5 ms·

Somehow, the US seems to have forgotten to get more than "always the same" to the front. Also, the helmet-bullshit is driven by polish anti-german pis-bullshit

Somehow, the US seems to have forgotten to get more than "always the same" to the front. Also, the helmet-bullshit is driven by polish anti-german pis-bullshit. Germany delivered PZH2000 and Gepard, as well as being the first with modern Air Defence. France and Britain were the first with Cruise Missiles. Scandinavia was the first with Tanks. Netherlands the first with modern planes. The Blinken-Deescalatin-Crowd in the US which seems to still believe in escalation management and mutual co-operation with Russia. Where are ATACMS, more Patriot, more Bradley, more Abrams, more cluster munitions? The material is there, it's high time!

KptMarchewa 3y ago
I don't agree with bashing Germany, but Poland was first with tanks, delivering over 300 of them starting from April 2022.
Yoric 3y ago
As far as I understand, the US has a strong problem with stockpiles. They can send more material to Ukraine, but they want to have enough to also sustain a war in Taiwan. And it's unclear (at least to me) what the Chinese military doctrine would entail, since China has been mostly at peace since the truce with India. If a war for/around Taiwan ends up being the same kind of high-intensity conflict as the war in Ukraine, it has the potential to engulf the yearly US production of ammo in a few weeks.
- verdverm 3y ago
  The weapons for a (hopefully not) showdown over Taiwan are going to be very different, just like the entire situations. Shells and tanks in one, boats and planes in the other. There is no easy way to ship tons of material to Taiwan, likely the West will be having to run a Chinese blockade, kind of the opposite of the Cuban missile crisis. Except for drones and phones, war has definitely changed, the fog is dissipating.
  - Yoric 3y ago
    Your remarks make sense, but it's only going to be boats and planes if the war stays contained around Taiwan. India and China have been waiting ~60 years for a rematch, so there is the distinct possibility of a second front on land. North Korea could also try and attack South Korea for a variety of reasons (either as a distraction for China or taking advantage of the distraction), which could open yet another front. And these are the easy ones – if there is a big showdown, it could domino in a number of directions, each of which would justify the US maintaining a stockpile of ammo. And of course, land and sea warfare share some of the same missiles.
    - benterix 3y ago
      There is one big but in all this, and this is the example of Russia. All autocrats are looking at Russia and how the war played out for them. Not too well, it seems. One can well model and alternative reality where Russia didn't start the war but instead concentrated on using its economic advantage to make Europe more dependent on its gas etc. (it was going quite well!). And it seems a good example to China as to what is more beneficial to do. The Chinese leaders have been quite pragmatic so far, and while one definitely can't say what's actually in their heads, the war is unlikely if they follow logical reasoning.
      - verdverm 3y ago
        Applying western thinking to the CCP is a mistake, thinking autocrats follow logical reasoning too. Xi's career goal is the complete re-unification of China and he's getting quite old now, likely his last term (ends in 2027/8 iirc). He'll be making important decisions in the next few years.
      - Yoric 3y ago
        From what I understand, there are semi-rational reasons for which Putin might have wanted to attack Ukraine in 2022 and not wait, for instance, 10 more years to ensure that Europe could not wean itself of Russian resources. - Despite Russian propaganda to the contrary, the Russian army is still going to pieces. Yes, there is a stronger professional core now than there used to be during the 90s, but that core is shrinking because the military has difficulties both funding itself, attracting new recruits, and with endemic corruption. Some of the reasons for which it has difficulties attracting new recruits are that the Russian population is growing old very quickly and emigration is attractive to whoever can afford to leave. - Historically, Russian doctrine is to assume that an invasion is coming from the West. Always. History shows of a few places where such an invasion can be stopped fairly easily, if Russia controls them. As it turns out, two of the lynchpins are respsectively in Ukraine in Poland. Since the army is getting weaker and there is a chance that Ukraine could join NATO, if Russia wants to grab control of the lynchpins, it has to attack as early as possible, before the imbalance grows worse. - The fact that PRC is eyeing towards Taiwan means that the US cannot commit too many forces in Ukraine. There is a risk that PRC might end up subjugating Taiwan either semi-peacefully or at least so fast that the US doesn't get a chance to react, in which case the window of opportunity would close.

KptMarchewa 3y ago

I don't agree with bashing Germany, but Poland was first with tanks, delivering over 300 of them starting from April 2022.

Yoric 3y ago

As far as I understand, the US has a strong problem with stockpiles. They can send more material to Ukraine, but they want to have enough to also sustain a war in Taiwan. And it's unclear (at least to me) what the Chinese military doctrine would entail, since China has been mostly at peace since the truce with India. If a war for/around Taiwan ends up being the same kind of high-intensity conflict as the war in Ukraine, it has the potential to engulf the yearly US production of ammo in a few weeks.

verdverm 3y ago
The weapons for a (hopefully not) showdown over Taiwan are going to be very different, just like the entire situations. Shells and tanks in one, boats and planes in the other. There is no easy way to ship tons of material to Taiwan, likely the West will be having to run a Chinese blockade, kind of the opposite of the Cuban missile crisis. Except for drones and phones, war has definitely changed, the fog is dissipating.
- Yoric 3y ago
  Your remarks make sense, but it's only going to be boats and planes if the war stays contained around Taiwan. India and China have been waiting ~60 years for a rematch, so there is the distinct possibility of a second front on land. North Korea could also try and attack South Korea for a variety of reasons (either as a distraction for China or taking advantage of the distraction), which could open yet another front. And these are the easy ones – if there is a big showdown, it could domino in a number of directions, each of which would justify the US maintaining a stockpile of ammo. And of course, land and sea warfare share some of the same missiles.
  - benterix 3y ago
    There is one big but in all this, and this is the example of Russia. All autocrats are looking at Russia and how the war played out for them. Not too well, it seems. One can well model and alternative reality where Russia didn't start the war but instead concentrated on using its economic advantage to make Europe more dependent on its gas etc. (it was going quite well!). And it seems a good example to China as to what is more beneficial to do. The Chinese leaders have been quite pragmatic so far, and while one definitely can't say what's actually in their heads, the war is unlikely if they follow logical reasoning.
    - verdverm 3y ago
      Applying western thinking to the CCP is a mistake, thinking autocrats follow logical reasoning too. Xi's career goal is the complete re-unification of China and he's getting quite old now, likely his last term (ends in 2027/8 iirc). He'll be making important decisions in the next few years.
    - Yoric 3y ago
      From what I understand, there are semi-rational reasons for which Putin might have wanted to attack Ukraine in 2022 and not wait, for instance, 10 more years to ensure that Europe could not wean itself of Russian resources. - Despite Russian propaganda to the contrary, the Russian army is still going to pieces. Yes, there is a stronger professional core now than there used to be during the 90s, but that core is shrinking because the military has difficulties both funding itself, attracting new recruits, and with endemic corruption. Some of the reasons for which it has difficulties attracting new recruits are that the Russian population is growing old very quickly and emigration is attractive to whoever can afford to leave. - Historically, Russian doctrine is to assume that an invasion is coming from the West. Always. History shows of a few places where such an invasion can be stopped fairly easily, if Russia controls them. As it turns out, two of the lynchpins are respsectively in Ukraine in Poland. Since the army is getting weaker and there is a chance that Ukraine could join NATO, if Russia wants to grab control of the lynchpins, it has to attack as early as possible, before the imbalance grows worse. - The fact that PRC is eyeing towards Taiwan means that the US cannot commit too many forces in Ukraine. There is a risk that PRC might end up subjugating Taiwan either semi-peacefully or at least so fast that the US doesn't get a chance to react, in which case the window of opportunity would close.