Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Fri Sep 20 02:39:20 2019

Utopia Talk / Politics / Could China and Russia crush the USA?
Average Ameriacn
Tue Mar 12 17:23:21
We need to double our defense budget!


Recent war game simulations reveal that the U.S. would be defeated ‘in one scenario after another’ in a war with Russia and China.

A recent rand analysis shows that the United States would be crushed by Russia and China in a war. rand made this discovery during its annual “Red on Blue” war game simulation.

This exercise trains the U.S. military in formulating strategies and responding to modeled enemy threats. In these games, red represents an allied Russia and China, and blue represents the United States.

rand analyst David Ochmanek said that in conventional war, the U.S. would suffer “heavy losses in one scenario after another and still can’t stop Russia or China,” despite the fact that the U.S. spends $700 billion a year on superweapons such as stealth aircraft and carriers.

These powerful weapons are typically grouped en masse at a land base or on an aircraft carrier, and are therefore extremely vulnerable to being wiped out in large numbers by precision-guided long-range missiles. As former Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work said, the F-35 may rule the sky, but it “gets killed on the ground in large numbers.” This is how the U.S. could quickly lose a large number of its military equipment to the “reds.”

Russia’s and China’s “smart” weapons pose an increasing threat to U.S. infrastructure, such as runways, fuel tanks and ships. These could easily be wiped out by a simple missile strike. They are more vulnerable because many U.S. bases have no defenses from cruise missiles, drones and helicopters due to the removal of a large number of mobile anti-aircraft troops.

The solution? rand says that the U.S. would need to invest $24 billion every year for five years to prepare the U.S. for “high-tech war with Russia and China.” Short-term, this would mean buying missiles and air defense batteries. Long-term, this requires investing in lasers, railguns and high-powered missile defense systems.

Perhaps the biggest concern discovered in these rand war games is America’s vulnerability to what the Chinese call “system destruction warfare.” The Chinese have been known to “attack the American battle network at all levels, relentlessly, and they practice it all the time,” Work said. This means that the enemy shuts down U.S. networks so completely that the command post is left with nothing but blank screens and radio static.

What happens when the command structure loses everything? In a war game simulation, the exercise is ended because nobody can figure out how to keep fighting. This is a chilling reality. In a moment, the U.S. could lose its entire command structure, and chaos would ensue.

“It turns out U.S. superweapons have a little too much Achilles in their heels,” said Breaking Defense reporter Sydney Freedberg Jr.

Russia and China’s ability to crush the U.S. in war, along with this reference to Achilles’ heel, are strikingly reminiscent of the decades-long prophecies of the Trumpet.

Soon after World War ii, Herbert W. Armstrong, editor in chief of the Plain Truth, predecessor of the Trumpet, said that America had won its last war!

Again, this time in 1961, he said, “Unless or until the United States as a whole repents and returns to what has become a hollow slogan on its dollars: ‘In God we trust,’ the United States of America has won its last war! … It means, Mr. and Mrs. United States, that the handwriting is on your wall!”

In February 1978, after the U.S. was defeated in Vietnam, Mr. Armstrong again warned, “America’s influence and prestige is on the rapid decline. The pride of our power has been broken. The time is fast approaching when the United States will be so weak and so fearful of its own shadow that, as the Prophet Ezekiel predicted, the trumpet will sound the call to battle, but none shall answer (Ezekiel 7:14).”

These fearful predictions have come to pass! The pride in the U.S.’s power has been broken and it has won its last war, as its history since World War ii has proved. And these latest simulated war games confirm that the U.S. is incapable of winning a war with Russia and China.

Continuing to proclaim Mr. Armstrong’s bold prophecies, Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry has also sounded the alarm.

In his May 2005 Trumpet article, Mr. Flurry focused on Ezekiel 7:14: “They have blown the trumpet, even to make all ready; but none goeth to the battle: for my wrath is upon all the multitude thereof.” Mr. Flurry wrote:

The trumpet of war is to be blown in Israel—mainly America and Britain. (If you would like more information, request our free booklet on Ezekiel. All of our literature is free.) It seems everybody is expecting our people to go into battle, but the greatest tragedy imaginable occurs! Nobody goes to battle—even though the trumpet is blown! Will it be because of computer terrorism? …

Over a decade ago, Joseph de Courcy wrote this in his Intelligence Digest: … “Computer dependence is the Western world’s Achilles’ heel, and within a few years this weakness could be tested to the full.”

How strikingly real this has become! America clearly has “a little too much Achilles in [its] heels.” The U.S. could be taken down suddenly by an attack on its command network. What a chilling prophecy that is now capable of becoming reality!
Wed Mar 13 11:11:07
Thank God this article came out the same week Trump's Pentagon budget did. I'm sure that's just a coincidence.

Anyway, "$24 billion a year for five years" almost assuredly actually means "$50 billion a year for fifteen." Pass.
The Children
Wed Mar 13 13:31:10
ofc we culd. we culd crush ur country 3 decades ago. it just that we r peace lovin people and prefer peace rather than war. but dunt kid urselves. no amount of moniez can save u from our wrath shuld u incur it.

superior civilazation. superior morals
Wed Mar 13 16:41:32

If we were fighting on the Russian or Chinese border? Sure.

Anywhere else on the planet? lol! No. :o)

large member
Wed Mar 13 16:44:35
You are correct. The security issue is that that border could be quite dynamic.

The existential issue is of course that security is anchored to a nuclear arsenal.
large member
Wed Mar 13 16:45:09
A number of nuclear arsenals*
Wed Mar 13 16:58:10
What kind of war are we talking about? Are you saying that Russia and China working in coordination with each other can invade the USA and conquer us?
large member
Wed Mar 13 17:10:33
No. They are saying that any command structure deployed against Russia or China is quite likely to be overwhelmed.

I don't think it is possible to project this kind of disaster to the American frontier.
Wed Mar 13 17:35:36

This is the fear mongering nonsense that is used to keep inflating our "defense" budget.
Wrath of Orion
Wed Mar 13 18:01:57
A one-eyed monkey hanging from a balloon could scatter them to hell with one hand grenade!
large member
Thu Mar 14 02:46:44
Something is wrong with expectations if anything other than global supremacy becomes fear mongering.
Thu Mar 14 09:07:49
Am I the only one that thinks that perhaps it's not really worth putting huge weight behind a new letter that quotes the bible as part of it's info?
large member
Thu Mar 14 15:24:31
Its been known for a while. The DoD accessed about a decade ago that it lacked two-theatre capability.

Ultimately, it has a lot to do with a 0 casualty ideal stemming from the 90s.

Casualty minimization nurtures a pretty fragile military apparatus were catastrophic losses might represent daily casualties wwii era US battalions would shrug off until they could be cycled off the front lines.

It might be an idea to back step and practice scenarios where inter unit C4 is non-existent.

Just to see how badly that goes.
Thu Mar 14 17:35:29
I feel like all the modern military of the world function off the no casualty ideal.

Basically in order to deal with very advanced but fragile enemies, one needs equally advanced and fragile technology.

The moment anyone falls back to just throwing manpower at the war WW 2 style, no amount of bodies can overcome the weaponry of the enemy.

So, while the Russians and Chinese certainly are planning some nasty digital weapons to hinder the US military, those weapons are also very vulnerable to technology interruption.

It seems very much more likely in this conventional only scenario that all parties are reduced to abandoning networked technology after initial exchanges of digital networking take down.

Now does this mean US still has an advantage after all networks for all parties are broken? Certainly not, and I think it's safe to say in that scenario the US could not possibly come out on the winning side if the war is offensive in nature (being within the Russian and or Chinese sphere of homeland influence).

But I think it's very far fetched to picture a scenario as explained in this news letter where the US networks are completely disabled, but the Chinese and Russian networks are fully operational as the combat progresses.
large member
Thu Mar 14 17:49:45
I would think it more to what extent legacy systems are still in place than it is imagining that fully modernized command and control will be intact.

In Norway, the mail service is still the mobilization trigger of last resort (you will get a mobilization order letter a few days after mobilization has been ordered).

Russia fought is last analogue war against Georgia in 2008.

I have no idea what China's status is.
large member
Thu Mar 14 18:04:24
But again, all of this is against the backdrop of nuclear arsenals. There is no conventional existential threat for any of the countries we are speaking of.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share