Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Major breakthroughs in UK munitions production

baesystems.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 49 posts

Re: Major breakthroughs in UK munitions production

#21

Post by zmgsabst »

sleepyguy wrote: post #5

Innovation brought on by the fact they want to rid themselves of dependence on the USA. All around the world more and more countries and industry are looking for ways to decouple from American dependence.

This is due to being unable to meet the artillery demands of the Ukraine war.

NATO has been badly out produced by Russia — and drained its collective stockpiles to dangerous levels.

- - - -

Articles pretending that this was invented in a few months due to Trump are silly — and commit a fallacy so common it has a name.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

Re: Major breakthroughs in UK munitions production

#22

Post by 4ndrewl »

monero-xmr wrote: post #11
sleepyguy wrote: post #5

Innovation brought on by the fact they want to rid themselves of dependence on the USA. All around the world more and more countries and industry are looking for ways to decouple from American dependence.

As an American, this is a good thing. I don't want a world where Europe / UK are vassals to the hegemon. A European happy to live under America's boot rather than own their own destiny is a weak person indeed.

I mean only if they are prepared to use it against US interests...

Re: Major breakthroughs in UK munitions production

#23

Post by zmgsabst »

jmyeet wrote: post #19

Empires usually operate by looting their holdings to enrich the imperial core. There is normally something that sustains their dominance. The British Empire was the drug dealer empire, first with tobacco and later with opium. There were also some spices in there too. But the British Empire at one point covered a quarter of the globe, leading to the double-meaning of "the sun never sets on the British Empire" (also me…

Trump is an avatar to revive the imperial core, elected by a proletariat which has been looted by bourgeoisie focused on the periphery of the empire and their insular power games, eg, controlling EU via NATO. The US is not a monolith and understanding Trump requires understanding the class factions within the US.

This too has analogs in Rome.

In a present context, this is US multipolarity: focused on building the US and NA (as a modern Monroe Doctrine) while dropping foreign entanglements.

Trump’s threats against Canada, Mexico, Greenland, and Panama are best understood within that context.

Re: Major breakthroughs in UK munitions production

#24

Post by zabzonk »

looofooo0 wrote: post #13
zabzonk wrote: post #2

[flagged]

Don't worry about this, it is even worse. 75% of all casualties Russian military doctors see stem from drones. (In major wars before it was artillery leading this list.) So investing into artillery shells is a bit like investing in cavalry 120 years ago..

> 75% of all casualties Russian military doctors see stem from drones

How can the doctors tell? And a drone does not carry much AP armament. But one smacking into a Ukrainian residential block...

Re: Major breakthroughs in UK munitions production

#25

Post by sleepyguy »

zmgsabst wrote: post #21
sleepyguy wrote: post #5

Innovation brought on by the fact they want to rid themselves of dependence on the USA. All around the world more and more countries and industry are looking for ways to decouple from American dependence.

This is due to being unable to meet the artillery demands of the Ukraine war. NATO has been badly out produced by Russia — and drained its collective stockpiles to dangerous levels. - - - - Articles pretending that this was invented in a few months due to Trump are silly — and commit a fallacy so common it has a name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

https://ukranews.com/en/news/1077392-bae-systems-preparing-t...

>comes against the backdrop of the refusal of British and European defense companies to purchase American equipment. This is due to fears that President Donald Trump has turned the USA into an unreliable partner.

This was just one of the many articles. You can do a quick search and the theme is decouple from the USA.

Re: Major breakthroughs in UK munitions production

#26

Post by lokimedes »

monero-xmr wrote: post #11
sleepyguy wrote: post #5

Innovation brought on by the fact they want to rid themselves of dependence on the USA. All around the world more and more countries and industry are looking for ways to decouple from American dependence.

As an American, this is a good thing. I don't want a world where Europe / UK are vassals to the hegemon. A European happy to live under America's boot rather than own their own destiny is a weak person indeed.

For a continent with two world wars within a span of 30 years, Europe was ready for US hegemony in 1944. The Trump narrative is not really based on neither US nor European logic, but his own particular kind of gaslighting.

Re: Major breakthroughs in UK munitions production

#28

Post by benterix »

roenxi wrote: post #14
sleepyguy wrote: post #5

Innovation brought on by the fact they want to rid themselves of dependence on the USA. All around the world more and more countries and industry are looking for ways to decouple from American dependence.

Trump: "Spend more making yourselves more military independent". Europe: "Screw you! We'll show you! We're going to spend more money on becoming militarily independent!" The man has an inhuman power to influence narratives.

More like:

Trump: "Buy more from us to make yourselves more military independent!"

Europe: "There is another way."

Re: Major breakthroughs in UK munitions production

#30

Post by benterix »

looofooo0 wrote: post #18
ohgr wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These artillery shells are mostly for destroying equipment and structures not people.

No, if you look at statistics like ww2, most harm to soldiers was inflicted by artillery.

>> These artillery shells are mostly for destroying equipment and structures not people.

> No, if you look at statistics like ww2, most harm to soldiers was inflicted by artillery.

These two statements are not mutually exclusive.

Post reply on HN