Mister Zelenskyy's war in the news

L

Legion

Oderint dum metuant




Mar 8, 2022

Ukraine’s Use Of Stinger And Javelin Missiles Is Outstripping U.S. Production


As Western arsenals empty their stockpiles, flowing some 17,000 “fire-and-forget” missiles into Ukraine, the small rockets risk being consumed faster than the West can currently replace them.

As America focuses on shipping missiles into the fight, strategic thinkers are eyeing America’s vulnerable and aging missile industrial base, mulling the challenges of readying old production facilities to meet the unexpected demands of wartime production. Few realize that advanced Javelin anti-tank and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles are backed by an aged and insecure production infrastructure, riddled with potential bottlenecks, vulnerabilities, and supply challenges.

For air threats, America’s well-known portable antiaircraft missile, the FIM-92 Stinger, is out of production in the U.S. and cannot be replaced easily. The missile system was first produced in the 1970s, and with tens of thousands of updated Stingers sitting in the U.S. inventory, the missile wasn’t expected to be replaced until the 2030s. The Ukraine conflict may well change the supply calculations, forcing the United States to accelerate replacement plans.

The anti-tank FGM-148 Javelin started entering U.S. service in the mid-1990s, and, today, with 45,000 missiles produced or on order, plenty are available. In 2019, the Pentagon awarded the program, a joint venture between Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, a contract for 2,100 advanced “F-Model” Javelins, that combine “multiple features such as blast fragmentation and high-explosive anti-tank into a single warhead,” allowing fighters to employ the Javelin against both armored and “soft” unarmored targets. With the first “F-Models” arriving in mid-2020, and a new, lighter-weight “G-Model” entering testing, Javelin production was winding down, replacing training rounds spent as U.S. soldiers worked with a missile set to be in U.S. service through 2050.

Today, the Javelin production line may merit re-invigoration. Production cuts have been substantial over the past decade: between FY 1999 and FY 2001, the U.S. procured some 9,848 Javelins, while, in the most recent three-year period (between FY 2020 and FY 2022), missile procurement shrank to a total of 2,037.

Reports suggesting that Ukraine forces expended 300 Javelins in the first week of the war.



Oops.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/craighooper/2022/03/08/ukraines-use-of-stinger-and-javelin-missiles-is-outstripping-us-production/?sh=2ad646b82409
 
Zelenskys war. what crap. That is the equivalent of saying the fight was his fault, " He kept hitting me in the fist with his face".
 
Legion said:
volodymyr-zelensky-ukrainian-president-dance-video-high-heels.jpg


BEHOLD YOUR HERO, CHICKEN-HAWKS​


Regime change, wrapped in all of its fantastical failure, is making a comeback in Washington, and no one seems to notice or even care.

"Threaten our homeland, our way of life, and most importantly our leader, and yes, we will nuke the shit of out you. I guarantee it.”

That’s what a senior retired Russian diplomat told me on the sidelines of a Track 2.0 dialogue in 2012 when I asked him what would happen during a NATO-Russian war or a threat to the Russian government itself.

He was pretty clear: Threats Russia’s sovereignty, ability to control its territory, run its economy—and most of all, ensure leadership survival—were all things it might go to nuclear war over.

Isn’t that what we are doing today regarding the Ukraine crisis?

To be clear, we are putting a historic amount of pressure on Russia, more than some countries endure in a real, kinetic war. In the months to come, that pressure will have a combined impact, and we have not stopped at all to consider the ramifications.

In fact, we have chosen by accident a new de facto Ukraine strategy. It’s so terrifying and stupid that it’s never been tried before on a nuclear-armed superpower capable of ending nearly all human life in 30 minutes.

The West’s undeclared goal is simple: Putin has to go. Or, Putin has to die, as some are now cheerleading.

Now, one would think the idea of trying to depose the leader of the largest nation on earth, with the third most powerful military and 140 million citizens, would be at least debated in full view.

At some point, if Putin sees the Ukraine crisis as not a giant mistake but instead a fight for his own survival, true hell will break loose.

Harry J. Kazianis is director of defense studies at the Center for the National Interest in Washington DC


https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/14/the-wests-real-ukraine-strategy-is-russian-regime-change/
Click to expand...

I don't think Zelensky gives a flying fuck who presides over Russia as long as they get out, and stay out, of Ukraine.
Say what you want about Zelensky, but you cannot deny he has balls and loves his country, and want's it's freedom from Russia.
 
Yeah, Zelensky made a lot of already insecure incels sad. They already didn't measure up, then comes Zelensky. How do you expect them to react, really?
 
I think he's short, right? He reminds me of what Ava Gardner said about Sinatra (though possibly apocryphal I never checked). "he may weigh 120 lbs but 90 lbs of it is cock".

A loootta incels fuming on the internet these days.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I'm a bit unclear as to what YOU are signalling........free land for Russian immigrants?...........one world united under Putin?........please be specific.........
Click to expand...

Again?

  1. I think the US should have stayed out of it and should still stay out of it.
  3. I also think the US should have left NATO long ago, but since we didn't, we should do so immediately.
Is that clear enough?
 
Legion said:
Again?

  1. I think the US should have stayed out of it and should still stay out of it.
  3. I also think the US should have left NATO long ago, but since we didn't, we should do so immediately.
Is that clear enough?
Click to expand...
no.....because you keep posting things critical of Zelensky and Ukraine and their struggle to survive......just post things about keeping the US out and leaving NATO.....that would make sense......
 
And as has been, Vladimir surely thanks "copy and paste" plus his umpteen pseudonyms for their continuous support
 
Since the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the phrase “national interest” has become something of a blasphemy.

Certain thinkers in the “realist” school of foreign policy analysis have drawn ire for articulating the interests which might motivate Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine or questioning whether the United States has a significant interest in intervening there.

Increasingly in our censorious modern world, any attempt to understand the behavior of an actor (in this case Russia) is treated as a de facto endorsement of that actor’s behavior.

This is not a new development.

During the never-ending 'Global War on Terror' those who tried to articulate the ideological framework within which jihadists operated were accused of believing the same things as the terrorists themselves.

But to recognize that Russia has long opposed the expansion of Western power into its near abroad is not the same as defending its security claims.

And recognizing the Russian demand in no way denies Ukraine’s own interest in preventing itself from being dominated by its larger neighbor.

To recognize the interests of one nation is not to deny the interests of another, nor does it make a moral claim as to which set of interests are “right” or “wrong.”

We would do well to remember John Quincy Adam’s axiom about America’s interests: "Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy."



https://americanmind.org/salvo/here-be-monsters/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top