• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

Patooka

Contributor
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
5,579
Location
Sydney
Basic Beliefs
aaa
LOL, no. You do you homework.

Let's go through the chronology;

You post some borderline coherent pro Russia rant here.
I refute it and link to the article that proves barbos is wrong here (i.e "did homework")
You then rant about my lack of homework and still won't source your claims. My homework is quite literally above you bloviating about homework.

This is my fault. I tried to engage in a conversation with you in good faith when I really should know better by now. I've got no one to blame but myself. Good luck with your nazi zombies and refusal to spell Zelensky's name properly.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
4,407
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist
LOL, no. You do you homework.

Let's go through the chronology;

You post some borderline coherent pro Russia rant here.
I refute it and link to the article that proves barbos is wrong here (i.e "did homework")
You then rant about my lack of homework and still won't source your claims. My homework is quite literally above you bloviating about homework.

This is my fault. I tried to engage in a conversation with you in good faith when I really should know better by now. I've got no one to blame but myself. Good luck with your nazi zombies and refusal to spell Zelensky's name properly.

One of the greatest favors that barbos can do for you is to put you on his ignore list, because then you don't get hooked into trying to engage him in a rational discussion that is never going to happen. It is better to be a spectator of, rather than a participant in, those conversations. I find that it is far more informative to read RT, whose English language pages, at least, make an effort to try to make the Kremlin line sound rational. The Russian versions of the same stories, when they even exist, can be very different, because they are tailored to a different audience--one that is more likely to be sympathetic to Kremlin talking points. However, if I am going to read biased material on the progress of the war, I far prefer the Kyiv Post, which is far more truthful and informative.
 

Cheerful Charlie

Contributor
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
7,259
Location
Houston, Texas
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Most Wagner group soldiers dead, wounded, deserted, captured.

....
Olga Romanova, head of the Rus Seated charity foundation, said in a YouTube video published by the My Russian Rights project that the private military company (PMC) headed by Russian financier and longtime Vladimir Putin ally Yevgeny Prigozhin had recruited in the range of 42,000 to 43,000 prisoners by the end of last year.

That tally has most likely surpassed 50,000 fighters in the present state of the war, she said, according to a translation from news outlet Meduza. But of those approximate 50,000 soldiers, only "10,000 are fighting at the front, because all the rest are either killed...or missing, or deserted, or surrendered."
.....

 

TV and credit cards

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
4,964
Location
muh-dahy-nuh
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
About Leopard Tanks
Who has them. How many should go. A new ammunition stream for dwindling artillery stock.

There's No Way Out of Here
Russia considers tightening up the borders. No worries though. It won't apply to passenger traffic. Won't go in to effect until September. So when the next mobilization happens, you'll still be able to Run Like Hell. Trust us. We're from the government.

All is Lost
If you want something a bit more challenging than the gibberish that occasions these pages, try Stephen Bryen of the Asia Times.
 

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
6,411
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
In other news Henry Kissinger has finally succumbed to dementia. Well, at least it looks that way.
I'm not so sure. I agree with you that it's probably wishful thinking hoping that Russia would want peace in the future. I think that the vile thugs running Russia also want the Baltics, Moltova, Poland, and other countries that used to belong to Russia.

However, I do think that Kissinger's idea of Ukraine give up the areas that were effectively under Russian control a year ago (Crimea, eastern Donbas) in exchange for NATO membership has some merit. It appears to me that a stalemate is coming. Unfortunately,
western support isn’t going to be infinite, and they’d likely struggle without it. I think many Ukrainians would grudgingly accept trading land for peace with Russia. Putler would get to claim a victory in Russia for liberating the areas he basically controlled anyway, and the rest of Ukraine could be confident he could never invade again. In exchange, the West could start a Marshall Plan for Ukraine. Build it back up with substantial and deep economic development. Europe still needs gas. Maybe fully develop the gas fields near Kiev to sell to Europe. There is a path out of this conflict. But agree with Barbos, that Russia doesn't really want peace right now. So, it's probably futile to discuss.
 

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
6,411
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
About Leopard Tanks
Who has them. How many should go. A new ammunition stream for dwindling artillery stock.

There's No Way Out of Here
Russia considers tightening up the borders. No worries though. It won't apply to passenger traffic. Won't go in to effect until September. So when the next mobilization happens, you'll still be able to Run Like Hell. Trust us. We're from the government.

All is Lost
If you want something a bit more challenging than the gibberish that occasions these pages, try Stephen Bryen of the Asia Times.
That was a very good article from Stephen Breyen. I need more time to digest it. But one part stuck out:

"While Ukraine is far away, the Russians see NATO’s “ganging up” on Russia as a key issue for Russian security and stability. This brings the Baltic region into sharper focus because Russians see NATO trying to surround them and undercut their economic and military advantages."

Well, fuck yea. We are ganging up to try to stop the war. What choice does the west have? If Nato pulled out of the Baltics, they would be rapidly attacked. No sovereign country wants Russians in their country raping their women, pillaging their property, stealing them blind. It is Russia that is pushing countries to gang up against Russia for their own protection.
 

T.G.G. Moogly

Traditional Atheist
Joined
Mar 19, 2001
Messages
9,654
Location
PA USA
Basic Beliefs
egalitarian
"While Ukraine is far away, the Russians see NATO’s “ganging up” on Russia as a key issue for Russian security and stability. This brings the Baltic region into sharper focus because Russians see NATO trying to surround them and undercut their economic and military advantages."

Well, fuck yea. We are ganging up to try to stop the war. What choice does the west have? If Nato pulled out of the Baltics, they would be rapidly attacked. No sovereign country wants Russians in their country raping their women, pillaging their property, stealing them blind. It is Russia that is pushing countries to gang up against Russia for their own protection.
The Ruski gangsters know why the democratic west is united against them. They just like playing the fool for the sake of public consumption.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
33,979
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Don't be a dick.
Most Wagner group soldiers dead, wounded, deserted, captured.

....
Olga Romanova, head of the Rus Seated charity foundation, said in a YouTube video published by the My Russian Rights project that the private military company (PMC) headed by Russian financier and longtime Vladimir Putin ally Yevgeny Prigozhin had recruited in the range of 42,000 to 43,000 prisoners by the end of last year.

That tally has most likely surpassed 50,000 fighters in the present state of the war, she said, according to a translation from news outlet Meduza. But of those approximate 50,000 soldiers, only "10,000 are fighting at the front, because all the rest are either killed...or missing, or deserted, or surrendered."
.....

Malcolm Nance said they have a pretty good idea of the number of Russian casualties because they just leave them where they died.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLD

SLD

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2001
Messages
4,154
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Basic Beliefs
Freethinker
Most Wagner group soldiers dead, wounded, deserted, captured.

....
Olga Romanova, head of the Rus Seated charity foundation, said in a YouTube video published by the My Russian Rights project that the private military company (PMC) headed by Russian financier and longtime Vladimir Putin ally Yevgeny Prigozhin had recruited in the range of 42,000 to 43,000 prisoners by the end of last year.

That tally has most likely surpassed 50,000 fighters in the present state of the war, she said, according to a translation from news outlet Meduza. But of those approximate 50,000 soldiers, only "10,000 are fighting at the front, because all the rest are either killed...or missing, or deserted, or surrendered."
.....

Malcolm Nance said they have a pretty good idea of the number of Russian casualties because they just leave them where they died.
An 80% casualty rate will suck the oxygen right out of your offensive immediately.
 

T.G.G. Moogly

Traditional Atheist
Joined
Mar 19, 2001
Messages
9,654
Location
PA USA
Basic Beliefs
egalitarian
An 80% casualty rate will suck the oxygen right out of your offensive immediately.
This has been Russia's military policy since well before the Putinistas grabbed power. It's just part of how they wage war and isn't going to go away anytime soon.
 

SLD

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2001
Messages
4,154
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Basic Beliefs
Freethinker
An 80% casualty rate will suck the oxygen right out of your offensive immediately.
This has been Russia's military policy since well before the Putinistas grabbed power. It's just part of how they wage war and isn't going to go away anytime soon.
That’s largely myth. Russia in WWII certainly sustained huge casualties. But their offensive operations, especially later in the war, we’re certainly not human wave attacks with 80% casualty rates. That wasn’t how they conducted operations in Afghanistan. They did emphasize combined arms, and maneuver warfare. But yes, they have been willing to lose large numbers. Dictators can afford to do that. But it doesn’t always help. Remember, Patton’s adage, it’s not about dying for your country, it’s about making the other poor bastard die for his.

In the end, Ukraine doesn’t really need to drive Russia out of all of their territory. They just need to hang on and make Russia suffer huge casualties trying to advance. They can afford to lose some ground. Putin won’t be around forever.

IAE, here’s an interesting article about decision centric warfare and the lessons from the conflict.


i don’t think 130 modern tanks is likely to make a huge difference. It can help in local battles. It can blunt Russia’s offensive. But I note that the US has 2500 M1 in service and another 3700 in strategic reserve. they'll need a thousand to really make a difference. Plus another 1000 Leopards. That would fuck Russia up. In truth we need to supply them a lot more advanced weaponry and the training to go with it. Training could be done in Poland. They need to use Poland as basically a supply, refitting and training base. And not just for the tanks, but for everything.
 

Ford

Contributor
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
6,184
Location
'Merica
Basic Beliefs
Godless Heathen

i don’t think 130 modern tanks is likely to make a huge difference. It can help in local battles. It can blunt Russia’s offensive. But I note that the US has 2500 M1 in service and another 3700 in strategic reserve. they'll need a thousand to really make a difference. Plus another 1000 Leopards. That would fuck Russia up. In truth we need to supply them a lot more advanced weaponry and the training to go with it. Training could be done in Poland. They need to use Poland as basically a supply, refitting and training base. And not just for the tanks, but for everything.

It doesn't need to make a "huge" difference or "fuck Russia up." I'd hazard a guess that Western nations aren't looking for Ukraine to have a spectacular victory that pushes Russians back to Moscow by summer. They want to push Russia past a tipping point where they say "we've had enough" and settle for a negotiated settlement. The problem appears to be that Putin hasn't grasped the fact that his nation is no longer a near-peer to the rest of the folks who sit at the UN Security Council table, and will continue to act as if the "Russian Bear" is still a fearsome force.

He (obviously) needs to go, but I'd also guess that the West doesn't want the Russian government to collapse in the aftermath of a stunning "fuck Russia up" defeat. There's the looming threat of Putin playing the nuclear card, but if his inner circle decides to give him a push out a window and take over themselves to end the war, it is better than having the whole shebang fall apart like it did a few decades ago. A cornered, weakened Russia is better than a Russia gripped by yet another revolution.
 

TV and credit cards

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
4,964
Location
muh-dahy-nuh
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
.
That’s largely myth. Russia in WWII certainly sustained huge casualties. But their offensive operations, especially later in the war, we’re certainly not human wave attacks with 80% casualty rates. That wasn’t how they conducted operations in Afghanistan. They did emphasize combined arms, and maneuver warfare. But yes, they have been willing to lose large numbers. Dictators can afford to do that. But it doesn’t always help. Remember, Patton’s adage, it’s not about dying for your country, it’s about making the other poor bastard die for his.

In the end, Ukraine doesn’t really need to drive Russia out of all of their territory. They just need to hang on and make Russia suffer huge casualties trying to advance. They can afford to lose some ground. Putin won’t be around forever.

IAE, here’s an interesting article about decision centric warfare and the lessons from the conflict.


i don’t think 130 modern tanks is likely to make a huge difference. It can help in local battles. It can blunt Russia’s offensive. But I note that the US has 2500 M1 in service and another 3700 in strategic reserve. they'll need a thousand to really make a difference. Plus another 1000 Leopards. That would fuck Russia up. In truth we need to supply them a lot more advanced weaponry and the training to go with it. Training could be done in Poland. They need to use Poland as basically a supply, refitting and training base. And not just for the tanks, but for everything.

Good article. Perhaps another reason in the seemingly slow-walk of weapon systems to Ukraine is basically in learning to walk before they run. About integrating this new armament properly and effectively in concert with existing systems so it's not wasted giving the reprehensible Republicans something to scream about.

I think when the dust settles and the remaining Ukrainian warfighters return, they will be some of the better military trainers Europe has to offer. I'm sure all their creativity on the battlefield is being documented and saved to train their future forces. The military is big on "lessons learned". What went right and what went wrong and how do we improve. I think when all is said and done, Ukraine's admittance to NATO won't take as long as we might currently think. There's going to be a lot of experience and knowledge in the Ukrainian Armed Forces that would really benefit NATO.

Russia, achieving anything close to a modern day Command and Control structure is surely an impossibility now if it ever was one. Putin's magnum opus has seen to that.
 

Jayjay

Contributor
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
6,673
Location
Finland
Basic Beliefs
An accurate worldview or philosophy
The problem is that we don't really know the real state of Ukraine's military right now. Their OPSEC is tight as babushka's butt. Clearly, they've had enough casualties in Bakhmut and Soledar because the defensive lines broke. But how much do they have left? Nobody knows. Us spectators can merely speculate based on what's happening on the battlefield: who's gaining ground, who's able to repel attacks.

Do they have enough gas in the tank to take advantage of the Leopards and Bradleys by the time they get them 3-6 months from now?
 

T.G.G. Moogly

Traditional Atheist
Joined
Mar 19, 2001
Messages
9,654
Location
PA USA
Basic Beliefs
egalitarian
That’s largely myth. Russia in WWII certainly sustained huge casualties. But their offensive operations, especially later in the war, we’re certainly not human wave attacks with 80% casualty rates. That wasn’t how they conducted operations in Afghanistan.
Let me amend by saying that this is how Russian dictators have always waged war.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
4,407
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist
The president of Chechia is largely a ceremonial post, although the post is influential in the politics of the country. Its outgoing president is Milos Zeman, who was known as something of a Putin supporter until last February's invasion. So he was in favor with barbos earlier on in this thread. Zeman likened to the invasion to something of a "cold shower" for him and other pro-Putin Westerners. For the past year, Zeman has been a rabid critic of Putin and even called for Putin to be hauled before a war crimes court. So he stopped being talked about favorably in the Russian propaganda circus.

Interview: Czech President Wants Putin Before War Crimes Court


A new president of Chechia has now been elected: Petr Pavel. His chief rival was Andrej Babis, but Pavel won in a landslide. He is an ex-NATO general and is firmly aligned with Western democracies. Babis was considered more aligned with the idea of a populist oligarchy, and he was promoted by a fake website and emails hosted on Russia's Yandex server. Towards the end of the race, Babis claimed he was getting death threats and stopped campaigning, probably realizing that he had no chance of winning. The Russian propaganda mill spread the rumor that Pavel had died, and Pavel was forced to dispel the rumor on Twitter.

Petr Pavel: Ex-general beats populist rival in Czech election


From the article:

Mr Pavel has backed keeping the Czech Republic anchored in the European Union and Nato and has come out strongly in favour of further military aid for Ukraine to fight against Russia's invasion.

By contrast, Mr Babis was forced to backtrack earlier this week after he suggested that he would not live up to the country's obligations to defend a fellow Nato member if attacked.
 

Cheerful Charlie

Contributor
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
7,259
Location
Houston, Texas
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Reports are coming in from Ukraine that the Russians have been deploying rubber decoy tanks in Ukraine. Apparently hoping to cause Ukraine to waste munitions destroying these rubber decoys. Unfortunately their rubber tanks don't hold air and deflate, fooling nobody.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
4,407
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist
Why does it take a year to get US tanks to Ukraine?

We are the biggest arms supplier in the world, and we have a lot of orders to fill. I believe that both Taiwan and Poland have high priority back orders--the Taiwanese to beef up defenses against imminent attack and the Poles to replace the old Soviet tanks that they sent into Ukraine. There is a factory in Lima, Ohio, that is trying to fill all the orders expeditiously, so we are probably running at full capacity right now. Ukraine is being moved to the head of the line, but the other countries feel that they have urgent needs, as well.
 

Jayjay

Contributor
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
6,673
Location
Finland
Basic Beliefs
An accurate worldview or philosophy
Ukrainian army maybe so-and-so, and losing rapidly. But I'm still amazed at how good Ukrainians are at their propaganda.

Take these two videos:





The music choices are just golden.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
29,524
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Reports are coming in from Ukraine that the Russians have been deploying rubber decoy tanks in Ukraine. Apparently hoping to cause Ukraine to waste munitions destroying these rubber decoys. Unfortunately their rubber tanks don't hold air and deflate, fooling nobody.
The British used inflatable tanks in WWII, as part of their misdirection campaign to persuade the Germans that the D-Day landings would be at Calais.

Apparently, the biggest problem was stopping them from looking absurdly cuddly.
 

bilby

Fair dinkum thinkum
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
29,524
Location
The Sunshine State: The one with Crocs, not Gators
Gender
He/Him
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Why does it take a year to get US tanks to Ukraine?
We’ve got hundreds of them just sitting in the desert.
Sure, but they're 9,986km from Kherson, and they're types for which Ukrainian operators are not trained.

It's a lot easier to ship them former Soviet equipment from places like Poland, which the Ukrainian Military are already familiar with and trained to operate (and for which they already have stockpiles of ammunition and spare parts).

Particularly if the Poles are already a long way down the path of replacing their ex-Soviet equipment with NATO equipment, and of training their own forces to operate that new gear.

So that's what has been happening up to now, and that's why it's taken so long to start getting US equipment into Ukraine.
 

Copernicus

Industrial Grade Linguist
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
4,407
Location
Bellevue, WA
Basic Beliefs
Atheist humanist
But I'm still amazed at how good Ukrainians are at their propaganda
Their wannabee hitler president was a TV clown in his prior life. He knows thing or two about being good at TV shit.

Unlike the wannabe Stalin president of Russia, who was a murderous KGB clown in occupied East Germany in his prior life. The KGB clown doesn't know a thing about being good at TV shit, but he is still pretty good at murdering people. Stalin would be proud.
 

TV and credit cards

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
4,964
Location
muh-dahy-nuh
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Why does it take a year to get US tanks to Ukraine?
We’ve got hundreds of them just sitting in the desert.
Sure, but they're 9,986km from Kherson, and they're types for which Ukrainian operators are not trained.

It's a lot easier to ship them former Soviet equipment from places like Poland, which the Ukrainian Military are already familiar with and trained to operate (and for which they already have stockpiles of ammunition and spare parts).

Particularly if the Poles are already a long way down the path of replacing their ex-Soviet equipment with NATO equipment, and of training their own forces to operate that new gear.

So that's what has been happening up to now, and that's why it's taken so long to start getting US equipment into Ukraine.

Sure, but a year? I think this was a somewhat hollow promise to get the Leopards moving. The US has no problem moving heavy equipment around the globe. On a bad day we can get these tanks across the US and the Atlantic in less than a month, I'm sure. We started moving Abrams tanks back to Germany after Russia invaded Crimea. How many the US has in Europe, I know not.
The issue is between manufacturing new M1A2s or reworking M1A1s. The US version has armor that is not for export and cannot readily be changed. Egypt has over a thousand of them already in export configuration. So this "a year" guff doesn't wash.

Further, training for the Abrams is based on the average enlisted dude: slow and methodical. Lengthy training is only provided to those with a six year commitment. Ukraine will be sending guys who can learn at a faster rate. Training will likely be halved. The Leopards are designed with the conscript in mind. Much less training required.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
33,979
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Don't be a dick.

  • Trump warned of the possible "catastrophe" of World War III amid increased nuclear threats from Russia.
  • Trump claimed that other countries were making threats "because they have no respect for our leadership."
  • He said he would build an "impenetrable dome" over the US, similar to Israel's Iron Dome.
Former President Donald Trump said he would build an "impenetrable dome" over the US if re-elected as president, as he warned of the possible "catastrophe" of World War III.

"If you take a look right now, the 'nuclear' word is being mentioned all the time. This is a word you're not allowed to use. It was never used during the Trump administration," Trump said in a video released Friday.
 

Patooka

Contributor
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
5,579
Location
Sydney
Basic Beliefs
aaa
Sure, but a year? I think this was a somewhat hollow promise to get the Leopards moving. The US has no problem moving heavy equipment around the globe. On a bad day we can get these tanks across the US and the Atlantic in less than a month, I'm sure. We started moving Abrams tanks back to Germany after Russia invaded Crimea. How many the US has in Europe, I know not.
The issue is between manufacturing new M1A2s or reworking M1A1s. The US version has armor that is not for export and cannot readily be changed. Egypt has over a thousand of them already in export configuration. So this "a year" guff doesn't wash.
I don't think the issue is one of pragmatism or capability but one of image. With regards to foreign policy, tanks are considered an offensive weapon. Germany for some reason doesn't want to appear to be an aggressive power so they don't want to be the only ones supplying tanks. To paraphrase someone else, the US offering Abrams is largely symbolic and is basically holding Germany's hand whilst we all cross the street together. If that's the case, the commitment from the US is more important than the when or how many. It's a technicality that satisfies everyone's concerns basically. Kinda like how the US never exported its FB-111 strategic bomber but sold a lot of RF-111Gs. Or Poland was involved in the invasion of Iraq so clearly there was an international coalition supporting Bush Jnr. Obviously the lion's share of tanks will be Leopards, but Germany wants to say, "We're not the only ones. Don't forget Poland America".
 

Jayjay

Contributor
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
6,673
Location
Finland
Basic Beliefs
An accurate worldview or philosophy
Sure, but a year? I think this was a somewhat hollow promise to get the Leopards moving. The US has no problem moving heavy equipment around the globe. On a bad day we can get these tanks across the US and the Atlantic in less than a month, I'm sure. We started moving Abrams tanks back to Germany after Russia invaded Crimea. How many the US has in Europe, I know not.
The issue is between manufacturing new M1A2s or reworking M1A1s. The US version has armor that is not for export and cannot readily be changed. Egypt has over a thousand of them already in export configuration. So this "a year" guff doesn't wash.
I don't think the issue is one of pragmatism or capability but one of image. With regards to foreign policy, tanks are considered an offensive weapon. Germany for some reason doesn't want to appear to be an aggressive power so they don't want to be the only ones supplying tanks. To paraphrase someone else, the US offering Abrams is largely symbolic and is basically holding Germany's hand whilst we all cross the street together. If that's the case, the commitment from the US is more important than the when or how many. It's a technicality that satisfies everyone's concerns basically. Kinda like how the US never exported its FB-111 strategic bomber but sold a lot of RF-111Gs. Or Poland was involved in the invasion of Iraq so clearly there was an international coalition supporting Bush Jnr. Obviously the lion's share of tanks will be Leopards, but Germany wants to say, "We're not the only ones. Don't forget Poland America".
I don't know what Germany's rationale was, but I think sending Abrams is also good for the future contingency when it turns out Ukraine needs even more tanks and all the Leopards have already been sent (and presumably getting destroyed). At that point it'll be very nice to have the Abrams training and logistics figured out.

Or if WW3 breaks out. Also a possibility.
 

Cheerful Charlie

Contributor
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
7,259
Location
Houston, Texas
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Tanks would be most useful along the North of Ukraine. Making attacks from Belorussia much more problematic. Ukraine just fielded the first of their own designed and produced high accuracy artillery. The Ukranians have become experts at drone warfare and are starting to produce excellent long range drones. All the Eastern NATO nations will be learning from all of this and working on making Russian military invasions too costly for Russia to contemplate. For Russia, it is now or never.
 

TomC

Celestial Highness
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
5,450
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
Or Poland was involved in the invasion of Iraq so clearly there was an international coalition supporting Bush Jnr.

Heh.

I don't know enough to have an informed opinion in this thread.

But you just reminded me of a joke from about 2005.

President Bush II is in the Oval Office. A top level military aide enters and says, "Sir, three Brazilian soldiers died in Iraq today"

Bush II says "I'm terribly sorry to hear that."

Aide leaves.

Bush II turns to Cheney.
"How many is a brazillion?"
Tom
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
38,209
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Reports are coming in from Ukraine that the Russians have been deploying rubber decoy tanks in Ukraine. Apparently hoping to cause Ukraine to waste munitions destroying these rubber decoys. Unfortunately their rubber tanks don't hold air and deflate, fooling nobody.
This is a standard military strategy for ages.
 

Cheerful Charlie

Contributor
Joined
Nov 11, 2005
Messages
7,259
Location
Houston, Texas
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
I am not sure watching your rubber tanks deflate while your enemies laugh at your feeble efforts is age old military strategy. At least nobody stole them.
 

SLD

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2001
Messages
4,154
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Basic Beliefs
Freethinker
Why does it take a year to get US tanks to Ukraine?
We’ve got hundreds of them just sitting in the desert.
Sure, but they're 9,986km from Kherson, and they're types for which Ukrainian operators are not trained.

It's a lot easier to ship them former Soviet equipment from places like Poland, which the Ukrainian Military are already familiar with and trained to operate (and for which they already have stockpiles of ammunition and spare parts).

Particularly if the Poles are already a long way down the path of replacing their ex-Soviet equipment with NATO equipment, and of training their own forces to operate that new gear.

So that's what has been happening up to now, and that's why it's taken so long to start getting US equipment into Ukraine.

Sure, but a year? I think this was a somewhat hollow promise to get the Leopards moving. The US has no problem moving heavy equipment around the globe. On a bad day we can get these tanks across the US and the Atlantic in less than a month, I'm sure. We started moving Abrams tanks back to Germany after Russia invaded Crimea. How many the US has in Europe, I know not.
The issue is between manufacturing new M1A2s or reworking M1A1s. The US version has armor that is not for export and cannot readily be changed. Egypt has over a thousand of them already in export configuration. So this "a year" guff doesn't wash.

Further, training for the Abrams is based on the average enlisted dude: slow and methodical. Lengthy training is only provided to those with a six year commitment. Ukraine will be sending guys who can learn at a faster rate. Training will likely be halved. The Leopards are designed with the conscript in mind. Much less training required.
We have 3500 Abrams in storage, and 2500 or so operational. We could and should ship the operational ones over ASAP and pull others out of storage. We don’t need to use the against anyone but Russia anyways. It will still take long weeks, but with a full force of six to seven hundred, they could definitely make a dent.

For now, Ukraine just needs to hold the line. We should’ve provided these tanks back in June. We’ve protracted the war by delaying our aid and being way too stingy. But we can make a huge difference this spring once more supplies pour in. Ukraine need only hang on. By all signs they are. Russia doesn’t appear to be able to even take Bakhmut at this stage. Wagner forces have been depleted by enormous casualties and now regular army troops are being thrown in and getting killed.
 

SLD

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2001
Messages
4,154
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Basic Beliefs
Freethinker
Ukrainian army maybe so-and-so, and losing rapidly. But I'm still amazed at how good Ukrainians are at their propaganda.

Take these two videos:





The music choices are just golden.

Why do you keep saying this shit? They’re not losing rapidly. It’s the Russians who can’t do shit. Wagner is done for, and now it’s back to regular Army - the same ones that got kicked out of Kiev and Kharkiv last year and ran away from Kherson. And they aren’t even close to taking Bakhmut. Even if they eventually do, it won’t do them much good. The eventual arrival of further western aid will fuck the Russians up all over again.

The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all - or at least a century to come. Give Ukraine everything it needs to utterly destroy the Russian military machine and it will. Russia will soon have no modern battle tanks, no serious air power, no real mobility for its forces. It will be defeated and utterly useless if we let Ukraine have what it needs.

Seriously. What the fuck is our leadership afraid of? We shouldn’t be giving them 30 tanks - we should be giving them 1,000, plus 1,000 leopards (what the fuck does Germany need them for? France?). Nail Russia’s butt to the wall. It can be done.
 

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
6,411
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Ukrainian army maybe so-and-so, and losing rapidly. But I'm still amazed at how good Ukrainians are at their propaganda.

Take these two videos:





The music choices are just golden.

Why do you keep saying this shit? They’re not losing rapidly. It’s the Russians who can’t do shit. Wagner is done for, and now it’s back to regular Army - the same ones that got kicked out of Kiev and Kharkiv last year and ran away from Kherson. And they aren’t even close to taking Bakhmut. Even if they eventually do, it won’t do them much good. The eventual arrival of further western aid will fuck the Russians up all over again.

The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all - or at least a century to come. Give Ukraine everything it needs to utterly destroy the Russian military machine and it will. Russia will soon have no modern battle tanks, no serious air power, no real mobility for its forces. It will be defeated and utterly useless if we let Ukraine have what it needs.

Seriously. What the fuck is our leadership afraid of? We shouldn’t be giving them 30 tanks - we should be giving them 1,000, plus 1,000 leopards (what the fuck does Germany need them for? France?). Nail Russia’s butt to the wall. It can be done.

I do think that Russia has regained the initiative. We should have started the process of sending the tanks earlier. We need to send more to Ukraine. Whatever they need. Our leadership is afraid of nuclear war. We've been too slow sending aid. However, we also need to keep the coalition together. Russia can do whatever the fuck they want as an outlaw nation. We have to be far more careful to keep the allies together. But we have to do whatever we can to help Ukraine stop Russia. If Russia wins, they'll continue their vile march through the rest of Eastern Europe and who knows where else. China will attack Taiwan. And etc and etc.
 

barbos

Contributor
Joined
Nov 12, 2005
Messages
14,784
Location
Mlky Way galaxy
Basic Beliefs
atheist
The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all
I agree, and you should have started with that. Destroy Russia, kill the russians, and take all their oil-gas and other natural resources.


There are no such things as Russian gas, oil, aluminium, coal, uranium, diamonds, grain, forests, gold, etc. All such resources are Tatar, Bashkir, Siberian, Karelian, Oirat, Circassian, Buryat, Sakha, Ural, Kuban, Nogai
And who the fuck are these Siberians and Kubans?

By the way, I would like to know what Canada, Australia and US think about this great Idea.
You have not thought that through you polish nazi lady.
 

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
6,411
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all
I agree, and you should have started with that. Destroy Russia, kill the russians, and take all their oil-gas and other natural resources.
Do you read English? SLD clearly said that this is an opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat. Probably harsher words that I would have chosen. However, he is correct that some how we need to find a way to stop the invaders. Your country is the invader. Don't care about your oil and gas.
 

barbos

Contributor
Joined
Nov 12, 2005
Messages
14,784
Location
Mlky Way galaxy
Basic Beliefs
atheist
The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all
I agree, and you should have started with that. Destroy Russia, kill the russians, and take all their oil-gas and other natural resources.
Do you read English? SLD clearly said that this is an opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat. Probably harsher words that I would have chosen. However, he is correct that some how we need to find a way to stop the invaders. Your country is the invader. Don't care about your oil and gas.
And do you?
The whole damn thing started with that. Euro-scam has always wanted to destroy Russia
It's being going on for centuries ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_War ). This polish cunt should know.
She just glad she can say it openly now.
 

Elixir

Made in America
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
22,446
Location
Mountains
Basic Beliefs
English is complicated
The whole damn thing started with that
“That” being Putler illegally “annexing” Crimea, then amassing over a hundred thousand troops on Ukraine’s border and staging the botched invasion that is decimating what’s left of Russia’s pitiful military.
Barbos might be right that we would have been better off just disabling Russia from the start. I don’t think that even barbie wants to see the entirety of his Country reduced to a radioactive wasteland….
 

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
6,411
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The real failure is not in Ukraine, but in the western world. This is a golden opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat once and for all
I agree, and you should have started with that. Destroy Russia, kill the russians, and take all their oil-gas and other natural resources.
Do you read English? SLD clearly said that this is an opportunity to eliminate Russia as a threat. Probably harsher words that I would have chosen. However, he is correct that some how we need to find a way to stop the invaders. Your country is the invader. Don't care about your oil and gas.
And do you?
The whole damn thing started with that. Euro-scam has always wanted to destroy Russia
It's being going on for centuries ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_War ). This polish cunt should know.
She just glad she can say it openly now.
I really don't give a damn about who started it. I'll be the first to admit that the west was very mean to Russia. What I care about is how to stop the war; have Russians return home; and Eastern Europe living in peace. We don't need your resources. We can get them from friendly countries such as Ukraine and others.
 

barbos

Contributor
Joined
Nov 12, 2005
Messages
14,784
Location
Mlky Way galaxy
Basic Beliefs
atheist
We can get them from friendly countries such as Ukraine and others
We who? Don't speak for Europe. They want russian resources, so much so that they are dreaming about splitting Russia into parts so they can rob more easily.
Of course that piece of shit polish cunt sucks at geography, otherwise she would know that Europe would get shit if they split Russia.
 

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
6,411
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
What I care about is how to stop the war;
That's easy, just tell Elensky to stop.
Problem is, US neocons don't want war to stop.
Your side has committed to hanging all members of the Ukranian government. When Russian troops take over a Ukranian village, your side rapes, kills, and loots whatever they want. Your side has made a terrible mistake, you've given the Ukrainians no choice but to fight. They are fighting for their lives. For their country. For their future. What is your side fighting for?
 

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
6,411
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
We can get them from friendly countries such as Ukraine and others
We who? Don't speak for Europe. They want russian resources, so much so that they are dreaming about splitting Russia into parts so they can rob more easily.
Of course that piece of shit polish cunt sucks at geography, otherwise she would know that Europe would get shit if they split Russia.
What are you talking about splitting up Russia? That's crazy talk. People want Russians to return home. We don't need to invade Russia. Your side is destroying Russia for us.
 
Top Bottom