Russia Invades Ukraine. Volume 4
Discussion
CarlosFandango11 said:
Oliver Hardy said:
Slightly off topic, glide bombs. Was watching a bit on the news about Russia adopting old bombs to glide bombs, they deploy them from a high altitude inside Russia and the Ukrainians can not move their SAM systems to shoot down the aircraft because they will be in danger from attack. They said they are highly accurate and use GPS, how can a glide bomb be accurate if it has no engine or mechanise to propel or steer it, while in my thick head says you can calculate the inpact of the bomb surely it can only be a rough estimate where it lands and the higher you launch it and further away the less accurate it wil be???
Glide bombs do have a mechanism to steer them.
It's the russian equivalent of the US JDAM, a kit of bits that bolts onto a dumb bomb to convert it into a smart bomb with wings and a sat nav guidance system.ben5575 said:
youngsyr said:
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
Unlike trying to argue that we shouldn't be trying to end the war in Ukraine sooner because we've spent a lot of money subsidising the costs of energy caused by the war in Ukraine.That's an unsupported assumption.
BikeBikeBIke said:
youngsyr said:
Again, you're implying the UK is the only one providing military aid to Ukraine, when we're actually a small fraction.
You're also assuming that no-one else would step in to provide the aid we withheld in the hypothetical situation.
Finally the aid slow down hasn't made any real difference in the conflict - some territory has been lost, but it's essentially a stalemate now, so again not evidence that less aid means a win for Russia, quite the opposite.
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
I don't think letting others pay our share is a reasonable I also suspect we encouraged others to donate with our aid.You're also assuming that no-one else would step in to provide the aid we withheld in the hypothetical situation.
Finally the aid slow down hasn't made any real difference in the conflict - some territory has been lost, but it's essentially a stalemate now, so again not evidence that less aid means a win for Russia, quite the opposite.
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
Territorial stalemate. If the Ukranians are being ground down they could fall apart. So territory doesn't tell us everything.
That's a figment of your imagination, not mine.
Territory might not tell us everything, but it's certainly telling us that significantly less aid doesn't equal a defeat for Ukraine.
youngsyr said:
Again, you're implying the UK is the only one providing military aid to Ukraine, when we're actually a small fraction.
You're also assuming that no-one else would step in to provide the aid we withheld in the hypothetical situation.
Finally the aid slow down hasn't made any real difference in the conflict - some territory has been lost, but it's essentially a stalemate now, so again not evidence that less aid means a win for Russia, quite the opposite.
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
I was going to respond to your points. But then decided it's a pointless endeavour. You're also assuming that no-one else would step in to provide the aid we withheld in the hypothetical situation.
Finally the aid slow down hasn't made any real difference in the conflict - some territory has been lost, but it's essentially a stalemate now, so again not evidence that less aid means a win for Russia, quite the opposite.
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
If you can't understand why it's in all of Europe's (continental Europe, not the EU) interests not to let russia be expansionist and conquer it's near neighbours then I can't be bothered to explain it to you.
spookly said:
youngsyr said:
Again, you're implying the UK is the only one providing military aid to Ukraine, when we're actually a small fraction.
You're also assuming that no-one else would step in to provide the aid we withheld in the hypothetical situation.
Finally the aid slow down hasn't made any real difference in the conflict - some territory has been lost, but it's essentially a stalemate now, so again not evidence that less aid means a win for Russia, quite the opposite.
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
I was going to respond to your points. But then decided it's a pointless endeavour. You're also assuming that no-one else would step in to provide the aid we withheld in the hypothetical situation.
Finally the aid slow down hasn't made any real difference in the conflict - some territory has been lost, but it's essentially a stalemate now, so again not evidence that less aid means a win for Russia, quite the opposite.
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
If you can't understand why it's in all of Europe's (continental Europe, not the EU) interests not to let russia be expansionist and conquer it's near neighbours then I can't be bothered to explain it to you.
On my part, I'm absolutely gutted to hear you won't be replying to me anymore, I'm sure I had much to learn from you.
Ok, bye bye now.
youngsyr said:
spookly said:
youngsyr said:
Again, you're implying the UK is the only one providing military aid to Ukraine, when we're actually a small fraction.
You're also assuming that no-one else would step in to provide the aid we withheld in the hypothetical situation.
Finally the aid slow down hasn't made any real difference in the conflict - some territory has been lost, but it's essentially a stalemate now, so again not evidence that less aid means a win for Russia, quite the opposite.
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
I was going to respond to your points. But then decided it's a pointless endeavour. You're also assuming that no-one else would step in to provide the aid we withheld in the hypothetical situation.
Finally the aid slow down hasn't made any real difference in the conflict - some territory has been lost, but it's essentially a stalemate now, so again not evidence that less aid means a win for Russia, quite the opposite.
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
If you can't understand why it's in all of Europe's (continental Europe, not the EU) interests not to let russia be expansionist and conquer it's near neighbours then I can't be bothered to explain it to you.
On my part, I'm absolutely gutted to hear you won't be replying to me anymore, I'm sure I had much to learn from you.
Ok, bye bye now.
A dig is sometimes deserved.
spookly said:
youngsyr said:
spookly said:
youngsyr said:
Again, you're implying the UK is the only one providing military aid to Ukraine, when we're actually a small fraction.
You're also assuming that no-one else would step in to provide the aid we withheld in the hypothetical situation.
Finally the aid slow down hasn't made any real difference in the conflict - some territory has been lost, but it's essentially a stalemate now, so again not evidence that less aid means a win for Russia, quite the opposite.
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
I was going to respond to your points. But then decided it's a pointless endeavour. You're also assuming that no-one else would step in to provide the aid we withheld in the hypothetical situation.
Finally the aid slow down hasn't made any real difference in the conflict - some territory has been lost, but it's essentially a stalemate now, so again not evidence that less aid means a win for Russia, quite the opposite.
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
If you can't understand why it's in all of Europe's (continental Europe, not the EU) interests not to let russia be expansionist and conquer it's near neighbours then I can't be bothered to explain it to you.
On my part, I'm absolutely gutted to hear you won't be replying to me anymore, I'm sure I had much to learn from you.
Ok, bye bye now.
A dig is sometimes deserved.
How very dignified and superior.
Does this mean that we're friends again? I'm so very happy!
CharlesdeGaulle said:
spookly said:
I very much doubt you'll learn anything from anyone. I've seen your responses, you're just doubling down each time.
A dig is sometimes deserved.
He's best ignored. Whilst he's clearly a strategic mastermind anyone that disagrees is a fool. A dig is sometimes deserved.
youngsyr said:
ben5575 said:
youngsyr said:
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
Unlike trying to argue that we shouldn't be trying to end the war in Ukraine sooner because we've spent a lot of money subsidising the costs of energy caused by the war in Ukraine.That's an unsupported assumption.
What should we be doing?
borcy said:
youngsyr said:
ben5575 said:
youngsyr said:
So assumptions upon assumptions, hardly a strong position.
Unlike trying to argue that we shouldn't be trying to end the war in Ukraine sooner because we've spent a lot of money subsidising the costs of energy caused by the war in Ukraine.That's an unsupported assumption.
What should we be doing?
I suspect its much more likely that out government are kicking the can down the road and expecting it to be someone else's problem within a year.
What should we be doing? I suggest making all the right noises and loudly proclaiming our support for Ukraine, whilst cutting the actual cost to as close to zero as possible.
I see the same claims made in the US - oh we're giving Billions to Ukraine that could be spent on... insert something random.
It's not like were chucking cash at them, we're mostly giving them arms, equipment, ammo to defend themselves, which then has to be replaced - money spent here on our UK arms supplier.
Realistically, it's the simple question, do you want the fighting on your front garden, or on someone elses a few miles away.
It's not like were chucking cash at them, we're mostly giving them arms, equipment, ammo to defend themselves, which then has to be replaced - money spent here on our UK arms supplier.
Realistically, it's the simple question, do you want the fighting on your front garden, or on someone elses a few miles away.
Byker28i said:
I see the same claims made in the US - oh we're giving Billions to Ukraine that could be spent on... insert something random.
It's not like were chucking cash at them, we're mostly giving them arms, equipment, ammo to defend themselves, which then has to be replaced - money spent here on our UK arms supplier.
Realistically, it's the simple question, do you want the fighting on your front garden, or on someone elses a few miles away.
And thats precisely my point, it isn't on our doorstep; it's 3.5 countries away, two of those are France and Germany.It's not like were chucking cash at them, we're mostly giving them arms, equipment, ammo to defend themselves, which then has to be replaced - money spent here on our UK arms supplier.
Realistically, it's the simple question, do you want the fighting on your front garden, or on someone elses a few miles away.
Russia is zero threat to the UK.
youngsyr said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
youngsyr said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
youngsyr said:
It's a viewpoint we've taken and are taking in plenty of other places in the world, why is Ukraine so special?
Because it's in Europe, our back garden and helping them out is cheap and in our own advantage.And what advantages are we going to receive?
Advantages are that Putin things twice next time. He got Crimea without a fight and thought, "Great same again". If he gets Ukriane or even the coast of Ukraine it will be Moldova next immediately amd he'll be thinking "Great, this works." or maybe the next guy will.
So, what is the all in cost so far?
There is your answer, its the right thing to do with some side benefits that we may avoid the horrors the Ukrainians are going through for the sake of money and some kit that, if push came to shove it would be British troops using, or maybe it just gets decommissioned unused ?
Or, would you quite like to see your sons go of to war, your home get bombed, missus and daughters at the mercy of Russian troops, maybe one of them shooting your dog ? You quite happy in a trench ?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff