Aglifter wrote:Any first world nation either has WMDs or can produce them quickly - ESP chemical weapons.
Not sure what that gets you when you don't have the size or strategic depth to survive to produce them (they'd better start now). Delivery vehicles can be a problem as well, unless you're willing to base your deterrence on the premise of scorching your own earth, which I guess could work but you'd have to be very convincing to make it credible.
Though in general, in the event of a US collapse any wealthy technically adept nation would be a fool to not immediately commence a defense buildup, up to and including WMD. Of course the world is still full of nations that are one or more of 1) not wealthy, 2) not technically adept, 3) fools. And even competent, wealthy nations can be handicapped by sheer lack of size/resources.
Maybe we're just jaded, but your villainy is not particularly impressive. -Ennesby
If you know what you're doing, you're not learning anything. -Unknown
Sanity is the process by which you continually adjust your beliefs so they are predictively sound. -esr
... Other than a few guided rockets, it doesn't take much to make a chemical weapon. You're talking about Victorian era tech - really, something quite simple.
Even the rockets - again, not that expensive in the current era.
Now, if the GPS satellites aren't replaced, things could get trickier, but the NAZIs managed to build V2s.
Other than that, you have to be able to make some artillery and shells - this stuff is all very simple - Singapore does have mandatory military service, so they must have some level of arms.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our Fortunes, & our sacred Honor
Either you're assuming they'll be a deterrent after decades of industrialized nations practicing gas-mask-and-charcoal-suit security theater and that the globally destabilizing environment caused by total US economic collapse, other nations wouldn't be desperate enough or emboldened to try it... or you're okay with the notion of WMD warfare between small nations. After all, it's happened before.
Yeah, I don't think the exchange rate will ever be that good.
Aglifter wrote:... Other than a few guided rockets, it doesn't take much to make a chemical weapon. You're talking about Victorian era tech - really, something quite simple.
Even the rockets - again, not that expensive in the current era.
Now, if the GPS satellites aren't replaced, things could get trickier, but the NAZIs managed to build V2s.
Other than that, you have to be able to make some artillery and shells - this stuff is all very simple - Singapore does have mandatory military service, so they must have some level of arms.
No. You're going to need strategic delivery systems to even hope to deter anyone. And you'd still be subject to reprisals- awareness of likely reprisals was enough to deter Hitler from using WMD's.
Edit: To be more clear, I agree that chemical agents and tactical delivery systems are easy. But those will not be sufficient to deter any invasion. And using those chem agents tactically may not be enough to let you *win*, especially when the reprisals start coming back your way. At which point you're worse off than you started.
Last edited by Greg on Wed Mar 06, 2013 7:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Maybe we're just jaded, but your villainy is not particularly impressive. -Ennesby
If you know what you're doing, you're not learning anything. -Unknown
Sanity is the process by which you continually adjust your beliefs so they are predictively sound. -esr
All the WMD in the world can't deter internal security threats. Most of the existing stock of nations that are wealthy, technically skilled and ostensibly not fools, possess the seeds of their own destruction within. Because, surprise!, those are also the demographic death-spiral nations.
Maybe we're just jaded, but your villainy is not particularly impressive. -Ennesby
If you know what you're doing, you're not learning anything. -Unknown
Sanity is the process by which you continually adjust your beliefs so they are predictively sound. -esr
I think the threat of WMD warfare between wealthy, small nations, would be a reality, if the US military power collapses - and, frankly, it already may have - the odds of the US fighting to save Singapore or Taiwan, is rather slight - but the economic impact of trying to conquer them may be more than its worth to China or Malaysia.
I don't know what the demographics of Singapore are - I know they are, actively, trying to reduce speculation on their real estate market to keep home prices more affordable for their youth - (mostly because China's "Free money for the Han" program was sending prices through the roof.)
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our Fortunes, & our sacred Honor
Aglifter wrote:... Other than a few guided rockets, it doesn't take much to make a chemical weapon. You're talking about Victorian era tech - really, something quite simple.
Even the rockets - again, not that expensive in the current era.
Now, if the GPS satellites aren't replaced, things could get trickier, but the NAZIs managed to build V2s.
Other than that, you have to be able to make some artillery and shells - this stuff is all very simple - Singapore does have mandatory military service, so they must have some level of arms.
No. You're going to need strategic delivery systems to even hope to deter anyone. And you'd still be subject to reprisals- awareness of likely reprisals was enough to deter Hitler from using WMD's.
Edit: To be more clear, I agree that chemical agents and tactical delivery systems are easy. But those will not be sufficient to deter any invasion. And using those chem agents tactically may not be enough to let you *win*, especially when the reprisals start coming back your way. At which point you're worse off than you started.
The problem with chemical weapons is that you need a LOT of it to even begin to control an area.
I know - but, essentially, you are dealing w. very connected entities. Its about "I can make the disruption difficult/impossible to cope with", not "I can actually destroy your population centers."
No one involved actually has the ability to maintain a prolonged campaign - that might happen again, if globalization collapses, but otherwise, its, pretty much impossible for any wealthy nation to economically survive a prolonged conflict.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our Fortunes, & our sacred Honor
Aglifter wrote:... Other than a few guided rockets, it doesn't take much to make a chemical weapon. You're talking about Victorian era tech - really, something quite simple.
As it turns out, it's possible to manufacture phosgene gas in your garage, using nothing but a can of brake cleaner, and an arc welder...
Cognosce teipsum et disce pati
"People come and go in our lives, especially the online ones. Some leave a fond memory, and some a bad taste." -Aesop
Aglifter wrote:... Other than a few guided rockets, it doesn't take much to make a chemical weapon. You're talking about Victorian era tech - really, something quite simple.
As it turns out, it's possible to manufacture phosgene gas in your garage, using nothing but a can of brake cleaner, and an arc welder...
Yeah... I used to clean and prep metal with brake cleaner before welding. I don't do that anymore.
As for the thread subject, I think we are screwed in an outhouse. All the anti-gun movements around the country aren't happening in a vacuum, it's part of the Dem Cong's larger plan to disarm us before stomping us all.
Last edited by Darrell on Thu Mar 07, 2013 12:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
