"we don't have enough weapons to fight China" Topic

link

This story from a right-wing blog is based on a WSJ story, which requires a subscription to read. BUt it is quoted a bit here. The WSJ story is based on an analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

"According to Seth Jones, senior vice president at CSIS, the defense industrial base in the United States is running at its maximum capacity. But that capacity is currently fixed at the peacetime levels we have grown accustomed to. But while the United States isn't technically at war in Ukraine, we are burning through ammunition and weapons at a wartime pace. This is not a sustainable situation."

"The number of Javelin shoulder-fired missiles and antiaircraft Stinger systems we have sent to Ukraine thus far would take seven years each to replenish under current production levels. The same goes for the 155 mm and Howitzer shells we have been shipping to them. In one of the more chilling portions of the CSIS study, they predict that if a similar engagement with China broke out suddenly across the strait, we could begin running out of critical munitions in literally less than a week. And China will be able to hold out for far, far longer than a week. They've been stockpiling ammunition and armaments for years without using them for much of anything aside from training exercises and local skirmishes.

The solution is available, assuming the money for the military budget is there. (A big assumption at this point.) The White House would need to start ordering new stockpiles at a pace sufficient to get the defense manufacturers to ramp up their production levels significantly. But they can't do that overnight and the clock may be ticking."

Yea, well right-wing or not, our generals and admirals have been warning about the same issue for the last few years, so there is that.

Not surprising, sadly, given the poor state of our military due to mismanagment.

Someone has a plan, and it is NOT good for our country or allies.

Maybe we can ask the Taliban/Al Qaeda nicely for some of our leftovers abandoned in Afghanistan (dripping sarcasm intended, in case you can't tell).

Where would a land battle with China be fought?

Tally Ho!

On Taiwan?

Definitely sounds concerning.
Based on your quoted bit, a couple of questions spring to mind.
"…we are burning through ammunition and weapons at a wartime pace. " Is this really true, or just selective?
What IS the peace-time production rate for Stingers and Javelins? And more importantly, how quickly could we ramp up/how easy are they to make?
As I say, this is alarming, but I wonder if the article cherry-picks somewhat.

Much of the military has been focused on Low Intensity Conflict. Until the issue in Ukraine occurred, the LIC supporters were all pushing the "fact" that Heavy War was obsolete and was not something that would occur in the near to mid-future. Why pay for a heavy force when you will not need it. They let manufacturing of certain weapon system not just go idle, but be dismantled (talking about Stingers here). You don't need a tank, just use this Stryker equipped with a 105mm gun (oh, it's not working, so we will buy a fully tracked light tank to give infantry some punch to replace it). Close and dismantle most of the ammunition plants. 20 years of the War on Terror and the leadership drank the cool-ade of LIC and forgot maintaining the ability to fight a two front war. You have leaders in Armor branch that never maneuvered an armored unit at the platoon,company and/or battalion level. It's why they had to bring in some old Cold Warriors to try and teach them the skills used so well in the Gulf Wars.

They covered this report on Fox last night and the panel was way short of expertise, IMO. It is hard to get at facts on things like this. We don't hang out a big list of military inventory for everyone to see, and yet some presume that our military is unaware of the expenditure rate of material, or that they have been driven by- pick your political target- to give up the store without advising of the consequences. Or that China, not exactly an amphibious operations powerhouse as a military force, will jump the gun because we are low on ammo. Which we happily tell them, I guess.

The White House doesn't order stockpiles unless Congress pays for it, correct? The biggest danger to the military budget may be the apparent coalition of extremists on both left and right in Congress, per a link Bill provided in another post. Isolationism is an historic movement that we have encountered before.

Apparently, some are not in agreement that the proxy destruction of the conventional Russian army is a once in a lifetime geopolitical opportunity for America and Europe. Or that the largest producer of military arms and ammunition in human history cannot come back from a year of logistical expenditure that does not even involve our troops. Or that defense contractors everywhere have a financial interest in this kind of news.

Somewhere deep in the Pentagon, where they are thrilled to keep sending material to Ukraine to destroy the Russian army, they are drawing up new contracts for more stuff. Meanwhile Russia is not exactly a production dynamo at this point.

And China has plenty of internal issues. Plus the most vulnerable oil supply line in the world. Their navy is still building and years behind ours. They might want at least a couple of trained naval battlegroups before they invade across water. Not that they couldn't try it. But it seems we have been sending quite a bit of military hardware to Taiwan lately….

How do you define "enough"? And that's just for starters. Underestimating usage rates is an old problem and not one that I foresee being fixed anytime soon given the political element. I'd also say that these "exercises" have been demonstrating extremely high usage rates since the depths of the Cold War – but conversely those rates are shown to result in extreme damage to the opposition!

Probably the biggest problem the West has, and it may be wider than that, is the ability to stand up production when needed.

Yes, that is what is believed that with supplying Ukraine, we won't have enough to supply Taiwan.[or even ourselves !] Of course, bottom line the only place we may fight the PRC/CCP is on Taiwan. There is no way in Hell you could fight a land war in China. For obvious reasons.

By arming Taiwan it might deter a PRC/CCP invasion. If they know Taiwan is well armed. This should have happened while Putin was massing on Ukraine's borders. But again … the US leadership was a dollar late & a day short.

The PRC/CCP is going to have a hard enough time executing an amph op. One of the more difficult missions a Military can commit to. Plus, Taiwan does not have that many landing beaches either.

Somewhere deep in the Pentagon, where they are thrilled to keep sending material to Ukraine to destroy the Russian army, they are drawing up new contracts for more stuff. Meanwhile Russia is not exactly a production dynamo at this point.

Bingo ! As many have said, we have to supply the Ukraine to assist them in getting the Russians out of Ukraine. The Russians are still the US & NATOs' enemy …

But it seems we have been sending quite a bit of military hardware to Taiwan lately….

Probably not enough … but at this point Ukraine is the priority. Saw some footage on FOX, of the Taiwan's military today. It looks like they are using upgraded M60A1s(?). There is a lot of mountainous terrain on Taiwan. But still MBTs will work in some locations.

Probably the biggest problem the West has, and it may be wider than that, is the ability to stand up production when needed.

Yes, seems the US, the "former arsenal of democracy" needs to pick it up. Maybe some in NATO too.

We still have a lot of people that need jobs. And many in the gov't have said the illegal aliens came here for jobs. Hmmm ?

You have leaders in Armor branch that never maneuvered an armored unit at the platoon,company and/or battalion level. It's why they had to bring in some old Cold Warriors to try and teach them the skills used so well in the Gulf Wars.

So very sad to hear. But it is not surprising that many current leaders are "fighting the last war". Good thing, I guess, they had to bring in some "old timers" from the Cold War and even the Gulf Wars. Teach to newies how to fight was.

Not surprising, sadly, given the poor state of our military due to mismanagment.

Very much so … They have been told to waste time on woke, CRT, 1619, pronouns, etc. topics from the top levels. This is a disgrace. They military needs to train to fight both LIC and conventional wars. That will mean a lot of training in classrooms and in the field, etc. Training, deploying, etc., gets you experience. Training and experience is how you develop a combat ready force. Unless that has changed since I was a Rifle Plt Ldr and Mech Co. Cdr, '79-'90 ?

We should notice how poorly the Russians were trained, etc., when they invaded Ukraine. And that was from the top down. US Military take note.

Besides … my experience is you are in the military … what else arez you supposed to do ? But train and prep to go to war. Woke, pronouns, CRT, etc. classes need to be replaced with real prep for combat topic. Including military history, weapons ID, etc., etc. Then time in the field, FTXs, etc.

Among all our problems is the poor quality, feckless, etc. leadership from the top down. They don't understand how to prioritize. They are bound by an agenda that is not what they should be in the current situation worldwide.

My friend who is a RET. ARMY COL. His son, I knew since he was a CPT, is now a 2 Star. He has said to his Father, that everyone is afraid to make waves, they have to go with the skewed "dogma" coming down from the very top, etc. He, if I know him as I did when he was a CPT, he does all he can without being a "target". But he knows he can't do anything if he gets thrown out of the Army. For not following the priorities coming from the very top.

Again, the problem starts at the very top. As we learned as young officers, you are responsible for everything those in your command does and fails to do.

Yes, that last sentence is correct and important.

Aid to Taiwan has changed slightly, but has been substantially increased. The change means that most of the money going to them is in the form of loans rather than grants, not surprising given their GDP. Approved in the last Congress, fortunately.

Xi has seen how the world responded to Putin, and a war could really hurt his economy, which is his real weapon against the west. China has done almost nothing for Putin other than some showmanship.

The "bristling" defensive plans for Taiwan vs conventional forces takes advantage of their rugged terrain and medium weapons systems designed to wage a logistically difficult and costly war against an invader, as I understand it. Looming behind all of this is the US Navy, a juggernaut compared to the developing Chinese naval forces in their early stages.

But I agree that more should be done. The trick is not to push Xi into a response that might start a war.

The aid infuriates Xi, who rattles sabres with military exercises.

That sounds about right … Xi wants to take Taiwan in one piece, at least for now.

How many are going to sign on for a Cold War Reagan-esque building program when social services need funding? Most people don't really care about anything other than an attack on CONUS and aren't going to be writing any politician asking that the big defense industries get lots and lots of money for weapons to sit in warehouses. Sure we can always just give them for free. Defense never has enough, it's like asking a junky how much drugs does he need.

Most people don't know what is really going on here or in the world. They are self-involved, short-sighted, etc. If all they watch are legacy news networks at 6:00 as well as some others. They know/learn nothing. Currently the US is handing out a lot of freebies, social welfare, etc. To not only US citizens but the 2-3 million from around the world/160 nations being drawn to the US. By the Gov't incentives to cross the Southern Border. Many are not here to work but suck up the freebies …

A Republic's first duty is to protect its citizens. I don't see that happening too much today.

Your right legion but your point your figure a the chump change and not the real criminals.

Actually, we're up to 5 – 6+ MILLION, just since the change of administration a couple of years ago, and the current rate is about 3+ MILLION per year flowing over the border annually, that we know about (probably even more that we don't), on top of the other 30+ MILLION already in the country, so about 10% of our current population now here illegally.

They're warning that the money for social security may run out for those that paid into that ponzi scheme, but there is NO concern over money being available for non-citizens who've broken our laws and are in our country illegally. They're the new "super-citizens" of the country, since they have more rights than those born and living here for decades.

Your right legion but your point your figure a the chump change and not the real criminals.

Not sure which criminals you mean, per se. But a lot of criminals around in many, many places.

Thresher +1