|
Post by mtrstudent on Jan 21, 2023 17:01:35 GMT
I could easily give away something I don't have so it's a pity those 3 Baltic States don't have a Leopard between them or indeed Britain has so few serviceable Challenger Tanks it can only commit 14 I proposed one theory above for the dithering, there are probably many. There is obviously some reason stopping US sending Abrams which would break the deadlock. From what I understand, deploying Abrams tanks requires a far greater logistics effort than Leopards and Challengers, as the things are incredibly thirsty. They are something of an "all in" weapon, whereas the Leopard (and I assume the Challenger 2) require far less support than the Abrams. Seen a lot of arguments kinda going each way but General Mark Hertling seems like someone who'd know his shit and basically says that. I think older versions that would be sent need jet fuel while Ukraine is set up for diesel. But the engine is listed as "multi fuel" so I'm confused.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 21, 2023 17:04:04 GMT
I could easily give away something I don't have so it's a pity those 3 Baltic States don't have a Leopard between them or indeed Britain has so few serviceable Challenger Tanks it can only commit 14 I proposed one theory above for the dithering, there are probably many. There is obviously some reason stopping US sending Abrams which would break the deadlock. From what I understand, deploying Abrams tanks requires a far greater logistics effort than Leopards and Challengers, as the things are incredibly thirsty. They are something of an "all in" weapon, whereas the Leopard (and I assume the Challenger 2) require far less support than the Abrams. As far as I know, which isn't a lot, you are exactly correct But it's all symbolic if US commits Tanks then it gives Germany Cover (and additional pressure) to do the same. So it's kind of in US hands to a certain extent and they are holding back for whatever reason Also the US are not putting pressure on Germany as far as I'm aware?
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Jan 21, 2023 17:14:07 GMT
From what I understand, deploying Abrams tanks requires a far greater logistics effort than Leopards and Challengers, as the things are incredibly thirsty. They are something of an "all in" weapon, whereas the Leopard (and I assume the Challenger 2) require far less support than the Abrams. As far as I know, which isn't a lot, you are exactly correct But it's all symbolic if US commits Tanks then it gives Germany Cover (and additional pressure) to do the same. So it's kind of in US hands to a certain extent and they are holding back for whatever reason Also the US are not putting pressure on Germany as far as I'm aware? it is thought that the UK and France sending tanks (the French tank is stretching the description of a tank, but it's dictionary correct apparently), then that would put enough pressure on Germany to join the fun. It looks like there's something (probably called Russia) that's stopping Germany from releasing the Leopards.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 21, 2023 17:51:35 GMT
As far as I know, which isn't a lot, you are exactly correct But it's all symbolic if US commits Tanks then it gives Germany Cover (and additional pressure) to do the same. So it's kind of in US hands to a certain extent and they are holding back for whatever reason Also the US are not putting pressure on Germany as far as I'm aware? it is thought that the UK and France sending tanks (the French tank is stretching the description of a tank, but it's dictionary correct apparently), then that would put enough pressure on Germany to join the fun. It looks like there's something (probably called Russia) that's stopping Germany from releasing the Leopards.
"Cry 'Havoc!', and let slip the Dogs Leopards of War" Shakespeare
|
|
|
Post by denfcdk on Jan 21, 2023 19:45:27 GMT
Thoughts (trying to be not too emotional, but it is not easy) from Kyiv: -we need tanks to survive; -putin is afraid of bigger power, so military support to Ukraine is crucial to break down his regime; -putin doesn't want to stop only in Ukraine, you can't avoid bigger war sacrificing Ukraine or part of Ukraine. russia is going only to use time to gather more people/tanks etc; -every single day is priceless, it is about human lives, real people, real families.
And, of course, we understand that West doesn't have to help us, it is only your good will, it is your kindness and compassion. People like you guys push your governments to make these truly historical steps to stop russian evil.
Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jan 21, 2023 20:08:37 GMT
Thoughts (trying to be not too emotional, but it is not easy) from Kyiv: -we need tanks to survive; -putin is afraid of bigger power, so military support to Ukraine is crucial to break down his regime; -putin doesn't want to stop only in Ukraine, you can't avoid bigger war sacrificing Ukraine or part of Ukraine. russia is going only to use time to gather more people/tanks etc; -every single day is priceless, it is about human lives, real people, real families. And, of course, we understand that West doesn't have to help us, it is only your good will, it is your kindness and compassion. People like you guys push your governments to make these truly historical steps to stop russian evil. Thank you. Absolutely Although it's absolutely right to support Ukraine against Putins war it's also in all of Europe's interest to as well Don’t like US dragging their feet re tanks but for Germany it makes no sense at all You can't play peacemaker with Putin
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jan 21, 2023 21:06:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 21, 2023 22:26:44 GMT
It's hardly surprising that Qatars Propaganda Organ would take a partular slant It's unlikely to gain serious traction other than by the more naive The emir of Qatar has thanked Vladimir Putin for his “great support” with the 2022 FIFA World Cup, even as the Russian president’s lethal war on Ukraine continues.
The leaders met Thursday at a regional summit in Astana, Kazakhstan, where Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani lavished praise on Putin, who has become a pariah in the West since launching his full-scale assault in February.
www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.eu/article/qatars-emir-gushes-over-vladimir-putin-for-world-cup-support/amp/
|
|
|
Post by drfootball on Jan 22, 2023 13:27:14 GMT
I could easily give away something I don't have so it's a pity those 3 Baltic States don't have a Leopard between them or indeed Britain has so few serviceable Challenger Tanks it can only commit 14 I proposed one theory above for the dithering, there are probably many. There is obviously some reason stopping US sending Abrams which would break the deadlock. Abrams is a complicated, maintenance intensive and massively thirsty beast ( 3 gallons to the mile ) the US can't just hand a few over, the Ukraine would need a huge training support package which means they wouldn't add to the order of battle until at least early summer. Leopard 2 is much simpler to operate, maintain and train to use, it also runs on diesel. Much more suited to the Ukraine, it was also designed to fight the Russian T72,80 and 90 its the obvious choice. Challenger 2 is good but it's gun uses non NATO standard ammo, packs a big punch though. French LeClerc tank is crap.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 22, 2023 17:21:50 GMT
I could easily give away something I don't have so it's a pity those 3 Baltic States don't have a Leopard between them or indeed Britain has so few serviceable Challenger Tanks it can only commit 14 I proposed one theory above for the dithering, there are probably many. There is obviously some reason stopping US sending Abrams which would break the deadlock. Abrams is a complicated, maintenance intensive and massively thirsty beast ( 3 gallons to the mile ) the US can't just hand a few over, the Ukraine would need a huge training support package which means they wouldn't add to the order of battle until at least early summer. Leopard 2 is much simpler to operate, maintain and train to use, it also runs on diesel. Much more suited to the Ukraine, it was also designed to fight the Russian T72,80 and 90 its the obvious choice. Challenger 2 is good but it's gun uses non NATO standard ammo, packs a big punch though. French LeClerc tank is crap. My post which you are replying to was in reply to a post from Mr Coke which tended to imply rather simplistically I'm sure not mischievously that Germany was holding up the Ukrainian War effort against Russia. My intended point which I expanded in other posts was that it was not that simple in Geo Political terms. To address your Post, I freely and have expressed that I have very little Military Knowledge but the point you are making seems at least to be in dispute as least by retired General Ben Hodges Here is an Article which quotes him and it goes on it to explain Germanys reasons Well, the Pentagon's undersecretary for defense policy, Colin Kahl, told reporters on Wednesday the U.S. will not send Abrams tanks to Ukraine because they are too difficult for Ukrainian troops to maintain. But many observers are not buying that.Retired U.S. General Ben Hodges responded on Twitter that this is condescending to Ukrainian troops, who have been sort of MacGyver-ing solutions to all sorts of problems throughout this war. It should be mentioned here that Germany's Leopard tanks are also difficult to maintain. I think Chancellor Scholz wants to make sure that Germany does not stand out as one of the only countries to send battle tanks to Ukraine and would prefer that the U.S. join him in that effort. And that's likely going to be priority No. 1 today when they discuss this in Ramsteinwww.npr.org/2023/01/20/1150228785/why-ukraines-allies-are-reluctant-to-send-u-s-or-german-battle-tanksWith regard to the Utility of Abrams in the Ukrainian Theatre I contend this is also disputable Last month US State Department agreed to sell116 Abrams to Poland for $3.75B . I don't see how the terrain of Poland would be much different to Ukraine www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-oks-potential-sale-m1a1-abrams-tanks-equipment-poland-estimated-375-billion-2022-12-06/Fully acknowledging the time it may take to have Abrams in service after training etc, if ever, I understand that US has about 4500 Abrams if they sent 1% of them to Ukraine ... if they wanted too Even symbolically it might be enough to break the impasse
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jan 22, 2023 18:29:28 GMT
With regard to the Utility of Abrams in the Ukrainian Theatre I contend this is also disputable Last month US State Department agreed to sell116 Abrams to Poland for $3.75B . I don't see how the terrain of Poland would be much different to Ukraine When drfootball said suited to Ukraine I think he meant their situation, more than the terrain. I'm also pretty clueless about military stuff but the pro-ukraine experts I follow basically all seem to agree that Leopards would be better than Abrams. They would take Abrams instead - but it's also a money question. Biden has limited cash and the Ramstein load was $2.5 bn. That's like 60-70 Abrams at Polish prices?
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Jan 22, 2023 19:08:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 22, 2023 19:23:37 GMT
With regard to the Utility of Abrams in the Ukrainian Theatre I contend this is also disputable Last month US State Department agreed to sell116 Abrams to Poland for $3.75B . I don't see how the terrain of Poland would be much different to Ukraine When drfootball said suited to Ukraine I think he meant their situation, more than the terrain. I'm also pretty clueless about military stuff but the pro-ukraine experts I follow basically all seem to agree that Leopards would be better than Abrams. They would take Abrams instead - but it's also a money question. Biden has limited cash and the Ramstein load was $2.5 bn. That's like 60-70 Abrams at Polish prices? My use of the world terrain may be misleading what I'm saying is that if Abrams are capable of being used in Poland they are equally capable of being used in Ukraine I have to acknowledge the Military Experts in the operation of Abrams some say they are complicated to run and service others like the the Retired General i quoted say no more complicated than Leopards My main point which Im obviously failing to get across is that the supply of Abrams may well be symbolic rather than operational Of the apparent 4500 Abrams US has presumably some are in reserve/mothballed, use them. Even today when Scholz was interviewed about Leopards he said and I'm paraphrasing "Allies must act in consort" Whether people believe Scholz or not is immaterial, take away his reason for not acting, problem solved QED. If Biden has Congress Budget restrictions use a mechanism similar to Lend-Lease in WW11 a bit like a Sale or Return arrangement
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Jan 22, 2023 19:49:20 GMT
German intelligence apparently increasingly alarmed with the daily Ukrainian losses in Bakhmut (3 digit daily).
Not fuckin alarmed enough to get the finger out and provide more armour.
I think the fall of Bakhmut (if it does fall) will cause the Ukrainians problems
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jan 22, 2023 20:06:08 GMT
When drfootball said suited to Ukraine I think he meant their situation, more than the terrain. I'm also pretty clueless about military stuff but the pro-ukraine experts I follow basically all seem to agree that Leopards would be better than Abrams. They would take Abrams instead - but it's also a money question. Biden has limited cash and the Ramstein load was $2.5 bn. That's like 60-70 Abrams at Polish prices? My use of the world terrain may be misleading what I'm saying is that if Abrams are capable of being used in Poland they are equally capable of being used in Ukraine I have to acknowledge the Military Experts in the operation of Abrams some say they are complicated to run and service others like the the Retired General i quoted say no more complicated than Leopards My main point which Im obviously failing to get across is that the supply of Abrams may well be symbolic rather than operational Of the apparent 4500 Abrams US has presumably some are in reserve/mothballed, use them. Even today when Scholz was interviewed about Leopards he said and I'm paraphrasing "Allies must act in consort" Whether people believe Scholz or not is immaterial, take away his reason for not acting, problem solved QED. If Biden has Congress Budget restrictions use a mechanism similar to Lend-Lease in WW11 a bit like a Sale or Return arrangement I'm thinking a symbolic move looks sensible as well mate. At least with the info we have. I don't think the Poles can run and repair Abrams yet, but spares, shops etc for Leopards are near enough to Ukraine. If Ukraine wants tanks it can use more quickly then the pros all seem to think Leopards are the best choice. I still haven't been able to work out if it's true that the older Abrams (that the US would send) only really work on jet fuel instead of diesel. Leopards definitely work with Ukrainian fuel though. Some third-hand rumours are saying the US would send Abrams to European countries if those countries then send Leopards to Ukraine. Sounds kinda bullshitty but also could make sense?
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 22, 2023 20:31:57 GMT
My use of the world terrain may be misleading what I'm saying is that if Abrams are capable of being used in Poland they are equally capable of being used in Ukraine I have to acknowledge the Military Experts in the operation of Abrams some say they are complicated to run and service others like the the Retired General i quoted say no more complicated than Leopards My main point which Im obviously failing to get across is that the supply of Abrams may well be symbolic rather than operational Of the apparent 4500 Abrams US has presumably some are in reserve/mothballed, use them. Even today when Scholz was interviewed about Leopards he said and I'm paraphrasing "Allies must act in consort" Whether people believe Scholz or not is immaterial, take away his reason for not acting, problem solved QED. If Biden has Congress Budget restrictions use a mechanism similar to Lend-Lease in WW11 a bit like a Sale or Return arrangement I'm thinking a symbolic move looks sensible as well mate. At least with the info we have. I don't think the Poles can run and repair Abrams yet, but spares, shops etc for Leopards are near enough to Ukraine. If Ukraine wants tanks it can use more quickly then the pros all seem to think Leopards are the best choice. I still haven't been able to work out if it's true that the older Abrams (that the US would send) only really work on jet fuel instead of diesel. Leopards definitely work with Ukrainian fuel though. Some third-hand rumours are saying the US would send Abrams to European countries if those countries then send Leopards to Ukraine. Sounds kinda bullshitty but also could make sense? I agree the Poles are unlikely to be much use with Abrams, even if they were willing to do so. To paraphrase my new best Buddy General Hodges to overestimate the complexity of Abrams and underestimate and condecend to the capabilities of the Ukrainian Army who have been able to use *MacGyver-ing ingenuity throughout the War *https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34075407.amp Hard to say if the rumours you mention are true or not but if they are it shows US reluctance to send US Battle Tanks to a Non NATO Country. In any case whatever the reason the US at present is unwilling to send Abrams to Ukraine for whatever reason Comments like Germany send Tanks or at least allow others. War is over get out the bunting are tedious.
|
|
|
Post by questionable on Jan 22, 2023 20:40:19 GMT
BREAKING: Germany will not stand in the way if Poland sends leopard tanks to Ukraine, Germany's foreign minister says - Reuters 7:58 PM · Jan 22, 2023
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Jan 22, 2023 20:42:08 GMT
I agree with Wannabee... to break the impasse, the US could send some Abrams on a sort of held in reserve lend/lease and if they prove to be unsuited and too complicated, then at least that would remove Germany's reason of not sending Leopards unless the Yanks send some tanks. And at the very least they'd be free to allow other NATO countries to help out with Leopards to UKR. What I am worried about is that German politics could delay things so that when/if the Russians begin a massive offensive come springtime, the UKR could be overwhelmed by cannon fodder and sheer numbers of equipment that they have to retreat and lose vital strategic positions to continue this war.
OS.
Edit... having just read the last post about Germany allowing Poland to send tanks then that's brilliant news. We just need to get other countries with Leopard tanks to be allowed to do the same.
|
|
|
Post by questionable on Jan 22, 2023 21:03:16 GMT
I agree with Wannabee... to break the impasse, the US could send some Abrams on a sort of held in reserve lend/lease and if they prove to be unsuited and too complicated, then at least that would remove Germany's reason of not sending Leopards unless the Yanks send some tanks. And at the very least they'd be free to allow other NATO countries to help out with Leopards to UKR. What I am worried about is that German politics could delay things so that when/if the Russians begin a massive offensive come springtime, the UKR could be overwhelmed by cannon fodder and sheer numbers of equipment that they have to retreat and lose vital strategic positions to continue this war. OS. Edit... having just read the last post about Germany allowing Poland to send tanks then that's brilliant news. We just need to get other countries with Leopard tanks to be allowed to do the same. The Americans should at least station Abraham’s in Poland, or at least a few hundred in the UK so Ukraine can become accustomed to them and at short notice we can deliver them to Ukraine
|
|
|
Post by swampmongrel on Jan 22, 2023 21:25:16 GMT
I agree with Wannabee... to break the impasse, the US could send some Abrams on a sort of held in reserve lend/lease and if they prove to be unsuited and too complicated, then at least that would remove Germany's reason of not sending Leopards unless the Yanks send some tanks. And at the very least they'd be free to allow other NATO countries to help out with Leopards to UKR. What I am worried about is that German politics could delay things so that when/if the Russians begin a massive offensive come springtime, the UKR could be overwhelmed by cannon fodder and sheer numbers of equipment that they have to retreat and lose vital strategic positions to continue this war. OS. Edit... having just read the last post about Germany allowing Poland to send tanks then that's brilliant news. We just need to get other countries with Leopard tanks to be allowed to do the same. If Germany say Poland can send Leopards to Ukr what argument could there be that any other country shouldn’t send them? Thankfully it looks like the Polish threat to do it unilaterally (I.e. without German approval) has paid off.
|
|
|
Post by sticky on Jan 22, 2023 21:29:29 GMT
Why aren’t Germany sending them ? Not clued up on it all like you boys
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 22, 2023 22:03:32 GMT
I agree with Wannabee... to break the impasse, the US could send some Abrams on a sort of held in reserve lend/lease and if they prove to be unsuited and too complicated, then at least that would remove Germany's reason of not sending Leopards unless the Yanks send some tanks. And at the very least they'd be free to allow other NATO countries to help out with Leopards to UKR. What I am worried about is that German politics could delay things so that when/if the Russians begin a massive offensive come springtime, the UKR could be overwhelmed by cannon fodder and sheer numbers of equipment that they have to retreat and lose vital strategic positions to continue this war. OS. Edit... having just read the last post about Germany allowing Poland to send tanks then that's brilliant news. We just need to get other countries with Leopard tanks to be allowed to do the same. The Americans should at least station Abraham’s in Poland, or at least a few hundred in the UK so Ukraine can become accustomed to them and at short notice we can deliver them to Ukraine Your suggestion is both practically, logistically and militarily sound If adopted it still doesn't explain US reluctance to place Abrams on non NATO soil
|
|
|
Post by ashleyscfc on Jan 23, 2023 0:59:36 GMT
I agree with Wannabee... to break the impasse, the US could send some Abrams on a sort of held in reserve lend/lease and if they prove to be unsuited and too complicated, then at least that would remove Germany's reason of not sending Leopards unless the Yanks send some tanks. And at the very least they'd be free to allow other NATO countries to help out with Leopards to UKR. What I am worried about is that German politics could delay things so that when/if the Russians begin a massive offensive come springtime, the UKR could be overwhelmed by cannon fodder and sheer numbers of equipment that they have to retreat and lose vital strategic positions to continue this war. OS. Edit... having just read the last post about Germany allowing Poland to send tanks then that's brilliant news. We just need to get other countries with Leopard tanks to be allowed to do the same. The Americans should at least station Abraham’s in Poland, or at least a few hundred in the UK so Ukraine can become accustomed to them and at short notice we can deliver them to Ukraine You tried moving a few hundred tanks?! 😂 The yanks have the best logistics in the world but even they struggle moving tanks at scale over seas. Germany have seen sense so hopefully that’s the start of it.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jan 23, 2023 1:40:39 GMT
Let us humbly pledge allegiance to the 👑 of the World
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Jan 23, 2023 7:23:49 GMT
Let us humbly pledge allegiance to the 👑 of the World Still triggered
|
|
|
Post by drfootball on Jan 23, 2023 9:26:10 GMT
Abrams is a complicated, maintenance intensive and massively thirsty beast ( 3 gallons to the mile ) the US can't just hand a few over, the Ukraine would need a huge training support package which means they wouldn't add to the order of battle until at least early summer. Leopard 2 is much simpler to operate, maintain and train to use, it also runs on diesel. Much more suited to the Ukraine, it was also designed to fight the Russian T72,80 and 90 its the obvious choice. Challenger 2 is good but it's gun uses non NATO standard ammo, packs a big punch though. French LeClerc tank is crap. My post which you are replying to was in reply to a post from Mr Coke which tended to imply rather simplistically I'm sure not mischievously that Germany was holding up the Ukrainian War effort against Russia. My intended point which I expanded in other posts was that it was not that simple in Geo Political terms. To address your Post, I freely and have expressed that I have very little Military Knowledge but the point you are making seems at least to be in dispute as least by retired General Ben Hodges Here is an Article which quotes him and it goes on it to explain Germanys reasons Well, the Pentagon's undersecretary for defense policy, Colin Kahl, told reporters on Wednesday the U.S. will not send Abrams tanks to Ukraine because they are too difficult for Ukrainian troops to maintain. But many observers are not buying that.Retired U.S. General Ben Hodges responded on Twitter that this is condescending to Ukrainian troops, who have been sort of MacGyver-ing solutions to all sorts of problems throughout this war. It should be mentioned here that Germany's Leopard tanks are also difficult to maintain. I think Chancellor Scholz wants to make sure that Germany does not stand out as one of the only countries to send battle tanks to Ukraine and would prefer that the U.S. join him in that effort. And that's likely going to be priority No. 1 today when they discuss this in Ramsteinwww.npr.org/2023/01/20/1150228785/why-ukraines-allies-are-reluctant-to-send-u-s-or-german-battle-tanksWith regard to the Utility of Abrams in the Ukrainian Theatre I contend this is also disputable Last month US State Department agreed to sell116 Abrams to Poland for $3.75B . I don't see how the terrain of Poland would be much different to Ukraine www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-oks-potential-sale-m1a1-abrams-tanks-equipment-poland-estimated-375-billion-2022-12-06/Fully acknowledging the time it may take to have Abrams in service after training etc, if ever, I understand that US has about 4500 Abrams if they sent 1% of them to Ukraine ... if they wanted too Even symbolically it might be enough to break the impasse Indeed geo politics is playing a massive role in this whole conflict and many opinions are debatable and I`m sure General Hodges has an eye on non escalation in his comments on donating Abrams to Ukraine. I happen not to share his view but I do agree with you that as a symbolic gesture it would send a massive signal to Putin that the West is steadfast in it`s support. My remark that Leopard 2 is better suited to Ukraine is more to do with maintainance, spares support and availability of diesel to run them, rather than the actual geographical terrain. Ukraine is very much tank country and the Abrams would be in it`s element outside the urban areas, as will be Challenger 2 and Leopard 2 when they arrive in theatre.
|
|
|
Post by OldStokie on Jan 23, 2023 12:57:43 GMT
The Americans should at least station Abraham’s in Poland, or at least a few hundred in the UK so Ukraine can become accustomed to them and at short notice we can deliver them to Ukraine You tried moving a few hundred tanks?! 😂 The yanks have the best logistics in the world but even they struggle moving tanks at scale over seas.Germany have seen sense so hopefully that’s the start of it. You're bang on the money there. The logistics of tank transportation from the US to Europe would be a nightmare. Even from the UK it will be a massive task to deliver them to a central hub in Poland unless we have already got the number we promised stationed on the continent. Even then it will be months and not days to deliver them to the front in Ukraine. Time is of the essence and we're quickly running out of it. Even though it's been posted on here, I've seen nothing in the media that Germany has given Poland permission to send Leopards to UKR. Anybody got a link to it? OS.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jan 23, 2023 13:18:09 GMT
You tried moving a few hundred tanks?! 😂 The yanks have the best logistics in the world but even they struggle moving tanks at scale over seas.Germany have seen sense so hopefully that’s the start of it. You're bang on the money there. The logistics of tank transportation from the US to Europe would be a nightmare. Even from the UK it will be a massive task to deliver them to a central hub in Poland unless we have already got the number we promised stationed on the continent. Even then it will be months and not days to deliver them to the front in Ukraine. Time is of the essence and we're quickly running out of it. Even though it's been posted on here, I've seen nothing in the media that Germany has given Poland permission to send Leopards to UKR. Anybody got a link to it? OS. www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64370165
|
|
|
Post by FranktheRabbit on Jan 23, 2023 13:21:40 GMT
For what reason? Fat, lying, Tory bastard.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 23, 2023 13:25:36 GMT
For what reason? Fat, lying, Tory bastard. Isn't that Cleverley's job. Boris will use any excuse for a holiday.
|
|