4 ms·

As it turns out, that's what they were doing this whole time, at least with the Javelin program. Not something you can design and ship overnight. The military-

As it turns out, that's what they were doing this whole time, at least with the Javelin program. Not something you can design and ship overnight. The military-industrial complex exists for sure, but it's good to have high-tech arms when you need them.

cbanek 4y ago
Yeah, it certainly exists, and always did. In greater numbers than people know due to classified defense programs and their budgets. The real problem is we spend TOO much money on defense compared to other needs. Do we really need so many aircraft carriers? Is that really what is required these days? Or submarines? Or even just soldiers. Defense is expensive. With drones becoming the main way of warfare, I wonder if aircraft carriers are on their way out, the same way that WW2 was the last gasp for the battleship. Drones are cheaper, smaller, less vulnerable, less risk, less human loss of life, etc. Fun fact, did you know the Gatling gun was invented to reduce the amount of people killed in war? Oops.
- vbezhenar 4y ago
  Big ships are obsolete. One missed rocket and it sunk. Russian Moscow ship proved it hard way. Rockets are too powerful and too precise and you can’t count on 100% rockets being intercepted. Modern war machines should be cheap and autonomous. We need some kind of sci-fi power field before big machines would become viable again. If US would engage in war with some big army, like Chinese, Russian or European their carriers will sunk every day.
  - kfajdsl 4y ago
    You can see this with stuff like the burgeoning market for air launched effects/loitering munitions. Fortunately, the US military is investing heavily into these kinds of systems.
  - nradov 4y ago
    There is no way to make cheap, autonomous war machines that can operate at extended ranges like in the Pacific theater. Anything we build to use there will have to be large and expensive in order to meet the mission requirements, regardless of whether it has humans on board or not. For example, the US Navy and Air Force 6th-generation tactical aircraft programs will probably be optionally manned, but will be larger than their 5th-generation predecessors (F-22 and F-35) in order to reduce reliance on vulnerable tankers. Unit cost will be upwards of $300M. Big ships are vulnerable, but far from obsolete. There are many ways to break the kill chain before missile point defense comes into play. Lessons learned from battles in the congested Black Sea littorals don't necessarily have much relevance elsewhere.
- nradov 4y ago
  Drones are far from becoming the main way of warfare. That is science fiction, not reality. The small, cheap drones lack the range and sensors needed to fight in the Pacific theater, where aircraft carriers and submarines are the most effective platforms. And autonomous flight software is still very primitive, so any complex drone missions require remote piloting via satellite connections; those satellites are increasingly vulnerable to ASAT weapons. Drone technology will continue to improve, but it's never going to be cheap to project power over long distances. The defense budget will continue to increase inexorably, until we hit a real fiscal crisis or just give up and decide to allow China to dominate.
- djbebs 4y ago
  You could put the us military budget at zero, and you'd still have an unsustainable high public deficit. The fact of the matter is that welfare and welfare alone is the highest expenditure by far, and any cuts anywhere else will be meaningless unless deep and permanent cuts are made to the welfare state.
  - stuaxo 4y ago
    That has already done that in the US. Maybe if healthcare was sorted, all those profits not going into the system could go back into peoples pockets and there would be space for a little more tax to pay for welfare. Give poor people money and they spend it, boosting the economy.
    - nradov 4y ago
      How much profit is there in the healthcare system as a percentage of the federal deficit?

cbanek 4y ago

Yeah, it certainly exists, and always did. In greater numbers than people know due to classified defense programs and their budgets. The real problem is we spend TOO much money on defense compared to other needs. Do we really need so many aircraft carriers? Is that really what is required these days? Or submarines? Or even just soldiers. Defense is expensive. With drones becoming the main way of warfare, I wonder if aircraft carriers are on their way out, the same way that WW2 was the last gasp for the battleship. Drones are cheaper, smaller, less vulnerable, less risk, less human loss of life, etc. Fun fact, did you know the Gatling gun was invented to reduce the amount of people killed in war? Oops.

vbezhenar 4y ago
Big ships are obsolete. One missed rocket and it sunk. Russian Moscow ship proved it hard way. Rockets are too powerful and too precise and you can’t count on 100% rockets being intercepted. Modern war machines should be cheap and autonomous. We need some kind of sci-fi power field before big machines would become viable again. If US would engage in war with some big army, like Chinese, Russian or European their carriers will sunk every day.
- kfajdsl 4y ago
  You can see this with stuff like the burgeoning market for air launched effects/loitering munitions. Fortunately, the US military is investing heavily into these kinds of systems.
- nradov 4y ago
  There is no way to make cheap, autonomous war machines that can operate at extended ranges like in the Pacific theater. Anything we build to use there will have to be large and expensive in order to meet the mission requirements, regardless of whether it has humans on board or not. For example, the US Navy and Air Force 6th-generation tactical aircraft programs will probably be optionally manned, but will be larger than their 5th-generation predecessors (F-22 and F-35) in order to reduce reliance on vulnerable tankers. Unit cost will be upwards of $300M. Big ships are vulnerable, but far from obsolete. There are many ways to break the kill chain before missile point defense comes into play. Lessons learned from battles in the congested Black Sea littorals don't necessarily have much relevance elsewhere.
nradov 4y ago
Drones are far from becoming the main way of warfare. That is science fiction, not reality. The small, cheap drones lack the range and sensors needed to fight in the Pacific theater, where aircraft carriers and submarines are the most effective platforms. And autonomous flight software is still very primitive, so any complex drone missions require remote piloting via satellite connections; those satellites are increasingly vulnerable to ASAT weapons. Drone technology will continue to improve, but it's never going to be cheap to project power over long distances. The defense budget will continue to increase inexorably, until we hit a real fiscal crisis or just give up and decide to allow China to dominate.
djbebs 4y ago
You could put the us military budget at zero, and you'd still have an unsustainable high public deficit. The fact of the matter is that welfare and welfare alone is the highest expenditure by far, and any cuts anywhere else will be meaningless unless deep and permanent cuts are made to the welfare state.
- stuaxo 4y ago
  That has already done that in the US. Maybe if healthcare was sorted, all those profits not going into the system could go back into peoples pockets and there would be space for a little more tax to pay for welfare. Give poor people money and they spend it, boosting the economy.
  - nradov 4y ago
    How much profit is there in the healthcare system as a percentage of the federal deficit?