Ok but it takes more than two months to train those soldiers to use highly specialised equipment. By which time Trump is in office.
Ok but it takes more than two months to train those soldiers to use highly specialised equipment. By which time Trump is in office.
The reality is that Europe will likely have to step up and fill the gap. Perfectly timed though the German government seems to be falling apart.
Fully understand that, but they can still continue to fight without Trump support, at least to a certain extent. There’s constantly new troops being NATO trained returning to Ukraine. They haven’t stopped enlisting soldiers and they haven’t had to do a massive conscription drive. Yes there’s been huge losses, but there’s still plenty of fight left in the Ukrainian troops.
Interesting note, the EU in 2023 was producing about 5x more artillery shells than the US
I get that, and I don’t think day one of Trump will end the war, as I said above. But we also have to be a bit more realistic about what can be achieved in two months left under Biden, others (not you I know) have suggested they can just launch an offensive before Putin’s ally occupies the White House.
For you, or others who know, what can Ukraine do with the fancy US tech they already have and are trained for that they haven’t done much of yet? Where can they hit with HIMARs or F-16s to degrade Russia’s ability to hold on long term?
#startsquirtingstopshooting?
The Kremlin would be a start, preferably when Putin and his cronies are there.
First. The US needs to allow them to hit into Russia with US weaponry.
Interesting stats coming out the Polish Presidential Office. Poland has come under some fire for lately not giving huge amounts of military support for Ukraine. There’s also been some disagreements after Polish farmers blocked passage into and out of Ukraine at the beginning of the year, plus Poland arrested a Ukrainian boxer at one of their airports. The Poles have even suggested that they can arrest any Ukrainian nationals in the country that are of fighting age and send them back to the country. This is in the guise of assisting the Ukrainian forces, while also kicking them out of the country.
In terms of military and aid support, Poland has spent 4.91% of their GDP. 0.71% on Military, with the rest going towards emergency aid for displaced Ukrainians. In terms of military support, they given:
On top of that, they’ve trained a total of 25,000 Ukrainian troops, of which half were NATO missions, with the other half being purely Polish missions.
It’s really interesting statistics as Poland and Ukraine have had a patchy history at the very best of times. But looking at the numbers, it’s fairly extenstive.
I’m completely in the dark and curious on how this works. Would it be given or is it a piece of business for a country to indept another country with military support either by owing money or a political favour?
I can’t imagine that anything is free and can’t see that kind of money being owed to that many countries ever being returned.
Remember Poland was part of the former USSR. They don’t want Putin controlled Belarus and Ukraine as their Eastern neighbours.
It’s very much self interest.
There’s a few factors here. The Polish armour and aircraft was all generally aging Soviet assets. The majority of tanks were T-72s and PT-91 Twardy, an upgraded T-72, which were still in good nick. Poland has already been looking to upgrade, so this just means they solve multiple problems. They no longer need to decommission them. If they wanted to sell, they would have probably had to do major upgrades and on top of this, most of Europe is moving away from Soviet tanks, so the buyers would have been Hungary, Byelorussia or another more hostile player.
Poland, in the next few years, is set to have the largest standing army in Europe, with it’s purchase and opening of factories to produce South Korean armoured vehicles.
Poland sees the worth of a Ukraine on their border which would have exceedingly good relations between the two. A hostile Ukraine just becomes more expensive, having to heavily police the border, while also dealing with the inevitable mafia, crime and corruption that would flow over the border. A positive relationship with a free Ukraine could lead to cheap gas and oil and moving away from other supplies.
If Ukraine were to fall, there’s almost a guarantee that Russia will continue expansion. Moldova will 100% be next, followed by the Baltics. Ukraine falling shows to Putin that Europe just simply can’t match the production of the Russian military complex. Granted they’re not up against all of it, but it’s still a sizeable chunk. Remembering as well, there’s no guarantee that the whole of NATO would join in a war. You have Orban in Hungry, a Russian puppet and multiple right wing governments in power or pushing for power that are soft towards Putin.
In this case, it’s honestly a cheaper option to have everything thrown in Ukraine and to help them, than to fight the war in your own territory.
Also as @Moz says, we know what it’s like for Russians to invite themselves in and we wouldn’t want to wish it on anyone else. Last time Russia invited herself into Poland, they slaughtered 22,000 of our best and brightest individuals in Katyn, amongst all their other attrocities.
War is fucked. We really do have it good down here on our secluded island.
I’ve never really thought about it before but it is interesting that arms are almost always referred to as assets. I was looking at the nuclear subs deal and recently at the missile deal as a waste of money but if weapons are assets, maybe our government has made are a clever bit of business. We buy a bunch of missiles we don’t need for $10 billion now and when a war (inevitably) kicks off somewhere, they sure as shit will be worth a lot more than $10b to someone who needs them. We give military aid and offload an asset we don’t need and get a country in our pocket. Favours are worth an aweful lot in business.
I don’t think that’s why they’re termed assets for how much they’re worth financially, more so because they assist with the defence or aggression of each country in question. A tank in Australia is an asset, because it can be used to protect against attack. Most of the equipment being sent to Ukraine is free, although there have been large portions that are being “leased” to them and they’ll pay off later. Most countries giving stuff to Ukraine, are doing it because:
a) It’s the right thing to do.
b) As I said before, a Russian loss will be cheaper in the long run.
For Australia, unless it’s naval, most of our assets are depreciating. Furthermore, in general, unless you’re producing it yourself, most of the time large amounts of military equipment will be obsolete by the time you get a large amount. We’ve got M1A1s that we’re giving to Ukraine. The most advance models are M1A2 which we’re purchasing, all the while the US is designing the M1A3.
Ukraine itself is producing huge amounts of military equipment itself. They’re not just putting their hands out. They’re producing huge amounts of ammunition, artillery, drones, missiles etc.
Reports that 50,000 Russian and North Korean troops are currently massed around the Kursk salient ready to attack. Ukraine has indicated that initial attacks have been repelled. A lot of drone footage in the area shows fully loaded Russian BMPs advancing so far that they’re being destroyed by Ukrainian tanks at literally point blank range
There’s a report floating around that the daily Russian KIA is exceeding the nations birthrate.
They just had their highest losses in a single day
Saw a mental analysis of a Russian attack into Kursk that happened a few days ago. Essentially Russian troops attacked en-masse down a main artery. Ukrainian troops stage a controlled withdrawal, while also stationing troops on the heights of either side of the attack. As Russian troops advanced, they left small pockets of soldiers in the villages/hamlets along the line. Ukrainian troops then hit hard, took out large parts of their armored support and isolated the Russian troops.
Russia then tried to attack through another flank to rescue their soldiers, before losing 300 dead and missing, plus about 18 armored vehicles. The Russian troops are still present in the towns, but they’re hold up, with only drone based supplies being delivered and no other support, pretty much waiting for Ukrainian troops to find them.
I did see a confirmed video of a Leopard 2 taking out a whole row of armored vehicles, tanks and trucks advancing as a convoy, apparently from the area.
Probably a whole heap of dead North Koreans in that lot too.
Shows the commanders haven’t learnt. That one Leopard tank won’t be buying beers for a while.
Russia is also slashing the medical payout of 3 million rubles for injuries sustained in combat approx USD 30K, to as little as 1 million or even 100,000 rubles - $10k or 1k.
Putin Slashes Soldiers' Payouts as Russia's Losses in Ukraine Skyrocket - Newsweek
“Sorry Ivan, your missing legs, you only get $1000…”
Biden has lifted all restrictions on US weapons being used inside Russia.
Expecting some big targets to be turned to rubble. Is the Kremlin in range?
Unfortunately they only have a range of 300km