things these days? Perhaps a big laser cannon would work? Unfortunately that also creates a shockwave when the air is heated taking out buildings close.. thus causing casualties.

Before operations would carpet bomb. Now people don't know what that is like and compare everything to zero casualties. That is the new age - however the age of killing indiscriminately seems to be just dawning for Deash..

Physical war sucks. There is no other way to define it. It is a blunt instrument to do the job of a scalpel. At least there is an attempt to minimise casualties.

Barrel bombs are large pipe bombs.

The US call them daisy cutters - but oddly theirs can vary from pushed out the back of the plane (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLU-82) or dropped with guidance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast).

 

[Freakbro]

No, but we can condemn most countries for using antiquated, dumb and indiscriminate weapons.

I imagine that includes cluster bombs, since we signed the treaty to ban them?

 

[dowie]

No, but we can condemn most countries for using antiquated, dumb and indiscriminate weapons.

quite, especially when you see footage of Russian heavy bombers dropping a few sticks of the things through clouds on to god knows what... still it is good PR for Putin

 

[Dj_Jestar]

I do think we over egg the term "smart weapons" and the pejorative use of "barrel bomb"

A 'barrel bomb' is a metal container with explosives in it....sounds just like any other bomb to me. And until very recently all ordnance was dumb and just dropped out the back of an plane - and tbf, most of it still is.

All this smart technology, which isn't as good as the propaganda would have you believe, is technologically advanced and expensive, so you can hardly condemn most countries for not having it.

Even the munitions you describe (and that the Russians as well as other forces are using to bomb strongholds and Raqqa) are much, much more accurate. The guidance systems used on the planes and other aircraft (and land-based launchers) are scarily accurate, even with unguided munitions, because the on-board computers will calculate aircraft speed, wind speed, trajectory, AoA etc. etc. with automatic release.

You are deliberately underplaying just how primitive barrel bombs are. They have their name for being literally barrels packed with explosives with lots of gaffer tape to keep it all in. The extent of the guidance barrel bombs have are "are we over a city?" "Yep" "Ok, I'll throw it out."

As for land-based launchers of "barrel bombs"... well... accuracy isn't even a statistic to them...

 

[Tefal]

And the reason why Israel has access to such technology (And Syria doesn't is......??)

because Syria invested mostly in air to air armaments for its air force to fight the Israeli air force not air to ground munitions as it didn't expect a land war.

so they used up their ammo very quickly.


Israel has access to it because Israel actively develops these weapons because mostly its air force is used to attack ground targets, instead of just buying them in from outside.


so ina war it can make its own.

 

[sven256]

Even 1940's bombs were more accurately delivered than the barrel bombs, for one thing they were designed to at least try and land inside a targeted area and had an aerodynamic shape to assist in that.

Barrel bombs, no attempt at even 1940's level of accuracy.

Any proof on that?

As the barrel bombs are dropped from a hell of a lot lower altitude and at a lot slower speed than conventional bombs. So I would guess are far easier to land on target.

Now I'm not arguing rights and wrongs but considering the numbers of them dropped. I would guess they are fairly accurate if they want to be.

 

[sven256]

Even the munitions you describe (and that the Russians as well as other forces are using to bomb strongholds and Raqqa) are much, much more accurate. The guidance systems used on the planes and other aircraft (and land-based launchers) are scarily accurate, even with unguided munitions, because the on-board computers will calculate aircraft speed, wind speed, trajectory, AoA etc. etc. with automatic release.

You are deliberately underplaying just how primitive barrel bombs are. They have their name for being literally barrels packed with explosives with lots of gaffer tape to keep it all in. The extent of the guidance barrel bombs have are "are we over a city?" "Yep" "Ok, I'll throw it out."

As for land-based launchers of "barrel bombs"... well... accuracy isn't even a statistic to them...

But they are not being used by the Assad forces, The so call hell cannons are used by the so called "moderate rebels". These are just a gas tank with explosives.

 

[Tefal]

As for land-based launchers of "barrel bombs"... well... accuracy isn't even a statistic to them...

didnt the ira use something similar to this to blow up an army barracks once?

 

[Tefal]

Any proof on that?

As the barrel bombs are dropped from a hell of a lot lower altitude and at a lot slower speed than conventional bombs. So I would guess are far easier to land on target.

Now I'm not arguing rights and wrongs but considering the numbers of them dropped. I would guess they are fairly accurate if they want to be.

theres a video of them lobbing them out theback filmed by the crew lobbing them, out the back.

theyre just old metal cylinders suffed with explosives

 

[sven256]

theres a video of them lobbing them out theback filmed by the crew lobbing them, out the back.

theyre just old metal cylinders suffed with explosives

Breaking news....

But my point was they are no different than old conventional bombs, are they not?. The difference is these are dropped from a lower altitudes and at a slower pace so likely to be more accurate.

Which contradicts the previous statement which i quoted.

 

[Dis86]

Any proof on that?

As the barrel bombs are dropped from a hell of a lot lower altitude and at a lot slower speed than conventional bombs. So I would guess are far easier to land on target.

Now I'm not arguing rights and wrongs but considering the numbers of them dropped. I would guess they are fairly accurate if they want to be.

As you say yourself you're guessing. I suggest you look at how they're deployed. There is literally no attempt to aim.

 

[sven256]

As you say yourself you're guessing. I suggest you look at how they're deployed. There is literally no attempt to aim.

So what you are saying then its no different than 99.99% of bombs dropped during the second world war then? Which was the 1940, which I was referring to.

Thank you for clarifying that.

 

[Tefal]

Breaking news....

But my point was they are no different than old conventional bombs, are they not?. The difference is these are dropped from a lower altitudes and at a slower pace so likely to be more accurate.

Which contradicts the previous statement which i quoted.

iots a barrel some with an actual lit burning fuse :/

radically different from any conventional bomb with fins, known performace etc

they're dropped from highish altitudes so they don't get shot down (you can see the kind of altitude int he video its about the clarity of "that's a town" ant even pick out buildings


the other thing is the conventional bombs your talking about are dropped over and over and over again in testing sites till they cac calculate how the travel and perform so that the air force using them can develop sights, or now days computerised systems to calculate how and where the bombs will fall even without guidance.

these don't they're literately lobbed out and they land where they land with no clue how each bomb will perfom as theyre not al lthe same.