Quote:
Originally Posted by Tnchi2a
Know something about telecommunications (worked for ATT networking) i would stay away from the command and control attacks it would be effective vs low level city power grids but with the interlinking systems the effect would be minimized, really it would take an EMP of much greater power then a small device could deliver to take down the grid plus most if not all military C&C is satellite based now. with the nerve centers in EMP proof locations. (also ex-USAF)
as for the China attacking the us economic. China's markets are to closely tide to ours for that to be effective. now it may work for Russia and Iran how are not as closely tie to the world markets.
Ill have my Timeline up in a few days for comments and suggestions.
|
I agree with your assessment of the military aspect. You missed my point with regards to civilian command and control. The proposed scenario would be several singular 1 megaton warheads launched (or delivered by commercial aircraft) high into the atmosphere (where only the THAD can reach) and detonating up and down either coast. The overlapping EMP's would knock out almost all electrical equipment and fry all of the civilian transportation and distribution systems in range of the EMP. How do you deliver food if there are no trucks running? There would be no water (because the pumps are fried and the grid is down). With the grid and telecom grid fried; There would be no telecommunications, no police dispatch, etc.... The disruption would come from our own civilian sector. The average city only has a 3 day supply of food in it. Without police coordination, looting would be rampant. With telecom down, one cannot reassure the population that help is on the way. Where would this help come from if the EMP disrupted an area of 1500 square miles? This attack would be designed to force US attention towards it's own shores and away from the areas about to be disputed. My theory assumes the survival of the military side of command and control as we launch an identical "counter attack," thus disabling the new "Pact's" C&C system.
China has already "attacked" our markets on two occasions and Russia did it once. This involves tripping certain automated trading programs (which are supposedly illegal by the way) that are designed to sell stock if it begins to fall. They get the stock falling and buy it as it plummets to rock bottom. After the market recovers, the stock regains its lost value, but is now owned by the hackers. That "wealth" has now been transferred (not destroyed) to the hacker who benefits from the "attack." This type of "attack" would not endanger China's economy (which would already be under pressure because of the "depression" that the US is in). In fact, this type of attack has happened at least half a dozen times since the 2008 meltdown. The EU actually fined several US traders for using this software and "destabilizing" the EU markets as a result. Remember that the goal of these attacks is to render the Western response to any moves made by Russia or China "cost prohibitive," not to physically "disable" the US military "command and control." It would be very difficult to justify spending BILLIONS of dollars to defend Japan or the Ukraine when MILLIONS of Americans are without the basic necessities of life. People would riot in the streets. This would be the Russian/Chinese thinking for justification of such a sneak attack. They really wouldn't understand how such an attack might just galvanize US resolve, like the mistake Osama Bin Laden made with the 9/11 attack. This could indeed be the real trigger for WW3.