Would ukraine be defeated by russia if it wasn't for the western support by now?

[Anonymous]

yes

no

[Leopard23]

No. Ukraine has been supplied with equipment that has evened the odds such as man portable anti Air and anti aircraft rockets. Satellite inteligence that can show Russian postions, numbers, movements, weaknesses and can be used to direct Ukrainian artillery. The US military has vast surplus stockpiles of M4/M16s along with 5.56mm ammunition from 2000 most of these weapons have acog scopes. The US military has tons of kevlar vests and helmets surplus from 20 years ago. Now Ukraine is getting armor and possibly F16s or F5s, the US military has huge numbers of mothballed fighters. Here's the thing whether it be be the huge numbers of 4000 m1 Abrahams tanks, Bradley's, f16/18/5/4/15 A4s/ A10s or the m4s/m16s, M1 garrands, M14s, stinger missles, SAWs, M60s, body armour, helmets humvees you name it the fact is that the US military is looking to replace everything that's of the cold war era with new stuff. So new smzll arms like the m7 for the army, IAR for the Marines, F35s, new Stealth bombers, a new Stealth fighter superior to the f22 and 35, new tanks, new apcs. New ammunition armor piercincing 8mm instead 5.56.

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 Bro, US Military could not defeat a Tiny, 3rd World country " Vietnam " in a War, Vietnamese killed over 60,000 US solders like stray dogs and US had to run away like US ran away from Afghanistan 😎

And Now, even Mico size Tiny Country North Korea Threatens US daily and Poor US can't fight and win from even North Korea... Let alone fighting with China or India 🤣

They day US will fight with any Powerful country, you all people will become history 😂

[Leopard23]

@Trackboy you know what a pyhric victory is. You must do from your Greek conquerors. When we left Vietnam the ARVN that is the south Vietnamese army was well equipped and trained, same as the afgan national army. South Korea can defend its own boarders, it is a more powerful military than India.
You know the indians were never really able to defeat the British, they dominated you. The tiniest occupying force in history. They took your women as wives, the gay British men sodimised indian men at will. They were your masters.

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 Obviously you Christian are Thugs and Thieves British looted India and got Rich but with in 70 years, India Turned the table... Now No one talk or care about UK... Britan is a sinking Boat ( May be Rishi Sunak can try to save it ) and India is a Rising Sun !

India has only 2 Competitors in the world, 1. USA 2. China

Rest of other 197 Countries are like Insects in front India !

But Yes... US Arny can't fight and win with any strong Country... US can't fight and win from North Korea or even from Iran? Right?

[Leopard23]

@Trackboy yeah the British with a handful of men conquered the weak indians, who got on their knees to suck. Indian men in Britain go to India to get wives because Indian women in Britain prefer British men. India is just how the British left it
India has many competitors, they can't even beat Pakistan.
India doesn't even have indoor plumbing or sewage systems which most countries have had for hundreds of years.
The US destroyed the Korean army in the Korean war. Fought the Chinese to a stand still all while the majority of the US military was still deployed in Europe and at home. India can't even defeat Pakistan.
We never fought Iran seriously in a war. We kept the gulf open.

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 Poor boy India Ripped apart Pakistan in 2 Parts in 1971 war... Even when USA was backing Pakistan !

Britan is so tiny and weak in front India in 2023

British New Queen is so scared of India that she decided not to wear " Kohinoor " Dimond as she don't want to make India Angry ( Boy, Go google this all )

I understand, Indian's snatch your Jobs in US/UK... but you Guys are dumb and you Guys deserve to sell only Pizza... not to be a CEO 🤣😂

[Leopard23]

@Trackboy nope you struggled against a weak Pakistan tharsxon you boarder and you pat yourself on the back for it.
Britain has more GDP than india despite having a lower population, being smaller and having to provide healthcare and good wages to its workers. Britain also has toilets since 1592. It also has a stronger military. I mean with a handful of soldiers it dominated India.
As for snatching jobs all those unskilled jobs that went to India are coming back as automation and robots can do them better.
Yes indias best and brightest leave India for countries with indoor plumbing and streets not covered in shit.

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 Talk about 2023, India is 5 times stronger than UK, don't talk about 1800 or 1850

And even in 1850, India was Richer than Britan and the Cunning Britishers looted and Robbed India to get Rich and Now Again Britan has lost all its Power and Influence ! No body talk about UK in World's issues

During Covid-19, India was the only country who donated millions of Vaccine to Poor Countries... Go Google it!!!

Lol, Boy, I know You Guys can't afford Graduation in your country as it expensive but at least you should learn something in school !

Pakistan is a Nuclear Nations and on Global Fire Index, Pakistan Amry is 7th Strongest Army of teh World and even British Army is not very ahead of Pakistan in Fire Power Index,... India holds 4th Position in the World !

India is dealing with two Nuclear Power Hostile nations China & Pakistan Alone and other hand, North Korea who is very far from USA, threatens American daily 🤣

www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.php

[Leopard23]

@Trackboy India is 5 times richer yet everyone crops in the street.
India can barely deal with Pakistan on its boarders. Meanwhile the US is deployed around the world operating in multiple warzones forv20 years. India is so afraid of China that lgbtq prime minister mohdi has come to Biden begging for help on his knees
Pakistan is the 7th strongest army in the world you say? Lol quit joking they are weak.

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 Boy, UK is Starving, Their People are dying due to hunger, lack of Food, They are unable to pay Rent... I am talking about January 2023- feburary-2023 and UK's own News Paper is saying this all... Boy, First Go help UK... British are dying Hungry, Go give them some Food and Money

www.google.co.in/url

www.google.co.in/url

www.google.co.in/url

Lol ! check the list of Global Fire Power Index, where Pakistan and India stands in World Ranking

2023 Military Strength Ranking - Global Firepowerhttps://www. globalfirepower. com › countries-listing
Ranking the nations of the world based on current available firepower. ; 1. United States. USA ; 2. Russia. RUS ; 3. China. CHN ; 4. India. IND ; 5. United Kingdom.

[Leopard23]

@Trackboy uk are a major food provider. Living in a house in the UK is better than a shack in India which floats away during the monsoon and people shit in the street.
The firepower index means little when you look at how badly trained and weak Indian soldiers are, how bad their weapons and equipment are.
The UK can deploy to fight anywhere in the world to fight in 48hours. India can barely deploy in their own country.

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 The way you speak it tells you are just High school pass like 80 % American who can't AFFORD graduation

Boy, Go and see News Now... People of UK are starving Hungry and can't pay even Rent, Go check the News or read the NewsPaper... I had posted some links click on them to see it !

First go get them Food to UK, They will die Hungry on The Streets !

And any time if you American dared to fight with China or India then we will tear America's asshole in 48 hours 🤣😂🤣

[Leopard23]

@Trackboy 80 % American who can't AFFORD graduation are still better than the 90% of indians who never go to school and have never been toilet trained.
People in India are starving, living in shacks beside sky scrappers, there's shit in the streets, they are dying of diseases.
India can't beat a weak Pakistan or even keep China out of their territory how would they fight America?

[Trackboy]

India already torn Pakistan in 2 Parts

Indians Run Most High tech Companies of the World as They are more educated than You Americans

Indian fucks American woman in US By giving them $$$$, I think any Indian Must have fucked your Mom's pussy there by giving her $$$ 😂🤣🤣😂

How much Your Mom charges for her Pussy ? $$$$

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 If I come there and give you $ 25000 then Will you let me fuck your Mom's pussy?

[Leopard23]

@Trackboy yeah that was 50 years ago with Pakistan. Recently the Pakistanis shot down outdate indian aircraft.
Indian Americans run high tech companies not indians, they aren't indians anymore we toilet trained them.
Yes indian men in the US have to pay for sex due to their lack of sexual equipment. That's why indian women in America don't end up with indian men.

[Trackboy]

@leopard23

A day before when Indian fighter jets ( Mirage-2000 ) had gone to bomb on Terrorist Camps inside Pakistan then their Entire F-16 fleet could not do anything !

But Next day when Pakistan's F-16 jet came to India to retaliate then Indian Pilot shoot down F-16 using 50 years old Mig-21 and then when that Mig-21 reached in Pakistan after chasing Pakistan's jets then it was shoot down in their Country

[Leopard23]

@Trackboy yes ots called a surprise attack. Just to point out the f16 is 50 years old and no f16 was shot down.

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 You need to check Footage on Youtube dated on 27 Feb.2019 at 5 PM IST time when IGDSPR of Pakistan told that 2 fighter Jets were shoot down and One Pilot is killed and other Pilot is captured Alive... So Captured Pilot was who was flying Mig-21

But who was the other Pilot who got liked? and which fighter jet it was then? It was F-16 shoot down by Mig-21 by Indian Pilot inside Pakistan !

[Leopard23]

@Trackboy where is the gun camera footage?

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 can you tell me 1 thing here, JUST SIMPLE LOGIC... Okay?

1. On 26th Feb.2019 Indian Airforce went in Pakistan to Airstrike Pakistan's terrors Camps and All the fighter jets came back with out any damage !

2. Now, Next day on 27. Feb.2019... Pakistan Airforce F-16's came India to retaliate... JUST THINK HERE, if Pakistan's F-16 had come inside India and they had shot down Indian's Mig-21 the the Garbage of Mig-21 and Pilot of Mig-21 would have been crashed inside India... RIGHT?

Now, India's Mig-21 and Pilot found inside 100 km of Pakistan that's shows... Pakistan Fighter Jets didn't dare to enter in India's Air space and they fired AMRAM Missile from a very safe distance... okay ( which didn't hit any Indian's Jets )

When Mig-21 ( which was Airborne at that Time ) chased F-16's then they Ran back to Pakistan and in this Process... Mig-21 entered deep Inside in Pakistan's Air space and they shot down it form a SAM missile ! ( Surface to Air Missile )

So who was brave?

[Leopard23]

@Trackboy yeah that's just indian propaganda because Modhi can't admit how weak India is

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 Ony US is getting weaker... Thousands of Homeless people sleeps on the Road of USA, They don't have Home, Job or Food... China & India are Rising !

You Mother fucker see these Videos, Millions of Poor Homeless American sleeps on the Road like Beggars

https://youtu.be/s7uPwL9IN5Y

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 Mother fucker... America have more slums and Poor Homeless people than any other country... I laugh on you 🤣😂

Mother fucker... see below video of Poor Homeless People of America living life like a stray Dog 😂

https://youtu.be/yRWmKh13b50

[Trackboy]

@leopard23 Mother fucker... American are sleeping on the Road, they don't have clothes to wear, Food to eat... and Mother fuckers Like you Brag that America is a Super Power in 2023 ? 😂🤣🤣😂

https://youtu.be/-vc6CHRrtH8

[BeMuse]

Russia stated they wanted to remove the Nazis and demilitarize Ukraine, not take their territory. By handing weapons to the Ukrainians, they continue to have a military as Nazis conscript random people and arm them with NATO supplied weapons with the choice of fight or be buried alive. So yeah, yeah that's pretty much what is happening. Russia will keep fighting until Ukraine has no weapons and/or people left to fight and NATO keeps giving them weapons while the Nazis keep forcing them to fight using said weapons until everyone in Ukraine is dead or the people of Ukraine turn against the Nazis and hang them from lamp posts.

[BeMuse]

Either the people of Ukraine all go to the meat grinder to die to a much larger adversary or they turn on the Obama/Soros/Nuland appointed puppet regime that controls them now and was committing genocide in their own countries in the name of Nazism. It's really up to Ukrainians how they want to play it.

[jshm2]

Ukraine isn't even in the picture. This is the West vs Russia with Ukraine being the proxy ground.

Zelensky like Saddam sold his soul to the Americans. He will find out, like Saddam did, that the USA is only a friend until it has no use for you.

[Leopard23]

Saddam didn't do what he was told or maybe he got the go ahead for the invasion of Kuwait. Hard to say. If you want to know what the US government is doing or has done you have to look at the end result and what was achieved.

[Soteris]

No. And its important to point out that Russia has not even gotten to the hard part yet. The easy part is the invasion, the actual moving in troops and taking over the country. The hard part is the occupation afterwards. This would just be a Russian Iraq/Afghanistan since they have nowhere near the troops to actually occupy all of Ukraine unless they ship in literally a few million more and that is with minimal local resistance.

[Leopard23]

Occupying Iraq was relatively easy. The problem was the foreign support and foreign fighters that came in. Also it didn't help that we didn't secure right away huge stop piles of arms in Iraq. In Afghanistan the Taliban basically left for 20 years offering token resistance every so often, they used the time well to recruit and train new soldiers a lot of whom were trained in the armies of Muslim nations but a huge number of recruits were sent by the Taliban to join the Afgan national army to be trained and armed by the US military waiting for the day the US military pulled out. I think the Taliban's real worry was another islamic group similar to themselves taking over as they knew the US Army was never going to stay.
I think Russia's biggest problem is the poor performance of their military in the conflict, the war should be over by now and they are failing to project power on their own doorstep.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 You are confusing the invasion with the occupation. USA was never actually able to impose their victory in Iraq, if they had then they would not need to continue to occupy it without fear for if they left then all their hard work would be undone. You can blame it on whatever you like, point is that it does not change the outcome.

As for Russias biggest problem? Oh boy.. where to even start. Obviously their military was crap, but their logistics were even worse to the point where the military never even got a chance to suck ass. Furthermore you had the airforce.. Supposedly they are soon actually going to do something.. over a year after the war started..

But there are way more layers of failure and incompetence here such as the Russian secret service who was supposed to prepare this war as well as to know how it would go and the consequences of it. They failed so badly that USA could not have planned this better to fuck over Russia if they so tried and had literally every resource known to man. This is a failure of epic proportions.

But I would argue that the biggest failure of them all is Putin himself. He is the mastermind of this fuckup and the main reason why it ever got this bad in the first place. This was a failure literally decades in the making and he laid down every cobblestone on this path by his own hands.

[Leopard23]

Define victory? What is the US military doing in Iraq? Would you define 2500 troops in Iraq as an army of occupation? By comparison there are 36,000 police alone in Newyork city alone or there are currently 3000 us Troops in Saudi Arabia. US presence in Iraq is minimal and is just like every other US bases in the middle east and Europe to for that matter.
You are right about Russia. Putin is a very clever man but the US have had a lot of very clever men analysing him and the Russian military for years. He's been playing the strong man for years and was maneuvered & baited into either invading Ukraine or accepting that former soviet and Warsaw pact states are free to their own self detrimination. NATO is not suprised by the poor performance of the Russian military.
upload.wikimedia.org/.../...A---Jo-Di-graphics.jpg

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 Defining victory is not my job, it is USA's. And therein lies much of the problem as well, USA did not really define an objective. They just sort of went in there and then.. just stayed.. In the grand scheme of things that is basically just pointlessly wasting your military resources without an end in sight.

As for Putin invading Ukraine, no one was forcing him or baiting him into this. It was just the inevitable result of his own bad decision making. At the point of the invasion he himself had rendered both his own intelligence service and army incapable at which point he himself were unable to make a proper decision by only having incorrect data to work from.

This was entirely his own fault because he intentionally built a corrupt system and thought he could still control it from above. He could not.

[Leopard23]

The victory is control of the oil rich Persian gulf region. Anywhere you see a US military base is part of the US hegemony, south and central America too.
upload.wikimedia.org/.../...an_bases_worldwide.svg
As for putin invading Ukraine, it was known exactly what he'd do, he'd already done it in Georgia and in Ukraine.
If you ever want to know what the US government is doing or has done and why you only have to look at the end result and how it benefited the US government's intrests.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 If victory is control of the oil fields then that does not require military occupation, hence USA is not finished with its military occupation of Iraq and my point remains.

[Leopard23]

Not really a military occupation with 3 battalions and the country you are supposedly occupying has a 500,000 strong army. There is 35,000 us personel in Germany so I guess the occupation of Germany is successful.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 A military occupation is a military occupation. The number of troops is irrelevant. The troops STATIONED in Germany is not there as an occupying force. It is completely different and I dont even feel like arguing about that point today.

[Leopard23]

The US Troops in Germany and okinawa have been there is since the US invaded and those forces continue the occupation. What I'd the difference between Iraq and Germany?

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 The troops in Germany and Okinawa does not have any duties and are welcome there. They do not need to occupy the surroundings or police the population. The troops in Iraq is.. anything but.

[Leopard23]

The US Troops in Iraq don't leave the base. Like in okinawa or Germany they are just there to work in the base. The bases in Iraq are no different than the US bases in Saudi Arab or Kuwait or any other base in the middle east with us allies. I was stationed in Saudi Arabi, we didn't leave the base. The US military doesn't conduct operations in Iraq except when support is requested by the Iraqis much the same as with Germany or oikinawa.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 Even if they dont leave their bases in Iraq (they do), they are still nominally an occupying force which they are not in places such as Germany. They are there to force project where as in Germany its not like you are force projecting against the German state.

[Leopard23]

The US military maintains all foreign bases to project power ie deploying troops for the 2001 Afghanistan invasion or the 1999 intervention in Kosovo and Air strikes against Serbia. In Italy us bases were used to project power into Libya and Syria.
US forces Iraq aren't force projecting against the iraqi state, the Iraqi state has their own military. US military presence in Iraq is just the same as it is in Europe.
The US has two bases in Iraq and 2500 personel spread between them to enable logistic support and the NATO training mission in Iraq. There has been no US operations in Iraq for 3 years. Currently Lieutenant General Giovanni Iannucci of Italy commands NATO personel in Iraq of which Sweden has 70 military personnel. Is Sweden occupying Iraq and projecting power against the iraqi state?

[Leopard23]

deploying troops for the 2001 Afghanistan invasion or the 1999 intervention in Kosovo and Air strikes against Serbia *from air bases in Germany*

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 But the military bases in Germany is not meant to force project into Germany. If Germany has problems the US military will not go out in force from their bases to enforce USA's geopolitical desires where as that can very much happen in Iraq if for example the Taliban came there and tried to do what they did in Afghanistan.

USA is an occupying force in Iraq. They are there to enforce their goals.

[Leopard23]

If Iraq has problems as of 2020 the US military will not go out in force to project force in Iraq, they don't have the assests to do so in Iraq anymore and who would the US be enforcing their will upon? The iraqi government who's military in Iraq is vastly superior in both numbers and equipment? They'd have a better chance of enforcing their geopolitical will on Germany. Like in iraq the US military may go out in force in Germany if the German government requests it.

What did the Taliban do in Afghanistan? They waited 20 years until the US military pulled out, recruited and trained their soldiers in that time, launched a few campaigns for propaganda and recruitment purposes and had their guys join the afgan national army so that when the time came they would have troops trained and armed by NATO.
The Iraqis are in charge now, they will have to sink of swim on their own just like the Afgan national army did. They've already had to deal with ISIS as now the Taliban does as well.
The US has already enforced their goals in Iraq just like they did in Germany, Italy and Japan. Defeat a hostile nation, Install a US friendly government and keep us bases as a means of projecting power in the region just like okinawa was used to project power in the Korean and Vietnam wars.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 Ahahaha! First of all, USA has no chance to enforce anything in Germany. Its a giant country with only around 35 000 troops. They can't do jack shit. But, if USA were to start loosing control and lose their objectives in Iraq they would not only roll out their troops but also shove as many aircraft carriers and reinforcements as it would take to re-establish the status-quo. Again, they invaded Iraq for a reason, they would do it again if needed.

I also love how you point out that USA could only go out in force in Germany if the government itself requested it. Again, its not an occupation force and it shows.

As for the Taliban in Afghanistan? Once USA left the Taliban overthrew the current government and instituted their own. They were only able to do that because the US occupying forces left the country. Something they would not be able to do if USA was still there, hence why the government in Iraq is sitting pretty and not dragged out into the streets and stoned to death by extremists groups like the Taliban.

Again, the US troops in Germany is completely different from the troops occupying Iraq. They are not comparable in any way shape or form.

[Leopard23]

Iraq is 23%larger than Germany and has fewer roads.
https://youtu.be/Y5yfe2gb2z8
The German military is in a bad shape of readiness and have all kinds of massive shortages of equipment and lack training. The only real equipped military in Germany ready for war at the moment is the US military. Any of Germany's neighbours could launch a very successful invasion of Germany.
If the US had a problem with Iraq like you said because they are not currently an occupying force they would have to launch an invasion just like the US military would if they had a problem with Germany.
The US military could have kept bases in Afghanistan indefinitely if they choose just like the US military has everywhere else. The US rarely gives up military bases, France is one of the few. Again the Taliban decided in 2002 to wait the US out rather than fight a bloody war like they did with the Russians and it paid off, they are stronger than they've ever been. The US likely made a deal with the taliban to keep ISIS out.
The government in Iraq is not sitting pretty because even with the minor US presence in Iraq there to train their police, military and advise on civil projects the country is a hair trigger away from civil war and mass genocide. Forget alqueda and ISIS insurgencies, I'm talking about the iraqi military and police forces splitting up between ethnicities and fighting an open war, completely different situation. The Iraqi military is a lot better supplied than the German military is.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 No. USA can't do jack shit if Germany closes the American bases and they will not invade Germany. That is just silly. In fact, I dont even think USA could invade Germany even if they tried. The only reason D-Day was a thing during WW2 is because its essentially a stones throw between the UK and France by water and yet it is probably the most complicated and difficult military maneuver in human history.

So no. USA will only stay in countries such as Germany if they are welcomed in and USA can't do anything about it. Again, Iraq and Afghanistan is different. USA was specifically an occupying force. I dont particularly care if you accept this or not because it is still a fact.

[Leopard23]

The US military is all about force projection, they could most definitely invade Germany, the German military is only 60,000 strong and is in a poor state of disrepair. The luftwaffe has about 200 fighters, a single us fleet aircraft carrier carries about 100 fighters and the 11 of those along with 9 amphibious assault ships.
D-Day was complicated but while D-Day was being planned the largest fleet ever assembled was island hopping through the Pacific on its way to Japan. The Marines which are the US military's ever ready amphibious assault force never even saw action in Europe. Even today with over 200,000 personnel the US marine Corp dwarfs the German military in not just men but equipment too.
Like with Germany, Japan, Italy, Afghanistan, Iraq the US was an occupying force but no longer. Each of these countries are responsible for their own sovereignty and national defence and internal security though Iraq like Germany is worried about aggressive neighbours to the east.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 Uh huuuh.. won't fucking matter. First of all, Aircraft carriers are juicy targets but its irrelevant. The country is too big, you are not only fighting against the enemy army but also occupying the territory. You would need millions upon millions of soldiers to properly occupy Germany even after you defeat them militarily. 200 000 personnel will get you maybe a beach head until you starve your own soldiers out due to lacking supplies.

[Leopard23]

American aircraft carriers are juicy targets but hard to hit as they are so well defended. Germany has nothing capable of hitting a US carrier.
Germany is not too big. Fighting the German army would be no trouble as their army is tiny and lacks military equipment and supplies. The autobahn opens it up for easy invasion. Occupying would be no trouble as there are few weapons in Germany for the population to resist. Remember Germany was occupied for years without millions of troops. Germany is smaller than Iraq and we occupied it for 15 years but unlike Germany it's awash with fully automatic ak47s under every man's pillow and every man has military training.
The US military is a logistics machine, we keep fleets at sea for years without them being supplied at a naval base.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 Germany has plenty to hit USAs aircraft carriers and high on that list would be their submarines. I would also argue that I rather fight in the road network of Ukraine than in Germany, especially if I was severely under-strength. The civilians dont strictly need guns to repel invaders either. Improvised weapons works great, especially against targets in urban environments such as IEDs. The biggest problem USA would face is just that they dont have enough people and those people dont have anything to shoot with or eat because supplying it by boat is a logistical nightmare.

You need to drop the myth that guns have in USA. Its not real, its mythology.

[Leopard23]

Germany's submarines are in a more state of disrepair. Logistics is what the US military does, if you want to supply a large invasion force, move large numbers of troops or equipment you use the sea lanes, that's what was done in the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and gulf war. How do you think the us military all over the world gets supplied.
The Iraqis, Alqueda and taliban all used IEDs but it didn't matter because they just couldn't kill enough us personel to repel US forces, unlike Germany they had trained personel with access to huge amounts of explosives. I mean the US has successfully "occupied" Germany sincec1945.
There's no mythology involved with guns. If you've ever gone house to house in Iraq or been fired at by an rpk in Afghanistan you'd know that. The Germans wouldn't have even half the fight the Iraqi army, republican guard, Alqueda, ISIS or the Taliban had in resisting invasion.

[Leopard23]

Among the failures none of Germany’s submarines is operational, only four of its 128 Eurofighter jets are combat-ready and the army is short dozens of tanks and armored vehicles needed for NATO missions.
In addition, troops are short on the basics: body armor, night vision gear and cold-weather clothing.
The situation is so dire that 19 helicopter pilots from Germany’s Bundeswehr were forced to turn in their flight licenses because of a lack of training time.
Germany has the largest economy in Europe but has been dragging its feet on fixing its scandalous defense problems,” Benitez said. Part of the problem is political and reflects the willingness of German leaders to consistently inhibit defense spending for the sake of other priorities.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 I know that logistics is USAs strong point. What I am saying is that it won't be enough. During D-day they supplied up to 56 000 tons of supplies alone per day and this was just over the English channel.

USA can't do the same today and it definitely can't do it between Germany and USA. Its just logistically impossible. How do USA normally get supplies? By limiting the scope of their troops and by relying on allies nearby. Neither which they can do if they want to try invade Germany.

As for the problems with Germanys submarines? It will not stop them from sinking USAs aircraft carriers. They can still function in their roles even if they suffer various mechanical issues and USA is notoriously bad at protecting their aircraft carriers from submarines.

[Leopard23]

But that was D-Day like 80 years ago. Don't forget there was a larger amphibious war going on in the far east, a D-Day every week, largest fleet in history that never returned to port.
The US normally gets all their supplies from ports.
The German military was in better shape during D-Day and was unable to stop the invasion of France.
US aircraft carriers are protected by destroyers, frigates, submarines, and anti submarine aircraft. German subs are out of action, a submarine that's engines don't work, targeting systems aren't working or is leaking water isn't going to do much. And they've only 4, they'd be destroyed in their sub pens before the carriers were even near. You remember how the US navy hunted u-boats.
"USA is notoriously bad at protecting their aircraft carriers from submarines." You are thinking of the British and Japanese. US Subs on the other hand have a stellar record for sinking aircraft carriers

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 Yeah, that was D-day 80 years ago. It will be harder today with even more supplies required. I dont care if you have a port or not, you dont have the ships for starters and that is honestly the least of your problems if you were going to try a naval invasion over that distance.

Have you heard about the Swedish submarine who humiliated your navy and specifically sank your super carriers in war games? And speaking of war games. German submarines actively participates in them which means they function well enough to run a mission against an American aircraft carrier. They only need to do it a few times after all so it does not have to be up to normal battlefield standards.

[Leopard23]

We've 9 amphibious assault ships and 3 under construction. To give an example in 1992 3 of these landed 25,000 Marines in Somalia. The US army has more Paratroops than the Germans have soldiers. The US army also has 70,000 special forces soldiers.
That was a Wargame 20 years ago. A lot of these war games have special constraints to avoid exposing technology, these problems would have been fixed and regardless German submarines aren't in working order just like the majority of German tanks.

[Soteris]

@Leopard23 What I am saying is that you dont have enough ships to transport military equipment that distance at that quantity. I also have no reason to believe that USA has solved their problem with detecting diesel electric submarines and Germany has one of the, if not the best in the world.

[the-mad-german]

Ukraine will lose this,... all the west did was extend this war and raise the death count. On both sides...

[HippieVeganJewslim]

Probably, but I’d not know what kind of superpowers the Ukraine has.

[OddBeMe]

Yes and that’s ok. You know the French helped the US rev, right?

[LimitedBenefits101]

Pretty much, without our help they be DOOMED.

[KostasKouvalis]

Oh most certainly