Russia has depleted its tank stocks: the industry is not covering combat losses
-
Just leave Lemmy already, you are cancer
Your comment is the more stupid here
-
I think at this point the unspoken truth is that we must have a military that needs to be a deterrent to the US as well.
US has thousand military facilities all over europe, you could simply lower the gap by kicking them out. Making such claim a year ago would have get you labeled as a russian troll.
Everyone upvoting your comment should take half of the money in his wallet and donate them to the government because that's how you match US trillion dollar budget.
-
Yes because Russia will build more tanks and other equipment in the next decade. Not a problem if Europe builds up too. But that will be a problem if Europe does nothing.
If Russia were an immediate threat, Europe would have no choice but to give Trump whatever he wants so the US will protect Europe. But with Russian forces being decimated by this war, Europe has the opportunity to build it's own arms industry to be able to produce it's own weapons to be able to counter Russia in a decade's time.
Europe does nothing.
European countries combined are already spending more money on war than russia. European countries have a big arms industry already and they export weapons all over the world, including to countries ruled by dictatorships like saudi arabia. They even sold weapons to russia in the past years that are being used in the ukraine war.
-
I'm going to go with what European military leaders are saying, out loud and in public. God knows what those leaders really know and talk about.
I'm guessing you're European? Well, you've had 80 years of mostly peace and prosperity. Timed to get armed, personally. (Yes my fellow Americans, Europeans can acquire guns without too much hassle. Yes, real guns. Gun ownership just isn't a major part of their culture like it is over here.)
If you're allergic to guns, consider these two scenarios:
-
Hostile foreign power invades America.
-
Hostile foreign power invades Europe.
In which case do you expect the invader to suffer the most? Which case do you consider more likely?
I’m guessing you’re European? Well, you’ve had 80 years of mostly peace and prosperity.
I'm guessing you are american because you sound like you don't know much history
-
-
I don't know what to think anymore. I feel like every week for the last 4 years it's been "China's economy is going collapse any day now" and "Russia is losing to many people and resources in this war. They might as well give all of Russia to Ukraine"
I don't take any news written in English with any seriousness for these two countries.
-
European leaders are already talking about using the new army to invade the Middle East.
It's funny how easily people are deceived, imagine if your house neighbor were to buy some howitzers and hire 100 guys for "security reasons". Armies are made to wage war and most weapons are designed to kill other humans.
-
You are ignoring the elephant in the room, which is that a rising sense of militarism quickly feeds into a decay of your society, if you make an incredible amount of guns somebody is going to use them, that is how these things work.
I am not saying Europe shouldn't absolutely take being able to militarily counter Russia seriously, as they should any regional threat, but what is needed isn't necessarily to reshape Europe into a hypermilitarized environment, especially in the area of police and the militarization of police, what Europe needs is to make sure it has effective counters to a mass, mechanized land war.
One of the most effective counters, and a decisive element of the war in Ukranian has been HIMARs, long range missiles capable of striking mobile Russian SAM assets and other high value targets from extremely far away. These make maneuvering a large concentrated armored force much much much more costly and dangerous.
...but this all devolves into a sense of militarism that undermines the original reason for making all the guns in the first place, it is just a matter of how far you can push it in your society before that cancer becomes terminal... see the U.S. as a prime example....
Even your comment advocating for reasonable spending gets downvoted. People are mad on war propaganda.
-
where's that super next-next-gen Russian Armata thing? is that a ghost tank?
It never really existed in production, of course. It is like the early builds of the AK-12 where one offs were made and shown off as if they were going into full scale production soon.
The more real BMPT was at least fielded in double digit numbers, although conceptually it seems more suited to being a terror weapon supporting a shock & awe type advance rather than something used in a prolonged war.
-
It never really existed in production, of course. It is like the early builds of the AK-12 where one offs were made and shown off as if they were going into full scale production soon.
The more real BMPT was at least fielded in double digit numbers, although conceptually it seems more suited to being a terror weapon supporting a shock & awe type advance rather than something used in a prolonged war.
i don't mean this in a dickish way, but I do love that concept of "just say something incorrect or incomplete" about war and someone will be happy to bring clarification
-
where's that super next-next-gen Russian Armata thing? is that a ghost tank?
-
There's been very little damage to Russia so far though.
That's true, if you listen to Russian media exclusively.
-
I don't know what to think anymore. I feel like every week for the last 4 years it's been "China's economy is going collapse any day now" and "Russia is losing to many people and resources in this war. They might as well give all of Russia to Ukraine"
I don't take any news written in English with any seriousness for these two countries.
Russia has spent up enough of of their mainline modern vehicles like T-90Ms to a point where the refurbishments have long ago stopped keeping up. Similarly IFVs are lost, especially many of their airborne models which were misused early in the war.
The war has become much more static, with Russian vehicle losses slowing them down. The final on Avdiivka for example was completely brutal, lasting a month and consisting of a lot of unsupported infantry charges over an open field. The Russians did eventually win, taking the fortified position they were assaulting, but the tactics used and amount of losses to do them are not something that would have happened if they'd had the vehicles to spare.
The shear scale of the war has had Russia brute force it from being a maneuver fight to an attrition fight, and Russia is banking on having the higher population to win.
Also, pretty sure modern warfare has learned heavily that tanks are completely obsolete against drones. Or even less modern warfare tells us how useless they are in cities against [guerrilla] fighters.
Tanks are one tool in the box, and like any other tool they are adapting to drones. Drones are not a silver bullet, and they especially are not as useful in supporting or spearheading fast moving offensives, which is still an important role tanks will fill.
As for cities, tanks have always had trouble in cities. This isn't a revelation of this war. Militaries tend to be skiddish of putting tanks in city fights unless they really have to. Russia particularly still has memories of Chechnya in this regard.
-
Interesting to note that since 2022, he lost under 1% of his population to the war... Meat attacks could go on for years on end and it would barely move him.
You got to get him out of the picture to have this war end.
Not long ago, a Russian politician was asking women to dress "less modestly" in order to have more kids, so they know they can't keep it going that long
-
Interesting to note that since 2022, he lost under 1% of his population to the war... Meat attacks could go on for years on end and it would barely move him.
You got to get him out of the picture to have this war end.
he lost under 1% of his population to the war
This is not entirely accurate figure. The 1% is only the number of people confirmed dead by the independent sources like Mediazona. The number of people who are "missing in action" but just can't be confirmed dead is staggeringly more than that. Also don't forget that that's mostly people of productive age and demographic, which skews the metrics a little. Also add to it all the people who left the country, which are also of the most productive demographics.
That being said, Russia is big, and meat attacks could indeed go on for years. It will be devastating for Russia, but not for Putin.
there’s probably worse than him coming next
That's the scary scenario, but there is also a bunch of boring technocrats that might be put in place by the oligarchy, which sounds great in comparison.
-
It never really existed in production, of course. It is like the early builds of the AK-12 where one offs were made and shown off as if they were going into full scale production soon.
The more real BMPT was at least fielded in double digit numbers, although conceptually it seems more suited to being a terror weapon supporting a shock & awe type advance rather than something used in a prolonged war.
definitely sounds ridiculous -- but -- maybe i listen to a lot of knowledge fight -- could be a psy-op? can you prove to me that beans growing with corn is not a psy-op?
-
Interesting to note that since 2022, he lost under 1% of his population to the war... Meat attacks could go on for years on end and it would barely move him.
You got to get him out of the picture to have this war end.
Interesting to note that since 2022, he lost under 1% of his population to the war... Meat attacks could go on for years on end and it would barely move him.
If that "1% of his population" refers to the general population, I would note that the total includes many people who could never fight, such as:
- all those involved, whether directly or indirectly, in the development and production of military hardware,
- all those involved, whether directly or indirectly, in the extraction and trade of natural resources, without which the Russian economy would collapse, and
- all those physically unable to fight, such as children, the elderly and disabled people, and all those who care for them in one way or another.
As much as Putin's tyranny may yet squeeze out of the general population, 1% in three years is already devastating, in my view.
-
I hope this hits Russia hard, but I wonder how much Russia needs tanks at this stage of the war vs a breadth and depth of infantry and artillery reserves.
Main battle tanks are for punching through enemy defenses and making a run on enclosing enemy forces/enemy territory.
Once you capture that territory tanks are still very much useful, especially because of their mobility and ability to reposition quickly, but they aren't necessary in the same way that you need some kind of tank or something behaving like a tank in the maneuver portion of the war. Even if Ukraine counterattacks with main battle tanks, the most effective counters in that case are artillery, entrenched infantry, and mechanized infantry with effective AT that can respond and reposition to slow down armored columns attempting to break through their front lines. Don't get me wrong, tanks would absolutely decisively help too, but if I had to choose between depriving Russia of artillery and depriving Russia of tanks, I would choose artillery. I mean... obviously but especially at this stage of the war.
Who knows though, I hope Ukraine can get a steady supply of main battle tanks from someone (do they currently?), if Russia can't field main battle tanks even if it doesn't immediately affect the strategic balance of the war, the immediate psychological impact and tactical efficiency of tanks chewing through emplaced machine gun nests and enemy positions will be huge. No matter where you are on the battlefield you know that if Ukranians show up with an actual main battle tank, you are fucked as a Russian unless you have a whole lot of artillery/air support at the ready.
155mm, and the U.S. has about 1500 of its M109 self propelled guns in service.
-
Elsewhere on Lemmy today;
Germany warns Russia may be preparing attack on NATO
Both of these cannot be true.
Not with tanks. Probably with hypersonic nukes instead.
-
Elsewhere on Lemmy today;
Germany warns Russia may be preparing attack on NATO
Both of these cannot be true.
Everything written about this conflict (by anyone) is propaganda. The enemy is a powerful and maximally oppressive force we all need to fear, but is also so weak it's losing equipment fast and its final defeat is only a matter of time.
-
Elsewhere on Lemmy today;
Germany warns Russia may be preparing attack on NATO
Both of these cannot be true.
