It's true that it's hard for a company to break into the market, but the market itself is competitive. The equipment manufacturers are competing against each other for contracts.
u sleepin on Northrop-Grumman , Bell-Textron and Boeing like that bro baka we got more than three heavy hitters (especially Northrop those are my boys)
>Wehraboos literally think the US coated for 80 whole years on Nazi tech
Yeah bro those Nazis they had gps and AI and vibraniun and shit but those dang israeli soviets wrecked it all
Superior technology gives us the false confidence that we’re invincible and can do whatever we want ie play god. Wars are rarely decided by technology anyways
>Wars are rarely decided by technology anyways
Bullshit. Game of Thrones said it best. You can pay the gold price or the iron price. Nations pay whichever is cheaper. If trade is cheaper than fighting a war, that's what they do. If war is cheaper than paying money, that's what they do.
The best way to ensure you are never in a war is to maintain a strong military and have free trade. Keep the iron price high and the gold price low.
>Wars are rarely decided by technology anyways
Wars are decided by 2 things, the goals and the means to reach them. Technology is the main way to reach your goals. So all that's left is not setting unrealistic expectations like "a civilized afghanistan". Americans are bad at that.
When you can clown on your "near peers" (a term of absolute condensed cope) with a handful of artillery and your innate godly logistics, only impossible goals are worth pursuing.
Korean conflict was a solid victory. Goal was to push the invading Norks back over the border. That was achieved. ROK was preserved. It was never the goal of the UN forces to conquer the norks. But it was the norks goal to conquer the south. And they failed even with the help of the chinese and russians.
The border where the Norks sit on all the shitty land dying of parasites nobody else has, while South Korea is a major regional power and a first world US ally? Post your cope about the battle of Chingchong and ignore the US raping the Chinese and Norks immediately afterwards.
1 year ago
Anonymous
what's the theory on whose Black person did pic related?
issi or was it really wagBlack folk?
1 year ago
Anonymous
Because they're Chinese in Africa so it's ok to kill them simple as.
>norks goal was complete control of the peninsula >UN/US was to maintain the agreed 38th parallel borders prior to the war
Cope. >cold war didn't go hot so it doesn't count
Even more cope. It's been decades since the Soviets collapsed, deal with it.
Anon since nations stopped being animals rutting in mud, before the USA even existed wars war fought purely on proxy, influenced via funding, political and diplomatic reach and will and global interventions has seen the rise and fall of nation states
>US lost the Korean War and the Cold War?
US won the cold car unironically. That happened when the Berlin wall came down. The Korean war isn't over yet. We are still at war with Korea right now.
In all honestly because we don't have territorial threats, Mexico and Canada aren't after our asses and no countries are after their asses. Every war we've had in modern history has been us shipping off to fight in some fricked up conflict that didn't even really involve us.
>Korean War
South Korea is now top 10 largest economies in the world >Gulf War
Saddam pushed out of Kuwait >Iraq War
Saddam toppled and permanent base of operations established in Iraq along with a democratic government established >Yugoslavia
Serb army neutralized
Sure we lost Vietnam, but to this day we have friendly relations with vietnam and they align with America over China to this day.
Korean War is at most a draw
The goal was not to make South Korea rich
The goal was to defeat the Norks
The Norks are still kicking and now a nuclear power too
America has literally never lost a war, ever. >Stalemated 1812 >Curb stomped the NVA then left once our political objectives changed >Toppled Taliban, created a puppet, got bored two decades later and left
>Could not fully defeat the NVA, left because you suffered too much casualties and they immediately took over >Could not fully defeat the Taliban, decide to leave the country to your innefective puppets who hated you and surrendered to the enemy
Cope
Post source showing the US ever intended to annex Afghanistan. You can't? Cool. We were always planning to leave, it took Biden fricking up the withdrawal on purpose to smear Trump's policy of hand-picking new Taliban leaders at the Camp David meeting and then leaving for you to even have a cope picture of a helicopter to point to and make thirdie noises at.
I mean I'm not even a yank but the fact you'd print a flyer celebrating the fact that you managed to score a single kill against a plane that bombed you daily without incident is incredible cope. Like "hur hur we did once manage to actually score a single counter victory serbia strong"
The fact it took the yanks flying the planes at the same time through the same route to make them remotely at risk, just shows that their technology was so strong during the conflict it actually bred complacency. All it took was changing up the sortie routines to make themtnt untouchable again
GMLRS capability is rooted in it's logistics. It had a good stockpile and higher production numbers then comparable systems. It's been so effective against the Russian's because the number of available missiles is sufficient to perform accurate salvos that are difficult to intercept and the range is far enough to keep it relatively safe. The small amount of systems Ukraine has forces them to be extremely careful in their employment as well.
GMLRS is great but you could replace it with other missile designs and if they had the same pre-war stockpiles and production rates as GMLRS they would have the same or better effect. There are several guided missile systems that have better range and payload but just aren't sufficient in numbers/or accurate enough to get the job done. The guidance packages and fire control networks these weapons use, particularly stuff like anti-jam GPS is a lot harder to make a comparison and the burgers probably have an advantage there on top of their hard on for precision standoff weapons.
>Bad SPG >Tank inline with every other western tank with some ahead of current Abrams versions >No real diesel subs >Mortars? Self propelled mortars? >Buying German small arms >Bradley is probably not the best IFV either
Probably should add SAM to it. Patriot isn't good at all. Probably not even better than some S400. In fact American drones also seem to be just expensive and not quantitatively better than Turkish ones.
Diesel subs function better for coast defense, and OP did say >tech exists
SPG aren't a meme either. USA just stopped improving there with no wheeled SPG, and the tracked one being outdated. Please don't even dare to imply having a few precision HIMARs is gonna serve the same role as gun artillery.
>>Tank inline with every other western tank with some ahead of current Abrams versions
None in mass produced numbers with the exception of maybe the K2, of which there are still very few. >>No real diesel subs
No need when you have moronic frickton of nuclear subs.
German small arms
Piecemeal purchases. Even the M27 still hasn't superseded all the M4s in Marine Inventory. >Bradley is probably not the best IFV either
Literally was for a long time. All of other competitors were developed with lessons learned on the Bradley. Of its era, the Bradley is the undisputed king, nothing comes close.
America's second Special Bonus Trait* is called "Overestimation" in which the U.S Overestimates its opponent's capabilities and prepares for an enemy that couldn't possibly do what they are afraid they can.
*The first Special Bonus was called "Logistics" and the third Bonus is "MIC".
>US makes the best one
Not according to the Netherlands.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a43520043/how-israel-puls-rocket-system-compares-to-himars/
>“In comparison, with HIMARS, more precision guided missiles are delivered within budget. PULS also has greater operational sustainability because it carries more missiles. The PULS rocket artillery system also has open architecture making it suitable (in the near future) for [new types] of ammunition from European producers.
More missile variety, from smaller 122/160mm guided Accular, to GMLRS-ER equivalent EXTRA and ATACMS-equivalent Predator Hawk, can carry dissimilar weapon loads with 2x pods, can mount on any chassis, flexible software architecture means it can take any new missiles developed.
The fact that HIMARS sees alot of action in 2023 by no means indicates it's the best system available.
>[Country X]... doesn't count!
They ran the numbers. Cope however you like. >Terrible range
As already stated, EXTRA is GMLRS ER ramge. Predator Hawk actually exceeds that of ATACMS by 100km. >GPS constellation
Nope. Can be guided by INS.
GMLRS and Prsm are better than their Israeli counterparts
>GMLRS... is just BETTER okay???
Tell that to the Netherlands. And Denmark. >Prsm
I'll give you that, but that's it.
>They ran the numbers.
So did everyone else. Cope with that. >Nope. Can be guided by INS.
With degraded accuracy, lmao. Pure cope. >Tell that to the Netherlands
Where is netherlands? do they even have an army?
>Well it's better because more countries use it!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
Fun fact on GMRLS - has a 91kg explosive, 15m CEP.
EXTRA has 120kg explosive, 10m CEP.
And as mentioned, the platform is strictly more adaptable. Open framework for missile integration, any chassis can use it. >With degraded accuracy, lmao.
Wow, so, just like GMLRS?
>can be guided by INS
You are now aware of integration drift, INS is great but it compliments GPS, it's there to increase overall accuracy and try to maintain it when GPS is denied or degraded. The longer and further you fly with INS only, the less accurate you get. Saying a missile doesn't need GPS because it has INS shows a poor understanding of guidance, INS only guidance makes for a very ineffective weapon with a poor CEP which just compounds itself the longer range your missile has.
I'm saying you have a poor understanding of guidance systems. Idc about you and the other anon arguing about GMLRS and EXTRA.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You're going to have to quote the post where I claim that INS maintains the same level of accuracy sans GPS. You'll be looking awhile, because it doesn't exist.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Anon here said
>not according to this irrelevant country!
Terrible range and uses American military GPS constellation.
that the missile in question used American GPS. You then replied here
>[Country X]... doesn't count!
They ran the numbers. Cope however you like. >Terrible range
As already stated, EXTRA is GMLRS ER ramge. Predator Hawk actually exceeds that of ATACMS by 100km. >GPS constellation
Nope. Can be guided by INS.
[...] >GMLRS... is just BETTER okay???
Tell that to the Netherlands. And Denmark. >Prsm
I'll give you that, but that's it.
saying "Nope. Can be guided by INS" which implies that you believed it didn't in fact use an American GPS constellation to conduct a successful strike and that INS by itself was sufficient. Just because you didn't precisely say it in exact words doesn't remove the context of your reply and doesn't make your post any less moronic anon holy kek.
The thing that concerns me about this image is that China can make stuff a lot cheaper. They have lower paid workers and less regulation.
Look at the price of a Holosun vs the price of a Trijicon for example.
The quality control is also worse, especially for weapons that aren't meant to be used
For instance, there was an arquebus that the chinese made for one of their emperors. Notably, it was about 10 times heavier and several times bigger than the arquebuses that they gave to the common soldier. Now why do you think that was the case? The claim at the time was obviously that an emperor needs an really imperial gun. But given that the chance that a European arquebus could misfire was as high as 50%, and that the Chinese were far worse at making guns than the Europeans, what do you think was a surefire way of avoiding having the Emperor's gift suddenly explode upon use? And more importantly, what did that say about the likely combat effectiveness of the typical Chinese firearm?
>country with largest and most advanced military industrial complex, largest and most advanced tech industry, largest and most well funded military, produces best weapons
WOW! That's a shock.
We fund weapon development with a shitload of money (beyond every major world power) and our production capabilities are subsidized by foreign partnerships.
We don't make our tech alone. We will partner with allied nations who help us and also get their share of the tech.
A simple example would be the Israelis partnering with us on the development of missile defense systems.
We also have some of the most extensive private infrastructure available for weapons development and R&D. We're unrivaled in that persuit.
>why does this keep happening
Because -- unlike the other two "global superpowers" -- we
1) didn't spend decades murdering all our "intellectuals".
2) didn't foster a culture of deception and servility.
3) tried, when possible, to reward innovation and foster a belief in progress.
it's it just a gps guided missile?
It’s just the best GPS guided rocket
shill force getting sloppy with words today
much better than glosnas guided missile
Money.
Zealous tithing to support the holy trinity: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Dynamics.
It's true that it's hard for a company to break into the market, but the market itself is competitive. The equipment manufacturers are competing against each other for contracts.
u sleepin on Northrop-Grumman , Bell-Textron and Boeing like that bro baka we got more than three heavy hitters (especially Northrop those are my boys)
BAE Systems.
>why does this keep happening
picked up research from nazi germany, see operation paperclip.
>Wehraboos literally think the US coated for 80 whole years on Nazi tech
Yeah bro those Nazis they had gps and AI and vibraniun and shit but those dang israeli soviets wrecked it all
Coasted*, thanks stupid kraut phone from Japan
That and French and bong tech
One of the conditions for the US entering the war was the transfer of technology.
Mass production.
It's not really superior to many GMLRS at all, but due to the sheer scale and the exports it's cheaper per unit.
It only exists in your mind my fat friend, for any type of equipment you could find something better elsewhere.
A long range, stealth effective air superiority fighter.
Got him
2 years ago 20 gayots would have jumped out their holes
>su-57
Guess that's gonna be different in the future
>us has the best military equipment
>lose every war they entered since ww2
why does this keep happening
Superior technology gives us the false confidence that we’re invincible and can do whatever we want ie play god. Wars are rarely decided by technology anyways
>Wars are rarely decided by technology anyways
Bullshit. Game of Thrones said it best. You can pay the gold price or the iron price. Nations pay whichever is cheaper. If trade is cheaper than fighting a war, that's what they do. If war is cheaper than paying money, that's what they do.
The best way to ensure you are never in a war is to maintain a strong military and have free trade. Keep the iron price high and the gold price low.
>Wars are rarely decided by technology anyways
Wars are decided by 2 things, the goals and the means to reach them. Technology is the main way to reach your goals. So all that's left is not setting unrealistic expectations like "a civilized afghanistan". Americans are bad at that.
When you can clown on your "near peers" (a term of absolute condensed cope) with a handful of artillery and your innate godly logistics, only impossible goals are worth pursuing.
US lost the Korean War and the Cold War?
>US lost the Korean War?
stalemate at most
and the Cold War?
not a war homie lmao
That sounds like an awful lot of cope for such a short post.
Korean conflict was a solid victory. Goal was to push the invading Norks back over the border. That was achieved. ROK was preserved. It was never the goal of the UN forces to conquer the norks. But it was the norks goal to conquer the south. And they failed even with the help of the chinese and russians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollback
>Wikipedia used to source anything but "Early Life"
To the pit with this degenerate!
>push the invading Norks back over the border.
What border? Norks are Korean and still are in Korea, what the frick do you learn in burgerstan?
>What border?
The pre war one perhaps?
The border where the Norks sit on all the shitty land dying of parasites nobody else has, while South Korea is a major regional power and a first world US ally? Post your cope about the battle of Chingchong and ignore the US raping the Chinese and Norks immediately afterwards.
what's the theory on whose Black person did pic related?
issi or was it really wagBlack folk?
Because they're Chinese in Africa so it's ok to kill them simple as.
>what the frick do you learn in burgerstan?
We learn what the 38th parallel is.
>norks goal was complete control of the peninsula
>UN/US was to maintain the agreed 38th parallel borders prior to the war
Cope.
>cold war didn't go hot so it doesn't count
Even more cope. It's been decades since the Soviets collapsed, deal with it.
>Achieving your objectives and slaughtering the enemy is cope
And this is why your country is poor.
Anon since nations stopped being animals rutting in mud, before the USA even existed wars war fought purely on proxy, influenced via funding, political and diplomatic reach and will and global interventions has seen the rise and fall of nation states
Yes
>amerimutt education
cope
>US lost the Korean War and the Cold War?
US won the cold car unironically. That happened when the Berlin wall came down. The Korean war isn't over yet. We are still at war with Korea right now.
>Gulf war doesn't exist now
>America didn't go into Panama and walk out with their fricking president.
In all honestly because we don't have territorial threats, Mexico and Canada aren't after our asses and no countries are after their asses. Every war we've had in modern history has been us shipping off to fight in some fricked up conflict that didn't even really involve us.
>Korean War
South Korea is now top 10 largest economies in the world
>Gulf War
Saddam pushed out of Kuwait
>Iraq War
Saddam toppled and permanent base of operations established in Iraq along with a democratic government established
>Yugoslavia
Serb army neutralized
Sure we lost Vietnam, but to this day we have friendly relations with vietnam and they align with America over China to this day.
Korean War is at most a draw
The goal was not to make South Korea rich
The goal was to defeat the Norks
The Norks are still kicking and now a nuclear power too
>Driven into a tiny fraction of their land
Yeah sure their nooks are so scary when they're a starving third world nation.
America has literally never lost a war, ever.
>Stalemated 1812
>Curb stomped the NVA then left once our political objectives changed
>Toppled Taliban, created a puppet, got bored two decades later and left
>Could not fully defeat the NVA, left because you suffered too much casualties and they immediately took over
>Could not fully defeat the Taliban, decide to leave the country to your innefective puppets who hated you and surrendered to the enemy
Cope
Post source showing the US ever intended to annex Afghanistan. You can't? Cool. We were always planning to leave, it took Biden fricking up the withdrawal on purpose to smear Trump's policy of hand-picking new Taliban leaders at the Camp David meeting and then leaving for you to even have a cope picture of a helicopter to point to and make thirdie noises at.
We win every (most) fights. But we lose campaigns.
US equipment is good but it's not that good, and often very overrated
Cope
didnt stop the bombs, huh?
you'll barely walk a kilometer, have an even shorter effective range, but freedom 9000 kilometers away still managed to land on your country
How's Milosovich doing these days?
The definition of cope.
I like how they lied about shooting down another 2 of them.
No Kosovo?
I mean I'm not even a yank but the fact you'd print a flyer celebrating the fact that you managed to score a single kill against a plane that bombed you daily without incident is incredible cope. Like "hur hur we did once manage to actually score a single counter victory serbia strong"
The fact it took the yanks flying the planes at the same time through the same route to make them remotely at risk, just shows that their technology was so strong during the conflict it actually bred complacency. All it took was changing up the sortie routines to make themtnt untouchable again
GMLRS capability is rooted in it's logistics. It had a good stockpile and higher production numbers then comparable systems. It's been so effective against the Russian's because the number of available missiles is sufficient to perform accurate salvos that are difficult to intercept and the range is far enough to keep it relatively safe. The small amount of systems Ukraine has forces them to be extremely careful in their employment as well.
GMLRS is great but you could replace it with other missile designs and if they had the same pre-war stockpiles and production rates as GMLRS they would have the same or better effect. There are several guided missile systems that have better range and payload but just aren't sufficient in numbers/or accurate enough to get the job done. The guidance packages and fire control networks these weapons use, particularly stuff like anti-jam GPS is a lot harder to make a comparison and the burgers probably have an advantage there on top of their hard on for precision standoff weapons.
There is nothing special about HIMARS. Israel,Brazil,Turkey,North Korea, China Russia, and even Ukraine all have domestic guided MLRS
I know it’s just that HIMARS and GMLRS are the best.
Proofs?
are hypersonic missiles not a thing yet? has russia used them to any interesting effect?
Wlong!
implessive
Where are the 1m diameter missiles?
>Bad SPG
>Tank inline with every other western tank with some ahead of current Abrams versions
>No real diesel subs
>Mortars? Self propelled mortars?
>Buying German small arms
>Bradley is probably not the best IFV either
Probably should add SAM to it. Patriot isn't good at all. Probably not even better than some S400. In fact American drones also seem to be just expensive and not quantitatively better than Turkish ones.
>Probably not even better than some S400.
lmao, okay Ivan
It's supposed to be an insult because S400 isn't amazing either.
Cope. Especially the diesel subs, it's like complaining the US has fewer horses than the other side in the 70s.
Diesel subs function better for coast defense, and OP did say
>tech exists
SPG aren't a meme either. USA just stopped improving there with no wheeled SPG, and the tracked one being outdated. Please don't even dare to imply having a few precision HIMARs is gonna serve the same role as gun artillery.
>Diesel subs function better for coast defense
cope
More like cope defense. Diesel subs are for poorgays, period.
>diesel subs
BLESSED AMERICAN
>>Tank inline with every other western tank with some ahead of current Abrams versions
None in mass produced numbers with the exception of maybe the K2, of which there are still very few.
>>No real diesel subs
No need when you have moronic frickton of nuclear subs.
German small arms
Piecemeal purchases. Even the M27 still hasn't superseded all the M4s in Marine Inventory.
>Bradley is probably not the best IFV either
Literally was for a long time. All of other competitors were developed with lessons learned on the Bradley. Of its era, the Bradley is the undisputed king, nothing comes close.
>Bad SPG
>M109
>bad
That guy is a certified homosexual.
Also, this exists.
Bad loss ratio in Ukraine and mediocre spec compared to a lot od other spg. M1299 is a prototype so irrelevant and there are better prototypes.
America's second Special Bonus Trait* is called "Overestimation" in which the U.S Overestimates its opponent's capabilities and prepares for an enemy that couldn't possibly do what they are afraid they can.
*The first Special Bonus was called "Logistics" and the third Bonus is "MIC".
Usa makes tons of different prototypes.
A luxury others cant do
It doesn't, the US doesn't have a single machine gun that's the best.
gee i wonder why
It turns out spending ungodly amounts on your military leads to having better equipment.
>US makes the best one
Not according to the Netherlands.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a43520043/how-israel-puls-rocket-system-compares-to-himars/
>“In comparison, with HIMARS, more precision guided missiles are delivered within budget. PULS also has greater operational sustainability because it carries more missiles. The PULS rocket artillery system also has open architecture making it suitable (in the near future) for [new types] of ammunition from European producers.
More missile variety, from smaller 122/160mm guided Accular, to GMLRS-ER equivalent EXTRA and ATACMS-equivalent Predator Hawk, can carry dissimilar weapon loads with 2x pods, can mount on any chassis, flexible software architecture means it can take any new missiles developed.
The fact that HIMARS sees alot of action in 2023 by no means indicates it's the best system available.
>not according to this irrelevant country!
Terrible range and uses American military GPS constellation.
>[Country X]... doesn't count!
They ran the numbers. Cope however you like.
>Terrible range
As already stated, EXTRA is GMLRS ER ramge. Predator Hawk actually exceeds that of ATACMS by 100km.
>GPS constellation
Nope. Can be guided by INS.
>GMLRS... is just BETTER okay???
Tell that to the Netherlands. And Denmark.
>Prsm
I'll give you that, but that's it.
>They ran the numbers.
So did everyone else. Cope with that.
>Nope. Can be guided by INS.
With degraded accuracy, lmao. Pure cope.
>Tell that to the Netherlands
Where is netherlands? do they even have an army?
>Well it's better because more countries use it!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
Fun fact on GMRLS - has a 91kg explosive, 15m CEP.
EXTRA has 120kg explosive, 10m CEP.
And as mentioned, the platform is strictly more adaptable. Open framework for missile integration, any chassis can use it.
>With degraded accuracy, lmao.
Wow, so, just like GMLRS?
>Wow, so, just like GMLRS?
Yep, GMRLS uses US-owned sat system, just like your irrelevant copy.
>Fun fact on GMRLS - has a 91kg explosive, 15m CEP.
EXTRA has 120kg explosive, 10m CEP.
Prove CEP numbers
>can be guided by INS
You are now aware of integration drift, INS is great but it compliments GPS, it's there to increase overall accuracy and try to maintain it when GPS is denied or degraded. The longer and further you fly with INS only, the less accurate you get. Saying a missile doesn't need GPS because it has INS shows a poor understanding of guidance, INS only guidance makes for a very ineffective weapon with a poor CEP which just compounds itself the longer range your missile has.
So what you're saying is, GMLRS and EXTRA share the same weakness? Okay.
I'm saying you have a poor understanding of guidance systems. Idc about you and the other anon arguing about GMLRS and EXTRA.
You're going to have to quote the post where I claim that INS maintains the same level of accuracy sans GPS. You'll be looking awhile, because it doesn't exist.
Anon here said
that the missile in question used American GPS. You then replied here
saying "Nope. Can be guided by INS" which implies that you believed it didn't in fact use an American GPS constellation to conduct a successful strike and that INS by itself was sufficient. Just because you didn't precisely say it in exact words doesn't remove the context of your reply and doesn't make your post any less moronic anon holy kek.
GMLRS and Prsm are better than their Israeli counterparts
China's gear is the best now, it's all stolen US tech after all. Just better made.
The thing that concerns me about this image is that China can make stuff a lot cheaper. They have lower paid workers and less regulation.
Look at the price of a Holosun vs the price of a Trijicon for example.
The quality control is also worse, especially for weapons that aren't meant to be used
For instance, there was an arquebus that the chinese made for one of their emperors. Notably, it was about 10 times heavier and several times bigger than the arquebuses that they gave to the common soldier. Now why do you think that was the case? The claim at the time was obviously that an emperor needs an really imperial gun. But given that the chance that a European arquebus could misfire was as high as 50%, and that the Chinese were far worse at making guns than the Europeans, what do you think was a surefire way of avoiding having the Emperor's gift suddenly explode upon use? And more importantly, what did that say about the likely combat effectiveness of the typical Chinese firearm?
>country with largest and most advanced military industrial complex, largest and most advanced tech industry, largest and most well funded military, produces best weapons
WOW! That's a shock.
It's amazing what $800 billion a year can buy.
Brain draining the entire planet results in a very powerful industrial military complex.
We fund weapon development with a shitload of money (beyond every major world power) and our production capabilities are subsidized by foreign partnerships.
We don't make our tech alone. We will partner with allied nations who help us and also get their share of the tech.
A simple example would be the Israelis partnering with us on the development of missile defense systems.
We also have some of the most extensive private infrastructure available for weapons development and R&D. We're unrivaled in that persuit.
Maybe that isn't actually the case and plenty of other nations make equipment on par with or better?
Except you're wrong, brown, and poor.
See this attitude is what's takes you down a shit path. Resting on your laurels and assuming superiority in all aspects but also eternal superiority.
>why does this keep happening
Because -- unlike the other two "global superpowers" -- we
1) didn't spend decades murdering all our "intellectuals".
2) didn't foster a culture of deception and servility.
3) tried, when possible, to reward innovation and foster a belief in progress.