Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Cargo_200 t1_j230zi6 wrote

while at the same time demanding peace talk. The world is standing with heroic Ukraine at these difficult times. Slava Ukraini 🇺🇦

114

Kakrime t1_j2384wf wrote

Im getting tired about people saying there are problems about tanks logistics, repair etc. Europe must send tanks jointly Now. I dont want to listen to any excuses. Every european country a part of what it has I dont care about the tanks names

42

Formulka t1_j238tie wrote

Ukraine is getting just enough to slowly push back against the Russians while we in the west can deliver weapons that would win the war in a month today. It's sickening but that's politics, trying to boil Russia like the proverbial frog.

28

jimsmoments89 t1_j23dq1n wrote

Makes me wonder if the long-term objective of the west is to, as you say, deplete Russia and weaken them further. But they trade Ukrainian lives to make this happen, and Ukraine can do little to actually get the volume of military material that can end the war through the battlefield in the shorter term.

The EU also in all likelihood don't want to end up having Ukraine as a militarized neighbour that could be a long-term threat. Because the EU and Ukraine still hasn't formalized their relationship, to the EU I think they still see Ukraine as a Troubled ex soviet satellite with baggage.

Maybe the EU wants to keep up arming their own militaries while supplying Ukraine with a matching volume of weapons, as balance and deterrent.

Depleting Russia of weapons and soldiers over time might also open up for the Russian federation to fracture in the future, if local powers feel the central government is weak enough

15

Formulka t1_j23ehfl wrote

Depleting Russia might be part of the reason but a bigger one probably are internal politics of various NATO countries. Militarized Ukraine is no threat to EU, where did you get that idea? After the war or after they kick the Russians out they will need substantial forces and high-tech weapons to prevent any further conflicts and loss of life.

13

jimsmoments89 t1_j23gz57 wrote

Any country that is more militarized than their neighbours is a potential to threat to those neighbours unless there is a balance. Nothing against Ukraine per se.

Ukraine only needs to reclaim their territory and join NATO. They don't need to have the 3rd largest military in the world after that

5

axusgrad t1_j23wknk wrote

Because surely Russia won't attack a third time

7

jimsmoments89 t1_j24wtk0 wrote

Right, but with NATO involved in Ukraines defense as a de factor member, what Ukraine has in military material matters not as much.

Safe to say it will still be the largest in Europe.

2

Brave_Principle7522 t1_j25bryv wrote

To join NATO you have to have a percentage of gdp to war funds and all their equipment has to match nato the all nato countries have to agree which means even politics matter as if you angered another country in the past the can deny you so there is a lot to it

1

Krivvan t1_j23gxr9 wrote

There was the recent press conference where Biden sorta hinted/implied that they were limited in the weapons they could send due to concerns from some EU members in NATO. Even mentioned how doing so could risk the breakup of the EU and NATO somehow.

I don't think he hinted over what kinds of concerns they were beyond escalation though.

9

-----shreddit----- t1_j23uxgc wrote

He was talking about long range missiles i think

3

Krivvan t1_j25jjht wrote

The question started with "if patriots are ok then why not other weapons" but I imagine the answer would apply to any kind of military assistance seen as "too offensive."

1

Kom501 t1_j23tmru wrote

You guys are massively overestimating the EU's military/industrial capacity (the cold war ended and the EU cut defense and isn't ready for a war like this) and the impact of the weapons they are holding back like the West has magic weapons. Russia has been firing 100's of missiles every few days from safe within Russia and it has had little impact. Russia is massively bigger and spread out than Ukraine.

The USA is the only one who has enough inventory of long range munitions, and a few hundred fired back at key targets would do little. Ukraine could fire 500 cruise missiles at Moscow and it would kill a few thousand people, be repaired in a few months, and have no effect on the war machine, and no one besides the USA has that many. What magic weapon are we holding back that could win in a month. Wars are not fought like a movie, it is a long march of logistics and maneuvering to just take small objectives.

8

Epyr t1_j23ykl0 wrote

They don't know what they are talking about, though emotions make it understandable as Ukrainians are dying every day.

A lot of Western tech takes a lot of time to train on which limits what can be sent. It's also a tough 'game' to play of equipping Ukraine without giving them equipment that you really don't want to potentially fall into Russian hands. That, and most of these countries still need to maintain stocks in case they are invaded or are drawn into a war.

4

No_I_Am_Sparticus t1_j24rbab wrote

Just throwing weapons at Ukraine may well also result in some of them going 'missing'. It happens and has happened.

3

RobeLife1 t1_j2705g6 wrote

Theres one thing that Ukraine has that almost no UN state possess, and that's battle hardened/ tested soldiers a very valuable asset that might be a scary prospect to some and explain why they get and don't get different types of support.

2

starskip42 t1_j23u0bo wrote

The EU would love a highly militarized and friendly neighbor who will protect them against an aggressive other neighbor.

There is a need for both arming Ukraine AND preparing for escalation on home soil. If the initiative is pressed too hard the escalation would likely come sooner than they can prepare for.

The baggage of corruption is on hold as membership is currently in a candidate state. It's not moving until after the war, and will come with a mountain of oversight.

Fracturing the russian federation is a real possibility. But it will take time, and continued losses. If putin stops the war he avoids this but not his own downfall. He's boned either way... unfortunately he knows this.

Once putin falls Belarus is free.

−1

Kakrime t1_j2390fj wrote

We people need to keep pressing on governments for heavy weapons

6

Professional-Bee-190 t1_j23nzl8 wrote

If only real life were as easy as the RTS video games I believe to be accurate representations of war and logistics.

9

Cold-Change5060 t1_j2ax4d0 wrote

How would insufficiently equipped tanks with completely inexperienced crew help?

1

Kirby_Pucket t1_j23v06k wrote

Russia will be hated for generations, and attacked.

18

SeaRaiderII t1_j23tuzp wrote

Where are those people saying Russia was about to run out of missiles every month since March?

13

wehooper4 t1_j24u5mo wrote

Russia is burning way more missiles than they are producing, so that’s still “running out”. They have run out of the majority of their stock of things like Iskander where they are at 1/6 their pre-war stocks, and are at levels of sea and air launched cruse missiles that would make NATO forces quite nervous.

But that’s still hundreds if not low thousands remaining, and not even counting the 6000+ S300’s that can also be used in a ground attack mode.

What we’re seeing is Russia being willing to deplete it’s stockpiles far further than we though they would. This cripples their ability to project force or have credible deterrence in the future.

19

eoten t1_j251h3b wrote

Irrelevant, until they do run out.

−3

demalteb t1_j247ke7 wrote

Serious question about military tactics: why do they spread out their attacks like that? like, why not 1000 at once? is this an issue of logistics, or do they hope with every barrage that this will be enough already? or are they simply inept?

9

Devourer_of_felines t1_j24iywv wrote

Logistics; the days of the Soviet Union cranking out hundreds of tanks a day is long gone. It takes a long time to build enough of their newer cruise missiles for another concentrated wave.

The old Soviet era stuff likewise needs to be taken out of storage and repaired/refurbished before being sent to a launch site

13

wehooper4 t1_j24uqip wrote

Each wave of attacks is more like the yearly production of these missiles. Sure there are some new-builts mixed in there, but they are mostly still from stocks of them.

5

Cold-Change5060 t1_j2awzab wrote

And that's the yearly production during relative peace times.

Their stockpile of supplies to make them are running out too.

1

humblegar t1_j24fkm5 wrote

Logistics, that is why Ukraine attacks those airfields and planes.

7

RobeLife1 t1_j26z49i wrote

Unprofessional opinion is its more about spreading terror, if they thought they had the ability to send a crippling blow, they'd do it. Since they don't keeping people living in fear is the next best thing. They also have to keep feeding the propaganda machine inside of Russia. Every launch is a opportunity to spread lies about the glorious motherland.

4

sunbro2000 t1_j25b34d wrote

The purpose is probably to get ukraine to spend their resources, time, and manpower and go into further debt by repairing their infrastructure over and over. It's a pretty basic military strategy. Just like how it is more effective to wound your enemy then it is to kill them etc.

3

Rubence_VA t1_j2323vk wrote

Something is going on for sure, this is unusual.

5

nnm_UA t1_j23jb81 wrote

Sorry but this is nothing new for us. This is the 10th attack on our critical infrastructure:

10.10 - 80 missiles,
11.10 - 28,
22.10 - 33,
31.10 - 50,
15.11 - 96,
17.11 - 20,
23.11 - 67,
05.12 - 70,
16.12 - 76,
29.12 - 69.

So for russians all according to plan.

34

Formulka t1_j236aj8 wrote

Must be a retaliation for the Engels base attack. Of course Russians don't bother targeting military targets.

13

Affectionate_Roof361 t1_j23gkwf wrote

This was a coordinated attack, was bound to happen with or without the attacks on Engels base, if anything that attack delayed /lower the number missiles which would be fired.

Seems like another attack happened as Russians started sending missiles from the Black Sea .

15

Laparakamara t1_j24rqp2 wrote

Ukraine should start doing thr same to moscow.

0

albeva t1_j262s6x wrote

As much as we'd all love to see Russia brought low there are several issues:

  • Direct attack on Russia (while fully deserved at this point) would not go down well internationally. Ukraine would no longer be merely defending their country.
  • What little anti-war sentiment and support for peaceful resolution there is within Russia would instantly evaporate.
  • Russia would very likely use this as justification to use Nuclear Weapons against Ukraine.
4

hiro0500 t1_j264xfi wrote

Ukraine looks more like afghanistan now, is all fxxk up. No one will win this war. Guess who's gonna rebuild this place.

−2

danebest t1_j255cil wrote

Slava Ukraini, WWIII has begun.

−6

Reasonable_Weight_14 t1_j246nup wrote

And the West remains distracted by the latest banality.

−11