|
Captain von Trapp posted:The military promotion structure, borked as it is, is more or less specifically designed not to promote the kind of person who goes off the reservation, at all, ever. Much less the kind of person with the clinical derangement required to push the button in anything other than a "nukes inbound" scenario. 
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
Maybe the promotion structure is different now, but I don’t like how Trump idolizes bad boy generals like Patton and MacArthur.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Counterpoint: Thomas Sarsfield Power True, but for better and/or worse the promotion process today is very, very different in process, philosophy, and results than it was in the 50s.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Haha Trump just called the president of Taiwan :itshappening:
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
Trump is unleashing Chang!
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
Trump made it even better* with his response to the criticisms. I don't have the link handy but it amounted to "What's the big deal, we sell them billions of dollars in weapons a year!" *Better if his goal was to make the Chinese even more wary of Trump.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
Trump calling Taiwan is not the end of the world. It's kind of sad that he didn't seem to realize the implications of it but meh. To be honest if we want to put pressure on China at any point, Taiwan is an easy place to do it. Steps toward recognizing Taiwan are basically cost-free to us but would make them very upset, and they'd probably be willing to accommodate us to keep it from happening.
Mortabis fucked around with this message at 03:53 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Trump calling Taiwan is not the end of the world. It's kind of sad that he didn't seem to realize the implications of it but meh. To be honest if we want to put pressure on China at any point, Taiwan is an easy place to do it. Steps toward recognizing Taiwan are basically cost-free to us but would make them very upset, and they'd probably be willing to accommodate us to keep it from happening. Oh gently caress. Now I'm worried.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
Talking to Taiwan’s president would be okay if I thought Trump was doing it for calculated reasons, but I really don’t. He’s just flailing around with a stick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
Wait till he tweets about the Mayor of Sevastopol, Russia giving him a call.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
He did say during the campaign that recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea was going to be on the table though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
If his secretary of state is Romney or Bolton then that seems kind of unlikely. Looks like Bolton might not get confirmed though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Honestly, all it takes is Trump. The SecDef's only job is to confirm the order, if he refuses, the President can fire him and there's an entire litany of undersecretaries who can step in as provisionals to satisfy the Two Man Rule. The flag officer aboard the TACAMO plane also has provisional authority to act in the SecDef's place, though that's supposed to only be delegated if SecDef is incapacitated/killed or out of position if/when the poo poo hits the fan. What happens if POTUS and SecDef are out? Is it just two guys on the TACAMO, or whatever battle staff is on Nightwatch? I haven't watched By Dawn's Early Light in a while, so I'm not up on what constitutes authority in that scenario. Edit: Nevermind. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=punqdlHMDjo God bless you Mary. Effective-Disorder fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
Effective-Disorder posted:What happens if POTUS and SecDef are out? Is it just two guys on the TACAMO, or whatever battle staff is on Nightwatch? I haven't watched By Dawn's Early Light in a while, so I'm not up on what constitutes authority in that scenario. Re earlier chat, I'm pretty sure the answer to this is printed on pages with an orange coversheet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
The system in BDEL is the old system, where the Air Force had the Looking Glass, the Navy had TACAMO, and SecDef (presumably with the President aboard) had the E-4, since while the VC-25 is definitely a more livable environment, it's not as ideally suited for conducting and executing strategic action. There isn't even a shower on board the E-4 because they couldn't justify wasting weight on more water storage. Also, even though the Air Force doesn't have the EC-135s anymore, they do have the modern day equivalent of CINCSAC in the Global Strike Command, who also enjoys privileges under the tenets of predelegation in the event of "complications" in the National Command Authority structure. Up until recently those complications dealt mostly with "near-impossible things that will never happen," but thanks to president-elect Trump being enamored with "the power of the nuclear," the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons as a "cheaper" alternative to war (if employed against actors who cannot instantly retaliate) is a non-zero eventuality now. And all we've heard from him thus far on the issue is that he won't be a "happy trigger" in regards to nuclear weapons. I don't know what's more disturbing...that he doesn't know it's supposed to be a "hair trigger," or that in ~TYOOL~ 2016 we now have a C-in-C who has to vocally reassure everyone in such a half-hearted manner that he won't nuke Mecca if Steve Bannon double-dog-dares him. Anyway, sorry for getting political there, but this poo poo is very firmly in my wheelhouse, and I'm looking into a career pivot in the next few months, because I want nothing to do with helping to form this man's nuclear doctrine/strategy. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 05:08 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:The system in BDEL is the old system, where the Air Force had the Looking Glass, the Navy had TACAMO, and SecDef (presumably with the President aboard) had the E-4, since while the VC-25 is definitely a more livable environment, it's not as ideally suited for conducting and executing strategic action. There isn't even a shower on board the E-4 because they couldn't justify wasting weight on more water storage. To be honest, I'd feel better if you were involved in informing nuclear doctrine and/or strategy, because I reckon you have a good idea of the potential outcomes, even beyond the obvious negatives, and you seem to have your poo poo wired tight. If it's in your wheelhouse, then I would humbly ask that you keep standing that watch and maybe keep my rear end alive a little bit longer if you can. Maybe even if it came down to a Stanislov Petrov situation, I'm willing to bet my rear end on the side of the guy from the internet comedy forum as opposed to whatever rear end kisser takes his place if he decides to take a "career pivot". If I've learned nothing else from this thread, it's that stupidity gets its way if nobody says nothing (and even some times when somebody does say something, usually). Otherwise, just tell me when to start digging a hole in the ground.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
Effective-Disorder posted:I'm willing to bet my rear end on the side of the guy from the internet comedy forum Counterpoint: Internet comedy forums helped elect DJT.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Counterpoint: Internet comedy forums helped elect DJT. I don't want to think that someone would launch a strike because of a dank meme. That kind of ideation can start a chain of events that could cause liver cirrhosis, aside from all the better reasons to drink heavily. Edit: I'm betting on the internet comedy forum? Yeah, gently caress 2016, and gently caress my life, but hey, here we are. Let's drink some shots. Anyway, at least some content: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maZdUtB0ojs (No space for a shower because of 57 cases of MREs, all Cheese and Vegetable Omelette.) Effective-Disorder fucked around with this message at 05:39 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
Effective-Disorder posted:Otherwise, just tell me when to start digging a hole in the ground. AIRPOWER/Cold War Thread: Alas, Babylon
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:46
|
|
|
Captain von Trapp posted:AIRPOWER/Cold War Thread: Alas, Babylon Thanks, moving to Florida now. Hey, where were they anyhow? Gulf side of the Everglades? I've seen Homestead a couple of times, and they're probably still on somebody's targeting program just for the runways, right? Prevailing winds shouldn't pose much of a problem. Up in southern NY, I was wondering what that dot on the 80's FEMA projection was until I realized that Stewart still has that nice long runway. Effective-Disorder fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:46
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Counterpoint: Internet comedy forums helped elect DJT. Countercounterpoint: Caro lives.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 05:47
|
|
|
Effective-Disorder posted:Thanks, moving to Florida now. Hey, where were they anyhow? Gulf side of the Everglades? I've seen Homestead a couple of times, and they're probably still on somebody's targeting program just for the runways, right? Prevailing winds shouldn't pose much of a problem. Up in southern NY, I was wondering what that dot on the 80's FEMA projection was until I realized that Stewart still has that nice long runway. Central Florida. The town of Fort Repose was fictional, Tangerine FL is essentially where it was taking place. I know way too much about that goddamn book. Great book, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
LtCol J. Krusinski posted:Great book, though. I had to read both Alas, Babylon as well as Swan Song for summer reading as a kid. It was a very grim summer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
I meant Mount Dora not Tangerine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 06:15
|
|
|
Ironically in the book they mention Mount Dora. Tangerine is were Pat Frank lived when he wrote the book.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
LtCol J. Krusinski posted:Central Florida. The town of Fort Repose was fictional, Tangerine FL is essentially where it was taking place. I know way too much about that goddamn book. Yeah, it was a great book. LtCol J. Krusinski posted:Ironically in the book they mention Mount Dora. Tangerine is were Pat Frank lived when he wrote the book. http://jacksonville.com/lifestyles/2009-06-15/story/pat_frank%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%98alas_babylon_%E2%80%99_50_years_later quote:Most or all of “Alas, Babylon” was written in Mount Dora in Central Florida. Well, they got it wrong too then, so no worries. https://www.google.com/maps/place/M...18!4d-81.644519 Not far from Disney World! I think I'll see if I can take a trip out there in the near future. I've seen most everything south of Miami, including some rocket facilities.(http://www.abandonedfl.com/aerojet-dade/) It was definitely worth the trip to see some old rotted concrete and intact control panels with vacuum tubes still poking out of beautiful hand-plotted circuit boards. Only time I've gone that far north other than Disney was to check out Cape Canaveral. I think it might be fun to see what's up in Mount Dora. Edit: Checked a map, it's all Wal-Mart and Golden Corral. Oh well. Effective-Disorder fucked around with this message at 06:41 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 06:20
|
|
|
Effective-Disorder posted:Thanks, moving to Florida now. Hey, where were they anyhow? Gulf side of the Everglades? I've seen Homestead a couple of times, and they're probably still on somebody's targeting program just for the runways, right? Prevailing winds shouldn't pose much of a problem. Up in southern NY, I was wondering what that dot on the 80's FEMA projection was until I realized that Stewart still has that nice long runway. Oregon (preferably around Eugene) or Puerto Rico. Oregon has an ANG base at Klamath Falls, and Portland might eat a few warheads simply for being a decent countervalue target, but there aren't many *strategic* targets left in the state other than a long straight stretch of I-5 that can be severed well enough by nuking Portland. Umatilla's empty now, so there's no reason to waste warheads groundbursting all those former CW bunkers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
I’m curious about the safety of Costa Rica in a nuclear conflict. No standing army since 1948.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Oregon (preferably around Eugene) or Puerto Rico. Oregon has an ANG base at Klamath Falls, and Portland might eat a few warheads simply for being a decent countervalue target, but there aren't many *strategic* targets left in the state other than a long straight stretch of I-5 that can be severed well enough by nuking Portland. Umatilla's empty now, so there's no reason to waste warheads groundbursting all those former CW bunkers. I'll start stockpiling cases of Rogue, and go look for those caves with the rich stuff. Thanks for the tip. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxLhytQ67fs
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
At the height of the cold war did individual national guard armories have warheads targeted on them? Or ROTC units at colleges? I know SIOP had way more warheads in than profitable targets so it doesn't seem out of the question.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 07:05
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Talking to Taiwan’s president would be okay if I thought Trump was doing it for calculated reasons, but I really don’t. There's zero long-term benefit to continuing the pretense that Taiwan isn't actually an independent nation. Trump might be a bull in a china shop diplomatically speaking but that doesn't change the fact that a lot of the china shop is actually bullshit in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 07:10
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:At the height of the cold war did individual national guard armories have warheads targeted on them? Or ROTC units at colleges? I know SIOP had way more warheads in than profitable targets so it doesn't seem out of the question. The Soviet missile arsenal was far more tuned for counterforce until their accuracy started improving from ~1975 to 1985. Countervalue they left mostly to their bombers and older boomers. As for your question - from a strike planning perspective, why bother going out of your way to hit conventional weapons armories when you've all but guaranteed that said weapons will never be used against you in a proper counterforce strike? A few thousand variably irradiated and demoralized national guardsmen crossing the Atlantic or Pacific with M14s, 16s, and 60s in hand on appropriated boats since you'd have already nuked the poo poo out of their transports and Ro-Ros? Not a threat, especially with a massive flotilla of Soviet submarines on both sides of the country full of pissed off sailors looking for revenge knowing their homes are gone and their families are likely dead. Obviously if you could take said targets out or render them useless by peripheral means (fallout or overlap), it's icing on the cake, but if it's assets and materiel that can't be levied against you in the short term, it's not really worth wasting a bomb on it. Phanatic posted:There's zero long-term benefit to continuing the pretense that Taiwan isn't actually an independent nation. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 08:26 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 07:55
|
|
|
Treasury bonds do not work that way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Treasury bonds do not work that way. You're right, I forgot they're not puttable bonds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:25
|
|
|
Just to reiterate a previous point that I wasn't entirely joking about, if anyone with experience in any sort of policy (not just end-of-the-world policy) were to find greener pastures because of an administration change, wouldn't that only reinforce the knowledge gap that the new administration presents in the first place? I'm not only talking about big headline's politics. Aside from the general assumptions of military hierarchy, are doctrinal shifts always a top-down thing, or does an organization have its own inertia? I mean, considering the nature of any complex organization, the perspectives of the people who actually implement top-level policy must have an impact on how events unfold, regardless of discipline. The military isn't a perfect machine by any means, as has been repeatedly shown in this thread. On the other hand, the structure of the system is explicitly designed such that the NCA can order the use of nuclear weapons with as little delay or deliberation as possible, as per the reality that if it came to that it should be possible even under the worst possible conditions. The system is inherently fail-deadly, although not apparently on the level of a cocked Dead Hand system. But, that's only my naive interpretation. There is nothing to suggest that we don't have a contingency planned that would entail a similar capability. Hell, we designed ERCS and other stuff to ensure retaliation under adverse conditions, and we have all sorts of COG and other stuff behind the veil to account for those situations. So, I can understand if there is some level of apparent futility that would make someone want to wash their hands of the whole mess if they had any doubts in the NCA being able to grasp their position rationally. But, does it really become such a cluster gently caress under a "madman" who is willing to blur the first-use line? Nixon trolled the poo poo out of people with the very premise that he was willing to push the button, and nothing happened. Nixon was probably smarter than Trump is, and maybe Checkers was even smarter, but is this really a matter of moving hands on a clock closer to midnight? Hell, even Reagan had a change of heart once he figured out what actually happens in a nuclear exchange. It was poo poo like Able Archer and the concurrent NATO exercises that almost set it off, aside from Reagan's talking points spooking the poo poo out of Brezhnev and Andropov in the first place. Trump seems to be giving Putin a boner, and the Chinese think he's a joke, so that's not exactly a problem. Besides, if I had to cynically speculate, OPLAN 8010 probably already has options to waste anyone, even Canada, so it wouldn't be as though anyone would have to do much work if Trump asked for options in casually nuking anybody for the slightest affront. Maybe updating target lists to include CNN, at most.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
Even if China could do a firesale on US debt it would wreck them way more than us. They care about Taiwan, but not that much. I don't think most of those bonds are even held by the PRC government anyway, but rather in private investors' hands. Mortabis fucked around with this message at 08:40 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Even if China could do a firesale on US debt it would wreck them way more than us. They care about Taiwan, but not that much. It is sufficient enough cause for them to step up their island construction and potentially place more overtly offensive weapons on them, and/or execute a short-term economic blockade of the island just to flex their muscles and see what kind of response it'd provoke from Lord Cheeto. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 09:02 on Dec 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 08:47
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:There's zero long-term benefit to continuing the pretense that Taiwan isn't actually an independent nation. China has threatened to invade Taiwan if it were to be recognized as a separate country instead of a mere disagreement about who is in charge of the one, and only, and indivisible China. There's no long-term benefit from keeping up the status quo but at the same time what benefit is there to risk starting a war between China and Taiwan?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 09:18
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:
Private, government and military aren't entirely separate domains in the People's Republic of China, for the record.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 09:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
China could probably do something to gently caress with Trump's debts, though. We have no idea since we never saw any disclosures or tax returns, but that might play more into Trump's strategy than anything else. My hot take is that some hawk in his team spoke him into it ("Come on, you aren't going to let CHINA tell you who you can call and who you can't!"), he spoke with President Tsai, then the media exploded, and now there's the Grifter-in-Chief camp represented by him and his kids who want to pull it back a little (Trump went on twitter to point out that she called him, not the other way around!) and the John Bolton camp who want to make new bold China policy, drat the consequences. The best case scenario that gets the least people killed is that China et al. rein it in a little, recognize that Trump is a con man out of his depth who's liable to fly off the handle if pushed too far, and do poo poo like "grab all of the South China Sea" but not quite "annex Taiwan."
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2016 09:25
|
|
