- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmit.online
You must log in or register to comment.
At least Europe is stepping up when the U.S. isn’t. But they don’t have the U.S. defense industry, so who knows how long Ukraine can hold out.
Also Europe gave away so many shells that now the European ammo factories work to replenish the most basic strategic stockpiles of the EU militaries.
I don’t see that they have a choice. Russia isn’t going to stop with Ukraine if they can take it.
This seems obvious. He invaded Ukraine because he doesn’t want to share more border with the EU or NATO. If Ukraine falls, he’ll have no European borders except with the EU or NATO.
You’d think it was obvious. However, over here in America…
Sadly true. :(
At least from a German standpoint I can say: we never had stockpiles. Like literally. The official estimate was that the Bundeswehr had ammo for two days of war. No hyperbole.
The most efficient thing Germany could have done with all the Leopards would have been to use them as mobile roadblocks.
They should just adopt a war time strategy right now.
Ammo and vehicles non stop. That would boost not only their economy but prepare for the inevitable. Hes coming for the old Soviet Block and then some if he isn’t stopped in Ukraine
I mean, the point of strategic stockpiles is to use them when called for. This isn’t necessarily a problem YET, until the stockpiles are empty, not just depleted, despite the factories churning out new ammo as fast as they can.
Europe can simply buy more arms from the US. This has the advantage of replacing old stock with new.
Bear in mind, these aren’t charity donations. Weapons and aid are being provided to Ukraine under bilateral aid agreements - which are inherently two way, and almost always heavily favour the country giving, as the receiving country is desperate. Ukraine won’t be expected to pay right away, but they will be expected to pay - and they will be expected to pay over the odds, with interest.
Granted, they probably won’t be able to pay in full - but that’s a future government’s problem. In the meantime, the donating nations can treat the loans as a surefire return and fiddle their books, making their long term economic forecasts seem far better than they really are.
Also, Denmark is a small-ish country. It is not “Europe” as in whole of it.
I realize that. I was speaking on general terms.
Bring the guns!
How many?
ALL OF THEM.
We have 6 boss, do you want all of them?
ALL OF THEM!
According to the internet, they have 76 of these.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M109_howitzer#M109A3_and_M109A3B
Ah. I read it in an other article as if they would donate all ammunition for artillery. I guess there are mixed sources at the moment
Edit:
Dude your link says 2-6 and the reference note says practically no functioning artilery
Denmark: 2–6 (upgraded to M109 A3DK, used to be 76)
What’s actually being sent is 19 Caesar systems, the much more modern replacement for the M109 in the Danish army https://ekstrabladet.dk/nyheder/politik/danmark-sender-laenge-ventet-vaabensystem-til-ukraine/9596797 (article in Danish)
Caesar is a very good piece of artillery. Ukrainians love them.
I’d have a caesar
With tobasco and a squeeze of lime?
Would you walk him often?
Bravo to Europe for standing up to the fascist swine and their wholly owned subsidiary in the United States.
Half-owned
Not enough unfortunately. We are still debating sending weapons like the Taurus system, because Russia could get mad at us (like with the tanks and the planes and everything else we already delivered after long discussions and delays).
You boys are doing a lot better than us in the US right now. We have to eliminate our traitors and then we’ll be back in with you.
::Denmark:: We’re sending all of our artillery away!
::Germany:: Heavy breathing
THE PLAN HAS SUCCEEDED! WE SHALL FINALLY HAVE OUR VENGEANCE FOR THE VIKING YEARS!
COMMENCE THE ATTACK!
I mean, I don’t know what Denmark would attack with artillery anyways.
The Russians, when they make it that far. Might as well lend it to Ukraine to prevent that.
Invading russian swine.
Based on historical precedent, probably the Irish
One day they’ll have the firepower to prove Cnut’s lesson about the tides wrong, but the current equipment just wasn’t up to the task
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Denmark
I expect that they probably played a role in some expeditionary activity.
It looks like some light direct-fire stuff was used in the several hours of conflict with Germany in World War 2.
I mean, the newer stuff isn’t a land battle in Denmark, but if you go by that standard, the last time the US would have used artillery would probably be the American Civil War in the 1860s.
In the US I’d count action by the national guard. We had one of those in 1970, but the kids didn’t put up much of a resistance so it wasn’t a prolonged battle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_State_shootings
There may be others, but this springs to mind.
Where do you guys thinks this ends? Do you think Ukraine is going to win now or this is just going to prolong the eventual outcome?
That depends on the Western support.
The West as a whole always made sure to send just enough for Ukraine not to lose.
The whole summer offensive debacle last year was caused (to a large degree) by the Western reluctance to send modern tanks, IFVs, etc. So the Russians dug in like hell.
If Ukraine had just Bradleys, not even tanks, at the end of 2022, they could have thrown Russia almost to its border.
Ukraine won’t win just because of this particular supply of artillery. But if we can get them enough support then they will ultimately win, yes. This artillery helps that.
There’s a jack rackam video on japan in wwii that’s has a relevant idea here. War isn’t a game where you run out the clock and declare a winner. Negotiating peace is a whole at in of itself. Something like that. More weapons, more negotiating power. Negotiations also aren’t just win/lose, and they require more than one party. I think russia isn’t planning on accepting the current lines either.
The harder a win looks to russia the more concessions they will be willing to make at the negotiating table.
Europe is the richest continent by far. They simply need to step up production and deliveries to make the outcome clear.
Ten artillery shells per ruzzki tank and five per ruzzki soldier would make the outcome pretty one-sided 😉
Europe is the richest continent by far.
I looked this up a while back. IIRC, it’s Australia (one well-to-do country) followed by North America followed by Europe.
googles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_continents_by_GDP
This uses Oceania rather than Australia, so a bunch of poorer countries are included and North America is first, followed closely by Oceania.
PPP-adjusted per-capita GDP. International Monetary Fund numbers, 2023:
-
North America, $64,279
-
Oceania, $62,900
-
Europe, $50,110
-
South America, $19,506
-
Asia and Pacific, $18,406
-
Africa, $6,341
-
Antarctica, $0
EDIT: I should note, though, that the whole “NATO spending commitment” thing as well as some of the Ukraine donation charts I’ve seen are measured in terms of percent-of-GDP rather than absolute value, so it’ll take the different sizes of economies into account, more-or-less. Arguably, that’s biased a bit towards wealthy economies still, since some costs are going to be more-or-less fixed across societies, like food and basic shelter, and the “ability to spend on things” should maybe be based on money above-and-beyond that. But it does at least partially account for the fact that Estonia is much smaller than the US, and less wealthy per-capita than Luxembourg.
Why do you use per capita if the GDP also supports your point? If you compare wealth or economic power it does not seem important how many people achieve this.
-
Who will use these weapons, Ukrainians? They are all dead, and russia still has artillery.
yes, Ukrainians, because contrary to your completely baseless assertion, they’re still very much alive
Russia is not going to overrun Ukraine. Worst case scenario is that Trump will win elections, stop any aid and Ukraine will be forced to sign a peace deal putting it in similar situation as before the war (no EU, no NATO and some territory lost).
Better scenario is that Trump loses and Putin, seeing his best chance at getting advantage is gone, will sing a peace treaty ending the war. He will soon win re-election and he just murdered Navalny. His position is safe enough to give up on Ukraine.
Best case Ukraine will not sign any treaty and regains all it’s territory and Crimea. The war formally continues but Ukraine joins NATO ending any actual fighting.
