This article just came across my desk courtesy of a friend: Bigger Fleets Win | Proceedings – January 2023 Vol. 149/1/1,439 (usni.org)
I will avoid discussing the article, instead I will only discuss the two references to me (A little bit of vanity here).
First there is footnote 24, which references my book War by Numbers. There problem is that the discussion that he is footnoting does not something I recall writing. He may be paraphrasing me, but I do really recall making that point. Still, I appreciate the shout out.
The next paragraph also repeats footnote 24 following the sentence “Why bother discussing such ancient history when ‘everything is different now?’. I actually do not recall making such a statement, but maybe I did somewhere. Between a thousand+ blog posts, 60+ reports, 7+ books, etc. I could have said that. I don’t remember saying that. The article having two footnotes 24 and no footnote 25 leads me to suspect that the footnoting got garbled.
Later on in the article, they claim that “the DuPuy Institute finds it difficult to validate models of future combat based on past data because ‘there are no real-world examples in the past twenty-five years of combat between conventional armed forces with similar levels of advanced technology and military competence.'”
The first part of this…the “finds it difficult” part really does not sound like anything I have said. My attitude it that you go ahead and test a model to the past, because if it cannot predict the past, if it cannot predict the actions of lower tech weapons; then you can be pretty damn sure it is not also predicting modern combat. So this does not seem to be a claim I would make.
Now the quote that is attached to that sounds exactly like something I would say or did say. I kind of remembering saying that in a phone interview. I don’t remember when or where. The reference is to footnote 30, an article on F-35s published in Breaking Defense two years ago. It is here: HASC Chair Slams F-35, 500-Ship Fleet; Highlights Cyber – Breaking Defense. Now, I don’t see any references to The Dupuy Institute there. Perhaps it is in one of the linked articles.
Anyhow, nice to be referenced and quoted. Would be nicer if it was in proper context.
Update: Found the quote from my book. The article says:
“The Dupuy Institute, one of the most notable independent centers of operational research on land warfare, and one that models combat outcomes based on historical data, expressed this concern in 2017:
“Many have postulated… a revolution in warfare created by the synergetic effects of increased weapons accuracy… [etc., see above]. Recent U.S. conventional operations have increased this perception due to our opponents being technologically inferior, not particularly well trained, or simply incompetent, while the United States had enjoyed air supremacy and the luxury of outgunning our opponents.”
Now this is something I have said. It is footnote 29, the Freedberg article quoted above, which does not quote me. So, clearly the footnotes have gotten garbled.
I do have to thank Captain Tangredi, who I have never met, for calling us “one of the most notable independent centers of operational research on land warfare.” The quote from 2017 is clearly referring to War by Numbers (published 2017).
