> It used to be a safe assumption that "the military is always 30 years ahead". IDK if that isn't still true about the US military. The most high-tech equipmen

> It used to be a safe assumption that "the military is always 30 years ahead". IDK if that isn't still true about the US military. The most high-tech equipment sent to Ukraine is still decades old. Israel receives more up-to-date equipment but we haven't seen them deal with $400 drones yet -- it's likely they'd fare much better. We actually don't know how far US military tech is ahead because we haven't seen that tech being actively used in the battlefield. I think the greater issue is that if the US were to enter a conflict where that tech would be necessary, it would likely face an opponent that also has access to nuclear weapons and then that tech is unlikely to remain relevant for long unless it can prevent every single nuclear weapon from launching and arming.