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

'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: 'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

#11

Post by FloorEgg »

OgsyedIE wrote: post #10
FloorEgg wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've also been shocked at the abandonment of US soft power. While I see many possibilities for what is really going on (including the left and right narratives, and a few others) what seems most likely is that the previous hegemony power system was built on oil and gas industrial productivity -> military might - hard power - and the world is transitioning to a new hard power paradigm and during these transitions soft…

Military might depends either on domestic retention of a skilled machine tools workforce (as Iran has) or the mass import of a skilled foreign machine tools workforce (as Russia did before 2022, their munitions industry was the Siemens corporation's single biggest customer). Look at the example of the failed munitions plant in Texas in the last two years for what happens without either of the above.

Do you think it's reasonable to say that since at least around the 1970s, on net, the people running the United States have been consistently trading power for greed?

Re: 'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

#12

Post by OgsyedIE »

FloorEgg wrote: post #11
OgsyedIE wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Military might depends either on domestic retention of a skilled machine tools workforce (as Iran has) or the mass import of a skilled foreign machine tools workforce (as Russia did before 2022, their munitions industry was the Siemens corporation's single biggest customer). Look at the example of the failed munitions plant in Texas in the last two years for what happens without either of the above.

Do you think it's reasonable to say that since at least around the 1970s, on net, the people running the United States have been consistently trading power for greed?

No, I think that's a hopelessly reductive interpretation that mistakes stupidity for malice.

Since arguably the 1940s the people running the United States have been consistently trading power over the domains they consider illegible and confusing for power over the domains they consider tractable and familiar, under elite job market conditions where they are incentivised to know as much as possible about abstract court politics and the manipulation of language and as little as possible about the real world.

Even right now, you see the Trump family, the various oligarch families in the cabinet, fiddling the figures, stealing and enabling mass disasters, they are doing what they believe is right and good while having horrific delusions.

Two excellent primers on this, albeit with more of a focus on the parallel problem in the EU establishment than the US, are below:

https://aurelien2022.substack.com/p/not-getting-it-together

https://aurelien2022.substack.com/p/starting-from-zero

Re: 'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

#13

Post by Zigurd »

FloorEgg wrote: post #9
Zigurd wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Iran war demonstrates a lack of understanding of the basic arithmetic of hard power. Iran is 3X to 5X Iraq, depending on what dimension of an invasion plan you're thinking of. Failure to gather at least 3X the resources applied to Iraq means certain failure. The vandalization of US soft power mechanisms by Musk and others comes into this too. Nobody else is willing to jump into this mess and get dragged down with…

I've also been shocked at the abandonment of US soft power. While I see many possibilities for what is really going on (including the left and right narratives, and a few others) what seems most likely is that the previous hegemony power system was built on oil and gas industrial productivity -> military might - hard power - and the world is transitioning to a new hard power paradigm and during these transitions soft…

That's an odd take. The thing that's going to make China think twice would be good relations with Europe, and a joint willingness to isolate China if it comes to that. I don't know any politicians on the left or center who are hostile to Europe.

China's relative advantage is like a club level tennis player: all you need to win is to make fewer dumb errors.

Re: 'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

#14

Post by Zigurd »

FloorEgg wrote: post #11
OgsyedIE wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Military might depends either on domestic retention of a skilled machine tools workforce (as Iran has) or the mass import of a skilled foreign machine tools workforce (as Russia did before 2022, their munitions industry was the Siemens corporation's single biggest customer). Look at the example of the failed munitions plant in Texas in the last two years for what happens without either of the above.

Do you think it's reasonable to say that since at least around the 1970s, on net, the people running the United States have been consistently trading power for greed?

Another really weird take. While George HW Bush was hardly a great president, he did manage to not fumble the liberation of Eastern Europe at the end of the Cold War. I think he's underappreciated.

Re: 'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

#15

Post by ahartmetz »

FloorEgg wrote: post #9
Zigurd wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Iran war demonstrates a lack of understanding of the basic arithmetic of hard power. Iran is 3X to 5X Iraq, depending on what dimension of an invasion plan you're thinking of. Failure to gather at least 3X the resources applied to Iraq means certain failure. The vandalization of US soft power mechanisms by Musk and others comes into this too. Nobody else is willing to jump into this mess and get dragged down with…

I've also been shocked at the abandonment of US soft power. While I see many possibilities for what is really going on (including the left and right narratives, and a few others) what seems most likely is that the previous hegemony power system was built on oil and gas industrial productivity -> military might - hard power - and the world is transitioning to a new hard power paradigm and during these transitions soft…

That is a weak variant of the "Trump is playing 4D chess" argument. No, he isn't - he is an idiot, he's playing tic-tac-toe, and he's losing.

Re: 'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

#16

Post by grebc »

OgsyedIE wrote: post #12
FloorEgg wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think it's reasonable to say that since at least around the 1970s, on net, the people running the United States have been consistently trading power for greed?

No, I think that's a hopelessly reductive interpretation that mistakes stupidity for malice. Since arguably the 1940s the people running the United States have been consistently trading power over the domains they consider illegible and confusing for power over the domains they consider tractable and familiar, under elite job market conditions where they are incentivised to know as much as possible about abstract cou…

I’d take the re-election of Trump to mean the US isn’t a serious society/people anymore.

I don’t say that lightly, and it’s certainly not just the US that has that problem either. Australia, where I live, is infected with it.

Re: 'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

#17

Post by FloorEgg »

OgsyedIE wrote: post #12
FloorEgg wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think it's reasonable to say that since at least around the 1970s, on net, the people running the United States have been consistently trading power for greed?

No, I think that's a hopelessly reductive interpretation that mistakes stupidity for malice. Since arguably the 1940s the people running the United States have been consistently trading power over the domains they consider illegible and confusing for power over the domains they consider tractable and familiar, under elite job market conditions where they are incentivised to know as much as possible about abstract cou…

> Since arguably the 1940s the people running the United States have been consistently trading power over the domains they consider illegible and confusing for power over the domains they consider tractable and familiar, under elite job market conditions where they are incentivised to know as much as possible about abstract court politics and the manipulation of language and as little as possible about the real world.

My question was grounded in ignorance and curiosity. Appreciate the response, gives me a lot to think about. Cheers

Re: 'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

#18

Post by [deleted] »

Zigurd wrote: post #14
FloorEgg wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think it's reasonable to say that since at least around the 1970s, on net, the people running the United States have been consistently trading power for greed?

Another really weird take. While George HW Bush was hardly a great president, he did manage to not fumble the liberation of Eastern Europe at the end of the Cold War. I think he's underappreciated.

[deleted]

Re: 'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

#19

Post by lovich »

Zigurd wrote: post #13
FloorEgg wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've also been shocked at the abandonment of US soft power. While I see many possibilities for what is really going on (including the left and right narratives, and a few others) what seems most likely is that the previous hegemony power system was built on oil and gas industrial productivity -> military might - hard power - and the world is transitioning to a new hard power paradigm and during these transitions soft…

That's an odd take. The thing that's going to make China think twice would be good relations with Europe, and a joint willingness to isolate China if it comes to that. I don't know any politicians on the left or center who are hostile to Europe. China's relative advantage is like a club level tennis player: all you need to win is to make fewer dumb errors.

You don’t know if any politicians who are hostile to Europe via threatening to annex Greenland, not recognize the UK’s sovereign claims to the Falkland Islands, or literally stealing their money after the Swiss put a pause on advanced payments for missile systems that were going to be delayed for 4-5 years?

Re: 'They shot all their weapons; they trashed their ships; they ran out of money'

#20

Post by FloorEgg »

Zigurd wrote: post #13
FloorEgg wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've also been shocked at the abandonment of US soft power. While I see many possibilities for what is really going on (including the left and right narratives, and a few others) what seems most likely is that the previous hegemony power system was built on oil and gas industrial productivity -> military might - hard power - and the world is transitioning to a new hard power paradigm and during these transitions soft…

That's an odd take. The thing that's going to make China think twice would be good relations with Europe, and a joint willingness to isolate China if it comes to that. I don't know any politicians on the left or center who are hostile to Europe. China's relative advantage is like a club level tennis player: all you need to win is to make fewer dumb errors.

As an outsider with no loyalty to any US political party it looks to me like both sides are weakening US hegemony in entirely different ways and have been for a while now. It's also clear there are two distinct incompatible realities projected via the media, and the Americans who only expose themselves to one of the realities only judge, and therefore can't empathize, with the other.

I'm sure that anyone who is e.g. a Democrat is offended by me saying that I've noticed the both sides weakening the US and will want me to list examples, but I'm not going to do that because anytime I have in the past people respond with extreme hostility instead of curiosity. If you don't agree with me that's fine move along.

Post reply on HN