If currently it's 7, then what is the top of your scale referring to? Because surely that 10-rate country doesn't exist on Earth.

Don't know how you define "bad guys", but if a country is stubbornly treating it's citizens merely as a resource (like gas and oil), then it's surely not a good or sustainable place to live in.

UN Gen Assembly votes to expel RU from Human Rights Council. Purely symbolic, of course. China on Russia's side, of course.

I´d give Norway an eight, so there is room at the top.

What are you some kind of stooge? Norway, null points.

Interesting, all of a sudden homophobic slurs are a-Ok. Same with the repeated personal attacks.

You're a disgrace, you should step down as a mod. Or be removed.

"Gay icon" is a homophobic slur?

"You're a disgrace" is pretty much a personal attack, so when are you gonna step out? Or be removed?

You're lucky the mods are allowing pretty much everything here. Especially disinformation and trolling.

There is discussion going on behind the scenes regarding what is disinformation and trolling. There are clearly some very strong viewpoints.

It would be nice if folks could leave out all personal comments, but this is EF and I can ask until I die but it won't happen.

Oh, I bet.

According to the FT, Nato has agreed to supply heavy weapons and new types of weapons to Ukraine.

Seems the claim that NATO will fight Russia to the last Ukrainian was not a joke.

Good decision to protect us in Europe but the poor Ukrainians...

The currently most well-known NATO battle tanks are the US-American M1-Abrams, the German Leopard 2, the British Challenger, the French Leclerc, heavy guns and multiple rocket launchers would be useful.

So you propose not to supply the heavy weapons to Ukraine? And then what?

Stoltenberg said at today's presser after the NATO summit that he did not understand the division in offensive and defensive weapons as Ukraine is defending itself against an invasion. So somehow all weapons are defensive, is what I heard him say.

seems cowardly that they only offer weapons to ukraine rather than get their hands dirty themselves. i understand the implications but it still comes off as weak.
then again i guess its less about helping ukraine than it is about weakening russia so its better for them to prolong the war with someone else fighting.

Highly unlikely these could be made available to Ukraine. These are machines that take years of training and substantial logistics to be used effectively. Plus, western european countries barely have enough of these modern tanks to defend themselves and none to spare. Only Americans have a real surplus of heavy modern weaponry, but they won't be shipping Abrams or F-16s to Ukraine, let's stop dreaming about that.

The eastern europeans may be able to provide some seemingly compatible tanks and IFVs that the Ukrainians can use, but sadly even those are either mostly museum pieces or very few modernized with incompatible equipment.

Sadly, for now the only weapons that NATO can really help with in the short term are ATGMs like the NLAWs or Javelins or portable manpads as Stingers or Starstreaks. Much more helpful would be drones, communications, real-time satellite intel and good old-fashioned artillery, and lots and lots of it.

There is a youtube video on how to drive an Abrams plus there are plenty of computer simulators around.

An experienced tank driver should be able to convert in weeks.

I'm hoping you're just a troll. It's frightening to think people really can think this way.

It is genuinely amazing that accounts like this are not nuked. It is literally an EF account engaging in Russian propaganda and disinformation on our forum. Incredible and I do wonder what the tolerance of Thelocal for this kind of stuff on their forum really is, if they knew it was happening under their noses.

Their tolerance is very high...as usual! Wasn't vushka here who had the nerve to post how wonderful it is that we in the collective West have freedom of speech (I can add more for her: freedom of association!!) which she or he is obviously using to support a regime that cancelled any resemblance of freedom of speech and expression.
Well done.

You should write a post on Reddit to complain

Seriously, what vushka said is literally what President Zelensky said in his own words in an Economist interview last week. To paraphrase, he said that there is basically split in his allies: Those that want a quick resolution to this war like Germany and France, those that want Russia to be defeated/humiliated militarily like Poland and Czechia, and finally those that want a prolonged war in order to weaken Russia like US/UK.

Source

Volodymyr Zelensky in his own words

https://www.economist.com/europe/202...-his-own-words

For those who don't have a subscription you can watch the interview here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNjiRmIWtss

NATO says Ukraine to decide on peace deal with Russia — within limits
https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...-limits-peace/

That leads to an awkward reality: For some in NATO, it’s better for the Ukrainians to keep fighting, and dying, than to achieve a peace that comes too early or at too high a cost to Kyiv and the rest of Europe.

I've been surprised at how much he's been willing to criticize various countries that are vital in sustaining his war effort. You can tell in the interview that he's being somewhat diplomatic, but definitely holding back on what he wants to say and avoids naming and shaming.