[lliamander]

> Do you want people operating sewing machines or (say) welders?

Adequate clothing is actually a very important in war. Frostbite, sunburn, heat exhaustion, cuts and scrapes (which can lead to infection), trench foot, etc. are all conditions that can be mitigated through clothing.

[throw0101c]

> Adequate clothing is actually a very important in war. Frostbite, sunburn, heat exhaustion, cuts and scrapes (which can lead to infection), trench foot, etc. are all conditions that can be mitigated through clothing.

Which is why all US military clothing is mandated to be domestically produced (Berry Amendment).

But how much industrial capacity do you want to take up making clothing? Or do you want to concentrate your finite workforce in perhaps being able to produce (say) artillery shells or cruise missiles?

Which is another ironic/sad part of Trump and Ukraine: a large portion of the US money 'sent' to UA actually went to the American military industrial complex. Helping UA was actually helping the US in being better prepared from a military supply chain POV.

Similarly, by alienating NATO allies, they're now less inclined to purchase US military gear, and so there will be lower economies of scale for fighters and missiles and such.

The icebreaker agreement (ICE Pact) would have caused investment in US shipyards:

* https://canadiandefencereview.com/davie-will-soon-establish-...

* https://gcaptain.com/polar-icebreakers-may-be-key-to-jumpsta...

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICE_Pact

[lliamander]

> Which is why all US military clothing is mandated to be domestically produced (Berry Amendment).

Cool.

> But how much industrial capacity do you want to take up making clothing?

I actually want the market to decide that. But that is fundamentally what we do not have. It has been more or less the result of conscious trade policy (by all governments involved) to incentivize production in other countries.