>> ^IronDwarf:

>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.


I'm saying it's not OK to use anyone.

>> ^longde:

So, if a local teacher used you or any of your loved ones in a murder example, that would be cool...hypothetically speaking, of course>> ^LarsaruS:
>> ^IronDwarf:
>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.

Well, the first is a human being and the second is a human being too... Wait? What was the question again?
Ah, right... Hypothetical!



Yes. It would be. I don't let hypothetical statements bother me... there are a lot more stuff to be bothered by in real life. And if it works and the students learn (more than they would have otherwise)... I say go for it.

So, if a local teacher used you or any of your loved ones in a murder example, that would be cool...hypothetically speaking, of course>> ^LarsaruS:

>> ^IronDwarf:
>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.

Well, the first is a human being and the second is a human being too... Wait? What was the question again?
Ah, right... Hypothetical!

>> ^IronDwarf:

>> ^NordlichReiter:
I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.


Well, the first is a human being and the second is a human being too... Wait? What was the question again?
Ah, right... Hypothetical!

>> ^NordlichReiter:

I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.
At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?
Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.


I'm not even sure how to respond to you if you don't see the difference in using a hated enemy of the country and the President in a hypothetical math problem.

I had a college professor, for game design, one of many problems involved the trajectory of artillery.

At what angle would you need to raise the barrel of a 150MM Howitzer in order to crest the top of a hill that is 150 meters high, and hit a target that is 5 miles away?

Here's the real question. What would be done if the geometry teacher had said, where would someone stand if they intended to kill say, Osama Bin Laden? Probably nothing.

>> ^BoneRemake:
>> ^Jinx:
How is the distance between Nevada and Iraq any different from the distance between a bomber and its target, or from an Artillery gun to its target. Is engaging your enemy only when you see the whites of their eyes somehow more palatable? Who'd have thought the most user friendly interface for shooting people in Virtual Reality would eventually be adopted to real life. You should all welcome it. Is it mere coincidence that collateral from modern wars is much less than from 100 years ago? Do you think thats because of improved weapons technology and training, or do you think its because todays GIs are saints compared to their 1945 brothers?
Yeah, guided missiles are better at not killing stuff.


I believe you are wrong. It is a difference because your taking life without the chance of your being taken. Its no different than playing halo online with some god mode, you get to live while everyone else dies. War in itself is wrong unless your purely defending imho. Look at that I did it without calling you a douche. A sense of pride overcomes me.


This is also much like when guns were invented. The further you are from your enemy when you attack, the less likely you'll witness any harm to yourself.

I believe this is misdirected anger. Being able to click a button and have someone die somewhere else on the planet is scary stuff. The real problem is the imaginary need to do this.

At the end of the day, the people in the position of those in the video likely have the same issue of knowing that they executed x number of people. I play violent video games in bliss, knowing nobody is harmed by my actions.

>> ^Jinx:
How is the distance between Nevada and Iraq any different from the distance between a bomber and its target, or from an Artillery gun to its target. Is engaging your enemy only when you see the whites of their eyes somehow more palatable? Who'd have thought the most user friendly interface for shooting people in Virtual Reality would eventually be adopted to real life. You should all welcome it. Is it mere coincidence that collateral from modern wars is much less than from 100 years ago? Do you think thats because of improved weapons technology and training, or do you think its because todays GIs are saints compared to their 1945 brothers?
Yeah, guided missiles are better at not killing stuff.



I believe you are wrong. It is a difference because your taking life without the chance of your being taken. Its no different than playing halo online with some god mode, you get to live while everyone else dies. War in itself is wrong unless your purely defending imho. Look at that I did it without calling you a douche. A sense of pride overcomes me.

Totally solid point, Jinx. Still disgusting to me, though.>> ^Jinx:
How is the distance between Nevada and Iraq any different from the distance between a bomber and its target, or from an Artillery gun to its target. Is engaging your enemy only when you see the whites of their eyes somehow more palatable? Who'd have thought the most user friendly interface for shooting people in Virtual Reality would eventually be adopted to real life. You should all welcome it. Is it mere coincidence that collateral from modern wars is much less than from 100 years ago? Do you think thats because of improved weapons technology and training, or do you think its because todays GIs are saints compared to their 1945 brothers?
Yeah, guided missiles are better at not killing stuff.

How is the distance between Nevada and Iraq any different from the distance between a bomber and its target, or from an Artillery gun to its target. Is engaging your enemy only when you see the whites of their eyes somehow more palatable? Who'd have thought the most user friendly interface for shooting people in Virtual Reality would eventually be adopted to real life. You should all welcome it. Is it mere coincidence that collateral from modern wars is much less than from 100 years ago? Do you think thats because of improved weapons technology and training, or do you think its because todays GIs are saints compared to their 1945 brothers?

Yeah, guided missiles are better at not killing stuff.

^ Artillery shells work for avalanche control, but are difficult to aim for something this small. Plus, they may not have had a good area to set one up. Dynamite could work, but then they'd have to airlift people in, set up climbing harnesses, plant the charges, etc.

With the ball they just fly up, smack it a few times, and fly back. I'm sure it takes skill, but it's probably the safest and cheapest method of the three.

We use artillery here in Alaska to do it... these in fact:
http://www.robertsarmory.com/rrifle.htm

Maybe if I don't respond he will go away.
Mmm, not working, better try again.
Ok, one last time, if he still doesn't go away, prepare to deploy sonic artillery.
Ok, buddy. You've had your chance for a peaceful solution. All batteries! Open fire!

That was some clever editing, with the juxtaposition of the title "Cradle of civilization" with rocket artillery.

My stepfather was in an 8" howitzer outfit on the Western Front in France in 1918. Before he died in 1985 at the age of 93, he told me a lot about being on the receiving end of a German artillery barrage.

He said that there was no way possible for anyone to understand what it was like unless you had been there yourself. He also stated that he had seen several BRAVE men go insane after having over 1,000 (that's right, one thousand!) rounds come down in just a few short hours.

Unfortunately for this good man, he was gassed with Mustard gas. He suffered from this for the rest of his life, and until about a year before he died, still had nightmares about being shelled.

Thank each and every one of you who have served!

From an ex-Staff Sargent, 379th Bomb Wing (Heavy), Strategic Air Command, USAF 1968-1972