United States Defense Thread

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Updates on Biden/Austin & the Pentagon — Part 2 of 3

5. The pressing issue (but less strategic issue) is how to manage the Middle East turmoil — short term issues with Iran can blow up in Biden’s face.

(a) Biden needs a SecDef that knows the area and understands contingency options well (to deter war) and discuss implementing JCPOA with Iran, in cooperation with UK, France and Germany. If Biden can keep Iran in check, his administration can take 1 to 2 years to work on the plan for the more strategic issues in the Indo-Pacific, with an emphasis on India and Japan.​

(b) Managing China’s rise includes the getting the DoD and State Department to work with Japan, Australia, India (and mini-laterals like the Quad) and ASEAN to manage China’s rise — with a PLA(N) that has by tonnage the largest naval fleet in the world and a significant amphibious fleet (that enables it to convert the South China Sea into a Chinese lake, in the near future if unchallenged) — with a PLA second artillery missile force that can hit moving targets at sea.

6. China’s national defense and military reform under Xi Jinping consists of three elements:
(i) adjustment and reform concerning the composition of the military structure;​
(ii) adjustment and reform concerning the military policy system; and​
(iii) deepening of the integration between the military and civilian sectors.​
(a) Element 6(i) consists of the rationalization of the CMC and the four general departments structure (General Staff Department, General Political Department, General Logistics Department, and General Armaments Department), strengthening the joint operation structure, adjusting the relative troop strength among the Ground Force, Navy, Air Force, and the Second Artillery Corps, and reducing the non-combat organizations and members of the PLA.​
(b) Element 6(ii) refers to progress in the professionalization of the officer corps, improving the draft, officers, and veterans’ reemployment systems, and eliminating waste within the military.​
(c) Element 6(iii) focuses on promoting military- civilian sector cooperation in equipment development, reforming national defense education, and adjusting and rationalizing the sea and air border patrol management structure.​
(d) The media, both domestic and international, focused their attention on “adjustment and reform concerning the composition of the military structure,” particularly regarding what China would do by way of the organizational reform with the aim of strengthening the joint operation structure.​
(e) China’s PLA reforms, announced in waves between the autumn of 2015, Feb 2016 and Nov 2020, created changes that exceeded the expectations of many observers, beginning with the abolition of the four general departments structure and the 7 military regions system (in favor of five theater commands) — as part of the 300,000 PLA troop cuts to streamline it into a modern fighting force.​
(f) The Nov 2020 new joint operations outline also codifies the shift from campaigns (战役) to operations (作战) as the unit of analysis for China's operational doctrine, indicating a more nimble and refined approach to the use of force.​
(g) The promulgation of a high-level doctrinal document suggests that the PLA is consolidating the changes to improve joint operations that were part of the unprecedented reforms that began in late 2015. In fact, it likely signals confidence that the reforms have been successful.​
7. According to Taiwan News, China launched its “Guam killer missile, the DF-26B, from Qinghai Province, on 26 Aug 2019. This missile was dubbed the “Guam killer” because it was the first Chinese-made missile capable of striking U.S. military facilities in Guam, where Andersen Air Force Base and Naval Base Guam are located. Aside from the DF-26B, China also fired into the South China Sea what it calls its “aircraft carrier killer missile” — the DF-21D — a variant of the DF-21, which is an anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) that China claims is capable of striking an aircraft carrier.

8. For PLA watchers—the Central Military Commission has issued a new operational doctrine an "Outline of Joint Operations for the Chinese People's Liberation Army (Trial)" went into effect in Nov 2020. This marks only the fifth time that the PLA has changed its operational doctrine since 1949.

(a) Given the above advancements, DoD is building a backup air base at Tinian Island, located just 100 miles to the north of Guam’s Andersen Air Force Base. This comes as the Pentagon is working to expand its existing airfields located deep in the Pacific and even create new ones that it could use during a major peer-state clash, namely with China, in the 1st and 2nd island chains. Given the distance and early warning to be provided by SBIRS GEO-5 and GEO-6 that are slated to join the U.S. Space Force’s missile warning satellites, I believe that Guam and Tinian, can survive multiple waves of DF-26B missile attacks (not all of which need to be intercepted).​
(b) Besides Guam and Tinian, the Pentagon has a base in Wake Island, which is located 1,500 miles east of Guam (read about the upgrades to that remote island outpost in this recent feature). With the ongoing 'pivot towards the Pacific' and with adversary A2/AD capabilities creeping farther east, Wake Island is more important than it has been in decades, possibly since World War II. Beyond its clear logistical utility, acting as a major hub where there isn't another for thousands of miles, it sits outside the range of China's and North Korea's medium-range ballistic missiles, and largely at the end, if not entirely out of range, of their intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs). The base on Wake Island will be more about staging airpower as a conflict heats up, not just with dealing with dislocated airpower in the opening stages of an attack. This is where new developments at Tinian Island will come into play.​
(c) This is all part of an emerging distributed combat operations strategy that will likely be as much about survival as about getting an advantage on the enemy, at least during the opening stages of a potential conflict in the Pacific Theater. Anderson Air Force Base is so key to U.S. strategy that the possibility that a natural disaster could knock out flight operations in the entire region is also a driving factor behind this initiative to build on Tinian.​

9. To lend teeth to Pacific bases, the Marine Littoral Regiment (MLR) concept was born (See: Force Design 2030) which called for reorganizing the US Marine Corps to be lighter in preparation for battling in hotly contested maritime spaces. After nearly two decades of ground warfare, the US Marine Corps has already disbanded several of its tank battalions as part of the redesign. Force Design 2030 calls for three MLRs.
(a) The other two MLRs will be based in Japan and Guam. Current plans expect US Marines to begin arriving in Guam by 2024, with 2,500 there by 2026 and the full 5,000-Marine force to be in place by 2028. Aside from experimenting with the way MLRs should be organized, the regiment in Hawaii will also test new equipment.​
(b) They want US Marines in the MLR to identify problems and gaps with the construct.​
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Updates on Biden/Austin & the Pentagon — Part 3 of 3

10. Biden has written this on why he chose Austin. I understand why he went for tried and tested (the successor of Mathis as commander of CENTCOM):

“General Austin got the job done. He played a crucial role in bringing 150,000 American troops home from the theater of war. Pulling that off took more than just the skill and strategy of a seasoned soldier. It required Austin to practice diplomacy, building relationships with our Iraqi counterparts and with our partners in the region. He served as a statesman, representing our country with honor and dignity and always, above all, looking out for his people.​

Today, I ask Lloyd Austin to once more take on a mission for the United States of America—this time as the secretary-designate of the Department of Defense. I know he will do an outstanding job.”​

11. However, I disagree with national security experts who raised concerns about Austin’s lack of experience handling what many consider to be the most pressing challenge facing the US for years to come: an increasingly aggressive China. “This suggests quite loudly to me that Biden doesn’t take hard power, and the China military threat as seriously and urgently as we need to,” said Elbridge Colby, a former defense official and a lead author the 2018 National Defense Strategy that laid out the Pentagon’s pivot from counterterrorism to great power competition.

12. If confirmed by the Senate, Gen. Austin, 67, would be the first Black American to fill the position. Austin, is a retired Army general, who served for 41 years, and was the head of the U.S. Central Command from 2013 to 2016 (where he succeeded Mattis in command) and oversaw the military campaign to defeat the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. Austin holds a degree from West Point, an MA in education from Auburn University and an MBA from Webster University.
  • He has a Silver Star, the nation’s third highest award for valor in combat, when he was the 3rd Infantry Division’s assistant division commander for maneuver. The division led the assault on Iraq in March 2003. In just 22 days, soldiers went from the berm separating Kuwait from Iraq all the way into Baghdad, a drive that culminated in the “Thunder Run,” where tankers and infantrymen from the 2nd Brigade took the international airport and penetrated the heart of the Iraqi capital.
  • He later commanded the 10th Mountain Division in Afghanistan, led Multi-National Corps-Iraq from Feb 2008 until Apr 2009, and then commanded U.S. Forces-Iraq from September 2010 through the completion of the mission in Dec 2011.
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #143
It has been suggested that the US invites Japan to become part of FVEY (5EYES) the tightest intelligence group in the Western world, that comprises of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom & United States. If this was agreed to by all of the FVEY partners it would create SXEY. FVEY is branching out from being a pure intelligence group to a wider military and sometimes political / diplomatic group. Although it has slowly widened its scope in a limited context, its predominant primary role is intelligence.

If Japan is added to the group I think that it would add to the strength of the group as a whole. Such a move would really upset the CCP who will throw a completely hissy fit, but it will also cause Putin a bit of a belly ache as he suddenly has another FVEY partner on his Siberian coast and an old enemy to boot.


 

DDG38

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
It has been suggested that the US invites Japan to become part of FVEY (5EYES) the tightest intelligence group in the Western world, that comprises of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom & United States. If this was agreed to by all of the FVEY partners it would create SXEY. FVEY is branching out from being a pure intelligence group to a wider military and sometimes political / diplomatic group. Although it has slowly widened its scope in a limited context, its predominant primary role is intelligence.

If Japan is added to the group I think that it would add to the strength of the group as a whole. Such a move would really upset the CCP who will throw a completely hissy fit, but it will also cause Putin a bit of a belly ache as he suddenly has another FVEY partner on his Siberian coast and an old enemy to boot.


This has been on the table for a very long time, and given the level of engagement with Japan has only increased in the past 10 years or so it's a natural progression. It will be a hard task though, there are some very big differences between the 5EYES systems and Japan's home grown intel network. We'll see how it goes, the idea has long had merit, just need to get 5 countries to sign off on it. That will be a challenge despite the operational commonality between them.
 

Musashi_kenshin

Well-Known Member
11. However, I disagree with national security experts who raised concerns about Austin’s lack of experience handling what many consider to be the most pressing challenge facing the US for years to come: an increasingly aggressive China.
That's a good assessment. Austin's military career doesn't mean that he'll be unable or unwilling to rise to the challenge of dealing with China.

His experience isn't with large naval and air engagements against a peer/near-peer adversary, but no one in a position to head the DoD has that experience. The State Department and White House will set policy on foreign relations, whereas Austin's job would be to prepare the military for a potential conflict. It wouldn't be probable he could think that China isn't a threat given its overt build up.

As you noted, he received the Silver Star. He's no coward and wouldn't back down against Beijing. He will also have his staff and experts to tell him what he needs to be informed.

If anything, having a background with logistics could be useful, as he'll understand the need of having a military that can fight as opposed to having lots of shiny weapons that won't be what is actually needed. Fewer lasers and more redundant bases that are well defended or can be set up quickly, along the lines of the plans you posted on in the earlier comment.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Let’s face it, the BLM lobby beat out the gender equality lobby along with lots of help from the anti military leftists in the Democratic Party.
 

Musashi_kenshin

Well-Known Member
Let’s face it, the BLM lobby beat out the gender equality lobby along with lots of help from the anti military leftists in the Democratic Party.
The anti-military "progressives" aren't happy, because they want someone who isn't tainted by involvement with the military, defence department or industry..... which would make for a terrible choice.

Austin could actually be a really good choice - boring but sensible. No doubt (unless he's pulled early due to congressional objections) he'll have something to say about US defence policy at the confirmation hearings.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
There are already several Democratic senators who are opposed to Austin being granted a waiver on the 7 years out rule. DoD is a massive organization and on paper Flournoy seems a better management choice as someone who can get many of the critical new high technology projects moving due to long and close contacts with the military industrial establishment. It is these contacts and her somewhat hawkish views that eroded her chances but it was Biden caving to the Black lobby that was the overriding consideration IMO.
 

Musashi_kenshin

Well-Known Member
There are already several Democratic senators who are opposed to Austin being granted a waiver on the 7 years out rule.
Eh, if Congress wants to refuse to give Austin a waiver that's up to them. I'm just saying that I don't think he's such a bad pick. There's a case for saying that Flournoy would have been better, but that doesn't mean Austin is bad or even just middling.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Eh, if Congress wants to refuse to give Austin a waiver that's up to them. I'm just saying that I don't think he's such a bad pick. There's a case for saying that Flournoy would have been better, but that doesn't mean Austin is bad or even just middling.
Austin is probably ok as a choice from a capability POV but from a political hassle POV he isn’t. I think enough Republicans could overcome the left wing democratic senators to provide a smooth confirmation of a Flournoy choice quickly. Could be wrong, spiteful losers might want to make confirmation of any choice difficult.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #151
The United States, Canada, Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, Norway and Sweden have signed an International Cooperative Engagement Program for Polar Research - ICE-PPR. This is the the first multilateral effort specifically focused on cooperation in high-latitude, cold weather locations across the globe and is a direct response to the rise of great power competition in polar regions and enables the full spectrum of research, development, testing, evaluation, experimentation, acquisition, fielding, and personnel exchange. This looks like a very interesting program and I can see the benefits that it will bring to all of the countries involved.

 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I seriously doubt Canada will ever build another heavy icebreaker. Some extra ammunition for the Canadian Rangers’ new rifles and wait for thinner ice so the AOPS can be useful will be junior’s plan.
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #153
Trump has vetoed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. Text of his letter is below.


The next step will be the reconvening of the Congress and a formal vote that overrides his veto. The Bill was passed in both Houses with a veto proof majority so the reconvention vote should be a formality. The House of Representatives will meet on Monday 27/12/2020 and the Senate on Tuesday 28/12/2020.

 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
A short article on the loss of US industrial capacity and how it affects defence. It isn’t only applicable to the US. Perhaps the lack of PPE production capacity will awaken pollies AND corporate morons as to the dangers of this decline.....sadly, probably not.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #155
A short article on the loss of US industrial capacity and how it affects defence. It isn’t only applicable to the US. Perhaps the lack of PPE production capacity will awaken pollies AND corporate morons as to the dangers of this decline.....sadly, probably not.
Not good reading but something some of us have been familiar with for a while.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Post 1 of 2: Defending the US Capital against dangerous idiots with guns on 17 & 20 Jan 2021

One of the valuable things I find about international forums such as these is that it’s a good opportunity to see how other regions of the world tend to view America. Which is useful as it gets away from the more binary left vs right filtered versions of discussion that are often the only ones that get addressed within the US.

The point being, it’s useful to get an outside perspective. And when multiple people from multiple regions/countries/cultures are saying the same thing...
Military.com: National Guard DC presence will swell to 26,000 for Biden inauguration

1. The Americans have an internal security issue that is related to a failure in national education. IMHO, the right to bear arms is not a right to be engaged in an armed insurrection. National Guardsmen mobilized to the District of Columbia are authorized to carry deadly weapons while posted in and around the Capitol, the National Guard Bureau confirmed to Military Times. This reports states that 26,000 National Guard personnel being deployed for 20 Jan 2021; when I am much more concerned with the planned protests on 17 Jan 2021, which has more potential for violence.

2. The above iconic picture (by @erinschaff on 13 Jan 2021) of troops taking a rest break from guarding the capital against the upcoming 17 Jan 2021 (Sun) armed rallies by members of the violent far-right and libertarian boogaloo movement, has an important civil war reference. Incidentally, the plaque on the right wall commemorates Union troops that were quartered there to defend against the last insurrection. The more things change, in America, the more things stay the same. Members of this American boogaloo movement are hoping for a nationwide “armed march” on Capitol Hill and all 50 state capitols.

(a) Though it’s not totally clear how many people are expected to participate in the boogaloo boys backed protests, the 17 Jan 2021 (Sun) events appear to be the next major organizing effort by extremist groups. An iconic boogaloo boy that has been arrested, is Steven Carrillo. Carrillo is a 32-year-old US Air Force sergeant from California, that was charged with the murder of two officers during the George Floyd protests, one in Oakland and another in Santa Cruz.​

(b) Libertarian extremists known as the boogaloo boys are now linked with at least 2 murders. Before being arrested, Steven Carrillo wrote in his own blood the terms "boog" and "I became unreasonable" on a car. Both terms are commonly used by the movement. Members of the boogaloo movement don't necessarily have a really cohesive ideology that brings them all together. They kind of run the gamut of the far right. So many of them are libertarians who are really steeped in gun culture. Others are white supremacists and are overtly racist. So there is a lot of ideological variation among the members of this movement.​

(c) “Many of Us will return on January 19, 2021, carrying Our weapons, in support of Our nation's resolve, to which [sic] the world will never forget!!!" one QAnon supporter wrote on Parler, a right-leaning social media platform that was taken offline on 11 Jan 2021 when Amazon stopped hosting it. "We will come in numbers that no standing army or police agency can match.”​

(d) It is interesting that more than 1,000 political scientists have come to the same consider logical conclusion; that what Trump did is not only morally wrong but illegal (and he should be removed from office). Instead of agreeing with experts, we find that “there is a whole ecosystem, like an alternate reality, that many of these groups migrate to,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of the Anti-Defamation League.​

And as far as Defense issues go, an armed populace is a tremendous boon for the USA. It makes invasion & successful occupation of American territory an impossibility for an enemy power. "A gun behind every blade of grass", as some have noted, is a factual reality, and by comparison would make the Middle East seem like a vacation spot for an army of occupation.
3. Not sure how to react to your approach. With so many guns floating around, the US population is well prepared for a zombie apocalypse :) . But do we really want America to do better at mass shootings or an armed insurrection.
Tremendous Boon?
why don’t you try explaining that one to the Parents of
Virginia Tech
Sandy Hook
Stoneman Douglas
Columbine
And a Dozen or so more Schools.
Having a very heavily armed Populace in a Country that has virtually zero chance of being invaded anyway, considering the size and power of the US Military and the sheer Geographical difficulty in such an undertaking, is no excuse for allowing easy access to Assault Riffles for murderous Psychopaths.
4. Agreed. IMHO, the right to bear arms is not a right to be engaged in murder, mass shootings or an armed insurrection.
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #158
The Pentagon has released its 2020 Industrial report and according to the article below it's rather bleak reading. It confirms what some of us have been saying about the inability of the US to ramp up industrial production like it did in 1941 - 45. An unintended effect of globalisation.

 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Post 2 of 2: Defending the US against Trump’s dangerous idiots

Biden has nominated Kurt Campbell to oversea Indo-pacific in the NSC. He was one of the architects of Obama's pivot - Biden's Indo-Pacific coordinator Campbell | The Canberra Times | Canberra, ACT Looking at opinions in a news sources from a number of US allies in the region, he seems to be a 'reassuring' choice. Hope he gets it right.
5. That is good news for America’s allies and partners in Asia; but given Biden’s domestic issues, Campbell will face leaders in Asia that have become deeply sceptical of American staying power when the going gets rough. Trump’s ability to do what he wants, whether or not it is good for America is unparallelled — firing Mark Esper for his classified memo — warning that conditions weren't met for withdrawal from Afghanistan, has greatly diminished American to European eyes (with NATO having more troops than America in Afghanistan).

6. The final full week of Donald Trump's presidency ended with America in disarray. Today, America is a country fearful about the threats surrounding Inauguration Day in a capital city that has become a fortress; unsettled by new details of the harm that rioters could have inflicted on lawmakers during the 6 Jan 2021 insurrection. Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser urged Americans to avoid the city during Biden's inauguration. Speaking at a news conference, Bowser, a Democrat, stressed that she was concerned about more violent actors potentially coming to the city in the run-up to the inauguration, saying:
"If I'm scared of anything, it's for our democracy, because we have very extreme factions in our country that are armed and dangerous."​

7. IMO, the more capable the extremist group, the more dangerous they are. IMHO, extremist idiots with poor trigger discipline are a greater danger to their own fellow extremist than to:

(a) the Biden admin (from 20 Jan 2021 onwards);​

(b) the current state government run by Governor Jay Inslee; and​

(c) the citywide curfew declared by Muriel Bowser as the Mayor of Washington.​

8. The right wing groups have a PR problem that I have no sympathy for. The left wing groups have a PR problem that I also have no sympathy for. If you look at U.S. history broadly, you see quite a few “rebellions” in which armed groups proclaimed themselves the true and legitimate source of governance – “self-created” bodies, as their opponents denounced them.

9. Early American history is rife with such revolts: events like the Whiskey Rebellion of the 1790s, or the Dorr Rebellion of the 1840s. And, of course, the most violent and widespread rebellion of all, Southern secession. In that sense, perhaps, it was appropriate that many of the 6 Jan 2021 invaders in the Capitol were carrying Confederate flags; given the specific meaning tied to that flag on secession:

Stedman *1: Part of Donald Trump’s strategy since 2016 was to cast doubt on our electoral legitimacy. This strategy was amplified during the pandemic when so much of the country implemented early voting and vote by mail, which Trump and his acolytes relentlessly criticized as fraudulent methods. His strategy was aided and abetted by Fox News and its commentators, as well as by various social media personalities and websites.​

Wednesday was the culmination of that strategy. The electoral count was the last possible chance for Trump to keep power. The strategy was shamefully supported by senators like Josh Hawley of Missouri and Ted Cruz of Texas, as well as key members of the Republican House leadership. This all ratcheted up the stakes of yesterday’s electoral count, and Trump’s supporters were there yesterday to pressure Republicans to bend to the President’s will, and failing that to prevent the count from taking place.​

Sklansky *2: There is a strong and straightforward argument for treating Trump’s words and conduct over the past several weeks, and especially on Wednesday, as grounds for impeachment. The standard for impeachment is “high crimes and misdemeanors,” which is a term meaning, essentially, abuse of power. And it is hard to think of a clearer violation of office, or a more dangerous abdication of duty, than refusing to acknowledge the result of an election voting you out of office, encouraging your supporters to prevent the lawful transfer of power and congratulating them for their violent efforts to do just that.​

10. Not sure if the Americans can find a cure but it’s their own problem to solve. How it is solved is a domestic political choice. However this problem is to be solved, it will not be by Trump or with his input. Trump’s political capital has cratered.

11. A Pew Research Center poll showed that 54% of Americans want to see Trump removed from office and 68% said they don't want to see him continue to be a major national political figure in the years to come. His overall approval rating fell to 29%, the lowest it has ebbed during his presidency.

12. Combined or at war with each other, these left and right wing groups or nut-jobs present an internal security problem that is becoming more mainstream in America. Only the stupid cannot recognise the obvious:

America is a country diminished by stupidity and internal armed dissent.​

*1 Stephen Stedman, senior fellow at FSI
*2 David Sklansky, Stanley Morrison Professor Law; faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center
 
Last edited:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #160
The US has a rather large problem if it gets into a shooting war with a peer level enemy. It will be unable to resupply hardware such as ships aircraft and heavy armour quickly enough to cover the losses inflicted upon it in the first few weeks / months of the opening stanzas. In fact it has no real reserves now and even if it started to ramp up production to war time levels it no longer has the industrial base to sustain such production.

Prior to WW2 kicking off in Europe, President FD Roosevelt in 1938 started modernising and rebuilding the US Army and Navy. More ships, aircraft, tanks, guns etc., were ordered. In 1940 FDR increased the tempo basically putting the US on a war footing and after the US entry to the war in December 1941 they found themselves fighting a 2 front war and supplying the allies. The interesting thing is that most of the material ordered in 1940, such as ships and aircraft didn't arrive on the front lines until 1944, but when they did they arrived in sufficient numbers and were sufficiently advanced to change the tide of war. The US on its own basically out produced the Axis by a significant factor, hence it being known as the arsenal of democracy. However back then it had a tremendous industrial capacity to turn to making war material with auto-makers churning out aircraft, tanks, trucks, and other materials. Shipyards turning out ships in huge numbers etc. The whole nation went onto a war footing and became a total war economy. However if FDR hadn't of started the planning and initiating action back in 1938, it would have been a completely different story.

Today the US hasn't that capacity and anyone who thinks that they can ramp up and start pumping out war material like they did before and during WW2 is dreaming. They have 3 major aircraft manufacturers. Two shipbuilders capable of building warships. Four, maybe five Defence Primes all told, who control probably 90 - 95% of the defence manufacturing capacity. So whilst a production war surge isn't impossible it will be quite difficult to pull off in the required time, which will be short indeed.


The actual report: Industrial Mobilization: Assessing Surge Capabilities, Wartime Risk, and System Brittleness

I think that now the US really needs to take a good hard look at its defence production capability and start planning for a production surge now. That's the first part. The second is to start building the capabilities and platforms required. Don't worry about all the gee whiz fancy gears and fancy weapons, but just get capabilities and platforms built. Increase their capabilities in follow on tranches and forget the politics. Just get the job done. Get out of these current foreign bush wars and use that money to build up your forces and capabilities for the big war to come.
 
Top