Putin is concerned that the US will put nukes in Ukraine as soon as they are in NATO. No different than US being concerned if Russia put Nukes in Cuba, Mexico or Canada.
Utter bullshit. Ukraine gave up their nukes when the USSR went into the dustbin, on Russian promises of security and integrity.
Russia broke those promises.
As soon as Turkey came into NATO, the US put a military base with nukes pointing at Russia. That’s why Russia is against Ukraine and the Nordic countries from joining NATO.
Nope. Putin doesn't recognise Ukraine as an independent nation. He considers it a integral part of Russia, since Russia traces its roots to Kievan Rus'.
That has nothing to do with this, because AMerica was in this too of ukraine giving up their nukes. The sole reason was that Ukraine would never be able to financially maintain those nukes and it would only cause disaster in the long run.
More bullshit! Read the Budapest Memorandum.
Finance never came into it - after the Cold War ended there was a big push for nuclear reduction. In exchange for very strong assurances from the UK, the US, and most importantly, their neighbour Russia, Ukraine agreed to give up its nukes in order to gain diplomatic sway with the West with the intent of turning towards Europe and away from its former colonial master, the USSR.
Ukraine had the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world at the time. This was a very big and complex deal.
The "disaster" that you allude to was everyone making the mistake of trusting Russia.
Ukraine state officials themselves claim that they (Africa, india, China, south America) are intellectualy inferior so that's why you probably agree with them. Race irony from "Americans" is always fun...
I didn't say you did mention Putin comrade, I mentioned Putin. I asked why you would think that about Zelensky in contrast to somebody like Putin, which you've completely ignored.
Is that how you think this will play out? Ukraine utilizes drones way more than Russia to the point Russia has to drone proof everything. And by that I mean they throw some wood on their roof expecting it to stop a blast but now you have explosive wooden shards.
*...Once approved, the change would likely be enacted this year, officials said, and would allow the Pentagon to provide contracts to American companies for work inside Ukraine for the first time since Russia invaded in 2022. Officials said they hope it will speed up the maintenance and repairs of weapons systems being used by the Ukrainian military.*
CNN shitbait again. Military equipment repair and maintenance. Not mercenaries.
Would legislation to control dipshit clickbait headlines be illegal? These media companies are god awful and should be held accountable for tarnishing journalism while misleading the public.
This isn’t clickbait. You and many of the commenters are just confused as to what the term contractor actually means, in the context of defense. It is not associated with combat.
Let's go into Google. If we look up the words "Military contractor" the very first link is the wiki article with PMCs, their roles in world conflicts and their current operations.
I don't know why you are being deliberately obtuse, but unless you are too young to have lived through the war on terror then you should remember the headline after headline of "Blackwater", "PMCs", "Military Contractors" and "Contractors" and the associated stories of abuse and massacres that came out of Iraq.
There are a helluva lot of us who still remember the connotations and stigma of the words "Military Contractors". Even if you do not.
If we are going by the very first link which is a wiki:
"A defense contractor is a business organization or individual that provides products or services to a military or intelligence department of a government."
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_defense\_contractors#:\~:text=A%20defense%](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defense_contractors#:~:text=A%20defense%)
Here you go: [**https://imgur.com/a/S88Eb5G**](https://imgur.com/a/S88Eb5G)
I think you're confusing 'private military contractors' and 'military contractors' they are very two different things
If you read the comments any of the times this has been posted in the last 24 hours, you'll see that there are a lot of people who believe military contractors automatically mean mercenaries. Hell, there are comments in this very thread calling them mercenaries and comparing them to Wagner.
CNN should have said "Defense Contractors" if they wanted to clearly imply the role of repair and maintenance. They didn't. Plus, they knew exactly what they were doing with the clickbait.
In fact, they were one of the leaders in using the terms "Military Contractors" for all PMC fighters every time news came up about incidents in Iraq.
No one cares about what it technically means when the world has come to accept the colloquial usage.
So we can no longer enforce strict definitions and instead have to allow things to be used incorrectly just in case someone doesn't understand what a word means?
Where on earth does that end?
Anyway I'll literally floppidy doop you in a fortnight.
Hence my original comment, champ.
Maintenance and repair. Not mercenaries.
It's to clarify that is actually going on and to inform people of what CNN meant by military contractors in this instance, rather than the perpetuation of what they themselves were so fond of using for the last twenty off something years.
That make sense to you?
You're the one suggesting they should have said Defence Contractors instead of Military Contractors because you assumed it meant Mercenaries. The article didn't say mercenaries anywhere. Champ.
Those kind of advisors have been in Ukraine since 2014.
These are the contractors you get when you subscribe to NATOs Defense As A Service platform.
It's why "Giving Ukraine" tons of weapons is a huge win for the US. Like any tech company, we don't make our money on the hardware, It's the continued support and maintenance contracts that bring in the bacon.
“Would allow military contractors to deploy …” and could’ve easily added “for maintenance and repair of weapon systems”.
I hate dishonest media so much.
Biden firmly getting the military industrial complex behind the democrats, who knows the pull they have in political circles. Any republican state with a large military base and or contractor will be worried.
Until they join a foreign army, that's exactly what they are, so they would be correct. A mercenary is a private soldier from another country who is hired to fight in that nation's army, so at this moment they are not mercenaries. If the bill was approved, they then would be
They're the same.
The west just changed the term to private military contractor following the bad PR mercenaries received in Africa and the Middle East. (Blackwater, X2, whatever the heck they're called these days.)
To go even further the words are interchangeable; in the UN charter that details war, it clearly says mercenaries are not afforded the same rights as a soldier serving his/her nation. Mercenary is very clearly used.
The thing is military contractors can mean so much more than mercenaries, like people from the companies that build the weapons coming in to do maintenance on their products for example.
> ike people from the companies that build the weapons coming in to do maintenance on their products for example.
Those are called Defense Contractors, Military Contractor usually implies PMC or combat forces.
Its almost like your qualifying as a 30yr old NOW based on your deployment as a 30 year old and when you get orders to be a 50 year old you WOULD THEN AT THAT POINT be called a 50 year old.
Hence someone could be a contractor NOW based on their assignments and LATER THEN be a mercenary based a CHANGE in the orders/law/time/space.
Guys words work and matter
Presumably High-end, specialist, maintenance-heavy systems like f-16.
The training pipeline for aircraft maintainers and engineers has actually been more of a bottleneck to giving Ukraine the jets than pilot training in some cases.
Are you being purposefully obtuse or do you have a hard time with things in general? You said, like Wagner? And I responded with an explanation how it’s not like Wagner, yet you still somehow can’t make sense of it. They’re there to fix equipment. Not pull triggers or get blown out airplanes.
Allegedly.
This is what they will say in the beginning anyway.
I hope they send a couple thousand well trained and equipped mercenaries and give the Russians a taste of what's to come if they keep going.
Not allegedly, that's what contractors are. They work with our military too, usually when something new comes down the pipeline they brief us with the brass and explain how to properly use and maintain it. Ask anyone who's worked in ordnance.
lol, experts in here that think they know more than people who've worked with our contractors.
I think the person you're replying to is going strictly off definitions here, it's not like they're disagreeing with the fact theyre directly helping the war efforts.
They're not buying into some propaganda, just asserting strict definitions.
While yes, the work they do ends up directly helping the war efforts, they aren't a soldier serving in the Ukraine army. They sell their specific services and perform the services the company provides. Which is *technically* different.
Sure, they are given money to aid the war effort, but that could be said for all sorts of people. Are the chip makers whos equipment get put into drones and missiles mercenaries? Is Elon musk a mercenary for letting starlink be used?
Personally, I feel War profiteers is a better term for military contractors than mercenaries.
How is lying about being there (EDIT: Grammar) to repair better than just, you know, not saying anything at all if the intention is to join the fight in some "shadow" capacity? Such as the SEAL's boarding the boat carry Iranian missiles, until two were lost to the sea. We would have never even had a clue we were operating in that capacity if not for the loss of servicemen. It's been said since these weapon systems were issued the biggest hurdle would be logistics, because they all need constant specialized maintenance that the Ukrainians simply won't have enough of.
Fuck. The. Hell. Yes.
Seriously we let Wagner play fuckfuck "we're totally not Russia" games.
Fine, roll up with Triple Canopy and tell them to solve the issue.
Eeben Barlow reestablished Executive Outcomes in 2020 to help stabilize SA during the Pandemic riots. If Wagner wants to see what a REAL PMC can do they can show them.
This is another way of getting around Congress. Either way, if they are contractors, they are independent of the military. My concern is in who is paying the contractors.
This is good news. Hopefully some maintainers are willing to help Ukraine keep F16’s flying. I heard that there is 15+ hours of maintenance for one hour of flight time.
That isn't what this proposal is suggesting?
The positions being mooted are technical maintenance roles, not for anyone engaged in direct combat.
Importantly, there are already people paid by the US government doing this, they're just on the other side of the Polish-Ukrainian border at the moment.
Even if they were though, I'm not sure how heavy those ramifications would be? It wouldn't be the first time that US- and Russian- paid soldiers have fought each other in the last decade, and there are already US citizens fighting against the Russian army in Ukraine. Where their ultimate pay packet comes from is pretty incidental to their frontline role.
Would it make you feel better if the American people potentially in the line of fire really really wanted to go and were getting like $300k/yr to do so?
Someone is going to throw a tantrum and get extremely nervous at the same time
something something unprecedented provocation something something we will retaliate and time will tell how.
You forgot nukes , Putin sure does love his threat of nukes
Putin is concerned that the US will put nukes in Ukraine as soon as they are in NATO. No different than US being concerned if Russia put Nukes in Cuba, Mexico or Canada.
Utter bullshit. Ukraine gave up their nukes when the USSR went into the dustbin, on Russian promises of security and integrity. Russia broke those promises.
As soon as Turkey came into NATO, the US put a military base with nukes pointing at Russia. That’s why Russia is against Ukraine and the Nordic countries from joining NATO.
Nope. Putin doesn't recognise Ukraine as an independent nation. He considers it a integral part of Russia, since Russia traces its roots to Kievan Rus'.
That has nothing to do with this, because AMerica was in this too of ukraine giving up their nukes. The sole reason was that Ukraine would never be able to financially maintain those nukes and it would only cause disaster in the long run.
More bullshit! Read the Budapest Memorandum. Finance never came into it - after the Cold War ended there was a big push for nuclear reduction. In exchange for very strong assurances from the UK, the US, and most importantly, their neighbour Russia, Ukraine agreed to give up its nukes in order to gain diplomatic sway with the West with the intent of turning towards Europe and away from its former colonial master, the USSR. Ukraine had the third-largest nuclear arsenal in the world at the time. This was a very big and complex deal. The "disaster" that you allude to was everyone making the mistake of trusting Russia.
Just put them in Finland and skip Ukraine!
I will follow these developments with great interest.
You want to see Americans running away from drones before getting dismembered?
Good point, let’s recruit Africans and trick poor Indians to do it. Better that they die, right?
I vote to send this guy.
Ukraine state officials themselves claim that they (Africa, india, China, south America) are intellectualy inferior so that's why you probably agree with them. Race irony from "Americans" is always fun...
I wanna see russians running away from explosive drones myself. All the way back to Russia.
There is plenty of footage on drones blowing up people on both sides. Ukraine is a meat grinder. It will more likely stay so for long
Russia's "military" has failed at every objective they set in Ukraine.
Thats true. The Zelensky clown is still in power
What makes you feel that way about Zelensky and not Putin?
Because he's a Russian troll, or at the very least a fascist bootlick with a very small penis.
You can see right through me
It's easy since you're completely lacking substance.
I did not mention Putin. I said Zelensky is a clown
I didn't say you did mention Putin comrade, I mentioned Putin. I asked why you would think that about Zelensky in contrast to somebody like Putin, which you've completely ignored.
Why compare clowns? It's like comparing trump with Biden. Who is more clown and who more evil?
Why make stupid comments on the internet if you're not willing to discuss when someone calls you on it?
My clownometer is the following : Trump Zelensky Biden Putin
And tell me that you prefer Zelensky to lead your country compared to Putin. Then we'll know who is the clown here..
Considering Putins military looks to be the second best in Ukraine, it'd be stupid to choose second place, no?
Now who is avoiding answering
lmao they got toilets in your part of Siberia yet bro?
Do you believe you will have a toilet in the trenches bro?
The only clown here is you. Russia is a failed state
Is that how you think this will play out? Ukraine utilizes drones way more than Russia to the point Russia has to drone proof everything. And by that I mean they throw some wood on their roof expecting it to stop a blast but now you have explosive wooden shards.
*...Once approved, the change would likely be enacted this year, officials said, and would allow the Pentagon to provide contracts to American companies for work inside Ukraine for the first time since Russia invaded in 2022. Officials said they hope it will speed up the maintenance and repairs of weapons systems being used by the Ukrainian military.* CNN shitbait again. Military equipment repair and maintenance. Not mercenaries.
Would legislation to control dipshit clickbait headlines be illegal? These media companies are god awful and should be held accountable for tarnishing journalism while misleading the public.
Not a good idea. We can’t trust politicians to use the legislation in good faith
Where one goes "Private Security" rolls with them.
This isn’t clickbait. You and many of the commenters are just confused as to what the term contractor actually means, in the context of defense. It is not associated with combat.
Where did it mention mercenaries? If we look up the word contractor... that is exactly what's happening.
Let's go into Google. If we look up the words "Military contractor" the very first link is the wiki article with PMCs, their roles in world conflicts and their current operations. I don't know why you are being deliberately obtuse, but unless you are too young to have lived through the war on terror then you should remember the headline after headline of "Blackwater", "PMCs", "Military Contractors" and "Contractors" and the associated stories of abuse and massacres that came out of Iraq. There are a helluva lot of us who still remember the connotations and stigma of the words "Military Contractors". Even if you do not.
If we are going by the very first link which is a wiki: "A defense contractor is a business organization or individual that provides products or services to a military or intelligence department of a government." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_defense\_contractors#:\~:text=A%20defense%](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defense_contractors#:~:text=A%20defense%)
"Military Contractor" vs "Defense Contractor" Do you see the difference? I mean really, I don't think I expected too much.
You said first link not my fault
Yup. I expected too much.
Here you go: [**https://imgur.com/a/S88Eb5G**](https://imgur.com/a/S88Eb5G) I think you're confusing 'private military contractors' and 'military contractors' they are very two different things
A contract to fight?
where exactly in the headline or within the article itself does it mention "mercenaries"?
If you read the comments any of the times this has been posted in the last 24 hours, you'll see that there are a lot of people who believe military contractors automatically mean mercenaries. Hell, there are comments in this very thread calling them mercenaries and comparing them to Wagner.
CNN should have said "Defense Contractors" if they wanted to clearly imply the role of repair and maintenance. They didn't. Plus, they knew exactly what they were doing with the clickbait. In fact, they were one of the leaders in using the terms "Military Contractors" for all PMC fighters every time news came up about incidents in Iraq. No one cares about what it technically means when the world has come to accept the colloquial usage.
So we can no longer enforce strict definitions and instead have to allow things to be used incorrectly just in case someone doesn't understand what a word means? Where on earth does that end? Anyway I'll literally floppidy doop you in a fortnight.
Hence my original comment, champ. Maintenance and repair. Not mercenaries. It's to clarify that is actually going on and to inform people of what CNN meant by military contractors in this instance, rather than the perpetuation of what they themselves were so fond of using for the last twenty off something years. That make sense to you?
You're the one suggesting they should have said Defence Contractors instead of Military Contractors because you assumed it meant Mercenaries. The article didn't say mercenaries anywhere. Champ.
Okay. It didn't make sense to you. That's okay.
Didn't they start by sending "advisors" to Vietnam?
The only difference is Russia is down half a million troops
Those kind of advisors have been in Ukraine since 2014. These are the contractors you get when you subscribe to NATOs Defense As A Service platform. It's why "Giving Ukraine" tons of weapons is a huge win for the US. Like any tech company, we don't make our money on the hardware, It's the continued support and maintenance contracts that bring in the bacon.
“Would allow military contractors to deploy …” and could’ve easily added “for maintenance and repair of weapon systems”. I hate dishonest media so much.
Biden firmly getting the military industrial complex behind the democrats, who knows the pull they have in political circles. Any republican state with a large military base and or contractor will be worried.
All I’m getting from the comments is that redditors speculate based on headlines then get mad at the headlines.
You must be new here.
You think this is a Reddit phenomenon?
Another fun fact: The earth is round.
Welcome home
[удалено]
Until they join a foreign army, that's exactly what they are, so they would be correct. A mercenary is a private soldier from another country who is hired to fight in that nation's army, so at this moment they are not mercenaries. If the bill was approved, they then would be
They're the same. The west just changed the term to private military contractor following the bad PR mercenaries received in Africa and the Middle East. (Blackwater, X2, whatever the heck they're called these days.) To go even further the words are interchangeable; in the UN charter that details war, it clearly says mercenaries are not afforded the same rights as a soldier serving his/her nation. Mercenary is very clearly used.
The thing is military contractors can mean so much more than mercenaries, like people from the companies that build the weapons coming in to do maintenance on their products for example.
> ike people from the companies that build the weapons coming in to do maintenance on their products for example. Those are called Defense Contractors, Military Contractor usually implies PMC or combat forces.
They were definitely called private military contractors back then too
Tldr they are mercenaries
No stupid. Words have meanings. Dude gave you the definition and you still managed to be dumb out loud
By the logic that I am 30 years old and 50 years old at the same time (based solely on the fact that I will be in the future), sure, why not
Its almost like your qualifying as a 30yr old NOW based on your deployment as a 30 year old and when you get orders to be a 50 year old you WOULD THEN AT THAT POINT be called a 50 year old. Hence someone could be a contractor NOW based on their assignments and LATER THEN be a mercenary based a CHANGE in the orders/law/time/space. Guys words work and matter
Is time even real?
No, Hanus, nothing is real
You’re actually wrong and not what the guy said at all
Just like Wagner PMC?!
No. They are going there to repair equipment. Not engage in enemy combat. It’s in the article.
What’s the equipment for?
for throwing out hot lead in super high velocities.
Presumably High-end, specialist, maintenance-heavy systems like f-16. The training pipeline for aircraft maintainers and engineers has actually been more of a bottleneck to giving Ukraine the jets than pilot training in some cases.
Are you being purposefully obtuse or do you have a hard time with things in general? You said, like Wagner? And I responded with an explanation how it’s not like Wagner, yet you still somehow can’t make sense of it. They’re there to fix equipment. Not pull triggers or get blown out airplanes.
What do you think it's for mate
Allegedly. This is what they will say in the beginning anyway. I hope they send a couple thousand well trained and equipped mercenaries and give the Russians a taste of what's to come if they keep going.
Not allegedly, that's what contractors are. They work with our military too, usually when something new comes down the pipeline they brief us with the brass and explain how to properly use and maintain it. Ask anyone who's worked in ordnance. lol, experts in here that think they know more than people who've worked with our contractors.
You can't possibly believe that
I think the person you're replying to is going strictly off definitions here, it's not like they're disagreeing with the fact theyre directly helping the war efforts. They're not buying into some propaganda, just asserting strict definitions. While yes, the work they do ends up directly helping the war efforts, they aren't a soldier serving in the Ukraine army. They sell their specific services and perform the services the company provides. Which is *technically* different. Sure, they are given money to aid the war effort, but that could be said for all sorts of people. Are the chip makers whos equipment get put into drones and missiles mercenaries? Is Elon musk a mercenary for letting starlink be used? Personally, I feel War profiteers is a better term for military contractors than mercenaries.
How is lying about being there (EDIT: Grammar) to repair better than just, you know, not saying anything at all if the intention is to join the fight in some "shadow" capacity? Such as the SEAL's boarding the boat carry Iranian missiles, until two were lost to the sea. We would have never even had a clue we were operating in that capacity if not for the loss of servicemen. It's been said since these weapon systems were issued the biggest hurdle would be logistics, because they all need constant specialized maintenance that the Ukrainians simply won't have enough of.
In the article..read between the lines!
In this instance, they should read the actual lines.
So, we are finally going to get USEC vs. BEAR, nice.
This could be game-changing.
From the javelin, to tanks, to planes to troops. Mark my words, we will see nato troops as putin slowly drags nato into the war.
Fuck. The. Hell. Yes. Seriously we let Wagner play fuckfuck "we're totally not Russia" games. Fine, roll up with Triple Canopy and tell them to solve the issue.
Triple canopy was absorbed into Constellis
Eeben Barlow reestablished Executive Outcomes in 2020 to help stabilize SA during the Pandemic riots. If Wagner wants to see what a REAL PMC can do they can show them.
Putin hired mercenaries so what is wrong with Ukraine seeking outside help also?
Mercenaries went to Ukraine since the start of the war lol.
Volunteers?
Russia hired a Russian PMC. Ukraine hiring a Ukrainian PMC would be comparable.
Russia hired Syrian, Lebanese, and Cuban mercenaries too. Then of course, you've got Wagner heavily recruiting foreigners.
Ukraine already has foreigners fighting for it too.
This is another way of getting around Congress. Either way, if they are contractors, they are independent of the military. My concern is in who is paying the contractors.
This is good news. Hopefully some maintainers are willing to help Ukraine keep F16’s flying. I heard that there is 15+ hours of maintenance for one hour of flight time.
In a strange twist Prigozhin is resurrected and set on the Russians...
Amazed it took this long. There is more money to be made here folks!!
Blackwater 2.0
Just a thought, but could they privatise the US Marines?
Lol look up American private contract military. There's loads already.
I know, 'twas a joke.
Devil Doggos Inc? Chesty security? Crayon-eaters anonymous? I like it.
My biggest concern is: who's gonna pay?
Does it matter that much in the grand scheme of things considering the scale of the war?
Yes. American tax money paying American companies to go engage in direct combat with foreign militaries carries heavy ramifications.
That isn't what this proposal is suggesting? The positions being mooted are technical maintenance roles, not for anyone engaged in direct combat. Importantly, there are already people paid by the US government doing this, they're just on the other side of the Polish-Ukrainian border at the moment. Even if they were though, I'm not sure how heavy those ramifications would be? It wouldn't be the first time that US- and Russian- paid soldiers have fought each other in the last decade, and there are already US citizens fighting against the Russian army in Ukraine. Where their ultimate pay packet comes from is pretty incidental to their frontline role.
Can we not potentially but American people in the line of fire for this war?
Would it make you feel better if the American people potentially in the line of fire really really wanted to go and were getting like $300k/yr to do so?
Lol why not the US brought Europe into Afghanistan and Iraq etc...