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

541–550 of 701 posts

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

#541

Post by __turbobrew__ »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #503
troupo wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. As soon as Russia nukes someone, the war instantly ends. Because no one will ever think to retaliate.

I get the sarcasm, but besides the US that for whatever reason might retaliate with nukes, who else? And would they risk it just because?

I think if there is no retaliation to a nuclear strike on Ukraine, every nuclear capable country will rush towards nuclear weapons as fast as possible.

The reason being, Europe has a long term understanding they are under the nuclear umbrella of the USA which means that Europe does not need to maintain their own atomic weapons. If that long term agreement does not hold, the only way to deter Russia is to have nuclear weapons of your own since you cannot rely on deterrence from other countries.

Once everyone has nukes, Russia can no longer bully countries around because they will glass Moscow. This is a worse state than today where Russia can invade countries using conventional weapons without much consequence.

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

#542

Post by szopa »

pheaded_while9 wrote: post #505
helsinkiandrew wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Units can also collect e-points to purchase more equipment: > The allocation changes regularly, but as of June 2025, Business Insider reported that destroying a tank was worth eight points. A multiple launch rocket system counted for 10. Killing a regular Russian soldier earned 12 points. Wounding a drone pilot was valued at 15 and eliminating him netted 25. In the final step, the payoff, units use the points they’ve…

Gameification of war is the literal worst thing I ever heard. Lords of War, eat your heart out.

Note that capturing a live Russian soldier is worth 10 times more than killing one. Think about how that affects the incentives of Ukrainian soldiers. Avoid committing war crimes, get better gear for your team.

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

#543

Post by __turbobrew__ »

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.

> What's the goal of the US/Iran war?

Distraction from Epstien Files

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

#544

Post by jingpostmedia »

lopsotronic wrote: post #107
silvestrov wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the most interesting innovations in the Ukraine war is their internal market place for drones, letting each drone group decide which drones they want to procure and use in battle. It is not a top-down decision, production and supply as other armies use for their weapons logistics.

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.

[flagged]

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

#545

Post by rng-concern »

wahern wrote: post #525
pheaded_while9 wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I think the difference is between: 1) me doing a nice thing and them reciprocating later, possibly. Others may or may not see this display of niceness. 2) me doing a nice thing, getting karma points my friend and other sees, which I can possibly use to get perks of some kind.

Gamification is not a new word for an old idea. It's a new thing, at least in many contexts.

#1 seems a lot more human to me.

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

#546

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

ericmay wrote: post #536
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 som…

> - All countries have equal rights. It’s even more simple. All countries don’t have equal rights. The strong make the rules and the weak suffer what they must. That’s how the world actually functions. But if you want to argue that countries have equal rights, well, in order to have equal rights one must have some rule, or law, or some other mechanism in which to receive and agree upon such rights or a forum to argue…

> All countries don’t have equal rights

It's even simpler than that: all countries do have equal rights. The fact that russia or israel or the USA feel differently, and violate those rights, is immaterial.

But if you want to argue that it's legally and morally okay for any country to attack and invade whomever they want, for whatever reason they want, go for it. It kind of cuts against your point though.

> The closest thing we have to an entity that defines and adjudicates relations with respect to countries and rights is the United Nations

What does the United Nations say about israel's actions in Lebanon and Palestine? I'll give you a hint: it matches what they say about russia's actions in Ukraine, because they're the same thing.

> What does the United Nations say about nuclear weapon proliferation?

The United Nations agrees that countries have equal rights. Beyond that, are you talking about israel's nuclear weapon proliferation here, or iran's civilian nuclear program?

israel, a religiously fanatical autocracy which routinely threatens, attacks, invades, and occupies other countries, holds no moral high ground, and doesn't have or deserve any special rights above and beyond iran here. What does israel have as far as a nuclear program? That's what other countries are now entitled to, unless israel wants to give up theirs.

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

#547

Post by edg5000 »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #475
silvestrov wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the most interesting innovations in the Ukraine war is their internal market place for drones, letting each drone group decide which drones they want to procure and use in battle. It is not a top-down decision, production and supply as other armies use for their weapons logistics.

Units can also collect e-points to purchase more equipment: > The allocation changes regularly, but as of June 2025, Business Insider reported that destroying a tank was worth eight points. A multiple launch rocket system counted for 10. Killing a regular Russian soldier earned 12 points. Wounding a drone pilot was valued at 15 and eliminating him netted 25. In the final step, the payoff, units use the points they’ve…

Wow, very interesting fact. If a unit is performing badly due to lack of equipment, they won't get the points to get the equipment they need. I wonder if that's a problem in practice. I'll read up on it, very interesting stuff.

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

#548

Post by __turbobrew__ »

icegreentea2 wrote: post #298
a34729t wrote: post #182

China has missed their window of opportunity, sadly. For the next big war, the US will simply not even need to air or sea to deliver weapons or supplies (see SpaceX's StarFall, of which 60x4 should fit into Starship). Per my calculations, the JDAM version of this will be cheaper than flying planes (and pilots) to drop bombs or cruise missiles. For small(er) wars, cheap drones break everything as they can destroy your…

Unclear how China will react to orbital/near-orbital launches that track near/over China in a hot war situation. If I were China, I'd probably be backdoor signalling that they would consider these launches to be potential nuclear strikes to try to get them off the table.

China could also prove to the world their ASAT capabilities by shooting down military orbital payloads which overfly their territory.

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

#549

Post by cenamus »

morkalork wrote: post #274
creato wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Israel can fly aircraft over their adversaries at will. Russia can't.

What a difference having proper 5th generation planes makes

I don't think Iran has SOTA air defences, compared to what the US and Ukraine are using.

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

#550

Post by helsinkiandrew »

pheaded_while9 wrote: post #505
helsinkiandrew wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Units can also collect e-points to purchase more equipment: > The allocation changes regularly, but as of June 2025, Business Insider reported that destroying a tank was worth eight points. A multiple launch rocket system counted for 10. Killing a regular Russian soldier earned 12 points. Wounding a drone pilot was valued at 15 and eliminating him netted 25. In the final step, the payoff, units use the points they’ve…

Gameification of war is the literal worst thing I ever heard. Lords of War, eat your heart out.

> Gameification of war is the literal worst thing I ever heard.

Is this much difference from a combat mission being written up and soldiers being promoted/awarded medals.

The point of this is to see who is successful and what drones/weapons are the most effective. With a limited budget and much larger enemy it comes down to kills per dollar.

Post reply on HN