With this crop of Republicans, hypocrisy is not a bug; it’s a feature.
They love it.
In case you need it:
Talking about Orbán, the election is taking place today as I write. The electoral system is extremely complicated, but a friend of mine who lives in Hungary and has been fighting for the rights of minorities, in particular Sinti and Roma, has tried to explain it.
I don’t think it is his fault that his post doesn’t sound clear. Obfuscation will help to muddy the waters if Orbán loses, and it will be easy to claim cheating, interference (no, not from FacePalm Vance, the other interference) and to declare the election null and void.
I think that Zelenskyy’s military might be a little bit too busy right now for that…
Tisza’s victory is no guarantee that everything Orban did will be reversed. AIUI, their primary focus is on corruption and Fidesz’s co-option of legal, political and media/cultural institutions, and reversing that is a long job. I don’t think there’s much detail about how far they will fall into line with the EU on substantive policy towards Ukraine.
Be that as it may, the psychological message is almost as important as the actual actions. The Orban-turd has been openly sprayed, disinfected and wiped in the sight of all Europe, Russia, Ukraine, and America. It will be a much-needed shock to Putin, Vance and Trump.
Yes, let’s hope..
Interesting piece here on the complexities of the EU support Orban has been blocking:
https://www.euractiv.com/news/why-orbans-defeat-wont-yet-unblock-eus-e90-billion-ukraine-loan/
EFPs that were originally meant for penetrating armored vehicles or the like, are now going for Russians.
Interesting use of the term head hunting by Forbes. An EFP is a shaped charge, why do they aim for the head? No body armour could stop that and the torso is bigger. Psychology? Is facial recognition superior to torso recognition? Or was the one image discussed a chance head hit that aimed for the torso?
This technology will not stay in that battlefield, btw.
All your questions are addressed in the article. The answer they give is “nobody knows.”
What I consider scary is that the technology will not stay in battlefields. It won’t stay in the hands of nation states only. Soon coming to an assassination near you.
Exactly. And states all over the world will have no other option than to become more repressive, intrusive, paranoid and draconian to prevent that from happening. So that the oppressed ones (they will call them terrorists) will feel even more justified in trying to use this technology that soon will be open source to fight the states, who will then retaliate by becoming even more restrictive and punitive.
Another downward spiral coming our way. Just having a link on your computer to this technology will be akin to having a child porn image or link on your hard drive today. Immediate prison, opprobrium and social exclusion.
Mierda.
If you’re meaning the shaped charge, that ship sailed decades ago.
It was a system that was triggered by his car breaking an infrared light beam, so pretty automated for the time.
The blast technology that produced the projectile is decades old (and was used in the Herrhausen assassination as noted), but what’s new and disruptive IMO is the combination with (a) drone technology and (b) sophisticated guidance. The murderers of Herrhausen got lucky - they got him not with the projectile itself but with a fragment of the door splintered off by the blast (a design defect of his armored vehicle).
I think the idea of an aerial drone for assassination isn’t really a viable one. From the moment of launch the sound of the rotors scream “Hey, there’s a drone right over here!” Surprise is pretty important for a successful assassination.
And really, if you wanted to try to assassinate someone with a drone, a FPV drone would work just fine. Nothing special about that vid WRT that.
Yes, but the drone could theoretically pack enough explosive that even if the VIP target began to run, the blast would still be enough to take him out - and/or the drone could chase after the VIP enough to get within blast radius.
Plus, the drone could be timed to strike at a time when the crowd is cheering loudly or there is other noise going on, which would conceal the rotor sound of the drone itself.
Well, but the larger you make it, the louder it’s going to be, and the easier it is to spot and shoot down. The FPVs chasing folks riding dirt bikes in Ukraine seem to be audible to someone revving a 2-stroke engine within an inch of its life.
Plus, most assassins are willing to do just enough to get close to their target and act. Killing the target is the important part, getting away usually isn’t. Most of the assassins I can think of that got away didn’t seem to have a really clear idea of what they were going to do afterward. I suppose Booth and the supposed RAF members that killed Herrhausen did have plans on what to do afterward, the latter far more successful than the former.
So I suppose on a long enough time line, I’ll almost assuredly be wrong about someone using drones as a method of assassination. In 1988, I would have said that an EFP would be just as unlikely. But I don’t think that it will become common.
I’ve created a Drone thread in MPSIMS for a general discussion for both military and civilian usage, so we can discuss such without pulling away from specific topics.