2 ms·
1. It's "Ukraine", not "the Ukraine". 2. Not really. NATO mostly gave Ukraine stuff that's obsolete, or close. The cutting-edge stuff (drones, mostly) is U
by AnimalMuppet 2y ago
1. It's "Ukraine", not "the Ukraine".
2. Not really. NATO mostly gave Ukraine stuff that's obsolete, or close. The cutting-edge stuff (drones, mostly) is Ukraine innovating out of resource constraints, not NATO testing stuff out.
- protomolecule 2y ago[flagged]
- AnimalMuppet 2y ago"Mostly". "Close". Two counterexamples don't add up to "nope". But maybe, instead of "obsolete", I should have said "not state of the art". Is there anything that NATO has given Ukraine that is state of the art? HIMARS might be. Were the Abrams and Bradleys state of the art, or were they old revs? Is Storm Shadow actually state of the art?
- rainworld 2y ago[flagged]
- protomolecule 2y ago>Is there anything that NATO has given Ukraine that is state of the art? AMRAAM-ER, for example. >Is Storm Shadow actually state of the art? "France, the UK, along with Italy are jointly developing the Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon to replace SCALP/Storm Shadow and each nation's respective anti-ship missiles by 2028 and 2034." [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storm_Shadow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storm_Shadow