How insane would a government have to be to use conventional warfare against another 1st world country in the 21st...

How insane would a government have to be to use conventional warfare against another 1st world country in the 21st century? There's literally nowhere troops could hide with all the satellites and technology on the ground. Are the days of old war gone?

Attached: FB7D5514-DB92-4A67-B07D-728ADC6F43CE.jpg (384x288, 33K)

Other urls found in this thread:

breakingdefense.com/2018/12/army-multi-domain-update-new-hqs-grey-zones-the-art-of-the-unfeasible/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Depends. Anybody vs US? Dumb. First world power vs first world power? Doable, every asset has a counter and its a lot harder to protect your logistics when you dont have the Atlantic ocean blocking any attempts to attack.

>How insane would a government have to be to use conventional warfare against another 1st world country in the 21st century?
As opposed to what?

Thats why nobody risks it because the first thing to go will be all the sats in orbit and high burst nukes to emp both countries. Technology is too advanced for warfare.

Peace

>Thats why nobody risks it because the first thing to go will be all the sats in orbit and high burst nukes to emp both countries
No.
And what if the peaceful option was unacceptable?

Define unacceptable.

Unacceptable to your national interests as a nation (for either the Challenger or Defender). This could involve territorial, ethnic or status quo, etc.

Well so far it's all been by proxy. I'm not sure what would constitute as unacceptable enough to escalate from that.

The next big war will basically be a satellite turkey shoot, just about all major powers have the capability to attack satellites, and will. Kessler Syndrome will inevitably follow. Heavily armored Orion-style pusher plate nuke boats will unironically be the way to get things into space.

Right, but that's because nobody so far has created an [modern] unacceptable situation that would lead to the cost vs benefit analysis dictating that escalation beyond proxying or skirmishing is preferable to not escalating.

If they have oil then it is not unreasonable or not insane to use unforseen use of force to use nukes i mean we used it on Japan because one of the Chinese Nanking survivors told us they had oil in their nation and well we didn't find any oil but we did end the war fast though.

>disable/destroy satellites in space
>disable/destroy control centers operating said satellites
>???
>profit
Relatively far fetched but certainly well within the realm of possibilities. The issue is that there really isn’t any reason for a major power nowadays to try and start any sort of conventional conflict. The US has geographic isolation between two giant oceans to rely on on top of a fuckhuge navy, Russia was never really an aggressive sea power and couldn’t hope to afford so, and China is likely on the verge of a massive natural/ecological disaster that’ll result in a regime change and a minimum of 100 million deaths as has happened at least 10 times throughout its history. Basically the cost for all sides far outweighs any potential benefits.

>How insane

Attached: 1556437806811.gif (858x570, 2.39M)

>Disperse troops and especially logistics so they are not killed by long range missile technology and artillery attacks.

>Use complex networks, drones, satellites etc. to spot and target the enemy long range assets.

What OP is thinking about is what the US military has been thinking about for 5-10 years. A war against Russia or China is not an impossible outcome anymore and since they've developed all kinds of long range tech (mostly missiles), US needs to catch up fast and be even better. This means lots of funding for similar long range technology and this has been in the budget for several years already.

Nothing can save Russia or China. There's nothing they can do to save themselves, they just don't have what it takes.

breakingdefense.com/2018/12/army-multi-domain-update-new-hqs-grey-zones-the-art-of-the-unfeasible/

Attached: Time for war.jpg (477x720, 65K)

What is multi domain warfare.

>Nothing can save Russia or China.
Nukes.

No shit genius, that's literally the premise of the thread. What sort of absolute retard would send a first world nation to war when the actual combat they would see would be beyond ravaging?

It'll stay proxies and peace until we either lose a fuck ton of technology or a fuck ton of people.

The ass blaster supreme is not the only nuclear rocket model

satellites arent real and the earth is flat you lobotomized parrot

I wouldn't call getting the majority of your nukes shot down while also getting hammered by American nukes "saved".

>Nothing can save Russia or China
>have electronic warfare
>have effective new fighting doctrine of battalion tactical groups
>have sophisticated air defense
>have a shit ton of hardware
>never gonna make it.jpg
What?

Attached: D2EA120F-3A87-48BB-9893-428E546D45F1.png (1024x886, 952K)

>No shit genius, that's literally the premise of the thread.
I am well aware of that. I was explaining why it is not "insane" for states to fight each other - but a rational process. Driven by a cost vs benefit analysis.

>What sort of absolute retard would send a first world nation to war when the actual combat they would see would be beyond ravaging?
I don't know, but I certainly did not propose this - however, it is still perfectly possible for a nation to engage in a conflict that it does not have parity with its opponent.

>It'll stay proxies and peace until we either lose a fuck ton of technology or a fuck ton of people.
Exactly as I said then. Through intentional or unintentional choices, creating an unacceptable situation where the alternative to fight is better than conceding.

Not even nukes.

With modern civil defense, there's enough people left to execute each and every russian this planet holds.

Chinese people would just eat each other anyway.

Nope, they won't make it even with those.

The required changes to doctrine and equipment are minor and there's very little Russia could do to counter this.

It's the only one for me.

The new vague but trendy buzzword

What are battalion tactical groups?

>The next big war will basically be a satellite turkey shoot, just about all major powers have the capability to attack satellites, and will.
Bingo. Even if a country has no capability to completely disable a satellite they would certainly be immediately be capable of destroying any ability to collect and transmit useful information.
Kessler Syndrome will inevitably follow.
Nice meme but it's a spooky story NASA and basedboys repeat because they can't handle the idea of space war being bland, remote and effective.

China has an entire sub branch to assist it's cryptologists.

Aren't there satellite blinding lasers?

>Kessler Syndrome will inevitably follow
Wouldn't the opposite happen if everyone had access to missiles that could clear debris?

A pebble flying around the planet at around 30,000mph hitting a spacecraft traveling at 20,000-30,000mph in the opposite direction would be a catastrophe. We would need a shit ton of lasers to ablate away all the shit being flung about in orbit to make it relatively safe again. Blowing more shit up with missiles is only compounding the issue.

I recall some AF memo saying that 50 kW was sufficient for debris clearance, which is well within reach for current-gen energy weapons

In space though? Where is the power gonna come from? How will you manage waste heat? Shits difficult.

you're vastly overestimating modern tech

I mean, we’re about due for another global conflict so I’d bet on it happening in the next 80 years.

>In space though?
From land, if I recall correctly.

They should send a giant blob of ballistic gel in the sky to absorb the fragments!

The concept of satellite swarms in being developed because of this.

They can't destroy them all and replacing them is cheap and easy.

Whatever happens to everything else in the orbit remains a mystery, the debris isn't going to clear itself any time soon...

China and the US are literally weaponizing orbit as we speak. The fuck do you mean "No". Taking out enemy sat network would basically win you a war from the start.

Attached: 1512804459217.jpg (204x247, 8K)

Wait, what? Japan relied on the US for oil imports. The US cutting off oil trade was a major reason they invaded the other SE asian countries, for their oil. Where are you getting this idea of the US trying to annex japan for oil?

High burst EMPs are not a thing.

As opposed to unconventional warfare.

Both sides have the capability to take out the other sides satellites.

So both sides are also preparing for fighting in a battlefield where they don't have satellite coverage.

The USN is bringing back traditional navigation training (celestial navigation and that sort of thing) and China is building PGMs that work with GPS, GLONASS, and the BeiDou system, so that as long as one of those is still functioning, they can work.

Preparation for the worst case scenario does not mean they are willing to make it a reality.

>another Jow Forums confuses what he saw in the movies for real world capabilties
I hate these threads

>mouthbreather who doesn't know jack shit about anything enters and shits on the floor
I hate reruns