"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Maybe you should enter the exclusive circle of Head of States
 
As for Turkey,Tell them Finland and Sweden come in or they go out. Erdogan has never been a reliable partner and has way too close ties to Putin. Anyone believing that Turkey is reliable would stitch a penis to a sow and expect piglets.

There is no process for evicting a NATO member. None.

While I share your antipathy to Erdogan, NATO can't simply tell Turkey to get lost, because that is not written into the treaty anywhere. I've read opinions stating that NATO could de facto ignore Turkey, essentially ghosting the nation, but that still wouldn't result in a de jure expulsion, and wouldn't remove Turkey's veto power.
 
Erdogan is playing a stupid game.

Aside from moving away from Attaturk's vision within his country, he's moving away from his nation's mission as a member of NATO.

With elections coming up in a year, I suspect he's playing to a domestic audience. Strongmen gotta strong, and all that. "I told NATO to hammer sand, in order to save you from Kurds" will probably be a feature in his campaigning.
 
You just know that he will "win by a landslide".

Right, he's got his thumb on the spool in a lot of different ways, hence my comment upthread about NATO requiring members to be democratic. He's no devotee of democracy, the way I'm reading it.

He's getting ready to assail the Kurds -- American allies in the fight against ISIS -- as well. Far as I'm concerned, a long walk off'n a short pier would be called-for, but again, NATO has no way of expelling the nation.
 
re NATO expelling/suspending a member nation

The reasoning on the matter from NATO during its founding and from a bit later:

"Can Turkey be Expelled from NATO? It's Legally Possible, Whether or Not Politically Prudent"

This is a link to the NATO founding treaty (aka Washington Treaty) as initiated in 1949

"https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl.../20161122_E1-founding-treaty-original-tre.pdf"


re Turkey and its behavior re its NATO obligations

Although I agree that what is going on with is disappointing, we have to take into account their prior relationship with Russia - at least to a fair degree. Their position relative to Russia is similar to Germany's in terms of economics and natural gas supply. And regardless of Turkey's commitment to NATO, Erdogan's first and primary responsibility is to the welfare of the people/nation of Turkey.
 
Last edited:
 
Okay it's in Dutch and both are opinionated articles in regards to Germany's position in regards to supplying heavy weapons (article April and May) towards Ukraine.
So basically already outdated and nowhere in these articles is it mentioned that Germany hasn't send any weapons to Ukraine.

Here is a partial overview: (actually common knowledge within the www)
  • 2.500 Luftabwehrraketen
  • 900 Panzerfäuste mit 3.000 Schuss Munition
  • 2450 Panzerabwehrhandwaffen vom Typ RGW 90, auch "Matador" genannt
  • 1600 DM22-Panzerabwehrrichtminen
  • 3000 DM31-Panzerabwehrminen
  • 100 Maschinengewehre
  • 15 Bunkerfäuste mit 50 Raketen
  • 100.000 Handgranaten
  • 2.000 Minen
  • 5.300 Sprengladungen
  • 16 Millionen Schuss Munition
  • Unbestimmte Anzahl an Drohnen
  • Unbestimmte Anzahl an Fahrzeugen
  • etc.
 
 
Ukraine's losses estimate by Zelensky.
"we're losing 60-100 soldiers per day as killed in action..."

So far, the KIA numbers remain classified. Zelensky mentioned approximate figures several times. Just off the top of my head: about 200 on the second day of the invasion, about 1,300 in the middle of March and about 3,000 in the middle of April.

Of all the services, only NGU (National Guard) reported their losses once on 11th May: KIA 501, WIA 1697. NGU is about 3 times smaller than the Army and does not participate in all operations.
 
but not the promised heavy stuff.
Come on enough of this nonsense.

Firstly you stated that Germany hasn't send any weapons - obviously you have been mistaken.
Now you bring in the promised heavy stuff: what promised heavy stuff isn't coming?

Ukraine had forwarded a $300 million weapons request to Germany in March, which included tanks. Off this request around $150 worth of weapons were supplied to Ukraine in March and April. So how many tanks do you think one can buy for 150 million? (around 50 T-72's or 7 Leo II A7) Therefore the UK and Germany brokered the deal with Poland to "immediately" supply Ukraine with 230 T-72 MBT's.

Then Germany to the great surprise of Ukraine proposed to send 50 Gepard's - End of March. Short off ammunition it took almost 7 weeks to settle this issue.
For your information a serviced and upgraded Gepard by KMW/Rheinmetall with spares and ammo costs around 3 million euro a piece.

End of April Germany informed Ukraine that they can deliver 11 PzH2000 from present NATO units (buying 4 from Netherlands and 7 coming from Germany)
From March to May, Germany making use of the NATO ring-exchange send numerous heavy stuff to Ukraine via Bulgarian, Slovakian and Czechia inventory incl. MBT, APC/AFV, artillery
and SAM systems.
And keep in mind that NATO only acquitted towards sending MLRS on 1st of June. Modern tanks from NATO inventory are still a taboo.
The 100 Leo 1A4 (build 1980) were dropped by Ukraine - luckily they understood the huge challenge to train, maintain and logistically make use of 100 totally outdated tanks.

The Ukrainians started training on the Gepard and PzH2000 from 9th respectively 16th of May onward.
So what promised heavy stuff did Germany not send, respectively agree to?
 
Last edited:
Not much, but better than nothing.

WASHINGTON, June 1 (Reuters) - The Biden administration plans to sell Ukraine four MQ-1C Gray Eagle drones that can be armed with Hellfire missiles for battlefield use against Russia, three people familiar with the situation said.

 

Users who are viewing this thread