Originally posted by Robtard
/countered
turns out I wasn't even using the right chopper...
The Apache is the top American gunship, the A model had nearly 1000 built, over 500 have been upgraded to the D (block I and II) version, with ~700 being upgraded to the D block III.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/apache-block-iii-program-kicks-off-as-contract-signed-02480/
even if 3/4 of these were rendered nonoperational in the initial outbreak, that is far more than enough firepower than would be needed to secure most militarily relevant locations, if not end the outbreak.
Originally posted by marwash22
that still points to them being not very bright.
I agree, I suppose I'm just checking my understanding of the lore
Originally posted by inimalist
ok... one major city gets overrun, and the idea of a "rescue mission" will be gone.
The army itself will be deployed in the infected region to help the people. What will commanders do in such a situation, if the things start to get out of hand? Bomb their own soldiers?
Originally posted by inimalist
cost? you think this would be more costly than the other wars America has the ability to fight, simultaneously?
Originally posted by inimalist
unless there is a mass outbreak in every city involved in any way with oil production, this is irrelevant.
What is the appropriate military solution for this scenario? Bomb the water?
Originally posted by inimalist
even without heavy vehicles, how do you realistically see zombies dealing with WW1 era infantry tactics of digging trenches and barbed wire fences?
Originally posted by inimalist
to quote the cracked article I posted before:http://www.cracked.com/article_18683_7-scientific-reasons-zombie-outbreak-would-fail-quickly_p7.html
Check the articles which I have cited here. They are based on real life examples and can give you goose bumps.
Originally posted by inimalist
I thought the pack thing was more a result of the zombies individually moving toward food sources, hence why the pack builds over time rather than roams like typical hunting animals would.
They've shown minimal intelligence in TWD, the grouping(as you said) seems to just be zombies moving towards the same food source or noise, thereby grouping over time.
A fence was beyond their ability to rationalize.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Dude, it seems like you have never been in an outbreak like situation. I have seen a glimpse of this last year in my city and I know that how fast it can happen and how quickly the panic spreads. Not to forget that a chunk of population will try best to leave the infected region and go to safer places.
what happened in your city?
Zombieism is a little different than, say, the flu. Unless we are talking about the 0-hour event that initiates the outbreak, preventing people from widespread travel (air/boat/train) is going to be easy. Zombies lack the ability to really "sneak" past airport security, especially when there is a known outbreak of something highly contagious. In fact, the situation you are describing would produce 1 of 2 outcomes: 1) the military and CDC shut down all air travel from the city immediately when the outbreak begins (as we know they do from other, much less deadly outbreaks) or 2) there is so much chaos and death from the outbreak that airports don't function anyways. The same thing can be said about sea or rail travel. In all cases, a carrier-but-non-zombie would have to travel prior to the outbreak or in the immediate aftermath, prior to showing any signs of infection, and before the CDC or military can shut stuff down. This offers very few opportunities for a single location of outbreak to spread globally. Certainly a handful of people may travel and spread the disease, but we are talking after the outbreak event, and all nations will be on guard for what has already happened and would know who to look for.
short range travel (cars, walking) might spread some of it to neighboring cities, but a military quarantine doesn't need to follow municipal boundaries.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
The army itself will be deployed in the infected region. What will commanders do in such a situation, if the things start to get out of hand? Bomb their own soldiers?
well, no... air and ground units already communicate in combat zones... and why would the army leave ground troops in the city if it has become untenable? Once they lost the city, they would roll up their artillery units and bombard the zombie positions from miles away.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
These wars are not good analogies. You are dealing with normal people in these wars. The amount of ammunition spent is selective and minimized to avoid unnecessary casaulties. However, in an outbreak like situation, far more ammunition may be spend and fuel may be utilized during the military operations - increasing the costs significantly.
well, for one, you are incorrect. The vast, VAST, majority of bullets used by the American military are not shot at people. They are shot from heavy weapons as suppressing fire. Already, more bullets are shot at nothing rather than at something, so zombies might actually increase the ratio of shot-to-hit, as you would never need to use suppressing fire (unless your zombies know mixed unit tactics and have access to military weapons).
Second, it costs far more to use SMART technology to bomb out people encamped in bunkers or shielding themselves in civilian enclaves. Artillery and fast-air bombardment costs little in comparison. While more ammo from gunships might be a realistic, the conflict would be over in a fraction of time. You might use more bullets in a single month than is used in Iraq, but you wouldn't be fighting zombies for 10 years.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Watch the movie Cabin Fever. It shows that how infection can spread very fast. Hint: contaminated water.Water are is the appropriate military solution for this scenario? Bomb the water?
how would they deal with contaminated water? Likely the way they deal with it now... undrinkable water isn't exactly a new problem for industrialized nations.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Zombies are the least of the worries, dude. As I have said before, the infection can spread through several other means and very fast. You are not following my point properly.
well like, the thing is, unless the source of the infection is entirely untraceable and can pass through all currently known forms of medical and physical quarantine, this is again irrelevant.
In fact, the more deadly and quickly it spreads, the quicker the solution will turn from save-and-research to scorched-earth. If the zombies are dead, the virus doesn't spread.
and now, if you are agreeing that the zombies themselves aren't an issue, you basically have to accept that an external source of infection (ie, something that would still be there once the zombies are dead) would be detected very quickly. If the zombies pose no problem, the military/doctors can work on isolating the origin of the problem, which I'm going to bet scientists could figure out.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
I have read this article. It is filled with many errors and generalized assumptions. Don't read too much in to it.
filled with so many errors you don't think it might be relevant to discuss them?
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Check the articles which I have cited here. They are based on real life examples and can give you goose bumps.
sure, your articles talk about why it might be scientifically possible that something resembling a zombie might some day exist... none of that gives them the ability to shoot down an Apache... none of it gives them resistance to being rolled over by a tank...
Not using bombs is one thing I think World War Z got right. The range at which a bomb takes a person out of the fight is vastly higher than the range at which it kills a zombie, plus it will pulverize some of the horde which is the last thing you want to do if it is fluid/fluid transmitted.
Originally posted by inimalist
filled with so many errors you don't think it might be relevant to discuss them?
IMO its the assumptions made that are the killer for that article. There's very little standardization of zombies so some of the more esoteric issues aren't necessarily relevant.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Not using bombs is one thing I think World War Z got right. The range at which a bomb takes a person out of the fight is vastly higher than the range at which it kills a zombie, plus it will pulverize some of the horde which is the last thing you want to do if it is fluid/fluid transmitted.
I guess I'm thinking that, at some point, the impetus to try and save potential survivors is taken over by the need to remove the zombies. In a real world scenario, I think it would be justified for the military to just deveatate a place, casualties be damned. idk, zombies seem like the type of existential threat to humanity where the losses of possible survivors is worth getting rid of them.
that being said, sure, bullets could work fine.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
IMO its the assumptions made that are the killer for that article. There's very little standardization of zombies so some of the more esoteric issues aren't necessarily relevant.
I suppose the issue is that trying to make the lore "realistic" either requires us to assume thing about zombie biology based on real world science, versus how they are depicted in fiction.
Originally posted by inimalist
what happened in your city?
Huge number of people got infected (including me). Hospitals and other medical centers got overwhelmed within days. People certainly panicked. Undisclosed number of doctors and nurses themselves got infected while attending to patients. Military was eventually called, which established its own emergency medical centers in several regions. Even then, many people could not get proper medical attention because of lack of sufficient arrangements. The outbreak was not just limited to my city but spread to several other regions. Most likely it did not start from a single location. Undisclosed number of people died; official figures are not correct. The outbreak stopped because of the timely arrival of the summer season. This was sufficient glimpse for me.
The above happened even when Dengue is properly understood. Now imagine the impact of a virus, which is far worse and not properly understood. Situation can easily get out of hand and really fast. I used to be a skeptic of zombie fiction too but no longer.
Point is that humans, in general, are never adequately prepared. Their is always room for mistakes and additional improvements. New or not so well-known virus can catch us by surprise. Remember the Black Plague? TWD like virus can be far worse and absolutely devastating to human civilizations worldwide, if it begins at several regions simultaneously. Humans themselves will be also responsible for spreading the infection besides several other factors.
Originally posted by inimalist
Zombieism is a little different than, say, the flu. Unless we are talking about the 0-hour event that initiates the outbreak, preventing people from widespread travel (air/boat/train) is going to be easy. Zombies lack the ability to really "sneak" past airport security, especially when there is a known outbreak of something highly contagious. In fact, the situation you are describing would produce 1 of 2 outcomes: 1) the military and CDC shut down all air travel from the city immediately when the outbreak begins (as we know they do from other, much less deadly outbreaks) or 2) there is so much chaos and death from the outbreak that airports don't function anyways. The same thing can be said about sea or rail travel. In all cases, a carrier-but-non-zombie would have to travel prior to the outbreak or in the immediate aftermath, prior to showing any signs of infection, and before the CDC or military can shut stuff down. This offers very few opportunities for a single location of outbreak to spread globally. Certainly a handful of people may travel and spread the disease, but we are talking after the outbreak event, and all nations will be on guard for what has already happened and would know who to look for.short range travel (cars, walking) might spread some of it to neighboring cities, but a military quarantine doesn't need to follow municipal boundaries.
Originally posted by inimalist
well, no... air and ground units already communicate in combat zones... and why would the army leave ground troops in the city if it has become untenable? Once they lost the city, they would roll up their artillery units and bombard the zombie positions from miles away.
Originally posted by inimalist
well, for one, you are incorrect. The vast, VAST, majority of bullets used by the American military are not shot at people. They are shot from heavy weapons as suppressing fire. Already, more bullets are shot at nothing rather than at something, so zombies might actually increase the ratio of shot-to-hit, as you would never need to use suppressing fire (unless your zombies know mixed unit tactics and have access to military weapons).
Spoiler:Do the math. Once the law and order situation breaks down in many regions, personal safety will take priority. Yes, heroic stands and establishment of potential safe zones can be expected. But how much safe can you be if the virus is already inside?
All the survivors are infected.
Originally posted by inimalist
Second, it costs far more to use SMART technology to bomb out people encamped in bunkers or shielding themselves in civilian enclaves. Artillery and fast-air bombardment costs little in comparison. While more ammo from gunships might be a realistic, the conflict would be over in a fraction of time. You might use more bullets in a single month than is used in Iraq, but you wouldn't be fighting zombies for 10 years.
Originally posted by inimalist
how would they deal with contaminated water? Likely the way they deal with it now... undrinkable water isn't exactly a new problem for industrialized nations.
Originally posted by inimalist
well like, the thing is, unless the source of the infection is entirely untraceable and can pass through all currently known forms of medical and physical quarantine, this is again irrelevant.
Originally posted by inimalist
In fact, the more deadly and quickly it spreads, the quicker the solution will turn from save-and-research to scorched-earth. If the zombies are dead, the virus doesn't spread.
Originally posted by inimalist
and now, if you are agreeing that the zombies themselves aren't an issue, you basically have to accept that an external source of infection (ie, something that would still be there once the zombies are dead) would be detected very quickly. If the zombies pose no problem, the military/doctors can work on isolating the origin of the problem, which I'm going to bet scientists could figure out.
Originally posted by inimalist
filled with so many errors you don't think it might be relevant to discuss them?
For point 1: It is not about the numbers. It is about coordination and cooperation on a grand scale which will be a big headache to pull off once the shit hits the fan. A powerful virus can infect huge number of people in a matter of few days. Once the chaos ensues, panic will spread, and people will become disorganized. In addition, their will be people who will try to take advantage of others. Humans can become as big of a threat to themselves as the virus, if not more. Remember that the Black Plague spread so fast because of human actions. And not every individual is a highly trained fighter or specializes in survival warfare (humans need to feed and drink on daily basis. Once the supplies go down, many will be forced to venture out in search of food and other supplies. Such activities will expose them to unnecessary dangers.). For the military; you cannot indiscriminately bomb civilians who are trying to flee the infected regions. Their will be additional uproar and consequences for these type of actions. On top of this, a chunk of military personal may refuse to do so and rebel. Psychological constraints cannot be overlooked.
For points 2, 3, 5, and 6: The article assumes that the infected hosts will be undergoing similar decay processes that the dead individuals normally do and will be too stupid. This is silly assumption. What about the properties of the virus? How it programs its host? What capabilities it gives to its host? How it deals with internal and external threats to the hosts? All of these questions are valid.
The hypothetical virus in TWD 'apparently' grants sufficient resistance to its host to make it continue against all odds for a long time and significantly slows down decomposition processes. It also makes its host strong enough to tear through bodies of the living and other solid objects. One possibility is that the virus kills the bacteria inside the host once the immune system shuts down. The virus also programs its host to seek potential food and spread the infection further. It 'apparently' also grants some level of thinking ability to the host. The TWD zombies are not jumping in to rivers and oceans unnecessarily to catch fishes. They mainly trek along dry grounds and use man-made paths to seek prey. They can't drive the vehicles but they are not absolutely stupid.
Check these articles:
http://www.technologyreview.com/biomedicine/20566/ (Bacteria killing)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110309102154.htm (Fungus killing)
Another bad assumption in the article is that the virus will only spread through biting. Very bad assumption.
Keep in mind that the zombies may be dead to us; but they may not be absolutely biologically dead because of the virus that is driving them. The hypothetical virus in TWD serves as the substitute for the immune system inside the living after 'apparent' biological death.
Yes, the zombies will not constantly remain in good shape. They may become useless after a long time of physical abuse.
For point 7: Probably the worst argument in the whole article. Insects and animals can become carriers of the virus after contact with zombies. Also, some carnivores are afraid of humans. In additon, their is risk of the animals themselves getting eaten during hunting. And large predators typically prefer fresh meat. Scavenging is secondary.
Originally posted by inimalist
sure, your articles talk about why it might be scientifically possible that something resembling a zombie might some day exist... none of that gives them the ability to shoot down an Apache... none of it gives them resistance to being rolled over by a tank...
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
In terms of real viruses, yes, but not in terms of zombie lore.
Originally posted by inimalist
S_W_L: so, your argument boils down to: "The virus will spread despite abundant evidence that humans can stop the spread of viruses or contaminated resources"cool, if that is the definitional quality of your zombies, w/e man, wicked
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
No. My argument boils down to the capabilities of the virus.
... yes... the capability being to evade human quarantine
really, your scenario is much less of a zombie apocalypse and more of a pandemic outbreak. Any lethal virus with the "capabilities" you are talking about would end human civilization, zombies or not.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Have you watched TWD?
I watched two episodes before it became unwatchably bland. That really has no effect on my point. It is quite common for zombie fiction to present the infection as spread purely by bite, so much that I would call it a standard assumption.
Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
My argument boils down to the capabilities of the virus.
The entirely fictional virus that you can assign any capabilities you wish . . .
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I watched two episodes before it became unwatchably bland. That really has no effect on my point. It is quite common for zombie fiction to present the infection as spread purely by bite, so much that I would call it a standard assumption.
Spoiler:
Everyone, even the living, are infected in TWD.