Fly-sized assassins

FuturePundit asks "Will Terminator Robots Come In Fly Miniature?" My comment:

The wiping-out-towns problem is already solved by aerial bombardment or poison gas. Notice that full-size drones are already being used for targeted killing. Swarms of fly-sized assassins, with some means of identifying targets, are a logical development.

Fighter pilots who have survived being locked on by homing surface-to-air missiles describe the experience as "soul-destroying." I suspect that unleashing a horde of dog-sized robots, each of which picks an enemy soldier at random and hunts him specifically, might turn a defensive trench into chaos as soon as the defenders realized what was happening.

The robotic battlefield might come about sooner than we expect, as a result of human psychology.

Battlefield mechs

Neatogeek quotes an analysis of "mechs," soldiers wearing armored powered suits, which concludes that they will never be cost-effective. I have no objection to the technical points that are raised, but the conclusion goes too far.

This is more an argument that mechs will never be dominant on the battlefield, not that they won't exist at all.

One of the painfully learned lessons of modern war is the necessity of "combined arms," of more than one type of warrior, working together. Even the most powerful, heavily armored tank has vulnerabilities -- e.g. poor vision and lack of fine-grained situational awareness -- that the humble foot soldier can cover. When you fight a combined arms team, one of the things you really really want to do is to separate their armor from their infantry, because defeating them separately is easier than defeating them together.

As long as there is some necessary task on the battlefield, for which mechs are better adapted, mechs will have a place. If history is a guide, there will be such a role.

Even in ancient times, armies combined infantry, cavalry, archers, etc. I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that it will be different in the future.

Redcoats vs Rebels in Northern Ireland

James Rummel, over at Hell in a Handbasket, has a post about... well, it's a little complicated.

It turns out that there is an Ulster American Folk Park, some kind of a theme park where the theme is the USA. For the 4th of July this year, they're going to re-enact the War of 1812. Apparently there are also American Revolutionary War re-enactors in Ireland. And they're importing American re-enactors to play the part of British Redcoats.

So Americans are going to Ireland to play British Redcoats so Irish playing American colonials can pretend to shoot them in the War of 1812. To quote Hermione Granger, "Please don't ask me to say it again."

[CORRECTION: The Redcoats are being played by British re-enactors (see James's comment below, thanks!) This explains why they're re-enacting the War of 1812, the British re-enactors probably like to burn the White House every chance they get.]

My only comment was:

I once ran across the website of Ukrainian Vietnam War re-enactors. They dress up in US Army uniforms.

That's all I could manage. Archaeologists are going to dig this stuff up 4000 years from now and I don't know what they'll do.

From Enemy to Friend

Famous blog babe Megan McArdle is bemused by the Russian spy ring that was recently exposed by the FBI. The best she can do is "In fact, the only parallel I can think of is the possibly apocraphyl allegation that during the Cold War, Soviet intelligence subscribed to the Village Voice for several years . . . in an attempt to find out about rural life in America. "

I commented:

A non-apochryphal version of the Village Voice story can be found in "From Enemy to Friend" by Bui Tin. Bui Tin is best known as the North Vietnamese colonel who accepted the surrender of the President of South Vietnam. But one of his earlier jobs was translating American magazine articles for consumption by North Vietnamese leadership.

He said that he was never able to get across to his superiors the insignificance of individual magazine articles, and the lack of influence by, say, the New York Review of Books on the Nixon White House. He was continually horrified to hear top leadership debating some article he had translated as if it were American gospel.

Bui Tin crossed the authorities in postwar Vietnam and found it advisable to move to France. The book is his FAQ, answers to the questions he's always asked about the Vietnam War.

One of the most interesting chapters is about the secret treaties between China and North Vietnam. China promised to help defend North Vietnam against attack by the US on a tit-for-tat basis. If the US attacked North Vietnam by air, the Chinese air forces would come in to defend North Vietnamese air space. If the US Navy shelled North Vietnam, the Chinese navy would intervene to stop the shelling.

Of course, China didn't do any of this. They just looked the other way and whistled tunelessly as their North Vietnamese friends went out on the limb and got pummeled. If you ever wondered, "What's more worthless than a treaty," the answer is "A secret treaty."

The book is short and a worthwhile read if you're interested in the history of the Vietnam War. If you can find it; it's currently listed as unavailable at Amazon.

Amphibious Warfare

Richard Fernandez, at his excellent Belmont Club blog, asks Is Amphibious Warfare Obsolete? I pointed out in comments:

Amphibious warfare was already declared dead, after the Gallipoli debacle in WWI.

In the 1930s, the Commandant of the Marine Corps realized that a war with Japan would require amphibious operations. But there was no “book” on amphibious operations, no doctrine. Also, like I said, Gallipoli had convinced many that it wasn’t practical.

There were no think tanks in those days, and the Marine Corps had no budget for such things. So what happened was, a bunch of Marine officers arrived at Quantico to go to school, lieutenants expecting to learn how to become captains, majors to become colonels, etc. Instead they were told their job was, one, to determine if Gallipoli really had closed the book on amphibious warfare, and two, if not, to write it.

They concluded “No” to the question, and wrote the “Tentative Landing Operations Manual,” which became the basis of Marine and US Army doctrine used in WWII, and still used today.

So if history is a guide, a fundamental rewrite of doctrine may be what’s needed to keep the amphibious option alive.

The Marines have long recognized the problems with amphibious landings against modern weapons. That's why they've continued to push for the V-22 Osprey, despite its well-publicized problems. But a technological fix like the V-22 may not be enough.

Music and codebreaking

Joanne Jacobs has a post on "Music students excel in algebra" over at her education blog. The connection between music and math is hardly new, of course. Pythagoras was all about that. I commented:

The USS California was one of the ships sunk in the attack on Pearl Harbor, and her crew was parceled out to whatever units needed manpower. The members of the ship’s band were assigned to the Navy’s codebreaking unit because, by coincidence, the number of band members matched the number of men requested. Fortunately they were very successful at their new job. Apparently, many of the skills transferred.

By the way, ship's band is not a full-time job. Except for the higher-ranking officers and specialists, like the ship's doctor, there are no fulltime jobs. Sailors do different jobs depending on the situation. When "Battle Stations!" is announced, cooks may man antiaircraft guns, and band members join damage-control parties.