|
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 January 30 2023 21:23 Simberto wrote:
See, at this point i am getting pretty pissed off.
Throughout the war, Germany has solidly been in the middle of the pack donating stuff to Ukraine. Just look at the fucking stats.
Now we are even donating tanks, and as soon as people officially asked, we told them that yes, they too could send German battle tanks if they want to.
And less than a week after that, we are once again the obstructing bad guys. Can't you guys pick on someone else for a second? Like the US who has thousands of tanks just standing around doing nothing? Or all the countries who have sent far less than Germany by any reasonable metric (Total, Per capita, Per GDP)
It is not as if anyone had sent any modern Nato tanks before Germany, either.
But no, it is just constantly bashing Germany on all the fucking channels. Why? It is getting really, really annoying. There does not seem to be anything we can do to stop that. Look at the fucking statistics. There are countries which are far more deserving of your hate when it comes to support for Ukraine. Can we have a fucking break for just one minute?
Germany sticks out the most because everyone is constantly looking at Germany for some reason. If you look at one country all the time, of course that is where you will find most of the fault.
Edit: For example, Magic Powers. You are from Austria. Why don't you wonder why Austria has sent far, far less than Germany by any metric? Especially in the realm of military equipment? But of course, it is much more comfortable to look at Germany and say that we are the baddies.
There's a war happening in case you forgot. This is about people's lives and nationhood, not a parade on a rainy day.
Austria has sent about as much as Germany has. The country is 10 times smaller in most regards, so you can't judge by raw numbers, you have to adjust the ratio to GDP, military spending, perhaps population size and such things. When you do that, both Germany and Austria are fairly even. And guess what, I would criticize our leaders for that just as much as I've been criticizing Scholz or others. You can pick your favorite feet-dragger in my country, I promise to you I'll hop on board and back you all the way until they start sending more support and stop messing about.
The reason why I haven't picked out one Austrian individual is that Austria is a small fish in this war, so it's hardly worth it for the time being. I'd have to pick at least a dozen other countries, and that would get tiring real quick.
With Scholz being so visible he represents the whole cabal of obstructive middle-men. That's why I pick him, and not because he's my favorite second tier villain - although he's rapidly becoming that now after his most recent comment on fighter jets.
And that's also why I keep coming back to him. He just doesn't stop dragging his feet, he has to keep doing it. He's obstructing the effort to help Ukraine at every step and I'm not having it.
Please mention more of the likes of him and I'll completely back you up on it, you have my support.
|
On January 30 2023 21:23 Simberto wrote:
See, at this point i am getting pretty pissed off.
Throughout the war, Germany has solidly been in the middle of the pack donating stuff to Ukraine. Just look at the fucking stats.
Now we are even donating tanks, and as soon as people officially asked, we told them that yes, they too could send German battle tanks if they want to.
And less than a week after that, we are once again the obstructing bad guys. Can't you guys pick on someone else for a second? Like the US who has thousands of tanks just standing around doing nothing? Or all the countries who have sent far less than Germany by any reasonable metric (Total, Per capita, Per GDP)
It is not as if anyone had sent any modern Nato tanks before Germany, either.
But no, it is just constantly bashing Germany on all the fucking channels. Why? It is getting really, really annoying. There does not seem to be anything we can do to stop that. Look at the fucking statistics. There are countries which are far more deserving of your hate when it comes to support for Ukraine. Can we have a fucking break for just one minute?
Germany sticks out the most because everyone is constantly looking at Germany for some reason. If you look at one country all the time, of course that is where you will find most of the fault.
Edit: For example, Magic Powers. You are from Austria. Why don't you wonder why Austria has sent far, far less than Germany by any metric? Especially in the realm of military equipment? But of course, it is much more comfortable to look at Germany and say that we are the baddies.
If it makes you feel any better, now you know what its like to be an american.
|
Germany deserves the flak they got over their position on tanks. However, if the final outcome (US sending Abrams as well as various European nations sending Leopards) was achieved because of Scholz's refusal to move without the US, it might actually be for the best. I'm not sure there are enough Leopards available for sending to Ukraine, while there are more than plenty Abrams sitting around doing nothing.
Their position on fighters is a bit weird. I'm not sure why they spoke up at all, because nobody asked Germany about sending fighters. Unlike tanks, most fighters in Europe are either made by the US (vast majority) or by France and/or UK. There's also the Eurofighter, but I would be surprised if the UK, Spanish or Italian military had to ask for permission from Germany before authorizing their gift to Ukraine. The Germans definitely have no authority to say whether the Dutch may or may not send their F16s, and insofar as I know they're the only country to even bring up sending fighters, for the moment.
|
Germany and France when Ukraine asks for help: smalldoge.png
Germany and France when the EU loosens fair competition rules to improve state aid for domestic business affected by war in Ukraine: gigadoge.jpg
|
So we are back to bashing Germany again less than a week after they lead the organization of the largest number of NATO-made tanks - which should by all accounts have been America's role. And this is because *checks notes* they are not supplying their outdated and barely functioning Tornado fighter jets and *checks notes again* their submarines?
This is how you destroy the will of a people to help. This is how you get Germany military aid to dry up. By being incessantly petulant little children clamoring for more at every turn, and bashing one of your staunchest allies. If this continues, don't be surprised to wake up one day to the Germans saying "You know what? Fine, we are not sending anything anymore. Doesn't make a difference anyway."
If that is your goal, good job on being Putins little puppet.
|
On January 30 2023 22:13 Artesimo wrote:
Estonia had no problems asking first, even if they got shut down the first time they wanted to send howitzers at the start of the war. The whole tank thing wonderfully highlights how charitably is given to one and not the others. Anonymous claims of germany blocking other countries to export leopard2 are beleived, while german officials claiming that germany isn't the only european nation being cautious when it comes to tanks are completely ignored.
Which ones are the other nations ? Do they hold the leverage to stop main battle tanks from being sent to Ukraine?
Also, since we keep going on about this leader nonsense. Being a leader doesn't mean doing what other people want you to do. What you are really complaining about is germany not doing what you want.
Don't attempt to missrepresent what i said. I didn't say Germany should send tanks to Ukraine. Even if i thought so, that's not the point, but taking a stance.
Reiterating the delicate state of the Bundeswehr is no use anyway, so I am not even gonna bother. Or that even in the west the military doesn't exist just so you can protect your country. Ukraine got its tanks, the US was forced to send tanks as well, most likely thanks to germany. Even if that was an unintended consequence, it is a massive win in my eyes and far better than getting any leopards. You need the US to deliver tanks in the long run, simple as.
I don't disagree with this. Not like it happening sooner wouldn't have forced US hand regardless. So what's your point?
On January 31 2023 01:50 Nezgar wrote:
So we are back to bashing Germany again less than a week after they lead the organization of the largest number of NATO-made tanks - which should by all accounts have been America's role. And this is because *checks notes* they are not supplying their outdated and barely functioning Tornado fighter jets and *checks notes again* their submarines?
This is how you destroy the will of a people to help. This is how you get Germany military aid to dry up. By being incessantly petulant little children clamoring for more at every turn, and bashing one of your staunchest allies. If this continues, don't be surprised to wake up one day to the Germans saying "You know what? Fine, we are not sending anything anymore. Doesn't make a difference anyway."
If that is your goal, good job on being Putins little puppet.
Who is talking about subs and tornadoes ?
|
On January 31 2023 01:50 Nezgar wrote:
So we are back to bashing Germany again less than a week after they lead the organization of the largest number of NATO-made tanks - which should by all accounts have been America's role. And this is because *checks notes* they are not supplying their outdated and barely functioning Tornado fighter jets and *checks notes again* their submarines?
This is how you destroy the will of a people to help. This is how you get Germany military aid to dry up. By being incessantly petulant little children clamoring for more at every turn, and bashing one of your staunchest allies. If this continues, don't be surprised to wake up one day to the Germans saying "You know what? Fine, we are not sending anything anymore. Doesn't make a difference anyway."
If that is your goal, good job on being Putins little puppet.
Agreed. That was kind of my point in my previous post, too. And i find the Psy-Ops, explanation quite reasonable actually.
We are not even talking about demanding gratitude here, though that would be quite nice after gifting some really expensive military hardware that we don't really have enough of ourselves. We are just talking about not constantly being complained at. Because that is incredibly exhausting and will eventually lead to the german population just saying "fuck it".
Instead of companing about Germany at every step of the way, lobby your own government to send more. You are much more likely to do good rather than hurt your cause that way, and they are much more likely to listen to you.
|
On January 31 2023 01:54 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +
Reiterating the delicate state of the Bundeswehr is no use anyway, so I am not even gonna bother. Or that even in the west the military doesn't exist just so you can protect your country. Ukraine got its tanks, the US was forced to send tanks as well, most likely thanks to germany. Even if that was an unintended consequence, it is a massive win in my eyes and far better than getting any leopards. You need the US to deliver tanks in the long run, simple as.
I don't disagree with this. Not like it happening sooner wouldn't have forced US hand regardless. So what's your point?
Signs point towards the US delivering tanks because german/a larger european effort to deliver tanks was contingent on the US delivering. Not that the US is delivering tanks because the EU is also delivering tanks. They deliver so the EU also delivers.
|
The "pressure" by Germany on the US to send battle tanks was a stunt. The US leaned back and said "no u" and the ball was right back in Germany's corner, with the US saying Germany should greenlight the tanks and then the US would follow. There's absolutely no shred of evidence that the US wasn't already planning to send Abrams tanks. One can easily turn the narrative around and argue the US played Germany by not budging right away. Who played whom? Exactly, we have absolutely no clue. It's absurd to argue that Scholz (or anyone else) played anyone other than themselves in this whole escapade.
It's absurd to argue that this game of symbolic cross-atlantic needling was anything other than politicians doing their usual politician thing that got them into (our could get them out of) power to begin with. This was self-interest by a few individuals, not a series of brilliant 5D chess moves. Get this idea out of your heads, these are not geniuses, they're regular human beings like any one of us with all the regular human quirks and faults, except with an elevated lust for power.
The only thing we really know is that Germany kept refusing to send Leopard 2s and was the one and only party holding the leash to the remaining foreign-owned Leopard 2s. Actions speak louder than words. As soon as Germany gave the greenlight, everyone immediately chimed in with their own stock, just as they were promising the whole time.
|
On January 31 2023 01:15 Acrofales wrote:
Germany deserves the flak they got over their position on tanks. However, if the final outcome (US sending Abrams as well as various European nations sending Leopards) was achieved because of Scholz's refusal to move without the US, it might actually be for the best. I'm not sure there are enough Leopards available for sending to Ukraine, while there are more than plenty Abrams sitting around doing nothing.
I have to agree. I think that, perhaps, the best way to bolster the spring offensive would be for the Americans to agree to replace Poland's post-Soviet tanks with Abrams tanks. The former could be used by Ukraine immediately.
|
On January 31 2023 03:35 Magic Powers wrote:
The "pressure" by Germany on the US to send battle tanks was a stunt. The US leaned back and said "no u" and the ball was right back in Germany's corner, with the US saying Germany should greenlight the tanks and then the US would follow. There's absolutely no shred of evidence that the US wasn't already planning to send Abrams tanks. One can easily turn the narrative around and argue the US played Germany by not budging right away. Who played whom? Exactly, we have absolutely no clue. It's absurd to argue that Scholz (or anyone else) played anyone other than themselves in this whole escapade.
It's absurd to argue that this game of symbolic cross-atlantic needling was anything other than politicians doing their usual politician thing that got them into (our could get them out of) power to begin with. This was self-interest by a few individuals, not a series of brilliant 5D chess moves. Get this idea out of your heads, these are not geniuses, they're regular human beings like any one of us with all the regular human quirks and faults, except with an elevated lust for power.
The only thing we really know is that Germany kept refusing to send Leopard 2s and was the one and only party holding the leash to the remaining foreign-owned Leopard 2s. Actions speak louder than words. As soon as Germany gave the greenlight, everyone immediately chimed in with their own stock, just as they were promising the whole time.
I think it's absolutely hilarious how much you are contradicting yourself.
On one hand you claim that the pressure was a stunt. You claim that the US leaned back and said "No you". And then later, in the same fucking paragraph, you argue that we cannot know and that we have no clue.
That includes you.
All your claims are based entirely on speculation. All your arguments about "behind the door" deals and communications are based ENTIRELY around speculation. You cannot both make claims without evidence and when someone else gives their interpretation of things, blast them for making claims without evidence.
The only thing we REALLY know is that there were no official requests from other European nations for German permission to deliver their tanks to Ukraine. Every other communication is based on speculation, hearsay and was exclusively done behind doors.
It's stunning that you can just claim the opposite without any fucking evidence. Unless you are able to provide any evidence for your claims, I implore you to cease this spreading of lies and speculation. Otherwise you look like an absolute tool.
|
On January 31 2023 03:35 Magic Powers wrote:
The "pressure" by Germany on the US to send battle tanks was a stunt. The US leaned back and said "no u" and the ball was right back in Germany's corner, with the US saying Germany should greenlight the tanks and then the US would follow. There's absolutely no shred of evidence that the US wasn't already planning to send Abrams tanks. One can easily turn the narrative around and argue the US played Germany by not budging right away. Who played whom? Exactly, we have absolutely no clue. It's absurd to argue that Scholz (or anyone else) played anyone other than themselves in this whole escapade.
It's absurd to argue that this game of symbolic cross-atlantic needling was anything other than politicians doing their usual politician thing that got them into (our could get them out of) power to begin with. This was self-interest by a few individuals, not a series of brilliant 5D chess moves. Get this idea out of your heads, these are not geniuses, they're regular human beings like any one of us with all the regular human quirks and faults, except with an elevated lust for power.
The only thing we really know is that Germany kept refusing to send Leopard 2s and was the one and only party holding the leash to the remaining foreign-owned Leopard 2s. Actions speak louder than words. As soon as Germany gave the greenlight, everyone immediately chimed in with their own stock, just as they were promising the whole time.
Perfect example of the discrepancy on how much scrutiny is applied to different sides. We still have no proof of the bold part btw, and the closest thing we got is a few anonymous sources[EDIT: that don't even claim that germany blocked foreign deliveries, only that it would intend to. Just to underline how thin that supposed "we know" is] that at least then would prove that the US was forced to.
Also I never claimed it was 5d chess, I specifically mentioned it might as well have been unintentional. But I find it very difficult to look at the clear timeline of events and meetings and come to the conclusion that the US was in no way forced by either germany or an EU effort, while also pretending that germany held back other countries tanks based on anonymous sources.
This is not about any team winning or a debate, there is no 'uuuuh germany played the US/the US played germany'. There is the fact that the US has strongly resisted to send tanks until they were officially forced by it being clear at least some of the european tanks were contingent on them sending tanks. I am not delusional enough to claim that scholz/the EU planned this all along. But I can look at the events and come to the conclusion that one seem to have influenced the other. I don't need to make any assumptions on the motivations for that, like it is key to your argument. I can be wrong ofc, but that is how it looks to me when looking at the whole thing in a more rational way than needing someone to 'get played'.
|
|
|
Apparently there were reported explosions again yesterday but no pics or anything. Was reportedly the HQ of the Republican Guard.
edit: Well this is interesting...
|
It is weird that the last Iran thread was from 2017 and before that we would regularly discuss Iran, like multiple thread every year. Am I missing one? Seems like the strike over there was discussion worthy.
|
On January 31 2023 01:50 Nezgar wrote:
So we are back to bashing Germany again less than a week after they lead the organization of the largest number of NATO-made tanks.
Germany didn't organize anything. WTF are You smoking?
That's not at all what happened. EU countries were prepared to send tanks with or without Germany and Scholz finally decided to join when it was inevitable. Your country was not a driving force here, but an obstacle.
Biden called Scholz bluff and somehow thats a "great move" by Scholz...
|
France, and Australia to start supplying Ukraine with a continuous stream of artillery shells.
PARIS (AP) — France and Australia announced Monday plans to jointly produce and send several thousand 155-millimeter artillery shells to Ukraine, starting in the coming weeks.
The multimillion-dollar plan is the latest offer of support for Ukraine by both countries, and comes amid growing appeals from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy for heavy weaponry and long-term supplies from Western allies nearly a year into Russia’s war on Ukraine.
The joint announcement, made by Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles and French Defense Minister Sebastien Lecornu, also appeared aimed at sending a signal that the two countries have overcome a damaging dispute over submarines.
Australia secretly jettisoned a $60 billion contract for conventional French submarines in 2021 in favor of a deal for nuclear-powered submarines made by the U.S. and Britain instead, deeply harming French-Australian relations.
The production of artillery shells for Ukraine will be led by French manufacturer Nexter in cooperation with Australian manufacturers, the defense ministers said. They did not provide further details, citing national security.
“I’m pleased to announce that Australia and France are working together to supply 155-millimeter ammunition to Ukraine, to make sure Ukraine is able to stay in this conflict and see it concluded on its own terms,” Marles said.
Lecornu said they aim to send the first shells in the first quarter of this year, and that the project is meant to secure a steady supply of shells to Ukraine over time.
Source
|
Russian Federation618 Posts
On January 31 2023 03:37 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2023 01:15 Acrofales wrote:
Germany deserves the flak they got over their position on tanks. However, if the final outcome (US sending Abrams as well as various European nations sending Leopards) was achieved because of Scholz's refusal to move without the US, it might actually be for the best. I'm not sure there are enough Leopards available for sending to Ukraine, while there are more than plenty Abrams sitting around doing nothing. I have to agree. I think that, perhaps, the best way to bolster the spring offensive would be for the Americans to agree to replace Poland's post-Soviet tanks with Abrams tanks. The former could be used by Ukraine immediately.
They actually do so. The only production factory (in Lima, Ohio) capable of making new M1s is producing them currently for Poland and Taiwan. Thing is, it produces only 12 tanks per month. I'm not sure which factories are capable of capital repairs of M1s, if any, but the fact that M1s that are supposed to go to Ukraine are bought through the fund that is used to procure the new equipment, rather than taking it from existing stocks says that either US don't have additional capability to conduct capital repairs on mothballed vehicles, or for some reason don't want to.
Meanwhile UVZ alone is said to produce around 100 tanks a month - T-72B3M/T-90M, though to be fair, most of them are old hulls undergoing capital repairs and moderinzation with protection, sights and fire control system, though T-72B3M variant seems to recieve only less capable thermals, than previous Sosna-U thermal sight, without incorporating it into fire control system, probably due to the high demand on Sosna-U on T-90M.
And then there are also T-80BVM produced in Omsk and T-62M2 in Chita. Though again, they are old hulls restored, repaired and modernized. The only tank produced completely from scratch in Russia is T-90M (and maybe some T-80BVM).
|
|
|
On January 31 2023 06:08 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2023 01:50 Nezgar wrote:
So we are back to bashing Germany again less than a week after they lead the organization of the largest number of NATO-made tanks. Germany didn't organize anything. WTF are You smoking? That's not at all what happened. EU countries were prepared to send tanks with or without Germany and Scholz finally decided to join when it was inevitable. Your country was not a driving force here, but an obstacle. Biden called Scholz bluff and somehow thats a "great move" by Scholz...
Your country complained about not being able to send Leopards without actually handing in a request to be able to send them. And once they did, they got the okay. Bold move to point fingers, really.
Whether or not the USA would have sent Abrams without getting pressured by Germany and other European nations is up for debate. If by "calling the bluff" you mean that the USA accepted the deal that without their Abrams there would be no Leopards, then sure, go ahead and give credit to Biden for that.
At the end of the day, the delivery of Leopards is organized by Germany, like it or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
