Comments by "" (@tomk3732) on "Military History Visualized" channel.

  1. I say option a) Russia would not risk Kherson to be overrun. Ukraine just tried yesterday and lost like 800 men. So Russians may be few and far in between there, but they are armed top notch.
    28
  2. What exactly? They got smashed bad in these armored cars, are almost out of tanks and IFV.
    23
  3. Well, Iraqi tank crews were so poorly trained they could not hit huge Abrams tank from point blank range. Their infantry could not hit barn door from 100m with their AK47s. Realistically T-72A has no issues hitting stationary tank target from 2000m with about 80%+ probability on first shot. At least Polish T-72M1 (similar to A). Iraqis had a very hard time penetrating their own tanks with ammo they got - which was from 1960s. Essentially Iraqi T-72 could not penetrate cheeks of other T-72 from above 1500m. And we are talking here original T-72s.
    18
  4.  @ClassicCase  No, its not even close to T-72. Its main opponent was T-55 / T-62 series of tanks. It can compete with original T-72s or maybe up to A standard. After that its T-72 as overall way better tank in every role and configuration.
    17
  5. What about Ukrainian soldier bombing civilians in Donbass? Who made him do this?
    12
  6. There are no other tanks to "free up" Ukraine is running out of any and every tank. They have none "left" anywhere.
    12
  7.  @ArchOfficial  Wow, UA boots just exceeded total number of tanks Russia had as losses ;) Less than 100 vehicles of different types were loss both on the north and south flank of a successful Russian offensive to encircle the city (or what is left of it) of Avdiivka. Ukraine loosing 4 out of about 40 tanks they have is significant as it is a 10% loss of remaining fleet. They are also loosing other vehicles which they have no replacements for.
    9
  8.  @michael-gb3rn  Sure, the source said 200 killed so I added 600 for wounded.
    9
  9.  @kuanliu4253  Are you kidding - there are like 1000s of videos showing even live strikes on schools and markets in Donetsk! Every week about a dozen people get killed or at least hurt from UA attacks against strictly civilian targets.
    9
  10. Maybe if it was 200 years old, or at very least 100. But not 20. Heck, I would not hesitate to fire ammo from WWI in my 30 06. Same with my Mosin.
    8
  11. Leo 1 main weakness is luck of any armor making it unsuitable for any modern war. Up armored with say K-5 Panther would be significantly better tank vs. Leopard 1 today. This assumes same avionics. Later version of Leo 1 tried to at least partially fix armor issue by adding more of it, but it was still not a lot and slowed the tank down. Leo 1 is a total glass canon.
    7
  12. Sure, but its super thin armor makes it an example of a glass canon. It can engage stuff for sure and is better then nothing but not much better. I.e. its no match even for T-64BV. Also 105 not as good as 125 in fire support. Its basically a light tank.
    7
  13. Nah, this is just pro UA BS. T-62 is not that bad for back of the front duty for allied troops that are just training on tanks. They used anti ship missiles for like 2 months now. More BS. I heard about Russia running out of missiles 2 months ago.
    6
  14. No, Sherman or T-34.
    6
  15. There is always same number of troops - i.e. if you tank has crew of 10 it means that 7 are taken out of maintenance. I.e. a unit with say 52 tanks will have with maintenance same number of people regardless how many are in a tank. Hence Russian T-72 units have same number of troops as US Abrams tank units. Even if T-14 had (it does not) two man crew, it would mean just larger maintenance unit. There is no cheating.
    6
  16. What partisans? There are none to be seen. The main opponent is Ukrainian national guard that has no tanks and few javelins in light infantry role. Solution to defend against these guys for out numbered DPR forces was to simply add tank company to each BTG. How would UA light infantry attack enemy infantry supported by artillery and tanks????
    6
  17.  @EK-gr9gd  LOL, no ;) Germany did tests and its a NO.
    5
  18. This whole thing is a "pretend" to give tanks - not to really give tanks that will make a difference.
    5
  19. Yes, tank on tank are RARE, but infantry on tank is NOT RARE. This tank would get creamed by infantry & artillery. One reason why Poland did not upgrade its original T-72M tanks was weak armor. Only T-72M1s were upgraded. Russia upgraded their T-72Bs but difference from Ural (T-72M) to T-72B is like from here to the moon in armor. T-72B armor is similar to what Leopard 2 A4 has. T-72M is what T-55 has.
    5
  20. Well, one has to point out that NATO equipment would not have survived local treatment. I.e. its common in Africa to use a rifle as walking stick, sitting stick ,portable hammer etc. (all seen by me) I assume tanks and other equipment gets similar treatment - seen trucks that cannot go up hill as their engines are so worn they do not produce even fraction of HP of new.
    5
  21. To bad they will go against 40 Mista M2s that will fire 200+ shells back at them. In single salvo.
    5
  22. Still BMP-2 is far better machine for intended role of IFV just b/c it is actually armed correctly - not to mention BMP-3.
    5
  23.  Not my Burner  well, they are not holding the line anymore, are they??? Russians are breaking through. Ukraine is asking countries to provide lists of refugees that skipped military service. People over 50 are called. This only happens when you have no troops... Why would you call people over 50???
    5
  24. Yeah but they would need 100s of F-16s to get such local air superiority. Russia has dense air defenses and would quickly deploy more assets in area you are trying to breach. In addition Russia has rather lots of cruise missiles and ballistic missiles which would now have F-16s as targets on few air bases that can host them.
    4
  25. Yep like 24h ago Leopard tank was destroyed by massive fireball - probably stacked mines. Tank more or less was disintegrated. Ukraine lost 4 Leopards in just last 48h.
    4
  26. Russian thermals on their T-90M and T-14 are superior to thermals on latest M1. Not by a wide margin but better. They are 3rd gen. M1 has very good 2nd gen. On vanilla T-72BM3 you have a bit worse thermals then on M1. I would guess most Russian tanks have better thermals then Leo 1 which I feel probably has first gen.
    4
  27.  @evtinker1814  Maybe, it was not accepted for service yet & its expensive. Russia decided to upgrade 100+ T-72s per year instead and get some T-90Ms. I doubt too much things of interest are in Russian tanks. I just seen Russians paint a Z and drive Ukrainian tanks as their own. I doubt they inspect them too much. Heck, Russians already lost at least two dozen captured tanks.
    4
  28.  @hochmeisterr  T-14 was not accepted for service. T-90M is too expensive and only like 100 are in service. Besides why waste expensive T-90M when cheap T-72BM3 or even T-72B is just as good?
    4
  29. One has to remember that Leo 1 was removed from service due to existence of T-72. So yes, as tanks go Leo 1 is trash.
    4
  30. Total cope, LOL! Soon we see "Why T-34/85 is great!"
    4
  31.  @777-l3j4m  Do you know, how hard it is to hit a tank with RPG7???
    4
  32.  Not my Burner  we know Russian losses, Brits count the Graves. Also Ukraine suffers huge losses as they have huge disadvantage in artillery.
    4
  33. Not really - they have shown that in Ukraine they sure can fight and their economics of war are very, very good.
    4
  34. Kursk is a symbol of defeat. Its like a time check. As for many others there is clearly some truth in all myths, like Soviets executing so many of their own, human wave attacks did occur early in the war. Soviets did not care too much about people. Soviets were indeed preparing for an attack BUT such attack was not to come very soon. I.e. Soviets were not ready to attack in 1941. Soviets were counting on German involvement in UK and rather soft walk over. From political spectrum it was clear to Soviets that they will have to fight Germans sooner or later. General winter or more likely general autumn certainly helped defenders. Winter of 1941 was very hard. Soviet moved in extra troops from the east. These troops had winter clothing. So winter alone did not stop the Germans, Soviets did, but winter certainly helped properly dressed Soviets with properly greased guns. Note that today all Russian equipment is tested for very cold weather combat - things work quite differently in mild -15C then in a bit colder -45. Also note that through Germans did know climate of Russia they did not adequately prepare for it - they did not expect the war to last that long (common explanation). The main danger of land-lease was peace Soviets and Germans may have agreed on. Stalin did consider giving up some of the western Soviet lands.
    3
  35. LOL!
    3
  36.  @JohnBrowningsGhost  What? LOL. Leo 1 was put out to pasture b/c of T-72. More precisely Germany after unification tested L7 vs. T-72 armor on T-72M1 and found it ... lucking. And that is like very basic T-72.
    3
  37. Wait few months! It will be like 1945 in Germany!
    3
  38. Umm, no. 105mm gun is not as good as 115mm gun on T-62. Its a step up - first gun with a smooth bore! This allowed for 1) bigger projectile 2) higher muzzle speed So if you had same tech available to you, the 115mm smoothbore always wins vs. 105mm rifled gun. Physics is simply in the way.
    3
  39. ​ @Vatnik_tschistilka  From the front it is not that effective. Heck there is armor simulation of 2000m tank shot vs. BMP-1 and it barely makes it through. Front of BMP-1 has good armor as for time period - front is protected vs. machine gun fire and from 20mm auto-canon fire other than very close range. As for BMP-2 the front is 15mm at 57 degrees. Turret is 30mm at 32 degrees. " However, if the angle is steep enough, the 20 mm bullets will just bounce and won't even scratch the enemy target, such as the BMP-2's front armor." Realistically this is not why Marder sucks with its 20 mm - it sucks b/c 20 mm just has slightly more power than a HMG - it has like less than 1/2 the power of 30 mm - and even 30 mm is now seen as "low" and countries are moving towards 50 mm ++ category of auto canons.
    3
  40. Why, US sent aid to countries that was old. Why Russia cannot send its old stuff as aid? Why is it when Russia does it, its desperation, when US does it, its "good".
    3
  41. LOL, no, are you kidding me? I would say latest M-60 maybe was even with T-62. I still would think with equal crew T-62 was more lethal. It had way better gun. Way.
    3
  42.  @kpadalldotablet1009  Why b/c I can think straight and do not repeat idiot propaganda?
    3
  43.  @Vatnik_tschistilka  It was not difficult to out number Russians 8 to 1 - they needed a whole two brigades in the area they were attacking. Who had non existent mechanized force? Ukraine still has plenty of armored cars and given how common cars are every army in the world is quite mechanized. There is no need to supply units on such dash - its not like they run out of fuel or ammo. I know Russia had two brigades in the area - so I assume Ukraine had more than six in the area, with two attacking around two battalions. I.e. two brigades for the whole Kharkiv front - east to west. One was national guard the other was DPR militia. Each battalion had a cover of around 20km. Its not like most of this stuff is not well known. Each brigade, with trucks has around 500 vehicles at full strength - this is also known. I do not understand what is so strange or mysterious here. Russian command had less than 200k troops for well over 1000km front line - they could not man such huge front with so few troops. Hence the mobilization.
    3
  44. But its not happening at all like you say.
    3
  45. Germany paused on western front and still could not defeat the Soviets - by the time allies got involved Germany clearly lost the war - i.e. by 1943 Soviet had turned the tide decisively. Main problem for Germany was that Soviet industry was huge - it could out produce Germany & Soviet man power was also huge. Allied non intervention would have weakened Soviet Union but Germany would still loose.
    3
  46. Most sane pp like me already concluded the same. Nothing special or new. The T-62M can be used as part of new Kherson People Republic BTGs. Russia has tendency to give old junk to its allies. Similar to US.
    3
  47. Yes, Ukraine also understands strength - Putin is talking their language. They are having impolite conversation.
    3
  48. Nah, maybe if it was 1000 tanks but we are talking about what, 100? maybe 150? At the current rate tiny Russian force is kicking Ukrainians in the rear end I doubt anything less then 1000 would make a difference. Heck, even 1000 would be temporary only.
    3
  49. Another 4 guns. Great. I am sure it will make huge difference. Note that Ukraine had more towed and self propelled guns at the beginning of war then all of EU NATO combined. Russia has more artillery systems then not just all of NATO + Ukraine but almost as much as rest of the planet combined.
    3
  50. Usually NATO tanks do not get ERA upgrades, at least not on the front. Adding ERA to Leo 2 A4 would upgrade it to roughly T-72 B mod 1989 - i.e. still quite inferior to T-72BM3.
    2
  51. For intended role its a bit inferior vehicle to BMP-2 and much inferior to BMP-3. Intended role here is troop transport and support. Reason why its inferior to BMP-2 and especially BMP-3 is that it simply has not much to support troops with. The 20mm non stabilized auto cannot is tiny. Both BMP-2 and BMP-3 have a 30mm auto cannot that packs way, way more punch. In addition to auto cannon BMP-3 has 100mm gun. Upgrades to this family or new Russian BMP include even bigger 57mm auto-canon while Americans are moving to 50mm auto cannon. How can one support troops with a mini cannon this vehicle has when 30mm is seen today as too small? Sure better than nothing but not a great vehicle today - great for its time, but not today.
    2
  52. other than 3 you wrote is true. 1) yeah, like the T-34 that Germans wanted to copy but settled on the panther which performed soo poorly initially 2) Both Soviets and US employed "inferior" tanks - so inferior they were superior - i.e. T-34 and Sherman were best tanks of the war as they could be made in large numbers and were reliable - so what they could not take on Tiger easily. 3) yes 4) you got populations wrong - Germany - united - was well over 100m. German production was not split at all - allies in the west were not really involved in 1941, nor 1942 nor 1943. Soviet production was simply dwarfing German production as Soviet industry was very advanced - i.e. they had high tech for the time. Something Germany did not expect - they were not fighting a cave man - they were fighting a technological equal.
    2
  53.  @albertgijsbers6325  And this is why they are by far the best selling tanks in the world!
    2
  54. Frontally would resist even from point blank range. Side turret would resist even from point blank range. Turret rear would resist from say 500m or more. May penetrate point blank range. Hull side 30mm would penetrate from point blank range, maybe at 500m Overall, very well protected from APCs and IFVs with auto cannot around 30mm.
    2
  55.  @rogerpennel1798  There was zero need. They used MiG-29s as aggressor testers for a bit and then they given them away to Poland. So more or less they scrapped them as well. None of these T-72s were latest model or anything. They were cheap export models, M and M1. At the end of the cold war Germany had LOTS of their own tanks and no need for more tanks. It is hard to imagine that just before the end of cold war Germany (west) had over 500k troops (!!!) This was supported by over 7000 armored vehicles and well over 1000 combat aircraft. Given drop by almost a factor of 3 in size ... do you think anyone sane would keep even semi decent for the time T-72 M1 ??? LOL, no!
    2
  56.  @Rechnerstrom  Poland did not phase out T-72s. Poland started limited upgrade program for even the oldest T-72s. Out of about 350 of these less then 100 were upgraded. Poland sent some non upgraded T-72s to Ukraine.
    2
  57.  @AgentPepsi1  It was intended as such. But quickly proven itself to be far more capable. This is why today most tanks are T-72s not T-80s and T-72 models are more advanced then T-80s. T-90 is sort of a mix of T-72 and T-80, its a T-72 with welded turret.
    2
  58. Not really - one was destroyed by near miss from artillery - it side armor is as weak as IFV or weaker than some IFV.
    2
  59. It probably would not cross a 1m deep river in Ukraine as terrain is way too soft. If T tanks cannot cross there is no way anything NATO would even attempt.
    2
  60. Nothing can be added to Leo 1 armor to make it defend against modern ATGM - it simply is so paper thin.
    2
  61. There are almost no "free tanks left". So not much can be "Freed up".
    2
  62. Offensives with what - they are low on troops and low on equipment. These will be used to fill in current gaps.
    2
  63. Oh plenty - note 20 or so countries still using it. So need ammo for it. Lots of ammo. Also recently given as aid - so clearly ammo is available.
    2
  64. Pretty much any AT weapons that infantry has today would got through Leo 1 like knife through hot butter.
    2
  65.  @thunderbug8640  Sure, search youtube for "number of Russian tanks" or similar and watch the videos of the guy counting each and every tank. I proven already like 10 times Oryx is garbage, don't feel like proving it 11.
    2
  66. Not really, T-62M is far better tank in defensive role then Leo 1 in offensive role. The ammo from Leo 1 can "maybe" penetrate T-62M while paper thin armor of Leo 1 is in danger of being smoked by an APC with 30mm auto cannon even from around 1000m. Of course Ukraine is out of tanks, they take anything, not that it will mean they will not loose the war.
    2
  67. Actually no - they compared the Leo 1 to T-72 and this is why Leo 1 was made obsolete. They did rather famous tests on the tanks & went with Leo 2 - Leo 1 was moved out of front lines as it could not hold against even export level T-72.
    2
  68. Russia is making 2nd gen thermals at a rather amazing pace. Matching or exceeding western tech should not be a problem at all - see how well Soviets did in that respect. I would not worry at all if I was in charge of Russian armor. They have a very long history of shocking the west - about 100 years now. Russian manufacturing capacity - as per west - dwarfs western ability - so I would be shocked if west was able to go toe to toe with Russia in weapons making. Russia is 2nd largest arms exporter by value after US - so I feel like they do indeed have customers.
    2
  69. Nope. With the best available there is no chance to penetrate front of T-72BM3 / T80BVM. Unless you hit drivers hatch etc.
    2
  70.  @iatsd  If we count "the other spots" than M1 Abrams is weak and can be penetrated by late WWII tanks... When talking about penetration you look at turret cheeks or at the hull - otherwise tank protection discussions become a bit ... meaningless. So yeah, no chance. Also no chance penetrating M1 A2 or above from the front.
    2
  71. Soviet 100mm gun is very old. Much older then NATO L7. I doubt Soviet 115 would fit in there - also not common Soviet ammo - used only for one single type. 125mm is like 98% and is I bet not really suited - it would need to be heavily modded - its for auto loader. Not worth it. Just give the tanks away, some ammo, some fuel and by the time they break down some Russian will blow them up.
    2
  72. Freedom to Donbass from Canada!
    2
  73. Leo 1 is similar to T-55s / T-62s used by Russia. It is a second line tank. It would be a death trap in attack role - specially against determined enemy. In any tank on tank action vs. regular Russian armor it is hopeless. Certainly better than nothing - but not a miracle weapon - just last resort weapon. They will not turn the tide of the war that Russia is now clearly winning.
    2
  74. I say you are correct if both Spain and Germany sent all of their tanks.
    2
  75. These guys just plain cope.
    2
  76. War will not last years unless Ukraine just refuses to surrender at stays in state of war for years. Mission accomplished time for Moscow is approaching fast as UA army is collapsing in Donbass and running out of both men and equipment. They cannot hold on for months like this. They need to replace 1000s of men per day, admitted by Kiev.
    2
  77. LOL, why T-34/ 85 is ideal for Ukraine! What a COPE! Go home Germans - cannot take a hint. Maybe Russians need to visit Berlin again.
    2
  78.  @ENGAM  Well, a lot of Russian strategy is around... let the bastards kill each other. This is, to put it mildly, disliked in Donbass but its not like they have a choice.
    2
  79.  @tomhenry897  These are from DPR and LPR - they had total mobilization - i.e. all men of all ages, probably from 18 to 50.
    2
  80.  @GiantJanus  Where are they taking ground exactly - they just lost two towns today. They control most of Soledar and are encircling Bakhmut defended by at least 60,000 Ukrainians - or around 20 brigades per UA live map deployment.
    2
  81.  @kewlwarez  Yes, but they faced only light infantry as well. And they out numbered the enemy in the area 8 to 1. This is by far no longer the case.
    2
  82.  @orionide4032  Sure that is how you count bodies - you get the ratio of how many kills are from artillery, you get the average shots needed per kill & than you can estimate losses.
    2
  83.  @norbertscheibner8334  Turbines suck period. The issue is that its not really cost effective to get rid of it for the US - yes it was attempted. Yes, US knows about the issue. But each tank has at least 2 engines. Getting rid of at least 10,000 engines is not cheap - and may not exactly be worth the effort. Besides, suitable diesel engines have not been available for long. M1 and T-80 are from the past when diesel engines were not exactly "power".
    2
  84. Just to put this into context, Germans had about 10 times the number of AT guns in September 1939 then Poland. Poles had 37mm Bofors about 1200 units. This was less then 1/2 of needed #s - Poles needed about 3000 AT guns. Units that were at full AT strength proven Polish 37mm gun was very effective, in a single battle a single Polish brigade destroyed or disabled roughly 100 German tanks and armored cars. Polish AT gun had better penetration than PAK 36 - 40mm at 400m at 30 degrees.
    2
  85. Maybe, but I doubt it. I think it is just different way of counting stuff - same as in WWII.
    2
  86. Tanks are so obsolete that Poland is buying every tank it can get. Just to be devils advocate - flying tank (heavy attack helicopter) can do a lot of things a tank can do.... but it can also be killed itself and costs few times more then a tank.
    2
  87. Here is BMP-2 swimming few hundred meters - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxBRb36IVkY Note the river bank is prepared and BMP-2 is certainly much newer.
    2
  88. Mobilization was of small number of people. War effort has decreased unemployment to super low levels (like less than 5%) and trade with Asia proven to be much better than with EU. Sanctions are actually helping Russian economy now. Ukraine is spent - we shall see a slow decline till they either come to their senses or last Ukrainian dies.
    2
  89.  @RCorvinus  Yeah, but they cannot get their wish - all equipment is immediately sent to the front line. You will see videos of these vehicles in action weeks after they are delivered. On the other side Russia is dealing with 1000s of vehicles being sent to the front. Russia right now has capability to out produce whole of NATO in tank production - after moving their economy into war economy direction.
    2
  90. Yeah Oryx makes numbers as they feel like - I just hope they do not go over the actual know number in existence ;)
    2
  91.  @mechano6505  Kharkiv was never annexed. Russia still holds most of Kherson. I would not be surprised that after finishing off of the main UA force they re took the city or demanded it back after end of hostilities.
    2
  92.  @mechano6505  Izium was never claimed, so its was not Russia's own. As for Kherson, why not? Russia can take it back later or it can be negotiated away. Yes, enormous copium by Ukraine whom has no step back policy of idiocy costing it huge casualties. As soon as it was inconvenient Russia simply left the area. Land is only good to hold when it brings you closer to your goal. Imagine Ukraine was so flexible.
    2
  93.  @kreathyr8270  Which is a good thing - Germany does not want to prolong the war that is lost for Ukraine. Its not good for Ukraine and not good for Germany. Germany does not care its also not good for Russia - which is main impetus of US.
    1
  94.  @volodymyr3169  There is no knife ear as no one makes it in larger #s.
    1
  95.  @Mentol_  The main problem with "human wave" is that no one has very good definition of what exactly is it.
    1
  96.  @randyraudi7725  IFV are not really there to fight tanks or other IFV. They are to move infantry and help it in attack or defense. Here bigger gun matters.
    1
  97.  @randyraudi7725  No the gun is there for infantry support - the double feed system is exact proof of that. In fact tanks main role is ALSO infantry support. Tanks usually carry only few AT rounds, almost all rounds are HE. The role of the main gun on IFV is to engage infantry in fortified positions - where MG would be of little help. The auto canon is used to remove wooden/ concrete fortifications or walls in city buildings. BTW, HE is to fight infantry - both for tanks and IFV.
    1
  98. No, I just saw Russian MTLB armored taxi swimming in mud. There is no way any tank or even IFV can pass.
    1
  99. Well, too bad they don't make it for May 9th parade. I can already see some M113 towing 155 howitzers on the red square!
    1
  100.  @Rabarbarzynca  Not really, Mariupol only has AzovStal and Russians moved further out from Izium. Its only matter of time now before Donbass forces are surrounded. And then rather long time before they are all liquidated. See how long it took to take out Nazi in Mariupol. People have strange view of wars thanks to CNN. It took US 6 weeks to take Falujah and it was defended by just 1200 poorly armed and trained fighters. 6 weeks. But no one talks about that now.
    1
  101.  @Rabarbarzynca  Russians in Kiev region were a total mystery. The whole force was maybe 30k, plus maybe 5k for Chechens. Tiny. And they taken area the size of half of Poland. I personally believe either it was an attempt to encircle and scare Ukrainians or as claimed a fixing operation. The force employed was so tiny it is hard to say they wanted to take Kiev. Note that through Russians are very low on using actual numbers they still employed at least 12k plus plus for Mariupol - city that is at least 6 times smaller then Kiev. Yet for Kiev they had - and Sumy and Chernihow such tiny numbers? Putin stated goals for Ukraine, as per Putin are: - demilitarization - de Nazification - no to NATO - neutral status. All other things such as "he wants to take all of Ukraine" etc. Were made up by the west. Its a sport of "what Putin really wants". Personally I think Putin will at least take whole right hand side of Dniepr river. Maybe if Ukraine surprises him and surrenders he will be angry and take only Donbass. But Ukraine is unlikely to surrender so Russians will take much more. I am unsure about Odessa, maybe, but I think not - the river makes for a nice border.
    1
  102. I wonder if there are still any T-55s in storage. They have plenty of T-72s still and losses are now very low. So no issues for Russia.
    1
  103. A lot of this is propaganda and a lot of this is true. Same as from the other side - pro Ukraine, a lot is true but a lot is pure propaganda. Just to give the help (weapons only) to Ukraine - currently at over 60B -- this is about half of Lend - lease help during WWII that Soviets got adjusted to today's $$$. I.e. Ukraine is getting about 2x+ the aid Soviets got against Germany. Combined with other aid it is more like 4x.
    1
  104. I would say neither - it is totally different war. It is not winter or Russo - Japanese war nor patriotic war as Russians are allergic to taking any losses - for the first time in history Russian commanders are fired if they take losses. Also Russians are now clearly winning the war so we cannot use examples where they lost - maybe the continuation war is a good example, when Soviets easily started to roll over the Fins and give such epic losses to Finland that Finland had to surrender or loose entire nation.
    1
  105.  @External2737  Spent? Russia is crushing Ukraine all along the front line and giving them massive casualties. Ukraine lost the war at the very beginning when they refused to negotiate. How can any logical person not see that Russia only deployed 300k reservists - they can deploy as needed another 300k and another 300k etc. Ukraine deployed 100% and their army is now shrinking. Lets all hope for Ukrainian counter offensive - the war will end soon after unless idiots want to fight to the last Ukrainian - in that case, few more years and no more western ruled Ukraine.
    1
  106.  @demonprinces17  Not really. Tanks are expandable piece of hardware to do certain job. Efficiently and cheaply. T-72BM3 is ideal for these operations. It is cheap, packs a punch and easily deals with all threats in Ukraine. After all guys, you do know Russians are pushing Ukrainians back - i.e. attacking with like what, 1:3 disadvantage? Heck when things are 1:1 Ukrainians are toast.
    1
  107.  @V14-x6n  Depending on version T-90A optics could be the same or inferior to T-72BM3. Best thermals these have are "not the best" 2nd gen. The T-90M and T-14 have "not the best" 3rd gen. As far optics goes latest Abrams is superior to all T-72s and T-90A but inferior to both T-90M and T-14. Russia produces T-90M but at a low rate. Reason is, T-72BM3 can do almost everything T-90M can but at half the cost. Cost wise T-72BM3 is about 1/2 of new T-90M and this is at least half of new T-14. Russians being practical picked T-72BM3s as their main route till they run out of these. As far as losses go, they are so high in Ukraine that US, no longer sends just tanks, artillery, anti air, but also aircraft! I.e. their "client" state is getting hammered. I expect at least 1000 Ukrainian tanks have been taken out, 750 permanently, 250 need fixing. Which is almost entire front stock! Ukraine can recondition maybe 800-1000 tanks max - but these will be old. Poland delivered 100 old tanks. Slovakia 5. Less the 100 APCS afaik plus US sent some super old M113 - 200 of them (which are similar to MT-LB which both Ukraine and Russia have 1000s). This is why US is sending 800m of aid every week (!).
    1
  108.  @nvelsen1975  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_combat_vehicle_production_during_World_War_II vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_armoured_fighting_vehicle_production_during_World_War_II "The United Kingdom produced 27,528 tanks and self-propelled guns from July 1939 to May 1945," --- this is dwarfed by Soviet production.
    1
  109.  @abcdedfg8340  Imagine that Ukraine now got more stuff from the west than Soviets got throughout entire WWII. Yes, help was nice and noticeable - it may have prevented Stalin from caving in - or at least from Soviets becoming very weak & prolonging the war till 1946 or 1947. Germany may have realized they need nukes after all and developed them together with US. Japan would not be attacked by Soviets. Etc. etc.
    1
  110. Why maintain - by the time they are about to break down they will be scrap metal. Simple solution to complex problem. Use them same way Russians used German Panther's and Tigers during WWII - ride them till they break down.
    1
  111.  @rogerpennel1798  Yep, as soon as they figured out during early 90s that it is trash vs. tests vs. East German T-72s it was removed form front line service.
    1
  112.  @rogerpennel1798  Of course they would not have kept T-72s even if they were very best - they had 1000s of tanks, tanks that had little use they needed to recycle. Germany army shrink by about 3x. So 1000s of west Germany made, perfectly fine tanks and IFVs were sold off. There was nothing wrong with T-72s - there were simply surplus like 1000s of west German tanks and IFVs that also were perfectly fine vehicles.
    1
  113. Mostly b/c greens are about ideas - this is an idea. They also are easily manipulated by propaganda. But come push to shove I doubt greens would be all over the army to come and fight. It would be AFD that would fight.
    1
  114. You do not understand geo politics. Germany should do everything it can not to send any weapons. US is doing all it can to send all weapons. The war is between Russia and US and Ukraine is a proxy. Germany is not trying to help too much US proxy as it wants to keep US out of Europe. It is also in Germany's best interest to keep Russia in Europe and not go to Asia. US does not care - weak Europe under its boot is a good thing. US does not care for UA losses - as long as 1 Russian dies for 100 UA its ok. For Germany its best if war ends now. Like now. Sending weapons === war will end in the future. Weak Russia is not in German interest. Its in US. Notice how evil Russian oil and gas is being replaced by good US gas that is 50% or 100% more $$$. This weakens EU == Germany. Notice how Russia does not care - why? B/c they sell their gas to China. Why? B/c China will pay more then Germany. Why? B/c alternative is US which is lots of $$$. Winners: US (sold for lots of $$$), Russia (sold for more $$$), China (got for less $$$) Losers: EU (Germany - has to pay like double for gas and other stuff). Big losers: EU (Poland - has to spend 20 Billion USD this year for Ukrainians and no money from EU aka Germany). As you see Germany is in tough spot & war is very, very bad for it.
    1
  115. In short fire bombs are more effective at getting users of such idiotic instruments killed then the indented victim. If you need to use fire bombs, pick easier targets, like trucks.
    1
  116.  @JohnBrowningsGhost  Leopard 1 is from 1956 design. T-72 is from 1971/72 design. See the difference? Guess from when are T-54/55 series and T-62.
    1
  117. Russian support is sky high. Putin has over 80% support now. I doubt you can break Russian morale. Especially after atrocities in Mariupol.
    1
  118. No they do not need to. All tanks fire better when stopped. Stabilization on old T-72s was indeed poor. But Russians do not use these.
    1
  119.  @kerchtrucking  Yes, for new battalions forming there.
    1
  120. It is a bit surprising that such old design as panzer IV did so well against new Sherman.
    1
  121. Depends which versions of M60. Last version I would call them even. (T-62M).
    1
  122. Not really - there are no plans to invest in the army and production - other than say Poland. You do not see for example neither US nor Germany planning to increase tank production.
    1
  123.  @recoil53  Not really - there are no huge orders or huge expansion in the plans. Sure maybe Nordic countries are standardizing rifles but US just changed the caliber from 5.56 to 6.8. Also it will take years before US artillery production has any meaningful increase. Germany can order 10x more - but does not change the fact that production numbers per month are not increasing by much. You cannot increase production without major investment. US did not open old tank factory. I.e. there is nothing indicating major artillery production is coming to the west. Even if by some magic west doubled artillery production in a year - the war is going so bad for Ukraine that in a year - even this year they need to capitulate or the fight will be to the last Ukrainian. Lets say UA wants to implode and will fight to the last one and west doubles production in a year (this doubling is a dream - nothing indicates this - but lets take best case UA scenario) so what? Russia will still have 3 : 1 advantage and Ukraine will be running out of people. Even if the west doubles production again (magic) in a year and matches Russian artillery - who will operate it after 4 years of war on UA side? The only solution for Ukrainian victory is for NATO to join the war & convince Russia it cannot go for the tie (i.e. defend with nukes). This seems less likely than magical artillery production numbers. I fail to see the dream unrealistic world where Ukraine has a chance of defeating Russia - nothing at all indicates such scenario. No sane person looking and hard core data sees this. Especially with idiots in Ukraine defining victory as total defeat of Russia. I think Russia should continue in their current strategy and if Ukraine wants to fight to the last man and woman, sadly, let the idiots do it. If they are so stupid as to throw their nation away, maybe they do not deserve it in the first place.
    1
  124.  @recoil53  Dude, do you know how long it takes to build a factory to make ammo for 155mm guns and how long it takes to expand? Official numbers for Russian production show steady gains from 2014 - these gains per year are less than 100k rounds. Officially in 2022 Russia made over 700k rounds per year. If anyone was serious they would have signed papers yesterday. Look at Russian production increase - this is a multi year process, needs investments etc. There clearly is no will to increase production as no one sane thinks they will need to do so. "In the US, BAE & the Pentagon are figuring out what needs to be done to ramp up production too. " - no they are NOT. They know exactly what to do but it costs $$$ that no one is exactly wanting to spend. So they did nothing. After more than a year of a war they signed no contracts. Why? They know that war will almost certainly be over by the time these things would be online & wasted $$$. Even if Ukraine was still in the fight they will be out of people. So there is no push to ramp up production in few years. If there was, we would see orders. Same with tanks, US has factories already build, need to refurbish and off they go. But no ORDERS were placed. None. "Factories for the anti-tank missiles are also adding new lines." they are adding a little bit more capacity, but nothing drastic. No new factories are build AFAIK.
    1
  125.  @oohhboy-funhouse  Well, up to a point. There a limits to the hitch.
    1
  126. I only have seen DPR forces with these - so its Ukrainians robbing other Ukrainians.
    1
  127. By summer war will be over. Offensive to take out Ukraine main force is starting now / started. By May 9th I expect Ukraine Donbass forces to be surrounded or Putin will call full mobilization. Lend / Lease is a terrible idea and I hope it does not saddle Ukraine for next few hundred years with debt - whatever is left of it.
    1
  128. Well, after Poland sent all of its T-72 tanks it has only Leopards left - so its sending first batch of 10.
    1
  129.  @AlexanderTch  Yes, they will get it all clear from Germany - i.e. there is no way Germany can say no - politically speaking.
    1
  130.  @juslitor  Not really - we actually saw this in action on video. Most tanks actually survive multiple near misses - on video. Not Leo 1 - its weaker then many IFV.
    1
  131. It was an excellent gun, but also had its issues and was not perfect. Also "excellent" does not mean it was worth 10x allied guns in similar category.
    1
  132.  @greg.kasarik  You forgot to include luck of any armor on Leo 1 ;) Panther believe it or not also had night vision! It was called Vampire system. Panther would not be that hard to upgrade to be a better tank for modern times as Leo 1 was a very specific tank. To upgrade a panther all you would need is to install L7 main gun which for the time was not big BTW, add modern ballistic computer all other trimmings (not hard) and say add K-5 reactive armor - now your upgraded tank, if we shall say that the armor is not some 1945 crumbly stuff, and power pack is not of similar 1945 quality is much better then Leo 1. Leo 1 was build when AT weapons ruled. A BMP-1 with its low velocity gun was able to take out any tank. Infantry had tons of weapons to deal with tank. In this scenario few "glass cannon" tanks were created. These tanks had armor package of IFV. Their main defense was speed. This was so bad they had to be up armored as even distant shots from 20mm auto cannons were a threat (!). This tank thus is more like an IFV without infantry today - it has fire power but none of the defenses of a modern tank. Now upgraded as above panther, is now similar to T-62M. It may not be fast tank but it has plenty of armor compared to IFV. One has to point out that if IFV were sufficient more of these would be sent not T-62M. So IFVs were insufficient and tanks were sent. This points out why upgraded panther has roles on modern battlefield that Leo 1 simply cannot fill in.
    1
  133.  @victorzvyagintsev1325  Leo 1 in modern conflict has no crew survivability ;) Anything will penetrate it, even auto cannon fire from 30mm (some armor was upgraded but I doubt enough to stop 30mm, 20mm and 25mm maybe but not modern 30mm).
    1
  134. For years Canada tried to sell them for next to nothing and no one wanted to buy them.
    1
  135. Yeah, Oryx numbers can only be used for stats - they show 22% - decent. About a month ago a guy that counts tanks in storage called less than 500 have been taken out. So either Russia is slow to replace or their losses are far lower.
    1
  136.  @thunderbug8640  Umm, less than 500 tanks of all types, not just T-80s. Plus around 100 - 150 new tanks made. So if we use 22% than Russia has taken out of storage around 100 T-80 tanks.
    1
  137. Maybe few. Russia pulled around 500 tanks out of storage a month ago, so it does not seem like losses are that huge.
    1
  138.  @leehoughton9068  500 seems like a huge number - Russia did open two new repair depots but I doubt restore her means more than "basic maintenance" i.e. not restore as in take whole tank apart, inspect, paint, grease and re-assemble. That takes lots of time. Russia did no more than 200 tanks like this per year.
    1
  139. Odessa will probably see Russians from Mikolayev - i.e. ground forces.
    1
  140. Maybe if they can be fixed - more junk for Soviet armor to remove.
    1
  141. Poland is stupid but not that stupid. PT-91 is vastly superior to the junk Spain has. For starters it works. Poland could receive all 40 for the 200+ tanks it already sent. These 40 could be stripped for parts.
    1
  142. T-62M does not have advanced sensors - like thermals. It does not have laser warning receiver or simialr tech AFAIK.
    1
  143.  @EpicThe112  HESH is ineffective against modern armor or even T-62M brow armor. Syrians had original T-62s which were more or less T-55s with a bit more armor. Hesh also needs energy to inflict damage - so no, at 5km, if they manage to hit anything, a HESH round in 105mm will not have a lot of energy left. HESH is obsolete type against T-72s or T-80s or T-90s as they have modular armor that have zero chance of hurting anyone inside more then high explosive shells does. This is main reason British tanks were obsolete for modern war.
    1
  144. They loose stuff so fast I would not worry about any maintenance. They lost 100s of tanks. Give them a week and all Leo 1s would be scrap.
    1
  145.  @hochmeisterr  I doubt it. Say a month to surround Donbass pocket. Another month, 6 weeks to clear it. Month to move towards Dnipro. 2 months to take it, at the same time 3 months for Kharkiv. So we are under 7 months. I guess to get to a year Putin would need to go for more - like say Odessa. I think if there will not be any concrete results by May 9th parade they are going to mobilize and finish it off quicker that way. All depends on how far Putin wants to go.
    1
  146. Mostly correct, except the D-day comparison. After fall of France UK had almost no defenses of any kind. Like .... none. This cannot be compared to D-day as Germans did have some defenses - it was not few guys with rifles on the beach. Granted path to success would be blocked by simple logistics (how do you supply even little troops over the channel) but still it is worth pointing out that even a single German paratrooper division in 1940 would be a major issue for the British. BUT as charts show Germany would need roughly 10 divisions to take out UK in the most optimistic scenario - rather tiny force BUT supporting around quarter of a million of troops with royal navy and some royal airforce was a NO GO. Even if no one escaped Dunkirk you simply could not take UK with say 5 divisions. Also note this is all very optimistic, it assumes Germany could control UK / take over with far less troops then they needed to occupy General Government - i.e. non-annexed part of Poland.
    1
  147.  @harveyknguyen  Maybe some. But Luftwaffe would have no issues gaining air superiority over a certain area for some time - say a day. Problem is with what happens next.
    1
  148.  @christopherg2347  Western systems are only out ranged by few km, not 5-15km - unless the send old junk.
    1
  149.  @christopherg2347  Yes, Russians systems are outranging western artillery systems. This is easily verifiable on the net.
    1
  150. Russia does not use T-72M and T-72M1 - Poland uses T-72M and T-72M1. Russia may have limited, very limited stock of T-72As employed - mostly with Donbass forces. Russia also has at least 100 ex Ukrainian tanks T-64BVs. Majority of tanks are T-72B / BM /BM3 style tanks which are all vastly superior to Leo 1 under any condition.
    1
  151.  @wheelwrightpl9429  Its not. mobility - better armor - vastly superior cannon - vastly superior for every role, both as AT as anti infantry even some can fire missiles sensors - superior ammo - vastly superior There are no "inferior" sections. Sure you can find some scenario when T-72 cannot depress its gun or something so maybe not 100% "any" but say 99%?
    1
  152.  @wheelwrightpl9429  LOL, I think you are talking about Polish T-72s. These are not Polish T-72s. They have almost as good thermals as M1. And T-90Ms have superior to M1. How could you sell parts of T-72 for vodka - who would even buy these? In time of war you would need to be really crazy to a) drink vodka and b) sell military stuff in Russia for vodka. I rather sell parts of Polish T-72 for vodka in Poland - when found out it would be far lesser punishment.
    1
  153.  @jessehachey2732  So far 1000s of Orcs are joined by 10x as many Ukies. I hope this war ends, but if Ukies are so stupid, none may be left when it ends!
    1
  154.  @dorugi20  Sure, why don't you search for "attack on Donetsk" in that little youtube search bar??? Or you are not intelligent enough?
    1
  155. Germans were sure correct, British tanks almost exclusively had a monopoly on terrible design. Regarding armor, what could have been compared is book values of both Soviet and UK armor, not so much as to what factory actually made. I.e. T-34 armor as designed, steel alloy composition was better then what Churchill had. Soviets certainly had ability to precisely measure the strength of their tank armor - the problem is that it takes time - you need to cut out coupons out of a casting then you need to precisely create a round bar and then break that bar under load for tensile strength alone. That is a lot of extra work which is a waste as no one would "re-melt" a bad batch - i.e. T-34 with non spec armor would go into combat anyways - so why bother.
    1
  156. Well it is now almost certain Ukraine will loose.
    1
  157.  @jessehachey2732  Yeah they loot washing machines and kill these Ukies by the dozen. Imagine if you can rob a washing machine of its chip and the Ukeis are still soooo bad as troops that you can easily eliminate them. Imagine how terrible western armies must be if they trained Ukies to be such a terrible soldiers! Better learn Russian!
    1
  158. Russian have a Kornet missile - latest AT missile fire and forget with long engagement range able to fly through 3 or 4 Leopards 1 parked in straight line.
    1
  159.  @geodkyt  Given that Ukraine probably lost close to 1000 tanks by the time I write this I think they would need huge stopgap measure. Once Donbass pocket is surrounded its over. Its mop up after that. Ukraine is not really a viable nation even now. Its land with ultra low population as everyone went away. Once gutted even more it will be something that some want to saddle Poland with to take care of it. Like Poland needs another Wolyn.
    1
  160.  @geodkyt  I seen on video at least 100 tanks of Ukraine were captured by Russians. Then we have air force losses, we have 200 sorties per day. Say 100 are close air support. Say half of them are against moving targets. Say only 10% of these are tanks. And each aircraft kills only 1 tank per mission, we have 5 tanks per day - this is a bit of a low ceiling as say in Izium front yesterday aircraft destroyed like 8. Times this by days of war, so we have about 300 tanks taken care of by air force. Double that for helicopters. So 600 tanks destroyed. Russian tanks are also taking out enemy vehicles, they also have man portable weapons in large quantities. They have much more powerful artillery. They have drones. Etc. So one would assume a number here of say 200. Add this up and you are close to 1000 tanks destroyed. If you find above hard to believe lets assume your position - if your side was true, Ukraine would not only defeat Russians they would be heading in Moscow direction. Also Ukraine would not be so desperate for tanks - they would have plenty of their own. Germany would not need to think about sending old Leo 1s. One has to remember that both sides started with roughly same # of tanks, over a 1000 deployed. After loosing a 1000 Ukraine went to its reserves - which on paper are huge, but I doubt they have more then 1000 tanks they can use - rest are ghosts. So this perfectly explains desperation, old T-72s and Leo 1s etc. Also one has to note army sizes deployed. Russians only deployed, as per US army, today 78 BTGs. These have at most 1000 soldiers each. They are supplemented by Donbass forces and others. Given size of Ukraine armed forces and conscription, Ukraine has at least 2:1 advantage in man power deployed. If they actually did so well as you claim in equipment department I doubt Russians would be attacking. The actual number of destroyed Ukrainian equipment is likely higher - thus the panic in Kiev. Note out of that 1000 many may be salvaged - but this is not so likely if terrain is taken by Russians - i.e. looser cannot salvage equipment. Thus the offer of say Poland to "fix" equipment in Poland. Remember, Ukraine started this war with most tanks in Europe, biggest air defense system in Europe and largest artillery core in Europe in addition to largest army in Europe.
    1
  161. T-62 has the problem of being similar to WWII design of not having any protection for ammo. Also only upgraded versions have laser range finder.
    1
  162.  @wotanscry1594  T-72B mod 1985 is roughly Leopard 2 A4. T-72BM is roughly Leo 2 A5. T-72BM3 is roughly Leo 2 A6.
    1
  163.  @wotanscry1594  You are right T-80UE is total junk. But it was NOT made in Soviet Union, nor Russia. It was made in Ukraine ;) It is not the first time Ukrainian tanks are found to be total junk. I would be shocked if it performed well. Their Bulat tanks are hand assembled and only like 10 work. They had LOTS of rejections of equipment, i.e. their export customers refused delivery. Lots of issues. So no shock here. Other then the name and some similarity there is nothing T-80UE has similar to Russian / Soviet tanks. Its like taking US product and creating a cheap Chinese knock off that looks from distance the same & you name it similar. So I agree, Leopard 2A4 is better tank then T-80UE. I disagree it comes even close to T-90 export variants, may I remind you that T-90 is the best selling tank on this planet. It is better selling then M1 and Leopard. T-90s fly off the shelf and at least in both Egypt and Iraq they are upgrade for US made M1 - i.e. both are replacing their M1s with T-90 tanks. Leo 2 A4 is roughly on par with T-72B. They are about the same age & have similar performance. Also T-80 was picked in 1980s as world's best tank, which I remember was briefly taken by Leopard and then taken by M1 in 90s. I am sure that was somewhat biased, but T-80 is a very nice tank, for its era. I mean original T-80, not junk from Ukraine.
    1
  164.  @WangMingGe  Ukraine realistic tank fleet is around 2200 or so, including 200 or so from Poland. they have less then 1000 left right now, maybe they have 600-700 in action and around 300 in repair - max. No one is going to pay for these Leo 2s - Ukraine is not going to get these tank. Nor they are getting too many T-72s as simply no large number of T-72s is available. So Ukraine has zero perspectives for more tanks, at least more then few hundred in the next 6 months. So its is clear there is zero perspective of Ukraine winning the war. Where winning the war is say, stopping Russians at current front line.
    1
  165.  @WangMingGe  Ukraine will probably blow up all bridges over Dniepr soon. But it does not matter as Russia has nice bridgehead near Kherson. Sivyerski Donets river level dropped and its mostly an issue for Russians - Ukrainians no longer need to cross it.
    1
  166. Not really - additional crew member means less 1 in maintenance. Why less training and why simpler - he said they add thermals etc. to them - so "same" complexity.
    1
  167. Any version of Leo 1 is hopeless vs. modern T-72. They cannot penetrate from the front but round from T-72 can kill two Leo 1s when they are parked just right - from the front. T-72 - even old versions fire on the move at a standard tank target is around 80% from 2km. Newer versions is better. T-72 mobility is better as well for newer versions. Sensors are better etc. etc. etc. T-72 BM3 can withstand most frontal hits from Leo 1 from point blank range - i.e. 100m. There is a reason why Leo 1 was removed from service. Darts velocity decreases only marginally between 100m and 2000m - for most darts we are talking about < 10%.
    1
  168. They are doing "cope". Germans in 1990s tested L7 against East German T-72s - T-72M1 and decided to take Leo 1 out of service.
    1
  169. But Polish T-72s are way better then this junk.
    1
  170. Nah, the depression is not an issue for majority of UA terrain. Zero advantage.
    1
  171. Its just the west using different accounting. Same as in WWII Russia produced same T-34 few times over as it counted rebuilding tanks as making tanks.
    1
  172.  @roadgent7921  So far very good. Russians did show they are easily a match for any western army. I mean they held Ukraine and are advancing with like tiny army. Tiny.
    1
  173. Its disappointing that Germany did not deliver these tanks - was looking forward to seeing them in the parade of captured equipment in Moscow on May 9th. These are of lesser value than T-72s that Poland delivered. They can be of limited use. But just that. Note Ukraine started with more tanks then all of Europe combined. Adding 100 or 200 tanks from NATO countries will not make much of a difference. The only way Ukraine can win this war is: a) declare they won b) get NATO involved c) nukes
    1
  174.  @Maarten-Nauta  How about Putin's reply today?
    1
  175.  @kpadalldotablet1009  Sure I do - I just open history book & look at the stats there - older conflict usually do not have too much lies in them, data is quite good. Than just apply to this conflict. Heck, I can confirm with conflict say in the last 20 years. And just like that I do not need propaganda. Russia is going to show one more time to the west why it never won with the east. A giant Russian boot will be on the forehead of fallen Nazi Bandera, as with the Nazi before him.
    1
  176.  @orionide4032  If you were right they would have Moscow by now - where are they closer?
    1
  177.  @kpadalldotablet1009  Any history book with stats. There usually is no controversy and numbers are well agreed on. There is no bias - all sides agree. Sure you do not need history book - you can just google. Data is quite good as all sides agree - and neutrals as well. There is no controversy. We are talking about WWI and WWII here. Sure Russia and everyone else has a neo Nazi element. Putin does not care that much about land as land was to be give back to Ukraine in return for no membership in NATO and no Nazi policies. Maybe you need to re-read Minsk agreement. Sure, Nazi in 2023. What is so strange about that? That west allowed this to happen and supports them? Come on, one can point out to say ISIS in 2020 - any different? Land and people do not equal power at all - since when? Africa has lots of people and lots of land - last time I checked they were low on power ;) Problem is that western system - especially US system is for US not for others. For example, Russia and China currently, have lots in common with say US even internally how they are run. So what? US does exactly the same, or worse than Russia OUTSIDE of US. I.e. democracy and freedom for us, slavery and dictatorship for them. So is west good or evil - depends on point of view. I have no idea what the Nazi in 1943 as an example would need to do in order to prove to you they are indeed bad. Or maybe you think they were good? The collective west, including US, sure did think they were good up to roughly 1937. After all, "elimination" of say mentally deficient or sick was popular in the west - see California.
    1
  178. I rather be in T-72 - it can take some frontal hits from enemy tank and can defeat most anti tank weapons from the front. With Leo 1 anything will penetrate on first round. Anything. Even auto cannon fire from 30mm cannons will go through. Even from the front.
    1
  179. Was it in Greece when speaking to parliament Zielinski showed with two Nazi by his side and half of Greek parliament walked out b/c they had bad memories of Nazists?
    1
  180. Why supply modern ammo - these 40 tanks will get mostly taken out by maintenance and getting stuck.
    1
  181. Maybe. But I would think that Russia would create a puppet state instead of taking over.
    1
  182. Leo 1 was taken out of service as it had issues penetrating T-72M1 frontally. By Germans themselves. But now it suddenly "can" LOL!
    1
  183. Yes, mostly static defense. Maybe with ability to change fire position.
    1
  184. Amazing, isn't it? Did you know, BTW, how this "chemical industry" of today was created?
    1
  185. Well, I expect Russians to at least partially surround main Ukrainian army in Donbass before May 9th. Then there will be weeks or months of mopping Ukrainians up. So some weapons in six weeks would slow things up, cause some Russian casualties and prolong the war causing way more UA casualties.
    1
  186.  @michaelbevan3285  Not really - they were slightly different guns - many countries developed their 37mm guns - including US at about the same time with very similar characteristics - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/37_mm_gun_M3 I can list many examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3,7cm_KP%C3%9AV_vz._37 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_1_37_mm_anti-tank_gun Soviets did have a clone of the German early gun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/37_mm_anti-tank_gun_M1930_(1-K)
    1
  187. Nah, implemented even in latest T-14. Future US tank will also have one. Implemented on French tank.
    1
  188.  @EK-gr9gd  Works great to me. Not sure why its "poorly designed". It makes tank smaller, crew 1 less, and auto loads quite fast - at least does not get tired. Ukraine has shown its a good design. Hitting the carousel causing explosion is ultra rare - probably did not happen in this war yet.
    1
  189.  @AgentPepsi1  The issue is not with ammo in the carousel - this is not really a problem. The issue is in T-72 you can store ammo in many other places - like everywhere. But of course you don't have to.
    1
  190.  @EK-gr9gd  Ammo will cook off after an hour. I am sure crew will get out by then. You are confusing auto loader carousel with ammo stored outside of it. In T-72 you can, if you want, store ammo everywhere. That is the problem. This was solved with T-90 - they have single storage in the back of the turret with blow out panel.
    1
  191.  @AgentPepsi1  human auto loader also can get tired and needs armor protection. This means tank needs to be heavier to offer same level of protection. Also, if we move up to 140mm or 135mm etc. It will be very hard to load by hand efficiently.
    1
  192.  @AgentPepsi1  certainly you are not as familiar with tanks as I am.
    1
  193. Sure - but it would leave large gaps. How do you plan on clearing them?
    1
  194.  @TheRezro  Your views are based on "copeware" and "hopeware" - mine are exactly what World Bank is saying. Why would factory workers be dead or not paid? Why? Explain? Why would China pay "quarter of the price" - nothing indicates any "quarter" of the price at all - in fact our friends at WB show many goods are sold for MORE than they were to EU. This is good for China as well as they pay LESS than before. Why would Russian economy implode when World Bank says it will do great - is the west lying? Ukraine is spent economically and with people dying. Why would Russia collapse? Why? West says Russia will do great so a collapse seems not logical. Explain. Why is Russia a joke? They are fighting a proxy war with NATO, not using their full army and are winning.... why is this implying Russia is weak? Why? Explain.
    1
  195. Offensive? LOL
    1
  196. They use FPV drones as lancet can over penetrate ;)
    1
  197. Support for the war is 75%+++ Even anti Putin guys support the fight for political reasons. I.e. Free Russia anti Putin forces == war is needed.
    1
  198. I recon that as soon as they arrive within max two weeks we see them in action on the front line. Ukraine is desperate now.
    1
  199. Maybe. When tank is made they usually have at least 2 engines for it, sometimes 3. Maybe even 4?
    1
  200.  @matevodopija8190  Sure they did - Poland got their tanks with like 3 engines. I expect Soviets to at least match export customers.
    1
  201. Correct - what they are doing is called "cope" - they know they cannot give Ukraine more Leo 2 tanks so they are saying some old junk from 1960s is ... better than new stuff. They cope by saying Leo 1 has advantages - same as Mercedes from 1960s has advantages over one from 2020. I mean some Mercedes cars from 1980s made it past 2 million km (!) But who would rather have old car than new one???? It is just cope. Even in city fight Russian Wagner used latest T-90M - why they did not use upgraded T-62M? Come on, both have same reverse speed :)
    1
  202.  @potator9327  Leo 1 A5 is not that much lighter than Leo 2. Leo 1 A5 is 43t and Leo 2 A4 is 55t.
    1
  203.  @Crosshair84  Sure, but Mr. Z is an idiot - what do you expect from a comic. He was ultra hated before the war so since he liked his chair he signed pact with the devil. Now he is just a figure head. No power. So even if he wanted to do something he could not. He cannot surrender... he has ... no power.
    1
  204.  @mbnovik  Be real - the 1st army in the world (LOL) failed in Afghanistan... recently.... US could not defeat bunch of Taliban. For 20 years. Russian economy according to world bank is doing better than any G7 economy. Guess World Bank is lying. The idiot Europeans are still buying Russian oil and gas - but now at inflated prices as it needs to be blended in Asia before it is sold. How stupid EU is?
    1
  205.  @p_serdiuk  Nah, it gets out ranged.
    1
  206.  @ddshiranui  But how, Russian guns have longer range then any western guns.
    1
  207.  @ddshiranui  They can just use heavy missile MLRS with 80km range. Drone targets, missiles splat. For high value target they can use drone ammo which Russia pioneered - i.e. suicide drones delivered via MLRS. Heck if the west pushes more buttons Russia can always partially mobilize. If they fully mobilize they may with so much impetus just take Berlin back.
    1
  208.  @ddshiranui  Russian showing is very impressive in Ukraine. Far better then the collective west imagined. This has caused panic in Berlin with massive military spending to offset huge Russian advantage. West though Ukraine can bleed Russia with some RPGs sent over. But as Ukrainian army got crushed they started to send everything even plane parts / whole aircraft! And despite all of this there is now just 92 BTGs in Ukraine. That is like 80k Russians or so. That is it. Together with allies maybe 160k. Ukraine has what, over 500k? This includes conscripts.
    1
  209.  @p_serdiuk  They are literally like 100s of videos of Russians doing just that - one shot one kill with artillery directed by a drone. How the hell on earth do you think, tiny Russian army, is kicking the rear end of Ukrainian army, supported by the west, with most equipment of anyone in EU - Ukraine started with more arms then all of Europe combined? Really, they do this by not being good at force multiplication? Really? Come on. Use your brain.
    1
  210.  @ddshiranui  No we watched same videos you are just very easily swayed by propaganda and simply do not use logic. Let me fix that for you and use only facts, no "expert" opinions, no CNN just facts. 1. It took US weeks to get to Baghdad despite facing an army that lost a major war, was not supported by anyone and had no will to fight 2. It took US 6 weeks to take Falujah despite having 10:1 advantage and facing poorly armed and trained insurgents. 3. It took Russians also 6 weeks to take Mariupol, despite having only 3:1 advantage and facing the very best unit in Ukraine, Azov Nazi regiment. 4. Ukraine had the largest army wholly in Europe before the war started. They had the most tank, the best (!!!) air defenses (1 more battery of similar vintage AA then Germany (!)) 5. Ukraine is / was supported by all of NATO. As well as few western countries. Poland alone spent billions in aid and sent more then half of their own T-72s it had in storage. 6. At first Ukraine received only hand held weapons. Then S-300 (that was destroyed in like 24h), Polish offer for MiG-29s was rejected as provocation. But now, about 10 days ago parts to MiG-29 were sent as well as whole aircraft. Every NATO country is sending heavy weapons, tanks, artillery, AA systems. US almost enacted 33B in extra aid (!!!) US spending on Ukraine this year, total will, including 33B approach 50B (go check it out). 7. Russia never had more then 100k in Ukraine, Ukrainian army is around 300k, most 97% in ground forces - air power is small, navy does not exist. Ukraine has mobilized and added another 200k. At least 100k of that is in extra brigades. 8. All countries in Europe, not just Germany, reacted by buying guns. Lots of guns. 9. Donbass militia is armed with ex Ukrainian stuff, their numbers are at most 70k, including Chechens. Lets look at above facts and facts only. Compared to US I do not see Russian forces doing badly - in fact, they are doing great & much better then US forces did! This is comparing apples to apples. Facts only. We see small Russian force, mopping the floor with huge, western supported army. This reaction to Russian show of power - not a paper tiger - has forces the west to give everything they got. It also is forcing western countries to arm themselves much better. Your conclusions that Russians have corruption issues etc. could be true - but then if a corrupt army can do what Russians can do I fear that not corrupt Russian army is made of Gods. Conclusion is that Russian military capabilities were vastly under estimated. Look at facts and facts alone. This is why west though some RPGs will be enough ;) But this is not all - EU also vastly miss calculated sanctions where Russia did their math well!
    1
  211.  @ddshiranui  Most of mainstream media is pure propaganda. Don't waste time on it. Read actual combat reports and info from actual first hand sources plus use logic. Russian focus on tanks is correct - tanks and armored vehicles multiply the force projection power. Everyone sees it and now everyone wants to imitate - i.e. heavy is the way to go - especially for small army. Tanks BTW are protected by infantry - plenty of videos from say Mariupol to show that. Infantry is a dismount from APC. No. Russian advance is NOW. In the first part of the war Russians did advance with tiny force. the idea may have been to catch Ukrainians unprepared to to grab some stuff for free. They did have some success but not enough. It is still puzzling what did exactly happen during first three weeks. Russian forces say near Kiev were smaller then police force in Kiev so way too tiny to even... police the city. Some say it was fixing operation. Day 1 was a success - paratroopers captured and held the airfield. But so what - it was holed and could not be used. Also support force that came in was tiny. Ukraine started with 2000 towed artillery pieces - please don't make a fool out of yourself thinking that 100 more from US will make a huge difference. Sanctions totally failed. Russians just decreased ruble percent to just 14%. Russian bonds have same yields as before - better then Poland. Ruble is up. I watch some videos by students in Russia. There does not seem to be any economic collapse at all. They complain prices went up like 40%. I counter that in Poland stuff went up... 100%. I doubt Russian economy will see any major decline - I would not be shocked to see modest GDP growth. Russian liberals are for Putin - idiot western sanctions erased Russian opposition. Putin pulled up 83% last month - I bet he is closer to 90% now. There is no exodus of Russian intelligentsia - you should actually watch people from Russia. Where these guys would go - to the west that hates them? There are plenty of rich women on Instagram tearing up $5000 bags to show support. Artists for Putin. Lots of Russians are disappointed with the west and are coming home. So the "exodus" is of Russians from the west. You should watch more videos of actual pp not some CNN BS propaganda. On the front line in Donbass Ukraine is folding. It will be a miracle if they are still not encircled by May 9th. Every day they are being pushed and they committed 100% of their force. Situation is terrible and Ukraine should surrender now and accept terms as in two weeks Putin will demand 2x as much land. Surrender now while you still can - limited time offer.
    1
  212.  @mechano6505  photo evidence certified to be true by Ukrainian Inteligence services? You are sooooo gullible. And what about Ukraine getting crushed right now in Donbass? What about simple calculation of dead based on artillery use in all previous wars? What about sat images of Russian bases?
    1
  213. Its a great idea to virtue signal help. Send 10 - and let Ukraine use them till they break down or get stuck or destroyed. Given current condition I expect getting broken down / stuck will be 9 out of 10. Combat value near zero - but hey, virtue signaling value of 10.
    1