Didn’t know where else to post this.

I was thinking while looking at Mexico’s military force on paper vs say the U.S. for a hypothetical invasion/occupation. Like many modern non-NATO forces, it lacks heavy armor, combat aircraft, naval vessels, etc. But with dronewar now ascendant, could this be less a liability and more an advantage? Assuming one could rapidly equip and train their light infantry forces with a mix of both small and medium sized drones?

It seems it would be easier to acquire tens of thousands of commercial off the shelf drones and use old stockpiles of munitions and train young, gaming experienced soldiers to operate them then build or acquire increasingly rare tanks or fighters. And having such a light military means it should be easier to shift to this doctrine then say doing so with a lumbering NATO-style behemoth like the U.S. with it’s MIC.

Could this be a cheap strategy especially for latin american nations to pump up their military forces in the face of U.S. aggression? Make it too costly to engage, as well as cozy up to China for cheap drone parts.

Besides drones, all the rest of the military spending would be best directed towards air defense systems. This is the only bottleneck I see since these are sophisticated systems on par with tanks and fighters. I mean the drones can save you from ground invasion but you can still be leveled from the sky. I suppose until we get cheap air defense drones, which I think might be the future. (imagine loitering long range air defense drones with simple stealth tech; the barrage balloon of the 2040s).

  • spudnik [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
    11·
    8 months ago

    This kind of reminds me of the Chaco War. Newly emerging technologies spur new tactics, and the changes can happen rapidly enough to really benefit smaller forces who can adapt quicker

    During the final months prior to the outbreak of war, Paraguayan diplomats secured a secret loan from Argentina. Unlike Bolivia, Paraguay had almost no standing army and no peace-time budget for mobilization stockpiles. While their troops fought the first skirmishes of the war armed with machetes and one castoff Argentine Mauser rifle for every 3-7 men, a civilian purchasing commission frantically shopped the arms bazaars of Europe for bargain equipment. Ironically, the inexperience of the men selected for the task and the crippling, national lack of funds now proved fortuitous. While Bolivia’s professionals spent lavishly on “serious” weapons, like heavy Schneider howitzers, water-cooled heavy machineguns, tanks, and the all but useless little Vickers mountain guns, the Paraguayan amateurs bought poor man’s artillery—light, cheap, Stokes-Brandt mortars, three of which could be had for the price of one field gun—and Madsen light machineguns (right). Cartridges and artillery shells could be had clandestinely, free of charge, from the Argentine army, and grenades were in production in Paraguay itself. In the heat, dense brush, and mud of the Chaco, lightness, mobility, and a high trajectory were the dominant requirements.

    http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v1/v1n3/chaco.html

    • Des [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.netOPEnglish
      10·
      8 months ago

      really fascinating! i am nearly totally unfamiliar with that war besides reading a couple paragraphs about it

      right down to buying civilian weapons, it really reflects the current dronewar revolution doesn’t it?