Do you have any articles/explanation on this? I very much believe it, but I'm pretty curious.
Air Force is easy. Outside of its F-22 squadrons *which was orignally supposed to be a 750, then 648, then 382 airframe buy, instead it capped out at 195 (including 8 "pre-production" aircraft), the newest Air Superiority fighter in the inventory (F-15C) was designed while Nixon was in office, and no, the F-35 is NOT an air superiority fighter. The Air Force was supposed to purchase 168 B-2 Spirits, the got 21. Instead the Air Force continues to operate a bomber designed BEFORE the Korean War that has, in a couple cases, THIRD GENERATION aircrew (Grandfather, father, son/daughter) flying the same damned aircraft.
The Marines are in the process of eliminating its ENTIRE armored capacity. If the U.S. even has to kick in a door, the heaviest armored vehicle will be either the AAV-7 (2with a 40mm automatic grenade launcher) or the LAV-25 (with a 25mm chain gun), neither of which are not as well protected as the Bradley IFV, (which this thread spent a couple pages tearing to pieces).
Army continues to operate the M1A2. Still a very good vehicle, but the "best tank in the world"? The simple fact that it is a question shows that the track is way past its "sell by date".
The U.S. military has been coasting on the same tech deceloped to kick the snot out of the Soviet Army if it tried the Fulda Gap and pushed through while Reagan was president. That is a DISGRACE. U.S. has to engage a near-peer rather than a souped up militia anytime soon the losses we will take will be vastly higher than should be the case.
To use the oft repeated line - The most expensive (ship/fighter/tank) is the 2nd best one.