Current US Military

User avatar
SuburbanFarmer
Posts: 25283
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Current US Military

Post by SuburbanFarmer » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:43 am

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:41 am
SuburbanFarmer wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:40 am
Speaker to Animals wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:38 am
You don't seem to understand how war is fought right now.
War is not fought right now. There hasn't been a US War since WW2.

We simply run roughshod over third-rate powers at will in "police actions", whenever it suits our special interests. At unbelievable cost to our treasure and resources.
You're an idiot. Please don't vote.
Like I said, it makes no difference what I vote. They'll keep doing it until they can't.
SJWs are a natural consequence of corporatism.

Formerly GrumpyCatFace

https://youtu.be/CYbT8-rSqo0

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Current US Military

Post by Speaker to Animals » Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:59 am

nmoore63 wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:36 am
It depends on how you see the future I guess.

If you want to keep on fighting regional battles against subpowers while maintaining global American hegemony than you need all this stuff.

If you think that's a giant waste of resources, then spending that on domestic infrastructure makes a lot more sense.

But most of that military machines will become absolute instantaneously in an actual great war.

You can do far more for the true military capabilities of the United States by getting more manufacturing domestically, then you ever will on offensive manned aircraft.
Weapon systems very, very rarely become obsolete. You'd be hard-pressed to find an example of that in history. Specific implementations of those systems become obsolete. We went from longbows to rifles, but ranged units were still a thing, for example. Sometimes, we think something is obsolete, such as armor, only to discover we had not thought of how to properly evolve the concept (armored vehicles and tanks). Oftentimes, something that was used very heavily is used less because we invented completely new weapon systems. For instance, we don't use the bladed weapon much any longer, but we still have to train with bayonnettes. We still carry knives on the battlefield. All across Africa the machete is used to great effect.

The idea that aircraft are going to be obsolete is so unbelievably naive and ridiculous that I have trouble even believing you believe this.

nmoore63
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: Current US Military

Post by nmoore63 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:02 pm

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:39 am
I think it would help if both of you had spent time actually fighting, or serving, or doing ANYTHING to these ends in order to understand what the fuck you are talking about. It feels like I am arguing against television shows or whatever you consumed to give you these ridiculous impressions.

If we go to war, and our adversaries gain air dominance over CONUS, you are going to have a really, really bad time.
I am certainly not knock the importance of air superiority.

I am knocking that it is clear we will run through a tech revolution in military equipment the second it is great power versus great power war developes.

That combined with the fact that I consider our regional wars blowing crazies in the desert to be a giant waste of resources.

As such creating the infrastructure to survive domestically while creating and maintaining the capacity to develop, produce and deploy said future equipment is more important than what we need to fuck around in the desert in 2018.

nmoore63
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: Current US Military

Post by nmoore63 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:07 pm

Speaker to Animals wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:59 am
Weapon systems very, very rarely become obsolete. Y
Dude.

Pre-1900 naval vessels were useless in during world war one.
Pre-1930 aircraft were useless during world war two.

I do not count and am not talking about personal arms. I am talking machines.

If there is a great war in 2030, nothing we are building now will be useful in year 2 of the war.

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Current US Military

Post by Speaker to Animals » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:08 pm

nmoore63 wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:02 pm
Speaker to Animals wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:39 am
I think it would help if both of you had spent time actually fighting, or serving, or doing ANYTHING to these ends in order to understand what the fuck you are talking about. It feels like I am arguing against television shows or whatever you consumed to give you these ridiculous impressions.

If we go to war, and our adversaries gain air dominance over CONUS, you are going to have a really, really bad time.
I am certainly not knock the importance of air superiority.

I am knocking that it is clear we will run through a tech revolution in military equipment the second it is great power versus great power war developes.

That combined with the fact that I consider our regional wars blowing crazies in the desert to be a giant waste of resources.

As such creating the infrastructure to survive domestically while creating and maintaining the capacity to develop, produce and deploy said future equipment is more important than what we need to fuck around in the desert in 2018.
If we got into it with a major power, and they achieved air dominance over CONUS, there is not really anything you could have done prior that could possibly ensure we survive domestically. Once that happens, you are at their mercy.

The only reason we lost wars since WW2 is that we are not brutal bastards. We try to occupy or pacify people, and they just go into insurgency mode, which is nearly impossible to defeat while occupying an unwilling nation. Nobody is going to do that to us. They will proceed to exterminate most of us.

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Current US Military

Post by Speaker to Animals » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:09 pm

nmoore63 wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:07 pm
Speaker to Animals wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 11:59 am
Weapon systems very, very rarely become obsolete. Y
Dude.

Pre-1900 naval vessels were useless in during world war one.
Pre-1930 aircraft were useless during world war two.

I do not count and am not talking about personal arms. I am talking machines.

If there is a great war in 2030, nothing we are building now will be useful in year 2 of the war.

You confuse upgrades to a weapon system with the system itself going obsolete. Warships are hardly obsolete. We swapped out sails for engines, and wood for iron. In recent years we mostly swapped out guns for missiles too.

What's your point?

Systems rarely go obsolete. They evolve.

nmoore63
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: Current US Military

Post by nmoore63 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:11 pm

No.

Every world war 1 tank was useless In world war 2

They were scrap.

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Current US Military

Post by Speaker to Animals » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:11 pm

I am trying to think of a weapons platform concept that has gone obsolete, and I honestly cannot think of one other than maybe a siege engine, but even then I am not sure the idea is totally obsolete.

User avatar
Speaker to Animals
Posts: 38685
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm

Re: Current US Military

Post by Speaker to Animals » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:12 pm

nmoore63 wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:11 pm
No.

Every world war 1 tank was useless In world war 2

They were scrap.
The TANK was not useless. You are confusing the system of a tank with a specific tank model.

Do you think cars are obsolete because the Model T sucks??

nmoore63
Posts: 1881
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: Current US Military

Post by nmoore63 » Wed Jun 20, 2018 12:19 pm

I don’t have an issue with the concepts... though it is difficult to imagine year 2 is the war.

But it is clear that the thing already holding back the f-35 is the human occupant.

The only reason they matter is because of effeciency.

But it’s very obvious already that the quantity of future tech will far outstrip the quality of current capabilities.