|
Yeah, a lot NATO "cheapskating" probably got a pass until now because the countries offered something else that raising a stink over military spending wasn't worth jeopardizing, like US bases in strategically important places (*cough* Greenland *cough*)
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
Well I know that it was Trump's like one foreign policy deal, threatening to leave NATO if the rest of the alliance didn't start paying their fair share. Now, I doubt this was an organic thought on his part and probably came from, oh, who can possibly say, but it is ironic that it's happening after he left office but only because his creditor decided to conduct a program of extreme NATO bolstering.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:18
|
|
|
zoux posted:Well I know that it was Trump's like one foreign policy deal, threatening to leave NATO if the rest of the alliance didn't start paying their fair share. Now, I doubt this was an organic thought on his part and probably came from, oh, who can possibly say, but it is ironic that it's happening after he left office but only because his creditor decided to conduct a program of extreme NATO bolstering. It is my firm belief he never understood that 2% spending is money that countries spend on themselves, not into NATO (=US) pockets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:30
|
|
|
Xakura posted:It is my firm belief he never understood that 2% spending is money that countries spend on themselves, not into NATO (=US) pockets. I'd buy it. It's the same blithering idiot that spent 4 years studiously ignoring everyone, everywhere, constantly explaining how stupid, dumb, and wrong he was about how tariffs work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:47
|
|
|
Yeah he wanted NATO members to pay NATO. Powerful smoothbrains.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:47
|
|
|
Xakura posted:It is my firm belief he never understood that 2% spending is money that countries spend on themselves, not into NATO (=US) pockets. Like I said, I don't think it was his idea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:53
|
|
|
zoux posted:Well I know that it was Trump's like one foreign policy deal, threatening to leave NATO if the rest of the alliance didn't start paying their fair share. Now, I doubt this was an organic thought on his part and probably came from, oh, who can possibly say, but it is ironic that it's happening after he left office but only because his creditor decided to conduct a program of extreme NATO bolstering. Not the only foreign policy deal, there was also withholding military aid to Ukraine to coerce them to manufacture evidence on Hunter Biden.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 16:56
|
|
|
Slashrat posted:Yeah, a lot NATO "cheapskating" probably got a pass until now because the countries offered something else that raising a stink over military spending wasn't worth jeopardizing, like US bases in strategically important places (*cough* Greenland *cough*) An interesting part of the Ukraine War has been learning how badly Germany has been letting their forces decay. Not expecting them to be anywhere near the US or UK but wasn't it learned their number of modern aircraft ready to deploy was in the low double digits, their radios are garbage, and they only had about 300 usable tanks?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:48
|
|
|
Tbf that level of military funding largely worked out fine for us E: honestly the greater strategic sin was the energy dependence on Russia
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:57
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Tbf that level of military funding largely worked out fine for us It works great until it doesn't work at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 17:59
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:other times it’s just a country with a refusal to pay, play along, but gets mad at countries with less money elsewhere in NATO or he EU. Just come right out and say Germany. psydude fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Jun 1, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:08
|
|
|
psydude posted:Just come right out and say Germany. Why, I could have meant anybody!
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:12
|
|
|
A.o.D. posted:It works great until it doesn't work at all. Yeah but military spending has opportunity cost as well so who knows
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:14
|
|
|
If Germany, of all countries, doesn't want to build up its army, that's cool with me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:16
|
|
|
zoux posted:If Germany, of all countries, doesn't want to build up its army, that's cool with me. They've gone a bit too far in the opposite direction and are now the kid in your freshman history class who insists the UN can solve all wars through diplomacy if we all just try.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:25
|
|
|
The plausible roads to European strategic autonomy from the US are very few, but all of them involve Germany actually taking its defence spending commitments seriously.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:29
|
|
|
US has decided to give Ukraine HIMARS (4 systems so far). The US has required and received Ukraine’s assurances that Ukraine will not use HIMARS to strike Russian land. Training will take 3 weeks or so for operators, possibly more for maintainers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:30
|
|
|
I'm of the strong opinion that we should be giving zero fucks about whether or not Ukraine uses those to immediately pummel Belogrod's train station and oil storage facilities into a collection of smoking craters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:45
|
|
|
They're legit military targets so I'd be ok with them going kerblooey. I get the political angle though so oh well.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:49
|
|
|
Same, but it's not like Ukraine has a shortage of targets on its own land. For that matter, all evidence indicates that long-range strategic strikes don't actually help that much. They should focus on defeating armies in the field, not trying to knock out ball breathing production.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:50
|
|
|
It seems like a reasonable hedge. To the extent that attacking targets in Russia is strategically advantageous, there are other weapons systems that are capable of doing that (such as helicopters or special forces). There's an open question as to whether that includes Russian occupied territory, but I'd assume they've stipulated that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 18:56
|
|
|
Uncle Enzo posted:Same, but it's not like Ukraine has a shortage of targets on its own land. Belgorod POL storage and rail yards are pretty crucial to Russian movements in Ukraine, it’s not as abstract as ball bearings or propeller springs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 19:00
|
|
|
Hyrax Attack! posted:An interesting part of the Ukraine War has been learning how badly Germany has been letting their forces decay. Not expecting them to be anywhere near the US or UK but wasn't it learned their number of modern aircraft ready to deploy was in the low double digits, their radios are garbage, and they only had about 300 usable tanks? I recall an article saying they had 19 fully operational tanks, but me brain and numbers don't work so good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 19:24
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Belgorod POL storage and rail yards are pretty crucial to Russian movements in Ukraine, it’s not as abstract as ball bearings or propeller springs. Are they still bring supplied mainly from Belgorod? I would have thought they had switched to the Voronezh–Valuyki route, on account of how a Ukrainian counterattack on Vovchansk is simply a matter of time. On another note, it seems there has been a Russian attempt to open a front again near Hlukhiv in Sumy oblast. https://mobile.twitter.com/EuromaidanPR/status/1532009523623473152?cxt=HHwWgMC9ge-i5cIqAAAA
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 19:24
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:I recall an article saying they had 19 fully operational tanks, but me brain and numbers don't work so good. I'd believe it, NYtimes said 300 but at the time of the start of the Russian invasion if Germany had to send all available tanks to the Ukrainian border and they could only dispatch those that worked, had trained crews, and ammo, wouldn't be surprised if it were 19. Probably similar to if in 1936 the US had to send all combat ready troops to Europe with a week's notice, would have been a lot of horses and trainer tanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 19:43
|
|
|
I also could be misremembering- this was way before Ukraine during an Audit of German Forces back in 2017/18? Ish? I dunno. Ignore me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 19:53
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:I also could be misremembering- this was way before Ukraine during an Audit of German Forces back in 2017/18? Ish? I dunno. They're spending 100 billion Euros to modernize so that's a plus but yeah from a recent article: quote:Even in Rukla, the flagship German NATO mission which has relatively few complaints when it comes to resources, the general scarcity has been felt. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/23/...&smid=url-share
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 20:00
|
|
|
I'm srsly worried about the seeming lack on that list of purchases of stuff like spares and ammo, which by all accounts are among the bigger problems.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 20:11
|
|
|
Is there a line item labelled "sustainment" or "readiness" or "maintenance"?
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 20:27
|
|
|
Ahem. I think you'll find that this funding is for capital expenses only, and those do not sound like capital expenses. (Just shitposting from my limited experience in the NGO world here.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 20:46
|
|
|
The UK has asked for US permission to send some of its MLRS systems to Ukraine. Hopefully they'll be shipped off sooner rather than later. Anything that can push the Russian artillery back will be in demand I'm sure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 20:56
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:US has decided to give Ukraine HIMARS (4 systems so far). The US has required and received Ukraine’s assurances that Ukraine will not use HIMARS to strike Russian land. Training will take 3 weeks or so for operators, possibly more for maintainers. Are we talking, like, 4 batteries, or 4 launch vehicles? The latter doesn't sound terribly impactful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 21:32
|
|
|
4 launchers. A typical US battery is 6 launchers plus support equipment, but the US is in the process of changing to a 9-launcher per battery organization as the standard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 21:35
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:4 launchers. A typical US battery is 6 launchers plus support equipment, but the US is in the process of changing to a 9-launcher per battery organization as the standard. The 4 launchers are just the prestaged one, there's more coming. They are already in EU and being used for training.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 21:44
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:The 4 launchers are just the prestaged one, there's more coming. That is possible, likely probable. The DOD representative did not commit to that today, stating that the US would continue to assess the situation to determine what type of future assistance would be required and offered. He did say that there was sufficient US capacity to offer more if directed to in the future.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 21:54
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/savaadaak/status/1532098265826709508?s=21&t=K5zTq3_n6U2iihXYKmGp0w MLRS’s from the UK too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 22:32
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/MichaelStone/status/1532084932415307776?t=rddZauAVmjn4h5qKm0pfuQ&s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 22:38
|
|
|
Nick Soapdish posted:https://twitter.com/MichaelStone/status/1532084932415307776?t=rddZauAVmjn4h5qKm0pfuQ&s=19 *General Atomics has entered the chat.* God I love that name and lineage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 22:39
|
|
|
Looking forward to seeing Hellfire vs. T-72 videos, and all the jack-in-the-box turret fun. Though by the time these UAVs deploy, it might be Hellfires vs. T-54/55s
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 23:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:13 |
|
|
Jimmy Smuts posted:Looking forward to seeing Hellfire vs. T-72 videos, and all the jack-in-the-box turret fun. Though by the time these UAVs deploy, it might be Hellfires vs. T-54/55s In a weird perverse way this war is turning out to be like the ultimate laboratory test of what a NATO Warsaw Pact war may have been like, at least in terms of equipment. I feel really weird saying that as I don’t want anyone to think I feel that Ukraine is some sort of test bed or should be used that way. Not to imply that we are not collecting data which is a normal thing mind you. But yeah I’m interested to see how the Russians are going to be able to counter the MLRS and general atomics contribution.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2022 23:15
|
|