- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
Nice, I hope they also find a way to stop the Kherson drone terror attacks with this effort
deleted by creator
Decent. Hope he succeeds.
Wasn’t this what blowing up the bridge back in 2022 was about?
Yeah but they could actually do it now with the Flamenco
US and Europe forced this war into a stalemate by not allowing Ukraine to do what was necessary in the early period. So they had to homegrow an industry. Now we’re seeing the fruits of that.
US and Europe forced this war into a stalemate by not allowing Ukraine to do what was necessary in the early period.
This sounds like some kind of Hegseth rant. The US/EU wasn’t holding Ukraine back, it was juicing them up. The entire military budget for the country is being backfilled by NATO treasury notes. “Ah, but if we’d been just a bit more aggressive…” It’s all just Monday Morning Quarterbacking. “Shoulda thrown more Hail Marys to win the game.”
How’s that going with Iran?
The US and Europe put EXTREME limits on how Ukraine could use and deploy weapons at a preposterous level as their territory was being invaded, because they truly didn’t believe Ukraine could stand a chance. They kept those limits in place so Ukraine fought with one arm behind their back. Ukraine then had to build their own supply chain (intermediate and short range drones, the flamingo, etc,) because of this. Now, the fruits of that are paying of. Russia is 100% in the wrong and always has been. But only now can Ukraine show movement in this.
Iran isn’t fighting with those limits and has basically kowtowed the US into line. They have several marches stolen on Ukraine in terms of self-sufficient arms development. Because of that the US has no real options here, other than to submit… The US is 100% in the wrong on this and always has been.
The two scenarios very much rhyme but not in the way you are implying.
It’s more nuanced. From what I recall they weren’t giving Ukraine long range missiles and I also remember some conditions regarding Russian territory for shorter range missiles. It makes sense though. Ukraine is defending and US/EU are helping them defend. If they were supplying them weapons to attack it would be different.
Some people believe this wasn’t really in the best interest of Ukraine but on the other hand it would have really not be in the best interest of the US/EU. What people often forget is that the choices were defeat or (alleged) stalemate and not a stalemate or victory.
Victory has always been on the table for Ukraine if they hadn’t been held back in using the weapons they were given. The US and EU were always too afraid of Putin escalating to a nuclear conflict. Most likely that fear is unfounded. Putin isn’t stupid, he would have let the EU have it’s pyrrhic victory. Cutting off their energy supply would have hurt the EU worse than losing the war hurt his pride. Leaving them with broken energy markets while he sat there with an oil supply would have let him entrench much deeper than he already is on the far right across both continents. He probably could have taken control of Ukraine’s rare earth supply through intermediary markets cheaper, and more completely, than the war has cost him already.
At this point though, the market has largely diversified itself away from Russia. Meaning the EU isn’t as worried about Ukraine blowing up the oil supply. At least until the problem in Iran came into play, almost as if coordinated.
Victory has always been on the table for Ukraine if they hadn’t been held back in using the weapons they were given.
But that’s my whole point. You imply that they shouldn’t have been held back, and I explain why the conditions were given. Whether or not that is good or not depends on the point of view. If you don’t want to be pulled into a war, you don’t give offensive weapons, if you don’t mind being pulled into a war, you do give offensive weapons. The plan could also have been to keep Ukraine in a stalemate so they can create their own industry. We don’t know that.
The only plan was to not interrupt the sale of Russian oil to the EU. Because despite repeated, and loud, warnings by everyone with a brain, the EU allowed themselves to become dependent on Russian oil. Meaning if they allowed Ukraine to actually crash the Russian economy 3 years ago, it would have caused serious hardship in the EU, and some strain on the US economy. Which would have been entirely workable, but politically toxic, and all the leaders involved were too weak to handle it.
At this point though, the market has largely diversified itself away from Russia.
Russia is doing plenty of business into India and China
iirc India has been really pressing the advantage though, Russias been getting shit prices for their oil.
Idk, this sounds like cope.
India has an enormous energy demand and a lot of money. I’m sure a bunch of middle men are cleaning up, but I doubt anyone in Mumbai is enjoying a cheaper energy bill
True, but they’re not in the decision process for the EU supplying support to Ukraine.
Evil fn Nazis
Yep, that’s why they should leave Crimea.
*nazi commander
