Post by Cybermortis on Aug 14, 2015 16:28:45 GMT
the point is that during the world war eras, the US was not in "we must be better armed than the rest of the world combined" mode, and in fact, was pretty danged casual about the idea of keeping up with ANYBODY in the arms race. after all, we were friends with the brits, and the french, and the Indians were more or less contained to their reservations; so who was there to fight with?
Japan for starters.
Although official US policy was to remain neutral on the international stage, they did understand the need to maintain armed forces to protect possessions in the Pacific (or friendly islands they were allied with). They had also fought the Spanish in the Spanish-American War in 1898 and had the Philippine-American war from 1899-1902, which didn't really end until 1913.
While these were small conflicts in a way, they did show that the US Military needed to remain equipment at least comparable to other nations. Japans increasingly aggressive expansion in the Pacific was another reason for attempting to maintain a reasonably modern fighting force - less due to a desire to have a war and more in the hopes that Japan would think twice before starting a war with them. Keep in mind that Japan's Navy was built up specifically to fight the US navy, something the US must have been well aware of for at least a decade by 1940 if not for much longer than that.
The US Military suffered during the 20's and 30's, as did the military's of most nations, from the Great Depression cutting funding to almost nothing. However if you take a closer look you can see that equipment-wise the US military was probably in a better condition and probably better equipped in some areas than comparable nations. The M1 Garand rifle for example was developed during the late 20's and entered service within 10 years, becoming the first semi-automatic rifle to be issued to troops anywhere in the world. Everyone else at this date was still using bolt action rifles - in the case of the British Army they were still using the same principle rifle as had been used in 1914.
The US, unlike many nations, had much of the equipment needed to fight WW2 with by 1939/40 even if that equipment hadn't been issued or entered production by that date. It was the comparative lack of funding for the military during the 20's and 30's that lies behind the equipment not being in use before then followed by an understandable hope they would not have to get involved in another major war.
The situation in Europe was similar, but the primary reason for slow progress was the desire not to have another war followed by lack of funding. The US hadn't suffered as badly as France or Great Britain during the Great War, both of which had seen an entire generation of men almost wiped out and could see the scars of the war first hand. (Something Americans couldn't, as no battles were fought in the US). In order to maintain a high-tech military you need both money and a national will and reason to spend that money. The US of the 20's and 30's only had one of the three (the possible threat from Japan).