I have a serious question...

[ROX]

Originally Posted by Big Dad

I used to fly with the big white whale aka my avatar the (Doomsday machine) E-4 aircraft. Things have changed since the days of having to find a landing spot somewhere on the planet after a nuclear attack.

I hope Iran doesn't have an opportunity to change that statement.

[Hucky]

Lunch time.

[Hucky]

Okay--Game On

[MarineHawk]

Originally Posted by Big Dad

In contrast to these threats, the US no longer has airplanes orbiting 24/7 waiting to give a "launch the nuclear arsenal" in response to a Russian or Chinese nuclear attack i.e. the 1980's.

Right. The big difference from past foes is the asymetrical character of the order of battle now. By way of comparison, it took all the might of the U.S., Russia, France, and Britain and 20 million dead to take down the Kaiser in 1918--though Russia collapsed and we entered late.

It took all the might of most of the world's industrialized powers, minus the Krauts, Wops, and Japs, to take down the Axis in WWII at a cost of 55 million dead (we lost about 400,000 dead).

During the 45-year Cold War, we faced the constant threat of immediate attack by thousands of ICBMs containing tens of thousands of megatons of nuclear explosives--possibly enough to kill every living thing in North America (even the Canadians; note that they are very hardy creatures, much like the cockroaches who survived the great meteor impact that destroyed the dinosaurs 60 million years ago, but even the Canadians might not survive a full ICBM strike by the Kremlin).

We still have the possibility of a a nuclear strike, but on a much, much smaller scale. Much of the Russian arsenal is out of action (it costs many $billions to keep a large arsenal maintained and functional; only we can, and do, afford that). India and Pakistan don't have any reliable way to deliver nukes to Omaha. China can deliver some accross the Pacific, but not like the thousands the USSR could. North Korea is not a nuclear threat at this time. Trust me.

Keep in mind that, unlike the foes we have faced in the past, who it us took years and hundreds of thousands of American dead died to defeat (it would have cost many millions of American lives taking down the USSR militarily), with our nuclear arsenal, we can kill every living creature in the Middle East in a few minutes with the push of a few buttons.

Never forget that. The menace we face is annoying and threatening. It has harrassed us and knocked some buildings down. It must be dealt with. But it can't threaten us with annihilation like past foes could. If they blow up something big here, we know, and they know, we can kill every one of them in short order. We didn't have that option with Germany (twice) or with the USSR. China may be a military threat in a couple of decades, but they're still quite a ways off in that regard.

[3Hummer]

everything goes in a cycle of up and down, every country has been that way, and continue to be that way.

[BlueTJCO]

Originally Posted by MarineHawk

Right. The big difference from past foes is the asymetrical character of the order of battle now. By way of comparison, it took all the might of the U.S., Russia, France, and Britain and 20 million dead to take down the Kaiser in 1918--though Russia collapsed and we entered late.

It took all the might of most of the world's industrialized powers, minus the Krauts, Wops, and Japs, to take down the Axis in WWII at a cost of 55 million dead (we lost about 400,000 dead).

During the 45-year Cold War, we faced the constant threat of immediate attack by thousands of ICBMs containing tens of thousands of megatons of nuclear explosives--possibly enough to kill every living thing in North America (even the Canadians; note that they are very hardy creatures, much like the cockroaches who survived the great meteor impact that destroyed the dinosaurs 60 million years ago, but even the Canadians might not survive a full ICBM strike by the Kremlin).

We still have the possibility of a a nuclear strike, but on a much, much smaller scale. Much of the Russian arsenal is out of action (it costs many $billions to keep a large arsenal maintained and functional; only we can, and do, afford that). India and Pakistan don't have any reliable way to deliver nukes to Omaha. China can deliver some accross the Pacific, but not like the thousands the USSR could. North Korea is not a nuclear threat at this time. Trust me.

Keep in mind that, unlike the foes we have faced in the past, who it us took years and hundreds of thousands of American dead died to defeat (it would have cost many millions of American lives taking down the USSR militarily), with our nuclear arsenal, we can kill every living creature in the Middle East in a few minutes with the push of a few buttons.

Never forget that. The menace we face is annoying and threatening. It has harrassed us and knocked some buildings down. It must be dealt with. But it can't threaten us with annihilation like past foes could. If they blow up something big here, we know, and they know, we can kill every one of them in short order. We didn't have that option with Germany (twice) or with the USSR. China may be a military threat in a couple of decades, but they're still quite a ways off in that regard.

[DennisAJC]

When the shit hits the fan, it's not going to be about nukes.

It's going to be targeting fragile infrastructures like power grids, water supplies and crashing and controlling the internet. Terrorist cells who are almost certainly embedded in our flock will hit at once.

Freezing society in fear and starving a country by stopping the economy is how it will happen.

This is the new world we live in. You can't kill the source of the infection by bombing the other country when the infection has terminally spread in your own back yard.

All this talk about military might really doesn't bring any comfort.






Mark my words. This is how the end will begin. I had a dream about it.

But it won't happen until March 22, 2022 Noon Pacific time.

My name is DennisAJC.........H2 Wheelin Prophet

[bparker]

MarineHawk, I really enjoy reading your insights and opinions.

[bparker]

I agree 100% it will happen this way. You can cripple a country and never have to fire a shot and at the same time cause mass panic and hysteria which will lead to economic failure.

Originally Posted by DennisAJC

When the **** hits the fan, it's not going to be about nukes.

It's going to be targeting fragile infrastructures like power grids, water supplies and crashing and controlling the internet. Terrorist cells who are almost certainly embedded in our flock will hit at once.

Freezing society in fear and starving a country by stopping the economy is how it will happen.

This is the new world we live in. You can't kill the source of the infection by bombing the other country when the infection has terminally spread in your own back yard.

[MarineHawk]

Not one country has ever been crippled by a terrorist group trying to knock out a power grid. there's a reason for that. If it could be done, it already would have. Al Qaeda might someday again be able to kill a decent number of Americans in isolated attacks (they haven't been able to kill one American over here in seven years, and no, it's not because they aren't trying, we keep finding them out and rounding them up, and, here's a novel thought, we're killing them by the tens of thousands in the central battlefield, where they keep focusing their attention, because they know they must get the Dems to hel them kick us of out of Iraq or they will be f*cked), but their not going to shut down the country and bring us to our knees. The Nazis bombed the British cities into submission, but it did not stop the British. We bombed Germany off the face of the earth and yet, they fought to the last man, and their wartime production actually peaked in late 1944. If a country could just make another country collapse like that, we would have sent a bunch of Kraut talking guys into Berlin and done it. If you say our 2007 infrastructure technology actually makes us more vulnerable, I don't believe it. When a modern country is wrecked by a bunch of ignorant, extremist f*cks knowing out their power lines, I'll believe it. If it could be done it would have been done. With all the resources of our $13T economy, why didn't we just do that to Hussein if it was possible. In 1991, we (me included) had to go in and physically kick those bastiges out of Kuwait, even though we decimated their infrastructure far greater than any raghead power-grid terror team could. We actually blew up their infrastructure. Why don't we just send some CIA guys into Iran or N. Korea or Canada and shut their power grid down? Not that easy. Further, if they ever really did something fairly harmful (they can't possibly have nukes for the maintenance reasons i mentioned earlier, but pretend they do, could have), and they took out a quarter of Chicago. Not gong to happen, but, if it did, we would find every arab/muslim person in the country and isolate them (lke the Japanese in 1941, only worse). PC would die overnight. We'd blow up the country that sponsored them. It would never happen again. It won't happen in the first place anyway. When any country in the world, much less the USA, is brought to its knees by this mythical infrastructure terror, I'll believe it.

Just my $0.03

[Big Dad]

Originally Posted by MarineHawk

Right. The big difference from past foes is the asymetrical character of the order of battle now. By way of comparison, it took all the might of the U.S., Russia, France, and Britain and 20 million dead to take down the Kaiser in 1918--though Russia collapsed and we entered late.

It took all the might of most of the world's industrialized powers, minus the Krauts, Wops, and Japs, to take down the Axis in WWII at a cost of 55 million dead (we lost about 400,000 dead).

During the 45-year Cold War, we faced the constant threat of immediate attack by thousands of ICBMs containing tens of thousands of megatons of nuclear explosives--possibly enough to kill every living thing in North America (even the Canadians; note that they are very hardy creatures, much like the cockroaches who survived the great meteor impact that destroyed the dinosaurs 60 million years ago, but even the Canadians might not survive a full ICBM strike by the Kremlin).

We still have the possibility of a a nuclear strike, but on a much, much smaller scale. Much of the Russian arsenal is out of action (it costs many $billions to keep a large arsenal maintained and functional; only we can, and do, afford that). India and Pakistan don't have any reliable way to deliver nukes to Omaha. China can deliver some accross the Pacific, but not like the thousands the USSR could. North Korea is not a nuclear threat at this time. Trust me.

Keep in mind that, unlike the foes we have faced in the past, who it us took years and hundreds of thousands of American dead died to defeat (it would have cost many millions of American lives taking down the USSR militarily), with our nuclear arsenal, we can kill every living creature in the Middle East in a few minutes with the push of a few buttons.

Never forget that. The menace we face is annoying and threatening. It has harrassed us and knocked some buildings down. It must be dealt with. But it can't threaten us with annihilation like past foes could. If they blow up something big here, we know, and they know, we can kill every one of them in short order. We didn't have that option with Germany (twice) or with the USSR. China may be a military threat in a couple of decades, but they're still quite a ways off in that regard.

"I like the way you talk (type) mhmmm" and the fact that you go back to the "Great War" trench warfare. You should have brought up the fact that the Germans and the Brits actually were humane enough to have the Christmas truce in the trenches, share food and drink, and play football. And, then, resume the battle. I think that it illustrates a sobering reality in contrast to the enemy of today.

As far as Iran is concerned...and I would compare Iran with the Nat, on your ass, while taking a well-deserved $hit, at the end, of a successful moose hunt. You just don't want to get any on your hands once you deep six it. I'm also a DS vet...the only thing I might differ from you is that we should have gone all the way to Baghdad the first time. The older I get the more it pisses me off. But, then that's the congress....

[NewHummerGuy]

Originally Posted by DennisAJC

When the **** hits the fan, it's not going to be about nukes.

It's going to be targeting fragile infrastructures like power grids, water supplies and crashing and controlling the internet. Terrorist cells who are almost certainly embedded in our flock will hit at once.

Freezing society in fear and starving a country by stopping the economy is how it will happen.

This is the new world we live in. You can't kill the source of the infection by bombing the other country when the infection has terminally spread in your own back yard.

All this talk about military might really doesn't bring any comfort.






Mark my words. This is how the end will begin. I had a dream about it.

But it won't happen until March 22, 2022 Noon Pacific time.

My name is DennisAJC.........H2 Wheelin Prophet and MOTORBOATIN MOFO SOB

Thats better

[MarineHawk]

Originally Posted by Big Dad

...the only thing I might differ from you is that we should have gone all the way to Baghdad the first time....

We don't differ on that at all. At the end of Feb., I was thinking: WTF? Why stop? We own these bitches now! Why let them regroup?
That being said, hindsight is 20/20, and I thought at the time that Sodomer was too weakened at that point to survive in power. I was wrong.

By way of edit: While I agree that we should have driven to undefended Baghdad in 1991, the lefties who, only recently, make this criticism, are pure opportinists. No Dem or lefty in Feb/March 1991 was saying "attack, continue the attack." Pure BS on their part.

[MarineHawk]

Originally Posted by Big Dad

As far as Iran is concerned...and I would compare Iran with the Nat, on your ass, while taking a well-deserved $hit, at the end, of a successful moose hunt. You just don't want to get any on your hands once you deep six it. ....

There are reasons why we need to give them a beat down fairly soon if the govt' doesn't collapse (not because we need to wait until we have to be reactive, but basically out of need to maintain an effective psychological deterence), but I agree Iran's in trouble (economy collapsing; tremendous dissent) and far from able to harm us in any direct way. They're slightly more dangerous to Europe because they might actually be able to land in missle in Paris or Munich--not New York. That's why the French via Sarkozy are starting to demand that Iran be checked, militarily if necessary. If Iran did anything to us, it could not be severe, and, again, we could simply delete them from the map in minutes if they did so.

[Big Dad]

Originally Posted by DennisAJC

When the **** hits the fan, it's not going to be about nukes.

It's going to be targeting fragile infrastructures like power grids, water supplies and crashing and controlling the internet. Terrorist cells who are almost certainly embedded in our flock will hit at once.

Freezing society in fear and starving a country by stopping the economy is how it will happen.

This is the new world we live in. You can't kill the source of the infection by bombing the other country when the infection has terminally spread in your own back yard.

All this talk about military might really doesn't bring any comfort.






Mark my words. This is how the end will begin. I had a dream about it.

But it won't happen until March 22, 2022 Noon Pacific time.

My name is DennisAJC.........H2 Wheelin Prophet

All the more reason to have a CCW permit. Wait...you live in Canada, is it true that the one handgun in Canada is still located in Edmonton? In Alaska the requirement for the CCW permit is gone. Just about anyone can carry. It's very polite there. I'm positive the infection isn't terminal in Alaska.

Anyways I don't think the fundamentalists are going to "freeze" or "starve" the USA anytime soon aka during my, or my kids lifetime.

[DennisAJC]

Originally Posted by Big Dad

All the more reason to have a CCW permit. Wait...you live in Canada, is it true that the one handgun in Canada is still located in Edmonton? In Alaska the requirement for the CCW permit is gone. Just about anyone can carry. It's very polite there. I'm positive the infection isn't terminal in Alaska.

I have a Non-Restricted, Restricted and Prohibited Firearms Licence.

I've amassed a collection of firearms that would make the CIA go, "Oh hey, that can't be right."

And ya, there's that other guy in Edmonton.

Originally Posted by Big Dad

Anyways I don't think the fundamentalists are going to "freeze" or "starve" the USA anytime soon aka during my, or my kids lifetime.

I hope so too. But if we had this conversation in 2000 and speculated that in 2001 a bunch of rag heads would fly planes into buildings......

Let's just say, it's a new world we live in and ANYTHING is possible. There is no doubt in my mind there are very intelligent people protecting the country. But unless they have a crystal ball, I fear we just have to wait it out and see what comes our way. It's hard to be proactive when there are too many scenarios. But I'm with you in the hopes our children will not see this in their lifetime.

[DennisAJC]

Originally Posted by NewHummerGuy

Thats better

Oh ya, sorry.

[DennisAJC]

Originally Posted by bparker

MarineHawk, I really enjoy reading your insights and opinions.

He scares me. He knows things. Things I'm afraid to ask why he knows.



He knows things.

[Big Dad]

Originally Posted by DennisAJC

But I'm with you in the hopes our children will not see this in their lifetime.

Here here.

[Big Dad]

Originally Posted by MarineHawk

There are reasons why we need to give them a beat down fairly soon if the govt' doesn't collapse (not because we need to wait until we have to be reactive, but basically out of need to maintain an effective psychological deterence), but I agree Iran's in trouble (economy collapsing; tremendous dissent) and far from able to harm us in any direct way. They're slightly more dangerous to Europe because they might actually be able to land in missle in Paris or Munich--not New York. That's why the French via Sarkozy are starting to demand that Iran be checked, militarily if necessary. If Iran did anything to us, it could not be severe, and, again, we could simply delete them from the map in minutes if they did so.

Absofrickenlutely! I figure it'll take a missile ending up in Europe somewhere...we could throw our hat in the ring, AGAIN, and keep the American casualties to a minimum by making a glass parking lot out of Iran and just divvy up the oil. Little bit of wishful thinking.