Mooney_Driver wrote:
I guess what they aim for is status quo ante referring to February 24th and a forced peace in Donbass, but not much more than that.
It’s hardly possible – I don’t see the feasibility of this scenario. If Ukrainian army reaches these borders they will continue because it will mean Russian army is in heavy withdraw. And in that case Russia can hardly keep Crimea.
Russia cannot be allowed to keep Crimea, which is Ukraine.
Russia got away with Crimea only because the West got caught with its trousers down and didn’t do anything.
Peter wrote:
A lot of changes in last 24hrs.
True. Germany has confirmed delivery of 14 Leopard 2A6 Panzer, which contrary to expectations are the modern mainstay variant the Bundeswehr uses as well. The very latest A7V variant is not even in widespread service in Germany itself, so if is perfectly fine that they opted for the trusted but still not outdated A6 variant. They will be on Ukraine by March.
Der Spiegel reports that the total number of battle tanks planned for delivery from European nations now stands at 80. Add to that the planned delivery of 30 to 50 Abrams tanks from the US and you get a sizeable force, though still below Ukraines hopes for 300 total.
I risk myself jumping in this very emotional debate :
Ukraine seem to have totally depleted its ex-soviet arsenal, looking at how NATO now provides its main weapon systems. It is said to have only 4 tank brigades left.
So in a few months, Ukraine will have a NATO army manned by Ukrainians.
I read that Abrams tanks are too heavy for most european bridges, which is already a problem for NATO exercises.
So :
The most probable outcome is a long standing war, like in Korea, none of the sides able or willing to breakthrough.
But is Russia really able to move forward if we don’t send tanks to Kiyv ? It seems they would get stuck.
Russia won’t let Crimea (with Sebastopol) go, just like the UK won’t let Scotland (with Faslane) go.
MedEwok wrote:
Der Spiegel reports that the total number of battle tanks planned for delivery from European nations now stands at 80. Add to that the planned delivery of 30 to 50 Abrams tanks from the US and you get a sizeable force, though still below Ukraines hopes for 300 total.
Some rag reports that Morocco may let them have all their tanks they still have out of Soviet origin. That might put the number up a bit. The question is how to get them there in a reasonable amount of time.
Also having 3 different new tanks to learn how to operate e.t.c. is going to be a challenge. How can you coordinate Abrahams and Leopard tanks to coordinate with possible Russian equipment?
Jujupilote wrote:
Ukraine seem to have totally depleted its ex-soviet arsenal, looking at how NATO now provides its main weapon systems. It is said to have only 4 tank brigades left.
I guess exactly that was part of Russias intention. Deplete them down to a level where they can’t sustain the defence.
Jujupilote wrote:
So in a few months, Ukraine will have a NATO army manned by Ukrainians.
Operating NATO equipment (partially) which still does not make them a NATO army.
Jujupilote wrote:
But is Russia really able to move forward if we don’t send tanks to Kiyv ? It seems they would get stuck.
Russia has spent the recent months regrouping and they still have the advantage in equipment and manpower. I would expect that they may well start a new offensive either for the 1 year day of the invasion or thereabouts.
Jujupilote wrote:
Russia won’t let Crimea (with Sebastopol) go, just like the UK won’t let Scotland (with Faslane) go.
I agree.
Jujupilote wrote:
Russia won’t let Crimea (with Sebastopol) go, just like the UK won’t let Scotland (with Faslane) go.
Crimea is Ukraine and it was invaded by Russia. Scotland is part of UK and nobody invaded it in recent history although you can say England invaded it few hundred years ago but that’s irrelevant in today’s geopolitical situation.
Peter wrote:
The view seems to be that a tank is much more useful than any number of “fighting vehicles”, so they want tanks. Modern ones, stabilised guns, IR vision, etc. In the Gulf wars, against Russian tanks, at night and at a distance, it was 1 shot = 1 tank gone.
That was in the desert though, where groups of tanks engage at very long range and the superior capabilities of western tanks can be exploited to the full. At those long ranges Russian tanks just get picked off – they probably can’t even see the western tanks, let alone target them, and their guns wouldn’t make a dent anyway.
A bit of cursory research suggests that as well as advanced guns and targeting systems, the main difference is armour. The M1 Abrams and Challenger 2 are equipped with various developments of ‘Chobham armour’ – the exact composition of which remains secret – and it is thought that there isn’t much in the way of tank guns or anti-tank weapons that can penetrate them. No Challenger has ever been lost to enemy action (the Mk I model destroyed ~300 Iraqi tanks for no losses in Gulf War 1) – the only loss was a blue-on-blue with another Challenger in Gulf War 2. One Challenger 2 that got stuck and threw a track survived 14 close-range RPG hits and a MILAN hit, the crew were all fine and it was back in service six hours later!
I think if they get any significant number of these two tanks, as well as Leopard 2, the difference will be that they’ll be able to advance on Russian positions (most of) which simply won’t have any weaponry capable of stopping them. I don’t foresee large tank battles because Russian tank commanders won’t come out and play when they realise these tanks are in theatre, and the terrain won’t be suitable for desert-style engagements at distances measured in miles.
Russia won’t let Crimea (with Sebastopol) go, just like the UK won’t let Scotland (with Faslane) go.
There is not even a remote parallel there. Crimea is Ukraine.
There might be a parallel between Scotland and the DDR. If Kohl had not spent ~1 trillion DM on the DDR, the DDR would have become a wasteland and the population (which by definition had German citizenship) would have moved to W Germany where most would end up drawing social security. He said more or less this himself – after he left office. An independent Scotland would similarly not sustain itself economically, with the same result.
Faslane is worth about $20BN (to rebuild in Wales). Inconvenient but yeah just run the printing press for another few days a year 
Unless, whoops, Wales goes independent as well Then you will end up with Wales+Scotland as the biggest council estate in Europe… even bigger than N Ireland
That was in the desert though
Yes; very true. But large bits of Ukraine are also very flat.
US is to send 31 Abrams tanks.
Peter wrote:
But large bits of Ukraine are also very flat.
And somewhat soggier than most deserts, making rapid movement challenging!
Peter wrote:
stabilised guns
The Leopard 2 beer test
