5 ms·
In the quite likely scenario that Iran goes on any longer, the US will become so war exhausted that we will be unable to provide any support for Taiwan.
by 0cf8612b2e1e 6mo ago
In the quite likely scenario that Iran goes on any longer, the US will become so war exhausted that we will be unable to provide any support for Taiwan.
- catlover76 6mo ago[dead]
- carefree-bob 6mo agoThe Iran war is a skirmish by any reasonable measure. It does not exhaust either the US Navy or the Airforce, and the Army isn't even participating. Now I understand it has a large impact because of oil prices and the closing of the strait of hormuz, but don't confuse the economic impact of the closing of shipping lanes with something that "exhausts" the US military. Remember this is the military that spent two decades in Afghanistan and Iraq, using considerably more resources. Those were actual wars, followed by occupations that lasted two decades. And that didn't exhaust the US. In terms of the Naval cost, it is occupying 15% of ships, with zero ships sunk or damaged. I believe there were 13 soldiers killed during strikes on bases in the area. Those bases have been manned for decades and have not exhausted the US Army. Let's maintain some perspective.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 6mo agoI would dispute the depletion of expensive munitions, but I still believe that is largely irrelevant next to political exhaustion. I do not think most Americans would care to defend Taiwan, even against the China boogeyman. The practical realities of losing Chinese goods would be a devastating reality few are prepared to face.
- carefree-bob 6mo agoI agree, political exhaustion is the real constraint. I personally would not be willing to do anything to defend Taiwan from China. But then again, I don't support any of the wars we fought in the middle east, either.
- marklar423 6mo agoJust want to drop this link to the excellent https://acoup.blog/2026/02/13/collections-against-the-state-a-primer-on-terrorism-insurgency-and-protest/ https://acoup.blog/2026/02/13/collections-against-the-state-... which discusses the different costs of war, including how significantly weaker powers can win by increasing political costs.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 6mo agoJP Morgan is predicting $5/gallon gas. Apparently gas prices are one of the best indicators to predict presidential support. In normal times, this seems unfair-lots of external factors can influence gas prices. Rare that you can so directly point towards administration action causing an effect. Every day this conflict continues is going to have devastating political outcomes. I largely subscribe to the belief that Kamala losing was a reflection that people were mad at inflation.
- carefree-bob 6mo agoThe problem here is that gas prices have bifurcated to the point that an "average" doesn't mean much. I'm pretty sure I know how California will vote regardless of the gas price, but gas in Texas and much of the midwest will remain cheap. This map should be eye opening. https://gasprices.aaa.com/ https://gasprices.aaa.com/
- 0cf8612b2e1e 6mo agoFor sure. I am in SoCal, and when I hear people complaining of the “$4 gas”, I can only laugh. I still believe the average represents a real increase being borne across the country, even if it is felt unevenly.
- bdangubic 6mo agoGas is Texas is not that much cheaper than national average and will hit $4 soon if this “war” continues. I have several friends in Texas who are livid about gas prices.
- gozucito 6mo agoThe reality of losing TSMC is no joke either. I remember Covid times when many G20 leaders went to Taiwan begging for some chips so that they could keep exporting cars and other things that need computer chips.
- carefree-bob 6mo agoWhat do you mean by "losing TSMC"? It's not ours. Do you know what does belong to the west? ASML. What makes TSMC actually work.
- poszlem 6mo agoASML is not "yours" too in that case as it happens to be european.
- carefree-bob 6mo agoASML's largest shareholder is Intel, and they rely on a supply chain from American, German, and other western European countries, all on the US leash. But more importantly, ASML does exactly what America tells them to do. And Europe for the most part does as well. Sorry, I wish Europe had the fortitude to not be subordinated to the US, but that's how it is.
- vanviegen 6mo agoIntel does not hold a significant share in ASML anymore. I agree that the US has other 'western' countries 'on a leash'. That used to be an arrangement that was mutually beneficial...
- tick_tock_tick 6mo agoI mean it's literally beholden to the USA congress and it's most meaningful parts are made in the USA. There is a reason why they fall in line with every USA export control and restriction. If ASML is Europe's then I'd say all of Europe is the USA's.
- tick_tock_tick 6mo agoI think people are pointing out how little it actually takes to wage this war against Iran and that there are basically zero costs to the USA to do so. A classic "political exhaustion" requires some degree of meaningful hardship on the USA and a slight gas price increase just isn't enough.
- hedora 6mo agoWait until the fertilizer shortage hits food prices, and the helium shortage actually shuts down semiconductor manufacturing. Those things should be hitting just before election season.
- gozucito 6mo agoDo you know what percentage of THAADs have been used in Iran?
- carefree-bob 6mo agoI get what you are saying, and I was sympathetic to this view in the Ukraine war (where we gave orders of magnitude more munitions than have been spent on Iran). At that time, I believed it "We are running out of missiles, we are running out of shells", etc. But it turns out the US adapted. They increased production, they substituted for next best options, they got other countries to produce for us, and still we have not run out. Not after years of Ukraine. So I am no longer on the "US is running out of munitions" bandwagon. Plus, this military spending increases productive capacity.
- greedo 6mo agoTake a peek at last year's budget for missile production. It's amazingly small, and the production capacity is limited as well. RTX makes both Patriot and SM2/3 missiles, and production is so low that the Navy is going to be using the Patriot in its VLS launchers. Lockheed makes THAAD, around 100/year. That's nothing. A veritable drop in the bucket. PAC-3 production MIGHT hit 650 this year, with a goal of 2000 per annum by 2033!!! SM-6 is about 300/year, and they're hoping to get to 500/year by roughly the same timeframe. SM-3 is even lower at maybe 75/year. The USN has just never prioritized filling their weapons magazines. It's hard to know what missiles were expended in the current Iran War, but you can figure out how many were purchased over the years since it's public info. Then subtract what's been used for training, fighting the Houthis in Yemen etc. Before the war started, total purchases of all PAC-3 were approximately 2500. Some of these were used in training, some donated to Ukraine, and some were part of FMS. Approximately 500 SM-3 missiles have been delivered. Approximately 1100 SM-6 missiles have been delivered.The majority of both the SM-3 and SM-6 are used by the USN, though some allies have made small purchases of both. Unclassified estimates have Iran launching over 3000 ballistic missiles and 4500 drones. US policy for BMs is two missiles each. Not all of these would have been engaged by the US (Israeli systems such as Arrow etc would be tasked with missiles targeting Israel, though Israel also has Patriot through FMS). But it's easy to see where 3000 to 4000 interceptor missiles could have been consumed. Now add in what the USN burned through in the Red Sea when the Houthis started targeting shipping and it's easy to be concerned about magazine depth. And this is just interceptors. It doesn't count Tomahawks, JAASM, etc.
- poszlem 6mo agoThis is a misconception, and honestly it's hubris talking. The US has already burned through a big chunk of its key munitions. More than half of its THAAD interceptors, about a quarter of its Patriot stock, roughly 1,000 total with limited yearly production, and a serious slice of Tomahawks, some of which will take years to replace. Even with ramp ups, you are looking at 3 to 4 years before extra production actually shows up. And for the really constrained systems like GBU-57, cruise missiles tied to Williams engines, or anything needing Chinese gallium, even that timeline is probably optimistic if China keeps export controls in place. And this constant comparison to Iraq or Afghanistan just does not hold up. Those were wars where the US could sit in safe zones and strike from distance. A Taiwan scenario is completely different. It is right on China’s doorstep, against a peer the US has never actually faced at this scale. Even the USSR was not comparable in terms of economic integration or industrial strength. edit: If the ceasefire collapses this Wednesday as Trump has signaled, these numbers will start moving again, and the replacement time estimates will only get worse because the industrial base hasn't yet begun delivering against any of the surge contracts
- dgroshev 6mo agoThe asymmetry with Iraq goes both ways. In Iraq, the goal was regime change and occupation. In Taiwan, the goal is to disrupt the most difficult type of military operation in existence (opposed landing). No one is planning to roll Abramses into Beijing.
- acdha 6mo agoAlso, there is a 0% chance that China has not been closely observing this and updating their plans in case we end up in a hot war. Unlike Iran, they have the resources to mount serious attacks on supply chains, electronic attacks on support infrastructure, and overwhelm defenses – if it came to a head in Taiwan, they’d be willing to trade an uneven number of drones and modern fighters (both significantly outclassing Iran in quality and quantity) to take out hard to replace things like AWACS or THAAD radars. The difference in resupply distance is heavily B skewed in their favor.
- greedo 6mo agoI can't see the interceptor burn through being so low. Doctrine is 2-4 missiles per ballistic target. I've know the OSINT kids have a hard time with something like this since it's all classified and compared to Ukraine much harder to get visual confirmation, but I suspect Patriot use much higher. Hopefully the US has been using more of the PAC-2 than PAC-3 but they may have not been that discreet.
- rurp 6mo agoReports are that the US has exhausted certain key capabilities such as high end missiles and interceptors. We've likely used more interceptors in a month against a fourth rate power than Ukraine has in their entire war against Russia. That's extremely damning and irresponsible from a strategic perspective. Exhausting key functionality like that will absolutely lead to major losses of things like manpower and ships against a near-peer adversary.
- hedora 6mo agoWe were burning a year worth of global patriot manufacturing capacity every day at the beginning of the war. Math says we slowed down and are also running out.
- 0xbadcafebee 6mo agoUS will start a draft and turn up more warfighting manufacturing. They have no way to respond to things other than with violence. Of course they'll lose the fight for Taiwan, but America has no problem fighting stupid wars they then lose.
- MaxHoppersGhost 6mo agoI don't think the US will become too war exhausted for another war. We just got out of one and we're back in one again. Taiwan would get politicians and people fired up.