[HN Gopher] War Starts
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       War Starts
        
       Author : limbicsystem
       Score  : 81 points
       Date   : 2021-12-05 17:55 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (backstory.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (backstory.substack.com)
        
       | steve76 wrote:
       | >China is also alleged to have launched a hypersonic glide
       | vehicle from their missile, a technological feat that no other
       | country is close to achieving.
       | 
       | Here's a way to achieve. Don't eat your fellow countrymen, as the
       | marxists do. They did not eat each other because they were
       | starving. They ate each other because they liked it and did not
       | like not following orders. Make all the missiles you want. Make
       | all the technological advances you want. You still eat each
       | other. Even animals have an aversion to that.
        
       | senkora wrote:
       | > When Yemen united its mountainous Islamic tribal north with its
       | mountainous Islamic tribal south, many observers were adamant
       | that the experiment was doomed to fail. The differences between
       | the two sides were too great.
       | 
       | Clever.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | yyyk wrote:
         | Funny, but super-reductive.
         | 
         | It's like describing every country fighting in WW2 as a
         | 'Christian urban state' - with the exception of the officially
         | atheist USSR. Obviously the war was between USSR and everyone
         | else. Oh, that's the Red Alert timeline, not the real one.
        
           | tofof wrote:
           | Except Japan, and China, and the USSR, and also Ethiopia and
           | Libya and Algeria and Egypt and India and the Phillipines
           | ......
        
           | thaumasiotes wrote:
           | Well, except that as the situation developed, it turned into
           | exactly what you describe, a conflict between the USSR and
           | everybody else. That tends to suggest that the analysis has
           | value.
        
             | zapataband1 wrote:
             | Actually it turned into the U.S./established capital powers
             | against any inkling of communism and any poor nation that
             | USSR decided to aid.
        
             | lazide wrote:
             | No love for Japan?
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | No. Why? The cultural analysis would tell you that Japan
               | is the natural enemy of every European country including
               | the USSR. In a conflict between several European
               | countries, what does that suggest?
               | 
               | We see them in history attacking every nearby European
               | country (in which category I'm including the US) as well
               | as their actual enemy, China. Where's the surprise?
        
               | lazide wrote:
               | And the Turks!
               | 
               | Since the suggestion it was two sided, when really it was
               | more hexagonal.
        
       | lstodd wrote:
       | Low intensity conflict. It's always like that.
       | 
       | Someone shoots at someone somewhere else. It just a background
       | noise. Why bother? You won't hear your bullet. Even if you could,
       | it won't change anything anyway.
        
       | reducesuffering wrote:
       | If you're further interested in a look inside Yemen, here's a
       | cursory look from a traveler a month ago:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl8FPYOnJ4M
        
         | pcardoso wrote:
         | This channel is amazing, found it the other day and was
         | instantly hooked.
        
       | howmayiannoyyou wrote:
       | > China is also alleged to have launched a hypersonic glide
       | vehicle from their missile, a technological feat that no other
       | country is close to achieving.
       | 
       | In a prior career I watched closely as hundreds of bright, some
       | brilliant, minds opted for careers in fintech, crypto or webtech
       | instead of working for (or continuing to work for) US defense
       | companies both small and large. For some this was a moral
       | decision, but for most it was about money.
       | 
       | It's almost as if our democracies don't require defending, at
       | least not by us. Best to hope someone else will do so. After all,
       | those weapons are sometimes misused, the arms industry is also a
       | business, and the amount of efficiency & waste is appalling. And,
       | our democracies are equally flawed, unequal & manipulated by
       | special interests. The democracies run by those we elected, I
       | should add. At least, these are the arguments I've heard stated
       | time and again.
       | 
       | For something closer to the ideal I might contribute, some would
       | say. If things were different I could justify the sacrifice.
       | 
       | If the US and the West loses its competition with China/Russia -
       | it will be largely because we focused too heavily on our very
       | lementable flaws, and far too little on what the world might look
       | like were our remaining positive qualities overshadowed by the
       | national interests of countries less virtuous.
        
         | [deleted]
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | _dain_ wrote:
         | Perhaps it's more attractive to work for a defense company when
         | your country actually knows how to win a war.
        
           | howmayiannoyyou wrote:
           | The US knows how to win battles and knows how to win wars. It
           | is willing to go to great lengths and expense for the former,
           | but only the expense part for the latter. Something to do
           | with election cycles, a fickle public & and lousy
           | communications strategies when it comes to expectation
           | setting. So, I sorta agree? None of this has anything to do
           | with why my 22 year old nephew (most recent example) is going
           | to Wall Street instead of DARPA.
        
           | dillondoyle wrote:
           | Are you talking about the US/nato coalition?
           | 
           | I think the definition of what winning is has been the #1
           | issue the past 20 years and that has been demoralizing in
           | some ways.
           | 
           | Winning was sold as a bunch of different moving targets,
           | often farcically unbelievable like the taliban participating
           | in Democracy. So yeah we lost on that one. Never stood a
           | chance of winning if that's what winning is.
           | 
           | I don't think there's any question in these lopsided
           | conflicts us/nato could have absolutely decimated the other
           | side. But that didn't seem to be what winning was pitched as.
           | 
           | To me that's why it feels like we lost.
           | 
           | I'm more confident - though still worried - about an actual
           | big conflict against CCP/totalitarian alliance. Our reliance
           | on tech scares me the most.
        
         | cipheredStones wrote:
         | What exactly is the nexus between "democracy requires
         | defending" and "more smart people should be making fancy
         | weapons"?
         | 
         | There are many serious threats to democracy in the US, but
         | they're almost all internal: attempts to overturn elections,
         | the confluence of increasingly disproportionate rural power
         | with increasing urbal-rural polarization, etc. China is
         | certainly a threat to democracy in Taiwan, and its commercial
         | power sometimes limits free expression in the US, but it's
         | difficult to imagine a mechanism by which it would threaten the
         | US form of government.
         | 
         | On the other hand, it's not too difficult to imagine a
         | mechanism by which increasingly brilliant feats of weapons
         | technology inch us closer to a terribly destructive conflict by
         | convincing the powers-that-be that they could win without too
         | high a cost.
        
           | tomohawk wrote:
           | After the CCP took over China, they turned their attention to
           | Tibet. Tibet didn't stand a chance, and is now well along the
           | ethnic cleansing path. Ask the Dalai Lama what he thinks
           | about what's going on there.
           | 
           | The CCP turned their attention to East Turkistan. There's now
           | over a million Uighurs in concentration camps. Ethnic
           | cleansing is in full swing as they bull doze the past.
           | 
           | People think of these countries as part of China now. That's
           | how all the maps are drawn.
           | 
           | They recently crushed Hong Kong.
           | 
           | There is strong evidence that the CCP is committing
           | attrocities such as organ harvesting from living dissidents.
           | The organ replacement situation is China is amazing for CCP
           | members.
           | 
           | Their next target is Taiwan, and dictator for life Xi has
           | staked his reputation on conquering it.
           | 
           | What do you think they intend to do with hypersonics or
           | quantum supremacy?
           | 
           | They are pouring a lot more money into these things than the
           | west is. What do you think will happen when they can break
           | our strongest encryption with quantum computers? All that
           | invenstment of time by our best and brightest in fintech
           | won't matter at that point.
        
           | howmayiannoyyou wrote:
           | > What exactly is the nexus between "democracy requires
           | defending" and "more smart people should be making fancy
           | weapons"?
           | 
           | "Fancy" weapons give you a vote in how war is fought and who
           | will win. They give you a seat at the table when war ends.
           | They are the stick in Carrot & Stick diplomacy. If smart
           | people don't make 'em, you don't get a vote, you don't get a
           | seat, you don't have a stick, and you either go along or pack
           | your bags for the concentration camp.
        
             | stirfish wrote:
             | >If smart people don't make 'em, you don't get a vote, you
             | don't get a seat,
             | 
             | I don't understand. If I develop a new kind of missile and
             | sell it to the government, I don't get a say in what that
             | missile is launched at.
        
               | n4r9 wrote:
               | I'd guess you can make some stipulations in the contract.
               | Could be wrong tho.
        
             | cipheredStones wrote:
             | Alright, just wanted to get from the high-minded "nobody
             | wants to defend democracy anymore" to the underlying "if we
             | don't get all our best people working for Lockheed Martin,
             | the Chinese are going to put us all in concentration
             | camps".
        
         | systemvoltage wrote:
         | Ask someone in Berkeley if they would be open for developing
         | defense capabilities and taking up a job at one of the defense
         | contractors. You'll be unfriended, shamed, mocked, ridiculed
         | and thrown out of the society. But, ask the same group of
         | people what they think about China - "Man, they're really
         | impressive." - this is a verbatim quote from a PI at UC
         | Berkeley. Something is terribly wrong with these people.
         | 
         | When the will of the people is weak, mangled, broken,
         | dismembered, and destroyed by the political affiliation, I have
         | no hope for the west to have any spirit to defend, let alone
         | assert dominance.
        
         | wolverine876 wrote:
         | Wars are typically won by the side with more assets, money and
         | people. Military equipment is generally not economically
         | productive (though it can be necessary for having any economy
         | at all); fighter jets don't make people more productive, but
         | cargo jets do.
         | 
         | My thought always has been that the best way to defend the
         | country is to grow the economy. Of course, if war comes, then
         | you need to work on the short-term issues of making fighter
         | jets.
         | 
         | Do you think the US would be better off militarily without all
         | the technological and economic growth?
        
         | wolverine876 wrote:
         | Why is the parent and thread collapsed?
        
       | tpmx wrote:
       | Meanwhile the russians are actually gearing up to invade Ukraine
       | with force as we speak (write), and the worst deterrent the west
       | seems willing to use is blocking Russia from the SWIFT
       | international banking system, and that's a maybe.
        
         | motohagiography wrote:
         | Strange to see war starting to surface the mainstream zeigeist,
         | as it's been happening predictably in slow motion as the
         | consequence of obvious incentives for about 18 months, and then
         | it goes up all at once. From everything I can tell from reading
         | about previous ones, war is a kind of triumph of the absurd,
         | where meaning is extinguished and all that is left is the
         | violence until the attrition establishes some coherence again.
         | 
         | My bets are Russia re-establishes some of its soviet era
         | borders between the Black and the Baltic seas, including
         | Ukraine, then possibly Latvia or Estonia. Israel is almost out
         | of alternatives on Iran, and China will consolidate Hong Kong
         | and Taiwan in Xi's lifetime. The only thing standing in any of
         | their way is the alliance of Biden, Bojo, Macron, and Trudeau
         | getting enough democratic traction for a draft and total war.
         | So nothing, basically.
         | 
         | Anyway, remember to act surprised.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Please don't take HN threads on generic flamewar tangents and
         | especially not nationalistic ones. That's not what this site is
         | for.
         | 
         | (Edit: and we've had to ask you about this numerous times in
         | the past. That's not cool.)
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | helge9210 wrote:
         | This means a possibility for me to die in this war (fighting
         | against Russians).
         | 
         | Is this how inevitability of the war was felt in Europe hundred
         | of years ago?
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | This was very readable.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-05 23:01 UTC)