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

Nowhere is safe

steveblank.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 329 posts

Re: Nowhere is safe

#81

Post by tmnvix »

ACCount37 wrote: post #55
poszlem wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the reason we can imagine conflict easier than peace is pretty structural. Wars usually happen because of disequilibrium, and we're sitting right in the middle of a big one. The world order we know was built by and for the US when it was the uncontested superpower. Thats just not the case anymore. Countries that spent decades being the West's cheap labor pool have risen up, industrialized, built real militari…

I don't think there are major unresolved economic tensions between US and Iran or the likes. US isn't, somehow, mad because Iran or Venezuela are suddenly very rich and prosperous and independent - that simply isn't true. The closest to your dynamic would be that between US and China, and those two aren't at war as of yet. Iran is vaguely supported by China, but it's a low level of support, and it isn't China's proxy…

One theory is that control over Venezuelan and Iranian oil is a means of constricting Chinese economic competition.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#82

Post by carlosjobim »

SkyeCA wrote: post #75
carlosjobim wrote: post #2

Do drones just appear out of thin air? Or are they made in factories, which as far as I know are "high value fixed civilian infrastructure" - which is vulnerable to attack? If drones become a big enough problem for countries like the US, then drone factories in China will be bombed, I have no doubt about that. The author is quite misguided if he thinks wars can only be fought defensively and never offensively.

> If drones become a big enough problem for countries like the US, then drone factories in China will be bombed Bombing China would be an insane course of action to take for virtually any reason. That aside consider this: You currently have the power to buy a handful of the shelf parts and assemble your own deadly drone at home. You don't need very specialized parts to do this. Bombing drone factories would do nothin…

And making drones and drone parts for massive assaults on stationary targets in the US is not an insane course of action?

For proxy wars, super powers won't bomb each other. But if one of them is attacked by weapons from another, then they will.

> You don't need very specialized parts to do this.

So making drones and drone parts do not require any highly advanced technology or manufacturing processes? Then why weren't they widely used in the first world war?

Re: Nowhere is safe

#83

Post by krisoft »

> what if the Army could cut and cover 100 meters of precast tunnel segments in a day

If you have the precast tunnel segments to do that why wouldn’t you just plop them down on the ground? What benefit does cutting and covering provide?

Also how would you protect your construction crew and construction supply chain as they are slowly plodding along 100m a day?

Once built, could this cut and cover tunnel be disabled by hitting it anywhere along its length with a “bunker buster” amunition? Or a backpack full of explosives and a shovel? Or a few cans of fuel down the ventillation and a lit rag?

And if the answer is that you will patrol the topside to prevent such meddling, how do you protect your patrols? And if you can protect them why don’t you do the same for your logistics?

Re: Nowhere is safe

#84

Post by megous »

YZF wrote: post #63
throw310822 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US are also the major enabler of Israel's colonial expansion and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. This was clearly expressed by Bin Laden himself as one of the motives behind the 9/11 attacks. > Were you thinking the US was just minding its own business and some bad guys came and attacked it As I remember, this was exactly the way the US explained 9/11: "they hate us for our freedom".

[flagged]

West bank and Gaza were never under full Palestinian control since 1967 both were under brutal occupation or blockade + contant Israeli meddling into internal affairs.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#85

Post by some_random »

TheGRS wrote: post #71
brianjlogan wrote: post #15

Hmm... Interestingly one does not look at the solutions to de-escalate conflict. Despite the proxy wars we've had a relatively peaceful world since WW1/WW2. Please humor me here, I'm not saying the world is horror free. The emphasis I would hope would also be for improved negotiation tactics, better resource sharing and goal alignment between groups of people. Why is it that we can dream up more conflict but not peac…

Globalization offered the model for this. When the economy is globally linked there is more pressure for stability than conflict. I think that theory still holds. The fallout of the last 10 years is that the distribution of the wealth created in that system has not been even at all, and we are seeing huge wealth gaps. Jobs were redistributed to poorer nations and lost in a lot of wealthier markets. If nations can sol…

As I understand it, the idea was that there would be winners and losers from globalization but overall the benefit would be more global and outweigh localized drawbacks. This means that you can tax the global benefit and compensate the losers while still having everyone come out ahead! Sounds fantastic right, but in reality there were winners and losers and no one gave a shit about the losers. Detroit and Toledo did not gracefully transition from being industrial centers to centers of art and culture, they rusted and rotted and were denigrated by the coastal elite who benefited from their place in the world as finance and service hubs.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#86

Post by maxglute »

carlosjobim wrote: post #82
SkyeCA wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If drones become a big enough problem for countries like the US, then drone factories in China will be bombed Bombing China would be an insane course of action to take for virtually any reason. That aside consider this: You currently have the power to buy a handful of the shelf parts and assemble your own deadly drone at home. You don't need very specialized parts to do this. Bombing drone factories would do nothin…

And making drones and drone parts for massive assaults on stationary targets in the US is not an insane course of action? For proxy wars, super powers won't bomb each other. But if one of them is attacked by weapons from another, then they will. > You don't need very specialized parts to do this. So making drones and drone parts do not require any highly advanced technology or manufacturing processes? Then why weren'…

> is not an insane course of action?

No? Flat out arming proxies is literally the point of overt proxy warfare. Sometimes one tries to to be deniable and source other weapons, but other times it's just, enjoy quagmire, cry about it. It's like suggesting PRC going to start blowing up Lockheed plants if they ever lose anything to US munitions.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#87

Post by some_random »

throw310822 wrote: post #49
stavros wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who did the US bomb before 9/11? Iraq, during the Gulf War. > Who did the US bomb before Pearl Harbor? Japan, though the US didn't bomb them, it instituted an oil embargo and asset freeze. > Who did the US bomb before its embassies in East Africa were attacked Iraq, during the Gulf War. > Who did the US bomb before https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103 ? Tripoli and Benghazi, Iran Air Flight 655. I don't…

The US are also the major enabler of Israel's colonial expansion and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. This was clearly expressed by Bin Laden himself as one of the motives behind the 9/11 attacks. > Were you thinking the US was just minding its own business and some bad guys came and attacked it As I remember, this was exactly the way the US explained 9/11: "they hate us for our freedom".

Yeah, he also justified it by citing the US's acceptance of homosexuality so maybe it's more complicated than that.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#88

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

Centigonal wrote: post #73
TheGRS wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Globalization offered the model for this. When the economy is globally linked there is more pressure for stability than conflict. I think that theory still holds. The fallout of the last 10 years is that the distribution of the wealth created in that system has not been even at all, and we are seeing huge wealth gaps. Jobs were redistributed to poorer nations and lost in a lot of wealthier markets. If nations can sol…

I'll add to this by saying that globalization works as well as it does because the average person would suffer dramatically from a major war and the resulting breakdown of global supply chains. People who are wealthy enough to move anywhere in the world (including to a military-grade bunker somewhere remote like New Zealand) if their current domicile is negatively affected don't have as strong of an incentive to main…

As a corollary: people who, because of geography, are unlikely to suffer any traditional or novel military consequences of a war in country (e.g. Americans w.r.t a war in the middle east) are only going to have moral reasons for avoiding such a war, other than the risk to members of their family and friends. This makes the risks from such countries significantly worse than those who are militarily at risk should they choose to attack another.

Of course, none of that stops terroristic responses to war, but those by themselves affect relatively small numbers of people (or have done so far; obviously terroristic use of nuclear weapons would change that).

We can see all of this in the voices of the segment of the American population that is "all in" for the war in Iran, safe in their belief that they will suffer no militaristic consequences from it.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#89

Post by SkyeCA »

carlosjobim wrote: post #82
SkyeCA wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If drones become a big enough problem for countries like the US, then drone factories in China will be bombed Bombing China would be an insane course of action to take for virtually any reason. That aside consider this: You currently have the power to buy a handful of the shelf parts and assemble your own deadly drone at home. You don't need very specialized parts to do this. Bombing drone factories would do nothin…

And making drones and drone parts for massive assaults on stationary targets in the US is not an insane course of action? For proxy wars, super powers won't bomb each other. But if one of them is attacked by weapons from another, then they will. > You don't need very specialized parts to do this. So making drones and drone parts do not require any highly advanced technology or manufacturing processes? Then why weren'…

> So making drones and drone parts do not require any highly advanced technology or manufacturing processes?

I'll understand if you aren't a hardware person, but I think you severely overestimate how complex a drone needs to be if you only intend for it to be single use (which is apparently all the rage in modern war).

You don't even need drone specific parts, the parts you need are used in all kinds of other applications...many are even in your home right now whether you know it or not.

To destroy the supply of these generic parts you would have to destroy...basically everything.

> Then why weren't they widely used in the first world war?

This statement alone makes me not take your argument seriously. You aren't arguing in good faith.

Re: Nowhere is safe

#90

Post by aaron695 »

brianjlogan wrote: post #15

Hmm... Interestingly one does not look at the solutions to de-escalate conflict. Despite the proxy wars we've had a relatively peaceful world since WW1/WW2. Please humor me here, I'm not saying the world is horror free. The emphasis I would hope would also be for improved negotiation tactics, better resource sharing and goal alignment between groups of people. Why is it that we can dream up more conflict but not peac…

[dead]
Post reply on HN