(WAR) Doomer Doug- Military Defeat of USA

[Doomer Doug]

Well this should create a firestorm of discussion. This is where it is all headed down the road a few years from now. Like you thought the Red Chinese were buying Sunburst missiles cause they look snazzy?

[Doomer Doug]

This is long, 3300 words but the subject is complex and as Flint always says I need to explain myself.

The Military Defeat of Imperial USA
by Doug McIntosh 1-23-04

This is an essay which has been simmering slowly in my spirit for several years. I have waited until now to express myself because I was waiting for the final pieces of the tapestry to fall into place. They now have. The USA, with its combination of ignorance, arrogance, Imperialism, financial folly, military weakness, moral squalor and corrupt leadership, is ripe for the plucking. Yes, Virginia, the USA could be defeated militarily a lot easier than many Americans think. The fact few in the USA even think it possible merely shows me the target window is opening wider.

The company line on the USA military is we spend more than the next nine countries combined; so therefore, we are unable to be defeated. An incorrect analysis in my view. The proper response is what do we do when the next 40 countries decide to take us on. The Finns, who inflicted the only defeat the Russian Army ever suffered, honorable mention goes to Afghanistan and the Chechens, have a saying. It goes like this: "What do you do after you have killed forty Russians and the 41st shows up?" . This is the situation the USA finds itself in. The blunt truth is the United States Imperial System, its global oligarchy of corporate predators has led to widespread hatred and contempt for the USA. Everywhere around the world, people truly despise our US government, our corporate looters, our amoral, cynical culture and our lifestyle. Inside the USA matters like Enron, Tyco or political corruption are ignored. This is not true overseas. The cultural idea of America, our freedom, ability of the common man to make something of himself, still hold great appeal. However, if you ask people what they think the USA is, they will tell you she is a corrupt corporate oligarchy sucking the blood out of the rest of the world. For that, we are truly despised. The first judgment about the military defeat of the USA must be whether enough people around the world hate us, for different reasons, to attack and defeat us. The answer is they do. This hatred will eventually express itself in an attack upon the continental USA. People like individual Americans; they like what we claim to be. They just despise what we do, how we act and our ugliness and arrogance. The ugly American is alive and well at all levels of our government, business and general culture.

The enemy is the rest of the world which sees the USA as an out of control brat, throwing temper tantrums with guns and bombs. Most Americans neither know or care this is what is thought around the world. After all, we won the Cold War and can do anything we want.

Since it is a fact most of the world would like to take the USA down a notch, there are only two ways to do this. One is economic and the other is military. The economic attack is already well under way. The fiat dollar collapse is an orchestrated attempt by foreign powers to drain the gasoline out of the US Imperial tank. We will be forced to withdraw from Iraq like the Romans were forced to withdraw from England. A seven trillion dollar debt doesn't leave much room for Imperial pretensions. Over the last few months we have seen a collapse in the overseas financing needed to maintain Imperial America. This is intentional and is designed to force us to cease our mindless overseas adventures. We are not getting the message. The message will be sent more directly over the next few years. War with both China and Russia is inevitable by 2020. The reason I know this is so is both the Russians and Chinese have openly told us. In addition, they are both taking concrete steps to do it. The USA finds itself in the situation of Europe in the 1930's: they read Hitler's Mien Kampf, they just didn't believe he meant it. When the USA is attacked, no one in America can claim both Russia and China didn't give ample warning of their intentions. Who do you think is behind Al Qaida anyway? Are we Americans so naive to think the Islamic terror offensive isn't the start of a long range, broad based military operation to destroy the USA? We are; we will pay for it down the line in a few years. We will not be invaded next year, but five, ten and fifteen years away we will.

Assuming I am correct in my previous assumptions, no doubt many will protest about our great military strength. Um, what great military strength are you talking about? Do you mean our 294 ship Navy, our 10 Division Active Army and our gutted Air Force? Is that the great American military strength you are talking about? One measure of the Clinton administration is it effectively gutted the American military. We now have, in 2004, roughly 50% of the military we had in 1994. Further, Clinton gutted our war preparedness infrastructure, our war supplies and Gore even sold off the Naval oil reserves to his pal at Occidental Petroleum. No, I make no moral judgments. I am simply doing the balance sheet of military strength. Further, it is a fact our current overseas deployments have destroyed the combat effectiveness of our military. Things are so bad, the military has actually run out of small arms ammunition, M-16, Pistol, M-60 and 50 caliber machine gun. The military has one ammo plant. Period. This one plant can produce enough ammo in a year to meet bare minimums of training. Supplies of spare parts and the other things needed to keep a military functional are critically low. Remember the stories about the US soldiers in Iraq without body armor due to Clinton and Bush refusing to buy enough? Don't give me any crap about how well prepared the US military is to fight a major war on one front, let alone two. The US military is in a state of collapse which will only progress over the next several years. Do you really think many of the reserve and National Guard troops will reenlist? A weekend a month and two weeks in the summer has turned into 18 months in Iraq and Afghanistan. Things are so bad right now the US military is forcing 40,000 troops, nearly two divisions, to stay in after their enlistment end. No ammo, critical shortages of needed supplies and forcing soldiers to stay in do not add up to a functional military in my view. You may argue with my conclusions, but not my facts. By the way, it is another little known fact after the war in Kosovo the US Air Force requested six months of stand down to recover. The 130,000 troops returning from Iraq in March will be militarily useless for the rest of the year. I don't think that means we will be attacked in May. I do think it indicates just how dysfunctional, long term dysfunctional, the United States military is. I am talking about a long term trend of readiness decline. If a few Iraq citizens with AK-47's and RPGs stalled our advance on Baghdad, just think what a real enemy could do.

Now that I have offended your sense of American patriotism I will let go of the full barrage. The idea Russia's military has collapsed is false. Russia has used the time since 1991 to upgrade her nuclear capability, develop a high speed torpedo, a supersonic anti shipping missile, a new aircraft, the SU-27, and taken the military equipment withdrawn from Europe and put it deep inside the Ural Mountains. In addition, Russia has spent billions creating vast, underground complexes in the Urals, supplied them for years and gained a corps of combat trained troops in Chechnya. In other words, Russia now has absolute naval supremacy, absolute air supremacy and absolute nuclear supremacy over the United States. With their 200 mph torpedoes, their supersonic Sunburst missiles and their favorite toy, the SU-27 they can sweep the seas of our ships. A while back there was a story of how several Su-27 fighters buzzed the flight deck of the aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk. A not so subtle message our carrier fleet was so much scrap metal is what this little propaganda coup was. At any rate, the point I'm making is the US military has already been defeated before the war starts due to being technologically obsolete. Bravery means little against technology. Napoleon killed 6,000 Marmaldukes in Egypt at the cost of 30 French lives. Napoleon even commented on how brave the men he was slaughtering were. He still butchered them with muskets against swords. The US military has lost the technological battle. There was even a news story about an "unknown", read Russian, anti tank laser weapon which destroyed an M-1 Abrams tank in Iraq.

As for the Red Chinese, the story is even bleaker. Massive numbers of soldiers combined with modern technical weapons are an unbeatable proposition. China has been preparing for war with the USA for the last ten years at least. China corrupted the 1996 presidential elections to gain time for this buildup. Anyone who thinks the government of China is our friend need only look at Tienmein Square or what happened to the recon plane crew. A nice intelligence haul that one, which further reduced any chance of military superiority the USA had. Taiwan, as always, is a flash point which won't go away. Red China has been spending billions of dollars from their trade balance with the USA to buy weapons capable of destroying the US military. It is the same story as in WW2. We sell Japan scrap metal and they made bombs out them. We buy China's products and they buy Russian weapons to kill us. Who says history doesn't repeat itself? Anyone who thinks even poorly supplied Red Chinese soldiers can't inflict heavy losses on the American military should talk to any Marine 1st Division veteran of the Chosin reservoir. The only reason we didn't lose 20,000 Marines was naval air power. We have now lost naval air power, helicopter air power, fighter jet power and even air resupply power. In this new generation of supersonic anti ship, anti aircraft and shoulder fired missiles, the aircraft, the helicopter and the ships and bases that serve them are extremely vulnerable to destruction from non nuclear weapons. It is a simple fact, one man with an RPG can take down a 25 million dollar Apache helicopter. It is a simple fact, the Sunburst missile, or the SU-27, can take out an aircraft carrier battle group. In fact, we should rename our carrier task forces, BFT, or big fat target.

I have shown the intent, the preparation and the weapons our future enemies will use in a military attack on the domestic USA. As for time, with the exception of Taiwan, which may explode this spring, I still think we are several years away. Our enemies want to let us stew in our own juices, weaken our economy through terror attacks and the fiat dollar collapse and finally, show the American people just how incompetent our leadership is. The result of this will be the physical occupation of the continental USA. The method is to break our will as a people and destroy our culture. In that vein, I would include Bush and his "non amnesty" for ten to fifteen million illegals in the mix. The following represent a few of my thoughts on the how this attack will be done.

Many of you still don't think it is possible for the USA to be attacked. Even after Pearl Harbor and 9-11-2001, many of you have a mental block on the subject. So be it. I will just look at the issue, coldly, clinically and with a mind as to how our enemies plan to do it. The issue is best highlighted by a scene I saw in the 1970's "GodFather" television miniseries. I was living in Bellingham, Washington in 1978 and it was shown on Canadian television. One scene showed this very, very large Sicilian enforcer sitting down to eat. The other side decided to kill him the following way. First, they waited for him to be at his ease eating. Second, they used three men. Third, one man held his right arm down, the second his left arm down and the third choked him with a wire. It was the classic case of overkill. The deceased individual could have broken each of his attackers in half individually. Together, they were unbeatable.

The first principle is unified hatred and common action. My scenario envisions several years of state directed, untraceable, "Islamic terrorism" against the USA. We are weak, frightened and ill prepared for the massive blow planned against us. We have scattered our precious military resources willy nilly all over the world in our war on terror. Our debt based economy is in shambles. Sound familiar? He who defends everything, defends nothing. I can think of more than nine nations which would attack us, and many more who would watch silently. It is not much of a stretch to assume our enemies will unite in their method, if not their reasons. Hatred of the USA is the glue which will hold them together. No doubt they will fight over the spoils like vultures, but that is for the future. For the moment, they will unify to destroy the USA.

The key military doctrine is unified, timed action. What is commonly called a First Strike, or a surprise attack. The advantage always goes to the attacker in this scenario. The attacker chooses the time, the place and the method of attack. It is this which gives them their chance to destroy the USA with the first blow. If the blow is massive enough, effective enough and widespread enough, the US military will cease to exist as an effective fighting force in one hour. In the ruthless logic of total war, this is what is planned by our enemies. The issue then becomes is this First Strike plausible? The answer is yes for the following reasons.

Over the last few years we have reduced our number of targets. If one nuclear missile were dropped on the following targets on the west coast of the US: Everet Naval Base, Bremerton Naval Shipyard, Trident Submarine base, Fort Lewis, Yakima Firing Range, San Diego shipyard and naval base, Camp Pendelton, Fort Carson, Nellis Air Force Base, Klamath Air Base and International Airports in major cities, any military response would be crippled instantly. You can do similar lists for the East and Gulf Coasts. Take out Camp Lejune and the marines are destroyed. Take out Norfolk and the Atlantic fleet ceases to exist. In an instant the military infrastructure is vaporized. A few nukes as EMP weapons and you instantly destroy our advantages in communication. Attack our space based systems and we lose our ability to target. The list goes on and on. So yes, multiple, timed, sequential attacks on the dozens of prime military targets inside the USA would cripple us instantly. Ah you say, scramble the bombers. Well, we don't have any nuclear equipped bombers anymore. Our land based missile capacity will be sharply reduced by 2007. As for our nuclear equipped subs, well now, why do you think the Russians are building those underground cities in the Urals? Do you think they will care if we waste a few million peasants in Moscow or Beijing? Once you understand how these people think, things get really depressing.

As for our forces deployed overseas, they are toast. Having lost our ability to resupply them by air or sea, they will either be left to rot or overwhelmed in place. In my scenario, 9 of our 12 aircraft carrier groups are sunk by sunburst missiles, high speed torpedoes and SU-27 bombers in one hour. If you think that is not possible, or reasonable, or militarily feasible, I suggest you go take a cold shower and wake up. It is a surprise attack after all. In the movie, "Sum of all fears" they had a scene where the carrier is surprise attacked by Russian bombers. It will be like that. The fleet will be sailing ignorantly along until the final thirty seconds. And then they will die. In place, in treachery and instantly. Why do you think the Russians are building these weapons, and the Chinese buying them, if they do not intend to use them? Hasn't a Chinese General already said they will nuke Los Angeles if we try and help Taiwan? Like I said before, the attack may be surprise, but the decade long preparations for it are not. The information on the military buildup by both Russia and Red China is out there for anyone to see if they want to. Throw in North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia(both will collapse in a few years) and a host of others, along with European apathy and you have the makings for the instant military defeat of the USA.

Ah, you say, we will do the "Red Dawn" routine. Irregular resistance requires three things. The first is a major power willing to supply the rebels for its own political purposes. The second is it needs a secure base of operations to regroup. The third is must have the support of 10% of the general population and the apathy of the other 90%. You have no idea how vicious, nasty, brutal and effective the Chinese and Russians will be against any "patriots." My view is the rest of the world will ignore us, most of the people in the United States will accept the new order and the few that resist will have limited ability to influence things on the ground.

So there you have it. My view of where everything we call the current situation is heading in the near to long term. The reason I despise Clinton so much is not he is a sexual predator and a boor. It is he allowed the Red Chinese to improve the accuracy of their missiles; gave them the computers to test their missiles and finally, gave them billions in free trade to buy the very weapons they will use to kill us down the road. As for Bush, his recon plane folly has given the Red Chinese the final piece of the jigsaw puzzle in terms of electronic warfare and communications. The West has consistently ignored clear evidence of a Russian military buildup in the nuclear area, the building of underground bases and the storage of vast amounts of military supplies withdrawn from Europe. People will ask where the Russian army will get ten thousand tanks in its present condition. I will say their present condition masks the money being spent to maintain the underground bases full of tanks. Won't we all be surprised when thousands of tanks, artillery pieces and armored troop transports suddenly supply the "collapsed" Russian army. Unlike the USA, they won't have to build them. These weapons of war already exist in the underground bunkers the USA doesn't admit the Russians have. It has been said of Russia, all it is capable of doing is destroy the world. We will find out later in the this decade or early next.

When I was younger I saw a comedy movie called, "Here Come The Russians." I'm not laughing now. The new version is Here come the Russians, the Chinese, the North Koreans, the Cubans, the Venezuelans, the Syrians, the Pakistanis and the Saudis. One by one, we could take them. They will unify out of hatred for the USA. They will come. They will attack us. The only issue is whether enough Americans will bother to fight them after our military is destroyed in the first strike. George Washington and his dream come to mind. We shall see soon enough.

[ainitfunny]

I figure the most coldly practical advice to give to American young people nowdays is that they should Major in Chinese language and minor in Russian if they hope to have adequate "survival skills" for what I agree is coming soon.

As for the rest of us over the hill gang, it would be prudent and we probably have just enough time to look up and practice some pertinent words IN CHINESE AND RUSSIAN which we may need to communicate with our captors like:

Mercy
food
water
cold
warm
yes
no
doctor
pain/fever
fire
clean
dirty
cold
hot
wet
friend
enemy
home
family
wife
husband
brother
sister
daughter
son
father
mother
help
good
bad
car
come
go
stay
I/me
you
he/she/it
today
yesterday
tomorrow
day/night
open/close
start/stop
keep/discard
need
look
see/saw
happy/sad
sleep/rest
sick
dead
who
what
where
when
how
("why" is not a useful word for conqured people)

I assure you if the prospect of learning even these few basic words in Chinese and Russian seems silly, think how "silly" you would feel if you or your loved one's life depended on your being able to establish even this rudimentary level of communication with a millitary occupational troop pointing a gun at you.

I say this because I have no hope that the profound changes necessary to avert this scenario can and will be made. It is too late.

[Michiana MaJo]

Wow....I am almost speechless...this is the most sobering piece I have seen....and, who can argue with it? This is a "must share" item. We need to get our preps in order, tho it would be interesting to see if they'll do us much good, if Doug is right! I'd like to ask him if HE is prepping!

I will have to go back and read other articles by Doomer Doug. Steve ******, last nite, on his show, was saying how much he respected what Doug has to say re: gold and the economy.

Looks like Doug has a lot of important thoughts besides the economy, as well.

[pixmo]

A topical opinion article for the thread. Keep up the good work, Doomer Doug. Your articles never fail to disappoint.

<table width="100%" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" bordercolor="#000000" height="43"><tr><td bgcolor="#D08153"><font face="Verdana, Arial,Helvetica, sans-serif" size="4"><b><font size="4" color="#FFFFFF">DANIEL SNEIDER: AFGHANISTAN, IRAQ WARS STRETCHING TROOPS THIN
</font></b></font></td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#f5f5dc" height="2"><div align="left"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="4"><b><font size="2">Fair use policy applies
http://www.kansas.com/mld/eagle/news...al/7773474.htm</B>

The U.S. military is in the midst of one of the most massive movements of troops since World War II. Almost the entire battle force in Iraq is being replaced by fresh units, involving the rotation of nearly 240,000 soldiers and Marines over the next five months.

Buried within this huge rotation is one deployment that has quietly alarmed some military experts. Some 8,000 troops from the two Hawaii-based brigades of the 25th Infantry Division, the famed Tropic Lightning Division, are being sent to Iraq and Afghanistan. These troops are the cavalry for the Pacific Command -- they are the men and women who are designated to rush first into battle in case of a war involving North Korea.

This leaves the United States with a very thin line of defense in an area of the world that is of vital strategic interest. It comes at a time when there is a high potential for conflict, possibly triggered by the collapse of negotiations to persuade North Korea to abandon its nuclear-weapons program. And it is a move that will not pass unnoticed by North Korea, which could read it as a sign that the United States is too tied down in Iraq to handle another crisis.

This doesn't mean that the United States could not eventually fight and win a war in Korea without the 25th. A combination of American air and naval power and the South Korean army, along with the one U.S. Army division still based in Korea, may be enough to blunt a North Korean attack. And that could allow time for reinforcements to arrive from elsewhere.

But this deployment reveals the stress created by the war in Iraq.

"Clearly, unanticipated commitments in postwar Iraq had stretched the Army to the point where it had little in reserve for any other contingencies that might arise," wrote defense specialist Jeffery Record in an Army War College study on the global war on terrorism that is being widely read in Washington, D.C.

The best response is for the United States to increase its military forces, especially ground troops. But Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, needless to say, does not agree. He and others argue that revolution in military technology -- precision weapons, increases in mobility, the ability to coordinate air and ground forces more quickly and effectively, and the use of special forces -- diminishes the need for ground troops.

During a recent visit to Seoul, however, a senior South Korean military officer expressed serious doubt about its ability to repel the North. Among other things, South Korea lacks key weapons systems, such as those to accurately direct fire against the North's thousands of artillery batteries. Plans to transfer such technology are in the works, but it will take years.

The cost of war in Iraq is not only measured in the tens of billions spent or the lives being lost every day. It is the price of having put too much of our resources in the wrong place.

</font></font></div></td></tr></table>

[Bubba Zanetti]

I agree. We are vulnerable and there is no political will to see anything done.

I am putting a hand-pumped well in my basement this week, prepping, prepping.....

[nutkin]

In a word...

Excellent.

Think I'm going to make some copies of this for some DGI's we know. Ya'll know the ones....living under (and loudly shouting about) the grand illussion of our military, economic and (insert word of choice here) superiority.

[Annie]

".. the only issue is whether or not enough Americans will bother to fight them..."

Many people can trace their ancestry in this country back three or four hundred years. I am a descendant of the Hale family; you'll remember Nathan Hale, who regretted that he had but one life to give for his country. He volunteered to go behind British lines at the request of George Washington, was caught and hanged at the tender age of 21. I've often wondered what would really happen in this country in the event of a takeover. We read on these threads that some of the American populace is armed and well. When it gets down to fighting for our families, food, farms, will American ingenuity really work in terms of sheer numbers? I wonder if Nathan Hale would put on a uniform and go to Iraq if he were here today. I wish I could go back in time for just one hour and meet a few of those people.

[CygnusXI]

Russia is our friend now [/sarcasm]

Well written piece, and oh so true.

[Curious]

The arrogance of the Neo-Cons is BREATHTAKING.

They care little about the US ... only about their dreams of Religious Driven Zealotry.

YES ... the US is at risk.

YES ... the US is overextended out the Wazoo.

And the Sheeple of the US during 2003 were acting like the citizens of Paris and Berlin in August 1914 ... cheering and throwing flowers, LOOKING FORWARD TO the GLORY of their victories without a thought - no, actually shouting down and screaming at those who tried to express a thought - about the endeavor into which they were plunging.

Most of those who populate TB2K were typical Sheeple during 2003 ... and like the sheeple of Germany in 1914, or 1938/39, the sheeple of France of 1812 or 1914, or even the sheeple of the American South in 1861, they did NOT want to look at History, ACTUAL military capabilities, or the economics of war.

I would not go so far as to say the US is doomed, but we are at severe risk.

The Neo-conservatives have taken a nation that is economically weak and have gone to the outside of the envelope of it's capabilities in order to push their own Religious Driven Agenda that the US should RULE the world (under THEIR direction of course).

When you fly airplanes you learn if one pushes on the envelope of capabilities time after time ... or for an extended period of time ... the result is DEATH AND DESTRUCTION. If you can't learn it intellectually by paying attention to the history of those who have done it in the past you will definitely learn it up close and personal at some time in the future.

The US is "Pushing the Envelope" wrt both it's actual military/economic capabilities while at the same time trying to impose via it's muscle (versus moral persuasion) a Religious Zealotry Driven view of how the world should be structured.

Push a Religious Agenda with muscle ... guess what ... other people try to push back with muscle.

Yes ... the US is at risk.

History tells us that once a country starts down this path it usually continues until such time as the pain from death and destruction becomes too great, but of course "It is always the other's guy's fault".

I personally don't want my boys to have to go fight in a major war so that a small group of Jewish Religious Zealots can merely take more land on the West Bank from families that have lived on that very land for hundreds of years. Yet that very issue and our attempt to IMPOSE that theft is what is driving both the passions of the Middle East AND our military overextension that leaves us at risk EVERYWHERE.

The Neo Conservative Crowd will NOT be happy until we have either invaded MORE Middle Eastern countries with TENS OF MILLIONS of inhabitants ... or DESTROYED THEM via our own WMD's ... merely because that is the desire of the Jewish Zealots who currently control the agenda.

The Neo Conservative Crowd has effectively SIEZED POWER in the US ... and they care not one whit about the US itself, except how it's power can be used to further THEIR Religious Agenda (which is fwiw an agenda of a very small group of people who are only a very small fraction, a minute fraction of those who populate the US).

Throw your slings and arrows at me and my post. You certainly didn't hold back last winter or spring when I bluntly told this board about what would happen wrt to Iraq ... and which has proved uncannily accurate. Like Sheeple everywhere most here just "want to believe" ... thinking is too much work. The thought must be that History and what it teaches is "Bunk" and NOT worthy of consideration.

It matters NOT what you say: History itself will eventually tell us if I am right or wrong. Words won't change history. IF boastful words and arrogance DID change history Hitler would have WON WW2, and German would be the 2nd langage of choice worldwide today.

Curious

[lynnie]

Because my mindset and worldview is to try and look at things from a biblical perspective, I have wondered for years why America appears to be absent from the book of Revelation. Either she is the Babylon who is destroyed, or she is so utterly weakened that she has no part in world affairs.

Personally, after my kids spent one year in the local public school the year after we moved ( now back in private Christian school)...a 92% white, middle class school.....and looking at the local kids in the malls, on the streets, and looking at the teen magazines my nieces buy, I think it is all over. The next generation, apart from a miracle of returning to faith in God and the bible, is already taken over by the enemy. The battle is already lost for the next generation. It is all the same enemy, whether it poses as Chinese, Russian, or just unbridled liscentiousness and paganism. It is all anti-law, anti-righteousness, anti true freedom. I am as afraid of when American teenagers are running this nation as I am of foreigners. They are as foreign to what America traditionally stood for as a commie is.

I have every reason to think Doug's post is possible, although I'd expect full control on the coasts and more resistance in the rural areas.

[CTCStrela]

The only issues I have with this peice are: The Schvall (Squall) Torpedo (mentioned as the 200mph one in the artical) is very short range, and leaves one HELL of a datum back to the sub that launched it. It's quite noisy, and has a small warhead. This means after launch of one, we know exactly where the sub is, and can sink it. The sub has to be close to launch it, and this puts it into serious peril, even before it launches one. It is very doubtfull that one schvall could sink a carrier. At any rate, it has major problems with guidance, and there are currently fielded passive and active countermeasures for it that are very effective.

The SU-27 has been around for quite a long time, and lacks the range to get out to most CVBG's. Not to mention, we have a squadron of them ourselves, and the F-15's avionics are quite superior. Remember, it's not a question of gunfighting manuverability (which in theory, the SU is better at). It's a war of electronics, missiles, normally, and at this, the SU is two generations behind (think F-104 ). On top of that, the Russian pilots only use a half G-suit in combat, so the theoretical manuverability of the aircraft is a moot point. With a half-suit, a pilot can only sustain about 5-6 g's without going into G-lock. Ergo, if an F-15 gets swarmed with SU's, and runs out of missiles, AND decides to get into knife-fighting range with an SU, it'll be a short fight, as the Russian pilot tries to pull a tight sustained turn, and g-locks. A plane with a unconcious pilot at the controls makes a pretty fat target, doesn't it? Remember GW-1? The Iraqi's did try to make an airborn fight of it, the first day of the war. SU-27's and Mig-29's fell in droves. Research it.

[Brutus]

DoomerDoug,

I believe the missile name you were looking for is
Sunburn, not Sunburst.

[JC Refuge]

Many would say I've taken on the voice of the contrarian or even the DGI crowd of late. Believe me, I try to let the fun and doom roll roughshod as much as possible. But sometimes, a little reason and moderation is called for. It's just too easy if you spend much time in this forum to get pulled off your center/balance if you fail to acknowledge the other side of things--maybe even a hopeful view of things--and buy into all the worst case scenarios.

Doug--you have many times freely admitted your way-off-the-charts alarmist views are not for popular consumption. Yet they are gobbled up here and certainly viewed as entertaining and thought-provoking. And I for one appreciate your presentation style and skills.

But let me just point out, for the benefit of those who might be about to go jump off their nearest freeway overpass--the formula for fact vs. fabrication opinion swaying:

The primary ingredient is lots of truthfulness. Depending on the sophistication of your audience, the more genuine facts you can throw into your treatise mix, the more your whole concoction will be swallowed whole. Generally speaking, you want a ratio of 50-90% truth to go with your balance of hyperbole and imagination that is intended to convince the reader of your special core message and thus stimulate a belief or desire in them that is in line with your own. It works in advertising and political campaigning as well as most any other persuasive communication.

I point that out because Doomer Doug has made use of many recent news stories and available stats that woven together with his special viewpoints and judgments can obviously smother all sunlight from one's view. But even "facts" are sometimes taken out of context or wrongly presented in the first place by the original source.

One case in point in this essay is this reference: "Things are so bad, the military has actually run out of small arms ammunition, M-16, Pistol, M-60 and 50 caliber machine gun. The military has one ammo plant. Period." Yes, I read the recent story on that. There was a grain of truth in the original article, but all in all it was sorely uninformed and narrowly focused. It had its own agenda.

Fact is, the U.S. has plenty of ammunition-producing capacity in all sizes and calibers. It's something we do still retain in-country--the capacity to design and build armaments, ammunition, and all things military imaginable. My current perspective on this comes from two main points: One, I am best friends with a full bird in the Pentagon whose present responsibility is wartime armament and ammunition procurement. Two, I have worked in the defense business and I know of three or four plants in the Twin Cities area alone that could be tooled up in a day or so to start cranking out just about any kind of ammo or ordnance you'd want to order up.

There are other points one could take isue with, but I'll just say that many of the "facts" in Doug's essay are skillfully upholstered in hard and taut opinion and cushioned with conclusions that don't necessarily hold up under the weight of reason.

All that said, I'll be more clear about what I do agree with--that the Sino-Soviet conspiracy to bring down the US lives. That today's terrorism is a creation of that monster. And that we do face a very serious threat in the next two decades. (That threat is as much from within as from without.) Even that the odds of our being able to overcome these dangers are long.

But I disagree with the expressed, defeatist emotion on America in general. That we are incapable of coming out on top. That hatred of America and its people is justified, that all our leaders are corrupt, that our military is hopeless, and all the rest of that "please just put a bullet in my head now" whining.

It ain't at all close to as bad as you like to think it is, Doug. The game isn't over. And there are a lot of really excellent people I know out there in the military, in intelligence agencies, in government, in business, and in my community who are at least as ethically pure and driven as you are. Life goes on and hopefulness is what drives it.

[Richard]

Curious agreed we should adopt more of a damage limitation role in the ME, not active military involvement, it is not the concern of the US or the UK whether one tribe occupies a piece of desert or another
we should not be fighting other Peoples' wars, or supplying arms or should I say WMD to either side
we should draw a tight ringfence around the ME, not take on a quarter of humanity in an endless conflict, how many times has the world been on the brink of WWIII since 1949 because of the ME

[Richard]

The SU-27 has been around for quite a long time, and lacks the range to get out to most CVBG's. Not to mention, we have a squadron of them ourselves, and the F-15's avionics are quite superior.

I asked a US pilot of an F15 or F16 (or whatever is the equivalent of the SU 27) what they would do if they met an SU 27 in a battle situation
he said they wouldn't engage it

this was at Farnborough airshow in the UK about 3 years ago

[Sooth]

Our military still has the capability and the will. That is being rapidly eroded and flushed down the toilet by the current administration. When the Reserves and National Guard were counted on to make up the third brigade of every division in the 1970’s, the divisions were still pretty much at full strength. Now, the Pentagon relies and relies much too heavily on the presence of the Reserves and National Guard to make up the main strength of the fighting forces. No need to even go into that fallacy.

The hell of it is, 99% of our people in uniform will give and give and give to their last breath to make it happen regardless of the lack of spare parts, body armor, ammunition, water, sane leadership, coherent strategy, anything. They are and will give it all to those at the top who could and do give a rat’s hindquarters less about them. They are, after all, just volunteers, just cannon fodder in the greater struggle of The Project for the New American Century.

After giving it all away starting with Reagan and continuing through Clinton, the current administration is hell bent on closing more, 25% more, of our stateside bases starting with this year’s BRAC committee while spreading our forces out as thin as melted butter in very small compounds located on or near a lot of very hostile territory throughout the world. The Rumsfeld Doctrine. That makes these very few soldiers, sailors, marines and air force personnel sitting ducks for any and all. At the same time, Bush and his minions are talking about reducing the numbers in Iraq from 150,000 to around 100,000 and pulling out the Main Battle Tanks and a large percentage of the helicopters. They want our forces to be quick and agile in the remaining supply of Humvees. The same Humvees that regularly get splattered all over the landscape.

This is no strategy for victory or even maintenance in a hostile world. Doomer Doug is exactly correct. The world or more precisely, the Muslim world, wants U.S. dead and gone as the nation we now are. They want U.S. and our territory and our people converted, enslaved or dead. Given this administrations penchant for arrogance and downright stupidity, they are getting their chance.

We need to bring the troops home from most of the occupied world. We need to consolidate our position at home now. We need to save a buck here and stop spending it like there is no tomorrow over there. Our military presence in hundreds of countries is simply an outflow of foreign aid that we cannot afford.

What Bush and his minions are doing in the Middle East is no more or less than a New Crusade. HIS EXACT WORDS before his handlers told him not to say that again. Well, folks, the Crusades were an unmitigated disaster then and they are an unmitigated disaster today. We are bleeding out some of our best and brightest. Every time you fill up your gas tanks at the local station and see a few drops of gas spill on the ground, IMAGINE THAT THOSE DROPS ARE BLOOD. That is exactly what has and is paying for that gasoline to which you give little thought.

So much more to say. So little time to say it.

Sooth

[changed]

As our Guardsmen come back, they will get out and it will be hard to replace them. They feel betrayed. They feel like they were left in the dark about how long they would be deployed and when they would be able to come back. They complain that some regular army were brought back before they were.

[Mountain Mike]

Doug,

Thanks for this well-written, sobering essay. Though some of your facts may be in dispute, I think you will be correct in the long run.

The world has unlimitted wants/needs and finite resources. The US clearly devours more than its "share" of resources, so it is obvious that much of the rest of the world would be envious for our cushy lifestyle. What bad people want, they take. One day they will come for us.

More random thoughts:

Divide an conquer.....do those words ring a bell with anyone? who is minding the store at home?

China is a two edged sword....sure, they make cheap DVD players for us, but they now have technology, manufacturing capacity, and plenty of capital.

Remember the in the movie "Gone With the Wind" when Rhett Buttler predicts the fall of the South because of their lack of manufacturing capacity? Aren't we like the South in the Civil war, lacking in manufacturing capacity? How long would it take for us to whip up another 1000 tanks, or build 100 more ships???

[CTCStrela]

Originally posted by Richard
I asked a US pilot of an F15 or F16 (or whatever is the equivalent of the SU 27) what they would do if they met an SU 27 in a battle situation
he said they wouldn't engage it

this was at Farnborough airshow in the UK about 3 years ago

They said they wouldn't engage it? Well, I don't have a response to that, as well, it's a pretty bizarre and uncharacteristic thing for a fighter pilot to say..
Most of the active airforce pilots I've talked to only wish to cross swords with a mig-29 or su-27. Strange that you found one flying the "equivilent" stating that he would not..

[changed]

http://usatoday.printthis.clickabili...partnerID=1660

Newstory to back up discontent in Guard.

[JC Refuge]

Changed--
Question--When and in whose army has there not been discontent? Honestly, if there was not x-amount of discontent in the military, then you know you're in trouble because you would obviously be coddling the troops rather than toughening them up.

Back on point, the article you linked to seems to indicate discontent to the point of leaving is pretty much a non-issue, other than to give some bean counter in DC something to think about for awhile.

First quote:

A recent survey of 5,000 soldiers from 15 states showed that the rate at which Army Guard members choose to leave the military could jump — to 20-22% a year among those who have served long overseas tours, typically 12 months.

Last year, about 16% of all Army Guard troops left the military as a result of retirement, injuries or a decision not to re-enlist, a figure slightly below the annual historical average of 18%. Among Guard soldiers returning from deployments in the USA and overseas from 2001 to 2003, only 12.5% left, statistics show.

That looks to me like MAYBE there COULD be only a 2-4% jump from historical levels in those who choose not to re-enlist--and this during a period of war!

Quote 2:

There is no exodus yet. Army Guard retention rates have run well above average in the past three months for new and mid-career soldiers. Guard officials were unable to explain why. Army Reserve officials say the Reserve's retention rates are artificially high now because "stop loss" orders bar soldiers from quitting during the Iraq conflict, but Guard officials downplay that as a factor in the Guard's retention rates.

John Goheen, spokesman for the National Guard Association of the United States, says no one is sure how troops will react once they return home because the Army Reserve and Guard have never faced a similar situation. "Nobody is panicking, but there is some concern. We'll just have to wait and see."

[CTCStrela]

Originally posted by Doomer Doug
This is long, 3300 words but the subject is complex and as Flint always says I need to explain myself.


" Things are so bad, the military has actually run out of small arms ammunition, M-16, Pistol, M-60 and 50 caliber machine gun. The military has one ammo plant. Period. "

The military ammo plant produces match target loads for marksmanship competitions and snipers/socom. Front line troops use ammunition produced by commercial plants under militray contract

"If a few Iraq citizens with AK-47's and RPGs stalled our advance on Baghdad, just think what a real enemy could do. [/b][/quote]"

I took us a month and a half (approx) to defeat and occupy a country with the land mass of two or three US states...I wouldn't call that a stall. What gives?

" Russia now has absolute naval supremacy, absolute air supremacy and absolute nuclear supremacy over the United States."

Absolute Naval Supremacy:
What about the Kursk? Anyone remember this? The reason for it's sinking was the degredation of it's torpedos to the point that one detonated from vibration. That having to do with the fact that that particular torpedo was assembled in 1974 (?!?!) and hadn't been maintained for the last 9 years. This is *not* a military with absolute naval supremacy... Doug, have you even heard of the ecological disasters of Vladivostok, etc, where the Russian fleet is *rotting*? They don't even have the money to mothball the fleet properly, so to clear the docks, they cut the ships loose and pushed them onto sand banks, where they rust to this day. What ships still operate are funded by the cities they are named after...

Absolute Air Supremacy:
The Russian Air Force no longer fields a bomber capable of reaching the United States, under any circumstances.
We, however, have 5 different aircraft types in active service, and an additional 3 in reserve, that are mission capable to Russia.

Absolute Nuclear Supremacy:
As of the last estimate, approximately 70% of Russias active ICBM's are still liquid fueled, (the fastest of those requiring a 40 minute prep). Of that 70%, 20% require fueling before launch (10 hours), and can only remain ready for launch for 48 hours, prior to draining and extensive refurbishing (corrosive fuel). On top of that, Russian ICBMS have never had a better that 50% readiness state , even at the height of their program.

The US, since fazing out of it's last liquid fueled ICBM (the Titan II), has maintained an average readiness of 95-98% within it's ICBM arsenal. This readiness is even more telling in that within that amount of ready ICBMs, 100% of these are ready to be cold launched within 60-90 seconds of launch warning.
This does not, of course, include the SLBM's on our subs, which far, far outweigh the Russian's active fleet.

What supremacy do they have again?



"A while back there was a story of how several Su-27 fighters buzzed the flight deck of the aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk. A not so subtle message our carrier fleet was so much scrap metal is what this little propaganda coup was."

This kind of thing has been happening for the last 50 years, on both sides. My father's friend served on the Kittyhawk during vietnam, and he told me stories of morning "sh*traids" that the US and Russian forces would have on each other, literal garbage bombs dropped on ships, from low flying aircraft. This isn't a coup, it's common behavior between two opposing (but not at war) military forces. Not to mention, actually, the collisions and herding that they used to do. A good reference for this is the book "Cold War at Sea", which has a lot of declassified incidents listed in it. Hell as late as 1988, a US carrier was rammed by a Soviet frigate in the black sea. This is common stuff.


"The US military has lost the technological battle. There was even a news story about an "unknown", read Russian, anti tank laser weapon which destroyed an M-1 Abrams tank in Iraq. "

What news artical was this, Doug?

"As for the Red Chinese, the story is even bleaker. Massive numbers of soldiers combined with modern technical weapons are an unbeatable proposition. "

Ok, first off, IMHO, the only technologically deficient weapon in the US military is the M-16 rifle. Other than that, we literally have a two generational advantage over any possible opposition, if not greater. But small arms is largely eyewash, at any rate, as we haven't fought a small arms war since WWI. To keep the casualties low, the United States fights a style of war I like to call bulldozerkrieg. Massive suppressive artiliery/airstrikes, followed later by mopping up operations by grunts. Low intensity confilct (such as that in Afganistan) is where the small arms come into play, not in a theoretical invasion by Russian and Chinese troops.
Speaking of this....uh, how are the Chinese going to get here, and to what end would this "invasion" be? If anything, Russia and China are more likely to invade each other....
Come to think about it, there has been a low order battle simmering on the border between them, with occassional platoon sized firefights, of and on for the last 40 years....

"It is a simple fact, one man with an RPG can take down a 25 million dollar Apache helicopter."

It is also a simple fact, that one apache can destroy 15 enemy tanks, and decimate an entire battallion (formed or in transit) of said enemy men with RPG's. Don't believe it? Look at the road out of Kuwait during GW I. The enemy's weaponry hasn't advanced since then...

"It is a simple fact, the Sunburst missile, or the SU-27, can take out an aircraft carrier battle group. In fact, we should rename our carrier task forces, BFT, or big fat target."

Uh, please explain to me how one ex-soviet fighter (that probably hasn't been maintained, and is made up of cannabilzed broken fighters) can even make it near US CV Battlegroups? Please...it would be shot down about 30 times before it got close enough to launch a sun*burn*


"Over the last few years we have reduced our number of targets. If one nuclear missile were dropped on the following targets on the west coast of the US: Everet Naval Base, Bremerton Naval Shipyard, Trident Submarine base, Fort Lewis, Yakima Firing Range, San Diego shipyard and naval base, Camp Pendelton, Fort Carson, Nellis Air Force Base, Klamath Air Base and International Airports in major cities, any military response would be crippled instantly. You can do similar lists for the East and Gulf Coasts. Take out Camp Lejune and the marines are destroyed. Take out Norfolk and the Atlantic fleet ceases to exist. In an instant the military infrastructure is vaporized."

In that same instant the entire attacking country would be vaporized by the US. Not to mention that you're assuming that they could even pull off an attack of this magnitude, short of a massive ICBM launch, which we of course, would return in kind.
Items:
Lejune isn't the only Marine base.
Norfolk isn't the only Naval base.
These are only two of hundereds of bases. And why do you think that the Navy would all be in port, or the marines, for that matter...

That's a lot of bullseyes for your first attack, Doug. Pretty thin argument..

"A few nukes as EMP weapons and you instantly destroy our advantages in communication. Attack our space based systems and we lose our ability to target. The list goes on and on. So yes, multiple, timed, sequential attacks on the dozens of prime military targets inside the USA would cripple us instantly. Ah you say, scramble the bombers. Well, we don't have any nuclear equipped bombers anymore."

We have 5 nuclear capable bomber types active and ready to go in the US, today.

"Our land based missile capacity will be sharply reduced by 2007. As for our nuclear equipped subs, well now, why do you think the Russians are building those underground cities in the Urals? "

What makes you think that those underground cities aren't targeted, Doug?


"Do you think they will care if we waste a few million peasants in Moscow or Beijing? Once you understand how these people think, things get really depressing."

Do you think they don't know that we're going after their military, not their million peasants in Moscow, or Beijing, in retaliation?

Our nuclear forces haven't been targeted counter value (IE at civilians) since the 60's. We go counterforce in a nuclear scenerio, which means we dismember their command and control, their logistics, their warfighting and production facilities, and their ability to fight, period. I think they would care if their entire military infrastructure was "vaporized" in kind by us in retaliation. I don't see it as a threat.

"As for our forces deployed overseas, they are toast. Having lost our ability to resupply them by air or sea, they will either be left to rot or overwhelmed in place. In my scenario, 9 of our 12 aircraft carrier groups are sunk by sunburst missiles, high speed torpedoes and SU-27 bombers in one hour. If you think that is not possible, or reasonable, or militarily feasible, I suggest you go take a cold shower and wake up. It is a surprise attack after all. "

Once again, explain how an (theoretically) active force (in TOTAL) of 400 aircraft are going to be able to even get near the carriers (rangewise), let alone penetrate the zoned defense of the carriers, and then somehow sink an aircrafy carrier( after all of this) with a missile that has a 350lb warhead?


"Ah, you say, we will do the "Red Dawn" routine. Irregular resistance requires three things. The first is a major power willing to supply the rebels for its own political purposes. "

Uhm, once again..how are they getting here?

I would appreaciate a response on these points, Doug

Thanks in advance!

Strela

[lars]

Go NeoConservatives! Yeeha!

[changed]

JC Refuge, I am just reporting the news. A coworker who is in the Guard just came back and he was telling me what the other guardsmen are saying. This is backed up by the news article so it is not just rumour or gossip.

[wrs]

You are not convincing anyone with your lame responses, everything you say is anecdotal and asking about the article is a dead-giveaway you aren't paying attention....

Heres a link to it, read it and weep

If you don't like the source then just put "pencil sized hole" and Abrams and tank into a Google and see what you get.

As far as the F-15, it's early 70s technology and the avionics are at best, early 80s. I worked on them and designed countermeasures systems for the F-16, F-15, C-130 and F-18 when I worked for Tracor from 83-88. The best microprocessor in there is 16bit 1750a mil-spec slow stuff and the one we put in the F-15 (ALE-45) was designed and developed in 78-79 and used the M6809 8 bit processor. I had to fix the design when we finally fielded it in 85 because so much stuff didn't really work that managed to get through the original certification process. The systems we designed to replace the old electro-mechanical jobs (ALE-40) in the F-16 were using the 1750a architecture. The first one ran at 15Mhz and I designed and developed it from 83-85, it was redesigned in 86-87 using similar technology and finally fielded in 93 or so. It takes forever to upgrade fighter technology, I think the su-27 is 80s technology which makes it more advanced than the F-15 as far as airframe goes. Now Im not up on Russian avionics cause I wasn't cleared for it but I doubt you are so I think you are blowing smoke with all your anecdotal blather..................

Oh yeah, one more kind of countermeasures system we made, fake RVs for the ICBMs. I wasn't on any of those programs but they were deep black and if we have countermeasures in the warhead department, you can bet they are based on a preexisting deterrrent technology. I worked on several other classified subjects while at Tracor and from the way you talk, I can tell you are an ignoramus that just doesn't like hearing things that shake your foundation because most of what Doug said is right on. He has colored the consequences of our actions with his expectations but that is about all I see him doing wrong in the essay.

By the way, cross-continental bombers are useless in a nuclear war, you can rule them out, stealth or not, the commanders of them won't live long enough to deploy them because the truth is, they are really tactical and that is all they have ever demonstrated any capability for. The Russians also know where every silo is and they track them with satelites just like we do with theirs. Go check out SBIRS on the internet, it is a replacement of the creaky out of date system we have deployed today, the Russians already have a new one I think.

My advice to you is to get your head out of the sand and quit attacking the messenger before you seriously consider his message.

P.S. Nothing I said about my work at tracor is in the slightest bit classified so don't worry about someone finding out, it's all old data and I haven't been in that business for 15 years but my friends still are and they tell me not that much has changed.

[Bill P]

Another $0.02:

I don't think the major players on the global stage hate the USA as much as you say. The major players would be the corporate and government leaders of many countries, NOT The general populace.

Cases abound:

Saudi Arabia, home to al Qaida is dependent on USA to keep their monarchy in power as well documented in SLEEPING WITH THE DEVIL by Steve Baer.

China is increasingly dependent on the USA for food imports and as the largest market for their highly leveraged economy. If China lost the US market their infrastructure would collapse economically.

Russia is already in an advanced state of decline, robbing their eastern citizens of basic resources so they can export same to Germany/France. Russia had their chance for WW III when they were stronger and had a better chance than they do now.

With NATO and recent history I dont see Europe in a direct military conflict versus the USA

and the USA is extremely popular in Eastern Europe and much of the former Soviet Union states.

Doug, when you factor in oil depletion to your military scenario I think it becomes increasingly difficult for all major powers, the US included, to wage a winnable war at a distance. As oil is depleted, it will become increasingly difficult to maintain civil order and stave off civil unrest at home, let alone field an army/navy/air force that can successfully project enough force at a distance. Missiles and biologicals leave a tell tale signature that can be traced back to origin - Mutually Assured Destruction still applies.

IMO "the world ends not with a bang but rather with a multitude of whimpers" to loosely quote T S Elliot.

[Ruckmanite]

Here’s a couple of things to chew on Doug. The link has a bunch of prophecy stuff at the top, and it has old news, but the information on the Russian Akula 941’s and 971’s is interesting. http://prophecyandcurrentevents.com/...y/082999up.htm

A better information link is here. Lots of pictures and technical data.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/fleet/russian/941.htm

From the top link..

“…Russia deployed a new SS-27 (TOPAL-M) silo-based, solid-propellant, three-stage ICBM with 6,820 mile range which can be armed with multiple warheads. The Topal-M is far in advance of anything we have and is capable of orbiting the planet and then being directed to targets on demand virtually without warning; and it has built-in missile defense systems. At least 12 SS-27s have been deployed in 1998 and 1999, with 20 more scheduled for next year.
In the 1980s Toshiba sold technology, made in America, to Russia which has enabled them to silence their submarines. They are now so quiet we can not track them. Over the past decade, Russia has built six silent Akula 941 nuclear subs. Each sub is estimated at 5.8 billion dollars each. The Akula 941 is 562 feet long and has 20 missile tubes which in aggregate can deliver 200 total nuclear warheads. It also has 13 launch tubes for single warhead cruise missiles. In 1996 a Russian sub entered Puget Sound and remained undetected while it mapped the Sound and spied on the U.S. Trident submarine base in Bangor, Washington.
In addition, Russia has deployed 18 Akula class 971 attack subs at a cost of 5.2 billion each. Spending estimates total 66.4 billion in nuclear submarine spending alone in just four years. The Akula class submarines (941/971) cannot be detected by our SOSUS warning Net. As a result, these submarines could approach the coast of America and blanket the continental U.S.A. with nuclear warheads virtually without warning.
These three new weapons systems are all offensive, first-strike nuclear weapon delivery systems. Why would Russia, at a time of supposed world peace in the post-Cold War period, when she is supposedly broke, be on a crash program to build such systems? Russia is moving to rapidly modernize and expand its fleet of warplanes, its short, intermediate and long-range nuclear missiles; its submarine fleet and sub missile systems, its production and deployment of tank, armored vehicles, helicopter gun ships, small arms, etc? Is Russia talking peace and preparing for war?
At the same time, while we never built our "Star Wars" system, Russia has deployed an anti-missile defense system in and around their major cities. The United States preparations to shield the civilian population from a nuclear attack are virtually non-existent, but Russia has over 100 underground cities shielded by several hundred meters of concrete. Russia has implemented huge new civil defense programs, including enormous fallout shelters -- one new underground city is larger than Washington, DC.

Photos of these subs can also be found here.
http://www.diodon349.com/photopoint/0017/aindex.htm

[CTCStrela]

As per your linked article (to support or disprove Doug's article?)

"In the sort of excited language seldom included in official Army documents, he said, "The unit is very anxious to have this 'SOMETHING' identified. It seems clear that a penetrator of a yellow molten metal is what caused the damage, but what weapon fires such a round and precisely what sort of round is it? The bad guys are using something unknown and the guys facing it want very much to know what it is and how they can defend themselves."

A molten yellow metal penetrator isn't a laser, as Doug stated it was.

That could have been one of two things...
A sabot kinetic energy round (has been around since the late seventies, or a copper kinetic slug (similar to the ones used in certain classified munitions). Seeing as we have it, I don't see why the enemy doesn't....


"As far as the F-15, it's early 70s technology and the avionics are at best, early 80s."

The pure fact is the United States Airforce has a complete squadron of SU-27's, and use them as an aggressor squadron in exercises. The SU-27 only recently aquired a radar capable of lookdown-shootdown tactics, and is sorely pressed to win an engagement outside of heat-seeking missile range. That is a simple fact. It is, by the nature of it's shape, a low-observable aircraft, but synthetic apeture radar, such as what we have on Aegis cruisers (such as would be defending against Doug's "sneak attack", and on the F-15E Block 40 Strike Eagle (avionics update circa 1995), and on the newer F-18's and F-16's, can easily detect it in anything but a doppler-shift manuver (which only works temporarily). Regardless, the troops train day in and day out on shooting down exactly these types of aircraft, what makes you think they can't do the job?


"Oh yeah, one more kind of countermeasures system we made, fake RVs for the ICBMs. "
Yes fake RV's for the ICBMS, and on top of that, manuverable RV's for the ICBMs, Low-observable, etc etc.

" from the way you talk, I can tell you are an ignoramus that just doesn't like hearing things that shake your foundation "

How do you figure. I'm not attacking the messenger, I'm attacking the article. It's simply not based on fact...



"By the way, cross-continental bombers are useless in a nuclear war, you can rule them out, stealth or not, the commanders of them won't live long enough to deploy them because the truth is, they are really tactical and that is all they have ever demonstrated any capability for."

I don't see how a B-52 armed with 16 SLAM's in the 550kt yeild range could be percieved as tactical. Nor a B-1B, or a B-2 etc etc. At any rate, I was arguing with the statement Doug made that "We don't have any Nuclear Bombers"

Tell that to the folks in the hole at Offut...



"The Russians also know where every silo is and they track them with satelites just like we do with theirs."

That is my point...
How exactly is Russia going to get a "sneak attack" to work on us, without incurring a massive retaliation in kind?

" the Russians already have a new one I think"

What's anecdotal now?

"My advice to you is to get your head out of the sand and quit attacking the messenger before you seriously consider his message."

I seriously considered his message, and the only sand that I see is the foundation Doug's article was constructed upon.

[Ruckmanite]

Hey CTC,

Correct me if my memory fails me, but I remember Clinton changing our military status from "launch on warning" to "launch on impact" prior to Y2K. I have not heard if GW has reversed that order or not, but it was an unprecedented manuver.

Also, our Minuteman's are being destroyed as we speak, to reduce our "threat" to our enemies, while they continue to build the Topol-M missiles.

They are not our friends, and now we are going to beg them to sell us natural gas.

[CTCStrela]

I'll let photographs show you what I mean visa-vi f-15/f-16 (not to mention f-22 or JSF) versus su-27 avionics...

F15-


F-16

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaver...16_Cockpit.JPG

FA-18 (sans radar)

http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Pho...EC87-146-5.jpg

SU-27 Flanker

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaver...27_Cockpit.JPG


Do you now see what I mean regarding the avionics package of the SU-27 being 2 generations behind?
Yes, it is a fly by wire aircraft, yes, it is extremely manuverable, yes it has an innovative look-see-shoot function on the pilot's helmet, that cages IR missile-seeker heads to where the pilot is looking. But it is NOT competitive or on par with the updated avionics in ANY of our frontline fighters. ERGO it'll NEVER get a shot off in time.

[Mac]

The Iraqi's did try to make an airborn fight of it, the first day of the war. SU-27's and Mig-29's fell in droves. Research it.

The Iraqi's never have had the Su-27 and the number of MiG-29's shot down in that war were eight or less. They did try to engage a few times and in one engagement an Iraqi fighter group attacked a flight of F-15E's and managed to destory two of their own birds. One when a Mig-29 shot down a fellow Iraqi MiG-23 and another when the Iraqi pilot lost altitude awareness and flew into the ground.

Iraqi pilots were not that skilled, regardless of the bird they were flying.

And, while the Su-27 Flanker design is now fairly old, the Russians have been modifying the bird and deploying alot of newer versions or major updates to their older Flanker fleet.

As for the article, I will say that the idea that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq has committed seven or eight of our active divisions (with another forward based in Korea) is concerning. These were not major foes we were fighting, and while our cassualties have been light, the wear and tear of the men and material has been rough. Not to mention the stress on our Navy and warplanes.

[CTCStrela]

For some reason the links arent working...so inclusion of photos follows

1.F-15
2.F-16
3.F-18 (sans radar)
4.Su-27 Flanker

[CTCStrela]

F-16

[CTCStrela]

F-18 Sans Radar

[CTCStrela]

Notice something? It's all ANALOG....

[CTCStrela]

Originally posted by Ruckmanite
Hey CTC,


Also, our Minuteman's are being destroyed as we speak, to reduce our "threat" to our enemies, while they continue to build the Topol-M missiles.

They are not our friends, and now we are going to beg them to sell us natural gas.

The MM3's are being upgraded to a CEP of around 75 meters, not being destroyed. What this means is a guaranteed silo kill of over 90% per warhead, hardened or not.

I think you mean the MX missiles are being destroyed, which is true. The solid fuel in them is becoming brittle and unreliable, and they are being phased out. For that matter the D-5 Tridents just got a new guidance package. Topal-M's are very similar in capability to the MX of the 80's, and are a rising threat (especially if MIMRV'd) (multiple independent manuveravble re-entry), However, they only have 20 or so at this point. Regardless, there is still plenty of warning in a nuclear exchange. I worry a lot more about 60's era FOB'd SLBM's than land based items...

[Curious]

CTCStrela wrote:

I took us a month and a half (approx) to defeat and occupy a country with the land mass of two or three US states...I wouldn't call that a stall. What gives?

umm... If we "defeated" them, then why are we still fighting?

Your comment shows linear thinking when it comes to war. The problem is War is NOT linear. There are DIFFERENT TYPES of war, which many - including large numbers who think themselves as "warriors" - fail to realize. We got our arses handed to us in Vietnam by thinking linearly like you clearly are with your statement.

War is merely an extension of Politics. Politics by other means ... but still politics. Unlesss you are going to ELIMINATE everybody in the occupied lands war doesn't end when you defeat the armor, or infantry. It is was so simple and clear cut as you say then then Ireland would still be part of Great Britain since the British Army clearly could defeat any armor or weaponry the IRA could throw against them in the 1910's - 1920's.

Time to take off the blinders and stop thinking that war is only as YOU imagine it. History show's it is NOT ... and a lot of War's in the 20th century show it is NOT.

"A while back there was a story of how several Su-27 fighters buzzed the flight deck of the aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk. A not so subtle message our carrier fleet was so much scrap metal is what this little propaganda coup was."

CTCStrela's reply: "...This kind of thing has been happening for the last 50 years, on both sides..."

What that comment about the buzzing left out ... is that our Radar and Detection Systems in the fleet or in the airborn warning planes did NOT even see them coming. That is what was noteworthy about the buzzing incident ... they were over the deck of the carrier without being spotted by anything more than about 15 seconds before they passed over (and then only by the human eye of some people on deck). Completely Stealth approach.

The US Military right now is long on chest thumping ... but it couldn't even equip 8 full divisions with body armor!!! If we are so short of a basic infantry item such as body armor ... and can't even equip 1/2 of our scaled down infantry with it, the indication to me is that we have a massive material deficit. Short one particular item is not by itself the problem ... the problem is a war material shorfall of a BASIC ITEM that should be overflowing in the warehouses is like seeing one rat. If you see one then there are another 100 lurking out of sight.

And yes, no matter what you say, the US has only ONE munitions plant. Take that out and many types of munitions will NOT be able to be produced for quite some time. All we will have is what is "In Stock" and if the body armor situation is any indication I wouldn't put much faith in us having much in stock.

Curious

[CTCStrela]

Originally posted by Curious
CTCStrela wrote:



umm... If we "defeated" them, then why are we still fighting?

Your comment shows linear thinking when it comes to war. The problem is War is NOT linear. There are DIFFERENT TYPES of war, which many - including large numbers who think themselves as "warriors" - fail to realize. We got our arses handed to us in Vietnam by thinking linearly like you clearly are with your statement.

War is merely an extension of Politics. Politics by other means ... but still politics. Unlesss you are going to ELIMINATE everybody in the occupied lands war doesn't end when you defeat the armor, or infantry. It is was so simple and clear cut as you say then then Ireland would still be part of Great Britain since the British Army clearly could defeat any armor or weaponry the IRA could throw against them in the 1910's - 1920's.

Time to take off the blinders and stop thinking that war is only as YOU imagine it. History show's it is NOT ... and a lot of War's in the 20th century show it is NOT.



What that comment about the buzzing left out ... is that our Radar and Detection Systems in the fleet or in the airborn warning planes did NOT even see them coming. That is what was noteworthy about the buzzing incident ... they were over the deck of the carrier without being spotted by anything more than about 15 seconds before they passed over (and then only by the human eye of some people on deck). Completely Stealth approach.

The US Military right now is long on chest thumping ... but it couldn't even equip 8 full divisions with body armor!!! If we are so short of a basic infantry item such as body armor ... and can't even equip 1/2 of our scaled down infantry with it, the indication to me is that we have a massive material deficit. Short one particular item is not by itself the problem ... the problem is a war material shorfall of a BASIC ITEM that should be overflowing in the warehouses is like seeing one rat. If you see one then there are another 100 lurking out of sight.

And yes, no matter what you say, the US has only ONE munitions plant. Take that out and many types of munitions will NOT be able to be produced for quite some time. All we will have is what is "In Stock" and if the body armor situation is any indication I wouldn't put much faith in us having much in stock.

Curious

Curious...the original article talked about a symmetrical, staged attack by conventional and nuclear weapons on the US, propagated by Russian and Chinese forces. I responded with the symmertrical, staged responses that US forces would concievably use to respond to said attack. The style of body armor we're talking about is being phased into the conventional military as we speak, and was originally only availible to SPECOPS troops. The first battlefield usage of the armor was in somalia (black-hawk down). It's not a question of not having enough, it's a question of when it was planned to be issued, versus when we needed it.

Iraq is not now a symmetrical battlefield, if anything, it is very similar to what Germany was after WW2. The last causualty to Allied troops in Germany due to "Werewolf" action was in 1948, fully two years after Germany surrendered.

As far as the "one munitions plant" goes, the original article, written by Doug, stated that we were lacking 5.56x45, 7.62x51, and 50BMG ammunition. The military small arms munitions he was speaking for have been (with the exception of match and sniper ammunition) contracted out to commercial production since the early 80's. Multiple factories.

Once again, I'm responding directly to the article and the statements within.

[CTCStrela]

"What that comment about the buzzing left out ... is that our Radar and Detection Systems in the fleet or in the airborn warning planes did NOT even see them coming. That is what was noteworthy about the buzzing incident ... they were over the deck of the carrier without being spotted by anything more than about 15 seconds before they passed over (and then only by the human eye of some people on deck). Completely Stealth approach."

Once again, Doug's article left out the fact that the buzzing incident was noteworthy because of this...I need to see the source article, if you don't mind.

I was responding to Doug, but if you wan't, I'll put something forward to you.

From time to time, Carrier Battlegroups operate under non-radiating tactics. No radar, no radio transmissions, etc etc. The idea is that they are trying to hide/or move without the movement being detected. Obviously they were detected. Failure in tactics, perhaps...