Norway will be sending leopards to Ukraine too .
Am I the only one hearing the Thundercat's theme tune.
I said earlier on in this thread when things were looking bleak for the Ukrainans,I was holding out for someone to break ranks and come to the Ukrainans Aid ,I was hoping for a bugle and the 7th Calvary sounding a charge ,
Leopards, Abrams and Bradleys will have to do ,
📯
if they board a ship (for valid reasons) they are not the aggressor of course not.
If they block or attack a ship without cause then they are the aggressor.
What Estonia is proposing is a blockade of Russian bound/originating traffic aka a blockade. That is totally different from the ability to board a vessel in your waters.
They are terrifying. The overpressure from the blast can rupture organs and impact even those inside trenches and bunkers
Why would they be attacking ships exactly
How much do you know about the M1 Abrams? Do you think it would be suitable to send to Ukraine or no?
or else banish it completely and wait for the revolution.....😂
"Putins Restraint" !!! My God. What planet or alternative universe is he living in? He badly needs to visit Ukraine and do a tour of the cities which are living examples of Putins " Restraint", then come back and update his articles
..
The beer test-
There's nothing left for Russia in this war except to kill more people so Putin can buy some more time. He's lost.
What a surprise. A destination most famous for underage prostitution and the selling of children to paedophiles is popular with Russians.
I'd be wary around that work colleague if I were you @JustTakeTheTrade.
No they are suggesting a further extension of their maritime borders according to UNCLOS,so they have the possibility to control shipping in the Baltic sea for security reasons
Anyone who has come across them either on holiday or in the workplace will tell you that they are an obnoxious nationality. Every effort needs to be made by the west to defeat them.
Another collaborator smashed in berdiansk been a while since we've seen a targeted assination.
Double birthday present for President Zelensky.
Yeah, but all those division's were supplied by the US and the UK, plus " They Had The BOMB".....
I believe she survived, unfortunately. And it was yesterday or earlier.
I think it was yesterday or possibly Monday,alot of stuff was missed due to the lepoard talk that blew up yesterday
Slovakia is ready to discuss the transfer of its MiG-29s to Ukraine, says Minister of Defense of the country Yaroslav Nagy
Huzzah!
They will sell weapons to almost anyone else in the world, but not Ukraine 💩
That's disappointing you would think Jews would want to fight Nazis.
They are not particularly heavier or harder to deploy than the current M1 fleet, though in fairness, the new order includes a larger proportion of obstacle reduction equipment (JABs, ABVs). Most countries haven't used a tank in anger in decades, that's no reason to not have them in case they do need to on short notice.
The Marines divested the tanks because they had a limited budget and manning and wanted to emphasise what only they could do: Littoral Warfare as the Navy's land force with emphasis on anti-shipping and area denial. The US Military doesn't need a second conventional land army. The Corps would have preferred to keep the tanks, but it isn't necessary: The Commandant's Force 2030 document doesn't say tanks don't have no place in the Marine's mission, it does say that if tanks are required, then that's what the Army's for. The US Army has more tank on-the-beach landing capacity than the Australian Navy, the Army's eight Besson class ships alone will lift more than Australia's current tank fleet.
More than many. Yes, it's suitable. No, it's not the best option, I think focusing on the Leopard fleet makes more sense. However, if it takes sending a couple dozen M1s to open the floodgate for the rest, then they can presumably make use of them. The issues are of sustainability and politics less than of capability. With a half-dozen countries each providing Leopard support, that's more options for training, spare parts, etc, and it looks like a multinational effort, not an American one.
Who knows? The Australians found themselves short-footed in 1950 as their new Centurions were suddenly diverted to the British Army in Korea. The Vietnam deployment was conducted with about four month's notice from "you're going" to "you're on the ground conducting ops."
It's not as much a risk of being invaded, as much as a risk of having a need to send tanks somewhere and not being able to do so. Australia's area of interest is more than just the continent.
France24 were interviewing a senior fellow at the Atlantic Institute in the US to talk tanks, so she wore...
:-)
russian in Europe,not best pleased at this spectacle 😆
Is that not a huge issue with American procurement constant changing the design spec turning say an apc nearly into a tank. I remember watching a YT video about it in a light hearted way. Guy comes in with a design for a apc for example then someone pipes up could we put a turret on it. Guy then says yes but you would loose all the advantages of an apc and so on. Will try to did it out. And edit later.
Dunno how accurate it is.
Look at the early development of the Bradley vehicle , that's a movie script in itself,
Strykers are similar 8x8 wheel armored vehicles that can be an APC , Ambulance, intelligence,comes with a remote machine gun station, mortar variant,and 105mm tank gun variant ,
But that kinda makes sense having multiples of the same basic vehicle but with various different capabilities,you might or be able to call an Abrams for support but you could call a Bradleys and Strykers ,
But I did see the Russians are threatening to send their Latest wonderwaffen the T14 armata tank to Ukraine,all 5 of them that have been produced
For sure, he is losing the plot...getting more and more hysterical each show. You can even see it in the faces of his guests, the disbelieving incredulous looks. His female version Margarita Simonyan doe not seem to around too much at the moment either.
Yes, if Australia suddenly needed tanks, that would be a problem, but there simply is no credible scenario in which it would. The only reason Australia has the capability at all, realistically, is to support yet another US military adventure, in which case, there would not be a problem if Australia were short a few. The only exception was Australia's action in East Timor, in which it didn't send any tanks. You have to balance Ukraine's absolute vital current need against Australia's likelihood of having a 'real' need anytime soon, and it's no contest - real vs hypothetical.
Just look at it in the same light as the amazingly brave and sensible action of Latvia sending all of it's 155mm Howitzers to Ukraine. Their thinking is likely that they would only need them if Ukraine loses, so, their best use is ensuring that doesn't happen.
China is the main immediate defence consideration for Australia, and that most likely in China making a play for Taiwan. China making any such move, I think, is largly dependent on what happens in Russia vs Ukraine. If Russia wins, game on, if not...change of plan.
Australia's current need for tanks is about as real as Czechia's for submarines:
On Tik Tok, one young Australian asked: “This might be incredibly dumb - why do we need tanks? What are we fighting, we are surrounded by f*cking water?”
Out of the mouth of babes...
...Dr Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst in defence strategy and capability at Canberra-based think tank the Australian Strategic Policy Institute...
“How does the Australian Army fight [with tanks] in the Indo-Pacific region, which is primarily maritime in nature, where the adversary we're facing is a major power like China, who is fighting primarily at sea, in the air, in space and in cyberspace?” Dr Davis said.
Dr Davis called them "an acquisition for the last war rather than the next war". He said while they might have been useful in the Middle East in Iraq and Afghanistan, the defence strategy is moving away from those regions.
He says a lot more on the topic and it all makes sense, to me anyway: https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-feed/article/australia-were-getting-new-tanks-but-do-we-really-need-them/i0oa1sgpn
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c635d680d76ce16e490d61f21d7a1353.svg)
