Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Pintu

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
4,166
Location
Sweden
Ukraine needs tanks? We have tanks.

https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/sierra-army-depot

Sierra Army Depot
Doyle, California

One of the largest fleets of armored vehicles in the world, sitting out in the California desert.

NEARLY A MILE ABOVE SEA level in an isolated corner of Northern California, more than 26,000 armored vehicles stand ready. They form the most noticeable part of the Sierra Army Depot, a 36,000-acre repository for the U.S. Army’s tanks, trucks, and armored personnel carriers.


[...]

Over the decades, the stockpile of weaponry at the Sierra Depot grew as the Army started using the arid base to store an expanding fleet of surplus vehicles. Today that includes some 2,000 M1 Abrams main battle tanks that are parked in neat rows, along with vast lots of armored personnel carriers, trailers, trucks, and other miscellanea.
Finally speaking in numbers that can actually make a huge difference.
 

Simbo

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
5,223
Looking like the abrams decision is part of the longer term solution to modernisation of Ukranian forces, which needs to be done. Leopards will be the short term, assuming they will be getting more than what's been initially announced...

 

11101

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
21,297
Looking like the abrams decision is part of the longer term solution to modernisation of Ukranian forces, which needs to be done. Leopards will be the short term, assuming they will be getting more than what's been initially announced...

So aside from backing Germany, the US gets to look like they're being tough on Russia without supplying anything that will be used to fight Russians. Sending Abrams would have been an escalation.
 

Simbo

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
5,223
So aside from backing Germany, the US gets to look like they're being tough on Russia without supplying anything that will be used to fight Russians. Sending Abrams would have been an escalation.
Well, they have sent other things... 59 Bradleys is the most recent escalation.
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,157
Location
Hollywood CA
So aside from backing Germany, the US gets to look like they're being tough on Russia without supplying anything that will be used to fight Russians. Sending Abrams would have been an escalation.
The US doesn't need that to look tough. Its already contributed more than everyone else combined. Not that the contributions of other countries (especially Poland) aren't impressive given their respective GDPs, but in the end, its the cumulative effect of all nations that are going to make a difference.

 

utdalltheway

Sexy Beast
Joined
Aug 20, 2001
Messages
20,491
Location
SoCal, USA
The US realizes it's better for it to fight the Russians on Ukraine soil than on German soil.
Pity the Germans are so slow on the uptake.
 

The United

Full Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2015
Messages
5,794
About 100 of them within a few months would be great. It will give UA a big break from the current situation and also give them opportunity to start their own initiatives.
 

Carolina Red

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
36,379
Location
South Carolina
That’s a potential 182 tanks - absolute game changer
Nice. That would equate to a little over 2 American armored brigades worth of Western MBTs, putting them almost on par with the British Army as far as modern armor is concerned.


*side note: really interested to see if the Challenger 2 tank maintains its streak of having never been lost to enemy fire
 

massi83

Full Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
2,596
It's very much in their interest to help Ukraine. As Sanna Marin said, Russia simply cannot win this war.
We can send 50 once Erdogan and Orban stop being bitches.

Sanna Marin talks well, acts a lot less.

I would send 10. I just don't think that's what's going to happen. Nothing in the conversation here implies that the number will be 10.
 

Rajma

Full Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
8,579
Location
Lithuania
I must say the Dutch gov. have impressed me, real leadership right there when you need it the most.
 

RedSky

Shepherd’s Delight
Scout
Joined
Jul 27, 2006
Messages
74,240
Location
Hereford FC (Soccermanager)
Finland also share a 1340km long border with Russia and are still not a member of NATO.
There is no chance in hell that Russia would open a 2nd Front and Finland are well equipped to cope if that did happen. They've got a small military but a very large well trained reserve army to rely on. They are a nation that learnt from the previous time Russia invaded them and have been preparing for that eventuality since.
 

Rajma

Full Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
8,579
Location
Lithuania
Russia recalls 30 of their T-34 tanks from Laos and hypes them up on TV:
Well if you needed any more evidence that they’re beginning to run out of the working scrap metal, look no further.
 

Morty_

Full Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2013
Messages
2,922
Supports
Real Madrid
There is no chance in hell that Russia would open a 2nd Front and Finland are well equipped to cope if that did happen. They've got a small military but a very large well trained reserve army to rely on. They are a nation that learnt from the previous time Russia invaded them and have been preparing for that eventuality since.
Thats how sane people think, but Putin isn't sane, and Russia isn't a sane nation, so who knows.
It would be an absolute disaster for Russia to try, of course.
 

RedDevilQuebecois

Full Member
Joined
May 27, 2021
Messages
8,061
Russia recalls 30 of their T-34 tanks from Laos and hypes them up on TV:
Well if you needed any more evidence that they’re beginning to run out of the working scrap metal, look no further.
So crazy to see those pieces of museum taken towards a war in 2023. That is before reminding people that the battle-hardened T-34/85s were already outperformed in battle by the ever-so maligned Shermans and battle-untested Pershings during the Korean War.
 

the hea

Full Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
6,327
Location
North of the wall
There is no chance in hell that Russia would open a 2nd Front and Finland are well equipped to cope if that did happen.
12 months ago a lot of people where saying the same about a Russian full scale invasion of Ukraine.

They are a nation that learnt from the previous time Russia invaded them and have been preparing for that eventuality since.
This is the main reason why our goverment is so reluctant to give to many away, history has taught us that we need to be prepared. They know that the tanks might be needed, especially since the open door policy of NATO seems to be not so fully open.

I personally think it should be possible to give more than a few, which is what has been suggested here. We have in total 100 2A6s and somewhere between 80-90 of the older 2A4s. The 2A6 version is probably seen as to important to give any away but when it comes to the 2A4s they will most likely need to be replaced within the next 10-15 years anyway so if a contract for replacements could be secured with deliveries within the next 2-3 years I think a large part of the 2A4s should be available.
The problem is that it won't be easy to buy new tanks in the coming years. Production capacity is almost non existent for most manufaturers and the demand will go through the roof when all the tanks going to Ukraine will need to be replaced.
 

maniak

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Messages
9,940
Location
Lisboa
Supports
Arsenal
Portuguese defense ministry said a couple of hours ago there's no decision regarding sending tanks to ukraine.
 

nimic

something nice
Scout
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
31,378
Location
And I'm all out of bubblegum.
12 months ago a lot of people where saying the same about a Russian full scale invasion of Ukraine.
True, but that doesn't make it a valid counter-argument in any situation. Finland is in the EU, and is currently in the process of joining NATO. It also has a very solid defensive military. There is also no conceivable pro-Russian part of the population, like the one Russia imagined would prop up a potential Ukrainian puppet state (though it seems Russia greatly over-estimated the depths of their pro-Russia sentiments). All of those things would make it unthinkable for Russia to contemplate invading, and that's before we take into account that they're already slogging it out in Ukraine.
 

sport2793

Full Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2012
Messages
3,170
Location
USA
73 Easting was fought in between a driving rain storm, heavy fog, and a sand storm. Air power wasn’t a factor.
It was in the middle of a flat desert though, kind of hard to hide infantrymen with anti-tank missiles in that environment. With that said as long as Ukraine can deploy recon drones with infantry supporting the tanks, they can get by without traditional air superiority. I do think though that having air superiority leads to a lot of the lopsided open-field victories that the US can rack up.
 

frostbite

Full Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2021
Messages
3,215
True, but that doesn't make it a valid counter-argument in any situation. Finland is in the EU, and is currently in the process of joining NATO. It also has a very solid defensive military. There is also no conceivable pro-Russian part of the population, like the one Russia imagined would prop up a potential Ukrainian puppet state (though it seems Russia greatly over-estimated the depths of their pro-Russia sentiments). All of those things would make it unthinkable for Russia to contemplate invading, and that's before we take into account that they're already slogging it out in Ukraine.
Yes, after the losses they have incurred in the past 12 months, they are not in the position to invade anyone else in the next 5+ years.
 

Pintu

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
4,166
Location
Sweden
12 months ago a lot of people where saying the same about a Russian full scale invasion of Ukraine.

This is the main reason why our goverment is so reluctant to give to many away, history has taught us that we need to be prepared. They know that the tanks might be needed, especially since the open door policy of NATO seems to be not so fully open.


I personally think it should be possible to give more than a few, which is what has been suggested here. We have in total 100 2A6s and somewhere between 80-90 of the older 2A4s. The 2A6 version is probably seen as to important to give any away but when it comes to the 2A4s they will most likely need to be replaced within the next 10-15 years anyway so if a contract for replacements could be secured with deliveries within the next 2-3 years I think a large part of the 2A4s should be available.
The problem is that it won't be easy to buy new tanks in the coming years. Production capacity is almost non existent for most manufaturers and the demand will go through the roof when all the tanks going to Ukraine will need to be replaced.
I genuinely believe we should both be giving as much as we can, the line of defense is over there...

The not yet in NATO argument isn't that relevant... Finland is not Ukraine; you're in the EU, which includes a military alliance of all countries except Malta and Denmark. Above the EU, we have specific defense guarantees from the US and the UK during the accession process. That's basically every NATO country that really matters... Russia is not invading Sweden or Finland after Biden's promised to defend them...

The open door policy clearly applies to us, this is going to be the quickest procedure ever... And it makes sense. It was big EU countries (Netherlands, and mainly France & Germany...) that blocked Ukraine. Sweden and Finland joining is good news for these countries, as they have to defend us anyway. With us in NATO, they can share this burden with the US.

Hungary had been stalling this to use it in some negotiations within the EU council, but it has now been cleared and they will likely ratify it within the next month or two. Erdogan is a d***, but it is likely related to internal politics. He has a big election coming up this spring and wants to present himself as a strong figure on the geopolitical scene. He needs this to win re-election for presidency, and it is still unlikely that his coalition can maintain their parliamentary majority.
 

the hea

Full Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
6,327
Location
North of the wall
True, but that doesn't make it a valid counter-argument in any situation. Finland is in the EU, and is currently in the process of joining NATO. It also has a very solid defensive military. There is also no conceivable pro-Russian part of the population, like the one Russia imagined would prop up a potential Ukrainian puppet state (though it seems Russia greatly over-estimated the depths of their pro-Russia sentiments). All of those things would make it unthinkable for Russia to contemplate invading, and that's before we take into account that they're already slogging it out in Ukraine.
I agree that the chance of Russian aggression is currently very low, the Finnish intelligence service said a couple of weeks ago that they estimate that under 25% of the Russian military personel and equipment stationed near the Finnish border 1 year ago are now left. But if we start giving up to much of our defense capabilties there is a chance someone in Russia might start getting some ideas, the more desperate they become the more unpredictable they will behave.
We are also one of the smallest countries in the EU, 5.5 million people or a little over 1% of the total population so even if we only give 4-6 tanks we would still have given way more then the EU average. There are other countries who are in a much better position to give tanks now, Greece and Spain for example have over 300 Leopards each and are in a much better place geographically speaking.

But as I stated further up my own opinion is that we should give more then a few, we should at least match the Germans and give a company worth of tanks now and if we could secure replacements within a reasonable time frame all of our 2A4s should be made available.
 

Carolina Red

Moderator
Staff
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
36,379
Location
South Carolina
It was in the middle of a flat desert though, kind of hard to hide infantrymen with anti-tank missiles in that environment. With that said as long as Ukraine can deploy recon drones with infantry supporting the tanks, they can get by without traditional air superiority. I do think though that having air superiority leads to a lot of the lopsided open-field victories that the US can rack up.
In the massive Battle of Norfolk, just 2000m east of 73 Easting, the lines actually intermingled due to the weather and confusion. That said, yes, it’ll definitely be much easier to get into a close combat situation in Ukraine.

Agreed, I’m just saying 73 Easting wasn’t because of it.
 

Simbo

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
5,223
I agree that the chance of Russian aggression is currently very low, the Finnish intelligence service said a couple of weeks ago that they estimate that under 25% of the Russian military personel and equipment stationed near the Finnish border 1 year ago are now left. But if we start giving up to much of our defense capabilties there is a chance someone in Russia might start getting some ideas, the more desperate they become the more unpredictable they will behave.
We are also one of the smallest countries in the EU, 5.5 million people or a little over 1% of the total population so even if we only give 4-6 tanks we would still have given way more then the EU average. There are other countries who are in a much better position to give tanks now, Greece and Spain for example have over 300 Leopards each and are in a much better place geographically speaking.

But as I stated further up my own opinion is that we should give more then a few, we should at least match the Germans and give a company worth of tanks now and if we could secure replacements within a reasonable time frame all of our 2A4s should be made available.
Am I right in thinking Finland has something pretty much written into law/constitution to maintain a certain level of readiness against the threat of Russia?