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

641–650 of 701 posts

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

#641

Post by brabel »

liamwire wrote: post #485
brabel wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 n…

There is a lot of resistance from the Ukrainians to going to the frontlines as we can see in the endless videos of people fighting the government “recruiters” who come to forcibly take them and the large stream of people fleeing the country. It’s hard to tell if the will to continue fight comes from the people or the government, it’s not nearly as clear as you imply. In my view, it’s a huge crime against life for this war to continue. A compromise is the only solution. From both sides of course. But it seems both sides still consider the continuing fight and death toll is worthwhile and preferable to the compromises they would need to make to end the craziness. We will look back at this time as a huge failure of Europe and the US to manage to first prevent Russia aggression, and then even worse , prolonging the conflict for several years by simply failing to provide what was needed to defeat Russia while providing just enough for the Russians to advance only very slowly and at a high cost - the worst possible outcome since Ukraine still loses a huge amount of territory and more importantly, people, while Russia loses a much smaller proportion of its population while achieving many of its goals and proving to the West that it can challenge its political position near its borders even if war is the only way to do so.

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

#642

Post by Taikonerd »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #476
Animats wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In Taiwan's case, the question is how does China see the reunification. It could be a naval blockade until Taiwan runs out of food/fuel/medicines and they surrender. Or it could be "we will take the island no matter what" and if somebody survives OK, if not, also OK.

Yeah, people always talk about the China "invading" Taiwan like PLA soldiers are going to be storming the beaches.

If I were Xi, I wouldn't do that; I would just blockade them. You can get the same capitulation (hopefully) without firing a shot.

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

#643

Post by esseph »

troupo wrote: post #639
esseph wrote: post #625

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ukraine was expected to fall quickly, and any help it needed started arriving very reluctantly, very slowly, in small batches stretched over months and years of deliveries much much later. This is bullshit from anyone in the know. There had been multiple YEARS of Western Special Operations inside Ukraine leading up to and during the opening phases of the war . Some were pulled back to defend Kyiv / Zelensky during…

> There had been multiple YEARS of Western Special Operations inside Ukraine leading up to and during the opening phases of the war. That is why Russia quickly reached Kiev, and Ukraine still can't win the war? Because there were inhales, screams MULTIPLE YEARS OF SPECIAL OPERATIONS? > Without UK SOF and their initial deployments of anti-armor weapons, there is a good chance Russia would have gotten much further. No…

Read about Operation Orbital:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orbital

"In February 2022, amid a build-up of Russian forces on the Russo-Ukrainian border and concerns of an impending Russian invasion, the UK began supplying Ukraine with anti-tank weapons, including NLAW missiles. Teams of UK military personnel were deployed to provide training on how to use the weapons, within the framework of Operation Orbital.[10] Some 2,000 missiles were airlifted to the country by the Royal Air Force using C-17 Globemaster III transport aircraft. RAF surveillance aircraft, including Boeing RC-135, were also involved with collecting intelligence on Russian ground movements."

Read about Operation Interflex:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Interflex

---

Also:

"But when the president approved $350 million in military aid on Feb. 26 — nearly six times larger — 70 percent of it was delivered in five days. The speed was considered essential, officials said, because the equipment — including anti-tank weapons — had to make it through western Ukraine before Russian air and ground forces started attacking the shipments. As Russia takes more territory inside the country, it is expected to become more and more difficult to distribute weapons to Ukrainian troops."

"Within 48 hours of Mr. Biden approving the transfer of weapons from U.S. military stockpiles on Feb. 26, the first shipments, largely from Germany, were arriving at airfields near Ukraine’s border, officials said."

"The military was able to push those shipments forward quickly by tapping into pre-positioned military stockpiles ready to roll onto Air Force C-17 transport planes and other cargo aircraft, and flying them to about half a dozen staging bases in neighboring countries, chiefly in Poland and Romania."

"Now it is being turned back against the Russian invasion of Ukraine, part of a vast airlift that American and European officials describe as a desperate race against time, to get tons of arms into the hands of Ukrainian forces while their supply routes are still open. Scenes like this, reminiscent of the Berlin airlift — the famed race by the Western allies to keep West Berlin supplied with essentials in 1948 and 1949 as the Soviet Union sought to choke it off — are playing out across Europe."

"In less than a week, the United States and NATO have pushed more than 17,000 antitank weapons, including Javelin missiles, over the borders of Poland and Romania, unloading them from giant military cargo planes so they can make the trip by land to Kyiv, the Ukrainian capital, and other major cities. So far, Russian forces have been so preoccupied in other parts of the country that they have not targeted the arms supply lines, but few think that can last."

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/06/us/politics/us-ukraine-we...

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

#644

Post by dredmorbius »

yborg wrote: post #92

I wonder when the use of 'culminate', v. "reach a climax or point of highest development" for "cease to be effective" became the standard in military-related writing when trying to sound smart. The original usage in the specific context of an army's advance or offensive coming to an end made some sense but it's now used as basically a wordy synonym for "stops" in any context.

[dead]

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

#645

Post by dredmorbius »

AlexCoventry wrote: post #174
LinuxAmbulance wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

According to Zelensky, there will be drones capable of traversing tens of thousands of kilometers within a couple of years. The US mainland is definitely at risk of drone attack in the near-medium term, IMO. > One, two, three years — drones will strike ten, twenty thousand kilometers. With reactive engines, they will be very cheap -- Zelensky https://x.com/nexta_tv/status/2042105223989035429

Balloon-lofted drones seem more likely as a means for even a minor military power to strike deep within a country.

These can be launched in mass, cheaply. They're difficult to detect and/or distinguish (weather balloons are already common), and easy to cloud with dummy balloons, perhaps dangling aluminium paper to enhance radar signatures.

The drones themselves could use optical+inertial guidance, and have either minimal propulsion or be entirely glide-based. Given prevailing high-altitude winds (generally west-to-east in mid-northern latitudes) strikes could be launched many thousands of miles from targets with minimal or no fuel / propulsive storage use.

"Ukraine uses military balloons to deliver drone strikes inside Russia" https://english.nv.ua/russian-war/ukraine-uses-military-ball...>

"Ukraine Revives Military Balloons for Modern Warfare Needs: Report" https://thedefensepost.com/2026/02/18/ukraine-balloons-moder...>

Japan used a similar strategy, though to no strategic or tactical effect (six civilians were killed in Oregon), during WWII:'

Fu-Go balloon bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fu-Go_balloon_bomb>

In 1945, a Japanese Balloon Bomb Killed Six Americans, Five of Them Children, in Oregon https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/1945-japanese-balloon...>

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

#646

Post by dredmorbius »

tsimionescu wrote: post #449
ceejayoz wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just don't see how the fuel costs of getting things up to space winning out unless production is located up there. Starship's in theory targeting something like a million bucks in fuel for a launch. For a military that spends more than that on individual missiles , that's peanuts.

Starship is also in theory targetting to reach Mars in 2022.

Co-development of the SpaceX Tardis makes deadlines irrelevant.

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

#647

Post by dredmorbius »

Robotbeat wrote: post #342
lostlogin wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The next war is going to need the US to do something pretty spectacular if it’s going to reclaim the ground it’s lost in the Iran war. The situation there is an utter joke, and shows no sign of wrapping up any time soon.

That’s because there’s no political will for ground forces by the US because it’s a dumb war. If there was political will, then the area around the Hormuz strait would’ve been seized, as well as the nuclear sites secured. Carpet bombing, too, not just surgical strikes.

It's not merely that the US has not, will not, and/or can not put boots on the ground.

It's that regional bases and sea-based platforms from which the US has operated with impunity in previous conflicts, as recently as a decade ago, are no longer safe from retaliation. This puts the US, its forces, and perhaps more significantly its friends and allies in the region at risk in both the present and any future conflict(s).

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

#648

Post by ExoticPearTree »

squidbeak wrote: post #604
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuking all the major population centers would pretty much destroy the ability of Ukraine to manufacture weapons in any meaningful number and it would also deprive its army of any new soldiers, no reinforcements, no food supplies and so on. I think it will change the course of the war pretty fast and pretty drastically.

You're mistaken. A significant portion of Ukraine's manufacturing now happens abroad, out of Russia's reach. Meanwhile, a large part of its domestic production is decentralized and widely distributed. (You can easily find snobbish and pejorative comments by Rheinmetall's CEO about this.) Nuclear weapon use would lead to no meaningful military success, but it would immediately alienate the superpower Russia depends on…

Maybe I'm dumb, but what good are they then if you cannot use them to annihilate your enemy?

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

#649

Post by ExoticPearTree »

troupo wrote: post #565
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Yup. A country that starts nuking other countries in a genocidal war of conquest will not ever be seen as a threat by any other countries and will not suffer any consequences ever. Russia has already entered this war on the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everybody and nobody was going to bomb them.

I maybe missing something, but it feels bonkers to me of why with all the MIRVs they have on hundreds of nukes they do not feel the need to carpet bomb Ukraine with them.

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

#650

Post by ExoticPearTree »

the_gastropod wrote: post #598
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. China could just bomb Taiwan into submission if it chooses to. I don't think it is a problem for China to build 20-30k ballistic missile and launch them at Taiwan. Or send a million drones over there just to be sure nothing survives them. Taiwan is, unfortunately, in a very precarious situat…

1. “Reunification” is straight Chinese propaganda. Taiwan has never been part of the PRC. Japan has a stronger claim for “reunification” than the PRC does (and that’d also be very dumb) 2. Taiwan and Taiwanese allies also have agency. China doesn’t just get to fire 20-30k ballistic missiles at Taiwan with no consequences. The consequences would maybe be asymmetrical, but they’d no doubt be very painful for China.

1. That I see it as payback for the KMT losing the civil war.

2. Yeah, dunno about that, who will do what exactly to China? I also think that, since you mentioned it, Japan would intervene, China will pretty much use it as an excuse for retribution on what the Japanese did to the Chinese during WW2.

Post reply on HN