Ask HN: Is there a book about how a technological advantage wins wars?

Germany was defeated without the atomic bomb.

Japan could have (and would have) been beaten without the atomic bomb at a high cost in American and Japanese lives.

The atomic bomb changed the arc of history because it intimidated the Soviets. Even after VJ-day planners thought it very possible that the US would go to war with the Soviet Union -- since the Korean war involved mainland China it also could have become an unlimited conflict.

and the ironic use of

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wunderwaffe

To be positive here is a very good example of technology winning the war

https://www.amazon.com/Britains-Shield-Radar-Defeat-Luftwaff...

Bought "Britain's Shield", thanks!

Also I like the premise of Arthur C Clarke's short story, but it's a shame that it's fiction (it would actually be awesome to have a nonfiction book of examples where a technologically superior group lost to a technologically inferior one... At least to find out why)

Vietnam war? Afghanistan for the Soviets if not the US?

Note in both cases the ‘less advanced’ country got a limited amount of very advanced hardware from another advanced country, particularly for air defense.

Ukraine vs Russia is another strange case. On one hand Ukraine and Russia diverged from the same root for tanks, aircraft and missiles…. Russia usually has the same stuff Ukraine does and also the next generation (e.g. S-400 vs S-300, Su-35 vs Flanker, …) so in most areas the Russians have some lead.

Ukraine has gotten some advanced stuff like the Javelin, but since 2014 they have been a nation at war that knows their survival depends on having better quality troops.

> Ukraine has gotten some advanced stuff like the Javelin, but since 2014 they have been a nation at war that knows their survival depends on having better quality troops

Ukraine battles for their future, because we don't want to return to USSR, which is so loved by Russians.

And BTW, Russia have huge technological advantage, because they have lot more techs than Ukraine.

Basically, in 2014, Ukrainians was only ak-74s, even have not body armor; old artillery (without computers); no military communication.

After that, allies helped lot, mostly US/Britain. Also Ukrainians repaired old soviet t-64s and armored machines and soviet helicopters, and jets, and air defense.

And Russia have for decades spend huge budgets on create enhanced electronics for soviet weapons, so we where sure, they have advanced tech.

In reality, Russians was not good enough trained to withstand long war, they planned to win in few days, and most their forces was planned to be used as military-police.

But any way, Russians have huge advantage in techs - numbers of tanks, jets, helis, mobile air defense, differ few times.

Best forces landed in Hostomel. Here, very close to Kiev, was very interest battle, officials said about 35 helicopters and few hundreds land troops, and there Ukrainians shot down first ka-52 in this war, also they tried to land few il-76s (I'm not sure, hear that one was also shot down), so stakes was extremely high.

They has been eliminated by few days artillery shooting (and yes, there also destroyed Mriya plane).

As I know, similar battles was at other airports.

Also we seen few saboteurs groups, but fortunately they where small and Ukrainian troops eliminated them with just hand arms.

Most other Russian military mostly kneaded the dirt, or fire on civilian objects, and and does not do any honorable.

To be honest, atomic bomb was not need to US, as they always have huge advantage in conventional weapons over all enemies, but they have entered race, because Germany was first started and all others feel fear.

And now we encounter huge consequences, because Russia and China have nukes and could use them as terrorists, and US/Britain/EU have to listen to their mostly stupid demands.

All other technologies was achievable by all parties near simultaneously, so nobody get much enough advantage to win war.

Few times separate battles where won, because one side was there with technological advantage, and nothing more.

> Is there a book about how a technological advantage wins wars?

Probably not. There are loads of examples of less technologically advanced groups defeating more advanced opponents (or at least forcing them to give up). A few examples:

- Vietnam against the French, then the Americans

- Afghanistan against the British, the Soviets, and the Americans

- Haiti against the French

- America vs. the British

- Germanic Barbarians vs. the Roman Empire

- IRA vs. the British

Some writers (Gladwell comes to mind) have even suggested that the opposite is true, namely that the number of times a more technologically advanced power has been defeated or at least held off by a less powerful, less technologically advanced opponent is actually much higher than one would expect looking simply at the capabilities of each party involved.

This is an interesting point, and I like having these examples so I can study each one :) Thanks!

Although in one of these cases I think they lost because they didn't want to use their technological advantage. e.g. America losing to Vietnam because they didn't want to nuke them, even though the technological advantage was clearly there (i.e. they lost due to morality).

Edit: Do you know where Malcolm Gladwell talked about this? Would love to read it.

He wrote about it in: David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants

Zulus didn't win against the British, but the huge technological gap was impressive. It's a good analysis of tactics and psychological warfare too.

You're talking about this war right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Zulu_War

Is there a book that goes deeper into the tactics and psychological warfare?

Yup. It was covered in a chapter of The 33 Strategies of War, Robert Greene, but not the entire details of that war. It might be what you're looking for if you want a broad guide.

These examples are the exception, not the norm regarding the underdog winning the war.

If it's history you seek, William Dalrymple's The Anarchy is a fantastic read. It talks about how a private enterprise managed to dominate and rule over the richest part of the world in its time. Guns, Germs and Steel may also for your requirement.

I've heard a lot of good things about "Guns, Germs, and Steel" but didn't know it touched this topic. Thanks I'll definitely check it out now!

Check out the battle of cajamarca that is mentioned in that book. It was won by technological superiority.

Technological advantage is not playing much role in real life, because it is usually very expensive, and (mostly) logistics and resources scarcity limit its usage.

Much more play geography and psychology, also extremely important economics, but to be strict, all these three things are strongly tied.

For this I know two excellent books: 1. Revenge of geography. Kaplan. 2. The strategy of indirect approach. Basil Liddell Hart. (He argues for indirect moves, but for me, all his examples about effective using geography and psychology).

And sure, best book on war for all times - the Art of war Sun Tzu, but should read from few translations simultaneously, because some missing important things and others are written too knotted.

I’d highly recommend Most Secret War which covers the role of Scientific Intelligence in Britain’s battle with Germany during WWII.

https://www.amazon.com/Most-Secret-Penguin-World-Collection/...

Looks intriguing, thanks!

I can think of parts of books that do this.

The Splendid and The Vile goes on a 1-2 chapter tangent about the very interesting use of radar during WW2 for targeting London and the many counter measures developed by the British. It seems that there must be great books out there about this.

Similarly the book Cadillac Desert has a chapter about how the large Damns built in the Pacific Northwest had a massive surplus of electricity, which enabled the smelting(?) of aluminum in quantities so large that it allowed the allies to outproduce the Germans and win the air war because of it. Planes were being shot down at a similar rate.

A River Lost: the life and death of the Columbia is another book about the social, civic and environmental impacts that damning the rivers the PNW has had.

Firepower by Paul Lochart. Published late last year. It only covers Europe (and the US) between 1300 and 1950. So it does not covers all the times and places, but it’s a great read.

Second time today I've seen this book recommended. Definitely have to check it out now, thanks!

Steve Blank - The Secret History of Silicon Valley https://youtu.be/ZTC_RxWN_xo

(Sadly not a book)

This video has been on my "to watch" list for a long time, but I didn't know it was related to this topic. Now it's at the top, thanks!

I think The Butter Battle Book by Dr. Seuss covers this topic pretty well, as well as the one-sentence street book "never bring a knife to a gun fight".

I thought you were joking until I checked the book's description lol. Now I'll definitely have to read it! Never enter a stick fight without a flamethrower :)

Dr Suess was actually one of the better war propagandists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Seuss#World_War_II-era_wor...