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’.
In fairness, David in this metaphor is probably the guy in the Levant knocking out predator drones with a slingshot.
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’.