Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Oh good grief, this summary is both farcical and tragic: also, Trump has fucked air travel for at least the next two years, never mind automobiles and logistics.

Oh good grief, this summary is both farcical and tragic: also, Trump has fucked air travel for at least the next two years, never mind automobiles and logistics.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
89 Posts 35 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

    @NohatCoder @cstross Uhh no. 1970s era USSR SAMs have practically no chance of hitting an F-35, and little chance of hitting various 4th gen jets (thanks to ECM and countermeasures). I mean, assuming well trained pilots.

    An F-35 is much more difficult to detect and track on radar than the (much older technology) Tomahawk cruise missiles that were expended at great expense in the initial wave of attacks.

    Why did the US military do this? I don't know, but it could easily have been stupidity

    isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
    isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
    isaackuo@spacey.space
    wrote last edited by
    #42

    @NohatCoder @cstross driven by Hegseth and/or Trump himself.

    But then, they were expecting Iran to surrender within the first few hours, or maybe days, so who knows?

    Anyway, USS Ford having clogged toilets had an "effect" on the viability of F-35 round the clock bombing of Iran anyway.

    These are things which COULD have been ... I dunno ... PLANNED about and for. But Hegseth and Trump are just so stupid.

    nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

      @cstross really does not change the fact that there never was any way to "win" this Iran War. You just have to look at this size, terrain, population layout of Iran compared to Iraq 2003 to get an idea of what sort of invasion force would have been necessary.

      And there aren't any neighbors to Iran eager to become an invasion staging area.

      So ... Iran will win. Period. They'll get bombed and stuff, and then ... they'll win.

      graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
      graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
      graydon@canada.masto.host
      wrote last edited by
      #43

      @isaackuo @cstross The US victory conditions are for the Islamic Republic to go away. (US elite consensus that it's illegitimate, generational offense at daring to claim ownership of oil, etc.) They don't need to be Napoleon and be lauded as a conqueror.

      Take a look at Iran on Google Maps; switch on the traffic.

      Sparse transportation network, very concentrated; single export economy.

      Think kinetic sanctions; blow up the ability to export oil and the roads over the mountains. Mine the ports.

      graydon@canada.masto.hostG 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • graydon@canada.masto.hostG graydon@canada.masto.host

        @isaackuo @cstross The US victory conditions are for the Islamic Republic to go away. (US elite consensus that it's illegitimate, generational offense at daring to claim ownership of oil, etc.) They don't need to be Napoleon and be lauded as a conqueror.

        Take a look at Iran on Google Maps; switch on the traffic.

        Sparse transportation network, very concentrated; single export economy.

        Think kinetic sanctions; blow up the ability to export oil and the roads over the mountains. Mine the ports.

        graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
        graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
        graydon@canada.masto.host
        wrote last edited by
        #44

        @isaackuo @cstross Is this a big bundle of war crimes before they start bombing power plants? Yes. The whole thing is illegitimate per the defunct post-war order.

        Does anyone in the US administration care at all? No. (Many are actively in favor.)

        Can the US do it? This is one of the things you can do with air supremacy.

        Will it work?

        It could; starving people are docile, but people who know they're going to starve are not. (Not that this is going to save anybody.)

        graydon@canada.masto.hostG isaackuo@spacey.spaceI 2 Replies Last reply
        0
        • graydon@canada.masto.hostG graydon@canada.masto.host

          @isaackuo @cstross Is this a big bundle of war crimes before they start bombing power plants? Yes. The whole thing is illegitimate per the defunct post-war order.

          Does anyone in the US administration care at all? No. (Many are actively in favor.)

          Can the US do it? This is one of the things you can do with air supremacy.

          Will it work?

          It could; starving people are docile, but people who know they're going to starve are not. (Not that this is going to save anybody.)

          graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
          graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
          graydon@canada.masto.host
          wrote last edited by
          #45

          @isaackuo @cstross Does the current "supply chain shock" scenario go flying out the window singing strange names in unpronouncable tongues once anybody starts figuring out that the supply of fossil carbon from the Gulf is now indefinitely impaired? (It's not like US fossil carbon producers mind the current prices. It's not like elites notice food prices.)

          It sure does; that's "some other global economy, try again later" for prognostication. Far too many pieces no one can predict.

          graydon@canada.masto.hostG 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • graydon@canada.masto.hostG graydon@canada.masto.host

            @isaackuo @cstross Is this a big bundle of war crimes before they start bombing power plants? Yes. The whole thing is illegitimate per the defunct post-war order.

            Does anyone in the US administration care at all? No. (Many are actively in favor.)

            Can the US do it? This is one of the things you can do with air supremacy.

            Will it work?

            It could; starving people are docile, but people who know they're going to starve are not. (Not that this is going to save anybody.)

            isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
            isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
            isaackuo@spacey.space
            wrote last edited by
            #46

            @graydon @cstross Okay, but how does this actually make the Iranian regime go away?

            Yeah, starving people may be docile, but this would help whoever's already in power.

            Unless you have a full on invasion force, I see "regime change" as a political struggle. And Trump's hurting, not helping, political support for the Iranian opposition.

            graydon@canada.masto.hostG 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • graydon@canada.masto.hostG graydon@canada.masto.host

              @isaackuo @cstross Does the current "supply chain shock" scenario go flying out the window singing strange names in unpronouncable tongues once anybody starts figuring out that the supply of fossil carbon from the Gulf is now indefinitely impaired? (It's not like US fossil carbon producers mind the current prices. It's not like elites notice food prices.)

              It sure does; that's "some other global economy, try again later" for prognostication. Far too many pieces no one can predict.

              graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
              graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
              graydon@canada.masto.host
              wrote last edited by
              #47

              @isaackuo @cstross Is the US military going to collectively mutiny over being ordered to commit overt genocide in Iran?

              Doesn't seem likely.

              Is is getting on for being a really good idea to avoid recreational travel? I would say so.

              The Angry Weather would have dragged us out of the domain of preference into the domain of necessity soon enough; this looks like getting dragged firmly into necessity a little early, as planetary scales go.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                @graydon @cstross Okay, but how does this actually make the Iranian regime go away?

                Yeah, starving people may be docile, but this would help whoever's already in power.

                Unless you have a full on invasion force, I see "regime change" as a political struggle. And Trump's hurting, not helping, political support for the Iranian opposition.

                graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
                graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
                graydon@canada.masto.host
                wrote last edited by
                #48

                @isaackuo @cstross It takes a minimum economy to maintain a regime. It needs radios and the ability to manufacture small arms ammunition and keep records. If you crash an economy hard enough and external support isn't available (no sufficient transport network over those mountain passes before they get mined), it stops being able to have a government.

                It's not even a little bit hard to imagine this administration deciding that's the plan.

                Much better if they don't, but.

                isaackuo@spacey.spaceI 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • graydon@canada.masto.hostG graydon@canada.masto.host

                  @isaackuo @cstross It takes a minimum economy to maintain a regime. It needs radios and the ability to manufacture small arms ammunition and keep records. If you crash an economy hard enough and external support isn't available (no sufficient transport network over those mountain passes before they get mined), it stops being able to have a government.

                  It's not even a little bit hard to imagine this administration deciding that's the plan.

                  Much better if they don't, but.

                  isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                  isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                  isaackuo@spacey.space
                  wrote last edited by
                  #49

                  @graydon @cstross Okay, I understand that as a theory, but I don't see how that would work in practice.

                  It's hard to imagine being bombed back into the Stone Age more than the Taliban, and ... well, we saw how that worked out.

                  And it's not like the Taliban was the darling of external helping superpowers or anything.

                  And the terrain was - oops - yeah, similar to much of Iran. And the region - oh yeah, right next door.

                  isaackuo@spacey.spaceI graydon@canada.masto.hostG 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                    @graydon @cstross Okay, I understand that as a theory, but I don't see how that would work in practice.

                    It's hard to imagine being bombed back into the Stone Age more than the Taliban, and ... well, we saw how that worked out.

                    And it's not like the Taliban was the darling of external helping superpowers or anything.

                    And the terrain was - oops - yeah, similar to much of Iran. And the region - oh yeah, right next door.

                    isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                    isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                    isaackuo@spacey.space
                    wrote last edited by
                    #50

                    @graydon @cstross And that was WITH a huge invasion force, as well as pretty powerful warlords and stuff helping on the ground.

                    ... Annnnnd we still lost. It's not like the locals liked the Taliban, they just had a (correct) expectation that the Taliban would stick around longer than the Americans.

                    And that was that. Yippee.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                      @NohatCoder @cstross driven by Hegseth and/or Trump himself.

                      But then, they were expecting Iran to surrender within the first few hours, or maybe days, so who knows?

                      Anyway, USS Ford having clogged toilets had an "effect" on the viability of F-35 round the clock bombing of Iran anyway.

                      These are things which COULD have been ... I dunno ... PLANNED about and for. But Hegseth and Trump are just so stupid.

                      nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN This user is from outside of this forum
                      nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN This user is from outside of this forum
                      nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.place
                      wrote last edited by
                      #51

                      @isaackuo @cstross Well, something in Iranian possession is clearly at least somewhat capable of targeting US planes. It is likely that the systems have been modified throughout the years, it is also quite likely that there are quite a few "knobs" one can turn in order to adjust what kind of radar signature the systems should look for. A lot of modern stealth really only defeats the defaults configuration.

                      isaackuo@spacey.spaceI 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • cstross@wandering.shopC cstross@wandering.shop

                        RE: https://infosec.exchange/@bontchev/116271481696841313

                        Oh good grief, this summary is both farcical and tragic: also, Trump has fucked air travel for at least the next two years, never mind automobiles and logistics. The supply chain shock will get as bad as 2022 within a couple of months—then keep getting worse.

                        edelruth@mastodon.onlineE This user is from outside of this forum
                        edelruth@mastodon.onlineE This user is from outside of this forum
                        edelruth@mastodon.online
                        wrote last edited by
                        #52

                        @cstross

                        I'm reading the article, agog, but I don't understand any of this paragraph, and I would like to:
                        "Its precise location was then revealed to the entire internet by a sailor who went jogging on deck with Strava running. Iran’s calling B7."

                        Strava running?
                        B7?

                        Clarifications welcome.

                        cstross@wandering.shopC 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • edelruth@mastodon.onlineE edelruth@mastodon.online

                          @cstross

                          I'm reading the article, agog, but I don't understand any of this paragraph, and I would like to:
                          "Its precise location was then revealed to the entire internet by a sailor who went jogging on deck with Strava running. Iran’s calling B7."

                          Strava running?
                          B7?

                          Clarifications welcome.

                          cstross@wandering.shopC This user is from outside of this forum
                          cstross@wandering.shopC This user is from outside of this forum
                          cstross@wandering.shop
                          wrote last edited by
                          #53

                          @Edelruth Strava is a GPS-enabled exercise tracking app. It identified the ship's position because the sailor was running laps of the flight deck.

                          B7 is *I assume* a snarky joke riffing on the game "Battleships".

                          edelruth@mastodon.onlineE 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                            @graydon @cstross Okay, I understand that as a theory, but I don't see how that would work in practice.

                            It's hard to imagine being bombed back into the Stone Age more than the Taliban, and ... well, we saw how that worked out.

                            And it's not like the Taliban was the darling of external helping superpowers or anything.

                            And the terrain was - oops - yeah, similar to much of Iran. And the region - oh yeah, right next door.

                            graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
                            graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
                            graydon@canada.masto.host
                            wrote last edited by
                            #54

                            @isaackuo @cstross The US adventure in Afghanistan was undertaken while trying to do nation-building and while following the laws of war. (the much-complained about JAG representatives checking legitimacy of airstrike targets, etc.) It was seen as a fight.

                            If you don't do that and bomb power plants, food stocks, oil refineries, water infrastructure, etc. with specific genocidal intent, you get different results. There's a circulating narrative around "could have won if" about this approach.

                            graydon@canada.masto.hostG isaackuo@spacey.spaceI 2 Replies Last reply
                            0
                            • graydon@canada.masto.hostG graydon@canada.masto.host

                              @isaackuo @cstross The US adventure in Afghanistan was undertaken while trying to do nation-building and while following the laws of war. (the much-complained about JAG representatives checking legitimacy of airstrike targets, etc.) It was seen as a fight.

                              If you don't do that and bomb power plants, food stocks, oil refineries, water infrastructure, etc. with specific genocidal intent, you get different results. There's a circulating narrative around "could have won if" about this approach.

                              graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
                              graydon@canada.masto.hostG This user is from outside of this forum
                              graydon@canada.masto.host
                              wrote last edited by
                              #55

                              @isaackuo @cstross There's also the definite problem that everyone making decisions on both sides is incapable of doing a quantitative analysis. (They may have access to such analysis; it might be quite good, even. That doesn't mean they have any ability to believe it or to incorporate it into their understanding.)

                              Something does not have to have a high probability of success to be adopted as a strategic goal; it has to feel right to these specific terrible people.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • cstross@wandering.shopC cstross@wandering.shop

                                RE: https://infosec.exchange/@bontchev/116271481696841313

                                Oh good grief, this summary is both farcical and tragic: also, Trump has fucked air travel for at least the next two years, never mind automobiles and logistics. The supply chain shock will get as bad as 2022 within a couple of months—then keep getting worse.

                                drajt@fosstodon.orgD This user is from outside of this forum
                                drajt@fosstodon.orgD This user is from outside of this forum
                                drajt@fosstodon.org
                                wrote last edited by
                                #56

                                @cstross on one level Trump has done more for Open Source software and renewable energy in a few months than the Democrats did in years. Nothing like being a clueless despot for making people think about what they buy and how they do things...

                                netraven@hear-me.socialN fazalmajid@social.vivaldi.netF 2 Replies Last reply
                                0
                                • cstross@wandering.shopC cstross@wandering.shop

                                  RE: https://infosec.exchange/@bontchev/116271481696841313

                                  Oh good grief, this summary is both farcical and tragic: also, Trump has fucked air travel for at least the next two years, never mind automobiles and logistics. The supply chain shock will get as bad as 2022 within a couple of months—then keep getting worse.

                                  alex_p_roe@mastodon.worldA This user is from outside of this forum
                                  alex_p_roe@mastodon.worldA This user is from outside of this forum
                                  alex_p_roe@mastodon.world
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #57

                                  @cstross Our future is in the hands of a greedy, self-absorbed madman. Frightening.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.place

                                    @isaackuo @cstross Well, something in Iranian possession is clearly at least somewhat capable of targeting US planes. It is likely that the systems have been modified throughout the years, it is also quite likely that there are quite a few "knobs" one can turn in order to adjust what kind of radar signature the systems should look for. A lot of modern stealth really only defeats the defaults configuration.

                                    isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                    isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                    isaackuo@spacey.space
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #58

                                    @NohatCoder @cstross Iran does indeed have a wide range of SAM systems, including some hopelessly outdated stuff but also including systems introduced within the last ten years.

                                    Anyway, defeating stealth is not as simple as turning a knob. It's low level physics that extremely little signal is reflected back to the radar. But it's also physics that stealth aircraft still can be detected and tracked by radar at very short range.

                                    And there are IR/optical SAM systems which don't rely on radar.

                                    isaackuo@spacey.spaceI 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • graydon@canada.masto.hostG graydon@canada.masto.host

                                      @isaackuo @cstross The US adventure in Afghanistan was undertaken while trying to do nation-building and while following the laws of war. (the much-complained about JAG representatives checking legitimacy of airstrike targets, etc.) It was seen as a fight.

                                      If you don't do that and bomb power plants, food stocks, oil refineries, water infrastructure, etc. with specific genocidal intent, you get different results. There's a circulating narrative around "could have won if" about this approach.

                                      isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                      isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                      isaackuo@spacey.space
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #59

                                      @graydon @cstross Well, I can certainly believe that various people who are stupid (if not AS stupid as Trump) wishfully believing in that sort of genocidal theory.

                                      I just don't think it would actually work.

                                      I mean, of course the sort of people who would fall for this sort of theory tend to not be the most stable minds to begin with...

                                      graydon@canada.masto.hostG 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                                        @NohatCoder @cstross Iran does indeed have a wide range of SAM systems, including some hopelessly outdated stuff but also including systems introduced within the last ten years.

                                        Anyway, defeating stealth is not as simple as turning a knob. It's low level physics that extremely little signal is reflected back to the radar. But it's also physics that stealth aircraft still can be detected and tracked by radar at very short range.

                                        And there are IR/optical SAM systems which don't rely on radar.

                                        isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                        isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                        isaackuo@spacey.space
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #60

                                        @NohatCoder @cstross In particular, older IR missiles depended on the target being hot compared to the background noise, to be able to detect/track the target.

                                        But more modern IR missiles just need the target to be different from the background in at least one of two different wavelengths. It's like color vision where the target just needs to be a different color or brightness than the background.

                                        Stealth aircraft tend to try and reduce IR signature by mixing in ambient air to the exhaust, but

                                        isaackuo@spacey.spaceI 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                                          @NohatCoder @cstross In particular, older IR missiles depended on the target being hot compared to the background noise, to be able to detect/track the target.

                                          But more modern IR missiles just need the target to be different from the background in at least one of two different wavelengths. It's like color vision where the target just needs to be a different color or brightness than the background.

                                          Stealth aircraft tend to try and reduce IR signature by mixing in ambient air to the exhaust, but

                                          isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                          isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                          isaackuo@spacey.space
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #61

                                          @NohatCoder @cstross this is just plain less effective against more modern IR/optical missiles. Against 1970s era IR missiles? Sure. Against 2010s era IR missiles? Probably no effect whatsoever.

                                          burrland01@mastodon.worldB 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups