On to the US. I thought Biden was perfect in the first half of 2022. The real time intelligence information which united Ukrainians behind themselves, and the world behind Ukraine when Russia proved to be false. The slowly escalating weapons deliveries which both led yet followed world opinion, ultimately resulting in HIMARS which single handedly crushed Russian ambitions. Then he slacked. The next half of 2022 resulted in minimal to no extra capabilities, but at least gave the appearance of action. The first half of 2023 resulted in no new capabilities, merely a sustainment of what had been done in 2022.
HIMARS got all the headlines, but there's a LOT of other stuff. We've now sent 150-ish Bradly IFVs, a whole lotta Patriot missile complexes, and I imagine the intelligence support is continuing. There's a lot of unglamorous stuff, too--trucks, night-vision goggles, infantry equipment. And recently cluster artillery shells, which are *way* more effective against infantry and trenchlines. So even though things haven't progressed as quickly as a lot of us would hope, there's a lot happening that doesn't get the publicity. And while other EU nations have at times dragged their feet, there's no denying the effectiveness of Storm Shadow.
I, too, wish Ukraine were fully equipped with hundreds of F-16s, not for the jets themselves, but for all the amazing weapons they can carry--SDBs, laser-guided bombs, fully-functional HARMs, etc. But in order for Ukraine to fully employ the jets, they have to be trained. And not just the pilots, but the whole support infrastructure as well--maintenance is a doozy for modern fighters.
I never mentioned F-16. In fact your list of things provided is basically my list of complaints. Cluster munitions should have been sent much earlier. You don't have to know anything about the military to understand that they would be far more effective per shot for many uses than single war heads. Just think that a regular shell attenuates to the 3 power away from its detonation, and approximately half of that is aimed straight up, and you can see why. Further even vaguely paying attention you would know that the US plans to decommission its entire stock, and that decommissioning millions of cluster munitions will cost billions of dollars. In terms of cost effectiveness, a munition that is more effective yet saves money is obvious, and would have had a huge impact. The US should have started delivering them a year ago, with the plan to deliver the entire stock over the next 24 months, with Ukraine agreeing to later dispose any that didn't meet their standards. There is no excuse not to have done that.
Bradleys. I think someone made a rule that no more than double digits should ever be operational in Ukraine at once, and you can count total Bradleys destroyed or damaged by subtracting 99 from the number delivered. It's stupid to have a policy of defeating the entire Russian army, and yet limit deliveries to less than four digits. Ditto for air defenses of all types. It was so obviously useful, and strung out for so long, and still present in a fraction the numbers needed. Tanks. The slow delivery of tiny numbers of largely obsolete models is embarrassing. Again, trying to take on all of the Russian army without more than double digits of any tank model is just terrible policy. This is especially so because they are just gathering dust, and 80% of anything earmarked for use against Russia can just be sent over without thought, because that is what it's purpose is! Longer range weapons. Really obvious how useful they would be. Provided slow, late and in tiny numbers. I understand this halfway because it's the first item in the paragraph that could conceivably be more useful anywhere else ever. Still, it would be so useful in Ukraine that it's stupid to not have provided even a few hundred. F-16: great, they're mostly like the other items on this list. they are just a different variety of artillery, air defense, and long range munitions. There is a bunch, they aren't getting newer, there would be minimal to no additional cost to send a few hundred (vs maintaining and disposing), why not?
Also, general policy. Russia has been making huge trouble and killing a very many people in many terrible ways all over the place. There is no doubt that large swathes of the world are right now worse off because of them, and I doubt anyone at all is better except a few corrupt individuals numbering in the thousands on the backs of others. This is ongoing right now, and not just in Ukraine. Why is everyone so reluctant to return the favor? What are they waiting for, "Catalonian separatists" to appear in their countries?
Topic: Ukraine (Read 771438 times)
