<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
        <title>Comments for Unclear on the concept...?</title>
        <description>We&apos;re the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost.  All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT,  and KA 2003-2010</description>
        <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/unclear_on_the_concept.html</link>
        <atom:link href="http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/unclear_on_the_concept_rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2012 15:57:43 Z</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Movable Type 4.12</generator>
        <language>en</language>
        <copyright>Copyright 2012</copyright>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>

        <item>
            <title>Unclear on the concept...?</title>
            <description>A french artillery piece from WWI. Made of paper. Explains a lot... right? Actually, no. Also known as a Quaker Gun. Obviously, used for deception purposes - whether as in pretending to have something more powerful than you have for deterrence purposes (see May Day Parades at Red Square, or early Nazi Party Rallies at Nueremburg), or to deceive the mean people who suck and are trying to kill you as to the location of your *real* toys - so they can die surprised, later, when they miscalculate and you end up killing *them,* the bassids! I just picked on...</description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/unclear_on_the_concept.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/unclear_on_the_concept.html</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2005 09:51:15 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>

        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from cw4(ret)billt on 2005-12-30</title>
            <description>
                <![CDATA[Not mentioned in the Kosovo retrospective was General Short's comment in <i>Aviation Week</i> upon being told that most of NATO air's hits were on decoys:
"If bombing decoys will keep the whole Serb Army busy replacing those decoys, then they won't be doing any ethnic cleansing."

Heh. Clueless...  ]]>
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/unclear_on_the_concept.html#comment-37193</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/unclear_on_the_concept.html#comment-37193</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2005 11:36:07 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from cw4(ret)billt on 2005-12-30</title>
            <description>
                <![CDATA[One Who Shall Remain Nameless (because he's still with the program) debriefed me on how the "visual image recognition" branch of the smart weapons family was doing ca. 1997:

"As long as it's targeting a T-72 and coming straight down at noon, it works like a champ. If it's offset to the side, or there's a shadow near the target, or if you're shooting at something other than a T-72, all bets are off. It can't tell a BMP from a bump in the road."

I <i>can</i> say that things have improved and I <i>can't</i> say by how much--that's getting into OPSEC territory. ]]>
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/unclear_on_the_concept.html#comment-37188</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2005/12/unclear_on_the_concept.html#comment-37188</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2005 10:35:47 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>


