Started By
Message

re: Deindustrialization - Have We Become a Poor Country?

Posted on 12/17/23 at 6:30 pm to
Posted by Lima Whiskey
Member since Apr 2013
19475 posts
Posted on 12/17/23 at 6:30 pm to
quote:

But we can build the infrastructure relatively quickly to have the basic components constructed in several areas. Things can change quickly.


If that was true we would have defeated Russia in Ukraine.

Rebuilding, for example, our shipbuilding capacity would take 15 to 20 years. This isn’t the 1940s where we could retool existing plants for wartime production, critically, we also don’t have the trained workforce for it either.

quote:

If the US oriented its economy to beating Russia, it could do so easily.


If Ukraine is so important, if winning is so vital, and retooling our economy is so easy, then why didn’t we do that?

Are we choosing to actively sabotage Ukraine then?

Why do we want Ukraine to lose?

quote:

And this has translated to them becoming bogged down in a former sphere of influence, unable to dominate in the air, only taking defensive positions.


They actually dominate the air. The introduction of their version of a JDAM dramatically change the air war.

quote:

becoming bogged down


They’re slowly grinding their way through the Ukrainians. Arestovich said Ukraine has lost 300k dead. Which means Ukraine has suffered perhaps 900k to 1200k wounded. Kolomoisky‘s TV station published a total casualty figure of 1.1 million. The death toll, and Russias firepower is what’s allowing them to advance in places like Mariynka, and Avdiivka.
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
36405 posts
Posted on 12/17/23 at 7:10 pm to
quote:

If that was true we would have defeated Russia in Ukraine.


We aren’t fighting the Russians directly in Ukraine yet. We are mostly giving the Ukrainians older equipment.

quote:

Rebuilding, for example, our shipbuilding capacity would take 15 to 20 years. This isn’t the 1940s where we could retool existing plants for wartime production, critically, we also don’t have the trained workforce for it either.


But the Navy’s goal for its shipbuilding is spread out over 35 years. The current ship building rate is 11 per year, with a goal of 360 ships by the 2060’s. Without reference to what the security situation looks like, why would we need to change our shipbuilding capacity? Retooling industrial capacity over a generation seems less concerning when the Navy has 30 year plans. Again, more does not = better.

quote:

If Ukraine is so important, if winning is so vital, and retooling our economy is so easy, then why didn’t we do that?


The US can do a lot of things at once. And pointing out the US has that ability doesn’t mean that it will happen. If the US needed to transition to a wartime economy, as the Russians have, it is well within the productive capacity of the nation.

quote:

Are we choosing to actively sabotage Ukraine then? Why do we want Ukraine to lose?


The piecemeal strategy of aid release has definitely hampered the Ukrainians.

quote:

They actually dominate the air. The introduction of their version of a JDAM dramatically change the air war.


At no point during this war has Russia ‘dominated’ the air, at least not in the way that the US has seen domination of airspace. And given they’ve lost over 30 jets that would be considered ‘modern,’ I’m not sure that it is an argument I believe. At least until we get a per sortie figure.

quote:

They’re slowly grinding their way through the Ukrainians. Arestovich said Ukraine has lost 300k dead. Which means Ukraine has suffered perhaps 900k to 1200k wounded.


I don’t trust your casualty loss figures, given your calculations early in the war.

quote:

The death toll, and Russias firepower is what’s allowing them to advance in places like Mariynka, and Avdiivka.


They’ve advanced at a snail’s pace in the last year. They have the manpower advantage and the resource advantage, and yet are still bogged down in a country which should, theoretically, be no match for them. They’ve reorganized and adapted well, but I’m skeptical of their ability against a country like Turkey, let alone the full brunt of NATO.

Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
424693 posts
Posted on 12/17/23 at 7:20 pm to
quote:

If that was true we would have defeated Russia in Ukraine.

We're not fighting Russia in Ukraine. If we did, it would have been with airplanes, not mortar shells.

quote:

Rebuilding, for example, our shipbuilding capacity would take 15 to 20 years.

Why would we need to do that?

quote:

This isn’t the 1940s where we could retool existing plants for wartime production, critically, we also don’t have the trained workforce for it either.

This also isn't the 1940s where international labor was difficult to obtain and transport to the US...or pay.

quote:

If Ukraine is so important, if winning is so vital, and retooling our economy is so easy, then why didn’t we do that?

We haven't spent nearly what you imagine we did in Ukraine, big picture.

The risk is Russia starting WW3. It's not military or industrial capability.

quote:

Are we choosing to actively sabotage Ukraine then?

Why do we want Ukraine to lose?

What? This is pretty low-level clever.

first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram