War in Ukraine

[BeardedVol]

Brought to vatniks by RIA Novosti, bastion of "journalism".

 

[volbound1700]

The irony, you call me a moron and make up a whole statement that I never said.
There is no reason to kill 33 million people, only the ones in front of the FABs/artillery, bring everything to the ground. This is the biggest demolition in the existence of man in one location.

The objective is to just flatten everything as they move west, if people die.... they die. It would seem prudent to move West, if they wish to live.




Exactly what I said, I actually said it was boring. (see other posts) They are speeding up the pace but its same play over and over at this point. Maybe they will switch it up and start using the TUs for delivery of the FABs in larger quantity.... still the same play. Real wars are won by leveling **** down to the ground... lost art until now.



Well, unless they were successful there is no way of securing a logistics line that far into enemy territory, which is why they are now onto flattening the county mode. I don't think you have to worry about them trying that again as they will just flatten everything. Its a ton easier to just flatten everything, not much different between what Israel is doing except Russia is doing it at a massive scale. It takes time to deconstruct a country of that size, the Ukraine is the size of Texas in area and the amount of energy to flatten is huge - it will take time, resources and energy.

Again, everything is wrong. Here is what really happened.

Russia thought they could just swing their military dick around without a plan and Ukraine would fold. They sent their army to take Kiev in a long convey with no logistical planning or training of their men.

Their special forces tried to take airport and got their tails kicked by Ukrainians. Meanwhile their convey stalled without a plan or logistical equipment and the casualties mounted. They had to pull out.

Their diversionary attacks in the East had some success so Russia pulled out and re-enforced those fronts which turned into a stale mate now that Russia burned through its best resources trying to take Kiev. This is where we are currently are at 2 years later. Russia still hasn't won and they are too prideful to say they messed up. Ukraine wasn't the pushover they expected so now they are just fighting for pride and are caught up in a war that continues to diminish their resources. They are trying to adjust their plan to focus on the "land bridge" with Crimea and coastline as that is their secondary objective if they cannot get all of Ukraine. None of their new "plans" have worked well either and it has turned into an ugly war of attrition.

No, they cannot physical kill all of Ukraine, as you alluded to, it is the size of Texas and has over 30 million people. So your "flatten everything" is unrealistically impossible for Russia to achieve without going Nuclear.

This entire conflict has exposed the corruption and incompetence in the Russian military system.

 

[LouderVol]

Ukraine is at great risk of its front lines collapsing

According to high-ranking Ukrainian officers, the military picture is grim and Russian generals could find success wherever they decide to focus their upcoming offensive.

www.politico.eu

grim observation on manpower.

the problem for the Russians is pretty much the same. Their current strategy isn't built to take advantage of a lack of Ukrainian numbers. They have to have the bodies to take advantage of this. A blitz/shock and awe would absolutely tear up weak defensive lines and capture tons of prisoners.

the general advances will push the line, but it isn't designed to break it and take advantage of the openings. Especially if it is a "wave" tactic. They need to have enough fresh bodies to push into any opening to make sure it stays open, and that the Ukrainians can't just pull back or reform. This could very easily turn into another Bakhmut or Avdiivka situation.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Again, everything is wrong. Here is what really happened.

Russia thought they could just swing their military dick around without a plan and Ukraine would fold. They sent their army to take Kiev in a long convey with no logistical planning or training of their men.

Their special forces tried to take airport and got their tails kicked by Ukrainians. Meanwhile their convey stalled without a plan or logistical equipment and the casualties mounted. They had to pull out.

Their diversionary attacks in the East had some success so Russia pulled out and re-enforced those fronts which turned into a stale mate now that Russia burned through its best resources trying to take Kiev. This is where we are currently are at 2 years later. Russia still hasn't won and they are too prideful to say they messed up. Ukraine wasn't the pushover they expected so now they are just fighting for pride and are caught up in a war that continues to diminish their resources. They are trying to adjust their plan to focus on the "land bridge" with Crimea and coastline as that is their secondary objective if they cannot get all of Ukraine. None of their new "plans" have worked well either and it has turned into an ugly war of attrition.

No, they cannot physical kill all of Ukraine, as you alluded to, it is the size of Texas and has over 30 million people. So your "flatten everything" is unrealistically impossible for Russia to achieve without going Nuclear.

This entire conflict has exposed the corruption and incompetence in the Russian military system.

You say everything is wrong than go on to agree with me, they tried to take out the government at the top.... it obviously didn't work. It has nothing to do with lack of planning, the plan didn't work... this is in art of war. They took the chance and lost. So what?

This would have resulted in less blood shed and destruction, either way it didn't work and they probably won't make that same mistake again. Onto the flattening mode.

No, they cannot physical kill all of Ukraine, as you alluded to, it is the size of Texas and has over 30 million people. So your "flatten everything" is unrealistically impossible for Russia to achieve without going Nuclear.

I never alluded to it, they will take out everyone that is in front of their artillery or FABS, meaning you move west or you die. If people stand in the way, they will be killed. You say its impossible but it seems to be working quite well. Don't get me wrong it will take time, I said 1-2 years ago it could take over a decade. Depending on ammo/men situation, it could impact the time table of the advance one way or another, but there is no winning move or series of moves on the chest board for the Ukraine that is present.

Hopefully it doesn't come to all that, my guess (best case maybe hopeful thinking) is the United States just lets it all go come November.

 

[volbound1700]

You say everything is wrong than go on to agree with me, they tried to take out the government at the top.... it obviously didn't work. It has nothing to do with lack of planning, the plan didn't work... this is in art of war. They took the chance and lost. So what?

This would have resulted in less blood shed and destruction, either way it didn't work and they probably won't make that same mistake again. Onto the flattening mode.




I never alluded to it, they will take out everyone that is in front of their artillery or FABS, meaning you move west or you die. If people stand in the way, they will be killed. You say its impossible but it seems to be working quite well. Don't get me wrong it will take time, I said 1-2 years ago it could take over a decade. Depending on ammo/men situation, it could impact the time table of the advance one way or another, but there is no winning move or series of moves on the chest board for the Ukraine that is present.

Hopefully it doesn't come to all that, my guess (best case maybe hopeful thinking) is the United States just lets it all go come November.

Got it, maybe we are not far off as we think. My bad for misunderstanding your posts.

Russia tried an early blitzkrieg that failed so they are doing the long, old fashion, WW1 type push.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Got it, maybe we are not far off as we think. My bad for misunderstanding your posts.

Russia tried an early blitzkrieg that failed so they are doing the long, old fashion, WW1 type push.

Yup. I mean the plan was to just take out the government, this resulted in large losses by Russia. I don't think anyone disputes Russia took losses that it could have avoided. I seriously doubt they do that again. I agree this is a combination of WW1/2 with new tech, but its really the same thing i.e. a real war instead of all this U.S. stuff of causing trouble everywhere. The present plan is to flatten the area in front of them... move west, but Russia does still have to take losses to create cauldron's around the village/towns/cities to gain fire control out of these areas. Ukraine has to find people (they'll have to move onto women and children at some point) to fill the ditches to accept the FABs to the forehead.

Its the same play... over and over... and they appear to be getting better at it. I don't see a solution to be honest. Give the Ukraine 1000 F-16s... what does that do? Not much, matter of fact, they won't have the personnel or ability to even do anything with most of them. Give them F-35s, or B-1s, or B-2s, etc. what does it really do? Nothing, not really.

All the factors on the battlefield only change the timetable not the end result - at least with what is present.

Right now the Ukraine needs to find more and more people to get in those ditches to receive those Fabs and artillery shells in the face, if they can find them... this can go on for some time.

 

[volbound1700]

Yup. I mean the plan was to just take out the government, this resulted in large losses by Russia. I don't think anyone disputes Russia took losses that it could have avoided. I seriously doubt they do that again. I agree this is a combination of WW1/2 with new tech, but its really the same thing i.e. a real war instead of all this U.S. stuff of causing trouble everywhere. The present plan is to flatten the area in front of them... move west, but Russia does still have to take losses to create cauldron's around the village/towns/cities to gain fire control out of these areas. Ukraine has to find people (they'll have to move onto women and children at some point) to fill the ditches to accept the FABs to the forehead.

Its the same play... over and over... and they appear to be getting better at it. I don't see a solution to be honest. Give the Ukraine 1000 F-16s... what does that do? Not much, matter of fact, they won't have the personnel or ability to even do anything with most of them. Give them F-35s, or B-1s, or B-2s, etc. what does it really do? Nothing, not really.

All the factors on the battlefield only change the timetable not the end result - at least with what is present.

Right now the Ukraine needs to find more and more people to get in those ditches to receive those Fabs and artillery shells in the face, if they can fine them... this can go on for some time.

I feel like both sides are taking heavy attrition though. Russia is using the war to clean out its minorities, however. They haven't conscripted from Moscow or St Petersburg very much but are heavily conscripting rural Russia and parts of Russia that have non-Russians. It is a playbook from Stalin who really allowed the non-Russian members of the USSR to suffer more during WW2 and prior.

 

[LouderVol]

Let's go back to the Fall of 2013... when Viktor Yanukovych, the elected president at the time, was deciding on an economic trade deal. Because Ukraine had a lot of Soviet legacy ties to Russia and a clear demographic leaning of Western Ukrainians towards Europe, Yanukovych wanted to make a pragmatic and reasonable deal where Ukraine would be able to trade freely with both the EU and with Russia/Eurasian markets. But for the EU and NATO (United States), that was not good enough. We didn't want a neutral Ukraine. We wanted a Ukraine that was either 100% with us or not. So Yanukovych made the decision to chose to cut a trade deal with Russia... and with good reason at the time. Keep in mind that the EU was showing signs of being a basket case in 2013. You had the PIIGS crisis in the EU (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain) where these countries had tremendous debt issues and were forced into austerity measures by Brussels and Germany.

I say all of that to say that even economic neutrality, much less military neutrality, was not going to be permitted to Ukraine because we (United States) wanted to clearly use Ukraine as a wedge and battering ram against Russia.

where is this EU only deal? Surely it must have come about and been readily signed in after Yanukovych left?

I will go ahead and answer my own question, because you have ducked it multiple times already. It doesn't exist. It didn't exist, it never existed.

The trade deal they had ready with the EU only opened up more markets to Ukraine. It didn't make any requirements on who Ukraine did business.

Russia didn't like it because it was Ukraine leaving the Russian monopoly. There is a reason Yanukovych got elected running on a promise to sign a deal with the EU. It was popular and needed to get Ukraine out of the mess their economy was in. It would have forced Russia to trade with Ukraine on a more fair market value rather than the heavily Russian favored deals from before. It was always Russia that was saying IF they opened up to the EU Russia would stop trading with Ukraine. Russia was actively doing it. sanctions sanctions sanctions.

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE9BI0E2/

"Next year Ukraine will have to cover foreign debt payments of $8 billion, according to its finance ministry. It was teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, partly because Moscow was blocking sales of Ukrainian-produced meat, cheese and some confectionery, and scrapping duty-free quotas on steel pipes. Some officials said the restrictions showed what life would be like if Ukraine signed the EU agreement."

as usual you are straight up lying about what happened to cast Russia in a better light. Russia was the one with the ultimatum. Russia was the one saying you can only trade with us.

The EU had requirements but there wasn't anything dictating that Ukraine couldn't trade with Russia.

 

[LouderVol]

Yep, been this way from the beginning. Ukrainian troops have used civilian infrastructure as military installments.

use the snip tool and circle in red in the before picture where this missile launcher was set up and ready to use? To me it looks like it was in the process of being transported on the road.

I guess a road is technically civilian infrastructure, but that is a mighty broad justification to try and explain away hitting the surrounding buildings or civilian buildings in the future.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I feel like both sides are taking heavy attrition though. Russia is using the war to clean out its minorities, however. They haven't conscripted from Moscow or St Petersburg very much but are heavily conscripting rural Russia and parts of Russia that have non-Russians. It is a playbook from Stalin who really allowed the non-Russian members of the USSR to suffer more during WW2 and prior.

I don't really keep up with all that, I don't think Russia has done any general mobilization but there are some disputes as to that. You don't have the large scale videos of people being put in vans. I would be a little surprised by Russia running out of men or ammo on most stuff (gas might be problem with refineries being hit). Now they have found systems to increase the rate of flattening i.e. FABs. Hypersonic missiles are pretty good but not at scale i.e. expense. FABS are a fraction of a fraction (cost) of hypersonic or cruise missiles.

As I type, Russians took another small town Bohdanivka, and are now doing the same play on Bilohorivka i.e. encircling.

The javelins/stingers are good tools in a war but most U.S. systems really aren't for real wars. Expensive burnable material.

The United States would be better off taking that $60 billion and paying each Russian soldier $240,000 to switch sides, they could buy 250,000 of them.

Clown world.

 

[LouderVol]

The OSS/CIA have been using Ukrainian nationalists since the mid-1940s. First to be an insurgency group in the Soviet Union and then as a destabilizing force inside of Ukraine on the Russian Federation's border. The Moscow terror attack is just one example of why the Russians consider a hostile entity like those Nazis to be dangerous... as would the United States if you had Puerto Rican or Mexican nationalist terror outfits.

hold on hold on hold on. what?

The Ukrainian nazis worked with muslim jihadists all as part of a CIA master plan? My God, I bet you needed a kleenex and a cigarette after that bit of conspiracy fever dream. you are desperately roping it all together.

trying to work everything together to the point of tying people you actually believe are real honest to God nazis with a religious, non-christian, extremist group just shows how far away you are from applying ANY critical thinking. You jumped several levels trying to link those two together.

all of those groups existed outside of the CIA, and would continue to exist outside the CIA. and would continue to do the exact same things without the CIA. bad things happen aplenty outside of our CIA.

do you ever stop and think, and wonder about the actual likelihood that literally everything you post about is part of some vast conspiracy? It doesn't seem likely at all to you, that NONE of this can be explained as happening as a standalone incident? It is just as likely that EVERYTHING is part of the conspiracy as it is that NOTHING is.

You really really need to apply some sort plausibility study if you are wanting to convince anyone you care about the truth. Try it for a while. don't link literally everything to a global conspiracy.

 

[Rocky_Top_Vol13]

 

[LouderVol]

Looks like the Russians are making advances in Chasiv Yar...

freaking lol. some huge Russian break thru that was.

a whopping 7.5 miles from downtown Bakhmut. about 5 from the western edge of the city.

congrats to the Russians to taking the next houses back yard.

Its been almost 11 months. The Russians are taking an AVERAGE of a METER an hour, for a year. this is what the grand Russian victory looks like. Taking two steps forward in an hour. against an enemy they have apparently completely destroyed, and left with no weapons or equipment to fight back. the west has run out of the ability to prop up Ukraine, and Russia is only able to take a METER AN HOUR.

Russia is not a threat to anyone in the west. I don't care which side says they are, its just a pure lie. Russia is not going to be able to springboard from defeating Ukraine to be a threat to NATO. Russia would not be able to continue this fight against NATO.

 

[volbound1700]

I don't really keep up with all that, I don't think Russia has done any general mobilization but there are some disputes as to that. You don't have the large scale videos of people being put in vans. I would be a little surprised by Russia running out of men or ammo on most stuff (gas might be problem with refineries being hit). Now they have found systems to increase the rate of flattening i.e. FABs. Hypersonic missiles are pretty good but not at scale i.e. expense. FABS are a fraction of a fraction (cost) of hypersonic or cruise missiles.

As I type, Russians took another small town Bohdanivka, and are now doing the same play on Bilohorivka i.e. encircling.

The javelins/stingers are good tools in a war but most U.S. systems really aren't for real wars. Expensive burnable material.

The United States would be better off taking that $60 billion and paying each Russian soldier $240,000 to switch sides, they could buy 250,000 of them.

Clown world.

Yeah, I posted sometime back about how Russia is strategically conscripting from places with non-Russian minorities or Siberia where you are less likely to experience the hit in the home front. Chechnya, Dagestan, and others having took the blunt of the conflict. I wonder if this ISIS-K attack may have some relationship to the conscripting activity.

France did this for a lot of colonial wars as they relied on local colonial conscripts and the foreign legion (a chunk of the foreign legion that fought in Algeria and Vietnam were former German soldiers from WW2 who had no where to go).

I definitely can agree on USA being "too involved" but I don't buy the Ras arguments about USA manipulating Ukraine or that Russia is the good guy here.

That being said. USA (and NATO) has been mostly sending outdated equipment to Ukraine and the money we are spending is upgrading our forces with better weapons to replace those outdated equipment.

 

[LSU-SIU]

freaking lol. some huge Russian break thru that was.

a whopping 7.5 miles from downtown Bakhmut. about 5 from the western edge of the city.

congrats to the Russians to taking the next houses back yard.

Its been almost 11 months. The Russians are taking an AVERAGE of a METER an hour, for a year. this is what the grand Russian victory looks like. Taking two steps forward in an hour. against an enemy they have apparently completely destroyed, and left with no weapons or equipment to fight back. the west has run out of the ability to prop up Ukraine, and Russia is only able to take a METER AN HOUR.

Russia is not a threat to anyone in the west. I don't care which side says they are, its just a pure lie. Russia is not going to be able to springboard from defeating Ukraine to be a threat to NATO. Russia would not be able to continue this fight against NATO.

Victory could take a decade+, depends on how much the United States taxpayer funds they want to waste into Ukraine money laundering process and whether the Ukraine can manufacture additional meat to get in a ditch. Flattening villages, towns, and cities one (or a couple) at a time - will take time. If they Ukraine can't find more meat to send to the grinder than at some point the process will speed up.

Most likely they will try and avoid overextending as they did at the start of the war.

 

[LSU-SIU]

That being said. USA (and NATO) has been mostly sending outdated equipment to Ukraine and the money we are spending is upgrading our forces with better weapons to replace those outdated equipment.

The United States could send the Ukraine all the new F-35s they have and it won't make bit of difference, there is no real system or systems that the United States has that can change the end result there other than nukes.

Artillery ammo would change the timetable but only the time would be impacted, it doesn't change the result. More men will change the timetable but not change the result.

 

[volbound1700]

freaking lol. some huge Russian break thru that was.

a whopping 7.5 miles from downtown Bakhmut. about 5 from the western edge of the city.

congrats to the Russians to taking the next houses back yard.

Its been almost 11 months. The Russians are taking an AVERAGE of a METER an hour, for a year. this is what the grand Russian victory looks like. Taking two steps forward in an hour. against an enemy they have apparently completely destroyed, and left with no weapons or equipment to fight back. the west has run out of the ability to prop up Ukraine, and Russia is only able to take a METER AN HOUR.

Russia is not a threat to anyone in the west. I don't care which side says they are, its just a pure lie. Russia is not going to be able to springboard from defeating Ukraine to be a threat to NATO. Russia would not be able to continue this fight against NATO.

I even wonder how much a "threat" Russia was even during the Cold War. Russia hasn't done that great at wars, historically. Their big wins over Hitler and Napoleon relied on their opponents getting bogged down in logistical/attrition nightmares due to the size and weather of Russia.

Russia did well in the 7-years war as well but most of the other wars in history, Russia has heavily underperformed, even when having superior numbers:

1. Russo-Japanese War
2. Crimean War
3. Ukraine War
4. Winter War with Finland
5. Poland 1920
6. World War 1

Even World War 2 is still up to debate. Without lend-lease equipment and USA/British using bombing raids on Germany that forced the Luftwaffe away from Russia airspace, the war might have been a lot different.

Hitler/Germany got overextended with air war over Germany, North Africa Campaign, U-Boat Campaign, and Eastern Front.

 

[volbound1700]

The United States could send the Ukraine all the new F-35s they have and it won't make bit of difference, there is no real system or systems that the United States has that can change the end result there other than nukes.

Artillery ammo would change the timetable but only the time would be impacted, it doesn't change the result. More men will change the timetable but not change the result.

Pilots matter more than equipment as well. F-35s do "no good" without great pilots to fly them.

 

[LouderVol]

The irony, you call me a moron and make up a whole statement that I never said.
There is no reason to kill 33 million people, only the ones in front of the FABs/artillery, bring everything to the ground. This is the biggest demolition in the existence of man in one location.

The objective is to just flatten everything as they move west, if people die.... they die. It would seem prudent to move West, if they wish to live.




Exactly what I said, I actually said it was boring. (see other posts) They are speeding up the pace but its same play over and over at this point. Maybe they will switch it up and start using the TUs for delivery of the FABs in larger quantity.... still the same play. Real wars are won by leveling **** down to the ground... lost art until now.



Well, unless they were successful there is no way of securing a logistics line that far into enemy territory, which is why they are now onto flattening the county mode. I don't think you have to worry about them trying that again as they will just flatten everything. Its a ton easier to just flatten everything, not much different between what Israel is doing except Russia is doing it at a massive scale. It takes time to deconstruct a country of that size, the Ukraine is the size of Texas in area and the amount of energy to flatten is huge - it will take time, resources and energy.

Only if you are desperate.

What is Russia winning in this war? Bombed out land with no people, no buildings, no usable infrastructure. and it is costing them lives and material for something that will be worthless for a long long time. The Russians are cutting off their nose to spite their face.

even if the Russians are just wanting the space as a literal buffer that serves no other function, by your own words they have made that area indefensible if they were attacked in the future. and they are spending huge amount of energy, resources, and lives, for something that will not and can not give an equal return for those losses.

that buffer is only effective in this type of gruelling ground war. That will be completely ineffective in a greater war against the west where air power will dominate. all that buffer area will be is wasted time, money, equipment, and manpower for Russia, as the tactics of the west will completely nullify any advantage the buffer gives Russia. Its just another Maginot line, but instead of going around it, the west would just go over it.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Pilots matter more than equipment as well. F-35s do "no good" without great pilots to fly them.

There are multiple factors:

> pilots (trained pilots)
> support equipment
> parts (logistics)
> trained repair and support personnel
> adequate facilities and landing strips

None of that really exists there.

Its hard to imagine how the facilities are not hit by hypersonics at that point as well because the expense/reward becomes heavily in Russia's side at that point. I don't even know how they could be used even with the JDAMs, I mean Russia is moving their lines forward at this point... maybe defensive positions where they are not advancing?

You're looking at a 3-5 year program involving many thousands to just get things going let alone really have a realistic option to use them.

Most U.S. systems really aren't built for a real war. U.S. carrier groups are about to go the way of the dinosaur which will greatly impact the U.S. reach moving forward. Big war ships are a thing of the past, as a country can now sink a carrier with one hypersonic missile or even groups of drones.

 

[NorthDallas40]

“Most U.S. systems really aren't built for a real war.“

Yet the US is the largest weapons exporter by a huge margin and their weapons are sought by pretty much anyone wanting to arm their country or drug cartel.

We were expecting moronic hot takes and we are not disappointed

 

[volbound1700]

There are multiple factors:

> pilots (trained pilots)
> support equipment
> parts (logistics)
> trained repair and support personnel
> adequate facilities and landing strips

None of that really exists there.

Its hard to imagine how the facilities are not hit by hypersonics at that point as well because the expense/reward becomes heavily in Russia's side at that point. I don't even know how they could be used even with the JDAMs, I mean Russia is moving their lines forward at this point... maybe defensive positions where they are not advancing?

You're looking at a 3-5 year program involving many thousands to just get things going let alone really have a realistic option to use them.

Most U.S. systems really aren't built for a real war.

We are giving them systems to. Also regarding facilities, a lot of Western Ukraine is still very much intact and they can use those areas. Keep in mind that over half of Ukraine hasn't even been touched by Russia (noticeable the part near Lviv where most the supplies are flowing into).

 

[LSU-SIU]

We are giving them systems to. Also regarding facilities, a lot of Western Ukraine is still very much intact and they can use those areas. Keep in mind that over half of Ukraine hasn't even been touched by Russia (noticeable the part near Lviv where most the supplies are flowing into).

They can all be reached by hypersonic missiles and drones, there really is limited to no defense to the hypersonic. Hypersonics are expensive, so it comes down to cost/reward factor. Of course, not sure what the F-35s would be used for.

 

[volbound1700]

They can all be reached by hypersonic missiles and drones, there really is limited to no defense to the hypersonic.

True but Russia used a lot of that weaponry up in the Kiev offensive. I think that is why they were forced to resort to WW1 tactics.

Sure, I think Russia has more of those weapons but they are holding onto them for any, theoretical, future conflict and don't have the spare weapons to use other than an attack here and there. Ukraine also has these weapons.

Ukraine has facilities but definitely not the pilots. Logistics (i.e. Oil) maybe an issue as well.

 

[LSU-SIU]

True but Russia used a lot of that weaponry up in the Kiev offensive. I think that is why they were forced to resort to WW1 tactics.

Sure, I think Russia has more of those weapons but they are holding onto them for any, theoretical, future conflict and don't have the spare weapons to use other than an attack here and there. Ukraine also has these weapons.

Ukraine has facilities but definitely not the pilots. Logistics (i.e. Oil) maybe an issue as well.

Hypersonics are expensive, unless its target is very valuable they won't be used.... they have them but they don't have thousands of them.

Either way, let's say after 3-5 years and you have some F-35s - what exactly is their purpose? Unless you have defensive positions near a line to attack, exactly what they going to be used for?