3 ms·

~1.7 Trillion dollars so we can have a bleeding-edge Ferrari while our "enemies" in the PRC and Russia are still driving around in Yugo 45s So many people seem

by jboog 6y ago

~1.7 Trillion dollars so we can have a bleeding-edge Ferrari while our "enemies" in the PRC and Russia are still driving around in Yugo 45s So many people seem to still buy into the Cold War mindset that we just need the latest bleeding edge platforms or the Soviets are going to invade and we'll all be reading Trotsky. The US and NATO militaries are so far ahead of the Russians and China it's comical to claim another 1.7 trillion dollars for a "ferrari" is a prudent use of taxpayer dollars. China can't even field a blue-water navy yet. I guess they're only about a century behind the US there lol

paganel 6y ago
> The US and NATO militaries are so far ahead of the Russians and China it's comical to claim another 1.7 trillion dollars for a "ferrari" is a prudent use of taxpayer dollars. Russia and China don't need a Yugo to out-speed the US's Ferrari, they have ICBMs and the Russians have nuclear subs that work well enough. And the US's Ferrari did a really, really poor job in the off-road terrains of the Middle East, with Iraq at best a draw (and a huge loss for the local population, but who cares about that?) and a definite defeat in Afghanistan.
- jboog 6y ago
  I'm talking about the conventional fight. Once you get into nukes it's another ballgame. How does the F35 or its cool successor prevent MAD? Iraq and Afgh were counterinsurgency fights. Any China or Russian fight will not be the same. And the US absolutely crushed the Iraqi military within a matter of days in both Desert Storm and OIF. The problem was the "nation building" COIN fight.
themacguffinman 6y ago
Well you certainly don't stay ahead of your adversaries by resting on your laurels.
- manquer 6y ago
  You don't stay ahead by spending way over yours means. it is a key reason the Soviet union collapsed. They were trying match US spending in many sectors and capitalism can outspend communist economies any day. Diverting spending from say infrastructure to miltary does not help a country in the long term.

by jboog 6y ago

paganel 6y ago

> The US and NATO militaries are so far ahead of the Russians and China it's comical to claim another 1.7 trillion dollars for a "ferrari" is a prudent use of taxpayer dollars. Russia and China don't need a Yugo to out-speed the US's Ferrari, they have ICBMs and the Russians have nuclear subs that work well enough. And the US's Ferrari did a really, really poor job in the off-road terrains of the Middle East, with Iraq at best a draw (and a huge loss for the local population, but who cares about that?) and a definite defeat in Afghanistan.

jboog 6y ago
I'm talking about the conventional fight. Once you get into nukes it's another ballgame. How does the F35 or its cool successor prevent MAD? Iraq and Afgh were counterinsurgency fights. Any China or Russian fight will not be the same. And the US absolutely crushed the Iraqi military within a matter of days in both Desert Storm and OIF. The problem was the "nation building" COIN fight.

themacguffinman 6y ago

Well you certainly don't stay ahead of your adversaries by resting on your laurels.

manquer 6y ago
You don't stay ahead by spending way over yours means. it is a key reason the Soviet union collapsed. They were trying match US spending in many sectors and capitalism can outspend communist economies any day. Diverting spending from say infrastructure to miltary does not help a country in the long term.