Ukraine conflict
10-24-2024, 08:19 AM
#4161
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
I"m shocked I tell youi...shocked!
Russia's immediate threat is getting pounded into food scraps by the Ukrainian army. They've resorted to hiring N. Koreans to do the heavy lifting they're incapabale, or unwilling, to do. Where is the units that Russia will send to invade Estonia and trigger a response from NATO?
Why am I not surprised that the resident Putin lover implies that NATO won't respond? Putin will have to wait to see if Trump gets elected before he ever decides to move against Russia.
Russia's immediate threat is getting pounded into food scraps by the Ukrainian army. They've resorted to hiring N. Koreans to do the heavy lifting they're incapabale, or unwilling, to do. Where is the units that Russia will send to invade Estonia and trigger a response from NATO?
Why am I not surprised that the resident Putin lover implies that NATO won't respond? Putin will have to wait to see if Trump gets elected before he ever decides to move against Russia.
https://kyivindependent.com/at-least...ntries-resist/
Belgium, Slovenia and Spain are among seven NATO countries reluctant to grant Ukraine an invitation to join NATO, Politico reported on Oct. 23, citing four anonymous U.S. and NATO officials and diplomats.
While Germany and the U.S. are already known to have reservations about the move, the outlet reported that Belgium, Slovenia, and Spain are "hiding behind" those two countries, and slow-walking President Volodymyr Zelensky's ongoing request.
In mid-October, Zelensky unveiled his five-point victory plan, which includes Kyiv's invitation to join NATO placed at the top of the list. U.S. Ambassador to NATO Julianne Smith said on Oct. 17 that the alliance does not currently have such plans.
"Countries like Belgium, Slovenia or Spain are hiding behind the U.S. and Germany. They are reluctant," one of the NATO officials told Politico.
The nations "support it in the abstract, but once it gets closer to materializing" they will start to oppose the idea more publicly, they added.
Two other countries — Hungary and Slovakia — are not backing Ukraine's NATO membership due to their pro-Kremlin leanings, Politico reported.
While Germany and the U.S. are already known to have reservations about the move, the outlet reported that Belgium, Slovenia, and Spain are "hiding behind" those two countries, and slow-walking President Volodymyr Zelensky's ongoing request.
In mid-October, Zelensky unveiled his five-point victory plan, which includes Kyiv's invitation to join NATO placed at the top of the list. U.S. Ambassador to NATO Julianne Smith said on Oct. 17 that the alliance does not currently have such plans.
"Countries like Belgium, Slovenia or Spain are hiding behind the U.S. and Germany. They are reluctant," one of the NATO officials told Politico.
The nations "support it in the abstract, but once it gets closer to materializing" they will start to oppose the idea more publicly, they added.
Two other countries — Hungary and Slovakia — are not backing Ukraine's NATO membership due to their pro-Kremlin leanings, Politico reported.
An alliance is like a chain. It is not made stronger by adding weak links to it. A great power like the United States gains no advantage and it loses prestige by offering, indeed peddling, its alliances to all and sundry. An alliance should be hard diplomatic currency, valuable and hard to get, and not inflationary paper from the mimeograph machine in the State Department.
Walter Lippmann
Walter Lippmann
https://www.globalfirepower.com/coun...20Organization)%20alliance.
That of Lithuania only marginally better with a few less helicopters and a few more small two engine transports. But like Lithuania, NO combat aircraft.
Though in fairness to the small guys, they are funding their militaries much better on a per capita basis than the larger NATO economies like Canada, Spain, Italy, Germany...
Last edited by Excargodog; 10-24-2024 at 08:33 AM.
10-24-2024, 09:43 AM
#4162
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 805
I"m shocked I tell youi...shocked!
Russia's immediate threat is getting pounded into food scraps by the Ukrainian army. They've resorted to hiring N. Koreans to do the heavy lifting they're incapabale, or unwilling, to do. Where is the units that Russia will send to invade Estonia and trigger a response from NATO?
Why am I not surprised that the resident Putin lover implies that NATO won't respond? Putin will have to wait to see if Trump gets elected before he ever decides to move against Russia.
Russia's immediate threat is getting pounded into food scraps by the Ukrainian army. They've resorted to hiring N. Koreans to do the heavy lifting they're incapabale, or unwilling, to do. Where is the units that Russia will send to invade Estonia and trigger a response from NATO?
Why am I not surprised that the resident Putin lover implies that NATO won't respond? Putin will have to wait to see if Trump gets elected before he ever decides to move against Russia.
Then the Viet Cong in the south fought a well equipted ARVN to a standstill (the reason US troops got more directly involved)
On paper, it should not have been possible.
Post WW2, it has been the smaller, less populated, materially weaker forces that have prevailed over the larger militaries. Probably each for different reasons, but those with the logistics/big sticks seems to have lost more often than not. (by lost, I mean fail to achieve their political objectives, if they could even define them)
I suspect that part and parcel of the reasons the use of the most powerful military in the world keeps failing to achieve political victories is a lack of understanding why the little guys keep beating up the big guys. They just go back to their War College Training and rinse and repeat. (even McClellan in his later years gave no indication he understood why he couldn't win a battle. 'All I needed was just a little bit more logistical material!).
Russia has it's own internal problems. Which they only made worse by invading Ukraine.
As they spiral deeper into oligarchic fascism, these problems will only become greater.
You are correct. Russia is waiting for and counting on Trump.
But it probably won't save them. Or worse, make Putin overreach even farther.
Last edited by MaxQ; 10-24-2024 at 09:56 AM.
10-24-2024, 09:54 AM
#4163
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 805
Tell me more about the Estonian army and it's capabilities. Can't wait for you to school me on it.
As someone who speaks the language, I think I know a little more about it than you with your google searches.
Just FYI, it's a lot more capable than you think. Your definition of "active duty" just shows you don't understand how a conscription army like that works.
As someone who speaks the language, I think I know a little more about it than you with your google searches.
Just FYI, it's a lot more capable than you think. Your definition of "active duty" just shows you don't understand how a conscription army like that works.
(or maybe you were too young to have been required to learn Russian?)
None of my business, but just curious.
Used to be, (no idea as to today), that most smaller countries required a year or so of military service. Just to learn the basics. But it created a ready population force to activate in time of national need. It also created the foundations of a guerrilla army in the event of being occupied/overrun. (Poland was one such country)
While I do not myself have military training, as an outsider it puzzles me why military professionals often seem to be convinced that "their" structures and tactics are the only ones that can, in the long run, be the only ones that work. Lots of historical examples of that attitude being incorrect.
10-24-2024, 12:07 PM
#4164
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2022
Posts: 1,466
the bot will also display a complete lack of strategic and tactical foresight when it complains about a lack of airforce for nations that really cannot support modern 4.5 gen fighters in any meaningful capacity. Having a capable ground force is a much better option as you wait for the US to assemble its airpower.
at the end of the day nato is a deterrent for aggression in Europe…….seems to be working just fine for the nations that are officially part of the alliance.
the bot has an agenda that derives from the kremlin……Make europe not our problem……
Treat the bot like the troll it is.
10-24-2024, 01:06 PM
#4165
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
the bot doesn’t care. The bot will not mention that 7k is on par with the population of Estonia. The bot will not mention that estonia is currently above the 2% its been desperately whining about everyday all day for years. The bot will not mention that estonia was above the required 2% in 22.
the bot will also display a complete lack of strategic and tactical foresight when it complains about a lack of airforce for nations that really cannot support modern 4.5 gen fighters in any meaningful capacity. Having a capable ground force is a much better option as you wait for the US to assemble its airpower.
at the end of the day nato is a deterrent for aggression in Europe…….seems to be working just fine for the nations that are officially part of the alliance.
the bot has an agenda that derives from the kremlin……Make europe not our problem……
Treat the bot like the troll it is.
the bot will also display a complete lack of strategic and tactical foresight when it complains about a lack of airforce for nations that really cannot support modern 4.5 gen fighters in any meaningful capacity. Having a capable ground force is a much better option as you wait for the US to assemble its airpower.
at the end of the day nato is a deterrent for aggression in Europe…….seems to be working just fine for the nations that are officially part of the alliance.
the bot has an agenda that derives from the kremlin……Make europe not our problem……
Treat the bot like the troll it is.
Let's take Estonia:
ERR News
18.06.2024 04:55https://i.err.ee/smartcrop?type=optimize&width=1472&aspectratio=16% 3A10&url=https%3A%2F%2Fs.err.ee%2Fphoto%2Fcrop%2F2 024%2F05%2F31%2F2420382h0ca4.jpgAn EDF training exercise using Piorun air defence weapon systems. Source: Kaitseväe Peastaap / mil.eeEstonia's defense spending is set to be higher than the USA's this year according to new projected figures released by NATO this week.
Data for 2024 shows that Estonia's spending is expected to total 3.43 percent of GDP. This is well above the alliance's 2 percent guideline. Last year, Minister of Defense Hanno Pevkur said it would be approximately 3.2 percent of GDP.
Poland is forecast to be the biggest spender at 4.12 percent, and the USA third with 3.38 percent. Latvia (3.15 percent) and Greece (3.08 percent) round out the top five. Lithuania is just behind on 2.85 percent of GDP
18.06.2024 04:55https://i.err.ee/smartcrop?type=optimize&width=1472&aspectratio=16% 3A10&url=https%3A%2F%2Fs.err.ee%2Fphoto%2Fcrop%2F2 024%2F05%2F31%2F2420382h0ca4.jpgAn EDF training exercise using Piorun air defence weapon systems. Source: Kaitseväe Peastaap / mil.eeEstonia's defense spending is set to be higher than the USA's this year according to new projected figures released by NATO this week.
Data for 2024 shows that Estonia's spending is expected to total 3.43 percent of GDP. This is well above the alliance's 2 percent guideline. Last year, Minister of Defense Hanno Pevkur said it would be approximately 3.2 percent of GDP.
Poland is forecast to be the biggest spender at 4.12 percent, and the USA third with 3.38 percent. Latvia (3.15 percent) and Greece (3.08 percent) round out the top five. Lithuania is just behind on 2.85 percent of GDP
Answer:
Estonia is about $38 billion 3.43% of which is $1.3 Billion
Latvia is about $42 billion 3.15% of which is $1.32 Billion
At the other end of the spectrum the perennial laggard is Canada. It has a GDP of 1,200 billion and generally has been putting about 1.25% into defense. Now, almost three years into the Ukraine war, they have boosted that slightly and temporarily:
PBO forecasts that Canada's military expenditures will rise from 1.29% of GDP in 2024-25 to a peak of 1.49% of GDP in 2025-26 before falling and stabilizing at 1.42% by 2029-30. This represents $39.0B in 2024-25 rising to $52.2B in 2029-30.Jul 8, 2024
Parliamentary Budget Officer
Update of Canada's Military Expenditure and the NATO 2 ...
[img] F0y+mAAAAaVBMVEX////69PTLf4LBZWr16OmvISqpAAPx4ODn6u3Hz9avucOLmqhrgJM7X HbZ3+MRQmMAO16Rn6zL0ti1vsfS2N2dqbV5i5wfSWgoTmz19/igrLe9xs2BkaAAPmFXcIUeSWhieY1KZn4wVHC/hRbEAAAAnklEQVR4AcXLBRLCMBAAwMMhbm20+v8/4g61sUbOdg7mP4seWq7W3bjZ7qD7rHtsf+hBhHuQ0G5jXBw6US JFulGbbsw4z7vRusmoMvByH854ThDiB1KhkMiRdTiItBf83Vhh S1q52t5Sxd9XTROs1dTKULnYWkn0O2LPLdQFQNtCwxlC71hHXp lGeHCWUY7SO+5Twjjh5OGScEoG5jonYFELc1/AQIEAAAAASUVORK5CYII=[/img]Parliamentary Budget Officer
That ain't commie propaganda Hub, it's just math.
10-24-2024, 01:17 PM
#4166
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,633
Are you a Finnish and Russian speaker as well?
(or maybe you were too young to have been required to learn Russian?)
None of my business, but just curious.
Used to be, (no idea as to today), that most smaller countries required a year or so of military service. Just to learn the basics. But it created a ready population force to activate in time of national need. It also created the foundations of a guerrilla army in the event of being occupied/overrun. (Poland was one such country)
While I do not myself have military training, as an outsider it puzzles me why military professionals often seem to be convinced that "their" structures and tactics are the only ones that can, in the long run, be the only ones that work. Lots of historical examples of that attitude being incorrect.
(or maybe you were too young to have been required to learn Russian?)
None of my business, but just curious.
Used to be, (no idea as to today), that most smaller countries required a year or so of military service. Just to learn the basics. But it created a ready population force to activate in time of national need. It also created the foundations of a guerrilla army in the event of being occupied/overrun. (Poland was one such country)
While I do not myself have military training, as an outsider it puzzles me why military professionals often seem to be convinced that "their" structures and tactics are the only ones that can, in the long run, be the only ones that work. Lots of historical examples of that attitude being incorrect.
10-24-2024, 01:21 PM
#4167
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,633
More blatant lies from Hub. It has CONSTANTLY been mentioned that - relative to their size and GDP, the NATO nations of Eastern Europe have been leading the nonUS NATO nations in defense spending. But that's the problem. Most of these nations are small with small GDPs.
Let's take Estonia:
Little Estonia on a percentage of gdp basis is hitting it out of the park - Latvia too. But what is the GDP of Estonia? Of Latvia?
Answer:
Estonia is about $38 billion 3.43% of which is $1.3 Billion
Latvia is about $42 billion 3.15% of which is $1.32 Billion
At the other end of the spectrum the perennial laggard is Canada. It has a GDP of 1,200 billion and generally has been putting about 1.25% into defense. Now, almost three years into the Ukraine war, they have boosted that slightly and temporarily:
And THAT'S THE POINT. When it comes to funding and resources, even Estonia and Latvia and Lithuania and yes - even the far larger Poland (GDP $811 Billion) overpaying their share does not offset the fecklessness of the larger economies (Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Netherlands, Canada) underpaying their share.
That ain't commie propaganda Hub, it's just math.
Let's take Estonia:
Little Estonia on a percentage of gdp basis is hitting it out of the park - Latvia too. But what is the GDP of Estonia? Of Latvia?
Answer:
Estonia is about $38 billion 3.43% of which is $1.3 Billion
Latvia is about $42 billion 3.15% of which is $1.32 Billion
At the other end of the spectrum the perennial laggard is Canada. It has a GDP of 1,200 billion and generally has been putting about 1.25% into defense. Now, almost three years into the Ukraine war, they have boosted that slightly and temporarily:
And THAT'S THE POINT. When it comes to funding and resources, even Estonia and Latvia and Lithuania and yes - even the far larger Poland (GDP $811 Billion) overpaying their share does not offset the fecklessness of the larger economies (Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Netherlands, Canada) underpaying their share.
That ain't commie propaganda Hub, it's just math.
There aren't enough people in Russia to go through that meat grinder if they try a land invasion.
10-24-2024, 04:05 PM
#4168
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
https://youtu.be/PGy1CLV2YqA?si=qQeY5AtAmvgit_Jb
10-24-2024, 09:17 PM
#4169
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,633
Seriously? Look up WWII. The USSR successfully invaded then in 1940, the Germans over ran the country in 1941, and the USSR took it over again in 1944. I'm not sure the phrase "almost impossible" means what you think it means.
https://youtu.be/PGy1CLV2YqA?si=qQeY5AtAmvgit_Jb
https://youtu.be/PGy1CLV2YqA?si=qQeY5AtAmvgit_Jb
Which direction you think they would invade them from? South, like Germans? Lol.
Again, look at a map.
10-25-2024, 06:38 AM
#4170
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,252
I would assume from the east - you know, like the last two times?
https://www.intellinews.com/ubn-russ...-hours-317829/
https://i.postimg.cc/c6t4mCyv/IMG-7460.jpg
https://www.fpri.org/2017/06/natos-baltic-defense-challenge/
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
