What is more important during a battlefield, saving a soldier's life or protect a $10M vehicle?
>>29572726
Banging the girl in your pic
>>29572754
But she would not fuck me, anon.
Bumperino
>>29572726
Even in a purely economic sense it depends. Some soldiers have millions and millions of dollars worth of training invested in them.
>>29572726
how many lives can the $10mil vehicle save?
>>29572726
Just what are you using that vehicle for if not life saving?
>>29572892
That's your problem.
>>29572754
>this anons got his shit together
>>29572892
>she would not fuck me
But you can fuck her
>>29572726
Probably saving the soldier. Just from a perspective of public relations.
1. Face Mom in her local newspaper crying about how the Military got her babby killed.
2. Lose a truck and nobody really cares the MIC loves spending money, just order another one from Oshkosh.
>>29572726
If the vehicle is not some mission critical shit (i.e. if that gets blown up we all die) you always save human life first. Humans aren't cheap. That vehicle can be built in a factory, that human was born and raised, trained, fed, etc - that's much more than $10M.
>>29573536
From a time investment, the Soldier is the better choice.
Humans take at least 18 years to reach combat readiness (assuming you're not fighting for a shithole), and take hundreds of thousands - if not millions of dollars - during their formative years and training.
Losing a vehicle worth $10 million sucks, but it takes a lot less time to replace it.
>>29572726
Depends. Is that soldier an officer?
>>29572726
trick question, vehicle crew is more people than 1 soldier
New vehicle: cost, time, materials
New soldier: training cost, time, experience, natural ability, morale of others, equipment (if applicable)
If you can't make another the vehicle can be very valuable (more than 10 mil probably)
If the soldier has skill, knowledge, or info you can't replace then he's very valuable
>>29572726
vehicle is a (arguably) soulles machine made in some workshop along with 1000's of others shat out in a day, that cost the taxpayer less than 0.0001 cents to build.
A soldier means a lot to his comrades, family and friends.
Save a life, bin that 10mil mrap
It really depends on the mission and the situation at hand.
>>29572726
A vehicle cannot work without a soldier
>>29573671
>Save a life, bin that 10mil mrap
Sides gone.
>>29572726
well since even the most technical advanced fighters my military produces excludint the highest tier like Delta and SEALS can cost upwards of a million US to train and equip, in an economics only decision i would save the vehicle. BUT muh feels would choose the soldier and say fuck the truck.
>>29573778
>that chick on the left
HNNNNNNNNG
>>29572726
Assuming its just the vehicles death, and not vehicle+crew, save the soldier. Unless the equipment is absolutely mission critical, you can always make do, reinforce, or retreat. You can't do that if everyone is dead trying to save a tank.
Even from a long term perspective, a multi-year war, it'll take months to train a new soldier to today's standards, and a single plant could produce multiple vehicles in that time.
>>29572726
To protect/destroy Communism.
>>29573585
doesn't take long to build a 10mil vehicle. lot longer to train a soldier.
fucking stupid thread anyway. what the fuck are the soldiers on the ground going to do in this situation anyway? their training revolves around working together and covering each others asses. they're naturally going to prioritize the safety of their comrades.
>>29573866
>in an economics only decision i would save the vehicle.
Stupid fucking economics, considering how hard it is to replace SOF and how easy it is to build a 10 mil truck.
Doesn't take a couple of years to build a truck. Your cost/benefit analyses is wack.
>>29572892
Not with that attitude
>>29573513
>>29572726
You can easily replace a machine but not a trained soldier
I watched Bridge of Spies. I know you're supposed to go down in the $10M vehicle.
Last I heard, the average human life was calculated at around 7-8 million. I'd imagine a soldiers life would be worth more with the investment the state put into him.
>>29573513
Has a point, too. Let's say a soldier is worth 1,200 a month instead. How many soldiers would that vehicle have to save each month to be worth the human sacrifice?
>>29574611
>>29574637
Dem wuz sum big muddafuggin camas on dat playne.
