The final analysis.

[thaibeachlovers]

18 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If the west stops sending the bullets what choice will they have?

If, as seems likely, there is no breakthrough before winter, it'll be another year or two or three of conflict. I'm not psychic, but I reckon the chances of the west continuing an indefinite support costing billions is zero.

BTW, the west has already ( apparently ) used up it's excess supply of munitions ( at least that's the reason Biden gave cluster bombs to Ukraine, isn't it? ) so that'll be the end.

Oh dear, seems the end may come sooner than expected.

As seen on Al Jazeera, the GOP is starting to be against a blank cheque for Ukraine, and Poland has stopped supplying Ukraine with war material. They say they have given all they can and that's all that they are giving, In response Zelenski threatens to sue Poland, which is probably not a good idea.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/21/what-us-lawmakers-have-said-about-ukraine-aid-as-zelenskyy-urges-more

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy’s visit to Washington comes as Republican opposition to more US aid for Ukraine grows.

 

 

https://apnews.com/article/poland-ukraine-weapons-russia-war-trade-dispute-5e2e7a194b5238b86c160f0f4848b4f3

Poland is done sending arms to Ukraine, Polish leader says as trade dispute escalates

[Hummin]

On 7/22/2023 at 5:54 PM, swissie said:

In case of "rebuilding Germany". This was the "Marshall-Plan". Never affecting the US Taxpayer, as the funds were borrowed from "credit markets", At a time when the US "financial health" was beyound any questioning. Times have changed, as rating agencies have downgraded US Government dept. Same in Europe. "Rinse and repeat" not possible this time around.

The Marshall Plan made unbreakable bonds for Usa and their markeds, and was a great long term  investment for Usa, that still pays off. 

[Hummin]

On 7/25/2023 at 8:48 PM, swissie said:

Indeed, there is something laughable about this war of attricion. A country with 24 million  inhabitants, trying to wage a (defensive) war against a country with 6 times the "personnel". Who will run out of "personnel" first?

Finally: The crimea and eastern Ukraine will be "Russian Territory" (there, they speak Russian and "feel" Russian, not Ukrainian). Has been like this for centuries.

In the aftermath, confronted with huge "rebuilding costs" , to be payed with money from the EU/US will further destabilise already fragile "western democracies". This time around, "western taxpayers" will not go along, as eastern european countries are detaching themselves further from "democratic values" on a monthly basis, while asking for more money from "the western countries." (Poland, Hungary mainly).

At some point, "peace talks" will take place. Russia will keep the Eastern Ukraine and the Crimea. Russia will be financially "hurt". The Ukraine will be bankrupt.

For "the West" the best scenario. All other scenarios would be far worse for "the West".

PS: Why start "a counter offensive" without the necessary air-cover? Undersupplyed with weaponery and personnel. Indeed, laughable warfare. But from wich side?

 

It is to easy to write off Ukraine now, since the world (Western Allies) is on their side and will not let Ukraine go down the drain. You also forget Ukraine have great mineral resourches as well important food resourches much needed to the world. 

 

The truth is, Russian Invaded Crimea and later also Ukraine border cities as well tried to capture the capital. Even there where russians and Ukraines who speak russians in those border cities, they where Ukraines and the rest is pure border conflicts made by insurgants backed by either sides or independent groups making living in those areas a hell.

 

Both sides use propeganda and Ukraine was one of the worst corrupt countries in Europa. 

 

What will happens after the war one day end? We will build up Ukraine, make bilateral deasl with them, and control the resourches they have for our best! Ukraine will not loose. Simple as that

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

14 minutes ago, Hummin said:

It is to easy to write off Ukraine now, since the world (Western Allies) is on their side and will not let Ukraine go down the drain.

You might come to regret saying that. Poland is no longer supplying anything to Ukraine ( link posted in different post ), the US congress may restrict funds and other supporting countries are broke.

I'm surprised it has gone on so long, but if the Ukrainians do not break through before winter, IMO the west isn't going to fund a never ending war.

[Danderman123]

46 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Time. Western countries are not on a war footing, so production is not expidited.

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/2023/03/28/us-army-eyes-six-fold-production-boost-of-155mm-shells-used-in-ukraine/

 

US Army eyes sixfold production boost of 155mm shells used in Ukraine

 

You don't think that the US and NATO can't far outproduce Russia?

[Hummin]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You might come to regret saying that. Poland is no longer supplying anything to Ukraine ( link posted in different post ), the US congress may restrict funds and other supporting countries are broke.

I'm surprised it has gone on so long, but if the Ukrainians do not break through before winter, IMO the west isn't going to fund a never ending war.

That is a big misunderstanding, and most likely a calculated click bait from the media. Polen is Natos big dog, and will jump if told. 

[thaibeachlovers]

13 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/2023/03/28/us-army-eyes-six-fold-production-boost-of-155mm-shells-used-in-ukraine/

 

US Army eyes sixfold production boost of 155mm shells used in Ukraine

 

You don't think that the US and NATO can't far outproduce Russia?

LOL. Many NATO countries can't even spend 2% on the military, so where is the ability to outproduce Russia coming from, other than the US, and the congress may stop or reduce US support?

 

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/07/07/number-of-nato-allies-spending-2-of-gdp-on-defence-to-jump-this-year

Estimates released on Friday by NATO show that at least 11 allies should reach the target set by the transatlantic military alliance. Only seven are believed to have reached the target in 2022.

 

Poland isn't going to give anything from now on. ( link in a different post )

[thaibeachlovers]

3 minutes ago, Hummin said:

That is a big misunderstanding, and most likely a calculated click bait from the media. Polen is Natos big dog, and will jump if told. 

I prefer to believe the link, and it was also reported on Al Jazeera.

[Hummin]

2 minutes ago, Hummin said:

That is a big misunderstanding, and most likely a calculated click bait from the media. Polen is Natos big dog, and will jump if told. 

I cant find an article where they try to make an u-turn on the statements, but in a few hours there will be several news articles trying to calm down the prime ministers statements. Poland have been one of the biggest contributors, and will still be one of the most important allies. 

 

The statement was about their new weapons as far I can see for the moment. More will come in the next ours to clearify what he really ment. 

[thaibeachlovers]

9 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

US Army eyes sixfold production boost of 155mm shells used in Ukraine

I'm sure they are, but if congress won't fund it, it's not going to happen.

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, Hummin said:

I cant find an article where they try to make an u-turn on the statements, but in a few hours there will be several news articles trying to calm down the prime ministers statements. Poland have been one of the biggest contributors, and will still be one of the most important allies. 

 

The statement was about their new weapons as far I can see for the moment. More will come in the next ours to clearify what he really ment. 

As reported on Al Jazeera the Poles have run out of stuff to give them as need to be able to defend themselves.

[Tug]

48 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Oh dear, seems the end may come sooner than expected.

As seen on Al Jazeera, the GOP is starting to be against a blank cheque for Ukraine, and Poland has stopped supplying Ukraine with war material. They say they have given all they can and that's all that they are giving, In response Zelenski threatens to sue Poland, which is probably not a good idea.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/21/what-us-lawmakers-have-said-about-ukraine-aid-as-zelenskyy-urges-more

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy’s visit to Washington comes as Republican opposition to more US aid for Ukraine grows.

 

 

https://apnews.com/article/poland-ukraine-weapons-russia-war-trade-dispute-5e2e7a194b5238b86c160f0f4848b4f3

Poland is done sending arms to Ukraine, Polish leader says as trade dispute escalates

Don’t get your hopes up on betraying the Ukrainians that was McCarthy the weakest speaker of the House of Representatives in the history of the United States he is groveling in hopes of keeping his job and all of that is in the behest of trump it ain’t gonna happen the democrats control the senate and the White House 

[Hummin]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

As reported on Al Jazeera the Poles have run out of stuff to give them as need to be able to defend themselves.

Behind pay wall, so just wait and see, as well reported in Norwegian news last hour as well. Putin finds it interesting thow an amusing to last news about Poland and great for more propaganda. 

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-09-21/poland-says-it-s-still-supplying-ukraine-with-weapons#xj4y7vzkg

[Danderman123]

19 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. Many NATO countries can't even spend 2% on the military, so where is the ability to outproduce Russia coming from, other than the US, and the congress may stop or reduce US support?

 

https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/07/07/number-of-nato-allies-spending-2-of-gdp-on-defence-to-jump-this-year

Estimates released on Friday by NATO show that at least 11 allies should reach the target set by the transatlantic military alliance. Only seven are believed to have reached the target in 2022.

 

Poland isn't going to give anything from now on. ( link in a different post )

You don't seem to understand that the economies of the NATO countries are much stronger than Rusdia.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.france24.com/en/live-news/20230607-german-arms-maker-guns-for-rapid-production-as-ukraine-war-rages

 

"The European Union has agreed on a plan to spend two billion euros ($2.1 billion) on artillery shells for Ukraine to try to get a million rounds of artillery ammunition to the country over twelve months.

Kyiv had told the EU it needed 350,000 shells a month to support troops, saying its forces were having to ration firepower as the conflict turned into a grinding war of attrition."

 

 

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Oh dear, seems the end may come sooner than expected.

As seen on Al Jazeera, the GOP is starting to be against a blank cheque for Ukraine, and Poland has stopped supplying Ukraine with war material. They say they have given all they can and that's all that they are giving, In response Zelenski threatens to sue Poland, which is probably not a good idea.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/9/21/what-us-lawmakers-have-said-about-ukraine-aid-as-zelenskyy-urges-more

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy’s visit to Washington comes as Republican opposition to more US aid for Ukraine grows.

 

 

https://apnews.com/article/poland-ukraine-weapons-russia-war-trade-dispute-5e2e7a194b5238b86c160f0f4848b4f3

Poland is done sending arms to Ukraine, Polish leader says as trade dispute escalates

Poland and other countries on the eastern edge of the EU are upset about Ukraine grain being sold at a discount in their countries.  The grains is being sold there because Russia is restricting exports by sea.  The Polish government is playing politics, but has indicated that it will continue to give old military equipment to Ukraine as it upgrades its forces.  https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/20/europe/poland-ukraine-weapons-grain-intl-hnk/index.html

 

This is nothing by a political/economic spat that will be resolved soon.  It will have little effect on the war.

[Danderman123]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm sure they are, but if congress won't fund it, it's not going to happen.

A majority of Republicans in Congress support funding for Ukraine.

 

So, it's  Watch and Learn for you.

 

Meanwhile:

 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

4 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

You don't seem to understand that the economies of the NATO countries are much stronger than Rusdia.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.france24.com/en/live-news/20230607-german-arms-maker-guns-for-rapid-production-as-ukraine-war-rages

 

"The European Union has agreed on a plan to spend two billion euros ($2.1 billion) on artillery shells for Ukraine to try to get a million rounds of artillery ammunition to the country over twelve months.

Kyiv had told the EU it needed 350,000 shells a month to support troops, saying its forces were having to ration firepower as the conflict turned into a grinding war of attrition."

 

 

You seem to have a problem with believing that you know more about this than other posters.

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You seem to have a problem with believing that you know more about this than other posters.

 

He does back up his claims with sources.  Usually that shows superior knowledge than those who refuse to proved sources.

[Danderman123]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You seem to have a problem with believing that you know more about this than other posters.

 

It's common knowledge that the Russian economy is a fraction the size of the EU or the US.

 

Given sanctions, Russia is having great difficulties producing armaments.

 

And my prior work in Russian aerospace was quite informative. 

[ballpoint]

A timely interview, given this thread.  Former Vice Chief of Staff for the US Army, General Jack Keane, details why it's worth spending $100 billion to stop Putin, and why he thinks support will continue, calling it "an incredible return on the investment".  Seems like the only ones calling for this support to be dropped are those pushing a pro Putin agenda.

 

 

 

 

 

[Tug]

7 hours ago, ballpoint said:

A timely interview, given this thread.  Former Vice Chief of Staff for the US Army, General Jack Keane, details why it's worth spending $100 billion to stop Putin, and why he thinks support will continue, calling it "an incredible return on the investment".  Seems like the only ones calling for this support to be dropped are those pushing a pro Putin agenda.

 

 

 

 

 

Yup just shy of 6% of our defense budget to stop and bleed Russia without killing Americans protecting Europe standing with the Ukrainian nation in their struggle to survive and wait there’s more!!!creates employment for Americans replenishing the munitions used id call that making the best of a horrible situation.every time I think about how the Ukrainians have to go out and fight it fills me with rage to think their neighbor could do that to them!!salva Ukraine evict the looters!!

[kwonitoy]

16 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You seem to have a problem with believing that you know more about this than other posters.

 

From someone who seems to have an uncanny knack for pontificating about numerous subjects on which he knows absolutely nothing but is extremally confident of his knowledge.

Dunning Kruger effect

The Dunning-Kruger effect is the phenomenon by which those least competent in a certain subject area overestimate their skills the most. 

[thaibeachlovers]

8 minutes ago, kwonitoy said:

From someone who seems to have an uncanny knack for pontificating about numerous subjects on which he knows absolutely nothing but is extremally confident of his knowledge.

Dunning Kruger effect

The Dunning-Kruger effect is the phenomenon by which those least competent in a certain subject area overestimate their skills the most. 

Sooooo good to hear your opinion ( 55555555555 ), given I don't remember you posting on this thread before. I guess you just came on to attack me, which is rather naughty given the forum rules.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

It's common knowledge that the Russian economy is a fraction the size of the EU or the US.

 

Given sanctions, Russia is having great difficulties producing armaments.

 

And my prior work in Russian aerospace was quite informative. 

and yet, they seem to be holding their front line ( mostly ) despite the much anticipated Ukrainian counter offensive, which has apparently only resulted in some villages being captured, and they seem to have plenty of drones to attack Ukrainian facilities.

 

I seem to recall some posters claiming a year or so ago that Russia was about to run out of shells way back then, but they must have been misinformed.

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, ballpoint said:

A timely interview, given this thread.  Former Vice Chief of Staff for the US Army, General Jack Keane, details why it's worth spending $100 billion to stop Putin, and why he thinks support will continue, calling it "an incredible return on the investment".  Seems like the only ones calling for this support to be dropped are those pushing a pro Putin agenda.

Seems like the only ones calling for this support to be dropped are those pushing a pro Putin agenda.

Pathetic comment. It's possible to oppose the massive financial cost born by the American ( and other country's ) taxpayer to make a proxy war against a country that was not likely to attack their country, without being a Putin stooge .

 

What else would a general say? It doesn't mean he's right.

Of course, he is immune to the financial problems affecting the common man, sitting in his nice office with a big salary, so he doesn't need to worry about being able to buy food or pay his mortgage.

 

The US military and the military industrial complex have done very nicely out of portraying the Russians as the boogyman that will only be kept at bay by the billions of $ that the US taxpayer has sent their way, a boogyman that was shown to be a bit sad after the fall of the Soviet Union.

If the Russians didn't exist, I suppose they would have had to invent an enemy to justify their massive tax take.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and yet, they seem to be holding their front line ( mostly ) despite the much anticipated Ukrainian counter offensive, which has apparently only resulted in some villages being captured, and they seem to have plenty of drones to attack Ukrainian facilities.

 

I seem to recall some posters claiming a year or so ago that Russia was about to run out of shells way back then, but they must have been misinformed.

The longer Russia holds their line, the weaker the country gets.

 

"The combined GDP of nato’s members is 12 times that of Russia, even after accounting for Russia’s lower prices. The difference is that Russia is willing to spend much more heavily on the war: military spending now takes up almost 40% of the national budget, far in excess of Western levels."  https://www.economist.com/briefing/2023/09/21/western-help-for-ukraine-is-likely-to-diminish-next-year

 

How long can Putin allow Russia to go to hell in order to support his unnecessary war of empire?

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Seems like the only ones calling for this support to be dropped are those pushing a pro Putin agenda.

Pathetic comment. It's possible to oppose the massive financial cost born by the American ( and other country's ) taxpayer to make a proxy war against a country that was not likely to attack their country, without being a Putin stooge .

 

What else would a general say? It doesn't mean he's right.

Of course, he is immune to the financial problems affecting the common man, sitting in his nice office with a big salary, so he doesn't need to worry about being able to buy food or pay his mortgage.

 

The US military and the military industrial complex have done very nicely out of portraying the Russians as the boogyman that will only be kept at bay by the billions of $ that the US taxpayer has sent their way, a boogyman that was shown to be a bit sad after the fall of the Soviet Union.

If the Russians didn't exist, I suppose they would have had to invent an enemy to justify their massive tax take.

"The US military and the military industrial complex have done very nicely out of portraying the Russians as the boogyman..."

 

More of the same blah, blah, blah; unsupported by any evidence.

 

If it makes you feel better, the defense industry has well below average profit margins compared to other US industries.  https://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/margin.html

[Tug]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Seems like the only ones calling for this support to be dropped are those pushing a pro Putin agenda.

Pathetic comment. It's possible to oppose the massive financial cost born by the American ( and other country's ) taxpayer to make a proxy war against a country that was not likely to attack their country, without being a Putin stooge .

 

What else would a general say? It doesn't mean he's right.

Of course, he is immune to the financial problems affecting the common man, sitting in his nice office with a big salary, so he doesn't need to worry about being able to buy food or pay his mortgage.

 

The US military and the military industrial complex have done very nicely out of portraying the Russians as the boogyman that will only be kept at bay by the billions of $ that the US taxpayer has sent their way, a boogyman that was shown to be a bit sad after the fall of the Soviet Union.

If the Russians didn't exist, I suppose they would have had to invent an enemy to justify their massive tax take.

Ahhhh we have eyes and brains it’s horribly clear exactly what Putin is doing most folks find it unacceptable (to put it mildly)or should I say evil criminal barbaric horrific just remember who attacked who and under what pretense most folks do I for one certainly do salva Ukraine ???????? evict the invaders form your lands!

[Danderman123]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and yet, they seem to be holding their front line ( mostly ) despite the much anticipated Ukrainian counter offensive, which has apparently only resulted in some villages being captured, and they seem to have plenty of drones to attack Ukrainian facilities.

 

I seem to recall some posters claiming a year or so ago that Russia was about to run out of shells way back then, but they must have been misinformed.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-will-send-ukraine-atacms-long-range-missiles-biden-tells-zelenskiy-nbc-2023-09-22/

[Hummin]

27 minutes ago, heybruce said:

 

How long can Putin allow Russia to go to hell in order to support his unnecessary war of empire?

That depends on his allies and future allies.

 

Russia is not alone, and Russia is not the only country who have beef with USA or the western world. 

 

If you only read western allies news, it is not that noticeable, but at once you open your view for more broad and wide news channels, you see putin have alot more support and emphasis than we would thought.

 

Future is not decided if world economy will be connected to Usd as status Q, 

 

Brics is one serious attempt. Next big economy threat coming from India, and who they choose as their future allies to. Nothing is carved in stone yet.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRICS