2 2
SkyDekker

Ukraine

Recommended Posts

(edited)

I for one am embarrassed about Canada's military contributions. Democracies however are generally ruled by majorities. Riggerrob can pipe in but under funding of hardware for the CAF has gone on for at least four decades. Lack of equipment and age of equipment have been serious issues for a even longer time.

Military spending substantially arises from a perceived need. Canada doesn't see many threats in the world. Many perceived important interests. The US sees many.

IMO the Ukraine war justifies an all out response. The entire rationale for NATO was the Russian threat. Nothing against the Russian people. But Putin wasn't created overnight. The Duma has rubber stamped his actions. The Russian military has gone along with the action. Generals, FSB insiders, the Duma, etc. all know whats going on.

Canada's lack of extra useful weapons doesn't prevent it from buying some used equipment from other NATO members.

The Phoenix Ghost is this was rapidly developed by the Air Force, in response, specifically to Ukrainian requirements

"The US military’s electronic warfare enterprise needs to take a page from SpaceX when it comes to responding to new threats, the Pentagon’s director for electromagnetic warfare said today.

After SpaceX sent Starlink terminals to Ukraine in February in an apparent effort to help Ukraine maintain its internet connection amid war with Russia, SpaceX founder Elon Musk claimed that Russia had jammed Starlink terminals in the country for hours at a time. After a software update, Starlink was operating normally, said Musk, who added on March 25 that the constellation had “resisted all hacking & jamming attempts” in Ukraine."

It seems as if there is a damn Ukrainian saboteur under every Russian ruble  "A major fire broke out today in a secretive Russian military research center, killing several people, injuring others, and leaving significant damage in its wake. The facility in Tver, 120 miles northwest of Moscow, is responsible for diverse research focused on air defense, but reportedly crosses over between the fields of both space and the military. Most notably, it reportedly studies stealth technologies — and, above all, counters to use against them."

Edited by Phil1111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

My error as the core point I was making is that NGO's have gone short of their defense obligations and it is becoming glaringly obvious now.

What NGO’s have defence obligations? And why is it obvious?

17 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

To be completely jingoistic here, I am proud that America is doing so much and in a timely manner for Ukraine. 

I don’t see why anyone would disagree with that. The amount of aid being given by the USA right now is commendable. The problem is how you’re doing the ugly American thing of being proud of it by shitting all over everyone else, and regarding hints that are completely irrelevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jakee said:

The problem is how you’re doing the ugly American thing of being proud of it by shitting all over everyone else, and regarding hints that are completely irrelevant.

It started with complaining about having to pay for it. He wants the pride and glory at less personal cost I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

It started with complaining about having to pay for it. He wants the pride and glory at less personal cost I guess.

Joe was merely insistent that other NATO members meet an ideal, common target of spending. Not calculating that politicians in other countries set different priorities on the threats they face.. That they have constituents that rank defense as a low priority concern. That regardless of what those defense ministers say or represent in NATO meetings. That they will be overruled by political party leadership, in spending committees.

That as political parties come and go in NATO members. Each will have different defense spending objectives. IMO Joe fails to recognize that NATO itself is seldom called to meet article 5 provisions. That the only time it was was for the defense of the US. Even though Ukraine is not a NATO member. NATO has taken a leadership position in the threats to its sovereignty.

While I agree with Joe to a large extent. It should also be pointed out that the US spent $2.313 trillion in Afghanistan. Yet so far only spent $13.6 billion in Ukraine.

I agree with Joe because Russia is a bigger threat to common security than what the Taliban ever was.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

W/O completely derailing this thread. Australia is currently embarked on a substantial increase in military,....er...defense.. spending. Including a fleet of new nuclear submarines.

I read an article a couple years ago about the cost to send a US nuclear submarine on a single patrol. It seemed like a stupidly large amount. Tens of millions of dollars.

In any event Australia has raised the ire of China and has been at odds for several years. China released last year several Canadian hostages it was holding to pressure Canada. Xi, IMO is a threat to the world the equal to Putin. Xi is a bully,a killer, an authoritarian without constraints. 

Given the budget from Canada three weeks ago. Canada see's no threats anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
59 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Australia is currently embarked on a substantial increase in military,....er...defense.. spending. Including a fleet of new nuclear submarines.

And famously they will be US built, not French. Which has caused a cold war between France and Oz. It seems they want to be able to defend against an attack from the sea. Which will merely force China to use ICBMs instead.

Edited by gowlerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
36 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

And famously they will be US built, not French. Which has caused a cold war between France and Oz. It seems they want to be able to defend against an attack from the sea. Which will merely force China to use ICBMs instead.

Actually I was just reading about them the other day. They will be a bit of a abortion design. With many chances for a goat-F*&k. Or cost overruns.

Oh mon-dieu the French got it. But thats business for you.

Edited by Phil1111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
45 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Actually I was just reading about them the other day. They will be a bit of a abortion design. With many chances for a goat-F*&k. Or cost overruns.

Oh mon-dieu the French got it. But thats business for you.

HMAS Vexatious and HMAS Vampirious? Is that an Australian joke of some kind?

 

Edit, yes it is. The whole article is an April fools joke.

Edited by gowlerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

HMAS Vexatious and HMAS Vampirious? Is that an Australian joke of some kind?

Edit, yes it is. The whole article is an April fools joke.

I liked the "HMS Vanquished."   Although the thing that suprised me when I first read it was the LEU reactor.  In a submarine?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joseph Stalin missed a golden opportunity in 1945. He could have established a neutral corridor across Central Europe to include: Finland, Sweden, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Yugoslavia, etc.

A well monitored neutral corridor would protect both Capitalist and communist military interests and might have prevent the current blood-shed in Ukraine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, riggerrob said:

A well monitored neutral corridor would protect both Capitalist and communist military interests and might have prevent the current blood-shed in Ukraine.

No, you’d have got exactly what’s happening now. Countries in the ‘neutral’ corridor deciding that Russia is really fucking scary and they don’t want to be neutral anymore, closely followed by Russia demonstrating why it was right to be scared of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, riggerrob said:

....A well monitored neutral corridor would protect both Capitalist and communist military interests and might have prevent the current blood-shed in Ukraine.

 

5 hours ago, jakee said:

No, you’d have got exactly what’s happening now. Countries in the ‘neutral’ corridor deciding that Russia is really fucking scary ....

Russia and the Russian people adore and respect strongmen. There is no core democratic belief that multi-racial and multi-cultural populations can be ruled by democracies. Many still rue for the days of Stalin. Perestroika was but a blip in Russian history. Thats not to say that there are not democratic believers in Russia. But they are few.

Until Russia has a free, open, press and a transparent government. A majority of people who accept the cleansing of corruption benefits that free elections bring about. Russia will remain dangerous. As will China.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jakee said:

No, you’d have got exactly what’s happening now. Countries in the ‘neutral’ corridor deciding that Russia is really fucking scary and they don’t want to be neutral anymore, closely followed by Russia demonstrating why it was right to be scared of them.

Hi jakee,

And, that is why Uncle Joe would not have any 'neutral' countries.  He knew exactly what he was doing.  The west was lucky to get what they could in their meetings with him.  

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

 

Russia and the Russian people adore and respect strongmen. There is no core democratic belief that multi-racial and multi-cultural populations can be ruled by democracies. Many still rue for the days of Stalin. Perestroika was but a blip in Russian history. Thats not to say that there are not democratic believers in Russia. But they are few.

Until Russia has a free, open, press and a transparent government. A majority of people who accept the cleansing of corruption benefits that free elections bring about. Russia will remain dangerous. As will China.

Hi Phil,

Re:  Russia and the Russian people adore and respect strongmen.

For over a 100 yrs now, they really have not had a choice.  There were a few short-lived exceptions, but, for the most part, that has been the history of the USSR and now, the Russian Federation.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi jakee,

And, that is why Uncle Joe would not have any 'neutral' countries.  He knew exactly what he was doing.  The west was lucky to get what they could in their meetings with him.  

Indeed - and again now Russia's idea of a 'neutral' Ukraine would be a completely demilitarised one with a puppet govenrment installed and if the people start getting restless? Well here comes the Russian army again with nothing to stop them this time.

To expect them to abide by any real neutrality guarantee would be insane. Less than a week before the invasion Putin was dressing down his intelligence chief for some reason. When pressed on the status of the Donbas the spy said 'Yes we should recognise Luhansk and Donetsk and send in the Army to help occupy the territory' and Putin said 'Hohoho Sergei don't be silly, no one is talking about occupying Ukraine!' but here we are...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi jakee,

And, that is why Uncle Joe would not have any 'neutral' countries.  He knew exactly what he was doing.  The west was lucky to get what they could in their meetings with him.  

Jerry Baumchen

Unfortunately Roosevelt overruled Churchill, and Truman, having been kept pretty much in the dark, was clueless at Potsdam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, kallend said:

Unfortunately Roosevelt overruled Churchill, and Truman, having been kept pretty much in the dark, was clueless at Potsdam.

Hi John,

Re:  Truman, having been kept pretty much in the dark

That was why no previous Roosevelt V-P would ever run with him again.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)

Over Easter Dinner, I compared the current siege of Mariupol with the 1990 Oka Crisis near Montreal, Canada.

After he surrendered, Mohawk Warrior Ronaldo Casalpro (nom du guerre: Ronald "Lasagna" Cross) was beaten by the Quebec Provincial Police. Two QPP officers were suspended, but never formally punished. The rest of the Mohawks refused to surrender to the QPP because they KNEW that they would also be beaten. QPP lost control of the perimeter around the Oka Reservation by mid-August 1990, so were supplemented by (federal) Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Eventually the Canadian Army - specifically the Royal 22nd Regiment (aka. VanDoos) - slowly squeezed Mohawks into surrendering. Given the extensive media coverage, the 22nd Regiment maintained rigid discipline within their ranks and professionally completed their task without further deaths.

My younger brother was serving in the Canadian Army and was sent to Oka to assist the 22nd Regiment. His opinions about the professionalism of the QPP cannot be repeated in polite company.

Fast forward to today, Ukrainian soldiers stubbornly defend the ruins of a steel mill in Mariupol, Ukraine because they KNOW that Russian soldiers WILL kill them if they surrender. Earlier rumors claimed that Russian soldiers strip-searched Ukrainians fleeing along "humanitarian corridors." Any Ukrainians with evidence of runic alphabet or fascist leanings were killed and many other were marched near-naked away from the road (aka. humanitarian corridor) in freezing weather.

The Russian Army recently aired video of Ukrainian soldiers surrendering. One of the P.O.W.s was Don Zvonyk, with a distinctive tattoo on his chest. But 5 days later, Russian officials in Donyetsk sent photos to his mother. The photos showed the dead soldier's distinctive tattoo. When Zvonyk's family retrieved his body from the morgue, they noticed a "large wound in back of head."

CNN TV News 2022 May 2.

 

Warfare in Eastern Europe had always been fought on a vastly different basis than in Western Europe. During World War 2, neither the (fascist) Nazi Germans nor Soviet (Russian) Army accepted significant numbers of prisoners of war and many thousands, hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of P.O.W.s starved or froze to death on the Russian Front.

Any one trying to apply the Geneva convention or "rules of war" to the current crisis in Ukraine is woefully naive about the nature of warfare outside of civilized Western Europe.

Edited by riggerrob
add a sentence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, riggerrob said:

Any one trying to apply the Geneva convention or "rules of war" to the current crisis in Ukraine is woefully naive about the nature of warfare outside of civilized Western Europe.

It seems that all western analysts expected Russia’s war to be based around heavy bombardment of civilian populations simply through lack of ability to fight any other way. What I don’t know if they predicted (and I certainly had no idea) was the depth of the brutality and depravity the Russian army is showing on a deliberate, personal and face to face level as a matter of policy.
 

For instance large number of civilians who were abducted into Russia for no other reason than to ransom in exchange for POWs, who were first made to lie outside for days in freezing fields with their shoes deliberately filled with water, then denied medical treatment until amputation was required of toes, feet or even entire limbs. Fucking animals.

As an aside, this is also why certain decisions that were made in the Middle East were so damaging. For example blanket immunity for US contractors, including for deliberate and indiscriminate murder of civilians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear jakee,

Warfare is never as simple or as pretty as portrayed in the history books.

History books are written by the victors.

One of the reasons that victors need so many decades - to write memoirs - is that a fireplace can only burn so many embarrassing documents per hour.

Hah!

Hah!

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, riggerrob said:

Dear jakee,

Warfare is never as simple or as pretty as portrayed in the history books.

History books are written by the victors.

One of the reasons that victors need so many decades - to write memoirs - is that a fireplace can only burn so many embarrassing documents per hour.

Hah!

Hah!

 

Hi Rob,

Re:  History books are written by the victors.

In the early part of WW II, Hitler's generals told him that he was violating the rules of war.  The above is, almost verbatim, his response to them.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2