Bulging Biceps Don't Win Modern Wars – Paul Krugman
Posted3 months agoActive3 months ago
paulkrugman.substack.comOtherstory
calmnegative
Debate
20/100
Military SpendingWarfareGeopolitics
Key topics
Military Spending
Warfare
Geopolitics
Paul Krugman argues that military strength is no longer the primary determinant of success in modern warfare, and that other factors are more crucial; the discussion centers around the implications of this argument for defense spending and strategy.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
31m
Peak period
2
0-2h
Avg / period
1.3
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 1, 2025 at 11:10 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 1, 2025 at 11:41 AM EDT
31m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
2 comments in 0-2h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 2, 2025 at 7:20 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45438634Type: storyLast synced: 11/17/2025, 12:08:40 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
Weirdly the author seems to acknowledge this despite the title:
> Combatants also have to be physically fit enough to endure incredible hardship.
But they discount the importance of having a culture that is appropriate for the job throughout the organization not just for combatants. Sure a programmer doesn’t need to be running a fast mile or whatever, but culture still matters and a soft one doesn’t seem appropriate for the military.
As for Russia’s failures - I don’t see why those would carry over to America. The author suggests their image of a masculine aggressive force hasn’t worked in Ukraine. I would say it isn’t enough on its own - you still need industrial strength and technology and all that. But dismissing the importance of a “warrior culture” on this one example feels like a leap.
Discipline is lacking at all ranks because every soldier has become inured to the endless stream of bullshit. I'm talking about the real military and not the jingoistic slop that is portrayed in novels.
There is a reason why no one is staying in the military anymore. Our actual culture has taught people that sadism and ignorance are not virtues. We also know that they do not make soldiers more ready for combat.
What makes a warrior is killing the enemy before they can kill you and your countryman, not bullying their comrades to suicide or hating them because of their gender or skin color.
This requires endurance, not strength. Training to do this regularly won't give you bulging muscles. For those, you need short bursts of targeted high-intensity exercise. So a physically fit soldier won't necessarily look strong. Think marathon runner, not bodybuilder.
I agree that the article isn't particularly well-written, but I think it's trying to express the idea that military effectiveness isn't linked to maintaining a particular warrior esthetic.