"Some Thoughts on the Use of Land-Based Missiles..." Topic
1 Post
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please don't call someone a Nazi unless they really are a Nazi.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Modern Media Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Workbench Article Hundvig  is not a real big fan of pre-painted minis, and he positively despises randomly-packed "collectable" ones - so why is he writing this article?
Featured Profile Article Looking at the Soviet and U.S. token and dice sets for Battlefront's Team Yankee.
Current Poll
Featured Movie Review
|
| Tango01 | 07 Nov 2014 10:45 p.m. PST |
… for Maritime Denial. "Eric Lindsey of CSBA published an excellent monograph last month examining how the U.S. Army might field land-based anti-ship missiles and rockets, not to mention air and missile defense systems, to defend forward U.S. allies from aggression. I strongly agree with the concept in principle. Such capabilities would be extremely useful for constraining an adversary's wartime use of the waters and airspace adjacent to a U.S. ally's territory. They would definitely increase the adversary's potential costs and risks of hazarding transits through maritime chokepoints controlled by the ally, conducting close blockades against the ally, or executing amphibious/airborne assaults against the ally. They would provide valuable layers for defense-in-depth against an adversary's attempts to strike forces and infrastructure located on the ally's territory or in nearby areas at sea. They could certainly help with carving out temporary ‘pockets' that support friendly air and naval operations within a contested zone…"
Full article here
link Amicalement
Armand |
|
