What weapon(s) and what quantities would need to be sent to Ukraine to win the war by the end of the year?

What weapon(s) and what quantities would need to be sent to Ukraine to win the war by the end of the year?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    LGM-118

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They already lost

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Russia? They still hold a small amount of territory yet to be reclaimed.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      …the losing contest.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    enough powerful long range weapons to destroy Russian military industry and logistics would do the trick, and of course allowing ukraine to strike every target in russia they like.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >allowing ukraine
      hah you see? not even the NATO believes Ukraine is a real country but instead place which is to be controlled and allowed to do things without autonomy.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nta but it's common knowledge that the west is providing Ukraine with weapons with certain constraints on how they use them. Not sure why you consider this some sort of gotcha. Now stay on topic and answer the question.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >rabid vatnik wienerholster foaming at the mouth about semantics
        They really are this frickdumb, aren't they?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        jeez you are awful as a vatnik shill, don’t give up your dayjob

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nice reading comprehension anon

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not an option. Containment will contain like the last time. Russian implosion like USSR implosion will take time. That is not exciting as idiots want dramatic stuff.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Could you repeat that in English, pidoras?

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I still think we should give them back their nooks
    They gave them up on the promise that Russia wouldn't invade them
    Russia invaded them
    So the memo is nullified. They should get nukes.
    >B-but muh NNPT
    blow it out your ass

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    More of what they have already, or are getting soon. It's a numbers game now.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    100,000 men

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They need ten times as much of everything they've already been given, and they need it last year. Failing that, they need as much as Europe and the U.S. have the political will to give.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We should give them France's Navy. God knows they aren't using it.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    First off, not a concern troll or a vatBlack person. With that out of the way, I think the momentum is gone and the war is lost. Ukraine was entirely willing to fight, yet the West dillydallied with the weapons and now it's unironically ogre. Russia will claim a pyrrhic victory and walk away with clay. 50 years from now nobody will remember this war and people are back to doing business with Russia. Worst of all, this sends a message to every tinpot dictator out there that the West is weak and will not intervene on their enemies' behalf.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >First off, not a concern troll or a vatBlack person.
      Yes, you're a Dalit assclown, we get that

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      More ammunition of pretty much all types, IFVs, tanks, HIMARS, drones, cruise missiles, and air defense systems. If the F-16s we keep hearing about finally show up with a frickload of HARMs and other goodies that'll be great. I'd LOVE to see the Ukrainians get some EA-18Gs or other aircraft in that same role. What the Ukrainians will eventually need given enough time is MCLCs and other mine clearing options. Another key part is to axe rules of use stating the Ukrainians can't use X weapon on targets inside the Russian borders. Instead require some form of verification that a target is indeed government or military in nature to be done which should be easy enough.

      The most effective way to do this so far as I see it is status quo. Strong stubborn defensive operations that eviscerate meat waves with minimal casualties. Let the Russians kill themselves and only go on the offensive when there's a good opening.

      The west's problem is we need to stop treating this as a money issue and not even assign a dollar value to shipments. It's not like we're paying money and a factory is cranking out brand new whatever. All the stuff Ukraine needs is sitting in stockyards and armories around the US waiting for a war or decommissioning/scrapping, bought and paid for in the 70s, 80s, 90s, and 00s.

      I think the problem you have is a problem a lot of people have. You forget that the defenders have the luxury of being able to fight a defensively focused war. The side that needs momentum is the attacker/invader. Russia has none and is desperately trying to regain it with meat waves yet so far has failed to regain it. The second the attacker's momentum is gone the course of the war is basically dictated by the defender. By forcing heavy attrition a defender can win the war even after "losing" every battle. Horrific Pyrrhic victories are basically Russia's bread and butter, it's incredibly unsustainable.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      And ukraine would let russia walk away from this... why, exactly? Russia cannot just sit on its hands forever. Their industry will keep getting hit. The sanctions will continue sapping at the economy. Cross-border raids will continue and get worse. Banditry will break out internally as the economy smothers and the state has to keep rerouting men and equipment to the front lines and occupied territory. And if they try to decrease their investment in the war, pulling back troops and equipment, Ukraine has already demonstrated that it can and will launch large offensives to exploit those weaknesses.

      Essentially, Russia is completely incapable of maintaining this status quo, unlike Ukraine. The only way russia can walk away from this and start undoing the damages they've suffered is to give up all occupied territory, including Crimea. The only reason it hasn't happened yet is because they've dug themselves into a hole of ultranationalist rhetoric, and will likely face a civil war if they pull out now.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I agree, so long as Ukraine continues to bee supported economically the war cannot be truly lost. The issue comes with the fact that Russia will continue prosecuting the war in the belief that Ukraine will surrender, and Ukraine will continue prosecuting the war to regain lost lands. After a time however the meaning for the war becomes muddled. Neither side is willing to budge, but one will have to eventually. I don't think this will come to demographics, as a truly intense war that kills several million and forces the leader's hand simply won't come. Economically probably won't do so either, as Russia can continue this war without stopping as the system is kleptocratic in nature and the people simply show no signs of revolt. Thus, the most likely end to the war is a *political* one, in which one or the other leader is compelled to the negotiating table by others. For Ukraine, that other would obviously be the US, and for Russia that would likely be China.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Ukraine produces bomb drones domestically now very, very cheaply, Russian AA is well proved to suck, and Russia isn't in a position to pull working AA out of their ass. If Congress and the EU freeze all aid tomorrow, Ukraine could still support a very damaging harassment campaign indefinitely.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Realistically, I think a naval strike group and a few F-22s and 35s would solve the war within the season. However, that's the fantasy I edge to from dawn till dusk, and not reality. Realistically, as many F-16s and 18s as NATO can bare to just light on fire. SEAD and air superiority would allow a true fricking armored assault to take place, resulting in TZD we have yet to see in this lifetime. I'm talking some real Battle of the Somme type shit.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    if you gave them a couple of F-22s they would be bombing Putin's mansion the next day.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >weapons
    Weapons aren't why Ukraine is losing. NATO should raise a million man army to supplement the manpower shortage in Ukraine, as well as stripping Ukraine "leadership" of any decision making authority.
    THEN we can say Ukraine has a chance.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      you think Russia wouldn't be in hot shit if Ukraine were dropping 1000lbs bombs onto the Kremlin using stealth bombers that Russia has no counter to?

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    a few dozen EA-18G to mop up what's left of russian AD
    then it's time to dust off the good ol' tornado IDS and PGM spam ruski positions into oblivion
    is it really THAT hard, HATO?

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Short of nooks, I don't think there are really any weapons realistically capable of winning the war for Ukraine in under a year. With that being said, there is no time limit for them. They can continue killing Russians apace and Russians can't do anything to stop it since they're no longer strong enough to overwhelm Ukraine outside of small towns getting traded. But even then it happens both ways. Russians gain a bit of clay here and lose a bit there. Nobody but Russia has any reason to want it to end.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Semi-autonomous drone swarms.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    30 F-35s with ample guided bombs and HARM would probably rape the shit out of the russians enough for the ground forces to win wherever it's most crucial.

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Send 200 F35s and the war will be over in a month.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They would just use them to drop grenades on mobiks tho

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    precisely 177 Boris Johnsons, no more, no less

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      HATO can only send 176 Boris Johnsons. Why does the US abandon its allies? Does it only want to use hohols as meat for the meatgrinder?

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    nukes
    1

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    10 B-1 Lancers and 200 JASSMs

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Okay. Serious answer.

    War is a stalemate right now. No two ways about it. Neither side can make a meaningful advance. To break the stalemate Ukraine needs the funding and equipment for a mass mobilization. This means they will need funding and equipment to train ~500 000 men up to NATO standards somewhere. Then, they will need a couple hundred howitzers, another couple hundred wheeled or tracked howizters, at least a thousand IFV's to form new units and make up losses in others, I dont even want to speculate on how many tanks. Then they need munitions for long range fires, and an almost unlimited amount, for 155mm they need n+1 ammunition (n = infinity). For airpower a hundred or so multi-role aircraft and the entire assortment of missiles for them - long range, short range, anti-radiation, ASM so on and so forth.

    In other words America could drop $120 billion on them and it would barely be noticed. It would require the US and EU to consistently drop billions into them for at least a year or two for them to get the AFU up to the point where they could push the Russians back to the start-lines of the conflict.

    I dont think its a good deal for the US, it may be for the EU. As for the Russians, stalemate is good for us. If they want to keep running Verdun simulators up and down the line, thats perfect for us as we effectively disarm and depopulate their country.

    Look, I'm pro-TZD but every calculation is viewed through the lens of what's best for the US. I dont think the added cost of helping Ukraine win is worth the investment. Maintaining the status-quo is very much worth it because its not *that* expensive. 30-60 billion a year to ruin Russia is a great deal. Although I would prefer to bring Russia into our camp so we can isolate China but whatever.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This war is going to end when Russia runs out of gas, shells, or both, or when Monke gets couped by oligarchs/the Russian people/the CIA. With the kill:loss ratios that Ukraine has been producing, this is honestly the cheapest and least bloody option for Ukraine. NATO knows this and Zelensky knows this. As Russia continues to bleed, life will become closer and closer to normal behind the front, Ukraine will become more efficient at killing Russians, and more and more Russian economic infrastructure will be destroyed. The collapse will happen very slowly, then all at once.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If you want to just grind Russia down or force a breakthrough, sure. But the supply lines can be choked for much cheaper than that. A rush program for ground-launched Tomahawks + an adapter to drop Rapid Dragon from Soviet cargo planes and you're off to the races.

      When every train depot from Moscow west is getting smoked every week, there won't be a line to break through anymore.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Few bombing runs by NATO and a threat getting more involved would force Russia to withdraw (or NOOOK, which would end with Russia removed from the map and history, which is fine by me). Probably the cheapest solution equipment-wise.

    Otherwise it is difficult. Ukraine needs an aerial superiority, which they wont be getting by the end of the year due how long training of actual Ukrainian pilots would take, even if the west would be willing to release shitton of planes to Ukrainian use. Obvious workaround would be using western "mercenary" pilots with the western planes, though that has its own issues.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Few bombing runs by NATO and a threat getting more involved would force Russia to withdraw (or NOOOK, which would end with Russia removed from the map and history, which is fine by me).

      A nuclear war between Russia and USA/UK/France would be beneficial to Europe. Getting rid of the western and eastern globohomoists would be great.

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You already posted the answer

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    nook

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You have to work within the constraints of Ukrainian state capacity.
    Giving them uber complex platforms that require years of training won't work within the timeframe of a year.
    They also can't train 50,000 tankers or 500,000 infantrymen to an acceptable standard in this time.
    You also need to be realist about what the US and Europe can practically give away

    here is a list of things that i think could be done within a year, if everyone got serious about this.

    >Artillery ammunition and barrels at decent levels (ie 5-10K), crushing levels aren't achievable without more ramp and more time.
    >more artillery systems within reason, even old junk is helpful.
    >remaining 155 DPICM and 226mm ICM from stockpiles.
    >~1000 ATACMs, the US can technically spare this if they get their thumb out of their ass and hurry up PRSM aquisition
    >1000s of small diameter bombs to use with F-16
    >500-1000 of american ALCMs and standoff PGMs (JSOW, JASSM,SLAM-ER,JSM, JDAM-ER)
    >air launched anti ship missiles in small numbers for F-16s (NSM, AGM-84)
    >an F-16 backstop, so that F-16s lost or needing maintainance can be quickly replaced to keep existing pilots in the air.
    >Radar and systems upgrades for F-16s
    >Meteor integration for F-16 (would have to start soon)
    >a couple hundred Taurus from Germany
    >enough IFVs, APCs, IMVs and modern MBTs to equip those who are already trained and those who can be trained, this won't be a massive armored fist though, just maintainance.
    >more western SAM systems from reserve, limited by training capacity and other commitments (PACOM,CENTCOM).
    >Ringtauch some South Korean SAM systems since they fill capability gaps (ie longer range anti-helicopter capabilities)

    This probably isn't politically feasible in practice,m but it shows what reasonably could be done.
    I don't know it would win the war, it would certainly cause massive pain to the existing Russian army.

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    One (1) RX-78-2 Gundam mobile suit.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I actually daydream about single-handedly wrecking Russia with my own Gundam.

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What weapon(s) and what quantities would need to be sent to Ukraine to win the war by the end of the year?

    100 000 MLRS rockets. Thousands of IFVs. Hundreds of tanks. Thousands of artillery pieces. Millions of shells. There is not enough military industry left in the west for the ukies to win because they will not be able to raise enough mass.

    The only thing America can produce in bulk (as in several thousands per year) is simple armored cars because civilian infrastructure and knowledge can be used for this. These cars cannot be armed with anything more complex than a .50 cal in a hand cranked turret. The american military industry is essentially a bloated dysfunctional R&D complex with a cottage production industry attached. Now, imagine that this manufacturinglet country goes to war against f.ex China.

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    one (1) F-35

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      One F35 with unlimited ammo could frick up the Russians pretty bad.
      Honest to god it's probably capable of achieving air superiority on it's own and enable a massive ground offensive.

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You want an honest answer? Gold bars. Lots of it. For them to bribe enough Russian Generals to turncoat and march on Moscow.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Russia is once again defeated by it's own corruption

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    looks like Russia runs out of inherited soviet artillery in one and a half years, so they have to give up anyway. speeding up would be nice and save lives, but Russia is already fricked.

    all Ukraine needs is continued support and delivery of ammunition and equipment

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