Russia - threadbanned users in OP

I was listening to a Sky podcast. One military expert was adamant that the A10's were ideal for Ukraine & a far better choice than the F16's.

There has been several posts on here where it was said that Poland full expects a war with Russia, sooner or later, and it seems that they are fully preparing for it to happen. As far as they are concerned, the more Russian gets weakened now, the better. A Russia militarily destroyed will be a very good outcome for them. And the rest of the world too.

Jules De Plank didnt account for Ireland, Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Slovakia, Slovenia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Malta, Luxembourg, Belgium in his chart up above.

Theres more military, humanitarian, and financial in that bunch than you might think. (60k places for refugees for 1 thing.) (And at least 90 armored vehicles)

Or certain non-EU countries like North Macedonia, which might seem like m'eh, but actually North Macedonia gave a shocking 8 T72s ! Dont fuk with North Macedonia Jules.

U.S spent 12bn on energy imports from Saudi Arabia in 2019.

Each year's EU revenue v expenditure breakdown by country is available.

Belgium contributed more than Ireland in revenue to the EU in 2021, but the massive amount spent on the institutions in Brussels, including pensions for EU staff etc., brings their total expenditure up. Year on year they are an outlier in administration costs for Brussels.

You said Belgium doesn't financially contribute to the EU, but that is false. They're far more of an asset than Ireland both financially and otherwise.

Are you claiming that the EU expenditure figures for Belgium include it's own running costs? I don't think that is the case. On the overview tab they list EU public administration costs as a seperate entity at €10.9 billion while the expenditure to Belgium is €9.6. Ireland is a net contributor to the EU budget while Belgium is a net cost.

True about the HARM, but Ukraine managed to adapt the Mig-29 to carry and use them. I'm not sure which stand-off weapon the F-16 can use but the A-10 can't. Neither can currently use the GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bomb.

Look, we both want the same thing, so give them both :-) My preferred option would be to stop this nonsense and let Ukraine specify what it thinks would most suit it's needs and ask for that, instead of everyone else dictating to them what they should have.

The A10 can pretty much do everything the F16 can including Air 2 Air they can be equipped with sidewinder missles for self defense against other aircraft and they are also equipped with the latest Sniper pod so they carry stand off weapons too ,

There is a bomb truck variant of the A10 being tested for the Army that can carry 16 Small diameter bombs at a time

Sorry, but that is just ridiculously wrong. The A-10 doesn't have enough thrust to retain energy in a dog fight, its avionics are limited, the amount of air-to-air missiles it can carry is limited and, most crucially, it lacks radar. Sure, the aircraft is popular with certain crowds due to its absolutely massive cannon, but it is at its heart an air-to-ground platform. Using it for air-to-air is like trying to shave yourself with a katana: Sure, you can probably make it work but the final result is likely not going to be pretty!

That radar, and the AIM-120 AMRAAM, are the key part here. This combination would allow F-16s on patrol over, or just behind the frontlines to target Russian helicopters and ground attack aircraft while still on approach to the combat area, denying air superiority. And that's before we get into things like data link capability, using one F-16 to illuminate radar targets for an entire flight, or even squadrons and other such capabilities, even in relatively early model F-16s give it much more versatility. Additionally, the aircraft could equally easily be used to intercept the regular cruise missile attacks against Ukrainian cities, while also being plenty powerful in case the Russian Air Force actually comes out in force. The A-10 has none of that capability, and from m understanding it is that capability which Ukraine needs most at the moment.

Where does it say that EU Public Administration costs are a seperate entity? The total spend in that area was €10.9 billion across the entire EU for 2021, €5.6b of that was spent toward the running of the EU quarter in Brussels and is included in Belgium's 2021 expenditure figure of €9.6b. If you remove that €5.6b, Belgium becomes a net contributor.

You can go back as far as you like and see that the EU Public Administration expenditure for Belgium far exceeds that of other countries, but that expenditure goes toward an EU institution that all EU members use. It isn't a fair representation of Belgiums EU contribution to describe them as "takers", because it isn't the true reality.

If you download the excel file, you can see the breakdown and that EU Public Administration costs are not seperate, but included in member state expenditure.

He's rotten to the core literally. Running to his arch enemy's in the west, whom his propaganda machine is spewing absolute bile against. Talk about hypocrisy, same as all his oligarchs. They cannot live in the Russia they themselves have destroyed. He should be sent back home for treatment. And meanwhile, they should hack Russian TV ( especially Solovyov and Margarita Simonyan Muppeteers channels) and publicly announce what's happening....Unlikely I know, would be great.