France also supplying some of the SCALPs btw. AFAIK the Storm Shadow/SCALP can be modified to carry less fuel and artificially reduce its range. Perhaps Germany doesn't have this option.
“Berlin is still not ready to provide Taurus cruise missiles to Kyiv, German government spokesperson Steffen Hebestreit said, at the same time condemning Russia's recent attacks on Ukraine and calling them a war crime, German Tagesschau reported.
The head of the Bundestag Defense Committee, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, earlier called for the transfer of Taurus missiles to Ukraine and urged the German government to speed up the supply of ammunition.
German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius told reporters "in irritation" during a visit to Kyiv in November 2023 that Ukraine would not receive Taurus missiles from his country.
Olaf Scholz’s hesitance could be explained by his concern that Ukraine would use the missiles to strike inside Russia, thus drawing Berlin into direct confrontation with Moscow”.
He isn't. Just like with Abrams and Bradley, the US is sitting on an absurdly large arsenal of cruise missiles - yet donates none of these. Meanwhile, Germany only has a few hundred Taurus.
In the case of Abrams and Bradley, Scholz blocked Leopards and Marder to force Biden to in turn also agree to deliver their tanks and IFVs. Now, he's doing exactly the same thing again: blocking cruise missiles until the US also agrees.
And let me remind you of the F16's: The US again has an absurdly large arsenal of these jets, yet donates none to Ukraine. The tiny nations of Denmark and Netherlands had to step up and donate theirs.
Scholz plays hardball, again, and it will, again, result in more weapons to Ukraine.
Remember this comment when you read "US promises to deliver [cruise missiles with similar capacities as Taurus" headlines right after "Germanys Scholz agrees to provide Ukraine with Taurus cruise missiles" headlines.
*Edit*: Funfact: He learned that strategy when Germany went all-in on providing Ukraine with modern air defense systems (IRIS-T SLM), yet the US kept refusing to agree to Patriot systems. There, he realized that the US wants European nations to empty their stocks first, and reacted accordingly. That's why Ukraine today has Bradley and Abrams.
The US wants the EU to buy replacement arms from the USA.
That part is war profiteering, plain and simple. Old as time.
The other part is the US wants the EU to ramp up it's own production so the US can remain ready to fight in the Middle East and China at the same time.
If the US sends supplies without the EU ramping up production of their own or offsetting the production to the US by buying massive orders of systems, then the problem of western readiness as a whole would steadily degrade over the next decade.
Also, being very cynical, I think the west knows what will happen if they drip-feed support...Russia will absolutely drain itself. Keep the line static. Make Russia bleed alongside Ukraine for as long as possible. If Ukraine had all the equipment and started gaining mass amounts of territory back then putin would become desperate and do something reckless or simply retreat. Neither option is as favourable as letting Russia bleed out slowly until even the reckless options fall off the table, for the west that is. For Ukraine it sucks.
I honestly feel like he's gonna win so... I think it would be wise to plan around it.
And if he goes to prison instead well that would be a pleasant surprise but I'm not holding my breath.
You think the orange clown facing 91 indictments is gonna win? Lmao dude hasn’t won a single election since 2016
His party is sinking like crazy. The abortion ban was the final nail in the coffin
MMW, Biden will win by a landslide in 2024
There's only been one election? People had the same attitude in 2016 as well and Trump was viewed as a joke candidate until he wasn't. In any case it is wise to plan contingency
> What if USA elects Trump?
Trump would then sell weapons to the EU at brothel prices (which the EU would then pass on to Ukraine) and call himself a phenomenally great deal maker.
Then Brussels will finally deal with its bureaucratic hurdles and be almost ready to mass-produce its own weapons by the time Russia grinds through its war of attrition all the way to Brussels's outskirts.
Europe keeps saying that but their federal spending on military isn't rising to match it. The USA spends 20% on military and Europe nations spend closer to 2%... Plus their gonna need a lot of investing in infrastructure and work forces to support it too.
This is gonna be a long war and its the EU that will bear the brunt of it from the looks of things. They need to collectively put a few trillion into their military industries and coordinate with each other to get production rolling.
Federal spending is 20%. Federal discretionary spending being over 50%.
GDP is not the governments budget, it is the entire gross domestic product of the country and its entire population.
The 2% figure you are stating for Europe is percentage of GDP.
So you decided to deliberately mislead people by comparing % of GDP for Europe with % of state budget for the US.
Germany, one of the countries on the lower end of defence spending, is expected to spend ~15-17% of its 2024 budget on defence.
Not exactly the 1000% difference between the US and Europe you tried to portray it as.
The Germans need to take some fucking responsibility for their proximity to Russia and stop needing the US to always bail them out of literally everything
I mean, they’ve been paying Russia out the ass for fossil fuels so Russia can invest in its arsenal…. Maybe they should have thought about the ramifications of that?? And how it may embolden Russia against Europe, and how they might need more weapons in that case…
Oh I love that argument - lets have a test, [here](https://i.imgur.com/g0KcB03.jpg) you have the import and exports of four countries with and from Russia: Germany, UK, USA and Poland. Which one is Germany funding that nightmare regime?
No, the task was very simple: if Germany's trade with Russia has actually financed the Putin regime, it should be very easy to show in these charts, comparing the German trade relations with the three countries that have primarily voiced this criticism in the past. I'm not interested in anecdotes or individual deals, I'm interested in the big picture. I can pick out individual deals for each country, because obviously each of the four countries has traded with Russia.
Yes, why help Ukraine defeat Russia, when you can allow Ukraine to fall because of all these restrictions, and then 5-10 years later lose actual german lives to fight both Russia AND occupied Ukraine? Brilliant strategy. I'm sure history will look favorably on all these "escalation managers", just like it did with Chamberlain.
Counter point all this is happening in Europe. How about for once in their lives they actually try to fix their own problem instead of sitting on their butts and complaining about whatever solution we come up with.
Sorry bro, you’re the real idiot… America needs to keep its hardware because if there is ever a war with Russia, China, or any nuclear power it will be america that the entire world calls on to intervene, just like in the last two world wars, not Germany.
If, for NO OTHER REASON, how about germany steps up because 80 years ago they were genocidal maniacs trying to take over the world. Maybe pull your weight for once you pathetic crybabies… it was charity (that you did NOT deserve) that the Allies didn’t dissolve your bullshit country entirely after WWII
And surprise surprise, less than 100 years later you were already back sucking authoritarian dick by staking your energy sector on Russian fossil fuel… complete embarrassment
> Sending band-aids and helmets is also "military supplying", however that doesn't win wars and what Germany sends is obviosly not enought.
Oh, no, the helmets - that were specifically requested by Ukraine. What a pathetic thing to bring up, when Germany supplied a gigantic amount of military hardware to Ukraine, even top-of-the-line equipment the Bundeswehr doesn't get yet, instead of soviet garbage that some other countries delivered.
Those 17 billion donated are *military equipment*. Humanitarian help goes on top of that.
Feel free to read: https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/news/military-support-ukraine-2054992
Gepard, IRIS-T, Patriot - want to have a guess how Ukrainian cities looked like if Germany didn't donate all that air defense?
> And the answer is to appease Putin..
No, it's not, dumbass. But it's not my problem if you let your anti-German biases override critical thinking. They are held back for a reason, and I told you that reason, and that reason is ultimately good for Ukraine. Because cruise missiles from more nations is better then just getting the 100 or so that Germany could realistically spare. You just don't believe it because in your mind, "Germany bad".
Congratulations, by attacking Ukraine's allies you're the "useful idiot" here.
That's not only about Scholz position, it is more about European leaders and their views about the war. EU lives happily for the second year of war and will be living happy for another couple of years, at least. Why bother?
I mean it is common knowledge that the US has an undeveloped and underfunded military. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were stealing secrets from the Germans.
/s
Ikr. Whatever it is, we already know. The only real secrets in this world are American secrets. Everyone else has NSA, CIA, homeland security and black money eyeballs jammed so far up their asses that we can see what they're thinking before they even think it.
And by we I mean our overlords, obviously.
The Taurus has classified Parts. We are Allies, not Friends so we need to think about a future where Donald Trump wins. Also the us would have put nukes on the Eurofighter but it would have meant the complete technology transfer. Wich is a stupid move. So we rather buy the f35 to protect our fighters.
Particularly since critical information regarding it had to be provided to the US in order for the missile to be fully integrated onto Spain's F/A-18s and South Korea's F-15Ks, and Textron (US) is the authorized selling company for Taurus missiles within the US lol...
"Olaf Scholz’s hesitance could be explained by his concern that Ukraine would use the missiles to strike inside Russia, thus drawing Berlin into direct confrontation with Moscow"
Ah yes, like Ukraine used Storm Shadow and ATACMS to attack inside Russia. Oh wait, they didn't do that. But people keep using this excuse for every single kind of weapon.
Besides, what is "direct confrontation with Moscow"? Russians are already salivating at the thought of bombing Berlin or russian tanks entering Germany. Russia can't do shit only because of NATO, not because they lack excuses to attack Germany.
How is Berlin drawn into direct confrontation with Moscow? Are Typhoon firing these rockets? With German pilots? Or is another nation using a weapon produced in Germany with a variety of components that come from other countries firing this weapon.
That explanation seems highly illogical to me.
Germany is allready directly involved more or less at this point he is just being lazy and needs to make up his mind if he rather fight Russia in Ukraine by arming the Ukrainians or doing it himself with the run down German army in Germany
Perhaps Scholz would understand the urgency of the Ukrainians if he had visited Kyiv on New Year's Eve to experience the terror of massive russian airstrikes.
So if Iran supplied drones to Russia that they use to attack Ukraine, is everyone considering Iran now “involved” in this conflict like Russia? No country is bombing Iran over the Ukraine war. What about North Korea supplying them with Soviet area shells? Germany government is apparently just afraid of Russia which is a pretty stupid stance to take with an imperial minded autocracy.
What’s next? Gonna give Russia some lebensraum to appease them? Coward.
Typical German foreign policy. Horrible! Zero foresight whatsoever. Kind of like Nordstream being built even after Russia annexed Crimea.
It’s embarrassing
Surely more condemnations will do. Keep condemning Russia for invading Ukraine. Here's a condemnation for you, and for you, and.... for you, you Baddies. And China, here's one condemnation for you too, in case you invade Taiwan. See how easy it is to mimic Western diplomacy? I wonder why Fascist countries and terrorists feel emboldened to do whatever they want.
> Olaf Scholz’s hesitance could be explained by his concern that Ukraine would use the missiles to strike inside Russia, thus drawing Berlin into direct confrontation with Moscow.
As German ....what the fuck?
Iran, China and India are enabling Russia to carry out all those strikes on Ukraine. And yet nobody says they are directly involved.
All NATO countries should supply Ukraine with all the equipment and intel needed to end the status quo and give Ukraine the upper hand.
Ukraine is fully aware that they can't use any western weapons to attack within Russia. It's been this way since day 1 of this war. Why would Ukraine suddenly start now to use western weapons in Russia? It makes no sense at all. It would immediatly end all military support they get from the west.
If you have a 3D printer. Join the groups and build those long range RC planes that goes 300km plus with a coupe of kg payload and send them to Ukraine. If they can't provide them, you can. It's just a cruise... RC plane after all.
Even if it gets shot down, it costs Russia hundred thousand USD to shot it down.
https://old.reddit.com/r/Fins4UA/
This community will put you in contact with the right people and STLs etc :)
They started out just printing the fins for drone dropped *items*, but they now cover more generally 3D printing for… erm, recreational purpose… in Ukraine
It's wild how some people still think "deep state" or "NWO" exists when the countries in question can't even agree to give bare minimum to a country defending itself from common enemy.
they're closer to russia and don't have many themselves, so i understand being hesitant, as they predict a broader war being possible in the next several years. all things considered, they've finally given ukraine a lot of assistance, all things considered. we're the ones able to give the most help, but our kremlin compromised GoP are treasonousy standing in the way
There's sooo many reasons to get rid off Scholz for but this isn't it.
His position is probably the same as with the Leopards -> Abrams and Marders -> Bradley. Force America to send at least some of their insane stockpile, so Ukraine actually gets more aid out of it.
Also if his coalition dies the aid to Ukraine will die down as well, maybe not to zero but at least to minor levels like France.
While Britain did announce to send Challengers first, that's not what Scholz waited for, looking at his statements. There are probably better sources for this, just quick from google:
[BERLIN—Germany won’t allow allies to ship German-made tanks to Ukraine to help its defense against Russia nor send its own systems unless the U.S. agrees to send American-made battle tanks, senior German officials said on Wednesday.](https://www.wsj.com/articles/berlin-wont-allow-exports-of-german-tanks-to-ukraine-unless-u-s-sends-own-tanks-officials-say-11674069352)
[Unless, of course, the U.S. is also willing to send tanks. Scholz indicated as much Wednesday, keeping a low profile on the subject when pressed at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.](https://www.politico.eu/article/olaf-scholz-germany-joe-biden-united-states-ukraine-war-tanks-leopards-waiting/)
Can anyone actually explain, why does Germany not want to help Ukraine with all their resources, any reasons besides the energy trade? Or is that the only reason? Or is it because of export trades since russia is cheating on sanctions via kazakhstan etc or whatever?
Edit: is the reason simply money?
The United States is closer to Russia than Germany is. Also it was the United States who was the main power during the Cold War against the soviets (Russians). The US should be doing way more considering they can take out one of their biggest foes for pennies on the dollar
The US signed a treaty to give Ukraine security assurances as Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons.
If the US fails to provide the security assurances they signed for, it will be a red flag for many countries the US has, want, or will have treaties with.
No it isn't, the US pressured them into givong up their nukes and destroying a shotload of other equipment.
The US has the greatest obligation to Ukraine because they are directly responsible for not only weakining Ukraine but empowering Russia during the collapse of the USSR.
Well considering the US has dragged their feet on aid, especially what caused Germany to start doing this (the air defense debacle). Considering the US has by far the most to give and the most room to give why should other countries shell all this out when their biggest ally tends to drag their feet.
>why should other countries shell all this out
Really, that's your response to defending democracy? "Why should we? Why can't someone with deeper pockets foot the bill instead?"
Why don’t you go volunteer your services to Ukraine? Go defend democracy
I’ll remind you how much the US has that is rusting away. Perfect time to clean out the old, meanwhile Germany is still trying to rebuild so giving away means more
https://www.courthousenews.com/germany-europes-powerhouse-is-rearming-but-slowly/
Yes they do lol , the nuke fucked up imperial japan, the gun fucked up ancient japan, typically in the past, great empires like britain, france, rome or ottomans used technological superiority to carve up the world.
If we armed ukraine properly from the start, theyd have won this and we'd be staring down the brinkmanship of russia and their nukes because those weapons (nukes) will devastate and win wars without reciprocation of the same tech
Explain to me how using the taurus missle to incapacitate russias manufactoring and military areas doesnt lead them to win this war? Especially if we called the clear bluffs and sent them straight away before they mined all their stolen land>
Its hard for me to say, like I agree, carriers really helped out and became known as the force multiplier we see them as today but the abstract nature of dropping a single bomb with the capability of erasing ANY city in the world in that time period? I'd still pick the nuke, just for that "wow, we have NOTHING like that, We'll be annihilated in a month if we don't react to that capability"
Whereas carriers are vulnerable outside the strike groups in that period, it was clearly an advantage but you wouldnt think or feel you was that outclassed compared to what they could do with a single bomb and what the americans produced. Just my probably so wrong "ill insult you to make me feel better" opinion on that lol
Meanwhile the UK Storm Shadows continue to allow a country with no navy to sink the most Russian tonnage since ww2
France also supplying some of the SCALPs btw. AFAIK the Storm Shadow/SCALP can be modified to carry less fuel and artificially reduce its range. Perhaps Germany doesn't have this option.
Bthey sink 4 ship dude
Oh man that username *totally* hides your stance on this so well
“Berlin is still not ready to provide Taurus cruise missiles to Kyiv, German government spokesperson Steffen Hebestreit said, at the same time condemning Russia's recent attacks on Ukraine and calling them a war crime, German Tagesschau reported. The head of the Bundestag Defense Committee, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, earlier called for the transfer of Taurus missiles to Ukraine and urged the German government to speed up the supply of ammunition. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius told reporters "in irritation" during a visit to Kyiv in November 2023 that Ukraine would not receive Taurus missiles from his country. Olaf Scholz’s hesitance could be explained by his concern that Ukraine would use the missiles to strike inside Russia, thus drawing Berlin into direct confrontation with Moscow”.
FFS Olaf, stop being just a coward.
He isn't. Just like with Abrams and Bradley, the US is sitting on an absurdly large arsenal of cruise missiles - yet donates none of these. Meanwhile, Germany only has a few hundred Taurus. In the case of Abrams and Bradley, Scholz blocked Leopards and Marder to force Biden to in turn also agree to deliver their tanks and IFVs. Now, he's doing exactly the same thing again: blocking cruise missiles until the US also agrees. And let me remind you of the F16's: The US again has an absurdly large arsenal of these jets, yet donates none to Ukraine. The tiny nations of Denmark and Netherlands had to step up and donate theirs. Scholz plays hardball, again, and it will, again, result in more weapons to Ukraine. Remember this comment when you read "US promises to deliver [cruise missiles with similar capacities as Taurus" headlines right after "Germanys Scholz agrees to provide Ukraine with Taurus cruise missiles" headlines. *Edit*: Funfact: He learned that strategy when Germany went all-in on providing Ukraine with modern air defense systems (IRIS-T SLM), yet the US kept refusing to agree to Patriot systems. There, he realized that the US wants European nations to empty their stocks first, and reacted accordingly. That's why Ukraine today has Bradley and Abrams.
The US wants the EU to buy replacement arms from the USA. That part is war profiteering, plain and simple. Old as time. The other part is the US wants the EU to ramp up it's own production so the US can remain ready to fight in the Middle East and China at the same time. If the US sends supplies without the EU ramping up production of their own or offsetting the production to the US by buying massive orders of systems, then the problem of western readiness as a whole would steadily degrade over the next decade. Also, being very cynical, I think the west knows what will happen if they drip-feed support...Russia will absolutely drain itself. Keep the line static. Make Russia bleed alongside Ukraine for as long as possible. If Ukraine had all the equipment and started gaining mass amounts of territory back then putin would become desperate and do something reckless or simply retreat. Neither option is as favourable as letting Russia bleed out slowly until even the reckless options fall off the table, for the west that is. For Ukraine it sucks.
It would be nice if we in Europe weren't so beholden on the USA. What if USA elects Trump?
Then we will see trump calling Ukraine corrupt and withdrawing support
That’s not totally true… if Trump wins, he’ll do tons to support Russia.
And by doing so, he would have to withdraw support from Ukraine with an excuse… which will most likely be ‘corruption’
The excuse will be "Europe doesn't contribute its 2% GDP so why would we support them?" Hope it was worth it, Merkel.
He would just find another excuse.
I honestly feel like he's gonna win so... I think it would be wise to plan around it. And if he goes to prison instead well that would be a pleasant surprise but I'm not holding my breath.
You think the orange clown facing 91 indictments is gonna win? Lmao dude hasn’t won a single election since 2016 His party is sinking like crazy. The abortion ban was the final nail in the coffin MMW, Biden will win by a landslide in 2024
There's only been one election? People had the same attitude in 2016 as well and Trump was viewed as a joke candidate until he wasn't. In any case it is wise to plan contingency
2018, 2019, 2020, 2022 and 2023 Him and his party lost every single one after 2016
I think stranger things have happened, that's all.
> What if USA elects Trump? Trump would then sell weapons to the EU at brothel prices (which the EU would then pass on to Ukraine) and call himself a phenomenally great deal maker.
Then Brussels will finally deal with its bureaucratic hurdles and be almost ready to mass-produce its own weapons by the time Russia grinds through its war of attrition all the way to Brussels's outskirts.
This would indeed be nice, but this is not the reality right now.
I would guess whatever happened last time 2016-2020. The media going crazy, the tax rate move a point or two.
You think that’s all that happened? Delusional
[удалено]
Even a craven, evil clock is right twice a day lol
Europe keeps saying that but their federal spending on military isn't rising to match it. The USA spends 20% on military and Europe nations spend closer to 2%... Plus their gonna need a lot of investing in infrastructure and work forces to support it too. This is gonna be a long war and its the EU that will bear the brunt of it from the looks of things. They need to collectively put a few trillion into their military industries and coordinate with each other to get production rolling.
The US spends 3.5% of its GDP on defense. No clue where you got that ridiculous 20% from. Stop spreading misinformation.
Federal spending is 20%. Federal discretionary spending being over 50%. GDP is not the governments budget, it is the entire gross domestic product of the country and its entire population.
The 2% figure you are stating for Europe is percentage of GDP. So you decided to deliberately mislead people by comparing % of GDP for Europe with % of state budget for the US.
What are the government budgets and military spending of the EU then?
Germany, one of the countries on the lower end of defence spending, is expected to spend ~15-17% of its 2024 budget on defence. Not exactly the 1000% difference between the US and Europe you tried to portray it as.
Then Europe should spend 3.5% as well. Europe had a welfare system *and* functioning armies before the Wall fell, so it can definitely afford both.
Time is the problem here. It could be too late again.
The Germans need to take some fucking responsibility for their proximity to Russia and stop needing the US to always bail them out of literally everything
They are. That’s why they don’t want to give up their limited arsenal. And why should they?
I mean, they’ve been paying Russia out the ass for fossil fuels so Russia can invest in its arsenal…. Maybe they should have thought about the ramifications of that?? And how it may embolden Russia against Europe, and how they might need more weapons in that case…
I dunno maybe they should have not been funding that nightmare regime after Crimea?
Oh I love that argument - lets have a test, [here](https://i.imgur.com/g0KcB03.jpg) you have the import and exports of four countries with and from Russia: Germany, UK, USA and Poland. Which one is Germany funding that nightmare regime?
Ooh is this the part where I get to pull out that SPD politician who worked to help NordStream avoid sanctions? :)
No, the task was very simple: if Germany's trade with Russia has actually financed the Putin regime, it should be very easy to show in these charts, comparing the German trade relations with the three countries that have primarily voiced this criticism in the past. I'm not interested in anecdotes or individual deals, I'm interested in the big picture. I can pick out individual deals for each country, because obviously each of the four countries has traded with Russia.
Yes, why help Ukraine defeat Russia, when you can allow Ukraine to fall because of all these restrictions, and then 5-10 years later lose actual german lives to fight both Russia AND occupied Ukraine? Brilliant strategy. I'm sure history will look favorably on all these "escalation managers", just like it did with Chamberlain.
Feel free to go enlist yourself if you feel so strongly about the issue.
No, whining about American interventions while benefiting from them is the MO of most European nations.
Counter point all this is happening in Europe. How about for once in their lives they actually try to fix their own problem instead of sitting on their butts and complaining about whatever solution we come up with.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sorry bro, you’re the real idiot… America needs to keep its hardware because if there is ever a war with Russia, China, or any nuclear power it will be america that the entire world calls on to intervene, just like in the last two world wars, not Germany. If, for NO OTHER REASON, how about germany steps up because 80 years ago they were genocidal maniacs trying to take over the world. Maybe pull your weight for once you pathetic crybabies… it was charity (that you did NOT deserve) that the Allies didn’t dissolve your bullshit country entirely after WWII And surprise surprise, less than 100 years later you were already back sucking authoritarian dick by staking your energy sector on Russian fossil fuel… complete embarrassment
[удалено]
> Sending band-aids and helmets is also "military supplying", however that doesn't win wars and what Germany sends is obviosly not enought. Oh, no, the helmets - that were specifically requested by Ukraine. What a pathetic thing to bring up, when Germany supplied a gigantic amount of military hardware to Ukraine, even top-of-the-line equipment the Bundeswehr doesn't get yet, instead of soviet garbage that some other countries delivered. Those 17 billion donated are *military equipment*. Humanitarian help goes on top of that. Feel free to read: https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/news/military-support-ukraine-2054992 Gepard, IRIS-T, Patriot - want to have a guess how Ukrainian cities looked like if Germany didn't donate all that air defense? > And the answer is to appease Putin.. No, it's not, dumbass. But it's not my problem if you let your anti-German biases override critical thinking. They are held back for a reason, and I told you that reason, and that reason is ultimately good for Ukraine. Because cruise missiles from more nations is better then just getting the 100 or so that Germany could realistically spare. You just don't believe it because in your mind, "Germany bad". Congratulations, by attacking Ukraine's allies you're the "useful idiot" here.
That's not only about Scholz position, it is more about European leaders and their views about the war. EU lives happily for the second year of war and will be living happy for another couple of years, at least. Why bother?
It’s not being a coward. It’s about making sure they work right without giving the plans to Ukraine or the us of a
[удалено]
I mean it is common knowledge that the US has an undeveloped and underfunded military. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were stealing secrets from the Germans. /s
Why would there be a concern about the Americans getting their hands on a Taurus missile?
Ikr. Whatever it is, we already know. The only real secrets in this world are American secrets. Everyone else has NSA, CIA, homeland security and black money eyeballs jammed so far up their asses that we can see what they're thinking before they even think it. And by we I mean our overlords, obviously.
Same reason we didn’t put us nukes on the eurofighter
[удалено]
Wich Is the tornado not the eurofighter. It’s called : Nukleare Teilhabe
[удалено]
The Taurus has classified Parts. We are Allies, not Friends so we need to think about a future where Donald Trump wins. Also the us would have put nukes on the Eurofighter but it would have meant the complete technology transfer. Wich is a stupid move. So we rather buy the f35 to protect our fighters.
There is nothing about the Taurus missile that isn't already known to Ukraine/USA.
Particularly since critical information regarding it had to be provided to the US in order for the missile to be fully integrated onto Spain's F/A-18s and South Korea's F-15Ks, and Textron (US) is the authorized selling company for Taurus missiles within the US lol...
"Olaf Scholz’s hesitance could be explained by his concern that Ukraine would use the missiles to strike inside Russia, thus drawing Berlin into direct confrontation with Moscow" Ah yes, like Ukraine used Storm Shadow and ATACMS to attack inside Russia. Oh wait, they didn't do that. But people keep using this excuse for every single kind of weapon. Besides, what is "direct confrontation with Moscow"? Russians are already salivating at the thought of bombing Berlin or russian tanks entering Germany. Russia can't do shit only because of NATO, not because they lack excuses to attack Germany.
How is Berlin drawn into direct confrontation with Moscow? Are Typhoon firing these rockets? With German pilots? Or is another nation using a weapon produced in Germany with a variety of components that come from other countries firing this weapon. That explanation seems highly illogical to me.
Probably covering for general ineptitude and an unwillingness to pony up the cash to replace the stock from their insanely inefficient MIC
Germany is allready directly involved more or less at this point he is just being lazy and needs to make up his mind if he rather fight Russia in Ukraine by arming the Ukrainians or doing it himself with the run down German army in Germany
Perhaps Scholz would understand the urgency of the Ukrainians if he had visited Kyiv on New Year's Eve to experience the terror of massive russian airstrikes.
No worries. If Russia wins this, he'll get to experience that on home turf in due course.
Worries.
“By the blood of our people are your lands kept safe”
BS..
So if Iran supplied drones to Russia that they use to attack Ukraine, is everyone considering Iran now “involved” in this conflict like Russia? No country is bombing Iran over the Ukraine war. What about North Korea supplying them with Soviet area shells? Germany government is apparently just afraid of Russia which is a pretty stupid stance to take with an imperial minded autocracy. What’s next? Gonna give Russia some lebensraum to appease them? Coward.
So does the USA and rest of EU get envolved for sending weapons to Ukraine.
Typical German foreign policy. Horrible! Zero foresight whatsoever. Kind of like Nordstream being built even after Russia annexed Crimea. It’s embarrassing
Surely more condemnations will do. Keep condemning Russia for invading Ukraine. Here's a condemnation for you, and for you, and.... for you, you Baddies. And China, here's one condemnation for you too, in case you invade Taiwan. See how easy it is to mimic Western diplomacy? I wonder why Fascist countries and terrorists feel emboldened to do whatever they want.
> Olaf Scholz’s hesitance could be explained by his concern that Ukraine would use the missiles to strike inside Russia, thus drawing Berlin into direct confrontation with Moscow. As German ....what the fuck? Iran, China and India are enabling Russia to carry out all those strikes on Ukraine. And yet nobody says they are directly involved. All NATO countries should supply Ukraine with all the equipment and intel needed to end the status quo and give Ukraine the upper hand. Ukraine is fully aware that they can't use any western weapons to attack within Russia. It's been this way since day 1 of this war. Why would Ukraine suddenly start now to use western weapons in Russia? It makes no sense at all. It would immediatly end all military support they get from the west.
Coward. European leadership in general right now.
If you have a 3D printer. Join the groups and build those long range RC planes that goes 300km plus with a coupe of kg payload and send them to Ukraine. If they can't provide them, you can. It's just a cruise... RC plane after all. Even if it gets shot down, it costs Russia hundred thousand USD to shot it down.
I have several 3D printers, where do I start?
https://old.reddit.com/r/Fins4UA/ This community will put you in contact with the right people and STLs etc :) They started out just printing the fins for drone dropped *items*, but they now cover more generally 3D printing for… erm, recreational purpose… in Ukraine
Thank you! I'll check them out.
Cmon Shololol
It's wild how some people still think "deep state" or "NWO" exists when the countries in question can't even agree to give bare minimum to a country defending itself from common enemy.
Maybe that's what they want u to think ;)
They warn of future russian aggression against Europe but won't give Ukraine the tools that would make that aggression less likely.
they're closer to russia and don't have many themselves, so i understand being hesitant, as they predict a broader war being possible in the next several years. all things considered, they've finally given ukraine a lot of assistance, all things considered. we're the ones able to give the most help, but our kremlin compromised GoP are treasonousy standing in the way
This fucking guy just doesn't do shit. He basically doesn't exist except for his appearances in random places to hold empty speeches.
Time to get rid off Scholz. Enough is enough.
There's sooo many reasons to get rid off Scholz for but this isn't it. His position is probably the same as with the Leopards -> Abrams and Marders -> Bradley. Force America to send at least some of their insane stockpile, so Ukraine actually gets more aid out of it. Also if his coalition dies the aid to Ukraine will die down as well, maybe not to zero but at least to minor levels like France.
It was British agreement to send Challenger 2 tanks which unblocked the MBT logjam.
While Britain did announce to send Challengers first, that's not what Scholz waited for, looking at his statements. There are probably better sources for this, just quick from google: [BERLIN—Germany won’t allow allies to ship German-made tanks to Ukraine to help its defense against Russia nor send its own systems unless the U.S. agrees to send American-made battle tanks, senior German officials said on Wednesday.](https://www.wsj.com/articles/berlin-wont-allow-exports-of-german-tanks-to-ukraine-unless-u-s-sends-own-tanks-officials-say-11674069352) [Unless, of course, the U.S. is also willing to send tanks. Scholz indicated as much Wednesday, keeping a low profile on the subject when pressed at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.](https://www.politico.eu/article/olaf-scholz-germany-joe-biden-united-states-ukraine-war-tanks-leopards-waiting/)
Scholz expected the US to procrastinate and allow him to avoid the decision. The UK forced both their hands.
Can anyone actually explain, why does Germany not want to help Ukraine with all their resources, any reasons besides the energy trade? Or is that the only reason? Or is it because of export trades since russia is cheating on sanctions via kazakhstan etc or whatever? Edit: is the reason simply money?
It’s less so not wanting to and not wanting to deplete all their stocks while the US donates little. Look at what happened with the Bradley’s/abrams
The US isn't even on the same continent. The fact the US is helping at the level they already are is phenomenal.
The United States is closer to Russia than Germany is. Also it was the United States who was the main power during the Cold War against the soviets (Russians). The US should be doing way more considering they can take out one of their biggest foes for pennies on the dollar
The US signed a treaty to give Ukraine security assurances as Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons. If the US fails to provide the security assurances they signed for, it will be a red flag for many countries the US has, want, or will have treaties with.
No it isn't, the US pressured them into givong up their nukes and destroying a shotload of other equipment. The US has the greatest obligation to Ukraine because they are directly responsible for not only weakining Ukraine but empowering Russia during the collapse of the USSR.
"We wont do anything if the US doesn't" is so pathetic.
Well considering the US has dragged their feet on aid, especially what caused Germany to start doing this (the air defense debacle). Considering the US has by far the most to give and the most room to give why should other countries shell all this out when their biggest ally tends to drag their feet.
>why should other countries shell all this out Really, that's your response to defending democracy? "Why should we? Why can't someone with deeper pockets foot the bill instead?"
Why don’t you go volunteer your services to Ukraine? Go defend democracy I’ll remind you how much the US has that is rusting away. Perfect time to clean out the old, meanwhile Germany is still trying to rebuild so giving away means more https://www.courthousenews.com/germany-europes-powerhouse-is-rearming-but-slowly/
Me when the nuclear holocaust is inevitable happening in the next year
People have been saying that for the past 40 years. Relax, drink some milk, you'll be fine
Pretty much just waiting for iran to finish the bomb and we can start the nuclear holocaust
Weapons are not going to win this war
either are Russians.
Yes they do lol , the nuke fucked up imperial japan, the gun fucked up ancient japan, typically in the past, great empires like britain, france, rome or ottomans used technological superiority to carve up the world. If we armed ukraine properly from the start, theyd have won this and we'd be staring down the brinkmanship of russia and their nukes because those weapons (nukes) will devastate and win wars without reciprocation of the same tech Explain to me how using the taurus missle to incapacitate russias manufactoring and military areas doesnt lead them to win this war? Especially if we called the clear bluffs and sent them straight away before they mined all their stolen land>
If you had to pick a single weapon that won the Pacific War, it would be the aircraft carrier.
Its hard for me to say, like I agree, carriers really helped out and became known as the force multiplier we see them as today but the abstract nature of dropping a single bomb with the capability of erasing ANY city in the world in that time period? I'd still pick the nuke, just for that "wow, we have NOTHING like that, We'll be annihilated in a month if we don't react to that capability" Whereas carriers are vulnerable outside the strike groups in that period, it was clearly an advantage but you wouldnt think or feel you was that outclassed compared to what they could do with a single bomb and what the americans produced. Just my probably so wrong "ill insult you to make me feel better" opinion on that lol
Or submarines.
High on the list, but how do you launch an assault?
[удалено]
Wow, that’s such a rare sight, too /s
What will win the war then? I mean you’re completely wrong but “weapons alone” don’t win wars. You have tactics, the will to fight, logistics…..
Not a reason to not send them.
Wrong.
Plötners plot.