<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Efficacy of Musket Fire</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.isegoria.net/2014/06/the-efficacy-of-musket-fire/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2014/06/the-efficacy-of-musket-fire/</link>
	<description>From the ancient Greek for equality in freedom of speech; an eclectic mix of thoughts, large and small</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Jun 2026 19:08:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Handle</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2014/06/the-efficacy-of-musket-fire/comment-page-1/#comment-1274083</link>
		<dc:creator>Handle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2014 18:43:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=34819#comment-1274083</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s true today.  The ratio of shots fired in combat situation to bullets hitting flesh is a fraction of a percent.

But though I&#039;m starting to sound like Robin Hanson lately, but here&#039;s my own &quot;X is not for the-thing-we-usually-associate-with-X&quot;: &quot;Bullets aren&#039;t for killing.&quot;

Most fire is suppressive fire, that is, sent in the direction of the enemy in an attempt to keep them pinned down behind cover and immobilized, with maybe a faint hope that occasionally one of the shots will hit somebody.

At that point, with rounds constantly blasting, you will either be trying to flank and maneuver to a position of superior lethal potential, or you will be calling for indirect fires or air support to rain down explosives on top of the enemy, frozen in their position by an unrelenting blizzard of bullets.

It&#039;s the explosives that actually do most of the flesh-mangling and killing.  The wave of bullets is mostly useful to buy time to deliver the bombs.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s true today.  The ratio of shots fired in combat situation to bullets hitting flesh is a fraction of a percent.</p>
<p>But though I&#8217;m starting to sound like Robin Hanson lately, but here&#8217;s my own &#8220;X is not for the-thing-we-usually-associate-with-X&#8221;: &#8220;Bullets aren&#8217;t for killing.&#8221;</p>
<p>Most fire is suppressive fire, that is, sent in the direction of the enemy in an attempt to keep them pinned down behind cover and immobilized, with maybe a faint hope that occasionally one of the shots will hit somebody.</p>
<p>At that point, with rounds constantly blasting, you will either be trying to flank and maneuver to a position of superior lethal potential, or you will be calling for indirect fires or air support to rain down explosives on top of the enemy, frozen in their position by an unrelenting blizzard of bullets.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s the explosives that actually do most of the flesh-mangling and killing.  The wave of bullets is mostly useful to buy time to deliver the bombs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
