Oorlog in Oekraïne #1104 MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN !

quote:

🇺🇸❗️ Russia used the first round of talks with the US over ending the war in Ukraine to demand the withdrawal of Nato forces from the alliance’s eastern flank, - FT

👀 US delegation had rejected Moscow’s demand, but there were no guarantees that US would not eventually make this concession to Putin.

https://bsky.app/profile/maks23.bsky.social/post/3limwnbg3a22z

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:09 schreef phpmystyle het volgende: [..] Ja klopt. Zat stukje de Wijk nog te luisteren (de alliantie) en daar was ook zo'n nitwit die zei dat Rusland elke dag 1500 militairen verliest. Als dat waar is dan was het Russische leger wel uitgeschakeld want dan zijn er meer doden gevallen dan ze aan soldaten hebben. Maar ook op X kom ik geen draadjes tegen e.d Maar wat schat je in? Zouden nederlandse intellgence dit weten of is dit zo secret dat alleen USA, UK, China en France dat weten? NB veel digitale systemen voor salarisadministratie, voorraden, registratie zijn van Amerikaanse origine of gebouwd stacks van Amerikaanse makelij. Die moeten a.d.h. dat soort software toch wel een beetje kunnen meeluisteren..

quote:

This is an enormously complex question, complicated by the issue that we don't concretely know what's going on in Russia. Or if any NATO state does, such intel would be highly classified. Plus, well-informed experts are getting paid for their opinions on sites like those you've linked to, not giving them away for free on Reddit! But, for the sake of discussion, here's my unqualified take. It is true that, due to a reliance on US power, many of our NATO allies have let their military capabilities stagnate if not downright crumble. In Brief: • Britain has divested from some it's post Cold-War and GWOT programs, and has had trouble with projects meant to replace legacy platforms. (Not that the US hasn't also had issues here.) They're also suffering from recruiting issues and internal dissent in much the same way the US is. A point of note in both cases is that this internal weakening of national defense can attributed to Russian interference, in part. • Germany has maintained their legacy of innovative engineering, but hasn't been producing at scale. They have contributed massive amounts of munitions and fighting systems to Ukraine, but are struggling to catch up. However, it seems like they're attempting to ramp up ordnance production. • France... Well, as they say, "The French copy nobody, and nobody copies the French." Joking aside, French leadership has been very open about supporting Ukraine, and have arguably been the most vocal about directly opposing Russia. They're making obvious investments in modernizing their military, and they have units with recent combat experience due to near-continual operations in Africa. The French are experienced, well equipped, and ready for a fight. (They are perhaps the exception to the other listed examples, having an historically "arms-length" relationship with NATO.) • Italy, much like Germany, has some really interesting stuff, but not too much of it. I don't really know as much about their posture at the moment. That said, I would pay good money to watch a unit of Centauros flatten a Russian armored column, should it come to it. (Though I sincerely hope it does not.) • Poland, the Scandinavians, and other eastern European states (including the Baltics) are absolutely not fucking around at this point. Russia is on their borders, and they likely see Ukraine's fate as entwined with their own. This is why many of them have essentially opened their storehouses to the Ukrainians, donating vast quantities of Soviet-era materiel, and more limited stocks of more modern systems. This was absolutely necessary for the purpose of slowing down Russia in Ukraine, but has left them in the position of needing to replenish what was donated. (Even accounting for the reshuffling of assets that occurred after the donations, in some cases.) Still, most of these nations anticipate a fight with Russia at this point, and are doing everything in their power to build up their forces. It's simply an issue of time. Everyone is behind the curve, but everyone sees the writing on the wall. The question is if Europe can rapidly build the military industrial complex necessary to repel a Russian invasion and then possibly mount a counteroffensive. Of course, the other question is the state of Russia's military industrial complex. They've been dusting off Cold-War equipment, they've lost hundreds of thousands of men, their logistical chain is clearly in shambles, and Ukraine has been able to strike targets within Russia, including major gasoline facilities. Yet, they continue to be able to mount offensives and make gains. (This isn't praise, just an unwillingness to underestimate them.) What we really don't know is how long they can keep that up. To Directly address some of your other points: What capabilities does Russia have that no one else in NATO besides the USA has? They have some oddball leftovers from the Soviet era that are technically "unique" like erkoplans and their laser tank. (Which, oddly enough, might have been a decent counter to FPV drones.) More seriously, they have the TOS-1, that to my knowledge, is the only mass-produced, self propelled, thermobaric artillery system that has seen extensive combat use. Actually, Russian doctrine prioritizes overwhelming artillery fire in a way that Western doctrine does not. But again, how many shells they have left to fire is a key variable. There's also some evidence that they have not obeyed nonproliferation treaties governing space based weapons. If even the US was prepared to match that capability, such knowledge would be right up there with the alien bodies at Area 51 in terms of classification level. How could 20+ countries lose to one? This same question was being asked in the early 1940's when the Nazis did the same thing. They beat the French, they beat the Czechs, the Dutch, the Norwegians, the Finns, the Polish, and a few others, They arguably had the Brits on the ropes until the Americans and the Soviets took some of the pressure off. (Well that and the absolute thrashing they delivered during the battle of Britain.) The current situation is unnervingly similar, the only difference being that we're all more aware of what Russia's long-term goals are. (We can reasonably assume Putin wants to at least restore the borders of the USSR.) At the start of what would become WWII, most nations believed Hitler's ambitions to be more limited. So yeah. That's the opinion on global affairs from one guy on the internet. Take it for whatever it's worth..

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:20 schreef phpmystyle het volgende:

[..]
De temperaturen in pak'm beet Vladisvostok liggen hoger dan het enthousiasmeom nauwelijks getrainde Europese soldaten te laten knokken tegen een getrainde vijand.

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:15 schreef Straatcommando. het volgende:
Rutte is in mijn ogen nog steeds heel ongeloofwaardig als hij dingen roept als meer geld naar defensie. Ook al heeft ie gelijk

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:16 schreef phpmystyle het volgende:

[..]
Ben vooral boos dat het zover is gekomen. Had in 03-2022 voorbij kunnen zijn.
Nu zit je in een situatie dat ik ook niet meer zeker weet of Poetin niet méér gaat proberen.

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:20 schreef phpmystyle het volgende:

[..]
De temperaturen in pak'm beet Vladisvostok liggen hoger dan het enthousiasmeom nauwelijks getrainde Europese soldaten te laten knokken tegen een getrainde vijand.

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:10 schreef Straatcommando. het volgende:

[..]
Nee we gaan vaat niet mobiliseren als we ouderwets oorlog gaan voeren (lees existentiële dreiging)

Dit topic man. Waarom doe ik het toch steeds weer .

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:35 schreef Discombobulate het volgende:

[..]
Als Poetin de Baltische Staten binnenvalt dan gaan wij als Nederland echt niet ineens direct mobiliseren hoor omdat we NAVO zijn. Ik zie het niet meer gebeuren in deze tijd. Dan wordt gewoon een stukje Estland van Poetin als onze conventionele legers het niet goed meer handelen.

En dit is zonder de VS hé, hypothetisch. Met de VS is de NAVO van een heel andere orde.

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:19 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:17 schreef phpmystyle het volgende:
Boekesteijn over huidige Russische capaciteit:
https://x.com/ajboekestijn/status/1890933228304814569

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:36 schreef phpmystyle het volgende:

[..]
Dat.
Sluiten Suwalki gap en het is klaar.
Of Rusland dat kan weten we niet. Zij hebben de artillerie, en wij hebben de luchtmacht.

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:38 schreef MissionPhailed het volgende:

[..]
Zou wel in de huidige lijn der verwachtingen liggen als de Amerikanen op den duur daadwerkelijk militairen terugtrekken uit (delen van) Europa.

Nuchter beschouwd is het ook vreemd dat er anno 2025 nog steeds Amerikaanse militairen gelegerd zijn in Europa. Tot aan de val van het IJzeren Gordijn was dat nog volkomen logisch, maar idealiter had Europa de jaren '90 moeten gebruiken om in ieder geval militair op eigen benen te gaan staan, i.p.v. nog decennia leunen op de VS.

Neemt natuurlijk niet weg dat het volkomen van de ratten besnuffeld is dat de Amerikanen nu openlijk de zijde kiezen van een vijandelijk land, en in de afgelopen weken diverse andere landen in meerdere opzichten bedreigd heeft.

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:27 schreef phpmystyle het volgende:

[..]
Het is pas denkbaar geworden omdat Rusland is gaan opschalen ná 03-2022, de verkiezingen in Amerika, en het gebrek aan wederzijds dialoog tussen Moskou en Brussel.

Het is wel wat complexere allemaal dan alleen een binaire ja en nee.

quote:

Op donderdag 20 februari 2025 20:44 schreef phpmystyle het volgende:

[..]
Vanuit Helsinki via de autobaan met de CV90 of Marder naar Talinn