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

521–530 of 701 posts

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

#521

Post by streetfighter64 »

Fizz43 wrote: post #417
kingleopold wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

clear goal is making trillions to war profiteer friends, is this too hard to see for the public?

The public loves that narrative but it collapses under scrutiny.

The military industrial complex is a "narrative"? If anything the public does not understand it enough. But please, do scrutinize it. What is the goal of all of the USAs wars in the middle east, if not to funnel taxpayer money into the pockets of shareholders of weapons companies? The latest one for example, in Iran, is clearly just because Trump can profit off of it, and because Israel wants to destroy all of their enemies in the region. And of course, Israel is a great consumer of USAs military technology (which they buy with "aid" i.e. taxpayer money from USA itself).

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

#522

Post by ExoticPearTree »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #465
asdff wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the question becomes then why did putin start the war without sufficient buildup of missile reserves to flatten Kyiv in the first few days? And why not contract with israeli defense companies for precision missile technology? It doesn't seem like their relations are really that severed even with the whole Iran issue. One would also think China might also appreciate a client willing to battle test their precis…

Flattening a city doesn't win a war. They started the war with the intent of driving tanks into the city and overthrow the government in three days, but (as the article mentions) that didn't work out. But flattening cities is a WW2 strategy, and it didn't actually do much to win the war in the end, only cause unnecessary civilian suffering.

If you flatten all of them and kill the residents, you will win the war. The question is just how far are you willing to go, not the lack of capacity to do so.

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

#523

Post by wvh »

budsniffer952 wrote: post #481
marcus_holmes wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If the US would truly try to raze Iran, they would do so at immense cost, both financially and reputationally.

I have to wonder what your definition of "winning" is.

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

#524

Post by kergonath »

dctoedt wrote: post #495
colechristensen wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

> Countries and people WANTED the war, war was still thought about as a general benefit to the country That was true among some of the players in various governments — Kaiser Wilhelm being a prime example. Can you cite any (reputable) historians who think that was a general attitude?

It is well documented in France as well. It was seen as a revenge for 1870. There was quite a bit of enthusiasm. At least initially, before the killing started in earnest and people got stuck in the trenches.

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

#525

Post by wahern »

pheaded_while9 wrote: post #514
wahern wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing new about earning "points" for kills. Warriors have always tallied their kills and displayed their numbers, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victory_marking or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalping , though the rewards were typically accolades, and only indirectly access to more materiel.

There is nothing new under the sun. You fail to address my clear moral objection with these irrelevant historical instances. It has no rhetorical value in this context.

The point was just that gameification is just a modern word that doesn't reflect any change in behaviors. Presumably you were familiar with these practices under previous descriptors. And your moral objections would have been shared by many millions before you, long before gameification was coined.

On the other side of the coin to thinking there's something new about the way war is waged are the people who think they can wage war without the same consequences as befell nations before. It's fundamentally the same err, IMO. So I take moral objection to the pretense that there's something morally novel to criticize. This stuff is what happens in war, always. And things can get way worse than this, and will get worse the longer we tolerate open hostilities among nations.

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

#526

Post by ExoticPearTree »

tbrake wrote: post #103
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? kneecaping china by cutting off a huge source of its oil imports. Russia will not be able to make up the difference.

All countries are affected, not just China.

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

#527

Post by ericmay »

oatmeal1 wrote: post #422
ericmay wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

We pulled out of the JCPOA. It worked but we quit.

Iran routinely denied inspectors access to facilities. American intelligence isn’t 100% accurate. And why should we have to effectively pay off Iran or have some special deal where they hold the world hostage less they build a nuclear bomb? Why do we only have to do that with Iran but not other countries?

I’m all for diplomatic solutions to problems, but Iran was building nuclear weapons under our nose anyway and loading up on missiles and drones to make it difficult to impossible for the US to do anything about them without severe regional casualties. Nevermind Iran’s continued funding of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthis and their support for Russia in its war against Ukraine.

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

#528

Post by ericmay »

strangegecko wrote: post #519
shimman wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conflating China with Russia is absolutely bonkers. No need to comment when you're already engorged on propaganda. Also don't understand what point you're trying to make outside of the US being explicitly poor actors that ignore treaties, allies, and are willing to start wars to run cover for unpopular domestic leadership while causing the unnecessary deaths of millions of people across the world. Also WTF does backs…

I'm guessing with backstabbing he means China's practice of stealing technology and closing off the market for foreign companies. Lots of smaller and mid sized companies that tried to invest in the Chinese market lost everything because the government protected and supported local copycats, with no intention of giving the foreign company fair access to the market.

Thanks yes. You can read about Germany shedding 10,000 manufacturing jobs a month for yourself here: https://www.wsj.com/economy/china-is-devastating-the-last-st...

And let’s not forget China’s helping of Russia to prosecute its war in Ukraine by training soldiers [1] and providing dual use technology access.

It’s interesting how the OP that you responded to was quick to start slinging accusations of propaganda and react so violently without even asking a clarifying question. Well, let’s just say some of us read those comments with a little extra interest.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jul/04/ukraine-war-br...

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

#529

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

strangegecko wrote: post #517
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

russia makes sense to the extent that they're attacking other countries unprovoked, but what are you talking about stopping China, North Korea, and Iran, from actually doing? Being successful? Improving their country? Existing?

He literally said it for China: stopping an invasion. I would add limiting political influence from autocratic governments that don't respect individual rights, but I know that's opening another Pandora's box.

- china isn't invading

- "autocratic government that doesn't respect individual rights" may describe china and north korea, but also describes the usa and israel over the last couple years (who have done more invading than china)

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

#530

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

ericmay wrote: post #527
oatmeal1 wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We pulled out of the JCPOA. It worked but we quit.

Iran routinely denied inspectors access to facilities. American intelligence isn’t 100% accurate. And why should we have to effectively pay off Iran or have some special deal where they hold the world hostage less they build a nuclear bomb? Why do we only have to do that with Iran but not other countries? I’m all for diplomatic solutions to problems, but Iran was building nuclear weapons under our nose anyway and loa…

> why should we have to effectively pay off Iran or have some special deal where they hold the world hostage less they build a nuclear bomb?

This is a narrative you constructed. The reality is simpler:

- All countries have equal rights.

- The usa and israel want iran to give up their rights to a nuclear program, which is equal to the usa's and israel's right to a nuclear program.

- If you want someone to give you something, you generally have to give them something on which they place equal or greater value.

> Iran was building nuclear weapons under our nose anyway and loading up on missiles and drones

So was+is the usa and israel.

> Nevermind Iran’s continued funding of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthis

The usa continues funding israel and supporting their war on Lebanon, Palestine, and Iran.

Post reply on HN