But thats kinda the multifaceted problem... we spend too much on defense and these other countries don't... since they know they have to hold out for a couple days and be "saved" they spend money on their social programs and abuse american taxpayers on both fronts while claiming some moral superiority
This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...
- Thread starter Nole Lou
- Start date
But thats kinda the multifaceted problem... we spend too much on defense and these other countries don't... since they know they have to hold out for a couple days and be "saved" they spend money on their social programs and abuse american taxpayers on both fronts while claiming some moral superiority
in regards to the bolded…kindly GFY.
Of course I know Australia, Japan, SK etc are our allies in the pacific. Didn’t post otherwise…jfc
In regards to your other points, mostly agree.
Just pointing out the we have world wide commitments and the rest of our NATO partners basically don't. UK/France being the exceptions.
European countries should be contributing more per capita than the US to Ukraine.
Last edited:
Hoping for a BUK battery (or ten) to go down today. 1,000 AA losses would be nice to see.
And so much of the US military aid benefits the defense industry in this country.
3 Russian refineries are in danger of closing as markets shrink, and Ukraine keeps attacking energy infrastructure. Refined products are an important piece of the Russian economy, and brings in a lot of hard currency.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024...k-closure-amid-mounting-losses-reuters-a87028
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024...k-closure-amid-mounting-losses-reuters-a87028
"But what a PARTY!!!!!!Kurshchina..... Assault enters a minefield ... they didn't have the classic snowplows.....Between the elves and the mines.... one after another.....PUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Anybody who thinks russia would attack a nato country is clueless. Poland and romania would be in moscow in a matter of days.
You have zero idea what a desperate dictator is capable of.
Earlier we saw these were coming on line.
Anybody who voted for Trump thinking he'd support NATO alliances is clueless.
That'd be YOU.
Do not "escort it away"
Sink it. Quickly.
Send the message that we are not to be tested.
Now imagine he thousands of nukes.
Then imagine clowns here calling for NATO to bomb Moscow.
Interesting take on political realities from a Brit on the battlefront forum:
Just a quick thought: it’s often tempting and expedient to refer to “Europe” as a whole, particularly in the context of a conflict involving comparably large places such as Russia and the US. We all do it and it makes good sense. We do have to remember, though, that “Europe” has really never been a real thing, politically speaking, until extremely recently. Certainly there hasn’t been time yet for a solid, coherent “European” identity to take root in the mind of the public.
I know is not news to this forum but that means that the huge number of different cultures, languages, histories and political idiosyncrasies ultimately still holds sway in European microsocial circles. So, in the absence of an overall leader who can make the decision for us (and there are clearly not many who would be large and powerful enough to wield such influence over Europe’s multiple heavyweights - that’s one of the reasons why it’s always the US, not Germany or France for example) places like Ukraine will quickly recede from the priority list anywhere other than border nations to whom it has some historical relevance and familiarity. The UK and France still have vestiges of broader horizons to their thinking as a hangover from empire but otherwise it may be nearly impossible to coordinate strong action as a continent when ‘only’ Eastern Europe is directly threatened. That’s not because Europe is childish or otherwise lacking in any way that everywhere else isn’t, too; it’s the way things work when ‘the people’ hold power. Russia is different because it’s run and coordinated by and in the interests of an oppressive tyrant. The US can sometimes act in a coordinated fashion while wielding the power and resources of almost a whole continent because they are a recent ex-colonial entity who still have strong roots in a narrow, relatively singular political background but, even then, the global view regularly falls apart when the population is effectively unsettled and the American people decide that whatever-it-is they see in Trump means more to them than what is actually happening in the world. Criticising them for electing Trump is the same as criticising “Europe” for failing to make a strong and consistent political decision regarding a war on “its” eastern border is the same as criticising the Native American nations for not uniting and throwing out European colonialists a few centuries ago: It makes sense from a macro point of view but makes no sense whatsoever at the micro level where real world politics actually takes place.
tl;dr: “Europe” as a real, meaningful political entity and identity doesn’t exist (yet). “Europe” therefore almost certainly won’t act as strongly and coherently as we’d like wrt Ukraine. The dice will roll in 30+ countries and, if we’re lucky, a meaningful majority will keep supporting them. It’s much more likely that we’ll end up with an unsatisfactory melange of half measures and good intentions driven by each national populace’s perceived ‘real’ concerns and capabilities. Let’s manage our expectations accordingly.
A related thought: as far as I can see European and even American support to Ukraine has been basically as strong as it actually possibly could have been throughout (and even immediately prior to) this war. The US and multiple European polities have visibly run themselves aground over the least few years over issues relating at least superficially to Ukrainian aid. It might not have been enough to achieve an idealistic ‘quick win’ or to prevent Russia (remember them? The ones actually to blame for this whole f***fest?) from causing untold trauma to the Ukrainian people but I see precious little evidence to say that western governments really, truly could have made more support work. Few western populations are clamouring publicly for more Ukrainian support. Several political voices are speaking out against it. That is a real influence on what western governments can do.
Hopefully what they (we) actually do is enough, for Ukraine and us all.
/soapbox
Just a quick thought: it’s often tempting and expedient to refer to “Europe” as a whole, particularly in the context of a conflict involving comparably large places such as Russia and the US. We all do it and it makes good sense. We do have to remember, though, that “Europe” has really never been a real thing, politically speaking, until extremely recently. Certainly there hasn’t been time yet for a solid, coherent “European” identity to take root in the mind of the public.
I know is not news to this forum but that means that the huge number of different cultures, languages, histories and political idiosyncrasies ultimately still holds sway in European microsocial circles. So, in the absence of an overall leader who can make the decision for us (and there are clearly not many who would be large and powerful enough to wield such influence over Europe’s multiple heavyweights - that’s one of the reasons why it’s always the US, not Germany or France for example) places like Ukraine will quickly recede from the priority list anywhere other than border nations to whom it has some historical relevance and familiarity. The UK and France still have vestiges of broader horizons to their thinking as a hangover from empire but otherwise it may be nearly impossible to coordinate strong action as a continent when ‘only’ Eastern Europe is directly threatened. That’s not because Europe is childish or otherwise lacking in any way that everywhere else isn’t, too; it’s the way things work when ‘the people’ hold power. Russia is different because it’s run and coordinated by and in the interests of an oppressive tyrant. The US can sometimes act in a coordinated fashion while wielding the power and resources of almost a whole continent because they are a recent ex-colonial entity who still have strong roots in a narrow, relatively singular political background but, even then, the global view regularly falls apart when the population is effectively unsettled and the American people decide that whatever-it-is they see in Trump means more to them than what is actually happening in the world. Criticising them for electing Trump is the same as criticising “Europe” for failing to make a strong and consistent political decision regarding a war on “its” eastern border is the same as criticising the Native American nations for not uniting and throwing out European colonialists a few centuries ago: It makes sense from a macro point of view but makes no sense whatsoever at the micro level where real world politics actually takes place.
tl;dr: “Europe” as a real, meaningful political entity and identity doesn’t exist (yet). “Europe” therefore almost certainly won’t act as strongly and coherently as we’d like wrt Ukraine. The dice will roll in 30+ countries and, if we’re lucky, a meaningful majority will keep supporting them. It’s much more likely that we’ll end up with an unsatisfactory melange of half measures and good intentions driven by each national populace’s perceived ‘real’ concerns and capabilities. Let’s manage our expectations accordingly.
A related thought: as far as I can see European and even American support to Ukraine has been basically as strong as it actually possibly could have been throughout (and even immediately prior to) this war. The US and multiple European polities have visibly run themselves aground over the least few years over issues relating at least superficially to Ukrainian aid. It might not have been enough to achieve an idealistic ‘quick win’ or to prevent Russia (remember them? The ones actually to blame for this whole f***fest?) from causing untold trauma to the Ukrainian people but I see precious little evidence to say that western governments really, truly could have made more support work. Few western populations are clamouring publicly for more Ukrainian support. Several political voices are speaking out against it. That is a real influence on what western governments can do.
Hopefully what they (we) actually do is enough, for Ukraine and us all.
/soapbox
Putting the bad news in one place. Think it was just this past week that the West warned Russia not to keep attacking energy sources. Guess they are not afraid of the West. EDIT - at least the UN did -
Last edited:
The troops count glitched and should show 1,640.
And someone was asking about the F16s the other day.
News is from a Zelenskyy tweet:
Shooting down 10 of 1640 (0.6%) incoming is better than nothing, but probably not the 'game changer' some expected.
You don’t know which 10 those were, and what was shot down or not shot down by other systems. The F16s could be being used for high value aerial targets the other systems struggle with.
Are they ‘changing the game’?
Hell, even the 10 shoot downs are couched as ‘approximately’.
Intercepts are almost entirely by other systems.
In Kyiv at 3:00 about 30-40 minutes was intersive AA work (mostly Gepard, Skynex and HMG) at Shakheds. Since approx 6:00 to 7:30 several waves of missiles - hypersonic, aeroballistic, cruise. Distant booms, some closer some more further. Kyiv was targeted with at least 16 missiles
Result of AD work
1 3M22 "Zirkon" hypersonic missile - 1 intercepted (Kyiv, debrises damaged builing in the center of the city, one woman was wounded)
8 "Kinzhals" - 7 intercepted
1 Iskander-M - not intercepted
4 Kh-22/Kh-31P - 4 intercepted
101 Kh-101/Kalibr - 85 intercepted
5 Kh-59/69 missiles - 5 intercepted
90 Shakheds and decoys - 42 intercepted, 41 supressed by EW/fell (decoys), 2 returned to Russia
For this attack Russia involved 7 Tu-160, 16 Tu-95, 2 Tu-22M3, 5 Su-34, 10 MiG-31K, 4 Su-27/30, 4 ships - carriers of Kalibr misisles.
Main targets of attack - power infrastructure. Some thermal power plants or its equipment was damaged in Volyn', Rivne, Odesa oblasts - there are problems with electricity and water supply in some districts of theses oblasts. In Kyiv there was prevential electricity cut off for about 1,5 hours.
In Dnipropetrovsk oblast there was a hot of locomotive depo - 2 killesd, 3 wounded.
Also there are victims in Odesa oblast, Mykolaiv (Shakhed hit the building), Rivne - preliminare 5 more people.
On the photo debrises of "Zirkon" in the appartments in Kyiv
Edited 3 hours ago by Haiduk
2
I’m sure they post for public consumption everything they are doing.Are they ‘changing the game’?
Hell, even the 10 shoot downs are couched as ‘approximately’.
Intercepts are almost entirely by other systems.
In Kyiv at 3:00 about 30-40 minutes was intersive AA work (mostly Gepard, Skynex and HMG) at Shakheds. Since approx 6:00 to 7:30 several waves of missiles - hypersonic, aeroballistic, cruise. Distant booms, some closer some more further. Kyiv was targeted with at least 16 missiles
Result of AD work
1 3M22 "Zirkon" hypersonic missile - 1 intercepted (Kyiv, debrises damaged builing in the center of the city, one woman was wounded)
8 "Kinzhals" - 7 intercepted
1 Iskander-M - not intercepted
4 Kh-22/Kh-31P - 4 intercepted
101 Kh-101/Kalibr - 85 intercepted
5 Kh-59/69 missiles - 5 intercepted
90 Shakheds and decoys - 42 intercepted, 41 supressed by EW/fell (decoys), 2 returned to Russia
For this attack Russia involved 7 Tu-160, 16 Tu-95, 2 Tu-22M3, 5 Su-34, 10 MiG-31K, 4 Su-27/30, 4 ships - carriers of Kalibr misisles.
Main targets of attack - power infrastructure. Some thermal power plants or its equipment was damaged in Volyn', Rivne, Odesa oblasts - there are problems with electricity and water supply in some districts of theses oblasts. In Kyiv there was prevential electricity cut off for about 1,5 hours.
In Dnipropetrovsk oblast there was a hot of locomotive depo - 2 killesd, 3 wounded.
Also there are victims in Odesa oblast, Mykolaiv (Shakhed hit the building), Rivne - preliminare 5 more people.
On the photo debrises of "Zirkon" in the appartments in Kyiv
Edited 3 hours ago by Haiduk
2
FWIW-another version says this only applies to protecting Kharkiv whatever that means.
Take it up with Haiduk.
https://community.battlefront.com/t...ine-gonna-get/?do=findComment&comment=2054611
He lives in Kiev and relays what the authorities share.
There has certainly been talk that the government exaggerates the real interception rate.
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/05/13/7455511/
Compared to the previous half-year, Ukrainian air defence has intercepted far fewer Russian missiles, with 46% of missiles shot down over the last six months and 73% over the six months before that.
Source: The Wall Street Journal
Quote: "In the past six months, Ukraine intercepted around 46% of Russian missiles, compared with 73% in the preceding six-month period, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of daily data from the Ukrainian Air Force Command.
Last month the interception rate fell to 30% of missiles. The interception rate for long-range Shahed drones, which are easier to shoot down, fell just 1 percentage point to 82% in the past six months."
