[flagged]
US army also used donkeys in places where vehicles were inconvenient in Afghanistan and DARPA spent millions on developing a robotic donkey replacement for those kind of conditions that ultimately failed to be a replacement for the real thing.
At some point it starts to feel like poor propaganda, this conflict has spawned a number of cases of ridicule along the lines of "when their side does X it's because they're too poor/stupid/corrupt to do any different, but when we do X it's because we're clever/ingenious/thrifty". It's borderline absurd to see people falling for the same kind of propaganda they're railing against.
It wouldn't make much sense to pay big bucks for a hummer/mrap/apc style vehicle for short hauls if it can't even make the trip without getting stuck in the mud and getting hit with a drone.
> It could be true
That's the nature of even decent propaganda.
> ... and still propaganda, or false and propaganda? If true, pretty interesting, but presumably we might want input on the general feasibility of such an engine from a few rocket scientists. I notice mention of fuel is conspicuously absent, I would think ...
In fact, if it was clearly true, it would be poor propaganda. The goal of propaganda isn't to persuade people, but to consume the enemy's resources, bog them down, and confuse them - to immobilize them.
You might notice a lot of immobilization in our society today. How about a discussion of climate change? Privacy? Vaccines? What, impossible to discuss? How can that be?
Cui bono? - that's the clarifying, penetrating question; the assault on propaganda.