t isn't the loss of the high end hotshots that is the problem. It's the guys
and gals who build the machinery, in factories owned by Americans, kept on
American soil that we're losing, and they're the important ones. We're in
deep
doodoo as our dearly beloved prez says if we are attacked by anyone who meets
with China's approval these days. If we can't manufacture tanks, guns, bombs
and bullets here, we're screwed, regardless of what the top echelon thinks.
And
we're approaching that stage at a rapid pace. It was our manufacturing
capacity, the awakening of a sleeping giant, that won World War II. If we
couldn't have supplied our soliders and most of those of the rest of what
came
to be known as the free world, we lost. We did it. Or, rather, our parents
and
grandparents did it. I don't think we can.


Charlie Self

Why in the world would you think that a major war could possibly last long
enough today for anyone's production capacity to much enter into the equation?
Who are we going to fight with Tanks and major firepower that are big enough to
A) keep us from getting resupplied B) cause us to use up our existing weaponry
and C) wouldn't rather quickly escalate into a major mushroom event? A major
war that would be a slow starter like WWII that would allow time for us to
build lots of weapons like we did in WWII is not the least likely. Oceans
aren't going to protect us like they did then, enemys big enough to keep us
away from existing suppliers aren't going to be incapable of bringing the war
to us like in WWII. I don't think war preparedness is a valid argument against
free trade - although there are many valid arguments against it ( just as there
are many valid arguments for it).

Dave Hall