网帖翻译

@bigcracker
different strikes in Iraq and Syria, seen some of the video and looks like at least munition depots from the way things cooked off.
Edit: Also seen Jordanian aircraft took part as well.

在伊拉克和叙利亚发生了不同地点的袭击事件，我观看了部分视频片段，从爆炸的情况来看，至少有弹药库遭到了打击。
编辑补充：同时也有消息称，约旦的飞机也参与了此次行动。

@RedditAcct
I was complaining cause a train horn woke me up and these guys gotta live with this lol.

我刚才还在抱怨火车汽笛把我吵醒，而这些人却不得不面对这样的爆炸事件，真是让人苦笑不得。

@SouthDoctor
85 confirmed targets hit.

已确认85个目标被击中。

@Alfie___Solomons
Hit revolutionary guard positions. Crazy shit

打击了革命卫队的阵地。真是疯狂至极。

@Melodic-Bench
After the U.S. gave them days to pull out lol.

这还是在美国给他们几天时间撤离之后发生的，哈哈。

@DrNickedited
Three days to do sweet fuck all apparently, considering the footage now coming out showing a lot of secondaries going off at some of the strike sites.
Here is another video of rockets and other ammo flying off wildly at a strike site.
Goes to show that maybe, juuuuuuuust maybe, the US actually knows what they are doing?

显然三天时间他们啥都没做，现在流出的视频显示，在一些袭击地点有大量的二次爆炸发生。这里还有另一个视频，展示了火箭和其他弹药在被击中的地点四处乱飞。这也说明，也许——仅仅是也许——美国真的知道自己在做什么。

@Rosetta-im-Stoned
Damn, those angles are wild. I'd be shitting my pants if I was that close to those secondaries popping off.

天哪，那些爆炸的角度太疯狂了。如果我离那些二次爆炸那么近的话，估计裤子都要吓湿了。

@rice_not_wheat
Take cover or something. Anything is better than watching it from a balcony.

赶紧找个地方躲避一下吧，总比站在阳台上看着强。

@continuesearch
Unless you have a very long tunnel I think the window for that is closed

除非你有个非常长的防空洞，否则逃跑的时间窗口可能已经关闭了。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@time_drifter
The cow in the background really helps bring it home.

背景中的那头牛真的让人有种身临其境的感觉。

@doctor_monorail
Syria is just a fucking battleground for world and regional powers. It's wild that it's been a black hole for the past years.

叙利亚简直就是全球和地区大国的战场。过去十年来，那里就像一个黑洞一样。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@Evitabl
The whole eastern Mediterranean and Middle East is a crossroads of Africa-Eurasia. I hope we can get our shit together as a species and civilization and stop causing everyone to suffer

整个东地中海和中东地区是非洲-欧亚大陆的交汇点。我希望我们作为一个物种和文明能够团结起来，停止制造痛苦，让所有人都能免受其害。

@International_Emu
Three days for them to move their assets to different locations, only to find out the US was watching the entire time to see where they would put them.

他们有三天时间将资产转移到不同地点，结果发现美国一直在监视，就是为了看他们会把资产藏在哪里。

@rajahbeaubeau
Between US intel in the lead up to Ruzzia's Ukraine invasion and these strikes today, I am truly struck by the accuracy and effectiveness of US pre-deployment intelligence for target positions and movement.

在俄罗斯入侵乌克兰之前的美国情报工作，以及今天的这些空袭行动，使我对美国的预部署情报工作的准确性和效力深感震撼。

@ReputationNo
I actually read somewhere that we were having trouble finding targets. This of course could have been conveniently “leaked” however to give them a false sense of security.

我曾在某个地方读到过，我们当时在寻找目标方面遇到了困难。当然，这可能是为了给对方制造一种虚假的安全感而故意“泄露”的信息。

@suggested-name-
I read that about Yemen specifically, which is due to how specific the targets are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/_missile_strikes_in_Yemen#Timeline
we're only hitting missiles and drone facilities that are in advanced stages of being prepared to fire on ships, retaliatory strikes like today's against any Houthi military target would not be difficult to come by

我了解到的是关于也门的情况，难点在于目标非常具体：
（根据维基百科https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/_missile_strikes_in_Yemen#Timeline
我们只打击那些处于准备发射阶段的针对船只的导弹和无人机设施。像今天这样的报复性打击，只要针对任何胡塞武装的军事目标，都不难找到并实施。

@Brodellsky
I mean we literally have unfathomable@s of fidelity when it comes to our satellite imaging. If they wanted to, they could damn near read the text off your phone whenever you stand outside, in real time. Like when you say they were watching the entire time, you really aren't kidding.

实际上，我们在卫星成像技术方面有着难以想象的高分辨率。如果我们愿意的话，几乎可以在你站在户外时实时读取你手机上的文字内容。所以当你说美国一直在监视时，你真的不是在开玩笑。

@Ok_Inevitable
The US military is extremely competent. The people that say yes or no might not be depending on the year

美国军方的能力极其出色，不过是否做出明智决策则取决于具体的年份。

@Smash_dams
The US military also has the greatest amount of restraint and precision you can imagine considering the firepower at our disposal.

考虑到我们所掌握的火力，美国军方在实施打击时展现出了你能想象到的最大程度的克制与精准度。

@alinroc
That restraint and precision is what makes the firepower such a strong deterrent.
It won't get used often (at large scale, anyway) but when it does, you sit up and take notice.

正是这种克制和精准使得我们的火力成为一种强大的威慑力量。它不会经常被大规模使用，但一旦使用，所有人都会警觉起来，因为当美国放手一搏时，其策略往往是反击力度远超对手。

@pvt
As much crap everyone gives the US about varying things, the Military is effective, and there's a reason why, despite many global issues outside of war, nations are hesitant to anger the US and why alliances and defense agreements are so sought after. Drones, Jets, ICBM, Missile Trucks, A Robust Navy. The US is a military powerhouse, and it rarely cuts loose, but when it does, people are at attention cause the US still has the strategy of slapping harder than the person who slapped you first.

尽管大家对美国在许多问题上有各种批评，但不可否认的是，美国军方确实有效力。这也是为什么，即便在战争之外存在众多全球性问题时，各国仍不愿意激怒美国，并积极寻求与其结盟和签订防御协议的原因。无人机、战机、洲际弹道导弹、导弹发射车以及强大的海军实力，使美国成为一个军事强国。虽然它很少全力以赴，但一旦出手，全世界都会高度关注，因为美国的战略是在你先动手后以更猛烈的方式还击。

@Freshness
Striking this many targets at this many layers of operations basically says we know exactly where all of your shit is, you operate because we allow it. The day we stop tolerating your existence, is the day we wipe your entire operation.

同时打击如此多的目标并触及多个层级的行动实际上表明，我们知道你们所有设施的确切位置，你们之所以能运作是因为我们允许你们这么做。当我们不再容忍你们的存在时，就是我们将彻底消灭你们整个行动体系的那一天。

@Rellint
I hope our proportional response includes some fab sites, where do they manufacture those shaheed drones? Could do us and the Ukrainians a favor going after those.

我希望我们采取的相应规模打击能包括一些关键制造设施，比如那些自杀式无人机是哪里生产的？如果能针对这些设施采取行动，不仅对我们自己有利，也能帮到乌克兰人。

@International_Emu
I mean operation praying mantis was a “proportional response” and the US destroyed half of Iran’s navy, so maybe, but Iran did mess with our boats and nobody messes with our boats, as history has shown.

我的意思是，当年的“螳螂行动”也被视为一种“对等回应”，那次美国摧毁了伊朗海军的一半力量。所以或许这次也是类似的回应，毕竟伊朗曾经挑衅过我们的舰艇，而历史上无人敢轻易触碰我们的舰艇。不过，每一次行动的具体规模和目标选择，都是基于当时的情况和战略考量来决定的。

@AnIdeaMan
We do, we can fuck shit up like no ones business. There isn't a military power on this planet that can stand toe to toe with us, conventional that is

我们确实可以像无人之业务那样搞得一团糟。这个星球上没有一个军事强国能够与我们正面对峙，至少在常规战力方面。

@PrizedTurkey
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) recalled its senior officers from Syria, and will now rely on regional proxies, five security sources told Reuters.
That was two days ago.

伊朗的伊斯兰革命卫队（IRGC）从叙利亚召回了高级军官，现在将依靠地区代理人。据路透社报道，这发生在两天前。

@TriflingHusband
What do you the militias are going to do in days? Do you know how difficult it is to move a bunch of military equipment? Where would they move it to? It isn't like the US isn't watching every square inch of area where these people are operating. Do you think it would be a good idea for this equipment to be brought out into the open where every movement is tracked? If they drag the stuff to other bases, they will tip off the US where other facilities are.

你认为在接下来的几天，这些民兵会怎么做呢？你知道把一堆军事装备搬动起来有多困难吗？他们会把它们搬到哪里去呢？美国并非不对这些人活动地区的每一寸土地加以监视。你认为把这些装备暴露在公开场合会是个好主意吗？如果他们把东西拖到其他基地，就会向美国透露其他设施的所在地。

@StephenHunterUK
They'll be able to move some of the lighter stuff - and themselves - but not the heavier stuff.

他们可以搬动一些轻型装备和他们自己，但无法搬动重型装备。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@TriflingHusband
Yeah, and they will be tracked. Potentially giving away their dispositions and command and control locations. Having them scurry around like ants isn't a bad thing in of itself.

没错，他们的行动将被追踪，这可能会暴露他们的部署位置和指挥控制系统。让他们像蚂蚁一样四处乱窜本身并不是坏事。

@Suspended-Again
Makes me think we’ll street seeing a lot more tunnels in conflict regions. Best way to counter the eye in the sky. And drones.

这让我想到，在冲突地区我们将会看到更多的地道。这是对抗空中监视（卫星）和无人机的最佳方式。

@TriflingHusband
Tunnels are really expensive (comparatively speaking) and limiting. I don't doubt they will increase in use but I doubt they will take precedent.

地道的建设和维护成本相对较高，并且存在局限性。我不怀疑地道的使用会增加，但我认为它们不会成为首选策略。

@variableness
You mean the US gave them days to move all the fancy equipment, which the US would be tracking all the way to a new location for the US to bomb….right?

你的意思是，美国给他们3天时间转移所有高端装备，而美国会一路追踪这些装备到新的地点，然后继续轰炸……对吧？

@IndependentBrick
Bringing the Thunder.
No wonder Iran was trying to back off. They heard the coming storm.
And it's not done yet.

这是雷霆一击。难怪伊朗试图退缩，他们已经预感到风暴即将来临。而且这还远未结束。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@Remote_Person
I’m sure B-’s were involved so the Iranians didn’t hear shit until the shockwave hit.

我敢肯定B-轰炸机参与了行动，所以直到冲击波袭来，伊朗人才会意识到发生了什么。

@happyfire
That's a significant number. It truly demonstrates the intensity and seriousness of the situation.

这个数量相当可观，它真实地展现了当前局势的严峻性和紧张程度。

@choppedfiggs
It demonstrates like hey, we know everything about your operation already. Keep fucking around and we can show you what other locations we already know about.
It's a big show of how much intelligence we have.

这次打击展示了我们对你们行动的全面了解。继续胡闹的话，我们会告诉你们，对于其他已知的地点我们也同样清楚。这充分体现了我们所掌握的情报量之大。

@MethBearBestBear
This is just day . Biden has already said there is a lot more to come and this will be a multi day effort minimum

这只是第一天。拜登已经声明后续还有很多动作，并且这至少将是一个持续数天的努力。

@Judge_Bredd
I'm hoping for three so we can show what a real "Three Day Operation" looks like.

我希望这能持续三天，这样我们可以展示一下真正的“三天行动”是什么样子的。

@garden_speech
Going to be interesting to see how this impacts his polling numbers / job approval. US appetite for more Middle East wars is low, but also people don't like looking weak. I'm guessing he'll see a modest increase in approval if he manages to pull off what looks like a restrained but strong response.

这次行动对拜登的民调数字和工作支持率的影响将会很有意思。美国民众对于更多中东战争的胃口不大，但也不喜欢显得软弱无力。如果他能成功展现一种克制而有力的回应，我猜测他的支持率会适度提升。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@tommybombadil
I know it’s a running joke but the greatest thing our tax dollars are used on is military and intelligence.

虽然这是一个老生常谈的笑话，但我认为我们纳税钱最伟大的用途就是用于军事和情报部门了。

@kiklion
I think this also showcases the economic benefit of those investments though. There's a decent argument to be made of allies investing more, but how many shipping routes go close enough to unstable, violent area's that would get massively disrupted if there was no definitive power to keep the lanes open.
If those shipping lanes closed, how many people would starve if the breadbaskets of the world couldn't transport their food around efficiently?
The US has a lot of internal issues, and has black spots like the invasion of Iraq, and Guantanamo Bay, but the world could easily be a lot worse.

同时这也凸显了这些投资带来的经济效益。关于盟国增加投入有一定道理可讲，但有多少运输航线紧邻不稳定的、暴力频发区域？如果没有一个明确的力量来确保航道畅通，这些航线将受到严重影响。如果这些航运线路关闭，全球粮食主产区无法有效输送粮食的话，会有多少人因此挨饿呢？美国确实存在很多内部问题，例如伊拉克入侵事件和关塔那摩湾等问题，但不可否认的是，如果没有美国，世界形势可能会糟糕得多。

@pllktedited
People also like to simplify these situations and say the US does all this for oil and to keep the "petrodollar" propped up...
At this point in history, the global stability of energy prices is a huge national security issue for every single country on earth...the US just happens to be in the best position to help the stability...
It is beyond naive for someone to say "it's oil bro lol" when energy price stability affects pretty much all@s of the global economy and just about every human living and working on our planet...from billionaires to the poor and everyone in between...

人们也喜欢简单化地看待这些问题，认为美国这么做只是为了石油和维持“石油美元”的地位……在当前历史阶段，全球能源价格的稳定性是地球上每一个国家的重大国家安全问题……美国恰好处于能够帮助稳定这一局势的最佳位置……当能源价格稳定影响到几乎全球所有经济体以及生活和工作在地球上的每一个人，从亿万富翁到穷人，再到中间阶层时，有人还说“一切都是为了石油，兄弟”这种话，实在是太天真了……

@nazare_ttnedited
Yep, all the “lol oil, Raytheon go brrt” is funny but when covid hit and gas rose to $ a gallon, everyone was losing their shit. Even now with the “OMG my groceries are expensive,” while true, is nothing compared to prices if we couldn’t maintain those shipping routes.
The government does fucked up shit, sometimes for horrible reasons, but I’m willing to bet that the majority of people criticizing said actions are paying no mind to the privileges they enjoy.

没错，“全是石油惹的祸，雷神公司大赚特赚”这类说法挺有趣，但当新冠疫情爆发导致汽油价格上涨至每加仑$X时，所有人都慌了神。现在大家抱怨“我的食品杂货好贵啊”，虽然这是事实，但如果不能保持那些运输航线的畅通，那么现在的物价上涨相比而言就不算什么了。政府有时候会做出错误决定，甚至出于恶劣动机，但我敢打赌，大多数批评这些行为的人并没有意识到他们所享受的各种特权。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@soad
Those three lives were worth more than any fucking ammo depot.

那三位牺牲者的生命比任何该死的弹药库都更有价值。

@No-Operation
Republicans still saying biden didnt do anything

共和党人还在说拜登什么都没做。

@MRiley
Nope, they'll call him a warmonger in an election year... But they also had the headlines ready to go to say he's weak and didn't do anything too.

不，他们会在选举年称他为好战分子……但他们同时也准备好了标题，指责他在面对危机时表现软弱、无所作为。

@GenXguy-
More than 85 targets hit and 125 precision munitions fired according to CENTCOM.

根据中央司令部（CENTCOM）的消息，超过85个目标被击中，并发射了125枚精确制导武器。

@Risley
Is that a lot? Asking bc a facility may take 10 hits before it’s destroyed so would that be 10 targets or 1?

这是很多吗？我这样问是因为一个设施可能需要被打击10次才能完全摧毁，那么这种情况是算作10个目标还是单算作1个目标呢？
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@alexidhd
The US usually uses some pretty big and pretty precise munitions so I doubt it woud take 10 hits to destroy a target. And by "pretty precise" I mean "hit a target the size of a vehicle from a plane 50k feet in the air or from some launch site 200 miles away.

美国通常使用一些相当大且相当精确的弹药，因此我怀疑摧毁一个目标不需要10次打击。当我提到“相当精确”时，我的意思是能够从5万英尺高空的飞机上或从200英里外的发射地点准确命中一辆车大小的目标。

@FlutterKree
from some launch site 200 miles away.
Tomahawks have a 1k~ mile range and accuracy of about 5~ meters. So pump that number up.

战斧导弹的射程在1000至2000英里之间，且精度能达到5米左右。因此，从距离目标200英里的发射地点发射时，这个数字可能需要向上调整以体现其打击能力。

@karpomalice
So you’re saying they could feasibly kill me while I sleep in Boston from Miami

你的意思是说，他们理论上可以从迈阿密杀死在波士顿熟睡中的我？

@FlutterKree
Potentially, yes. I doubt the US tries to fire from the longest range possible, though. And the public numbers for US systems are nearly always less than the actual numbers the system is capable of.

理论上确实可能，但我怀疑美国不会试图从最远射程进行打击。此外，公开发布的关于美国武器系统的数据通常低于其实际能力。

@ShinyGrezz
The US' military operates on a policy of "speak softly and carry a big stick". They don't need to appear powerful, they are.

美国军队奉行的是“温和言辞、手握大棒”的政策。他们不需要显得强大，因为他们本身就很强。

@gutoedited
Even for people that may have mixed feelings on some of the international policies of the US, watching its military at work after spending tons of time listening to china, Russia, iran etc etc boast about theirs, is akin to watching aliens descend down to show everyone how stuff is really done.
It's a logistical behemoth that can deliver several simultaneous strikes on target from literally across the world. It's downright flabbergasting how easily the US military could take on the rest of the world put together and not even struggle that much.

即使是对美国某些国际政策持复杂情感的人，在长时间听闻中国、俄罗斯、伊朗等国夸耀其军事实力之后，看到美国军队实际运作的样子，就如同观看外星人降临地球向大家展示真正做事的方式一样。美国军事力量如同一头后勤巨兽，能够从世界各地同时对目标发起打击，其轻松应对世界各国联合挑战的能力简直令人瞠目结舌。

@SoMuchMoreEagle
Even for people that may have mixed feelings on some of the international policies of the US, watching its military at work after spending tons of time listening to china, Russia, iran etc etc boast about theirs, is akin to watching aliens descend down to show everyone how stuff is really done.
And we haven't even taken off our earrings yet.

即便有些人对美国的部分国际政策持有不同看法，在听过中国、俄罗斯、伊朗等国家不断自夸后，目睹美国军队的实际行动就像是看外星人下凡演示如何正确行事。而且请注意，我们还远未全力以赴
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@ThatFrenchieGuy
Given the quality of US munitions, assume shot= target destroyed. We're able to put a lb bomb that's dropped from a plane k feet in the air within feet of where we wanted it.

考虑到美国武器的质量，假设一发即一个目标被摧毁。我们能够将一枚从5万英尺高空飞机上投下的磅重炸弹精准投放到距离预定目标3米之内

@Not_In_my_crease
The US has 'knife bombs' where they don't explode just deploy some swords and slice a dude in half.

美国有那种“刀刃炸弹”，它们不会爆炸，而是释放出一些剑片，能把人一刀两断。

@Pm
It's just a hellfire missile (fire from a helicopter) with or blades that pop out of it. So not half, eighthththths

那其实是一种地狱火导弹（从直升机发射），带有12或更多片展开的刀片，所以不是切成两半，而是切成了更小的碎块。

@StephenHunterUK
That's the JDAM for you and why the US has been supplying the conversion kits to Israel. Otherwise, you're looking at a much bigger error even at lower altitudes with a computer-controlled bomb release system. Like a % chance of getting within feet.
For point of comparison, a Second World War B- was % within , feet.

这就是JDAM（联合直接攻击弹药）的作用，也是为什么美国一直在向以色列提供这种转换套件的原因。否则，即使使用计算机控制的炸弹投放系统，在较低高度投掷时也会有较大的误差，可能只有大约30%的机会能将炸弹投掷在10米范围内。作为对比，二战时期的B-17轰炸机在投掷炸弹时，其命中精度是50%落在250英尺内。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@Worldly_Collection
Wasn’t a portion of this because their formations took massive flak fire and the norden basically required autopilot during dropping of these bombs which was not often possible?
I think they also dropped bombs at significantly higher altitudes than what they tested the norden for. But, yeah, either way we bomb shit real good now.

我记得其中一部分原因是由于他们的编队遭受了猛烈的防空炮火，而诺登轰炸瞄准器实际上需要自动驾驶模式才能准确投弹，但这在实战中并不总是可行的。而且，他们投掷炸弹的高度通常远高于诺登瞄准器测试时所设定的高度。不过不管怎样，现在我们确实能把炸弹炸得相当精准了。

@Cosmic-Engine
A considerable amount of this stuff lies between “unknown because it’s impossible to know” and “unknown because it’s deeply classified (for good reasons or not)” but my most recent understanding is that the Norden Bomb Sight simply never actually worked, AND flak, flying at high altitude, variables that couldn’t be considered at the time, etc all played a role in those outcomes.
When you consider what’s necessary in order to have a massive bomb land at a specific spot after being released at high speed from a platform moving in three variable dimensions tens of thousands of feet above, it’s a pretty tall order even today. That’s one reason why some aspects remain classified - because this ability to hit precisely is a quantum leap in capability, so countries that can do it don’t want anyone else to be able to do it. I remember watching the recordings of precision strikes from the first Gulf War, and how everyone was talking about it afterwards. There were jokes about missiles coming through windows in a bunch of things for a couple of years later, because it’s a ludicrous thing to do… the only thing that’s crazier is how much we take that capability for granted now. Especially considering how the current standard is all the way up to “kill one guy in a car, leave the other people alive.”
The other aspect is that the Norden was trying to solve an equation that was just impossible to solve with the kind of technology that was available at that time. Like, you can’t find the area under a curve using geometry, it simply isn’t possible. You need a new kind of math to have any hope of doing it. You can get kind of close using estimates & hedging methods, but it’s still just an estimate. The fire control computers built for the Iowa-class battleships were much more capable of doing these estimates, so they were able to be significantly more accurate & reliable (even though the firing platform is on a ship) mostly because they were simply bigger and more complex, which was what drove performance in analog computers. Obviously, every pound of bomb-sighting computer on a plane is a pound not being used for something else, so you can’t just have a battleship-class computer for your bombsight. The “promise” of the Norden was that if you used the autopilot to “lock down” a few of the variables, you could save almost literally a ton of computer weight.
The problem was that it never actually delivered on that, and the USAAF / War Department basically ignored this small problem of a more or less non-functional bombsight right through the end of the war, always kind of pretending that it was working.
There’s a case to be made that the Norden program was a procurement disaster, and there’s even a credible case to be made that somebody should’ve had charges brought against them for all of the money & other critical resources it consumed without ever actually delivering the results which were promised. I don’t think there’s ever been a conclusive, official answer as to why the failure of both the Norden as a system (and procurement program) and precision bombing as a tactic / strategy didn’t cause a wider scandal or anything like that. Maybe during the war, it’s because you want good vibes & morale as opposed to coming out and saying “oh, damn, this entire thing has been a complete disaster, whoopsie” and after the war it’s just “well, that’s behind us, whew” but who really knows?

相当一部分关于这一领域的信息处于“未知（因为无法得知）”和“未知（因涉及深度机密，无论出于何种原因）”之间。根据我最近的理解，诺登轰炸瞄准器实际上从未真正起作用，并且防空炮火、高空飞行、当时未能考虑的诸多变量等因素都对结果产生了影响。
要让一颗从数万英尺高处、高速投放的大型炸弹精确地落在指定位置，即使在今天也是一项极其艰巨的任务。这也是为什么有些方面仍被列为机密的原因之一——这种精准打击能力是技术上的巨大飞跃，能够做到这一点的国家自然不希望其他国家也能拥有这项技术。我记得观看过第一次海湾战争中的精准打击录像，战后所有人都在讨论此事。在那之后的几年里，甚至出现了关于导弹能穿过建筑物窗户的笑话，因为这是一件看似荒谬的事情……更令人惊讶的是，我们现在竟然已经将这种能力视为理所当然。尤其是考虑到当前的标准已经可以实现“杀死车内的一个目标，而其他人员安然无恙”。
另一方面，诺登瞄准器试图解决的问题是一个在其时代技术水平下几乎无法解决的方程式。例如，你不能仅通过几何学方法来求解曲线下的面积，这是不可能的。要想解决这个问题，你需要一种全新的数学方法。虽然可以通过估算和保险策略接近目标，但始终只是估计值。为爱荷华级战列舰建造的火控计算机在进行此类估算上更具能力，因此它们在准确性与可靠性上远超诺登瞄准器，主要原因是这些战列舰火控计算机体积更大、结构更复杂，在模拟计算机时代，正是这些因素决定了其性能表现。显然，飞机上的每一磅轰炸瞄准计算机重量就意味着少了一磅用于其他用途的载荷，因此你不可能直接在轰炸瞄准装置上安装一个战列舰级别的计算机。诺登瞄准器当初的承诺是，如果利用自动驾驶锁定一些变量，理论上可以节省大量计算机设备的重量。
问题在于，诺登瞄准器并未真正兑现这一承诺，美国陆军航空队（USAAF）和战争部基本上在整个战争期间忽略了这款近乎无功能的轰炸瞄准器存在的小问题，总是假装它仍在正常工作。
有人认为诺登计划是一场采购灾难，甚至有合理的案例表明，由于该计划耗费了大量资金和其他关键资源，却从未真正交付承诺的结果，应当有人为此负责。我认为至今尚未有一个正式、明确的答案来解释为何诺登系统（及其采购项目）以及精确轰炸作为战术/战略的失败没有引发更大的丑闻或类似事件。也许在战争期间，保持高昂士气和积极氛围比公开承认“哦，天哪，整个事情完全是个灾难，哎呀”更重要；而在战后，人们可能就抱着“好吧，那些都已经过去了，松一口气”的心态，但究竟真相如何，又有谁能真正知道呢？

@Clmhrd
Asking bc a facility may take hits before it’s destroyed so would that be targets or ?
Not really knowing for sure, I'd assume that would count as target. Otherwise, given these numbers (/), "precision munitions" didn't actually hit anything.
So, distinct targets, some of them hit multiple times.

询问一下，如果一个设施需要被打击10次才能摧毁，那么这算是10个目标还是1个目标？在没有确切信息的情况下，我猜测这种情况应算作1个目标。否则的话，按照这些数字（/），那些“精确制导弹药”实际上并未击中任何东西。所以是针对多个不同的目标进行打击，其中一些目标可能被多次命中。

@GenXguy-
Surprisingly, Twitter got this one right. Saw reports hours ago about a flight of B- Bombers taking off from their base in the UK. Guess we know where they ended up.

令人惊讶的是，推特上这次的信息是对的。几个小时前就看到有关B-轰炸机从英国基地起飞的报道。看来现在我们知道它们的目的地了。

@Bamboozleprim
They waited until the market closed for the weekend literally down to the minute lol.

他们特意等到周末股市收盘的最后一分钟才行动，真是笑死人了。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@XG
there's absolutely no reaction from the markets, it was priced in. Biden's odds did go up on multiple sites on the move though.

市场对此完全没有反应，因为这一消息已经被市场提前消化了。不过，在此次行动之后，拜登在多个网站上的胜选赔率倒是上升了。

@ILikeVancouver
They started taking air defense out about fifteen minutes before. News didnt report anything till after close lol.

大约在行动前十五分钟就开始清除了防空设施。新闻发布是在股市收盘后才出来的，哈哈。

@BroccoliOpposite
No, they launched the attack directly after Biden greeted the bodies of the soldiers in DC. That’s how they timed it.
Nothing to do with the stock market. Read around, there are statements from the White House and DOD. I think that’s a coincidence you noticed and assumed to be causative.

不，他们是直接在拜登在华盛顿迎接阵亡士兵遗体之后发动袭击的。这就是他们选择的时间点。与股票市场无关。请多查阅相关信息，白宫和国防部都发表了声明。你注意到的时间巧合可能只是偶然，并非因果关系。

@Academic_Budget_
At least 18 Iran backed militia in Syria killed from the attacks so far

目前已有至少18名受伊朗支持的叙利亚民兵在袭击中丧生。

@variableness
It’s amazing how few people understand that by “giving the Iranians 3 days to evacuate” the military was in a perfect place to bomb known facilities and follow/track equipment moving to previously unknown facilities, which would get bombed. If you don’t hunk the military has eyes on whatever they want, I got news for ya

令人惊讶的是，很少有人明白“给伊朗3天时间撤离”的背后含义。此举实际上使军队处于绝佳位置去轰炸已知设施，并追踪那些转移到未知设施（之后同样会遭到轰炸）的装备。如果你还认为军队无法对想要关注的目标进行监视，那么我得告诉你一些你可能不知道的事情。

@Charming_Computer_
Its also a way to intimidate Iran.
It's the US saying to Iran: "We know where you are. We can hit you at anytime and you can't do shit to stop it."

这也是一种对伊朗进行震慑的方式。美国是在向伊朗传达这样的信息：“我们知道你的位置。我们可以在任何时候打击你，而你对此无能为力。”

@GenericAtheistedited
Yeah, it wasn't really a threat when Biden said,
"We will hold all those responsible to account at a time and in a manner of our choosing"
It's just a statement of facts, and a promise. Looks like he's delivering and we're not even sure this is all of it.
Edit: Didn't see the White House , posted the end below.
Our response began today. It will continue at times and places of our choosing. The United States does not seek conflict in the Middle East or anywhere else in the world. But let all those who might seek to do us harm know this: If you harm an American, we will respond.

当拜登说，“我们将按照我们选择的时间和方式追究所有责任方的责任”时，这并不是真正的威胁。这只是陈述了一个事实，并作出了一项承诺。看起来他正在兑现诺言，而且我们还不确定这就是全部行动。编辑补充：没看到白宫声明，以下是白宫最后发布的部分内容：“我们的回应从今天开始，将在我们选择的时间和地点继续进行。美国不寻求在中东或其他任何地方挑起冲突。但要让那些可能对我们构成危害的人知道这一点：如果你伤害了美国人，我们将予以回应。”

@Joezev
It will continue at times and places of our choosing.
That sentence just shows complete domination. Like 'we will do whatever we want and there is no way you could possibly stop us'.

这句话显示了完全的主导地位，就如同在声明：“我们将随时在我们选定的时间和地点采取行动，你们无法阻止我们这样做。”这传达出一种近乎绝对的实力和决心，以及对对手无从防御或反击能力的暗示。

@knoegel
It's funny because you don't hear a peep from the pro Iranian people who in other threads were saying Biden won't do anything and their anti air defense would defeat any bombers.
What dummies they are

有趣的是，在其他帖子里那些支持伊朗的人曾说拜登不会有所作为，他们的防空系统能击败任何轰炸机，现在却悄无声息。真是些愚蠢之极的人。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

@Jasoy_Vorsneed
People are defending Iran now? Jesus.

现在竟然有人在为伊朗辩护？天哪。

@Weekly-Ad-
Dark motherfuckin Brandon ladies and gentlemen

女士们先生们，这就是那位让局势变得严峻的Brandon总统

@Brodellsky
And some people think Texas can and could secede lol

有些人还认为德克萨斯州可以并且能够脱离美国独立，哈哈。

@HammerSmoshedAss
Texas can't even turn a heater on

德克萨斯州连暖气都开不好，还想搞独立。

@SGTShamShield
People that I know who support Republican policies are squawking about how Biden is starting WW.
I asked them, "How is retaliation for killing US soldiers 'starting' anything?"
As expected, they shifted topics and whataboutisms.

我认识的一些支持共和党政策的人正在嚷嚷拜登是如何开启世界大战的。我问他们，“对杀害美军士兵进行报复怎么就成了‘挑起’战争了呢？”不出所料，他们转移话题并开始讲起了“何不食肉糜”的逻辑。

@BrandoNelly
“Because Biden makes us look weak so they think it’s okay to kill Americans”
Is what I see. Guess they are finding out how weak we are huh

“因为拜登让我们看起来软弱，所以他们觉得杀美国人无所谓。”看来他们现在才发现我们的“软弱”了吧。

@jimbofranks
That is a proper statement of force. I do not see weakness in this statement.

我认为这是一份恰当的武力声明。在这份声明中我没有看到任何示弱之处。

@Waxed_Sasquatch
The vague nature of the response is far more menacing. Maybe that was the last bomb, maybe not, maybe stop trying to kill us. (Also we should not kill them, ffs war should be a fully antiquated thing at this point in history)

回应中的模糊性实际上更具威慑力。可能是最后一颗炸弹，也可能不是，也许应该停止试图伤害我们。（另外，我们也不应该去杀他们，天哪，在历史的这个阶段，战争本应完全过时了）

@aaaaaaaarrrrrgh
(Also we should not kill them, ffs war should be a fully antiquated thing at this point in history)
I agree that not having wars would be better, but some people seem to not want to get the message until you kill them, and until you do, they'll try to harm you in every way they can. And for those, we need to accept that not killing them isn't a good option.

（另外，我们确实不应该去杀他们，天哪，在历史的这个阶段，战争本该彻底成为过去式）我同意没有战争会更好，但有些人似乎只有在你杀死他们之后才会吸取教训，在此之前他们会竭尽全力来伤害你。对于这些人，我们必须认识到不杀掉他们并不是一个好的选择。

@socialistrob
The US also regularly does this before military action which is technically what you're supposed to do under international law. Basically they issue a final ultimatum which they know the other side won't comply with and then - days later the bombing begins. This way they can say "we gave you a chance to turn in the people behind the attacks on US forces and you refused"

美国在采取军事行动前也经常这样做，这从技术上讲是符合国际法规定的。基本上，他们会发出一个明知对方不会遵守的最后通牒，几天后轰炸就开始了。这样他们可以说，“我们曾给你们机会交出袭击美军部队背后的人，但你们拒绝了。”

@twowaysplit
Air superiority is overall superiority, and the US owns the sky.

空中优势就是全方位的优势，而美国主宰着天空。

@zombieblackbird
The ants take the bait back to the nest and fuck the whole colony. Genius.

就像蚂蚁带着诱饵回到巢穴，结果摧毁了整个蚁群。真是天才般的策略。

@interwebsLurk
Yeah, issue the warning and then watch everything with KEYHOLE satellites and drones. Stuff that doesn't move target it. Stuff that does move but stays in-country; now you have NEW targets. Stuff that moves back into IRAN, alright, that is where the US wants it to stay anyway.

没错，发出警告后，通过KEYHOLE卫星和无人机监视一切。不动的目标就锁定它。移动但仍在本国境内的目标，现在就有了新的打击对象。那些移动回伊朗的，好吧，反正美国希望它们留在那里。

@AnIdeaMan
Yup we sent up the warning then watched them. Hell we may have even discovered new targets by watching and hit those too.

对，我们发出了警告然后一直监视他们。甚至可能通过观察发现了新的目标，并对其进行了打击。

@kukulkhan
Everyone complains that we telegraphed our moves to the world. I kind of agreed at first but then I gave it a little more thought and realized that it’s just a strategic move.
The us is just watching where these fuckers run off to Just like how people mark and follow pests back to nests they don’t know of before.
Think about it. They announce the attack. Terrorist scramble and go to their “secret” safe places and the us learns of/confirms locations.
We bomb them just enough to see where their super secret places are
And the pattern repeats. GENIUS.

大家都抱怨我们把行动计划告诉了全世界。起初我也这么认为，但后来仔细一想，这其实是一个战略行动。美国就像是在观察这些混蛋逃往何处，就像人们追踪害虫回到之前未知的巢穴一样。设想一下，美国宣布将进行反击，恐怖分子惊慌失措地逃向他们所谓的“秘密安全地点”，而美国借此机会得知并确认了这些地点。我们对这些地方进行适度轰炸，以便找出他们超级秘密藏身之处，然后这个模式就会不断重复。真是天才之举。

@emerald
That's what I was thinking too. We prob moved intel into place a day or some BEFORE we said we'd retaliate. Then watched where they bugged out to.

我也是这样想的。我们可能在宣布报复行动前的一天或更早时候就已经布置好了情报人员。之后就监视敌人逃跑的方向。

@pllkt
I don't think people realize just how sophisticated the US's total battlefield awareness and intelligence gathering capabilities are in ...it was wild to see the what could be done in the 's and early 's...
Once you become a high priority focus of the US military because of your bad choices and the full weight of their SIGINT and surveillance capabilities bear down on you it's gonna be a bad time...
I'm guessing these days there is also a lot of machine learning / AI helping to sift through the massive amounts of communication and surveillance data to help do things like identify potential targets and flag comm data for further review...

我认为人们并没有充分意识到美国在战场整体意识和情报收集方面有多么先进……上世纪90年代及本世纪初所展现的技术已经令人惊叹不已。一旦你因为错误的选择成为美军的重点关注对象，并且其信号情报（SIGINT）和监控能力全力对付你时，那对你来说绝对是一段糟糕的时光……我想如今大量机器学习和人工智能技术也在协助分析海量通讯和监控数据，帮助识别潜在目标并将通信数据标记出来供进一步审查……

@AspirinTheory
This is precisely my thinking.
Bad guys forget we were at war for + years in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere — and ran intel (sig and hum) ops across every continent and with every decent signal source.
The total awareness, intel gathering, and magnified lethality of what we have in our arsenal has only benefited from our decades of investment, learning, trial and error, and mission obxtive success.

我的想法完全相同。坏家伙们忘记了我们在伊拉克、阿富汗和其他地区打了超过20年的战争，在每个大陆以及每一个有价值的信号源上都运行着信号情报（SIG）和人力情报（HUM）行动。我们武器库中全面的情报感知能力、情报收集能力和强化的杀伤力，都是得益于过去几十年我们在投资、学习、试错和完成任务目标方面的积累与进步。

@allbutluk
Just mins boggling how far ahead US is militarily vs rest of the world even nato allies
Some may match their fire power in certain areas but the shear logistic / intel / coordinations US can do in short time is fanscinatinc

美国在军事上与其他国家（甚至是北约盟国）相比领先得令人难以置信。有些国家可能在某些领域火力相当，但美国能在短时间内完成的后勤、情报和协调能力真是令人惊叹。

@Zediscious
I think a lot of people underappreciate the US's ability to conduct war. I don't want to make guesses as to how far ahead we are, but the number and sophistication of the bombs countries use isn't really a factor.

我认为许多人低估了美国进行战争的能力。我不想猜测我们在多大程度上领先，但各国使用炸弹的数量和复杂性其实并不是关键因素。

@currynord
It’s specifically the American capacity to set up and deploy an entire logistics chain with essentially no notice. Russia hasn’t been able to take over a neighboring nation which is /th the land area primarily because their wartime logistics are terrible. Tanks running out of fuel in enemy territory, munitions scarcity, food shortages, etc.
It’s impossible for anyone to accurately say how well other nations stack up to the United States in terms of technology, but nobody does logistics better.

具体来说，美国的独特之处在于能够在几乎无预警的情况下建立起并部署一整条后勤链。俄罗斯之所以无法成功占领一个面积仅为其几分之一的邻国，主要原因就在于其战时后勤极其糟糕——坦克在敌方领土耗尽燃料，弹药短缺，食品供应不足等等。虽然很难准确评估其他国家在技术方面与美国相比表现如何，但在后勤方面，无人能出美国之右。