• @ArbitraryValue
    link
    English
    51
    edit-2
    12 days ago

    It took them years of intense warfare to run out. NATO stockpiles would last a few months. That’s not indefensible because NATO doesn’t intend to fight an artillery war, but the limited industrial capacity is still concerning. I suppose that many other factories would be refitted for the production of weapons if a major war actually broke out, but I do worry that Western Europe has gone soft after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Again, that’s not indefensible because spending vast amounts of money on weapons in the absence of any enemies that would pose a serious threat is not prudent, but rearming now seems like the wise course of action.

    (Not noncredible enough? Too noncredible? I’m only qualified to comment because I played StarCraft a lot.)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2012 days ago

      Maintaining idle production capacity is expensive. Really expensive, for such specialized tooling. And war has changed a lot since 1918, artillery is no longer a lone fighting force like it once was. Countries have chosen to tool for different types of armament in a lot broader strokes.

      I’m sure, if the need arose, plants could retool a lot faster than you realize.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1311 days ago

      That’s not indefensible because NATO doesn’t intend to fight an artillery war

      We didn’t expect to fight a war against a country with an army straight out of WW2.

      We’re trying to help a country fight a war with 60 year old gear. Give them real tech and let them roll the idiots.