• Tunnelvision [they/them]
      ·
      5 months ago

      If the United States had the capacity to make enough ammunition and ordnance to fight multiple wars at the same time, there would be enough people employed by these companies that you would probably personally know at least 1 of them.

        • Tunnelvision [they/them]
          ·
          5 months ago

          All those places together do not even employ 400,000 people. I work in manufacturing and I don’t know a single person who works at these places. What I’m saying is so many new jobs would be created that MILLIONS of people would from that point on be in the defense sector making bombs and bullets. It’s not even comparable.

        • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
          ·
          5 months ago

          Walmart is a big employer. Can they supply war munitions? Being a big employer is genuinely irrelevant unless the bulk of those employees are making munitions

            • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
              ·
              5 months ago

              Look I'm not trying to be a dick here but are you being serious? The US can deliver some special, expensive wundermunitions via aircraft, if they have absolute air superiority. They only get that against shepherds. We're talking about enemies in 2024 who have more than just sheep maintenance capacity, so...

    • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
      ·
      5 months ago

      A very large portion of American military doctrine is centered around avoiding overextension.

      And yet they are currently already overextended.

        • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
          ·
          5 months ago

          The US Navy is currently extremely overextended. They are currently losing what Navy officers have described as the largest naval battle the US has been in since WW2 against a nation whose navy consists of speedboats.

          On the subject of supply or logistics, the US military basically lacks any of the transport/airlift capacity they had 25 years ago. That, to my mind, qualifies as a supply or logistics failure, given that such a capacity would be a basic necessity for any actual Army engagement in a conflict.

        • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
          ·
          5 months ago

          The US military's greatest weakness is the inability to hold objectives

          Just gonna add here that yes, the US military does have trouble with the basic requirements of a military. This does not help your argument.

            • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
              ·
              5 months ago

              There's no question about that. The US military can do massacres, but it can't achieve military goals unless they're just "air based massacres".