历史与人物mwi.usma.edu
现代战场上最有效的武器是混凝土
The Most Effective Weapon on the Modern Battlefield Is Concrete
2016 — 2018，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这是美国西点军校现代战争研究所（MWI）的一篇文章，论述混凝土屏障——防爆墙、隔离墙等——在现代战场（如伊拉克、阿富汗）上反而是最有效的"武器"：美军用筑墙来实施围困、保护基地，而非正面强攻。文章还谈到不同规格的屏障类型及其在实战中的部署方式。
为什么经久不衰：它把战争拉回最朴素的工程与后勤逻辑：两千年前凯撒靠挖壕筑墙取胜，今天依然如此，读来常读常新。
HN 评论精选
实战中轻便易部署的 Hesco 沙箱比混凝土更实用，混凝土后勤负担重且脆性易损。
我在阿富汗时几乎没见到混凝土结构，我们什么都用 Hesco 防爆墙。连最靠后的医院也只是钢板墙，外面围着 Hesco。Hesco 是很有意思的材料：便宜、极轻、易部署，填充之前谁都能用一把小步兵铲搞定，填满后基本坚不可摧。直升机一次能吊几块混凝土墙？一块？那建墙得花多久。或者派装甲混凝土搅拌车到现场浇筑？在阿富汗这种地方不现实。而且我猜 Hesco 更耐打——一箱石头被炸飞再落下还能用，混凝土一裂就永久坏了。
chrisseaton查看英文原文
I don't think I saw any concrete structures when I was in Afghanistan. We used Hesco bastion for everything. I think even the furthest-back hospital was just sheet steel siding construction, surrounded by Hesco. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesco_bastion Hesco is another very interesting material. Cheap, extremely light and easy to deploy, until filled, which can be done by anyone with an entrenching tool (small infantry shovel/spade that everyone carries) if required, and then basically indestructible. How many of those concrete walls can a helicopter carry? One? It's going to take a long time to build any wall or structure. Or do you send an armoured cement mixer and create on-site? That's not realistic in a place like Afghanistan. I'm not an engineer but I would also guess that Hesco survives better - a box of stones can lift up and crash back down with an explosion where if concrete cracks it's permanently broken.
筑墙与工事决定胜负的思路自古罗马至今一脉相承。
读来很有意思：从凯撒时代到现在几乎没变。读他的《高卢战记》，你会觉得战争是靠挖壕沟、筑墙赢下来的。比如在这一页搜"fortification"（筑垒）；再对比第三卷开头写加尔巴的那几章。可以说，在他的叙述里，胜利全在于准备充分、不松懈。
pjungwir查看英文原文
It is interesting to read that so little has changed since the days of Caesar. Reading his Gallic War you'd think the war was won by digging ditches and building walls. For instance, search for "fortification" on this page: http://classics.mit.edu/Caesar/gallic.5.5.html Contrast with Galba in the early chapters of http://classics.mit.edu/Caesar/gallic.3.3.html You would only exaggerate a little to say that in his telling, victory is all about being prepared and not slacking off.
混凝土既是屏障也是国家意志的象征，真正起作用的是背后的供应链。
我服役期间有个任务是去韩国炸混凝土墙。2008 年韩国政府采用了新的混凝土屏障设计，用来加固战略要地。为了看这些屏障的真实使用效果，一支与韩国海军陆战队合作的美军战斗工兵分队被派去破障。由此我学到两点：混凝土一是实用屏障，二是象征物。在战区，Hesco 集装箱占主导，快速部署和耐久性让它更合适；但厚重的混凝土块象征国家政权的延续——更重更硬、后勤要求更高，筑起混凝土墙就是国家在宣示"我们在此长驻，不会撤退"。所以真正最有效的武器其实是高效运转的供应链。不过话说回来，我们破那些混凝土墙也没费多大劲。
alaskamiller查看英文原文
One mission in my service was going to Korea and blowing up concrete walls. Back in 2008 the Korean government acquired new concrete barrier designs meant to re-enforce strategic locations. Wanting to see real life usage of these barriers, a contingency of Marine combat engineers working with the ROK Marines got tasked to breaching them. From that I learned two interesting things of note. Concrete serves two means: it's actual use as a barrier and the other being a manifestation. In combat zones, Hesco containers prevail. Rapid deployment and durability makes them a much better fit. But imposing concrete blocks represent the continuity of the state. Heavier and harder, with more logistics required, building out concrete walls is meant as a way for the state to declare they are here to stay, not retreat. So actually it's wielding a supply chain effectively that is the most effective weapon on the battlefield. That said though, we made short work of the concrete.
现代基地建设多由私营承包商承担，战争与军工利润深度捆绑。
虽然文章突出士兵建屏障，但现代战场上大部分基地建设其实是承包商做的。2013 年 Mother Jones 那篇文章用"有意思"来形容都算轻的：伊拉克和阿富汗战争中赚得最多的是迪克·切尼控股的公司。考虑到他们持有多少合同、扮演多关键的角色，没有他们，那些战争在后勤上很可能根本打不下去。有人说掌握优势供应链者赢得战争（或至少拖延结束）。但控制供应链的是私营承包商而非美军：美国战时基地这些临时城市的几乎一切供给都靠他们，没有他们就没法打这些仗，而经营这些公司的人又身处政府最高层。这不是阴谋论，而是赤裸裸的战争牟利。这引出两点：（1）如果你掌控获利的公司，又能影响政府的战争政策与预算，你就能制造出以盈利为目的的战争——没有承包商参与，我们还会打这些仗吗？（2）如果这些承包公司明天消失，我们还能拥有想象中的军事实力吗？
peterwwillis查看英文原文
Although this article highlights soldiers as building barriers, the majority of base construction on the modern battlefield is done by contractors. This article from 2013 is, well, "interesting" to put it lightly: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/05/contractors-385-billion-military-bases/ A company controlled by Dick Cheney made the most money in the Iraq & Afghanistan wars. It's probable that those wars would have been logistically impossible otherwise, considering how many contracts they held and how vital a role they played. Someone said that control of a superior supply chain wins wars [or at least, delays their resolution]. But private contractors, not the US Military, control the supply chain. They supply virtually every aspect of the temporary-cities that are U.S. wartime bases. Without them, we can't have these wars. And the people who run them work in the highest levels of government. It's less conspiracy theory than blatant war profiteering. I think this brings up two interesting points. (1) If you control the corporations that profit, and you influence the government's war policy as well as budget, you can create wars for profit. Would we even have these wars if contractors weren't involved? And (2), if the contracting companies "went away" tomorrow, would we still have the military might we imagine we have?
历次讨论
同类还值得读
开发者无薪坚持完成 Mac 图形计算器：一个秘密项目的故事
Dev stays without pay to finish Mac Graphing Calculator as skunkworks project
苹果 Mac 图形计算器（Graphing Calculator）开发者的亲述：在项目被砍后，几位工程师在没有报酬、没有正式授权的情况下，以“地下项目”方式偷偷留在公司把软件做完…
历史与人物上首页 6 次 · 2009–2022pacifict.com理查德·费曼与 Connection Machine
Richard Feynman and the Connection Machine
长文回忆费曼晚年参与 Connection Machine 并行计算机项目的经历：他分析路由器、用自创的并行 Basic 编写 QCD 程序，也涉足细胞自动机等主题。
历史与人物上首页 5 次 · 2010–2021longnow.org编辑精选负 2000 行代码
-2000 Lines of Code
folklore.org 上 Andy Hertzfeld 记录的一则苹果 Macintosh 开发轶事：Bill Atkinson 被问到写了多少行代码时，回答“-2000 行…
历史与人物上首页 4 次 · 2014–2022folklore.org编辑精选Dennis Ritchie 的第一版 C 编译器（约 1972 年）
Dennis Ritchie’s first C compiler (c. 1972)
这个 GitHub 仓库保存了 Dennis Ritchie 约 1972 年编写的最早 C 编译器源码，是 C 语言和 Unix 早期历史的一手材料。
历史与人物上首页 4 次 · 2013–2025github.com一位破解赛马密码的赌徒
A Gambler Who Cracked the Horse-Racing Code (2018)
彭博社 2018 年的长篇特写，讲述数学家 Bill Benter 如何用统计模型和算法在赛马博彩中持续盈利、累计赢得近十亿美元的故事。
历史与人物上首页 4 次 · 2018–2024bloomberg.com