If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"phil hunt" wrote in message . .. What would be sensible strategies/weapons for a middle-ranking country to employ if it thought it is likely to be involved in a war against the USA or other Western countries, say in the next 10 years? Instead of trying to build *up* to defeat a western/Nato/US opponent, the only possible solution would be to build *down*, and grow self aware, mobile, small scale explosives. A 20 year old with a backpack full of C-4, as is done now. Pete |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 03:54:46 GMT, "Bryan J. Maloney"
wrote: (phil hunt) nattered on .org: What would be sensible strategies/weapons for a middle-ranking country to employ if it thought it is likely to be involved in a war against the USA or other Western countries, say in the next 10 years? Orbital laser satellites, preferably mind-control lasers. If not that, then frickin' sharks with frickin' laser beams in their heads. Well, if we're being silly - How about a modern version of "The Mouse that Roared"? Send an elite troop of longbowmen to capture the negatively charged stranglet that was just created at fermilab. Then hold the world for ransom for whatever it is you want - universal disarmament, foreign aid, etc. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"raymond o'hara" wrote in message news:KM9Eb.580420$Tr4.1558044@attbi_s03... cheap dirty nukes . if you got 'em use 'em At which point your entire country becomes a glowing plain of radioactive glass. Great strategy there but dont give up the day job. Keith |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Wasn't it phil hunt who wrote:
What would be sensible strategies/weapons for a middle-ranking country to employ if it thought it is likely to be involved in a war against the USA or other Western countries, say in the next 10 years? I think that any middle-ranking country that went up against USA/The West using military weapons would get seriously stomped on. The only way to have a chance would be to win the propaganda war, turning popular opinion in the USA against contesting the war. Infiltrate your supporters into the US media many years before war is likely. Be aware that the peril of one individual that the US media can identify with is worth an awful lot more in propaganda terms than the death of anonymous thousands. Design any military actions with their propaganda value as the primary consideration, ignoring conventional military value almost completely. Employ well-equipped media crews on the ground who understand the US media, and have them rapidly release their (edited) footage to the guys you've got planted in the US. "The only way to understand the battle is to understand the language. War is as much concept as execution." Provoke your opponents into making the first media-visible aggressive step, and make yourself appear to be implementing passive resistance, or using a minimal defensive response. Meanwhile, if you can find any targets that are not media-visible (i.e. the US government can't publicly admit that the targets exist) then attack them aggressively. -- Mike Williams Gentleman of Leisure |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
What would be sensible strategies/weapons for a middle-ranking country to employ if it thought it is likely to be involved in a war against the USA or other Western countries, say in the next 10 years? Well, it could slip a few million dollars to a charismatic religious leader to carry out terrorist attacks on New York City. It could also develop weapons of mass destruciton, or pretend to be doing so. And it could buy billions of dollars of weaponry and associated materials from France, Germany, and Russia, so as to keep those countries in its pocket. all the best -- Dan Ford email: see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Pete wrote:
Instead of trying to build *up* to defeat a western/Nato/US opponent, the only possible solution would be to build *down*, and grow self aware, mobile, small scale explosives. A 20 year old with a backpack full of C-4, as is done now. Pete Which is what I would suggest. No country could currently defeat the USA in a stand-up fight. So disperse your army globally and take out US-interest soft targets: embassies, companies, tourists, registered shipping, anything that flies a US flag. The losses would be sickening, and it makes me nauseous to think about the scenario. Especially if army elements managed to get on US soil. Simon Morden -- __________________________________________________ ______ Visit the Book of Morden at http://www.bookofmorden.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk *Thy Kingdom Come - a brief history of Armageddon* out now from Lone Wolf |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
phil hunt wrote in message
. .. Crewed by Alien Space Bats, presumably? European or African alien space bats? -- Scott -------- Monitor the latest efforts of "peaceful Muslims" at http://www.jihadwatch.org/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Australia F111 to be scrapped!! | John Cook | Military Aviation | 35 | November 10th 03 11:46 PM |