fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
No bio...
User ID: 3415
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
Because Israel is white
Jews, Schrodinger's race
What's fun is you have factions on the left who deeply believe that they're white, and ones who take great offense to that.
There's also factions on the right who very much think they're white, or who think they're very much not.
And all for different reasons too, lots of fun
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
Israel manipulates, but they're at least capable of peaceful coexistence
While I agree that fundamentalist Muslims make probably the worst National neighbors, this is pretty generous to the Isreali's
Their history of perpetually expanding their settlements in the West Bank (at least they left Gaza) shows they're not particularly interested in totally peaceful coexistence.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
world would treat Iran's nuclear program very differently.
If only there was some kind of agreement to monitor the nuclear program and help chill the situation out. It could be a joint plan between nations, it could be really comprehensive.
Sucks no one ever tried that
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
For one of the most nuanced conflicts in the world, no one ever discusses it with nuance
It's hard to fault Isreal for blowing up its hostile neighbors. They're hostile after all.
But it's also hard to fault Isreal's neighbors for being mad about getting blown up.
It also feels pretty straightforward that clapping Iran will make them want nukes. They tried to toe the line and use the threat of making nukes as deterrence. Their bluff got called and they got smacked.
Next time they get a chance to achieve nuclear breakout (and there will be a next time), they won't make that mistake again.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
I saw the news of the strike and thought of you (<3)
Fair point from our discussion the other day.
I'm surprised to be saying this but Trump threaded the needle well. A bunch of MOPs and ~40 Tomahawks/whatever?
Small strike, big effect. Well played!
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
I am deeply and profoundly confident that while America might airstrike them many more times, US infantry/Marines (special forces who knows) will not touch Iranian soil in 2025.
That would be an unbelievable strategic blunder. The amount of weapons China and Russia would pour in... It would be so foolish.
We'll find out in 5 months!
But increasingly, the only roles which are prestigious in modernity are those of white collar undefined-what-the-value-add-here-is jobs
I'm curious which jobs you're thinking of, and why the value add is unclear? Although it's also worth making the distinction between the difficulty measuring an individuals level of value add (very hard depending on the job) and the value add from the job position(s) overall, which I actually think is always incredibly clear, and the person saying "this doesn't add value" just doesn't like the job for ideological or other belief reasons.
I've worked 4 white collar jobs now. 2 of which I absolutely did not generate enough economic benefit to offset my salary. Although both of those I was an intern/fresh grad, so I was hired less to do work and more in the hope I stuck around until I was more experienced, and did work later.
The first was in an operational risk function at a bank. This specific department seemed to largely exist due to government compliance reasons, as we didn't do very much. But governments and societies have a preference for better regulated banks, so that's a value-add. In a 0 regulation environment, I think they'd get trimmed, but I also think it's rational for banks to have some level of internal risk monitoring regardless. The principal-agent problem combined with massive sums of money means that humans with power will do incredibly dumb shit which can put the bank as a whole at risk (see: bearings bank). And this bank in question had some pretty good fuck ups that resulted in government consequences in recent history, their prior lack of risk management wasn't a working business strategy.
The second was in the tax function of a large corporation. We were overstaffed half the year, but this was on purpose. Clearly whoever was in charge prefered is to be overstaffed during the year, so we'd be correctly staffed during the crunch of tax season. I always wondered why we didnt just have a skeleton crew for day to day tax stuff, and then have consultants come in for the tax filings. I assume it was probably cheaper to pay a few extra medium-tier accountant salaries than to pay for a massive tax engagement every year.
At both jobs, we can quibble about the cost/benefit of the scope/size of the department, but the value add was clear imo, I just articulated it. it doesn't strike me that either department was incredibly sub-optimal (I'd assume they'd get cut if so). You can hand-wave this away I guess as "these are zombie companies limping along due to a decade of free money" but both are massive successful corporations/household names in North America that anyone here would recognize.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
Unions exist solely for extracting rent in the form of above market wages
Do you feel this way about historical unions that were fighting for weekends, 8 hour work days, and basic safety precautions? Or just the modern ones that do seem to have devolved into straight rent seeking (police and teachers most obviously, with a honorable mention to east coast dockworkers).
guilds and trades apprenticeships restrict supply to drive up wages through regulatory capture
The elevator repair mechanic guild in Ontario is one of the most egregious rent seeking institutions of our time and I wish we could burn them down. Unfortunately they're very tied into the suburban-developer-complex who in turn have very deep pockets and ties to the Italian mob.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
This is a super interesting comment.
On a first read, I totally agree. If I'm zelensky, I'd infinitely prefer to be the leader of "the remaining 75% of Ukraine" versus "the shattered remains of the country once known as Ukraine".
But then that completely undermines the entire concept of deterrence. If your neighbor, who you have a long and shitty history with, is invading you with the full might of their army with the goal of totally capitulating you, isn't a high enough bar to use nukes, what is?
Further, it's really interesting to consider the history (or lack thereof) of nuclear war. The USA and the USSR were locked in what I'm sure felt like a profoundly existential struggle to determine the forward looking economic/social paradigm of the human race. One in which (until the maturation of SLBMs) the first mover's advantage could realistically result in complete victory for one side, and nuclear genocide for the other.
And yet, despite all that pressure, and moments where it seemed credible the other side had or was about to launch, the actual human(s) in charge of pushing the button always found a way or a reason to not do it.
And it raises an interesting question about the game theory and logic of deterrence. Under the framework, it's extremely "logical" to both ensure your nation state opponent believes you'll nuke them if they push you too far. It's also "logical" to actually nuke them if they do push too far, otherwise they'll realize you're a phony and they'll fuck with you as much as they want. But! As an individual enjoyer of industrial civilization who enjoys having their friends and family alive and not vaporized or starving to death, it's also extremely "logical" to absolutely not press that button. Sure, maybe someone else will, but hopefully when it finally comes time to do it, they'll think of their families too.
As an enjoyer of industrial civilization myself, I'm glad the second group seems to have been around when it counts.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
I agree that it's hard to look at the current state of global conflict/deterrence and not concluded that having nukes is the dominant strategy for maintaining sovereignty.
But Ukraine couldn't keep the nukes. They didn't have the launch codes, they didn't have the economy to maintain them indefinitely. They definitely didn't have the economy to build out the other two legs of the nuclear triad (especially SLBMs). And finally, there's a 0.0000% chance the big dogs were ever letting them keep them.
Ukraine could trade the nukes for a "deal" or they could give them up later once they got sanctioned into oblivion, at a time their economy was already imploding.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
Prior to the last week, I would have assumed Iran was a hard target and thus somewhat untouchable (smaller strikes/assassinations being the limit of messing with them). It's surprising how hard they've been slapped.
But also in some ways, they are still. No one is going to be launching a ground invasion, and the regime is not looking hot right now, but still has power.
It blows me away that despite a close connection to Russia, and increasingly China, they had such terrible IADS. If you can't get invaded, the only way your adversary, who has one of the world's best Airforce's, can cause you serious issues is by air striking you into pieces.
They must have thought their missiles and proxys were a deterrent, which they were at one point. But man it kills me. In PvP video games, if things are going well/fine, you should always be asking yourself "how do I lose" and it doesn't seem like the gang in Iran did that at all.
That being said. It's not hard to imagine a world in which Israel's air campaign culminates eventually as they run low on munitions and a deal of some flavor is worked out. Then Iran spends the next 5 years rebuilding and furiously fortifying. Maybe they get some tips on anti-espionage purges from the Chinese. And then in 2030 were right back to two weeks ago status quo but this time Iran has hardened everything.
This is a devastating tactical victory for the Israelis, the strategic outcomes remain to be seen...
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
I'm honestly pretty confused as to how this got communicated so poorly, but you seem to be acting in good faith so I'll take responsibility for the miscommunication.
I tried to differentiate earlier between "missiles", "interceptors" and "JDAMs/bunker busters". Perhaps you are not aware of the difference, which is fair.
When I say "missiles", I mean weapons like Tomahawks, PrSM, JASSM, JSOW. Guided missiles with engines that target and destroy things. When I say "interceptors" I mean missiles that shoot down other missiles. "JDAMs" are dumb bombs (think ww2) that have guidance kits (computer+wings) strapped on so they can aim and hit things. However JDAMs need to be dropped much closer to the thing being exploded, as they have no engines. Bunker busters are basically fuck-off huge JDAMs + some extra tricks.
What is keeping China out of Taiwan right now, is that they are not confident that they can keep the US Navy far enough away from Taiwan to stop the USA from blowing up all their landing/resupply craft to execute a miliary occupation of the island.
So every Tomahawk, PrSM, JASSM, or JSOW shot at Iran, cannot be shot at a Chinese landing ship (or missile launcher, or SAM, or shipyard, or airbase, etc). Every interceptor used to shoot down an Iranian ballistic missile cannot be used to defend against a Chinese missile.
Hence why I said that if America bombed Iran with only JDAMs, that wouldn't effect readiness against China, as JDAMs are useless against China (can't get close enough to release). However this feels unrealistic as it would be high-risk, lower effectiveness. Usually militaries don't tie one arm behind their back. Also even if you only use JDAMs, you're still going to need to use interceptors when they start shooting back.
There is no universe in which the USA is bombing TSMC facilities. I'm really not sure how I gave that impression, but to be clear that is not happening. There are allegedly "kill switches" in fabs to make the machines not work anymore in the event of an occupation.
In a hot war with China I assume that the USA would target mainland Chinese facilities for strikes. Although it's actually an interesting question as I doubt they could materially impact Chinese war production given the size and distribution of it. Russia can't even shut down Ukrainian war production. So shooting at their mainland might not be worth inviting China to start lobbing things at LA. Who knows, that's beyond my pay grade lol. They would definitely be trying to swat every plane from the sky, sink every ship on the sea, and destroy ground based missile launchers in and around Taiwan.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
Oh
My mistake for being unclear then.
I highly doubt America will be glassing Taiwan, that seems very unhelpful
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
No, where did glassing Taiwan come from?
China doesn't start world war 3 because of all the various American missiles that are likely to blow up Chinese things before they could complete their strategic objectives. There's also lots of American missiles that prevent Chinese missiles from blowing up American things.
If America uses massive quantities of its offensive and defensive missiles, they can't use them against China.
If America bombed Iran with only JDAMs/bunker busters and never fired any cruise missiles or defensive interceptors then sure, that's "free" (we'll ignore airframe wear).
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
Hypothesized chain of causality:
America expends large numbers of munitions on Iran > this lowers China's risk of making a play for Taiwan over the next ~5 (10?) years > China makes a move for Taiwan > both juggernauts slug it out > during the conflict, global trade collapses > depending on who wins the conflict (or if it even ends, it might just turn into a stalemate with occasional explosions), global trade potentially never recovers, and the world bifurcates a lot > we all are worse off as a result
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
Same, but I'd prefer neither much more. I think the two of them have much more in common with each other than they do with our current system.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
Collapse of the current global trade/finance system that massively benefits America would cause harm.
Our lives are subsidized in many many ways by this system.
Perhaps you think the current system has made Americans lazy and complacent consumers of trinkets (not wrong), but the violent end to the system will still cause a lot of harm to the people around to experience it.
Also yeah, losing the chip fabs (and the rare earth metals, and the pharmaceutical precursors, and the machine tools, and innumerable other inputs) would be devastating to scientific and economic progress. All those things could be onshored eventually, but that process would be unfathomably painful (and longgggg).
Also losing the ability to sell stuff to a massive fraction of the world's population
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
I'd argue the difference between autocratic islam and autocratic Christianity is wayyyyy smaller than either side will ever admit
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
It would be better for the first 10-50 years, after that, open question.
Iran is pretty paternalistic and I don't want to live there.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
I guess what I'm trying to understand about your view is why knowing the scale doesn't matter.
Bigger country = need more bombs = less bombs to deter China. Why isn't that important to understand?
I guess you can respond by saying "well we should simply make more bombs", which is correct, but the political party who is more willing to make bombs is currently in power and they're not exactly going hard on increasing defense production (happy to be proven wrong here, I would like USA to be stronger vs China than it is).
If Ted Cruz overplays America's hand due to ignorance, we all suffer
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
I am actually somewhat in favor of more paternalism, but it's hard to have that not go absolutely fucking sideways
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
1mo ago
These are logistics, and it is not the place of US Senators to do the logistics work of the US military.
Doing another Ceteris Paribus, I would much rather my elected officials understood the scope/scale of the military conflict they are pre-commiting the military people to executing on.
For a more tangible point, every missile fired at Iran, and every defensive interceptor used to protect American assets against Iran, cannot be used for a war against China. The bigger Iran is, the more of those you will need. T
here is a serious opportunity cost to committing to a war, especially when you are in a cold war with a country that is expanding its military faster than you.
Maybe you think it's more important to smash Iran than be maximally prepared against China, in which case fair enough.
But to confidently say "I don't care if the people in charge of deciding to start a war don't understand basic facts about the scope and scale of the war they're committing us to" I think you should have much higher standards for your elected officials.
I think it's very possible for them to be both genocidal and oppressed. I also think being genocidal has made them oppressed, and being oppressed guarantees they stay genocidal.
To pre-empt "you're a bleeding heart lefty", if I were dictator of my country, I would absolutely ensure a Palestinian refugee diaspora did not form in my country. This does not go well for the hosts typically.
However, half the Gaza strip is under the age of ~20. They've grown up living lives of poverty in a ""country"" that you can walk end to end in about 8 hours, and it's not easy to leave. I'm sure they grow up hearing stories of friends/family/neighbors who've lost loved ones, been injured, or lost their homes to isreali strikes.
If you or I were born there, we'd hate Jews too. I have a very hard time holding teenagers accountable for the beliefs they were born into.
If I were designing an environment to incubate terrorists I don't think I could do much better than the Gaza strip, it's basically a terrorist factory.
I'm pretty black pilled on the whole situation. I think both sides are too deep and too stubborn to ever resolve it. I think they deserve each other.
More options
Context Copy link