Sometimes I take a step back and just can't believe that in the year 2022, there is a full scale invasion happening of a European country. Enemy tanks on the outskirts of peaceful cities, hostile forces attacking civilians, etc.
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
Were they honestly firing a tank into what appears like a suburb?
Is that a war crime I just witnessed? Bunch of cowardly dogs.
That's Russia's MO, shell everything to rubble and roll in with their armor to capture the moonscape. They get rocked every time they try to advance into an area they haven't obliterated.
The Following User Says Thank You to burn_this_city For This Useful Post:
^ Although there have been rumblings that the US might not have a massive surplus of arms to keep supplying Ukraine like they have been if they want to maintain their own supplies:
Quote:
Pentagon officials say that Kyiv is blowing through a week’s worth of deliveries of antitank munitions every day. It is also running short of usable aircraft as Russian airstrikes and combat losses take their toll. Ammunition has become scarce in Mariupol and other areas.
This is presenting Western countries with a stark choice between pouring more supplies into Ukraine or husbanding finite capabilities they may need for their own defense.
Germany has declined to transfer tanks to Ukraine on grounds that it simply cannot spare them. Canada quickly ran short on rocket launchers and other equipment that the Ukrainians desperately need. The U.S. has provided one-third of its overall stockpile of Javelin anti-tank missiles. It cannot easily deliver more without leaving its own armories badly depleted — and it may take months or years to significantly ramp up production.
I mean Ukraine is now the hottest hotspot in the world, and represents a conflict between East and West.
If Western countries are going to hang onto their stockpiles while Ukraine burns, then what are we even doing? Ship everything to Ukraine. Russia isn't a threat to other Western nations if they are on the receiving end of a #### kicking in Ukraine.
Use that time to replenish stocks while Russia is preoccupied with Ukraine.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
I think the $40T Nato economies should be able to out produce the $1.5T Russian economy in the long haul. If we're running low on stockpiles relatively speaking, Russia must be in worse shape.
^ Although there have been rumblings that the US might not have a massive surplus of arms to keep supplying Ukraine like they have been if they want to maintain their own supplies:
It's still largely a matter of will for the west, since Russia has all the same problems, just way worse. After all, if they empty their stockpiles and throw all their troops into Ukraine, they take the risk that all around the federation separatists take advantage of that situation.
The only real advantage Putins regime has is their ruthlessness towards the economic situation and general well-being of Russian citizens, but that doesn't really counterbalance the massive disparity in economic resources.
As long as the west is willing, they can trivially outspend Russia on the long term without really breaking a sweat, and when you have money to throw at a problem, bottlenecks tend to get solved much quicker.
Of course that doesn't mean that there won't be shortages of equipment in Ukraine. In fact if the war doesn't resolve itself in the next month or so, it might be forced into a waiting period while both sides gather their resources for the next round.
I think the $40T Nato economies should be able to out produce the $1.5T Russian economy in the long haul. If we're running low on stockpiles relatively speaking, Russia must be in worse shape.
Long term, absolutely. But the US is currently only producing about 1,000 Javelin missiles a year, and even if they increase production, that will take time which means they're likely looking at several years to replenish their stock given that they've sent about 7,000 to Ukraine already.
Long term, absolutely. But the US is currently only producing about 1,000 Javelin missiles a year, and even if they increase production, that will take time which means they're likely looking at several years to replenish their stock given that they've sent about 7,000 to Ukraine already.
I'm guessing their ridiculous Air Force could fill the anti tank gap until they up those production numbers.
Yeah not sure anyone is invading the US Mainland with tanks any time soon.
No, but the US likely wants to retain the ability to supply other countries with them (say China takes advantage of the situation). Or if the **** really hits the fan and Russia invades a NATO country, they would be a useful weapon.
I'm not even sure how Ukraine can have a shortage of anti tank missiles. Javelins are supposed to have a 90+% hit rate and they already have about as many Javelins as Russia has armored vehicles that are deployed, never mind their other anti-tank weapons like their own Stugna and weapons from other countries.
what the Ukraine needs is mostly Russian gear, what we should be doing is going to every pissant thrid world country that has been buying cheap gear from the Russians and buying their kit with a promise to replace it with better western gear
This conflict has shown the weakness of MBTs to weapons like the Javelin.
The main US Abrams fleet is probably just as vulnerable to that. I wonder what changes there will be to doctrine and investment.
If Russians were actually practicing combined arms they wouldn't be losing the tanks at the rate they are. Not to mention they picked a time to attack which forced them to stick to only roads and very limited choke points. The way Russians deployed tanks violated even Soviet doctrines and speaks really to the incompetence of Russia's military brass if anything.
Abrams have been updated to the M1A2C have APS systems which were chosen to shoot down these types of ATGMs. Problem for the Russians has been bad doctrine, bad organization, and obsolete hardware.
what the Ukraine needs is mostly Russian gear, what we should be doing is going to every pissant thrid world country that has been buying cheap gear from the Russians and buying their kit with a promise to replace it with better western gear
For the coming Russian attack that will happen in the next two-three weeks that's all they can hope for. You can't deploy Western gear fast enough for it to be effective. Ukrainians would have to spin up/retrain all their tank crews, service personnel, and logistics to support the new systems.
You can't give Ukraine an Abrams and expect them to have a crew to operate it, nor the mechanics to fix the tanks if they break down. Fuel used is also different, and all the controls are in English instead of Cyrillic. All of that will take months of training at best which isn't time the Ukrainians have.
