If I shoot someone and nothing happens, then I'll know to take out my knife and stab him.
That's why steel and titanium plates are still used to protect sensitive areas as well.
Although it all depends on the knife, the force, etc...
just like they invented the gun so you don't have to stab someone, they invented the bomb so you don't have to stand around shooting at them.
Yeah, but the US and NATO don't exactly "win points with the locals" by falling back to bombing. Even as collateral damage and friendly fire is mitigated more and more with newer and newer technologies -- from lasers to GPS-INS systems -- there will never be an absolute 0, far from it. Especially when it comes to verifying your target up-close.
That's why we still have the boots on the ground. And that's why we still get "bogged down" by allegedly "inferior" bands of combatants. Things may be obsolete in some battles, but they are still almost as affective as they were decades, even centuries, ago in others.
these military guys are a bunch of idiots.
Oh, I don't know about that. One dimensional or "not enough dimensions" at times, sure. Missile defense is a perfect example. It doesn't protect against some threats that are very much real. But does that mean you don't do it? Especially when deterrence is more of an objective than actual use?
But there is still not one nation on Earth that wants to directly take on the US military, because of its tactical (completely ignoring its strategic) strike capability.
It's hard to go against the combined US Command'n Control infrastructure when it's unleashed in a conventional war.
Which is why, regardless of what their citizens may say or what their leaders may say publicly, everyone wants to be an "ally" of the US.
But that's just one dimension (or set of dimensions), and the US military has many, many issues against other threads.
Especially those without states and their related caring and baggage.
one day they are going to invent stab-proof, bullet-proof, bomb-proof, fire-proof, freeze-proof, acid-proof, radiation-proof armor and then be totally shocked when the entire army is defeated by mud.
Yep. You pegged it!
and I'm going to say, "you laughed at me when I said you should make it mud proof."
No system can be invented to survive everything, it's impossible.
But the combination of inter-woven, bonded and/or over-lapping materials with a backplate over sensitive areas is enough to stop most larger, shorter, but deadly small arms projectiles.
All while the smaller calibres that can penetrate rarely kill or mortally wound in a single shot.
Most US movies do a horrible job showing how the 5.56x45 (or the similar, Russian 5.45x39) doesn't stop people (even it does cause an eventual, mortal wound), and even the 7.62x39 you'll find coming out of an AK has serious issues on impact (before the accuracy and other issues). Furthermore, the Royal Marines and Argentine forces found the 7.62x51 was going right through each other, and not killing, far worse than the smaller calibres at times.
Ironic because the British came close to the best round with their 6.8 experiments after WWII, of which US special forces are now adopting (not the same round, but very, very similar). But even it may not be an ideal, all-around, round -- especially when you get back to accuracy, which another 6.5 may be better (and worse in some close quarters combat).
