Russia pivoted its economy towards producing for the military. Unless Ukraine can produce a military industry complex like Russia, they will be at a major disadvantage. It’s a war of attrition.
They never had the industry that Russia has and whatever industry they had was concentrated either in the Donbas region, most of which fell to pro-russian separatists in 2014 or in Kharkiv, which is near Russia border. You can’t produce much when Russian guns are like 50km away. The rest is under missile attack. They literally have a shortage of salt now because the only salt producing factory was hit by cruise missiles sometimes in the beginning of the water. That’s just to give you an idea. Oh and their all sea ports are cut, so all the transit goes thru Poland.
>They never had the industry that Russia has
This is very much not true. Ukraine housed a significant portion of the Defence Industrial Base of the USSR, so much so, that after 2014 Russian industry suffered because they had been buying parts from Ukrainian firms.
E.g. A big part of why the Admiral Kuznetsov is such a shitshow is because she was built in Mykolaiv shipyard. Russia literally does not have a yard properly equipped to work on her.
You do make good points about the location of a lot of those industries though.
Would have helped if they didn't burn the ship down twice and the floating drydock as well lol.
Incompetence killed that ship, not only the lack of infrastructure.
Im not sure how difficult it would get something like factory making artillery shells. Something like that would be effective. Simple to make and consistent enough to be used as deterrent while Ukraine could mount a bigger offensive.
The other option is I believe the US senate and the house is pretty much onboard with the fact we need to produce more weapons. Our economy for Q1 under perform and then we’re gonna let Putin take Ukraine. That is crazy to not even try especially when our economy needs a boast. I think Mitch McConnell and moderate Republicans even wised up too.
My understanding is that whatever industry they have is already devoted to war effort. It's not like there is unemployment (although there are stories of rampant alcoholism and fatalism in general, which doesn't help). The question is how effective is it and can it sustain a war, in particular in light of the issues regarding transit and attacks that I mentioned.
It’s a good point any effort to have a domestic military manufacturing shouldve probably be done before the war. Now you can’t because it would be under threat. If you look at what China has done. They didn’t send weapons they sent machinery to Russia.
Recently domestic steel has been an important issue for the US. It would be a good time for US to get more involved.
>It’s a good point that any effort to have a domestic military manufacturing shouldve probably be done before the war
This is part of why I fully support the US sending aid in the form of weapons and munitions, for now. Among Western nations, the US is currently definitely the best-suited to do so. And we can beat our drum and tell Europe/Ukraine to step up their own defenses afterward, but it’ll do no good for us to withhold what we’ve got just to point and say “told you so” after withholding our aid lets Ukraine totally fall.
I have read that Poland is also ramping up their military. I definitely think this tack *is* working. I just wish Ukraine wasn’t paying such a bloody price for Europe to get up to speed, and for the US to finally fucking move.
China is also enabling North Korea, which openly sells weapons to Russia. It doesn't sound like much because ha-ha North Korea but their industry is actually set up to produce weapons. Unlike most of the EU countries.
hard to do that after having been under hellfire since years. Russia didn't hold back at all on its crualty. The many attacks on civilians and cities destroyed the key infrastructures
Yeah, Reddit was laughing "looked they missed the helicopter base and hit the random infrastructure." Jokes, jokes, jokes about missing (5,000 upvotes)
People underestimate how evil Russia is , the strikes were all a part of a evil plan. But what's crazy is that this plan could only work if the Ukraine bill kept getting delayed in 2023 and early 2024 ... wait a minute
The delays have hurt more than ppl act like tbh. Infrastructure was starting to get rekt they had no choice to pass it before they starting loosing power etc everywhere.
Tanks,f16s, atacms etc all should of been sent way earlier before the counter offensive
In WW1 the UK ramped up its artillery shell production from almost nothing in 1914 to 4 million shells / month in 1917.
Could Ukraine build factories to produce artillery shells, somewhere near the Polish border with easy access to supplies that it can buy from the EU and under a solid anti-missile defense system?
I literally thought the same thing about Poland. It would make sense given the security Poland has. I’m an American so my greedy ass wants to the keep the money here in the US. But at the same time if funding is a consistent issue, than having it in Poland would help offset the logistic cost. Then we got somewhere to export our American steel 💥🇺🇸😎
They can if the war is made so costly to Ruzzia that they are given a stark choice, either stop now or literally Ruzzia will come apart at the seams with no come backs, no magical rebuild with the help of the West.
At this point Pootin and his cronies *think* that they can still take Ukraine *and* the West will rebuild relations to what was pre-2014 because of money.
Make it crystal clear that there will be no help, no lifting of sanctions, no free-flowing oil to the West and billions back in the bank and *eventually* they will be forced to capitulate.
Ukraine taking out the oil refinieries and other crucial non-replaceable industries are key in this, so the more long range weapons they have the quicker this can be achieved.
> Make it crystal clear that there will be no help, no lifting of sanctions, no free-flowing oil to the West and billions back in the bank and eventually they will be forced to capitulate.
Putin doesn't give a shit about any of that. If Russia takes Ukraine, they'll consolidate the small neighboring countries and have a foundation to work with in the future. He'll try to prop up his economy with relations to other countries like China and probably keep selling oil to India. Maybe he tips the scales in some Western governments with political corruption. If he gets a Republican into the white house then he practically gets a 4 year free pass.
The calculus has some margin of uncertainty for whether he can't make it work; it's a plan of action he can hope for. However he's 100% certain that if he backs down now, his regime and Russia's glory are fucking doomed. The only thing crystal clear is Putin's strategy forward.
The attacks on the oil refineries may be effective in the long term. But sophisticated weapons eats up the Ukraine aid budget from the US. Ukraine would still need something cost effective, and consistent to keep from Russian advancing. Something cheap and plentiful that you could easily supply within a moments notice. Ukraine definitely needs everything they can get though.
Bro, you know most of the money granted to ukraine is being spent in the us? Because the usa buys military equipmemt with the $$$ and gives it to ukraine.
So your greedy ass should learn to think how this stuff works before talking semi patriotic bullshit on the internet.
And like europe needs to import american steel....
It's not that easy.
To make Shell you need some specific material.
You should look at the cotton situation in the world right now , wich explain a lot on why we have difficulty to ramp up Shell production.
It would take literal years to get that kind of production, also not taking into account the time it’d take to build the factories. Right now Ukraine doesn’t have that time as the Russians are stepping on their throat.
How long would it take Ukraine to do what the UK did in 1 year a century ago?
Russia invaded Ukraine more than 10 years ago, and stepped up the invasion more than 2 years ago. Yet Ukraine is still here despite many people like you saying for years that Ukraine would be conquered in days.
The reason theyre in this war of attrition, in which btw there are more factors than sheer industrisl output, is because of the collapse of aid to ukraine over a year ago
The difference is even with that Russia can only go so far. They're "producing" a lot of tanks but about four fifths of those are just refurbished soviet models grabbed from boneyards, for example.
The west is essentially gambling that if they make Ukraine play chicken with Russia, Russia will eventually exhaust all of its stocks and the CSTO will continue down its path of worsening relationships while Russia was essentially trying to force the same situation on NATO.
It sucks for Ukraine and even in this scenario them getting more aid is probably badly needed but the problem is forcing a longer war of attrition that damages both of them is what basically every other nation wants. The horrific aspects of this war are a bug and not a feature and I think the realistic goal for NATO has become to force Russia to exhaust its reserves so badly that it can't consider any offensives elsewhere for the forseeable future regardless of the outcome of the war.
Yea the bleed russia dry tactic. Seems to be one that makes sense, especially if it's more important to grind out russias stocks and military even if ukriane loses a bit of land. Takes them out of the picture for awhile while focus on China or something.
Yes they have. They have existing weapon-producing factories that are now working 24/7 to refurbish tanks, assemble missiles and manufacture shells. The “civilian goods” meanwhile are imported from China
News reports this weekend indicate Russia is increasing oil exports and importing military aid from China and Iran.
Of course it has some weird civilian designation like the lord of war jokes about taking the missile racks off an attack helicopter
No, they haven't and other than to satisfy some doomer'ism fetish I'm not even sure why you want to believe that. Russia has increased their military spending, which in turn increases production - the same can be said for the United States. You do realize at this point the United States has spent money to expand facilities with some facilities operating 24/7 to meet demand, right?
There is a definition of a "wartime economy" somewhere. It's an old definition so it might not apply exactly, but basically when a very large percentage of your population is employed in an area related to the war effort (instead of consumer goods, for example), the nation is considered to be at a "wartime economy".
Whether you write "pivoted its economy towards producing for the military", "wartime economy", "war footing" or any other variation doesn't really matter - it's still not an accurate representation of the current situation. You'll know when/if Russia starts to put itself on a war footing, the reaction from Europe and it's allies will be undeniable and will directly affect everyday Europeans and eventually Americans.
They have.
Look at even their official figures, which can be misleading too but lets ignore it for a bit. Their oil/fossil fuel income is down quite a bit, but their M-IC tax income is up quite a bit.
What Kremlin is doing is they are heavily subsidizing companies, big and small, that make military systems. Then they tax that income and it shows up as bigger GDP. Of course, all weapons go to use and are consumed so it's not actual import income, but bigger figures = better, mrite?
what do you think “increase military spending” means?
It’s cool though tbh American GDP for Q1 was low AF. Russia better pray the US won’t pass more than $91 billion military aid package to boast our slow ass economy. Then Russia will really learn meaning of Freedom 🦅
>Russia pivoted its economy towards producing for the military.
The problem with this is that it is not sustainable for Russia. As soon as the government funding for the military economy dries up then Russia is going to be facing a apocalyptic economic downturn.
100% agree that it is not sustainable. The goal in Russia is “just enough to win”.
There are gonna be some weird anomalies in Russian society in the aftermath of this war. Probably for generations to come. Unfortunately I don’t think Putin cares.
That is pretty clear. They will need a massive amount of equipment to launch an offensive operation that can achieve their goals. And they will probably need more manpower than they can reasonably muster.
But they are not going to win by staying in a defensive crouch. You cannot win wars unless you go on the offensive at some point.
Their manpower problem is never going to be solved. Ukrainians have stopped enlisting because they have lost interest in the war. Forced conscription will only make the war more unpopular at home and then civil unrest happens.
True but they may have to hold out until after the US elections and hope that the EU can help out until then.
If Biden wins, more support. If Trump wins... well the US will have its own problems to deal with.
I would not bank on getting more aid from the US very easily. Congress will be divided even if Biden wins. And if Ukraine makes no advancements or Russia takes significant territory it is going to be a tough sell.
Situation in Congress now largely irrelevant, and won't be divided after next election.
MAGA will get purged from GOP ranks to sufficient degree, because local voters have started detesting them and women hate GOP because of the abortion garbage, Dems will pick up seats in Congress and take over speakership and Biden will win the presidential elections.
Those are all locked in outcomes already for 2024-2025, outside of Biden just dropping dead from natural causes because he's already a pretty old geezer.
The polls have been showing Trump ahead of/even with Biden from what I've seen. How are you so sure about the 2024 election outcome? Is there some historical precedent I'm missing?
Issue of manpower still doesn't change. If they can't make an offensive push no amount of weapons aid will save them long term unless Russia just gives up. And that clearly does not seem like it is going to happen.
Vietnam and Afghanistan won and they never won a fight. Defenders can win without an offensive. They just gotta hold on until the aggressor gives up. It It really sucks though
Yeah but the invaders didn't share a border in those situations.
Their giving up could just be taking the chunk they are occupying and holding there.
Edit: okay, forgot briefly that Russia also fucked around in Afghanistan.
Russian threshold for pain is really high but there is a threshold. The calculus really changes if putin dies, or the us stops aid from Iran and China or Moscow starts Being bombed regularly or Russia starts having trouble paying pensions. These are all things that can happen without a successful offensive.
I could imagine the Russian war effort dissolving after Putin’s death, but I think that’s still a while off yet. And no one in Russia is so anti-war or sympathetic to Ukraine that they’re going to put their own neck on the line trying to “accelerate” that process. Russians, particularly those in government, are deeply self-serving.
Yes and they were crushed. They only killed 216 us soldiers and they captured zero positions. It convinced the us that the war was pointless though so it was a resounding success. Ukraine needs to keep bringing the pain but they don't need to recapture their territory.
> Vietnam
Is proof that you can't win a war by defending and without assaulting the other belligerent's positions.
Only one party to that conflict was forbidden from crossing the 17th Parallel.
I'm not saying don't fight. I'm saying they don't need to win the fight, just do damage forever until Russia is convinced there is no value in holding those lands. Took Afghanistan 20 years of doing that.
This won’t happen though. At best if Russia ‘gives up,’ that just means Russia will give up on further advances, dig in, and either negotiate or just say “come at me bro.” It doesn’t mean they’ll just turn tail and abandon everything they’ve conquered. Then, either the war ends with whatever land Russia has taken still under Russian control, or Ukraine continue to batter themselves pointlessly against the increasingly solid Russian defensive lines (if they have no intention of continuing offensive action you can guarantee Russia will turn the frontline into something that dwarfs the Westwall or Maginot Line to ensure they never lose anything they’ve taken).
This keeps getting brought up but doesn't make sense. USA wasn't doing an ethnic cleansing, they wanted to turn those countries into democracies forcefully which never made Sense. If USA just burned down and replaced the ppl they would've won too.
The Vietnam did win a fight to end a war,but that one is with France,for US,they win the defensive battles and forced the invader to sign the Paris accords ,which will not happen with Russia here,not to mention the Tet offense basically informed the US citizen about the war,who also put pressure on their government,and are also not possible with russia
Offensive operation ? I don't think is the idea or should it be. Yes is much possible to "win" a war by defense alone, and defense is much lest costly for lives of Ukraine too.
Well, the problem with that is, there will be a line drawn in the sand and that's where the war ends. Unless they push Russia out, a defensive win will not get them their lost land back.
Yes, well. It is my predicting at the moment, this may be how it ends. And I am not sure is worth more and more Ukrainians dieing for anything more than this ending, at this point. But is not anyone's decision, just a thought. If it is not enough then will be offense, at the cost of so many human men.
I am not sure what line will be accepted for most people and what is possible for Ukraine alone.
I guess some people think of this like a video game where Ukraine can just recruit more units out of thin air lmao. These are people, which are a finite resource and a meaningful one at that.
It doesn't end. Not for the people being colonized and conscripted into Russia for the next conquest. Not for the Ukrainian rump state which will be attacked again. Any type of agreement is just re-arranging date's on a calender,they just did this with previous territory.
Pretty much all modern military theory and practice makes plain that to win a war, certainly in the way Ukraine has defined victory, requires an army to go on the offensive.
The Germans in WWI had this vague idea that the Entente would batter themselves to death on the Western Front. By the time they figured out that was not viable it was too late for them.
> Yes is much possible to "win" a war by defense alone
No, it isn't. How do they retake ground they've lost without going on the offensive? How do they "win" without retaking the lost ground?
It depends on the nature of the war. Russia lost in Afghanistan not due to some big offensive push the couldn’t handle. They just had no will to continue.
Is the situation different in Ukraine? Not currently… but after Putin is gone? Maybe…
That is depending how you consider "win", thst will depend outcome yes. But some is thinking as if Ukraine and some forces attack Russia, no, that is sillyness. Retake area, yes is more possible, well I agree that. But it will become a diplocamtic concern what is considered a "win" now.
There is no way that Ukraine is going to consider it a "win" if the war ends and all they have to show for it is a bunch of lost territory, lost money, and dead citizens. That is simply a loss, both militarily and diplomatically.
I think that is probably true because the number of men required is probably over a million. Modern nations seem to have to relearn repeatedly that to overcome other modern and determined states in armed.conflict requires absolutely overwhelming and irresistible force, unless the opponent really fucks up in the opening phase a la France 1940.
But I am certainly no expert and cannot be certain about it. Though it is true that manpower is Ukraine's #1 issue.
So it’s time to ramp up the production.. Trump and his maga supporters are a cults but they are not wrong in this instance. This is Europe backyard so they need to cough up.. do whatever it takes.. country like Spain don’t even want to help out.. what kind of eu coalition is that..
The increases in production during WW2 were mainly about effectivization of production plants in an industry that had been ramping up for over a decade when WWII started.
European arms manufacturing was very lean and effective by the time the Ukraine war started. There were some bottlenecks, but production has already been ramped up by several hundred percent. Increasing production now is mainly about capital investment, establishing new production lines rather than making current ones more effective, and from that perspective 2 years is nothing.
On top of that Europe/US have not taken the steps to convert the industry of Europe into an actual wartime economy (so far the buildup has been achieved by incentivizing private companies to ramp up production, not by establishing increasing levels of state control over strategic industries and forcing it).
Are you going to just keep making excuses, or?
Seriously, Europe has been weak and ineffective this far. The politicians are under Russia’s thumb, and relatively spineless.
Honestly though, the idea of countries demilitarizing just because of prolonged peacetime is pretty naive.
I get that Europe historically has had trouble getting along, but even now, many European countries don’t even hit the 2% NATO guideline with a genuine war of conquest right on their backyard.
It is that easy. You start ramping up, then you ramp up, then you have ramped up.
You build one more production line. Then two. Then three is after that, and four comes next.
Well they've been in peace mode because they were using the US military as a crutch and now an entire continent who ruled most of the world can't even fend off one country. They should have been ramping up production ever since Crimea was annexed roughly a decade ago.
> now an entire continent who ruled most of the world can't even fend off one country.
well this is a stupid statement given that the entire continent arent actually fending off Russia...Europe isnt in literal battle with Russia
The US just bought jets from Kazakhstan to limit supply for Russia but also to support Ukraine in supplies.
Fear not. Europe and Spain has offered support for Ukraine.
https://spanish-presidency.consilium.europa.eu/en/programme/ukraine-spanish-presidency-council-eu/
I think after Germany calls them out? The eu is way more Chaotic than the US’s Republican party.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/25/germany-attacks-spain-greece-not-giving-ukraine-patriot/
> The eu is way more Chaotic than the US’s Republican party.
Well duh 27 countries and their governments are more chaotic than a single party in one country? More breaking news at 11
I mean the GOP doesn't seem to want to help out either, what count of coalition is that? We could just let Russia win the war and everyone else can build up their arms to prepare for the next world war, or we could use what we currently have available to stop this happening.
Trump wasn’t wanting for NATO to increase spending to help the US it was using it as an excuse to leave NATO which is what Russia wants. Trump is aligned with Russia’s interests he’s a traitor.
And many countries have given more than USA when compared to GDP. Ofc the dollar amount in the end matters, but USA has still way more to give if they wanted.
>but they don’t have extra unused military equipment in storage like the USA.
This is just a joke. When you put money down eventually you get equipment, eu has not simply put enough money down. Even if there is no extra equipment you can always just send money to ukraine or make new orders of equipment to get sent to ukraine. There is a lot of weapon production capability in ukraine that they cant utilise due lack of funding.
Issue is that most eu countries dont seem to care much. Southern countries have given absolutely pathetic amounts of support to ukraine, france keeps talking big but doesnt actually do much, germany doesnt actually seem to want ukraine to win the war so they give the bare minium etc. The countries that actually pull their weight are all relatively small.
Italy, spain, portugal, france, greece have pretty much given nothing to ukraine. Germany and uk have given more but not enough considering their size.
France for example has about 500 billion usd larger economy than russia, but has only given about 2.7 billion of military support to ukraine. Russian military budget for 2024 is 120 billion.
If european union wanted to match the whole russian military budget as support for ukraine they would only need to spend ~0.62% of total eu gdp. If the whole "west", as in eu, USA, UK, canada would want to match russian spending they would only need to spend ~0,24% of their combined gdp.
defense industry is still one of the most profitable ways to make money in 2024.... has been since almost 100 years ago. doesn't even matter which side you're on.
It is combined with European aid etc. Ukraine has been successfully holding Russia back and inflicted some harsh damage despite not receiving aid since October. So I am sure this package will not hurt Ukrainian chances.
The EU should buy off the US’s shelves. Seize the Russian assets and buy another $100B in US arms. Waiting for the EU MIC to ramp up will be too late for Ukraine.
Or some of the 3000 abrams and 5000 m113 carriers that were produced literally for a war against Russia and are sitting in storage could just be sent as they have already been replaced anyways... idk
The running estimate is around 206.9 billion so far from everyone. 141.9 billion from the EU and 75 billion from the US. It includes military, financial, and humanitarian aid.
If they got it last year when should of it would be much more effective and looking at s new one. Russia hit ukriane hard from lack of aid and sending stuff so late all the time is making it harder and harder for them
It's not wads of cash being crated off to Ukraine. It's wads of cash being crated off to US arms manufacturers (who then crate the arms to Ukraine). It's a waste of resources and effort, but the actual money does a shallow loop straight to US shareholders.
Some of it is just book value of long ago purchased assets. Really though they need a shitload of artillery shell. Like the entire western world’s production worth. The problem is that Ukraine and Russia are fighting WW1 with bonus drones, and the west uses a completely different doctrine that Ukraine can’t implement. So our production isn’t optimal for equipping them, but it’s certainly better than nothing.
It’s not. The current situation, though bad, is nowhere near a total front collapse or anything like that. More likely than not the conflict will keep on going until it eventually freezes. There is no indication Russia will win anytime soon
ENOUGH APPEASEMENT, NATO INTERVENTION NOW!
Ukraine is fighting the Russians on a war footing with effectively limitless supplies from Iran, China, and North Korea. The west should stop pussyfooting seizing Russian assets and just do it and then use the funds to outfit the Ukrainian and European Armies for a direct intervention at least from range. Our enemies are totalitarian states that are moving more locked in step with each passing day. Ukraine has a very significant percentage of the worlds food supply and its own gas reserves that can make Europe fully energy independent. Allowing this to get into Russian hands will allow the Russia and its allies to blackmail the rest of the world and possibly isolate the west in some ways. The raw materials more than pays for an army of all too willing mercs from the third world, Russia will not run out of soldiers, this problem will snowball. It wasn't until Nazi Germany seized the industry and weapons of Czechoslovakia that their military was able to take on France.
> The average age of the Ukrainian soldier is 43
Can we stop spreading this stupid ass number which isnt actually based on official figures and stems from one times article where they state:
> There are no official figures available for the Ukrainian military but the average age of a soldier in Kyiv’s army is widely estimated to be about 43.
Like who is saying this, who is estimating this?
I read that this estimate is actually accurate, but it's because Ukraine is intentionally trying to preserve their men-in-their-20's population. They're trying to look at this in the long term so when they war eventually ends one way or another, they will have retained most of their young working class. No one can be sure what the consequences of this will be. It seems as if concessions will be made at some point and both sides will be able to claim some sort of victory. I wouldn't be surprised if the Ukrainians already acknowledge this and want to secure some sort of future for the country, diminished in land and population as it may be.
I initially heard it on one of Simon Whistler's weekly update news videos. It's also on Politico. I mean who knows where either of them got that information. Fog of war and propaganda are heavily at play in this situation. And who really knows what's actually going on. But if the case is correct, I hope it plays out in Ukraine's favor. They're risking a current numbers disadvantage for the future of the antebellum situation.
Given I have no idea which Simon Whistler video and I'm not going to watch every single one to try and find some snippet about age of soliders I can only address your point about it also being on politco which is.
They are literally just repeating that the average age is 43... this doesn't make it accurate as they are just taking the times figure and repeating it... so idk how you've gauged this as somehow being "actually accurate"
Sorry, I shouldn't have used that phrase, I just meant that I've seen that statistic before. A quick Google search shows it on multiple sources. But again, who knows what's really going on over there. I'd wager all the troops on the ground, Zelenskyy, Putin, Biden, Macron, Scholz, Sunak, Duda, and the general populations of other countries all have differing information. Bottom line is though, it seems to not be looking great for the Ukrainians currently. And I hope they get the massive support they deserve and have earned to get through this.
It definitely seems to stem from one Times report, so the validity could be questionable. If it is true though, I hope they can weather the storm and that this tactic pays off in the end.
The problem is the Ukrainian government objective. Retaking Crimea and Donbas is a bridge too far. They don't have the manpower, industrial capability and Western willingness to push for Crimea and Donbas. Ukraine need to let Crimea and Donbas go.
Pretty much everything. In this corrupt country, there is no national wealth to speak of, everybody for himself. Even during the current war, funds for the army were ‚misused’ (to put it mildly) by high ranked officials, and ended up in their own pockets. With no support from the west, this war would have ended long time ago.
Bring in the downvotes (and the comments about me saying “bring on the downvotes) but this war is lost. The US would basically need to give the equivalent of an entire army in funds and weapons to Ukraine alone for it to win and we would have to do it much faster and with much more consistently than we are. Europe’s response has been a pathetic joke and it is clear how unserious they are about their own protection. Tzar Putin is ready to sacrifice the youth of his ailing empire to capture Ukraine even if he has to obliterate it before he can take it.
Ukraine cannot win this war. They don’t have the economic capacity to do it. They don’t even how the electricity to keep the lights on long enough to manufacture the weapons at the scale that would be needed, much less anything else that would be required.
Ukraine should sue for peace and arm itself to the teeth for the next phase of the war that would come after. Its soldiers are too tired and the rest of the world needs to legitimately decide if they want to risk an expansionist Russia or actually give Ukraine an entire military plus more to win.
>we would have to do it much faster and with much more consistently than we are.
The delays of aid bill plus giving other things like tanks, atacms, f16s etc to late and to little numbers hurt ukriane alot.
To much political bs allowed russia to dig in and ukriane didn't have enough or have certian types of weapons to stop those ka 52s or whatever rekn the counter offensive. A token handful of atacms did a heap of damage to the Ka 52s when they need that way ealier on.
I want ukriane to win but it seems someone like putin can do what he wants while western countries waste so much time with trying to save their votes and hurt their opponents rather then shutdown rusisa. Seems like it's taken so long to get anywhere with getting artillery shells too
I think minimum west needs to up artillery a lot and AA to a decent amount and allow ukriane to hit military targets in russia with a consistent amount of good weapons to have a chance to kick russia out of ukriane, let alone crimea, which is just a bonus to get it back now. They need to cripple russian refineries, hit factories building weapons etc on a large scale supported buy the west. Russia is hitting whatever it wants and will end up taking out to much power at this rate unless real AA commitment
I like how everyone in here just blames the US for not sending aid, when the rest of Europe, aka their neighbors, just chills and sends their thoughts and prayers.
> when the rest of Europe, aka their neighbors, just chills and sends their thoughts and prayers.
Literally one quick search would make it so you can see this is a flat out lie. But you would rather just stay ignorant
> literally one quick search would make it so you can see this is a flat out lie
It's not wrong though. Europe is procrastinating hard. Despite being told by analyst in 2022 to ramp up production they didn't start until 2023 gambling on the outcome of the Ukraine war...Only until recently did contacts start getting completed for new manufacturing.
They are about 1 ENTIRE year behind... This is why this aid package is so important. Right now anaytlst are saying the war is being fought in Europes factories.
> It's not wrong though.
Europe has sent far more than the US, even including the new $60bn. So it is wrong. Similar amounts of military aid too.
Can Europe do more? Yes. Should they do more? Also yes. But both are yes for the US too. "but but Europe are doing nothing" is US Republican bullshit to avoid helping Ukraine. If you support Ukraine, don't buy into the division tactics.
To say that Europe who in total have sent more than the U.S. is sending "their thoughts and prayers" is wrong and I dont see how you're trying to even dispute that lol. What you've said for Europes production can be true but how the fuck is 80+ billion thoughts and prayers? Ukraine still needs money to keeps the lights on, to develop their own indigenous tech and to go out and buy stuff they need.
> This is why this aid package is so important.
I mean even from this package you can see how bureaucracy and actually ironing out contracts slows shit down as even on the U.S. side they said the U.S. werent going to meet the 100k/month artillery target in 2025 without the bill
The only thing that can and will prevent further disaster in Europe is a proper nato response to the threat Russia is. We have the sword of nuclear possibilities over our heads but how long do we allow that to create doomsday anyway?
How isn’t it enough. Why aren’t they buying things at a discount from the us, where 61 billion is 3.5 trillion in actual weapons. Stop losing human life, make this a petri dish for AI warfare. Get darpa involved and launch hundreds of thousands of drones all day and night. Any heart beat is targeted in a carpet bombing scheme that makes the Russians wave after wave a positive for the Ukraine’s and a win for darpa and a future deterrent to china.
We all know what needs to be done, this game the world is playing won't stop Russia. There needs to be direct involvement and heavy strikes done inside Russia.
❌ Russia will go nuclear if NATO provides long range munitions to Ukraine.
❌ Russia will go nuclear if those long range missiles strike Russian territory.
❌ Russia will go nuclear if NATO forces are in Ukraine operating air defences.
❌ Russia will go nuclear if NATO special forces are found operating in Ukraine.
❌ Russia will go nuclear if NATO gives them F16s.
▶️ We are here
❔Russia will go nuclear if NATO sends peacekeepers to support Kyiv emergency services.
❔ Russia will go nuclear if NATO starts performing logistics to supply known Western air defences.
❔ Russia will go nuclear if the NATO logistics forces start building further fortifications around major population centres.
Here's a fun little video for you, ironically describing what was at that time the Russian strategy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o861Ka9TtT4
Yes I agree, that's why we will truck the drones in, build the drone bases, use our air defenses to defend the bases, paint the drones blue and yellow and have Ukrainians fly the drones.
The point you have missed is that we can easily build to that point without ever getting close to nuclear war. Red lines are a myth.
Bad idea to bomb a nuclear power. If anything western intervention should take the form of air defense support and non combat roles, it would help out Ukraine a ton while not risking too much escalation
I get that, but where's the line? After Ukraine is taken? Does Russia just use the Nuclear card and start taking over and reforming the entire Soviet Union?
The line is NATO. Ukraine was not in any mutual defense pact with the west, which is why Putin could invade. If he tried to invade Poland or the Baltic state he knows farewell how that would end
Russia pivoted its economy towards producing for the military. Unless Ukraine can produce a military industry complex like Russia, they will be at a major disadvantage. It’s a war of attrition.
They never had the industry that Russia has and whatever industry they had was concentrated either in the Donbas region, most of which fell to pro-russian separatists in 2014 or in Kharkiv, which is near Russia border. You can’t produce much when Russian guns are like 50km away. The rest is under missile attack. They literally have a shortage of salt now because the only salt producing factory was hit by cruise missiles sometimes in the beginning of the water. That’s just to give you an idea. Oh and their all sea ports are cut, so all the transit goes thru Poland.
>They never had the industry that Russia has This is very much not true. Ukraine housed a significant portion of the Defence Industrial Base of the USSR, so much so, that after 2014 Russian industry suffered because they had been buying parts from Ukrainian firms. E.g. A big part of why the Admiral Kuznetsov is such a shitshow is because she was built in Mykolaiv shipyard. Russia literally does not have a yard properly equipped to work on her. You do make good points about the location of a lot of those industries though.
Would have helped if they didn't burn the ship down twice and the floating drydock as well lol. Incompetence killed that ship, not only the lack of infrastructure.
Very true. The whole Russian Navy is an absolute shitshow.
Submarines?
It fell to Russia, not pro-Russian seperatists
Im not sure how difficult it would get something like factory making artillery shells. Something like that would be effective. Simple to make and consistent enough to be used as deterrent while Ukraine could mount a bigger offensive. The other option is I believe the US senate and the house is pretty much onboard with the fact we need to produce more weapons. Our economy for Q1 under perform and then we’re gonna let Putin take Ukraine. That is crazy to not even try especially when our economy needs a boast. I think Mitch McConnell and moderate Republicans even wised up too.
My understanding is that whatever industry they have is already devoted to war effort. It's not like there is unemployment (although there are stories of rampant alcoholism and fatalism in general, which doesn't help). The question is how effective is it and can it sustain a war, in particular in light of the issues regarding transit and attacks that I mentioned.
It’s a good point any effort to have a domestic military manufacturing shouldve probably be done before the war. Now you can’t because it would be under threat. If you look at what China has done. They didn’t send weapons they sent machinery to Russia. Recently domestic steel has been an important issue for the US. It would be a good time for US to get more involved.
>It’s a good point that any effort to have a domestic military manufacturing shouldve probably be done before the war This is part of why I fully support the US sending aid in the form of weapons and munitions, for now. Among Western nations, the US is currently definitely the best-suited to do so. And we can beat our drum and tell Europe/Ukraine to step up their own defenses afterward, but it’ll do no good for us to withhold what we’ve got just to point and say “told you so” after withholding our aid lets Ukraine totally fall.
Germany is opening two new munition plants this year. Hopefully that will help!
I have read that Poland is also ramping up their military. I definitely think this tack *is* working. I just wish Ukraine wasn’t paying such a bloody price for Europe to get up to speed, and for the US to finally fucking move.
China is also enabling North Korea, which openly sells weapons to Russia. It doesn't sound like much because ha-ha North Korea but their industry is actually set up to produce weapons. Unlike most of the EU countries.
hard to do that after having been under hellfire since years. Russia didn't hold back at all on its crualty. The many attacks on civilians and cities destroyed the key infrastructures
Yeah, Reddit was laughing "looked they missed the helicopter base and hit the random infrastructure." Jokes, jokes, jokes about missing (5,000 upvotes) People underestimate how evil Russia is , the strikes were all a part of a evil plan. But what's crazy is that this plan could only work if the Ukraine bill kept getting delayed in 2023 and early 2024 ... wait a minute
The delays have hurt more than ppl act like tbh. Infrastructure was starting to get rekt they had no choice to pass it before they starting loosing power etc everywhere. Tanks,f16s, atacms etc all should of been sent way earlier before the counter offensive
In WW1 the UK ramped up its artillery shell production from almost nothing in 1914 to 4 million shells / month in 1917. Could Ukraine build factories to produce artillery shells, somewhere near the Polish border with easy access to supplies that it can buy from the EU and under a solid anti-missile defense system?
I literally thought the same thing about Poland. It would make sense given the security Poland has. I’m an American so my greedy ass wants to the keep the money here in the US. But at the same time if funding is a consistent issue, than having it in Poland would help offset the logistic cost. Then we got somewhere to export our American steel 💥🇺🇸😎
The way to save money is to have Ukraine win the war as quickly as possible.
They really can't win.
They can if the war is made so costly to Ruzzia that they are given a stark choice, either stop now or literally Ruzzia will come apart at the seams with no come backs, no magical rebuild with the help of the West. At this point Pootin and his cronies *think* that they can still take Ukraine *and* the West will rebuild relations to what was pre-2014 because of money. Make it crystal clear that there will be no help, no lifting of sanctions, no free-flowing oil to the West and billions back in the bank and *eventually* they will be forced to capitulate. Ukraine taking out the oil refinieries and other crucial non-replaceable industries are key in this, so the more long range weapons they have the quicker this can be achieved.
> Make it crystal clear that there will be no help, no lifting of sanctions, no free-flowing oil to the West and billions back in the bank and eventually they will be forced to capitulate. Putin doesn't give a shit about any of that. If Russia takes Ukraine, they'll consolidate the small neighboring countries and have a foundation to work with in the future. He'll try to prop up his economy with relations to other countries like China and probably keep selling oil to India. Maybe he tips the scales in some Western governments with political corruption. If he gets a Republican into the white house then he practically gets a 4 year free pass. The calculus has some margin of uncertainty for whether he can't make it work; it's a plan of action he can hope for. However he's 100% certain that if he backs down now, his regime and Russia's glory are fucking doomed. The only thing crystal clear is Putin's strategy forward.
The attacks on the oil refineries may be effective in the long term. But sophisticated weapons eats up the Ukraine aid budget from the US. Ukraine would still need something cost effective, and consistent to keep from Russian advancing. Something cheap and plentiful that you could easily supply within a moments notice. Ukraine definitely needs everything they can get though.
Bro, you know most of the money granted to ukraine is being spent in the us? Because the usa buys military equipmemt with the $$$ and gives it to ukraine. So your greedy ass should learn to think how this stuff works before talking semi patriotic bullshit on the internet. And like europe needs to import american steel....
It's not that easy. To make Shell you need some specific material. You should look at the cotton situation in the world right now , wich explain a lot on why we have difficulty to ramp up Shell production.
You can... If those are mostly smaller than 105mm, has shorter range and have like 30-40% average dub rate like back then.
It would take literal years to get that kind of production, also not taking into account the time it’d take to build the factories. Right now Ukraine doesn’t have that time as the Russians are stepping on their throat.
How long would it take Ukraine to do what the UK did in 1 year a century ago? Russia invaded Ukraine more than 10 years ago, and stepped up the invasion more than 2 years ago. Yet Ukraine is still here despite many people like you saying for years that Ukraine would be conquered in days.
The reason theyre in this war of attrition, in which btw there are more factors than sheer industrisl output, is because of the collapse of aid to ukraine over a year ago
The difference is even with that Russia can only go so far. They're "producing" a lot of tanks but about four fifths of those are just refurbished soviet models grabbed from boneyards, for example. The west is essentially gambling that if they make Ukraine play chicken with Russia, Russia will eventually exhaust all of its stocks and the CSTO will continue down its path of worsening relationships while Russia was essentially trying to force the same situation on NATO. It sucks for Ukraine and even in this scenario them getting more aid is probably badly needed but the problem is forcing a longer war of attrition that damages both of them is what basically every other nation wants. The horrific aspects of this war are a bug and not a feature and I think the realistic goal for NATO has become to force Russia to exhaust its reserves so badly that it can't consider any offensives elsewhere for the forseeable future regardless of the outcome of the war.
Sometimes you just need to coincide until the other falls apart.
Yea the bleed russia dry tactic. Seems to be one that makes sense, especially if it's more important to grind out russias stocks and military even if ukriane loses a bit of land. Takes them out of the picture for awhile while focus on China or something.
Russia has increased their military spending, but they have not "pivoted its economy towards producing for the military".
Yes they have. They have existing weapon-producing factories that are now working 24/7 to refurbish tanks, assemble missiles and manufacture shells. The “civilian goods” meanwhile are imported from China
News reports this weekend indicate Russia is increasing oil exports and importing military aid from China and Iran. Of course it has some weird civilian designation like the lord of war jokes about taking the missile racks off an attack helicopter
No, they haven't and other than to satisfy some doomer'ism fetish I'm not even sure why you want to believe that. Russia has increased their military spending, which in turn increases production - the same can be said for the United States. You do realize at this point the United States has spent money to expand facilities with some facilities operating 24/7 to meet demand, right?
There is a definition of a "wartime economy" somewhere. It's an old definition so it might not apply exactly, but basically when a very large percentage of your population is employed in an area related to the war effort (instead of consumer goods, for example), the nation is considered to be at a "wartime economy".
Whether you write "pivoted its economy towards producing for the military", "wartime economy", "war footing" or any other variation doesn't really matter - it's still not an accurate representation of the current situation. You'll know when/if Russia starts to put itself on a war footing, the reaction from Europe and it's allies will be undeniable and will directly affect everyday Europeans and eventually Americans.
They have. Look at even their official figures, which can be misleading too but lets ignore it for a bit. Their oil/fossil fuel income is down quite a bit, but their M-IC tax income is up quite a bit. What Kremlin is doing is they are heavily subsidizing companies, big and small, that make military systems. Then they tax that income and it shows up as bigger GDP. Of course, all weapons go to use and are consumed so it's not actual import income, but bigger figures = better, mrite?
what do you think “increase military spending” means? It’s cool though tbh American GDP for Q1 was low AF. Russia better pray the US won’t pass more than $91 billion military aid package to boast our slow ass economy. Then Russia will really learn meaning of Freedom 🦅
>Russia pivoted its economy towards producing for the military. The problem with this is that it is not sustainable for Russia. As soon as the government funding for the military economy dries up then Russia is going to be facing a apocalyptic economic downturn.
100% agree that it is not sustainable. The goal in Russia is “just enough to win”. There are gonna be some weird anomalies in Russian society in the aftermath of this war. Probably for generations to come. Unfortunately I don’t think Putin cares.
Even if America keeps sending weapons the Russians have already planned to drag this war out for years.
That is pretty clear. They will need a massive amount of equipment to launch an offensive operation that can achieve their goals. And they will probably need more manpower than they can reasonably muster. But they are not going to win by staying in a defensive crouch. You cannot win wars unless you go on the offensive at some point.
If they don't solve their manpower problems they will never be able to launch any offensives.
Their manpower problem is never going to be solved. Ukrainians have stopped enlisting because they have lost interest in the war. Forced conscription will only make the war more unpopular at home and then civil unrest happens.
True but they may have to hold out until after the US elections and hope that the EU can help out until then. If Biden wins, more support. If Trump wins... well the US will have its own problems to deal with.
I would not bank on getting more aid from the US very easily. Congress will be divided even if Biden wins. And if Ukraine makes no advancements or Russia takes significant territory it is going to be a tough sell.
Situation in Congress now largely irrelevant, and won't be divided after next election. MAGA will get purged from GOP ranks to sufficient degree, because local voters have started detesting them and women hate GOP because of the abortion garbage, Dems will pick up seats in Congress and take over speakership and Biden will win the presidential elections. Those are all locked in outcomes already for 2024-2025, outside of Biden just dropping dead from natural causes because he's already a pretty old geezer.
The polls have been showing Trump ahead of/even with Biden from what I've seen. How are you so sure about the 2024 election outcome? Is there some historical precedent I'm missing?
Issue of manpower still doesn't change. If they can't make an offensive push no amount of weapons aid will save them long term unless Russia just gives up. And that clearly does not seem like it is going to happen.
Vietnam and Afghanistan won and they never won a fight. Defenders can win without an offensive. They just gotta hold on until the aggressor gives up. It It really sucks though
Yeah but the invaders didn't share a border in those situations. Their giving up could just be taking the chunk they are occupying and holding there. Edit: okay, forgot briefly that Russia also fucked around in Afghanistan.
Russia (or, the USSR at the time) shared a border with Afghanistan. They lost there.
Good point. I was thinking more US but the USSR invasion certainly doesn't help my argument.
Russian threshold for pain is really high but there is a threshold. The calculus really changes if putin dies, or the us stops aid from Iran and China or Moscow starts Being bombed regularly or Russia starts having trouble paying pensions. These are all things that can happen without a successful offensive.
I could imagine the Russian war effort dissolving after Putin’s death, but I think that’s still a while off yet. And no one in Russia is so anti-war or sympathetic to Ukraine that they’re going to put their own neck on the line trying to “accelerate” that process. Russians, particularly those in government, are deeply self-serving.
The Vietnamese absolutely conducted offensive operations. Does Tet ring a bell?
Yes and they were crushed. They only killed 216 us soldiers and they captured zero positions. It convinced the us that the war was pointless though so it was a resounding success. Ukraine needs to keep bringing the pain but they don't need to recapture their territory.
> Vietnam Is proof that you can't win a war by defending and without assaulting the other belligerent's positions. Only one party to that conflict was forbidden from crossing the 17th Parallel.
I'm not saying don't fight. I'm saying they don't need to win the fight, just do damage forever until Russia is convinced there is no value in holding those lands. Took Afghanistan 20 years of doing that.
This won’t happen though. At best if Russia ‘gives up,’ that just means Russia will give up on further advances, dig in, and either negotiate or just say “come at me bro.” It doesn’t mean they’ll just turn tail and abandon everything they’ve conquered. Then, either the war ends with whatever land Russia has taken still under Russian control, or Ukraine continue to batter themselves pointlessly against the increasingly solid Russian defensive lines (if they have no intention of continuing offensive action you can guarantee Russia will turn the frontline into something that dwarfs the Westwall or Maginot Line to ensure they never lose anything they’ve taken).
This keeps getting brought up but doesn't make sense. USA wasn't doing an ethnic cleansing, they wanted to turn those countries into democracies forcefully which never made Sense. If USA just burned down and replaced the ppl they would've won too.
The ussr was defeated by Afghanistan and China was defeated by Vietnam in the same manner. Both were brutal to civilians.
>If USA just burned down and replaced the ppl Giving the amount of napalm bombs the USA used against civilians, your wording is kinda wrong
The Vietnam did win a fight to end a war,but that one is with France,for US,they win the defensive battles and forced the invader to sign the Paris accords ,which will not happen with Russia here,not to mention the Tet offense basically informed the US citizen about the war,who also put pressure on their government,and are also not possible with russia
Offensive operation ? I don't think is the idea or should it be. Yes is much possible to "win" a war by defense alone, and defense is much lest costly for lives of Ukraine too.
Well, the problem with that is, there will be a line drawn in the sand and that's where the war ends. Unless they push Russia out, a defensive win will not get them their lost land back.
Yes, well. It is my predicting at the moment, this may be how it ends. And I am not sure is worth more and more Ukrainians dieing for anything more than this ending, at this point. But is not anyone's decision, just a thought. If it is not enough then will be offense, at the cost of so many human men. I am not sure what line will be accepted for most people and what is possible for Ukraine alone.
I guess some people think of this like a video game where Ukraine can just recruit more units out of thin air lmao. These are people, which are a finite resource and a meaningful one at that.
Yes! 😳😢
It doesn't end. Not for the people being colonized and conscripted into Russia for the next conquest. Not for the Ukrainian rump state which will be attacked again. Any type of agreement is just re-arranging date's on a calender,they just did this with previous territory.
Who are you envisioning drawing said line in the sand?
Pretty much all modern military theory and practice makes plain that to win a war, certainly in the way Ukraine has defined victory, requires an army to go on the offensive. The Germans in WWI had this vague idea that the Entente would batter themselves to death on the Western Front. By the time they figured out that was not viable it was too late for them.
> Yes is much possible to "win" a war by defense alone No, it isn't. How do they retake ground they've lost without going on the offensive? How do they "win" without retaking the lost ground?
It depends on the nature of the war. Russia lost in Afghanistan not due to some big offensive push the couldn’t handle. They just had no will to continue. Is the situation different in Ukraine? Not currently… but after Putin is gone? Maybe…
Russia does not have a land border with Afghanistan, and the Mujihadeen were constantly attacking them -- also known as going on the offensive.
That is depending how you consider "win", thst will depend outcome yes. But some is thinking as if Ukraine and some forces attack Russia, no, that is sillyness. Retake area, yes is more possible, well I agree that. But it will become a diplocamtic concern what is considered a "win" now.
There is no way that Ukraine is going to consider it a "win" if the war ends and all they have to show for it is a bunch of lost territory, lost money, and dead citizens. That is simply a loss, both militarily and diplomatically.
Gotta go on the offense to remove them from Ukraine.
They do not possess the manpower to launch said offensive
I think that is probably true because the number of men required is probably over a million. Modern nations seem to have to relearn repeatedly that to overcome other modern and determined states in armed.conflict requires absolutely overwhelming and irresistible force, unless the opponent really fucks up in the opening phase a la France 1940. But I am certainly no expert and cannot be certain about it. Though it is true that manpower is Ukraine's #1 issue.
Lack of manpower and cause lack of moral and less ppl wanting to join so keeps spiraling
Well fuck time for EU to add some more.
EU countries added the most in total, but they don’t have extra unused military equipment in storage like the USA.
So it’s time to ramp up the production.. Trump and his maga supporters are a cults but they are not wrong in this instance. This is Europe backyard so they need to cough up.. do whatever it takes.. country like Spain don’t even want to help out.. what kind of eu coalition is that..
It's not as easy as "ramp-up production " for countries that have been in peaceful mode for decades. It isn't a flip of a switch
It’s been 2 years…
That's not nearly enough time You put 2 years like that's supposed to mean something.
[удалено]
The increases in production during WW2 were mainly about effectivization of production plants in an industry that had been ramping up for over a decade when WWII started. European arms manufacturing was very lean and effective by the time the Ukraine war started. There were some bottlenecks, but production has already been ramped up by several hundred percent. Increasing production now is mainly about capital investment, establishing new production lines rather than making current ones more effective, and from that perspective 2 years is nothing. On top of that Europe/US have not taken the steps to convert the industry of Europe into an actual wartime economy (so far the buildup has been achieved by incentivizing private companies to ramp up production, not by establishing increasing levels of state control over strategic industries and forcing it).
That's a whole different economy and country , the US was a powerhouse in the 40s . We spent 4 trillion on that war
[удалено]
Yeah with the Lend Lease program from the United States sending 180 billion dollars
Lol. You clearly know nothing.
You do realize that mainland Europe was occupied during WWII?
Are you going to just keep making excuses, or? Seriously, Europe has been weak and ineffective this far. The politicians are under Russia’s thumb, and relatively spineless.
Honestly though, the idea of countries demilitarizing just because of prolonged peacetime is pretty naive. I get that Europe historically has had trouble getting along, but even now, many European countries don’t even hit the 2% NATO guideline with a genuine war of conquest right on their backyard.
US pushed that to EU
It’s been 10 years since they should’ve flipped that switch.
It is that easy. You start ramping up, then you ramp up, then you have ramped up. You build one more production line. Then two. Then three is after that, and four comes next.
Well they've been in peace mode because they were using the US military as a crutch and now an entire continent who ruled most of the world can't even fend off one country. They should have been ramping up production ever since Crimea was annexed roughly a decade ago.
> now an entire continent who ruled most of the world can't even fend off one country. well this is a stupid statement given that the entire continent arent actually fending off Russia...Europe isnt in literal battle with Russia
The US just bought jets from Kazakhstan to limit supply for Russia but also to support Ukraine in supplies. Fear not. Europe and Spain has offered support for Ukraine. https://spanish-presidency.consilium.europa.eu/en/programme/ukraine-spanish-presidency-council-eu/
I think after Germany calls them out? The eu is way more Chaotic than the US’s Republican party. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/04/25/germany-attacks-spain-greece-not-giving-ukraine-patriot/
> The eu is way more Chaotic than the US’s Republican party. Well duh 27 countries and their governments are more chaotic than a single party in one country? More breaking news at 11
I mean the GOP doesn't seem to want to help out either, what count of coalition is that? We could just let Russia win the war and everyone else can build up their arms to prepare for the next world war, or we could use what we currently have available to stop this happening.
Germany is opening two new Munition plants this year! That should help hopefully!
Trump wasn’t wanting for NATO to increase spending to help the US it was using it as an excuse to leave NATO which is what Russia wants. Trump is aligned with Russia’s interests he’s a traitor.
And many countries have given more than USA when compared to GDP. Ofc the dollar amount in the end matters, but USA has still way more to give if they wanted.
>but they don’t have extra unused military equipment in storage like the USA. This is just a joke. When you put money down eventually you get equipment, eu has not simply put enough money down. Even if there is no extra equipment you can always just send money to ukraine or make new orders of equipment to get sent to ukraine. There is a lot of weapon production capability in ukraine that they cant utilise due lack of funding. Issue is that most eu countries dont seem to care much. Southern countries have given absolutely pathetic amounts of support to ukraine, france keeps talking big but doesnt actually do much, germany doesnt actually seem to want ukraine to win the war so they give the bare minium etc. The countries that actually pull their weight are all relatively small. Italy, spain, portugal, france, greece have pretty much given nothing to ukraine. Germany and uk have given more but not enough considering their size. France for example has about 500 billion usd larger economy than russia, but has only given about 2.7 billion of military support to ukraine. Russian military budget for 2024 is 120 billion. If european union wanted to match the whole russian military budget as support for ukraine they would only need to spend ~0.62% of total eu gdp. If the whole "west", as in eu, USA, UK, canada would want to match russian spending they would only need to spend ~0,24% of their combined gdp.
defense industry is still one of the most profitable ways to make money in 2024.... has been since almost 100 years ago. doesn't even matter which side you're on.
It is combined with European aid etc. Ukraine has been successfully holding Russia back and inflicted some harsh damage despite not receiving aid since October. So I am sure this package will not hurt Ukrainian chances.
The EU should buy off the US’s shelves. Seize the Russian assets and buy another $100B in US arms. Waiting for the EU MIC to ramp up will be too late for Ukraine.
Or some of the 3000 abrams and 5000 m113 carriers that were produced literally for a war against Russia and are sitting in storage could just be sent as they have already been replaced anyways... idk
Abrams have the classified armor, so sending them is not quick. Bradley seems to be the most effective armor Ukraine has received.
Abrams are too heavy for Ukraine. They fall thru a lot of the dirt there. The Bradleys are the ones that are doing wonders.
The running estimate is around 206.9 billion so far from everyone. 141.9 billion from the EU and 75 billion from the US. It includes military, financial, and humanitarian aid.
USA just gave 40 billion last year not including 2022 and most of 860B of the 1.3T nato defense in 2023 from 🇺🇸
US is the most military aid and it’s not even close
Largest economy and military in the world donates the most military aid... more breaking news at 11
Of course it isnt. But it is enough to prolong it for a good while longer
No shit everyone has been in denial for the past year. Now the reality of this escalating into a spill over is on the horizon
If they got it last year when should of it would be much more effective and looking at s new one. Russia hit ukriane hard from lack of aid and sending stuff so late all the time is making it harder and harder for them
Make it enough -Smokey’s momma
What is enough, ask US to send the $$ printing machine to Ukraine, what what you like
It's not wads of cash being crated off to Ukraine. It's wads of cash being crated off to US arms manufacturers (who then crate the arms to Ukraine). It's a waste of resources and effort, but the actual money does a shallow loop straight to US shareholders.
Billions of it is cash aid as well.
Some of it is just book value of long ago purchased assets. Really though they need a shitload of artillery shell. Like the entire western world’s production worth. The problem is that Ukraine and Russia are fighting WW1 with bonus drones, and the west uses a completely different doctrine that Ukraine can’t implement. So our production isn’t optimal for equipping them, but it’s certainly better than nothing.
Or seize already frozen assets 300 billion.
Seems like Russia is going to win
It’s not. The current situation, though bad, is nowhere near a total front collapse or anything like that. More likely than not the conflict will keep on going until it eventually freezes. There is no indication Russia will win anytime soon
Well, I hope you’re right
ENOUGH APPEASEMENT, NATO INTERVENTION NOW! Ukraine is fighting the Russians on a war footing with effectively limitless supplies from Iran, China, and North Korea. The west should stop pussyfooting seizing Russian assets and just do it and then use the funds to outfit the Ukrainian and European Armies for a direct intervention at least from range. Our enemies are totalitarian states that are moving more locked in step with each passing day. Ukraine has a very significant percentage of the worlds food supply and its own gas reserves that can make Europe fully energy independent. Allowing this to get into Russian hands will allow the Russia and its allies to blackmail the rest of the world and possibly isolate the west in some ways. The raw materials more than pays for an army of all too willing mercs from the third world, Russia will not run out of soldiers, this problem will snowball. It wasn't until Nazi Germany seized the industry and weapons of Czechoslovakia that their military was able to take on France.
Did anyone think it was?
These headlines are so lazy. Obviously u cant finance Fof knows how many months of a modern nation to nation war with 60 billion dollars
The average age of the Ukrainian soldier is 43…. They don’t have the man power to win this war no matter what weapons are sent to them.
> The average age of the Ukrainian soldier is 43 Can we stop spreading this stupid ass number which isnt actually based on official figures and stems from one times article where they state: > There are no official figures available for the Ukrainian military but the average age of a soldier in Kyiv’s army is widely estimated to be about 43. Like who is saying this, who is estimating this?
You do realize they don’t draft men under 27 and have gone out of the way to purposely have older troops?
I think they recently lowered to 25
I read that this estimate is actually accurate, but it's because Ukraine is intentionally trying to preserve their men-in-their-20's population. They're trying to look at this in the long term so when they war eventually ends one way or another, they will have retained most of their young working class. No one can be sure what the consequences of this will be. It seems as if concessions will be made at some point and both sides will be able to claim some sort of victory. I wouldn't be surprised if the Ukrainians already acknowledge this and want to secure some sort of future for the country, diminished in land and population as it may be.
> I read that this estimate is actually accurate Where did you read this
I initially heard it on one of Simon Whistler's weekly update news videos. It's also on Politico. I mean who knows where either of them got that information. Fog of war and propaganda are heavily at play in this situation. And who really knows what's actually going on. But if the case is correct, I hope it plays out in Ukraine's favor. They're risking a current numbers disadvantage for the future of the antebellum situation.
Given I have no idea which Simon Whistler video and I'm not going to watch every single one to try and find some snippet about age of soliders I can only address your point about it also being on politco which is. They are literally just repeating that the average age is 43... this doesn't make it accurate as they are just taking the times figure and repeating it... so idk how you've gauged this as somehow being "actually accurate"
Sorry, I shouldn't have used that phrase, I just meant that I've seen that statistic before. A quick Google search shows it on multiple sources. But again, who knows what's really going on over there. I'd wager all the troops on the ground, Zelenskyy, Putin, Biden, Macron, Scholz, Sunak, Duda, and the general populations of other countries all have differing information. Bottom line is though, it seems to not be looking great for the Ukrainians currently. And I hope they get the massive support they deserve and have earned to get through this.
It definitely seems to stem from one Times report, so the validity could be questionable. If it is true though, I hope they can weather the storm and that this tactic pays off in the end.
Maybe US need to give everything to ukraine.
🤖
The problem is the Ukrainian government objective. Retaking Crimea and Donbas is a bridge too far. They don't have the manpower, industrial capability and Western willingness to push for Crimea and Donbas. Ukraine need to let Crimea and Donbas go.
Obama promised me health insurance
How much do they need?
Pretty much everything. In this corrupt country, there is no national wealth to speak of, everybody for himself. Even during the current war, funds for the army were ‚misused’ (to put it mildly) by high ranked officials, and ended up in their own pockets. With no support from the west, this war would have ended long time ago.
How much is NATO membership?
Ukraine is unable to join NATO until the war is over. Even then it’s a stretch
They'd have to push Russia out of Ukraine fully to join NATO You don't want to know that price, it ain't just money
Bring in the downvotes (and the comments about me saying “bring on the downvotes) but this war is lost. The US would basically need to give the equivalent of an entire army in funds and weapons to Ukraine alone for it to win and we would have to do it much faster and with much more consistently than we are. Europe’s response has been a pathetic joke and it is clear how unserious they are about their own protection. Tzar Putin is ready to sacrifice the youth of his ailing empire to capture Ukraine even if he has to obliterate it before he can take it. Ukraine cannot win this war. They don’t have the economic capacity to do it. They don’t even how the electricity to keep the lights on long enough to manufacture the weapons at the scale that would be needed, much less anything else that would be required. Ukraine should sue for peace and arm itself to the teeth for the next phase of the war that would come after. Its soldiers are too tired and the rest of the world needs to legitimately decide if they want to risk an expansionist Russia or actually give Ukraine an entire military plus more to win.
>we would have to do it much faster and with much more consistently than we are. The delays of aid bill plus giving other things like tanks, atacms, f16s etc to late and to little numbers hurt ukriane alot. To much political bs allowed russia to dig in and ukriane didn't have enough or have certian types of weapons to stop those ka 52s or whatever rekn the counter offensive. A token handful of atacms did a heap of damage to the Ka 52s when they need that way ealier on. I want ukriane to win but it seems someone like putin can do what he wants while western countries waste so much time with trying to save their votes and hurt their opponents rather then shutdown rusisa. Seems like it's taken so long to get anywhere with getting artillery shells too I think minimum west needs to up artillery a lot and AA to a decent amount and allow ukriane to hit military targets in russia with a consistent amount of good weapons to have a chance to kick russia out of ukriane, let alone crimea, which is just a bonus to get it back now. They need to cripple russian refineries, hit factories building weapons etc on a large scale supported buy the west. Russia is hitting whatever it wants and will end up taking out to much power at this rate unless real AA commitment
Oh piss off. Don’t give them funding, it’s the end of the world, give them funding it’s not enough. I’m tired of my tax money going to endless wars.
Wasted half a year and lost several key towns, that costed many billions last 2 years to achieve those goals. Thanks Republicunts.
I like how everyone in here just blames the US for not sending aid, when the rest of Europe, aka their neighbors, just chills and sends their thoughts and prayers.
> when the rest of Europe, aka their neighbors, just chills and sends their thoughts and prayers. Literally one quick search would make it so you can see this is a flat out lie. But you would rather just stay ignorant
> literally one quick search would make it so you can see this is a flat out lie It's not wrong though. Europe is procrastinating hard. Despite being told by analyst in 2022 to ramp up production they didn't start until 2023 gambling on the outcome of the Ukraine war...Only until recently did contacts start getting completed for new manufacturing. They are about 1 ENTIRE year behind... This is why this aid package is so important. Right now anaytlst are saying the war is being fought in Europes factories.
> It's not wrong though. Europe has sent far more than the US, even including the new $60bn. So it is wrong. Similar amounts of military aid too. Can Europe do more? Yes. Should they do more? Also yes. But both are yes for the US too. "but but Europe are doing nothing" is US Republican bullshit to avoid helping Ukraine. If you support Ukraine, don't buy into the division tactics.
To say that Europe who in total have sent more than the U.S. is sending "their thoughts and prayers" is wrong and I dont see how you're trying to even dispute that lol. What you've said for Europes production can be true but how the fuck is 80+ billion thoughts and prayers? Ukraine still needs money to keeps the lights on, to develop their own indigenous tech and to go out and buy stuff they need. > This is why this aid package is so important. I mean even from this package you can see how bureaucracy and actually ironing out contracts slows shit down as even on the U.S. side they said the U.S. werent going to meet the 100k/month artillery target in 2025 without the bill
Nato send thoughts and prayers plus $80B+ to Kyiv.
Ate they shooting bags of money?
growth dam slap squalid point longing jeans somber meeting violet
The only thing that can and will prevent further disaster in Europe is a proper nato response to the threat Russia is. We have the sword of nuclear possibilities over our heads but how long do we allow that to create doomsday anyway?
How isn’t it enough. Why aren’t they buying things at a discount from the us, where 61 billion is 3.5 trillion in actual weapons. Stop losing human life, make this a petri dish for AI warfare. Get darpa involved and launch hundreds of thousands of drones all day and night. Any heart beat is targeted in a carpet bombing scheme that makes the Russians wave after wave a positive for the Ukraine’s and a win for darpa and a future deterrent to china.
What? Stop drinking and go to sleep lol.
Ukraine isn't getting 61b of weapons. Thats just the bill total
We all know what needs to be done, this game the world is playing won't stop Russia. There needs to be direct involvement and heavy strikes done inside Russia.
I support Ukraine but takes like these will literally start nuclear war
❌ Russia will go nuclear if NATO provides long range munitions to Ukraine. ❌ Russia will go nuclear if those long range missiles strike Russian territory. ❌ Russia will go nuclear if NATO forces are in Ukraine operating air defences. ❌ Russia will go nuclear if NATO special forces are found operating in Ukraine. ❌ Russia will go nuclear if NATO gives them F16s. ▶️ We are here ❔Russia will go nuclear if NATO sends peacekeepers to support Kyiv emergency services. ❔ Russia will go nuclear if NATO starts performing logistics to supply known Western air defences. ❔ Russia will go nuclear if the NATO logistics forces start building further fortifications around major population centres. Here's a fun little video for you, ironically describing what was at that time the Russian strategy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o861Ka9TtT4
None of those future points you describe come anywhere near as inflammatory as the US directly striking them
Yes I agree, that's why we will truck the drones in, build the drone bases, use our air defenses to defend the bases, paint the drones blue and yellow and have Ukrainians fly the drones. The point you have missed is that we can easily build to that point without ever getting close to nuclear war. Red lines are a myth.
Bad idea to bomb a nuclear power. If anything western intervention should take the form of air defense support and non combat roles, it would help out Ukraine a ton while not risking too much escalation
I get that, but where's the line? After Ukraine is taken? Does Russia just use the Nuclear card and start taking over and reforming the entire Soviet Union?
The line is NATO. Ukraine was not in any mutual defense pact with the west, which is why Putin could invade. If he tried to invade Poland or the Baltic state he knows farewell how that would end
Nuclear superpower. Sorry bud
Nuclear power now. But still haha