Nice and slow websitesDamn, them bitches got knocked back to 2001 in the mobile phone market lulz
How is that even possible under EU law!? The entire purpose of the EU is to prevent shite like that happeningHe controls most of the media in Hungary, and has ammended the law and legislation, and stacked institutions to make it very difficult to be in opposition to him. And has his own gangs of thugs if all of that doesn't work.
Yes, a sizeable part of the population do genuinely support him, but I'm oretty sure it's not a majority.
Russians really just want to be told what to think, who to hate and what to do by their Mafio overlords, as long as they have enough in their government cheque to buy a cabbage every week they're happy cause the TV tells them it's so much worse in the rest of the world... Imagine what it'd be like if their neighbours just came back from visiting relatives in a fully democratic Ukraine receiving a ton of investment through its membership of the EU all eating the best of food and traveling Europe for their holidays....The thing you don't realize about the new plebphone from russia is that critically it can't run apps.
No telegram - no pesky milbloggers.
No vpn - no access to western news.
etc...
The thing you don't realize about the new plebphone from russia is that critically it can't run apps.
No telegram - no pesky milbloggers.
No vpn - no access to western news.
etc...
Let's see what happens here before jumping to conclusions.
EU is originally based on the premise that "if we share our resources and our markets, we won't need to attack each other ; and peace will hopefully help develop wise and fair governments". More or less. So that's why most of the EU legislations focus on trade, while letting countries in charge of their own justice, defense, culture etc. Also a reason why whenever the union tries to expand its action to other topics, some members start bickering that it's not what they signed for (especially on hot topics like freedom of speech, immigration, religion).How is that even possible under EU law!? The entire purpose of the EU is to prevent shite like that happening
It's hard to do a thorough investigation on a site at the bottom of the sea tbfWhy? After nearly a year we still don't know shit about North Stream.
No one will ever tell the truth if they even find out
I get that but don't member states also have to follow certain principles chief among them be stable democracies, follow the rule of law and have human rights at the top of the agenda along with adhering to the principles of the EU, all things that Hungary seems to be hellbent on subverting no doubt at the behest of PutlerEU is originally based on the premise that "if we share our resources and our markets, we won't need to attack each other ; and peace will hopefully help develop wise and fair governments". More or less. So that's why most of the EU legislations focus on trade, while letting countries in charge of their own justice, defense, culture etc. Also a reason why whenever the union tries to expand its action to other topics, some members start bickering that it's not what they signed for (especially on hot topics like freedom of speech, immigration, religion).
To stay on topic, that way of thinking was also behind Germany's strategy of "let's do business with Russia to reinforce peace on the continent", which as we can see is not as simple as one could wish.
Not really. Especially not when it's as accessible as the baltic sea.It's hard to do a thorough investigation on a site at the bottom of the sea tbf
Breaking: Uk to send Challenger 2 Tanks to Ukraine.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64274755
"Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has confirmed the UK will provide Challenger 2 tanks to Ukraine during a call with President Volodymyr Zelensky, No 10 says."
Reading Wikipedia , they had a troubled developement and are heavy and not that fast , leopard 2 and Abraham’s are beter. But will still do for the Ukrainians. Good thing Ukraine gets them because no one else wanted them.Reporting for duty....
I don't see many Russians winning an argument against one. According to that wiki it has a flawless combat record with the only 1 destruction being a friendly fire incident between challengers 2s.Reading Wikipedia , they had a troubled developement and are heavy and not that fast , leopard 2 and Abraham’s are beter. But will still do for the Ukrainians. Good thing Ukraine gets them because no one else wanted them.
leopard 2 and Abraham’s are beter
Reading Wikipedia , they had a troubled developement and are heavy and not that fast , leopard 2 and Abraham’s are beter. But will still do for the Ukrainians. Good thing Ukraine gets them because no one else wanted them.
I am Dutch , if that helps.
I'd take you seriously if you knew even the first thing about it, but you clearly don't.
I'd imagine finding out your nationality would be a huge clue as to why you made that post.
Thanks I read enough on Wikipedia, it’s a decent tank but they couldn’t sell it to other countries, it reads countries prefer Abrahams and Leopard 2, they even stopped advancing them since 2005, only did upgrades , like I said good enough for Ukraine. Will surely stop Russian piece of shit tanks .Here is a good read for you:
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/challenger-2-compared-to-the-competition/
You're still investigating a site under 150ft of water, it's challenging ffs and requires extremely competent and highly skilled people, you don't roll up in a white van and put up yellow "do not cross" stickersNot really. Especially not when it's as accessible as the baltic sea.
It happend in the Bornholm basin
I don't see many Russians winning an argument against one. According to that wiki it has a flawless combat record with the only 1 destruction being a friendly fire incident between challengers 2s.
How is that even possible under EU law!? The entire purpose of the EU is to prevent shite like that happening
Thanks I read enough on Wikipedia, it’s a decent tank but they couldn’t sell it to other countries, it reads countries prefer Abrahams and Leopard 2, they even stopped advancing them since 2005, only did upgrades , like I said good enough for Ukraine. Will surely stop Russian piece of shit tanks .
But it sure is time, all this talking and not sending .
Yes .. unless all advanced stuff goes now ..This is going to continue to escalate until we have to send troops.
Good, once actual NATO forces are on the ground it's game over, NATO doesn't want to goto war with Russia cause it might escalate, no they don't want to fight cause the casualty rate for the Russians will be utterly catastrophic bordering on inhumane, it would be a slaughterfest akin to the first Iraqi war where we just steamrolled over tens of thousands of dead Iraqis in days and to be perfectly honest Russia needs to be humiliated and forced back to their borders with their army in tatters, every squadie I've talked to is itching to get in that fightThis is going to continue to escalate until we have to send troops.
Good, once actual NATO forces are on the ground it's game over, NATO doesn't want to goto war with Russia cause it might escalate, no they don't want to fight cause the casualty rate for the Russians will be utterly catastrophic bordering on inhumane, it would be a slaughterfest akin to the first Iraqi war where we just steamrolled over tens of thousands of dead Iraqis in days and to be perfectly honest Russia needs to be humiliated and forced back to their borders with their army in tatters, every squadie I've talked to is itching to get in that fight
Yeah it ain't gonna happen, one can only dream... As for NATO casualties, they'd be minimal due to the overwhelming air power / precision missiles that would be brought to force before any land invasion and lol at Squaddies, yeah some of them aren't the brightest cuntsI very much doubt that is going to happen as that really would back Putin into a corner. At best, that would speed up his defenestration, but at worst that could lead to Russia using nuclear weapons.
And if NATO boots do go on the ground, while the Russians would be slaughtered, do remember that some NATO forces would suffer casualties. Russia do still have enough arms to cause significant losses. And let's me honest, squaddies aren't known for their brains but are for their bravado.
I'm afraid so, but yes.This is going to continue to escalate until we have to send troops.
even Abrams would get fucked by artillery on these stagnant front lines.
Yeah we let Russia , drop these minefields ,good thing we waited so long not … Apache’s, tanks , decent sams and drones , should have been send much earlier . Even f16s. We could have went for a quick K.O instead we get a war of attrition. After a couple of months we knew Russia had a technology disadvantage, not only that but their supply lines technical knowledge is also shite …Don't see the tanks changing much in this type of war. This seems to be artillery war, and even Abrams would get fucked by artillery on these stagnant front lines. I could see them being useful in quick offensive moves at some weak spots but even then you need to take into account mines. There's probably mines on each step.
There's another problem with western equipment I keep hearing from reporters who talk to soldiers on front lines. It's not built for this kind of stress. When you need to fire dozens of shells per day, it gets worn down very quickly. And when equipment is sent in such spares quantities it only compounds the problem.Yeah we let Russia , drop these minefields ,good thing we waited so long not … Apache’s, tanks , decent sams and drones , should have been send much earlier . Even f16s. We could have went for a quick K.O instead we get a war of attrition. After a couple of months we knew Russia had a technology disadvantage, not only that but their supply lines technical knowledge is also shite …
but maybe the west thinks they can wear them down , and plunge them back to Middle Age times ,trigger a revolution within , and make them small for the next 50 - 70 years .. I hope there is a deeper plan .. because when you let Russia spin up their war economy.. it’s gone be 5 - 10 years of this shite .
Don't see the tanks changing much in this type of war. This seems to be artillery war, and even Abrams would get fucked by artillery on these stagnant front lines. I could see them being useful in quick offensive moves at some weak spots but even then you need to take into account mines. There's probably mines on each step.
This being the key. But this is far from ever becoming such warfare. Without planes, attack helicopters, long range missiles you have tanks as cannon fodder.Russia's poor tactics involving their own tanks has mislead us into thinking they're no longer useful but realistically they're still still an essential part of modern, combined arms warfare. Without them Ukraine won't be able to effectively liberate their land. And I doubt they want to resort to Russian tactics of just sending in waves of human cannon fodder with almost no armored vehicle support.
Tanks will help Ukraine launch a counter-attack artillery will not be as effective if the attacker has surprise on their sideDon't see the tanks changing much in this type of war. This seems to be artillery war, and even Abrams would get fucked by artillery on these stagnant front lines. I could see them being useful in quick offensive moves at some weak spots but even then you need to take into account mines. There's probably mines on each step.
It's an artillery war, cos both sides are so evenly matched.Don't see the tanks changing much in this type of war. This seems to be artillery war, and even Abrams would get fucked by artillery on these stagnant front lines. I could see them being useful in quick offensive moves at some weak spots but even then you need to take into account mines. There's probably mines on each step.
Hmm okay interesting.. I can imagine , western stuff is build for precision targeting . But if we send the good stuff earlier we wouldn’t be where we are now .. attrition . In my opinion . Ukrain asked from the start for all this stuff. We could have send, tanks ,apaches , Sams, drones there in August in my opinion . Now it’s a war for attrition.There's another problem with western equipment I keep hearing from reporters who talk to soldiers on front lines. It's not built for this kind of stress. When you need to fire dozens of shells per day, it gets worn down very quickly. And when equipment is sent in such spares quantities it only compounds the problem.
Wow, I knew convicts were being used as cannon fodder but these numbers are even worse than I imaged