i think theres alot of merit to that.
ww2 started in 39, pearl harbor in 41, takes a while to get the world (or the US) stage in motion. the invasion of Ukraine seemingly hasnt made a big enough impact, yet.

i remember when trump got elected they said the doomsday clock was the closest its ever been to midnight or zero or wtv. i dont necessarily buy that, but id be curious to know where the hands on the clock are now.

This post was edited by C4NTWO on Aug 28 2024 07:04pm

Doomsday clock is political B.S. for crap like climate change.

100% agreed. Which is exactly where I was going: Putin wants far more than just the Donbass, this war has never been about "protecting the innocent residents of Russian-speaking Ukraine from the evil Azovites and their political arm in Kyiv". Likewise, I have stressed time and time again that the calls for a "negotiated peace" are pointless while Russia believes they can get everything if they keep pushing.

Side note: it is of course completely ridiculous from Russia to demand control over the full Cherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts which they never had under their full control at any point during this war. This is not a serious or logically consistent proposal (these oblasts aren't even overwhelmingly Russian-speaking) and exposes the justifications Russia has given for this war as a mere pretext for a landgrab and/or the attempt to subjugate a satellite which had the audacity to break free.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 28 2024 07:43pm

How so, you've already done that and the United States, as well as Europe has proven themselves to have no industrial capacity to slow down Russia, a country with an alleged GDP of less than Texas.
Should tell you how fake and gay our economy is.

The West has slow-walked and half-assed the supplies to Ukraine. The key issue is a lack of political will, rather than a lack of industrial prowess. At the end of the day, no Western country cares enough about Ukraine to go on wartime footing, or to gut their own militaries by sending a big share of their own materiel and stockpiles. They're mostly getting the leftovers and what our diminished peacetime arms industry can muster.

United States only makes 500 patriot missiles a year, Russia fires over 4000 missiles at Ukraine a year.
This is the same case with all of their weapons systems up and down the line.

Do you seriously think the United States, with all its people, factories and natural resources, wouldn't be able to produce far more than 500 patriots per year if it really wanted?

Yes, its that pathetic, or else they would of increased production already.
Hows increasing artillery production going??
The only thing that happened was it increased astronomically the cost of these weapon systems, why would Government subcontractors not want this.
Stinger missiles go from $20k to $400K
Artillery shells are now pushing 4K a piece.

This post was edited by PapaPsych on Aug 28 2024 09:02pm

Patriot PAC3 cost about $4 million each that's problematic when the Ukrainians (who got them for free) fire them in volleys

They were always fired in Volleys, that's how they get the chance of hitting higher.
In desert storm it was standard procedure to send 4 of them for every incoming missile.
This is still standard procedure with the new improved PAC3, because money is no object.
But the amount of missiles they can build a year is limited.