299
He told the New York Times that he thinks the U.S. will “very likely” find itself in a three-front war with China, Russia, and Iran. As a result, he said, the Pentagon should continue developing autonomous weapons at full speed, pointing to big mismatches in how far the U.S. would be willing to go while fighting a war compared with other countries.
As another poster pointed out, this is…not true.
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/us-stockpiles-missiles
https://www.heritage.org/missile-defense/commentary/its-past-time-re-supply-our-munitions-depleted-us-navy
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/us-missile-defense-under-strain-213274
https://trt.global/world/article/91a89e6ad503
https://cde.news/u-s-military-missile-arsenal-under-strain-amid-global-conflicts-and-aging-infrastructure
I believe they are referring to a far blunter instrument of death which would only purvey loss on a scale that is unprecedented and difficult to imagine.
Again, as the other respondent pointed out, the overwhelmingly likely end result of a nuclear exchange is hardly a “win” for any party.
Oh yeah, I just finished editing to add that part to be more clear of my opinion on the subject. There will never again be a nuclear “win” in human history, and in truth I wouldn’t even count the first.