This isn't good, it seems:
More than three years into its airstrike campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, the Pentagon is still struggling to replenish its bomb and missile stockpiles. Now it’s Congress’ budgetary inaction that is thwarting Air Force efforts to persuade arms makers to increase production.
"Replenishing stockpiles" isn't the same as "low on bombs," is it?
I have no doubt that the Air Force is 100% correct that we need to replenish our stockpiles and that this is very important.
But I suspect that the low supply is in the ready rack, so to speak, with war reserve stocks untouched.
Mind you, I don't want to dip into war reserve stocks to wage ongoing small campaigns. And that includes supplying bombs and missiles to allies who are dropping them against common enemies.
We have a war reserve for a reason--in case a major war breaks out and we want to win it. Not running out of ammunition is a big part of winning, no?
Anyway, we should replenish the stockpiles. But if a major war breaks out--like a North Korea scenario--we'll have bombs and missiles to drop.
Unless our military deteriorated way more than I thought under the prior administration. If we really are low on bombs, and that is after we've dipped into war reserve stocks, we are potentially in a world of hurt.
