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

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

mwi.westpoint.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 701 posts

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

#391

Post by krapp »

shipman05 wrote: post #143
krapp wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not every country or tribe has been engaged in near continuous violence for over two centuries. That isn't simply "fighting many wars" it's being "existentially bound to warfare." The US is peculiar. It's the nation born of a continent-wide campaign of genocide and plunder. It's the only Western nation that couldn't give up slavery without a civil war. It's the only nation to wage nuclear war, and did so primarily ag…

I appreciate this comment, and agree with it in some respects, but some of these specifics are demonstrably false. > It's the nation born of a continent-wide campaign of genocide and plunder Hard to see how that description doesn't apply to most of the New World. Mexico and Peru were founded on bones of conquered and plundered empires. First Nations in Canada suffered much the same as their counterparts in the US. >…

That's fair criticism. The US isn't that unique in terms of colonialist expansion in the New World and I honestly forgot about Haiti. I just knew that Britain managed to end slavery without a war but I forgot about Haiti and its uprising.

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

#392

Post by recitedropper »

briandw wrote: post #390
phyzome wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By antifragile, do you mean fragile?

I mean that when you have a system like this and you don’t stress it, it becomes more likely to fail catastrophically. It’s like the Dodo bird. It evolved in the absence of predators, so was easily made extinct. Had the island had dogs the entire time, the Dodo would have evolved to survive.

I agree with you--but just fyi I think "antifragile" is generally used in the opposite to what you mean. If I'm remember correctly Taleb has tried to coin it as a precise word to describe the inverse of your phenomena: Systems that prioritize robustness over optimizations, and therefore can handle stress effectively.

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

#393

Post by cyberax »

ddtaylor wrote: post #363
cyberax wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US can produce these chips. South Korea can also do that.

The US cannot produce most of what that TSMC can can. And those US factories aren't rolling yet either.

Most drones don't use anything cutting-edge. Even 15-year-old chips are more than enough.

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

#394

Post by bandrami »

This is a pendulum I've now seen fully swing twice since I enlisted 30 years ago.

"We need more integrated logistics because the teeth can't fight without the tail!"

Some years pass

"Why do we have all these non-combat roles in the military? Shrink everything down and focus on warfighting!"

More years pass

"Why can't we do any support internally? We need stronger and more integrated logistics!"

Lather, rinse, repeat.

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

#395

Post by D_Alex »

Animats wrote: post #288
lo_zamoyski wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if we're talking Ukraine, we have to talk Poland as it has been facilitating 90% of all Western military equipment, humanitarian aid, and crucial trade deliveries into the country. Poland is, of course, geopolitically positioned in a way that requires at least regional power status to survive if not thrive. A power vacuum in Poland is bad news for the security of Europe and Poland's immediate neighbors and region…

Poland and the Baltics know they're next on Putin's list. So they're glad to help Ukraine. Better than fighting the Russians on home territory. Taiwan and Japan, though, aren't in Russia's line of fire. The cooperation with Ukraine is because Ukraine figured out how to stop Russia. Taiwan has a real threat, and if they can build defenses that mean China faces a years-long war, there probably won't be one.

>Poland and the Baltics know they're next on Putin's list.

"Putin's list" is a dishonest meme, just like the "rules-based international order" that the Western nations supposedly embrace.

There is no such list, and there are no such rules. There is only deceitful propaganda used to justify geopolitical ambitions. Don't spread it.

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

#396

Post by marcus_holmes »

ericmay wrote: post #351
giantg2 wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ba…

> 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.

Ukraine is proving that the "big bombs" are useless - fpv drones can and do take out tanks, planes and ships. They don't survive long enough to deliver the "big bombs".

Russia is currently reduced to sending in unmechanised light infantry to try and take ground because everything larger doesn't survive (and the light infantry apparently survive for only 20 minutes on average). Russia's Black Sea fleet cowers in port under its anti-air defences and even then takes losses. Their long-range bombers are not being used in the long-range bombing of Ukraine's civilians, that's all down to cruise missiles, because they're too valuable to lose (and a lot of them have been destroyed on the runway by drones).

The age of WW2-era mechanised warfare is gone. It's as obsolete as the cavalry that came before it.

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

#397

Post by throwaway27448 »

malfist wrote: post #11
bad_haircut72 wrote: post #6

When Russia invaded Ukraine, nobody (even the Ukranians) imagined that 5 years later they would have their own missiles hammering Russia 2500kms in the rear. Americans need to start accepting that a) the Iran war will also probably still be going on in 5 years and b) Iran will probably in a better place than they are now, strategically speaking.

> 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.

> The Russia/Ukraine war has a goal, to make Ukraine either part of Russia or a client state.

Or at least the Donbas... I can't imagine they'd want a border pressing up against nato without a rump state in between.

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

#398

Post by throwaway27448 »

TSiege wrote: post #232
pphysch wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It absolutely does, it can simply choose to not bomb Iran after Iran enforces regulations on its (shared with Oman) waterway. Bombing Iran for a month because Iran fired on 4 ships that were violating its SoH rules is wildly disproportionate and optional.

This is not necessarily true. Yes the strait of hormuz is technically in their territorial waters, but it has been recognized as an international water way until recently. Every country with a port on the other side of the strait is going to lose access. This might not be a tolerable situation to those allies of ours and they also have the ability to force the war to drag on. Maybe we walk and pull out from our bases…

> but it has been recognized as an international water way until recently

Who cares? International law is quite clear. But regardless, the world really doesn't have a say so long as Iran (& likely Oman in the end) wants to enforce this view.

> but maybe they bomb a port in iran and iran strikes a us base in response

...and the strait will still be closed. It just makes zero sense.

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

#399

Post by lazide »

zemvpferreira wrote: post #356
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The US has been running on fantasy for a long time.

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

#400

Post by yostrovs »

ericmay wrote: post #343
nostrademons wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the war started, it certainly looked like it. Russian soldiers were in Kyiv at one point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kyiv_(2022) It was the failure of Russian logistics and the triumph of Ukrainian logistics that beat them back.

Credit certainly that Russian logistics failed, but was it Ukrainian logistics that beat them back or was it Ukrainian logistics and heroism alongside American and British support, intelligence, and 24/7 airlifts of critical weapons and equipment that beat them back?

There were no critical weapons supplied to Ukraine until after the Russians retreated from Kiyv.
Post reply on HN