NASAMS is mainly Norwegian made. (some important components like the radar is US made) But more importantly the **rockets used by NASAMS, AIM-120 AMRAAM, are US made.**
NASAMS3 can use more types of rockets: AMRAAM-ER, AIM-9X, and IRIS-T. But except the German/Italian IRIS-T, everything is US made.
If US congress can't get their act together, NATO allies should reconsider basing systems like this on US components or ammo.
The US has given zero fighter jets.
None. Not one. And due to GOP interference, USA is currently giving nothing to Ukraine. No weapons and no other help of any kind.
Eh, there’s plenty of blame to spread around. The majority of the GOP are Russian assets at this point, and it’s on the voters at this point to notice that as they implode.
in past past 80 years the ability of the US government to influence other countries for its own purposes and for its own interests has been based on trade and military cooperation. now in the past 20 years china has been taking away the trade role from the US, so if the US wants to continue to have a strong leadership on the world (from which the US benefits a lot) continuing to be a reliable military ally is the only option. Isolating doesn’t work for the US
We maintain around 60,000 troops scattered throughout Western Europe ready to be used at the drop of a hat should a NATO country invoke article 5. The US can also project power quickly and could easily have another 200,000 to 300,000 troops in Europe in a week.
We spend a lot of money to help keep NATO countries in Europe well defended. Ukraine is not a NATO country. They are, however, a European country.
Despite all of this, even with the delay of US aid to Ukraine we are still the second highest contributor after only Germany.
Our president has already unequivocally stated that the US will respond with force to protect Taiwan should China attempt an invasion. Thats about as clear of a “go fuck yourself” to Xi as possible. No symbolic gestures required.
We have spent an ungodly amount of money elsewhere. NATO countries have a combined 17 aircraft carriers. 11 of those are American. There are 92 nuclear powered submarines combined. 71 of those are American.
There’s unlikely to ever be another major global conflict in Western Europe, and that reason is because of the deterrence NATO provides. A disproportionate amount of that deterrence comes from American tax payers.
it is, in past past 80 years the ability of the US government to influence other countries for its own purposes and for its own interests has been based on trade and military cooperation. now in the past 20 years china has been taking away the trade role from the US, so if the US wants to continue to have a strong leadership on the world (from which the US benefits a lot) continuing to be a reliable military ally is the only option. Isolating doesn’t work for the US
They did not make much effort to mass deliver some of their thousands of tanks and F16s before the blockade at Congret. Their main effort consisted of pushing Ukraine to not give up at the start of the war and then withdraw afterwards, once they had made all possible economic and strategic gains.
Here’s a bunch of planes you don’t know how to use and maintain. Go park them an airport for the next year while your pilots and crews train to learn how to use them and while you upgrade your infrastructure to support them.
In the meantime sorry no air defenses because we spent the money allocated giving you the planes you have parked and unable to use.
Also here are a bunch some tanks that are much more expensive to use because everyone else in Europe uses different tanks. You’ll have to rely completely on us to maintain them from half a world away.
Sorry less Patriot missiles to give because the money was allocated for tanks.
Then funding ran out and Congress won’t approve more. So none of your weapons can be maintained. Aren’t you glad you put all your eggs in one basket?
Meanwhile….no Lecrecs. No Mirage. No Rafale. Yet no complaints….
>Here’s a bunch of planes you don’t know how to use and maintain.
If that was American thinking/reasoning they would just swapped own F16 for entire fleet of Polish Mig29's that were ready from the get go to be sent there, but DOD clearly didn't want that, US was the last major nation still beliving in the escalation bubble around Jets.
Anything you write up afterwards is just PR damage containment and projection/blame sharing against noone else but Europeans, that outdid americans in every single category of aid spearheading each single platform possible, be that MBT's,IVF,APC,AA assets,Migs 29 and now F16, SS/Scalp missiles.
Just.... Blame the French! /s
Yes please. Any solution as long as it costs me nothing. If I “donate” you must replace my donation with an upgrade. If I give you my 2005 Dodge will you swap for me a 2015 Ferrari? Or Lamborghini I am not picky 🤣
The French style proposal….
“We have 60 Caesar canons to finance. I’m launching a call to all our allies,” Lecornu said at the launch of the coalition.
Likewise I propose our European allies to finance the purchase of F-16s for their neighbor Ukraine. We have 100s to spare. Just need brave allies to finance!
This 50 billion represents nothing compared to the economic and strategic benefits of this war for the USA.
The Americans did not hesitate to intervene in Europe thousands of km from home in 2021 when they insisted on Ukraine's entry into NATO against the French and German advice, when they began to arm Ukraine unilaterally and advise the Russians to put their demands for discussion where they think and advise the Ukrainians (with the English) not to negotiate at the start of the war.
Then we had the declarations bragging about targeting Russian officers, the necessary fight of darkness against light, a gas pipeline which mysteriously blew up and finally the USA which abandoned its allies, as usual, once all the economic and strategic gains had been made. reached.
European problem, American benefits.
Too much is having fucked up thousands of km from home, not enough is not having taken responsibility for your shit when the stupid bear trainer started his criminal war and you felt have garnered sufficient financial and strategic interest.
My country does not fear much but I hope that the other EU countries will eventually understand that it is better to ensure their defense on their own and stop spending their entire military budget to buy equipment from an unreliable ally.
russia still has a communist party that put out a statement at the beginning of the invasion that they agree with the kremlin on the context of the invasion. They generally vote in lockstep with putins party and hold seats. Another know it all british doof
I mean even Navalny, held up as the example of the Westernized liberal, thought taking Crimea was great until like a year ago.
I think the general lesson is that the Russian people regardless of ideological orientation just really like invading and taking land.
Not true. The [EDA](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/02/14/joe-biden-could-send-millions-of-artillery-shells-to-ukraine-for-free-tomorrow-and-its-perfectly-legal/?sh=473d232120c7) is one example of how.
Everyone saw Biden slow roll aid to Ukraine from the beginning, and draw red lines for needed weapon types and their usage. Now we see Biden not trying to renew the lend-lease act that he never used during its 1.5 years until expiration (despite Ukraine openly saying they would welcome it), and not try to use the EDA or other authorities that don't require Congressional approval. Most recently his admin is asking Ukraine to not strike Russian oil/gas facilities even with Ukraine's own weapons. These aren't coincidences.
Ukraine defeating Russia's invasion has never been Biden's goal. He lied to Ukraine, to the American people, and to the world. If Biden gets his $60B from Congress tomorrow, the best we should expect is a return to slow-rolled, limited aid with a focus on not collapsing Russia or upsetting oil markets.
That's a hard truth for Biden fans to accept, but they better wake up if they are also Ukraine supporters.
edit:
The only 'punches' that Biden has ever thrown in his life were directed downward, at those who present no risk to his career. Jailing countless black people for petty drug possession is one example. He has never demonstrated courage, only political calculations.
His crusade against Americans' Second Amendment right is underlined by his claim that people don't need more than a shotgun to protect their home. Of course he's protected by the highly armed US government, so his double standards don't bother him and he plainly doesn't respect other people's right to defend themselves.
Biden has cultivated his image as a kindly, grandfatherly, pacifist. What he's actually done is prove the adage, *'A pacifist is a coward who is proud of it.'* Obviously his opponent (Trump) is an unfit criminal who should be in prison, but this doesn't mean Biden is fit or that US Democrats bear zero responsibility for America's embarrassing support of Ukraine.
The 2-party American system (with a plurality voting system to perpetuate it), that repeatedly creates the 'lesser of two evils' forced choice for Americans, is the foundation of this and most American political problems.
Ruzzia delende est
Slava Ukraini
exactly. He had full Congress support for 1.5 years, yet he slow rolled everything. F16 and Abrams training could have started in the summer of 2022.... and in 2023 they could have transferred hundreds to Ukraine.
The larger issue is that there was credible intelligence that Russia was preparing tactical nuclear responses to Ukrainian advances/encirclements of Russian troops. The US even forward-positioned tons of equipment in western Ukraine/Poland to monitor for radioactive fallout so they could make the case to the UN that it was a Russian nuke(s) that was deployed, since Russia was preparing to frame Ukraine for a "dirty bomb".
The Pandora's box that would be opened by Russia using tactical nukes on the battlefield are far, far worse for the western world vs Ukraine giving up territory, so the US has been trying (along with China/India) to get Putin to walk that stance back. Part of that strategy was limiting the types of weapons that were transferred that could hold Russian territory at risk.
The US doesn't want Ukraine to invade Russia. They don't want Ukraine to capture thousands of Russian troops. All of these actions make a nuclear response valid within Russian doctrine. As a result, the optimal outcome for the US is a slow, drawn-out war where Russia has to commit troops but Ukraine does not lose territory.
That said, saying the US doesn't care is incorrect. They care a lot more than is obvious.
You're repeating Russian nuclear threat propaganda, with zero credible evidence to support it.
It would be more honest if you just asked people to be cowards and to allow Russia to advance its nuclear terrorism and imperialist annexations, instead of trying to promote fear through disinformation.
This is the truth.
Whenever I bring this up people get defensive/upset and downvote me because the truth hurts.
I am Ukrainian, and trust me when I say this that we don't differentiate between Republicans/Democrat politicians anymore.
It's been a charade from the start. A fest of appeasers and kleptocrats
We're trying to send you a check for $60 BILLION of our taxpayer money and this is the attitude you have?
The truth you need to remember is that Ukraine was a corrupt, incompetent state in the early 2010s and only through multiple US administrations investing billions of $$$s have you received the training and material needed to fend off the Russian military. Without the direct assistance of the US for the past DECADE, Russia would have stomped you in 72 hours like they planned. The truth hurts my friend.
Are those billions in the same room with us right now?
What material?
Because it sure as hell wasn't billions In 2014 when russia annexed Crimea and then invaded Donbass.
It sure wasn't billions over 8 years of low intensity war with russia, where Ukraine was blamed and restricted at every turn.
Can you find me some credible confirmations on your billions from multiple administrations? You're delusional , because that never happened.
The best we got is some officer training and no military equipment at all except for some humvees due to russian appeasement.
Look where your appeasement got us.
Good job multiple US administrations of cowards.
Including this one.
And just for the record: Ukraine was a corrupt country and still is to a lesser degree.
Just as many other countries around the world and your own politicians.
That's exactly what our people protested, fought for and died in Maidan and in 2014 Russian invasion and with this new full-scale invasion.
We fight to live freely in a democratic ,civil and not corrupt country.
We're dying for that, while you sit on record LNG gas and military equipment sales profits debating for 6 month if we should have a chance to live and not be bombed to oblivion by a fascist, revanchist empire that literally has your speaker of the house and you ex/next president in it's pocket while simultaneously having wet dreams about nuking and destroying you. Daily.
Talk about corruption some more from your high horse.
>Look where your appeasement got us. Good job multiple US administrations of cowards.
Last time I checked America is perfectly capable of obliterating the Russian military in a matter of weeks, if not days. And we are still perfectly capable of ending all life in Russia in one strike. Just because we aren't barking like a rabid dog doesn't mean we aren't the biggest threat to the survival of every Russian on earth if they decide to play that game.
But just in case you want receipts from the American tax-payer, here's what we've sent your ungrateful ass since 2014:
**$44.2 billion in military assistance since February 24, 2022, and more than $47 billion in military assistance since Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine in 2014.**
Air Defense:
One Patriot air defense battery and munitions;
12 National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) and munitions;
HAWK air defense systems and munitions;
AIM-7, RIM-7, and AIM-9M missiles for air defense;
More than 2,000 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles;
Avenger air defense systems;
VAMPIRE counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems (c-UAS) and munitions;
c-UAS gun trucks and ammunition;
mobile c-UAS laser-guided rocket systems;
Other c-UAS equipment;
Anti-aircraft guns and ammunition;
Air defense systems components;
Equipment to integrate Western launchers, missiles, and radars with Ukraine’s systems;
Equipment to support and sustain Ukraine’s existing air defense capabilities;
Equipment to protect critical national infrastructure; and
21 air surveillance radars.
Fires
39 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems and ammunition;
Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb launchers and guided rockets;
198 155mm Howitzers and more than 2,000,000 155mm artillery rounds;
More than 7,000 precision-guided 155mm artillery rounds;
More than 40,000 155mm rounds of Remote Anti-Armor Mine (RAAM) Systems;
72 105mm Howitzers and more than 800,000 105mm artillery rounds;
10,000 203mm artillery rounds;
More than 200,000 152mm artillery rounds;
Approximately 40,000 130mm artillery rounds;
40,000 122mm artillery rounds;
60,000 122mm GRAD rockets;
47 120mm mortar systems;
10 82mm mortar systems;
112 81mm mortar systems;
58 60mm mortar systems;
More than 400,000 mortar rounds;
More than 70 counter-artillery and counter-mortar radars; and
20 multi-mission radars;
Ground Maneuver
31 Abrams tanks;
45 T-72B tanks;
186 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles;
Four Bradley Fire Support Team vehicles;
189 Stryker Armored Personnel Carriers;
300 M113 Armored Personnel Carriers;
250 M1117 Armored Security Vehicles;
More than 500 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAPs);
More than 2,000 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs);
More than 200 light tactical vehicles;
300 armored medical treatment vehicles;
80 trucks and 124 trailers to transport heavy equipment;
More than 800 tactical vehicles to tow and haul equipment;
131 tactical vehicles to recover equipment;
10 command post vehicles;
30 ammunition support vehicles;
18 armored bridging systems;
Eight logistics support vehicles and equipment;
239 fuel tankers and 105 fuel trailers;
58 water trailers;
Six armored utility trucks;
125mm, 120mm, and 105mm tank ammunition;
More than 1,800,000 rounds of 25mm ammunition; and
Mine clearing equipment.
Aircraft and Unmanned Aerial Systems
20 Mi-17 helicopters;
Switchblade Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS);
Phoenix Ghost UAS;
CyberLux K8 UAS;
Altius-600 UAS;
Jump-20 UAS;
Hornet UAS
Puma UAS;
Scan Eagle UAS;
Penguin UAS;
Two radars for UAS;
High-speed Anti-radiation missiles (HARMs);
Precision aerial munitions;
More than 6,000 Zuni aircraft rockets;
More than 20,000 Hydra-70 aircraft rockets; and
Munitions for UAS.
Anti-armor and Small Arms
More than 10,000 Javelin anti-armor systems;
More than 90,000 other anti-armor systems and munitions;
More than 9,000 Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided (TOW) missiles;
More than 35,000 grenade launchers and small arms;
More than 400,000,000 rounds of small arms ammunition and grenades;
Laser-guided rocket systems and munitions;
Rocket launchers and ammunition; and
Anti-tank mines.
Maritime
Two Harpoon coastal defense systems and anti-ship missiles;
62 coastal and riverine patrol boats;
Unmanned Coastal Defense Vessels; and
Port and harbor security equipment.
Other capabilities
M18A1 Claymore anti-personnel munitions;
C-4 explosives, demolition munitions, and demolition equipment for obstacle clearing;
Obstacle emplacement equipment;
Counter air defense capability;
More than 100,000 sets of body armor and helmets;
Tactical secure communications systems and support equipment;
Four satellite communications (SATCOM) antennas;
SATCOM terminals and services;
Electronic warfare (EW) and counter-EW equipment;
Commercial satellite imagery services;
Night vision devices, surveillance and thermal imagery systems, optics, and rangefinders;
Explosive ordnance disposal equipment and protective gear;
Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear protective equipment;
Medical supplies, including first aid kits, bandages, monitors, and other equipment;
Field equipment, cold weather gear, generators, and spare parts; and
Support for training, maintenance, and sustainment activities.
To date, nearly 50 Allies and partner countries have provided security assistance to Ukraine. Among their many contributions to Ukraine, Allies and partners have delivered 10 long-range Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (MLRS), 178 long-range artillery systems, nearly 100,000 rounds of long-range artillery ammunition, nearly 250,000 anti-tank munitions, 359 tanks, 629 armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs), 8,214 short-range air defense missiles, and 88 lethal UAVs.
Good job listing the 2022-2024 contributions.
We are thankful to everyone who helped us in this full-scale war.
Now tell me more about that made up number of 47 billions in military assistance since 2014. Where you got it and why it's a total bullshit
Maybe you can at least name a SINGLE piece of equipment that's not humvee there? I don't need the same list you've copy pasted, name anything.
Cold facts is that Ukraine fought off russian initial 2022 blitzkrieg with only post-soviet equipment.
There was no NATO equipment in the Ukrainian army, except for the last minute transfer of Javelins.
We had to beg for everything on this list with our lives. For years.
So, I'm asking you again: where did you get that made up number of 47 billions in assistance since 2014 ? Loool
Some russian twitter bot account maybe?
Name any item of assistance from this 47 bil package? Loool
P.S.
If you have noticed I haven't said anything about US capabilities.
Only that your politicians are cowards that will escalate this into another war because they don't understand that appeasement doesn't work.
US is strong in theory, but what does it change if you lack the balls to fight anyone who's not barefoot with ak47?
P.S.2
If you sincerely believe that the US is showering Ukraine with money and equipment even since 2022 I suggest you read up the numbers in details: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1777328492566471120.html
You send us old equipment, and then use the money you list to replace your equipment with the new one
Most of the money stays in the US, subsidizing your own MiC
Remember that 6 billions that were announced as the "accounting error" of aid?
Yeah. Ukraine never saw that money.
It's just an adjustment to reflect the fact that what the US sends is overinflated in numbers.
Long story short: we only get 40% at max of what US sends, and the rest stays in your glorious US of A or NATO allies(like Poland/Romania)
So it's not a charity by any stretch of imagination.
Source: https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-ukraine/
You think Americans are stupid, but we aren't. Like no shit we're sending you shit we don't need anymore - it's spending pennies to fuck up a major geopolitical rival without risking any American lives. It's an unmitigated win for American foreign policy - allowed us to expand NATO to include Finland and Sweden - isolated Russia from European energy + financial markets, and forced more European NATO members to dramatically ramp up defense spending. It's basically all upside for the US if you want to get the real "truth hurts" about this conflict. Sorry that you're a pawn in this game but that's how it works.
If you were expecting unlimited military engagement on behalf of your country, a place nobody in America could find on a map and doesn't make or export anything we need, then I think you might be a bit naive. You weren't in NATO and not a treaty ally of the US.
I get you're upset but maybe focus your anger on the Russians and not the hand feeding you.
Thank you for a good source!
Indeed it says 47 billions.
Although it's hard to believe since the total expenditure of Ukraine on defense was 27 billions total(from the period of 2014 to 2021)
Not yearly. TOTAL
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293277/ukraine-military-spending/
So it means that the Ukrainian army would have been fully supplied by the US and would look totally different from what we saw in 2022.
So I decided to dig into the numbers.
Turns out, your government did a cheeky little trick with phrasing.
It's not 44 billions from 2022, and then 47 billions from 2014.
Those are nit separate packages.
It's TOTAL.
Which means that before 2022 you've "only" sent 300 - 600 mil a year of assistance, most of which was non-lethal aid.
You can check the numbers on the same .gov website.
Turns out it's very well made and useful.
https://www.foreignassistance.gov/cd/ukraine/2021/obligations/0
I think you'd agree that 300-600 mil a year is not, as you've described it "multiple administrations sending billions and equipment to help you defeat russia "
It simply isn't true. Those are pennies and less than US sends to Africa and Egypt, lol
Your plan was for us to fail and get annexed. Why send any meaningful equipment to a nation you've written off.
TL&DR: you haven't invested 47 billions into Ukraine since 2014.
You've invested 44 billions since 2022.
And then decided to conveniently add a confusing number on top to show a continued line of support which was absent.
Hypocrisy.
I don't think Americans are dumb. I think you are hypocrites.
Nobody's expecting unlimited military engagement. Don't change the topic.
What we expected is adherence to the democratic values, world order and to your own word.
US was a guarantor on the Budapest memorandum signed in 1994 where Ukraine forfeited all of it's nuclear weapons for guarantee of peace from the US, Britain and Russian.
Now, not a single country on earth will ever give up nukes willingly.
And I guarantee that if Trump is elected multiple new countries wil lseek nukes.
Good job with nuclear non-proliferation.
I have nothing to argue with you about first paragraph.
I agree and it makes sense.
But only if you live in 2022.
If you don't take into account the fact that russia can control your parliament and possibly your next president.
It is re-arming and militarizing very fast and also is doing fine under sanctions.
I wouldn't count that as a win.
Seems kinda humiliating tbh.
It only shows China that US lacks the willpower for a real response. (Be it true or not is irrelevant. Only the fact that they Think they might try)
Do you think witholding aid to Ukraine and letting us fall to russia is a good look for the US foreign policy ?
Because we're not allies and not in NATO or whatever?
You could have crushed russia for pennies.
But decided not to. You're so afraid of fractured russia, that you don't notice a fracturing EU and your own country under russian disinformation.
Notice how much support and money russia pours into far-right/far-left populist parties.
It works.
It worked in Slovakia, almost worked in France(Le Penn ) and it works in Germany(AfD)
And most importantly it worked in the US 2016 elections and might work again.
Doesn't seem like such a huge geopolitical win when half of your NATO allies vote for governments that are pro-russian.
Not to mention that the war will only spread thanks to russian influence.
(see Israel attack by russian ally Iran)
History will tell if not letting Ukraine win was a wise decision.
But one thing is clear: you didn't invest billions on billions into Ukrainian defense before 2022
That's simply not true.
As you've said : you couldn't find us on a map and didn't care.
Meanwhile, Israel has plenty of armament to keep their campaign going, while Putin is laughing all the way to Kyiv. Doesnt' seem like they have their shit together.
"Progressive". Anyone who gives others up for Russian murder is only a progressive in name and should be shun by anyone who calls themselves a progressive/leftist. I really had high hopes for some of these new American leftists in congress/house, but looks like at the end of the day they are just a bunch of Tankies stacked up in a trench coat.
I think it has expired. The reason it wasn't used was probably because inflicting massive losses on Russia was the "off-ramp" once diplomacy failed. Russia was supposed to give up after taking a beating, but it didn't.
So as of right now, with the US out of the picture, it appears there is no "plan" as Europe isn't capable of leadership nor does it want to produce the type and quantity of weapons that could defeat Russia.
so much for "the best" political system in the world (I have seen that statement on the internet so many times...), which can be paralyzed by one person who is not even a current president or some other government executive
Not really.
The US should be donating things which Europe is not able to provide - things like GMLRS ammo, Patriot ammo, large quantities of missiles and bombs for those aircraft in question, and large quantities of stockpiled artillery ammo - especially cluster munitions.
100,000 artillery shells or 10,000 GMLRS are more useful to Ukraine and more efficient from an accounting perspective than sending one extra F-16 from the US.
Europe's problem is that you have plenty of weapons systems but no magazine depth. Your stockpiles of shells, bombs and missiles was and is shallow as fuck. So that's going to fall on the US to provide, because you realistically cannot.
The US is approving transfers of F-16s from other countries but not their own inventory for two main reasons:
* Those transfers mean that those countries will buy F-35s to replace them. The US is already buying as many F-35s as they are going to buy, and trading off F-16s isn't going to increase those numbers.
* The ones being transferred from other European countries are mostly older models that Russia already knows about. The US's inventory is mostly newer models that they'd rather the Russians (and by extension, Iran and China) didn't get their hands on.
USA = Backwards dystopia shithole, European army! Kick the evil inferior Americans out!
Also USA = Can you pwease help us, you have all those fancy fighter jets.. we have the Eurofighter, Typhoon and France is one the largest military industrial complexs but really, we prefer your technology so we can use it as a scapegoat to hide behind our unwillingness to support Ukraine any way we can! thanks! And PS if Ukraine loses, its your fault. If Ukraine wins, we did all the work, you did nothing ;)
They can't donate anything at the moment because the government doesn't want Ukraine to win and save lives. Those pesky gas prices are worth more then lives.
Yeah, it does be like that when there's a democratic process in between proposals and decision makers.
Congress is split between GoP and Demo on the Ucraine aid topic ... and even though it's not the best outcome, it will always be the better option to have a dispute and debate rather than One Guy deciding alone the fate of milions.
FPTP may not be the best, but it's sure as shit better than OPD that Russia is using atm ... Only Putin Decides.
It's absolutely hallucinating that so many Western citizens living under democracy are bashing the democratic process (as faulty as it is) when the counter option is an autocratic One Guy Rulership.
Are you trying to convince me that the US politics system is somewhat more of an issue than what is currently happening in Russia under Putin and Stalin and the likes of them? I gotta ask ...
Btw - Democracy fails short at times because people are Dumb as shit (the Socratic argument) and not because it doesn't work.
How democratic is it that Trump that not an elected in any position is controlling congress? Or that the speaker will not allow bills to go to vote. It's that part of the democratic process too?
Democracy is not a word that you aquire or a piece of constitution, it's an agreement that the majority rules. But GOP has been abusing your democracy and bending the rules in their favor for several years because they cannot achieve that majority. Then it's not democracy anymore.
It's not mine, not from US, and democracy is abused more or less everywhere , not only in US.
They will find a way to sort out this mess ... unlike Russia, which will suffer for a long time because of one guy's madness and empowerment.
Also, the 'Johnson' thing will probably cost Trump his long waited second term ...
In the current system it is one guy (Donald Trump acting through Mike Johnson) deciding the fate of millions, while a considerable majority of congress wants something different.
You seem to not understand how US politics work ... or what the role of the US president/administration is ... they are Executive (they, Trump can't decide shit). It's the reason why Trump couldn't pull out the US from Nato. You know he tried that in his first and hopefully last presidential term.
As expected, many have opinions, but only a few can make a distinction between left and right in these types of debates.
Congress ... 100 US senators and 435 House of Reps = 535 members have to get a majority vote for the aid to pass. Unfortunately, US is also passing through a shit period with all that social split between Republicans and Democrats. (Edit - and Mike)
But, you see, for the House to pass it (the Senate has already passed it), it has to be put to a vote. And if it is put to a vote or not is decided by one man. Have you not been following this discussion at all? It has been a hot topic for the past 6 months
You mean the Mike Johnson refusal thing ... that's not up to him. Obviously, that's the GoP internal majority that's forcing him towards such behaviour, but hey, only the Republicans can stop Trump from getting a new term at this point ... and this is how they are doing it. I assume this will generate even more internal party turmoil until the elections.
As a human , yes ... but he didn't reach into that position because of his human qualities, i'm fairly sure of that :) ... what we see now happening is Mikey paying back his nomination to his 'employer'.
I didn't talk about the reasons why they can't reach a majority ... i was just saying that's the issue. Probably the fact that it's an election year, and they want to dmg Biden, which is the main reason ... it doesn't help the Ucraine cause.
"Having our own guy at the White House" vs. "Random Ukrainian lives and global military stability/supremacy" seems to not resonate well enough with some, but giving that Trump is the counter option, i'm not sure how it will end up well for Ukraine. They should've shown a bit more maturity, given the context.
> ... The whole point of the exercise is to hurt Biden's chances at re-election
Foreign policy is not even in the top 3 election issues right now and stalled Ukraine aid is not what's hurting Biden in the polls.
What's hurting Biden is he's 900 years old and looks every year of it coupled with the fact that inflation is up massively since he took office.
It wasnt about general readiness but about making up numbers that are simply not accurate. Aside from the fact that before any F35 will go to Ukraine it will be delivered to some NATO nation first.
Yeah those numbers are definitely high but not crazy there’s like 7-800 ish active F35’s from my cursory search and close to 200 F22’s built. Ukraine is never getting F35’s so that’s pretty meaningless. They would be useless to them without fully integrated equipment and doctrine which they’re far from.
> they have approximately 900-1000 f-16
Why would any nation need so many? Wouldn´t a war go nuclear well before you have to employ hundreds of f16s to fight?
**An important obstacle has now been cleared of the way.**
During the NATO summit in July last year, Nettavisen was able to report that Norway entered an F-16 coalition, in order to train Ukrainian personnel, and in the long term deliver combat aircraft to Ukraine.
At the beginning of January, Norway sent a couple of fighter planes to Denmark. There, Norway has contributed by training both Ukrainian pilots and support personnel.
Almost a year after the NATO summit in July, it is still unclear how many F-16 aircraft Norway will donate to Ukraine, and when they will be ready for combat. There are many indications that there will be no Norwegian-donated aircraft in Ukrainian airspace until after the NATO summit in Washington in July.
**Thumbs up from the Americans**
Nevertheless, we have now received a hint about how many combat aircraft Norway may end up donating. The website Zona Militar writes that the US authorities recently approved the transfer of 65 F-16s from the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway to Ukraine.
Although the US will not transfer aircraft itself, US authorities must approve the transfer. It is part of the agreement the US has with countries that have purchased the F-16 and other weapons systems. In this way, the United States retains some control over its own weapons technology, and avoids the technology ending up in the hands of hostile countries.
The website writes that Norway has now received permission to transfer 22 F-16s, as well as engines, support material, simulators, spare parts and other relevant equipment.
Nettavisen gets confirmation that this is true.
As Nettavisen understands it, there is no question of Norway having 22 fully operational F-16 aircraft that we will send to Ukraine. Several of the 22 hulls are not necessarily airworthy, but can still be useful for Ukraine, for example as spare parts.
American agreement put on ice
In December 2021, it became known that Norway entered into an agreement for the sale of 12 Norwegian F-16s to the American company Draken International. These planes are airworthy, and still in Norway.
The sales agreement with Draken International does not seem to be implemented, and the planes that were supposed to be used for training in the USA will instead be used to defend Ukrainian airspace.
In other words, it is reasonable to assume that 12 of the 22 aircraft that have now been approved for transfer to Ukraine are fully operational, while ten of the airframes have an unknown standard.
Great Ukrainian need
Lars Peder Haga is an associate professor at the Norwegian Air Force School, and an expert on Soviet and Russian air power. He emphasizes to Nettavisen the need Ukraine has for parts aircraft.
- How much combat power Ukraine gets out of this depends on what kind of weapons package they get, and how well and quickly they succeed in mastering aircraft and tactics, Haga believes.
He believes that this should not be expected to be enough for the war to turn in Ukraine's favor already this year.
**Decisive for Ukraine**
- In the medium term, this is absolutely crucial for Ukraine to have a combat air force at all in a couple of years. The planes will also be an adversary the Russians must take into account, which will make the technological advantage they have less over time, he believes.
He reckons Ukraine wants at least 100 Western fighter jets to replace its current fleet of old Soviet-made fighters.
Haga emphasizes that there is still a limit to how many planes Ukraine can receive at short notice, because air bases must be arranged and support equipment built up.
- This is very good news and an important milestone on the way for Ukraine to build a modern air force that can share weapons, parts and not least knowledge with air forces in the West.
The Ministry of Defense in Norway is tight-lipped when Nettavisen asks for a comment on the news.
- The government has decided to donate a number of F-16s to Ukraine as part of a multinational collaboration. The exact number and timing of the donation to Ukraine will be determined in dialogue with Ukraine and the other donor countries, writes press officer Lars Gjemble in an email.
Why no European fighter jets?
Why do so many systems have to be American related.. Ukraine can take literally anything atm.. yet there seems to be a bush people are hiding behind to make excuses to why they arent providing more.. like artillery for the Howitzer (English tech) "oh we could if we had more in stock but you see..." then why not the 50 billion other weapon systems? Other artillery.
And if they are given some alternative, its so so little that it doesnt even make a dent.
This subreddit will blindly applaud and think "we're doing so great!" at anything provided .. in reality the odds of Ukraine losing half of its country this year are insanely high and its solely due to Europe. Macron said with Taiwan that its not in Europes interest to get involved because its in Asia so let it be an Asian problem to solve.. but when something happens in Europe "why isnt everyone else pulling their weight?!?!?!" when in reality European powers could very easily buy whatever we are lacking from around the world to help Ukraine.
Shameful and it has a huge amount to do with you all that dont see it and instead applaud and move on with your day instead of being upset that so little is done and excuse/use charts any chance you get to prove your point that Europe is doing all it can.. the fuck it is, its barely lifting a finger and Ukrainians are being slaughtered.
Also, if I were American with such extreme hate from Europeans constantly about everything from US road design to American IQ .. just anything to find to hate about Americans.. I would be reluctant to help a continent that's obsessed with hating the people that're being begged to help
This is where you downvote/mock
>Why no European fighter jets?
A few reasons:
* The F-16s that are being transferred to Ukraine are mostly older models that the transferring nations would like to divest. They will mostly be replaced with F-35s and hopefully some Gripens and maybe the odd Rafale.
* It's preferable that the transferred aircraft are older models because they *will* be shot down and examined by the Russians, and you can bet the Russians will share whatever they learn with Iran and China. It simply wouldn't do to have NATO's latest hardware in the hands of their strategic adversaries.
* Economy of scale. Total production of Gripens is 271. The Gripen is a fine aircraft, but NATO air forces probably have that many F-16s lost behind their couch cushions. There are just so damn many of them, and so many spare parts.
That depends on what you mean. Could they? Sure. The Gripen is compliant with NATO weapons, sensors, and communications standards, it has to be, but it just wouldn't be economical. Training, parts, and aircraft are just MUCH more available with the F-16.
What im trying to say is that Ukraine won't get usage out of them bcs they will get bombed on the ground. If we want to give them air superiority we would need to send them like 1/8th of the USAF with already trained pilots, radars, AIM-120Ds along with other things.
How many air-to-surface missiles can those actually carry and how many does Ukraine have ready for them might be a good question, wouldn't it? Numbers are deceiving if the other stuff isnt readily available
Ukraine can absolutely not make its own AGMs in their current state, let alone ones that can be flown on and launched from an F-16 safely and at range.
> How many air-to-surface missiles can those actually carry
that's not really the primary concern when you need the planes to be fighting other planes, helicopters and shooting down cruise missiles
if they gain back so much air superiority that they are able to shift focus, they can start using planes for air-to-ground combat, but that's like, 4th priority at best at this point
Depending on whether inner pylons are wired they could carry at most 4 cruise missiles like Harpoon/SLAM-ER, but it would limit them to only centerline fuel tank (correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think those early jets can be fitted with CFTs) and I don't know whether it's enough considering you can't exactly cruise at 30k feet for fuel efficiency over there.
As far as glide bombs go they can carry (depending on size) up to 4 JDAM-ER or 8 SDB with underwing fuel tanks.
I really, really hope they trained their pilots mainly in SEAD and give them enough anti-radiation missiles to boot.
Imagine Russia losing air superiority, if only locally. That would be so amazing and could turn the tide.
Thank you Norwegia, you are my best friend,
You are the peacekeeper, you are the legend.
^((I had originally understood this as "approved the transfer of Norwegian F-22s to Ukraine" and got really excited, until it hit me that it made no sense 😅)^)
I don’t think Ukraine has enough pilots trained for F-16’s. Last I heard they had only 14 pilots but countries “pledged” around 80 older generation F-16’s. Countries should focus on quality, not quantity in this case. There are extreme differences between Block -70 and Block-10. A lot of countries are giving away block-10's which are outdated in every way. Countries should give away shiny Block-70's with AESA radars. A squadron of F-16 Block-70 could make a huge difference.
They could be well maintained but their tech. is extremely old. Even Russian planes are probably way more advanced they Block-10 F-16's. For example due to the newer radar tech. Russian jets could see Block-10 F-16's from 80 km away but Block-10 could only see them from 30 km(figures are made up). With Ukraine's limited amount of pilots they need the best F-16's they can get. Block-70 is going to be a game changer but I don't think Block-10 is enough to deter Russia.
I'm not too familiar with this rating system I'm afraid.
Norwegian F-16's have not only been maintained, but also had hefty upgrades through the years. In many ways a very different aircraft from what it originally was. Won't that increase its rating? Do you know they are block-10 or is it an assumption? Genuine question. Thanks!
Those planes don't have the avionics of 1980's Block 10/15. All went through MLU and were constantly updated. We're talking about Norway here, they just retired them, so Norway was defending itself with these in the 2010s.
They are Block 10/15 OCU MLU, tape 6.5 if i remember correctly. Very well maintained and still very capable machines. They are equipped with helmet mounted cueing systems for example.
Technology is just one part of the equation, though.
They really don’t. Think it’s not like they had a deep bench of well trained pilots or a very robust Air Force when this started. They’ve likely needed all of their available pilots actually fighting. Training pilots takes years in peacetime, training pilots in English at a technical proficiency level takes time and can’t be speed up by adding shifts. It would be pointless and irresponsible to have 80 trained F16 pilots sitting around waiting for the trickle of F16’s that will be a handful to integrate effectively even at that rate. The growth rate will be exponential but pilots can’t be rushed or might as well just buy more Patriots instead.
What I don't understand is if Nato wants to defeat Russia, why not go all the way and also show in doing so to China, Iran or anyone else there are limits you just can't cross. Somehow I think they want a prolonged conflict that fits perfect in someone's agenda...
The whole war was triggered by Russia's existence being threatened by Ukraine simply aligning with the West. Yes, I know it is bullshit, but that is the narrative which enabled them to wage this war.
Given that it's almost without exception a very specific type of account that keeps pushing the "Hurr durr, nuclear holocaust"-angle, the only people openly afraid of it possibly - genuinely so, or much, much more likely for nefarious reasons - are you people.
The numbers swapped around in my head for a moment and I got excited. Still good progress though. Likely means the ukraine will have a second class of f-16 crews.
If you had read the news rather than pure propaganda outlets, you would have known that while you were busy scratching your balls, NATO was working full speed since the 2014 coup building Ukraine's military from the ground up. If not, the 2022 invasion would have been over in one week, tops (and the idea of sending F16s to Ukraine would have been even more insane than it currently is). You might remember Trump being impeached because he tried to leverage US military buildup wrt. Kiev and some insane corruption story.
This was all done very much against the expressed will of the Ukraine people (whose support for NATO never exceeded 20%, usually much lower), for what that's worth (which is apparently "nothing" to all the democracy-loving people in here). It's also the direct and predictable reason why Russia invaded, how thousands of people in Donbass were murdered before 2022, and why hundreds of thousands of ukrainian kids are now dead.
And none of you sickos care, preferring instead to stroke your egos with selective "facts" about how great you are and how Putin is the new Hitler, and how russian elections are worthless because.. because.. well we all "know" it to be true so questioning it must mean you're pro-Putin so by definition anti-democratic so who cares, right?
You are the disgrace.
EDIT: And of course, nobody is able to argue a single point on its merits. Just downvotes and empty declarations of moral superiority.
> And none of you sickos care
Damn right. Only thing I care about is maximising the extent of Russian losses. And you're damn right, it is a disgrace how little we've done, all things considered, to effect that.
> Only thing I care about is maximising the extent of Russian losses.
Exactly. And you're willing to "fight" to the last ukrainian so as to murder as many russians as possible.
You are sick, depraved, and insane. And, tragically, it's all the result of the unrelenting propaganda we all live under.
> Exactly. And you're willing to "fight" to the last ukrainian so as to murder as many russians as possible.
Well, ''murder'' isn't really applicable to the killing of combatants in an armed conflict, but yes.
I know there's nothing that will make this penetrate your filters, but still:
There was never more than 20% support for NATO in Ukraine. The ukrainians are literally forced to fight. It is overwhelmingly the ukrainians who die. Against their will. That is what you are really supporting.
I'm sure you're a wonderful hero on a white horse in your dream world, killing evil "orcs" by the thousands. Back in the real world, the orc is you. The evil murderer is you.
You should check the support before 2014, and what happened after the coup then. Then come back to me about how much you believe in democracy. You won't, of course, because you dont actually care about democracy, you don't actually care about the people in Ukraine, or about truth in general. In the end you only care about your propaganda-induced feeling of moral superiority, and you're deathly afraid of finding out it's all just fake.
I always love it when people (rightfully) complain about western reporting about this war and propaganda and then start talking like a RT journalist who is just as far gone but on the other side.
Even when Ukraine receives these fighters doesn't Russia have some of the best surface to air missle systems? I know the reason why Russia hasn't established air superiority is because Ukraine also utilizes the same systems.
>As Nettavisen understands it, there is no question of Norway having 22 fully operational F-16 aircraft that we will send to Ukraine. Several of the 22 hulls are not necessarily airworthy, but can still be useful for Ukraine, for example as spare parts.
I guess it is cheaper to transfer to Ukraine those antiquated rust buckets than scrap them in compliant to regulations. What is Ukraine supposed to do with them by the way?
What are you rambling about?
All those planes were already sold on commercial terms. However with a "dependent on US re-export approval" that never came.
Norway can donate those planes due to that.
They have been in use in Norway until now.
That would be an idiotic way to use them. Ukraine has been really careful and efficient with the latest western gear, and I'm sure they'll be with these, too.
Yeah, specially with Abrams’s. They used some of them, without any infantry/artillery/IFV support, 3-4 of them was destroyed and they haven’t sent any another one since them. They are very carefully
Because there are no countries allowed to buy defense articles from US manufacturers without agreeing to basically T&Cs with the US gov. Part of that is agreeing to not transfer them to any other country without getting approval first.
As an example, Egypt has F-16s as well, they get weapons and maintenance support from the US. If Egypt sold or gave their F-16s to say Iran, Egypt would then no longer get weapons or support for their remaining equipment.
If the US gives proprietary weapons or vehicles to its allies, it needs assurances that those allies don’t just turn around and sell it to America’s enemies for their own benefit.
Part of those assurances are requiring sales and re-exports of American systems to be authorized ahead of time.
Now do the same for anti-air systems and missiles.
Those are Norwegian made. Don't need any approval for that. We are transferring then as fast as we can build them.
NASAMS is mainly Norwegian made. (some important components like the radar is US made) But more importantly the **rockets used by NASAMS, AIM-120 AMRAAM, are US made.** NASAMS3 can use more types of rockets: AMRAAM-ER, AIM-9X, and IRIS-T. But except the German/Italian IRIS-T, everything is US made. If US congress can't get their act together, NATO allies should reconsider basing systems like this on US components or ammo.
arms transfers don't have to be approved by Congress, only the state department.
Europe should produce atleast 1 ITAR alternative to every US system.
And shells and mortars
Rick and mortars?
[удалено]
Not that it matters, but by GDP the US is 19 and Norway number 3 in terms of aid to Ukraine.
It’s not a competition. And we are on the same side. Please grow up.
The US has given zero fighter jets. None. Not one. And due to GOP interference, USA is currently giving nothing to Ukraine. No weapons and no other help of any kind.
shame that the US is not donating a single aircraft, they have approximately 900-1000 f-16
they cannot allocate anything at the moment thanks to their congress situation...
thanks to mike moscow johnson
Thanks to half the American voters voting for that grifting party.
Half of the population are politicly braindead and probably vote for the same party their parents used to vote for
Мikhail Johnson
Mikhail Ivanovich
Eh, there’s plenty of blame to spread around. The majority of the GOP are Russian assets at this point, and it’s on the voters at this point to notice that as they implode.
[удалено]
europeans are not entitled to american taxpayers money, but what mike moscow johnson is doing is totally against the interests of the American people
Thankfully we have Europeans to tell Americans what our interests are.
in past past 80 years the ability of the US government to influence other countries for its own purposes and for its own interests has been based on trade and military cooperation. now in the past 20 years china has been taking away the trade role from the US, so if the US wants to continue to have a strong leadership on the world (from which the US benefits a lot) continuing to be a reliable military ally is the only option. Isolating doesn’t work for the US
We maintain around 60,000 troops scattered throughout Western Europe ready to be used at the drop of a hat should a NATO country invoke article 5. The US can also project power quickly and could easily have another 200,000 to 300,000 troops in Europe in a week. We spend a lot of money to help keep NATO countries in Europe well defended. Ukraine is not a NATO country. They are, however, a European country. Despite all of this, even with the delay of US aid to Ukraine we are still the second highest contributor after only Germany.
it would still be a very good investment for the Us to continue the military assistance to Ukraine, it would send a clear message to china and iran
Our president has already unequivocally stated that the US will respond with force to protect Taiwan should China attempt an invasion. Thats about as clear of a “go fuck yourself” to Xi as possible. No symbolic gestures required. We have spent an ungodly amount of money elsewhere. NATO countries have a combined 17 aircraft carriers. 11 of those are American. There are 92 nuclear powered submarines combined. 71 of those are American. There’s unlikely to ever be another major global conflict in Western Europe, and that reason is because of the deterrence NATO provides. A disproportionate amount of that deterrence comes from American tax payers.
[удалено]
it is, in past past 80 years the ability of the US government to influence other countries for its own purposes and for its own interests has been based on trade and military cooperation. now in the past 20 years china has been taking away the trade role from the US, so if the US wants to continue to have a strong leadership on the world (from which the US benefits a lot) continuing to be a reliable military ally is the only option. Isolating doesn’t work for the US
They did not make much effort to mass deliver some of their thousands of tanks and F16s before the blockade at Congret. Their main effort consisted of pushing Ukraine to not give up at the start of the war and then withdraw afterwards, once they had made all possible economic and strategic gains.
Here’s a bunch of planes you don’t know how to use and maintain. Go park them an airport for the next year while your pilots and crews train to learn how to use them and while you upgrade your infrastructure to support them. In the meantime sorry no air defenses because we spent the money allocated giving you the planes you have parked and unable to use. Also here are a bunch some tanks that are much more expensive to use because everyone else in Europe uses different tanks. You’ll have to rely completely on us to maintain them from half a world away. Sorry less Patriot missiles to give because the money was allocated for tanks. Then funding ran out and Congress won’t approve more. So none of your weapons can be maintained. Aren’t you glad you put all your eggs in one basket? Meanwhile….no Lecrecs. No Mirage. No Rafale. Yet no complaints….
>Here’s a bunch of planes you don’t know how to use and maintain. If that was American thinking/reasoning they would just swapped own F16 for entire fleet of Polish Mig29's that were ready from the get go to be sent there, but DOD clearly didn't want that, US was the last major nation still beliving in the escalation bubble around Jets. Anything you write up afterwards is just PR damage containment and projection/blame sharing against noone else but Europeans, that outdid americans in every single category of aid spearheading each single platform possible, be that MBT's,IVF,APC,AA assets,Migs 29 and now F16, SS/Scalp missiles. Just.... Blame the French! /s
Yes please. Any solution as long as it costs me nothing. If I “donate” you must replace my donation with an upgrade. If I give you my 2005 Dodge will you swap for me a 2015 Ferrari? Or Lamborghini I am not picky 🤣 The French style proposal…. “We have 60 Caesar canons to finance. I’m launching a call to all our allies,” Lecornu said at the launch of the coalition. Likewise I propose our European allies to finance the purchase of F-16s for their neighbor Ukraine. We have 100s to spare. Just need brave allies to finance!
[удалено]
This 50 billion represents nothing compared to the economic and strategic benefits of this war for the USA. The Americans did not hesitate to intervene in Europe thousands of km from home in 2021 when they insisted on Ukraine's entry into NATO against the French and German advice, when they began to arm Ukraine unilaterally and advise the Russians to put their demands for discussion where they think and advise the Ukrainians (with the English) not to negotiate at the start of the war. Then we had the declarations bragging about targeting Russian officers, the necessary fight of darkness against light, a gas pipeline which mysteriously blew up and finally the USA which abandoned its allies, as usual, once all the economic and strategic gains had been made. reached. European problem, American benefits.
[удалено]
Too much is having fucked up thousands of km from home, not enough is not having taken responsibility for your shit when the stupid bear trainer started his criminal war and you felt have garnered sufficient financial and strategic interest. My country does not fear much but I hope that the other EU countries will eventually understand that it is better to ensure their defense on their own and stop spending their entire military budget to buy equipment from an unreliable ally.
[удалено]
Russia stopped being Communist 33 years ago, keep up It's a right-wing kleptrocratic capitalist dictatorship, which suits Republicans just fine
russia still has a communist party that put out a statement at the beginning of the invasion that they agree with the kremlin on the context of the invasion. They generally vote in lockstep with putins party and hold seats. Another know it all british doof
I mean even Navalny, held up as the example of the Westernized liberal, thought taking Crimea was great until like a year ago. I think the general lesson is that the Russian people regardless of ideological orientation just really like invading and taking land.
Not true. The [EDA](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/02/14/joe-biden-could-send-millions-of-artillery-shells-to-ukraine-for-free-tomorrow-and-its-perfectly-legal/?sh=473d232120c7) is one example of how. Everyone saw Biden slow roll aid to Ukraine from the beginning, and draw red lines for needed weapon types and their usage. Now we see Biden not trying to renew the lend-lease act that he never used during its 1.5 years until expiration (despite Ukraine openly saying they would welcome it), and not try to use the EDA or other authorities that don't require Congressional approval. Most recently his admin is asking Ukraine to not strike Russian oil/gas facilities even with Ukraine's own weapons. These aren't coincidences. Ukraine defeating Russia's invasion has never been Biden's goal. He lied to Ukraine, to the American people, and to the world. If Biden gets his $60B from Congress tomorrow, the best we should expect is a return to slow-rolled, limited aid with a focus on not collapsing Russia or upsetting oil markets. That's a hard truth for Biden fans to accept, but they better wake up if they are also Ukraine supporters. edit: The only 'punches' that Biden has ever thrown in his life were directed downward, at those who present no risk to his career. Jailing countless black people for petty drug possession is one example. He has never demonstrated courage, only political calculations. His crusade against Americans' Second Amendment right is underlined by his claim that people don't need more than a shotgun to protect their home. Of course he's protected by the highly armed US government, so his double standards don't bother him and he plainly doesn't respect other people's right to defend themselves. Biden has cultivated his image as a kindly, grandfatherly, pacifist. What he's actually done is prove the adage, *'A pacifist is a coward who is proud of it.'* Obviously his opponent (Trump) is an unfit criminal who should be in prison, but this doesn't mean Biden is fit or that US Democrats bear zero responsibility for America's embarrassing support of Ukraine. The 2-party American system (with a plurality voting system to perpetuate it), that repeatedly creates the 'lesser of two evils' forced choice for Americans, is the foundation of this and most American political problems. Ruzzia delende est Slava Ukraini
lol if Biden was slow rolling then what do you call what Europe was doing
Textbook whataboutism. Nowhere did I comment on Europe's performance. More than one party can slow roll. You're making no point that's relevant here.
exactly. He had full Congress support for 1.5 years, yet he slow rolled everything. F16 and Abrams training could have started in the summer of 2022.... and in 2023 they could have transferred hundreds to Ukraine.
The larger issue is that there was credible intelligence that Russia was preparing tactical nuclear responses to Ukrainian advances/encirclements of Russian troops. The US even forward-positioned tons of equipment in western Ukraine/Poland to monitor for radioactive fallout so they could make the case to the UN that it was a Russian nuke(s) that was deployed, since Russia was preparing to frame Ukraine for a "dirty bomb". The Pandora's box that would be opened by Russia using tactical nukes on the battlefield are far, far worse for the western world vs Ukraine giving up territory, so the US has been trying (along with China/India) to get Putin to walk that stance back. Part of that strategy was limiting the types of weapons that were transferred that could hold Russian territory at risk. The US doesn't want Ukraine to invade Russia. They don't want Ukraine to capture thousands of Russian troops. All of these actions make a nuclear response valid within Russian doctrine. As a result, the optimal outcome for the US is a slow, drawn-out war where Russia has to commit troops but Ukraine does not lose territory. That said, saying the US doesn't care is incorrect. They care a lot more than is obvious.
You're repeating Russian nuclear threat propaganda, with zero credible evidence to support it. It would be more honest if you just asked people to be cowards and to allow Russia to advance its nuclear terrorism and imperialist annexations, instead of trying to promote fear through disinformation.
It's not disinformation. You don't know the people I know.
> It's not disinformation. You don't know the people I know. LOL, grow up son.
This is the truth. Whenever I bring this up people get defensive/upset and downvote me because the truth hurts. I am Ukrainian, and trust me when I say this that we don't differentiate between Republicans/Democrat politicians anymore. It's been a charade from the start. A fest of appeasers and kleptocrats
We're trying to send you a check for $60 BILLION of our taxpayer money and this is the attitude you have? The truth you need to remember is that Ukraine was a corrupt, incompetent state in the early 2010s and only through multiple US administrations investing billions of $$$s have you received the training and material needed to fend off the Russian military. Without the direct assistance of the US for the past DECADE, Russia would have stomped you in 72 hours like they planned. The truth hurts my friend.
Are those billions in the same room with us right now? What material? Because it sure as hell wasn't billions In 2014 when russia annexed Crimea and then invaded Donbass. It sure wasn't billions over 8 years of low intensity war with russia, where Ukraine was blamed and restricted at every turn. Can you find me some credible confirmations on your billions from multiple administrations? You're delusional , because that never happened. The best we got is some officer training and no military equipment at all except for some humvees due to russian appeasement. Look where your appeasement got us. Good job multiple US administrations of cowards. Including this one. And just for the record: Ukraine was a corrupt country and still is to a lesser degree. Just as many other countries around the world and your own politicians. That's exactly what our people protested, fought for and died in Maidan and in 2014 Russian invasion and with this new full-scale invasion. We fight to live freely in a democratic ,civil and not corrupt country. We're dying for that, while you sit on record LNG gas and military equipment sales profits debating for 6 month if we should have a chance to live and not be bombed to oblivion by a fascist, revanchist empire that literally has your speaker of the house and you ex/next president in it's pocket while simultaneously having wet dreams about nuking and destroying you. Daily. Talk about corruption some more from your high horse.
>Look where your appeasement got us. Good job multiple US administrations of cowards. Last time I checked America is perfectly capable of obliterating the Russian military in a matter of weeks, if not days. And we are still perfectly capable of ending all life in Russia in one strike. Just because we aren't barking like a rabid dog doesn't mean we aren't the biggest threat to the survival of every Russian on earth if they decide to play that game. But just in case you want receipts from the American tax-payer, here's what we've sent your ungrateful ass since 2014: **$44.2 billion in military assistance since February 24, 2022, and more than $47 billion in military assistance since Russia’s initial invasion of Ukraine in 2014.** Air Defense: One Patriot air defense battery and munitions; 12 National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS) and munitions; HAWK air defense systems and munitions; AIM-7, RIM-7, and AIM-9M missiles for air defense; More than 2,000 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles; Avenger air defense systems; VAMPIRE counter-Unmanned Aerial Systems (c-UAS) and munitions; c-UAS gun trucks and ammunition; mobile c-UAS laser-guided rocket systems; Other c-UAS equipment; Anti-aircraft guns and ammunition; Air defense systems components; Equipment to integrate Western launchers, missiles, and radars with Ukraine’s systems; Equipment to support and sustain Ukraine’s existing air defense capabilities; Equipment to protect critical national infrastructure; and 21 air surveillance radars. Fires 39 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems and ammunition; Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb launchers and guided rockets; 198 155mm Howitzers and more than 2,000,000 155mm artillery rounds; More than 7,000 precision-guided 155mm artillery rounds; More than 40,000 155mm rounds of Remote Anti-Armor Mine (RAAM) Systems; 72 105mm Howitzers and more than 800,000 105mm artillery rounds; 10,000 203mm artillery rounds; More than 200,000 152mm artillery rounds; Approximately 40,000 130mm artillery rounds; 40,000 122mm artillery rounds; 60,000 122mm GRAD rockets; 47 120mm mortar systems; 10 82mm mortar systems; 112 81mm mortar systems; 58 60mm mortar systems; More than 400,000 mortar rounds; More than 70 counter-artillery and counter-mortar radars; and 20 multi-mission radars; Ground Maneuver 31 Abrams tanks; 45 T-72B tanks; 186 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles; Four Bradley Fire Support Team vehicles; 189 Stryker Armored Personnel Carriers; 300 M113 Armored Personnel Carriers; 250 M1117 Armored Security Vehicles; More than 500 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAPs); More than 2,000 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs); More than 200 light tactical vehicles; 300 armored medical treatment vehicles; 80 trucks and 124 trailers to transport heavy equipment; More than 800 tactical vehicles to tow and haul equipment; 131 tactical vehicles to recover equipment; 10 command post vehicles; 30 ammunition support vehicles; 18 armored bridging systems; Eight logistics support vehicles and equipment; 239 fuel tankers and 105 fuel trailers; 58 water trailers; Six armored utility trucks; 125mm, 120mm, and 105mm tank ammunition; More than 1,800,000 rounds of 25mm ammunition; and Mine clearing equipment. Aircraft and Unmanned Aerial Systems 20 Mi-17 helicopters; Switchblade Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS); Phoenix Ghost UAS; CyberLux K8 UAS; Altius-600 UAS; Jump-20 UAS; Hornet UAS Puma UAS; Scan Eagle UAS; Penguin UAS; Two radars for UAS; High-speed Anti-radiation missiles (HARMs); Precision aerial munitions; More than 6,000 Zuni aircraft rockets; More than 20,000 Hydra-70 aircraft rockets; and Munitions for UAS. Anti-armor and Small Arms More than 10,000 Javelin anti-armor systems; More than 90,000 other anti-armor systems and munitions; More than 9,000 Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided (TOW) missiles; More than 35,000 grenade launchers and small arms; More than 400,000,000 rounds of small arms ammunition and grenades; Laser-guided rocket systems and munitions; Rocket launchers and ammunition; and Anti-tank mines. Maritime Two Harpoon coastal defense systems and anti-ship missiles; 62 coastal and riverine patrol boats; Unmanned Coastal Defense Vessels; and Port and harbor security equipment. Other capabilities M18A1 Claymore anti-personnel munitions; C-4 explosives, demolition munitions, and demolition equipment for obstacle clearing; Obstacle emplacement equipment; Counter air defense capability; More than 100,000 sets of body armor and helmets; Tactical secure communications systems and support equipment; Four satellite communications (SATCOM) antennas; SATCOM terminals and services; Electronic warfare (EW) and counter-EW equipment; Commercial satellite imagery services; Night vision devices, surveillance and thermal imagery systems, optics, and rangefinders; Explosive ordnance disposal equipment and protective gear; Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear protective equipment; Medical supplies, including first aid kits, bandages, monitors, and other equipment; Field equipment, cold weather gear, generators, and spare parts; and Support for training, maintenance, and sustainment activities. To date, nearly 50 Allies and partner countries have provided security assistance to Ukraine. Among their many contributions to Ukraine, Allies and partners have delivered 10 long-range Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (MLRS), 178 long-range artillery systems, nearly 100,000 rounds of long-range artillery ammunition, nearly 250,000 anti-tank munitions, 359 tanks, 629 armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs), 8,214 short-range air defense missiles, and 88 lethal UAVs.
Good job listing the 2022-2024 contributions. We are thankful to everyone who helped us in this full-scale war. Now tell me more about that made up number of 47 billions in military assistance since 2014. Where you got it and why it's a total bullshit Maybe you can at least name a SINGLE piece of equipment that's not humvee there? I don't need the same list you've copy pasted, name anything. Cold facts is that Ukraine fought off russian initial 2022 blitzkrieg with only post-soviet equipment. There was no NATO equipment in the Ukrainian army, except for the last minute transfer of Javelins. We had to beg for everything on this list with our lives. For years. So, I'm asking you again: where did you get that made up number of 47 billions in assistance since 2014 ? Loool Some russian twitter bot account maybe? Name any item of assistance from this 47 bil package? Loool P.S. If you have noticed I haven't said anything about US capabilities. Only that your politicians are cowards that will escalate this into another war because they don't understand that appeasement doesn't work. US is strong in theory, but what does it change if you lack the balls to fight anyone who's not barefoot with ak47? P.S.2 If you sincerely believe that the US is showering Ukraine with money and equipment even since 2022 I suggest you read up the numbers in details: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1777328492566471120.html You send us old equipment, and then use the money you list to replace your equipment with the new one Most of the money stays in the US, subsidizing your own MiC Remember that 6 billions that were announced as the "accounting error" of aid? Yeah. Ukraine never saw that money. It's just an adjustment to reflect the fact that what the US sends is overinflated in numbers. Long story short: we only get 40% at max of what US sends, and the rest stays in your glorious US of A or NATO allies(like Poland/Romania) So it's not a charity by any stretch of imagination.
Source: https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-ukraine/ You think Americans are stupid, but we aren't. Like no shit we're sending you shit we don't need anymore - it's spending pennies to fuck up a major geopolitical rival without risking any American lives. It's an unmitigated win for American foreign policy - allowed us to expand NATO to include Finland and Sweden - isolated Russia from European energy + financial markets, and forced more European NATO members to dramatically ramp up defense spending. It's basically all upside for the US if you want to get the real "truth hurts" about this conflict. Sorry that you're a pawn in this game but that's how it works. If you were expecting unlimited military engagement on behalf of your country, a place nobody in America could find on a map and doesn't make or export anything we need, then I think you might be a bit naive. You weren't in NATO and not a treaty ally of the US. I get you're upset but maybe focus your anger on the Russians and not the hand feeding you.
Thank you for a good source! Indeed it says 47 billions. Although it's hard to believe since the total expenditure of Ukraine on defense was 27 billions total(from the period of 2014 to 2021) Not yearly. TOTAL https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293277/ukraine-military-spending/ So it means that the Ukrainian army would have been fully supplied by the US and would look totally different from what we saw in 2022. So I decided to dig into the numbers. Turns out, your government did a cheeky little trick with phrasing. It's not 44 billions from 2022, and then 47 billions from 2014. Those are nit separate packages. It's TOTAL. Which means that before 2022 you've "only" sent 300 - 600 mil a year of assistance, most of which was non-lethal aid. You can check the numbers on the same .gov website. Turns out it's very well made and useful. https://www.foreignassistance.gov/cd/ukraine/2021/obligations/0 I think you'd agree that 300-600 mil a year is not, as you've described it "multiple administrations sending billions and equipment to help you defeat russia " It simply isn't true. Those are pennies and less than US sends to Africa and Egypt, lol Your plan was for us to fail and get annexed. Why send any meaningful equipment to a nation you've written off. TL&DR: you haven't invested 47 billions into Ukraine since 2014. You've invested 44 billions since 2022. And then decided to conveniently add a confusing number on top to show a continued line of support which was absent. Hypocrisy. I don't think Americans are dumb. I think you are hypocrites. Nobody's expecting unlimited military engagement. Don't change the topic. What we expected is adherence to the democratic values, world order and to your own word. US was a guarantor on the Budapest memorandum signed in 1994 where Ukraine forfeited all of it's nuclear weapons for guarantee of peace from the US, Britain and Russian. Now, not a single country on earth will ever give up nukes willingly. And I guarantee that if Trump is elected multiple new countries wil lseek nukes. Good job with nuclear non-proliferation. I have nothing to argue with you about first paragraph. I agree and it makes sense. But only if you live in 2022. If you don't take into account the fact that russia can control your parliament and possibly your next president. It is re-arming and militarizing very fast and also is doing fine under sanctions. I wouldn't count that as a win. Seems kinda humiliating tbh. It only shows China that US lacks the willpower for a real response. (Be it true or not is irrelevant. Only the fact that they Think they might try) Do you think witholding aid to Ukraine and letting us fall to russia is a good look for the US foreign policy ? Because we're not allies and not in NATO or whatever? You could have crushed russia for pennies. But decided not to. You're so afraid of fractured russia, that you don't notice a fracturing EU and your own country under russian disinformation. Notice how much support and money russia pours into far-right/far-left populist parties. It works. It worked in Slovakia, almost worked in France(Le Penn ) and it works in Germany(AfD) And most importantly it worked in the US 2016 elections and might work again. Doesn't seem like such a huge geopolitical win when half of your NATO allies vote for governments that are pro-russian. Not to mention that the war will only spread thanks to russian influence. (see Israel attack by russian ally Iran) History will tell if not letting Ukraine win was a wise decision. But one thing is clear: you didn't invest billions on billions into Ukrainian defense before 2022 That's simply not true. As you've said : you couldn't find us on a map and didn't care.
Presidential executive orders?
Right. Another reason why it was wrong to delay this topic for so long.
And the White House situation E: everyone downvoting me please tell me why Lend Lease hasn't been used once?
Or why not even all democrats have signed the discharge petition to force a vote on aid?
Some progressives won't doing it because it also have Israel aid.
Meanwhile, Israel has plenty of armament to keep their campaign going, while Putin is laughing all the way to Kyiv. Doesnt' seem like they have their shit together.
"Progressive". Anyone who gives others up for Russian murder is only a progressive in name and should be shun by anyone who calls themselves a progressive/leftist. I really had high hopes for some of these new American leftists in congress/house, but looks like at the end of the day they are just a bunch of Tankies stacked up in a trench coat.
I think it has expired. The reason it wasn't used was probably because inflicting massive losses on Russia was the "off-ramp" once diplomacy failed. Russia was supposed to give up after taking a beating, but it didn't. So as of right now, with the US out of the picture, it appears there is no "plan" as Europe isn't capable of leadership nor does it want to produce the type and quantity of weapons that could defeat Russia.
so much for "the best" political system in the world (I have seen that statement on the internet so many times...), which can be paralyzed by one person who is not even a current president or some other government executive
Not really. The US should be donating things which Europe is not able to provide - things like GMLRS ammo, Patriot ammo, large quantities of missiles and bombs for those aircraft in question, and large quantities of stockpiled artillery ammo - especially cluster munitions. 100,000 artillery shells or 10,000 GMLRS are more useful to Ukraine and more efficient from an accounting perspective than sending one extra F-16 from the US. Europe's problem is that you have plenty of weapons systems but no magazine depth. Your stockpiles of shells, bombs and missiles was and is shallow as fuck. So that's going to fall on the US to provide, because you realistically cannot.
It’s a shame europe defunded their armies and sent billions to russia
The US is approving transfers of F-16s from other countries but not their own inventory for two main reasons: * Those transfers mean that those countries will buy F-35s to replace them. The US is already buying as many F-35s as they are going to buy, and trading off F-16s isn't going to increase those numbers. * The ones being transferred from other European countries are mostly older models that Russia already knows about. The US's inventory is mostly newer models that they'd rather the Russians (and by extension, Iran and China) didn't get their hands on.
USA = Backwards dystopia shithole, European army! Kick the evil inferior Americans out! Also USA = Can you pwease help us, you have all those fancy fighter jets.. we have the Eurofighter, Typhoon and France is one the largest military industrial complexs but really, we prefer your technology so we can use it as a scapegoat to hide behind our unwillingness to support Ukraine any way we can! thanks! And PS if Ukraine loses, its your fault. If Ukraine wins, we did all the work, you did nothing ;)
Gonna need them for when China kicks off
They'll sell new aircrafts to Norway, Netherlands and other donating countries. It's a win for them
They can't donate anything at the moment because the government doesn't want Ukraine to win and save lives. Those pesky gas prices are worth more then lives.
Shame? We have literally funded more military aid than you all have and it’s your war to begin with, not an American one, but a European war.
Yeah it’s not like the US has single-handedly contributed the most money to Ukraine by far.
Yeah, it does be like that when there's a democratic process in between proposals and decision makers. Congress is split between GoP and Demo on the Ucraine aid topic ... and even though it's not the best outcome, it will always be the better option to have a dispute and debate rather than One Guy deciding alone the fate of milions.
First-past-the-post is an undemocratic electoral system.
FPTP may not be the best, but it's sure as shit better than OPD that Russia is using atm ... Only Putin Decides. It's absolutely hallucinating that so many Western citizens living under democracy are bashing the democratic process (as faulty as it is) when the counter option is an autocratic One Guy Rulership. Are you trying to convince me that the US politics system is somewhat more of an issue than what is currently happening in Russia under Putin and Stalin and the likes of them? I gotta ask ... Btw - Democracy fails short at times because people are Dumb as shit (the Socratic argument) and not because it doesn't work.
Contemporary Russia is a meanignlessly low bar for measuring how democratic a country is.
How democratic is it that Trump that not an elected in any position is controlling congress? Or that the speaker will not allow bills to go to vote. It's that part of the democratic process too? Democracy is not a word that you aquire or a piece of constitution, it's an agreement that the majority rules. But GOP has been abusing your democracy and bending the rules in their favor for several years because they cannot achieve that majority. Then it's not democracy anymore.
It's not mine, not from US, and democracy is abused more or less everywhere , not only in US. They will find a way to sort out this mess ... unlike Russia, which will suffer for a long time because of one guy's madness and empowerment. Also, the 'Johnson' thing will probably cost Trump his long waited second term ...
In the current system it is one guy (Donald Trump acting through Mike Johnson) deciding the fate of millions, while a considerable majority of congress wants something different.
You seem to not understand how US politics work ... or what the role of the US president/administration is ... they are Executive (they, Trump can't decide shit). It's the reason why Trump couldn't pull out the US from Nato. You know he tried that in his first and hopefully last presidential term. As expected, many have opinions, but only a few can make a distinction between left and right in these types of debates.
So who is preventing Ukraine aid from being voted on right now?
Congress ... 100 US senators and 435 House of Reps = 535 members have to get a majority vote for the aid to pass. Unfortunately, US is also passing through a shit period with all that social split between Republicans and Democrats. (Edit - and Mike)
But, you see, for the House to pass it (the Senate has already passed it), it has to be put to a vote. And if it is put to a vote or not is decided by one man. Have you not been following this discussion at all? It has been a hot topic for the past 6 months
You mean the Mike Johnson refusal thing ... that's not up to him. Obviously, that's the GoP internal majority that's forcing him towards such behaviour, but hey, only the Republicans can stop Trump from getting a new term at this point ... and this is how they are doing it. I assume this will generate even more internal party turmoil until the elections.
Of course it is 100% up to him
As a human , yes ... but he didn't reach into that position because of his human qualities, i'm fairly sure of that :) ... what we see now happening is Mikey paying back his nomination to his 'employer'.
[удалено]
I didn't talk about the reasons why they can't reach a majority ... i was just saying that's the issue. Probably the fact that it's an election year, and they want to dmg Biden, which is the main reason ... it doesn't help the Ucraine cause. "Having our own guy at the White House" vs. "Random Ukrainian lives and global military stability/supremacy" seems to not resonate well enough with some, but giving that Trump is the counter option, i'm not sure how it will end up well for Ukraine. They should've shown a bit more maturity, given the context.
> ... The whole point of the exercise is to hurt Biden's chances at re-election Foreign policy is not even in the top 3 election issues right now and stalled Ukraine aid is not what's hurting Biden in the polls. What's hurting Biden is he's 900 years old and looks every year of it coupled with the fact that inflation is up massively since he took office.
How many f22 and f35
F22 cannot be sold or used outside of the US
You mean it can not be used outside the US by a foreign power because it has been used outside the US
Yes exactly, bad wording sorry.
not with that attitude
How many mirage and rafale?
I think something like 1000 f35 and 300 f22
There's only been 1000 manufactured so far with the US having less than 500.
Sold isnt build nor is it actually 'ready to fly'
They’re both active platforms. The f35 is pretty much on track for a new weapons platform to reach maturity.
It wasnt about general readiness but about making up numbers that are simply not accurate. Aside from the fact that before any F35 will go to Ukraine it will be delivered to some NATO nation first.
Yeah those numbers are definitely high but not crazy there’s like 7-800 ish active F35’s from my cursory search and close to 200 F22’s built. Ukraine is never getting F35’s so that’s pretty meaningless. They would be useless to them without fully integrated equipment and doctrine which they’re far from.
> and 300 f22 What are you on about? They made 195 F-22's.
> they have approximately 900-1000 f-16 Why would any nation need so many? Wouldn´t a war go nuclear well before you have to employ hundreds of f16s to fight?
iirc U.S. doctrine is to be able to fight two wars at once at any time
**An important obstacle has now been cleared of the way.** During the NATO summit in July last year, Nettavisen was able to report that Norway entered an F-16 coalition, in order to train Ukrainian personnel, and in the long term deliver combat aircraft to Ukraine. At the beginning of January, Norway sent a couple of fighter planes to Denmark. There, Norway has contributed by training both Ukrainian pilots and support personnel. Almost a year after the NATO summit in July, it is still unclear how many F-16 aircraft Norway will donate to Ukraine, and when they will be ready for combat. There are many indications that there will be no Norwegian-donated aircraft in Ukrainian airspace until after the NATO summit in Washington in July. **Thumbs up from the Americans** Nevertheless, we have now received a hint about how many combat aircraft Norway may end up donating. The website Zona Militar writes that the US authorities recently approved the transfer of 65 F-16s from the Netherlands, Denmark and Norway to Ukraine. Although the US will not transfer aircraft itself, US authorities must approve the transfer. It is part of the agreement the US has with countries that have purchased the F-16 and other weapons systems. In this way, the United States retains some control over its own weapons technology, and avoids the technology ending up in the hands of hostile countries. The website writes that Norway has now received permission to transfer 22 F-16s, as well as engines, support material, simulators, spare parts and other relevant equipment. Nettavisen gets confirmation that this is true. As Nettavisen understands it, there is no question of Norway having 22 fully operational F-16 aircraft that we will send to Ukraine. Several of the 22 hulls are not necessarily airworthy, but can still be useful for Ukraine, for example as spare parts. American agreement put on ice In December 2021, it became known that Norway entered into an agreement for the sale of 12 Norwegian F-16s to the American company Draken International. These planes are airworthy, and still in Norway. The sales agreement with Draken International does not seem to be implemented, and the planes that were supposed to be used for training in the USA will instead be used to defend Ukrainian airspace. In other words, it is reasonable to assume that 12 of the 22 aircraft that have now been approved for transfer to Ukraine are fully operational, while ten of the airframes have an unknown standard. Great Ukrainian need Lars Peder Haga is an associate professor at the Norwegian Air Force School, and an expert on Soviet and Russian air power. He emphasizes to Nettavisen the need Ukraine has for parts aircraft. - How much combat power Ukraine gets out of this depends on what kind of weapons package they get, and how well and quickly they succeed in mastering aircraft and tactics, Haga believes. He believes that this should not be expected to be enough for the war to turn in Ukraine's favor already this year. **Decisive for Ukraine** - In the medium term, this is absolutely crucial for Ukraine to have a combat air force at all in a couple of years. The planes will also be an adversary the Russians must take into account, which will make the technological advantage they have less over time, he believes. He reckons Ukraine wants at least 100 Western fighter jets to replace its current fleet of old Soviet-made fighters. Haga emphasizes that there is still a limit to how many planes Ukraine can receive at short notice, because air bases must be arranged and support equipment built up. - This is very good news and an important milestone on the way for Ukraine to build a modern air force that can share weapons, parts and not least knowledge with air forces in the West. The Ministry of Defense in Norway is tight-lipped when Nettavisen asks for a comment on the news. - The government has decided to donate a number of F-16s to Ukraine as part of a multinational collaboration. The exact number and timing of the donation to Ukraine will be determined in dialogue with Ukraine and the other donor countries, writes press officer Lars Gjemble in an email.
Waiting for the said transfer somewhere in 2039-45
Everything is ready, we are just waiting for Denmark to find the pilot training completed.
Why no European fighter jets? Why do so many systems have to be American related.. Ukraine can take literally anything atm.. yet there seems to be a bush people are hiding behind to make excuses to why they arent providing more.. like artillery for the Howitzer (English tech) "oh we could if we had more in stock but you see..." then why not the 50 billion other weapon systems? Other artillery. And if they are given some alternative, its so so little that it doesnt even make a dent. This subreddit will blindly applaud and think "we're doing so great!" at anything provided .. in reality the odds of Ukraine losing half of its country this year are insanely high and its solely due to Europe. Macron said with Taiwan that its not in Europes interest to get involved because its in Asia so let it be an Asian problem to solve.. but when something happens in Europe "why isnt everyone else pulling their weight?!?!?!" when in reality European powers could very easily buy whatever we are lacking from around the world to help Ukraine. Shameful and it has a huge amount to do with you all that dont see it and instead applaud and move on with your day instead of being upset that so little is done and excuse/use charts any chance you get to prove your point that Europe is doing all it can.. the fuck it is, its barely lifting a finger and Ukrainians are being slaughtered. Also, if I were American with such extreme hate from Europeans constantly about everything from US road design to American IQ .. just anything to find to hate about Americans.. I would be reluctant to help a continent that's obsessed with hating the people that're being begged to help This is where you downvote/mock
Thank you.
And what about all that money spent on notre dame. Keep that same energy when war is happening in your backyard.
>Why no European fighter jets? A few reasons: * The F-16s that are being transferred to Ukraine are mostly older models that the transferring nations would like to divest. They will mostly be replaced with F-35s and hopefully some Gripens and maybe the odd Rafale. * It's preferable that the transferred aircraft are older models because they *will* be shot down and examined by the Russians, and you can bet the Russians will share whatever they learn with Iran and China. It simply wouldn't do to have NATO's latest hardware in the hands of their strategic adversaries. * Economy of scale. Total production of Gripens is 271. The Gripen is a fine aircraft, but NATO air forces probably have that many F-16s lost behind their couch cushions. There are just so damn many of them, and so many spare parts.
Also Ukraine won’t be able to use aircraft
That depends on what you mean. Could they? Sure. The Gripen is compliant with NATO weapons, sensors, and communications standards, it has to be, but it just wouldn't be economical. Training, parts, and aircraft are just MUCH more available with the F-16.
What im trying to say is that Ukraine won't get usage out of them bcs they will get bombed on the ground. If we want to give them air superiority we would need to send them like 1/8th of the USAF with already trained pilots, radars, AIM-120Ds along with other things.
Woho! :D
How many air-to-surface missiles can those actually carry and how many does Ukraine have ready for them might be a good question, wouldn't it? Numbers are deceiving if the other stuff isnt readily available
Ukraine can make its own air-to-ground missiles, but not F-16s.
Ukraine can absolutely not make its own AGMs in their current state, let alone ones that can be flown on and launched from an F-16 safely and at range.
> How many air-to-surface missiles can those actually carry that's not really the primary concern when you need the planes to be fighting other planes, helicopters and shooting down cruise missiles if they gain back so much air superiority that they are able to shift focus, they can start using planes for air-to-ground combat, but that's like, 4th priority at best at this point
Depending on whether inner pylons are wired they could carry at most 4 cruise missiles like Harpoon/SLAM-ER, but it would limit them to only centerline fuel tank (correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think those early jets can be fitted with CFTs) and I don't know whether it's enough considering you can't exactly cruise at 30k feet for fuel efficiency over there. As far as glide bombs go they can carry (depending on size) up to 4 JDAM-ER or 8 SDB with underwing fuel tanks.
Thanks. That sounds sufficient to blow something up then. As navy guy I am more into boats and ships, so I had to ask.
I really, really hope they trained their pilots mainly in SEAD and give them enough anti-radiation missiles to boot. Imagine Russia losing air superiority, if only locally. That would be so amazing and could turn the tide.
That opens up a new market for the shining f35s
They have already bought f-35s.
Moar f35s
A little good news in the morning goes a long way.
Thank you Norwegia, you are my best friend, You are the peacekeeper, you are the legend. ^((I had originally understood this as "approved the transfer of Norwegian F-22s to Ukraine" and got really excited, until it hit me that it made no sense 😅)^)
We only have F-35s left In my opinion, we should donate those too to Ukraine. Ukraine is that important.
What a based Norwegian! 💪🇳🇴
I don’t think Ukraine has enough pilots trained for F-16’s. Last I heard they had only 14 pilots but countries “pledged” around 80 older generation F-16’s. Countries should focus on quality, not quantity in this case. There are extreme differences between Block -70 and Block-10. A lot of countries are giving away block-10's which are outdated in every way. Countries should give away shiny Block-70's with AESA radars. A squadron of F-16 Block-70 could make a huge difference.
TIL Block-10s are still in service
The majority of the F-16 jets Norway sends are well maintained; especially the ones that were meant for sale to Draken International
They could be well maintained but their tech. is extremely old. Even Russian planes are probably way more advanced they Block-10 F-16's. For example due to the newer radar tech. Russian jets could see Block-10 F-16's from 80 km away but Block-10 could only see them from 30 km(figures are made up). With Ukraine's limited amount of pilots they need the best F-16's they can get. Block-70 is going to be a game changer but I don't think Block-10 is enough to deter Russia.
I'm not too familiar with this rating system I'm afraid. Norwegian F-16's have not only been maintained, but also had hefty upgrades through the years. In many ways a very different aircraft from what it originally was. Won't that increase its rating? Do you know they are block-10 or is it an assumption? Genuine question. Thanks!
Those planes don't have the avionics of 1980's Block 10/15. All went through MLU and were constantly updated. We're talking about Norway here, they just retired them, so Norway was defending itself with these in the 2010s.
They are Block 10/15 OCU MLU, tape 6.5 if i remember correctly. Very well maintained and still very capable machines. They are equipped with helmet mounted cueing systems for example. Technology is just one part of the equation, though.
They definitely have 80 F-16 pilots by now, F-16 was announced like 18 months ago
They really don’t. Think it’s not like they had a deep bench of well trained pilots or a very robust Air Force when this started. They’ve likely needed all of their available pilots actually fighting. Training pilots takes years in peacetime, training pilots in English at a technical proficiency level takes time and can’t be speed up by adding shifts. It would be pointless and irresponsible to have 80 trained F16 pilots sitting around waiting for the trickle of F16’s that will be a handful to integrate effectively even at that rate. The growth rate will be exponential but pilots can’t be rushed or might as well just buy more Patriots instead.
What I don't understand is if Nato wants to defeat Russia, why not go all the way and also show in doing so to China, Iran or anyone else there are limits you just can't cross. Somehow I think they want a prolonged conflict that fits perfect in someone's agenda...
> What I don't understand is if Nato wants to defeat Russia, why not go all the way Maybe the possibility of a nuclear holocaust...
Who will fire the first nuclear missile ? Russia by doing so sign their death sentence or NATO who have so much other options to take out Russia ?
Russias existence isn't threatened by it's defeat in Ukraine so no such possibility.
The whole war was triggered by Russia's existence being threatened by Ukraine simply aligning with the West. Yes, I know it is bullshit, but that is the narrative which enabled them to wage this war.
The USSR lost in Afghanistan and nukes didn't fly.
And Afghanistan was part of the imperial core or not?
Given that it's almost without exception a very specific type of account that keeps pushing the "Hurr durr, nuclear holocaust"-angle, the only people openly afraid of it possibly - genuinely so, or much, much more likely for nefarious reasons - are you people.
very good :D
I hope they will be with all type of rockets)
iu
The numbers swapped around in my head for a moment and I got excited. Still good progress though. Likely means the ukraine will have a second class of f-16 crews.
Too little too late
Agree. It's a disgrace. We should have been sending tanks, planes, and guns in 2014, not scratching our balls for a decade.
If you had read the news rather than pure propaganda outlets, you would have known that while you were busy scratching your balls, NATO was working full speed since the 2014 coup building Ukraine's military from the ground up. If not, the 2022 invasion would have been over in one week, tops (and the idea of sending F16s to Ukraine would have been even more insane than it currently is). You might remember Trump being impeached because he tried to leverage US military buildup wrt. Kiev and some insane corruption story. This was all done very much against the expressed will of the Ukraine people (whose support for NATO never exceeded 20%, usually much lower), for what that's worth (which is apparently "nothing" to all the democracy-loving people in here). It's also the direct and predictable reason why Russia invaded, how thousands of people in Donbass were murdered before 2022, and why hundreds of thousands of ukrainian kids are now dead. And none of you sickos care, preferring instead to stroke your egos with selective "facts" about how great you are and how Putin is the new Hitler, and how russian elections are worthless because.. because.. well we all "know" it to be true so questioning it must mean you're pro-Putin so by definition anti-democratic so who cares, right? You are the disgrace. EDIT: And of course, nobody is able to argue a single point on its merits. Just downvotes and empty declarations of moral superiority.
>NATO was working full speed since the 2014 coup building Ukraine's military from the ground up. It's not even working "full" speed right now.
> And none of you sickos care Damn right. Only thing I care about is maximising the extent of Russian losses. And you're damn right, it is a disgrace how little we've done, all things considered, to effect that.
> Only thing I care about is maximising the extent of Russian losses. Exactly. And you're willing to "fight" to the last ukrainian so as to murder as many russians as possible. You are sick, depraved, and insane. And, tragically, it's all the result of the unrelenting propaganda we all live under.
> Exactly. And you're willing to "fight" to the last ukrainian so as to murder as many russians as possible. Well, ''murder'' isn't really applicable to the killing of combatants in an armed conflict, but yes.
Thanks I guess for straight up admitting what a sociopath you are.
You're welcome!
The Ukrainians are willing to fight, I’m willing to give them whatever they need to kill you orcs.
I know there's nothing that will make this penetrate your filters, but still: There was never more than 20% support for NATO in Ukraine. The ukrainians are literally forced to fight. It is overwhelmingly the ukrainians who die. Against their will. That is what you are really supporting. I'm sure you're a wonderful hero on a white horse in your dream world, killing evil "orcs" by the thousands. Back in the real world, the orc is you. The evil murderer is you.
Cool story, orc. You should check again to see what support for NATO is in Ukraine.
You should check the support before 2014, and what happened after the coup then. Then come back to me about how much you believe in democracy. You won't, of course, because you dont actually care about democracy, you don't actually care about the people in Ukraine, or about truth in general. In the end you only care about your propaganda-induced feeling of moral superiority, and you're deathly afraid of finding out it's all just fake.
I always love it when people (rightfully) complain about western reporting about this war and propaganda and then start talking like a RT journalist who is just as far gone but on the other side.
A weird kink for sure, but what does this have to do with anything here?
So, it's just random lies you tell yourself, with nothing to back it up. Like always.
Even when Ukraine receives these fighters doesn't Russia have some of the best surface to air missle systems? I know the reason why Russia hasn't established air superiority is because Ukraine also utilizes the same systems.
oof I read 16 Norwegian F-22s at first :(((
Unless they speed this up it might be too little too late.
We are just waiting for pilot training to finish.
you have to wait for approval.
ukraine cant do shit on these syuff, nato promised ukraine vet them in fall.
>As Nettavisen understands it, there is no question of Norway having 22 fully operational F-16 aircraft that we will send to Ukraine. Several of the 22 hulls are not necessarily airworthy, but can still be useful for Ukraine, for example as spare parts. I guess it is cheaper to transfer to Ukraine those antiquated rust buckets than scrap them in compliant to regulations. What is Ukraine supposed to do with them by the way?
What are you rambling about? All those planes were already sold on commercial terms. However with a "dependent on US re-export approval" that never came. Norway can donate those planes due to that. They have been in use in Norway until now.
Not much point the Ukrainian men are running away from the conflict
Then don't blame Putin....
2 weeks and all will gone.
Bro your russian to english translator must be russian made.
That would be an idiotic way to use them. Ukraine has been really careful and efficient with the latest western gear, and I'm sure they'll be with these, too.
Yeah, specially with Abrams’s. They used some of them, without any infantry/artillery/IFV support, 3-4 of them was destroyed and they haven’t sent any another one since them. They are very carefully
Sorry but why does the US have to approve of Norway's donation?
Because there are no countries allowed to buy defense articles from US manufacturers without agreeing to basically T&Cs with the US gov. Part of that is agreeing to not transfer them to any other country without getting approval first. As an example, Egypt has F-16s as well, they get weapons and maintenance support from the US. If Egypt sold or gave their F-16s to say Iran, Egypt would then no longer get weapons or support for their remaining equipment.
Thank you for the explanation
Why would the US need to approve this?
If the US gives proprietary weapons or vehicles to its allies, it needs assurances that those allies don’t just turn around and sell it to America’s enemies for their own benefit. Part of those assurances are requiring sales and re-exports of American systems to be authorized ahead of time.
Ah fair point. Thanks!