yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

Technology doesn’t win wars. Why the US pretends it does. | Sean McFate | Big Think


3m read
·Nov 3, 2024

Processing might take a few minutes. Refresh later.

SEAN MCFATE: War is getting sneakier. War is going underground. And we have to go underground with it. We have to fight in the shadows. Otherwise, we will be left behind.

So, for example, you know, in this type of new environment, some of the best weapons do not fire bullets. In the old days, the old rules of war, when the Soviet Union wanted to arrest the West, wanted to sort of freak out NATO, what it would do was hold a huge military exercise on the border of Germany, East and West Germany. 150,000 troops. And NATO and the United States wasn't sure, like, well, is this an exercise or could it be a real invasion? And that would shake things up.

But that's the old days, the innocent days. Today, when Russia wants to shake up Europe, what they do is they weaponize refugees. They deliberately bomb civilian centers in Syria, creating an avalanche of refugees into Europe, which creates Brexit, which creates the rise of right-wing national parties that want to disembowel the European Union. The Soviets wish they could do that, if they could only have done that.

So I think this is an example of how wars of the future will be fought. They will not even look like wars to the traditional mind, and a few heads will explode in the Pentagon. Sure. When people think of the threats that face our country today, they think of Russia, China, terrorism, pandemics, et cetera. But those are not the worst problems.

The worst threat is systemic. It's growing entropy in the global system. It's persistent conflict. It's something I call durable disorder. What durable disorder is and what durable disorder means is that we have an emerging global system that can contain problems but not solve them. Meanwhile, we have this post-1945 idea of a liberal world order that the US sort of champions and rules upon, but that world has gone away, and we're not prepared for what follows next.

For the United States, the last successful war was World War II. We won decisively in 1945. The world ran on vacuum tubes, yet the idea of conventional war is still the strategic paradigm of which the Pentagon, the military, the modern national security establishment is built around, and this is dangerously wrong.

When you ask people to think about the future of war, often what they tell you is something that looks like World War II with better technology. But there is nothing more unconventional today than conventional war. Nobody fights this way. When people think about what warfare is, they think of John Wayne or Saving Private Ryan. They think of killing more enemies, taking more territory, and flying your flag over the enemy's capital. They think of Berlin in '45. They think of Japan's surrender on the battleship, the USS Missouri.

And then they wonder why there's not a USS Missouri moment against the Taliban, against ISIS. The reason is nobody fights this way of war anymore, yet we are mired in the past. And as long as we're mired in the past, and war has moved on, we will be left behind.

And even an undefeated. So if there's one maxim for the last 70 years of war, it's that technology is not decisive in warfare. If you look at big, powerful, technologically advanced militaries go up against low-level Luddites who confound them. You know, whether it's the Mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Soviets or America fighting in Vietnam against the North Vietnamese, et cetera, Iraq and Afghanistan, this is, without question, the one thing we should all agree on.

Yet for some reason, people think we need to double down and invest in technology for warfare. In fact, for most people, they can't even imagine the future of war without high tech. Such is the bias that we have for it. But this is the definition of insanity, doing the same thing again and again and expecting a different result.

For example, take the F-35 fighter jet. You know, we have not fought, we have not had a strategic dogfight since the Korean War. So why do we need more fighter jets? I do not know. We already have the best fighter jets. And the F-16, the F-15, and...

More Articles

View All
How to Invest In the Stock Market for Beginners in 2020
Good date subscribers! Thank you so much for joining us today. My name is Graham, and welcome to the Financial Education Channel. I’m so happy! Finally, we’ve been talking to each other for probably like a year and a half. I finally got Jeremy on my chann…
Directional derivatives and slope
Hello everyone! So what I want to talk about here is how to interpret the directional derivative in terms of graphs. I have here the graph of a function, a multivariable function: it’s ( F(x, y) = x^2 \cdot y ). In the last couple of videos, I talked abo…
This Mistake Cost Me $1 Million!
There you are with your opportunity. You’ve beat the odds, and you don’t know your numbers. Set goals you can achieve, and watch things happen, because people want to work in a winning. It’s like playing for Brady; nobody wants to leave the team. There i…
Candle Trick
Tonight we’re going to show you a candle trick that you can use to impress your date at your next candlelit dinner. What we’re going to show you is how you can light a candle without touching the wick. Okay, so Nigel is going to, uh, light up a wooden sp…
Acid–base properties of salts | Acids and bases | AP Chemistry | Khan Academy
Salts can form acidic solutions, neutral solutions, or basic solutions when dissolved in water. For example, if we dissolve sodium chloride in water, solid sodium chloride turns into sodium cations and chloride anions in solution. At 25 degrees Celsius, t…
Corresponding points and sides of scaled shapes
We are told figure two is a scaled copy of figure one. So this is figure two; here this is figure one. Looks like figure two not only has it been scaled down to a smaller version, but it also looks like it has been rotated 180 degrees, or you could say it…