If you've got the weapons . .

Post #31,464 by Andrew Grygus 3/9/02 10:10:43 AM Reply	If you've got the weapons . . . . and we do - then it's prudent to have a plan. A plan will help reduce mistakes (also, leaking secret reports reminds the unfriendly that we do have the weapons, and a plan). [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #31,468 by nking 3/9/02 11:44:12 AM Reply	Tactical Nukes They can use smaller nukes to create Electro Magnetic Pulses (EMP) over unfriendly countries to short out their electronics. This is called tactical use of nuclear weapons. Let's say they pop a small nuke over Iraq, and that it disables their planes and other devices. No radar, no communication, no planes, no automobiles (no electric ignitions, anyway), no tanks, etc. Then our planes and tanks go in and crush them. "Will code Visual BASIC for cash."
Post #31,484 by JayMehaffey 3/9/02 1:44:11 PM Reply	Not as effective as might be hoped. Setting off an EMP device probably wouldn't be as effective as you might hope. It would ground the airforces of Middle Eastern countries, but none of them have an airforce that could be a threat to us anyway. It would nicely cripple their anti-air missle systems, this would be probably the one major advantage gained. The effect on ground targets wouldn't be as great as you might hope though. Much of the stuff they have on the ground is so outdated that EMP would have limited effect. For instance, Iraq's tanks are T-55 and T-72s, neither of which have any significant electronics. The only effect of EMP on either tank would be to lose the radio and any range finder. Jay
Post #31,487 by nking 3/9/02 2:55:22 PM Reply	You mean old-old tech back when they used Vacuum tubes? Ala "After Y2K" the comic strip? "Will work for fair salary and benefits, seeking company with integrity."
Post #31,498 by JayMehaffey 3/9/02 4:10:27 PM Reply	Sort of The T-55 can trace it's ancestry back to the T-34 tank of WWII fame, through the T-44 and T-54. T-54s where first build in 1946, and the T-54/55 series where a darn good tank for the 1950s. But not surprisngly, for such old technology, there is nothing in the tanks operation that is electronic. There are a few electrical parts, such as the engine starter and internal lights but simple electrical components are not effected by EMP. And even those parts are not necissary to run the tank. It has a built in pneumatic starter for the engine, optical gun sights, it's gun is hand loaded and so on. The only part of a T-55 operating today that might be hurt by EMP is the radio and any range finders or night sights that have been installed since the tank was built. The T-72 is a much newer tank, itself a decent of the T-55 via the T-62. The T-72 doesn't actually inheret much from the older tank though, other then a general design. Construction of the T-72 started in 1971, and was replaced in the early 80 by the T-80. The T-72 has more electrical components, and generally has been updated with electronics like night vision systems and so on. But once again, these are not necissary to run the tank. Of course, the resistance they get to EMP doesn't actually do them much good. A T-55 could fire at point blank range and still wouldn't be able to penetrate the armor of an Abrams. In theory the T-72 might be a threat if it had a good crew (not many in Iraq), had high quality armor percing rounds (Iraq didn't have any in the Gulf War), and had some air cover (not a chance in hell in Iraq). Jay
Post #31,500 by Ashton 3/9/02 4:22:51 PM Reply	Armor? Well.. we have LOTS of DU (depleted Uranium) and we are willing to spread it around just anywhere. As we did in '92. Iraq wishes.. it had the U which depleted the natural-U. Makes a great armor-piercing round. Hey! it is really Heavy at At. Wt. 238! AND: U is pyrophoric; in powder form (or when two sharp pieces are struck together) it 'sparks'. Flares like Magnesium (though not Quite.. so energetically does it crave Oxygen to combine with). Imagine what happened inside those tanks we hit with our DU rounds. But after all, they weren't human - they were enemy (that week). Kinda surprised we haven't already sold them some DU.. our largest export to the world is, after all: weapons. Wonder what that says? Ashton military school prepared me for the prevailing mindset of homo-sap.. especially the local variety.
Post #31,515 by Andrew Grygus 3/9/02 8:55:09 PM Reply	What it says . . . our largest export to the world is, after all: weapons. Wonder what that says? What it says is that we have highly effective marketing (the "demos" are to die for). It also says there's a lot of demand. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #31,492 by Ashton 3/9/02 3:33:30 PM Reply	Yes, ' plan' is not the deed. More is implicit. This is a MAJOR change (and complete reversal of Bush's stated aim towards reducing all dependence upon nuclear weapons): Planning for a new generation of 'tactical' weapons and especially the nice euphemism of theater weapons. Note that just such a leaked-Announcement dovetails perfectly with the paranoid-view of Reagan ---> Bush plans for militarization of space; evidence exists to substantiate this ongoing sub-rosa direction in US thinking: [link\|http://www.cdi.org/adm/1330/Gagnon.html\| Bruce Gagnon comments at CDI] (Center for Defense Information, DC) [link\|http://www.globenet.free-online.co.uk/\| Apparent main site in UK] [link\|http://past.thenation.com/issue/000619/0619hartung.shtml\| The Nation, from 6/19/00] I have to find out more about Gagnon and his now several-year involvement in ferreting out material.. If he's a loony, he's a saner one than the Singing-AG of the DOJ. Why am I not surprised at the event and the direction -->? Ashton Good Luck, Chaps - you will be Needing That.
Post #31,525 by Ric Locke 3/10/02 10:53:29 AM Reply	Uh, Ash, think about it a bit more. These are called "contingency plans". They have them for every country in the world, and Antarctica. Most of them are dreamed up by Majors and below in brainstorming sessions not terribly dissimilar to the kinds of planning, etc. used by online action gamers. I'm quite sure that somewhere in the files there's a contingency plan for, e.g., nuking London, with ground zero(es) carefully plotted for maximum destructive effect. It wouldn't surprise me if there was one for New York city, just in case the Bad Guys (who?) should take it over. It does not surprise me in the least that there are contingency plans for bombing various places in the Middle East, with the ones we've been noticing lately being the most recently updated. [It's probably been a while since the plans for invasion of Argentina were looked at.] Normally they don't get released. There was a time when they did once in a while, but in the modern hysterical atmosphere people always overreact. One of the worst bits of weaseling in the Freedom Of Information Act is the one that lets the military refuse to release such things. This is a psyop aimed at Saddam and Prince Whatever of Saudi Arabia. Think of it as a line in an email header: Bcc: S. Hussein (via CNN) Regards, Ric
Post #31,541 by Ashton 3/10/02 3:33:08 PM Reply	"Disinformation, Age of" - see under "Current Events" See also: dissembling and gerund phrases such as at: [link\|http://www.geocities.com/gene_moutoux/diagram2.htm\|Lying techniques parsed] Umm Ric - you didn't imagine that I/we er believe at face value ANYTHING released officially or officially-leaked (from M$ or any agency, that is. Now the Pope is in an entireley different category, natch..) Mean only: this particular tack creates an open-ended set of expectations - opposite to those generated by the [lie] Other recent [lie] regarding our Selected Resident's putative view of: Say? "The non-Role of Nukes in Everyone's Future". THAT piece of disinfo you see.. clashes a bit with the latest homogenized piece of fluff. My merely personal opinion is: no military mind can long stay away from imagining: possession of Ultimate Control of all aspects of the daily world play. It is THERE to be imagined about, as perfectly obviously as, as a down-scale Mercedes owner's guaranteed lust for a new $86K SL-500 .... the both convertible AND hardtop - at the push of a VERY-expensive button, covered by the skin of a popular endangered-species du jour.. (er the button, not the top itself). Ergo" Military Control of Space\ufffd is as natural as a MBA's catechism or a flak's fluff. SO I merely commented upon the neat way in which this latest disinfo dovetails with that equally obvious Military Grail. Just add into the mix, our utter Religious Faith in the exercise of pure Power - over all more subtle human considerations like (persuasion?) ... and stir. Otherwise of course: Nothing is changed. HTH. Ashton FLASH This just in: Every day and in every way.. the Russians are believing more and more that, we are a bunch of poop-heads and will do Anything to keep them screwed up - while smiling a lot.* * poop-head - illustrates the level of actual discourse when Dr. K(issinger - you thought I meant Kevorkian din'cha?) and Dubya get down to Long Term Stradigy: sellin' the mining rights on Ceres, say.. to the Lone Star Drilling Co. and bro Jeb's branch o' the Prescott Bush Legacy.
Post #31,589 by dmarker2 3/11/02 8:41:26 AM Reply	Re: As usual - balanced well reasoned logic ... Any country that takes exception to the leak is just too sensitive for its own good (read: using the news to rattle sabres rather than accept mutual reality). US may be making some diplomatic screw-ups (this obsession with Saddman Hussien) but there is some sense in letting world know that US is not always 'touch-feely', nor should be. Jimmy Carter's 'touch-feely' policies did the US no 'real' good whatsoever. Reagan's 'teflon' president approach to tough international action was the basis for collapse of USSR. I don't like his support for some S American governments but he won in the long run. In fact, I suspect Bush is doing his best to copy Reagan. DSM
Post #31,611 by wharris2 3/11/02 10:39:52 AM Reply	Bush 2 imitates Reagan? An admirable goal, but he hardly has the personality to carry it off. A puppy-dog look and stilted speeches doth not a good Reagan imitation make. (Listening to his speech this morning, it never fails to amaze me how bad both he and his father are at delivering speeches.) Where each demon is slain, more hate is raised, yet hate unchecked also multiplies. - L. E. Modesitt

Welcome to IWETHEY!