"Why no Abrams to Ukraine?" Topic

m1 abrams maintenance and logistics heavy

Yes, I think that is well known.

if faced with full out war .after a while would we be similar to german Wehrmacht with their tigers and elefants etc out of action against modern shermans equivalents

No that is not an accurate comparison. US M1s were maintained, supplied and used effectively in Iraq. The US Maint./Log system is very good. Again, as I said, I was assigned at both Bn & Bde Log & Maint. Officer positions. [Even though I was a Grunt.] No way are any US AFVs anything like Wehrmacht WWII heavy AFVs. Especially comparing Maint. & Log.

any m60s lying around anywhere?

Some were sold off, IIRC. Some may still be in mothballs. However, to get those Fully Mission Capable would take time and be expensive. IIRC the Turks have many in their armor units. But I'm pretty sure they probably wouldn't give them up. Unless for a "big paycheck", etc. Plus, IIRC the Turks and Putin are "buddies", to a point.

fake news for the russians

The Russians think they are masters at propaganda. Most IMO is for their own peoples' consumption. We can see right thru most of their machinations. If a Russian says it … it is probably a lie.

m1 abrams maintenance and logistics heavy

That is what the US is saying why they won't send the M1s. As we have discussed before. Germany won't send Leo IIs until we send M1s. The US gave M1s to the Iraqis after we pulled out. They abandoned 42 of them when the first ran into ISIS. Then we had to back in.

Regardless, the more time that is wasted with the US, Germany, etc. The longer Putin's war will last. And more people will die.

I say send em and the Germans will send the Leopards. We may never get another chance for this kind of proxy war to wreck Russia's conventional forces. Cynical, maybe, the Ukranians are taking it on the chin, but they and all of Europe will be safer in the long run if they win. We are getting off cheap with them beating up on our long time mortal foe and they deserve whatever we can give them. The best way to end this is with as much force we can supply without triggering nukes, as fast as we can. Get this over with and save lives on both sides in the long run.

"The US gave M1s to the Iraqis after we pulled out. They abandoned 42 of them"

This is the crux of my question. It must be logistically easier to maintain M1s in Ukraine than it would have been in Iraq, and I'm damn sure the Ukrainians have a higher level of training and motivation than the Iraqis did. So if they went to Iraq, surely they can go to Ukraine?

Send 'some'. Even if just a platoon. US has plenty! Ukraine is not stupid… may not be sent to front line… if logs will be problem. But if that sending triggers Germany into ok'ing supplies of Leo's, etc.? Good!
Same with UK Chally's. 'Might' not see front line use… but 'there'… if needed, to free up weponry that WILL be used.

I say send em and the Germans will send the Leopards. We may never get another chance for this kind of proxy war to wreck Russia's conventional forces.

I'm afraid it may come down to those in charge are more concerned about expense, etc. than defeating the Russians.

Yes, we have the chance to clip Putin's wings. We have to take advantage of that. Or deal with the consequences later. Also, when the Ukraine pushes the Russians off their territory. They will need equipment to defend their borders. E.g. like Poland, the Baltic States, etc. So those M1s and Leopards may have to stay there.

It must be logistically easier to maintain M1s in Ukraine than it would have been in Iraq, and I'm damn sure the Ukrainians have a higher level of training and motivation than the Iraqis did. So if they went to Iraq, surely they can go to Ukraine?

Skinflint +1

As I mentioned this before. It would be easier to maintain any AFVs in, e.g. Europe than Iraq & A'stan. If for no other reason the gritty desert sands/dust acts like a sandpaper on everything it touches, etc. And that gritty dust gets everywhere. Certainly, a bit harder to maintain any machine in desert conditions.

That being said, many place is Iraq, A'stan, etc. don't really have the infrastructure as Europe does in many locations.

Those in charge who would cut funds are a minority on this even in their own party now controlling the House. The rest of them have no trouble spending, and in this case the investment is solid. I would hate to lose this chance for ultimate peace after all the blood and treasure already expended.

I hate to even think about what would happen if we cut our funding over a sudden concern about spending and as a result Putin was somehow able to claim victory and recover. We can do this, and must.

Yes, I know that as well … and I agree … Again, I'm very disappointed at our leadership. We, NATO, etc. have to continue to support the Ukraine. We can't let Putin hold any territory in the Ukraine, e.g. Donbas, Crimea, etc. He will claim victory. And he may attack the Ukraine again in the not so near future.

If NATO fails the Ukraine. It may just embolden Putin for future wars in the region. However, he knows an attack on one is an attack on all. Ukraine has its corruption, etc. problems, but if they become part of NATO when this is all over may be the solution.

If Ukraine won't be allowed to join NATO because of corruption, etc. Some of those NATO nations need look in the mirror.

Those in charge who would cut funds are a minority on this even in their own party now controlling the House.

They might find support from Progressives. link

We can only hope our leaders work this out before it's too late.

Perhaps they are afraid the Ukrainians would steam roll the Russians with modern tanks and Putin with nothing to lose would use nukes. Is it possible the USA is hoping Putin will die or be removed internally and the best long game is to wait this one out?

Yes, good point Bill. The extreme wings of the parties are unlikely allies on this, apparently. Nothing is ever simple! These wings are hardly the place to find people with experienced geopolitical skill sets either. But I think there is enough bipartisan oomph to keep aid going. Spend now, save later. Most of the country still supports keeping up the aid.

I think Ukraine has proven it belongs in NATO, and you are right Legion. If corruption were an issue nobody would be a member.

American Lawmakers Urge The White House To Ship Abrams Tanks To Ukraine

link

Armand

Perhaps they are afraid the Ukrainians would steam roll the Russians with modern tanks and Putin with nothing to lose would use nukes.

That may be a consideration … but Putin's tries to play that trump card frequently.

I think Ukraine has proven it belongs in NATO, and you are right Legion. If corruption were an issue nobody would be a member.

Yes they earn it and are earning it every day. With their blood and treasure.

Seems Ukraine is no more or less corrupt than many in NATO. 'nuff said.

American Lawmakers Urge The White House To Ship Abrams Tanks To Ukraine

That seems to be the move, and in turn the Germans will send Leo IIs. With all this equipment from the US, NATO, etc. will allow the Ukraine to go on a major offensive. I don't think what the Russians are fielding in occupied Ukraine could stop a modern combined arms offensive.

Again, our top leadership seems to be a dollar late and a day short… again … No dynamic decisions, moves, etc. Betas don't dynamic … That is clear. And again, they seem to have other "more important" priorities, I guess …

wardog asked

any m60s lying around anywhere?

I saw some footage on the news this morning. Looks like Taiwan is using upgraded M60A1s[errata M60A3] . They ain't going to give those up !

From the net :

Taiwan's Tank Force

In total, the Taiwanese military currently fields around 1,200 tanks. These include the M60s, but also some four hundred and fifty CM-11 Brave Tigers and two hundred and fifty CM-12s. The CM-11 pairs a modified M-48 Patton turret with an M-60 chassis. The CM-12 is an M-48 with the same modified turret as the CM-11.

In addition to the aging tank force, the island nation could get a boost from some much newer American hardware. In 2019, the U.S. State Department greenlit the sale of 108 M1A2T Abrams tanks, Stinger missiles, and related equipment to the island nation in a deal worth approximately $2.2 USD billion. However, even as Taipei could get newer tanks, it will likely maintain its aging tank force –

No, I think they are well suited to Taiwan's needs and it would be robbing Peter to pay Paul in any case.

Again, our leadership walks a tightrope everyday. Assessing nuclear intentions must be a bit stressful. But the noose has been slowly tightening without provoking Putin to use nukes. The time to finish it is in the spring, IMO. The tanks should have been sent, like yesterday. But there is still some time to get ready.

News is now saying that the US will send Abrams, & Germans have agreed to send Leopards.

Damon.

"News is now saying that the US will send Abrams, & Germans have agreed to send Leopards.

Damon."

Right, well, I can only assume Biden's National Security Advisors read TMO, and I'm taking credit for that should it win the war for Ukraine X-D

Brilliant news. The sooner this thing is finished with a Ukrainian victory, the fewer people have to die.

Yes!!!

Legion 4 wrote -

Both Europe and the ROK are full of streams, rivers, marshes …..
I'd think the Ukraine's terrain is about the same for the most part. I think M1s or any "heavier" MBT like that could operate with few problems in the Ukraine.

My understanding is that most of Ukraine consists of open farmland with topography similar to that of the American midwest. I'm sure that Druzhina can offer more detailed information.

B

Brilliant news. The sooner this thing is finished with a Ukrainian victory, the fewer people have to die.

That is what the goal should be. IIRC, Grant's "doctrine" was something like, and I'm "paraphrasing" – Get the war over as soon as possible, less lives will be lost, and less damage will be done, etc. Of course, we don't want to have losses like in the ACW. But Putin is working on it !

My understanding is that most of Ukraine consists of open farmland with topography similar to that of the American midwest.

That sounds about right. Central (West)Germany was similar.
I live in what is considered the "Midwest", "the Great State of OHIO". Farmland is 5-10 minutes away. With farms, ranches, crops, and cows, horses, etc., etc. The Amish are in that near by countryside too. Very rural …

I've run training ops all over the US when in the Army. And even some other places in the world. In all sorts of terrain and weather conditions. Ukraine may not have the road network in the countryside/farmland of Western Europe or the USA. However, MBTs, APCs, IFVs, etc., were made to move cross country. Most if not all AFV and rolling stock crews/drivers are trained/know how to maneuver cross country. As I have said before, terrain & situation dictates everything. However, I've never seen an M113, M60A1 or M1IP stuck … And if so, each Mech & Tank Bn has Heavy M88s and Light Recovery Vehicles, M578 VTRs.

So again, terrain and weather conditions are always a consideration. But don't always stop operations.

Looks like the US is sending 30 M1s and Berlin is sending 14 Leo IIs. A good sign along with all the other weapons being sent from NATO, etc., e.g.: France AMX-10 RCs, US M2 Bradleys, Strykers, MRAPs, etc.

I do get a bit annoyed at some in the media saying the M1 is too complex, requires more maint. & Log, etc. Now … are the Ukrainians incapable of this ? They seem to be pretty good with the plethora of weapons, etc. they have from all over the world.

Our M1 Maint. crews are guys off the block. Like everyone else in the Army. They are trained to keep the Iron Monsters fully mission capable. Are the guys in Ukraine uneducated, etc. ? NO ! As long as the US supplies parts, fuel, etc. from Poland, as IIRC there are US M1s there now. And the US will get those supplies, etc. there … We have C-17s, etc. landing everyday I'd think/hope.

The US Maint./Log system is very good. We[or used to] set up Field trains about 20Ks or less behind the FEBA or LD/LC. The Field Trains have all Classes of Supply. Including parts, fuel, ammo, food, water, toilet paper, etc. As well as maintenance support teams, supply personnel, cooks, refueling Sec., etc., etc. The Transport Plt has Cargo trucks that running convoys to Higher HQ Support Area and back. At least twice a day in most cases.

3-5 Ks behind the LD/LC are the Combat Trains. A smaller more mobile version of the Field Trains. They can push forward to resupply the Combat units at Forward Resupply Points. Or send a "Push Package" for immediate resupply of ammo, fuel, etc. if need be. Again, cargo truck convoys are running all day.

As I said, was assigned to run Maint & Log at both Bn & Bde levels. For about 3+ years. And yes, Grunt, Tanker, FA, etc. Officers in those Bns & Bdes run Maint./Log. Usually Higher HQ wants Grunts, Tankers, etc. in those positions. As we know what the forward units need. As we have led e.g.: Rifle or Tanks Plts, etc. as well as commanded Infantry, Mech, Tank, FA, etc. Cos.

Daily we or our Techs would brief the Bn or Bde Cdrs on what is fully mission capable. What is dead-lined, awaiting parts etc. They want to know how many Tanks, APCs, AT AFVs, FA tubes, etc. they have to use in combat ops. That night, next day etc. Generally, our Operational Readiness Rate was 94+% or higher. Even rarely made 100%.

I learned what the saying, "Amateurs supply tactics, professionals study logistics" meant. Many Combat Arms Officers are both Tacticians & Logisticians.

So bottom line IMO the M1s will do fine in the Ukraine. Few if any will get stuck. And few if any will be KO'd. But they will be maintained & resupplied, IMO.

One commentator I heard today suggested that the lead time of the Abrams could be a year more because of the difficulties of the M1's logistics tail. This thing could well be more about political optics for Germany than tracks on the ground. Though it seems that Leopard's could be in play by early Summer.

One commentator I heard today suggested that the lead time of the Abrams could be a year more because of the difficulties of the M1's logistics tail.

As I said & explained that shouldn't stop the M1s going. But new Maint Tms have to be trained as well as the actual crews, regardless.

This thing could well be more about political optics for Germany than tracks on the ground.

It appears more & more political optics seems to be a standard. E.g. as I have said about the A'stan Debacle, etc. …

Though it seems that Leopard's could be in play by early Summer.

That would good, but only 14 are being sent …

Alot of countries have now said they will send Leopards, including Germany. Altogether approx 100 Leos have been promised. US have said they will send 30 M1 tanks. If they are M1 basic tanks with 105mm gun or M1A1 with 120mm gun and what "A" I don't know.

Just saw an interview with a recent former Sec/State on FOX. A West Point grad, Airborne Ranger, as a young Tank Plt Ldr in Germany. He led an M1 Tank Plt. He said the M1 will have no problem operating in the Ukraine. Log will be no problem as we will support them, etc.

FWIW – As I had said, I don't think Ukraine's terrain is too much different than Central Germany.

And of course, Putin said these tanks will burn. My question … what are you going to use Vlad to make that happen ? 😎

So, there are M-1s already in Europe. Last year the number of Us troops and tanks in Europe was significantly increased. I get the logistical support issues, but why would it take a year to send a small number of tanks to Ukraine? Couldn't you train the Ukrainians to use and maintain them in a crash course and just drive them over the border by spring? There is also the ability to share logistical expertise via the web for more support.

There are more than a thousand Leopards deployed all over Europe. How hard is is to assemble a brigade of these, train the Ukranians, get them over the border by April? They are there because of the Russians. Why not let them do their job?

I know I am sounding simplistic here…. I just don't get why some of the tanks already in Europe cant be spared in the interest of moving faster. Politics aside.

Just a question. Don't all these have to be replaced for our troops?

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The United States announced on Wednesday it will supply Ukraine with 31 advanced M1 Abrams tanks worth $400 USD million in a matter of months, a decision that helped break a diplomatic logjam with Germany over how best to help Kyiv in its war against Russia.

The total cost of a single Abrams tanks can vary, and can be over $10 USD million per tanks when including training and sustainment. "

Then those tanks need rounds. I assume again from our arsenals

"It really depends on ammo type. Abrams and other NATO tanks use 120mm ammo. And ammo for german cannon costs ca. 5000 USD. Soo… it's A LOT!!!"

I don't know how dated this is.

"120mm Rheinmetall APFSDS: Weight 50kg; Price $800 USD (S/R)
120mm Rheinmetall APFSDSDU: Weight 50kg; Price $1,200 USD (R/R)
120mm Rheinmetall APFSDSDU M-829A3: Weight 50kg; Price $1,500 USD (R/R)
120mm Rheinmetall HEAT: Weight 50kg; Price $800 USD (C/S)
120mm Rheinmetall HE: Weight 50kg; Price $800 USD (R/R)
120mm Rheinmetall WP: Weight 50kg; Price $1,000 USD (R/R)
120mm Rheinmetall MPAT: Weight 50kg; Price: $4,000 USD (R/-).
120mm Rheinmetall STAFF (SMart Top Attack Fire & Forget): Weight 50kg; Price $3,000 USD (S/R).
120mm Rheinmetall APERS: Weight 50kg; Price $850 USD (R/-)
120mm Israeli LAHAT: Weight 50kg; Price $20,000 USD (R/-). .
120mm Raytheon TERM-CE (Tank Extended Range Munition-Chemical Energy): Weight 50kg; Price $30,000 USD (R/-).
120mm Alliant TERM-KE (Tank Extended Range Munition-Kinetic Energy) XM-1007: Weight 50kg; Price $30,000 USD (-/-)
120mm TERM-TA: Weight 50kg; Price $15,000 USD (-/-).

120mm Rifled L-11 APFSDSDU: Weight 50kg, Price $1,500 USD (R/R)
120mm Rifled L-11 APFSDS: Weight 50kg; Price $800 USD (S/R)
120mm Rifled L-11 HESH: Weight 50kg; Price $1,000 USD (S/R)
120mm Rifled L-11 APDS: Weight 50kg; Price $650 USD (R/R)"

But we can assume a pretty penny.

Maintenance parts? Again from our inventories?

I think Abrams use aviation fuel. Does the Ukraine have that? I assume it might need to be special, but again, who supplies?

This does not include the billions in both money and weapons we have already supplied. Also weakening our own military. Russia is not our only enemy. Are those enemies getting weaker at the same time? What happens if we have a war with Iran? Would are troops be scrapping for replacements, once they deplete their initial allotments? God forbid a war with China.

"In 2022, the Biden administration and the U.S. Congress have directed nearly $50 USD billion in assistance to Ukraine, which includes humanitarian, financial, and military support, according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a German research institute. The historic sums are helping a broad set of Ukrainian people and institutions, including refugees, law enforcement, and independent radio broadcasters, though most of the aid has been military-related. Dozens of other countries, including most members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union, are also providing large aid packages to Ukraine."

Subject: How Much Aid Has the U.S. Sent Ukraine? Here Are Six Charts. | Council on Foreign Relations


link

When must we say enough?
What if this war drags on years, like Iraq/Iran did?

I'm am trying to be a realists here. At some point this decision will have to be faced. Especially with a country who already is trillions of dollars in debt and that debt growing by the minute.

I know thoughts like this are not popular right now, but
Are we we cutting off our nose to spite our face?

Only a matter of time once the Ukrainians have them ( soon it looks) the Russians will have one

Don't all these have to be replaced for our troops?

Depending on precisely whats sent probably not. Early marks are the most likely and frankly if the defence of the USA suddenly hinges on some mothballed tanks from like the 80's something will have gone really, really wrong.

I'd also note the defence of the USA hinges on a heck of a lot more than the largely odds and ends that have been sent to Ukraine. And for the more modern stuff I very much doubt that the US has sent anything in too greater quantity or that can't be substituted for with other systems.

China is the only remotely near pier threat the US has unless you want to fall out with the EU? And I'm going to go with should it happen that conflict is not going to turn on M113s, old M1s, stingers or even Javelins. (And if the Marines want their tanks back I think they'd be taking back newer models than the ones they put into deep storage!)

US isn't remotely cutting its nose off – no, more like picking its nose and flicking it at Putin!

Your deficit is an entirely different problem and I'm not sure the relatively small beer of the donations to Ukraine make much difference – particularly since the gifted weapons systems aren't true dollar valuations. I wonder how much the global instability and food price inflation resulting from this war has cost the world and indeed the US economy?

I think it's those leopards will be the game changer. 80 Leo's fairly soon, with more to follow. 14 Challies could ruin your day so I'm not dismissing them. But it's those cats will make the difference.

I think Abrams use aviation fuel. Does the Ukraine have that? I assume it might need to be special, but again, who supplies?

As I wrote in another thread, the Abrams can use a variety of fuels including diesel.

Most of the armaments supplied to Ukraine are old stuff, giving the opportunity to rearm with modern stuff to fight other enemies. This probably won't include Russia if their army is destroyed by Ukraine.

What if this war drags on

Make sure it does not drag on by supplying all Ukraine needs to win. It will be cheaper in the long run and there will be less casualties including civilians.

…

Only a matter of time once the Ukrainians have them ( soon it looks) the Russians will have one

They would be slack if they haven't already obtained one. They won't be able to build one or use its knowledge to defeat one, due to sanctions.

Druzhina
Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers

35th, I have to say I agree with these guys. The debt has to wait a little longer maybe. There is a once in a century chance here to help Ukraine and wreck Russia's conventional forces for a long time. I am not discounting Ukraine's sacrifice. But Putin started this, and we were careful not to provoke him before hand and give him a way to blame us. He now has the world against him in a clearly bad guy role. NATO is back. Let's get this done this year.

The global economic instability is more due to the pandemic than anything else. We have suffered less than almost any other country. Inflation has slowed, employment is still at record levels even as the tech companies downsize from their pandemic expansions. We have enough of most everything. And nobody in history has made more ammo than us. The defense industry supports thousands of jobs and businesses. One the chickens stop dying from avian flu, there will be cheaper eggs. Our annual defense budget is more than 12 times bigger that what we have given Ukraine, I believe. A very affordable way to neutralize Putin.

It's not that we have no problems. But check out what happened in the China real estate market as just one catastrophic example. People lost everything. Or the food shortage there during the pandemic. Not to mention we have no idea how many have died there. Their shutdown policies nearly wrecked their economy. Their population is decreasing in key demographics areas, while the elderly population is exploding. They want to challenge us in the Pacific with a navy that is nowhere near as powerful as ours.

Nothing is ideal. The border is a mess, our politics are a sorry state. We count the bad things up and blame each other. But we are not counting our blessings very often. And the Ukranians are an inspiration more than anything. If they go down and Putin wins, the ramifications are bad for all of us. All my opinion.

Tort,

Did you look at the link I supplied. The US by itself exceeds all the other countries combined in its contributions to the Ukraine and we keep expanding that, with no questions being asked. The Ukraine is in Europe's back yard. I believe we have done our part. I am not saying stop, but we cannot keep being the open faucet, let the European faucets open wider.

The only way this stops is if Putin is deposed (that does not seem likely right now), he dies suddenly ( we can hope), the Ukrainians drive the Russians out ( very doubtful), the Russians get most of the lands they occupied (probably how it will end, in a draw), a world war breaking out (with all the countries in alliances, just like WW1 and WW2, that is a possibility sadly).

My fear is we are playing the game the French did with Britain in the Revolution, when they too could not afford it and it came back to bite the French crown. The French were up to their butts in debt, just like we are now.

I am trying to be realistic and I realize I am in a minority in my opinion. But with another year of this, I bet that changes.

We will see

Only a matter of time once the Ukrainians have them ( soon it looks) the Russians will have one

They most likely do already. We gave to the Iraqis. In 2014 as after we left, when the Iraqis ran into ISIS they abandoned 42 M1s. Reports were IRGC were in Iraq driving some M1s … So … I'd say the Russians got some…

As I wrote in another thread, the Abrams can use a variety of fuels including diesel.

Yes, like many US vehicles it is multi-fueled.

Don't all these have to be replaced for our troops?

Some of the equipment is older e.g. M113s, Strykers, even M2s. I heard on the WH briefing today that the RET. ADM said the US has no extra M1s … I'd say that is disinformation … You don't tell the enemy how many Aces you're holding.

I wonder how much the global instability and food price inflation resulting from this war has cost the world and indeed the US economy?

I learned this at the School of Business at University …

War is bad for business

War is good for business

No matter how bad it gets … someone makes a profit

I think it's those leopards will be the game changer. 80 Leo's fairly soon,

I thought Berlin was only sending 14 Leo IIs. One Tank Companies worth.

Make sure it does not drag on by supplying all Ukraine needs to win. It will be cheaper in the long run and there will be less casualties including civilians.

IIRC ACW GEN U.S. Grant's doctrine was something similar. Paraphrasing – "The sooner you win the war the less will die and more money will be saved. " Again not a direct quote … I'm old but not that old !

So, there are M-1s already in Europe.

Some in Germany IIRC. But the US Forces in Poland includes a Tank or Mech Hvy Bde Combat Grp. But those are being used by US troops AFAIK.

FWIW as I posted here earlier –

I do get a bit annoyed at some in the media saying the M1 is too complex, requires more maint. & Log, etc. Now … are the Ukrainians incapable of this ? They seem to be pretty good with the plethora of weapons, etc. they have from all over the world.

Our M1 Maint. crews are guys off the block. Like everyone else in the Army. They are trained to keep the Iron Monsters fully mission capable. Are the guys in Ukraine uneducated, etc. ? NO ! As long as the US supplies parts, fuel, etc. from Poland, as IIRC there are US M1s there now. And the US will get those supplies, etc. there … We have C-17s, etc. landing everyday I'd think/hope.

I also have said this before, the M1 was designed to fight in Western Europe. The talk about it being too heavy, IMO is
a bit exaggerated. The terrain in the Ukraine is similar to Central Germany. I don't think rural Ukraine may have the road net much Western Europe has, especially German. But tracked AFVs were designed to go cross country. Trained and skilled drivers with their TC assisting, will rarely if ever get stuck.

The border is a mess, our politics are a sorry state

What tragedy for so many for so many reasons.

35th, yes I did read the link and I see your point. I do not disagree about the spending but I want to see America help take the Russian threat off the table for a while. It would cost far more to fight them directly and would very possibly go nuclear.

I think this is different than our other conflicts, or the French, British in a major way. No boots on the ground. This is a cost that is tragic to bear, and I hope we can help the Ukranians win back their freedom. This has to be the last time the Russians get away with this or they will just keep going.

The US by itself exceeds all the other countries combined in its contributions

The 'By Share of GDP' table in the article has the USA at 9th position. Perhaps this is a better indicator?

Druzhina
Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers

I thought Berlin was only sending 14 Leo IIs. One Tank Companies worth.

Germany has announced that (for the time being) they are going to send 14 Leopard II tanks.

However, this tank is also operated by many other European (and perhaps a few non-European countries) that have shown willingness to send these tanks to Ukraine, but could not do so without explicit re-export permission from German government.

The most vocal of these countries has been Poland, which wants to send at least 14 tanks, and has also shown interest in coordinating Leopard II contributions coming from other countries – rather useful, since the main supply route to Ukraine tends pass through Ukraine. I am not sure about what all countries are going to participate in, though Netherlands is apparently going to send in at least 18 Leopard IIs, while Finland is going to contribute with "a few tanks" (exact number still to be decided).

In any case, it seems that Ukraine seems to be ending with quite an interesting "all-stars tank brigade" with a Challenger II company, M1 abrams battalion and a couple of Leopard II battalions – let's see if France will be also contributing a few LeClerc tanks to the show. Plus there will also be an interesting array of APCs, IFVs and self-propelled howitzers in support.

The article I originally linked was mid December. I believe we passed another multi billion dollar package since. That does not include the Abrams. Did I not hear patriots were being supplied recently?

US debt as of this morning according to news on TV, 31 Trillion dollars. I think that is more than the government brings in, in one year in revenue. Imagine you making 60,000 a year, but spending 75000 a year, every year. Who funds that extra 15000? At what interest? For how long? How long can that last?

I know I am in a minority currently in these views, but I feel the concerns must be expressed.

A few articles. The first experiences my main concern. The second another example of the depletion of those arms.

Subject: US disarms itself to aid Ukraine


link

Subject: Strykers, Bradleys likely in huge US aid package for Ukraine


link

35th. I feel like Fox keeps moving the goal posts in their opinions on this as they focus on elections. Byron York's source here is Seth Jones, an academic who also advised keeping troops in Afghanistan, continuing the nation building process there, and dealing with the Taliban. Hard to follow the pendulum.

The expenditures are an outrage. But I am saying save Ukraine, wreck the Russian army, then reassess for China.

Germany has announced that (for the time being) they are going to send 14 Leopard II tanks.

However, this tank is also operated by many other European (and perhaps a few non-European countries) that have shown willingness to send these tanks to Ukraine, but could not do so without explicit re-export permission from German government.

Yes, I also have heard that in the media. Even during the Cold War, we war gamed against Canada. And they were using Leo Is. I hope Berlin and many other nations sends Leo IIs, etc. To push the Russians out of Ukraine.

In any case, it seems that Ukraine seems to be ending with quite an interesting "all-stars tank brigade" with a Challenger II company, M1 abrams battalion and a couple of Leopard II battalions – let's see if France will be also contributing a few LeClerc tanks to the show. Plus there will also be an interesting array of APCs, IFVs and self-propelled howitzers in support.

Totally agree. I could imagine that counter in a board wargame would get a high combat/battle rating.

In a WH briefing yesterday RET USN ADM discussed this. The US is sending 31 M1s as that is the organization the Ukraine uses. IIRC based on Russian TO&Es.

FWIW – That TO&E is 3 MBTs/Plt

3 Plts/Co. +1 Cmd Tank = 10

3 Cos of 10 MBTs/each = 30

Plus 1 Bn Cmd Tank

Total 31 …

That is the TO&E the USSR used again during the Cold War for some of their MBT Bns.

Someone correct, me if I'm wrong.

A small Bn by US standards. But still an MBT Bn by Ukrainian/Russia standards. And in the right hands can by/is effective. After all AFAIK that is the TO&E the Ukraine has been using and has effective. The Russians not so much …

BTW, IIRC, a US Tank Bn did/or does have over 50+ MBTs. In 4 Cos. + Cmd Tanks. That may have changed since I ETS'd in '90 …

Tort I don't believe either of my links was from Fox.

But as far as Fox goes, I would say most on that channel highly support aid to Ukraine, some to the extreme. Kilmeade And Hannity stand out as vehement pro-Ukrainian. I believe the only major one who has voiced concerns is Tucker Carlson.

You and Sean Hannity are on the same wavelengths. 😉 actually Kilmeade and your views are very similar as well. Be careful Tort.. you might be coming over to the dark side. 😉

Enjoy

Subject: Sean Hannity presses Tulsi Gabbard on her Ukraine policy stance – YouTube


YouTube link

I feel like Fox keeps moving the goal posts in their opinions on this as they focus on elections. Byron York's source here is Seth Jones, an academic who also advised keeping troops in Afghanistan, continuing the nation building process there, and dealing with the Taliban. Hard to follow the pendulum.

Yes, & no … as you know I and also other think we + NATO should have kept a reduced number of troops in A'stan. Other GENs + have recommended similar.

However, I don't think continuing to nation building would be effective. For many reasons, we have talked about before. Keep them there to support the ANA/ANP. Limit our combat ops, etc. As we see what happened when the US & NATO left. A'stan is a living Hell for everyone save for the Taliban & AQ. Which pretty much are one in the same. It is now a terrorist/jihadi breeding ground with jihadis coming from all over the world. We can't "fix" A'stan or jihadis, etc., but we can mitigate much of the damage they can do to much of the rest of the world.

Also note with our open Southern border we have caught over 100+ on the terrorist watch list. How many got away ? What are they here for ? But again, this has been talked about before.

FWIW – Yesterday a former Sec/State said what I and others have said. The A'stan Debacle emboldened Putin to invade the Ukraine. Seeing the poor, feckless, etc., US leadership in action.

It was compounded by as the Taliban took province after province and the US did nothing. Similar occurred as Russia massed on the Ukraine's border. The US sent few combat assets. As they thought it might "upset" Putin. The US didn't start sending large numbers of combat assets until after the Russians rolled across the border.

Too little … too late … again, now there will be a protected war in the Ukraine. With many more dead, etc. Based on poor leadership, etc., etc.

And if you watch other than FOX, everything especially now is based on upcoming elections. If you only watch the 6:00 legacy news networks, etc., you get a rain drop in the ocean of what is actually happening. 💧

OVI +1

There seems to be a healthy dose of nostalgia for the "good old days" on this thread – a time when German tanks fought the Evil Russians on the Ukrainian steppe. I anticipate the final result will be similar.

Legion +1

Legion

"Also note with our open Southern border we have caught over 100+ on the terrorist watch list. How many got away ? What are they here for ? But again, this has been talked about before."

Wasn't it only 19 that brought down the World Trade Center, Pentagon and Pennsylvania?

Scary isn't it?

There seems to be a healthy dose of nostalgia for the "good old days" on this thread – a time when German tanks fought the Evil Russians on the Ukrainian steppe. I anticipate the final result will be similar.

Nostalgia ? The Russian Forces are 2d Rate at best. So does one think the remaining Russian MBTs, etc. will be successful in taking on German, etc. Leo IIs, etc. ? Look at all the Russian MBT, etc., loses currently. They don't fight combined arms and it cost them dearly. The Russians must have forgotten to study WWII history. And/or modern mobile maneuver combined arms warfare …

Wasn't it only 19 that brought down the World Trade Center, Pentagon and Pennsylvania?

Scary isn't it?

Yep, all the terrorists that have not been caught crossing the border have to do is steal or rent a truck. Then run over people just walking down the street.

Hmmm ? Seems the Russians are not the only ones who forgot to study history. Or don't care …

Well, guys, I do visit all sides except MSNBC. There is darkness everywhere! Fox often gets things others miss. Byron York is a political reporter who appears on Fox regular evening news quite often. He is referencing Seth Jones, but I wonder about his spin considering Jones Afghanistan positions. I am not saying Fox is anti-Ukraine. They just shift their spin to keep their viewers. Biden bad, Dems bad. And yes the others do it. The politics around this war unite mostly in the center, not the left or right media.

Legion, I think we will always disagree on the start of the war. Part of me says you are right, we may have deterred Putin by giving Ukraine major help at the start. Part of me says he was always coming, did not care who the President is, and we were right not to give him cover by appearing to provoke the invasion with massive aid. Nobody cared if he is upset, we wanted him to look bad and strengthen the world wide case against him.

The last admin let the Taliban get away with their increased attacks for nearly a year after the deal was signed. No more air cover for government troops among other things. We avoid criticizing the type of leadership we had at this time to keep us from getting carried away and stay out of the DH. Leadership has long been an ongoing issue for the US.

Then there are the nukes. Not once mentioned on Fox news last night as the panel discussed the tanks and reinforcing Ukraine. Honestly, if some of these people just read TMP, they might also have a clue about some of the military details and implications. I have learned a ton here. It is very embarrassing on CNN when an anchor refers to a single soldier as a troop. More than one must be troops, I guess. How we understand the war here is not like these people.

I would like to get all the tv news retired commanders together on one news show every night to give us a briefing.

I believe every decision in the WH about military aid to Ukraine includes the topic of Putin's nuclear arsenal. We had better hope so. This is not small ball we are playing. Every day that tension is there. We don't think he would do it, but it's in the game and you live with it.

From Mitilary.com – M1s to Ukraine – FWIW … link

I think we will always disagree on the start of the war. Part of me says you are right, we may have deterred Putin by giving Ukraine major help at the start. Part of me says he was always coming, did not care who the President is, and we were right not to give him cover by appearing to provoke the invasion with massive aid.

Well if you knew you'd get the out of you if you went into the Rock's yard … would ya ?

Many former Military, etc., types agree, or I do with them. I was just a Grunt CPT and RIF'd. As Putin was massing on the border for months. Was the time to start sending massive amounts of combat weapons systems, etc. to deter the invasion. You don't invade where the enemy is strong. But where he is weak and unsuspecting. Surprise is a Principle of War. We learned that in WWII and even Korea. E.g. Inchon … But if Putin saw no weakness in Ukraine's ability to defend, he may have not invaded. Of course, FWIW his strategic surprise was gone. But maybe not his tactical surprise.

And not the just the US but NATO. Putin seeing a consolidated effort, might have deterred him. If not, his losses would be higher, etc.

We will have to agree to disagree on US leadership … 'nuff said.

I believe every decision in the WH about military aid to Ukraine includes the topic of Putin's nuclear arsenal.

Yes, certainly, it has to be a consideration. But again, Putin is not a Jihadi who wants to be martyred. He likes being "King". Just like Un … You can't be king if you are dead. Most Russians in Putin's circle feel the same.

The US is sending 31 M1s as that is the organization the Ukraine uses.

Ukrainian tank battalion organisation was 4 tanks per platoon, 3 platoons per company + 1 company command tank = 13
3 companies + 1 battalion command tank = 40
This may have changed and there is the possibility that armoured brigade battalions have a different organisation to mech brigade tank battalions.
Source: video by Battle Order, 4th chapter, 27/6/2022.

Druzhina
Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers

Good intel … as I said I heard the TO&E in a WH briefing recently. The number 31 again reminded me of old USSR tank TO&Es.

You may want to send that link to the WH … 😁😎

I for one am getting tired of the incremental creep to Armageddon as every "red line we won't cross" has been violated by our leaders.

Oh, just limited aid with oversight controls! Nah, we really meant a flood of unmonitored aid while the US faces dire crises at home.

Oh we just want to restore the preinvasion borders! Oh, did we say that? We meant the pre-2014 borders! Ooopsie, we really meant to also retake the Crimea and the home port of the Russian Black Sea Fleet.

Oh, we're just sending limited military gear, like ammo and stuff…and some old artillery pieces, oh, and drones…and maybe Patriot Missile batteries manned by US soldiers…and maybe M1 Abrams MBTs that we swore we'd never send. Well, heck, we left $80 USD BILLION of stuff behind in Afghanistan, so whatever I guess.

And we're not at war with Russia, we just want to defend Ukraine…and remove Putin and try him for War Crimes…oh, and we're at War with Russia, according to Germany's Foreign Minister.

YouTube link

So let's just stop creeping up to Armageddon driven by idiotic leaders and just push the button down, eh? That's where this all ends up unless we have some sane people elected to office.