The EMP itself causes heating of electronics. Electro-magnetic pulse. The pulse causes fluctuations in electricity and magnetism: each of which causes fluctuations in the other. Hard drives use magnetic alignment to write and store data.
Is it that significant? I mean id think the over heating would just be from the increased voltage in the circuits. yah, but the fluctuations are the kind that would mess up a compass, I dont think theyd take a magnet and reverse the poles on it or anything like that. Hard drives use magnets, two kinds, an outward force (north north), adn inward (north south) per block, and one is "1" and the other "0" hence binary, atleast, i think thats how it works. Man I just got off this forum with a total moron, I told him that the average time for a nuke to be launched and hit a target is 45 minutes. He said bullshit and said that after 18 years of military service, top secret clearance, and two masters degrees he couldnt even toucht hat sort of data. I told him, "After one year of high school I could figure out that a rocket travelling "X" distance at a rate of "y" takes 45 minutes maximum to go from one end of the earth to another" Am I off base with that?
REPLY: Right on countzero. Some here seem to forget just what sort of people we are up against. They do not want peace and seek civilian targets throughout the world and have been doing so for many decades now. The attack on the World Trade Center in New York where I sometimes live is a pretty good example of what I am talking about. These bastards need to be wiped out and I hope President Obama is going to get serious about it and get the job done. I spoke with a young soldier yesterday, we met at some bar and had a few drinks together, who has already done two tours and is getting ready for a third. These guys are motivated and want to be allowed to go where these bastards are and kill them. He looks forward to his next DEPLOYMENT is what he called it. I asked about how the guys felt about these multiple deployments and such. He told me that because of the lousy employment situation here in the USA right now, there is no shortage of new volunteers. So that is the story I got from a soldier who has been seriously involved in these wars for many years now. ...Fellowtraveler
Funnily enough you're fairly close, even though you calculated it the wrong way. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The speed of an ICBM is not its over-the ground speed i.e. it's not doing Y mph horizontally (distance X) it goes up and then comes down - following "two sides of a triangle". Where it does score however is in that while the ICBM is in flight the Earth turns underneath it. Try here, and check the "Flight phases" section.
Yah, I did calculate in for three dimensions. Anyways, just off of a rough estimate, it takes an object in orbit 90 minutes to orbit the earth, considering the farthest away a missile would be launched would be half that, youd expect it to be somewhere around the 45 minute range give or take several.
The book said it knocked out all electronics but then again it might be nothing more than an estimate.
"The first thing humans learned is to kill, and we are damn good at it or tigers will be ruling the Earth right now" - Valentine Wiggin from Ender's Game I totally agree with that quote. Humans tend to be violent toward our own species. Well, war is started mainly because of territory, and/or power. War is like legal violence.This is cruel but its a fact: Darwin's survival of the fittest. Humans tend to rise from the ashes of war and get stronger, it provides us with a focus.
In my opinion, the air force is the most respectable, most skilled and most deadly out of all three branches of the armed forces Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!, but nuclear submarines and nuclear silos are pretty deadly too.
According to the Art of War ( I love that book Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ) The most important is to attack an enemy's strategy, next best is to disrupt his alliances, the next best is to attack his armies, then only as a last resort will you attack his cities. Its best to take cities whole.
Most strategies for taking a city is: 1.Bombard it with naval(if in range), artillery/rocket barrage, and air raids. 2.Move in with tanks and infantry. 3.Sweep the city house by house. Providing step 1 does its job I don't see why cities shouldn't be taken.
Step 1 does little but provide more cover for any defenders who know what they're doing. And if you ask any trained soldier FISH* (FIBUA for the UK, MOUT for the US) you'll find that it's one of the least "favourite" jobs going. Urban terrain soaks up men like nobody's business and causes tremendous losses. Read about Stalingrad for one example. * Fighting In Someone's House - colloquial term for Fighting In Built Up Areas/ Military Operations in Urbanised Terrain.
Yes it does Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Technically, the paratroopers are in the air force. Plus, you will be down to your knees begging for you life when thousands of bombers and fighters are heading your way. Chances are they won't see you though :bawl:. Air Force receive the least casualties in all wars and have the best damage:casualties ratio, pilots are all officers, and pilots undergo heavy training.
No, no, no. House sweeping is TERRIBLE!!! Have you seen what that did to the Germans in Battle of Stalingrad?. The best is to siege and blockade it, then you move in when they are at their weakest. They away their will to fight first then its pincer blitzkrieg time Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!. Cities shouldn't be taken, because if you kill innocent civilians: Your troops are going to feel bad, you are going to feel bad, enemies will want revenge. So your demolishing your morale and boasting theirs. Also you can take and use their resources if you don't destroy them Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!. If you treat their civilians well, more will join your cause, you will feel good, and your troops will also fell good. Same with treating POWs well.
True, fighting in rubble is easier. And yeah I'd hate to fight close quarters. I used to study WW2 and know about Stalingrad. Bloody battle that was. The Russians threw everything at the Germans.
I honestly didn't see your comment about Stalingrad before posting mine Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Seiges are possibly the best tactic in the world. Blockades are efffective. I don't beleive in killing civilians. I'm old fashioned like that. I like the more dignified fighting, like General "Stonewall" Jackson, or Field Marshall Irwin Rommel.
Same, I fight like a gentlemen. Both in video games, in theory and in real-life ( hand to hand ). That's why I never got suspended, even though I win fights, I don't punch or kick ( only in arm, leg, and stomach if necessary ). I restraint and grapple ( and bend if necessary ). I am really fast, but I can never bring myself to punch in the face, dunno why Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Harder. There's more cover available, and any flimsy structures are already down, so no-one will try to defend them.
