Comments by "Tony Wilson" (@tonywilson4713) on "And Now We Return to Our Regularly Scheduled Program (Ukraine War Updates) || Peter Zeihan" video.

  1. That's a very valid point. One of the odd things is how rarely strategic missiles of ANY KIND have been used by developed nations. Yes there's been lots of bombs and rockets but not a lot of what might be called strategic missiles where they are targeting from range a specific thing like the Ukrainians are doing at ammo dumps right now. There's been a lot of RPGs and in a few cases missiles like the stinger that are fired from MAPADS or off the shoulder. There was a lot smart bombs dropped in Gulf War 1 and a few other places. Other than the Falklands where the Argentinians used the Exocet to great effect the only other times I can think off hand where a lot of missiles were used was Gulf War 1 where the Iraqis shot SCUDs at Israel and Gulf War 2 where America used a lot of Tomahawks for strategic strikes before sending in troops. Because of air combat there's been a huge number of air-to-air, surface-to-air and air-to-surface missiles used, but in terms of surface-to-surface tactical missiles there's not been that much. There's probably a few other cases but I can't remember when 2 sides with lots of missiles faced off. In Ukraine BOTH sides have lots of missiles and they also have guided artillery shells which have been used to devastating effect. HIMARS has been staggeringly effective. In fact so effective quite a few nations are now ordering it or increasing their order. I'm Australian and we have lots of Navy issues being discussed right now(???) and what sorts of missiles we are wanting to get like Tomahawks and LRASMs. In looking into that discussion one of the very odd things I found was how little there's been of naval conflict since WW2. Other than the Falkland's when 5 ships (4 Brit & 1 Argentinian) an older sub were lost by the Argentinians and a few other smaller boats were lost there hasn't been much. There's been a few missiles like the USS Stark in 87 and the Moskva. One of the really odd things is how few torpedos have been used. In WW2 torpedos were fired off by the 1,000. Since WW2 the number is 10 fired by submarines and I only know of 1 fired by and aircraft. There might be more. Wikipedia only lists 7 on its main page fired by submarines. I found 3 more fired by an Argentinian sub during the Falklands at what they thought was a ship and they think it might have been a whale. And just now when I was looking for details on that I found a British Lynx helicopter launched a Mk 46 torpedo at the ARA Sante Fe but failed to hit.
    2
  2.  @matthewgaudet8001  Yeah Peter has made that clear a number of times. I just find it amazing that for all the conflicts there have been since WW2 how little of it has involved navies other than in support roles. For the amount of money spent and for all that various people have shot at each other its pretty amazing that only 11 torpedos have been fired in 78 years and 7 of those were during the 1 conflict - the Falklands. I'd be surprised if there's not a few more that just aren't in the common record. I know the Russians came very very close to launching a nuclear torpedo during the Cuban Blockade. 2 of the 3 guys on the boat said yes and the guy who said no could easily have been on one of the other subs in the group.
    1
  3.  @martinjohnson5498  good example, and 1 I had forgot, but the theatre was a lot smaller and the combatants far less technically capable than today.
    1