Is the US really preparing for World War III?

Let's address a question we get asked just about every week: Is the U.S. fielding all these new aircraft, weapon systems, and other Defense platforms because it's preparing for war?

The answer is complicated — but it all comes down to one word: Deterrence.

📱 Follow Sandboxx News on social

📱 Follow Alex Hollings on social

[Mreye]

Fail to prepare, and you prepare to fail.

[paulreese]

As Teddy once said, speak softly and carry a big stick...

[wbball]

"Would you intercept me? I'd intercept me." -- The Kid

[The_ZeroLine]

We’re always prepared for WWIII. That’s why we spend as much as the rest of the world combined on our military each year. Most of this has been in the works for decades. Deterrence is always cheaper.

[JoRoWi]

All of this and China’s newest Sub just… sank… while docked.

Lovely

[safetychuck]

We've been preparing for WWIII since I was in the US Navy in the early 80's, and most likely have been preparing since WWII.

[Poo_Brain_Horse]

I really appreciate that your videos are often 5-8 minutes. You don't take 30 minutes to answer one question. You keep it short. I appreciate it!

[sclarin]

I automatically like any Sandbox video that comes out but i'd love to see more longer form videos. Just my 2 cents.

[sundragon]

Periodicals from the late 1980s like Jane's Defense Weekly foretold of the People's Republic of China building a blue water navy and that goal would be reached around 2030.

[hoynmsy]

I’m not a particularly big fan of the military industrial complex, but I do find it fascinating that our capabilities (and most importantly, our military’s TRAINING) is so bad-ass!

[zzzzzsleeping]

Yes! they are preparing.
It's better be ready than it's not.
THE KEY IS DETERRENCE.

[MotoKeto]

If you study history of the U.S. military before WW 2. You will find that we were well under way of rearming. New battleships, Essex class aircraft carriers, Tanks, Bomber Aircraft, fighter aircraft. It is way better to have it and not use it then wanting it and not having it.

[i-love-space]

The main thing most people ignore is that Strategic Weapons systems age. These same people buy a new car every few years, but expect us to rely on ground based missiles deployed in 1970, our NEWEST strategic bombers deployed in 1989, Missile submarines deployed in the 1990s, and with our newest fighter planes that are 20+ years old.
Military hardware becomes obsolescent very quickly. And we have to build new versions every few years, at the same time we pay to operate a military force around the world and take care of the men and families.
Funny how people only pay attention to things that directly affect them.

[texasranger]

Could you do a video about the future of Shorad?
Will short range air defense provided by the laser stryker? Will the Bradley replacement IFV XM30 function as an anti air cannon? Should the US look at the SkyRanger / Skynex / millenium gun system? And will there be a Stinger replacement with a better battery, targeting, and most importantly more affordable? Or is this affordable future the APKWS guidance upgrade for the cheap and plentiful Hydra 70mm rocket? Should we slap that on Avenger Hummvees? Or IRIS-T? And how are M-shorad Strykers doing? The new EAGLS?!

[jeffcox]

Awesome!! Thank you. Great information, and presented perfectly. 🇺🇸 🌎 🇺🇲

[briangregory]

You had me at nuclear, Alex. "Peace is our Profession." Strategic Air Command

[McGiver]

short answer YES!
all NATO members are...!
it's happening...!

[texasranger]

A video about the X65 and active flow control would be cool.

[googacct]

It is real easy to tell if our actions are the correct ones when it comes to China. If we do something that makes China complain, then we probably did the right thing.
In the rare event that they compliment us on doing something, we probably want to stop.

[dougadams]

5 Democrat Presidents, 15 wars, 1 President (Trump) ZERO wars.