I don't understand how Ukraine hasn't won the war already since they own himars.

I don't understand how Ukraine hasn't won the war already since they own himars. They can reach out and kill whatever they want

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >limited supply of missiles
    >limited range
    >no ATACMS
    >noooo don't strike muh precious little bean russia
    any more moronic questions? homie you can't even deliver 155mm shells, fricking best korea of all places shits all over western industrial base

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I thought the yanks were supplying ATACMS to Ukraine. It it just a matter of very limited supply because they're so expensive?
      Also, doesn't HIMARS range far exceed Russian 152mm even without ATACMS?? Someone give me the run down.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I thought the yanks were supplying ATACMS to Ukraine.
        no, they supplied like 20 missiles and i think 15 were used already and that's it. atacms supply was pretty much picrelated

        >Also, doesn't HIMARS range far exceed Russian 152mm even without ATACMS??
        it is but it's not a tube artillery and can't compensate for all the 155mm shortages

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >I thought the yanks were supplying ATACMS to Ukraine.
          20 or 21 missiles
          > It it just a matter of very limited supply because they're so expensive?
          No, because someone is just moronic. The US will spend much more utilizing those expiring missiles

          The US is spending BILLIONS on Ukraine, why not set aside 1 billion for 400+ ATACMS?
          >No, because someone is just moronic.
          who dat

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >The US is spending BILLIONS on Ukraine
            it is no longer a case, so isolationist are happy now i guess. since december even ammo supply stopped.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah, okay, the spending has dropped off. I'll adjust my question: why DIDN'T they spend more on ATACMS?
              HIMARS seemed like the only unironic wunderwaffen/game changer (other than western intelligence) in this war.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >why DIDN'T they spend more on ATACMS?
                idk some weird escalation management bullshit, i really have no idea why US is afraid of russia losing a war so bad. biden had congress back in 2022 and he did nothing with it, lend-lease wasn't even used and expired. ukies were supplied with too litlle and too late and now republicans in congress are pretty adamant on not giving ukraine anymore aid because every ukie fail at this point is a biden's fail.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The same reason why Ukraine didn't get jets a year ago - moronic escalation management.
            There are hundreds of ATACMS that soon will expire and the US will need to spend money to utilize them. There are hundreds of Bradley IFVs, waiting on the scrapyard. None of them weren't sent to Ukraine because of much escalation management
            >who dat
            Guess it would be right to say Sullivan

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I thought the yanks were supplying ATACMS to Ukraine.
        20 or 21 missiles
        > It it just a matter of very limited supply because they're so expensive?
        No, because someone is just moronic. The US will spend much more utilizing those expiring missiles

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      More like shits all over russia, tard

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Why did you post a pedophile?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >best korea of all places shits all over western industrial base

      >MUH INDUSTRIAL BASE
      It literally shorts out the leftist or turd world brain to even contemplate that the US is fully capable of buying all the steel (as an example) it needs from its allies. Their 19th Century brains can't accept that offshoring a messy, polluting industry doesn't mean it's now a "lost art" in your own nation and we could quickly ramp up if it ever became a national emergency. Similarly, they can't wrap their head around how the US hasn't been stockpiling 155mm artillery shells for decades so we can re-fight WWI in the fields of Ukraine.

      I have a sibling who wasted an Ivy League scholarship on a humanities degree who won't stfu about this moron "insight". He wonders why I won't listen to his genius analysis on modern geopolitics.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >>I have a sibling who wasted an Ivy League scholarship on a humanities degree
        >I am educated in one matter, ergo I am an expert in all matters
        Many such cases

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Not to rant, but it gets worse...he passed on getting a finance or MBA so he could get a mongrelized liberal arts degree. He'd easily be a multimillionaire by now, but he took the pinko pill and our mom died in a state nursing home.

          Humanities...not even once.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Sorry to hear about your mom, anon. Could be worse, my cousin ended up pimping his six year old son out for crack money out in Montana. The family sent in letters for execution.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            No he couldn't. Business degrees are like law degrees, highly lucrative in very select fields but otherwise suffer from a supply glut. He'd mostly likely have wound up entry level middle-management at best.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Cool... so how long will it approximately take the USA till they got enough industrial capabilities back to produce enough artillery gear for Ukraine?

        It's a proxy war.
        The whole USA can not produce enough gear for a proxy.
        Imagine if the USA would itself be at war!

        In the Korean war, the USA shot more than 2 million artillery shells per month!
        Nowadays they are unable to provide a few hundred thousand per year.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          We wouldn't even take the artillery route, you fricking turd world amateur. Being able to SEAD means you blind your enemies, than take away their toys for good.

          Russia can't SEAD and suck ass at logistics (picrel), so they're stuck at a pathetic 20% share of Ukrainian territory like the turd world army they are. The western countries can't push the Ukrainians harder then they already have or crybaby Putin is going to start wailing about his nukie-nukes and freaking out the global markets. And no, moron, Russia hasn't even encountered what NATO is capable of...just the handouts.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Ukraine needs AMMO. When the hell are we going to send the tons of ammo? I'm sick of this impasse from a bunch of suited guys, many of whom never even served in the military.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >the ukrainians hold and push back ivan to essentially pre-war borders after almost losing Kiev
          >all before the most substantial of lend-lease arrives
          >lend-lease vehicles arrive
          >absolutely demolish russian logistics, men, and equipment
          >vatniks and jeets now have to go on internet spergouts to try and sway american support
          >Its Americas proxy war!
          >despite numerous other nations supplying ukraine too
          how has the "Worlds Second Army" come to this? maybe your nation should stop bringing life to 80 year old Nazi propaganda in every decision you make

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      They have ATACMS, they already used them.
      Didn't accomplish much.
      Same story as with the JDAMs. They were simply bad systems and immediately dropped.

      Lauching 6 missiles at once is better than launching only one.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Lauching 6 missiles at once is better than launching only one.
        Is that what you tell monke when all six miss the target?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Air defense has an harder time to intercept six missiles that come in at once, than one single missile.
          The ATACMS simply failed.
          If it would have been successful, we would see it being used more.
          It was already there, it got already tried.

          If you believe some q tard shit,where the USA has all those mighty weapons but decides to backstab Ukraine and rather watches their ally die, you are an idiot.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Air defense has an harder time to intercept six missiles that come in at once, than one single missile.
            Oh, sorry...I thought we were talking about striking actual strategic targets and not sperging out like a fricking spazz and trying to harm innocent civilians like those fricking towelhead snackbars Russia is always fellating. Yeah, Russia's really good at violating the Geneva Convention. No doubt about that.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >USA has all those mighty weapons but decides to backstab Ukraine and rather watches their ally die, you are an idiot

            If not did USA cut off all help since december to bolster Ukraine or what? And before that the mighty USA had a total of 20 ATACAMS and no aviation to spare at all, all lost to a chink baloon. Poor souls are in no position to help so called ally it seems.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              China got mogged by India and South Sudan.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Didn't accomplish much.
        they obliterated russian airfield and destroyed iirc nine helicopters in one strike, what are you talking about

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          They destroyed a few choppers ONCE. So they only had one noteworthy success and that one was months ago.
          And they weren't even the Ka-52 who were killing Bradleys and Leopards at that time daily.

          If the ATACMS would have been successful, the counteroffensive would have been a success too.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >They destroyed a few choppers ONCE.
            can't tell if bait or actually moronic

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            They only got a limited quantity of ATACMS and they did destroy quite a few KA52’s. I haven’t seen many in action since.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >low quality slide thread

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You need an economy and human beings to fight and win wars. Aid doesn't mean shit if there's no one to man it.
    This is why Russia now controls 15% of formerly Ukrainian landmass and has been doing so for a year with no signs of change.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >end the war
    >no more russians to kill
    It must go on

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This. HIMARS was too powerful and would end the war too quickly, resulting in less Russians killed.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >less Russians killed

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    is there any reason not to give ukraine all of our old ATACMS and unguided M26 rockets now that they're thoroughly obsolete?

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >I don't understand how Ukraine hasn't won the war already

    not enough billions and white blood to be spilt.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Anon, US sent literally 0,4% or something of their stockpiles of outdated 30yo shit.
    I know, vatBlack folk arent the brightest people but they still has manpower and shit to kill people from, as well as 1km frontline.
    Like really, motherfrickers send 50 cars, 10 tanks and week worthy set of ammo and expect ukies to win the war with them.
    Thats unrealistic shit.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah. We need to seriously ramp shit up. None of this "REEEE why Ukraine no win with the outdated stuff we gave it?!"

      Ukraine needs LOTS more stuff, much better stuff, and way more often.

      To quote Mike, "No more half-measures."

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Ukraine needs their nuclear armament returned to them since Russia violated the terms to their disarmament.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The USA signed that agreement and gave them security guarantees back in the day.

          Its the job of the USA to go in and enforce that. It is what they signed.
          Why don't they do that?

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    HIMARS have had a dramatic impact in that Russia's gains cannot truly be fait accompli as the whole area is under threat from accurate artillery fire.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >"America kun, what is the secret to your wunderwaffes?!"
    >"they hit what they aim at"
    >tfw

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >see Azov on social media
    >they're crowdfunding m113
    the absolute state of US military aid

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Maybe they are not as good as advertised?

    They are only used as counter-artillery now or counter-counter-artillery. You see them strike a single vehicle or artillery peace, but they don't hit anything in the rear anymore.

    By paper, Ukraine should have enough HIMARS to launch hundreds of missiles per day... in practice we get like one successful strike on some minor target once per week.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Ukraine has at least 39 HIMARS units.
    Six missiles per unit,so they can fire 234 missiles in one go.
    Reloading takes some time, but even if you hide somewhere far away and have to drive far, it's done in a few hours.
    Meaning you could do that a few times per day, launching a thousand per day should be possible by paper.

    Now what do we see in reality?

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    That's not how it works, moron. Extremely low effort post.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They're limited by ammo

    America should stop pussyfooting and drop 1000+ GMLRS and 500 ATACMS to Ukraine

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I don't understand how Russia hasn't won the war already since they have over 100 BM-30 which have bigger missiles and more wheels. Frankly, how can 12 puny little HIMARS compete with Big Russian Rocket?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *