NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On November 28 2022 16:05 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On November 28 2022 14:04 KwarK wrote:
On November 28 2022 08:52 GreenHorizons wrote: EU officials are starting to get upset at the US for raking in profits at the EU's expense.
Top European officials are furious with Joe Biden’s administration and now accuse the Americans of making a fortune from the war, while EU countries suffer...
“The fact is, if you look at it soberly, the country that is most profiting from this war is the U.S. because they are selling more gas and at higher prices, and because they are selling more weapons,” one senior official told POLITICO...
"The U.S. is following a domestic agenda, which is regrettably protectionist and discriminates against U.S. allies," said Tonino Picula, the European Parliament's lead person on the transatlantic relationship...
Another EU diplomat argued that “the money they are making on weapons” could help Americans understand that making “all this cash on gas” might be “a bit too much.”...
“It’s not good, in terms of optics, to give the impression that your best ally is actually making huge profits out of your troubles,” the diplomat said.
But Biden doesn't seem concerned
...When EU leaders tackled Biden over high U.S. gas prices at the G20 meeting in Bali last week, the American president simply seemed unaware of the issue, according to the senior official quoted above.
That’s a nonsense piece. Europe created reliance on Russian gas and the US is coming to their rescue. The gas is more expensive because it’s needed elsewhere and being shipped across the Atlantic.
Also it’s a bit rich from Europe to complain about the US benefitting selling weapons when we have been benefiting for decades of the american military budget and failed year after year to meet our obligations on the matter. Europeans underspending in NATO has been a hot topic for many years, and that had only been possible because of the American military effort.
Until a decade ago underspending on defence against the Soviet Union has been pretty reasonable. The Soviet threat diminished a lot in the 90s. And a lot of the US defence spending has nothing to do with NATO and everything to do with a global hegemonic empire. But since the Russian invasion of Georgia and especially since the invasion of Ukraine NATO has become more relevant.
That’s a good point, but you better believe France or Germany would not have shrunk their military budgets the way they did without the protection of the american military. Europe has been safe for 30 years at a minimal cost because who needs a serious army under that awesome american umbrella?
Clearly both Trump proving that the US were not as reliable a partner as we thought and Russia proving it was very capable and willing to invade its neighbours for its imperial ambitions have changed the mindset, but meanwhile, whining that americans are making a profit with the sale of weapons is a bit hypocritical.
On November 28 2022 03:40 plasmidghost wrote: Y'all think the war will end next year? I would think that it would be a bit optimistic, but if the West gives Ukraine a bunch of equipment over the winter, it could happen.
I think NATO can get more ammo from South Korea. They have a huge fleet of armor and artillery (basically rivaling Russia) and very deep ammo stocks that's NATO-compatible.
The issue there is that south korea has a hostile neighbour that will probably lead to a similar situation to the eastern european countries that have send weapons to ukraine in exchange for newer equipment or the increase of nato forces on their border. They have that huge stockpile because of the threat of north korea. I think they are unlikely to give up any active stock, and will have higher demands on how well their stockpile needs to be filled.
Wasn't Russia re-buying NK ammo stocks though? The thing is, most of the NK ammo comes from Russia, so if they're depleting their own supplies I see no reason why SK couldn't also part with some of their stock (effectively using it as intended but remotely). And unlike NK they have better capabilities of replenishing their own stocks as they're not as reliant on imports in this matter.
On November 28 2022 03:40 plasmidghost wrote: Y'all think the war will end next year? I would think that it would be a bit optimistic, but if the West gives Ukraine a bunch of equipment over the winter, it could happen.
I think NATO can get more ammo from South Korea. They have a huge fleet of armor and artillery (basically rivaling Russia) and very deep ammo stocks that's NATO-compatible.
The issue there is that south korea has a hostile neighbour that will probably lead to a similar situation to the eastern european countries that have send weapons to ukraine in exchange for newer equipment or the increase of nato forces on their border. They have that huge stockpile because of the threat of north korea. I think they are unlikely to give up any active stock, and will have higher demands on how well their stockpile needs to be filled.
Wasn't Russia re-buying NK ammo stocks though? The thing is, most of the NK ammo comes from Russia, so if they're depleting their own supplies I see no reason why SK couldn't also part with some of their stock (effectively using it as intended but remotely). And unlike NK they have better capabilities of replenishing their own stocks as they're not as reliant on imports in this matter.
I wonder where that comes from? First of all, after the fall of Soviet Univon NK was tied with China almost exclusively, cooperation with Russia was much smaller in comparison. Second, they have ammunition that simply does not exist outside of NK, with 170-mm Koksan artillery system or 240-mm M1985 MRLS being the examples. Both Russia and China have neither 170-mm guns, nor 240-mm MRLs at service, which means that at least assembling of shells/rockets is domestic in NK.
On November 28 2022 03:40 plasmidghost wrote: Y'all think the war will end next year? I would think that it would be a bit optimistic, but if the West gives Ukraine a bunch of equipment over the winter, it could happen.
I think NATO can get more ammo from South Korea. They have a huge fleet of armor and artillery (basically rivaling Russia) and very deep ammo stocks that's NATO-compatible.
The issue there is that south korea has a hostile neighbour that will probably lead to a similar situation to the eastern european countries that have send weapons to ukraine in exchange for newer equipment or the increase of nato forces on their border. They have that huge stockpile because of the threat of north korea. I think they are unlikely to give up any active stock, and will have higher demands on how well their stockpile needs to be filled.
Wasn't Russia re-buying NK ammo stocks though? The thing is, most of the NK ammo comes from Russia, so if they're depleting their own supplies I see no reason why SK couldn't also part with some of their stock (effectively using it as intended but remotely). And unlike NK they have better capabilities of replenishing their own stocks as they're not as reliant on imports in this matter.
A few things on that: - if I remember correctly, north korea has a ridiculous amount of stock due to running a military first policy - NK will have the stronger domestic arms manufacture because everyone is sanctioning them. They have to, because you can't really base your defence strategy on the hope that your suppliers keep selling to you / continue to ship to you. ALso I would say the relationship between NK and russia is a bit more complicated. I would not call them close allies and more in the same ballpark as china-russia relations, but with a different power dynamic. - NK is less under threat of invasion from SK than SK from NK I would say. This is a bit of bias on my part, but NK are the baddies. They got nuclear weapons and are the ones you would expect to kick off a war, not SK. When is the last time you worried that your government wants to invade russia rather than the other way around? (maybe I should add 'before the war in ukraine' to that). I think the same applies here. SK needs its military to defend against a potential NK invasion. NK needs its military because they need to keep up the appearances of a threat of an invasion and probably for the higher up people to stay in power. And to a lesser extend to be able to resist SK / western power I think. I would put their military in the same drawer as russias, where they have been a lot less worried about invasion from their neighbours than their neighbours had to worry about invasion from them. - SK weapons being used to fight russia is not their intended use. The potential enemy if SK is NK, russia is just a supporter of NK on the political stage. I don't think they are particularly concerned with weakening the russian army. - We don't know the details on these attempts. It could also be simply NK selling off their old and decrepit stocks they got from the soviet union.
On November 28 2022 03:40 plasmidghost wrote: Y'all think the war will end next year? I would think that it would be a bit optimistic, but if the West gives Ukraine a bunch of equipment over the winter, it could happen.
I think NATO can get more ammo from South Korea. They have a huge fleet of armor and artillery (basically rivaling Russia) and very deep ammo stocks that's NATO-compatible.
The issue there is that south korea has a hostile neighbour that will probably lead to a similar situation to the eastern european countries that have send weapons to ukraine in exchange for newer equipment or the increase of nato forces on their border. They have that huge stockpile because of the threat of north korea. I think they are unlikely to give up any active stock, and will have higher demands on how well their stockpile needs to be filled.
Good point. I do wonder if as the freeze sets in, NATO goes into overdrive and pumps out a ton of weapons and equipment. Is that possible?
The US defence industry would be capable of this I think, I can't speak much to other countries abilities beside germany. German defence industry definitely won't, as this has all the factors that caused the industry to be how it is atm. Weapon manufacturing required some pretty big infrastructure, which is only really worth it to put up if you can ensure long term commitments. One of the problems why the bundeswehr often struggles with quick purchases is because the political and economic climate (as in the countries budgeting, not inflation and all that, even though that plays into it) have been continuously cutting away at military budgest and projects. This led to scaling up production capabilities being too much of a risk, most of our arms industries sales are exports and bundeswehr demands are pretty low on the priority list as you never know if it will generate any follow up contracts etc.
Scaling up weapons production for the war in ukraine to me has the same characteristics, as it is completely tied to the continuous support of the west as well as the war not ending suddenly. There have been some smaller scale attempts, one that comes to mind is upping the production of ammunition for the gepard in norway, though that at least initially was a failure due to incompatibilities. But I am sure that due to the increase demand, there already has been some scaling up of ammunition production as that is a lot simpler than the production of bigger hardware, and thus not hinging on a long conflict to be profitable.
On November 28 2022 03:40 plasmidghost wrote: Y'all think the war will end next year? I would think that it would be a bit optimistic, but if the West gives Ukraine a bunch of equipment over the winter, it could happen.
I think NATO can get more ammo from South Korea. They have a huge fleet of armor and artillery (basically rivaling Russia) and very deep ammo stocks that's NATO-compatible.
The issue there is that south korea has a hostile neighbour that will probably lead to a similar situation to the eastern european countries that have send weapons to ukraine in exchange for newer equipment or the increase of nato forces on their border. They have that huge stockpile because of the threat of north korea. I think they are unlikely to give up any active stock, and will have higher demands on how well their stockpile needs to be filled.
Wasn't Russia re-buying NK ammo stocks though? The thing is, most of the NK ammo comes from Russia, so if they're depleting their own supplies I see no reason why SK couldn't also part with some of their stock (effectively using it as intended but remotely). And unlike NK they have better capabilities of replenishing their own stocks as they're not as reliant on imports in this matter.
I wonder where that comes from? First of all, after the fall of Soviet Univon NK was tied with China almost exclusively, cooperation with Russia was much smaller in comparison. Second, they have ammunition that simply does not exist outside of NK, with 170-mm Koksan artillery system or 240-mm M1985 MRLS being the examples. Both Russia and China have neither 170-mm guns, nor 240-mm MRLs at service, which means that at least assembling of shells/rockets is domestic in NK.
If you'd provide me with a quote in Polish I can translate it for you. I am unable to open this website for whatever reason.
Edit: Digging a bit deeper it seems that "dziennik polityczny" is a portal with fake news. Stealing articles from other websites to give it some credibility and posting its own articles that are complete fabrications (slandering US troops stationed in Poland etc.). I have no idea why they'd mention 16th mech div though. This division is stationed at the north of Poland so it wouldn't make much sense to see them in Ukraine, considering other divisions like the 18th are stationed way closer to Belarus and Ukraine.
On November 28 2022 08:52 GreenHorizons wrote: EU officials are starting to get upset at the US for raking in profits at the EU's expense.
Top European officials are furious with Joe Biden’s administration and now accuse the Americans of making a fortune from the war, while EU countries suffer...
“The fact is, if you look at it soberly, the country that is most profiting from this war is the U.S. because they are selling more gas and at higher prices, and because they are selling more weapons,” one senior official told POLITICO...
"The U.S. is following a domestic agenda, which is regrettably protectionist and discriminates against U.S. allies," said Tonino Picula, the European Parliament's lead person on the transatlantic relationship...
Another EU diplomat argued that “the money they are making on weapons” could help Americans understand that making “all this cash on gas” might be “a bit too much.”...
“It’s not good, in terms of optics, to give the impression that your best ally is actually making huge profits out of your troubles,” the diplomat said.
But Biden doesn't seem concerned
...When EU leaders tackled Biden over high U.S. gas prices at the G20 meeting in Bali last week, the American president simply seemed unaware of the issue, according to the senior official quoted above.
That’s a nonsense piece. Europe created reliance on Russian gas and the US is coming to their rescue. The gas is more expensive because it’s needed elsewhere and being shipped across the Atlantic.
Also it’s a bit rich from Europe to complain about the US benefitting selling weapons when we have been benefiting for decades of the american military budget and failed year after year to meet our obligations on the matter. Europeans underspending in NATO has been a hot topic for many years, and that had only been possible because of the American military effort.
Not every European country was even allowed to spend too much on military for obvious reasons. Around war start a few countries raised their budget quickly as I recall.
Seems to me like you‘re using old Trump complaints about Europe not doing enough and turning an original foreign policy demand into a fault.
Apologies in advance if this sounds too condescending.
On November 28 2022 03:40 plasmidghost wrote: Y'all think the war will end next year? I would think that it would be a bit optimistic, but if the West gives Ukraine a bunch of equipment over the winter, it could happen.
I think NATO can get more ammo from South Korea. They have a huge fleet of armor and artillery (basically rivaling Russia) and very deep ammo stocks that's NATO-compatible.
The issue there is that south korea has a hostile neighbour that will probably lead to a similar situation to the eastern european countries that have send weapons to ukraine in exchange for newer equipment or the increase of nato forces on their border. They have that huge stockpile because of the threat of north korea. I think they are unlikely to give up any active stock, and will have higher demands on how well their stockpile needs to be filled.
Wasn't Russia re-buying NK ammo stocks though? The thing is, most of the NK ammo comes from Russia, so if they're depleting their own supplies I see no reason why SK couldn't also part with some of their stock (effectively using it as intended but remotely). And unlike NK they have better capabilities of replenishing their own stocks as they're not as reliant on imports in this matter.
I wonder where that comes from? First of all, after the fall of Soviet Univon NK was tied with China almost exclusively, cooperation with Russia was much smaller in comparison. Second, they have ammunition that simply does not exist outside of NK, with 170-mm Koksan artillery system or 240-mm M1985 MRLS being the examples. Both Russia and China have neither 170-mm guns, nor 240-mm MRLs at service, which means that at least assembling of shells/rockets is domestic in NK.
If you'd provide me with a quote in Polish I can translate it for you. I am unable to open this website for whatever reason.
Edit: Digging a bit deeper it seems that "dziennik polityczny" is a portal with fake news. Stealing articles from other websites to give it some credibility and posting its own articles that are complete fabrications (slandering US troops stationed in Poland etc.). I have no idea why they'd mention 16th mech div though. This division is stationed at the north of Poland so it wouldn't make much sense to see them in Ukraine, considering other divisions like the 18th are stationed way closer to Belarus and Ukraine.
Yes, I decided to look up info a bit. So far the only things confirmed by multiple sources are that such cemetery really exist in Olsztyn, it seems to be unique, or at least very rare to Poland in that regard (at least I didn't find anything similar) and that Olsztyn is indeed a base of 16th Mechanized Division. Other stuff isn't confirmed. Though I think if Polish soldiers are allowed to sign up as volunteers for AFU (not representing Poland there officially, ofc), the territorial disposition of Polish units across the country doesn't matter this much, number of volunteers per unit does.
New footage. Early guesses are that yet another Su-34 got shut down. If that's the case, that's yet another almost $40 million down the drain for Russia. Also, the balls of the Ukrainian people for running towards the crash site to get video
On November 28 2022 19:01 Ardias wrote: I wonder where that comes from? First of all, after the fall of Soviet Univon NK was tied with China almost exclusively, cooperation with Russia was much smaller in comparison. Second, they have ammunition that simply does not exist outside of NK, with 170-mm Koksan artillery system or 240-mm M1985 MRLS being the examples. Both Russia and China have neither 170-mm guns, nor 240-mm MRLs at service, which means that at least assembling of shells/rockets is domestic in NK.
I remembered there was something on the news regarding that:
Justin McCurry in Tokyo and Isobel Koshiw in Kyiv Tue 6 Sep 2022 10.24 BST First published on Tue 6 Sep 2022 04.49 BST
Russia is buying millions of rockets and artillery shells from North Korea to support its invasion of Ukraine, according to a newly declassified US intelligence finding.
A US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said on Monday that the fact Russia’s defence ministry had turned to Pyongyang demonstrated that “the Russian military continues to suffer from severe supply shortages in Ukraine, due in part to export controls and sanctions”.
US intelligence officials believe the Russians could try to acquire additional North Korean military equipment in the future. The intelligence finding was first reported by the New York Times.
The US official did not reveal exactly how much weaponry Russia intended to buy from North Korea.
On November 28 2022 21:59 Ardias wrote: Though I think if Polish soldiers are allowed to sign up as volunteers for AFU (not representing Poland there officially, ofc), the territorial disposition of Polish units across the country doesn't matter this much, number of volunteers per unit does.
To my knowledge (and I was in the military) it's impossible for Polish soldiers to enlist in any way shape or form in foreign armies (not even French Foreign Legion etc.). It's considered treason and grounds for court-martial.
To get permission to serve in a foreign force as a Polish citizen you must enter a petition with the Defense Minister and fulfill a set of requirements: 1. Clear military status (not required to undergo basic training, not moved to reserve) 2. Not part of Polish military 3. Clean bill of health 4. No outstanding debts or warrants (including taxes etc.) and not marked as insolvent debtor 5. Haven't been imprisoned before
For non-military personnel who enlist in a foreign force without getting this approval from the DM they can be sentenced to jail time of 3 months up to 5 years.
The only times I've seen anyone mention this website was obvious Kremlin shills on Reddit. I wouldn't be surprised if it was run or funded by Russia.
Yeah, I thought that seemed like a bunch of bullshit. For instance, earlier today was the confirmation of just the second Polish volunteer killed in Ukraine
On November 28 2022 19:01 Ardias wrote: I wonder where that comes from? First of all, after the fall of Soviet Univon NK was tied with China almost exclusively, cooperation with Russia was much smaller in comparison. Second, they have ammunition that simply does not exist outside of NK, with 170-mm Koksan artillery system or 240-mm M1985 MRLS being the examples. Both Russia and China have neither 170-mm guns, nor 240-mm MRLs at service, which means that at least assembling of shells/rockets is domestic in NK.
I remembered there was something on the news regarding that:
Justin McCurry in Tokyo and Isobel Koshiw in Kyiv Tue 6 Sep 2022 10.24 BST First published on Tue 6 Sep 2022 04.49 BST
Russia is buying millions of rockets and artillery shells from North Korea to support its invasion of Ukraine, according to a newly declassified US intelligence finding.
A US official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said on Monday that the fact Russia’s defence ministry had turned to Pyongyang demonstrated that “the Russian military continues to suffer from severe supply shortages in Ukraine, due in part to export controls and sanctions”.
US intelligence officials believe the Russians could try to acquire additional North Korean military equipment in the future. The intelligence finding was first reported by the New York Times.
The US official did not reveal exactly how much weaponry Russia intended to buy from North Korea.
I was mostly disagreeing with your sentence I've highlighted in bold, which was "most of the NK ammo comes from Russia" On the matter of buying ammunition - could as well be, as the deal is beneficial for both governments. I wonder what we could give in return, there were rumors of allowing the Korean workers to work on infrastructure projects in Russia, that could very well be part of the deal.
On the matter of military - acknowledged, thanks for the information.
The only times I've seen anyone mention this website was obvious Kremlin shills on Reddit. I wouldn't be surprised if it was run or funded by Russia.
Dug in on it a bit, it was created on Ferbruary 2014, registered in Nassau, New Providence, and having quite one-sided rhetoric, so you are probably right about it.
Though signs of the substantual Polish volunteer presence are showing sometimes. You may take this info with a grain of salt, since it came fron an acquaintance of acquaintance of mine, but by his words, around half of the intercepted communications on his part of the front (he didn't specified which one though, but my guess will be Kupyansk) were in Polish. That's part of the reason why I decided to ask about this article.
I believe there are plenty of Polish volunteers in Ukraine. Most of them probably didn't bother to get the approval from the DM though. I know some are private contractors but I'm not sure what their status with the Polish military is. I doubt anyone in the active military service is in Ukraine though.
The only times I've seen anyone mention this website was obvious Kremlin shills on Reddit. I wouldn't be surprised if it was run or funded by Russia.
Yeah, I thought that seemed like a bunch of bullshit. For instance, earlier today was the confirmation of just the second Polish volunteer killed in Ukraine
On November 29 2022 01:59 Manit0u wrote: To my knowledge (and I was in the military) it's impossible for Polish soldiers to enlist in any way shape or form in foreign armies (not even French Foreign Legion etc.). It's considered treason and grounds for court-martial.
To get permission to serve in a foreign force as a Polish citizen you must enter a petition with the Defense Minister and fulfill a set of requirements: 1. Clear military status (not required to undergo basic training, not moved to reserve) 2. Not part of Polish military 3. Clean bill of health 4. No outstanding debts or warrants (including taxes etc.) and not marked as insolvent debtor 5. Haven't been imprisoned before
For non-military personnel who enlist in a foreign force without getting this approval from the DM they can be sentenced to jail time of 3 months up to 5 years.
These have been waived for the Ukrainian war by the defense ministry. Or at least it was publicly promised to be the practice as I doubt they bothered to change the law.
On November 29 2022 01:59 Manit0u wrote: To my knowledge (and I was in the military) it's impossible for Polish soldiers to enlist in any way shape or form in foreign armies (not even French Foreign Legion etc.). It's considered treason and grounds for court-martial.
To get permission to serve in a foreign force as a Polish citizen you must enter a petition with the Defense Minister and fulfill a set of requirements: 1. Clear military status (not required to undergo basic training, not moved to reserve) 2. Not part of Polish military 3. Clean bill of health 4. No outstanding debts or warrants (including taxes etc.) and not marked as insolvent debtor 5. Haven't been imprisoned before
For non-military personnel who enlist in a foreign force without getting this approval from the DM they can be sentenced to jail time of 3 months up to 5 years.
These have been waived for the Ukrainian war by the defense ministry. Or at least it was publicly promised to be the practice as I doubt they bothered to change the law.
Didn't hear anything about the law being changed and I pulled those requirements directly from the government website today. Also didn't see any news of large number of volunteers suddenly going to Ukraine. On our side of the border, sure, but didn't really see anything on many people actually crossing over.
I mean, we can all assume that there will most likely be a sizeable contingent of Polish volunteers in Ukraine, most of which I would assume were already in Ukraine before this war even started. We can make such assumptions just by proximity of the countries, considering how many volunteers there are from other countries there and that most of them seem to be coming through Polish border.
I'm almost finished watching this video, I'd highly recommend it to get a clearer picture of this war. There is precedent for everything that Russia has been doing and is doing in Ukraine.
Furthermore, the narrator paints a picture of Putin learning the wrong lessons from previous wars that Russia has fought against the likes of Syria and Georgia, and falsely attributing those past successes - at least in part - to the ruthlessness of Russia's army - rather than its obvious fighting superiority. That superiority doesn't exist in Ukraine. Either way, Putin and his generals seem to believe that ruthless bombing campaigns promise to bear fruits. What they fail to understand is how big Ukraine is compared to the terror attacks and how much more foreign support they're getting than previous enemies of Russia. Even if he understands that Ukraine, militarily speaking, is a match for Russia - which he still might not - it's likely that he overvalues terrorizing the civilian population; he may not even be aware how it's backfiring by increasing Ukraine's support domestically and internationally.
EPT
