You must log in or register to comment.

johndoe73684168 t1_j5pzjvn wrote

The Netherlands btw leases tanks from Germany and after this announcement are considering buying them and giving them to Ukraine.


Nervous_Promotion819 t1_j5q3w04 wrote

That most likely won't happen because I believe these are Leopard 2 A7s. Also, that would shrink Germany's tank arsenal even further, and this company (14 Tanks) that is now being sent is all that can be spared


johndoe73684168 t1_j5q60pq wrote

The Dutch can give their 18 A6 tanks no problem, but the announcement today was only that the government is considering it.


Nervous_Promotion819 t1_j5qaakk wrote

But they don't own them. Dutch soldiers are stationed in a German-Dutch corps. If the Netherlands would buy these, Germany would miss them in this corps


johndoe73684168 t1_j5qamof wrote

Yes, I said they are leased tanks. I'll just assume Germany doesn't care since they are not using those tanks anyway.


Nervous_Promotion819 t1_j5qc04b wrote

No, they use these tanks because they are based in the I. German-Dutch Corps, which is subordinate to the 1. Panzer Division. The corps is an integral part of the German army


johndoe73684168 t1_j5qd9al wrote

Ok you know more about it, I only read the article where pm Rutte said because we lease them, we can buy them also and then give it to Ukraine. Which seems normal for a lease agreement.


420trashcan t1_j5rmguw wrote

What is Germany going to need tanks for during the time it will take to build more?


malphonso t1_j5tt5gi wrote

You never know what's going to happen. Russia could decide to go all in along with allies.

Sure, they'd be fought back, but Germany might still need the tanks to do that with.


420trashcan t1_j5ttt3c wrote

Russia has to go through Poland first, if you recall.


malphonso t1_j5tuxe9 wrote

And I'm sure Poland would appreciate Germany having tanks in reserve and ready to offer help if it's needed.


AdminsAreLazyID10TS t1_j5rl8ic wrote

One might ask what use a tank is to a country that will not and can not use it.

Even if NATO gets involved, guess what, the material is already in combat against the enemy.


Nervous_Promotion819 t1_j5t1s3h wrote

A tank company (14 tanks) means about 250 soldiers who will no longer have their main weapon system. It takes years to fill those gaps, and by then these soldiers have forgotten a lot because they haven't been able to practice. One has to remember that even if Ukraine is completely pushing Russia out of its territories, it does not mean that Russia is no longer a threat in the future.


AdminsAreLazyID10TS t1_j5vh5af wrote

You're not wrong, though fortunately for them they have an ally with 6,000 functional tanks to their 300 if they need training.

Or maybe Germany should lease them some crews too to have a tank corps with some real experience.


YlangScent t1_j5t2ef5 wrote

True, but that's a bit of a simplistic argument to make.

The truth of the matter is that Ukraine is not part of NATO or any formal alliance to begin with. In fact they've been on the Russian 'side' for most of modern history and are the most corrupt nation in Europe after Russia.

It is currently unthinkable that Ukraine becomes pro Russian again in the near future, but not unthinkable that corruption will lead material into the wrong hands. There's also a somewhat non negligible chance that Ukraine becomes neutralized and loses their arsenal to Russia.

>One might ask what use a tank is to a country that will not and can not use it.

The same use as nuclear weapons: deterrent. If Ukraine still had theirs, there would have never been an invasion. Also the world is unpredictable, you never know what you need your tanks for. Could be as simple as training or as serious as defending your own country rather than a country you have sympathy, but no treaties with.


AdminsAreLazyID10TS t1_j5vgnkk wrote

Germany isn't deterring anyone with their 300 obsolete tanks. Who's going to invade them anyways? Poland? Denmark? Hungary, lmao? Not happening.

That's the real deal with the "modern" tank designs, btw, they're all forty years old now and all vulnerable to modern AT.

There's an actual modern Abrams design on the way (and the rebirth of light tank philosophy) that aims to have countermeasures but the real thing is this Ukraine war will be the last chance obsolete, fifty or forty year old designs like Leopards, Challengers, and M1s have in a genuine tank vs tank setting.

Germany might as well just send all 300 rust buckets and embed design engineers to figure out how to make a modern replacement.


YlangScent t1_j630sht wrote

>Who's going to invade them anyways?

Same way Ukraine was thinking before 2014.

It's irrelevant what the current situation of the world is. It's utterly unpredictable what the future brings and extremely irresponsible for a country to give up war or defense material. Just look at Sweden and Finland scrambling to join NATO to gain protection now and giving up 'ideals'.

Equipment can be as old and obsolete as they come, it is still better than not having them. Especially if the 'enemy' is currently unlikely to expand their arsenal.


bluetornados246 t1_j5ro990 wrote

How can I lease one? What kind of monthly payments would I be looking at?


2_blave t1_j5rtbwx wrote

You just have to save up 14,000,000 Pepsi points and it can be yours!


pointlessbike t1_j5skoj3 wrote

How many Putin chips is 14M Pepsi points? Asking for a comrade


PEVEI t1_j5pl8n1 wrote

Finally, it took them a while, but it’s the result that counts. It sounds like the US may provide some Abrams as well; it’s hard to imagine Russia standing up to modern main battle tanks.


pegothejerk t1_j5pw8ng wrote

Yup, just approved, the story is just a bit later in the feed than this one.


GoArray t1_j5qiuts wrote

Safe to assume those "just approved"s are backwards, per Germany's earlier (only if the US does) stipulations.


Captainwelfare2 t1_j5q05ne wrote

Bwahaha. Get in losers, we’re going Vatnik Stomping.


mtarascio t1_j5ppqat wrote

That's a floodgate opening.


polystyr t1_j5pqxo2 wrote

What will be next? High range himars/ cruise missiles more bradleys? F16’s? Hopefully for ukraine.


k890 t1_j5q5ijy wrote

Ukraine Air Force spokesperson say combat aircraft is chosen and pilots/service crew will start training soon along with preparing airfields to handle Western aircraft soon.

But I take it with massive grain of salt.


Johns-schlong t1_j5r2ax0 wrote

Ukraine getting f22s and B2s confirmed, got it.


k890 t1_j5r4vu0 wrote

I mean, B2 Spirit bomber had first flight in 1989 it's barely younger than HIMARS rockets design used by Ukraine. B2 aging fleet gonna be replaced with B-21 Raider in nearby future so why keep pieces of somehow still flying metal scraps in USA while Ukraine gonna put them to good use last time in their history? /s


Dontbeevil2 t1_j5rr809 wrote

Bgm-109s. I’d love to see Ukraine devastate the Russian power grid and ports. Absurd that they get to bask in comfort.


DirkDiggler688 t1_j5t898x wrote

I dont really understand why reddit has a hardon for escalating a war...

I guess no one learned from history...


TheMindfulnessShaman t1_j5tau5s wrote

> I dont really understand why reddit has a hardon for escalating a war... > I guess no one learned from history...

Yeah, it's called 'Appeasement just fucks everyone'.


DirkDiggler688 t1_j5tb30b wrote

SO you prefer wars instead of diplomacy. Thats why you suppose US wars for the last 100 yrs.. Ohh ok...


TheMindfulnessShaman t1_j5tb5fa wrote

Can you negotiate with actors that have lost all trust and respect no laws?


DirkDiggler688 t1_j5tbemg wrote

I mean countries negotiate with the US all the time. Or do you support all the wars the US has started, all the countries we bombed and all the millions killed since 2000?


sonic_stream t1_j5td11m wrote

I no endorsing US war and Russia war, but with Russian's warcrimes, combined with their violation of international rules and laws, Russian atrocities cannot be stopped since they have no desire to negotiate and UN is useless.

The only way to end Russian agression is to defeat them on battlefield once and for all. And no stop giving me bullshit about I being warmongers. Russia commited too much warcrimes and atrocities that any sane person will prefer destruction of Russia more than negotiation, if it mean alternative form of making Russia accountable for the war crime.

I mean, at least make more effort in respecting Geneva Convention like US, but Russia just blatantly commit war crimes purposely it's disgusting.


TheMindfulnessShaman t1_j5u4vpo wrote

> I mean, at least make more effort in respecting Geneva Convention like US, but Russia just blatantly commit war crimes purposely it's disgusting.

It's a Geneva Warcrimes Checklist to the Kremlin.

He literally awarded Russia's Highest Medal to the Bucha regiment right after Ukraine was able to re-secure the area and discover the mass graves and atrocities there.


Red_Meridian t1_j5tsaq0 wrote

Russia has killed or kidnapped 1 million Ukrainians. This is a time for vengeance and we should be enabling that. Russia is going to be ready with 500k troops in March and that 1 million will be 5 by the end of the year if NATO doesn’t step up.


[deleted] t1_j5tllhu wrote

Russia invaded. Everyone would happily take peace if Russia would just leave.

Escalating the defence of a nation against an aggressor is also a historical norm. Did you not learn that from history? It’s how Russia defeated Germany in WW 2 after all.


Gone213 t1_j5pszr0 wrote

So let's get this straight, Lithuania or Latvia sent tanks and urged Germany and Poland to send tanks. Germany and Poland were in a standoff on who would send tanks first. The US announces they'll most likely be sending in Abrams tanks and now Germany and Poland will be sending in their leopard tanks? Did I get that right?


hallese t1_j5punf3 wrote

I think Poland was more concerned about getting a pledge from Germany that the tanks Poland sends to Ukraine can be replaced some day, and that Germany wasn't going to ban Poland from future purchases.


stanleythemanly85588 t1_j5sfcoq wrote

it was probably issues with end user certificates, Poland is buying a ton of Abrams and black panthers from S. Korea


one_jo t1_j5q3sdr wrote

Afaik there where a lot of older tanks sent by various nations including Germany via trade. German chancellor Scholz didn’t want to send Leopard 2 tanks though without American support and them sending Abrams tanks. Apparently the US is willing to send some now so probably Scholz will agree on Leopard 2s too. According to German news the decision will be made tomorrow. Not sure how der Spiegel knows more already.


usrevenge t1_j5sh0zg wrote

Everyone is trying to send stuff but they want to be polite and not take the first step.

It's 3 people each trying to pay for dinner.


Morbanth t1_j5t3c1d wrote

>Germany and Poland were in a standoff on who would send tanks first. Did I get this right?

No. Countries that buy the Leopard agree to follow German arms restrictions and everyone was waiting for permission from Scholz to send their used, older model tanks to Ukraine. Scholz asked the US to put their money where their mouth is and send Abrams first, which they agreed to. Now Ukraine is getting 30 Abrams and about 100 Leopards.


xdeltax97 t1_j5q1uv8 wrote

Wonder what they’ll be getting next?


aiboaibo1 t1_j5sou5i wrote

Effing game of pretense, they wanted to send them all along, just avoid pics of German tanks rolling on the same soil as in Nazi days. Russian media is going to have a field day with the imagery.

Now the US is going to play for time and wait for countries to send out their Leos so they can purchase Abrams from the US. Good sales strategy.

Germany has entirely lost all the lessons from WW2. Time when Germany was a force for good is entirely over. Also never start a land war in Asia.


TheMindfulnessShaman t1_j5tazgn wrote

> Russian media is going to have a field day with the imagery.

Russian media is like watching Batboy reality series spoken in Afrikaans.


R_V_Z t1_j5q66jt wrote

That's a weird name for a cat, did Elon name it?


frealfr t1_j5rauef wrote

Germany sure has dropped the ball.


Crizbibble t1_j5s3c4k wrote

Germany made the smart play here in waiting and getting the US to announce they are send Abrams and taking the spotlight off of their country. Sometimes you have to protect your people first.


swizzlemc2pots t1_j5s6m1e wrote

Only dropped it by allowing politicians to be influenced by russian money to switch from nuclear to gas thereby funneling money to russia to invade ukraine. Indirectly europe funded russia


BloodIsTaken t1_j5stxac wrote

God, I‘m so sick of everyone who says abandoning nuclear energy made Germany dependent on Russia. The vast majority of nuclear fuel used in nuclear power plants in Germany came from Russia, so even if Germany had continued using nuclear energy it wouldn’t have changed much in terms of independence - if anything it would be worse, as we have seen how fast Germany could get independent from russian gas even during a cold (-10C or lower temperatures at times) winter.


silly_biomedic t1_j5qc7r9 wrote

This is great news. The russian destruction of ukranian towns and unprovoked mass murder is wrong and putin's regime must be stopped. However, it bears reminding that each escalation risks an existential nuclear threat. If the end result is millions dead, the means by which it happaned have been slowy unravelling.

Edit: Despite being downvoted to hell; I stand by the comment. When we provided HIMARS, manpads, and anti-tank capabilities, russia was no longer able to enter cities with mechanized vehicles. Thus, they aimed to drone strike and artillery barrage cities, targetting civilians to erode the war effort, logistics, and morale. In short, western intervention escalated the tradgedy. Of course, I fully agree with our support of weapons to Ukraine, but the link between the two is sadly very clear.

A demonstrative nuclear strike over the black sea or rural ukraine is not out of the question as the next step in a series of escalations. I have been celebrating that the Ukranians will have modern tanks to defeat the russians; but I think those who say they can't or won't are wrong. Putin has shown he is an arrogant, crazy asshole and his regime is likely coming to a close. When a rabid animal has it's back against a wall, you can expect it to bite. Even if the risk is incredibly low, the potential for devestation and horrific tragedy remains high. I think that in general, these weapons can and must be used to expel russia out of ukranian territory. I just hope that looking back it doesn't come at a cost.


KerPop42 t1_j5qeh39 wrote

Eh, probably not. Put in can't unilaterally use the nukes, and he's losing popularity. Using nukes would paint a huge target on Russia's back, and over an offensive war that poses no existential threat to Russia.

The odds of an escalation of material support for Ukraine resulting in tactical nukes is pretty much nil.


pragmatic_zealot t1_j5qfnaw wrote

>Putin can't unilaterally use the nukes

Are we sure about this? If there are others that need to authorize using nukes, I'm sure they're at least a little worried they might fall out of a building the day after they refuse.

I hope you're right, and I'd bet you are, but can't say I don't lose sleep over it.


willstr1 t1_j5qgw24 wrote

Nukes aren't fully automated, it's still orders through a chain of command and I bet most of that chain isn't willing to end the world for Putin's fragile ego. And even that assumes the nukes and launch vehicles work. Equipment that is expensive to maintain and never expected to be used are a prime target for a kleptocracy


Buzzkid t1_j5qvaxy wrote

Russia has an automatic nuclear launch system. It is called Dead Hand.


me_suds t1_j5s6l3r wrote

Yes but it's also not for frist strik it's triggered by the dection of a nuclear strike on Russia


Heiferoni t1_j5t40of wrote

Right. Better let Putin take as many countries as he wants because WOOOO scary nukes!