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

Medieval-style fortifications are back in the Sahel

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 82 posts

Re: Medieval-style fortifications are back in the Sahel

#31

Post by stymaar »

Fortifications never went anywhere.

Just in this century, the US used fortified camps in Iraq and Afghanistan, and so did the French in Sahel. And the Ukrainians fortified Dombas and effectively prevented the Russians to take it quickly. Then the Russians fortified the Zaporizhzhia frontline (the Surovikin line) which stopped the Ukrainian counter offensive in 2023.

And talking about Africa in particular, the border between Morocco and Algeria, and also Western Sahara, has been a fortified wall for the past 40 years now.

Re: Medieval-style fortifications are back in the Sahel

#32

Post by AnimalMuppet »

Amezarak wrote: post #30
dukeofdoom wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iran changed the game with their missile and drone defense ability forever I think. Obliterating US bases in the region, and used precise targeting (for example, hit actual correct hotel floor number hundreds of miles away where commanders where stationed with cheap drones ~$30k). So the only real protection now seems to be distance, and not being a target worth the missile. Individual motorbikes in Ukraine conflict,…

How many US ships did the Iranians hit? Ed: The answer suggests to me this is highly overblown in combination with the total number of US military casualties from missile and drone attacks (7). It makes “obliteration” of bases sound like extreme hyperbole and propaganda. It certainly suggests that, given one of the most powerful militaries in the world threw everything they had at the US and couldn’t do anything more…

Yes and no. They can't hit a moving target yet. They can hit a stationary one very precisely at a fairly long range.

They can't (yet) hit an aircraft carrier. They can hit an airbase, though, and have. That's more than nothing.

Re: Medieval-style fortifications are back in the Sahel

#33

Post by MagicMoonlight »

stymaar wrote: post #31

Fortifications never went anywhere. Just in this century, the US used fortified camps in Iraq and Afghanistan, and so did the French in Sahel. And the Ukrainians fortified Dombas and effectively prevented the Russians to take it quickly. Then the Russians fortified the Zaporizhzhia frontline (the Surovikin line) which stopped the Ukrainian counter offensive in 2023. And talking about Africa in particular, the border…

[dead]

Re: Medieval-style fortifications are back in the Sahel

#35

Post by Amezarak »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #32
Amezarak wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many US ships did the Iranians hit? Ed: The answer suggests to me this is highly overblown in combination with the total number of US military casualties from missile and drone attacks (7). It makes “obliteration” of bases sound like extreme hyperbole and propaganda. It certainly suggests that, given one of the most powerful militaries in the world threw everything they had at the US and couldn’t do anything more…

Yes and no. They can't hit a moving target yet. They can hit a stationary one very precisely at a fairly long range. They can't (yet) hit an aircraft carrier. They can hit an airbase, though, and have. That's more than nothing.

Not just carriers, they couldn’t even hit US Navy destroyers transiting the strait with massed attacks. E.g. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2-us-navy-destroyers-transit-st...

Accurate long-range attacks are not new. If anything they are less effective than at any other time in modern history.

Re: Medieval-style fortifications are back in the Sahel

#37

Post by csomar »

0xcafefood wrote: post #4

I thought walled towns died not due to state authority becoming stronger, but because offensive weaponry simply became effective enough to overcome walls. Walls can protect you from men with swords, but not from heavy artillery or bombers. Today, wouldn't a fleet of cheap drones render a wall moot?

ISIS-style soldiers usually have light-weaponry because they need to be mobile. Having heavy artillery or bombers will make them an easy target for an organized army which they are very not equipped to fight. Their advantage is in there ability to hit in random unprotected areas with little damage but to do it constantly and unpredictably.

Re: Medieval-style fortifications are back in the Sahel

#38

Post by michaelt »

Amezarak wrote: post #30
dukeofdoom wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iran changed the game with their missile and drone defense ability forever I think. Obliterating US bases in the region, and used precise targeting (for example, hit actual correct hotel floor number hundreds of miles away where commanders where stationed with cheap drones ~$30k). So the only real protection now seems to be distance, and not being a target worth the missile. Individual motorbikes in Ukraine conflict,…

How many US ships did the Iranians hit? Ed: The answer suggests to me this is highly overblown in combination with the total number of US military casualties from missile and drone attacks (7). It makes “obliteration” of bases sound like extreme hyperbole and propaganda. It certainly suggests that, given one of the most powerful militaries in the world threw everything they had at the US and couldn’t do anything more…

How many US warships did the Iranians need to hit?

Turns out, none. Plenty of stationary targets, like US-owned data centres in US-aligned countries. Plenty of huge, slow-moving, undefended tankers.

Re: Medieval-style fortifications are back in the Sahel

#39

Post by adolph »

allthetime wrote: post #26
dist-epoch wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on who you want to protect against. For example if you want to protect against hordes of teenagers stealing everything from an Apple store, you just need a button to deploy barbed wire at all entrances and exits, and then a few guards with rubber batons beat the shit out of everyone. When the state is weak, communities take the law into their own hands, which is why we see this medieval-style fortifications a…

Or you can just remotely brick the devices so there is no value in stealing them.

Isn’t that already the case, yet some amount of store theft still occurs?

It could be there is a base rate of people who don’t know yet and thus a natural rate would be higher if remote locking wasn’t a thing.

https://xkcd.com/1053/

Re: Medieval-style fortifications are back in the Sahel

#40

Post by Amezarak »

michaelt wrote: post #38
Amezarak wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many US ships did the Iranians hit? Ed: The answer suggests to me this is highly overblown in combination with the total number of US military casualties from missile and drone attacks (7). It makes “obliteration” of bases sound like extreme hyperbole and propaganda. It certainly suggests that, given one of the most powerful militaries in the world threw everything they had at the US and couldn’t do anything more…

How many US warships did the Iranians need to hit? Turns out, none. Plenty of stationary targets, like US-owned data centres in US-aligned countries. Plenty of huge, slow-moving, undefended tankers.

1. We’re not arguing about the strategic outcome of the war, which different people interpret in totally opposite ways based on their party affiliation.

2. The USN fired thousands of missiles at the Iranians so obviously they were highly motivated to retaliate. They tried and failed to do anything about it. Thus the idea that Iranian missile and drone tech changed the game would seem to be falsified, which is what this discussion is about. If anything it would appear that defense tech has changed things in the opposite way, considering its track record in prior conflicts.

Post reply on HN