Author Topic: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War  (Read 397732 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18543
    • View Profile
Tail wags the dog
« Reply #605 on: September 21, 2016, 04:13:27 PM »
tail wags the dog:

http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-iraq-mosul-20160921-snap-story.html

Why announce this before an offensive , right before an election?  :wink:
« Last Edit: September 21, 2016, 06:55:46 PM by Crafty_Dog »


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #607 on: October 03, 2016, 01:53:34 PM »
Any chance there is a transcript of this Big Dog?  I read faster than people talk   :-D

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Who is #1?
« Reply #608 on: November 06, 2016, 11:45:23 AM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18543
    • View Profile
boondoggles
« Reply #609 on: December 19, 2016, 05:04:10 AM »
The zumwalt which has had 3 breakdowns is more expensive than an aircraft carrier .   The 4 billion for air force one was a close second:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443165/zumwalt-class-navy-stealth-destroyer-program-failure

The revolving door of the military industrial complex  is the exact same as the lobbyist politician revolving door of greed.

Sure we all want a strong military and the most advanced weapons systems but not with open check books.

Trump is absolutely correct in questioning the cost of air force one.   And he needs to start cleaning the swamp of our military government political complex people.



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #610 on: December 19, 2016, 02:58:58 PM »
His new rules blocking government employees from lobbying for 5 years after leaving government are simply brilliant.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18543
    • View Profile
F 35 boon doggle is putting it mildly
« Reply #612 on: January 06, 2017, 01:39:02 PM »
From this article it is clear that 56 years after Eisenhower's warning - no one listened to him

Yeah let's get ripper off spending trillions while china and russia rip off the designs for peanuts on the dollar to copy them for stuff that doesn't work

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443612/f-35-donald-trump-should-cancel-failed-f-35-fighter-jet-program

It is one tiger tank vs 100 T 34s.

bigdog

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2321
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #613 on: January 08, 2017, 05:49:26 AM »
Any chance there is a transcript of this Big Dog?  I read faster than people talk   :-D

Brooks has a highly regarded book of the same name.

bigdog

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2321
    • View Profile
Re: F 35 boon doggle is putting it mildly
« Reply #614 on: January 08, 2017, 05:49:51 AM »
From this article it is clear that 56 years after Eisenhower's warning - no one listened to him

Yeah let's get ripper off spending trillions while china and russia rip off the designs for peanuts on the dollar to copy them for stuff that doesn't work

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443612/f-35-donald-trump-should-cancel-failed-f-35-fighter-jet-program

It is one tiger tank vs 100 T 34s.

http://nsnetwork.org/cms/assets/uploads/2015/08/F-35_FINAL.pdf

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: F 35 boon doggle is putting it mildly
« Reply #615 on: January 08, 2017, 11:46:45 AM »
From this article it is clear that 56 years after Eisenhower's warning - no one listened to him

Yeah let's get ripper off spending trillions while china and russia rip off the designs for peanuts on the dollar to copy them for stuff that doesn't work

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443612/f-35-donald-trump-should-cancel-failed-f-35-fighter-jet-program

It is one tiger tank vs 100 T 34s.

http://nsnetwork.org/cms/assets/uploads/2015/08/F-35_FINAL.pdf

Well, it's provided China with low cost R&D for their much less costly fighters that they produce at much greater numbers.

So, we got that going for us.

http://www.atimes.com/article/chinas-spies-gain-valuable-us-defense-technology-report/
« Last Edit: January 08, 2017, 01:01:21 PM by G M »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #618 on: January 30, 2017, 04:02:06 AM »
I share similar and equally non-expert suspicions that it is too complex and hard to keep flying under less than ideal conditions and wonder about the range of problems it solves.

Fortunately it is not left to me-- in Sec Def Mattis we have someone whose judgment I trust.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18543
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Sunni Arab states on buying spree
« Reply #620 on: February 09, 2017, 07:43:03 PM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Interview with Gen. Stanley McChrystal
« Reply #622 on: February 10, 2017, 04:52:25 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Are we at the start of a Tech World War?
« Reply #623 on: February 10, 2017, 04:54:27 AM »
Third post

Are We at the Start of a Tech World War?
It’s a battle unlike any we’ve ever seen before
Nick Bilton
06 July 2016

During this past year, various theories have been posited to suggest that our current political mood might foretell a reckoning so dark that it could eventually spiral into a veritable international crisis—some terrifying World War III doomsday scenario. Some of these hypotheses have been undeniably hysterical, for sure. But others have been remarkably, even eerily, sober. And now, with a world on edge, they have gone mainstream.

In the weeks preceding the Brexit vote, outgoing prime minister David Cameron admonished listeners that the United Kingdom’s divorce from the European Union could cause instability in the region that might indeed lead to a significant geopolitical conflict. Various members of the media echoed this sentiment, and offered up a theory that other countries might subsequently exit the E.U. (Sweden, Holland, Hungary, and Greece are on the short list to try to walk first), potentially setting off a battle of influence between Russia and the United States, a Cold War 2.0.

Three-thousand-plus miles away, in America, politicians, the media, and most reasonable humans have been agonizing that Donald Trump’s foreign policy (if you can dignify a plan as sophisticated as putting the world in a vice grip and giving it a noogie, while calling it names) would lead to another martial crisis. And then there’s the other side of the coin. Trump himself has argued that if he is not voted in as president, a populist uprising might ensue and we could end up in the midst of just such a violent battle. (Personally, I’d prefer to take my chances.)

It doesn’t take a political scientist to see that the world is on edge. And technology, we often forget, undergirds this political reality. The Internet and innovation have made cultures around the globe collide with historically unprecedented force. With the exception of perhaps a handful of rogue states, like North Korea, we all now eat at the same McDonald’s, use the same iPhones and discuss the same hot-button topics on the same social networks. Every corporation on the planet can do this thanks to—not in large part, but in all parts—technology.

And it’s that same technology that has helped oversee an extraordinary re-distribution of wealth that has tilted American society off its axis. Since 1979, when Steve Jobs was first visiting Xerox Parc and learning about the computer mouse—a moment that would change computing, and hence society, forever—the bottom 80 percent of American families has had their share of the country’s income fall, while the top 20 percent has enjoyed modest gains. The top 1 percent, of course, has coincidentally seen their income rise stratospherically. To borrow from Bernie Sanders’s stump speech, the richest 1 percent in America have almost 40 percent of our country’s wealth, while the bottom 90 percent have 73 percent of the debt. This is largely the result of technology. And just wait until our work force is truly affected by the rise of robots and automation.

You don’t have to look too far back into history to see that when the marginalized have had it with the system, it doesn’t take a lot to set flame to tinder. World War I didn’t begin with two countries invading each other. It was inaugurated by a tense global climate, a matrix-like alliance system, and the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, an heir to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, by a passionate 19-year-old in Sarajevo. It was only one spark that blew up the world.

Technology is also likely to be at the center of the next major geopolitical battle. The anti-immigration, anti-one percent, anti-capitalism and anti-everything else we’re seeing right now isn’t just going to go away in a society where people feel their voices are not being heard. They’re going to continue to try to affect change, and increasingly, they will rely on technology. And it’s that same technology that is likely to ensure that all future wars bear little resemblance to previous ones.

I learned this terrifying lesson a few years ago, when I attended a small conference in Canada focused, in large part, on futuristic tech—robots, cyborgs and artificial intelligence, usual stuff like that. But at some point, an older man calmly made his way to the lectern, and placed on the projector a crude illustration of America with three concentric circles emanating from the center. The man introduced himself as a former government spy, offered up some impressive credentials, and said that he had seen some dark things in his lifetime, but the darkest was still to come.

The next major war, he said, wouldn’t be fought with bombs, men, or even robots. It wouldn’t be waged on a battlefield or in the sky. Instead, it would be a silent war. He explained that during the past couple of decades, most of the world’s private and public infrastructure had become predominantly digital. And that the next major war could decimate that infrastructure. Water-treatment facilities, oil pipelines, dams, electrical grids, telecommunications platforms, food shipments, public and private transportation, traffic lights, prisons, every single drip of media—and a long, long list of other things we need for survival but take for granted—would all be vulnerable.

What could happen in such a scenario? According to this man’s prophecy, at first people wouldn’t know what had happened. The lights would simply go out. Our smartphones and computers would be black rectangles. The Internet: poof! Water infrastructure would stop working, power plants would go offline. Cars that were built after the 1970s, when manufacturers started adding integrated circuits, would never start again. Crops, which are now operated by digital irrigation systems, would die. And that would all be in the first few hours. Imagine what would happen in the coming days, weeks, and months.

How could such a terrifying thing happen? There are several scenarios. The concentric circles on the man’s slides were meant to illustrate the fallout from an E.M.P., or an electromagnetic pulse bomb, which can fry computer circuits hundreds of miles away. A silent flash later and we would essentially be sent back centuries, he told the audience. He noted that it might sound hyperbolic, but when you think about just how dependent we are on all of those little computer chips, it’s actually rather terrifying. Another theory for such a catastrophic event, and perhaps a much more likely scenario, is the prospect of computer hackers—possibly from an adversarial country—taking down power plants, water systems, the Internet, or private infrastructure. (America has been trying to retrofit its infrastructure to avoid this, but it’s still unclear if it’s avoidable at all.)

It’s important to understand that the right hackers, with the right tools, wouldn’t just crash our computer systems, forcing us to hit the power button and restart them. Real cyber warfare could destroy actual machines. We saw this happen with the Stuxnet virus, in 2010, where security experts had identified a malicious computer worm (nicknamed “the world’s first digital weapon”) which was built to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program by making its centrifuges spin so fast that that they tore themselves apart. (Numerous reports claim that the worm was built by the United States and Israel.) Then there are the endless data breaches that have occurred with regularity over the past few years. Maybe there’s a worm already sitting somewhere inside our computers, waiting to be prodded awake.

Over the years, I’ve learned that these predictions weren’t simply the doomsday prophecies of older government agents who attend conferences. A report this year from the The Gatestone Institute, a not-for-profit policy council and think tank, noted that “an EMP attack on the U.S. would leave the country with no electricity, no communications, no transportation, no fuel, no food, and no running water,” and that such a situation “could be far more deadly and dangerous to the United States than the most powerful H-Bomb ever built.” The same, it appears, could be true for hackers able to penetrate systems that govern our infrastructure. Just watch this staged cyberattack, which shows how some code can destroy the power grid.

It's also important to remember, of course, that technology facilitates democracy in many ways. Unlike previous turmoil and wars, where coups took place with guns or pitchforks, the stepping stones that could lead us into a worldwide tumult today seem to be taking place with voters at the ballot boxes. Whatever you make of the events in Britain or Austria, where the far-right anti-immigration candidate Norbert Hofer lost the presidency there by a mere 0.6 percent (Hofer may still end up as president as Austria threw the last election out plans host a re-vote), the demonstrations were largely bloodless. (The tragic murder of M.P. Jo Cox is, of course, a heinous exception.)

But it’s also important to recall that unstable government, and disaffected polities, can lead to mass unrest. And the consequences of that unrest could be more terrifying, and indefensible, than we have ever seen before. When you look at the ease with which North Korea (as the F.B.I. claims) broke into Sony, or Guccifer, the Romanian hacker, who has claimed responsibility for dozens of high-level breaches in the U.S., including penetrating Hillary Clinton’s server, or how easily the Chinese have popped in and out of our government systems, we shouldn’t scoff at the warnings that something like this could happen one day.All it took during World War I was one shot. Maybe all it will take for World War III is one line of code.

Nick Bilton is a special correspondent for Vanity Fair.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
RT: China at tech parity with US or is passing us
« Reply #624 on: February 16, 2017, 11:15:45 PM »
« Last Edit: February 17, 2017, 09:41:54 AM by Crafty_Dog »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18543
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #625 on: February 17, 2017, 07:59:02 AM »
 :-o :-o :-o

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18543
    • View Profile
Half brother of N, Korean Kim murdered with VX gas
« Reply #626 on: February 18, 2017, 07:33:01 AM »




bigdog

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2321
    • View Profile
An Active-Duty National Security Advisor: Myths and Concerns: McMaster
« Reply #630 on: March 03, 2017, 10:20:14 AM »
https://warontherocks.com/2017/02/an-active-duty-national-security-advisor-myths-and-concerns/

"Concern #4: An active-duty national security advisor will not have enough Washington experience to successfully navigate the intricacies of the West Wing. This could be a problem for many active-duty officers, but not for McMaster. A regular speaker for years at Washington think tanks and well-known among the policy establishment and on Capitol Hill, he is not simply a muddy-boots soldier thrust into the byzantine world of national politics. Frequently described as a warrior scholar, he not only knows many of the key Washington players but has also spent a great deal of time studying, thinking, and writing about both the use of force and the policy-making process."
« Last Edit: March 03, 2017, 11:23:12 AM by Crafty_Dog »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18292
    • View Profile
Re: An Active-Duty National Security Advisor: Myths and Concerns
« Reply #631 on: March 03, 2017, 11:02:37 AM »
Nice find, BD.  This President seems to make great appointment picks.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Trump proposes big cuts to Coast Guard
« Reply #632 on: March 04, 2017, 07:27:18 PM »
http://www.sfgate.com/technology/businessinsider/article/Trump-s-cutting-1-billion-from-the-Coast-Guard-10975671.php

As noted in the Arctic thread, we are bigly outnumbered in ice breakers and other means of establishing presence in the Arctic.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18543
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #633 on: March 05, 2017, 09:17:36 AM »
I tried to find the total CG budget and this is the best that come up.  Around 10 billion so a 10 % cut is big .  Especially when already strained. 

https://www.navytimes.com/story/military/2016/02/24/bigger-budget-more-troops-ahead-coast-guard/80846656/

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #634 on: March 05, 2017, 09:29:44 AM »
I tried to find the total CG budget and this is the best that come up.  Around 10 billion so a 10 % cut is big .  Especially when already strained. 

https://www.navytimes.com/story/military/2016/02/24/bigger-budget-more-troops-ahead-coast-guard/80846656/

The Coast Guard is often ignored, but very important to national security.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18543
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #638 on: April 24, 2017, 04:30:39 PM »
America's love for special forces.

Well what else are we going to do?  We can no longer blast the enemy off the face of the Earth with conventional weaponry because the NY slimes will show photos of collateral
damage.




G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile


bigdog

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 2321
    • View Profile
strategic mission creep for special operations
« Reply #642 on: June 04, 2017, 04:28:29 PM »
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-special-operations-20170525-story.html

"With special operations forces now posted in more than 80 countries, the ever-increasing set of missions and uptick in casualties give pause even to some military experts and veterans who support the expanding role.

“'You talk about mission creep — this is strategic mission creep all over the world,' said retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, a 37-year Army veteran. 'Special operations just isn’t sized to do that.'”
« Last Edit: June 04, 2017, 08:18:39 PM by Crafty_Dog »



Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #645 on: June 06, 2017, 01:36:31 PM »
Excellent and timely piece BD.  Coincidentally I have been in some interesting conversations recently about exactly this.  Let's continue to follow this!

Hearty agreement with that piece GM-- It does a nice job summarizing the extent of Obama's devastation and I will be using it elsewhere to that end.

 


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #647 on: June 06, 2017, 01:45:52 PM »
Excellent and timely piece BD.  Coincidentally I have been in some interesting conversations recently about exactly this.  Let's continue to follow this!

Hearty agreement with that piece GM-- It does a nice job summarizing the extent of Obama's devastation and I will be using it elsewhere to that end.

 

China has a tolerance for casualties we don't, and that figures into their doctrine. They are willing to take 100,000 to inflict a loss of 10,000 for us. The left is a force multiplier for America's enemies.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Re: Military Science, Military Issues, and the Nature of War
« Reply #648 on: June 06, 2017, 03:31:00 PM »
BD-- "Trump on Qatar" is probably better in the "Articulating our Strategy" thread-- I'm thinking in the aftermath of Trump's Riyadh speech, this could be a good moment to re-assess that.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 69460
    • View Profile
Is there a Saudi Arms deal?
« Reply #649 on: June 06, 2017, 06:06:17 PM »
Isn't there Qatar money behind Brookings now?  Anyway, caveat lector:

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/markaz/2017/06/05/the-110-billion-arms-deal-to-saudi-arabia-is-fake-news/