How is warfare in highly urbanized mega cities like Shenzen, Kinshasa, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Bombay...

If you have any sort of intention of seizing the city intact or having some semblance of good public image, just straight up leveling city blocks that show signs of resistance isn''t particularly desirable, even if it is effective.

And this is even beginning to go into the possibility of defenders just using the resulting rubble as cover, depending on how motivated they are.

>Why storm Stalingrad when we can just level it?
>"Levels Stalingrad"
>Fug they're just defending the rubble even better than before

Attached: 1504002624928.jpg (1251x967, 388K)

What about cities near ports? If you want to keep control of the port you'd need to clear the nearby city, no?

It would make Grozny look like tea with nanny in the park, which is why it would be really unlikely. I mean, who has the resources and willingness to sustain a long operation in a vast urban center? Maybe it would just end up like Aleppo or Homs, with ground-down opponents limply blowing whats left into smaller pieces.

If going by US doctrine post/during-Korea, pic related.
If not, then Stalingrad on steroids, with the civilian populace faring worse than the soldiers in every regard.

Attached: Operation_Upshot-Knothole_-_Badger_001.jpg (1140x969, 85K)

Attached: 20-000-30-000-civilians-were-eaten-decisive-tang-strategic-victory-https-en-wikipedia-org-wiki-battl (500x429, 97K)

Almost every instance of urban fighting, including most of the ones mentioned in this thread but Sarajevo jumps out at me, has been absolutely abysmal to be a part of, whether you're a civilian or a combatant. Crank all those up to 11 and you'd have something I wouldn't want to be within 1000 miles of

How would better of an idea would be just going around it, encircling it and perhaps just throwing some bombs on it?

Its impossible, you can only TRY to siege mega cities, but in no way you can conquer then, no one has enough troops or means to do so

>Like Stalingrad, probably
I was thinking more like Leningrad. Siege instead of assault, starvation and cannibalism

>What about cities near ports? If you want to keep control of the port you'd need to clear the nearby city, no?
Take the port, expand a security cordon around it. The civilians are not a real threat even if they are armed, and actual military counterattacking the port from the city can be blamed for any collateral destruction that happens.

edgelords never learn
> bomb them like hell
> 30mm autocannon the entire damned city
> brrrrrrtttt so hard you light the atmostphere on fire
oh boy now we're ready
> rubble blocks the streets - we can't use armor for the rest of the war
> every pockmark on every wall becomes a loophole for snipers to fuck your shit up
> now the entire world is pissed at you and you can't get supplies

The enemy will still be dug in in so they're going to be an headache you need to deal with even after the massive death toll and most civilians got killed or left.

If nobody has any moral qualms, firebombing. Lots of it to just get people the fuck out. Then it is significantly easier but not by much.

Under every manhole cover is an IED.
On every balcony is some asshole with an RPG or rifle.
In every dark alleyway is recoilless rifle.
Within every pile of rubble are an infantry squad plotting their next ambush.

This is basically what the Russians did in Chechnya II
Actually worked surprisingly well for them

Chechen resistance numbered in the thousands though. I think a megacity would be much, much more difficult, to damn near impossible to fully level without the use of nukes.

Take a look at Detroit.

Explosive drone swarms that see through walls with wifi and unified neural network. One drone explodes by a window or door so the rest fly into the building to map it out as point cloud data for infantry. Also slot of shooting through walls.

Attached: star-of-david-shirt.jpg (670x760, 55K)

my realistic loadout for this situation.

Attached: Loadout Final.jpg (890x1682, 191K)

If you dont have to worry about what the international community thinks then gas is probably the best way, right?
You can just pump that shit in there and wait for the enemy to choose between coming out or dying.

I know everyone hates chemical weapons, but they seem like the only way to practically clear out a city of that size without rendering it permanently uninhabitable. You'd needed dozens, if not close to a hundred nukes to level a place the size of NYC to the point of no resistance, and then suddenly, you no longer have a reason to occupy/capture it.

It would almost be easier to look at one of those big cities and bribe the local criminals to tear it apart from the inside, and focus on taking out law enforcement so the city is in a state of anarchy that bears down on the defending army by forcing them to play both police and soldier.

Just kill the electricity......no a/c in windowless buildings, no elevators in hi-rises, no water or means of pumping sewage, and no means of preserving food......

Problem solved

So a siege

This guy gets it. Better yet, arming and training them while you’re at it.

>Hundreds of nukes
What the fuck. Are you trying to unearth the mantle?

>Camillus carnivore
Opinion discarded

>carnivore
You need to go back

Seeing as all of those cities are full of niggers, how much willy pete and thermobaric munitions do we have?

Cordone the city, cut the water and power, give it a month, drag out any fiesty skeletals remaining.

it will never because of governments around the world with hundreds of people whos job is to make sure that doesnt happen

What's the scenario? Is it ISIS in Manila? American operatives in Shenzen?

Somthing like this for starters where we get the cops/.mil fucking shit up like walking into a dungeon and getting mobbed.

Attached: Hong Kong Protests 715 Sha Tin cage match surrounded police.jpg (1320x770, 248K)

Unless you literally go full medieval starving out a castle on it.
Cutting any infrastructe leading in and out of it, preventing amy aid and wait about 6 months.
By then most people will have died and the few survivors will all have resorted to murdering anyone outside their specific group and jave probably eaten another human by then.
Also almost all their ammo will be spend by then.

6pBp. Nursing homes will be the worst hit.

Similar to the Favelas
>brutal as all hell

It depends heavily on who is fighting. IF the US or NATO countries are fighting, 20-25% of the city will be leveled, the rest intact. If anyone else is fighting, it will almost completely be leveled, even if there are only a few thousand insurgents. See the battles of Marawi, Mosul, Aleppo, etc. vs Fallujah, Raqqa, for images of the destruction. Deaths will probably be rather limited as the sheer size of the cities makes it relatively easy for civies to find ways to escape the fighting. (its real hard to completely close off a 400 ish km of front in an urban environment, unless you devote a stupid huge number of soldiers to the fight.) To be honest, it would be quite interesting if a few thousand ughurs "found" heavy weapons and occupied a major city. There would be no way for the PRC to hide the complete loss of a city that size.

Why not level the city and then circumvent it?

We did the same thing in Korea.
Soldiers didn't fucking enter buildings
they tore them down with quad 50's

bump

bumpingo

Even better, assume positions of power in the city's politics or major industries and essentially have the city bend to your will.

saturation bombing

>those chinese cities
they will never have wars. too racially homogeneous and no outside enemies. plus the gov control is strong.
chinks aren't stupid like the US that's practicing population replacement.

bump

What an absolutely massive faggot. You should go to New Zealand and get locked up so you can suck Tarrant's dick IRL, too.

Yeah- it's called nuclear fucking weapons but then it wouldn't be a ginormous shitshow. The reason why motehrfukers fight over cities is b/c these cities are regarded as valuable whether onto themselves or the resources they have access to..

With such a high structure density I bet gas attacks could do wonders in a place like that.

Either level it entirely or take better targets. I would rather take my own eyes out with a teaspoon than fight through hundreds of collapsed city blocks filled with glass, steel, concrete and thousands of pissed off bugmen lurking in every shadow with a thousand invisible vantage points. Syrian veterans would take one look at think back on Aleppo like it was a beautiful Sunday morning walking through the park with their sweetheart.

The sheer size of the city and its population would swallow up all but the largest of military formations. Several thousand soldiers means nothing in a city of millions if you attempt to run things like we have in the past. Likely formations will break down into smaller, independent units that are highly networked and backed up by a C2 and ISR constellation that is monitoring local news and social media as well as usual sources. Terror attacks can shut down a city for a day, no telling what will happen when we have multiple skirmishes daily - people will be scared at first, some will leave, but ultimately they will have to continue in a semi-normal fashion if only for the sake of survival. Interference with the cities in and outflows will have major repercussions. Sewage, water, electricity, telecommunications, and transportation are all needed and any damage caused will have cascading effects.
For actual tactics, the key will be to operate in a way that isn't going against the "flow" of the city. For instance, trying to drive tanks down a major street will be met with delays from traffic in the way, angry civillians, and damage to the infrastructure that will disrupt traffic in the future, causing more backup and damaging logistical networks needed to supply both the army and the city itself. Snipers work well, using light armored vehicles to transport infantry safe from snipers but still mobile enough to maneuver in a city. IEDs would have to be small and remotely operated rather than self detonating, RPGs or other infantry anti-tank weapons are preferable. Drones, particularly small drones will help to provide SA for guys on the ground. Intel will need to be pushing out reports at the lowest possible level as that is where the war will be fought. EA will play a big role, but any interference with civillian communications will have major backlash, again - you have to go with the flow of the city otherwise you're fighting both it and the enemy.Also gangs

go back to plebbit, niggerfaggot

Depends on the level of resistence the invader meets, give a gun to every 100th civilian in any of those cities and it will swallow and spit out any military invading. Historically city fighting favors the defender 10 to 1. There's a good reason militaries used to bypass large cities, going for fortresses outside of it instead but no one uses fortresses any more.

Baghdad was a shit show for 10 years, yet that state had little loyalty from its population, the places you posted are insanely nationalistic.

If you're smart it wouldnt look like anything. You would either capture and defend key points you need or simply bypass cities or starve them out

Seething plebbit nigger

What gas or chemical weapon would they use nowadays? Phosgene? Mustard gas? Or rather nerve agent like sarin or VX? I cant see them using nerve agent since its a liquid rather than a gas i think...

You do know that most wars in China were between Chinese generals killing each other?

>rugged kali laptop
>not $20 thinkpad with arch

bump

Once the normal supply lines are cut it will get very ugly very fast and there will be a terrible die of everyone.

You forgot rabbit's foot or lucky religious icon cuz you will need it.

Neutron bombs

If you add up the thousands of years of Chinese history they have only been united for like 300 years, and half of that was under threat of death by the fucking mongol conquerers. The Chinese have spent literally thousands of years killing each other.

Like this

Attached: Dresden.jpg (510x375, 147K)

Or this

Attached: original_icp_hiroshima_02_c-jpg.jpg (1920x1160, 591K)

there will never be another Chinese civil war. History is not a good example because China was mostly isolated and they were the rules of the region. Now, external enemies are plenty so you can quit circlejerking about any internal wars. They're way too united for that to happen.

Yeah, as opposed to today where the poor interior is isolated from the wealthy coast, which in turn is economically split between the north coast and south coast. You cannot beat history, it will happen again eventually. Cope and seethe.

economic civil wars will never happen under communist rule.
you know what's more likely? wars to retake areas that were invaded and conquered by outsiders.

>He doesn't know about the brother wars