Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

U.S. Military Power makes WWIII unrealistic.

page: 9
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by lifeform11
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


If the state of a countries technology is what determines if war would brake out and if you have the best technology then it will be a deterrent, then how come America were attacked on their own soil by some of the most basic in terms of military might and your still fighting against them.

considering that, then it is easy to see how world war 3 could easily happen as many countries have better technology than those your still fighting.

edit on 11-10-2012 by lifeform11 because: typo


The attack on 9/11 could have been prevented very easily if Airlines had a different policy as far as how to deal with Hijackers. Think about it...a few people on a few planes took control with some BOX CUTTERS! THAT is never going to happen again! It should have never happened in the first place as if the Airlines had just had a locked cockpit door and if someone attempted that again...the passengers would KILL ANY HIJACKERS! They found a chink in the system and I can tell you if I was on one of those flights...there is no way I would allow my fate to be determined by some under trained Religious Zealot!

As terrible as 9/11 was...it woke the U.S. UP! You also have to take the number of people who died into consideration. Tens of Thousands of people die in the U.S. every MONTH slipping in the Bathroom. So as far as the attack being of any real effect...it was limited to making people afraid...now...the people who paid money to terrorist groups are AFRAID! Afraid that if it happens in some manner again...the U.S. will end the Problem once and for all. That almost happened shortly after 9/11. The original U.S. Military response was to be MUCH BIGGER...they toned it down quite a bit. Split Infinity


I agree with everything your saying, but it did happen and America's technology was far superior and is still far superior yet your still fighting, America's technology didn't prevent war. so considering that nearly every other country has better technology all be it not as advanced as America I fail to see how America's edge would make a difference in preventing a world war three type scenario.

There is also always the possibility America are not involved in world war three when or if it broke out, America didn't get involved in world war 2 until it was well into it.
edit on 12-10-2012 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)
edit on 12-10-2012 by lifeform11 because: typo




posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Woah, been a while since I posted on here. I found this thread rather interesting and this weapon sounds rather impressive, but would it not be possible to put the same reflective material from the satallities on to a missle so the beam would simply bounce off it?
edit on 12-10-2012 by Vulcha because: typo.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Vulcha
 


Assuming they could manufacture the material used in the reflectors. dont really think a missile covered in the stuff would be flight worthy either
edit on 12-10-2012 by MastaShake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


That's what the FRench said about the Maginot line. As long as there is an offensive weapon, there will always be a defensive countermeasure.
edit on 12-10-2012 by ArcAngel because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by MastaShake
 


It could possibly be applied as a coating rather than random panels bolted on so the shape would remain the same. The OP has stated it can flex, though not to what degree, but maybe it could also be put on kinda like cladding? Obviously whoever had said missle would need the material, but in war time such a thing would be a priority, and I should imagine something would be thought up by the worlds many sceientists and engineers. If the material was manufactured by another nation, they could apply it to aircraft, ships, vehicles, etc and that would make this laser pretty much useless.
edit on 12-10-2012 by Vulcha because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   
WW3 will happen. It might not be called WW3 but it will happen.
Technology will never alleviate the human condition.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by lifeform11
 

A WWIII scenario will most likely not occur as the U.S. Military would not allow it. If India and Pakistan were to start launching Nuclear Missiles at each other...there is a High Probability that these Missiles would be shot down.

This is why the U.S. is deploying a WORLD WIDE MISSILE SHIELD and has positioned Carrier Groups that currently have SM-3 ABM's close to areas that have Nuclear Missile Capabilities. The FEL will be the ULTIMATE SHIELD...but in the mean time...the SM-3 ABM is a VERY CAPABLE ABM!
Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ArcAngel
 

The difference here is that the FEL and MEB systems are SELF PROTECTING. They are specifically designed to COUNTER...COUNTER MEASURES! Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by GarrusVasNormandy
And let's not forget that all technology has a weak and vulnerable bone. It's just a matter of finding it. These types of weapon are really neat and cool, until an EMP attack sneaks up on them, and then you just have a big paperweight on your ship, while the opposing force has an old cannon aimed at your ship.

Things aren't that simple.


Let me ask what may be a stupid question. I have a modicum of electrical knowledge, enough to know that the only true protection from an EMP, be it naturally occurring or man-made, is a properly grounded Ferriday cage. Here's the question: If a ship is made of steel, which conducts electricity, and the ship is obviously in contact with seawater, does it not serve as its own grounding system, providing intrinsic protection against an EMP?

My take on the WW3 discussion; It will happen. I don't know when or how, but it will happen. The current situation in Iran could be the catalyst for the conflict, and it might not be. But when it does occur, the world will see devastation on a scale never seen before.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by lifeform11
 

A WWIII scenario will most likely not occur as the U.S. Military would not allow it. If India and Pakistan were to start launching Nuclear Missiles at each other...there is a High Probability that these Missiles would be shot down.

This is why the U.S. is deploying a WORLD WIDE MISSILE SHIELD and has positioned Carrier Groups that currently have SM-3 ABM's close to areas that have Nuclear Missile Capabilities. The FEL will be the ULTIMATE SHIELD...but in the mean time...the SM-3 ABM is a VERY CAPABLE ABM!
Split Infinity


I just Googled the SM-3 and apparently it's not solely employed by the US.
en.wikipedia.org...

I still think the main deterrent for WWIII has less to do with US military superiority, and more to do with more stability across regions where similar (though still overall less advanced) technology exists. Japan is not going to try and attack any nation of strategic importance to the US because it wouldn't be useful for them. If, for some reason, they wanted to colonize, say, Israel (they wouldn't, and they also wouldn't be able to do it without massive casualties regardless of US involvement, but bear with me) the US' military advancement would be noticeably less apparent compared to a battle between these two nations. Essentially, all the nations that have resources and military capability anywhere near the US' don't have strategic interests that are misaligned with the US. Other than Russia and China, but they are vastly outmatched by the combined military might of NATO nations. You can bet if the US was in a position without strong allies in Europe and Asia it would be much more cautious, regardless of any technological superiority.

Also, I don't think you ever answered the question of countermeasures to FEL, like coating missiles or other weapons in reflective materials?



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by RobertF
Isn't s particle beam weapon the same as laser? Irregardless of its power source?


No, a particle beam fires particles i.e. matter whereas a laser is light energy.



posted on Oct, 18 2012 @ 12:39 AM
link   
The best way to prevent war,is to control the number of poor,ignorant fools there are to fight them.

The best way to control that,is to take the power away from those who take advantage of the poor,ignorant fools who are willing to fight them.

I am still poor,I am still a fool,but I am not ignorant anymore.

Educate your damned kids,educate your kids.



posted on Oct, 19 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by techwolf
 

The SM-3 ABM/SAT KILLER is a Vastly Superior Version of a Standard SM-3. The New SM-3 ABM/ASAT is ONLY OPERATED by U.S. Forces.

As far as counter measures for the FEL....VERY DIFFICULT to counter. Reasons why....1. The FEL cannot use a Standard Laser Reflection Mirror as the FEL will VAPORIZE IT! The FEL must use a special type of Insect Multiple Eye Form of Reflection Prism.

The FEL system is also self protecting and this includes the Satellite System. It is able to defend itself from everything from an another ASAT to an EMP or even a Nuclear Satellite Killer. It is near impossible to destroy.
Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 02:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by DaRAGE
 

It is a LASER that works like a PARTICLE BEAM! With a Global Satellite Reflection Grid and Networked Super Computers for Targeting...the Nuclear Powered FEL Beam is HOTTER THAN THE SURFACE OF THE SUN! It can target the actual independent MIRVED WARHEADS of any Missile and VAPORIZE THE WARHEAD. This is a lot different than shooting down a missile.

Uranium and Plutonium exposed to such concentrated Energy and Head will vaporize into Hydrogen and Helium.
Split Infinity



Unless the intensity of the beam were able to catalyse fission this can't be true. In being vaporised it won't become another element, that requires nuclear fission or fusion, not a phase change. You'd just have Uranium/Plutonium vapour.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 04:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grigori

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Bisman
 


What does that have to do with your statement that the atomic bomb (which was not invented yet) was talked about and said to prevent any future world wars, before it was invented, before it was ever talked about, and before anyone, even its' creators, had ANY idea how powerful it would be.

No one ever said anything of the kind, I would love you to source all these people talking about how the atomic bomb would mean a ww2 would never happen.
edit on 9-10-2012 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)


I'm not much of a historian here, but wasn't the Manhattan Project where the origins of the Atomic Bomb came from? Didn't the Manhattan Project employ a certain Albert Einstein there? Didn't Albert Einstein come to the States to escape a Nazi Regime? Wasn't the Nazi Regime during World War 2? I don't know, maybe Bisman knows something you or I don't?

I don't remember hearing about any "Atomic" plans before world war 2. I could have sworn the plans for an Atomic bomb were the efforts to respond to the German machine.


A common misconception, Albert Einstein did not work on the Manhattan Project but was very much respected by it's think tank and had laid down some of the fundamentals a la theory of relativity etc. I believe I've read that he contributed some of his thoughts by correspondence to the team when queried. I don't have a source but the Wiki page for the Manhattan Project only makes one mention of him. The Manhattan Project was more a denial tactic as I interpret it; the physics said there was good likelihood a bomb could be made and politically this implied that whichever nation or alliance could obtain it first would be able to use it as "the big stick" against any others seeking the technology. Yes we know how that played out in the long run with the Cold War but that's how I would have interpreted it in the context of the situation.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 04:23 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


If you read my post, you'll have seen that I asked this question: What if another country manufactured the same material that is used in the satalites to reflect the beam? Not standard reflectors. The same reflectors as used in the satalites that reflect the beam. If another country managed to create said material, and used it to armour missles, aircraft, ships, etc, surely that would make the FEL redundant?



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 04:31 AM
link   
Now actually on the topic of the thread, I agree to an extent that between the technology and massive amounts of hardware available to the US and it's allies that it is a stabilising influence against large scale high intensity war. War will continue to happen but no party as yet has the raw firepower and power projection capabilities of NATO and it's partners. Some nations challenge or defeat it's raw manpower but that doesn't equate to much if it can't be brought to bear. Until china's modernisation efforts result in it having it's own carrier fleet or something changes drastically to alter the usability of the US Nimitz carriers I see it unlikely that anyone would try to escalate a conflict to all out war. You don't want to provoke too much when there's a CSG in your region with all that conventional firepower alone. A single carrier airwing compares quite favourably to a number of developed nation's airforces.

The key factor is how far an aggressor thinks it can push it's boundaries before escalation. Most industrialised countries have a lot of capacity for war that's not in use in part because a) it's not required or b) they crutch on the US military for control (I'm Australian and I know that's the case for us). Even the US has plenty of unused capacity for war should the need for total war arise. I'm pretty terrified at what China could do though if it were ever pushed that far. I'd say the next large war will doubtlessly involve them in a major way, the nation's internal tensions could either push it away from war with isolationism or spur expansionism.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by techwolf
 

The SM-3 ABM/SAT KILLER is a Vastly Superior Version of a Standard SM-3. The New SM-3 ABM/ASAT is ONLY OPERATED by U.S. Forces.

As far as counter measures for the FEL....VERY DIFFICULT to counter. Reasons why....1. The FEL cannot use a Standard Laser Reflection Mirror as the FEL will VAPORIZE IT! The FEL must use a special type of Insect Multiple Eye Form of Reflection Prism.

The FEL system is also self protecting and this includes the Satellite System. It is able to defend itself from everything from an another ASAT to an EMP or even a Nuclear Satellite Killer. It is near impossible to destroy.
Split Infinity


Ah, so the US has an upgraded version of the SM-3? Interesting, thanks for the info. Although I don't see why this upgrade specifically is so far beyond the capabilities of other (mostly NATO) nations. Indeed, Russia and China have been working on ASAT's for a while and I think Russia has successfully brought down a satellite, no? So why would the US having weapons only slightly more advanced than other nations actually deter war?

As for the FEL, I can't find anything about "insect multiple eye form reflection prism" but what makes it impossible to replicate? I'm not well versed in optics, but unless the reflecting medium is made of some material that is exceedingly rare, then other nations could easily figure out a way to copy the structure of whatever "reflection prism" is employed. They may have to lose a few missiles to it, but it should be incredibly easy.



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
The premise is flawed.

Mutual assured destruction makes war unrealistic. Both sides with an equal shot at victory makes it possible. One side with invincible overwhelming force makes it inevitable.

If you have nothing to fear from picking a fight why not do it? Why not keep doing it?

With regard to attacks by another state on the USA, its not likely since there is no purpose to it. Nothing to be gained. The Chinese are unlikely to attack their customer. The Chinese worry isn't 'how to destroy america' its that america financially implodes itself wiping them out along with it.

Only religious crazies have the desire to 'destroy america' and they don't have the capability to wage a war on a state. They can commit isolated atrocity but thats about it and you cant deter that with gizmos.

If you change it to US Military power makes the USA bankrupt its probably closer to true. The next decade will tell the tale.
edit on 21-10-2012 by justwokeup because: typo



posted on Oct, 21 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by nitestick
 

When I state vaporized...I should have been more specific about what happens. Only Solar Gravitational Compression and thus heat are capable of creating Light Elements via fusion...thus Hydrogen Atoms fuse into Helium atoms. All Heavy Elements were created via the process of Supernova Explosions as this process created Lead, Uranium, Gold...etc.

In order for Uranium or Plutonium to be Vaporized...and Water vaporizes at 100 C. or 212 F....it does not turn water into separate atoms of Hydrogen and Oxygen. All it does is separate the Water Molecules into a Vapor thus the Heat turns liquid Water into Water Vapor.

Now with the FEL LASER...you have a Beam of Photons carrying with it Super Excited Electrons in a Free Radical State. Since the FEL BEAM is comprised completely of QUANTUM PARTICLES...weird things start to happen at such a beams contact at Solar Core Temps. and bombardment of Uranium or Plutonium with all these Photons and Electrons.

The Changes that occur in Uranium and Plutonium do not necessarily change the element but rather DEPLETE THE ELEMENT and as a byproduct...hydrogen and helium atoms seem to be created. This can only seem to be a process of Neutron Decay and some Quantum Creation of a Proton since both Protons and Neutrons are comprised completely of QUANTUM PARTICLES such as various forms of Quarks, Gluons, Leptons, Mesons, Bosons...etc.

The Beam only obtains Solar Core Temps. if using a very Powerful supposedly secret Micro-Fusion Generator. The current Ford Class Carriers...the USS. Gerald R. Ford...CVN-78 and the USS. J.F.K....CVN-79...are supposedly set to use two new A1B Nuclear Fission Reactors. Questions have come up and there is a possibility that either two Newer more powerful Reactors will take their place or there will be the use of 2 A1B reactors plus a third Micro-Fusion Generator which has been rumored to have an output equal to 7 A1B Reactors. In this case...the FEL will obtain BEYOND Solar Core Temps. and at these temps...actual changing of Uranium and Plutonium into smaller base Atoms is possible...either that or it will create a massive Fusion Detonation that will take half of Earths Atmosphere with it! LOL! What a Life! Split Infinity






top topics



 
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join