-10
'Weak' US military unable to fight major conflict: Report (thecradle.co)
submitted 7 months ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/usa@lemmy.ml
23 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] kersploosh@sh.itjust.works 16 points 7 months ago

This smells like propaganda. It's on a random "news" blog with no information about the organization. There isn't even a name in the article's byline, only "News Desk." The article itself is lazy and biased, simply parroting taking points from a nationalist conservative think tank with a clear political agenda.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 8 points 7 months ago

If anyone is unfamiliar with the heritage foundation they are just a mouthpiece for the ultra-wealthy’s interests. Nothing they say should be taken as factual information.

[-] Starbaba@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago

PSA: @yogthos@lemmy.ml is a radical pushing a specific anti-US agenda. Keep that in mind when considering their posts and comments. I suspect "news" organization linked to in this particular post is an Iranian-funded propaganda outlet.

People could make a pass at a reasonable argument that the US armed forces are lagging behind China (the evidence for that is still poor), but claiming it lags Russia has no basis in reality.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -3 points 7 months ago

[-] stewie3128@lemmy.ml 3 points 7 months ago

Well if the Heritage Foundation says so then it must be true. /s

[-] FirstCircle@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 months ago

Well, you know, they have some "very fine people" over there at HF, I've heard it said. Working on stuff like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

As always it depends on the context.

US is currently dominant in weapons technology, Air forces ( Yes I used the plural correctly), nuclear delivery systems, submarines etc etc etc.

The US does have a manpower shortage in terms of metabolically healthy, and physically fit humans that it can draw upon for a ground war.

What are the parameters of the war they're modeling?

[-] Starbaba@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

I actually think considerations for a ground war are pointless when considering near-peer adversaries where all sides have nuclear weapons.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -5 points 7 months ago

US is very obviously not dominant in nuclear delivery systems given that both Russia and China have hypersonic weapons while US does not. There's also no indication that US has any superiority in submarines or other forces. In fact, US airforce admits that they don't actually have superiority over China https://www.airandspaceforces.com/air-force-rethink-air-superiority-allvin/

The war US is obviously thinking about is one with China because China is surpassing the US now.

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Hypersonic weapons are an interesting avenue. But that is not the entirety of the nuclear deterrence story. You want a multiplicity of delivery systems so that you can guarantee delivery in any scenario.

I would love to see cited sources indicating the US has insufficient nuclear delivery capability to at least peer Russia and China.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -2 points 7 months ago
[-] femtech@midwest.social 3 points 7 months ago

and you think russia has the funds and manpower to keep their nukes upgraded let alone maintained?

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -5 points 7 months ago

Yeah I do, just like they're able to produce 3x as much artillery ammunition currently compared to the west. Russia has a state run military industrial complex that's designed to make weapons as opposed to line the pockets of the oligarchs.

[-] femtech@midwest.social 3 points 7 months ago

Able to? That's because we are not in a war with them and the Republicans won't let us do more.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -3 points 7 months ago

This has nothing to do with republicans. US does not have the industrial base or trained workforce. You can't print artillery shells the way you print money.

[-] femtech@midwest.social 3 points 7 months ago

We can spin it up fast, that's the whole reason Congress keeps buying new tanks, just to keep the production line up and running. It has everything to do with republicans. Republicans in Russia and the US want Russia to win.

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -4 points 7 months ago

Nobody who has any clue about how these things works thinks you can spin this up fast. It takes years to build factories, train workers, create supply chains, and so on. The fact that you don't understand such basic things shows that you've never had a real job.

[-] femtech@midwest.social 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Most of it is automated, also you don't need armor to win the war when we have drones. We could do bagdad 2.0 to Russia if we wanted to be directly involved easy. But we will just send drones over just like Ukraine is doing and winning with.

Also real job? Have you been to a dod manufacturing plant?

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -2 points 7 months ago
[-] femtech@midwest.social 2 points 7 months ago

That's because we don't make them anymore, we use other things. Predator drones make up the most amount of kills along with great Intel gathering. If they want to make more for Ukraine to have then hiring people that did it already is the fastest choice. Russia is about to fall into a post war depression with the oligarchs fighting over the scraps.

[-] jet@hackertalks.com 2 points 7 months ago

This is just normal sausage making. If you have infrastructure you've got to maintain it. A lot of times that's not pretty. One of the benefits of the West is they tend to be open about these things. So you can see the sausage being made.

Nothing in this article indicates that the US does not have an effective nuclear deterrence

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml -2 points 7 months ago

lol ok

this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
-10 points (33.3% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7175 readers
435 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
pangyuehung@lemmy.ml
yogthos@lemmy.ml