> If Lockheed dedicates the entire Troy, Alabama line exclusively to JASSM-ER and produces zero LRASM anti-ship missiles, the maximum rate is 860 per year. That drops the timeline to 2.2 years, but it means the Navy gets zero of the anti-ship missiles it would need for a Taiwan contingency.
China wins by literally doing nothing.
US losing on manufacturing, automobiles, renewables, human talent, global good will, etc.
This is a back of the envelope, not cognizant of all of the factors, estimate.
We don't know what the pacing item of the manufacturing is. It could be sub-assemblies from another company, raw materials, final assembly workers, facilities for final assembly, or a lack of capital to address these shortcomings.
Double the price you are willing to pay, and I bet the rate goes up a lot. You can build a new building in 6 months. In 90 days you can hire and train enough new workers for a third shift.
At the current demand, and the current sales price, and the current planned procurement's, that is all LM can make....
I have a saying I use with clients: "anything is possible with time and money".
Certainly, anything is possible. But this is a current and present risk if China were to make a move in the next month (if we agree that anything is possible). Author is saying "this is a clear and present risk", not that "this can't be solved with time and money".
what we don't know is what is the blocker? it maybe that LM is running at 10% capacity, with a lot of material in stock. a purchase order shows up, and they start a night shift next week.
may or may not be a dire situation. unless, as you mentioned, we need them next month.
That's the thing: this Iranian operation produced nothing of value for the United States but most definitely weakened our capabilities even if we say it is a temporary state until our supplies are replenished.
Trading a rook for a pawn makes sense if you can take a queen. But if you just trade a rook for a pawn...
Speak nothing of the waste of tax payer dollars and loss of Iranian civilian lives for this nothingburger.
> About two-thirds of voters ages 18 to 24 (66%) associate with the Democratic Party, compared with 34% who align with the GOP.
> About six-in-ten voters 80 and older (58%) identify with or lean toward the GOP, while 39% associate with the Democratic Party.
> How does voting behavior differ by age?
> In 2024, 47.7% of citizens between the ages of 18 and 24 voted, compared to 60.2% of 25- to 44-year-olds, 70.0% of 45- to 64-year-olds, and 74.7% of people 65 and older.
Older voters have higher turnout and skew heavily Republican.
Older voters didn't vote for war with Iran. Some will go along with the president for tribal reasons and what's left of american patriotism.
Defining things generationally is unnecessarily divisive: the people who have been relentlessly pushing for war with iran have names and addresses and have been doing so for 30 years.
I don't think you can not address it "generationally" The people who voted are absolutely getting what they voted for. None of this was not predicted before and during the election. I remember reading years ago that Trump wanted his second term to do the wanton things he couldn't before (like bludgeoning countries with the military). It was all out there.
It's past time to stop blaming a few warhawks "over there" Voters did this. Voters need to fix it
Trump ran on ending the war in ukraine in "a week" and never said anything about war with iran during his campaign.
The voters didn't and don't do shit: elites pick the two candidates, pay them both a bunch of money, buy congress and push through what they want. If Kamala were elected we'd be at war with iran just the same.
Stop blaming normies who have no power for what PNAC, etc have been pushing for for decades with real money.
Now you say that and it's an interesting assertion. The Chinese certainly will tell you that they are in a war. And will also say that America is in a war.
Americans a few years ago defined a "continuum of conflict" consisting of competition, crisis, and conflict (sometimes you see cooperation). America will tell you that we are in competition with China, which is a type of conflict.
We're not in a military war with them...yet (and maybe Trump would just let them take Taiwan; who knows).
We are definitely in an economic "war" with them, basically outright banning their automotive industry from gaining a foothold in the US and doing things like pressuring Nvidia to limit exports to them.
45 comments
US losing on manufacturing, automobiles, renewables, human talent, global good will, etc.
We don't know what the pacing item of the manufacturing is. It could be sub-assemblies from another company, raw materials, final assembly workers, facilities for final assembly, or a lack of capital to address these shortcomings.
Double the price you are willing to pay, and I bet the rate goes up a lot. You can build a new building in 6 months. In 90 days you can hire and train enough new workers for a third shift.
At the current demand, and the current sales price, and the current planned procurement's, that is all LM can make....
Certainly, anything is possible. But this is a current and present risk if China were to make a move in the next month (if we agree that anything is possible). Author is saying "this is a clear and present risk", not that "this can't be solved with time and money".
what we don't know is what is the blocker? it maybe that LM is running at 10% capacity, with a lot of material in stock. a purchase order shows up, and they start a night shift next week.
may or may not be a dire situation. unless, as you mentioned, we need them next month.
Trading a rook for a pawn makes sense if you can take a queen. But if you just trade a rook for a pawn...
Speak nothing of the waste of tax payer dollars and loss of Iranian civilian lives for this nothingburger.
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/04/09/age-generati...
https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-americans-vote-and-ho... Older voters have higher turnout and skew heavily Republican.Defining things generationally is unnecessarily divisive: the people who have been relentlessly pushing for war with iran have names and addresses and have been doing so for 30 years.
It's past time to stop blaming a few warhawks "over there" Voters did this. Voters need to fix it
The voters didn't and don't do shit: elites pick the two candidates, pay them both a bunch of money, buy congress and push through what they want. If Kamala were elected we'd be at war with iran just the same.
Stop blaming normies who have no power for what PNAC, etc have been pushing for for decades with real money.
In 2025, BYD manufactured 2.2 million battery electric vehicles.
I only need one.
Americans a few years ago defined a "continuum of conflict" consisting of competition, crisis, and conflict (sometimes you see cooperation). America will tell you that we are in competition with China, which is a type of conflict.
We are definitely in an economic "war" with them, basically outright banning their automotive industry from gaining a foothold in the US and doing things like pressuring Nvidia to limit exports to them.
Nothing to see here, moving along.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-158_JASSM
It's looking like the US needs some disruption on their armament suppliers, kinda what SpaceX did for space launches.
Compare that to the 1.5M each of the JASSM cost.
U.S. is burning through Tomahawk cruise missile stockpile
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47619879
US Burned 14 Years of Missiles in 30 Days
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47619701
This opens it up for newer ideas - the age of hideously expensive missiles is over.