Penalty for NOT Declaring and just invading.

Expletived wrote:

I know I saw this in the pasta few years ago. Possibly in the CoW version. But isn't there a massive MORALE penalty for countries invading without declaring? Seems to be that just about every single noob launches an invasion without it and there are NO repercussions.

If you nuke, chem bomb cities, you get alot of revolts. Shouldn't this be the case as well?

RevolutionV1984 wrote:

KFGauss wrote:

Did you happen to maybe just look up the cost of the weaponry/ammunition, command & control equipment, surveillance gear, logistics equipment and support, and everything else we've been sending or helping purchase (don't forget spare parts, diagnostic and repair tools, maintenance manuals, training, shipping containers and transportation fixtures/vehicles, etc.)?

After tallying all of those physical items' costs, were you then still suspicious?

And if you were, can you tell us the details that support your suspicion?

Can you name the form of the "corruption" you suspect? What has been diverted? To where was it diverted? Who benefited?

I'm going guess the answers are all, "No."

The extremely effective and sophisticated systems, and the ordinary consumables used by armies operating at the levels of effectiveness the Ukrainians are operating at are hella expensive. That's why (in the right hands) they can turn the tide.

I'm not a leftist.

I do know the difference between Russian Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt propaganda repeated by detestable shills, and legitimate journalism.

What are you even talking about here? We know the sum totals in value of dollar amounts. There is no need to break down the details, as that is irrelevant to the point of how much aid we have sent in total. However, it has been well-established, published and documented, that majority of the equipment the typical Ukrainian infantry unit is using is older Soviet-style equipment, and most of the armor and planes they use are older Soviet stuff. We're sending ammo, artillery (including HIMARS), drones, gear, and money. The sheer amount of money, coupled with the widely-known reputation of corruption inside Ukraine, and not to mention, the Biden family, is raising very reasonable suspicion among anyone with even a shred of honesty and fiscal responsibility. The gall of you to call anyone else a shill, after you deliberately pretend that isn't a basic reaction towards sending now topping $60+Billion to a foreign country without question or accountability of where it all ends up, the level of cognitive dissonance required to actually mean what you said is just astounding. Ok, I'm done.

Flat Stanley wrote:

RevolutionV1984 wrote:

KFGauss wrote:

Did you happen to maybe just look up the cost of the weaponry/ammunition, command & control equipment, surveillance gear, logistics equipment and support, and everything else we've been sending or helping purchase (don't forget spare parts, diagnostic and repair tools, maintenance manuals, training, shipping containers and transportation fixtures/vehicles, etc.)?

After tallying all of those physical items' costs, were you then still suspicious?

And if you were, can you tell us the details that support your suspicion?

Can you name the form of the "corruption" you suspect? What has been diverted? To where was it diverted? Who benefited?

I'm going guess the answers are all, "No."

The extremely effective and sophisticated systems, and the ordinary consumables used by armies operating at the levels of effectiveness the Ukrainians are operating at are hella expensive. That's why (in the right hands) they can turn the tide.

I'm not a leftist.

I do know the difference between Russian Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt propaganda repeated by detestable shills, and legitimate journalism.

What are you even talking about here? We know the sum totals in value of dollar amounts. There is no need to break down the details, as that is irrelevant to the point of how much aid we have sent in total. However, it has been well-established, published and documented, that majority of the equipment the typical Ukrainian infantry unit is using is older Soviet-style equipment, and most of the armor and planes they use are older Soviet stuff. We're sending ammo, artillery (including HIMARS), drones, gear, and money. The sheer amount of money, coupled with the widely-known reputation of corruption inside Ukraine, and not to mention, the Biden family, is raising very reasonable suspicion among anyone with even a shred of honesty and fiscal responsibility. The gall of you to call anyone else a shill, after you deliberately pretend that isn't a basic reaction towards sending now topping $60+Billion to a foreign country without question or accountability of where it all ends up, the level of cognitive dissonance required to actually mean what you said is just astounding. Ok, I'm done.

dude he said to drop the politics

Flat Stanley wrote:

no, the mod said tho

@xXWolfXx

Expletived wrote:

I know I saw this in the pasta few years ago. Possibly in the CoW version. But isn't there a massive MORALE penalty for countries invading without declaring? Seems to be that just about every single noob launches an invasion without it and there are NO repercussions.

If you nuke, chem bomb cities, you get alot of revolts. Shouldn't this be the case as well?


Looking back at this thread makes me want to be a moderator and ban him for no reason
He blocked me, so he cant get mad at me for posting this.

Karts22 wrote:

Thats like 10% of US military spending per year. Not a lot considering it's against Russia and allthough Russian equipment is mostly old, there is a lot

The Destroyer 4 wrote:

Expletived wrote:

I know I saw this in the pasta few years ago. Possibly in the CoW version. But isn't there a massive MORALE penalty for countries invading without declaring? Seems to be that just about every single noob launches an invasion without it and there are NO repercussions.

If you nuke, chem bomb cities, you get alot of revolts. Shouldn't this be the case as well?


Looking back at this thread makes me want to be a moderator and ban him for no reason
He blocked me, so he cant get mad at me for posting this.

8df861d0-6331-472c-9270-c6998370af19_text.gif

RevolutionV1984 wrote:

Western planes are better, do more damage for starters. Tanks have more HP if I'm not mistaken. I use planes a lot that's huge for me.

Are you kidding me did you miss the botched withdrawal from Afghan? The American peoples' appetite for unnecessary wars is mostly spent. Even Ukraine, neither party's constituents want American forces directly involved.

Nobody likes losing. People like dying for nothing or to enrich some tyrant even less, no matter where they're from.

RevolutionV1984 wrote:

Karts22 wrote:

Thats like 10% of US military spending per year. Not a lot considering it's against Russia and allthough Russian equipment is mostly old, there is a lot

Back to the OP topic... What would happen if a single nation like UNITED STATES IS attacked by THIRTY countries who are attacking ONE nation with a TRILLION troops in a deceitful act, could there be some kind of sanctions mechanic that puts the attackers IN DEBT in the market, AND COUNTING that against them as a penalty for deceitful acts of war? hmmm