Mega-city Warfare, Hive Warfare thread

File: 54111dcbe9deb6959668360939cc35ef.jpg (3MB, 4500x2531px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4500x2531px

>>33802416
http://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pubs/Parameters/Issues/Spring_2015/5_FelixKevin_WongFrederick_The%20Case%20for%20Megacities.pdf

File: incendiary.webm (3MB, 1280x536px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1280x536px

Same as it ever was just on a bigger scale

>>33802416
It's impossible. Fighting in small Muslim villages is already difficult, we usually go in with at least triple the force we expect to meet.
Source: am IDF.

>>33802416

urban warfare is a serious pain as is.... put it on the scale of a "mega city" and you're talking about a logistical/tactical fucking nightmare.

File: 1489404492053.jpg (99KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1920x1080px

>>33802846
In America we say were fighting for Isreal. So for you all do they say your fighting for America??? Also any stories?

>>33802705
I don't think its that simple anon...

>>33802858
I know but you can't just bypass these cities or drop leaflets on them and empty it of hostiles. Plus you most likely have to fight the cities like you can't just avoid it. Would probably have to have outrageous fights in there with massive numbers and entirely new tactics and strategies. It's like damn Hives from 40k.

>>33802933
Well, I'm still in training, as it's much longer than in the us (at least according to some us officers I spoke to).
We understand that America is helping us, but also realize that it's American interests to help us, and that it doesn't happen for kindness of heart.
I could tell you about the training if you're interested. I just recently was at the biggest fake city in the world, training for close quarters City battle. Apparently the Marines were there a week before us.

>>33803091
I'm Army Armor though wanted to make a secondary MOS infantry just for the MOUT training, and a belief everyone should strive to be able to fight the best on foot or in armor so go on.

If they have freeway overpasses, I'd expect to see Baghdad style thunder runs.

Important targets like city hall, government agencies, military installations, are likely to be taken by an attacking force before the rest of the city is.

A lot of civilians are going to end up as collateral damage.

>>33803234
Huh, I'm also armor, but armor-supporting infantry.
How long is your training?

>>33802416
Conventionally, siege a city if you can't fight your way into it. Maybe even if you can fight your way into it.

I'd expect for cqc teams to do a majority of the actually in-city fighting, basically 5-7 man squads that take key targets. Think T3 SpecOps, in a larger quantity. That might end up being the militaries of the future at some point.

>>33802416
Look up the web comic gone with the blast wave

>>33802933
>leningrad siege
think about those massive firefights again you'd have to be an idiot to go for another stalingrad esk battle

>>33802416
>>33802933
thread theme

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=408tWOubRDM

all of you mother fuckers just saying "hurr, just put the city under siege" that can take a long time, like 4 years worth of time
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Sarajevo

>>33802416
Hydrogen bombs are called city busters for a reason.

>>33803381
Thats an awesome comic and /k/ as fuck, mandatory reading for all kommandos but i dont think it holds valuable tactics/scenarios... plus, the setting is different, they fight in a megacity, but it is a nuclear blasted one, not one with millions of innocent civilians living within.

>>33803305
About to head to the Armor school in Benning for Officers in June.

>>33803480
Huh, I met your future commander in person. Ranked lieutenant colonel, cool guy. Talked to me, a private, for a while.

>>33803510
Cool what he like?

>>33803575
Tall. I only spoke to him for a few minutes, but he seemed like cool guy. He was in Israel to look at how we train our tank officers, some kind of information exchange.

>>33803419
Fucking great soundtrack!

>>33803622
As long as he prefers people based on merit rather than personal reasons i'm happy.

The 2nd battle of Grozny sounded like hell. Deeply dug in resistance who know all the layout, pill boxes round every corner, all ground level entrences boarded up, booby trapped buildings, light mobile opposition moves back into area as soon as it's cleared and move onto next target, fucking sewers. Even after they evacuated, occupying troops were harassed for weeks by hold outs

File: image.jpg (107KB, 600x684px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 600x684px

>>33803781
How you think the US would do in a city like Rio, Karachi, Shanghai, or Tokyo? With a similar or more comment and numerous enemy force like PLA, and other in the Chinese cities, or Veteran hadjis in Karachi.

>>33802416
Cordon off the city, control the flow of bodies and supplies. At a guess, I would say that anybody wanting to leave gets to leave. Military age males get interned for 18 months. Nobody allowed in, exceptions can be made on a case-by-case basis. Inbound food supplies get rigidly controlled, and periodically adjusted downward in accordance with the known number of people who have left.

Insert SF teams to contact gangs and the criminal underworld. Set them up to be your local militias and intel resources. Keep them well supplied, they're going to be doing the majority of your grunt work for you.

As opportunity allows, shrink your cordon. You want to be able to establish stable zones where the civil population has some degree of security and normalcy. Give them that, they'll stay out of your hair.

Avoid the predictable targets and objectives- city hall, broadcasting stations, public utilities, and the like. Let the other side invest heavily in holding those, while you set up equivalents in your safe zones.

Lots of drones. Everything from Reapers on down to squad level eye in the sky. Speaking of which, somebody needs to get cracking on a mobile HD security camera. A remote operator flies it to a specified location, it lands/clings and sends back A/V feed for a day or a week. Autonomous fight or flight software, so if it's attacked it runs away, if it's captured it sends a distress signal. Remote operator has the option of triggering the thermite destruct function. It'll have to be equipped with PV panels to recharge the batteries.

Anyhow, that's my thoughts on the matter. Don't put a field army into a city. That's how you get Stalingrad'd, even if you win.

>>33804003
I don't think coordons would work with cities of the stated size and population magnitude.

>>33803445
First, you evaluate the value of the city against your strategic goals. What does it have that you need? If nothing, you isolate, bypass, and leave it to its own devices. Maintain a strong security and surveillance element to insure you don't get breech loaded by surprise if somebody sallies a mechanized column from the hood.

>>33803993
It's the future of 4th gen, you can occupy a city but you can't control it

>>33804003
>criminal underworld

I don't think thats a good idea for a standard procedure, you need trained guys not whatever some random locals can do for you.

Urban warfare is a bitch everyone knows that, so if anything OP should stablish if:

>Can we just surpass the city?
>Can we use nukes?
>Can we just use a shit ton of artillery and forget it?
>Are we invading or stabilizing a goverment?
>Is the enemy conventional or guerrilla?

With the conditions described, then we can talk about how to face the meat grinder.

>>33804038
You'd have to do it with OPs, barriers, and QRFs. Drones make it marginally doable. Or aerostats for static area coverage. It'll still be manpower intensive, but nothing compared to what would be involved in taking and holding a megacity.

Essentially, all you want to do is block the city off from interfering with your operations.

File: sophisticated visual aid.jpg (615KB, 1751x1313px) Image search: [Google]

615KB, 1751x1313px

>>33803993
As I understand it, the problem with defending an urban area is pic related.

The attacking force is going to have an overwhelming advantage in mobility, because they control the sky.

Because they have mobility and you don't, they can attack anywhere, and you can't defend everywhere.

If you hadn't already been beaten in maneuver warfare, you wouldn't be fighting a battle in one of your own cities, where every bomb that drops is going to kill a few more of your own citizens.

>>33803446
You can't just H-bomb a whole city in the modern world anon.

>>33804236
There's a reason you haven't been WW2 scale conventional conflicts since the atom bomb.

The larger the conflict is, the higher of a chance that it will escalate into nuclear warfare.

When you get into conventional operations in cities of 20 million or more people, that is an extremely large scale of warfare, and nuclear escalation is highly likely, albeit not inevitable.

>>33804189
cities are easy as fuck to defend, or rather hard as fuck to attack. most of the modern infrastructure runs through them, and they contain working people that will, in a modern conventional war, be considered legitimate targets as they were in ww2.

current nato doctrine is that you should optimally have a number superiority of 3 when taking ground in the field.
In a city thats number is 10.

Doesn't this really depend on what mega-city you're talking about? I imagine say, Tokyo would have less resistance than some other megacities around the world.

>>33804236
You sure as shit can as long as the US and Russia are on the same side of a conflict. MAD doesn't apply to anyone else.

>>33804140
>you need trained guys not whatever some random locals can do for you.

There are other ways of controlling territory beside fighting for it. If you co-opt the local gang structure, you're using 2 problems to solve each other. They're fighting for you, not against you. And your trained troops are staying out of the meatgrinder.

You're not using them as assault troops, they're more in the role of skirmishers or guerillas. They also serve to neutralize the guerillas the other side is throwing at you.

Your greentext questions address the core of the issue. Lets assume no nukes. Other than that, I'd say try like hell to stay out of the city. That's a bloodbath we want to avoid if at all possible.

>>33804273
The big problem is, you can't cover all of the ground.

It would require way too many dudes.

And if you're on the back foot, you can't move your dudes around fast enough.

>>33803446
Large swathes of the population can support you, or at least be indifferent. So indiscriminately bombing everyone simply turns everybody against you.

>>33804189

What are you on about? Urban defense is easier than attacking.

As an attacker:

Every street corner is a potential crossfire.
Every window is a potential sniper.
Every car is a potential IED.
Every building is a potential ambush.
etc etc etc.

Plus half your aircraft is useless. You can't provide effective CAS in a city with a helicopter because the distances you act on are literally within rifle range or potentially RPG range and they can act from ANY rooftop.

City fighting fucking sucks and no nation has faced parity city warfare since WW2.

Even without that parity? Massive amounts of casualties occur due to the insane amount of 'random' factors and potential upsets.

>>33804311

But you think you can really trust people for something that might extend for years? They would probably just coordinate with themselves to have some fights for show here and there and just get the almost literal neetbux.

Also think that you are giving resources to criminals, that means you are empowering them and giving them an edge over other groups, which can give them weird ideas like using all of those resources to form something similar to a pseudostate like in powerfull cartels do in Mexico, which might end up creating many more problems in the future.

And thats just one idea, a criminal organization that uses war for profit aren't good news for anybody.

> I'd say try like hell to stay out of the city

To a great extent, what can an army need from a city?

Cities don't give resources, on the contrary, they take them, they don't serve for staging areas, and if you have political needs you are better off using SF here and there to achieve such needs than actually occupying the whole city with your army.

>>33804476
>Every car is a potential IED.
worse

>Every wall is a potential IED
>Every door is a potential IED
>Every piece of furniture is a potential IED
>Every manhole is a potential IED
>Every power switch is a potential IED
>Every closet is a potential IED
>Every TV is a potential IED
>Every doormat is a potential IED

the americans were heavily traumatized over some posters with grenades strapped to them, imagine how they'll break down when random walls turn into EFPs for no reason

>>33804476
>parity city warfare since WW2

Maybe Ukraine did? Apart from the report about the efectiveness of ATGMs on non APS protected tanks and the unexpected efectiveness of 152mm artillery pieces on modern tanks I haven't heard much about urban warfare in Ukraine except that they were doing crazy shit like using 3d printers to make drones on the fly.

>>33803781
Do you think thats what modern urban planning is about? Making it impossible to hold a city against the government, all uniform straight lines and far apart streets

>>33803234
What about mech inf fags in bradleys?

>>33802416
Controlled and using combine armed paramilitaries and the police are the future. Where our boys from other states cannot recognize the land, the men who lived al their lives in the area can provide routes, info, and can also engage the hostiles where the military cannot respond fast enough in time. All they need is to be follow the same or higher standards as the US military, especially discipline. Freikorps were very successful being used to suppress the revolts in Weimar Germany while the Insular Police were an important asset in suppressing the Nationalist revolt in Puerto Rico alongside the National Guard.

>>33804546

>Everything is a potential IED

How long until an entire city just becomes one big IED?

File: everything is bomb.jpg (339KB, 996x1386px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 996x1386px

>>33804546
EVERYTHING IS BOMB

>>33804672
See
>>33804709

Slavs experienced it now the Americans will.

>>33804546
>>33804672
True story.

During the Battle of Fallujah, the insurgents went full Home Alone with a bunch of buildings, expecting coalition forces to clear them and take heavy casualties.

What happened instead was that when coalition forces took fire from a building, they'd hit it with a round of 120mm from the Abrams, and the entire building would be destroyed by a massive IED chain reaction.

>>33804038
The Iron Curtain held in a continent, only a few hundred got over the Berlin Wall. Seige of Alessia under Ceasar being another where one force build a massive wall. With ground penetrating radar making sure people aren't tunneling under it, I think you could hol da mega-city cordon with dramatically fewer soldiers than it'd take to take control from an armed opponent, and at much lesser cost, both to you and in civilian and infrastructure damage.

>>33804721
I don't think you could do that to a 30 story building or an entire tenement in an actual city or even a mega city though.

To bring down one you would have to use some heavy ordinance plus doing so would make shit covered in debris and dust for a large area like on 9/11.

>>33804133
Not the message I'm getting from H. John Poole's works.

Revive the Vietnam era Marine CAP patrol where a squad was embedded with local defense units and interacted with them on a daily basis. The people got to know and like the CAP, the CAP liked and knew the locals and the local defenders knew they weren't being hung out to dry and would fight.

File: FB_IMG_1493447763419.jpg (62KB, 720x1013px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 720x1013px

Just fucking bombard it with artillery and cut off all major supply lines. Psychological warfare works, and siege warfare is basically what you should expect to fight such a large force.

>>33804728
So what do you with the 10-100 Million people fleeing said city and the many miles of urban terrain then? One of the big reasons to fight Ina city is its a center of control of the enemy army, may have a lot of troops and equipment there. And even if you get Olathe cordon up and start getting people out even if just 1% stays back to fuck with you that's still a fucking shit-ton of people along with the hostiles.

>>33804080
I'd imagine cities are of
Major importance as they would reasonably hold a lot of troops as well as the main areas for command and control. There were everything is organized around so they would reasonably have a sizable force there and ready as well as a lot of the C&C for all the surrounding areas. In fact it may even make them the primary targets.

File: image.jpg (144KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1024x683px

>>33804189
Are you retarded.

>>33802416
Cities will be left full of mudpeople and mongrels not worth saving once white flight is complete. Why the fuck would anyone waste boots on the ground to go into them? What's in there that they need? We invented megabombs for megacities.

>>33804782
>I'd imagine cities are of Major importance as they would reasonably hold a lot of troops as well as the main areas for command and control
no

>>33804828
Explain.

File: image.jpg (103KB, 1000x366px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1000x366px

Fellow Commonwealth cunt here, urban combat is a specialty with the PR National Guard and the Insular Police, just apply the tactics at a larger scale and get a use of paramilitaries. The best way to fight in a megacity is to take preemptive action to prevent it from escalating into a malignant cancer. While unconstitutional and against American values, the use of intelligence agencies, survellience programs, and spies designated to provide a file on political dissidents and potential hostiles were very effective in suppressing the 1950s revolts. This also includes sending in moles into these organizations and extracting information from traitors. The Nationalist revolt was originally designed to gain attention from the UN to support their cause, however, that failed horribly because the FBI and the government managed to successfully infiltrate the organization and use surveillance programs and a file registry on te party members and its grunts. Intelligence and a combined arms is key to winning.

At the same time is providing a force that has the public'a trust. Under Operaciòn Mano Dura Contra El Crimen (Operation Heavy Hand Against Crime) The National Guard was used to assist the Insular Police in patrols and raids against the criminal syndicates that plague the island with supplies and illicit trade goods from the Mexican cartels. While the police is heavily distrusted due to internal corruption, the National Guard was welcomed with open hands by the poorfags living in projects. While not much, it effecty reduced crime by 33% during the 90s and was then reactivated again in 2004 to fight the second crime wave. I'll post sources next post, excuse the commie and piopolo bias from the authors.

>>33804792
Yes, but I'm also right.

File: 1493266412499.jpg (85KB, 540x465px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 540x465px

>>33804873
That bold attitude! You must be swimming in the pussy!

>>33804899
>not using a deagle

>>33802933
>In America we say were fighting for Isreal.
what the fuck are you talking about
>>33803091
Training really doesn't stop in the US
Theres the basic, combat and MOS schools, then you go to the fleet/army equivalent and train there. Then theres follow on schools you can go to.

File: image.jpg (203KB, 961x604px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 961x604px

>>33804858
>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/14/national-guard-soldiers-patrol-in-puerto-rico/

>https://writetofight.wordpress.com/the-nationalist-insurrection-of-1950/

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puerto_Rican_Nationalist_Party_revolts_of_the_1950s

>http://www.insightcrime.org/news-briefs/puerto-rico-national-guard-drug-trafficking

This one you have to pay for full access but the abstract is free to see. It's worth the read imo.
>https://case.hks.harvard.edu/mano-dura-mobilizing-the-national-guard-to-battle-crime-in-puerto-rico/

Have some good ol' 90s retro images
>http://www.gettyimages.com/event/national-guard-called-in-to-combat-puerto-rican-crime-wave-51106893?#army-specialist-michael-montijo-joins-puerto-rico-police-department-picture-id51109274

What I want to see is civil war in a megacity.

File: 565787.jpg (69KB, 450x618px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 450x618px

>>33804933
>mfw Rios finally got domed by the FBI
>mfw all of the filthy commies whining about it
>mfw the FBI in general

>>33804287
China has nooks. Otherwise this would be true.

>>33804287
"Everyone is getting fucked up" applies to any country that has nuclear weapons or allies with nuclear weapons.

Which is most of the important countries.

>>33804933
I also forgot to add, suppress any civillian news from entering and leaving the city. No one goes in, no one goes out. Another reason why the revolt suppression was successful was because the news media was suppressed from leaving the island and from spreading into the US to prevent public opinion to go against the US (Since they literally bombed their own citizens in Utuado and Jayuya), while also preventing the UN from getting into the USA's neck and launching an investigation. President Truman himself even waved the news off by being vague, calling it "An incident between Puerto Ricans" before two Nationalists from New York attempted to assasinate him as a way to get attention to the situation in Puerto Rico. While the attempt failed (leaving one dead white house officer, 3 wounded Secret Service Agent, one dead perpetuator and one wounded perpetuator), it managed to cast some attention to the situation despite the News media also beig vague on the motives of the

>>33804782
Who said anything about letting people leave? Mega-refugee camps are as big a problem as urban mega-city combat.

Food and medicine go in, no one comes out, unless I can figure out a way to ensure key enemy leaders aren't' slipping through like having 'business' outside the city or a 'sick aunt' they need to take care of. It's a mega prison and for the people who aren't combatants, nothing really changes.

Meanwhile, like Alessia, the combatants are bottled up and impotent against my main maneuver forces.

>>33804287
MAD hasn't been a thing since the 80s
Its all about NUTS now.

>>33804981
>suppress any civillian news from entering and leaving the city.
how do you propose doing that in the current day megacity when everyone and their dog has a smartphone and social media account.

>>33805012
Come on, even the Sudanese government knew to turn off the cell phone towers before they massacred a village.

File: Shanghai satellite picture.jpg (562KB, 1540x1022px) Image search: [Google]

562KB, 1540x1022px

>>33804981
Here is Shanghai from Orbit now tell me how your gonna control who gets in and out with a US Army Division or MEU. Follow up images coming soon to get an idea of terrain.

>>33805012
call up local ISPs, tell them to shut off their BGP. if someone manages to make a mesh network to the nearest neighboring country, they get a free ticket to the country of their choosing and all the free beer they want.

>>33802416
Chemical weapons would be the best way if your opponent didn't have a way to retaliate in kind.

File: Smog Shanghai.jpg (45KB, 964x473px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 964x473px

>>33805056
Could you fucking imagine fighting in this shit.

File: shanghai section.jpg (1MB, 2048x837px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x837px

>>33805068

>>33805016
generally african villages don't have the same resources as a megacity.
i'm pretty sure out of the millions of citiizens living in some place like shanghai or tokyo there'll be some smart cookie who can nigger rig a secure way to communicate with the outside world.

File: shanghai-slums-.jpg (309KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

309KB, 1024x683px

>>33805091
You have to come up with whole new tactics and strategies for this bullshit

>>33805056
>>33805091
What's the operational, strategic, or tactical value of occupying all of Shanghai?

>>33805098
this

>>33805109
>>33805098
the best anyone is going to get is a satellite connection.

>>33805108
China's financial hub, would make it a massive target.

>>33805101
In the event of open warfare slums are more than likely going to be set ablaze, albeit unintentionally, and the disruption of civil services means that widespread fires will develop.

>>33805125
That's not a reason to occupy it. If you're looking to cause economic damage then simply attacking it will work.

>>33805123
And that's all they need. With a BGAN terminal you can get a very reliable connection with fuckall infrastructure.

>>33805168
until you shut off the satellites :^)

>>33805149
What do you do when Shanghai becomes a base of operations for the PLA against the US in the area. Lot's of manpower provided by the people. Factories for munitions, and other threats. By passing it or simply bombing will due to little in my opinion and the best bet is to either contest the city, or search and destroy critical parts.

>>33802416
This video is a sales pitch for a potentially very lucrative mass market: networked micro drones. Kamikaze, chemical, audio-visual sneaky-peeky.

>>33805004

The limitations of strategic bombardment are still there even if we acknowledge only limited use of nukes is always under the idea of avoiding a MAD scenario.

So its still pretty alive.

>>33805012
>>33805056
You attempt your best to jam any signals going in and out of the city whether its cellular, internet wifi, etc. Of course, people will be nigfer rigging and attempting to create private networks or a connection. While this is generally not my specialty, you can make use of paramilitary and intelligence going undercover to sabotage any makeshft machine and detain (Or as the FBI did in PR, black bag them) all while looking like an independent organized syndicate attempting to control the available networks (Also due to the massive size of the population, people won't notice the missing person unless its their irl friends and relatives). Of course this requires generally having archive surveillance data on the targeted folks and citizens (Which the FBI also did effectively on an island population of 2 million, imagine it at the level of the NSA). I will admit that this system isn't perfect, and there will be flaws involved. A best counter to do it is use of media as an attempt to discredit the authors via subversive/subtle propaganda.

>>33805188
Blow the shit out of the power plants, substations, bridges, railroads, shipping yards, pipelines, and anything else supporting an industrial society.

Bomb the radio and TV transmitters just for the fun of it.

Basically, Serbia '99 but a lot more sorties.

>>33805228
The difference is the Chinese don't have shit triple A and will make than plan Extremely costly for the aircraft resulting in a lot of downed planes.

>>33804672
Switzerlands moved past cities, 40 percent of the country is rigged to blow in case of enemy invasion.

>>33805228
That's very easy to claim, but incredibly difficult to do.

It's a problem I've noticed among a lot of people on /k/, they think that a) everything is going to go as planned, and b) the enemy will never offer any resistance and if they do, we will always overcome that resistance.

In our Shanghai situation, you're talking about subjugating a first-world megacity with a population of 24 million people, one of the largest ports in the world, and one of the largest industrial zones in the world.
Now mix-in a professional military opposing you along the outskirts, along with say 1-2% of the city's population actively fighting you. That's a guerrilla force 240-480k strong, fighting on their home turf.

File: image.png (2MB, 1334x750px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1334x750px

>>33804945
>he admitted to being responsible of all the 200+ bombings in Chicago, New York and PR, including to sending letter bombs to President Carter, Governor Muñoz Marin and President Ford
>he admitted to planning and organizing the sabotaging of the Air Guard's aircraft with bombs
>he admitted to stealing 7 million dollars from the American working class in Operaciòn Aguila Blanca (Operation White Eagle) to fund his bombing campaigns while buying goods for the poorfags as a way to gather support of their cause
He deserved every bullet from the FBI.
>mfw commie and piopolo authors being butthurt about the event

>>33805188
>>33805241
Standard SEAD/DEAD doctrine combined with tactical bombing. Urban areas are great for hiding forces, but shit for deploying forces. You're also not hiding any munitions factories of note or sophistication against an enemy with satellite and aerial reconnaissance.

>>33804782
still, you force them to attempt a breakthrough, if you cordoned off well enough you could push and entrap into kill zones, and any armor assets would be forced to take roads, which could hold numerous tank traps and IEDs.

Of course during this seige the city would be cut off from supplies, medical, food, water. Whatever supplies they stockpiled would not last a city of 10-100 millions so the defending army would most likely ration and not share with civillians, causing mass riots or even hostile, armed efforts by the locals to overtake and gain the supplies. This can be used to the attacking armies advantage, handing out supplies for collaboration and safe passage out of the city. But you gotta hold the collaborators familes as collaterol or risk depection.

I would be more afraid of small scale gurella/sof raids on weaker or less defended areas of the seige rather then a large breakthrough attempt. Those small raids if succesful could let key personnel or intel assets to escape.

>>33805345
>Standard SEAD/DEAD doctrine combined with tactical bombing.

Didn't work in Vietnam, won't work today.

>Urban areas are great for hiding forces, but shit for deploying forces.

Because that's so great for us, who want to drive the enemy out of the city & occupy it.
The most dangerous thing you can do as a military strategist is to severely underestimate your enemy, while at the same time putting too much faith in your ability to wage war (believing nothing will go wrong and that you and your doctrine will always succeed).

>>33805345
>Subjugating and then occupying a city of 24 million people and one of the nations most important industrial areas isn't a problem, just drop more bombs!

t. McDonnell Douglas sales rep

>>33805176
>destroy telecom satellites
>fuck over your own satellites
woops

>>33805401

>Didn't work in Vietnam

Didn't exist before Vietnam. What a retarded statement.

>>33805511
>go up to inmarsat
>"shut off your service to china NOW"
>problem solved

>>33805532
>chingchongs don't have their own telecom satellites

>>33805532
You have no idea what you're talking about. Telling Inmarsat to "turn off" their BGAN service to China means shutting off service for all of India, East Asia, and Oceania. To which they'll say "lol no".
If you deactivate all SIMs sold in or sent to China, all they have to do is acquire foreign SIMs.

>>33805550
He'll just say "Then we'll destroy/jam their satellites!" as if everything we do is always a success and there is no possible way we can fail or meet any resistance.

File: spongebob underwear.jpg (27KB, 480x259px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x259px

>>33805524
>[SEAD & tactical bombing] didn't exist before Vietnam. What a retarded statement.

What the fuck am I reading?

>>33805594
>What the fuck am I reading?


The truth

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppression_of_Enemy_Air_Defenses

>>33803091
How long did it take to learn how to force brown people out of their neighborhoods and bulldoze their houses without a sense of irony?

>>33805614
>Pre-Vietnam
>WWII
>Korea

m8...just suggesting that we could successfully conduct a successful bombing & SEAD campaign against the PLAAF while also occupying & subjugating Shanghai was retarded enough.

>>33804843
space is a premium in megacities, any stationed troops need to eat, sleep, shit and drink inside the megacity if you plan on keeping troops there. that is expensive. much cheaper to just build a fort somewhere else and keep the garrison there.

>>33805345
>Standard SEAD/DEAD doctrine combined with tactical bombing.

You'll also need a large invading force, air power (like artillery) is just a force multiplier, not force in of itself.
There's no winning a war with just bombs.

>>3380564

I didn't suggest anything ITT except that saying something did not work in its infancy means it never will is full fucking retard.

Congratulations on not even reading the article beyond the headers.

No U 4 U

Just look at bf4

File: don't have to....jpg (30KB, 702x395px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 702x395px

>>33805659
>any stationed troops need to eat, sleep, shit and drink inside the megacity if you plan on keeping troops there. that is expensive.

Don't have to worry about that when your civilians are your soldiers

>>33805401
>Didn't work in Vietnam

But that's wrong

>>33804515
>They would probably just coordinate with themselves to have some fights for show here and there and just get the almost literal neetbux.

Yes. It's cheaper than fighting them. That's one of the reasons we do it in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. We're not paying them to be good guys, we're paying them to be not-bad-guys relative to our interests. We're buying their neutrality.

>something similar to a pseudostate like in powerfull cartels do in Mexico

It wouldn't be the first time we've installed or supported a kleptocracy. Noriega comes to mind.

It's not a perfect or long term solution, but historically it's the kind of thing we do.

>Cities don't give resources, on the contrary, they take them, they don't serve for staging areas, and if you have political needs you are better off using SF here and there to achieve such needs than actually occupying the whole city with your army.

We agree on this point.

>>33805642
Occupying and subjugating come after SEAD, the bombing campaign, and invasion.

It should also be pointed out that Shanghai is a coastal city and is bisected by numerous rivers and canals.

>>33805713
>Successful SEAD + bombing campaign against the PLAAF without losing 3/4ths of your air force
>Successfully invading Shanghai without getting completely annihilated by being outnumber by the defenders on home turf
>Successfully occupying & subjugating the occupation you just bombed into oblivion, then waged an all-out war among for several months

Can you see the failures in your logic? Someone else pointed out that you're assuming that EVERYTHING goes right for you.
Did you not see the OPs video, or read the report linked? Have you completely forgotten what we experienced in Vietnam and Iraq?

>>33805770
>subjugating the occupation you just bombed into oblivion

Derp, should read "population", not "occupation".

File: ghost-in-the-shell-988950.jpg (61KB, 960x519px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 960x519px

Ghost in The Shell has basicly what you want for megacity warfare.

a core of high value special forces and police officers supported by a shit-ton of intelligence and automated heavy machinery.

Open war in Megacities is a fantasy and will never take place, as 1. Countries that own megacities don't engage in ground combat and 2. megacities have no strategic benefit to holding. Manufacturing is done mostly in industrial parks with attached small towns, supporting a megacity requires mega-resources and starving one out in a blockade will be easy.

If we end up having open war in Megacities, then prepare for nuclear war cause none of that shit is worth-it.

>>33805686
Underrated post

>>33805770
A2/AD never works though.

It didn't work when the Soviets set up a top of the line network around Hanoi and crewed it with their own people.

It didn't stop Iraq's multibillion dollar IADS from getting cucked

It hasn't kept the US from bombing Syria regularly.

File: 14.jpg (159KB, 620x877px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 620x877px

>>33802416
Got nothing to contribute but Gone With the Blastwave

>>33805799
My statement is still valid, you're assuming EVERYTHING will go right for you, and that you can solve everything with more bombs.

File: 1493332275143.png (156KB, 319x251px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 319x251px

>>33804546
>>33804709
Fuck beat me to it.

>>33805868
>you're assuming EVERYTHING will go right for you

I fail to see how you are not doing the same.

>>33805868
Okay, suppose 50% of sorties fail.

That's still thousands upon thousands of bridges, power plants, and other important shit getting ganked.

>>33805901
Because he doesn't assume his plan is fullproof.

>>33805965
And you have now also fucked your Airforce because modern planes are not fucking easy to replace. Could you imagine what would happen to the US or Russia if they went after a mega-city doing that shit and 50% of their fucking planes were downed.

>>33805978
>fullproof

Posts like these are a diamond dozen.

Oh, and he is.

Instead of saying he is unstoppable, he is saying he is invincible. Same shit.

>>33805770
IADS suffer when located within cities due to the buildings getting in the way of radar, the actual radars themselves would need to be located in open areas within or outside the city. You're also forgetting that garrisoning such a large city eats up a massive amount of force on the defender's side. You're also forgetting that civilians tend to flee invading armies, putting a strain on the defenders as they have to deal with refugees as they attempt to advance and reinforce from outside the city.

>>33806007
so your both wrong congratulations.

>>33805997
What else precisely are you going to use air power for, if not to attack the enemy?

The correct move if you're the US is always going to be to overwhelm the enemies air defense, so that you can secure air dominance and tear apart the enemy logistics.

>>33806042
Don't be such a pre-Madonna

>>33803480
The two best CEO's I've worked for were an Army Ranger and Army Armor officer.

Granted, I'm a former Marine ELINT guy turned IT, but they were good leaders.

Never got along with your enlisted though.

>>33806007
>Instead of saying he is unstoppable, he is saying he is invincible. Same shit.

He's not making any real statements on defending & holding a megacity, he's poking holes in your strategy. That's far different from "saying he's invincible".

File: tmp_11844-38d317866721.jpg (50KB, 600x604px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 600x604px

>>33806042
>both wrong
>one post replied to

File: Thermobarics.png (296KB, 602x458px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 602x458px

>>33802416

Thermobaric weapons would be very useful in clearing out structures.

>>33803446

Radiation: you have to hold the city after leveling it or otherwise, and you can't do that when it's impossible to live in. At most, you want to be precise enough to knock of individual structures.

>>33805997
I'm sorry, are you actually arguing that the USA would just forget about A2A or air superiority campaigns? Did the USA forget to pack cruise missiles or artillery too?

File: Satellite_Shanghai and nearby cities.jpg (61KB, 725x513px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 725x513px

>>33805056

>>33806066
>He's not making any real statements on defending & holding a megacity

Your right, his statements of if being realistically impossible are without merit due to this.

Thanks!

>>33806066
He's not poking holes in a strategy, he's giving his own retarded strategy; most people aren't even arguing about securing and occupying a megacity, but cordoning and bypassing it with limited engagement of enemy forces within. His responses are basically NOPE followed by a vague reason such as saying SEAD and bombing won't work because of the PLAAF and IADS and ground forces will not only face embedded armies, but also a guerrilla force twice the size of the USMC.

I guess the correct answer is act like we're going to attack a megacity and our opponent will deploy the majority of their military to garrison it, thus allowing us free reign everywhere else.

File: BAMM-CHINA.png (3MB, 1361x914px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1361x914px

>>33802416
Okay so after reading all this the current questions are as follows.

>1: Why fight for a mega-city.

>2: Can you even siege or surround a mega-city and if so how would you handle the population trying to leave and those who stay.

>3. How would you fight in a mega-city while also dealing with the massive amount of people, criminals, and other kinds of people in a city.

Our prime examples seem to be cities in India, China, Pakistan, and Jew York/Los Angeles.

>>33806237
I have to preface with this: Conventional conflicts are practically nonexistent today. So any conflict we'll be involved with will either be against an insurgency, or for one side of a civil war.

>Why fight for a mega city?
Mega cities are the centres of finance, trade, industry, communications, and logistics. If you won't fight for a mega city, you are ceding it to the opposing faction.

>Can you even siege or surround a mega-city and if so how would you handle the population trying to leave and those who stay.
I have no real answer to this. It is possible to siege a mega city, but it would result in a humanitarian catastrophe.

>How would you fight in a mega-city while also dealing with the massive amount of people, criminals, and other kinds of people in a city.
Very high cooperation & tight integration with the local police/military/paramilitary forces. You deploy with the locals, "showing the flag" and walking old-school "beats" for a given area would be ideal, while still being able to rapidly re-deploy to a developing situation.
You'll also want your troops to be very familiar with the local culture & customs + language knowledge. The difficulty here is that this can change quite drastically when re-deploying to a different district.

>>33806562
Being a center of finance doesn't really matter, if one of your cities is being invaded your economy is already taking a beating and any corporate infrastructure should have long ago left town. Trade itself is disrupted by the act of attacking unless the infrastructure is what you need. Likewise industry, communication, and logistics. Unless you have a need for them it's simpler to just destroy them to deny them to your enemy.

>>33802416
You glass that shit. Simple.

>>33806766
Apparently you didn't read the first sentence of my post, which should have established that I'm talking about a civil war/insurgency type situation.

>>33802702
Thanks anon.

>>33806562
Finance is now almost entirely electronic. Banks keep very very little negotiable money on hand (cash, precious metals, etc), meaning 2 men and a Brinks truck can clean out anything of value (to the bank, this disregards shit like safe deposit boxes, but that shit isn't theirs and isn't insured anyway so they DGAF) well ahead of enemy forces and they can simply set up shop pretty much anywhere with an internet connection and a halfway competent IT guy.

The mere act of being in conflict with an aggressor entity will pretty well tank trade, and will put a damper on industry (which if it's used for war materiel will be bombed into oblivion right off). Moreover even if the aggressor is totally unopposed over the industrial centers they will have no means of using it themselves.

While it's technically doable to siege a megacity, for all practical purposes it's so retarded nobody would ever try. It would either be entirely ineffective or would take so fucking much manpower they would have no ability to move on. It would take hundreds of thousands if not millions of combat soldiers to do plus dedicated air support and supply.

I agree that the only way to humanely fight in a mega-city would be to integrate, but if you're an aggressor nation/entity and not trying to curb an insurgency that's obviously not gonna work. The other option is full scorched earth.

I see it most likely that the only mega-cities that will be attacked with the intent to occupy any portion of the city long-term would be port cities, and they'd set up a reasonably small perimeter around the dockyards and tell all the residents from within the exclusion to GTFO. That's doable, provides real immediate and tangible benefits to the aggressor (a safe port). Potentially extend this to any major railyards as long as they would be able to make and hold a land access to it, meaning it couldn't be in the center of the city (they're normally not anyway).

>>33806819
An insurgency comes with the implication that one has already occupied the megacity, in which case existing COIN strategies would be use. Assuming that a civil war scenario would want you to see as little infrastructure damage as possible then you'd probably see attempts to isolate and bypass the megacities while occupying just enough of it to hold defenders in place or secure infrastructure that you need.

>>33804737
You still remember your father's screams on the phone as those buildings collapsed on 9/11. Thinking people aren't itching for terrorist fucks to storm their respective cities to get some payback. Hearing my dad scream as he was pulverized into nothing on the answering machine.

I can't fucking wait for the fight of our lives gentleman. May God protect you

>>33804782
>they would reasonably hold a lot of troops as well as the main areas for command and control.

Seal them off, bypass, and let them rot. If there's no strategic value in taking a city, don's assume the tactical liability of getting bogged down in trying to kick the other guy out. Work on controlling the supply lines into the city. If you control the groceries, you own the city.