HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: CLF@ECLX.PSU.EDU (Christopher L Frame)
Newsgroups: alt.war
Subject: COMBAT ARMOR Design
Date: 20 Nov 92 21:45:35 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Penn State Engineering Computer Lab
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24


	Perhaps personnel interacting on this net can contribute to an actual
conceptual armor design.

	Here are some design questions:

	1.  What function should the armor serve and how can this be achieved?
		(i.e.   anti-ballistic only using ceramic plates,
                        heavy weapons carrier using power assist, etc)
		
	2.  What type of projectiles should the armor be capable of defeating?
		(i.e.   7.62 NATO AP, .50 cal BMG FMJ, etc) 

	3.  What type of power source should the armor use (if any)?
		(i.e.   lithium batteries, 2 HP gas engine)

	4.  Should the armor be built for enhanced speed, power, protection?

	5.  What material can be used for the armor protection?
		(i.e.   be careful, no unpowered armor with steel plates)

	6.  What type of armaments should equip the armor?

	7.  Should the armaments be integral with the armor or independent?


	And don't forget the WHY to any of these questions.  It's great to have
some MEGA-armed suit, but without a REALISTIC purpose it's nothing more than
a collectors item.

Christopher Frame
General Armaments 
Newsgroups: alt.war
From: randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton)
Subject: Re: Women in Combat
    <1992Nov11.205408.9168@news.columbia.edu> <1992Nov13.151432.16140@inel.gov> 
    <101869@bu.edu> <1992Nov16.151908.7591@inel.gov>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:34:16 GMT
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences

dpe@inel.gov (Don Palmrose) writes:


>I do find it interesting that the proponents want women on all ships except
>subs.  Well, Ed, do you know why this is so?  I always thought that subs and
>surface ships had the same amount of privacy (at least from what I have seen
>on each).  Maybe it has to do with the type of people serving on subs? ;-)
>;-)

Not true.  This proponent wants women on *ALL* combat vessels,
including submarines.

-Randy
Newsgroups: alt.war
From: jhan@descartes.uwaterloo.ca (Jerry Han)
Subject: Re: AIRLAND BATTLE
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 20:01:58 GMT

>I encourage responses from individuals of any branch or rank.

What about if you're a civilian who just has this interest in Military History and Tactics, esp. Modern (post WWII)?

AirLand Battle 2000, as I see it, is a rather good concept.  Mobility and Maneuverability instead of Attrition.  The problem is (and this is a problem with a lot of the US Strategy/Tactics), what happens if you can't win Air Superiority?  Or (even worse), you can't even achieve Air Parity?  

As well, haven't a lot of the deep strike/deep seek systems been canned by Congress because of the downfall of the Soviet Union?

Organization: Materials Science and Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
From: strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom)
Subject: Re: Veterans' Day
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 17:02:37 GMT
Organization: IBM Research

In article <1992Nov17.231510.5149@berlioz.nsc.com>, alan@lancaster.nsc.com (The Hepburn) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov12.195413.15371@watson.ibm.com>, strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:
|> |> 
|> |> 
|> |> Just for the record so that people won't forget again
|> |> 25 years later: We were protesting against the
|> |> *government policy,* not the soldiers!
|> |> 
|> |> I know that you can point to some well-publicized
|> |> incidents where returning soldiers were spat upon
|> |> by protestors, but I think that's far outweighed
|> |> by incidents where protestors were abused by
|> |> war supporters.
|> |> 
|> |> 
|> 
|> Well, you may have been protesting against "government policy" but it was
|> the soldiers and their families who took the brunt of the attack.  I have
|> extremely bitter memories of my time coming home when I could not buy a
|> bus ticket because "the bus was full" and not being served in coffee shops,
|> and my parents and siblings told me stories of hateful "friends" who were
|> extremely vociferous in their feelings toward me and my decision to serve
|> this country.
|> 
|> I admit that these things might have been the reactions of a "fringe group" 
|> but when it's as widespread as my experience tells me, then that fringe was
|> a lot bigger than you, and others, wish to admit.  And the media, in its
|> zealous desire to sell its product certainly didn't help either side.
|> 

I am sorry that you experienced these bitter reactions.  But I
think you ignored my last sentence.  This was a very controversial
war, especially towards the end.  Nevertheless, the negative
reactions and the prejudice you encountered, bad as they were,
were still less extensive and intense than the reactions
anti-war protestors and conscientious objectors encounter
from their opponents on a regular basis.

During this last war, my son joined me on a picket line
protesting Desert Storm.  The next day he received several
threats from classmates that he would be beaten up if
they saw him on a picket line again.  

After the Vietnam war, some soldiers got a glimpse of the
ugliness people like me experience as a matter of course.

I think that people on both sides, such as you and I,
should band together in opposing this kind of hate.
That's why I made such a ruckus over in the perot
newsgroup about Stockdale's hateful speech.
-- 
Rob Strom, strom@watson.ibm.com, (914) 784-7641
IBM Research, 30 Saw Mill River Road, P.O. Box 704, Yorktown Heights, NY  10598
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: smittie@csulb.edu (Smittie)
Subject: Re: does david kohr KNOW an ad hominiem?
Organization: Cal State Long Beach
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:43:40 GMT

Shouldn't/couldn't this be taken to email???

smittie
--
                             Tada mono de ha nai
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GEnie, MCI, AOL:Smittie   All of these accounts except MCI will die on or
smittie@beach.csulb.edu   about Dec 31. UNIX will be forwarded for 2 weeks.
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: phoenix@cwis.unomaha.edu (Shannon Chris Saltzman)
Subject: Thankyou
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 02:21:06 GMT

I am 20 years old.
I have just voted and I thought about it as I walked out.
Men who served during war and peace time made this country
possible. 
Sure my work and dedication will give (along with my peers)
what this country needs to remain vital, but for those who
gave something extra for this country, Thankyou.

Shannon Saltzman

-- 
From the coffee table of MR SHANNON SALTZMAN
"Is doggie heavan kitty hell?"
     Stephanie Phoenix(age 6)
This in everyway represents the authors opinion!!!(take it if ya want)
From: Monte Olsen <olsenm@ccmail.orst.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Veterans' Day
Date: 18 Nov 1992 18:19:04 GMT
Organization: OSU Extension Service
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: reynolde-mac.ads.orst.edu
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
X-XXMessage-ID: <A72FC9923601A70D@reynolde-mac.ads.orst.edu>
X-XXDate: Wed, 18 Nov 92 18:21:06 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.170237.26958@watson.ibm.com> Rob
Strom, strom@Watson.Ibm.Com writes:
>After the Vietnam war, some soldiers got a glimpse of the
>ugliness people like me experience as a matter of course.
>
>I think that people on both sides, such as you and I,
>should band together in opposing this kind of hate.
>That's why I made such a ruckus over in the perot
>newsgroup about Stockdale's hateful speech.

I am sorry your son experienced those threats. They
shouldn't have occurred.

But I can tell you as a returning Vietnam veteran that the
incidents to which you referred in the 60s and 70s weren't
isolated, and they were often carried out by extremely
agressive, hostile people. These incidents included
taunting, name calling and verbal and physical threats. I
found myself in a number of verbal and physical
confrontations I didn't ask for and didn't want. Most of
us wanted to come home and be left alone--if we couldn't
be welcomed. And how do you know whether the reactions we
encountered were any less extensive or severe than what
you encountered? You weren't in our shoes. You have
absolutely no way of knowing. With an attitude like yours,
it's no wonder the abuse we took was so extensive and, at
times, vehement.

If you think the inconvenience you suffered as a protestor
in any way compares with what Vietnam veterans experienced
you are dead wrong. And, despite what you say, there was
absolutly no jusitification for it, and there never will
be. PERIOD! 

This is my last post to this group. You can have it.

Monte Olsen
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam,talk.politics.misc
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Subject: Re: Objective sourcing
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 16:34:44 GMT

In article <1992Nov15.180628.16955@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
>luopak@pell2l5.alleg.edu (Kathryn Luopa) writes:
>
All these comments about objectivity.

I think a good indicator of objectivity is a balanced perspective on an
issue.  To explain a conflict in terms of absolute white hats and black
hats raises a warining flag for me.  I think most conflicts are more
accurately described with different shades of gray.  And to see one
side as having a darker shade of gray doesn't mean the other is an
angel.  Kim seems to see absolute black and white.  He even said at
one point that the South could not have masscred people because they
weren't communists and it takes a communist ideology to devalue
human life so as to massacre it.  This statement ruined his
credibility with me.  I would have the same attitude if anyone
supports communism in the same way.  David Kohr's statement about
anti-communism biasing Kim's statements also seemed extreme.  To
wear ones biases on ones sleave is a mark of honesty to me and the
value of ones arguments comes from their content.

My criticisms of South Vietnam should not be interpreted as support
for the north and most certainly not be considered as criticism of
individual vets.  Their treatment on return was a disgrace to America
and I think _all_ Americans share in that disgrace, anti-war protestors
and love-it-or-leave-it types both.  

When this group started, many posters commented on how pleased they
were with the lack of flaming and the constructive nature of posts.
Most of them do not post too often now.  Is it possible for those
who have developed animosities to take a step back and cool off?
I find it interesting that Kim, who is the center of a lot of
debate here, has not flamed anyone, and I think that whether one
agrees with him or not, maybe we could learn to adopt his tone.
>
>-- 
>Modern Day Problems:
>
>Hi Diddle, Diddle, the Cat and the Fiddle,
>The Cow Blew Up on the Launching Pad


-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Re: Veterans' Day
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:11:10 GMT

drk@melodian.cs.uiuc.edu (Dave Kohr) writes:

] In article <BxM807.2uy@news.orst.edu> Monte Olsen <olsenm@ccmail.orst.edu>
] writes:
] >Welcome home to you guys! There is a place where regular folks say these
] >things quite often. I just started reading posts there about a month ago
] >and the first time I saw some of the thank you notes, it was stunning.
] >
] >Monte Olsen
] >187th AHC, Tay Ninh
] >1970-71
] 
] Would it maybe be worthwhile to create a separate group for discussions
] about Vietnam War veteran issues, called alt.war.vietnam.veterans or
] something like that?  (There is already a group called soc.veterans, but I
] don't know what gets discussed on it.)


Not like its any NEWS or anything,
but there will always be 'strife' 
in the 'veterans' community over which
was REALLY the 'BigWar' and what was
really the 'HardestBit' and....

And when we do not have that, there is
the traditional interservice rivalry,
except of course for those of us from
Interservice Units who KNOW we are 
Implicitly Superior to the rest of
those 'grunt types' who just are
lowly <token> and hence are <token2>.

Our Current Mission Spec is to help
the indigenous population as it tries
to understand complex issues.

ciao
drieux

ps: its called 'winning the hearts and minds' of the natives....


-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Hi Diddle, Diddle, the Cat and the Fiddle,
The Cow Blew Up on the Launching Pad
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: alan@lancaster.nsc.com (The Hepburn)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
Subject: Re: Veterans' Day
Date: 18 Nov 92 00:04:32 GMT
Organization: National Semiconductor Corporation

In article <1992Nov16.000732.43734@watson.ibm.com>, strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:
|
|> 
|> If I read correctly the acronym under your signature, you were
|> in the Navy, and if my memory serves me correctly, that means
|> that you were *not* drafted.  American combat involvement
|> in Vietnam began in 1965, and you served a tour of duty
|> from 1969-1970.  I think it is fair of me to say that since
|> you voluntarily enlisted in a military unit subsequent
|> to the outbreak of hostilities you can be described as "pro-war".
|> (It's possible that you enlisted because you thought you
|> might be drafted if you didn't enlist.)
|> 
|> 
Normally I can take rhetoric such as this and not let it get to me, but
this is really something.  Just because somebody enlists in the military
does not make them "pro-war".  On the contrary, I think that you will find,
if you take the time to ask, that veterans in general, and combat veterans
in particular, are the most outspoken in their loathing of war.  Once you
have tasted the fear of combat you realise just how fragile your life is
and you hope and pray that the war will end, and that no one will have to
experience what you are experiencing.

We do not love war, we do not enjoy war, but we have a certain moral standing
that tells us that we have to "do our duty" to our country when we are asked.
I'm not saying that the inti-war protesters are not moral, but their moral
convictions just put them on the other side of the fence.  Are they wrong?
Are we wrong?  NO!  So long as we are each true to our own sense of morality
then there is no right or wrong side.  But when we are denigrated because
of our decision then the protest is no longer being carried on against a
governmental policy; rather it's being carried on against those of us who
chose to serve.

-- 
Alan Hepburn           "An ignorant person is one who doesn't know
National Semiconductor       what you have just found out."
Santa Clara, Ca              
alan@berlioz.nsc.com                              Will Rogers
Xref: sparky alt.war.vietnam:589 alt.flame:14997
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam,alt.flame
Subject: Re: does david kohr KNOW an ad hominiem?
Date: 20 Nov 92 20:32:38 GMT
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper

drk@melodian.cs.uiuc.edu (Dave Kohr) writes:


So basically let me see if I have your point?

You are NOT upset that I call You a 
LimpWristedPinkoStoogeOfTheInternationalCommunistConspiracy
because this is NOT really an ad hominen attack on you,
just as your Rant Fest at Kim about his concern that
Communism Die out in Vietnam is Not an Ad Hominen attack
at his postions.


Ok, 

quid pro quo.

ciao
drieux


-- 
Modern Day Problems:
Little Miss Muffett, sat on a ToughtIt,
Eating her Kurds and Weighs, Along came a Spider,
and she drove off with the Neat Guy with a HOT CAR!
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Speaking of People we can not trust
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 17:57:40 GMT

wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester) writes:
] In article <BxFBq9.577@cs.uiuc.edu> drk@cs.uiuc.edu (David Kohr) writes:
] ]In article <1992Nov8.212723.25899@emr1.emr.ca> knguyen@emr1.emr.ca (Kim
] ]Nguyen) writes:
] ]> But I tell you that I dream to see Communist Vietnam die.
] ]
] ]To anyone reading Kim's postings, this admission should serve as a warning
] ]signal regarding the accuracy and completeness of the historical facts
] ]presented and the biases reflected in the conclusions reached.
] 
] Golly, Dave. Kinda like how your posts do the same? Of course, *you* couldn't
] be biased, no? You are for the Truth.
] 
] Kim lived in S.Vietnam and escaped after it fell to a N.Vietnamese armored
] invasion. He witnessed many things there yet you say he is a questionable
] source? Odd.


Well there is Kissinger, and Einstein, both decided to
abandon their Native Soil....

There is Solzhenitsyn and a long list of lesser known
AntiSoviet Agitators.

Then There are the Dangerous Elements that Precipitated
the Need for the PLA to liberate Tien an Mien Square....

How About Dupchek, who just died the other day, and
the AntiCommunist Regime in Czhekoslovakia seems to
be CONFUSED about the 'Spring fiacso' and how elements
of the Warsaw pact nations had to liberate Praha from
the Threat of AntiStateTerrorists....

ciao
drieux

ps: and then there are all the Hungarian Emigres from
the class of '56.....

ps: could be an 'ethnic' thing, as the White Dissidents
are sorta OK, they at least are from some form of 
European Ancestry....


-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Hi Diddle, Diddle, the Cat and the Fiddle,
The Cow Blew Up on the Launching Pad
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam,talk.politics.misc
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Objective sourcing
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:06:28 GMT

luopak@pell2l5.alleg.edu (Kathryn Luopa) writes:

] This is a reply to Tuan Nguyen concerning his posting of Fri, 13 Nov 1992.
] You say that Kim's accounts cannot be objective and therefore have no  
] credibility, but that you'd like to hear some accounts of a North  
] Vietnamese who lived in Hanoi during the war. Do you think that a North  
] Vietnamese will be OBJECTIVE about the war?! His or her credibility would  
] likewise be severly limited by the fact that he/she was/is probably of the  
] Communist ideology. The basic fact is that everyone has their own  
] experiences and everyone has their own opinions. If you choose to seek out  
] stories or accounts of the war you have to realize that other people may  
] not feel the same as you.  Your experiences will guide how you interpret  
] the information given to you by another.  Don't say that Kim's accounts  
] are unobjective, everyone must decide for themselves.
] 
] Kathryn Luopa


1. Minor Technical Problems here, Giap, 'the victor of Dien Bien Phu'
whom some of us have been keeping track of, supports Kim's 
"propoganda" about the status of the NLF into and after TET.

therefore since Kim is supported by the HEAD of the NVA,
this makes Kim a Kommie Propoganda Tool, and hence clearly
an acceptable source for David Kohr, et al.

2. Again we can re_direct folks to Doan Van Toi's
book 'the vietnamese gulag' to support other contentions
that the 'liberation of south viet nam' was not the sort
of 'walk in the park' as has been presented by the 
trendoids of the left.

3. the recent discovery of a Montangard Group living 
on the edge of Kampuchea, also indicates that not everyone
understood that things were much better after the
NeoColonialistForeignDevils left....

The problem devolves to the fact that if you do not wish to
look at the data, it is far easier to maintain a conclusion.

ciao
drieux

ps: sub_ammusing text, why is it that the OLD Neo_Colonialists
the French seem to have slightly better texts on the 
PostAmericanNeoColonialist phase of south vietnam.

pps: Some of us do NOT consider the war over, merely as there
are no 'white persons' involved in the armed struggle phase.




-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Hi Diddle, Diddle, the Cat and the Fiddle,
The Cow Blew Up on the Launching Pad
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam,alt.flame,talk.politics.misc
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Documentation as important thing
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 21:43:45 GMT


I had presumed that we all work with information
in an 'as is' basis, and work to deal with 'corroboration'
of that intel based upon the available sources.

I 'flamed' david for what is simply a pleasantly
amusing advancement of a traditional ad hominiem
attack - to wit, that the source is attacked for
some opinion held by the source, NOT for its failure
to adhear to other available data.

I have also referenced in this alterantive sources
in the 'print media' that supports KIM's main line.

I have learned that in american culture, books take
precedence over reality. I once, foolishly, tried to
explain to an american professor that I understood 
his argument, having presented just such an argument
to "Nixon's Man on the spot". And that I wanted to
correct the proff's 'presuppositions' and 'conditionals'
with information that came out of that exchange. But as I was
not able to provide 'documentation' of the fact that
I had the conversation, this was not 'academically acceptable.'

I was, therefore, most pleased, when a series of 
articles came out in the 'trades' about techniques
used by combat medics, and passed along, 'under documented'
in the 'oral tradition.' As I was then able to make
'citations' so that the folks in the 'biology' department
were able to understand that REALITY IS OUT THERE,
SEE! SOMEONE WROTE ABOUT IT!


The bottom line is that this is a 'quid pro quo'
sorta thing. Just because an oral tradition has
been maintained, if subsequent analysis of the
data can over_ride it, then YES, lets move onto
the 'relevant' information.

When we are merely 're_hashing' old sloganeering,
then let us take to that 'agenda' the same scalpel!


ciao
drieux

ps: 'flaming' is an irregular verb:

"I am trying to correct the errors in your thinking."

"You are being sophmoric and not accepting truth."

"He/she/it is merely flaming."



-- 
Modern Day Problems:
Little Miss Muffett, sat on a ToughtIt,
Eating her Kurds and Weighs, Along came a Spider,
and she drove off with the Neat Guy with a HOT CAR!
Newsgroups: alt.war.vietnam