Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[StarDreamer]

I accept your intellectual defeat.

I guess the finnish state has made good profits from the qas trade with Russia too.

The Finnish state doesn't sell on Russian gas, and imports of it(through the one pipeline) stopped when we refused to pay in rubles. We've never built up a shortsighted dependance on Russian gas like a certain other country. So you might want to get your facts straight before declaring victory.

And as we've seen your pride in how much Germany had provided was quite quickly shot down when you compare to per-capita or GDP.

It might be worth to at times step down from that ivory tower or superiority you've built there.

I feel even Finland should help more, but we are somewhat constrained by geographic location and Turkish(and Hugarian) stupidity.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

@nhytgbvfeco2: No, i'm saying, we don't need to tell ourselves from Eastern European countries being traitors, we doing enough.

They will get 40 IFV but thats not enough.

If they get Leopards, next week this won't be enough too. Then we must deliver Tornados or Eurofighter or Frigates or everything else we delivered was nothing and we are traitors again.

You say i exaggerate?

No sadly not:

https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/e...01/16/7154209/

What WE deliver, decide WE nobody else.

The Finnish state doesn't sell on Russian gas, and imports of it(through the one pipeline) stopped when we refused to pay in rubles. ...

The finish state owned Fortum has earned enough money from Northstream I + II.

Obviously hypocrisy and double standard.

[Vanoi]

What is it explaining to me? That Soviet derived models will not continue to be a mainstay of Ukrainian forces for some time? Or that Leopard 2s aren't the ideal long term western system? I don't get what you're saying?

That Ukraine can't rely on T-72s for it's offensive operations. You said in your post that Ukraine had expertise in maintaining and making them. They don't. At least in regards to the T-72 they don't produce these tanks at all. What they possess is left-over 1st gen T-72s from the Soviet Union and the various amounts of T-72s captured and donated from allied countries. Hence why they are having trouble sourcing parts and ammunition for them. No doubt Ukraine will continue to use Soviet tanks but in a much more limited capacity. And it's certainly not enough for Ukraine to conduct more offensives.

The point made about the Leopard 2 is that it's needed now and plenty of countries have offered to help get Leopard 2s to Ukraine but reluctance from Germany is preventing this.

Your comment about the Leopard 2 being a long term transition option for Ukraine makes no sense. Any ideas regarding getting Leopards to Ukraine involve them getting there within a few months. Only long term option ever mentioned is Germany's defense companies refiting a bunch of mothballed Leopard 1s and 2s but that would take until 2024. That's little too late for Ukraine.

[Septentrionalis]

Given that our Minister for Foreign Affairs recently (a week ago?) stated that the US has invited Finland to participate in negotiations for an alliance outside the framework of NATO, who knows if Germany will one day find itself in a position in which they have to pay for their own defence instead of freeloading and cowering behind the backs of Americans while badmouthing them and colluding with Russia. History shows that alliances and fortunes change depending on actions countries take.

I am interested in seeing how many signals like this will be seen as the conflicts draws on and countries prove that they are fair weather friends without real commitment to security in Europe. This is Polands prime minister today on Twitter.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

The point made about the Leopard 2 is that it's needed now and plenty of countries have offered to help get Leopard 2s to Ukraine but reluctance from Germany is preventing this.

According to Hebestreit, however, there has been no official request from the Polish government so far.

https://www.zdf.de/nachrichten/polit...ntentType=news


Instead of making anti german propaganda for electoral purposes PIS government could show the official request? Couldn't they?

[antaeus]

That Ukraine can't rely on T-72s for it's offensive operations. You said in your post that Ukraine had expertise in maintaining and making them. They don't. At least in regards to the T-72 they don't produce these tanks at all. What they possess is left-over 1st gen T-72s from the Soviet Union and the various amounts of T-72s captured and donated from allied countries. Hence why they are having trouble sourcing parts and ammunition for them. No doubt Ukraine will continue to use Soviet tanks but in a much more limited capacity. And it's certainly not enough for Ukraine to conduct more offensives.

The point made about the Leopard 2 is that it's needed now and plenty of countries have offered to help get Leopard 2s to Ukraine but reluctance from Germany is preventing this.

Your comment about the Leopard 2 being a long term transition option for Ukraine makes no sense. Any ideas regarding getting Leopards to Ukraine involve them getting there within a few months. Only long term option ever mentioned is Germany's defense companies refiting a bunch of mothballed Leopard 1s and 2s but that would take until 2024. That's little too late for Ukraine.

You didn't go back and read my post, as you're still putting words into my mouth to flesh out what I said so that it is more oppositional than what I actually said. Your article doesn't dispute that the majority of Ukrainian equipment will continue to be of Soviet origin for the foreseeable future, or that it is ideal for the reasons the US government has given (which is why that was the focus early on), that it is quick into action now, as opposed to next year. There will still be deliveries of post-soviet equipment from the west. Look to further T-72s (and derivatives) from Poland for examples. And that Post-soviet equipment has been, and will continue to kill Russians.

You're still being binary in your thinking. Looking for things to debate without thinking clearly about what you want to debate. We agree in our posts. I just don't think you're being broad enough in how you're describing the situation. Which is why I said you're both right, and wrong. The danger is mistaking Ukrainian wishes that are playing down what they have in order to pressure Western governments for more. As I said earlier, the reality is more subtle.

[Vanoi]

You didn't go back and read my post, as you're still putting words into my mouth.

No I'm not. You directly said Ukraine had expertise in maintaining and making these tanks. They do not.

Your article doesn't dispute that the majority of Ukrainian equipment will continue to be of Soviet origin for the foreseeable future, or that it is ideal for the reasons the US government has given, that it is quick into action now, as opposed to next year.

Maybe you should read my post again as I never said that Ukraine would stop using Soviet equipment or that the majority of equipment used by Ukraine would no longer be Soviet in origin. The only thing I said is that Ukraine would be using some of it's Soviet equipment such as it's T-72s in a limited capacity due to lack of spare parts and ammunition.

There will still be deliveries of post-soviet equipment from the west. Look to further T-72s (and derivatives) from Poland for examples. And that Post-soviet equipment has been, and will continue to kill Russians.

Yes and Morocco just sent twenty of it's own T-72s Ukraine. No doubt they will likely receive more. And yet the lack of spare parts and ammunition remains a problem despite deliveries hence why the US continues to pressure Germany and others to send Leopard 2s.

You're still being binary in your thinking. Looking for things to debate without thinking clearly about what you want to debate. We agree in our posts. I just don't think you're being broad enough in how you're describing the situation. Which is why I said you're both right, and wrong.

I know exact what I am debating about My conversation was originally with Mortica about Leopard 2s and why Ukraine needed them and why T-72s were not enough. You jumped into our debate with no real point and plain out false information regarding Ukraine's abilities with the tanks it possesses. I simply you don't actually understand the situation at all but please continue.

[Sar1n]

NYes and Morocco just sent twenty of it's own T-72s Ukraine. No doubt they will likely receive more. And yet the lack of spare parts and ammunition remains a problem despite deliveries hence why the US continues to pressure Germany and others to send Leopard 2s.

You forget that many of the countries most supportive of Ukraine are also those who have long experience with operating, maintaining and even modifying Soviet equipment on their own. Case in point, most if not all of the Moroccan T-72 are going to Czech Republic for repairs and modernizing.

[Vanoi]

You forget that many of the countries most supportive of Ukraine are also those who have long experience with operating, maintaining and even modifying Soviet equipment on their own. Case in point, most if not all of the Moroccan T-72 are going to Czech Republic for repairs and modernizing.

And how much spare parts and ammunition do they have? As the article said, Ukraine is having trouble getting these despite help from the West. The Czech Republic can modernize the T-72s for Ukraine. You still need spare parts and ammunition.

[Kyriakos]

Tbh I don't think it's a very good idea to allow Germany/Japan to massively rebuild their armies. They obviously can do that (industrially), but up to now they were content not doing so (more profit, less involvement in war which is tricky due to their ww2 past).
Anyway, in what way would very potent Germany/Japan armies make a difference, as long as the enemy is a nuclear power? I hope the answer isn't to allow them to have nukes too.

[Cyclops]

Germany is in a tough spot. Easy to beat up on them for neighbours looking for some cheap points. They have tried to pacify Russia by building close economic ties. This is the exact process by which French German wars have become a near-impossibility. Remember Franco-German Wars? There's significant portions of the gaming industry still making a living of those.

It was a worthwhile project. I could carp on about "Russia's never gonna change, you can't trust them" but that's racist nationalist bull****. Germany will get stick for rearming, and OTOH for trying to make peace. As a lynchpin state, on which regional security depends it can't afford to push boundaries like Poland or Hungary (with their differing approaches) can.

Tbh I don't think it's a very good idea to allow Germany/Japan to massively rebuild their armies. They obviously can do that (industrially), but up to now they were content not doing so (more profit, less involvement in war which is tricky due to their ww2 past).
Anyway, in what way would very potent Germany/Japan armies make a difference, as long as the enemy is a nuclear power? I hope the answer isn't to allow them to have nukes too.

Be fun to see the look on Putin's face if Tokyo and Berlin rearmed fully though. Ghost Stalin in hell would be like "son, I am dissapoint".

[Kyriakos]

The thing is that it wouldn't deter, if we are talking about actual war; unless one thinks Russia wouldn't use nukes even if it risked being invaded.
So you would just end up with Germany/Japan either simply having very powerful conventional armies (still can't go to war with Russia) or nuclear Germany/Japan with very powerful conventional armies= no one can check what they do.
Last time no one could check what they did, we had tens of millions of people killed for racial reasons.

[Cyclops]

The thing is that it wouldn't deter, if we are talking about actual war; unless one thinks Russia wouldn't use nukes even if it risked being invaded.
So you would just end up with Germany/Japan either simply having very powerful conventional armies (still can't go to war with Russia) or nuclear Germany/Japan with very powerful conventional armies= no one can check what they do.
Last time no one could check what they did, we had tens of millions of people killed for racial reasons.

...because all Germans are Nazis, and all Japanese are kamikazes? Its fun to play these games, but Germany is a very sincere and trusted international player. Japan may still have quite a racist society, that's not necessarily an indicator of foreign aggression though.

I'd add we could check what both of them did. We, "The West", let Hitler arm Germany to threaten the Soviets in the hope he would do our dirty work tearing down communism. Japan was allowed to play in China, because the West was also playing in China, across Asia, in fact all around the world.

The GrossDeutschland populations that were a CB for Nazi Germany no longer exist largely, we ethnically cleansed them (because ethnic cleansing bad right?). Japan is now a post Imperial power as well, demogaphically and economically.

Both Germany and Japan are today lynchpins of regional security in the two of the three hottest strategic zones in the world. Allowing them more arms would take the weight off our US friends who do complain a little about "Europoors" not pulling their weight. Safer than arming noisy little post Imperial states with chips on their shoulders like Poland, or worse Hellas and Turkiyye, amirite? I mean Colonels half arsing a coup in Kypros leading to a Turkish invasion, cool stuff.

[Kyriakos]

...because all Germans are Nazis, and all Japanese are kamikazes? Its fun to play these games, but Germany is a very sincere and trusted international player. Japan may still have quite a racist society, that's not necessarily an indicator of foreign aggression though.

I'd add we could check what both of them did. We, "The West", let Hitler arm Germany to threaten the Soviets in the hope he would do our dirty work tearing down communism. Japan was allowed to play in China, because the West was also playing in China, across Asia, in fact all around the world.

The GrossDeutschland populations that were a CB for Nazi Germany no longer exist largely, we ethnically cleansed them (because ethnic cleansing bad right?). Japan is now a post Imperial power as well, demogaphically and economically.

Both Germany and Japan are today lynchpins of regional security in the two of the three hottest strategic zones in the world. Allowing them more arms would take the weight off our US friends who do complain a little about "Europoors" not pulling their weight. Safer than arming noisy little post Imperial states with chips on their shoulders like Poland, or worse Hellas and Turkiyye, amirite? I mean Colonels half arsing a coup in Kypros leading to a Turkish invasion, cool stuff.

Well, imo neither Germany nor Japan should be allowed to have nukes. I'd like to hope it's also the prevalent view. Ww2 wasn't just any war, and it wasn't 1000 years ago either.
PS: (honest question) does Japan even accept it run genocides in ww2?

[fkizz]

Anyway, in what way would very potent Germany/Japan armies make a difference, as long as the enemy is a nuclear power? I hope the answer isn't to allow them to have nukes too.

Not sure on case of Germany, but Japan, would make a difference in the same way Finland having had a good investment in defense made sense, even Stalin admited to it. Since Winter War they weren't bothered again.

Now the re-armement issue on said countries biggest barrier is sociocultural, post-WWII there were a lot of pacifist programs, but Japan and Germany respond differently to those stimuli.
Ultimately it should have some political will from whatever country if they seriouslt want to get re-armed, otherwise it's a waste of material and resources.

[conon394]

And how much spare parts and ammunition do they have? As the article said, Ukraine is having trouble getting these despite help from the West. The Czech Republic can modernize the T-72s for Ukraine. You still need spare parts and ammunition.

Sorry Vanoi just picking you at the tail of the argument .

I'm not indifferent to point about how T72 parts or spares are getting lean. But realistically given its background its fair to say Ukraine is likely to be able to scare up more the human capital know how to fudge a T-72 over a completely new system.

Thus if the reports that Poland is going to push more T72s to Ukraine are a good thing. They can used immediately and are better than nothing. Any news of Pact/USSR type kit that can be scrounged up is good news.

That said I think the German Chancellor is being silly - just green light the Leopard. It is clearly the obvious choice. There are simply not that many Leclercs or Challengers lying about. The Leo is the only tank with both potential numbers in working condition and a logistical chain right next to Ukraine (Poland and than back to Germany) that can be sent. There is no based in Europe support of repairing or reconstructing the M1 its all in the US sending them is pointless. I realize in many cases the numbers are covering so so storage units be it in Germany or Spain but realistically many are working and its not like Russia has a spare force of T14 by the hundreds sitting in Kaliningrad now. Given the recent slew of promised deliveries I find the German hesitation baffling.


-------------------

PS: (honest question) does Japan even accept it run genocides in ww2?

How many Americans notice the genocide of the First Nations? The Chinese exclusion acts or the Internment of Japanese Americans citizens in WW2?

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

French TV channel LCI posted clips from an interview with foreign minister Annalena Baerbock on Sunday, in which she said her government has not received a formal request for approval from Warsaw, but added “if we were asked, we would not stand in the way”.

https://www.westerntelegraph.co.uk/n...minister-says/

As i said no request atm. But if a request comes, it will be approved.

[Kyriakos]

^Imo, that's pretty dangerous. I wonder if Germany has its own foreign policy on this, or now is pretty much (implicitly, if you prefer) doing as US would want.
Moreover, is there really that big a difference between Germany sending Ukraine its own tanks, and allowing giving tanks it sold to other countries? (because such arms contracts always come with clauses stating the producer has to allow for resale/gifting to another country => if Germany sells more LeoII to someone, who's to say they too won't give them to a country in war with Russia?)

[StarDreamer]

The finish state owned Fortum has earned enough money from Northstream I + II.

Obviously hypocrisy and double standard.

Fortum is only part-state owned. And that gas "money" was through a purchase of German company, turned subsidiary, that was ultimately nationalized by Germany. All in all Fortum lost quite a lot of money during that debacle. Having purchased it for quite a bit and essentially having to give it away for a nominal fee. It was quite the scandal that the state didn't exercise stricter control of the company to mitigate such risky business. So much for all that gas money, that seemingly also flowed through a pipeline that was never opened...

Obvious lies and false statements.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

In September 2017, Finnish power company Fortum announced it would buy E.ON's remaining 47% stake in Uniper and make a bid for the other 53% held by other shareholders, valuing Uniper at €8 billion.
In July 2022, the German government and Fortum agreed to bailout Uniper a €15 billion rescue deal after being severely affected by reduced supplies and high prices following the energy standoff with Russia.^[21] Germany agreed to pay €267 million for a stake in the ownership of Uniper, while also offering the firm up to €7.7 billion in financing.^[22] Under the bailout, a record in German corporate history, the government will take a 30% stake in Uniper, reducing the ownership of Fortum to 56%.^[23]
Finland's Minister of Ownership Steering Tytti Tuppurainen stated that Finland would not accept the nationalisation of Uniper without a level of compensation being paid.^[25] The German government's intention to nationalize the company was formalized the next day.^[26] Germany will spend $8 billion to acquire a 99% stake in the company.^[27] Uniper published a €40b loss for the first 3 quarters of 2022.[2]

So Fortum paid 8 billion in 2017 + 7 Billion (eventually) in July 2022 and got 7,97 Billions in July 2022 + 8 Billion € at the end of 22.

And we haven't even talk about the annual revenue as stakehholder.

Yeah a big loss for poor poor Fins.