Quote:
Originally Posted by helbent4
It's not the stored data that's important, an agreement can be made on paper like in the days of yore. Like, the 80's. In the 90's it would have been via fax, after by email.
|
Considering the data in question is the financial records of at least one country, I rather think is is VERY important.
Quote:
Originally Posted by helbent4
I don't see your point about Ft. Knox; gold can be moved by plane, train, truck, mule train, etc. Moved to wherever safe, it's not germane to the discussion. Let's try to keep focused here!  |
Ok, lets spell it out.
4000+ tonnes of gold would require approximately 80 trucks assuming a 50+ tonne capacity. That's a LOT of trucks or return journeys, and they're trucks at the big end of the scale too. That's also a LOT of fuel if you're taking it any distance, not to mention manpower for security, and with that manpower comes many opportunities for gold to go missing....
Now as to where? 4000+ tonnes, as we've seen in truckloads, is a LOT of bulk to find somewhere secure to hide. Yes, it's extremely unlikely that each truck would be filled by cubic space to capacity, but even so, you're going to need more than an average warehouse to keep it all in.
It's not impossible to do, but even in peacetime, it's a hell of a logistical effort to keep under wraps!
Quote:
Originally Posted by helbent4
The Brasilian or Argentinian governments. Do try to keep up, eh? (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
|
So we've got Argentina effectively at war with Britain (and probably preparing for another invasion from the UK to kick them out of the Falklands) while relations between Argentina and Brazil are going down the toilet... Wars don't just happen after all, there's usually a period of "troubles" before the shooting breaks out. During this lead-in it's EXTREMELY unlikely either country would be willing to part with military hardware (especially Argentina!).
We also have the fact that the US was without a government for the critical period.
Looking closer at Howling Wilderness, we see that the last legitimate President (the Secretary of Energy) committed suicide sometime between taking office on the 19th of May 1998 and the 2nd of June 1998. The "Rump Congress" reconvened on the 19th April 1999, nearly a year later, which left only the Joint Chiefs in control. I can't think of many foreign governments which would be willing to negotiate with them given the fact they have nothing to offer in return (and their legitimacy is rather questionable). Of course you also need a foreign government in the first place (most of which have been effectively wiped out by nukes, civil disorder, etc).
Quote:
Originally Posted by helbent4
This doesn't seem relevant to the discussion. We're talking trade, not seizure.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abbott Shaull
Once the nuke start flying anyone trying to buy military hardware from anyone would be called off. As I recall there were some Cadillac Cage Stingrays that some country had order that made their way into the US Inventory after the start of the war.
|
I thought seizure
was solidly on the table.... :S
Quote:
Originally Posted by helbent4
So, there's nothing to stop a trade with either Argentina or Brasil up to and including 1998 then?
|
Besides the fact that as mentioned above, both nations were preparing to go to war with each other for some time and unlikely to have any significant amounts of hardware to spare? And that beginning in November 1997 the US government (what was left of it) was under ever increasing pressure to deal with the after effects of the nukes? Not to mention that prior to the nukes, the US didn't really need the slow moving, prop powered, ground attack aircraft. Even if somebody had identified a need for such a craft, negotiations regarding supply and purchase would likely to have barely begun, heavily hampered by US corporate interests more inclined to push for their own products to be taken up by the military than allow foreigners access to "their" market.