IMO unspoken driver Air Force recapitalizaion problems mirrors navy - too many platforms not suitable for indopac theatre. F35 designed for euro theatre, doesn't have non tanking range for indopac. No reason to double down on inadequate hardware when ngad / b21 on the horizon. Hence US trying to plug longer range lo mix f15ex that can serve as missile truck for future hi mix ngad fighters. And drones. Meanwhile current Air Force mix / Force composition enough for other adversaries even with less airframes. In interim, brass of different branches still going to fight for funding even though much of what's available to acquire is not optimal for what is needed.
The U.S. military has an unprecedented capacity for destroying organized state power. The fourth largest air force in the world is the U.S. Navy. The U.S. Army has the second most military aircraft amongst military branches of the world.
To your question it depends on how you count “win”. The Gulf War was a win. Same with Panama, Grenada, and the toppling of Saddam Hussein. Was Korea a win? It wasn’t a loss as South Korea still exists. Afghanistan was a loss. China hasn’t taken over Taiwan largely due to the U.S. military’s deterrence. Is that a win? Wars in former Yugoslavia ended as a result of U.S. military intervention.
EDIT: The real “win” of the U.S. military comes from the deterrent effect it has on dissuading nations from attacking our allies and the accompanying amount of political power that comes from that fact. Early in the 2000s the South Korean President made a remark about the U.S. military. Rumsfeld announced that U.S. was considering withdrawing from the Korean peninsula. As a result there was panic selling in the Korean stock market. The Korean President backtracked on the remarks.
Absolutely, people fixate on Korea and Vietnam while ignoring that the US has won many ”fast” wars since 1945. Operation Desert Storm is a perfect modern example.
The US has nukes. It has a fleet of B-2 Spirits which are essentially unkillable and can deliver nuclear weapons anywhere on the planet. Does it need to win anything? If it ever loses, it could just nuke everybody out of spite and call it a day.
Its victory over Japan in WW2 was a foregone conclusion due to sheer industrial output. There is literally nothing Japan could have done to avoid being utterly defeated, it was but a matter of time even without the nukes. The US would just keep spamming war materiel and personnel at the enemy until the enemy was destroyed. It's truly mind boggling the scale of it.
Now factor in the fact that America is basically asleep right now. More or less deindustrialized, in world boss mode, it views itself as the highly paid managers of the other shithole nations where the cheap manufacturing actually occurs. And it still projects absurd amounts of power by just sending carrier groups to random places. Imagine what's going to happen once they start reindustrializing.
They don't even need to win anything, they have people like the CIA and NSA making sure that winning is not even necessary to begin with. You don't need to actually get americans killed if you can get your enemies to kill each other by destabilizing their nations.
Obviously the US military has absolutely crushed their enemies as far as not having their hands tied by politics has allowed. And that is important, whether for better or for worse.
In at least 70% of the major conflicts since then, US has absolutely failed in almost every respect in terms of reforming the countries they go to war with, and in bringing about any objective benefits for others or for themselves.
But, until now the deterrent effect of the US military just existing has undoubtedly saved many countries from being overrun by a neighboring thug with despotic tendencies. It is trivial to think of several plausible scenarios for the last 80 years that are far darker than what actually transpired. So that deterrent effect is by far the most important one, and an excellent reason for the US military to remain strong as we move into the future.
The US airforce is one hell of a deterrence - I'd argue that it's a more effective deterrence than the nuclear threat. The nuclear option is just too nuclear.
The US hasn’t fought a war since 1945. The Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 made war illegal. This pact was the basis for the war crimes tribunals after WWII, because Germany and Japan were signatories they were deemed to have violated the treaty by waging war. Likewise Congress has the sole authority to declare war, and this authority hasn’t been used since December 1945.
Yes, in Lebanon, the Dominican Republic, the Korean DMZ, Grenada, Libya (twice), the Persian Gulf, Iraq (three times), Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Haiti, Serbia, Pakistan, and Uganda.
But the bigger question might be, how many wars has NATO prevented since WWII? I believe the answer is: a lot.
[+] [-] maxglute|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] Kon-Peki|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] hindsightbias|1 year ago|reply
Which is why I have always been a big fan.
[+] [-] wakawaka28|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] rswskg|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] incomingpain|1 year ago|reply
Another article by the same author: https://www.defensenews.com/unmanned/2024/04/24/here-are-the...
So he's fully aware of the loyal wingman projects.
Turkey has the following unmanned fighter jet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayraktar_K%C4%B1z%C4%B1lelma
But the US airforce has this from 2011: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Phantom_Ray
or this from 2003: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_X-47A_Pegasus
EVeryone knows about this drone from 2001: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-9_Reaper
The author damned well knows that the US airforce is simply being overly secretive about their current capabilities.
[+] [-] andrewstuart|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] gregjor|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] skhunted|1 year ago|reply
To your question it depends on how you count “win”. The Gulf War was a win. Same with Panama, Grenada, and the toppling of Saddam Hussein. Was Korea a win? It wasn’t a loss as South Korea still exists. Afghanistan was a loss. China hasn’t taken over Taiwan largely due to the U.S. military’s deterrence. Is that a win? Wars in former Yugoslavia ended as a result of U.S. military intervention.
EDIT: The real “win” of the U.S. military comes from the deterrent effect it has on dissuading nations from attacking our allies and the accompanying amount of political power that comes from that fact. Early in the 2000s the South Korean President made a remark about the U.S. military. Rumsfeld announced that U.S. was considering withdrawing from the Korean peninsula. As a result there was panic selling in the Korean stock market. The Korean President backtracked on the remarks.
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/07/international/asia/south-...
[+] [-] eh8|1 year ago|reply
The US doesn’t lose wars, it loses interest
[+] [-] matheusmoreira|1 year ago|reply
Its victory over Japan in WW2 was a foregone conclusion due to sheer industrial output. There is literally nothing Japan could have done to avoid being utterly defeated, it was but a matter of time even without the nukes. The US would just keep spamming war materiel and personnel at the enemy until the enemy was destroyed. It's truly mind boggling the scale of it.
Now factor in the fact that America is basically asleep right now. More or less deindustrialized, in world boss mode, it views itself as the highly paid managers of the other shithole nations where the cheap manufacturing actually occurs. And it still projects absurd amounts of power by just sending carrier groups to random places. Imagine what's going to happen once they start reindustrializing.
They don't even need to win anything, they have people like the CIA and NSA making sure that winning is not even necessary to begin with. You don't need to actually get americans killed if you can get your enemies to kill each other by destabilizing their nations.
[+] [-] sgc|1 year ago|reply
In at least 70% of the major conflicts since then, US has absolutely failed in almost every respect in terms of reforming the countries they go to war with, and in bringing about any objective benefits for others or for themselves.
But, until now the deterrent effect of the US military just existing has undoubtedly saved many countries from being overrun by a neighboring thug with despotic tendencies. It is trivial to think of several plausible scenarios for the last 80 years that are far darker than what actually transpired. So that deterrent effect is by far the most important one, and an excellent reason for the US military to remain strong as we move into the future.
[+] [-] lostlogin|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] ipnon|1 year ago|reply
International law is weird.
[+] [-] chrisco255|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] karaterobot|1 year ago|reply
But the bigger question might be, how many wars has NATO prevented since WWII? I believe the answer is: a lot.
[+] [-] fxd123|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] downboots|1 year ago|reply
has humanity ever won in wars?
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]