- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Anyone else concerned that advanced conventional warfare is no longer all that special?
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:24 am
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:24 am
The US has been throwing everything its got (minus nukes) at Iran yet Iran is still able to launch counter attacks against us and our allies. This capability on Iran's part is probably due to Russia and others with some similar conventional warfare options as the US.
Look at Russia. They're throwing everything they've got (minus nukes) at Ukraine yet Ukraine has been able to keep up its attacks against Russia with the help of the US's weaponry and intelligence systems.
Now the US's supplies are running lower than we'd like and if we find ourselves in a war against a larger power like Russia or China, we're fricked because we have two choices:
1. Throw everything we've got from the conventional arsenal until it runs out, exposing us to the option of having to use nukes
or
2. Throw everything we've got from the conventional arsenal and then relying on other major allies to step in and use up all their conventional arsenal. Then what happens when that war is over and the US and all its allies are left with super low supplies but a shite ton of nukes?
With all the world's biggest powers providing its weaponry to lesser allies, allowing them to keep their footing in major wars, are we quickly closing in on one of these super powers just saying "frick it" and throwing nukes at an adversary just to end things once and for all?
Look at Russia. They're throwing everything they've got (minus nukes) at Ukraine yet Ukraine has been able to keep up its attacks against Russia with the help of the US's weaponry and intelligence systems.
Now the US's supplies are running lower than we'd like and if we find ourselves in a war against a larger power like Russia or China, we're fricked because we have two choices:
1. Throw everything we've got from the conventional arsenal until it runs out, exposing us to the option of having to use nukes
or
2. Throw everything we've got from the conventional arsenal and then relying on other major allies to step in and use up all their conventional arsenal. Then what happens when that war is over and the US and all its allies are left with super low supplies but a shite ton of nukes?
With all the world's biggest powers providing its weaponry to lesser allies, allowing them to keep their footing in major wars, are we quickly closing in on one of these super powers just saying "frick it" and throwing nukes at an adversary just to end things once and for all?
10
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:25 am to TDsngumbo
quote:
Now the US's supplies are running lower than we'd like and if we find ourselves in a war against a larger power like Russia or China, we're fricked because we have two choices:
That’s assuming that China and Russia are in better positions than we are……
Spoiler…
They aren’t.
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:26 am to beerJeep
That may well be a fair point.
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:26 am to TDsngumbo
quote:
The US has been throwing everything its got (minus nukes) at Iran
Link?
quote:
Now the US's supplies are running lower than we'd like
Link?
quote:
Then what happens when that war is over and the US and all its allies are left with super low supplies but a shite ton of nukes?
I thought we’d make more.
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:26 am to TDsngumbo
quote:
Anyone else concerned that advanced conventional warfare is no longer all that special?
No
quote:
1. Throw everything we've got from the conventional arsenal until it runs out, exposing us to the option of having to use nukes
One thing this country has is bombs, missiles, and ammo.
Just make more.
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:27 am to Covingtontiger77
Quickly making more and saying "oh, we'll just make more" are two different things.
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:27 am to TDsngumbo
Imagine if they had nuclear bombs that they were about to have
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:28 am to TDsngumbo
quote:
The US has been throwing everything its got (minus nukes) at Iran
Just bombing stuff from the air or over the horizon can only accomplish so much. That’s always been true.
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:37 am to TDsngumbo
The problem is we no longer fight wars like we mean it. We could easily wipe Iran off the face of the earth, but we fight with our hands tied behind our back because we want to limit collateral damage.
As the saying goes, being kind to your enemies is being cruel to yourself. There is no less criticism, innocents still die, things are drug out for sometimes years.
Go in with the full force of the US military and wipe one of these shitholes off the face of the Earth and most of these rogue countries would calm the frick down.
As the saying goes, being kind to your enemies is being cruel to yourself. There is no less criticism, innocents still die, things are drug out for sometimes years.
Go in with the full force of the US military and wipe one of these shitholes off the face of the Earth and most of these rogue countries would calm the frick down.
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:38 am to TDsngumbo
Insofar as the US striking Iran is concerned, it's not exactly typical conventional warfare. No war has ever been won by air superiority alone. It ALWAYS takes infantry to take and hold ground. This has never changed throughout the history of warfare. The closest we ever came to winning without boots on the ground was the capitulation of Japan in 1945 without having to actually invade the islands, but we had island hopped all over the Pacific and sunk pretty much all of their naval fleet by that point and the main islands of Japan were essentially isolated and cut off at that point.
As far as Russia is concerned in Ukraine - Russia has been overestimated as a superpower for several decades at this point. Their nuclear arsenal remains rather formidable on paper, but no one knows whether their systems are actually operational. Their conventional military is poorly trained, poorly equipped, poorly paid and poorly motivated. This isn't an indictment of conventional warfare, it's simply an example of piss poor preparation and planning.
As far as Russia is concerned in Ukraine - Russia has been overestimated as a superpower for several decades at this point. Their nuclear arsenal remains rather formidable on paper, but no one knows whether their systems are actually operational. Their conventional military is poorly trained, poorly equipped, poorly paid and poorly motivated. This isn't an indictment of conventional warfare, it's simply an example of piss poor preparation and planning.
This post was edited on 7/13/26 at 10:58 am
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:46 am to SloaneRanger
You poor Panicans lose again.. One day you dumbasses will learn your lesson
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:49 am to TDsngumbo
Modern warfare has always been about destruction of an opponent’s infrastructure which is the basis for military enterprise. And the will to fight on vs. surrender. Sherman’s “march to the sea” took the fight out of the South.
But in today’s military dynamic the collateral damage re ‘innocents’ is deemed a “War Crime”, and like the Jihadists, ruthless sociopaths and suicidal martyrdom religious fanatics hide behind the women and kids. And those who oppose Jihad and long for Freedom are out in the front.
Trump could take out the entirety of Iranian energy infrastructure within a day. And the Jihadist would be flushed from their bunkers and therein easy targets for weapons like Warthogs and AC-130s. But it would take a new and Freedom-loving Regime many years to build back. With the deaths of many innocents. No way Trump wants his name on that for the history books. And the Jihadists know it. It would take a ‘George Patton’ who don’t care about his name to truly take out a Jihadist Nation.
But in today’s military dynamic the collateral damage re ‘innocents’ is deemed a “War Crime”, and like the Jihadists, ruthless sociopaths and suicidal martyrdom religious fanatics hide behind the women and kids. And those who oppose Jihad and long for Freedom are out in the front.
Trump could take out the entirety of Iranian energy infrastructure within a day. And the Jihadist would be flushed from their bunkers and therein easy targets for weapons like Warthogs and AC-130s. But it would take a new and Freedom-loving Regime many years to build back. With the deaths of many innocents. No way Trump wants his name on that for the history books. And the Jihadists know it. It would take a ‘George Patton’ who don’t care about his name to truly take out a Jihadist Nation.
Posted on 7/13/26 at 9:51 am to TDsngumbo
quote:
That may well be a fair point.
Russia can’t beat their Nextdoor neighbor with 1/4th the population and is reliant on human wave attacks by the norks.
China is in an absolute population free fall. Their economy is a complete house of cards with trillions wiped out in real estate markets over the last few uyears.
They would completely and totally collapse in a war against the United States.
Posted on 7/13/26 at 11:02 am to beerJeep
All good points regarding Russia and China. The first and most important step in becoming a military world power is to become a world economic power. Without the economy to back it, military power cannot be sustained.
Posted on 7/13/26 at 11:06 am to TDsngumbo
You obviously did not play sports. This gig in Iran reminds me of a scrimmage. We show a little that destroys their entire military in the first few minutes of the quarter or inning.
Now, we sit back and test our defense capabilities live. But in no way has the USA deployed its finest technology to eradicate this entity.
Meanwhile, we just took control of the Strait again. Certainly you do not think POTUS Trump will be fooled twice in case you think he was fooled once, do you?
Now, we sit back and test our defense capabilities live. But in no way has the USA deployed its finest technology to eradicate this entity.
Meanwhile, we just took control of the Strait again. Certainly you do not think POTUS Trump will be fooled twice in case you think he was fooled once, do you?
Posted on 7/13/26 at 11:10 am to TDsngumbo
Is this what DU and Reddit are saying? Cool story
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News