Der Zeitgeist

Nah, the German Greens always had a hard stance vs. Putin. It's part of their value-based foreign policy outlook, drawing a clear line vs. autocratic regimes. What is new for them is the willingness to use or at least supply military power in pursuit of that policy.

I guess the question for the Azovstal siege is now how many troops Russia can really pull from there without weakening the siege so much that UA units could conduct raids or breakout attempts.

Maybe you prefer Vladimir Solovyov. He's been perfecting his casual WW3 threatening, menacing arms-crossed-with-Apple-Watch-style recently.

Watch out, defenders of Azovstal: Kadyrov is coming.

What a strange and unexpected opinion to read on a forum for a military-themed video game.

lol Yeah, good luck with that. (finding one, I mean)

Just to add some personal observations about the opinions in Germany: The thing I find most interesting is that the especially young generation of the eco-green electorate seems to be turning into veritable Russia-hawks with the war in Ukraine (also see the survey result I posted above). Considering the history of the Green party, that's a pretty fascinating development and very different from how the Green party almost tore itself apart about the Kosovo war and the German military involvement in Afghanistan in 2001.

Positive (the question below specifically mentions heavy weapons), with some interesting differences along party lines.

Exports will be approved by the ministry of economic affairs, led by Robert Habeck, who is a strong proponent for sending heavy weapons. However, the chancellor has the final say of course. There's some speculation that Scholz made a fundamental decision not to send AFVs to Ukraine (for possible reasons, see what I wrote here: https://community.battlefront.com/topic/140931-how-hot-is-ukraine-gonna-get/?do=findComment&comment=1922904 ), this would explain the convoluted schemes with the Dutch PzH 2000 or Italian AFVs that were also mentioned yesterday.

There are various interpretations about the bevhaviour of Scholz and the SPD on the issue of shipping heavy weapons. Like almost everything, you can of course pin it on Russian kompromat, but the real reasons are likely much more mundane. For me, it's most likely a combination of: Having a number of critical state elections that the SPD wants to win in the coming months, where they don't want to risk having their party base and aging electorate run scared with talks of German Panzers rolling east. A number of influential SPD officials (especially Rolf Mützenich & Ralf Stegner) that are fundamentally opposed to any confrontational policy with Russia. The usual ****up of our bureaucracy in the Ministry of Defense, where the leadership has no idea what's going on and the middle management is basically running their own policy. Just keep the pressure up, it's as simple as that. The fundamental fear of German foreign policy is the concept of "Alleingänge", taking any risks by making decisions that aren't also taken by allied nations. If Germany appears isolated on the question of heavy weapons, it will align its policy to come back into the fold.

It doesn't affect the Leopards at all. The Leopards are an entirely separate issue, because they're not part of the Bundeswehr stock but are held by the industry.

Ralf Stegner is always a sad spectacle. He does speak very good English though, didn't expect that. What's notable is the style of the interview by the (I guess) British-trained journalist. We wouldn't have a questioning quite as thorough as that on regular German TV.

Now we're talking.

Interesting, thanks! I never really got why the 105mm gun was supposed to be a problem for Ukraine. Combat ranges probably aren't all that long anyway, and even slightly older western APFSDS rounds might be better than whatever Ukraine and Russia are currently using. I saw some picture analysis from a Russian tank in Ukraine that had Sabot rounds from the late 70s or something.

Now we have our right-wing AfD applauding the chancellor for standing up to the warmongers. Nice work, Olaf.

This is such a f... disgrace. Ukrainians should just drive over to Rheinmetall with flatbed trucks and take the stuff.

In case anyone is wondering: Nothing really new from Scholz re: heavy weapons shipments. Supposedly there's a list of items Ukraine wants to receive, and German industry can deliver with Germany paying for it. No clear statement if the government would approve Leopard / Marder or other heavy systems from that list.

On that front, we're expecting a press statement from Chancellor Scholz at 18:00. Not sure if he's capitulating to Russia, resigning, or sending the entire Bundeswehr stock of Panzers, but something is happening.

I suspect that's one reason why a lot of western countries are hesitant about sending MBTs or IFVs. Because they don't want to enable an eventual Ukrainian offensive into the "DNR" & "LNR" territories. There's still a lot of hope and illusions that this war will end with a return to the status quo.

(also @sross112) This might be a remnant of CFE verification measures when the treaty was still in force. Destruction of equipment under the treaty could be verified by various means, including on-site inspections but also satellite surveillance. Placing certain parts of equipment in a certain way can allow the other side to verify that a piece has been disassembled. The same was done with B-52s at AMARC, which had their wings and fuselage cut in a treaty-prescribed way so that the other side could check this with satellite imagery. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_Conventional_Armed_Forces_in_Europe

Yes, it looks like a lot of sites now have much higher resolution and newer imagery. I checked out a few naval bases and airfields and it's a remarkable difference in quality.

History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes.

I think you spelled "Manuela Schwesig" wrong.

45°10’43.39″N, 30°55’30.54″E