Someone needs to call Germany out.

Who’s side are they on?

Germany's.
The stink will hang around for a long time.
Macron is keeping a low profile, very wise

If Ukraine is not in distress now, I don't know what distress is! The Union Flag seems to be appropriately flown.

Not sure what to make of this - the headline is not completely supported by the body of the article:
In breakthrough, minister says Germany won't block Poland from giving Ukraine tanks - MarketWatch

​​​​​​​Not exactly definitive, although a move in the right direction.

Reminds me of the new paperback, "Tanks for Ukraine", by Hugo First.

Nightmare fuel

Anyone else have these lol, in a car usually....parachutist etc .. suppose a tanks worse.
they surely knew they were de-electrified before touching the cables, which you can see eventually.

reminds me of those choppers supposedly going under them, which i thought was a trick of the perspective....i hope

..

Yes, it's upside down. Often seen in that "flag-on-a-stick" configuration.

Hilarious. Russian volunteer in "LPR" Murz explains how expensive Russian EW works. It's put in the rears to avoid destruction by artillery and... you guessed it, it jams own Russian equipment. And no one does anything about it because "orders"….

Not really. Scholz is doing Germany a huge dis-service of which it will not benefit at all.
He's a pro.

Remind me which expertise Thatcher "sold off"? Or are you thinking of the privatisation of DERA in 2000? Which flavour of government was it at the time?

Politics had nothing to do with the construction of the two carriers - the requirement for which was endorsed by a joint committee - despite the best efforts of a cadre of pongoes to wrongly suggest it was all to keep Gordon Brown happy.

Realistically, how long can UKR withstand RU? Even with all the Western support it can get and a kill ratio of 3:1 (which I reckon is too optimistic) I am afraid RU will wear down UKR eventually. Maybe not this year or even next year. UKR is at a huge disadvantage when it comes to manpower. What must happen to give UKR the edge it needs to defeat RU?

Imho, RU aggression will not end by outside pressure. No matter how horrific its own losses. Vlad will just keep going unless he is stopped by internal pressure which isn't seen anywhere at this stage.

Well, that is the negative projection. By that logic they should just give up. Allow the nasty dog to control the household.

As a diehard Socialist it pains me to say this but you are right.

One has to wonder why it's the only good thing he has ever managed to do for his entire political career.



​​

There is an important difference: Ukraine is defending its Existance. Russia is 'only' trying to expand it's turf. This makes for a significant difference in level of acceptance/motivation in the population. 500k Deaths would be really tragedy for Ukraine but there would be 5 Mio people potentially able to defend the Country. So it wouldn't stop their physical ability to do so. As long as there is the will, there will still be a lot of potential defenders left.
500k Deaths for an adventure in a foreign Country will be difficult for puplic opinion in Russia. There is a reason Putin is still reluctant to go for mobilisation of the Moscovites and St Pete's.

Yes that is a daft example. The US has no operational control over the UK nuclear deterrent. It might have considerable industrial leverage but that is a very different thing indeed. And the relevant calculation - which is a very real consideration - becomes "how long to regenerate that industrial capability" in the event of a breakdown in relationships. Whether the UK (or indeed any other nation) gets those calculations right is debatable, especially as the minimum economic scale required to deliver the full range of security/defence solutions is nigh-on global in scale. It is certainly at least one continent's worth of economy, hence any nonsense about strategic autonomy has to be heavily qualified. I suspect that after the dust has settled re Russia's invasion of Ukraine, that a lot of countries will be revisiting those calculations.

In respect of the Challenger 3 upgrade what none of us know - or at least none of us who do know can disclose - is what confidential arrangements are in place to ensure that the necessary minimum design team, industrial capability, through life support, and contractual autonomy are in place. It might be that none of that is in place, in which case potentially the German government might have an arms control 'lock' on the Ch3 turret. However it might be that all those are in place - including confidential government-to-government arrangements - in which case there can never be a question of a German 'lock'. We simply don't know, but what we do know is that it is not as simplistic as some assume.

This river flows in many directions. As an example the Argentine efforts to re-equip their air force have frequently foundered because the relevant aircraft that they coveted included UK owned IP, most often the ejector seats.


================


The data that became available a few months ago revealed that the KIA ratio for personnel was 6:1 in Ukraine's favour. Given that pre-war population sizes were 3:1 in Russia's favor, but that a lot of the better educated Russian males in-zone for conscription promptly fled the country, these staggering ongoing loss-rates appear simply unsustainable for Russia. By late 2022 it seems about 900,000 Russians had fled Russia (see link below, it is likely over 1m now) and the vast majority of those appear to be male. In contrast Ukraine appears to have very little equivalent thinning out of its corresponding pool. Personally I hope that we in the broader Western alliance give Ukraine all that is necessary for them to promptly clear the Russian invasion out of their territory at minimum further loss of Ukrainian life; and that the West retains its strategic patience through this effort and beyond.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....3697f9c290.png


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia...ion_of_Ukraine

"Following the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, more than 300,000 Russian citizens and residents are estimated to have left Russia by mid-March 2022, at least 500,000 by the end of August 2022, and an additional 400,000[1] by early October, for a total of approximately 900,000. This number includes economic migrants, conscientious objectors, and some political refugees"

Allied estimates now putting Russian loses at around 188,000 - and that may exclude those of the Wagner group.

To me Crimea looks to be the lynch pin, retake Crimea and destroy the bridge, Russia then loses the ability to attack and resupply from that direction, they also lose the port facilities, once that area is secured then the rest of the frontline becomes more managable, there are few supply lines in from mainland Russia so once they are removed from the equation Russia will be struggling to hold anything and the coast line areas will be restored.

Surly, someone soon, must tap Putin on the shoulder and say…. This is not going very well??

Or am I being foolish in thinking that.??

Curious: do you think there is the required political will amongst the Western allies to support UKR re-taking Crimea?
I mean "we" effectively turned a blind eye for 8yrs, so what's the political calculus that justifies a roll-back on this stance? And will it wash with the electorate who may settle for a de-minimis "victory" of pre- Feb 2022 borders?

Given the gyrations of the French and Germans governments to do the minimum possible, I have serious reservations that re-taking Crimea will get the support needed.

The mistake re UK nuclear weapons has already been pointed out: here is another example. In 2013 Saudi wanted to order 800 Leopard 2 tanks - an enormous order. This was refused on political grounds and the Saudis bought M1A1/2 instead. Both of these tanks use the 120 mm cannon which is built under a license from Rheinmetall. Either the German government doesn't care when the component is much less obviously "German " than a complete tank ( not many newspaper reader will know/care about the origin of the cannon ) or "free use " was part of the license contract,

F16's seen as being of little importance ?
 

It puzzles me somewhat that the agreed supply of F16's from NL is being noted with a sort of "yeah, ok" and nothing more. I would have thought this significantly more important than the tank question.

The annexation of Crimea by Russia has never been recognised by the UN or in many other countries and resulted in sanctions being applied. How long that status quo would have remained is now a moot point because Putin's adventurism has inadvertently put it under direct threat. As others have pointed out, the continued Russian occupation of Crimea would be a loaded gun pointing at Kiev, so if Western support for Ukraine puts them in a position to force the Russians out they will probably do it. By their actions (or lack of them) Germany and France are making themselves irrelevant.

I don't know, but can you see any other way of ending the conflict?, if Russia is allowed to retain those post 2014 lands then they will have the ability to relaunch an attack when they have suitably rearmed and at the time of their choosing. Without the bridge, the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov coast Line and its ports the opportunity to bring in troops from Russsia will be limited to the land borders thus making Ukraine far more able to defend themselves, They could rip up all the rail routes and road routes along the border making any future incursions difficult to sustain.
The problem with the Pre Feb 2022 borders is Ukraines Oil, Gas and mineral wealth is in those areas you describe along with the offshore fields. Why would Ukraine ever agree to give those up along with their lands, especially after the cost in Ukrainian lives in the likes of Mariupol.

The will to continue the fight is the pivotal point. Ukraine really now has no choice, whereas the cost for Russia can be become intolerable and the political will to continue may then fail. Logically, N Vietnam could never have succeeded against the might of the US if you just assessed it in terms of numbers and kit.

We saw what you did there. :ok:.

A military victory with Ukranian's "ejecting the Russian forces" seems far over the horizon: Mark Miley - chairman of Joint Chief of Staff said just a few days ago that it would be "very, very difficult" for Ukraine to take back control of all occupied territory this year. Next year then? The year after? I don't think Ukraine will enjoy indefinite and unconditional support, so its in backers interest that the conflict ends quickly; in timescales that may be incompatible with a military victory. And even if that eventuated, would it guarantee no future Russian aggression, or just continued low(er) intensity conflict around restored borders?

Another option is a obviously a negotiated settlement ... that isn't a Russian ruse to pause and rebuild. For a good-faith negotiation the core demands of one side have to materially change. Current prospects for that seem rather thin. Unless ....

.... there is a Russian implosion; social and/or economic, and with the "consent" of Putin's associate, who see more to gain from letting it pan-out than trying to stop it.

This last option is - IMHO - the most likely end to the conflict, as it could meet the pre-conditions for that negotiated settlement mentioned above, depending on what the immediate post-Putin Russia looks like. Whether this could lead to Crimea returning to Ukranian control I have no idea. I do however think that lasting peace will only come with some security guarantees for Ukraine, if not NATO membership. But as always, trying to foresee politically driven decisions is a fools errand...

Also it's a home game for Ukraine and an away match for Russia with all the advantages and disadvantages that entails

The article highlights one thing which does maybe not really help pushing Scholz to deliver the tanks. Industry representatives are concerned that the prospect of them being replaced with Abrams means that KMW/Rheinmetall and their products will be driven out of these countries with little hope to keep the foothold in these markets for future tank sales once the Countries have switched Training, Maintenenance and Spare Parts stocks to the US model.. So agreeing to give away the Leopards damages the German Arms manufacturers. That said, not letting them giving them away will also hurt them. Between a Rock and a hard place. It's a kind of a poisoned offering (not giving them to Ukraine, but readily giving them to Finland, Poland, Spain) and may explain somewhat heated discussions. Still doesn't excuse the blocking by Scholz. But might rather contribute than discourage him from blocking.

From the artocle: In the bigger scheme of things this is still very short sighted. The damage regarding the reputation being done now is much bigger than maybe buying in future more Leo3 than the bare minimum needed (1000 instead of 300) and then giving them to other Countries for competitive prices. With a higher production volume the manufacturers could set up much more efficient serial production instead of the individual manufactory work they are created in today. The Leopard 2 being used across Europe almost all are built based on the Chassis of the 2125 Leopard 2 once built for the German Army in series production back in the day.

As they are currently developing the latest Leo version it would make sense to put the hulls back into production assuming they can, after all tanks for the last thirty odd years is more or less the same items regurgitated into the latest mark, even the T90 is simply a T 72 with added bling and a new number to flog it to Foreign Countries. Snazzy new names flogs the old dog with new looks but under its skirts it’s still a T72.

The Russians see Sevastopol as theirs and have a large Naval contingent there.
It would be very very difficult for Ukraine to capture unless there is a Russian capitulation along the who front which seems unlikely unless there is the removal of Putin and his pals.
The bigger concern would be the tactical use of a bucket of sunshine as a warning.
If Sevastopol is in imminent danger of falling then the Russians would likely have been pushed back over the border along the front, and without knowing the full US ultimatum, (most likely they will only attack Russian positions in Ukraine), then the Russians have less to loose and are safe over the border.

Putting the UN in there may help a little, but I suspect very few countries will agree to send peacekeepers and it will turn into a counter insurgency mess.

I thought global warming had rendered the need for a warm water port a moot point as Russia now has ports that no longer freeze up in the Black Sea. Sevastopol was only rented to Russia.

There is only one aggressor in this war and it is Russia.
There is only one country that has invaded and occupied the soil of internationally recognised, sovereign country. That invader is Russia.
Crimea is Ukraine.
If Russia by some chance is announced the winner and Crimea (or any part of Ukraine) recognized as part of Russia, the WW3 is much closer than it will ever be in the case of Ukraine getting to rule its own territory. Russian ambitions do not restrict to Ukraine, just hear what all the former Warsow pact countries have to say and what Russia says of those. What if Russia wins and they start thinking that "wow, all those NATO countries fed Ukraine and still they lost, they must be exhausted by now, now is the time to take the Baltics/Suwalki gap/Poland/Åland islands/Finland/whatever."

What comes to the proposal of replacing Leos with Abrams one to one for countries donating Leos to Ukraine even though Germans wouldn't agree on it: who cares what German arms manufacturers or German government thinks afterwards. The Leos are long gone to Ukraine by then with spares and everything including spare tanks to cannibalize. It's game over for German MBT business at that point once all the customers have turned to something else, and for a reason.

Maybe UK or French MBT business will bloom then, who knows.

I'm not sure the US would be willing to do this. They could probably then wave good bye to their own clauses. Which they consider very important. If Poland does it on their own they might not obect. But to atcively encourage to circumvent these almost holy (to themselves) agreements? I slightly doubt it.

Dream on ;-)
Seriously: The French are apparently pondering to get out of MGCS and run Leclerc until they rust away (2060+). UK has largely gotten rid of its own tank manufacturers already.
Next Generation MBT with unmanned turrets currently under actual development are basically MGCS/Leopard 3, Rheinmetall KF51 and Abrams X (leaving Armata aside).
Under actual development with a bigger caliber gun (130 or 140mm, respectively with up to 50% higher muzzle energy) are only Leo3/MGCS and KF51.

I understand your point, but the longer this current situation goes on the more urgent it will be to provide UKR western MBT's, and the best option in numbers is Leo due to training/spares/logistics (and the turbine engine dispute).
If the west is going to support Ukraine till the end, the MBT's will be needed and if Germans are stubborn something has to be done without them.

And then comes the question of aircrafts as Migs and SU's will need replacement eventually. F16's or some other FJ. What puzzles me is the lack of discussion on that topic though, NL said they'd be happy to provide Vipers, US says why not, end of discussion. What's going on?

Beamr
No chance of UK made MBT, it will be an Abraham or Lep 3, we can’t even make a decent APC given current kit assembly one’s issues .

I think you need to understand German politics more as they are not just sending, or Green lighting 14 old Challengers, the ones being sent are not ones that were going to be upgraded. We are talking about a country that invaded Russia with tanks and many of them. If Germany Green lights the re export of Lep 2 there is a potential for many tanks again rolling on the Steppes. If you don’t understand the optics of that in Germany or Russia you do not understand the issues at play.
I am pretty sure Germany will be making tanks for quite awhile yet.

Cheers
Mr Mac

Well, since we are picking that old fight up again, I do understand the optics of a lot of T34's rolling west through Karelian ishtmus without being invited. And to Katyn. And to Tallinn. And just like Russians today send Siberian people to Ukraine to die, they sent an Ukrainian division to die in Finland as they don't care for others (racial, ethnic, nationality, if not Russian then considered lower people).

Germany already sent Marders and no one bats an eye. Putin couldn't care less which MBT's are fielded, they are still fighting NATO and nazis in their propaganda.
Germany isn't the one Russkies are picking in their propaganda but the US. They want to be amongst the big guys, China and US. They don't compare themselves to any old "US lapdog", it doesn't fit the great Russian Mir thinking.

How long ago did the 3rd Reich Germany invade the USSR (including Ukraine), and did far fewer rapes and murders in Ukraine than the USSR when they came back the other way?

How long ago (a clue, it's rather more recently) since Russia/the USSR murdered Hungarian and Czech civilians who wanted minor changes towards a more democratic form of government?

Who (except in Putin's perverted mind and propaganda) believes there is the slightest potential for European tanks rolling across the steppes?

I know there can be more than one point of view, but to be respected a point of view needs some basis in reality.

Not even Putin believes Putin. If he did, he would have de-escalated given the provocation he poses.

Crikey.. I wouldn’t want to be on the receiving end of that lot.