|
Originally Posted by ThumbsUp
(Post 4034557)
Just for clarity, the US has an incredible, nearly inexhaustible supply of PGMs. I think you are referring to specific more exquisite weapons that weren’t in large quantities to start, but JDAMs are aplenty, not that you need everything to be that level of precision for acceptable CDE.
The exquisite munitions are for kicking the door in, cleaning up enemy IADS, and getting after high value, mobile targets whose location will likely become harder to pin down after hostilities commence. Once air superiority (air supremacy in this case) is achieved, then the ATO basically starts to function like an airline operations schedule, with reusable planes and drones servicing predefined targets with cheap iron bombs (typically with cheap guidance kits), returning to refuel, re-arm, line mx, maybe change crews, and go again. That's sustainable for a *very* long time. We have vast stockpiles of iron bombs and various bolt-on guidance kits, all very affordable as such things go. We even still have the ability to deploy unguided iron bombs the old fashioned way (I'll let current fighter attack guys weigh in on the current level of proficiency). We really no longer need the expensive munitions for this conflict, except maybe for an occasional niche application. The legit concern is that we expended a lot of the high-end stuff, which reduces deterrence in the Pacific until inventories are restored (which will take time due to limited production capacity, even if funded). But the flip side is that we demonstrated to PRC that our chit still works really well, that in and of itself has a deterrent effect. Also demonstrated that the current regime at least isn't afraid of engaging, additional deterrent effect. |
|
Originally Posted by Name User
(Post 4034583)
The SPR drawdown will end in July. Would have helped if an administration hadn't drawn down the SPR going into an election in an attempt to "buy" votes. There was a way to do this - had the US moved years ago to reduce demand on oil products (ie more EVs like China is doing) this war was doable. The issue is, just like always, the US government operates in knee-jerk mode and does little long term planning (again, like China). Another way to do this would have been not to go to "war" with the fossil fuel industry .......it seems California policy led to a uniquely disadvantaged position. .
Originally Posted by Trip7
(Post 4034588)
https://www.wsj.com/business/energy-oil/think-6-gas-is-bad-its-about-to-gets uniquely disadvantaged.-even-worse-in-california-354d3d2f?st=M2QVXC
and... "We are doing everything we can to meet our supply obligations there,” Wirth said. “But it does point out the vulnerabilities that have been created in California as a result of decades of poor energy policy.” |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 4034585)
Yes.
The exquisite munitions are for kicking the door in, cleaning up enemy IADS, and getting after high value, mobile targets whose location will likely become harder to pin down after hostilities commence. Once air superiority (air supremacy in this case) is achieved, then the ATO basically starts to function like an airline operations schedule, with reusable planes and drones servicing predefined targets with cheap iron bombs (typically with cheap guidance kits), returning to refuel, re-arm, line mx, maybe change crews, and go again. That's sustainable for a *very* long time. We have vast stockpiles of iron bombs and various bolt-on guidance kits, all very affordable as such things go. We even still have the ability to deploy unguided iron bombs the old fashioned way (I'll let current fighter attack guys weigh in on the current level of proficiency). We really no longer need the expensive munitions for this conflict, except maybe for an occasional niche application. The legit concern is that we expended a lot of the high-end stuff, which reduces deterrence in the Pacific until inventories are restored (which will take time due to limited production capacity, even if funded). But the flip side is that we demonstrated to PRC that our chit still works really well, that in and of itself has a deterrent effect. Also demonstrated that the current regime at least isn't afraid of engaging, additional deterrent effect. Approved as requested |
Originally Posted by Buck Rogers
(Post 4034607)
From the article...."...And it doesn’t help that two of the state’s major refineries closed in the past six months, cutting off almost one-fifth of its fuel-making capacity. Even if the strait reopens soon, its closure has already withheld at least 1 billion barrels from the global market, analysts say. ...
and... "We are doing everything we can to meet our supply obligations there,” Wirth said. “But it does point out the vulnerabilities that have been created in California as a result of decades of poor energy policy.” |
Originally Posted by Buck Rogers
(Post 4034607)
"We are doing everything we can to meet our supply obligations there,” Wirth said. “But it does point out the vulnerabilities that have been created in California as a result of decades of poor energy policy.”
Enron I think the name was… https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...3F531DD768D3F4 |
Originally Posted by Extenda
(Post 4034475)
It’s wild to me watching us dismantle the post WWII international order which WE created solely for OUR benefit, with half the country cheering it on.
I have no idea what’s on the other side of it, but I highly doubt it’s better than us running the carefully crafted world which had us as the only super power since I’ve been alive. It’s like we had some tantrum, took our ball and stormed home after dominating the playground basketball game for 80 years, much to the bewilderment of our teammates and opponents. Countries affected (or even created) directly:
|
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 4034585)
The legit concern is that we expended a lot of the high-end stuff, which reduces deterrence in the Pacific until inventories are restored (which will take time due to limited production capacity, even if funded). But the flip side is that we demonstrated to PRC that our chit still works really well, that in and of itself has a deterrent effect. Also demonstrated that the current regime at least isn't afraid of engaging, additional deterrent effect. |
Originally Posted by Lowslung
(Post 4034617)
Did we though? Yes, we killed something like 95% of incoming drones/missiles. But the Iranians were still able to do significant damage to some very high end systems. They would’ve killed a lot more of our people as well, but thank god we had the foresight to evacuate them (kudos to the leadership that made that decision). I feel like an alternate lesson the Chinese or Norks might take away is that if you saturate our defenses with enough targets, you’ll eventually get through, kill the radars & the patriot batteries & therefore threaten our regional forces & make your main operation that much easier. Caveat: those concerns are based on open source information. I’m sure there’s plenty we’re not seeing…..but still…
Which is why you need deterrence in the form of your own offensive capability, which our NATO allies largely spent the last three and a half decades divesting themselves of. |
Originally Posted by FangsF15
(Post 4034124)
Even Chuck Schumer called out Obama’s deal as terrible on the senate floor, and would have led them to a nuke by now already. It’s on video. That deal was a massive giveaway, and released over a BILLION dollars in cash Iran used to make EFP IED’s that killed and maimed our boys (and a few girls).
After Trump killed the deal in 2018, Iran said screw it now and went ahead with enriching to the degree they had NOT done before. And no more monitoring once that deal was killed in 2018. Killing that deal in 2018 without replacing with a new one - how is that good? You need to be able to criticize fairly. You don’t seem to. Since you brought it up, masks are worthless, unless they are N-95, properly fitted, and not jammed in your pocket 10x a day (contaminating your hands, pockets, and anything else you touch. Also, it wasn’t a vaccine. Despite what the MSM said, it did not “stop the spread”. Some famous personalities lied when they said “it stops with you”. “This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated “. Demonstrably untrue at best, lies at worst. It was an experimental therapeutic. One that we should all be thankful for, but it was by definition not a vaccine. And it was a vaccine, a mRNA type that continues to be used today safely. In fact, you’ll probably see more variants of it for different things than just a coronavirus. You and I won’t ever see face to face. To come back full circle, I can’t take any of you seriously about Iran. You people have a fantasy that Iran will make a dirty bomb go off in NYC or some large city, and kill what? 50,000-100k? You had 1,000,000 Americans die and your response was to get that face diaper away from me and keep that needle to yourself. Noted. And summarily dismissed. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:57 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands