|
Admittedly, the study was almost certainly done to help lobby Congress, and at the same time, the US' edge it had since the 1990s has clearly dulled. This is probably more to do with China then Russia, although the Russian military has recovered to some degree (not so much its surface navy). China has quitely been building up a blue water navy that would seriously give the USN a run for its money in the Pacific in the next decade, and while most Americans still think they are running around with some fishing boats with missles to attached to them...their latest vessels seem modern, capable and they are building a lot of them. Moreover, the Chinese had made substantial strides in aerospace. Obviously, the US is going to sink more money into boondoggle projects, but there may be actually a point they would have an advantage. This isn't mean they are going to invade California, but our ability to launch wars of adventure may seriously be curtailed.
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2019 21:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 22:46 |
|
|
Fuligin posted:pln tryna storm taiwan would be such a shitshow can you even imagine The PLN isn't going to need to, the independence movement is pretty much DOA at this point. Prav posted:have russians ever sailed a ship succesfully Eh, they beat up the Ottomans pretty bad on occasion. Surface navies aren't they strong suit, but their modern subs are supposedly actually pretty good. At this point, I think most of their surface ships exist to keep NATO away from Murmansk/Sevastopol. Their strategy in the Arctic is subcentric. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 21:22 on Mar 11, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
The Syrians were almost certainly warned by the Russians, and we warned the Russians because we are in reality scared of Russian nukes. (I think the USAF is more likely to be grounded by a lack of spare parts for the F-35 though.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2019 21:24
|
|
|
Typo posted:yeah the real question is is China going to be happy with the status quo "not independence" forever They will probably just keep the current strategy of just slowly connecting Taiwan to the mainland more and more to the point their two economies are practically intertwined and then push for political concessions. I could see Senkaku/Diaoyu being more of a flash point (China probably could just land there.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2019 21:39
|
|
|
Typo posted:I agree with this as the most optimal strategy for the PRC, the question is whether the current leadership will opt for patience beyond 2040 40% of Taiwanese exports go to China, it is probably already too late. I guess they could "go nuts", but their strategy is clearly already working. It will probably just be a process of slowly wearing them down and they forcing them into some type of loose-EU style political pact. China really isn't interested in getting rid of the Taiwanese military, the Taiwanese dollar or even ruling Taiwan directly, but to essentially take Taiwan out of the geopolitical equation. In contrast, the hatred toward Japan is real. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 21:56 on Mar 11, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2019 21:48
|
|
|
Honestly, I think "WW3" probably is just going to be a series of proxy wars happening continuously but the major players Russia/China/US don't actually engage each other. Basically, the Cold War on steroids.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2019 22:01
|
|
|
Yeah, the Chinese fleet isn't some "brown" water force like it was in the 1960s: US wargaming has already shown the PLAN would be dominant in any encounter and that shift is only going to move further in China's direction. In addition, China is now producing more nuclear submarines that will be comparable to the latest Virginia class vessels and likely already has ballistic missile-carrying submarines with capabilities comparable to the Ohio class. The US still has an advantage in raw numbers, but the US sub fleet now has to split its responsibilities between the Russian and Chinese fleets which are only expanding their capabilities. The US is losing both the surface and underwater fight. The US' carriers are really their only real ace in the hole, even then the gap in capabilities is decreasing. The Belt and Road is unlikely to carry the full extend of Chinese trade but it is providing an emergency system that also is simply useful for facilitating the Eurasian trade. That said, if the PLAN can keep the trade lanes in the Indian ocean open, there isn't much the US is going to be able to do. Also, RCEP has been ratified which means pretty much all of East and South-East Asia is going to be tied with the Chinese economy, which means any sort of blockade would be completely unworkable even if the PRC didn't have a fleet. It is why the US is mostly stuck with posturing at this point while desperately trying to shore up its image. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 17:29 on Dec 19, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2021 17:24
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:the navy transits through the zones China is claiming as Exclusive Economic zones are a bit more aggressive than shoring up image. They are having to back off at this point and even so those patrols are very clearly about just about image. If you follow naval news in the region, it is clear the US is on the back foot. One factor is simply how thinly spread the USN is at this point and that it isn’t capable of a peer-peer conflict especially since it has major assets tied up in the Persian Gulf and the Arctic. Ramrod Hotshot posted:Does anyone actually think there could be a ship-to-ship battle between the US and Chinese navies? It's almost unimaginable. If a conflict was really so imminent, I'd have to think one side would back down or a deal would be reached first. War between first-rate national militaries just doesn't happen anymore, there's too much for both sides to lose. It is about leverage, and you can’t dictate terms if the other side would absolutely wipe the floor with you. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 18:32 on Dec 19, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2021 18:28
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:they demonstrate that China can’t enforce its international maritime claims. Just like Russian bombers buzzing around show that the West doesn’t control its own air space? All it shows is that China wasn’t willing to use force to ram US ships but that may change. If there was a war those US assets would be toast in the time it took a hypersonic missile to knock them out. —— Also, not only Taiwan but the entire sea zone around it is covered by long range Chinese assets. It is why the entire Taiwan issue is a smoke screen from a military point of view. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 18:41 on Dec 19, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2021 18:38
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:right they can’t or won’t enforce their maritime claims when the USN gets involved. Eh, the PLAN would wipe the floor with the USN in the SCS. The SCS is littered with airbases and missile sites not to mention a ton of other assets. It would be a shooting gallery. The PRC actually doesn’t want to fight a war because it pointless if you are actually winning through economic and political means. It doesn’t mean it would be scared to take apart the US’ aging overstretched fleet if the situation forced itself. I mean it isn’t just me but the US Navy itself admits it as much and the situation is getting worse. —— I think you are working from info that is 20-30 years out of date. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 19:00 on Dec 19, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2021 18:57
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:it has been about 20 years since I was on a ship in the SCS. In the last 20 years, a lot has changed. That said, I think a shooting war is unlikely since 1. both sides have plenty of nukes and 2. war itself isn’t useful for either side. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 19:17 on Dec 19, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2021 19:14
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:are we sure that the tens or hundred of thousands of teenagers raised on imperial propaganda know this? are we sure that the officer core of the end of history knows this? are we sure there are still sufficient profits to keep the nihilists in the security services satisfied? It isn’t that different than the situation in 1945 and we are still here. War itself won’t go away (Yemen/Ethiopia etc) but war between the great powers is just too costly and disruptive to capitalism itself. The current structure of capitalist couldn’t be sustained in an actual ww3 scenario, and I think both sides know it. Admittedly, there will be a point where the US will know there will be no way for it to win but it will also be far beyond the inflection point for it to do much. At this point, we are hoping that the UK and Australia do the “heavy lifting .”
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2021 19:47
|
|
|
indigi posted:they said this before the other world wars too. the situations are different but at the time everyone sincerely believed this the same way they sincerely believe it today. I don’t buy it They didn’t have nukes, and the assumption was that they could win without the actual structure of society being affected. In this case, it may be even messier than back in the Cold War since there are now a bunch of other nuclear armed states even though the total number of nukes has been reduced since the 1970s.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2021 17:38
|
|
|
indigi posted:yeah but everyone in charge of the military and associated political/business interests is still myopic and/or stupid and will convince themselves it’s “winnable.” and a decent number of them believe they literally have god on their side Obviously, anything can always happen, but at the same time capital does not want to throw away the game if there is hope. Honestly, a lot of American corporations (look at Disney) are fine with a Chinese dominated world if they can get a slice of the pie. It is also why XI has been relatively selective in his targets even though he is obviously pushing China in a more state directed economy. Also, Russia and China have both been upgrading their capabilities to send a crystal clear message.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2021 17:49
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:I don’t think this is a useful anthropomorphism. capital doesn’t have hopes and it isn’t a unified thing. if anything, the last 40 years of anti-climate change propaganda and the last president to check the use of nuclear weapons getting domed in texas should go to show capitalism for the apocalyptic death cult that it is. no, while disney may see profit opportunities in china, I see the finance and knowledge wing of the imperium about to get routed by the industrial and extractivist wing. It is just where the profit motive is at, and at a certain point, the ability to extract more from the West will be eclipsed by China and allied economies.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2021 21:02
|
|
|
Yeah, we don’t know past Korea how the US military would actually hold up in a genuine hot war. Everything from that point was a comparative cakewalk where usually the US could dominant the battlefield with air power and usually only lost though long term insurgency. What happens when local commanders, not used to the responsibility, have to take direct control over units? How do US ground forces fare when the air space is actually contested? Usually US forces can call on immediate air support (it has its issues) when needed but that very well may not be the case in a more contested setting: wargaming that takes into account modern Chinese/Russian equipment in BVR (beyond visual range fights) is ending up far more mixed then even 10 years ago. It is why I have been arguing that the West very well be arguably weaker than they appear in a hot war setting. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 19:22 on Dec 28, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2021 19:16
|
|
|
skooma512 posted:The west also relies heavily on vehicles and technology like NVGs and comms. Jamming and hacking any of these has dire consequences for the people on the ground, and its already been incorporated into exercises. Yeah, and obviously both the Russians and Chinese are doing everything possible to potentially disrupt communications. I think though it gets into the central issue is that the US military has essentially become a colonial force used to conflicts where jamming or a contested air space. It is why we just ignore wargames but also I think why the last major intervention was Libya. Also, the US maintenance system is also completely insane. Private contractors are routinely flown out overseas while actual maintenance companies stand idle (for obvious reasons). How is that crap suppose to fly during an actual war? Ardennes has issued a correction as of 21:58 on Dec 28, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2021 21:51
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:the point of wargames is to expose weaknesses, in addition to maintaining readiness among personnel. they they always go back and reset to a win condition is for political and morale purposes Why is it those weaknesses don’t seem to be fixed even years after they are brought up?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2021 23:09
|
|
|
Yeah, I don’t see a lot of enthusiasm coming from the population even if they are being blasted by propaganda. Living standards and life expectancy are already rapidly declining and cutting off trade with most of Asia isn’t going to help things. I could see regular units being held in reserve to back the NG domestically. That said, I don’t want to go as far as say true US is toothless. The USN even if it is aging and overstretched can still inflict damage and the show isn’t over until the USD collapses. Also, if anyone has been paying attention, it is clear that the US has been conducting a gladio 2.0 in the EU.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2021 11:38
|
|
|
Fish of hemp posted:Who will sell China their oil? Those fancy ships and planes consume a lot of fuel and it has come from somewhere. And I don't think anyone in Middle East wants to risk operation COUNTRY_NAME Freedom. Russian and Aidan, that is why China has built pipelines to both.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2021 12:09
|
|
|
It is, also at the same time, even the middle class is struggling to pay for an education and it is quickly becoming a luxury. I know the k-12 system in Oregon is slowly but surely collapsing on itself, Portland is talking about moving to a 4 day school week (Oregon also has some of the lowest numbers of instructional days in the country. At a certain point, either you pay full freight from pre-school through graduate school or you are just going to be at a disadvantage. As much as you can criticize Russia, it isn’t the same way here.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2021 17:32
|
|
|
E Depois do Adeus posted:Sorry I haven't been paying attention, what is this in reference to? Attempting to influence multiple elections, especially vis a vie Nordstream 2.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2022 22:58
|
|
|
A Bakers Cousin posted:not sure how that shows anything connected to gladio, but ok That is where the 2 comes in.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2022 23:35
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:NHS pls National Health (Insurance) System
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2022 17:04
|
|
|
Armacham posted:Win win situation It does (partly) explain the amount of meat heads in positions of authority. I have seen some weird videos out of OCS as well. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 07:46 on Jan 14, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2022 07:39
|
|
|
The Vietnam War is a just an example, but it shows that the defects in the US military that existed in the 1970s are likely even worse. The US didn’t have a response, even with its material superiority, to an enemy that genuinely wanted to fight. (Iraq 1/2 and Libya were pretty much just air shows in comparison.)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2022 15:55
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:It really makes me wonder how the US would have performed in NATO vs Warsaw Pact war (before it went nuclear and ended everything) like on the one hand that's the war they were training for and building all their equipment to fight. But on the other the assumption that the Soviets would only come through the Fulda Gap, the noisy obvious and expected place for them to storm through seems like we might have been in for a rude awakening (of course till the nukes fly) It would have probably still been a grisly fight, at that point NATO still had enough numbers to seriously disrupt any offensive. However, pretty much all Soviet planning was reactive in anticipation of a NATO first strike. Maybe the Warsaw Pact could have pushed through sheer weight if of numbers but with heavy causalities. —— I would say if anything it was the Persian Gulf conflict in its own way more disastrous since it gave such (undeserved) confidence in Western capabilities that since that point Western militaries quite literally rested on their laurels. Bar Ran Dun posted:it’s probably a mistake to think this. Both in Vietnam and the more recent gulf conflicts. A population that wants to fight off an invader will accept loses for an extended period of time. In the case of Afghanistan slowly but surely the population turned against us with relatively minimal violence because we we had already threw up our hands. During Iraq 1/2 and Libya both government had minimal levels of support, so we could utilize air power without having to “worry” about the ground conflict except for a few cases. How would have Iraq gone if every town in Iraq had been a Fallujah? Ardennes has issued a correction as of 17:27 on Jan 14, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2022 17:14
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:It's not like the US military isn't learning any lessons from all of its failures, it's just coming up with all the wrong solutions. We tried doing all sorts of counter-insurgency methods in Iraq & Afghanistan only for them to ultimately fail for the same reasons we failed in Vietnam. You can engage the people and try to resolve their grievances, but if you are not the real political power in the region then you will lose out in the end. Insurgents will always have a presence in the countryside. They will always be there after you've retreated back to base camp - forming a state in parallel that can actually serve peoples' needs while you twiddle your thumbs waiting for the next deployment or enemy attack. We know something is wrong, but I wouldn’t say we are learning lessons. “Engaging” a population doesn’t work when they have every reason to want you out of their country, and otherwise the only other solution is simply to have a unsustainably large occupation force. Also, it makes sense, considering how the US is run, that out puppets would be corrupt, unpopular, and incompetent. Ultimately, the Taliban/Saddam/Gadiffi were all low hanging fruit but the rest of the world has already adapted to our strategy. Bar Ran Dun posted:you are conflating willingness of soldiers to fight with another problem one more rooted in the abstract and in our ideology. and that’s the case even in Vietnam and Tet is a good example of it. I was talking about the Vietnamese people as a whole willingness to fight, this in turn would impact US soldiers since it is obvious that their enemy wouldn’t give up. In Iraq, only portions of Anbar province showed any real resistance and a lot of that simply had to do with Saddam has his rule. The population as a whole generally didn’t care, but if they did, we will be in the same so to situation as Vietnam (including an obsession with metrics). Ardennes has issued a correction as of 19:53 on Jan 14, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2022 19:40
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:are you using “our” here because you’re actively involved in the poo poo the empire does? I am probably the farthest from it, but “our” refers to the United States. Also, “we” and “our” are grammatically correct in those two instances. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 19:57 on Jan 14, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2022 19:55
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:language is political, it's a little awkward at first but you don't have to use possessive pronouns when discussing the evils of the US If you are a US citizen (obviously not everyone is etc), I think it is necessary to own up to it even if you oppose it. We have lived a standard of living dependent on treasure from abroad, it isn’t really possible to sweep it under the rug at this point. Every time you take apart of the political process and vote you put a stamp of approval on the system as a whole.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2022 20:11
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Kinda lol that that corps sized formation has a single shorad bn to its name Yeah, that might be a bit of an issue if you are fighting a power with an actual Air Force. (SHORAD is AA)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2022 16:16
|
|
|
A lot of that is just that the pre-war US army was comparatively tiny and didn’t even really have tanks in sizable numbers as the war began. The US had to get up to speed very quickly.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:I guess they're going all in that the Airforce will be able to wipeout out the PLAAF Yeah, that if a bit of an issue considering the PLAAF is rapidly mirroring the capabilities of the USAF and at very least would deny the US air superiority (which would in turn neuter the US army’s offensive capabilities since they don’t really have any where the dedicated AA capabilities they need.)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2022 20:06
|
|
|
sullat posted:
Yeah, that’s the LBJ, despite being launched in 2018, it hasn’t been commissioned. Midranged AA is probably the most important in a tactical sense, most modern air forces will either work out of the range of MANPADS or use tactics to disrupt them and pretty much all long range AA is strategic (some are more mobile than others). It would make sense Poland and Greece would retain some capabilities considering their relative positions.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2022 00:30
|
|
|
The f-35 is going to do it all, I am not really even joking.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2022 02:16
|
|
|
Usually, most larger navies have 1/3rd of their ships in maintenance, 1/3rd of their ships at dock/transit, and 1/3 undergoing deployment. Also, the US really only has a 10 carrier navy since the Ford still isn’t ready for actual combat deployment, 3 out of 10 carriers deployed is about right with the Nimitz returning to port. —— The Navy has been pushing its ships hard the last couple years as a continual show of force versus Russia and China. It doesn’t mean that there will be actual conflict. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 09:07 on Jan 19, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2022 09:00
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:And now the M16 (well, the AR-15 civilian counterpart) is worshipped as a religious relic by half the country lol Later versions of it were better but it is a bit overrated especially if you start pushing it under certain conditions (it doesn’t do well with frost).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2022 15:26
|
|
|
A big issue is if the dust cover is open or not; in pretty much any battlefield condition it is going to be open and therefore allow material directly into the weapon. The AK occasionally has issues but often it can simply be forced/mortared into operation. Also, the safety on the AK works in pretty much every condition l.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2022 15:56
|
|
|
The m16/m4 are high maintenance firearms, in low intensity occupations with professional soldiers, this is fine but it much more of an issue when things get more chaotic (also the dust cover is still an issue). And yeah, it still sucks in cold climates. Either way, the US Army is looking at moving away from direct impingement and 5.56. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 18:10 on Jan 19, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2022 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 22:46 |
|
|
Justin Tyme posted:This is the case, the M16/M4 platform is perfectly fine now. I wouldn't say it requires any more or less maintanence than any other service rifle. It still generally is considered to need a fair degree more maintenance to an AK pattern rifle for a number of reasons. The problem is when you enter an environment that is unforgiving with little downtime, an actual war. KomradeX posted:Exactly, we're so convinced we'll always have sit superiority that we don't think that will ever not be the case, even though we saw in Afghanistan plenty of tomrs where air support just wasn't available. Which I guess good, it's no skin off my back that we're only capable of fighting wars if colonial expansion and not one against a peer. Which is funny because they keep saying we can't win these colonial wars because we've got an army for peer warfare Well, the US Army is a bit of a jack of all trades, since there is still a bunch of legacy equipment from the Cold War mixed with newer anti-insurgency focused equipment/tactics. Part of that is you get weird gaps in capabilities since they rely on equipment that at this point is on the edge of obsolescence so it ends up a hodgepodge. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 18:42 on Jan 19, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2022 18:36
|
|