5 ms·

Why so much buzz around this? I can't see few more tanks in the battlefield doing something to shortening this war.

by igortg 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dragontamer 4y ago
I don't think tanks are the big play here. The big play are the USA's M2 Bradley and Stryker vehicles, which will effectively mechanize a few battalions of the Ukrainian infantry. Each Bradley can hold 6 troops, each Stryker can hold 9. The problem: mechanized infantry needs Tanks for support. Early on, France's AMX-10 RC recon vehicle (aka: a light vehicle with a big tank gun on it) was being considered, but it looks like proper tanks have been decided upon. France is sending those AMX-10 RC vehicles anyway. ------------- By mechanizing the infantry, they aren't going to be riding in Toyota trucks around the battlefield anymore. They'll have large 25mm Autocannons, medium armor (M2 Bradley) or light armor (Strykers) to protect them. M2 Bradley have advanced optics that can see 3000 to 4000 meters at night, and gun computers (fire control systems) that can accurately make shots at those distance. And rockets just in case it comes across an enemy tank (though its #1 routine would be to call a friendly tank for backup in that situation). Ukraine has a significant number of brave troops who are making due with what they got. Just civilian cars and trucks right now. Giving them a proper battlefield taxi (aka: M2 Bradley, Strykers, or Humvees) is a huge step up. Ukraine does have a mechanized infantry core that's already done some pretty amazing offenses. But Ukraine obviously needs to make that core larger and stronger for the upcoming offensive.
- remarkEon 4y ago
  >each Stryker can hold 9. Strykers hold 2 + 9, a 2 man vehicle crew plus a 9 man infantry squad plus an extra seat for the PL/PSG or the JTAC or whoever else you have rolling around with you. They're nice vehicles, but they're not going to hold up against tanks or anti-tank weapons. Given the terrain over there, they'll be great in urban ops but I'd keep them out of ranged engagements.
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    Toyota / Nissan trucks don't hold up very well against tanks or anti-tank weapons either. Stryker is going to be mostly a road-transport vehicle, though 8x8 means it has a degree of maneuverability even over grass (at least, better than a 4x4 Toyota). There are plenty of videos of Ukrainian anti-tank crews setting up ambushes using a Toyota truck for example. If those crews had a Stryker instead, they'd be safer and faster.
- simplotek 4y ago
  > Ukraine does have a mechanized infantry core that's already done some pretty amazing offenses. But Ukraine obviously needs to make that core larger and stronger for the upcoming offensive. It's also big news as an offensive in the south can cut off supply to Crimea and thus lead to a siege similar to the one of Kherson. It would already be very hard for Putin to endure more major defeats but Ukraine retaking Crimea or even Mauripol could ultimate sign Russia's defeat and Putin's demise.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> Why so much buzz around this? Several reasons: (1) the Western MBTs involved are seen as a big qualitative improvement over the Ukraine’s (and Russias) Soviet (and in Russia’s case, post-Soviet)–design MBTs. (2) The release of tanks is seen as a harbinger of loosening on a broad category of heavy Western equipment (manned combat aircraft, for instance.) (3) The release of heavy vehicles in active production, rather than the prior one-time emptying of stocks of soviety-designed vehicles from mostly ex-Warsaw Pact countries (though some MiG-29s for spares came from the US) is seen as sustainable (and thus something Russia is less likely to think they can overcome by a war of material attrition where they equipment runs out.) > I can’t see few more tanks in the battlefield doing something to shortening this war. A qualitative improvement without any quantitative change could, but its not “a few more tanks”, the commitment of Western tanks is something like 15%+ of a generous estimate of Ukraine’s total potential tank inventory (which includes non-operational Soviet-design MBTs from before the way that might be brought up to operational status and captured Russian MBTs), from what I can tell (321 new Western tanks pledged, with somewhere around 2,000 tanks potentially available previously.)
- throwaway290 4y ago
  The buzz is also the controversy around potentially Russians gaining access to this equipment (on the off chance they capture some).
credit_guy 4y ago
> few more tanks It's not just a few. It's close to one hundred. It's a big deal because there's many more of these where the one hundred are coming from. If the West sees that these tanks are put to good use (like the HIMARS were), then more will come.
- nikolay 4y ago
  More won't come.
ihatepython 4y ago
Because it makes it more official, that this war is not simply Ukraine vs Russia, but rather NATO vs Russia. NATO has been funding the war from the Ukrainian side. Soon, it will expand to include China, because China cannot allow Russia to be defeated, because they would be next. This actually means that there is absolutely zero chance for peace.
- dragontamer 4y ago
  What was Russia's reason for attacking Ukraine and starting this whole mess? Last time I checked, Russia still hasn't officially declared war on Ukraine, or given a reason yet. Despite the large scale conscription of soldiers, Russia seems to still call this a special military operation, rather than a proper war. The USA / NATO side is defensive purpose. Ukraine certainly deserves a right to exist and fight for itself. This war would end tomorrow if Putin ordered his troops back into Russia. --------- Why were Russian soldiers attacking Kyiv in February 2022?
  - ihatepython 4y ago
    This war/conflict actually began back in 2014, after Yanukovich was overthrown. The simple solution is to honor the Minsk Agreement and allow the Donbas to vote on whether or not they want to join Russia. Merkel has stated that there was never any intention to allow the Donbas to vote. The purpose was to buy time to build up Ukraine's army. So the negotiation was in bad faith. It is false that this war would end tomorrow if Putin ordered his troops back into Russia. Again the simple solution is to honor the Minsk Agreement.
    - dragontamer 4y ago
      > The simple solution is to honor the Minsk Agreement and allow the Donbas to vote on whether or not they want to join Russia Why did Russia invade, kill, and kidnap citizens before such a vote? Its pretty obvious that what Russia is doing here is simple colonialism and imperialism. Russia wants Ukraine. It started by gobbling up Crimea, and moved on to to take Donbas and other such territories. Last year, I've had plenty of Russian sympathizers tell me how peace-loving you all are, especially with your "Slavic Brothers". And it was all proven false upon the brutal attack on Kyiv on Feburary 2022. ------- > It is false that this war would end tomorrow if Putin ordered his troops back into Russia. The hostilities of Feb 2022 through today started when Putin crossed into Ukraine. It will end when Putin retreats his army back into Russia. ----- > Again the simple solution is to honor the Minsk Agreement. And the first step to that agreement was a ceasefire. And that ceasefire was utterly demolished when Russia attacked Kyiv. Putin DESTROYED that agreement with the Feb. 2022 attack. You realize that? The conditions of ceasefire will never again return, not until the Russian army is out of Ukraine.

Why so much buzz around this? I can't see few more tanks in the battlefield doing something to shortening this war.

by igortg 4y ago

Why so much buzz around this? I can't see few more tanks in the battlefield doing something to shortening this war.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

dragontamer 4y ago

I don't think tanks are the big play here. The big play are the USA's M2 Bradley and Stryker vehicles, which will effectively mechanize a few battalions of the Ukrainian infantry. Each Bradley can hold 6 troops, each Stryker can hold 9. The problem: mechanized infantry needs Tanks for support. Early on, France's AMX-10 RC recon vehicle (aka: a light vehicle with a big tank gun on it) was being considered, but it looks like proper tanks have been decided upon. France is sending those AMX-10 RC vehicles anyway. ------------- By mechanizing the infantry, they aren't going to be riding in Toyota trucks around the battlefield anymore. They'll have large 25mm Autocannons, medium armor (M2 Bradley) or light armor (Strykers) to protect them. M2 Bradley have advanced optics that can see 3000 to 4000 meters at night, and gun computers (fire control systems) that can accurately make shots at those distance. And rockets just in case it comes across an enemy tank (though its #1 routine would be to call a friendly tank for backup in that situation). Ukraine has a significant number of brave troops who are making due with what they got. Just civilian cars and trucks right now. Giving them a proper battlefield taxi (aka: M2 Bradley, Strykers, or Humvees) is a huge step up. Ukraine does have a mechanized infantry core that's already done some pretty amazing offenses. But Ukraine obviously needs to make that core larger and stronger for the upcoming offensive.

remarkEon 4y ago
>each Stryker can hold 9. Strykers hold 2 + 9, a 2 man vehicle crew plus a 9 man infantry squad plus an extra seat for the PL/PSG or the JTAC or whoever else you have rolling around with you. They're nice vehicles, but they're not going to hold up against tanks or anti-tank weapons. Given the terrain over there, they'll be great in urban ops but I'd keep them out of ranged engagements.
- dragontamer 4y ago
  Toyota / Nissan trucks don't hold up very well against tanks or anti-tank weapons either. Stryker is going to be mostly a road-transport vehicle, though 8x8 means it has a degree of maneuverability even over grass (at least, better than a 4x4 Toyota). There are plenty of videos of Ukrainian anti-tank crews setting up ambushes using a Toyota truck for example. If those crews had a Stryker instead, they'd be safer and faster.
simplotek 4y ago
> Ukraine does have a mechanized infantry core that's already done some pretty amazing offenses. But Ukraine obviously needs to make that core larger and stronger for the upcoming offensive. It's also big news as an offensive in the south can cut off supply to Crimea and thus lead to a siege similar to the one of Kherson. It would already be very hard for Putin to endure more major defeats but Ukraine retaking Crimea or even Mauripol could ultimate sign Russia's defeat and Putin's demise.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> Why so much buzz around this? Several reasons: (1) the Western MBTs involved are seen as a big qualitative improvement over the Ukraine’s (and Russias) Soviet (and in Russia’s case, post-Soviet)–design MBTs. (2) The release of tanks is seen as a harbinger of loosening on a broad category of heavy Western equipment (manned combat aircraft, for instance.) (3) The release of heavy vehicles in active production, rather than the prior one-time emptying of stocks of soviety-designed vehicles from mostly ex-Warsaw Pact countries (though some MiG-29s for spares came from the US) is seen as sustainable (and thus something Russia is less likely to think they can overcome by a war of material attrition where they equipment runs out.) > I can’t see few more tanks in the battlefield doing something to shortening this war. A qualitative improvement without any quantitative change could, but its not “a few more tanks”, the commitment of Western tanks is something like 15%+ of a generous estimate of Ukraine’s total potential tank inventory (which includes non-operational Soviet-design MBTs from before the way that might be brought up to operational status and captured Russian MBTs), from what I can tell (321 new Western tanks pledged, with somewhere around 2,000 tanks potentially available previously.)

throwaway290 4y ago
The buzz is also the controversy around potentially Russians gaining access to this equipment (on the off chance they capture some).

credit_guy 4y ago

> few more tanks It's not just a few. It's close to one hundred. It's a big deal because there's many more of these where the one hundred are coming from. If the West sees that these tanks are put to good use (like the HIMARS were), then more will come.

nikolay 4y ago
More won't come.

ihatepython 4y ago

Because it makes it more official, that this war is not simply Ukraine vs Russia, but rather NATO vs Russia. NATO has been funding the war from the Ukrainian side. Soon, it will expand to include China, because China cannot allow Russia to be defeated, because they would be next. This actually means that there is absolutely zero chance for peace.

dragontamer 4y ago
What was Russia's reason for attacking Ukraine and starting this whole mess? Last time I checked, Russia still hasn't officially declared war on Ukraine, or given a reason yet. Despite the large scale conscription of soldiers, Russia seems to still call this a special military operation, rather than a proper war. The USA / NATO side is defensive purpose. Ukraine certainly deserves a right to exist and fight for itself. This war would end tomorrow if Putin ordered his troops back into Russia. --------- Why were Russian soldiers attacking Kyiv in February 2022?
- ihatepython 4y ago
  This war/conflict actually began back in 2014, after Yanukovich was overthrown. The simple solution is to honor the Minsk Agreement and allow the Donbas to vote on whether or not they want to join Russia. Merkel has stated that there was never any intention to allow the Donbas to vote. The purpose was to buy time to build up Ukraine's army. So the negotiation was in bad faith. It is false that this war would end tomorrow if Putin ordered his troops back into Russia. Again the simple solution is to honor the Minsk Agreement.
  - dragontamer 4y ago
    > The simple solution is to honor the Minsk Agreement and allow the Donbas to vote on whether or not they want to join Russia Why did Russia invade, kill, and kidnap citizens before such a vote? Its pretty obvious that what Russia is doing here is simple colonialism and imperialism. Russia wants Ukraine. It started by gobbling up Crimea, and moved on to to take Donbas and other such territories. Last year, I've had plenty of Russian sympathizers tell me how peace-loving you all are, especially with your "Slavic Brothers". And it was all proven false upon the brutal attack on Kyiv on Feburary 2022. ------- > It is false that this war would end tomorrow if Putin ordered his troops back into Russia. The hostilities of Feb 2022 through today started when Putin crossed into Ukraine. It will end when Putin retreats his army back into Russia. ----- > Again the simple solution is to honor the Minsk Agreement. And the first step to that agreement was a ceasefire. And that ceasefire was utterly demolished when Russia attacked Kyiv. Putin DESTROYED that agreement with the Feb. 2022 attack. You realize that? The conditions of ceasefire will never again return, not until the Russian army is out of Ukraine.