Total waste of Irish taxpayer funds and defense is not the reason. If Russian bombers were a serious threat then surface to air missiles would take care of the problem, aside from which said bombers would have to make their way back home with NATO on alert in Norway. Second Russia posses submarines, they can park anywhere off the coast, shoot missiles, then slip away. Given the countrys position at the edge of the Western European seaboard, where defense is concerned, the focus must be on dealing with threats from the sea, i.e. air/sea rescue. intercepting drug smuggling and protecting fisheries or other other commercial considerations. The navy in this country has been run down. That must be addressed.
Grippens would not be intended for Irish homeland defense, instead military adventurism as part of the Nordic battlegroup rapid reaction force.
(genuinely) which wars are these? I could only point to internal conflicts and it's hard to see them making inroads anywhere else anymore (China will be emboldened in any territory disputes they have with russia now). Do you count Syria?
Drink up!!!
Russia aqquired that reputation long before WW2
Exactly. When the 10 years in the middle East impacted the biggest economy in the world America so badly and that was without other countries using sanctions you realise how fucked Russia is. I know their middle East campaign lasted over 10 years but it was seriously scaled back by then. The US also had the military backing of some very powerful western allies.
I'd like to say less but give Russia 3 years max and they will be crippled financially and militarily. Meanwhile the world will be buying their oil and gas for pennies which they already are.
Surely the main reason they wanted was not to lose the 2018 world cup which they would have. There's no reason to let Ukraine sort out it's defenses otherwise. They could easily have taken Mariupol and a few other cities back then. Probably Kharkiv also.
😄😄
Here comes the Belarusian air force. Now with solid wings.
Guardian has a sketchy report of a Ukrainian missile landing harmlessley in Belarus. I don't think anyone here is in doubt that Putin will bring Belarus into the war, considering the Kremlin is desperate at this point...
That's Russia trading on a reputation that it acquired in WW2. The last time Russia fought a protracted conflict over a land area the size of Ukraine, it lost and its whole system fell. Putin may be willing to stay the course for as long as it takes, but evidently the 100,000s of military-aged men who've fled the country feel a bit differently, and you can be as determined as you like, but that doesn't fend off the economic realities of war, much less a foreign invasion with all the logistical overhead that introduces. Russia does not have unlimited time or resources to prosecute this war. It's an old man in the Kremlin ordering forces forward who haven't been able to advance in months.
Looks like it was far fewer than the 120 that the Russians were claiming, and it appears that the Ukrainians got quite a few of them. Three injuries but no deaths reporting in Kyiv. A lot of power out in various cities though.
Afghanistan comes to mind when countering that argument.
Gas back to pre-war prices.
Another Russian missile attack this morning. The volume looks to be down on previous.
I'll point this out again, Russia has a tendency to win the wars it loses. Its more willing endure high losses than most countries. Eventually the other side choses to cut bait and compromise rather than accept further loses even though they're knocking the **** out of Russia.
That's why we should worry about the US not giving Ukraine the hardware to prevent any further bombardment of civilian targets.
The attack on Ukraine was planned anyway. US intelligence had info that Putin was up to something as far back as last autumn and they were aware he may have been planning an attack on Ukraine proper. It's true though that he appears to have wrecked the Russian military and economy in the process, as he assumed the war would be over in 3-5 days.
Zelensky wasn't born yesterday, and he will know as well as anyone that the Russians could not be taken at their word, so any peace deal would have to stipulate grave consequences if the Russians were to have another go at Ukraine. At a minimum, it would mean western troops on the ground in Ukraine, at least west of the Dnieper and heavy fortifications along the eastern and northern borders. But full NATO membership would be ideal. Ukraine is the prime example of what can happen when you're not in it and you have a massive belligerent neighbour.
I don't quite agree with you, it may not be an immediate conversation piece but the effects and facts of this war are in all our faces daily. Whether it's refugees or rising food and energy costs - everyone dealing with daily life can see the consequences.
That's a path we have chosen as part of the EU and as individual citizens are paying the price of it. We are all invested in this war to a greater or lesser extent.
Coincidentally, Swedish Grippen's are now the aircraft of choice for the Irish Aer Corps. Finally, the Civil Service has realised that, apart from a clear constitutional breach of Irish Sovereignty, we cannot continue to rely on the RAF QRF to intercept Russian bombers.
12 to 16 aircraft are being proposed. I'm my mind, it's a no-brainer. They are extremely versatile jets. Perfect for a small air force like ours.
No country would proactively attack a nuclear-armed Russia, they'd be guaranteeing their own destruction (Russia has thousands of nuclear weapons)
Against China?
No one wants to invade Russia, and Putin would instantly use nukes in any such situation.
They aren't under any threat whatsoever from anyone, only themselves.
People don't seem to realise this enough. Russia is burning through a Cold War inventory decades in the making and storing, it absolutely doesn't have domestic ability to replace these losses in any sort of remotely meaningful way.
Modern war is high-tech war, and hugely expensive. Russia's industrial base and economy cannot support a protracted modern war against an opponent willing to dog it out like Ukraine is, even with limited backing from western nations.
Their genuinely modern inventory is totally minuscule compared to their Cold War stocks. They're not built or structured, economically or industrially, for a modern war of attrition.
Neither is Ukraine obviously, but it has the obvious defenders advantage and the national will to resist in any form possible, as well as western backing.
They literally cannot win at this point, and even if they gave up today, their military has been so severely weakened it wouldn't be restored to its pre-invasion level for a very, very long time.
For Russia to win this war at this point, it'd need massive numerical superiority of probably 5:1 in tanks, aircraft, soldiers, etc, as well as industrial capability to maintain that ratio. None of which it has.
Russia waited 8 years to get ready after 2014.. most of that financial preparation,
A peace treaty now , wouldn't mean peace - it'd be Russia trying to prevent a Ukrainian recovery, while getting a large army in place , refurbishing equipment ,and stockpiling ammunition..
Some months ago, I remember seeing that Lukashenko was asking the Russians if Belarus could have its nukes back. They must have been transferred to Russia all those years ago, along with any other Soviet nukes from the newly independent corrupt former members of the USSR..
I've seen no mention of this since, but I don't imagine that Putin's trust goes that far with his sycophantic chum. Has anyone seen anything about this?
They have been using up a surplus of military equipment that took them 70 years to build up while crippling their economy,I agree completely with you, they won't be attacking anyone in my lifetime again, more likely that they will have to defend themselves from invasion,loss of sections of Russia.
I don't know. I think this has been such a disaster that they won't be trying anything again for another generation at least.
The warm European winter continues. Putin must be punching walls. A severe cold spell will eventually come but the fear of a long cold winter is over. There will be no blackmail of gas.
Basic journalism ethics is that you use the photo as it is. Whether or not it “gets the correct point across” is irrelevant. It’s accurate or it is not. I am reminded of Reuters firing a photographer in Beirut for submitting an inaccurate photo of an Israeli air strike. Nobody was arguing that there wasn’t as Israeli air strike going on, but the photo was not an actual depiction.
There are honest mistakes, and there is deceitfulness. There is enough going on that the latter should be unnecessary
Russians revolting A Drunk Russian Sergeant Beat His Commander To Death After Both Men Were Called Up As Part Of Putin's Chaotic Draft (uproxx.com)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/99cb88aba86d6cd761548c5d5bb50f6a.svg)
