To my understanding, EU countries aren’t in a shortage of aircraft - their air power is enough to match Russia. However, they are in a shortage of bombs to drop and missiles to fire.

They’re also in a shortage of artillery and rocket artillery and air defense.

As for the industry that can be scaled up fastest (drones), everyone is in a shortage of them. Fortunately there is one country in Europe that’s been doing absolutely everything to scale up their production. So much that it currently out-produces the US, and maybe out-produces both the US and the EU. I’m fairly certain that this country is willing to help on the matter (it’s called Ukraine).

I assure you, the factory will be too small to supply all demand, and 2 generations behind the cutting edge. And its construction will get delayed by unforeseen mishaps.

Came here to post this, but saw that this thread existed already. :)

• Previously, this was speculated about as a rumour, now it’s being publicly negotiated.
• In rough terms, 800 billion is approximately 0.8 US defense budgets.

So, as a result of the US abandoning its previous role, the EU is moving to replace the capabilities offered by the US previously.

The sum is not impossibly big, the total volume of the EU response to COVID was about 2 trillion, so this is about 40% of the volume of the COVID response budget.

Notes:

• Previously, this was speculated about as a rumour, now it’s being publicly negotiated.
• In rough terms, 800 billion is approximately 0.8 US defense budgets.

So, as a result of the US abandoning its previous role, the EU is moving to replace the capabilities offered by the US previously.

If the US does lift sanctions on select oligarchs from Russia, I think the EU should consider sanctions on select oligarchs from the US.

I can suggest one such oligarch, Elon Musk - he’s associated with wielding illegitimate power, manipulating social media and interfering in elections (both national and primary) using wealth.

How about freezing his assets? I don’t think he has taken the prudent step of collecting all his money and stowing it under Donald’s presidential seat.

Proposing a legal remedy that’s not properly implemented where I live, but could be properly implemented…

It should be required by law that police disclose to all people who have been under their surveillance, all the information that was collected about them - after their surveillance permit expires (and the permit should be possible to get only through a court of law, no managerial decisions).

…and also, they should be required to compensate for any damage done through this.

Guess: the geopolitical situation.

Reasoning (much speculation on my part):

• PKK is often an excuse for Turkish attacks and proxy attacks
• the tactics which PKK has used have not proven effective, it has become and stayed isolated
• with Trump in power, Syrian Kurds cannot rely on US support and Erdogan is less inhibited, PKK may become an excuse for Turkey to attack them
• with Bashar al Assad gone, there is a possibility of negotiating a tolerable position in a new Syria, and Erdogan is less inhibited because of this too - his regional competitor is gone
• better to remove the excuse for attacks and explore other options

Hopefully later, then.

Or never, if Taiwan announces on some day “we don’t have nuclear weapons, but if needed, we will use them”.

Short summary: Abdullah Öcalan, the formal leader of PKK (but he’s in a Turkish prison already for decades) called for PKK to disarm and dissolve. So far it looks like they might proceed with it.

The sourcing is what actually makes people worry, and makes the Ukrainian government ask from every big supplier: “do you have a backup plan that works without Chinese parts?”.

Tracing the supply chains would reveal that Europe has only half of the industries needed to make a decent drone - with the rest coming from China, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, etc.

In peaceful times, it would not be such a problem - “oh, we cannot make autonomous agricultural vehicles”.

In not so peaceful times, it’s a considerable risk, and a lot of people are working to lower the risk. It means setting up industries which were outsourced to the other side of the planet.

I can say a few words about that, since I make DIY drones (minus the explosives).

Short summary: you need billions of investment into industry to be able to make cheap drones (but a nice feature: the same factories can supply peaceful activity during peaceful times).

Motors: you cannot DIY them, you need a factory making magnets, ball bearings, rotors and stators, and a final factory for assembly.

Motor controllers: you cannot DIY them beyond a crude prototype for which you naturally need to buy parts. You need a factory making microcontrollers, MOSFETs, PCB boards and a factory to assemble the stuff (robotic pick and place machines, automated soldering ovens, automated testing, etc).

Flight controllers: same as with motor controllers, you need a factory to make them. Open source only comes in at the last step where you configure BetaFlight or ArduPilot as you please.

Flight computers: same as with flight controllers, you need a factory. Fortunately Raspberry Pi, the world’s most-produced microcomputer is made in the UK… from parts largely imported from China. DIY comes in at the last moment, where you choose the operating system and customize (or build) navigation software.

Batteries: making cells needs a factory. DIY comes at the last stage, if the factory doesn’t make ideal batteries, so you buy loose cells and customize.

Fiber optical transceiver: I have not yet seen a garage-built one, though I have seen free space optical transceivers (currently not used in war fighting) that are pretty DIY. But you need components. You can’t cook a silicon photomultiplier in a kitchen, you need a semiconductor factory.

Optical fiber: unfeasible to DIY. Samples can be made in a lab, but to make 20 kilometers of good fiber, you need a well-adjusted factory. You buy up telecom fiber, by shipload if you can, by truckload if you cannot.

Camera: nope, cannot be DIY-ed.

Explosives: can be DIYed at the cost of accidents costing engineers’ lives. So in practise, cannot be DIY-ed.

Airframe: now, the airframe of a drone can be DIY-ed (and this can convey tangible benefits).

(I better not try to write the same about artillery barrels, since artillery is the second most destructive weapon in this war after drones. A DIY artillery barrel is possible, but for pumpkin shooting competitions or at best, short range smoothbore mortars. Heavy industry, high quality steel and a long process with many steps are needed to make a long rifled barrel for high pressure shots.)

I’ve read about this too. There was a French AWACS plane with its fighter escort taking a look at Crimea from distance. And later, there was a visit by an US Navy plane that can drop sonar buoys and assorted stuff. I missed the Italian electronic warfare plane, reading about it now.

Russian sources have been speculating that an Ukrainian strike usually comes within days of such a visit.

I think the military are doing their stuff regardless of politicians, as long as politicians (read: Trump) won’t forbid them.

I watched this train wreck. Didn’t try to transcribe, so I might have small errors. Essence first, emotions later.

Trump:

• claims (falsely) that previous presidents didn’t help Ukraine
• contradicts oneself, claiming that Biden was too hardline on Russia
• claims that Obama didn’t give any military assistance to Ukraine (but Obama did)
• claims that he gave Javelin ATGMs to Ukraine (could be true, as Trump did try to blackmail Zelensky with 0.4 billions worth of military aid, while Biden didn’t try to blackmail with 60 billions - it’s almost certain that Biden gave a thousand times more Javelins and other useful systems)
• claims that the words of a US president aren’t worth so much as to deter Russia
• again mis-states the volume of US economic and military assistance to Ukraine as 380 billion or something
• says that Zelensky needs to be thankful and is being disrespectful
• behaves disrespectfully, claiming Zelensky is not allowed to speak, continues ranting
• claims that Ukraine “hasn’t got the cards” and is going to lose
• claims that Zelensky is “gambling with World War 3” (note: Ukraine is defending itself)

Zelensky:

• doesn’t get to speak as Trump rants
• manages to say that he is thankful to the US
• says that he already had a ceasefire with Putin, which he personally signed in 2019 with Merkel and Macron also present, and Putin broke the ceasefire
• says he wants a ceasefire with guarantees
• says that Ukraine isn’t going to lose

Vance:

• says Zelensky isn’t thankful enough in this room here and now

Opinion:

A carefully orchestrated verbal agression by Trump and Vance. Zelensky was not given opportunity to present his point of view, which is very rare in diplomacy (this probably isn’t diplomacy). He’s in the damn White House, he’s not going to shout.

Result:

Zelensky walked away without signing the mineral resources treaty. Fully understandable for bystanders. Foreseeable by Trump - perhaps the goal of this tirade.

Apparently, there is confirmation from the opposing side that Ukrainian jamming has started to have effect on Russian glide bombs. Confirmation came from a milblogger named “FighterBomber” associated with the Russian air force, and was picked up by Dmitry from “War Translated”, who has a habit of combing Russian-language sources for information.

Glide bombs have been a difficult weapon for Ukraine to adapt against, since they’re launched from over 40 kilometers of distance (air defense typically cannot reach so far), and are cheaper than the means of intercepting them.

Note: the milblogger speaks of “problems in the Laotian air force”, as is customary when speaking of the local air force would be punishable.

It should also be noted that some Western types of glide bombs (like GBU-39 SDB) have also failed in Ukraine, but other members of the GBU family continue to function, likely due to better inertial navigation systems.

“Hide him quickly, she’s from Eastern Europe and wants to talk about Ukraine.” – someone from the Trump administration, likely

Short summary:

• Russia is operating with a budget deficit
• borrowing from foreign lands is blocked
• local banks are unable / unwilling to buy more state bonds, as they’d risk insolvency
• the most liquid part (estimate: about 60%) of the national wealth fund has been used up

Pressing financial issues might be impossible to postpone for longer.

My guess: it was Putin doubling down on his bet made in 2014, which in turn was triggerd by chance (protests over an EU accession treaty triggering a revolution in Ukraine) and opportunism.

Putin seized Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and his popularity ratings soared. He allowed the conflict to be frozen and undertook a campaign of military reforms, but Ukraine also undertook their own.

He subsequently isolated himself to such degree that he was surrounded by yes-men, and they told him Ukraine could be conquered with 200 000 men (and “was about to collapse anyway”, etc). He thought it would be over in days and told them to get it done.

A historical clarification - Ukrainians don’t like it being called a “civil war”, as it truly wasn’t.

The “republics” were started by Igor Girkin, a highly productive employee of the GRU, now imprisoned for incessant criticism of Putin over “not invading Ukraine properly enough”. He had the assistance of countless colleagues, of course.

At some point, the flow of support from Russia to the “republics” allowed even a civilian to calculate how many people were involved. In a court case over corruption, the Kirov region’s court in Russia carelessly published what amount of military food rations were delivered bi-weekly. Unless I recall incorrectly, the calculation indicated presence of approximately 30 000 men. The court even clearly called them units of the RF military. An archived copy of the text remains, the original publication was taken down of course.

That’s why people object to calling it “civil war” - it was a low-intensity war between states, interleaved by occasionally adhering to some ceasefire or keeping heavy weaponry far from the front. It was fought between Russian troops in control of Donetsk and Lugansk, and Ukrainian troops.

Now as for US interference: Obama tried getting Putin to back off, but was ineffectual. He enacted sanctions (about which Navalny once noted that they were close to a joke), but also left the oil tap open, and the resulting decrease in revenue somewhat influenced Putin. Obama also started military assistance to Ukraine, which was reforming its armed forces at very high pace. Humanitarian aid to displaced people was also offered, and I’m sure that many more things happened.

Trump continued the military aid, but tried blackmailing Zelensky once by blocking it. He demanded that Zelensky must have Biden’s son investigated. Zelensky didn’t do that, but a US whistleblower informed the public of the occurrence and Trump got his first impeachment proceedings as a result. As we know, he wasn’t impeached. His grudge against Ukraine likely originates from this incident - Zelensky not bending to his will, and the Ukraine scandal blowing up in his face. Humanitarian and developent assistance continued to be offered.

Biden mostly continued the assistance programmes from his predecessors. But in late 2021, when intelligence analysis started pointing towards an imminent invasion, he engaged in diplomacy to make Ukraine aware of the level of the threat (they didn’t believe it at first - they were sure that Putin was a criminal, but didn’t consider him detached from reality) and tried to deter Russia from invading. He was ineffectual at that. After the invasion, he offered considerable military assistance, which helped Ukraine stand its ground, and probably made a difference. There might be no more Ukraine without timely assistance from the Biden administration. I would not say that Biden’s assistance has “terrible consequences”. Without his assistance, we’d have really terrible consequences.

A war is terrible. But the defending side losing a war and an agressor winning (followed by repressions against the civlian population, and subverting the resources of a country to serve another conquest), that is multiple times more terrible - it can be the start of a chain of invasions.

But Biden didn’t do everything that could have been done.

From what I hear, they don’t always bother - if it’s a towed artillery piece, the circus of moving it is allegedly more dangerous than staying holed up.

(the following is “as far as I know”, might be inaccurate) They dig their gun into a wooded area, put lots of antidrone nets overhead, keep ammunition far away in diverse locations, and don’t stay near the piece when they aren’t using it. If a drone comes, there’s a chance it gets caught in the nets or detonates prematurely. If it hits, there is a decent chance that the gun can be fixed. If another battery starts trying to hit it, they hit back.

It’s a repeat resolution, made on the third anniversary of the invasion.

And yes, the US voted in the same bloc with North Korea. (China abstained from voting.)

Diplomats do as presidents tell them. :o