A primer on modern ADA skipping over the Bekka Valley Turkey Shoot is like a primer on modern tank conflict skipping over the Battle of 73 Easting. Unsatisfying and incomplete.
It may all make sense in context when you read about Arab militaries (western trainers sometimes have to be physically restrained when Arab soldiers hoard knowledge so they're more important instead of passing it on), or the effects of inbreeding on population intelligence.
That's not a quote from the piece...or at all relevant to the discussion...
Did you read it? Are you a bot?
I'm noticing more and more of these low effort, inflammatory, really detached comments that look like they're copy-pasted from completely different discussions on the Motte, and when you dig into the accounts its all equally detached comments seemingly building cache/ paper trails so the accounts can can be used for brigading later... both pro-russia, pro-ukraine... both left and right.
.
I know the discussion that quote is from and notably it doesn't even match the context in that discussion (which used the quote as an example of poor intellectual standards in commentary on the war)
On this being weaker. I would tend to agree but I learned a little. Critiquing your other post has more things.
“The Ukraine conflict is one of the clearest examples of good vs. evil in the past century"
Need to spend more time on why Ukraine isn’t good. Most just because hate the establishment like a Caitlin Johnston or Michael Tracey (who I loved on BLM riots for doing real research) and still follow to keep some twitter balance.
Spend way too much time talking about other wars. That just breaks down to whataboutism. Who cares about old wars. Prove Ukraine is bad not that other wars were also good or bad. I hate whataboutism as I think it’s usually wrong but here it does nothing for you.
It's not even the most egregious war currently being fought within 1000km of the Black sea. That infamy belongs either to the reignited Nagorno-Karabakh war where Azerbaijan and Turkey are trying to squelch the young democracy in Armenia, or the ongoing conflict in Syria where turkey is likewise trying to Squelch the increasingly autonomous Kurdistan and its various democratic movements ... We don't hear about these conflicts though, because Turkey is a NATO member and a keystone of Europe's treaties to keep migrants out.
“It's not even the most egregious war currently being fought within 1000km of the Black sea. That infamy belongs either to the reignited Nagorno-Karabakh war where Azerbaijan and Turkey are trying to squelch the young democracy in Armenia, or the ongoing conflict in Syria where turkey is likewise trying to Squelch the increasingly autonomous Kurdistan and its various democratic movements ... We don't hear about these conflicts though, because Turkey is a NATO member and a keystone of Europe's treaties to keep migrants out.“
Maybe more here. But probably it’s own post. Most Americans don’t know much about these wars. We ignore them because (1) lack any strategic importance to US (2) strategically important to allies (3). Too small to care. (4). Don’t have a natural ally to back. (5). Would be like Syria where we lack strategic capabilities unless we go full Iraq and commit US troops. Still could write about these comments individually as not many do.
“Was this what it was like in 2002-2003 when Afghanistan and Iraq were starting? Did every remotely public intellectual drop their standards this quickly? I remember the Anti-war movement being more prominent at the time... Was that only after the fact?“
America went too far in those places. Scores a small point to get reader to consider past mistakes. Still judge Ukraine on Ukraines merits. America got attacked then and we had 1 congressional no vote to Iraq War, Cheney lied and propagandized us. Not a key point and for an essay only serves purpose of getting the reader to consider they have overreacted before.
“Or is the Anti-war movement silent because this is Putin and he's now coded pro-trump and Anti-gay... (yet somehow everyone else in central Eurasia isn't)”
Just culture warring here. Doesn’t move argument.
“Putin is awful... don't get me wrong. But Ukraine is literally executing civilians for continuing to live in occupied areas, has shelled civilians since 2014, has banned every rival political party, banned a free press, banned its population from leaving, has banned a major linguistic minority from using its own language in business and school... Ukraine is one of the most authroitarian anit-democratic countries on earth: Comparable to Iraq under Saddam, Saudi Arabia, or even North korea in many respects... and this is what our leaders hold up as their ideal and model of democracy for the rest of us?“
This is only paragraph where you address any reason why Ukraine is not good. These need expanded to prove Ukraine is not good.
Banning civil liberties when a country is in all out war is fairly normal. You can expand here but when Ukraine is fighting for the right to exists most people think martial law is ok. You can’t have a debating society when a few hundred miles away (at times less) a guy has a gun to your head. If you want to make a point on civil liberties then you need to explain why martial law isn’t appropriate.
Shelling civilians and cutting water to Crimea are the only points to make that Ukraine is not good. The only time you at all mentioned your core thesis. Granted I will cite a Ukraine was sort of at war the entire time as justification but you won’t an entire essay with 5 words on Ukraine isn’t good and it’s your thesis.
not discussing the linked piece is actually ironic because the Air Defence piece is the exact kind of technical, non-culture waring, moving the discussion forward cerebral work that my rage fueled rant is criticized for not being.
Are you replying to a different post, or were there some massive edits?
This post is a pretty short survey of Cold War SAM systems, followed by brief speculation on the effectiveness of modern systems. It's a bit dry for the partisans, and a bit shallow for the engineers, but it's not exactly culture war fodder. None of the quotes are present.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
2yr ago·Edited 2yr ago
Why not talk about IR SAMs as well as radar guided? There's also SACLOS, where the missile gets sent guidance information by radio from a ground-based observer with a bigger detection system. I guess that's technically either IR or radar guided but there's also a distinction between fire and forget missiles (with their own inbuilt guidance systems) vs ground-guided ones that need a signal painted on the target.
Much of my knowledge only really comes from Wargame Red Dragon. Even so, I found even crappy IR Soviet Strelas more irritating than the more sophisticated Buks and Tunguskas (though they were pretty lethal) because I couldn't SEAD them with my Wild Weasels or EF-111 Raven. Anti-radiation missiles like HARMS don't work on things that don't need radar. Stingers and many MANPADs today are IR, they ought to be worth mentioning.
I also had no idea the S-300 was such an old system (I guess they couldn't put such a long-ranged weapon in Wargame without wrecking the balance, though that didn't stop them putting a Patriot in with a silly 5.6 km range).
Also, what about counterstealth? That f117 that got shot down over Yugoslavia by oldish sams, that would be something to talk about.
Ya my personal knowledge/feel comes from stuff like Wargame and Highfleet too.
Goppy is vastly more knowledgeable about a lot of this stuff, that's part of the reason I wanted to host him.
.
The thing with IR is the range is vastly more limited than with Radar. That's why they get deployed in manpads and air to air missiles instead of longer range anti-air systems.
Usually they're either combined with radar detection, fired, and then the Ir kicks in at a certain point once they've closed with the target (in which case your initial active radar use is giving away your position anyway), or they're used from ranges short enough that IR alone works.
obviously specific ranges are classified... But IR detection of people and vehicles from a $50-100k bubble on a plane or observation tower was 14km when I was Researching my motorcycle warfare piece and i'd imagine you wouldn't get much better than 30km even trying to hit a jet engine against an empty backdrop... just the amount of atmospheric moisture you're looking through at that range is going to scatter IR information
By contrast the radar systems covered in the piece are detecting and locking on 100-150km away.
I've read every post on your substack to this point...gotta say this was very much weaker than your normal content. Not very engaging, not a new take on things, very biased but not in a fun or interesting new way.
Oof... You're being very harsh on my guest contributor.
He's done a series on military matters that touch on and about Ukraine I'm going to be hosting (of which this is the lightest content), in addition to my usual output, that I've found quite interesting/informative.
Thus my decision to host him.
For reference though this doesn't affect my output... my recent lightness is down to travel and illnesses picked up in airports
No, I don't think I was being harsh enough on him.
The Anarchonomicon take on air defense I'd expect would be something like citing Herodotus's account of the Xanthians:
The Pedasian stronghold being at length taken, and Harpagus having led his army into the plain of Xanthus, the Lycians came out to meet him, and did valorous deeds in their battle against odds; but being worsted and driven into the city they gathered into the citadel their wives and children and goods and servants, and then set the whole citadel on fire. Then they swore each other great oaths, and sallying out they fell fighting, all the men of Xanthus. Of the Xanthians who claim now to be Lycians the greater number — all saving eighty households — are liars.
150 When the fleet had gone to Samos, the Babylonians revolted;1 for which they had made very good preparation; for during the reign of the Magian, and the rebellion of the seven, they had taken advantage of the time and the disorders to prepare themselves against the siege; and (I cannot tell how) this was unknown. At the last they revolted openly and did this: — sending away all the mothers, they chose each one woman from his own household, whom he would, as a bread-maker; as for the rest, they gathered them together and strangled them, that they should not consume their bread.
151 When Darius heard of this he mustered all his power and led it against Babylon, and he marched to the town and laid siege to it; but the townsmen cared nothing for what he did. They came up on to the bastions of the wall, and mocked Darius and his army with gesture and word; and this saying came from one of them: "Why sit you there, Persians, instead of departing? You will take our city when mules bear offspring." This said the Babylonian, supposing that no mule would ever bear offspring.
Estimates for the number of North Vietnamese civilian deaths resulting from US bombing range from 30,000–65,000.[29][4] Higher estimates place the number of civilian deaths caused by American bombing of North Vietnam in Operation Rolling Thunder at 182,000.[30]
The real success of the North Vietnamese over US bombing campaigns wasn't based on destroying a relative handful of American aircraft, it was based on the government successfully rallying the population of Vietnam to wage a "People's War in the Air":
The northern economy was decentralized for its protection, and large factories, located in the heavily populated Red River Delta region, were broken up and scattered into caves and small villages throughout the countryside. In the more heavily bombed southern panhandle, entire villages moved into tunnel complexes for the duration. Food shortages in North Vietnam became widespread, especially in the urban areas, as rice farmers went into the military or volunteered for service repairing bomb damage.[72] When the nation's transportation system came under attack, destroyed bridges were repaired or replaced by dirt fords, ferries, and underwater or pontoon bridges. The system proved to be durable, well built, easily repaired, and practically impossible to shut down.[73]
Perhaps North Vietnam's ultimate resource was its population. During 1965, 97,000 North Vietnamese civilians volunteered to work full-time in repairing the damage inflicted by U.S. bombs. Another 370,000–500,000 civilians worked part-time.[74] When the nation's lines of communication came under attack, railroad supply trains and truck convoys were split into smaller elements which traveled only at night. The logistical effort was supported by citizens on sampans, driving carts, pushing wheelbarrows, or man-portering supplies on their backs to keep the war effort going. They were motivated by slogans like "Each kilogram of goods...is a bullet shot into the head of the American pirates."
Like the Xanthians and Babylonians before them, the Communist Party of Vietnam didn't so much prevent civilian casualties and the destruction of their productive capacity as they despised them, dismissed as not worthy of notice. The nation was capable of enduring privation, food shortages, deaths, and hard labor in order to win. "Nothing is more precious than freedom and independence." So let's question whether strategic bombing of civilian targets is likely to achieve any goals, or merely to inflict suffering that will be ignored by the nationalist psychopaths who seem to be running Ukraine, while allowing the globalist psychopaths than run NATO et al to provide even more destructive weapons to the Ukies.
And that doesn't even get into the question of why focus only on USSR and post-Soviet systems? Why ignore every other missile defense system in existence? Why focus on Russian use of these systems against the Ukrainians' handful of jets, while ignoring the much more apt and important comparison between the inferior Ukrainian forces (with outside support) successfully preventing Russian air dominance from exerting significant impacts on the battlefield? It's just regurgitated Russian talking points memos. I want the angles I haven't heard before.
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
A primer on modern ADA skipping over the Bekka Valley Turkey Shoot is like a primer on modern tank conflict skipping over the Battle of 73 Easting. Unsatisfying and incomplete.
It may all make sense in context when you read about Arab militaries (western trainers sometimes have to be physically restrained when Arab soldiers hoard knowledge so they're more important instead of passing it on), or the effects of inbreeding on population intelligence.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
“The Ukraine conflict is one of the clearest examples of good vs. evil in the past century"
You said it! Look at how despicable these people are!
Video: Ukraine Soldiers Sing Praises Of WW II Era Nazi: https://youtube.com/watch?v=4H-yMmNh5Cs
And now NPR is just casually rehabilitating the Nazis: https://www.npr.org/2022/03/03/1084113728/a-closer-look-at-the-volunteers-who-are-signing-up-to-fight-the-russians
That's not a quote from the piece...or at all relevant to the discussion...
Did you read it? Are you a bot?
I'm noticing more and more of these low effort, inflammatory, really detached comments that look like they're copy-pasted from completely different discussions on the Motte, and when you dig into the accounts its all equally detached comments seemingly building cache/ paper trails so the accounts can can be used for brigading later... both pro-russia, pro-ukraine... both left and right.
.
I know the discussion that quote is from and notably it doesn't even match the context in that discussion (which used the quote as an example of poor intellectual standards in commentary on the war)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Neat piece, thanks for writing it.
More options
Context Copy link
I recall that Ukraine might not have a lot of air strength, but they don't necessarily need to worry about that.
More options
Context Copy link
On this being weaker. I would tend to agree but I learned a little. Critiquing your other post has more things.
“The Ukraine conflict is one of the clearest examples of good vs. evil in the past century"
Need to spend more time on why Ukraine isn’t good. Most just because hate the establishment like a Caitlin Johnston or Michael Tracey (who I loved on BLM riots for doing real research) and still follow to keep some twitter balance.
Spend way too much time talking about other wars. That just breaks down to whataboutism. Who cares about old wars. Prove Ukraine is bad not that other wars were also good or bad. I hate whataboutism as I think it’s usually wrong but here it does nothing for you.
It's not even the most egregious war currently being fought within 1000km of the Black sea. That infamy belongs either to the reignited Nagorno-Karabakh war where Azerbaijan and Turkey are trying to squelch the young democracy in Armenia, or the ongoing conflict in Syria where turkey is likewise trying to Squelch the increasingly autonomous Kurdistan and its various democratic movements ... We don't hear about these conflicts though, because Turkey is a NATO member and a keystone of Europe's treaties to keep migrants out.
“It's not even the most egregious war currently being fought within 1000km of the Black sea. That infamy belongs either to the reignited Nagorno-Karabakh war where Azerbaijan and Turkey are trying to squelch the young democracy in Armenia, or the ongoing conflict in Syria where turkey is likewise trying to Squelch the increasingly autonomous Kurdistan and its various democratic movements ... We don't hear about these conflicts though, because Turkey is a NATO member and a keystone of Europe's treaties to keep migrants out.“
Maybe more here. But probably it’s own post. Most Americans don’t know much about these wars. We ignore them because (1) lack any strategic importance to US (2) strategically important to allies (3). Too small to care. (4). Don’t have a natural ally to back. (5). Would be like Syria where we lack strategic capabilities unless we go full Iraq and commit US troops. Still could write about these comments individually as not many do.
“Was this what it was like in 2002-2003 when Afghanistan and Iraq were starting? Did every remotely public intellectual drop their standards this quickly? I remember the Anti-war movement being more prominent at the time... Was that only after the fact?“
America went too far in those places. Scores a small point to get reader to consider past mistakes. Still judge Ukraine on Ukraines merits. America got attacked then and we had 1 congressional no vote to Iraq War, Cheney lied and propagandized us. Not a key point and for an essay only serves purpose of getting the reader to consider they have overreacted before.
“Or is the Anti-war movement silent because this is Putin and he's now coded pro-trump and Anti-gay... (yet somehow everyone else in central Eurasia isn't)”
Just culture warring here. Doesn’t move argument.
“Putin is awful... don't get me wrong. But Ukraine is literally executing civilians for continuing to live in occupied areas, has shelled civilians since 2014, has banned every rival political party, banned a free press, banned its population from leaving, has banned a major linguistic minority from using its own language in business and school... Ukraine is one of the most authroitarian anit-democratic countries on earth: Comparable to Iraq under Saddam, Saudi Arabia, or even North korea in many respects... and this is what our leaders hold up as their ideal and model of democracy for the rest of us?“
This is only paragraph where you address any reason why Ukraine is not good. These need expanded to prove Ukraine is not good.
Banning civil liberties when a country is in all out war is fairly normal. You can expand here but when Ukraine is fighting for the right to exists most people think martial law is ok. You can’t have a debating society when a few hundred miles away (at times less) a guy has a gun to your head. If you want to make a point on civil liberties then you need to explain why martial law isn’t appropriate.
Shelling civilians and cutting water to Crimea are the only points to make that Ukraine is not good. The only time you at all mentioned your core thesis. Granted I will cite a Ukraine was sort of at war the entire time as justification but you won’t an entire essay with 5 words on Ukraine isn’t good and it’s your thesis.
Please keep the commentary to the piece linked from my guest author... not an unlinked piece from me.
for those curious this is the piece he's discussing
.
not discussing the linked piece is actually ironic because the Air Defence piece is the exact kind of technical, non-culture waring, moving the discussion forward cerebral work that my rage fueled rant is criticized for not being.
More options
Context Copy link
Are you replying to a different post, or were there some massive edits?
This post is a pretty short survey of Cold War SAM systems, followed by brief speculation on the effectiveness of modern systems. It's a bit dry for the partisans, and a bit shallow for the engineers, but it's not exactly culture war fodder. None of the quotes are present.
Ya these are quotes from this piece
which as a rage fueled bonus content rant I'm perfectly fine with being more culture warring and lighter on content.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Why not talk about IR SAMs as well as radar guided? There's also SACLOS, where the missile gets sent guidance information by radio from a ground-based observer with a bigger detection system. I guess that's technically either IR or radar guided but there's also a distinction between fire and forget missiles (with their own inbuilt guidance systems) vs ground-guided ones that need a signal painted on the target.
Much of my knowledge only really comes from Wargame Red Dragon. Even so, I found even crappy IR Soviet Strelas more irritating than the more sophisticated Buks and Tunguskas (though they were pretty lethal) because I couldn't SEAD them with my Wild Weasels or EF-111 Raven. Anti-radiation missiles like HARMS don't work on things that don't need radar. Stingers and many MANPADs today are IR, they ought to be worth mentioning.
I also had no idea the S-300 was such an old system (I guess they couldn't put such a long-ranged weapon in Wargame without wrecking the balance, though that didn't stop them putting a Patriot in with a silly 5.6 km range).
Also, what about counterstealth? That f117 that got shot down over Yugoslavia by oldish sams, that would be something to talk about.
Ya my personal knowledge/feel comes from stuff like Wargame and Highfleet too.
Goppy is vastly more knowledgeable about a lot of this stuff, that's part of the reason I wanted to host him.
.
The thing with IR is the range is vastly more limited than with Radar. That's why they get deployed in manpads and air to air missiles instead of longer range anti-air systems.
Usually they're either combined with radar detection, fired, and then the Ir kicks in at a certain point once they've closed with the target (in which case your initial active radar use is giving away your position anyway), or they're used from ranges short enough that IR alone works.
obviously specific ranges are classified... But IR detection of people and vehicles from a $50-100k bubble on a plane or observation tower was 14km when I was Researching my motorcycle warfare piece and i'd imagine you wouldn't get much better than 30km even trying to hit a jet engine against an empty backdrop... just the amount of atmospheric moisture you're looking through at that range is going to scatter IR information
By contrast the radar systems covered in the piece are detecting and locking on 100-150km away.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I've read every post on your substack to this point...gotta say this was very much weaker than your normal content. Not very engaging, not a new take on things, very biased but not in a fun or interesting new way.
Oof... You're being very harsh on my guest contributor.
He's done a series on military matters that touch on and about Ukraine I'm going to be hosting (of which this is the lightest content), in addition to my usual output, that I've found quite interesting/informative.
Thus my decision to host him.
For reference though this doesn't affect my output... my recent lightness is down to travel and illnesses picked up in airports
No, I don't think I was being harsh enough on him.
The Anarchonomicon take on air defense I'd expect would be something like citing Herodotus's account of the Xanthians:
And his account of the siege of Babylon by Darius
The best air defense is having the balls to not care about civilian casualties on your own side. "I'm not saying we won't get our hair mussed".
To bring this back to critique of Sloppy Goppy, he states that:
That's kind of like saying the Ravens' cornerbacks remained undefeated because they completed the game even though they gave up six touchdowns in the process. Wikipedia tells us:
The real success of the North Vietnamese over US bombing campaigns wasn't based on destroying a relative handful of American aircraft, it was based on the government successfully rallying the population of Vietnam to wage a "People's War in the Air":
Like the Xanthians and Babylonians before them, the Communist Party of Vietnam didn't so much prevent civilian casualties and the destruction of their productive capacity as they despised them, dismissed as not worthy of notice. The nation was capable of enduring privation, food shortages, deaths, and hard labor in order to win. "Nothing is more precious than freedom and independence." So let's question whether strategic bombing of civilian targets is likely to achieve any goals, or merely to inflict suffering that will be ignored by the nationalist psychopaths who seem to be running Ukraine, while allowing the globalist psychopaths than run NATO et al to provide even more destructive weapons to the Ukies.
And that doesn't even get into the question of why focus only on USSR and post-Soviet systems? Why ignore every other missile defense system in existence? Why focus on Russian use of these systems against the Ukrainians' handful of jets, while ignoring the much more apt and important comparison between the inferior Ukrainian forces (with outside support) successfully preventing Russian air dominance from exerting significant impacts on the battlefield? It's just regurgitated Russian talking points memos. I want the angles I haven't heard before.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link