User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/15/2020 7:26:23 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Paul: They wouldn't be the first nation to make that exact same mistake.  Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Paul: Originally Posted By Sundowner08L: Winning requires will we don't have. They wouldn't be the first nation to make that exact same mistake. Japan was convinced we didn't have the will to fight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2020 7:35:21 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CarmelBytheSea: Washington Post today - https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/459941/27A3B542-502A-4E7C-8E8A-A2D93FDC9774_jpe-1415575.JPG That is why it is known as the Washington Compost |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2020 10:21:41 AM EDT
[#3]
The other problem is that wherever they are getting their info from, rather than making an alarmist quote that "We lose every time, or we get our asses handed to us" they aren't showing you the reports themselves for you to take a look at them and make a decision or discuss it.
I'll bet money that the reports are 99.9% generated from the RAND corporation. And if you know how RAND operates, you can pay them anything to do a study that skews the info to be in your favor. For example, in this case they are being used by the U.S. Military to justify larger allocations of funding to fix a problem that isn't outlined or a problem that may not be a problem at all, just something to keep us ahead of a possible threat 10 years from now. By the way, there might be some overestimation of enemy capabilities and underestimation of our capabilities in these war games, I'd recommend writing to the person who oversees some of these studies and ask if she had DoD clearance when she has conducted them. Her link is below https://www.rand.org/about/people/w/wong_yuna_huh.html Some of the war game scenarios being conducted. It's all wild speculation and the details of the simulations don't include detailed info about specific jamming systems or weapons systems and how they would change the outcome, you might find a better simulation of real events on a more detailed level on your home computer in some cases. https://www.rand.org/blog/rand-review/2020/05/the-serious-side-of-gaming-qa-with-yuna-wong.html?utm_campaign=randreview&utm_content=1589492167&utm_medium=rand_social&utm_source=twitter https://asiatimes.com/2019/03/did-rand-get-it-right-in-its-war-game-exercise/ Would a war scenario be limited to the defense of Taiwan itself only or would the United States for military reasons try and neutralize Chinese missile sites and the assembly locations of China’s military forces pressing on Taiwan? What would happen to China’s navy – it would likely be sunk. The RAND scenario says China would “win.” But this hypothesis is not well supported empirically. No one knows if China can fight or win a modern battle. This is not 1950 where China tried to use human wave attacks against allied forces in Korea. Nor is it the entirely unopposed occupation by China of islands and reefs in the South China Sea – a mistake by the United States not to take action and push them out. None of this means the United States can stand still and wait until an attack occurs, either in Europe, in the Balkans or Poland, or in Asia, in Taiwan or Japan, for example. A major part of relations in Europe and Asia is the ability of the United States and its allies to effectively deter any attack by an adversary. RAND is right in pointing out there are deficits in US and allied forces and force structures that need correction and improvement, but it would be a mistake to think the deficits are fatal or can’t be overcome. It would be misleading to think the United States and its allies would necessarily be defeated in war. In this sense, the RAND war game does more harm than good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2020 12:57:07 PM EDT
[#4]
Wait, the "expert" saying US lost to China in a war game is named Wong?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2020 1:35:30 PM EDT
[#5]
Specifically: Yuna Huh Wong
Her info at RAND corporation is as follows: Education Ph.D. in policy analysis, Pardee RAND Graduate School; M.A. in political science, Columbia University; B.S. in political science and economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology  Which is unfortunate, but look past the name, I see she's an intelligent woman with her degrees, but I don't see any military experience or DoD clearance for conducting these war games that created these sensationalized quotes. She is in the process of working on selling a home version board game for those interested in wargaming though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2020 3:32:41 PM EDT
[#6]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/19/2020 12:13:59 PM EDT
[#7]
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File
Attached File