Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

[HungryHippos]

I hear what you're saying. But I'm trying to think when as supplying countries at war with munitions ever worked, without eventually the supplier having to join in at the end?

Ukraine appear to have the will to use the kit they get properly, so we should supply them so they can properly defend themselves.

Ukraine going to the negotiating table now would look weak, and would result in a one-sided peace deal against them, they need to have enough kit supplied so they could win should the war continue down the line, that is the best way to get Russia to a peace deal that won't give them as much.

Russia has to see that to defeat Ukraine would require more and more resources, and that the counter-supply isn't a tap that can be turned off easily. When the cost gets too high, that is when we may see a fair deal being made.

I don't/can't see us joining the conflict more directly as things stand, the risks are too high.

 

[Efour]

Ok.
So is there/are there adequate supplies of artillery shells already stockpiled ready to go or is the truth, as I've been led to believe, there's literally not enough production facilities across all of Europe/USA to keep up with demand, on a non war footing?

The USA is playing politics with it's aid money, does it supply artillery shells on a large basis, can it, again from what I understand is it hasn't the production either?

So given that, regardless of what cruise missiles, MLRS launched guided rockets, a few tanks and APCs, f16s one day soon, none of this will realistically make a difference compared to
"a **** ton of 155mm HE "

Is this situation winnable for Ukraine "unless" the rest of the free world effectively goes to full economic war the other guys......?

I'm not saying roll over and die to Ukraine but seeing as we are not willing to go 100%. Isn't it time to consider something else?
Putin won't stop here though... Right? That's the follow up reply.

If our governments aren't willing to do what is needed, for whatever reasons, wtf are we doing?

 

[Rroff]

Is this situation winnable for Ukraine "unless" the rest of the free world effectively goes to full economic war the other guys......?

We don't need to go to full economic war, but the situation certainly needs to be tackled with a more war footing mentality to financing and production - it might seem expensive now but it will be a fraction of the costs we are likely going to incur if things head down the path of Cold War 2.0, let alone if Russia's intentions don't end at Ukraine.

 

[HungryHippos]

We should be able to collectively out-produce Russia on armaments whilst not killing our economies, the GDP of EU is far, far higher than Russia, and it looks like we'd need more armaments anyway due to the whole NATO on the border with Russia thing we have going on (cold war mk.2).

It sounds like we need to ramp up production not just for Ukraine, but for our own stockpiles as well.

 

[Roar87]

So the strategy is to keep firing artillery at Russia in the hope that they run out of soldiers and we end the war through attrition? We need to produce artillery shells because that is the actual plan?

 

[StriderX]

So the strategy is to keep firing artillery at Russia in the hope that they run out of soldiers and we end the war through attrition? We need to produce artillery shells because that is the actual plan?

The strategy is to make Russian armaments look like garbage because it is so it has no customers which it no longer does, mission accomplished.

 

[teejay73]

Ok.
So is there/are there adequate supplies of artillery shells already stockpiled ready to go or is the truth, as I've been led to believe, there's literally not enough production facilities across all of Europe/USA to keep up with demand, on a non war footing?

The USA is playing politics with it's aid money, does it supply artillery shells on a large basis, can it, again from what I understand is it hasn't the production either?

So given that, regardless of what cruise missiles, MLRS launched guided rockets, a few tanks and APCs, f16s one day soon, none of this will realistically make a difference compared to
"a **** ton of 155mm HE "

Is this situation winnable for Ukraine "unless" the rest of the free world effectively goes to full economic war the other guys......?

I'm not saying roll over and die to Ukraine but seeing as we are not willing to go 100%. Isn't it time to consider something else?
Putin won't stop here though... Right? That's the follow up reply.

If our governments aren't willing to do what is needed, for whatever reasons, wtf are we doing?

Everything that I've been reading lately is that we don't have enough stockpiles of ammunition to keep giving Ukraine. The problem with production is that the West/Europe hasn't been on a war footing for some time and have been dwindling supplies for years. We don't have the infrastructure to just start mass production of
the artillery that Ukraine needs. Russia, on the other hand have and always had the ability to mass produce their weapons. In fact chips and computer hardware that they need for their missiles, etc has still been getting through depsite sanctions, and has been coming from the U.S companies like Texas Instruments - not directly of course.

The problem for Ukraine has never been all about the equipment, though of course it's been pivatol in the early part of the war. Their problem has always been numbers on the ground - actual people fighting a conventional war. To put this in to some form of context, Russia had in one small region of their frontline assault 40,000 soldiers - that is half of the available troops the U.K has as whole. Ukraine as hard as they have been fighting are seeing wave after wave of Russian re-supply of troops. Going 100% in to this means more than just weapons for Ukraine, it means going in with boots on the ground, and that is where the line has always been drawn. The best thing Ukraine could do is to have enough long range weapons to seriously damage Russia's infrastructure and more importanly their cash cow, the oil & gas.

 

[Rroff]

So the strategy is to keep firing artillery at Russia in the hope that they run out of soldiers and we end the war through attrition? We need to produce artillery shells because that is the actual plan?

Russia will run out of man power before you run out of dumb takes... clearly the strategy isn't to just keep firing artillery, but to use it to support advances and degrade Russia's capability to oppose that.

 

[Rroff]

Russia had in one small region of their frontline assault 40,000 soldiers - that is half of the available troops the U.K has as whole.

Probably not 40,000 combat troops but we'd struggle to put more than 20,000 boots on the ground in a similar situation with the current state of our armed forces. Albeit if properly equipped and properly supported with logistics, etc. they'd probably be able to deal with a far larger Russian force than that especially if we can maintain control of the skies.

 

[ubersonic]

Perhaps it's time we tried to stand on our own feet instead of hiding behind America.

Problem being that the entire British/Western European military doctrine and equipment purchasing of the past 75 years has been geared/designed towards hiding behind America :\

Russia regrets needless loss of life.
We are prepared to negotiate, if we receive a reasonable offer.

I'm struggling for a third.

"I remain a master strategist.

 

[ubersonic]

The West had endless amounts of money for two failed wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but offers mere pennies to prevent the march of Russia into Eastern Europe. Absolute madness.

It's worth noting that the value of the ammunition/ordinance/equipment fired in, destroyed in, and sent to the Ukrainian theatre in the last two years exceeds what was fired in and destroyed in both 8 years of Iraq and 19 years of Afghanistan combined. Hell you could throw Libya into the figures and not even notice.

 

[Sankari]

EU: 'Sorry we didn't give you the 1 million shells we promised.'

Ukraine: 'OK, but they're on the way now, right?'

EU: 'Oh sure, they'll be there just in time for Christmas.'

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1755218762599374949

It's worth noting that the value of the ammunition/ordinance/equipment fired in, destroyed in, and sent to the Ukrainian theatre in the last two years exceeds what was fired in and destroyed in both 8 years of Iraq and 19 years of Afghanistan combined. Hell you could throw Libya into the figures and not even notice.

Wow, I did not realise that.

 

[Minusorange]

What is madness is when all these leaders come out and say ' we have you Ukraine ' or ' we can never allow Russia to win, no matter what '

Then proceed to send nothing....

As usual, all talk.

I think it's more a case of "we'll give you what we can"... p.s. but we won't invest in expanding our military capability of producing arms because we're not at war ourselves, best of luck xxx

incredibly stupid decision or lack of decision

 

[jigger]

Ok.
So is there/are there adequate supplies of artillery shells already stockpiled ready to go or is the truth, as I've been led to believe, there's literally not enough production facilities across all of Europe/USA to keep up with demand, on a non war footing?

The USA is playing politics with it's aid money, does it supply artillery shells on a large basis, can it, again from what I understand is it hasn't the production either?

So given that, regardless of what cruise missiles, MLRS launched guided rockets, a few tanks and APCs, f16s one day soon, none of this will realistically make a difference compared to
"a **** ton of 155mm HE "

Is this situation winnable for Ukraine "unless" the rest of the free world effectively goes to full economic war the other guys......?

I'm not saying roll over and die to Ukraine but seeing as we are not willing to go 100%. Isn't it time to consider something else?
Putin won't stop here though... Right? That's the follow up reply.

If our governments aren't willing to do what is needed, for whatever reasons, wtf are we doing?

Worst Ukraine please stop winning post ever.

 

[Efour]

Worst Ukraine please stop winning post ever.

Honestly... I expect a bit better.

Actually are Ukraine winning right now? I mean not losing is winning to some degree. Are we still saying winning is possible with the current trickle of arms or is it a slow lose, all things equal... I assume there must be a boost coming a real game changer..

 

[jigger]

Honestly... I expect a bit better

Its hard to get better than winning? All Ukraine can do is beat what Vladolf puts in front of them.

 

[Rroff]

I think it's more a case of "we'll give you what we can"... p.s. but we won't invest in expanding our military capability of producing arms because we're not at war ourselves, best of luck xxx

incredibly stupid decision or lack of decision

No one wants, politically, to be the one writing the cheque :s and it probably won't be them having to pay the much bigger costs down the road

 

[jigger]

No one wants, politically, to be the one writing the cheque :s and it probably won't be them having to pay the much bigger costs down the road

I honestly feel NATO should act collectively and ask each nation to make a small investment in basic armament production capabilities.

 

[Efour]

I honestly feel NATO should act collectively and ask each nation to make a small investment in basic armament production capabilities.

Definitely needs to be some coordination across the whole spectrum from production all the way to physical fighting units.
Should be the biggest wake up and shake up in decades.

 

[PlacidCasual]

It's not a subject I pay close attention to but do periodically check out seemingly informed opinion pieces. Is Ukraine not at risk of running out of suitable soldiers? I accept the death tolls for the Russians are far higher but proportionally they represent a smaller segment of the pool of available soldiers. Are we not reaching the point where even with more offensive capability Ukraine will lack the army to do anything with it?