In the face of this rather chilling (depressing?) report, let me ask the question - what would be the consequences if Ukraine would not be provided any jets at all? I am basically just trying to find at least some bright side ...
The way I understand your question is: what happens if things remain the way they are right now?
Sooner or later (and rather sooner than later), remaining Ukrainian MiG-29s, Su-24s, Su-25s, and Su-27s will be flown 'to death'. There will be no ressources left in their airframes: they'll become more dangerous for their pilots (if they aren't that, already), than for the enemy.
Then, they're going to be grounded, and Ukraine is going to have no flying component of its air force.
While the Russians will be given yet more time to adapt - either already to Storm Shadows- and JDAM-strikes, or to GMLRS-strikes.
...plus, of course, Russia is going to have it much easier to stage its cruise- and LPGM-strikes into the depth of Ukraine.
Thank you, yes that is where my question was pointing. So even though the F-16 Ukraine is eventually going to receive are not going to be any game changers, it will allow them to keep their air force able to operate, even though they will receive only a fraction of functionality they would need.
Surprisingly the Ukrainians have found the M113 extremely helpful, despite its weak armour. Otherwise great points about the state and types of F16s Ukraine is going to receive. Very disappointing really but we can only hope that they use them resourcefully and eventually get much more descent versions of the F16.
On the other hand, I remember when UK PM Sunak was pushing the delivery western jets(Typhoons being under serious consideration) and a section of the domain experts in the UK stated that their airforce was in such a bad shape that they couldnt even donate a single squadron of typhoons(Yet they have over 130). Which I found absurd even when arguments were raised that some of them were being used for parts, the UK would still have enough to protect their country and can still order F35s. And which country is planning on contesting the UK's skies with other combat jets? The Typhoons should be in Ukraine doing what they were meant to do imho(but one can only dream when we consider how much avarice exists amongst elites even in the West).
Another interesting unfortunate but expected development is the need for Ukraine to provide better CUAS for its in service combat aircraft since Russians are now using lancets to hit some of their airbases(Like the recent strike of a MiG-29). Delaying military aid to Ukraine has given Russia tremendous opportunities to adapt and borrow from Ukrainian ingenuity.
It wasnt, sorry. The plane was real the attack was real, cope with it. The only question is of it was "active" aircraft or a old worn out airframe, painted and posted there as decoy.
These idiots who think they need to hang onto their weapons in case they need them, don't they understand this IS the need. It's the need of the century.
While I share your sentiment, that's not how any army or government works. There are equipment requirements for an army to continue training. Do you expect armies to stop recruiting for however long this war lasts and dismiss their current troops? Do you suggest they should replace tanks in armoured brigades with horses or maybe alcohol?
The issue isn't whether they want or have equipment to deliver, the issue is that almost no country is producing any. Still after 19 months, most countries have not placed any meaningful orders for heavy equipment. Those few deals that were signed, are on timescales of 5-10 years. It's still peacetime production, on the same level as it was in previous years. Where are these massive German purchase contracts worth 100B euros?
Sure, but regardless of our ranting, that is not how it works and not what will happen. If Ukraine wants weapons to keep flowing, they need to convince countries to increase production. There is no other way.
At the moment, they don't want to give them it seems. Don't want to repair them, don't want to supply them, don't want to train the ZSU on them, don't want to supply spare parts for them. What can you do -_o_-
No country in NATO wants to get involved as much as the USSR did in Korea or Vietnam, not even close to that. You can't make them and until Zelensky understands this, it will get uglier. Their best hope is to strike production deals and force through high output and fast timescales. There is a bit of movement there at the moment but nothing concrete yet.
I don't expect the to dismiss their troops, but I expect them to release stocks to the same degree as if they were in a war themselves. Not requiring troops to use them is a bonus, not a reason to hang onto them. I don't believe all of the munitions held back are being used for training.
But you are absolutely right that lack of production is disgraceful and must be rectified.
It took 2 to 3 years to increase production sharply during WWII in the west, even with a total-war and complete economic conversion to wartime industrial production, in conditions of political unanimity. We're far short of that.
Not only the need of the century, but actually the best use of it. The hard truth is that Ukraine do both the killing and the dying at the moment. If we ever had a cheaper way of strengthening our defense I dont know. The only ones who could claim to have a need is ironically the Swedes, builders of Gripen. Since they are not formally a Nato member.
Currently, Ukraine is left with very used Mig-29 (a couple dozen at best), very used Su-27 (maybe a dozen), very used Su-24 (half a dozen?), and some, also very used, Su-25.
ANY western aircraft will be an improvement here.
It was possible to integrate a lot of Western munitions with Mig and Suchoj aircraft. Even if sth is not integrated with F-16 - that could be added way more accessible than it was already done for integration with Russian designs.
Ukrainian engineers should be comfortable about changing anything inside the Soviet aircraft models, but they will be in trouble upgrading F-16, at least during the first couple of months. Thus, any integration of additional systems should be done before the delivery.
What should be occurring already is a sharp increase of F-35A/B/C production, to ~200 per year, to free up more legacy western aircraft that are in much better shape for combat in Ukraine, in greater numbers, with more weapons from the 4 to 4.5-gen era.
Those 'legacy' strikefighters mostly have not enough range, or require too much tanker support, for effective fighting in the Western Pacific context. F-35s are what's required in that theatre. So then more capable aircraft can be freed up for Ukraine and Eastern Europe.
I'm guessing Sweden has its own problems selling Gripens:
- they're not in NATO so Russia may be a bit bolder in its retaliation
- most of their most important markets for Gripen are Russia sympathizers and would likely find ways to create problems of commercial nature
- planes are costly stuff and someone has to cover the cost - it would be unfair for Sweden to do it alone but rest of EU may not be willing to pay
On the other hand, I think not only Gripens but also Rafales and Eurofighters are not out of the question at a future point, after the F16s create a precedent. But there would still be the cost problem, as they're much more expensive platforms than old F16s.
Partialy true, but Russia is not able to attack Sweden. no land connection and they were not able to use ships againts UA and Sweden has good navy. Also by air it is very limited because of Finland,.. Sweden will now exact position of each RU plane. Also with market it is not clear. yes some country support russia, but you can buy planes only from USA, EU, France , Sweden and Korea there each of this is suporting UA. Ru will be not able to deliver anything for years now and China is big question. on other side grippen can show how good they are.. Price is problem but some older one or/and with support of EU.
The article indicates that Gripens are no longer being made and that there aren’t many around. So export markets wouldn’t be a concern. The problem is that Sweden doesn’t have many to send to Ukraine and also, as another commenter mentioned, the sale would require US approval since the plane uses a US engine.
But in addition to the lack of political will or military industrial complex considerations there is also the issue of training. The early F-16s are relatively easy for pilots to master. Could you train Ukrainian pilots to exploit a modern NATO ECM or SEAD system like those on the Growler in the time available? Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen, or F-35 possibly too. And then there is the risk of the tech falling into Russian hands. The logical step would be to supply them with pilots. Which is not going to happen.
I see the Poland falling out with Ukraine over grain story turned out to be more than Russian propaganda.
Regarding Poland we should look for their deeds, not words. That's politics, they have their elections soon, many farmers are unhappy with the cheap Ukrainian grain. The president may have to say right stuff to collect those votes. Same for Zelensky - he tries to balance his rating domestically and worldwide. Both need aggressive rhetoric to influence right wings.
1. His rating outside of Ukraine brings in the financial and military donations. His rating inside Ukraine keeps the army fighting and mobilized persons going to the army.
The one year late delivery of old F-16 to Ukraine is the best solution for the NATO and US governments in their minds. Why?
With all the reports and all the coverage and explanation by Tom, but very clear in this report from today, the West have one objective clear: Ukraine must degrade the russian ability to wage war. Every weapon system destroyed is not available to threat NATO countries.
NATO wants to keep Ukraine at this level of capacity so the russian armies get their men and weapons there and not on the polish or baltics border. They want to keep the russians stressed for the next 5-10 years as they finally deploy enough F-35 and recover their armored forces to gain a clear advantage. At least in Poland, the Baltics amd Romania. When they perceive they are in advantage, they Will admit Ukraine in their ranks. This is their ultimate goal.
The problem with this is, the long time that they will be literaly using Ukraine. PSU can't say at this point "f*ck off, I don't wan't this", because they don't have any choice. If they stop offensive operations, russians are going to be dessestresed enough to reinforce and reconstitute and reequip their armies in Ukraine. And have the choice to relaunch the invasion or to freeze the conflict and redeploy to the NATO borders. This second option will be the failure of NATO strategic, so NATO keep going pressing Ukraine yo continúe the pressure.
The problem here is NATO don't perceive itself as capable of waging a war against russia now or haven't the will to fight it.
I agree with a lot of what you are saying. And that's why I hope Ukraine will recover its territory with what its got, to the surprise of those who are seemingly using them.
You're right on one point, NATO does not want to fight Russia. But this is solely due to the nuclear issue. Currently Ukraine is fighting the entire Russian army assisted by what is basically less than 1% of NATO's arsenal. Maybe the west does not want to destabilize Russia, maybe it's about business interests, maybe about nuclear armagedon fears, but whatever the reason - NATO's contribution to the war is about sufficient to match Russia's conventional army power and both of those are currently a joke.
Interesting theory but I think it doesn’t really hold up. If Ukraine can hold off Russia using old Soviet and western equipment with a tiny smattering of up to date equipment, then NATO would have no problems. Clearly large numbers of F-35s are not necessary to defeat Russian conventional forces. NATO doctrine seems to require setting up no fly zones but this can largely be achieved using Patriot air defense systems which seem to be incredibly numerous everywhere outside of Ukraine.
So, why not give up more modern equipment to them and stop Ukraine armes forces bleeding? If they have sufficient forces right now, why not give them tanks in the hundreds and Even F-16C ir F-15C?
That'll come, but not before replacement F-35 are produced and delivered. What's required is F-35 production to ramp past 200 per year. It takes years to expand that and their uptake. So old clapped-out F-16s it will be.
That is what we are all wondering about. Why don't they give the Ukrainians what they need to win? Is it incompetence, corruption, they do not really want Ukraine to win, what?
There are ~1,100 Bk3f F-35 right now, plus another 120 F-22A.
NATO is not waiting for enough Stealth aircraft, it has a bunch already, and their #1 focus is to assist the legacy strike aircraft to achieve their assigned missions without loss. that's what they also train for.
The basic fact is everything the West does in Ukraine, is non-obligatory. Ukraine is very fortunate to have been given assurances the West will support Ukraine, until Russia is defeated. That's all that matters now. Blaming the West though is a path to losing that support fast.
So I would not go voicing any opinions or accusations along those lines.
What they need to say? Thanks misters for your suport but we are waging your war? Thanks for your half hearted help, so our soldiers are still sent yo death as wey kill russians and deplete their best weapons stocks?
NATO ruled out surrender and negociations back in March 2022 and then only help slowly and in a limited way? And Ukraine need to say "Thanks!"? Really??
The problem is, how efficient the support is. When NATO is hesitating to provide certain arms or ammo, it may lead just to prolonging the war, more lives wasted, more houses destroyed and finally, more US + EU money spent.
How come Gripen could be a solution, considering the total number of them produced is 250 or something? How many of those could Sweden give, and if we talk about producing new ones - won't this take years? Whereas with F-16 at least around a hundred of planes is already kinda promised to Ukraine, and service, spare parts and training will also be much easier to receive. A
Regarding training, I find it hard to believe that there aren’t any Israeli pilots of Ukrainian descent or Polish pilots that speak Ukrainian who could fly jets for Ukraine. These people could easily be made Ukrainian citizens and enlisted. Is there some political reason for this not happening?
One excuse for not sending modern jets to Ukraine was that Ukraine didn't have anyone who could fly them. I'm saying that was pretty much a BS excuse. They could have found pilots if they wanted to.
Jet fighters made in Europe not popular in Us… true. Cant have the world understand other than Murica can make such Things. Some years ago Norway wanted to upgrade its F16 Fleet. We asked for bidders. Three planes were evaluated. F35, Gripen and I think Eurofighter. The Eurofighter quicly decided to withdraw, understanding and criticising the process. Claiming it was not fair. Sound and smart. The Swedes hung in. Deliver information, bought politicians… the latter were probably very cheap, coming from the Left Socialists and disliking anything from Us automatically. So maybe he worked for free. Us promised buy backs and so on. Off course we choose F35. It had really nothing to do with quality of the planes and everything with being a Loyal Nato member. But the political pressure was there. But there are clear commercial reasons why the US dont want non American jets there. The French should of course see the market opportunity and their own safety being served with sending their jets, but ….
You have missed the old mirage-2000.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ukraine-is-closer-to-receiving-mirage-2000d-fighter-jets-from-france-media/ar-AA1h0m33
....for same reasons like I didn't miss Rafales.
Besides, what is media reporting Ukraine MIGHT get, and what is Ukraine ACTUALLY getting - are not only two, but some 50 different pairs of shoes.
In the face of this rather chilling (depressing?) report, let me ask the question - what would be the consequences if Ukraine would not be provided any jets at all? I am basically just trying to find at least some bright side ...
The way I understand your question is: what happens if things remain the way they are right now?
Sooner or later (and rather sooner than later), remaining Ukrainian MiG-29s, Su-24s, Su-25s, and Su-27s will be flown 'to death'. There will be no ressources left in their airframes: they'll become more dangerous for their pilots (if they aren't that, already), than for the enemy.
Then, they're going to be grounded, and Ukraine is going to have no flying component of its air force.
While the Russians will be given yet more time to adapt - either already to Storm Shadows- and JDAM-strikes, or to GMLRS-strikes.
...plus, of course, Russia is going to have it much easier to stage its cruise- and LPGM-strikes into the depth of Ukraine.
Thank you, yes that is where my question was pointing. So even though the F-16 Ukraine is eventually going to receive are not going to be any game changers, it will allow them to keep their air force able to operate, even though they will receive only a fraction of functionality they would need.
And lest be glad they get something. Even If suboptimal. The world and its leader being as they are.
Oh indeed. Still feels like a half miracle
Surprisingly the Ukrainians have found the M113 extremely helpful, despite its weak armour. Otherwise great points about the state and types of F16s Ukraine is going to receive. Very disappointing really but we can only hope that they use them resourcefully and eventually get much more descent versions of the F16.
On the other hand, I remember when UK PM Sunak was pushing the delivery western jets(Typhoons being under serious consideration) and a section of the domain experts in the UK stated that their airforce was in such a bad shape that they couldnt even donate a single squadron of typhoons(Yet they have over 130). Which I found absurd even when arguments were raised that some of them were being used for parts, the UK would still have enough to protect their country and can still order F35s. And which country is planning on contesting the UK's skies with other combat jets? The Typhoons should be in Ukraine doing what they were meant to do imho(but one can only dream when we consider how much avarice exists amongst elites even in the West).
Another interesting unfortunate but expected development is the need for Ukraine to provide better CUAS for its in service combat aircraft since Russians are now using lancets to hit some of their airbases(Like the recent strike of a MiG-29). Delaying military aid to Ukraine has given Russia tremendous opportunities to adapt and borrow from Ukrainian ingenuity.
Otherwise great 3 part series and thank you.
It wasnt, sorry. The plane was real the attack was real, cope with it. The only question is of it was "active" aircraft or a old worn out airframe, painted and posted there as decoy.
Are you sure it was fake? It was Dolgintsevo airbase in Kryviy Rig. But looks quite authentic actually.
This is no "surprise" about M113. The common alternative to M113 is something like Mitsubishi L200 pickup. It is still the case now.
Hello, thanks for this excellent article. What about the French Mirage 2000 (probably D variant) ?
These idiots who think they need to hang onto their weapons in case they need them, don't they understand this IS the need. It's the need of the century.
While I share your sentiment, that's not how any army or government works. There are equipment requirements for an army to continue training. Do you expect armies to stop recruiting for however long this war lasts and dismiss their current troops? Do you suggest they should replace tanks in armoured brigades with horses or maybe alcohol?
The issue isn't whether they want or have equipment to deliver, the issue is that almost no country is producing any. Still after 19 months, most countries have not placed any meaningful orders for heavy equipment. Those few deals that were signed, are on timescales of 5-10 years. It's still peacetime production, on the same level as it was in previous years. Where are these massive German purchase contracts worth 100B euros?
What are these countries' armies there for? Does the France's army protect France from Germany?
If those armies are paid for and trained to keep Russians and Chinese at bay, now is *the* time to keep them at bay.
Sure, but regardless of our ranting, that is not how it works and not what will happen. If Ukraine wants weapons to keep flowing, they need to convince countries to increase production. There is no other way.
There are huge stocks (mostly of older systems), especially in USA.
At the moment, they don't want to give them it seems. Don't want to repair them, don't want to supply them, don't want to train the ZSU on them, don't want to supply spare parts for them. What can you do -_o_-
No country in NATO wants to get involved as much as the USSR did in Korea or Vietnam, not even close to that. You can't make them and until Zelensky understands this, it will get uglier. Their best hope is to strike production deals and force through high output and fast timescales. There is a bit of movement there at the moment but nothing concrete yet.
Zelensky succeeded in getting NATO and EU involved to an extent. If he did not try to, Ukraine would have been left alone long ago.
I don't expect the to dismiss their troops, but I expect them to release stocks to the same degree as if they were in a war themselves. Not requiring troops to use them is a bonus, not a reason to hang onto them. I don't believe all of the munitions held back are being used for training.
But you are absolutely right that lack of production is disgraceful and must be rectified.
It took 2 to 3 years to increase production sharply during WWII in the west, even with a total-war and complete economic conversion to wartime industrial production, in conditions of political unanimity. We're far short of that.
Not only the need of the century, but actually the best use of it. The hard truth is that Ukraine do both the killing and the dying at the moment. If we ever had a cheaper way of strengthening our defense I dont know. The only ones who could claim to have a need is ironically the Swedes, builders of Gripen. Since they are not formally a Nato member.
Thank you. Depressing.
Of NATO will not provide efficient Fighters to Ukraine, even if we get to a "peace" in 2024, Russia will attack Ukraine again later.
Currently, Ukraine is left with very used Mig-29 (a couple dozen at best), very used Su-27 (maybe a dozen), very used Su-24 (half a dozen?), and some, also very used, Su-25.
ANY western aircraft will be an improvement here.
It was possible to integrate a lot of Western munitions with Mig and Suchoj aircraft. Even if sth is not integrated with F-16 - that could be added way more accessible than it was already done for integration with Russian designs.
BTW, Tornado is integrated with Storm Shadow.
Ukrainian engineers should be comfortable about changing anything inside the Soviet aircraft models, but they will be in trouble upgrading F-16, at least during the first couple of months. Thus, any integration of additional systems should be done before the delivery.
I am sure they will have mighty help from technicians from NATO countries. They have not integrated western weapons to Soviet aircrafts alone, too.
Yes, something is better then nothing. But that "something" has its flaws.
What should be occurring already is a sharp increase of F-35A/B/C production, to ~200 per year, to free up more legacy western aircraft that are in much better shape for combat in Ukraine, in greater numbers, with more weapons from the 4 to 4.5-gen era.
Those 'legacy' strikefighters mostly have not enough range, or require too much tanker support, for effective fighting in the Western Pacific context. F-35s are what's required in that theatre. So then more capable aircraft can be freed up for Ukraine and Eastern Europe.
Is USA blackmailing Ukraine and other nations not to sell and deliver "good stuff" that they can sell old junk to Ukraine?
I mean can Sweden sell Gripen or does Biden say to Zelensky that USA are not willing to help anymore?
I'm guessing Sweden has its own problems selling Gripens:
- they're not in NATO so Russia may be a bit bolder in its retaliation
- most of their most important markets for Gripen are Russia sympathizers and would likely find ways to create problems of commercial nature
- planes are costly stuff and someone has to cover the cost - it would be unfair for Sweden to do it alone but rest of EU may not be willing to pay
On the other hand, I think not only Gripens but also Rafales and Eurofighters are not out of the question at a future point, after the F16s create a precedent. But there would still be the cost problem, as they're much more expensive platforms than old F16s.
Partialy true, but Russia is not able to attack Sweden. no land connection and they were not able to use ships againts UA and Sweden has good navy. Also by air it is very limited because of Finland,.. Sweden will now exact position of each RU plane. Also with market it is not clear. yes some country support russia, but you can buy planes only from USA, EU, France , Sweden and Korea there each of this is suporting UA. Ru will be not able to deliver anything for years now and China is big question. on other side grippen can show how good they are.. Price is problem but some older one or/and with support of EU.
The article indicates that Gripens are no longer being made and that there aren’t many around. So export markets wouldn’t be a concern. The problem is that Sweden doesn’t have many to send to Ukraine and also, as another commenter mentioned, the sale would require US approval since the plane uses a US engine.
Gripen contains engine of American origin. Sweden needs approval for export
Also German gun, British ejection seat, Italian radar - that killed quite a few export attempts.
But in addition to the lack of political will or military industrial complex considerations there is also the issue of training. The early F-16s are relatively easy for pilots to master. Could you train Ukrainian pilots to exploit a modern NATO ECM or SEAD system like those on the Growler in the time available? Rafale, Eurofighter, Gripen, or F-35 possibly too. And then there is the risk of the tech falling into Russian hands. The logical step would be to supply them with pilots. Which is not going to happen.
I see the Poland falling out with Ukraine over grain story turned out to be more than Russian propaganda.
Regarding Poland we should look for their deeds, not words. That's politics, they have their elections soon, many farmers are unhappy with the cheap Ukrainian grain. The president may have to say right stuff to collect those votes. Same for Zelensky - he tries to balance his rating domestically and worldwide. Both need aggressive rhetoric to influence right wings.
1. His rating outside of Ukraine brings in the financial and military donations. His rating inside Ukraine keeps the army fighting and mobilized persons going to the army.
2. Do you believe politicians?
Gimme a break on training, it is more than 18 months of repeating that training will take X months.
All of these is fog and mirrors - only issue is lack of will.
The one year late delivery of old F-16 to Ukraine is the best solution for the NATO and US governments in their minds. Why?
With all the reports and all the coverage and explanation by Tom, but very clear in this report from today, the West have one objective clear: Ukraine must degrade the russian ability to wage war. Every weapon system destroyed is not available to threat NATO countries.
NATO wants to keep Ukraine at this level of capacity so the russian armies get their men and weapons there and not on the polish or baltics border. They want to keep the russians stressed for the next 5-10 years as they finally deploy enough F-35 and recover their armored forces to gain a clear advantage. At least in Poland, the Baltics amd Romania. When they perceive they are in advantage, they Will admit Ukraine in their ranks. This is their ultimate goal.
The problem with this is, the long time that they will be literaly using Ukraine. PSU can't say at this point "f*ck off, I don't wan't this", because they don't have any choice. If they stop offensive operations, russians are going to be dessestresed enough to reinforce and reconstitute and reequip their armies in Ukraine. And have the choice to relaunch the invasion or to freeze the conflict and redeploy to the NATO borders. This second option will be the failure of NATO strategic, so NATO keep going pressing Ukraine yo continúe the pressure.
The problem here is NATO don't perceive itself as capable of waging a war against russia now or haven't the will to fight it.
I agree with a lot of what you are saying. And that's why I hope Ukraine will recover its territory with what its got, to the surprise of those who are seemingly using them.
You're right on one point, NATO does not want to fight Russia. But this is solely due to the nuclear issue. Currently Ukraine is fighting the entire Russian army assisted by what is basically less than 1% of NATO's arsenal. Maybe the west does not want to destabilize Russia, maybe it's about business interests, maybe about nuclear armagedon fears, but whatever the reason - NATO's contribution to the war is about sufficient to match Russia's conventional army power and both of those are currently a joke.
Interesting theory but I think it doesn’t really hold up. If Ukraine can hold off Russia using old Soviet and western equipment with a tiny smattering of up to date equipment, then NATO would have no problems. Clearly large numbers of F-35s are not necessary to defeat Russian conventional forces. NATO doctrine seems to require setting up no fly zones but this can largely be achieved using Patriot air defense systems which seem to be incredibly numerous everywhere outside of Ukraine.
So, why not give up more modern equipment to them and stop Ukraine armes forces bleeding? If they have sufficient forces right now, why not give them tanks in the hundreds and Even F-16C ir F-15C?
That'll come, but not before replacement F-35 are produced and delivered. What's required is F-35 production to ramp past 200 per year. It takes years to expand that and their uptake. So old clapped-out F-16s it will be.
That is what we are all wondering about. Why don't they give the Ukrainians what they need to win? Is it incompetence, corruption, they do not really want Ukraine to win, what?
There are ~1,100 Bk3f F-35 right now, plus another 120 F-22A.
NATO is not waiting for enough Stealth aircraft, it has a bunch already, and their #1 focus is to assist the legacy strike aircraft to achieve their assigned missions without loss. that's what they also train for.
The basic fact is everything the West does in Ukraine, is non-obligatory. Ukraine is very fortunate to have been given assurances the West will support Ukraine, until Russia is defeated. That's all that matters now. Blaming the West though is a path to losing that support fast.
So I would not go voicing any opinions or accusations along those lines.
What they need to say? Thanks misters for your suport but we are waging your war? Thanks for your half hearted help, so our soldiers are still sent yo death as wey kill russians and deplete their best weapons stocks?
NATO ruled out surrender and negociations back in March 2022 and then only help slowly and in a limited way? And Ukraine need to say "Thanks!"? Really??
You could try pretending it's really a NATO war, and try blaming people who owe Ukraine nothing.
Sure, that could help.
The problem is, how efficient the support is. When NATO is hesitating to provide certain arms or ammo, it may lead just to prolonging the war, more lives wasted, more houses destroyed and finally, more US + EU money spent.
Thankyou Tom for the detailed and sobering explanation
Any thought on the French proposal for Mirage 2000 ? ^^
Our gov keeps trying to give theses like on some used goods fair.
How come Gripen could be a solution, considering the total number of them produced is 250 or something? How many of those could Sweden give, and if we talk about producing new ones - won't this take years? Whereas with F-16 at least around a hundred of planes is already kinda promised to Ukraine, and service, spare parts and training will also be much easier to receive. A
Regarding training, I find it hard to believe that there aren’t any Israeli pilots of Ukrainian descent or Polish pilots that speak Ukrainian who could fly jets for Ukraine. These people could easily be made Ukrainian citizens and enlisted. Is there some political reason for this not happening?
Should they be flying the old Migs?
They could fly modern jets now.
In Canada, USA or Russia.
There are no modern jets in Ukraine.
One excuse for not sending modern jets to Ukraine was that Ukraine didn't have anyone who could fly them. I'm saying that was pretty much a BS excuse. They could have found pilots if they wanted to.
Jet fighters made in Europe not popular in Us… true. Cant have the world understand other than Murica can make such Things. Some years ago Norway wanted to upgrade its F16 Fleet. We asked for bidders. Three planes were evaluated. F35, Gripen and I think Eurofighter. The Eurofighter quicly decided to withdraw, understanding and criticising the process. Claiming it was not fair. Sound and smart. The Swedes hung in. Deliver information, bought politicians… the latter were probably very cheap, coming from the Left Socialists and disliking anything from Us automatically. So maybe he worked for free. Us promised buy backs and so on. Off course we choose F35. It had really nothing to do with quality of the planes and everything with being a Loyal Nato member. But the political pressure was there. But there are clear commercial reasons why the US dont want non American jets there. The French should of course see the market opportunity and their own safety being served with sending their jets, but ….