• awwwyissss
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    the Pentagon’s actual, data based estimate (and not its uh, lying)

    The Pentagon’s five actual, data-based and more recent estimates, which indicate a much lower rate, are classified. Otherwise I take your point, seems you’re essentially right about the failure rate.

    I suspect the failure rate is higher than what the Pentagon is saying, probably ranging from 2-25% depending on conditions. At least it’s much safer than the cluster munitions the Kremlin is using.

    • alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.orgM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The Pentagon’s five actual, data-based and more recent estimates, which indicate a much lower rate, are classified.

      oh, fascinating. i’m sure there’s a banal reason why the Pentagon totally can’t release these supposed much lower rates and has to classify them—but we definitely have lower rates of duds now, believe us this time! the Pentagon would never do things like selectively classify or release data to manipulate narratives, misrepresent how dangerous things are or the severity of certain weapons or political trespasses, or generally and systemically lie about everything. that’s why, for example, whenever we audit where our money is going and to what things, they fail said audit. i’m definitely going to take their classified word for it here instead of all the actual data (including some of their own previous data) which strongly implies they are lying as they usually do.

      • awwwyissss
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah if you have any sources to back that up I’m all ears, otherwise it’s pure conjecture.