Why won't they send in more NATO countries, after these months, to help Ukraine regain land from Russia? - eviltoast

It makes sense that they won’t allow their own skin to be ravaged (United States, Britain, Germany, France etc), but why not the Baltics and Poland, at this point?

I’m surprised they haven’t done so, after these long months

    • olgas_husband@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      i think he meant because of the civil war, so there were a lot of battle tested people, and the soviet equipment and war doctrine they inherited.

      i don’t entirely agree with him tho, the country was riddled with corruption, this probably hurts the effectiveness of army and the nato factor, ukranian personal were trained by nato, which led to a mishmash of training, war doctrines and equipment

    • Danann@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ukraine started off as the most well-armed European army besides Russia. Thousands of tanks, armored fighting vehicles, artillery pieces, hundreds of jets, large stockpiles of artillery ammunition and small drones, etc. This was all backed by years of ideological hardening and training and the willingness to conscript right off the bat.

      All of that has been whittled down and the delusion nurtured both by Ukraine and the Western media to dominate the (English-speaking) information sphere. This has the effect of the West sending minimal replacements for the equipment spent and lost because they believed they only had to kick in the door for the whole rotten structure to fall apart.