[HN Gopher] Rise of the war machines: Charting the evolution of ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Rise of the war machines: Charting the evolution of military
       technologies
        
       Author : howsilly
       Score  : 55 points
       Date   : 2021-10-29 20:41 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (journals.plos.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (journals.plos.org)
        
       | jonmc12 wrote:
       | The analysis of Cavalry and Iron is fascinating. As is the
       | correlation between MilTech and Phylogeny (cultural similarity
       | between polities).
       | 
       | I was most surprised that the authors had no strong theories
       | about the role of "agricultural productivity". In addition to
       | building armies from agricultural surplus, the ability to feed
       | horses, people, elephants, etc was key to large military
       | campaign. A common defensive technique against large army
       | campaigns included burning agriculture.. for instance Hannibal's
       | invasion of Rome. ie, the agriculture supply-chain itself seems
       | to be a necessary pre-requisite to military campaigns with
       | thousands of troops.
        
         | narrator wrote:
         | Speaking of examples of food innovation aiding military
         | campaigns, Napoleon's army was responsible for the development
         | of canned food[1].
         | 
         | [1] https://unrealfacts.com/napoleon-bonaparte-role-canned-
         | food-...
        
       | rogereur wrote:
       | I think wars in the future will be about who's better at computer
       | science. It will be programmers vs programmers, and computer
       | literacy will become the new military service and a national
       | security interest
        
         | doomjunky wrote:
         | I was astonished about the rapid expansion of the list of cyber
         | warfare forces in recent years and by the incredible mass of
         | cyber warfare capabilities of the United States.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cyber_warfare_forces
        
         | wolverine876 wrote:
         | It's just the technology of the day. From an earlier day:
         | 
         |  _" Oscar Wilde issued a memorable prediction of the war of the
         | future: "A chemist on each side will approach the frontier with
         | a bottle."_
         | 
         | https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2003/12/22/the-ring-and-t...
        
       | arminiusreturns wrote:
       | It all cumulates eventually into a race to singularity, which is
       | a zero sum game. Whoever gets there first wins. I promise to make
       | mine mostly benevolent.
       | 
       | I think emp warfare (actually already quietly a thing) is going
       | to be the in between for stuff like drones...
       | 
       | I hope the new generations of children are being taught old
       | school survival skills, because they are probably going to need
       | them.
       | 
       | One of the best books on the post nuclear world that I reference
       | often is _The Shield of Achilles_ , and one of the conclusions
       | that sticks with me is that there will be a rise in corporate
       | power and a fall of nation state power.
       | 
       | Fight club was right after all... "planet Starbucks" indeed.
        
         | usui wrote:
         | I don't think a rise in corporate power and a fall of nation
         | state power makes sense.
         | 
         | At some point, some group is going to need to have a monopoly
         | on violence. It doesn't matter if two groups of power don't
         | have complete dominance over a geographic region, they are
         | still two groups with power that look after their own kind and
         | perform diplomacy.
        
       | baybal2 wrote:
       | To me, it's very clear. Drone warfare will be the next big thing
       | after a nuke, and ICBM.
       | 
       | Probably it's the only thing which can shift the power poles from
       | the current nuclear states.
        
         | narrator wrote:
         | Drones warfare will really have a big affect on small
         | conflicts, not great power conflicts. Look at the recent
         | Azerbaijan/Armenia war. Drones give the power of having a full
         | fledged air force to small countries.
        
           | baybal2 wrote:
           | The role of drones in a big conflict is a tactical warfare
           | again regaining critical importance.
           | 
           | Mid-sized drones are an unkillable airforce, following the
           | front-line, with very small logistic footprint.
           | 
           | This way, nuclear countries cannot simply nuke your few
           | airfields, and deprive your force in the field of air cover,
           | and then bomb you with impunity with cheap bombs.
           | 
           | It very much means, a big conventional army can now get a
           | decent chance to reach your capital in case of continental
           | conflict even if you nuke all their airfields, and supply
           | caches.
           | 
           | In fact, a lighter force can now have much bigger chances to
           | win than a heavier one, burdened by expensive toys, with huge
           | demand on supplies, which will run out of fuel in a day if
           | the supply chain is interrupted. A tank without fuel is just
           | a bunker with 50 cal. on top.
        
         | yellow_postit wrote:
         | satellite sabotage/hijacking/repair is a field I would foresee
         | parallel accelerating development in. The critical path for
         | comms and vision when paired with drones makes leo a likely
         | playground but with the fun dynamics of many amateur
         | astronomers being able to watch what's going on.
        
       | wolverine876 wrote:
       | > Here we analyze the evolution of key military technologies in a
       | sample of pre-industrial societies world-wide covering almost
       | 10,000 years of history using Seshat: Global History Databank.
       | 
       | Does anyone here know about that Seshat Databank? It looks
       | fascinating, and I ran into it someplace else too. What is its
       | scope? Who actually uses it and for what?
        
         | nradov wrote:
         | You can just read their own description.
         | 
         | http://seshatdatabank.info/seshat-about-us/
        
           | DiggyJohnson wrote:
           | Re: Lazy Saturday Accommodations:
           | 
           | About Us Seshat: Global History Databank is a large,
           | international, multidisciplinary team of evolutionary
           | scientists, historians, anthropologists, archaeologists,
           | economists, and other social scientists. Our team includes
           | scholars from various backgrounds, policy makers, and
           | enthusiastic volunteers. Seshat is governed by an editorial
           | board, who oversee work done by postdoctoral researchers,
           | collaborators and consultants, and research assistants all
           | over the world. We are a nonprofit organization housed by the
           | innovative Think-Tank the Evolution Institute. Our mission is
           | to gather information from historical societies in order to
           | rigorously test different hypotheses about the rise and fall
           | of large-scale societies across the globe and human history.
           | 
           | The Seshat: Global History Databank is an umbrella
           | organization for numerous research projects that examine
           | different facets or themes of human life. Each project is
           | headed by various members of the Seshat Team along with a
           | group of consultants and contributing experts. Support for
           | our research comes from a variety of private donors,
           | academic, and governmental funding sources. The Seshat
           | (project) Wikipedia page provides some additional information
           | about how the project is organized and funded.
           | 
           | We also rely on the efforts of our team of Research
           | Assistants and Volunteers -- see how you can get involved in
           | this exciting organization!
        
       | enzino wrote:
       | One has to wonder how much of military "tech" is simply fake.
       | Until its use is demonstrated in war (which i absolutely do not
       | advocate, and is known to affected by propaganda as well), all
       | the incentives from weapons' manufacturers and buyers are to
       | exaggerate features and effectiveness. The main victim is the
       | gullible public, who funds the military-industrial complex with
       | taxes.
        
         | newaccount2021 wrote:
         | Or just catastrophically malfunction. What % of ICBMs launched
         | from silos in the Midwest will fail and land inside the US?
         | What % of those actually trigger?
        
         | ArtWomb wrote:
         | Arthur C. Clark's "Superiority" comes to mind ;)
        
         | throw3849 wrote:
         | Most countries have real safety concerns and their weapons are
         | VERY effective.
        
         | wolverine876 wrote:
         | It serves another purpose: Deterring potential enemies and
         | giving confidence to allies. For example, the US has
         | contributed to international peace East Asia for generations in
         | part by having underlying muscle available. And today, if the
         | US military tech was removed, I have a hard time imagining that
         | alliances with Japan, S Korea, and others, not to mention
         | Taiwan's freedom, would survive.
        
           | pasabagi wrote:
           | Wait, what? Did you miss the bit where they bombed North
           | Korea until they had killed about one fifth of the
           | population, and destroyed basically every form of standing
           | shelter? Or the war in Vietnam? Or the support for South
           | Korean dictators, even as they murdered their own people?
           | 
           | If that's a contribution to international peace, I hate to
           | imagine what you'd think was a contribution to regional
           | instability.
           | 
           | Even on a modern level, I think it's arguable that the 90's
           | gulf war, and then the 2000's one, were the drivers behind a
           | massive up-arming amongst states around the world that saw
           | themselves as on the US's potential 'regime change' hitlist.
           | It's often touted as a reason for China's massive arms
           | buildup, for example.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | bpodgursky wrote:
         | Even if 90% of military tech is fake (and I think "fake" more
         | usually means "we think it works, but turns out it doesn't"),
         | the other 10% can completely tip the scales in a war, to
         | disastrous effect (to the loser). History has a lot of examples
         | of technology which seemed preposterous until it completely
         | turned the tides of battles or wars (radar, tanks, mustard gas,
         | atomic bombs...)
         | 
         | Drone warfare is pretty clearly in this camp. Not a lot of
         | people followed the Armenia / Azerbaijan war last year, but
         | Armenia was fighting a war from 10 years ago (trench + urban
         | warfare), and they got slaughtered by armed drones. It was a
         | wipeout.
         | 
         | Nobody wants to be the Armenians in the next war... and often
         | that means wasting a lot of money figuring out what the next
         | breakthrough is.
        
           | enzino wrote:
           | your comment shows little knowledge of history. wars,
           | historically, have been won by the parties with the strongest
           | economy. that's even true for pre-historical conquests, as
           | far as we know. ww2 was won by the midwest industrial base,
           | and (mostly), the soviet's. check out the ussr industrial
           | growth in the 30s. (they didn't have the fed wrecking havoc.)
           | today there's no match for china, this is not even
           | controversial. thankfully they're smart enough to understand
           | that war doesn't make sense.
        
             | remarkEon wrote:
             | What.
             | 
             | The US spent 20 years fighting goat herders with AK-47s,
             | and lost. The CCCP did the same and also lost, albeit they
             | left actually left when they realized is was a mess (with a
             | little help from CIA, sure). There are other obvious
             | examples.
             | 
             | Economic might is a major determinant in how well you can
             | prosecute a war but it is by no means the only thing that
             | matters.
        
               | FromHoiPolloi wrote:
               | The vast majority of wars have been won by the party with
               | stronger economy. There are of course exceptions.
               | Especially when the theater of operation is on the other
               | side of the globe (i.e. 1776)
        
               | enzino wrote:
               | unless you live on the moon, it should be clear by now
               | that the afghanistan occupation's main objective was to
               | enrich contractors. the mission was accomplished.
        
               | remarkEon wrote:
               | I was there, so believe me I'm plenty familiar with the
               | grift that went on. But your characterization of economic
               | might Uber alles is not accurate, which was my point.
        
               | enzino wrote:
               | My objective is not to belittle the contribution of
               | individuals in war efforts. Clearly wars are won by
               | soldiers. But technology matters. Cement to make roads.
               | Steel to make ak47s (which are much more valuable, per
               | kilo of raw material, than drones). Coal to power it all.
               | And so on.
        
               | s5300 wrote:
               | Mujahideen that turned into Taliban were literally
               | trained by the CIA.
               | 
               | Calling them goat herders is either ignorance, racism, or
               | pushing whatever agenda you're trying to push.
               | 
               | Unless you're specifically speaking of the lowest caliber
               | grunts of their infantry, in which theirs are nearly the
               | same as ours. Mostly uneducated cannon fodder.
               | 
               | But yes, the US completely intentionally drew out the 20
               | years of war to put money in the military industrial
               | complexes pockets. The Taliban tried to surrender 2-3
               | months after we first attacked them IIRC, and we said no.
        
               | remarkEon wrote:
               | Unless those mujahideen were time travelers, no they were
               | not the same taliban I was fighting when I was there. I'm
               | well aware of the early history of how the Taliban
               | developed as a CIA proxy war against Soviet Union. It had
               | little to do with who we were fighting when we were
               | actually there. It's a Reddit-tier reductionist reading
               | of history to laugh it off as "you were fighting the
               | people CIA trained".
               | 
               | >Calling them goat herders is either ignorance, racism,
               | or pushing whatever agenda you're trying to push.
               | 
               | I'm accurately describing the people I personally fought
               | in this war. Good to know it's racist to accurately
               | describe them.
               | 
               | > Unless you're specifically speaking of the lowest
               | caliber grunts of their infantry, in which theirs are
               | nearly the same as ours. Mostly uneducated canon fodder.
               | 
               | I actually laughed out loud at this.
        
               | s5300 wrote:
               | I wasn't trying to imply that anybody fighting post 2000
               | or even earlier is fighting the people the CIA trained.
               | 
               | I'm saying that today's Taliban receive training by
               | yesterday's Taliban/whatever tribal spinoffs came from
               | that who were trained by the CIA.
               | 
               | Is that anything like the direct US Military/CIA
               | training? No, but the tribal knowledge of what _was_
               | learned doesn 't just disappear, it gets passed down.
               | 
               | Do you think it wasn't at all passed down? I too have
               | more than one friend in the marines that went on multiple
               | deployments mid 2000's-2010's. They seem to think it's a
               | fairly reasonable argument.
               | 
               | I see no point in the goat herders comment. We don't
               | refer to our basic infantry as former "factory laborers",
               | "retail workers", "hamburger flippers", or "highschool
               | dropouts" - all occupations I've seen go into the army,
               | and end up as actively deployed infantry.
               | 
               | I don't know though. If you want to say the hamburger
               | flippers got blown up by the goat herders IED, feel free.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | User23 wrote:
               | The US "cannon fodder" comes from the most advanced
               | civilian gun culture in the world. To this day the US
               | federal government actively supports civilian
               | marksmanship.
               | 
               | It was entertaining seeing how the CIA taught the 2021
               | Taliban proper trigger discipline compared to the fingers
               | resting on the trigger of a machine gun photos of the
               | early 2000s. Shades of Kipling there.
        
               | s5300 wrote:
               | Do you know what the Army Commendation medal is? To my
               | knowledge, it's mostly something that is given after your
               | first deployment/duty, fairly common but you have to have
               | done something meaningful.
               | 
               | A friend of mine got his commendation medal in what I
               | believe was Basic training (and this was just national
               | guard), or training slightly after basic. This, from his
               | understanding at the time, was fairly uncommon/unheard
               | of.
               | 
               | Why he received the medal? He was the singular person in
               | his platoon/training regiment that shot a perfect
               | score/sheet in their rifle marksman class. For some
               | reason, very few others came even close to perfect, most
               | more towards the (lol) average of what was required, or
               | worse than that.
               | 
               | He got a lot of questions from his peers as to what he
               | was doing differently to have so seemingly easily scored
               | perfectly. He said he wasn't really sure... asked "did
               | you zero your rifles?"
               | 
               | By his account, he was quite literally the singular
               | person, of a group of people all having military training
               | and fucking around with firearms and live ammunition,
               | that read the actual manual, instructions, and properly
               | zeroed his rifle.
               | 
               | So, while you may perceive "comes from the most advanced
               | civilian gun culture in the world" to be true, I somewhat
               | disagree on its merits and propose that if the Taliban
               | infantry are indeed goat herders, they may have more
               | hands on experience in properly using firearms, as animal
               | husbandry in areas like Afghanistan has some livestock
               | preditors they must be wary about. That and the whole
               | growing up in a completely unstable place constantly in
               | some form of war/conflict.
               | 
               | I have however heard reports from the tales of General
               | Butt Naked & Co, that down in West Africa and such, that
               | the child soldiers know nothing other than the idea of
               | "big number equal good"
               | 
               | And so, they set the windage sights on their AK's to the
               | highest number, and end up shooting completely over the
               | heads of people 20 feet from them. Perhaps these are the
               | types you're thinking of when you say Afghani goat
               | herder? No, you may be thinking of African child
               | soldiers.
        
               | User23 wrote:
               | > So, while you may perceive "comes from the most
               | advanced civilian gun culture in the world" to be true, I
               | somewhat disagree on its merits and propose that if the
               | Taliban infantry are indeed goat herders, they may have
               | more hands on experience in properly using firearms, as
               | animal husbandry in areas like Afghanistan has some
               | livestock preditors they must be wary about.
               | 
               | Your point is well taken, and I don't know when your
               | anecdote is from, but rural Americans definitely use guns
               | as an agricultural tool. Hunting season laws don't apply
               | to wildlife that's damaging crops or worrying livestock.
               | In my neck of the woods everyone knows how to zero their
               | rifle, because one shot is the most you're going to get.
               | 
               | I don't mean to say Americans are neo-Spartans or
               | anything, just that I'm willing to bet the average Ame
               | 
               | > I have however heard reports from the tales of General
               | Butt Naked & Co, that down in West Africa and such, that
               | the child soldiers know nothing other than the idea of
               | "big number equal good"
               | 
               | I heard that anecdote applied to the Bush War.
        
               | enzino wrote:
               | It's sad to hear that the neo-marxist lowering of
               | educational standards is also happening in the military.
               | Our faith rests with the self-regulated militia.
        
               | s5300 wrote:
               | I don't know what self-regulated militia you speak of,
               | but I hope they have a way to survive MIRV's & a supply
               | chain that isn't reliant on fast food and Wal-Mart,
               | because any domestic group that can't will likely be
               | stopped the second our government feels like stopping
               | them.
        
               | enzino wrote:
               | That was just a word play on the 2nd amendment. They
               | couldn't stop the Afghans with GSM-targeted drone-
               | delivered missiles though :)
        
               | throwaway210222 wrote:
               | > The Taliban tried to surrender 2-3 months after we
               | first attacked them IIRC, and we said no.
               | 
               | The problem with fighting people who may have wronged you
               | but have not seized any of your territories, yet whose
               | values and principles are far from your own is that you
               | can only accept unconditional surrender.
               | 
               | Otherwise, why fight.
        
               | enzino wrote:
               | One could think of rural hipsters with goats in america.
               | I think characterizing Afghans as poor fighters was part
               | of the propaganda push. "They're so weak, no way we'll
               | lose." Turns out those goat herders have successfully
               | expelled invaders since recorded history.
        
             | FromHoiPolloi wrote:
             | The USSR was perfectly capable of wrecking havoc on itself
             | without the fed. While the Soviet evacuation of it's
             | industry to the east was impressive one must not forget the
             | massive aid the USSR received from the western allies.
        
           | remarkEon wrote:
           | Yeah, I've been waiting for a full reading of last year's
           | Armenian/Azerbaijani conflict but haven't seen anything that
           | runs down the full event. Any links? Thus far I've found some
           | YouTube or other video clips. Looking for a more technical
           | exploration of how that tech was used.
        
             | wikidani wrote:
             | I believe there's a fairly comprehensive report on the
             | Bayraktar TB2 and its use on this blog [oryxspioenkop.com].
             | You might want to check out popular front on instagram as
             | well
        
             | mNovak wrote:
             | I recall The War Zone [1] having pretty good coverage of
             | the tech component.
             | 
             | [1] https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-10-30 23:01 UTC)