3 ms·
All of the apologist replies are based on the problem of overoptimizing. Yes, if you pay 100x as much, you can always get something 10% better. Is it worth it?
by earthboundkid 7y ago
All of the apologist replies are based on the problem of overoptimizing. Yes, if you pay 100x as much, you can always get something 10% better. Is it worth it? Well, it is 10% better. Depends.
For our military since the 70s, we have not fought a major power, and the main incentives are to keep the contractor money flowing and the body bag count down. So, the system is working to deliver what it is optimized to deliver.
Were we to get into a war with Russia or China though, it's pretty clear we'd get our asses handed to us because we can only make N weapons for Y dollars while they make 10N weapons for the same price, and theirs are only 10% less effective than ours. As it is, ISIS and the Taliban can keep us spinning our wheels for a decade with nothing to show for it. Imagine a foe with an actual military budget…
- all2 7y agoTo be fair, the Russians also occupied Afghanistan with very similar results. I think this is a tenant of colliding ideologies of the occupied people, ideologies of the occupiers, and asymmetrical warfare (see a fantastic book titled "Small Wars").
- gumby 7y ago> To be fair, the Russians also occupied Afghanistan with very similar results Exactly, but was that lesson learned? No.
- earthboundkid 7y agoAlso, they occupied Afghanistan for less time and with arguably more control.