Are we being played by the Military Industrial Complex?

[PLATO]

Doing a little research and came across some interesting numbers:

According to a The National Interest article in August 2020, Russia had 27,000 Armored vehicles of all types.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russia-has-twice-many-tanks-america-does-it-matter-166338

According to an Atlas Obscura article from 2017, the U.S. Army has over 26,000 Armored Vehicles is STORAGE at the Sierra Army Depot
https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/...0stand%20ready.

According to Wikipedia, the U.S. has 5000 active tanks, 6724 Bradley Fighting vehicles, 6000 M113 Armored personnel carriers (total 17,624) as well as thousands of Strykers (4466) which are considered Armored personnel carries by Wiki.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_currently_active_United_States_military_land_vehicles

The media has us thinking that our inventories are "dangerously low" and Congress is throwing money at military manufacturing. It looks to me as if we could literally give Ukraine thousands of armored vehicles and not really dent just our STORAGE.

Why the massive spending increases? I support a world leading military and like the fact we are making sure we are prepared for anything, but one has to wonder. War with China probably won't demand high numbers of armored vehicles as I see that more as a naval/air/missile conflict without large scale ground warfare. Outside of Russia, what are we preparing for? Is this just all about keeping the military industrial complex fed?

[Geronimo]

probably. those numbers really make me question the tiny numbers of armored vehicle contributions from the US to Ukraine though. Why not send hundreds of armored vehicles from storage under lend lease terms?

[Dinner]

This does benefit them but we will need the gear to deter both Russia and China as well as support friends and allies. Also our ammo stores are way to small compared to what we had in 1990 and we really should build those back up anyway.

[N35t0r]

Doing a little research and came across some interesting numbers:

According to a The National Interest article in August 2020, Russia had 27,000 Armored vehicles of all types.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russia-has-twice-many-tanks-america-does-it-matter-166338

According to an Atlas Obscura article from 2017, the U.S. Army has over 26,000 Armored Vehicles is STORAGE at the Sierra Army Depot
https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/...0stand%20ready.

According to Wikipedia, the U.S. has 5000 active tanks, 6724 Bradley Fighting vehicles, 6000 M113 Armored personnel carriers (total 17,624) as well as thousands of Strykers (4466) which are considered Armored personnel carries by Wiki.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_currently_active_United_States_military_land_vehicles

The media has us thinking that our inventories are "dangerously low" and Congress is throwing money at military manufacturing. It looks to me as if we could literally give Ukraine thousands of armored vehicles and not really dent just our STORAGE.

Why the massive spending increases? I support a world leading military and like the fact we are making sure we are prepared for anything, but one has to wonder. War with China probably won't demand high numbers of armored vehicles as I see that more as a naval/air/missile conflict without large scale ground warfare. Outside of Russia, what are we preparing for? Is this just all about keeping the military industrial complex fed?

You can't shoot tanks out of a howitzer...

Also, please do give Ukraine some M1s! Maybe then ****ing Scholz will grow some balls and send (and allow other countries to send) Leopards. Seriously, when the ****ing greens are telling you to send weapons, you send weapons!

Incidentally, the US was spending ~25B per month in Iraq and Afghanistan, so it's not like the current funding requirements can be catalogued as 'massive'. Compared to those two wars, supporting Ukraine against Russia is not only a total bargain, it's also not resulting in killed US soldiers. It's strange that the republicans aren't all-in on it. Oh right, it's more important to make the democrats look bad.

[Meticulous Man]

I recently bought a translation of an illustrated British book about the Gulf War of 1990-1991 and noticed that the drawings indeed seemed to convey something more than just the photographs of the war. I found there definitely was something more bizarre and looming about the drawings. For instance, there often were humans in the (news/propaganda) photos but in the drawings, humans were nothing. There was something unexplainable about their quality. I’m not sure whether this is generalisable to all drawn images of the war...

[Jon Miller]

That sounds interesting, can you share a couple of examples?

JM

[pchang]

Military contracts are mostly cost plus, meaning you get paid what it cost you plus some percentage of profit. 6% is a common number. Hard to get rich that way. Sending M113s sounds like a good way to get a lot of Ukrainians killed. I also, don’t think Strykers are that good either.

[PLATO]

Sending M113s sounds like a good way to get a lot of Ukrainians killed.

As opposed to fully exposed infantry?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/12/05/the-m-113-troop-carrier-is-old-and-lightly-armored-its-also-helping-ukraine-win-the-war-with-russia/?sh=51e98f385562

[pchang]

By fostering overconfidence in an advance. If they push those things into enemy artillery range, it could end very badly.

[PLATO]

By fostering overconfidence in an advance. If they push those things into enemy artillery range, it could end very badly.

Totally agree! Based on what we have seen from the Ukrainians so far (not to mention the "advice" they are most likely getting from NATO) I don't get the sense that they would use them rashly, but war does make people make odd decisions.

My thinking was more to the mobility they could provide in helping Ukrainians position troops for both defense and advance. Far superior to unmounted troops in that respect.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

Why the massive spending increases? because this is a great opportunity for the defense manufacturers to see how weapons are performing in the field under real conditions (both sides). the last year has been a gold mine of data. what works well? what didnt work? what can we do different? what can we do new? where is the other side weak? i whole new generation of weapons are being designed as we post. for those countries who can afford it - these are good times indeed.

[PLATO]

Why the massive spending increases? because this is a great opportunity for the defense manufacturers to see how weapons are performing in the field under real conditions (both sides). the last year has been a gold mine of data. what works well? what didnt work? what can we do different? what can we do new? where is the other side weak? i whole new generation of weapons are being designed as we post. for those countries who can afford it - these are good times indeed.

Nothing like a good Arms Race to stimulate the economy!

[Geronimo]

Nothing like a good Arms Race to stimulate the economy!

I wish it was a space race to stimulate the economy

[Dinner]

You can't shoot tanks out of a howitzer...

Also, please do give Ukraine some M1s! Maybe then ****ing Scholz will grow some balls and send (and allow other countries to send) Leopards. Seriously, when the ****ing greens are telling you to send weapons, you send weapons!

Incidentally, the US was spending ~25B per month in Iraq and Afghanistan, so it's not like the current funding requirements can be catalogued as 'massive'. Compared to those two wars, supporting Ukraine against Russia is not only a total bargain, it's also not resulting in killed US soldiers. It's strange that the republicans aren't all-in on it. Oh right, it's more important to make the democrats look bad.

Poland is sending Leo's. Several other states said they also wanted to do so but that they didn't want to do it alone. I suspect the flood gates on tanks will open now

[Geronimo]

Poland is sending Leo's. Several other states said they also wanted to do so but that they didn't want to do it alone. I suspect the flood gates on tanks will open now

I suppose it takes a crew a month or more of intense training to be proficient with these MBTs. I wish the donators had understood that when it comes to sending military assistance, ASAP is the only way to get the maximum bang for the buck.