It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Even if we assume that we'll be fighting with a coalition, I'm left to wonder how ready THEY are for the fight?
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Love this thread! Great title! Way Above, Justin.
I'm just reading for now, but I find this subject very interesting. Especially the way the war will 'come on'. It could be full steam ahead tomorrow or 10 years in the making. The unpredictability is probably the most mysterious factor.
In my opinion, the war has already begun. On 9/11/01, but the full-blown engagement is yet to come.
Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
The logistics side of the entire issue has got me concerned greatly. If fighting an asymmetrical, unconventional war is bleeding us dry of necessary warfighting materiel, then how on Earth do we expect to fight in more intense, higher-level forms of warfare?
Originally posted by Justin Oldham
Ah-hah. That's a good question. Will this one go to total war? I'm dueto have dinner tonight with some friends to discuss this. It's a sticking point for my next book, so I'm trying to get a better sense of the thing.
I'm not sure that this one will go to total war. It could. I think that America's geographic position means that we won't see much of it...should that happened. Then again, as I've said in other threads, this war will be defined by missiles and what their owners do with them.
Does any country have the political will to fully mobilize? Does any country have the willpower to sustain the kind of damage that we saw done in WW2? I begin to think the answer is "no." Because this war will be a proxy-driven asymetrical affair, I'm enclined to think that because the major power will want so very much to stay in tact...that nobody will make those kinds of committments.
As it stands, I think that Western leaders will be overly challenged by their fear of body bags. they may value their jobs more than they value victory in war. This can certainly have its effect on the shaping of the anatomy of this war.
I believe that mobilization, war-time economy, and total war all need to be redefined a bit for these times.
None of things means the same thing today that it meant in 1939, at least not across the board.
The days when the sewing machine company switched over to making machine guns and thereby made record profits during the war which could be invested in post-war expansion are over, as are the days when scientific advances made during a war would change the post war economy. Today the advancements are made during peacetime, which is nice because you can compromise on the pace to better suit the economy.
Wartime economy for tomorrow's war will actually have more to do with protecting the country from the concerns over the war, planning the call-up of an enlarged reserve force in an economically-conscious way, and during peacetime going through carefully planned production cycles and R+D patterns as well as carefully analyzing our foreign trading in a way designed to sustain critical defense industries by ensuring that industries featuring dual-use technology are kept domestic and that vital defense sectors are kept alive during periods when new production is not actually necessary.
We need to be able to put 3 divisions on the ground at the drop of a hat that have the technology to beat back the first wave from a force several times their size.
Behind them we need 3-6 active mechanized divisions to do the wholesale killing against nation states and also pinch hit against less conventional threats.