Re: Toys from Jane's...

On 10-Apr-01 at 22:45, mreindl@pacbell.net (mreindl@pacbell.net) wrote:
> 
> 
> Andy Cowell wrote:
> 
> > > Roger (getting tired of the "stupid grunts" comments, and I'm an
> > >	       ex-squid.)
> >
> > That's not how I took that comment at all.
> 
> Nor I.  I think he's just giving fair acknowledgement to the fact that
> combat is stressful enough without having to introduce more into the
mix.

If this were an isolated incident it wouldn't bother me, but over the
past two weeks this is the third comment I've heard about soldiers not
being smart enough to handle the extra weapons.  That doesn't require
excessive intelligence, it just requires training.  If you have been
in many training situations and you know by reflex the shotgun ammo
is in the belt pouch and the rifle ammo is on your harness then you
don't think about it, you just do it.  The rifle with the built in
grenade launcher which can be set for distance is on the way, we'll
see it in 10 years max.  This will require thought, range the target,
dial in an extra meter, pull trigger two.  Maybe in a close encounter
that won't be used, but I would be willing to bet that in an assault
the shift from rifle to shotgun would be trivial.

It reminds me of my test for archaelogical theories.  Goes like this, 
if the theory requires my ancestors to be stupid I dismiss it out of
hand.
I've noticed we, as a society, tend to equate uneducated with stupid.
In this arguement we are equating stressed with stupid.  Those who
go stupid under stress won't last long in future (or current) combats.