General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About
David Houseman
BFBS Forces News
comments
Comments by "David Houseman" (@davidhouseman4328) on "The heavy weapons the UK could send Ukraine" video.
How do you figure? The threat of invasion ended with the Battle of Britain, fought before the US entered the war.
5
It nowhere near all of Russias resources in Ukraine. Troop numbers cited are something like 200k out of nearly a million.
2
@MusicalMemeology We already have organisations like NATO and G7, the point of the UN is to be universal you just have to be aware of it's limitations. And the problems with talking about just democracies is that there is no clear line just a graduation from high quality to low, Russia uses the trapping of democracy.
2
Ukraine has already taken total Russian victory off the table with Russia retreating from around Kyiv and northern Ukraine.
2
Ukraine aren't going to claim the air like NATO could, so they would be better with drones from 50 feet.
1
@paulrevere2379 yes they do.
1
Your not even following the Russian narrative as they've complained about the supply of weapons.
1
Russia has already given up on the whole of Ukraine and are only looking at the East and South.
1
Yep, lots, though it varies, including some giving more substantial kit like Slovakia transferring it's S300 missile system.
1
Fought Germany when invaded it's neighbour? Not seeing the similarity?
1
@kylehines3185 why would you need to mention it, it was Nazi Germany Britain was fighting?
1
The invasion has shown Russian incompetence and more generally the weakness of armour. Not sure why that would cause us to reevaluate?
1
@maquettemusic1623 It is doctrinal failing but there failing showing the importance of proper logistical and infantry support over numbers, which is much more of the British set up. And thats without bringing in airpower which NATO has always had at the fore. Where Ukraine are struggling is with artillery and and air strikes, not things armour is well suited against. And the whole war is one we aren't fighting directly, it is an example of where training and soft power are what are being used not a massed ground force.
1
@Jim Carner The review already included increasing the range of MLRS and acquiring new artillery to replace the AS90.
1
@Jim Carner how can me explaining why we aren't revaluating lead to you saying we are?
1
@Jim Carner That was part of the defence review, not reevaluation.
1
@Jim Carner Because you seemlingly don't understand English. Specifically the "re" part. Reevaluating means you took an decision and now your thinking that it might be wrong. The decision in the defence review was to update one system and replace another, that currently looks like exactly to right decision. AS90 is old kit, replacing old kit is what happens all the time. And the point in this case is that is what they were already planning on doing in the defence review.
1
@Jim Carner It's only patronising if you understood in the first place.
1
The give away was you included old, ie. stuff that doesn't need testing. And it's basically just old or at least well eatabliahed thats being sent.
1
@niajall6327 it may change but so far it seems like what being sent is older kit. Added to that there aren't embedded forces that would normally report back on effectiveness.
1
Russia can commit suicide and start nuclear war. Other than that spreading the war would only harm Russia.
1
You probably want to start your comment with something true to be taken seriously. Did you mean NATO rather than the UN?
1
It's basically kit for defending against Russia, defending against Russia. Except are people aren't dieing in the fight.
1
The UN hasn't changed, its always been powerless against the permanent members.
1
The middle east has seen direct force used which is more than your seeing here?
1
Our reaction would probably have been to sanction Russia and then shrug as they were already using Russia kit.
1