武装冲突从来都不是直来直去的。 武器不是力量。 民族认同很重要。
作者：菲利普斯·佩森·奥布莱恩 (Phillips Payson O’Brien)
尽管俄罗斯在乌克兰发动的可怕战争的后果将在数十年内逐渐显现，但从这场冲突中吸取的三个教训已经很清楚了,而且，回想起来，应该一直都是显而易见的。 一年前的今天，当入侵开始时，外界的大部分评论都集中在俄罗斯的优势上。 人们普遍认为，弗拉基米尔·普京总统的军队拥有压倒性的空中力量和火力、快速移动的地面部队和广泛的网络战能力,所有这些据说都意味着俄罗斯将迅速征服其邻国。 它声称的力量似乎如此强大，以至于当俄罗斯军队刚刚越过边界时，一些分析人士都在思考哪位亲莫斯科的乌克兰政客可能会领导基辅的傀儡政权。
然而，过去 12 个月的第一个教训是，战争绝非易事或直来直去的——这就是为什么发动战争对任何国家来说几乎总是错误的决定。 美国有时让战争看起来很简单，最明显的是 1991 年，当时沙漠风暴行动在一个半月内将伊拉克军队赶出了科威特。 然而，只有在美国进行了长达十年的军事建设并部署了世界上最先进的军事技术之后，才有可能取得这一胜利。 即使在那时，海湾战争的一个决定性特征是美国并没有试图占领另一个社会。 当向巴格达进军的机会出现时，乔治·H·W·布什总统的政府却退缩了。
在此后的三十年里，尽管美国拥有世界上最大的经济体和最强大的武装力量，但事实证明，美国通常无法将其主导地位转化为快速的胜利，而最终陷入旷日持久的冲突，充其量只是结果喜忧参半。 战争开始容易，结束难。没有人真正知道军队、技术和经济资源在激烈的战斗中会如何表现。 计划失败，混乱笼罩，军事优势变成僵持时期。
过去一年在乌克兰发生的战争比沙漠风暴更为典型。俄罗斯的压倒性力量不过是； 俄罗斯没有向乌克兰人发动现代战争，而是依靠陈旧的武器和指挥结构。 俄罗斯军队没有在几周内占领基辅，而是经历了重大的系统故障。 从那以后，俄罗斯的问题似乎变得更糟了。 普京换帅如换袜子，装备质量下降，伤亡人数暴增。 现在，俄罗斯和乌克兰军队在长长的血淋淋的战壕中对峙，普京几乎没有希望按照他的意愿结束战争。
尽管冲突中的一方几乎从来不会简单地压倒另一方，但对于像俄罗斯这样存在严重缺陷的大国来说，失败的风险尤其高。 当前战争的第二个教训是，军事力量不是国家力量的基础，而是塑造国家武装力量的经济、技术、政治和社会因素的产物。 俄罗斯对乌克兰的入侵有时被描述为大国对抗小国。 在西方政策圈，俄罗斯专家的主导地位——他们中的许多人在其职业生涯中一直将俄罗斯视为地区霸主，而其邻国主要是后苏联国家，促成了这种事件框架。
俄罗斯无疑是一个核大国，但从几乎所有其他标准来看，它都远远落后于其声誉。 俄罗斯经济存在严重缺陷。 其国内生产总值在世界上排名第十，不到美国的十分之一。 俄罗斯的大部分财富是通过资源开采创造的，因此很少生产高科技产品，实际上几乎没有其他具有任何实际价值的产品。 在社会方面，人口正在萎缩且预期寿命相对较低的俄罗斯表现出极大的痛苦迹象。 在政治上，它在一个独裁者的统治下已经僵化，独裁者通过容忍接近王位的人的腐败来巩固他对国家的控制。
换句话说，今天的俄罗斯军队是盗贼统治没落的产物，而不是大国的产物。
通过忽视俄罗斯的系统性弱点，西方分析家帮助制造了民主国家今天所处的混乱局面。 基于武器数量的假设认为乌克兰太弱，无法在公开战斗中抵抗俄罗斯，因此推迟了向陷入困境的国家提供大量军事援助。 这是一个有悖常理的循环论证：因为俄罗斯强大而乌克兰弱小，我们应该停止向乌克兰提供援助。
幸运的是，事实证明这种说法是站不住脚的。 这场战争以及 1945 年以来的许多其他战争的第三个教训是，低估民族认同的重要性会导致军事灾难。 按照传统标准，乌克兰相对于今天的俄罗斯比 1980 年代阿富汗相对于苏联以及 1960 年代北越相对于美国要强大得多。 两个冷战超级大国都因试图用武力镇压当地抵抗力量而感到羞愧，都不得不撤军。
然而，在俄罗斯入侵乌克兰的前期和去年的大部分时间里，西方许多人未能意识到乌克兰人对他们的独立和民主的重视程度。 一些关注俄罗斯的学者似乎已经接受了莫斯科的观点，认为乌克兰是一个软弱的、人为的实体，缺乏广泛的民众支持。 北约支持基辅的怀疑论者主要关注乌克兰的腐败（同时忽视了腐败对俄罗斯权力的影响）。
这样的判断和质疑现在看来是愚蠢的。 乌克兰人的身份从一开始就是坚强而坚决的。 许多分析家忽视了民主国家，即使是不完美的民主国家，相对于独裁国家的军事优势。 尽管前者在受到威胁时经常显得混乱和分裂，但他们可以更强有力、更灵活、更聪明地做出反应，部分原因是他们的公民感到有能力在战斗环境发生变化时即兴发挥和表现出主动性。 这种模式在乌克兰也适用。 尽管最初拥有的先进武器较少，但乌克兰进行了顽强的反击，给俄罗斯造成了深远的影响，据估计，俄罗斯已经损失了战争开始时拥有的一半主战坦克。
结果如此明显，以至于之前淡化乌克兰机会的某些评论员似乎改变了主意。 前国务卿亨利·基辛格一直主张美国应该在西方和俄罗斯之间保持中立，他去年坚持要求基辅做出领土让步。 但今年早些时候，他表示支持乌克兰加入北约。
过去一年的三个教训：战争从来不是直来直去的； 权力不基于武器； 民族认同具有军事价值，这应该让民主支持者松一口气。
Phillips Payson O’Brien 是苏格兰圣安德鲁斯大学战略研究教授。 他是《战争是如何获胜的：空海力量和盟军在第二次世界大战中的胜利》一书的作者。
顾震帝整理，2023年，2月，28日。
Источник http://lapplebi.com/news/
batman688
[url=https://alt-coins.cc]Альткоин обменник[/url] – Альткоин, Альткоин
[url=https://alt-coins.cc]Alt coin обменник[/url] – Альткоин, Altcoin обменник
[url=https://alt-coins.cc/]Альткоин обменник крипты[/url] – Alt coin bestchange, Альткоин сс обменник
WASHINGTON, Jan 10 (Reuters) – The International Monetary Fund will forecast steady global growth and continuing disinflation when it releases an updated World Economic Outlook on Jan. 17, IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva told reporters on Friday.
[url=https://kraken3yvbvzmhytnrnuhsy772i6dfobofu652e27f5hx6y5cpj7rgydonion.org]kraken3yvbvzmhytnrnuhsy772i6dfobofu652e27f5hx6y5cpj7rgyd onion[/url]
Georgieva said the U.S. economy was doing “quite a bit better” than expected, although there was high uncertainty around the trade policies of the administration of President-elect Donald Trump that was adding to headwinds facing the global economy and driving long-term interest rates higher.
kraken3yvbvzmhytnrnuhsy772i6dfobofu652e27f5hx6y5cpj7rgyd.onion
https://kraken3yvbvzmhytnrnuhsy772i6dfobofu652e27f5hx6y5cpj7rgyd-onion.shop
A year ago today, things went from bad to worse for Boeing
[url=https://kra26c.cc]kraken войти[/url]
At 5 p.m. PT on January 5, 2024, Boeing seemed like a company on the upswing. It didn’t last. Minutes later, a near-tragedy set off a full year of problems.
As Alaska Airlines flight 1282 climbed to 16,000 feet in its departure from Portland, Oregon, a door plug blew out near the rear of the plane, leaving a gaping hole in the fuselage. Phones and clothing were ripped away from passengers and sent hurtling into the night sky. Oxygen masks dropped, and the rush of air twisted seats next to the hole toward the opening.
https://kra26c.cc
кракен
Fortunately, those were among the few empty seats on the flight, and the crew got the plane on the ground without any serious injuries. The incident could have been far worse — even a fatal crash.
Not much has gone right for Boeing ever since. The company has had one misstep after another, ranging from embarrassing to horrifying. And many of the problems are poised to extend into 2025 and perhaps beyond.
The problems were capped by another Boeing crash in South Korea that killed 179 people on December 29 in what was in the year’s worst aviation disaster. The cause of the crash of a 15-year old Boeing jet flown by Korean discount carrier Jeju Air is still under investigation, and it is quite possible that Boeing will not be found liable for anything that led to the tragedy.
But unlike the Jeju crash, most of the problems of the last 12 months have clearly been Boeing’s fault.
And 2024 was the sixth straight year of serious problems for the once proud, now embattled company, starting with the 20-month grounding of its best selling plane, the 737 Max, following two fatal crashes in late 2018 and early 2019, which killed 346 people.
Still the outlook for 2024 right before the Alaska Air incident had been somewhat promising. The company had just achieved the best sales month in its history in December 2023, capping its strongest sales year since 2018.
It was believed to be on the verge of getting Federal Aviation Administration approval for two new models, the 737 Max 7 and Max 10, with airline customers eager to take delivery. Approvals and deliveries of its next generation widebody, the 777X, were believed to be close behind. Its production rate had been climbing and there were hopes that it could be on the verge of returning to profitability for the first time since 2018.
Most plane crashes are ‘survivable’
[url=https://kra26c.cc]kraken тор[/url]
First, the good news. “The vast majority of aircraft accidents are survivable, and the majority of people in accidents survive,” says Galea. Since 1988, aircraft — and the seats inside them — must be built to withstand an impact of up to 16G, or g-force up to 16 times the force of gravity. That means, he says, that in most incidents, “it’s possible to survive the trauma of the impact of the crash.”
For instance, he classes the initial Jeju Air incident as survivable — an assumed bird strike, engine loss and belly landing on the runway, without functioning landing gear. “Had it not smashed into the concrete reinforced obstacle at the end of the runway, it’s quite possible the majority, if not everyone, could have survived,” he says.
The Azerbaijan Airlines crash, on the other hand, he classes as a non-survivable accident, and calls it a “miracle” that anyone made it out alive.
https://kra26c.cc
kraken ссылка
Most aircraft involved in accidents, however, are not — as suspicion is growing over the Azerbaijan crash — shot out of the sky.
And with modern planes built to withstand impacts and slow the spread of fire, Galea puts the chances of surviving a “survivable” accident at at least 90%.
Instead, he says, what makes the difference between life and death in most modern accidents is how fast passengers can evacuate.
Aircraft today must show that they can be evacuated in 90 seconds in order to gain certification. But a theoretical evacuation — practiced with volunteers at the manufacturers’ premises — is very different from the reality of a panicked public onboard a jet that has just crash-landed.
Galea, an evacuation expert, has conducted research for the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) looking at the most “survivable” seats on a plane. His landmark research, conducted over several years in the early 2000s, looked at how passengers and crew behaved during a post-crash evacuation, rather than looking at the crashes themselves. By compiling data from 1,917 passengers and 155 crew involved in 105 accidents from 1977 to 1999, his team created a database of human behavior around plane crashes.
His analysis of which exits passengers actually used “shattered many myths about aircraft evacuation,” he says. “Prior to my study, it was believed that passengers tend to use their boarding exit because it was the most familiar, and that passengers tend to go forward. My analysis of the data demonstrated that none of these myths were supported by the evidence.”
[url=https://alt-coins.cc]Alt coin обменник[/url] – Alt coin cc, Альткоин бестчейдж
[url=https://alt-coins.cc]Альткоин обменник крипты[/url] – Альткоин сс обменник, Альт коин обменник
New Glenn’s first flight
Blue Origin formally announced the development of New Glenn — which aims to outpower SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rockets and haul spacecraft up to 45 metric tons (99,200 pounds) to orbit — in 2016.
[url=https://kra26att.cc]kraken даркнет[/url]
The vehicle is long overdue, as the company previously targeted 2020 for its first launch.
Delays, however, are common in the aerospace industry. And the debut flight of a new vehicle is almost always significantly behind schedule.
Rocket companies also typically take a conservative approach to the first liftoff, launching dummy payloads such as hunks of metal or, as was the case with SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy debut in 2018, an old cherry red sports car.
https://kra26att.cc
kraken darknet
Blue Origin has also branded itself as a company that aims to take a slow, diligent approach to rocket development that doesn’t “cut any corners,” according to Bezos, who founded Blue Origin and funds the company.
The company’s mascot is a tortoise, paying homage to “The Tortoise and the Hare” fable that made the “slow and steady wins the race” mantra a childhood staple.
“We believe slow is smooth and smooth is fast,” Bezos said in 2016. Those comments could be seen as an attempt to position Blue Origin as the anti-SpaceX, which is known to embrace speed and trial-and-error over slow, meticulous development processes.
But SpaceX has certainly won the race to orbit. The company’s first orbital rocket, the Falcon 1, made a successful launch in September 2008. The company has deployed hundreds of missions to orbit since then.
And while SpaceX routinely destroys rockets during test flights as it begins developing a new rocket, the company has a solid track record for operational missions. SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket, for example, has experienced two in-flight failures and one launchpad explosion but no catastrophic events during human missions.
[url=https://alt-coins.cc]Alt coin cc[/url] – Alt coin обменник, Altcoin обменник
[url=https://alt-coins.cc]Альткоин обменник крипты[/url] – Alt coin cc, альткоин bestchange
A year ago today, things went from bad to worse for Boeing
[url=https://kra26c.cc]Љракен тор[/url]
At 5 p.m. PT on January 5, 2024, Boeing seemed like a company on the upswing. It didn’t last. Minutes later, a near-tragedy set off a full year of problems.
As Alaska Airlines flight 1282 climbed to 16,000 feet in its departure from Portland, Oregon, a door plug blew out near the rear of the plane, leaving a gaping hole in the fuselage. Phones and clothing were ripped away from passengers and sent hurtling into the night sky. Oxygen masks dropped, and the rush of air twisted seats next to the hole toward the opening.
https://kra26c.cc
kraken ссылка
Fortunately, those were among the few empty seats on the flight, and the crew got the plane on the ground without any serious injuries. The incident could have been far worse — even a fatal crash.
Not much has gone right for Boeing ever since. The company has had one misstep after another, ranging from embarrassing to horrifying. And many of the problems are poised to extend into 2025 and perhaps beyond.
The problems were capped by another Boeing crash in South Korea that killed 179 people on December 29 in what was in the year’s worst aviation disaster. The cause of the crash of a 15-year old Boeing jet flown by Korean discount carrier Jeju Air is still under investigation, and it is quite possible that Boeing will not be found liable for anything that led to the tragedy.
But unlike the Jeju crash, most of the problems of the last 12 months have clearly been Boeing’s fault.
And 2024 was the sixth straight year of serious problems for the once proud, now embattled company, starting with the 20-month grounding of its best selling plane, the 737 Max, following two fatal crashes in late 2018 and early 2019, which killed 346 people.
Still the outlook for 2024 right before the Alaska Air incident had been somewhat promising. The company had just achieved the best sales month in its history in December 2023, capping its strongest sales year since 2018.
It was believed to be on the verge of getting Federal Aviation Administration approval for two new models, the 737 Max 7 and Max 10, with airline customers eager to take delivery. Approvals and deliveries of its next generation widebody, the 777X, were believed to be close behind. Its production rate had been climbing and there were hopes that it could be on the verge of returning to profitability for the first time since 2018.
Most plane crashes are ‘survivable’
[url=https://kra26c.cc]kraken официальный сайт[/url]
First, the good news. “The vast majority of aircraft accidents are survivable, and the majority of people in accidents survive,” says Galea. Since 1988, aircraft — and the seats inside them — must be built to withstand an impact of up to 16G, or g-force up to 16 times the force of gravity. That means, he says, that in most incidents, “it’s possible to survive the trauma of the impact of the crash.”
For instance, he classes the initial Jeju Air incident as survivable — an assumed bird strike, engine loss and belly landing on the runway, without functioning landing gear. “Had it not smashed into the concrete reinforced obstacle at the end of the runway, it’s quite possible the majority, if not everyone, could have survived,” he says.
The Azerbaijan Airlines crash, on the other hand, he classes as a non-survivable accident, and calls it a “miracle” that anyone made it out alive.
https://kra26c.cc
kraken магазин
Most aircraft involved in accidents, however, are not — as suspicion is growing over the Azerbaijan crash — shot out of the sky.
And with modern planes built to withstand impacts and slow the spread of fire, Galea puts the chances of surviving a “survivable” accident at at least 90%.
Instead, he says, what makes the difference between life and death in most modern accidents is how fast passengers can evacuate.
Aircraft today must show that they can be evacuated in 90 seconds in order to gain certification. But a theoretical evacuation — practiced with volunteers at the manufacturers’ premises — is very different from the reality of a panicked public onboard a jet that has just crash-landed.
Galea, an evacuation expert, has conducted research for the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) looking at the most “survivable” seats on a plane. His landmark research, conducted over several years in the early 2000s, looked at how passengers and crew behaved during a post-crash evacuation, rather than looking at the crashes themselves. By compiling data from 1,917 passengers and 155 crew involved in 105 accidents from 1977 to 1999, his team created a database of human behavior around plane crashes.
His analysis of which exits passengers actually used “shattered many myths about aircraft evacuation,” he says. “Prior to my study, it was believed that passengers tend to use their boarding exit because it was the most familiar, and that passengers tend to go forward. My analysis of the data demonstrated that none of these myths were supported by the evidence.”