all 10 comments

[–]GuyWhite 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Ukraine got what they paid for. 😉

[–]Dune1032[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The weapons are the same as what the US uses. The problem is that HIMARS and Excalibur were not designed to overcome jamming. In contrast, the British Storm Shadow missile has a terrain following feature in addition to GPS for targeting.

[–]GuyWhite 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We can give them their money back. 😉

[–]Dune1032[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Ukraine is a good testing ground for weapons. I'm surprised that the Pentagon didn't realize that weapons dependent on GPS for targeting could be jammed.

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Everyone knew. No one gives a shit because it is a giant money laundering scheme. Those weapons are designed to be used against third world countries when they don't sell out their natural resources to the globalists.

[–]Dune1032[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

If the US knew these weapons wouldn't work against a country with advanced weapons, why would they give them to Ukraine? It would expose to the world that these weapons are ineffective against first rate countries. The best explanation is that the Pentagon never thought that weapons using GPS for targeting could be jammed. During World War II, the US resorted to daylight bombing because they thought that their heavily armed bombers would not need fighter escorts. The Luftwaffe showed this was folly by attacking the bombers head-on, dropping bombs into the formations, and using rockets.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

If the US knew these weapons wouldn't work against a country with advanced weapons, why would they give them to Ukraine?

Obviously to use federal tax dollars to buy those weapons from their own companies so they can make a huge profit. The "US" of course is not a sentient entity onto itself, it is a country run by corrupt and greedy people who use their power over the country to transfer the countries wealth to themselves using schemes like this.

It would expose to the world that these weapons are ineffective against first rate countries.

Everyone with any intelligence already knows it.

The best explanation is that the Pentagon never thought that weapons using GPS for targeting could be jammed.

The entire pentagon would not only have to be retarded but also lack access to anyone who is not retarded. That just is not the case.

they thought that their heavily armed bombers would not need fighter escorts

Signals and electronic warfare are not new. The technology they are using to jam GPS is not new.

[–]Dune1032[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

If countries see that these weapons don't work, they won't buy them. Defense contractors could just as easily make money designing and producing weapons that work. It would be retarded to produce weapons that don't work. The consequence could be the loss of a war.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If countries see that these weapons don't work, they won't buy them.

Ukraine did not buy them. Other countries will buy them for their purposes where they are killing weaker, less sophisticated people.

Defense contractors could just as easily make money designing and producing weapons that work

False. Defense contractors make weapons according to specifications. They make money by building the minimum viable system. Those are the cheapest to build. Why would the military buy a 10 million dollar rocket to kill a farmer in Afghanistan when a 1 million dollar rocket does the exact same thing? The farmer in Afghanistan is not going to jam the radar, or the gps.

It would be retarded to produce weapons that don't work.

The weapons were built to be sold. They were sold to make money for the people who decide how to spend the money of the American tax payer. The tax payers have no say in any of it.

The consequence could be the loss of a war.

The effectiveness of these rockets has zero impact on the war. Even if they worked. Ukraine has killed off almost all of it's fighting aged men. That is most likely the intention of the jews who control Ukraine.

[–]Dune1032[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Taiwan, South Korea, and European countries are not facing weaker enemies. HIMARS and Excalibur are not cheap. It would be cheaper to buy dumb bombs and artillery rounds. If countries see that the weapons don't work, they will buy alternatives. The British Storm Shadow has a terrain contour following system that cannot be jammed. I'm not talking about Ukraine. Suppose the US got into a war with Russia or China. If American troops are armed with weapons which don't work, many troops will die.