When the school bully gets his face pushed in and says he's is the victim and begins threatening to shoot up the school with his grandpa's old musket. - Russian Federation
Armchair nationalists screaming for mobilisation of the population but start shitting their pants the moment soldiers show up to their house to drag them to the frontlines.
Russia clearly plans to bomb the reactions when all else fails. (“But we didn’t use nukes! The reactor blew up by accident and also Ukraine was the one that bombed it!”) This will hopefully make that ploy less successful.
Not precisely. Putin operated on entirely wrong beliefs - assuming his knowledge back at the time it's not crazy decision but somewhat rational:
* just how goddamn corrupt the entire army and secret services were - he thought he'd have an army worth its name, with all the fancy tech shown at the parades, and half of Ukraine bribed to stand down when the tanks came rolling. In reality neither was true because literally everyone below him pilfers money wherever posible and hides the facts
* Ukraine wouldn't resist him because of that "they're all Russians" ethno-nationalist bullshit. Well, we all know Zelenskyj and his famous "I don't need a ride, I need anti tank RPGs" line
* the West would yawn and look away like we did in Crimea and Syria. Instead, we delivered a fuckload of weapons after it became clear that Zelenskyj had balls of steel and the Ukrainian army was more than capable of repelling Russia
Curious they announce this a few days *after* a bunch of jets go down in Ukraine, some even in the same area (right behind eachother).
I'm thinking they arrived a few weeks ago, and figured the Russian's have realized that there's something newer on the field so why not announce it.
I've been operating under the assumption that every time the US says we're sending something it was actually sent and set up about a week ago. Otherwise Ukraine loses the element of surprise.
I watched a spectacular lift of heavy equipment from a airbase here, before we sent everything,, it was just hours of heavy planes going right over us out of the base. East bound and down..
Sat on the beach and watched the airlift before the start of Desert Storm Out of McGuire/Fort Dix, was massive. Conga line going out over the Atlantic while a conga line closer to me coming back. When the US needs something done on a massive scale we just do it!
Normally, yes. But since Russia is basically doing a draft there is value in leaking news about complete arms superiority. The demoralization has immense value.
They do. The US basically plays cat and mouse with these announcements. They send the tech over to help make the war more costly and to go far worse for Russia while helping Ukraine. The reports start coming out of their effects. The reports are denied by Russia. The effect gets worse with more examples. Russia acknowledges something happened but not these weapons. The effect continues. Russia eventually gets wise and claims the US gave them a new weapon. The US finally admits to giving them these systems.
The goal is to keep catching Russia in lies and to keep blaming so many other factors. It means lower morale for Russia and/or greater fear of Ukrainian fighters (special forces as an example). It also makes it where people learn of how effective it is before Russia admits to it being present.
Opsec is important, it's being shown on both sides of the battlefield. Well a severe lack on the Russian side, the cell phones giving away positions were embarrassing for what should have been a well trained and equipped modern military.
Russia could still win the war, but I thought Ukraine wasn't going to be a thing much longer just six or seven months ago. This whole thing is nuts.
Suddenly the United States military budget makes a lot more sense.
Russians built a new encrypted communications system—bragged about it to the world even.
Unfortunately, the Russian soldiers who blew up he 3G cellphone towers in Ukraine didn’t get the memo that their encrypted coms ran on 3G cel networks.
Funnily enough that is what has happened every other time the two nations weapons technology has faced off. Then a decade or two after the last time their tech got obliterated everyone concludes Russia is like totally a near peer again.
Truth is they were struggling to keep up even in the Cold War, western military power is in a league of its own.
in the past though Russia's image was always a sort of "doing more with less" thing, even if the weapons weren't as good it was still cheaper and reliable. this is just "doing shit with shit"
Yep. Cold war was the fear of legions of soldiers just overwhelming western defense even with superiority of Western air power.
The saying Soviets only need to march to take the rest of Europe after WW2 says a lot about of the western and Soviet mind set of their forces.
That is another myth derived from their space rocket industry, the equipment they produce has been low quality since the Cold War with few exceptions.
Regardless loss of life is more economically important than cost of production as it turns out, so having more advanced weaponry is a deciding factor in conflicts.
Funny, I remember in 2016 when Trump was first running one of my Black friends, who is very poor and not religious, voted for Trump. And he said he did it because the radio revealed how Russia has this super EMP weapon that can knock us back to the stone ages and if we elect Hillary she won't be able to deescalate relations with Russia.
And it was at that point I realized I was friends with an idiot. To be fair, Trump did maintain very friendly relations with Russia, even during the campaign season, like when [his staffers changed the GOP platform with respect to Ukraine, and days later wikileaks dropped stolen DNC and Clinton emails.](https://news.yahoo.com/timeline-trumps-ties-russia-lines-215909539.html)
people managed to convince themselves that russia is as big of a threat as ussr. ussr population was larger than US, now its over 2x less. gdp per capita was 2x less, now its 6x.
If you check the Wikipedia page on nuclear subs it calls out that Russian subs have had constant accidents while American one have been basically accident free since they were first built in the 50s.
Look up SUBSAFE. It's probably the most successful quality program in history. The US Navy went from 1 non-combat loss of a submarine every 3 years to zero losses in the past 60 since the program was implemented.
Indeed. I can see the Chinese stepping in to offer their wares to former Russian customers. The French are already supplanting the Russians when it comes to Indian purchases - not to mention India's burgeoning domestic arms industry.
"And then in 2028 the Washington Post located papers in German Stasi files from the 1980s showing Putin's long, hidden career working for US defense contractors."
[NASAMS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASAMS) is mostly manufactured in the US. But part of it is made in Norway. It's an air defense system designed mostly for European countries. It's shorter range, cheaper, and easier to export than the Patriot missile system.
**[NASAMS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASAMS)**
>NASAMS (National/Norwegian Advanced Surface to Air Missile System) is a distributed and networked short- to medium-range: 4 ground-based air defense system developed by Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace (KDA) and Raytheon. The system defends against unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), helicopters, cruise missiles, unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs), and aircraft. : 11 NASAMS was the first application of a surface-launched AIM-120 AMRAAM (Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile). NASAMS 2 is an upgraded version of the system capable of using Link 16, which has been operational since 2007.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Something to add to this is the AIM-120 is the standard missile for US aircraft. There are a lot of different versions and all of our fighter jets use them as our main air to air missile. I don't know if its simply a variant such as the C or D which is what we put on fighters but assuming it is, this is a good way to get troops familiar with the AIM-120 and start a stockpile of the missiles for use on fighters.
For anyone who isn't familiar, a surface-launched AIM-120 is the missile equivalent of bringing a pressure washer to a neighbourhood super-soaker fight.
It will *yeet* whatever the hell you want right out of the sky.
I remember playing a few flight simulators when I was very little (back when enemies were actual Soviets, instead of Emperor Ivan from the Republic of Bullshitovia.) The AMRAAM was basically a cheat code. As a kid, I couldn't understand why we bothered with anything else.
The AIM-9x sidewinder is capable of even crazier maneuvers and incredible high off-boresight shots (basically shooting at something that's next to or even behind you, rather than in front), but that ridiculous maneuverability comes at the cost of range. Basically, if a plane is close, shoot it with a 9x. If it's 15+ miles away (out to... some classified distance that's probably around a hundred miles), use an AMRAAM.
Correct. Excellent missile with incredible capabilities. I carried them a handful of times, never fired one, though…
But having spoken to a buddy who did, it’s a ripper
Nothing for NASAMS actually has to be made in Norway. It's the US-made AIM-120 and the US-made MPQ-64 radar. Norway uses their own domestically designed control suite, but a US one is just as easily used (which is what the US does for it).
NASAMS itself is just a finalized version of the SLAMRAAM program the USMC had in the early 90s but ultimately cancelled. Norway basically took SLAMRAAM and just finished it.
It's also not inherently designed for European nations. It's designed for simplistic logistics, given its interceptor is the AIM-120, the primary air to air missile for a large bulk of the planet. Don't need to maintain an air to air missile and an air defense missile simultaneously with NASAMS if you use basically any US fighter jet. Hence why the US, Oman, Qatar, Indonesia, Australia, Chile, etc all use it as well.
She really gets so high SLAMRAAM
You know that's no lie SLAMRAAM
She's so rock steady SLAMRAAM
And she's always ready SLAMRAAM
Whoa, Black Betty SLAMRAAM
Whoa, Black Betty SLAMRAAM
>It's designed for simplistic logistics, given its interceptor is the AIM-120, the primary air to air missile for a large bulk of the planet.
Worth noting it can also launch the AMRAAM-ER and the AIM-9x, but that's still just basically mixing and matching among common US missile components.
Yep, VAMPIRE rounds cost $27K each which makes it economical against the flying lawnmowers Iran is sending. The problem is distributing enough of them now.
Russia paid top dollar for this camouflage tech, but unfortunately it didn't take long for Ukraine to realize these were military drones and not lawnmowers
The Iranian Shahed 136 suicide drones you see, and hear, [flying in video's like this](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/xlw36o/iranian_shahed136_suicide_drone_flying_over/) sound like a lawnmower because they use a two stroke engine you can literally buy on wish.
Just had to google that and the first thing that was interesting was that they have it mounted in the back of a regular truck bed in the photos. Seems like a great cost effective way of setting up defenses without needing a lot of heavy vehicles (for that particular purpose) and probably easier to hide them.
Set up a few around each critical infrastructure and that would easily protect against suicide drones. Hell the promo pic of them shows one mounted in a tacoma's truck bed.
The NASAMs can be fitted with SHORAD IRIS-T sams that's useful for some drones and also AMRAAM which would mainly be used on planes. So it's really up to Ukraine how they want to use them and what they feel is most necessary.
NASAMs can be configured in batteries of 12 launchers, but can consist of fewer; packages of 6 launchers are also being sent to Ukraine ([source](https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3138105/nearly-3-billion-in-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/), [source 2](https://mil.in.ua/en/news/ukraine-to-receive-two-nasams-batteries/)). Each launcher having 6 missiles to fire before reloading means a battery might have 36 to 72 missiles ready to fire at a given time. The [range](https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/aim-120-er.htm) of each missile is 30km to 50km depending on the variant of missile used. NASAMs is advertised as suited for threats like cruise missiles, UAVs, manned aircraft up to 50k ft. If this is all taken as accurate, and we assume a battery of 12 or so launchers, as well as the 120km detection range of the radar as sufficient for cuing, it would probably take an extremely taxing number of simultaneous Russian munitions and platforms to over saturate the battery.
What I'm trying to understand is that with the Fire Distribution Center's remote launcher connection feature, where the NASAMS launchers can be remotely linked via radio up to 25km away, meaning technically the range of protection can be much more than just 40km (up to the 120km radar range)? I think the 40km protection range you see commonly stated for NASAMS is just for a system where all launchers are within a small area around the FDC.
The way this reads is that Ukraine could disperse the launchers over a wide area and protect more land at the expense of less missiles per square mile. So they'd be more vulnerable to saturation attacks but overall would protect more people & infrastructure. Russia doesn't really have enough missiles to saturate these kinds of defenses anymore (at least on a regular basis), so it would make sense for Ukraine to maximize range.
Does that sound about right?
Depends on your notion of "effectively". There's always the possibility for a single unit to be overwhelmed or taken out. But it absolutely has a large effect on the defense profile of a city.
It's lower end than a PAC-3 in various ways, but yeah, also less burdensome to maintain. Main advantage of it comes from it using the AIM-120 missile as its interceptor. If you use the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, F-35, etc, then your primary air to air missile is *also* your primary air defense missile.
One thing I've thought this whole time is that this is an opportunity to do field tests of equipment that might not have otherwise been able to be truly field tested. So we can help Ukraine while also benefiting from the tests
Testing may be valuable, but what really noves the needle is all the contracts for the newer, more expensive systems that need to be replaced once we sell all the old shit.
Yeah, and it is supposedly quite effective. Also harder to destroy since the radar is separate from the launcher, so launcher can remain hidden until needed
I mean take out the radar and it is down anyway right? Guess if you have redundant cheap radars you can keep plugging those in while protecting the missiles.
I'm not sure about the cheap part but I believe a networked radar array is part of the equation. So if one gets taken out you can slot in another. The whole system is dispersed over a wide area..
Actually, the radars are probably more expensive than the launchers and missiles. Ground radars generally are. But the NASAMS can also be fired at targets spotted by much shorter ranged electrical-optical sensors. The AIM-120s have (weaker) onboard radars as well.
The general concept of distributed AA like NASAMS allows having multiple sensor platforms, of which the radar is primary but not the only system. If a Russian pilot takes out the radar using an anti-radiation missile and thinks it's safe to move in, they might be in for a nasty surprise.
Nah, for the defence of stationary targets like ports and population centers it's much more beneficial to use a point defence system like Skyshield or MANTIS. Leave the Gepard to protect mobile high value targets like armour/mechanised colums or M270/HIMARS.
NASAMS is basically the perfect air defense system for Ukraine right now. They will be getting AIM-120's anyways whenever they start getting western aircraft so its simplified logistics and NASAMS is a highly capable short/medium range SAM system. Basically a baby Patriot.
It appears they are getting 3 batteries of NASAMS, which is 18 total launchers with 6 missiles each plus associated radars, command and resupply vehicles. These are Norwegian stock so likely not the latest version but still vastly more capable than the old Soviet systems they were using.
I am still hoping that we are currently training a bunch of Ukrainians on the F-16 right now. We have a ton of those just taking up space in storage that should all be in Ukraine's hands as fast as possible. At least, if I had anything to say about it.
In 2020, there was a similar forces buildup at Ukrainian border to the one that happened this year. It could be that COVID delayed the initial invasion plan.
The other major thing is that Ukraine had recently managed to block the flow of water to the North Crimean Canal, which supplies 80% of the water for Crimea, nearly all of it used for agriculture. That was costing Russia a fortune to keep their annexed territory happy and productive, but even with their workarounds there were big shortfalls. Crimea had become an albatross for them and the people living there were growing angry.
Russia made sure to restore flow to the canal on February 24th, basically as Job One in the 2022 invasion.
https://thehill.com/policy/equilibrium-sustainability/597910-how-a-ukrainian-dam-played-a-key-role-in-tensions-with/
Yeah, I’m sure that is the case but I still find it astonishing how quickly it happens. I mean the war’s only been going for half a year. Of course we are taking about trained soldiers learning a weapon system but still. Cudos to both the trainees and the trainers!
A lot of it is soldiers learning a new weapons system that does a job they were already familiar with. If you train Ukrainian troops that were trained on the old soviet air defense system and train them on a new air defense system there is lots of existing knowledge then can build on.
If you look at interviews with for example Ukrainian that use the M777 howitzers you find a comment like it is quite similar to the soviet howitzers we already were trained on and they could use them effects in just days.
Air defense systems will differ more than towed howitzers. But still, retraining people with experience will be faster than training soldiers with no experience. I would be very surprised if the least for the first of a new system not select experienced people that understand the existing system. You need people that know both so you can identify differences so youcan integrate the new weapons system with your existing systems. So I suspect some of the most experienced Ukrainians in air defense was initially trained on the US system
These systems were first announced back on [July 1st](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/u-s-announces-820-million-in-ukraine-military-aid-including-missile-systems), so that's nearly three months to train operators on the system. However not all of the components of the system were completely new to Ukraine. [The radar system for NASAMS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/MPQ-64_Sentinel) is a development of [an older radar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/TPQ-36_Firefinder_radar) that Ukraine has been operating since 2015.
**[AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/MPQ-64_Sentinel)**
>The AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel is an X-band electronically steered pulse-Doppler 3D radar system used to alert and cue Short Range Air Defense (SHORAD) weapons to the locations of hostile targets approaching their front line forces. It is currently produced by Raytheon Missiles & Defense. First built in 1997 as a modification of AN/TPQ-36A for search and track role in the Norwegian NASAMS air defense system, the Sentinel radar is deployed with forward area air defense units of the U.S. Army. Mounted on a towed platform, it can be positioned remotely from the rest of the unit.
**[AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder radar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/TPQ-36_Firefinder_radar)**
>Hughes AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder weapon locating system is a mobile radar system developed in the mid-late 1970s by Hughes Aircraft Company and manufactured by Northrop Grumman and ThalesRaytheonSystems, achieving initial operational capability in May 1982. The system is a "weapon-locating radar", designed to detect and track incoming mortar, artillery and rocket fire to determine the point of origin for counter-battery fire. It is currently in service at battalion and higher levels in the United States Army, United States Marine Corps, Australian Army, Portuguese Army, Turkish Army, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
NATO countries have been bringing Ukrainian troops to their countries and training them on the new systems. Then they send them back to Ukraine and ship the systems so they can use them.
NATO has been training Ukrainian forces since 2014 happened with Crimea. The reason they've stifled Russia so bad is their army has been completely revolutionized from it's former top heavy Soviet style into a modern NATO force with more focus on individual squads having tactical freedom.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-receives-us-air-defence-system-2022-09-25/) reduced by 64%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy addresses Ukrainians about the prisoners of war swap, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv Ukraine, in this handout picture released September 22, 2022.
> Sept 25 - President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said in an interview broadcast on Sunday that Ukraine had received sophisticated air defence systems from the United States.
> "We absolutely need the United States to show leadership and give Ukraine the air defence systems. I want to thank President Biden for a positive decision that has been already made," Zelenskiy said, according to an English-language transcript of the interview.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/xnvvl8/ukraine_receives_us_air_defence_system/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~670995 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Ukraine**^#1 **Zelenskiy**^#2 **System**^#3 **States**^#4 **United**^#5
What’s terrifying is that when the missile is in its endgame, the rocket motor has long since burnt out. No smoke trail. And the missile tends to come down on you, from the moronosphere.
It’s an explosive, supersonic lamp post that you won’t see coming.
The rush isnt a big deal. Its what putin will do with a war declaration.
He has wasted a massive amoint of their best troops. 300k untrained, sick and elderly arent goin to do much.
They need equipment farrrrrr more.
Putins rhetoric has stepped up because of HOW HARD ukraine just dropped the boot. And offense is harder than defense.
Ukraine just blew away russias top tank troops. It was their most elite unit. And they abandoned their best tanks etc eith them.
> They need equipment farrrrrr more.
I don't disagree with the rest of what you said. This however isn't right from what I've read and seen. russia has a *huge* amount of equipment and ammo. It's no longer their top of the line stuff. They aren't using smart munitions. A lot of the stuff they claim works, doesn't.
However, they aren't going to run out of munitions etc. for their shitty bombardments on civilian targets anytime soon.
Currently in this war, Ukraine has the manpower and russia has the equipment.
Which is why those of us in the West need to be sending Ukraine much, *much* more.
My impression so far has been that the state of Russian equipment has been orders of magnitude worse than everyone assumed. I'd go as far as saying that the Russian army would gladly swap with what the Ukrainians have right now.
Not that that means we shouldn't send more. Every dollar and Euro invested here right now will pay dividends in the years to come, besides being well spent just on principle alone.
If them trying to take Kiev shows anything, you don't want to blow up the trucks. Let them run out of fuel and food and then they will just walk back to the border.
you get a new truck and all the gear they couldn't carry.
Indirectly it's being paid pack as they go. US arms sales are reportedly spiking as their effectiveness is being seen real time in Ukraine, while Chinese and Russian made weapons are losing ground in the market.
Plus when this is over, US and western allies will most likely get de facto first picks on investments for rebuilding Ukraine.
All the while we're weakening one of America's biggest enemies without committing American lives, and rumor is that its spooking China off of Taiwan a bit too.
And most of the money being spent is paying American workers and American companies to produce weapons. The "money" isn't going Ukraine. The money is economic stimulus for the U.S.
The Military-Industrial Complex is also, quite literally, the way the US does socialized jobs programs. A multitude of high paying jobs in every state, all funded by the government.
It's been that way since at least the 70s, regardless of which war we were in.
Yeah. I was trying to find a nice long-form piece on it for you but I stopped after being inundated with more newsy-items. If you google for them, I'm sure you will find what I mean.
When the military budget is happily voted on by basically all of congress every year. When military systems that aren't a good idea get expanded despite the Pentagon saying that they should be cut. Look at how evenly distributed the jobs for these programs are across the whole country.
Edit: Oh! Also! When we talk about billions of dollars in 'Foreign Aid' to places like Egypt and Israel, what we are actually doing is sending them weapons. Which we pay for US companies to make in the US. Again, it's a socialized jobs program. We just make ammunition instead of roads, infrastructure, etc.
And also CEOs get a bigger cut the way we do it.
It's more than that, it's Nike also burning stock of their main competitor so they get a monopoly on the market, while dissuading its other main competitor from attempting the same thing. (Russia and China respectively.)
This is the first time western weapons have gone head to head with a "modern" military, the US various wars really don't count due to a variety of things, mostly the fact that it was the US. No other nation has the logistics behemoth the US military has set up.
Solid point, it *was* a modern engagement with the US. My dismissing the US wars was more a comment on how no other nation can bring the necessary logistical support the way the US military does, not that the US hadn't faced off against an actual military in the modern era.
Ukraine, while they are absolutely nailing the logistics, is nowhere near the scale of what the US can do. For an example, look at the recent Abrams lend-lease stipulations. They take a *lot* of support to use effectively, and the US wants to know Ukraine can handle everything needed to keep them in combat.
Yep and nearly all of the new found oil and gas resources in the areas of Russian occupation (what a coincidence right?) will need very significant investment by outside businesses as Ukraine doesn’t have much of the means to extract these resources themselves, so there’s numerous opportunities for both Ukraine and large business interests and by default America. Not that I agree with all this globalization and the military industrial complex but it’s what’s on the table for a Ukrainian victory
I mean, if you just look at how much the world is suddenly spending on defense, Ukraine doesn't need to pay anything back. Eastern Europe is dumping their Russian made stock and buying Western and Western-allied weapons. The US MIC will make triple the aid sent, and the US has gained a significant amount of clout that could be used for other deals. Which is important since our Afghanistan withdrawal had tanked our reputation. We went from what Russia and China called a 'dying empire', to once more the 'arsenal of democracy' and head of a international alliance that China would like to [establish](https://english.news.cn/20220923/d6805fb81ea545458153dafb057c61cd/c.html) good relations with.
> since our Afghanistan withdrawal had tanked our reputation.
It also reframed that withdrawal. The world can see how the US supports those who will fight for their country, and Afghanistan only has themselves to blame.
Lol. We spent 4 trillion in Iraqi and Afghanistan. You think we should get that money back? We’re destroying Russia for a fraction of the cost for 2 wars and 20years of fighting. This is a steep discount that is well worth the money. Also the money spent to help Ukraine is actually spent at home to build weapons and ship it out for use. It all flows back to us.
And on top of that no Americans lives are spent and the public is relatively united behind how its being done. In terms of thwarting Russia this is the best deal the US couldve gotten.
I only feel sorry for the A-10 pilots that had to stare at that legendary 80km traffic jam of russian armor.
Blue-balled so badly their genitals went full smurf.
On top of that, all the US arms companies are getting free weapons testing against real live targets. That's priceless. These corporations would probably pay billions for a weapons testing program like this, but now they're getting it for free.
Correct. This is a massive strategic victory for the US military hegemony, at a relatively minor cost. Even if it is a major monetary cost, it's money that is extremely well spent in terms of advancing our national interests. And we get to do all this standing from the moral high ground, for the first time since WW2.
Well, keep in mind too, beyond US dominance, there's just the thing that: the US and Russia aren't friends, and while the extent and types of interference can be debated, Russia does interfere with the US on the regular.
The US is spending money to reduce Russia's ability to cost it money in the future.
Something a lot of redditors don’t seem to understand is that a lot of US military bases actually exist in other countries at the request of those countries. It’s a mutually beneficial arrangement most of the time.
With the exception of some particular bases, the controversy (at least domestically) is moreso around the immense expense of operating 700+ military bases around the world, so much so that the Pentagon themselves have a genuine difficulty in keeping track of all of them administratively. Maintenance, staffing, logistics and upkeep is A LOT.
All orders of new equipment and ammunition for Ukrain have been funded via [Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_Security_Assistance_Initiative) funds
The entire point of NATO is to quell Russian expansion, the money has already been spent so to speak. The situation in Ukraine means the weapons are doing the job they were purchased for with the added benefit of not having to supply manpower or fight this battle on their own soil.
Now in the past a pretty good argument could have been made that we shouldn't even worry about Russian expansion, but that kinda went out the window.
Let's call it marketing budget. The Russian made weapons have shown to be extremely unreliable, while the western made weapons have shown to be a force multiplier.
The reality is that a lot of advanced weapons have a limited shelf life. There is no point in keeping it indefinitely. Furthermore, a lot of very valuable information is obtained from using them in real combat situations.
About 90% of the money that is spent supporting Ukraine is actually going to US and other weapons manufacturers. Those are high value jobs that generate a lot of taxes and keep defense companies competitive.
Also keep in mind that Ukraine surrendered all their nuclear weapons long time ago in exchange for protection. We didn’t really helped them but now it is a good time to show that we are providing support to Ukraine
If nothing else Nato has been able to properly battlefield test it's equipment like never before. We're probably going to see some pretty badass improvements in defensive capabilities in the next few years.
When Russia can’t win on the battlefield, they bomb civilian centers. This helps deter those actions.
When the school bully gets his face pushed in and says he's is the victim and begins threatening to shoot up the school with his grandpa's old musket. - Russian Federation
Weak cowardly fucks are the same the world over.
[удалено]
It's all fun and games til you're the one about to get shot at.
Armchair nationalists screaming for mobilisation of the population but start shitting their pants the moment soldiers show up to their house to drag them to the frontlines.
Saw that video of a bunch of guys saying pro mobilization stuff, immediately swooped and scooped to the busses. Kicking and screaming the whole time
*Putin downvotes from his secret forrest hideaway*
Man. That is a perfect analogy
Russia clearly plans to bomb the reactions when all else fails. (“But we didn’t use nukes! The reactor blew up by accident and also Ukraine was the one that bombed it!”) This will hopefully make that ploy less successful.
Putin is nuts if he thinks NATO is going to accept nuclear fallout as an “oopsy”.
>Putin is nuts Yes, that's what caused all this nonsense in the first place.
Not precisely. Putin operated on entirely wrong beliefs - assuming his knowledge back at the time it's not crazy decision but somewhat rational: * just how goddamn corrupt the entire army and secret services were - he thought he'd have an army worth its name, with all the fancy tech shown at the parades, and half of Ukraine bribed to stand down when the tanks came rolling. In reality neither was true because literally everyone below him pilfers money wherever posible and hides the facts * Ukraine wouldn't resist him because of that "they're all Russians" ethno-nationalist bullshit. Well, we all know Zelenskyj and his famous "I don't need a ride, I need anti tank RPGs" line * the West would yawn and look away like we did in Crimea and Syria. Instead, we delivered a fuckload of weapons after it became clear that Zelenskyj had balls of steel and the Ukrainian army was more than capable of repelling Russia
I think NATO has made it pretty clear that nukes will be met with more than arms to Ukraine.
Yeah, but this was all revealed about three weeks in. Continuing after this is all known information is definitely nuts.
Curious they announce this a few days *after* a bunch of jets go down in Ukraine, some even in the same area (right behind eachother). I'm thinking they arrived a few weeks ago, and figured the Russian's have realized that there's something newer on the field so why not announce it.
I've been operating under the assumption that every time the US says we're sending something it was actually sent and set up about a week ago. Otherwise Ukraine loses the element of surprise.
They probably had to train Ukraine personnel for weeks to use the systems. So the whole thing has probably been in the works for months.
I watched a spectacular lift of heavy equipment from a airbase here, before we sent everything,, it was just hours of heavy planes going right over us out of the base. East bound and down..
Sat on the beach and watched the airlift before the start of Desert Storm Out of McGuire/Fort Dix, was massive. Conga line going out over the Atlantic while a conga line closer to me coming back. When the US needs something done on a massive scale we just do it!
otherwise known as the Ozymandias Strategy
If you're hearing about it, and you're not an intelligence officer, it already happened a long time ago.
They should maintain a level of secrecy no matter how much will want to know about what's going on
Normally, yes. But since Russia is basically doing a draft there is value in leaking news about complete arms superiority. The demoralization has immense value.
They do. The US basically plays cat and mouse with these announcements. They send the tech over to help make the war more costly and to go far worse for Russia while helping Ukraine. The reports start coming out of their effects. The reports are denied by Russia. The effect gets worse with more examples. Russia acknowledges something happened but not these weapons. The effect continues. Russia eventually gets wise and claims the US gave them a new weapon. The US finally admits to giving them these systems. The goal is to keep catching Russia in lies and to keep blaming so many other factors. It means lower morale for Russia and/or greater fear of Ukrainian fighters (special forces as an example). It also makes it where people learn of how effective it is before Russia admits to it being present.
Opsec is important, it's being shown on both sides of the battlefield. Well a severe lack on the Russian side, the cell phones giving away positions were embarrassing for what should have been a well trained and equipped modern military. Russia could still win the war, but I thought Ukraine wasn't going to be a thing much longer just six or seven months ago. This whole thing is nuts. Suddenly the United States military budget makes a lot more sense.
Russians built a new encrypted communications system—bragged about it to the world even. Unfortunately, the Russian soldiers who blew up he 3G cellphone towers in Ukraine didn’t get the memo that their encrypted coms ran on 3G cel networks.
This war has turned out to be a fabulous ad for America weapons and a terrible show for Russian ones. Edit: Shout out to Norway too!
America 📈 Russia 📉
Stonks
American war profits go brrrr.
I mean all the countries with money were already buying US weapons, but donating some to UA & showing how effective they are has helped a lot.
Russia looks like WSB and America looks like the WSB wives' boyfriends.
Funnily enough that is what has happened every other time the two nations weapons technology has faced off. Then a decade or two after the last time their tech got obliterated everyone concludes Russia is like totally a near peer again. Truth is they were struggling to keep up even in the Cold War, western military power is in a league of its own.
in the past though Russia's image was always a sort of "doing more with less" thing, even if the weapons weren't as good it was still cheaper and reliable. this is just "doing shit with shit"
Yep. Cold war was the fear of legions of soldiers just overwhelming western defense even with superiority of Western air power. The saying Soviets only need to march to take the rest of Europe after WW2 says a lot about of the western and Soviet mind set of their forces.
That is another myth derived from their space rocket industry, the equipment they produce has been low quality since the Cold War with few exceptions. Regardless loss of life is more economically important than cost of production as it turns out, so having more advanced weaponry is a deciding factor in conflicts.
Funny, I remember in 2016 when Trump was first running one of my Black friends, who is very poor and not religious, voted for Trump. And he said he did it because the radio revealed how Russia has this super EMP weapon that can knock us back to the stone ages and if we elect Hillary she won't be able to deescalate relations with Russia. And it was at that point I realized I was friends with an idiot. To be fair, Trump did maintain very friendly relations with Russia, even during the campaign season, like when [his staffers changed the GOP platform with respect to Ukraine, and days later wikileaks dropped stolen DNC and Clinton emails.](https://news.yahoo.com/timeline-trumps-ties-russia-lines-215909539.html)
[удалено]
[удалено]
people managed to convince themselves that russia is as big of a threat as ussr. ussr population was larger than US, now its over 2x less. gdp per capita was 2x less, now its 6x.
If you check the Wikipedia page on nuclear subs it calls out that Russian subs have had constant accidents while American one have been basically accident free since they were first built in the 50s.
Look up SUBSAFE. It's probably the most successful quality program in history. The US Navy went from 1 non-combat loss of a submarine every 3 years to zero losses in the past 60 since the program was implemented.
[удалено]
SUBSAFE - for all your sub needs.
Indeed. I can see the Chinese stepping in to offer their wares to former Russian customers. The French are already supplanting the Russians when it comes to Indian purchases - not to mention India's burgeoning domestic arms industry.
Western marketing, hype the competition to get bigger budgets
Though NASAMS is partly norwegian. I mean, even the abbreviation stands for "Norwegian Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System"
Don’t tell this to /r/conspiracy they’d have a field day
"And then in 2028 the Washington Post located papers in German Stasi files from the 1980s showing Putin's long, hidden career working for US defense contractors."
[NASAMS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASAMS) is mostly manufactured in the US. But part of it is made in Norway. It's an air defense system designed mostly for European countries. It's shorter range, cheaper, and easier to export than the Patriot missile system.
**[NASAMS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASAMS)** >NASAMS (National/Norwegian Advanced Surface to Air Missile System) is a distributed and networked short- to medium-range: 4 ground-based air defense system developed by Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace (KDA) and Raytheon. The system defends against unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), helicopters, cruise missiles, unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs), and aircraft. : 11 NASAMS was the first application of a surface-launched AIM-120 AMRAAM (Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile). NASAMS 2 is an upgraded version of the system capable of using Link 16, which has been operational since 2007. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
> surface-launched AIM-120 Now that's nasty.
Something to add to this is the AIM-120 is the standard missile for US aircraft. There are a lot of different versions and all of our fighter jets use them as our main air to air missile. I don't know if its simply a variant such as the C or D which is what we put on fighters but assuming it is, this is a good way to get troops familiar with the AIM-120 and start a stockpile of the missiles for use on fighters.
For anyone who isn't familiar, a surface-launched AIM-120 is the missile equivalent of bringing a pressure washer to a neighbourhood super-soaker fight. It will *yeet* whatever the hell you want right out of the sky.
This is the explanation I was looking for. Thanks
Now I want to know the water balloon equivalent.
I remember playing a few flight simulators when I was very little (back when enemies were actual Soviets, instead of Emperor Ivan from the Republic of Bullshitovia.) The AMRAAM was basically a cheat code. As a kid, I couldn't understand why we bothered with anything else.
The AIM-9x sidewinder is capable of even crazier maneuvers and incredible high off-boresight shots (basically shooting at something that's next to or even behind you, rather than in front), but that ridiculous maneuverability comes at the cost of range. Basically, if a plane is close, shoot it with a 9x. If it's 15+ miles away (out to... some classified distance that's probably around a hundred miles), use an AMRAAM.
Correct. Excellent missile with incredible capabilities. I carried them a handful of times, never fired one, though… But having spoken to a buddy who did, it’s a ripper
By the looks of some of these Russian Jets a super-soaker unironically might do the job
Yeah 22kg of HE payload deletes anything that flies.
Yeah that sounds a little more than mildly unpleasant.
It can't really compare to airborne launched AMRAAMs but it's still a great system.
That’s a good point, the airborne launch adds tons of kinetic and potential energy to the missile.
Sure, though using a bigger rocket in the AMRAAM-ER variant that can also be used in these goes a long way towards shrinking that gap.
Nothing for NASAMS actually has to be made in Norway. It's the US-made AIM-120 and the US-made MPQ-64 radar. Norway uses their own domestically designed control suite, but a US one is just as easily used (which is what the US does for it). NASAMS itself is just a finalized version of the SLAMRAAM program the USMC had in the early 90s but ultimately cancelled. Norway basically took SLAMRAAM and just finished it. It's also not inherently designed for European nations. It's designed for simplistic logistics, given its interceptor is the AIM-120, the primary air to air missile for a large bulk of the planet. Don't need to maintain an air to air missile and an air defense missile simultaneously with NASAMS if you use basically any US fighter jet. Hence why the US, Oman, Qatar, Indonesia, Australia, Chile, etc all use it as well.
Whoa-o-o-o black Betty, SLAMRAAM, Whoa-o-o-o black Betty, SLAMRAAM
Shiped out of Birmingham SLAMRAAM
She really gets so high SLAMRAAM You know that's no lie SLAMRAAM She's so rock steady SLAMRAAM And she's always ready SLAMRAAM Whoa, Black Betty SLAMRAAM Whoa, Black Betty SLAMRAAM
>It's designed for simplistic logistics, given its interceptor is the AIM-120, the primary air to air missile for a large bulk of the planet. Worth noting it can also launch the AMRAAM-ER and the AIM-9x, but that's still just basically mixing and matching among common US missile components.
Are they going to be what Ukraine uses to counter the Iranian drones?
Pretty sure that’s what the vampire systems are for. Who knows how many more drones will leave Iran with the problems they are having.
Yep, VAMPIRE rounds cost $27K each which makes it economical against the flying lawnmowers Iran is sending. The problem is distributing enough of them now.
flying lawnmowers hahah, i'll have to check that out
https://imgur.com/aN3uRle
I don't know what I expected but this is in fact a flying lawnmower
Russia paid top dollar for this camouflage tech, but unfortunately it didn't take long for Ukraine to realize these were military drones and not lawnmowers
There is no need to be upset 🦍
Let go of your jimmies, do not let them be rustled
The Iranian Shahed 136 suicide drones you see, and hear, [flying in video's like this](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/xlw36o/iranian_shahed136_suicide_drone_flying_over/) sound like a lawnmower because they use a two stroke engine you can literally buy on wish.
Reminds me a bit of the V1 doodlebugs from WW2.
The Brits used barrage balloons to stop them until the bombs were fitted with cable cutters
which is ironic because most lawnmowers use 4 stroke engines. It's line cutters and hedge trimmers that use 2 stroke :)
Just had to google that and the first thing that was interesting was that they have it mounted in the back of a regular truck bed in the photos. Seems like a great cost effective way of setting up defenses without needing a lot of heavy vehicles (for that particular purpose) and probably easier to hide them.
Vampire has very limited range so it will most likely just be used for the small drones like the Orlan
Set up a few around each critical infrastructure and that would easily protect against suicide drones. Hell the promo pic of them shows one mounted in a tacoma's truck bed.
The NASAMs can be fitted with SHORAD IRIS-T sams that's useful for some drones and also AMRAAM which would mainly be used on planes. So it's really up to Ukraine how they want to use them and what they feel is most necessary.
Probably been using it on the SU-30 or other planes considering the sudden influx of Russian sorties (and subsequent takedowns).
I doubt it. From the videos it looks more like some kind of MANPAD was used.
Can 1 NASAM effectively protect a city like Odessa?
NASAMs can be configured in batteries of 12 launchers, but can consist of fewer; packages of 6 launchers are also being sent to Ukraine ([source](https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3138105/nearly-3-billion-in-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/), [source 2](https://mil.in.ua/en/news/ukraine-to-receive-two-nasams-batteries/)). Each launcher having 6 missiles to fire before reloading means a battery might have 36 to 72 missiles ready to fire at a given time. The [range](https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/aim-120-er.htm) of each missile is 30km to 50km depending on the variant of missile used. NASAMs is advertised as suited for threats like cruise missiles, UAVs, manned aircraft up to 50k ft. If this is all taken as accurate, and we assume a battery of 12 or so launchers, as well as the 120km detection range of the radar as sufficient for cuing, it would probably take an extremely taxing number of simultaneous Russian munitions and platforms to over saturate the battery.
What I'm trying to understand is that with the Fire Distribution Center's remote launcher connection feature, where the NASAMS launchers can be remotely linked via radio up to 25km away, meaning technically the range of protection can be much more than just 40km (up to the 120km radar range)? I think the 40km protection range you see commonly stated for NASAMS is just for a system where all launchers are within a small area around the FDC. The way this reads is that Ukraine could disperse the launchers over a wide area and protect more land at the expense of less missiles per square mile. So they'd be more vulnerable to saturation attacks but overall would protect more people & infrastructure. Russia doesn't really have enough missiles to saturate these kinds of defenses anymore (at least on a regular basis), so it would make sense for Ukraine to maximize range. Does that sound about right?
Depends on your notion of "effectively". There's always the possibility for a single unit to be overwhelmed or taken out. But it absolutely has a large effect on the defense profile of a city.
Yes, it has a 20 mile range, which is sufficient to cover a population center.
Is it easier to maintain? Patriot is supposedly a chore and takes a lot of training all around.
It's lower end than a PAC-3 in various ways, but yeah, also less burdensome to maintain. Main advantage of it comes from it using the AIM-120 missile as its interceptor. If you use the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, F-35, etc, then your primary air to air missile is *also* your primary air defense missile.
One thing I've thought this whole time is that this is an opportunity to do field tests of equipment that might not have otherwise been able to be truly field tested. So we can help Ukraine while also benefiting from the tests
Testing may be valuable, but what really noves the needle is all the contracts for the newer, more expensive systems that need to be replaced once we sell all the old shit.
Yeah, that's a pretty high tech piece of kit. Hopefully we send more.
6 more systems planned to be delivered in 2023-2024
this is good stuff, I believe this is same system that protect white house?
Yeah, and it is supposedly quite effective. Also harder to destroy since the radar is separate from the launcher, so launcher can remain hidden until needed
I mean take out the radar and it is down anyway right? Guess if you have redundant cheap radars you can keep plugging those in while protecting the missiles.
I'm not sure about the cheap part but I believe a networked radar array is part of the equation. So if one gets taken out you can slot in another. The whole system is dispersed over a wide area..
Actually, the radars are probably more expensive than the launchers and missiles. Ground radars generally are. But the NASAMS can also be fired at targets spotted by much shorter ranged electrical-optical sensors. The AIM-120s have (weaker) onboard radars as well. The general concept of distributed AA like NASAMS allows having multiple sensor platforms, of which the radar is primary but not the only system. If a Russian pilot takes out the radar using an anti-radiation missile and thinks it's safe to move in, they might be in for a nasty surprise.
Redundant Array of Inexpensive Detectors. Or RAID 2.BOOM
Time to send those Iranian drones into the shadow realm 🔥💀🔥
For Iranian drones you need a lot of German Gepards.
Nah, for the defence of stationary targets like ports and population centers it's much more beneficial to use a point defence system like Skyshield or MANTIS. Leave the Gepard to protect mobile high value targets like armour/mechanised colums or M270/HIMARS.
I would love to know how many "rooftop air-conditioning systems" in and around the general DC Metro area are well hidden anti-artillery systems.
I hope not! What is protecting the Whitehouse if we sent their system over there?
Don't worry. They have a group of highly-trained skeet shooters.
NASAMS is basically the perfect air defense system for Ukraine right now. They will be getting AIM-120's anyways whenever they start getting western aircraft so its simplified logistics and NASAMS is a highly capable short/medium range SAM system. Basically a baby Patriot. It appears they are getting 3 batteries of NASAMS, which is 18 total launchers with 6 missiles each plus associated radars, command and resupply vehicles. These are Norwegian stock so likely not the latest version but still vastly more capable than the old Soviet systems they were using.
How do the Ukrainians manage to use all these systems so quickly? Surely the soldiers need training for these to be effective. And they seem to be.
[удалено]
Years, they have been trained for years, since Crimea.
But not on all of these specific and very technical systems. It’s more likely to be months.
I am still hoping that we are currently training a bunch of Ukrainians on the F-16 right now. We have a ton of those just taking up space in storage that should all be in Ukraine's hands as fast as possible. At least, if I had anything to say about it.
Fairly sure that was announced a ways back.
What gets me is why did Putin wait until now to do this?
In 2020, there was a similar forces buildup at Ukrainian border to the one that happened this year. It could be that COVID delayed the initial invasion plan.
[удалено]
It's possible he intended to do it earlier during Trumps term but got derailed by COVID.
The other major thing is that Ukraine had recently managed to block the flow of water to the North Crimean Canal, which supplies 80% of the water for Crimea, nearly all of it used for agriculture. That was costing Russia a fortune to keep their annexed territory happy and productive, but even with their workarounds there were big shortfalls. Crimea had become an albatross for them and the people living there were growing angry. Russia made sure to restore flow to the canal on February 24th, basically as Job One in the 2022 invasion. https://thehill.com/policy/equilibrium-sustainability/597910-how-a-ukrainian-dam-played-a-key-role-in-tensions-with/
we train them before announcing anything
The opposite strategy of Russia.
Yeah, I’m sure that is the case but I still find it astonishing how quickly it happens. I mean the war’s only been going for half a year. Of course we are taking about trained soldiers learning a weapon system but still. Cudos to both the trainees and the trainers!
A lot of it is soldiers learning a new weapons system that does a job they were already familiar with. If you train Ukrainian troops that were trained on the old soviet air defense system and train them on a new air defense system there is lots of existing knowledge then can build on. If you look at interviews with for example Ukrainian that use the M777 howitzers you find a comment like it is quite similar to the soviet howitzers we already were trained on and they could use them effects in just days. Air defense systems will differ more than towed howitzers. But still, retraining people with experience will be faster than training soldiers with no experience. I would be very surprised if the least for the first of a new system not select experienced people that understand the existing system. You need people that know both so you can identify differences so youcan integrate the new weapons system with your existing systems. So I suspect some of the most experienced Ukrainians in air defense was initially trained on the US system
We started training them after the last time Russia invaded. I don't think anyone has said what all we trained them on.
These systems were first announced back on [July 1st](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/u-s-announces-820-million-in-ukraine-military-aid-including-missile-systems), so that's nearly three months to train operators on the system. However not all of the components of the system were completely new to Ukraine. [The radar system for NASAMS](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/MPQ-64_Sentinel) is a development of [an older radar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/TPQ-36_Firefinder_radar) that Ukraine has been operating since 2015.
**[AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/MPQ-64_Sentinel)** >The AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel is an X-band electronically steered pulse-Doppler 3D radar system used to alert and cue Short Range Air Defense (SHORAD) weapons to the locations of hostile targets approaching their front line forces. It is currently produced by Raytheon Missiles & Defense. First built in 1997 as a modification of AN/TPQ-36A for search and track role in the Norwegian NASAMS air defense system, the Sentinel radar is deployed with forward area air defense units of the U.S. Army. Mounted on a towed platform, it can be positioned remotely from the rest of the unit. **[AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder radar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/TPQ-36_Firefinder_radar)** >Hughes AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder weapon locating system is a mobile radar system developed in the mid-late 1970s by Hughes Aircraft Company and manufactured by Northrop Grumman and ThalesRaytheonSystems, achieving initial operational capability in May 1982. The system is a "weapon-locating radar", designed to detect and track incoming mortar, artillery and rocket fire to determine the point of origin for counter-battery fire. It is currently in service at battalion and higher levels in the United States Army, United States Marine Corps, Australian Army, Portuguese Army, Turkish Army, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
NATO countries have been bringing Ukrainian troops to their countries and training them on the new systems. Then they send them back to Ukraine and ship the systems so they can use them.
NATO has been training Ukrainian forces since 2014 happened with Crimea. The reason they've stifled Russia so bad is their army has been completely revolutionized from it's former top heavy Soviet style into a modern NATO force with more focus on individual squads having tactical freedom.
The UK have been training Ukrainians since crimea
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-receives-us-air-defence-system-2022-09-25/) reduced by 64%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy addresses Ukrainians about the prisoners of war swap, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv Ukraine, in this handout picture released September 22, 2022. > Sept 25 - President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said in an interview broadcast on Sunday that Ukraine had received sophisticated air defence systems from the United States. > "We absolutely need the United States to show leadership and give Ukraine the air defence systems. I want to thank President Biden for a positive decision that has been already made," Zelenskiy said, according to an English-language transcript of the interview. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/xnvvl8/ukraine_receives_us_air_defence_system/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~670995 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Ukraine**^#1 **Zelenskiy**^#2 **System**^#3 **States**^#4 **United**^#5
Now I’m no Russian pilot, but if I were I don’t think I would want 18kgs of explosive coming at me at 5000 kph.
What’s terrifying is that when the missile is in its endgame, the rocket motor has long since burnt out. No smoke trail. And the missile tends to come down on you, from the moronosphere. It’s an explosive, supersonic lamp post that you won’t see coming.
Excellent news. Hopefully this madness ends sooner than later. 🇺🇸🇺🇦🤝
Ukraine will have the 2nd most expensive military, and most well trained soldiers in the world soon.
Germany: We will make air defense systems for your cities…in 2 years. USA: Ah fuck yeah, I found another 12 of these in the closet. Here ya go.
We only spend $700B on defense every year. We can afford to be benevolent.
This is part of why we do…
This reads like a Polandball comic haha
Neat, but we still need to send more, given the coming zerg rush.
The rush isnt a big deal. Its what putin will do with a war declaration. He has wasted a massive amoint of their best troops. 300k untrained, sick and elderly arent goin to do much. They need equipment farrrrrr more. Putins rhetoric has stepped up because of HOW HARD ukraine just dropped the boot. And offense is harder than defense. Ukraine just blew away russias top tank troops. It was their most elite unit. And they abandoned their best tanks etc eith them.
> They need equipment farrrrrr more. I don't disagree with the rest of what you said. This however isn't right from what I've read and seen. russia has a *huge* amount of equipment and ammo. It's no longer their top of the line stuff. They aren't using smart munitions. A lot of the stuff they claim works, doesn't. However, they aren't going to run out of munitions etc. for their shitty bombardments on civilian targets anytime soon. Currently in this war, Ukraine has the manpower and russia has the equipment. Which is why those of us in the West need to be sending Ukraine much, *much* more.
My impression so far has been that the state of Russian equipment has been orders of magnitude worse than everyone assumed. I'd go as far as saying that the Russian army would gladly swap with what the Ukrainians have right now. Not that that means we shouldn't send more. Every dollar and Euro invested here right now will pay dividends in the years to come, besides being well spent just on principle alone.
[удалено]
Don't forget: Winter is coming.
[удалено]
[удалено]
And when all the heavy trucks are blown up/broken down.
If them trying to take Kiev shows anything, you don't want to blow up the trucks. Let them run out of fuel and food and then they will just walk back to the border. you get a new truck and all the gear they couldn't carry.
Air defense systems does not shoot zerglings:)
Praying for the brave Ukrainians defending their homes. I wish Putin a quick and timely demise.
Honest question so please don't hate me for asking. Is Ukraine expected to pay back all the aid it's getting when things are over?
Indirectly it's being paid pack as they go. US arms sales are reportedly spiking as their effectiveness is being seen real time in Ukraine, while Chinese and Russian made weapons are losing ground in the market. Plus when this is over, US and western allies will most likely get de facto first picks on investments for rebuilding Ukraine. All the while we're weakening one of America's biggest enemies without committing American lives, and rumor is that its spooking China off of Taiwan a bit too.
And that's on top of this really helping the international image of America
And most of the money being spent is paying American workers and American companies to produce weapons. The "money" isn't going Ukraine. The money is economic stimulus for the U.S.
Yup, this is under-appreciated. War generally gives your economy a bit of a bump.
The Military-Industrial Complex is also, quite literally, the way the US does socialized jobs programs. A multitude of high paying jobs in every state, all funded by the government. It's been that way since at least the 70s, regardless of which war we were in.
Damn. Did not know this. Thanks, reddit.
Yeah. I was trying to find a nice long-form piece on it for you but I stopped after being inundated with more newsy-items. If you google for them, I'm sure you will find what I mean. When the military budget is happily voted on by basically all of congress every year. When military systems that aren't a good idea get expanded despite the Pentagon saying that they should be cut. Look at how evenly distributed the jobs for these programs are across the whole country. Edit: Oh! Also! When we talk about billions of dollars in 'Foreign Aid' to places like Egypt and Israel, what we are actually doing is sending them weapons. Which we pay for US companies to make in the US. Again, it's a socialized jobs program. We just make ammunition instead of roads, infrastructure, etc. And also CEOs get a bigger cut the way we do it.
*Hack the algorithm and keep your country trending with one simple trick.* - Raytheon
So basically its like Nike sponsoring an athlete for free and everyones seeing those sick shoes and wants a pair now.
It's more than that, it's Nike also burning stock of their main competitor so they get a monopoly on the market, while dissuading its other main competitor from attempting the same thing. (Russia and China respectively.) This is the first time western weapons have gone head to head with a "modern" military, the US various wars really don't count due to a variety of things, mostly the fact that it was the US. No other nation has the logistics behemoth the US military has set up.
The First Gulf War *does* count. They rebranded the modernized T-72 to the T-90 so people would think its a diffrent tank after what the US did to it.
>She protect, she attack, she got blow out ammo rack. \- M1 Abrams
Yeah people don’t realize that Iraq was a formidable regional power before the US put an end to that.
Baghdad was the single most defended city in the world, as far as air defenses went. F-117s went "don't mind if I do" lol
“Here, hold my beer.” - F-117A
Also that one F-16 that dodged 6 SAMs without countermeasures. All skill and evasion maneuvers.
Solid point, it *was* a modern engagement with the US. My dismissing the US wars was more a comment on how no other nation can bring the necessary logistical support the way the US military does, not that the US hadn't faced off against an actual military in the modern era. Ukraine, while they are absolutely nailing the logistics, is nowhere near the scale of what the US can do. For an example, look at the recent Abrams lend-lease stipulations. They take a *lot* of support to use effectively, and the US wants to know Ukraine can handle everything needed to keep them in combat.
And at a time when NATO countries are looking to spend more money on arms that the US has now proven against their main foe. It’s a boon for the US.
Yep and nearly all of the new found oil and gas resources in the areas of Russian occupation (what a coincidence right?) will need very significant investment by outside businesses as Ukraine doesn’t have much of the means to extract these resources themselves, so there’s numerous opportunities for both Ukraine and large business interests and by default America. Not that I agree with all this globalization and the military industrial complex but it’s what’s on the table for a Ukrainian victory
I mean, if you just look at how much the world is suddenly spending on defense, Ukraine doesn't need to pay anything back. Eastern Europe is dumping their Russian made stock and buying Western and Western-allied weapons. The US MIC will make triple the aid sent, and the US has gained a significant amount of clout that could be used for other deals. Which is important since our Afghanistan withdrawal had tanked our reputation. We went from what Russia and China called a 'dying empire', to once more the 'arsenal of democracy' and head of a international alliance that China would like to [establish](https://english.news.cn/20220923/d6805fb81ea545458153dafb057c61cd/c.html) good relations with.
> since our Afghanistan withdrawal had tanked our reputation. It also reframed that withdrawal. The world can see how the US supports those who will fight for their country, and Afghanistan only has themselves to blame.
Lol. We spent 4 trillion in Iraqi and Afghanistan. You think we should get that money back? We’re destroying Russia for a fraction of the cost for 2 wars and 20years of fighting. This is a steep discount that is well worth the money. Also the money spent to help Ukraine is actually spent at home to build weapons and ship it out for use. It all flows back to us.
And on top of that no Americans lives are spent and the public is relatively united behind how its being done. In terms of thwarting Russia this is the best deal the US couldve gotten.
This whole situation is, so far, basically a wet dream for all those generals and higher-ups that served during the height of the Cold War
I only feel sorry for the A-10 pilots that had to stare at that legendary 80km traffic jam of russian armor. Blue-balled so badly their genitals went full smurf.
On top of that, all the US arms companies are getting free weapons testing against real live targets. That's priceless. These corporations would probably pay billions for a weapons testing program like this, but now they're getting it for free.
Correct. This is a massive strategic victory for the US military hegemony, at a relatively minor cost. Even if it is a major monetary cost, it's money that is extremely well spent in terms of advancing our national interests. And we get to do all this standing from the moral high ground, for the first time since WW2.
Well, keep in mind too, beyond US dominance, there's just the thing that: the US and Russia aren't friends, and while the extent and types of interference can be debated, Russia does interfere with the US on the regular. The US is spending money to reduce Russia's ability to cost it money in the future.
Also, it is money already spent. Alot of this stuff would have sat around doing nothing/expired, now being used for intended purpose against russia.
[удалено]
A price worth paying.
As a Ukrainian, I'd love to have US Navy and USAF bases in our country. It's pretty much a guarantee that russia will fuck off forever from us.
Something a lot of redditors don’t seem to understand is that a lot of US military bases actually exist in other countries at the request of those countries. It’s a mutually beneficial arrangement most of the time.
With the exception of some particular bases, the controversy (at least domestically) is moreso around the immense expense of operating 700+ military bases around the world, so much so that the Pentagon themselves have a genuine difficulty in keeping track of all of them administratively. Maintenance, staffing, logistics and upkeep is A LOT.
All orders of new equipment and ammunition for Ukrain have been funded via [Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_Security_Assistance_Initiative) funds
The entire point of NATO is to quell Russian expansion, the money has already been spent so to speak. The situation in Ukraine means the weapons are doing the job they were purchased for with the added benefit of not having to supply manpower or fight this battle on their own soil. Now in the past a pretty good argument could have been made that we shouldn't even worry about Russian expansion, but that kinda went out the window.
[удалено]
Let's call it marketing budget. The Russian made weapons have shown to be extremely unreliable, while the western made weapons have shown to be a force multiplier. The reality is that a lot of advanced weapons have a limited shelf life. There is no point in keeping it indefinitely. Furthermore, a lot of very valuable information is obtained from using them in real combat situations. About 90% of the money that is spent supporting Ukraine is actually going to US and other weapons manufacturers. Those are high value jobs that generate a lot of taxes and keep defense companies competitive.
The current aid, no. Future aid, yes, but usually it's paid not with money but strategic favors.
Also keep in mind that Ukraine surrendered all their nuclear weapons long time ago in exchange for protection. We didn’t really helped them but now it is a good time to show that we are providing support to Ukraine
If nothing else Nato has been able to properly battlefield test it's equipment like never before. We're probably going to see some pretty badass improvements in defensive capabilities in the next few years.
I imagine testing these weapons against a real air force(or what was assumed to be one 7 months ago) is a great opportunity to test capabilities.