Originally posted by AMoore:
quote:
Originally posted by DorianGreyed:
"(the SCUDs did more damage when we fired the Patriot at them than when we didn't)" - Alan
I wish more people understood this. When the military went on TV or in front of reporters stating the Patriots' success rate (which varied, depending on who was talking) the word "intercepted" was used. "Our Patriots intercepted 21 out of 23 SCUDS." It was later found out that, in military terms, "intercepted" means that the two missiles passed each other in the air. In almost all cases, the SCUD went merrily on it way. The small amout of damage done by SCUDS was primarily due to the Iraqi's lousy aim and faulty workmanship.
There were other aspects of the problem as I recall. Often, the Patriot would hit the empty rocket motor of the SCUD upper stage, doing no important damage, but the worst, for the statistics, was when the intercept course for one fired in Israel caused it to attempt to fly through an apartment building.
quote:
Remember, this is the same military that told us that we were winning in Vietnam and that there was a "light at the end of the tunnel" and the same military that is telling us today that we are winning in Iraq. I am NOT talking about the everyday serviceman who is doing the fighting. I'm speaking of the brass in uniform and the suits in the Pentagon and the White House.
"The first casualty of war..."
When a politician makes a public statement, what is important isn't whether or not it's true -- usually he doesn't care about that. What's important is his intention when he makes the statement. For example, Bush, saying Iraq was on the verge of developing nuclear weapons, was less interested in Iraq's nuclear program than in generating support for his planned invasion. Whether or not Iraq was on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon was unimportant to him. Support for the invasion was important.
Alan Moore
