How long would WW3 last?
Discussion
I would imagine the US and China have the tech to knock a missile out of the sky, as per the Israeli Iron Dome, but on a larger scale. I’m not sure the Russians will have that level of security though.
Wouldn’t surprise me if the locations of any submarines was known as well, so I’d expect a war with Russia to be brief.
US v China though? The US tech ‘might’ be better than the Chinese, but the Chinese probably have numerical superiority in warheads. Probably the Chinese will come out on top.
Wouldn’t surprise me if the locations of any submarines was known as well, so I’d expect a war with Russia to be brief.
US v China though? The US tech ‘might’ be better than the Chinese, but the Chinese probably have numerical superiority in warheads. Probably the Chinese will come out on top.
I imagine it will be a couple of years max of symmetrical warfare until one side or the other runs out of modern jets and tanks etc. then the losing side will quickly dissolve into the wilderness and the 'winners' will be forced to fight another 10-20 years of asymmetrical guerrilla warfare trying to flush out the thousands of soldiers and irregular forces until a peace agreement is reached.
I can't imagine the US Army being able to successfully occupy the entirety of China or vice versa.
I can't imagine the US Army being able to successfully occupy the entirety of China or vice versa.
Depends entirely on the scenario, and the escalation of events. It may not even get to a point of a 'declared' war. If you are considering a hypothetical 1980s cold-war turned hot scenario then conventional wisdom at the time was 24-72 hours.
Plenty of light reading at Rand if you are interested. Also here.
Plenty of light reading at Rand if you are interested. Also here.
gazza285 said:
I would imagine the US and China have the tech to knock a missile out of the sky, as per the Israeli Iron Dome, but on a larger scale. I’m not sure the Russians will have that level of security though.
.
Someone may prove me wrong but I'm pretty sure that russian anti air/balistic missle systems are as advanced if not more so than the US. The S300/400 family of missiles is highly advanced..
If we are talking about MIRVs which is what modern nuclear ballistic missiles are, then there is really no way to defeat them, they have already separated outside of the atmosphere and have time/enough kinetic energy to actively avoid incoming intercept missiles. Thats before we even mention modern hypersonic missiles and that modern missiles are created with the same principles of stealth as aircraft.
There is a guy on youtube who simulates various scenarios on DCS using the AI, he managed to partially take out a Nimitz battle group with 100+ outdated silkworm missiles, they key in that scenario was that even with advanced detection and targeting, the volume of missiles was overwhelming.
Edited by 46and2 on Thursday 18th November 15:32
Edited by 46and2 on Thursday 18th November 15:33
46and2 said:
There is a guy on youtube who simulates various scenarios on DCS using the AI, he managed to partially take out a Nimitz battle group with 100+ outdated silkworm missiles, they key in that scenario was that even with advanced detection and targeting, the volume of missiles was overwhelming.
CMANO a far better option than DCS for that kind of simulation. Though less visually interesting for a youtube channel.An interesting question, in my opinion it would depend how it started and played out.
In the scenario where a mistake leads to a spontaneous catastrophic exchange of nuclear weapons then about a day.
In the scenario where some regional brinkmanship or proxy war drags two superpowers into an open declaration of war then I imagine it would play out for years. Arsenals of high-tech assets would be quickly exhausted in a high intensity conflict and simply couldn't be quickly replaced like they were in WW2 thus I would assume both sides would be very cagey about deploying them. There is also no positive endgame to play for, both sides would know there can be no total victory like taking Berlin in 1945, push too far when the opponents back is against the wall and they will deploy their nuclear arsenal so there are no winners. Modern weapons mean that taking infrastructure intact is impossible as is subjugating an urban population so conquering territory would be utterly fruitless.
The most likely situations I see are China attacking Taiwan drawing in the US, or Russia annexing a bit of Eastern Europe that the west isn't willing to cede. In the first case my guess is it would a be a relatively brief high intensity conflict until either China succeeded or were beaten back, in the second I think it would turn into a lengthy low-intensity military standoff while the west attempted to force Russia to back down through economic blockade.
In the scenario where a mistake leads to a spontaneous catastrophic exchange of nuclear weapons then about a day.
In the scenario where some regional brinkmanship or proxy war drags two superpowers into an open declaration of war then I imagine it would play out for years. Arsenals of high-tech assets would be quickly exhausted in a high intensity conflict and simply couldn't be quickly replaced like they were in WW2 thus I would assume both sides would be very cagey about deploying them. There is also no positive endgame to play for, both sides would know there can be no total victory like taking Berlin in 1945, push too far when the opponents back is against the wall and they will deploy their nuclear arsenal so there are no winners. Modern weapons mean that taking infrastructure intact is impossible as is subjugating an urban population so conquering territory would be utterly fruitless.
The most likely situations I see are China attacking Taiwan drawing in the US, or Russia annexing a bit of Eastern Europe that the west isn't willing to cede. In the first case my guess is it would a be a relatively brief high intensity conflict until either China succeeded or were beaten back, in the second I think it would turn into a lengthy low-intensity military standoff while the west attempted to force Russia to back down through economic blockade.
Bright Halo said:
If conventional it would rage on for months if not years. See Syria.
If it goes Nuclear, then about 24hrs. USA has tech to destroy all China/Russia missile sites and subs. They also have the tech to destroy any launched icbm hypersonic or not in flight.
Does this mean that there is no such thing as an ICBM?If it goes Nuclear, then about 24hrs. USA has tech to destroy all China/Russia missile sites and subs. They also have the tech to destroy any launched icbm hypersonic or not in flight.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff