Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 20:34:04 -0500 (EST)
From: danceswithcarp <dcombs-AT-bloomington.in.us>
Subject: Re: Send a folksinger to the Balkans...



On Wed, 7 Apr 1999, Unka Bart wrote:

> Best of all was being an artilleryman.  Man!  If you want to put a
> *serious* hurtin' on someone, there's absolutely nothing like having your
> very own 8" Howitzer (yes, yes, I know, I know.  But honestly, those
> Fokkers were flying Messerschmidts... but I digress...).

Speaking of these technical matters, Janes.com says the U$ is finally
going to try out some of those anti-armor cluster bombs in Yugoslavia.
These are some really wicked little demons that break out of the cannister
in the air by the dozens and then +home+ in on metal.  They're shaped
charges so they're pretty much going to penetrate any top-armor on any
tanks or APCs the Serbs have (for those of you not in the know, the top of
an armored vehicle isn't really armored as much as it's just
covered--easiest penetration).   

This means essentially there is no hiding above ground anymore.
Between the cluster bombs and the anti-armor cluster bombs you'd
best have some dirt and timber between you and the sky.  But even
dirt and timber won't protect you from Fuel Air Munitions, which is 
like filling a football stadium with gasoline fumes and then
setonating it just for the blast pressure effects.

There's a great Bill Maudlin cartoon from WW2.0 of Willie and Joe looking
at a tank and one of them is commenting "No thanks, a moving target
attracts the eye."  Never was this so true as now.

Someone said "Starship Troopers" was a good sci-fi flick.  The bugs are
sci-fi but the weaponry isn't that far advanced.  The whole NATO war
machine is truly incredible when you think about it.  War is almost damn
atuomated.  No.  It +is+ automated.  Already a single infantryman can put
out more firepower than a whole company of WW1 infantry.  And another man
can call in more fire from artillery and rockets than a entire regiment of
those same WW1 era soldiers could count on.

Senor Lewis and Unka Bart know what firepower was available during the
Vietnam War and that has been by passed by magnitudes of 10.  Those poor
fucking Serb groundpounders are going to see the elephant for sure.  I saw
where NATO now has 600 planes on station.  That sounds like an awesome
amount, but only about 1 out of 4 of those planes are on an assigned
mission to take out specific targets.  The rest are electronic
jammers, anti-radar, combat air patrol.  So maybe only 150 are actively
engaged in bombing.  And that still is a lot of sparklies if you are on
the ground.

Imagine how this must appear to the less industrialized peoples:  A great
airfleet of metallic birds spitting fire and raining death and even for a
technologically advanced military like the serbs which would probably be
in the top 40 militaries in the wirld THERE IS NO DEFENSE. THE ONLY PLACE
TO HIDE IS UNDERGROUND.

On the other hand while there are civilian casualties they truly have been
reduced by factors of 100s since Vietnam.  There will be people die from
the destruction of the infrastructure, after all, that is the point, but
such casualties aren't nearly as spectacular or photogenic as blown-apart
bodies.  However, the willy-nilly destruction of cities as in WW Ver2.0
hopefully, is hopefully hystery in warfare.

To see these terrifically powerful advances in technology you only have to
compare this to the Taliban's most recent conquest of the Afghan cities:
artillery and rocket fire leveled most downtowns and what they didn't
level the fires gutted.  Does anyone rember Beriut?  Gutted towers, and
miles of devastation.  Chechnya was alot like that, too. War isn't sterile
by any means, but it is getting much less bloodless for NATO due to
technology and the liberal use of it.

Of course the western powers have had the sense to stay out of the cities
with ground troops since Panama, and that may not be the case if the
infantry is sent into Kosovo, but you have to admit these great militaries
are making it harder and harder to fuck with them and survive let alone
get your side of the story out.  If NATO sends in the armor and troops
they will have people get killed, for sure, but the firepower trade will
be so one-sided that we won't be able to imagine it even with TV cameras;
we will all be in denial.

Which brings me to the anarcho-question:  What kind of potential
revolutions are there in the industrial/post-industrial nations?  The
collapse of the U$$R was close to civil war, but eventually the state just
melted into another state.  How would the U$ or UK or Grrrmoney or France
go?  I have no doubt the U$ would use these massivly lethal weapons on
their own people if there was an armed revolt, all of the way up to nukes
if that's what it took for the state to survive.

How does one go about toppling superpowers with the military and
economic resources of NATO members?  


carp