Russia will take years to replace nuclear-capable bomber planes that were hit in Ukrainian drone strikes last weekend, according to Western military aviation experts, straining a modernisation programme that is already delayed.
Satellite photos of airfields in Siberia and Russia’s far north show extensive damage from the attacks, with several aircraft completely burnt out, although there are conflicting versions of the total number destroyed or damaged.
The United States assesses that up to 20 warplanes were hit - around half the number estimated by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy - and around 10 were destroyed, two U.S. officials told Reuters.
My theory? To fight Nintendo switch 2 scalpers. It makes more sense than your theory if you could think about it.
It could be. So you agree that the surveillance laws don’t make much sense?
Do you remember how pirating was in the headlines for a long time, how governments actually banned piratebay and various other sites?
Remember how that did jack shit against piracy?
So the laws won’t protect the children. Then why do those laws exist?
Because the lawmakers are easily led idiots?
Too simple for an explanation, they are not stupid.
I haven’t said anything about those laws making sense or not, I’ve only implied your reasoning doesn’t make sense.
By presenting an arbitrary other motivation, which implies that there is no obvious motivation.
Yet why does my reasoning not make sense? We fought in Libya. Everybody hates Russia and would be eager to fight if Russia didn’t have nuclear bombs. Remove the critical voices and we are ready to go.
Your reasoning is a random one, with the exact same validity and any other random one. “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence” rings any bell?
Wait, you claim “everybody” hates Russia but doesn’t fight because Russia has nuclear bombs, so they are removing critical voices to be able to attack… Are nuclear weapons powered by critical voices? Or are you hallucinating?
A European attack is prevented by critical voices from within Europe. If those voices are removed we will attack despite the threat of nuclear bombs.
Easy to say. You say “we will attack” so I assume you — like me — are part of at least some European military?
I’m in the Finnish Defence Forces. Our entire military strategy is based around defending an attack from Russia, not actively attacking it.
That’s why the new weapons are needed, to prepare for an attack.
Why else would Europe need those weapons? Russia has problems fighting Ukraine. How could they fight Europe?
Btw, I say we because any serious war will use the entire population, like Ukraine.
I don’t think you understand just how large thing a country’s entire military strategy is. You don’t just up and change it like getting a new patch on your favourite game.
There’s infra built literally almost a century ago for these very purposes, the entire reserve would need to be retrained basically.
That’s how we’ve been able to keep Russia from attacking us since the previous bout; by being extremely prepared to defend against an attack.
Also, surely you’re aware that wars of aggression are banned in international law? We can’t just attack Russia with thr combined might of EU armies, as it stands rn.
That’s why we need to get Ukraine to the EU, so that then it’s not a war of aggression, but honoring the mutual defense clause.
That’s also why Russia is pulling off their sabotage like cutting cables and jamming GPS, etc. Because as long as it’s not a direct military attack, EU cannot respond with military force.
Oh and, in which country’s military forces would you be participating in this attack fantasy?