"No dumb bastard ever won a war by going out, and dying for his country. He won it by making some other dumb bastard die for his."
I don't mean to be pedantic, but you can trace communism as far back as Plato and Seneca. Marxism was a German iteration of it.
The US has its problems. We've never canceled a election, not in war or peace. We've never banned a party. The Democrats caused the US Civil War and we let them back in because it was the right thing to do. And we still have our guns. We are free Euro. Vance was right to chew you out for 17 minutes straight.
I absolutely agree that the United States ought to hold her allies to a higher standard when it comes to free speech. With that said, there are times and places to make statements like his. I do not see how what he said is helpful to ending the war in Ukraine or maintaining a strong alliance in Europe.
Those issues are serious, but it seems really odd to point them out as the most important issues the average American cares about. There's also the fact many problems in the US are regional and local. The average person living in Texas probably doesn't give a shit about the stuff at the Capital. I'd wager Americans, on average, are satisfied with their state/local government, but not necessarily the federal government depending on what side of the ideological fence you're on (which is essentially your post anyways). Also, states have some political autonomy to resist federal policy because of the court system and separation of powers.
Yeah, Vance is smart (he went to Yale after all) he should know better, but populist brain can rot your better judgement at times.
A Europe that is turning Soviet against its own people and does not hit its defense targets is a security concern. The US cannot solo a Russian invasion. And the US has donated the bulk of Ukraines equipment. It seems Europe cares more about attacking its own people for prayer than having sufficient standing armies for the NATO alliance. Does that make sense?
Vance could have just said that instead of rambling for 15 minutes.
The difference between Blackhawks and the Russian transport helicopters is the UH-60 is easier to operate and maintain. There's also the issue of trying to maintain a Russian designed helicopter where parts are in short order. Flying machines suck down perishable parts and the UH-60 has more vendors to keep flying. SBU operates a fleet they purchased from the private sector (which the Biden State Department got butthurt and went after some Polish company that aided them in the effort) and the AFU has desired more since.
I agree that Trump is out of his depth with realpolitik, but I'm not sure if HW Bush or Nixon were great examples either. HW kind of blundered the collapse of the Soviet Union, and was more interested in preserving the status quo than taking advantage of the unipolar moment. Nixon had the massive blunder of China, which I'd say is the biggest and most consequential example of failed realpolitik in the Cold War.
I'd recommend checking out Pax Americana's videos on the state of the British Military.
Nigga they got Cold War/GWOT leftovers and some ATGM's.
Javelins and other missile systems expire. Triple 7s were a dead end and in the way out. And no, scrapping doesn't net money when DLA breaks up used equipment. It's destroyed at a loss due to OSHA and HAZMAT handling procedures.
You are fucking retarded. M777 is a 40km system and air droppable via blackhawk. That is perfectly suited to US Army doctrine. Javelin missiles can be refurbished and their CLU's are reusable. That is a retarded statement and you should feel bad.
We have a new innovative set up where the gun is mounted on a chassis that can move unassisted. A gun that is self propelled if you will that doesn't require the logistical footprint of helicopters. Also the fucking CLUs aren't lostech and missles can only be refirbed so many times before needing to replaced entirely, which is good in order to prevent production from closing, as what happened with the FIM-92. You've earned today's dumb nigger award with Obama cluster.
That is a retarded argument. Towd guns can go and be dropped where SPG's cannot.
The CLU is 250,000 a pop. For a fucking optic. Fuck off retard. As for the missiles, that's 175,000 a pop every time you shoot one. That's not counting the 30,000 for the canister it's in. Nigga seek help, this shit expensive!
When he says triple 7s are a dead end he means that in the sense that their replacement wont be predicated on the pre-existing chasis. Modern SPGs are going to be like the Arcus system: Truck mounted and able to set up, fire and leave the area before their shells start hitting the target. They're too big to be heli-dropped in but they also wont need to be as wheeled vehicles are more capable of moving themselves into position without needing to be carried there which as MG states reduces the logistical requirements of the weapon system. 10x10 trucks are also able to simply carry more than a tracked armored chasis as in addition to being bigger the weight is distributed over a wider area which means you're less likely to get stuck in things like mud.
A M777 is a towed howitzer. It doesn't have a chassis. It's not a SPG. It's a tube:
My bad was thinking of the Paladin. Point still stands though. The war in Ukraine shows why you want your weapon systems to be mobile.
