Massively OP weapons that are underutilized in western armies or doctrines

Post massively OP weapons that are underestimated/underutilized in the western armies or doctrines

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The israelites already do this to hospitals

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Doesn't understand the meme
        I'm sorry your homosexual paleshitian friends are getting rekt. Maybe next time don't store weapons underneath in them after going on a rape and murder spree.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    lol, lmao even

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What a fricking nightmare. Imagine ground based drone swarms of mines both AT and AP, that roam around like crabs all communicating over massive interconnected networks that can dynamically build and remove an entire 100-400m deep minefield. Linked to other UAV drones or even satellites that would use AI to infer the optimal placement for the minefield.

      >Mech brigade moves out to launch an offensive action at the front, hoping for a breakthrough.
      >Hour or so drive to beginning of the front
      >AI powered ISR assets detect your movement from geostationary orbit and start directing an entire minefield to pick itself up and move 100s of meters or even some Km to ambush you on the most likely path you will take.
      >Drive over ground that not even 15-20 minutes ago a Mech Recon platoon drove over
      >Original Mech brigade is totally destroyed or damaged and unrecoverable
      >In the coming days recovery efforts are launched
      >Recovery vehicles and teams get to the area with minimal issue
      >After hoisting and towing what they can, 40 mins into the drive home with the salvaged vehicles the same thing happens again to the recovery teams

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Seperate post for some technology.

        Wide-area motion imagery (Google Lodestar surveillance).

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wide-area_motion_imagery

        Loitering surveillance that can detect and track hundreds of individual targets, including people or vehicles from many miles away. Can scan an area several kilometers in diameter at once. Not susceptible to radar clutter, jamming or other *common* interference. Apparently the Apache has something similar - it's own version - but I don't think it's confirmed and I can't remember where I heard that.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Jesus Wept
      Could we do this with a updated and modified M23 VX Chemical Mine?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's a smart idea but it sounds prohibitively expensive, overly complicated and like it would introduce an additional point of potential failure via EW vulnerability

      How would the mines rearrange and re-emplace themselves effectively to fill in the gaps?

      How would they communicate between each other?

      How would the initial emplacement work and how would it be done efficiently?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Why post this drivel?
        >How would the mines rearrange and re-emplace themselves effectively to fill in the gaps?
        The mines are surface emplaced. The concept appears to show them using something like an explosive charge or release of compressed gas to effect the move, but really, locomotion isn't hard.
        >How would they communicate between each other?
        Something like LORAWAN at designated time windows.
        >How would the initial emplacement work and how would it be done efficiently?
        Establish control measures. Geofence a minefield. Load the mines that will go in it with the geofence and the control measures by radio. Emplace the mines before the live time in the control measures. Minefield goes live at the live time.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the Americans spent $80,000,000,000 on the Self-Healing Minefield
      >so the Russians/Chinese spent $80,000 on the mine clearing penal battalion

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I know this is a bit of a bait thread, but the humble landmine spam has indeed been underestimated in western doctrine.
    This is partly due to political moronation, partly because of milcorp greed. Seceral countries banned landmines outright after signing the treaty, not just the anti-personnel ones. In other cases, anti-vehicle mines were subsidized (on a company's financial sheet) by selling higher-margin anti-personnel ones, so when those went away, AT mines followed. AT mines were a flagship product, but a bit of a loss-leader, propped up by the AP ones.
    Western forces never fully wargamed a scenario where mines are an actual barrier, instead of merely funnel devices.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This is absolutely fricking wrong. The US dabbed all over Iraq's massive minefields in Desert Storm and penetrated them within hours of the ground invasion because they were foresighted enough to bomb the shit out of anything that could conceivably threaten their engineering crews.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Dabbing on thirdies doesn't count, anon. You want peer/near-peer experience, not whack-a-haji xp grinding.
        Show me a wargame where the attacker had to cross a minefield and a) didn't have air supremacy, or even dominance, only at best localized air superiority; b) the minefield was laid in sneeki breeki fashion, with all sorts of dirty tricks; c) the minefield was overwatched by indirect fire; d) the attacker couldn't "just go around, lol".
        >Inb4 "that woudn't have been realistic conditions".

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Your entire thing was basically saying "western forces don't know how to deal with mines", when they in fact have in the past.

          To think that a proper Western force would try to push a minefield without air superiority or any other sort of massive advantage over the defender is completely disingenuous.

          Also, Iraq wasn't "third world" at the time. They were the 4th largest army in the world at the time, had one of the most comprehensive IADS outside of Russia, and had actual wartime experience from the Iran-Iraq war. General sentiment at the time was that the US would suffer horrendous casualties against them.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Also, Iraq wasn't "third world" at the time. They were the 4th largest army in the world at the time, had one of the most comprehensive IADS outside of Russia
            May we see a citation?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              You'll need to learn about search engines thirdie. No spoonfeeding for you.

              Read about XM123 Goblin while you seethe.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Look it up homosexual, it took me 3 seconds on google. While you’re at it, head leave and reread the list of logical fallacies. Argument ad incredulity is pretty close to argument ad obstinate moron, which is what you’re doing

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Your reading comprehension is so poor that your own source owns you in the second sentence.

              I know how to google perfectly well and return the advice, but thanks. No amount of pretending to be a different anon will undo the fact that the source you linked disproves you within first 15 seconds of reading. It's almost like you didn't rea- oh wait, that's exactly what happened. You didn't read it.

              Yes, precisely. Now go back and reread your original point. No, Iraq was not the fourth largest army at the time of US invasion in 2003, and even when it was at the peak of mobilisation would not make it anywhere near the 4th strongest like you'd like to imply by association.
              Even russians admit that their war with Georgia in 2008 showcased multiple faults in their military, launching reforms. And yet, the war was deisively won in 5 days, despite the GDP gap between Russia and Georgia being 138 to 1 and the gap between USA and Iraq in 2003 545 to 1. In fact, Iraq had very similar gdp to Georgia in 2008 (21bln vs 12.8bln).

              Oh my fricking God he is that stupid

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            He's not OP. I meant the weapons that the western armis don't use themselves enough, learn to read.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Just because a number of Western countries have banned mines doesn't mean they haven't thought up of ways to counter or remove them. They're STILL fricking digging up leftover mines and UXO from both World Wars in Europe.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Read fricking again. It's not about countering them, it's about their usage. And it's not only about landmines, we can discuss other weapons that aren't popular in the west but are very effective

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                So what youre saying is no answer is correct except "wow mines are very cool russia is very cool"

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >it's about their usage
                No western armies, including the ones that banned anti-personnel mines, don't train in mine warfare. Even CCW signatories use, and train with, anti-tank mines.

                I was trained on emplacement and retrieval of antitank mines for defensive obstacles when I served, and I was a logistics officer in a CCW signatory military during GWOT. Everyone also knows how you might change the pressure requirement to trigger an AT mine. This is not the capability gap that you, and OP, think it is in western nations.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >peer/near-peer
          There are no peers to NATO. Which is why your employers in whatever turdhole country you come from pay so many people to try and undermine and subvert the West.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Fricking moron. Do you realize on how feared iraq was when it was its peak of power? There were predictions that the U.S. will get into a long drawn out battle. You know what happened? Iraq got destroyed, their minefields were next to useless and their armor columns got deleted left and right.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >dabbing on thirdies doesn't count
          They spent over a month completely destroying the Iraqi military from the air to the point that, when the breaching attempts finally happened, there were no Iraqis in sight because all of the ones who would have been there were dead or too scared to approach. A lot of the units that crossed the border made it 100 miles in without seeing basically any Iraqis it was that bad.

          Your shit about everything suddenly not working just because you say so is cope, nothing more.

          Read fricking again. It's not about countering them, it's about their usage. And it's not only about landmines, we can discuss other weapons that aren't popular in the west but are very effective

          What the frick are you talking about? Do you think mines aren't a common thing brought up in western militaries? Jesus christ the US just got off 20 straight years of getting blown up by IEDs and you think nobody ever thought of the concept of a deliberately placed minefield?

          >Also, Iraq wasn't "third world" at the time. They were the 4th largest army in the world at the time, had one of the most comprehensive IADS outside of Russia
          May we see a citation?

          Oh you are that stupid. You're the type of person to have a weird feeling in your chest, call an ambulance, get rushed into emergency surgery where they fix an anuerysm or imminent heart attack or something, then come out of it claiming that it wasn't that bad and they didn't do THAT much. No anon, they did. Your inability to comprehend alternate scenarios to the one that actually happened is a major problem.

          Yes, precisely. Now go back and reread your original point. No, Iraq was not the fourth largest army at the time of US invasion in 2003, and even when it was at the peak of mobilisation would not make it anywhere near the 4th strongest like you'd like to imply by association.
          Even russians admit that their war with Georgia in 2008 showcased multiple faults in their military, launching reforms. And yet, the war was deisively won in 5 days, despite the GDP gap between Russia and Georgia being 138 to 1 and the gap between USA and Iraq in 2003 545 to 1. In fact, Iraq had very similar gdp to Georgia in 2008 (21bln vs 12.8bln).

          >he thinks anyone is talking about Iraqi Freedom
          Holy frick, we've gotten to the point that zoomers think that Desert Storm doesn't count because it was "ancient" and "is ancient history". We're heading for a major war aren't we.

          where does the US need a mine field

          would be interesting if Texas mined the border, I will admit

          [...]

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Holy frick, we've gotten to the point that zoomers think that Desert Storm doesn't count because it was "ancient" and "is ancient history". We're heading for a major war aren't we.
            unironically yes, people forgot about DRE

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >where the attacker had to cross a minefield and a) didn't have air supremacy, or even dominance, only at best localized air superiority

          we simply just don't do this. that's a Ukrainian thing.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Show me a wargame where
          NTC, several times a year.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You are a fricking moron. The west does not go through a minefield. It goes over it, because the west does not do mine clearing ops unless they have air superiority

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Unless it's Western allies, in what case they can die in minefields or wait 2 years for the air support.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      They’re 80 year old technology Anon. We have literal scores of tools to fight an mine in existence, and many, many units devoted to neutralizing them.
      Anon mines ain’t shit. (You) can remove mines with a BAYONET and some time. These are not even the rare tamper-resistant and/or low-metal mines (they might exist, but I have not heard about them and even if employed they would be <1% of the total). They are just cheap metal mines that the USSR shit out by the millions.
      The problem is artillery. You need time and relative peace to demine an area so vehicles can traverse it. The Ukis are not given this time because Russia still has functioning arty. Large scale de-mining cannot occur while shells are being fired at your position.
      Mines are evil in part because they prove no obstacle to even low-skill armies. You can use a bayonet, a metal detector, a dog, even a fricking species of rat. Militaries can clear it, it just takes time.
      But civilians don’t know better and get blown up.

      TL;DR stop fricking getting worked up about mines, a country with air superiority is going to have enemy arty deleted very early on and mines can be removed at leisure.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Mine-man.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >The Ukraine
    >the western armies
    The esl shills remind me of when I tried to hamfist sentences in French class.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >the mental level of browns
    https://www.ourmidland.com/news/article/Iraq-s-Army-Was-Once-World-s-4th-Largest-7151366.php

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Your reading comprehension is so poor that your own source owns you in the second sentence.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        This is either the worst bait or you legit don't realize there were 2 Iraq conflicts and everyone is talking about the first one.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You have to be 18 or older to use this site, Gen A babby

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Learn to google you tard.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I know how to google perfectly well and return the advice, but thanks. No amount of pretending to be a different anon will undo the fact that the source you linked disproves you within first 15 seconds of reading. It's almost like you didn't rea- oh wait, that's exactly what happened. You didn't read it.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >By 1988, at the end of the Iran–Iraq war, the Iraqi Army was the world's fourth largest army, consisting of 955,000 standing soldiers and 650,000 paramilitary forces in the Popular Army. According to John Childs and André Corvisier, a low estimate shows the Iraqi Army capable of fielding 4,500 tanks, 484 combat aircraft and 232 combat helicopters.[65] According to Michael Knights, a high estimate shows the Iraqi Army capable of fielding one million troops and 850,000 reservists, 5,500 tanks, 3,000 artillery pieces, 700 combat aircraft and helicopters; it held 53 divisions, 20 special-forces brigades, and several regional militias, and had a strong air defense.[66]

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, precisely. Now go back and reread your original point. No, Iraq was not the fourth largest army at the time of US invasion in 2003, and even when it was at the peak of mobilisation would not make it anywhere near the 4th strongest like you'd like to imply by association.
          Even russians admit that their war with Georgia in 2008 showcased multiple faults in their military, launching reforms. And yet, the war was deisively won in 5 days, despite the GDP gap between Russia and Georgia being 138 to 1 and the gap between USA and Iraq in 2003 545 to 1. In fact, Iraq had very similar gdp to Georgia in 2008 (21bln vs 12.8bln).

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >2003
            He's talking about Desert Storm, you moron. In the 2003 Second Gulf War Iraq wasn't near the 4th largest military because their military was largely destroyed in the First Gulf War 10 years earlier.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Desert Storm
            >2003
            Lmao everyone laugh at this fricking brownoid

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Did you think 2003 iraq was the only war with iraq or something? Why do people memory hole the gulf war like this? Is it out of cope that america can eternally gut what is formally the 4th largest military?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            everyone point and laugh

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Holy shit you are actually a worthless Black person. My fricking sides.

            https://i.imgur.com/yx8r91H.jpg

            Post massively OP weapons that are underestimated/underutilized in the western armies or doctrines

            You're also a fricking moron.
            It's not like we developed mclic, aerial release mines, arty mine layers, and an extensive use of mines in our doctrine.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Miinefields assure the area will be uninhabitable for the next 100 years.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >mines
    According to who? America literally dealt with enemy mines when it was dealing with iraq in the 90s and also early 2000s. Mines are just obstacles that can easily be dealt with with the right resources.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the West doesn't care about mines because it assumes (rightly so) that it will always have air superiority, and if you have air superiority you can just blow up any minefield that you come across.

    Remember that there's nothing even close to Nato's airforce, if Russia and China teamed up they probably wouldn't even be able to take on the US's naval airforce, let alone their actual airforce, that's how far ahead the West is (mostly the US but Europe does have some stuff)

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >ITT thirdies try to clown on western militaries because the poorest country in Europe ONLY took more land in a single offensive than Russia did in an entire year
    Clown world

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >western
    hmm?

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    where does the US need a mine field

    would be interesting if Texas mined the border, I will admit

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's too late for that. We need to be proactive and mine the northern border asap

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >where does the US need a mine field

      Anywhere it cares to deploy a blocking position. It used plenty of mines in WWII and they're ideal for defense of the Korean peninsula, Taiwan and anywhere canalization of nation-state forces is desired.

      Why are so many anons totally ignorant of war yet on a weapons forum?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Why are so many anons totally ignorant of war yet on a weapons forum?
        The blunt answer is that they come from /misc/ and view /k/ as the weapons specific sister board of /misc/, much like /vst/ is the strategy games specific sister board of PrepHole or /vg/. To them you don't need to have an independent interest in military things to post, you just need to be vaguely involved in weapons/military/violence in some form, which most /misc/ users are because they're thinly veiled extremists. This is also why they seem to lack any actual knowledge of like, how an infantry company operates or how one would call in fire support, but have lots of very well thought out spicy opinions on which rifles are the best to use in a civil war. They aren't interested in the art, they're interested in going on shooting sprees or shooting people they dislike.

        Tl;dr /misc/ has ruined this fricking board and this website ban it please

        >where the attacker had to cross a minefield and a) didn't have air supremacy, or even dominance, only at best localized air superiority

        we simply just don't do this. that's a Ukrainian thing.

        Well a US alternative is to airlift most of a division over the minefield and supply it with aircraft, which was one of the things done in Desert Storm.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Oh and for a real world example that happened here a few days ago, there was an openly admitted /misc/ user here claiming that artillery pieces are easy to use, he could figure it out with a bit of playing around with one, and "everything is in the manual" so him and a few buddies could use one in a hypothetical US civil war. He admitted to not having military experience and when pressed on what he'd do if he hypothetically found something like a tank, he just said "oh well we'll have veterans with us they can use them" like it's akin to riding a bike and not something you have to actually, you know, train for and practice.

          None of them see these things as interesting on their own terms, they're just interested in how they'll assist them in killing (insert minority here).

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          frick you gay /k/ has been my main board since probably 2010 if not longer. Prior to that I was /b/tard and NEVER a pol/gay/.

          try to examine posts and board quality is gay and cringe because this place has always been a cesspool that requires a certain level of chan literacy to appreciate. So just learn to post better I guess.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            how the FRICK can you lurk here for 13 years and still not understand what a minefield is for? are you mentally moronic?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              i was just having a laff m8

              This person is an extremely bad poster and shouldn't be listened to during any discussion of board quality or board culture btw.

              [...]
              He said it himself, he's a /b/tard. In fact given that he's denying any difference over time in the first place I'd wager that he's not from that time period, or was one of the ones contributing to it. There has always been a definite negative effect on this board from /misc/ transplants trying to collect information about military action for their stupid race war fantasies.

              I'll put on a serious face and concede a little to this anon. /b/ was fun for a very brief period of time. /misc/ exists to out /misc/gays, be thankful that the conditioning is so intense that they can be easily identified and disregarded. i stopped caring about whatever we are talking about actually, effort posting is gay.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            This person is an extremely bad poster and shouldn't be listened to during any discussion of board quality or board culture btw.

            how the FRICK can you lurk here for 13 years and still not understand what a minefield is for? are you mentally moronic?

            He said it himself, he's a /b/tard. In fact given that he's denying any difference over time in the first place I'd wager that he's not from that time period, or was one of the ones contributing to it. There has always been a definite negative effect on this board from /misc/ transplants trying to collect information about military action for their stupid race war fantasies.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              That's a real stretch. He was a /b/tard more than a decade ago. I also think he's right. The US doesn't see itself using minefields that much, because it doesn't want to commit ground forces to the kind of wars where they'd be useful and has no pressing strategic needs that override that want. It absolutely maintains the capability, but it would need to regenerate it for scale (a short training process that it's already set up to do, mostly) if it wanted to employ it broadly. The reality is that the US wants to deploy ground forces for decisive combined arms manouevre or peace enforcement - it doesn't want to deploy them to hold back the 5th Shock Army for years using vast protective minefields and obstacle belts with mine panels, because that kind of war is a bloody mess no matter how well you do it.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The US doesn't see itself using minefields that much
                Using and counteracting are two different things holy frick.

                >because it doesn't want to commit ground forces to the kind of wars where they'd be useful and has no pressing strategic needs that override that want.
                Ok I cannot take you seriously when you say shit like this.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Ok I cannot take you seriously when you say shit like this.
                Let's make a bet. If the US deploys even a single conventional minefield in an operational theatre in the next year, I will make a thread saying that I'm an idiot and you were right, linking to this thread. If the inverse happens, then you make that thread.

                Betting is a tax on bullshit, and you're so worked up that you're full of it right now. The US doesn't want to commit forces to conflicts where they would have to emplace mines or benefit from it, because those wars suck. There are no strategic needs that are in any way likely force them to do it either. You are wrong.

                >Emplacing isn't countering.
                I never said it was. You're jumping at shadows. I've consistently said in this thread that western nations are perfectly competent at all aspects of mine warfare. You need to chill the frick out, take a step back and think about the topic and what you're arguing about.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                What wars is the US fighting right now? None? Interesting… consider suicide please

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Drinkable tap water, indoor plumbing and electricity.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This shit is ridiculously overrated. The Germans had it right when they told Ukies the way to deal with minefields is to go around them. They didn't conquer France in 6 weeks by banging their heads against the Maginot line.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *