How would a hypothetical war play out in burgerland suburbia? US suburbs are nothing like in Europe due to our car based infrastructure everything is spread out and open for cars, how would you even set up a defensive position or offensive push when you can be shot from any direction even more so after all the houses are leveled and there’s nothing but dead flat open terrain
firebombs kill everyone
This is the correct answer. Light one of those houses on fire. Without a fire department to respond the entire ‘burb will be gone in a day or 2.
As for defensive positions you are going to need to sandbag anything you are trying to be in. You could shoot a 556 and it would go through a dozen of these houses before it stops. I wouldn’t think these houses would even have basements to get down in.
Imbecile, sprinklers have saved houses from burning in the giant California wildfires. Take into consideration some pools or a golf course with more grass and sprinklers. Yeah no. Also don't pretend the wind would help you the weather hourly a variable you simply can't just decide to have help you when it suits you its a wild card and might hinder fire spread.
>firebombs kill everyone
How do you propose to get air supremacy over the United States?
You're never reaching suburbia without it.
This.
It would basically return to the default state of the natural topography after enough conventional ordinances land.
Typical North American residential architecture uses flimsy building materials timber composites. Even mid-density residential areas won’t be much better, as 5-over-1’s are basically big tinderboxes with a concrete bases.
European residential architecture tend to use concrete or brick a lot more which will be more durable to fire and explosions.
There are a lot of suburbs in Europe and everywhere else. FFS, Tokyo has massive suburbs and it's the largest city in the world.
But do they look like this?
>But do they look like this?
Worse actually, they don't have as much room in Europe so houses are all piled on top of one another. The typical homes look like this or they live in commieblocks which are worse.
I thought this was ai generated kek
These buildings are older than most American cities
>that would be 100,000,000 rupees good ol' chap
HOL up you're telling me "muh cookie cutter suburbs" was yuroach projection all along??
EVERYTHING is Eurangutan projection, anon. Everything. Any time you hear a Yurosnore complaining about Americans, it's about something the Europoor did first and worse.
Its a phase literally every single country goes through in their development cycle. When you have population growth + a growing middle class you need lots of houses and fast.
I am about to buy a house and ngl, buying into a "master planned" suburb is tempting. First, the 100% cookie cutter ones are the bottom end of the market (200K or less). The new meta is developers will contract 3-4 builder per project and each builder will have 3-4 houses they build. You buy the land from the developer and pay the builder and chose your house and that way there is 16 different types of houses in the community which breaks up the monotony. They are pretty good investments as well if you can figure out how a city is growing and buy in the right spot and sit on it for a while as demand will only keep increasing as the city grows around desirable areas.
>there are dudes who bought houses in The Woodlands north of Houston for $200k and are now selling them for $500k
>Its a phase literally every single country goes through in their development cycle
Of course it is, but in the eyes of intellectual bolsheviks (ignore the oxymoron and bear with me), whenever capitalist pig dog Americans do it it's bad, but when the glorious infallible STATE of tyrannical hellholes do it, it's good, because it results in the maximum amount of misery for the population of the latter, and maximizing misery is the primary interest of bolsheviks.
Literally every white / Western country goes through. The rest of the world doesn’t have the middle class due to low-IQ. Peasants can be crammed into hovels and suffer everywhere else with actual development going towards the elites (see the new Egyptian capital).
Egyptian population doubles every 30 years or so so they probably need to build a shitload of new cities at this point
Arabs do be frickin’, there’s some ASS under those garbage bags.
jesus christ what a dystopia
Industrialisation for you. At least in Western Europe the housing regulation made it walkable, there are cornershops/pubs within 1-200m of pretty much most houses that you can just walk to for milk and bread.
why doesn't that development in OP post have a single store, a pub or a small mall? probably no schools or kindergartens either.
Not entirely. I'm an American and I hate our inefficient suburbs.
Our housing models aren't organic; they're vomited by money-grubing developers shitting out garbage McMansions in little self-contained terrariums.
Jesus dude get fricking real. It's the most efficient way to shit out housing for the middle class. Houses in "organic" neighborhoods are just houses developers built 40 years ago.
No, houses in "organic" neighborhoods are homes people built a hundred years ago from old farm plots. People still do this of course, but it's rarer.
Suburbs are not organic. They have never been organic. They are the government's answer to a mess they made, in the most hands-off, inefficient way the government can do.
>efficient
Maybe for the developer
How about you get an actual job so you can move out of your mama's house in her comfy suburb she an pa moved out too after living in the ghetto ass apartments near where they worked with the rest of the trashwhile trying to make a living to spoil their stupid children? Then you can enjoy the overpriced shitty condos made in the former warehouse and rail yard district near the urban renewal city center full of buttholes, but hey atleast it's walkable to the local light rail station and the shitty chains and hipster brewpubs, or bikeable to the gentrified park which is nice and pretty during the periods after the cops run off the homeless camps.
Well feel free to live in an overpriced condo in the hustle and bustle of the city then. I don't want to share walls with strangers and I won't do it.
Almost every house in Colorado has a basement. Most of the northern plains states have basements. Not every place is Florida or Gulf Coast lowlands.
I think those are mostly a thing within large urban areas in bongland & Western Europe.
Suburbs in less populated places in Eastern and Northern Europe are often pretty random sprawls of unique single-family homes, maybe with a commieblock or two on the streets near the local supermarket.
true, but that's the same case in the US
Houses like this don't exist in my country, this is a typical ignorant burger take on "europe" like it is some kind of a uniform entity
Eastern europe isnt real europe
no worries, I live in central europe
Only 3 countries in Central Europe deserve to be in Europe
What country? I know for a fact those kind of housing tracts exist in the three major European industrial countries of England, France, and Germany. You might escape that kind of shit if you're some kind of poorgay in Hungary or a mountain israelite in Switzerland.
poorland but I can't seem to remember specifically this kind of houses from either czechia, slovakia or austria either. maybe I am wrong. I think I remember them in germany.
Poland got raped by gommies so it never had the chance. All those other countries you listed are considered "backward" by 19th century industrial revolution standards, which is where all those tract houses came from, so that's why these tracts don't appear as much if ever. But it's hardly any loss.
I think the buildings were just different? for example in the city of łódź workers lived like this, but sure the scale is much smaller
You could cut the irony with a knife
suburbs in America dont uniformly look like this. This is something youd see in Florida or Texas, maybe Southern California. In the midwest and northeast things are more varied. Lots of basements.
There's already more variation happening to houses built in southern states in the 1980s as people have added onto them. Kind like a similar thing to what Bonganon said about social housing.
I live in such a neighborhood and the trees planted back then have grown in some cases into huge oaks. A Thai immigrant turned his little suburban lawn into a farm which supplies his son's restaurant, and a little lawn like that is way more productive than you might think on that amount of space. I half-joked to him that if there was ever a big crisis then he would do best out of everyone in the neighborhood.
Shotgun houses with the quasi-Victorian look along the Gulf Coast and particularly New Orleans seem like a happy medium between "house" and "density." I always liked that style. Narrow width but long, a bit like a spaceship and very much for working / middle-class people but without being crammed like bugs into apartments. Also seeing more two-story houses being built with a small footprint to supply the demand for density.
The boomers also bail and move further out. It's a slash-and-burn growth machine and they don't care what happens to the old neighborhood provided they double their money. My neighborhood is not quite that yet but that might be because all the blacks who have moved in are women for some reason.
>don't have as much room in Europe
>t. never been to euroland
The entirety of Europe west of the Urals fits into the United States east of the Mississippi: that's 750 million people in an equivalent land area containing 250 million Americans. Of course you have less space than America you fricking idiot.
It's kind of insane that those 17 milion people have sveral times more weight in voting than the 53 milion to the left.
It's the only thing holding the country overflowing with 3rd worlders from becoming 3rd world.
I didn't say it's good or bad, just kind of crazy for a "democracy".
Good thing US isn't a democracy(no matter what the politicians say) but a constitutional republic.
>Good thing US isn't a democracy
It is though... It is both a republic and a (representative) democracy.
t. hilary voter
they don't, electoral college votes are proportional to state population. With the exception of very low population states like Wyoming, it's just a meme cope Hilary came up with in 2016.
Yeah like 80% of the votes in the west are california and texas
literally ass backwards. California and Texas have 20% of the electoral votes
https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/2020
and guess which two states have ~20% of the population?
Stop being stupid.
Why libruls get morrr
Its proportional to pop and for every meme state that votes red (Montana) there is a meme state that votes blue (Rhode Island, fricking Delaware).
Its actually quite a nifty system.
And it's kind of insane politicians in Washington can tell them how to live
You, too, are marvelously moronic.
I have been, and yes, European polities has no space compared to most United States. From where I live, a drive to the next major metropolitan region, is equivalent to a drive from Paris to the Ruhr. through 3 countries.
Most of that 17M bloc vote overwhelmingly Blue, moron. Arizona Sun corridor is the only one a bit mixed. But most of the lights in that region are urban cities that always lean Blue, or Federal-government subidized places with browns, all of which lean Blue. The Red flyovers you seem to hate on are in the western and southern side of the 250 M bloc. Learn some geography if you're going to be so triggered about voting.
Mostly a Western Europe thing, high-density urban housing for working class families.
I've never seen them in CE. Here that role was filled mostly by these apartment complexes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panel%C3%A1k
>commieblocks le bad even doe they’re roomy, made out of sturdy materials and let your kids walk everywhere they need to go
Commieblocks are awful.
Don't even try justify living with crying moron kids and music from grown adult morons through the walls at 3am, don't forget the druggie neighbours and the piss stained stairs up to the top floors.
>t. has never been near a commie block
OH NO NO NO NO EUROPOORS WHATS THE COPE NOW
>B-B-BUT WE MAKE THEM OUT OF ROCKS!
this is England, Netherland or North Germany.
South Germany and other real middle european nations have garden, garage etc. a normal house has atleast a garden, a driveway and a small garage.
Only in the UK you can find those kind of houses
Those are more of an older, almost inner city style. Those houses are probably almost if not over 100yrs old.
Pic related is more typical of a suburban/commuter town in the UK, just outside a major city, core of older houses with suburbs around, although IIRC these are 70s-80s houses hence so much green space.
Most of the houses are brick+block construction externally with concrete foundations and no basements
No, they look like this.
American here. Are there any good novels about life in the suburbs of a large Japanese city?
Those suburbs aren’t like the ones fought through in WWII, so even if they were a carbon copy of modern America OP still raises an interesting question without historical parallels to turn to for answers.
But the European and even the Japanese ones are made out of stone and the European ones have cellars.
There is no reason for soldiers to dismount when assaulting a US area like this just drive your IFV through those houses and hose down the ones you don drive through.
Yeah those houses are built for poor factory workers. That is the idea behind them that's why they are built the way they are
>There is no reason for soldiers to dismount when assaulting a US area like this just drive your IFV through those houses and hose down the ones you don drive through.
Even in ukr with their brick and mortar houses we see them digging small trenches around houses and building subterranean shelters, the same would happen here, enemies would pop up from a hole under the rubble and shoot you from behind.
>But the European and even the Japanese ones are made out of stone and the European ones have cellars.
This is going to vary quite a bit between regions. I think stone houses are more common in Southern Europe.
In the North, they're often wood packed with lots of insulation, built on stone or concrete foundations that extend a foot or two off the ground to keep moisture from the soil away from the wooden parts (mold is a serious problem around here, especially in badly engineered houses built by our boomers). The foundation may have to be quite sturdy to stay in place and survive the ground freezing during the winter, so maybe that could provide some protection in a war zone. If the occupants don't die of asthma attacks the second they enter the cellar, that is.
Central Europe checking in
Elevated concrete foundations as you describe, 95%+ of houses are cinderblock in all load-bearing, and usually most interior, walls with thick glass wool or polystyrene insulation. The latter is more common, probably because it's cheaper and easier to plaster over but I wouldn't know
Roof structure is typically wood (when pitched, doesn't apply to those "cube" houses).
Cellars are common but far from universal, typically some two meters into the ground with smaller ground level windows to allow for some natural light
> European ones have cellars.
This homie hasn’t heard of basements
>poor factory workers
AND I CANT EVEN AFFORD ONE OF THEM NOWADAYS HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
american style suburbs are economically worthless(no business, industry or major infrastructure; first to be evacuated) and tactically indefensible (car centric infrastructure is tank centric infrastructure). A defender would be stupid to hold it, and an attacker wouldnt bother taking it, or would just grind it to the ground with artillery.
I guess thats another reason why american low density suburbs are kinda shit compared to more dense and economically efficient urbs and euro style mixed use suburbs.
its only saving grace during war is that itll be fast to rebuild when it does get grounded because every house is a carbon copy of the other.
north american suburbs are unique in how low density it is with its wide "streets", a massive front and back yard and garage mandated by housing codes, and the prevalence of expensive single unit homes.
Suburbs in other historic countries are denser, use up less land, have many cheaper multiunit homes, are often stacked side by side together and has a tiny front and back yard. also the streets are tiny, often just wide enough for 1.5 lanes
>north american suburbs are unique in how low density it is with its wide "streets", a massive front and back yard and garage mandated by housing codes, and the prevalence of expensive single unit homes.
>Suburbs in other historic countries are denser, use up less land, have many cheaper multiunit homes, are often stacked side by side together and has a tiny front and back yard.
That sounds awful. I think I prefer our generic houses. Even OP's pic looks like crap to me because of the lack of space between homes and no fenced off backyards.
>t. SoCal suburbanite
I wish I was in some rural area back east with even more space, but being city adjacent has its advantages as well. I'd frickin hate to live in a cramped multiplex. I figured the people ridiculing suburban neighborhood layouts were from rural areas, like wood elves gagging at city life like its some sorta dystopian nightmare.
thats fine. I think more options is good. You can have your low density massive suburban house if you can afford it, the problem with north america is that american style suburbs is mandated by law, so there arent any other style of suburbs that are more dense and cheaper to live in that youre allowed to build other than massive apartments. Your options for housing shouldnt just be high rise urban apartment if youre poor vs single unit suburban homes if youre middld class or above. Thats what the missing middle housing crisis is, and its part of the reason housing prices are so fricked in canada, where youre either a renter or a home owner
Personally, I prefer to live in a house where I dont have a massive 30 year mortgage, where i dont have to drive 5-10 min for groceries and 30+ min to work, and where its more friendly for me to walk or bike because why spend money on gas if I dont have to. The only problem with a more urban and dense regions is that im surrounded by out of touch leftist morons, but lets not pretend you cant find them in suburbs either, theyre just more confined cuz you dont see your neighbours in suburbs
Fair enough. I don't have to make the trip to my office at work often and ordering groceries delivered has gotten way easier and cheaper since the 'rona lockdowns, so I'm not too fussed about gas prices. I'm only lightly acquainted with my neighbors and I like it that way. If I wanna get more fresh air I can jog to the nearby park or hang out in my backyard. But yeah I agree, more options is better, not everyone is the same or has the same budget so mandating the same shit for everybody is nonsense.
I do wish I had a basement though, that much is true. Bet it'd be cool in the summer.
>the problem with north america is that american style suburbs is mandated by law
Why lie, troony?
>the problem with north america is that american style suburbs is mandated by law
Anon, this might surprise, but there isn't really any kind of federal zoning laws on the books. Most of this type of thing is determined on the state or local level. As such, there's no law mandating this style of suburb exists in every city in the United States, it's just a tendency for many of them to decide to develop in that way.
It was the result of the combined effort of slumlords, car makers and real state developers since the 1950s, there's nothing organic about US-style sprawling suburbia.
That's why in other countries, "suburbs" are a lot more dense and mixed with commercial buildings.
>That's why in other countries, "suburbs" are a lot more dense and mixed with commercial buildings.
That's a lot of words to say "I live in a store".
World's worst dog.
euros live in commie blocks with no land, no guns and are all poor.
>It was the result of the combined effort of slumlords, car makers and real state developers since the 1950s
schizophrenia
Poor people don't live in urban high rises
>american style suburbs are economically worthless
American suburbs house much more value than all the screeching urbanite leeches like you in the world produce combined.
>and tactically indefensible
Wow, good think there's virtually no way of invading US and they're the most survivable type of housing in a nuclear war.
>car centric infrastructure is tank centric infrastructure
moronic homosexual
>I guess thats another reason why american low density suburbs are kinda shit
Spoken like a true communist subhuman.
>Suburbs in other historic countries are denser, use up less land, have many cheaper multiunit homes, are often stacked side by side together and has a tiny front and back yard. also the streets are tiny, often just wide enough for 1.5 lanes
In other words, europoor standards.
Theres usually no reason to go through a suburb, our country is set up with non-moronic roadways so you can just go past/around the burbs
This suburbs offer little strategic value.
They lack factories, farms or food resources, and don't have the financial, political, or military facilities.
A suburb is a resource desert.
They are basicly just spread out apartment buildings. The only thing of strategic value is the humans themselves. Which are mainly valuable as forced labor or farmed debt slaves.
The consumer products thinly dispersed in them are if low value to nation states.
Where do these kinds of suburbs actually exist? I assume new developments out west? I'm a born New Englandgay so I'm used to houses all looking different but I've lived all around the east coast and they look nothing like this, I only see places like this posted by foreigners
Pretty much anywhere that has lots of available land
literally anything that's been developed since the end of WW2. The original Levittown was in MA IIRC, which was the blue print for this.
Although I'm sure it's much less common in the NE than the Midwest, South and out West.
Florida and Arizona.
aka, anywhere Boomers go to die.
>implying Pasadena isn't a suburb
>Where do these kinds of suburbs actually exist?
Big sprawl cities in the interior U.S., "sunbelt" cities (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Phoenix) which developed rapidly since the 1980s. Oklahoma. Florida. The vastness of them can be mind-blowing and pictures don't do them justice, you see a thousand houses in the picture but this can more or less continue for 40 more miles.
>there are dudes who bought houses in The Woodlands north of Houston for $200k and are now selling them for $500k
I think they benefit from low property taxes in the beginning too, then they cash out and move further out and the cycle repeats itself over again. But I've read cities struggle down the road because the property taxes on the limited stock of single-family homes can't cover the costs later of maintaining or upgrading the infrastructure that was built in a mad rush so suburbs built in the 80s start ghettoizing.
>But I've read
Have you not been to such places? They're dumps.
>. But I've read cities struggle down the road because the property taxes on the limited stock of single-family homes can't cover the costs later of maintaining or upgrading the infrastructure that was built in a mad rush so suburbs built in the 80s start ghettoizing.
This is correct. Suburban style housing developments are huge tax drains because you're laying all that asphault and concrete for roads that serve just a few thousand total people but over a huge area.
It ends up costing a ton in taxes you don't get back because the tax base is so much less dense.
Its only recently that cities are starting to notice the huge red ink present from those types of places. Its a reason you're seeing more mixed mode development in some places (that is to say, 3+ story developments with shops on the first floor) because those can actually come out green on taxes due to the density of development.
Its not that suburbia is impossible, its just that you can't make a sprawling infinite suburb and not eventually butt up against the reality that you can't support a city that way.
Not even close. All of our government funding is being diverted away from infrastructure and into things like "homelessness", "diversity", immigrants and trans-people. If the government took that money and applied it properly, we would have an incredible infrastructure right now.
No. What actually happened was the super rich started being able to avoid taxes through loopholes, and they never returned to paying them.
It is like people keep voting for the party that cuts taxes.
Number one: in 1945 corporations paid about fifty of federal taxes. Now they pay about five percent.
yeah yeah we all played Deus Ex
Playing it for the first time during the Coof was quite the trip
This looks nice. Surprised there isn't a community park or a school tucked in there somewhere, but this looks like a decent cozy suburban area.
>This looks nice. Surprised there isn't a community park or a school tucked in there somewhere, but this looks like a decent cozy suburban area.
Sort of. I imagine this is the school (in box). It just looks like one from the building style with athletic fields next to it. There might be another one just outside of frame. (I'm from the area but the whole region is vast and full of literally millions of people living in suburbs like this so don't know the specific one.) Then there's this creek running through the middle with a walking / hiking trail. The other thing is those can go on for miles as well, cutting through different suburban developments.
No wonder you homosexuals are absolutely terrorized by the idea of going innawoods
We had the same thing in the Uk in 50s-70s with social housing. The same design was built in their hundreds of thousands all over the country, all to the same design. It kept costs down and simplified their construction and maintenance, as everything used the same design, bricks, dimensions, windows and doors. Most were sold off by Thatcher in the 80s though to try to recoup some money as well as cut down on the ever growing maintenance bills. Since then their owners have been customising the shit out of them so they no longer look as uniform. I assume the same building methods where used for these. Mass production does have it's advantages, even though it can look boring and monotonous.
Social housing even in poor 1930s Dublin could look kino; Art Deco flats that still stand.
Link for the pic: https://artdecodublin.blogspot.com/2011/12/social-housing.html
Reminds me of that one episode of the X-files where if you changed anything in your house you'd get raped by a trash monster.
Qrd?
there was an episode of the X-files where if you changed anything in your house you'd get raped by a trash monster.
One single thermobaric bomb drop can wipe out all of those plywood houses.
there's no reason to conduct operations in a suburb, unless you have intel about a particular house being involved in the opposition, in which case you would target just that house
otherwise, you would just occupy the area with checkpoints and patrols to monitor people going to work/errands. People can't just live in their house forever. Or if they attempt to, then they aren't really harming anyone by doing so.
pretty sure I have seen fights in Ukraine in what used to suburbs, it's mostly just foundations left at this point though, honestly any structure isn't going to survive a modern battlefield very long.
Pretty much this. Most of these developments have only one or two exits to an arterial road, easy to contain if you need to control the population.
>ignorant burger take on "europe" like it is some kind of a uniform entity
Ironic.
I've been to Germany, my friend has family in Braunschweig and a small town near there called Wittmar, and that region of Germany the towns and cities could've been clones of any American flyover state.
You're like the little israelite york cousin from South Park who nasally whines "the air is so dry out here!"
You sound insufferable
fake, you'd never see a child from an F150
Niedersachsen is a complete shithole and only representative for areas which weren’t properly rebuilt to the historical original.
I'm not familiar with that placename, but again the area around Wolfenbutel and Wittmar was nice, and my comment about the similarity to American flyover towns was not meant as an insult at all. My friend's greatuncle's house on the south side of Braunschweig was extremely similar to my greatuncle's house in Boise, Idaho; similar cleanliness, neighborhood style and people (well-manicured lawns and friendly but private older people milling about).
The only area in the vicinity that was a bit ghetto was the other greatuncle who lived in Wittmar, he tooks us down the road to where the old East/West Germany border was, to show the difference in the towns there.
Really besides the traffic in Berlin and Munich nothing was too bad, those towns were nice generally, the most ghetto I'd say was maybe Liepzig but even that one wasn't too bad (some smoking hot clubbing girls were at the hostel there).
He's a retired Ulvade, TX police dog who emigrated to France in a disgraceful retirement.
Why was this post removed? Plenty of worse actual shitposts in the thread removed, this was a good rundown on the Phoenix metro area's growth the last 40 years (and considering it's the style of suburban sprawl often photographed in complaints about American suburbanism, was very relevant to the thread subject).
I like German beer
yes.
Niedersachsen is like Kensas.
they dont have mountains, hills, river or anything. is all just a giant field for wheat, potatoes or pig farms.
Bavaria looks more like Montana or Oregon.
The Harz mountains were pretty and reminded me of the Black Hills. One of my friend's relatives had a really nice house in Wittmar on the hill, you could go out the backyard, cross some railtracks, and you were up in these pretty wooded hills with some old stone ruins and an old watchtower, it was pretty neat.
RAMIREZ, DO EVERYTHING
In the U.S. houses are all made of wood, bricks and/or linoleum and often without basements. The houses are basically useless as any kind of fortification in a war, and will just provide cover. The frontline would be a standard trench / bunker line dug out of the rows of lawns and green space, connecting whatever basements may exist. The roads anywhere near the front would be dead zones. But honestly the actual shape of the war would depend on what the opposing forces look like, ie, military, militia, local homeowners, starving urbanites, etc. In a serious war the place would be burnt to the ground in very short order.
>no basements
that's a west coast thing owing to the frequent earthquakes, practically every house east of the rockies has a basement even underwater states like Louisiana and Florida
>bomb it all
this is only a good idea if your intent is to exterminate the population of America or else completely destroy its capability to ever wage war again (both of which are tied to the other) so that tends to exclude any probable adversary that isn't the harvesters from Independence Day; I assumed OP was talking about the US government waging war on its own people, not an attempt by a foreign country to invade the US which is an even more implausible scenario than Independence Day
Florida man here.
I don't have a basement. I don't know anybody with a basement. Ground water is too high for one.
And people say Floridians aren't smart...
if they were smart, they'd have illegal basement fish ponds and sell caviar
>Florida
BS
Basements are uncommon in a lot of southern states. You need to dig the foundation below the frost line. Go far enough north and you need to dig enough that it doesn't take that much more effort to just make a basement. But in warmer climates you don't need to dig very deep at all, and in turn a lot of builders just don't make basements because it would be an extra expense.
Yeah it's mostly frost/ground freeze. You need to dig a certain depth below the frost line or else the house will shift, but it hardly ever freezes on the west coast, even in Seattle, so a basement isn't strictly necessary.
Earthquakes aren't a big deal as long as you anchor the house to the foundation properly and use the correct formula for the concrete. My parents' house in Seattle has a basement and it has been through plenty of major earthquakes in the last 75 years and the foundation is just fine.
Basements are extremely rare if not just flat out non-existent in the Carolinas, Georgia, Alabama, etc. So idk what you're smoking
>even underwater states like Louisiana and Florida
Black person I'm from Virginia and used to live in a neighborhood where the high tide line was in the fricking street. This is a fat lie.
>often without basements.
Bullshit. Unless you happen to live somewhere with a very high water table or are in the desert.
as someone in the north, I was surprised to learn that many, if not the majority, of houses in the south do not have a basement these days, even in tornado alley. In the north it's a pretty obvious choice because you need somewhere to put the central heating and fuel tank, and the water pipes have to be buried pretty deep so it's easier for them to come into the basement. But I think in the south it's not such an obvious benefit
>as someone in the north, I was surprised to learn that many, if not the majority, of houses in the south do not have a basement these days, even in tornado alley.
Here in North Texas it's because of the clay soils, or so I hear. Other areas it's the water table. It can be done but holy hell it's so expensive you're better off with an above-ground concrete "tornado room" / bunker. There are above-ground storm shelters which some companies make.
If you ever drive across Texas and need to take a leak you'll also run across these well-funded rest stops that will have tornado bunkers built into them. There's one in the town of Jarrell which got absolutely wiped by a monster tornado in the 90s and shredded everything (including people) above ground and I'm not sure even a bunker would've survived it. The rest stop has an exhibit about it.
Also think this is part of the reason, much of Texas used to be an under an ocean. You're basically living on the bed of an ancient ocean which created the heavy clay soil. This absorbs water and swells in wet times, and it shrinks and cracks in droughts. That's why foundation repair companies do well here (and makes building basements a b***h).
Nicely put fellow North Texbro. I’ve wanted to have a basement like I did in the Midwest but it just wouldn’t be worth the effort here
It is all about cheap mass development on the 1980s california model. Digging a basement and shoring it up while building and keeping rain out is probably a third more work per home, maybe double. Compared to making a massive flat level or graded area all at once and then constructing all homes at the same time and in the same stages.
Yeah, there's no reason to dig when you have plenty of space anyway
>Yeah, there's no reason to dig when you have plenty of space anyway
LMAO I got this reference, I guess I am old.
> often without basements
Bullshit. That’s true in California because of earthquakes and near the coast for water. That’s a very small fraction of homes.
>The frontline would be a standard trench / bunker line dug out of the rows of lawns and green space, connecting whatever basements may exist.
A smart move may be to dig *under* the concrete pad while heaping stones on top of it inside the house. That way you would get some decent protection against artillery fire. But I guess its just a concrete pad with no rebar and its very thin...?
People who shit on lightweight construction are such babies
can't afford babies because of ac/heating costs. Also no free time to get a gf because stuck in traffic :^)
Imagine paying money to live in a dog kennel lmao
we let our dogs inside the house because dogs are friends not food, chang
>t.loses entire block to a discarded cigerette
Lmao
>america house bad because uhhhh region-specific natural disasters!
>Houses made of wood only burn in certain locations
Lol
One guy could post up with a .50 and literally shoot through entire blocks
Are these things you actually worry about?
I mean, maybe build sturdier houses in those regions.
Or don't I honestly couldn't give a shit.
Euros can't conceptualize how big the US is. It's why they need to compare a continent to a single nation.
Saw this fire with my own eyes when I was a kid, it was wild.
t. ruralgay who lives in a drafty pos with several broken cars parked out front
Better a dog kennel than a rat hole.
Invaders run out of petroleum in the California desert and dehydrate waiting for their supply chain to unfrick itself.
The CNG sinks half of the PLAN and the other half turns around and goes home. The invaders are now our problem and the CCP disavows them.
>how would you even set up a defensive position
Seems to me that subdivisions would make for excellent defensive combat, as there is all kinda places to take cover and fire from while also providing all kinda routes for maneuver, both to attack and retreat.
My brain is telling me that that's in Dubai
There's a chance it could be Phoenix Arizona, they're the only city in America with suburban sprawl that extensive and deep. But I've never actually seen a double-circle like that before, so it might well be UAE.
Sun City Arizona
You cannot put a city on the Sun.
I feel as if I'd eventually go insane and start murdering people if I lived in a place like that.
why?
There's nothing to do in surburbs and you have to drive half a decade to get anywhere worthwhile.
Arizona suburbs can be pretty bad. The only saving grace are seasonal decorations
Sun City is essentially a giant retirement home/hospice
>t. knower (my grandparents lived there)
And none of those buildings are grocery or restaurants, huh?
yes everyone who lives in that city starves to death
Absolute perfection. The perfect way of life! If only the mood enhancers and pacifiers could be put into the drinking water. Life would be an Eden.
You're getting cover and concealment mixed up. It's like hiding behind a sheet metal car door and thinking it'll stop bullets when even common handgun rounds will pass all the way through most areas.
Not that it makes a huge difference, but many newer houses in the metro area shown aren't even fully sheathed with OSB. They'll OSB the shear walls and rigid foam the rest. That means just one sheet of drywall and a thin layer of exterior siding/stucco is the only thing 'protecting' you inside. Combine that with an area that's 99% no basements and you've got virtually zero ballistic protection.
Some artillery or large cal machine guns on mechanized infantry would absolutely shred a place like this.
That whole picture is 100% CONCEALMENT, suburbia has zero hard points
cardboard houses so 20mm SPAAG kills everyone
It would be the most kino maneuver warfare of all time since most likely those house can not withstand any artillery barrage unlike or bombing campaign
Tanks stuck in basements.
why are you making all these urbanite seethe threads across the site?
commieblock europoor cityslicker sees a building owned by a private citizen and shits himself
>marvel at the cardboard hovel daddy bank lets me make a mess in!
no
>sour grapes: the post
yes
>yfw daddy bank kicks (You) out of the hovel
It's not as simple as that anon.
>capitol: stormed
>wages: garnished
>hovel: foreclosed
>wife: blacked
In your vitamin-d deficient digital world. Irl no, not so much.
>chang's law
>wah waah muh bank
you're living in the equivalent of your parents' basement
the bank can't kick you out of a house you own you goddamn moronic renter serf
It's genuinely impossible to be insulted by something this moronic, anon.
It's okay
We have stores too except we dont live in them.
One day USA will recover mixed zones
Depends. Assuming it's antihomosexuals fricking around in a small town type shit, what is the minimum caliber required to punch a hole in picrel?
5.56 would probably knock a hole in it. if not just step up to a common .308 or 30-06. you'd probably have to put a lot of holes in them to really drain at any appreciable rate.
Why is it so consistent that Euroc**ts are so arrogantly wrong/moronic about things they hate the US for?
they live on an overcrowded continent that destroyed all of its nature 500 years ago, that has been destroyed by war twice over. Cut them some slack. They're like our little brother that has to have a tantrum once in a while
Their governments tell them they are god's gift to the world and everything they do is perfect and flawless 24/7 from birth. Their media constantly runs Florida Man tier stories about the US to further puff them up.
>how would you even set up a defensive position or
How would you set up a defensive position inside a house made of sawdust and glue? And they lack basements as well. One drone + molotov wienertail is going to burn your defensive position to the ground.
Fed troops moving would just sit inside their Bradleys and crush the houses underneath their tracks, since there are no basements its a no risk thing.
>a house made of sawdust and glue
Some men are born before thier time.
Love these threads where americans get their panties in a bunch and inevitably showcase their inferiority complex, ignorance and stupidity.
Yur just a stupid head!
You "people" are moronic. Scratch the outer veneer of worldliness europeans put out and you'll find a pathetic moron
love those wars where Europe inevitably gets pummeled and we have to bail their asses out yet again. Can't wait for Russia to invade so the cycle begins anew
every accusation is a projection
>every accusation is a projection
Wait, wut? You mean all this time I... I mean my friend...
Military is looking for entry point, path, junction, high ground, and cover to their objectives. New cookie cutter suburb are flat cul de sacs or 2 entrances, with no tree cover, surrounded by occasional woods but mostly artificial pond and ditches, provides little to the passing military just as they intended for non residents.
It also provides little to the defender because the street is >3 american lane wide, exta wide with lawn and drive way, no trees on each side cuz neighours argue over leaves, roots and shade and building are slope topped 2 story tall mad e out of wood, open for arial observation. The only good thing is you can survive some bombing in the concrete basement, assuming the bomb don't come crashing through the roof.
Unlike 3+ story tall brick flat roof on a narrow street that can freely plunge fire where armored vehicle has limited fire arc and gun barrel clearance, would risk being burried and stuck if crashing into the building, and the street that can barely pass 2 civ vehicles.
The population would be in great pain if they lost access to road and shopping junction.
The defense will be more like ATGM, sniper and manpad team(all 2 men) if they can blend in. For armored vehicle, crashing into building may save you from cluster munition, if you didn't land right on basement
Out of curiosity how would you attack/defend something like picrel without outright leveling the buildings?
I am a moron
Is this Lebanon?
South-eastern Slovakia
So not that far off, in terms of living conditions
Looks pretty defendable from the height, flat roof and windows and more can be created if they blow hole through it.
Some of the buildings are also very connected allows for more elastic defence. However not much so between rows. With the right engineer, crane, zipline maybe used to improve supply flow or even passing personnel up and down and between rows. i think there should also be some street drain network that connects building. It would be a tough cookie to chew if defender can hold up their will with continued supply.
I will assume the location isn't a big city based on how much tree in the back ground, and no road around it like most city that has enough traffic.
However the background forest provided so much cover that allows defender to provide support and relief or attacker to amass as staging area. The elevation may be higher too giving massive advantage to cannon on the mountain. Controlling these forest would be the first ticket for the attacker. Defender should watch out for that with doppler radar and other more specialized surveillance that can see through the canopy.
In higher octane scenario, smoke up the whole town on approach to see who has more grenadiers. I doubt this town is that important.
>I will assume the location isn't a big city based on how much tree in the back ground, and no road around it like most city that has enough traffic
It's at the periphery of a large city (by Slovak standards anyway, regional capital, 200k populaiton), circled in red in picrel. The pic in
only shows a portion of it.
>Euros assblasted about Burgers
>Burgers assblasted about Euros
>Ivan Patelovich chuckling because he derailed another potentially decent thread
Is it really that hard to ignore shit-stirring trolls?
>it's the vatniks
Hello schlomo
>meanwhile, the 130 post thread about supplying shells to Ukraine 404's for no reason
Shoot a jannie for Christ
This is why I don't visit any thread with less than 150 posts, anything before that is gambling on whether or not that effortpost will actually submit before the mod team decides their chosen side in the thread is losing
it's fun effort posting in those, because you know you BTFOed them when the thread gets nuked.
All federally constructed overpasses are designed to be blown up beyond use using only around 20 M112s at each entrance/exit ramp. War would realistically never reach. Do you know how many helicopters the DLA has anyways?
The government will Katrina you before you even have a chance to put a major dent into them, so be prepared for that.
>All federally constructed overpasses are designed to be blown up beyond use using only around 20 M112s at each entrance/exit ramp. W
Citation required.
>all this space between houses
>nobody growing anything
>no trees
What HVAC salesman heaven looks like.
Space doesn't exist merely to be filled with things Hans, it has its own value; such as providing a clean and safe area for children and pets to play
what if you built communal spaces where the children could play together? A "park".
And you could even design your neighborhood so it would be a short walk to those "parks".
maybe also put a small grocery nearby and a restaurant or two.
Or you could just leave the space free and open instead of forcing the cattle coop you desire onto everyone else, you dumb shit.
free and open for what?
Ah yes, trees. Freedoms worst enemies!
You wouldn't, it'd be a death trap.
>Hardly any trees, and the few there are short shitty palms
>No barriers between property, no one has a decent back yard
>Every house the same dull grey or beige
Jesus Christ what a fricking ugly neighborhood. This is what you Euros think US suburbs are like??? Thank God only the idea of us has to live forever in the bleak prison that is your head.
All those 1 story homes likely means that's a retirement communit anyyway.
That's all they ever build for suburban homes in my state, and most of the south for that matter. There's two neighborhoods in my town of 25k with two story houses, and one of them it's only 50/50 because the original developer went bankrupt during the recession
Personally, I invite foreign invasion of my local suburb. I'm interested to test the whole "torture doesn't work" thing on enemy prisoners, and I'm interested to see if the "crucify through the wrists" method is actually superior. We've still got a lot of telephone poles in my neck of the woods so we won't even have to cut fresh wood for the examples.
Imagine being the army group tasked with taking over Houston, you'll run out of fuel before you make it across the city even if you don't encounter resistance.
Any offensive through suburban areas would be hellish and extremely slow. Burning everything down or blowing up the houses wouldn't actually create flat open terrain, there would still be plenty of cover for infantry to hide in and ambush armored vehicles, and if you burned everything you'd also have to deal with smoke and the fire making it hard to identify targets with your thermals. Driving through them with armored vehicles is just asking for trouble, since you'd have to button up and the debris would block your vision ports.
just burn it and then drive around?
American suburbs have nothing of tactical or strategix importance in them, and it would take much to flatten those cardboard neighborhoods anyways.
Once I grew out of my "public transportation" phase and bought a house in the suburbs. I fricking love it, peace and quiet and shitty neighbors are forced by HOA to cut their fricking jungle grass.
>cut off the flow of gasoline
>everyone quickly starves
Settle down there, Lord Humongous
imagine being okay with commuting hours for basically every single basic service just to own a handful squaremeters of backyard where you can't do anything anyway because of the HOA.
this is why subdivisions (specifically those, not necessarily suburbs themselves) are the most cucked places to live, it's the worst of both worlds.
I'd rather live in an apartment in the actual city or in a rural area where I actually have land to do stuff on. But a tiny postage stamp lawn you still have to go through the trouble of maintaining, but can't really do anything with, is the most cucked way to live.
The fundamental problem with suburbs is that they are subsidized like hell - paid by the urban population. Once the suburb population would actually pay their real share on infrastructure it would instantly mean the end of the American dream.
Europe, with decades of their own car-centric urban planning approach, is now mostly moving to selfsustaining mixed zones.
>The fundamental problem with suburbs is that they are subsidized like hell - paid by the urban population
Urban areas are subsidized like hell - paid by the property, fuel and labor taxes of the productive suburb population and directly fed into the bloated Black person hive with equally worthless designers, HR and other make-believe management jobs.
So this is the american "individualism"? Copy/paste houses in the suburbs? Implessive.
Obnoxious communist troony shill
Shut the frick up, mentally ill subhuman, the adults are talking
>Some artillery or large cal machine guns on mechanized infantry would absolutely shred a place like this
This can be easily seen in images of rural Ukraine, which seems to have a mix of brick and mortar structures and others made of wood or equally flimsy stuff. Both get fricked up by shelling and gunfire, but the brick and mortar buildings last longer and give better shelter and cover.
There's probably WW2 images proving the same point.
You're not an adult since you've never even had a job, troony.
You’re the one bringing up trannies. Do you like them or something?
>buzzwords buzzwords buzzwords
lmao are you even human
Looking at the war in Ukraine makes me think most combat would take place in small irrelevant towns near bigger ones.
Here's a town that was hit by a tornado. Pretend that's a Russian fortification instead and all the debris is their litter.
>its the same urbanites cyclist seethe thread they've been spamming across multiple boards with the exact same image
I'm sorry that you rage at the mere thought of someone owning any amount of land, a home and having the ability to get in their vehicle and travel across the country on a whim. literally, unironically go and touch grass. real grass, not the well manicured communal 'park' that's surrounded on all sides by a concrete and glass hellscape
>rupee currency icon
seems pretty pricey
no wonder you see a family of 4 on a scooter
Car ownership and its use are also subsidized.
There's a reason civilization comes from "city". Modern industrial nation states do not really need suburban and rural dwellers. You only exist because it's convenient to real state investors, car makers, and politicians that want a power base to back them up for their power games in big cities.
Everything else, like agricultural production and manufacturing could be solved by poor cheap inmigrant workers and company towns.
There's nothing wrong with wanting a quiet life in the suburbs if that's your preference, you can afford it, and you can't deal with the stress of a big city, but you're a delusional parasite in the same level of thirdies and their we wuz kangs bullshit if you believe suburbs aren't subsidized. Know your place and shut the frick up.
And BTW, when wars happen, suburbs are razed and become no man's land while cities are defended and besieged. Plenty of examples in the last hundred years of that.
>And BTW, when wars happen, suburbs are razed and become no man's land while cities are defended and besieged
More moronic fantasies. Cities starve and become depopulated while suburbs survive easier.
>Cities starve and become depopulated while suburbs survive easier.
Suburban prepper fantasies. People in remote rural towns can survive supporting each other if they're far from the action. But not in a total or civil war. Suburbs are too big and inefficient to sustain themselves and are doomed by their own design, so they are sacrificed first to exchange space for time while cities are fortified and defended.
Both Yugoslavia in the 90s and now Ukraine prove all this beyond doubt.
>/pol/tard seething and projection
You're a weak loser living on handouts from more productive people like me.
>Suburbs are too big and inefficient to sustain themselves and are doomed by their own design
They are much less big and inefficient than the urban anthills that get squashed with thousands dead at every chance.
>so they are sacrificed first to exchange space for time while cities are fortified and defended.
Nobody will defend you and your Black person cattle, scum.
>Both Yugoslavia in the 90s and now Ukraine prove all this
Literally the opposite.
>/pol/tard seething and projection
/n/ troony cope and deflection
>You're a weak loser living on handouts from more productive people like me.
You haven't worked on a real job a day in your life. All your activities are funded by the people who actually benefit the society while you're just a worthless shill that shits up other boards on laundered bezos bucks
Also, the cope fantasy where US is being invaded and its cities besieged can only exist in the deranged mind of an urbanist welfare leech.
go leave moron, you stick like a sore thumb, you don't belong among genuine gun nuts and military nerds
Repeating the same moronic bullshit over and over doesn't work here /misc/Black person, go back to your contaiment cesspool.
Also this thread is about how would "a hypothetical war play out in burgerland suburbia". It doesn't matter if it would be an invasion or civil war. The question is about how that type of terrain fares in an armed conflict, and the answer it's clear: Badly.
They're speed bumps at best against any type of organized military force. Even the russians in Ukraine were able to bypass or neutralize those places before being stopped at the gates of more dense cities.
Yugoslavia is full of the shallow graves of naive idiots that didn't want to leave behind their hard earned patch of land and cozy homes during their civil war.
>Repeating the same moronic bullshit over and over doesn't work here
Get out then, troony
>Also this thread is about how would "a hypothetical war play out in burgerland suburbia".
And it's a moronic bait for trannies like you to shill your script.
>Even the russians in Ukraine were able to bypass or neutralize those places before being stopped at the gates of more dense cities.
That's not what happened at all.
>Yugoslavia is full of the shallow graves of naive idiots that didn't want to leave behind their hard earned patch of land and cozy homes during their civil war.
More yugoslav city dwellers died than rural or suburban ones, by far.
As a neutral onlooker, this anon appears to be winning this argument.
I'm not sharing walls with people who are not my kin or close friends. Many other people agree with this.
Suburbs need infrastructure and supplies the same as cities do, and is more spread out than any material stores in urban regions, so can be cut off and restricted and harder to defend. I dislike urbanism and enjoy surburban life as a good middle ground between city services access and rural isolation, but your idea that suburbs would hold out like islands in an invasion is the fantasy.
>/pol/tard seething and projection
>You're a weak loser living on handouts from more productive people like me.
Ironic. You claim to recognize projection in greentext, but then your text does just that.
>Suburbs need infrastructure and supplies the same as cities do, and is more spread out than any material stores in urban regions, so can be cut off and restricted and harder to defend
Actually it's much harder to cut off the suburbs, they are better supplied, have more space and materials to scavenge and more spread out so unless you outright level them all you're going to need more people patrolling them and manning checkpoints. Moderate shelling is also less damaging because the density is so small. You hit an apartment block and it half collapses and you've just killed or sentenced to death a whole block of suburbs worth of people.
>your idea that suburbs would hold out like islands in an invasion
It's not my idea. They'd be hit hard, but they're much less deadly in a besieged city in any conditions short of genocide.
>Actually it's much harder to cut off the suburbs, they are better supplied, have more space and materials to scavenge and more spread out so unless you outright level them all you're going to need more people patrolling them and manning checkpoints.
They aren't better supplied because it's decentralized supply. You don't know how cooperative each neighbor will be or how supplied they are, with possibly half or more of the individual locations being a supply detriment for the area as a whole. The sources of replenishment are also more spread out, so while harder for the OPFOR to consolidate, they are harder for the local defenders to defend as well.
Also considering many subdivisions usually only have one or two road exits to an arterial street, the containment for checkpoints isn't as bad as you make out, with the exception of locals on foot. But since we've already established the spread out nature of the surburban area, control and moderation of vehicle traffic is the only worry, and can be consolidated by checkpoints at a couple main arterial intersections.
If things get a little more hectic, you could start blocking off more side roads to vehicle traffic using the husk of Clyde's Silverado after he was glassed trying to defiantly run a checkpoint.
>That's why in other countries, "suburbs" are a lot more dense and mixed with commercial buildings.
They are mixed with commercial buildings here in America, too. There are 48 different State polities on the continental United States, and those have dozens of individual counties and hundreds of municipalities, all of which are the ones that have the absolute say in how suburban neighborhoods are developed.
Why do people take one example of something and universally apply it to the entirety of America (while paradoxically implying they are the educated and enlightened ones)?
/pol/tards are seething losers and parasites, it comes with being part of that place.
For example, this subhuman here
cannot stop repeating moronic buzzwords and lying just to "win" the argument when even people that like suburbs like you agree that they're suboptimal to put it midly in case of armed conflict.
>Modern industrial nation states do not really need suburban and rural dwellers.
>Everything else, like agricultural production and manufacturing could be solved by poor cheap inmigrant workers and company towns.
We're going to have to shoot you buttholes sooner or later, aren't we? I just wanted to be left alone and raise chickens and go fishing and hobnob with the neighbors, but nooo....
>Everything else, like agricultural production and manufacturing could be solved by poor cheap inmigrant workers and company towns.
Slavery is not a competitive model in modern economics.
How has a thread with an interesting topic turned into seethe?
Are mutts really this insecure?
If you want to know what European buildings turn into when war comes look at cean, aachen Warsaw, coloign, Berlin and Stalingrad.
Sorry your shill campaing fell flat, OP. Keep trying and maybe in a few attempts someone will throw you some bone in response to your bait.
>megacorp offices and Black person ghettos are totally the same as the centers of trade and manufacture of old.
yeah actually, lmao
Everything would burn down to nothing pretty quick.
Google apartment complexes nearby and you'll find more. Look up what the previous hot new place for everyone to move to was that nobody care about anymore and you'll find even more. Then go to the old ghettos downtown and you'll find either whatever replaced hipsters or sanitized corporate retail.
Yeah and in 25 years they will be complaining about the gentrification of it as it becomes a hip place for yuppies to move into again. That's the way things go.
Enjoy the cardboard mcmansions get torn down and a eco-friendly 5 family unit made out of 3d printed human shit blocks gets put up after the land was sold for $3 million (which your Aunt bought in 1980 for $60k)
>there's nothing to do in the suburbs
>he says in the age of the fricking Internet
>I live in such a neighborhood and the trees planted back then have grown in some cases into huge oaks. A Thai immigrant turned his little suburban lawn into a farm which supplies his son's restaurant, and a little lawn like that is way more productive than you might think on that amount of space. I half-joked to him that if there was ever a big crisis then he would do best out of everyone in the neighborhood.
People forget victory gardens during the war. The problem is that a lot of the more recent suburbs, the ones made from the 1980s and more recent, the ridiculous 3000 sq-ft homes take most of the land, and also a lot of places have shitty HOA that prevents farming and things like that (chickens can especially be problematic, and often roosters aren't allowed for noise issues). But yes square foot gardening styles can be extremely productive, although they do require pretty heavy upkeep and maintenance to maintain.
The main problem is everyone who constantly criticises suburbia always point out the fresh-built tracts out in the SW desert which don't have the agricultural potential either and place the limitations on those specific sites to the concept as a whole.
>People forget victory gardens during the war.
I forgot too. That hadn't occurred to me but this guy really made one, and he built a drip irrigation system using PVC pipes. No HOA in this neighborhood but there are some of those around here.
>there's nothing to do in the suburbs
>he says in the age of the fricking Internet
wow amazing I can waste away in front of a screen all day long instead of doing cool stuff in real life how fun
You will stream things you own virtualy on services using accounts that go bust or get suspended, while they reserve the right to remove or modify said content at will like when it doesn't meet current woke standards or the soundtrack license of the iconic time period flick license has expired (don't worry the iconic song you relate to on a movie you own has been replaced with generic music you have never heard.)
I remember 4k stuff owned on netflix that reverted to 1080p.
Or when your kid (they insist it was thier friend that was over) gets your entire account banned on a gaming service by saying a bad word and all the games you supposedly owned are gone.
This will be your main form of entertainment and is why it is okay you live somewhere with nothing but every inch of space turned into homes, a tiny token park every dog is taken to urinate in, and a ice cream shop a liqor store and a bad pizza shop.
But enjoying life is childish anyways, just apply yourself more at work.
>Or when your kid (they insist it was thier friend that was over) gets your entire account banned on a gaming service by saying a bad word and all the games you supposedly owned are gone.
You know the woke can never ban model train sets.
>But enjoying life is childish anyways, just apply yourself more at work.
This but unironically. I've been working 60 hours a week recently, from home, and I am actually way happier. Almost no gaming or doomscrolling. It's, amazing.
as a yourapoor that has lived in a suburb in the south for a few years.
if you don't know the burb it can be kind of confusing at first. A lot of the houses are more or less identical aside from what ever the owner has put on his lawn/ curtains ect. So I'd imagine that directing fire might be a bit harder especially if your directing fire down a road.
If you remove the street signs it would also be surprisingly hard to navigate just on visuals because aren't any land marks or things that stand out. So runners, supplies medivac ect getting lost might be a thing. GPS would obviously solve that but in the modern competitive EW and SINT landscape. You can't be sure that you can just radio in your coordinates or that you would even want too.
While the walls at least where I lives would struggle to stop a 22. You do have a solid concrete slab for a foundation. If you had the time to dig under it you'd be pretty safe.
As an attacker just set up over watch and maybe burn the homes closes to the roads, don't bother clearing them out. As the defender just fall back to a more defensible location.
If there is one thing america has that we don't it large stretches of wild and farm land. You could conduct a better defense from there. Better lines of sight, more natural terrain features to hug/dig into. If they get to the burbs you fricked up several times in the last hundred or so miles.
That's good insight on the navigation and lines of sight that wasn't really brought up before. But you did bring up (as others have) the lack of hard cover the buildings give so invading force suppressive fire would probably just go into an area without the need for much accuracy, depending on what collateral damage restrictions the invading force has.
I agree it'd be stupid to move in and clear out, best bet would be to control the main arterial roads around the subdivisions, find the main road access intersections and place checkpoints there, find the primary supermarket and and set up a CP there and and if local utilities still work broadcast whatever demands for the populace, with focus on restricting vehicle traffic and keeping an eye on large groups. Then wait for the local citizens to voluntarily come out and submit and check them out, get intel, and either allow them back to their current homes and give them passes or whatever for their jobs if control of the area is at that point, or move them up the chain to the units that are dealing with the citizens of the land you're occupying.
If trouble brews and you have to respond going into a subdivision, get paper maps and a solid briefing and mission plan so the forces moving in will be able to extract if necessary, and/or just glass the development if that is viable to your political needs or your rules of engagement.
>They already live in ze pod
These houses are made of cardboard and paper mache. Just drive a tank or IFV straight through it, or firebomb it. The real danger is gonna be fighting through the densely built financial centers with tall buildings where it's all concrete, glass and steel.
You're armored vehicles are now stuck in an 8 foot deep concrete pit, partially covered with rubble and getting anything flammable from the garden shed poured on it by angry locals.
The vast majority of these houses don't have basements on them.
stupid question here:
could u launch a nuclear strike if u're behind the launch key? who're the kind of people who hold the keys at nuclear missile silos?
Yes, but two people need to turn the key unless you're British and then the only failsafe is not letting unreliable people be around nukes.
The launch is conducted by air force or navy officers. The air force guys aren't much different from other AF officers (gay furries) while the navy guys are Submariners (legally insane)
Suburbs specifically like in OPs pick only exist in Florida, Texas, and California.... suburban warfare in the u.s. would look identical to the urban warfare we've seen in Ukraine, mostly due to similar building materials
In a service economy, what is even worth defending other than critical infastructure that keeps people alive like water treatment plants and power stations? Oh you took over some office buildings and mcdonalds? Who gives a frick.
>How would a hypothetical war play out in burgerland suburbia?
The closest thing you'll ever get are snow-related altercations.
anon, those 'houses' are basically matchwood and polystyrene. A bomb will have double the area of effectiveness and what doesn't get big bad wolf blowing it down is going to burn like a fricker.
suburb houses offer no defensive value besides visual obstruction
you cannot use plaster and foamboard as any sort of hard cover
it's tactically more like a artificial shrubland than a proper urbanized area
They'll be bypassed, no one can defend plywood houses with wide open spaces in all directions, mw2 was a video game. Maybe you'll see some armored vehicle actions near the highway.
I actually read some books on this topic
No, you didn't
It would be like nothing the world has ever seen, senpai... Turrible.
not poor suburb enjoyer reporting for duty.
Help, I live there and painted my door burnt sienna, but the tone is slightly different than the hoa approved paint brand of burnt sienna that costs 4x more and only comes in a gallon or more and has been out of stock for 6 months.
Now I am being fined more than my ammo budget of several months and probably won't be able to shoot again till fall.
Merica!
you can defeat most American homes with bottle rockets.
commieblocks would be an upgrade for millions of americans
suburbanites are such unbearable homosexuals.
at least urban areas and rural areas serve a purpose.
I live in the suburbs and pictures like this depress me
>70% of our country shouldn't live like this, so much of this beautiful country has been ruined by cheap matchstick housing developments like this
I dream of the day non-Whites are removed from this country and most Americans can move back into the city and we can demolish these monstrosities
It's new development dipshit. All those trees grow.