منتدى الشنطي
اهلا بكم زوارنا الكرام راجيا ان تجدوا المنفعة والفائده
هذا منتدى ثقافي علمي اجتماعي صحي ديني تربوي

منتدى الشنطي

ابراهيم محمد نمر يوسف الشنطي
 
الرئيسيةالرئيسية  البوابةالبوابة  بحـثبحـث  الأحداثالأحداث  اليوميةاليومية  مكتبة الصورمكتبة الصور  التسجيلالتسجيل  دخول  

شاطر
 

 لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟

اذهب الى الأسفل 
كاتب الموضوعرسالة
ابراهيم الشنطي
Admin
ابراهيم الشنطي

عدد المساهمات : 54062
تاريخ التسجيل : 28/01/2013
العمر : 73
الموقع : الاردن

لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Empty
مُساهمةموضوع: لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟   لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Emptyالجمعة 04 يناير 2019, 10:26 am

لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟






لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ 140828132531-01-world-war-ii-0828-horizontal-large-gallery

0


مترجم عن مقال مجلة Time الأمريكية: Why It’s No Longer Possible for Any Country to Win a War
إنّ العقود القليلة الماضية كانت أكثر العصور سلامًا منذ تاريخ البشرية، فلأول مرة في التاريخ كانت أعداد الموتى نتيجةً للعنف البشري أقل من تلك التي سببتها حوادث السير، السمنة أو حتى الانتحار!
حيث أنّ حالنا الآن هو على عكس المجتمعات البشرية السابقة، حيث بلغت نسبة أعداد الوفيات نتيجة العنف البشري في المجتمع الزراعي – على سبيل المثال – 15% … بينما تضاءَلت في القرن العشرين لتصل إلى 5%، أمّا في أيامنا هذه فنحن فقط مسؤولون عن 1% من مجموع الوفيات!
وعلى الرغم من طمأنة ما سبق، إلّا أنّ الوضع السياسي العالمي يتدهور سريعًا، فقد عادت موضة تأجيج النزاعات وإثارة الحروب إلى الرواج، مما أثار رعبًا ليس فقط لدى الناس العاديين بل لدى الخبراء أيضًا، فهم خائفون من تكرار ما حدث في عام 1914 … حيث أدى قتل فرانس فريناند – وريث العرش النمساوي والذي قُتل على أيادٍ صريبية – إلى إشعال شرارة الحرب العالمية الأولى. اليوم واقعة بسيطة في البادية السورية، أو حركة غير مسؤولة وغير حكيمة من شبه الجزيرة الكورية قد تكون بادئةً لصراع دولي لا يُحمد عقباه.
ولكن جميعنا يدرك أنّ الحال في 1914 لا يشبه حالنا الآن، فآنذاك كانت للحرب جاذبية عظيمة خاصةً لصُنّاع الحروب من أصحاب النخبة والنفوذ القوي حول العالم؛ بسبب امتلاكهم لأمثلة حقيقية وواقعية عن الحروب الناجحة وتأثيرها على الوضع الاقتصادي وحتى على القوى السياسية، أمّا الآن فمفهوم الحرب الرابحة قد يكون من الأنواع المهددة بالانقراض.
فمنذ عهد الإمبراطورية الرومية والدولة الآشورية، نشأت إمبراطوريات واسعة عظيمة بُنيت من خلال الحروب. لذا، في عام 1914 كانت لدى قوى النخبة أمثلة وفيرة عن الأرباح التي يمكن أن تجلبها الحروب، ففي الفترة من 1846 إلى 1848 استطاعت القوات الأميركية السيطرة على كاليفورنيا، نيفادا، يوتا، أريزونا، نيو مكسيكو وأجزاء من كولورادو، كانساس، وايومنغ وأوكلاهوما … والتي عُدّت حينها صفقة العصر، وبلغت خسائر الجيش الأميركي فيها لتحقيق ذلك النصر ما يقارب 13000 جنديًا.
ولم تكن أميركا وحدها من خاضت حروبًا عظيمةً، فقد خطت خطاها الإمبراطورية اليابانية التي انتصرت بحربٍ على كلٍ من الصين وروسيا، ألمانيا أيضًا انتصرت في حربها على فرنسا، وتقريبًا كل القوى العظمى كانت لديها سلاسل من المستعمرات الحربية التابعة لها، فعندما عزمت فرنسا، بريطانيا، وإيطاليا على البدء في مخططاتها الاستعمارية في كل من فيتنام، ليبيا و نيجيريا كان خوفهم الرئيسي هو أن يسبقهم أحد إلى تلك المستعمرات.
اليوم، ليس لدى الدول العظيمة دراية تامة بمفهوم الحرب الناجحة وما هي حقيقتها، ربما  يكونون قد قرأوا عنها في الكتب التاريخية، أو شاهدوها في أفلام هوليود التي أعادت تجسيدها بأفلام لاقت رواجًا كبيرًا، لكن على هذه الدول أن تؤمن أنّ هذا النوع من الحروب انقرض ولم يعد له وجود، ومع ذلك فإنّ بعض دول العالم الثالث وبعض القوى المؤثرة ما زالت تلوح وتروج لحروبٍ كهذه، لكنها كقوى فاعلة ليست لديها القدرة والمعرفة الكافية للوصول إلى مبتغاها.
وفي الحقيقة، كان أعظم انتصار في الذاكرة الحية هو انتصار الولايات المتحدة الأميركية على الاتحاد السوفيتي، والذي حدث دون أية معارك عسكرية كبرى، لكن انتصار أميركا في الحرب الباردة لم يجعلها تتخلى عن نمط الحرب التقليدي، حيث عادت لاستخدامه في حرب الخليج الأولى، والذي لم يثمر إلّا عن خسائر فادحة على الصعيدين المالي والعسكري، حيث بلغت خسائرها عدة مليارات دولار نتيجة حرب العراق وأفغانستان.
أمّا الصين – والتي بدأت تُعدّ من ضمن القوى المؤثرة في العالم في بدايات مطلع القرن الواحد والعشرين – فقد ركزت على العامل الاقتصادي، والذي كان سببًا لتقدمها وازدهارها، حيث اتبعت في نهضتها أسلوب المعجزات الاقتصادية، والذي اتبعته كل من اليابان وألمانيا بعد الحروب التي خاضتها بعد عام 1945، وسعت الصين أيضًا إلى تجنب كل الصراعات العسكرية منذ الحرب التي خاضتها مع فيتنام في عام 1979.
لم يكن الوضع في الشرق الأوسط مختلفًا، حيث أنّ القوى الإقليمية لا تعرف بعد كيفية شن الحروب الناجحة، فلم تكتسب إيران أي شيء من حمام دم الحرب الإيراني – العراقي الطويل، وقد تجنبت بعد ذلك جميع المواجهات العسكرية المباشرة، وأصبح ذلك مهيمنًا إقليميًا بشكل افتراضي، حيث أنّ عدُويها الرئيسيين – الولايات المتحدة والعراق – انخرطا في حربٍ دمرت كلًا من العراق والشهية الأمريكية لمستنقعات الشرق الأوسط.
أيضًا يمكن قول الشيء ذاته عن إسرائيل، والتي شنت آخر حرب ناجحة لها منذ خمسين عامًا، ومنذ عام 1967 ازدهرت إسرائيل رغم حروبها الكثيرة لا بفضلها، إذ أنّ أراضيها المحتلة هي عبء اقتصادي ثقيل ومسؤولية سياسية مدمرة، مثل إيران. سعت إسرائيل مؤخّرًا إلى تحسين موقعها الجيوسياسي. ليس من خلال شنّ الحروب، بل بتفادي التورّط في الحروب التي دمرت كلًا من العراق وسوريا وليبيا.
مؤخرًا، كانت الحرب الناجحة الوحيدة التي خاضتها قوة كبرى هي الفتح الروسي لشبه جزيرة القرم. ومع ذلك، فقد أصبح ذلك ممكنًا من خلال مجموعة غير عادية من الظروف: أولها أنّ الجيش الأوكراني لم يُظهر حينها أيّة مقاومة، كما امتنعت قوى أخرى عن التدخل، وسكان القرم إمّا دعموا الغزاة أو قبلوا الغزو بسلام كأمر واقع. هذه الظروف سيكون من الصعب توفرها مرةً أخرى، حيث أنّ الشرط المسبق لخوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ هو غياب أي عدو مستعد للمقاومة، الأمر الذي يقلل من احتمالية توافر فرص كهذه في المستقبل.
في الواقع، سعت روسيا إلى تكرار ما حدث مع بقية أجزاء أوكرانيا، لكنها واجهت معارضةً أكثر صلابةً، وتعثرت الحرب في شرق أوكرانيا إلى حالة جمود غير منتجة، فغزو المصانع المتدهورة في الحقبة السوفياتية في كل من لوهانسك ودونيتسك لا يغطي تكلفة الحرب، وبالتأكيد لا يعوض تكاليف العقوبات الدولية التي فُرضت على روسيا آنذاك.
على الرغم من تمكن روسيا من غزو شبه جزيرة القرم، يبدو أنّ الاستراتيجية الأكثر نجاحًا في القرن الحادي والعشرين، والتي تتبعها الدول العظمى هي الحفاظ على سلامتها والسماح للآخرين بالقيام بالقتال نيابةً عنها، ولكننا نتساءَل مرةً أخرى: لماذا أصبح من الصعب على القوى العظمى شن الحروب الناجحة؟
يعد التغيير في طبيعة الاقتصاد الحالي من أهم الأسباب، ففي الماضي إذا هَزمْتَ عدوّك في ساحة المعركة، فبإمكانك بسهولة أن تحصل على الأموال عن طريق نهب مدن العدو وبيع المدنيين في أسواق الرقيق، واحتلال حقول القمح ومناجم الذهب، أمّا في القرن العشرين فلن تكسب من طريقة كهذه سوى القليل؛ لأنّ الأصول الاقتصادية الرئيسية تتكون اليوم من المعرفة الفنية والمؤسساتية، ولا يمكنك التغلب على المعرفة من خلال الحرب.
ومع ذلك، قد تزدهر منظمة مثل: داعش عن طريق نهب المدن وآبار النفط في الشرق الأوسط، ففي عام 2014 استولت داعش على  أكثر من 500 مليون دولار من البنوك العراقية، وكسبت مثلها في 2015 من خلال بيع النفط. رغم ذلك، فإنّه من غير المرجح أن تشن الصين والولايات المتحدة حربًا مقابل مليار تافه، أمّا فيما يتعلق بإنفاق تريليونات الدولارات على الحرب ضد الولايات المتحدة، فكيف يمكن للصين أن تسدد هذه النفقات وتوازن كل أضرار الحرب والفرص التجارية الضائعة؟ هل سينهب جيش التحرير الشعبي المنتصر لثروات وادي السليكون؟ صحيح أنّ الشركات مثل: Apple و Facebook و Google تستحق مئات المليارات من الدولارات، لكن لا يمكن الاستيلاء على هذه الثروة بالقوة. لا توجد مناجم السيليكون في وادي السليكون.
نظريًا، يمكن للحرب الناجحة أن تحقق أرباحًا ضخمةً من خلال تمكين المنتصر من إعادة ترتيب نظام التجارة العالمي لصالحه، كما فعلت الولايات المتحدة بعد فوزها على هتلر. ومع ذلك، فإنّ التكنولوجيا العسكرية الحالية تجعل من الصعب للغاية تكرار هذا العمل الفذ. وبحسب التعريف، فإنّ الأرباح الكبيرة الناتجة عن الحروب هي التي تجعل منها محط اهتمام المنتصر، ومن الممكن أيضًا أن تجعل الطرف المنهزم يلجأ إلى أسلحة الدمار الشامل، فليس من قبيل المصادفة أنّه منذ هيروشيما لم تقم القوى العظمى بمقاتلة بعضها بعضًا مباشرةً، ولم تشارك إلّا في ما كان (بالنسبة لهم) صراعات قليلة المصالح، كما لم يكن هناك أي منها يميل إلى استخدام الأسلحة النووية لتفادي الهزيمة. في الواقع، حتى مهاجمة الطاقة النووية من الدرجة الثانية مثل: إيران أو كوريا الشمالية هو اقتراح غير جذاب للغاية.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ %D8%A9%D8%A9
إنّ مفهوم الحرب السيبرانية “الإلكترونية” يزيد الأمور سوءًا بالنسبة للإمبرياليين المحتملين، فحتى عهد جورج دبليو بوش، كانت الولايات المتحدة قادرةً على إحداث فوضى في الفلوجة البعيدة، بينما لم يكن لدى العراقيين أي وسيلة للانتقام من سان فرانسيسكو، ولكن إذا كانت الولايات المتحدة قد هاجمت الآن دولة تمتلك قدرات حرب إلكترونية معتدلة، فإنّ البرمجيات الخبيثة والفيروسات يمكن لها أن توقف حركة النقل الجوي في دالاس، وأن تتسبب في تصادم القطارات في فيلادلفيا، وتعطيل الشبكة الكهربائية في ولاية ميشيغان.
أمّا في عصر الغزاة العظماء، كانت الحرب عبارة عن صفقة منخفضة الضرر وذات ربح مرتفع، ففي معركة هاستينغز في عام 1066م، اكتسب وليام الفاتح إنجلترا بأكملها في يوم واحد بتكلفة بضعة آلاف من القتلى. وعلى النقيض، فإنّ الأسلحة النووية والحرب السيبرانية هي تقنيات عالية الضرر، وذات ربح منخفض، حيث يمكن استخدام هذه الأدوات لتدمير بلدان بأكملها، ولكن ليس لبناء إمبراطوريات مربحة.
اليوم، وفي عالم مليء بأزيز الرصاص وانفجارات المدافع، ربما يكون أفضل ضماناتنا للسلام أنّ القوى الكبرى ليست على دراية بأي مثال حديث عن حرب ناجحة، ورغم كل ما تصدره القوى العظمى من تهديدات واستنكارات، إلّا أنّها خائفةٌ تمامًا من حرب فعلية، وتفضل أن يبقى ذلك كلامًا مسطورًا فقط، على عكس القادة العظماء أمثال: يوليوس قيصر وجنكيز خان اللّذين كانا إذا ما خططا لحربٍ خاضاها مباشرةً.
وعلى الرغم من كل ذلك، إلّا أنّه يبقى احتمال اكتشاف هذه الدول لطريقة شن حرب ناجحة في ظل ظروف القرن الواحد والعشرين أمرًا مخيفًا، وقد يفتح أبواب الجحيم بسرعة، وهذا ما يجعل النجاح الروسي في شبه جزيرة القرم فألًا مخيفًا بشكل خاص، لكن دعونا نأمل أن يظل هذا المثال معزولًا. ومع ذلك، حتى لو كان من المستحيل شن الحروب الناجحة في القرن الحادي والعشرين، فهذا لا يعطينا ضمانةً مطلقةً للسلام، فلا يجدر بنا أبدًا الاستهانة بالغباء البشري.
الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل
https://shanti.jordanforum.net
ابراهيم الشنطي
Admin
ابراهيم الشنطي

عدد المساهمات : 54062
تاريخ التسجيل : 28/01/2013
العمر : 73
الموقع : الاردن

لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Empty
مُساهمةموضوع: رد: لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟   لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Emptyالجمعة 04 يناير 2019, 10:29 am

Why It’s No Longer Possible for Any Country to Win a War


blob:http://time.com/f6368458-759b-442b-851d-f818bd140c8f
Harari is the internationally best-selling author of Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind and Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow; he lectures at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
The last few decades have been the most peaceful era in human history. For the first time ever, fewer people die today from human violence than from traffic accidents, obesity or even suicide. Whereas in early agricultural societies human violence caused up to 15% of all human deaths, and in the twentieth century it caused 5%, today it is responsible for only about 1%. Yet the international climate is rapidly deteriorating; warmongering is back in vogue, and military expenditure is ballooning. Both laypeople and experts fear that just as in 1914 the murder of an Austrian archduke sparked the First World War, in 2017 some incident in the Syrian Desert or an unwise move in the Korean Peninsula might ignite a global conflict.
Yet there are several key differences between 2017 and 1914. Back then, war had great appeal to elites across the world because they had concrete examples for how successful wars contribute to economic success and political power. Now, successful wars seem to be an endangered species.
From the days of Assyria and Rome, great empires were usually built through war, and elites in 1914 had plenty of recent examples for the huge profits a successful war can bring. In 1846–48 the United States invaded Mexico, and for the price of 13,000 dead American soldiers, it got California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico and parts of Colorado, Kansas, Wyoming and Oklahoma. It was the bargain of the millennium. Similarly, imperial Japan cherished its victories over China and Russia; Germany glorified its triumph over France; and almost every great power had a string of splendid little colonial wars to its name. When France, Britain or Italy contemplated putting boots on the ground in Vietnam, Nigeria or Libya, their main fear was that somebody else might get there first.
In 2017, global elites don’t know what a successful war even looks like. They may have read about them in history books and seen fanciful recreations in Hollywood blockbusters, but they have good reason to suspect that this type of war has gone extinct. Though some third-world dictators and non-state actors still manage to flourish through war, it seems that major powers no longer know how to do so.
The greatest victory in living memory — of the United States over the Soviet Union — was achieved without any major military confrontation. The U.S. then got a fleeting taste of old-fashioned military glory in the First Gulf War — which only tempted it to waste trillions on humiliating military fiascos in Iraq and Afghanistan. China, the rising power of the early twenty-first century, has assiduously avoided all armed conflicts since its Vietnamese debacle of 1979, and it owes its ascent strictly to economic factors. In this, it has emulated not the Japanese and German empires of the pre-1914 era, but rather the nonviolent Japanese and German economic miracles of the post-1945 era.
Even in the Middle East, regional powers don’t know how to wage successful wars. Iran gained nothing from the long bloodbath of the Iran-Iraq War and subsequently avoided all direct military confrontations. It became regional hegemon by default, as its two main enemies — the U.S. and Iraq — got embroiled in a war that destroyed both Iraq and the American appetite for Middle Eastern quagmires.
Much the same can be said of Israel, which waged its last successful war fifty years ago. Since 1967, Israel has prospered despite its many wars, not thanks to them. Its conquered territories are a heavy economic burden and a crippling political liability. Like Iran, Israel has recently improved its geopolitical position not by waging successful wars, but by avoiding getting sucked into the wars that devastated IraqSyria and Libya.
The only recent successful war waged by a major power has been the Russian conquest of the Crimea. However, it was made possible by an extraordinary set of circumstances: The Ukrainian army showed no resistance; other powers refrained from intervening; and the Crimean population either supported the invaders or peacefully accepted the conquest as a fait accompli. These circumstances will be hard to reproduce. If the precondition for a successful war is the absence of any enemies willing to resist, it limits the available opportunities.
Indeed, when Russia sought to reproduce its Crimean success in other parts of the Ukraine, it encountered substantially stiffer opposition, and the war in eastern Ukraine bogged down into an unproductive stalemate. Conquering decrepit Soviet-era factories in Luhansk and Donetsk hardly pays for the war, and it certainly does not offset the costs of international sanctions.
The conquest of Crimea notwithstanding, it seems that in the twenty-first century the most successful strategy is to keep your peace and let others do the fighting for you. Why has it become so difficult for major powers to wage successful wars?
One reason is the change in the nature of the economy. In the past, if you defeated your enemy on the battlefield, you could easily cash in by looting enemy cities, selling enemy civilians in the slave markets and occupying valuable wheat fields and gold mines. Yet in the twenty-first century, only puny profits could be made that way. Today, the main economic assets consist of technical and institutional knowledge — and you cannot conquer knowledge through war. An organization such as ISIS may flourish by looting cities and oil wells in the Middle East — in 2014, ISIS seized more than $500 million from Iraqi banks and in 2015 made an additional $500 million from selling oil. But China and the U.S. are unlikely to start a war for a paltry billion. As for spending trillions of dollars on a war against the U.S., how could China repay these expenses and balance all the war damages and lost trade opportunities? Would the victorious People’s Liberation Army loot the riches of Silicon Valley? True, corporations such as Apple, Facebook and Google are worth hundreds of billions of dollars, but you cannot seize these fortunes by force. There are no silicon mines in Silicon Valley.
A successful war could theoretically still bring huge profits by enabling the victor to rearrange the global trade system in its favor, as the U.S. did after its victory over Hitler. However, present-day military technology would make it extremely difficult to repeat this feat. By definition, profits large enough to make a global war worthwhile for the victor will also make it worthwhile for the loser to resort to weapons of mass destruction. The atom bomb has turned “victory” in a World War into collective suicide. It is no coincidence that since Hiroshima superpowers never fought one another directly, and engaged only in what (for them) were low-stake conflicts in which none was tempted to use nuclear weapons to avert defeat. Indeed, even attacking a second-rate nuclear power such as Iran or North Korea is an extremely unattractive proposition.
Cyber warfare makes things even worse for would-be imperialists. As recently as the days of George W. Bush, the U.S. could wreak havoc in far-off Fallujah while the Iraqis had no means of retaliating against San Francisco. But if the U.S. now attacks a country possessing even moderate cyber warfare capabilities, malware and logic bombs could stop air traffic in Dallas, cause trains to collide in Philadelphia and bring down the electric grid in Michigan.
In the great age of conquerors, warfare was a low-damage, high-profit affair. At the battle of Hastings in 1066, William the Conqueror gained the whole of England in a single day for the cost of a few thousand dead. Nuclear weapons and cyber warfare, by contrast, are high-damage, low-profit technologies. You could use such tools to destroy entire countries, but not to build profitable empires.
Hence in a world filling up with saber-rattling and bad vibes, perhaps our best guarantee of peace is that major powers aren’t familiar with any recent example of a successful war. While Genghis Khan or Julius Caesar would invade a foreign country at the drop of a hat, present-day strongmen talk loud but are very careful about actually launching wars. Of course, if somebody does find a formula to wage successful wars under twenty-first-century conditions, the gates of hell might open with a rush. This is what makes the Russian success in the Crimea a particularly frightening omen. Let’s hope it remains an isolated example. Though, even if it is impossible to wage successful wars in the twenty-first century, that does not give us an absolute guarantee for peace. We should never underestimate human stupidity.
الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل
https://shanti.jordanforum.net
ابراهيم الشنطي
Admin
ابراهيم الشنطي

عدد المساهمات : 54062
تاريخ التسجيل : 28/01/2013
العمر : 73
الموقع : الاردن

لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Empty
مُساهمةموضوع: رد: لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟   لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Emptyالجمعة 04 يناير 2019, 10:36 am

Is it possible for any single country to win a war against China?


The support of USA in any conflict with Taiwan is irrelevant. USA can no longer steam her carrier groups between Taiwan and China as she did with Nimitz and Independence in 1996. The military strength of China now, and even more in the immediate future will deter USA from intervening. For all practical purpose, the 1st Island Chain is China in all but the name. If push comes to shove, China will control the 2nd Island Chain as well. USA will have to keep their carriers in Frisco Bay to remain safe.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-564937947e2a7aca261cf0caa05a6a8a

USA cannot win a war with China even in the Pacific Ocean.
China military might and knowledge now is very much further ahead of USA then is realised by most people. The Dong Fang 21 D is a real carrier killer. And not just from tests made in Western desrt of China.
اقتباس :
US NAVY FEARS China's DF 21D missile WORLDS FASTEST ANTI SHIP MISSILE

لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-b35b56c78ac8cbdc169c88ef069d6f1a

A Chinese DF-21D ASBM costs only $5 to $10.5 million. China can afford to build hundreds of them.

لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-d0f459d8aa0163a68895138dee80662c

China Successfully Tests 'Carrier Killer' Missile In The Gobi Desert.

That was in 2013. The missile will be even more lethal by now and in future

A condemned old space project support ship of 10000 ton was modified as a simulation of US Navy carrier and sunk by DF-21D missile live firing in the Pacific sailing 2000km from China in 2010.

And how about subsonic anti-ship cruise missiles? also by the thousands?

And yeah, stealth too.

لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-a04af20b76a8e98a1a66e3090d08c54b

GB-6A
The GB-6A, based on the GS-6 glide cluster bomb, has a turbojet engine (seen in the cutaway at the missile's rear) which could give it a range of 500-600 kilometers (that's about 311-373 miles). Its stealth would make intercepting it highly difficult.
GB-6A subsonic stealth cruise missile, like its American counterparts JSOW-ER, uses a stealth glide bomb (the GS-6) for its fuselage, attaching to a turbojet engine. At about 13-16 feet long, it would likely weigh one ton with a 500 kg warhead. The GS-6A can be launched by the J-10B multirole fighter, and presumably the J-16 and JH-7A strike fighters, and H-6K bomber. The cruise missile would increase China's A2/AD operations by providing a stealthy attack option against enemy bases and warships.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-344148284d31bedf344adaef0e06b514

YJ-12
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-dfc2d389bc4b321809765f30946a50cd

DF-21D
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-30c0346a2bb505f4742290817ccc77c3

DF-21D MIRV Version
YJ-12 Anti-ship Missile Regarded by US media as China’s Most Dangerous Missile

US War on the Rocks website published an article on July 2 titled “China’s Most Dangerous Missile (So Far)” by Robert Haddick, an independent contractor at U.S. Special Operations Command, that regards China’s YJ-12 anti-ship missile as China’s most dangerous weapon so far.

An article by Wang Genbin, deputy commander-in-chief of Department 4 of China Aerospace Science & Industry Corp. (CASIC), on a journal publicly available in China. Wang says in the article that in the two decades since 1988, China spent 3 billion yuan ($494 million) in successfully developing DF-21A, 21B, 21C and 21D missiles and completed the transition from development of only nuclear missiles to that of both nuclear and conventional missiles and from fixed target to low-speed target. In addition, the accuracy has been improved from several hundred to several tens of meters. The two decades from 1988 ended in 2008. What Wang says means that by 2008, DF-21D is able to hit low-speed target, i.e. a warship, with the accuracy of several tens of meters. Do you think Wang’s figure is not based on tests? In China, an officer of his rank will be in problem if the accuracy he mentioned is not based on tests.

For fear of being blamed for revealing the secret about the test results of DF-21D, important Chinese official media 环球网_全球生活新门户_环球时报旗下网站says in its report : A US research institute believes that in 2011 and 2012, China conducted quite a few launches of DF-21D in the South China Sea and successfully hit and sank a simulated model of aircraft carrier made by transforming China’s Yuanwang 4 survey ship.

Return to YJ-12, Haddick says: Naval War College Review published a 2011 study that YJ-12 had the longest range of 400 km among all the ASCMs in the world. It enables Chinese attack aircraft to launch it outside the engagement range of US Navy’s Aegis Combat System and the SM-2 air-defense missiles. As a result US aircraft carrier strike group does not have enough time to respond to the attack.

Haddick describes in his article a realistic future scenario of China sending 48 Su-30 MKK or J-11B fighter jets to attack a US aircraft carrier combat group. The Chinese aircrafts are supersonic and have a combat radius of 1.500 km. They each can carry two to four YJ-12 missiles. As those aircrafts are roughly equal in strength to that of US F-15E fighter-bombers, the aircrafts from the US carrier can only shoot down a few of them. The 100 YJ-12s launched by them from various directions at very low altitude above sea surface will not be detected until they are so close that the US warships have only 45 seconds to engage them.

According to the conclusion of a study from the Naval Postgraduate School, surface warships on alert were only able to hit 32% of the attacking missiles. That means more than 32 of the more than 100 ASCMs will hit US warships, but US navy will be in trouble if only five of them hit US warships.

China unveiled its Type 055 naval destroyer on June 28, the latest step in its decade and a half of military buildup. The new Chinese destroyer outcompetes U.S. destroyers and cruisers, highlighting a major failure in U.S. Navy planning that stretches back to the 1990s. Given the 055’s long-range supersonic YJ-18and YJ-12over the horizon (OTH) anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs), the Chinese destroyer currently outcompetes U.S. Arleigh Burke class destroyers and bigger Ticonderoga class cruisers. Both ships rely on fewer and shorter-range Harpoon anti-ship missiles (ASMs) and aircraft carriers that are themselves vulnerable to China’s ballistic missiles. The U.S. Long Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), under development since 2009, would right the balance, but not for years to come, and meanwhile we must assume China will continue improving its capabilities. Reaction times to the latest supersonic and hypersonic anti-ship weapons can be as short as 15-30 seconds. The YJ-18 and YJ-12 are inspired by Russian design, and the threat environment is complicated by unconventional technologies such as Russian-made anti-ship missiles camouflaged as commercial shipping containers. The U.S. Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) ASCM variant, which may be deployed before 2020, has less range than its Chinese counterparts.


China's Mach 6 Monster Air-to-Air Missile Could Make the U.S. Air Force Come in for a ‘Crash Landing’
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-6a472246ad4ddd1ad8999b0cc515672b


November 28, 2016

The Chinese military has apparently test-fired a new — and potentially powerful — very-long-range air-to-air missile. If reports are accurate, the new weapon could hit U.S. aircraft at twice the range at which the Americans can shoot back.
Images depicting the new missile under the wing of a Chinese air force J-16 fighter circulated in November 2016. The J-16 reportedly fired at least one of the missiles, successfully striking an aerial target.
China has developed air-to-air missiles at a pace at least as rapid as its development of fighter aircraft. The new very-long-range air-to-air missile, or VLRAAM, appeared suddenly. Foreign observers apparently don’t even know what the Chinese call the new munition.
Technical data on the missile is hard to come by, but the photos Beijing has allowed to leak do at least establish the weapon’s dimensions, which — along with a raft of publicly-available scientific research — hint at the missile’s capabilities. In the photos, the VLRAAM is clearly around a third the length of the J-16, giving the munition an overall length of around 20 feet and a diameter of roughly a foot.
In any event, the weapon is much more substantial than is the U.S. military’s own longest-range air-to-air missile, the AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile. The AMRAAM is just 12 feet long and seven inches in diameter. The latest version of the American missile, the AIM-120D, reportedly boasts a maximum range in excess of 90 miles.
The new Chinese munition closely matches the dimensions of Russia’s K-100 air-to-air missile, which has been in halting development for 25 years now but could, in theory, hit targets as far as 200 miles from the launching plane.
To achieve its apparent long range, the Chinese VLRAAM reportedly relies on a powerful rocket motor than can propel the munition at “hypersonic” speeds of up to Mach 6 — half-again faster than the AIM-120D’s own top speed.
China also have the DWL-002 passive radar detection system using multi-station layout, the base station will capture the signal, the signal to reach the station by calculating the time difference, you can calculate the radiation source and the distance difference between each station, and then find the coordinates of the target in the air.
According to recent reports in the Chinese media, China is betting that its new DWL002 passive detection radar system will grant its armed forces a massive boost in countering the United States’ advanced stealth fighters. According to a report inDefense News, Chinese sources claim that the radar will render systems like the advanced F-22 fighter and the upcoming F-35 “obsolete” — a strong claim to be sure.
The DWL002 came to light in recent years and has been pitched by Chinese sources repeatedly as a credible counter to conventional stealth military aviation. The DWL002 is an emitter locating system (ELS) which partially iterates on innovations found in older Russian designs, including the KRTP Tamara series and ERA Vera-E. The DWL002 is a more advanced ELS compared to China’s YLC-20 system (which is itself based on the KRTP-91 Tamara). The United States and other Western European countries have abandoned the use and development of passive-detection radar systems, citing poor accuracy. China and Russia continue to use the systems. The DWL002 itself will have a likely range of around 400-500 kilometers and is comprised of three stations that operate in tandem, placed kilometers apart. According to Defense News, the DWL002’s range would allow it “cover all of Taiwan and the disputed Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea, but [it] is not within range of U.S. military bases on Okinawa. Nor can it reach the Philippines.”
The DWL002, if it lives up to its touted capabilities, would severely hamper stealth fighter-based attempts at establishing aerial control over Chinese territory provided Chinese air defense systems are operational. Anti-stealth radar technology would play an important role in allowing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to effectively counter parts of the United States AirSea Battle operational concept, for example. Part of the effectiveness of AirSea Battle relies on the U.S. Air Force and Navy deploying long-range stealth-based air platforms. With the DWL002 ELS, Chinese air defense systems would be significantly more effective at detecting hostile stealth aircraft. Another feature of the DWL002 that has drawn some attention from the Chinese media — notably the Global Timesaccording to WantChinaTimes— is its ability to track aircraft without notifying pilots that they have been detected by radar. Furthermore, according to Vassily Kashin, senior research fellow at the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, a Moscow-based think tank, the DWL002’s capabilities are not being exaggerated and pose a serious threat to stealth platforms.
The DWL002 system is not only operational, this is sold and operating in Turkmenistan . This will detect the USAF flying tankers and EWCS to guide Chinese planes and VLRAAMs to take down the tankers and EWCs
In Chinese
Using Google translate
Part of China missile lead came from their research and using of N15 propellant while the USA and Russia still uses the Trident D-5 propellent.

Also the advances and lead of China now in the guidance and radar subsystems and anti-jamming integrated into complete networks to bring the missiles good news to their targets.

And Chinese design in integrating all above together and industrial productions to churn out thousands of the various missiles.




Foreign media shocked China air missiles have been achieved across the board across the board
As for the C4ISR
China's future satellite navigation will be millimeter-accurate
The Beidou 3 will guide military munitions and drones.
By Jeffrey Lin November 7, 2017
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-9adb55534367ae68f4057a8dd638d35b

BEIDOU LAUNCH
The Beidou satellite is usually launched by LM-3 space launch vehicles.
by78
China's military is updating its satellite navigation system, launching tech that'll offer super accurate guidance for munitions and drones.
On Sept. 29, China launched two Beidou 3 satellites from a Long March 3C rocket from the Xichang Satellite Launch Center in Sichuan province. Another two Beidou 3 satellites will launch before the end of 2017, part of a network of 20 Beidou 3 and 10 older Beidou 2 satellites set to go up by 2020.
I hope it is clear now that China cannot be expected to fight with AK47s and sampan boats and human waves like what many people think before.
China said uses of her supercomputers aided very much in the technology break through in military scope.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-2decf46ebf3235bfa8b2d9d2bf659e85

This super-made once again earned China the world's first
China topped the list of supercomputers in the list of the world's top 500 computers by the number of the U.S. in number one. According to the BBC website reported on November 13, according to the latest top 500 supercomputer survey, the world's most powerful computer, accounting for 202 units. In contrast, the United States has 143 computers on the list. This bi-annual survey, which started 25 years ago, has the least number of computers in the United States but ranks second in many countries. Japan ranked third, with 35 computers on the list, Germany has 20 computers on the list, ranked fourth.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-7128d14ae905f2f485e9f53e0e2f3661

The rankings runner-up are all China won
China is a latecomer to the world competition in high-performance computers. Almost a decade ago, China could hardly see China in the T0P500. However, in the past few years, the content of China can no longer be separated from the world's ears. From November 17, 2010, "Tianhe No.1" has made the breakthrough in the world and broke the long-term monopoly of the United States.Up to now, China has maintained the number-one ranking in all TOP posts in the world. At that time, however, it was always awkward that the rankings of China in that time were only three or five or 10 in most of the 500 list despite the number one in the world. Compared with the number of more than 100 or more than 200 in the United States, , The scene is not so good-looking.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-d9ab9af1fdb58a7bd80561fea02d5d6c

America's most advanced "Titan" ranked fourth
However, the speed of catching up in China is indeed the highest in the world. Starting from "Tianhe No.1", "Tianhe No.2" to "Light of Shenwei · Taihu Lake" is almost the rapid increase in geometric series, almost monopolizing the top of the world rankings in these 10 years. Now the "Divine Comedy · Taihu Lake" once again won the new world, its floating-point computing speed of 9.3 billion times per second, which is higher than the third place in Switzerland's "Dayen peak" floating-point operations It is five times faster at 1.96 billion and 5.5 times higher than the 1.76 billion one at the fifth place in the United States. And at the current pace of development, China is developing a new supercomputer floating-point computing speed will reach 100 billion times, is still the world.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-d1cbe6ecc9c43c96fdd0b8dedcbe1f8b

Many advanced weapons in China in recent years are inseparable from supercomputers
According to the analysis, as the best high-tech representative in the world today, each supercomputer has tens of thousands of processors and is mainly used to handle high-intensity computing tasks. It is costly and is mainly used for climate change research, nuclear weapon simulation, Detection, weather forecasting, DNA sequencing and simulation of biomolecules and other fields, or hypersonic weapons design, fifth and sixth generation fighter development, international intelligence deciphering and encryption preferred equipment. Therefore, the United States, Japan and Europe are all unwilling to be overtaken by China for a long time. They are also speeding up their secret development and trying to surpass China as soon as possible.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-afc24391135181c0c429bdbbce66c903

Dongfeng -41 nuclear warhead is super simulative test
However, China will not surrender itself and its investment is now growing at a rate of 20% per annum. Moreover, China has also started to popularize extensively in practical applications. From a few years ago the country only had 2-3 units, now surpassing the United States in one fell swoop and occupying over 40% in the TOP list, which is sufficient This shows that China will certainly maintain and occupy the position of number one in the world for a long time, laying a solid foundation for more and more extreme weapons. (Author's signature: Military Review Chen Guangwen)
Other than nucelar explosives, the most powerful are Semtex, HMX, or even the holy grail Octanitrocubane sought by the West in vain.
China leapt pass that into the N15 kind of explosive 10 to 100 times more powerful than TNT. N15 in propellent form is also used by China in her missiles as I mentioned earlier before.
In January 2017, China announced a new research result. The world's first all-anion anion salt was successfully synthesized. The related research papers have become China's first research paper in the field of energetic materials published in the international top science "science" , But also allow China to occupy a new generation of ultra-high-energy energetic materials to study the international high ground.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-dd68c29ecd63263ff2eb5440ecbc8bca

Explosives
As all-nitrogen ultra-high energy material energy up to 10 to 100 times the TNT above, the power comparable to small nuclear bombs, with high density, high energy, clean and detonated pollution-free, nitrogen explosion products, stable and safe. Therefore, the main object of development.
More than 200 years ago, people isolated nitrogen from the air and later discovered nitrogen ions. Various theoretical calculations were made on all-nitrogen derivatives. However, the earliest synthesis was recorded in 1956. Before this century, It is considered a breakthrough and is currently under exploration. Its prospects have attracted the positive research from all countries.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-e79cb00cbb59a4054eb2079d59db2831

Introduction
At present, one of the hot topics in this field is the synthesis of all-nitrogen anion, which is mainly poor in stability. It is very difficult to obtain all-anion. Originally, the United States first started the experiment and did not expect China to successfully launch the high energy-containing material , And the results achieved mainly in the synthesis of a breakthrough. Chinese researchers creatively used meta-chloroperbenzoic acid and ferrous glycinate as cutting reagents and auxiliary agents, respectively, and successfully prepared the stable all-nitrogen anion salt at room temperature by means of oxidative cleavage for the first time. Thermal analysis results show that this salt decomposition temperature up to 116.8 ℃, has a very good thermal stability, so the world-class performance level, very practical value.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-beaadb9ffbd7b8c6ced79c01064a5643

Explosives kits have been in use since practical
The successful preparation of all-nitrogen anion salt is a historic breakthrough and has important scientific significance for its synthesis and application and technological development, that is, one step closer to practical application. The importance of comparable to 055-type flooding, do not think it is explosives, which belongs to the old concept, and now its use is much more than explosives, can also be used for rocket propellant. Maybe later, we can apply on the rocket, greatly improve the rocket's specific impulse, so as to improve the rocket performance. The purpose of the United States study on all-nitrogen ultra-high energy materials is to create a new type of rocket fuel that replaces toxic hydrazine-based rocket fuel.
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Main-qimg-b6108d5bcedf7acb77f0e23d1e5bc82e

Rockets can also be used
Some people will compare the new metal hydrogen in the United States. In fact, the all-nitrogen anion salt and metal hydrogen are two different types of ultra-high energy energy-containing materials. The former belongs to chemical synthesis and the latter belongs to physical pressure preparation. Although similar in purpose, In the performance of some higher, but the former is more mature in the application of some, in fact, they have their own advantages and disadvantages, belong to one of the new technologies, different things, can not simply say who is better, there is no substitute for the relationship.
At present, we have prepared a total nitrogen anion salt, almost equal to touch the edge of industrial production, perhaps in the near future can be applied to human production and life.(Author's signature: Military World)
الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل
https://shanti.jordanforum.net
ابراهيم الشنطي
Admin
ابراهيم الشنطي

عدد المساهمات : 54062
تاريخ التسجيل : 28/01/2013
العمر : 73
الموقع : الاردن

لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Empty
مُساهمةموضوع: رد: لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟   لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟ Emptyالسبت 09 مارس 2019, 8:59 pm

من سينتصر إذا اشتعلت الحرب بين "روسيا وأمريكا" ومن هو الاقوى عسكرياً؟

الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة اذهب الى الأسفل
https://shanti.jordanforum.net
 
لماذا لم يعد ممكنًا لأية دولة خوض حربٍ ناجحةٍ؟
الرجوع الى أعلى الصفحة 
صفحة 1 من اصل 1

صلاحيات هذا المنتدى:لاتستطيع الرد على المواضيع في هذا المنتدى
منتدى الشنطي :: موسوعة البحوث والدراسات :: بحوث عسكريه-
انتقل الى: