Can a nation with only computers stay free?

[Revoltingest]

The problem with seeking safety by way of military might is that it leads nowhere.
It is just a self-feeding drain that scares others into doing the same, creating huge problems for pretty much everyone and solving or preserving pretty much nothing.

Looking at history, countries which had a weak military were often conquered.
Being strong can prevent this.

How come anyone can even hope to attain safety for "freedom" (which kind of freedom, btw? What does that truly mean?) by having a powerful military is quite beyond me. It is a self-inflicted trap and drain, nothing more, nothing less.

Unilateral disarmament to achieve peace is a fantasy.
Your foes will be armed, & see prosperous weaklings as a fat & juicy prize.

 

[LuisDantas]

Looking at history, countries which had a weak military were often conquered.
Being strong can prevent this.

I disagree. Being strong protected no empire ever. All of them fell, usually with more social damage when they made a point of having a powerful military.

Besides, things are different these days. For most of history military might was determined mostly by feelings of commitment and leadership. It was representative of a people's desire to exist with its own autonomy, stand its ground by putting itself on the line.

Such is no longer the case, particularly in the USA. Now it is just a function of economic priority and the political influence of the military industry.

I seem to recall that it has become something a tradition to actually promise to attempt not to commit troops in American military interventions - which is not too different from saying that they are not supposed to have any legitimacy, if you think about it.

Unilateral disarmament to achieve peace is a fantasy.

Of course.

Then again, peace through superior firepower is a known non-starter. History and common sense both demonstrate it.

Your foes will be armed, & see prosperous weaklings as a fat & juicy prize.

Your foes will be desperate to arm themselves ASAP, no matter the price, and make a point of striking first in order to avoid what they see as a necessary "defense" of its own.

Feeding the arms race is pointless. Diplomacy and true international cooperation are indispensable.

 

[esmith]

What you're describing is physically impossible. Nothing can be "parked" in orbit over the United States; geostationary orbits are only possible over the equator. And they're 22,000 miles up, not 300.

It will not be "parked" there. That is the position where the EMP pulse will be detonated. I guess I could have used a more descriptive sentence. But I assumed that everyone knowsthat the weapon is basically a ballistic missile in the form of a satellite.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It will not be "parked" there. That is the position where the EMP pulse will be detonated. I guess I could have used a more descriptive sentence. But I assumed that everyone knowsthat the weapon is basically a ballistic missile in the form of a satellite.

I don't think it's a good idea to assume that "everyone knows" ridiculous doomsday scenarios you've imagined up.

 

[PolyHedral]

I as the aggressor have full military capabilities with the following assets: an army with the standard array of weapons, a navy with the standard array of ships, an air force with the standard array of aircraft, and the capability to launch a satellite into orbit
Now knowing that the US is relying on their technology systems I will launch a satellite into orbit and position it approximately 300 miles above Lebanon KS (the approximate geographical center of the lower 48 states. This satellite contains an EMP weapon which I will detonate at the proper time. When I detonate this weapon it will completely wipe out the electric grid of the US, it will fry all electronics that are not protected from EMP pulses. This will blind the US.

It will blind most of the US. A lot of military hardware is EMP-hardened.

(Not to mention that the only effective way to generate an EMP is to detoante a nuke, which technically means you've just used a WMD against the United States... How good is your anti-ICBM tech? )

 

[esmith]

Probably less than the amount of money given to the military.

A protection that would extend to the civilian power grid and commercial systems in your hypothetical, and even in a hypothetical where only some of the military funding was cut. Heck, with that kind of money being thrown to computer R&D, I doubt the cost would be all that high in the long run, anyway.

You must remember that the US electric grid system covers thousands of miles and the majority, if not all, the US economic info-structure is computer based. At he present time, I would hazard to guess that the majority of it is not protected from an EMP source, which can be a solar EMP. Most private companies have little or no desire to consider EMP protection to be cost effective. Now you would have to build a Faraday cage around every electrical sub-station in the US. There is only one state(of the lower 48) that has an independent electric grid whereas the rest are basically interlinked which can cause a ripple effect of power losses if something happens. Remember the 2003 Northeast blackout? It was caused by just one small mistake at one control room Northeast Power Blackout

BTW, that link is not reliable; it's clearly a biased source.

It may be a little on the extreme side but it does present the possibilities. Maybe you would consider this site more to your liking.
Electromagnetic Pulse - Nuclear EMP - futurescience.com
make sure to also read his myths about EMP along with various other links in the main article.
MYTHS

Only for those who make enemies for no reason, like the superpowers. Or people who perceive threats where there are none.

Your above remark was in response to the following:

Quote: esmith

Also, it doesn't have to be a nuclear threat. The triad of NBC warfare still has the biological and/or chemical agents that could be released in either the air or drinking water or both in all major cities in the US. The world is a very dangerous place and is getting more dangerous each day.

Do you not agree that Islamic terrorist main objective is to bring "their" brand of Islam to the entire world. They would like nothing better than to strike a blow against the Western group of nations and especially the US. This has nothing to do with the actions that the US takes against them. Now I agree that the US actions against them is responsibly for the recruitment of some of their members but it is also reasonable to expect that others join because they also have the same objective.

I don't understand the relevance.

Here you are addressing my example of the Korean "Police Action". Within a few short months after the surrender of Japan the prevailing philosophy within the Truman administration was that there was no need for the Army, Navy, or Marine Corps. The only military that was needed was the Air Force because the US had the A-bomb. Due to this, the 3 other services were downgraded to the point that they were basically unfit for combat. Most of the military hardware was sold to other nations and what was left was basically junk. (a excellent source of information dealing with the political and military thought process going back to the late 1800 through the Korean "Police Action" is a book The Coldest Winter by David Halberstam. Now the reason I use this as an example is just as valid today as it was then (just after WWII). The idea that we now have the perfect deterrent and we do not need to expend money for certain aspects of the military. Yes I agree that there is wast and money could be better spent.

A motive that hasn't led others to invade Britain, Germany, France, or any other ex-world power.
'Sides, if it's just a matter of dominating the world, there's only two countries I can see who have that motive: China (piracy hub of the world) and the United States.

Your above statement was addressed to my statement:

Quote:esmith
To eliminate the possibility ofthe United States ever being able to counter "their" desire to dominate the world.

You answered you own question by the statement "ex-world power". What nation is left that presently has the military power to even attempt to stop an aggressor from attempting to invade another country or countries.

See above. Then again, that's been the entire motive for the US to attack other countries. Plus, I wonder why only "Islamic" terrorists rather than the many, many other types of terrorists.

I think that I have answered that question in Post #108 of http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...drowning-welfare-programs-11.html#post3527085
At the present time there is only one major player in the world on international terrorism and those are the Islamic terrorist.

And bring the entire world upon them. (Though such an event could lead to a Cold War between the US and China, since China would want to take that region for themselves, and the US would want South Korea to have it.)

You should probably look beyond just Korea. I think that the next major conflict will come in the Spratly Islands area. I think that the Chinese view that area and even the entire South China Sea as belonging to them. See Sourth China Sea Dispute

And nothing else. I once again ask you: what kind of computer do you think Anonymous used to attack them? Probably a 150-200 USD netbook running Kali Linux bought in some South Korean, Japanese, or Chinese equivalent to Fry's or Best Buy, which afterwards would have run some wiping software, destroyed, and disposed of.

(One interesting thing of note, though: seems they have more female ground troops than male ones. lol)

You must remember that you do not need a highly technological military to accomplish something if you have a numerical superior force that has little or no regard for human life. Technology is not always the superior asset in a land based conflict.

 

[esmith]

I don't think it's a good idea to assume that "everyone knows" ridiculous doomsday scenarios you've imagined up.

So, you think that the possibility of a EMP event whether natural or man-made is "ridiculous". Suggest you read the following
Electromagnetic Pulse - Nuclear EMP - futurescience.com
an additional link referenced in the above article also:
Electromagnetic Pulse - EMP Myths - futurescience.com

 

[esmith]

It will blind most of the US. A lot of military hardware is EMP-hardened.

(Not to mention that the only effective way to generate an EMP is to detoante a nuke, which technically means you've just used a WMD against the United States... How good is your anti-ICBM tech? )

We at this time do not have an anti-ICBM system that can reach the 200-300 mile altitude when the EMP device would be detonated. Also what would be the economic affect of the loss of the majority of the electrical power and the economic records of most banks and other monetary records?

 

[Curious George]

I was involved in a discussion with members about what would happen if the United States gave up all of our military hardware and used that money to fund welfare systems. There was a hypothesis put forward that the nation could be defended by computers, personal computers to be exact. Since the discussion was not germaine to the OP I suggested that the discussion could be continued but with it's own subject. So, to bring anyone that would like to join in this discussion I will attempt to bring everyone up to speed.
I contend that a nation's freedom can only be guaranteed by a strong military the other
The following are copied and pasted here from the other discussion:

Now I will open with the following scenario with the United States not having any military only basic police/security agencies.

I as the aggressor have full military capabilities with the following assets: an army with the standard array of weapons, a navy with the standard array of ships, an air force with the standard array of aircraft, and the capability to launch a satellite into orbit
Now knowing that the US is relying on their technology systems I will launch a satellite into orbit and position it approximately 300 miles above Lebanon KS (the approximate geographical center of the lower 48 states. This satellite contains an EMP weapon which I will detonate at the proper time. When I detonate this weapon it will completely wipe out the electric grid of the US, it will fry all electronics that are not protected from EMP pulses. This will blind the US. I will then assault two locations on the East and West coast.(best would be Long Beach CA and Atlanta GA ) with a massive drop of combat troops preceded by air and sea "softening up". I will then establish a port for debarkation of my heavy equipment (which I really don't need since the US does not have a military) and combat troops. I will then capture Washington DC, and Los Angles and all major cities up and down both coast. I now demand that the Government of the United States surrender. Which they must or I will order the elimination of selected civilian populations of various cities. In actuality I do not need an EMP pulse, I will just go with the conventional attack phase.

If you are in doubt of this EMP scenario I suggest you read the following article:
EMP Attack Unstoppable followed up by the following The Results of an EMP Attack

Though I do not believe a nation does not need military might I will play devils advocate.

First your EMP attack never happens because I have already rooted your systems, detect the attack and hack your satellite. I will then go ahead and lock up your sewer systems and shut down your military communications. Your major cities will be overrun with feces and you will be on your knees begging for mercy in a month. For good measure, I will turn off your lights and water. That should bring your surrender time to about two weeks since you will have to deal with the mass riots in your cities.

 

[PolyHedral]

We at this time do not have an anti-ICBM system that can reach the 200-300 mile altitude when the EMP device would be detonated. Also what would be the economic affect of the loss of the majority of the electrical power and the economic records of most banks and other monetary records?

I wasn't asking about their system, I was asking about yours, because detonating a nuclear device above the US to destroy their electrical systems would probably be met with nuclear retaliation.

 

[esmith]

I wasn't asking about their system, I was asking about yours, because detonating a nuclear device above the US to destroy their electrical systems would probably be met with nuclear retaliation.

I assume you mean the US in your statement "destroy their electrical systems". Not necessarily an EMP weapon does not necessarily require a nuclear weapon to obtain the desired results. Therefor do you think the US would launch a nuclear attack against a country that did not use nuclear weapons?

 

[PolyHedral]

I assume you mean the US in your statement "destroy their electrical systems". Not necessarily an EMP weapon does not necessarily require a nuclear weapon to obtain the desired results. Therefor do you think the US would launch a nuclear attack against a country that did not use nuclear weapons?

A large EMP weapon does require a nuclear detonation.

 

[esmith]

A large EMP weapon does require a nuclear detonation.

How about the CHAMP
Video: Doomsday for Iran? US Tests EMP Bomb - Defense/Security - News - Israel National News
CHAMP - lights out (Video)

And this is only today's technology.

 

[dgirl1986]

I would want a bulletproof computer...

if you were to give up having military, you would leave yourself open for a takeover.

 

[Riverwolf]

You must remember that the US electric grid system covers thousands of miles and the majority, if not all, the US economic info-structure is computer based. At he present time, I would hazard to guess that the majority of it is not protected from an EMP source, which can be a solar EMP. Most private companies have little or no desire to consider EMP protection to be cost effective. Now you would have to build a Faraday cage around every electrical sub-station in the US. There is only one state(of the lower 48) that has an independent electric grid whereas the rest are basically interlinked which can cause a ripple effect of power losses if something happens. Remember the 2003 Northeast blackout? It was caused by just one small mistake at one control room Northeast Power Blackout

Sucks. I seem to remember something about that.

Then again, I reiterate: it's probably less expensive than all the money being thrown at the military.

It may be a little on the extreme side but it does present the possibilities. Maybe you would consider this site more to your liking.
Electromagnetic Pulse - Nuclear EMP - futurescience.com
make sure to also read his myths about EMP along with various other links in the main article.
MYTHS

Nope, not really.

You see, predicting exactly what might be developed or what might catch on in the military is a waste of time. Are you aware of the couple of uber-geeks who implanted chips in their brains and used them to basically communicate telepathically halfway across the world?

Your above remark was in response to the following:
Do you not agree that Islamic terrorist main objective is to bring "their" brand of Islam to the entire world. They would like nothing better than to strike a blow against the Western group of nations and especially the US. This has nothing to do with the actions that the US takes against them. Now I agree that the US actions against them is responsibly for the recruitment of some of their members but it is also reasonable to expect that others join because they also have the same objective.

Bah. All extremists want that. They're not the terrorists I worry about.

Here you are addressing my example of the Korean "Police Action". Within a few short months after the surrender of Japan the prevailing philosophy within the Truman administration was that there was no need for the Army, Navy, or Marine Corps.

Ah, yes, that is foolish.

Like I said: even Switzerland has a military.

Your above statement was addressed to my statement:
You answered you own question by the statement "ex-world power". What nation is left that presently has the military power to even attempt to stop an aggressor from attempting to invade another country or countries.

World powers come and go. When Germany was world power, America was nothing. When Britain was world power, America was just some colonies. When France was world power... okay, America was "land of opportunity" at that time, but nowadays, so is pretty much the entire developed world, and in any case, it certainly wasn't world power.

Tomorrow, it might be China, but seeing as they can't even police themselves (let alone the world), I doubt that would last long. Who knows which one will come through after that? Norway? Canada? South Africa? Egypt? Brazil? Mexico? Tibet? India? 'Tis anyone's guess.

I think that I have answered that question in Post #108 of http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...drowning-welfare-programs-11.html#post3527085
At the present time there is only one major player in the world on international terrorism and those are the Islamic terrorist.

According to the media.

You must remember that you do not need a highly technological military to accomplish something if you have a numerical superior force that has little or no regard for human life. Technology is not always the superior asset in a land based conflict.

Which of the two sovereigns is imbued with the Moral Law?
Which of the two generals has most ability?
With whom lie the advantages derived from Heaven and Earth?
On which side is Discipline most rigorously enforced?
Which army is stronger?
On which side are officers and men more highly trained?
In which army is there the greater constancy both in reward and punishment?

Remember Cannae.

 

[Riverwolf]

Though I do not believe a nation does not need military might I will play devils advocate.

First your EMP attack never happens because I have already rooted your systems, detect the attack and hack your satellite. I will then go ahead and lock up your sewer systems and shut down your military communications. Your major cities will be overrun with feces and you will be on your knees begging for mercy in a month. For good measure, I will turn off your lights and water. That should bring your surrender time to about two weeks since you will have to deal with the mass riots in your cities.

LOL I wish I'd thought of that!

 

[Riverwolf]

A large EMP weapon does require a nuclear detonation.

Poly, his scenario was that the hypothetical US doesn't have any form of military whatsoever, so we can assume there's no nukes, as well.

 

[Riverwolf]

BTW... what is "freedom" in this case, anyway?

 

[esmith]

*sigh* remember Kenny.

That name does not ring a bell, at least at this time.

 

[Riverwolf]

That name does not ring a bell, at least at this time.

I meant Cannae. ^_^