- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/9/23 at 6:53 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
Ukraine definitely seems to have stabilized the situation in Soledar, but there's now news of Russian advances in Pidhorodne (which, like Soledar, is north of Bakhmut).
Russia is making an extremely determined push to cut off Bakhmut from the north. If they can do that, then it will be much harder for Ukraine to hold the city.
It's still baffles me that Russian is throwing this much effort into capturing Bakhmut. Even if they capture Pidhorodne, they will not be able to quick get around Ukraine's flank. If (big if btw) get through Pidhorodne the Ukrainians can just fall back to the west side of the Bakhmutova River. They can then use the river as part of their defensives. The Ukrainians would also have the option of falling back just a few kms and using hilly and wooded area to the west of Bakhmut which is an even better defensive position for Ukraine than Bakhmut itself is.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 7:52 pm to WeeWee
Part of me says it’s smarter to conserve your forces and fight in Bakhmut but it’s not the hill you are going to choose to die on or bring up a lot of reserves but instead fight and fall back to another defensive line. The other part of me just sees WW2 Stalingrad but this time the Russians are the Germans. Bakhmut as a city is s but completely destroyed but this could serve as an absolute slaughterhouse where the Russians have to fight building to building, room to room with Ukrainians posted everywhere throughout the city and the salt mines underneath. You’d kill thousands doing this but Ukraine would also lose a lot.
This post was edited on 1/9/23 at 7:54 pm
Posted on 1/9/23 at 7:54 pm to WeeWee
More scuttlebutt on the potential for NATO-manufactured MBTs for Ukraine in Politico.
quote:
BERLIN/PARIS — Less than a week after Germany finally agreed to supply Ukraine with Marder infantry fighting vehicles, pressure is building on Berlin to step it up and send modern battle tanks.
France and Poland are pushing the EU’s biggest economy to equip Kyiv with its powerful Leopard 2 tank, while Britain is reportedly considering sending about a dozen of its Challenger 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine. If Britain did so, this would make it significantly harder for Berlin to hide behind its current argument that it does not want to act alone in sending heavy weaponry.
quote:
A French official told POLITICO that Paris is turning the screws on Germany in the hope of extracting an agreement from Berlin to send Leopard tanks to Ukraine ahead of a Franco-German summit on January 22, the 60th anniversary of the Élysée partnership treaty between the two nations.
Similar pressure is coming from Poland, which wants to form a broad coalition among Western partners to jointly hand over Leopards to Ukraine. “We encourage other countries to form a broad coalition for the transfer of more modern tanks to Ukraine, such as Leopard tanks,” Deputy Foreign Minister Pawel Jablonski told Polish public radio on Monday.
Germany, Spain, Poland, Greece, Denmark and Finland are among numerous countries already using the approximately 60-ton Leopard 2, which is equipped with a 120-millimeter cannon as well as a state-of-the-art defense system and armor. This would allow allies to jointly organize delivery of both the tanks and required ammunition, and team up on the required maintenance and repair.
“The Ukrainians really want the Leopards because there are lots in stock across Europe,” said the French official, who is familiar with the tank discussions.
However, since the Leopards are being produced by Munich-based defense company Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, their delivery to Ukraine demands a re-export authorization by the country of origin, Germany — meaning that international pressure is now concentrating on Berlin.
“Poland can hand over Leopards only in a coalition of countries,” Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki told reporters on Saturday, adding that talks with other countries on forming such an alliance are ongoing.
“I talked about it with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz a couple of weeks ago in Brussels, and I think we may know more about it in the next few days,” Morawiecki added.
quote:
Ukraine has also asked Paris to send French Leclerc battle tanks to Ukraine, a request that is currently being examined by the French authorities. French officials caution, however, that Leclerc tanks are no longer in production, raising questions over maintenance and the provision of spare parts — problems that the Leopards, due to their wide availability in many nations and their continued production, do not face.
Still, France would be willing to deploy its Leclerc tanks to NATO allies that send some of their own Leopard tanks to Ukraine, in order to fill gaps, an official in Paris said.
One official in Berlin said that a recent notable diplomatic success by Scholz, namely getting China and a broader coalition of other G20 countries to sign a statement urging Russia not to use nuclear weapons, has alleviated concerns in Berlin that the delivery of more Western military equipment to Ukraine could lead to a third world war.
However, the German government spokesperson stressed Monday that one of Berlin’s key goals remained avoiding becoming an active party to the war, and added that there was “no automatism” that would make the delivery of Leopards “the next logical step” following the decision to send Marder tanks.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 7:58 pm to WeeWee
The several hills north west and south of Bakhmut can artillery rounds onto to Russians, even mortars can do it
Posted on 1/9/23 at 8:08 pm to GOP_Tiger
In another Pollitico story:
quote:
The U.S. is considering sending Stryker armored combat vehicles to Ukraine in an upcoming aid package to help Kyiv fend off an expected Russian spring offensive, according to two people familiar with the discussion.
quote:
The Strykers may be part of the next tranche of military aid, according to a Defense Department official, who like others asked for anonymity to discuss internal deliberations ahead of an announcement. The administration could announce the package, with or without Strykers, late next week around the time of the next Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting in Germany.
The people stressed that no final decision has been made, and the administration could decide to send the Strykers in a future package instead.
quote:
“Ukrainians need armored personnel carriers and short of other countries providing it, is what we have in inventory,” the DoD official said. “Not as good as a Bradley for a tank fight, but good to protect infantry and get up close to a fight.”
quote:
Sending powerful armored vehicles such as the Bradley and Strykers could be a precursor to providing tanks. But Western nations remain stuck in much the same place they have been for months — debating who goes big first.
“There’s a strange back and forth with the Europeans where any time anyone asks, the Europeans they say, ‘Well, you know, the U.S. should go first.’ And the administration said, ‘Well, we want the Europeans to go first or we want to do it together.’ And the Ukrainians are just saying, ‘For the love of God, just give us the tanks,’” said a person familiar with those discussions.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 8:16 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
Britain is reportedly considering sending about a dozen of its Challenger 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine.
That’s enough to equip one single tank company. When you figure in the added logistics issues of having a single company fielding a different tank from the rest of the battalion compared to the contribution a single tank company can make on the battlefield, is it even worth it? The answer is, not really.
A single tank company will only have localized impact. It could be used as a “breakthrough” formation perhaps for a battalion. If the Western allies want to make a real impact on the battlefields of Ukraine, it’s going to take far more than a single company of Challenger II, or Abrams or Leo II’s for that matter.
If Germany and the rest of Europe want to actually help Ukraine, it’s going to require equipping multiple tank brigades with modern main battle tanks. And from a logistics standpoint, it would be better to settle on a single type. Considering the availability of the Leopard II, plus the fact spare parts are readily available close at hand, it is the natural choice for the job.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 8:19 pm to GOP_Tiger
I've never posted on this website. I hope the Ukraine war doesn't lose the interest of the OT citizens. I count on you for updates. Thanks
Posted on 1/9/23 at 8:22 pm to WeeWee
ISW Update
quote:
Wagner Group financier Yevgeny Prigozhin continues to use reports of Wagner Group success in Soledar to bolster the Wagner Group’s reputation as an effective fighting force. Wagner Group forces claimed to capture territory within Soledar over the past few days, and many Russian sources have discussed the gains as indicators that Wagner Group forces may soon encircle Bakhmut.[1] Combat footage widely circulated on social media on January 9 shows Wagner Group fighters engaging in fierce small arms combat near the city administration building in central Soledar.[
quote:
Russian President Vladimir Putin submitted a bill setting conditions for further institutionalized corruption in Russia through domestic legislative manipulations. Putin submitted a bill to the Russian State Duma on January 9 denouncing the Council of Europe’s Criminal Law Convention on Corruption and withdrawing Russia from the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO).[6] Putin submitted the bill on the grounds that the Council of Europe terminated Russia’s GRECO membership, thus removing Russia’s ability to vote but requiring them to cooperate on several obligations.[7] Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov claimed that this move does not undermine Russian legislative capacity to fight corruption and emphasized that corruption has not been eradicated anywhere in the world.
quote:
Russian Security Council Deputy Chairperson Dmitry Medvedev likely gauged the willingness of the Russian information space to accept increased censorship of opposition voices in a Telegram message on January 8. Medvedev posted a message on Telegram on January 8 which he framed as a response to discussions in the Russian information space about “traitors who have gone over to the enemy.” Medvedev stated that a serious conversation began “between the bosses” (likely in reference to Russian leadership) on whether to respond with rule of law or with justice.[10] Medvedev noted that “quiet groups of impeccably inconspicuous people” operated in Russia to enforce “special rules of wartime” during World War II with great success, likely alluding to internal censorship.[11] Some Russian milbloggers appeared to understand Medvedev’s implied censorship and agreed, noting that Soviet security and counterintelligence organizations were highly effective at censorship and that “ideological people” are willing to assist these efforts
quote:
Key Takeaways
Wagner Group financier Yevgeny Prigozhin continues to use reports of Wagner Group success in Soledar to bolster the Wagner Group’s reputation as an effective fighting force.
Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to open the door for further institutionalized corruption in Russia through domestic legislative manipulations.
Russian Security Council Deputy Chairperson Dmitry Medvedev likely gauged the willingness of the Russian information space for the censorship of figures deemed as pro-Ukrainian sympathizers, garnering some acceptance from the nationalist milblogger community.
Russian and Ukrainian forces continued offensive operations along the Svatove-Kreminna line.
Ukrainian partisans may be targeting Russian critical ground lines of communication (GLOCs) in rear areas of Luhansk Oblast.
Russian forces conducted ground attacks across the Donetsk Oblast frontline and made gains around Soledar and Bakhmut.
Russian forces continued to reinforce positions on the east (left) bank of Kherson Oblast.
Russian forces continued to construct defensive fortifications and transport military equipment in Zaporizhia Oblast amid continued concerns over a possible Ukrainian counteroffensive in the area.
Russian and Ukrainian sources indicated that a second wave of mobilization may be imminent or ongoing.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 8:26 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
“The Ukrainians really want the Leopards because there are lots in stock across Europe,” said the French official, who is familiar with the tank discussions.
However, since the Leopards are being produced by Munich-based defense company Krauss-Maffei Wegmann, their delivery to Ukraine demands a re-export authorization by the country of origin, Germany — meaning that international pressure is now concentrating on Berlin.
“Poland can hand over Leopards only in a coalition of countries,” Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki told reporters on Saturday, adding that talks with other countries on forming such an alliance are ongoing.
The problem with sending Leopards to Ukraine is that there just are not enough of them available. Any Leopards sent to Ukraine will strengthen Ukraine but weaken NATO unless those tanks are replaced by other NATO MBTs. The Ukrainians would have to be trained on how to use the Leopards and the countries that donated Leopards would have to be trained on how to use their replacement tanks which will likely be M1A2s. Yes the Leopard is a better fit for the Ukrainians but there are only 3600 of them. The USA on the other hand has 3700 Abrams in storage. Availability favors the Abrams even though the Abrams use more fuel and require more maintenance. However, I ultimately do not believe that Ukraine will get any NATO MBTs. I hope that I am wrong but I just don't see it happening. However, I could see the USA providing Abrams to Poland and Bulgaria in exchange for those countries sending their T72s to Ukraine. That would give Ukraine roughly 500 additional MBTs.
This post was edited on 1/9/23 at 9:25 pm
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:00 pm to WeeWee
quote:
Any Leopards sent to Ukraine will strengthen Ukraine but weaken NATO unless those tanks are replaced by other NATO MBTs.
What would the tanks be for in the he short term? Russia is no threat in a land war. As Russia bleeds NATO can easily afford to help them bleed more and not worry about a land attack.
Now if it’s China then you may be correct, but there’s a lot of territory between NATO and China.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:08 pm to WeeWee
Political and logistical questions aside on why Nato tanks aren't being moved, could there be in your and other tank folks opinions performance considerations to not send them?
Would they be held back out of concern that if they do poorly due to weather, drone usage, or similar battle factors that it would embolden Russia or similar bad actors if they prove ineffective?
Not that I think they would - but I doubt Russia thought their tanks would have been performed as poorly as they have prior to Feb 24.
Cheers
Would they be held back out of concern that if they do poorly due to weather, drone usage, or similar battle factors that it would embolden Russia or similar bad actors if they prove ineffective?
Not that I think they would - but I doubt Russia thought their tanks would have been performed as poorly as they have prior to Feb 24.
Cheers
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:12 pm to doubleb
The fact that Oryx has already documented 1615 Russian tank losses so far in this war (with many more likely to come) definitely means that NATO may not need as many MBTs to fight off any potential future Russian aggression.
But Poland is buying loads of Abrams and K2 Panthers. If Leopards are better for Ukraine, a lot of NATO countries, such as Canada, could probably trade their Leopards for Abrams.
But Poland is buying loads of Abrams and K2 Panthers. If Leopards are better for Ukraine, a lot of NATO countries, such as Canada, could probably trade their Leopards for Abrams.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:13 pm to GOP_Tiger
Dumb question but what is oryx and how would it know how many tanks Russia has lost?
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:31 pm to WeeWee
I really don’t think Ukraine cares what tank is sent just as long as they get them. Poland is ready to hand over the 240 Leopards that they have which outfits 2 armored brigades. This is what I think Ukraine prefers is the Leopard just for availability in the area but they certainly wouldn’t turn their noses up at getting more T-72s either. They just need tanks. Poland rightfully wants replacement tanks if they hand over the Leopards they have so you’d most likely have to give them 75-100 M1A2s to start with just to get the deal in motion. There aren’t enough Challenger 2s to really make a difference and I just don’t see Abrams coming to Ukraine. They are just too big and heavy and have a gas turbine engine that you’d have to train them how to maintain it. That’s before the fuel it guzzles as you said. It’s just not practical. The only real options are more T-72s or Leopards. A deal needs to be agreed that Europe provides the MBT’s with the U.S. supplying the APCs and IFVs as well as the support vehicles to go with them. We have enough M2, M113 and Strykers that we could outfit several mechanized brigades. Time is the enemy though. It will be spring before you know it and Russia is going to attack somewhere in force so the Ukrainians need time to receive and train on the new tanks and get them to the battlefield.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:50 pm to doubleb
quote:
What would the tanks be for in the he short term? Russia is no threat in a land war. As Russia bleeds NATO can easily afford to help them bleed more and not worry about a land attack.
As long as Russia has thousands of tanks it can throw in a fight even if they are obsolete tanks and the ability to mobilize millions of men, and a dictator who is out of touch with reality it will remain a threat. It appears like Putin is slipping deeper into insanity as time goes on and the Russian people still support him. If NATO weakens itself by providing Poland’s Leopards to Ukraine it might make Putin even more reckless. Putin might just decide to risk a conventional attack on Estonia to divert western attention away from Ukraine. Yes that would trigger Article 5, but triggering article 5 is not an instant process. It took almost a month for NATO to confirm that the 9/11 attacks qualified after the USA invoked it. Not to mention that it would take weeks to get NATO forces in position to repeal Russian forces. Putin might be crazy enough to attack Estonia then threaten to use nukes but not actually use them, and then offer to withdraw his troops from Estonia if Russia would get to keep eastern Ukraine. I am not saying it’s going to happen, but I could see it happening as Putin becomes more isolated and insane.
I also agree with Darth’s point that providing 10-50 NATO MBTs will have little effect on the fighting. Ukraine needs hundreds of tanks and they already operate the T72 so we should clean out as many T72s in NATO arsenals and replace them with M1s, Challengers, LeClercs, and Leopards first. If the west did that then Ukraine could have approximately 2000 MBTs by the end of the spring Rasputitsia. Ukraine would be able to concentrating on stopping any new Russian offensive and be preparing to launch their own summer offensive since it appears that the weather is not going to cooperate and allow any major winter offensive.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 9:59 pm to GOP_Tiger
quote:
The Strykers may be part of the next tranche of military aid, according to a Defense Department official,
Oh boy
Posted on 1/9/23 at 10:05 pm to ghost2most
quote:
Dumb question but what is oryx and how would it know how many tanks Russia has lost?
My apologies. Oryx is the leading open-source intelligence collector who is counting both sides' equipment losses. Here's the database of Russian losses and here's the corresponding list of Ukrainian losses.
Both Russia and Ukraine have exaggerated the number of enemy vehicles and planes that they have destroyed, so how can anyone know what is truth and what is fiction? In today's world, both sides are eager to post photos and videos online of enemy equipment that they have captured or destroyed.
Oryx's list has the links to the photo and/or video documentation for every single lost piece of equipment. He and the open-source intelligence (OSint) community need to be very careful to check any new claimed loss to make sure that it isn't one that's already been documented. Oryx himself used to do the daily counting and updating of the list, but he's now left it to Jakob Janovsky, so you can follow him on Twitter if you want the daily updates.
Of course, both sides have lost much more equipment than shows up on Oryx's list, because neither side is going to brag about their own losses and video them, so (for example) a HIMARS strike deep at night, deep behind Russian lines, that results in a severely damaged Russian tank? That might not get documented, because Russia might haul that tank away to a repair yard and use it for spare parts to fix other vehicles.
So, Oryx's lists provide us with a minimum of what has actually been lost by both sides.
Posted on 1/9/23 at 10:22 pm to GOP_Tiger
That’s kind of wild re Oryx. I mean how do they scour the thousands of videos to determine what’s real, not duplicates, etc?
Kind of mind boggling
Kind of mind boggling
Posted on 1/9/23 at 10:24 pm to WeeWee
quote:
we should clean out as many T72s in NATO arsenals and replace them with M1s, Challengers, LeClercs, and Leopards first
This is what's already happening. Poland is sending its T-72s to Ukraine on a rolling basis, as it updates them. It's able to do this because of the Abrams and K2 Panther tanks that it's acquiring now.
The US and the Netherlands jointly paid for 90 Czech T-72s to get upgraded with new electronics and optics, and those deliveries are just starting. Czechia is giving those tanks because Germany is giving it Leopards to replace them.
The real problem is that the Leopard 2 is the only (non-Russian) European tank in current production, and I think that the Germans were only making a couple of them a month before the war, and I don't know how much production has increased. That's why Poland's military partnership with South Korea is so important -- it's eventually going to mean a K2 Panther factory in Poland.
Page 2293 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News