Re: [GZG] FTverse colinies

[Robert Bantly <bantly_robert@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Independence_%28LCS-2%29
 
US Navy's LCS-2, designed for Naval "asymmetric" warfare...
 
Cheers / Robert

> Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 01:17:40 +0200
> To: gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> From: enzodeianni@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [GZG] FTverse colinies
>
> Oerjan wrote:
>
>
> >...
> > >but the comparison would not always be in favor of the USA,
> >
> >Of course it won't. If it were, I'd be unemployed :-)
>
> Like lot of people around the world :)
>
> >...if a weapon system could
> > >be produced in Zimbabwe (for example) and such a thing could be made
> > >with a labor intensive procedure, it could be more convenient to make
> > >it there.
> >
> >Very much so. Though in the particular case of Zimbabwe, I suspect that
> >you'd mostly get cannon fodder with spears and machetes - thanks to Mr.
> >Mugabe & co. that country currently lacks virtually all kinds of
> >infrastructure needed for more advanced weapons... ('Course, cannon fodder
> >is quite labour intensive to produce too, at least for the mothers :-/ )
>
> And society too... you have to build them up for 9 months and 13-odd
> years (if we think of recent terrible events in Africa):(
> Anyway, on lighter notes (so to speak), what do you expects from a
> country where elections are going to be repeated due to the fact that
> people chose the wrong party, and a member of the Politburo of Mugabe
> just declared that people have better to choose wisely or else a
> civil war will ensue...
>
> >Certainly. As one of the South African defence companies used to advertise:
> >"80% of the capability for 60% of the cost" :-) (Which in itself is
> >refutation of Robert's idea that monetary costs and combat power are
> >proportional to one another...)
>
> Right on point.
>
> John added:
>
> >You also have to consider that no procurement decision is made in a
> >vacuum. Countries with the luxury of knowing precisely who they will
> >fight and where they will fight them have a different set of
> >priorities than a country which must project power across the globe
> >against unpredictable adversaries.
>
> That's right. But that's more a political/strategical decision than
> an economical factor.
> And, as somebody wrote before during the recent exchanges, there are
> other factors that warp military requirement decision, like political
> convenience (internal and external)... the USA built systems because
> of where, in the country, the plants producing them were sited, and
> countries like Taiwan bought US "hand-me-down" vessels they didn't
> need because US funds were going to pay for them and/or there were no
> other competitor's offers.
>
> And Brendan wrote:
>
> >Relating back to FTverse; the intent to project military power (through
> >FTL) is going to impact "acceptable" costs. Transporting thousands of
> >militia or a few elite units is just logistics; replacing
> >casualties/ammo/equipment may be prohibitive with the travel times
> >required.
> >The "effective" points cost we can PSB to include the logistical costs
> >of putting those forces on the front line (ie: you pay less up front,
> >but need more to be "comparable" to a more expensive force).
>
> That should definitely be considered in a "campaign" situation and in
> evaluating the economical/military power of a country (stellar or
> otherwise)... and things could get rough there, if our occasional
> experience of "high-tech" war has a meaning (I'm referring to the
> Israeli-Arab War of '73 and the logistical problems it caused in few
> weeks of operations, that several among you probably know about)....
> big numbers just to maintain troops in line...
>
> On another line, I do not believe in the "elite myth"... I think our
> experiences show that high quality forces (with both training and
> material superiority) rule the battlefield, but are very limited when
> things move to the "asymmetrical" war... want to destroy a planet's
> power grid? Having local aerospace superiority is all you need! But
> if you want to occupy for any time the main population centers
> against a motivated opposition, you'll need far more than SAS or
> Delta Force or a few companies of powersuited infantry, or they'll
> bleed to death through thousands small attacks from unarmored,
> untrained militians, IMO.
>
> Best wishes
>
>
> Enzo de Ianni
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l mailing list
> Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l