The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war • Hacker News Board

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#351

Post by ericmay » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 10:53 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #332

lopsotronic wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also have to ponder how it looks when you remove the Chinese supply chain for all those commodity parts. Which will almost certainly be the case if we decide to punch that dance card. Having a boundless cornucopia of servos and radios will affect the shape of your logistics/maintenance/fabrication complex. That's not just a "Ukraine Problem" either.

The US manufacturing capacity was a huge factor in winning WW2. I wonder who holds that advantage now...

There are a lot of differences. One of the chief differences was that during World War II the United States continental homeland was pretty much untouchable, which allowed the United States and the allies access to a secure and resource rich supply chain that helped lead to victory over the Axis powers.

In an engagement with China it is likely that both sides would be able to strike each other's defense industrial base, with the added "benefit" that American missiles, aircraft, and other equipment are stationed strategically in the region in various countries (Japan, South Korea, Philippines, Australia, and others) and as such the United States can project some amount of destruction on critical Chinese industrial facilities. I'm wondering if China in this scenario would be eager to, or hesitant to strike the United States for fear of a very rapid escalation of the war. Anyway - the point is that long range missiles, drones, and other offensive capabilities mean that supposedly "safe" manufacturing facilities are in danger, with the United States being a bit closer in range to inflict damage than China and with China having I would guess a little bit of hesitancy to strike mainland America.

In addition to some of the simple geographic differences, China has its own strategic challenges. Energy, for one. So far nobody has built a tank, plane, or ship that can run on batteries and while drone technology has continued to advance in many critical ways they don't bring the big bombs quite yet. Naturally the United States in the event of a war is going to at least consider if not outright strike Chinese energy facilities, and deny imports of oil which are critical to supply chains and conducting a war.

If China's only theater is perhaps Taiwan that's probably less of an issue, but then you've got the United States with its, in my view, inferior supply chain, operating unfettered, similar to during World War II while the Chinese supply chain both local and superior particularly for small or "low cost" components is facing both energy stress and stress from missiles or other attacks.

I don't mean to sound pro-USA here or to suggest there aren't other significant advantages or disadvantages for either the United States or China, but to just highlight that your thoughtful comment here which seems to imply that China's massive industrial capacity is akin to the United States' during World War II is not quite an apples-to-apples comparison.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#352

Post by ericmay » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 10:57 PM UTC

shimman wrote: post #213

Animats wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main point of this paper is that rear area bases are too vulnerable now. This paper is from West Point, and is the view from the Army side. It's a big problem for air forces, too. The US has a tradition of large, supposedly secure bases in the rear. The USAF has relied on this since WWII. It's not working any more. Iran has been hitting US air bases. In the last day, they've hit US bases in Qatar, Jordan, Kuwait…

Maybe the US should focus more on diplomacy and open collaboration rather than letting a few dozen psychopaths convince the country we need to support a war machine that has benefited no one outside of the defense industry.

What diplomatic means should the United States (why the US and not others) take to stop Russia in Ukraine, stop Iran in the Middle East, stop North Korea, and stop China and its support for Russia or insistence of attacking Taiwan?

Certainly there is some room for negotiation and diplomacy and frankly I think we've tried that and tried it until it was clearly insane and then we still tried it. We (the west) tried to invite Russia to NATO and we opened up Europe to Russian gas. We tried the JCPOA with Iran. We have no clue what to do with North Korea. And we pushed for Chinese entry into the WTO only for them to backstab the west.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#353

Post by dash2 » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 11:05 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #146

lopsotronic wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also have to ponder how it looks when you remove the Chinese supply chain for all those commodity parts. Which will almost certainly be the case if we decide to punch that dance card. Having a boundless cornucopia of servos and radios will affect the shape of your logistics/maintenance/fabrication complex. That's not just a "Ukraine Problem" either.

Ukraine and Taiwan quietly cooperate in weapons development and production, especially drones.[1] They both have big, aggressive neighbors. Ukraine knows how to fight them, and Taiwan can make electronics in quantity. Ukraine is starting to get cooperation from Japan, too, but that's in an earlier stage.[2] With Taiwan, it's serious. The paper doesn't mention Ukraine at all, yet it's all about the kind of war that Uk…

The paper explicitly mentions Ukraine and that’s a key motivation for its conclusions.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#354

Post by wartywhoa23 » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 11:13 PM UTC

AlexCoventry wrote: post #191

wartywhoa23 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I am. That requires a total reassesment of who the real enemy is, though (hint: psychopaths at power).

How do you reliably prevent a clever psychopath who's set their mind to it from gaining power?

That is the question worth focusing all the available energy and enthusiasm that is always somewhere else, but never at the humankind's worst problem.

I think the answer could arise from a widely growing understanding of

a) the methods of mass manipulation. Without manipulation, or outright mass hypnosis, no dictator is possible;

b) the whole structure of power, and the fact that there are numerous barriers to filter out all non-psychopaths along the way to the top, with multiple checkpoints where an ever increasing degree of corruption and depravity must be demonstrated to the controllers.

But even a) alone should be sufficient.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#355

Post by protocolture » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 11:20 PM UTC

AlexCoventry wrote: post #138

strulovich wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a very charitable explanation, it takes politicians at their word during a war. (One should not do that, and you can refer to Putin’s language at 2022 as a parallel example to Trump’s) The initial US goals clearly were: 1. Regime change 2. Denial is of nuclear weapons It’s also clear these goals were not achieved. So the US changed tactics and goals. (Same as Russia no longer plans on capturing Kiev it se…

According to The Economist, the Iranian theocracy is no longer in power, the IRGC is. Still, not the regime change Trump was hoping for, that's for sure. > Khamenei’s killing has accelerated Iran’s transition from a theocracy to an ambitious nationalistic state dominated by military men. The irgc appears to wield power with few constraints. Clerics who challenged its influence—including former Presidents Mohammad Kha…

>IRGC

Forgive me its been a while since I read about Irans political structure, but my understanding is that the IRGC is supposed to take over in times of succession crisis, and sort of take any measures to guarantee the islamic revolution.

The test is supposed to be that they hand back power sometime after the crisis.

If you assume Khamenei Jr is still unwell, and there's still a spot of bother regarding what his succession would look like, and the civilian government is still a bit in shambles, the IRGC taking over seems very easy for them to justify. Whether they hand that power back willingly is another matter that remains to be seen.

The problem here is that Trump bombing Iran is going to keep them in power longer. The IRGC being in charge is going to keep Trump bombing them. I dont see a way out of that spiral on either side.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#356

Post by zemvpferreira » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 11:25 PM UTC

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #324

lopsotronic wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sheer quantity of "mislabelled"[1] PRC origin parts passing through the logistics chains as Primo-A-grade-American-Made - even in Defense - is deeply disturbing, and that's the stuff that they do catch. Transshipment is the elephant in the room here - smaller components made in PRC, then shipped to wherever as Raw Materials (tm), and then put in a "friendly nation" box and sold as safe. DoD's DMEA and DLA CD prog…

The point is that, when PRC cuts off the parts, there are backstops for alternate sourcing most of them even if it means reopening mines to get the materials and subsidizing production.

I don't mean to belittle the American war machine but as someone involved in overseas manufacturing for a while, I just don't see how it's possible to source 90% of items now made in China without a solid decade or two of investment. There are no factories, no supply chains, no skilled workers. It seems like fantasy.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#357

Post by protocolture » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 11:25 PM UTC

lenerdenator wrote: post #105

malfist wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Iran war will also probably still be going on in 5 years The Russia/Ukraine war has a goal, to make Ukraine either part of Russia or a client state. What's the goal of the US/Iran war? So far it seems like the goal is to mostly return to the status quo prior to the war. I can't imagine that could continue 5 years because there's just not an objective. Of course, I could easily be mistaken.

> What's the goal of the US/Iran war? It varies. Which is the problem. I can think of a few: 1) Severely kneecap the Iranians' nuclear ambitions. This one might actually be working to an extent. 2) Severely kneecap the Iranians' military ambitions in the Middle East as a whole, particularly with respect to Israel. This remains unknown. Their neighbors seem content to give them a pass for launching missiles into their…

>1) Severely kneecap the Iranians' nuclear ambitions.

Every time someone hits them, they learn that they wouldnt be hit if only they had a nuclear weapon.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#358

Post by protocolture » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 11:29 PM UTC

LinuxAmbulance wrote: post #127

thrownawaysz wrote: post #68

>the difficulty of transporting extremely heavy 155-millimeter artillery shells and guided multiple-launch rocket system pods across contested oceans and degraded theater road networks I found it interesting that not even this article thinks about it that the US mainland ever can be attacked

> I found it interesting that not even this article thinks about it that the US mainland ever can be attacked It can be, but it would be very, very difficult for anything short of lobbing ICBMs around. You'd have to have a fleet of ships that would be detected as soon as they set sail, and then protect that fleet for the entire voyage, which would also be extremely difficult for any adversary. Getting boots on US soi…

>Getting boots on US soil would be even tougher.

Getting them there seems easy, its the keeping them there that seems like a logistical nightmare.

>You'd have to have a fleet of ships that would be detected as soon as they set sail, and then protect that fleet for the entire voyage, which would also be extremely difficult for any adversary.

Or make friends with one of your neighbors that the USA appears to be keen on pissing off constantly. I have never seen more negative sentiment about the USA from Canadians before, who now see the USA as a strategic threat instead of their mentally challenged neighbor.

And dont get me started on Mexico, they can probably be had for pennies.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#359

Post by xp84 » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 11:33 PM UTC

Someone wrote: post #108

xp84 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s an odd declaration and maybe based on Rus/Ukraine. But Ukraine is doing better now than in the first week of the “Special Military Operation” due to having a lot of rich allies who have (in fits and starts) given them a lot of money and gear, and due to a Russia which has stretched its military and economy to the breaking point. By contrast, Iran’s only allies are its terrorist affiliates in Lebanon, Gaza, and t…

> Anyway, the US and Israel can keep degrading Iran’s military and “government” by dropping bombs (or better, drones) on them every week for a decade and it won’t really be a big deal for the former. Can they? https://www.csis.org/analysis/last-rounds-status-key-munitio... says “In the 39 days of the air and missile campaign before the ceasefire, U.S. forces heavily used the seven munitions in Table 1. For four of th…

Perhaps. If we need more, we can make more though, and at a faster rate than Iran can. I really doubt Iran has the capability to significantly threaten the factories where we make those munitions. The same can't be said the other way around.

I also suspect the US military is actively pursuing more cost-effective ways to blow things up, as Ukraine (and indeed Iran) has been doing. We don't have to use Patriots and Tomahawks all the time, unless we're shooting down something fast and dangerous with it. And again, Iran has a limited ability to pay for that type of thing, so I'm not that worried.

Re: The glass backbone: Why the Army's logistics will break in the next war

#360

Post by xp84 » Thu, Jul 09, 2026, 11:37 PM UTC

O3marchnative wrote: post #167

xp84 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s an odd declaration and maybe based on Rus/Ukraine. But Ukraine is doing better now than in the first week of the “Special Military Operation” due to having a lot of rich allies who have (in fits and starts) given them a lot of money and gear, and due to a Russia which has stretched its military and economy to the breaking point. By contrast, Iran’s only allies are its terrorist affiliates in Lebanon, Gaza, and t…

Have you taken a look at Iran's targeting capabilities and the assets they were able to destroy? More importantly, have you considered who facilitated those targeting capabilities? https://www.hudson.org/national-security-defense/war-above-w...

Thank you - didn't see that yet, not surprising but very disappointing. Still, unless China is gonna start giving kinetic support to Iran, Iran's ability to be "doing great" in the war is still limited by its crippled, single-commodity-based economy and the US and allies' ability to blow a lot of their shit up.