bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch) (12/14/88)
From: Anna Kochanowska: Visual Edge Software, St. Laurent, PQ >(Do you know that it is forbidden in USSR to make a picture of any post >office, bridge, railway station etc.? You may simply loose your camera >and have a lot of troubles. And you expect people to talk about their >projects, programs and other secrets?!) Do you know that the street signs on the Dutch-West-German border are all deliberately misleading, presumably to buy the dutch a few extra hours the next time Hitler or someone like him comes along? A very great deal of what we might see as paranoia on the Russians' part, they must see as a normal healthy adaptation to reality after 800 years of dealing with Subudai, Batui, Toqtamesh, Tamerlane, Charles of Sweden, Napolean, Hitler, etc. etc. etc. Ted Holden HTE
miket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout) (12/16/88)
In article <204@imspw6.UUCP>, bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch) writes: > From: Anna Kochanowska: Visual Edge Software, St. Laurent, PQ > >(Do you know that it is forbidden in USSR to make a picture of any post > >office, bridge, railway station etc.? You may simply loose your camera > >and have a lot of troubles. > Do you know that the street signs on the Dutch-West-German border are all > deliberately misleading, presumably to buy the dutch a few extra hours the > next time Hitler or someone like him comes along? > A very great deal of what we might see as paranoia on the Russians' part, > they must see as a normal healthy adaptation to reality after 800 years of > dealing with Subudai, Batui, Toqtamesh, Tamerlane, Charles of Sweden, > Napolean, Hitler, etc. etc. etc. Excellent point. Who could blame them? Invading Russia is almost a Planet Earth tradition. Don't forget that even the USA tried it once (end of WW1). The Russians have traditionally adopted many techniques to hamper invaders. Soviet railway gauge (the distance between the rails) is 5' 0", as opposed to the semi-universal 4' 8.5". This was a serious problem for the German invaders in WW2; adapting locomotives/rolling stock/rail gauge ate up a LOT of German resources that could have been better used for other purposes. Supposedly the Russians did not 'officially' adapt this gauge to hamper invaders, but there's no doubt it helped them a lot in both World Wars. Another handicap to would-be invaders of Russia is the dismal road system, rumored to be intentionally kept in bad shape to keep invaders from moving troops quickly. Most contemporary WW2 German accounts of mechanized warfare in the USSR are full of complaints about how few roads there were, and how nearly worthless the existing roads were. A more 'normal' road system might have resulted in the fall of Moscow. Supposedly the road system isn't much better even today. An interesting mental exercise is to postulate a large hostile mechanized force landing on a beach on the coastline of the USA today; all other things being equal, our extravangant highway system would permit a mechanized invader to cover massive amounts of territory with little effort (please, no comments about how you and your friends would stop them with your recreational firearms, CB radios, and pickup trucks!). -- NSA food: Iran sells Nicaraguan drugs to White House through CIA, DIA & NRO. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Michael Trout (miket@brspyr1)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BRS Information Technologies, 1200 Rt. 7, Latham, N.Y. 12110 (518) 783-1161 "God forbid we should ever be 20 years without...a rebellion." Thomas Jefferson
scott@clsib21.UUCP (Scott P. Herzig) (12/20/88)
In article <5141@brspyr1.BRS.Com>, miket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout) writes: > all other things being equal, our extravangant highway system would permit a > mechanized invader to cover massive amounts of territory with little effort > (please, no comments about how you and your friends would stop them with your > recreational firearms, CB radios, and pickup trucks!). > We wouldn't need recreational firearms, CB radios, or pickup trucks to stop potential mechanized invaders. All we need is rush hour! Imagine all these tanks and personnel carriers stuck in a traffic jam on our "extravagant" highway system. -- Scott P. Herzig, CLSI, Inc. 320 Nevada Street Newtonville, MA 02160 UUCP: {...}bbn!clsib21!scott Internet: scott%clsib21.uucp@bbn.com
cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) (12/22/88)
In article <1021@clsib21.UUCP., scott@clsib21.UUCP (Scott P. Herzig) writes: . In article <5141@brspyr1.BRS.Com., miket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout) writes: . . all other things being equal, our extravangant highway system would permit a . . mechanized invader to cover massive amounts of territory with little effort . . (please, no comments about how you and your friends would stop them with your . . recreational firearms, CB radios, and pickup trucks!). . . . . We wouldn't need recreational firearms, CB radios, or pickup trucks to . stop potential mechanized invaders. All we need is rush hour! Imagine . all these tanks and personnel carriers stuck in a traffic jam on our . "extravagant" highway system. . . Scott P. Herzig, CLSI, Inc. Cute answer, but the reality would be more like: "Comrade Lieutenant, there are many cars between us and objective!" "Make like Bigfoot, and drive right over them." followed by sound of crunching glass, bending metal, and screaming drivers. I have more confidence that the resistance will be AR-15s, mobile cellular phones, and BMWs -- the yuppies have more to lose than the good ole boys. -- Clayton E. Cramer {pyramid,pixar,tekbspa}!optilink!cramer (Note new path!)
childers@avsd.UUCP (Richard Childers) (12/22/88)
In article <1021@clsib21.UUCP> scott@clsib21.UUCP (Scott P. Herzig) writes: >In article <5141@brspyr1.BRS.Com>, miket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout) writes: >> all other things being equal, our extravangant highway system would permit a >> mechanized invader to cover massive amounts of territory with little effort >... to stop potential mechanized invaders. All we need is rush hour! Nahhh. Do you know how much those things weigh ? Let's put it this way. If you put an armored tank in a demolition derby, I seriously doubt it would get more than a few dents, those from whatever few International Harvester vehicles were so unfortunate as to be in the derby with aforementioned tank. But beer bottles abound, and napalm can be made by adding together gasoline and styrofoam, so I don't think we'd be entirely helpless were such a damned unlikely thing to happen. People who spend their time dreaming about world conquest usually forget the cost of the infrastructure required to maintain their holdings. Entropy never takes a vacation, and neither do guerillas, last time I checked. So I wouldn't worry about takeovers. If some country is stupid enough to try, I have every confidence it will be the most expensive mistake they make in their career as world leader. Besides, can you imagine a Russian tank crossing a New York freeway support that's been built by Union Labor, with sand cutting the tensile strength of the cement ( less cement == more $$$ in organized crime coffers ) to barely sufficient strength to avoid collapse ? < snicker > They'd take the low road after that, sticking to dirt roads, where we could flood them ... -- richard -- * "... where there is no movement, there is no perception." * * Ribot, _The Psychology of Attention_ * * ..{amdahl|decwrl|octopus|pyramid|ucbvax}!avsd.UUCP!childers@tycho * * AMPEX Corporation - Audio-Visual Systems Division, R & D *
gerard@ruuinf.UUCP (Gerard Tel) (12/22/88)
In article <5141@brspyr1.BRS.Com>, miket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout) writes: > In article <204@imspw6.UUCP>, bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch) writes: > > The Russians have traditionally adopted many techniques to hamper invaders. > Soviet railway gauge (the distance between the rails) is 5' 0", as opposed to > the semi-universal 4' 8.5". This was a serious problem for the German > invaders in WW2; This is a common explanation of the width of Russian railways. However it is a typical example of Western paranoia, it is not true and I will give two arguments for this. In the first place, it is easier to invade a country with wide tracks using narrow trains than vice-versa: you can add one iron bar between the two existing ones (which the Germans did), while you cannot widen a track like that because the crossbars are too small. So if the Russians chose their trackwidth for this reason it would have been narrower than ours. Secondly, the Russian track width was determined EARLIER that the track widt in the rest of Europe. While in west europe there were many companies each using their own tracks, the Russian czar coordinated things better and decided on one width. The only possible conclusions from these two arguments is that the width in the west was choosen so as to make Russian invasion impossible. However, I would not draw that one. So let's draw no conclusion at all. By the way did you ever have a ride in a wide-track train? It is much more comfortable than ours. Gerard Tel. > NSA food: Iran sells Nicaraguan drugs to White House through CIA, DIA & NRO. ^^^ Let us add some KGB food... Imperialists plan sabotage in Soviet arms factory that was rebuilt to peacefull toy plant.
rlevasse@hawk.ulowell.edu (Roger Levasseur) (12/24/88)
In article <5180@brspyr1.BRS.Com> davef@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Dave Fiske) writes: >and they went up the river to where there are a lot of U.S. Navy ships >docked. When we got near that area, the captain warned us over the >loudspeaker that we were entering a "restricted" area, and that the [stuff deleted] >I basically think this is a bunch of malarky designed to make the trip >more exciting for the tourists, but I didn't feel like testing it As I understand it, the Navy facility in Charleston is a weapons facility. One of the weapons in stock are submarine launched ICBM's. The US Navy loads and unloads these missles from the subs there as well. Sure makes sense to have it restricted. -roger Roger Levasseur hawk.ulowell.edu
childers@avsd.UUCP (Richard Childers) (12/26/88)
In article <920@ruuinf.UUCP> gerard@ruuinf.UUCP (Gerard Tel) writes: >This is a common explanation of the width of Russian railways. >However it is a typical example of Western paranoia, it is not true ... Indeed. I can't see an engineer justifying this decision to superiors ... >Secondly, the Russian track width was determined EARLIER that the >track widt in the rest of Europe. While in west europe there were many >companies each using their own tracks, the Russian czar coordinated >things better and decided on one width. The real story behind that is that an engineer, Isambard Kindom Brunel, recommended wider rails for substantial reasons, but was rebuffed by a well-established engineering establishment. Billions of tons of freight that could have been shipped, weren't, as a result of this 'foresight' on the part of the decision-makers ... >By the way did you ever have a ride in a wide-track train? It is much >more comfortable than ours. Some day ... > Gerard Tel. -- richard -- * "... where there is no movement, there is no perception." * * Ribot, _The Psychology of Attention_ * * ..{amdahl|decwrl|octopus|pyramid|ucbvax}!avsd.UUCP!childers@tycho * * AMPEX Corporation - Audio-Visual Systems Division, R & D *
miket@brspyr1.BRS.Com (Mike Trout) (12/29/88)
In article <335@avsd.UUCP>, childers@avsd.UUCP (Richard Childers) writes: > In article <1021@clsib21.UUCP> scott@clsib21.UUCP (Scott P. Herzig) writes: > >... to stop potential mechanized invaders. All we need is rush hour! > Nahhh. Do you know how much those things weigh ? Depending on the vehicle, between 10 and 60 tons, sometimes even more. The average main battle tank generally runs between 40 and 55 tons, usually tending more toward the higher number. > Let's put it this way. If you put an armored tank in a demolition derby, > I seriously doubt it would get more than a few dents, those from whatever > few International Harvester vehicles were so unfortunate as to be in the > derby with aforementioned tank. True enough. But crushing cars and trucks slows you down considerably, and speed and mobility are critical elements of blitzkrieg. Even worse, running over stuff tends to weaken and cause damage to tracks and running gear. I would wager that after running over ten or so automobiles, the average tank would have to pull over to have some track maintenance done. And a rush hour traffic jam, after being "flattened" by armored vehicles, would still be an incredible tangle of wreckage and debris that would tend to get caught in tracks. Any tank driver will tell you that if you're not careful, a glancing blow against a rock or tree will cause the track to fly off. I tend to agree with Scott that the typical USA rush hour would be a severe handicap to any invader, and is probably our best "ace in the hole." Note that during an invasion, everybody and his brother would be in their personal vehicles trying to get somewhere, and THAT mess would make a normal rush hour look like Pee-Wee's Playhouse. > But beer bottles abound, and napalm can be made by adding together gasoline > and styrofoam, so I don't think we'd be entirely helpless were such a damned > unlikely thing to happen. But guerrilla warfare requires a high level of skill and organization, something that comes from national experience with thwarting invaders. As the USA has, for all practical purposes, never really been invaded, the effectiveness of USA civilian irregulars is a very open question. I'll place my trust in the US Army, Navy, and Air Force, who know roughly how to handle such things, rather than in Uncle Joe-Bob who thinks he will stop a column of T-80s with his 12 gauge. Note that part of standard training for all Soviet tank crews is to drive their tank through something like a car wash--except that the wash sprays gasoline instead of water, and the gasoline is then ignited. The crew must demonstrate their ability to avoid panic, stop the vehicle, extinguish the fire (incidentally, all modern tanks are immune to damage from being doused with flaming liquids), and continue on their way. Actually, in a combat situation, the approved procedure (for all nations, not just the USSR) is to ignore the harmless fire and continue driving. > People who spend their time dreaming about world conquest usually forget the > cost of the infrastructure required to maintain their holdings. Entropy never > takes a vacation, and neither do guerillas, last time I checked. > So I wouldn't worry about takeovers. If some country is stupid enough to try, > I have every confidence it will be the most expensive mistake they make in > their career as world leader. Absolutely true. The WW2 Germans found that occupying even "quiet" areas burned up an unacceptable amount of resources, and hotbeds of guerilla activity (USSR, Yugoslavia, Norway, France) swallowed up entire divisions on occupation duty. Anybody who is stupid enough to invade the USA (even if they somehow get to the beaches) deserves whatever they get. -- NSA food: Iran sells Nicaraguan drugs to White House through CIA, DIA & NRO. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Michael Trout (miket@brspyr1)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BRS Information Technologies, 1200 Rt. 7, Latham, N.Y. 12110 (518) 783-1161 "God forbid we should ever be 20 years without...a rebellion." Thomas Jefferson
alexis@reed.UUCP (Alexis Dimitriadis) (12/31/88)
> [Russian rails are wider] > >This is a common explanation of the width of Russian railways. > >However it is a typical example of Western paranoia, it is not true ... The rail system in Peloponnesus (a large peninsula in southern Greece) also has the wide rails; the rest of Greece is standard. These folks are really paranoid about being invaded by northern Greece (more :-) than you realise). BTW, the British drive on the left side of the road in a ploy to create impassable traffic jams if they're ever invaded; it's worked great for 922 years and counting :-))).