this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2023
97 points (91.5% liked)

World News

38972 readers
1738 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Nearly half of the air-to-ground munitions that Israel has used in Gaza in its war with Hamas since October 7 have been unguided, otherwise known as “dumb bombs,” according to a new US intelligence assessment.

top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

A US official told CNN that the US believes that the Israeli military is using the dumb bombs in conjunction with a tactic called “dive bombing,” or dropping a bomb while diving steeply in a fighter jet, which the official said makes the bombs more precise because it gets it closer to its target. The official said the US believes that an unguided munition dropped via dive-bombing is similarly precise to a guided munition.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Lol no it fucking isn't as precise as guided ammo.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No, no, what you should read is that their use of guided ammo is no more accurate than dive-bombing. That is, either the "guided" munitions aren't that accurate, or the targeting data used is of that quality.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago

At what point do you care if you hit exactly where you aimed at or 1 meter to the left? The bomb explodes on the target either way.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Why do you think that? Dive bombing hits generally within a few meters, even during WW2 where it was used against tanks. Why would a guided rocket be that much better? Where would it get the target data from if it doesn't have a human to guide it?

Obviously, there exist guided munitions with higher accuracy (<1m) but that's not the majority.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

When you gotta hit dozens of metres underground I think you'll need more than a few metres accuracy error.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Dive bombers sunk ships (most of them taking evasive action at the time as well) regularly in WW2 using completely dumb bombs.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, so? Still doesn't make it "as accurate as laser guided bombs".

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I never claimed that they were? I was only pointing out that dropping dumb bombs with precision is something that was perfected 80 years ago.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago

That's literally the claim we are talking about in this thread - that dumb bombs dropped while dive bombing aren't as accurate as laser guided bombs - which was claimed in the comment I was replying to

[–] [email protected] -3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Says it right in the article.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

It says "US official says" that, it doesn't say it is indeed so (you know, as proven scientifically or by analysis by an independent source).

An individual belonging to a government that supports another government saying something that spins in a positive way the actions of the later government isn't in even the same universe as the standard of proof for something to be widely accepted as true.

Given the US' continued support of Israel in this, militarilly and diplomatically, statements of US officials justifying Israeli military choices aren't at all trustworthy, quite the contrary.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I choose to belive the experienced officials over the dumb lemmy users making baseless accusations against them.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

How exactly do you know the never once named person, who is only and ever refered to as "US Official" and who made that comment, is "experienced"?!

Plenty of people in that article who put their name on the line along with their words say the exact opposite of the anonymous "US Official".

Clearly you just liked that statement (no doubt because it aligns with your political beliefs) and went backwards from there to assuming the anonymous person quoted making that statement is "experienced", which is fine amongst people who already believe the same politics as you but won't convince anybody with 2 brain cells.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Nah, I just don't believe you who provides no proof for your claim.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

If that was a thinking posture you would have the same proof requirement for quotes from "US Officials" who want to remainn unnamed as you do for the person whose only claim is that you can't outright trust without further proof what's said by unnamed "US Officials".

It's quite funny that your counter to my point is to demand that I prove my claim that you should demand proof from anonymous sources.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I personally have never flown a fighter in combat, only seen it. But, a nefarious conspiracy theory doesn't make too much sense.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

If you think politicians lying to make what they defend sound good is a "conspiracy theory", then you're just the right person to purchase this piece of really cheap river-crossing realestate I have for sale in New York!

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I don't think a DoD official is going to lie for anyone, He'll just stay silent.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

The only person in the article who said the words you quoted (that basically mean "it's all the same") is an anonymous official whilst every single one of the persons who are actually named there said the opposite.

Anonymous sources in the kind of positions in the state aparatus were they're authorized to talk to the press will absolutelly say whatever helps the message of "the boss" including outright lying about "what we think".

Have you been under a rock for the past 3 decades to still believe that when an anonymous source is quoted on the press what they say is generally way less trustworthy than when it's a named somebody???!

[–] ryannathans 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago

Well if that paragraph isn't true, why would the rest of them be?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I can’t actually wrap my head around a military official equating dive bombing to precision guided munitions what a bunch of clowns.

Sure, sending your hulking fighter jet screaming towards the ground and launching a dumb bomb is basically the same as calmly designating a target with a laser from near level flight.

Why does any of this shit matter in the first place? We aren’t talking about blowing up tank divisions or specific highly advanced military targets, we are talking about an absolutely incredible amount of bombs dropped on insurgent fighters nebulously distributed in a civilian population.

It is genocide, no other word for it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago

But but but what about " we do our utmost to protect the lives of civilians in Gaza"?

Or we stopped pretending that this is the case?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Major Keren Hajioff, an Israeli spokesperson, said on Wednesday that “as a military committed to international law and a moral code of conduct, we are devoting vast resources to minimizing harm to the civilians that Hamas has forced into the role of human shields.

“I’m extremely surprised and concerned,” said Brian Castner, a former Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) officer who now serves as Amnesty International’s senior crisis adviser on arms and military operations.

It is a massive civilian harm problem if they do not have that accuracy, and if you can’t even give a benefit of the doubt that that the weapon is actually landing where the Israeli forces intended to,” Castner added.

The type of munitions used in each strike is determined according to the characteristics of the target, the operational need, and the effort to mitigate harm to civilians, which the terrorist organization uses as a human shields,” Dinar said.

The US has also provided Israel with unguided munitions, including 5,000 Mk82 bombs, a source familiar with recent weapons transfers told CNN, confirming a Wall Street Journal report.

The US has provided approximately 3,000 JDAMS to Israel since October 7, CNN previously reported, and told Congress last month that it planned to transfer $320 million worth of the Spice Family kits.


The original article contains 1,084 words, the summary contains 202 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] [email protected] -2 points 10 months ago

When dropping 2000 pound explosives on refugee camps to "destroy a tunnel 70 metres underground" I'm sure a metre or 5 aiming error won't matter right guys?