Live Conflict Ukraine-Russia War

[Spitfire9]

Europeans will shoot down a Russian fighter jet that violated their border! Do you believe this fantasy?

Even when a Turkish pilot shot down a Russian bomber, the Europeans were so afraid of Putin's wrath that, in the midst of the conflict, they withdrew their Patriots from Turkey's eastern border and fled in terror.

When Turkey made its request, "formidable" NATO mumbled something unintelligible.

That's when it all became clear! That was 10 years ago.
Today, the US is no longer with Europe. And without the US, what kind of NATO is there?! With their "gender equality" and other "values," the Europeans have reached such absurdities that they appoint pregnant women as defense ministers instead of combat generals, as if there was no difference between them.

Rasmussen, Stoltenberg, Rutte—wonderful people. But I don't think Napoleon would have trusted them with command of even a battalion

About Russia deliberately flying into other countries' airspace: I think it is time for countries to tell Russia that it is game over, from now on such intrusions will be met by deadly force. That is entirely legal in international law, law that Russia expects other countries to respect where its airspace is concerned.

Yes, the US is no longer with Europe. Personally, I am pleased that the position has been clarified. I never liked 'the west' slavishly supporting US foreign policy due to being members of NATO, itself dominated by the US.

Yes, I always wonder at governments appointing ministers that have 'no hands on experience' or specialist knowledge in the domain concerned eg a defence minister who has never served in the military or a finance minister with no deep study of economics. Whether a minister is male or female is of no importance to me. In my opinion whether well known UK prime minister Thatcher were male or female was irrelevant.

As to generals having a say in a country's foreign policy, I think not. Same the other way round to me - politicians should not decide how battles are fought.

 

[Relic]

According to The Times, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer indicated that a deal to release $115 Billion usd worth of frozen Russian assets is close. The funds would included approximately $10 Billion usd worth of assets frozen in Britain, with a further $20 Billion scattered across Europe and the remaining bulk in the Euroclear depository in Belgium .

The plan would be to release $50 Billion usd worth of funds in each of 2026 and 2027, funding 2/3 of Ukraine's military needs and budget deficit. The remaining 1/3 would come from Canada , Norway , Britain , Japan (loans) and from the budgets of European Union members.

The key meeting on the topic will we held on December 18th. Belgium continues to push back against the idea, sighting an unacceptable plan for the EU to share risk associated with the backing of the funds. EU leaders are working diligently to dilute the risk for Belgium, making the plan acceptable for Brussels.

This would be an enormous "win" for Ukraine. Not only would it satisfy their budget / military needs for a further two years, it would provide substantial and predictable military specific support, over and above the planned individual contributions from their partners. It would almost certainly max out funding for American PURL packages and the Czech ammunition initiative, while injecting massive funding into Ukraine's own domestic military production, which is chronically underfunded. It would also allow Ukraine to make substantial new purchases of armored vehicles and artillery systems from supplies around the world. The current need for replenishment of armor in the Ukrainian brigades is substantial.

 

[Relic]

Ever wonder what kinds of things are purchased in "PURL" packages? Here is an example...

For the first time Ukrainian F-16s have been spotted with U.S. made "Sniper pod" targeting systems and APKWS rocket pods. These systems are being mounted on F-16s for a "cheap", accurate way of intercepting mass waves if Russian drones. APKWS features a conventional Hydra-70 rocket, with an improved guidance system. Ukraine has been using them on their attack helicopters since 2022, but inventories ran low when the Trump Government cut off military aid to Ukraine. Those inventories are being re-stocked, however, with twice monthly "PURL" purchases, valued at $1 Billion usd per month. Each APKWS rocket costs approximately $35,000 usd, substantially cheaper than the much more expensive AIM-7, AIM-9, AIM-120 and IRIS-T missiles that Ukrainian F-16s were being forces to use to down Shaheds.

The USA produces more than 250,000 HYDRA-70 rockets per year and recently ordered 55,000 new APKWS guidance kits for them. The ability to supply these effective interceptors is limited only by funding for them. Production to meet Ukraine's needs is nearly limitless. If 10,000 units were purchased by Ukraine each year through "PURL", it would cost approximately $350 million usd.

Ukrainian F-16s Appear To Be Armed With Laser-Guided Rockets In New Photos

Ukraine has a massive need for the low-cost, high-volume anti-air capability APKWS II rockets offer against drones and some cruise missiles.

www.twz.com

 

[Soldier30]

Footage from Russian FPV drone strikes on Ukrainian armored vehicles in the Pokrovsk sector. The video was filmed on the roads leading to Pokrovsk, near the villages of Grishino and Rodinskoye. The video shows numerous abandoned and destroyed Ukrainian military vehicles.

Footage of a Russian Lancet-51 kamikaze drone striking a rare Ukrainian Tunguska air defense missile and gun system. The video was filmed near the town of Shostka in the Sumy region. The Tunguska air defense missile and gun system was inactive at the time of the strike and was moving for cover. The 2S6 Tunguska anti-aircraft gun and missile system was developed in the USSR in 1982 and is now rarely used in the Ukrainian and Russian armies. The Lancet drone strike caused a fire in the Tunguska air defense system.

 

[Soldier30]

A Russian 300mm Tornado-S MLRS strikes a temporary deployment site for Ukrainian units in Myrnohrad. The video shows a group of Ukrainian soldiers entering the building before the missile strike. The strike used a precision-guided rocket equipped with a GLONASS satellite guidance system. The building was destroyed by the missile strike.

The Russian army launched strikes on energy and transport facilities used by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Russian Geran-2 kamikaze drones, Lancet drones, and FPV drones were allegedly used. Media outlets also reported the use of tactical aircraft, missiles, and artillery. Video footage shows strikes on Ukrainian gas distribution stations and transformer substations.

 

[Iskander]

About Russia deliberately flying into other countries' airspace: I think it is time for countries to tell Russia that it is game over, from now on such intrusions will be met by deadly force. That is entirely legal in international law, law that Russia expects other countries to respect where its airspace is concerned.

Yes, the US is no longer with Europe. Personally, I am pleased that the position has been clarified. I never liked 'the west' slavishly supporting US foreign policy due to being members of NATO, itself dominated by the US.

Yes, I always wonder at governments appointing ministers that have 'no hands on experience' or specialist knowledge in the domain concerned eg a defence minister who has never served in the military or a finance minister with no deep study of economics. Whether a minister is male or female is of no importance to me. In my opinion whether well known UK prime minister Thatcher were male or female was irrelevant.

As to generals having a say in a country's foreign policy, I think not. Same the other way round to me - politicians should not decide how battles are fought.

Madame Thatcher said, "If we have to choose between freedom and security, we will choose freedom."
Fine words. Freedom and democracy are wonderful things.
But when, as they say, the enemy is at the gates, it's time to choose... Churchill.
But who will choose him? Modern European society? It doesn't want war. Any war.

Your compatriots rejected the decisive Boris Johnson just because he didn't wear a gauze bandage!

In fact, the word "leader" is completely inappropriate for heads of European state. After all, a leader must be at the forefront and lead the people. Modern European politicians, on the contrary, prefer to follow the crowd.
In Europe during the Roman Republic, when war loomed, they elected... a dictator. Incidentally, the dictator was elected democratically.
The ancients weren't fools. Fools don't usually build colossal empires

 

[Spitfire9]

Madame Thatcher said, "If we have to choose between freedom and security, we will choose freedom."
Fine words. Freedom and democracy are wonderful things.
But when, as they say, the enemy is at the gates, it's time to choose... Churchill.
But who will choose him? Modern European society? It doesn't want war. Any war.

Your compatriots rejected the decisive Boris Johnson just because he didn't wear a gauze bandage!

In fact, the word "leader" is completely inappropriate for heads of European state. After all, a leader must be at the forefront and lead the people. Modern European politicians, on the contrary, prefer to follow the crowd.
In Europe during the Roman Republic, when war loomed, they elected... a dictator. Incidentally, the dictator was elected democratically.
The ancients weren't fools. Fools don't usually build colossal empires

I don't think that people of Europe have any interest in building empires. In general they don't want to elect dictators either. They like democracy. What sensible person wants a political system in which the leadership of the country cannot be changed after a few years through elections? You will be aware that Hitler - a militant nationalist - was elected democratically before scrapping democracy. Did not work out so well, did it?

 

[Nilgiri]

I don't think that people of Europe have any interest in building empires. In general they don't want to elect dictators either. They like democracy. What sensible person wants a political system in which the leadership of the country cannot be changed after a few years through elections? You will be aware that Hitler - a militant nationalist - was elected democratically before scrapping democracy. Did not work out so well, did it?

Actually Hitler didn't come to power democratically.

Came to power technically legally yes (the horseplay backroom deals and "reluctant" Hidenburg caving in for political stability - none of which had any meaningful input from the Gerrman electorate).... but it was not a popular mandate given by the German people to the NSDAP.

What happened next with the (reichstag fire) emergency/enabling powers act, coercion/arrests of not only KPD but SPD too (to pass said act).... night of the long knives (and Hindenburg's role in this).... and then Hindenburg's own death (and Hitler merging president role with chancellor one)....then became avalanche cascade of illegal power grab and there was no chance for any democracy to come back since the republic law (and its courts) were usurped.