Can I ask a serious question, born out of total ignorance? If Moscow's finest armored units were decimated by a bunch of backyard drones and shoulder fired anti-tank missiles, are tanks really all that important, effective in the battlefield anymore? I mean, surely Russia has their own version of the Javelin Missile System that is probably just as effective against western armor, right?
Short answer is yes. First, we don’t know Russia’s finest armored units have been decimated. We just want to believe that, so we do. Not that I doubt they have taken some remarkable losses. Second, Ukraine needs armor to go on the counteroffensive and take back Russian gains at some point. To your point, the Russians do have anti-tank missiles, but they are not in the same class as the javelin. It may be that anti-tank missiles and mines level the playing field between infantry and armor; therefore, the days of armored spearheads advancing 30km deep in front of the infantry are over. But tanks are here to stay as a vital part of a combined-arms team in direct support of advancing infantry.
Is there a particular reason why the US hasn't sent tanks? Are they training Ukranians on them or something before sending them?
I’ve never heard that sending U.S. tanks was ever under consideration. The only concept I’ve heard discussed is former Warsaw Pact countries sending their own Soviet-era tanks, such as T-72s, and perhaps the U.S. would backfill those countries with modern armor. And I don’t have the first idea why we would be an obstacle to that concept. Some of our decisions have been baffling since this thing started.
We are sending everything short of infantry. Think mobile anti-tank, anti-air launchers and drones. The reason why is obvious; Ukraine is undermanned and is never going to be able to go toe-to-toe with Russia. The only way for Ukraine to even make this a stalemate is remaining mobile and hidden. Guerilla warfare. 10 men with these weapons will do far more than 50 tanks ever could.
It just baffles me that Ukraine is asking & other countries including Australia are sending armored vehicles, offensive weapons, tanks, etc, & the country with the world's largest arsenal seems to be dragging its feet, including blocking the airplane thing. That could've been facilitated a while ago.
I agree with much of that, but I still say that Ukraine at some point needs the ability to go over to the offensive and take back its land. That means tanks, artillery, and aircraft.
You are more right than you know. Russia is teetering presently. At some point, they are going to get their act together and start using their advantages to slowly strangle Ukraine. While Ukraine is putting up a noteworthy fight at the moment, they are going to hit a point of exhaustion before Russia, no matter what we supply Ukraine with (though, we need to fix our political problems and maximize that supply as well). Ukraine’s heroic resistance, which no military expert predicted, has given our government a precious gift of time. Time to work on Congress, to secure the right team of advisors (i.e. find that idiot Jake Sullivan a nice gig at MSNBC next to Jen Psaki; they can call their show The World As We Wish It Was), to get the allies rowing together, to build up the forces we need in Europe. For the most part, we have inexplicably and inexcusably squandered that gift.
My guess is that we have always overestimated Russian weapon systems. The Russian procurement process was so corrupt that even the systems they dobhave don't seem to be working as well as they should.
Really appreciate all the information you kart here. Really helpful. This is a great thread and thanks to everyone for keeping it informative
I’m not saying no one is saying that. There are ignorant people in all walks of life. But the main argument against arming Ukraine with Western arms has to do with helping them right now, and Soviet arms, in terms of vehicles and most munitions except for Stingers and Javelins, are the best way to help them right now. Training is one matter already pointed out. I’m not a tanker, but I imagine it takes at least weeks to train an M1A2 crew, weeks more to get these crews working in increasingly larger formations. Compare that to giving them a T-72: that same crew is ready to roll the tank directly into combat that same day. Advanced aircraft would take even longer to get into the fight. The more important matter is logistics. Ukraine already makes the munitions these Soviet-era systems fire. They already have stockpiles of spare parts. They already know how to maintain them and what lubricants to use and not to use. Outfitting Ukraine with Western arms is something to do (and something we should do) after they have won the campaign.
