Once upon the time, there was a land beyond, beyond… and….long, long, long after creating some other country nearby (through hiring a group of Wikings to pacify and civilise a gang of barbarians in the wilderness on the other side of the river), all of its princess gathered together and decided to get themselves some F-16s…
So one should basically be thankful the deployment of F-16's is being delayed, right?
I personally believe the PSU can definitely use them ASAP to defend Ukraine's sky... But if everything you say is true (which I don't doubt) then wouldn't you say that the delays in deployment of such a weapon in order to sort of prepare the PSU to use them is actually one rare proof of competence from the West and even the PSU? Doesn't that mean they see and try to solve the problems you just listed?
I agree that those planes definitely won't be the magic solution to defeat the Russians and that more of other weapons the ZSU and PSU already know how to use would be preferable... But just how are F-16 going to make matters worse? I am genuinly asking because I do not know and I don't pretend to know so feel free to enlighten me.
Again, I am overcome with skepticism and depression, how to get out of this. How to defeat the Russians and not unleash the 3rd World War, which the West fears like the devil, because Putin threatens.
"3rd World War" - a World War is when half of the world fights against another half of the world. Who do you see on the Russian side? Do you think China wants to join the fight?
China and India alone have some 3 billion of citizens. Is something like more than 30% of the world-wide population. Then add 'few minor countries'.... say, such BRICS-members like Brazil, South Africa, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, UAE.... how many people do you get together?
While we're at that: do you know that out of some 200 countries on this planet, around 150 are strictly against the Western politics vis-a-vis Palestine?
How do you think is that mirroring itself in regards of the politics of these 150 countries vis-a-vis Ukraine....?
I would agree NK is only country to really have real upside in tossing in more and more with russia and ending its isolation. I am sure China be happy to sell more stuff to Russia but fighting for it don't think so.
They're all earning handsomely from supporting Russia. Is perfectly enough for them - and also nice to have so people like you continue ignoring what are they doing.
So, you say, Germany was the only country fighting the Allies - this is why WW2 and WW1 were called "World Wars". In the same way Russians alone will fight NATO (with some external economic support) to make the war being called WW3.
Well, no, the Germans & Italians with the minor axis nations -Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Finland, Vichy Levant, Iraq, Vichy Morocco & Algeria and Japan fought the Allied forces which consisted of a significant part of the world to include the USSR, US, UK, Free France, China, India and almost every Commonwealth nation, Brazil, Mexico, and others and spanned all continents except S America.
Err who am I ignoring? WHat I meant was in BRICS countries have no interest other selling stuff to Russia and helping it circumvent 'western' sanction but only so far. Iran and North Korea re the only states that have real reasons to getting more deeply involved siding with Russia.
Because that's ignoring the fact that the BRICS- (and few other) countries in question are keeping Russia financially afloat. And explaining this with 'just earning money', but with lots of other reasons, too.
For example: India is also mad about continuous Western business relations to the PRC. And, all the Western 'attempts' to cut these ties have miserably failed.
Reform and reorganisation - in Ukraine and in the West. Is starting with end of oligarchy-dictated politics, so to avoid appointment of corrupt and incompetent politicians. Then the same kind of reforms at the top of armed forces - simply because 'generals' are also politicians.
Russia and Belarus are ruled by oligarchy that destroyed all their other oligarchy. I.e. established itself in possession of monopoly.
....which is precisely what Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg and similar (and there few hundreds of similars: they own between 80% and 90% of what is to own in the West) are horny about achieving in the West, too - which is why they're all supporting such like Trump.
Russia got Putin who imprisons and murders whoever opposes him.
Belarus got Lukashenka who does the same.
Which one of the three: Musk, Bezos or Zuzkerberg should become the ultimate ruler? Will the two others agree with that? Remember Khodorkovsky.
Ukraine had its oligarchy intact and that was decisive in its remaining a democracy - because as soon as anyone gained too much power all the others used to join against and overthrow him.
Social-economic structure of Belarussia and Ukraine haven't change since XVl century. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania was dominated by a single family, while in Ukraine there were several competing families. Belorussians were known for their patience, while Ukrainians liked to rebel against the magnates.
That whole part of the world is essentially stuck in the past. It's why it was much easier to get the serfs...err people to embrace Communism than more individual* based western societies.
Basically races of slaves being told to embrace a new system of slavery where they get some benefits (eg literacy, some healthcare and maybe a Lada).
*Though western hyper individualism is now destroying social fabric in the west proof you can have too much of a good thing.
Trump and Vance will be the ultimate rulers. The same as Putin is the ruler of the oligarchs in Russia. Musk, Bezos, and Zuckerberg don’t have any armies. Trump/Vance will be able to prosecute and convict them at will if they step out of line.
Exactly. Be prepared for the USA to find all kinds of reasons to buddy up with russia, a country that 2/3 of the conservative right now wants to imitate.
Read between the lines, and these twits see Europe as an actual enemy. The only reason they want NATO to spend more is because they intend to pressure European countries into buying American. They fear what a European defense base able to rely on inexpensive Ukrainian labor can do on the world market.
I think you will find lots and lots of incompetence etc on the Russian side as well, which is probably saving Ukraine then and now. And dont formet that the Ukrainians also do a lot of good and innovative things in the war, like drones etc. The picture is not all negative, otherwise Pudding would have occupied the country. But for improvement you need to identifiy and correct your weaknesses along with improving your strentgths.
Well writen: "...pilot killed himself (...) when violating rules and doing barrel rolls at much too low altitude..." I´ve already lost count for how many pilots lost their lives in such "barrel rolls at much too low altitude." When working thrue all the report of young Iraqi pilots who´s SPS system on their MiG-21 failed or hydraulic failed during landing - and recently about all those Albanian pilots who crashed their MiG-15/17/19/21´s beceuase low flying proficiency or too dangerous meneuvers in low level.
Wondering why the remaining Polish Mig-29s are not swapped for F-16s and the Mig-29s sent to Ukraine? From what I understand Ukraine has been offered more F-16s than it has pilots in the S/T?
Couple news bits floating about Poland is considering handing over the rest of its Warsaw pact planes to Ukraine its just apparently waiting for arraignments for for other NATO states to do replacement air coverage. Pretty sure Poland would not want the old F-16 on offer to Ukraine I am sure that rather be in line for the new V version
Poles are waiting for NATO partners to pull their heads out of their backsides, and organise bolstering its air force. Because the country is so large, it can't maintain enough own F-16s on QRA, 24/7, to cover its airspace against all eventualities.
....with other words: it still needs its remaining MiG-29s, and thus can't send them to Ukraine...
MIght help if the navy was usually carrying a full air wing to capacity on its CVs. Than the Air Force might feel a lot more comfortable send in one the one or two squadrons to cover all Pland's Pact era stuff.
Yes but... the airframes in question are all 40+ years old, meanwhile, most of them flown to death. Which in turn means: it would cost a lots of money (and time) to overhaul and rebuild them.
....and then it would cost even more money to install Western avionics. Because, and just for example: avionics alone on aircraft like F-35, costs something like 55-60% of the jet (another 30-35% are spent for the engine).
OK. Was about to discuss this in another installment of this 'saga', but lets do some 'loud thinking... in advance'...
'Put Western avionics and weaponry on Ukrainian aircraft'.
Sounds logical and perfectly simple, doesn't it?
However... The way not only the Ukrainian, but the Western 'defence sector' - and entire economies - are organised.... this would result in such a massive fight over who is going to put what into what, and who is going to control all of that, and who is going to pay and who to cash, that there would be a major fight between everybody involved.
.....exactly the kind of fight already raging within the Ukrainian sector alone over the production of missiles like Stugna, Neptune etc. And so much so, their designer, Luch, was almost driven against the wall (read: bankruptcy), late the last year....
Organizational issues will be resolved quickly. If the main issues arise - the survival of people, the loss of territories and industrial facilities, and how many planning bombs arrive at the front line, etc., etc.
And this is not a question of Ukrainian industry, but first and foremost of American industry, and their political will to allow this to happen.
Well, this is a problem from the Ukrainian defence sector, and then not only for two years already.
With other words: they do have successful missile designs (and then for air-to-air missles and for SAMs, too), but they can't press them into service, because jealous idiots are complaining that the Luch is not earning enough to survive... and the Luch is not earning enough to survive because its designs are still not in series production.
Meanwhile, the Russians are bombing the country, the PSU has no AAMs that could outmatch the Russian AAMs, and too few SAMs (and none that could stop UMPKs)....
This is going to happen when someone like Saab or Dassault partners up with a company in Ukraine. Combine Soviet aircraft design concepts with NATO electronics and you've got the best of both worlds.
Unfortunately work needed to start two or more years back. The Western mindset doesn't seem to get that it damns itself. Ironically, better markets are the first step towards improvement. More competition.
I'm afraid even Dassault is not what it used to be any more. If this would be the 1980s, Kyiv (and few other places in Ukraine) would've been roamed by people like Generals l'Estoile and/or Audran, and their 'French Men in Black', and PSZSU's aircraft full of all sort of French modifications....
But, those times were over already back in the late 1980s, and Macron can't even dream about becoming another Mitterand...
....and Saab is de-facto controlled by such like BAE and its US-consorts. Sure, Saudis can afford travelling to London, 'forget' a suitcase full of bucks in the corner of some office, and buy all the necessary avionics and software to equip their EF-2000s with PGMs long before the RAF, Luftwaffe and the Italian Air Force ever came to the idea to do so.
But, Ukrainians simply do not have the money... or do not know the right people and the right methods...
This is the wedge someone has gotta beat into the trunk of this diseased tree - European companies have got to pull away from America and embrace Ukraine. There's more profit to be made in the long run building up a European defense base. Shareholders have to be made to see that somehow. I don't like capitalism much, but it is what it is.
You would also need western jet engines in your dream combination of Soviet airframes with western electronics and weapons.
Soviet jet engines were consumables - I remember a paper from Poland which compared the engines of their MiG-29 and their F-16s, and the operating hours between engine heavy repairs were ten times more for the western engines (never mind operating characteristics and efficiency etc)
The advantages of Soviet design are mainly ruggedness and lower cost due to lack of built-in fancy features that can be added on in pods later.
I want a design where most of the simpler parts can be built where labor and material costs are cheaper and that can handle decentralized ops. Forget stealth - leave anything that requires that to drones.
What you leverage in crewed aircraft is the components that can be bolted on. It’s a platform, not a combat vehicle.
And how many years would that take? There are no good solutions here other than a willingness to learn from mistakes and act decisively on those lessons.
We understand that there is no single right option in this situation. Ukraine must simultaneously move along parallel paths, i.e.
- Squeeze everything possible out of the existing fleet, and
- Prepare for the adoption and use of new equipment - and there should be several parallel stories here too - F-16s alongside Mirages and Gripens....
The truth is that for a country against which a total war of destruction has been declared, there is no equipment that can be said to be enough. We need everything in exorbitant quantities.
The level of education regarding English is sadly very bad from my own experience in Ukraine.
So once our delegation was on a debating tournament in Kyiv around 2012. They couldn't communicate in English with part of the organising team.
My Ukrainian cousin in laws wife studied translation into English. She never exchanged even a single word in English with me although her husband is fluent.
So you can expect that those more capable pilots left the PSU for WizzAir
Ukrainian IT has hoovered all the talented people from all other industries as it provides up to 10x higher salary. And everyone in IT knows English. An internal brain drain.
Absolutely. Tom Cooper is just an agitator paid to do someone's agenda. Otherwise why would he bring bad news and smear the reputation of Zelensky, Budanov, Syrsky and co?
You can critique something you know for sure and you know how to improve it. Critique things you assume happening... OK, Don Quixote, there is your windmill...
These things aren't easy to read, but based on all his posts I've read, I'm convinced that Tom is for a Ukrainian victory. Why else fund raise for the SSO's Shark drone?
I have been following these posts for some time now. I have found that in general the analysis presented here are thougthfull and accurate and provides a good understanding of how the war is progressing. Usually a long time before MSm gets around. (I think Tom would feel thats a low bar, But still.) The point of his analysis is, and he pointed thus out, understand what is going on. If you cant understand what happened learning and improvement is only luck and will in the long run not happen. Regarding Toms support of Ukraina that has never been in doubt if you follow this, But he doesnt reduce that support to being a fanboy. Now these last days his focus has been on Ukrainian errors. But if you had followed his postings for some time you would have heard about the «keystone cops in Moscow», learnt termos like cuddling (or kuddling) orcs etc. But the purpose here is to understand what is going on. Unfortunately what is going in is rather deoressing at the moment. And unless that changes Ukraina has some serious problems in the long run. Providing an understanding of what you (Ukraine) is doing wrong is a starting point.
Look. The difference between us, I'm not following some posts, but I see some things with my own eyes. And I can say, that some things, presented as facts are direct intentional lies. One example. The author is describing huge cyber attack, led to loosing C2 for couple of days. That is ridiculous!!!! I personally was watching the face of the Air Forces Commander in the monitor for the very first week after February 24, 24 hours a day, cause he was online all the time, as well as all his subordinate commanders. No cyber attack will damage the analog phone, and even if everything will be broken, noone will stop beautiful lady at the battle post with the headphones mark targets on the transparent plastic wall with words backwards. That is one, ans you may find many other lies. And if you want to dig into this crap mountain to find some diamonds, well, go ahead. Your choice. It upsetting me, that lots of SMEs are reading and eating it all. Oh, boy....
I am a fan of Glen Grant, who provides very painfu butl fair criticism. Once one general told me, his article contains lies. Well, I replied, provide me just with one, and I will come along with you. It never happened. That is the difference. I believe I've tell enough for those, able separate ceeds from the chaff. Oh, I am sorry, for this particular example, crap.
Only you're speaking truth, and that because you chat with Oleshchuk, 24/7....
As next, I'm sure you're going to be so kind and explain us here (or at least to me), how many English courses for their personnel have what of PSU brigade-commanders organised between, say, 2014 and 2023?
....and, how many were organised by Oleshchuk? ....or anybody else in the PSU?
Finally, since I'm lying, while you know so much better, I'm sure you can also present evidence that the CO 831st Brigade has shot down an Il-76 and two Mi-24s, on 25-26 February 2022, so to earn himself the 'Hero of Ukraine' award?
I'll wait, patiently, for your answer - and thanks a lot in advance.
Because they are meant to break the groupthink that the Ukrainian leadership and the PSU can do no wrong. Of course they can screw up. We all can. It's time to stop pretending otherwise.
One of the biggest weaknesses of my approach to evaluating the war is that I have to assume a basic level of competence on the part of the governments involved. Glitches are caused by poor planning and inept leadership.
Obviously, this creates a blind spot. It's just smaller than the one Jake Sullivan's pathetic education imparted to him.
It will be extremely concerning, if after two-plus years, Ukraine hasn't been able to get intensive English language immersion going. There have to be retired pilots all across the world who can help train personnel remotely. But so far as I'm aware there is no effective international air legion in place, which I had thought someone would have been able to organize long before now.
That's all pretty concerning. If it indicates a lack of preparedness for using F-16s are Ukraine will have to - in other words, imitating Swedish and Taiwanese practices for distributed sortie generation - their impact will be dramatically reduced.
One caveat: as a grad student, I watched time and again as American professors leaned on language issues as an excuse for pushing international students to drop out (Oregon State University is a corrupt fuckhole, which is why I bailed on my PhD program some years back). It is very, very probable that US-based instructors in Arizona are being pressured to only graduate pilots once they've reached a standard that native English speakers probably can't manage.
Americans have a thousand sneaky ways to reify their social pyramid scheme. Once it was decided that world war 3 is unthinkable, the parameters for America's defeat in any crisis were established.
Essentially, the USA is a grand casino where everyone is taught in school to fake it until they make it. The goal of life is to suck up to the right people in order to get close enough to a flow of wealth that you can camp on and exploit.
That JD Vance idiot is a classic example of how the scheme works - a lucky few make it through the shitty conditions they were born into, then turn around and tell others in a similar situation that it's their fault for not succeeding despite the odds. To keep people from pointing out the obvious hypocrisy, people like him pretend that it was all hard work and determination that made them successful, not lucky breaks that brought them into contact with the kind of folks who get a young person into Yale Law School and then onto a tech startup.
The result is a sociopathic con artist society not that different from russia's, if you're one of the 50% of the population struggling to get by. For the next 40% life is okay if uncertain, 9% are totally comfortable, 0.9% are rich, and the rest literally don't have to act like humans any more. Once you get to Trump, Biden, Musk, or Clinton level, a whole different set of rules apply - including legal. You literally get more Constitutional rigths because it costs a lot to pay to defend them in court if someone decides theirs beat yours.
In school, across media, even entertainment, Americans are taught that this is perfectly normal. If you complain or point out the rigged game, you get labeled a loser. So most people join a tribe and speak its language, repeating what other people say in order to belong somewhere, ideally to a group on the higher end of the latter.
The average American has zero impact on foreign policy. And US leaders have zero reason to risk a major war that might upset the game as it stands. If you are making it in the US, you have no incentive to let the pyramid collapse - especially if at the top.
What the people there are basically saying when they insist that WW3 is the apocalypse is that they will sacrifice anyone lower down instead of tolerating any risk of losing what they have. If you are an enemy of the USA who acts crazy enough and has nuclear weapons, you are essentially untouchable so long as you don't directly attack Americans.
That hard truth is, unfortunately, the tragedy at the heart of NATO. There is no nuclear umbrella - it's always been a bluff. In a recent poll only 7% of Americans said they would fight even to defend the USA in a war. This entire country is built on the idea that when volunteers are called to step forward, only suckers fail to take an immediate step back.
If it comes down to it, American leaders will always sacrifice someone more expendable to save their own skins. On the plus side, there will almost certainly never be an all-out nuclear war. Unfortunately, NATO and even the Anglosphere can't rely on America until something pretty dramatic changes.
Huh, I think I managed to explain a paragraph by writing a longer post. Sorry. Hard to condense a systems analysis.
Thanks. That makes sense. So the miniscule risk to this elite posed by allowing Russia's war machine to be broken (by strikes and/or economic means) isn't worth it to them. I've long seen the only real escalation as Putin starting to lose, whatever form that takes.
Look, my point was not to blame you or something. All I'm asking, what is your intent? Critique to make what? Reaction, noise, proving your expertise.... What was your point? I would appreciate your fair answer
Seems, you're new here? Is no problem: in such case, the question is fair.
My intentions are always exactly the same: understanding the why, who, where, when, and how. ....and explaining what's going on. Including things that are going wrong. That's what I'm doing for nearly 40 years, meanwhile, and indeed: doing for living (see: https://www.helion.co.uk/people/tom-cooper.php?sid=3f4271ad75ec3520bfff8a248fecf912) - and that always in exactly the same fashion, regardless what conflict.
Because: one can't understand warfare if researching in any other way, or for any other purpose.
But if you take all-sources unproven information, make assumptions based on your personal feelings, so the value of such a research is poor, and have no historical value.
It looks like spilling the soy sauce. You take all the products, including raw and rotten, spill it with sauce of fair footages and historical examples, and all this tastes like fair soy sauce. But it has nothing to do with history. Yes, that's the "Saga of how Ukrainians are bad", and like for every saga, you cannot refer it as a fact.
We have luxury to live in the free world, and everyone can say anything if not breaking the law.
If you like to play historian in your doubtful manner, do what you love to.
As for me, there are many other authors to read at this valuable resource.
I would recommend you to stop online-psychoanalysing me. You obviously have no clue how do I work, and - what's wrorse - instead of continuing to ask questions, you've started guessing.
And I'm fed up of experts in online-psychoanalysis since about two days I went online, back in 1996.
Do us both a favour and go reading so many other authors.
I remember seeing a presentation online(I think 2019) of the Ukrainian airforce planning to gradually purchase up to 120 F16s over a decade. Quite surprised they didnt implement rigorous English courses for their pilots, quite damning tbh. On the other hand, if Biden really wanted those F16s there they would have been in Ukraine within the first year and operating. Eric Prince publicly lobbied for us to send 100+F16s and F15s into Ukraine in the first year that we had sitting doing nothing but in great condition.
If there were foreign volunteers on the ground then why not in the air? And doing so would have also helped EU countries move faster with supplying training to Ukrainian pilots and F16 aircraft. If the manufacturing country is pushing the idea then it makes it easier. But its hard moving forward when at every step behind closed doors, Sullivan doesn't want Russia to lose too badly. Dems may call Trump a Russian asset, but Biden's slow walking of aid has possibly had the same effect.
Still a lot better than the Republicans blocking aid completely. Btw, one of the major points Tom's been making since F-16s were first proposed is that you cannot just rush F-16s into a country and expect them to make any difference without the years of preparation it needs to build the infrastructure and training needed to operate them? Life is not a video game.
The craziest part about the F16 debate is that 2 years ago when some of us were saying let preparations to get them to Ukraine begin now(2022), others were saying it would take at least 2 years before they would start flying so it would be pointless even starting. They & You missed my point. My argument wasnt about how long it takes but a will to make it work whether it takes 2 or 10 years the best time to start preparing is yesterday the second best time is now. Unfortunately they started in 2023.
Because there were prominent domain experts saying this is possible(Former SACEURs, Air Force Gen BreedLove, Eric Prince, Air Marshall Greg Bagwell). There are solid arguments which Tom has presented here on why getting them there in the first year wouldnt have been the best option. Not that it couldnt happen but they(the Ukrainians) wouldnt be able to properly utilize them in a year etc. The fundamental point is Biden admin purposefully delayed even greenlighting preparations for Ukraine to get them. Preparations should have started in March 2022 when it became obvious the VKS had been thoroughly beaten by the Ukrainian Air Force. Instead as usual with the incessant delays, preparations started late in 2023. A whole year lost.
Have you even read the posts this thread is part of? Tom makes it clear (as many of us also knew) that Ukraine was not ready, prepared or able to convert to F-16s in a year. Just because some experts (I won't include the distinctly dodgy Eric Prince) said so does not mean it could have happened. Magical thinking never fares well when it comes up against harsh reality.
Thanks Tom. It's genuinely a pleasure reading your scathing critique on the ZSU/PSU/UA Gov (and all others). You will know better than I do. However, my impression is that the West is collectively, constantly and regularly shocked by the level of chaos, corruption and outright incompetence, at every level in Ukraine. This F-16 saga is yet another case, where there was clearly an assumption, that a country in an extistential war, cannot be this idiotic. Surely, they will have sorted out the very basics. This must be such a cultural shock to every western representative, whenever he/she comes into an interaction with the UA counterpart, that it's akin to a remote, isolated tribe, seeing a jet plane for the first time. You can tell them it is like this, they can read all the books about it, watch all the films, listen to all the podcasts, yet their brains will simply not accept it, it's so beyond their experiences.
Ironically, it feels like the collective West is slowly reaching the same conclusion as JD Vance "I don't really care about what happens to Ukraine.". I don't blame them. You cannot help those that refuse to help themselves.
JD Vance doesn't care what happens to Ukraine because he thinks they are beneath him, but because he thinks they are a necessary sacrifice in order to realize his vision for the world (i don't agree with him). I think you're being harsh. We can want the best for Ukraine, while still calibrating assistance based on competence. The West had no excuse not to push Ukraine towards preparing better for the F16s, as highlighted by Tom
I don't care about JD Vance, I only quoted him because he is a potential VP.
NATO is only now opening a coordination centre for Ukraine, in Wiesbaden. Another centre will be used/created in Bydgoszcz. This should've been done 2 years ago.
NATO has been slow in properly organising the support for Ukraine and the lessons learned processes. However, this isn't kindergarden and it is not NATOs job to do everything for UA, hold hands and treat them like kids. There is 0 reason for UA pilots to be undergoing english language training outside of UA. They should all have english teachers assigned and basic pilot english taught at civilian flight schools. Only the advanced military courses, including specialist language, should be conducted in NATO training centres. There are probably thousands of english teachers in UA and maybe 100 pilots. You could have multiple teachers per pilot if necessary. This is just typical useless and incompetent Ukrainian authorities. The same authorities that 10 years into the war, still have no clue how to conduct conscription.
Your detailed posts are always appreciated. I just wanted to push back on what I perceived to be the notion that we shouldn't have compassion because of Ukraine's shortcomings
Thanks Tom, clear as usual. I may add the Zero reason: western continuous search for profitting and NATO oriented style mantras.
In Argentina, a recent discuss is open within the specialized defense media, quoted by military officers of the different "national" schools of thougth.
The new item, once the F-16 question is resolved, is the reequipment of the Navy. And, seems logical the discusion if we are taking about submarines (after the terrible loss of the ARA San Juan in 2017) but now they are taking about buying surplus french or italian FREMM frigates and even the San Giorgio "semi carrier". Why a sane country is going to sell those complex weapons to Argentina, when we are displaying all the difficulties to pay for them? In the most un-protected military zone of the world? And why we need them?
Argentine Navy and Air Force are "supply bessieged" since Malvinas war. The UK stopped and prohibited, directly or by diploma y, the reinforcement and replacement and the adquisition of spares for all the major components: The turbines of the destroyers, the electronics of the F-1M, the ejection seats of the Super Etendard Modernisee (basically, no Rolls Royce, no Martin Baker, no Ferranti and Marconi, etc.)
So, if we want to deploy military means to defend, we need to Buy to alternate suppliers, do it in house, or think outside the box.
Why Argentina need destroyers? We have 4500 km of coast. Why not Buy AShM? We have a sustainable and national rocket and missile design. Why no better look at the Houtis and Ukranians are doing with missiles and naval drones? Why not plan acordingly to our strategic profundity and develop indigenous drones to saturate logística línea of any invader? Why buy the F-16 If our only remaining disputed territory are the Malvinas?
I think than in Argentina case, or in Ukraine, the military polítics are not fullfilling the real necesitties.
El tema de los embargos por los asientos eyectables Martin Baker es absurdo porque ya llevamos décadas que los usan la FAA (la COAN ya no desde que no vuela ningún Super Etendard), y existe una empresa subsidiaria de mantenimiento de MB instalada en nuestro país.
El problema de nuestras FF.AAs es presupuestario y cultural, nunca se invirtió correctamente o se despifarraba en cualquier cosa.
El gobierno de milei se cree "el restaurador de las FF.AAs" por aumentar ligeramente el presupuesto pero solo sirve para "la gilada".
El tema de los F-16 ya venía del gobierno anterior, solamente faltaba la firma del presidente de turno (milei lo toma como su punta de lanza), lo mismo pasó con la actualización del TAM.
La Armada es la más castigada de las tres fuerzas por la falta de presupuesto, pero el genio de petri quiere comprar un portahelicópteros sin tener suficientes helicópteros en la misma fuerza.
También están estudiando la posible adquisición de submarinos usados!!!(NADIE RECUERDA AL ARA SAN JUAN???).
También está el (gravísimo) problema de que la mayoría de nuestros militares votaron a ése loco.
Thank you for the update, lots of new information. I think however that you summarised the problems in the last two paragraphs. The first described the problems (lengte of coast line etc), the second summarised why it isnt done properly. The problem with all military is that they are not really sane and focused on their tanks. Instead they have all kinds of internal dysfunctions, historical hang ups, political manoevring etc. Personally I think history is extremely dysfunctional, generals prepare håtheir whole force for figthing the last war, think the weapons of last war are cool etc. last for decades and generasjons, as discussed by Tom. Regarding history, why is it at that you still havent agreed to solve the Malvinas issue with the Brits? Make an agreenent, wait 30 yrs and you will get Malvinas…
Regarding Malvinas I have the same questions than You. The only thing I can tink about is that the Brits are not keen to negociante them because they are fullfilling their task of make Argentina incapable of project a menace. So, al long as the position is not costly enough, the can site there as it gave them a base to a claim to a portion of Antartica.
The Malvinas have nothing to do with Britain's Antarctic claims. Since the vast majority of residents want nothing to do with Argentina, how about Argentina creates a stable government, economy, and society that they would want to be part of? Everyone wins that way.
Ug. I really wish this WASN'T to be continued. I don't want to read anymore. But this isn't really any surprise. You are a country at war, trying to fight corruption in every service and government agency, have a small budget, have old gear, have old leadership, have to have tons of basic requirements to even try and get more modern stuff which you are competing with the other military elements for. The list is long. Honestly, the issue for me isn't all the crap that they haven't done or have to do, it's that they even got this far.
And yet still, the best thing, both morally and in self-interest, is to assist them towards victory. But of course that assistance needs to be designed based on realities such as pointed out by Tom.
The best thing is of course to continue to support them. But one has to wonder regarding the western nations supporting Ukraine. Why hasnt they known this and tried to rectify it? Maybe the second installment?
Good point, but are not aircraft in another world of complexity?
I hope the road signs collected by the Su-27 said "Warning: Low Flying Aircraft"
Thanks for your reporting!
So one should basically be thankful the deployment of F-16's is being delayed, right?
I personally believe the PSU can definitely use them ASAP to defend Ukraine's sky... But if everything you say is true (which I don't doubt) then wouldn't you say that the delays in deployment of such a weapon in order to sort of prepare the PSU to use them is actually one rare proof of competence from the West and even the PSU? Doesn't that mean they see and try to solve the problems you just listed?
I agree that those planes definitely won't be the magic solution to defeat the Russians and that more of other weapons the ZSU and PSU already know how to use would be preferable... But just how are F-16 going to make matters worse? I am genuinly asking because I do not know and I don't pretend to know so feel free to enlighten me.
Lets say it this way: at least 50%, probably more, of delays with deliveries were caused by Ukrainians.
Again, I am overcome with skepticism and depression, how to get out of this. How to defeat the Russians and not unleash the 3rd World War, which the West fears like the devil, because Putin threatens.
"3rd World War" - a World War is when half of the world fights against another half of the world. Who do you see on the Russian side? Do you think China wants to join the fight?
On the Russian side....?
China and India alone have some 3 billion of citizens. Is something like more than 30% of the world-wide population. Then add 'few minor countries'.... say, such BRICS-members like Brazil, South Africa, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, UAE.... how many people do you get together?
While we're at that: do you know that out of some 200 countries on this planet, around 150 are strictly against the Western politics vis-a-vis Palestine?
How do you think is that mirroring itself in regards of the politics of these 150 countries vis-a-vis Ukraine....?
I don't believe any of them cares enough to enter the fight to save Russia. Maybe with the exception of NK which has not much to lose.
I would agree NK is only country to really have real upside in tossing in more and more with russia and ending its isolation. I am sure China be happy to sell more stuff to Russia but fighting for it don't think so.
Oh, why should anybody enter a war directly?
They're all earning handsomely from supporting Russia. Is perfectly enough for them - and also nice to have so people like you continue ignoring what are they doing.
So, you say, Germany was the only country fighting the Allies - this is why WW2 and WW1 were called "World Wars". In the same way Russians alone will fight NATO (with some external economic support) to make the war being called WW3.
Where did I say that?
And the Russians are already fighting NATO. And quite successfully, too. And NATO is not fighting back. So, why escalate it to a direct war?
Well, no, the Germans & Italians with the minor axis nations -Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Finland, Vichy Levant, Iraq, Vichy Morocco & Algeria and Japan fought the Allied forces which consisted of a significant part of the world to include the USSR, US, UK, Free France, China, India and almost every Commonwealth nation, Brazil, Mexico, and others and spanned all continents except S America.
Err who am I ignoring? WHat I meant was in BRICS countries have no interest other selling stuff to Russia and helping it circumvent 'western' sanction but only so far. Iran and North Korea re the only states that have real reasons to getting more deeply involved siding with Russia.
Because that's ignoring the fact that the BRICS- (and few other) countries in question are keeping Russia financially afloat. And explaining this with 'just earning money', but with lots of other reasons, too.
For example: India is also mad about continuous Western business relations to the PRC. And, all the Western 'attempts' to cut these ties have miserably failed.
Indeed. All related parties are cynically earning on the war. Both UA and RU supporters.
How would Germany's support be recouped?
Reform and reorganisation - in Ukraine and in the West. Is starting with end of oligarchy-dictated politics, so to avoid appointment of corrupt and incompetent politicians. Then the same kind of reforms at the top of armed forces - simply because 'generals' are also politicians.
Russia and Belarus destroyed their oligarchy - see what has become to their democracy.
Remember how many dictatorships were in the post-WW2 Europe.
Russia and Belarus are ruled by oligarchy that destroyed all their other oligarchy. I.e. established itself in possession of monopoly.
....which is precisely what Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg and similar (and there few hundreds of similars: they own between 80% and 90% of what is to own in the West) are horny about achieving in the West, too - which is why they're all supporting such like Trump.
Russia got Putin who imprisons and murders whoever opposes him.
Belarus got Lukashenka who does the same.
Which one of the three: Musk, Bezos or Zuzkerberg should become the ultimate ruler? Will the two others agree with that? Remember Khodorkovsky.
Ukraine had its oligarchy intact and that was decisive in its remaining a democracy - because as soon as anyone gained too much power all the others used to join against and overthrow him.
Social-economic structure of Belarussia and Ukraine haven't change since XVl century. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania was dominated by a single family, while in Ukraine there were several competing families. Belorussians were known for their patience, while Ukrainians liked to rebel against the magnates.
That whole part of the world is essentially stuck in the past. It's why it was much easier to get the serfs...err people to embrace Communism than more individual* based western societies.
Basically races of slaves being told to embrace a new system of slavery where they get some benefits (eg literacy, some healthcare and maybe a Lada).
*Though western hyper individualism is now destroying social fabric in the west proof you can have too much of a good thing.
Trump and Vance will be the ultimate rulers. The same as Putin is the ruler of the oligarchs in Russia. Musk, Bezos, and Zuckerberg don’t have any armies. Trump/Vance will be able to prosecute and convict them at will if they step out of line.
I fear you are right
Exactly. Be prepared for the USA to find all kinds of reasons to buddy up with russia, a country that 2/3 of the conservative right now wants to imitate.
Read between the lines, and these twits see Europe as an actual enemy. The only reason they want NATO to spend more is because they intend to pressure European countries into buying American. They fear what a European defense base able to rely on inexpensive Ukrainian labor can do on the world market.
I think you will find lots and lots of incompetence etc on the Russian side as well, which is probably saving Ukraine then and now. And dont formet that the Ukrainians also do a lot of good and innovative things in the war, like drones etc. The picture is not all negative, otherwise Pudding would have occupied the country. But for improvement you need to identifiy and correct your weaknesses along with improving your strentgths.
Well writen: "...pilot killed himself (...) when violating rules and doing barrel rolls at much too low altitude..." I´ve already lost count for how many pilots lost their lives in such "barrel rolls at much too low altitude." When working thrue all the report of young Iraqi pilots who´s SPS system on their MiG-21 failed or hydraulic failed during landing - and recently about all those Albanian pilots who crashed their MiG-15/17/19/21´s beceuase low flying proficiency or too dangerous meneuvers in low level.
Wondering why the remaining Polish Mig-29s are not swapped for F-16s and the Mig-29s sent to Ukraine? From what I understand Ukraine has been offered more F-16s than it has pilots in the S/T?
Couple news bits floating about Poland is considering handing over the rest of its Warsaw pact planes to Ukraine its just apparently waiting for arraignments for for other NATO states to do replacement air coverage. Pretty sure Poland would not want the old F-16 on offer to Ukraine I am sure that rather be in line for the new V version
Poles are waiting for NATO partners to pull their heads out of their backsides, and organise bolstering its air force. Because the country is so large, it can't maintain enough own F-16s on QRA, 24/7, to cover its airspace against all eventualities.
....with other words: it still needs its remaining MiG-29s, and thus can't send them to Ukraine...
I would think the US, Canada and maybe the UK could find sufficient capacity to manage that w/o risking their own air security.
What you or me would think, and what the super-competent NATO is doing - are affairs that are two worlds apart.
There's a good reason why I call them 'People in Need of fresh Air'.
MIght help if the navy was usually carrying a full air wing to capacity on its CVs. Than the Air Force might feel a lot more comfortable send in one the one or two squadrons to cover all Pland's Pact era stuff.
Could is the operative Word….
It would be easier to modernize the existing fleet of MiG-29s, Su-27s, and Su-24s.
Replace the radar with a powerful one, add some avionics, and adapt the weapons.
Yes but... the airframes in question are all 40+ years old, meanwhile, most of them flown to death. Which in turn means: it would cost a lots of money (and time) to overhaul and rebuild them.
....and then it would cost even more money to install Western avionics. Because, and just for example: avionics alone on aircraft like F-35, costs something like 55-60% of the jet (another 30-35% are spent for the engine).
If we are talking about such an important thing as time, this is the right decision. +++ Infrastructure, trained staff, etc.....
But the most important thing is time - no one needs to be told about its value during a war of this nature.....
Moreover, the options for such modernization were being worked out even before the escalation in 2022.
OK. Was about to discuss this in another installment of this 'saga', but lets do some 'loud thinking... in advance'...
'Put Western avionics and weaponry on Ukrainian aircraft'.
Sounds logical and perfectly simple, doesn't it?
However... The way not only the Ukrainian, but the Western 'defence sector' - and entire economies - are organised.... this would result in such a massive fight over who is going to put what into what, and who is going to control all of that, and who is going to pay and who to cash, that there would be a major fight between everybody involved.
.....exactly the kind of fight already raging within the Ukrainian sector alone over the production of missiles like Stugna, Neptune etc. And so much so, their designer, Luch, was almost driven against the wall (read: bankruptcy), late the last year....
Organizational issues will be resolved quickly. If the main issues arise - the survival of people, the loss of territories and industrial facilities, and how many planning bombs arrive at the front line, etc., etc.
And this is not a question of Ukrainian industry, but first and foremost of American industry, and their political will to allow this to happen.
Well, this is a problem from the Ukrainian defence sector, and then not only for two years already.
With other words: they do have successful missile designs (and then for air-to-air missles and for SAMs, too), but they can't press them into service, because jealous idiots are complaining that the Luch is not earning enough to survive... and the Luch is not earning enough to survive because its designs are still not in series production.
Meanwhile, the Russians are bombing the country, the PSU has no AAMs that could outmatch the Russian AAMs, and too few SAMs (and none that could stop UMPKs)....
This is going to happen when someone like Saab or Dassault partners up with a company in Ukraine. Combine Soviet aircraft design concepts with NATO electronics and you've got the best of both worlds.
Unfortunately work needed to start two or more years back. The Western mindset doesn't seem to get that it damns itself. Ironically, better markets are the first step towards improvement. More competition.
I'm afraid even Dassault is not what it used to be any more. If this would be the 1980s, Kyiv (and few other places in Ukraine) would've been roamed by people like Generals l'Estoile and/or Audran, and their 'French Men in Black', and PSZSU's aircraft full of all sort of French modifications....
But, those times were over already back in the late 1980s, and Macron can't even dream about becoming another Mitterand...
....and Saab is de-facto controlled by such like BAE and its US-consorts. Sure, Saudis can afford travelling to London, 'forget' a suitcase full of bucks in the corner of some office, and buy all the necessary avionics and software to equip their EF-2000s with PGMs long before the RAF, Luftwaffe and the Italian Air Force ever came to the idea to do so.
But, Ukrainians simply do not have the money... or do not know the right people and the right methods...
This is the wedge someone has gotta beat into the trunk of this diseased tree - European companies have got to pull away from America and embrace Ukraine. There's more profit to be made in the long run building up a European defense base. Shareholders have to be made to see that somehow. I don't like capitalism much, but it is what it is.
You would also need western jet engines in your dream combination of Soviet airframes with western electronics and weapons.
Soviet jet engines were consumables - I remember a paper from Poland which compared the engines of their MiG-29 and their F-16s, and the operating hours between engine heavy repairs were ten times more for the western engines (never mind operating characteristics and efficiency etc)
Naturally!
The advantages of Soviet design are mainly ruggedness and lower cost due to lack of built-in fancy features that can be added on in pods later.
I want a design where most of the simpler parts can be built where labor and material costs are cheaper and that can handle decentralized ops. Forget stealth - leave anything that requires that to drones.
What you leverage in crewed aircraft is the components that can be bolted on. It’s a platform, not a combat vehicle.
And how many years would that take? There are no good solutions here other than a willingness to learn from mistakes and act decisively on those lessons.
We understand that there is no single right option in this situation. Ukraine must simultaneously move along parallel paths, i.e.
- Squeeze everything possible out of the existing fleet, and
- Prepare for the adoption and use of new equipment - and there should be several parallel stories here too - F-16s alongside Mirages and Gripens....
The truth is that for a country against which a total war of destruction has been declared, there is no equipment that can be said to be enough. We need everything in exorbitant quantities.
The level of education regarding English is sadly very bad from my own experience in Ukraine.
So once our delegation was on a debating tournament in Kyiv around 2012. They couldn't communicate in English with part of the organising team.
My Ukrainian cousin in laws wife studied translation into English. She never exchanged even a single word in English with me although her husband is fluent.
So you can expect that those more capable pilots left the PSU for WizzAir
And funny is, this English proofreading service is from Ukraine https://www.grammarly.com/
Ukrainian IT has hoovered all the talented people from all other industries as it provides up to 10x higher salary. And everyone in IT knows English. An internal brain drain.
Those in IT learn English firstly through computer games, then through coding and afterwards through work.
I had reasonable communication in English with people from the medical field. And with refugees now. Things change a lot in 12 years.
‘ah, just give us F-16s, we’re going to do the rest’ - that the typical Russian-Ukraine-Soviet mindset.
It is interesting, what is the intent of author posting this?
To help Ukraine? Barely.
To convince someone Ukraine is helpless? As far as russian cannons are not shelling Poland, Ukraine worth it.
To show competence and expertise, driven with open sources unconfirmed information? Questionable.
So, what is the point of those "Sagas" posted recently? Just curious
Indeed. What is critique good for? Critique never helped anybody.
Better stop critique... right?
Absolutely. Tom Cooper is just an agitator paid to do someone's agenda. Otherwise why would he bring bad news and smear the reputation of Zelensky, Budanov, Syrsky and co?
Right! Finally! I've been waiting for this revelation for more than 20 years!!! Iranian-Taiwanese-Albanian agent Tom Cooper caught on the spot! ))))))
Jokes apart, the F-16s are also being awaited on the other side of the front. The bounty is promised for the first downing of F-16:
https://bulgarianmilitary.com/amp/2024/06/09/168k-for-first-downed-ukrainian-f-16-5-6k-for-each-next-one/
Ah, now for Taiwan, too?
....and me, stupid, thought that list is limited to the MI6, BND, HNA, CIA, Mossad, Muqbarrat, AQI, ÖAMTC, ARBÖ, MILFs....
Anyway... yes, the VKS is 'waiting' for F-16s. Or not waiting at all: regularly striking Stary... AB. Seems, the dogmas rule the day there, too...
You can critique something you know for sure and you know how to improve it. Critique things you assume happening... OK, Don Quixote, there is your windmill...
So, I do not know for sure what is the PSZSU doing?
Good to know. ...
These things aren't easy to read, but based on all his posts I've read, I'm convinced that Tom is for a Ukrainian victory. Why else fund raise for the SSO's Shark drone?
I have been following these posts for some time now. I have found that in general the analysis presented here are thougthfull and accurate and provides a good understanding of how the war is progressing. Usually a long time before MSm gets around. (I think Tom would feel thats a low bar, But still.) The point of his analysis is, and he pointed thus out, understand what is going on. If you cant understand what happened learning and improvement is only luck and will in the long run not happen. Regarding Toms support of Ukraina that has never been in doubt if you follow this, But he doesnt reduce that support to being a fanboy. Now these last days his focus has been on Ukrainian errors. But if you had followed his postings for some time you would have heard about the «keystone cops in Moscow», learnt termos like cuddling (or kuddling) orcs etc. But the purpose here is to understand what is going on. Unfortunately what is going in is rather deoressing at the moment. And unless that changes Ukraina has some serious problems in the long run. Providing an understanding of what you (Ukraine) is doing wrong is a starting point.
Look. The difference between us, I'm not following some posts, but I see some things with my own eyes. And I can say, that some things, presented as facts are direct intentional lies. One example. The author is describing huge cyber attack, led to loosing C2 for couple of days. That is ridiculous!!!! I personally was watching the face of the Air Forces Commander in the monitor for the very first week after February 24, 24 hours a day, cause he was online all the time, as well as all his subordinate commanders. No cyber attack will damage the analog phone, and even if everything will be broken, noone will stop beautiful lady at the battle post with the headphones mark targets on the transparent plastic wall with words backwards. That is one, ans you may find many other lies. And if you want to dig into this crap mountain to find some diamonds, well, go ahead. Your choice. It upsetting me, that lots of SMEs are reading and eating it all. Oh, boy....
I am a fan of Glen Grant, who provides very painfu butl fair criticism. Once one general told me, his article contains lies. Well, I replied, provide me just with one, and I will come along with you. It never happened. That is the difference. I believe I've tell enough for those, able separate ceeds from the chaff. Oh, I am sorry, for this particular example, crap.
Oh, then it's easy: Cyberattacks are all lies,. Therefore, this is a lie (indeed, a lie supplied to the European Parliament):
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2022/733549/EPRS_BRI(2022)733549_EN.pdf
....this is a lie, too:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viasat_hack
...this is a lie:
https://www.pcmag.com/news/report-nsa-investigates-viasat-hack-that-coincided-with-ukraine-invasion
...and this too:
https://news.viasat.com/blog/corporate/ka-sat-network-cyber-attack-overview
....etc.
Only you're speaking truth, and that because you chat with Oleshchuk, 24/7....
As next, I'm sure you're going to be so kind and explain us here (or at least to me), how many English courses for their personnel have what of PSU brigade-commanders organised between, say, 2014 and 2023?
....and, how many were organised by Oleshchuk? ....or anybody else in the PSU?
Finally, since I'm lying, while you know so much better, I'm sure you can also present evidence that the CO 831st Brigade has shot down an Il-76 and two Mi-24s, on 25-26 February 2022, so to earn himself the 'Hero of Ukraine' award?
I'll wait, patiently, for your answer - and thanks a lot in advance.
Thanks for confirming you're a troll that can't answer a single question.
Because they are meant to break the groupthink that the Ukrainian leadership and the PSU can do no wrong. Of course they can screw up. We all can. It's time to stop pretending otherwise.
One of the biggest weaknesses of my approach to evaluating the war is that I have to assume a basic level of competence on the part of the governments involved. Glitches are caused by poor planning and inept leadership.
Obviously, this creates a blind spot. It's just smaller than the one Jake Sullivan's pathetic education imparted to him.
It will be extremely concerning, if after two-plus years, Ukraine hasn't been able to get intensive English language immersion going. There have to be retired pilots all across the world who can help train personnel remotely. But so far as I'm aware there is no effective international air legion in place, which I had thought someone would have been able to organize long before now.
That's all pretty concerning. If it indicates a lack of preparedness for using F-16s are Ukraine will have to - in other words, imitating Swedish and Taiwanese practices for distributed sortie generation - their impact will be dramatically reduced.
One caveat: as a grad student, I watched time and again as American professors leaned on language issues as an excuse for pushing international students to drop out (Oregon State University is a corrupt fuckhole, which is why I bailed on my PhD program some years back). It is very, very probable that US-based instructors in Arizona are being pressured to only graduate pilots once they've reached a standard that native English speakers probably can't manage.
Americans have a thousand sneaky ways to reify their social pyramid scheme. Once it was decided that world war 3 is unthinkable, the parameters for America's defeat in any crisis were established.
Thanks. Can you explain the last paragraph?
Sure, sorry for the lingo!
Essentially, the USA is a grand casino where everyone is taught in school to fake it until they make it. The goal of life is to suck up to the right people in order to get close enough to a flow of wealth that you can camp on and exploit.
That JD Vance idiot is a classic example of how the scheme works - a lucky few make it through the shitty conditions they were born into, then turn around and tell others in a similar situation that it's their fault for not succeeding despite the odds. To keep people from pointing out the obvious hypocrisy, people like him pretend that it was all hard work and determination that made them successful, not lucky breaks that brought them into contact with the kind of folks who get a young person into Yale Law School and then onto a tech startup.
The result is a sociopathic con artist society not that different from russia's, if you're one of the 50% of the population struggling to get by. For the next 40% life is okay if uncertain, 9% are totally comfortable, 0.9% are rich, and the rest literally don't have to act like humans any more. Once you get to Trump, Biden, Musk, or Clinton level, a whole different set of rules apply - including legal. You literally get more Constitutional rigths because it costs a lot to pay to defend them in court if someone decides theirs beat yours.
In school, across media, even entertainment, Americans are taught that this is perfectly normal. If you complain or point out the rigged game, you get labeled a loser. So most people join a tribe and speak its language, repeating what other people say in order to belong somewhere, ideally to a group on the higher end of the latter.
The average American has zero impact on foreign policy. And US leaders have zero reason to risk a major war that might upset the game as it stands. If you are making it in the US, you have no incentive to let the pyramid collapse - especially if at the top.
What the people there are basically saying when they insist that WW3 is the apocalypse is that they will sacrifice anyone lower down instead of tolerating any risk of losing what they have. If you are an enemy of the USA who acts crazy enough and has nuclear weapons, you are essentially untouchable so long as you don't directly attack Americans.
That hard truth is, unfortunately, the tragedy at the heart of NATO. There is no nuclear umbrella - it's always been a bluff. In a recent poll only 7% of Americans said they would fight even to defend the USA in a war. This entire country is built on the idea that when volunteers are called to step forward, only suckers fail to take an immediate step back.
If it comes down to it, American leaders will always sacrifice someone more expendable to save their own skins. On the plus side, there will almost certainly never be an all-out nuclear war. Unfortunately, NATO and even the Anglosphere can't rely on America until something pretty dramatic changes.
Huh, I think I managed to explain a paragraph by writing a longer post. Sorry. Hard to condense a systems analysis.
Thanks. That makes sense. So the miniscule risk to this elite posed by allowing Russia's war machine to be broken (by strikes and/or economic means) isn't worth it to them. I've long seen the only real escalation as Putin starting to lose, whatever form that takes.
Look, my point was not to blame you or something. All I'm asking, what is your intent? Critique to make what? Reaction, noise, proving your expertise.... What was your point? I would appreciate your fair answer
Seems, you're new here? Is no problem: in such case, the question is fair.
My intentions are always exactly the same: understanding the why, who, where, when, and how. ....and explaining what's going on. Including things that are going wrong. That's what I'm doing for nearly 40 years, meanwhile, and indeed: doing for living (see: https://www.helion.co.uk/people/tom-cooper.php?sid=3f4271ad75ec3520bfff8a248fecf912) - and that always in exactly the same fashion, regardless what conflict.
Because: one can't understand warfare if researching in any other way, or for any other purpose.
OK, that is clear.
But if you take all-sources unproven information, make assumptions based on your personal feelings, so the value of such a research is poor, and have no historical value.
It looks like spilling the soy sauce. You take all the products, including raw and rotten, spill it with sauce of fair footages and historical examples, and all this tastes like fair soy sauce. But it has nothing to do with history. Yes, that's the "Saga of how Ukrainians are bad", and like for every saga, you cannot refer it as a fact.
We have luxury to live in the free world, and everyone can say anything if not breaking the law.
If you like to play historian in your doubtful manner, do what you love to.
As for me, there are many other authors to read at this valuable resource.
I would recommend you to stop online-psychoanalysing me. You obviously have no clue how do I work, and - what's wrorse - instead of continuing to ask questions, you've started guessing.
And I'm fed up of experts in online-psychoanalysis since about two days I went online, back in 1996.
Do us both a favour and go reading so many other authors.
I remember seeing a presentation online(I think 2019) of the Ukrainian airforce planning to gradually purchase up to 120 F16s over a decade. Quite surprised they didnt implement rigorous English courses for their pilots, quite damning tbh. On the other hand, if Biden really wanted those F16s there they would have been in Ukraine within the first year and operating. Eric Prince publicly lobbied for us to send 100+F16s and F15s into Ukraine in the first year that we had sitting doing nothing but in great condition.
If there were foreign volunteers on the ground then why not in the air? And doing so would have also helped EU countries move faster with supplying training to Ukrainian pilots and F16 aircraft. If the manufacturing country is pushing the idea then it makes it easier. But its hard moving forward when at every step behind closed doors, Sullivan doesn't want Russia to lose too badly. Dems may call Trump a Russian asset, but Biden's slow walking of aid has possibly had the same effect.
That with foreign volunteers is something I've explained already, but I'll do so again, in the next installment of this feature.
Great! looking forward to it Tom.
I do as well, but I have a feel I am not gonna like the content of the story…
Objective truths unfortunately dont care for our feelings. I think I may not as well but better the truth.
Still a lot better than the Republicans blocking aid completely. Btw, one of the major points Tom's been making since F-16s were first proposed is that you cannot just rush F-16s into a country and expect them to make any difference without the years of preparation it needs to build the infrastructure and training needed to operate them? Life is not a video game.
The craziest part about the F16 debate is that 2 years ago when some of us were saying let preparations to get them to Ukraine begin now(2022), others were saying it would take at least 2 years before they would start flying so it would be pointless even starting. They & You missed my point. My argument wasnt about how long it takes but a will to make it work whether it takes 2 or 10 years the best time to start preparing is yesterday the second best time is now. Unfortunately they started in 2023.
"On the other hand, if Biden really wanted those F16s there they would have been in Ukraine within the first year and operating."
Care to explain this then? You wrote it.
Because there were prominent domain experts saying this is possible(Former SACEURs, Air Force Gen BreedLove, Eric Prince, Air Marshall Greg Bagwell). There are solid arguments which Tom has presented here on why getting them there in the first year wouldnt have been the best option. Not that it couldnt happen but they(the Ukrainians) wouldnt be able to properly utilize them in a year etc. The fundamental point is Biden admin purposefully delayed even greenlighting preparations for Ukraine to get them. Preparations should have started in March 2022 when it became obvious the VKS had been thoroughly beaten by the Ukrainian Air Force. Instead as usual with the incessant delays, preparations started late in 2023. A whole year lost.
Have you even read the posts this thread is part of? Tom makes it clear (as many of us also knew) that Ukraine was not ready, prepared or able to convert to F-16s in a year. Just because some experts (I won't include the distinctly dodgy Eric Prince) said so does not mean it could have happened. Magical thinking never fares well when it comes up against harsh reality.
"some experts" are a US AirForce General and former SACEUR as well as a Nato Air Force Marshall that flew the FA-18 as well as the F-16!!
Thanks Tom. It's genuinely a pleasure reading your scathing critique on the ZSU/PSU/UA Gov (and all others). You will know better than I do. However, my impression is that the West is collectively, constantly and regularly shocked by the level of chaos, corruption and outright incompetence, at every level in Ukraine. This F-16 saga is yet another case, where there was clearly an assumption, that a country in an extistential war, cannot be this idiotic. Surely, they will have sorted out the very basics. This must be such a cultural shock to every western representative, whenever he/she comes into an interaction with the UA counterpart, that it's akin to a remote, isolated tribe, seeing a jet plane for the first time. You can tell them it is like this, they can read all the books about it, watch all the films, listen to all the podcasts, yet their brains will simply not accept it, it's so beyond their experiences.
Ironically, it feels like the collective West is slowly reaching the same conclusion as JD Vance "I don't really care about what happens to Ukraine.". I don't blame them. You cannot help those that refuse to help themselves.
JD Vance doesn't care what happens to Ukraine because he thinks they are beneath him, but because he thinks they are a necessary sacrifice in order to realize his vision for the world (i don't agree with him). I think you're being harsh. We can want the best for Ukraine, while still calibrating assistance based on competence. The West had no excuse not to push Ukraine towards preparing better for the F16s, as highlighted by Tom
I don't care about JD Vance, I only quoted him because he is a potential VP.
NATO is only now opening a coordination centre for Ukraine, in Wiesbaden. Another centre will be used/created in Bydgoszcz. This should've been done 2 years ago.
NATO has been slow in properly organising the support for Ukraine and the lessons learned processes. However, this isn't kindergarden and it is not NATOs job to do everything for UA, hold hands and treat them like kids. There is 0 reason for UA pilots to be undergoing english language training outside of UA. They should all have english teachers assigned and basic pilot english taught at civilian flight schools. Only the advanced military courses, including specialist language, should be conducted in NATO training centres. There are probably thousands of english teachers in UA and maybe 100 pilots. You could have multiple teachers per pilot if necessary. This is just typical useless and incompetent Ukrainian authorities. The same authorities that 10 years into the war, still have no clue how to conduct conscription.
Your detailed posts are always appreciated. I just wanted to push back on what I perceived to be the notion that we shouldn't have compassion because of Ukraine's shortcomings
Thanks Tom, clear as usual. I may add the Zero reason: western continuous search for profitting and NATO oriented style mantras.
In Argentina, a recent discuss is open within the specialized defense media, quoted by military officers of the different "national" schools of thougth.
The new item, once the F-16 question is resolved, is the reequipment of the Navy. And, seems logical the discusion if we are taking about submarines (after the terrible loss of the ARA San Juan in 2017) but now they are taking about buying surplus french or italian FREMM frigates and even the San Giorgio "semi carrier". Why a sane country is going to sell those complex weapons to Argentina, when we are displaying all the difficulties to pay for them? In the most un-protected military zone of the world? And why we need them?
Argentine Navy and Air Force are "supply bessieged" since Malvinas war. The UK stopped and prohibited, directly or by diploma y, the reinforcement and replacement and the adquisition of spares for all the major components: The turbines of the destroyers, the electronics of the F-1M, the ejection seats of the Super Etendard Modernisee (basically, no Rolls Royce, no Martin Baker, no Ferranti and Marconi, etc.)
So, if we want to deploy military means to defend, we need to Buy to alternate suppliers, do it in house, or think outside the box.
Why Argentina need destroyers? We have 4500 km of coast. Why not Buy AShM? We have a sustainable and national rocket and missile design. Why no better look at the Houtis and Ukranians are doing with missiles and naval drones? Why not plan acordingly to our strategic profundity and develop indigenous drones to saturate logística línea of any invader? Why buy the F-16 If our only remaining disputed territory are the Malvinas?
I think than in Argentina case, or in Ukraine, the military polítics are not fullfilling the real necesitties.
Son tantos temas que no sé por dónde empezar.
El tema de los embargos por los asientos eyectables Martin Baker es absurdo porque ya llevamos décadas que los usan la FAA (la COAN ya no desde que no vuela ningún Super Etendard), y existe una empresa subsidiaria de mantenimiento de MB instalada en nuestro país.
El problema de nuestras FF.AAs es presupuestario y cultural, nunca se invirtió correctamente o se despifarraba en cualquier cosa.
El gobierno de milei se cree "el restaurador de las FF.AAs" por aumentar ligeramente el presupuesto pero solo sirve para "la gilada".
El tema de los F-16 ya venía del gobierno anterior, solamente faltaba la firma del presidente de turno (milei lo toma como su punta de lanza), lo mismo pasó con la actualización del TAM.
La Armada es la más castigada de las tres fuerzas por la falta de presupuesto, pero el genio de petri quiere comprar un portahelicópteros sin tener suficientes helicópteros en la misma fuerza.
También están estudiando la posible adquisición de submarinos usados!!!(NADIE RECUERDA AL ARA SAN JUAN???).
También está el (gravísimo) problema de que la mayoría de nuestros militares votaron a ése loco.
Thank you for the update, lots of new information. I think however that you summarised the problems in the last two paragraphs. The first described the problems (lengte of coast line etc), the second summarised why it isnt done properly. The problem with all military is that they are not really sane and focused on their tanks. Instead they have all kinds of internal dysfunctions, historical hang ups, political manoevring etc. Personally I think history is extremely dysfunctional, generals prepare håtheir whole force for figthing the last war, think the weapons of last war are cool etc. last for decades and generasjons, as discussed by Tom. Regarding history, why is it at that you still havent agreed to solve the Malvinas issue with the Brits? Make an agreenent, wait 30 yrs and you will get Malvinas…
Regarding Malvinas I have the same questions than You. The only thing I can tink about is that the Brits are not keen to negociante them because they are fullfilling their task of make Argentina incapable of project a menace. So, al long as the position is not costly enough, the can site there as it gave them a base to a claim to a portion of Antartica.
The Malvinas have nothing to do with Britain's Antarctic claims. Since the vast majority of residents want nothing to do with Argentina, how about Argentina creates a stable government, economy, and society that they would want to be part of? Everyone wins that way.
Ug. I really wish this WASN'T to be continued. I don't want to read anymore. But this isn't really any surprise. You are a country at war, trying to fight corruption in every service and government agency, have a small budget, have old gear, have old leadership, have to have tons of basic requirements to even try and get more modern stuff which you are competing with the other military elements for. The list is long. Honestly, the issue for me isn't all the crap that they haven't done or have to do, it's that they even got this far.
And yet still, the best thing, both morally and in self-interest, is to assist them towards victory. But of course that assistance needs to be designed based on realities such as pointed out by Tom.
The best thing is of course to continue to support them. But one has to wonder regarding the western nations supporting Ukraine. Why hasnt they known this and tried to rectify it? Maybe the second installment?
I support your sentiment.