Live data from Hacker News

The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

economist.com

61–70 of 85 posts

Re: The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

#61
post #34

>William Owen, the editor of Military Strategy Magazine and an adviser to the British army, says that better trained and equipped armies would not be tied down in the first place. If first-rate Israeli kit and training were used against an opponent of the standard of Russia or Ukraine, he argues, $3,000 FPVs would be “mostly, if not completely, irrelevant”. Oh how much I wish Mr Owen would be sent to the front lines…

So hes partly right. The reason why drones are _so_ devastating in ukraine is that there is no air superiority. that standard "modern" way is bomb the living shit out of anything armoured, and then push forward with your own armour. Hence why ukraine needed so many javelins to stop armour and helicopters. Its also why despite the sheer amount of stuff that Iran et al threw at Isreal, it hardly got through. unlike Oma…

> the standard "modern" war

For the US and friends is terrorizing the enemy, his forces, his civilian population into giving up. Is feeding a civil war until he crumbles.

> bomb the living shit out of anything armoured

That’s absolutely not what’s missing in Ukraine.

> and then push forward with your own armour.

And then, as soon as you assemble let alone move in the open, you get wrecked. No one has an easy answer for this. The answer is what we’re already seeing: attrition.

> Iran

Iran prevailed in an highly asymmetric conflict by successfully attriting US/Israeli air defenses and surviving their attacks, depleting their arsenals. Which was their goal, not “levelling Tel Aviv”—however much they would have liked to.

Finally, what Israel is facing in Lebanon right now is but a pale imitation of what’s going on in Ukraine. But bad enough. One can imagine what just a couple days of Ukraine-level losses would do to them, militarily and politically. No matter their air superiority.

Re: The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

#62
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump attacked Iran because Israel was going to attack Iran: Rubio says US struck Iran fearing it would retaliate for Israeli attack - https://abcnews.com/Politics/rubio-us-struck-iran-fearing-re... Part of a long trend: Israeli Operatives Who Aided Harvey Weinstein Collected Information on Former Obama Administration Officials to undermine the Iran Nuclear Deal - https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/israeli-oper…

> Trump attacked Iran because Israel was going to attack Iran When Israel attacked Iran in 2025, Iran was very, very clear that they did not consider it an attack from the US and did not retaliate against US assets. The US choose to support israel with intel and weapons, and Iran still didn't strike at US interests. Then the US joined forces with israel to push for bigger concessions from Iran just before the ceasefi…

Oh I'm not saying Israel's decision to attack Iran forced the US to join in on strategic or self-defense grounds. I'm saying it forced them because the US does whatever Israel tells them. That is why both US lead negotiators with Iran are Jewish [1], why US congressmen have Israeli flags outside their offices [2], why Nancy Pelosi said the #1 priority in the Capitol is Israel [3], why Netanyahu gets 3 straight minutes of applause when he starts his speech in Congress (and lots of applause interruptions later) [4].

Because when 50% of donations to the Democratic party, and 25% of donations to the Republican party, are from Jewish sources [5], it can't be any other way.

[1] In practice, critical negotiations, with Iran and elsewhere, have been put in the hands of two people, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, with close personal relationships with the president and obvious economic stakes in the relevant conflicts. - https://snyder.substack.com/p/on-superpower-suicide

[2] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2qjLaSyAWj8

[3] if this Capitol crumbled to the ground, the one thing that would remain would be our commitment to our aid, I don’t even call it our aid, our cooperation with Israel. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1LmnQRnw8I

[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6XZKE7a_F4

[5] https://www.jpost.com/us-elections/us-jews-contribute-half-o...

Re: The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

#63
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect the plan was (and still is) to weaken authorities in Iran so that the people take over. Or have the Iranian government reach a deal that would be less favorable to them. A plan with quite long odds you could rightly say, but not as stupid as subduing them by invading them I suppose.

It would help if the US didn't ignore the actual protests in Iran and haven't let the Iranian regime slaughter the protesters in hundreds or even thousands.

It was even worse than that - the US leader actively encouraged the protests, only to forget about them once the slaughter began.

"Iranian Patriots, keep protesting – take over your institutions!!! ... help is on its way", said Trump. And then... nothing. They could have provided money, weapons, intelligence, support of all kinds but instead chose to let their potential allies be slaughtered.

Similarly, the US facilitated the dismantling of Rojava, the Kurdish polity in North-Eastern Syria. The Kurds had been led to believe that they'd be able to retain some form of semi-autonomy, but the US pulled the rug from them at the last possible moment. And then, er, wondered why their cousins in Iran weren't willing to rise up against the government there.

It's almost as if they spent the whole of January putting themselves into the worst possible position for achieving their war aims. What did they hope to achieve by sabotaging themselves in that way?

Re: The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

#64
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you mean Iran, they were actually following agreement in JCPOA and not building nukes, until Trump broke it. And they begotiated while USA bombed them twice during negotiations. This situation was created by USA and comment rightfully focuses on people who created it. > brown people cant be actors only acted upon Did you read some different comment? Cause nothing in that comment implies this. But in fact, this cha…

I'm not sure what point you are replying to; my reading of GP's (somewhat incoherent) post is that Iran has more in common with Nazi Germany than it does with (most) of western civilisation. If we're working on a scale of 1-10 for "how close is a ruling government to Nazi Germany", Iran is maybe a 7 or 8. The US, despite Trump's best efforts, is still only at a relatively benign 3 or 4.

> my reading of GP's (somewhat incoherent) post is that Iran has more in common with Nazi Germany than it does with (most) of western civilisation.

I not sure what I am supposed to take away from this comparison. I never claimed Iran, UAE or Saudi are western civilizations. And conversely, Nazi Germany was a product of western civilization and still have active western fans. Notably, in the form of German AfD and guess who was giving them money and supporting them lately. And also notably in the form of Stephen Miller and sigh heiling American business leaders and politicians.

> If we're working on a scale of 1-10 for "how close is a ruling government to Nazi Germany", Iran is maybe a 7 or 8.

The relevant difference being that Nazi Germany started the war of conquest. In this case, USA started this war for no good reason and celebrates conquest. Nazi Germany committed genocide. Israel committed genocide and USA punished people from saying it out loud. Iran, UAE and Saudi all mistreat their minorities, Iran probably the most. And still, Iranian minorities specifically refused to join the war, because they knew they will be betrayed again if they do.

Iran is oppressive dictatorship - but original war plan was to keep it as oppressive dictatorship and negotiate with new head for oil. Like what happened in Venezuela. Iran is what happens when Islam goes bad.

And on top of it all, USA seems to despise other western democratic countries, is attacking them as much as it can and is trying to make them weaker. And supports those far right movements.

> still only at a relatively benign 3 or 4

USA is better country then Iran internally. Absolutely. It is also massively more powerful and is causing more issues then Iran can cause. Greenland thing was not benign. Financial help to AFD is not benign. AFD are literally people who want nazi germany happen again. Support to Russia is not benign. Starting the war against Iran and causing worldwide economic issues worldwide is not benign. Murdering those boatsmen is not benign.

Re: The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Both are wars instigated by the leaders of great powers having nukes and a lot of empty land does not make russia "great power", and their war results match this.

By your definition, there are no great military powers in the world right now.

Is that not sort of the obvious conclusion, right now? Military power is in flux, and not what it was even ten years ago?

It sure feels like “soft power” is “real” power - at least until (if) someone sorts out a defensive strategy. Bluster and bullshit appear to get very limited results, no matter how many missiles are behind them.

Re: The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

#66
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think an honest assessment of the history reveals that the Islamic Republic has been far more hostile to Israel and far stabler than the Shah, who oversaw a deeply unpopular monarchy and was deposed by his own people

I don't disagree with this, it's just that there's no reason to assume Israel simply wants the least hostile Iranian government. We never saw a real effort to replace the Islamic Republic, not even now. Likewise there was never an attempt to replace Hamas in the Palestinian territories. Well also, about Pahlavi being deposed by his own people, who really knows.

What do you think Israel’s objective is then? It seems rather clear to me that they have expansionist ambitions which necessitate defeating their neighboring foes, who are backed by Iran. A non-hostile Iran is an Iran that does not back these foes. There has been no attempt to replace Hamas because Israel’s goal is the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.

Re: The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

#67
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Trump attacked Iran because Israel was going to attack Iran When Israel attacked Iran in 2025, Iran was very, very clear that they did not consider it an attack from the US and did not retaliate against US assets. The US choose to support israel with intel and weapons, and Iran still didn't strike at US interests. Then the US joined forces with israel to push for bigger concessions from Iran just before the ceasefi…

Oh I'm not saying Israel's decision to attack Iran forced the US to join in on strategic or self-defense grounds. I'm saying it forced them because the US does whatever Israel tells them. That is why both US lead negotiators with Iran are Jewish [1], why US congressmen have Israeli flags outside their offices [2], why Nancy Pelosi said the #1 priority in the Capitol is Israel [3], why Netanyahu gets 3 straight minute…

Conflating “Jewish” with “loves and supports Netanyahu” is a bald-faced antisemitic trope.

Pretending Kushner’s bullshit has anything to do with being a Jew and not being willing to sell anyone or anything for a dollar is just silly.

The pro-Israel group is just as likely, maybe moreso given the current administration and the people like Thiel running it, to be apocalyptic Christians, trying to bring on their own idiotic vision of the end times.

Re: The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

#68
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh I'm not saying Israel's decision to attack Iran forced the US to join in on strategic or self-defense grounds. I'm saying it forced them because the US does whatever Israel tells them. That is why both US lead negotiators with Iran are Jewish [1], why US congressmen have Israeli flags outside their offices [2], why Nancy Pelosi said the #1 priority in the Capitol is Israel [3], why Netanyahu gets 3 straight minute…

Conflating “Jewish” with “loves and supports Netanyahu” is a bald-faced antisemitic trope. Pretending Kushner’s bullshit has anything to do with being a Jew and not being willing to sell anyone or anything for a dollar is just silly. The pro-Israel group is just as likely, maybe moreso given the current administration and the people like Thiel running it, to be apocalyptic Christians, trying to bring on their own idi…

> Conflating “Jewish” with “loves and supports Netanyahu” is a bald-faced antisemitic trope.

I guess "Jewish has nothing to do with support for the Jewish state" would have sounded too silly, so you used Netanyahu instead. Luckily we have opinion polls to prove the "trope" true: https://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/646214/suppo...

The group with the most sympathy for Israel, and least for Palestine, is, unsurprisingly, Jewish.

Re: The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

#69
post #8

"There are other similarities between Ukraine and Iran. Both are wars instigated by the leaders of great powers in the apparent belief of easy victory. Both have developed in ways those leaders did not anticipate into something like a stalemate—stalemates in which, for Russia and America alike, a lack of victory looks increasingly like defeat. Are technological changes making the role of the defender easier? Or syste…

> and Ukrainians would welcome Russian troops as liberators while Zelensky's government would fold immediately. It is wild how many conflicts involve this blunder. I can’t think of a single major example where the advisors were right. It’s such a great example of believing your own propaganda and/or being too afraid to actually look under the hood of your claims to your leader. Autocracy tends to breed lying yes men…

There are many ethnic Russians in Eastern Ukraine that really welcomed the Russian army. The problem is that the rest of the country is not that happy about this.

Re: The dangerous delusion of modern warfare

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So hes partly right. The reason why drones are _so_ devastating in ukraine is that there is no air superiority. that standard "modern" way is bomb the living shit out of anything armoured, and then push forward with your own armour. Hence why ukraine needed so many javelins to stop armour and helicopters. Its also why despite the sheer amount of stuff that Iran et al threw at Isreal, it hardly got through. unlike Oma…

"Air superiority" wouldn't do anything in 2026 unless you're fighting an African tribe with ak47s in a fullscale war and even then your enemies would probably supply the tribe with some air defense systems that would cause trouble for the pilots.

You establish air superiority first by doing supression of enemy air defences, then destroying any offensive capabilities they might have (air bases, fighters), and then you rule the skies.
Post reply on HN