Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 400 posts

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#211

Post by colordrops »

tomohawk wrote: post #203
NotAmazin wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forgot to mention Israel's aggression on adjacent countries Lebanon and Palestine. Would Israel's constant belligerence start a war?

I'm not aware of Israel making it a matter of national policy to annihilate Iran or any other country. However, that is Iran's stated policy, and what they've said they'll do when they get nukes. https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2018/04/21/Iranian-g... Iran is training proxies in Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine to attack Israel. And that's what they're doing. They just launched a missile barrage, the largest eve…

> I'm not aware of Israel making it a matter of national policy to annihilate Iran

You jest. That's the centerpiece of their foreign policy.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#212

Post by raprp »

tomohawk wrote: post #198
wpietri wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I'd add that it need only be a solution to the person who can start the war. Authoritarian leaders find fights with external enemies extremely useful to quash dissent. Given the global drift toward authoritarianism and nationalism, and especially given how the world's largest military is in the hands of an authoritarian, I think the risk for war is disturbingly high.

Was Obama an authoritarian? What about Bush? What about Clinton (Bill)? The previous few presidents got the US involved in lots of stupid wars. This president has expressly said he doesn't want to do that and has avoided it.

With John Bolton around don't keep your hopes up. Iran's humanitarian invasion is just around the corner.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#213

Post by GauntletWizard »

colordrops wrote: post #211
tomohawk wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not aware of Israel making it a matter of national policy to annihilate Iran or any other country. However, that is Iran's stated policy, and what they've said they'll do when they get nukes. https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2018/04/21/Iranian-g... Iran is training proxies in Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine to attack Israel. And that's what they're doing. They just launched a missile barrage, the largest eve…

> I'm not aware of Israel making it a matter of national policy to annihilate Iran You jest. That's the centerpiece of their foreign policy.

Asking the world to dethrone and delegitimize a country - even without the context of Iran's posture towards them - is different from genocide, which is Iran's posture, yes.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#214

Post by simonebrunozzi »

jeffdavis wrote: post #29

What's the point of war in the modern world? Gain land/people? If there's a thriving economy there, war will probably change that quickly. If there's no thriving economy, what's the point? You could try to exploit the people/resources there, but the profits in that seem (at least compared to a world power) pretty thin. Unskilled labor and unimproved land are just not worth what they used to be. Specific resources mig…

Good point, but counterpoint is: assets.

Gold. Credit. Mines. Water, forests. Strategic positions.

E.g. I wouldn't be surprised if China has considered invading Mongolia, potentially worth trillions of US$ in minerals alone.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#215

Post by A2017U1 »

daxorid wrote: post #174
turc1656 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

as TeMPOraL and Erik816 mentioned, it's not just the increase in population that you get the impression the food supply is more fragile. In fact that probably has very little to do with it. It's more of the just-in-time aspect of the supply chain that all the supermarkets and other food producers/sellers utilize. It is done for efficiency to maximize profit. It applies to all food products, but especially with perish…

It's not just supermarkets. For most of recent history in the West, it's been fairly normal for homes to maintain a larder, root cellar, pantry, or other long-term food storage as a buffer against both economic and supply-related hardships. Prudently doing so in the modern era, however, is a fairly surefire way to get branded a crazy prepper. And supply chain buffers at home are becoming even shorter with the advent…

I used to keep a weeks worth of water, noodles/pasta, canned goods. Would rotate it out every 3 months and buy the same.

Despite the government advocating people have 3 days supply and numerous natural disasters where stores empty in hours, my flatmate and friends thought I was absolutely insane.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#216

Post by everdev »

dwiel wrote: post #110
everdev wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A counterpoint would be examining each country's idea of "acceptable losses". If losing 1 major city to nuclear weapons is considered unacceptable, then the major nuclear power are essentially on equal footing. Nuclear deterrence seems to be so effective because no nation to date has seemed to be willing to trade 1 of their cities for 2+ of their enemies.

Why just 1?

It was an example to show how a country with a chance of landing even 1 nuclear missle successfully is on equal military footing with a country that can land hundreds assuming the stronger country does not see losing any of their cities as an acceptable risk.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#217

Post by everdev »

stephen_g wrote: post #205
everdev wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A counterpoint would be examining each country's idea of "acceptable losses". If losing 1 major city to nuclear weapons is considered unacceptable, then the major nuclear power are essentially on equal footing. Nuclear deterrence seems to be so effective because no nation to date has seemed to be willing to trade 1 of their cities for 2+ of their enemies.

That's not how these systems work, at least in the US and Russia. "The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner" by Daniel Ellsberg (who was involved in war planning before he leaked the Pentagon Papers) has some fascinating and scary info about this. Apparently there are backup systems in both countries that will fire nuclear weapons automatically (!) at predefined targets if certain cities are hit wit…

The point is more about even countries with a minimal nuclear arsenal being in relatively equal military footing as the countries with large arsenals because no country seems willing to risk losing one of their major cities to nuclear attack. So, threatening 100 cities is about the same as threatening 1 - no one will attack you.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#218

Post by jbay »

mikeash wrote: post #145
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Cuban missile crisis is an example of MAD working as intended. If it weren't for the threat of nuclear war the Cuban missile crisis would have turned into the "Russian tanks in Paris and Marines in Havana crisis"

There wasn’t MAD during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The US had the ability to completely destroy the USSR but the reverse was not true, which is why they wanted to put missiles in Cuba in the first place. If a war had occurred, the US would have suffered enormously, but it would have come out of the conflict largely intact. Think the “get our hair mussed” bit from Dr. Strangelove. The Crisis just shows that war can be…

Actually, the US only thought that there wasn't MAD. As mentioned in the documentary "The Fog of War", only decades later did the US discover that there were already nuclear missiles with warheads in Cuba when they began the blockade. And Castro was willing to use them!

That made the situation even more dangerous than they realized at the time. The US would not have come out intact. It's very lucky for everyone that the Soviets decided not to escalate the situation.

Of course, I suppose MAD isn't MAD if there isn't also mutual knowledge of mutually assured destruction. It's something even worse when both sides think they have the advantage.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#219

Post by mistermann »

vermilingua wrote: post #157
mistermann wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not only nationalism. Current conflicts are rooted in the same prejudices as a hundred years ago. The root cause (this idea that somehow my nation/religion/race/etc is superior) Honest question: is it possible in your opinion for someone to not believe "my nation/religion/race/etc is superior" yet still be opposed to globalism? To me, this is what nationalism means, international cooperation while unequivocally mai…

Yes, by disillusioning yourself that any of those things matter. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter what god you pray to, because prayer is personal; doesn’t matter what nation you call your own, because emigration is easier than ever; and doesn’t matter what colour your skin is, because it doesn’t define you. Obviously all that is easier said than done, but really if you stop letting any kind of tribal attachment define…

> doesn’t matter what nation you call your own, because emigration is easier than ever

Are there any fiscal consequences to that, at all? For example, I often read about the advantage of socialized medicare in Canada versus the US, is this difference a figment of people's imagination? Is that a tribalist belief, or acknowledgement of physical & fiscal reality?

> Yes, by disillusioning yourself that any of those things matter. Ultimately, it doesn’t matter what god you pray to, because prayer is personal; doesn’t matter what nation you call your own, because emigration is easier than ever; and doesn’t matter what colour your skin is, because it doesn’t define you.

Are you saying it doesn't, or it shouldn't? Because from what I see on the news and read in psychological studies, it seems like there are significant numbers of people, some of whom are scientists, who don't share this interpretation of reality.

> Obviously all that is easier said than done, but really if you stop letting any kind of tribal attachment define you as a person, life becomes a lot simpler.

Is this a fact or a theory? And I don't mean that flippantly or offensively, I think it's a perfectly valid question considering the current political climate.

Re: Reasons to Fear Another ‘Great War’

#220

Post by A2017U1 »

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #214
jeffdavis wrote: post #29

What's the point of war in the modern world? Gain land/people? If there's a thriving economy there, war will probably change that quickly. If there's no thriving economy, what's the point? You could try to exploit the people/resources there, but the profits in that seem (at least compared to a world power) pretty thin. Unskilled labor and unimproved land are just not worth what they used to be. Specific resources mig…

Good point, but counterpoint is: assets. Gold. Credit. Mines. Water, forests. Strategic positions. E.g. I wouldn't be surprised if China has considered invading Mongolia, potentially worth trillions of US$ in minerals alone.

China hasn't invaded a country in 50 years and hasn't put an offensive military anywhere in decades. They very much keep to themselves as far as large economies go.

Find the amount of yellow peril in this thread amusing. I guess no one really worries about the numerous invasions by US/UK/Allies

Post reply on HN