|
Hey guys and (hey) gals I have found the best Tom Swifty: "I had at blast at Tenerife" Admiral Nelson said disarmingly.
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:02 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:That's not really true. What you're talking about is the concept of one-point safety; that if the compressive explosives were to begin accidentally detonating from one point, a nuclear chain reaction will not occur (below whatever threshold). It's very possible to have a nuclear weapon that is not one-point safe, and there were many US weapons that were not one point safe. The US stockpile now, but that is reportedly a relatively recent condition, as in post-Cold War. As for the design safety approach for Russian/British/French/Chinese/Indian/Pakistani/ Anyone who thinks nuclear weapons, especially American ones, are safe, go read Command and Control. They're not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I'm not sure "good guys" exist in international politics or wars or whatever but I am 90% sure that in any theoretical future conventional conflict I'd rather the US win than the theoretical opposition. Think US occupation is bad, well, look at France vs Poland. South Korea vs North. Egypt vs. Syria. Colombia vs Venezuela. In the long run, bring on the warmongering crony capitalism. I think you're on the wrong premise if you think in terms of 'but I don't want iran to winnn!' There's a very real historical precedent for how overwhelming military superiority (especially if it's temporary) gets into people's heads and starts creating wars of choice. Future US occupation won't be post-war France, it'd be Iraq and Afghanistan. Edit: that's not to mention stuff like disturbingly large numbers of Americans being okay with military coups in surveys. Fangz fucked around with this message at 01:36 on Apr 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 01:10
|
|
|
zoux posted:Does Russian doctrine allow for the limited use of tactical nukes? Anyone who knows won't be posting here but I think the consensus answer on current doctrine is probably, in order to rapidly escalate away from conventional conflict and "up the stakes" so to speak. Fangz posted:But even that is a shaky assumption unless you take it as a tautology. How much did the wehrmacht represent the strategic interests of Weimar Germany at the end of the day? What about LeMay and MacArthur for Cold War America? What about the Soviet military and the USSR? So what's your solution to the theoretical problem you have identified?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Anyone who knows won't be posting here but I think the consensus answer on current doctrine is probably, in order to rapidly escalate away from conventional conflict and "up the stakes" so to speak. Military demands should be kept secondary and subservient to civilian government, rules keeping military officers separate from government should be maintained, budgets should be kept tightly limited, the US should be kept more reliant on its allies, and we should be doubtful of the argument that once the military is strong enough 'that no one cares to mess with us', this would automatically deliver positive outcomes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Good, simple example: rocket artillery. Rocket artillery has become, or is likely to be, the real long arm of any ground conflict in the future. The thing with rockets is, the only way to make them go further, or carry more stuff, is you have to make them bigger. This is very easy for China/Russia...they don't have to haul their launchers or rockets over oceans in order to use them. So, they (particularly China) have created absolutely mammoth rocket artillery systems that substantially outrange/outgun US/NATO systems just due to their sheer size: the latest model is a 400mm (read: battleship gun) diameter system, in contrast to the 227mm NATO standard. The US, conversely, simply can't field a 400mm system as the size of the munitions and the launcher won't jive with our current airlift/sealift capacity. There's a point of diminishing returns with artillery (to include conventional rockets) where bigger does not equal better. That thing has a hell of a footprint and is most definitely a strategic weapon. The US isn't going to field a 400mm rocket because it's impractical beyond just the air/sealift capability and does not fit with doctrine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
Fangz posted:But even that is a shaky assumption unless you take it as a tautology. How much did the wehrmacht represent the strategic interests of Weimar Germany at the end of the day? What about LeMay and MacArthur for Cold War America? What about the Soviet military and My opinion ultimately is that US and NATO military hegemony is better for the world than the alternative. I think your point, that you are very clumsily trying to make, is that you disagree, which is totally fine. bewbies fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Apr 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:There's a point of diminishing returns with artillery (to include conventional rockets) where bigger does not equal better. That thing has a hell of a footprint and is most definitely a strategic weapon. The US isn't going to field a 400mm rocket because it's impractical beyond just the air/sealift capability and does not fit with doctrine. China is absolutely using their heavy MRLs in tactical roles. In fact, they are basically using them as hunters for threat artillery systems, In addition to all of the other crunchy targets that are just behind the maneuver units. You're absolutely right the logistics footprint is enormous, which is the whole reason why fielding such a system isn't viable for an expeditionary army. An example, They've had to set up specific supply chains for their heaviest rocket systems, to include rail, in order to move ammunition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
Trump is rather neatly illustrating that the US and NATO are two different things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Trump is rather neatly illustrating that the US and NATO are two different things. Well, once Germany pays its dues, we'll be able to afford all sorts of shiny toys.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
And the US entirely dominates NATO to the point that European countries feel subservient. That + US domestic politics being more important than foreign relations scares the poo poo out of us. Trump makes it hard to stick our fingers in our ears and go la-la-la.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 03:08
|
|
|
zoux posted:Does Russian doctrine allow for the limited use of tactical nukes? Don't they have a "nuclear de-escalation" policy? AKA "If we're losing then we'll nuke our opponent just a little bit, which will surely make them back down."
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
It was mentioned a few pages ago that German Politics just before the Reichstag Fire happened that politics had Communists, the centrists, the Nazis and the "traditional Far Right". Who were the traditional far right before the Nazis? We associate Far Right parties today with the Nazis, due to White Supremacy and the like, but what were they like before? I thought people might also be interested in this, although maybe I'm wrong. I'm not that interested in the biggest guns you can fit on tanks and ships. The people are more interesting:  The book this is from was written a few years before the fall of Russia
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 09:59
|
|
|
Hazzard posted:I thought people might also be interested in this, although maybe I'm wrong. I'm not that interested in the biggest guns you can fit on tanks and ships. The people are more interesting: I believe the 'No' answers for the first question had experienced alcoholism in their units, they just didn't have any problems with it. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 10:14
|
|
|
Hazzard posted:It was mentioned a few pages ago that German Politics just before the Reichstag Fire happened that politics had Communists, the centrists, the Nazis and the "traditional Far Right". Who were the traditional far right before the Nazis? We associate Far Right parties today with the Nazis, due to White Supremacy and the like, but what were they like before? You'd be looking at the DNVP, with Alfred Hugenberg as their leader. They were the far right during the period before WW1, and remained present during the Weimar republic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 10:26
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:I believe the 'No' answers for the first question had experienced alcoholism in their units, they just didn't have any problems with it. There was some extra text in the book I got this from, talking about how it's very hard to get away with desertion, as well as being dishonourable (can't think of a better word here, I don't like the connotations). Various countries past and present have a problem with alcoholism, but it's not really a problem when the army is a garrison force, it's when they're on the march and can't get liquor anymore it blows up. Panzeh posted:You'd be looking at the DNVP, with Alfred Hugenberg as their leader. They were the far right during the period before WW1, and remained present during the Weimar republic. What was their specific idealogy? Were they monarchists? Interested in dictatorships?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 10:47
|
|
|
Hazzard posted:It was mentioned a few pages ago that German Politics just before the Reichstag Fire happened that politics had Communists, the centrists, the Nazis and the "traditional Far Right". Who were the traditional far right before the Nazis? We associate Far Right parties today with the Nazis, due to White Supremacy and the like, but what were they like before? Traditional far-right in Germany between the wars were various stripes of monarchists and Prussian militarists. It was this group, famously containing General Ludendorff, that originated the "Stab-in-the-back" myth that the Nazis latched onto with both hands.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 10:53
|
|
|
Hazzard posted:What was their specific idealogy? Were they monarchists? Interested in dictatorships? The DNVP was interested in pan-Germanism, and had largely right-wing economic ideas. They were always authoritarian but moved from monarchism to wanting a presidential dictatorship to try to improve their electoral success. Hugenberg was part of the cabinet appointed with Hitler but was muscled out fairly quickly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 11:57
|
|
|
They supported the Kapp putsch, didn't they?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 12:04
|
|
|
A few months ago I asked about advice of things to see in Berlin, just wanna say thanks! Some of the things suggested I had already seen before, but a few things were new to me. The highlight was the former Stasi prison in hohenschönhausen. Or the abandoned Soviet garrison city a bit out in Brandenburg, which wasn't suggested in the thread (with good reason, as it isn't 100% legal to be there). Anyway, in summer I'm going to Dresden for a few days, does anyone have any recommendations of historical stuff to see there? So far I've heard about the museums inside the Dresden castle in the old city, the Zwinger palace, as well as their military history museum. Also thinking of visiting Meissen, seems like a nice place during summer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 12:36
|
|
|
Falukorv posted:Anyway, in summer I'm going to Dresden for a few days, does anyone have any recommendations of historical stuff to see there? HEY GAIL
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 13:29
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Anyone who thinks nuclear weapons, especially American ones, are safe, go read Command and Control. They're not. uh hello they are designed to be as unsafe as possible, that's the whole point
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 13:40
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Military demands should be kept secondary and subservient to civilian government, rules keeping military officers separate from government should be maintained, budgets should be kept tightly limited, the US should be kept more reliant on its allies, and we should be doubtful of the argument that once the military is strong enough 'that no one cares to mess with us', this would automatically deliver positive outcomes. I agree with the statements that you make here, but roughly zero of this stuff is relevant to a DoD headscratching job about planning required capabilities and systems to fight WWIII.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:uh hello they are designed to be as unsafe as possible, that's the whole point I really, really want to know what history would have been like with an accidental nuclear detonation on US soil. I can't even begin to think of how far reaching the consequences would have been.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
Well, it depends on where the accident was. So long as it's not where anybody was living, it'd probably get only the amount of attention that all those on-purpose nuclear detonations on US soil did.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 15:46
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Well, it depends on where the accident was. So long as it's not where anybody was living, it'd probably get only the amount of attention that all those on-purpose nuclear detonations on US soil did. Sure, but the public reaction is what takes things down a road I cant' even imagine. glynnenstein fucked around with this message at 16:03 on Apr 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Well, it depends on where the accident was. So long as it's not where anybody was living, it'd probably get only the amount of attention that all those on-purpose nuclear detonations on US soil did. Eastern North Carolina was where the Goldsboro B-52 incident occurred so nothing of value would have been lost.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
A stack of books showed up at my doorstep last night, one of which is Friend or Foe by Paul Kemp Really good book! "Have rammed and sunk enemy submarine. Survivors appear to speak Italian." -Famously quote after a friendly fire incident during WW1.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
Falukorv posted:A few months ago I asked about advice of things to see in Berlin, just wanna say thanks! Some of the things suggested I had already seen before, but a few things were new to me. The highlight was the former Stasi prison in hohenschönhausen. edit: some of the stuff in the old city was restored well (highlights are the only(?) surviving paved jousting ground) but a lot of stuff looks fake and wrong. If you want a nice looking neighborhood go across the river to the Neustadt instead, it's the largest preserved Second Reich quarter in germany, those buildings are original unlike almost the entire Altstadt. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Apr 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Eastern North Carolina was where the Goldsboro B-52 incident occurred so nothing of value would have been lost. I just finished Command and Control, and if I recall correctly didn't he say that the fallout may have drifted up to DC? That's one way to drain the swamp.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 19:15
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Eastern North Carolina was where the Goldsboro B-52 incident occurred so nothing of value would have been lost. Wasn't there some kind of above-ground open-air reactor somewhere in that vicinity too? IIRC it was in a pit or something and for irradiation testing they'd just hoist it up and light up the surrounds. Edit: it was in Georgia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Nuclear_Aircraft_Laboratory https://northgeorgiamountainramblings.wordpress.com/2010/04/28/when-the-cold-war-came-to-dawsonville/ GotLag fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Apr 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:zwinger is good, the stuff in the Residenzschloss is great (your museum ticket will handle all the museums there, there's more than one), the military history museum is somewhat disappointing although the building looks cool, go to Festung Dresden instead. Meissen is great and it's just a short trip down the river from Dresden, get on the train or take a bike. Thanks! I was in Dresden last December but only for a few hours, were i walked around the old town for a bit without entering any museum or such, except the catholic cathedral, mostly hanged around the christmas market fattening up like a christmas pig and drinking mulled wine. At the time i was staying in Bad Schandau and the few days there were mostly spent hiking in Saxon Switzerland. This time i will have more time for the city itself and all of it's experiences, with more pleasant weather (i hope). Interesting about Neustadt, i'll be certainly see some of it as it's there i will be staying. Why did Neustadt survive the firebombing better than the Altstadt? Falukorv fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Apr 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Falukorv posted:Why did Neustadt survive the firebombing better than the Altstadt? HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Apr 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
pthighs posted:I just finished Command and Control, and if I recall correctly didn't he say that the fallout may have drifted up to DC? That's one way to drain the swamp. I thought somebody here actually posted some sight that checked out the actual weather conditions that day, which suggested the fallout would have blown out over the Atlantic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 20:55
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
30 Years war book update: I'm at a point now in the 30 years war where it's like some sort of perpetual motion machine of war: despite no money going into it, it still goes on. Gustavus is dead, the Swedes are basically in it to get their soldiers paid (which was one of the motivations for them invading in the first place.) The emperor is trying to make peace in Germany but is being smart about it (IE walking back his strident Catholic policies) but meanwhile isn't doing enough to get Protestant Germany back in the fold. Spain and France have now gotten stuck into the whole thing thanks to machinations of Cardinal Richelieu and Oliviers (Spain's Richelieu equivalent) and some barmy French nobleman who somehow got an Italian (?) dukedom. Why this war kept bankrupting people is sorta obvious, though: people raise armies of men, and then loose like 3/4ths of the initial number due to famine, disease, and desertion. I think the war in Germany at this point is just a large group of angry desperate men who will serve anybody who can pay them cash money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:A stack of books showed up at my doorstep last night, one of which is Friend or Foe by Paul Kemp I guess that didn't necessarily narrow it down in any battles on the Adriatic in WWI...
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I guess that didn't necessarily narrow it down in any battles on the Adriatic in WWI... Its friendly fire, there was no battle 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I guess that didn't necessarily narrow it down in any battles on the Adriatic in WWI... From a friend: The sloop Cyclamen, whose charge included a troopship, had been warned of German submarines off the Tuscan coast and promptly made the signal which acieved a certain amaount of nororiety in the Royal Navy: 'HAVE RAMMED AND SUNK ENEMY SUBMARINE. SURVIVORS APPEAR TO SPEAK ITALIAN'
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
In fairness, a "friendly" submarine is kind of like a guy coming up behind you with a big kitchen knife, putting his hand on your shoulder, the knife over the other, and then whispering "I'm on your side" in your ear.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 18:02 |
|
|
They should have to tie little flags to their periscopes or something
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2017 22:47
|
|
