Global mass rearmament

[MNW67]

what sort of weapons ?

I would say weapons that could have hit the supply lines and control hubs etc. deep inside Russia.

 

[Highway Man]

The same ones they have been drip fed with. But again, more and earlier.

Drip fed? 120 billion $ from the U.S and 35 billion £ from the EU. a pretty big drip feed.

 

[denso13]

Drip fed?

Yes, they would have been in a much better position with more.

 

[MNW67]

Drip fed? 120 billion $ from the U.S and 35 billion £ from the EU. a pretty big drip feed.

War is expensive! The second Gulf war cost $3 trillion.

I think the military aid part from the US to Ukraine so far is $80 billion. It is not clear whether that has all actually been delivered yet.

But also one of the biggest problems was that Ukraine's use of the most effective weapons was deliberately hobbled.

 

[Odds]

Considering the US spends around $900bn a year on military hardware; $120bn over three years is a pretty small drip in the (blood)bath.

 

[Highway Man]

But also one of the biggest problems was that Ukraine's use of the most effective weapons was deliberately hobbled.

So you think that deliberate hobbling was the mistake made by the military and the world leaders, we should have all joined in and brought our allies in to fight against Russia and Russias allies would turn a blind eye to it?

 

[Highway Man]

I am shocked at how silly we have been, we should have gone straight for Moscow and level the Kremlin, that would teach them.

 

[denso13]

we should have all joined in and brought our allies in to fight against Russia

I don't think anyone is suggesting that, we should have given them the tools to do it themselves.

 

[MNW67]

So you think that deliberate hobbling was the mistake made by the military and the world leaders, we should have all joined in and brought our allies in to fight against Russia and Russias allies would turn a blind eye to it?

I believe that if Ukraine had the same freedom of use at the start which they now have with those weapons systems, then Russia's invasion force would have been wiped out by Easter 2022. No allies would have been needed.

 

[Highway Man]

I don't think anyone is suggesting that, we should have given them the tools to do it themselves.

Oh yes that wouldn't upset anyone, we could just rub the stickers out on the side of these weapons saying, made in the UK.

 

[denso13]

we could just rub the stickers out on the side of these weapons saying, made in the UK.

Why? We are supplying them now with no issues, just should have been more and earlier.

 

[Highway Man]

Why? We are supplying them now with no issues, just should have been more and earlier.

Yes to help them defend themselves, not to go deep into Russia with the cruise missiles that was proposed along with other long range missiles. Doesnt matter what we send them they cannot use these weapons themselves plus they are fast running out of soldiers to fight, Ukraine has never been in a position to win this war, sending them more weapons and money is just pouriing petrol on a fire

 

[denso13]

Ukraine has never been in a position to win this war

I disagree. But that happens.

 

[MNW67]

Yes to help them defend themselves, not to go deep into Russia with the cruise missiles that was proposed along with other long range missiles.

I agree that wouldn't have been very sporting.

 

[MNW67]

Oh yes that wouldn't upset anyone, we could just rub the stickers out on the side of these weapons saying, made in the UK.

The big fear at the start was that Putin would use small tactical nuclear weapons if Ukraine was armed effectively.