Forum menu
Lots of equipment and munitions have been sitting in storage for years and are part of our national defense budget, and our spend in line with our commitment to NATO .
Storm Shadow missiles would probably have never been fired and then we would have had to replace with better , newer more shiny version and pay for decommissioning the ood stock .
At least this way we get to see how effective our existing weapons are in a war that doesn't put the ukaf in harms way, which is a double edged sword. No good =. Bad investments and need for r&d to improve. Very good = we kill more enemy soldiers and killing other humans is never a good thing as they are not personally responsible for invading, just doing what they are told
Lots of equipment and munitions have been sitting in storage for years and are part of our national defense budget, and our spend in line with our commitment to NATO .
Storm Shadow missiles would probably have never been fired and then we would have had to replace with better , newer more shiny version and pay for decommissioning the ood stock .At least this way we get to see how effective our existing weapons are in a war that doesn’t put the ukaf in harms way..
Wow! So we fire some misslles at Russia because otherwise they'll cost us money if we don't?
Lots of equipment and munitions have been sitting in storage for years and are part of our national defense budget, and our spend in line with our commitment to NATO
Has anyone actually checked we have it ?
Keeping in mind we've had the tories for the last 14 years, and remembering how it went with the ppe debacle.
Wow! So we fire some misslles at Russia because otherwise they’ll cost us money if we don’t?
Yes, that is what you say to old folks who are complaining that the UK is supporting Ukraine while they are losing their winter fuel payment.
I guess you just have to speak to people in a language they understand.
In less contentious news, the Ukrainians appear to have set a very large munitions depot very on fire.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c30lp1qq6pzo
We?
We aren't firing anything.
And yes , decommissioning weapons does cost money.
As the potential of a small error having big consequences is real. Special machinery has to be designed , built and tested to ensure safety.
When this is all over and Ukraine cities and infrastructure needs rebuilding I would imagine the UK will be in the running to provide services as a quid pro quo for helping the Ukrainian people to defend their country from invasion.
Britain just doesnt seem to do this, economies of scale suggest that we should probably be aligning with Europe on some sort of similar act,, but…. EU (army) bad etc
There are two issues here, a European "army" and European defence procurement.
Traditionally, the "army" has been enshrined in NATO and there hasn't been the political imperative for another layer of complexity. There have been deviations along the way and Russian involvement (seconded by erstwhile EU supporters) largely discredited the idea for most nations.
European defence production wound down following the cold war and, with the exception of France as second largest producer of weapons in the world (sounds impressive but only accounts for 11% of world sales), has never needed to be much more than a supplier of technologically-outdated weapons to replace outdated and expired weapons.
Western politicians should have paid more heed to the 2014 invasion of Crimea and Donbas regions but are now learning the lesson that the combined west can't support the needs of one country fully, never mind a continent.
"EU-bad" isn't the issue. The European Defence Industrial Programme is only now at the consultation stage and Kier Starmer needs to leverage the UK's strong European defence industry co-operation and get involved https://commission.europa.eu/news/first-ever-european-defence-industrial-strategy-enhance-europes-readiness-and-security-2024-03-05_en
Wow! So we fire some misslles at Russia because otherwise they’ll cost us money if we don’t?
We supply them for the self-defence of a sovereign country that has been invaded. An invasion that's in contravention of multiple international agreements
Have you seen the Russian ammo depot explosion videos from last night in Toropets which Ukraine hit with drones. There's some big old fireballs / mushroom clouds!
The Ukrainians have proved Putin can't fight on two fronts effectively so an invasion of another country is unlikely.
Putin knows that Russia would last minutes if it went nuclear
Toropets lies about 380km (236 miles) north-west of Russia's capital Moscow, and some 470km north of the border with Ukraine
Incredible that ukraine is able to pull off these types of attacks. Been reading they have some highly clever AI learning which is helping to create the drones flight paths based upon known AA sites and where previous drones have been unsuccessful / destroyed. Could explain why they have a reasonable success rate of these types of missions.
some bonkers footage and it seems that 5 nearby villages have been cut off and probably destroyed
theres apparently another depot with almost as much ammo, 14 miles away too thats probably on very high alert right now
fires still burning
https://twitter.com/TreasChest/status/1836264389122347259
dazh
Big badaboom.
Is this a serious thread or not?
Funnily enough, the first thing I thought in my head when I read the original post about the explosion was "Badaboom. Big Badaboom" (Fifth Element, innit). And that was before moab had written it.
This often comes into my head when watching completely unrelated films/news articles and seeing explosions.
Western politicians should have paid more heed to the 2014 invasion of Crimea and Donbas regions but are now learning the lesson that the combined west can’t support the needs of one country fully, never mind a continent.
Against what though?
Russia could hypothetically bring some allies to the party, but Ukraine has proved that we do have enough weapons to fight them even at a numerical disadvantage. It's hard to imagine the Ukraine invasion going on more than a few days if it had been against a NATO country.
A "discussion" on Russian TV about how they might attack the UK....
https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1836455659900145925
Only the people of the UK have that right THANKS
Badaboom indeed!
Whilst I am happy that Ukraine have destroyed Russian resources to kill more Ukranians, I just cant help thinking about what further damage is done to the environment.
At a time when the biggest challenges are environmental pollution driving extreme weather which erode the world we rely on, humans continue to destroy it at ever increasing pace.
Humans appear in a race to destroy the world.
There are reports that the Toropets ammunition depot specialised to some degree in storing guided missiles. Including Iskander and North Korean KN23 ballistic missiles and S300 air defence missiles. These have all been used to attack cities and infrastructure in Ukraine, including the S300s adapted for ground attack.
The fact that these will not now hit Ukrainian hospitals and apartments or facilitate another dark, freezing winter by knocking out the grid is a very good thing. They are also incredibly expensive and slow to replace. This attack probably saved a lot of Ukrainian lives and critical infrastructure and is, ISTM, the very definition of a legitimate target. Kaboom indeed.
Against what though?
Russia could hypothetically bring some allies to the party, but Ukraine has proved that we do have enough weapons to fight them even at a numerical disadvantage. It’s hard to imagine the Ukraine invasion going on more than a few days if it had been against a NATO country.
The problem isn't fighting to a standstill, it's regaining lost ground. You can't afford a protracted war for a variety of practical and economic reasons and you need the materiel to avoid this
UK-centric, but it's quite topical just now and the short answer is give it six to nine months and Lord George Robertson will report on the UK's situation https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-launches-root-and-branch-review-of-uk-armed-forces
In the meantime there are holes identified that can't be left for twelve months or more, including huge budget problems within the UK. These should have been addressed years ago https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/uk-defence-spending-decisions-cant-wait-strategic-defence-review
We don't have enough people in our forces and we don't have the basic kit to equip a fully-resourced UK military, especially in the event of war when we'd need to mobilise reserves and possibly the civilian population
Since 2000, the number of fully trained personnel across all forces has fallen by 32%, with the Army seeing a fall of about 28%, the Royal Navy/Marines 26% and the RAF 45% https://fullfact.org/news/size-of-armed-forces-pre-election-briefing/
One lesson from Ukraine is the difficulty in replacing modern ultra-tech items quickly, especially when everyone is suddenly trying to get the same chipsets and other components. Even something as basic as explosive is hard to find currently, so we needed to have been doing something years ago, rather than panicking now about what might happen in November
We live under the shelter of US largesse, but it's possible that'll be gone next year if Trump wins and lives up to some of his declarations. Ukraine will be the first to suffer, followed by Moldova and possibly elsewhere in Europe. We can't afford that
There is a series on iPlayer about America policing the world. I'm two programmes in. It starts back with Sadam Hussain and moves forward from there.
I'ts enlightening, interesting and absolutely depressing as well as a tough watch in teh second programme about former Yugoslavia / Bosnia.
There are so many common elements, situations, timings and decision factors then, as now with Ukraine and "escalation" that "Lessons learnt so it will never happen again" becomes such a throwaway vacuous statement which means almost nothing of substance. As in the programme, so much hinged on elections and here we are again with November just around the corner.
Clinton stumbled and dithered in Bosnia. The first programme mentions Leadership, courage and a will to act quickly and decisively against an aggressor and I think there is some truth in that and the time to do it for Ukraine was Feb / March 22. putin is emboldened and it feels like we are playing catch-up. November will be very interesting and telling.
putin is emboldened and it feels like we are playing catch-up.
I know what you mean, but I can't see a country with a raft of economic and now demographic issues being able to continue a land war indefinitely.
Russia's navy and air force have taken a hit, but the bulk of it is still available. Space, cyber and hybrid warfare are also strong possibilities for future campaigns.
The west has sat back since 2000, while Russia and China have developed their military greatly under consistent leadership over the last decade or two. The technology given to Iran and N.Korea in exchange for their weapons concerns me
November will be very interesting and telling
Yes
I know what you mean, but I can’t see a country with a raft of economic and now demographic issues being able to continue a land war indefinitely.
Seems like wishful thinking to me. Pretty sure some people on here said they would lose enthusiasm a couple of years ago. The economics appear not to be a problem and western sanctions have failed. As long as Russia has friends like China and Iran, along with the rest of Asia it will be able to continue to supply its war machine. The demographic thing will take decades to play out. It has millions of young men it can call upon and they have the ruthlessness and authoritarianism to do just that. Ukraine has much bigger problems than Russia on the economic and demographic fronts.
Ukrainian public support for the war will probably also collapse before Russia. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if resentment of the west builds to levels which will massively undermine the determination to continue and Zelensky's position will become increasingly untenable. The Ukrainians I hear from have no love for him.
how much is Putin paying you dazh?
how much is Putin paying you dazh?
Grow up. This isn't a game of football.
If you want to delude yourself that Putin and Russia are weak and about to lose go ahead but the facts on the ground don't support that. Also Ukrainian sentiment towards the west and Zelensky is not universally supportive as assumed on this thread. I would like nothing more than for Putin to be sent packing and everything to go back to how it was but that's not going to happen.
Ukrainian sentiment towards the west and Zelensky is not universally supportive as assumed on this thread
Almost certainly correct, no society is a monolith but there's a vast gulf between a few dissenting voices and Ukraine as a whole throwing in the towel.
The Russian public have relativity little to lose if their soldiers retreat, wounded National pride being the main thing.
The Ukrainian public have EVERYTHING to lose if they give up, from their independence, to their future prosperity, to their actual Children!
Even if you see everything through a lens of pure cynical self-interest the rationale for resisting Russia every step of the way is pretty solid.
The Ukrainians I hear from have no love for him.
Polls suggest it's a bit more evenly split than your anecdotal poll.
Making out like Russia is inevitable but what you forget is this 'super' power has an military that is a paper tiger. Kursk has been invaded, begging for weapons from Iran and North Korea. Running out of most things. Doesn't sound like a military where most of it's stuff is untouched.
Any truce will embolden Putin and it will be a matter of when and not if until the next foray. The west simply need to step up.
Using tanks mothballed since the 80s
Supplying conscripts with rifles out of the 70s
Using tanks mothballed since the 80s
Supplying conscripts with rifles out of the 70s
Ohh, luxury, they have it easy. When I was a young one, we were lucky if they gave us some rocks to throw at the panzers.
Sanctions have failed?
care to explain why inflation is at 9%, whilst interest rates are at 19% ?? Ruble at 90 to the dollar??
does that look like a healthy economy to you??
Sanctions have failed?
Russia is running out of Yuan, as a direct result of sanctions. Buying Chinese goods is going to get quite tricky quite quickly for Russia.
I suppose the other way to look at sanctions, is what would the situation be like if they weren't in place. Certainly they are making things more difficult for Russia (and for everyone else too)
They won't single handled push Putin in retreating from Ukraine, but they will make it much harder and more expensive for Russia to continue with the invasion.
I doubt any rational thinker believes that sanctions on their own will bring about the end of the conflict. It is not black and white.
That Yuan link up there is interesting. I was of the view China was a staunch ally of Russia, maybe that is only as long as Russia can pay....
does that look like a healthy economy to you??
No of course it isn't, sanctions have obviously had a big impact but they have failed to prevent the execution of the war. Ultimately Russia is a huge country with vast natural resources and an independent currency so will always be able to draw on those to operate in international markets with countries who are prepared to deal with them. Chinese sanctions would probably work but Chinese banks unilaterally refusing to deal with Russia is probably not enough.
Polls suggest it’s a bit more evenly split than your anecdotal poll.
Which means there are already huge numbers of people in Ukraine who don't support the war in its current form. I reckon if Ukraine is going to continue resisting in the long term then they need quite a bit more than 50ish% support.
The west simply need to step up.
Depends what you mean by step up. Right at the beginning of this thread I said the west needed to implement a 100% trade blockade with Russia. They didn't do that and they're still not doing it. What else can they do? Boots on the ground and using western military assets to attack Moscow are not an option for obvious reasons. It's all very well showering Ukraine with billions of dollars and supplying arms but it hasn't been enough to bring an end to the war so far.
Sanctions have failed?
They do seem to have been rather less successful than hoped both for incoming and outgoing materials but thats down to many countries ignoring it.
Oil is the obvious one where some countries are profiting massively outgoing. So Russia is making less but still getting a decent income.
Then there are a bunch of countries who apparently have had a massive increase in their manufacturing base judging by the increase in imports from the EU/USA of manufacturing and electronics gear.
Then they'll pay for it in the form of other resources. China, being a global supplier literally swallows up resources, and will constantly need more. Russia has more than anyone.
Sanctions are always something that degrades an economy over time rather than causing an immediate collapse. Russia gets a lower price for its oil than pre-sanctions and imports are much more expensive. Critical technology has to be sourced through black markets so it costs more and supply is limited. Critical resources get diverted to military production so consumer prices rise and people with money buy stuff on the black market, fueling corruption and military goods get diverted back to civilian use. Russia has to import things like semiconductors and machine tools, but countries like South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan have joined the sanctions. Factories can keep running for a while by patching up old equipment, but you can't build tanks, helicopters, jet engines, etc. if your factory equipment is worn out and you can't replace it. It takes years, but an economy facing severe sanctions will slowly erode and become increasingly fragile. North Korea is a prime example.
They’ve been very smart about how the economy has been managed since sanctions however it resembles a drinker who’s had a heavy Saturday and then decided to avoid a hangover by indulging in a boozy Sunday brunch. The hangover isn’t cancelled, it’s deferred and will be all the worse for it.
Sanctions always take along time to bite and Putin took care to insulate himself against these by building up a massive war-chest of gold and foreign currency reserves ahead of the 2022 invasion (he was one of the few people that knew it was coming after all).
Russia's MVP's so far in this war have really been its central bankers, they've done a far better than expected job of propping up Russia's balance sheet and the massive restrictions they put in place to prevent capital flight have been pretty crucial.
In the meantime, competition for labour means that many common Russians have done pretty well over he lsat few years despite inflation, which has been a vital factor in maintaining public support for the war.
Putin's calculation all along was that the decadent and venal West would lose interest and want cheap oil so badly that the sanctions regime would be relaxed once the EU starting hankering after cheap fossil fuels again, Russia only had to hold out a few years max.
Two and a half years in and Putin's war chest is now largely gone and as a result the very big hangover that Dakuan mentioned (solid analogy there) creeps ever closer. Russia has handled this better than most thought possible but they have now burnt through every reserve and you can only defy gravity for so long.
As said before, I really do think Putin is hanging on for a 2nd Trump term as his best hope for victory, everything seems looks like it will come to a head towards the end of this year.
Trump isn’t going to win, so there’s that.
I haven’t heard much from Harris about Ukraine?
what happens when the cash reserves dry up? Print money, hello hyper inflation! ?