(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
I think he is wearing his triangulation blue-green Belarus flag ribbon rather than a Colorado beetle one?
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 10:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 11:13 |
|
|
I am surprised Kazakhstan and Armenia even showed up. Here is a video of them walking to Alexandrovskiy garden. Luka is missing, not surprising he has knee problems. Also I am not seeng Pashinyan of Armenia and Tokayev of Kazakhstan looks like he wants to be out of the frame as much as possible. https://twitter.com/nashaniva/status/1655851308094566400?s=20 OddObserver posted:I think he is wearing his triangulation blue-green Belarus flag ribbon rather than a Colorado beetle one? Yes. Except its red-green. He never wore the beetle ribbon, they were even banned in Belarus for I think 2 years? Maybe 2016-17 Sekenr fucked around with this message at 10:23 on May 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 10:18
|
|
|
I'm really happy more people made the "potato beetle" comparison to that yellowish black ribbon Kremlin uses. It also allows me to post this utterly bonkers 1950' Polish propaganda piece: Yes, it's US bomber dropping potato eating capitalist bugs over Polish and East German fields.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 10:37
|
|
|
Colorado beetle name appeared as soon as the ribbon itself was invented. I don't know who invented it but all potato farmers hate the beast so any propaganda value it could have on  was negated instantly
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 10:50
|
|
|
Sekenr posted:I am surprised Kazakhstan and Armenia even showed up. Here is a video of them walking to Alexandrovskiy garden. Luka is missing, not surprising he has knee problems. Also I am not seeng Pashinyan of Armenia and Tokayev of Kazakhstan looks like he wants to be out of the frame as much as possible. Putin made them attend the parade so that the Ukrainians don't bomb the red square and accidentally get the wrong president lol
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 10:58
|
|
|
Being el gringo feo, I slept through the victory day parade. I awoke to discover this was the only tank in the parade today. in 2023.  Not a single plane in the sky either.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 10:59
|
|
|
HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:Being el gringo feo, I slept through the victory day parade. I awoke to discover this was the only tank in the parade today. in 2023. You only need one tank as a reference for later VFX work to comp 1000 tanks into the shot in time for the evening news
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 11:00
|
|
|
They did at least parade some of their TELs too. No clue when they last had missiles in them of course....
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 11:19
|
|
|
If they paraded every Russian cripple from this war pushing carts with the remains of all KIAs then you'd get a pretty decent sized patriotic parade. With the promise that next year it would only be bigger.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 11:42
|
|
|
alex314 posted:I'm really happy more people made the "potato beetle" comparison to that yellowish black ribbon Kremlin uses. The "American bug". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVA1C8kUw4I
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 14:44
|
|
|
alex314 posted:I'm really happy more people made the "potato beetle" comparison to that yellowish black ribbon Kremlin uses. It was a whole genre   "How do you do, native friend, which way to the countryside? We are here to promote Atlantic culture"  "Truman's HQ"  "American high command gives you, potato beetles, the mission to sabotage agriculture in the name of the Freedom Initiative" And so on and so forth
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 15:28
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:So what are the downsides (apart from cost, etc.)? There is a training round that is supposed to be cheaper and extend the life of the barrel during training and then there is the full power round. The training round is apparently fairly nice to shoot out of the Spear since the rifle is pretty heavy and has a good muzzle brake/suppressor combo. Going by Ian's and Carl's vids anyways. The full power round kicks fairly hard and that is where the comparisons to the M14 start becoming a bit eerie IMO. There's some vids out there of people shooting it and the rifle is starting to buck off their shoulders in full auto. For slow aimed fire its 'fine' of course but its still comparable to a 7.62x51 firearm which is kinda high for something that is supposed to be a full auto assualt rifle of sorts. Or maybe its supposed to be a compact DMR that is close enough to assault rifle that it gets issued widely. I dunno. That scope is pretty bad rear end no matter what. Wish it was cheaper though. Reputedly the army might not end up getting rid of their M4's and might use both M4's and M5's side by side for a long time to come since the extra ammo you can carry with the M4 is still a strong point in its favor. Interestingly going by Carl's vid the M4 still handles dirt better than the M5 will but the M5 isn't a bad gun mechanically. Only thing that truly looks stupid to me is the 2nd charging handle. I'm sure there is a argument for it but I don't think its worth it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhFjUliSvVc PC LOAD LETTER fucked around with this message at 16:54 on May 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 16:40
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Has there been any test footage of 6.8 vs Level IV? Im kind of pessimistic from what Ive heard, tbh Yes. :nsfw: because guns hitting people-shaped targets. This YouTube video demonstrates a couple different 6.8mm cartridges--including the new hybrid case--against Level IV body armor. The standard, brass cartridges damage but don't penetrate; the hybrid cartridges cause about a 2" depth bulge. The testers point out that even their hybrid cartridge is just using a standard lead bullet. Military-issue rounds will likely have steel penetrators, which almost certainly would have penetrated. Newer hybrid cartridges have a stainless steel base on an otherwise normal brass cartridge. This provides the ability to have a much stronger charge, which in turn results in a higher-velocity round. MikeC posted:How practical is trying to support friendly squads 300m away though with the equipment carried by infantrymen? Can people regularly see 300m out much less spot guys moving around trying not to be seen? I have seen a lot of combat footage in Ukraine and it seems they might not see past 150m in many directions from what they show on their cameras. Average direct-fire engagement range in "open" ground is ~200m. Average direct-fire engagement range in urban terrain is less than 50m. That said: those are averages, and partly driven by the capabilities of existing platforms. If I only had people equipped with 5.56mm, I wouldn't even try to have squads supporting each other with direct fire 400m away or further. Why bother? Unless that squad had a medium machinegun, it just wouldn't do much. But if every soldier has a rifle capable of hitting that far, it provides tactical leaders options they don't even have today. Budzilla posted:Amazing that the British wanted a similar round in the 50s and the US vetoed that idea and went with the fill rifle 7.62 cartridge and later on with the 5.56 and now this. Djarum posted:The optics are crazy secret sauce. I am still skeptical in terms of them actually being able to produce them en mass and them performing as well as they claim in the field. Though having an optic and suppressor as standard on every rifle will be huge even if the more advanced features don’t end up working as well as advertised. Kraftwerk posted:What makes optics so special compared to iron sights. Most of the time you can’t actually see what you’re shooting at, right? Like the dramatic short range videos we see of people mag dumping into Russians at the trenches or the defense vids where you see 2-3 guys shot at close range are supposed to be the exception rather than the rule. Most of the time I think you’re shooting in the general direction and by the time you find the bodies nobody actually knows who killed them. Cicero posted:I admit I'm a bit concerned about urban warfare or trench clearing, as we've seen Ukrainians often have to do, since the gun setup is heavier and has fewer bullets per magazine. The ammunition amount very legitimate concern. I wonder if we'll see 25-round and weird extended 30-round magazines come out (drat they'd be long, though). The weight--and length--are overblown concerns, imo. With the suppressor, the M7 is the same length as the M16. The M4 was certainly easier to use in/around vehicles and tight spaces, but the M16 was fine, and was a lot shorter than older battle rifles. In terms of weight, with suppressor, optics, and magazine, it's about the same as an old M14. The M250 is something like half the weight of the M249. I maintain that footage and accounts from Ukraine reinforce the military benefits of the NGSW program, though I do expect a lot of attention will be put on thinking through impacts to the close fight. Edit: Addressing the post immediately above The recoil is more than the M4/M16, but people forget that those platforms have ridiculously low recoil. You can put the buttstock on your nose and fire the weapon and won't hurt your nose. (Please don't do this, goons.) The 6.8mm recoil seems a little less than 7.62mm on this platform. The suppressor helps a lot. The other thing is that you shouldn't use full auto on the rifle at anything more than about 50m away. Less than 50m away who cares if your aim shifts a few inches higher: you'll still hit your target. Full auto is really for the close fight (room clearing, trench clearing). There's a reason nobody bothered with 3-round burst on the M4: you had more control just pulling the trigger three times, and aiming each time. (Although I think the newest versions of the M4 and M16 went back to full auto...I'm not sure.) Double edit replying to their edit: The US Army is explicitly issuing the M5 only to infantry, forward observers, scouts, combat engineers, and special forces. Everyone else is keeping the M4/M16. The second charging handle is for charging the weapon in constrained environments (e.g. the back of a Bradley, or on a helicopter). I agree it's probably a little extraneous. I'm unsure how much mechanical complexity it introduced, or if it's just an elegant solution to a long-running design problem. Ynglaur fucked around with this message at 16:53 on May 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 16:45
|
|
|
Thanks for that effort post. Very informative. Beyond the obvious problem of 6.8mm being heavier and bulkier, and potentially having to have lower capacity magazines, I would have assumed it would also be frankly very undesirable from a logistics perspective to now have a new and completely different sized cartridge that is incompatible with your old weapons, or any of your allies weapons. You lose the ability to use ammo from NATO partners, and now have to lug around (and manage) even more different ammo types, for what seem marginal benefits in effectiveness. I thought that kind of interoperability was the reason for standardising in the first place.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 16:59
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Edit: Addressing the post immediately above Yeah full auto isn't something for long range, and is really more of a 'oh poo poo' option, but that it might be practically unusuable for most average guys is still a issue. And 'oh poo poo' situations apparently do happen every now and again. The low recoil of the M4 was also considered a strong point in its favor for training avg. joes who've never shot a gun before even in semi auto. You can train away a flinch that comes from noobs firing higher power weapons their first time but it takes a while. Ynglaur posted:[i]The US Army is explicitly issuing the M5 only to infantry, forward observers, scouts, combat engineers, and special forces. Everyone else is keeping the M4/M16. Ynglaur posted:The second charging handle is for charging the weapon in constrained environments (e.g. the back of a Bradley, or on a helicopter). I agree it's probably a little extraneous. Tigey posted:I would have assumed it would also be frankly very undesirable from a logistics perspective to now have a new and completely different sized cartridge that is incompatible with your old weapons, or any of your allies weapons. You lose the ability to use ammo from NATO partners, and now have to lug around (and manage) even more different ammo types Yeah I forgot this. Its a good point. I can't help but wonder if the US is going to start trying push 6.8 as a NATO standard. While everyone is focused on the rifle the LMG (M250) is actually really impressive and might be a bigger deal militarily speaking. If the US is willing to foot the bill I wouldn't be surprised if NATO ends up adopting it at some point. PC LOAD LETTER fucked around with this message at 17:12 on May 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 17:09
|
|
|
Interoperability is definitely a consideration. I wonder if logistics have gotten "good enough" that since we're already managing 5.56mm, 7.62mm, .50 calibre, 40mm grenades, and all of the variants thereof, that adding one more calibre wasn't going to break the logististians. They're crying themselves to sleep already just thinking about the autocannon calibers. Edit: Ukrainian logisticians merely laugh at such triffling concerns. Full auto is not for "oh poo poo". If you go "oh poo poo" you're unlikely to hit the fire selector, you're just going to pull the trigger a lot. Full auto--on a rifle--is for cases where you want a high volume of fire while aiming in general directions, such as room clearing. I agree the M250 may be even more significant. Something like ~50% of direct fire hostile casualties in Iraq were from the M249 SAW, even though there are only 6 in a platoon of ~40 infantry. The M250 hits harder, further, and is more accurate.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 17:39
|
|
|
From German news media Zeit: Prigoschin now claims that the Russian army is already fleeing Bakhmut. He then further claims the RAF-leadership is purposefully lying to Putin to hide that Russian units are abandoning their posts in the city.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 18:14
|
|
|
The US will just push 6.8mm as the new NATO standard. The changeover will be a pain but you can't stick to one standard forever once newer, much better options are available. If the Ukraine conflict keeps going the continent's worth of 5.56mm supply will probably just be gradually dumped there.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 18:16
|
|
|
If there's going to be a switch to a new NATO standard, i think it's gonna take decade(s?) and be far too slow to have material significance for this war.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 18:18
|
|
|
The new 6.8 caliber rounds and crazy auto aiming optics will probably go to special forces first. Especially the optics, they sound expensive as hell I can't imagine every soldier is going to eventually get issued with them? Although ACOG optics are expensive as hell too and it seems like drat near every soldier gets those (in the US military I mean).
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 18:21
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:The new 6.8 caliber rounds and crazy auto aiming optics will probably go to special forces first. Especially the optics, they sound expensive as hell I can't imagine every soldier is going to eventually get issued with them? Although ACOG optics are expensive as hell too and it seems like drat near every soldier gets those (in the US military I mean). I mean, have you seen how much night vision costs? It’s not issued to literally everyone but we have no problem giving a whole division $40k goggles.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 18:26
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Genuinely curious: why do you doubt the ability to build them at scale? The ubiquitous of effective ACOGs and similar optics demonstrate we have the optics part down. And by ubiquitous I mean that in 2005, every trigger-puller in Iraq had an optic on their M4. The rest is electronics, and we've gotten pretty good at building sophisticated electronics at scale (see: iPhone). I'm not a manufacturing expert by any means, though, so I'm genuinely curious what causes you to doubt this. There is a BIG difference between building something that works for demonstration or testing and building them in mass. Also building them to be able to be used in the field. Having something that can not only survive combat but also being abused by enlisted who don’t really give a gently caress about if poo poo breaks is going to be the key. The optics are the one weak spot to the entire platform, the rifle is pretty conventional, the rounds are newer tech but nothing outrageous biggest issue is producing enough of it which just takes time, the suppressor is using newer production methods but they are proven at this point. Yeah we can build very sophisticated electronics but take an iPhone into combat and it won’t last long. There is a million things that can go wrong and likely will. Having the scope included that works without the electronics is still light years better than most anyone else but I will not in the least be surprised if the secret sauce ends up having a lot of problems for some time. It always does. Hell I would be suspect if it didn’t honestly. There is a reason why Special Operations members hate having to use new, fancy poo poo because it almost always fails when you need it the most. Reliability is the number one most important thing in the field. It doesn’t matter what it does if it doesn’t work when you need it. Hell, anyone that has ever been in the military or been around it has stories of new poo poo not working.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:The new 6.8 caliber rounds and crazy auto aiming optics will probably go to special forces first. Especially the optics, they sound expensive as hell I can't imagine every soldier is going to eventually get issued with them? Although ACOG optics are expensive as hell too and it seems like drat near every soldier gets those (in the US military I mean). As I posted earlier, the US plans to issue them to every infantryman, combat engineer, scout, and special forces operator. It's actually not that many people, even including the National Guard and Reserves:
Re: manufacturing at scale and for robustness. Yes, I agree. As of the award announcement earlier this year these systems have already gone through ~20,000 hours of soldier testing, including with special forces, 75th Ranger Regiment, etc. This procurement is well beyond lab testing, and has been for some time. I agree it remains to be seen whether or not they can manufacture at scale (thousands of rifles/year, etc.), but the first deliveries are due in calendar Q3 this year, so we should know fairly quickly. The US Army is finally playing budget games intelligently (the Marines have always been better at this), and are getting funding to replace older equipment they're shipping to Ukraine in order to get newer kit. For example, they sent a lot of old M113s to Ukraine, and got funding from Congress to purchase AMPFVs to replace them. I wonder if they see a budgetary path to do the same thing with small arms. There's some dark irony in Russia invading Ukraine and somehow making the US military even more capable by side effect.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
prigozhin continues to issue contradictory statements about wagner's position in bahkmutquote:Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin on Tuesday questioned the Russian state’s ability to protect the country from a Ukrainian counteroffensive, amid an escalating rift between the paramilitary group and the Kremlin’s security establishment. in the last hour or so prigozhin put out a statement saying the promised ammunition resupply was slashed by 90% and wagner would be retreating except that it was made clear that leaving the battlefield would mean the entire unit would be guilty of treason. frankly the whole situation is such a public farce it almost feels like it must be some kind of psyop to confuse the planning for any potential counter offensive, it's hard to believe that the russian general staff could be this publicly dysfunctional the first israeli manufactured short range radars are being fielded by ukraine these were purchased by a lithuanian ngo, but export approval was granted by the israeli government. given that these are an obvious counter to iranian drones, it suggests to me that despite mostly keeping the conflict at arms length, israel is not too happy about russia funding and field testing an iranian long range weapons platform the us has announced a new $1.2 billion military aid package quote:The US has announced a $1.2 billion aid package to Ukraine intended to “bolster its air defenses” and “sustain its artillery ammunition needs,” with Ukraine’s counteroffensive against Russian forces looming. long term funding of artillery and air defense ammunition matches the needs listed in the leak. it's been a while since i've seen a call from ukraine for more armor, i wonder if it's because the short term need has been met, or if they've decided they've gotten all they've wrung out all the available supply
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 20:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CherylRofer/status/1655994501582974981 Not certain of the credibility of the initial report, or the person boosting it, but if it is true then: lol.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 20:11
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:There's some dark irony in Russia invading Ukraine and somehow making the US military even more capable by side effect. This war has already had so many knock-on effects that Putin's War is going to be up there with the invasion of Iraq and the fall of the Berlin Wall in terms of watershed moments in history. e: also "generals are always prepared to fight the previous war" doesn't apply when you get to watch someone fight the next war. The US military has a huge motivation for reform now that they know a military geared to fight low-tech insurgencies is going to get absolutely mulched by a near-peer opponent. Moon Slayer fucked around with this message at 20:26 on May 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 20:23
|
|
|
FMguru posted:https://twitter.com/CherylRofer/status/1655994501582974981 It was an address to Ukrainian soldiers urging them to surrender and join forces with Russians against American puppeteers. His Ukrainian is serviceable but shaky. quote:Lads, they take you for utter fools. They're telling you we're the enemy. We're not the enemy. Understand this, you and I, for the most part, are kin. There was a time when we might have argued, but now we must forget about arguments and remember that our fathers and grandfathers were natives of one common Motherland. Paladinus fucked around with this message at 20:36 on May 9, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
FMguru posted:Think also about those who are standing behind your backs and pushing you to war against your will. We know that you do not want to go to war, but they have so intimidated the Ukrainian people that you are afraid to even say it out loud. If they have to, let the Americans fight with their own weapons instead of forcing you. "They're forcing you to fight our invasion of your country! Who're the real villains here?" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEL4Fq4zUus
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1656009079830061075?t=3nzIrychzKsY0hp_whICzQ&s=19 Ukrainian PR is so good.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 21:21
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:The ammunition amount very legitimate concern. I wonder if we'll see 25-round and weird extended 30-round magazines come out (drat they'd be long, though). A local right wing extremist fighting for Ukraine also said nobody fighting in Ukraine gives much of a poo poo about penetration power of the rounds but they do care about the amount of ammo. Because everyone knows their rifles are not the primary killers so penetration is a very secondary concern. However, not having your squad run out of bullets while laying down suppressive fire to that hedgerow with hostile troops 200 meters away is much more valuable in practice, as your rifles are more often for pinning enemies or scaring them off rather than taking them out.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 22:39
|
|
|
I don't want to get my hopes up too much, but all this news out of Russia lately is doing a lot to try to convince me things are going a lot worse for them than we thought.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 23:13
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1655722764198707201Washington Post posted:No final decision has been made, according to a British official who declined to confirm the type, timing or quantity of weaponry under consideration. But the notice is a substantive step toward Britain itself supplying such munitions, and the requested specifications and capabilities closely match its air-launched Storm Shadow cruise missiles Washington Post posted:...according to a previously unreported file included among the classified U.S. documents leaked online through the Discord messaging platform, U.S. intelligence confirmed Britain intended to send Ukraine an unspecified number of Storm Shadow missiles, along with British personnel to aid in targeting.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2023 23:47
|
|
|
Wikipedia has the Storm Shadow's range as 300 nautical miles for the British version and 135 nautical miles for the export version. This is compared to the 190 mile = 165 nautical mile range of the ATACMS. So if they get the export version, they're getting a poor man's ATACMS. If Britain is giving their own version, it sounds like they have a legitimate long range cruise missile. Speculation, but I wonder if this is driven by an American / NATO desire to give them a missile with longer range than the HIMARS but still not long enough to reach too deep into Russian territory.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 00:03
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1655722764198707201 Pablo Bluth fucked around with this message at 00:26 on May 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 00:22
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:My guess is their contacts with the UK government have confirmed it's no longer of question of "should we?" but only a practical question of finding the best suitable weapon(s). P,us the Tories took a beating in elections last week and supporting Ukraine is the only thing they have that isn't a complete poo poo-show. They're desperate for distractions. How long would it take for Ukraine to get them?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 00:31
|
|
|
Not sure this was posted / discussed here yet, but the EU Parliament voted in favour of the new measure to ramp up artillery munition production across the EU (one million artillery shells over the next 12 months). https://www.euractiv.com/section/defence-and-security/news/eu-lawmakers-speed-process-to-boost-ammunition-production-across-europe/
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 00:40
|
|
|
It is pretty obvious that the US and UK are playing good cop/bad cop in terms of weapons and ratcheting things up. My feeling is bar a full collapse of the Russian military/government we won’t see an end to the conflict until next year. You’ll see meaningful gains this summer again with the counter offensive, enough to keep the support in Ukraine and overseas positive. Come next year we’ll see Ukraine get all of the equipment they will need to fully push Russia out, in turn getting Ukraine mostly equipped with NATO standards. Soon after Russia is pushed out you’ll see at the very least US and UK forces stationed in country which would serve as a massive deterrence from Russia trying any games going forward.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 01:45
|
|
|
Djarum posted:Soon after Russia is pushed out you’ll see at the very least US and UK forces stationed in country which would serve as a massive deterrence from Russia trying any games going forward. How would this work exactly? It's not like the Russians are going to sign a peace treaty. They're gonna keep lobbing missiles at Ukraine long after their armies have been thrown out thus making it an "active" but low intensity conflict that makes putting NATO troops in harm's way a trigger for WW3.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 02:04
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:How would this work exactly? It's not like the Russians are going to sign a peace treaty. They're gonna keep lobbing missiles at Ukraine long after their armies have been thrown out thus making it an "active" but low intensity conflict that makes putting NATO troops in harm's way a trigger for WW3. It wouldn’t be NATO. You’d have US and UK “peacekeepers” stationed in country. It’s basically a mechanism to ensure that Russia stops hostilities since they aren’t going to lob missiles, if they even have any left by that point, if there is a chance to hit US or UK forces. It would be something akin to Korea where they are still at war but North Korea isn’t going to try anything stupid. Although frankly if Ukraine pushes them out of the country completely I think there will be a declaration of peace just because I don’t think Putin will be able to last. Who or whatever replaces him will likely call of a ceasefire and end of hostilities.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 02:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 11:13 |
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:How would this work exactly? It's not like the Russians are going to sign a peace treaty. They're gonna keep lobbing missiles at Ukraine long after their armies have been thrown out thus making it an "active" but low intensity conflict that makes putting NATO troops in harm's way a trigger for WW3. The US/EU are sitting on something like a couple hundred billion in Russian assets and reserves that were frozen in overseas banks. There is no short term need for that money, but they're going to want it back eventually, and that isn't going to happen without a formal agreement to end the fighting.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2023 02:35
|
|