[Animats]

The main point of this paper is that rear area bases are too vulnerable now. This paper is from West Point, and is the view from the Army side. It's a big problem for air forces, too.

The US has a tradition of large, supposedly secure bases in the rear. The USAF has relied on this since WWII. It's not working any more. Iran has been hitting US air bases. In the last day, they've hit US bases in Qatar, Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain. That's just this round. There were previous hits a few months back. It's not publicized much, but it's no secret. It's hard to protect an air base against drones. Air bases are big, everyone knows where they are, airplanes are hard to hide from drones, and are vulnerable to small explosive charges. As Russia keeps finding out as Ukraine hits their air bases. There have been hits well inside Russia. Blast-resistant hangars in Crimea have been attacked. Don't leave a door open.

China is going in for airbase hardening in a big way.[1] This is sometimes called a "concrete sky" program. The USAF is way behind in the Pacific. Too many planes parked out in the open, or in weak hangars.

Active defenses against drones and missiles do work, but they just thin them out. Some get through. If the attacker has enough manufacturing capacity, the defenses can be overwhelmed. Ukraine is currently building about 7 million drones a year.

[1] https://www.hudson.org/arms-control-nonproliferation/concret...

[chasd00]

> The US has a tradition of large, supposedly secure bases in the rear. The USAF has relied on this since WWII. It's not working any more.

I guess we're all guerrilla fighters now.

[Animats]

"The guerrilla must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea" - Mao

Guerrilla forces have to be popular, or at minimum, have the local population cowed. They're useful for kicking an oppressor out of your own country, but not for conquest.

[shimman]

Maybe the US should focus more on diplomacy and open collaboration rather than letting a few dozen psychopaths convince the country we need to support a war machine that has benefited no one outside of the defense industry.

[Noumenon72]

If the problem was as simple as a few individuals and had no benefits it would not persist -- this is a Hollywood view of the world that won't help you understand your opposition.

[watwut]

Things that benefit only few can persist for a very long time. And US politics is full of those.

[shimman]

No, it's quite simple. US imperialism only benefits the select elites of the country at the expense of the poor.

Why are you denying the absolutely destructive power of the US military and it's abject failure in not only making the world safer for Americans but explicitly more dangerous?

Are you personally benefiting from US imperialism?

[shmeeed]

This was not the point of GP's comment. The point was that your reductive take on the military-industrial complex as "a few dozen psychopaths" is simplistic and won't help you understand your opposition.

Also, please refrain from making personal allegations.

[ericmay]

What diplomatic means should the United States (why the US and not others) take to stop Russia in Ukraine, stop Iran in the Middle East, stop North Korea, and stop China and its support for Russia or insistence of attacking Taiwan?

Certainly there is some room for negotiation and diplomacy and frankly I think we've tried that and tried it until it was clearly insane and then we still tried it. We (the west) tried to invite Russia to NATO and we opened up Europe to Russian gas. We tried the JCPOA with Iran. We have no clue what to do with North Korea. And we pushed for Chinese entry into the WTO only for them to backstab the west.

[shimman]

Conflating China with Russia is absolutely bonkers. No need to comment when you're already engorged on propaganda.

Also don't understand what point you're trying to make outside of the US being explicitly poor actors that ignore treaties, allies, and are willing to start wars to run cover for unpopular domestic leadership while causing the unnecessary deaths of millions of people across the world.

Also WTF does backstab even mean in this context? That China didn't bend over and allow US corporations to rat fuck their country dry? Who exactly benefits from enriching US corporations here? It's assuredly not US citizens.

Good grief.

[strangegecko]

I'm guessing with backstabbing he means China's practice of stealing technology and closing off the market for foreign companies.

Lots of smaller and mid sized companies that tried to invest in the Chinese market lost everything because the government protected and supported local copycats, with no intention of giving the foreign company fair access to the market.

[ericmay]

Thanks yes. You can read about Germany shedding 10,000 manufacturing jobs a month for yourself here: https://www.wsj.com/economy/china-is-devastating-the-last-st...

And let’s not forget China’s helping of Russia to prosecute its war in Ukraine by training soldiers [1] and providing dual use technology access.

It’s interesting how the OP that you responded to was quick to start slinging accusations of propaganda and react so violently without even asking a clarifying question. Well, let’s just say some of us read those comments with a little extra interest.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jul/04/ukraine-war-br...

[shimman]

Okay and how does this materially hurt Americans? The elites in the US hoard all the wealth, US corporations doing well internationally means fuck all for the domestic citizens.

This is what I mean by how much of a farce this all is. Why should I care that China's steal IP? Chinese products are actually good + cheap to a consumer like me, all I see our corporations being unable to compete with an actual competitor that has a different view of the world + vision of the future.

Hard to see why I should be willing to sacrifice Americans to uphold corporations.

[ericmay]

Well if this is what you believe you're basically going to just end up in a world where you are sacrificing Americans or Europeans to uphold Chinese corporations and then their elites hoard all the wealth, and tax revenue to fund services vanishes in the United States, though I think Trump and co would be happy about that development.

At the end of the day, corporations will be upheld so it's a question of whether you'd like some degree of control and ownership, or whether you'd like to, well who knows what you'd do because how are you going to buy products when you don't have a job, and makes you think Chinese companies won't eventually raise their prices or start cheating out? They already do via companies like Temu which are producing e-waste and plastic junk at artificially cheap prices and of course that ends up polluting the environment too.

If nothing else, consumerism and cheap material products at the expense of all else I'd argue isn't a good thing and we should move away from that as a society.

[oatmeal1]

We pulled out of the JCPOA. It worked but we quit.

[ericmay]

Iran routinely denied inspectors access to facilities. American intelligence isn’t 100% accurate. And why should we have to effectively pay off Iran or have some special deal where they hold the world hostage less they build a nuclear bomb? Why do we only have to do that with Iran but not other countries?

I’m all for diplomatic solutions to problems, but Iran was building nuclear weapons under our nose anyway and loading up on missiles and drones to make it difficult to impossible for the US to do anything about them without severe regional casualties. Nevermind Iran’s continued funding of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthis and their support for Russia in its war against Ukraine.

[ImPostingOnHN]

> why should we have to effectively pay off Iran or have some special deal where they hold the world hostage less they build a nuclear bomb?

This is a narrative you constructed. The reality is simpler:

- All countries have equal rights.

- The usa and israel want iran to give up their rights to a nuclear program, which is equal to the usa's and israel's right to a nuclear program.

- If you want someone to give you something, you generally have to give them something on which they place equal or greater value.

> Iran was building nuclear weapons under our nose anyway and loading up on missiles and drones

So was+is the usa and israel.

> Nevermind Iran’s continued funding of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthis

The usa continues funding israel and supporting their war on Lebanon, Palestine, and Iran.

[ericmay]

> - All countries have equal rights.

It’s even more simple. All countries don’t have equal rights. The strong make the rules and the weak suffer what they must. That’s how the world actually functions.

But if you want to argue that countries have equal rights, well, in order to have equal rights one must have some rule, or law, or some other mechanism in which to receive and agree upon such rights or a forum to argue that such rights have been violated requiring some sort of justice. Otherwise these aren’t really rights, just claims.

The closest thing we have to an entity that defines and adjudicates relations with respect to countries and rights is the United Nations.

What does the United Nations say about nuclear weapon proliferation?

[ImPostingOnHN]

russia makes sense to the extent that they're attacking other countries unprovoked, but what are you talking about stopping China, North Korea, and Iran, from actually doing? Being successful? Improving their country? Existing?

[strangegecko]

He literally said it for China: stopping an invasion. I would add limiting political influence from autocratic governments that don't respect individual rights, but I know that's opening another Pandora's box.

[ImPostingOnHN]

- china isn't invading

- "autocratic government that doesn't respect individual rights" may describe china and north korea, but also describes the usa and israel over the last couple years (who have done more invading than china)