War in Ukraine

#1,276
#1,276
How does everyone really see this one end?

I see Russia taking the Donbass and calling it a day similar to Crimea in 2014. They won't take all of Ukraine because it would be too difficult to hold with the discontent it would create. However, they will need to do something or else lose face as pointed out in this thread.
 
#1,277
#1,277
05_never_again said:
So Estonia "owns" it. If you can't transfer it as you wish, then do you really own it?

They might call it ownership under these rules you mentioned (which I am totally unfamiliar with) but in practice it would appear they don't entirely own it. This is like buying a gun from somebody, but you have to get the previous owner's permission to let a buddy of yours use it.
Click to expand...
Welcome to ITAR/EAR regulations. The equipment is theirs. What they choose to do with it could put them in conflict with the arms contracts, wind up in international courts, and most likely result in them not being able to procure any arms in the future from one of the world’s largest exporter of arms, Germany. Additionally willfully breaking ITAR/EAR agreements would likely put them crossways with procuring arms from other ITAR/EAR treaty signatories which would devastate their ability to procure arms in the future.

I’m willing to bet any number of VN bucks that this is exactly the case.
 
#1,278
#1,278
NorthDallas40 said:
Welcome to ITAR/EAR regulations. The equipment is theirs. What they choose to do with it could put them in conflict with the arms contracts, wind up in international courts, and most likely result in them not being able to procure any arms in the future from one of the world’s largest exporter of arms, Germany.

I’m willing to bet any number of VN bucks that this is exactly the case.
Click to expand...
Germany's or Estonia's?
 
#1,279
#1,279
headhunter15 said:
Click to expand...

"German officials have said however, that exporting arms to Ukraine is out of question due to the current tensions and because of Germany’s role in starting World War II and the Nazi atrocities committed in the region. "

I get not wanting to start another world war, but with the atrocities committed 80 years ago you would think would be a reason for helping the Ukranians out, not against.
 
  • Like
Reactions: headhunter15
#1,280
#1,280
volbound1700 said:
Funny, out of everyone in Europe, you would think the Germans would be itching to get payback from the 1940s. Or perhaps Russia gave them such a beating that they don't want to every try that again.
Click to expand...
Or, the Germans realize that they need a reliable and cheap energy supply to fuel their economy and they can set aside past differences from 80+ years ago and have mutually beneficial trade.
 
#1,282
#1,282
NorthDallas40 said:
Welcome to ITAR/EAR regulations. The equipment is theirs. What they choose to do with it could put them in conflict with the arms contracts, wind up in international courts, and most likely result in them not being able to procure any arms in the future from one of the world’s largest exporter of arms, Germany.

I’m willing to bet any number of VN bucks that this is exactly the case.
Click to expand...

I think they forfeited it due to Finland. Finland being a non-NATO and Neutral country likely eliminates their case. There is no expectation of ITAR/EAR when they sold it to Finland. They also didn't block Finland from giving the artillery to Estonia so it has now went through multiple hands. Also, it isn't like Germany would win the PR battle. USA and most of NATO would support Estonia if they shipped weapons to Ukraine. The court would basically vote Germany down.

If your Estonia, who gives a ****. Import weapons from USA, France, UK, etc. USA has a far better arsenal then Germany anyways.
 
#1,283
#1,283
volbound1700 said:
I think they forfeited it due to Finland. Finland being a non-NATO and Neutral country likely eliminates their case. There is no expectation of ITAR/EAR when they sold it to Finland. They also didn't block Finland from giving the artillery to Estonia so it has now went through multiple hands. Also, it isn't like Germany would win the PR battle. USA and most of NATO would support Estonia if they shipped weapons to Ukraine. The court would basically vote Germany down.

If your Estonia, who gives a ****. Import weapons from USA, France, UK, etc. USA has a far better arsenal then Germany anyways.
Click to expand...
You are patently wrong. Go read the edit I added that isn’t in your quote specifically about buying arms from other ITAR/EAR signatories which every Western country is.
 
#1,284
#1,284
volbound1700 said:
Yeah Russia better be careful with Germany. Germany nearly took them out in the 1940s while fighting the West at the same time. If Russia pisses off enough Germans, there is always that crazy, underground fringe element that could bring the Nazis or something like them back and want to wipe Russia out. This time, however, Russia wouldn't have the Western Allies on their side.

Russia cannot be stupid enough to fight France, UK, USA, Germany, Italy, Poland, and the rest of NATO all at the same time by themselves. I know that many of these European nations are not the military forces they were in the early 20th century and before but they are still not pushovers either.
Click to expand...
You are making my point for me. With all of these other nations in Europe already there, why is there a need for the US to even be involved in any of this?

You can't say that Russia would be crazy to fight all of these countries on one hand, but then turn around and say that these other countries are incapable of defending themselves because they didn't seem to be able to do it 80 years ago without our help.
 
#1,285
#1,285
volbound1700 said:
Or perhaps the West. I think they hate USA, France, and UK about as much as Russia. In fact, Russia is far more likely to allow Germany to retake its lost lands from Poland, Czech Republic, etc. than the West is willing to.
Click to expand...
You are reaching. Is there really any serious talk about doing any of this?
 
#1,286
#1,286
NorthDallas40 said:
Estonia’s
Click to expand...
But Estonia ultimately not moving these weapons into Ukraine isn't a judgment call on their part, correct? It isn't like they are making a decision not to; they are being legally forbidden from doing so by Germany. Even though these weapons "belong to" Estonia.

You obviously are familiar with the regulations here, but it sounds like if you purchase arms subject to these rules (which I'm assuming is any and all arms deals) you always kind of quote/unquote own them and not truly own them.
 
#1,287
#1,287
Rasputin_Vol said:
You are making my point for me. With all of these other nations in Europe already there, why is there a need for the US to even be involved in any of this?

You can't say that Russia would be crazy to fight all of these countries on one hand, but then turn around and say that these other countries are incapable of defending themselves because they didn't seem to be able to do it 80 years ago without our help.
Click to expand...

All of those countries included the USA.
 
#1,289
#1,289
Rasputin_Vol said:
You are making my point for me. With all of these other nations in Europe already there, why is there a need for the US to even be involved in any of this?

You can't say that Russia would be crazy to fight all of these countries on one hand, but then turn around and say that these other countries are incapable of defending themselves because they didn't seem to be able to do it 80 years ago without our help.
Click to expand...

Because we've been fighting their wars for them for over 100 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#1,290
#1,290
volbound1700 said:
How does everyone really see this one end?

I see Russia taking the Donbass and calling it a day similar to Crimea in 2014. They won't take all of Ukraine because it would be too difficult to hold with the discontent it would create. However, they will need to do something or else lose face as pointed out in this thread.
Click to expand...
No one cares about "losing face" or makes decisions based on how perception would be other than these United States clowns running the show. They would rather maintain a narrative and keep up a façade rather than actually do something that is practical.
 
#1,292
#1,292
VolStrom said:
Because we've been fighting their wars for them for over 100 years.
Click to expand...

Why is that? The United States doesn't enter wars unless it has a benefit to us.

Face it, sometimes you have to fight. If you don't, someone else feels the vacuum. In many issues with the past wars, it would have worked better had the USA joined earlier. Let's say USA joined WW2 in 1939 when it broke out, I doubt France falls and Hitler is probably overthrown with Germany surrendering in 1941. The whole reason the war escalated was Hitler's victory over France pushed Germany 100% behind him and brought other European nations into the Axis (Italy, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, etc.).

USA joins WW2 in 1939, none of that happens. This is why we intervene now. You cannot just sit in a cave and hope it goes away. History doesn't work like that and the countries that try to follow that mentality usually die.
 
#1,293
#1,293
Rasputin_Vol said:
No one cares about "losing face" or makes decisions based on how perception would be other than these United States clowns running the show. They would rather maintain a narrative and keep up a façade rather than actually do something that is practical.
Click to expand...

Mark my words, Russia takes Donbass like Crimea in 2014. Are you a Russian apologists?
 
#1,294
#1,294
volbound1700 said:
Yeah, this doesn't make any sense to me. Customs doesn't work that way. You cannot block someone from shipping a good unless you retain some form of ownership. Also NATO rights would be lost once it was given to Finland because Finland is a non-NATO member. Germany doesn't have a case here IMO. By giving it to a non-NATO member, Germany forfeited any of the stuff referenced here by the poster.
Click to expand...
Estonia should simply send the weapons to Ukraine and tell Germany they're welcome to go try to recover them at their leisure.
 
#1,295
#1,295
05_never_again said:
But Estonia ultimately not moving these weapons into Ukraine isn't a judgment call on their part, correct? It isn't like they are making a decision not to; they are being legally forbidden from doing so by Germany. Even though these weapons "belong to" Estonia.

You obviously are familiar with the regulations here, but it sounds like if you purchase arms subject to these rules (which I'm assuming is any and all arms deals) you always kind of quote/unquote own them and not truly own them.
Click to expand...
The ITAR/EAR rules follow the equipment throughout their entire life and are never vacated as long as the equipment exists. This is the reality any country which doesn’t manufacture their own arms lives with. To the best of my knowledge every western country is a signatory. And while each county tailors their own requirements there are common basic tenants. One of which is ANY export for the life of the equipment and any number of re-exports.

Don’t infer my stating the ITAR/EAR rules as saying I don’t want Estonia to arm Ukraine. I’d like to see all the western countries arm Ukraine to the teeth and blow the damn Russians completely out of western Russia to a point they could see Alaska wherever they land.
 
#1,296
#1,296
volbound1700 said:
Ugh, you heard of Neo-Nazis? They are bigger than you think in Germany and the West.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I've heard of neo-Nazis. Now answer my question. Is there really any serious talk about doing any of this? The only Neo-Nazis I am aware of are these Svoboda and Right Sektor MFers in Ukraine. But in Germany, just how much clout do these neo-Nazis have anymore?
 
#1,297
#1,297
Rasputin_Vol said:
Yeah, I've heard of neo-Nazis. Now answer my question. Is there really any serious talk about doing any of this? The only Neo-Nazis I am aware of are these Svoboda and Right Sektor MFers in Ukraine. But in Germany, just how much clout do these neo-Nazis have anymore?
Click to expand...

Quite a bit. Watch this documentary:

Remember, the original Nazis started as a fringe group as well.
 
#1,298
#1,298
volbound1700 said:
Why is that? The United States doesn't enter wars unless it has a benefit to us.

Face it, sometimes you have to fight. If you don't, someone else feels the vacuum. In many issues with the past wars, it would have worked better had the USA joined earlier. Let's say USA joined WW2 in 1939 when it broke out, I doubt France falls and Hitler is probably overthrown with Germany surrendering in 1941. The whole reason the war escalated was Hitler's victory over France pushed Germany 100% behind him and brought other European nations into the Axis (Italy, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, etc.).

USA joins WW2 in 1939, none of that happens. This is why we intervene now. You cannot just sit in a cave and hope it goes away. History doesn't work like that and the countries that try to follow that mentality usually die.
Click to expand...
I can't believe what I'm reading. The US should have joined the war in 1939? On what grounds?

And of what benefit would it have been for us to enter WWII at any point?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolStrom
#1,299
#1,299
Vol423 said:
Estonia should simply send the weapons to Ukraine and tell Germany they're welcome to go try to recover them at their leisure.
Click to expand...

Another way they could totally get around it and kept it 100% legal (frankly international treaties are pretty worthless in most instances) is to deploy Estonian troops (i.e. advisors) with the Artillery and claim it is still being used by the Estonian Military.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top