this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2025
368 points (100.0% liked)

World News

41977 readers
6860 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cloud_herder@lemmy.world 7 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Pffftft get bent. Providing military gear to Ukraine that was destined to be disposed of for reaching its end of life by sitting on a shelf doesn’t really cost the US much, other than on an accounting ledger. It’s either on the balance sheet as “N number of ATACMS valued at $X were disposed of for $Z (cost of disposal)” or “N number of ATACMS valued at $X were provided to Ukraine at a cost of $W (cost of shipping)”. Which end up being roughly the same.

Regardless the munitions are gone and off the books. Both outcomes mean US arms producers get to make more missiles — which is money spent within the US on US jobs.

So, who gives a shit? Let Ukraine defend themselves while Russia expends money and soldiers. Ya Muppet.

[–] NimdaQA@lemmy.world -3 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Disposed? They were going to be refurbished as ATACMS isn’t being produced anymore since 2007. For now, current stockpile are needed for refurbishments until its successor, PrSM can actually get out in actual numbers which takes time and is unlikely to outpace Russian Iskander production which has already at least 7 months ago, almost reached peak ATACMS production and probably has by now if not surpassed.

But because of the US sending them into Ukraine, they don’t have these ATACMS that would be very useful to equip NATO or US forces in Europe with at least until PrSM becomes available in large numbers and knowing US production tendencies, will be quite some years away.

(Doubt the ATACMS problem is as bad as the Stinger problem, they had to get retired employees whom are in their 70s to teach new employees because some smart person decided to cancel stinger production, retire the Stinger and give them to the national guard til Ukraine).

It’s going to be the modern day missile gap.