In other news: Zelenskiy signed a bill on Tuesday to lower the mobilisation age for combat duty from 27 to 25 https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraines-zelenskiy-signs-bill-lowering-mobilisation-age-combat-duty-25-2024-04-02/
So what we have here is nothing else than wholesale purchase of cannon fodder.
Every dollar that goes to funding nazis in Ukraine for a war they have no chance of winning is a dollar that can’t go towards funding genocide in the middle east. Of course that money should be going into public services instead, but as if they are ever going to allow that to happen.
EDIT: NATO nazis were fast to pounce on this one, HA!
lol the NAFO brigades
The problem NATO has with this proxy war can’t be solved by printing money. The issue lies in the lack of industrial production in the west, and you can’t just create a huge industry for producing weapons and ammunition out of whole cloth.
This will be a fantastic vehicle for pushing for austerity in Europe though. The oligarchs have been very upset that Europeans enjoy a social safety net and things like pensions. The need for massive military spending will be a perfect justification for stripping these rights away from the workers. Europeans are about to start enjoying American style freedoms.
what too much finance capital does to a mf
warning to all, this guy does nothing but spread russian propaganda all day. check their post history.
That’s right, I spread Russian propaganda as reported by mainstream western media.
Who goes back and reads new comments in two-day old posts, anyway?
Based on votes, more people than I thought…
Lemmy is still small enough that older posts have a chance to stick around. Another benefit over a huge forum like reddit where the sheer volume of stuff buries things really fast.
Who ya gonna call?
Industrial production is not a significant issue the collective West has within the context of supplying Ukraine armaments and ammunition.
The issue is a lack of, or decline in, domestic political capital in key member states, cohesive unified policy, and a long term strategy.
Now, if the United States was completely removed from the equation, then industrial production capacity constraints, especially around munitions, may become a real issue.
lol CNN disagrees with you there bud https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/10/politics/russia-artillery-shell-production-us-europe-ukraine/index.html
US and Western officials insist that although Russia has been able to jump-start its factory lines, in part because it has the advantage of being a managed economy under the control of an autocrat, capitalist western nations will eventually catch up and produce better equipment.
I mean the article seemingly agrees with CircusCritic, they’re only outproducing because of lack of funding from NATO countries in combination with the control Russia has over its own economy. If NATO, NATO countries, or the US can actually begin to deliver a lot of funds, production will increase rapidly.
We have industries for creating these armaments, they just don’t have the incentive to create a lot due to a lack of funding.
The when is of course an important question. Providing 100 billion to Ukraine in funding in 2 years will have a different impact than 100 billion next month.
Does the west actually have those industries? Turns out decades of outsourcing as much production as possible overseas was a bad idea. Who would have thunk it.
Munition factories aren’t typically outsourced, but a lot were decommissioned after the Cold War ended. That problem is especially acute within European NATO member states.
But, in the context of NATO, as a whole, just supplying Ukraine for their existing conflict, production isn’t the limiting factor.
The munitions themselves are made in the US, but the raw materials, tooling, and various components in more advanced weaponry have complicated supply chains and are sourced from all over.
The US military is going through massive headaches because domestic supply chains arent able to support the construction of new ships, missles, tanks, aircraft, and other equipment like mobile launchers and uniforms because the domestic production of raw materials and skilled labor required for production have been gutted. Just look at the fiasco that AUKUS is currently undergoing trying to produce submarines. Sure the Navy never technically stopped building it’s ships domestically, but allowing the rest of the domestic shipbuilding industry to collapse has lead to the US being comically inept at at producing serviceable ships.
Free market capitalism is incompatible with national security as capital is only interested in quarterly profits and will sacrifice long term security to meet that goal. Defense contractors have de facto monopolies today and use the threat of going out of business to pressure the Pentagon into giving them massive paychecks to fuck around.
As I explained in my original comment, you can’t just create such industries overnight. These require building out supply chains, training workers, and so on. You can just look at how great reshoring chip production is going despite untold billions being poured into that to get an idea of what a monumental task this is.
Building out an industry on this scale is going to take years if not decades. Providing 100 billion to Ukraine in funding isn’t going to do jack shit. Ukraine is running out of weapons and ammunition. Replacements for any of these don’t exist, and production capacity is insufficient to make any actual difference in the foreseeable future.
Highly recommend reading this article from RUSI explaining these problems https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine
Ship building and shell production are on the polar opposite ends of time requirements for industrial capacity building…the fact that you used ship building as an example here makes me wonder if you’re being intentionally disingenuous…
Also, you don’t seem to understand how these funding programs actually work if you think this is being allocated to build out Ukrainian domestic production capacity.
Chip production might have different requirements from shell production, but it’s a good example of how difficult it is to bootstrap an industry. Also, nobody is talking about allocating anything to Ukrainian domestic production capacity here. Maybe actually try and read that RUSI article till you understand what it’s saying.
Doesn’t it take only 1 of the counties with veto power to shut this down? Why would Russia ever approve?
Edit: Had a brain fart. Thanks for the corrections. Leaving my dumb comment anyway.
Russia isn’t in NATO, but they are it’s most successful recruiter.
Which is why I’m baffled why people still spread the myth that Russia invaded to ‘stop nato aggression.’
Like, firstly you’re fucking wrong, but if you want to wear that L like a medal then go for it. Russia is the biggest reason the baltics joined.
NATO lost. They stopped the aggression. You’re going to have to dea with that. NATO is finished now, along with the rest of the west.
I’m not sure who would say that it was to ‘stop NATO aggression’, but it’s not hard to imagine it as a some kind of response to NATO’s continued expansion around them.
NATO hasn’t been in any direct operations against Russia but they have been involved in the ME where they have been active.
I think of it a lot in the same way as the US’s pacific ocean and Caribbean territorial expansion and involvement in central america as a response to the Cuban Missile crisis and Soviet posturing.
I’m not sure who would say that it was to ‘stop NATO aggression’
I think the line might be “in response to” or similar, but it’s parroted by tankies and russophiles.
NATO’s continued expansion around them.
Can we imagine any reasons why Russia’s neighbors might want to join a defensive pact to protect against Russia? No? Oh well, must be US imperialism then.
Which happened first? NATO expansion, or Russian invasion?
There’s your answer.
Nato: Invades the entire middle east and fucks it up to steal oil
You: “What a great defensive alliance”
Where those WMD’s in Iraq at?
I’m not saying there isn’t reason for those countries to want to joint an alliance against their imperialist neighbor, but honestly it’s kinda hard not to see how NATO’s influence has been abused for purposes other than defense.
Because that’s what Russia has been repeating for the past two years. Some people believe lies whan they’re repeated often enough.
A major reason may have been to stop Ukraine’s entry in Nato though.
I am very confused by your comment. Are you saying Putin never said that, or are you saying he was lying?
From Putin’s actual mouth:
ON DECISION TO LAUNCH ‘SPECIAL MILITARY OPERATION’
“We saw military infrastructure being ramped up, hundreds of military advisers working and regular deliveries of modern weapons from NATO. (The level of) danger was increasing every day. Russia preventively rebuffed the aggressor. It was necessary, timely and … right. The decision of a sovereign, strong, independent country.”
Just to be clear, he definitely said that, but he was definitely lying.
(source: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/putin-speaks-victory-day-parade-moscows-red-square-2022-05-09/)
