WORLD WAR 3

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree our army/air force/navy are all vastly superior, but just saying, if an extremely long, conventional war started, we basically built China's infrastructure while neglecting our own. It could take us a long time to get new factories up and running (as opposed to just converting existing factories to wartime efforts like we have in the past).

[/ QUOTE ]

except we can hit their infrastructure, and they can't really hit ours

I'm pretty sure the US would make those targets a high priority, and I doubt China can defend vs the onslaught on them

[/ QUOTE ]

also, this is where allies come in, or at least being willing to write a really big check to buy what we need for long enough to get our infrastructure in order.

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes of course it tracks ships, ever watched a WW2 movie?

[/ QUOTE ] Not that closely I guess. But I've watched Top Gun-like movies where they flew their planes just above the water to avoid being detected on the radar, so I assumed that meant conventional radar wasn't very good at detecting ships. I willingly admit that I have no idea what I'm talking about here, though.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes the sats are controlled within the use, and no, its not arrogant to think its damn near impossible to shutdown the tracking stations, I have no idea where they control them, I doubt anyone even knows where the backup controllers are, but either way I can guarantee you they are buried in a near impregnable fortress under some mountain.

[/ QUOTE ] I didn't say anything about finding the backup controllers. (But you doubt anyone knows where it is? What does that mean? Someone knows I hope.) I meant build your own control center with the help of some high up traitors to control or at least be able to shut down the enemy's satellite. Or just hack into the enemy's control center. But it's possible you are right that this is damned near impossible.

[ QUOTE ]
no offence, but saying that launching sats is the same as shooting them down reveals some ignorance on your part, it was well publicized when china tested their first sat shooter, there is no way russia has this technology yet, or is close to it.

[/ QUOTE ] I am pretty ignorant about these kinds of things, but if you can launch a satellite into orbit so it comes pretty close to the satellite you want to take out, it can't be that hard to have some sort of weapons system on your satellite to at least decapicitate it for a while.

[black_drake]

You'd think getting blown to pieces for half a decade by NON MILITARY HOME MADE BOMBS, the government would actually do something about the piss-poor armored Humvees, or...hmm...STOP USING THEM TILL THEY ARE PROPERLY ARMORED. Yeah, I'm still ticked about the equipment those poor soldiers get - for those that think US Soldiers have top-notch equipment, you're in for a rude awakening.

[cowboy2579]

I like this arguement. One thing that hasn't been done yet is to define the potential players in the big war and the objective which one player has in mind at the opening of hostilities.

For this purpose, I'm assigning teams:

Team #1 = USA, Isreal, UK, France, Germany & minor players in western Europe.
Team #2 = Russia, Iran, Syria, Turkey, minor Muslim players and several former satellites to the USSR.
Team #3 = China, some minor players from SE Asia.

Potential Objectives:

Objective #1: secure oil-rich regions in order to feed economic growth.
Objective #2: secure other non-replenishable resources in order to feed economic growth.
Objective #3: do not cause nuclear holocaust.

Non-player Actors: They entities could have an impact in the conflict, but it is not likely they themselves would be able to field any significant conventional force.

South American countries
Canada
Eastern Europe not aligned with team #2
African countries
Austrailia
Countries in SE Asia not aligned with team #3
India (not sure if India belongs on a team or not)
Pakistan (just like India)

FWIW, I think the most likely scenario playing out would have to be team #3 invading the Middle East in order to fulfill Objective #1. This tips off a 3-way war with each side fighting the others, possibly with teams 2 and 3 ganging up on team 1.

I don't think anyone would be dumb enough to try and invade the USA, China or Russia. Its just too damn hard (esp. the USA) with no upside. The middle east is relatively soft and has plenty of strategic resources.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes of course it tracks ships, ever watched a WW2 movie?

[/ QUOTE ] Not that closely I guess. But I've watched Top Gun-like movies where they flew their planes just above the water to avoid being detected on the radar, so I assumed that meant conventional radar wasn't very good at detecting ships. I willingly admit that I have no idea what I'm talking about here, though.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes the sats are controlled within the use, and no, its not arrogant to think its damn near impossible to shutdown the tracking stations, I have no idea where they control them, I doubt anyone even knows where the backup controllers are, but either way I can guarantee you they are buried in a near impregnable fortress under some mountain.

[/ QUOTE ] I didn't say anything about finding the backup controllers. (But you doubt anyone knows where it is? What does that mean? Someone knows I hope.) I meant build your own control center with the help of some high up traitors to control or at least be able to shut down the enemy's satellite. Or just hack into the enemy's control center. But it's possible you are right that this is damned near impossible.

[ QUOTE ]
no offence, but saying that launching sats is the same as shooting them down reveals some ignorance on your part, it was well publicized when china tested their first sat shooter, there is no way russia has this technology yet, or is close to it.

[/ QUOTE ] I am pretty ignorant about these kinds of things, but if you can launch a satellite into orbit so it comes pretty close to the satellite you want to take out, it can't be that hard to have some sort of weapons system on your satellite to at least decapicitate it for a while.

[/ QUOTE ]


ship radar differs from plan radars, planes can fly under radar that normally tracks planes, boats work on a different system.


there is no way an outside country could "hack" into the sytems that control sats, nor could they "build their own control center", the encryption measures would be impossible to break, and yes, these things are "classified" so teh general public has no idea where secret military bases, and where these kinds of stations are, only top military personal do.


its much harder to shoot a sat down, than launch it, by a factor of 1000

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
there is no way an outside country could "hack" into the sytems that control sats, nor could they "build their own control center", the encryption measures would be impossible to break, and yes, these things are "classified" so teh general public has no idea where secret military bases, and where these kinds of stations are, only top military personal do.

[/ QUOTE ] That's what they need the high up traitors for [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]


[ QUOTE ]
its much harder to shoot a sat down, than launch it, by a factor of 1000

[/ QUOTE ] I'll take your word for it.

[cowboy2579]

[ QUOTE ]
it can't be that hard to have some sort of weapons system on your satellite to at least decapicitate it for a while.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that seems doable.

[garcia1000]

War Nerd speaks!
http://www.exile.ru/articles/detail....p;IBLOCK_ID=35

1. War involves battles.

Wrong! Most of the "armies" in the world right now avoid battle and focus on killing civilians. This is the hardest thing for Americans to understand: armies that don't aim at victory and actually avoid battle. So many war buffs who ought to know better just won't see this.

More at the link.

[wtfsvi]

what's the word? decapacitate I guess.

[cowboy2579]

[ QUOTE ]
what's the word? decapacitate I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL, i just assumed that you got tired of typing a response and misspelled and misused decapitate winding up your response.

This is the word i think you want: Discapacitate.