@artemiusua said in #31:
> NATO has about 15 000 tanks.
You should have said so from the start...
Kapituliren!
youtu.be/NUltKAecUag
> NATO has about 15 000 tanks.
You should have said so from the start...
Kapituliren!
youtu.be/NUltKAecUag
@Anuj3022 said in #1:
> Germany has agreed to send leopard tanks to Ukraine which can be a major power against Russia. NATO allies also providing arms and weapons to strengthen the military of Ukraine.
Do you have something anti-nuke? If don't, you should attack Putin directly, before it attacks you.
> Germany has agreed to send leopard tanks to Ukraine which can be a major power against Russia. NATO allies also providing arms and weapons to strengthen the military of Ukraine.
Do you have something anti-nuke? If don't, you should attack Putin directly, before it attacks you.
Russia has a no first use policy. the US doesn't.
@diarrhea_isnt_funny said in #36:
> A few tanks added to the mix isn't "good news." What we're seeing now is the West trying to ride out this fantasy of Ukraine winning for as long as possible. $$$ is the reason. Ukraine has refused to admit it's ever lost a battle or has a severe loss of troops (upwards of 150,000) because it would be interpreted as weakness and a reason for the West to stop sending that mon mon money. The tragedy is that things didn't have to get this bad. Unfortunately, Z and the West settled on a reckless course of win or die trying, and the result is a Ukraine that has been shattered, and many people lost. This is what you get when you elect a comedian with military genius pretensions your president, and partnered with another president whose incompetence is matched by his lack of principles.
>
> This fiasco will eventually lead to U.S. troops entering Ukraine, raising the stakes for another Iraq and even worse outcomes.
its hard to keep 150,000 dead troops hidden from a country with a cetain level of power, and they know it. they prolly arent doing it on purpose
> A few tanks added to the mix isn't "good news." What we're seeing now is the West trying to ride out this fantasy of Ukraine winning for as long as possible. $$$ is the reason. Ukraine has refused to admit it's ever lost a battle or has a severe loss of troops (upwards of 150,000) because it would be interpreted as weakness and a reason for the West to stop sending that mon mon money. The tragedy is that things didn't have to get this bad. Unfortunately, Z and the West settled on a reckless course of win or die trying, and the result is a Ukraine that has been shattered, and many people lost. This is what you get when you elect a comedian with military genius pretensions your president, and partnered with another president whose incompetence is matched by his lack of principles.
>
> This fiasco will eventually lead to U.S. troops entering Ukraine, raising the stakes for another Iraq and even worse outcomes.
its hard to keep 150,000 dead troops hidden from a country with a cetain level of power, and they know it. they prolly arent doing it on purpose
the people making imporant decisions are people who can live in bunkers for the rest of their lives
@Sarg0n said in #37:
> Russia is de facto a Pariah state. They already have lost almost everything.
Explain to me precisely what Russia has lost. McDonalds? Russia is entirely self sufficient, and still has major trading partners with China, India, and other nations. The idea that the West could use sanctions to bring Russia to its knees was always an absurd notion without any basis in geo fiscal reality. It's time that this deadly fiasco stop and both sides go the the negotiation table, and if Z still refuses to do this he's only hurting his own people.
> Russia is de facto a Pariah state. They already have lost almost everything.
Explain to me precisely what Russia has lost. McDonalds? Russia is entirely self sufficient, and still has major trading partners with China, India, and other nations. The idea that the West could use sanctions to bring Russia to its knees was always an absurd notion without any basis in geo fiscal reality. It's time that this deadly fiasco stop and both sides go the the negotiation table, and if Z still refuses to do this he's only hurting his own people.
If ww3 happens Germany will be on the best side for once
With Ukraine of course
The US has been changing Europe's diapers for 105 years.
Grow up Europe and defend YOURSELF!
Grow up Europe and defend YOURSELF!
Germany’s government is defiant, maintaining that its lockstep approach to weapons deliveries is the best way to support Ukraine, and the only way it can do so while keeping its domestic public on side. Allies of Chancellor Olaf Scholz accuse his critics of being “dedicated” to making him a scapegoat.
The German leader faced mounting criticism last week from international and domestic partners over the protracted decision to supply Ukraine with Leopard 2 battle tanks, which are made in Germany and required authorisation by Berlin for re-export from other countries.
A deadlock on the tanks question was broken only last Wednesday, when Washington announced it would also send 31 of its own Abrams tanks to Ukraine, meeting a condition Berlin had reportedly insisted on for releasing the Leopard 2.
This “lockstep” logic, seemingly followed to avoid Germany being singled out as an aggressor in the eyes of the Kremlin, has been criticised since it appears to question the security guarantee provided by article 5 of Nato’s founding charter.
Scholz’s Zeitenwende speech in February last year had raised expectations in other European capitals that Berlin would, in future, take a bolder initiative on military questions.
But the view in German government circles is that close coordination remains necessary to shore up fluctuating domestic support for Europe’s largest economy arming Ukraine.
0
The German leader faced mounting criticism last week from international and domestic partners over the protracted decision to supply Ukraine with Leopard 2 battle tanks, which are made in Germany and required authorisation by Berlin for re-export from other countries.
A deadlock on the tanks question was broken only last Wednesday, when Washington announced it would also send 31 of its own Abrams tanks to Ukraine, meeting a condition Berlin had reportedly insisted on for releasing the Leopard 2.
This “lockstep” logic, seemingly followed to avoid Germany being singled out as an aggressor in the eyes of the Kremlin, has been criticised since it appears to question the security guarantee provided by article 5 of Nato’s founding charter.
Scholz’s Zeitenwende speech in February last year had raised expectations in other European capitals that Berlin would, in future, take a bolder initiative on military questions.
But the view in German government circles is that close coordination remains necessary to shore up fluctuating domestic support for Europe’s largest economy arming Ukraine.
0
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.