Will there ever be a heavy-weight military clash?

[plan_D]

I'd have expected everyone to understand that dictatorships, of any kind, are more suited for war situations than democracies. World War II is a perfect example of that fact, it's been said countless times that the only way we could defeat the evil Nazi dictatorship was to find an even worst Soviet one.

To face a war, life needs to be cheap. Democracies put a lot of emphasis on life, so they fall short when the time comes to spend peoples lives for a nation.

In the "good 'ole days" of savagery, and monarchy we had no problem where democracy and war weariness were concerned.

We will have a heavy-weight conflict again, and most likely in our life time. It's upsetting to think that people seem to think mankind has changed from the time of Julius Caeser. We love to go to war, sorry but it's true! We've been fighting from the dawn of man 'til now, and every once in a while the whole "civilised" world comes into conflict.

Classical History:

Greece vs. Persia
Romans vs. the known world (Gauls, Carthaginians, Britons etc.)

Dark Ages:

Danes, Swedes, British Isles, France and Germany were constantly smashing each other to pieces. The Huns rampage across Europe. The whole of Asia is ripping itself to pieces.

Middle-Ages:

Well, what can I say? All of Europe and Asia was smashing each other to pieces. Hundred Years War and all that business!

Imperial Ages:

War in the Americas, and Europe still. Mongolians have fun in Asia. The Asians and Middle-Eastern lot are still warring .

Industrial Ages :

Now the whole world has been discovered so its just more places for us all the fight.

Then we got World War I and World War II - and everyone thinks never again! What about Korea, Vietnam, more wars in the Middle-East. The only thing we've got missing - a massive war, it's well overdue going by histories standards.

Man has been fighting from day one, and it will continue fighting 'til its last day. Every now and then it kicks off into a massive war.

"Men grow tired of sleep, love, singing and dancing sooner than war" - Homer

(And no, not The Simpsons Homer, you dipshits)

[mkloby]

Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass

i have to say i agree with Udet, the oppression placed on the Chineese by their government and their relative technology free lifestyles means they'd be better placed to face a war, not to mention the fact they'd still have a phenominal population and any war China is in would rely on China's immence man power..........

China's ability to wage war completely depends upon the nature of the conflict itself... bear in mind China doesn't have much when it comes to power projection capabilities...

[Matt308]

Yet. And it is the asymetric power projections that are most worrisome. Kinda like the Maginot Line and the Germans just running around it.

[mkloby]

Originally Posted by Matt308

Yet. And it is the asymetric power projections that are most worrisome. Kinda like the Maginot Line and the Germans just running around it.

I'm sorry I'm not seeing the parallel...? There's ALWAYS a weapon to defeat anything, unless you're The Almighty.

It will take china a very long time to build up power projection capabilities.

Does anyone know the veracity of this "statistic?" I remember reading/seeing somewhere a little while back something that stated that only about 1% of chinese produced steel is considered quality and is of the grade that would be used by western nations for building/construction. Their production of the alloy is supposed to be extremely poor quality.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

our standards don't matter though, it's obviously good enough for them so they're obviously using it in their military.........

[Matt308]

Sun Tzu has always espoused the asymetric form of fighting. The force multipliers. The western world, and the US in particular, is migrating towards a more and more centralized form of C3I. While we don't have our head in the sand with respect to threat analyses and risk mitigation, I worry that our might is increasingly putting reliance upon infrastructure that is not historically military in nature.

Look what a few guys did to our economy in 2001. Denial of service threats that do not result in ANY casualties (civilian nor military) can be absolutely catastrophic to our nation. And risk mitigation strategies are inordinately expensive to implement. An entity that coordinates their attacks on a national infrastructure, coupled with military agression is liable to inflict some serious hurt.

I hope someone smarter than I am has this all figured out.

[mkloby]

Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass

our standards don't matter though, it's obviously good enough for them so they're obviously using it in their military.........

Is it really though? What happens when a ship is built using sub-grade material? How powerful will armor on a MBT or other AFV be if it is of very poor quality. If they're using substandard steel in building not just military equipment, but infrastructure, it can have serious effects down the future, not just in the aspect that mil equip may be very subpar by western standards...

I was actually asking if anyone else had heard or knows anything regarding chinese steel output. That stat may have been old and may now be outdated. I for sure do not know.

[Matt308]

I don't have any stats, but do know that China is pouring over the world markets for steel and raw ore to make their own. I hadn't heard that it was substandard, but rather that their economy is going such gangbusters that they are dying for more energy sources to power their steel mills (huge energy sinks).

Thus recently you have seen the Chinese in the middle east and central europe (energy) and in Africa (raw materials).

[Grampa]

im only gonna say.
No peace is forewer, no war is for ever, its forewer

[timshatz]

Udet, took me a while to get back to you on your post. Been kicking it around, trying to figure out the details. There is very little good information on what a high tech, info war would be like. A large one hasn't been fought, the only one that has occured is the Gulf War of 2003. In that, there were some interesting operations/trends. I am not an expert in any way, shape or form on this stuff so what I say must be taken with a grain of salt. Doubtless there are others who know more (probably on this board) and they'll weight in.

Blue Force Tracker is a good representative of computer enhancement of the battlefield. This is a computer program/lan/operational system that keeps track of all your assets on a battlefield (Blue), the enemy (Red) and unknown (I think green or grey). It produces a common battlefield picture in real time that all units engaged in the operation can use. Takes inputs from assets (Land, Air, Sea, Sattelite, ect) and feeds them into a screen readout like a video game.

It seems to work pretty well. During the Gulf War it was very helpful in reducing the number of Blue on Blue engagements (also known as friendly fire).

Another operation that is big in informational warfare is getting inside the enemies decision process. This is done by disrupting, denying or falsifying their communications from as many sources as possible. In some cases, it means jamming communications. In others, it means allowing information through, still, in others it means sending false messages or delaying the message a couple of hours so when it gets there it is already well out of date. This seems to have been very effective in the Gulf War. So much so that the Iraqis were down to the level of climbing telephone poles to take a look around and see what was happening.

Also, the method and types of worms/viruses has changed. There are still DOS (denial of service) attacks, aggressive takeovers of computers, zombie attacks, ect. They will always be there as they are more of the shock effect. If you want to shut down an electronic grid or civilian infrastructure, that is the way it will be done. Same with a military grid, although they are typically much harder to break into. But a more recent development in the computer attack scenario involves not so much taking over the computer but introducing a program into the system that degrades the data. Only by a little bit. It is a quiet, in the backround kind of thing that will disrupt the targeting systems for high tech weaponry. A GPS guided bomb that misses the target by 100 yards or so. Very suttle but very effective.

That is some of the little I know or have heard about info war. There is other stuff but it is in dribs and drabs. Definitely quiet stuff. Much like the Blitzkrieg was in the 30s, there have been testing grounds (like Spain was to the Blitzkrieg) but all the associated parts have not come together in one large operation. But is definitely part of the process now.

As for which society would be at greater risk to a info war attack, it is an interesting question that produces more questions than answers. On a country like the US, you have a lot more systems that are run using computers and networks than in most other countries. That makes them more vunerable to attack. But you also have a populace that is more tech savy, and, as a consequence, knows methods (and generally has experience) with responding to the attack. Most of us have been hacked, wormed or had a virus. We know how to respond. Secondly, the support needed to fix those attacks and bugs lies in the US. The defenses are homegrown. That being said (and somebody else alluded to it in a earlier post), the ability to create havoc using an asymetric threat on the information infrastructure is far greater in the US due to our dependence on computer based systems.

On the other hand...the Chinese have a less specialized and less computer based system. These is changing fast but they still have a ways to go. But much like the Wermacht in WW2, not as many Chinese will have experience with computers as you would find in the US. In WW2, almost every American kid had a driver's liscense and knew how to get a car going. Whereas in Germany, the frequency of that type of skill was much lower. I think the same is probably true with China at present.

Long and short, info war will hurt the US faster and cost more, but the recovery will be faster as well. It will do less damage in China but the damage will be longer lasting and more difficult to fix. Again, this is an IMHO call, all things being equal in the attack (which they won't be). But ya' gotta start somewhere.

[Matt308]

Jeez, Tim. You really did put some thought to this.

[timshatz]

Originally Posted by Matt308

Jeez, Tim. You really did put some thought to this.

Yeah man, I gotta get a hobby.

[Matt308]

[HealzDevo]

But the fact is though, that if you are relying on electronic methods of keeping up with what is going on, on the battlefield, then you could find that the enemy jamming you with sophisticated or non-sophisticated GPS jammers as well as signal jamming disruption. Therefore the US and other NATO forces are more susceptible to this type of jamming in theory...

[timshatz]

Yeah, very true. Here's a quote about it that I am sure somebody on this board will spot.

"The more complicated the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the pipes"

Who said it? (may not be an exact quote but it is as close as I can remember it)