poesel

Wrt to Scholz meeting with Biden: it's a bit funny that Germany, who was scolded for its pusillanimity, seems to have become one of the main driving powers behind the support of Ukraine. How the tables turn. Even inside Germany, there is no real opposition against that support. There is an ongoing-heated debate here about the funds for the fiscal year of 2024 with, amongst others, huge farmer protests. But no one (important) has proposed to cut the funds for Ukraine. That has surprised me TBH. But then it is very German to take a long time to get around to one thing, but then we stick to it forever (for better or worse).

Who in the US needs to sign off on arms purchases from NATO partners, and who sets the price? Is there a loophole for delivering arms to Ukraine?

I'd like to add that the CASEVAC drone just needs a magnetic compass and a barometer (or LIDAR) to fly towards the friendlies. Neither of which can be jammed. As soon as it is out of EW range, it can fly with all sensors towards its destination.

Could someone please explain what this Zelenskyy / Zalushny thing is all about? Is that only a political quarrel, and Zelenskyy is trying to get rid of a rival? Or is there some real concern that a general is trying to reach for political power?

Adding to what @TheVulture said: there is not much difference in the end result between sending a drone into a zone with the order to kill any human it can find and sending an artillery shell into the same area. Apart from hand-to-hand combat, everything is a remote kill. The really scary part is when the AI can decide when to send a drone to kill somewhere. Hello Skynet.

Germany considers delivering Taurus to the UK in exchange for Stormshadows for Ukraine. https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/taurus-marschflugkoerper-deutschland-erwaegt-ringtausch-fuer-ukraine-a-5c9a23d0-fd34-4706-9de0-b85cab5e3ed8 Is 'Ringtausch' already an English word?

DW has a longer article (in German) about the situation in Baschkortostan. TL;DR: will it topple Russia? - no, but it is a sign. https://www.dw.com/de/was-es-mit-den-protesten-in-russland-auf-sich-hat/a-68026361

Let's assume that this is correct (and I think it's likely) and also that Putin is aware of this. So his counter-strategy is to dig in to keep what he has and to mount some attacks to be seen active to the Russian public. And at the same time not annoy the important people and get rid of the unwanted or unnecessary. I don't see Putin run out of money or people anytime soon. The same goes for (enough) support from the West, and the Ukrainians have no choice.

How come that they can press those company workers into service? I thought Petersburg & Moscow were mostly exempt from such actions?

Ecuador and The US concluded an agreement on the exchange of Soviet weapons worth $200 million for modern equipment. The deal should be completed by the end of this month. Ecuador doesn't know for which purpose the US is receiving them.. could be Ukraine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Ecuadorian_Armed_Forces Ecuador has some Soviet manpads and light AA. Nice to have, but nothing fancy. But why is the west not doing that more often? Should be quite some kit floating around.

Thanks Butschi for writing that, so I don't have to write it. There has been some slight grumbling about Ukrainians having it a bit too easy wrt to other refugees, but this will be normalized. Apart from that, there have been no noteworthy troubles.

Because politicians want to stay in office. It doesn't help if your voters are dead. As an autocrat, you don't have to worry about that. It may even help if the right ones die. Case in point: Russia. Because we don't relate to them culturally. You care about people you 'know'. I do care more about Ukraine than Gaza, although my co-worker is Palestinian and I personally know no one from Ukraine!?! I guess this is some basic human tribal thing.

That does not surprise me. Object recognition and tracking are well into the capability range of €10 microcontrollers for years now. It just (*) needed someone to merge it with the flight control of a drone, and here we are. (*) just is the engineer's term for a few months to make it work

Thanks all for the S-300 answers. Yes, it was really a question.

How come that S-300 rockets are so good at ground attacks? They were build for ground-to-air combat!? Why do they hit anything, and why are they intercepted so seldom?

I'd like to point out that this is probably a case of lost in translation. I'm pretty sure that they would have received a manual ('Handbuch'). A 'Anleitung' is usually something like a step-by-step instruction. More suitable for field repairs than a thick manual.

Yes, already wrote Steve. He's got probably nothing better to do today anyway

Sorry, the forum is acting weird.

I think you misunderstood me. I was not talking about my opinion (for the record: all for it) but the public opinion. A year ago, the German public would have gone nuts about a missile attack of Ukraine on a Russian city. 'Escalation!', 'WW3 imminent!', 'Don't poke the bear!' etc... There were some raised eyebrows when Ukraine did those little drone attacks. And now missiles, and the reaction is: nothing. So I wanted to hear about the reaction in other countries. If true, I think this is a big change. Ukraine can now attack into Russia. And by 'can', I mean politically. Without fear of backlash for killing civilians (which will inevitably happen). It doesn't matter that Ukraine neither can nor wants to send 100 missiles to Russia. The fact that they can retaliate on Russian soil with rockets without loosing western support is the change.

Let's just assume that Ukraine bombed Belgorod and killed civilians as a by product. That was what has been reported by the mass media here. The reaction (here): nothing. Is that the same everywhere? I am really surprised that the public takes such an attack with a shrug. It is not the first time Ukraine attacked Russia directly but not with this dimension. IMO, Ukraine just learned that it is ok with the west to retaliate to Russia in kind (as long as no western weapons are used). That would change the character of this war.

Wine? I'll give you a Merlot from the Tessin (Ticino) but that is all. The guns are nice, but you can't use them anywhere else, it seems. The model that Switzerland runs on can only be run by one country in Europe, and only a small one. Copying that anywhere else would lead to total failure. Also, the Swiss have shot themselves in the foot wrt their relationship with the EU lately. Let's see what will come of it. Since we are already in the Alps: I'm wondering if there will be some pressure on Austria to join NATO. The power of the post WW2 agreements to stay neutral seems to wane.

There had been some discussions in the papers here if Germany should have its own nukes. The question was what to do if the US withdraws its protection. The French don't want to share. I don't know what the UK's policy would be in that case. That leaves the rest of Europe without nuclear protection. That discussion didn't create much political traction that I'm aware of. But that the question was even asked is really something new.

Worst case scenario is that Russia falls apart, and the nukes end up in the hand of criminals (who know how to use them). Apart from that, any coup would weaken Russia in some way, even if not successful (see Prig). Which would be a good thing. A group of people who could pull it off and have a reason to do so do not currently exist in Russia. If they existed, we would have a coup.

Turkey finally agreed to Sweden joining NATO. One condition was that Turkey gets F16s. https://www.spiegel.de/ausland/ankara-tuerkischer-parlamentsausschuss-billigt-schwedens-nato-beitritt-a-0a6d82fa-0893-4c47-8692-3052c5f30c93

They found Nawalny. Looks like he was looking for Santa north of the polar circle. https://www.spiegel.de/ausland/alexej-nawalny-in-strafkolonie-in-der-polarregion-verlegt-a-982d1734-43c5-4d7a-9a25-055ab997b5a8