Bitcoin Forum

In this Video it shows U.S. military Slaughtering Sand Fleas as they scurry and crawl through the desert like the insects that they are.

Do you think this is fair of the U.S. to use such Weapons on Such  primitive creatures like these?

I'm not sure it's all that fun or Moral squeezing the trigger and killing these sand fleas so easily. I think this Should be looked at by the U.N. council surely there must be some kind of regulation shooting and killing such Insects that clearly have the disadvantages of inbreeding and Beastiality (Camels)for decades and centuries.

Poor insects watch the video here of this senseless slaughter as i prepare a statement for the U.N. Council to review!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7tbbW9pZQk

Maybe they are practicing to use them on the UN.    8)

It seems the US wants to prove something by showing such destructive weapon.

What in the world are you talking about?

This is just targeting with a thermal camera from an aerial asset like a helicopter.
This is war.  In war people kill each other.  This is what is happening in your video.
The purpose of weapons is to do just what they are shown doing. 

Sure, it is very disturbing.  But no, it does not mean the "US wants to prove something."

It simply means that some soldiers were told to go fight XYZ, and they did.

The technology could be better. It looks like it's really, really hard to get a direct hit. Also, military people don't brag about killing.

Comments : HD, meaning of splashing, incendiary, lot of munition, average targeting.
Improvements: single shot.
Great: Camels are so majestic in all these violence.

Now what I don't get is those people wanting to destroy America (or China, Russia and isreal). When will they stop? At one point there intelligence must be questioned. Like Iranians writing that in 2039 they will destroy isreal... What most Muslims don't understand is that right now and since a long time the war against the supremacists they hide, protect, support and don't oppose didn't really start...

Because even with my little comment, it's a very precise weapon that is used there.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/90/Firebombing_of_Tokyo.jpg/1101px-Firebombing_of_Tokyo.jpg

Japan needed 40% of urban area to be bomb by b29

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Wesel_1945.jpg/1280px-Wesel_1945.jpg
Wesel Germany 97 % bombed

Now it's possible to save the infrastructure while getting close to 100% loss of life in an area... What will stop the supremacist using Islam as a foundation this time? Because I don't see Muslims doing it... When it comes to Burkinis they all raise their voices... When it comes to the slaughtering of westerners... Not a word (some can't even hide their smiles)...

Why do you think the Islamic supremacists are too afraid to attack China? Becaus they fucking now... That makka is gone. And who ever disagree in China is gonna face serious consequences... This is why the Islamic supremacists (not radical or extremists) believe to take over the west and Russia  first... LoL noobs, remove vodka to Russian males...

It's more like stupid to set yourself so fiercely in the warring mode that you forget fear, especially when you know you will never win.

8)

Ahahha will see...

Try to remember you'll be exactly the same little primitive creature the day the US army decides to bomb you, there will be no difference as superior as you think you are...

I doubt that....I am American.

So? Never heard of civil war?
Like people never learn from history...

LoL if those people were able to clean their countries from those supremacists bent on attacking the world they would not be subjected to the counter strikes... Last drone strike in New Zealand for example? Yeahhh you see...

Translating the title, "Is it fair for the US to design better weapons and then go use them and win battles?"

How many people missed the "Sarcasm" of both the title and the op?  Answer----EVERYONE

lol

lmao Thanks for sharing your Woody Status with us.

I think the figure is 250,000 rounds fired for every one enemy death. dunno if that includes the fancy munitions too. I don't think they could afford a quarter million hellfires for a single stiff.

In the Video it looks like about 20-25 rounds per Cockroach...I have no idea where you got the number 250,000 from

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-forced-to-import-bullets-from-israel-as-troops-use-250000-for-every-rebel-killed-314944.html

it's a well known statistic. like I said I don't think it applies to the heavier stuff.

In 1132, the Church outlawed the crossbow as an offensive weapon to human digity.

Translated:  It wasn't "fair."

That's just way to many. Maybe a lethal chemical bomb that would kill all in one shot, but if Einstein is against such a thing, then so am I.

It is a good thing that the Americans are finally targeting the ISIS. Earlier, they were using their jets to bomb the secular forces of Bashar al Assad. That said, I just want to point out that the Americans are still supporting the other hardline Islamist terrorists such as the Jabhat Al Nusra and the Jaysh Al Islam. IMO, these people are just the same as ISIS.

Thank Hillary and Obama for that crazy.

Vote Trump, and stop the crazy.

Perhaps you should go out and execute yourself for your crime of killing all those bacterium and viruses that you kill in your body through vaccination.

8)

Yeah because there is nothing like supremacists or extremists in our countries. And there is no link between western activities and the development of terrorists organizations and dictatorships....

5$ each round. 1.25 millions per ennemi killed. It's a shame your government isn't giving out even 10% of this amount for each of your citizen...

Because Trump wants to reduce army budget? I never heard him saying something like that...

I think your Dollar amount is too high.  Yes i could use 10% in my pocket.

You are so ignorant... A pure product of education national? You don't even know your history and you are here teaching... Do you know who charle Martel is? I bet it's censored to not offend the pious...

Let's see:
"
Let me put down here some facts that are worth returning to from time to time, as arguments over the history of Islam and Islamism are back in the news with today’s beheading in London. In debates over the history of tension between Muslims and Christians, the Crusades are often cited, out of their historical context, as the original cause of such clashes, as if both sides were peaceably minding their own business before imperialist Westerners decided to go launch a religious war in Muslim lands.

....

All that said, it’s worth remembering that the Crusades arose in the late Eleventh Century only after four centuries of relentless Islamic efforts to conquer Europe, and the Christians of the Crusading era cannot be evaluated without that crucial context.


650-54: Muslim conquest of Cyprus.

652: Muslim Invasion of Sicily begins.

674-78: First Siege of Constantinople, repelled with the invention and deployment of “Greek Fire.”

711-18: Muslim Conquest of Spain, which would not be reconquered completely by the Christians until 1492.

717-18: Second Siege of Constantinople.

719: Muslim invasion of France begins, establishing Muslim control of the Septimania region of southwestern France.

732: Battle of Poitiers (Tours); Charles Martel halts Muslim northward march into central France.

736: Muslim Conquest of Georgia, where the Emirate of Tbilisi would hold sway until 1122.

820: Muslim Conquest of Crete, which would be held until 961.

827: Muslim Conquest of Syracuse in Sicily.

846: The Muslim Sack of Rome by troops landing at the port of Ostia, including the sack of St. Peter’s Basilica while Pope Sergius II and the helpless Roman garrison retreated behind the city walls.

847: Muslim Conquest of Bari in southern Italy; the Muslim presence on the Italian peninsula proper lasted 25 years. In 915, at the Battle of Garigliano, Pope John X personally led an army against Islamic forces in southern Italy

863: In a rare break from the pattern of this era, the Byzantines go back on offensive, with mixed results over the next 200-300 years of warfare.

902: Muslim Conquest of all Sicily. In 965, an independent Emirate of Sicily would be established lasting until 1091.

1048-1308: The Byzantine-Seljuk Wars, yet another continuation of the mutual, longstanding efforts by the Byzantines and their Islamic neighbors to conquer each other’s territory. In 1071, the Battle of Manzikert would prove the first of a series of decisive engagements (followed by the 1176 Battle of Myriokephalon) that gradually wrested Asia Minor from the Byzantines, converting it from a Christian land to a Muslim one and isolating the remaining Byzantine presence to the immediate surroundings of their historic capital of Constantinople.

And, of course, Islamic efforts against Europe and the West would continue well after the Crusades, from the Fall of Constantinople in 1453 to the naval incursions finally stopped at Lepanto in 1571 to the epic Seige of Vienna in 1683 (which in turn was followed by another century of bloody wars between the Ottomans and Hapsburgs).

As has often been noted, the early history of Muhammad as a military leader and Islam as the driving force of conquest is quite different from the early history of Christianity as the persecuted faith founded by a non-violent martyr, and these differing foundations have presented different challenges for Christian and Muslim thinkers dealing with questions of war, peace, and the defense of self and others. That said, none of this is intended to demonize Muslims as uniquely violent in the Dark Ages. Aggressive wars of conquest were the rule throughout the world in those centuries, and have become only fitfully less so into our own age.

But the Crusades did not originate in a vacuum; they were launched in a world where the Roman Empire, the guardian of Western Civilization, had fallen to outside invaders 600 years earlier and European Christians had been on the defensive ever since. The Europe that would stand astride the non-Western world into the middle of the Twentieth Century was still distant in the future. The fearful and divided Christian principalities of 1095 had grown up in a world where Islam, not Christianity, had been the engine of imperial expansion for long before living memory.

Virtually nobody in the West and/or what passes for Christendom today argues that violence can or should be justified on the basis of things that happened a thousand years ago. The insistence of Islamist propagandists on revisiting such ancient history for present-day propaganda purposes should be resisted – but it should also be subjected to the corrective of accurate history. And that history is one in which Muslims carried the sword to Europe for centuries before Christian armies took the Crusade to them."

Go back to the jungle...

you are completely right. united states always want to threaten the world. Us has a tendency to rule whole planet for that reason it has got a lot of powerful weapons to control the world.