"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (4 Viewers)

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


Britain has announced that it will send long-range missiles to Ukraine, joining the U.S. in bolstering the country's defensive systems despite threats from Russia that they would target those types of weapons.

The United Kingdom's Defense Secretary Ben Wallace issued a press release announcing the shipment of multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS), which can strike targets with high precision up to 50 miles away.

"The UK stands with Ukraine in this fight and is taking a leading role in supplying its heroic troops with the vital weapons they need to defend their country from unprovoked invasion," Wallace said in a statement. "If the international community continues its support, I believe Ukraine can win."

MLRS are similar to the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) the U.S. recently shipped to Ukraine as part of a $700 million weapons package.

 

The amount of small-arms ammo pouring into Ukraine is no secret:

Guns and ammunition make up a large amount of the transferred weapons. The U.S. has sent Ukraine over 50 million rounds of ammunition for handguns, rifles and artillery. Canada, Greece, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Slovenia have also supplied ammunition.

As for eliminating future rivals, perhaps ... but that seems pretty optimistic of him.
 
Small arms and ammo are a very unimportant part of all of this.

This conflict is a great example of what is important - a force armed with only small arms can not succeed. Ukraine could not stop the Russians without lots of explosives and the way to deliver said explosives - AT missiles, AA missiles, tank guns, artillery tubes, MLRS rockets and so forth. Without them and continuous resupply, they'd have no more success than the communists in post-WWII Greece and Malaysia instead of, as they are, closer to the situation of the NVA vs the ARVN in 74 ~ 75.
 
HELSINKI (AP) — NATO kicked off nearly a two-week U.S.-led naval exercise on the Baltic Sea on Sunday with more than 7,000 sailors, airmen and marines from 16 nations, including two aspiring to join the military alliance, Finland and Sweden.

[...]

Ahead of the naval drill, which involved 45 vessels and 75 aircraft, the top U.S military official said in Sweden — the host of the BALTOPS 22 exercise — that it was particularly important for NATO to show support to the governments in Helsinki and Stockholm.

"It is important for us, the United States, and the other NATO countries to show solidarity with both Finland and Sweden in this exercise," U.S. Gen. Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Saturday during a news conference aboard the large amphibious warship USS Kearsarge, which was moored in central Stockholm.

[...]

Turkey, a NATO member that has had good relations with Russia, has objected to Finland and Sweden joining the military alliance, citing their alleged support for a Kurdish group that Turkey labels as terrorist. NATO's chief has been trying to resolve the dispute.

The United States has never before moved such a large warship as the 843-foot USS Kearsarge in the Swedish capital, where it sailed through narrow passages in the Stockholm archipelago, Milley said.

NATO holds Baltic Sea naval exercises with Finland, Sweden

NATO has kicked off nearly a two-week U.S.-led naval exercise on the Baltic Sea with more than 7,000 sailors, airmen and marines.
apnews.com
 
Thumpalumpacus said:
Do they have platforms capable of countering these strikes in the numbers coming in?
Click to expand...
From what has been published there are some limited successes against cruise missiles and similar but only limited success. The point is that the clearly have proven their ability to keep their military material well protected from Russian strikes of all kinds. You have to admire the airforce in particular. There are only a limited number of places you can operate and maintain aircraft and the infrastructure needed to support an airforce and this they have done successfully to a considerable degree.

To assume that Ukraine need advice is probably the wrong way around. When this is all over I am confident that a number of western countries will be lining up to learn how Ukraine manged both this and a number of other facets of the war.
 
Glider said:
Seeing how well Ukraine have been able to preserve and use their airforce, armour and tanks. I don't think they need any advice on how to reduce the risk of missile strikes.
Click to expand...
Need advice? Perhaps not. But advice from US and NATO captured IMINT and SIGINT on planned Russian launches and likely Ukrainian targets is hopefully always welcome. I expect no Ukrainian knickers need unknotting nor pride stroked when such advice is proffered.

Can you imagine an Ukrainian officer replying as you have above? "Seeing how well we've preserved our airforce, armour and tanks, we don't need any advice from you on how to reduce the risk of missile strikes. So you can just take that dossier of intel and shove it." Is that what you have in mind?
 
The solution here is simply. Sweden asks Turkey for a list of suspected Kurdish terrorists, and stick the buggers on a plane for Ankara - or to Erbil International Airport in Iraq if you're worried the Turks will top them. Sweden should have never allowed itself to become a satellite office for the the Kurdish independence movement - and now this presents an opportunity to put that to right.

Sweden as a gravitation center for the kurds
 

I think the sticking point may be differing definitions of "terrorism" in this instance.
 
I believe advice and intelligence are two different things. There is a lot of evidence that Ukraine has been given a lot of intelligence and has used it wisely. I see advice as being instructed or 'advised' as to what action to take.

Apologies for my confusion
 
Thumpalumpacus said:
I think the sticking point may be differing definitions of "terrorism" in this instance.
Click to expand...
Likely. But if Sweden and Finland want into NATO and Turkey holds the cards, then the former two had better consider the latter's definition.

Here's Turkey's POV

Finland and Sweden: 'Guesthouses for terrorists'

Turkiye voices objection to Finland, Sweden joining NATO, for now - Anadolu Ajansı
www.aa.com.tr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 1 more.
    • Total: 5 (members: 3, guests: 2)

    Similar threads

    A
    The coming $26 billion windfall for the Canadian Armed Forces. What to buy?
    2
    Replies
    37
    Views
    1K
    Sisu
    S
    M
    All V-22's Grounded
    Replies
    2
    Views
    1K
    GTX
    M
    All This For The Low, Low Price of .....
    Replies
    19
    Views
    2K
    MIflyer
    M
    M
    The Wrath of KAAN?
    Replies
    3
    Views
    834
    Snautzer01
    M
    The USAF V-22 Mishap of 2023
    Replies
    2
    Views
    491
    Thumpalumpacus
    Menu
    Log in
    Register