It requires physical access. Presence can be achieved by placing a dash camera or window camera strategically.
> and they were expending a lot of effort trying to exceed that previous false number.
The idea here being that if the allies just made more tanks than the axis they would automatically win? It's a lionized story of intelligence agency cleverness built squarely on the back of insane military "strategy."
Having a dashcam in this situation is only useful if that dashcam is physically there during the times you care about eh? Which is the physical presence part. With some applied statistics, that can be reduced (no need to sit in every parking lot 24/7 for instance), but there is definitely some sitting in parking lots involved.
No, it’s that they would set tank production quotas (and budgets) based on what they expect to need to produce to crush the enemy. Modulo whatever level of effectiveness had been apparent so far.
Which, for any given set of resources, would mean taking away resources from something else. Either manpower, steel, oil/gas, etc.
So overproducing tanks means fewer aircraft, or less artillery, etc.
Convincing the enemy you’re producing too much (or too little) of something to get them to waste their time and energy is a classic counter intelligence move.
WW2 was won largely with logistics and economic might + reasonable tactics. Applying the economic might effectively was part of that.
> Convincing the enemy you’re producing too much (or too little) of something to get them to waste their time and energy is a classic counter intelligence move.
So much so that it calls into question the entire idea of clandestine wartime intelligence having any exceptional value.
> WW2 was won largely with logistics and economic might + reasonable tactics.
I think people who say this simply haven't counted the dead.
> Applying the economic might effectively was part of that.
Which had essentially no bearing on our problems with Japan.
Uh huh. Populations of conscriptable soldiers or percent of the population killed totally didn’t matter? Those are part of the economic equation.
The war in the pacific was started by, and almost entirely dominated by, economic matters. Japan attacked the US because of US embargoes on fuel, for instance.
And the creation of the atom bomb (which ended it) was only possible due to the insane logistical feats of the US - and its excess economic capacity and resources. Which is why Germany failed, and the USSR only got one after getting the ‘ingredients list’ post war - once the wartime resources had been freed up.
War is hell, so don’t start them. But also, don’t think modern war isn’t won (or lost) based on logistics and economic factors. Which intelligence can help with.
It requires physical access. Presence can be achieved by placing a dash camera or window camera strategically.
> and they were expending a lot of effort trying to exceed that previous false number.
The idea here being that if the allies just made more tanks than the axis they would automatically win? It's a lionized story of intelligence agency cleverness built squarely on the back of insane military "strategy."