Rapidly Depleting Munitions Stockpiles Point to Necessary Changes in Policy

SUMMARY

U.S. munitions stockpiles are rapidly being depleted as the Ukraine war continues. Sufficient stockpiles of munitions are vital to the U.S. defense. Once the stockpiles are expended, the Department of Defense cannot simply buy more munitions—manufacturing takes years. Congress and the Department of Defense must ensure that the U.S. has sufficient stockpiles to meet the challenges of the modern era while working with manufacturers to make the industry as responsive as possible.

Rapidly Depleting Munitions Stockpiles Point to Necessary Changes in Policy

LOCKED AND LOADED: The most terrifying weapons of the future – including mega-bomb that could destroy Earth +

LOCKED AND LOADED: The most terrifying weapons of the future – including mega-bomb that could destroy Earth

Related:

STAR WARS: The terrifying future space weapons – ‘rods from God’ meteorites, molten metal cannons and weaponised asteroids

The Army will finally stand up a laser-equipped Stryker platoon next month

YouTube: We tested the US Military’s secret space weapon

The US doesn’t believe that these weapons are weapons of mass destruction—which would violate the Outer Space Treaty!?!

Russian Missile/Drone Strikes Ukraine’s Power Grid – Ukraine’s Top Brass Admits Resource Shortage

Update on Russian military operations in and around Ukraine for December 17, 2022:

– Russian missiles and drones deliver massive damage to Ukrainian electrical infrastructure;

– The extensive damage reported by Russian strikes contradicts Kiev’s claims of intercepting “most” Russian missiles and drones;

– Pentagon plans training program for 500 Ukrainian forces per month falling far short of necessary numbers just to replace lost Ukrainian manpower;

– Ukrainian General Zaluzhny admits a growing logistical crisis and shortcomings regarding Western systems transferred to Ukrainian forces;

– Zaluzhny complains about HIMARS’ limited range;

– Zaluzhny demands arms deliveries on a scale the US and NATO are incapable of;

References:

An interview with General Valery Zaluzhny, head of Ukraine’s armed forces

Russian Missile/Drone Strikes Ukraine’s Power Grid – Ukraine’s Top Brass Admits Resource Shortage (Odysee) via The New Atlas

NATO Chief Voices Fear Of War With Russia While US Greenlights Drone Strikes On Russian Territory

In what Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp describes as “a rare acknowledgment of the dangers of backing Ukraine,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg acknowledged a fear of something going “horribly wrong” and leading to a hot war between the nuclear-armed alliance and Russia.

NATO Chief Voices Fear Of War With Russia While US Greenlights Drone Strikes On Russian Territory

Related:

You (and Almost Everyone You Know) Owe Your Life to This Man.

U.S. and NATO scramble to arm Ukraine and refill their own arsenals

Either this narrative about weapon stockpiles, being depleted, is part of the information war or Russia is demilitarizing NATO!?!

U.S. and NATO scramble to arm Ukraine and refill their own arsenals

In Ukraine, the kind of European war thought inconceivable is chewing up the modest stockpiles of artillery, ammunition and air defenses of what some in NATO call Europe’s “bonsai armies,” after the tiny Japanese trees. Even the mighty United States has only limited stocks of the weapons the Ukrainians want and need, and Washington is unwilling to divert key weapons from delicate regions like Taiwan and Korea, where China and North Korea are constantly testing the limits.

So the West is scrambling to find increasingly scarce Soviet-era equipment and ammunition that Ukraine can use now, including S-300 air defense missiles, T-72 tanks and especially Soviet-caliber artillery shells

There are even discussions about NATO investing in old factories in the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Bulgaria to restart the manufacturing of Soviet-caliber 152-mm and 122-mm shells for Ukraine’s still largely Soviet-era artillery armory.

The European Union has approved €3.1 billion ($3.2 billion) to repay member states for what they provide to Ukraine, but that fund, the [ironically-named] European Peace Facility, is nearly 90 percent depleted.

Smaller countries have exhausted their potential, another NATO official said, with 20 of its 30 members “pretty tapped out.” But the remaining 10 can still provide more, he suggested, especially larger allies. That would include France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands.

NATO’s secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, has advised the alliance — including, pointedly, Germany — that NATO guidelines requiring members to keep stockpiles should not be a pretext to limit arms exports to Ukraine. But it is also true that Germany and France, like the United States, want to calibrate the weapons Ukraine gets, to prevent escalation and direct attacks on Russia.

Washington is also looking at older, cheaper alternatives like giving Ukraine anti-tank TOW missiles, which are in plentiful supply, instead of Javelins, and Hawk surface-to-air missiles instead of newer versions. But officials are increasingly pushing Ukraine to be more efficient and not, for example, fire a missile that costs $150,000 at a drone that costs $20,000.

Macron rejects ‘confrontation’ as he relaunches Asia strategy

Macron rejects ‘confrontation’ as he relaunches Asia strategy

“We don’t believe in hegemony, we don’t believe in confrontation, we believe in stability,” Macron said.

Macron said a coordinated response was needed to tackle the overlapping crises facing the international community — from climate change to economic turmoil triggered by Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Our Indo-Pacific strategy is how to provide dynamic balance in this environment,” he said.

“How to provide precisely a sort of stability and equilibrium which could not be the hegemony of one of those, could not be the confrontation of the two major powers.”

The Indo-Pacific Strategy doesn’t sound as innocent as Macron makes it out to be:

The new US Indo-Pacific Strategy document released in February has two interesting components, one overt and one covert. The document overtly declares the US is an “Indo-Pacific power.” Covertly, its aim is to “tighten the noose around China.” Arguably, minus the military might, China’s nearly a decade-long “Belt and Road Initiative” cannot be perceived as a grand national strategy aimed at controlling Eurasia or the Asia Pacific or any region for that matter. Yet the BRI is mythologized into such a geostrategic game-changer that it has rattled the US and its allies in the Asia Pacific. The BRI, at best, is nothing more than a mere geopolitical overland and maritime “chessboard” based on trade and investment.

BRI and the ‘Indo-Pacific’ Strategy: Geopolitical vs. Geostrategic