User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 11:21:11 AM EDT
[#1]
 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 11:21:26 AM EDT
[#2]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 11:30:29 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood:
Send them! We probably have hundreds of surplus A model UH-60s sitting in depots waiting to be sold through GSA. The Ukrainians would really love to get their hands on some of these, as they have managed to obtain at least one UH-60A from the civilian market and absolutely love the platform. Outside of MEDEVAC, rescue and troop transport duties, it can also be configured as an attack helicopter. That is important because we can probably spare a lot more UH-60s than we can AH-64s. Likewise, I think we can probably spare some C model Hornets. The Navy has retired all of theirs and now only the Marines operate them. The A-D model Hornets are pretty much nearing the end of their service lives anyway, and they don't have the legs to be of much use to the Marines who have shifted their focus to the vast expanses of the Pacific. So why not donate a few dozen of these to the Ukrainians and let them spend their last few years in service doing what they were designed to do.....fuck up Russians. Not sure what kind of drones they are requesting, but if they are asking for something beyond the civilian off the shelf types, why not send them some Predator-B drones? I think we've pretty much retired all of those in favor of the MQ-9 Reaper. So hand them and the ground stations over to Ukraine and see what they can do with them. If they all end up getting destroyed, we really haven't lost anything anyway. And the Ukrainians will likely use them to great effect while they do last. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 11:47:31 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Gudabeg: The argument isn't for immigration reform. It's to secure the border. Think of all the people you see saying "no money for Ukraine UNTIL the border is secure", we should be trying to get them onboard by securing the border. Telling them to shut up is just going to make them be against Ukraine. Same phenomena as immigration and the AfD in Germany. Border funding is a red herring anyway. ANY money devoted to border security during this administration is just going to buy pampers, mobile phones and bus a plane tickets to send illegals to red states to destroy Republican majorities. Build a wall you say? It’ll have big gates to wave everyone into. NO WAY Biden stops the influx. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 11:53:34 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Charging_Handle: Send them! We probably have hundreds of surplus A model UH-60s sitting in depots waiting to be sold through GSA. The Ukrainians would really love to get their hands on some of these, as they have managed to obtain at least one UH-60A from the civilian market and absolutely love the platform. Outside of MEDEVAC, rescue and troop transport duties, it can also be configured as an attack helicopter. That is important because we can probably spare a lot more UH-60s than we can AH-64s. Likewise, I think we can probably spare some C model Hornets. The Navy has retired all of theirs and now only the Marines operate them. The A-D model Hornets are pretty much nearing the end of their service lives anyway, and they don't have the legs to be of much use to the Marines who have shifted their focus to the vast expanses of the Pacific. So why not donate a few dozen of these to the Ukrainians and let them spend their last few years in service doing what they were designed to do.....fuck up Russians. Not sure what kind of drones they are requesting, but if they are asking for something beyond the civilian off the shelf types, why not send them some Predator-B drones? I think we've pretty much retired all of those in favor of the MQ-9 Reaper. So hand them and the ground stations over to Ukraine and see what they can do with them. If they all end up getting destroyed, we really haven't lost anything anyway. And the Ukrainians will likely use them to great effect while they do last. Those usmc hornets have been ridden hard and put away wet. They’re not a viable option |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 11:55:52 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By weptek911: Border funding is a red herring anyway. ANY money devoted to border security during this administration is just going to buy pampers, mobile phones and bus a plane tickets to send illegals to red states to destroy Republican majorities. Build a wall you say? It’ll have big gates to wave everyone into. NO WAY Biden stops the influx. When I hit that part of your comment I read the rest of it in Lili Von Shtupp's voice. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 11:56:08 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fadedsun: Those usmc hornets have been ridden hard and put away wet. They're not a viable option |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 11:57:37 AM EDT
[#8]
The occupation authorities of the Russian Federation banned the activities of the UGCC in the occupied part of the Zaporizhzhia region (document)
The Russian occupation authorities have issued an "order" banning the activities of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, as well as the Knights of Columbus and Caritas, which are engaged in social service, in the occupied territory of Zaporizhzhia Oblast. "Order" of the so-called. the head of the occupation military-civilian administration of the Zaporozhye region, collaborator Yevgeny Balitsky, published on his official website.  The Department of Information of the UGCC became aware of this only now, although the document is dated December 26, 2022. The occupiers unjustifiably aggravate the ban on the activities of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church in the occupied territory of the Zaporizhzhia region by the alleged storage of "explosives and firearms on the territory of religious houses and auxiliary premises", as well as by the fact that the activities of the UGCC are carried out "in violation of the legislation on religious and public organizations of the Russian Federation", namely due to "the participation of parishioners in mass riots and anti-Russian rallies in March-April 2022", "distribution of literature calling for the violation of the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation", "active participation of UGCC communities in the territory of Zaporizhia region in the activities of extremist organizations and propaganda of neo-Nazi ideas", etc. In addition to banning the activities of the UGCC, the Russian occupation authorities ordered: -to transfer movable and immovable property and land plots of the Church to the disposal of the occupying military-civilian administration of the Zaporozhye region; -to terminate the lease agreements for premises and land plots previously concluded by the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church with local authorities in the Zaporozhye region; -not to register the religious community "Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church" with the occupation authorities of the Zaporozhye region; -to prohibit persons who held leadership and administrative positions in the UGCC from registering public and religious organizations in the occupied territory of Zaporizhia region. In addition to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, the "order" of the occupation authorities of the Russian Federation prohibits the activities of other organizations, including those engaged in social service and humanitarian support of the population in the occupied and de-occupied territories: the Order of the Knights of Columbus and the Caritas Charitable Foundation: Caritas Canada, Caritas USA, Caritas Polska, Caritas Chech Republic, Caritas-Donetsk and Caritas-Melitopol. Control over the implementation of this "order" of the so-called. Governor Balitsky put it on his deputy for security. The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church calls on international organizations to do everything possible to ensure the observance of religious freedom in the occupied territory of Ukraine.   It is worth noting that on November 16, 2022, in Berdiansk, the occupation authorities arrested two Redemptorist priests, Ivan Levytskyi and Bohdan Heleta, who are still in Russian captivity. And in December 2022, she "deported" from Melitopol all the priests of the UGCC who remained to serve there even after the occupation of the Zaporizhzhia region by Russia in the spring of 2022. https://ugcc.ua/data/okupatsiyna-vlada-rf-zaboronyla-diyalnist-ugkts-na-okupovaniy-chastyni-zaporizkoy-oblasti-dokument-4036/ |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 12:03:51 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fadedsun: Those usmc hornets have been ridden hard and put away wet. They’re not a viable option And the condition of those compared to Ukrainian fighters? Also, didn't Australia have a bunch of F18s they could surplus? I don't think we have that many UH60s in surplus, but we should send what we have. I'm not aware that any Apaches are ready for surplus, but we DO have a bunch of AH1Ws that are surplus. I believe they were upgraded/reconditioned for export sales, but I wouldn't mind sending them to Ukraine. I don't recall the quantity, 2-3 dozen? It would help. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 12:10:39 PM EDT
[#10]
Kh-59 towards Poltava.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 12:26:34 PM EDT
[#11]
Top U.S. defense firm General Dynamics is planning to open weapons plant in Ukraine - an investment that implies taxpayers will continue to dole out dollars to support war that has no end in sight
General Dynamics, based in Renton, Virginia, wants to open an artillery factory in western Ukraine producing 155-millimeter shells within six months The firm, one of the major suppliers to the U.S. military, is also unperturbed about the possibility of Donald Trump winning November's presidential election. 'It means that we are, one way or another, going to be in this for the long haul,' said one source, who declined to be identified owing to the sensitivity of the plans. A Ukrainian-based official said that other major U.S. defense companies could follow suit and set up local production to send arms to the frontline. 'It's not only General Dynamics considering the establishment of a venture in Ukraine. It will be a trend for the next several years,' the source DailyMail.com understands that the facility will largely focus on producing 155-millimeter shells, a NATO-standard artillery round, that have been key to the Ukrainian fightback against Russia. Moscow currently produces roughly a million artillery shells a year; Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky complained last month that deliveries of munitions from his allies had 'slowed down.' Zelensky unexpectedly cancelled an address to the US Senate on Tuesday where he would have appealed for fresh aid for the war in Ukraine. The 155 mm shells can be packed with highly explosive material, use precision guided systems, pierce armor or produce high fragmentation. Past variants have included smoke rounds to obscure troop movement and illumination rounds to expose an enemy's position. They are being fired by Ukraine's military at a rate of 6,000 to 8,000 rounds a day, according to Ukrainian MP Oleksandra Ustinova, who serves on Ukraine's wartime oversight committee. It comes as senior U.S. and Ukrainian government officials, including Zelensky's chief of staff Andriy Yermak, are meeting in Washington on December 6 and 7 with industry bigwigs to rebuild the war-torn nation's defense sector. But Antone Voronin, deputy director of Ukraine's government-owned defense company Spets, said in September that the country needed to bring in fresh funding from abroad to do so. Continued |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 12:52:36 PM EDT
[#12]
|
|
|
|
OK, USA
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 1:05:50 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Prime: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAhE6CVWUAMBrrO?format=jpg&name=small
Killing a General via friendly fire is quite an achievement! |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 1:29:22 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: For those unfamiliar, this is the guy partly responsible for the rapid build up of U.S. 155mm production, among other things.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAv1O0tXAAAMUkF?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 This is a relief to hear. This war has demonstrated that small drones are a serious problem, and I have had grave doubts about US forces preparedness to deal with them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 1:31:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Prime]
[#15]
Shahed and Lancet production.
⚡️ The community #Molfar investigated where, who and how drones are assembled in Russia, and found a connection between the " #Шахедів" and " #Ланцетів " productions.   
What analysts say: 🔺 UAVs are collected in shopping centers, there are addresses and coordinates of five shopping centers where UAVs are collected;
🔺 companies from about 70 countries are involved in the supply of tens of thousands of parts for Russian drones, in particular from the USA, Britain, Taiwan, China (they claim that the American manufacturer Allied Mineral Products works in Alabuz);
🔺 identified new employees collecting drones and entered their data into the criminal register of the Russian Federation;
🔺 revealed the name of the chief designer of Zala Aero Group, Alexander Zakharov. His closest relatives are "bankrupt", but own luxury housing in Europe or work at the UN.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 1:53:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By realwar: Top U.S. defense firm General Dynamics is planning to open weapons plant in Ukraine - an investment that implies taxpayers will continue to dole out dollars to support war that has no end in sight General Dynamics, based in Renton, Virginia, wants to open an artillery factory in western Ukraine producing 155-millimeter shells within six months The firm, one of the major suppliers to the U.S. military, is also unperturbed about the possibility of Donald Trump winning November's presidential election. 'It means that we are, one way or another, going to be in this for the long haul,' said one source, who declined to be identified owing to the sensitivity of the plans. A Ukrainian-based official said that other major U.S. defense companies could follow suit and set up local production to send arms to the frontline. 'It's not only General Dynamics considering the establishment of a venture in Ukraine. It will be a trend for the next several years,' the source DailyMail.com understands that the facility will largely focus on producing 155-millimeter shells, a NATO-standard artillery round, that have been key to the Ukrainian fightback against Russia. Moscow currently produces roughly a million artillery shells a year; Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky complained last month that deliveries of munitions from his allies had 'slowed down.' Zelensky unexpectedly cancelled an address to the US Senate on Tuesday where he would have appealed for fresh aid for the war in Ukraine. The 155 mm shells can be packed with highly explosive material, use precision guided systems, pierce armor or produce high fragmentation. Past variants have included smoke rounds to obscure troop movement and illumination rounds to expose an enemy's position. They are being fired by Ukraine's military at a rate of 6,000 to 8,000 rounds a day, according to Ukrainian MP Oleksandra Ustinova, who serves on Ukraine's wartime oversight committee. It comes as senior U.S. and Ukrainian government officials, including Zelensky's chief of staff Andriy Yermak, are meeting in Washington on December 6 and 7 with industry bigwigs to rebuild the war-torn nation's defense sector. But Antone Voronin, deputy director of Ukraine's government-owned defense company Spets, said in September that the country needed to bring in fresh funding from abroad to do so. Continued Awesome news!  There is another American company going in as well with 155mm production Ukraine, should be in the news in the future. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 1:55:07 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By trapsh00ter99: It's a good strategy for the dems in the 2024 election  The most hated inept administration in US history and Republicans will still manage to snatch defeat.Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By trapsh00ter99: Originally Posted By RockNwood: That is all so messed up. Biden doesn't even want to support Ukraine. The Republicans are stupid enough to think Ukraine is anything important to Biden?! FFS we have idiots across the board. They couldn't play checkers to get out of a paper bag or something like that. The bill doesn't pass, Biden shrugs his shoulders, calls Vlad to tell him the slow walk obstruction is still on track, then calls MSNBC to blame to Republicans for letting Ukraine children get bombed by mean ole Rooskies. Win, win. Putin happy, Biden happy, Tucker happy, Trump stumped, RNC goes back to their lunch time scotch and sodas. The most hated inept administration in US history and Republicans will still manage to snatch defeat.It’s very frustrating. The morally right thing to do also happens to be the best defensive policy AND a popular thing and instead they run the other way! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 1:55:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GTLandser: This is a relief to hear. This war has demonstrated that small drones are a serious problem, and I have had grave doubts about US forces preparedness to deal with them. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GTLandser: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: For those unfamiliar, this is the guy partly responsible for the rapid build up of U.S. 155mm production, among other things.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAv1O0tXAAAMUkF?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 This is a relief to hear. This war has demonstrated that small drones are a serious problem, and I have had grave doubts about US forces preparedness to deal with them. The other relief I have is they are moving to purchase lots of domestically produced small drones as well. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 1:59:16 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAvvfNHWEAE5kqs?format=jpg&name=small They probably need 300 of these to cover the 900 mile front. Better than a warm handshake , but … |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:07:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: They probably need 300 of these to cover the 900 mile front. Better than a warm handshake , but … Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAvvfNHWEAE5kqs?format=jpg&name=small They probably need 300 of these to cover the 900 mile front. Better than a warm handshake , but … To be honest, they are useful in protecting areas like energy infrastructure and such. They can hit the leftover Shaheds if they get too close to a guarded facility. There will never be enough systems to protect everything, but you can place what you get in areas proven to be most likely targeted. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:09:06 PM EDT
[#21]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:09:11 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood:
"Send them." CMOS |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:09:41 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Prime: The Russians attacked again on Romania's border. Izmail port hit by drones, one person killed https://s.iw.ro/gateway/g/ZmlsZVNvdXJjZT1odHRwJTNBJTJGJTJG/c3RvcmFnZTA4dHJhbnNjb2Rlci5yY3Mt/cmRzLnJvJTJGc3RvcmFnZSUyRjIwMjMl/MkYwOSUyRjI2JTJGMTgwNjA0N18xODA2/MDQ3X3BvcnQtSXptYWlsLWF0YWNhdC5q/cGcmdz03ODAmaD00NDAmaGFzaD1kOTY4/YjBlYjJhZDU5NWJjNDM5OTg1ZmIxNjY0MWZiOQ==.thumb.jpg The port of Izmail on the Ukrainian bank of the Danube has again been the target of Russian drone attacks, Ukrainian media reported. One person died after his van was hit, Odessa Governor Oleh Kiper said. Russia launched attacks against 11 regions of Ukraine on Wednesday, killing one person and wounding at least eight others, according to reports from regional officials on Thursday morning. The governor of the Odessa region, Oleh Kiper, reported that the infrastructure of the Danube port of Izmail was attacked, killing a van driver near a warehouse. In the Donetsk region, Russian attacks wounded two people in Avdiivka, one in Andriivka and another in Nelipivka, the Donetsk Oblast Military Administration reported. Russian strikes on Podoly village in Kupiansk district of Kharkiv Oblast region wounded two women aged 58 and 49, Governor Oleh Syniehubov said. Two people were wounded in Russian missile strikes on the Seredyna-Buda area in the Sumy region, the regional military administration reported. The regions of Chernihiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Kherson, Luhansk, Mykolaiv, Khmelnytsky and Zaporizhzhia were also attacked, but local officials reported no casualties. Ukrainian defenses shot down 15 of 18 Shahed kamikaze drones launched by Russia overnight, mainly targeting the Odessa and Khmelnytsky regions. https://www.digi24.ro/stiri/externe/rusii-au-atacat-din-nou-la-granita-romaniei-portul-izmail-lovit-de-drone-o-persoana-a-fost-ucisa-2606615 FILING UNDER: Russia will never attack NATO Because NATO Would Do Terrible Scary Things! EXHIBIT: 87 + 14 I can almost smell the trickle going down Blinken’s leg and hear the pitter patter of Austin’s feet running away. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:10:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#24]
 This please. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:17:43 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By GTLandser: This is a relief to hear. This war has demonstrated that small drones are a serious problem, and I have had grave doubts about US forces preparedness to deal with them. Pretty hard for the DoD to ignore this now present threat . . . . CMOS |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:20:19 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAwIO95XEAIrqht?format=jpg&name=medium This please. it is nice to see republicans are finally starting to show signs of brain life. This is exactly what I've been suggesting they do for the past year and a half. Instead of being opposed to helping Ukraine just because Biden is for it, we should instead be shaming Biden for not doing enough! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:21:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Prime]
[#27]
   
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:21:35 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lieh-tzu: And the condition of those compared to Ukrainian fighters? Also, didn't Australia have a bunch of F18s they could surplus? I don't think we have that many UH60s in surplus, but we should send what we have. I'm not aware that any Apaches are ready for surplus, but we DO have a bunch of AH1Ws that are surplus. I believe they were upgraded/reconditioned for export sales, but I wouldn't mind sending them to Ukraine. I don't recall the quantity, 2-3 dozen? It would help. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Originally Posted By fadedsun: Those usmc hornets have been ridden hard and put away wet. They’re not a viable option And the condition of those compared to Ukrainian fighters? Also, didn't Australia have a bunch of F18s they could surplus? I don't think we have that many UH60s in surplus, but we should send what we have. I'm not aware that any Apaches are ready for surplus, but we DO have a bunch of AH1Ws that are surplus. I believe they were upgraded/reconditioned for export sales, but I wouldn't mind sending them to Ukraine. I don't recall the quantity, 2-3 dozen? It would help. I’m pretty sure any aircraft we have that could be transferred is better than an empty hangar, or even the handful of decrepit MiG-29s or the four Su-24 Ukraine has. The 18 Australian Hornets would be a huge bump up with their bigger radars. Add a few dozen from ours. Empty hangar? OR, old Hornet? You have 24 hrs to make a choice. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:24:55 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Prime: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAwlzE1XIAA1nKV?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAwl0PJXAAExR8W?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAwl2gnWYAAoAYg?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAwl4s6WcAAyvOF?format=jpg&name=large
lol, they will be surprised how much damage Cap'n tungsten crunch did when they try to take off. It slices through wiring, flight controls, engines, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:27:56 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Awesome news! There is another American company going in as well with 155mm production Ukraine, should be in the news in the future. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By realwar: Top U.S. defense firm General Dynamics is planning to open weapons plant in Ukraine - an investment that implies taxpayers will continue to dole out dollars to support war that has no end in sight General Dynamics, based in Renton, Virginia, wants to open an artillery factory in western Ukraine producing 155-millimeter shells within six months The firm, one of the major suppliers to the U.S. military, is also unperturbed about the possibility of Donald Trump winning November's presidential election. 'It means that we are, one way or another, going to be in this for the long haul,' said one source, who declined to be identified owing to the sensitivity of the plans. A Ukrainian-based official said that other major U.S. defense companies could follow suit and set up local production to send arms to the frontline. 'It's not only General Dynamics considering the establishment of a venture in Ukraine. It will be a trend for the next several years,' the source DailyMail.com understands that the facility will largely focus on producing 155-millimeter shells, a NATO-standard artillery round, that have been key to the Ukrainian fightback against Russia. Moscow currently produces roughly a million artillery shells a year; Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky complained last month that deliveries of munitions from his allies had 'slowed down.' Zelensky unexpectedly cancelled an address to the US Senate on Tuesday where he would have appealed for fresh aid for the war in Ukraine. The 155 mm shells can be packed with highly explosive material, use precision guided systems, pierce armor or produce high fragmentation. Past variants have included smoke rounds to obscure troop movement and illumination rounds to expose an enemy's position. They are being fired by Ukraine's military at a rate of 6,000 to 8,000 rounds a day, according to Ukrainian MP Oleksandra Ustinova, who serves on Ukraine's wartime oversight committee. It comes as senior U.S. and Ukrainian government officials, including Zelensky's chief of staff Andriy Yermak, are meeting in Washington on December 6 and 7 with industry bigwigs to rebuild the war-torn nation's defense sector. But Antone Voronin, deputy director of Ukraine's government-owned defense company Spets, said in September that the country needed to bring in fresh funding from abroad to do so. Continued Awesome news! There is another American company going in as well with 155mm production Ukraine, should be in the news in the future. Oh those filthy capitalists building factories! For shame! Next thing you know US car makers will be relocating to Mexico and China!!! Maybe even Canaduh!! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:29:51 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: To be honest, they are useful in protecting areas like energy infrastructure and such. They can hit the leftover Shaheds if they get too close to a guarded facility. There will never be enough systems to protect everything, but you can place what you get in areas proven to be most likely targeted. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAvvfNHWEAE5kqs?format=jpg&name=small They probably need 300 of these to cover the 900 mile front. Better than a warm handshake , but … To be honest, they are useful in protecting areas like energy infrastructure and such. They can hit the leftover Shaheds if they get too close to a guarded facility. There will never be enough systems to protect everything, but you can place what you get in areas proven to be most likely targeted. Still sounds like a lot is needed. We keep donating “travel samples” rather than meaningful QUANTITY. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:32:15 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAwIO95XEAIrqht?format=jpg&name=medium This please. OK I fell out of my chair! From Congress?! I applaud this bold statement. THIS is what they can campaign on. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:34:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: Still sounds like a lot is needed. We keep donating “travel samples” rather than meaningful QUANTITY. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAvvfNHWEAE5kqs?format=jpg&name=small They probably need 300 of these to cover the 900 mile front. Better than a warm handshake , but … To be honest, they are useful in protecting areas like energy infrastructure and such. They can hit the leftover Shaheds if they get too close to a guarded facility. There will never be enough systems to protect everything, but you can place what you get in areas proven to be most likely targeted. Still sounds like a lot is needed. We keep donating “travel samples” rather than meaningful QUANTITY. Honestly, I would refer back to my recommendations from last fall where I suggested we supply Ukrainian infrastructure with CRAM systems to shoot stuff down cheaply. This would allow the mobile systems to work closer to the front. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:34:07 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Prime: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAwlzE1XIAA1nKV?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAwl0PJXAAExR8W?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAwl2gnWYAAoAYg?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAwl4s6WcAAyvOF?format=jpg&name=large
It looks like far more tungsten holes than rivets and hex bolts!! We’re fine. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:36:15 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: It’s very frustrating. The morally right thing to do also happens to be the best defensive policy AND a popular thing and instead they run the other way! Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By trapsh00ter99: Originally Posted By RockNwood: That is all so messed up. Biden doesn't even want to support Ukraine. The Republicans are stupid enough to think Ukraine is anything important to Biden?! FFS we have idiots across the board. They couldn't play checkers to get out of a paper bag or something like that. The bill doesn't pass, Biden shrugs his shoulders, calls Vlad to tell him the slow walk obstruction is still on track, then calls MSNBC to blame to Republicans for letting Ukraine children get bombed by mean ole Rooskies. Win, win. Putin happy, Biden happy, Tucker happy, Trump stumped, RNC goes back to their lunch time scotch and sodas. The most hated inept administration in US history and Republicans will still manage to snatch defeat.It’s very frustrating. The morally right thing to do also happens to be the best defensive policy AND a popular thing and instead they run the other way! You assume their objectives are the same as yours. The devil thinks they are doing a wonderful job. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:38:46 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Honestly, I would refer back to my recommendations from last fall where I suggested we supply Ukrainian infrastructure with CRAM systems to shoot stuff down cheaply. This would allow the mobile systems to work closer to the front. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAvvfNHWEAE5kqs?format=jpg&name=small They probably need 300 of these to cover the 900 mile front. Better than a warm handshake , but … To be honest, they are useful in protecting areas like energy infrastructure and such. They can hit the leftover Shaheds if they get too close to a guarded facility. There will never be enough systems to protect everything, but you can place what you get in areas proven to be most likely targeted. Still sounds like a lot is needed. We keep donating “travel samples” rather than meaningful QUANTITY. Honestly, I would refer back to my recommendations from last fall where I suggested we supply Ukrainian infrastructure with CRAM systems to shoot stuff down cheaply. This would allow the mobile systems to work closer to the front. Being pretty ignorant of what we have, I would enjoy hearing what a proper layered AD system SHIULD look like fir all things: drones, cruise and ballistic missiles, helos, bombers lobbing glide bombs, fighters, etc. It seems we are just throwing a few of this and few of that without providing an impenetrable wall. I like Ukraine is going all in on the asks and STARTS with THAD. Bold move. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:38:48 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: Oh those filthy capitalists building factories! For shame! Next thing you know US car makers will be relocating to Mexico and China!!! Maybe even Canaduh!! Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By realwar: Top U.S. defense firm General Dynamics is planning to open weapons plant in Ukraine - an investment that implies taxpayers will continue to dole out dollars to support war that has no end in sight General Dynamics, based in Renton, Virginia, wants to open an artillery factory in western Ukraine producing 155-millimeter shells within six months The firm, one of the major suppliers to the U.S. military, is also unperturbed about the possibility of Donald Trump winning November's presidential election. 'It means that we are, one way or another, going to be in this for the long haul,' said one source, who declined to be identified owing to the sensitivity of the plans. A Ukrainian-based official said that other major U.S. defense companies could follow suit and set up local production to send arms to the frontline. 'It's not only General Dynamics considering the establishment of a venture in Ukraine. It will be a trend for the next several years,' the source DailyMail.com understands that the facility will largely focus on producing 155-millimeter shells, a NATO-standard artillery round, that have been key to the Ukrainian fightback against Russia. Moscow currently produces roughly a million artillery shells a year; Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky complained last month that deliveries of munitions from his allies had 'slowed down.' Zelensky unexpectedly cancelled an address to the US Senate on Tuesday where he would have appealed for fresh aid for the war in Ukraine. The 155 mm shells can be packed with highly explosive material, use precision guided systems, pierce armor or produce high fragmentation. Past variants have included smoke rounds to obscure troop movement and illumination rounds to expose an enemy's position. They are being fired by Ukraine's military at a rate of 6,000 to 8,000 rounds a day, according to Ukrainian MP Oleksandra Ustinova, who serves on Ukraine's wartime oversight committee. It comes as senior U.S. and Ukrainian government officials, including Zelensky's chief of staff Andriy Yermak, are meeting in Washington on December 6 and 7 with industry bigwigs to rebuild the war-torn nation's defense sector. But Antone Voronin, deputy director of Ukraine's government-owned defense company Spets, said in September that the country needed to bring in fresh funding from abroad to do so. Continued Awesome news! There is another American company going in as well with 155mm production Ukraine, should be in the news in the future. Oh those filthy capitalists building factories! For shame! Next thing you know US car makers will be relocating to Mexico and China!!! Maybe even Canaduh!! It is amusing, because there was such concern about 155mm being available in enough quantities for a Chinese threat. So now you will have domestic production focused on backfilling what we gave out, while another plant in Ukraine is making the stuff for local use, or even to sell to Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:44:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Prime]
[#38]
Yesterday:
 Video
   
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:52:39 PM EDT
[#39]
Video
   
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 2:57:04 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: Being pretty ignorant of what we have, I would enjoy hearing what a proper layered AD system SHIULD look like fir all things: drones, cruise and ballistic missiles, helos, bombers lobbing glide bombs, fighters, etc. It seems we are just throwing a few of this and few of that without providing an impenetrable wall. I like Ukraine is going all in on the asks and STARTS with THAD. Bold move. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAvvfNHWEAE5kqs?format=jpg&name=small They probably need 300 of these to cover the 900 mile front. Better than a warm handshake , but … To be honest, they are useful in protecting areas like energy infrastructure and such. They can hit the leftover Shaheds if they get too close to a guarded facility. There will never be enough systems to protect everything, but you can place what you get in areas proven to be most likely targeted. Still sounds like a lot is needed. We keep donating “travel samples” rather than meaningful QUANTITY. Honestly, I would refer back to my recommendations from last fall where I suggested we supply Ukrainian infrastructure with CRAM systems to shoot stuff down cheaply. This would allow the mobile systems to work closer to the front. Being pretty ignorant of what we have, I would enjoy hearing what a proper layered AD system SHIULD look like fir all things: drones, cruise and ballistic missiles, helos, bombers lobbing glide bombs, fighters, etc. It seems we are just throwing a few of this and few of that without providing an impenetrable wall. I like Ukraine is going all in on the asks and STARTS with THAD. Bold move. It seems we are building them up to the layered networked air defense we have, but currently they need training on these, and it needs to work with their legacy Soviet systems that don't like to talk on our networks. It's a nightmare to deal with in peacetime let alone with cruise missiles and drones going after you. Here is an example of a U.S. layered air defense to go against anything thrown at it, it is expensive.   Shorter range systems to protect the longer range systems.  Throw in point defense gun or missile systems like a Gepard or Avenger to protect the units above. Then add the dedicated anti drone systems and jammers. See how this adds up? Now we have one setup, I need a Patriot system and all shorter range systems for Odessa. Now do another city or facility the same way. This takes time, training, and the amount of equipment needed to have a good chance of stopping the enemy with these layers. Future example, but these are close range and they overlap each other.  Israeli example, same idea, these illustrate the ranges, but the big systems on the outside of the image would be protected by all the shorter range systems illustrated near the big units.  You set them up according to range like this.   Ships do the same with air defense layers. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 3:07:06 PM EDT
[#41]
FOG
 this body means nothing to me.  spring break outside Bakhmut |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 3:09:29 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Charging_Handle: Send them! We probably have hundreds of surplus A model UH-60s sitting in depots waiting to be sold through GSA. The Ukrainians would really love to get their hands on some of these, as they have managed to obtain at least one UH-60A from the civilian market and absolutely love the platform. Outside of MEDEVAC, rescue and troop transport duties, it can also be configured as an attack helicopter. That is important because we can probably spare a lot more UH-60s than we can AH-64s. Likewise, I think we can probably spare some C model Hornets. The Navy has retired all of theirs and now only the Marines operate them. The A-D model Hornets are pretty much nearing the end of their service lives anyway, and they don't have the legs to be of much use to the Marines who have shifted their focus to the vast expanses of the Pacific. So why not donate a few dozen of these to the Ukrainians and let them spend their last few years in service doing what they were designed to do.....fuck up Russians. Not sure what kind of drones they are requesting, but if they are asking for something beyond the civilian off the shelf types, why not send them some Predator-B drones? I think we've pretty much retired all of those in favor of the MQ-9 Reaper. So hand them and the ground stations over to Ukraine and see what they can do with them. If they all end up getting destroyed, we really haven't lost anything anyway. And the Ukrainians will likely use them to great effect while they do last. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Charging_Handle: Originally Posted By RockNwood:
Send them! We probably have hundreds of surplus A model UH-60s sitting in depots waiting to be sold through GSA. The Ukrainians would really love to get their hands on some of these, as they have managed to obtain at least one UH-60A from the civilian market and absolutely love the platform. Outside of MEDEVAC, rescue and troop transport duties, it can also be configured as an attack helicopter. That is important because we can probably spare a lot more UH-60s than we can AH-64s. Likewise, I think we can probably spare some C model Hornets. The Navy has retired all of theirs and now only the Marines operate them. The A-D model Hornets are pretty much nearing the end of their service lives anyway, and they don't have the legs to be of much use to the Marines who have shifted their focus to the vast expanses of the Pacific. So why not donate a few dozen of these to the Ukrainians and let them spend their last few years in service doing what they were designed to do.....fuck up Russians. Not sure what kind of drones they are requesting, but if they are asking for something beyond the civilian off the shelf types, why not send them some Predator-B drones? I think we've pretty much retired all of those in favor of the MQ-9 Reaper. So hand them and the ground stations over to Ukraine and see what they can do with them. If they all end up getting destroyed, we really haven't lost anything anyway. And the Ukrainians will likely use them to great effect while they do last. F-18s or Gripens would have been the jets I initially would have recommended to send in the first place. F-16s need nicely maintained air strips. What as the F-18 and Gripens have landing gear that can handle rougher surfaces or airstrips to get attacked. Gripens can land on the Highways too. And I think they can take off from them too. Kinda makes it good from a asymmetrical standpoint, that Russia would have trouble focusing ISR on the Jets if they have so many places to launch from. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 3:22:59 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: It is amusing, because there was such concern about 155mm being available in enough quantities for a Chinese threat. So now you will have domestic production focused on backfilling what we gave out, while another plant in Ukraine is making the stuff for local use, or even to sell to Europe. Looking at Rheinmetall's prices, that factory stands to make a tidy profit filling bids to NATO partners over the next 5-10 years. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 3:33:45 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Looking at Rheinmetall's prices, that factory stands to make a tidy profit filling bids to NATO partners over the next 5-10 years. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: It is amusing, because there was such concern about 155mm being available in enough quantities for a Chinese threat. So now you will have domestic production focused on backfilling what we gave out, while another plant in Ukraine is making the stuff for local use, or even to sell to Europe. Looking at Rheinmetall's prices, that factory stands to make a tidy profit filling bids to NATO partners over the next 5-10 years. Yep, but now you're going to see companies competing to provide rounds at reduced prices to secure contracts for production. South Korea, and the U.S. with increased production capacity might offer rounds at reduced prices to Europe once they backfill for domestic use. It's not bad to have competition and options. Rheinmetal might expand and compete with US and S.Korea as well. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 3:40:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Prime]
[#45]
The Case for Conservative Internationalism
How to Reverse the Inward Turn of Republican Foreign Policy  It is hard to think of a more chaotic moment in the history of the Republican Party than the present; perhaps only Andrew Johnson’s 1865–68 presidency comes close. The GOP’s de facto leader, former President Donald Trump, faces 91 felony charges in four separate criminal cases. After serving just nine months as Speaker of the House, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California was forced out of the speakership by eight members of his own party, triggering a round-robin tournament that left the House paralyzed for weeks before a little-known member pieced together the votes to replace him. House Republicans have been flirting with shutting down the government and defaulting on the national debt in legislation that has no prospect of winning support even from fellow Republicans in the Senate, while Trump spreads lies about the 2020 election and strategizes about weaponizing the U.S. executive branch against his opponents. The GOP’s disorder is especially evident—and dangerous—in the realm of foreign policy. For decades since 1952, the Republican Party had a fairly clear international vision: promote American security and economic power while supporting the expansion of democracy around the world. That meant providing for a strong military, cooperating with allies to advance shared interests, and boosting U.S. power in international institutions. It meant advancing free trade, ensuring fair international competition for U.S. companies, and promoting the rule of law in immigration policy. And it meant opposing authoritarianism, especially when autocrats directly challenged U.S. interests. Republicans’ commitments to these principles have weakened dramatically. Trump whiplashes between a wish to project U.S. power abroad and isolationism; recently, he has vowed to withdraw from NATO, end imports of Chinese goods, deploy the U.S. military onto American streets to fight crime and deport immigrants, and “drive out” “warmongers” and “globalists” from the U.S. government. Other conservative leaders—such as Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and the entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy—express outright hostility toward sustaining the United States’ international commitments. Most GOP presidential candidates offered unqualified support for Israel after Hamas’s attack, but Trump appeared to be impressed with it. On Ukraine, the party’s politicians are split, with just over half of House Republicans voting in September 2023 to halt U.S. aid to Kyiv’s defense against Russia’s invasion. So it does not appear to be an auspicious time for traditional Republican internationalism to regain its influence over the GOP. To some degree, GOP leaders’ stances reflect an apparent isolationist turn among their constituents. An August 2023 Civiqs Daily Tracking poll found that 77 percent of registered Republican voters agree that the United States should become less involved in solving problems overseas. It might not even seem urgent that Republicans develop a clear foreign policy at all. As recently as April 2023, when a Wall Street Journal poll asked likely Republican voters which issues were most important when they assessed presidential hopefuls, foreign policy ranked fourth, tied with a candidate’s view on crime. By August 2023, foreign policy had sunk to GOP voters’ lowest priority among 14 policy positions, falling behind the economy, inflation, immigration, and others. But foreign policy should be an urgent priority. The world is growing more dangerous, and foreign policy bears directly on the state of the domestic economy and, thus, Americans’ very livelihoods. Extending U.S. power abroad—and U.S. influence in international institutions such as NATO—deters foreign aggression that might otherwise disrupt the U.S. economy. Expanding trade helps create fair international competition for U.S. businesses. And U.S. President Joe Biden’s foreign policy has helped generate the economic discomfort that Republican voters put at the top of their list of concerns. The Biden administration works from the theory that U.S. foreign policy has failed the middle class and needs to be repaired through market protections and government subsidies; this approach has stoked inflation, distorted markets, stunted trade, and frustrated U.S. allies. The United States needs a strong and vibrant Republican Party. To make a more coherent case for how it would solve the country’s problems, the party will have to clarify its foreign policy focus. Traditional conservative internationalism remains the best way to protect U.S. national security and steward the economy. And voters, in fact, may still be eager for an internationalist foreign policy agenda—if that agenda could be presented to them persuasively. A July 2023 Reagan Institute poll revealed that “strong majorities of Americans believe their country should lead the world, invest in military power, promote international trade, support freedom and democracy, and stand with Ukraine until it wins its war against Russian aggression.” Self-described Trump voters mostly identified as internationalists, not as isolationists, and their support for assisting Ukraine increased by nearly a third—from 50 percent to 64 percent—when the pollster explained how that aid contributed to U.S. security. Americans, including conservatives, remain what they have always been: reluctant internationalists, but internationalists all the same. They do not respond well to abstract appeals about preserving the “international order.” But they understand that if the world lets China set the rules, U.S. liberties will become less secure, U.S. businesses will be disadvantaged, and U.S. allies will be left vulnerable. Voters do not need Republicans to pander to Trumpism or to polls that suggest soft support for internationalism. They do need Republicans to advance a theory for what is happening in the world and how the party intends to protect the country and secure Americans’ prosperity. No such theory can be developed without a clear foreign policy. PROTECTION RACKET Despite Biden’s abandonment of Afghanistan, his administration has done well in rallying support for Ukraine, strengthening U.S. defense alliances in the Pacific, and helping Israel respond to Hamas’s terrorist assault. But a gaping hole exists in the middle of Biden’s foreign policy, created by protectionist economics. At the heart of the Biden administration’s foreign policy is a belief that although the United States has many sources of dynamism—its deep private and public capital markets, its relatively permissive legal immigration policies, its world-class universities, its strong Chapter 11 bankruptcy protections, and its uniquely creative and skilled labor force—U.S. businesses cannot prosper domestically or compete internationally unless the government funds them and shields them from competition. The consequences of this fundamental misconception are both geopolitical and economic. Biden has failed to recommit to ratifying the United States’ accession to the Trans-Pacific Partnership—a trade agreement with 12 dynamic Asian countries that President Barack Obama signed but Trump repudiated. Instead, Biden offered a vacuous alternative in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, a nebulous pact that the White House has readily acknowledged “is not a trade agreement.” The administration is forgoing a chance to lower tariffs and strengthen labor and environmental standards on imports, thereby directly advantaging China: in 2021, China applied for admission to the TPP in the United States’ place. The Biden administration’s “Buy American” restrictions have stressed supply chains, penalized foreign companies such as Samsung and Toyota that have created a huge number of jobs in the United States, and embittered allies that the United States will need in future conflict with China. Biden has retained Trump-era tariffs that even he has described as self-defeating. The global South is eager for international trade and investment, but the Biden team is ceding these trade opportunities to Chinese businesses. That not only passes up mutually beneficial economic opportunities but affords developing countries little reason to support the United States when Washington appeals for help in its efforts to aid Ukraine and Israel. Going forward, Biden’s foreign policy stance will prevent the United States from achieving the economy of scale that can match or exceed China’s, especially as Beijing deepens its collaborations with Moscow and Tehran. The guiding principle of U.S. policy toward China should be to force or motivate it to become a responsible economic and geopolitical stakeholder—to play by international rules. To prevent China from acquiring critical technologies such as advanced semiconductors, the Biden administration has advocated a “small yard, high fence” approach, protecting a limited number of technologies but imposing severe threats of secondary sanctions against adversaries and allies alike if they do not also restrict sales to China. This position risks alienating allies that share U.S. security objectives, invest in U.S. companies, buy enormous amounts of U.S. products, and boast cutting-edge firms whose technological innovations and manufacturing capacity U.S. companies need. For instance, unilaterally imposing restrictions on chip-making tools and telling allies to follow the United States’ lead was resented in both The Hague and Tokyo. America’s allies are pleading for a U.S. economic strategy that helps them reduce their reliance on China. Washington should long ago have tightened restrictions on U.S. funding for Chinese military technologies and reduced dependence on Chinese products in critical areas such as pharmaceuticals. But a better approach to China would also offer trade advantages to allied countries in the form of an economic NATO, urge allied governments to prevent companies from surging into markets that Chinese economic warfare restricts, and rally public demand for products that China penalizes. The United States should also license more friendly countries to produce products critical to the U.S. defense industry. In a September 2023 Chicago Council on Global Affairs survey, 74 percent of Americans surveyed—nearly an all-time high—believed trade was good for the U.S. economy. Eighty percent believed it was good for their own standard of living, and 63 percent thought it was good for creating jobs. In the July 2023 Reagan Institute survey, 58 percent of respondents believed that negotiating favorable trade deals should be a foreign policy priority, and 62 percent of Republican respondents supported signing a trade agreement with Asian countries if the respondents were told that the agreement was designed to counter Chinese economic power. The problem with U.S. strategy toward globalization in the past 20 years was not that Washington allowed too much trade but that it permitted trade that did not establish reciprocity—trade that did not create a level playing field on which U.S. firms could compete with foreign counterparts, principally China. Trade deficits with China cost the United States 3.7 million jobs between 2001, when China was admitted to the World Trade Organization, and 2018. Three-fourths of these lost jobs—2.8 million—were in manufacturing. After Washington allowed Beijing the benefits of free trade without requiring it to play by the rules, the consequences of unequal trade with China affected every congressional district in the United States. China maintained industrial subsidies, pirated intellectual property, forced companies into joint ventures, and restricted access to its market—practices it continues to this day. In addition to placing more restrictions on China, the United States should engage in more meaningful trade talks with Indonesia, the Philippines, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom. Washington’s current lack of an effective economic line of operations overmilitarizes U.S. strategy. Allies do not want a war with China, and they do not want a moral crusade against authoritarianism. They are pleading for an economic strategy that helps them reduce their reliance on China and remain prosperous. Good, inventive trade policy could create not only a bigger yard—a larger group of countries that adhere to fair rules and norms—but also higher walls, by encouraging more voluntary cooperation against China and others when they do not play fair. BROKEN ARMOR Little unites Americans more than the belief that the U.S. military should be strong. The Reagan Institute poll showed that 92 percent of Republicans, 81 percent of independents, and 79 percent of Democrats believe that sustaining the strength of the U.S. military is essential to maintaining the country’s peace and prosperity. More than 70 percent of Americans believe that Washington should increase its spending on defense. But a gap is growing between what the United States commits itself to doing militarily and the force it funds. In March 2023, Biden proudly advertised his $842 billion budget request for the U.S. Department of Defense as the largest such request in U.S. peacetime history; it represented a 3.2 percent increase in nominal spending. With inflation running higher than that throughout most of 2023, however, the request amounted to a real reduction in defense spending for the second year in a row. Moreover, $109 billion, or one-eighth, of the U.S. defense budget that was approved in 2022 was spent on things that do not directly or indirectly assist in fighting and winning wars, such as breast cancer research. The U.S. government’s neglect of the military has been a bipartisan problem. In 2011, Republicans helped pass the Budget Control Act, which over the ensuing ten years, cut $600 billion from the Defense Department’s budget. And if the budget agreement that McCarthy negotiated with Biden in May 2023 goes into effect in the spring of 2024, it will cut defense buying power by another $100 billion. Unless the U.S. government radically revises its willingness to fund defense, it will fail to deter its adversaries and could very well lose its next war. In 2015, the Chinese navy had 255 ships capable of contributing to combat operations. Now it has 370. The U.S. Navy has only 291, and the Biden administration plans to further reduce that number to 280. Military unreadiness is now perhaps the greatest national security challenge for the United States. In a war against China, U.S. forces could run out of critical munitions in a week. Fortunately, neither China nor Russia has yet directly challenged the United States in ways that require Washington to fight outright. But they are getting close. After World War II broke out, it was a lucky thing that the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union held out long enough for the United States to ramp up military recruitment and expand its defense industrial base to prepare to join the war. Americans may assume that the United States has similar leeway now; this assumption constitutes a very dangerous temptation to its adversaries. As the war between Russia and Ukraine drags on, sentimental appeals about Ukrainian courage and Russian depredations are wearing thin. And Republicans have legitimate concerns: they want to reduce federal spending, ensure that U.S. aid money does not get siphoned off by corrupt Ukrainian officials, and understand where assisting Ukraine should rank in the hierarchy of U.S. interests. Little unites Americans more than the belief that the U.S. military should be strong. But Biden is giving only enough aid for Kyiv to keep fighting, not enough for it to win. There is a strong conservative case to make for continuing, even increasing, U.S. assistance to Ukraine. For a price of just five percent of the 2023 U.S. defense budget and no U.S. casualties, Ukrainians are fighting the war NATO feared it might have to fight. Voters should know that 60 percent of U.S. assistance to Ukraine goes to U.S. companies that make the weapons sent to Kyiv. And the United States’ engagement with Ukraine has revealed the dangerous deficiencies that Washington has allowed to creep into its defense. Ukraine is in some ways providing both the inspiration and the warning that the United Kingdom did during World War II, allowing the United States to see where its military is unready for what it may be called to do. Adequately funding defense will ineluctably require entitlement reform. Neither party wants to touch existing entitlement programs—namely, Social Security and Medicare—even though they are becoming unaffordable: entitlements constitute 63 percent of federal spending, up from 19 percent in 1970. Outlays to these programs are squeezing Washington’s discretionary spending, and the interest the country must pay on its huge national debt will further constrict what it can spend on both defense and domestic programs. U.S. federal debt stands at $33 trillion. According to Moody’s Analytics, by 2025 or 2026, federal interest payments on that debt will exceed defense spending. Former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley and former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie are the only Republican presidential candidates who own up to the necessity of entitlement reform. But their acknowledgment of it is an excellent start. Legislators already have a blueprint for how to cut entitlement spending in the recommendations made by the 2010 bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. Both parties need to change their attitude toward entitlement reform, but Democrats will likely keep whistling past the graveyard unless Republicans regain their own seriousness about putting entitlements on a sustainable footing to free up funding for defense and other domestic priorities. BORDER FOLLY According to analysts at the Brennan Center, a nonprofit law and public policy think tank, many Americans do not understand why the U.S. military does not protect U.S. borders. There is room here for better Republican policy; indeed, immigration policy has a crucial connection to foreign policy and to the United States’ economic health. A January 2021 Pew Research Institute poll found that 68 percent of Americans think the United States is doing a bad job of managing its borders. And that is true: since January 2020, an estimated 200,000 migrants have attempted to cross into the United States illegally every month via the Mexican border, more than at any other point in the last 20 years. Contrary to sensationalized media coverage, the vast majority of these migrants are adults, not unaccompanied minors. The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the U.S. military from functioning as a domestic police force. Already overstretched generals do not want to take on the job of protecting U.S. borders and are hesitant to launch missions that might tarnish Americans’ respect for the military. But to build more support for U.S. engagements abroad, political leaders need to show they can bring more effort and resources to border security. The January 2023 Pew survey found that a majority of Americans support giving the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency more money to secure the U.S.-Mexican border. More than money and extra personnel are needed. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency has estimated that over 60 percent of recent migrants are not from Mexico or Central America but begin their journey in farther-flung places such as Colombia, Cuba, Peru, and Venezuela and then travel through Mexico. The United States should invest more: in surveillance and other technologies that increase its ability to track migrant movements through Central America and to make interdictions beyond the U.S.-Mexican border; in new immigration courts to process asylum claims more quickly; in more cooperation with Mexico to forestall migrants’ transiting its territory; and in more engagement with migrants’ countries of origin, both to help resolve the problems that precipitate mass emigration and to ease the return of migrants who do not meet U.S. immigration criteria. The failure to properly regulate immigration is leading the United States to neglect its current biggest geopolitical opportunity: consolidating North American cooperation. U.S. politicians do not worry enough about the downsides of Mexico sinking into criminality and do not act creatively enough to make Canada, Mexico, and the United States a common platform for energy, labor, and manufacturing. With clearer immigration policy, supply chains at risk of weaponization by China could be more easily relocated to Mexico; California’s and Texas’s creaky energy grids could be strengthened by increasing both imports and exports of energy from Canada and Mexico. If the United States created opportunities for nearby neighbors to prosper that directly enhance the U.S. economy, Americans would see the advantages of shaping the world in ways that expand security and prosperity. Until Americans are more confident that the United States has control over its borders, however, they may not be willing to support the cooperation opportunities that its geographical position offers. HELLO, WORLD The world that the United States and its allies created after World War II made the United States much safer and richer. But Americans need to be reminded that if the United States does not enforce this international order, someone else will. That someone else would likely be China. And China in charge would make for a dangerous world in which it and authoritarian allies such as Russia and Iran could amass the military and economic power to impose a repressive vision on the world. Rejoining the Trans-Pacific Partnership, negotiating and securing the ratification of other trade treaties, increasing defense spending while reforming entitlements and reducing the national debt, securing the U.S.-Mexican border, aiding countries fighting to preserve their liberty: these are big goals. The American Enterprise Institute scholar Fred Kagan observes that “no one wants to die for the international order.” It is too diffuse a concept. But selling voters on an internationalist foreign policy may not be nearly as hard as some politicians imagine if they approach the public with more concrete arguments grounded in U.S. national interest. The Biden administration and too many Republican leaders now engage in nativist, self-interested appeals—false assertions that internationalism has made the United States weaker or that caring about the U.S. national interest means ignoring the world. This could not be further from the truth. The United States’ international choices shape its domestic landscape. Currently, U.S. leaders are making incoherent foreign policy choices that render the country less safe and less prosperous—choices that will only become much more painful to undo down the line. Behind the United States’ partisan polarization lies a general confusion and disillusionment. A June-July 2023 Pew poll found that just 16 percent of Americans trust the federal government, the lowest level in 70 years of polling. Just 10 percent agreed that politics made them feel hopeful. In August, in a Wall Street Journal poll, 93 percent of likely Republican primary voters agreed that the United States is headed in the “wrong direction.” These are grim findings. But they also represent an enormous opportunity—an opening for good, clear policies to gain traction, because Americans are obviously dissatisfied with what they are getting. The solution is not to adopt policies that abandon trade, weaken the U.S. military, leave the U.S.-Mexican border chaotic, and cease giving aid to deserving allies. Americans still resolutely want to secure a role for the United States as a leader in the world, both for the country’s sake and for their own individual safety and prosperity. U.S. leaders must show they know how to do it. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/case-conservative-internationalism |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 4:22:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Ryan_Scott]
[#46]
We need to recognize that the lines will be fixed without a dramatic shift in capabilities or tactics and that the production of the weapons systems heretofore sent to Ukraine isn’t sufficient to do more than hold the line. So either we send new classes of weapons from stores that haven’t been drawn down, try something radically new, or this is going to be a war of attrition for a long time.
This is the consequence of Biden slow rolling aid and preventing strikes into Russia, primarily. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 4:47:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: RockNwood]
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: It seems we are building them up to the layered networked air defense we have, but currently they need training on these, and it needs to work with their legacy Soviet systems that don't like to talk on our networks. It's a nightmare to deal with in peacetime let alone with cruise missiles and drones going after you. Here is an example of a U.S. layered air defense to go against anything thrown at it, it is expensive. https://missilethreat.csis.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/hill-1.jpg https://media.defense.gov/2017/Feb/23/2001702977/-1/-1/0/170223-D-ZZ999-999.JPG Shorter range systems to protect the longer range systems. https://www.defense-aerospace.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/EuropeanSkyShieldInitiative.png Throw in point defense gun or missile systems like a Gepard or Avenger to protect the units above. Then add the dedicated anti drone systems and jammers. See how this adds up? Now we have one setup, I need a Patriot system and all shorter range systems for Odessa. Now do another city or facility the same way. This takes time, training, and the amount of equipment needed to have a good chance of stopping the enemy with these layers. Future example, but these are close range and they overlap each other. https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2019-09/1568811517_lower-ad-1.jpg Israeli example, same idea, these illustrate the ranges, but the big systems on the outside of the image would be protected by all the shorter range systems illustrated near the big units. https://idata.over-blog.com/4/22/09/08/Gulf-and-MidEast/Israel/indus-def/Rafael/MIC4AD/MIC4AD.jpg You set them up according to range like this. https://www.vifindia.org/siteimage/AIR-DEFENCE-IS-EVERYWHERE.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DnmrNy4WsAAldFg.jpg Ships do the same with air defense layers. https://missilethreat.csis.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Aegis-Layered-Defense_logo.jpg Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAvvfNHWEAE5kqs?format=jpg&name=small They probably need 300 of these to cover the 900 mile front. Better than a warm handshake , but … To be honest, they are useful in protecting areas like energy infrastructure and such. They can hit the leftover Shaheds if they get too close to a guarded facility. There will never be enough systems to protect everything, but you can place what you get in areas proven to be most likely targeted. Still sounds like a lot is needed. We keep donating “travel samples” rather than meaningful QUANTITY. Honestly, I would refer back to my recommendations from last fall where I suggested we supply Ukrainian infrastructure with CRAM systems to shoot stuff down cheaply. This would allow the mobile systems to work closer to the front. Being pretty ignorant of what we have, I would enjoy hearing what a proper layered AD system SHIULD look like fir all things: drones, cruise and ballistic missiles, helos, bombers lobbing glide bombs, fighters, etc. It seems we are just throwing a few of this and few of that without providing an impenetrable wall. I like Ukraine is going all in on the asks and STARTS with THAD. Bold move. It seems we are building them up to the layered networked air defense we have, but currently they need training on these, and it needs to work with their legacy Soviet systems that don't like to talk on our networks. It's a nightmare to deal with in peacetime let alone with cruise missiles and drones going after you. Here is an example of a U.S. layered air defense to go against anything thrown at it, it is expensive. https://missilethreat.csis.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/hill-1.jpg https://media.defense.gov/2017/Feb/23/2001702977/-1/-1/0/170223-D-ZZ999-999.JPG Shorter range systems to protect the longer range systems. https://www.defense-aerospace.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/EuropeanSkyShieldInitiative.png Throw in point defense gun or missile systems like a Gepard or Avenger to protect the units above. Then add the dedicated anti drone systems and jammers. See how this adds up? Now we have one setup, I need a Patriot system and all shorter range systems for Odessa. Now do another city or facility the same way. This takes time, training, and the amount of equipment needed to have a good chance of stopping the enemy with these layers. Future example, but these are close range and they overlap each other. https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2019-09/1568811517_lower-ad-1.jpg Israeli example, same idea, these illustrate the ranges, but the big systems on the outside of the image would be protected by all the shorter range systems illustrated near the big units. https://idata.over-blog.com/4/22/09/08/Gulf-and-MidEast/Israel/indus-def/Rafael/MIC4AD/MIC4AD.jpg You set them up according to range like this. https://www.vifindia.org/siteimage/AIR-DEFENCE-IS-EVERYWHERE.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DnmrNy4WsAAldFg.jpg Ships do the same with air defense layers. https://missilethreat.csis.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Aegis-Layered-Defense_logo.jpg Firehose, meet my brain! Thanks that is super helpful. Great graphics! I wish the west would start calculating costs of providing defensive aid versus all the aid given for displaced people, damaged infrastructure and aid expected to be needed to rebuild. This whole support approach is simpleton stupid. Just because a missile is worth $100k doesn’t tell the whole story. OK we could debate whether to donate an item worth $100k. But if we DON’T deliver that, what is the total cost of inaction? - costs for storage and maintenance over 10-20 years? - cost to eventually demil if we never use it? - cost to help displaced people for the next 3-5 years from not having the missile to protect them - cost to rebuild infrastructure or replace damaged infrastructure, plus shipping and handling Grrrrrr |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 5:00:25 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: Firehouse, meet my brain! Thanks that is super helpful. Great graphics! I wish the west would start calculating costs of providing defensive aid versus all the aid given for displaced people, damaged infrastructure and aid expected to be needed to rebuild. This whole support approach is simpleton stupid. Just because a missile is worth $100k doesn’t tell the whole story. OK we could debate whether to donate an item worth $100k. But if we DON’T deliver that, what is the total cost of inaction? - costs for storage and maintenance over 10-20 years? - cost to eventually demil if we never use it? - cost to help displaced people for the next 3-5 years from not having the missile to protect them - cost to rebuild infrastructure or replace damaged infrastructure, plus shipping and handling Grrrrrr Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: Originally Posted By RockNwood: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAvvfNHWEAE5kqs?format=jpg&name=small They probably need 300 of these to cover the 900 mile front. Better than a warm handshake , but … To be honest, they are useful in protecting areas like energy infrastructure and such. They can hit the leftover Shaheds if they get too close to a guarded facility. There will never be enough systems to protect everything, but you can place what you get in areas proven to be most likely targeted. Still sounds like a lot is needed. We keep donating “travel samples” rather than meaningful QUANTITY. Honestly, I would refer back to my recommendations from last fall where I suggested we supply Ukrainian infrastructure with CRAM systems to shoot stuff down cheaply. This would allow the mobile systems to work closer to the front. Being pretty ignorant of what we have, I would enjoy hearing what a proper layered AD system SHIULD look like fir all things: drones, cruise and ballistic missiles, helos, bombers lobbing glide bombs, fighters, etc. It seems we are just throwing a few of this and few of that without providing an impenetrable wall. I like Ukraine is going all in on the asks and STARTS with THAD. Bold move. It seems we are building them up to the layered networked air defense we have, but currently they need training on these, and it needs to work with their legacy Soviet systems that don't like to talk on our networks. It's a nightmare to deal with in peacetime let alone with cruise missiles and drones going after you. Here is an example of a U.S. layered air defense to go against anything thrown at it, it is expensive. https://missilethreat.csis.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/hill-1.jpg https://media.defense.gov/2017/Feb/23/2001702977/-1/-1/0/170223-D-ZZ999-999.JPG Shorter range systems to protect the longer range systems. https://www.defense-aerospace.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/EuropeanSkyShieldInitiative.png Throw in point defense gun or missile systems like a Gepard or Avenger to protect the units above. Then add the dedicated anti drone systems and jammers. See how this adds up? Now we have one setup, I need a Patriot system and all shorter range systems for Odessa. Now do another city or facility the same way. This takes time, training, and the amount of equipment needed to have a good chance of stopping the enemy with these layers. Future example, but these are close range and they overlap each other. https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2019-09/1568811517_lower-ad-1.jpg Israeli example, same idea, these illustrate the ranges, but the big systems on the outside of the image would be protected by all the shorter range systems illustrated near the big units. https://idata.over-blog.com/4/22/09/08/Gulf-and-MidEast/Israel/indus-def/Rafael/MIC4AD/MIC4AD.jpg You set them up according to range like this. https://www.vifindia.org/siteimage/AIR-DEFENCE-IS-EVERYWHERE.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DnmrNy4WsAAldFg.jpg Ships do the same with air defense layers. https://missilethreat.csis.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Aegis-Layered-Defense_logo.jpg Firehouse, meet my brain! Thanks that is super helpful. Great graphics! I wish the west would start calculating costs of providing defensive aid versus all the aid given for displaced people, damaged infrastructure and aid expected to be needed to rebuild. This whole support approach is simpleton stupid. Just because a missile is worth $100k doesn’t tell the whole story. OK we could debate whether to donate an item worth $100k. But if we DON’T deliver that, what is the total cost of inaction? - costs for storage and maintenance over 10-20 years? - cost to eventually demil if we never use it? - cost to help displaced people for the next 3-5 years from not having the missile to protect them - cost to rebuild infrastructure or replace damaged infrastructure, plus shipping and handling Grrrrrr lol, I was hoping some of the graphics helped, and as you mentioned, there is much more to consider than what was presented, protection of people and war production facilities, air bases, etc needs to be part of the cost factors. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 5:04:35 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ryan_Scott: We need to recognize that the lines will be fixed without a dramatic shift in capabilities or tactics and that the production of the weapons systems heretofore sent to Ukraine isn’t sufficient to do more than hold the line. So either we send new classes of weapons from stores that haven’t been drawn down, try something radically new, or this is going to be a war of attrition for a long time. This is the consequence of Biden slow rolling aid and preventing strikes into Russia, primarily. Here's another one. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/7/2023 5:17:31 PM EDT
[#50]
https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/news/star-blizzard-continues-spear-phishing-campaigns https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/news/uk-and-allies-expose-cyber-campaign-attempted-political-interference https://news.sky.com/story/russian-security-service-compromised-private-conversations-of-politicians-13024300 https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2023/dec/07/russia-ukraine-war-live-putin-zelenskiy https://www.cse-cst.gc.ca/en/information-and-resources/news/joint-cyber-security-advisory-warns-spear-phishing-campaigns-against-targets-interest-worldwide https://www.gov.pl/web/dyplomacja/oswiadczenie-ws-atakow-cybernetycznych-wymierzonych-w-procesy-wyborcze-w-wielkiej-brytanii
|
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
