Posts by Adam Lee13

James Phillips92 said:Exactly—everything else is just smoke and mirrors for the folks who want to believe the hype.

Look, you just don't get how things actually work in the United States. For them, the bottom line is keeping the oil flowing in massive quantities and making sure producers aren't getting too cozy with Russ or China—they couldn't care less about who's pocketing the oil money over there. Their real play is keeping gas and diesel cheap enough for domestic industry and everyday folks, selling a mountain of weapons to those same countries, and then eventually cycling all that oil profit right back into the American stock market.

If you want proof, just look at those Gulf nations with state-run oil giants doing all the heavy lifting.

James Phillips92 said:None of that is the real reason. The main driver was just grabbing the oil—pretty much the same logic behind Putin seizing territory in Ukraine.

🤣

analogbear5 said:Even if it happened with Hillary Clinton's backing, Libya was mostly a French operation. The dollar wasn't even the main driver here. Has everyone seriously forgotten those leaked emails?

Clinton emails suggest France bombed Gaddafi’s regime for oil

Gaddafi essentially paid the ultimate price because he kept playing aggressive anti-West politics from the moment he took power.

1. Overthrowing the pro-Western government in Libya

2. The Expulsion of Italians and Jews from the country along with seizing all their assets

3. Kicking Western corporations out and nationalizing everything they owned

4. Handing over military bases to the USSR

5. Direct military aggression against Chad, occupying a third of the country, and openly meddling in other African nations against the interests of the West

6. Funding terrorist groups like the IRA and ETA, plus direct involvement in terror tactics like shooting down planes and stuff

7. Crushing the Libyan Berbers and treating the Black population of Libya like slaves

The only thing he didn't do was turn into a cannibal like Go Amin; honestly, the guy was a total degenerate who got exactly what was coming to him.

But here's the kicker—the West actually overlooked almost everything listed above, and this was the real breaking point that triggered his downfall: Articles from 2009Russian military expansion: New bases in Libya, Syria, and Yemen

It's pretty wild how two years later, all three of those countries were hit by the West, whether through direct action or via proxies. In this case, the West just decided the Russian influence had gone too far.

Russia's GDP took a massive 4% hit in Q2 2022

coastalbison6 said:Those 130mm shells are incredibly hard to find, and nobody’s actually confirmed if those were shipped out yet.
The artillery is mostly from the 70s... I honestly don't know how much that's going to help the guys on the ground.

A range of 17 miles, which means they can cover the border with Belarus properly again...

Joshua Myers432 said:That’s an apples-to-oranges comparison. Ukraine isn't Korea, it isn't Afghanistan, and it isn't a country being invaded by Mexicans. The situation there is far more nuanced. For heaven's sake, Zelenskyy is a native Russian speaker. There isn't much else to say...

Like, seriously? Like how 80% of Americans used to speak with the exact same dialect, not just the same language as Mexicans—is that what the poet was actually getting at???

Russian oil is sitting at just $79, which means they're still taking a massive 20% hit on the price🤣

https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/urals-oil

Meanwhile, over here in the States, Natural Gas prices just tanked by a third:

https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/natural-gas

Amanda Diaz said:The truth is, both sides adapt based on who they are.

“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak,” as Sun Tzu put it.

So, which one actually works better when things finally hit the fan? Which strategy keeps you from getting absolutely wrecked???

slyfox43 said:I find it a bit hard to swallow the idea that Ukrainians are burning through Javelins at such an astronomical rate. I’m not one to lean into conspiracy theories, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were quietly stockpiling a portion of those supplies for a rainy day—perhaps as leverage in case Western pressure forces them into a peace deal that doesn't sit right with their interests.

If the situation were mine, I’d likely be doing the exact same thing if I had the means.

As for ramping up Javelin production, it’s entirely possible to accelerate the process if we actually make it a priority. The Defense Production Act is a powerful tool when it's used correctly.

Sure, a factory can flip from one shift to three overnight on paper, but you still need like 3-4 months just to get the workforce trained up and ready to go...

Here’s the breakdown on what American max production looks like for Javelin and TOW missiles throughout 2022:

-6,480 Javelins for the year

-24,000 TOW-2 missiles annually

The real headache here, though—and this is the part that sucks—is the lead time. You’re looking at roughly 18 to 20 months from the moment an order is placed before they even start cranking them out, and then you’ve got another 12 months just to actually finish everything that was ordered. It's a massive lag.

If this drags on, the US is going to have to pivot toward donating TOW missiles instead, which is a whole different ballgame. Meanwhile, the Ukrainians really need to start being more surgical with their Javelins; someone needs to sit them down and explain that these aren't exactly falling from the sky in endless abundance. Basically, stop spraying and praying if you aren't 100% sure you're going to nail the target.

Andrew Miller102 said:It’s the classic media boomerang—the idea that we have to announce every single shipment just to prove to someone that we actually sent the weapons.The Slovaks sent over some S-300s for Ukraine, but if these early reports are right, the Russians managed to wipe out the entire shipment.☕

https://www.defensenews.com/global/e...ng-to-ukraine/

https://twitter.com/KingKong9888/sta...05419027857409

If our neighbors were Mexicans, they'd probably say the Ukrainians are taking some massive losses on Twitter...🤣

Kate Lewis3 said:Just drop a link if you find it, I can't track this down.

But look, if that price tag is actually real for 100 PzH-2000s—which seems sketchy since they're supposedly offloading their entire fleet while refusing to sell the Marder vehicles just sitting there waiting to be scrapped—then the math is totally blown. We're talking $17 million per unit? When we picked up ours for under $3.5 million? Even if the production cost for a brand-new PzH-2000 is around $10 million, I don't buy that the ammo alone accounts for that massive gap. Not even with missiles included.

Unless, of course, someone is taking a massive kickback under the table.

The new Paladins in the States go for about $11 million each, and that's just swapping the old turret and gun onto a fresh chassis; plus, for that kind of cash, they get a dedicated ammo carrier bundled in with every self-propelled howitzer.

the cost of 100 Pzh 2000 howitzers including spare parts could reach an amount of 1.7 billion Euro. man, that's a lot...

It looks like they're playing it smart by hitching a ride on that massive German order for 100 units, basically sweetening the deal to grab another 20 or so for themselves at a discount because the volume is so huge. It drives the per-unit price down.

Seriously though, Germans are such snakes; they won't donate weapons because then they wouldn't have them, but they'll happily sell you the exact same gear—doesn't matter to them if they end up empty-handed later.🤦

EDIT: forget it, this isn't happening... According to the report, the delivery of new howitzers to Ukraine will be completed in 2027.

Honestly, if the Americans just handed the Ukrainians a few thousand Excalibur units and maybe a couple hundred ATACMS , they’d be set. I mean, seriously, Russia wouldn't even know what hit them.

[B says:
velvetbadger11;91882051 Apparently these Australian armored vehicles are just rolling right over mines... I mean, are they actually triggering them or what? If that’s legit, then all that Russian mining work was basically a waste of time. [/B]

Man, oh man...😁😵

I honestly have no clue why the US isn't just handing over the ATACMS, especially since they’re basically being phased out for PrSM anyway... if my math is right, they've probably got something like 2,000 or 2,500 just sitting around in storage somewhere. If they actually let them loose, the Ukrainians could really start making life miserable for the Russians deep behind the lines, given that those things have a 300-kilometer reach.

Christian Torres3 said:A weapon either works or it doesn't, and I haven't heard a single complaint about quality from the Ukrainians. The Air Force is actually loving the Stingers, especially the crews flying the Su-34s.

Look, I never said the stuff wasn't broken... quite the opposite, actually... I'm just saying they aren't really "spending" money on Ukraine so much as they're upgrading themselves. They’re shipping out older gear that’s still perfectly lethal and functional—stuff they were going to retire in a few years anyway.

So, the US only really eats the cost for those few extra years they managed to squeeze out of equipment that was already slated for disposal.

In reality, there isn't even a real cost here; this is basically just one massive commercial for these weapon systems. Once the whole world sees what Western advanced weaponry can actually do, the order books are going to be absolutely flooded.

Not to mention, this is a total disaster for Russia's reputation—it's a giant anti-advertisement for their air defense, their aviation, and their entire line of armor. They’re going to lose most of their customers, who will naturally pivot toward the competition, and wouldn't you know it, the competition is the West.😁

slyfox43 said:As an American taxpayer, there’s a certain quiet satisfaction in knowing my money is finally being funneled toward a cause that actually holds some moral weight.

It’s probably a stretch to imagine some Russian officer picking up a captured NLAW and deciding to test it out during a meeting of the Russian Security Council—they aren't exactly known for their passion for liberty—but man, wouldn't that be a sight to see?

They're handing over gear that's already seen about 75% of its useful life... take Stingers, for instance. They're basically leftovers from the end of the Cold War that have just been kept on life support; they'll probably be totally obsolete by 2026 or 2027 anyway.

Meanwhile, the government will just blow through this cash to refresh their own inventory.

Germany just sent over 2,650 Matadors to help out the Ukrainians.

slyfox43 said:There is this.

The deployment of advanced cruise missiles in modern conflict zones is much like trying to play chess while the board itself is constantly shifting under your feet. It’s a relentless game of technological cat-and-mouse where one side's breakthrough is immediately met by the other's desperate attempt to neutralize it.

It isn't even a requirement that we stick to an American system.

I mean, we could probably just hand over some C-RAM units to help them protect their bases, government buildings, power plants, or those high-end restaurants and whatnot.

They aren't exactly using up all that C-RAM inventory back in Afghanistan anymore anyway.

Carl Lee27 said:It’s looking like we might be seeing something way more substantial than just the Stinger when it comes to Western anti-aircraft systems lately.

Quote: Ukraine Hints At Deal With US On Anti-Missile Defence Systems

https://ommcomnews.com/world-news/uk...efence-systems

I mean, looking at the gap between a Stinger and a Patriot US system, there isn't really much in the middle for Americans to work with... so if they're hinting at something "more serious," what on earth are we actually talking about here???😁