4 ms·

Report from Iron Mountain (2006)

67 points by nkurz 9y ago

ardit33 9y ago
The Roman Empire got large because of the "military" complex that the society had at the time. In order to advance socially (status, and wealth) being a military commander was a must. If you had victories in your belt you had more status within the society. Just being rich, didn't give you more status than somebody that was successful in combat, but it gave you the ability to fund wars and expeditions in order to gain more riches. Hence, since the personal ambitions of important people in Rome fueled the military complex and all the invasions that came with it. Most wars were justified as need for the the protection of Rome. Even full scale invasion and slaughtering of other tribes (either in the North with Germanic tribes, or South East with Parthia). This all had an origin when Rome was born and had to fight its neighbor italic tribes to get where it was. Then it was the large Punic wars with Carthage that truly cemented the military complex in the society. It was a brutal war (half of soldiers that fell for the Roman Empire over centuries, died during the Punic wars), that threaten the existence of Rome itself. So, some of the military complex was justified historically (either be strong, or get subjected), it was hijacked and amplified by people's personal ambitions. (either riches, becoming emperors, etc).... Similarly, today the military complex in the US was born for needed reasons (WW1 and WW2), but it is so large that it needs reasons to exist, and create wars when not needed (second Iraqi war as the worst example of this).
- trynumber9 9y ago
  I'd argue the U.S. involvement in Vietnam was a much worse and equally unnecessary. Iraq is simply the most recent.
throwaway5752 9y ago
To save others the hassle: hoax. More on the late author: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Coppens_(author) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Coppens_(author)
- jacques_chester 9y ago
  The site linked to is called "Conspiracy Times", which is presumably why the question got raised at all.
- otp124 9y ago
  Born 1971? That means he authored the book before he was born. Did you mean to link someone else?
  - kbob 9y ago
    Philip Coppens wrote the web page, not the _Report_.
wu-ikkyu 9y ago
"The war is not meant to be won. It is meant to be continuous. The essential act of modern warfare is the destruction of the produce of human labor. A hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance. In principle, the war effort is always planned to keep society on the brink of starvation. The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects. And its object is not victory over Eurasia or Eastasia, but to keep the very structure of society intact." -George Orwell
- cyberpunk0 9y ago
  Great quote and point
- Animats 9y ago
  We've achieved continuous war. Counter-insurgency is like a pushing contest in a valley. If the insurgents start to win, they have to control territory, which means visibility and concentration. Then they're vulnerable to heavy weapons. If the counter-insurgents start to win, the insurgency goes underground and is too distributed to attack effectively. Neither side can force a decision.
caf 9y ago
(2008) It's a good satire - it perfectly skewers the "think-tank report" style that the US DoD was so enamoured of at the time. Very Strangelovian.
- dang 9y ago
  Internet archive says 2006. Could be earlier of course.
nkurz 9y ago
Glad to see this get some traction. I posted this because despite being a hoax (or at least a pseudonymous piece of political satire), the "Report from Iron Mountain" was one of the most interesting perspectives I read last year. The report itself is here: http://www.stopthecrime.net/docs/Report_from_Iron_Mountain.pdf http://www.stopthecrime.net/docs/Report_from_Iron_Mountain.p... If skimming (recommended) Section 6 might be a good focal point: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_ironmountain08.htm http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol...

67 points by nkurz 9y ago

The Roman Empire got large because of the "military" complex that the society had at the time. In order to advance socially (status, and wealth) being a military commander was a must. If you had victories in your belt you had more status within the society. Just being rich, didn't give you more status than somebody that was successful in combat, but it gave you the ability to fund wars and expeditions in order to gain more riches. Hence, since the personal ambitions of important people in Rome fueled the military complex and all the invasions that came with it. Most wars were justified as need for the the protection of Rome. Even full scale invasion and slaughtering of other tribes (either in the North with Germanic tribes, or South East with Parthia). This all had an origin when Rome was born and had to fight its neighbor italic tribes to get where it was. Then it was the large Punic wars with Carthage that truly cemented the military complex in the society. It was a brutal war (half of soldiers that fell for the Roman Empire over centuries, died during the Punic wars), that threaten the existence of Rome itself. So, some of the military complex was justified historically (either be strong, or get subjected), it was hijacked and amplified by people's personal ambitions. (either riches, becoming emperors, etc).... Similarly, today the military complex in the US was born for needed reasons (WW1 and WW2), but it is so large that it needs reasons to exist, and create wars when not needed (second Iraqi war as the worst example of this).

trynumber9 9y ago
I'd argue the U.S. involvement in Vietnam was a much worse and equally unnecessary. Iraq is simply the most recent.

throwaway5752 9y ago

To save others the hassle: hoax. More on the late author: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Coppens_(author) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Coppens_(author)

jacques_chester 9y ago
The site linked to is called "Conspiracy Times", which is presumably why the question got raised at all.
otp124 9y ago
Born 1971? That means he authored the book before he was born. Did you mean to link someone else?
- kbob 9y ago
  Philip Coppens wrote the web page, not the _Report_.

wu-ikkyu 9y ago

"The war is not meant to be won. It is meant to be continuous. The essential act of modern warfare is the destruction of the produce of human labor. A hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance. In principle, the war effort is always planned to keep society on the brink of starvation. The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects. And its object is not victory over Eurasia or Eastasia, but to keep the very structure of society intact." -George Orwell

cyberpunk0 9y ago
Great quote and point
Animats 9y ago
We've achieved continuous war. Counter-insurgency is like a pushing contest in a valley. If the insurgents start to win, they have to control territory, which means visibility and concentration. Then they're vulnerable to heavy weapons. If the counter-insurgents start to win, the insurgency goes underground and is too distributed to attack effectively. Neither side can force a decision.

caf 9y ago

(2008) It's a good satire - it perfectly skewers the "think-tank report" style that the US DoD was so enamoured of at the time. Very Strangelovian.

dang 9y ago
Internet archive says 2006. Could be earlier of course.

nkurz 9y ago

Glad to see this get some traction. I posted this because despite being a hoax (or at least a pseudonymous piece of political satire), the "Report from Iron Mountain" was one of the most interesting perspectives I read last year. The report itself is here: http://www.stopthecrime.net/docs/Report_from_Iron_Mountain.pdf http://www.stopthecrime.net/docs/Report_from_Iron_Mountain.p... If skimming (recommended) Section 6 might be a good focal point: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_ironmountain08.htm http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol...