Posted on 05/11/2024 6:13:02 AM PDT by hardspunned
The Main Battle Tank (MBT) is a hallmark of modern warfare. Since the final years of the First World War, the land battleship concept has enchanted the minds of ground warfare planners. Armor, speed, mobility, strength, were once all key components in determining which nation had the greatest tanks.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalinterest.org ...
https://youtu.be/s7p2-tMS4UE?si=ymGS-_o4R2G-pd8X
The Ukrainians recently pulled all of the M1 Abrams tanks — a gift extorted from the American taxpayer — off the front line, saying they were “weak and vulnerable.”
The author starts by praising the T-14 Armada, which isn't in service and doesn't actually exist as a viable weapon since it was a Russian propaganda/ grift program. I didn't bother reading after that.
Can you link us to the origin of that quote?
The author ranks the T-72 as the world’s greatest tank.
1. Russian T-72
The reason that this old Soviet tank is the best in the world is because of the fact that it is used by multiple countries.
“this is the greatest tank in the world today.”
I always laugh at those sanctimonious “I stopped reading when “…
Had you read a bit more you would have seen this’
“Billed as Russia’s greatest tank, this tank is almost too overrated to waste time writing about. Yes, it is truly next-level.
But it is so advanced that it’s way too expensive and complicated to produce in large numbers. Because of its unique technological nature, the tank was pulled early on from the frontlines of Ukraine out of fear that losing even one of these MBTs would be gravely detrimental to Russia. So, regardless of the high level of technology built into this platform; irrespective of how scared of it Western strategists are, it’s a wasting asset for Russia.
Yeah, that was some very convoluted reasoning. Because Yemen, and Angola and Cuba etc etc use it… It’s the best in the world. Never mind that the only time it went up against US forces head to head in desert storm, M1 tanks were undefeated fighting them. I don’t believe a T 72 was able to take a single M1 out of service.
And it’s failing in Ukraine says far more about export versions, in the band’ hands of poorly trained soldiers, operating higgildy piggildy with no coordination in an environment without control of the air. Has it been a US armored division under a battlefield dominated by USAF, you wouldn’t be seeing “M1 tank fails!” stories.
Drones rule. A$500 drone can destroy a $3 million dollar tank easily.
Perfectly said.
The T90M is supposed to be the best Russian tank in production. Vlad V. Putin claims it is unstoppable. 45 of which have been destroyed in UKR.
The largest type of Russian tank, out of the 2000 destroyed, is the T-72 in all its varieties.
the key here is a well-practiced and cohesive tank crew. Targeting and shooting on the move, etc. I doubt UKR tank crews have that much experience with them.
Huh? The M-1 Abrams is not the modern Abrams. It is is the in-storage European stockpile surplus. That model was first rolled out in 1995.
These tanks do not have modern armor. They have tungston armor. No modern electronics are in them
So, any badmouthing of the M-1 is because they aren’t aware that these are export older models that were sitting in storage. Same name, same look, but not the same tank.
The Ukranians were used to Russian tanks, not western ones. They weren’t raised in them like the US military. How much loss is due to that and using them in the Russian tank doctrine?
Finally, T-72? The older M-1 used the T-72 as target practice in the Iraq wars. What updates they have undergone I wouldn’t know. So I wouldn’t be so down on giving these tanks to Ukraine. Give them more. They are just paperweights in parking lots as is. The more we give the Ukrainians the more we drain the actual threat to the West.
We spent 7 trillion dollars in the cold war. Stopping them this time with used “cars” seems like a deal.
“”””The Ukrainians recently pulled all of the M1 Abrams tanks — a gift extorted from the American taxpayer — off the front line, saying they were “weak and vulnerable.””””
The Ukrainian governments statement with your quote is what I was hoping you would link to.
The losses of the T-54/55 aren’t a whole lot worse than the 5 M1s lost, perhaps this guy should move it to his list.
“The split of documented Russian tank losses by platform:
T-54/55: 8
T-62: 136
T-64: 92
T-72: 1441
T-80: 840
T-90: 136
unknown tank: 347
An M-1 commander from Fort Riley attended our church before being transferred. I asked him one day what possible opposing tank would be the biggest threat to the Abrams and he immediately answered the Israeli Merkava.
In 5 years, the best tank will be a remote controlled tank with AI that is cheap to make and expendable.
I believe you are right. Since the profit margin and maintenance cost on such a tank would be very low, don’t expect the MIC to supply America with anything like that.
Who is this guy?
Looking through his back articles at the National Interest, I smell a political grifter pandering to the Trump vote. (¬_¬)"Brandon J. Weichert, a National Interest national security analyst, is a former Congressional staffer and geopolitical analyst who is a contributor at The Washington Times, the Asia Times, and The-Pipeline. He is the author of Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower, Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life, and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy. His next book, A Disaster of Our Own Making: How the West Lost Ukraine, is due October 22 from Encounter Books. Weichert can be followed via Twitter @WeTheBrandon."
It’s a BS article. Oh my, let’s rank buggy whips. All of these tanks are obsolete.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.