On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 17:52:28 GMT, Derek Lyons wrote:
(phil hunt) wrote:
What would be sensible strategies/weapons for a middle-ranking
country to employ if it thought it is likely to be involved in a war
against the USA or other Western countries, say in the next 10
years?

The most sensible strategy is not to get involved in such a war to
start with.

Indeed; but sometimes war is unavoidable.

I think one strategy would be to use large numbers of low cost
cruise missiles (LCCM). The elements of a cruise missile are all
very simple, mature technology, except for the guidance system.
Modern computers are small and cheap, so guidance systems can be
made cheaply.

Guidance systems depend on *much* more than simply their computers.
You also need the inertial components, or their analogs, and *those*
are going to be hard to obtain in large quantities, especially at any
useful accuracy level.

digital cameras can do much of the job, and they are available
cheaply.

snipped various fanciful uses
Many of these depend on the West not deploying something it's
exceedingly capable at; Electronic warfare and countermeasures.

What electronic countermeasures could be used?

Faster weapon system design mewans it could
"get inside the decision curve" of Western arms industries, because
by the time they've produced a weapon to counter the low-cost
weapon, the next generation of low-cost weapon is there.

Problem is, the Western powers can get inside this curve faster than
the medium nation can. The factories, power grid, etc of the medium
nation can be taken out within a few weeks to months via manned
bombers, or our own cruise missiles. Vital components produced
overseas can be stopped via blockade.

That's after the war breaks out. The USA isn't likely to start
bombing every country with an arms industry, is it?

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).