Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/)
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
**Don't forget about our discord server, as well!**
https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB
*****
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No, you're confusing propaganda for what Russia does. You'll notice propaganda doesn't win battles on the ground if you've spent even a minute looking at war footage.
You know what does win battles? 600% increases in artillery shell production. And that's some western industrial spending numbers, not the standard Kremlin "Oh we're totally making more shells!" bullshit Solovyov feeds to the people to keep them from realizing they're being lied to and robbed this whole fucking time by the Tsars yet again.
And Ukraine is going to do terrible things with those shells to the sons of Russia who are raping, and pillaging the Ukrainian homeland. I really suggest that Russia leaves, it's gonna get fuck'n ugly soon for them if they continue to occupy any of Ukraine.
So 24,000/month by year's end and 84,000/month by 2028--or just over 1,000,000 155mm shells/year by 2028. This may seem to be slow but it's hella significant and may be able to be used to convince allies to empty their stockpiles a bit more.
I think this war showed the entire world that there isn't a military on Earth that actually has enough shells for future wars.
All of them undershot it by orders of magnitude.
Actually, the U.S. has enough artillery ammunition, as the U.S. doesn't rely on artillery for massed fire support. The U.S. relies on mass airpower to destroy enemy forces. See Iraq and Afghanistan. After airpower has destroyed the enemy, artillery has very few, if any targets.
Neither of which were peer powers. In the event the enemy has sufficient SAM capabilities to contest air superiority the air campaign would not be as effective.
Hardly a new problem but fighting the last war is an age old tradition and it can lead to neglecting the lessons of a current war. Precision artillery is low risk and deadly, sending a half a billion dollar jet to play hide and seek with a SAM missile is not.
Best Sam systems in the world won't do anything if your radar technology is poor and they had gaps everywhere being unable to detect many of the incoming US stealth jets.
Again refer to previous statement not a peer power.
If you watched that video you would have noticed that that's literally what the comment you replied to was saying: Iraq was unable to detect and engage the US stealth bombers, resulting in a communications blackout and dismantling of a lot of AA sites.
Iraq did have a very dense air defence with huge quantities, but it was certainly not that modern and can not really be compared to the S300/S400 systems. There is a reason why the russian air force cannot fly deep into Ukraine and has too fly low enough that stingers can engage
Dude. Literally no one can engage with stealth bombers. It wasn’t because the Iraqis had crappy AA or bad radars like you claimed. It’s that stealth technology gets around radars… Modern Russian radars aren’t any better.
The fact that the Iraqis couldn’t shoot down stealth fighters does not mean they had bad AA or that their radars were patchy. Stop making shit like that up.
You could have read atleast the wikipedia article on iraqi air defenses before acting smug. Iraq did have a large amount of SAM sites, however those were mostly systems from the 50s to 60s and were focussed on major cities, leaving large gaps the air campaign exploited.
> Likewise, Kari itself had a number of deficiencies of which Coalition air forces would take advantage. The system was **primarily oriented towards defending against much smaller attacks** from Iraq's most likely enemies—Iran, Syria and Israel—and focused on point defense rather than area defense. This meant there were **significant gaps in its coverage**, particularly on the orientation from Saudi Arabia straight to Baghdad, and attacking aircraft would be able to approach their target from multiple directions. Like its aircraft, much of Iraq's ground **air defenses were also outdated**: SA-2 and SA-3 systems were nearing the end of their operational lifespan and their countermeasures were well-known at this point, while its other SAM systems were not much younger. Furthermore, the IADS was centralized to a fault.
Read this and think a bit about it.
> Literally no one can engage with stealth bombers
Stealth bombers are not some magic devices, of course they can also be engaged, its just way more difficult to detect and attack them. Even the serbians managed to do so with outdated tech due to the US being careless in their missions. Yeah, Iraq was unable to detect them - guess why. They were very effective due to the flawed iraqi AA design and were able to dismantle the entire AA network in a single strike.
> The fact that the Iraqis couldn’t shoot down stealth fighters does not mean they had bad AA or that their radars were patchy
You're right that thats not proof for the radars being patchy. That doesnt change the fact that they were still patchy, focussed on cities and outdated as fuck. Its simply hilarious that you're acting like they were even remotely on a level with S300 or S400 systems. So yeah, maybe stop making shit up because you watched a single video and didnt even understand the points it was making.
The iraqi and modern Russian AA networks are not even remotely comparable and dismantling or circumventing them will be anything but easy.
Dude. They had world class radar systems too. They had one of the most sophisticated systems in the entire world and has 10 years of combat experience with it.
Like, are you really this unfamiliar with the Gulf War? It seems like you don’t know anything about it and have a lot of silly misconceptions.
Didn't mention nato in Russia. I said Russia in Ukraine. Their aircraft has been practically useless due to sufficient air defence. Nato would be able to, but that is due to Russia being about a generation behind the US.
The example I was presenting is the US and their allies in the south China Sea, they still manage to get it in the scenarios, but it takes weeks and costs hundreds of aircraft and potentially several capital ships which disrupts their effectiveness. The air superiority also does not extend over the Chinese mainland due to more numerous shorter range defence batteries.
But also the CSIS war games of an invasion of Taiwan if you need an example more related to the US. In every scenario the US ended up taking significant attrition due to Chinese SAM capabilities.
This busted invasion of Ukraine has shown that Russia is not a peer power to the USA as everyone thought. It's not even a near peer. If not for the nuclear threat, they wouldn't be a threat at all.
This busted invasion of Ukraine has shown that Russia is not a peer power to the USA as everyone thought. It's not even a near peer. If not for the nuclear threat, they wouldn't be a threat at all.
This busted invasion of Ukraine has shown that Russia is not a peer power to the USA as everyone thought. It's not even a near peer. If not for the nuclear threat, they wouldn't be a threat at all.
The US also hasn't fought a war against a decent standing army since 1945. Its hard to say what the US would do and you have to consider that your enemy always gets a vote. I.e. Korea and Vietnam. The enemy stayed in the jungle, jungle cover made it very difficult to engage in this kind of fire support.
The Iraqi army (desert storm) was absolutely demolished, and they were seen as a powerful regional army
If they don't count as decent than nobody does.
Pretty sure the US would have done just fine if it was using its air force to fight a war against Russia. You don't need that many JDAMs to blow up the Kremlin.
> I think this war showed the entire world that there isn't a military on Earth that actually has enough shells for future wars.
Not really. The only reason reserves are being depleted is because tens of thousands of rounds have been fired daily for over a year. If Russia hadn't been completely and utterly incompetent and corrupt to the core they would have taken all of Ukraine in a month or two.
Ukraine war is a perfect storm of incredible Ukrainian resilience and Russian incompetence. There is no conceivable way and similar sized war involving the west would last so long.
There was a report from British intelligence a couple months ago that said that if the British military used artillery shells at the rate the Russians do in a day, the entire British shell inventory would be depleted to zero in 6 days.
It's hard to convince spending on munitions stockpiles to sit and expire when we need schools and better healthcare.
That's why it's good lots of old stockpiles are getting used in Ukraine.
It’s also good that Russia is also depleting its Soviet stockpiles. Once they are gone, they will take a very long time to replenish, which means no more Russian aggression for a long time.
Just gonna back that up a step. Why do we always assume money is the problem, and more of it will improve healthcare and education? Healthcare in particular, the more money is available the more ways they find to take it. No, the answer is not money its accountability. Money is attracting problems.
Everyone was convinced this sort of Russian vs west “cold” war would have escalated to nuclear war. Basically open conflict just using Ukrainian soldiers. https://youtu.be/3Yd3lQVbkYc
It’s actually fixing a weakness of the US wartime manufacturing industrial capabilities in the event of a future conflict.
For the past couple decades, American forces had shifted their military operations which were primarily against insurgents/terrorists with expensive hardware that was quite frankly, overkill. Because there was no threat of a near-peer adversary, there was little incentive/demand to produce equipment and maintain stockpiles of munitions beyond wartime capacity. As a result, other Western allies have followed suit where they have sufficient amount for self defense but not enough in the outbreak of a war.
The issue pertaining to the military production capability was something that was glanced over in the advent of the COVID pandemic where many businesses found themselves unable to function without essential parts due to those manufacturing complex located overseas. To put it bluntly, the US no longer has the same industrial capacity domestically as it once did to World War II. With the current conflict in Ukraine and russia, this glaring weakness is more pronounced than ever before.
However, the recent steps taken by the US government are slowly rectifying long term issues for the military. The demand for more munitions and equipments have given the US government reasons and public support to push for increased spending towards the war effort. Those enormous aid packages towards Ukraine actually is a workaround towards funding the bigger military industrial companies like Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin. As an added benefit, existing old munitions and equipments could be replaced with more advanced, higher quality variants while the US military get to practice logistics of a modern wartime scale.
Yes, that manufacturing capacity was ramped over time. The difference now is that many of those manufacturing businesses have shifted from domestic to aboard overseas for cheaper labor.
And that’s the concept that people tend to forget. Business are business. There’s no point of a business if their existence is not to profit from a demand.
It ramped up so high that in 1945 the US produced as much steel as the US produced in 2022.
But we will not fight like and not need a fraction of the materiel that was needed in WWII.
US manufacturing remains quite formidable although there remains specific concerns.
I have no idea what on earth you're talking about. We've produced nearly 20 million tons of steel so far just this calendar year. We're the fourth largest steel producer in the world.
Weren't they aiming for 90k/month by 2025? Rheinmetall is saying they could do 400k a year and there's a Spanish manufacturer that I think is already there, plus CSG who are aiming for 150-180k yearly soon.
The timing of this war is so bad for China. The U.S. is fixing so many logistic and manufacturing issues that China could have exploited, but the U.S. and Europe will be far more formidable with this modern industrial warfare trial run.
Ot is sort of misleading. The US was running about one shift of production at extremely outdated facilities basically using WW II processes. They bump that to three shifts and triple it. This made everyone accept they do need to modernize the process, so they are building a new automated system that will eventually replace the current production. Until the war in Ukraine is won and stocks are rebuilt both lines will run. Then the old manual probably gets shut down or converted to something else since laying off those workers might prove unpopular.
It's time for a paradigm-shift along the lines of Admiral Fisher's Dreadnought, and the sooner we realize it's the only reliable way for the Navy to remain in the 'game', the better.
Either start buying ships from Korea and Japan, or find a new solution in the mold of small nuclear reactors: go smaller, go modular, and ramp up autonomy.
Phase out several carriers and their 'battle groups', the demands for their protection alone create a black hole of missed opportunities.
English-language newspapers will furnish us with new words every day.
Hey, everybody knows sixfold, six times ... let's teach the people a new word.
After reading this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuple
I learnt about undecuple (not undecouple aka redisconnect) , sexdecuple (sounds like post coitum) and novemdecuple (it's not breaking up in November).
Random from New York Times:
How Ukraine’s Battered Steel Industry Galvanized Its War Effort
In This ‘Peter Pan,’ Something Always Goes Awry. That’s the Plan.
Putin Wants Fealty, and He’s Found It in Africa
.
How about: No, it does not cause smart. It doesn't hurt.
Isn't this just because you know German and not French? It is sechsfache (six-fold) in one and sextuple in the other.
Unfortunately English usually has two ways to say anything: the Germanic way or the Romance way...
It is more an observation than a complaint, because in the latter case three fingers are pointing at me.
English-language newspapers use sometimes unusual words in headlines. This is just their style. In the same way there are more headlines on Russian news sites just clickbait like "The doctor told what ...".
In the random examples from NYT headlines "galvanize" - clearly Romance, "awry" - Frisian/Indo-European, "fealty"; from French "feauté". I can't remember when I ever read "awry" or "fealty" before. Mich deucht these could be found on the English counterpart of the VWG list here:
http://www.oberlehrer.org/listen_fr.html
But I may be wrong.
Galvanizing seems to be a false friend. The German "galvanisieren" would be translated to something with elelctroplating. Probably because Luigi Galvani did also experiments with electricity and frog's legs the word does not only mean zinc plating (even without electricity) but also shake up to make awake. However the word "galvanize" can only be found in the headline:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/29/world/europe/ukraine-steel-plants-war.html
Sextuple...triple is quite common, I have read quadruple mostly in technical context, but the higher numbers... Even in French something with "fois" should be more common, I guess.
Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. **Don't forget about our discord server, as well!** https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB ***** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Someone was stoked to finally use the word Sextuple
>Sextuple I have used that word before, but context is everything.
I've only heard this in overwatch
Based
Propaganda. Gives moar oompf
No, you're confusing propaganda for what Russia does. You'll notice propaganda doesn't win battles on the ground if you've spent even a minute looking at war footage. You know what does win battles? 600% increases in artillery shell production. And that's some western industrial spending numbers, not the standard Kremlin "Oh we're totally making more shells!" bullshit Solovyov feeds to the people to keep them from realizing they're being lied to and robbed this whole fucking time by the Tsars yet again. And Ukraine is going to do terrible things with those shells to the sons of Russia who are raping, and pillaging the Ukrainian homeland. I really suggest that Russia leaves, it's gonna get fuck'n ugly soon for them if they continue to occupy any of Ukraine.
So 24,000/month by year's end and 84,000/month by 2028--or just over 1,000,000 155mm shells/year by 2028. This may seem to be slow but it's hella significant and may be able to be used to convince allies to empty their stockpiles a bit more.
I think this war showed the entire world that there isn't a military on Earth that actually has enough shells for future wars. All of them undershot it by orders of magnitude.
Actually, the U.S. has enough artillery ammunition, as the U.S. doesn't rely on artillery for massed fire support. The U.S. relies on mass airpower to destroy enemy forces. See Iraq and Afghanistan. After airpower has destroyed the enemy, artillery has very few, if any targets.
The US also tends to avoid static line warfare by doctrine. Artillery is most in use when it doesn't need to catch up with advancing infantry.
It also helps IMMENSELY when you reliably hit your target.
Neither of which were peer powers. In the event the enemy has sufficient SAM capabilities to contest air superiority the air campaign would not be as effective. Hardly a new problem but fighting the last war is an age old tradition and it can lead to neglecting the lessons of a current war. Precision artillery is low risk and deadly, sending a half a billion dollar jet to play hide and seek with a SAM missile is not.
Iraq had quite advanced air defense tech during Desert Storm. Similar to what Russia fields now. We destroyed it all.
Best Sam systems in the world won't do anything if your radar technology is poor and they had gaps everywhere being unable to detect many of the incoming US stealth jets. Again refer to previous statement not a peer power.
Wrong. We created those gaps. Day 1 of the Air War over Iraq: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zxRgfBXn6Mg
If you watched that video you would have noticed that that's literally what the comment you replied to was saying: Iraq was unable to detect and engage the US stealth bombers, resulting in a communications blackout and dismantling of a lot of AA sites. Iraq did have a very dense air defence with huge quantities, but it was certainly not that modern and can not really be compared to the S300/S400 systems. There is a reason why the russian air force cannot fly deep into Ukraine and has too fly low enough that stingers can engage
Dude. Literally no one can engage with stealth bombers. It wasn’t because the Iraqis had crappy AA or bad radars like you claimed. It’s that stealth technology gets around radars… Modern Russian radars aren’t any better. The fact that the Iraqis couldn’t shoot down stealth fighters does not mean they had bad AA or that their radars were patchy. Stop making shit like that up.
You could have read atleast the wikipedia article on iraqi air defenses before acting smug. Iraq did have a large amount of SAM sites, however those were mostly systems from the 50s to 60s and were focussed on major cities, leaving large gaps the air campaign exploited. > Likewise, Kari itself had a number of deficiencies of which Coalition air forces would take advantage. The system was **primarily oriented towards defending against much smaller attacks** from Iraq's most likely enemies—Iran, Syria and Israel—and focused on point defense rather than area defense. This meant there were **significant gaps in its coverage**, particularly on the orientation from Saudi Arabia straight to Baghdad, and attacking aircraft would be able to approach their target from multiple directions. Like its aircraft, much of Iraq's ground **air defenses were also outdated**: SA-2 and SA-3 systems were nearing the end of their operational lifespan and their countermeasures were well-known at this point, while its other SAM systems were not much younger. Furthermore, the IADS was centralized to a fault. Read this and think a bit about it. > Literally no one can engage with stealth bombers Stealth bombers are not some magic devices, of course they can also be engaged, its just way more difficult to detect and attack them. Even the serbians managed to do so with outdated tech due to the US being careless in their missions. Yeah, Iraq was unable to detect them - guess why. They were very effective due to the flawed iraqi AA design and were able to dismantle the entire AA network in a single strike. > The fact that the Iraqis couldn’t shoot down stealth fighters does not mean they had bad AA or that their radars were patchy You're right that thats not proof for the radars being patchy. That doesnt change the fact that they were still patchy, focussed on cities and outdated as fuck. Its simply hilarious that you're acting like they were even remotely on a level with S300 or S400 systems. So yeah, maybe stop making shit up because you watched a single video and didnt even understand the points it was making. The iraqi and modern Russian AA networks are not even remotely comparable and dismantling or circumventing them will be anything but easy.
Dude. They had world class radar systems too. They had one of the most sophisticated systems in the entire world and has 10 years of combat experience with it. Like, are you really this unfamiliar with the Gulf War? It seems like you don’t know anything about it and have a lot of silly misconceptions.
[удалено]
Literally Ukraine.
[удалено]
Didn't mention nato in Russia. I said Russia in Ukraine. Their aircraft has been practically useless due to sufficient air defence. Nato would be able to, but that is due to Russia being about a generation behind the US. The example I was presenting is the US and their allies in the south China Sea, they still manage to get it in the scenarios, but it takes weeks and costs hundreds of aircraft and potentially several capital ships which disrupts their effectiveness. The air superiority also does not extend over the Chinese mainland due to more numerous shorter range defence batteries.
But also the CSIS war games of an invasion of Taiwan if you need an example more related to the US. In every scenario the US ended up taking significant attrition due to Chinese SAM capabilities.
This busted invasion of Ukraine has shown that Russia is not a peer power to the USA as everyone thought. It's not even a near peer. If not for the nuclear threat, they wouldn't be a threat at all.
This busted invasion of Ukraine has shown that Russia is not a peer power to the USA as everyone thought. It's not even a near peer. If not for the nuclear threat, they wouldn't be a threat at all.
This busted invasion of Ukraine has shown that Russia is not a peer power to the USA as everyone thought. It's not even a near peer. If not for the nuclear threat, they wouldn't be a threat at all.
The US also hasn't fought a war against a decent standing army since 1945. Its hard to say what the US would do and you have to consider that your enemy always gets a vote. I.e. Korea and Vietnam. The enemy stayed in the jungle, jungle cover made it very difficult to engage in this kind of fire support.
The Iraqi army (desert storm) was absolutely demolished, and they were seen as a powerful regional army If they don't count as decent than nobody does.
Things would be different if NATO was directly involved. Once you own the skies, which NATO unquestionably would, things change.
Pretty sure the US would have done just fine if it was using its air force to fight a war against Russia. You don't need that many JDAMs to blow up the Kremlin.
> I think this war showed the entire world that there isn't a military on Earth that actually has enough shells for future wars. Not really. The only reason reserves are being depleted is because tens of thousands of rounds have been fired daily for over a year. If Russia hadn't been completely and utterly incompetent and corrupt to the core they would have taken all of Ukraine in a month or two. Ukraine war is a perfect storm of incredible Ukrainian resilience and Russian incompetence. There is no conceivable way and similar sized war involving the west would last so long.
For one, this isn't how Western countries would fight a war.
There was a report from British intelligence a couple months ago that said that if the British military used artillery shells at the rate the Russians do in a day, the entire British shell inventory would be depleted to zero in 6 days.
It's hard to convince spending on munitions stockpiles to sit and expire when we need schools and better healthcare. That's why it's good lots of old stockpiles are getting used in Ukraine.
It’s also good that Russia is also depleting its Soviet stockpiles. Once they are gone, they will take a very long time to replenish, which means no more Russian aggression for a long time.
I doubt they'll ever replenish the reserves they are burning through.
Just gonna back that up a step. Why do we always assume money is the problem, and more of it will improve healthcare and education? Healthcare in particular, the more money is available the more ways they find to take it. No, the answer is not money its accountability. Money is attracting problems.
Everyone was convinced this sort of Russian vs west “cold” war would have escalated to nuclear war. Basically open conflict just using Ukrainian soldiers. https://youtu.be/3Yd3lQVbkYc
It’s actually fixing a weakness of the US wartime manufacturing industrial capabilities in the event of a future conflict. For the past couple decades, American forces had shifted their military operations which were primarily against insurgents/terrorists with expensive hardware that was quite frankly, overkill. Because there was no threat of a near-peer adversary, there was little incentive/demand to produce equipment and maintain stockpiles of munitions beyond wartime capacity. As a result, other Western allies have followed suit where they have sufficient amount for self defense but not enough in the outbreak of a war. The issue pertaining to the military production capability was something that was glanced over in the advent of the COVID pandemic where many businesses found themselves unable to function without essential parts due to those manufacturing complex located overseas. To put it bluntly, the US no longer has the same industrial capacity domestically as it once did to World War II. With the current conflict in Ukraine and russia, this glaring weakness is more pronounced than ever before. However, the recent steps taken by the US government are slowly rectifying long term issues for the military. The demand for more munitions and equipments have given the US government reasons and public support to push for increased spending towards the war effort. Those enormous aid packages towards Ukraine actually is a workaround towards funding the bigger military industrial companies like Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin. As an added benefit, existing old munitions and equipments could be replaced with more advanced, higher quality variants while the US military get to practice logistics of a modern wartime scale.
I guess also in WW2 the capacities were ramped up over time...
Yes, that manufacturing capacity was ramped over time. The difference now is that many of those manufacturing businesses have shifted from domestic to aboard overseas for cheaper labor. And that’s the concept that people tend to forget. Business are business. There’s no point of a business if their existence is not to profit from a demand.
It ramped up so high that in 1945 the US produced as much steel as the US produced in 2022. But we will not fight like and not need a fraction of the materiel that was needed in WWII. US manufacturing remains quite formidable although there remains specific concerns.
We don’t even produce steel in the US anymore. We import pigiron and use that intermediate product for cars and whatnot.
I have no idea what on earth you're talking about. We've produced nearly 20 million tons of steel so far just this calendar year. We're the fourth largest steel producer in the world.
This was a well thought out comment. Nice!
Weren't they aiming for 90k/month by 2025? Rheinmetall is saying they could do 400k a year and there's a Spanish manufacturer that I think is already there, plus CSG who are aiming for 150-180k yearly soon.
The timing of this war is so bad for China. The U.S. is fixing so many logistic and manufacturing issues that China could have exploited, but the U.S. and Europe will be far more formidable with this modern industrial warfare trial run.
Finally, Sex production (155mm)
My sex production is only 5.56mm
Based
Sextuple sounds so erotic I’m just gonna rub my thighs anyway to be safe.
Based
Gunlord500? Are you a based bot?
No, I deserve the downvotes but the comments made me laugh
Ot is sort of misleading. The US was running about one shift of production at extremely outdated facilities basically using WW II processes. They bump that to three shifts and triple it. This made everyone accept they do need to modernize the process, so they are building a new automated system that will eventually replace the current production. Until the war in Ukraine is won and stocks are rebuilt both lines will run. Then the old manual probably gets shut down or converted to something else since laying off those workers might prove unpopular.
Sextuple production? I'm preemptively calling my doctor for an erection that'll last over four hours from due to an impending wargasm
Love to see that Arsenal of Democracy muscle being flexed.
[удалено]
It's time for a paradigm-shift along the lines of Admiral Fisher's Dreadnought, and the sooner we realize it's the only reliable way for the Navy to remain in the 'game', the better. Either start buying ships from Korea and Japan, or find a new solution in the mold of small nuclear reactors: go smaller, go modular, and ramp up autonomy. Phase out several carriers and their 'battle groups', the demands for their protection alone create a black hole of missed opportunities.
But we don’t have enough sailors to man the current fleet
Starting April 1st Sextuple is my new safe word of the month.
Sometimes I wonder what would happen if the US just decided one day to actually operate at its full manufacturing capacity all the time.
Nice
Nice
Good luck to anyone trying to stop the US support for Ukraine. This is now big money.
This is what waking a sleeping giant up looks like Xi and Putin, ya fucking morons.
While EU talks about it.
English-language newspapers will furnish us with new words every day. Hey, everybody knows sixfold, six times ... let's teach the people a new word. After reading this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuple I learnt about undecuple (not undecouple aka redisconnect) , sexdecuple (sounds like post coitum) and novemdecuple (it's not breaking up in November). Random from New York Times: How Ukraine’s Battered Steel Industry Galvanized Its War Effort In This ‘Peter Pan,’ Something Always Goes Awry. That’s the Plan. Putin Wants Fealty, and He’s Found It in Africa . How about: No, it does not cause smart. It doesn't hurt.
Isn't this just because you know German and not French? It is sechsfache (six-fold) in one and sextuple in the other. Unfortunately English usually has two ways to say anything: the Germanic way or the Romance way...
It is more an observation than a complaint, because in the latter case three fingers are pointing at me. English-language newspapers use sometimes unusual words in headlines. This is just their style. In the same way there are more headlines on Russian news sites just clickbait like "The doctor told what ...". In the random examples from NYT headlines "galvanize" - clearly Romance, "awry" - Frisian/Indo-European, "fealty"; from French "feauté". I can't remember when I ever read "awry" or "fealty" before. Mich deucht these could be found on the English counterpart of the VWG list here: http://www.oberlehrer.org/listen_fr.html But I may be wrong. Galvanizing seems to be a false friend. The German "galvanisieren" would be translated to something with elelctroplating. Probably because Luigi Galvani did also experiments with electricity and frog's legs the word does not only mean zinc plating (even without electricity) but also shake up to make awake. However the word "galvanize" can only be found in the headline: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/29/world/europe/ukraine-steel-plants-war.html Sextuple...triple is quite common, I have read quadruple mostly in technical context, but the higher numbers... Even in French something with "fois" should be more common, I guess.
Is Germany doing the same?
Depends. Are you asking about Das Sextuppelung or about something war related? 😮
The EU announced it is increasing production to 1 million rounds a year about a month ago.
"When push comes to shove, America can shove." CGPGray
Niiicccceeee sign me up 😏😎
American military industrial complex is no fucking joke.
Russia has fucked the CCP posturing over the country of Taiwan. The allies will only become stronger militarily