Re: Scenario behind "Waking up displaced"

On 31 jaan, 02:02, raphfrk <raph...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Jan 30, 10:24 pm, Erik Max Francis <m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > At whom?
>
> At the predefined targets.  There was talk of de-targetting the
> nuclear weapons a few years ago, so maybe there isn't pre-defined
> targets anymore.
>
> A launch at China and Russia would seem to be the most likely outcome
> if they decide to fire.  Ofc, that would likely trigger a counter
> strike (and in theory, they might actually be the ones responsible).
>
> Is this supposed to be an attack by a 'mad scientist' or another
> country ?  The whole MAD policy would seem to act as a disincentive
> for this attack type too.
>
If so - which country has the most to win by triggering MAD? That is,
no one suspects them beforehand and no second strike scenario
programmed in the dead hand mechanisms takes them out as a part of the
plan?

But the part which the aliens would actively fight with would be the
armed forces.

Navies are in ships, which are steel Faraday cages authomatically. So
they are intact.

Air forces, however, do not sleep in their planes. They are disabled
in their barracks. As are land forces.

How good Faraday cages are sheetmetal roofs?

The goal of the sleep field would be to minimize resistance without
causing excessive casualties. This means that keeping the sleep field
on for more than a few days does cause massive casualties, as
civilians (and infantry) die of thirst.

How much would the capacity for organized resistance be destroyed by
eliminating Air Force, staffs and political leadership? The visible
attack, once it comes (probably some hours after switching on the
sleep field, so that they should have won after a few days, to switch
the field off, let the conquered civilians wake up, drink and clean
their underwear) could then concentrate against navies.