A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

asymetric warfare



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old December 18th 03, 08:30 AM
Pete
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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


Ads
  #12  
Old December 18th 03, 08:32 AM
pervect
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old December 18th 03, 08:49 AM
Keith Willshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"raymond o'hara" wrote in message
news:[email protected]_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  
Old December 18th 03, 09:04 AM
pervect
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 03:22:52 +0000, ess (phil
hunt) 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 one strategy would be to use large numbers of low cost
cruise missiles (LCCM). The elements of a cruise missile are all
very simple, mature technology, except for the guidance system.
Modern computers are small and cheap, so guidance systems can be
made cheaply.


How are you getting your position information?

The cheap solution is to use GPS. But IIRC the US has complete
control over the GPS satellite system. So if you are at war with the
US, you can't count on your GPS working right.

I don't know the details of the system (one reason I'm free to post) -
but the absolute best case I can see is for you to force the US to
basically shut off the GPS system everywhere. Depending on your
weapons range, you may be able to force GPS nullification only in a
limited area (the US can probably scramble the timing when the
satellites are over the area threatened by your weapons, while leaving
the timing intact when the satellites are over "safe" areas.

Denying the US use of GPS would have a negative impact on US military
capability, but it would not eliminate it.

From a terrorist POV - naw, it's pretty obvious, but I'll defer
comment, no sense in making life easy for them.
  #15  
Old December 18th 03, 09:21 AM
Kevin Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"pervect" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 03:22:52 +0000, ess (phil
hunt) 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 one strategy would be to use large numbers of low cost
cruise missiles (LCCM). The elements of a cruise missile are all
very simple, mature technology, except for the guidance system.
Modern computers are small and cheap, so guidance systems can be
made cheaply.


How are you getting your position information?

The cheap solution is to use GPS. But IIRC the US has complete
control over the GPS satellite system. So if you are at war with the
US, you can't count on your GPS working right.

I don't know the details of the system (one reason I'm free to post) -
but the absolute best case I can see is for you to force the US to
basically shut off the GPS system everywhere. Depending on your
weapons range, you may be able to force GPS nullification only in a
limited area (the US can probably scramble the timing when the
satellites are over the area threatened by your weapons, while leaving
the timing intact when the satellites are over "safe" areas.


That is a decent description of the selective availability (SA) function of
GPS. SA renders the average (non-US military) receiver incapable of
determining a precise fix, and you need precision for the kind of weapons
the poster was postulating. SA was shut down a couple of years back so that
civil users (i.e., surveyors, commercial aircraft, etc.) could take
advantage of its precision (prior to that occuring surveyors had to use what
is known as "differential GPS", a more time consuming method of achieving a
precise location), but according to the official USG website on the subject
it can be reinstituted over a particular region at will.


Denying the US use of GPS would have a negative impact on US military
capability, but it would not eliminate it.


Actually, I don't think SA adversely affects US military systems.

Brooks


From a terrorist POV - naw, it's pretty obvious, but I'll defer
comment, no sense in making life easy for them.



  #16  
Old December 18th 03, 10:14 AM
Mike Williams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old December 18th 03, 11:23 AM
Bernardz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
says...
LCCMs could be designed to attack enemy vehicles, both armoured, and
supply columns. The missile could use dead-reckoning to move itself
approximately where the enemy vehicles are, then use visual sensors
to detect vehicles (moving ones would probably be easier to detect).
This would require digital cameras and computers in the guidance
system, both of which are cheap. Programming appropriate image
recognition software is non-trivial, but has been done, and the cost
could be spread over large production runs. As the LCCM sees a
vehicle and chooses a target, it could dive towards it, and
simultaneously broadcast its position and a photo of the target
(useful intel for the missile controllers).


Without getting much into the technical end of this discussion (which other
posts have already done), it is safe to say that pretty much any cruise
missile system built 'on the cheap' (especially by second and third-world
standards) would be so obsolete at the time of its deployment that existing
and near-future US countermeasure systems will easily detect and deter their
success. Do you think that you are the only one who thought of this? The DoD
is very much aware of the cruise missile threat.


Say I built heaps of multiple-rocket launchers built an improved WW2, V1
jet to hit a city say at 200 miles and then targeted them at an US ally
cities.

Aiming would be pretty trivial, most modern cities are pretty big anyway
and so what if a a lot miss? Its not like they cost me much anyway each
missile.

My missiles shot down are a lot cheaper then the anti missiles the US
uses anyway.

The make sure that this US ally is aware of your capability. That might
keep the US out of the conflict.


This strategy seems to work for the North Koreans.


--
Wealth must be produced before it can be distributed.

20th saying of Bernard
  #18  
Old December 18th 03, 11:56 AM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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  
Old December 18th 03, 12:00 PM
Simon Morden
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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  
Old December 18th 03, 01:08 PM
tscottme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Australia F111 to be scrapped!! John Cook Military Aviation 35 November 11th 03 12:46 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.