04-02-2017, 06:15 PM
(04-02-2017, 02:46 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: We have a capital-intense military. We prefer cannons to cannon-fodder, so to speak. We far prefer inflicting casualties to taking them. That's what one expects in First World countries, the worst countries to face in major wars. Think of Finland in the Second World War -- the Finns achieved a 30-1 kill-to-loss ratio against the Soviet Union, a country still preferring cannon fodder to capital.
Poorer countries can simply give a rifle to infantry and tell the infantry to keep firing until commanded to cease firing once the war starts. Very often the infantrymen end up being killed before they get any order to cease firing. Such is the reality of All Quiet on the Western Front, a reality that none of the participants of the "Great" War of a century ago want to endure again.
And the Soviets still won the war against Finland, and the Italians lost against the Ethiopians. Sometimes the capital wins, and sometimes the cannon fodder wins.
I'm not saying we shouldn't have a capital intensive military - we should have it - I'm just saying that looking only at the dollars provides a false sense of security.