The Ukraine is barely fighting anymore hence the non existent counter offensive. In reality Russia has already won and now nato are just sending weapons straight to Russia while decreasing their own standard of living. It’s based as shit.
Comments (25)
sorted by:
NATO seems to suck at war games these days. Unless they're trying to do something we haven't thought of yet.
NATO are rearming. The war has flobbed off a bunch of older gear. Tested a lot more gear, and got war production producing, manufacturing. Almost all Eastern Europe got rid of their old MiGs. Their former s300 batteries. Tanks. Replacing them for newer tech. Production and output has increased. These are big purchases and spending and upgrades. Missile defenses, tanks, artillery, jets, even ships, and subs.
Outside of donations. It in turn sells more globally outside of members.
The poster is somewhat naive. There is attrition and Ukraine are kind of shit at it. It's what, dragging this out, from a proxy it can drop at a hat, or win, or what not. In the meantime they're making billions. Food, Energy. Outside of weapons upgrading. The press coverage of this conflict is even more ridiculous. But as far as agenda goes there's bigger hoodwinks happening as EVs and renewables and tech push through.
Devil is in the details.
It would be perfectly valid theory about "rearming" and "modernisation" of NATO arms stockpiles if there was some evidence of appearing something really new on duty in NATO countries. But I can't find anything new at all. Only same old things that are differ from what is sold (no, it is not donated! it is sold for a money US transfer to Ukraine) to Ukriane only by manufacturer, and not by any properties important. Sometimes I even see something that makes thing worse in terms of mainteinance complexity and cost of ownership.
Where is TR3B planes, force shield AD, laser rifles and so on?
Replacing AK with M16 of MIG/SU with F and Eurofighter have nothing to do with modernisation in miltary power or advancy sense. It is all about just making money.
Do you think they'll press it. But it is occurring on huge levels, as war machines and production turns. Factories are manufacturing. More are getting involved. I don't know what you've been reading or where. Find it. Start with the MiGs donated, what did these upgrade to f35s? What about the old s300 systems? Now tanks and artillery. What about new ships and subs building? Etc.
Outside of the munitions, shells, and components. These are seeing places like South Korea, Japan manufacture etc.
Tell me about UK's latest package. Industrial scale, factory. Not simply stock. Where is Denmark buying the rockets from? What about Holland, buying the munition. Tell me about German manufacture. What about the new contracts for ships and subs? What about Israeli?
You're not reading much. Russia has similar demands and production, rockets, munitions, drones, components, from quite a few places, and it also has the Chinese producing more.
F35? Are you serious? It is a maintenace nightmare comparing to the MIGs.
There is something weird with all that.
Look, for the real battlefield you need a reliable and easy repairable devices that does not need a weeks of maintenance for a hour of work. What is the point of military equipment if it could show any results for only few first shots and then it is unuseable? It is very good for sale demonstrations and profits, but it is completely senseless for a real battle.
Look at Ukraine battlefield - none of Western weapons show any success at all. That old S300 and Grad MRLS do much more damage to the Russian forces than all western weaponry combined. So exchanging really working military equipment to the "modern" one have nothing to do with military power.
What is the problem for the West to start manufacturing S300 rockets for example, to empower NATO allies who have S300 legacy from Soviet Union times? Don't tell me that Western factories could not copy that old, but reliable things. If so, West is already fucked completely and there is no any sense in all that military pride parade at all.
152mm shells mistery is a good example too. All 155mm NATO howitzers do not survive fire rate needed for real battle at all. Heavy maintenance after 30 shots when you need 300 a day means that things just unuseable, regardless of their "modernity". Old USSR stuff sustain that without any problems. Ok, it is not easy to start manufacturing of some soviet howitzer copy from scratch. But what is the problem to adjust factory that manufacture 155mm shells to 152mm? Tuning fucking 3mm down is now a lost knowledge? What the fuck is going on?
This insane approach of making hugely overpriced overcomplicated and unreliable weapons infested the minds of Western MIC long ago.
There is definitely something else behind that new weapons race. And it have nothing to do about real battles at all.
You're chatting shit. That is uncalled for speculation outside of the point raised.
They upgraded their fighters and choppers in many Eastern European countries to newer western equivalents. Hence they donated older Soviet stocks. Older Soviet Anti Aircraft systems are upgrading. Tanks are upgrading. Artillery is upgrading. Some nations have larger orders of new ships and subs of various descriptions. As well as drones and other equipment rockets, shells, etc.
Meanwhile there are huge debates currently on Russian capabilities with the whatever nonsense about hypersonics being shot down. Tanks and other equipment. With Western missile defenses suggested to be beating hypersonics, tell me what happens to those sales. Tanks again were shown and suggested to have problems.
I am not getting into what you assume is better. Rather I am stating facts, bigger spending into the Nato front is occurring. As suggested it isn't donated, it's also upgrading new equipment. Meanwhile factories globally are manufacturing increasing arms and munitions. This has become for both sides, as this conflict continues.
HIMARS, what about other missiles, missile systems. Tanks. Drones. It stands to reason. Outside of capabilities. If I get rid of a warehouse, what do I fill it back up with? It doesn't sit there empty. It sooner opens a new factory. Sell more and replace stock. Read the news. Not simply the propaganda. Donated to the Ukrainian weapons charity's. Hahaha.
Upgrading with what? Some electronics shit that adds nothing to reliability if not worsen it? Catalysators to the tanks exhaust? Replacing glass optics with camera and LCD?
It's impossible with anything today. If you have something that maneuver at hypersonic speed, no existing system could do that. You need hypersonic missile more meneurable than hypersonic target and have at least same speed.
Seems nobody here get the main thing about Russian hypersonic missiles. Main thing is not that they are hypersonic. Main thing that they constantly maneuver approacing the target at hypersonic speed. That was the main breakthrough and main achievement, not their speed. Many ballistic missiles have hypersonic speed approacing the target. But they could be easily shot down because their trajectory is completely predictable. Just blow something with ton of nails on the trajectory, ant hypersonic ballistic missile is done. Same with 60s variants of hypersonic cruise missiles. They are fast, but can't maneuver at that speed.
Maneuverring at hypersonic speed is very complex problem. It was more complex than solving problems with maneuverabiliyt that appear with transition from subsonic to supersonic speed. Same thing with supersonic to hypersonic. Old tricks does not work at all. And this is the key feature of hypersonic missiles. They are unpredictable. You can't catch them with a trick that works with ballistic missiles, that are hypersonic too. You could blow something on its way, when it is dozens miles away, but it just will not pass that cloud of debris. And since it moves too fast and change course also too fast, no existing AD system can even reliably target and track them. Even S700 that is in development had no success in shooting maneurable hypersonic targets, AD missiles have to be much more maneurable than target at at least the similar speed and for hypersonic speeds it is a very complex problem.
You could shoot AD missiles randomly, in the hope it occasionally hit the target, but as a circus with Patriot in Kiev shown, that does not help at all. Yes, I know that Patrion is far from gold standard of AD, but things will not be any different with any other system including S*00s.
Laser systems have a chance, but there is no radars fast enough to make tracking of hypersonic possible to target laser beam on the hypersonic for noticeabe time to burn it through. And all that weather things like clouds, fog and rain with snow don't make things easier for laser weapons.
And that retarded Russian missiles use old style inertial targeting, so to jam their targeting system you have to invent something that changes gravity and inetrtial mass. TR3B anyone?
And still can't produce fucking dumb 152mm shells for only reliable howitzers that really work on battlefield.
I see that as something completely insane and as a giant flashing sign with "something is totally wrong!" text on it.
NATO could make as many 155mm shells as it want, but there no single 155mm howitzer that could survive long enough to utilise them. But at the same time each old soviet howitzers from 60s easily shoot 152mm shells in quantities more than all NATO howitzers cobined shoot during that war in total. And they, suddenly, don't need maintenance, they don't freeze in winter and overheat in summer, their optical sight don't need batteries and electronics replacement after the rain or ford. They just shoot, as howitzers should do.
There is something broken in the core of Western MIC. It can produce "advanced" weapons, overcomplicated, with bells and whistles, but completely unable to make reliable, working ones. They make Lamborginis and Bentleys instead of Toyota 4WD pickups with lifted suspension, completly ignoring all that mud and lack of roads.
Western car and agricultural machinery industry have similar problem. Even web development suffer from that bells and wistles problem, It is something very wrong in the very core of all Western industry. If presentability and modernity becomes much more important that reliability, repairability and simplicity, than it is regress, not progress.
That is the main goal - sell more. Nothing else matters. Don't you see a huge and fatal problem here?
And you didn't name anything that could be named modern western weapons that have some really useful features of the scale of maneuverability at hypersonic speeds. Force shields? Completely new propulsion system? Adamantium or neutron matter? Anything?
PS: And meanwhile, radiation levels in Khmelnitsky seems have new background level. https://redata.jrc.ec.europa.eu/chart/timeseries/daily/UA33429 Stays around 0.15 uSv/h since May 12 with same variations as earlier. Seems sensor is fine. So, only two possibilities left - some local uranium glass vase near sensor or something slightly radioactive was blown with warehouse.
No, it's trajectory, let's suggest a few launchers are covering an area, creating a field of fire, they are possibly being detonated like flashbangs, or countermeasures, prior to collision, the explosion causes the incoming missile to be brought down, and also firing off all the rockets to stop one. Literally what they did. Then they inserted fictious numbers of what they downed. Because they're begging for more rockets. They emptied out dozens of rockets depleting their supply, it takes how long to reload. Then they claimed they shot down loads with them. Honk.
Outside of this is the trajectory and tracking their signature. Now all the press is claiming the Russian scientists who made the hypersonics committed treason. It means they sold off key blueprints, causing competing systems to identify them. Now the trajectory is being calibrated by opposing anti-aircraft?
I am inclined to agree with radioactive something left larger atmosphere traces. I am not sure why the reading spiked prior to the explosions. How are encased shells radioactive? The debate was and is they leave traces on firing and impact. In a shell being handled and loaded, how, sounds real stupid. But exploded can possibly leave readings if that's what it was there?
Debate on artillery systems, Russia has been superior in this conflict. Look at map. But it doesn't mean much if it's just an artillery war.
Factories producing munitions and armaments are faster increasing their outputs globally for both sides.
My point was and is Nato have also been upgrading. There are much larger orders outside of the charity donations. Examples of unlimited or billions spent on rockets and ammo and drones. So what's building them? If they empty out stocks giving them to charity. They're replacing them with what. Same stock or upgrades?
I think you nailed it with upgrades. We know Ukraine was the playground, but nothing there is important to the people prowar. Upgrades for the next war that is definitely coming is it.
Although is it. Or is it simply forcing weapons through in order to contain it back to competing powers and red lines? As new industry and tech forces through?
War is easier you know your enemy.
This there's a piggy/proxy in the middle and we're being fed a bunch of bullshit narratives into paying more for it.
Yes it has far wider geopolitical implications as hotspots emerge, and prices soar. But unless hell breaks loose instead of entrenched lines of artillery fire and random blitzs.
This will continue to ride out on otherwise agenda.
What is the solution, wider war, or does it go back to a colder war? It just needed a tug of war to convince everybody else gullible enough?
Contain, how do you all that integration, trade, and competing arms, some are even going nuclear. I know have a tug of war. But does it go hot? Not yet in any case. It's profiting. While it reaps competitive agendas.
Who really knows. It stinks of bacon.
A real holocaust of the synagogue of satan.
Haha.
No look at it. The solution is what? Tell me how peace occurs? A Berlin wall with nukes either side? What about coastline? Odessa? Is there natural geography, dviding this terrority? Will massive fences, walls be put up, what?
Are we talking about objectifying back to red lines like the Cold War. That nation and terrority doesn't interact with competing territory because it is competition. It's cut off to extents and reasons, so are any other allied pariah affiliates?
Or does it go hot?
The narrative is beating Russia through a merry bunch of fantasists and propagandists. The shit they spew isn't factual, it fantasizes. What if Ukraine could win. Because they simply keep the conflict ongoing with further arms. While the only loser is the Ukraine. It won't beat Russia without it going hot, and a much wider conflict occurring. Seriously. It has lost its claims but it rejects peace because it thinks it can win them back. Literal irony, everything coming out if the Ukraine. Stupidity. Almost as assuming as Russia fully integrating the rest of the Ukraine into its territory.
So a tug of war occurs it has other agendas. Because in the meantime, however, there are much wider geopolitical agendas profiting, aligning, and being motioned. These drive new technology, change supplylines, redistribute trade, finances, sell arms, and cause shortages, etc.
Imagine organizing your two groups to put on a show.
In this case, the goal is consolidation. It appears that it is working exactly as planned and all parties involved are more than impressed with the job they have done.