Shrike
15hr ago
Going in as an officer is great for aspiring right-wing leaders. If you commit to it and don't screw up, you build a resume and a rolodex and give yourself future credibility as a political leader. It only negatively impacts your status among a small sliver of the population and opens up future employment avenues as well.
If a son of mine was interested in the military, I would likely discourage them from going in as enlisted, but not necessarily if they were interested in going in as an officer.
Shrike
15hr ago
I agree that this might be a problem - and sincerely hope and pray that it is not.
However from a humanitarian perspective it seems to me the blockade is almost infinitely preferable to a concentrated power generation destruction campaign. When a blockade is lifted, it takes days or weeks for trade to resume; when power generation capacity is wholesale destroyed, it takes months or years to rebuild, and the economic damage from a blockade would be overshadowed by the economic damage from destroying Iran's power generation capacity.
(The US does have specialized munitions to temporarily degrade power supply but given that their effects are, I believe, relatively easily reversible I am not sure we would use them for "Bridge and Power Day.")
Shrike
15hr ago
I don't think stopping Chinese drone parts from getting in (via sea) will be very hard, I don't think Chinese ships are likely to try running the blockade, although I could be wrong. China can provide stuff like MANPADS via aircraft easily enough if they really want to.
I suppose they could declare a destination in e.g. Bahrain and then attempt to swerve at the last minute, but then presumably they would be stuck in Iran indefinitely (I assume the US would interdict them if they successfully pulled this stunt and then tried to leave, although I might be wrong).
Keep in mind that sea control is an ideal task for aircraft and thus it's not very hard for the US to keep an eye on ~all ships transiting the strait, and they can do it without deploying, say, destroyers in the Persian Gulf. And I don't think it would be very difficult for ships with humanitarian aid to stop in Dubai or wherever for inspection and then finish the rest of the journey.
Shrike
19hr ago
Shrike
19hr ago
This is not a criticism of this post - I appreciate the time it took to write this up and it provides a useful springboard for less lengthy digressions (such as my own) - but I still think it is too soon to tell what the ultimate US strategy is or really what the final outcome is going to be here. I remember a week ago when users here seemed to be prognosticating the end of the conflict based on ten-point plans released on notoriously reliably news aggregation website Twitter X and of course the US did not in fact bite.
Iran might still agree to a deal. I think the economic pressure on them from the blockade may be underappreciated. But if they do not, the US could return to more punitive measures. The US appears to have used the ceasefire to rearm their carriers. I think it is a mistake at this point to assume the final plan of the States is to have a yearslong blockade. It seems plausible to me that the US resumes airstrikes if Iran refuses to return to the table.
Shrike
1d ago
How, exactly, are you going to outfit the commercial shipping fleet with all the guns and rockets required to shoot down these drones while simultaneously engaging in an active fight with the Chinese navy on the other side of the country?
It's not particularly difficult to simply strap a short-range weapons system onto a ship.
And if it is the US intervening, remember that the US navy is going to be tied down in Iran and the Middle East as well.
This remains to be seen!
You'll have to forgive me for not believing this was a viable answer to shahed drones when I have seen footage of it failing to defend against shahed drones in a conflict happening right now.
You'll have to forgive me for believing that it is a viable answer to Shahed drones when I have seen footage of Shahed drones being shot down by guns in a conflict happening right now.
No defense is 100% effective, and I am not claiming that. I am claiming the general idea that there is no way to counter Shaheds is overblown. The Ukrainians do it on the cheap all the time.
If the US has an economic and worthwhile answer to these drones, why haven't they used them to open the Strait of Hormuz?
The US transited two destroyers through the strait, so...if the drones were so scary, why did that happen? As I pointed out to you before, the Houthis did not sink any ships with Shahed-type weapons. Based on the Houthis' experience, it seems pretty clear that torpedoes ("suicide drones"), ballistic missiles, and conventional missiles are a greater threat to shipping.
Is there a manufacturing base capable of supplying enough of them to outpace Iran, China and Russia's production of Shahed/Shahed derivatives?
The current production capacity is believed to be around 25,000 annually. This isn't more than, say, Russia's supposed production, but they are unlikely to be shooting any at the US of A for some time, while to my knowledge China hasn't produced any Shaheds. I don't claim to know what Iran's production rate is due to Recent Events.
It's also worth noting that this is just one type of interceptor – the US has a number of anti-drone programs going on right now.
Shrike
1d ago
They have seen what happened to Saddam and to Gaddafi. They would be turned over to their political opponents, put on trial, their lives as they knew it over, some possibly executed.
What's interesting is that the Trump administration is the one administration that genuinely does not seem to care about if you are a "bad guy" or not – the Trump admin has been extremely functionalist.
However, the Trump administration can only do so much to bind the actions of a future administration, which creates a real risk for Iran.
I think on balance if they don't make the Trump admin a good offer (and they still can) they will come to regret it.
Shrike
1d ago
The american side has fired well over a thousand patriot missiles and a sizeable portion of THAAD missiles. This is not only extremely expensive but weakens the US against Russia and China.
Shrike
1d ago
Actually, Iran has done better than I expected. I did not expect them to still be capable of regularly launching effective strikes against their enemies after a month of US and Israeli air strikes.
FWIW, I would say the Iranians have proven more resilient on the ground than I expected (the US and Israel seem to be pretty hung up on permanently putting their bunkers out of business), but also that their air defenses have done more poorly than I expected. Saddam Hussein shot down more Strike Eagles than Iran has so far. Iran has shot down a lot of drones, though.
Shrike
1d ago
That doesn't explain the videos from Ukraine of air defences getting blown up by shaheds
Sometimes even multi-million dollar guided missiles miss. However you showed me a bunch of guys in a technical (maybe). Sometimes guys in technicals also miss.
So far it seems like the US and Gulf Nations have intercepted the majority of the missiles and drones the Iranians have launched. Given that the US was unwilling to come to an agreement, and seems to have used the truce to prepare for a second round of combat, likely with the aid of the Gulf nations, it appears that Iran has failed to establish deterrence with their ballistic/cruise missile arsenal.
This does not mean the Shahed is a bad weapon (in fact, I think rather highly of it). But the reason that Iran had these drones and missiles was precisely to deter the United States and Israel from acting. From that perspective, they failed in February, and if the combat resumes, they will have failed a third time.
Shrike
1d ago
Restocking and resupplying these munitions isn't a walk in the park.
The US can build more than 100 JDAMs bomb kits per day, and there are good reasons to believe that the US has switched a substantial portion of its strike packages over to JDAMS.
This does not necessarily mean that more bespoke munitions like JASSMs, which might be employed for a number of reasons, are off the table.
Shrike
1d ago
There's precedent for the US pulling out the stops in rescue operations.
It's definitely possible that the entire story isn't being told, but the rescue mission wouldn't be unprecedented.
Shrike
1d ago
Hitting something moving in 3D at several hundred km/h is far harder than you think.
It's really not very hard. The main problem with Shaheds is ensuring you have the air defense assets in the right place to detect and intercept them.
Shrike
2d ago
Shrike
2d ago
Sadly Hyperion is merely on my to-read list, but you can think of me as an aspiring fan!
Shrike
2d ago
I don't use mobile, but you are correct that the images on here are mostly hard to make out unless you go to the person's page.
Which is okay. All I really need is have an unusual blur of color.
Unfortunately both options dox me, as there is no person on earth worse at MS paint than me.
Shrike
3d ago
Want to spruce up your online appearance? Worried the mods will ban you for having a confusing username? Would like to set yourself apart from the boring grey persona but can't afford to pay your second-most-favorite Twitter artist to create a mediocre likeness of you?
Well, good news, you too can have a passable pfp for free. That's right, we've finally found something we can all agree AI is actually pretty good at.
I think I am perhaps somewhat more demanding than the average AI image generation user (and, I assure you, for entirely different reasons than most people who are demanding of AI art) but one thing I've been impressed with is their ability to generate profile pictures. I assume this is because they were trained on a million of them. You can get them to add colored borders, if you like, or similar effects. You can even get them to use specific color hex codes. I've also gotten good results getting them to incorporate other things into their art, such as specific symbols.
Consider my pfp, which I think is a little bit appealing (and perhaps more importantly distinguishes me from several other fine members of this forum who have usernames that begin with "S' and happen to be roughly as long). Copilot did most of the work. Here's my prompt:
Please generate me an artistic pfp in the shape of a bird, specifically a loggerhead shrike.
This probably isn't news to anyone here, but there are still lots of people (including up until yesterday, me) who don't have unique pfps and I find image generation fun, so...check it out if you have five minutes and the default Motte profile picture.
Shrike
3d ago
Congrats! That certainly is fun. May you have many more happy years.
Here's what I said to the last Motter who mentioned he was getting married, and since nothing's happened to cause me to reconsider in the 24 hours since, I still stand by it:
The advice that I always give people is that most of marriage is actually "roommate stuff." Be a good roommate, help with the dishes or laundry or whatever, keep your spouse informed of what your plans are and a lot of the other stuff will go smoothly.
I guess the other thing I would say is don't hedge, go all-in - be honest, invite honesty, be a good listener and understand that sometimes you will do best not to take things personally. And don't underestimate the value of physical intimacy as something that will keep a marriage sustained. Genuinely put the other party first, not because you are a doormat (and you may need to hold them accountable because you are seeking their good) but because you love them and want what is best for them.
God bless!
Shrike
3d ago
Au contraire - the shahed drone is itself one of these drones.
I explained very specifically why I think this is incorrect, or at least misleading.
Since I wrote a rather large comment, I will recap:
- Shahed drones are very vulnerable to gunfire, which is cheap. (I assure you the US military has lots of guns).
- The US military has now acquired and used very cheap laser-guided rockets, which are within the ballpark range of the cost of a Shahed, specifically for using against drones like the Shahed.
If you're going to discuss this stuff with me on here, please do me the courtesy of reading what I write (more or less). And if you're going to disagree with me, please do me the courtesy of explaining why, so that I can learn something new.
Shrike
3d ago
Woah woah woah woah woah, let's all be reasonable here, I've taken steps to prevent this from happening again.
(I mean I got a new pfp, not that I cut Shakes' internet cables.)
Shrike
4d ago
war is bad.
Sure, agreed.
But historically winning a war permanently is much more costly than fighting a war and then hammering out a peace that ends up being a breather. Periodic warfare is a historical norm. And the last time we decided "you know what, we're not doing that again" we (or at least our allies, if you want a narrower definition of "we") ethnically cleansed the losers and then we militarily occupied them for an indefinite period of time. And it's paid off for seventy years and counting.
So are you saying that should be our victory condition in all wars? Or do you think fighting smaller wars that kick the can down the road is acceptable ever?
You've gone from "We totally won, Iran is over, this was worth it!" to "What's the big deal if periodically bombing Iran is just something we do now?"
Are you confusing me with my twin?
I recently read Player of Games and while to some degree I echo the "boring Utopia" criticism, a lot of what makes the Culture utopia is a literally incredible amount of technological wizardly.
I can buy warp drives and the like, but if you have robots with little force fields and humans that can take a retrovirus to change gender and do drugs by thinking about it, you arguably have moved past the point of being able to offer social commentary simply because your society is inhuman. Banks, it seems to me, does social commentary anyway and I wouldn't say it's entirely a miss - some of it is thought-provoking. But I sort of choke when I am expected to believe that humans were doing stuff like going to dinner parties instead of wireheading or something even thought the technology in the books is more than just "really really smart AI," it is the ability to manipulate the spacetime continuum to a degree that arguably surpassed Star Trek (while having just enough limitations to serve the purposes of this specific plot, much like, well, an old-fashioned Star Trek episode).
Not sure if I explained that well. But basically Banks is, from what I can tell, asking me to believe that the entire Culture has insane gigatech and lives in the way that it does (that way happening to be, basically, what a liberal arts student would hope a socialist utopia would be like) Just Because. I've been vastly preferring the Stephenson I've read recently; Stephenson really is interested in the intersection of technology and ideology and tries to show his work whereas the Culture, to be honest, seems if anything more naive than Star Trek about the ideology of the future (while sharing perhaps certain assumptions of Roddenberry about how The Future would eliminate certain barriers between older men and young and desirable women.) Obviously you can justify anything you want in the Culture by waving your hands and saying "aligned AI" but that doesn't necessarily make it satisfying.
More options
Context Copy link