The wartime utility of precision versus brute force in weaponry
Material type:
TextPublication details: 2004Subject(s): Online resources:
In:
Armed Forces and Society Vol 30 No 2, Winter 2004, pp.171-201 (3)Abstract: Critical study of the extent to which it is possible or desirable to rely on PGMs as the primary means of striking at an enemy. This article is intended as an antidote to the unquestioning assumption that smarter must be better when considering bombs.
| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal Article | Mindef Library & Info Centre Journals | MILITARY ART & SCIENCE (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Not for loan | 17013-1001 |
Browsing Mindef Library & Info Centre shelves, Shelving location: Journals Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
| MILITARY ART & SCIENCE 4GW: tactics of the weak confound the strong | MILITARY ART & SCIENCE Moral centres of gravity | MILITARY ART & SCIENCE Is it not high time the doctrine industry published its doctrine on the limits of the utility of written doctrine? | MILITARY ART & SCIENCE The wartime utility of precision versus brute force in weaponry | MILITARY ART & SCIENCE Career development, job rotation, and professional performance | MILITARY ART & SCIENCE Striking the balance: strategy and force in the Russo Japanese War | MILITARY ART & SCIENCE Teaching strategy through theory and practice |
Entered on 16/JUN/2004 by CMP
Critical study of the extent to which it is possible or desirable to rely on PGMs as the primary means of striking at an enemy. This article is intended as an antidote to the unquestioning assumption that smarter must be better when considering bombs.
There are no comments on this title.
Log in to your account to post a comment.