Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (195890)	8/7/2006 9:27:08 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Tanks can use all the smart weapons and other techniques. They don't have to be large simple gun platforms. They aren't going to be obsolete in 10 years. In 50 or 100 anything can happen but there's a good chance that mobile armored platforms will still be useful, they might not look very much like today's tanks but they will fill the same role. You are entirely missing the point. Given smart weapon "A" which costs $1K and CAN be carried and launched by a soldier, why would you instead place it on a multi-million dollar armored launcher instead, which is a sitting duck for the solder + $1K weapon? The soldier is far more concealable, much harder to detect, costs less, and you can have many more of them, and presents a much smaller target. I fully expect smart weapons to be developed which also target individuals, indeed, Hezbullah actually seems to be using anti-tank rockets against soldiers from some reports, but this in no way helps the expensive launch platform extend its life. There is no benefit to the launch platform over a soldier.