War Is Boring is a Medium publication on military technology, weapons programs, and war history, with David Axe writing on the F-35.
HN links it for its critical F-35 coverage and for history pieces on railways in World War I and Soviet cosmonauts' shotguns.
No, no, no, the comedy tank of the era was the Sherman Tank.
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-m-4-sherman-tank-was-hell-on-wheels-and-a-death-trap-502b0d99e744
Favourite quote: Hence, the Sherman’s grim nickname—Ronson, like the cigarette lighter, because “it lights up the first time, every time.”
Everything was wrong about it and the Russians that got given these on Lend Lease knew that they had been given a death sentence. Aforementioned article just touches the surface, the barrel was too short, the 'tech' for being able to shoot on the move did not work and you needed five of the things to take out one German tank, four as cannon fodder (complete with the guys inside) and one to sneak around the back to get that German tank whilst it was busy taking out the other four.
The 5 Shermans vs 1 Panzer myth is much disputed however where there is smoke there is fire and I would not want to be in one. Plus, by the time that the Americans rocked up to fight WW2 - which was late to the party - the Germans had run out of oil so their tanks were running on recycled coal dust extract rather than the diesel fuel required.
The shoddy design of the Sherman Tank was no matter though, the 'allies' were expected to pay for these useless behemoths after the war so this was the military-industrial-complex and built-in-obsolescence at its finest.
Meanwhile the Soviets had a much more serious war on their hands so their hardware wasn't about making a quick buck. It had to be fit for…
>>>>Dude, I'm Ukrainian
Well, your country being invaded by an incompetent horde of brutal assholes surely influences your ability to dispassionately assess the strategic situation, and the motivations of said assholes. I can understand it's hard to hear that the people slaughtering your countrymen aren't 100% at fault...more like 95% at fault, with the other 5% being sustained multi-decade provocation from....the country that is giving you every weapon imaginable to repulse the murderers. But Ukrainians are dying due to fallout from a chain of events initiated 15+ years ago, by DC think tankers with an irrational willingness to antagonize a Great Power on the opposite side of the planet.
>>>>They were discussing who would they have preferred to work with in future Ukrainian government. What exactly is so scandalous here in your opinion?
I would argue it wasn't a conversation of "wouldn't it be nice if" but them making decisions about who would be the leadership of Ukraine, which isn't something that should be decided by US State Department officials.
>>>With your background you should understand better than most how modern propaganda works.
These days we call it "information operations" and "psychological operations".
>>>> People who participated still waiting for they paycheck, where do they apply?
Don't be naive. The bottom-rank locals in any revolution don't get a paper trail directly back to the US government. Most people who are getting suitcases of US dollars…
The frightening thing about an intelligence officer pitching you is the moment that it happens and feelings of fear, being overwhelmed (Is this really happening? Who are they? Where are they from? I thought they were X but really they are Y? Why me? Why now? What do they want? Will they hurt me or my loved ones if I don't agree? Are they recording this? Who else can I not trust? What do they know about me? How much do they know about me? How did they find out about XYZ? Do they know about my other thing? How can I stop this? Do I want to stop this? Can I trust them? Etc etc etc)
If the person being pitched can compose themselves and buy time to think there is nearly always a way out. Despite what people think intelligence pitching usually has an element of bluff. A handler making a pitch deep down knows this.
If the person being leveraged can find a way to call the bluff (and fight the fear of blackmail) usually the handler will back off - despite what they may say they might do ("We will expose you"). It's generally too risky for the handler to get involved in games and threats of exposing the blackmail evidence. Afterall, they want to continue in their job and aren't gonna risk damaging their own cover, career etc by trying to burn a source who rejected them. Most pitches fail.
Plus a person willing to fight their fear and run the risk of the blackmail compromise being exposed isn't likely to be someone who you are going to easily be able to control. The KGB trying to…
There's a definition nuance I don't follow. When https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Costa_Rica says "Costa Rica does not officially have a military" and "abolished the military of Costa Rica", that makes me think it has no military.
When http://www.coha.org/costa-rica-an-army-less-nation-in-a-problem-prone-region/ says "Without a formal military force, Costa Rica had no need to regularly invest in naval vessels, warplanes, or tanks, which typically make up the heavy equipment of any traditional armed forces." and "It is important to consider that a state that has no military is by nature nonviolent.", that makes me think it has no military.
The same with http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/15/opinion/la-oe-barash-costa-rica-demilitarization-20131208 which says "Henceforth, Costa Rica would take the almost unheard-of step of renouncing its military."
I don't understand why I should believe it has a military. At best we have different ideas of what a "military" means.
You mention "gendarmarie and other paramilitary forces" as a type of military. SWAT team are paramilitary forces, no? Would it be fair to say that Los Angeles has its own military? What about paramilitary support for anti-poaching and other conservation efforts?
The essay at https://medium.com/war-is-boring/costa-rica-doesnt-have-a-military-not-so-fast-499b5d67e160 attempts to convince me that the UEI is a "small military force in all but name", and that "the distinction between police and military…
So ignoring the transparent featured-posts/content model (ie: used by CSS Tricks) which AdBlockers don't have a way to block, there's also the donation model (doesn't scale well, usually).
I've donated to many sites that use donations as their primary means of staying afloat and many of these sites have lasted years with this as their model of revenue. The users of the site understand that the site might live on a month-to-month basis (although surplus from one month is generally put into savings in case a month falls short) and if they wish for the site to stick up, someone's gotta be forking over some money. My favorite local FM radio station also runs off of donations/sponsorships and does not play ads between songs. They've been in the radio business for well over 40 years. It can work if enough value is provided that people are willing to donate money.
Quite frankly - there isn't a strong business in presenting information, because on the internet, everyone has the means to present information with many being specialists in their field and doing it for free because they enjoy educating others about what they do.
Sure, I can pay for some write up on the recent CERN study from a journalist from some well-known publisher with at least some level of professional journalism. Or I can get it from one of the CERN scientists who wrote about the impacts of their findings for the "general layman" in one of their personal blogs for free.
I have a pretty high level of respect…
> Lockheed’s F-117 stealth fighter was developed in a breakneck 30 months by a close-knit team of 50 engineers led by an experienced fighter designer named Alan Brown and overseen by seven government employees. Brown said he exercised strict control over the design effort, nixing any proposed feature of the plane that might add cost or delay or detract from its main mission.
> The F-35, by contrast, is being designed by some 6,000 engineers led by a rotating contingent of short-tenure managers, with no fewer than 2,000 government workers providing oversight. The sprawling JSF staff, partially a product of the design’s complexity, has also added to that complexity like a bureaucratic feedback loop, as every engineer or manager scrambles to add his or her specialty widget, subsystem or specification to the plane’s already complicated blueprints … and inexperienced leaders allow it.
For those interested in a deeper look at why the F-35 is so, well, F'd, this is a great read:
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fd-how-the-u-s-and-its-allies-got-stuck-with-the-worlds-worst-new-warplane-5c95d45f86a5
It basically comes down to stupid design considerations forced upon the program by the various branches(mainly the Marine Corps) and how easily blinded Congress was by the notion of a (supposedly cheaper) one-size-fits-all solution.