Yeah the David vs Goliath fight is a lot less one-sided when you remember David was a shepherd and a dab hand with a slingshot, he’d have been using it to defend his flock from predators from childhood and ancient armies fielded them as weapons of war. The man basically took a gun to a sword fight.
The lesson I think is less ‘the weak can defeat the strong’ in general and ‘don’t engage your enemy on his terms, engage him where you are strongest’.
Obligatory reminder that a sling was actually pretty much a gun of its time, easily capable of killing a guy.
There are a few differences
Really? Like what?
Accuracy, for starters.
Rate of fire is another big one.
Killing someone with a single sling stone is significantly more impressive than with a pistol.
Re: @mobyduck648@lemmy.world
David wasn’t the only Jewish soldier with access to sling stone technology.
I think the moral of David v Goliath is supposed to be “corporal strength is no match for divine providence”
If David had missed, nobody would be talking about him - except, perhaps, as a cautionary tale about hubris.
Yeah the David vs Goliath fight is a lot less one-sided when you remember David was a shepherd and a dab hand with a slingshot, he’d have been using it to defend his flock from predators from childhood and ancient armies fielded them as weapons of war. The man basically took a gun to a sword fight.
The lesson I think is less ‘the weak can defeat the strong’ in general and ‘don’t engage your enemy on his terms, engage him where you are strongest’.