Page 1 of 26

Wargame simulations show Russia and China could defeat US

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:08 pm
by Yusseria
Scary.
Scary World War III ‘wargames’ show U.S. forces crushed by Russia and China in certain hot spots around the globe.

Research organization RAND has run dozens of wargames simulating major conflict scenarios in what it describes as Russia and China’s “backyards.” The wargames suggest that the U.S. forces in those locations would get attacked by a vast array of both conventional and cyber weapons.

RAND Senior Defense Analyst David Ochmanek discussed the simulations at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) in Washington D.C. last week. “In our games, where we fight China or Russia … blue gets its a** handed to it, not to put too fine a point on it,” he said, during a panel discussion. Blue denotes U.S. forces in the simulations.

“We lost a lot of people, we lose a lot of equipment, we usually fail to achieve our objectives of preventing aggression by the adversary,” Ochmanek added during the CNAS discussion.

Based on the wargames, a clash with Russia in the Baltic states would result in the rapid defeat of U.S. forces and their allies, Ochmanek told Fox News. “Within 48 to 72 hours, Russian forces are able to reach a capital of a Baltic state,” he said. On the other side of the world, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, while a massive military gamble for China, would also pose a huge challenge for U.S. forces in the area, according to Ochmanek.

Russia and China have amassed large inventories of precision-guided cruise missiles and ballistic missiles that can reach hundreds of miles and strike military targets, the researcher said. Set against this backdrop, U.S. military outposts and aircraft carriers in the contested regions could face a potential devastating barrage of missiles.

In RAND’s wargames and analysis, Russia, and particularly China, unleash so many missiles that they overcome U.S. defenses. “They send salvos that are so great that we cannot intercept all the missiles,” Ochmanek said.

The researcher notes that the key “domains of warfare” are contested from the start of hostilities. The U.S., he explains, should not assume air and maritime superiority over the battlespace. American space assets could also face attacks, while U.S. command and control systems could be targeted by electromagnetic and cyber weapons.

To combat these threats, U.S. forces could ramp up their deployment of so-called ‘standoff’ missiles that can be fired from large distances, such as cruise missiles, according to Ochmanek, along with highly robust reconnaissance systems and jam-resistant communications.

“For a sustained investment of an additional $8 billion a year between 2020 and 2030, the U.S. Air Force could buy the kit needed to make a difference,” he said, noting that similar sums would be required for the Army and Navy.

America’s posture is also key when it comes to challenging potential adversaries such as Russia, according to Ochmanek. “It’s putting more combat power back into Europe, and putting it on Europe’s eastern flank,” he said.

The U.S. National Defense Strategy, which was released by the DoD last year, cites the restoration of “America’s competitive edge by blocking global rivals Russia and China from challenging the U.S. and our allies,” as one its key goals.

“Long-term strategic competitions with China and Russia are the principal priorities for the Department, and require both increased and sustained investment, because of the magnitude of the threats they pose to U.S. security and prosperity today, and the potential for those threats to increase in the future,” the strategy explains.

Wargame simulations show that both Russia and China could defeat the US in both Taiwan and in the Baltic states. I believe that this demonstrates the growing power of both Russia and China and the threat that they pose to both the US and its allies. Russia could crush us in the Baltic states and China could crush us in Taiwan. In fact, Russia could conquer a Baltic state in less than 72 hours. My question is this: is this indicative of our need to strengthen our military? For all the talk about how much the US wastes on the military... if we can not even defend Taiwan or our Baltic allies then clearly something is wrong.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:12 pm
by El-Amin Caliphate
This is good and bad.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:13 pm
by United Muscovite Nations
I wonder how many posts this thread will get before people still on the Gulf War hype train start talking about "threat inflation."

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:14 pm
by Yusseria
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:This is good and bad.

I don't find the fact that Russia could conquer a Baltic state so quickly to be good.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:15 pm
by Yusseria
United Muscovite Nations wrote:I wonder how many posts this thread will get before people still on the Gulf War hype train start talking about "threat inflation."

Say what?

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:15 pm
by The Black Party
Nice and all, but how long would France last before surrendering after inevitably choosing the wrong side?

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:15 pm
by Trollzyn the Infinite
Well, to be frank: no shit.

It'd be kinda hard for a nation to defends other nations half-way across the world that border a hostile nation. All we could do is mount liberation efforts later on. Thing is, we don't have to worry about going to war with either country. Beijing is economically dependant on us and vice versa; Russia would have to fight all of NATO, and while they could knock out the Baltics with ease they'd get bogged down in Poland. Europe and Asia would be on high alert in the event of an invasion of the Republic of China or a Baltic State - with the latter being an act of war against all NATO countries, as a matter of fact.

This is all assuming no nukes are involved.

Regardless, neither scenario is even remotely likely.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:15 pm
by El-Amin Caliphate
Yusseria wrote:
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:This is good and bad.

I don't find the fact that Russia could conquer a Baltic state so quickly to be good.

Neither do I

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:15 pm
by Trollzyn the Infinite
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:This is good and bad.


There is nothing "good" about this; not even remotely.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:16 pm
by Christ Triumphant
And what do those simulations say about the likelihood of China and Russia actually cooperating in a war like that?

This is a nothing story. "Two major powers are able to defeat a single power" -- what breaking news...

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:17 pm
by Yusseria
The Black Party wrote:Nice and all, but how long would France last before surrendering after inevitably choosing the wrong side?

o o f

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:17 pm
by United Muscovite Nations
Yusseria wrote:
United Muscovite Nations wrote:I wonder how many posts this thread will get before people still on the Gulf War hype train start talking about "threat inflation."

Say what?

Everytime someone brings up that the US isn't spending enough to keep up with combined Chinese and Russian military, some guy from /k/ will come in and say that the US can quash any country easily and that all studies that show different things are just the government trying to get more tax money in the military.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:17 pm
by New haven america
Oh look, a projection used to justify giving the US' armed forces even more money.

Shocking.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:17 pm
by United Muscovite Nations
New haven america wrote:Oh look, a projection used to justify giving the US' armed forces even more money.

Shocking.

There it is.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:18 pm
by Yusseria
Christ Triumphant wrote:And what do those simulations say about the likelihood of China and Russia actually cooperating in a war like that?

This is a nothing story. "Two major powers are able to defeat a single power" -- what breaking news...

Why would they not? Their goals don't overlap. Russia, as always, wants more influence in Eastern Europe while China wants Taiwan.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:19 pm
by The Emerald Legion
Translation

"Russia and China could easily defeat token defense forces in areas right next to their borders before being subsequently crushed by the full weight of the US Military."

Well. No fucking duh.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:19 pm
by Yusseria
New haven america wrote:Oh look, a projection used to justify giving the US' armed forces even more money.

Shocking.

Oh, look, someone who wants to pretend like the US is totally strong enough and the military doesn't need more.

Shocking.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:19 pm
by New haven america
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:This is good and bad.


There is nothing "good" about this; not even remotely.

He probably thinks it's good because the US loses.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:20 pm
by Yusseria
United Muscovite Nations wrote:
Yusseria wrote:Say what?

Everytime someone brings up that the US isn't spending enough to keep up with combined Chinese and Russian military, some guy from /k/ will come in and say that the US can quash any country easily and that all studies that show different things are just the government trying to get more tax money in the military.

Yep, they're always around. Delusional as always.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:20 pm
by El-Amin Caliphate
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:This is good and bad.


There is nothing "good" about this; not even remotely.

The US not being the only superpower sounds pretty good to me.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:20 pm
by The Black Party
New haven america wrote:Oh look, a projection used to justify giving the US' armed forces even more money.

Shocking.

Until all branches of the Military get air conditioning (yes, including the Coast Guard), we should continue to slice NASA's budget and siphon it to the military.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:21 pm
by The Black Party
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:The US not being the only superpower sounds pretty good to me.

Unless you're a patriotic American.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:21 pm
by United Muscovite Nations
The Emerald Legion wrote:Translation

"Russia and China could easily defeat token defense forces in areas right next to their borders before being subsequently crushed by the full weight of the US Military."

Well. No fucking duh.

What "full weight"? The US military is smaller than it's been in decades, we don't even field enough tanks to match Russia alone, let alone China, and China practically doubles its naval capabilities every few years.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:21 pm
by Yusseria
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:
There is nothing "good" about this; not even remotely.

The US not being the only superpower sounds pretty good to me.

Depends on who the other superpower is.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:22 pm
by El-Amin Caliphate
The Black Party wrote:
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:The US not being the only superpower sounds pretty good to me.

Unless you're a patriotic American.

Fortunately I'm not ;)