Posted on 02/15/2008 5:27:11 AM PST by Travis McGee
24*7/10 = 16.8
Meaning with 10 crews, we can have 2 crews on duty 24/7, with each crew doing a 33.6 workweek. Call it a standard 35-40 work week when taking into account needed administrative tasks
Unless the controllers are sitting in an AWACS sitting 400 miles away from the action, but with line-of-sight communications to the UAV
Should’ve taken my shoes off. LOL. So much for a degree in math.
It's not just the military. Without an army of desk jockeys, the enforcement apparatus of a government falls apart. Somebody has to process the purchase orders for all the stuff, and cut the paychecks for all the people
There was a book a few years back, "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross, that covered this scenario. Recall the chaos that the DC sniper created. Now visualize a few dozen serial killers stalking federal bureaucrats...
What’s that quote from? “Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000?”
Don't focus to much on just the flying robots
Visualize little robots the size of cats being dropped to crawl around on the ground, crawling up trees near indications of traffic, and sitting there waiting for somebody to pass by.
When it senses movement, a video feed goes up to an orbiting UAV to relay to a human at HQ, who decides whether to drop a bomb at the coordinates
You wish! More like 50-60 hours. In my unit, we have a saying... it takes 2 hours to move a Humvee two blocks.
Tolstoy
This is where McCain turns on the military.
The Reserves and Guard would flip first. They don't usually live on base, and are fully integrated into civilian life. If things are cast in us-and-them terms, they're more likely to consider themselves one of the "them."
I would like to agree, but visions of Kent State or the use of military against vets (post WW1) pop into my mind.
That's one means of attack. But they have a long-established military philosophy that says that will not be the only means that is likely to be used.
In attacking with fire, one should be prepared to meet five possible developments:Fire: CEMP-ET
(1) When fire breaks out inside to opponent's camp, respond at once with an attack from without;
(2) If there is an outbreak of fire, but the opponent's soldiers remain qui et, bide your time and do not attack;
(3) When the force of the flames has reached its height, follow it up with an attack, if that is practicable; if not, stay where you are;
(4) If it is possible to make an assault with fire from without, do not wait for it to break out within, but deliver your attack at a favorable moment;
(5) When you start a fire, be to windward of it. Do not attack from the leeward.
No. The government forces were drawn from BATF and FBI offices all over the country as noted by the BATF initial raid casualties from the Little Rock and New Orleans offices. A real resistance force would not NOT NOT have assembled in a large and identifiable group in Texas that required logistical and infrastructure support, but would have done their work at the home offices and residences in the locales from which the attacking personnel at Waco had come.
Similarly: the body-armor clad reflagged Border Patrol agents who pul;led off the Elien Gonzales raid had no particular fear of demonstrators or reporters, who they simply peppersprayed and beat, nor of discretely carried handguns. But had dozens or hundreds of Miami's Cubanos on the scene hauled out rifles both capable of chewing right through vehicles and soft body armor, and also hitting targets from two or three blocks away, that would have changed the situation more than just a little.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.