View Full Version : A $75 Grand missile on my shoulder !!!
I must admit to getting annoyed at some of the army recruiting ads. This one with a guy getting a thrill out of a practice fire of a $75K ground to air missile really sucks. I know they have to be trained but surely they can do simulations. And is the value of the missile you're firing a credible argument for joining the army? Is that the criterion we want our defence force recruited upon?
I thought it was a bit strange that he thinks its fun to waste $75,000.
He better bloody hit the target if he has to use it in a real life situation.
Dippers Donuts
21 Jan 2002, 20:53
Take him to Afghanistan where he can use his $75,000 missile on a $2 Afghani tent.
Bloodstained Angel
22 Jan 2002, 06:41
I wonder how he would feel if he a ever actually got to fire his 75K missile at a real live human being :(
Santos L Helper
22 Jan 2002, 07:00
I wonder if he really has ever fired a live rocket. If you look closely you can tell that the explosion is just a computer graphic, but I agree with all that has been written so far................it's a waste and a stupid ad.
The Hitman
22 Jan 2002, 07:14
Stupid ad. That missile for a test cost more then our annual household revenue. One, stupid, metal piece of junk, fired by a pimple-ridden young army guy getting off on it all.
"It's the feeling of my life..."
The guy must have no f*ckin' life. Hate that ad, gives me the sh*ts - you need to get out more mate.
The Hitman
Originally posted by Frodo
I know they have to be trained but surely they can do simulations.
Life aint a simulation.
Originally posted by Dippers Donuts
Take him to Afghanistan where he can use his $75,000 missile on a $2 Afghani tent.
No Dipper, it's flying carpets they have out there, not flying tents :D
Originally posted by Dave
Life aint a simulation.
Philosophicaly debatable ;)
( but then again how about a real life testing of a nuclear missile or two on a few cities :rolleyes: )
It just goes to show how desperate the defence force are getting in trying to recruit more people
The thing thats started to **** me is that theyre even putting defence force ads in cinemas!! Theyre bloody everywhere!!!!
Dippers Donuts
22 Jan 2002, 22:17
Originally posted by iceman
It just goes to show how desperate the defence force are getting in trying to recruit more people
The thing thats started to **** me is that theyre even putting defence force ads in cinemas!! Theyre bloody everywhere!!!!
maybe there's a war comin'!!
conscription too!!
:eek: :eek: :eek:
Dippers Donuts
22 Jan 2002, 22:18
Originally posted by Frodo
No Dipper, it's flying carpets they have out there, not flying tents :D
The only flying carpet in Afghanistan would be Colon Powell's hairpiece.
Blues_Brat
22 Jan 2002, 23:39
It still has me buggered how a so called 'intelligent' species such as humankind thinks it's cool to spend $75K on one missile (in some cases $millions). Imagine what good can be done with that kind of money.
Originally posted by Frodo
Philosophicaly debatable ;)
Quite, but then as you're all figments of my imagination......
( but then again how about a real life testing of a nuclear missile or two on a few cities :rolleyes: )
If you can do that with no casualties ala the missle test go for it.
Originally posted by Dave
Quite, but then as you're all figments of my imagination......
If you can do that with no casualties ala the missle test go for it.
Yes, well as we are all figments of your imagination, Dave, then the nukes can be dropped on cities full of people that are figments of your imagination and the casualties will be imaginary ;)
ps How do you know that existance is not all a figment of your imagination and that you are the only real person?
Santos L Helper
23 Jan 2002, 10:32
Originally posted by Frodo
Yes, well as we are all figments of your imagination, Dave, then the nukes can be dropped on cities full of people that are figments of your imagination and the casualties will be imaginary ;)
ps How do you know that existance is not all a figment of your imagination and that you are the only real person?
Ahh Frodo the existentialist.
Originally posted by Frodo
ps How do you know that existance is not all a figment of your imagination and that you are the only real person?
My imagination isn't that good. Besides, if that were true I certainly wouldn't be working where I am now!
Ruddeger
23 Jan 2002, 13:37
I don't see the problem with this ad.
They've had ads directed towards those who want to be leaders, and now they've got ads directed towards those who want to kill people.
Why else other than these two reasons would someone joined the defence force.
Well OK, my friend is going to ADFA to become a air traffic controller, but he wants to be PM too, and that's position of power.
GoEagles
23 Jan 2002, 17:23
I hate that Navy add also, with the girl talking like she's a hero because she finds Indonesian fishing vessels with fish in them. Woopee Doo :rolleyes:
Anyone watch that program last night on ABC about how war is changing?
For those who didn't, guess how much one (1) Stealth Bomber costs......
2 billion US dollars! :eek:
Hmmmmmmm....................
Originally posted by Visro
Anyone watch that program last night on ABC about how war is changing?
For those who didn't, guess how much one (1) Stealth Bomber costs......
2 billion US dollars! :eek:
Hmmmmmmm....................
Naaaaa...yer forgetting the quantity discounts and the frequent flyer points :D
Cyclops
24 Jan 2002, 06:49
?
You want the ADF to practice with blank rounds? You don't want them to recruit anyone? A mature opinion anyone? Anyone?
Originally posted by Visro
Anyone watch that program last night on ABC about how war is changing?
For those who didn't, guess how much one (1) Stealth Bomber costs......2 billion US dollars! :eek:
Hmmmmmmm....................
That's because Stealth is a Bomber supporter, we don't come cheap. :D
Originally posted by Cyclops
?
You want the ADF to practice with blank rounds? You don't want them to recruit anyone? A mature opinion anyone? Anyone?
In reality, yes, I think it can be computer simulated. If we were to go to war then okay we could fire a few real practice ones then.
But the point for me is the message of the ads. They are misleading and therefore dishonest. No mention of the fact that every spark of individuality and free thought is wrought from you as you are drilled into a being that accepts orders without question. No mention of how a young son with plenty of sparkle and pizaz comes back broken and a different person.
It's all about firing missiles, driving tanks, building swings for children in East Timor. Bull****, you do that for less than 1% of the time. The rest is slog/torture and learning to obey or suffer punishments that break you.
So does that mean, if we do go to war, we would have to spend $75 grand each time we fire at an enemy aircraft. Seems a bloody waste of money to me.
Originally posted by Frodo
It's all about firing missiles, driving tanks, building swings for children in East Timor. Bull****, you do that for less than 1% of the time. The rest is slog/torture and learning to obey or suffer punishments that break you.
That's why I joined the RAAF, we sent the officers out to fight:)
Well the ADF adds may be annoying but they don't hold a candle to all the shock tactic adds used by the government. The ones I hate the most...
(1) The after the car accident adds with everyone screaming and yelling.
(2) Anti smoking adds where they cut up body parts, or have fish hooks going thru someones lip.
(3) Anti drink driving adds. You know the one with the three guys having a beer and a manslaughter charge:rolleyes:
...the list goes on
Why can the government departments get away with these adds but no-one else can. Personally, I find the adds a bit offensive and over the top, mostly I find them very annoying.
Dr AlfAndrews
27 Jan 2002, 10:46
Originally posted by RacerX
Well the ADF adds may be annoying but they don't hold a candle to all the shock tactic adds used by the government. The ones I hate the most...
(1) The after the car accident adds with everyone screaming and yelling.
(2) Anti smoking adds where they cut up body parts, or have fish hooks going thru someones lip.
(3) Anti drink driving adds. You know the one with the three guys having a beer and a manslaughter charge:rolleyes:
...the list goes on
Why can the government departments get away with these adds but no-one else can. Personally, I find the adds a bit offensive and over the top, mostly I find them very annoying.
Well ... er ... how do I explain this?
The car accident ads, the smoking ads and the drink-driving ads are ... how can I put this? ... er ... honest
They're actually telling you how it really is.
The defence ads are ... shall we say ... just a wee bit dishonest because they are focusing on the toys that you get to play with, but they don't show the boot camp training and the body bags.
The TAC ads and the anti-cancer ads are MEANT to be offensive ...
... perhaps they are trying to get a message through to the sort of people who call themselves "Racer X".
Now, Frodo ... did I explain that all right? Do you think Racer X understood me?
Dr AlfAndrews
27 Jan 2002, 10:53
Imagine if one of those $75K missiles accidentally hit a passing Stealth Bomber ...
... oops.
(no offence to our own BigFooty Stealth Bomber)
:D
evade28
27 Jan 2002, 20:17
(1) The after the car accident adds with everyone screaming and yelling.
(2) Anti smoking adds where they cut up body parts, or have fish hooks going thru someones lip.
(3) Anti drink driving adds. You know the one with the three guys having a beer and a manslaughter charge
...the list goes on
agree with alf, theyre supposed to shock you, thats why theyre called .'shock tactics'
4 your information, ppl do scream and yell at car accidents and it can be quite scary at times...
BTW you find them offensive do you? i find them to maybe be a way to stop people driving like morons, if people woke up to themselves and realised that they arent, in fact, mark skaife BEFORE the split second b4 they wrapped themselves around a power pole then it could stop a sh1t load of heartache, dont you agree?
Blues_Brat
27 Jan 2002, 21:21
Originally posted by RacerX
Well the ADF adds may be annoying but they don't hold a candle to all the shock tactic adds used by the government. The ones I hate the most...
(1) The after the car accident adds with everyone screaming and yelling.
(2) Anti smoking adds where they cut up body parts, or have fish hooks going thru someones lip.
(3) Anti drink driving adds. You know the one with the three guys having a beer and a manslaughter charge:rolleyes:
...the list goes on
Why can the government departments get away with these adds but no-one else can. Personally, I find the adds a bit offensive and over the top, mostly I find them very annoying.
I really miss that Dirt Racer ad :(
Originally posted by Dr AlfAndrews
Well ... er ... how do I explain this?
The car accident ads, the smoking ads and the drink-driving ads are ... how can I put this? ... er ... honest
They're actually telling you how it really is.
The defence ads are ... shall we say ... just a wee bit dishonest because they are focusing on the toys that you get to play with, but they don't show the boot camp training and the body bags.
The TAC ads and the anti-cancer ads are MEANT to be offensive ...
... perhaps they are trying to get a message through to the sort of people who call themselves "Racer X".
Now, Frodo ... did I explain that all right? Do you think Racer X understood me?
Call off your dogs doc.
Firstly both the defence add and the shock tactic adds both use somewhat "extreme" results to carry their message. But according to your thought process one is honest and the other dishonest. It is possible that by joining the ADF you will end up firing 75K SAMs at drones (unlikely but possible). It is also possible that driving your car will result in death and/or disfigurement of yourself or other road users (unlikely but possible). How can one be dishonest and the other honest?
People seem to accept these shock adds if it is in the public interest, and hell maybe those drink driving adds have their place. But IMO the shock ads are overused by various government agencies then over exposed during every add break of prime time telly.
The kids drowning in pools
Tired, drunken, and speeding drivers, including the "dirt racer" ad (thanks Blues Brat)
The drug using demon youth ruining their lives thru substance abuse
The alcohol abusers with their heads down toilets or beating their wives
Smokers slowly killing themselves
And for the record, I mainly find the TAC ads offensive because of the portrayal of ordinary blokes having a beer at home as criminals who are
about to kill people. The other screaming, bloody post accident ad is only annoying because it seems to be a lot louder than the normal TV volume, and it is shown ad nauseum.
Originally posted by Dr AlfAndrews
Well ... er ... how do I explain this?
The car accident ads, the smoking ads and the drink-driving ads are ... how can I put this? ... er ... honest
They're actually telling you how it really is.
The defence ads are ... shall we say ... just a wee bit dishonest because they are focusing on the toys that you get to play with, but they don't show the boot camp training and the body bags.
The TAC ads and the anti-cancer ads are MEANT to be offensive ...
... perhaps they are trying to get a message through to the sort of people who call themselves "Racer X".
Now, Frodo ... did I explain that all right? Do you think Racer X understood me?
Arghhhhhhh......It had to happen one day i suppose. Alf and I in agreement.........Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ;)
Dr AlfAndrews
29 Jan 2002, 22:08
Originally posted by RacerX
Call off your dogs doc.
Firstly both the defence add and the shock tactic adds both use somewhat "extreme" results to carry their message. But according to your thought process one is honest and the other dishonest. It is possible that by joining the ADF you will end up firing 75K SAMs at drones (unlikely but possible). It is also possible that driving your car will result in death and/or disfigurement of yourself or other road users (unlikely but possible). How can one be dishonest and the other honest?
People seem to accept these shock adds if it is in the public interest, and hell maybe those drink driving adds have their place. But IMO the shock ads are overused by various government agencies then over exposed during every add break of prime time telly.
The kids drowning in pools
Tired, drunken, and speeding drivers, including the "dirt racer" ad (thanks Blues Brat)
The drug using demon youth ruining their lives thru substance abuse
The alcohol abusers with their heads down toilets or beating their wives
Smokers slowly killing themselves
And for the record, I mainly find the TAC ads offensive because of the portrayal of ordinary blokes having a beer at home as criminals who are
about to kill people. The other screaming, bloody post accident ad is only annoying because it seems to be a lot louder than the normal TV volume, and it is shown ad nauseum.
Heel, Satan ... down, boy. :D
I'll accept your point that my use of the terms "honest" and "dishonest" is a bit fuzzy around the edges. Just my own little exercise in propaganda. I suppose I was saying the defence ads were "dishonest" because of the things they left out, like the boot camps and the possibility of getting killed in action. So, by that definition, I suppose the TAC ads are also "dishonest" because not every person who speeds, or drives under the influence finishes up in an accident.
Sure, there's a strong element of brainwashing in the ads you mention, just as there is brainwashing involved in all forms of advertising.
But, unfortunately, there are potential killers out there on the roads all day long. The guy having a beer or two with his mates is not a criminal ... UNTIL he gets into his car while still under the influence ... or UNTIL he starts beating his wife up. These people, I would venture to suggest, have brains that are badly in need of a damn good washing, wouldn't you say?
Kids DO drown in pools.
Smokers ARE, in fact, slowly killing themselves.
For the alcohol abuser, such dysfunctional activity as having your head down the toilet bowl or beating up your spouse is actually NORMAL.
Normal, that is, for a practicing alcoholic. There's no exaggeration in this ... at all.
Originally posted by Dr AlfAndrews
Kids DO drown in pools.
Not if the people responsible for looking after them are supervising them properly.
Originally posted by Dave
Not if the people responsible for looking after them are supervising them properly.
Exactly.......but the current mentality doesn't accept this despite it being the root cause. Isolation fencing is a ridiculous encumbrance.
In reality a parent with a child playing on the front lawn is very attentive lest the child run on the road. If the telephone rang would the parent leave the child to answer it? I don't think so. But that is erxactly what happens in backyards with pools and ponds and other dangers. The responsibility is with the parent not the resyt of society. Maybe part of owning a pool as a parent involves a compulsory course on child minding around pools, there are plenty of other ways.
How about isolation fencing on beaches or roads?
And don't get me started on RBT and Booze busses :mad: