Win / KotakuInAction2
KotakuInAction2
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
KotakuInAction2 The Official Gamergate Forum
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

44
()
posted 2 years ago by borga 2 years ago by borga +44 / -0
55 comments share
55 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (55)
sorted by:
▲ 6 ▼
– Gizortnik 6 points 2 years ago +6 / -0

When you consider how Communism works, and how aggressive it is, it's pretty obvious to me that the ONLY way to dissuade communist states from attacking is nuclear annihilation.

Even then, I don't even think you need MAD. I think a competant military with tactical nuclear weapons is still plenty effective at dissuading aggression from larger powers.

It's funny that I should mention Tropico so regularly, but it's a good point. Tropico's setting is based off of how Island nations, particularly in the Caribbean, had to survive the cold-war period dealing with the US and USSR. Well, the US isn't necessarily the good guy, and can get pretty demanding. The USSR isn't really better either, they just have different objectives. Both will overthrow you if they want, and if they can't overthrow you, both will send a task force down and invade. They will constantly press for an advantage over you if you don't build a strong military and try to placate everyone. That pressure only stops when you add a military base of one of the factions on your island, or by arming your island with nukes. The nukes don't actually threaten DC or Moscow, but they do threaten their fleets.

In the Falkland Islands conflict, Argentina had the General Belgrano sunk. IIRC Nearly 2,500 people died. The majority of all lives lost were from one ship. This loss was so destabilizing that it's not unreasonable to argue that collapsed the will of the government and people to fight and the embarrassment of the loss of the war meant that the government lost it's legitimacy and was overthrown. ONE. SHIP.

Anti-ship missiles are something that terrifies modern navies because of how effective they are at this point. The Falklands proved that. Argentina fucked up, but there's a real chance the British could have suffered the same fate if the Argentinian Exocet missile or anti-ship bombs had functioned better. The British lost a cruiser, but they could have just as easily lost a carrier or several troop transports. There was a real risk that both countries could have lost thousands of lives, more than even lived on the island. If the British had lost a carrier or a troop transport, Margret Thatcher's government would have been destroyed.

In the "Millennium Challenge" war games scenario, a USMC General was tasked with being Opposition Forces against an American naval task force, basically designed to mimic an invasion of Iran. However, he was ordered to basically roll over and fail. He decided to reject this, and trained his forces to attack the USN with targeted suicide boats, anti-ship missile fire, and again: troop transports; combined with a preemptive strike. The USN lost badly in the exercise. Total loss of the American carriers, and a sinking of several other ships and troop transports, with only some ground gained on the shore by the Americans. Yes, his forces were exhausted, but casualty estimates for the American forces were several thousand in a single day. He was ordered to do the exercise as intended, and then dismissed for embarrassing the Pentagon, but his point was clear. A competent and aggressive enemy could cause a catastrophic loss to the US military, even with limited and archaic technology. The political ramifications of the bloodiest day in American history resulting from a lost carrier, after the order of an offensive war on a minor nation shouldn't need to be stated. See: Argentina above.

Well, the same thing can work for tactical nukes. Iran has the advantage of having a very large military for it's size. But if you can't field such a military, you need force multipliers. If you are a minor nation, and a great power has sent a carrier task force, or even an armored column to your shores/border; a few tactical nuclear warheads could cause thousands, or tens of thousands of casualties, and quickly dissuade most aggressors. Your enemy would work to attempt other avenues of attack both economically and diplomatically, but a physical invasion would be stopped dead in it's tracts because of the politically unacceptable losses. If there was any dissent in their military that such an invasion was unwarranted, you could even be looking at a demoralized military or even a military coup.

If the first day of the invasion costs 10,000 dead on the invading force, there will be very little political will to keep pressing.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– TheModernDaVinci 1 point 2 years ago +1 / -0

"Millennium Challenge" war games scenario

While I agree with your overall point, I would just like to say that from what I understand, he was put on blast for a lot more than going rogue. We are talking stuff like boats carrying missiles bigger than them, the kamikazes exceeding their own buoyancy with how many explosives they were carrying, motorcycle messengers that would have to be moving at light speed to do what they were doing, the whole shebang.

But like I said, the general point you are making is a good one, and even if he achieved the results through copious amounts of bullshit, the results would indeed speak for themselves. Its also part of why I think Taiwan would be even more able to hold off an attack than Ukraine is (since it has a pretty extensive anti-ship missile network, with further backing from the Japanese).

In the end, it remains true: No matter how much we think we have changed history, the only true way to ensure peace and the survival of your nation is through superior firepower.

permalink parent save report block reply

Original 8chan Links to Gamer Gate:

.

The main GG discussion is on the videogames board: https://8chan.moe/v/

.

GamerGate archive is at https://8chan.moe/gamergatehq/

.

GamerGate Wiki:

https://ggwiki.deepfreeze.it/index.php/Main_Page

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

The below rules are just a summary of the rules which can be found in the Welcome Ashore post.

.

ONE: Do not post Illegal Activity, or criminal manifestos.

.

TWO: Do not engage in speech that promotes, advocates, glorifies, or endorses violence.

.

THREE: Do not threaten, harass, defame, or bully users.

.

FOUR: Do not post involuntary Salacious Material.

.

FIVE: Do not post Porn

.

SIX: NSFW content must be flaired NSFW.

.

SEVEN: Do not post Facebook accounts or twitter accounts with less than 500 followers, and personal information.

.

EIGHT: Do not intentionally deceive others by impersonating another.

.

NINE: Do not solicit or engage in transactions that are federally regulated by the US govt.

.

TEN: No vote manipulation. Do not break communities.win's features.

.

ELEVEN: Do not post spam.

.

TWELVE: Do not post intentional falsehoods or hoaxes.

.

THIRTEEN: No reposts

.

FOURTEEN: Do not post more than 5 posts a day to this sub.

.

FIFTEEN: Do not direct particularly egregious identity based slurs at users.

.

SIXTEEN: Do not attack entire identity groups as inferior or conspiring.


Moderators

  • DomitiusOfMassilia
  • ClockworkFool
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - 2hf5d (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy