The Return of Industrial Warfare

Source: RUSI.

The writer explains that Russia consumes weapons and ammunition in Ukraine at a pace that exceeds U.S./Nato rates of production. Assuming that Russia has the industrial capacity to supply its current consumption (potentially with China’s help), the U.S./Nato militaries cannot compete with Russian forces on the battlefield.

8 thoughts on “The Return of Industrial Warfare

  1. I wouldn’t put too much weight on that.

    Most of the bombs we dropped in VietNam were left over from WW2.

    Both we and the Russians have mountains of munitions left from the Great Battle for Europe that never happened. The Soviets were big believers in artillery and artillery rockets and never throw anything away. All that stuff is getting past its ‘Best if Used By” date so it is essentially free.

    Only the more advanced stuff is current production,

    Like

    1. RE: “Both we and the Russians have mountains of munitions left from the Great Battle for Europe that never happened.”

      I’m sure that’s true, but it is not necessarily definitive.

      Suppose two armies go to war with equal stockpiles of munitions. All else being equal, the army that can resupply its consumption at a faster rate is the one that can consume its stockpile at a faster rate, giving it the advantage in battle.

      Like

  2. The grain of truth in this analysis is not debatable – ammunition does not grow on trees. It has to be produced and moved to where it is needed. The rest of the analysis is questionable at best. And your conclusion from it. . .

    “U.S./Nato militaries cannot compete with Russian forces on the battlefield.”

    is completely bonkers. Russia is just barely holding its own against a much smaller, much weaker nation. It does not dare engage with NATO. If Chinese are anything they are rational. The idea that their manufacturing capability can or would support operations against NATO is a fantasy.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. RE: “The rest of the analysis is questionable at best.”

      Why, because you say so? If I have to choose between your opinion and RUSi’s, or between Stars and Stripes and RUSI, I’ll go with RUSI.

      Like

      1. “I’ll go with RUSI.”

        As a reminder, Russia has an economy about the size of that of Texas. The idea that it can outproduce all of NATO in a protracted conflict is questionable at best. Not because I say so, but because it is obviously true.

        People tend to choose sources that support what they want to believe. You want to believe that NATO is weak, and Russia is strong. Why you want to believe that is another subject.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply to Paul Murphy Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s