While I have no desire to block a debate that's providing interesting information, I am constantly looking at it from the viewpoint that GDW intended the game to be about a group of WW3 veterans surviving and maybe rebuilding in the aftermath of a global war, with the PCs adventuring in a manner similar to how PCs adventure in AD&D.
It wasn't specifically about any group fielding large numbers of vehicles to continue prosecuting the war and although it can be argued that certain NPC groups will try to get all the vehicles they can, half the fun of the game would be missions for the PCs to get the necessary spares and POL to get a handful of vehicles operating. These missions would be significant not just to the NPCs or PCs but also to the Players simply because those needed resources are now so scarce that their PCs would be taking a significant role in the game story - which is kinda the point of RPGs
As I say, the debate is throwing out a lot of interesting and useful information but for me ultimately, it is a purely intellectual exercise because I personally don't see T2k as a game of raising masses of armoured vehicles to keep WW3 going. I've always thought of the combat vehicles as rare and kept for "special occasions".
Protecting your enclave is obviously important but the resources dedicated to keeping those armoured vehicles in combat could be better used to keep the population alive and growing food.