3 ms·

Funny, though tbh it seems like there are cheaper ways to cause the US to spend gobs of cash. Yeah. My best understanding based on watching a lot of reti

Funny, though tbh it seems like there are cheaper ways to cause the US to spend gobs of cash. Yeah. My best understanding based on watching a lot of retired military personnel is that isolated incidents cost the US almost exactly zero additional dollars. The way an Air Force base works is this: there is a budget. This covers the (considerable) costs of the base itself, the personnel, the equipment, and so on. Active-duty fighter pilots must fly a certain number of hours per month to remain on active status. Just like any other demanding activity (sports, competitive gaming, whatever) their skills require constant maintenance. These flying hours are of course budgeted. (This will be true of literally any air force; it's not specifically a USAF thing) Things like these incident responses, and even things like flyovers before sporting events, come out of those predetermined budgeted flying hours that they were going to fly anyway. So isolated incidents like these don't really increase USAF expenses in a meaningful way. Those $400K/ea missiles will presumably need to be replenished but this must be compared to the USAF's total budget of $180 billion. To put any strain whatsoever on the US's capabilities our foes would need to start sending large amounts of drones: essentially, a saturation attack. More than we can comfortably respond to. Which is of course... extremely possible. But as long as these remain isolated incidents we can surmise that our adversary's goal is not "cost the US a bunch of money."

mistermann 4y ago
A potential flaw in this plan: while everything you say may be true, it is not broadly known. If China (or whoever) was to keep floating these things our way and we kept shooting them down at a don't worry about it, we're pot committed rate of ~$400k per incident, maybe people's blind faith in the military and politicians might be replaced with some rare curiosity, and maybe even displeasure! (Though: it's not like they have an alternative to vote for, but that too is not immutable, it only seems that way.) Keeping people immersed in a complex narrative is a lot easier than one would think, but it is also a very tricky balancing act that can get upset by the weirdest things. Personally, I'm all for it - anything that has the potential to wake up the American/Western public from their dream state is a good thing in my books, plus it makes for good entertainment.
- JohnBooty 4y ago
  Can you elaborate? while everything you say may be true, it is not broadly known It's readily available public information. As far as "widely known," I guess that's true. Most people haven't really nerded out on the details of how pilots maintain combat readiness and how budgets work, but uh, your point? anything that has the potential to wake up the American/Western public from their dream state is a good thing in my books I'm not exactly the biggest fan of any government, but what specifically are you talking about here? What is the "dream state" that these incursions might shatter?
  - mistermann 4y ago
    > It's readily available public information. As far as "widely known," I guess that's true. It's even worse: even when people do ingest available information, they very often do it erroneously, forming a misunderstanding (without realizing it). > Most people haven't really nerded out on the details of how pilots maintain combat readiness and how budgets work, but uh, your point? Broadly: humanity runs mostly on untrue stories, and does not realize it (actually, there's a "it's even worse' here too). >> anything that has the potential to wake up the American/Western public from their dream state is a good thing in my books > I'm not exactly the biggest fan of any government, but what specifically are you talking about here? Simplistically: people's understanding and trust in their government (abstract and concrete), and what is going on in general is highly erroneous, and not only do they not realize this, they believe the opposite. I consider this to be an extremely dangerous state of affairs, despite it having always been the case and "we're doing ok" nonetheless. Things often go "ok" for a very long time, and then suddenly start going "not ok", often without an obvious trigger. > What is the "dream state" that these incursions might shatter? The phenomena resulting from the combination of consciousness + culture + time, both individually and collectively. You might be best served by filing this under "woo woo" though...but then again, you also might not - there's only one way to (possibly) find out!

mistermann 4y ago

A potential flaw in this plan: while everything you say may be true, it is not broadly known. If China (or whoever) was to keep floating these things our way and we kept shooting them down at a don't worry about it, we're pot committed rate of ~$400k per incident, maybe people's blind faith in the military and politicians might be replaced with some rare curiosity, and maybe even displeasure! (Though: it's not like they have an alternative to vote for, but that too is not immutable, it only seems that way.) Keeping people immersed in a complex narrative is a lot easier than one would think, but it is also a very tricky balancing act that can get upset by the weirdest things. Personally, I'm all for it - anything that has the potential to wake up the American/Western public from their dream state is a good thing in my books, plus it makes for good entertainment.

JohnBooty 4y ago
Can you elaborate? while everything you say may be true, it is not broadly known It's readily available public information. As far as "widely known," I guess that's true. Most people haven't really nerded out on the details of how pilots maintain combat readiness and how budgets work, but uh, your point? anything that has the potential to wake up the American/Western public from their dream state is a good thing in my books I'm not exactly the biggest fan of any government, but what specifically are you talking about here? What is the "dream state" that these incursions might shatter?
- mistermann 4y ago
  > It's readily available public information. As far as "widely known," I guess that's true. It's even worse: even when people do ingest available information, they very often do it erroneously, forming a misunderstanding (without realizing it). > Most people haven't really nerded out on the details of how pilots maintain combat readiness and how budgets work, but uh, your point? Broadly: humanity runs mostly on untrue stories, and does not realize it (actually, there's a "it's even worse' here too). >> anything that has the potential to wake up the American/Western public from their dream state is a good thing in my books > I'm not exactly the biggest fan of any government, but what specifically are you talking about here? Simplistically: people's understanding and trust in their government (abstract and concrete), and what is going on in general is highly erroneous, and not only do they not realize this, they believe the opposite. I consider this to be an extremely dangerous state of affairs, despite it having always been the case and "we're doing ok" nonetheless. Things often go "ok" for a very long time, and then suddenly start going "not ok", often without an obvious trigger. > What is the "dream state" that these incursions might shatter? The phenomena resulting from the combination of consciousness + culture + time, both individually and collectively. You might be best served by filing this under "woo woo" though...but then again, you also might not - there's only one way to (possibly) find out!