"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (16 Viewers)

[Escuadrilla Azul]

Not disagreeing with maybe non-suitable laws, but the Swiss laws (contrary to almost any other democratic country) are IIRC solely based on the populations decisions.
For any law or change of law a peoples vote/referendum is necessary.

That the laws in vigour have a mayoritarian support don't make them right either, but as X XBe02Drvr says, T4MF.

 

[SaparotRob]

I don't agree with that assumption, because that is exactly as for what the Gepard was build for - to accompany infantry and armored vehicles into battle (not 20 miles behind).
That in today's modern arsenal, almost 40 years after it's introduction e.g. composite and reactive armor - the threat posed by a today's MBT is entirely different.

But we are talking about the Ukraine war - conducted on the Russian side by mostly Ukrainian/Russian irregulars and their shitty equipment - e.g. T-62's and T-72's and a huge number
of AFV's. The Ukrainians are forcibly conducting a urban warfare concentrated defense. And a T-62 or T-72 and even better Russian MBT's are basically impractical in such a warfare (unless one doesn't care about MBT losses).
Therefore the Russian "advance" goes antique - artillery and missile shelling supported by airstrikes and then moving their ground-forces into "suspected" clear territory.
So the front-line is actually the perfect? place for a Gepard to be - embedded in a defensive position and logically surrounded by infantry, ATGM teams, AFV and MBT's.

As I had already mentioned before I never suggested or indicated a head on head (knife to knife) fight between a Gepard and a MBT, but a Gepard being an integral part
in a defensive position and if the air is clear (MBT's) even in an offensive move.

Therefore IMO the latest Israeli Merkava is actually the tank, that would be best suited for the Ukrainians - since their counter-offensive will run into the same urban war style
then conducted by the Russians. However I am not sure about Israels view or policy onto the Ukraine/Russian war.

It's updated radar can track objects up to 20 miles (the old one about 10 miles) with it's gun velocity and using Ahead-ammunition it certainly can take out a non-hyper cruise
missile, anything in regards to a ballistic missile is out of it's capability.

But unfortunately as it seems - the Gepard might not come to the Ukraine since so far no decision has been made to produce the respective ammo by Germany or the Brazil ammo-deal
having been concluded. (If I am not wrong, Brazil abstained at the human-rights UN council issue).

I watched a video by "Bismarck" (Chris) of Military Aviation History on the Gepard.
My takeaway was that there isn't enough of them. He mentioned that of the 50 or so that Rheinmetall-etc have, perhaps about 15 or so might be readily available. That would require a large logistic train for too small a quantity of vehicles.
I got a kick out of him pointing out that the picture of all those Marders that should have been sent to Ukraine was actually taken in 2004 and was prior to scrapping. Compared to the Russian tanks in "ready reserve ", the "to be scrapped" Marders look immaculate.

 

[buffnut453]

Well, the whiney bitch (T4FM if you're following all this at home) has gone into overdrive. Here are some of the latest BBC reports:

Kremlin Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova is claiming that the West is openly calling for Ukraine to attack Russia....so, let me get this straight, it's ok for Russia to invade Ukraine but it's not ok for Ukraine to defend itself by disrupting Russian logistics?

Western countries are now openly calling for Ukraine to attack Russia, Kremlin Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova says.
Speaking after a top UK minister said Ukrainian strikes on Russian targets were legitimate, she warned that the West should take Moscow's vows to respond to strikes on its territory seriously.
Her comments come after Russia reported multiple blasts and an ammunition depot fire yesterday in the country's south, the latest in a spate of incidents described by a top Ukrainian official as "karma."
As we reported earlier this morning, the UK's Defence Secretary Ben Wallace told the BBC that it was fair for Ukraine to strike Russian targets in self-defence.
"If Ukraine did choose to target the logistics structure of the Russian army, that would be legitimate under international law," Wallace said.
Earlier this week another UK minister said it would be legitimate for Ukraine to use Western-supplied weapons on Russian soil.


And Ms. Zakharova again, warning the US that the world will remember US war crimes...except that the US military and its Allies worked really hard to minimize civilian casualties whereas the Russian military is actively targeting them:

Moscow has responded to reports that the US is considering labelling Russia a state sponsor of terrorism, saying it is a measure of an "idiotic nature" which will not remain unanswered.
"We, of course, do not leave anything unanswered, and they should understand this," TASS news agency reported Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, as saying.
She said US attempts to take unfriendly measures against Russia - because of crimes allegedly committed in Ukraine - may "ricochet" on Washington.
"The more the US starts up this topic in the minds of the international community, the more the international community remembers the crimes of the US," she said.


Now it's Dmitry Peskov's turn. Apparently, providing arms to Ukraine is destabilizing Europe (but, again, invading Ukraine didn't?):

Sending heavy weapons and other arms to Ukraine is dangerous for European security, the Kremlin has warned Western nations.
Spokesman Dmitry Peskov was responding to a speech by UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss urging Kyiv's allies to "ramp up" military production to help Ukraine.
Western allies have maintained their support does not amount to a military confrontation between Moscow and Nato.
But Peskov told reporters: "The tendency to pump weapons, including heavy weapons into Ukraine, these are the actions that threaten the security of the continent, provoke instability."
It comes after President Vladimir Putin warned nations creating "strategic threats" for Russia by intervening in the Ukraine war would face a "lightning-fast" response.


And, last but, but by no means least, back to Ms Zahkarova. Apparently, the UK's comments have given permission for Ukraine to make attacks inside Russian territory:

Some more now from the Russian foreign ministry press conference, where spokesperson Maria Zakharova warned the West against encouraging Ukraine to attack inside Russian territory.
"Further provocation prompting Ukraine to strike against Russian facilities will be met with a harsh response from Russia," she said.
Zakharova singled out UK armed forces minister James Heappey - saying that his claim that it would be "legitimate" for Kyiv to carry out strikes in Russia was being taken by Ukraine as permission to act.
Russia would not allow Western officials visiting Ukraine to deter it from launching retaliatory strikes on nearby Ukrainian targets, she also warned.
"Advisers from Western countries staying in Ukraine's decision-making centres will not necessarily be a problem for Russia's response measures."


I'm particularly tickled by the idea that Ukraine now has "permission to act" because Britain's Defence Minister said it was legitimate for Ukraine to make attacks inside Russia (for those not tracking, Heappey formerly served in the British Army and so has some concept of legality in warfare).

This is the problem with totalitarian regimes...they simply can't understand the concept of people actually thinking for themselves. They can't understand that Zelensky isn't defending Ukraine because the US and the West tell him to. He's doing it because it's his JOB and he's acting in his own nation's best interests. And he's FREE to do that without the approval or permission of ANY other nation.

 

[special ed]

In theory Russia can't spend Euros and since Russia demands payment for gas in Rubles, they aren't getting paid. Russia announced they will shut off the gas.

 

[SaparotRob]

In theory Russia can't spend Euros and since Russia demands payment for gas in Rubles, they aren't getting paid. Russia announced they will shut off the gas.

That's great. Russia runs out of money sooner.

 

[Admiral Beez]

This is the problem with totalitarian regimes...they simply can't understand the concept of people actually thinking for themselves. They can't understand that Zelensky isn't defending Ukraine because the US and the West tell him to. He's doing it because it's his JOB and he's acting in his own nation's best interests. And he's FREE to do that without the approval or permission of ANY other nation.

Putin is just waiting for Steiner's assault to bring things under control.

 

[buffnut453]

That's great. Russia runs out of money sooner.

Except that European nations may be looking for loopholes so they can pay Russia in roubles and continue to get all that lovely gas. Report below is BBC but based on work by the Financial Times:

It's being reported that European energy companies could use a loophole in order to satisfy a Russian demand that gas be paid for in roubles – amid fears that the supply might be cut off to more countries.

On Wednesday, the state-owned energy giant Gazprom halted gas exports to Poland and Bulgaria over their refusal to pay in roubles.

Today, the Financial Times is reporting that two of the single largest importers of Russian gas to Europe - Germany's Uniper and Austria's OMV - are preparing to use a new system which allows them to acquiesce to Russia's demand.

In order not to breach EU sanctions, Russia established a mechanism in late March whereby European companies would continue to pay Gazprombank - the Swiss-based financial arm of Gazprom - for their imports in euros.

The Russian bank, which is not under EU sanctions, would then convert euro-denominated deposits into roubles in a second account opened in their name, for onward payment to Russia, the FT reports.

Tiina Tuomela, chief financial officer of Uniper, told the newspaper that the company believes this amended payment process complies with sanctions.

 

[special ed]

Are there that many Rubles in existance?

 

[Jagdflieger]

That the laws in vigour have a mayoritarian support don't make them right either, but as X XBe02Drvr says, T4MF.

Okay, but what makes the implementation of a law more valid then the wish of the peoples majority?
And the Swiss people in majority are not willing to give up their stance onto neutrality. Off course neutrality being surrounded by friendly powers is somewhat very feasible.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Well, the whiney bitch (T4FM if you're following all this at home) has gone into overdrive. Here are some of the latest BBC reports:

Kremlin Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova is claiming that the West is openly calling for Ukraine to attack Russia....so, let me get this straight, it's ok for Russia to invade Ukraine but it's not ok for Ukraine to defend itself by disrupting Russian logistics?

Western countries are now openly calling for Ukraine to attack Russia, Kremlin Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova says.
Speaking after a top UK minister said Ukrainian strikes on Russian targets were legitimate, she warned that the West should take Moscow's vows to respond to strikes on its territory seriously.
Her comments come after Russia reported multiple blasts and an ammunition depot fire yesterday in the country's south, the latest in a spate of incidents described by a top Ukrainian official as "karma."
As we reported earlier this morning, the UK's Defence Secretary Ben Wallace told the BBC that it was fair for Ukraine to strike Russian targets in self-defence.
"If Ukraine did choose to target the logistics structure of the Russian army, that would be legitimate under international law," Wallace said.
Earlier this week another UK minister said it would be legitimate for Ukraine to use Western-supplied weapons on Russian soil.


And Ms. Zakharova again, warning the US that the world will remember US war crimes...except that the US military and its Allies worked really hard to minimize civilian casualties whereas the Russian military is actively targeting them:

Moscow has responded to reports that the US is considering labelling Russia a state sponsor of terrorism, saying it is a measure of an "idiotic nature" which will not remain unanswered.
"We, of course, do not leave anything unanswered, and they should understand this," TASS news agency reported Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, as saying.
She said US attempts to take unfriendly measures against Russia - because of crimes allegedly committed in Ukraine - may "ricochet" on Washington.
"The more the US starts up this topic in the minds of the international community, the more the international community remembers the crimes of the US," she said.


Now it's Dmitry Peskov's turn. Apparently, providing arms to Ukraine is destabilizing Europe (but, again, invading Ukraine didn't?):

Sending heavy weapons and other arms to Ukraine is dangerous for European security, the Kremlin has warned Western nations.
Spokesman Dmitry Peskov was responding to a speech by UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss urging Kyiv's allies to "ramp up" military production to help Ukraine.
Western allies have maintained their support does not amount to a military confrontation between Moscow and Nato.
But Peskov told reporters: "The tendency to pump weapons, including heavy weapons into Ukraine, these are the actions that threaten the security of the continent, provoke instability."
It comes after President Vladimir Putin warned nations creating "strategic threats" for Russia by intervening in the Ukraine war would face a "lightning-fast" response.


And, last but, but by no means least, back to Ms Zahkarova. Apparently, the UK's comments have given permission for Ukraine to make attacks inside Russian territory:

Some more now from the Russian foreign ministry press conference, where spokesperson Maria Zakharova warned the West against encouraging Ukraine to attack inside Russian territory.
"Further provocation prompting Ukraine to strike against Russian facilities will be met with a harsh response from Russia," she said.
Zakharova singled out UK armed forces minister James Heappey - saying that his claim that it would be "legitimate" for Kyiv to carry out strikes in Russia was being taken by Ukraine as permission to act.
Russia would not allow Western officials visiting Ukraine to deter it from launching retaliatory strikes on nearby Ukrainian targets, she also warned.
"Advisers from Western countries staying in Ukraine's decision-making centres will not necessarily be a problem for Russia's response measures."


I'm particularly tickled by the idea that Ukraine now has "permission to act" because Britain's Defence Minister said it was legitimate for Ukraine to make attacks inside Russia (for those not tracking, Heappey formerly served in the British Army and so has some concept of legality in warfare).

This is the problem with totalitarian regimes...they simply can't understand the concept of people actually thinking for themselves. They can't understand that Zelensky isn't defending Ukraine because the US and the West tell him to. He's doing it because it's his JOB and he's acting in his own nation's best interests. And he's FREE to do that without the approval or permission of ANY other nation.

The Ukrainians have given a Tejas-style reply to this spate of puling whinery:

 

[Jagdflieger]

I watched a video by "Bismarck" (Chris) of Military Aviation History on the Gepard.
My takeaway was that there isn't enough of them. He mentioned that of the 50 or so that Rheinmetall-etc have, perhaps about 15 or so might be readily available. That would require a large logistic train for too small a quantity of vehicles.
I got a kick out of him pointing out that the picture of all those Marders that should have been sent to Ukraine was actually taken in 2004 and was prior to scrapping. Compared to the Russian tanks in "ready reserve ", the "to be scrapped" Marders look immaculate.

Actually only 12 are ready to be send, but as long as the ammo issue isn't solved - it doesn't really matter
Unfortunately for the Ukraine the political process required in Germany to send so called heavy weapons - is probably hindering actual supplies to ever reach the Ukraine before
August/September this year. Sad but fact.

 

[Admiral Beez]

If Poland is sending T-72s, why not MiG-29s? A lot has changed since those days in March, and I'd like to see Poland revisit the MiG-29 decision.

Poland confirms T-72 tank delivery to Ukraine, with Challenger 2 tanks to fill gap

Poland’s prime minister has confirmed the country supplied its Soviet-designed T-72 tanks to Ukraine to support the fight against Russia, which invaded Ukraine Feb. 24.

www.defensenews.com

If that's all 250-300 of Poland's T-72s that's a serious increase in Ukraine's MBT fleet. Especially if the 2019 upgrades are all made.

Good on the Czechs earlier this month as well.

The main battle tanks and other vehicles that the Czech Republic is sending to Ukraine

www.outono.net

 

[Jagdflieger]

That's great. Russia runs out of money sooner.

I wouldn't really know about Russia's financial issues or maybe problems.
But I am aware that the present humanitarian crisis (5-6 million) Ukrainians fleeing and finding refuge outside of the Ukraine might increase to as much as 10 million by Summer/Autumn
this year. And that issue alone will cost tenth of billions for the EU. After all you can't just place 6 million people into tents and ask them to play ping-pong the whole day for month and maybe a year and more to come.
Looking at all our debt ridden Western governments - I wonder where these billions will be coming from, as usual by cutting down on defense spending's?

Please don't get me wrong - but the Czar is anything but stupid when it comes to judging and analyzing our Western countries structures.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Looking at all our debt ridden Western governments - I wonder where these billions will be coming from, as usual by cutting down on defense spending's?

The postwar global economy and international debt system was designed by the West. If the West needs more money, they'll find it. The whole concept of what is money is up for interpretation by those in control.

Please don't get me wrong - but the Czar is anything but stupid when it comes to judging and analyzing our Western countries structures.

I think Putin significantly misunderstood and misjudged how the US and the West would unify and react to his Ukraine project. I think the former POTUS might have confused Putin's understanding of the resolve and even interest of the US and western countries.

 

[vikingBerserker]

Even if they find a work around to buy Russian gas, it's only to buy them time until they can fully replace it. I think Europe shot themselves in the foot for becoming so heaivly reliant on Russian gas but I also think Putin has really shot himself in the foot by using it as a weapon.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I think Europe shot themselves in the foot for becoming so heaivly reliant on Russian gas but I also think Putin has really shot himself in the foot by using it as a weapon.

It's the same as all of us in the West becoming reliant on cheap Chinese crap to control inflation and to drive our corporate profits and stock markets. We need to think before we chase the all mighty dollar. Look at Australia now, where Australian coal is sold nearly entirely to China. As an aside, Australian coal is now one of the top global producers of GHG.

 

[Escuadrilla Azul]

Well, the whiney bitch (T4FM if you're following all this at home) has gone into overdrive. Here are some of the latest BBC reports:

Kremlin Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova is claiming that the West is openly calling for Ukraine to attack Russia....so, let me get this straight, it's ok for Russia to invade Ukraine but it's not ok for Ukraine to defend itself by disrupting Russian logistics?

Western countries are now openly calling for Ukraine to attack Russia, Kremlin Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova says.
Speaking after a top UK minister said Ukrainian strikes on Russian targets were legitimate, she warned that the West should take Moscow's vows to respond to strikes on its territory seriously.
Her comments come after Russia reported multiple blasts and an ammunition depot fire yesterday in the country's south, the latest in a spate of incidents described by a top Ukrainian official as "karma."
As we reported earlier this morning, the UK's Defence Secretary Ben Wallace told the BBC that it was fair for Ukraine to strike Russian targets in self-defence.
"If Ukraine did choose to target the logistics structure of the Russian army, that would be legitimate under international law," Wallace said.
Earlier this week another UK minister said it would be legitimate for Ukraine to use Western-supplied weapons on Russian soil.


And Ms. Zakharova again, warning the US that the world will remember US war crimes...except that the US military and its Allies worked really hard to minimize civilian casualties whereas the Russian military is actively targeting them:

Moscow has responded to reports that the US is considering labelling Russia a state sponsor of terrorism, saying it is a measure of an "idiotic nature" which will not remain unanswered.
"We, of course, do not leave anything unanswered, and they should understand this," TASS news agency reported Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, as saying.
She said US attempts to take unfriendly measures against Russia - because of crimes allegedly committed in Ukraine - may "ricochet" on Washington.
"The more the US starts up this topic in the minds of the international community, the more the international community remembers the crimes of the US," she said.


Now it's Dmitry Peskov's turn. Apparently, providing arms to Ukraine is destabilizing Europe (but, again, invading Ukraine didn't?):

Sending heavy weapons and other arms to Ukraine is dangerous for European security, the Kremlin has warned Western nations.
Spokesman Dmitry Peskov was responding to a speech by UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss urging Kyiv's allies to "ramp up" military production to help Ukraine.
Western allies have maintained their support does not amount to a military confrontation between Moscow and Nato.
But Peskov told reporters: "The tendency to pump weapons, including heavy weapons into Ukraine, these are the actions that threaten the security of the continent, provoke instability."
It comes after President Vladimir Putin warned nations creating "strategic threats" for Russia by intervening in the Ukraine war would face a "lightning-fast" response.


And, last but, but by no means least, back to Ms Zahkarova. Apparently, the UK's comments have given permission for Ukraine to make attacks inside Russian territory:

Some more now from the Russian foreign ministry press conference, where spokesperson Maria Zakharova warned the West against encouraging Ukraine to attack inside Russian territory.
"Further provocation prompting Ukraine to strike against Russian facilities will be met with a harsh response from Russia," she said.
Zakharova singled out UK armed forces minister James Heappey - saying that his claim that it would be "legitimate" for Kyiv to carry out strikes in Russia was being taken by Ukraine as permission to act.
Russia would not allow Western officials visiting Ukraine to deter it from launching retaliatory strikes on nearby Ukrainian targets, she also warned.
"Advisers from Western countries staying in Ukraine's decision-making centres will not necessarily be a problem for Russia's response measures."


I'm particularly tickled by the idea that Ukraine now has "permission to act" because Britain's Defence Minister said it was legitimate for Ukraine to make attacks inside Russia (for those not tracking, Heappey formerly served in the British Army and so has some concept of legality in warfare).

This is the problem with totalitarian regimes...they simply can't understand the concept of people actually thinking for themselves. They can't understand that Zelensky isn't defending Ukraine because the US and the West tell him to. He's doing it because it's his JOB and he's acting in his own nation's best interests. And he's FREE to do that without the approval or permission of ANY other nation.

So the attacks on russian soil are from the ukrainians????? Not from the SAS?????

What a deception!!!!! The UK has failed us

 

[Jagdflieger]

The postwar global economy and international debt system was designed by the West. If the West needs more money, they'll find it. The whole concept of what is money is up for interpretation by those in control.

I think Putin significantly misunderstood and misjudged how the US and the West would unify and react to his Ukraine project. I think the former POTUS might have confused Putin's understanding of the resolve and even interest of the US and western countries.

Printing money widely causes inflation - and whatever one borrows one needs to pay back with interest - the GDP isn't growing and as such the budgets won't likely increase either.
Putin just as NATO took into account that the Ukraine issue would be dealt with within a week or two. Since end of March his dreams went wet - but he also knows how to adjust towards
the new situation. Either NATO goes in now and calls his bluff or the Ukraine issue will become financially unbearable for the West - just my opinion.

 

[Escuadrilla Azul]

Okay, but what makes the implementation of a law more valid then the wish of the peoples majority?

The moral value of the law. I could put some examples but I doubt this is the place. I think it could be a great debate to hold but would go dangerously close to forbiden waters here.

 

[Crimea_River]

Regarding all the recent whiney bitch rhetoric noted above, though to us there are obvious logical disconnects, the statements are probably more geared toward bolstering government messaging to the perhaps increasingly uneasy Russian public.