I see many threads debating what would happen if China invaded the U.S. and i am going to use that as a jumping off point to discuss how a war is really fought and won in the context of modern warfare.
Modern warfare is all about fast movement, tanks and mechanized troops, attacking your enemy lightning fast with overwhelming fire power. As an example lets look at how Germany was able to roll over Poland, France and most of Russia with there Armys. Germany used what was called blitzkrieg or lightning war, which is what i described above tanks, mechanized infantry and close air support. Now it is true Germany surprised the enemy which certainly helped, but the way they waged it was perfection and ushered in this new way of warfare we will practice today. Close air support combined with fast moving infantry and tanks to completely annihilate and surpass enemy defenses, cut them off and starve large swaths of land including the soldiers trapped there, for example look at this picture http://i749.photobucket.com/albums/xx134/dharabhishek2007/Barbarossa%20%20first%20week/HoI3_51.jpg (its from Hearts of Iron 3 but gets the point across) When those three panzer divisions meet they will effectively cut off the enemy from retreating and starve them, an army that is not supplied does not fight in modern warfare, they need fuel, ammunition, food all of that. What the Germans were able to do in the vast Russian steppe is surround millions of men in these pockets and just continue forward, leaving infantry and rear guard units to round them up and crush them (infantry fill the gaps during blitzkrieg as tanks move forward).
This parallel can be seen today in the battle of 73 eastings during the Gulf War, American forces used a text book German blitzkrieg to crush Sadaams defensive line outside Kuwait. Large spearheads of M1 Abrams and Bradley fighting vehicles smashed through a defensive like extending 50 miles in endless desert with close air support and superior technology. We lost 1 man in that engagement and 1 bradley. Now, in both parts of what ive said (World War 2 and 73 eastings) LOGISTICS IS CRITICAL. Now what is logistics you may ask and how in the hell is it more important than they way we fight? Military logistics can be defined as and i quote "Military logistics is the art and science of planning and carrying out the movement and maintenance of military forces" now, how do logistics work in modern warfare? Well ask yourself this, where does the tank get its fuel? How does the infantrymen get his food and ammunition? It all comes down to the movement of supplies, a modern military which is pathetically supplied will fail no matter what it can do. Germanys attack on the soviet union is a beautiful parallel to this, the Germans so proud of what they have achieved have finally reached Stalingrad an unlikely prize but just another thing to conquer for them. Little did they know that there supply lines had been stretched horribly thin, supplies trickled in and could not support such a mechanized force, Russia is far to large and the partisan raiding that took place made supplying there forces completely impossible, not to mention 3/4 of the German military relied on horses to supply them rather than logistic vehicles. Now they have formed a HUGE bulge in Russia and they filled in the gaps with low quality infantry to hold the flanks, turns out the Russians secretly massed two gigantic tank armies on there flanks, and now winter has set in. Soldiers freeze to death, fuel freezes inside the panzers they don't start anymore. The Russian armies pounce and encircle 500,000 Germans around Stalingrad leaving them to starve and freeze to death until they can crush them when they have weakened. (Picture- http://historywarsweapons.com/wp-content/uploads/image/OperationUranus.JPG ) which is precisely what the Russians did,taking a page straight of the Germans play book they were so very used to. The Germans are a far better trained and equipped force but without supplies they can fight only a stand that is held by sheer will and bravery. They did fight hard but it was useless and were quickly overrun. The Luftwaffe did attempt supply drops but there really was no point the amount of supplies needed was far to much. The lesson here is of the importance of logistics and letting it keep up with your armies and how a war of movement is fought across wide swaths of land.
Now i am going to sum this up as i need to get to the fact of the day (:D) but logistics, fast movement and technology is critical to how a war today is fought, China cant invade the U.S. not only because of there lack of a navy but because even if they did land in that capacity how do you supply and feed your troops? Thats right you can't they have gone too far. I may revive and write more on this to flesh it out, but for now thank you for reading and as always if you like this stuff follow me!
-
[quote]Modern warfare is all about fast movement, tanks and mechanized troops, attacking your enemy lightning fast with overwhelming fire power.[/quote] You mean it's not about sitting in a corner getting 1337 quickscopes toward a 25 kill streak? My whole life is a lie....
-
A strike against our Critical Infrastructure and banking grid would be catastrophic, whether kinetic or cyber. Both are possible.
-
[quote]Now they have formed a HUGE bulge in Russia.[/quote] So did the Fatherland get the Motherland pregnant?
-
-
Has anyone noticed the severe difference between OP's knowledge on WWII and his grammar?
-
To bad you actually have to invade a country to destroy it's government and turn it into a war torn hell hole.
-
I'm guessing your talking about modern warfare from an american point of view? because I assure you british military is different, we rely less on air support. having worked with americans in afghan it seems your special forces are in partnership with air support... however the SAS are usually just lumped into hostile areas with little to no air support hence the reason they have the tag "special"
-
You're wrong OP Modern Warfare is fought in FPS view and you need to kill a certain amount of people before you get ordinance support.
-
You're wrong OP. [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCpjgl2baLs]Modern Warfare is fought with buttons. Big red buttons.[/url]
-
Any invasion of the mainland US without nuclear bombardment, a high altitude EMP burst weapon, or an heavy conventional explosives barrage would be ill advised at best, and a complete and total disaster at worst for the invading party. Unless Canada decides it doesn't like being America's Hat anymore or Mexico decides it needs to get revenge for the Battle of San Jacinto, any other country would need to cover vast tracts of water in order to even reach the mainland US. Should any country elude/or take out the US Navy ( [i]not happening[/i]), they still have to land on the beaches. Then they'd have to deal with not only the world's most technologically advanced military, but they'd also have to contend with the ~175 million or so armed civilians. ([i]Should Obama and the liberal Goon Squads have their way, we can forget about this part. [/i]) Last thing any country needs is to be on foreign soil fighting with literally every living breathing soul they encounter. Any landing party would be greatly outnumbered with respect to both man power as well as firepower. Germany had a field day with the surrounding countries because they were readily accessible by land and air, over relatively short distances. China, Russia, or any other country would have a helluva time moving vast amounts of men, equipment, and supplies across thousands of miles of open sea to get at the mainland US.
-
>Modern combat >1945
-
n0 th1s 1ss1337 m0d3rn w4rf4r!11!!eleven!11
-
I wouldn't really consider WWII to be "modern warfare". While there is certainly times for punching through defenses, generally the current wars are about removing an enemy force from control of an area rather than eliminating them, which is essentially impossible. A very literal example of this is the Second Battle of Fallujah where allied forces surrounded the city, bombarded it for weeks, and then methodically went through every room of every building, sweeping through the city, killing any men of fighting age that didn't immediately surrender. Great post though.
-
lol operation uranus
-
This is a quality thread.
-
Yah, as long as we are mobile and don't get stuck in prolonged engagements. A war of attrition will surly give the winning hand to the commies
-
no ur rong
-
[quote]Modern warfare is all about fast movement, tanks and mechanized troops, attacking your enemy lightning fast with overwhelming fire power.[/quote]No it isn't. Modern warfare is about non-kinetic operations as much as a straight clash of strength. "War amongst the people" is about anything but overwhelming firepower.
-
I wrote a book on this. On a side note: More WW2
-
Because Op know about this kind of stuff. I honestly don't understand why you guys keep on arguing hypotheticals. With all the technological advances, you cannot say how modern war would be fought.
-
Interesting. So you can have the world's most powerful army and even an awesome strategy to back it up but like a plant it must be watered every now and then or else it withers and dies.
-
Jesus OP. The fact that you can write this much...wow. Are you a veteran?
-
Dat siege of Leningrad.