• CluelessLemmyng@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    The cynic in me says these articles are all about fear mongering to permanently increase spend baselines in the MIC. Another part of me is saying that the industrial shortcomings are great to highlight and beef up now to ensure a deterrence and capacity for any conflict where the US is obligated to participate in (such as Taiwan).

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I mean, the article is from the Ukrainian military. I don’t think that Ukraine cares much about whether-or-not the US has capacity to defend Taiwan. I think that the Ukrainian military cares a lot about whether there might be some additional, unknown delay in supply to Ukraine due to slowdowns in the production pipeline. Like, they had the EU promise artillery shells by a date, and they got delays and got half that much at the expected date. I’m pretty sure that they had plans predicated on getting that ammunition, had set burn rates, etc. Then there was the fight in Congress in the US over aid supply that caused a delay. I bet that they don’t want more of those. If I were gonna guess, they’re aiming to look ahead and say “what might become a delay” and then highlight that as soon as possible to people who might iron it out. The guy from the US says “there might be a month or two delay due to obtaining filler”, they want that to be minimized and have a cap put on it.