Comments by "Joe Swanson" (@joeswanson733) on "Covert Cabal" channel.

  1. well this is just sad. to progress by 60 yeras of tech... only to regress 60 years. what a joke.
    2
  2. also the us is relying on china for imports... lol it's like a druggie trying to fight the dealer. lol
    2
  3. yeah we saw that in ww2. you were called cannon fodder. bare minimum training soldiers barely even qualified with their weapons sent into meat grinder battles.
    1
  4. we can't crank out weapons like we did ww2 style because... these new weapons are just so damn hard to make. also we don't have the factories anymore. gone are the days of ford churning out B29s like sausages.
    1
  5. japan always punched well above their weight class.
    1
  6.  @mmeade9402  yeah who we gonna call up to ship our s tuff? evergreen? maersk lol
    1
  7. people are forgetting how much more complicated modern weaponry is compared to the ww2 versions. but oh well.
    1
  8.  @NickKrige  uh... wern't the factories at the time state of the art? what were we building tanks using factories from the 1910s? silly me
    1
  9. it's no surprise if china switched over to 100% war production the would outproduce us 10: 1 ... even on a bad day .
    1
  10. it's the spin the western media oulets are just pumping out non stop
    1
  11.  @joeswanson5486  hey joe.
    1
  12.  @profdc9501  yes i can see operation rolling thunder in effect again
    1
  13. we would need toyota to produce our tanks and armored vehicles for us. lol
    1
  14. i could see another issue is we have more medically unfit people today than ever before. so you would see conscription but have a lot of 4F because of mental or physical disabilities... so there goes that idea.
    1
  15. on paper it did. lol
    1
  16. can you imagine look at all the weapnry advancements from 1946 to now... just to go back to using 1946 style weaponry...i would be very much disappointed in our manufacturing ability.
    1
  17. if M1 abrams tanks can get taken out in a snap... i'd imagine shermans would be nothing more than target dummies.
    1
  18. and if i recall my history the allied forces were stretched to breaking point by battle of bulge with a noticeable uptick in desertion.
    1
  19. uh... china already has the tools to build the tools to build the assembly lines. regarding chips. word on the grapevine is they're gonna build their chips. so if they can do that. well there goes any more choke points you can place upon them.
    1
  20. uh oh we would lose 99 million bodies.
    1
  21. no if japan and germany had nukes i would definitely see them launch. if i'm going down i'm taking you with me.
    1
  22. The Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Space Force and Coast Guard are the armed forces of the United States. The Army National Guard and the Air National Guard are reserve components of their services and operate in part under state authority. us amred forces Active personnel 1,376,658 (ranked 3rd) Reserve personnel 799,500 so lets add on he national guard 336k so you have a total of 2.50 million. we need to ramp up to 16,112,566
    1
  23.  @fh5926  what you're saying is if we mobilize everyone pretty much. would that be fair to people that got discharged or retired. like sorry we suck so badly we have to call you back. this would not get the general george marshall stamp of approval.
    1
  24.  @fh5926 you'd think it would be easy to bribe 19 year olds with conscription. hey kid you want ot make some extra side money ?
    1
  25.  @flynnmiller7861  i honestly thought it would take china til 2055 to reach full us naval parity
    1
  26. the us has so much experirence in hte past with mobilizing , fight war, demobilizing. rinse and repeat. it's a pain in hte as-
    1
  27. i like watching everything in fast motion. i wish movies could be played at 2-3x speed.
    1
  28. uh... if we have to call up retirees as trainers we're in deep sh*t. they didn't need to do that in ww2. so i i don't think we would need to do that.
    1
  29. push the little red button
    1
  30. good point. this kind of problem was brought up by colin powell since 2014. all recruitment military expeditionary force can not cut it in a full on war situation. like you said with the current political climate the people tha would've wanted to join the militay will take their talents elsewhere.
    1
  31. if you gotta go into using national guards... you got bigger problems.
    1
  32. uh the us has a lot more financial obligations today than it did in WW2. pretty much if we divert that much of our resources towards war production well you are going to cause a lot of pissed off voters. people today don't put up with rationing lke they did in the old days.
    1
  33. becuse the US was still isolationist at that point. europe was so far behind the times.
    1
  34. you just need cannon fodders... you got medical problems. no problem fix the papers 1A you're fit to serve. can't pass basic no problem. here's a rifle, your helmet, and off you go. just don't forget the body bags.
    1
  35. or half the us navy gets sunk 100 miles off the shore of china
    1
  36. it would take 3 years for full ramp up. that's assuming we had a full manufacturing base. I don't know why you guys assume the US has a full intact manufacuring base. we couldn't even make enough face masks during covid... i think if we had a full manufacturing base majority of the issues we've experienced from 2020 to now would be a non issue.
    1
  37.  @thomassenbart  you got to pay to make sure you don't get strangled by the supplying nation that one day no longer wants to listen to you...it's the cost of reliance
    1
  38. and that's what the guy in the video even pointed out. in a case of emergency reserves will be called up and deployed. but once you run out of reserves... that's when you are in trouble.
    1
  39. this sceanrio is assuming we don't go nuclear. of course once you go nuclear it's over. makes spending money on conventioanl forces to be pointless.
    1
  40.  @MudlangenTango  the "wars" that we have fought since at least vietnam are nothing more than border skirmishes by comparison.
    1
  41. the chinese aern't gonna bother landing in hawaii. they'll just bomb hawaii to cinders.
    1
  42. depends. if the US is fighting on enemy soil we would be losing to attrition pretty fast while the enemy will be relatively fine. if both sides fight on neutral terrirtory than it's up for grabs. 50/50.
    1
  43. i think if you have to go past reserves you are in some very bad danger zone territory like you might not actually win territory
    1
  44. uh... i don't think ww2 weapons had to contend with as many electronics as we do today. so chips. key word is chips. ww2 weaponry by comparison is way more mechanical and analog compared to what we used these days. for example i doubt a EMP would disrupt ww2 weaponry as much as it would modern weaponry
    1
  45. nope you would see politicans commit seppuku than cancel SS and medicare that's political suicide.
    1
  46.  @specialnewb9821  but abortion is just the SUpreme court repealing it's own decision. it's got nothing to do with congress....
    1
  47.  @specialnewb9821  indirectly. I'm just saying directly. Unless you guys want to tell me supreme court doesn't do a thing without their congressional masters approval. So much for checks and balanced
    1
  48. you got to factor out us didn't have toyota and honda and all those other japanese brands back in 1950....
    1
  49. well there's a problem here. do you know how expensive modern weapons are. the us would be beyond bankrupt. the US was almost bankrupt fighting WW2 with muliple war bond drives. also you would not see people just run off to the recruitment centers like before that's for sure.
    1
  50. Today, you have many people, even in congress, that would be just as happy to see us fail yeah it's called being bought off. half our congress are bought off.
    1