freerepublic.com/focus/news/682491/posts
I am not American (i am African), however it is clear that in the battlefield of the future the US will have to rely on hi-tech weapon variants that are also easy to deploy and have high levels of lethality. This is because a lot of the so-called 'third-world' nations are undergoing leaps when it comes to military tech, and although the US can still whoop all of their collective asses there have been some recent trends that are quite simply frightening for the US. This means that instead of trying to match the US, what they do is get a small arsenal that is meant to tackle US assets. For example russian sun-burn missiles that were invented solely for the purpose of destroying American aircraft carriers (i wonder what would happen if the US had to defend Taiwan from China since China has a good number of these). Or maybe to combat the stealth fighters they have the chezch radar system that can paint (and has been proven to) track the F-117, or the Australian system that can acquire the B-2 spirit. The purpose of this is to negate certain US strengths in such a way that there are many casualties on the American side, and these is meant not to stop the war, but to make the US citizens back home so sick of seeing their kids caming home in body bags that they force congress to stop the war. It is a great weapons system, but it is 10 years too late. With threats other than the soviet block rising there has to be a paradigm shift from what the US used to do. And if you think of it those who are championing the Crusader come from states like Oklahoma that will earn great revenue if it is approved. Now my question is whether giving the US a great military that is not obsolete is the goal, or just to ensure a state gets income from building an outdated system. They should put there state interests aside for the sake of national security. Now i knwo there are some who are asking why i have all of these to say (after all i am not American)? Well, i do have a stake in all this due to several reasons. One for instance is that that stupid Osama idiot bombed one of our buldings in 1998 (the embassy building in Kenya) and killed over 200 kenyans (he got 9 americans in the process). Another reason is like it or not the US stands to be the only barrier to stop kooks who want to mimic hitler from rising up from the dregs of humanity. Third reason is that as a non-american i know things that most americans don't have access to, and honestly only the US stands to protect the world from itself. And although i may sound like a sycophant it is just the plain truth. And people who advocate the crusader as a viable system in the modern era need to wake up and smell the coffee, or else if a war breaks out in the future and the crusader is sent some lessons in military manoeuvrability may be learnt that might be quite dear in terms of numbers lost. Just as the trebuchet is obsolete, so is the the crusader. And i wish someone in congress who is not just trying to get funding for his/her state could read this post! They were supposed to be in commission a couple years ago. This piece is about six years old and hopelessly out of date. It is cool looking but would be taken out in the first minutes of a confrontation with a serious foe. I don't think there's a counterbattery radar made that will survive an hour of operation while facing a US division or corps. Their new subs can simultaneously engage airplanes, boats and subs, something ours can't do yet apparently. The Topol-M can fly polar orbits and come nuke Chicago via flying over the South Pole. It really is a versatile missile that can come from several directions at the same time, effectively evading or distracting radar targeting. As for the third world, it is an incredibly powerful platform to ruin America economicaly in pre-emptive manner to a Russian attack. Those who deny the jurisdiction of the third world and Russia over a potential destruction of the US better think again. These armies are solely built against the US, not against European colonization or Russia. You might be interested in reading a post yesterday entitled "Metal Storm may replace Crusader" Just search on "Metal Storm" and you'll find it. For a real treat, go to their website and view the streaming video presentation. Absolutely fantastic - and sounds like they have a pretty good connection with DOD and Rummy's thinkers. A T-72 is not the frontline russian tank (the T-95 is and even American experts agree it is better than the M1-abrams). The Mig-29's that were shot down by f-16s were flown by inept Iraqi pilots, they also lacked complex combat suites, and furthermore were denied reliable information networks due to the good ol' american wildweasles and their radar busting missiles. However, i was not refering to old russian antiques flown by the iraqis. I was refering to ultra-modern russian fighters like the Su 37 (not to be confused with the russian stealth fighter S-37 Berkrut, which is even better), and to the latest military hardware and software. What will happen if China attacks Taiwan and the US is forced to enter into the fray due to treaties? And if you think that the russian stuff is a pile of junk then why is the russian Havoc/alligator attack copter rated the best in the world, why is the T-95 main battle tank also given top honors, why did the sukhoi 33 'beat' american f-15s in a demonstration dog fight, and why do some russian subs have the capability to attack planes subs and ships simultaneously. And then there is the nuclear attack force with hardware like the Topol-M that was designed to be manouevrable, and to beat american ballistic defense systems. Thank God up to now the US has faced 3rd world nations with antiques for weapons, but what happens if some crazy loony in china decides he wants to vacation in Taiwan, or Pakistan and India get into a fray? It is nice to be patriotic and stuff, however one has to be realistic at the same time. They even sell their squall torpedoes, their SS-400 anti-missile/AWACS batteries (better than PAC-3 Patriots) and other high tech goodies to third world nations. Their subs are not R&D either, nor is their latest S-500 batteries. Russia has maintenance "problems", however they symetricaly favor the maintenance of systems specificaly designed for strategic destruction of the US while the rest they can afford to keep down in maintenance. Indeed Russia has about 10 to 20 times more officers per foot soldier than normal. Since it only takes 2 weeks to train a foot soldier for a war and a couple years for a colonel, they could care less about preparing and maintaining foot soldiers, just as long as they have the right number of officers who get training in Chechnya. We on the other hand are not preparing for the same kind of surprise confrontation as we are spending on foot soldiers much more. In terms of number of officers our army is much much more inferior than Russia's and maintained in much worse ways. The only superior officers we could dig to match Russia's level of maintanance would be managers from ENRON - try that one out. NCOs truly run the show, and their subordinates are right behind them in the learning curve. I've had both good and bad officers, with the majority having a combat life expectancy of a few firefights, and the good ones we would protect with all we had. The Russian military is no different than its' Soviet past - the conscripts don't even know where they are when they are deployed, and they don't have access to maps. By taking out the command vehicles in a Russian unit, you've taken out the unit. Take out the command vehicles in an American unit, and the others come after you immediately. What most Americans don't understand if they haven't served in a combat arms unit is that the US military isn't the strongest only because of our weapons - it is mainly due to our tactics and the integration of systems in the Combined Arms doctrine. No other military force can share vital information between various units and branches on the battlefield like we do. We've learned how to take the blitzkrieg to a whole new level, with redundancy built into the system to count...
|
http://csua.com/feed/