A Strategy & Tactical Build for the US Space Force (USSF)

[Sir Lancelot Holland]

Just now, HachiRoku said:

the only thing that missile might have hit is a 747. There is no way it would hit a fighter. 

It was never meant to hit fighters, it was meant for the un-escorted Badgers, Backfires and Bears at long ranges before they got into missile firing range, part of a multi layered fleet defence system. Defensive maneuvering was equally effective against Sparrows and Sidewinders for the same reasons you put forward for defeating the Phoenix. Unlike the Vulcan none of those air-frames could behave like a fighter, so the chances were a bit better of hitting them. Even  so the Tomcats and Hornets would still have to close and engage supersonic bombers like the Blackjack with Sparrows or less likely Sidewinders, a stern chase they probably would not win due to fuel considerations once the missiles were released, the Badgers and Bears were easier to get at, so Blackjacks were invariably the primary targets for the Tomcats if they could catch them.

[Sir Lancelot Holland]

32 minutes ago, Captain Jean-Luc Picard said:

Sorry, one more thing:

If you have ever traveled a fair bit you might have noticed that a lot of people have a profound dislike for the united states. While acknowledging and respecting the ideals of the states, a lot of countries have simply had terrible experiences with the states, or shall we say bloody experiences. In the name of its ideals, the states have a lot of blood on their hands. It is without a doubt a military nation, but also a nation actively using its military. I might be grateful for some things, critical of others, but that doesn't change the facts.

If the united states do develop a military space force, i can totally see it being used to shed blood. Of course for good reasons, who doesn't have a good reason to do whatever it is they are doing.

This is not a political opinion, just a thought and opinion on the likely eventual use of a space force if it comes to existence.

Also the militarization of space will become fun when other countries will follow/imitate the states. You, know the states talk of threats it needs defending against, and creates a unique threat towards other countries which for obvious reasons of national security now need to defend against the threat presented by the united states. One can cite russia, china or whomever as threats, but how will they see such a move? Will they sit back and applaud?

Ironically the same can be said for the United Kingdom and France too, the Malaysian Mau Mau uprising, South Africa, in the case of the UK, Vietnam and Algiers for the French, it is a lesson every Nation that has held an Empire had to learn, with great power comes great responsibility, great power is always held in both awe and resentment.

[Hethwill]

1 hour ago, Captain Jean-Luc Picard said:

Hell, when the day does come where a space military is necessary, i won't be surprised to see the states have space contractors for everything.

Not unlike the very early seventeenth century west indies  

A New World after all , and until proven exceedinly profitable, needs adventurous private ventures investment, not comfortable citizen taxes money.

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard]

46 minutes ago, Norfolk nChance said:

I just hope we don’t roll out the Royal Space Force post Brexit

 

Norfolk.

Political opinions aside, and whatever the political discourse is on both sides, with budget cuts all over the place, some already hitting home like the NHS, some not having hit home yet ( the company i worked for in the UK is struggling to stay afloat and will probably close soon, other companies i knew have already closed or are also expecting to, i barely hear any talk of the already existing effects on the daily reality of companies), the pound going down even before brexit has even been activated... A bunch of skilled workforce ( myself included ) just noping the fuck out of UK to greener pastures to keep earning the same or more due to currency devaluation and uncertainties about the future..

I think it's safe to say that UK won't be able finance a royal space force deserving of such a name even if it wanted to in the nearest future. One day. but not in the near post-brexit future.

Not to go into the whole brexit thing, but for UK to spend large amounts of money on this at such a time seems unlikely.

Then again, Trident is something like 50 billions in an era of budget cuts, so who knows.

Edited August 18, 2018 by Captain Jean-Luc Picard

[Sento de Benimaclet]

If I were American, I would agree with the space war program. The United States has been the most powerful economy on the planet for nearly a century, a world superpower after the Second Great War and the only superpower after the USSR's extinction. It is the Roman Empire of our days. I will not criticize what was once the Spanish, French, British Empire.

During the Cold War, the possession of nuclear weapons in both ideological blocs was a deterrent, which, except for specific moments (missile crisis) guaranteed the virtual impossibility of a total war between the United States and the USSR. Today that guarantee no longer exists.

New countries have the atomic weapon and if we look at them, we see that they are currently the most "hot" and unstable areas. Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, India, Israel. They have also developed or are close to it intercontinental rockets with multiple nuclear warheads, which exponentially increases the devastation. Many of these countries are fierce dictatorships that do not care about the fate of their people, which means they would not hesitate to use the nuclear weapon if they see their regime threatened. Obviously the most unpredictable and therefore dangerous is to my way of seeing North Korea.

It is more than clear that the United States today is unbeatable in a conventional war. Its technology, logistics, organization, its bases strategically located around the world plus the help of its NATO allies corroborate this. However, the USA is losing the commercial, financial and economic leadership of the world, vital for national life, the American Way of Life, hundreds of thousands of jobs that work in the military industrial complex and therefore the supply and constant maintenance of its Forces Armed That is another factor that can, and will in fact lead, to the United States to intervene in other wars. Another risk factor

This was already seen in the time of President Reagan with his Strategic Defense Initiative of March 23, 1983.
I think the United States should build, if not already, bases in space or launch artificial satellites armed with missile anti-missile or the laser beam that is developing at this time for both the attack and the defense, since surely they will try to destroy such bases / satellites with anti-satellite missiles, if possible above those countries that are or can be a nuclear threat both to the USA and to its allies in the world. The logistics issue would be competence and responsibility of both the USAF and NASA.

This system, it should be clear, is for the defense against threats of nuclear missiles, should never serve to threaten or coerce the rest of nations if they do not go the "right way". I consider, if I were American, this system of space defense is necessary, if we look at the current problems, how they are aggravated and their consequences in societies and therefore in countries, overpopulation without real control, depletion of resources, water Drinking, oil, climate change that leads to desertification and destruction of huge arable land, proliferation of famines, pests, diseases, all this will lead to a struggle for resources, for global survival. And it is better to be prepared to face the problem or succumb.

Or they (those nations involved, USA, Western Europe, Russia etc) can spend all those billions of dollars / euros in regenerating the planet so that human existence on our planet remains possible and tolerable. The older I get and the more I think I know the world around me, the more pessimistic I become. I hope that I am wrong. 😉

 

 

 

 

[Norfolk nChance]

@Captain Jean-Luc Picard

 

The UK should be ok. With the Turkey wobble, watch Portugal, Italy, Greece and Iceland. This all falls back onto just Germany...

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard]

53 minutes ago, Sento de Benimaclet said:

It is more than clear that the United States today is unbeatable in a conventional war. Its technology, logistics, organization, its bases strategically located around the world plus the help of its NATO allies corroborate this. However, the USA is losing the commercial, financial and economic leadership of the world, vital for national life, the American Way of Life, hundreds of thousands of jobs that work in the military industrial complex and therefore the supply and constant maintenance of its Forces Armed That is another factor that can, and will in fact lead, to the United States to intervene in other wars. Another risk factor

[...]

This system, it should be clear, is for the defense against threats of nuclear missiles, should never serve to threaten or coerce the rest of nations if they do not go the "right way". I consider, if I were American, this system of space defense is necessary, if we look at the current problems, how they are aggravated and their consequences in societies and therefore in countries, overpopulation without real control, depletion of resources, water Drinking, oil, climate change that leads to desertification and destruction of huge arable land, proliferation of famines, pests, diseases, all this will lead to a struggle for resources, for global survival. And it is better to be prepared to face the problem or succumb.

Or they (those nations involved, USA, Western Europe, Russia etc) can spend all those billions of dollars / euros in regenerating the planet so that human existence on our planet remains possible and tolerable. The older I get and the more I think I know the world around me, the more pessimistic I become. I hope that I am wrong. 😉

 

 

 

 

Couple things here, of which you seem aware by your wording but that i want to insist on:

one, the money spent on yet another military project, while the US already spends more on the military than China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, India, France, United Kingdom, and Japan combined, some of those being allies, while this money could be more useful to help maintain or expand the commercial, financial and economic leadership. Historically ( with a big H ) and logically overspending on military over the long term obviously leads to a weakening of other areas including economics and thus to a loss in leadership in other areas.

two, the united states "right way" is not and will never and cannot logically be the same as other countries, even europe had disagreements with the US on what is the "right way", plus might is right ( the US ignoring resolutions for example, or fabricating claims ( https://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/opinion/what-i-didn-t-find-in-africa.html )

I would add that the problems you mention could be helped by putting some money into them indeed instead of a space force, but yeah, sure, humans, pessimism etc, not to mention that the US has possibly more responsibility than any other country in this situation existence in the first place ( maybe with the exception of the industrial revolution XD ).

But let's remember that the same guy that proposes the space force is the one that literally says that climate change is a chinese invention to make US manufacturing non competitive and literally censors any research on climate change. This censorship affects NASA as well. So yeah context is good but trump dosn't want the space force because of a climate change he does not believe in.

So yeah, you put some interesting context especially the climate wars or whatever we will call it, but let me add some context to your context XD

P.S. : Also i would be very careful about some of those dictatorships not caring about their people, the west is individualistic, as am i who grew up in the west, but there could be a whole debate made about not caring about their country/population on the long term as opposed to indeed not caring about their individuals today. It's just different countries where the "right way" is not the same, at least at the political level. I find north korea very predictable and the US very unpredictable nowadays as well. That's a whole different debate thought. And again the US are the only ones to have actually ever used nukes in war. But whatever. Gotta go out anyway and i'm getting sidetracked XD.

 

Edited August 18, 2018 by Captain Jean-Luc Picard

[Norfolk nChance]

@Sento de Benimaclet

 

I agree, they the United States needs to be ahead of the curve. Yet they feel and look like they’re playing catch up. NASA saying Mars unlikely in the 2030s. The Moon staging post late 2020s. We should have been there by now.

Private Corporations racing ahead or taking the lead could become very problematic. Imagine SpaceX in 2035 mines the first near Earth asteroid [ERO] with a low DeltaV? Horror show with history repeating itself. Like the East India Company growing to dwarf the Crown’s asset, and becoming uncontrollable and totally corrupt.

United States needs stay ahead of this competitive game. The threats might be more than just country wide as jurisdiction in Outer Space is not under US Law. The problem as always COST both current plus a sizeable allocation to R&D.

This might sound far fetched but history time and time again proves otherwise. From oil and Rockefeller, Carnegie and steel, to Apple Inc becoming the first Trillion-dollar Company in history. Its Market Cap makes it larger than the GDP of each of 183 out of the 199 countries of which the World Bank monitors GDP Data. In other words, if it was a Country it would be the 16^th Largest.

SpaceX mines an ERO in 2035 could quite literal destabilizes economies around the world...

 

Another book: The East India Company by Brian Gardner

https://www.amazon.co.uk/East-India-Company-Dorset-Reprints/dp/0880295309/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1534604756&sr=8-1&keywords=the+east+india+company%2C+brian+gardner

 

Norfolk

 

[StaleMemes]

3 hours ago, HachiRoku said:

No what I mean by cold is that you can keep the electronics warm but that will cause heat and heat is VERY visible in space. 

[Sento de Benimaclet]

15 minutes ago, Captain Jean-Luc Picard said:

the united states "right way" is not and will never and cannot logically be the same as other countries

True, but does American politics know? Because I come to the head names like Mossadeq, Arbenz, Allende that were not on the "right way" and you know what happened.

 

25 minutes ago, Captain Jean-Luc Picard said:

Historically ( with a big H ) and logically overspending on military over the long term obviously leads to a weakening of other areas including economics and thus to a loss in leadership in other areas.

In the case of the USA, no, because the military industrial complex generated billions of dollars, supplying the armies of the United States, whose global military might was the base upon which that commercial, financial and economic leadership was based. They complemented each other perfectly. As other empires have done throughout history. It is now when, spending more than ever in Armament is losing that leadership due to the strength of China's economy and finance. Before, it was a great business opportunity to invest and produce goods there, it got out of hand and now it is a giant of the economy, uncontrollable by the West and therefore the probable enemy. How many times have we seen this in History?

I think that the USA feels threatened by this progressive loss of leadership and that is where the issue of increased military spending in conventional weapons and Space Defense comes from. Not should we forget that there are such countries in unstable regions with nuclear weapons and the obligation of a government is to protect its population by all possible means at its disposal. Greetings!!.

[Sir Lancelot Holland]

I suspect a huge Military Industrial Complex is more a liability than a benefit, not only does it take from other financial and commercial interests, it requires conflict to justify it's existence,  While $/£Trillions have been poured into Nuclear capabilities it has only been the fear of the consequences of their use that prevents their use. As Sento de Benedict points out that unstable countries now have access to nuclear weapons that fear is being diminished, coupled with the inability of those countries to withstand a conventional war makes the use of nuclear war more a probability than a threat. 

I grew up and served at sea during the Cold War, I lived through the Cuba Crisis when most of the world came close to a conflict that could very easily have gone both global and nuclear, it was on the surface, life as usual, but, there was a genuine fear for the worst. One of the most surreal sights I have seen were the Vulcans taking off with Blue Steel nuclear weapons slung under them, it would not be the last time i would see a nuclear weapon, and whenever I did see them, my hope was that they would not be used. 

I had the opportunity to meet Russians, the fact that they are real people, who, have the same hopes and fears as we do had a profound impact, I do not fear Russian people,  nor do I fear North Korean people, I do fear those who lead them, and, more importantly, those who lead my own country.

[Captain Jean-Luc Picard]

2 hours ago, Sir Lancelot Holland said:

I had the opportunity to meet Russians, the fact that they are real people, who, have the same hopes and fears as we do had a profound impact, I do not fear Russian people,  nor do I fear North Korean people, I do fear those who lead them, and, more importantly, those who lead my own country.

So much this.

To be fair thought, the russians do have bear cavalry.

[modernknight1]

Well this discussion has managed to pull me out of my disinterested reverie.

 

Some excellent points made here. Because of past positions, I am actually part of a real world discussion group which is forming this strategy, however, I have not yet contributed - and not sure if I am going to or not yet. A big reason for this has already been excellently stated by Picard. The US does indeed have an immense amount of blood on its hands with 121 bombs a day still being dropped and no actual declarations of war against any nation legally present. I was very critical of this before I retired after a quarter of a century of service and with a very bright career which I am certain would have led to even higher promotions. In some ways I regret my decision because I may have been able (probably not) to have affected some change as I rose higher.  A colonel is just a peon at the funny five sided building which many jokingly name the chicken house because of all of the birds.

 

Civilians are in charge of the military at the top level - bottom line. This became painfully evident to me on a daily basis my last few years in the service. Incompetence is rampant. As someone else said earlier the military industrial complex is a liability. That is indeed true. It must justify its reasons for existence, hence the endless expansion, manufacturing enemies and arming them, and lethal military meddling in the middle east and other areas continuing. Rather than having a cohesive military and foreign policy that makes sense we have been playing all sides against the middle for decades to the point where trust and credibility for the US by other nations is at an all time low. We cannot be everyone's friend and arm and help their enemies at the same time. I witnessed programs at the funny shaped building which had not produced an iota of value or progress in years, yet still managed to pull in major funding to add high paying positions to their little empires. We came to call these little empires replete with dozens of government civilians collecting their second welfare incomes -  "self licking Ice Cream Cones". The internecine conflicts between some of these offices and programs were fierce and sometimes beyond petty. It was always both amusing and disheartening when I would witness two different programs working on nearly the exact same project - but in complete isolation from one another. Even more disheartening is when I would learn that the same contractor was building them their software and upon comparison would note that the interfaces were nearly identical - they were getting paid twice for the same thing. (happened more than once). When I would raise the red flag and tell people about these kinds of things - I became labelled as a "boat rocker".

 

However, regarding this "space force", I think there is a real glaring need and I will tell you why. First off - years ago many treaties were signed by many nations agreeing upon no weaponization of satellites in space. This caused us to come up with all kinds of alternative solutions in future battle simulations - like weaponized high altitude airships (Steampunk LOL) or take off and land space vehicles that were more like fighter/interceptors but with the capabilities of being able to leave orbit.

Why do we need these things. As someone else brought up earlier, the downed weather satellite by China in 2007 was a major eye opener. With an arsenal of satellite killing missiles, all communications in the world are at risk. As another pointed out, without communications - game over. I was part of a panel that discussed this at a major military communications conference in Georgia back in 2010. I asked why we continued to be insistent on tethering our infrastructure to comsat and milsat capabilities when our challengers in the world were doing just the opposite. China has for the last 20 years been hardening an ever expanding underground IPv6 infrastructure to include endless thousands of miles of 48 strand fiber optics buried deep under ground between all of their cities. Day 1 of WW3 would be an onslaught of satellite killers taking everything out they could. While our financial, banking, commercial, private communications, internet, and military communications in the entire west all bite the dust, the east will continue normally.

 

To believe that missiles (as we know them now) are the future is naive. Someone said lasers are too far off. That person has done no research. This stuff isn't even classified anymore. We have been developing what we call directed energy weapons for decades. For many years we experienced great problems like batteries and a lengthy regeneration between bursts. I personally watched a demonstration of a warehouse sized model knock a hole in two feet of steel plate back in 2005. Since then we have tackled and overcome the problems with overheating, battery size, power regeneration between bursts allowing almost rapid fire. Our Phalanx gun systems that were developed to take out in bound enemy mortar and artillery shells before they could hit our bases in the middle east were replaced by these directed energy systems over a decade ago. The continuing advances in this technology have allowed these systems to be put aboard both aircraft and sea going vessels already for a number of years. Bottom line - lasers have already been here for a while now. Also they are not the BEW BEW BEW pink and green and red beams of light one sees in the movies. You can't see them in the air until they hit something - and the point of impact is blinding when they do hit.

 

There is no doubt the west is ahead of the east in this technology and the east knows this all too well. They have been redoubling their efforts to build similar capabilities, but in addition, they are developing a smart next generation system of missiles that are self intelligent. Imagine missiles that will emerge from beneath the water after having navigated themselves some miles away from their mother subs before surfacing. Once on the surface they begin a haphazard journey to their target that is low beneath any radars abilities to track them and they may make numerous readjustments in course before deciding which target out of a list that would be the optimal based on the situation. Scary. I foresee a day in the near future where coastal defense batteries once again become a matter of importance but batteries of directed energy platforms that can auto engage in a split second based on advanced ground surveillance radar feeds.    

 

In order to deal with this threat to our Achilles heel satellite infrastructure, the space force is a vital necessity in order for the west (US) to maintain its power, but also keep its future enemies and/or competitors from gaining too much of an edge. For the east, the new leaps forward in directed energy technology are a dangerous threat to making the nuclear arsenals which have kept an uneasy peace for so long - from being invalidated. The way nukes work is that the nuclear explosions only occur when the detonators function. If a direct energy weapon takes out the nose cone of the weapon then its guidance system and detonator would both be destroyed rendering it a giant piece of worthless pig iron. That one idea alone turns everything on its ear and this is one of the reasons the Russians are so uneasy about this new "missile shield" capability that the west is employing all over the world. I've been out of the loop for too long of a time to know what these missile shield systems comprise of - but if I were a betting man I would say that directed energy weapons are part of the suite of systems - or they soon will be.

The last reason is that the space junk problem has just got out of control. Routine damage to satellites is becoming a very common and costly thing. We have so many thousands of derelict objects in space now traveling at 10s of thousands of miles per hour that navigating the expanse outside of the atmosphere and safely putting new objects into orbit is beginning to become a challenge. With non satellite based platforms with directed energy capabilities a regular mission for this force would also be keeping the space clean from all of this dangerous fast moving junk.

So I will leave it there. Just some additional food for thought. I guess the last thing I would say is that the continuing vitriolic attacks on the POTUS are just childish. Growing up in the military I was always taught that even if I didn't like an officer appointed over me or even hated him that I still had to respect him and "SALUTE THE RANK NOT THE MAN". I've never said anything bad about a sitting president in the office because I personally believe its seditious. I hated George Bush and still believe he was the worst POTUS in history, but never once said anything bad about him while he was in the office. I didn't vote for Trump either(I didn't vote for anyone), both because I am a strong middle of the road Independent and also because I haven't believed that we have had a fair selection process in many years(since Kennedy in fact). There were 13 people on that last ballot. If someone can get enough signatures to get on the ballot then they should all get equal press/air time and equal budgets issued by the gov't. Private, foreign and corporate interest Money has ruined the system and money has changed all the rules - allowing PACS and superpacs - which need not identify themselves when they fund both parties candidates to ensure they have a leash on whomever wins either way. Don't be angry with the POTUS, be angry at the system in place which is allowing all of the current situation to take place. Be angry with the deep state which has wriggled its way into the power structure. Its not a new thing - its just worse than its ever been before.

Remember Teddy Roosevelt's words:   “Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of today.”

AMEN

MK

www.linkedin.com/in/aaron-shields-9a3b293

 

 

Edited August 19, 2018 by modernknight1

[Norfolk nChance]

A big thank you for all your contributions. Whether an Action Admiral or Ultimate General the Task was not easy and with hindsight unavailable probably impossible to complete. The ownership lampooning of a President only muddies the waters blind siding a real threat that is just around the corner if not already upon us.

That funny shaped building @modernknight1 talks about suffers continually with lack of hindsight and over/under political funding mis-leading well intended professional military thinkers into the “self-licking ice cream cone”. The Bradley Fighting Vehicle just one ice cream within the Pentagon Wars shows just what a hard job they have.

The threats could also be more than Country wide which throughs up out sourcing as not the total cost solution either. The Task I’m only talking out to 2030, that believe it or not is not that far away. A Future History that will be History quicker than we all expect.

 

Thank you all again,

 

Norfolk nChance [ELITE]

 

[John Jacob Astor]

I know, I'm late to the party.

Two operational realities.

1) The physics of rocket propellant and having to get it into orbit will constrain the nature of space combat for the foreseeable future.  The cost increases resulting from increases in mass and acceleration are non-linear.  

2) Light-speed delays will constrain the use of live drone controls as competition drives towards the high ground, further and further out  (and you thought server lag was just a problem in video games).

These constraints bias the development towards small autonomous devices.

Which opens up the possibility of direct attacks against an opponent's military and civilian satellites, with the additional possibility of not having an having an attack traced back to a source.  You might be able to see them when they turn on.  But if they've been tumbling along with other orbiting junk for a while you might have no idea who they belong to.

This has destabilized arms race written all over it, with a host of undesirable byproducts.

In order to adapt, the US is likely going to have to rethink some of the big grand plans.  Or risk technological surprise.  Such as when the Navy parked all the battleships in Pearl because the harbor was too shallow for aircraft-launched torpedoes.

Oops.

Edited August 21, 2018 by John Jacob Astor
clarification

[Norfolk nChance]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-45243908

 

 

August 22 2018

 

 

The NSA did highlight India as a threat but again terrifying scenarios can be imagined and not just regarding the Sub-continent. The UK stopped giving aid to India in 2016, it received GBP 150m (USD 200m roughly) the year before....

 https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/From-Jan-1-UK-to-stop-financial-aid-to-India/articleshow/50388300.cms

 

 

Norfolk nChance [ELITE]

 

 

 

Edited August 22, 2018 by Norfolk nChance

[Sir Lancelot Holland]

In fairness to the USN's policy of basing her Battle-line at Pearl Harbour many navy's used shallow water ports or even had to sail up rivers to reach their anchorages, even with Battleships,  Taranto and Rosythe being examples. Ironically were it not for the British Ariel torpedo attack with antique Swordfish aircraft on Taranto, it is very likely Pearl Harbour would not have occurred at all, or, at least not in the format  that it did. That said, i have little doubt that the Imperial Japanese Navy would have come up with some way to achieve their aims, possibly greater emphasis on Mini Submarines much like Gunter Prien's attack on Scapa Flow, it is now common knowledge that the Japanese used them as a component of the Pearl Harbour operation since the claim of the USS Ward has been finally vindicated, with her kill outside the harbour being located. 

 

[Norfolk nChance]

@Sir Lancelot Holland

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271644766_The_Influence_of_Alfred_Thayer_Mahan_upon_the_Imperial_Japanese_Navy

The IJN adopted Mahan’s decisive battle theory only in my opinion. This without going for the vital choke points first. This is very over simplified but they built overly large ships rather than many more small cruisers destroyers or submarines.

The Allied Forces had no other route than starting at the Coral Sea and working there way up. Too much ocean Central Pacific while going North would meet the might of the IJN Navy and air force.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Ocean_theater_of_World_War_II

IJN could have tied down Allied forces through the many thousands of islands with the shallow ports.

 

Just a view.

 

Norfolk.