From: mattb@ctron.com (Matt Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.misc,alt.cyberpunk
Subject: Re: 21st Century Soldier
Date: 11 Sep 92 18:58:11 GMT
Reply-To: mattb@olympus.ctron.com (Matt Brown)
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.misc
Organization: Cabletron Systems INc.

(James Meritt) writes:
>(Paul Olson) writes:
>>This type of improvement is useful only at the beginning of a war or in small
>>scale skirmishes where the high tech side numerically overwhelms the
>>opposition.  As a good friend of mine (ex-Navy enlisted, ex-Marine officer,
>>ex-merc) once said, "As the war gets longer, the level of technology used gets
>>lower."  The new century may have added another technology layer, but it still
>>comes down to who can fight better hand-to-hand.
>
>I must have missed the hand-to-hand combat that took place in Kuwait/Iraq.
>Where/when did it occur?

The key word is "longer".  The outcome would have been the same, but the fight-
ing more basic and bloody, had we persisted in clearing Bagdad street-by- 
street.  The remark makes more sense if you use it in context with the Iran-
Iraq war, which lasted years and went from (moderately) high tech to low tech
(massed underarmed infantry frontal assaults and grounded air forces) as it
ran its course.

That said, I slightly differ with Paul, in that an initial advantage can shorten
the conflict. That advantage can be tech or tactics.  Look at the difference
between France 1940 and the East Front.  The German tanks were superior in
three ways to the French (thoughnumerically fewer):
1) Faster
2) Radio Equipped
3) Separate Commander and Gunner
They were inferior in armor and armament, but the German tactics took decisive
advantage of the plusses, and the war was over before logistical failure lowered
the tech level.  In Russia, much the same tactics and tech failed against the
endless steppes and Russian winter (failed to beat the mud to Moscow, that is),
and logistics took over.  

Now, this (and Paul's friend's statement too) is a gross generalization of
the events, but I think the principle is that you have to push for that
advantage, or you are bucking for a long war. And a long war is what we want
most to avoid. It helps to have an outnumbered demoralized lower tech adversary.

My second disagreement with Paul is in the "numerically overwhelms" statement.
It is often precisely the opposite case.  High tech enables a smaller defender
to stand off a larger attacker, because of an increase in effectivity per unit
(tank, soldier, plane,etc), at least in theory.  If you outnumber a low tech
opponent, you wouldn't need your best weapons to beat them, and you would
probably suffer worse losses (ie more expensive) if you sent in your best first.

I agree about the small skirmishes advantage, and hit and run kinda stuff. It
would also seem to me best to give this stuff to commandos, assault troops,
or critical sector defenders (mostly the comm and info resources).

The other thing is that if this stuff is unit-replacable, it will be easier to
maintain a force in the field than with high tech tanks or planes, as long as
enough spares are available.  With bigger weapons, like tanks, you need to do
parts-replacements and field fixes, which take time and expertise. But if your 
cyberhelmet konks out, get a new one and send the other back to the factory,
no questions asked.  Let them fix it. Don't waste time field-maintaining it.
obviously, replacing helmets is a smaller logistical task than tanks or tank
parts.

What does this have to do with cp?  Well, if you are writing about a cp battle
field or rpging one, you need to think about how you deploy these kind of 
augmented troops, how you handle breakdowns, how frequent the breakdowns, and
what kind of interesting situations would result from these tactical and 
logistical policies. Or go off on a tangent at warp speed like Gibson in
"Dogfight" or Maddox in "Snake Eyes" (ie, postulate a military usage of cyber
tech, but instead of detailing the battleground, deal with the aftereffects on
the survivors).

Matt
The big question is: who will be the first soldier to hook a GameBoy up to his
cyberhelmet?