Looking like the abrams decision is part of the longer term solution to modernisation of Ukranian forces, which needs to be done. Leopards will be the short term, assuming they will be getting more than what's been initially announced...
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
So aside from backing Germany, the US gets to look like they're being tough on Russia without supplying anything that will be used to fight Russians. Sending Abrams would have been an escalation.
Well, they have sent other things... 59 Bradleys is the most recent escalation.
Now that's a big deal.
The US doesn't need that to look tough. Its already contributed more than everyone else combined. Not that the contributions of other countries (especially Poland) aren't impressive given their respective GDPs, but in the end, its the cumulative effect of all nations that are going to make a difference.
The US realizes it's better for it to fight the Russians on Ukraine soil than on German soil.
Pity the Germans are so slow on the uptake.
Pity the Germans are so slow on the uptake.
That’s a potential 182 tanks - absolute game changer
Let's wait for the delivery dates. Looks like for example the Abrams will be newly produced units and only arrive in 1-2 years.
About 100 of them within a few months would be great. It will give UA a big break from the current situation and also give them opportunity to start their own initiatives.
Nice. That would equate to a little over 2 American armored brigades worth of Western MBTs, putting them almost on par with the British Army as far as modern armor is concerned.
*side note: really interested to see if the Challenger 2 tank maintains its streak of having never been lost to enemy fire
Isn't that almost as many tanks as the UKs currently has? Probably more, given plenty of ours aren't in working order.
Yep. On paper, the UK has in the 220ish range.
Doubt Finland is sending 10. 2-5 sounds more believable
It's very much in their interest to help Ukraine. As Sanna Marin said, Russia simply cannot win this war.
We can send 50 once Erdogan and Orban stop being bitches.
Sanna Marin talks well, acts a lot less.
I would send 10. I just don't think that's what's going to happen. Nothing in the conversation here implies that the number will be 10.
It was a bold statement considering they are neighbors.
Finland also share a 1340km long border with Russia and are still not a member of NATO.
I must say the Dutch gov. have impressed me, real leadership right there when you need it the most.
There is no chance in hell that Russia would open a 2nd Front and Finland are well equipped to cope if that did happen. They've got a small military but a very large well trained reserve army to rely on. They are a nation that learnt from the previous time Russia invaded them and have been preparing for that eventuality since.
Russia recalls 30 of their T-34 tanks from Laos and hypes them up on TV:
Well if you needed any more evidence that they’re beginning to run out of the working scrap metal, look no further.
Well if you needed any more evidence that they’re beginning to run out of the working scrap metal, look no further.
Isn't the T34 a WW2 tank?
Google says 1940 so yup
Thats how sane people think, but Putin isn't sane, and Russia isn't a sane nation, so who knows.
It would be an absolute disaster for Russia to try, of course.
So crazy to see those pieces of museum taken towards a war in 2023. That is before reminding people that the battle-hardened T-34/85s were already outperformed in battle by the ever-so maligned Shermans and battle-untested Pershings during the Korean War.
12 months ago a lot of people where saying the same about a Russian full scale invasion of Ukraine.
This is the main reason why our goverment is so reluctant to give to many away, history has taught us that we need to be prepared. They know that the tanks might be needed, especially since the open door policy of NATO seems to be not so fully open.
I personally think it should be possible to give more than a few, which is what has been suggested here. We have in total 100 2A6s and somewhere between 80-90 of the older 2A4s. The 2A6 version is probably seen as to important to give any away but when it comes to the 2A4s they will most likely need to be replaced within the next 10-15 years anyway so if a contract for replacements could be secured with deliveries within the next 2-3 years I think a large part of the 2A4s should be available.
The problem is that it won't be easy to buy new tanks in the coming years. Production capacity is almost non existent for most manufaturers and the demand will go through the roof when all the tanks going to Ukraine will need to be replaced.
Portuguese defense ministry said a couple of hours ago there's no decision regarding sending tanks to ukraine.
True, but that doesn't make it a valid counter-argument in any situation. Finland is in the EU, and is currently in the process of joining NATO. It also has a very solid defensive military. There is also no conceivable pro-Russian part of the population, like the one Russia imagined would prop up a potential Ukrainian puppet state (though it seems Russia greatly over-estimated the depths of their pro-Russia sentiments). All of those things would make it unthinkable for Russia to contemplate invading, and that's before we take into account that they're already slogging it out in Ukraine.
It was in the middle of a flat desert though, kind of hard to hide infantrymen with anti-tank missiles in that environment. With that said as long as Ukraine can deploy recon drones with infantry supporting the tanks, they can get by without traditional air superiority. I do think though that having air superiority leads to a lot of the lopsided open-field victories that the US can rack up.
Yes, after the losses they have incurred in the past 12 months, they are not in the position to invade anyone else in the next 5+ years.
I genuinely believe we should both be giving as much as we can, the line of defense is over there...
The not yet in NATO argument isn't that relevant... Finland is not Ukraine; you're in the EU, which includes a military alliance of all countries except Malta and Denmark. Above the EU, we have specific defense guarantees from the US and the UK during the accession process. That's basically every NATO country that really matters... Russia is not invading Sweden or Finland after Biden's promised to defend them...
The open door policy clearly applies to us, this is going to be the quickest procedure ever... And it makes sense. It was big EU countries (Netherlands, and mainly France & Germany...) that blocked Ukraine. Sweden and Finland joining is good news for these countries, as they have to defend us anyway. With us in NATO, they can share this burden with the US.
Hungary had been stalling this to use it in some negotiations within the EU council, but it has now been cleared and they will likely ratify it within the next month or two. Erdogan is a d***, but it is likely related to internal politics. He has a big election coming up this spring and wants to present himself as a strong figure on the geopolitical scene. He needs this to win re-election for presidency, and it is still unlikely that his coalition can maintain their parliamentary majority.
I agree that the chance of Russian aggression is currently very low, the Finnish intelligence service said a couple of weeks ago that they estimate that under 25% of the Russian military personel and equipment stationed near the Finnish border 1 year ago are now left. But if we start giving up to much of our defense capabilties there is a chance someone in Russia might start getting some ideas, the more desperate they become the more unpredictable they will behave.
We are also one of the smallest countries in the EU, 5.5 million people or a little over 1% of the total population so even if we only give 4-6 tanks we would still have given way more then the EU average. There are other countries who are in a much better position to give tanks now, Greece and Spain for example have over 300 Leopards each and are in a much better place geographically speaking.
But as I stated further up my own opinion is that we should give more then a few, we should at least match the Germans and give a company worth of tanks now and if we could secure replacements within a reasonable time frame all of our 2A4s should be made available.
In the massive Battle of Norfolk, just 2000m east of 73 Easting, the lines actually intermingled due to the weather and confusion. That said, yes, it’ll definitely be much easier to get into a close combat situation in Ukraine.
Agreed, I’m just saying 73 Easting wasn’t because of it.
Am I right in thinking Finland has something pretty much written into law/constitution to maintain a certain level of readiness against the threat of Russia?
Russians are assaulting Vuhledar by erasing it from earth. Currently it’s hell there.
We have something called total national defense (kokonaismaanpuolustus in Finnish) it includes a lot of laws for both the military and the civil sector to protect the country and it's citizens against external threats.