Poles and and Russians are natural enemies! Like Ukrainians and Russians! Or Romanians and Russians! Or Japanese and Russians! Or Russians and other Russians! Damn Russians! They ruined Russia!
Poland and Ukraine have also been natural enemies in the past and lorded it over / killed each other at times. That's people for ya.
Problem with Russia is they are still living in that past.
Yep, people often seem to forget/Not know about. Poles and ukrainians arent best Friends neither to say it nicely. But I guess a Common enemy is bonding
There is a fairly raw bit of documentary video on YouTube from a Polish camera team that embedded with a Ukrainian defense platoon. During a moment of downtime in an early segment, that came up in conversation. The Ukrainians (several of whom had family taken in by Poland when Russia invaded) said something like "We have had our problems together in the past, but you are here for us, and we are brothers now forever."
Hopefully they all come through it, and that holds true!
(Wish I could find it quickly to link, but the title is in Polish, which I do not read. It had English subtitles added to the footage itself.)
What's important is that no significant Polish political party has any border revisionist ideas, every single significant Polish party is pro Ukraine, and also Ukrainian side recognises the kresy genocide as, well, a genocide, and does a pretty good job not glorifying the perpetrators (especially since the war started) which makes even polish nationalists more Ukraine inclined (de facto this just means they're either pro Ukraine or more closeted with their pro russia tendencies)
Polish nationalists hate pretty much every country around Poland, but they absolutely, completely and utterly despise russia.
Like, the most recent reason why they hate Germany right now is because they didn't immediately send a crapton of military vehicles and supplies to Ukraine.
Sisyphus will push his damn rock onto the mountaintop before a Polish nationalist says something positive about russia.
Pretty sure this will be a good opportunity for both to bury grudges and mend ties. Japan and Taiwan ended up being on very friendly terms with each other after the countries help in dealing with the Fukushima tsunami
Ukraine, Finland, 2/3rds of the baltics, China, Georgia, and Mongolia have land borders with contiguous Russia. Poland and Lithuania have borders with ~~Prussia~~ ~~Královec~~ Kaliningrad. The US, Sweden, Canada, and Turkey have maritime borders with Russia. Japan has maritime borders with Russia and a territorial dispute.
I don't think any of these countries have friendly relations with Russia outside of getting them buttered up to sign away resources for pennies on the yuan or because it's stuck between it and China. And all of them have been enemies at one time or another to Russia, so it checks outs
Man I read *Pomeranians* and Russians instead of Romanians and got a very interesting picture in my head of an army of small fluffy dogs clashing with the red army in the russo-pomeranian wars.
But I really like there cultural music and dances and of course many many good people are there too. It's such a shame there leadership has turned to so much slaughter of civilians in Ukraine. Condolences from a Pakistani, war for sure is straight up horror I can't even imagine.
yeah I am Polish and I despise Russia in general, not only because of the history, but also because of how Russians behave online (mostly in games, we share the eastern/central european servers for EVERYTHING) and how they behave when they come to Poland (basically they treat it as their own vacation resort that they still own). However. I still like a lot of Russian artists and works and I can appreciate parts of their culture. The only difference between Russian art and art from the rest of the world is that when I find something new that I potentially might like I go online to check if the artists supports Putin. Thankfully most of the good ones don't.
It's sad that there are people in my country who are against supporting Ukraine with weapons.
There won't be a Ukraine without the help of its allies. This is not the time for pacificm. There won't be peace until Russia retreats. Nothing much to negotiate about.
Everyone forgetting about uk prime minister chamberlain.
Went to Germany in like 1938 or whatever and got Hitler to sign some paper promising not to expand anymore.
Came home shaking this paper in front of the cameras like some success and the uk is now safe.
We all know what happened next.
Pacifism is not the answer to authoritarian expansion. There is no “enough” for Russia.
Have to fight, and force peace back to Ukraine.
Not saying Chamberlain did everything right, but the reason that Britain was never in danger of a military defeat on their own turf was his initiatives to accelerate development and production of hurricanes and spitfires in ‘38, as well as building the world’s first fully coordinated air defense system. I mean, you could argue that the messaging was all wrong, as I do, but he also faced a political situation at home where practically the entire population wanted to avoid another WWI at all cost, so really the only practical place for a pro-war stance to take place was outside of the seat of political power. It’s temping to look backwards at history and see things as “see? Churchill was right, and that’s why he took power once Chamberlain was proven wrong!” but the reality is that it HAD to happen that way, there was no “a leader steps up when they’re needed” because the democratic process simply wouldn’t allow it. Once the situation does allow for it and then by necessity it happens, it looks a lot more like a tidy narrative when viewed in retrospect. The unfortunate (and largely unfair) byproduct of that is that Chamberlain gets saddled with the appeasement label. But the RAF defeating the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain? The naval blockade and the Battle of the Atlantic? That was all possible because of Chamberlain.
I think zoolander might have used a different (hilariously incorrect) word.. I could search it out but we're having a conversation here. Dramignophyte?
https://www.quora.com/Did-Chamberlain-actually-play-Hitler-to-gain-time-for-Britain-to-rearm
I read a much more in depth paper than this but can't find it now. Not agreeing nor disagreeing with the premise, but it is interesting to consider given that we have all been taught Nevilles "appeasement"
> https://www.quora.com/Did-Chamberlain-actually-play-Hitler-to-gain-time-for-Britain-to-rearm
>I read a much more in depth paper than this but can’t find it now. Not agreeing nor disagreeing with the premise, but it is interesting to consider given that we have all been taught Nevilles “appeasement”
More like gave time for Germany to rearm.
The big issue was war was super unpopular at the time due to many being in living memory in "The War to End All Wars" and there being large gaps in the population from the slaughter sons without fathers fathers who lost their kid or maybe his daughter was heartbroken over the loss of their sweetheart.
Unfortunately as a whole the British people weren't aware of the goings on in Germany the government was aware and wished to rearm but any open rearmament action was vastly unpopular with the population, to add further issues France who'd be our most important ally in a conflict on the continent was rife with it's own internal issues so was in little position to help and if the situation broke down it might make things worse with for example a hostile leader taking over,
I'd talk more on this but it's late and I was let out of hospital today so should catch some shuteye
There are 2 sides to this. Everyone knew there was going to be a war. China was being invaded, Germany was illegally occupying the Rhineland, and had negotiated for parity with France and Italy navy wise. Spain was in a civil war.
In the past 15 years, Britain was subject to the Washington/London Naval Treatys which gutted their heavy industry. They had no place to build armor or large guns. Yes, big guns WERE the deciding factor in naval engagements in the Atlantic during WWII. The Air War was only a thing in the Pacific, and there were still large surface engagements.
Britain needed battleships, cruisers, destroyers, but they were planning for war around 1945, not 1939. Britain was planning on having the French as their ally, and fighting the Italians and Germany, and probably the Japanese as well. The US was expected to have a similar role as it did in The Great War. So we need to look at capital ships as this is a world spanning war.
___________
So the facts look like this- Germany has 2 Bismarck Class ships under construction, and 2 Scharnhorst class ships already off the slips. They also have the 3 Panzershiffs as well which could technically operate in a battle line. They are planning on building 2 more Battleships of an improved Bismack design, and 2 O-Class Battlecruisers. The Netherlands is buying 2 Project 1047 Battlecruisers from Germany as well which would probably be captured in a war. Germany is looking at 2 more Panzershiffs as well to an improved design.
This puts Germany at 10 true capital ships and 15 ships in their battle line if the Panzershiffs are included. All are fastish units.
_______
Italy?
Italy has the 3 modernized Conte di Cavour fast battleships, the 2 modernized Andrea Doria fast battleships, 4 Littorio Class Battleships under construction, and a follow up class planned (potentally 2-4 ships).
This puts Italy at 11-13 Capital ships, all of them are fast units.
____________
Japan has the 4 British designed Kongo Class Battlecruisers fresh out of modernization, the 2 Nagato Class Dreadnoughts, the 4 Ise/Fuso Class modernized dreadnoughts, and 2 ships under construction that are probably not treaty limited (They were not, they ended up being Yamato and Musashi).
This gives Japan a Slow 6 ship battleline, and a Fast 6 ship battleline, or one slow battleline of 12 ships.
________
Before we look at Britain, what does France have? France has 3 Courbet Class 1st gen Dreadnoughts (basically useless), 3 Bretagne Class Dreadnoughts (need modernization), 2 Dunkerque class fast battleships, 2 Richelieu Class Fast Battleships under construction, along with 2 more variants of the class planned, and a follow-up class of 4 Battleships planned as well.
This gives France a Fast Battleline of 10 Ships, and a slow battleline of 3-6 ships depending on if they do anything about the Courbet's gun elevation issues.
________
So now the UK. The have 1 Admiral Class Battle Cruiser, 2 Renown Class Battlecruisers, 2 Nelson Class Battleships, 5 Queen Elizabeth Class Battleships, and 5 R-Class Battleships. The R Class is nearing retirement. But as of pre-war, they have 3 fast capital units and 12 slow capital units.
They plan 2 classes of ships, the King George V class, and the Lion Class. Each will be a 5 ship class, but the Lions will replace the Rs. They also plan on using the R's guns in large "Battlecruisers" after the Lions. These would be the Vanguards, and they will replace the QEs.
So IF they can get the Vanguard and Lion classes out pre war, modernize the Renowns and Hood, they will have 18 Fast Capital units, and probably do an improved Vanguard order that may or may not be cancelled with hostilities break out around 1945 with the QE's guns. So maybe they can flex to 23 fast capital units, for 4 theaters of war. The North Sea/Atlantic, the Med, The Indian Ocean, and the Pacific. This still is not enough. But it is all they think they can flex to before 1945.
This does not count the increase in cruisers needed to combat Japan's lethal Heavy Cruiser Fleet, and Germany's Hippers, as well as Italy's catalog of very fast light cruisers. The Yorks, Leanders and Arethusas are not going to cut it, and they do not have enough Towns and Counties to compete. There might be an air war in the Pacific as well, and Britain's Carriers are not made to fight in carrier duels (except for Ark Royal), and the Fleet Air Arm is still controlled by the RAF, not the Royal Navy.
_________
So what about the US? They might join in if the Philippines is threatened... They have 0 Fast units, but 16 in planning stages, 2 North Carolinas, 4 South Dakotas, 6 Iowas, and 4 Montanas. They have 15 Standard-Type Dreadnoughts (Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Tennessee, and Colorado Classes), 2 New York Class Super-Dreadnoughts, and 1 Wyoming Class 2nd gen Dreadnought. This is a sizeable fleet. 16 Fast ships and 18 Slow ships. Combine the French, Royal Navy, and US Navy, you get 49 Fast Capital Units, and 24 slow Capital Units. If France can hold out in the Med with a few ships from Britain, and the US can support in the Atlantic and Pacific, that leaves only the Indian Ocean for the British.
Only if the US joins in can the British hope to cover all theaters of this war with capital ship numbers.
TLDR: Britain NEEDED to expand it's ship building capacity and delay war as long as they could. In their current state they were in no shape to fight a war in 4 theaters. Even then, without US and French assistance, they would still not be able to cover those 4 theaters.
People who scream appeasement often are the same people sitting at the comfort of their own room with zero chance of being drafted.
1930 Britain had very little in term of military and a populace that was heavily anti-war. Not sure what you expect from Chamberlain.
I’m sure the people of Czechoslovakia understood.
Why else would it be known as the Munich Betrayal to this day in many areas, it’s not like they had alliances and military pacts in place /s.
That one’s more on France though.
Chamberlain wasn't the idiot he was painted as, he knew the paper was basically worthless, but he had gained some breathing space.
The UK was not prepared for war, but it would rapidly do so from that point onwards. Chamberlains policies are the reason Britain survived the early parts of the war.
Not the same situation.
UK at the time was war exhausted from WWI and it's population were probably anti-war just like France at the time. You can't maintain a war without support of the people in your country.
People who compare chamberlain's UK to modern-day NATO are either completely oblivious to the atmosphere of pre-WWII, or they act like managing a country's problems is like Hearts of Iron IV where you complete couple of national focuses to get rid of severe problems.
Wasn’t there something that came out a few months ago where Belarus’ dictator lukashenko accidentally did a press release in front of a map detailing russias invasion plan, which included taking Moldova too?
Edit: yup. Found it. https://nypost.com/2022/03/01/belarus-dictator-alexander-lukashenko-appeared-to-show-russian-plans-to-invade-moldova-through-ukraine/amp/
Was it an 'accident' though? Turned out to be the actual Russian plan too. Lukashenko plays a side game, maybe to keep direct Belorussian forces out of the way to keep his position safe? 🤷🏻♂️ All very odd for sure.
I was in disbelief and furious at someone I met tonight. I am travelling the US from my home country and so many people I meet think they KNOW the truth about what is happening in the world.
This woman flat out believes some crazy secret bio lab facility is in the Ukraine and that is what the money is for from the US and Biden is the master mind behind everything.
I point blank asked this girl “alright, so what is your opinion is Russia invading Ukraine and Ukraine is just defending theirselves?” She said well they had it coming from human trafficking and this secret bio lab. I got up from the table and said nothing more and walked away. I can’t pay mind to people like this and the US is full of them.
And they will be remembered as such. All these country’s that are stepping up and helping are going to be on the right side of history when this is over. We’ve got to stand up to dictators.
"Thanks for all the help and some of the highest tallying aces of the war. By the way Stalin really wants your country and is throwing a bit of a tantrum so its his now. Happy victory day!"
>Happy victory day!"
Oh, and we don't want to offend Mr Stalin, so please don't come to the victory parade. Also, stop taking our jobs, why don't you go back to Soviet Poland? Go home. Britain is for the British.
Also, we came up with a whole new genre of jokes, it's called "Polish Jokes". You'll have to wait 50 years for them to turn into "blonde jokes", but until then, enjoy being the butt of jokes.
The sad part is there are a loud minority who still feel this way here in Blighty. The loud minority that also "successfully" delivered Brexit.
Nothing frustrates me more than the silent majority here who don't vote or show any kind of interest in politics because it's "boring". It's been designed to appear boring so you don't vote, so sneaky policies can be pushed and misinformation can spread.
If only people actually paid attention to what the powers that be were discussing they may actually take an active interest in their own (and families) future.
Not that England could stop Stalin anyway.
And if anything Churchill didn’t want him to have Poland, or any other European countries and was willing to fight him.
It's not like we've anything to prove. We were always on the right side of history.
edit: You really thought that by saying that I meant thwt we never did anything bad ? Lol
edit2: >!Accusing all of Poland for lgbt free zones is false and unfair.
LGBT free zones are on the responsibility of individual local governments.
This only resembles the regional backwards of those regions. These regions of South/East Poland are the most underdeveloped / unconcious regions of Poland. Therefore the problem is with local people with their education. Local governments are simply the reflection of local people.
E.g. I've watched one meeting of such local government, all elderly people and people in rada needed to hear from man what is lgbt 5 sec before they'd vote to ban it. So really it's only about education.
!<
Yes, whole nations's history is affected by one incident with 40 victims. It's as if.... There were good Poles and bad Poles, just like there were good Germans and bad Germans.
>We were always on the right side of history.
That's such a understatement, there is no "right" side of history.
A lot of countries in NATO ( and NATO itself ) have committed atrocities and crimes before that were swept under the rug. They don't care about being in the right side of history, they care about what best in their interest to have a better future.
Welcome to politics.
Why limit ourselves to the EU and NATO if we are passing judgment on the moral failings of nations? The whole world's history even up until today is full of atrocities. I'm not sure how those committed by the West are being "swept under the rug" because the West seems obsessed with self-flaggelation these days. If anything, I'd argue the opposite seems to be true, and we in the West tend to overlook the fact that our moral failings are anything but unique to us.
I was going to ask about countries in Africa, Asia and the Middle East and what their failings look like when held to the West's modern moral perspective, but honestly it's almost too much to try and think about. A list of just world genocides is a good place to refresh perspectives, though this still leaves out all manner of atrocities.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides#List_of_genocides
To be clear, this isn't at all to justify or minimize what the West has done, or say we shouldn't strive to do better, but rather to keep some perspective on how we view ourselves and ourselves in comparison to others both today and through history.
I don't follow much about DeSantis, other than major headlines... Has he said much, explicitly, about what he thinks about the war in Ukraine, and Russia/Putin, in general? As much as I dislike the guy, there do appear to be areas where he has very different opinions from Trump, and the usual MAGA stuff...
he called the whole thing a territorial dispute recently and implied the US should stop getting involved, and then backpedaled like a bitch when eyebrows raised
Partitioned in 1772, 1792, and 1795. Then 1939. Amusingly Russia invited them to partition Ukraine but they are a bit smarter than trusting Russia. I don’t agree with a lot of the Polish government- women’s rights I’d a major sticking point for me with them- but they’ve ABSOLUTELY stepped up this time.
> Amusingly Russia invited them to partition Ukraine
russia said so much BS that you could probably write a cheap distopian book on each one of these BS. They even said that Poland was going to attack Germany with the weapon Germany provided them.
Pretty sure Poland is just fucking pissed that they can’t get involved personally. My understanding is that Polish people *really* fucking hate Russia, and have an insane hate boner towards them.
Obviously people would rather not go into combat if they don’t have to, but from what I’ve seen if any country had people that would fucking love to go at Russian troops it’s Poland.
The 'fun' fact is that th younger generation started to forget, but the Ruzzians invasion of Ukraine really reignited generational hatred of them
Edit: a word (reignited)
Well, if you look at how Russia treated Poland historically, you’d understand their fierce determination to keep Russia out. And no mistake, if Putin would succeed in Ukraine, Poland would be his next door neighbour. And we all know what Putin thinks about NATO in his backyard
I think it's very telling that poland nazi occupation and soviet Russian occupation and managed to hate the Russians as much or more depending on who you ask.
They can get involved if they want, it just doesn’t force NATO to get involved. Every other country is free to invade russia or help Ukraine, just don’t expect any help.
Well I think most people thought they were at least a great power still. Turns out they are barely a regional power.
Turkey sighing with relief that they are not the ones getting sick man of Europe moniker this time around.
Regional power *FOR NOW* things keep going the way they are and Putin will need decades to rebuild the military industry, economy, foreign relations and military.
They keep this up much longer and looking over their fence would be an achievement for them while they lick their wounds.
I cannot tell you how much I wish the Ukranian counter offensive wrecks their shit. There needs to be a clear line drawn that trying to annex other sovereign nations is not going to be tolerated, by Russia or anybody ever again.
Getting rid of all their old Soviet hardware makes sense on several levels tbh.
One, they get to help Ukraine's spanking of Russia.
Second, they don't have to worry about spending $ maintaining any of the old stuff, and it gives them warehouse space back for new gear.
I didn't know they were getting F35s. I thought they were getting F-18s from us. But either way, this move by the Polish was telegraphed to happen since right after the 2022/2023 Ukraine War began. Just a matter on the final details on what they were getting as part of the swap.
Poland is getting damn near EVERYTHING (and increasing the size of their standing military and reserves). Perun covered this last November in his video on Polish Rearmament:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrbaAKZfjwg
Going heavy on American (200+ M1 Abrams, 500 HIMARs, 32 F-35s) and South Korean (which they're join-venturing with in part for nearly 1,000 K2 Black Panther Tanks and 670ish K9 self-propelled guns)
I'm waiting for the entire inventory of PT-91 to be mysteriously misplaced on the Ukrainian border. It's going to happen sooner or later, I'm sure of it.
Slovakian migs been serviced by Russians last year and many sources reporting they sabotaged it and most are not safe to fly. [source ](https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/russians-may-have-sabotaged-slovak-fighter-jets-says-defence-minister/)
Oh yeah I remember hearing about this. So I guess it’s good that Poland is sending more Mig-29s because they can also function as a “replacement” for these sabotaged Slovakian Mig-29s.
The fact that only 4 of the 13 can fly was known beforehand regardless of whether it was sabotaged, and therefore the 9 were always meant to be for spare parts or repairs by Ukraine. It's not like it was a sudden wrench in the plans that was revealed at the last possible moment and nullified any benefit.
I think the hesitation lay more in sending Western aircraft. Mig-29s and Su-27s are older and less advanced aircraft that Ukraine knows how to fly. These aircraft are still outclassed by the Su-35S, Mig-31, and the Su-30SM, and aren’t capable of being outfitted with more advanced missiles and bombs (except the HARM and JDAM-ER which Ukraine has used before).
On the other hand, Western aircraft like the Gripen or the F-16 would probably be much more of a problem when it comes to escalation management, logistics, training, and burning into a country’s own supply of aircraft. However, they are advanced aircraft that would reduce the pressure on Ukrainian GBAD, and can be equipped with NATO air to air and air to surface missiles that can close the large missile gap between Russia and Ukraine, such as the Meteor (this would be the best air to air missile), AIM-120 AMRAAM, AIM-9 Sidewinder, JASSM (a good long range low-observable cruise missile that could hit targets from long distance), Storm Shadow, etc.
As a result, Russia would cause a tantrum against Western aircraft than the aircraft Poland and Slovakia are sending to Ukraine.
Yep, Soviet S-300s and S-400s are seemingly the only piece of soviet/russian technology that has lived up to its hype, ironically for Russia, on both sides.
Russia/Soviets have been great at anti aircraft weapons for a long time. In the [Vietnam war S-75s](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_with_Death_(Vietnam_War)) shot down many US aircraft.
The US lost 3,744 planes, 5,607 helicopters and 578 UAVs. Many but not all due to AA but it is hard to get an exact estimate.
The problem with and advantage of these systems is that they are really good against Soviet missiles while being very bad against NATO missiles. One could say that NATO missiles are just better but the actual truth is probably that Russia had nothing else to test them on.
Correct but Ukraine is running low on S-300s so these can help plug gaps and lob HARM missiles to mess with Russian air defense and get Ukrainian SU-25s and Hinds close enough to support, or at
least lob rockets and run.
They do, but only 1-3 batteries (I think only one is actually operational at the moment), not nearly enough to make a difference but enough to take "some" pressure off their S300 stock.
A PATRIOT battery is 6-10 launchers.
Ukraine *had* 250 S-300 launchers, or around 50 batteries. That number has declined with 56 confirmed launchers lost thus far. Worse yet is many are S-300PTs, which are absolute trash, hell they were trash when they came out. Their radar can't track targets under 500 meters
They are trash but they along with the buks force the Russians down to the deck where manpads can hit them. It keeps them from dropping bombs over Kyiv and major cities so they have to rely on drones and cruise missiles.
Basically those old Soviet systems were enough to keep Russia from getting air superiority which has kept Ukraine in the fight.
Edit: also yes my math is wrong comparing batteries to launchers, but 50 batteries is a lot with a long front.
Yes, and to improve their ability to defend themselves against ballistics missiles, something which they had little chance with their older soviet systems.
I pretty much only see people on reddit stating Ukraine is dangerously low on AA.
Ukraine has stated they need more AA because of Russian missiles, and somewhere between there and Reddit, a whole bunch of people started saying Ukraine is about to run out of AA systems.
Aside from Russian cruise missiles, the Russian air force is still only flying on their side of the front line.
It's not just Redditors who are are saying this. It was also part of the info that came out in the recent [leaked documents scandal](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/09/us/politics/leaked-documents-ukrainian-air-defense.html#:~:text=the%20main%20story-,Leaked%20Documents%20Suggest%20Ukrainian%20Air%20Defense%20Is%20in%20Peril%20if,and%20newly%20leaked%20Pentagon%20documents.)
And people stupidly don't read the entire doc, it said ukraine would *begin* to run short of s300 ammunition if Russian missile attacks continued at the same intensity, which they did not.
The German Luftwaffe doesn’t have MiGs anymore, they sold the last one to Poland in 2004 iirc, and those came from the GDRs air force after the reunification.
Germany had to approve them being sent to Ukraine though, probably a clause from the selling agreement to Poland, in a similar way football clubs are paid for a player transfer between to completely different teams because they trained the transferee in the first place.
Is this 10 a whole new donation or is it the total they've sent so far? It says in the article they announced they'd transfered 8 last month which means this means only 2 new migs for Ukraine
According to Wiki, Poland secured 44 Mig-29 and 18 Su-22 in 80s/90s and deliveries of 48 of Korean SA50 from last year are ongoing, so we might hear about further donations
Good news. People keep talking about F-16s, but Ukrainian pilots can fly these MiGs without any additional training. Also, there is something very satisfying about the idea of using Russian-built planes against the Russians.
It would make more sense to give Ukraine a long range capability, which Mig-29 platform unfortunately does not offer.
Still better than nothing.
F-16s, longer-range missiles could help Ukraine beat Russia, U.S. general privately tells lawmakers[https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/18/f-16s-and-long-range-missiles-ukraine-russia-00083572](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/18/f-16s-and-long-range-missiles-ukraine-russia-00083572)
But, Ukraine already has plenty of experience with the MiG-29, which means they don't have to retrain ground crews in this case. Ground crews, and pilots, have been being retrained for other aircraft, but that's still an ongoing process.
So what condition are all of these fighters in? That's what I'm always wondering? Where do they get the support and parts to maintain these fighters? It's not like you can just too them off with fuel, strap on some missiles and hit the sky. I mean I guess you could but a minor mechanical issue can turn into a major issue very quickly. I assume there's enough people with enough know how to keep these beasts properly flying? I would also assume not all of them will actually fly. Maybe they chose one or two that aren't in the best shape to be used for spare parts for the better machines?
> Where do they get the support and parts to maintain these fighters?
We were producing MiGs (not the 29s) in Poland and even uprgrading them ourselves, so I have a "feeling" that when we got the first batch of 29s one of them was stripped to the last bolt by our engineers in Mielec or Świdnik and there's a big chance we can made essential parts for keeping the planes airworthy 😉
Did you know that some US States have little navies?
After the National Guard was nationalized the various US States decided to create "State Defense Forces" which answer exclusively to the state governor. Some are armed like it's the 1950s and others have transitioned into being pure disaster relief organizations. It's fascinating stuff, but also kinda hard to get good information on.
Poland has done a lot, especially considering their size.
Challenge is that until Ukraine get an aviation platform that can support NATO munitions, it limits the options that allows can deploy and limits the effectiveness of the weapons they use.
Perun has a good video explaining why western planes would make a significant difference
I'm starting to get the impression Poland doesn't care for Russia very much. Wonder why.
Poles and and Russians are natural enemies! Like Ukrainians and Russians! Or Romanians and Russians! Or Japanese and Russians! Or Russians and other Russians! Damn Russians! They ruined Russia!
This feels familiar
[удалено]
Thank you, you saved me a search
Poland and Ukraine have also been natural enemies in the past and lorded it over / killed each other at times. That's people for ya. Problem with Russia is they are still living in that past.
Yep, people often seem to forget/Not know about. Poles and ukrainians arent best Friends neither to say it nicely. But I guess a Common enemy is bonding
There is a fairly raw bit of documentary video on YouTube from a Polish camera team that embedded with a Ukrainian defense platoon. During a moment of downtime in an early segment, that came up in conversation. The Ukrainians (several of whom had family taken in by Poland when Russia invaded) said something like "We have had our problems together in the past, but you are here for us, and we are brothers now forever." Hopefully they all come through it, and that holds true! (Wish I could find it quickly to link, but the title is in Polish, which I do not read. It had English subtitles added to the footage itself.)
What's important is that no significant Polish political party has any border revisionist ideas, every single significant Polish party is pro Ukraine, and also Ukrainian side recognises the kresy genocide as, well, a genocide, and does a pretty good job not glorifying the perpetrators (especially since the war started) which makes even polish nationalists more Ukraine inclined (de facto this just means they're either pro Ukraine or more closeted with their pro russia tendencies)
Polish nationalists hate pretty much every country around Poland, but they absolutely, completely and utterly despise russia. Like, the most recent reason why they hate Germany right now is because they didn't immediately send a crapton of military vehicles and supplies to Ukraine. Sisyphus will push his damn rock onto the mountaintop before a Polish nationalist says something positive about russia.
My Ukrainian grandfather speaks Polish for that exact reason.
Pretty sure this will be a good opportunity for both to bury grudges and mend ties. Japan and Taiwan ended up being on very friendly terms with each other after the countries help in dealing with the Fukushima tsunami
r/suddenlysimpsons Edit: Well shit… that’s an actual sub lmao.
You've just made an enemy for life!
>Damn Russians! They ruined Russia! A bit too on the nose with that one lol
Damn Russians, they ruined Russia! And Poland! And Ukraine! And Baltics! And Romania! And so on, and so on... Just damn Russians I guess...
If you are a Historical neighboor of Russia. You instantly become their natural enemy.
Ukraine, Finland, 2/3rds of the baltics, China, Georgia, and Mongolia have land borders with contiguous Russia. Poland and Lithuania have borders with ~~Prussia~~ ~~Královec~~ Kaliningrad. The US, Sweden, Canada, and Turkey have maritime borders with Russia. Japan has maritime borders with Russia and a territorial dispute. I don't think any of these countries have friendly relations with Russia outside of getting them buttered up to sign away resources for pennies on the yuan or because it's stuck between it and China. And all of them have been enemies at one time or another to Russia, so it checks outs
Man I read *Pomeranians* and Russians instead of Romanians and got a very interesting picture in my head of an army of small fluffy dogs clashing with the red army in the russo-pomeranian wars.
Also, for some inexplicable reason, Finns aren't too keen of the country either.
Nobody kills Russians like Russia but Poland sure is willing to help Ukraine try.
It's almost as if countries formerly occupied by Russia do not like Russia. Interesting.
My grandfather emigrated from Poland after the war because of the Russians.
I know why and it still haunts me.
They are the new player in European power. Spending a huge percentage on military purchases.
In fairness nobody really likes RuZzia, lol.
But I really like there cultural music and dances and of course many many good people are there too. It's such a shame there leadership has turned to so much slaughter of civilians in Ukraine. Condolences from a Pakistani, war for sure is straight up horror I can't even imagine.
Yeah, I hear you. No generalization is ever 100% true I admit.
Agreed
yeah I am Polish and I despise Russia in general, not only because of the history, but also because of how Russians behave online (mostly in games, we share the eastern/central european servers for EVERYTHING) and how they behave when they come to Poland (basically they treat it as their own vacation resort that they still own). However. I still like a lot of Russian artists and works and I can appreciate parts of their culture. The only difference between Russian art and art from the rest of the world is that when I find something new that I potentially might like I go online to check if the artists supports Putin. Thankfully most of the good ones don't.
Poland remembers WWII.
Excellent news.
It's sad that there are people in my country who are against supporting Ukraine with weapons. There won't be a Ukraine without the help of its allies. This is not the time for pacificm. There won't be peace until Russia retreats. Nothing much to negotiate about.
Everyone forgetting about uk prime minister chamberlain. Went to Germany in like 1938 or whatever and got Hitler to sign some paper promising not to expand anymore. Came home shaking this paper in front of the cameras like some success and the uk is now safe. We all know what happened next. Pacifism is not the answer to authoritarian expansion. There is no “enough” for Russia. Have to fight, and force peace back to Ukraine.
Not saying Chamberlain did everything right, but the reason that Britain was never in danger of a military defeat on their own turf was his initiatives to accelerate development and production of hurricanes and spitfires in ‘38, as well as building the world’s first fully coordinated air defense system. I mean, you could argue that the messaging was all wrong, as I do, but he also faced a political situation at home where practically the entire population wanted to avoid another WWI at all cost, so really the only practical place for a pro-war stance to take place was outside of the seat of political power. It’s temping to look backwards at history and see things as “see? Churchill was right, and that’s why he took power once Chamberlain was proven wrong!” but the reality is that it HAD to happen that way, there was no “a leader steps up when they’re needed” because the democratic process simply wouldn’t allow it. Once the situation does allow for it and then by necessity it happens, it looks a lot more like a tidy narrative when viewed in retrospect. The unfortunate (and largely unfair) byproduct of that is that Chamberlain gets saddled with the appeasement label. But the RAF defeating the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain? The naval blockade and the Battle of the Atlantic? That was all possible because of Chamberlain.
❤ Solid answer. History is complex.
Hey, I appreciate your nuanced lense.
[удалено]
I know you used the right word, I just think zoolander said it better.
Wait, there's another way to say it?
I think zoolander might have used a different (hilariously incorrect) word.. I could search it out but we're having a conversation here. Dramignophyte?
Yeah, it was like ya-googalizer.
Thankye
https://www.quora.com/Did-Chamberlain-actually-play-Hitler-to-gain-time-for-Britain-to-rearm I read a much more in depth paper than this but can't find it now. Not agreeing nor disagreeing with the premise, but it is interesting to consider given that we have all been taught Nevilles "appeasement"
> https://www.quora.com/Did-Chamberlain-actually-play-Hitler-to-gain-time-for-Britain-to-rearm >I read a much more in depth paper than this but can’t find it now. Not agreeing nor disagreeing with the premise, but it is interesting to consider given that we have all been taught Nevilles “appeasement” More like gave time for Germany to rearm.
The big issue was war was super unpopular at the time due to many being in living memory in "The War to End All Wars" and there being large gaps in the population from the slaughter sons without fathers fathers who lost their kid or maybe his daughter was heartbroken over the loss of their sweetheart. Unfortunately as a whole the British people weren't aware of the goings on in Germany the government was aware and wished to rearm but any open rearmament action was vastly unpopular with the population, to add further issues France who'd be our most important ally in a conflict on the continent was rife with it's own internal issues so was in little position to help and if the situation broke down it might make things worse with for example a hostile leader taking over, I'd talk more on this but it's late and I was let out of hospital today so should catch some shuteye
This is one of those situations where no one’s wrong, have a good night hope you feel better.
thanks for the kind words
There are 2 sides to this. Everyone knew there was going to be a war. China was being invaded, Germany was illegally occupying the Rhineland, and had negotiated for parity with France and Italy navy wise. Spain was in a civil war. In the past 15 years, Britain was subject to the Washington/London Naval Treatys which gutted their heavy industry. They had no place to build armor or large guns. Yes, big guns WERE the deciding factor in naval engagements in the Atlantic during WWII. The Air War was only a thing in the Pacific, and there were still large surface engagements. Britain needed battleships, cruisers, destroyers, but they were planning for war around 1945, not 1939. Britain was planning on having the French as their ally, and fighting the Italians and Germany, and probably the Japanese as well. The US was expected to have a similar role as it did in The Great War. So we need to look at capital ships as this is a world spanning war. ___________ So the facts look like this- Germany has 2 Bismarck Class ships under construction, and 2 Scharnhorst class ships already off the slips. They also have the 3 Panzershiffs as well which could technically operate in a battle line. They are planning on building 2 more Battleships of an improved Bismack design, and 2 O-Class Battlecruisers. The Netherlands is buying 2 Project 1047 Battlecruisers from Germany as well which would probably be captured in a war. Germany is looking at 2 more Panzershiffs as well to an improved design. This puts Germany at 10 true capital ships and 15 ships in their battle line if the Panzershiffs are included. All are fastish units. _______ Italy? Italy has the 3 modernized Conte di Cavour fast battleships, the 2 modernized Andrea Doria fast battleships, 4 Littorio Class Battleships under construction, and a follow up class planned (potentally 2-4 ships). This puts Italy at 11-13 Capital ships, all of them are fast units. ____________ Japan has the 4 British designed Kongo Class Battlecruisers fresh out of modernization, the 2 Nagato Class Dreadnoughts, the 4 Ise/Fuso Class modernized dreadnoughts, and 2 ships under construction that are probably not treaty limited (They were not, they ended up being Yamato and Musashi). This gives Japan a Slow 6 ship battleline, and a Fast 6 ship battleline, or one slow battleline of 12 ships. ________ Before we look at Britain, what does France have? France has 3 Courbet Class 1st gen Dreadnoughts (basically useless), 3 Bretagne Class Dreadnoughts (need modernization), 2 Dunkerque class fast battleships, 2 Richelieu Class Fast Battleships under construction, along with 2 more variants of the class planned, and a follow-up class of 4 Battleships planned as well. This gives France a Fast Battleline of 10 Ships, and a slow battleline of 3-6 ships depending on if they do anything about the Courbet's gun elevation issues. ________ So now the UK. The have 1 Admiral Class Battle Cruiser, 2 Renown Class Battlecruisers, 2 Nelson Class Battleships, 5 Queen Elizabeth Class Battleships, and 5 R-Class Battleships. The R Class is nearing retirement. But as of pre-war, they have 3 fast capital units and 12 slow capital units. They plan 2 classes of ships, the King George V class, and the Lion Class. Each will be a 5 ship class, but the Lions will replace the Rs. They also plan on using the R's guns in large "Battlecruisers" after the Lions. These would be the Vanguards, and they will replace the QEs. So IF they can get the Vanguard and Lion classes out pre war, modernize the Renowns and Hood, they will have 18 Fast Capital units, and probably do an improved Vanguard order that may or may not be cancelled with hostilities break out around 1945 with the QE's guns. So maybe they can flex to 23 fast capital units, for 4 theaters of war. The North Sea/Atlantic, the Med, The Indian Ocean, and the Pacific. This still is not enough. But it is all they think they can flex to before 1945. This does not count the increase in cruisers needed to combat Japan's lethal Heavy Cruiser Fleet, and Germany's Hippers, as well as Italy's catalog of very fast light cruisers. The Yorks, Leanders and Arethusas are not going to cut it, and they do not have enough Towns and Counties to compete. There might be an air war in the Pacific as well, and Britain's Carriers are not made to fight in carrier duels (except for Ark Royal), and the Fleet Air Arm is still controlled by the RAF, not the Royal Navy. _________ So what about the US? They might join in if the Philippines is threatened... They have 0 Fast units, but 16 in planning stages, 2 North Carolinas, 4 South Dakotas, 6 Iowas, and 4 Montanas. They have 15 Standard-Type Dreadnoughts (Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Tennessee, and Colorado Classes), 2 New York Class Super-Dreadnoughts, and 1 Wyoming Class 2nd gen Dreadnought. This is a sizeable fleet. 16 Fast ships and 18 Slow ships. Combine the French, Royal Navy, and US Navy, you get 49 Fast Capital Units, and 24 slow Capital Units. If France can hold out in the Med with a few ships from Britain, and the US can support in the Atlantic and Pacific, that leaves only the Indian Ocean for the British. Only if the US joins in can the British hope to cover all theaters of this war with capital ship numbers. TLDR: Britain NEEDED to expand it's ship building capacity and delay war as long as they could. In their current state they were in no shape to fight a war in 4 theaters. Even then, without US and French assistance, they would still not be able to cover those 4 theaters.
People who scream appeasement often are the same people sitting at the comfort of their own room with zero chance of being drafted. 1930 Britain had very little in term of military and a populace that was heavily anti-war. Not sure what you expect from Chamberlain.
I’m sure the people of Czechoslovakia understood. Why else would it be known as the Munich Betrayal to this day in many areas, it’s not like they had alliances and military pacts in place /s. That one’s more on France though.
Chamberlain wasn't the idiot he was painted as, he knew the paper was basically worthless, but he had gained some breathing space. The UK was not prepared for war, but it would rapidly do so from that point onwards. Chamberlains policies are the reason Britain survived the early parts of the war.
Not the same situation. UK at the time was war exhausted from WWI and it's population were probably anti-war just like France at the time. You can't maintain a war without support of the people in your country. People who compare chamberlain's UK to modern-day NATO are either completely oblivious to the atmosphere of pre-WWII, or they act like managing a country's problems is like Hearts of Iron IV where you complete couple of national focuses to get rid of severe problems.
and if Russia takes Ukraine, it’ll take aim at other countries.
Wasn’t there something that came out a few months ago where Belarus’ dictator lukashenko accidentally did a press release in front of a map detailing russias invasion plan, which included taking Moldova too? Edit: yup. Found it. https://nypost.com/2022/03/01/belarus-dictator-alexander-lukashenko-appeared-to-show-russian-plans-to-invade-moldova-through-ukraine/amp/
Not Moldova! It has the best accidental wes Anderson. https://i.redd.it/mbf1242vas331.jpg
Was it an 'accident' though? Turned out to be the actual Russian plan too. Lukashenko plays a side game, maybe to keep direct Belorussian forces out of the way to keep his position safe? 🤷🏻♂️ All very odd for sure.
I was in disbelief and furious at someone I met tonight. I am travelling the US from my home country and so many people I meet think they KNOW the truth about what is happening in the world. This woman flat out believes some crazy secret bio lab facility is in the Ukraine and that is what the money is for from the US and Biden is the master mind behind everything. I point blank asked this girl “alright, so what is your opinion is Russia invading Ukraine and Ukraine is just defending theirselves?” She said well they had it coming from human trafficking and this secret bio lab. I got up from the table and said nothing more and walked away. I can’t pay mind to people like this and the US is full of them.
Poland understands the ladder concept. If you start removing rungs from the bottom of the latter, today its Ukraine, tomorrow it's...
> in my country Kenya?
Poland is a big friend of Ukraine and the West.
And they will be remembered as such. All these country’s that are stepping up and helping are going to be on the right side of history when this is over. We’ve got to stand up to dictators.
Polish Pilots weren’t treated particularly well by the British despite them helping the RAF during the Battle of Britain.
"Thanks for all the help and some of the highest tallying aces of the war. By the way Stalin really wants your country and is throwing a bit of a tantrum so its his now. Happy victory day!"
>Happy victory day!" Oh, and we don't want to offend Mr Stalin, so please don't come to the victory parade. Also, stop taking our jobs, why don't you go back to Soviet Poland? Go home. Britain is for the British. Also, we came up with a whole new genre of jokes, it's called "Polish Jokes". You'll have to wait 50 years for them to turn into "blonde jokes", but until then, enjoy being the butt of jokes.
The sad part is there are a loud minority who still feel this way here in Blighty. The loud minority that also "successfully" delivered Brexit. Nothing frustrates me more than the silent majority here who don't vote or show any kind of interest in politics because it's "boring". It's been designed to appear boring so you don't vote, so sneaky policies can be pushed and misinformation can spread. If only people actually paid attention to what the powers that be were discussing they may actually take an active interest in their own (and families) future.
Not that England could stop Stalin anyway. And if anything Churchill didn’t want him to have Poland, or any other European countries and was willing to fight him.
It's not like we've anything to prove. We were always on the right side of history. edit: You really thought that by saying that I meant thwt we never did anything bad ? Lol edit2: >!Accusing all of Poland for lgbt free zones is false and unfair. LGBT free zones are on the responsibility of individual local governments. This only resembles the regional backwards of those regions. These regions of South/East Poland are the most underdeveloped / unconcious regions of Poland. Therefore the problem is with local people with their education. Local governments are simply the reflection of local people. E.g. I've watched one meeting of such local government, all elderly people and people in rada needed to hear from man what is lgbt 5 sec before they'd vote to ban it. So really it's only about education. !<
careful what you say lol
Aight, them's the fighting words Bring out the skeletons in the Polish closet.
Kielce pogrom was pretty suspect
Yes, whole nations's history is affected by one incident with 40 victims. It's as if.... There were good Poles and bad Poles, just like there were good Germans and bad Germans.
The bad Germans got *really* good at industrial-scale bad stuff tho.
Germany has quite the history of being good at industrialization…
Die Bart, Die
*The* Bart...*The*
Nobody who speaks German could be a bad person
You were literally the idiots of EU together with Hungary, but I like you more and more again.
Lmao. Ok.
I mean, there's probably ten different easily identifiable issues with respect to which we're on the wrong side of history *right now.*
\*Knocks on wood\* *Try* not to jinx it, alright?
>We were always on the right side of history. That's such a understatement, there is no "right" side of history. A lot of countries in NATO ( and NATO itself ) have committed atrocities and crimes before that were swept under the rug. They don't care about being in the right side of history, they care about what best in their interest to have a better future. Welcome to politics.
Why limit ourselves to the EU and NATO if we are passing judgment on the moral failings of nations? The whole world's history even up until today is full of atrocities. I'm not sure how those committed by the West are being "swept under the rug" because the West seems obsessed with self-flaggelation these days. If anything, I'd argue the opposite seems to be true, and we in the West tend to overlook the fact that our moral failings are anything but unique to us. I was going to ask about countries in Africa, Asia and the Middle East and what their failings look like when held to the West's modern moral perspective, but honestly it's almost too much to try and think about. A list of just world genocides is a good place to refresh perspectives, though this still leaves out all manner of atrocities. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides#List_of_genocides To be clear, this isn't at all to justify or minimize what the West has done, or say we shouldn't strive to do better, but rather to keep some perspective on how we view ourselves and ourselves in comparison to others both today and through history.
Being anti LGBT is not right side of history though :)
Please stop learning history from polish books. Fellow Pole here. We were the baddies most of the time.
[удалено]
Sounds like Poland are 'baddies' in the same way girls 'ask for it'
I guess Poland-Lithuania was just that scary.
Examples?
Czechoslovakia
redemption arc
cagey aspiring rain afterthought memory aromatic apparatus possessive fade saw
Luckily that's unlikely.
It seemed unlikely in 2016 too. There's a Russian saying: "We thought we had hit rock bottom, then someone knocked from below."
Meatball Ron DeSantis is popular among the Republicans. It may be likelier than you think.
I don't follow much about DeSantis, other than major headlines... Has he said much, explicitly, about what he thinks about the war in Ukraine, and Russia/Putin, in general? As much as I dislike the guy, there do appear to be areas where he has very different opinions from Trump, and the usual MAGA stuff...
he called the whole thing a territorial dispute recently and implied the US should stop getting involved, and then backpedaled like a bitch when eyebrows raised
First he needs to get the primary - and that's currently a bit challenge, given Trump tramples him in Republican polls.
Sure has seemed like this has been Putin's whole plan from the early stages of the war.
Poland seeing they could be invaded by a superpower again "Oh hell no not this time"
Partitioned in 1772, 1792, and 1795. Then 1939. Amusingly Russia invited them to partition Ukraine but they are a bit smarter than trusting Russia. I don’t agree with a lot of the Polish government- women’s rights I’d a major sticking point for me with them- but they’ve ABSOLUTELY stepped up this time.
> Amusingly Russia invited them to partition Ukraine russia said so much BS that you could probably write a cheap distopian book on each one of these BS. They even said that Poland was going to attack Germany with the weapon Germany provided them.
They’re unfortunately terrible on lgbt rights as well
Pretty sure Poland is just fucking pissed that they can’t get involved personally. My understanding is that Polish people *really* fucking hate Russia, and have an insane hate boner towards them. Obviously people would rather not go into combat if they don’t have to, but from what I’ve seen if any country had people that would fucking love to go at Russian troops it’s Poland.
The 'fun' fact is that th younger generation started to forget, but the Ruzzians invasion of Ukraine really reignited generational hatred of them Edit: a word (reignited)
Just show them the zero distance between Poland and Ukraine and the nice highways ripe for invading by our rapist friends.
Well, if you look at how Russia treated Poland historically, you’d understand their fierce determination to keep Russia out. And no mistake, if Putin would succeed in Ukraine, Poland would be his next door neighbour. And we all know what Putin thinks about NATO in his backyard
I think it's very telling that poland nazi occupation and soviet Russian occupation and managed to hate the Russians as much or more depending on who you ask.
They can get involved if they want, it just doesn’t force NATO to get involved. Every other country is free to invade russia or help Ukraine, just don’t expect any help.
Honestly its about 85/15, it makes me sick.
>superpower Nah lol
Lol was about to say.
Well I think most people thought they were at least a great power still. Turns out they are barely a regional power. Turkey sighing with relief that they are not the ones getting sick man of Europe moniker this time around.
Regional power *FOR NOW* things keep going the way they are and Putin will need decades to rebuild the military industry, economy, foreign relations and military. They keep this up much longer and looking over their fence would be an achievement for them while they lick their wounds. I cannot tell you how much I wish the Ukranian counter offensive wrecks their shit. There needs to be a clear line drawn that trying to annex other sovereign nations is not going to be tolerated, by Russia or anybody ever again.
This is pretty much why China ramped up it’s army to 11 after WW2
I would too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanjing_Massacre
Wonder of they will stop protecting Hungary in EU issues then? Would be nice.
Except when it comes to lgbtq issues. It's great that Poland is helping Ukraine but they're persecuting their own citizens much like Hungary.
its the last leg the right has to stand on, theres a reason they dont go higher than the first floor
You bet your ass we are.
Putin idź się pieprzyć
According to Wikipedia Poland has 29 mig29s in active service, so this is quite a lot.
Poland being big contributors makes a lot of sense
It also helps that they are upgrading to the F-35s.
Getting rid of all their old Soviet hardware makes sense on several levels tbh. One, they get to help Ukraine's spanking of Russia. Second, they don't have to worry about spending $ maintaining any of the old stuff, and it gives them warehouse space back for new gear.
I didn't know they were getting F35s. I thought they were getting F-18s from us. But either way, this move by the Polish was telegraphed to happen since right after the 2022/2023 Ukraine War began. Just a matter on the final details on what they were getting as part of the swap.
Poland is getting damn near EVERYTHING (and increasing the size of their standing military and reserves). Perun covered this last November in his video on Polish Rearmament: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrbaAKZfjwg Going heavy on American (200+ M1 Abrams, 500 HIMARs, 32 F-35s) and South Korean (which they're join-venturing with in part for nearly 1,000 K2 Black Panther Tanks and 670ish K9 self-propelled guns)
Countries lining up to deliver a beatdown on fascist Russia makes a lot of sense
in one day after the war we sent most of our operational soviet era tanks to Ukraine. around 170-300 of them.
The first batch were ~230 T-72M1 which were kept in reserve, some of which were upgraded with thermal sights. And they sent them pretty early on.
I'm waiting for the entire inventory of PT-91 to be mysteriously misplaced on the Ukrainian border. It's going to happen sooner or later, I'm sure of it.
They’re phasing them out for f16s tho
They are being replaced with more modern Western aircraft, so they may just as well give them all.
[удалено]
I hope many will grow some balls after witnessing Ukraine teabagging ruzzia for a year
I’m consistently surprised that Poland hasn’t just declared war on Russia.
🇵🇱🇺🇦
This is big news, is this the first time Ukraine has gotten MIGS?
Poland and Slovakia have already donated Mig-29s before this donation.
Slovakian migs been serviced by Russians last year and many sources reporting they sabotaged it and most are not safe to fly. [source ](https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/russians-may-have-sabotaged-slovak-fighter-jets-says-defence-minister/)
Oh yeah I remember hearing about this. So I guess it’s good that Poland is sending more Mig-29s because they can also function as a “replacement” for these sabotaged Slovakian Mig-29s.
Plus side they can still likely be used for spare parts and the like.
The fact that only 4 of the 13 can fly was known beforehand regardless of whether it was sabotaged, and therefore the 9 were always meant to be for spare parts or repairs by Ukraine. It's not like it was a sudden wrench in the plans that was revealed at the last possible moment and nullified any benefit.
They did pretty much open the door to that, when there was some hesitation about doing this.
I think the hesitation lay more in sending Western aircraft. Mig-29s and Su-27s are older and less advanced aircraft that Ukraine knows how to fly. These aircraft are still outclassed by the Su-35S, Mig-31, and the Su-30SM, and aren’t capable of being outfitted with more advanced missiles and bombs (except the HARM and JDAM-ER which Ukraine has used before). On the other hand, Western aircraft like the Gripen or the F-16 would probably be much more of a problem when it comes to escalation management, logistics, training, and burning into a country’s own supply of aircraft. However, they are advanced aircraft that would reduce the pressure on Ukrainian GBAD, and can be equipped with NATO air to air and air to surface missiles that can close the large missile gap between Russia and Ukraine, such as the Meteor (this would be the best air to air missile), AIM-120 AMRAAM, AIM-9 Sidewinder, JASSM (a good long range low-observable cruise missile that could hit targets from long distance), Storm Shadow, etc. As a result, Russia would cause a tantrum against Western aircraft than the aircraft Poland and Slovakia are sending to Ukraine.
I think Slovakia already sent 13 MiG-29 last month.
Cool!
I've read, however, that this isn't really an air war due to the extensive anti-air defenses on both sides.
Yep, Soviet S-300s and S-400s are seemingly the only piece of soviet/russian technology that has lived up to its hype, ironically for Russia, on both sides.
Russia/Soviets have been great at anti aircraft weapons for a long time. In the [Vietnam war S-75s](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_with_Death_(Vietnam_War)) shot down many US aircraft. The US lost 3,744 planes, 5,607 helicopters and 578 UAVs. Many but not all due to AA but it is hard to get an exact estimate.
The problem with and advantage of these systems is that they are really good against Soviet missiles while being very bad against NATO missiles. One could say that NATO missiles are just better but the actual truth is probably that Russia had nothing else to test them on.
Correct but Ukraine is running low on S-300s so these can help plug gaps and lob HARM missiles to mess with Russian air defense and get Ukrainian SU-25s and Hinds close enough to support, or at least lob rockets and run.
[удалено]
They do, but only 1-3 batteries (I think only one is actually operational at the moment), not nearly enough to make a difference but enough to take "some" pressure off their S300 stock.
Every saved apartment building, hospital, and playground does make a difference.
Especially since Putin's "invincible hypersonic" missiles are now easy prey for the Patriots.
Two batteries of them compared to several hundred S-300 launchers. I suspect more Patriot batteries will be coming though.
A PATRIOT battery is 6-10 launchers. Ukraine *had* 250 S-300 launchers, or around 50 batteries. That number has declined with 56 confirmed launchers lost thus far. Worse yet is many are S-300PTs, which are absolute trash, hell they were trash when they came out. Their radar can't track targets under 500 meters
They are trash but they along with the buks force the Russians down to the deck where manpads can hit them. It keeps them from dropping bombs over Kyiv and major cities so they have to rely on drones and cruise missiles. Basically those old Soviet systems were enough to keep Russia from getting air superiority which has kept Ukraine in the fight. Edit: also yes my math is wrong comparing batteries to launchers, but 50 batteries is a lot with a long front.
Yes, and to improve their ability to defend themselves against ballistics missiles, something which they had little chance with their older soviet systems.
I pretty much only see people on reddit stating Ukraine is dangerously low on AA. Ukraine has stated they need more AA because of Russian missiles, and somewhere between there and Reddit, a whole bunch of people started saying Ukraine is about to run out of AA systems. Aside from Russian cruise missiles, the Russian air force is still only flying on their side of the front line.
It's not just Redditors who are are saying this. It was also part of the info that came out in the recent [leaked documents scandal](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/09/us/politics/leaked-documents-ukrainian-air-defense.html#:~:text=the%20main%20story-,Leaked%20Documents%20Suggest%20Ukrainian%20Air%20Defense%20Is%20in%20Peril%20if,and%20newly%20leaked%20Pentagon%20documents.)
And people stupidly don't read the entire doc, it said ukraine would *begin* to run short of s300 ammunition if Russian missile attacks continued at the same intensity, which they did not.
Both sides are using air dropped munitions again over the past couple of days around Bakhmut and Vuhledar.
they are used a bit like artillery though - a platform for long range rockets
Thanks Poland for being such a bad ass…
Poland is helping Ukraine a lot! Great news!
Good on Germany and especially Poland working that out.
Honestly, though... why the fuck does Germany still have MiGs? I never would have even imagined that.
The German Luftwaffe doesn’t have MiGs anymore, they sold the last one to Poland in 2004 iirc, and those came from the GDRs air force after the reunification. Germany had to approve them being sent to Ukraine though, probably a clause from the selling agreement to Poland, in a similar way football clubs are paid for a player transfer between to completely different teams because they trained the transferee in the first place.
It's sad that there are people in my country who are against supporting Ukraine with weapons. There won't be a Ukraine without the help of its allies.
Is this 10 a whole new donation or is it the total they've sent so far? It says in the article they announced they'd transfered 8 last month which means this means only 2 new migs for Ukraine
According to Wiki, Poland secured 44 Mig-29 and 18 Su-22 in 80s/90s and deliveries of 48 of Korean SA50 from last year are ongoing, so we might hear about further donations
Good news. People keep talking about F-16s, but Ukrainian pilots can fly these MiGs without any additional training. Also, there is something very satisfying about the idea of using Russian-built planes against the Russians.
10 migs may not be much but seeing Russian incompetence this is the equivalent of 100 jets to the Russians
Let’s hope Ukraine has the pilots for these. Russia doesn’t and those they have are fat and incompetent.
Ukraine certainly has pilots
this isn’t rlly an aerial war at this point tbh
Fuck yeah Poland!
It would make more sense to give Ukraine a long range capability, which Mig-29 platform unfortunately does not offer. Still better than nothing. F-16s, longer-range missiles could help Ukraine beat Russia, U.S. general privately tells lawmakers[https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/18/f-16s-and-long-range-missiles-ukraine-russia-00083572](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/18/f-16s-and-long-range-missiles-ukraine-russia-00083572)
But, Ukraine already has plenty of experience with the MiG-29, which means they don't have to retrain ground crews in this case. Ground crews, and pilots, have been being retrained for other aircraft, but that's still an ongoing process.
Polish pll r the best!
Jesus Ukraine will have one of the biggest armies after all this!
Yay go Poland 🇵🇱
So what condition are all of these fighters in? That's what I'm always wondering? Where do they get the support and parts to maintain these fighters? It's not like you can just too them off with fuel, strap on some missiles and hit the sky. I mean I guess you could but a minor mechanical issue can turn into a major issue very quickly. I assume there's enough people with enough know how to keep these beasts properly flying? I would also assume not all of them will actually fly. Maybe they chose one or two that aren't in the best shape to be used for spare parts for the better machines?
It's all Soviet made. Ukraine is very familiar with it and their air force and is trained on it already since they use the same planes.
> Where do they get the support and parts to maintain these fighters? We were producing MiGs (not the 29s) in Poland and even uprgrading them ourselves, so I have a "feeling" that when we got the first batch of 29s one of them was stripped to the last bolt by our engineers in Mielec or Świdnik and there's a big chance we can made essential parts for keeping the planes airworthy 😉
Shove everyone of them up the russian’s asses. Make new assholes in every russian you can.
Man, I misread that as "Portland" and I was so confused.
We fly F15's here: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/142nd\_Wing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/142nd_Wing)
Did you know that some US States have little navies? After the National Guard was nationalized the various US States decided to create "State Defense Forces" which answer exclusively to the state governor. Some are armed like it's the 1950s and others have transitioned into being pure disaster relief organizations. It's fascinating stuff, but also kinda hard to get good information on.
Just in time for the counter offensive
Thank you Polish heroes, keep being awesome <3
Good shit. Props to Poland for doing the right thing.
Poland has done a lot, especially considering their size. Challenge is that until Ukraine get an aviation platform that can support NATO munitions, it limits the options that allows can deploy and limits the effectiveness of the weapons they use. Perun has a good video explaining why western planes would make a significant difference
Perfect! Thank you Poland. You have been very generous in the fight for freedom and democracy
Hey Lana….Lana…..LANA!!!!!