177 Comments
User's avatar
Wes O'Donnell's avatar

A Putin supporter left a comment saying my writing is “clearly an advertisement from the manufacturer” and that “AI could do a better job.” I considered responding to the prick but opted for the indefinite ban. In case he makes his way back, убирайся из Украины, придурок.

Expand full comment
Alan Haley's avatar

Wes, I’m no ‘Putin supporter’ but whoever wrote that is right! It does read a bit like a (good) sales brochure! Nothing wrong with that of course - it made me read it through.

Having spent a career in software marketing I can spot another. I know bugger all about drone warfare but any software-focussed ‘USP’ makes me wonder about its vulnerabilities as well?

Expand full comment
Teddy L's avatar

TBH I can understand the first part of hood statement but not the second part. Clearly this tech has incredible potential assuming it actually does a good job?

Expand full comment
Wes O'Donnell's avatar

I’m just a technophile and smitten with technology, so sometimes I let my enthusiasm get the best of me. Although, as far as advertisements go, it would be nice if NAD threw some money my way 😂

Expand full comment
Teddy L's avatar

Keep it up Wes. The enthusiasm is infectious 🤓

Expand full comment
Jan Mouchet's avatar

If a troll is angry sang and old Swedish song...

And a cuestion, what are the size of this marvel? And what warhead have?

Thanks for your work ,and this very interesting article for free!

Expand full comment
ReadingRainbow's avatar

What a dummy! AI clearly did the original job.

Expand full comment
Raphael's avatar

That’s what I thought it was to me sounded like an advertisement. I read a lot of military journals that discuss hardware software capabilities of missiles planes tanks it sounded like an advertisement was well written

As far as Ukraine goes, it’s a shit hole. They have no value for human life.

It’s a failed state. It’s just gonna be used for illegal operations, laundering money drugs human trafficking Oregon harvesting

I’m sure you’re aware of that playbook that’s why they balkinize countries carved out a little fiefdoms completely depraved

Expand full comment
Ole Anderson's avatar

Your definition of a failed state sounds just like Russia today.

Expand full comment
Raphael's avatar

Well, the fifth largest economy in the world is Russia

Self-sufficient in a lot of ways,

You gotta stop diluting yourself

Expand full comment
Ole Anderson's avatar

You are the ‘diluted ‘ one. We have single States with higher economies than Russia.

Expand full comment
Raphael's avatar

Well, the fifth economy in the world is not a delusion. It’s a fact go look at the IMF data.

Expand full comment
Nigel K Tolley's avatar

Yeah, maybe *you* should go look first, then report back. Hurry. Look somewhere that isn't your local soviet era library though, eh?

Expand full comment
Raphael's avatar

Yeah, it’s disappointing. What constitutes a failed state today America’s not much better. Hopefully we can turn it around Russia, the United States. Hopefully another country make it trifecta for the people.

Expand full comment
jennifer dibley's avatar

Ha ha you’d be surprised at what I know and how many Catholic education awards I received I choose to write in shorthand as that is what nurses did for decades before computers I choose to write in my phone I don’t use a computer my phone is a blanking Chinese apple phone that decides / overrides my typing and makes more grammatical and spelling errors than a male

Expand full comment
Helmut Rockstroh's avatar

Also a rather stupid comment of his. Use AI, of course, "centrally“ i.e. to modify the software makes sense. Thereby keeping the system/missile simple, and cheap.

Expand full comment
Alan Haley's avatar

Sorry my reply was cut off by an errant finger! What I meant to ask was about software vulnerability to copying/hacking. Otherwise good luck to the Swedes!

Expand full comment
Robert Bruns's avatar

Is Ukraine using these?

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 14
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Bruce Wagner's avatar

Oh, really? How do you explain Putin’s meat grinder then?

Expand full comment
Qtto's avatar

Three hundred years of Russian military history and doctrine? Which means practice of a mind set :

Some times you eat the Bear, but most times the Bear eats YOU! (8-10 Ukie casualties for every Russian.)

Expand full comment
Bruce Wagner's avatar

8 to 10 ? And that causality number would be what? I think your “number” is statistically impossible. The use of Ukie tells me everything I need to know about your opinion. I suggest you read “Blood Lands”, by Tim Synder as a good starting point to understanding what is being played out in Eastern Europe today. The Ukrainian people have survived centuries of Russian domination (among others) and sometimes outright genocidal attempts to destroy the Ukrainian language and culture. Are you aware of Stalin’s attempt to do this? And yet the Ukrainians have survived as a distinct ethnic people. Why? Because they do not want to be Russian! And Putin’s latest attempt to subjugate the Ukrainian people will fail too. History tells us so.

Ps Ukrainians do not speak a bad kind of Russian.

Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

I’m starting to suspect that these guys are really Russian AI bots.

Expand full comment
Raphael's avatar

They got the Byzantine Empire war doctrine. It’s roughly 900 years which was mostly done through diplomacy. They didn’t have a huge standing army, but they had to one of the longest running empires ever.

The orthodox church is more than just a church and that’s what is worrying Estonia today

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 14
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Bruce Wagner's avatar

Wow! And you get these statistics from where? You sound like a mouthpiece for Putin or maybe just delusional.

Expand full comment
Ole Anderson's avatar

Delusional or Putin stooge are not mutually exclusive . I’m leaning towards the delusional- he’s not wrapped tight enough to be part of any organization

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Bruce Wagner's avatar

Insults now masquerading as an argument. This is the tragedy of social media when someone stoops to using emotional invective as somehow proof of their point. The dumbing down of our time. Please explain how the big mighty Russian bear after several years of persistent offensive efforts has gained very little ground for the enormous loss of military resources, personnel and treasure. Satellite images of the front lines are pretty conclusive evidence of this. Ukraine will not win a war of attrition against the much larger Russian aggressor, but if they can stall for time the Russian economy with a GDP only about the size of Mexico and almost totally dependent on oil resources for financing the war will not bear up under the strain of sustaining this war and the economy will implode. The first corporate defaults have just happened, the ruble is sinking, and consumer shortages are appearing. Putin dam well knows that when the Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan it triggered the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union and he knows this will be his fate too, so he has no option but to go all in to the bitter end. Hopefully, Ukraine can hang on just a little while longer for this will inevitably happened because Putin over played his hand in Ukraine.

Expand full comment
SomeNYDude (he/him)'s avatar

The US is unreliable in trade and defense. Glad to see Europe marching ahead.

Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

I think we’re going to discover that being a dishonest and unreliable ally could lead to our losing the support of Europe in the Pacific. Russia’s gains threaten the democratic world which we Americans still claim to be a part of. Twenty years from now the USA will still be weaker because of the actions and words of our government today.

Expand full comment
SomeNYDude (he/him)'s avatar

Correct. We will be weaker based on the actions of this regime 20 years from now. Our Constitution needs to be amended to make it easier to amend. We have lots of holes this regime has used to take advantage of us.

Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

Amending the constitution is a dangerous thing. It works for the enemy as well as the people. What we need, and what the founding fathers took for granted, is for the legislative and judicial branches to act independently and check the power of the executive. A total lack of integrity in congress and the Supreme Court have caused them to bow to a populist tyrant.

Expand full comment
SomeNYDude (he/him)'s avatar

It is antiquated, and failed at the one mission it had, prevent a tyrant from taking power. It needs amending. It is a vigorous process to do so.

Yes the lege and judiciary have to step up. Part of that is eliminating citizen’s united and Congress stock trading. Another part is SC reform, because they are in on the corruption. A third is making sure if the Executive violates the Constitution there are consequences. All are lacking now.

Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

I agree that the courts and Congress need enforcement tools independent of the executive branch. Placing law enforcement and the military both under executive control was a mistake.

Expand full comment
SomeNYDude (he/him)'s avatar

We see in hindsight it was a mistake to place military and law enforcement in the same place under executive control. Independent of the Executive branch, and independently funded like the CFPB should be the goal. Impounding of funds should have consequences for the Executive. There are none now.

We will want to expand Medicare, because a national health program will be cheaper than the taxes + private healthcare premiums we pay now.

I am in favor of student loan forgiveness. If robber barons and corporations can get a tax cut why not ordinary people?

We need to discuss these items now so we know how to move in the future.

Expand full comment
Ole Anderson's avatar

What we need are smarter voters.

And commenters

Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

I agree completely, but with attacks on education and the high cost of college I don’t see that happening.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

I’m sorry, to what are you referring? Also, what makes you think I give a rat’s ass what you think since you’re either a bot or MAGA (which are kind of the same thing)?

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Apr 15
Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

They’re a bit more geopolitically aware than the US is under this regime. They’ve been backing us up there for decades, keeping warships there and supporting our forces in both war and peace. Of course, maybe now they’ll think there’s little value in backing us up since we’re proving to be such a dubious ally.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

Europe has been there for the US when we asked them to be. As our allies. Because allies back each other up. Definitely they should have strongly resisted some of these conflicts. However, human rights and democratic principles deserve defending regardless of where on the globe they’re threatened.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 16
Comment removed
Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

Lame globalist disaster sales pitch. That’s great! I thought I was just concerned for my country in the face of threats from white nationalists, fake Christians and Russian assets. And I’m a war pig also? I might get that printed on a t shirt.

Expand full comment
Nigel K Tolley's avatar

Coming from that nutter, it's a badge of honour.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

They owe us zero in NATO debt because NATO contributions are not payments to another country. These are investments member countries make in their own militaries. It’s a reasonable argument to make that many of these members have not invested sufficiently in their military for the last few decades or more. However, that’s not money that they owe the US in any way.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

I’m just stating the fact that there is no vehicle for indebtedness involved here. We can say they’ve been cheapskates, that they’ve unfairly taken advantage of us, etc. What we can’t do is demand repayment of a debt. They owe us nothing no matter how mad that might make us.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Stephen Cook's avatar

Leaving us with what, exactly? Few allies, little international influence, no ability to speak with or for other nations? A country diminished in the world.

Expand full comment
Thomas Theobald's avatar

No, he's correct.

As policy, the US has pushed its own military into allied countries in order to (a) reduce their need for military forces, thereby (b) funneling money into our own military-industrial complex, and (c) enabling Washington to have a strong say in how and when EU countries commit to military action.

They owe the US nothing. Even if they were simply coasting, that does not constitute any sort of debt. NATO agreement simply posits a certain % of GDP be spent on defense. There is no legal framework for any form of action if they don't. But they weren't coasting, this was leaning on the US as planned by us.

As a result of recent events, it is clear that while unpleasant, the EU - whose economy is far stronger than the US' at present - will have very few issues picking up the slack. Additionally, the US will have zero say in how the EU engages in military action.

Expand full comment
Doug's avatar

Canada needs to start building and deploying these asap!

Expand full comment
John Miller's avatar

That was my first thought: can we build stuff like this in Canada?

Expand full comment
Doug's avatar

A buy/build contract with a NATO ally should be possible.

Expand full comment
David H 🇨🇦's avatar

Absolutely we have the capacity to build this, and others, we've done so in the past and can do it again.

BUT, the procurement process is dire, practically moribund, we need to support entities that can take chances and get things done quickly. We need to be on a wartime footing with this.

OTOH, we also have to ensure that we're all pulling in the same direction and not profiteering. The UK lost tens, perhaps hundreds of billions to insider profiteering from Conservative ministers, peers and contacts in "emergency PPE supply contracts".

Expand full comment
Nigel K Tolley's avatar

Glad someone else recalls that! If you meet Keir, could you remind him?

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Doug's avatar

National defence of course, and to contribute to Europe’s defence.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Doug's avatar

I see you are a troll. Goodbye.

Expand full comment
Scott Shultz's avatar

Great analysis and writeup, and terrific news. . . Looks like the price of aggression just went up. This flood of innovation is inspiring and reminds me of my early technology studies, perusing "Spy vs Spy"

Expand full comment
Evan's avatar

Ah yes. High school and Mad Magazine. Even in New Zealand!

Expand full comment
Scott Shultz's avatar

Sorry that experience of the US was less mad than today. . . Cheers to NZ

Expand full comment
Evan's avatar

Actually I have ended up living in North Carolina. NZ has gone at least as sideways as LA or NY since I left.

Expand full comment
TanyaFella's avatar

Fascinating, and you write in a very engaging style.

Expand full comment
Jake's avatar

Looks good but the proof is in the field. That’s what the Russians excel at, send a few items out quickly to the combat zone. Reengineer it as needed. The Swedes are excellent engineers so l am hopeful that this is not just the usual vaporware.

Expand full comment
billy mccarthy's avatar

if america is abandoning europe we need more startups such as this

Expand full comment
Researching Ukraine's avatar

Interesting. I'd like to see it in action.

Expand full comment
Anders's avatar

Mmh, odd name. Ivar Kreuger was a bit of a flacky one. Hopefully this one isn’t

Expand full comment
MICHAEL'S CURIOUS WORLD's avatar

That's a great innovation. Fascinating. The decentralisation of defence is surely the way to go.

Expand full comment
Andy's avatar

I have to say… That sounds scary as f*ck.

Can the target be people?

Expand full comment
Wes O'Donnell's avatar

I imagine they could with minor modifications, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the manufacturer should.

Expand full comment
Andy's avatar

No more trenches, Wes…

Expand full comment
Pelopidas's avatar

Well, to be honest, your article, while informative, did read a bit like a promo from the company website. It was 100% positive without mentioning a single drawback, challenge, or counter argument. I didn’t mind that because it’s a given in most cases that the writer is selling one side of a story. That said, the system looks really cool, the platform innovative and effective. I’ll be sending it to a friend who has 35 years of experience in weapon systems to see what he thinks. Also, this type of innovation producing effective inexpensive defense systems is just what Western Europe should be doing. Perhaps JD Vance’s comments have had the desired effect after all.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Apr 15
Comment removed
Expand full comment
[insert here] delenda est's avatar

I was not aware that Ukraine had A-1 Abrams tanks?

Expand full comment
Richard Burger's avatar

I get uncomfortable when too much information is provided about weapons systems.

Presumably the.manufacturer only releases details that the Russians already know, but still it bothers me that a clear explanation is helpful to the enemy.

You are doing great work. Hopefully my concerns are unwarranted.

Expand full comment
Gundy Walton's avatar

This would be of great concern to me too!

Expand full comment
Chartertopia's avatar

The flip side is that this won't deter an enemy that doesn't know its capabilities.

Expand full comment
Richard Burger's avatar

This weapon is meant to defend, not deter. Russia will send drone waves regardless of the success rate of defenses. Giving an explanation of how it operates gives the enemy clues as to how to lower effectiveness.

Expand full comment
Chartertopia's avatar

That is idiotic. The best defense is to deter the enemy from attacking, period.

Expand full comment
Richard Burger's avatar

the weapon system under discussion is an anti-drone, ant-missile weapon. It has no ability to threaten missile or drone launch sites. It can not deter attacks, only attempt to reduce their effectiveness.

You may think weapons systems such as this one, or say Patriot anti missile batteries, are idiotic. You may think explaining these systems to the enemy will deter them. You may not be the brightest bulb on the tree.

Expand full comment
Chartertopia's avatar

What kind of attacker does not care if his attack is less effective?

"Oh, they've got machine guns and mines which will kill 90% of my attacking force? Pfft, it will be but a flesh wound."

Expand full comment
Richard Burger's avatar

When an attacking force consists of cheap drones they keep coming even if systems are in place to shoot a high percentage down. You aren't going to deter any attacks by having Patriots in place or (as you suggest) explaining to your enemy how your defenses work. You are arguing with the plain evidence of experience.

Expand full comment
Nigel K Tolley's avatar

Sadly though, Ukraine gave up its nukes in return for Russian promises that turned out to be, yet again, worthless. One icbm and Russia wouldn't have touched Ukraine.

Expand full comment
Y. Andropov's avatar

Secret Service should have this.

Expand full comment
Susan Fourtané's avatar

Drones were an exciting concept once when the conversation was around delivery, healthcare, and first respondents. Now it more about war scenarios and building them as killing machines.

Expand full comment
Ixglakian's avatar

Two things missing from the conversation here in the comments.

First, the notion that Substack articles are ever going to bring you cutting edge, top secret, espionage level intel before someone who actually has the knowledge, expertise and design /manufacturing capacity to do something with it already has it is plain foolish. A quick search finds not only the manufacturer's website with press releases, but month-old articles on trade magazine sites contains more details than Wes has supplied here.

Second, why have we failed to recognize that all this capability is stuffed into a respectably sized dildo? Watch the 1995 movie "Screamers" which was supposed to be a far-future horrifier, but seems on track to be here before Santa comes round again. Note, the mfg markets to civilian applications as well, meaning parents of ungrateful kids can order one and say "Santa isn't allowed near our house anymore!" The implication being that, a one time investment in a Krueger 100 system will pay for itself in 5 to 6 Christmases!

Expand full comment