this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
534 points (96.7% liked)
Ukraine
8285 readers
705 users here now
News and discussion related to Ukraine
*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.
*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.
*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title
*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW
Server Rules
- Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
- No racism or other discrimination
- No Nazis, QAnon or similar
- No porn
- No ads or spam
- No content against Finnish law
Donate to support Ukraine's Defense
Donate to support Humanitarian Aid
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I understand exactly what it is. What I'm saying is that Germany does not have the volume on hand, or the manufacturing capacity to produce such a volume, where it could generate the effect the candidate is implying it can.
The point was more that there are not many strategic targets, which Taurus could hit inside Russia, which can not be hit by a cheaper Ukrainian made drone due to air defence. So if Germany would send thousands of them, it would still not make that much of a difference. The main value is that Russia has to move assets further back.
Operational targets can't all just simply be moved further and further back from the front lines of a conflict, to say nothing of high value tactical targets.
Supplying several hundred low observable air launched cruise missiles per month would absolutely make a significant difference on the battlefield, that's not even a question.
But that doesn't mean I believe that would enough to cause Putin to reverse course, or to deliver a strategic defeat to the Russian army.
Regardless, Germany doesn't have that manufacturing capacity to begin with, nor do I believe they have the political will to do that, even if it were possible, but again, it is not.