Ukraine War - Destroying US military readiness

9,557 Views | 194 Replies | Last: 4 mo ago by samurai_science
Fightin_Aggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:12a, 1/29/23
AG
Is this an accident, malfeasance or by design?

Restocking the weapons we have given to Ukraine may take 5-12 years or worse

https://redstate.com/mike_miller/2023/01/23/as-bidens-blank-checks-to-ukraine-continue-how-long-will-it-take-the-u-s-to-replenish-the-munitions-weve-given-away-n692768

Also, since all these weapons have been given at little or no cost to Ukraine, Ukraine now wants to fight until they have reclaimed all territory including those lost prior to this conflict

Time to cut them off until there is an agreed to plan on what the goals are
The world needs mean tweets

My Pronouns Ultra and MAGA

Trump 2024
Reply Quote
14
GAC06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fightin_Aggie • 12:15a, 1/29/23
AG
There are threads on this. We are mostly using aging equipment that were already sunk costs.
Reply Quote
72
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fightin_Aggie • 12:16a, 1/29/23
On top of that, I live on one edge of Fort Hood and drive past miles of training ground every day. I have seen no maneuvers in quite a while, nor have I heard artillery concussions in the area, which is not the norm for most of the near-decade I have lived here. It seems to me that our troops are not doing nearly as much field training as they did up until this president.

What is the budget being spent on instead? Ukraine or something else?
Reply Quote
19
GAC06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ellis Wyatt • 12:21a, 1/29/23
AG
Lol
Reply Quote
29
AggieVictor10
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:23a, 1/29/23
AG
probably by design we should leave russia alone
Less virtue signaling, more vice signaling.

Birds aren’t real.
Reply Quote
1
chickencoupe16
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:24a, 1/29/23
AG
Yeah, our stocks have been lowered, but they are not depleted. In return, we have crippled our largest enemy of the past 80 years who possessed what was thought to be the number 2 military in the world.

China, our second largest enemy, is situated such that any war with them will be fought very differently and the ranking in importance of weapon systems will be very different from war with Russia. As such, the stocks of the weapons that will be most critical in taking on China have been largely untouched.

In addition, we have gained untold intelligence value from captured Russian equipment which will allow us to extend our technological advantage over them. In addition, many Chinese weapon systems are based off of Russian technology, so we gain there as well. What's more is NATO is more unified than ever before and looking to add two powerful countries. Beyond that, we have identified a lack of manufacturing capacity with regard to munitions and can begin working on increasing this.

As far as Ukraine, if the devastated cities and infrastructure doesn't hurt too badly, I'm quite sure the tens-of-thousands of dead do.
Reply Quote
69
1 edit
Fightin_Aggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GAC06 • 12:31a, 1/29/23
AG
GAC06 said:
There are threads on this. We are mostly using aging equipment that were already sunk costs.
155mm shells are not obsolete and should be able to be kept indefinitely if stored properly
The precision guided version is state of the art and first developed in the 20 teens

Javelin and stinger - older systems but still cost effective and great weapon systems as far as I know

What exactly are we replacing them with and where are these replacements?

The talking point that these are obsolete or aged doesn't pass the smell test
The world needs mean tweets

My Pronouns Ultra and MAGA

Trump 2024
Reply Quote
25
Fightin_Aggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to chickencoupe16 • 12:35a, 1/29/23
AG
chickencoupe16 said:


As far as Ukraine, if the devastated cities and infrastructure doesn't hurt too badly, I'm quite sure the tens-of-thousands of dead do.
As long as the Ukraine's leadership has unlimited free weapons and a population out for blood They will not consider a truce.

Why should they, continued war cost them nothing they aren't willing to pay? Destroyed cities and more casualties are not considerations for stopping the war for Ukraine for their leadership.

If we are giving them weapons we need to set goals and deadlines or they need to understand that this is not a forever supply
The world needs mean tweets

My Pronouns Ultra and MAGA

Trump 2024
Reply Quote
10
Faustus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fightin_Aggie • 3:51a, 1/29/23
Fightin_Aggie said:
Is this an accident, malfeasance or by design?

Restocking the weapons we have given to Ukraine may take 5-12 years or worse

https://redstate.com/mike_miller/2023/01/23/as-bidens-blank-checks-to-ukraine-continue-how-long-will-it-take-the-u-s-to-replenish-the-munitions-weve-given-away-n692768

Also, since all these weapons have been given at little or no cost to Ukraine, Ukraine now wants to fight until they have reclaimed all territory including those lost prior to this conflict

Time to cut them off until there is an agreed to plan on what the goals are
Nice.
So we're up to Nazis, coup, NATO, corruption, bio-weapons labs, Satan, cost, lgqbt, WWIII, FTX, banning opposition political parties during invasion, and destroying (domestic) military readiness.

It seemed like we were going to be stuck on the TGI Friday's tab forever.
Reply Quote
8
3 edits
bdp514am
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:19a, 1/29/23
Doesn't really matter, we have no will to fight a way anyway.
Reply Quote
3
Houstonag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:21a, 1/29/23
AG
Not for sure but a lot of physical armaments given to Ukraine are workable although aged. Out military procurement personnel should be backfilling with new orders of new weapons. They certainly have the funds. They have an infinite check book from Congress.
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
Ulysses90
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fightin_Aggie • 7:13a, 1/29/23
AG
Fightin_Aggie said:
GAC06 said:
There are threads on this. We are mostly using aging equipment that were already sunk costs.
155mm shells are not obsolete and should be able to be kept indefinitely if stored properly
The precision guided version is state of the art and first developed in the 20 teens

Javelin and stinger - older systems but still cost effective and great weapon systems as far as I know

What exactly are we replacing them with and where are these replacements?

The talking point that these are obsolete or aged doesn't pass the smell test


Not all 155mm HE shells are created equally. The old M107 shell family began being replaced by the M795 enhanced fragmentation shells almost 20 years ago but large stocks of M107 remained in bunkers around the world. Cleaning out the inventory of M107 shells would be a great prioritization decision for arming Ukraine.



Regardless of whether it is a war fought by Ukrainian forces using US ammunition and equipment or a war fought by US forces, the problem of a cold production line remains the same.

US ammo supply levels for artillery and other conventional weapons have been predicated since the end of the Cold War on only have to fight short limited conflicts. Cold War level ammo inventories have been deliberately depleted over the past 30 years long before the US sent any of it to Ukraine.

For perspective, Ukraine is averaging about 90,000 artillery shells per day. That's a lot but they aren't wasting them. At the height of the Iran-Iraq war, Sadam fired 1 million shells in a single day into Iranian held territory around Basra.



Reply Quote
5
Get Off My Lawn
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ulysses90 • 7:35a, 1/29/23
Ulysses90 said:
Fightin_Aggie said:
GAC06 said:
There are threads on this. We are mostly using aging equipment that were already sunk costs.
155mm shells are not obsolete and should be able to be kept indefinitely if stored properly
The precision guided version is state of the art and first developed in the 20 teens

Javelin and stinger - older systems but still cost effective and great weapon systems as far as I know

What exactly are we replacing them with and where are these replacements?

The talking point that these are obsolete or aged doesn't pass the smell test


Not all 155mm HE shells are created equally. The old M107 shell family began being replaced by the M795 enhanced fragmentation shells almost 20 years ago but large stocks of M107 remained in bunkers around the world. Cleaning out the inventory of M107 shells would be a great prioritization decision for arming Ukraine.



Regardless of whether it is a war fought by Ukrainian forces using US ammunition and equipment or a war fought by US forces, the problem of a cold production line remains the same.

US ammo supply levels for artillery and other conventional weapons have been predicated since the end of the Cold War on only have to fight short limited conflicts. Cold War level ammo inventories have been deliberately depleted over the past 30 years long before the US sent any of it to Ukraine.

For perspective, Ukraine is averaging about 90,000 artillery shells per day. That's a lot but they aren't wasting them. At the height of the Iran-Iraq war, Sadam fired 1 million shells in a single day into Iranian held territory around Basra.



Also, shells don't have indefinite shelf life. Chemical separation between explosives and stabilizing compounds can occur with time. Typically many decades, but it isn't irrelevant.

Also worth noting: artillerymen are finicky about their ammo. When you want to hit something a dozen miles away, you need homogeneous products: propellants from the same batch, shells with the exact same weight, etc. For many old lots of of ammo you're dealing with the remnants turned in from past exercises which are low-desirability.

What DOES concern me is the HIMARS ammo. Most of the other stuff was purchased to fight the Russians or Chinese and is currently going to kill what it was intended to kill. But the missiles… we've never even gotten close to having enough of those for a conventional fight and the china campaign is supposed to be launcher based. Sure, they're not consuming anti-ship missiles (which don't yet exist), but i see continued diminishing of that new ammo as a huge exposure point.
Reply Quote
4
CondensedFogAggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fightin_Aggie • 7:43a, 1/29/23
Fightin_Aggie said:
Ukraine now wants to fight until they have reclaimed all territory including those lost prior to this conflict

How shocking they want to restore land that was invaded and taken from them by force since 2014, tens of thousands of men killed, and countless women and children raped and tortured during the process and even now.

Why not go piss on the Alamo while you're at it and tell the ghost of David Bowie he should have just given the Mexicans everything.
Reply Quote
24
1 edit
aggie93
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fightin_Aggie • 8:34a, 1/29/23
AG
I'm a big opponent of this war and think we need to be pushing for a peace deal. You can see my posts on many Ukraine threads.

This is not a valid argument though. These are older weapons we were very unlikely to ever use in a future war, many we were going to have to pay to dispose of. We are getting something for our money in terms of reduced Russian military readiness and Russia has a finite very finite military resources.

The future for the US Military is our Navy and missiles. We need to focus on protecting shipping and charging a hefty fee to other countries to provide that service. We are unlikely to get in a land war that would use this stuff as well, we have newer equipment and could make more if we need to.

As I said I think we are taking the wrong approach on Ukraine but you don't make good arguments by spreading bad information, it only hurts the credibility of your other arguments.
"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

Ronald Reagan
Reply Quote
8
MouthBQ98
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:37a, 1/29/23
AG
Those expended arms have actually been used to cripple the rival for which they were most originally intended. They are serving their purpose, and in doing so, are eliminating their need to remain in inventory into the future.

We'll replace any imbalance as needed.
Reply Quote
6
Shoefly!
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CondensedFogAggie • 8:52a, 1/29/23
AG
CondensedFogAggie said:
Fightin_Aggie said:
Ukraine now wants to fight until they have reclaimed all territory including those lost prior to this conflict

How shocking they want to restore land that was invaded and taken from them by force since 2014, tens of thousands of men killed, and countless women and children raped and tortured during the process and even now.

Why not go piss on the Alamo while you're at it and tell the ghost of David Bowie he should have just given the Mexicans everything.

If you feel so strong about it, roll out! They'll gladly take volunteers!
Reply Quote
4
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CondensedFogAggie • 9:18a, 1/29/23
AG
"Over? Was it over when David Bowie died at the Alamo?"

"David?"

"Forget it, he's rolling."
Reply Quote
20
FIDO_Ags
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:27a, 1/29/23
Quote:
On top of that, I live on one edge of Fort Hood and drive past miles of training ground every day. I have seen no maneuvers in quite a while, nor have I heard artillery concussions in the area, which is not the norm for most of the near-decade I have lived here. It seems to me that our troops are not doing nearly as much field training as they did up until this president.

What is the budget being spent on instead? Ukraine or something else?


You do realize the First Cav isn't at Ft Hood right now.

Edit-spelling
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
GAC06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:29a, 1/29/23
AG
A better thread title:

Ukraine war: Invigorating NATO's military readiness
Reply Quote
1
rocky the dog
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:30a, 1/29/23
AG
Elections are when people find out what politicians stand for, and politicians find out what people will fall for.
- Alfred E. Neuman
Reply Quote
29
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Fightin_Aggie • 9:31a, 1/29/23
AG
Fightin_Aggie said:
GAC06 said:
There are threads on this. We are mostly using aging equipment that were already sunk costs.
155mm shells are not obsolete and should be able to be kept indefinitely if stored properly
The precision guided version is state of the art and first developed in the 20 teens

Javelin and stinger - older systems but still cost effective and great weapon systems as far as I know

What exactly are we replacing them with and where are these replacements?

The talking point that these are obsolete or aged doesn't pass the smell test


Those 155s were not wasted. They were fired at our greatest military advisory by someone else at the cost of zero American lives. We got a more unified, better militarized Europe and a weakened Russia out of the deal. If the conflict spurs NATO countries to spend more on military, we might even have zero cost for those political gains long term.

I'm not saying the war doesn't have a cost. It does. But you can't analyze cost / benefit if you completely ignore the benefits.
Reply Quote
13
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:40a, 1/29/23
Why can't Ukraine, this land of vast resources and hard working people, either make their own weapons or make something to trade with us for those weapons?

Why is it we have to just give it to them? They want help…? Then they can commit to repaying us with 10-15% if their GDP each year until the debt it repaid.

Instead, if the happen to remain an independent Soviet state, our gifts and gifts by others will have Ukrainians living better than folks in the US in 20 years.

Our aid should come with strings, oversight and repayment.
"The absence of the word accountability is not the same as wanting no accountability" -unknown

"You can never go wrong by staying silent if there is nothing apt to say" -Walter Isaacson
Reply Quote
9
samurai_science
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GAC06 • 9:40a, 1/29/23
GAC06 said:
A better thread title:

Ukraine war: Invigorating NATO's military readiness
Ukraine war: Stealing from US Middle Class and burdening future generations with debt.
Reply Quote
7
fulshearAg96
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to CondensedFogAggie • 9:41a, 1/29/23
AG
CondensedFogAggie said:
Fightin_Aggie said:
Ukraine now wants to fight until they have reclaimed all territory including those lost prior to this conflict

How shocking they want to restore land that was invaded and taken from them by force since 2014, tens of thousands of men killed, and countless women and children raped and tortured during the process and even now.

Why not go piss on the Alamo while you're at it and tell the ghost of David Bowie he should have just given the Mexicans everything.
Uh... Didn't we take land from the Mexicans?
Reply Quote
2
Pumpkinhead
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:41a, 1/29/23
AG
Destroying our military readiness to fight a European land war against Russia?

A main reason not just us but several NATO countries are okay sending their stuff to Ukraine is it is being used for one of the primary purposes that particular stuff was made for to begin with.
Reply Quote
4
2 edits
GarryowenAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:44a, 1/29/23
AG
I've come to realize the vast majority of people, including on this board, don't have a clue how the military operates.
Reply Quote
23
samurai_science
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fulshearAg96 • 9:44a, 1/29/23
fulshearAg96 said:
CondensedFogAggie said:
Fightin_Aggie said:
Ukraine now wants to fight until they have reclaimed all territory including those lost prior to this conflict

How shocking they want to restore land that was invaded and taken from them by force since 2014, tens of thousands of men killed, and countless women and children raped and tortured during the process and even now.

Why not go piss on the Alamo while you're at it and tell the ghost of David Bowie he should have just given the Mexicans everything.
Uh... Didn't we take land from the Mexicans?
My family was given a land grant, then the Mexicans tried to cancel the deal.
Reply Quote
5
chickencoupe16
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fulshearAg96 • 9:48a, 1/29/23
AG
fulshearAg96 said:
CondensedFogAggie said:
Fightin_Aggie said:
Ukraine now wants to fight until they have reclaimed all territory including those lost prior to this conflict

How shocking they want to restore land that was invaded and taken from them by force since 2014, tens of thousands of men killed, and countless women and children raped and tortured during the process and even now.

Why not go piss on the Alamo while you're at it and tell the ghost of David Bowie he should have just given the Mexicans everything.
Uh... Didn't we take land from the Mexicans?


Nah, the Mexicans gave the land to us. We just stopped allowing them to violate the constitution on our land and made a new constitution since the old on apparently didn't matter.
Reply Quote
5
JFABNRGR
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:49a, 1/29/23
AG
I think we signed contracts for the 220 munitions 6 months ago when the HIMARS were first sent.

Alot of atuff needed to be taken off the shelf like the M113s, hummers, lots of items.

Our enemy is being severely degraded while NATO has upped their security and buying more stuff from us over russia.

Then lessons learned wo using our own soldiers is priceless. We are way behind in drone warfare in both offense and defense. Javelins working great, switchblades not so much, NLAWs not liked either not ours but allows our MIC to sell more.

With this we can focus our future needs in a more effective way.
Reply Quote
2
Yukon Cornelius
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GAC06 • 9:50a, 1/29/23
AG
GAC06 said:
There are threads on this. We are mostly using aging equipment that were already sunk costs.


No doubt a lot of people getting rich right now. Afghan winds down. Military complex needs more money.
Reply Quote
8
GAC06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Yukon Cornelius • 9:57a, 1/29/23
AG
Nice of Russia and Ukraine to play along so we can buy more shells
Reply Quote
3
Yukon Cornelius
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GAC06 • 10:02a, 1/29/23
AG
GAC06 said:
Nice of Russia and Ukraine to play along so we can buy more shells


Never let a good crisis go to waste as they say.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
Get Off My Lawn
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BusterAg • 10:03a, 1/29/23
BusterAg said:
Fightin_Aggie said:
GAC06 said:
There are threads on this. We are mostly using aging equipment that were already sunk costs.
155mm shells are not obsolete and should be able to be kept indefinitely if stored properly
The precision guided version is state of the art and first developed in the 20 teens

Javelin and stinger - older systems but still cost effective and great weapon systems as far as I know

What exactly are we replacing them with and where are these replacements?

The talking point that these are obsolete or aged doesn't pass the smell test


Those 155s were not wasted. They were fired at our greatest military advisory by someone else at the cost of zero American lives. We got a more unified, better militarized Europe and a weakened Russia out of the deal. If the conflict spurs NATO countries to spend more on military, we might even have zero cost for those political gains long term.

I'm not saying the war doesn't have a cost. It does. But you can't analyze cost / benefit if you completely ignore the benefits.
The 80's called. They want their geopolitical talking points back.

Russia no longer has any real influence between nuclear ICBMs and regional land war capabilities. They are no longer a peer or near-peer threat. They are a regional power who happens to retain the world's largest doomsday switch. How weak do you want them to become and why?

NATO should have become a back-burner organization when the USSR collapsed. Instead it expanded toward Russia.

The left is acting like giddy school children poking sticks through the cage at a bear that men far superior to them managed to confine. It isn't brave. It's unnecessary and foolish. We're getting ratcheted closer to an inflection point and I don't like it one bit. Clear running of proxy wars without clear parameters with a flailing and failing nuclear power make me nervous.
Reply Quote
6
Old Army Ghost
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Get Off My Lawn • 10:08a, 1/29/23
ummm your friend putin invading ukraine shows why nato is still needed

its why it is expanding becauee your hero keeps threatening and invading
Old Army has gone to hell.
Reply Quote
25
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.