News "articles" that speak to the future of the war and spend most of their words describing new, expensive technology that will replace the existing military approach sound an awful lot like pieces planted by public relations firms working for military contractors.
The purpose is to generate the public's appetite for military spending and to prepare the way for aggressive lobbying. pg wrote at length about the value of public relations in "The Submarine:"
The above does not mean that TFA does not have value. As pg said: "Good PR firms... give reporters stories that are true, but whose truth favors their clients."
The public in the West has been sold the idea that war is outdated for about 75 years. But in about one month from now, the public will wake up to the fact that the this idea is not quite unanimously shared, and in particular Putin does not care for it that much. In which case, the old advice of Teddy Roosevelt still carries some weight: "Speak softly, but carry a big stick".
The purpose is to generate the public's appetite for military spending and to prepare the way for aggressive lobbying. pg wrote at length about the value of public relations in "The Submarine:"
http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html
The above does not mean that TFA does not have value. As pg said: "Good PR firms... give reporters stories that are true, but whose truth favors their clients."