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

481–490 of 701 posts

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

#481

Post by budsniffer952 »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #451
wildzzz wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but neither side has a B-2 or F-35. Drones are great for blowing up a few conscripts or a parked plane but a stealth bomber carrying 80 JDAMs can level 5km^2.

Which is working so well against Iran, right? Oh wait, no, the other thing.

Hilarious. You realize the US could nuke and flatten Iran tomorrow, right? Do you imagine that Trump was trying to conquer Iran and just couldn't do it with all the American military power? There is no scenario that Iran wins a war with the USA.

They were trying to overthrow the regime, for the second time in a year, and failed.

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

#482

Post by dctoedt »

colechristensen wrote: post #424
dctoedt wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think sooner or later, Iran will succeed in sinking a big US ship Sinking or even just seriously damaging a U.S. aircraft carrier — approx. 5K people in crew + airwing, billions of dollars in ship and aircraft — might trigger a Pearl-Harbor or 9/11 fury among the American public. No U.S. president could get away with even a "proportionate" response, let alone doing nothing. Think of the Tonkin Gulf incident in 19…

>It triggered a cascade of some of the stupidest and costliest government decisions in history. Eh. WWI wasn't an accident, a series of unfortunate incidents, or something that just got out of hand. Countries and people WANTED the war, war was still thought about as a general benefit to the country, almost sporting. Everybody was feeling powerful with the new capabilities industrialization gave them and they wanted t…

So you agree with me — stupid decisions, catastrophic fuckups.

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

#483

Post by frm88 »

bluGill wrote: post #296
kakacik wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regognized by whom? This is very one sided view, obviously US sided. This kind of shit or excuses could not be pulled if we would be talking about gulf of mexico for example. US is not center of the world and rest of the world means >95% of mankind, rest of the world is pretty fed up with that unfair treatment and things are changing. Very slowly, but steadily.

Nearly everybody recognized it as an international waterway. Iran did not official but they acted liked it was international.

Iran signed UNCLOS 1982 which most countries signed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_United_... in which Iran stated that only parties that signed are entitled to free passage through its maritime territory, except for warships etc. This was accepted by all. The US did not sign.

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

#484

Post by wahern »

caycep wrote: post #376
Animats wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think they already have that, they want to make sure it stays that way alternatively, there's a Dennis Ross piece out pointing out that China's procurement patterns over the years suggests they are not seriously thinking of invading Taiwan, they just want everyone to think that way...

To the extent Xi Jinping isn't seriously interested in invading Taiwan (and that seems dubious), he still needs to keep the PLA and other factions thinking he does. Reclaiming Taiwan is a pillar of PLA ideology and strategic doctrine. PLA culture is why China has never forced its will in North Korea despite continued disobedience to Beijing--the old guard in the PLA feels honor bound to defend North Korea's independence, rather than making it a client state, which it easily could do. It's similar to defense policy hawks in the US regarding Middle East intervention, who have nominally always been a minority faction. Perennial Middle East intervention never made much sense, and yet it keeps happening over and over, even when the military is woefully unprepared (e.g. Iran), because that faction is adept at manipulating defense policy, and has been playing the same long game since the 1990s. Which is precisely why the Taiwan threat is real. China isn't a political monolith, and the forces pushing to invade Taiwan, even if presently held at bay, could succeed in a blink of an eye, even without China being properly prepared for a successful invasion.

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

#485

Post by liamwire »

brabel wrote: post #477
XorNot wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine is keeping Russia where it is at a tremendous expenditure of people and treasure. Their success in the conflict is not guaranteed.

Their success is already impossible: you cannot lose half of your population and suffer millions of casualties and still consider that a success in the end, even if Ukraine was to retake most of the territory it has lost, which seems less and less likely as the years pass. Wars of this kind never have winners. Russia also lost too many soldiers to celebrate anything.

I couldn't disagree more. In a fight for existential survival, repelling an invader at any cost constitutes a win. It may almost be pyrrhic in the end, but deterrence is invaluable.

Not to lose sight of the very real cost, down to every man and family destroyed. Many may even argue that life under subjugation is still at least life. But many more have walked the walk into the fire, in defiance of that notion. I see no way of arguing the opinions of the living outweigh those of the dead when it comes to opinions on what's worth fighting for.

I would add that this isn't advocating for blindly and endlessly throwing meat into the meat grinder. But to the extent that a country tells you, not from the top down but from the men on the very frontlines of war, that they're willing to die, to win... I'd say believe them when they say they understand the costs, and yet consider it a win not in spite of those costs, but in the face of them, defiantly.

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

#486

Post by 27183 »

63stack wrote: post #472
usiran1286628 wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump has clearly stated many times the goal is to prevent Iran from obtaining nukes. Many times. Repeatedly, again and again, and all negotiations are directed towards that first and foremost.

Trump clearly stating anything is a stretch, that man cannot talk coherently even for a minute. He has also stated that the war has been won many times. Why would you take anything coming out of his mouth seriously?

Just the other day at the NATO summit he seemingly claimed Iran's nuclear program is so damaged they'll never be able to build a bomb. So, mission accomplished? Nothing the guy says is credible..

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

#487

Post by williamdclt »

protocolture wrote: post #355
AlexCoventry wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 su…

> 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.

Your statement actually makes the way out of the spiral very explicit: Trump must stop being in power.

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

#488

Post by lejalv »

lenerdenator wrote: post #327
QuercusMax wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Running a blockade is a risky proposition; it's not something that happens by accident. A lot of these "neutral" countries either host US military bases, US companies, or are otherwise aligned generally with the US.

Are they sailing under the flags of nations who are combatants in this war, yes or no?

US base in a country that allows its use = country is participating in the aggression = legitimate target

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

#489

Post by RealityVoid »

fragmede wrote: post #371
RealityVoid wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These kinds of systems are rare or super rare.

Not for long. Software copies easily. Hardware's more difficult.

You need hardware for these things. High speed image processing and high precision control and global shutter cameras. You can't just slap a raspi on it with any run of the mill camera and call it a day.

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

#490

Post by shmeeed »

shimman wrote: post #419
Noumenon72 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the problem was as simple as a few individuals and had no benefits it would not persist -- this is a Hollywood view of the world that won't help you understand your opposition.

No, it's quite simple. US imperialism only benefits the select elites of the country at the expense of the poor. Why are you denying the absolutely destructive power of the US military and it's abject failure in not only making the world safer for Americans but explicitly more dangerous? Are you personally benefiting from US imperialism?

This was not the point of GP's comment. The point was that your reductive take on the military-industrial complex as "a few dozen psychopaths" is simplistic and won't help you understand your opposition.

Also, please refrain from making personal allegations.

Post reply on HN