In the not-so-distant future, we will have so much data, such powerful computers, such cleverly designed simulator interfaces, and so much free time that will be possible to simulate, in detail, the entire scope of any modern conflict.
Challenges will be issued: successfully defend the Falklands against Britain; Iraq/Iran conflict, fully invade and overthrow your opponent; as the US, avoid supporting France in Southeast Asia without loosing face; as the USSR, survive the Cold War; stabilize (with any political alignment) South and Central America by 1980; prevent 9/11; defend Iraq and its conquests against either the 'Allied Coalition' or the 'Coalition of the Willing'. Countless other engagements are possible, large and small, political and economic, won and lost.
Surely one of the most daunting challenges would be the land invasion of the United States (or really any portion of North America) as a conclusion to the Cold War.
When we have these devices at our disposal, the discussion of Hardware vs. Tactics will, I believe, boil down to "If they, then, had tactics that we have since developed..."
Back on topic:
http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle2842.htm
What the heck happened to US Intelligence? "Did IQs suddenly drop while I was away?" I don't mind deception, that's downright human and natural, but it will be very hard to earn respect as a superpower if the US keeps making stupid mistakes like this.
At least, I think that was on topic...
(edit: edited for apostraphe abuse)
[ April 11, 2003, 17:01: Message edited by: Loser ]