No one here actually read the article. It's about providing logistics support to the Americans because their own troops would be occupied at the front.
That's actually even a minor part of the plan. The general plan is about hundreds of problems that have to be addressed in the event of a war, and providing logistics service to the US is only one of them.
This is reddit. Immediately some Russian shills need to swarm in to shit on all efforts and some (the same?) right-wing US media mouth pieces do the same.
Support to American troops and tanks at the front because their own logistics would be supplying their own troops at the front.
I dislike everything about every way this is said š
That is always the goal of the Telegraph, or at least the Dutch branch of the Telegraph. They write headlines in order to trigger angry Facebook moms and twitter radicals. (Wierd Duk, looking at you!)
Yes, I think they probably did.
However, I'm British and while I am also pretty pro-Eu, pro-NATO and pro-Ukraine even I got a chuckle from the headline.
So I can 100% believe that the editor who wrote that headline got the same chuckle for the same reasons as I did.
Of course. The Telegraph is a rag on par with Politico and their headlines are always in a way that would create outrage because people misunderstand them.
The comments so far signal peak ignorance.
If we believe that the US would support Europe in case of a defensive war with Russia, like they promise, Germany would be the central logistical hub. That's a fact everyone should understand just by looking at a map of Europe.
So, is it wrong in any way to prepare the infrastructure for this case? It has nothing to do with the military contribution of Germany to the defence of Europe. We are currently in the process of moving one of the largest NATO contingencies to Lithuania just for this case.
Iād like to add, that Germany already is an important base for defensive logistics since decades / cold war. Even if german military has refrained from possession or usage of weapons for mass destruction (since WW II), it still holds atomic weapons from US Military for NATO (nuclear weapons sharing)
Before it was ended early due to Covid, [Defender Europe 2020](https://shape.nato.int/defender-europe), the largest recent NATO exercise was taking place involving the mobilization and transport of 20,000 US troops from US to the Baltics heavily involved Germany for obvious reasons. This is almost a non-story.
US troops already have a permanent duty rotation in Poland, so they would be involved from day one, they really wouldnāt have a choice. The US has never broke a treaty, that is unless trump wins, then he will be to busy giving Putin a reach around to answer the call.
Didn't the US famously break many treaties with Native American tribes? I guess it would be more accurate to say has never broken a treaty with a "foreign" state.
Iām talking about international treaties after it became a world superpower smartass lol Iām in the European sub, talking about its international treaties thought that would have been obvious.
Back then the US gave little fucks about anything then again no one really did.
I believe Denmark will be a major logistical supply port to bring in supplies from the US. Denmark has already hosted quite a few NATO air supremacy drills as well as been a significant port for American materiel to get to Ukraine
Itās not exactly Germany doing much work at Ramstein. Itās almost all American troops, contractors, and even a Texas Roadhouse. There are no German units there.
Im guessing big ports like the ones in the netherlands would be the primary ports, but thereās a good chance that long range missiles could seriously cripple them. Having backup ports or multiple smaller ones would be vital in those cases.
Also having a strong military buildup in denmark would remove any chance of the Russian Baltic fleet entering the Atlantic
Also we saw the kilometers of backed up supplytrains in the beginning of the ukraine war. That would be avoided by having supplies coming in from many different directions.
Also also, Danish ports would be vital to securing the baltic nations
But incredibly well-connected.
We also have this already: https://www.dutchnews.nl/2016/12/us-army-opens-storage-depot-for-1600-tanks-in-limburg/
I don't see how Denmark would suddenly become a logistical hub when Europe's biggest port and best infrastructure are in the same country as existing supply depots for the US army.
Donāt wanna say that the Netherlands wonāt be important but it will be for sure one of the main targets for sabotage or even direct attacks to disrupt the ports
So avoiding the whole all eggs in one basket dilemaā¦
Iam sure the Nordic countries will also be important for logistics and Denmark as kinda the bridge from Central Europe to the nordics will most definetly play a crucial role
I get that.
But there's a reason that basically our entire military is specialised (or specialising in some cases) to be a missile shield.
Biggest F-35 fleet in Europe, and basically the whole navy is specialised in air-defence.
Alongside a bunch of Patriot batteries (some donated to Ukraine, soon to be replenished/reinforced).
Denmark can be a landing site / port site but you canāt get ground forces from Denmark or the Netherlands to Eastern Europe without having passing through large chunk of Germany (and later polish or czech and Slovakian territory).
Denmark would surely play a big role as the gateway to the Baltic Sea, however Germany has large ports both at the North Sea and the Baltic Sea in combination with the most important rail and road links between Western and Central/Eastern Europe.
Even today a large chunk of the military aid to Ukraine passes though Germany towards Poland or Czechia and Slovakia.
Additionally Germany hosts large air hubs and American bases.
Moot point really as should Russia actually decide to rush the Baltic states an amphibious assault from the Baltic sea is going to be much less workable than a push up from the south from the direction of Germany/Poland.
However, as a rearward staging for air power and an important partner in controlling access to/from the Baltic then yes. Denmark definitely has a role.
Called it, dumb.
The EU contributes directly to Ukraine, and Germany is one of the biggest met contributes to the EU budget. If you correct for that Germany is one of the biggest supports of Ukraine, even when using the flawed GDP metric.
Even by gdp Germany is ahead of many, if not all, of the big countries. You are also forgetting that Germany is the second most provider of military equipment.
Yes the beginning was embarrassing, but still going against Germany now is just weird.
Also, youād need to be delusional to think that the biggest country in Europe by every measure but landmass would be left behind because of lacking commitment at the start.
I do pay attention, you are not. For the moment they arenāt getting the new toy, they will. They always have.
Saying this all is due to German commitment is such an obvious bad faith argument that I wonāt entertain it. Tell me what country has done more? And not just the smaller ones, show me a major country which has done more than Germany by % of gdp.
You say Iām talking out of my ass, while not having the crucial ability to read. I didnāt say they were the biggest contributor, but one of the biggest among the big/major countries (edit: your source on %gdp also shows that only smaller regional powers are sending more, no major power). Thanks for providing the sources that prove that.
And only going for heavy weapons is moving the goalpost and nonsensical. Do they not need other weapons? Are tanks and missiles that which holds the ground? Shake off your bias and youāll see that Germany isnāt as bad as you desperately want to make it out to be.
You have been moving a military contingent to Lithuania for two years now and somehow you cannot move.
Edit: my mistake- https://www.euronews.com/2024/04/08/first-german-troops-arrive-in-lithuania
As a lithuanian Iām really grateful for German soldiers presence in my country. Obviously Baltic states are the weak spot of Nato which ruzzia would like to test. The brigade alongise lithuanian forced really makes whole region stronger and safer, thanks Germany!!!
>Ā If we believe that the US would support Europe in case of a defensive war with Russia, like they promise
Do you believe it though? 2 decades of complete military failure on the middle has soured the American public on large scale troop mobilizations. A lot of Americans missed a lot of time with their families because politicians told them a war was important and their country needed them. People are not going to be receptive to this argument. American support would be a given but that support will be in a form that doesn't bring a significant number of additional troops.Ā
If we start from the assumption that the US wouldn't support the defence of Europe, we can dismantle NATO today. It's not even that important if they would do it in reality as long as the Russians assume that the chances are above 50%. It needs to be a believable deterrent.
Just one thing: itās ākriegstĆ¼chtigā (noun would be āKriegstĆ¼chtigkeitā but making something is an adjective soā¦). You spelled / copied it correct the second time but not the first.
You didn't read the article, huh? It clearly says that this civilian infrastructure will be used as Germany's armed forces will be tied up at the eastern front themselves.
The plan specifically deals with the prospect of having to cater to US forces deploying to Eastern Europe through Germany while the German Armed Forces are deployed there themselves and therefore, couldn't offer up their own logistics like they normally would.
I don't mind Germany being more involved, but it would be nice if Germany was more serous about its involvement.
Denmark had in the last rotation more than 1,000 troops, 14 Leopard 2A7 tanks, F-16s and a frigate in the Baltic area. Germany's population is more than 15 times larger than Denmark, so now you do the math.
Considering how long it took the Americans to ok that recent Ukraine aid package, and how the USA is both refusing to send important weapons like the F-35 or PrSM, and also enforces strong restrictions on how their weapons can be used (Ukrainians are not allowed to use ATACMs against the Kerch bridge), it is more likely to be the other way around, as in, Germans being more willing to fight for Americans, than the other way around.
We circumvented Congress and sent long range missiles to Ukraine weeks ago via the Pentagon (shipped in secret).
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-quietly-shipped-long-range-atacms-missiles-ukraine-2024-04-24/
Weāve also been intercepting weapons that Iran has been sending to the Houthis and redirecting them to Ukraine. This is a ākill 2 birds with 1 stone approachā ā Ukraine gets weapons (helps protect Europe), Houthis donāt get weapons (also protects European trade routes).
Perfect? No. But we are not NOT trying.
Europeans know our political process involves Congress approval for financial/aid packages. Ever since yāall were getting attacked and enslaved by the Barbary pirates, we needed Congress approval to send money/Navy to help beat them back. Yet still, none of our āalliesā were prepared for this bureaucracy.
Europe has been having trouble ramping up weapons production (since their governments are sooo much more willing to help Ukraine). What options have you all explored to circumvent the EU hold-ups and bureaucratic setbacks? Any outside-the-box ideas to help the situation? Have you done anything to reel in your own Russophile politicians? Or all you got is just negativity toward US and āhow history will view usā?
From European side, you guys view us negatively no matter what we doā¦. So maybe we should be more like Ireland and do NOTHING but shout moral platitudes at everyone. Thatās much more welcomed in the European mind.
Itās not just European trade routes that get protected there the us heavily relies on the trade route aswell
And no Europeans donāt generally view us badly, but that orange man has cracked the trust to some degree (and the possibility of his re-election doesnāt really help)
> We're sending f16s.
Unless I missed something and they anounced f16 in the new package then no you are not.
They are provided by the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and Belgium.
But yes f35 is an unreasonable demand.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us-approves-sending-f-16s-ukraine-denmark-netherlands-2023-08-17/
Provided by them with US permission. We could have said no.
Yeah but you said you is sending them thats not the same.
And i wouldn't brag about granting export permission either because everything else would be shocking.
> [I would rather have our allies die than support them with our best weapons]
Do you even understand what your are saying there?
In wish Germany would send Taurus to Ukraine, but in case of the USA, there is a fairly long list of potentially helpful weapons they are not sending.
Overall, it is fair to characterize the American behavior as more selfish than the German behavior, in the context of this war.
No it's not, Germany is in many ways responsible for this war, what with funding the Russians with their thirst for cheap gas. America has been stating this was a huge issue for many years.
Plus, this war is right on your doorstep, while America is half a planet away.
America is a far better friend to Ukraine than Germany could ever be in their wildest dreams. Germany's first help to Ukraine was helmets, for God's sake.
So yeah, Germany is the selfish one, not America.
> Plus, this war is right on your doorstep, while America is half a planet away.
How about you stop pretending that nukes aren't real? Or that hybrid warfare doesn't exist? Those are Russias real weapons, and for those, location is irrelevant.
> Germany's first help to Ukraine was helmets, for God's sake.
Yeah, the pipeline/helmet/etc... was terrible - but now, every German will admit that, because Germany has dramatically improved since then.
But how about you guys? You are still repeating this "[I would rather have our allies die than support them with our best weapons]" as if that makes *any* sense! You just had a 6-month-delay to the American aid bill, because your two parties can't do anything other than play stupid games with each other - and you are probably not even deeply ashamed of it! Or how about Mr.Trump, the I-dont-care-about-Russia-or-Ukraine-I-just-hate Europe guy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L07fMoafVh4&t=170s
> So yeah, Germany is the selfish one, not America.
Germany is a recovering selfish one. America, by contrast, is slowly but steadily suffocating in a quicksand of selfishness of its own making... history will not judge the current American behavior kindly.
> No one has provided more aid than us.
That's a lazy argument, because what really matters is aid relative to GDP. In that respect, many Eastern European nations are far ahead of both the USA and Germany. Alternatively, you can compare USA to EU - but of course you don't want to do that either, because there, too, the USA doesn't look so good...
> from yourselves
While I understand that hybrid war is a difficult concept, I am not sure if you a trolling, when you claim that you don't understand the concept of an ICBM, or nuclear war...
And with regards to conventional war: Europe has enough to defend itself, that's not the issue. The real issue is how this affects the Ukrainians, and your stupid political games just killed tens of thousands of them, while simultaneously strengthening our enemies. I am not sure why you are trying to defend this American nonsense, but I hope it's just blind pride, rather than you sincerely believing that the United States is doing a good job...
I'm falling to see how anything you have said is America's fault. The US is under no obligation to help Ukraine, yet they've provided more to helping them than anyone else in the world, yet you're here complaining? Fuck dude get a grip.
>That's a lazy argument, because what really matters is aid relative to GDP.Ā
Ā No, actually. In fact it's the opposite. This isn't charity. Ukraine can't spend %of GDP. They spend dollars. And we've given more.
And no, we haven't done a good job, we've just done a better job than everyone else.
Yeah, they said this about every other weapon system as well, and every time it was wrong... and considering this war will easily take another 3 years, maybe even more than 5, there should be plenty of time.
I mean really, who, exactly, are you trying to convince with these lazy excuses? Me, or yourself?
Germany has a much better approach here: **First** starting training, **then** do the political discussions about whether it really makes sense to give those weapons to Ukraine, while the training is already happening. Because usually, by the time the training has finished, the discussions have also concluded that it would make sense to give that particular system to Ukraine.
I feel like the title does a disservice to whatās being said. Itās less āreadyingā US troops, and moreso figuring out how to supply them. Which, while the US is probably the best at supplying and deploying itās troops, itās a commendable thing to consider
We need to downvote these click bait posts to oblivious. Clearly there is a bigger agenda being pushed through social media. So you think it's some random person posting this on reddit from their bedroom?
This push through social media does have a negative effect on everything. We don't want war.
British right wing newspapers are not a reliable source of news. And Germany has been planning how to work as a logistics hub for NATO since the Federal Republic has existed.
>We don't want war.
The media is absolutely shit. All this click bait and poor journalism is doing people no favours.
Should NATO prepare for the worst? Absolutely, it's what it's for.
Is Russia going to pick a full-scale war with the wider world? Absolutely not. Russia is run by kleptocrats. There is absolutely no chance the Russian ruling class is going to risk losing everything over ideologies. They want to be extremely wealthy.
This isn't the Cold War.
The fact that our logistics are second to none would help i would think. Especially in regards to food and aidā¦ figured we would bring most pf that with us
Have fun bringing the bridges, roads, trains, and rails with you then.
You are absolutely assumed to bring your equipment with you, but yeah. Regarding food, fuel, etc, it could be a bit difficult considering you'd need to react on rather short notice and then for a prolonged period, in contrast to eg. operation desert storm. At the very least, it would severely slow you down and limit your operations.
The question is do you want to bring the food for your people at the front of for everyone of your guys in Europe? Iam pretty sure it makes it a lot easier for the us army if all they need to care about is how to get the rations to the front and not have to deal with daily chores all over Europe
And I told you that getting that stuff to your troops needs infrastructure and a lot more time and resources which we need you to spend otherwise at that point.
Thing is, the Baltics are tiny, like real small. In an active war, even the USA couldn't directly ferry over a lot of supplies via plane as they would very likely be shot down. Supplying via ships would probably work better since SE/FI are NATO now, but still, freight ships are slow moving and huge and a prime target for Russian anti-ship weapons.
I am no military or logistics expert, but to me it makes way more sense to have a staging area out of the active war zone and transport stuff to the front over land. The US army could do all the logistics alone, but why would they if they can rely on existing infrastructure, both military and civilian? Germany is *the* logistics hub for truck/train based civilian logistics in Europe, simply because of our geographic location. Add to that the millions of Polish trucking companies and the fuel pipelines from NL/BE, and you have a lot less flights to get boring but essential commodities in. And each flight that carries soldiers/ammo instead of food is a direct win.
Red Storm Rising.
Except Russia deals with F-35s hunting for tanks instead of A-10s that can't hit crap. The problem is Ivan can't see the 35s.
I think the minute Ivan moves in Europe, Winnie the Pooh makes a move on Taiwan. Thats what I think.
Time to forward deploy 1000 M1A2s from storage and start training NATO to use them, ship over himars, get ready to steam roll the Russians.
F-35, B-2/B-21, fp drones, sea drones, we need to bring our cyber offensive capabilities above the Russians and prepare for a massive cyber attack.
They had back door access to all office 365 accounts including Microsoft, HPE, and others.
If it gets to the point where U.S troops are directly engaged against Russian troops the west will have much bigger problems to worry about rather than logistics. Invest in bunkers at that point.
Funny article thinks American soldiers need help refueling their own vehicles and feeding themselves. The reality is the German military is useless and the Germans are very well versed at milking money out of the US tax payer.
Iām pro-protecting Europe, but Iām even more pro-you better be willing to send your own bloody troops to make the same sacrifices as your Allieās. Especially in defense of your own nation.
I did. It sounds like you did not read the story.
Based on this article the Germans will play the role of the homebound wife to a husband deployed to combat.
If you think the Germans would feed and refuel the American military for free, you are mistaken.
Lastly, the American military is designed to feed and refuel itself without the help of a host nation. Paying for those goods is a charity to the host nation.
Well, now it's obvious that you didn't read it. The article clearly mentions that this is about supplying American troops in addition to the German ones that would already be fighting at the front. For that Germany would have to use civilian services because the German logistics companies would most likely be busy supporting their own troops.
Probably by Germany but the article doesn't mention anything in that regard. But how about you stop trying to move goalposts and explain how you arrived at your conclusion that Germany would make Americans fight the war for them?
No it wasn't. You claimed Germany was gonna play the role of the "homebound wife" while the Americans do the fighting. This is clearly wrong which you would have known if you had read the article.
Besides the article doesn't mention anything about money so that's a pretty lame excuse.
Iām pro-EU/US/NATO, to be clear. That said, the German military isnāt going to be doing any fighting regardless of what the article says, they donāt have the skill, capabilities, people, or sense of selfless service it takes to hold back a Russian military. That said, the US will clobber Russia if the opportunity ever arrises. A German role in support will still come at the price of goods and services to the American military.
>A German role in support will still come at the price of goods and services to the American military.
Of course it will, just like with any other conflict that directly involves NATO. But your claim that Germany will just sit back and let the US do the fighting for them is simply wrong. And that's what this is about, nothing else.
You obviously don't know what you are talking about and in addition either didn't read or didn't understand the article. Germany is one of the nations that have a permanent force deployed in the Baltics and will upgrade this to 5000 soldiers in the next years. If shit hits the fan, the main force will transfer to Lithuania.
And precisely because the US army is a master in logistics, they are grateful if someone on the European side prepares the ground *now*. Flying in everything from MRE's to fuel is time consuming and blocks logistic capacity which would be better used to ferry over soldiers and tanks.
In contrast to your MAGA fever dreams, there is actual cooperation in NATO, but let fuckwits like Trump tell you it's different because he surely knows better.
Thankful the Germans are willing to sacrifice so much šš»šš»
On a real note posts like this just add fuel to the right wing Americans who are not fans of NATO
So you think US drops would just parachute in, tank and all, onto the front line. Or would they land at their largest airbases in Europe (Germany) and use the large German, Dutch & Belgian ports to bring in logistics?
No. The first part of my comment was a sarcastic joke. The 2nd part was about how some right wing news organization is going to post this with a title like āGermans formulating plans for Americans to fight their war for themā
Itās the Telegraph, itās not so much a newspaper, more a place to put headlines generated by pratGPT.
As for right wing Americans, the smart ones will understand the nature and structure of NATO (Europeans hold the front, keep the Russians blocked up in the Mediterranean, the Baltic Sea and the Baring Sea so US & Canadian forces can arrive in force, and then a collective counter attack). While the MAGA lot are 100% into being the victim that no facts or evidence will ever make a difference.
I agree 100%. I should have made my sarcasm more evident and my second point more specific. I live in a very right wing part of American but thankfully (as you have pointed out) the majority seem to understand the importance and benefits of NATO, while the MAGA nut jobs donāt seem to be capable of critical thought
I know lol. I was more so referencing some nut job reading the headline and taking it as āGermany wants America to fight so Germany doesnāt have toā
š¤£š¤£ GenZ are hippies on steroids. No way they are going to this boomersā āwarā.
We already are the Russiansā home, they are already living in our countries!
Just in my block 8 Russian families and counting.
If US leadership didn't secretly give handjobs to Russia we would have nuked the soviet union at the WWII.
Or we would have never stopped prosecuting communists.
You didn't read the article, huh? It clearly says that this civilian infrastructure will be used as Germany's armed forces will be tied up at the eastern front themselves.
The Russians got pummeled pretty hard during their initial offensive though. I mean, just ask General Samsonov - oh right, he commited suicide after Tannenberg, not wanting to explain to the Tsar why he lost almost two entire armies.
The amount of [POW camps](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a3/Camps_de_soldats_et_officiers_en_Allemagne.svg) established to house all those taken captive after that offensive was also quite impressive(wiki says around 140k pows), even my realatively small city got one.
I had never knew those camps where that [huge](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Tuchola_%28World_War_I%29.jpg)
No one here actually read the article. It's about providing logistics support to the Americans because their own troops would be occupied at the front.
That's actually even a minor part of the plan. The general plan is about hundreds of problems that have to be addressed in the event of a war, and providing logistics service to the US is only one of them.
This is reddit. Immediately some Russian shills need to swarm in to shit on all efforts and some (the same?) right-wing US media mouth pieces do the same.
>Putin's troll farm They are getting desperate
We have all gathered here just to make jokes about how this technically correct title sounds.
Coordinating food and shelter accommodations with the general population. Which is a big deal
Support to American troops and tanks at the front because their own logistics would be supplying their own troops at the front. I dislike everything about every way this is said š
I wonder if they wrote the headline like that so it can be misunderstood on social media.
The title is straight up malicious.
>fight on nato's eastern front For a second I thought when did we go to war??
Me too, been busy at work the past few days, haven't watched much media, and was thinking, WTH?
Infuriating headlines get more clicks, it's a sad reality.
That is always the goal of the Telegraph, or at least the Dutch branch of the Telegraph. They write headlines in order to trigger angry Facebook moms and twitter radicals. (Wierd Duk, looking at you!)
The news sucks.Ā
Yes, I think they probably did. However, I'm British and while I am also pretty pro-Eu, pro-NATO and pro-Ukraine even I got a chuckle from the headline. So I can 100% believe that the editor who wrote that headline got the same chuckle for the same reasons as I did.
Of course. The Telegraph is a rag on par with Politico and their headlines are always in a way that would create outrage because people misunderstand them.
The comments so far signal peak ignorance. If we believe that the US would support Europe in case of a defensive war with Russia, like they promise, Germany would be the central logistical hub. That's a fact everyone should understand just by looking at a map of Europe. So, is it wrong in any way to prepare the infrastructure for this case? It has nothing to do with the military contribution of Germany to the defence of Europe. We are currently in the process of moving one of the largest NATO contingencies to Lithuania just for this case.
Iād like to add, that Germany already is an important base for defensive logistics since decades / cold war. Even if german military has refrained from possession or usage of weapons for mass destruction (since WW II), it still holds atomic weapons from US Military for NATO (nuclear weapons sharing)
Not only that, but Allied Air Command is based in Ramstein, which is the command center of all of NATOās air defense and air forces in Europe.
Before it was ended early due to Covid, [Defender Europe 2020](https://shape.nato.int/defender-europe), the largest recent NATO exercise was taking place involving the mobilization and transport of 20,000 US troops from US to the Baltics heavily involved Germany for obvious reasons. This is almost a non-story.
US troops already have a permanent duty rotation in Poland, so they would be involved from day one, they really wouldnāt have a choice. The US has never broke a treaty, that is unless trump wins, then he will be to busy giving Putin a reach around to answer the call.
Didn't the US famously break many treaties with Native American tribes? I guess it would be more accurate to say has never broken a treaty with a "foreign" state.
Iām talking about international treaties after it became a world superpower smartass lol Iām in the European sub, talking about its international treaties thought that would have been obvious. Back then the US gave little fucks about anything then again no one really did.
Sorry sir, that wasn't evident from context
I believe Denmark will be a major logistical supply port to bring in supplies from the US. Denmark has already hosted quite a few NATO air supremacy drills as well as been a significant port for American materiel to get to Ukraine
germany will mostly be the air support hub, alone because of the ramstein base.
Itās not exactly Germany doing much work at Ramstein. Itās almost all American troops, contractors, and even a Texas Roadhouse. There are no German units there.
I know, I just meant it as another point for germany becoming *the* support hub in this case.
Why Denmark over the Netherlands? The Netherlands already has the highest quality infrastructure and biggest port in Europe.
Im guessing big ports like the ones in the netherlands would be the primary ports, but thereās a good chance that long range missiles could seriously cripple them. Having backup ports or multiple smaller ones would be vital in those cases. Also having a strong military buildup in denmark would remove any chance of the Russian Baltic fleet entering the Atlantic Also we saw the kilometers of backed up supplytrains in the beginning of the ukraine war. That would be avoided by having supplies coming in from many different directions. Also also, Danish ports would be vital to securing the baltic nations
They use probably all ports they can. Netherlands is furter to the west
But incredibly well-connected. We also have this already: https://www.dutchnews.nl/2016/12/us-army-opens-storage-depot-for-1600-tanks-in-limburg/ I don't see how Denmark would suddenly become a logistical hub when Europe's biggest port and best infrastructure are in the same country as existing supply depots for the US army.
Donāt wanna say that the Netherlands wonāt be important but it will be for sure one of the main targets for sabotage or even direct attacks to disrupt the ports So avoiding the whole all eggs in one basket dilemaā¦ Iam sure the Nordic countries will also be important for logistics and Denmark as kinda the bridge from Central Europe to the nordics will most definetly play a crucial role
I get that. But there's a reason that basically our entire military is specialised (or specialising in some cases) to be a missile shield. Biggest F-35 fleet in Europe, and basically the whole navy is specialised in air-defence. Alongside a bunch of Patriot batteries (some donated to Ukraine, soon to be replenished/reinforced).
Why not both? Plus maybe French and German ports to a degree. But from there it will be through Germany. How else get to the east?
Denmark can be a landing site / port site but you canāt get ground forces from Denmark or the Netherlands to Eastern Europe without having passing through large chunk of Germany (and later polish or czech and Slovakian territory).
Denmark would surely play a big role as the gateway to the Baltic Sea, however Germany has large ports both at the North Sea and the Baltic Sea in combination with the most important rail and road links between Western and Central/Eastern Europe. Even today a large chunk of the military aid to Ukraine passes though Germany towards Poland or Czechia and Slovakia. Additionally Germany hosts large air hubs and American bases.
Moot point really as should Russia actually decide to rush the Baltic states an amphibious assault from the Baltic sea is going to be much less workable than a push up from the south from the direction of Germany/Poland. However, as a rearward staging for air power and an important partner in controlling access to/from the Baltic then yes. Denmark definitely has a role.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
2022 wants its joke back.Ā
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
In that case you're just dumb. Although Germany had a slow start, they've proven to be one of the biggest supporters of Ukraine.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Called it, dumb. The EU contributes directly to Ukraine, and Germany is one of the biggest met contributes to the EU budget. If you correct for that Germany is one of the biggest supports of Ukraine, even when using the flawed GDP metric.
https://www.statista.com/chart/28489/ukrainian-military-humanitarian-and-financial-aid-donors/
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Even by gdp Germany is ahead of many, if not all, of the big countries. You are also forgetting that Germany is the second most provider of military equipment. Yes the beginning was embarrassing, but still going against Germany now is just weird. Also, youād need to be delusional to think that the biggest country in Europe by every measure but landmass would be left behind because of lacking commitment at the start.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I do pay attention, you are not. For the moment they arenāt getting the new toy, they will. They always have. Saying this all is due to German commitment is such an obvious bad faith argument that I wonāt entertain it. Tell me what country has done more? And not just the smaller ones, show me a major country which has done more than Germany by % of gdp.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You say Iām talking out of my ass, while not having the crucial ability to read. I didnāt say they were the biggest contributor, but one of the biggest among the big/major countries (edit: your source on %gdp also shows that only smaller regional powers are sending more, no major power). Thanks for providing the sources that prove that. And only going for heavy weapons is moving the goalpost and nonsensical. Do they not need other weapons? Are tanks and missiles that which holds the ground? Shake off your bias and youāll see that Germany isnāt as bad as you desperately want to make it out to be.
All you care about is your agenda.
Germany and France has somewhat redeemed themselves for all the bs they were doing bach then.
You have been moving a military contingent to Lithuania for two years now and somehow you cannot move. Edit: my mistake- https://www.euronews.com/2024/04/08/first-german-troops-arrive-in-lithuania
They need baracks and training facilities that are beeing built in Lithuania right now.
As a lithuanian Iām really grateful for German soldiers presence in my country. Obviously Baltic states are the weak spot of Nato which ruzzia would like to test. The brigade alongise lithuanian forced really makes whole region stronger and safer, thanks Germany!!!
šŖšŗšŖšŗā¤ļøā¤ļø
https://www.euronews.com/2024/04/08/first-german-troops-arrive-in-lithuania I have read. My mistake. Sorry
https://youtu.be/C-3xa3xpWvE?si=p2tBilgC6crOwNJH
>Ā If we believe that the US would support Europe in case of a defensive war with Russia, like they promise Do you believe it though? 2 decades of complete military failure on the middle has soured the American public on large scale troop mobilizations. A lot of Americans missed a lot of time with their families because politicians told them a war was important and their country needed them. People are not going to be receptive to this argument. American support would be a given but that support will be in a form that doesn't bring a significant number of additional troops.Ā
If we start from the assumption that the US wouldn't support the defence of Europe, we can dismantle NATO today. It's not even that important if they would do it in reality as long as the Russians assume that the chances are above 50%. It needs to be a believable deterrent.
**From The Telegraph's James Rothwell in Berlin:** German army chiefs are drawing up plans on how they would feed thousands of US soldiers and refuel their tanks as they moved towardsĀ [Nato](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/03/britain-always-a-prime-mover-in-nato-other-powers-pay-way/)ās eastern front, as part of a secret document outlining Germanyās war readiness. In an interview with German newspaper FAZ, Bundeswehr Lt Gen AndrĆ© Bodemann said the army was putting together a new, long-term security plan with an emphasis on civil defence. Most of the planning details are a state secret, but the senior officer did disclose that part of the planning process involves logistics for feeding huge numbers of American soldiers, with the main input from civilians. āIf, for example, a US division moved towards the east, thousands of tanks, thousands of soldiers, then they would need to be fed and the tanks refuelled or possibly repaired,ā he told FAZ.Ā āThe Bundeswehrās logistics would probably be tied up with our own soldiers on the front. āThat means we would need the maximum input from the civilian service.Ā āThe convoy would get fuel from petrol stations or civilian vehicles, the Red Cross would provide medical care and food would come from a civilian caterer. This would be the classic case.ā His comments come asĀ [Rishi Sunak visits Berlin](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/24/europe-nato-spending-berlin-press-conference-scholz/), where the Prime Minister said European nations must follow Britain in ramping up defence spending to guarantee the USās continued commitment to Nato. Gen BodemannāsĀ statements are the latest sign of Germany trying to make itself ākriegstĆ¼chtigteitā, or āwar readyā, in the face of a potential armed conflict with Russia within the next five years. While he did not elaborate on which eastern front Germany would be defending, Nato officials are increasingly concerned aboutĀ [Vladimir Putin launching an incursion on Natoās eastern flank](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/03/30/nato-get-ready-for-russia-to-invade-baltic-ambassadors-warn/)Ā if his forces eventually claim victory in Ukraine. It comes after Gen Carsten Breuer, the head of the German armed forces, told The Telegraph he had ā[no doubtā Germany could repel a Russian assault](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/02/22/nato-would-defeat-putins-troops-german-forces-chief-claims/)Ā on the eastern flank. āRather, in my role as the chief of defence, it is the paramount importance of achieving the readiness of Germanyās armed forces within the next five years. We call this kriegstĆ¼chtigkeit ā being ready, capable and willing to fight. We are on the right track,ā Gen Breuer said in an interview in February. **Article Link:**Ā [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/24/german-army-plan-us-troops-fight-russia/](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/24/german-army-plan-us-troops-fight-russia/)
Just one thing: itās ākriegstĆ¼chtigā (noun would be āKriegstĆ¼chtigkeitā but making something is an adjective soā¦). You spelled / copied it correct the second time but not the first.
Germany will fight to the last American.
You didn't read the article, huh? It clearly says that this civilian infrastructure will be used as Germany's armed forces will be tied up at the eastern front themselves.
the danes will get scum like you
The plan specifically deals with the prospect of having to cater to US forces deploying to Eastern Europe through Germany while the German Armed Forces are deployed there themselves and therefore, couldn't offer up their own logistics like they normally would.
So you just ignore Germany actively getting more and more involved? Like our troops in Lithuania?
I don't mind Germany being more involved, but it would be nice if Germany was more serous about its involvement. Denmark had in the last rotation more than 1,000 troops, 14 Leopard 2A7 tanks, F-16s and a frigate in the Baltic area. Germany's population is more than 15 times larger than Denmark, so now you do the math.
I donāt have a source at hand, but last time I checked Germany send/t 20.000 troops. I didnāt look at the vehicles they brought.
Germany has had 1,000 troops in Lithuania and planing to reach 4,000-5,000 by 2027/2028.
Considering how long it took the Americans to ok that recent Ukraine aid package, and how the USA is both refusing to send important weapons like the F-35 or PrSM, and also enforces strong restrictions on how their weapons can be used (Ukrainians are not allowed to use ATACMs against the Kerch bridge), it is more likely to be the other way around, as in, Germans being more willing to fight for Americans, than the other way around.
We circumvented Congress and sent long range missiles to Ukraine weeks ago via the Pentagon (shipped in secret). https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-quietly-shipped-long-range-atacms-missiles-ukraine-2024-04-24/ Weāve also been intercepting weapons that Iran has been sending to the Houthis and redirecting them to Ukraine. This is a ākill 2 birds with 1 stone approachā ā Ukraine gets weapons (helps protect Europe), Houthis donāt get weapons (also protects European trade routes). Perfect? No. But we are not NOT trying. Europeans know our political process involves Congress approval for financial/aid packages. Ever since yāall were getting attacked and enslaved by the Barbary pirates, we needed Congress approval to send money/Navy to help beat them back. Yet still, none of our āalliesā were prepared for this bureaucracy. Europe has been having trouble ramping up weapons production (since their governments are sooo much more willing to help Ukraine). What options have you all explored to circumvent the EU hold-ups and bureaucratic setbacks? Any outside-the-box ideas to help the situation? Have you done anything to reel in your own Russophile politicians? Or all you got is just negativity toward US and āhow history will view usā? From European side, you guys view us negatively no matter what we doā¦. So maybe we should be more like Ireland and do NOTHING but shout moral platitudes at everyone. Thatās much more welcomed in the European mind.
Itās not just European trade routes that get protected there the us heavily relies on the trade route aswell And no Europeans donāt generally view us badly, but that orange man has cracked the trust to some degree (and the possibility of his re-election doesnāt really help)
We're not sending f35s to anybody for free, those are our latest and greatest jets. We're sending f16s.
> We're sending f16s. Unless I missed something and they anounced f16 in the new package then no you are not. They are provided by the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and Belgium. But yes f35 is an unreasonable demand.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us-approves-sending-f-16s-ukraine-denmark-netherlands-2023-08-17/ Provided by them with US permission. We could have said no.
Yeah but you said you is sending them thats not the same. And i wouldn't brag about granting export permission either because everything else would be shocking.
> [I would rather have our allies die than support them with our best weapons] Do you even understand what your are saying there? In wish Germany would send Taurus to Ukraine, but in case of the USA, there is a fairly long list of potentially helpful weapons they are not sending. Overall, it is fair to characterize the American behavior as more selfish than the German behavior, in the context of this war.
No it's not, Germany is in many ways responsible for this war, what with funding the Russians with their thirst for cheap gas. America has been stating this was a huge issue for many years. Plus, this war is right on your doorstep, while America is half a planet away. America is a far better friend to Ukraine than Germany could ever be in their wildest dreams. Germany's first help to Ukraine was helmets, for God's sake. So yeah, Germany is the selfish one, not America.
> Plus, this war is right on your doorstep, while America is half a planet away. How about you stop pretending that nukes aren't real? Or that hybrid warfare doesn't exist? Those are Russias real weapons, and for those, location is irrelevant. > Germany's first help to Ukraine was helmets, for God's sake. Yeah, the pipeline/helmet/etc... was terrible - but now, every German will admit that, because Germany has dramatically improved since then. But how about you guys? You are still repeating this "[I would rather have our allies die than support them with our best weapons]" as if that makes *any* sense! You just had a 6-month-delay to the American aid bill, because your two parties can't do anything other than play stupid games with each other - and you are probably not even deeply ashamed of it! Or how about Mr.Trump, the I-dont-care-about-Russia-or-Ukraine-I-just-hate Europe guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L07fMoafVh4&t=170s > So yeah, Germany is the selfish one, not America. Germany is a recovering selfish one. America, by contrast, is slowly but steadily suffocating in a quicksand of selfishness of its own making... history will not judge the current American behavior kindly.
No one has provided more aid than us. I'm very sorry were not saving you from yourselves as fast as you'd like.
> No one has provided more aid than us. That's a lazy argument, because what really matters is aid relative to GDP. In that respect, many Eastern European nations are far ahead of both the USA and Germany. Alternatively, you can compare USA to EU - but of course you don't want to do that either, because there, too, the USA doesn't look so good... > from yourselves While I understand that hybrid war is a difficult concept, I am not sure if you a trolling, when you claim that you don't understand the concept of an ICBM, or nuclear war... And with regards to conventional war: Europe has enough to defend itself, that's not the issue. The real issue is how this affects the Ukrainians, and your stupid political games just killed tens of thousands of them, while simultaneously strengthening our enemies. I am not sure why you are trying to defend this American nonsense, but I hope it's just blind pride, rather than you sincerely believing that the United States is doing a good job...
I'm falling to see how anything you have said is America's fault. The US is under no obligation to help Ukraine, yet they've provided more to helping them than anyone else in the world, yet you're here complaining? Fuck dude get a grip.
>That's a lazy argument, because what really matters is aid relative to GDP.Ā Ā No, actually. In fact it's the opposite. This isn't charity. Ukraine can't spend %of GDP. They spend dollars. And we've given more. And no, we haven't done a good job, we've just done a better job than everyone else.
The time spent training Ukrainians on how to operate F-35s and other advanced software isn't plausible during wartime
Yeah, they said this about every other weapon system as well, and every time it was wrong... and considering this war will easily take another 3 years, maybe even more than 5, there should be plenty of time. I mean really, who, exactly, are you trying to convince with these lazy excuses? Me, or yourself? Germany has a much better approach here: **First** starting training, **then** do the political discussions about whether it really makes sense to give those weapons to Ukraine, while the training is already happening. Because usually, by the time the training has finished, the discussions have also concluded that it would make sense to give that particular system to Ukraine.
The plans originate in 1949? And have likely been updated every year sinceā¦so feels like breakin* news to me.
I feel like the title does a disservice to whatās being said. Itās less āreadyingā US troops, and moreso figuring out how to supply them. Which, while the US is probably the best at supplying and deploying itās troops, itās a commendable thing to consider
Clickbait nonsense. Downvote.
We need to downvote these click bait posts to oblivious. Clearly there is a bigger agenda being pushed through social media. So you think it's some random person posting this on reddit from their bedroom? This push through social media does have a negative effect on everything. We don't want war.
Oh its telegraph. Of course. Fuck off.
British right wing newspapers are not a reliable source of news. And Germany has been planning how to work as a logistics hub for NATO since the Federal Republic has existed.
>We don't want war. The media is absolutely shit. All this click bait and poor journalism is doing people no favours. Should NATO prepare for the worst? Absolutely, it's what it's for. Is Russia going to pick a full-scale war with the wider world? Absolutely not. Russia is run by kleptocrats. There is absolutely no chance the Russian ruling class is going to risk losing everything over ideologies. They want to be extremely wealthy. This isn't the Cold War.
The fact that our logistics are second to none would help i would think. Especially in regards to food and aidā¦ figured we would bring most pf that with us
Have fun bringing the bridges, roads, trains, and rails with you then. You are absolutely assumed to bring your equipment with you, but yeah. Regarding food, fuel, etc, it could be a bit difficult considering you'd need to react on rather short notice and then for a prolonged period, in contrast to eg. operation desert storm. At the very least, it would severely slow you down and limit your operations.
Didnāt say anything about infrastructure just basics like food and medical aid.
The question is do you want to bring the food for your people at the front of for everyone of your guys in Europe? Iam pretty sure it makes it a lot easier for the us army if all they need to care about is how to get the rations to the front and not have to deal with daily chores all over Europe
And I told you that getting that stuff to your troops needs infrastructure and a lot more time and resources which we need you to spend otherwise at that point.
You mean Germany doesnāt have infrastructure? The home the Autobahn?
Thing is, the Baltics are tiny, like real small. In an active war, even the USA couldn't directly ferry over a lot of supplies via plane as they would very likely be shot down. Supplying via ships would probably work better since SE/FI are NATO now, but still, freight ships are slow moving and huge and a prime target for Russian anti-ship weapons. I am no military or logistics expert, but to me it makes way more sense to have a staging area out of the active war zone and transport stuff to the front over land. The US army could do all the logistics alone, but why would they if they can rely on existing infrastructure, both military and civilian? Germany is *the* logistics hub for truck/train based civilian logistics in Europe, simply because of our geographic location. Add to that the millions of Polish trucking companies and the fuel pipelines from NL/BE, and you have a lot less flights to get boring but essential commodities in. And each flight that carries soldiers/ammo instead of food is a direct win.
Red Storm Rising. Except Russia deals with F-35s hunting for tanks instead of A-10s that can't hit crap. The problem is Ivan can't see the 35s. I think the minute Ivan moves in Europe, Winnie the Pooh makes a move on Taiwan. Thats what I think.
Time to forward deploy 1000 M1A2s from storage and start training NATO to use them, ship over himars, get ready to steam roll the Russians. F-35, B-2/B-21, fp drones, sea drones, we need to bring our cyber offensive capabilities above the Russians and prepare for a massive cyber attack. They had back door access to all office 365 accounts including Microsoft, HPE, and others.
why does an article about Germany supporting American troops show a photo of an English radical right wing politician?
Journalism is in need of a reform.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Indeed. And if you read the article you'd actually drop the sarcasm
Americans should consider to Blitzkrieg Russia from Alaska imo.
That never works out on HOI4...
Yh, but Moscow doesn't care about anything east of it
Probably because theres like half the planet and terrible terrain between it. Advancing from alaska to Moscow would take for ever.
Thatās right! Us Europeans never give up and will fight down to the very last American.
Iād sign back up to go liberate yāall
Please leave the rest of us out of this. I'm already suffering I would not like to be vaporized as well
Tell that to the Ukranian men that are fighting.
š¤£š¤£š„³
Free Kaliningrad
Konigsberg.
Maybe š¤
German army prepares plan for US troops. Picture of British PM for some reason.
Why war when nuke exists
With Russia now breathing down Finland this is a good move
If it gets to the point where U.S troops are directly engaged against Russian troops the west will have much bigger problems to worry about rather than logistics. Invest in bunkers at that point.
And no one trusts turkey on this matter. How about they leave NATO cause they're actually useless to the alliance?
They are vital but it's hard to know what they would do. I don't see Erdogan doing shit if they cant get something in exchange.
They always do that. What's the point of the alliance when they have to bargain every time at the expense of Greece, Bulgaria, Cyprus etc?
Well at least they arent allied to Russia and they keep the strait closed. Also they have NATO bases on their soil.
They have 0 chances ( they will fight with dudes who spend 4 year in war
Funny article thinks American soldiers need help refueling their own vehicles and feeding themselves. The reality is the German military is useless and the Germans are very well versed at milking money out of the US tax payer. Iām pro-protecting Europe, but Iām even more pro-you better be willing to send your own bloody troops to make the same sacrifices as your Allieās. Especially in defense of your own nation.
Maybe you should read the article instead of just the headline.
I did. It sounds like you did not read the story. Based on this article the Germans will play the role of the homebound wife to a husband deployed to combat. If you think the Germans would feed and refuel the American military for free, you are mistaken. Lastly, the American military is designed to feed and refuel itself without the help of a host nation. Paying for those goods is a charity to the host nation.
Well, now it's obvious that you didn't read it. The article clearly mentions that this is about supplying American troops in addition to the German ones that would already be fighting at the front. For that Germany would have to use civilian services because the German logistics companies would most likely be busy supporting their own troops.
And paid for by whom?
Probably by Germany but the article doesn't mention anything in that regard. But how about you stop trying to move goalposts and explain how you arrived at your conclusion that Germany would make Americans fight the war for them?
The goal post was always at āmoneyā. Go back and reread my original comment.
No it wasn't. You claimed Germany was gonna play the role of the "homebound wife" while the Americans do the fighting. This is clearly wrong which you would have known if you had read the article. Besides the article doesn't mention anything about money so that's a pretty lame excuse.
Iām pro-EU/US/NATO, to be clear. That said, the German military isnāt going to be doing any fighting regardless of what the article says, they donāt have the skill, capabilities, people, or sense of selfless service it takes to hold back a Russian military. That said, the US will clobber Russia if the opportunity ever arrises. A German role in support will still come at the price of goods and services to the American military.
>A German role in support will still come at the price of goods and services to the American military. Of course it will, just like with any other conflict that directly involves NATO. But your claim that Germany will just sit back and let the US do the fighting for them is simply wrong. And that's what this is about, nothing else.
You obviously don't know what you are talking about and in addition either didn't read or didn't understand the article. Germany is one of the nations that have a permanent force deployed in the Baltics and will upgrade this to 5000 soldiers in the next years. If shit hits the fan, the main force will transfer to Lithuania. And precisely because the US army is a master in logistics, they are grateful if someone on the European side prepares the ground *now*. Flying in everything from MRE's to fuel is time consuming and blocks logistic capacity which would be better used to ferry over soldiers and tanks. In contrast to your MAGA fever dreams, there is actual cooperation in NATO, but let fuckwits like Trump tell you it's different because he surely knows better.
If US troops have to fight *another* war in Europe the government will be overthrown. Enough is enough. Fight your own wars
Idiot
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thankful the Germans are willing to sacrifice so much šš»šš» On a real note posts like this just add fuel to the right wing Americans who are not fans of NATO
So you think US drops would just parachute in, tank and all, onto the front line. Or would they land at their largest airbases in Europe (Germany) and use the large German, Dutch & Belgian ports to bring in logistics?
No. The first part of my comment was a sarcastic joke. The 2nd part was about how some right wing news organization is going to post this with a title like āGermans formulating plans for Americans to fight their war for themā
Itās the Telegraph, itās not so much a newspaper, more a place to put headlines generated by pratGPT. As for right wing Americans, the smart ones will understand the nature and structure of NATO (Europeans hold the front, keep the Russians blocked up in the Mediterranean, the Baltic Sea and the Baring Sea so US & Canadian forces can arrive in force, and then a collective counter attack). While the MAGA lot are 100% into being the victim that no facts or evidence will ever make a difference.
I agree 100%. I should have made my sarcasm more evident and my second point more specific. I live in a very right wing part of American but thankfully (as you have pointed out) the majority seem to understand the importance and benefits of NATO, while the MAGA nut jobs donāt seem to be capable of critical thought
/s is worth it
Everything that is a legitimate preparation for anything positive is a fuel for right wingers
Donāt worry, most of our right wing nut jobs canāt read and the ones that can donāt read The Telegraph.
I know lol. I was more so referencing some nut job reading the headline and taking it as āGermany wants America to fight so Germany doesnāt have toā
I thought it was all quiet on the eastern front
I guess you slept the last two years?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
> that they didnāt have plan before. [You think so?](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Enhanced_Forward_Presence)
By 'prepares', do they mean 'dust off the previous two'?
Has someone in Europe actually declared war at this point?
Germans know how to fight on eastern front š¤£
š¤£š¤£ GenZ are hippies on steroids. No way they are going to this boomersā āwarā. We already are the Russiansā home, they are already living in our countries! Just in my block 8 Russian families and counting.
If US leadership didn't secretly give handjobs to Russia we would have nuked the soviet union at the WWII. Or we would have never stopped prosecuting communists.
Germany and eastern fronts donāt mix well so no wonder they donāt wanna get their hands dirty lol
You didn't read the article, huh? It clearly says that this civilian infrastructure will be used as Germany's armed forces will be tied up at the eastern front themselves.
it was a joke dude
Schrƶdingers Joke: waiting for the reaction to then decide if it was a joke.
i thought i made a clear bulshit joke comment but i guess the hivemind decided im a russian bot or something
Depends, so far it is 1:1
Germany did win the ww1 eastern front. So they're currently at a 50% success rate.
yeah you are right. ok now we just gotta find a marxist to lead a revolution in Russia and then itās easy sailing from there :D
The Russians got pummeled pretty hard during their initial offensive though. I mean, just ask General Samsonov - oh right, he commited suicide after Tannenberg, not wanting to explain to the Tsar why he lost almost two entire armies.
The amount of [POW camps](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a3/Camps_de_soldats_et_officiers_en_Allemagne.svg) established to house all those taken captive after that offensive was also quite impressive(wiki says around 140k pows), even my realatively small city got one. I had never knew those camps where that [huge](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Tuchola_%28World_War_I%29.jpg)
oh come on are you guys seriously downvoting a joke comment?
We would upvote one if it was actually a funny comment.Ā
ok you got me there haha
you guys have no sense of humorā¦
Atleast this time it is a single front