Re: [GZG] FTverse colinies

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
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@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu> From: enzodeianni@tiscali.it> 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@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu>
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l