dan/california

This is the closest thing I have seen to the Russians trying anything outside of what I will call greater Bakmuht. Sounds like it was less than successful. It may or may not have been what Ghirkin was referring too.

If there one thing I do not hold against Germany it is taking Russian gas while it was available. Cutting off that supply any sooner than the Russians did would have been a net negative for the overarching goal of Ukraine winning the war. I would simply point out that while that was a necessity, Germany was paying for the Russian side of the war up until the day the pipelines got blown. Furthermore decades of previous gas payments built the entire army that invaded Ukraine. The checks they are writing Ukraine ought to reflect that.

Well that is true, but it is also simply absolute proof this decision should have been made and acted upon six months ago. And then a a fully worked up brigade or two WOULD be smashing the Russians into the Sea Of Azov just east of Mariupol as we speak. Instead we are still arguing about it.

The problems in Iraq all come down to the Iraqi army, as currently constructed, not being remotely willing to fight for the Iraqi government, as currently constructed. Ukraine has proven beyond any conceivable doubt that they don't have the same problem. The fact the Iraqi's have a bunch of Abram's sitting around rotting when Ukraine needs them desperately does make me more than a little crazy though...

Reposting this to re-up the idea of Britain sending most or all of the Challenger 2 fleet. It may not be the most rational way of getting the Ukrainians a meaningful amount of NATO armor by this spring. But it seems to be the only one with the slightest chance of happening. And by yes they probably need the GLSDB first, and more. It appears those are just now being assembled though.

Given that Germany seems VERY willing to give Putin that deal on the INVASION OF UKRAINE, I think the one thing the Poles can be sure of is that no one in Berlin has a spine.

Global warming and the miracle of capitalism have wrecked Putin's plans utterly, if you want the short version.

That is really, REALLY funny!

The Baltic States understand that. the time to break the Bears teeth is now, and the place is in Ukraine. And they are not half bleeping it either.

Wallace has been a rock from the very beginning. HIS place in the history books is going to be one to envy.

Leave aside for the moment the question of the actual value of modern NATO main battle tanks. I am not in any way saying it is a settled debate. But lets get back to it separately from this weeks political criss of the moment. The apparent dead end status of the Leopard debate brings me back pretty quickly to the idea of Britain sending the entire Challenger 2 fleet to Ukraine. Not because it is the best solution to getting Ukraine NATO MBTs quickly, but because it is the most politically doable solution to getting Ukraine NATO MBTs quickly. Then in the medium turn Germany commits to supplying both Britain and Ukraine with Leopards as soon as it can practically be done, or the German arms industry is simply dead and buried. Because no one is ever going to trust them to come through when the chips are down, ever again. If the Germans decide they are out of the arms business, it then becomes a fascinating question whether Britain and Ukraine go with the Korean tank, or the Abrams long term. Please note I am essentially assuming the most of the Challenger 2 fleet would be effectively expended winning the current war. This includes ammo depletion, barrel wear, using up whatever the hardest to get spares are, as well as actual combat. How effective the Challengers proved to be would of course have a massive effect on what everyone does after the war. Edit: Or maybe Scholz is in the process of blinking? We shall see...

This is it really, history's verdict is that he blew it utterly. Except see above... We may just be unable to figure out the psychology of the current German government from the outside looking in. What Scholz is doing makes no sense to us, and clearly on some level it makes sense to him. But he is also at grave risk of his name being cited next to Chamberlain's for the next two hundred years. And he won't look any better when every single telling starts "despite the example of Chamberlin's epic failure". It is his right not to care, I guess. Of course, but I think buying the lie made all of them worse. The Russians weren't just not ready in Kharkiv, they were not even trying. This was reflected rather clearly in their performance, or rather non performance. Can't prove this of course, until it is all over and both sides talk about what happened more openly after the war. But that is true of a LOT of what we discuss here.

I don't, I was referring to all of the statements reporting they could only do one late last summer. There was a ton of stuff that said Ukraine couldn't do Kherson and something else at the same time. All evidence is that the Russians bought it, and Kharkiv was grossly undermanned and resourced when the Ukrainians took it back.

Can I volunteer?

Unfortunately not even the Russians are likely to fall for another information op like the one that preceded the Kharkiv offensive. Specifically the mournful declaration that there could not possibly be a Kharkiv offensive with Kherson underway.

Why yes it does....

Yeah but but those are probably just ACTUAL game cameras. There are lot of improvements that could be made with a clean sheet military design. Especially in regards to communication protocols, encryption, jamming, and so on. Are you better off with truck load of the cheap ones? The question deserves asking. I suspect the deer hunter models are very hackable though. Nothing better than taking over the other sides security system and telling not to mention that whole mech infantry company that is passing through the woods

Confirmation by massive secondaries would be ideal.

Militarized game cameras are going to be a thing. The gucci ones will come with a selection of covers that match nine kinds of tree bark, and the most common types of brick and siding.

I have seen contradictory things about when these would be available in quantity. Are we talking few weeks or many months to see these being fired in volleys?

See below. In regards to them being worked up as formed units, they would surely ship them to German base where the Bradleys are working up to speed wouldn't they? Unless other Western tanks have already been assigned but not yet announced. Fifty Bradleys and a squadron of challengers starts to sound a like a military useful thing. Especially if a new set starts training the minute the first batch heads to the front. Allow me to expound a little bit on the idea that the Challengers are a wasting asset that needs to be used. The Challenger, as I understand it, is one of the best tanks in the world at protecting its crews. So using them to crack the shell of the Russian line a critical spot is not the out and out suicide mission that it would be in anything in the T-72/80 family. If SEVERAL challengers got M, or even K killed making the breach that lets lets ~200 improved T-72s, the Bradleys, and every thing else the Ukrainians have that moves, smash through the Russian backfield all the way to the Sea of Azov the Challengers done their job. indeed they would have have done it magnificently. I would need to see hard photographic evidence on this one.

Fair.

And that former Bulgarian prime minister needs to get a job in Brussels. The EU needs to both reward, and be informed by, people willing to make hard calls. If only Scholz had a tenth of the spine...

Monkey king writes a much better summary than i do.

The British tank program is in a weird place. They never really got any export sales except for Jordan. So their are a very small number of of them in use world wide. The British have about ~250 of them in service now. The current plan is to upgrade ~150 of them with a new turret that uses the same gun and ammo as the newest Abrams/Leopard models, or near enough, 120mm smoothbore with digital everything. The basic idea is that instead of going thru all these hoops to sort of, but not really standardize with the Abrams/Leopard industrial ecosystem. Maybe they should just buy either Abrams or Leopards. Now all of these issues apply to Ukraine in the long term. But Ukraine has a largish short term problem with the Russian Army. I think the basic idea is that the Challenger II fleet would be shipped to Ukraine with the expectation that it would be mostly expended in the process of winning this war, and in the long term their would just be one less tank model in NATO. Is this even vaguely acceptable politically? I have no idea. It seems to make a lot of sense from From a NATO industrial base and logistics compatibility perspective in the long term. Edit: And for whatever combination of reasons the British seem more willing to do SOMETHING in the short term, as in right now. The right now part matters at the moment. That is an avoidable tragedy Ukraine didn't need. Sincerest sympathies to all the families. It does seem like most of the people who made the bad decisions involved were in the helicopter. That the entire upper level of the ministry was in one helicopter being one of the bad decisions in question. Can I recommend that Zelensky not get in any helicopter, EVER?