It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Pentagon's new cyber attack plan: 'Blunt force trauma'

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: BennyHavensOh
a reply to: johnwick

In my experience in both the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns I am just not seeing the overwhelming victory of which you speak. I must be missing something, can you enlighten me please?



America crushed Iraq's military in the most one sided conventional warfare in a half century.

Only Germany sprinting across France in WW2 compares.

The asymmetric warfare fought in the insurgency is not the same thing.

In conventional warfare, america cannot be challenged.

A war between the west and brics would be a total war between conventional forces.

We wouldn't see the bs roe ruf forced on our forces in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The military is trained and geared for conventional war.

It is all but impossible without employing extreme measures, to fight against asymmetric warfare amongst a hostile populous.

It has to go down like in WW2 where you just crush all opposition without mercy.

Otherwise you get the bogged down Vietnam Afghanistan for US/Russia and Iraq.

Send in the mitary, sort it out by force quickly, send them home.




posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: victor7
a reply to: Xcathdra




If a nation has such overwhelming military superiority, and broadcasts that fact, then the mindset is, hopefully, the other side wont risk a confrontation.


advertise this "overwhelming" capability to a country like Burkina Faso and similar types. major players already have post-graduated from these technologies.


Hence my comment about them playing blackjack at a high stakes table using 1 deck of cards.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 09:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: BennyHavensOh
a reply to: johnwick

If you consider all we have posted here the first thing that jumps out at you is that it is all a big damn mess, is it not? My concern with China was always that after our "government" granted them the right of Eminent Domain" over their holdings here in the US, they could and would start shipping back food, resources and whatever else they cared to off of their properties here to China to take care of their own at the expense of the American people. Frankly, I am thankful that I never made it to a level where I would have to be responsible for dealing with problems of this magnitude because I cannot even begin to comprehend of workable solutions for the strategic resolution of the global clusterflock that has evolved. We will need all the luck we can muster to keep it going for another 50 years IMHO.



Well said.

Command, this situation is FUBAR, I say again FUBAR over!!



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Cruise missiles don't need to avoid radar because they fly below it and hug the terrain. Its programmed into their memory to fly a certain route using hills and valleys to approach to be less vulnerable. They also have pics in their memory of that route and landmarks which they compare visually with a variety of optics. Especially the target area and the target itself.

If it isn't using radar or GPS to home, none of that electronic warfare stuff matters.

Thats just one aspect of smart weapons.

One which isn't lost on the Iranians. Their newer anti ship missiles have optical seekers in the nose hidden from view by a shroud…

image


edit on 20-4-2015 by intrptr because: image



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: johnwick

...but America has not fought a conventional war since 1945 and we have failed at all of our counter-insurgency attempts since then even with the help of the Masters of the Universe, the Central Intelligence Agency! Why would any country risk a conventional war with US when they can simply insurgency US to death?



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 09:40 PM
link   
a reply to: johnwick

I look at it differently.

Neither China or Russia are a threat unless we go to them. India and Pakistan are in a stalemate because they're both nuclear armed.

India's Navy is not shabby They have at least one aircraft carrier and were the seventh ranked Navy last time I checked. Besides we would be more than happy to move and probably supply Indian troops.
edit on 20-4-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 09:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: BennyHavensOh
a reply to: johnwick

If you consider all we have posted here the first thing that jumps out at you is that it is all a big damn mess, is it not? My concern with China was always that after our "government" granted them the right of Eminent Domain" over their holdings here in the US, they could and would start shipping back food, resources and whatever else they cared to off of their properties here to China to take care of their own at the expense of the American people. Frankly, I am thankful that I never made it to a level where I would have to be responsible for dealing with problems of this magnitude because I cannot even begin to comprehend of workable solutions for the strategic resolution of the global clusterflock that has evolved. We will need all the luck we can muster to keep it going for another 50 years IMHO.



I bet you read zero hedge every day?



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: johnwick

I look at it differently.

Neither China or Russia are a threat unless we go to them. India and Pakistan are in a stalemate because they're both nuclear armed.

India's Navy is not shabby They have at least one aircraft carrier and were the seventh ranked Navy last time I checked. Besides we would be more than happy to move and probably supply Indian troops.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

No, though ZH is quoted often on other sites I visit. Never was sure how to take them, I must admit. I have had personal experience with Eminent Domain both as a civilian and as an elected Township official and have always seen it as an evil power that only abuses the landowner. And warfare, well you can study it, be trained and proficient in it, and even make a career in it yet when you do you realize that it is NEVER the answer. It only leads to more and bigger, more costly war. It is a vicious cycle that is perhaps our destiny as humans to promote.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 10:01 PM
link   
a reply to: BennyHavensOh



It is a vicious cycle that is perhaps our destiny as humans to promote.


Being A realist I understand that that vicious cycle started when the first caveman threw a rock at another caveman. So the fact is that vicious cycle is indeed human nature and no matter what your hopes and dreams are it will never go away.


BTW that was a joke, a simple lol would've been an adequate reply.

edit on 20-4-2015 by Greathouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Greathouse

Agreed.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 10:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: BennyHavensOh
a reply to: johnwick

...but America has not fought a conventional war since 1945 and we have failed at all of our counter-insurgency attempts since then even with the help of the Masters of the Universe, the Central Intelligence Agency! Why would any country risk a conventional war with US when they can simply insurgency US to death?



That is a great question!!!!

There is no answer.

Even tsun tsu, the master of warfare, the chuck Norris of strategy understood the only way to not lose that war, was to not fight it.

You only send military forces into situations military forces are meant to engage in.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: johnwick

I look at it differently.

Neither China or Russia are a threat unless we go to them. India and Pakistan are in a stalemate because they're both nuclear armed.

India's Navy is not shabby They have at least one aircraft carrier and were the seventh ranked Navy last time I checked. Besides we would be more than happy to move and probably supply Indian troops.


I agree fully.

I also doubt very seriously india would help fight against the US in a war against russia and or China.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 10:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: BennyHavensOh
a reply to: Greathouse

No, though ZH is quoted often on other sites I visit. Never was sure how to take them, I must admit. I have had personal experience with Eminent Domain both as a civilian and as an elected Township official and have always seen it as an evil power that only abuses the landowner. And warfare, well you can study it, be trained and proficient in it, and even make a career in it yet when you do you realize that it is NEVER the answer. It only leads to more and bigger, more costly war. It is a vicious cycle that is perhaps our destiny as humans to promote.



Sadly, this is the bane of humanity.

We are smart as individuals, dumb in groups, and flat out stupid bordering on retarded at the national level.

It seems the more folks involved, the more likely something dumb will happen.

We are our own worst enemy.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: johnwick

That's the reason I added the free Tibet comment. Anytime China seeks territorial expansion India trembles.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: johnwick

Rotf !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks I needed that.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 11:05 PM
link   
why even mention brics, i mean do you honestly think china or india would help eachother or russia if it came down to actual war against the U.S? if you believe that you are quite naive and the reality is that the r, the i and the c of that "alliance" hate each other and would likely join on our side against whoever we attacked as soon as we gained the advantage in said war.

besides the brics is not even a military alliance, it's just an economic cooperative and nothing more, but even then i doubt we are going to actually ever attack those nations especially china or india and historically russia has been our friend for most of our history, even before we were a nation.



posted on Apr, 21 2015 @ 08:35 AM
link   
a reply to: namehere

I never said that the BRICS countries would ban together in a military action against the US, there are far easier ways to defeat an enemy than open warfare as the topic of this thread first stated. In a nation where everything is for sale, eventually everything get sold. Buy the resources, buy off the politicians, kick out the military leadership that will not do the bidding of the Bolsheviks in the administration, flood the country with disease infested third world mutants, reduce wages increase taxes and stir well, viola'. Why fire a single shot when you can let our greed and stupidity do the work for you?


edit on 21-4-2015 by BennyHavensOh because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2015 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: victor7



Also seems, before the shooting starts the real war will be played out in cyber world first


Not exactly, Chinese and Russian Satellites will be splashed or blinded first thing. We way out number both of them in Sats and our redundancy systems will keep ours sitting high out of reach. Star wars is more than likely an anti Sat weapon. F-15s can fly up and shoot down Sats with long range missiles, they tested that in the early 80s. Now we can use the SM-3 on our Navy ships to knock them out as well.



posted on May, 20 2015 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr



Their newer anti ship missiles have optical seekers in the nose hidden from view by a shroud…


Do you really think it will live to hit a U.S. ship? I think not if Aegis is turned on lol. I can see those skipping off the wave tops, flipping back around and hitting the Iranian mainland more than hitting one of our ships.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join