|
Mano posted:NZZ is the house paper of the liberal party in Switzerland- this means center-right btw. They are more pro-business / money than conservative. That's pretty accurate. NZZ is liberal for Switzerland but not nearly as liberal as say, The Economist. It can also be hard to translate those labels across cultures though. I haven't actually read any of NZZ's war reporting, but I was shocked when Le Temps (Geneva's main paper, to which we subscribe) was all in on supporting Ukraine, even early on. I expected thoughts & prayers & calls for calm. Also for more content, Google Translate does a really good job of making any article in a major European language readable in your language. You can use DeepL if you really care, but GT works fine. E: Just read the article. It looks like their war reporting is kind of what I would have expected for all Swiss war reporting if you asked in Jan 2022. NZZ is a quite reputable paper in general but if that article is representative I would skip all of its Ukraine articles. Huge difference between that reporting angle and the Geneva reporting angle. Saladman fucked around with this message at 06:00 on Feb 3, 2023 |
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 05:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
The only thing I buy in that article is that Scholz would make a decision behind closed doors without consulting his ministers. That has precedent, but it's such a cold take they don't get any credit for having it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 08:48
|
|
|
Mederlock posted:Has anyone heard of any other countries outside of Germany concretely promising their Leopards as well, yet? Maybe I missed it, but so far it seems only Britain, Germany, and the US have so far actually committed heavy steel. Poland has promised 14 2A4 tanks, Canada – 4 2A4. Finland and Norway have announced sending their Leos 2 too, but those announcements don't seem to have numbers (to be fair to Finland, they don't detail what they're supplying, as a rule). Spain had promised some 2A4s (it has like a 100 it doesn't use), but it did turn out a few days ago that literally 0 of them are usable. As a sidenote to all of this, Germany is also sending 88 Leopard 1 tanks to Ukraine. As for tanks in general, it sounds like you've missed Poland and friends giving Ukraine around 400 T-72 tanks in the past year. cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 10:33 on Feb 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 10:31
|
|
|
If Prigozhin maintains his position I could see Wagner getting more replacements from mobilized and drafted soldiers that are nearing their terms. "Hey, they won't let you go home anyway. So sign this paper and join us for 6 months. At least if you die your family can afford BMW instead of Lada". My other guess is that new guidelines for judges will ramp up incarceration. Stuff that used to end up in a fine, or (that term for "be good for x time and you won't go behind bars") will now end up in proper prison sentences.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 10:38
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Spain had promised some 2A4s (it has like a 100 it doesn't use), but it did turn out a few days ago that literally 0 of them are usable. You may remember the "Spain is totally ready to send its Leopard 2 tanks immediately" from months ago that they had to walk back immediately after. As far as I know it's about the same tanks, but remarks about their poor condition were dismissed back then.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 11:05
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:You may remember the "Spain is totally ready to send its Leopard 2 tanks immediately" from months ago that they had to walk back immediately after. As far as I know it's about the same tanks, but remarks about their poor condition were dismissed back then. We've gone through a few steps of it – they reportedly meant to make a move with the tanks early last year, then several weeks ago we entered the pre-Ramstein discourse with the number thrown around being like 20-30. Post-Ramstein that got reduced to like 4-5 tanks, but the Spanish defence ministry did ultimately clarify that Spain has no sufficiently functional Leopard 2A4 tanks. Much like Greece, they have a large 2A6 fleet, but Germany seems to be the only country so far that's explicitly committed to supplying Ukraine with the 2A6 variant. cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 11:37 on Feb 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 11:35
|
|
|
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/norway-order-54-new-army-tanks-germany-nrk-2023-02-03/ Norway have been trialing German and Korean tanks and today announced they were buying German. Norwegian news articles mention that delivery of the new tanks won't start until 2026 so this unfortunately does not mean that all the old A4s can be sent to Ukraine immediately.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 12:10
|
|
|
Drakhoran posted:https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/norway-order-54-new-army-tanks-germany-nrk-2023-02-03/ I wonder if the contract still contains the standard clause about not being allowed to send the equipment to 3rd parties without German consent? If it does, it demonstrates the argument that Germany is ruining its defense industry by being measured in its approach to allowing customers to send German sourced military equipment to third parties is not a strong argument. Ie, that Norway is seemingly not put off buying German tanks on the fear that they wouldn't be allowed by contract to send their tanks to whoever they wanted to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 12:33
|
|
|
Electric Wrigglies posted:I wonder if the contract still contains the standard clause about not being allowed to send the equipment to 3rd parties without German consent? If it does, it demonstrates the argument that Germany is ruining its defense industry by being measured in its approach to allowing customers to send German sourced military equipment to third parties is not a strong argument. Ie, that Norway is seemingly not put off buying German tanks on the fear that they wouldn't be allowed by contract to send their tanks to whoever they wanted to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 13:00
|
|
|
Article 26 of the German Basic Law (and the laws and regulations following it) say that yes, that clause is there. And further, I'm willing to make the incredibly bold declaration that you won't find a weapons manufacturer in the EU that isn't bound by the same rules. e: To be a bit less snarky: L335/99 from 2008. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32008E0944&from=DE Antigravitas fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Feb 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 13:01
|
|
|
AFAIK these tanks are part of meeting NATO mechanized battalion requirements. Presumably Norway is also the last to send tanks at this moment since we share a border with Russia.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 13:02
|
|
|
Drakhoran posted:https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/norway-order-54-new-army-tanks-germany-nrk-2023-02-03/ On the other hand, we're not very likely to need them at home for a while. They only exist to guard against a possible Russian invasion, really, and the Russians are kind of busy elsewhere at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 13:04
|
|
|
I think we should train tank crews in Norway, using our tanks. But we'll see what happens there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 13:13
|
|
|
https://www.politico.eu/article/ger...RSS_Syndication Ukraine wants Leopard 1s also?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 15:38
|
|
|
WarpedLichen posted:https://www.politico.eu/article/ger...RSS_Syndication Sure, why not? A tank beats the gently caress out of no tank and although they're a little fragile they still bring a fair amount of gun to the fight. The article is a little silly complaining about ammunition compatibility and supply chain. They're not going to mix Leo 1s and 2s in units, and AFU is already operating nearly every single kind of large caliber tank gun ever made so their supply chains are already nightmarish.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 15:45
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:The article is a little silly complaining about ammunition compatibility and supply chain. They're not going to mix Leo 1s and 2s in units, and AFU is already operating nearly every single kind of large caliber tank gun ever made so their supply chains are already nightmarish. And it's gonna get even worse when they get two mutually incompatible western 120mm guns, and two incompatible 105mm guns. Ukrainian logistics officers probably drink themselves to sleep every day. Still better than the alternative though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/IlyaMatveev_/status/1621549531593687046?s=20 Good article into Russian oil price cap circumvention. quote:As long as the oil companies directly or indirectly control the shipping element of the value chain and are able to refer to some high benchmark number for the cost of shipping, they could pretend they are selling the crude below the price cap, gain access to insurance services from the Western markets, and collect additional revenues on the shipping leg, thus keeping then whole for the full transaction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
EU: You can't sell your $10 widget for more than $2! Russia: Ok, my widget now costs $1 (plus $10 for shipping and handling) EU: Who could have foreseen this?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 18:09
|
|
|
Today's US aid package, more HIMARS ammo but no longer range missiles it seems, yet: https://twitter.com/Tendar/status/1621575554750095361?s=20&t=tAAB7vKjia2CkyOLBuQbwg
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 19:54
|
|
|
Orthanc6 posted:Today's US aid package, more HIMARS ammo but no longer range missiles it seems, yet: Wasn't longer range supposed to be announced today according to the rumours?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 20:37
|
|
|
TheRat posted:Wasn't longer range supposed to be announced today according to the rumours? Yeah this article claimed so, guess that was premature: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...=uverify%20wall
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 20:44
|
|
|
Orthanc6 posted:Today's US aid package, more HIMARS ammo but no longer range missiles it seems, yet: I think "Precision Guided Rockets" do refer to GLSDB, which are the ones that have longer range. Edit: Just saw Pentagon spokesman Ryder confirm this. So they are included in the package. KingaSlipek fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Feb 3, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
TheRat posted:Wasn't longer range supposed to be announced today according to the rumours? https://twitter.com/felschwartz/status/1621561173144395776 https://twitter.com/Tendar/status/1621572712937230338 It is not clear when Ukraine will receive them, or when they will be compatible with HIMARS - apparently they are not currently https://twitter.com/JackDetsch/status/1621573743888719879
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 20:50
|
|
|
It's interesting to me that the ratio of Javelin missiles to Javelin launchers was around 6:1 in the early part of the war and around 8:1 now. I wonder if that reflects the practical life of the launcher before it's lost, destroyed, unrecoverable, etc. I.e. Does the average Javelin gunner shoot 6-8 times before becoming a casualty? Does the launcher and fire control, on average, only last 6-8 engagements before getting damaged, etc.? I'm sure smarter people than I are tracking this stuff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 22:09
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:It's interesting to me that the ratio of Javelin missiles to Javelin launchers was around 6:1 in the early part of the war and around 8:1 now. I wonder if that reflects the practical life of the launcher before it's lost, destroyed, unrecoverable, etc. Well, there is a saying that there really aren't antitank crews that are bad at aiming. But more realistically, I think the launcher wears out after several uses.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 22:12
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:Well, there is a saying that there really aren't antitank crews that are bad at aiming. But more realistically, I think the launcher wears out after several uses. So you might be thinking the Javelin has a launcher that's like a tube that the missiles go into and has the optics and electronics attached to it, but that's not how the system works. It doesn't really have a multiple use "launcher". What it does have is a reusable Command Launch Unit or CLU which houses the optics and electronics and things, and connects to the Launch Tube Assembly. The LTA aka "round" is a fully enclosed tube with the missile in it, and is single use. This means the bits of the system that take the most beating from the rocket blast are not reused .  https://irp.fas.org/doddir/army/fm3-22-37.pdf Now that's not to say these CLU things live forever, I'm sure those get lost, damaged, blown up, etc. But they probably live a lot longer than they would if attached to a launcher tube.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 22:32
|
|
|
Most launchers are not really used much. Javelin is the kind of a weapon where you have to have a thousand spread out everywhere in the frontlines just to have one where it actually matters. If a Javelin operator gets to shoot 8 times against targets that actually merit a Javelin, they have probably just had a very bad day. (Or a series of very bad days...) I also believe that the launchers are considered to be extremely useful even absent munitions, because they have a very high-quality thermal sight.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 22:33
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:So you might be thinking the Javelin has a launcher that's like a tube that the missiles go into and has the optics and electronics attached to it, but that's not how the system works. It doesn't really have a multiple use "launcher". What it does have is a reusable Command Launch Unit or CLU which houses the optics and electronics and things, and connects to the Launch Tube Assembly. The LTA aka "round" is a fully enclosed tube with the missile in it, and is single use. This means the bits of the system that take the most beating from the rocket blast are not reused . Well, you learn something every day here. Yes, I was actually thinking it works like Swedish Carl Gustav or FDF-used APILAS, but with a re-loadable tube, which I am more familiar of.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 22:52
|
|
|
Yeah the CLU's are useful even without the missile.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 22:55
|
|
|
How prevalent are night vision goggles in the Ukraine military right now? I know some have been donated (maybe a lot?) But I've literally never seen any Ukrainian troops on video with them. Not that it means a whole lot what is seen on videos. Maybe they are strictly for the special forces? Ive seen videos where the Ukrainian troops say that the Russians basically don't have any of them so I feel like it would give the Ukrainians a huge advantage if they had them in significant numbers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 23:00
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:How prevalent are night vision goggles in the Ukraine military right now? I know some have been donated (maybe a lot?) But I've literally never seen any Ukrainian troops on video with them. Not that it means a whole lot what is seen on videos. Maybe they are strictly for the special forces? Ive seen videos where the Ukrainian troops say that the Russians basically don't have any of them so I feel like it would give the Ukrainians a huge advantage if they had them in significant numbers. I mean the basic issue is that the kind of conditions that would require the use of night vision goggles are generally not the kind of conditions that allow for good videos, unless what you want is a livestreamed viral video of your sergeant screaming to turn off that goddamn camera light before your entire position is obliterated by enemy fire. Kind of a self-curating process there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 23:04
|
|
|
Tomn posted:I mean the basic issue is that the kind of conditions that would require the use of night vision goggles are generally not the kind of conditions that allow for good videos, unless what you want is a livestreamed viral video of your sergeant screaming to turn off that goddamn camera light before your entire position is obliterated by enemy fire. Kind of a self-curating process there. I don't mean that I want to see night vision video of Ukraine combat ops. I know this isn't call of duty I just mean I never see videos of soldiers wearing them but I know that doesn't mean much of anything. I have a feeling that they probably haven't been given too many and what they have goes to the special forces.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 23:09
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:I don't mean that I want to see night vision video of Ukraine combat ops. I know this isn't call of duty I just mean I never see videos of soldiers wearing them but I know that doesn't mean much of anything. I have a feeling that they probably haven't been given too many and what they have goes to the special forces. I haven't used NVGs myself but if they're like any other kind of goggles even if not directly wearing them they'd be a bit uncomfortable and in the way to keep on you. Why do so when you don't need them? Especially if you're in combat conditions where they might get scuffed, dirtied, or shot up if you're keeping them on your helmet or something. Better to keep them in a safe container until the time comes to actually use them. After all, it's not like night is going to suddenly creep up on you by surprise requiring you to strap them on in a hurry.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2023 23:52
|
|
|
didn't see this development on the nzz article, peskov says it is a "canard" (not really sure what the nuance of the translation means, but seems like a general denial) not sure if this hurts or helps the credibility of the article https://tass.com/politics/1571089
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2023 00:34
|
|
|
lmao it was meant to be in january? yeah that's 100% bullshit
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2023 00:45
|
|
|
Not that it being 4 months earlier would even make it much more believable, but precisely zero people believed Russia was open to a good faith negotiated way out of this after they released their set of demands back in December as preconditions to negotiation. The demands were ludicrous and designed to not be acceptable and coincided with a clear American posture shift to just piling weapons up in Ukraine as fast as possible because clearly whatever the end would be, it wasn't going to be negotiated any time soon. The only proposal that Ukraine cede territory for peace floating around at that time was the Russian proposal that included some wild stuff like Poland would get Lvov region and Russia would get the East. It's impossible to overstate how much no one bit on that proposal. Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Feb 4, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2023 00:51
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Isn't this hindsight? I mean, this is probably more appropriate for the China thread, but I don't think that Russia's poor showing in Ukraine should be seen as a sign that every country would similarly gently caress things up. At the end of the day China has a way higher population than Russia, a much more modern economy in most ways and probably a more modern military with more potential too. I imagine that they have been looking at Russia's failings and are probably anxious to sniff out similar weaknesses in their own forces before it has to be put to the test. With Taiwan, its true that an amphibious operation would be extremely difficult, but China has other options, like they can blockade the island as well which would put the Taiwanese and Americans in a very difficult situation and I doubt that America would be willing to try and break such a blockade with force over Taiwan. Russia in comparison has a major problem with the fact that they simply can't block off the land routes to Ukraine in the west and attempting to do so is both politically and militarily impossible, then there's the fact that Ukraine is like 17 times larger in land area compared to Taiwan. In that sense Taiwan's position as an isolated island nation is a curse as well as a blessing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2023 01:09
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:Not that it being 4 months earlier would even make it much more believable, but precisely zero people believed Russia was open to a good faith negotiated way out of this after they released their set of demands back in December as preconditions to negotiation. The demands were ludicrous and designed to not be acceptable and coincided with a clear American posture shift to just piling weapons up in Ukraine as fast as possible because clearly whatever the end would be, it wasn't going to be negotiated any time soon. Uh, you seem to think the NZZ article was referring to January '22? They were writing about the meetings happening this January, as in "Russia gets to keep the territory it currently holds", not "We'll give you 20% of Ukraine if you don't start a war" last year.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2023 01:49
|
|
|
biden suggesting that in january of this year is even less believable
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2023 01:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:35 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/MalcontentmentT/status/1621392655342264320 Is the ground frozen enough for heavy armour operations? I really hope they do something dramatic like drive to the sea of Azoz or take back all the ground lost in the last month or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2023 02:03
|
|
