Congress voted on giving body armor to troops in Iraq, but it didnt pass. The idea is more than interesting, in the near future we can be seeing troops with early stages of power armor. Theres already lightweight strong body armor, why not use it and prevent a nuclear war? The answer, is because it will cost too much money, and the United States never loses significant amounts of soldiers to worry about it, not as long as we are fighting a rad-tad army in Iraq atleast.
If it costs too much money, I propose we discontinue and or make some sacrifices in the military to equip or soldiers with this.
Remember, this would mean no more grandmothers holding babies shielding the frisbie wearing soldiers from attacks. They can shoot that armor all they want with their 9mm and the soldier will just wait for a clear shot. As you know, a human can out-maneuver just about any tank. Moreover, our weapons can PEIRCE through a tank. This is why, I say we discontinue tanks as the mainstay of the army and use the NEEDED gasoline for our air support.
In battle, the one who owns the air, owns the battlefield. Build a veichle able to maneuver around quickly through urban areas, and run it on Hydrogen power. This would create a new market for metal, hydrogen power and keep the same gasoline market for the air. As far as "blitzkrieg type" invasions paratroopers armed with power armor would be much more scary, especially because all of the gasoline will be concentrated on the air. They will not be too heavy Either, They can run in that, theyll be able to land in that.
Plus, If we do this now, we can keep adding stuff onto it. We can Keep adding on computerized attributes to new prototypes.
Whos with me on this? There would be more destruction to property, but less deaths. You can rebuild houses, but not lives. Furthermore, I strongly believe it would be a deciding factor in making communism and nuclear war pretty far away.
What do you guys think?
If it costs too much money, I propose we discontinue and or make some sacrifices in the military to equip or soldiers with this.
Remember, this would mean no more grandmothers holding babies shielding the frisbie wearing soldiers from attacks. They can shoot that armor all they want with their 9mm and the soldier will just wait for a clear shot. As you know, a human can out-maneuver just about any tank. Moreover, our weapons can PEIRCE through a tank. This is why, I say we discontinue tanks as the mainstay of the army and use the NEEDED gasoline for our air support.
In battle, the one who owns the air, owns the battlefield. Build a veichle able to maneuver around quickly through urban areas, and run it on Hydrogen power. This would create a new market for metal, hydrogen power and keep the same gasoline market for the air. As far as "blitzkrieg type" invasions paratroopers armed with power armor would be much more scary, especially because all of the gasoline will be concentrated on the air. They will not be too heavy Either, They can run in that, theyll be able to land in that.
Plus, If we do this now, we can keep adding stuff onto it. We can Keep adding on computerized attributes to new prototypes.
Whos with me on this? There would be more destruction to property, but less deaths. You can rebuild houses, but not lives. Furthermore, I strongly believe it would be a deciding factor in making communism and nuclear war pretty far away.
What do you guys think?
(low autonomie, has to be refueled often)
