Do we lack the numbers to win a war if our technology is taken away from us?

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by wgabrie, May 11, 2021.

  1. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    One thing I have come across online is the idea that the United States of America has the best battlefield technology of any nation on Earth, but, it is said that the US lacks numbers, and our adversaries plan to take out our tech and then use their high number of troops to overwhelm us. Do we lack the numbers to win a war if our technology is taken away from us?
     
  2. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And how exactly are you going to "take our tech" away?

    Even more important, how are they going to get those troops to the US to do such a thing?

    The entire capabilities of China might drop an entire division of Infantry in Los Angeles. Then what? Russia is in the same boat, as is pretty much every other country in the world. They all (outside of Canada and Mexico) lack the logistical ability to be more than a pimple on the bottom of the US by an invasion.
     
  3. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The thing about high technology is that it's expensive and there will be fewer units active than enemy units.

    We are too busy being perfectionists and our adversaries can swarm us. How? Well, we have interests all over the world, not just mainland America. And, we have the same problem, how are we going to get our high-tech units over there across the oceans?
     
  4. Tejas

    Tejas Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2021
    Messages:
    3,436
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    Trophy Points:
    113
    .

    WHO would we fight... most of our enemies are domestic !!

    .
     
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2021
  5. Tejas

    Tejas Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2021
    Messages:
    3,436
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Ransomware hackers ?

    .
     
  6. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Ever read "Red Storm Rising"? Look at the Gulf War?

    In the modern battlefield, numbers matter much less than numbers matched with technology, logistics, and tactics.

    In the military, we call such things "force multipliers". And that is exactly what they are. Our technology lets us field a smaller military, because it is flexible and able to respond quickly and effectively if needed. To a wide range of threats. A single Battalion of M1 tanks can defeat a Tank Regiment of lesser tanks. Look no farther than the Battle of 73 Easting to see that in action. In the largest tank battle since WWII, 200 US and coalition tanks went up against a force of over twice as many Iraqi tanks.

    The end result, an almost total wipe. 2/3 of the Iraqi forces (over 1,300) killed, over half of their equipment destroyed. Most of the rest abandoned in place.

    US losses? 6 killed, a single M3 Bradley Infantry Fighting vehicle lost. We destroyed almost the entire force sent against us, with a single vehicle lost and 6 men.

    You like so many are seeing only dollar signs. Me, I see the lives saved, and I would much rather spend money than lives.

    And we have the same problem? Oh wow, you really have no idea, do you?

    We can literally fly entire divisions overseas within days. And depending on where in the world it is, we can have a division on the ground within hours. We have 35 Amphibious Warfare ships, with the capability of carrying from a Battalion to a Regiment of Marines on board. About half of them at sea at any time. Plus all of our other amphibious ships, some of which can supply all of the equipment needed for an entire Division, they just meet the personnel at the dock (who are flown over) and within hours are ready to go.

    How do you think we built up so fast in 1990?

    The US so outweighs any potential adversaries that none even come close. Just the California Air National Guard alone has more airlift capability than the entire Chinese or Russian Air Force. Of course, we also use it for a great many other things. There is a reason why the US is often the "Global First Responder" of a disaster almost anywhere in the world. Tsunami in Indonesia, Earthquake in Mexico, hurricane in Florida. It is for things like this that we keep such a capability. Whenever you hear about "US supplies" arriving in a disaster area, most of the time if it is from the Government or even the Red Cross, they are flown there by the US Air Force. Or brought there by the US Navy.
     
    Sarxas and Dayton3 like this.
  7. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,180
    Likes Received:
    62,818
    Trophy Points:
    113
    the American high carb, heavily processed corporate diet has created a less plentiful pull of recruitments
     
  8. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Right.

    You are aware that almost none of our equipment is actually on "The Internet", right? And hell, almost none of our equipment even uses "computers" that most would even recognize.

    That in the PATRIOT and THAAD missile system, for example. It quite literally is a 1990's facelift on 1970's technology. There is no way for hackers to even get inside of it in the first place. And most of it is still old-school hard wired. Heck, the PATRIOT is still updated clean each time, with JAZ disks. This is literally mid-1990's technology, and it does not connect to anything but other similar systems. The vast majority of US military technology is the same way.
     
  9. Tejas

    Tejas Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2021
    Messages:
    3,436
    Likes Received:
    1,242
    Trophy Points:
    113
    .

    I was referring to asymmetric warfare.

    Hordes of illegal aliens and radical cultural marxism that destroys the racial, religious, moral, social, cultural foundation of a nation is also asymmetric warfare.

    In other words, a covert war is happening. Unless there is an awakening, the result will be defeat without a fight.

    .
     
  10. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Welp, turns out that 75% of our automotive computer chips come from Taiwan. I hope to God that the computer chips for our military aren't similarly sourced.

    It's a Real National Security Issue That Most of Our ...
    [​IMG]https://www.investmentwatchblog.com...t-of-our-military-supplies-are-made-in-china/
    It is not just gadgets and consumer products that are the concern here. The U.S. Military's ability to procure needed supplies to arm and support itself in military conflicts is of great concern. As Loren Thompson of Forbes points out: "The moment is fast approaching when America's military will be unable to equip itself for modern warfare without relying on Chinese suppliers.

    Related: "CHINESE SPYWARE MASQUERADING AS A SOCIAL MEDIA APP": TikTok new privacy update allows collection of faceprint and voiceprints in the U.S.

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/454379/
     
  11. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I was reading online, a while ago, on the topic of what would really happen in a nuclear war and it said that military equipment would be destroyed in the EM blast. Any surviving equipment, after the initial attack, would have to be moved underground to avoid being destroyed.
     
  12. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    [​IMG]
     
  13. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You are aware that Taiwan is not "China", right? They are actually out ally in the region against China.

    *shakes head and laughs*
     
  14. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,706
    Likes Received:
    21,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If we were reduced to using rocks and sticks, I suppose we'd be open to a human-wave invasion from China. But we're never going to be reduced to rocks and sticks. Even if we no longer had radar, satelites and guided missiles, we'll still have tanks and rifles and explosives, and there's no way to get rid of that technology. Such weaponry sufficiently proliferated throughout a population thats willing to use it makes conquering that population realistically impossible.
     
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2021
  15. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You are aware that they are located off the Chinese Coast and under constant military threat from China and that China has repeatedly stated their intent and right to conquer and absorb them?

    *shakes head and laughs*
     
  16. Seth Bullock

    Seth Bullock Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    Messages:
    13,625
    Likes Received:
    11,934
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    China is the only adversary I can think of that could do that using sheer numbers of soldiers. But that would really only apply to a battlefield in or very near China. The U.S. has a lot of experience in expeditionary warfare (WW1, WW2, Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan). China has zero experience in exporting its military power, other than simply walking and driving across its border into N. Korea during the Korean war.
     
    Mushroom likes this.
  17. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Tell you what. Look at their actual sealift and airlift capability. Then look at the sealift and airlift capability of the US. At most, China can sealift a heavy Regiment. And airlift a heavy Battalion.

    We have on average an entire Division of Marines at sea at any time, and can quickly put more to sea if needed. Not to mention divisions worth of equipment, enough to field at least 2 more divisions within a week or so. It's already loaded on ships, just waiting for the word to put to sea and go wherever needed. We haver 17 large cargo ships in the Military Sealift Command, all fully loaded and sitting where they can be put to sea within hours. Tanks, artillery, infantry vehicles, and everything else needed to fight a war, just no people. That is not even counting the over 300 C-130, over 50 C-5, and the fleets that could be requisitioned from US Flag Carriers.

    [​IMG]

    And the PLAAN is known for having "no legs". They conduct almost no fleet exercises, have almost no UNREP capability, and are little more than a Coast Guard with bigger guns.

    We are talking about the nation that put over half a million personnel into Saudi Arabia with all of their equipment in less than 4 months. China has been saying it was going to take over Taiwan for 70 years now, and that is all it has ever been. They know if they ever actually did it, they would be destroyed within months. And not even militarily, the exodus of all the companies they rely upon to make good for and sell them to would vanish overnight.

    Try reading some Tom Clancy, he saw and understood this over 20 years ago. When he pointed out that a global turning away of Chinese goods would destroy their economy, and barely affect the rest of the world. There are hundreds of countries that would jump at the chance to get back the manufacturing that left for China. But the instant loss of just it's largest trading partner (20% of their direct exports, over 35% if including items sold to other countries for US companies) would cripple their economy overnight.
     
    Seth Bullock likes this.
  18. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And that is their greatest strength. When in combat as a land force, where they are dealing with going to an engagement entirely by land.

    Like in Korea, where they were able to walk over 1 million men to fight the UN forces.

    One of two major engagements they have had since they became a country. The other largely being the same, when they made a punitive attack into Vietnam.
     
    Seth Bullock likes this.
  19. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm good with all that. We're a Naval power, their coast is made for a blockade, and they are an export nation that cannot produce the fuel nor the food they need for their population, domestically. But, how critical are these computer chips to our war machine and are they sourced outside of the likely theater of a US/China war?
     
  20. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not all that critical. We can still manufacture them in the US, many we do not simply for reasons of cost. But we still have chip fabrications all over the country.

    And China does not even need to be blockaded. Just an internal US sanction ending trade with them would cripple their economy, removing over 20% of their exports. And expect most of the EU to follow, along with Japan and South Korea. As well as the Philippines, and most if not all of the UK Commonwealth.

    End effect, over half of Chinese exports no longer have a destination. With nobody to sell to, they are largely returned to Pre-Nixon levels of trade.

    We source a great many things simply for cost, not because of any other reason. And the military actually has quite a lot of things like that sitting in logistic depots all over the world. And if needed, Micron, HP, TI, Intel, GMT, and over 100 other companies would be churning out any needed domestically. You seem to be missing the simple fact that almost all of those chips were actually designed and first made in the US. As we exported jobs as people cared more about cost than location of manufacture, that largely moved overseas. But do not make the mistake that we can not quickly return most of it tight back to the US.

    China is simply the nation to go to because of cheap slave labor. They actually "originate" almost nothing. Most of their products are imagined, designed, and built in the US. They are then sent there to be cheaply reproduced. Especially as many of those chips are literally based on 1980's (and older) technology. In China, they are still making processors with 3μm technology. Here in the US, we moved past that decades ago. So as out own ship plants moved on to newer technologies, and many of our chips now are made at 28nm and less.

    To give an idea, the older 3μm that is still common in China is 3,000nm. The largest "domestic" Chinese chip maker is actually ZhaoXin. A fabless chip designer, that bought the plans from VIA. Their current generation does indeed use 40nm chip fabrication. But here is the kicker, they are not made in China. All ZhaoXin chips are made for them by Via in California. They still do not have a fabrication facility able to handle that kind of manufacture.
     
  21. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This would be the same folks that didn't bother to replenish N95 masks after the SARS outbreak of 2009 leaving us with our shorts down in 2020 with a strategic stockpile that had been drawn down 11 years ago?
    According to this, there is nothing cheap about setting this up. This is dealing with the automotive chip shortage:
    https://www.thedrive.com/tech/40589...-and-what-it-means-for-your-next-car-purchase

    Not like flipping on a light switch. Years.
    Good info. Thank you.
     
  22. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Do you even know what the shelf life is for an N95 mask?

    5 years.

    That means that even if they had been replaced, they would have then needed to be replaced another 2 times over the next decade.

    So obviously, SARS had not a damned thing to do with the availability of masks in 2020.

    And you are both moving back and forth between critical military infrastructure, and chips in cars. You are aware these are not the same, right? You are constantly bouncing and shifting goalposts here. And not all of those chips and other things are even needed in the first place. That goes along with the demand over the last 30 years to throw more electronics into our cars. But these are not needed for operation. People who buy newer cars will just have to deal without having MP3-iPhone ready streaming video players in their car without backup cameras and all the other garbage that they have become used to.

    Or in the automotive companies finding different solutions to achieve the same results.

    For example, did you even analyze your own reference? Or how it clearly stated that Tesla did not have that problem, because they had instead migrated to other solutions? And Toyota got around it by simply stockpiling critical components needed since the 2011 tsunami? Or that over 30% of microprocessors come from Japan? Which is a major cause for the problem, as they had a major fire earlier this year, but will be fully open again in another 2 months?

    All of that information was right in your very own reference. So in actuality, it is not quite saying what you are implying it says.

    Out military equipment still mostly uses chips and parts made right in the US, or from our major NATO allies (UK and Germany are also large providers).

    So once again, nothing to do with China, or the topic of this thread.

    But thank you for playing.
     
  23. SiNNiK

    SiNNiK Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2014
    Messages:
    10,432
    Likes Received:
    4,547
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Superior equipment is one thing, but superior training is another.

    We will be alright.
     
  24. FatBack

    FatBack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    52,306
    Likes Received:
    48,705
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    God help us if another D day is ever required of us. Our military is now sissified.
     
  25. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,497
    Likes Received:
    2,421
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is also just way to small.

    For example, most do not realize that the Marines only number around 3.5 divisions of Infantry, and even those Divisions have less people in them than a few decades ago. The 1st is in California, the 2nd is in North Carolina, and the 3rd is in Okinawa (the 4th is the Marine Reserves). But the 3rd only has a handful of Marines actually assigned to it, mostly it takes command of units from the 1st and 2nd when they are deployed into their operating area.

    And I do not know what we would do if we ever did get into another major war. The waves of BRAC in the 1990's destroyed hundreds of bases. Many of them operating at half capacity, but a key part of planning in the event the military had to ever grow again. Those closures packed those that remained even tighter onto other bases, as many times 2-3 bases were shoehorned into one that was left open.

    That is why tens of billions was spent building an entirely "new base" on Fort Bliss. The 1st Armored Division had to return home from Germany, and they had nowhere to go. So they almost doubled the occupied part of the base, for the facilities for them to move into. The 200's and 2010's saw a huge wave of base construction, as the military had grown, and they had to build facilities to put them in.

    We could not do another "D-day" today, even if we wanted to. And I can already hear the screams if we forced the little darlings of today to live in the 90 day facilities built as required for that war.
     
    FatBack likes this.

Share This Page