EPTAt first glance, I thought woo Canada! However, I think this might sound more impressive than it actually is as the Senator APC might be rather frail. The ones already in use in Ukraine are being used for patrols in quiet areas of the country. So this is likely not something that can be used behind a push to punch through Russian lines.
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 357
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
Falling
Canada11512 Posts
At first glance, I thought woo Canada! However, I think this might sound more impressive than it actually is as the Senator APC might be rather frail. The ones already in use in Ukraine are being used for patrols in quiet areas of the country. So this is likely not something that can be used behind a push to punch through Russian lines. | ||
|
Ardias
Russian Federation618 Posts
On January 20 2023 08:03 Falling wrote: At first glance, I thought woo Canada! However, I think this might sound more impressive than it actually is as the Senator APC might be rather frail. The ones already in use in Ukraine are being used for patrols in quiet areas of the country. So this is likely not something that can be used behind a push to punch through Russian lines. The first batch was only 8 vehicles. so there could be simply a logistical issues (hard to maintain 8 separate vehicles within whole brigade). But considering the size of Ukraine army, they would need as many protected vehicles as possible. AFU Motorized and airborne units use different MRAPs and armored cars a lot, there was a lot of videos of HMMWVs exploiting the gaps during Balakleya offensive. However if we are talking about punching through defense lines, then yeah, brigades armed with IFVs and tanks should go in first. | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6223 Posts
On January 20 2023 08:03 Falling wrote: At first glance, I thought woo Canada! However, I think this might sound more impressive than it actually is as the Senator APC might be rather frail. The ones already in use in Ukraine are being used for patrols in quiet areas of the country. So this is likely not something that can be used behind a push to punch through Russian lines. It looks like it has similar protection level to a base level M113 APC which is still pretty useful. Pretty much anywhere you can use an M113, you can use the Senator. It probably fills a similar role to what MRAPs are used for. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6274 Posts
On January 19 2023 17:10 Artesimo wrote: Read the article again then. The article does not claim this is fact, the article claims an unnamed source claims that. It literally is what I said it is - someone said something with the WSJ not making any claims on it being true or not. You can chose to believe it and frame it as me trying to shout fake news - which I am not. I am just not taking hearsay for fact until it becomes a bit more substantiated(like having multiple independent anonymous sources stating the same, or have a single credible named one come forth), just because it helps my point. They simply report that it was being said without claiming that it is true because you can't if he said she said is all you got. I am not questioning the WSJ reporting, they have done nothing wrong with the article, I am questioning your media literacy. So idk what word of mine you want to take over the WSJ article since there is no disagreement between what I said and the article... As Warding points out it is the job of the newspaper to verify that the person(s) they are quoting is a credible source and check the information through other sources. The whole point of the article is that Germany is blocking exports and if they did not think it truthful they would not publish it. That they use a direct quote is irrelevant. In fact the article itself mentions multiple German officials so you can see they already did verify it that way. Especially in politics it is not out of the ordinary to use anonymous sources. Neither did you ever provide any information that makes me doubt the truthfulness of the article. | ||
|
Artesimo
Germany573 Posts
On January 20 2023 16:33 RvB wrote: As Warding points out it is the job of the newspaper to verify that the person(s) they are quoting is a credible source and check the information through other sources. The whole point of the article is that Germany is blocking exports and if they did not think it truthful they would not publish it. That they use a direct quote is irrelevant. In fact the article itself mentions multiple German officials so you can see they already did verify it that way. Especially in politics it is not out of the ordinary to use anonymous sources. Neither did you ever provide any information that makes me doubt the truthfulness of the article. I never said the article is not truthful, I also never said they did not their due diligence. I never said you can't use anonymous sources, I never said you can't quote anonymous sources. The article says "german official(s) said anonymously...". It makes no claims on the truthfulness, because that is impossible to openly verify at the moment when all you got is sources that you can't name. Once again, I am not questioning the article, or the WSJ... I never objected to anything the article says, that it uses direct quotes or anything. I objected to taking a headline and 1 paragraph that only state "X said" as certainty. The headline is the only time the article makes any form of accusation, after that you get "officials said anonymously". I have no problem with the article, or its contents, but with your interpretation. And apparently your reading comprehension as I have to repeat multiple times that I don't doubt anything that is said in the article, and all I object to was conclusions drawn from it in this thread. Just as a reminder: "I don't know" is a valid position to have, and my position in that matter. I don't have a official statement of my government if they would allow other countries to send leopards to ukraine just like there isn't any official request. Maybe we get lucky and poland goes ahead to actually file a request so we can see if it gets denied or processing purposefully dragged out. EDIT: Going over the article repeatedly has made me realise that I actually do have a minor objection, which is the headline. Having such a strong headline and then only follow it up by a much weaker statement and the rest is mostly just context for the overall situation feels a bit weak. But that is a very minor complaint. | ||
|
warding
Portugal2395 Posts
I think Germans are generally missing the major political blunder and damage to its image and standing in the world that Scholz's government is responsible for. The rest of the world is judging Germany on this issue with the backdrop of seemingly extensive Russian corruption of Germany's political elites, decades of political appeasement of Russia and the Nordstream debacle. What the rest of Europe is thinking at the moment is: 1 - It's a great thing the US has been on our side this time, but with Trumpism this is far from guaranteed; 2 - We can't count on Germany+France to lead us, and we don't have the moral clarity of the UK on these types of issues with us in the EU anymore. 3 - This is a matter of survival, in particular for Eastern Europeans, so a new axis of power needs to be formed within the EU. Among other things. this means that "we" can't count on Germany's military industry (not to mention the Swiss). | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On January 20 2023 19:51 warding wrote: While it's true that Germany has contributed a lot to Ukraine, it seems that since the beginning its political messaging and posture often comes across as disingenuous and at times trying to appease Russia. Often when discussing this issue with Germans technicalities are often brought up (ie. the official request hasn't been made yet) and the need to understand internal German politics before judging. I think Germans are generally missing the major political blunder and damage to its image and standing in the world that Scholz's government is responsible for. The rest of the world is judging Germany on this issue with the backdrop of seemingly extensive Russian corruption of Germany's political elites, decades of political appeasement of Russia and the Nordstream debacle. What the rest of Europe is thinking at the moment is: 1 - It's a great thing the US has been on our side this time, but with Trumpism this is far from guaranteed; 2 - We can't count on Germany+France to lead us, and we don't have the moral clarity of the UK on these types of issues with us in the EU anymore. 3 - This is a matter of survival, in particular for Eastern Europeans, so a new axis of power needs to be formed within the EU. Among other things. this means that "we" can't count on Germany's military industry (not to mention the Swiss). Well said. Regarding point 1: Republican support for Ukraine is indeed declining, mainly among the voters (they're basically split now) but also in the house. We don't need to be worried quite yet, but down the line it could become an issue. It shows that the chest beating after 9/11 was drenched in patriotism by Republicans. Defending Ukrainian citizens from getting terrorized for a whole year is apparently not a worthy cause in their minds, but invading another country after a single terrorist strike is just another Tuesday. To this day a majority of Republicans support the invasion of Iraq, and that includes a large minority of moderate/liberal Republicans. But sending military aid to Ukraine is apparently not justified in their eyes. This can become very important. American patriots are disinterested in Ukraine, and Republicans (especially the conservative ones) are drenched in patriotism to this day. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
But yeah nobody can match the US where they just produce loads of military stuff they don't need, to placate some state senator with a factory, for a different vote. Nobody has stockpiles ready like the US and it will be difficult to become more independent of that. I really don't like the general anti-Germany news sentiment though. It generates lots of clicks so news jumps on it. But it's just playing into russia's hands. They got Brexit already. Pushing Germany away is plain stupid. I just roll my eyes whenever I see the next 'Germany doesn't ' headline on reddit reaching the top. | ||
|
Artesimo
Germany573 Posts
On January 20 2023 19:51 warding wrote: While it's true that Germany has contributed a lot to Ukraine, it seems that since the beginning its political messaging and posture often comes across as disingenuous and at times trying to appease Russia. Often when discussing this issue with Germans technicalities are often brought up (ie. the official request hasn't been made yet) and the need to understand internal German politics before judging. I think Germans are generally missing the major political blunder and damage to its image and standing in the world that Scholz's government is responsible for. The rest of the world is judging Germany on this issue with the backdrop of seemingly extensive Russian corruption of Germany's political elites, decades of political appeasement of Russia and the Nordstream debacle. What the rest of Europe is thinking at the moment is: 1 - It's a great thing the US has been on our side this time, but with Trumpism this is far from guaranteed; 2 - We can't count on Germany+France to lead us, and we don't have the moral clarity of the UK on these types of issues with us in the EU anymore. 3 - This is a matter of survival, in particular for Eastern Europeans, so a new axis of power needs to be formed within the EU. Among other things. this means that "we" can't count on Germany's military industry (not to mention the Swiss). I agree that the german messaging has been problematic throughout this conflict and a lot of the messaging that was put out was extremely flimsy and probably just using technicalities as excuses. When it comes to the topic of "haven't put an official request in yet" I strongly disagree however. Estonia wanted to send ukraine some howitzers that were handed to them by germany. They did the right thing of putting in an official request for it, and forced the hand of the german government through it. I don't remember if the request was denied or took painfully long to go through, but I do remember that is gave some clarity and something that then was used to put pressure on the german government. After germany boldly proclaims that any request on delivering leopards to ukraine from other countries would be processed swiftly, I think it would be time for one of the nations that proclaim they are eager to provide them to hand in such a request. Be like estonia. Instead we get this stupid game of hot potato that really makes it more look like nobody wants to be the first for some reason - including the US. Their reasons why abrahams is not suited are in part worse than some of the ones brought up when delivering the PzH2000 was discussed, yet they seem to mostly get accepted without any criticism (Arguing that the US already provides enough is valid, but not the point here. The point is that arguments face different scrutiny based on who makes them, which tells you its not about the argument, but the decision, or how you feel about the person making them). Everyone claiming they would be willing to provide leopards, or that they would quickly process those requests without any signal of how likely it is that they go through just doesn't give a lot of credibility to any of the parties involved. It's a clownshow from everyone involved, not just germany. I think the only bold/honest statements we got in this matter so far is the netherlands throwing the offer to pay for the delivery of leopards and finland saying it will send some as long as there is a coordinated european effort. Granted the finish thing is a bit more weasly than the dutch statement, but its the most definitive we got so far I think. I am not counting poland here because I refuse to take "Don't you make us send stuff without permission! Oh no, ofc we have not asked yet" as anything more than a political stunt. As silly as the PiS people are at times, I trust that even if they would be willing to send them without permission, they would first check if they can do so without causing an international incident that could have catastrophic consequences for them. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22367 Posts
Support for Ukraine is not a NATO led matter. You don't have to do it yourself, just stop standing in the way of those who do. | ||
zatic
Zurich15365 Posts
On January 20 2023 22:28 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: So... [*]Ministry wants to be prepared for either possibility, yes or no. Full inventory check of Leos in industry and military and determining compatibilities of different systems. Apparently this step was not done before by his predecessor Lambrecht FYI this kind of inactivity and frankly disinterest was largely the reason Lambrecht had to go. | ||
|
warding
Portugal2395 Posts
On January 20 2023 21:09 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: In the end Ukraine is not in the EU or NATO. Germany/France wil react differently with EU/NATO countries so not sure your point 2/3 are really valid. Is Ukraine the only scenario where European defense needs to be mobilized without Article 5? What if Belarus has its own Euromaidan revolution and Russia invades Belarus? What if this war ends with a rotten peace deal and the issue lingers further? What if we need to be discussing building up a more serious nuclear deterrent within the EU? @Artesimo I understand that the subject is complex. My main point is that Germany should be seizing the initiative on communication, especially on the Leo 2 subject. In comparison to Merkel, and now we know about the massive blunder that was Germany's foreign policy regarding Russia even in those times, she had the merit of positioning Germany as a reliable international leader within the EU. Something was being done right by Germany that isn't being done right now. The only land threat to European nations is Russia. We have 2000+ Leopard 2s, there's no reason why we shouldn't be donating 500 to Ukraine ASAP. Portugal has 37, we should be donating at least 20 IMO. | ||
|
Artesimo
Germany573 Posts
On that last note, its going further than that. He spoke of doing pre-emptive checks on compatibility between what germany has to offer, and the equipment of allies, hinting at the implications for training if a positive decision is made. He also mentioned that he expects that part of this has already been done in some capacity due to the work attitude within the department. While he explicitly stated that this is no indication on any form of decision, it is good to know that if it was decided to send tanks, not much time should be lost. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Finland will deliver another package of defence materiel to Ukraine. The President of the Republic decided on the matter on 19 January 2023 on the proposal of the Government. This will be the 12th package of defence materiel to be delivered to Ukraine. It is estimated that to replace the capabilities included in this delivery will cost more than EUR 400 million to Finland. The combined value of all defence materiel packages submitted so far is now EUR 590 million. - Ukraine continues to need support in defending its territory and the current package of defence materiel is clearly the largest one to date. Finland supplies heavy artillery and munitions to Ukraine, says Minister of Defence Mikko Savola. For operational reasons and to ensure that the delivery reaches its destination, more detailed information on the content of the assistance, manner of delivery or schedule will not be provided. Both Ukraine's needs and the resources of the Defence Forces have been taken into account when deciding on the additional assistance. These matters will be on the agenda on Friday 20 January in Ramstein, Germany where the defence ministers of Finland and Sweden are to sign a Statement of Intent (SoI) on support for Ukraine. Source Meanwhile in Poland... wtf. Coast guards rescued three divers off the northern coast of Poland over the weekend whose dubious explanation of their night-time dive near critical energy infrastructure, along with their mysterious identities, has reportedly sparked a cross-agency investigation. The three men, who told authorities they were Spanish nationals, were rescued near the Polish coastal city of Gdansk on Saturday night after their small motorboat broke down and they couldn't return to shore. Since then, doubts over their intentions have mounted. They were rescued not far from the Naftoport facility at the Port of Gdansk, which receives tanker shipments of oil and other and petroleum products. They were also found near an area where there are plans to build a new floating natural gas terminal. Officers apparently saw nothing suspicious at first in the fact that the men were diving near critical infrastructure at night with no permit and atypical amber-hunting equipment, and the local police did not pursue the matter, releasing the men without further questioning. They have all reportedly left Poland. Source | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4756 Posts
We laugh because it is better than crying. | ||
|
pmp10
3396 Posts
On January 20 2023 22:51 Gorsameth wrote: Why does NATO being divided on sending Leo's matter? The tanks are themselves are not that important. It's just that they have become the most visible symbol of western willingness to escalate in response to Russia. Without breaking barriers like that Ukraine can't last in a longer war. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
The Dutch Cabinet will look into supplying F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine if the Kyiv government asks for it. During a parliamentary debate on Thursday, Minister Wopke Hoekstra of Foreign Affairs said the Cabinet would look at such a request with an “open mind.” In Davos, Minister Kajsa Ollongren of Defense also said that the Netherlands is willing to help pay for modern Leopard 2 tanks that other countries send to Ukraine. “That is certainly something we are willing to do,” she told Bloomberg. Hoekstra said there are “no taboos” for the delivery of regular equipment. Sjoerd Sjoerdsma (D66) asked the Cabinet to supply F16s and infantry fighting vehicles to the Ukrainian armed forces. Many fear that Russia will launch another major offensive in the coming months. According to Hoekstra, the Netherlands only sends items that Ukraine asks for. Kyiv currently mainly needs heavy weapons. The country has been asking for modern battle tanks for some time. Poland and Finland want to send the German Leopard 2 tanks, but they need permission from Germany. Berlin is dithering. The German government is under intense pressure to allow these tanks to go to Ukraine. The Netherlands is willing to help pay to get the tanks in Ukraine, Ollongern said in Davos, but the delivery must take place within a European or NATO coalition. “We are waiting for Germany’s position on this, but I am in favor of trying to find a solution and sending tanks to Ukraine,” Ollongren told Bloomberg. “Every time, we have shown that we are able, together, to provide Ukraine with what they need.” Source | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9299 Posts
On January 21 2023 00:19 Silvanel wrote: I see that our newest police fuckup has reached English-speaking world. Be assured it is not the first time they did something like that. Our police is now the punchline of every joke. We laugh because it is better than crying. Our special services (Stanisław Żaryn) claim there was no danger and they have "full knowledge" of the situation. I read that the police was told to let those guys go and whatever happened there was either secretely monitored or allowed by our specials services. | ||
| ||
