From today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report:
Pressed by media as to why President Biden decided to send universally-reviled “cluster bombs” for Ukraine to use, the president said the quiet part out loud: “Because we’re running out of ammunition.” Suddenly the narrative carefully built by Biden’s neocon foreign policy team has been “cluster bombed” by reality. Also today…looking ahead at the NATO summit set to kick off tomorrow.
Reprinted from The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity.
These munitions are next to useless for the purpose intended.
Their age means the dud rate will be astronomical.
Go fig…
These munitions are a perfect fit for the purpose intended — because the purpose intended is to draw down old stocks of obsolete munitions and fork over big bucks to “defense” contractors to replace them with new, more expensive, stuff.
Stupid conjecture and dead wrong.
You don’t think they’ll replenish the stockpiles and think the suggestion is stupid.
Wanna buy a bridge?
Running out of weapons?
I was told several times here our superior manufacturing prowness in the West would be a huge plus in overcoming Russia.
Logistics and other rot was mentioned….lol.
Believing the military (and the military-industrial complex’s representatives) again? You generally chide others when they believe something from those sources that you don’t want to be true.
We’ve been hearing the “running out of weapons” schtick since before I was born. The bomber gap! The missile gap! Russia has more nukes than us, gotta BUY BUY BUY.
And yet if you punch “live fire exercise” into Google, here are just a few of the results you get for the last few months alone:
U.S. HH-60G Pave Hawks Carry Out Live-Fire Exercise in Hungary
Philippines, U.S. hold live-fire exercises focused on territorial defence
Large-scale live-fire exercise by US, South Korean armies returns after 6-year lull
U.S., South Korea hold largest-ever live-fire drill near DMZ
NATO rockets fly from the Black Sea coast in support of exercise Saber Guardian 23
Are they just faking all those exercises, too, sitting around their barracks lounges watching Psych reruns when the press release says they’re supposed to be blowing shit up?
The military doesn’t hesitate to cancel stuff when the resources are needed elsewhere. I’ve dry-fired mortars for lack of ammo when the balloon looked like it was going up somewhere and they packed all the rounds on trucks to ship to the coast for embark. I sat on the tarmac in Nevada waiting in vain for a C-130 that was suddenly needed for Somalia (I’d watched the Rangers getting dragged down the street in Mogadishu on the TV at an e-club a few days earlier).
They’re fielding all kinds of weapons and firing all kinds of ammo in real life, while the MIC’s pet politicians yell from the Capitol rooftop that “we’re running out” and need more billions.
Really Knapp?
Germany can not replace the tanks they gave them as Ikraine loses them.
The upcoming arms shipments are starting to be arms to be manufactured, not the intial staunch that has been coming out of our stores.
Did we not have here a blurb about how European leaders are starting to be vocal about Ukrainian lack of thankfulness for what they have been given?
Not exactly the voice of those who have never-ending supplies
You are reaching once again, focusing on trying to tell me I’m wrong in your always present simplistic way of hack writers.
Are you going to refer to logistics again?
That quite honestly is always good for a laugh at you.
It’s Friday and Knapp is on his schedule for picking a fight for the weekend…..
You do know this is a pattern with you?
I pick fights every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
But I’m just interested in why you’re all “don’t believe the military” whenever what the military is saying disagrees with what you want to be true, and then turn around with “but the military says” when the military is saying something that agrees with what you want to be true.
There is one, and only one, factor affecting the ability of the US and the EU regimes to continue supplying Ukraine with more weapons, for a tiny fraction of their government spending, than the Russians can supply for themselves even if they dedicated their entire industrial capacity to nothing BUT weapons.
That factor is the political will to do so.
Can that political will be negatively affected by everything from Ukrainian ingratitude to local popular dissent? Absolutely.
But as a mechanistic problem, it’s not difficult:
The US regime especially, but its toady regimes as well, has maintained its industrial capacity on a war footing for more than 80 years now. The goodies we get as consumers are things we get when General Motors, Boeing, et al. aren’t dedicating as much of their capacity to producing military stuff — and they’re both geared to and glad to get back to dedicating that capacity any time it’s wanted, because the money’s better.
The Russian regime, since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, on the other hand, has largely let its industrial capacity move toward things that raise its people’s standard of living (as long as the oligarchs get their rake-offs), since its regime hasn’t been particularly expansionist or militaristic, other than trying to keep additional parts of its old empire from floating away.
Which is better than what the US has done … until a war comes along and the opponent can manufacture ten howitzer shells to your one without breaking a sweat.
Perhaps you ought to explore today’s news about how much stores we need to have on hand?
Evidently we only need a month supply or so for a very hot war because, get this, we can ramp up manufactoring in those few short weeks to keep the supply going at needed levels.
This conclusion has occurred because our stores have been used up.
It’s curious that we are running out as reported very widely by a myriad of corners who have quite a variety of sources that helped them come to it when they believe we could easily produce these shells when we are using them in a future war to protect your cheap electronics imports.
As to your pattern….
I’m being serious here, you rarely pick fights during the week but when the weekend appears you do.
No one’s perfect except One and that’s a huge argument in itself.
Well, I try to pick fights during the week. Maybe it’s that I just get fewer takers.
If “our stores” have been “used up,” then where is all the ammo coming from that is being used in constant live fire exercises, including two or three just in the last couple of months (one with the Phillippines, one with South Korea, and one in Europe) that are advertised as “the largest ever?” Does the Munitions Fairy drop off extra loads of stuff that don’t come from “our stores” for such events?
Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in August of 1990. By the time I arrived in Saudi Arabia on January 1, 1991, at least two auto manufacturers had switched assembly lines to producing Hummers and they were coming off the line. We used old stocks of mortar ammo during our train-up. When we arrived in Saudi, newly manufacture lots of ammo (boxes dated 9-90 and 10/90) was coming off a ship in al Jubail for us to pick up. It had been manufactured in the US and transported by ship halfway around the world in four months from a standing start. In that same time frame, the Marine Corps had managed to determine that the M1 main battle tank was too slow to transport (they were so heavy that only one could be carried on a C-5A), un-mothballed its M-60s (the same plane could carry three of them), and got them into theater before they could round up the troops who were experienced with them (we lost a squad leader from our reserve mortar platoon because he had been a tanker on active duty; they needed him to be a tank commander).
There is no question of “running out” unless the politicians don’t want to spend the money. Do you know any politicians who don’t want to spend money?
You really like to refer to history to make your points don’t you?
I referred to the “latest” Washington strategy in regards to how low we can take our stores which has just been revised (30 days with the belief we can ramp up production to the levels needed within 30 days to maintain usage rates) and you went back to a past war….lol.
You really need to try harder.
If I was a military procurement planner, I would certainly prefer more than a 30 day cushion. But there are no munitions for which the US could not easily be on a full-scale war production footing within 90.
Beyond munitions, maybe longer to get going, but not that long. The US went from beginning to design the “Liberty Ship” in 1940 to launching an average of three of them every two days from 1941-45. For weapons systems that are already designed, tested, and approved, the US could be at full-on “World War 2 all over again” production levels within six months, and probably without having to ban the sale of tires for civilian vehicles, ration food, and other things likely to create popular resentment.
More history as you triple the lead time to 60 days past where the stores stand today?
You really need this weekend because this is getting comical.
You have not the slightest idea where the stores stand today. You just believe the claims of people you’re always telling other people to not believe.
Knapp come-on, get out of this rut you are in.
Various commentators from a vary wide perspective which shows different “sources” and other means have come to the conclusion the stores are bare.
The new, we only need 30 days of supply, is only one very obvious sign stuff is getting short.
Another is more and more promised shipments are goods to be produced, not stuff out of stores.
If you want to postulate the 155’s are not as low as they share, sure, there’s likely a recognition they could not hold a advance by the Russians without them.
But is that because they are “short””on other stuff or perhaps they are losing too much artillary and they need to be able to throw alot of stuff with what they are able to keep shooting until they lose them too?
I know you are clinging to your belief the West’s production ability can always over power Russia’s but that is not happening in that “perfect” way you perceive it should be.
“The new, we only need 30 days of supply, is only one very obvious sign stuff is getting short.”
How’s that? “Just In Time” production and shipping have been non-military commercial practice for decades. It’s not an approach I’d recommend for large military forces, but neither is it an approach that I’d find surprising.
Stop it…
Khanna from California, a Democrat, has just shared his observation “we are running out of ammo….” yet you are persisting.
Now, after after you previously shared that you personally would triple that 30 days are trying to J in T.
They are running out of stuff in Ukraine and you’ve brought up J in T?
You are great with theory but, dude if they can’t even keep Ukraine supplied how would we keep ourselves supplied utilizing j in t?
Theory is not working….
Where did Khanna “observe” that “we are running out of ammo?”
Jesus Tapdancing Christ. You know these people like. You’ve mentioned that they lie, and you’ve mocked others for believing them. And then when they something that they’ve been saying for 80 years, falsely Every. Fucking. Time, but that you want to believe for some unknown reason, all of a sudden anyone who doesn’t believe them is a fool.
Read about the “bomber gap.” Read about the “missile gap.” Read about the gigantic amounts of ordnance that are blown in place at the end of every US war because there’s plenty, and it’s cheaper and easy to make more than to bother shipping the stuff home. And then read the story of every NDAA during your lifetime and how generals and congressmen run around screaming that they’re ALMOST OUT and that NATIONAL SECURITY will be endangered if they don’t get to SPEND MORE.
Go to Brietbart or CNN.
Bb shared about a CNN interview today.
I know you like to refer to history but we are speaking about today’s stores getting low today not about how they overcame supply issues in the past.
Honestly, your insistance to ignore the recent reporting about Ukraine’s suppliers not able to keep them supplied is getting ridiculous.
Your silly, “why do you believe them now?” is a internet comment section cheap retort btw.
It’s just another “tell” that you are grasping at just about anything in your quest to argue a point darn near no one holds; the West is keeping Ukraine fully supplied.
I just can not believe you are clinging to that, but then here we are.
There aren’t very many sites that I never, under any circumstances, go to. Breitbart is one of them.
I shared it was a CNN interview. To use, “I don’t do Brietbart” as why you did not bother to verify whether he shared that or not before you did your snarky, “if I did not hear it, so it did not happen” claim is kind of boring and a cheap way to avoid on your part
If you want to claim Ukraine is not using up our stores and we will all of a sudden will produce more than enough to not only replenish (why are they getting low if we have this ability?:-) but to get enough to them that the always present complaint they are low on munitions will stop as well, go for it.
It’s not true but you seem to be married to your, “the west has superior logistics” so muchch you’re getting desperate to make your points.
Plus you really are getting comical in your refusal to admit your “logistics” is not working as you claim it is.
I can’t wait to read another reference to a past war as if that proves a thing about this one.
So far as I can tell, the “logistics” situation has not changed.
The Russians have been effectively stalled for more than a year now. It took them eight months to secure Bakhmut, and they have yet to follow up on that by securing Donetsk as a whole.
The reason they have been stalled is that the US/EU/NATO continue to deliver more and better arms and munitions to the Ukrainians than the Russians can deliver to themselves. And they can continue to do so indefinitely.
Stop it.
The lack of munitions is a constant refrain from the Ukrainians and now we are hearing the US is reducing what they believe they need on hand.
The media is filled with reporting on low stock and the inability to replenish.
Everyone from NPR, WSJ, and the WaPo has reporting this and I can list European sharing about the same issue in regards to themselves.
If you haven’t paid attention little alone read a few disparent voices (and thereby having different ways they came to the conclusion) then that’s on you.
You are beginning to be clown-like in your refusal to pay attention because you are so married to a belief you formed early in this war that is being disproven.
You keep claiming they have “stalled” and use that as “proof” they are short on arms.
That’s a knee-slapper, but that is the type of comment board “analysis” one gets when you try to take someone seriously and that’s on me at the end.
Keep with it, you’ll soon not be able to escape the realization you are wrong.
The media is filled with reporting — and you believe the reporting you want to believe, and don’t believe the reporting you don’t want to believe, and get upset when anyone else doesn’t view the reporting through your personal want to believe / want to disbelieve lens.
I’m reading much of the same reporting you are (although I don’t do Breitbart, Gateway Pundit, etc. because I have limited time and try to avoid stuff that I know in advance will be at least half nonsense). And in that reporting, I look not just at claims, but at evidence as to whether the claims are true.
In the reporting there are claims — from people who have a vested interest in increasing US spending on munitions — that the US is low on munitions.
In the reporting there are also claims that the US armed forces have been increasing the frequency, length, and size of their live-fire exercises, which is not something you do when you are low on munitions.
So I can believe Claim X, made by people who have a vested interest in getting people to believe Claim X, or I can believe the actual behavior of people who can be expected to act one way if Claim X is true and another way if Claim X is false, and are acting like Claim X is false, and remember all the previous times when Claim X was made and turned out to be false, which it always has.
Does that mean I couldn’t be wrong? No. I very well could be. But I’m operating on the most rational assessment I can make of the best evidence I have, instead of believing what I want to believe and screeching that anyone who doesn’t believe it with me is a big ol’ poopyhead.
I had no idea FOX News Sunday was going to cover the topic but you really picked a bad position to be digging a hole about.
Please spent a few moments on the net doing some research….lol.
Not sure what you think I’m “digging a hole” about.
I have an opinion based on my assessment of the known facts, of a long history, and of the believability of political statements.
You have an opinion as well.
At least one of us is wrong.
Maybe someday we’ll know which one, or if it’s both.
Either way, no biggie.
Digging a hole refrrs to ignoring new facts/data as it comes in.
Did you read Ron Paul’s contribution here perhaps?
If I was you, I’d explore why they are running out of 155’s and are unable to keep them supplied with other stuff.
I’d also start questionning abilities to fight a hot war against a similar enemy instead of our recent goat herder wars and sustain ourselves until production ramps up.
There’s reasons why this sipply issue is happening on several sides (political will, manufacture recalcitrantrance because of several issues; the “why” is going to be interesting as will the upcoming “solutions” and how they will use the solutions to expand influence, power, and the money to be made plus more ) .
One interesting tidbit about the low supplies……
Taiwan is said to be taking munitions out of their inventory to help out because they are burning through so much.
Looks like we need to put off that war until we get those stocks replenished in a few years.
Look into how long some are saying it will take to replenish our stocks to prewar levels too.
Those numbers I’ve been hearing have to be the outer time if things don’t go well (several years for Stingers for instance) but even the minimun times estimated can’t be great either.
“If I was you, I’d explore why they are running out of 155’s and are unable to keep them supplied with other stuff.”
And if I was you, I’d question whether they are running out of 155s and are unable to keep them supplied with other stuff.
Generals and politicians have been saying 24/7 that they are running out of [insert any item here] for more than 60 years now … and yet somehow they always turn out to have had it after all.
If that was not the case, I might take their word for it. But it is the case, so I don’t consider their word to be good evidence.
Are you still trying to keep your claims going?
Is Ron Paul wrong?
His newest effort shared here says you are wrong.
Is everyone wrong but you?
Put the shovel down …..
We’ll know whether I’m right or wrong eventually.
Ron Paul has, so far as I can tell, been wrong about pretty much everything for the last 12-18 months. He’s let his (justified) hatred of the US military-industrial complex drive him to mistake his “oughts” for “ises.” Or, more likely, just given McAdams control of the show’s line.
5 days of 155’s take 30 days to manufacture (shared by Ingraham while interviewing Vance tonight).
You are ignoring way too much.
I’m ignoring claims of shortages that we’ve been hearing for a year, and that resemble past false claims of shortages, and that are belied by the fact that shells continue to be fired and to explode.
When and if the shells stop arriving, getting loaded, getting fired, and exploding, THEN I’ll suspect there may be shortages. Claims by known liars who have continuously lied about the same thing for 60 years aren’t evidence.
One thing that I doubt you’re ignoring, but instead suspect you just haven’t heard about, is the $402 million in funding that’s been passed through to Bulgaria for 800,000 155mm shells.
The US plan is to ramp up to from 14k to 90k shells per month by the end of 2024, but it’s not obvious that that ramp-up means they’ll be adding 4k shells per month, every month, to the total for 18 months. They could starting by simply adding production shifts to the existing plants, getting a fairly big bump almost immediately, getting up to, say, 75k per month this year and then adding one new line or plant over the next year to get to 90k. It’s not necessarily linear.
On the other hand, they also seem to be in the middle of converting to new generations of shells with more capabilities at the same time they’re trying to add capacity, which might slow the capacity additions.
But the shells are clearly still arriving. Those explosions don’t happen by magic, they happen by shells being available and getting fired.
Lol…
You admit you have been ignoring this for a year and a half.
Perhaps you ought to pay attention instead of sticking your fingers in your ears?
I know being the lone voice on this must be fun for you but you are being ridiculous at this point or perhaps obstinate is better descriptive term?
Still haven’t taken that remedial “How to Read English for Comprehension” course, I see.
What a ass.
You have just shared you’ve been ignoring this for a year and a half and now you decided to insult me.
Is Vance wrong?
How about Paul?
Napolitano?
Is he wrong?
Who believes as you do?
Drop some names Knapp or are you the only lonely voice claiming all this talk of military stores being low is a lie?
Come on Knapp name some one credible that believes there are plenty of 155’s and we are being lied to.
You can’t can you?
You are beclowning yourself but continue.
“You have just shared you’ve been ignoring this for a year and a half ”
You have just shared that when you realize you’ve painted yourself into a corner, you’ll start lying to try and bluff your way out (that being the only plausible alternative explanation to a reading comprehension deficit on your part).
I have stated an opinion. And of course I think that opinion is correct. Which means that I think anyone who disagrees with that opinion is incorrect.
And someday, we may know whether I was right or wrong.
“Come on Knapp name some one credible that believes there are plenty of 155’s and we are being lied to.”
Sure:
Me.
So comical and typical of you
You are so adament that we are being lied to about the state of military stocks and you feel the need to reply to me and start a big long thread.
We even have a offering here today from the Libertarian perspective that we are running out.
Why don’t you put your opinion to the test?
Write a column sharing your opinion that we have plenty on hand especially those 155’s.
Come on, it’s really easy to share in a thread but let’s see you write something and get it published that contradicts everyone on this.
Do it Knapp, your adamant beliefs deserve to be shared with a much wider audience.
I’m sure you can convince everyone…….lol.
I did not say that we are being lied to about the state of military stocks.
I said that the claims of people and institutions which have lied continuously for decades about the state of military stocks is not evidence concerning the state of military stocks.
There’s a difference.
The facts on the ground — increased tempo of live-fire exercises — indicate that we are probably being lied to about the state of military stocks, but unlike you I don’t pretend to know for sure.
Here’s an oldie but a goodie:
“The General Accounting Office predicted that the Air Force would face severe parts shortages if a conflict extended beyond 30 days because of a practice of using war reserve stocks during peacetime.” — “GAO Calls for New Program to Assess Defense Contractor Profitability,” Inside the Pentagon, September 27, 1990.
That was five months before Desert Shield/Desert Storm ended. And whaddayaknow, the shortages never ended up happening.
Predictions/claims of shortages are routine.
Actual shortages other than very short-term and very item/location-specific ones (e.g. there was a week or two where they couldn’t haul food into Saudi Arabia fast enough to feed the troops three squares a day) haven’t been a thing since the early days of World War Two, for the simple reason that since World War 2, the primary function of the US government has been to throw money into the maw of the military-industrial complex as fast as humanly possible and warehouse the output.
More history as if that proves thing.
You appear to only have enough confidence in your belief that no one holds about supply on hand to keep replying to me whenever I comment on it.
Today this site shares a tidbit from a Libertarian site that comports with my position, not yours.
Publish something that shares your position if you can convince anyone.
Otherwise you are beclowning yourself by only trying to engage me.
You tried J in T, is 6 sigma next or one its clones in your quest to convince me we really are maintaining stocks while suppling everything needed?
Or will you man up and publish something for a wider audience so more can laugh at you?
I’m not particularly worried one way or another about whether I “engage” you.
There is a situation. I have an opinion on that situation. I share that opinion. Eventually that opinion may be proven right or wrong. It’s not like I have money riding on the outcome or anything.
Pretty much the only dog I had in this hunt vis a vis you specifically was your “no one trusts the MSM, no one trusts the military, why would you trust the MSM, why would you trust the military … hey, wait a minute, the MSM/military said something I agree with, they are obviously correct and truthful” schtick.
Still beclowning yourself I see.
You constantly decide you need to engage with me on this topic yet you don’t have the balls to actually write and publish your opinion that counters public figures opinions that even this site is sharing.
You obviously can’t write anything of that sort that won’t be laughed at prior to a big fat “NO! We won’t publish such nonsence!” can you?
What, you mean an op-ed? It seems like a more … boutique … topic than usual, but I might.
There is no opinion I hold that I don’t have the balls to hold publicly. That doesn’t mean I waste op-ed time and ink on stuff that I don’t expect newspapers to be interested in. Controversy sells. Banal/generic observations like “I generally don’t trust the serially untrustworthy to tell me the truth,” not as much.
So where’s your published piece detailing your balderdash?
Seems to me you only enough confidence in that hilarious opinion of yours to only to browbeat me with inane history lessons.
Everyone would love a go at it but you won’t because you know, at the end, you are so wrong.
I said I may write a piece on the matter. And I may.
But it may be a little while, as I’m trying to keep the ratio of op-eds I write on the Ukraine war down to 1 out of every 50 or so, and one just went out an hour or so ago (I was surprised at how quickly the Orange County Register and its associated chain picked this one up).
They needed filler around the ads.
You won’t write a thing about this all being a lie about munitions supply because we both know you are wrong.
So wrong it’s laughable…..
Tomorrow this site will likely yet another story about running out of munitions but you won’t write a thing sharing your BS will you?
You only will try to browbeat me with inane history lessons and J in T references because you won’t even try to get anyone to publish such nonsence.
I won’t write a thing about this all being a lie about munitions supply because we both know I said no such fucking thing.
You’re back to making up something you wish I’d said because that’s easier than arguing with what I actually said, which is:
Known liars saying X is not evidence that X is true.
Lo
You have devoted a whole weekend over this and now you claim you never claimed that.
Do you where clown make-up while you beclown yourself?
I know I’m being an ass to you but you started this and kept with the whole weekend and now you are claiming you never claimed there is not suppy issues.
Why can’t you just admit you are wrong about your idiotic “logistics”?
I devoted most of my weekend to helping my mechanic replace the lower control arms, AC compressor/condenser, etc., on my wife’s car (after helping him get the torque tube and transmission out of someone else’s Corvette to get it off the lift). Mocking pseudonymous Internet randos like you isn’t nearly as difficult or time-consuming as you seem to believe.
You are such a 🤡.
We both know this is a constant refrain of yours that because of superior logistics the west is able to keep Ukraine fully supplied while Russia’s manufacturing capacity is unable to.
How many times have you tried to share that complete nonsence whenever I make a comment about munition supplies?
A dozen? You sure seem to believe a couple of buzz words and some history “proves” something….or is it just you believe terms are a substitute for real scholarship?
How long will it take to replenish our Javelins?
Stingers?
155’s?
I really want to hear how J and T is working out for your fantasies.
Logistics, another farcical term of yours, is yet another bit of comedy of yours. Why don’t your share how that is working?
Beclown yourself some more….
Or just admit you are full of it.
“We both know this is a constant refrain of yours that because of superior logistics the west is able to keep Ukraine fully supplied while Russia’s manufacturing capacity is unable to.”
No, we don’t both know that, because you making shit up to pretend I said doesn’t constitute knowing that I said it.
We both know that my constant refrain is that because of larger industrial capacity and superior logistics capabilities, the west is able to keep Ukraine supplied at a fraction of the drain on its economy that Russia requires to keep itself supplied.
You also seem to have made up a phrase (“J and T”) for me to try to decipher. I’ll guess that you are referring to “JIT” (“Just In Time”) logistics practices? When I was in manufacturing I considered it a dumb way to make balance sheets look more attractive by running lower inventories, but it seems to have caught on, so yes, I assume that the defense industry has moved toward it.
It won’t take me any time at all to replenish my Javelins, Stingers, or 155s, as I have none.
Do you even pay attention to what you reply to me?
You referred to J and T when you tried to explain away the decision to keep less munition on hand.
You brought it up and now the simpleton you are must need me to spell it out, Just in Time as you used it.
You also keep digging a hole with your inane logistics, don’t you?
Superior logistics can keep Ukraine supplied?
Are you kidding?
You actually are repeating that?
What a loon!
Those superior logistics can not keep up with Ukraine’s usage and everyone is reporting that today yet you actually are repeating idiocy that, let me quote you,
“is able to keep Ukraine supplied”
They are not keeping them supplied.
We are out of 155’s, Javelins, Stinger.
Germany can’t keep up how many of their tanks being lost.
Other nations have shared similar issues.
Multi years it will take to replinish but you actually are claiming the West, “is able to keep Ukraine supplied”
Do you want to share how the West, “is able to keep Ukraine supplied”?
“You referred to J and T when you tried to explain away the decision to keep less munition on hand.”
I have never referred to “J and T.” That appears to be an Indonesian parcel service.
I did, however, refer to “JIT,” which stands for “Just In Time.” It was an inventory practice originally developed by Toyota that became a fad in the US in the 1990s. The idea was to reduce warehousing by having factory inputs arrive “just in time” to go directly to production lines, finished products to arrive at stores “just in time” to go on emptied shelves, etc.
Personally I didn’t think it was very well-implemented where I worked (lots of line stoppages when a shipment of e.g. containers arrived late). And I suspected it would be a fad, given the number of manufacturers who already had large warehouse build-out. But it seems to have stuck around, and has probably been adopted by the Pentagon and its “defense” contractors by now.
It’s true that I am out of 155s, Javelins, and Stingers. But, then, I never had any in the first place.
As to whether the US is out of 155s, Javelins, Stingers … there’s no way to know unless perhaps you work at DoD in procurement.
All we can do is look at what’s going on and decide whether the people who have been routinely lying to us about weapons inventory for at least 60 years just happen to be telling the truth this time.
And what’s going on is an increase in the size and tempo of US live-fire exercises. Which by definition require weapons to fire.
So I suspect that inventory is larger than the compulsive liars are letting on.
Wrong, you most definately refered to J and T when I shared the new “thinking” we only need 30 days of munitions for a war like Taiwan would be.
You even end this with your contention that there’s more on hand.
You know you are wrong but the why you are, would likely be very interesting to you.
But until you come to the realization you are wrong you won’t even try to understand will you?
I’ve been hearing really bad numbers in regards to Ukraine’s use rate especially in regards to how that rate would translate to our usage in a very hot war.
Just look into the replacement time that is estimated it will take to replenish our stocks to prewar levels.
They can’t keep up now and unless something changes “logistically” it is going to take years to replenish our stocks.
You claim our overall manufacturing capacityin the West can keep up but you are simply ignoring the military manufacturing side which isn’t close to the size of the huge domestic part of that base and all the reasons why that base can’t keep up.
It simply is not keeping up and your obstinacy is keeping you from seeing it.
The only time I have ever used the phrase “J and T” is in replying to your fantasy that I have ever used the term “J and T.” You may be thinking of “JIT,” or you may be living in a fantasy world, or both. Those are the options.
“You claim our overall manufacturing capacityin the West can keep up but you are simply ignoring the military manufacturing side which isn’t close to the size of the huge domestic part of that base and all the reasons why that base can’t keep up.”
Nearly every large manufacturer has done, and can quickly return to doing, military production. That’s been the case since World War 2 ended and DC decided to keep the economy on a war footing perpetually. Hell, during the escalation in Vietnam, Mattel got a contract to produce the M-16.
How fast the US can produce armaments is entirely and only a function of how much money the US government wants to spend on producing armaments quickly.
You used it and it is really ridiculous that you are denying it.
Now you, in this current reply shares how industry can go on a war footing as in WW2 (another silly history lesson) as a way to ignore current events.
Today’s offering on this website that shares we are running out and are unable to keep Ukraine supplied is from Responsible Statecraft.
Yet here you are trying to convince me otherwise.
What history nonsence will you share next?
Why don’t you address today’s offering here from RS?
They share as I do but you are telling me otherwise.
I bet there are several more offerings that will go up on this very website very shortly, if not today, that will share stuff is running out but here we are with you claiming otherwise…..
Don’t flatter yourself that I am “trying to convince you” of anything, just as I don’t flatter myself that I can “convince” a pseudonymous troll, who just makes shit up when the truth proves inconvenient or too much of a bother to keep up with, of anything.
I am talking with you, not to you. I’m talking to those who may be reading and find the exchange interesting.
You decided to tell me I’m wrong on this yet you are so wrong it getting ridiculous as to why you are persisting with this in how many threads over how many weeks?
You can’t even remember the terms you’ve tried on me….
You keep referring to history as if that is translating today which it isn’t.
RS, today on this website shares the same points as me.
Yesterday it was Paul.
We both know this going to be a common thread in quite a few offerings to come here yet you persist.
I too held the same view until the moment it was clear this not going to be a one week war because once it became protracted my understandings of things made me very suspicious of our abilities to sustain and I’ve been proven basically correct.
Are they lying about stock levels?
Not at the scale it is occurring but at the nitty gritty perhaps?
Renember that 30 day supply level I referenced? Some are saying that level is actually 7 days at what they say is needed for 30 days if you go by Ukraine use rates.
So yes, they may be lying.
You are wrong in attributing the phrase “J and T” to me. You can’t find any instance of me using it except to inform you that I’ve never used it, because no such instance exists. That’s just a fact. I have no idea why you’re so obsessed with pretending otherwise. Can’t admit that you mis-remembered “JIT?” Want to distract from the other problems with your claims? Some other reason?
I’m well aware that most people, especially on this site, believe that US munitions stock levels are low and that US munitions production can’t keep up with demand.
On the former claim (current levels low), it’s not so much that I disagree with the possibility as that the claims come from unreliable sources which have continually lied on that subject, leaving me agnostic. “Believe X, because a bunch of people who have lied about X before are telling me to believe X” isn’t my heuristic.
On the latter claim (US unable to quickly increase manufacture to meet that demand at need), I’m not agnostic. Eight decades of historical production say the claim is bullshit. If there’s money to be made by getting production of 155mm rounds up to 90k per month quickly, production of 155mm rounds will get up to 90k quickly.
Could I be wrong? Absolutely. And if I am, we’ll find out sooner or later.
4 days ago you used the term.
I used to be fat like a elephant and even after losing weight (COVID had me doing Keto by grilling steak) my memory is quite good (and I verified it because my weed is good;-)
To be honest, I remember it well because that it is one of the reasons why we’ve run short.
J and T is a dance that needs everything operating at a nice rhythm.
War by its nature screws with the rhythm in many ways, obvious and ways you don’t realize.
If they could ramp up production as you, then why haven’t they and have run short?
You are doing the “shouldas” don’t you see?
Sure they certainly should be able to, but for many reasons they have not and have run short.
Sure, they “shoulda” followed your historical examples and not be in this state of supply but they have not hence my wonderment of why you keep referring to past examples that obviously are not being implemented for a myriad of reasons.
I just do not understand why you are persisting with this.
4 days at least you’ve been at it, so long you honestly can’t remember (or scroll back so far;-) to remember a term.
You could easily turn how you believe (your shoulda’s) this supply issue could have prevented this into why it is occurring so easy into a good piece for this site as others will soon be getting published but arguing with me, who is being shown to be correct (ha! ;-) is just getting your hole deeper for when your new agnostics developed further and you realize you must climb out.
Ah, the Argument From Wall of Text.
Feel free to continue arguing against your own fantasies, since you obviously enjoy that more than you enjoy arguing with me.
You are a weird one Knapp.
I proved you wrote J and T and gave you when you wrote it and you respond in this manner.
Why can’t you admit you are wrong Knapp?
Is that just too hard?
Most try to understand where they went wrong because it’s a great way to learn but you just get weird…
You devote how many days to this in what has been weeks of your claims and you just go weirdo at the end because….why?
Damn dude….
Are you arguing with everyone today?
I’m kind of understanding why you are acting this way with me as you contend with quite a few posters who disagree with you today.
You need to watch some mindless comedies on Netflix….
Just watched the first episode of “Quarterback.”
Think I’ll go back for the second.
Have a nice evening.
The amount of downvotes you got today from so many around here shows a need to take a break.
Remember my profundity,
It’s when you are wrong and you endevour to understand why, is when you learn.
Also …..no one is perfect except One and there’s quite the argument over that.
“the west is able to keep Ukraine supplied……”
🤡 🤡 🤡
Ron Paul is a moron. He’s always wrong, always misguided. Same with this hit piece. I don’t listen to anything either Paul says. The Paul’s have been running their mouths off for years – nothing they claimed ever happened. We’re definitely NOT “out of ammunition” either.