{"id":66552,"date":"2005-06-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-06-30T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/06\/30\/la-mystique-des-armes-nouvelles\/"},"modified":"2005-06-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2005-06-30T00:00:00","slug":"la-mystique-des-armes-nouvelles","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/06\/30\/la-mystique-des-armes-nouvelles\/","title":{"rendered":"La mystique des \u201carmes nouvelles\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>Le cas du MH-47 (d&rsquo;abord identifi\u00e9 comme CH-47) abattu en Afghanistan, par les talibans sans doute (tiens, il en reste?), avec 16 soldats US \u00e0 bord sans doute tu\u00e9s, dont  <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nasdaq.com\/aspxcontent\/NewsStory.aspx?cpath=20050628ACQDJON200506281943DOWJONESDJONLINE000872.htm&#038;selected=9999&#038;selecteddisplaysymbol=9999&#038;StoryTargetFrame=_top&#038;mkt=WORLD&#038;chk=unchecked&#038;lang=&#038;link=&#038;headlinereturnpage=http:\/\/www.international.na\" class=\"gen\">certains peut-\u00eatre ex\u00e9cut\u00e9s<\/a>, pose un grave probl\u00e8me aux Am\u00e9ricains. S&rsquo;agit-il <a href=\"http:\/\/www.abc.net.au\/news\/newsitems\/200506\/s1403572.htm\" class=\"gen\">d&rsquo;une arme nouvelle<\/a>?<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tSelon ABC (Australie) : \u00ab <em>The official said that the twin-rotor CH-47 Chinook was believed to have been hit by a rocket-propelled grenade in mountainous terrain near the border with Pakistan, an attack claimed by Taliban guerrillas.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\t\u00bb <em>Taliban spokesman Abdul Latif Hakimi said fighters shot down the aircraft in the village of Shorak using a new type of weapon he did not describe.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tDans ces \u00e9tranges guerres de 4\u00e8me g\u00e9n\u00e9ration, o\u00f9 l&rsquo;adversaire des Am\u00e9ricains et de leurs suppl\u00e9tifs britanniques utilise des armes extr\u00eamement primaires ou peu conventionnelles, chaque \u00e9v\u00e9nement o\u00f9 est d\u00e9truit un syst\u00e8me pr\u00e9tendument hors de port\u00e9e de cet adversaire (en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral, un syst\u00e8me d&rsquo;arme a\u00e9rien) est l&rsquo;objet de multiples sp\u00e9culations. (On l&rsquo;a vu r\u00e9cemment encore \u00e0 l&rsquo;occasion <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article.php?art_id=1359\" class=\"gen\">de la perte d&rsquo;un C-130 britannique<\/a>, suivant celle d&rsquo;un CH-53 du Corps des Marines.) On parle donc, pour la destruction du MH-47, autant de l&rsquo;utilisation d&rsquo;un RPG7 que de l&rsquo;arriv\u00e9e \u00e9ventuelle chez les talibans de missiles portables sol-air, soit des <em>Stinger<\/em> am\u00e9ricains, soit des <em>Strella<\/em> sovi\u00e9tiques,  ou toute autre armes nouvelles.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tLes r\u00e9percussions ont \u00e9t\u00e9 imm\u00e9diates en Afghanistan: consignes de restrictions de vol, couverture des h\u00e9licopt\u00e8res par des avions de combat, des syst\u00e8mes de d\u00e9tection a\u00e9riens, etc. Du coup, les op\u00e9rations a\u00e9roport\u00e9es am\u00e9ricaines, qui forment une part importante de l&rsquo;effort op\u00e9rationnel dans le pays, sont fortement handicap\u00e9es. L&rsquo;efficacit\u00e9 de la guerre de 4\u00e8me g\u00e9n\u00e9ration contre les forces arm\u00e9es US (et, surtout, en fonction de la psychologie US) est une fois de plus d\u00e9montr\u00e9e au travers de ses cons\u00e9quences indirectes sur la machinerie militaro-bureaucratique am\u00e9ricaniste qui sur-r\u00e9agit et ordonne un tr\u00e8s grand nombre de mesures de protection et de restriction de l&rsquo;action.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tMis en ligne le 30 juin 2005 \u00e0 14H30<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Le cas du MH-47 (d&rsquo;abord identifi\u00e9 comme CH-47) abattu en Afghanistan, par les talibans sans doute (tiens, il en reste?), avec 16 soldats US \u00e0 bord sans doute tu\u00e9s, dont certains peut-\u00eatre ex\u00e9cut\u00e9s, pose un grave probl\u00e8me aux Am\u00e9ricains. S&rsquo;agit-il d&rsquo;une arme nouvelle? Selon ABC (Australie) : \u00ab The official said that the twin-rotor CH-47&hellip;&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[3915,3236,4624],"class_list":["post-66552","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-3915","tag-afghanistan","tag-mh"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66552","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=66552"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66552\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66552"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66552"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66552"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}