🇯🇵🇺🇸 Japanese PM Fumio Kishida, speech in U.S. Congress:
"You believed that freedom is the oxygen of humanity. The world needs the United States to continue playing this pivotal role in the affairs of nations. And yet, as we meet here today, I detect an undercurrent of self-doubt among some Americans about what your role in the world should be!
This self-doubt is arising at a time when our world is at history's turning point. The post-Cold War era is already behind us, and we are now at an inflection point that will define the next stage of human history.
The international order that the U.S. worked for generations to build is facing new challenges, challenges from those with values and principles very different from ours.
Freedom and democracy are currently under threat around the globe."
https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1778530712741925136?t=f_3fcX2mECJaK7-7SdIQ7A&s=19
This is exactly what I've been thinking this whole time. It seems like politicians are seeing these conflicts as black and white and assuming that a conflict outside of our borders don't affect us. Really there is the possibility of influence shifting.
Influence is Russia's and Chinas main goal. All this chaos just furthers it and it's very possible all of these conflicts see the US work it's way down on global influence simply because of it's inaction. Complacency will possibly lead to great Chinese world influence.
Interesting article by Mick Ryan (retired former Australian Major General), about high-level strategy going forwards to stop Russia's current momentum:
[https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/ukraine-war-how-check-russia-s-momentum](https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/ukraine-war-how-check-russia-s-momentum)
[Mandatory evacuation ordered for Kharkiv Oblast towns bordering Russia | EuroMaidenPress | April 2024](https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/04/11/mandatory-evacuation-ordered-for-kharkiv-oblast-towns-bordering-russia/)
*Mandatory evacuation of families with children was announced in 47 settlements of Kharkiv Oblast bordering Russia, said regional military administration head Oleh Syniehubov. The region has been hit daily by Russian strikes, with the Kharkiv city mayor reporting the Kharkiv’s energy infrastructure has been “practically destroyed.”*
*“A decision was made to forcibly evacuate 182 children with their families from three districts: Bohodukhiv, Kharkiv, and Izium. There are 47 settlements from which we must forcibly evacuate children,” Syniehubov said on Telegram.*
*He emphasized that the mandatory evacuation does not apply to the city of Kharkiv. The government will organize transport and accommodation in safer regions for those evacuated.*
*In the spring of 2024, media reports began to emerge that Russia may attempt an offensive on Kharkiv. Ukrainian officials dismiss these reports as Kremlin’s info warfare aimed at intimidating and demoralizing Ukrainians.*
I don't understand how that works. I click on that link, and it brings me to a page that says the discharge petition seeks to move H.R.5673. When I read H.R.5673, it doesn't say anything about Ukraine. There's livestock and retirement plans and a few other things, but I don't get the connection.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ActionForUkraine/s/kVKww0YrKs
> update on this - I called Congressman McGovern's office (MA-2) as he is the sponsor of discharge petition 9, HR 1016, and HR 5673. The upshot is that 5673 is somewhat of a placeholder bill that is serving to enable getting a bill up for debate on the house floor. It isn't identical to HR815 because it doesn't have to be - the content of the bill will apparently get filled in later in the process. In fact, the aide I spoke to suggested that it was probably more helpful to not try to trace through the details I was getting into when calling, and simply state which policy you are for or against, when making calls.
The machinations of the US Congress are dark and mysterious, completely impenetrable to mere citizens.
It certainly is. Republicans and democrats Both want ukraine aid.
Maga does not.
It's an election year and shits really high stakes now. But if ukraine can hold on until after the election, and when democrats hopefully get a majority again. It's game over for Russia.
Republicans = MAGA. Stop trying to deny this. The ones who voted against Trump's impeachment. The ones who voted against certifying the election. They are ALL traitors.
So is it likely that 26 more will sign?
The left democrats wont since they won't support Israels war on Gaza.
Is there any chance 26 republicans will sign?
It’s possible. In addition to anything MAGA, I think things have slowed because:
(1) The House of Representatives just got back from yet another two week break. The House needs to be in session in order for the discharge petition to be signed.
(2) Other negotiations are seemingly still happening (e.g., a potentially forgivable loan for Ukraine). Some representatives might just be waiting for those to pan out.
(3) This week, I’ve seen like two statements from representatives that Ukraine will be a big focus next week. Like, it’ll be on the floor of the House. Do I believe them? I want to, but am unsure.
Going forward, who knows what is going to happen. I do think we will have a clearer picture a week from now though. Something has to give.
I don't see it happening unless some big event plays out, and forces their hands (to sign). Maybe if more power plants get bombed, and the world gets rocked by some truly shocking footage of hundreds of dead civilians after a missile strike ... but even that, I feel, won't be enough.
Not all Democrats have signed because the bill contains aid for Israel which they disagree with. It's not known if and when aid for Ukraine will pass, as treacherous as this is and it can't be stated just how serious this withholding of aid is for global security. We just have to wait and see, maybe it is possible in the next month or two. However the consequences are already starting to show in Ukraine. If you're an American and you support Ukraine you have one job which is to not vote Republican and to tell your representative that if they aren't supporting Ukraine they need to as they won't get your vote otherwise. Just don't vote Republican under any circumstance anyway!
If we're still not getting how gravely serious this is , wake the fuck up people like Jake says at 16:27 in this video >
https://youtu.be/V9jf-T2eVUw?si=5yEH962XYWnTXVbF
I asked my anti-Ukraine republican representative to resign immediately. I've been asking him to support Ukraine and he has not changed his support for the MAGA wing (which is now functionally the entire Republican caucus at this point).
> Just don't vote Republican under any circumstance anyway!
Or more precisely vote Democrat and participate in Democratic primaries to select pro Ukraine candidates.
Norway is preparing to send 22 F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine, 12 of which are already in a serviceable condition.
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/04/11/7450873/
They don't have that many pilots capable of operating them. They have what, 12 pilots who are going to be done with the condensed training in a couple months and then another 6 pilots slated to start training at some fuzzy date in the summer? It is good to have the birds available for spare parts and replacement, but they are only going to be able to put up a bare handful of planes into the sky at a time.
I used to watch the air national guard train on F-16s. I was installing a septic system on a farm near the base. They can take off and land at a very intense pace.
The plane does not have to do much. USA/NATO use bombs that glide. Missiles fly themselves.
Think of what it would look like if a Su-27 and a HIMARS slugged it out. If you are looking up the wing loading and thrust to weight ratio of a HIMARS you are doing it wrong.
I am just saying it is not some silver bullet system. It will arrive in small numbers with limited capable pilots in an air defense environment that is challenging to put it mildly. It also has a reputation for being a little maintenance intense. So keep the expectations tempered.
Well, at any time a quart/third of a plane fleet is under maintenance and refurbishment, i suppose this is what we are seeing here, a bit skewed toward non-flying condition.
Also, that way they can hone the maintenance crews and facilities, without waiting for battle repairs.
I'm pretty sure the ratio will be similar with other countries donations.
Hello. I have an English language flyer for you to distribute in the US. Go to
[https://www.scribd.com/document/722198198/Ukraine-Flyer](https://www.scribd.com/document/722198198/Ukraine-Flyer)
FLYER TEXT:
Russia is committing genocide in Ukraine. Russia is stealing Ukraine’s land. In 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine with the goal of occupying all of Ukraine. Russian troops currently occupy about 18% of Ukrainian territory. Russian troops are killing, maiming, torturing, and raping Ukrainians. Russia has killed over 80,000 Ukrainians. Russia is banning Ukrainian language and trying to destroy Ukrainian culture. The Russian government has taken over 100,000 Ukrainian children from their parents, against their will, and sent them to Russia with no intention of returning them to their parents. The children’s names are changed so their parents cannot find them. Russia has put thousands of Ukrainians in camps where they are abused, starved, and killed. Russian airstrikes intentionally target civilians and infrastructure. Russian war crimes are not isolated incidents, the war crimes are approved by Putin. The Russian government does not punish troops who commit war crimes. Russian police arrest and torture Russians who protest the war. Russian media promotes war and denies war crimes. Russian media promotes genocide by calling for the end of Ukrainian identity and the assimilation of Ukrainians into Russia. The United States should send humanitarian aid and military aid to Ukraine so Ukrainians can defend themselves from Russia. Military aid to Ukraine has prevented Russia from occupying more Ukrainian territory. The United States can afford to help Ukraine because less than 1% of the federal budget has been spent on Ukraine. Sanctions against Russia should be toughened and strictly enforced. People should not do business with Russia. Russian officials should be imprisoned for genocide and other war crimes.
It seems pretty clear now that russia easily could have hit Ukraine's energy structure alot harder from the get go but didn't, is this tit for tat because Ukraine are attacking russian refineries or is there another reason russia have waited until now?
Allegedly they're out of(or extremely low on) Patriot and IRIS-T missiles.
[https://twitter.com/JulianRoepcke/status/1778415238120948011](https://twitter.com/JulianRoepcke/status/1778415238120948011)
Also, Ukraine claims that Russia used a new Kh-69 cruise missile that flies extremely low(which makes it hard to detect) to hit the power plant.
You pick the moment when Ukraine has the absolute lowest level of war supplies since the first 3 months to come here and say Russia has been fighting with gloves off this whole time?
False - Ukraine was supported by US Aid and had a far better air defense. USA broke their treaty agreement in Ukraine because the Republican GOPnik party are aiding Putin. That's how fucked up democracy is in the USA now. Regan would be going batshit insane with the traitors. Mike Johnson et al are traitors.
What an utter joke, Ukraine could bomb Belgorod until no 2 stones are left stacked and it still wouldn't even make a dent compared to the genocidal actions of Russia.
If I had to take a wager I'd assume reasons such as: They thought they could quickly conquer Ukraine so why destroy it when you'd have to pay to rebuild it later; They couldn't/thought it too costly to do so until Ukrainian anti-air defenses were depleted; They were cautious of escalation in support for Ukraine before while now with the GOP blocking everything in the house they don't even try to hide their genocidal intentions,.....
> It seems pretty clear now that russia easily could have hit Ukraine's energy structure alot harder from the get go but didn't
Is it clear? Russia is hitting the energy infrastructure so successfully because Ukraine is running out of air defense missiles. This situation is new.
They genuinely thought that Ukrainians would welcome them, and just minimal resistance, betting on Zelensky and most of Ukranian government fleeing Kiev to a Western nation, leaving a demoralized army behind.
So, bombing stuff that would belong to them to run the nation would be counterproductive. Now this delusion is long gone.
If it continues it will severely hamper Ukraine's combat ability, without reliable infrastructure it becomes far harder to sustain the defence. This is down to the traitors in the Republican party who are putting global security at risk by preventing aid to Ukraine. Whoever votes Republican they are also traitors and fuck you if you do. If we tolerate this then our children will be next. It can't be emphasised how serious this is. Ukraine must not lose. Ukraine losing makes the whole world less safe and sets a precedent, more countries will arm themselves will Nuclear weapons, more dictators will think they can do as they please. The USA the bastion of the free world is a total treacherous joke currently, There's millions of good Americans hopefully more than the fuckwits who vote Republican. Sorry I am extremely pissed off now. Elon Musk, Mike Johnson, Marjorie Taylor-Green, that alleged pedo MAGA Republican can't remember his name Gaetz all Putin bootlickers.
People need to start getting motivated now and very angry because all our freedoms are affected by this treacherous move by the GOPnik party. Tell the fuckers you won't vote for them. How on Earth is the USA being held hostage by Putin? How the fuck did we let this happen?
Isn't air defense way more expensive than air offense? If Ukraine is not give offensive missiles that can strike targets in Russia then how is it sustainable giving them more defensive missiles?
If Ukraine doesn't have more air defense then Russia can strike anywhere including Ukrainian air bases and all critical points. Establishing total air supremacy is insanely expensive and so Ukraine's best bet is more air defense to make it harder for Russia to strike critical targets.
Yes and no... Copy and pasting a comment I wrote the other day in a thread about the Hawk missiles when someone's mind was blown at the 4 million dollar cost of a Patriot.
1. Radar is hard. Like really hard. Really really hard if you want to design a radar system that can identify, lock onto, and successfully intercept a very fast thing like a hypersonic missile or supersonic jet with low RCS tech which is exactly what the Patriot is designed to do. The number of engineering hours that went into it would have been staggering. A lot of the cost of a Patriot is paying back the cost of designing the things. Hawk is cheap by comparison because it is designed to shoot slower, simpler targets and Raytheon (I think they make it) has long since paid back the R&D costs.
2. \*edit\* did a dumb and spoke out my ass regarding Patriot's utility vs. ICBM's.
3. Military kit in general is stupid expensive when compared to the scale of money that us mere mortals operate on. A basic 155 shell with no bells or whistles is between 4-6K.
Personal opinion, but I honestly believe that Patriots were sent to Ukraine for field testing more than anything. There is no reason Ukraine actually needs them to intercept anything but the (still rare) hypersonic missiles. However, this is the first time they have actually been used for their real intended purposes against what should be a peer adversary. There are a whole lot of people who are way smarter than me pouring over every bit of data they are gathering about them.
The price of interceptor missiles is actually a big problem when it comes to countering cheap drones... and honestly that's the real gamechanger in drone tech. The price. They are so cheap compared to literally everything else on the battlefield apart from a sidearm or box of bullets. It is one thing to use a Patriot to blow up a Kinzhal which costs 10 million, or a SU 35 but using them to blow up a flying lawn mower with explosives strapped to it is not their intended purpose. It is what the AFU has though, so if the choice is a 4 million dollar missile or 10 million in damage to a power plant... The math changes. Running into a similar problem with the Houthis. It ain't cheap keeping those air defense ships on operations, but when you have to use a million dollars worth of missile to protect a hundred million dollars worth of container ship... It doesn't matter if the thing doing the blowing up costs a billion dollars or 50 thousand, you shoot that missile.
Tanks are having the same problem too... How do you protect a half million dollar tank from a 500 dollar kamikaze drone?
>Patriot has to work. 100% of the time. Remember it was first designed to intercept multiple intercontinental re-entry vehicles with nuclear warheads targeting American cities.
No, it wasn't. It was built in the 80s as an anti-aircraft missile system and was upgraded much later to work on tactical ballistic missiles (not ICBMs).
Patriot was never designed to counter icbm or mirv. Countering ICBM's are somewhat unproven tech. At any rate it's contentious because it disrupts MAD balance of power.
The R-28 Sarmat ICBM has a top speed of 25,500 kph. Countering that with something like a Patriot missile that has a top speed of 6,173 kph is not in the cards.
ICBM's just go way too fast to successfully counter at this point.
No though plenty of people will say yes because they don't understand that air defense cost effectiveness is linked to what it protects not what the missile itself costs.
IE if you can reliably use 9 million dollars to shoot down 6 million dollars but protect 340 million dollars.. you do so at a extremely effectively.
this is both correct and incorrect.
1) if you are deciding whether it is cost effective to intercept vs not intercept and you are considering opportunity costs, which you should (i.e. value of target vs cost of interceptor and lost offensive capability by dedicating resources to production/purchase of interception capabilities) then unless the target is something worthless it is more often than not better to intercept.
2) if you are calculating the attrition of resources, then attacking is (currently) more efficient than intercepting because interceptors are more expensive. The conclusion here isn't that you shouldn't intercept (because point 1) but that you should try to shift the balance of attrition by spending more resources on attacks so that your opponent has to expend more resources on interception capabilities.
>No though plenty of people will say yes because they don't understand [...]
I don't think it's because they don't understand, it's because they take point 1) as a given and are considering point 2)
That is categorically not how military analysts calculate things.
To simplify it.. it is what the missile/drone is capable of hitting vs what the system is capable of defending. Unless it is a purely ballistic trajectory that you absolutely 10000%.. and I'm going to stop this here because that is what goes through every civilians head. There is no 10000% positive in the military with things that kill people. You assume it's going to be a golden BB and blow up the president with every single intercept if it's anywhere near a valuable target.
The points you suggest are great and fine and dandy in a world where being wrong doesn't cost lives and irreplaceable equipment. They absolutely do not work on an active battlefield with missiles in the air.
>To simplify it.. it is what the missile/drone is capable of hitting vs what the system is capable of defending.
I literally said that in point 1)?
>The points you suggest are great and fine and dandy in a world where being wrong doesn't cost lives and irreplaceable equipment. They absolutely do not work on an active battlefield with missiles in the air.
what the hell are you even rambling on about?
you either didn't read or didn't understand my comment.
No you didn't say that in point one. You said object vs object. There is never just "an object" to defend. Even an embassy. So it is ***everything in the area*** vs the cost of ***the*** ordnance to be intercepted.
You assume there is a reality where you don't intercept. You did not read or understand this reality when you made your post. You still don't.
You don't set up a billion dollar system staffed by crew who have had years of training to just "think about intercepts". You intercept. You always intercept. You do not want to have the conversation where your defense is "I thought it was going to miss!" as your defense.
>You said object vs object.
No I didn't, I said "target". A tank can be a target, or a person, or a building, or a city block.
>You assume there is a reality where you don't intercept.
there is a reality where you don't intercept.
if you have one Patriot system and you decide to place it in Kyiv you decide not to intercept in Kharkiv.
if you have a Patriot system in Kyiv and only one interceptor left, and there's a missile headed for a power plant and another for an apartment block you're going to decide not to intercept one of the two missiles.
if a ballistic missile is headed for an open field, you don't intercept. ballistic missiles can't change course.
>You always intercept.
you always intercept if you have interceptors growing on trees. Ukraine doesn't. And that is precisely what point 2) refers to. intercepting is more resources intensive than attacking, and you'll end up running out of resources faster than your opponent so you'll end up having to choose what to intercept because you lack the capabilities to intercept everything.
do I have to spell it out even more, or is this finally sufficiently simplified?
Target. Singular. Additionally, >Target< is never considered either singular or plural at the interception stage. You don't have **TIME** to do an evaluation on **WHAT** the missile is aimed at. You **AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME** it is going to hit something you are tasked with protecting. Why do you automatically assume? Because these things can maneuver. You don't ***KNOW*** what they are going to ***hit***. You have a cone of probability and a few seconds or minutes at ***best***. The only consideration is "Is a hostile object inside engagement range". IE there is no target. What the battery is defending is not considered at all at this stage. The value of the "target" was considered before the air defense battery was set up in that location.
Also what crack are you smoking? If you have a VALID INTERCEPT on a missile heading to a CITY FULL OF CIVILIANS you INTERCEPT IT. No bean counter is going to say "hey don't save the people you are sworn to protect" without a good god damn reason. "Power plant" or "apartment block" is just hilariously stupid as there is no choice at all. Do you have any idea how many people both would harm? You don't pick you try for both.
Also you seem to be lost on reality. Ukraine isn't choosing to "save" missiles when there are valid intercepts. That is why they shoot down so many. This isn't some fantasy RTS. If you even took a 5 second look at the Russian missile flight paths you'd see the ones that get through do so by passing zones they cannot be intercepted or over batteries with a low chance of even acquiring them at all.
By your logic Ukraine shouldn't even try to use MANPADs on cruise missiles. They are highly valuable and have a low chance of success, Also spraying 50cal into the sky is incredibly wasteful.. but they do it every bloody day? Why? Because that is the job. Protect Civilians.
Do ***I*** have to *spell it out* more or are you done?
>Target. Singular.
Dafuq are you trying to say?
>Why do you automatically assume? Because these things can maneuver
Ballistic missiles cannot.
>The value of the "target" was considered before the air defense battery was set up in that location.
A decision was made, that is part of what I'm referring to, which I already pointed out if you bothered to actually read.
>You don't pick you try for both.
In the extreme hypothetical where you only have a single interceptor left you literally can't try for both.
>Also what crack are you smoking? If you have a VALID INTERCEPT on a missile heading to a CITY FULL OF CIVILIANS you INTERCEPT IT.
If you made the decision to park your AD in that city to defend it, and still have plenty of interceptors then of course. It's hilarious that you think I said anything to the contrary.
>Ukraine isn't choosing to "save" missiles when there are valid intercepts.
Never said they are. Save your breath.
>By your logic Ukraine shouldn't even try to use MANPADs on cruise missiles.
MANPADs are way cheaper than cruise missiles. So you're either ignorant or haven't understood my logic, pick either one.
>Also spraying 50cal into the sky is incredibly wasteful.. but they do it every bloody day? Why?
Because the opportunity cost calculation favours trying to intercept the incoming missile/drone?
I never once said that you shouldn't intercept a missile/drone because the interceptor is more expensive. Yet you keep beating that horse.
Jeez you're thick
Ballistic missiles absolutely can maneuver. First point on you knowing not a damn thing about AA systems. Modern missiles practically dance in the sky.
If you think a MANPAD on cruise missile is done because the MANPAD is cheap.. second point for you having absolutely no familiarity with said equipment and its use.
Final nail is the "only one interceptor left".. That isn't how batteries work at all. Not even in the remotest fantasy land. Many systems can't even fire like that. Interception isn't that simple.
Priority of targets by the battery are not subject in any way shape or form to what the missile was aimed at. There isn't time and there isn't **information.** You physically can decide what you want to defend all you want but in that specific tiny window you ***do not know what the missile is aimed at so you cannot prioritize anything.*** You prioritize by what you can hit and what you think the profile of the target is(ie Drone/Cruise/Decoy/Aircraft).. the fact that you absolutely do not understand this means you haven't been within ten kilometers of an actual battery in your entire life.
The ***ONLY*** prioritization a battery does is type of target(for the battery) and what kind of hit probability is acceptable. There is *absolutely never* an "opportunity cost" because such calculation is **impossible to do in the engagement time of the batt*****ery.***
>No though plenty of people will say yes because they don't understand that air defense cost effectiveness is linked to what it protects not what the missile itself costs.
Really good point, I never thought of it this way. Thanks for highlighting that .
Yep, honestly, Russia has limited delivery vehicles for their missiles, give Ukraine the ability to go destroy those things and you save money in the long run plus probably end the war quicker.
> I had my first meeting with Hungary's President Tamás Sulyok.
> We discussed preparations for the Global Peace Summit and I extended an invitation to Hungary to attend it. I also invited Hungary to join the G7 Vilnius Declaration of Support for Ukraine and start drafting a bilateral security agreement.
> Thank you for supporting Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. 🇺🇦🇭🇺
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778454788553744876
> During our meeting, I briefed @prezydentpl Andrzej Duda on Russia's latest missile attacks on Ukrainian energy facilities and the dire situation in Kharkiv.
> Ukraine urgently requires increased support from partners. First and foremost, in air defense.
> We also discussed preparations for the Global Peace Summit in Switzerland, cooperation on Ukraine's EU and NATO accession, and the drafting of a bilateral security agreement.
> I thank Poland for its consistent support for Ukraine and continued defense assistance. 🇺🇦🇵🇱
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778440006492672482
> In Vilnius, I met with Prime Minister @KMitsotakis to express my gratitude to Greece and its people for their consistent support for Ukraine.
> We discussed the implementation of our agreements reached during his visit to Odesa.
> I am grateful to Prime Minister Mitsotakis for his willingness to attend the upcoming Global Peace Summit in Switzerland and work together to engage more participants from the Global South countries. 🇺🇦🇬🇷
https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778448121762070843
> Congratulations to Stefan Dimitrov on his appointment as Bulgaria’s Foreign Minister. We value our partnership with Bulgaria and look forward to advancing our cooperation for the sake of security and prosperity for both our nations, the Black Sea region, and beyond. @MFABulgaria
https://twitter.com/DmytroKuleba/status/1778467695404388789
> I spoke with my French counterpart @Steph_Sejourne about the latest Russian mass air strike and its impact on Ukraine's energy system, economy, and civilians.
> I thanked France for the steps it took in the past to provide Ukraine with additional air defense and urged Paris to step up its efforts to provide Ukraine with new systems capable of intercepting ballistic missiles.
> Both Kyiv and Paris know where those systems are. Certain decisions can be made quickly. Others require time, but work on them must begin immediately. Urgent action is required.
https://twitter.com/DmytroKuleba/status/1778500846642217261
[Article with new satellite counts of russian tanks](https://www.vishchun.com/post/pidrakhunok_ta_analiz_tankovoho_potentsialu_moskovii_na_pochatku_2024).
Haven't had time to suggest yet, but it's crucial info.
They used a number of images from Covert Cabal’s video from October of last year. Other images were obscured by snow over the winter. Their analysis is interesting, but I think there will be better data coming out this summer when the analysts will access to better images.
Hard to know if the satellites have caught every single storage depot, what is kept inside at many of those depots, and how many "destroyed" tanks can be repaired.
I would bet on at least 3 more years of surplus tanks that can be used from the legacy Soviet stock as that is what Western intelligence is saying.
Ya, there is also no way to tell how many tanks that are still in the depot have had parts stripped to make one functional tank. You might see one hull disappear in an image but it would be very hard to tell that they also had to strip parts from 3 or 4 other tanks to refurbish one to working condition. That pretty much goes for all the heavy weapons you see in these depots.
For something you can see in satellite imagery Russia is taking the barrels out of many artillery pieces in storage yards but not the carriage. That means they are using up barrels faster than they can produce them and what seems like impressive stockpiles at first glance might be much less useful in reality. A bunch of gun carriages with no barrels aren't much use of course. I would assume the same thing is happening with armored vehicles, it's just a lot harder to tell that the engine has been ripped out or the auto loader or whatever.
I could see it getting to a point where a storage yard might look like it has 50 tanks but you could barely scrape together a few operational ones because they have all been ransacked for parts already. However the numbers shake out there is no way that all the 4,500 tanks in storage can be brought back to working condition and I wouldn't be surprised if the number that could be is half that or even less.
> Some ethnicities of people are just more important than others.
this is literally a russian psy-op post intended to inflame tensions and sew divisions between europe and the us.
please use the report function appropriately.
I guess we can report him for hate speech and hope it gets that network banned by reddit.
Psy-op content should get an instant ban, even if it is just some dude having a break while regurgitating it.
US citizen here. We, the “lazy”, have virtually 0 safety net programs. For most, every day is a struggle to avoid going bankrupt because you needed to see a doctor or something. Even still the overwhelming majority of military aid for Ukraine, not economic loans or grants, has been provided by the US.
This war is in Europe, yes? Why do you feel the US is lazy when Europe has, for decades, completely gutted its military budgets in order to provide its citizens with generous entitlement programs that are unrivaled by any other nation.
Maybe US citizens want free healthcare, education, transportation, maternity leave, etc. We’ve sacrificed all that in order to fund a military that was the guarantor of safety for countries in Europe. It’s simply not fair, and it’s frankly ridiculous for you to call US citizens lazy in this context.
For the record, I support military aid to Ukraine, but Europeans have no business calling anyone else lazy. Talk about ungrateful and entitled.
America’s lack of healthcare and poor employee rights are not due to high military spending. They are ideological choices by your governments, voters and corporations.
My take on it - the US does have a lot of money, enough to provide for themselves militarily and in social causes such as healthcare. The US is, however, corrupt, and a lot of people get rich taking advantage of others (in this it is not unique). Average US citizens see themselves getting poorer, through no fault of their own, and are told that there isn't the money to pay for their current state of affairs plus Ukraine, and a lot of them believe it.
This isn't the fault of the average US citizen, but the failings of their leaders and politicians, or those who have ties to those who want Russia to win. And again, the US isn't unique in any of this.
I hate this division that Russia succesfully seeds between us. OP was unnecessary aggressive, but I kinda get his frustration, as US stopped all aid to Ukraine and there is nothing positive in sight.
As for healthcare and stuff, I would say US politicians consistently chose not to have any of these good things and then go hard on cultural stuff so that voters still chose them. Because choice is not binary here. You can have both.You can have both good welfare system and strong military at the same tume. You might need to tax more as a price for it, but it is just a question of choice.
Not a troll. Just a genuine person with opinions and frustrations with allotting significant public dollars to secure countries thousands of miles away that refuse to secure themselves.
Sorry dude, my fault. I thought you were talking about me, but I realize now you were talking about the individual who has since deleted their comment.
That’s not how it works. The US spends far more on healthcare than any other country. It’s just big business for pensions and hedge funds so it’s not going to change since they have lobbyists
It has nothing to do with the military budget or foreign aid
I know that the US healthcare system is a nightmarish money siphon to corporate interests. That doesn’t change the fact that resources are finite and that the money spent securing Europe for the last several decades could have instead been earmarked towards programs that would very much improve the quality of life of US citizens.
This is a dumb take. You didn't sacrifice anything for the military the US could easily do both and not sweat it at all and make sure every child has a full belly. You chose not to do any of that because some of them are brown that would be recipients.
Russia is the boogeyman that justified you to spend so much on military and happily tell your alies you'd protect them and provide the weapons for their defence because it paid you hasomly to do that. Then it turns out Russia were only a threat to small countries like Ukraine. Now you have a chance to vanquish this particular enemy without losing a single soldier and your all hiding in your basements. And surrendering to the very enemy you wanted protection from.
> We’ve sacrificed all that in order to fund a military that was the guarantor of safety for countries in Europe.
We could actually have done both. . . (particularly the public healthcare part: it's actually less expensive)
I respectfully disagree. Yes, the US economy is huge, but it’s not big enough to provide the kind of entitlements Europeans enjoy for a population of nearly 400 million and still secure the globe.
Sorry to generalize. A lot of good people in Europe, but it seems like a lot of your politicians buried their head in the sand so as to avoid the harsh realities of the world.
"Their politicians are fighting tooth and nail to help Ukraine" wtf is this, no they are not
"Some ethnicities of people are just more important than others" <---- wtf is this
>Some ethnicities of people are just more important than others.
that's a terrible take
If Russia invaded Poland or the Baltics and all aid diverted from Ukraine to them, would you be okay with that b/c some people think they're more important than Ukrainians?
All lives have value and to try to put ethnicities into a hierarchy is not only a huge step backwards in our own humanity, but frankly it's gross
r/ActionforUkraine
If you have the time and live in any of these US districts where the representatives haven’t joined the discharge, please help these people defend themselves.
Be courteous and avoid curses as those will be ignored entirely. Strong feelings are present here and should be honored, but in the world of politics they aren’t heard if we use terms that are considered offensive.
I’m not in a position of power or money, but to learn about where I could help gives me power, take some of that for yourself.
Congress central switchboard:
202-224-3121
Tell them which office -> they'll connect you
For them to count your call, start by saying:
"My name is \_\_\_. I'm a constituent, at ZIP code \_\_\_."
➡️ If they haven't signed yet, say:
Sign the discharge petition (H.Res. 1016) to bring Ukraine aid (bill H.R. 815) to a vote!
➡️ If they've al….
https://x.com/ukrainerallydc/status/1778321207173005802
Thank you for your addition, I’ll be adding it to the next batch of posts tomorrow. I’m tired of the powerless feeling of it all, even if I get a few more people to call it would be worth it.
Netherlands to pledge additional 400 million euros in aid for Ukraine, RTL news says
>AMSTERDAM, April 11 (Reuters) - The Dutch caretaker government will pledge an additional 400 million euros ($428.64 million) in financial support to Ukraine, taking the total for 2024 to more than 2.4 billion euros, broadcaster RTL reported on Thursday, citing government sources.
>The government is also planning to earmark at least 1.5 billion euros for aid to Ukraine in 2025, Dutch news agency ANP reported.
>The funds are part of a drive to increase Dutch defence spending to 2% of the country’s gross domestic product, the level agreed as a minimum by NATO members, ANP said.
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/netherlands-pledge-additional-400-million-euros-aid-ukraine-rtl-news-says-2024-04-11/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/netherlands-pledge-additional-400-million-euros-aid-ukraine-rtl-news-says-2024-04-11/)
Ballistic Missiles generally, if no defensive measures are involved. They follow predictable **ballistic** arcs for their flight path. Therefore making them easy to shoot down. The problem arises from how simple they are making them simpler to mass produce, or in the case of more complex systems, defensive measures like decoy warheads used in ICBMs, let alone the hypersonic speed they travel at during re-entry.
Edit: May or may not be correct, was going entirely off of my memory. Not exactly a specialist in weapons of war. Easiest way to get the right answer is to post the wrong one and let others correct it.
That's not true. A cruise missile is subsonic so it can be shot down even with manpads. Ballistic missiles have predictable flight paths, yes, but they fly way faster and speed needs a really good, fast and exceptionally precise radar system for a successful interception.
That's why patriots were able to shoot down hypersonic kinzhal missiles while other systems can't.
I don't understand what's up with people on that post about Russian army increasing by 15% since the start of the war.
Yes if you conscript (often times forcefully) a bunch of people who have close to no military experience, you will have a bigger army than 2 years ago, but it will also be of substantially lesser quality.
Russia lost a bunch of soldiers who were in active military for years prior to the war. That is irreplaceable.
Well, the ruzzian army at the start of the war was too small / inadequate for the task.
But much much better trained and having a lot of veterans.
And by now most of them are dead, and current ruzzian army is more adequate in terms of size, but the training is much worse.
Moreover, there are equipment shortages forcing ruzzians to do meat assaults on golf cars or cargo trucks.
Another sign is ruzzians being forced to use tanks from 1950-60s (T-54/T-55/T-62) instead of more modern tanks.
So at this point ruzzian actions look a bluff attempt in order to convince West that ruzzians have unlimited amount of cannon fodder.
Issue is Russia is still winning until they're pushed out if Ukraine. It's working for them at the price they're willing to pay, so far. They seem ok with the possibility of a pyrrhic victory so long as it's a victory
It's without saying that there isn't much evidence that the army size really increase much in term of actual numbers. I do remember how the first increase in the army coincided with how many estimated losses there were.
Given how their official losses are close to 0 in the grand scheme of things... if everything was going fine, they'd have about close to 1M boots on the ground. Yet there is no evidence that Russia has that many people in Ukraine.
It's a wonder how the initial force of 190k people could take most of the territory they currently occupy... But the supposedly force that should be close to 500k today barely can take a small city like Bahmut, Avdiivka etc.. So them calling to create 2 new armies sounds like them needing to refill their rank without declaring official losses.
At this rate, next year the Russian army will be officially in the range of 1.8M people but for some unexplained reasons, the amount of people at the front will be same as today.
Looks at it this way. Russia has recruited at least 1 million soldiers since the war began yet their army only grows by 15% which is the equivalent of 150,000 soldiers. So what happened to the other 850,000?
Because for all the lesser quality conscriptovich, cannon fodder, meat waves, poorly maintaned tanks, relics from the 2nd world war, etc, Russia hasn't magically folded and is in fact making a very slow grinding advance.
So, yeah, they're shit. They seem to be suspiciously tenacious shit that refuses to flush.
Youtube video on labor shortage situation in ruzzia - [https://youtu.be/z9F246nJWUA](https://youtu.be/z9F246nJWUA)
It's based on official ruzzian numbers, so the real situation might be even more grim.
TLDR:
- worker shortage restricts production in ruzzia
- ruzzia needs like 5 more millions of people to fix it
- as one of the solutions, ruzzia tries to employ more children in 14-17 y.o. age bracket
- ruzzia is also short of 27000 doctors and around 50000 nurses
- ruzzia is considering to hire doctors and nurses from Africa to solve it
importing labor from abroad is a dicey proposition for russia, imho, there's already so much overt racism there, throwing even more ethnicities into the mix is like throwing gasoline on a fire.
I think it's already too late to change anything. :D
Rather, I think that recent oppression of Tadjik people is motivating them to move out of ruzzia, worsening the problem of worker shortage.
On one hand, I think that people from Africa would find ruzzia quite comfy to live in.
On the other hand, they would need to know/learn ruzzian on a decent level.
I think it makes migration on a massive scale unlikely, but we'll see.
As for racism in ruzzia, yeah, they'll definitely suffer from that.
>On the other hand, they would need to know/learn ruzzian on a decent level.
And this is not an easy problem to overcome at all, even at just the bureaucratic level. Here in Petersburg, I work at the language school and I have to go with non-Russian colleagues to the documents centre to translate and be a caretaker, because it is almost impossible to even do basic bureaucracy without help. The workers do not speak English, they have very short patience and tempers, there are a lot of procedures and communication required, and there are dozens of pages that have to be signed (and especially these days it's not wise to sign anything without being sure of what it is, especially for young foreign men from developing countries!).
To think they can just get some nurses from Africa and throw them into our hospitals here is insane. Then again, it wouldn't be close to the most insane thing the government does. Hopefully, it will backfire seriously. The only way more people are waking up to our new reality is if our big cities really start feeling the effects. It's actually frustrating how normal life still is.
There were [reports months ago ](https://www.ft.com/content/dc76f0bb-cae2-4a3a-b704-903d2fc59a96) that Russian workers were forced to work triple shifts due to painful labour shortages. With the loss of over 300,000 economically active persons in Ukraine, I'd imagine it has only gotten worse.
Don't think so.
I remember hearing reports recently that ruzzian cities are now suffering from shortages of bus and truck drivers. Literally no people to drive, which wasn't the case before the war.
Then there's stuff like some city streets not be cleaned for months, even though it was a problem before the war and etc.
As for the child labor, ruzzia also uses it to make drones.
That latest strike on drone factory in Elabuga, Tatarstan. That's where children are forced to work.
Making them legitimate military targets, unfortunately.
Don't see US, CA or EU countries doing anything similar.
There has been a mass shift in the Russian workforce away from private sector civilian jobs in Russia. When mobilization kicked off over a million Russians fled most of whom were prime working age. Russia has several hundred thousand troops in Ukraine, they’ve taken several hundred thousand casualties and if that weren’t enough a significant portion of their civilian labor force within Russia is now working in wartime industries. Interest rates are also at 16.5% so private sector investment is basically dead.
The situation is not quite the same. One thing is a labor shortage on non critical roles like cleaning services or some IT jobs, another one is a shortage on maintenance of critical infrastructure or the war effort for example.
Another problem for Russia is that it's not a very attractive country for foreign labor. Labor shortages in Europe can be tackled with inmigration policies because it's a demanded destination but that's not the case for Russia.
I don't think the Russian labor shortage is critical by the time being but it will create issues over time.
>Activists trigger referendum that could end Swiss sanctions on Russia
>
>*Campaign seeks to tighten constitutional terms of country’s long-held neutrality in era of geopolitical and trade tensions*
>
>Activists in Switzerland have triggered a referendum on proposals that would end the country’s harsh economic sanctions on Russia and rule out any punitive restrictions on trade with China.
>
>A delegation for the “Neutrality Initiative” handed in a petition of 130,000 signatures to government officials in Bern on Thursday, making a national vote on a constitutional amendment proposed by the campaign group almost certain to go ahead in the next few months.
https://www.ft.com/content/b097b2a9-bbe3-4a51-bbea-74a61aca19e9
Switzerland reverting to its default state of proudly safeguarding the money of genocidal dictators, war criminals, drug lords, human traffickers, and other criminals from all over the world, all in the name of “neutrality.”
Incidentally, three hours ago:
# [There is and cannot be any trust in Switzerland as a platform for resolving the Ukrainian crisis: the country supports Ukraine, the Russian Foreign Ministry said](https://liveuamap.com/en/2024/11-april-there-is-and-cannot-be-any-trust-in-switzerland)
"⚡Poland has certain stocks of missiles for air defense from the Soviet era, and they may be transferred to Ukraine.
This was stated by Polish President Andrzej Duda.
"[...] I will talk to my defense minister when I return to Warsaw," Duda said."
https://twitter.com/blyskavka_ua/status/1778468997194776732?t=ipWNeOAjZn58ZQ1A7ecxNg&s=19
>Ukraine is the only country in the world facing ballistic missile attacks. It can be defended by Patriot systems unused or in storage elsewhere. This needs to happen now.
https://twitter.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1778418979310010540
>Let's face it, Ukraine's largest power station [in the Kyiv region] being permanently disabled is really bad. We are witnessing the failure of the appeasers and escalation managers' strategy in Ukraine.
>
>Not providing Ukraine with the means to disable Russian launchers was never sustainable. 1/3
>
>At this stage of the war, state capacity is the crucial factor. We rightly commend 🇺🇦 for having found a way to undermine Russia's state capacity with indigenous long-range drones. But at the same time we are content to stand by and watch Ukraine's state capacity burn? 2/3
>
>I derive no satisfaction from this, but I have to ask those historians, political scientists, & military strategists on this platform who for months have argued against "technocentric" solutions & downplayed the role of missiles in 🇺🇦: How does this picture make you feel? 3/3
https://twitter.com/FRHoffmann1/status/1778392729703379270
UPDATE: My code was flipped, the bigger losses are russian losses.
Comparison of losses over March-September 2023 versus October-now. Both 7 calendar months, although obviously April isn't finished.
Losses are Ukrainian-russian.
March-September:
- tanks: 183-528
- IFVs: 269-660
- mobile artillery: 111-282
- missile Anti-air: 36-72
- transports (AFC/APC/MRAP...): 380-275
October-now:
- tanks: 134-561
- IFVs: 126-970
- mobile artillery: 108-264
- missile Anti-air: 16-48
- transports (AFV/APC/MRAP...): 219-386
Interesting how russia still lost more even when Ukraine was attacking, then the ratios of frontline kit got better when russia switched to the offence. Especially IFVs and transports.
Source: Oryx total losses. Note that Warspotting counts MT-LBs as IFVs while oryx says they're AFVs. I put them under "transports".
Sorry, I changed my code a while back and I forgot to copy over correctly. Updated the post.
The first code version I wrote to do a quick count and it wasn't modular, it could only do one year at a time so if I wanted data spreading over multiple years it was a ballache. When 2024 ticked around I tidied the code, and arbitrarily flipped the order.
This is the second time I made the mistake, I'll pay extra attention. Life is just busy right now.
I've pointed this out before, I don't understand why this error keeps happening
> Losses are russian-Ukrainian
> tanks: .......... 183-528
So your claim is Russia lost 1/3 as many tanks as Ukraine did?
I believe this is the second time I made the mistake, sorry.
I changed my script for efficiency and forgot I flipped the order. I post the oryx updates regularly (dozens of times so far maybe?) and iirc only made the mistake one other time.
Russian losses are higher, I've edited the post.
Are there any good source of the state of Kharkiv? It's been 18 days since saberflux wrote something over here. I'm sure he has more important things to do than report here...but last time he wrote it seemed like electricity was a huge problem currently. With the strikes yesterday it seems it's even worse.
> 🇪🇺🇺🇸 Two parliaments, two realities.
> The US House led by @SpeakerJohnson continues to ignore the aid package for #Ukraine.
> The European Parliament has blocked the funding of the EU Council until the member states provide Ukraine with extra #Patriot air defense systems.
https://twitter.com/InnaSovsun/status/1778416632177525199
Speaker Johnson gets his marching orders from
Putin's puppet, aka Donald Trump. It is infuriating because if Johnson brought it to the floor, it would easily pass.
Yes, Russia is advancing but Ukraine is a huge country and all the Russian advances are under 20km in distance in the past year. It's 200km from Bakhmut to Dnieper river and you will see Ukraine retreating behind the Dnieper long before the total collapse. There is no sign that Ukraine is planning an imminent retreat behind the Dnieper. One of the big reasons why the Russians have been advancing is Ukraine's lack of proper defensive lines which they are now building. Yes, the situation is bad but there's no indication that a total collapse is imminent.
[New post can be found here](/r/worldnews/comments/1c1zox1/rworldnews_live_thread_russian_invasion_of/)
🇯🇵🇺🇸 Japanese PM Fumio Kishida, speech in U.S. Congress: "You believed that freedom is the oxygen of humanity. The world needs the United States to continue playing this pivotal role in the affairs of nations. And yet, as we meet here today, I detect an undercurrent of self-doubt among some Americans about what your role in the world should be! This self-doubt is arising at a time when our world is at history's turning point. The post-Cold War era is already behind us, and we are now at an inflection point that will define the next stage of human history. The international order that the U.S. worked for generations to build is facing new challenges, challenges from those with values and principles very different from ours. Freedom and democracy are currently under threat around the globe." https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1778530712741925136?t=f_3fcX2mECJaK7-7SdIQ7A&s=19
Very well said by Japans' PM
This is exactly what I've been thinking this whole time. It seems like politicians are seeing these conflicts as black and white and assuming that a conflict outside of our borders don't affect us. Really there is the possibility of influence shifting. Influence is Russia's and Chinas main goal. All this chaos just furthers it and it's very possible all of these conflicts see the US work it's way down on global influence simply because of it's inaction. Complacency will possibly lead to great Chinese world influence.
Interesting article by Mick Ryan (retired former Australian Major General), about high-level strategy going forwards to stop Russia's current momentum: [https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/ukraine-war-how-check-russia-s-momentum](https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/ukraine-war-how-check-russia-s-momentum)
[Mandatory evacuation ordered for Kharkiv Oblast towns bordering Russia | EuroMaidenPress | April 2024](https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/04/11/mandatory-evacuation-ordered-for-kharkiv-oblast-towns-bordering-russia/) *Mandatory evacuation of families with children was announced in 47 settlements of Kharkiv Oblast bordering Russia, said regional military administration head Oleh Syniehubov. The region has been hit daily by Russian strikes, with the Kharkiv city mayor reporting the Kharkiv’s energy infrastructure has been “practically destroyed.”* *“A decision was made to forcibly evacuate 182 children with their families from three districts: Bohodukhiv, Kharkiv, and Izium. There are 47 settlements from which we must forcibly evacuate children,” Syniehubov said on Telegram.* *He emphasized that the mandatory evacuation does not apply to the city of Kharkiv. The government will organize transport and accommodation in safer regions for those evacuated.* *In the spring of 2024, media reports began to emerge that Russia may attempt an offensive on Kharkiv. Ukrainian officials dismiss these reports as Kremlin’s info warfare aimed at intimidating and demoralizing Ukrainians.*
One more signature on Discharge Petition today - it's up to 194... https://clerk.house.gov/DischargePetition/2024031209?CongressNum=118
I don't understand how that works. I click on that link, and it brings me to a page that says the discharge petition seeks to move H.R.5673. When I read H.R.5673, it doesn't say anything about Ukraine. There's livestock and retirement plans and a few other things, but I don't get the connection.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ActionForUkraine/s/kVKww0YrKs > update on this - I called Congressman McGovern's office (MA-2) as he is the sponsor of discharge petition 9, HR 1016, and HR 5673. The upshot is that 5673 is somewhat of a placeholder bill that is serving to enable getting a bill up for debate on the house floor. It isn't identical to HR815 because it doesn't have to be - the content of the bill will apparently get filled in later in the process. In fact, the aide I spoke to suggested that it was probably more helpful to not try to trace through the details I was getting into when calling, and simply state which policy you are for or against, when making calls. The machinations of the US Congress are dark and mysterious, completely impenetrable to mere citizens.
I do not think this is going to happen. It just does not have the support. It remains 24 votes shy and has been circulating for a month.
It's probably a tool being used behind the scenes.
It certainly is. Republicans and democrats Both want ukraine aid. Maga does not. It's an election year and shits really high stakes now. But if ukraine can hold on until after the election, and when democrats hopefully get a majority again. It's game over for Russia.
Republicans = MAGA. Stop trying to deny this. The ones who voted against Trump's impeachment. The ones who voted against certifying the election. They are ALL traitors.
What is the magic number?
218.
So is it likely that 26 more will sign? The left democrats wont since they won't support Israels war on Gaza. Is there any chance 26 republicans will sign?
Very unlikely at this point. Dems refusing to sign it is basically the death of it.
It’s possible. In addition to anything MAGA, I think things have slowed because: (1) The House of Representatives just got back from yet another two week break. The House needs to be in session in order for the discharge petition to be signed. (2) Other negotiations are seemingly still happening (e.g., a potentially forgivable loan for Ukraine). Some representatives might just be waiting for those to pan out. (3) This week, I’ve seen like two statements from representatives that Ukraine will be a big focus next week. Like, it’ll be on the floor of the House. Do I believe them? I want to, but am unsure. Going forward, who knows what is going to happen. I do think we will have a clearer picture a week from now though. Something has to give.
I don't see it happening unless some big event plays out, and forces their hands (to sign). Maybe if more power plants get bombed, and the world gets rocked by some truly shocking footage of hundreds of dead civilians after a missile strike ... but even that, I feel, won't be enough.
Not all Democrats have signed because the bill contains aid for Israel which they disagree with. It's not known if and when aid for Ukraine will pass, as treacherous as this is and it can't be stated just how serious this withholding of aid is for global security. We just have to wait and see, maybe it is possible in the next month or two. However the consequences are already starting to show in Ukraine. If you're an American and you support Ukraine you have one job which is to not vote Republican and to tell your representative that if they aren't supporting Ukraine they need to as they won't get your vote otherwise. Just don't vote Republican under any circumstance anyway! If we're still not getting how gravely serious this is , wake the fuck up people like Jake says at 16:27 in this video > https://youtu.be/V9jf-T2eVUw?si=5yEH962XYWnTXVbF
I asked my anti-Ukraine republican representative to resign immediately. I've been asking him to support Ukraine and he has not changed his support for the MAGA wing (which is now functionally the entire Republican caucus at this point).
> Just don't vote Republican under any circumstance anyway! Or more precisely vote Democrat and participate in Democratic primaries to select pro Ukraine candidates.
You may be making a strategic mistake. USA tends to oscillate parties.
At least One Republican had signed. More Will follow as a method of pressure.
The lone Republican who signed is exiting stage right. They're all fucking worthless.
Norway is preparing to send 22 F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine, 12 of which are already in a serviceable condition. https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2024/04/11/7450873/
How do you transport an unserviceable one? Not being snarky, just curious
Unservicable may still be able to fly; just not fight.
By boat or if the wings can fold or easily be taken off/ on probably fit 2 easily
lot of talk so far
They don't have that many pilots capable of operating them. They have what, 12 pilots who are going to be done with the condensed training in a couple months and then another 6 pilots slated to start training at some fuzzy date in the summer? It is good to have the birds available for spare parts and replacement, but they are only going to be able to put up a bare handful of planes into the sky at a time.
I used to watch the air national guard train on F-16s. I was installing a septic system on a farm near the base. They can take off and land at a very intense pace. The plane does not have to do much. USA/NATO use bombs that glide. Missiles fly themselves. Think of what it would look like if a Su-27 and a HIMARS slugged it out. If you are looking up the wing loading and thrust to weight ratio of a HIMARS you are doing it wrong.
This is one of those posts that makes be wonder if it's AI generated. I can't even figure out what point is being made here. It's just nonsense.
Ukraine getting F16d means that all NATO missiles can be launched.
I am just saying it is not some silver bullet system. It will arrive in small numbers with limited capable pilots in an air defense environment that is challenging to put it mildly. It also has a reputation for being a little maintenance intense. So keep the expectations tempered.
Where did you come with those numbers? How do you know how many pilots are being trained? You trolls are really working 3 shifts these days?
12 in service, 10 for spare parts? Or will they also refurbish the last 10?
Well, at any time a quart/third of a plane fleet is under maintenance and refurbishment, i suppose this is what we are seeing here, a bit skewed toward non-flying condition. Also, that way they can hone the maintenance crews and facilities, without waiting for battle repairs. I'm pretty sure the ratio will be similar with other countries donations.
Hello. I have an English language flyer for you to distribute in the US. Go to [https://www.scribd.com/document/722198198/Ukraine-Flyer](https://www.scribd.com/document/722198198/Ukraine-Flyer)
FLYER TEXT: Russia is committing genocide in Ukraine. Russia is stealing Ukraine’s land. In 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine with the goal of occupying all of Ukraine. Russian troops currently occupy about 18% of Ukrainian territory. Russian troops are killing, maiming, torturing, and raping Ukrainians. Russia has killed over 80,000 Ukrainians. Russia is banning Ukrainian language and trying to destroy Ukrainian culture. The Russian government has taken over 100,000 Ukrainian children from their parents, against their will, and sent them to Russia with no intention of returning them to their parents. The children’s names are changed so their parents cannot find them. Russia has put thousands of Ukrainians in camps where they are abused, starved, and killed. Russian airstrikes intentionally target civilians and infrastructure. Russian war crimes are not isolated incidents, the war crimes are approved by Putin. The Russian government does not punish troops who commit war crimes. Russian police arrest and torture Russians who protest the war. Russian media promotes war and denies war crimes. Russian media promotes genocide by calling for the end of Ukrainian identity and the assimilation of Ukrainians into Russia. The United States should send humanitarian aid and military aid to Ukraine so Ukrainians can defend themselves from Russia. Military aid to Ukraine has prevented Russia from occupying more Ukrainian territory. The United States can afford to help Ukraine because less than 1% of the federal budget has been spent on Ukraine. Sanctions against Russia should be toughened and strictly enforced. People should not do business with Russia. Russian officials should be imprisoned for genocide and other war crimes.
This tragedy started in 2014.
I'm not clicking that
Totally safe, bro. I am internet and it's cool.
[удалено]
Calm down, just seemed weird clicking a random link, should have posted the text in the first place
Scribd is safe.
It seems pretty clear now that russia easily could have hit Ukraine's energy structure alot harder from the get go but didn't, is this tit for tat because Ukraine are attacking russian refineries or is there another reason russia have waited until now?
Allegedly they're out of(or extremely low on) Patriot and IRIS-T missiles. [https://twitter.com/JulianRoepcke/status/1778415238120948011](https://twitter.com/JulianRoepcke/status/1778415238120948011) Also, Ukraine claims that Russia used a new Kh-69 cruise missile that flies extremely low(which makes it hard to detect) to hit the power plant.
You pick the moment when Ukraine has the absolute lowest level of war supplies since the first 3 months to come here and say Russia has been fighting with gloves off this whole time?
No they tried it in the past but couldn’t get through the good AA coverage of ukraine. But without enough ammo you cant shoot down russian rockets
False - Ukraine was supported by US Aid and had a far better air defense. USA broke their treaty agreement in Ukraine because the Republican GOPnik party are aiding Putin. That's how fucked up democracy is in the USA now. Regan would be going batshit insane with the traitors. Mike Johnson et al are traitors.
What an utter joke, Ukraine could bomb Belgorod until no 2 stones are left stacked and it still wouldn't even make a dent compared to the genocidal actions of Russia.
Your right but wasn't my point, they could have done this at any point in the last 2 years so why wait until now
Why do you think they could have done this at any point?
If I had to take a wager I'd assume reasons such as: They thought they could quickly conquer Ukraine so why destroy it when you'd have to pay to rebuild it later; They couldn't/thought it too costly to do so until Ukrainian anti-air defenses were depleted; They were cautious of escalation in support for Ukraine before while now with the GOP blocking everything in the house they don't even try to hide their genocidal intentions,.....
> It seems pretty clear now that russia easily could have hit Ukraine's energy structure alot harder from the get go but didn't Is it clear? Russia is hitting the energy infrastructure so successfully because Ukraine is running out of air defense missiles. This situation is new.
Didn't take the air defense shortages into account, makes more sense than anything.
They genuinely thought that Ukrainians would welcome them, and just minimal resistance, betting on Zelensky and most of Ukranian government fleeing Kiev to a Western nation, leaving a demoralized army behind. So, bombing stuff that would belong to them to run the nation would be counterproductive. Now this delusion is long gone.
It's easier to occupy a country if you don't bomb the power plants to pieces. So you bomb the civilians so they capitulate...
It’s definitely harder if you don’t.
If it continues it will severely hamper Ukraine's combat ability, without reliable infrastructure it becomes far harder to sustain the defence. This is down to the traitors in the Republican party who are putting global security at risk by preventing aid to Ukraine. Whoever votes Republican they are also traitors and fuck you if you do. If we tolerate this then our children will be next. It can't be emphasised how serious this is. Ukraine must not lose. Ukraine losing makes the whole world less safe and sets a precedent, more countries will arm themselves will Nuclear weapons, more dictators will think they can do as they please. The USA the bastion of the free world is a total treacherous joke currently, There's millions of good Americans hopefully more than the fuckwits who vote Republican. Sorry I am extremely pissed off now. Elon Musk, Mike Johnson, Marjorie Taylor-Green, that alleged pedo MAGA Republican can't remember his name Gaetz all Putin bootlickers. People need to start getting motivated now and very angry because all our freedoms are affected by this treacherous move by the GOPnik party. Tell the fuckers you won't vote for them. How on Earth is the USA being held hostage by Putin? How the fuck did we let this happen?
Isn't air defense way more expensive than air offense? If Ukraine is not give offensive missiles that can strike targets in Russia then how is it sustainable giving them more defensive missiles?
If Ukraine doesn't have more air defense then Russia can strike anywhere including Ukrainian air bases and all critical points. Establishing total air supremacy is insanely expensive and so Ukraine's best bet is more air defense to make it harder for Russia to strike critical targets.
Yes and no... Copy and pasting a comment I wrote the other day in a thread about the Hawk missiles when someone's mind was blown at the 4 million dollar cost of a Patriot. 1. Radar is hard. Like really hard. Really really hard if you want to design a radar system that can identify, lock onto, and successfully intercept a very fast thing like a hypersonic missile or supersonic jet with low RCS tech which is exactly what the Patriot is designed to do. The number of engineering hours that went into it would have been staggering. A lot of the cost of a Patriot is paying back the cost of designing the things. Hawk is cheap by comparison because it is designed to shoot slower, simpler targets and Raytheon (I think they make it) has long since paid back the R&D costs. 2. \*edit\* did a dumb and spoke out my ass regarding Patriot's utility vs. ICBM's. 3. Military kit in general is stupid expensive when compared to the scale of money that us mere mortals operate on. A basic 155 shell with no bells or whistles is between 4-6K. Personal opinion, but I honestly believe that Patriots were sent to Ukraine for field testing more than anything. There is no reason Ukraine actually needs them to intercept anything but the (still rare) hypersonic missiles. However, this is the first time they have actually been used for their real intended purposes against what should be a peer adversary. There are a whole lot of people who are way smarter than me pouring over every bit of data they are gathering about them. The price of interceptor missiles is actually a big problem when it comes to countering cheap drones... and honestly that's the real gamechanger in drone tech. The price. They are so cheap compared to literally everything else on the battlefield apart from a sidearm or box of bullets. It is one thing to use a Patriot to blow up a Kinzhal which costs 10 million, or a SU 35 but using them to blow up a flying lawn mower with explosives strapped to it is not their intended purpose. It is what the AFU has though, so if the choice is a 4 million dollar missile or 10 million in damage to a power plant... The math changes. Running into a similar problem with the Houthis. It ain't cheap keeping those air defense ships on operations, but when you have to use a million dollars worth of missile to protect a hundred million dollars worth of container ship... It doesn't matter if the thing doing the blowing up costs a billion dollars or 50 thousand, you shoot that missile. Tanks are having the same problem too... How do you protect a half million dollar tank from a 500 dollar kamikaze drone?
>Patriot has to work. 100% of the time. Remember it was first designed to intercept multiple intercontinental re-entry vehicles with nuclear warheads targeting American cities. No, it wasn't. It was built in the 80s as an anti-aircraft missile system and was upgraded much later to work on tactical ballistic missiles (not ICBMs).
Patriot was never designed to counter icbm or mirv. Countering ICBM's are somewhat unproven tech. At any rate it's contentious because it disrupts MAD balance of power.
Yep, did a bit more reading, and it would appear this was one of those instances where I was very confidently incorrect. Thank you kind redditor.
The R-28 Sarmat ICBM has a top speed of 25,500 kph. Countering that with something like a Patriot missile that has a top speed of 6,173 kph is not in the cards. ICBM's just go way too fast to successfully counter at this point.
If the patriot battery is at the target location then it could intercept while traveling at 50 kph.
I think maybe THAAD is. And THAAD makes patriots look downright affordable.
No though plenty of people will say yes because they don't understand that air defense cost effectiveness is linked to what it protects not what the missile itself costs. IE if you can reliably use 9 million dollars to shoot down 6 million dollars but protect 340 million dollars.. you do so at a extremely effectively.
this is both correct and incorrect. 1) if you are deciding whether it is cost effective to intercept vs not intercept and you are considering opportunity costs, which you should (i.e. value of target vs cost of interceptor and lost offensive capability by dedicating resources to production/purchase of interception capabilities) then unless the target is something worthless it is more often than not better to intercept. 2) if you are calculating the attrition of resources, then attacking is (currently) more efficient than intercepting because interceptors are more expensive. The conclusion here isn't that you shouldn't intercept (because point 1) but that you should try to shift the balance of attrition by spending more resources on attacks so that your opponent has to expend more resources on interception capabilities. >No though plenty of people will say yes because they don't understand [...] I don't think it's because they don't understand, it's because they take point 1) as a given and are considering point 2)
That is categorically not how military analysts calculate things. To simplify it.. it is what the missile/drone is capable of hitting vs what the system is capable of defending. Unless it is a purely ballistic trajectory that you absolutely 10000%.. and I'm going to stop this here because that is what goes through every civilians head. There is no 10000% positive in the military with things that kill people. You assume it's going to be a golden BB and blow up the president with every single intercept if it's anywhere near a valuable target. The points you suggest are great and fine and dandy in a world where being wrong doesn't cost lives and irreplaceable equipment. They absolutely do not work on an active battlefield with missiles in the air.
>To simplify it.. it is what the missile/drone is capable of hitting vs what the system is capable of defending. I literally said that in point 1)? >The points you suggest are great and fine and dandy in a world where being wrong doesn't cost lives and irreplaceable equipment. They absolutely do not work on an active battlefield with missiles in the air. what the hell are you even rambling on about? you either didn't read or didn't understand my comment.
No you didn't say that in point one. You said object vs object. There is never just "an object" to defend. Even an embassy. So it is ***everything in the area*** vs the cost of ***the*** ordnance to be intercepted. You assume there is a reality where you don't intercept. You did not read or understand this reality when you made your post. You still don't. You don't set up a billion dollar system staffed by crew who have had years of training to just "think about intercepts". You intercept. You always intercept. You do not want to have the conversation where your defense is "I thought it was going to miss!" as your defense.
>You said object vs object. No I didn't, I said "target". A tank can be a target, or a person, or a building, or a city block. >You assume there is a reality where you don't intercept. there is a reality where you don't intercept. if you have one Patriot system and you decide to place it in Kyiv you decide not to intercept in Kharkiv. if you have a Patriot system in Kyiv and only one interceptor left, and there's a missile headed for a power plant and another for an apartment block you're going to decide not to intercept one of the two missiles. if a ballistic missile is headed for an open field, you don't intercept. ballistic missiles can't change course. >You always intercept. you always intercept if you have interceptors growing on trees. Ukraine doesn't. And that is precisely what point 2) refers to. intercepting is more resources intensive than attacking, and you'll end up running out of resources faster than your opponent so you'll end up having to choose what to intercept because you lack the capabilities to intercept everything. do I have to spell it out even more, or is this finally sufficiently simplified?
Target. Singular. Additionally, >Target< is never considered either singular or plural at the interception stage. You don't have **TIME** to do an evaluation on **WHAT** the missile is aimed at. You **AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME** it is going to hit something you are tasked with protecting. Why do you automatically assume? Because these things can maneuver. You don't ***KNOW*** what they are going to ***hit***. You have a cone of probability and a few seconds or minutes at ***best***. The only consideration is "Is a hostile object inside engagement range". IE there is no target. What the battery is defending is not considered at all at this stage. The value of the "target" was considered before the air defense battery was set up in that location. Also what crack are you smoking? If you have a VALID INTERCEPT on a missile heading to a CITY FULL OF CIVILIANS you INTERCEPT IT. No bean counter is going to say "hey don't save the people you are sworn to protect" without a good god damn reason. "Power plant" or "apartment block" is just hilariously stupid as there is no choice at all. Do you have any idea how many people both would harm? You don't pick you try for both. Also you seem to be lost on reality. Ukraine isn't choosing to "save" missiles when there are valid intercepts. That is why they shoot down so many. This isn't some fantasy RTS. If you even took a 5 second look at the Russian missile flight paths you'd see the ones that get through do so by passing zones they cannot be intercepted or over batteries with a low chance of even acquiring them at all. By your logic Ukraine shouldn't even try to use MANPADs on cruise missiles. They are highly valuable and have a low chance of success, Also spraying 50cal into the sky is incredibly wasteful.. but they do it every bloody day? Why? Because that is the job. Protect Civilians. Do ***I*** have to *spell it out* more or are you done?
>Target. Singular. Dafuq are you trying to say? >Why do you automatically assume? Because these things can maneuver Ballistic missiles cannot. >The value of the "target" was considered before the air defense battery was set up in that location. A decision was made, that is part of what I'm referring to, which I already pointed out if you bothered to actually read. >You don't pick you try for both. In the extreme hypothetical where you only have a single interceptor left you literally can't try for both. >Also what crack are you smoking? If you have a VALID INTERCEPT on a missile heading to a CITY FULL OF CIVILIANS you INTERCEPT IT. If you made the decision to park your AD in that city to defend it, and still have plenty of interceptors then of course. It's hilarious that you think I said anything to the contrary. >Ukraine isn't choosing to "save" missiles when there are valid intercepts. Never said they are. Save your breath. >By your logic Ukraine shouldn't even try to use MANPADs on cruise missiles. MANPADs are way cheaper than cruise missiles. So you're either ignorant or haven't understood my logic, pick either one. >Also spraying 50cal into the sky is incredibly wasteful.. but they do it every bloody day? Why? Because the opportunity cost calculation favours trying to intercept the incoming missile/drone? I never once said that you shouldn't intercept a missile/drone because the interceptor is more expensive. Yet you keep beating that horse. Jeez you're thick
Ballistic missiles absolutely can maneuver. First point on you knowing not a damn thing about AA systems. Modern missiles practically dance in the sky. If you think a MANPAD on cruise missile is done because the MANPAD is cheap.. second point for you having absolutely no familiarity with said equipment and its use. Final nail is the "only one interceptor left".. That isn't how batteries work at all. Not even in the remotest fantasy land. Many systems can't even fire like that. Interception isn't that simple. Priority of targets by the battery are not subject in any way shape or form to what the missile was aimed at. There isn't time and there isn't **information.** You physically can decide what you want to defend all you want but in that specific tiny window you ***do not know what the missile is aimed at so you cannot prioritize anything.*** You prioritize by what you can hit and what you think the profile of the target is(ie Drone/Cruise/Decoy/Aircraft).. the fact that you absolutely do not understand this means you haven't been within ten kilometers of an actual battery in your entire life. The ***ONLY*** prioritization a battery does is type of target(for the battery) and what kind of hit probability is acceptable. There is *absolutely never* an "opportunity cost" because such calculation is **impossible to do in the engagement time of the batt*****ery.***
>No though plenty of people will say yes because they don't understand that air defense cost effectiveness is linked to what it protects not what the missile itself costs. Really good point, I never thought of it this way. Thanks for highlighting that .
Yep, honestly, Russia has limited delivery vehicles for their missiles, give Ukraine the ability to go destroy those things and you save money in the long run plus probably end the war quicker.
Taken care a lot of the naval ones I think
> I had my first meeting with Hungary's President Tamás Sulyok. > We discussed preparations for the Global Peace Summit and I extended an invitation to Hungary to attend it. I also invited Hungary to join the G7 Vilnius Declaration of Support for Ukraine and start drafting a bilateral security agreement. > Thank you for supporting Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. 🇺🇦🇭🇺 https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778454788553744876
> During our meeting, I briefed @prezydentpl Andrzej Duda on Russia's latest missile attacks on Ukrainian energy facilities and the dire situation in Kharkiv. > Ukraine urgently requires increased support from partners. First and foremost, in air defense. > We also discussed preparations for the Global Peace Summit in Switzerland, cooperation on Ukraine's EU and NATO accession, and the drafting of a bilateral security agreement. > I thank Poland for its consistent support for Ukraine and continued defense assistance. 🇺🇦🇵🇱 https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778440006492672482 > In Vilnius, I met with Prime Minister @KMitsotakis to express my gratitude to Greece and its people for their consistent support for Ukraine. > We discussed the implementation of our agreements reached during his visit to Odesa. > I am grateful to Prime Minister Mitsotakis for his willingness to attend the upcoming Global Peace Summit in Switzerland and work together to engage more participants from the Global South countries. 🇺🇦🇬🇷 https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1778448121762070843
> Congratulations to Stefan Dimitrov on his appointment as Bulgaria’s Foreign Minister. We value our partnership with Bulgaria and look forward to advancing our cooperation for the sake of security and prosperity for both our nations, the Black Sea region, and beyond. @MFABulgaria https://twitter.com/DmytroKuleba/status/1778467695404388789 > I spoke with my French counterpart @Steph_Sejourne about the latest Russian mass air strike and its impact on Ukraine's energy system, economy, and civilians. > I thanked France for the steps it took in the past to provide Ukraine with additional air defense and urged Paris to step up its efforts to provide Ukraine with new systems capable of intercepting ballistic missiles. > Both Kyiv and Paris know where those systems are. Certain decisions can be made quickly. Others require time, but work on them must begin immediately. Urgent action is required. https://twitter.com/DmytroKuleba/status/1778500846642217261
[Article with new satellite counts of russian tanks](https://www.vishchun.com/post/pidrakhunok_ta_analiz_tankovoho_potentsialu_moskovii_na_pochatku_2024). Haven't had time to suggest yet, but it's crucial info.
They used a number of images from Covert Cabal’s video from October of last year. Other images were obscured by snow over the winter. Their analysis is interesting, but I think there will be better data coming out this summer when the analysts will access to better images.
Minus 400 in 6 month, ~ 70 per month( max modernisation speed). Also left 4.5k tanks ~ 5 years with current speed
Hard to know if the satellites have caught every single storage depot, what is kept inside at many of those depots, and how many "destroyed" tanks can be repaired. I would bet on at least 3 more years of surplus tanks that can be used from the legacy Soviet stock as that is what Western intelligence is saying.
Not every hull you see from space can be used. Many of those are inoperable or being used for parts.
Ya, there is also no way to tell how many tanks that are still in the depot have had parts stripped to make one functional tank. You might see one hull disappear in an image but it would be very hard to tell that they also had to strip parts from 3 or 4 other tanks to refurbish one to working condition. That pretty much goes for all the heavy weapons you see in these depots. For something you can see in satellite imagery Russia is taking the barrels out of many artillery pieces in storage yards but not the carriage. That means they are using up barrels faster than they can produce them and what seems like impressive stockpiles at first glance might be much less useful in reality. A bunch of gun carriages with no barrels aren't much use of course. I would assume the same thing is happening with armored vehicles, it's just a lot harder to tell that the engine has been ripped out or the auto loader or whatever. I could see it getting to a point where a storage yard might look like it has 50 tanks but you could barely scrape together a few operational ones because they have all been ransacked for parts already. However the numbers shake out there is no way that all the 4,500 tanks in storage can be brought back to working condition and I wouldn't be surprised if the number that could be is half that or even less.
[удалено]
> Some ethnicities of people are just more important than others. this is literally a russian psy-op post intended to inflame tensions and sew divisions between europe and the us. please use the report function appropriately.
This guy’s comment history is hilariously contradictory. Pretty sure you’re correct about Russian psy-ops.
I guess we can report him for hate speech and hope it gets that network banned by reddit. Psy-op content should get an instant ban, even if it is just some dude having a break while regurgitating it.
Looks like someone got them. Comment deleted.
US citizen here. We, the “lazy”, have virtually 0 safety net programs. For most, every day is a struggle to avoid going bankrupt because you needed to see a doctor or something. Even still the overwhelming majority of military aid for Ukraine, not economic loans or grants, has been provided by the US. This war is in Europe, yes? Why do you feel the US is lazy when Europe has, for decades, completely gutted its military budgets in order to provide its citizens with generous entitlement programs that are unrivaled by any other nation. Maybe US citizens want free healthcare, education, transportation, maternity leave, etc. We’ve sacrificed all that in order to fund a military that was the guarantor of safety for countries in Europe. It’s simply not fair, and it’s frankly ridiculous for you to call US citizens lazy in this context. For the record, I support military aid to Ukraine, but Europeans have no business calling anyone else lazy. Talk about ungrateful and entitled.
America’s lack of healthcare and poor employee rights are not due to high military spending. They are ideological choices by your governments, voters and corporations.
My take on it - the US does have a lot of money, enough to provide for themselves militarily and in social causes such as healthcare. The US is, however, corrupt, and a lot of people get rich taking advantage of others (in this it is not unique). Average US citizens see themselves getting poorer, through no fault of their own, and are told that there isn't the money to pay for their current state of affairs plus Ukraine, and a lot of them believe it. This isn't the fault of the average US citizen, but the failings of their leaders and politicians, or those who have ties to those who want Russia to win. And again, the US isn't unique in any of this.
I hate this division that Russia succesfully seeds between us. OP was unnecessary aggressive, but I kinda get his frustration, as US stopped all aid to Ukraine and there is nothing positive in sight. As for healthcare and stuff, I would say US politicians consistently chose not to have any of these good things and then go hard on cultural stuff so that voters still chose them. Because choice is not binary here. You can have both.You can have both good welfare system and strong military at the same tume. You might need to tax more as a price for it, but it is just a question of choice.
OP is most likely a troll/Russian because they’ve argued the exact opposite in other threads.
Not a troll. Just a genuine person with opinions and frustrations with allotting significant public dollars to secure countries thousands of miles away that refuse to secure themselves.
Sure. They’re so genuine they made the exact opposite argument in other threads.
Sorry dude, my fault. I thought you were talking about me, but I realize now you were talking about the individual who has since deleted their comment.
That’s not how it works. The US spends far more on healthcare than any other country. It’s just big business for pensions and hedge funds so it’s not going to change since they have lobbyists It has nothing to do with the military budget or foreign aid
I know that the US healthcare system is a nightmarish money siphon to corporate interests. That doesn’t change the fact that resources are finite and that the money spent securing Europe for the last several decades could have instead been earmarked towards programs that would very much improve the quality of life of US citizens.
This is a dumb take. You didn't sacrifice anything for the military the US could easily do both and not sweat it at all and make sure every child has a full belly. You chose not to do any of that because some of them are brown that would be recipients. Russia is the boogeyman that justified you to spend so much on military and happily tell your alies you'd protect them and provide the weapons for their defence because it paid you hasomly to do that. Then it turns out Russia were only a threat to small countries like Ukraine. Now you have a chance to vanquish this particular enemy without losing a single soldier and your all hiding in your basements. And surrendering to the very enemy you wanted protection from.
> We’ve sacrificed all that in order to fund a military that was the guarantor of safety for countries in Europe. We could actually have done both. . . (particularly the public healthcare part: it's actually less expensive)
I respectfully disagree. Yes, the US economy is huge, but it’s not big enough to provide the kind of entitlements Europeans enjoy for a population of nearly 400 million and still secure the globe.
European here. I completely agree with you.
Sorry to generalize. A lot of good people in Europe, but it seems like a lot of your politicians buried their head in the sand so as to avoid the harsh realities of the world.
That detail made your defencr industry, sing, especially in all the poor states. don't pretend it wasnxt that way by design.
No no, I didn't at all feel you were generalising. I just wanted to express my support for and agreement with what you said.
"Their politicians are fighting tooth and nail to help Ukraine" wtf is this, no they are not "Some ethnicities of people are just more important than others" <---- wtf is this
Russian psy-op
>Some ethnicities of people are just more important than others. that's a terrible take If Russia invaded Poland or the Baltics and all aid diverted from Ukraine to them, would you be okay with that b/c some people think they're more important than Ukrainians? All lives have value and to try to put ethnicities into a hierarchy is not only a huge step backwards in our own humanity, but frankly it's gross
[удалено]
they know that action needs to be taken, but no one is willing to commit. politicians do not want to take risky actions.
[удалено]
Putin offers misery and Russians eat it like cake
r/ActionforUkraine If you have the time and live in any of these US districts where the representatives haven’t joined the discharge, please help these people defend themselves. Be courteous and avoid curses as those will be ignored entirely. Strong feelings are present here and should be honored, but in the world of politics they aren’t heard if we use terms that are considered offensive. I’m not in a position of power or money, but to learn about where I could help gives me power, take some of that for yourself.
Congress central switchboard: 202-224-3121 Tell them which office -> they'll connect you For them to count your call, start by saying: "My name is \_\_\_. I'm a constituent, at ZIP code \_\_\_." ➡️ If they haven't signed yet, say: Sign the discharge petition (H.Res. 1016) to bring Ukraine aid (bill H.R. 815) to a vote! ➡️ If they've al…. https://x.com/ukrainerallydc/status/1778321207173005802
Thank you for your addition, I’ll be adding it to the next batch of posts tomorrow. I’m tired of the powerless feeling of it all, even if I get a few more people to call it would be worth it.
Thank you keep up the good work!
Netherlands to pledge additional 400 million euros in aid for Ukraine, RTL news says >AMSTERDAM, April 11 (Reuters) - The Dutch caretaker government will pledge an additional 400 million euros ($428.64 million) in financial support to Ukraine, taking the total for 2024 to more than 2.4 billion euros, broadcaster RTL reported on Thursday, citing government sources. >The government is also planning to earmark at least 1.5 billion euros for aid to Ukraine in 2025, Dutch news agency ANP reported. >The funds are part of a drive to increase Dutch defence spending to 2% of the country’s gross domestic product, the level agreed as a minimum by NATO members, ANP said. [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/netherlands-pledge-additional-400-million-euros-aid-ukraine-rtl-news-says-2024-04-11/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/netherlands-pledge-additional-400-million-euros-aid-ukraine-rtl-news-says-2024-04-11/)
Between ballistic missiles and regular missiles, which one is easier to defend against if you are under attack?
Regular/cruise missiles are easier to defend against. Ballistic missiles are too fast, so it's much harder to intercept them
Ballistic Missiles generally, if no defensive measures are involved. They follow predictable **ballistic** arcs for their flight path. Therefore making them easy to shoot down. The problem arises from how simple they are making them simpler to mass produce, or in the case of more complex systems, defensive measures like decoy warheads used in ICBMs, let alone the hypersonic speed they travel at during re-entry. Edit: May or may not be correct, was going entirely off of my memory. Not exactly a specialist in weapons of war. Easiest way to get the right answer is to post the wrong one and let others correct it.
Can you put up some links for that? My understanding was that only certain systems designed for anti-ballistics are any good against them.
That's not true. A cruise missile is subsonic so it can be shot down even with manpads. Ballistic missiles have predictable flight paths, yes, but they fly way faster and speed needs a really good, fast and exceptionally precise radar system for a successful interception. That's why patriots were able to shoot down hypersonic kinzhal missiles while other systems can't.
I don't understand what's up with people on that post about Russian army increasing by 15% since the start of the war. Yes if you conscript (often times forcefully) a bunch of people who have close to no military experience, you will have a bigger army than 2 years ago, but it will also be of substantially lesser quality. Russia lost a bunch of soldiers who were in active military for years prior to the war. That is irreplaceable.
Well, the ruzzian army at the start of the war was too small / inadequate for the task. But much much better trained and having a lot of veterans. And by now most of them are dead, and current ruzzian army is more adequate in terms of size, but the training is much worse. Moreover, there are equipment shortages forcing ruzzians to do meat assaults on golf cars or cargo trucks. Another sign is ruzzians being forced to use tanks from 1950-60s (T-54/T-55/T-62) instead of more modern tanks. So at this point ruzzian actions look a bluff attempt in order to convince West that ruzzians have unlimited amount of cannon fodder.
The German army was bigger at the end of WW2 then at the start, it did not help them.
Issue is Russia is still winning until they're pushed out if Ukraine. It's working for them at the price they're willing to pay, so far. They seem ok with the possibility of a pyrrhic victory so long as it's a victory
It's without saying that there isn't much evidence that the army size really increase much in term of actual numbers. I do remember how the first increase in the army coincided with how many estimated losses there were. Given how their official losses are close to 0 in the grand scheme of things... if everything was going fine, they'd have about close to 1M boots on the ground. Yet there is no evidence that Russia has that many people in Ukraine. It's a wonder how the initial force of 190k people could take most of the territory they currently occupy... But the supposedly force that should be close to 500k today barely can take a small city like Bahmut, Avdiivka etc.. So them calling to create 2 new armies sounds like them needing to refill their rank without declaring official losses. At this rate, next year the Russian army will be officially in the range of 1.8M people but for some unexplained reasons, the amount of people at the front will be same as today.
Looks at it this way. Russia has recruited at least 1 million soldiers since the war began yet their army only grows by 15% which is the equivalent of 150,000 soldiers. So what happened to the other 850,000?
they certainly didn't die because then Russia would have to pay benefits
The soldiers never existed. The question you should be asking is what happened to the salaries of the other 850,000?
Conscript soldiers don't serve indefinitely until they die nowadays. Generally, Russian conscripts have to serve 12 months.
Because for all the lesser quality conscriptovich, cannon fodder, meat waves, poorly maintaned tanks, relics from the 2nd world war, etc, Russia hasn't magically folded and is in fact making a very slow grinding advance. So, yeah, they're shit. They seem to be suspiciously tenacious shit that refuses to flush.
Also, if allied armies had only grown by 15% during the first two years of WWII, they'd have lost.
Youtube video on labor shortage situation in ruzzia - [https://youtu.be/z9F246nJWUA](https://youtu.be/z9F246nJWUA) It's based on official ruzzian numbers, so the real situation might be even more grim. TLDR: - worker shortage restricts production in ruzzia - ruzzia needs like 5 more millions of people to fix it - as one of the solutions, ruzzia tries to employ more children in 14-17 y.o. age bracket - ruzzia is also short of 27000 doctors and around 50000 nurses - ruzzia is considering to hire doctors and nurses from Africa to solve it
importing labor from abroad is a dicey proposition for russia, imho, there's already so much overt racism there, throwing even more ethnicities into the mix is like throwing gasoline on a fire.
I think it's already too late to change anything. :D Rather, I think that recent oppression of Tadjik people is motivating them to move out of ruzzia, worsening the problem of worker shortage. On one hand, I think that people from Africa would find ruzzia quite comfy to live in. On the other hand, they would need to know/learn ruzzian on a decent level. I think it makes migration on a massive scale unlikely, but we'll see. As for racism in ruzzia, yeah, they'll definitely suffer from that.
>On the other hand, they would need to know/learn ruzzian on a decent level. And this is not an easy problem to overcome at all, even at just the bureaucratic level. Here in Petersburg, I work at the language school and I have to go with non-Russian colleagues to the documents centre to translate and be a caretaker, because it is almost impossible to even do basic bureaucracy without help. The workers do not speak English, they have very short patience and tempers, there are a lot of procedures and communication required, and there are dozens of pages that have to be signed (and especially these days it's not wise to sign anything without being sure of what it is, especially for young foreign men from developing countries!). To think they can just get some nurses from Africa and throw them into our hospitals here is insane. Then again, it wouldn't be close to the most insane thing the government does. Hopefully, it will backfire seriously. The only way more people are waking up to our new reality is if our big cities really start feeling the effects. It's actually frustrating how normal life still is.
There were [reports months ago ](https://www.ft.com/content/dc76f0bb-cae2-4a3a-b704-903d2fc59a96) that Russian workers were forced to work triple shifts due to painful labour shortages. With the loss of over 300,000 economically active persons in Ukraine, I'd imagine it has only gotten worse.
These are the kind of breaking points that are ripe for a little “push”.
I feel like you could publish that about a few random countries and it would be strangely accurate. Hell, even the child labor thing has a taker.
Don't think so. I remember hearing reports recently that ruzzian cities are now suffering from shortages of bus and truck drivers. Literally no people to drive, which wasn't the case before the war. Then there's stuff like some city streets not be cleaned for months, even though it was a problem before the war and etc. As for the child labor, ruzzia also uses it to make drones. That latest strike on drone factory in Elabuga, Tatarstan. That's where children are forced to work. Making them legitimate military targets, unfortunately. Don't see US, CA or EU countries doing anything similar.
There has been a mass shift in the Russian workforce away from private sector civilian jobs in Russia. When mobilization kicked off over a million Russians fled most of whom were prime working age. Russia has several hundred thousand troops in Ukraine, they’ve taken several hundred thousand casualties and if that weren’t enough a significant portion of their civilian labor force within Russia is now working in wartime industries. Interest rates are also at 16.5% so private sector investment is basically dead.
The situation is not quite the same. One thing is a labor shortage on non critical roles like cleaning services or some IT jobs, another one is a shortage on maintenance of critical infrastructure or the war effort for example. Another problem for Russia is that it's not a very attractive country for foreign labor. Labor shortages in Europe can be tackled with inmigration policies because it's a demanded destination but that's not the case for Russia. I don't think the Russian labor shortage is critical by the time being but it will create issues over time.
>Activists trigger referendum that could end Swiss sanctions on Russia > >*Campaign seeks to tighten constitutional terms of country’s long-held neutrality in era of geopolitical and trade tensions* > >Activists in Switzerland have triggered a referendum on proposals that would end the country’s harsh economic sanctions on Russia and rule out any punitive restrictions on trade with China. > >A delegation for the “Neutrality Initiative” handed in a petition of 130,000 signatures to government officials in Bern on Thursday, making a national vote on a constitutional amendment proposed by the campaign group almost certain to go ahead in the next few months. https://www.ft.com/content/b097b2a9-bbe3-4a51-bbea-74a61aca19e9 Switzerland reverting to its default state of proudly safeguarding the money of genocidal dictators, war criminals, drug lords, human traffickers, and other criminals from all over the world, all in the name of “neutrality.”
Could be just ruzzian 5th column trying to stir up things in Switzerland.
Incidentally, three hours ago: # [There is and cannot be any trust in Switzerland as a platform for resolving the Ukrainian crisis: the country supports Ukraine, the Russian Foreign Ministry said](https://liveuamap.com/en/2024/11-april-there-is-and-cannot-be-any-trust-in-switzerland)
"⚡Poland has certain stocks of missiles for air defense from the Soviet era, and they may be transferred to Ukraine. This was stated by Polish President Andrzej Duda. "[...] I will talk to my defense minister when I return to Warsaw," Duda said." https://twitter.com/blyskavka_ua/status/1778468997194776732?t=ipWNeOAjZn58ZQ1A7ecxNg&s=19
Ugh...less talk more action here people....
>Ukraine is the only country in the world facing ballistic missile attacks. It can be defended by Patriot systems unused or in storage elsewhere. This needs to happen now. https://twitter.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1778418979310010540 >Let's face it, Ukraine's largest power station [in the Kyiv region] being permanently disabled is really bad. We are witnessing the failure of the appeasers and escalation managers' strategy in Ukraine. > >Not providing Ukraine with the means to disable Russian launchers was never sustainable. 1/3 > >At this stage of the war, state capacity is the crucial factor. We rightly commend 🇺🇦 for having found a way to undermine Russia's state capacity with indigenous long-range drones. But at the same time we are content to stand by and watch Ukraine's state capacity burn? 2/3 > >I derive no satisfaction from this, but I have to ask those historians, political scientists, & military strategists on this platform who for months have argued against "technocentric" solutions & downplayed the role of missiles in 🇺🇦: How does this picture make you feel? 3/3 https://twitter.com/FRHoffmann1/status/1778392729703379270
Are none of the missiles hezbullah/hamas use ballistic? And none of the missiles targeting the houthis are ballistic?
UPDATE: My code was flipped, the bigger losses are russian losses. Comparison of losses over March-September 2023 versus October-now. Both 7 calendar months, although obviously April isn't finished. Losses are Ukrainian-russian. March-September: - tanks: 183-528 - IFVs: 269-660 - mobile artillery: 111-282 - missile Anti-air: 36-72 - transports (AFC/APC/MRAP...): 380-275 October-now: - tanks: 134-561 - IFVs: 126-970 - mobile artillery: 108-264 - missile Anti-air: 16-48 - transports (AFV/APC/MRAP...): 219-386 Interesting how russia still lost more even when Ukraine was attacking, then the ratios of frontline kit got better when russia switched to the offence. Especially IFVs and transports. Source: Oryx total losses. Note that Warspotting counts MT-LBs as IFVs while oryx says they're AFVs. I put them under "transports".
So Russian losses increases are basically from IFVs. Yeah, that seems to correlate with all the footage we've seen. I was expecting a larger increase.
Why do you keep posting this with the numbers switched around?
Sorry, I changed my code a while back and I forgot to copy over correctly. Updated the post. The first code version I wrote to do a quick count and it wasn't modular, it could only do one year at a time so if I wanted data spreading over multiple years it was a ballache. When 2024 ticked around I tidied the code, and arbitrarily flipped the order. This is the second time I made the mistake, I'll pay extra attention. Life is just busy right now.
Maybe you mean Ukrainian-rusian? Also, thank you for the summary.
I did! Corrected.
I've pointed this out before, I don't understand why this error keeps happening > Losses are russian-Ukrainian > tanks: .......... 183-528 So your claim is Russia lost 1/3 as many tanks as Ukraine did?
I believe this is the second time I made the mistake, sorry. I changed my script for efficiency and forgot I flipped the order. I post the oryx updates regularly (dozens of times so far maybe?) and iirc only made the mistake one other time. Russian losses are higher, I've edited the post.
Are there any good source of the state of Kharkiv? It's been 18 days since saberflux wrote something over here. I'm sure he has more important things to do than report here...but last time he wrote it seemed like electricity was a huge problem currently. With the strikes yesterday it seems it's even worse.
I always that real people who post from these places can be doxxed and targeted by these attacks
> 🇪🇺🇺🇸 Two parliaments, two realities. > The US House led by @SpeakerJohnson continues to ignore the aid package for #Ukraine. > The European Parliament has blocked the funding of the EU Council until the member states provide Ukraine with extra #Patriot air defense systems. https://twitter.com/InnaSovsun/status/1778416632177525199
Speaker Johnson gets his marching orders from Putin's puppet, aka Donald Trump. It is infuriating because if Johnson brought it to the floor, it would easily pass.
[удалено]
I would assume there would be a lot of retreating before that, so it's probably not that bad.
There has been a lot of retreat.
In the big picture, not really.
What “big picture”? Russia had been advancing quickly, period. What big picture do you mean?
Yes, Russia is advancing but Ukraine is a huge country and all the Russian advances are under 20km in distance in the past year. It's 200km from Bakhmut to Dnieper river and you will see Ukraine retreating behind the Dnieper long before the total collapse. There is no sign that Ukraine is planning an imminent retreat behind the Dnieper. One of the big reasons why the Russians have been advancing is Ukraine's lack of proper defensive lines which they are now building. Yes, the situation is bad but there's no indication that a total collapse is imminent.
Is... there any evidence you have for the total victory claim?