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
Two Classes of Bitcoin? | Kitco NEWS
Joining me now is serial entrepreneur, Shark Tank star, and chairman of O shares ETFs, the one and only Kevin O’Leary, Mr. Wonderful. Wonderful to have you back with us! Great to be here. Thank you so much! All right, so Kevin, Jamie Dimon is saying tha…
DONALD TRUMP'S FULL SPEECH | Trump claims victory, addresses supporters in Florida
Thank you very much. Wow! Well, I want to thank you all very much. This is great. These are our friends. We have thousands of friends on this incredible movement. This was a movement like nobody’s ever seen before, and frankly, this was, I believe, the gr…
New Hampshire Summer Learning Series Session 5: Writing Coach
All right, good, great! Good morning, everyone. So welcome back to our summer learning series with KH Academy for New Hampshire Educators. Just a reminder that this is part of our summer learning path because we are working to enroll all of you into our p…
The Rise and Fall of Reddit
The meme stock trading trend, with its Wall Street bets form, reached a 10 billion dollar valuation in its latest funding round. The company says it has already raised more than 400 million dollars from Fidelity and plans to raise up to 700 million dollar…
Secant line with arbitrary point (with simplification) | AP Calculus AB | Khan Academy
A secant line intersects the graph of f of x, which is equal to x² + 5x, at two points with x-coordinates 3 and T, where T does not equal 3. What is the slope of the secant line in terms of T? Your answer must be fully expanded and simplified. And my apo…
How Dangerous is a Penny Dropped From a Skyscraper?
[Derek] What would happen if you dropped a penny off the Empire State Building? Could it kill someone walking on the sidewalk below? What does it take to create a deadly projectile? Well, I’m gonna put this to the test with original MythBuster Adam Savage…