In an EMP scenario (atomic or solar or any other kind if there are other kinds), are telephone lines likely to be destroyed? Telegraph lines? (I read that the 1869 event caused fires in some telegraph offices, and shocks to telegraph operators - regardless of whether the operators had unplugged their equipment. Unplugged, I guess, from batteries?) If the answer is yes, which would be the easiest and fastest to restore after the EMP - telephone or telegraph?
The specific source/scenario is going to matter more than the differences between the telegraph system and the electrical grid. If you were comparing the telegraph system to the modern POTS phone network it would be a more fair comparison.
Nobody really knows what would happen to the electrical grid. There are lots of guesses out there, but little real practical knowledge.
But the biggest factor for recovery is going to be is the EMP event localized, regional or global.
Only a solar event such as a CME could produce a global scale EMP.
The thing to look at to judge recovery time for a local /regional EMP is to look at recovery from other types of events that do broad damage to the electric grid. Events like hurricanes.
As long as you can get help and replacement equipment from outside the affected region, I se no reason why recovery would take longer than say rebuilding the electric grid in Florida after a major hurricane.
I se no reason why recovery would take longer than say rebuilding the electric grid in Florida after a major hurricane.
Did you notice that the query is about communications - telephone and telegraph - and not about electrical? If you did notice, are you saying restoring telephone and telegraph is the same as electrical?
Did you notice that the query is about communications - telephone and telegraph - and not about electrical?
Yes and no. I did not read it as being confined to communications. Most of the concerns around EMPs focus on the damage to the electrical grid.
If you did notice, are you saying restoring telephone and telegraph is the same as electrical?
1. There is no telegraph network today.
Does that mean there's no such thing as telegrams today? Or if there are, how are telegrams sent if not by a telegraph network?
Does that mean there's no such thing as telegrams today? Or if there are, how are telegrams sent if not by a telegraph network?
No, there have not been telegrams in most countries in decades. Western Union shut down their telegram service 14 years ago.
And even before that, telegraph lines were shut down after WWII. Telex replaced the older system, then by the 1980's IP switching.
The "Telegraph Network" you are trying to talk about ended 60 years ago.
Western Union shut down their telegram service 14 years ago.
And even then, they probably turned of the dedicated telegraph network a couple of decades before that, using more modern data networks instead.
And even then, they probably turned of the dedicated telegraph network a couple of decades before that, using more modern data networks instead.
As I stated, back in the 1980's they updated it to IP. In other words, a system almost like the Internet, back when the Internet was still a private operation run by the military.
But using the exact same system, packet switching over a private IP network.
In fact, early BBS systems all basically used telex equipment and systems. As Western Union transitioned to IP, a lot of telex systems became available, and the home hobbyists gobbled them up, then started to put them to use in their own way.
Or if there are, how are telegrams sent if not by a telegraph network?
See, there's this thing called the internet, it can be used to send all kinds of data anywhere. In an age of email, a dedicated telegraph network makes less than zero sense.
If it's global: You won't even have a chance of restoring communications networks until a large percentage of the Electric grid has been repaired. Manufacturing of equipment is too dependent on electricity. Unless estimates of damage to the electric grid turn out to be way overstated, we are just screwed in this scenario.
Depends on the context of the EMP. If it is a Solar EMP event, we'd had 6 to 12 hours of warning as the exact areas likely to be impacted depending on the exact trajectory of the flare involved. The ESA is working to put an observatory in Earth-Sun Lagrange point L5 to see about boosting that time frame to 15 to 18 warning, but they were shooting for a 2025 launch, in 2019. Don't know what its current status is with everything that happened this past year.
But even assuming 6 hours warning, some of that becomes a matter of when the warning is received. A lot of people may simply wake up in the morning to find all power shutoff in their homes. A lot of others would likely be getting panicked phone calls between t-6 hours and t-5 hours as they start trying to figure out what their respective companies need to shut down before the plug is pulled by the power company... And whatever else they want to disconnect from external(and even internal) sources in the time they have.
Telecomms are probably in decent shape these days are long-haul communications are done through Fiber, and glass doesn't conduct electricity. Although their repeater nodes and other associated support systems are another matter, as they need a power source.
Many power grid operations now have the ability to remotely shut down most of the grid, so they could likely have much of it shut down in short order(which means they can possibly wait until minutes before the event hits to give others time to enact their own contingencies.
Of course, the power grid companies need to worry about load-shedding issues on "spinning down" their plants as well, so it won't be quite that simple in reality. Hopefully they have some kind of plan in place for how to shut down each plant in a controlled manner quickly should the need arise. (Of course the grid operator may not be privy to the specifics, so headaches abound)
But if the Grid is shut down, it should be able to ride it out fairly well. Everything connected to the Grid might be a slightly different matter.
There would be zero warning if it were a gamma/X-ray bandwidth (Read speed of light) flare. For a CME, you're partially correct. For a high energy solar wind, or a particularly slow CME, it could be up to 36-48 hours.
If it is a Solar EMP event, we'd had 6 to 12 hours of warning as the exact areas likely to be impacted depending
If it hits the Earth dead on, the areas impacted would be everywhere.
But if the Grid is shut down, it should be able to ride it out fairly well.
Unless estimates of damage to the electric grid turn out to be way overstated,
I'm not an electrical engineer, but from what I've read the EMP will affect all of the copper cable systems and the steel cable systems. Thus copper telephone and power systems and the steel power grid systems. As I understand it the EMP causes a major induction current to overload the systems and the cables. However, any circuits / systems with WEMP protection should be safe, and so should cables and systems that are unpowered and disconnected at the time of the EMP.
However, the fibre optic communications systems should be unaffected.
However, the fibre optic communications systems should be unaffected.
Not unaffected. The switching equipment is all still electrically operated and computed controlled. The fiber itself won't be damaged, which will help, but if the EMP fries all the switching equipment, it will be of little use.
Not unaffected. The switching equipment is all still electrically operated and computed controlled. The fiber itself won't be damaged, which will help, but if the EMP fries all the switching equipment, it will be of little use.
Which is amazingly easy to isolate.
There is a reason why so much of our equipment like that is well grounded, and even placed inside of steel cages. The effects of EMP and solar flares is stupid-simple to avoid, if you take that into consideration.
And at one time, it was. There is a reason why so many such structures and systems were at one time buried underground, or placed inside of thick concrete block structures with steel lined walls.
I'm not an electrical engineer, but from what I've read the EMP will affect all of the copper cable systems and the steel cable systems. Thus copper telephone and power systems and the steel power grid systems. As I understand it the EMP causes a major induction current to overload the systems and the cables. However, any circuits / systems with WEMP protection should be safe, and so should cables and systems that are unpowered and disconnected at the time of the EMP.
Underground wire should be reasonably safe as well, as the ground should shield it from most the electromagnetic radiation. Its only exposure would be where the underground stuff has to come up to the surface.
Underground wire should be reasonably safe as well, as the ground should shield it from most the electromagnetic radiation. Its only exposure would be where the underground stuff has to come up to the surface.
Kazakhstan; Soviet HEMP (high altitude electromagnetic pulse) test 184 empirically proved it would take out ground based communications, power, pipelines, etc. Added to that was the US Starfish Prime test.
This has been discussed here before, but once again, a natural solar event is not a nuclear event. The solar event is ground up via induced GIC from solar events (wind, flares, CME), while a nuclear based EMP is top down. If you had read the references I gave you last time you would know this.
Kazakhstan; Soviet HEMP (high altitude electromagnetic pulse) test 184 empirically proved it would take out ground based communications, power, pipelines, etc.
An EMP taking out pipelines doesn't make a lot of sense. It might shut down pumping equipment if that is in the affected area, but that's about it.
An EMP taking out pipelines doesn't make a lot of sense. It might shut down pumping equipment if that is in the affected area, but that's about it.
You obviously didn't read them if that's your conclusion. I'm not your research assistant, nor anything else. Your choice is to remain willingly ignorant or read and research for yourself.
You obviously didn't read them if that's your conclusion.
I looked at the table of contents for each. Not one has anything in the TOC that is not directly about the electric power grid and/or electric grid equipment.
Without some indication in the TOC of a direct discussion of EMP effect on pipelines, reading them would be a waste of time.
Without some indication in the TOC of a direct discussion of EMP effect on pipelines, reading them would be a waste of time.
Willfully ignorant it is then. You're not going to be capable of understanding without the background.
I notice that you don't dispute that there is nothing in the table of contents to indicated a direct discussion of impacts of an EMP on pipelines.
That an extended outage of the power grid would result in corrosion damage to pipelined is not the same thing as and EMP causing direct damage to pipelines as such would result from an extended outage regardless of cause.
Shutting down pumps and computer controls due to grid outage is not damage to the pipeline from an EMP.
ETA: As to your claim about cracked lines due to high voltage arcing. That may or may not be true, but again the links you provided don't support it.
I'm not your research assistant
You also aren't my teacher, you don't get to assign me homework.
Edited to add: It would only take three well targeted HEMP strikes to take out the US pipeline systems.
And why would the Soviets, or anybody else waste perfectly good nukes attacking the atmosphere? Especially knowing that if they do so, they will be taking out any assets like satellites they themselves have over the area?
It is illogical, and simply makes no sense. Much more effective would be actually using them on ground targets, where the effects are already known.
And why would the Soviets, or anybody else waste perfectly good nukes attacking the atmosphere?
For the same reason anyone else would. These are bombs specifically designed to create large Electro-Magnetic Pulse effects - EMP. Think Neutron Bomb, which was designed to kill the people without destroying the infrastructure (other than the area immediately under the bomb's cone of destruction).
That means you disable the electrical and communications grid of your enemy, without totally destroying the national infrastructure. Keep in mind we have the very lovely Eisenhower National Defense Highway System here - aka, the Interstate - that allows you to travel from coast to coast via three different routes fairly easily.
Here's a simple scenario - the Chinese military prepositions RO-RO's (roll on, roll off) transport ships with an armored division and a mech infantry division onboard just south of Cancun. While you could do it with three, let's use six, to make sure we get coverage. To avoid issues with scatter plus unintentional shielding, let's pop one over Hell's Canyon, one over Las Vegas, one over OKC, one over Minneapolis, one over Scranton, PA, and one over Asheville, North Carolina.
You do so at a sufficient altitude that the ground effect radius doesn't extend very far past the Key West NAS, and the one over my head doesn't get too far into Mexico. It's 640 air miles from Cancun to New Orleans, so at 16 knots, that's 35 hours. (Remember, 640 miles is about 557 nautical miles.) That means a day and a half after the attack - when people are still trying to figure out what the hell happened, because of how quickly things shut off - you've got two full divisions of troops landing anywhere from Beaumont to Pensacola.
That gives them I-10, and multiple international airports. Two more divisions were pre-positioned off Canada, so they hit the Pacific Northwest. Obviously, 40,000 troops and tanks aren't going to be enough to take the country - but they're enough to establish bridgeheads. Our stuff is screwed, because of the EMP, and trying to figure Command and Control in this situation is nightmare - especially since our AWACs were all under one of the EMP bombs.
Yes, we still have carriers, of course, but ... the rule of thumb is one US carrier group equals 600 square miles of US territory, anytime, anywhere. Most of them aren't deployed HERE - they're over watching OTHER countries. But that also means that if they're in the middle of the ocean, THOSE you drop regular nukes on, which may not sink all of them, but they're otherwise toast.
But China isn't here to take over the US - they're here for some very simple reasons. They take over the Gulf Coast and the heart of Texas, they own our oil fields and refining capacity. They take California (please!), all the crop lands there. Push up to take Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska - that's our breadbasket.
That's why they won't use regular nukes on us - sure, it'll kill the cities and the transport networks, but it'll also drop radioactive wastes all over where the food comes from.
he Chinese military prepositions RO-RO's (roll on, roll off) transport ships with an armored division and a mech infantry division onboard just south of Cancun. While you could do it with three, let's use six, to make sure we get coverage. To avoid issues with scatter plus unintentional shielding, let's pop one over Hell's Canyon, one over Las Vegas, one over OKC, one over Minneapolis, one over Scranton, PA, and one over Asheville, North Carolina.
I suspect that the US would notice movement of large convoys of of PRC ships carrying troops to just off Mexico and Canada. Might there be some preparations in place?
That is not to mention that there is a submarine force that would not be affected in your scenario as well as troops, air power and missiles controlled by the US around the world.
I suspect that the US would notice movement of large convoys of of PRC ships carrying troops to just off Mexico and Canada. Might there be some preparations in place?
No one blinks an eye from all the cargo ship sent from China holding shoes, phones, ect... ect ... what would keep China from just loading them down with military and equipment for invasion and it isn't uncommon for cargo ship to be anchored of shore waiting for their turn to be unloaded or loaded.
No one blinks an eye from all the cargo ship sent from China holding shoes, phones, ect... ect ... what would keep China from just loading them down with military and equipment for invasion and it isn't uncommon for cargo ship to be anchored of shore waiting for their turn to be unloaded or loaded.
It's one of those "it's vaguely possible, but the details of execution makes it highly improbable" as the conspiracy needed to pull it off would involve so many people(and be subject to satellite observation) that it is highly unlikely to not leak out.
Yeah I remember someone saying that about 9-11
Yeah I remember someone saying that about 9-11
9-11 wasn't really a "vaguely possible but highly improbably".
It was ignored as a potential threat largely because it's a "you can only get away with that once" thing.
Yeah I remember someone saying that about 9-11
That was not really a very challenging operation. Get 20 people into the US, have them train to fly aircraft, crash them into buildings.
The hardest part was really finding 20 people who would actually volunteer to do a suicide mission, then go through with it.
But it was not particularly difficult or challenging in the execution. And it must be remembered, a few years before that, Tom Clancy wrote a book that involved a pilot purposefully crashing his 747 into the US Capitol during a joint session of Congress. And not even he had contemplated somebody taking his concept, and multiplying it by 4.
That was not really a very challenging operation. Get 20 people into the US, have them train to fly aircraft, crash them into buildings.
The hardest part was really finding 20 people who would actually volunteer to do a suicide mission, then go through with it.
And it must be remembered, a few years before that, Tom Clancy wrote a book that involved a pilot purposefully crashing his 747 into the US Capitol during a joint session of Congress.
The hardest part was really finding 20 people who would actually volunteer to do a suicide mission, then go through with it.
Actually, you only need to find eight people willing to suicide, the two in each cockpit need to be in on the suicide plan but the rest can be simple dupes.
You are comparing moving containers of shoes with moving tens of thousand soldiers, heavy equipment, and fuel literally around the world? And you expect that they would do that without any protection?
Sure, they could keep that keep that secret from everyone.
You are comparing moving containers of shoes with moving tens of thousand soldiers, heavy equipment, and fuel literally around the world? And you expect that they would do that without any protection?
Sure, they could keep that keep that secret from everyone.
It also ignores the matter that RO/RO ships hauling cars and no passengers don't have facilities for those troops. The ships aren't provisioned to provide food and water for more than then normal designed crew compliment. A Company of Troops would exceed that(as you still need the crew), never mind a brigade or regiment.
Which means a LOT of the RORO capacity would need to be used just to make sure the troops don't die from dehydration, never mind starve. I guess you could give them MRE's. Not great for morale, but it means they don't need to provision a mobile canteen option and figure out how to allow it to operate inside the ship.
Otherwise you're now sending a cruise ship of some kind following along behind the RORO ships to house the troops until the troops and gear need to meet up once more. But good luck pulling that off without throwing warning flags everywhere for the intelligence services to take note of.
Otherwise you're now sending a cruise ship of some kind following along behind the RORO ships to house the troops until the troops and gear need to meet up once more. But good luck pulling that off without throwing warning flags everywhere for the intelligence services to take note of.
And in this, we are basically recreating 1942.
When the US first got into WWII, we used cruise ships to move personnel. But rarely into an actual combat area. But as the war progressed, the US became masters at building Amphibious Warfare ships.
I have been on 2 of them myself. The old USS Iwo Jima (LPH-2), and the Whidbey Island (LSD-41). The Iwo carried a Regiment (about 2,000 Marines), and could stay at sea almost indefinitely. Providing food, water, showers, medical care, and everything else they needed for extended trips.
The modern ship of that name (LHD-7) has about the same capacity. It takes to sea with about a dozen other ships, including destroyers, subs, and others. All working together. Another thing the Chinese have never done.
The thought of China even trying this brings to mind a "Chinese Fire Drill". They would not even make it past the Philippines, before every US ship asset and ally is following them like a parade.
Before they even left port the Philippines and Taiwan would be screaming, as well as the US. And there would likely be a "Line of Death" somewhere between Hawaii and Mexico, with increasing warnings that to go farther risks war.
I have been on 2 of them myself. The old USS Iwo Jima (LPH-2), and the Whidbey Island (LSD-41). The Iwo carried a Regiment (about 2,000 Marines), and could stay at sea almost indefinitely. Providing food, water, showers, medical care, and everything else they needed for extended trips.
The Chinese have their own Tarawa-class knock-offs with some other technological improvements in theory.
And once again, it goes beyond theory.
The US has been actually conducting live Amphibious Operations nonstop since the end of WWII. With at least 2 Amphibious Fleets at sea at all times. Actually going out for months at a time, then doing various operations (normally giving experience to allied nations in how to fend off such an attack).
So for them, it is only theory. Large difference, like understanding and studying the theory of open heart surgery, and actually doing it.
Almost all of their Naval capabilities other than defending their own coast is largely theoretical. Now if they do start copying the US and Soviet model of putting their fleets out to sea and moving them all over for 6 months at a time, I will at least open my eyes to the possability.
And if they do that for at least 5 or 6 years, I will start to take notice. But until then, I largely ignore them and dismiss the idea because they have absolutely no experience in it.
And your mentioning Damage Control is actually part of it. Without such training and experience, that force would fall to pieces the first moment an enemy appeared on the horizon.
And the entire PLAN has a total of 3 Rescue and Salvage ships. All of which almost never leave their berths. And they certainly have no port facilities in that area of the world, and ships badly damaged would simply have to be scuttled, and the sailors taught to tread water for a very long time.
And to be factual, the US Navy Amphibious fleet does not actually have RORO ships. Just as they no longer have Rescue and Salvage ships. Decades ago, that task was actually pushed off onto the MSC (Military Sealift Command). And among those are 15 "Large, Medium Speed Roll On - Roll Off" ships. Once again, ships that are regularly pulled out of their berths and sent out on operations with the Navy.
There are regularly 2 of them based in San Francisco. When in port, they can easily be seen on the South side of the Oakland Bay Bridge. And I would always look for them a few years ago when I went to work, and it was not unusual to see one or both gone for months at a time.
The Chinese have their own Tarawa-class knock-offs with some other technological improvements in theory.
And once again, it goes beyond theory.
The US has been actually conducting live Amphibious Operations nonstop since the end of WWII. With at least 2 Amphibious Fleets at sea at all times. Actually going out for months at a time, then doing various operations (normally giving experience to allied nations in how to fend off such an attack).
And to be factual, the US Navy Amphibious fleet does not actually have RORO ships. Just as they no longer have Rescue and Salvage ships. Decades ago, that task was actually pushed off onto the MSC (Military Sealift Command). And among those are 15 "Large, Medium Speed Roll On - Roll Off" ships. Once again, ships that are regularly pulled out of their berths and sent out on operations with the Navy.
That probably should have been written "improvements, in theory."
But the "technological improvements" (in comparison to the Tarawa Class, commissioned in the 1970's) is potentially valid enough. It doesn't mean their "theory of operations" and/or "operational culture" is one that will be able to effectively operate or fight their ships.
But here is another kicker. We retired the last of the Tarawa class over 5 years ago. And have moved on since to the America Class, and now the Wasp class. And in "Sea Control" configuration, these ships carry almost as many aircraft as their Aircraft Cruiser.
We are quite literally decades ahead of them in this area. We are on the second class of ships past that, as they are copying our first class after we stopped using converted WWII era carriers.
But here is another kicker. We retired the last of the Tarawa class over 5 years ago. And have moved on since to the America Class, and now the Wasp class. And in "Sea Control" configuration, these ships carry almost as many aircraft as their Aircraft Cruiser.
You're backwards on that, the Wasp class came before the America class. The USS America CV-66 wasn't decommissioned until 1996. The USS Wasp LHD-1 was commissioned in 1989.
Uhhh, look again. I am obviously talking about the Amphibious vessel, not the Carrier.
As in the USS America, LHA-6, commissioned in 2014. And the USS Tripoli, LHA-7, commissioned in 2020.
I know quite specifically I said "America Class", not "USS America". Which was a Kitty Hawk class carrier. No America Class, Kitty Hawk class.
Uhhh, look again. I am obviously talking about the Amphibious vessel, not the Carrier.
As in the USS America, LHA-6, commissioned in 2014. And the USS Tripoli, LHA-7, commissioned in 2020.
I know quite specifically I said "America Class", not "USS America". Which was a Kitty Hawk class carrier. No America Class, Kitty Hawk class.
But here is another kicker. We retired the last of the Tarawa class over 5 years ago. And have moved on since to the America Class, and now the Wasp class. And in "Sea Control" configuration, these ships carry almost as many aircraft as their Aircraft Cruiser.
I was just saying a cargo ship would make a great camouflage cover.
As to moving tens of thousand soldiers, heavy equipment, and fuel literally around the world I think we did a pretty good job during WW II doing just that.
The smallest cargo ship can carry 100 shipping containers and the biggest carries over 18,000 shipping containers I would think there is room for more than just the crew of the ship and as for protection what would stop them from mounting a few surface to ground and surface to air missile launchers or some other type of defense.
I was just trying to offer a small idea of plausibility seeing as to the number of cargo ships that come and go each day.
As to moving tens of thousand soldiers, heavy equipment, and fuel literally around the world I think we did a pretty good job during WW II doing just that.
The smallest cargo ship can carry 100 shipping containers and the biggest carries over 18,000 shipping containers I would think there is room for more than just the crew of the ship and as for protection what would stop them from mounting a few surface to ground and surface to air missile launchers or some other type of defense.
Any other "hotel needs" (as I previously mentioned, food, sanitation, water) are likewise going to need to loaded onto the ship as well.
So now you have a transport container(or more) full of "mogas" or some flavor of aviation fuel if not both to supply the troops with power generation capabilities while at sea, and for their assault on the United States once they've arrived. So you're probably talking about a lot more than just one or two, armored combat vehicles aren't renowned for their fuel economy, if anything, they're renowned for their ability to consume huge amounts of fuel in short distances. If they're bringing helicopters along, they'll need fuel for them as well.
Of course, the logistics of moving a helicopter in a RO/RO or even in a sea-can is even more daunting, as there is going to be "some assembly required" before they can be used again.
This is the kind of thing where military professionals (or at least those familiar with their capabilities) can look at such and laugh at them.
I have been involved in such operations, on land, sea, and air. And it really is a challenge.
I mentioned the land convoys from El Paso to Yuma earlier. Each time took 2 days each way, with an overnight in Tucson in the middle. And stopping 2 to 3 times a day to refuel our equipment. We brought along our own tanker trucks (2 of them), and they could not even carry enough fuel for us to make it, they themselves had to refuel along the way.
And we are not even talking "armored combat vehicles", these are little more than really big tractor-trailers hauling really long trailers. The closest we had to "combat vehicles" were the new LMTV cargo trucks, without their combat skirts applied.
And feeding, berthing, and keeping the troops clean along the way. Without that, you will have half of your force jumping off the ships to vomit, and spend the next 2 or 3 weeks trying to recover from the ordeal. Sick, weak, dehydrated, and suffering from various forms of exposure.
Yes, and in an era of satellite based intelligence gathering, movement of all that shipping would have been noticed not long after it left port, and with it taking the better part of a week to transit the Pacific "on a good day" that gives a lot of time to respond with a counter.
Yes it can be done, the Untied States continues to demonstrate the ability to continue doing it. Doing it without being detected? That's a much bigger challenge. The United States at least has some room to maybe pull it off because it would only be a slight deviation from "normal operations" in a lot of cases, at least depending on scale.
The question that I'm having to ask now is - what good does it do to detect everything, if the military is told to ignore it?
Eric Swalwell was just put BACK on the Congressional Homeland Security Committee. I think that's the LAST place you'd want someone who was caught having an affair with a Chinese spy.
Of course, considering the person who put him there had a Chinese spy driving her around for years ...
I was just saying a cargo ship would make a great camouflage cover.
Well, not really.
You see, there are scores of sites dedicated to "Shipwatching". Not unlike the hobby of Trainwatching or Planewatching, you can go to them and see what ships have pulled into what harbor, where they left from, and updates along the route.
And believe me, this entire community will start buzzing the moment something like that happened. One thing that I know the US military learned, is that they can gather an amazing amount of information from public sources. And they themselves have to do all they can to avoid being noticed in the same way.
Way back in 1990 and 1991, I want to say it was the Washington Post that got tipped off before both Desert Shield and Desert Storm were about to kick off. And not by any kind of spy in the military, pizza.
Yep, the local pizza place the night before and of those operations saw a gigantic surge in deliveries of pizzas. The drivers realized that, and used that to tip off the media.
And that is why there is a pizza place inside of the Pentagon now.
No, if this was attempted, first you have the screams of companies expecting goods to leave their warehouses, and others expecting deliveries to be loud and noticeable. Then the ports those ships go into will be noticed, and it is not rocket science to see what assets might be in those ports.
Sealift plans take years to plan, and months to execute. And every cruise ship, pleasure yacht, and aircraft that flies overhead will be spotting and reporting them to any of a dozen sites made for that purpose.
Not as spies, as hobbyists. I knew a couple when I worked in San Francisco, including the CEO of the company. His office overlooked the Golden Gate, and many of us were on his balcony watching the end of the America's Cup from there (he though a pair of powerful tripod mounted binoculars). He told us that the US won even before the TV did.
And he had a log book on his desk, filled with ships coming and going, it was just his hobby. We even got into a conversation once, about what US Navy ships were inland at the time (I want to say there were 5). But he is just a tech geek that runs a VOIP telecom business. But his dad was a Merchant Marine, and he just really has an interest in ships. Who made it big enough to have an office on one of the top floors of a San Francisco office building.
No one blinks an eye from all the cargo ship sent from China holding shoes, phones, ect... ect ... what would keep China from just loading them down with military and equipment for invasion and it isn't uncommon for cargo ship to be anchored of shore waiting for their turn to be unloaded or loaded.
OK, first you have to clear the schedule for that ship. Which also involves telling the customer buying that stuff it is going to arrive late.
Then somehow assemble all the food, bandaids, bullets, and people and get them onto the ship, with nobody else noticing.
Oh, and modern cargo ships are not like those of 70 years ago. Most operate with a minimal crew. And almost no berthing. So say you put this Miracle Division onto cargo ships. What kind of shape will they be in at the end? Weeks with no motion, poor water and rations, extreme heat and cold.
Picture the WWII "Hell Ships" of Japan. Where 1/3 died before reaching their destination.
No, they could never keep such a secret, because nothing like this can be kept secret. Trust me, I have been part of the "Command Party" of a military convoy from Texas to Arizona about a decade ago. And for a lark, I brought along my CB radio.
Those truckers knew who we were, where we were from, and where we were going. For those who know what to look for, what our equipment was, and the direction we were going it was obvious. If we had been going East instead of West, they would have named another base as our destination. And if North, yet another.
You simply can not move a large number of military in the 21st century and keep it a secret. This is no longer 1938. Hell, even Stalin was warned that Germany was about to invade, but dismissed it. And the US kept an entire "Army" hidden that the Germans knew about, but never really existed.
But that was over 70 years ago, maskirovka like that does not work today.
OK, first you have to clear the schedule for that ship. Which also involves telling the customer buying that stuff it is going to arrive late.
What about the following, not that I think they could keep this secret either. Secrets don't stay secret in the modern world.
Build a specialized troop transport designed to look like a cargo ship.
Instead of delaying someone's freight shipment you are sticking extra ships in to the civilian traffic.
Our stuff is screwed, because of the EMP
Military equipment has been shielded from EMP for 50 years now. It is actually very simple to do, and the ability to do so is hundreds of years old.
Here's a simple scenario - the Chinese military prepositions RO-RO's (roll on, roll off) transport ships with an armored division and a mech infantry division onboard just south of Cancun.
And this needs to be addressed separately.
China can not even have a prayer in hell of invading the US. They can not even really invade Taiwan. And that is because of logistical capability, and the capability of the PLAN.
First off, they really do not have a "Blue Water Navy". All they have is a upgraded Coast Guard. They have never done large fleet exercises, they have never operated as a fleet for more than a few weeks at a time, and have absolutely no UNREP capability.
And that was only going over their logistics. Let's go over equipment.
Their amphibious capability is even worse. The vast majority of their RORO capability are civilian vehicle transports. Which would stick out like a sore thumb if they suddenly decided to pull them all off of their commercial routes, and load them up with military equipment. That would be discovered right away, and reacted to strongly.
Even to the point of the US claiming the Monroe Doctrine if they got anywhere even close to Mexico. There would likely be a blockade in place long before they got to the coast, where if they went farther they would make a great artificial reef.
China is the big boogieman at the moment, but in reality in many ways it is a paper tiger. A huge threat to their immediate neighbors, but of almost insignificant concern here in the US.. Precisely because of the logistical issues I brought up.
The biggest is UNREP. That is "Underway Replenishment", the ability to keep your ships fully stocked with everything from fuel and food to mail, replacement parts, and people. This is something the US mastered over a century ago, and has perfected constantly ever since. That is why we can maintain multiple fleets scattered around the world, and keep them in place for months at a time (sometimes for over a year).
China? They had a couple of destroyers off of the Horn of Africa for a few months, and were screaming because they could not keep them supplied.
And Fleet Operations is even more important, if you want your nice Navy to be on top of the water instead of under it. Each ship has their role, and has to do it like an intricate dance with all the other ships in the fleet. And once again, the US mastered that over a century ago.
In fact, the only ones to ever really compare was likely WWI era Japan and the UK. Both the US and Japan learned our first lessons from the UK, and then improved them in our own way.
So go ahead and sleep well tonight, China is not going to invade Mexico, or California, or anywhere else. They could never get here, and once here even if they did somehow make it, they would not last long. There is not a prayer in hell of China ever creating the logistical requirements to keep such an organization alive.
Hell, the US has more C-130 cargo transports than aircraft in the entire PLAAF. And just the California National Guard has more cargo aircraft than the entire PLAAF.
Just logistically, that concept might make a somewhat interesting story, but militarily it is laughable.
So go ahead and sleep well tonight, China is not going to invade Mexico, or California, or anywhere else.
Well theoretically, if Russia falls apart, they could invade Siberia and from there invade Alaska over the relatively short Bering Straight crossing.
A 100 mile round trip is not going to have an UNREP problem.
Well theoretically, if Russia falls apart, they could invade Siberia and from there invade Alaska over the relatively short Bering Straight crossing.
A 100 mile round trip is not going to have an UNREP problem.
*laughs*
Invade Siberia? Uhhh, they have already controlled Siberia since like forever.
And once again, how are they going to keep this fantasy army supplied?
There is an old saying I will not get into here, that deals with people who talk about strategy and tactics, and others who talk about logistics. And having spent over a decade involved in military logistics, notice the first thing I always tend to look at.
Great, the Russians invade Alaska. In the middle of nowhere, no roads or land connections to anywhere. Ultimately, they have repeated the Invasion of Kiska.
And we all know how well that little operation turned out. With a last desperate suicide charge from an army that was literally starving to death.
Invade Siberia? Uhhh, they have already controlled Siberia since like forever.
No, I was talking about China invading Siberia then hitting Alaska from there.
No, I was talking about China invading Siberia then hitting Alaska from there.
Uh-huh. And exactly how much of China do you think is going to be left after they do that?
And they still have to provide logistical support. Now simply over land before over water. Does not eliminate the need for logistics.
Oh wait, silly me. They still have to provide logistical support for all those ships up off the coast of Siberia. Just because it is off of Siberia and not Mexico, that does not magically eliminate the need for logistics.
Not to mention doing it with an army that has never trained in Arctic Operations. First against a country that has been a master of it for over 200 years, and another that has been a master of it for over 100 years.
After that, maybe we can all sit back and laugh as Norway invades Saudi Arabia.
And before you or anybody else says it, cold weather operations is not the same as Arctic Operations. There are a great many differences, something the US had to learn itself about 70 years ago. And the same thing that destroyed both France and Germany.
First big clue. Contrary to popular belief, it is not the snow, cold, and ice that defeated those invasions.
And exactly how much of China do you think is going to be left after they do that?
Which is why I qualified it with "If Russia falls apart"
And they still have to provide logistical support. Now simply over land before over water. Does not eliminate the need for logistics.
True, but over land logistics are generally easier.
True, but over land logistics are generally easier.
Look at the land in that area of the world, and think again.
A 100 mile round trip is not going to have an UNREP problem.
Holy crap! You've managed to attack Adak Island! Congratulations, that's literally the closest US city to Russian territory, home of a few hundred Aleuts, and not much else at this point in time. (Yes, I know Little Diomede Island and Big Diomede Island are closer, but no body lives there.)
Oh, did you want to actually DO anything worthwhile? It's another sixteen HUNDRED miles to Juneau, twelve HUNDRED miles to Anchorage. Two THOUSAND, four HUNDRED miles to Seattle.
Oh, did you want to actually DO anything worthwhile? It's another sixteen HUNDRED miles to Juneau, twelve HUNDRED miles to Anchorage. Two THOUSAND, four HUNDRED miles to Seattle.
And Canada might have something to say about China wanting to roll their troops through British Columbia. And that terrain is certainly not somewhere I'd be wanting to be fighting an offensive land campaign in. Plenty of ways to have mountains dropped on your guys. Of course, that also holds true for a lot of the terrain they'd be fighting through in Alaska as well.
Holy crap! You've managed to attack Adak Island!
Nope. At it's narrowest point, the distance across the Bering Straight from main land Russia to Main land Alaska is only 55 miles.
https://www.alaskacenters.gov/faqs-people-often-ask/how-close-alaska-russia
The narrowest distance between mainland Russia and mainland Alaska is approximately 55 miles. However, in the body of water between Alaska and Russia, known as the Bering Strait, there lies two small islands known as Big Diomede and Little Diomede. Interestingly enough, Big Diomede is owned by Russia while Little Diomede is owned by the US. The stretch of water between these two islands is only about 2.5 miles wide and actually freezes over during the winter so you could technically walk from the US to Russia on this seasonal sea ice.
Nope. At it's narrowest point, the distance across the Bering Straight from main land Russia to Main land Alaska is only 55 miles.
So glad you like to take stuff out of context - like ignoring my next two sentences.
Congratulations, that's literally the closest US city to Russian territory, home of a few hundred Aleuts, and not much else at this point in time. (Yes, I know Little Diomede Island and Big Diomede Island are closer, but no body lives there.)
The other minor detail is that they're ISLANDS in the middle of the Bering Strait. Still 48 miles of water between Alaska and the Russian mainland.
It's 55 miles total from the Russian main land to the Alaskan main land at the narrowest points of the strait. The islands aren't relevant to my original statement.
Who cares for a military invasion if there are cities there on either side? In fact it's probably easier to establish a beachhead in hostile territory away from any large cities.
Who cares for a military invasion if there are cities there on either side?
Anyone who cares whether or not the invasion succeeds. If you don't mind if it completely fails, then feel free to land in the middle of nowhere near any city.
Anyone who cares whether or not the invasion succeeds. If you don't mind if it completely fails, then feel free to land in the middle of nowhere near any city.
Unless your plan is to demolish cities, you do NOT want to take the fight into a city. Cityscapes are the ultimate advantage:defender location. Urban combat is tough enough in backwater shitholes populated by goatfucking assholes. Try clearing a few housing complexes floor by floor. Without overwhelming force, it's far better to draw the defenders out... unless the idea is to launch a campaign of asymetric warfare, in which case getting on land and then dispersing as quickly and widely as possible is best.
Unless your plan is to demolish cities, you do NOT want to take the fight into a city. Cityscapes are the ultimate advantage:defender location. Urban combat is tough enough in backwater shitholes populated by goatfucking assholes. Try clearing a few housing complexes floor by floor. Without overwhelming force, it's far better to draw the defenders out... unless the idea is to launch a campaign of asymetric warfare, in which case getting on land and then dispersing as quickly and widely as possible is best.
you do NOT want to take the fight into a city.
But you DO need to take the port facilities, to unload all the ships that you'll need to support your invasion.
Which are only found in cities.
The Allied forces brought their own harbors with them when they invaded at Normandy. One of them was destroyed by storms. The other functioned, and functioned well. But they also only had to get the Mulberries across the English Channel.
The Allied forces brought their own harbors with them when they invaded at Normandy. One of them was destroyed by storms. The other functioned, and functioned well. But they also only had to get the Mulberries across the English Channel.
Who cares for a military invasion if there are cities there on either side? In fact it's probably easier to establish a beachhead in hostile territory away from any large cities.
It's 55 miles total from the Russian main land to the Alaskan main land at the narrowest points of the strait. The islands aren't relevant to my original statement.
Who cares for a military invasion if there are cities there on either side? In fact it's probably easier to establish a beachhead in hostile territory away from any large cities.
But where are you going to go from there?
One huge advantage to the defender in that situation. No worries about "Friendly Fire", you can just pummel away at them constantly, and not give a damn because there will be no civilian casualties.
And once again, what is the purpose? There is nothing there, no resources or assets to take. There are not even roads or anything to take that force to anything of importance.
If China, Russia, or anybody did that, it would simply prove that their leadership had gone completely insane. They might as well conduct an amphibious assault on Antarctica for as much good as that would do. Or conduct an airborne assault in the middle of Death Valley.
There is a word for dropping forces in the middle of nowhere, with absolutely no objective in sight without a plan or purpose. And that is "moronic".
Well theoretically, if Russia falls apart, they could invade Siberia and from there invade Alaska over the relatively short Bering Straight crossing.
A 100 mile round trip is not going to have an UNREP problem.
This also ignores the matter that assertions have been made that China has been flat out told by Russia that any attempt to invade Russian territory by the PLA will be met with a Nuclear Response.
It doesn't ignore it. The scenario I posited presupposes that Russia has already collapsed, so no concern about any kind of response from Russia.
So go ahead and sleep well tonight, China is not going to invade Mexico, or California, or anywhere else.
More likely they'll be invited in.
More likely they'll be invited in.
California? Very likely actually.
Then they can resurrect the ghost of Mousy Dung, and have a gay old time having a series of Revolutions. Purging group after group that is found lacking, until they have their perfect People's State.
Of course, they could also use all that land that has been opening up. Like that new complex that Pinterest just abandoned. A huge complex on a 20 year agreement, they just walked away because of the COVID restrictions placed on it by the state they could not use it. So they now have people walk from home.
China can come in and put Tik-Tok in there instead. Then they can keep all the people entertained by posting endless videos of people flossing.
The vast majority of their RORO capability are civilian vehicle transports.
Yes, but with the clarification that we're only talking about half a dozen ships total per invasion point. I was talking about them USING civilian RO/ROs.
Also, I was referring to the US civilian population being screwed, not the military, from an EMP attack. The big question is - how shielded is our stuff if we're NOT expecting it? I freely admit my time in OD Green was literally when we still HAD OD Green - 35 years ago. But I was NBC back then, so I knew a bit more.
I completely agree with you that tactics wins battles, it's logistics that wins wars. Anyone with two brain cells understands that ... which does leave out a few people who've responded to this thread, apparently. The question would be whether or not the PLAN could our strategy from WWII, the one that worked for us.
Supply central over there. Staging area the Cancun region of Mexico, just like we used England for our stuff. I've been poking a bit of fun at the PLAAF and PLAN in my books (mostly the names - seriously, People's Liberation Army Navy?), but they do have one thing going for them. They have a VERY large civilian infrastructure. So, they literally could confiscate all their civilian aircraft and ships for transport of troops and materials.
A lot of it would depend upon the timing of things.
The big question is - how shielded is our stuff if we're NOT expecting it? I freely admit my time in OD Green was literally when we still HAD OD Green - 35 years ago. But I was NBC back then, so I knew a bit more.
We still shield it all today. I first joined over 35 years ago, and much is still the same. Such things as "Faraday Cages" are still part of the requirements on military equipment. The PATRIOT missile system has it built-in, as does the much newer THAAD equipment.
That is all passive, designed into it when the equipment was first made. Every single time we park our equipment, it is completely sealed up, and grounded. And EMP bomb can go off overhead, and most of it will function perfectly well.
Now granted, most of this I did not know way back then. It was only in my last few years in the Marines in the early 1990's that I became aware of things like TEMPEST, and how to make equipment to comply with it. Then in the 2000's in going to more high tech areas, seeing that inside of a hell of a lot of equipment, they are literally built inside of Faraday Cages.
Weird interlocking seals, woven metal gaskets where you would expect to find rubber, even metal screens that have to be removed before things could be worked on. The difference, is that the 20 year old me did not recognize what those were. But the me in my 40's saw, finally. Everything from generators and vehicles, to carrying cases and missile launchers were full of Faraday Cages.
And for those that do not know, those were discovered way back in 1836. In essence, seal an item inside of a grounded ferrite container that is grounded, and electromagnetic energy can not get inside. It is the exact same principle that allows you to look inside of your microwave oven in operation and not get fried.
Fun experiment, take a radio and put it in the microwave. It's gonna go quiet, because the Faraday Cage inside is blocking the signal. It may or may not work with a cell phone, as it does not block all frequencies, and things like Wi-Fi and other signals still get through.
But as far as the PLAAF and PLAN, they simply do not have the infrastructure for a conflict against any country that they do not share a border with. "They have no legs" you might say.
Oh, in a land conflict with a bordering nation, like Vietnam or Korea they can be a real terror. But farther away, their thread decreases significantly.
And the same with relying upon any civilian transport for military use. It is not made for that, and they have got to guarantee they hold dominance. Otherwise, those ships and aircraft are sitting ducks.
And if anybody thinks the US could not sink them or shoot them down while still in International Waters, after invoking the Monroe Doctrine, they do not get how the world works.
And heck, if people think the blood was bad with Mexico now, look back 100 years. We had just finished a bloody conflict with and inside of Mexico. Yet, they still had no problem admitting that Germany had offered to help them take back territory they lost to the US. And they turned them down, flat.
Mexico learned long ago we are a very bad enemy, but a good friend. So any attempt like this would be nothing but an invasion. And the US would respond as such.
So go ahead and sleep well tonight, China is not going to invade Mexico, or California, or anywhere else. They could never get here, and once here even if they did somehow make it, they would not last long. There is not a prayer in hell of China ever creating the logistical requirements to keep such an organization alive.
Give them another decade or two and things could change. I suspect that if China is going to do a flex of its military capabilities, it's going to happen in the next 5 years or so.
Capabilities like that take decades to even get the fundamentals of. No way they or anybody else is going to get those capabilities within the next quarter century.
First, they have to start to actually use their Navy as a navy. Not as a glorified Coast Guard. Sending out a dozen or more ships, all working together and keeping them supplied for months at a time at sea.
Those there are 2 capabilities they do not have, have never had, and are not even trying to get. They make a huge deal and blast the news wires because their "Aircraft Carrying Missile Cruiser" goes to sea for 2 weeks with a few destroyers. They are there for a few weeks, then return to port.
Meanwhile, we send an entire Carrier Battle Group to the Persian Gulf, and keep them on station for over a year. Meanwhile keeping them fully supplied in everything they need, from camouflage spray pain and squeegee sharpeners to ice cream and poker chips.
What most people fail to realize, is that the entire structure from Day 1 of the CCP is that it is really not designed to fight external threats. It is entirely designed to defeat internal threats.
Tiananmen Square style.
What most people fail to realize, is that the entire structure from Day 1 of the CCP is that it is really not designed to fight external threats. It is entirely designed to defeat internal threats.
Tiananmen Square style.
That and well, their carriers are a distraction at this stage. If they see combat use in the next decade, it'll be getting used as a Helicopter platform for moving troops to/from shore and use as a refueling/emergency landing site in case mainland China is too far away.
Their (manned) carrier aviation capabilities are likely to be decades away from being a meaningful threat to the US Navy. Their carrier based jets are also very underwhelming. A vertically launched Harrier would likely have posed a major threat to them.
But in the meantime, most of their operational doctrine is to keep their Navy under the shelter umbrella of their missile defense systems on the mainland. Their mission would simply be to play spotter for those platforms.
Too bad for them, in a shooting war, the US Navy is going to be engaging their ships from over the horizon, so playing spotter for the DF21/DF26 is going to be a bit rough to say the least.
Well, this is several other things, to be honest.
The biggest problem with the PLAN is they simply never do fleet operations. Their ships operate like the Coast Guard. Each doing their own thing, almost never working together. It would be like taking a member from each NFL team, and them throwing them against the NCAA champions. They may be excellent players, but they have no experience in working together.
Their "carriers" are a joke, they are not carriers. They were designed as, built as, and the Soviets never called them anything other than what they are. "Aircraft Carrying Missile Cruisers". Just enough aircraft to be a DEFENSIVE part of their fleet, not an offensive one. A huge difference from the US, where the air wing is the offensive part.
And yea, the DF-21. Talked about it for over a decade now, largely a fantasy, and a stupid one at that. There is a damned good reason why decades ago the US and USSR threw away all their land based missiles other than ICBMs. This miracle "Aircraft Carrier Killer Ballistic Missile" is actually a nuclear armed ballistic missile, and that is the very problem.
It is impossible to tell if that missile has a nuke on board or a conventional payload until it "goes boom". Does anybody think for a moment that the second it is launched, the Navy and US would assume it is anything other than a nuke heading towards them?
There is actually a significant segment that believe that it does not even exist. It is mostly a smokescreen, both to try and keep the US away, and to give some kind of "deniability" in the event they do nuke one of our fleets.
"It was not a nuke! It was their nuclear power plant going off when our weapon of might destroyed them! Do not look at the man behind the curtain!"
It is illogical, and simply makes no sense. Much more effective would be actually using them on ground targets, where the effects are already known.
As for "attacking the atmosphere," that ludicrous statement makes clear you have no understanding of the strategic value of knocking out an opponents grid; Nor an understanding of how it's accomplished.
Actually, I do. But countries think in terms of immediate causes and effects, not long down the line. And not even the Soviets, nor Germany and Japan were stupid enough to ever think they would "conquer" the US.
Taking out another military airfield or transportation hub is tangible and real, and is guaranteed. Launching a weapon that might work, and might have an impact is not real smart.
Taking out another military airfield or transportation hub is tangible and real, and is guaranteed. Launching a weapon that might work, and might have an impact is not real smart.
There is no 'might' to it. It's been tested real time by Americans, Chinese, and Russia/Soviets. It's also been tested around the world in various labs. If you are unwilling to avail yourself to several thousand pages of documents and evidence, at least stop trying to act like you know what your talking about.
There is no 'might' to it. It's been tested real time by Americans, Chinese, and Russia/Soviets. It's also been tested around the world in various labs. If you are unwilling to avail yourself to several thousand pages of documents and evidence, at least stop trying to act like you know what your talking about.
And there is absolutely zero evidence that any of those nations has ever contemplated actually trying to put it into operation.
It's kind of like "Decoy Missiles". Oh, I know the US and Soviets considered this over and over throughout the decades. In each MIRV missile, place in several "Decoy Warheads", with the idea that they would suck off inbound interceptors, letting more actual warheads get through.
Then logic stepped in. As some outside of the program looked in, and asked "If these dummy warheads take up the same area, weight, and have to meet the requirements of a real warhead, why not just use more warheads?"
And yea, I get that EMP has long been a boogieman along with Vapor Trails in the mentally challenged Conspiracy Theory circles. But in reality, the military dismissed it for the same reason that they dismissed decoy warheads. It simply makes no sense, when you are going to degrade your own capabilities along with those of the enemy. Especially when you can actually do real physical damage to the enemy.
Yes, it has been gamed. In fact Red Dawn was in many ways lifted from the invasion of Afghanistan, and other scenarios thrown in to make it even half-way possible. However, war games does not make reality. They are designed to test outlandish theories, and see what might be possible.
Like our purpose in 2008 in Yuma, defending an invasion of a foreign enemy through Mexico. Yea, the US still does wargames like that all the time. Because you can flip it 180 degrees, and use the same tactics in say defending Kuwait again from a resurgent Iraq. Or on its side, and defend Iraq from Iran.
But EMP weapons have long been the thing of Apocalyptical writers, conspiracy nutcases, extreme survivalists, and the like. Not serious military thinkers, as they realize that any such attack harms the enemy that launches them almost as much as the country they attack.
But hey, you be you. Think however you want, don't bother me none. Just do not think that you are going to be convincing many of us that it is a real threat.
There is no 'might' to it. It's been tested real time by Americans, Chinese, and Russia/Soviets. It's also been tested around the world in various labs. If you are unwilling to avail yourself to several thousand pages of documents and evidence, at least stop trying to act like you know what your talking about.
And there is absolutely zero evidence that any of those nations has ever contemplated actually trying to put it into operation.
But EMP weapons have long been the thing of Apocalyptical writers, conspiracy nutcases, extreme survivalists, and the like. Not serious military thinkers, as they realize that any such attack harms the enemy that launches them almost as much as the country they attack.
Uh, going to disagree here. All indications are that the Untied States has been highly interested in EMP weaponry, it's the ultimate "soft kill" for a lot of enemy capabilities. Or if nothing else, causing problems for the enemy on the home front, without needing to kill people by the million.
The "problem" which has prevented it from seeing much consideration is the whole "requires a nuclear strike to achieve" part of the problem, at least so far as the public is aware at this time.
As the nuclear strike part of the equation escalates things to all kinds of ridiculous and dangerous levels, it isn't seriously considered in the context of nuclear strike. If you're going to start a nuclear war, you might as well just do the "hard strike" and be done with it.
But if they can find a way to do an EMP without going Nuclear to do so, I could see US Military planners being all over it. And I could also see it not being made known until after the US is engaged in a war with a near-peer adversary. Otherwise we have other tools in the toolchest which can achieve the job by other means.
The bombing of Serbia in the 1990's demonstrated that DOD was developing, and had developed, stuff which specifically targeted power infrastructure. EMP is part of that paradigm. It just happens that Afghanistan (surprise) didn't have a power grid to bomb, and Iraq was likewise in a bad way so it would have been overkill there as well. ISIS/ISIL was also mostly out in the sticks and operated in a manner where attacking the grid didn't achieve much anyway... So anything new specific to attacking power grids that the US has developed since the mid-1990's is likely to still be classified as it hasn't been used in wartime just yet. (Or if it has, they had deniability as to what happened)
All indications are that the Untied States has been highly interested in EMP weaponry, it's the ultimate "soft kill" for a lot of enemy capabilities.
I agree, but only in regards to theater wide and smaller operations. Not in any kind of Country - Continental type of use. And it was not for the purposes of destroying infrastructure, but in degrading local communications as they counter-attacked through the area the nukes were used.
Where all the Allied forces were working off of a prepared gameplan, and the enemy would have to be responding blindly as they were not sure of what we were doing, and upper headquarters were unable to respond.
Even in a regular nuclear explosion, there are effects of ionization that seriously degrades communications. And while we have studied using high atmospheric use for such (as well as decoy warheads, nuclear mines, neutron weapons, etc), there is a huge difference between thinking about them in think tanks and war games, and actually putting them in as part of our real war plans.
Even in the early 1980's, I knew we had dismissed this because of the damage to our own assets from such a use. Sure, knocking out the Soviet infrastructure may sound like a great deal. Until you realize the cost is all of our intelligence satellites. And that is not a good exchange, as it leaves us completely blind afterwards.
In an EMP scenario (atomic or solar or any other kind if there are other kinds), are telephone lines likely to be destroyed?
Not really, since today most such lines are underground, and therefore insulated from the effects.
Only in the very oldest of neighborhoods are above ground phone lines in use anymore.