From: Billy Brown (bbrown@conemsco.com)
Date: Wed Mar 24 1999 - 08:36:33 MST
mark@unicorn.com wrote:
> CONTROL. The whole point of government is to control people, because,
> like Billy Brown, governors are scared of chaos. They're scared that
> something might change outside their control, and if preventing that
> means sticking electrodes in all our brains, then electrodes it is..
When name-calling begins, the opportunity for productive discussion has
ended. So, I don't think that there is much point in continuing this
thread. However, for the benefit of any lurkers who may be interested, I'll
summarize my view one more time:
The evolution of warfare over the last thousand years shows a clear trend of
increasing advantage to those who have the largest concentration of wealth.
Industrial technology has only accelerated this trend. The practical
implication is that in any environment where armed conflicts occur, large
organizations have a strong competitive advantage over small ones, and even
small organizations have an advantage over individuals. An environment full
of tiny power groups will thus tend to evolve into a small number of large
power blocks.
The emergence of unconventional styles of warfare has not changed that.
Instead, it simply creates a demand for better training and organization on
the part of an aggressor. Investment in heavy weapons is still an advantage
(because it forces the guerrillas to remain covert), so the net effect is to
create yet another advantage for those who invest heavily in their military.
The early 21st century may well see the emergence of cheap weapons of mass
destruction, especially nuclear devices. This trend is a threat to the very
existence of civilization, and may well demand that we expand into space or
take other drastic measures in order to survive. However, it is not a magic
silver bullet for destroying enemy military forces. Instead, it creates a
demand for ABM systems, improved minesweeping and radiation detection
devices, long-duration sealed environment systems, and universal
surveillance. Once again, those who have lots of money will be better able
to deal with such threats than those who do not.
IMO, the only way to reverse this trend is to create a weapon so cheap that
any individual can build one, so effective that no possible defense can
resist it, and so powerful that it can destroy any conceivable enemy before
he can shoot back. If such a weapon is ever invented, it will mean the end
of armies, States, society, and probably human life. Fortunately, there is
no sign that such a discovery is immanent (unless you count strong SI, which
is a different discussion entirely).
I believe those who disagree with my thesis do so because of two fundamental
mistakes:
First, they consistently assume that the side they favor is immune to all
the problems of organization, logistics and engineering that make real
warfare (not to mention real manufacturing) expensive. They assume that
anything they want to use can be made cheap and plentiful, that their own
side has perfect moral and perfect information. Then they assume that the
other side is still subject to all of the problems and limitations we see in
the real world. Obviously, this is not a realistic basis for planning.
Second, they tend to assume that the side they favor has access to the
technology of the early 21st century, while the side they oppose is limited
to what was in common use a few years ago. This is an easy mistake to make,
since an individual is naturally more interested in thinking of technologies
he could use than technologies that could be used against him. However, it
is still quite unrealistic. In the real world both sides of any potential
conflict are constantly working on ways of defeating each other, and any
evaluation of future military technology must take this into account.
Now, I'm going to go back to the political side of this debate. If you guys
want to hang around and argue about the details of nuclear weapon
construction in a public forum, feel free - I think there is already far too
much data on this subject in the public domain, and I'm not going to
contribute to the problem.
Billy Brown, MCSE+I
bbrown@conemsco.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:22 MST