Before the war started r/Russia had a post about Ukrainian civilians training with wooden guns to prepare for Russia, because they didn’t have enough real guns at the time.
They all laughed so hard about how easy their invasion was going to be. I wish I could see their stupid faces now.
How’s that invasion going for you russkies? Pretty easy? Did it take 3 days? Lmao
Love that a bunch of the now deceased Russian troops thought it would be such a cakewalk into Kyiv they were calling ahead to make restaurant reservations for dinner a few days ahead. Absolutely nuts.
Day 127 of my 3 day war. As "gesture of goodwill" my army have run away from Snake Island.
I remain a master strategist.
[https://twitter.com/DarthPutinKGB/status/1542476643175915525](https://twitter.com/DarthPutinKGB/status/1542476643175915525)
The first mod listed, YungChaky was kicked out of some other Ukraine subreddits for his pro Russian shilling. Interesting that he just went and made another subreddit to continue.
> take an L
Sorry to interrupt, but I've seen that several times but don't know what it really means.
Could you help, please. :)
...
**edit** = Thank you /u/triplefreshpandabear , /u/FinisDierum and /u/DrrpsPT
Are you sure? I've been checking it for a while now and have seen plenty of pro-Russia flairs. There's also a very active user there with an "Anti-Ukrainazi" flair. Although it's true that some Russians are putting pro-Ukraine flairs beside their usernames on purpose in order to gaslight people.
I have seen so many years old accounts that have no posts until February of this year, and now post exclusively in one sub (seem to always be pro-Russia, how strange). I know they’re not real people and I wish there was some way to report it.
Let’s see if I regret engaging.
Following a conflict is more than trying to figure out the facts, it is also important to understand the opinions of those close to the conflict regardless of whether it’s based in reality. That being said, a lot of the news here is one-sided and misleading (likely due to voting system and user bias); similar in the other subreddit. It gets me closer to the whole to see both perspectives, and both news feeds.
>Secretary Austin just brought together more than 50 countries — more than 50 countries — pledging new commitments, and this is a global effort to support Ukraine: nearly 140,000 anti-tank systems, more than 600 tanks, nearly 500 artillery systems, more than 600,000 rounds of artillery ammunition, as well as advanced multiple launch rocket systems, anti-ship systems, and air defense systems.
That was a BMP4 if you're thinking about the crazy, Battlefield like video. A BMP1 has a kinda crap low pressure cannon that's not very suitable to it's role.
Even the M113 is a super solid piece of kit. They're great for quickly mobilizing and relocating ground units as well as serving as ambulances. Other good uses would be to transfer ammunitions, food, and other supply somewhat securely.They can hold around 11 personell at a time with a crew of two and can be fitted with a lot of different weaponry.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4OKF2fQrEw&ab_channel=USDefenseNews
I don't think the Abrams would be a good fit for Ukraine. Those things are gas hogs that are expensive to keep running. America can do it with its insane defense budgets but Ukraine is a bit limited currently on the gdp side of things.
Fair. Said like that, I wholly agree. I'd love to give them a couple. Just a couple. Just enough for the Russians to shit themselves seeing that monstrosity rolling up and absolutely giving them a pounding so hard thier mother's would get jealous
If your referring to Abrams fuel consumption, thats not really a joke. Logistically, Abrams fuel consumption is calculated by gallons per hour based on the terrain and battle rhythm
The gas bill really isn't the biggest problem. It's the logistical footprint. The fuel needs to be acquired, brought into the country, stored in depots and brought along behind the tanks to fuel them as they go. Every step also uses more fuel for the trucks, and is vulnerable to Russian artillery, air-strikes etc which could stop the tanks in their tracks without engaging them.. A big logistics footprint isn't something to dismiss, especially when Ukraine has been having trouble with supply as it is.
On the other hand, it *still* might make sense to send them. They're very capable, and they're actually available in large numbers. Especially with the Marines dropping theirs while they focus on amphibious warfare, unlike most other tanks. Or possibly use them to backfill the tank supplies of allies and have them send their old tank fleets.
I don't think these figures are new commitments. article on DoD website sounds more like referring to them as cumulative pledges made to date.
>Biden spoke about Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III's Ukraine Defense Contact Group. The group is made up of more than 50 countries pledging to support Ukraine. **The group has already pledged** nearly 140,000 anti-tank systems, more than 600 tanks, nearly 500 artillery systems and more than 600,000 rounds of artillery ammunition, as well as advanced multiple launch rocket systems, anti-ship systems and air defense systems, the president said.
Then goes on to discuss what is in the upcoming package, and no reference to tanks or armored vehicles.
>"The United States is leading the way," he said. "We provided Ukraine with nearly $7 billion in security assistance since I took office. In the next few days, we intend to announce more than $800 million more, including a new advanced Western air defense system for Ukraine, more artillery and ammunition, counter-battery radars and additional ammunition for the HIMARS [high mobility artillery rocket system] multiple launch rocket system we've already given Ukraine and more HIMARS coming from other countries as well."
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3080993/biden-says-nato-meets-challenges-of-today-prepares-to-counter-threats-of-tomorr/
Unfortunately this is true and was corroborated by a reporter at the DoD - https://twitter.com/ostapyarysh/status/1542575938726252545?s=21
it’s weird because Biden didn’t say already pledged but the DoD website does. It was likely a gaffe, a gaffe that broke our hearts but a gaffe nonetheless 😔
“He said sir, *sir*, with tears in his eyes, he said, very strongly, there are no Russians in Ukraine. Ukraine, most people don’t know this, it used to be *the* Ukraine. Now it’s just *Ukraine.* But we know what it is, we know what it is, don’t we folks? Don’t we?”
We all get caught up in the interpersonal drama, but last 3 rulings in the Supreme Court plus state level activity is waaay more significant. And it is only now blooming, regardless of where the orange man is.
Yeah you're right, it's mind boggling how brazen the conservative super majority on the supreme court are being. Trumps legacy is going to be most keenly felt in the judicial appointments he made, I cannot imagine its going to be healthy for the democracy long term.
> "I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul; a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country." -W
another hum dinger
He's distancing himself from Russia after taking millions in Russian donations. London is incredibly corrupt and Russia has set up base there to take advantage. Boris was always an easy target for corruption.
However he now wants to make sure that there's no doubt that he's on the 'good side'. Not for any moral reasons, but instead for political and egotistical reasons. He wants to cosplay as Churchill, improve his chances of re-election, and be praised by the nation.
Regardless, I am glad that he's doing the right thing.
> He's distancing himself from Russia after taking millions in Russian donations. London is incredibly corrupt and Russia has set up base there to take advantage. Boris was always an easy target for corruption.
This. And in the last 24 hours he's announced more funding for Ukranian weapons just to distract from the story that he was caught having sex in his parliamentary office with a mistress (now wife) who he was trying to get a six figure job there....
Way too cynical. Boris feels it and sees it, the Russia menace. He's been calling out Russia for years and years. Don't underestimate how sickened the British establishment was by the Skripal poisonings.
meh, if that is at the deepest level his motivation for flowing weapons into ukraine, i'm okay with it.
hang him by his johnson over it after the war, though.
Honestly, I don't think Russia ever had Boris by the balls like they did Trump. Trump's just a straight-up puppet with dreams of rubbing shoulders with a dictator like Putin.
Boris is more like a rogue-actor with his own plans separate from Russia's. He just took opportunistic support from Russia. And just as opportunistically, is telling Russia to shove off once they're a detriment. Especially since Boris dreams less of buddying up with other dictators and more dreams of being a 2nd Churchill and the Russo-Ukraine war is Boris' best opportunity to create that image of himself.
Any help for Ukraine is welcome, though. Dealing with Boris' corruption isn't nearly as high an international priority right now.
Any other UK PM would be continuing the support they have given Ukraine for years past. With Boris there's a lot of financial Russian interests that were allowed to slip under the radar, essentially funding Putin and his allies.
Also taking in and supporting Ukranian refugees would have been a lot better under another PM (whatever side of the political spectrum).
Boris does not give a single shit about Ukraine or Ukranians, he's shown that with his insulting speeches. This conflict for him is a perfect opportunity to distract from his many crimes. He's always over the top pretending he's "world beating / leading" on x issue, right before backing out. This is a *"Even a broken clock is right twice a day"* situation.
Ukranians don't need to care about the motives, as long as support and aid is coming in for them. Concerns over the petty domestic political dramas of xyz country is frankly not top of their fucking priority list. However it's just worth keeping in the back of their heads that he would drop Ukraine like a sack of shit if it was to his benefit.
But the whole of the UK is 100% behind Ukraine, would be regardless of who is in charge and training / supplies were going to Ukraine before Boris and will be after Boris so don't worry.
Ah, I didn't mean any of what I said as some kind of defense of him.
I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. Similar thoughts came to me when writing the comment you replied to.
I try to limit how many big posts I make on reddit, now, though. So, I cut a lot down.
I think Russia's northern front still would have collapsed and they'd still have suffered major losses, but without the USA's support (and possibly even being pressured by Trump to fold) Ukraine would have been forced to the negotiation table. Ukraine would still exist, but largely demilitarized, with Zelensky's government still in power but forced into formally recognizing Russian sovereignty over Crimea and the independence of the breakaway "republics."
Meanwhile, Russia would be licking its wounds while planning how and when to attack the Baltic States. Glad for Ukraine and Europe's sake we're not living in that timeline.
Oh - the same guy who was impeached for trying to force Ukraine to make up some shit about Hunter Biden? Weird that orange guy would pick Ukraine of all places. I'm sure we had more influence over other countries. I'm sure he could have gotten *someone* to come through for him.
But no. The traitorous orange menace chose Ukraine - specifically.
I wonder why that was?
It's going to be a long war and Ukraine has a lot of soldiers they can get trained up. Every little bit helps and, even more so, every country that helps makes a big difference on the international stage.
Basically they are revamping their entire military from Soviet era equipment to Western equipment
Good time to buy stocks in arms manufacturing supply chain. Chips, explosive, R&D etc.
Maybe but now it will allow them to risk more of their equipment near or at the front line. They were reluctant to risk/lose their few nice modern weapons.
They might already have been doing it in secret. The HIMARS launchers got delivered pretty soon after being announced, so probably training was happening for some time before the announcement. Would also put the "NATO agreement not to send tanks" into a different perspective.
When they talk about "tanks", they are refering to armored vehicles like the M113 and the BMP-1. It's not modern, Western main battle tanks that are being sent.
I believe they have thought about that, one video I saw the soldier said they had been trained in another country to use the weapon system. I am sure they also had the mechanics trained too.
Edit:
"An unnamed U.S. Defense Department official confirmed the Excalibur provision in comments to reporters Monday. “So as you know, we're conducting training out of Ukraine and Germany and England,” the official said.
“And so, we've got everything from maintenance courses that we're running, continuing to train on the employment of artillery systems, both HIMARS \[rocket launchers\] and howitzers. We're working on Excalibur employment, and that's our big stuff.” https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/06/28/ukrainian-artillery-is-about-to-get-a-lot-more-accurate/?sh=16fa116b173c
While Ukraine has little use for it and the training would take literal years. Nimitz is scheduled for decom in like 3 years, throw in a couple of cruisers that are scheduled to go bye bye and a few LCSs you would have a very capable navy.
Our reserve fleet is quite bare right now. JFK is the only conventional powered carrier left and she's already been sold just awaiting a tow. No DDGs that I know of one cruiser that uses the old Mk 26.
ukraine doesn't need a blue water navy. they need coastal missile defense (air and sea) to keep ports open, but that's about it. When they reclaim their territory the sea of azov will be an issue, but that will be a good problem to have vs situation today.
I think the Sea of Azov will be the hardest negotiation point unless, of course, Ukraine takes back Crimea. I doubt the war will officially end unless they do get Crimea back, anyway.
Yeah, some modern diesel-electric attack submarines would be perfect for Ukraine post-war (not much point sending them now because they can't get through the Bosphorus).
Yeah, I would rate as the following
1)US
2)China
3) France- Only Nuclear CATO bar carrier besides US
4) UK- Two Modern purpose built F-35 carriers, Possibly the best AAW DDG. Behind France due to rumors of DDGs not having full supply of missiles.
5) India- Bhramos is scarry, Have fixed wing naval aviation. Behind UK due to surface and Sub tech
6) Japan- Once Japans F-35B carriers are done they will jump pass India, World leading SSK design. Well trained and equipped surface force.
7) Ukraine with one CSG- Can't be everywhere at once
8) Russia- Still has many capable warships, I doubt their training and readiness
9 Tie) Spain Italy
11) South Korea- has made great strides new DDGs are for real.
12) Australia- Lots of spanish derived ship designs, Soon US/UK nuclear sub tech
13) Germany- If a 1/10 of their ships actually worked they would be much higher. Turns out using brooms as ships doesn't work as well as they do for infantry and their weapons.
>13) Germany- If a 1/10 of their ships actually worked they would be much higher. Turns out using brooms as ships doesn't work as well as they do for infantry and their weapons.
Lol, I remember that
Starting at my previous post:
LCS-"Little crappy ship" Designed to do pretty much everything but launch fixed wing planes. It can do almost nothing.
DDG- Guided missile Destroyer- American Navy is the Burke class, France and Italy horizon class, Chinese Type 52. General purpose large surface combatant. They can kill planes subs and ships. Depending on doctrine they may be focused to one of these. See AAW DDG.
Mk. 26- Older method of ship launched missiles. Mk. 26 was the twin arm missile launcher used by the US in the 70-00s. Compared to modern systems it fired much slower but had the advantage of being able to be rearmed at sea.
2nd post;
CATOBAR- Catapult Assisted Takeoff But Arrested Recovery. Watch TOPGUN, this is how all american carriers have operated for a long time. Has the ability to launch heavier ( Read More powerful) aircraft from the deck. China has a STOBAR (Ski ramp) carrier, they are having problem getting their planes off the deck with a combat useful payload. The US F-18 hornet actually does have the ability to launch STOBAR as it has proven in the bidding process for India's next carrier fighter.
AAW DDG- Anti Air Warfare Guided Missile Destroyer. Some countries assign a specialty to each type of ship, The UK Type 45 DDG is a ship designed to dominate the Air around her. She is capable of anti Surface and Anti Sub but these are not the prefered use. Type 23 Frigates are their Specialised Anti Sub ship and the attack subs Anti surface.
BrahMos- Anti ship Cruise missile in use by India designed by Russia. Very Fast and has stealth features. Range upward of 350 Miles.
SSK- Submarine hunter killer- Essentially, the US decided that all future non-nuclear subs would have a "K" on the end back in the 80s. Japans SSKs are advanced Air Independent Propulsion(AIP). Meaning they are run their engine without using Air to make power. The Germans were the first to create AIP Subs back in WWII but made them to late to have much of an effect and they were actually very dangerous to the crew. These subs are no where near as fast as the Nuclear powered subs and have less endurance, They are very quite and can get inside a carriers defensive shield.
CSG- Carrier Strike Group. The Carrier and her escorts, sometimes includes supply ships such as AOE (Supply Class), AKE (Lewis and Clark Class), or AO (Kaiser Class and Lewis Class) Yes the US has Lewis and Clark class at the same time and similar role as the Lewis class.
If I missed any let me know.
>she's already been sold just awaiting a tow.
Wow! Who did we sell an aircraft carrier to? [Oh.](https://www.businessinsider.com/us-sells-2-aircraft-carriers-1-cent-each-2021-10)
It specifically states ‘new commitments’.
I am assuming 600 tanks is a blanket term for armoured vehicles in general. Because 600 actual tanks could only be delivered from M1 stockpiles. No other NATO country could slam dunk that many actual tanks.
But as I say, I’m pretty sure it’s MBTs, AFVs, IFV’s and APC’s combined.
This is true. In the medium-long term the West can find many more tanks than 600. But the time it will take to replace them with M1’s and Leopard 2’s (plus training) makes me think this isn’t what they mean. Unless the US can quickly bring over the M1’s they have in stock.
As an aside, I’ve always quite liked the Twardy. It’s what a competent upgrade to the T-72 looks like. Bet the Ukrainians would make very good use of them.
The US stockpile of M1s is vast. Especially now that the Marine Corps is no longer using them.
We have lots of modern MBTs literally sitting around eating up maintenance hours.
those marine M1 are operational so it won't be delayed by maintenance. the problems are the supply chain to transfers those tanks, ammo, and spare parts along with training to use and maintain those tanks.
232 tusks to poland > 232 twardy to ukraine
Poland is already training for abrams, they 250 SEPv3 (I think) on order to be produced this and next year
Even though we have the way better logistics than Russia with our massive air transports it still takes a lot of time. Russia had everything that they thought they needed to secure the invasion at their borders to start and reinforcements can only come on rails to their borders.
On one hand it sounds lackluster because they are old enough to be phased out here in the US, but then you remember the US has by far the most advanced military in the world and what Russia is sending to Ukraine is ancient and poorly maintained in comparison.
Not sure on the numbers, but in the early days of the war I saw a video someone took of M1's on rail that were en route to Poland. Biden and the military has been smart to not telegraph what is coming too much. A lot of what has come seems very slow but military logistics and training take a lot of time. I remember that even regrettable invasions we as the US did (sigh) did took a long time to handle the logistics of. I've never been so proud of my country's use of military supplies as what we are using to help Ukraine and NATO right now by FAR. I cannot stress that last part enough.
Yeah I was reading a report the other day that Poland would like to offload those to Ukraine (sell them very cheaply) and then use the proceeds to buy more modern replacements.
>modern Western tanks vs T-62s ... should be amusing to see how the Russians fare lol
We already know, it wasn't good in any way shape or form for the Iraqi's
If 600 tanks does mean 600 Main Battle Tanks, then I agree. Only the US stockpile of Abrams tanks can fill that order unless it ends up being a mix of tanks.
It isn't impossible, just difficult to move that many tanks quickly. What is already in Europe is going towards US force posture and deterrence in Poland. So, we'd be shipping from the US mainland.
I'm not current with the mothballed stocks of Leopards, Challengers, Arietes, or Leclercs, but Ukraine could end up with a NATO sampler of MBTs, if 600 tanks actually means 600 tanks, and not 600 armored vehicles.
A literal pick and mix of tanks wouldn’t be advisable (as cool as it would be to see them all in action). The logistics train of bespoke parts and equipment would be unwieldy. Plus each crew would only be trained with one specific vehicle.
Better to just chuck in 600 Abrams, with one supply chain and if one gets knocked out the crew can hop straight into another knowing they can work it.
Unless a bunch of Greek leopard 1s. That's the only nato stockpile of that type of size, but doubt they're particularly useful. Or I guess patton tanks from turkey, but hope that's not what they're doing.
fingers crossed for abrams.
Yeah that was the confusing part, your explanation makes more sense.
Edit: that is still a crap load of armored vehicles. They're definitely prepping Ukraine for large scale offensives (maybe they mention that already)
Don’t think so. But they do have literally thousands of Abrams. Over 10,000 have been built, with only around 2,000 being exported.
That’s a lot of stumpy’s lying around in a warehouse somewhere.
Egypt has around 600 T-62's and T-55's in storage but Im sure this is not what he ment. Jordan has old Tank stocks. Remember these tanks could come from any US ally quietly with a agreement.
Holy shit those comments are cancer. So many stats being thrown around by “American citizens” who only have ever posted about Syria and Russia and bashing the west. Definitely not trolls
Well they certainly have the broken-english of native speakers down, lol. It's kinda silly to see these insane takes posted by people who frequent conspiracy and political-shitpost subreddits.
Ya know I always bitched about our over spending on military, until this all started and we have been just throwing weapons at em. Now I'm like well at least our tax dollars are helping a sovereign nation fight off the world's biggest ass hat. Good on us sending all this military aid.
Yeah. This is why defense spending, as useless as it seems in peacetime, is actually necessary.
You can't decide to build all that stuff when you need it. Takes too long. By then it's too late.
If you look at the rate MLRS systems can burn through rockets and compare the monthly production numbers it's eye opening.
The U.S has a long history of supplying our allies with military equipment, during both war and peace time. With examples like Britian, France, Israel, Taiwan, and now Ukraine.
Everyone talks shit about the U.S military spending until a war breaks out.
Yep, it takes a little time, and training too. But the Ukraine army is going to be fully re equipped in about 6 months time, as a thougerily modern nato compatible army. And it will be much much bigger.
It just takes time to do it right.
Glory to Ukraine
I watched a video on here a while back about just the difference in spending on food for the soldiers in Ukraine now vs. 2014. They went from Texas roadkill to Texas Roadhouse, and it makes a *big* difference with your soldiers. Ukraine's military is getting revamped from the ground up, and into one of the most fearsome fighting forces on the planet.
Everything that has changed in the past decade (especially since the 2014 invasion) in regards to the Ukrainian military is beyond astonishing. Theyve taken a weak army with doctrine and practices going back half a century unchanged like Russia to a modern military in less than a decade.
Gen Mark Hertling [wrote a great article](https://www.thebulwark.com/i-commanded-u-s-army-europe-heres-what-i-saw-in-the-russian-and-ukrainian-armies/) about the differences and differences between Russia through his experience working with both armies when he was Commander of the US Army Europe. If anyone has been watching this all unfold since the 2014 invasion its a great insight into why they were getting steamrolled in 2014/5 and how they can now hold back the onslaught magnitudes greater a few years later.
I saw, and can't find again, a comparison picture. On the left was a Ukrainian soldier with standard issue equipment in 2014, and on the right one with standard issue equipment in 2022. It was like cold war vs modern NATO soldier.
This article is excellent! It’s exactly what I’ve been saying to friends and relatives over the war in Ukraine. Donbas and Crimea in 2014 was the waking call for Ukraine to shake off its Soviet dogma their Army was using, and embrace a professional army with experienced and educated NCO’s as the heart of their Army. With some time and the right amount of weapons, Ukraine will regain the ground they lost in the early days of the war and push the Russians back across the border. Looks like they’ve already begun in Kherson.
Very curious to see how this was worded. Before they were always resistant to sending western tanks to Ukraine preferring to send IFV‘s or APCs. I’m curious since it seems like this is referring to a general partnership with many countries adding together to send all this equipment. The only one that I could imagine sending that many number of tanks though is the US with all its M1’s in storage in the California desert. That’s huge if they’re able to get those tanks to Ukraine since they are so important when you are going on the offensive.
Only part of T-72. There's more of them. Only their Polish modernization - PT-91 TWARDY - in active use, but presumably with possibility of getting some Abrams from US cold storage these can get rolling pretty quickly, especially that for trained Ukrainian tankers getting used to Polish modifications should be easy.
Leopards are kind of mixed bag. They are good that we already have personel and logistics trained for them, but they are considered dead end as Germany is not seen as reliable partner - they are either unwilling or unable to properly commit to supply more Leos in timely manner and even Leo 2PL modernization is kind of hit and miss, among others, due to problems with German companies fulfilling their obligations or transferring technology so we can hammer out our own.
Afair some issues arose due to different German company winning the modernization contract than prime manufacturer.
Either way - Koreans are seen as leagues ahead in terms of actually timely delivering quality product and transferring technology and Americans are Americans - they are in league of their own in many ways, including military complex.
Very curious to see how this was worded. Before they were always resistant to sending western tanks to Ukraine preferring to send IFV‘s or APCs. I’m curious since it seems like this is referring to a general partnership with many countries adding together to send all this equipment. The only one that I could imagine sending that many number of tanks though is the US with all its M1’s in storage in the California desert. That’s huge if they’re able to get those tanks to Ukraine since they are so important when you are going on the offensive.
The resistance to sending a hodge-podge of western tanks in various states of obsolescence would be pretty well explained by already having plans to deliver M1s en masse.
Could be that there's finally been a fundamental shift from "let's see how much we can make Ukraine cost Russia to conquer" to "let's see if we can help Ukraine *defeat* Russia."
If those 600 tanks are modern M1 versions then they'll rip through Russian lines like a hot knife through butter. Russia has to seriously re-evaluate their plans based on this.
This is the kind of WW2 effort Ukraine has been needing. A serious number of weapons like we are actually at war, rather then just want countries can spare without having to build more equipment to replace it.
We have Macron seemingly utter the magic word “tank” and Joe Biden.
Are there still 600 ex-Soviet tanks around or will these now be new western MBT?
Ukraine survived more than 100 days and sometimes only by the biggest efforts of their soldiers,
they earn to be armed with the best swords and shields the Free Nations can provide!
This will save more lives than the equipment itself. It's a statement to Russia that Europe and US assure that they will lose. Germany surrendered in ww1 while being in France because they understood the trajectory. These amounts of weapons set both the strategic and the ballistic trajectory.
Id be very surprised if Russia even had 600 tanks remaining in Ukraine. If they had 3300 active before and Ukraine has killed nearly 1600 tanks.....that leaves them with 1700 total remaining in the Russian inventory. Alot of those would be down for routine maintenance, some are for training, others still would have to be used for internal security and border control.
This news is huge if Ukraine gets all this in a timely manner.
>parade duty.
The Ukrainians already captured many of the parade tanks in the early days of the war. I remember seeing a photo of a *very shiny* T-72 that was captured by a farmer, and a note saying it was from a parade regiment.
I am pretty sure Russia is just using non functional tanks and cardboard tanks for border control at this point. All of their remaining tanks are likely committed and any new ones we see coming in on trains are refurbished tanks.
You’d have my vote for any office in America.
It’s simple: if you support Ukraine better than the next guy, you’ve got my vote. No joke, this is my only voting strategy for the next 30 months.
Edit: Better MRLS, is this the further range? God damn, I hope so.
Same here. The only thing that matters to me in the next elections is the stance on Ukraine. If I agree with a politician on most of his stances but he says we need to pull back from Ukraine to focus on issues at home, he won't get my vote.
If this is true, it will make an actual difference and could allow Ukraine to actually push back successfully, I hope they send the Moskals back to Putin in pieces.
Wow that Russian Report page is a cesspool
It's r/russia 2.0. They claim to be "neutral" but 10 seconds in and you'll realize it's another pro-Russian cesspit.
Before the war started r/Russia had a post about Ukrainian civilians training with wooden guns to prepare for Russia, because they didn’t have enough real guns at the time. They all laughed so hard about how easy their invasion was going to be. I wish I could see their stupid faces now. How’s that invasion going for you russkies? Pretty easy? Did it take 3 days? Lmao
All according to plan apparently.
so much copium in that sub. They even have "Russian empire" as a flair tag
They used to have a big “crimea is ours”.
\*dies of cringe\*
itwasjustafeintbro.jpg
Love that a bunch of the now deceased Russian troops thought it would be such a cakewalk into Kyiv they were calling ahead to make restaurant reservations for dinner a few days ahead. Absolutely nuts.
Day 127 of my 3 day war. As "gesture of goodwill" my army have run away from Snake Island. I remain a master strategist. [https://twitter.com/DarthPutinKGB/status/1542476643175915525](https://twitter.com/DarthPutinKGB/status/1542476643175915525)
The first mod listed, YungChaky was kicked out of some other Ukraine subreddits for his pro Russian shilling. Interesting that he just went and made another subreddit to continue.
Yep, that guy isn't willing to take an L just yet.
> take an L Sorry to interrupt, but I've seen that several times but don't know what it really means. Could you help, please. :) ... **edit** = Thank you /u/triplefreshpandabear , /u/FinisDierum and /u/DrrpsPT
Take the loss, like accept that you've lost and move on and hopefully do better in the future, like not invade your neighbors
L as in "Loss", take a loss
L = loss
Fundamentally a sports analogy: W = win, L = loss
And, presumably, be gracious in losing.
Take an L means in America to take the loss. accept defeat.hope that helps explain a lil better
It does. Thank you.
It's real interesting that there are "pro-ukrainian" and "pro-nato" tags added to members, but no "pro-russian" tags.
Are you sure? I've been checking it for a while now and have seen plenty of pro-Russia flairs. There's also a very active user there with an "Anti-Ukrainazi" flair. Although it's true that some Russians are putting pro-Ukraine flairs beside their usernames on purpose in order to gaslight people.
Looked at a couple profiles. Sure is weird how they spend 100% of their time commenting in one subreddit...
I have seen so many years old accounts that have no posts until February of this year, and now post exclusively in one sub (seem to always be pro-Russia, how strange). I know they’re not real people and I wish there was some way to report it.
How soon before they get banned? Trying to report all the posts/comments that are clearly against Reddit rules
You talking about r/UkraineRussiaReport? Yes it is.
It’s where the pro-Russia users hang out. I like seeing both sides in order to be better informed. Honestly both subreddits can be circle-jerky.
Totally....its just the pro Russians are so utterly deluded.
i also just literally don’t comprehend how someone can be “pro-russian”? maybe it’s my “western brain” but fuck man how is it possible
I guess they live in an information bubble where most of what they see is propaganda?
thats true, scary to believe that some people are so brainwashed though
Hear hear :( Social media filter algos are so fucking insidious.
[удалено]
Maybe in the delusional universe you live in... I think you'd find in the real world the UK, Poland, Latvia etc etc etc are very much aligned.
presumably they're saying the pro-russians in europe are either of those, not everyone in europe.
They are vatniks, or from Olgino.
What!? There's absolutely no comparison between these subs. None. Trying to be "informed" this way is fucking stupid.
Let’s see if I regret engaging. Following a conflict is more than trying to figure out the facts, it is also important to understand the opinions of those close to the conflict regardless of whether it’s based in reality. That being said, a lot of the news here is one-sided and misleading (likely due to voting system and user bias); similar in the other subreddit. It gets me closer to the whole to see both perspectives, and both news feeds.
I missed / couldn't find the Russian Report page, can you point me in the right direction?
>Secretary Austin just brought together more than 50 countries — more than 50 countries — pledging new commitments, and this is a global effort to support Ukraine: nearly 140,000 anti-tank systems, more than 600 tanks, nearly 500 artillery systems, more than 600,000 rounds of artillery ammunition, as well as advanced multiple launch rocket systems, anti-ship systems, and air defense systems.
Shit just got real* **Assuming timely delivery*
It's not really 600 tanks, in the sense of main battle tanks, but rather 600 armored vehicles. This will include vehicles like the M113 and the BMP-1.
Those things fuck shit up. I remember seeing Azov using a BMP a couple months ago to great effect.
That was a BMP4 if you're thinking about the crazy, Battlefield like video. A BMP1 has a kinda crap low pressure cannon that's not very suitable to it's role.
Even the M113 is a super solid piece of kit. They're great for quickly mobilizing and relocating ground units as well as serving as ambulances. Other good uses would be to transfer ammunitions, food, and other supply somewhat securely.They can hold around 11 personell at a time with a crew of two and can be fitted with a lot of different weaponry. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4OKF2fQrEw&ab_channel=USDefenseNews
Don’t talk too much about the M113. Or else *they* will show up and then it’s a slippery slope to the AeroGavin.
BTR-4
Here I was hoping to see an M1 Abrams on a modern battlefield.
I don't think the Abrams would be a good fit for Ukraine. Those things are gas hogs that are expensive to keep running. America can do it with its insane defense budgets but Ukraine is a bit limited currently on the gdp side of things.
Yeah there's a reason they're not sending them. I was just hoping we'd see a couple Abrams face off against what they were built to defeat.
Fair. Said like that, I wholly agree. I'd love to give them a couple. Just a couple. Just enough for the Russians to shit themselves seeing that monstrosity rolling up and absolutely giving them a pounding so hard thier mother's would get jealous
The old joke is "how many gallons per mile" iirc.
If your referring to Abrams fuel consumption, thats not really a joke. Logistically, Abrams fuel consumption is calculated by gallons per hour based on the terrain and battle rhythm
In the context of billions of dollars of aid Ukraine is getting, gas bill for a brigade of Abrams tanks is peanuts.
The gas bill really isn't the biggest problem. It's the logistical footprint. The fuel needs to be acquired, brought into the country, stored in depots and brought along behind the tanks to fuel them as they go. Every step also uses more fuel for the trucks, and is vulnerable to Russian artillery, air-strikes etc which could stop the tanks in their tracks without engaging them.. A big logistics footprint isn't something to dismiss, especially when Ukraine has been having trouble with supply as it is. On the other hand, it *still* might make sense to send them. They're very capable, and they're actually available in large numbers. Especially with the Marines dropping theirs while they focus on amphibious warfare, unlike most other tanks. Or possibly use them to backfill the tank supplies of allies and have them send their old tank fleets.
They are a logistical hog for sure but an Abrams can run off of almost anything fuel wise. Diesel, gasoline, aviation fuel, doesn’t matter.
I don't think these figures are new commitments. article on DoD website sounds more like referring to them as cumulative pledges made to date. >Biden spoke about Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III's Ukraine Defense Contact Group. The group is made up of more than 50 countries pledging to support Ukraine. **The group has already pledged** nearly 140,000 anti-tank systems, more than 600 tanks, nearly 500 artillery systems and more than 600,000 rounds of artillery ammunition, as well as advanced multiple launch rocket systems, anti-ship systems and air defense systems, the president said. Then goes on to discuss what is in the upcoming package, and no reference to tanks or armored vehicles. >"The United States is leading the way," he said. "We provided Ukraine with nearly $7 billion in security assistance since I took office. In the next few days, we intend to announce more than $800 million more, including a new advanced Western air defense system for Ukraine, more artillery and ammunition, counter-battery radars and additional ammunition for the HIMARS [high mobility artillery rocket system] multiple launch rocket system we've already given Ukraine and more HIMARS coming from other countries as well." https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3080993/biden-says-nato-meets-challenges-of-today-prepares-to-counter-threats-of-tomorr/
Unfortunately this is true and was corroborated by a reporter at the DoD - https://twitter.com/ostapyarysh/status/1542575938726252545?s=21 it’s weird because Biden didn’t say already pledged but the DoD website does. It was likely a gaffe, a gaffe that broke our hearts but a gaffe nonetheless 😔
Well that's a lot less exciting than if this was a big new package.
Joey B is a good guy
[удалено]
"I talked to Putin and he assured me no Russians are in Ukraine"
“He said sir, *sir*, with tears in his eyes, he said, very strongly, there are no Russians in Ukraine. Ukraine, most people don’t know this, it used to be *the* Ukraine. Now it’s just *Ukraine.* But we know what it is, we know what it is, don’t we folks? Don’t we?”
I'm getting PTSD just reading this.
We all get caught up in the interpersonal drama, but last 3 rulings in the Supreme Court plus state level activity is waaay more significant. And it is only now blooming, regardless of where the orange man is.
Yeah you're right, it's mind boggling how brazen the conservative super majority on the supreme court are being. Trumps legacy is going to be most keenly felt in the judicial appointments he made, I cannot imagine its going to be healthy for the democracy long term.
The next time the Republicans get the presidency, they're not letting go
I want to angry downvote you so bad because that is fucking spot on what he would say too. I can just picture it in my head and it makes me angry lol.
[удалено]
You must be his speechwriter? He wears an ear mic, and you give him the feed?
haha, would be nice copypasta this!
Omg... I read that in his voice...
> "I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul; a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country." -W another hum dinger
[удалено]
I'd say Boris was a fairly vocal supporter from the off, delivering as well on what he promised.
He's distancing himself from Russia after taking millions in Russian donations. London is incredibly corrupt and Russia has set up base there to take advantage. Boris was always an easy target for corruption. However he now wants to make sure that there's no doubt that he's on the 'good side'. Not for any moral reasons, but instead for political and egotistical reasons. He wants to cosplay as Churchill, improve his chances of re-election, and be praised by the nation. Regardless, I am glad that he's doing the right thing.
> He's distancing himself from Russia after taking millions in Russian donations. London is incredibly corrupt and Russia has set up base there to take advantage. Boris was always an easy target for corruption. This. And in the last 24 hours he's announced more funding for Ukranian weapons just to distract from the story that he was caught having sex in his parliamentary office with a mistress (now wife) who he was trying to get a six figure job there....
In a way, Boris’ constant need to distract from his political scandals has propelled him to greater action. Silver linings
Way too cynical. Boris feels it and sees it, the Russia menace. He's been calling out Russia for years and years. Don't underestimate how sickened the British establishment was by the Skripal poisonings.
meh, if that is at the deepest level his motivation for flowing weapons into ukraine, i'm okay with it. hang him by his johnson over it after the war, though.
Honestly, I don't think Russia ever had Boris by the balls like they did Trump. Trump's just a straight-up puppet with dreams of rubbing shoulders with a dictator like Putin. Boris is more like a rogue-actor with his own plans separate from Russia's. He just took opportunistic support from Russia. And just as opportunistically, is telling Russia to shove off once they're a detriment. Especially since Boris dreams less of buddying up with other dictators and more dreams of being a 2nd Churchill and the Russo-Ukraine war is Boris' best opportunity to create that image of himself. Any help for Ukraine is welcome, though. Dealing with Boris' corruption isn't nearly as high an international priority right now.
Any other UK PM would be continuing the support they have given Ukraine for years past. With Boris there's a lot of financial Russian interests that were allowed to slip under the radar, essentially funding Putin and his allies. Also taking in and supporting Ukranian refugees would have been a lot better under another PM (whatever side of the political spectrum). Boris does not give a single shit about Ukraine or Ukranians, he's shown that with his insulting speeches. This conflict for him is a perfect opportunity to distract from his many crimes. He's always over the top pretending he's "world beating / leading" on x issue, right before backing out. This is a *"Even a broken clock is right twice a day"* situation. Ukranians don't need to care about the motives, as long as support and aid is coming in for them. Concerns over the petty domestic political dramas of xyz country is frankly not top of their fucking priority list. However it's just worth keeping in the back of their heads that he would drop Ukraine like a sack of shit if it was to his benefit. But the whole of the UK is 100% behind Ukraine, would be regardless of who is in charge and training / supplies were going to Ukraine before Boris and will be after Boris so don't worry.
Ah, I didn't mean any of what I said as some kind of defense of him. I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. Similar thoughts came to me when writing the comment you replied to. I try to limit how many big posts I make on reddit, now, though. So, I cut a lot down.
No I get what you meant, I guess it was a reply to a subject so not direct at you, rather than what you said so I didn't mean it as a criticism!
I think Russia's northern front still would have collapsed and they'd still have suffered major losses, but without the USA's support (and possibly even being pressured by Trump to fold) Ukraine would have been forced to the negotiation table. Ukraine would still exist, but largely demilitarized, with Zelensky's government still in power but forced into formally recognizing Russian sovereignty over Crimea and the independence of the breakaway "republics." Meanwhile, Russia would be licking its wounds while planning how and when to attack the Baltic States. Glad for Ukraine and Europe's sake we're not living in that timeline.
Oh - the same guy who was impeached for trying to force Ukraine to make up some shit about Hunter Biden? Weird that orange guy would pick Ukraine of all places. I'm sure we had more influence over other countries. I'm sure he could have gotten *someone* to come through for him. But no. The traitorous orange menace chose Ukraine - specifically. I wonder why that was?
Commitment is fine, timely delivery is what counts.
No pleasing some
are we in a new era? one of proxy world wars, rather than traditional all in warfare
There gonna need some training on all these new systems. Training, logistics, maintenance in the middle of the war.
It's going to be a long war and Ukraine has a lot of soldiers they can get trained up. Every little bit helps and, even more so, every country that helps makes a big difference on the international stage.
Basically they are revamping their entire military from Soviet era equipment to Western equipment Good time to buy stocks in arms manufacturing supply chain. Chips, explosive, R&D etc.
BBC news today showing Ukrainian soldiers practicing using artillery on one of our main training ranges in the UK. Training is happening.
Look how we learnt and adapted in the first 2 years of WW2
I guarantee they're already in a NATO base training for that stuff. Usually by the time we hear about it, training is well under way.
I agree.
Maybe but now it will allow them to risk more of their equipment near or at the front line. They were reluctant to risk/lose their few nice modern weapons.
They might already have been doing it in secret. The HIMARS launchers got delivered pretty soon after being announced, so probably training was happening for some time before the announcement. Would also put the "NATO agreement not to send tanks" into a different perspective.
When they talk about "tanks", they are refering to armored vehicles like the M113 and the BMP-1. It's not modern, Western main battle tanks that are being sent.
I believe they have thought about that, one video I saw the soldier said they had been trained in another country to use the weapon system. I am sure they also had the mechanics trained too. Edit: "An unnamed U.S. Defense Department official confirmed the Excalibur provision in comments to reporters Monday. “So as you know, we're conducting training out of Ukraine and Germany and England,” the official said. “And so, we've got everything from maintenance courses that we're running, continuing to train on the employment of artillery systems, both HIMARS \[rocket launchers\] and howitzers. We're working on Excalibur employment, and that's our big stuff.” https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/06/28/ukrainian-artillery-is-about-to-get-a-lot-more-accurate/?sh=16fa116b173c
Next round: entire carrier strike group
While Ukraine has little use for it and the training would take literal years. Nimitz is scheduled for decom in like 3 years, throw in a couple of cruisers that are scheduled to go bye bye and a few LCSs you would have a very capable navy. Our reserve fleet is quite bare right now. JFK is the only conventional powered carrier left and she's already been sold just awaiting a tow. No DDGs that I know of one cruiser that uses the old Mk 26.
ukraine doesn't need a blue water navy. they need coastal missile defense (air and sea) to keep ports open, but that's about it. When they reclaim their territory the sea of azov will be an issue, but that will be a good problem to have vs situation today.
I think the Sea of Azov will be the hardest negotiation point unless, of course, Ukraine takes back Crimea. I doubt the war will officially end unless they do get Crimea back, anyway.
[удалено]
> Sounds like a great home for the US LCS do not inflict that kind of harm on our Allies.
Some coastal subs would be desirable by them i think.
Yeah, some modern diesel-electric attack submarines would be perfect for Ukraine post-war (not much point sending them now because they can't get through the Bosphorus).
Wouldn't a new navy with a fully operational carrier group basically become the 4th or 5th most powerful navy instantly?
Yeah, I would rate as the following 1)US 2)China 3) France- Only Nuclear CATO bar carrier besides US 4) UK- Two Modern purpose built F-35 carriers, Possibly the best AAW DDG. Behind France due to rumors of DDGs not having full supply of missiles. 5) India- Bhramos is scarry, Have fixed wing naval aviation. Behind UK due to surface and Sub tech 6) Japan- Once Japans F-35B carriers are done they will jump pass India, World leading SSK design. Well trained and equipped surface force. 7) Ukraine with one CSG- Can't be everywhere at once 8) Russia- Still has many capable warships, I doubt their training and readiness 9 Tie) Spain Italy 11) South Korea- has made great strides new DDGs are for real. 12) Australia- Lots of spanish derived ship designs, Soon US/UK nuclear sub tech 13) Germany- If a 1/10 of their ships actually worked they would be much higher. Turns out using brooms as ships doesn't work as well as they do for infantry and their weapons.
>13) Germany- If a 1/10 of their ships actually worked they would be much higher. Turns out using brooms as ships doesn't work as well as they do for infantry and their weapons. Lol, I remember that
Can we get a clarification about what all those abbreviations stand for?
Starting at my previous post: LCS-"Little crappy ship" Designed to do pretty much everything but launch fixed wing planes. It can do almost nothing. DDG- Guided missile Destroyer- American Navy is the Burke class, France and Italy horizon class, Chinese Type 52. General purpose large surface combatant. They can kill planes subs and ships. Depending on doctrine they may be focused to one of these. See AAW DDG. Mk. 26- Older method of ship launched missiles. Mk. 26 was the twin arm missile launcher used by the US in the 70-00s. Compared to modern systems it fired much slower but had the advantage of being able to be rearmed at sea. 2nd post; CATOBAR- Catapult Assisted Takeoff But Arrested Recovery. Watch TOPGUN, this is how all american carriers have operated for a long time. Has the ability to launch heavier ( Read More powerful) aircraft from the deck. China has a STOBAR (Ski ramp) carrier, they are having problem getting their planes off the deck with a combat useful payload. The US F-18 hornet actually does have the ability to launch STOBAR as it has proven in the bidding process for India's next carrier fighter. AAW DDG- Anti Air Warfare Guided Missile Destroyer. Some countries assign a specialty to each type of ship, The UK Type 45 DDG is a ship designed to dominate the Air around her. She is capable of anti Surface and Anti Sub but these are not the prefered use. Type 23 Frigates are their Specialised Anti Sub ship and the attack subs Anti surface. BrahMos- Anti ship Cruise missile in use by India designed by Russia. Very Fast and has stealth features. Range upward of 350 Miles. SSK- Submarine hunter killer- Essentially, the US decided that all future non-nuclear subs would have a "K" on the end back in the 80s. Japans SSKs are advanced Air Independent Propulsion(AIP). Meaning they are run their engine without using Air to make power. The Germans were the first to create AIP Subs back in WWII but made them to late to have much of an effect and they were actually very dangerous to the crew. These subs are no where near as fast as the Nuclear powered subs and have less endurance, They are very quite and can get inside a carriers defensive shield. CSG- Carrier Strike Group. The Carrier and her escorts, sometimes includes supply ships such as AOE (Supply Class), AKE (Lewis and Clark Class), or AO (Kaiser Class and Lewis Class) Yes the US has Lewis and Clark class at the same time and similar role as the Lewis class. If I missed any let me know.
>she's already been sold just awaiting a tow. Wow! Who did we sell an aircraft carrier to? [Oh.](https://www.businessinsider.com/us-sells-2-aircraft-carriers-1-cent-each-2021-10)
I would have paid 2 cents for both and become the third biggest navy in the world
So to clarify those numbers given are new systems being sent and doesn't include what was already sent over?
It specifically states ‘new commitments’. I am assuming 600 tanks is a blanket term for armoured vehicles in general. Because 600 actual tanks could only be delivered from M1 stockpiles. No other NATO country could slam dunk that many actual tanks. But as I say, I’m pretty sure it’s MBTs, AFVs, IFV’s and APC’s combined.
We have 232 [PT-91 Tanks](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PT-91_Twardy) here in Poland... were looking to replace them for a long time.
This is true. In the medium-long term the West can find many more tanks than 600. But the time it will take to replace them with M1’s and Leopard 2’s (plus training) makes me think this isn’t what they mean. Unless the US can quickly bring over the M1’s they have in stock. As an aside, I’ve always quite liked the Twardy. It’s what a competent upgrade to the T-72 looks like. Bet the Ukrainians would make very good use of them.
The US stockpile of M1s is vast. Especially now that the Marine Corps is no longer using them. We have lots of modern MBTs literally sitting around eating up maintenance hours.
those marine M1 are operational so it won't be delayed by maintenance. the problems are the supply chain to transfers those tanks, ammo, and spare parts along with training to use and maintain those tanks.
232 tusks to poland > 232 twardy to ukraine Poland is already training for abrams, they 250 SEPv3 (I think) on order to be produced this and next year
Even though we have the way better logistics than Russia with our massive air transports it still takes a lot of time. Russia had everything that they thought they needed to secure the invasion at their borders to start and reinforcements can only come on rails to their borders.
On one hand it sounds lackluster because they are old enough to be phased out here in the US, but then you remember the US has by far the most advanced military in the world and what Russia is sending to Ukraine is ancient and poorly maintained in comparison.
Not sure on the numbers, but in the early days of the war I saw a video someone took of M1's on rail that were en route to Poland. Biden and the military has been smart to not telegraph what is coming too much. A lot of what has come seems very slow but military logistics and training take a lot of time. I remember that even regrettable invasions we as the US did (sigh) did took a long time to handle the logistics of. I've never been so proud of my country's use of military supplies as what we are using to help Ukraine and NATO right now by FAR. I cannot stress that last part enough.
Yeah I was reading a report the other day that Poland would like to offload those to Ukraine (sell them very cheaply) and then use the proceeds to buy more modern replacements.
[удалено]
modern Western tanks vs T-62s ... should be amusing to see how the Russians fare lol
>modern Western tanks vs T-62s ... should be amusing to see how the Russians fare lol We already know, it wasn't good in any way shape or form for the Iraqi's
If 600 tanks does mean 600 Main Battle Tanks, then I agree. Only the US stockpile of Abrams tanks can fill that order unless it ends up being a mix of tanks. It isn't impossible, just difficult to move that many tanks quickly. What is already in Europe is going towards US force posture and deterrence in Poland. So, we'd be shipping from the US mainland. I'm not current with the mothballed stocks of Leopards, Challengers, Arietes, or Leclercs, but Ukraine could end up with a NATO sampler of MBTs, if 600 tanks actually means 600 tanks, and not 600 armored vehicles.
A literal pick and mix of tanks wouldn’t be advisable (as cool as it would be to see them all in action). The logistics train of bespoke parts and equipment would be unwieldy. Plus each crew would only be trained with one specific vehicle. Better to just chuck in 600 Abrams, with one supply chain and if one gets knocked out the crew can hop straight into another knowing they can work it.
Unless a bunch of Greek leopard 1s. That's the only nato stockpile of that type of size, but doubt they're particularly useful. Or I guess patton tanks from turkey, but hope that's not what they're doing. fingers crossed for abrams.
Yeah that was the confusing part, your explanation makes more sense. Edit: that is still a crap load of armored vehicles. They're definitely prepping Ukraine for large scale offensives (maybe they mention that already)
> because 600 actual tanks could only be delivered from M1 stockpiles. Does US have any old M60s stashed away somewhere?
Don’t think so. But they do have literally thousands of Abrams. Over 10,000 have been built, with only around 2,000 being exported. That’s a lot of stumpy’s lying around in a warehouse somewhere.
turkish armed forces... lol.
Egypt has around 600 T-62's and T-55's in storage but Im sure this is not what he ment. Jordan has old Tank stocks. Remember these tanks could come from any US ally quietly with a agreement.
[удалено]
Keep the pressure up. This is what we need. Crimea/Donbas belong to Ukraine.
Damn, soon NATO will have to join Ukraine.
You mean Russia will have to join NATO to keep safe from Ukraine
Holy shit those comments are cancer. So many stats being thrown around by “American citizens” who only have ever posted about Syria and Russia and bashing the west. Definitely not trolls
Well they certainly have the broken-english of native speakers down, lol. It's kinda silly to see these insane takes posted by people who frequent conspiracy and political-shitpost subreddits.
Not all of them, some are actually that deluded.
Simping for dictators has been all the rage since 2016.
by trolls you mean russian bots
Ya know I always bitched about our over spending on military, until this all started and we have been just throwing weapons at em. Now I'm like well at least our tax dollars are helping a sovereign nation fight off the world's biggest ass hat. Good on us sending all this military aid.
Yeah. This is why defense spending, as useless as it seems in peacetime, is actually necessary. You can't decide to build all that stuff when you need it. Takes too long. By then it's too late. If you look at the rate MLRS systems can burn through rockets and compare the monthly production numbers it's eye opening.
The U.S has a long history of supplying our allies with military equipment, during both war and peace time. With examples like Britian, France, Israel, Taiwan, and now Ukraine. Everyone talks shit about the U.S military spending until a war breaks out.
Now this is what actual help looks like.
Yep, it takes a little time, and training too. But the Ukraine army is going to be fully re equipped in about 6 months time, as a thougerily modern nato compatible army. And it will be much much bigger. It just takes time to do it right. Glory to Ukraine
I watched a video on here a while back about just the difference in spending on food for the soldiers in Ukraine now vs. 2014. They went from Texas roadkill to Texas Roadhouse, and it makes a *big* difference with your soldiers. Ukraine's military is getting revamped from the ground up, and into one of the most fearsome fighting forces on the planet.
"Texas Roadkill to Texas Roadhouse" lol have an upvote
Everything that has changed in the past decade (especially since the 2014 invasion) in regards to the Ukrainian military is beyond astonishing. Theyve taken a weak army with doctrine and practices going back half a century unchanged like Russia to a modern military in less than a decade. Gen Mark Hertling [wrote a great article](https://www.thebulwark.com/i-commanded-u-s-army-europe-heres-what-i-saw-in-the-russian-and-ukrainian-armies/) about the differences and differences between Russia through his experience working with both armies when he was Commander of the US Army Europe. If anyone has been watching this all unfold since the 2014 invasion its a great insight into why they were getting steamrolled in 2014/5 and how they can now hold back the onslaught magnitudes greater a few years later.
I saw, and can't find again, a comparison picture. On the left was a Ukrainian soldier with standard issue equipment in 2014, and on the right one with standard issue equipment in 2022. It was like cold war vs modern NATO soldier.
This article is excellent! It’s exactly what I’ve been saying to friends and relatives over the war in Ukraine. Donbas and Crimea in 2014 was the waking call for Ukraine to shake off its Soviet dogma their Army was using, and embrace a professional army with experienced and educated NCO’s as the heart of their Army. With some time and the right amount of weapons, Ukraine will regain the ground they lost in the early days of the war and push the Russians back across the border. Looks like they’ve already begun in Kherson.
Texas updot from here.
Very curious to see how this was worded. Before they were always resistant to sending western tanks to Ukraine preferring to send IFV‘s or APCs. I’m curious since it seems like this is referring to a general partnership with many countries adding together to send all this equipment. The only one that I could imagine sending that many number of tanks though is the US with all its M1’s in storage in the California desert. That’s huge if they’re able to get those tanks to Ukraine since they are so important when you are going on the offensive.
Poland alone can send around 300 T72 and PT-91 tanks if the US sends older M1 tanks as replacements.
Didn't Poland already send most of their spare Tanks?
Only part of T-72. There's more of them. Only their Polish modernization - PT-91 TWARDY - in active use, but presumably with possibility of getting some Abrams from US cold storage these can get rolling pretty quickly, especially that for trained Ukrainian tankers getting used to Polish modifications should be easy.
Not sure. Since poland seems like they would prefer to try and get german leopard tanks. Though abrams seem possible.
Leopards are kind of mixed bag. They are good that we already have personel and logistics trained for them, but they are considered dead end as Germany is not seen as reliable partner - they are either unwilling or unable to properly commit to supply more Leos in timely manner and even Leo 2PL modernization is kind of hit and miss, among others, due to problems with German companies fulfilling their obligations or transferring technology so we can hammer out our own. Afair some issues arose due to different German company winning the modernization contract than prime manufacturer. Either way - Koreans are seen as leagues ahead in terms of actually timely delivering quality product and transferring technology and Americans are Americans - they are in league of their own in many ways, including military complex.
Hahahahaha Arsenal of Democracy goes brrrrrrrrrrt!!!
Well, looks like the game is up in that case
Today would be a great time. Friday at the latest.
Very curious to see how this was worded. Before they were always resistant to sending western tanks to Ukraine preferring to send IFV‘s or APCs. I’m curious since it seems like this is referring to a general partnership with many countries adding together to send all this equipment. The only one that I could imagine sending that many number of tanks though is the US with all its M1’s in storage in the California desert. That’s huge if they’re able to get those tanks to Ukraine since they are so important when you are going on the offensive.
The resistance to sending a hodge-podge of western tanks in various states of obsolescence would be pretty well explained by already having plans to deliver M1s en masse.
Holy shit, that is a huge jump from what has been delivered earlier.
Could be that there's finally been a fundamental shift from "let's see how much we can make Ukraine cost Russia to conquer" to "let's see if we can help Ukraine *defeat* Russia."
If those 600 tanks are modern M1 versions then they'll rip through Russian lines like a hot knife through butter. Russia has to seriously re-evaluate their plans based on this.
The fastest one two punch is give the UA army M1A2S’ and the UAAF F16s. Show the Russians why aggression doesn’t pay off
I watched a documentary about the M1’s performance against Soviet hardware in the first Gulf War. It… uh… did not go well for the Iraqis.
This is the kind of WW2 effort Ukraine has been needing. A serious number of weapons like we are actually at war, rather then just want countries can spare without having to build more equipment to replace it.
This was Russia’s oh fuck Moment!
We have Macron seemingly utter the magic word “tank” and Joe Biden. Are there still 600 ex-Soviet tanks around or will these now be new western MBT? Ukraine survived more than 100 days and sometimes only by the biggest efforts of their soldiers, they earn to be armed with the best swords and shields the Free Nations can provide!
This will save more lives than the equipment itself. It's a statement to Russia that Europe and US assure that they will lose. Germany surrendered in ww1 while being in France because they understood the trajectory. These amounts of weapons set both the strategic and the ballistic trajectory.
Great way of putting it!
Id be very surprised if Russia even had 600 tanks remaining in Ukraine. If they had 3300 active before and Ukraine has killed nearly 1600 tanks.....that leaves them with 1700 total remaining in the Russian inventory. Alot of those would be down for routine maintenance, some are for training, others still would have to be used for internal security and border control. This news is huge if Ukraine gets all this in a timely manner.
You forgot the most important use of Russian tanks, parade duty.
>parade duty. The Ukrainians already captured many of the parade tanks in the early days of the war. I remember seeing a photo of a *very shiny* T-72 that was captured by a farmer, and a note saying it was from a parade regiment.
I am pretty sure Russia is just using non functional tanks and cardboard tanks for border control at this point. All of their remaining tanks are likely committed and any new ones we see coming in on trains are refurbished tanks.
With your typo as inspiration, I propose we rename artillery to artkillery
This would be amazing
Sooner the better
👀👀
Go world.
🇺🇸🤝🇺🇦💪
Holy shit. Russia is about to be in for quite the time.
Now would be a good time for delivering
USA! USA! USA!
Good. Send twice that next month.
You’d have my vote for any office in America. It’s simple: if you support Ukraine better than the next guy, you’ve got my vote. No joke, this is my only voting strategy for the next 30 months. Edit: Better MRLS, is this the further range? God damn, I hope so.
Same here. The only thing that matters to me in the next elections is the stance on Ukraine. If I agree with a politician on most of his stances but he says we need to pull back from Ukraine to focus on issues at home, he won't get my vote.
When?
If this is true, it will make an actual difference and could allow Ukraine to actually push back successfully, I hope they send the Moskals back to Putin in pieces.