If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#491
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Jack
wrote: On 2004/01/18 10:05, in article , "Damien R. Sullivan" wrote: Basically, can a small or lower-tech democracy with non-corrupt government and motivated citizenry make invasion too expensive to work? Possibly not today, but back in 1776.... Exactly. I am _not_ in favor of gun confiscation, but I really can't accept the idea of the unorganized militia, with sporting weapons, deterring either regulars or invaders. With a laptop and intimate knowledge of communications networks, I can be a MUCH nastier deterrent. |
#492
|
|||
|
|||
|
#493
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Jack
wrote: On 2004/01/18 21:32, in article , "Howard Berkowitz" wrote: ... I am _not_ in favor of gun confiscation, but I really can't accept the idea of the unorganized militia, with sporting weapons, deterring either regulars or invaders. With a laptop and intimate knowledge of communications networks, I can be a MUCH nastier deterrent. ...until you have reduced the ability of the high tech forces to a level less out of line with those of the your indigenous forces, at which point the ability to do something more than strangle them with your power cord will certainly be required. Perhaps. Perhaps not. A high tech force may withdraw and regroup if its C3I is significantly degraded. They will maintain the advantage of a trained frontline force with modern weapons. You will have to overcome that with sufficient numbers of fighters and adequate weapons, intimate knowledge of all sorts of local and regional networks -- both of infrastructure and of human resources, and great leadership. Which leg of that triad do you really think you could do without? In one scenario, I can't. In another scenario, I'm talking about deterrence, not victory. In yet another scenario, I put the "adequate weapons" far below the leadership and the logistics. I also want a better assessment of the potential threat. While you haven't used the vague phrase "tyranny" that others have, I still want to know, in sufficient detail to plan resistance, why the opposition is there, how it is led and motivated, and whether its formation could have been prevented by nonmilitary means -- as has been the historical case in the US. Of course we don't have anything like "a well ordered militia" today, so perhaps you would like to suggest a replacement that can carry us to the next level of protection beyond that provided by video gamers? Once you have done your stuff with the laptop weapon, the conflict will become very conventional "unconventional" warfare -- something the so-called "high tech" forces, and not just in the US, are now better prepared to fight than they have ever been, even without the tech. And I have yet to see a plausible scenario for that threat emerging, much as John Ashcroft might like to introduce his version of muwatain. |
#494
|
|||
|
|||
Howard Berkowitz opined
In article , Jack wrote: On 2004/01/18 10:05, in article , "Damien R. Sullivan" wrote: Basically, can a small or lower-tech democracy with non-corrupt government and motivated citizenry make invasion too expensive to work? Possibly not today, but back in 1776.... Exactly. I am _not_ in favor of gun confiscation, but I really can't accept the idea of the unorganized militia, with sporting weapons, deterring either regulars or invaders. With a laptop and intimate knowledge of communications networks, I can be a MUCH nastier deterrent. But hunters with guns can make invasions more expensive, and give you and your laptop time to be effective. -ash for assistance dial MYCROFTXXX |
#495
|
|||
|
|||
Howard Berkowitz writes:
In article , Jack wrote: On 2004/01/18 10:05, in article , "Damien R. Sullivan" wrote: Basically, can a small or lower-tech democracy with non-corrupt government and motivated citizenry make invasion too expensive to work? Possibly not today, but back in 1776.... Exactly. I am _not_ in favor of gun confiscation, but I really can't accept the idea of the unorganized militia, with sporting weapons, deterring either regulars or invaders. With a laptop and intimate knowledge of communications networks, I can be a MUCH nastier deterrent. More likely, you can come to the same end as Archimedes, accomplishing no more in the end than one guy with a hunting rifle. Now, with a laptop *and* a rifle, you can accomplish a lot more than with either alone. On the defensive side, every detective with a hunch as to where that nuisance with the laptop is, every house-to-house search for same, has to allocate a SWAT team per target instead of just a couple beat cops. Which means the whole process takes them longer for the same available resources and gives you that much more time to make a nuisance of yourself with the laptop. Offensively, a lot of what you are going to accomplish with that laptop is learning interesting things like, e.g., section X of the enemy's operation is grossly dysfunctional except that mid-level person Y knows how everything works and is keeping the whole thing running. Is that a bit of abstract knowledge, or a target for a well-placed bullet? And then there's the nice combination of a laptop, a gun, and a bunch of improvised explosives... -- *John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, * *Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" * *Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition * *White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute * * for success" * *661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition * |
#496
|
|||
|
|||
|
#497
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Ash Wyllie"
wrote: Howard Berkowitz opined In article , Jack wrote: On 2004/01/18 10:05, in article , "Damien R. Sullivan" wrote: Basically, can a small or lower-tech democracy with non-corrupt government and motivated citizenry make invasion too expensive to work? Possibly not today, but back in 1776.... Exactly. I am _not_ in favor of gun confiscation, but I really can't accept the idea of the unorganized militia, with sporting weapons, deterring either regulars or invaders. With a laptop and intimate knowledge of communications networks, I can be a MUCH nastier deterrent. But hunters with guns can make invasions more expensive, and give you and your laptop time to be effective. Aren't there some assumptions here about the level of force the invaders will use? Soviet doctrine, in suppressing the Budapest uprising in 1956, was "one shot from a building, level the building. Many shots from a building, level the block." A much more humane force, the 82nd Airborne in Detroit is 1967, was not seriously inconvenienced by urban shooters. |
#498
|
|||
|
|||
|
#499
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Howard Berkowitz wrote: Aren't there some assumptions here about the level of force the invaders will use? Soviet doctrine, in suppressing the Budapest uprising in 1956, was "one shot from a building, level the building. Many shots from a building, level the block." A much more humane force, the 82nd Airborne in Detroit is 1967, was not seriously inconvenienced by urban shooters. ....was not seriously inconvenienced by a *very* few urban shooters, who weren't really defending their homes from invasion. Another advantage modern Americans would have in an invasion situation would be the startling amount of useful information available to the average citizen. Given a few organizers, you'd literally have to level an American city to "pacify" it with any reasonable certainty. -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#500
|
|||
|
|||
Howard Berkowitz wrote:
You are missing asymmetry. Archimedes' enemies used low tech, just lots of it. Losing a major C3I node, or the logistics network, is much more of a problem to a high-tech invader. And it's unlikely as hell that you with your laptop are going to get acess to any such. D. -- The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found at the following URLs: Text-Only Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html Enhanced HTML Version: http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html Corrections, comments, and additions should be e-mailed to , as well as posted to sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for discussion. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Australia F111 to be scrapped!! | John Cook | Military Aviation | 35 | November 10th 03 11:46 PM |