 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
MOBIUS
|
 |
Prifysgol Caerdydd
Dec 1999
time: 15:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
We airlifted in a mechanized brigade a few days ago - the first time anyone in the world has ever done so. We kept Berlin supplied by air over half a century ago. |
You'd have to keep that up around the clock through potentially hostile airspace - I'd say those transports would be relatively easy to knock out...
quote:
IF the Iranians got squirrely, the first thing we'd do is take out their silkworms. |
Well if I was in charge, I'dve fired them off in a huge surprise attack before then...
quote:
If they persisted, we might teach them a lesson by removing all that oil infrastructure from places like Bandar Abbas, Bandar e Lengeh, Kharg Island, Bushehr, etc. Hard to sustain a war effort when you're a semi-pariah nation without an economy.  |
Where there's a will there's a way...
quote:
We'd also make an accomodation with the House of Saud, or it's successor and open up more transport corridors. |
What if the Wahhabi population of Saudi overthrew the Royal Family in an Al-Qaeda led popular revolution caught up by the religious fervour of the Jihad against the Great Satan - now you've got those pesky Saudis to deal with as well...
quote:
Unlike Die Grosse Hermann, we can supply our armies by air. |
Yes when it's not being tested to breaking point...
quote:
If it even looked close to that, which it never would, we have other options and methods that could be brought to the table. And do you think anyone, anywhere would have the balls to stop us? |
And so it would come full circle - the US using WoMD on nations it is trying to disarm of WoMD lest they use them...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MOBIUS
|
|
Prifysgol Caerdydd
Dec 1999
time: 15:27
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Hostile airspace presumes there are enemy aircraft and competent pilots to operate them. We'd dispose of that issue inside a week, moving transports all the while. |
All of them? That didn't happen to the Iraqis in GWI, why should it happen now? What about SAMs?
quote:
You'd have to have targets to fire them at. What I'm saying is that if we expected sustained seaborne supply to be necessary (we have months of supply already in Kuwait, and it's not like there's going to be a shortage of oil there ), we'd clear a corridor for those ships to move through, before they arrived. |
Well, there's plenty of ships in the gulf, why not fire them all off in one go at those? You're saying there are no miscellaneous ships travelling through Hormuz...
quote:
There's not enough of them to get worked about, but hey, if they wanted to join the party, we'd get them closer to Allah too. |
Oh? I thought that most of the population were Wahhabis (80%+) - sounds like an awful lot of people with unhealthy attitudes to westerners in their country to my mind...
quote:
That's only if the other people got uppity and lucky. |
That was the general idea...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
spiritof1202
|
|
"Give us new missiles"
The 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon resulted in many dogfights between Syrian and Israeli jet fighters.
In the end, the Syrians lost over 80 planes and had a number of SAM batteries knocked out, while the Israelis lost no planes.
Sometime later, the Syrian Defense Minister was shopping for weapons in Moscow.
His host, the Soviet Defense Minister, was embarrassed about the scorecard from Lebanon.
He told his Syrian guest, "Take anything you want - our best tanks, rifles, or surface-to-air missiles."
"No, no - you don't understand!" the Syrian replied. "Last time you gave us surface-to-air missiles. This time we need surface-to-*jet* missiles!"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
My Wife Hates CIV
|
|
Michigan
Jan 1970
time: 05:27
|
|
The US could take on the entire middle east. and win. and that's still fighting 'nice'.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
My Wife Hates CIV
|
|
Michigan
Jan 1970
time: 05:27
|
|
since this sorta goes along with this thread thought i would post it here instead of start another thread...
While troops won't be replacing their assault rifles for ray guns just yet, high-tech lasers are nearly ready for other combat uses.
Last year the U.S. and Israeli armies field-tested a chemical laser made by TRW that successfully knocked out 100 mm rockets and artillery shells.
But making powerful lasers fit for use against enemy artillery means that they'll have to be mobile enough to keep up with fast-moving tanks and other units that make up a modern fighting force.
And the key to developing a more agile laser system may lie in research being done at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories.
Making Laser Systems Mobile
"This is actually a very pivotal time in terms of high-powered laser systems," says Brent Dane, project manager for high-energy lasers at Lawrence Livermore Labs.
For about six years he and his team have been hard at work on a high-powered, portable, electric laser for the U.S. Department of Defense.
"If there's one sort of key aspect of a solid-state laser, it's mobility," Dane says. "And the mobility comes from a very high electrical efficiency and architectures which support compact, very lightweight designs."
Humvee-Mounted Defense
Using special "beam director" software, a laser can lock onto an in-flight missile and heat the explosives inside their metal shell, causing them to detonate before they reach their target.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratories has just developed a 25-kilowatt laser and is working on a 100-kilowatt version, which Dane says will supply enough power to knock out a missile in two to three seconds.
The 100-kilowatt laser should be ready for combat by 2010, Dane says. However, the battlefield technology doesn't end with the lasers. The lasers will likely ride into battle atop hybrid electric Humvees.
"If you look at the typical traction battery that's being proposed for these hybrid electric vehicles," Dane says, "that battery will be adequate for actually powering a hundred-kilowatt laser system."
my point being here that the gap just continues to grow. and it's a pretty big gap already.
so... > What if: Syria and Iran launch a pre-emptive strike against the US ???
i really dont think they could. it sure wouldnt be a surprise attack. as i heard someone say on the news the other night. the US is the biggest cat in the world... and syria is a three legged blind mouse. Iran is not much better. I would say Iran better use those nukes now (or anyone else who might have them) - before they also are completly worthless. can you say middle east(ern united states)??
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:27.
Apolyton Time is 00:27. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-04-2003 04:35
.
)
)
|