.com.unity Forums - International Army Games 2016

Giggle on a side note to that Russia does seem to have realised cyber warfare is here & useful in all its forms. Theres propaganda or crippling a countries economy as a deterrent or a way to stop it waging war & affect public opinion.
Then theres information gathering, monitoring internet traffic etc from under sea cables. Finally in this Hi Tech military we have with battle nets drones, even unmanned F-16s, tanks or support vehicles will become drone control platforms.
At some point priority targets are going to be those that jam or even worst case hijack the battle net & drones.
In the future could all come down to the guys with the quickest computers & best programmers, you fire I intercept the projectile, you counter my counter.

Kind of sad the we only observed these games, Saudi, Israel, Germany but we were not willing to show off our prowess. That said think that many events were restricted to using specific equipment, well roughly T-72 or BMP-2 covers a wide array. Did not bother watching whole video but did China use different vehicles? If not there crews did well. Sure the Russians probably had a bit of extra practice but doing well would act as a deterrent, perhaps we were worried the outcome might go the other way.

Certainly for me the surprise was Kazakhstan (rubbish AAA though), no surprise Russia & China acquitted themselves well or that South American & African nations did not. Sure its fun & only a reflection on the training & will probably be the best guys but some results were surprising the huge gulf between good & bad.
Tank biathlon results for example top 4 total times around 1h45m Angola & Iran add an hour, that's a huge disparity.
Sniper results whoops go Kazakhstan with 491 points, Russia 627, China 730.
Venezuela, Iran, Zimbabwe around 1300 okay fair enough.
India, Greece 1500
Big whoops Greece is the only NATO country that entered & they ranked absolute last.
I hope NATO had a sniper competition after & they did terribly, have a horrible feeling this is not the case though I wonder how much of their defence budget actually goes on training.
On this point I am sure the USA is good especially when it comes to practicing in stuff that's expensive to run & maintain. Several thousand hours practice with a sniper rifle is a mere drop in the ocean cost wise compared to the same amount of time in a fighter seat.

Only good news is I cant see anyone being capable of supporting a long term full blown conflict despite all the sabre-rattling. USA could probably support economically to start with as they spend a lot training anyway & Lockheed Martins contracts alone are equivalent to something like all federal funding for 3 or 4 states! Seriously I haven't checked for a while but its insane.
Big problem is keeping the people happy at friendly loss of life which leads to USAs problem. They now wage war if possible from afar & with total overkill to reduce casualties which I understand but can they still do the whites of your eyes stuff. That & Hi Tech which means high cost & exotic material issues would make it very hard to fight a protracted war in that manor. Sniper no problem fire a missile at one guy or call in a helo or arty strike.
Launching 60 Tomahawks at an airbase to show your military might at a cost of what $60 million plus? Of all the targets to pick why something that is nigh on impossible to destroy?
So they got a few planes as a deterrent oh I'm scared of you that was in my book an absolute fail.
Russia & China based on past history loss of life is not such a big deal however they would have to seriously ramp up production to keep bombs & the like coming, mind you based on history Russia could do that. Economically they might not hurt so bad cheaper unit costs and the its good enough for the job mentality might win the day overall.