• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -11 month ago

    And superior equipment would save the lives of ukrainian soldiers so fewer would be needed to fight back Russia. So the conclusion should be to supply Ukraine with what it needs.

    However, you said

    Russia has no regulations whom to send in battle and how many.

    and that simply doesn’t matter as much.

    • Peter_Arbeitslos
      link
      fedilink
      English
      01 month ago

      Don’t get me wrong. Of course send everything we have to them, Taurus, F-16, billions of dollars. Damn, hit Putin in his Kreml with drones. We should have sent the equipment way earlier when they said they would need it and not months later. (Fuck you, Olaf Scholz.) If we would have done it earlier, we now wouldn’t talk about how to Ukraine needs more soldiers. Still send the weapons anyway. But now we talk about the need for soldiers and we can’t ignore it when Ukraine simply doesn’t have enough soldiers to handle all their weapons and fight back the Russian army on some parts of the front. And that they need more soldiers and have to mobilize is what have I heard a few times in the last weeks.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -11 month ago

        Okay, and what are “we” (as in Ukraines western partners) to do about this? We cannot send ukrainian refugees back with a gun and a helmet. We cannot wololo russian soldiers into ukrainian ones. We cannot conjure up soldiers magically. What we can do is send weapons, ammunitions, medical supplies etc. We can enforce sanctions against Russia and its oligarchy making it least profitable and discouraging to fight this war.
        Or do you want to send troops?

        • Peter_Arbeitslos
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 month ago

          Never said we could do anything about that directly (maybe indirectly by sending money). I just said we shouldn’t ignore the problem and downvote the post.