Giled Pallaeon
@giledpallaeon.bsky.social
Military & International Affairs nerd. Defense professional. Mostly naval subjects, but all aspects of defense and natsec welcome. Oh, & plastic spaceships, that too. All opinions on all subjects my own #WeAreNAFO
Pinned
Giled Pallaeon
@giledpallaeon.bsky.social
· May 15
Previous type entries have made note of the appropriate deployment of a particular type, with special regard to campaign operations. Star Destroyer as defined here overrides those generalized parameters. It is the assessment of [Redacted] to append the designation “Star Destroyer”…
Reposting so I can pin this. Below is part of a thread I wrote including my Watsonian redefinition of the term “Star Destroyer”
Objectively a terrible article, and therefore another excellent aid to the cause that "If you're talking about defense issues and don't know what you're talking about *in national publications*, then please, for the love of God, *shut the fuck up*."
Emblematic of defense illiteracy, almost every single paragraph in this article has something wrong with it.
www.wsj.com/world/the-gr...
www.wsj.com/world/the-gr...
The ‘Growler’ Signal-Jamming Jet That Helped Capture Nicolás Maduro
The U.S. used the jet for jamming and spoofing Venezuela’s air defense. It is a key tool in the military’s renewed focus on electronic warfare.
www.wsj.com
January 7, 2026 at 6:04 AM
Objectively a terrible article, and therefore another excellent aid to the cause that "If you're talking about defense issues and don't know what you're talking about *in national publications*, then please, for the love of God, *shut the fuck up*."
This is insane. Full stop.
If you made a Venn diagram of every weird person I knew in Silicon Valley during the first dot-com boom, centrifuged it, extracted the pellet, and re-suspended it in high-proof eugenics with a splash of AI, you'd end up with something like this.
It'll take a strong stomach to read this "gift" link.
It'll take a strong stomach to read this "gift" link.
Can You Optimize Love?
www.nytimes.com
January 7, 2026 at 5:57 AM
This is insane. Full stop.
Among others:
Avatar: The Last Airbender
The Good Place
Castlevania
Futurama (specifically “Meanwhile”)
Deep Space 9
Castlevania
She-Ra and the Princesses of Power
Star Wars: The Clone Wars
Batman Beyond (if you’ve watched other DCAU)
Andor
Arcane
Avatar: The Last Airbender
The Good Place
Castlevania
Futurama (specifically “Meanwhile”)
Deep Space 9
Castlevania
She-Ra and the Princesses of Power
Star Wars: The Clone Wars
Batman Beyond (if you’ve watched other DCAU)
Andor
Arcane
Given that apparently the Stranger Things finale was meh (idk, didn't watch it, just the scuttlebutt) and we're not that far removed from the disastrous GOT finale that retroactively made everyone have never cared about the show:
What's the *best* ending to a show you've ever seen? Quote/reply etc
What's the *best* ending to a show you've ever seen? Quote/reply etc
January 7, 2026 at 5:26 AM
Among others:
Avatar: The Last Airbender
The Good Place
Castlevania
Futurama (specifically “Meanwhile”)
Deep Space 9
Castlevania
She-Ra and the Princesses of Power
Star Wars: The Clone Wars
Batman Beyond (if you’ve watched other DCAU)
Andor
Arcane
Avatar: The Last Airbender
The Good Place
Castlevania
Futurama (specifically “Meanwhile”)
Deep Space 9
Castlevania
She-Ra and the Princesses of Power
Star Wars: The Clone Wars
Batman Beyond (if you’ve watched other DCAU)
Andor
Arcane
Reposted by Giled Pallaeon
Tactics always follow strategy, but if you don’t remotely understand what the USAF is capable of then you can’t really understand how to apply theory.
January 7, 2026 at 12:16 AM
Tactics always follow strategy, but if you don’t remotely understand what the USAF is capable of then you can’t really understand how to apply theory.
This this this this this
This is a good taxonomy because it gets at tactics.
Something that goes under appreciated in many strategy circles is the impact of tactics on the art of the possible
Theory is great, but a failure to understand tactics really limits the ability to comprehend Iran / Caracas / etc.
Something that goes under appreciated in many strategy circles is the impact of tactics on the art of the possible
Theory is great, but a failure to understand tactics really limits the ability to comprehend Iran / Caracas / etc.
Limiting it to non-fiction and the "how to" bit, I propose the following taxonomy, one book each:
Grand Strategy
Operational Art
Land, sea, and air theory
Land, sea, and air tactics
something about amphibious something
Logistics
Acquisition
Personnel
Civ-mil
Coercion theory
Grand Strategy
Operational Art
Land, sea, and air theory
Land, sea, and air tactics
something about amphibious something
Logistics
Acquisition
Personnel
Civ-mil
Coercion theory
January 7, 2026 at 12:47 AM
This this this this this
It’s a cliche but there’s a reason the old joke that “War is chaos and the U.S. military is good at it because we’re chaotic” is true because we don’t fight it all the time and embrace the opportunities.
I'm not super sure how you can. There's basic aspects of the military that don't translate well unless you experience them for yourself like how difficult it actually is to move X brigade to Y position or "how do I return fire at an adversary I can't see who is 1.5 miles away from me"
January 7, 2026 at 12:38 AM
It’s a cliche but there’s a reason the old joke that “War is chaos and the U.S. military is good at it because we’re chaotic” is true because we don’t fight it all the time and embrace the opportunities.
Reposted by Giled Pallaeon
unironically a real example of Fog of War is playing league of legends and your teammate telling you "he has no flash, he used it last fight" and then the guy kills you because he does actually have flash
January 7, 2026 at 12:33 AM
unironically a real example of Fog of War is playing league of legends and your teammate telling you "he has no flash, he used it last fight" and then the guy kills you because he does actually have flash
Strongly endorse this view. The issue is that if you’re seen, you get hit. So either don’t be seen, or blind the other guy, then kill them. It’s not easy, but humans remain fallible, as will man-made systems.
Mechanized warfare now lives in the gaps created by deception, disruption, and timing.
Why Mechanized Warfare Will Still Be Decisive in the Next Land War
Mechanized warfare is not dead. Observers have been debating this topic since the Ukrainian military and volunteers beat back the Russian assault on Kiev
warontherocks.com
January 7, 2026 at 12:32 AM
Strongly endorse this view. The issue is that if you’re seen, you get hit. So either don’t be seen, or blind the other guy, then kill them. It’s not easy, but humans remain fallible, as will man-made systems.
Reposted by Giled Pallaeon
As a politically liberal national security & mil-tech wonk... Yes, a LOT of truth to this, in many academic IR departments too.
January 7, 2026 at 12:06 AM
As a politically liberal national security & mil-tech wonk... Yes, a LOT of truth to this, in many academic IR departments too.
Obligatory reminder that there are layers to military fluency. Everyone should be passable in strategy, and the guy fluent in operational art must be listened to.
this is where i am at: THERE IS NO ONE ELSE. do you want to outsource your military policy to steven miller? no? how about the dc blob? also no? THEN LEARN WHAT THE FUCK HOW TO MILITARY
www.breakingbeijing.com/p/there-is-n...
www.breakingbeijing.com/p/there-is-n...
January 7, 2026 at 12:23 AM
Obligatory reminder that there are layers to military fluency. Everyone should be passable in strategy, and the guy fluent in operational art must be listened to.
And we’re a global hegemon whose entire theory of defense is* that we will fight over there, whereas nearly everyone else can assume it’ll be on their front yard.
*was, if this admin gets its way
*was, if this admin gets its way
I had an old post on Twitter about this. The US spends about 18% of its GDP on the social safety net and 3.5% on military. Germany spends about 24-25% of its GDP on the social safety net and 2% on the military.
Our military spending is not why they can have nice things or why we don't.
Our military spending is not why they can have nice things or why we don't.
just grievances all the way down
January 7, 2026 at 12:08 AM
And we’re a global hegemon whose entire theory of defense is* that we will fight over there, whereas nearly everyone else can assume it’ll be on their front yard.
*was, if this admin gets its way
*was, if this admin gets its way
Some additional details on the U-boat campaign, in case anyone was worried only Hitler was a dumb Nazi.
Karl Donitz, commander U-boat Command at the outset of the war*, strongly preferred the Type VII U-boat to its larger cousin, the Type IX. On strictly tactical characteristics it was better.
Karl Donitz, commander U-boat Command at the outset of the war*, strongly preferred the Type VII U-boat to its larger cousin, the Type IX. On strictly tactical characteristics it was better.
The Kriegsmarine also suffered from him. The construction of BISMARCK and TIRPITZ was strongly supported by him, and when Type VII/IX U-boat production finally climbed above loss replacement in 1941 he ordered the first several into the Mediterranean.
Fun fact: neither the Type VII nor IX…
Fun fact: neither the Type VII nor IX…
January 2, 2026 at 10:13 PM
Some additional details on the U-boat campaign, in case anyone was worried only Hitler was a dumb Nazi.
Karl Donitz, commander U-boat Command at the outset of the war*, strongly preferred the Type VII U-boat to its larger cousin, the Type IX. On strictly tactical characteristics it was better.
Karl Donitz, commander U-boat Command at the outset of the war*, strongly preferred the Type VII U-boat to its larger cousin, the Type IX. On strictly tactical characteristics it was better.
Reposted by Giled Pallaeon
So Hitler's position in 1940/1941 is not a good position ruined by foolish decisions, but in fact a deceptively weak position that is almost certainly doomed, leading to insane gambles that only make it worse.
The catastrophic mistake was having a war, a result of the worse mistake of being a Nazi.
The catastrophic mistake was having a war, a result of the worse mistake of being a Nazi.
January 2, 2026 at 6:14 AM
So Hitler's position in 1940/1941 is not a good position ruined by foolish decisions, but in fact a deceptively weak position that is almost certainly doomed, leading to insane gambles that only make it worse.
The catastrophic mistake was having a war, a result of the worse mistake of being a Nazi.
The catastrophic mistake was having a war, a result of the worse mistake of being a Nazi.
I always have two thoughts when I see this.
One, my not-an-economist understating is that this reckoning, or at least its severity, is entirely self-inflicted, between American delusions that govt budgeting is like households, and active immolation of the advantages to us of the current world…
One, my not-an-economist understating is that this reckoning, or at least its severity, is entirely self-inflicted, between American delusions that govt budgeting is like households, and active immolation of the advantages to us of the current world…
December 30, 2025 at 11:28 PM
I always have two thoughts when I see this.
One, my not-an-economist understating is that this reckoning, or at least its severity, is entirely self-inflicted, between American delusions that govt budgeting is like households, and active immolation of the advantages to us of the current world…
One, my not-an-economist understating is that this reckoning, or at least its severity, is entirely self-inflicted, between American delusions that govt budgeting is like households, and active immolation of the advantages to us of the current world…
Reposted by Giled Pallaeon
It’s remarkable how little of this rant is factually correct. It takes effort to be this damn wrong.
December 24, 2025 at 10:03 PM
It’s remarkable how little of this rant is factually correct. It takes effort to be this damn wrong.
Reposted by Giled Pallaeon
We sent a bunch of effete, Ivy League scientists into the desert and they returned with a portable sun.
every time I can recall from history that a group has centered a culture of martial virtue to the point of conflict,
the "soft intellectuals" the warriors distinguish themselves from have learned war real quick, dominate because they pay attention to details, and then go back to art and nerdy stuff
the "soft intellectuals" the warriors distinguish themselves from have learned war real quick, dominate because they pay attention to details, and then go back to art and nerdy stuff
December 24, 2025 at 9:31 PM
We sent a bunch of effete, Ivy League scientists into the desert and they returned with a portable sun.
This sure is a take from Six Frigates.
I’d argue a better one is that naval procurement has always been subject to fuckery of the first order, and that unique requirements require unique solutions.
I’d argue a better one is that naval procurement has always been subject to fuckery of the first order, and that unique requirements require unique solutions.
December 24, 2025 at 8:43 PM
This sure is a take from Six Frigates.
I’d argue a better one is that naval procurement has always been subject to fuckery of the first order, and that unique requirements require unique solutions.
I’d argue a better one is that naval procurement has always been subject to fuckery of the first order, and that unique requirements require unique solutions.
Right, so based on what POTUS is apparently planning to announce later this afternoon, have a thread on why surface combatants *might* want to be large. (Capital scale artillery is out. Go invent a Time Machine if that’s what you want.)
This comes down to requirements, as all engineering does /1
This comes down to requirements, as all engineering does /1
December 22, 2025 at 6:41 PM
Right, so based on what POTUS is apparently planning to announce later this afternoon, have a thread on why surface combatants *might* want to be large. (Capital scale artillery is out. Go invent a Time Machine if that’s what you want.)
This comes down to requirements, as all engineering does /1
This comes down to requirements, as all engineering does /1
So I know it’s sometimes difficult to understand why knowledgeable people in the defense world think Anduril is full of shit. But I now have a great way to explain how you should view their pitches. This was a recent… idea(*) of Palmer Luckey’s. Basically leverage American soft power and immigration
December 21, 2025 at 5:37 PM
So I know it’s sometimes difficult to understand why knowledgeable people in the defense world think Anduril is full of shit. But I now have a great way to explain how you should view their pitches. This was a recent… idea(*) of Palmer Luckey’s. Basically leverage American soft power and immigration
First of all, here’s the link. The below is in fact an accurate summary. www.reuters.com/world/europe...
December 19, 2025 at 11:05 PM
First of all, here’s the link. The below is in fact an accurate summary. www.reuters.com/world/europe...
This highlights my greatest frustration about how poorly defense is understood and covered outside its niche. Families of people Who Know can just ask (as annoying as that is), and we deal with it. But there are not enough of us to inoculate the public this way writ large.
December 18, 2025 at 1:49 PM
This highlights my greatest frustration about how poorly defense is understood and covered outside its niche. Families of people Who Know can just ask (as annoying as that is), and we deal with it. But there are not enough of us to inoculate the public this way writ large.
We already tried this without the cinder box that is CENTCOM
December 16, 2025 at 1:11 AM
We already tried this without the cinder box that is CENTCOM
We tried EUCOM and AFRICOM together already, adding CENTCOM won’t fix it. Can we please stop relitigating bad ideas that already failed? wapo.st/4p0PQOe
Pentagon plan calls for major power shifts within U.S. military
If adopted, the changes would fulfill Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s pledge to disrupt the status quo and slash the number of four-star generals.
wapo.st
December 16, 2025 at 1:09 AM
We tried EUCOM and AFRICOM together already, adding CENTCOM won’t fix it. Can we please stop relitigating bad ideas that already failed? wapo.st/4p0PQOe