Russia has depleted its tank stocks: the industry is not covering combat losses
-
Elsewhere on Lemmy today;
Germany warns Russia may be preparing attack on NATO
Both of these cannot be true.
They can be true. They might be low on current stockpile, but what is building up is production capacity. Preparing to attack doesn't mean immediately attacking, what most have concern is that once Russia's war against Ukraine cools down, Russia will spend the next 4-10 years building up towards potentially attacking NATO nations.
Yes, years down the line doesn't sound as alarming to the layman, but it is critical for that eventuality to be recognized and prepared for, nations and industry move slowly, and they need to prepare to fight another long drawn out war.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.
And somehow it won't effect the war at all
-
Artikel 42 EU treaty. All members of the EU have to fight with their full capacity. This will escalate quickly.
There are already EU troops in the Baltics, just to remind the Russans of it.
-
when that wagner guy revolted, it was the final nail in the coffin
What was crazy during the Wagner Revolt was the intransigence of the Ukraine line.
You'd think that would be the moment for a full press by Ukraine troops over a lightly defended border. But no... they just stayed put and watched Prigovian flounder.
The Partnership: The Secret History of the War in Ukraine
https://lemmy.world/post/27574354NYT article explains it.
-
Then move troops there
We can't put all our troops in the Baltics, nevermind the fact that we don't have all that much troops and ammunition. Most of our money is spent on high tech weapons in limited numbers.
The European NATO members already outspend Russia in terms of military investments
Not really.
In terms of Euros spent, yes, we outspend them, but when adjusted for purchasing power we're scarily close to parity: 100 rubles in Russia buys you a lot more than 1 euro in Europe. And our militaries are hopelessly fragmented, and behind in the rearming race.
Anders Puck Nielsen has a very informative video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxq-TvgNCBU
The rubel is massively devalued. PPP calculations have to be taken with a grain of salt.
-
t-14s have been exploded
Ehhhh, more like they only had like 15 of the things and none where really out of a prototype phase. Not worth sending due to the bad propaganda when they do get blown up (since there has been no tank platform in that conflict that does not get got).
I think Ukraine scored kills on one or two t-14s in the first year before Russia realized their mistake. I'll have to double check though.
-
Ditto for the su-57 felon.
Why is it impossible for a squadron of F-22s to defeat a squadron of SU-57s?
:::
Russia would have to actually build a squadron first
:::
-
We have to keep in mind that Europe needs to justify austerity for the citizens and rearmament for their militaries. I have no evidence of this, but I think it's an entierly sensible read that the warning from Germany is an overstatement with that intent in mind.
Yes, because it will impact social programs. That hardship needs to be justified.
-
That's because you're not thinking like Putin. Starting this war in the first place was the worst possible idea that never made any sense, except it allowed Putin to reform the slipping grip on the country and cemented his regime and his vision for at least some time. But just like the empires of old, now his regime requires constant slow boiling war to operate.
He will happily sacrifice every Russian to this, he can easily afford losing a thousand men per day to the grinder. It costs very little to him. European countries on the other hand will be very very hurt by the war on their territory, and everyone understands it.Starting this war in the first place was the worst possible idea that never made any sense
It made sense to the NATO strategists who recommended to not expand NATO further, because of that war.
-
The rubel is massively devalued. PPP calculations have to be taken with a grain of salt.
The rubel is massively devalued
The ruble's exchange rate is on the level of 2020-2021: 0,011 euro to the ruble. Shows how much you know.
Also, most of the military production is internal... so the exchange rate of the ruble is meaningless to determine relative military strength, which is precisely why a PPP conversion is needed.
-
The rubel is massively devalued
The ruble's exchange rate is on the level of 2020-2021: 0,011 euro to the ruble. Shows how much you know.
Also, most of the military production is internal... so the exchange rate of the ruble is meaningless to determine relative military strength, which is precisely why a PPP conversion is needed.
Right, I was too lazy to check.
-
The Partnership: The Secret History of the War in Ukraine
https://lemmy.world/post/27574354NYT article explains it.
Heavy stuff.
-
I don't think there was a good option that was also realistic.
The T-90M is itself a long in the tooth design that hasn't gotten the kinds of modernizations that tanks like the Abrams have to keep it relevant (and even then the Abrams is already being retired by the U.S.) Russian tanks needed an overhaul from the T-90M.The T-14 on paper had a lot of good upgrades. The problem of course being that it's much easier to draw something than make it work.
What Russian tanks needed was an overhaul to their fire control and ideally their protection to keep up and shift into active protection. The ancient curtain system is not cutting it.
Part of my wonders if maybe they should have invested in something scaled back and novel. Make a lightweight vehicle like the totally-not-a-tank-we-swear M10 Booker. Something lightweight, with a smaller caliber main gun to focus on taking out structures and infantry targets. Stick some active protection on it, and some missiles and you've got a vehicle that bridges that gap between IFV and MBT.
From my very limited understanding that's kinda what they tried with the BMD lineup. Problem is because they're for airborne use they end up too light to protect anything, and loaded with ATGMs, a 100mm cannon, and a 30mm for squirting lighter targets. Basically on first hit it goes up like a Christmas tree lol
-
Artikel 42 EU treaty. All members of the EU have to fight with their full capacity. This will escalate quickly.
There are already EU troops in the Baltics, just to remind the Russans of it.
You should read Article 42.
-
Russia was ridiculed by a very small army. It does not stand against NATO
Ukraine isn’t a very small army. They’re the second largest army in Europe.
-
That’s what APCs and lighter infantry vehicles are for. They’re not going away. It’s main battle tanks (the ones that cost millions of dollars) that are going away.
Moving troops around in safety is going to be extremely challenging but that’s because of enemy drones, not enemy tanks. Drones can fly recon around a moving personnel carrier just as easily as planes fly recon around an aircraft carrier.
I haven’t seen a single high ranking general or military strategist that suggests MBTs are going away. It’s just badly informed people on the internet that watched a couple of YT drone clips and think they’ve mastered the art of warfare.
-
We have to keep in mind that Europe needs to justify austerity for the citizens and rearmament for their militaries. I have no evidence of this, but I think it's an entierly sensible read that the warning from Germany is an overstatement with that intent in mind.
I guess you need to pretend there's a threat NOW in order to divert funds towards defense now.
If the threat is in more like 10 years, why don't we start investing next year instead? etc.
-
I still can’t believe how fucking shameless their regime is with those “prizes”. Like… holy fuck.
It's about search engine squatting, if you now search "Russia meatgrinder" you get that, instead of articles about losing the war.
-
Kinda what happened to battleships in the era of aircraft carriers and submarines?
