- Joined
- Mar 30, 2020
- Messages
- 9,831
- Reaction score
- 6,554
. Putin’s meatgrinder tactics are destroying a generation of Russian men (msn.com)
. Ammunition shortage of Wagner Group quickly ends, Russians redouble attacks on Bakhmut (msn.com)
. Bad News: NATO Tanks, Planes, and Artillery Unlikely to Win Ukraine War (msn.com) *
* As signs indicate a Ukrainian spring offensive may soon launch, many Western military analysts claim that a sufficient amount of Western armor could turn things around for Ukraine. A careful analysis reveals such optimism may be misplaced.
Leopard 2’s and M1A1 Abrams’ Combat Performance:
"There is still another factor that gets far too little consideration in Western press. The tanks Ukraine is counting on are not, in themselves, transformative technology that will greatly increase battlefield capabilities. In fact, the Leopard 2 and M1A1 Abrams have shown themselves vulnerable in combat."
"In December 2016, the Turkish army was conducting an operation against Kurdish separatists and ISIS rebels in northern Syria. Earlier in 2016, Turkey had lost many of the older M60 Patton tanks they had gotten from the U.S. and decided to employ the more modern Leopard 2A4s. In the Battle of al-Bab in December, the Leopards fared no better than the Patton tanks had, and at least 10 of the German tanks were knocked out by insurgents. Also in 2016, Defense One reported that up to 20 M1A1 tanks operated by Saudi Arabia in its war against Houthi rebels in Yemen had been knocked out."
"Let that sink in for a moment. Leopard 2s and M1A1s — the foundation of Ukraine’s battlefield hopes — were knocked out in battle when used by NATO Turkish troops and American-trained Saudis in fighting against insurgents, who themselves had no tanks. The most likely result for Ukraine, whether it’s the Leopard, the Challenger, or Abrams tanks, is going to be little different than the results they have achieved with their forces’ current, Soviet-era tanks. What matters is always how the equipment is used. The tanks themselves make far less difference."
-
"In early February (2023), Ukrainian intelligence reported that Russia had amassed approximately 300,000 troops inside Ukraine for a massive invasion, stocked with an astonishing 1,800 tanks, 3,950 armored vehicles, more than 3,000 pieces of artillery and rocket launchers, 400 jets, and 300 helicopters. -- Yet there likely remains a sizable Russian force not currently engaged. As far as we know, Ukraine does not have any meaningful strategic reserve. If the Ukraine offensive is successful and drives Russia back by any distance, they will be a spent force. If the Russian lines bend but don’t break and only give small incursions along the line, the UAF will also become a spent force. In either case, once that moment of culmination has been reached, Russia will have a large and well-supplied force to launch a major counterattack of their own. Ukraine will be hard-pressed to stop a Russian counterattack."
. Ammunition shortage of Wagner Group quickly ends, Russians redouble attacks on Bakhmut (msn.com)
. Bad News: NATO Tanks, Planes, and Artillery Unlikely to Win Ukraine War (msn.com) *
* As signs indicate a Ukrainian spring offensive may soon launch, many Western military analysts claim that a sufficient amount of Western armor could turn things around for Ukraine. A careful analysis reveals such optimism may be misplaced.
Leopard 2’s and M1A1 Abrams’ Combat Performance:
"There is still another factor that gets far too little consideration in Western press. The tanks Ukraine is counting on are not, in themselves, transformative technology that will greatly increase battlefield capabilities. In fact, the Leopard 2 and M1A1 Abrams have shown themselves vulnerable in combat."
"In December 2016, the Turkish army was conducting an operation against Kurdish separatists and ISIS rebels in northern Syria. Earlier in 2016, Turkey had lost many of the older M60 Patton tanks they had gotten from the U.S. and decided to employ the more modern Leopard 2A4s. In the Battle of al-Bab in December, the Leopards fared no better than the Patton tanks had, and at least 10 of the German tanks were knocked out by insurgents. Also in 2016, Defense One reported that up to 20 M1A1 tanks operated by Saudi Arabia in its war against Houthi rebels in Yemen had been knocked out."
"Let that sink in for a moment. Leopard 2s and M1A1s — the foundation of Ukraine’s battlefield hopes — were knocked out in battle when used by NATO Turkish troops and American-trained Saudis in fighting against insurgents, who themselves had no tanks. The most likely result for Ukraine, whether it’s the Leopard, the Challenger, or Abrams tanks, is going to be little different than the results they have achieved with their forces’ current, Soviet-era tanks. What matters is always how the equipment is used. The tanks themselves make far less difference."
-
"In early February (2023), Ukrainian intelligence reported that Russia had amassed approximately 300,000 troops inside Ukraine for a massive invasion, stocked with an astonishing 1,800 tanks, 3,950 armored vehicles, more than 3,000 pieces of artillery and rocket launchers, 400 jets, and 300 helicopters. -- Yet there likely remains a sizable Russian force not currently engaged. As far as we know, Ukraine does not have any meaningful strategic reserve. If the Ukraine offensive is successful and drives Russia back by any distance, they will be a spent force. If the Russian lines bend but don’t break and only give small incursions along the line, the UAF will also become a spent force. In either case, once that moment of culmination has been reached, Russia will have a large and well-supplied force to launch a major counterattack of their own. Ukraine will be hard-pressed to stop a Russian counterattack."
Last edited:
