The Changing Face Of Warfare

The other day I was sitting in my armchair thinking about lessons being learned by the grinding and ever-evolving war between Ukraine and Russia and the more recent war between the U.S. and Iran.  Armchair general stuff was swirling-about in my civilian brain.  Mostly about the asymmetric nature of the conflicts as it pertains to large, global powers going-up against smaller powers and the cost-asymmetry observed in the use of costly exquisite weapons to defeat numerous unsophisticated and cheap weapons.

Just as armor, gunpowder, artillery, naval power, the machine gun, poison gas, communications, mechanization, aircraft and mutually assured destruction changed the face of warfare; we are witness to another.    

Only last month an advanced AH-64 Apache attack chopper was downed by a loitering Iranian unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV).  A $30 million aircraft defeated by an unmanned drone that costs $20,000.  The pilots survived and were pulled from the waters the the Strait of Hormuz by an unmanned drone watercraft.  Lots of technology packaged in this single incident and a huge disparity in the price of weapon systems.  

China currently produces UAVs and similar loitering drones at a scale  that is stunning.  And if we found ourselves in a shooting war over Taiwan all we got is an ever-dwindling supply of Patriot missiles to shoot them down.  At $4 million a copy.

Shooting million-dollar missiles at twenty-thousand-dollar drones is unsustainable. 

Say hello to the new face of modern warfare. 

Ukraine has embraced drone warfare in earnest; including the deployment of autonomous UAVs capable of  delivering a warhead over vast distances; all the while stalling and reversing Russian advances into their territory at a terrifying cost in Russian and North Korean lives.

    

Assembling a single modern Patriot Advanced Capability-3 interceptor takes about a couple of years.  A solid rocket motor requires up to thirty months.  Setting-up a new assembly facility for Patriot missiles can presently take three to four years.

Ukraine assembles and delivers small FPV (First Person View) reconnaissance and kamikaze drones in a matter of hours to a couple of days.  Supply chain and procurement move an order from workshop to combat deployment in 24 to 48 hours.  Larger strategic strike UAVs and maritime drone boats requires only weeks.

Finally, there is the application of artificial intelligence to facilitate modern warfare. AI software processes real-time intelligence feeds to coordinate operations and advise targeting in single minutes and seconds.

Unmanned drones use onboard computer vision to lock-onto and strike targets independently; thereby defeating electronic jamming.  AI-enabled hardware permits inexpensive weapons systems to defeat high-value targets like tanks, missiles and ships.

Machine learning can sort thru overwhelming amounts of geospatial and signal intelligence that previously would require thousands of human analysts.  

Sadly, modern conflicts have become a test bed for rapid evolution in warfare and tactics as we've known it. 

Meanwhile, the administration has phased-out the Army's cutting edge drone warfare unit.   

And the U.S. is hesitant to allow Ukraine to manufacture Patriot missiles locally, partially to protect U.S. military intellectual property, but more so because it doesn't want Ukraine to do it better.  

Shortsighted?  Or brilliant strategy?  Judging from how the war with Iran is playing-out only time will tell.  Watch the Peter Zeihan video short to the end.  Better yet read the comments.... 

Moving The Goal Posts

Throughout his political career Donald Trump has often articulated a disdain for open-ended military conflicts.  You know; Forever Wars.    

He has often cited the trillions of dollars spent in Iraq and Afghanistan suggesting the US received nothing in return.  As an America First Populist he has argued that these resources are better spent on domestic priorities.  Both he and his followers have frequently blamed warmongering globalists, neocons, military leadership and a shadowy Deep State for dragging the country into unnecessary conflicts.  And he has been consistent in deriding the notion of nation-building.  

I cannot argue any of the foregoing as there is truth to be found in all of it; particularly the costs in lives, both military and civilian.  The purpose of this post is nothing more than to note, as an outside observer, the shifting rationales cascading in the wake of Operation Epic Fury. 

Following the January 2020 drone strike that killed General Qasem Soleimani Trump claimed the action was necessary to head-off imminent and sinister attacks on US diplomats and service members. Pressed by Congress the administration later moved the goal posts and in a formal memo to Congress, deleted any reference to an imminent claim, instead justifying the strike as a response to past attacks and to deter future aggression. 

In 2025 President Trump launched Operation Midnight Hammer striking Iranian nuclear facilities in Natanz and Fordow.  The president announced the facilities were obliterated, effectively ending Iran's nuclear ambitions.  In short order, and in direct contradiction of earlier claims, the administration moved the goal posts claiming Iran was rebuilding the same facilities as a rationale for the recent escalation of hostilities.

Then the goal posts were planted on Iran's ballistic missile program.  The rationale was the Iran was developing intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of striking our homeland soon. 

Defense Secretary Hegseth moved the goal posts arguing that Iran's conventional missiles and drones were a shield protecting their nuclear ambitions thus requiring the US to first dismantle Iran's conventional military.

Secretary of State Rubio suggested that the recent wave of attacks were preemptive in nature arguing that the US struck Iran because it knew Israel was planning an attack; consequently, the US had to strike first to neutralize Iran's capacity to attack our middle eastern bases.  Goal posts moved, again. 

Ironically the most inconsistent is the regime change rationale requiring moving the goal posts in both end zones.  Trump himself appealed to the Iranian people to take control of your government as he cheered the death of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei as a turning point.  Simultaneously, Defense Secretary Hegseth stated that the operations are not a so-called regime change war, framing it instead as a narrow mission to destroy specific Iranian military assets.  

Trump Says Germany is Helping With Iran Strikes

Between you and me, and hopefully within a relatively short passage of time, the administration will settle on some sort of rationale.  The goal posts may look something like this:  With insufficient international and weakening domestic support, military losses, rising oil prices, market volatility, insufficient evidence of any Iranian opposition capacity for overthrowing the current theocracy and a general lack of progress towards whatever rationale the administration eventually settles-on, it will be TACO time. The President will declare a win and victoriously announce we've done all that is possible for freedom-loving Iranians and that it is now time to move-on leaving them to pick-up the pieces.

I happen to believe regime change is overreach.  For the sake of Americans who wear a uniform in service to this country and civilians caught in the crossfire I pray for sooner; rather than longer. 

EDIT to add one hour following publication:

Attacks have intensified, with Iranian drone and missile strikes heading towards the Arab Gulf states. Many of these states rely on costly U.S. interceptors, and with stockpiles dwindling, energy infrastructure could become exposed.

The End of Venezuela?

Geopolitical strategist, Peter Zeihan, posted this yesterday morning. 

 

United States forces have captured the president of Venezuela, Nicolas Maduro, in the capital of Caracas.  Peter suggests that this event marks the beginning of the disintegration of what is left of the country... 

 

 

I got all sorta questions.

 

If you watched Telemundo last night - Venezuelans were celebrating.  They appeared ecstatic that Maduro is gone.  How could that possibly mean the beginning of the end?   If Peter believes Venezuela was already a dead state and where civilization is going to disintegrate, then wouldn't this action be a positive one as it provides Venezuelans an opportunity to turn things around?  It might be more like the beginning of Venezuela as a functional state.  

 

The military operation was nothing less than a spectacular tactical success.  Yet, what is the strategy to follow?  Is there a plan, some sort of architecture to manage an orderly transition?​  Or will this be a nation building mission with a vague and nebulous end result?  

 

Venezuela could install opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Corina Machado; whom Maduro didn't allow to take office and Trump has also dismissed out of hand. 

 

It will be interesting to see where things are in one month, three month and six month intervals. 

 

And ask yourself this.  What gives the United States the authority to attack another country and remove their leadership?  

 

Who is next?

 

Mexico or Greenland? 

 

Jones Act

Peter suggests that if you tasked him with creating a list of the greatest threats to America, he’s not sure cabinets, name-brand drugs, and semi-trucks would be on there...but the President disagrees.

 

So, get ready for a massive economic bulldozer to hit the US due to these new tariffs. With 90% of all US cargo moving by truck, these higher costs will create a ripple effect through every sector. 

This all started back with the Jones Act, which made domestic shipping prohibitively expensive, causing a shift in freight from ships to rail to (almost entirely) trucks.

Since those trucks are made across an integrated North American supply chain, dipping into Canada, the US, and Mexico, tariffs are hitting hard. That means everything Americans consume, from your food to your clothes, will cost a whole lot more.

 

Election Postmortem... || Peter Zeihan

 

Prescient?

From April 3, 2023.....

 

Inflation Paradox

Happy New Year gentle readers.  

With the dawn of the New Year unemployment is still below 4 percent, inflation has cooled to 3 percent, third quarter economic growth came in a 5.2% 4.9% (revised a second time) the ratio of job openings to unemployed workers has returned to pre-pandemic levels and wages are growing faster than prices.  All good news as we turn the page on a new calendar.

As supply chains have finally caught-up we've even settled into consumption patterns that are near normal.  (Note: If Iranian-back Houthi rebels step-up harassment of Red Sea shipping; supply chains are gonna get rocked).

All of that aside, what we know for sure is that us boomers are continuing to retire in droves; and as a consequence have created a demographic disturbance in the force.  The millennials and Gen Z population cohorts might not be capable of meeting future labor demands.  So, while we can momentarily bask in the warmth of recent positive economic news, inflation might be a stickler for awhile.  We have to wait and see.

And there is that nagging disconnect between consumer behavior and consumer perception.  So check back Sunday while I take another whack at that piñata.  

 

Fun Factoid:

Declaring it Public Enemy Number One, in 1974 President Gerald Ford mounted a campaign to suppress inflation.  It was called Whip Inflation Now (WIN) and an attempt to spur a grassroots movement to combat inflation by means of encouraging personal savings and disciplined spending habits in combination with 55 presidential vetoes (45 upheld by Congress) saving US taxpayers $9.5 billion.  I'm old enough to remember.

Either-Or

Michael Herzog, the Israeli Ambassador to the US, has been sharing a 45-minute video of the October 7 Hamas attack to members of the media at their embassy in Washington.

The video is a collection of social media posts, security camera and body cam footage captured from Hamas attackers to illustrate the brutality of the attacks on innocent civilians.  

The Israeli government will not publicly release the content out of respect for the victim's families.  To be clear, I have not viewed it and can only rely-upon press accounts of those who have. I have read and heard that it constitutes the most complete record of the slaughter of 1400 Israelis in a single morning.

There's a gravely-wounded man on the ground yet very much alive.  Hamas terrorists slowly behead him with a garden hoe.  A young Israeli woman  cowers under a desk in her bedroom as Hamas member wait and wait before killing her.  A young man whose arm ends in a bloody stump is tossed into the back of a pickup truck slick with blood while his captors laugh.  Two young boys in their underwear run into a shed with their father who dies falling-upon a grenade to protect them.  One of the boys cries out in English for their mother.

The most striking element of the content is the intoxicating joy, exultation and exhilaration the killers display at every turn while executing children, the elderly, spraying gunfire into homes and shooting  dogs that come loping from gardens to investigate.  The killers make calls home to celebrate and revel in the carnage.

I've read that the video closes with a flood of images of slaughtered babies and children.  Ten children under the age of five are missing and presumed held as hostages. 

Reflecting-upon Hamas' orgy of savagery it is righteous that the attention of the world be drawn to Israel.

Yet, let us not forget that continuing Russian aggression in Ukraine has already cost the lives of almost ten thousand innocent Ukrainians.  Russia has forcibly taken children from their families and sent them back to the Motherland for Russification.  There are Russian army camps for rape and torture.  A formality of barbarous convenience.

There is credible evidence that Russia has committed crimes against humanity and genocide in Ukraine.  Global authorities confirm that war crimes are part of the Russian playbook.  

I know evil when I see it.  Russia and Hamas are dissimilar yet they share a common goal of the total annihilation and eradication of a neighboring country. 

The moral depravity of the pro Hamas left and the pro Putin right has made our world an exceedingly dangerous place.  

I believe it is right to be thoughtful and judicious about military and humanitarian aid to others.  This is not warmongering jingoism.  Considering the notion that Russia and Hamas are the nexus of aggression along with their Iranian patrons are not Israel and Ukraine both deserving of our support in defending against their aggressors? 

To suggest it must be either one or the other is a false dilemma fallacy.

Blockade

These are observations made by Peter Zeihan on the blockade that Alabama Senator Tommy "Coach" Tuberville has made on armed services promotions.  I've been following this as it is fascinating to me that a single US Senator can single-handedly block promotions within the ranks of the US military establishment.

Obstructionism is hardly new to the political scene in Washington.  And while Tuberville is entitled to his opinion on abortion I'm struggling to see a connection to filling key defense and security positions.  The system is hopelessly flawed when one individual can bring the filling of critical national security positions to a grinding halt.

Zeihan claims that under normal circumstances if you learned that high-ranking military personnel were losing security clearances and access to critical information, you'd probably expect to hear some sound rationale. Unfortunately, that's not the case because the current greatest threat to our national security is orchestrated by Tuberville over abortion policy.

Senator Tommy Tuberville has placed a unilateral hold on nominations and confirmations of military officials because he doesn't like the Biden administration's current policy of allowing service members to travel for abortion services. Consequently, the affected military personnel cannot access the classified information necessary for strategic planning.

Abusing power to manipulate outcomes is nothing new for American politics; however, political deadlocks that impede military operations are detrimental and problematic for the country's security interests. Given the context of the Ukraine War and rising tensions with China does this pose a potential risk?  Is is something that as Tuberville characterizes it, no big deal?  Or is it a perfectly acceptable not to jerk military leadership and their families around for political theater?

Does Zeihan have a valid point?

And, BTW, Alabama Senator Tuberville lives in Florida.  Apparently that's not a big deal for the people of Alabama.  I have to wonder how us Cheeseheads would feel about one of our senators living in Chicago or Rockford....