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

661–670 of 701 posts

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

#661

Post by andrewflnr »

roenxi wrote: post #658
andrewflnr wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm just talking about the goals. That obviously doesn't imply anything about the existence of feasible ways to achieve them.

But it does imply at some level attempting to achieve them. At every stage of the war the US has taken (and continues to take) action that is more likely to close the strait than open it. To the point where people were pointing it out how this would game out years before the war actually happened. It is possible that the US military is so incompetent that they can't plan or that Trump has lost touch with reality. But…

You say Trump has "lost" touch with reality as if he ever had it. He comprehends that opening the strait is important but utterly lacks the mental or emotional capacity to understand in any level of detail what that requires.

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

#662

Post by d-cc »

dmsayer wrote: post #378
bix6 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for linking this is interesting. It sounds like they are still unable to produce many of the base components though? > most manufacturers of everything within Ukraine remain dependent on imported machining tools — traditionally Chinese, but increasingly Indian and, for those who can afford it, European. But for the cheapest components, simple base-line products like transistors, circuit boards, wiring, or sola…

Taiwan?

The revolution lives on, comrade.

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

#663

Post by opscure »

throwaway85825 wrote: post #614
edg5000 wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Basically yes. Ukraine has a big problem with soviet commanders who waste lives needlessly. The post Soviet younger commanders have much better reputations and use that to recruit, ie 'you can join my unit and won't be conscripted'. The popular and successful units grow and split into sub units. This way they dont have to fire the unpopular soviet era but politically connected commanders, they just slowly lose releva…

I often think about how culture impacts efficacy. Hindering individuals through reconditioning of a hierarchical top down structure (follow orders unconditionally) limits collaboration, cohesion, and creativity often in situations where it's needed most. I understand the advantages of rapid decision making, but I often think about how if any leader in the chain makes a poor decision it loses the trust of those below. Tactical, creative, non-conforming, and adaptive reduces single points of responsibility and failure. While this might exist in pockets, it's far from the norm in most traditional environments and I'm curious what a culture shift like this might yield at a wider scale.

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

#664

Post by ychnd »

0x59 wrote: post #301

WWII? Fabius did this to Hannibal more than a thousand years ago. The core of his strategy was to dunk on supplies, stall, and have the Carthaginians run out of food. I imagine Iran, Ukraine, and Russia all know about Fabian strategy.

More than two thousands years ago! Time flies ;)

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

#665

Post by troupo »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #649
troupo wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What you're missing is a simple bext step in your thought process: why are you so entirely sure that Russia will not suffer any single consequence for doing so?

(also this assumes that russia actuall has hundreds of working nukes)

(this also assumes that carpet bombing a country of 40 million people with nukes will find love and support inside Russia despite all the propaganda)

Edit: you have now replied many times with "I don't understand why Russia doesn't nuke Ukraine". Perhaps you should take the time to try and understand?

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

#666

Post by troupo »

esseph wrote: post #643
troupo wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Orbita…

> unloading them from giant military cargo planes so they can make the trip by land to Kyiv,

Something tells me that "trip by land to Kiev" is not "airlifted 24/7 into Ukraine" but exactly what I said several times already

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

#667

Post by ExoticPearTree »

troupo wrote: post #665
ExoticPearTree wrote: post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What you're missing is a simple bext step in your thought process: why are you so entirely sure that Russia will not suffer any single consequence for doing so? (also this assumes that russia actuall has hundreds of working nukes) (this also assumes that carpet bombing a country of 40 million people with nukes will find love and support inside Russia despite all the propaganda) Edit: you have now replied many times w…

> What you're missing is a simple bext step in your thought process: why are you so entirely sure that Russia will not suffer any single consequence for doing so?

There could be consequences. But I am wondering how painful would they be and if the US would get into a nuking game with them. Would it be worth it for the west to become a wasteland just because there needs to be consequences for Russia.

> Edit: you have now replied many times with "I don't understand why Russia doesn't nuke Ukraine". Perhaps you should take the time to try and understand?

Hence the question here again and again: why doesn’t Russia unleash the nuclear armageddon on Ukraine? They would stop the Ukraine’s attacks on itself and get a very large no-go zine between itself and NATO - win-win.

Otherwise why have nukes if you can’t use them?

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

#668

Post by troupo »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #667
troupo wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you're missing is a simple bext step in your thought process: why are you so entirely sure that Russia will not suffer any single consequence for doing so? (also this assumes that russia actuall has hundreds of working nukes) (this also assumes that carpet bombing a country of 40 million people with nukes will find love and support inside Russia despite all the propaganda) Edit: you have now replied many times w…

> What you're missing is a simple bext step in your thought process: why are you so entirely sure that Russia will not suffer any single consequence for doing so? There could be consequences. But I am wondering how painful would they be and if the US would get into a nuking game with them. Would it be worth it for the west to become a wasteland just because there needs to be consequences for Russia. > Edit: you have…

> Would it be worth it for the west to become a wasteland just because there needs to be consequences for Russia.

In your scenario you're saying that Russia is going to show its willingness to lay waste to everything in its genocidal war, including carpet-bombing a country of 40 million people with nuclear bombs. Making it surpass any war in history, including WWII.

Again, in this scenario, somehow, everything just stops, everything is handy-dandy, Russia suffers literally no consequences, everyone just says "oh yeah, the genocidal maniacs are satisfied now, they will never ever carpet bomb anyone else with nuclear bombs".

> why doesn’t Russia unleash the nuclear armageddon on Ukraine? They would stop the Ukraine’s attacks on itself and get a very large no-go zine between itself and NATO - win-win.

Because, once again, you seem to assume that Russia will suffer literally no consequences externally or internally for doing so.

E.g. Russia will be immediately carpet bombed themselves since we already know that their air defenses aren't worth shit.

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

#669

Post by telxosis »

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.

The idea is completely absurd to me.

China is constrained on this by near certain mutually assured economic destruction.

Even the food supply in China would basically be destroyed unless you believe that the population is going to just go back to a diet of largely rice with meat being a luxury.

20-30k ballistic missiles at Taiwan would cause a global depression that dwarfs the great depression. There would be almost no way the CCP survive this. That is why this subject is mostly people talking nonsense.

Reunification has to happen politically, persuasively, over time and without firing a shot.

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

#670

Post by cucumber3732842 »

LPisGood wrote: post #148
cucumber3732842 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tooth to tail is crappy PC/corporate-approved rename. The concept used to have a bunch of arrow and spear related names and a bunch of informal phallic counterparts all of which are better suited to the fundamental workflow of mechanized offensive operations.

For curiosity’s sake, what were these things referred to historically and informally?

The spear analogy dates at least as far back as 1940. Heavy mechanized units as the tip and then reinforcing units behind them, further units to secure flanks, logistics flow. From the metal differences across the head of a spear (something that people who have a passing familiarity of artillery or naval gunnery will be able to relate to) the finish of the handle to keep the wood in good shape the analogies basically write themselves. The dick jokes are an obvious follow on.
Post reply on HN