Ukraine counter offensive

[wellyfish]

So given what they SOLD to Ukraine, historically - even more reason for them to GIVE military aid.

It is given to them.
Initially the £s are taken from existing departmental budgets and given to arms manufacturers and suppliers.
Those manufacturers and suppliers then send the lethal aid to Ukraine.

 

[Notch7]

I also don't recall the Ukrainian leadership saying: What we need is more humanitarian aid, we have enough weapons

Ukraines gdp has dropped by 45%

do they need humanitarian aid?

 

[motorbiking]

of course GDP has dropped, half their workforce has been called up to fight. I'm surprised its as high as 45%. We could all send "aid", so as not to upset the Russians. But if the US and UK had opted to do that... the Ukrainian leader would be locked up in some Russian prison and the Ukrainian people would have "voted" to join the Russian Empire.

No matter what smoke screen Macron tries to hide behind, he clearly wants to be seen as doing his bit without angering a potential future trading partner.

It's true that dialogue needs to be open, even with a country that is happy to use radioactive and biological weapons on countries it isn't at war with. Putin likes the fact that France and Germany want to be seen to do their bit with minimal upset to Russia.

 

[Deleted member 174758]

France is pretty low on the list(s), however you cut it.
I can't cite more than the recent attempts at talks, but I have the impression they've been relatively dove-ish to Russia over a long term. As was Germany, to be fair.
Countries will need to speak to each other long after the current dispute is done.

Well, there is the fact that the French (and Germans) were supplying the Russians with high-tech military equipment despite the EU embargo which came into force in 2014. Old article, I know, but germaine to this discussion

 

[fillyboy]

MSN

 

[wellyfish]

MSN

Lol, that second sentence.

 

[Deleted member 174758]

Didn't David Cameron say that he would to see the EU extend as far as the Urals.
Joe Biden wants to see regime change in Russia.
With attitudes like that, conflict seems inevitable.

Didn't Putin say that all of the old Soviet Union satellite states are Russian by right and that he was going to build a new Russian empire which would include places like the Baltic states, Ukraine, Georgia, etc. He also referred to Ukrainians as Nazis and invaded their country, unprovoked, which his goons have attempted to Russify by obliterating all signs of Ukrainian culture (in the diminishing bits they control). If you think about it that is just how the original Nazis behaved.

With attitudes like that, conflict certainly seems inevitable.

And you still support him...

 

[Deleted member 174758]

It seems to have been forgotten that the Russians offered Britain a pact against Hitler but the British preferred to do a deal with Hitler.
Once war started, the allies bent over backwards to do deals with Russia.

Utter BS. Stalin was not to be trusted. His behaviour in the 1930s had already shown that. And the fact that he'd covertly trained the German military, and allowed them to have some of their armament industry operating secretly in the USSR, which was known to British Intelligence at the time, proved tha to the British government of the day. Only a dyed in the wool old-school communist (or brainwashed idiot) could believe otherwise.

Once war started, the allies bent over backwards to do deals with Russia. No they didn't. Germany invaded Poland from one side, the Russians from the other. You rewrite history more times than Stalin did, so much so that I suspect your copy of the book on WWII was written on an Etch-o-Sketch

 

[Charlie George]

It is given to them.
Initially the £s are taken from existing departmental budgets and given to arms manufacturers and suppliers.
Those manufacturers and suppliers then send the lethal aid to Ukraine.

Most, if not all supplies are from existing military stocks, and in most case's the Countries have'nt even begun to replenish the armaments donated, as contracts are needed to be issued etc and in some cases it will take many years to re stock, also the donated equipment/munitions will mainly be taken from the oldest stock first.

 

[IT Minion]

Utter BS. Stalin was not to be trusted. His behaviour in the 1930s had already shown that. And the fact that he'd covertly trained the German military, and allowed them to have some of their armament industry operating secretly in the USSR, which was known to British Intelligence at the time, proved tha to the British government of the day. Only a dyed in the wool old-school communist (or brainwashed idiot) could believe otherwise.

Once war started, the allies bent over backwards to do deals with Russia. No they didn't. Germany invaded Poland from one side, the Russians from the other. You rewrite history more times than Stalin did, so much so that I suspect your copy of the book on WWII was written on an Etch-o-Sketch

It's lifted more or less intact from a Russian PR release from a recent WW2 anniversary.

 

[wellyfish]

Most, if not all supplies are from existing military stocks, and in most case's the Countries have'nt even begun to replenish the armaments donated, as contracts are needed to be issued etc and in some cases it will take many years to re stock, also the donated equipment/munitions will mainly be taken from the oldest stock first.

That's not what Simon Clarke in his answer to a written question. This is what he said:

The UK is providing £1bn in additional support to enhance and sustain Ukraine’s resistance to the Russian invasion. This new funding has come from contributions from UK government departments and the devolved administrations’ existing budgets. Most departments committed around 1.5% of their 2022-23 capital budget. The Welsh Government contributed £30m and the Scottish Government contributed £65m. Following discussions with the Northern Ireland Finance Minister, and in the absence of an Executive, the Barnett formula will be applied in the usual way for the Northern Ireland Executive.

 

[Charlie George]

A

That's not what Simon Clarke in his answer to a written question. This is what he said:

All the weapons/munitions in use now are from existing stocks, if the Ukrainians had to place an order with suppliers direct it would take many months if not years, the money quoted would be for us to replenish this stock, and also for training Ukrainian troops/drones and also non lethal equipment etc.
This talks about US supplies.

Department Moves Quick to Replenish Weapons Sent to Ukraine

The Defense Department has contracted with an array of manufacturers to give back to U.S. military units what was taken from them to support Ukraine.

www.defense.gov

 

[wellyfish]

A

All the weapons/munitions in use now are from existing stocks, if the Ukrainians had to place an order with suppliers direct it would take many months if not years, the money quoted would be for us to replenish this stock, and also for training Ukrainian troops/drones and also non lethal equipment etc.
This talks about US supplies.

Department Moves Quick to Replenish Weapons Sent to Ukraine

The Defense Department has contracted with an array of manufacturers to give back to U.S. military units what was taken from them to support Ukraine.

www.defense.gov

Right, so you are saying the £1bn he's talking about won't be spent on weapons going to Ukraine. Rather, someone, somewhere, will determine what £1bn of existing is (in terms of what UKR want) and take that from UK forces?

So, until suppliers can replenish those 'donations', UK armed forces are 'down' £1bn worth of weapons?

 

[Notch7]

Most, if not all supplies are from existing military stocks, and in most case's the Countries have'nt even begun to replenish the armaments donated, as contracts are needed to be issued etc and in some cases it will take many years to re stock, also the donated equipment/munitions will mainly be taken from the oldest stock first.

Makes me think of those boxes of German ammunition (was it ammo, I forget now) they were all covered in mould and unusable.

 

[Notch7]

of course GDP has dropped, half their workforce has been called up to fight. I'm surprised its as high as 45%. We could all send "aid", so as not to upset the Russians. But if the US and UK had opted to do that... the Ukrainian leader would be locked up in some Russian prison and the Ukrainian people would have "voted" to join the Russian Empire.

No matter what smoke screen Macron tries to hide behind, he clearly wants to be seen as doing his bit without angering a potential future trading partner.

It's true that dialogue needs to be open, even with a country that is happy to use radioactive and biological weapons on countries it isn't at war with. Putin likes the fact that France and Germany want to be seen to do their bit with minimal upset to Russia.

If Boris Johnson hadn’t been desperately trying to save his own skin the UK wouldve done FA.