3 ms·

I can't think of a single scenario where having more tanks or fighter jets would be decisive in a full scale conflict between nuclear powers. Suppose the US an

by rurp 6y ago

I can't think of a single scenario where having more tanks or fighter jets would be decisive in a full scale conflict between nuclear powers. Suppose the US and China get into a direct conflict. How does the US having a 10x advantage in the number of traditional arms vs only, say, 2x stop China from threatening to obliterate humanity with nukes the minute their leadership is facing an existential crisis?

dQw4w9WgXcQ 6y ago
Nukes have pretty much ensured via MAD that there is no future "full scale direct conflict" between major powers. No matter how narcissistic some despot might be, their overwhelming self-interest still realizes there's not much power held over an empty parking lot or when vaporized into the side of a building. It's proxy wars from here on out. Given that, you can't think of a single scenario where having multiple floating runways would possibly benefit wartime?
unexpected 6y ago
Does something like Starlink prevent direct conflict, though? Imagine a world where anyone can get unfettered internet access. Instead of the great Firewall of China, citizens can just access a starlink satellite. How does that help with spreading democractic ideals? How does protesting and information dissemination look different? What if citizens in Iran, Middle East, Myanmar, etc. could all do the same thing? I hope Starlink is thinking about these Big questions.
- CrazyStat 6y ago
  Accessing a starlink satellite requires a bulky and expensive piece of equipment that emits electromagnetic waves and so can be tracked and confiscated and the operator fined, imprisoned, or killed. It doesn't seem like a very promising route for bypassing authoritarian government restrictions on the Internet.
slim 6y ago
it's for waging proxy wars. for example US could deploy it's army in Nigeria to protect freedom and democracy

by rurp 6y ago

dQw4w9WgXcQ 6y ago

Nukes have pretty much ensured via MAD that there is no future "full scale direct conflict" between major powers. No matter how narcissistic some despot might be, their overwhelming self-interest still realizes there's not much power held over an empty parking lot or when vaporized into the side of a building. It's proxy wars from here on out. Given that, you can't think of a single scenario where having multiple floating runways would possibly benefit wartime?

unexpected 6y ago

Does something like Starlink prevent direct conflict, though? Imagine a world where anyone can get unfettered internet access. Instead of the great Firewall of China, citizens can just access a starlink satellite. How does that help with spreading democractic ideals? How does protesting and information dissemination look different? What if citizens in Iran, Middle East, Myanmar, etc. could all do the same thing? I hope Starlink is thinking about these Big questions.

CrazyStat 6y ago
Accessing a starlink satellite requires a bulky and expensive piece of equipment that emits electromagnetic waves and so can be tracked and confiscated and the operator fined, imprisoned, or killed. It doesn't seem like a very promising route for bypassing authoritarian government restrictions on the Internet.

slim 6y ago

it's for waging proxy wars. for example US could deploy it's army in Nigeria to protect freedom and democracy