Quote:
Originally Posted by Olefin
The US still has more than sufficient capacity to produce armor plate as that base was kept intact. We were getting in armor plate at BAE to support
M88A2 production and MRAP's consistently during the war as was General Dynamics for the tanks, Oshkosh for their MRAP's, etc..
You have to keep in mind that US armored vehicle production is nothing like it was in WWII - there we were making tens of thousands of armored vehicles of varous types per year - here even with the war start US production would have never reached those levels
Plus the older armored vehicles would have been needed as the US converted the training divisions to infantry divisions to give them some kind of armor. Not top of the line but a lot better than using improvised armored cars from bank cars.
And if you use the original timeline (as I do) then the Cold War never really goes away - and thus the US keeps more industrial production dedicated to the military.
|
The big problem with this idea is that 1) Your assuming "Slick Willy" wouldn't have cut spending anyway. He ran on a pledge to do just that. It took him all of 90 days to kill most of the Military's "nonessential" training
and maintenance programs. This would probably be the primary reason Russia would be "emboldened" to try and rearm. To catch up with the US (who demonstrated their technological edge in the 91' Gulf War) while they were "resting on their laurels." The second primary problem is with resources. We would have lost nearly 40% of our steel supply (the amount coming from China since 1992). The Russians would not let China continue to ship product from China or continue to receive product from other countries in order to cripple China's economy. The Russians know that this would hurt the US economy and could be hoping to cause a large enough "negative effect" on the US economy to reduce their ability to assist China in their war effort. The attacks on shipping in the China Sea "war zones" would be a major reason for increasing US involvement in the Russo-Chinese War. By the time we become fully embroiled in WW3 on all fronts; our major steel mills will have been dismantled and shipped to China for more than 10 years (the major US Steel corps began dismantling US mills in 82'). While they have the capacity to produce plate during the most recent conflicts; could they continue to provide that plate WHILE the US was forced to build dozens of oil tankers, trains and rail cars (to meet war transportation needs after years of neglect), and container ships (to replace commercial shipping losses). These items would place a huge drain on the base metal (blast furnace) production needed to make new steel. The other steel furnaces can make finished metal but ONLY by using scrap steel of the appropriate quality for the finished metal being made. The M60's would have been used for certain training (mainly driver's training) along with added digital simulators for the other tasks (because you really need to train on the actual equipment your going to use). I still believe that all of those pieces of military equipment you see parked all over America would be consigned to the local BOF or Electric Furnace for use in NEW Armored Vehicle Construction. Also keep in mind that this would not be limited to steel; I imagine rubber, plastic, oil, coal, wood and a number of other resources would also be in short supply with the war and a reduction in shipping.
On a added note for anyone who thinks the US isn't stupid enough to "not plan ahead" for a world war. In 2012 the US finished a deal to sell off a significant chunk of our strategic stockpiles of Helium and Argon gasses to the private sector. About 8 Billion cubic feet of Argon was practically given away. Argon is the only gas that can be used to weld certain aluminum metals. Since Argon is not a naturally occuring gas; that may come back to haunt us in a future conflict.