Results 12,126 to 12,150 of 16600
Thread: Ukraine
-
01-27-2023, 12:27 PM #12126
Counting active and all M1 variants in storage that will never be used by the US again I've heard the 10k number tossed around a lot. Even if it isn't that high, we have tanks to burn, literally. Sending these tanks will not degrade our military...at all. There is zero non political reason not to send them.
Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk
-
01-27-2023, 12:31 PM #12127
This. If you base your outlook and beliefs of American military strategies and operational capabilities are, solely from press releases, media hubbub and soundbites, you should just leave the room now. War is a big game and no one shows all (or most of) their cards if they can.
-
01-27-2023, 12:51 PM #12128
By law the United States cannot export domestic U.S. military M1s because the armor metallurgy is classified. Only M1s built for foreign markets can be sent to Ukraine. So unless an ally agrees to give up their M1s, they all must be built from scratch.
FWIW, one of the ways the current admin helped grease the wheels for LEOs is by offering to send M1s, including service and support, to replace existing LEO stock sent to Ukraine. Unless Germany was willing to essentially lose its export market for LEOs, they had to allow the handover.
-
01-27-2023, 01:05 PM #12129
This explains
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...tanks-00079648Seeker of Truth. Dispenser of Wisdom. Protector of the Weak. Avenger of Evil.
-
01-27-2023, 01:09 PM #12130
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/3...rams-tank/amp/
I can’t do everything for you A holes, I’ve got work to do.
-
01-27-2023, 01:13 PM #12131
-
01-27-2023, 01:17 PM #12132The Pentagon intends to procure the tanks through the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI), meaning it will buy the Abrams directly from its maker General Dynamics to then be shipped to Ukraine, a process that “is going to take months,” Singh said.
Yep, even Zero-HedgeI have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.
"Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"
-
01-27-2023, 01:22 PM #12133
My god, i do have to do everything
-
01-27-2023, 01:28 PM #12134
-
01-27-2023, 01:31 PM #12135
I imagine the Abraham’s are to support the bradley’s. A bradley platoon usually has an m-1 with it. Plus artillery, you got combined arms for big pushes.
-
01-27-2023, 01:34 PM #12136
30 tanks. 3 months. 3 years? Whatever.
What difference does it make anyways?
-
01-27-2023, 01:34 PM #12137
Welcome to convo, cono. Late to the party but at least you're not arguing main battle tanks are obsolete. Because of their armor tanks provide battlefield mobility. Even though an APC is faster, its armor is too light to protect the crew near the front.
A main battle tank supported/protected by a combination of infantry, artillery, air-defense (and ideally close air support) is used to breach an enemies front lines ahead of a faster penetration force. Tanks are also useful as closer in field artillery and in urban environments.
Each Leopard is equivalent to 2.5-4 Russian tanks, and each Abrams worth 3-5, because of their superior firepower and ability to accurately hit targets while moving fast. Ideally, Ukraine would have 400 Western tanks, but the 250 or so they'll have around May will make a big difference.Last edited by MultiVerse; 01-27-2023 at 02:02 PM.
-
01-27-2023, 01:48 PM #12138
I love sending Abrahams to Europe.
-
01-27-2023, 01:59 PM #12139
-
01-27-2023, 02:14 PM #12140
Doesn't it depend on the targeting capability of Russian armor? During both Iraq invasions Bradleys outperformed Russian T-72 tanks, and Abrams at killing them, b/c of their maneuverability, range, optics, TOW missiles, etc. Crews said its 25mm cannon rounds punched through both hulls of Russian APCs killing infranty using them for cover due to shoddy Russian metallurgy.
-
01-27-2023, 02:29 PM #12141click here
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
- valley of the heart's delight
- Posts
- 2,481
No it doesn't. It retreads the political arguments, excuses, and inertia. It notably does not mention how many M1 tanks we have, nor how many M60s. Nor is there any mention of the battlefield opportunity that exists now before Russia trains a bunch more recruits for the meatgrinder. The longer we drag out this war, the greater the chance for something worse to happen. We built the tanks for this, use them.
-
01-27-2023, 02:45 PM #12142I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.
"Happiest years of my life were earning < $8.00 and hour, collecting unemployment every spring and fall, no car, no debt and no responsibilities. 1984-1990 Park City UT"
-
01-27-2023, 03:04 PM #12143
-
01-27-2023, 03:32 PM #12144
Hopefully the Russians get M1A1 suppositories real soon.
-
01-27-2023, 04:02 PM #12145
Hitler had 1,400 tanks invading Normandy.
Montgomery had 400 going after Rommel
But yeah. 30 Abrahams are going to change everything. In the age of satellite views and guided missiles.
Ok boomers. Good luck with that.
-
01-27-2023, 05:47 PM #12146
-
01-27-2023, 05:55 PM #12147
-
01-27-2023, 06:17 PM #12148
At this stage of the war it is.
Seeker of Truth. Dispenser of Wisdom. Protector of the Weak. Avenger of Evil.
-
01-27-2023, 06:19 PM #12149
Why don’t we send some darpa robot dogs to Ukraine?
Those are fucking scary.
-
01-27-2023, 07:09 PM #12150
The 25mm and TOW rockets are for use against other APCs and to try to survive an engagement with a tank. No Bradley TC is going to go looking for a fight with a modern MBT, that's what the Abrams and Apache escorts are for.
I'm sure there have been instances when a Bradley took out a T-72, but I would almost guarantee it was out of necessity to survive because the T-72 engaged the Bradley and not because the Bradley was looking for a fight with the T-72.
Bookmarks