When a military force begins to decline, the first symptoms may be subtle.
On multiple occasions after President Trump launched a massive air campaign against Iran this past weekend, retaliatory attacks by simply constructed Iranian drones have penetrated American defenses with serious results. For example, at least six U.S. soldiers died, and others were wounded, in an Iranian strike Sunday on a command facility in Kuwait. CNN reported that the Americans received no warning of the incoming drone. According to CBS News, the fortifications around the facility protected it from car bombs but not from a direct overhead strike. “We basically had no drone defeat capability,” an unnamed military official told the network.
. . .
When a complex system starts to decay, the first signs are usually subtle. In the third century, after the Roman empire had reached its geographic maximum, literacy began to decline across Roman society. Education levels fell not only among soldiers, but among officers, aristocrats, and even emperors. The Roman army still looked formidable for years afterward. It had good equipment and could march well. Yet it was no longer as advanced relative to Rome’s enemies as it had once been. It fought as hard as ever, but less effectively.
The capabilities of the U.S. military are still far superior to Iran’s. Yet certain developments in the American bombing campaign against Iran—a country seemingly rendered almost helpless after Israel destroyed most of its air defenses last year—are revealing what look like signs of strain.
You mean the US was sitting on the sidelines of the war in Ukraine all these years and didn’t learn a thing about counter-drone warfare?!?
And then decided to attack the country that makes russia’s drones, with no plan in place to defend against aerial drones?!?!?!?
What the fuck, man…
I’m sure they have it figured out with all the taxes spent on the most funded defense in the world.
They have a concept of a plan.
According to the commander-in-chief, all the military personnel who die in this pointless war are just a bunch of “losers and suckers.”
This week, the president belittled the so-called special relationship with Britain for being “obviously not what it was.”
Gee buddy, can you possibly imagine any reasons why that might be?!
Everything seemed fine and dandy just over a year ago, whatever could have changed in that time?
It’s a bit odd to blame low literacy rates for the fall of the Roman Empire. It took centuries for that Empire to fall, and throughout that time the literacy rates within were way ahead of most of its enemies. Historians like Gibbon largely blame economic and political factors: disruptions in trade routes due to constant warfare, depopulation of entire regions due to internal and external struggles, and lack of internal cohesion / constant infighting.
Now, at least the disruption of trade routes and the constant infighting are afflicting the USA right now, although not because of war. The USA is still so powerful that it takes a monarch’s unilateral decision to impose tariffs for trade to be rerouted, and it’s his doing that the country is as deeply divided as it’s been.
Literacy rates are a bellweather for the overall education of your population, which will affect commerce, politics, etc. This isn’t a case of, “Oh no, the farmer can’t read, that’s why the empire fell!” but more that a steady decline occurred, starting with education (among other things), leading to fewer economic, political, and international advantages, and ending with the collapse of an empire.
Now, note that the majority of American adults read at a 6th grade level at best, the political choices they’re making, and the fact their military is losing ground would fit in with that overall picture.
By contrast, Hegseth has been stressing lethality and a warrior ethos instead of learning and reflection, to the point of blocking U.S. military personnel from taking courses at the most elite American universities.
Its a bit to early for these negatives. That said it is an open secret that not many people are interested in joining the army and that they having been losing institutional knowledge. Part of the reason they also had stop loss back in the early 2010s.
I honestly think there is a real chance Iran pulls out a win here. They are off to a bad start, but the US has no real plan to shape the victory.
With the lack of rally around the flag effect at home and the trashing of the economy support could collapse rather quickly (and yet not fast enough). I don’t think the Iran government is popular due to being a theocracy, but they might actually get a rally around the flag effect.
Like the Roman aristocrats that were mentioned, it isn’t just the soldiers who are active now who are losing ground intellectually, it’s the general population those soldiers are drawn from, and that problem has been getting worse for over a generation. Long enough that their current recruits have already suffered the effects of it.
For the current regime in Iran, a “win” will be simply surviving. It’s quite possible for them to do that, IMO. They’ve already taken the harshest hit that an autocracy can take, the leaders were killed. If they put new leaders in place then that will prove that this isn’t just a strong-man organization held together by personality and personal power - it consists of a whole sub-population who want it to continue existing.
At that point the only way you’re going to get rid of it is a very thorough boots-on-the-ground conquest. You can possibly do that through civil war instead of your own soldiers, but that depends on there being an opposition that’s at least somewhat organized and motivated by long-term intent. The US evidently hasn’t set one of those up, and I think Israel would have a hard time too. So yeah, this doesn’t look so great for the US.
And now the same regime is going to have a new generation of leadership with a thirst for vengeance.
America and Israel really screwed the pooch on this one, as if anyone’s surprised…
I would be incredibly naive to assume Khameini is just another tinpot dictator. There’s no way that, knowing this day would come, he hasn’t made a priority of building institutional resilience in the event of his demise. He was in his late 80s. We can be sure that the conversation around who would succeed him was happening even before this war started.
As terrible as he was, he was by no means politically unintelligent. Unfortunately we can’t say the same for America’s leadership at the moment.
You’re talking about substituting an adversarial government with a stable replacement. Trump and Hegseth are talking about bombing the shit out of Iran. There is no strategy required to achieve their goals. They’re already accomplishing them.
I’m not talking about America’s goals, I’m talking about Iran’s goals. The issue is what a “win” is for Iran.
It’s unclear what a “win” is for America since they don’t see to have much of a long-term plan or goal here. If it’s simply “bomb the shit out of everything” I guess they could claim a win. But that’s just the proverbial pigeon knocking over all the chess pieces and shitting on the board.
I don’t see this as a direct sign of tech or strategy but likely more to do with a president acting impulsively without proper preparations in place and no purpose other than trying to distract from his failures, either way this was a stupid move.
Sometimes you get what you pay for, and other times you get the US armed forces. To be fair, the US military apparatus is only partially meant to be a fighting outfit. The primary purpose is to be a set of social programs - education, housing and retirement - for people without better prospects.
This war is a racket to drive up the golden dome price he plans to siphon a fuckton of money from.
I think you’ve got a case of correlation not causation here.
One big reason the Roman army turned stupider is because the smart ones all died in the endless civil wars. The 3rd century was not a peaceful time.
Well, all the smart, reasoned thought recently got Doge’d. Similar result.
