Soldato
Ukraine would have to use precious anti-tank ammo on him.
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Ukraine would have to use precious anti-tank ammo on him.
Associate
Did I say that we shouldn't provide them with equipment? No. (I did figure it would probably elevate the risk of the war expanding depending on equipment but that's a different debate). And I would argue that having given over $100,000,000,000 in support so far is hardly limited amounts......
Your argument essentially is "cluster munitions are bad".........but ethical considerations play second fiddle to Ukraine winning. I would argue that wrong is wrong.
and lol at your "certain forum posters". For the record "sniping at them" isn't the same as disagreeing with the use of a highly unethical weapon. A weapon that having been provided and signed off for (full credit for the British and other countries for disagreeing with this) by America and co has now lost its general "prohibited" status. I have no doubt we will begin to see its effects future conflicts which won't grab the collective support or clean up efforts of the west (probably because the conflict will be between black, brown whoever people that no one seems to care about) and will cause immense suffering going forward.
I would love nothing better than Seagal to fight with the russians. preferably showing his hand to hand against a tank. Payback for his awful movies.
morals don't exist in the real world?
Here's a hypothetical scenario for you,
A known murderer is about to enter your house and a gun just so happens to pop into existence nearby, are you going to risk death questioning the moral quandary of using an illegal firearm to find an equally questionable knife to defend yourself? The fact is that when the very existence of your identity is threatened the luxuries of peace are long gone.
Last edited:
No - I'm saying if our ethical considerations were so deep we should be doing more, which we can do, so that Ukraine doesn't have to resort to using stuff like cluster munitions. To criticise them under those circumstances would be grotesque.
Soldato
In our situation it would be more like seeing someone's house about to be invaded by people obviously intent on killing them and instead of phoning the police just watching it play out, then criticising the homeowner for using a knife or firearm "illegally" to defend themselves.
Last edited:
Soldato
Much slower than I'd have thought but Russia is making steady progress in mobilising industry, etc. for war. One of my biggest fears we'd let Russia grow into this war as they have less and less to lose by staying on a war footing.
Soldato
Last edited:
Soldato
It would balance things out a bit if Ukraine could field the same type of attack drones that Russia has with the Shaheds.
They seem to have made some progress with their own versions but the numbers of flights they've had is fairly low compared to the number they receive.
They seem to have made some progress with their own versions but the numbers of flights they've had is fairly low compared to the number they receive.
Associate
100bn and counting doesn't count? And could you answer the below question? CaptainRave (fitting name) already did.
***Keep it civil*** Could you at least come up with a scenario that makes sense?
This also makes zero sense on multiple counts. we haven't just watched it play out, we've collectively given a fortune as well as our moral support to Ukraine. And a knife or firearm is not analogous to cluster munitions.
Last edited by a moderator:
We are not letting Russia do anything
This is all on them.
There was a lot of hesitancy early in the war when there was a chance to maybe pushing Russia back, we are still mostly rinsing out old inventory, etc. when Ukraine is crying out for things like AS-90s in numbers, increased artillery production, etc.
That isn't to say we've not been doing anything at all and we've (as in the UK) lead the charge on a number of aspects and/or pushed innovation into play to plug gaps.
Last edited:
Caporegime
We are not letting Russia do anything
This is all on them.
Yeah, we are. The West is still merely sending scraps to Ukraine while sitting on their hands.
When it comes to the capabilities which would aid Ukraine in not having to resort to cluster munitions such as being able to have the edge over the weight of Russian artillery by utilising sophistication i.e. more ready supply of stuff like the AS-90 and AHS-Krab, ramping up production of regular artillery munitions to sufficient numbers for the job which needs to be done, etc. we've relatively done very little. (And those are just example).
I’m pointing out the Russians are already using chemical weapons on all Ukrainians, targeting combatants and civilians alike.
I wouldn’t hold it against the Ukrainians for replying in kind TBH.
Last edited:
It’s clearer and grimmer than that. They’ve already gone in and killed someone.
It's more like intruders have broken into the house, raped and murdered the children, been found by the father who has then beat them to death while orangeade stands outside tutting and asking if he could have not simply restrained them, probably worried about the local house prices.It’s clearer and grimmer than that. They’ve already gone in and killed someone.
Putin's mafiosi and gangsters have already though of that: a return to Stalin type "barrier" troops.
If there was a safe way to surrender to the Ukrainians, I'm sure a sizeable percentage would do so.
It’s clearer and grimmer than that. They’ve already gone in and killed someone.
What I'm saying is relative to the use of cluster munitions, we could have done more so that Ukraine didn't have a need case to use them.
So it would be a bit grotesque to criticise, but that doesn't mean we have to be fine with them using them.
Last edited:
- Status