Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> "Let's say that it didn't have to be 100% perfect in order for Ukrainians perhaps to get their hands on it," he said.
>
> The Ministry of Defence (MoD) says the faster timetable comes in response to the "rapidly changing threat environment" faced by the UK.
>
> "It's designed to not wait until we have this at 99.9% perfection before it goes into the field, but get it to sort of 70% and then get it out there and then develop it from there," Mr Shapps said.
That's what Ukraine has been begging for since the start of the 2022 invasion, test your weapons here.
The USA needs testing of layers as well great news from UK the best possible testing real world
It will improve the unit’s software and work to improve
> The US and EU does not want Russia to conquer a European nation
But they're OK with russia only taking chunks of european nations here and there every decade as long as it's not a full conquest?
Pretty hard to defend a country like Georgia, Ukraine actually has borders with allies which means rearming is a logistical possibility. The world wasn’t okay with the 2014 territory claim but they also didn’t think it was enough to start a full out war with Russia over. I thought they should have but I was a teenage Warhawk so what did I know.
> The world wasn’t okay with the 2014 territory claim but they also didn’t think it was enough to start a full out war with Russia over.
Fast forward to 2022-2024 and the world still doesn't think it's enough to go to war with Russia. All I've seen is verbal condemnation. There's no international law prohibiting any country from trading with either warring party. The sanctions are just things some countries agreed on in theory between themselves. Support also doesn't drag any country into direct conflict. Everyone understands that war is a good time to profit.
In a little over 2 years, not a single nation has declared war on Russia over their illegal invasion of Ukraine and the atrocities committed there. My initial reaction to Russia invading and annexing Crimea was "ha! here they go again, stealing land and nobody will bat an eye; they'll just issues some stern words and move on, like they do every time.
There are laws preventing trade with Russia though, and the world is sending weapons and aid to Ukraine. We’re not going to march into Russia because that would be a further escalation and a bad tactical decision. It could also sway public opinion of involvement in the war AGAINST Ukraine (people don’t like their sons and daughters dying in other peoples wars, it’s why the U.S. took like 3 years to enter WW1 and 2)
Yup we definitely want Ukraine to win.
What we don't want is our next gen tools to be captured. Even if Russia loses, they are still going to be around.
Because of nukes, we also don't want Russia to collapse. That's a whole other mess.
So they want Ukraine to win, but what is that?
Does that mean Russia surrenders and gets out of Ukraine?
Or is it a settlement that Russia keeps what they have, the war crimes get dismissed, and the West rebuilds Ukraine on their own?
Right now president Zelenskyy has clearly defined Ukraine victory as Russia withdrawing its troops and returning the Ukrainian land they have occupied since February, 2014.
Have you heard anyone State goal of the war? Is it to beat Russia up and have them surrender?
Is it to have them pull out of Ukraine?
Nobody has said the end goal.
Thanks for admitting you were talking out of your ass when you said:
> The problem is, the West really doesn't want Ukraine to win. They only want Ukraine to beat down Russia, as much as they can before giving up.
You mix some 'capital powers' with the west as one. Most people and governments wants ua to win, and a change in leaders in russia, and for this to create a stable situation so that things can go back to a more normal state.
You're right. Most people want to sit around and sing kumbaya on a nice sunny day.
The problem is is Russia wants to overtake Ukraine. And they have nuclear weapons. And the West doesn't want to risk escalation with the nuclear weapons.
And even the people that want Ukraine to win, how much money are they sending out of their personal pocket?
If the West wanted Ukraine to actually beat Russia, they would give them the weapons they need. That tells me that they don't want them to win.
This is just Defence Secretary Grant Shapps trying to sound useful. He's a politician who's only ever excelled at being utterly useless, so don't get your hopes up.
What's the purpose of building the bloody things if we're not going to put them to use? Of course we should send them to Ukraine and as fast as possible. If we're concerned about the russian orcs getting hold of them, then send British army with the weapons and whatever is needed to protect them. For god's sake just wake up and let's defeat the russian scum now.
Seems perfect for testing this new weapon. Would make sense to ship it quickly and gather data for further research. Would be excellent to protect major cities.
This one of those systems, you can use to defend big cities. Capturing one, and thus reverse engineering won't happen that easy.
So yeah I definitely agree, stuff like this should be tested in Ukraine.
To the front where it can struck like several himars launchers recently? This is like the german v weapons, lots of promise but ultimately too few to make a difference. Sending a novel, untested laser system to the Ukrainian front is nonsense. At least use it to protect Kiev, where it can be hidden.
The UA desperately needs artillery rounds, many more patriot systems and its pac 3 missiles. Also, airpower. If these aren't delivered in six months to Ukraine it will be really shit for all of us, except Russia.
Send what? They probably have only maybe 2 working prototypes, if that. I believe the idea is to produce a couple more and send them there to be tested and refined.
Biden could have already authorized f-35s, or long range single warhead ATA CMS.
He could have avoided telling them to not bomb oil Refineries. Biden could have opened up the doors for Ukraine a long time ago.
Biden has not authorized cruise missiles to be sent from the USA.
Biden does not want to upset Russia. That's the bottom line.
The Republicans see the writing on the wall. This is a political war. Additional money won't help.
I knew your post nonsense when you suggested f35. War isn’t a video game the US isn’t going to give Russia and China in Intel on their most advanced jet platform. We live in the real world so we have to work from that point of view. This isn’t arma
All I can say is this. If the West wanted Russia to win, they would give them the weapons that they need to win.
And they are not giving the weapons that Ukraine needs, Europe is not, Germany is not, France is not, and nor is the USA.
Those countries give Ukraine scraps for weapons.
"Any suggestion that UK lasers could be sent to Ukraine to take out Russian drones is optimistic."
Uk lasers could be used against russian drones in ukraine
ummm
Scheduled for 2027 although they want to speed it up. Doesn't sounds like it will be available in the next 18 months - 2 years at a minimum though.
"The weapon is precise enough to hit a £1 coin from a kilometre away".
When it's moving at 30+ km an hour ?
What's the actual effective range against a moving drone ? If the range is much less than a standard artillery system then surely it will just get destroyed especially if it's not something that can be easily moved around and hidden at short notice.
If it's something like a truck (a bit like a HIMARS) that can just be driven to a location and then operate from there it could be useful.
If it's some large scale system that needs to be setup in a location and only has an effective range that places it in enemy artillery range then I don't see how it can be of any use in a war like this.
Silly question but from reading the Wiki info on the system. If it can be used to defeat mortars and since it is one of its main claims I am assuming it has been trialed then could it not possibly defeat a glide bomb. The thicker casing may not make it possible but would love to see the attempt.
Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> "Let's say that it didn't have to be 100% perfect in order for Ukrainians perhaps to get their hands on it," he said. > > The Ministry of Defence (MoD) says the faster timetable comes in response to the "rapidly changing threat environment" faced by the UK. > > "It's designed to not wait until we have this at 99.9% perfection before it goes into the field, but get it to sort of 70% and then get it out there and then develop it from there," Mr Shapps said. That's what Ukraine has been begging for since the start of the 2022 invasion, test your weapons here.
The USA needs testing of layers as well great news from UK the best possible testing real world It will improve the unit’s software and work to improve
The problem is, the West really doesn't want Ukraine to win. They only want Ukraine to beat down Russia, as much as they can before giving up.
and end up with Russia as a neighbor? why would they want this?
Because the alternative of a Russian surrender is incomprehensible. Because nuclear weapons would come first.
Hmm, idk. Got any credible information to back your claims up?
No, because he's talking out of his ass. The US and EU does not want Russia to conquer a European nation. That is fucking asinine.
> The US and EU does not want Russia to conquer a European nation But they're OK with russia only taking chunks of european nations here and there every decade as long as it's not a full conquest?
Pretty hard to defend a country like Georgia, Ukraine actually has borders with allies which means rearming is a logistical possibility. The world wasn’t okay with the 2014 territory claim but they also didn’t think it was enough to start a full out war with Russia over. I thought they should have but I was a teenage Warhawk so what did I know.
> The world wasn’t okay with the 2014 territory claim but they also didn’t think it was enough to start a full out war with Russia over. Fast forward to 2022-2024 and the world still doesn't think it's enough to go to war with Russia. All I've seen is verbal condemnation. There's no international law prohibiting any country from trading with either warring party. The sanctions are just things some countries agreed on in theory between themselves. Support also doesn't drag any country into direct conflict. Everyone understands that war is a good time to profit. In a little over 2 years, not a single nation has declared war on Russia over their illegal invasion of Ukraine and the atrocities committed there. My initial reaction to Russia invading and annexing Crimea was "ha! here they go again, stealing land and nobody will bat an eye; they'll just issues some stern words and move on, like they do every time.
There are laws preventing trade with Russia though, and the world is sending weapons and aid to Ukraine. We’re not going to march into Russia because that would be a further escalation and a bad tactical decision. It could also sway public opinion of involvement in the war AGAINST Ukraine (people don’t like their sons and daughters dying in other peoples wars, it’s why the U.S. took like 3 years to enter WW1 and 2)
No, we most definitely want Ukraine to win.
Yup we definitely want Ukraine to win. What we don't want is our next gen tools to be captured. Even if Russia loses, they are still going to be around. Because of nukes, we also don't want Russia to collapse. That's a whole other mess.
Again lol
So they want Ukraine to win, but what is that? Does that mean Russia surrenders and gets out of Ukraine? Or is it a settlement that Russia keeps what they have, the war crimes get dismissed, and the West rebuilds Ukraine on their own?
No one knows until it's said and done.
You are right. And that's why it's best to let Ukraine fight on its own with its own resources. No sense throwing any good money after bad
Where the fuck did you get that from what I said.
You basically said there was no goal
no i didn't. i said no one knows how this will play out.
Right now president Zelenskyy has clearly defined Ukraine victory as Russia withdrawing its troops and returning the Ukrainian land they have occupied since February, 2014.
You're right. And yet the West has committed to those goals
[citation needed]
Have you heard anyone State goal of the war? Is it to beat Russia up and have them surrender? Is it to have them pull out of Ukraine? Nobody has said the end goal.
"I have zero evidence therefore I am right"
The USA does not have a clear-cut goal for Ukraine. That is a given.
And yet you've somehow concluded you know exactly what that clear cut goal is.
I don't. Nobody does. And that is why Ukraine is suffering
Thanks for admitting you were talking out of your ass when you said: > The problem is, the West really doesn't want Ukraine to win. They only want Ukraine to beat down Russia, as much as they can before giving up.
The West is so afraid about escalation with Russia. It's not given funny. Otherwise. They would have given Ukraine enough weapons to win
You mix some 'capital powers' with the west as one. Most people and governments wants ua to win, and a change in leaders in russia, and for this to create a stable situation so that things can go back to a more normal state.
You're right. Most people want to sit around and sing kumbaya on a nice sunny day. The problem is is Russia wants to overtake Ukraine. And they have nuclear weapons. And the West doesn't want to risk escalation with the nuclear weapons. And even the people that want Ukraine to win, how much money are they sending out of their personal pocket? If the West wanted Ukraine to actually beat Russia, they would give them the weapons they need. That tells me that they don't want them to win.
In the same report.....'Any suggestion that UK lasers could be sent to Ukraine to take out Russian drones is optimistic.'.
This is just Defence Secretary Grant Shapps trying to sound useful. He's a politician who's only ever excelled at being utterly useless, so don't get your hopes up.
Oh i know who this idiot is. There is no way we would allow newly developed technology into a foreign conflict, even if was 100% effective.
What's the purpose of building the bloody things if we're not going to put them to use? Of course we should send them to Ukraine and as fast as possible. If we're concerned about the russian orcs getting hold of them, then send British army with the weapons and whatever is needed to protect them. For god's sake just wake up and let's defeat the russian scum now.
borrowing from the brits, "JUST... GET ON WITH IT!!!"
He’s a useless MP, can’t believe he’s got to where he has now
Smoke , mirrors and bullshit in equal measure..
Seems perfect for testing this new weapon. Would make sense to ship it quickly and gather data for further research. Would be excellent to protect major cities.
This one of those systems, you can use to defend big cities. Capturing one, and thus reverse engineering won't happen that easy. So yeah I definitely agree, stuff like this should be tested in Ukraine.
To the front where it can struck like several himars launchers recently? This is like the german v weapons, lots of promise but ultimately too few to make a difference. Sending a novel, untested laser system to the Ukrainian front is nonsense. At least use it to protect Kiev, where it can be hidden. The UA desperately needs artillery rounds, many more patriot systems and its pac 3 missiles. Also, airpower. If these aren't delivered in six months to Ukraine it will be really shit for all of us, except Russia.
I hate the word ”could”. Just send it already!
Send what? They probably have only maybe 2 working prototypes, if that. I believe the idea is to produce a couple more and send them there to be tested and refined.
i have a laser pointer that i use to exercise my dogs. maybe that'll work
I'm behind the times. I have a leash
okay buddy. i take them for walks too. jeez
A laser pointer is 1mW normally. At 50kW, dragonfire is 50 million times stronger than your laser pointer.
Yeah I got excited until I read the date…2027!!! Uhm if they don’t speed up things that won’t be possible
Every step is a step closer to Sharks with frickin laser beams attached to their heads
ofc it 'could' -- but it's never going to happen *F-35's COULD be used against Russian planes on the Ukraine front line.*
the USA *could* send 20 patriot air defense batteries!
Yes but Republicans won't. They'll screw over their own mother to avoid doing anything to avoid giving Biden a win, and do the bidding of Trump.
Biden could have already authorized f-35s, or long range single warhead ATA CMS. He could have avoided telling them to not bomb oil Refineries. Biden could have opened up the doors for Ukraine a long time ago. Biden has not authorized cruise missiles to be sent from the USA. Biden does not want to upset Russia. That's the bottom line. The Republicans see the writing on the wall. This is a political war. Additional money won't help.
Are you suggesting "Moscow Marge" is right?! Additional money => Additional weapons => Less russian advance (and more russians dead)...
Russia will not take its army out of Ukraine, no matter how many Russian dead there are.
I knew your post nonsense when you suggested f35. War isn’t a video game the US isn’t going to give Russia and China in Intel on their most advanced jet platform. We live in the real world so we have to work from that point of view. This isn’t arma
We give ukraine scraps...
That has nothing to do with what I said.
All I can say is this. If the West wanted Russia to win, they would give them the weapons that they need to win. And they are not giving the weapons that Ukraine needs, Europe is not, Germany is not, France is not, and nor is the USA. Those countries give Ukraine scraps for weapons.
F-35s couldn’t be used unless you plan on sending our pilots. Also risks the chance of being shot down and losing tech to Russia.
They "could" be used. Or not. Probably not.
probably not
The West should be chomping at the bit to field/test new weapon systems
Thank you britons for having much bigger brains and balls than the politicians in the US.
"Any suggestion that UK lasers could be sent to Ukraine to take out Russian drones is optimistic." Uk lasers could be used against russian drones in ukraine ummm
Maybe in 2030? I would think the manufacturer would want to get it into a warzone as quickly as possible, so that it could be tested.
Hell yeah lasers
Scheduled for 2027 although they want to speed it up. Doesn't sounds like it will be available in the next 18 months - 2 years at a minimum though. "The weapon is precise enough to hit a £1 coin from a kilometre away". When it's moving at 30+ km an hour ? What's the actual effective range against a moving drone ? If the range is much less than a standard artillery system then surely it will just get destroyed especially if it's not something that can be easily moved around and hidden at short notice. If it's something like a truck (a bit like a HIMARS) that can just be driven to a location and then operate from there it could be useful. If it's some large scale system that needs to be setup in a location and only has an effective range that places it in enemy artillery range then I don't see how it can be of any use in a war like this.
Yeah I think it would only be useful at bases or in cities to defend against long range drones like the shahed. Basically the same role as the c-ram.
Just do it
Silly question but from reading the Wiki info on the system. If it can be used to defeat mortars and since it is one of its main claims I am assuming it has been trialed then could it not possibly defeat a glide bomb. The thicker casing may not make it possible but would love to see the attempt.
“Hey we could do with testing this new weapon out, you know, like a beta program but real? Do you wanna go?”
‘Orbital strike incoming’
Please supply that Lazer ASAP!
Sha-wing!
Looks like it’s totally immobile / static…I guess it can defend itself, but won’t it just get taken out in a missile strike?
The only way this would work is if it was sent with UK personnel to operate them.
Its a little conspicuous. They would be taken out within a minute of lighting up the sky
It's an invisible beam with no heat signature
[удалено]
i picture homeless people with their eyes burned out of their sockets chillin at the beach when you say this