Is "military tech is 10 years more advanced than what they show the public" just a psy-op? - No major power wants the public to think they're falling behind.

Penis Drager

Penis Drager

Schrödinger's retard
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Aug 8, 2020
When discussing the military capabilities of the world's superpowers (ei. US, Russia, and China), someone almost inevitably is going to repeat the line nearly verbatim. We take it as axiom that X ,Y, or Z nation is capable of shit well beyond what we are told. It's also something of a cop-out so no party in the discussion has to make any concessions in the "who would win in a fight?" debate.
To that latter point: It's awfully convenient how this talking point can be used to pretty much handwave away a competing nation unveiling weaponry that we don't have.
What if it's all just bullshit and we're basically fielding everything we have available?
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: Legalion, No. 7 cat, Chocolate Wombat and 5 others
Sort by date Sort by votes
Didn't the CIA give NASA two satellites that were bigger than the Hubble because they were out of date?

I mean, ffs... They found Osama bin laden with facial recognition software exercising in his back yard with a satellite. When you can see people's face from space things are a bit crazy.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The big stuff is well known to defense and military watchers. Things like stealth bomber, hypersonics, and tanks are close to 1 to 1 on public knowledge and reality. There is just no hiding them. The biggest thing that *may* be hiding is a stealth transport for SOF teams:

The real area where you see "10 years ahead of public disclosure" is the small stuff, and new intel capabilities. The ability to hide the knowledge that you have cryptographic analysis system which allows you to break "undefeated" algorithms is both rather easy, and vital to maintaining the capability advantage. There is a publicly disclosed capability to have a guided sniper round back in the early 2000s, but it proved to be extremely expensive, and rather unreliable at the time, and quite a bit easier to just drop a missile from a drone on target. Could there be SOF kill teams deployed with an upgraded version of this tech? Sure.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I've absolutely no doubt there are very advanced forms of weaponry that we are unaware of.

And yet, at the end of the day the Nuclear age really did bring home the ultimate weapon - a nuclear powered hidden stealth submarine is about as dangerous as a weapon will ever get. Almost impossible to stop.

But the real and most advanced weapon ever devised is currently being used the Western World is no doubt false information, heralded by those within those countries as being proof of it's rottenness and having the people within destroy it rather than the need to fire a single shot over the border.

It wasn't long ago we had a President that was asking Congress to prevent certification of an elected President; and had 27 states file a motion with the Supreme Court to remove said President from office.

That wasn't the victory however.

It was the 70 Million people here that thought it was just.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: LullerDerbyRollin
Upvote 0 Downvote
There's a lot of research into futuristic shit but the stuff that actually works is immediately promoted worldwide. to show that "my government can kick your government's ass".
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I've mostly heard that meme in regards to satellite imaging, where (from what I've seen) it looks like that was actually true, at least for a while- The military has always had higher rez satellite imaging than what the public can see, and when those military images eventually get released thru FOIA after 15 or 25 years, they have resolution roughly 10 years ahead of what the public had solid evidence of, at the time.

But a "rule" like that won't cover every one of the dozens of different areas where the military has interests/it's own tech- You're talking about everything from small arms, to heavy artillery, to electronics, to batteries, to coding, to conventional engines, to jet/rocket engines, etc, to weird, experimental tech like rail-guns and weapons that microwave your skin or beam out soundwaves to make you shit yourself; "10 years of improvement" in some obscure, new, experimental tech like say railguns could mean major innovations and drastic differences, but in a mature technology like the internal combustion engine, or a (normal, gunpowder-using) semi-auto pistol, "10 years of improvement" will probably barely be noticable.

I'd guess that in areas with wide application (inside and outside the military) like batteries, general-use computers, internal combustion engines, etc, the military's probably using the exact same stuff that's on the commercial market. But it'd be in areas that don't have much non-military application, (and especially with new technologies in that area), where they'll have stuff more advanced than what the public knows about- Stuff like the sensors in fighter planes, ICBM/anti-ICBM measures, the stuff they do to silence submarines, or sense the noise of enemy subs, etc.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BScCollateral
Upvote 0 Downvote
BScCollateral said:
And some of those 70 million people were also right about Hunter Biden's laptop.
Click to expand...
Yes, it makes sense to equate a person's laptop who is not the President with his laptop and and an actual, real and genuine attempt throw out the properly elected President.

I can see how these are indeed apples and apples. Congratulations!
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: Cpl. Long Dong Silver and BScCollateral
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back