Why are we giving Ukraine ANY military assisance?

Hey Ben- I know you’ve been calling for this for a while and I’m glad to see it happening even if it feels late…what more would you want to see sent to Ukraine?

Well why the hell not.

It’s only money.


Russia is saying that it considers use of depleted uranium to be a dirty bomb. Here is a quote from Konstantin Gavrilov, head of Russia’s delegation on the OSCE forum on security cooperation:

'We know that the Leopard 2 tank, as well as the Bradley and Marder infantry fighting vehicles, are armed with uranium-core armor-piercing projectiles, the use of which leads to contamination of the area, as happened in Yugoslavia and Iraq.

‘If Kyiv is supplied with such shells for NATO heavy military equipment, we will consider this as the use of dirty nuclear bombs against Russia with all the ensuing consequences.’
Russia warns it will treat uranium shells in German Leopard 2 tanks as 'dirty bombs' | Daily Mail Online

These people have went mental and is a big part of this mess that’s making me want to vomit and all the followers just gobbling it up. It’s fine to support Ukraine and want them to win (I do to) it’s another thing giving money to one of the most you corrupt nations in the world then just pretending it’s not a thing. The locals give zero ■■■■■ and will let you know the government is corrupt.

Labeling one calling that ■■■■ out as a Putin puppet even when you are married to a Ukrainian, spent months in Ukraine yourself, speak (Close to fluent) Russian and own property in Ivano-Frankisk Ukraine. Somehow they just know better so I seldom wade into this topic which is the first time a war has effected me (financially) personally as we are having to
take care of her family.



Which Abrams model are we offering to the Ukrainians?

I would assume they would be older M1s; that would be a given.

So are these the old M1s that were upgraded to Pseudo M1A1 status in the early 90s? Or more recent builds?

From what I understand, the Pseudo A1s got the 120mm cannon but kept the older amour of the original M1 in many cases.

Not that it matters much. The Russians are being forced to use T-62s now. Which are horribly out of date and can’t use more modern Russian munitions since they use the old 100mm gun rather than the 125mm that Russian tanks adopted with the T-64.

The same jackasses who think they ever had a clue about anything that went on in Iraq or Afghanistan. A basement dweller will never be an intellectual. :wink:


Uhm… that’s a pretty weak excuse on the Russians’ part.

Their tanks often use depleted uranium rounds too.

They are effective. Every modern army uses them.

Not even organic?

Just to add.

I have mixed feelings about the US and Germany providing modern M1s or Leopard 2A5s to Ukraine.

Considering how many T-72s were built all around the world (a bunch of which are in countries allied or friendly to NATO and the US) it would make more sense to provide those to the Ukrainians instead. Since they wouldn’t require conversion training. They could get into service much faster.

Plus it’s less of an escalation on our part.

I have mixed feelings about our support in general. But at the same time I do feel like it’s the right course of action. At least for now.

Yes, no one knows why they were fired. I guess the little dictator needed headlines to get his tanks and draw us closer to nukes. Remember when the left was anti-war and anti-nuke. I guess that was just another lie…

1 Like

Doesn’t matter what you feed them. It will never be a proper substitute for real-world experience. :wink:

1 Like

Germany V Russian round 3 … The last two did no go well for Germany!

The timing is almost like a Scranton Scrapper flew over there and told him he had 2 days to fire everybody if he wanted tanks.




Scranton scrapper… LOL!


First, everyone found out that Russia was not the military power everyone kept pretending them to be.

Soon, everyone (else) will find out that Russia is not the nuclear power everyone keeps pretending them to be. :wink:


Also I’m a bit worried about our stocks of certain weapons.

I’ve seen some articles recently that stated it could take years for NATO to replenish the stocks of weapons like the Javelin and the HIMARS.

That could be a long term problem.

I highly doubt they would try to use them short of NATO actually sending troops to Ukraine.

They talk a bunch of mad ■■■■ but we’ve crossed several red lines at this point and they’ve done nothing.

Stop reading those trash articles. They’re as full of ■■■■ as the can’t-think-without-a-link crowd. :wink:

1 Like

What I’ve looked at for an MRR shows 4 BN’;s, 3 INf with 3 companies each and one ARM (with 4 companies). 10 vehicles per company for a total of 31 per BN. or 93 BMP, and 40 tanks in an MRR. In a tank Regiment there will be 3 tank BN’s and one inf (all with 3 companies). with a total of 91 tanks and 36 BMP’s in the regiment. I had said 120 BMP’s in a MRR earlier, that was wrong.

Thats the latest I got and it does have a standard of 31 vehicles per BN. However the russians use 4 BN’s in a regiment instead of 3.