The problem with the Abrams tanks is we gave them 31 instead of 331 or more needed to flesh out a bunch of armored brigades. And, they aren't suited for a defensive war. I'd love it if we unloaded every Bradley we have in storage. Those have proved amazingly effective at torching Russian armor and infantry.
Google AI sez:
So, no Storm Shadow equivalent, which sucks. But, getting HARM missiles on a platform designed for them helps, and Harpoon missiles on F-16s ranging out over the Black Sea will eliminate the hope of the Russian fleet ever returning to battle. Hopefully the crafty, resourceful Ukrainian aeronautical engineers are working on their own glide bomb kitsYou raise great points and I’ve thought about that as well.
I still think the primary mission for the f-16’s at least initially is going to be suppressing their air defenses with the AGM-88’s which will be SO much better in that mission than their MIG-29’s.
As far as stand-off weapon this article gives a great breakdown but I have no idea what we’re sending them.
As far as our stockpiles I think we have to really be smart about the levels because if shit gets real in the Pacific well expend munitions at a extremely high rate.
Ukraine’s F-16s Could Come With These Weapons
A detailed breakdown of the munitions Ukraine is likely to get, and some it is less likely to get, with its F-16s.www.twz.com
It’ll be interesting to see what they come up. We’re giving them JDAM’s so I suppose they could modify them with glide kits
Without any proof, I'm of the belief that nearly all decisions regarding Ukraine are "group think" with DOD/Pentagon officials having huge influence in WH actions.
yep.
It may make a big difference if we gave them hundreds to form armored divisions that could actually force their way through Russian defenses. Ukraine was criticized for reverting back to small forces attacks after losing their expensive tanks in still minor offenses last summer.
How are they going to afford that?
As far as I know they are not paying for much of this. It should be like the thousands of tanks and vehicles we gave to the Soviet Union in WW2. With a large enough force, which we have not even began to supply to Ukraine, they can form real armored divisions to split the Russian forces. Armored battalions with 30 or so tanks just aren't enough. If we had the will we could have supplied hundreds of tanks and trained their crews and maintenance men by now. But we continue to fear Putin and let him do pretty much whatever he wants.
I half expect a later audit to determine this was inaccurate and just an excuse to send Ukraine stuff while we still can-and I applaud that if that is what is happening!Ukraine war briefing: Pentagon accounting error creates path for billions more to be sent to Kyiv
Isn't this the second big "accounting error" we've had
Whatever gets the job done I guess.
Ukraine war briefing: Pentagon accounting error creates path for billions more to be sent to Kyiv
Ukraine’s foreign minister calls on Hong Kong to prevent Russia from using region to circumvent sanctions; drone debris lands in Romania. What we know on day 884www.theguardian.com
If it was an actual auditing error...it raises questions.
I guess whether it was an "error" or "solution" is up for interpretation and should be done on an item-by-item basis. One could rationalize both replacement cost and depreciated value, depending on the situation. If the items were never actually going to be used by US troops because they were getting to the end of their useful life, depreciated value makes sense. If Ukraine got new and shiny stuff otherwise destined for US troops, replacement value makes sense.
That’s my point. We’re paying for it, and provisioning armored brigades means a large, ongoing expense that a plane load of artillery shells doesn’t.
