> But they are still not winning the war.
???
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
An unbalanced look into the matter IMO.
For example, how many wanna be Jihaddies have blown themselves to bits during construction of such devices?
How many have failed to work or work improperly?
Add in the mix of Iraq as Arsenal and to get a clear picture is difficult indeed to paint in the dots.
This article asserts technology won wars in the past, and is not winning this war because guerrillas are proving more adaptive. That’s nonsense on stilts. Technology alone has never won guerrilla wars. The decisive war-winning tactics taken in the past are simple, but brutal. Simply put, they involve starving or killing the population that supports the guerrillas. The tactics of the Indian Wars and the Civil War are what worked - the essence of it is that any population that supports the guerrillas will have its physical property burned to the ground. (Non-European warfighters have been much less considerate - their premier tactic has been to kill all, loot all, burn all. Japanese tactics during WWII were simply rehashes of tactics used by the Chinese and other Oriental armies since antiquity). The Roman attempted to get their denizens of their conquered lands to love them with massive public works, but they made sure that locals at least feared them. (Note that decimation is a word of Roman origin).
Kinda like a big duh!!
The great war technologies often initially start out in hobbyists garages, for example the airplane and the digital computer.
btt