3 ms·

I don't want to get into a measuring competition, but is there a military that does logistics better than the US? I mean this very seriously and not at all in a

by SEJeff 3y ago

I don't want to get into a measuring competition, but is there a military that does logistics better than the US? I mean this very seriously and not at all in a jingoist way. Look at how fast the US went from Kuwait to taking Baghdad international airport in the beginning of OIF. I recall that the entire world was like HOLY CRAP and had no idea how good the US was at logistics up until that part. “Infantry wins battles, logistics wins wars.” US Army General John J. Pershing, on battle in WWI

wolverine876 3y ago
There is no question you're right, as far as anything I've read, but is that a matter resources - of budget (the US having an extremely large one) and of long-term investment (systems, transport, bases world-wide, training, etc.) - or is it a matter of the US being somehow particularly talented in that field? At the same time, a war with China would likely be focused, at least, in the western Pacific. China's supply lines would be so much shorter - much of it would be in Chinese waters, the US would have to cross the Pacific ocean - than it's hard to believe the US would have a logistics advantage. The US is working hard to preposition bases, supplies, forces, alliances, etc. But the entirety of China, for millennia, has been effectively prepositioned. Again, the war would be disaster for all, regardless.
- nradov 3y ago
  For a national military to have solid logistics requires the country's culture to have a decent educational system, a strong work ethic, and a reasonably low corruption level. China has the first two and they're working on the third. In the past much of the stuff they would need to fight a real war has been straight up stolen by military officers and Party cadres. (I am aware that there is corruption and waste in US military logistics but it has been relatively lower than their adversaries.)
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    > For a national military to have solid logistics requires the country's culture to have a decent educational system, a strong work ethic, and a reasonably low corruption level. Interesting. I can see how those factors would help, at least. Is that a well-accepted theory? Whose is it? > China has the first two and they're working on the third. Corruption is a disease of dictatorships. Without a free press, opposition parties, separation of powers, and the public able to vote out the government, nothing really stops it. Imagine how corrupt a US president's administration would become with none of those things to stop it, after about 10-20 years. It's also the purpose of authoritarians, in a sense: You can see it in the unprecedented, brazen corruption of neo-authoritarians and their supporters in Western countries. They want power for the fruits of corruption (perhaps among other things). IIRC Chinese history, it's long been taught that history goes a cycle of three phases (my memory of the details will be off here, but this is the idea): Chaos, when there is no stable government. Ascent, where a new dynasty seizes power, and the country grows and flourishes. Decent, where the dynasty loses momentum, corruption grows, and instability grows. Then a return to Chaos. I'm sure the Communists, who are not unlike a dynasty in many ways, are very aware of that model of history.

by SEJeff 3y ago

wolverine876 3y ago

There is no question you're right, as far as anything I've read, but is that a matter resources - of budget (the US having an extremely large one) and of long-term investment (systems, transport, bases world-wide, training, etc.) - or is it a matter of the US being somehow particularly talented in that field? At the same time, a war with China would likely be focused, at least, in the western Pacific. China's supply lines would be so much shorter - much of it would be in Chinese waters, the US would have to cross the Pacific ocean - than it's hard to believe the US would have a logistics advantage. The US is working hard to preposition bases, supplies, forces, alliances, etc. But the entirety of China, for millennia, has been effectively prepositioned. Again, the war would be disaster for all, regardless.

nradov 3y ago
For a national military to have solid logistics requires the country's culture to have a decent educational system, a strong work ethic, and a reasonably low corruption level. China has the first two and they're working on the third. In the past much of the stuff they would need to fight a real war has been straight up stolen by military officers and Party cadres. (I am aware that there is corruption and waste in US military logistics but it has been relatively lower than their adversaries.)
- wolverine876 3y ago
  > For a national military to have solid logistics requires the country's culture to have a decent educational system, a strong work ethic, and a reasonably low corruption level. Interesting. I can see how those factors would help, at least. Is that a well-accepted theory? Whose is it? > China has the first two and they're working on the third. Corruption is a disease of dictatorships. Without a free press, opposition parties, separation of powers, and the public able to vote out the government, nothing really stops it. Imagine how corrupt a US president's administration would become with none of those things to stop it, after about 10-20 years. It's also the purpose of authoritarians, in a sense: You can see it in the unprecedented, brazen corruption of neo-authoritarians and their supporters in Western countries. They want power for the fruits of corruption (perhaps among other things). IIRC Chinese history, it's long been taught that history goes a cycle of three phases (my memory of the details will be off here, but this is the idea): Chaos, when there is no stable government. Ascent, where a new dynasty seizes power, and the country grows and flourishes. Decent, where the dynasty loses momentum, corruption grows, and instability grows. Then a return to Chaos. I'm sure the Communists, who are not unlike a dynasty in many ways, are very aware of that model of history.