Rock, paper, scissors in terms of status or recognition but I am struck by how these roles/experiences contrast and blend over time. Modern conditions call for hybrid roles: the warrant officer and mechanic/technician are artisan/warriors, while armed 'peacekeepers' seem like uniformed missionaries (or crisis actors intruding into realit…
Rock, paper, scissors in terms of status or recognition but I am struck by how these roles/experiences contrast and blend over time. Modern conditions call for hybrid roles: the warrant officer and mechanic/technician are artisan/warriors, while armed 'peacekeepers' seem like uniformed missionaries (or crisis actors intruding into reality tv).
Have lately been thinking a lot about the situation in Ukraine and have been struck by how few people bother to consider the strategic role of high tech weapons systems (air defense, nukes, missiles). Don't know what it is like in Canada or the US but here even fairly sophisticated people are looking at it as if it was WW1...which is insane given the centrality of technology. I feel like we are watching a two-dimensional conflict: the real players focus on analysing the tech/science dimension, while everybody else assumes it is just grunt versus grunt. Bizarre...unless I am reading wat too much into things and just sperging out.
The WWI aspect I think is driven by everyone's surprise that it seems to have turned into trench warfare - that certainly took me aback. Obviously the reason for this is technological. Sophisticated air defense, targeting, and EW capabilities seem to have made maneuver warfare impractical. Anything in the air or on the ground that presents itself as a target gets taken off the board rapidly, meaning that war reverts to infantry digging in to shelter from artillery. We're so used to high-velocity warfare, particularly when two highly asymmetric belligerents are involved, that no one really saw this coming.
In the end, you never really know what the tactical situation will be until the war starts.
Perfectly true. But it is extraordinarily convenient for gov'ts interested in suppressing public awareness of awkward and inconvenient issues at play (the role of sattelite and signals intelligence and communication, avionics, nukes). Cannot help but think that the focus on WW1 aesthetic (for want of a better expression) as supremely cynical, but effective, PR by our rulers. The narrative mgt of it all is galling. Certainly getting on my nerves.
Rock, paper, scissors in terms of status or recognition but I am struck by how these roles/experiences contrast and blend over time. Modern conditions call for hybrid roles: the warrant officer and mechanic/technician are artisan/warriors, while armed 'peacekeepers' seem like uniformed missionaries (or crisis actors intruding into reality tv).
Have lately been thinking a lot about the situation in Ukraine and have been struck by how few people bother to consider the strategic role of high tech weapons systems (air defense, nukes, missiles). Don't know what it is like in Canada or the US but here even fairly sophisticated people are looking at it as if it was WW1...which is insane given the centrality of technology. I feel like we are watching a two-dimensional conflict: the real players focus on analysing the tech/science dimension, while everybody else assumes it is just grunt versus grunt. Bizarre...unless I am reading wat too much into things and just sperging out.
The WWI aspect I think is driven by everyone's surprise that it seems to have turned into trench warfare - that certainly took me aback. Obviously the reason for this is technological. Sophisticated air defense, targeting, and EW capabilities seem to have made maneuver warfare impractical. Anything in the air or on the ground that presents itself as a target gets taken off the board rapidly, meaning that war reverts to infantry digging in to shelter from artillery. We're so used to high-velocity warfare, particularly when two highly asymmetric belligerents are involved, that no one really saw this coming.
In the end, you never really know what the tactical situation will be until the war starts.
Perfectly true. But it is extraordinarily convenient for gov'ts interested in suppressing public awareness of awkward and inconvenient issues at play (the role of sattelite and signals intelligence and communication, avionics, nukes). Cannot help but think that the focus on WW1 aesthetic (for want of a better expression) as supremely cynical, but effective, PR by our rulers. The narrative mgt of it all is galling. Certainly getting on my nerves.