Way to go DoD

Iran Gets Spare Parts

Just read that this morning at work... just a little bit scary.

I don't doubt it was a mistake. Huge bureaucracies are hard to keep complete track of, especially in the things they don't specialize in...They screwed up and didn't keep track of who was buying their extra/old crap....I don't see it as that bigga deal really though...We could still give probably any nation in the world(sans China?) a good stomping in any conventional military conflict....assuming we have the manpower...


Edited by .Ryan - 16 January 2007 at 10:19am

.Ryan wrote: I don't doubt it was a mistake. Huge bureaucracies are hard to keep complete track of, especially in the things they don't specialize in...They screwed up and didn't keep track of who was buying their extra/old crap....I don't see it as that bigga deal really though...We could still give probably any nation in the world(sans China?) a good stomping in any conventional military conflict....assuming we have the manpower...

Exactly, the only Country I'd be terrified to go against is Japan, or Russia. (Russia still has way to many nukes, and if We go to war against Japan we not only bring back old Grudges, but alot of our Technology would be cut off).

Just a point for understanding:

If we sell the Republic of Umpah our XYZ Intercept Radar, we already know its frequencies, and counters, and effectively negate its use against us, without massive R+D into finding the information on a Republic of Umpah home designed ABC Radar.

We sell our weapons technology to foreign states all the time, mostly 1st or 2nd generations of the system, while we are operating on Generation 5 of the same technology for the reasons stated above.

Iran likes our stuff. Why they'd rip off the M-16  I can't fathom beyond possibility of using NATO mags and ammunition. The F-14 isn't even in service anymore, I wouldn't be too concerned if they manage to keep them working for a few more years before canabilizing the rest of them.

Kristofer wrote: Panda Man wrote: .Ryan wrote: I don't doubt it was a mistake. Huge bureaucracies are hard to keep complete track of, especially in the things they don't specialize in...They screwed up and didn't keep track of who was buying their extra/old crap....I don't see it as that bigga deal really though...We could still give probably any nation in the world(sans China?) a good stomping in any conventional military conflict....assuming we have the manpower... Exactly, the only Country I'd be terrified to go against is Japan, or Russia. (Russia still has way to many nukes, and if We go to war against Japan we not only bring back old Grudges, but alot of our Technology would be cut off). Youre kidding me right? Recent war games with Taiwan show that the Chinese could win simply because US Commanders are not thinking outsite the box. Needless to say it is a war game, and only a war game, but still as wrong as most war games go to show, its a possibility that needs to be looked at because of the size of their armed forces. That and wasnt there also instance with Israel selling weapons we gave them to China? Also, any technology China gets from the US, being it new or old may be better than what they currently have, thus increasing their knowledge of our systems, and them utilizing our systems against us. And they save money on R&D playing catch up

Those wargames are generally held for the benefit of the smaller nations, and U.S. commanders will restrict themselves to certain 'textbook' strategies known to be employed by potential enemies. Furthermore, U.S. assets will rarely be sued to their full capability, as they're subject to certain handicaps in terms of weapon effectiveness, engagement range, etc etc- this is the reasoning behind that farcical report a few years ago about India 'winning' an exercise against a U.S. carrier fleet.

Noone who's *actually* fought the U.S. has had any luck in a straight up fight so far...

Wargames aren't just a 'hey, let's play at a war' sort of thing. They're designed to test specific strategies, to rehearse certain contingencies, etc. the games against Taiwan, for instance, likely involved the U.S. playing a notional Chinese aggressor, and using Chinese tactics and analogous capabilities- which are significantly behind the U.S. in terms of technology and tactical refinement.