Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

America Is Shipping So Many Weapons to Ukraine, Defense Companies Can’t Keep Up, Top Navy Officers Warn
The Tennessee Star ^ | January 13th, 2023 | by Micaela Burrow

Posted on 01/13/2023 5:48:27 PM PST by Mariner

Top officers in the U.S. Navy warned that the Ukraine war is putting a strain on an already stretched industrial base Tuesday, complaining defense contractors continue to fall behind in keeping up with the Navy’s needs, according to media reports.

Defense companies have struggled for years to keep pace with the Navy’s demands, citing pandemic-induced supply chain setbacks and a shortage of available labor, Navy Times reported. As the U.S. continues sending weapons and equipment to Ukraine, heightening the burden on weapons manufacturers, top Navy brass expressed worry that the fleet could fall dangerously low on needed assets if the war stretches out much longer.

“If the conflict does go on for another six months to another year, it certainly continues to stress the supply chain in ways that are challenging,” Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro said in a follow-up to his remarks at the annual Surface Navy Association conference conference Tuesday.

Most of the more than $29.9 billion in security assistance so far committed to Ukraine is withdrawn from existing U.S. stocks and includes equipment suited to defending against attackers from the ground, rather than the sea. However, as contractors scramble to invest more in expanding production capacity for HIMARS, Stinger missiles and other equipment, they poach resources that could be applied to filling the Navy’s orders, leaders warned, according to Navy Times.

(Excerpt) Read more at tennesseestar.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: corruption; ftxdonationstodems; getrichquik4theelite; militaryindustrial; moneylaundering; neoconnedshazthesadz; neoconsaresaddened; ukraine; war
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last
To: Mariner

An enterprising gun smuggler would start bringing these excess weapons back here to be used for when...they’re needed


21 posted on 01/13/2023 7:06:36 PM PST by Rural_Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hardspunned

And this one does?


22 posted on 01/13/2023 7:08:09 PM PST by Rural_Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Military Industrial Complex moguls that Eisenhower warned us
about are still worried that peace may break out any minute.

No cause for concern.

Our problem is the Communist Chinese are the real enemies for whom we need deadly weapons ready.


23 posted on 01/13/2023 7:09:26 PM PST by frank ballenger (You have summoned up a thundercloud. You're gonna hear from me. Anthem by Leonard Cohen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chickenlips

The only 155mm shell I found on e-bay was this - https://www.ebay.com/itm/195261558235


24 posted on 01/14/2023 3:17:37 AM PST by Krosan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

There’s something else too That is That well are manufacturing bases greatly reduced Automakers, for example, I have retold to make electric vehicles for fill the whims of environmentalist and current administration is so anti oil To have them making mutations when they so clearly have a much more important role to play in reducing CO2 to the environment


25 posted on 01/14/2023 4:27:01 AM PST by rottweiller_inc (inter canem et lupum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

So basically, it’s another proxy war.


26 posted on 01/14/2023 4:29:53 AM PST by A_perfect_lady (The greatest wealth is to live content with little. -Plato)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Waaaaaaaaaaah Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

Whiny Putinists have rolled out this doggerel time and again. We are not having trouble with weapons shipments. Many of the weapons sent to Ukraine are due to be replaced so they are going to have to start production anyway.

And IF they are having trouble over this relatively “little” war, how in heck do they think they are going to keep up in a “real” war??

The defense supply chain needs to get up to snuff.


27 posted on 01/14/2023 7:03:42 AM PST by Vaden (Russia: epicenter of globohomo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaden

“The defense supply chain needs to get up to snuff.”

Anti American neocons need to get onboard with America first.


28 posted on 01/14/2023 7:43:31 AM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Check it’s a money maker for Biden and the D.C. grab-a-lot crew.


29 posted on 01/14/2023 9:38:29 AM PST by Vaduz (LAWYERS )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

You’re an idiot of you think the US has no strategic interest in Ukraine.


30 posted on 01/14/2023 11:01:54 AM PST by willfulknowledge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: willfulknowledge

Let’s hear it smartass.

What is the strategic interest?


31 posted on 01/14/2023 11:23:33 AM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
It is time to increase our military industrial base.
as for your argument" Reducing strategically important capabilities to pursue a Ukraine war where we have not interests whatsoever. And everyone who supports such is anti American.

Are you done self-gratifying to a mirror reflection of yourself while fantasizing about your knowledge of global affairs?
We have plenty of interests in Ukraine.
1. Our word and global standing. Clearly, you have yet to read the A href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum">Budapest Memorandum and are unaware that the US, UK, and Russia promised to respect the sovereinty of Ukraine and protect it in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons.
2. Defeating Russia in Ukraine means they cannot march on Moldova and the Baltic Republics, bringing NATO into direct conflict with Russia. It is far cheaper to give Ukraine old equipment than to fight a conventional war directly against KGB Russia.
3. We are deterring China from attacking Taiwan. NATO unity makes it clear that such invasions will not be tolerated.
If you think giving some older weapons to Russia degrades our capabilities, what do you think losing carrier groups to China would do?

People supporting the Russian-Iranian-Chinese alliance are anti-American traitors, using your language.

32 posted on 01/17/2023 1:28:25 AM PST by rmlew ("Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

Your ignorance of the subject is astounding.

The Budapest Memorandum was an agreement signed by Bill Clinton, carrying the full force of his personal assurances. It was never even submitted to the US Senate and it was nearly universally derided there.

While Russia is likely to continue to march to Moldova, the Baltics are something they will not take on. They have a hard enough time with Ukraine.

Your allusions to the Domino Theory are delusions.

Unlike yourself, China does not make national decisions based on emotions. They KNOW they do not have the capability to occupy Taiwan, so they will not try.

If they had the ability, Ukraine would not deter them.

All three of your arguments do not stand the test of logic.


33 posted on 01/17/2023 9:19:36 AM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Just because you disagree with the strategic reasons to support Ukraine, your claim that they don't exist is an objective lie.

The Budapest Memorandum was an agreement signed by Bill Clinton, carrying the full force of his personal assurances. It was never even submitted to the US Senate and it was nearly universally derided there.
And it doesn't change the fact that our promise meant and means something.

While Russia is likely to continue to march to Moldova, the Baltics are something they will not take on. They have a hard enough time with Ukraine.
Putin and the rest of his gang didn't think Ukraine would be a problem. They assumed that Russian-speaking Ukrainians would support the invasion and that the Ukrainian military would collapse in 2022 as they did in areas in 2022. They assumed they could take Kiev in a few days. And a lot of analysts agreed in February. Russia has conducted cyberwarfare against Estonia. They have used the same irridentist language and tried to rile up ethnic Russians in Estonia.
If NATO didn't support Ukraine, NATO would have collapsed.

Unlike yourself, China does not make national decisions based on emotions. They KNOW they do not have the capability to occupy Taiwan, so they will not try.
2035, when they have 5-6 carrier groups and 6-10 landing helicopter docs is different than today. But even now China could take Taiwan, provided the US did not intervene. And even if we did, we would suffer heavy casualties to win, if we do win. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2022/06/01/but-can-the-united-states-defend-taiwan/

To defeat China, we would need the support of Japan, Australia, the Philippines, and Singapore. Pressure from India would be very helpful. All of these countries have good reasons to defect to China or go neutral. We have an alliance and unofficial alliances, because countries trust us.

34 posted on 01/18/2023 9:36:06 PM PST by rmlew ("Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

“And it doesn’t change the fact that our promise meant and means something.”

It was not OUR promise. It was not a promise by the USA. It was Bill Clinton’s promise.

It meant absolutely nothing. Even retards know that.

“If NATO didn’t support Ukraine, NATO would have collapsed.”

Utter nonsense. Ukraine is not a NATO member. And never will be. And no NATO member country has an existential interest there, with the US having no interests whatsoever.


35 posted on 01/19/2023 9:15:46 AM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
It was not OUR promise. It was not a promise by the USA. It was Bill Clinton’s promise.
Then we should give Ukraine nuclear weapons. Can't have it both ways.

An international memorandum hammered out over a year and two American administrations made between three major powers is more than a promise by Bill Clinton. It's not a treaty, but it was the word of the United States.

Utter nonsense. Ukraine is not a NATO member. And never will be. And no NATO member country has an existential interest there, with the US having no interests whatsoever.
As if France and the UK railing to stop the Nazis from taking over the Rhineland didn't cause an end of the mutual defence treaty between France and Belgium, or British and French failures to protect Czechoslovakia didn't lead to the Molotov-Ribentrop pact. In international relations, countries learn from precedent and broken promises. A failure of the US and UK to help Ukraine would have made NATO an empty promise.

PS. I have an IQ of 145. On 4 hours of sleep and 3 drinks, I'm still smarter than most people.

36 posted on 01/21/2023 9:44:46 PM PST by rmlew ("Mosques are our barracks, minarets our bayonets, domes our helmets, the believers our soldiers." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

“Then we should give Ukraine nuclear weapons. Can’t have it both ways.”

Ukraine was anxious to get rid of their nukes, but they slow walked it to gain compensation. And don’t think for even a minute that Ukraine was ignorant of the legal status of the memorandum.

They knew then, before they signed it, that it was not legally binding in the US, Russia, UK or Ukraine. And not in International law either. However, they DID ratify the START I AND Non-proliferation treaties in their Rada...both legally binding in Ukrainian and International Law.

“An international memorandum hammered out over a year and two American administrations made between three major powers is more than a promise by Bill Clinton.”

In law, it is ONLY a promise by Bill Clinton. Nothing else.

“A failure of the US and UK to help Ukraine would have made NATO an empty promise.”

Ludicrous.

The NATO treaty would still be binding and trusted by all members if Ukraine was incinerated tomorrow. NATO, nor the US has made any promises of any kind to Ukraine.

Otherwise there would be a treaty. Absent a treaty it’s just another empty set of promises by a rogue POTUS.

TOO bad the high-powered IQ of yours didn’t give you knowledge.


37 posted on 01/22/2023 9:59:58 AM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-37 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson