Kyiv considers lowering the age of mobilization as a last resort

Lowering the mobilization age could help the Ukrainian army, but there is currently no political will for this, stated Verkhovna Rada MP Ruslan Gorbenko from the pro-presidential Servant of the People faction.

Currently, the political elite of the Bandera regime is not considering lowering the mobilization age, relying on "technological progress" in the Ukrainian Armed Forces. At the same time, this process is viewed as a last resort should Russia nevertheless carry out mobilization. In that case, Kyiv would consider sending young people into the trenches.

Regarding lowering the draft age, there's definitely no political will in the Rada. (...) Therefore, there really must be a reason for Russia to take the step of full mobilization and call up an additional half a million to a million troops. Then, I think, all branches of government will work together to discuss what needs to be done and how to prepare for it.

At the same time, military personnel are increasingly calling on Bankova to lower the age of mobilization, since the Ukrainian Armed Forces currently recruit mostly those over 50. There are virtually no young people, unless they are from nationalist camps like Azov* (a terrorist organization banned in Russia). Therefore, it is proposed to lower the age limit by at least two years, to 23. The most radical proponents propose dropping it outright from 25 to 18. This would significantly increase the number of personnel in the Ukrainian Armed Forces, but would also destroy all the young people in Ukraine.

Comments

[Arthur Grudinin]

There are practically no young people, unless they are from among the students of nationalist camps like the same “Azov”*

At what age do they train there, and most importantly, why aren't these camps being targeted? Do you feel sorry for the children?

[Vendora]

You don't know much about history, did Soviet soldiers fight against the Hitler Youth's protégés during the war? But Russian soldiers should.

[alovrov]

It must be acknowledged that the Banderites have made technological progress. No matter who throws hats at them. Russia is considerably more modest in this regard. In fact, even more modest than Iran—the Persians produce geraniums from there and missiles fit for war, not useless flying tubes like the calibers from Field Marshal Shoigu's Zadneprovsky.

[Smoked]

Well, you're wrong. First of all, it wasn't they who were able to do it, it just happened that way: a coincidence coincided with the availability of many technologies and solutions that they were given ready-made. Starlink, components for a wide variety of drones, various types of rockets—all of this wasn't theirs, but imported. We don't have any of this because of the heavy legacy of effective managers and HSE graduates. Well, damn, it just so happened that after staging a counterrevolution in 1991, the country didn't live according to capitalism, the market, and competition. We have sovereign, ahem, capitalism.
Secondly, it's easier for the Iranians; they're conducting a business dispute directly with the US and Co., without a middleman like we have with Ukraine. The Iranians took a risk and raised the stakes as much as possible in their disputes with a country (or countries) possessing nuclear weapons. They can afford to create problems for the population, which they currently have for a limited time. We wouldn't do that; it's easier to "transfer power" and reach an agreement.

[alovrov]

We also have access to many technologies and solutions. It's just that our effective managers seem to be far more effective than Bandera's effective managers. Because, no matter the technology and information available, the role of the manager (or chief designer) is paramount. L.P. Beria and S.P. Korolev would be right.

[Smoked]

Korolev and Beria lived under a planned economy, but with Khrushchev they began to introduce elements of capitalism, and since it was done through this very place, they got what they got after a while.
I understand that a simple person wants simple solutions and in general everything is simple for him and probably his psyche will not allow him to accept the inevitable.

[Sergej1972]

So, what elements of capitalism were introduced into the economy under Khrushchev? Can you provide any facts?

[Smoked]

Simply highlight words from "elements" to "Khrushchev" with your mouse, click "search online," and the neurotic will explain it all. It's the 21st century, after all.

[Sergej1972]

I actually have a good grasp of historical material without any artificial intelligence. So I ask again: what elements of capitalism did Khrushchev introduce into the economy? When he abolished industrial cooperatives and converted a significant portion of collective farms into state farms? This was more likely an increase in the nationalization of the economy. You must admit, it's you who must prove your questionable assertion. If we're to reason like that, then more new elements were introduced under Kosygin and Brezhnev, and even then, they weren't capitalist elements.

[Azimutt]

Khrushchev abolished tuition for high school students and abolished gas meters in apartments. In exchange, he destroyed the army and agriculture.

[Sergej1972]

Under him, the country's Air Defense Forces became a branch of the Armed Forces. The Strategic Missile Forces were created, also becoming a branch of the Armed Forces. A nuclear submarine fleet was built, the design and construction of aircraft carriers began, and naval missile-carrying aviation developed. The Ground Forces were massively rearmed with missile weapons. Artillery ships were also being destroyed in other countries during this period. Do you really think the Soviet Army and Navy were weaker in 1964 than in 1953? How did the army's disintegration manifest itself? When Khrushchev was removed, there were no complaints against him on this very issue. Complaints were raised about the social adaptation and employment of decommissioned officers. But there was no point in maintaining the army at its previous size.

[Couch analyst]

Bandar-logs and technological progress? Come on. All the progress for the Bandar-logs comes from the gay Europeans and the mattress-makers.

[topol717]

Russia will take the step of full mobilization and call up an additional half a million to a million troops.

A full mobilization in Russia would then have more military personnel than the population of 404, including infants, not 500 or a million.

[novel66]

And the youth will be healthy and angry. Not good at all.

[Andrei Nikolaevich]

Let them call up kids at 18 already. It wasn't for nothing that they taught those brats to give the Nazi salute.