Posted on 01/14/2024 3:02:47 AM PST by UMCRevMom@aol.com
Russia could run out of infantry fighting vehicles in two or three years, if a recent assessment is accurate. It might run out of tanks around the same time.
According to one count, the Russian armed forces went to war in Ukraine in February 2022 with 2,987 tanks. After 23 months of hard fighting, the Russians have lost at least 2,619 tanks that independent analysts can confirm.
That’s 1,725 destroyed, 145 damaged, 205 abandoned and 544 captured T-55s, T-62s, T-72s, T-80s and T-90s.
If the Kremlin didn’t have options for replacing war losses, the Russian military would be down to just 368 tanks: far too few to defend against Ukraine’s own armor corps, which between pre-war tanks, restored tanks and donated tanks—minus losses—might number around a thousand vehicles.
But the Kremlin does have sources of replacement tanks: the Uralvagonzavod factory in southern Russia, which manufactures new T-90Ms, plus four other facilities that repair and modernize old tanks that have been moldering in storage. Some for decades.
The big question—one that no outside analyst definitively has answered—is how many tanks Uralvagonzavod can build, and how tanks the other plants can repair.
The Kremlin claims it received 1,500 new and modernized tanks following an intensive industrial effort that roughly tripled vehicle-generation in 2023. If that’s true—a big if—it would be reasonable to assume the Russian armed forces received around 500 new and modernized tanks in 2022.
Three thousand pre-war tanks minus 2,600 wartime losses plus 2,000 replacement tanks equals 2,400 tanks. As the Russian military added new formations in the 23 months since widening the war, so each field army, division, brigade and regiment would have fewer tanks than it would have had before 2022.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Where’s the poster who’s obsessed with all the “Z-for-Nazi Swastika” marked equipment. Shouldn’t he/she be saying a “V” is actually a Swastika now?
Where? I could envision them eventually being used against a US populace that has had its last straw with leftist government and its freedom-taking controls.
The first casualty of war is truth.
Of course, tanks can be used against a country’s own populace - just ask the Chinese.
I was really musing about old, Russian tanks with the reality of first-world military use of drones and more modern weapons. The Ukraine battlefield appears to be a good fit, to me.
I have come to the conclusion, in my life, that all military hardware will eventually be used, if possible. To not do so is an extreme waste of capital. The trick is to find where the older stuff might still be effective.
Yes, there seems to be an imbalance between UKR and RUS losses in that category. But consider just how much munitions it is taking UKR to do it. Untold numbers of artillery shells, sophisticated western man portable anti-armor weapons. They've pretty much become totally dependent on outside-UKR munitions supply - not good.
Very not good when Biden finally abandons UKR support as a diversion from his regime's performance here in the US. Look for that to come to a finality by the election this year.
I am so conservative that I support the restoration of the Spanish empire under the Bourbon monarchy, and my guides in political philosophy are Thomas Aquinas and De Maistre.
You extremist republican liberals that call themselves “conservatives” are funny. You have never understood what you are, much less why you are what you are.
And yet, and yet ...
We actual, genuine conservatives in the great old European tradition see an assertion that we dispute as a challenge to argument, an “en garde”, to a civilized crossing of blades. As did, note, Thomas Aquinas, as his “Summa” is really a guide to arguments.
Throwing garbage is not defending your position. It is boorish and disorderly behavior best suppressed by the monarch.
>I am so conservative that I support the restoration of the Spanish empire under the Bourbon monarchy, and my guides in political philosophy are Thomas Aquinas and De Maistre.
You extremist republican liberals that call themselves “conservatives” are funny. You have never understood what you are, much less why you are what you are.<
I’ll stick with being me; you can keep trying to be someone you’re not.
And thanks for psychoanalyzing me. Are you a clinical psychiatrist in real life or just pretending to be one on FR?
Professionally, I am an engineer (retired).
By education I am a Catholic, which includes Catholic theology and philosophy. Through good fortune I was reasonably well educated in that, for a layman. I am not addressing psychology, but philosophy.
Most people imagine that what’s in their minds is the result of some natural process. This is not true. We acquire our world-views in a context, that was mostly created through a historical process, with the explicit input of people who generated a given idea. Leaving aside Christianity and the Roman Empire and Germanic Kingdoms as our common mental origins, there are secular influences. In the case of the US this is, for instance, Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau. Burke, much less so. You may not even have heard of these guys, but you think what they did, entirely unconsciously, and you think its natural to do so.
I keep recommending Russell Kirk’s “The Conservative Mind”, a guide to exactly that point of what conservatism is.
“You should be ashamed of yourself”
I think you should be... but....
“Are those rocks your creations?”
No.
Google: funny rocks/images.
“It might just be a plain old ordinary breakdown due to neglect or negligence.”
True...
“What about the equality of expectations for women vs men?”
If you received a rock from a woman, then your expectation is met.
Call me old fashioned but I now view these ongoing new wars as mostly a corrupt mission of rich liberal elites to steal and take from what belongs to average Joe’s. Schemers take from Americans what should be used to protect all Americans.
Additional source:
Our Columnists-
“Z” Is the Symbol of the New Russian Politics of Aggression
In the days following the latest Russian invasion of Ukraine, the letter came to stand for devotion to the state, murderous rage, and unchecked power.
By Masha Gessen
March 7, 2022
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/z-is-the-symbol-of-the-new-russian-politics-of-aggression
No responsive propaganda trash. As usual.
Non
Oh! You responded to my post to Timber Rattler asking a question about a ‘poster.’ Then you admit you’re the one who is always coming up with ludicrous explanations of symbols? Yet never answered back on the Azov brigade stylized circle swastika?
Again, answering back for a post to someone else. I guess it’s the way of the little pebble to cast incoherent retorts to something not even directed at them.
On second thought, my comment was useless and now retracted. You don’t seem to have any shame.
Additional source:
Our Columnists-
“Z” Is the Symbol of the New Russian Politics of Aggression
In the days following the latest Russian invasion of Ukraine, the letter came to stand for devotion to the state, murderous rage, and unchecked power.
By Masha Gessen
March 7, 2022
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/z-is-the-symbol-of-the-new-russian-politics-of-aggression
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.