View Full Version : Red Dawn Official Trailer
I'm not sure if this has been post previously, but here you have:
Red Dawn Official Trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6T2Q4bBcUU)
Be ready. Everything is possible…
Targan
08-14-2012, 06:25 AM
Nice to see some Aussies in there, helping to defend freedom and the American way! :D
WallShadow
08-14-2012, 08:20 AM
Thanksgiving Day opening? Nice touch, both on the public consciousness and in the T2K timeline.
raketenjagdpanzer
08-14-2012, 08:37 AM
I'll wind up seeing it but them making the villains NK instead of Chinese really grinds my gears something awful.
mikeo80
08-14-2012, 09:04 AM
I'll wind up seeing it but them making the villains NK instead of Chinese really grinds my gears something awful.
It wouldn't be politically correct to p### off the ChiCOms. THey hold a good CHUNK of our national debt. AND they make all of our electronic toys and gizmos.
No one cares if you make fun of/p### off the Norks.
My $0.02
Mike
Cdnwolf
08-14-2012, 09:09 AM
Hmmmm looks familiar....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuCcZnVPDpc
LAW0306
08-14-2012, 02:42 PM
movie is pure shit.
HorseSoldier
08-14-2012, 03:23 PM
That makes my brain hurt.
kato13
08-14-2012, 04:20 PM
When I saw those all those aircraft my first (joking) thought was that such an aerial raid would use a measurable percentage of North Korea's daily fuel allotment.
I then had to look it up.
North Korea uses 15,070 barrels of oil daily (ranked 146th in the world)
http://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=KN
15 070 oil barrels = 2,395,938.53 liters (Google)
(1 oil barrels = 158.987295 liters)
I am assuming those aircraft are similar to An-12s and there were a dozen on them.
12 aircraft x 18,100 liters per plane = 217,200 liters
http://www.worldwide-aviation.net/aircraft/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=55
So that flight alone would take over 9% of North Korea's average daily heavy fuel consumption.
2,395,938.53 liters/217,200 liters = 9.065%
ArmySGT.
08-14-2012, 06:45 PM
Couldn't afford to upset the campaign donors, now could they.
mikeo80
08-14-2012, 06:55 PM
When I saw those all those aircraft my first (joking) thought was that such an aerial raid would use a measurable percentage of North Korea's daily fuel allotment.
I then had to look it up.
North Korea uses 15,070 barrels of oil daily (ranked 146th in the world)
http://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=KN
15 070 oil barrels = 2,395,938.53 liters (Google)
(1 oil barrels = 158.987295 liters)
I am assuming those aircraft are similar to An-12s and there were a dozen on them.
12 aircraft x 18,100 liters per plane = 217,200 liters
http://www.worldwide-aviation.net/aircraft/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=55
So that flight alone would take over 9% of North Korea's average daily heavy fuel consumption.
2,395,938.53 liters/217,200 liters = 9.065%
Nice work on this, Kato....
But you are encroaching on Paul's specialty...
He IS the stat guy..... :D
Just pulling your leg.
My $0.02
Mike
Cdnwolf
08-14-2012, 07:25 PM
When I saw those all those aircraft my first (joking) thought was that such an aerial raid would use a measurable percentage of North Korea's daily fuel allotment.
I then had to look it up.
North Korea uses 15,070 barrels of oil daily (ranked 146th in the world)
http://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=KN
15 070 oil barrels = 2,395,938.53 liters (Google)
(1 oil barrels = 158.987295 liters)
I am assuming those aircraft are similar to An-12s and there were a dozen on them.
12 aircraft x 18,100 liters per plane = 217,200 liters
http://www.worldwide-aviation.net/aircraft/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=55
So that flight alone would take over 9% of North Korea's average daily heavy fuel consumption.
2,395,938.53 liters/217,200 liters = 9.065%
Where did you get the figure of 18,100 liters per plane? Where are they starting from and how many times do they need to refuel?
:D
kato13
08-14-2012, 07:49 PM
It was the maximum fuel capacity. That was a guess, but seemed reasonable that they would at least fill their planes if they were going to try to assault a country 6000 miles away (over 3 times their loaded range IIRC).
My thought is that the Airborne troops are expected to flap their arms for the entire flight :D
wow movie does look like junk, but i will still spend x$ to see it.
LOL N.Koreans... Good lord.
raketenjagdpanzer
08-15-2012, 09:31 AM
Hey, Jericho had a pair of MiG 19's (Shenyang J7s) accompanying a Chinese cargo plane dropping "humanitarian aid" all over the US. Yeah, not sure what the refuel capability on the ol' MiG 19 is but I'm pretty sure it's ferry radius is a tad smaller than 6000 miles...
pmulcahy11b
08-15-2012, 11:13 AM
I'll probably watch it when it comes on cable.
The premise, however, is ridiculous. The DPRK does not have the troops, firepower, transport capability, and combat power in general to invade the US. I may be wrong due to the intervening years, but in the late 1980s-early 1990s (back when I was in the loop), their air-to-air refueling capability was almost nonexistent, and the training of DPRK pilots for air-to-air refueling even more nonexistent. And that's assuming that the aircraft is set up for air-to-air refueling (the DPRK tended to remove this equipment if the aircraft had any onboard to lighten the aircraft, giving it slightly less wing loading and a touch more speed).
And the DPRK would never reduce their combat power enough to invade the US. The DPRK leadership keeps their people in line by keeping them paranoid about a South Korean/UN invasion of the DPRK. Even now, the South Koreans could defeat the DPRK by themselves.
Like I said, ridiculous premise. But what the hell, I'll watch it.
stg58fal
08-15-2012, 01:34 PM
I hadn't planned on seeing it, but now I think I will. Since North Korea invading this country on its own requires far too much suspension of disbelief, I'll probably just pretend the the NoKors are part of a much larger UN force, and they (NoKor) are responsible for the area where the movie takes place. I'm sure I can come up with SOME kind of plausible reason for how the movie goes. If I can't, I should retire from GMing immediately.
weswood
08-15-2012, 01:37 PM
Wasn't it the Cubans in the original? With some Soviet advisors? I find that less believable than North Korea. On the other hand, if the plot was China invades becuase of the US's inabilty to repay it's debt, I could see that.
raketenjagdpanzer
08-15-2012, 01:48 PM
Wasn't it the Cubans in the original? With some Soviet advisors? I find that less believable than North Korea. On the other hand, if the plot was China invades becuase of the US's inabilty to repay it's debt, I could see that.
Why? Cuba is right there. At the time ('84 or so) they had battle-hardened troops that'd spent a decade in Angola (this is referenced by the sympathetic Cuban regional commander once, too). Nicaragua had gone commie and it looked like the entire Central American isthmus was headed that way, so Cubans jumping at the chance to slaughter a few hundred thousand Yanqui Dogs is entirely believable for the time.
Hell, it's entirely believable for today.
The "Red Canada" comment by Powers Boothe's major is less so, though. Given that the UK was still fighting alongside the US ("They won't be in it too much longer.") I just don't see them letting Canada go hard-USSR supporting.
stg58fal
08-15-2012, 01:49 PM
Wasn't it the Cubans in the original? With some Soviet advisors? I find that less believable than North Korea. On the other hand, if the plot was China invades becuase of the US's inabilty to repay it's debt, I could see that.
Yes, it was Cubans and Soviets in the original. Once the Cubans figured out that they couldn't do the job themselves, the Soviet presence increased.
Again, I just figure the Cubans were responsible for that area as part of a larger overall invasion/occupation. Which, IIRC, is pretty much what the pilot says after the kids recover him after him being shot down.
raketenjagdpanzer
08-15-2012, 01:50 PM
I'll probably watch it when it comes on cable.
The premise, however, is ridiculous. The DPRK does not have the troops, firepower, transport capability, and combat power in general to invade the US. I may be wrong due to the intervening years, but in the late 1980s-early 1990s (back when I was in the loop), their air-to-air refueling capability was almost nonexistent, and the training of DPRK pilots for air-to-air refueling even more nonexistent. And that's assuming that the aircraft is set up for air-to-air refueling (the DPRK tended to remove this equipment if the aircraft had any onboard to lighten the aircraft, giving it slightly less wing loading and a touch more speed).
And the DPRK would never reduce their combat power enough to invade the US. The DPRK leadership keeps their people in line by keeping them paranoid about a South Korean/UN invasion of the DPRK. Even now, the South Koreans could defeat the DPRK by themselves.
Like I said, ridiculous premise. But what the hell, I'll watch it.
Yes, but my nation is going to have to suck chinese cock for the next century or so as we spiral downwards so of course we can't offend our Red masters.
Fuck why are we even making this movie, IT'S ALREADY HAPPENED. Just digitally slap best buy logos on the "North Korean" troops and be done with it.
HorseSoldier
08-15-2012, 04:08 PM
One of the background events in the original was that communist Cuba and Nicaragua basically overran Central America (and Mexico? don't recall) before the actual invasion of the US. Even then they were an adjunct to the Soviets -- I don't really remember any Cuban troops in the movie beyond the speaking-role character that seemed to be sort of an advisor to the Soviet troops (been a while since I watched it, though). All the guys they were actually fighting seem to have looked pretty European and/or been speaking Russian.
weswood
08-15-2012, 06:11 PM
My reasonong about Cuba is that it's not very big. Maybe as an ally of USSR, being responsible for that local area, yeah I can see that.
I'll see it one of these days, maybe in the theater, maybe not.
The only way I could see North Korea invading the US is if (and that's a big if):
A) It's many years from now.
B) They have built their military up using this:
http://www.raremetalblog.com/2012/08/rare-earth-metals-north-koreas-new-trump-card.html
"South Korea estimates the total value of the North’s mineral deposits at more than $6 trillion."
This hit the news circut a few days ago, some are calling it a "game changer." Right now both the South Koreans and the Chinese are fighting to take advantage of the situation. Either way you look at it though, NK wins big. They don't have to sell weapons anymore, they can make tons of money legally.
Webstral
08-16-2012, 11:20 PM
In the original film, Cuba and Nicaragua [each] reach troop strength goals of 500k. Mexico is plunged into revolution. The Latino colonel who appears several times in the film mentions having fought in Mexico. I take this to mean that the Cubans and Nicaraguans are able to preposition men and materiel in Mexico under the guise of helping one side. Why the US would permit such a thing is beyond me, but we’re dealing with an example of right-wing propaganda (albeit hugely enjoyable propaganda).
Anyway, the Hispanic Reds roll up through Texas and get as far north as Kansas. Apparently, they don’t do much further west because US forces stop the southern invaders at Kansas, the Rockies, and the Mississippi. California is part of Free America. The Soviets reinforce with 60 divisions, cross the Bering Strait, cut the Alaska Pipeline, and attack across Canada. US-Canadian forces stop them “butt cold”.
I don’t understand why the airborne troops were dropped in Colorado in the first place. What purpose are they supposed to be serving there? Why aren’t they crushed by 4th ID, which is just down the road in Colorado Springs?
Tegyrius
08-17-2012, 06:16 AM
I don’t understand why the airborne troops were dropped in Colorado in the first place. What purpose are they supposed to be serving there?
Cutting major east-west transportation routes across the Rockies? Ground assault on Cheyenne Mountain? Soviet High Command wanted to secure a strategic supply of elk steak?
- C.
weswood
08-17-2012, 07:35 AM
Cutting major east-west transportation routes across the Rockies? Ground assault on Cheyenne Mountain? Soviet High Command wanted to secure a strategic supply of elk steak?
- C.
Yummmm. Elk. Pack the guns, we're invading Colorado! Might even do some skiing!
Cdnwolf
08-17-2012, 08:13 AM
The Pueblo Chemical Depot is a chemical weapons storage site located in Pueblo County, Colorado, United States.
The depot houses 2,611 tons (2,369 metric tons) of mustard agent in approximately 780,000 munitions, equivalent to about seven percent of the original chemical material stockpile of the United States
:D
raketenjagdpanzer
08-17-2012, 10:07 AM
The Soviets reinforce with 60 divisions, cross the Bering Strait, cut the Alaska Pipeline, and attack across Canada. US-Canadian forces stop them “butt cold”.
US-Canadian? Here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=5Qc8jJ0TjSY&NR=1
Nothing about the Canadians, and they got deep into the US before they were stopped, so they got through Canada.
Note that's not a dig at real Canadians, certainly not anyone here, just that in the movie our only remaining allies are "England...and they won't last much longer," and "Six-hundred million screaming Chinamen."
Edit: also in that same clip he says they attacked Calumet because it was a major Rocky Mountain pass.
Raellus
08-17-2012, 04:43 PM
I don’t understand why the airborne troops were dropped in Colorado in the first place. What purpose are they supposed to be serving there? Why aren’t they crushed by 4th ID, which is just down the road in Colorado Springs?
I'm not defending the film- it only seemed plausible when I was a kid, scared of impending nuclear annihilation- but maybe the 4th ID was already elsewhere. I don't know the chronology in the film's backstory, but presumably the Reds had struck first in another state[s] and the 4th was deployed there to meet/defeat the threat.
Obviously, the film's premise was pretty ridiculous. As a war flick, Red Dawn doesn't hold up under close scrutiny- not then, not now. It "worked" because many Americans felt a very real fear of the Soviet menace at the time. If anything, the film was/is a valid social commentary on late Cold War America.
As far as the new film goes, I don't think many Americans are scared of the NKs. I don't think it's going to have the visceral emotional appeal that the original did back in the '80s; it's just going to be another '80s remake action film flop that relies on bad CGI to make up for a terrible story/script/acting/etc.
Now, if the writers/directors/producers didn't cop out by casting NK as the baddy, and instead made the PRC the enemy, the new Red Dawn would be saying something.
HorseSoldier
08-17-2012, 05:46 PM
Agreed. The original movie worked because it touched on a cultural meme that resonated with audiences. I think this remake won't do very well because a North Korean invasion isn't a concern for anyone in America. Chinese invasion, maybe, though I think a movie where American debt becomes so bad we're invaded by Chinese repo men instead of the military would resonate with more Americans these days.
raketenjagdpanzer
08-17-2012, 06:33 PM
Now, if the writers/directors/producers didn't cop out by casting NK as the baddy, and instead made the PRC the enemy, the new Red Dawn would be saying something.
That's what they were going to do. Our ChiCom masters forbade it.
Webstral
08-18-2012, 12:14 AM
That's what they were going to do. Our ChiCom masters forbade it.
That wasn't hard to predict.
Cdnwolf
08-18-2012, 07:52 AM
Soooo we are all intelligent (and in some cases extremely good-looking) people...
Logistically (and FOR GAMING PURPOSE ONLY) ... how would you go about invading the USA?
I like the beginning concept of World in Conflict and sneaking the initial attack force in super freighters carrying ordinary cargo containers...
HorseSoldier
08-18-2012, 10:14 AM
Without US nuclear disarmament (or US nuclear inventory being neutralized by some technobabble handwavium or something) I don't know if there is a really functional plan for invasion of the US. There were a lot of world leaders and pundits who were seriously afraid of a possible US nuclear response to the 9/11 attacks in the days immediately following them, and it's hard to think of a scenario where an enemy putting an invasion force on US soil not being considered grounds for popping some nukes on opponent's homeland. (Not to mention the possibility of using nukes to destroy convoys and fleets bringing in the main invasion force.)
Even the possibility of a nuke response is a limiter -- we can debate whether the current or previous or hypothetical future presidents have the willingness to escalate things to the nuclear level, but it's always a card in the deck.
So, I'd say the first issue would be that the US would have to voluntarily divest itself of nuclear weapons. Then you'd probably also need the USN and USAF gutted to the point where they can't conventionally contest control of the seas. (Alternately, I suppose you could look at Mexico or Canada being a staging base for an invading force, but there would still be a logistical support coming in from across the Atlantic or Pacific and still the issue of interdiction to address.)
raketenjagdpanzer
08-18-2012, 10:57 AM
Soften up the east and west coasts with EMP strikes, hit port facilities up and down the Mississippi with low-yield ground bursts, same for dams along the TVA waterways, paste DC/Maryland with a high-low strike from subs like just offshore. Just blow Cheyenne mountain off the face of the earth.
Day 2, (assuming I'm the Russians) come in airborne and seaborne from Venezuela and Cuba, Sea/land down the PCH through Alaska and Canada, Feint the north sea fleet off Newf. and Maine to try and draw out the North Atlantic fleet, then hit them with nuc-tipped ASMs and torpedos.
Out west, hit Midway and Guam (oh and while I'm thinking about it, pretty much erase Diego Garcia with a tight 10mt pattern, maybe 2 or 3). Leave Hawaii untouched, but on the same day I'm doing the trick in the North Atlantic have an equal weight force moving strongly towards Hawaii and the West Coast again to sucker out the fleet(s) and smash them.
D+3 heavy conventional bombardment (yes) of transportation hubs across the CONUS while troops are moving down. Well prior to this I'd have compiled extremely detailed maps of alternate routes (like, for Central Florida, plans to move up 17/92 rather than I-4; smash I-4 out of existence in downtown Orlando, at Daytona and Tampa), rely HEAVILY on Airdrop.
Offer the Mexicans big hunks of the Southwest in exchange for basing options, play on the whole "the US hates brown people" angle, maybe use the Cubans and Venezuelans as intermediaries to secure that, for the big land push.
Despite a desire to take the nation intact, there's places that'd just have to get glassed. Ft. Hood, to prevent an armored counterattack, for example. Key West and Homestead would each get small stuff, like maybe a trio of 25kts each, to keep them from meddling with Cuba and Venezuela's movements through the Caribbean.
England at this point is going ape-shit, so they of course are getting a few "warning shots" (SSBN presence in the Channel and off Ireland, etc.) USAREUR will require some resources, too, since that's right in the back yard...
LOTS of sleeper teams. Lots of sabotage. If I'm looking at this 10-15 years out, even try and turn (or infiltrate!) local politics. Small towns are always the hitch...but suddenly if the mayor of Calumet (ha) wants to surrender peacefully, that makes a huge difference.
I'd play heavily on the strong leftist element in the US: tell Occupy you're here to make the 1% "pay their fair share". At gunpoint make hospitals provide free healthcare. Just hand out food from the "capitalist oppressors' " stores and shops, etc. There's plenty upon plenty of people in this country now that'd willingly collaborate upon such an event.
I think this invasion scenario makes sense. :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortress_America_(board_game)
stg58fal
08-18-2012, 01:33 PM
Soooo we are all intelligent (and in some cases extremely good-looking) people...
Logistically (and FOR GAMING PURPOSE ONLY) ... how would you go about invading the USA?
Exactly how the Chinese have been doing it for the last 15 years, and the Mexicans even longer than that (though the Mexicans aren't nearly as organized about it as the chinese, and their invasion is more of a population pressure-release valve and their country's 2nd biggest source of income):
- send millions of "illegal aliens", consisting almost entirely of military-age males (who are, of course, actually *in* the military;
- supply these 'gangs of criminals' with military grade weaponry, explosives, and anti-tank weapons;
- ensure the right palms get greased so my "illegals" don't get deported or locked up, and are allowed to take jobs with the highway department, utility companies, airports, sea ports, refineries, etc.
- "illegals" begin s campaign of gang warfare that make Kosovo look positively tame. Add in some sabotage to cripple or at least delay the .gov's response.
- protest loudly in the UN about how my citizens, who only want a better life, are being treated by the US .gov, and are basically slaves. Have a lot of pictures and video of 'innocent' illegals being beaten or killed by "government death squads".
- send even more soldiers, as well as heavy equipment, in container ships as has already been mentioned. While they're en route:
- sabotage the fuel distribution, transportation, and communication networks in this country.
- once my people are in the cities, there's almost no chance of nuclear, bio, or chem weapons being used by the US .gov, since they'd kill millions of Americans (and of course Washington, District of Corruption, would be one of the cities I occupied and shut down. The politicos aren't going to do anything that might risk their own safety and comfort).
-make absolutely certain that no matter what else gets destroyed or interrupted, there are no interruptions in evening tv, sporting events, or deliveries of beer. So long as American Idol and other garbage and 'the ball game' are on, and there's beer in the fridge, the sheep of this country will remain fat, happy, and complacent.
I'm sure I can think of more, but that will do for now.
HorseSoldier
08-18-2012, 02:14 PM
I think this invasion scenario makes sense. :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortress_America_(board_game)
I remember that game and playing it a few times with friends in middle or high school. Seemed like it always boiled down to the US holding out long enough to ion cannon the bad guys off the map.
weswood
08-18-2012, 02:52 PM
Exactly how the Chinese have been doing it for the last 15 years, and the Mexicans even longer than that (though the Mexicans aren't nearly as organized about it as the chinese, and their invasion is more of a population pressure-release valve and their country's 2nd biggest source of income):
- send millions of "illegal aliens", consisting almost entirely of military-age males (who are, of course, actually *in* the military;
- supply these 'gangs of criminals' with military grade weaponry, explosives, and anti-tank weapons;
- ensure the right palms get greased so my "illegals" don't get deported or locked up, and are allowed to take jobs with the highway department, utility companies, airports, sea ports, refineries, etc.
- "illegals" begin s campaign of gang warfare that make Kosovo look positively tame. Add in some sabotage to cripple or at least delay the .gov's response.
- protest loudly in the UN about how my citizens, who only want a better life, are being treated by the US .gov, and are basically slaves. Have a lot of pictures and video of 'innocent' illegals being beaten or killed by "government death squads".
- send even more soldiers, as well as heavy equipment, in container ships as has already been mentioned. While they're en route:
- sabotage the fuel distribution, transportation, and communication networks in this country.
- once my people are in the cities, there's almost no chance of nuclear, bio, or chem weapons being used by the US .gov, since they'd kill millions of Americans (and of course Washington, District of Corruption, would be one of the cities I occupied and shut down. The politicos aren't going to do anything that might risk their own safety and comfort).
-make absolutely certain that no matter what else gets destroyed or interrupted, there are no interruptions in evening tv, sporting events, or deliveries of beer. So long as American Idol and other garbage and 'the ball game' are on, and there's beer in the fridge, the sheep of this country will remain fat, happy, and complacent.
I'm sure I can think of more, but that will do for now.
Oh crap. OHHH CRAAPPPP! Uhhh talk to ya'll later, got to go buy more ammo, you're scaring me.
TrailerParkJawa
08-18-2012, 11:52 PM
I saw the trailer a few days ago. The only thing I thought was cool was the first shoot down of the transport. Otherwise this is a movie that I won't see. It should NOT have been remade. Different world, different times.
An invasion of the USA has always been been fiction but at least during the Cold War we were paranoid and I was in 9th grade and thought that shit was soooo real!
Even if you swap the NKs for China it don't matter they can't do it and even if they could their economy collapses instantly buy invading the their export markets.
Olefin
11-19-2012, 08:01 AM
The NK's basically only export to China, Iran and Cuba - so invading the US wont hurt their export markets at all. Cant wait to see it - hopefully this time they have enough of a budget to show that an RPG exploding inside a helicopter makes it go BOOM and fall to the ground - not just turn off smoking.
Panther Al
11-19-2012, 07:46 PM
I don’t understand why the airborne troops were dropped in Colorado in the first place. What purpose are they supposed to be serving there? Why aren’t they crushed by 4th ID, which is just down the road in Colorado Springs?
Honestly, once I was grown up and could think it through, it does make a sort of sense. There is only 3 relatively easy ways to go from the east to the west once you get past the plains. The southern route in Red Dawn got shot when the mexicans went north: there is no way they don't get the literally 3 miles past the Mexican border to cut that route in southern California. Up north, you have the old Great Northern/Milwaukee Road route through montana, as well a *just* to the south you have the UP. All three routes get necked down hard on the Columbia River. That leaves just the middle route, which is the DRG&W and the UP shooting through towards Salt Lake city. Both of those are part of the Colorado Joint Line. Its also where the southern route comes up against the middle road as well, so its a huge transportation choke point. I assumed what the Reds was doing was cutting the middle road, forcing the US to depend on the northern route to go east to west, and what with the push from Alaska, the question is how far down into BC or even Washington State they get: at any rate, the Columbia River Choke point is in *very* easy range of Tac Air. So basically, in the Red Dawn Scenario, there is *no* rail traffic from the Eastern US to the Pacific Coast, which means it will eventually wither on the Vine.
Not a bad plan as it goes.
raketenjagdpanzer
11-19-2012, 07:54 PM
I guess the first thing I'd do is surreptitiously bankroll the election of a president who had no interest in seeing the US maintain military and economic superiority and indeed actively disdained it going so far as to deeming that the US would "lead from behind" in any activities it did undertake.
I'd make sure he was a charming ideologue, a darling to the youth yet with enough heft and gravitas that the baby-boomer generation would be drawn to him as well. I'd make sure it was someone who would fiddle while a fiscal crisis burned assuring that if his administration wasn't the one directly responsible for castrating any ability for the U.S. to maintain a global response (and domestic response) capability, his successors would be in such a deep financial hole that there'd be absolutely no way they could fix both the economy and a domestic defense budget. I'd make sure he was someone who would convince our allies we were no longer worth assisting, by way of subtle insults (small, cultural ones), direct refusal to assist with defense (like denying an ABM shield), and insistence on ignoring regional crises regarding other nations' manufacture of WMDs and vows to use them on our allies. Thus, whether he was in office or his successor was in office, by the time we called for help there'd be no-one left willing to lift a finger when someone "kicked the door in" on us and the "whole rotten structure" came falling down.
That's how I'd start.
raketenjagdpanzer
11-19-2012, 07:59 PM
Thinking about Red Dawn (the original, not the remake our ChiCom masters permitted), Powers Booth makes the comment "They know we won't use nukes on our own soil."
Maybe it's just me, but isn't that just a little bit fishy?
I mean...if ever there's a do-or-die type situation when you've gotta use everything you have, isn't that it?
Or maybe he meant strategic nukes: maybe there's been a use of tac nukes along the front lines already?
Of course, leaving a glowing crater where scenic Denver used to be is also an easy way to help the commies prove their whole "AMERICA IS A WHOREHOUSE WHERE THE REVOLUTIONARY IDEALS OF YOUR FOREFATHERS HAVE BEEN FORGOTTEN." (if I remember the mandatory reeducation slideshow from the scene at the drive-in)
weswood
11-19-2012, 10:00 PM
I guess the first thing I'd do is surreptitiously bankroll the election of a president who had no interest in seeing the US maintain military and economic superiority and indeed actively disdained it going so far as to deeming that the US would "lead from behind" in any activities it did undertake.
I'd make sure he was a charming ideologue, a darling to the youth yet with enough heft and gravitas that the baby-boomer generation would be drawn to him as well. I'd make sure it was someone who would fiddle while a fiscal crisis burned assuring that if his administration wasn't the one directly responsible for castrating any ability for the U.S. to maintain a global response (and domestic response) capability, his successors would be in such a deep financial hole that there'd be absolutely no way they could fix both the economy and a domestic defense budget. I'd make sure he was someone who would convince our allies we were no longer worth assisting, by way of subtle insults (small, cultural ones), direct refusal to assist with defense (like denying an ABM shield), and insistence on ignoring regional crises regarding other nations' manufacture of WMDs and vows to use them on our allies. Thus, whether he was in office or his successor was in office, by the time we called for help there'd be no-one left willing to lift a finger when someone "kicked the door in" on us and the "whole rotten structure" came falling down.
That's how I'd start.
Would this hypothetical President also be considering a treaty with the UN that would affect private ownership of weapons? And maybe have a mainstream media obviously biased towards him?
raketenjagdpanzer
11-19-2012, 10:49 PM
Would this hypothetical President also be considering a treaty with the UN that would affect private ownership of weapons? And maybe have a mainstream media obviously biased towards him?
That treaty would have to be couched in such obfuscating language that the subjects...erm, citizens of this hypothetical United States as described in this scenario would be entirely unsuspecting of the abrogation of 2nd Amendment rights such a treaty would in fact incur.
Snake Eyes
11-19-2012, 11:24 PM
That treaty would have to be couched in such obfuscating language that the subjects...erm, citizens of this hypothetical United States as described in this scenario would be entirely unsuspecting of the abrogation of 2nd Amendment rights such a treaty would in fact incur.
That's what internet experts are for.
Tegyrius
11-20-2012, 05:54 AM
That's what internet experts are for.
Thank goodness we're here!
- C.
TrailerParkJawa
11-20-2012, 11:27 PM
The NK's basically only export to China, Iran and Cuba - so invading the US wont hurt their export markets at all. Cant wait to see it - hopefully this time they have enough of a budget to show that an RPG exploding inside a helicopter makes it go BOOM and fall to the ground - not just turn off smoking.
I was referring to China would kill its own export markets buy invading the USA.
Probably could have worded that better.
You know I always kinda like the smoking RPG hit on the Hind. Just thought it looked cool even it should have killed the crew or crashed the bird. I managed to see the original red dawn a few weeks ago. Still classic camp still unrealistic still kind a cool. :)
Rockwolf66
11-21-2012, 02:06 AM
I was referring to China would kill its own export markets buy invading the USA.
Probably could have worded that better.
You know I always kinda like the smoking RPG hit on the Hind. Just thought it looked cool even it should have killed the crew or crashed the bird. I managed to see the original red dawn a few weeks ago. Still classic camp still unrealistic still kind a cool. :)
According to a friend who flys for the US Army that RPG-7 should have blown that hind in two. Think about how powerful that RPG is. it hit inside the crew compartment at and upwards, outwards and rearwards angle. At the very least that Hind should have been spinning out of control from a busted tail rotor.
Snake Eyes
11-21-2012, 02:39 AM
I just had a chat with the 13 year old me who saw the original on opening day when it was released in the theaters in 1984 and he confirms that it was 114 minutes of pure awesome then and still is now. Reserving judgment on the remake.
raketenjagdpanzer
11-21-2012, 08:25 AM
According to a friend who flys for the US Army that RPG-7 should have blown that hind in two. Think about how powerful that RPG is. it hit inside the crew compartment at and upwards, outwards and rearwards angle. At the very least that Hind should have been spinning out of control from a busted tail rotor.
Dud round?
Rockwolf66
11-21-2012, 01:07 PM
Dud round?
Most likely way the hind could have survived even then it would have immediatly returned to base. Very few pilots are willing to fly an aircraft that just took that sort of hit and not head to the nearest friend'y mechanic.
Legbreaker
11-21-2012, 09:34 PM
Even just a "near miss" might be cause for an "unscheduled oil change".
In times of stress, the laundryman is your friend... ;)
Olefin
11-21-2012, 11:01 PM
similarly I hope if they show tank battles that they will have the US tanks actually be able to hit the enemy ones on either the first or second round! That US tank gunner in the movie was pretty bad - and having that tank just sit there like that should have ended its day pretty quickly.
I remember seeing that movie myself when it first came out. Loved seeing kids my age kick Soviet butt.
raketenjagdpanzer
11-22-2012, 07:46 AM
similarly I hope if they show tank battles that they will have the US tanks actually be able to hit the enemy ones on either the first or second round! That US tank gunner in the movie was pretty bad - and having that tank just sit there like that should have ended its day pretty quickly.
I remember seeing that movie myself when it first came out. Loved seeing kids my age kick Soviet butt.
In honesty the Soviet tankers were pretty awful too.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.