Let’s start with the fact that after more than a 100 years we still use the code name tank for vehicles that most definitely are not tanks.
This person does not understand what jargon is.
1 Like
some notable examples of WW2 vehicles that are similarly Not Tanks:
appropriate answer to “ACTUALLY that’s not a tank”
Did you know an AR-15 is technically a sandwich, not a gun.
4 Likes
https://twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1616149727061344293?s=20&t=jVFKQvh94YWkf7-AKcfx3A
Several countries will announce sending Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine on Friday at a meeting at the German Ramstein Air Base, the Lithuanian defence minister said on Thursday.
Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit, wisdom is not using it to shoot up a room full of schoolchildren
5 Likes
I think I read that supply might be a problem, but they’re cheap. And Russian air defense systems might be busy guarding other targets.
https://twitter.com/maria_drutska/status/1616158818957774848?s=20&t=jVFKQvh94YWkf7-AKcfx3A
Maybe. I’ve read that the HIMARS missiles aren’t really hard for the Russians to shoot down but a lot of times they’re fired alongside volleys of cheap unguided MLRS rockets as decoys. So Russians can track everything in flight but they can’t really pick out the real threat that’s the couple of guided missiles alongside the dozen unguided rockets on similar trajectories. But then that wouldn’t work with the small diameter bombs we’re talking about because Ukraine wouldn’t have any cheap, unguided munitions that could fly the same flight profile as the guided glide bomb.
Still working the nuclear threat.
https://twitter.com/vtchakarova/status/1616115110895882247?s=20&t=jVFKQvh94YWkf7-AKcfx3A
https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1616143540362280996?s=20&t=jVFKQvh94YWkf7-AKcfx3A
Did Medvedev make that distinction? I don’t think he intends or wants it to be clear because that would make it less scary. The bluster has worn thin but he’s going to get whatever mileage out of it he can.
“Major conflicts on which their fates depend” kind of implies that imo. I don’t think that any nuclear power has fought that sort of war though. Including this current war in Ukraine. But I think the Ukraine war is much more important to Russia than any post ww2 us wars though. And Russia losing, say, Crimea might fit that description pretty well.
But all wars are justified that way. Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan. National security. Dominoes. Vital national interests. Whatever.
Anyway, it’s not true. Ukraine is important to Putin. Putin’s fate might depend on it. Putin is not Russia though. Russia had been fine without Crimea.
Vietnam was literally: if USA#1 doesn’t stop 'em here it’s gonna be Domino’s cheesy stuffed communists around every corner. Some “advocated” using nukes in Vietnam.
2 Likes
Article in Dutch newspaper implies that Holland is going to pay the Baltic states for sending Leopard tanks because the Dutch government is not willing to cross the German export restrictions directly themselves. Don’t think Germany can block this much longer without looking even worse than they already do.
Seems like this goes the other way, if the US was that crazy about an objectively small unimportant country a continent away imagine how crazy the US would be if it were an objectively important country? Irrationality all around, but luckily rationality won out and the US left without nuking it.
Don’t really have to imagine it, look at the US reaction to Soviet designs on Cuba. Not even an important country, just one right next door. Imagine what would happen if an important country like Mexico or Canada got out of line.
please provide a citation where you saw this argument. currently, it is kind of a misinformation trope that air defenses make short work of HIMARS, but that has not been confirmed by US, EU, or UA brass, or really by evidence. The Makiivka strike was reportedly Himars/Gmlrs, where RU MOD claimed it intercepted 4 of 6 rockets. well, that might be true, but it didn’t matter as secondary detonation of the weapon cache destroyed the whole building, an effect even 6 himars couldn’t have achieved.
on the other hand, it has been backed up by evidence that Russia fired dud-tipped (or training) cruise missiles during their strikes on Kyiv and Dnipro, and energy infrastructure, in hopes that western missile defense will shoot those down instead of live warheads. which they did.
still the fact is that UA and the west have doubled and tripled down on getting HIMARS/GMLRS to the front. i don’t think Milley would keep sending a weapons system, nor would Austin try to ramp up their production, if they were easily defeated.
at least some of russian air defenses works is by situating themselves along the probable approach path to a target, and it may decide to intercept the missile and explode in its path or try to catch it from behind (this happened with UA S-300 rocket that fell in Poland). Pantsir similarly needs to be in a pretty sweet spot to have a good shot at it. S-400 i think is different in that it can pick up a missile earlier, and fire to intercept as well as catch. it can also track more targets. but it’s important to note that HIMARS mobility means that interception risk can be minimized if s-300 locations is known, and it can also try to overwhelm a single battery by firing multiple sets.
On the other hand you have Pakinstan & India, North Korea & its neighbors, soon maybe Iran? I’m saying this with humility because nobody least of all me wants to fafo but it’s not like enemies with nukes near each other is instant war in 2023. Russia’s omg National Interest Red Lines in Ukraine is just a preference for its imperial ambitions, nothing more.
Sure but Russia’s Ukraine red lines could lead to general thermonuclear war just as USA#1’s red lines with Cuba could have led to general thermonuclear war. Were the US red lines rational when really all the Soviets were doing was mirroring US medium range nuclear ballistic missile deployments in Turkey? Opinions vary. That the US Monroe Doctrine red lines were unreasonable and irrational would have been cold comfort to the tens of millions who would have died in that conflict. And the hundreds of millions who would die if Ukraine kicks off a nuclear exchange would be able to say that hey, the question of Ukraine being in Russia’s sphere of influence really shouldn’t actually be an existential question for Russia. Worth something I suppose.