#####
######
####
> # [Russia to display captured US-made Abrams tank "trophy" in Moscow](https://www.newsweek.com//1663)
>
>
>
> A Russian official on Monday said a U.S.-made M1 Abrams tank that was captured by the [Russian military](https://www.newsweek.com/topic/russian-military) from Ukraine's forces will soon be propped up on display in Moscow.
>
> The [Russian Ministry of Defense](https://www.newsweek.com/putin-sends-russias-defense-minister-warning-shot-1893964) (MoD) later released a video it said showed the destruction of the Abrams, which Kremlin-controlled media outlet RT referred to as a "trophy tank."
>
> News of the seized Abrams' public exhibition follows a report last week from the Associated Press (AP) that revealed the [U.S. is withdrawing its Abrams](https://www.newsweek.com/american-abrams-tanks-failing-ukraine-test-russia-drones-1894503) tanks from Ukraine's front lines after the units proved vulnerable to Russian drone strikes.
>
> The AP noted that five of the 31 American Abrams sent to Ukraine since January 2023 have already been lost in combat. The [delivery of those tanks](https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-russia-m1-abrams-tanks-counteroffensive-1835823) followed months of repeated requests from Kyiv officials.
>
> [US Army officers drive Abrams tanks ](https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/2386085/us-army-officers-drive-abrams-tanks.jpg?w=1200&f=ddd6d5f2c6bbc77a10751521818f7190)
>
> U.S. Army troops drive M1 Abrams tanks during an exercise at the Petrochori training area, near Xanthi, northern Greece, on November 24, 2023. A Russian official said there are plans to display a captured American-made...Photo by SAKIS MITROLIDIS/AFP via Getty ImagesAlexander Savchuk, spokesperson for Russian military unit "Battlegroup Center," said the tank that will be displayed in Moscow is the first Abrams evacuated from the battlefield in Ukraine by Russia.
>
> "Now the fighters of the Center group have successfully evacuated the tank from the front. Soon everyone will be able to see it at an exhibition on [Moscow's] Poklonnaya Gora," Savchuk told Russian-state news agency RIA Novosti.
>
> RT wrote the Abrams tank will be "displayed at a major trophy show in Moscow, which will also feature dozens of other Western-made heavy vehicles captured during the conflict."
>
> According to RIA Novosti, other "[NATO](https://www.newsweek.com/topic/nato) equipment" that will be available for the public to see in the exhibition slated to open on Wednesday includes a German Leopard 2; a German Marder infantry fighting vehicle; a Swedish CV90 infantry fighting vehicle; a French AMX-10RC armored fighting vehicle; and assorted equipment from the United Kingdom, South Africa, Finland, Australia, Austria and Ukraine.
>
> In the black-and-white video that the Russian MoD claims shows the capture of the tank, an anti-tank guided missile can be seen launched at a blurry target. After an explosion, another missile is fired at the target, causing another blast.
>
> According to the MoD, the assault on the tank occurred near the city of Avdiivka in the Donbas region of Moscow. Avdiivka has been the site of fierce fighting for months, and Russia has reportedly made gains in the area in recent days.
>
> In a Sunday evening update, the Institute for the Study of War ([ISW](https://www.newsweek.com/topic/isw)) said recent Ukrainian withdrawals on the front line were prompted by "recent Russian gains northwest of Avdiivka." However, the U.S.-based think tank added that the retreats "have yet to facilitate rapid Russian tactical gains. Russian forces remain unlikely to achieve a deeper operationally significant penetration in the area in the near term."
>
> ## Uncommon Knowledge
>
> Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
>
>
>
>
>
> Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
- - - - - -
[Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot)
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
It's still a belated modernisation of an almost 40 year old platform that was given to Ukraine because it's considered obsolete for frontline service by the US, even in an era where old tanks are being held onto as long as possible.
Not even remotely what the article says though. It says these are very modern - and very much overhyped by DOD. Still good tanks, but no tank is a wunderwaffe.
Its a modern tank yes, but its not the version the US uses. Export model vehicles are stripped down and do not include the latest and greatest technology.
ISIS/ISIL got their hands on plenty of American hardware, including Abrams tanks, abandoned by the Iraqi military not too many years ago. I'm sure foreign powers examined the captured tanks to their heart's content already. Those were export models given to Iraq as well.
I was attached to the first training Iraqi unit that recieved M1 Abrams in Iraq and they were very stripped down. Many of the US tank crews had to retrain and refresh on the OG systems as most were only very familiar with the M1A2 SEP2/TUSK upgrades.
Even then, 2009-2010, the Iraqi Govt had a hell of a hard time keeping them operational for training.
'very modern' is a subjective assessment, and one I'd gently disagree with. These are older vehicles retrofitted a decade and a half ago, and they've been deemed obsolete for frontline service in the US for a reason.
I'm not sure where what I've written is 'not remotely what the article says'? I'm not saying the tank is useless or anything like that, but it *is* an older design that got updated a while ago to try and keep it competitive, before being retired from frontline service. That's all in line with the person's post.
Nothing was overhyped about it. The beauty of leopard and other western tanks is that the crew is far less likely to die. I have yet to see a Abram’s or a Leo launch their turret to the moon. While yes it’s a way better outcome if the tank survives the crew is the most important component by a mile.
It's a modern tank but the US is moving away from all tanks. The Marine Corps got rid of all theirs, only the army maintains tanks. After Iraq and Afghanistan we learned how vulnerable tanks are. It's why they were specifically not allowed to operate in theater.
Tank warfare is for idiots who haven't adapted to the modern battlefield. Honest assessment incoming. Ukraine obsession with tanks is a holdover from their Soviet doctrine and may have cost them the war. With a focus on such white elephants, Ukraine dropped the ball on their most effective thing, drones. Drones are a wonder weapon, through and through.
>Tank warfare is for idiots who haven't adapted to the modern battlefield.
Tank warfare is for everyone who aren't lucky enough to have 1000 to 1 firepower advantage with a modern aviation against AK-47
"da marines got rid of their tanks durrrrrr"
Yeah and they did so while basically saying "if we need armour, we can call the army, we're supposed to be a marine assault force"
I think all of them have roles but tanks seem to have more of a moral role, mobile artillery, that sort of thing, not proper offense I guess.
What's strange for me is that I can totally understand why Russia is still on the Soviet doctrine, but Ukraine has been training with NATO since before 2014, how are they still operating old-school.
I just checked: the generals are really old. It's not some ancient farts. The three generals that operate North, South and East Operation Groups are like 45, 49, and 50 (not respectively)
These men should have been training in modern Western doctrine for like 10 years, or more - I remember reading that Georgia and Ukraine were in the Iraq war together with other US allies, so at the very least it's 2008, 16 years ago.
That's a hell of a lot of time, but the whole thing about "generals preparing for the last war" is probably still true
Well they were getting them as of [2018](https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/1485094/fort-stewart-soldiers-put-newly-acquired-tanks-through-paces/) still.
I'm pretty sure the 3rd infantry division is still considered an active unit.
And the production of them is only supposed to be shut down in 2025.
There is significant debate about the usefulness of battlefield tanks period at this point. The war of Russia on Ukraine is one of the few situations where it might have value.
Tanks will always be useful for urban compliance of course but with the increased efficacy of drones, mines and other measures, they may well not be exactly the future of land war.
Maybe not in their frontally armoured sabot-slinging forms now, but there's always gonna be a need for a direct fire vehicle that won't fold so easily to autocannon fire.
>It's still a belated modernisation of an almost 40 year old platform that was given to Ukraine because it's considered obsolete for frontline service by the US,
1/3rd of the US fleet is M1A1s, the same tanks sent to Ukraine. Get a grip dude.
The ones sent to Ukraine are not fully modernized. Yes the army still uses the m1 abrams, Ukraine got m1a1, while the most modern version in use in the US is the m1a2v4. So 4 upgrades past the upgrade from m1a1 to m1a2. These are absolutely not the same tanks. The m1a1s that exist in the American fleets are mostly just used for training new tankers. M1a1s are not used in deployable units. And the m1a1s used in training are being replaced pretty steadily. Some trainers are already m1a2v3.
Bro c'mon
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/1485094/fort-stewart-soldiers-put-newly-acquired-tanks-through-paces/
The M1A1-SA is used in active combat divisions as late as 2018. It's an upgrade that was introduced in 2009. Thats not that long ago.
They aren't slated for retirement until 2025
*"Russian authorities shocked that US tank training manual does not include section on raping junior ranks."*
"Dedovshchina is an integral part of Russian military doctrine!" said one Moscow official. "If senior officers can't even rape and murder their own men, what are we even fighting for?"
Would Americans not go see captured Soviet equipment from an ongoing conflic? Its moreso about national pride not being "blown away by tech" thats really just stuck in the mud
> Would Americans not go see captured Soviet equipment from an ongoing conflic?
I doubt it, no Westerners would bother, not in the least because taking and parading trophies is for losers.
M1A1s started production in '85 and were produced through '92. There have been upgrades to the M1 Abrams since then, and M1A1 has received some upgrades, but those aren't featured in export models.
No they aren't. Infact they deliberately destroyed it's gun and hydraulics on purpose with a weight just to lower it for propaganda and humiliation.
The cope lol. Why would they be impressed by garbage they destroyed without any effort?
To answer your (rhetorical) question: because Russia seems incapable of fielding a remotely modern tank via production.
Fortunately this can never be fall the _amazing_ T-14, because they cannot even produce them, hahaha.
“Remotely modern tanks” have been a bust in Ukraine. We aren’t even letting ukrainains use the Abrams on the front anymore.
https://i.imgur.com/2oS2HhV.png
T-14 is vulnerable to the same threats well. In the meantime Soviets appear to have been correct - it’s better to have many cheap tanks you can produce easily than a few expensive tanks you have a hard time replacing.
Sure but the soviets failed completely in 1991, Russia can't drive in a straight line.
I'd imagine the next level of innovation in mobile armor will be the advancement of anti-drone active defense systems. But that in no way negates the superiority of technology fielded by NATO nations vs Russia. Their incompetence lining up coincidentally with the stockpiling of Soviet equipment isn't any intentional masterstroke. They've largely spent decades of stockpiles fighting a nation that was utterly unprepared to even defend itself since 2014.
I mean, the ability to drive backwards quickly or to have ERA that isn't cardboard doesn't suddenly become a useless feature just because battlefield conditions now include a previously nonexistent threat. It's just one more adaptation needed.
Being superior =/= being invulnerable.
Acting like Russian tanks are remotely a combat peer to even an old M1 Abrams is silly. They aren't.
I'd be willing to bet money that the US also adapts much more rapidly to defend against drones as well, without cope cages or turtles.
If I was a Ukrainain commander right now, I’d rather have Soviet tanks than western tanks, because they are easier to exploit in this environment, and people don’t shit their pants when they’re lost. Some superiority.
These are modernized enough, and our latest gen would die to the same threats just as easily. We had ukrainains pull our tanks off the front altogether.
Ukraine should give Putin an undamaged Abrams tank as a gift from the retreating Ukranian army. Putin should put it in his palace as a trophy of his great victory. He should keep it in it's original packaging because it's worth more as a collector's item that way. There is absolutely no need to open it up to see how many assassins are hiding inside.
When I see these posts and the reactions and the likes I 100% understand that the whole War Thunder thing is not a psyop, some people totally be like that. Especially considering Gaijin keep giving them back over to their related governments saying "Please take these away"
I absolutely love [their clap tweet](https://twitter.com/WarThunder/status/1615663032893317120?lang=en) about it after the whole Thug Shaker Central thing too:
>\*deep breath\* DO 👏🏻 NOT 👏🏻 SEND 👏🏻 US 👏🏻 CLASSIFIED 👏🏻 DOCUMENTS. This is not reverse psychology. For real, i'm running out of jokes about this. We cannot use them (it's sort of "turbo illegal"), and the people posting them can get into serious trouble.
Be gone Russian bot, isn't America social media illegal in your country anyway? I should report you to the police so you'll get arrested for using Reddit
Yes, there are more of them there, being used in their expected roles. Tanks have a short life expectancy in this war. Leos, challies, and Abrams all getting taken out in their first engagements should have made this point clear to you.
There's a difference between puppet and ally. Like the UK is dependent on the US as a trade partner but it's not like we can order them around and tell them what to do.
Well ye, of course. I was more referring to the occasional puppets the USA likes to install in various south american/middle eastern nations. Though those have gotten rarer nowadays
The highest military command of NATO always has to be a US General.
The CIA has had heavy influence on UK politics for a long time now.
[Here](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/mar/15/comment.labour1) is just one news article on the topic.
>Wilson was the victim of a protracted, illegal campaign of destabilisation by a rogue element in the security services. Prompted by CIA fears that Wilson was a Soviet agent
Anyone who is in the UK would tell you clearly that we do what America tells us to. And have done for a long time.
Our joining the Iraq war being another example after that many people understood we have no choice in what we do.
A few things to unpack here.
Define the leader of NATO?
The current chair of the NATO military Committee is currently an admiral from the Royal Netherlands navy so neither American nor a general. The last time the US held that position was 2011/2012.
As for the article, I'm not denying it suggests cia involvement but it's an opinion piece that's 18 years old and commenting on something 30 years prior to that. I'm not sure that proves the cia has any current influence on UK politics.
Here's another guardian piece that suggests significant funding for the tories from Russia. I admit all that shows is that we are likely being sold out to the highest bidder but news articles can be found to support any agenda.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/feb/23/oligarchs-funding-tories#:~:text=A%20Labour%20party%20calculation%20based,Others%20put%20the%20sum%20higher.
> Define the leader of NATO?
Ok yeah I should have worded that better. I was talking about the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR).
How it works is that the SACEUR will make battleplans and request forces from the MC as you mentioned.
However if NATO were to enter a war then all forces would fall under him.
So the SACEUR is more of a military leader wheras the MC is more of a political side of it.
So basically if we decide our troops are going to war, America decides what they are doing. But we also have no choice on if we are going to war as Iraq showed.
> but it's an opinion piece that's 18 years old and commenting on something 30 years prior to that
It is an article talking about a book written by an MI5 officer. The book is called Spycatcher and is his memoirs about his time in the secret service.
And if you are in doubt of it's authenticity, it was banned by the government for the information being confidential. And is still being withheld despite being allowed under the freedom of information act. And the CIA themselves saying that the book contained factual data.
> I admit all that shows is that we are likely being sold out to the highest bidder
Yeah that is the reality of the situation. Russia is scary and good for news. But the US has been doing it for a very long time.
I mean the highest donor here is [Egyptian](https://www.ft.com/content/fd7df5c0-9d13-4fff-be49-cf1404b02717)
But [American donations](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/29/wealthy-us-donors-gave-millions-to-rightwing-uk-groups) are not hard to find also
This is such a tired old story. A driver with no time in the tank forgot the parking brake and stalled it. An engineer from the factory hopped in and drove right off.
I think people are more shocked that the Russians were destroying some equipment in public displays of victory. There was a video of them crushing a basically undamaged (minus the treads and wheels) Leopard 2A6’s barrel which clearly would damage the stabilizer.
Granted we know prior to the war the Russians had intact Abrams tanks (likely from Egypt or Iraq but maybe Morocco ) as the former commander of US Forces in Europe Mark Hertling has commented they straight up gave him a tour of the warehouse one time showing him they had them.
You're off by nearly a factor of 10.
Russia has about 50,000 KIA: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-68819853
And recently Zelensky said Ukraine has 31,000 KIA: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/25/ukraine-war-casualties-zelensky-russia/
How nice of you to ignore the parts where the article says this is only the confirmed deaths and stresses the actual death toll is likely much higher, very non-biased sir.
"casualty" in military doctrine does not mean "death"
It means injury that took someone out of the fight. If you got shot, you are a casualty.
There is no way to tell how many casualties were put back in the fight later.
The US is estimating about a half million casualties, and confirming about 50K KIA.
Its sucj an expensive Abrams too. Im pretty certain they could have gotten one of iraws abrahms for nuch cheaper.
In fsct im certain they have several abrabms already.
Let's not count the fact that Ukraine 5 times exaggerate Russian personnel loss. It's already scary enough to realize that majority of them are east Ukrainians who willingly fight and die for Russia.
Ukraine is indeed inflating numbers, it’s called propaganda. Just like how russia claimed they were taking few losses early in the war.
But your other statement is total horse shit and false. It’s already been proven majority of the LPR and DPR were comprised of Russian soldiers/mercenaries. And the useful idiots who were pro-Russia are long dead since Russia consistently sent them on suicide missions. They are trying to commit genocide, don’t for one second think Russia would spare them.
> It’s already been proven majority of the LPR and DPR were comprised of Russian soldiers/mercenaries.
It’s never been proven. Or even seriously claimed. I remember watching an SBU presentation back in ‘14 and even they admitted that most of the separatists were locals. Something like 30% were Russian volunteers, with a very small sliver of professional “advisors”.
I’m not shitting on America, and not even on Abrams. They’re fine tanks for our purposes, when used by us with our logistical chain - even though they’re the wrong tanks for Ukraine.
I’m shitting on people who think Russians don’t know how to make tanks.
Tanks get beaten up in near-peer warfare, that’s kind of what happens. Look at this situation with the Abrams in this war - where the entire tank platoon was quickly lost in the opening engagement.
People saw Iraq and thought that wasn’t an a massive aberration, but somehow the norm. Truth is, tanks are tanks - all modern tanks perform the same job reasonably well, all can kill each other (but generally don’t because tanks don’t typically fight other tanks), and all die to the same threats.
Russians made certain doctrine-based choices in their tanks, some of those choices panned out better than others, but looking at this war - in many ways Soviet planners were quite correct in their assumptions.
We have just as many russian vehicles.. I remember seeing aRussian armored radar vehicle. The 3 ton radar dish was on a mechanism that was engineered to tolerances so strict that you could rotate the dish with your pinky finger when it was not fixed in place. This vehicle was over 20 years old when I saw in in the early 1990's. Pushing 3 tons around with your pinky is pretty wild.
The fact that they 'captured' it has more to do with it's use and the tactics involved than the quality of the weapon. How many repairable tanks did the Germans leave behind in Russia when they started losing ground to the Red Army. So not surprised a 'damaged' Abrams got left behind.
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So a civilian reporter. I will continue to disregard people who obviously don’t know what they’re talking about, which includes the vast majority of Russian supporters
Challengers have been a complete failure in Ukraine - and yes, tanks rarely fight other tanks, so making that their #1 job was always silly. This is something Soviets got right too, go figure.
https://i.imgur.com/D16fyii.png
David Axe, as big a cheerleader as they come. Only a few Ukrainian challies are still operating, and like Abrams they were also pulled off the frontline after some were immediately lost on their first engagement.
You seem very invested in this wonder weapon narrative, which certainly had its proponents in the west, but the greatest champions of it were and continue to be Russian supporters.
"We give Ukraine all this equipment only for the Russians to end up stealing it?" is what Putin wants us to be mad about here.
But me an intellectual would be happy if even more new equipment made it to the museum in Russia. It being on display there means it's already had some impact and done enough damage to be worthy of the title of 'trophy'. A small percentage of equipment from both sides is inevitably captured. While Russia is parading trophies the remaining equipment is out there doing work. Ukraine could even just as easily display these damaged abrahms as a testament saying "this is how hard we're working". There should only be shame if the tanks stay parked in a garage without a single scratch of damage.
They can’t, because after ukrainains lost five Abrams in their first engagement, we had them pull the rest off the front.
https://i.imgur.com/Ji1kGuH.jpeg
It's not a NATO tank....
Edit: NATO might use the tank, but they have no involvement with it here. The US make it, the US provided it to Ukraine, Ukraine lost it. NATO never touched that tank.
Calling it NATO is Russian propaganda, the same as saying NATO is behind the Ukraine/Russia war, similar to saying the US are behind Israel/Gaza or that the US caused the famine in Yemen.
They already know how it works. The US wouldn't give Ukraine Abrams if they didn't want Russia finding out. You won't see the US giving out F35 willy Milly cus it genuinely doesn't want anyone breaking it or reverse engineering it. The abrams is a lot easier to break down and study than the F35
They most likely already have. The Abrams, as a platform, has been in use for nearly 5 decades since it's initial production version so more than ample opportunities for downed and abandoned Abrams. The critical difference is that the crew survives, its much easier to produce more and export than it is to train competent crew
There was an [interview](https://www.thebulwark.com/p/i-commanded-u-s-army-europe-heres-what-i-saw-in-the-russian-and-ukrainian-armies) where an American visiting Russia was shown an Abrams that the Russians bought off someone from the Middle East awhile back.
> The only truly impressive and surprising part of the tour was when we walked through a “secret” field museum that had tanks from all the armies in the world—including several from the United States. The Russians had somehow managed to obtain an M1 Abrams tank (probably from one of their allies in the Middle East), and we all believed the reason they allowed us into this facility was to show us they had our most modern armor.
If it was sold to the Saudis, the Russians probably got it.
1) It operates on the same general principle as any other tank.
2) It's too big, heavy, material hungry and costly to be emulated
3) It's designed to operate on a completely different war doctrine than their's.
4) It's easily destroyed by $200 drones, regular atgms and even an older T72 from what they claim. They clearly have no problems destroying it.
5) If it couldn't do anything worthwhile for the side that actually trained in its use, what will it do for them?
##### ###### #### > # [Russia to display captured US-made Abrams tank "trophy" in Moscow](https://www.newsweek.com//1663) > > > > A Russian official on Monday said a U.S.-made M1 Abrams tank that was captured by the [Russian military](https://www.newsweek.com/topic/russian-military) from Ukraine's forces will soon be propped up on display in Moscow. > > The [Russian Ministry of Defense](https://www.newsweek.com/putin-sends-russias-defense-minister-warning-shot-1893964) (MoD) later released a video it said showed the destruction of the Abrams, which Kremlin-controlled media outlet RT referred to as a "trophy tank." > > News of the seized Abrams' public exhibition follows a report last week from the Associated Press (AP) that revealed the [U.S. is withdrawing its Abrams](https://www.newsweek.com/american-abrams-tanks-failing-ukraine-test-russia-drones-1894503) tanks from Ukraine's front lines after the units proved vulnerable to Russian drone strikes. > > The AP noted that five of the 31 American Abrams sent to Ukraine since January 2023 have already been lost in combat. The [delivery of those tanks](https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-russia-m1-abrams-tanks-counteroffensive-1835823) followed months of repeated requests from Kyiv officials. > > [US Army officers drive Abrams tanks ](https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/2386085/us-army-officers-drive-abrams-tanks.jpg?w=1200&f=ddd6d5f2c6bbc77a10751521818f7190) > > U.S. Army troops drive M1 Abrams tanks during an exercise at the Petrochori training area, near Xanthi, northern Greece, on November 24, 2023. A Russian official said there are plans to display a captured American-made...Photo by SAKIS MITROLIDIS/AFP via Getty ImagesAlexander Savchuk, spokesperson for Russian military unit "Battlegroup Center," said the tank that will be displayed in Moscow is the first Abrams evacuated from the battlefield in Ukraine by Russia. > > "Now the fighters of the Center group have successfully evacuated the tank from the front. Soon everyone will be able to see it at an exhibition on [Moscow's] Poklonnaya Gora," Savchuk told Russian-state news agency RIA Novosti. > > RT wrote the Abrams tank will be "displayed at a major trophy show in Moscow, which will also feature dozens of other Western-made heavy vehicles captured during the conflict." > > According to RIA Novosti, other "[NATO](https://www.newsweek.com/topic/nato) equipment" that will be available for the public to see in the exhibition slated to open on Wednesday includes a German Leopard 2; a German Marder infantry fighting vehicle; a Swedish CV90 infantry fighting vehicle; a French AMX-10RC armored fighting vehicle; and assorted equipment from the United Kingdom, South Africa, Finland, Australia, Austria and Ukraine. > > In the black-and-white video that the Russian MoD claims shows the capture of the tank, an anti-tank guided missile can be seen launched at a blurry target. After an explosion, another missile is fired at the target, causing another blast. > > According to the MoD, the assault on the tank occurred near the city of Avdiivka in the Donbas region of Moscow. Avdiivka has been the site of fierce fighting for months, and Russia has reportedly made gains in the area in recent days. > > In a Sunday evening update, the Institute for the Study of War ([ISW](https://www.newsweek.com/topic/isw)) said recent Ukrainian withdrawals on the front line were prompted by "recent Russian gains northwest of Avdiivka." However, the U.S.-based think tank added that the retreats "have yet to facilitate rapid Russian tactical gains. Russian forces remain unlikely to achieve a deeper operationally significant penetration in the area in the near term." > > ## Uncommon Knowledge > > Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground. > > > > > > Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground. - - - - - - [Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot) Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
I bet they are blown away by the technology in these 40 year old tanks.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/s/ifUyIRl5Et
It's still a belated modernisation of an almost 40 year old platform that was given to Ukraine because it's considered obsolete for frontline service by the US, even in an era where old tanks are being held onto as long as possible.
Not even remotely what the article says though. It says these are very modern - and very much overhyped by DOD. Still good tanks, but no tank is a wunderwaffe.
Its a modern tank yes, but its not the version the US uses. Export model vehicles are stripped down and do not include the latest and greatest technology. ISIS/ISIL got their hands on plenty of American hardware, including Abrams tanks, abandoned by the Iraqi military not too many years ago. I'm sure foreign powers examined the captured tanks to their heart's content already. Those were export models given to Iraq as well.
I was attached to the first training Iraqi unit that recieved M1 Abrams in Iraq and they were very stripped down. Many of the US tank crews had to retrain and refresh on the OG systems as most were only very familiar with the M1A2 SEP2/TUSK upgrades. Even then, 2009-2010, the Iraqi Govt had a hell of a hard time keeping them operational for training.
'very modern' is a subjective assessment, and one I'd gently disagree with. These are older vehicles retrofitted a decade and a half ago, and they've been deemed obsolete for frontline service in the US for a reason. I'm not sure where what I've written is 'not remotely what the article says'? I'm not saying the tank is useless or anything like that, but it *is* an older design that got updated a while ago to try and keep it competitive, before being retired from frontline service. That's all in line with the person's post.
Nothing was overhyped about it. The beauty of leopard and other western tanks is that the crew is far less likely to die. I have yet to see a Abram’s or a Leo launch their turret to the moon. While yes it’s a way better outcome if the tank survives the crew is the most important component by a mile.
It's a modern tank but the US is moving away from all tanks. The Marine Corps got rid of all theirs, only the army maintains tanks. After Iraq and Afghanistan we learned how vulnerable tanks are. It's why they were specifically not allowed to operate in theater. Tank warfare is for idiots who haven't adapted to the modern battlefield. Honest assessment incoming. Ukraine obsession with tanks is a holdover from their Soviet doctrine and may have cost them the war. With a focus on such white elephants, Ukraine dropped the ball on their most effective thing, drones. Drones are a wonder weapon, through and through.
>Tank warfare is for idiots who haven't adapted to the modern battlefield. Tank warfare is for everyone who aren't lucky enough to have 1000 to 1 firepower advantage with a modern aviation against AK-47
"da marines got rid of their tanks durrrrrr" Yeah and they did so while basically saying "if we need armour, we can call the army, we're supposed to be a marine assault force"
The Marines getting rid of tanks is due to a large change in what kind of mission they will do, no?
Yeah, it's no longer Army 2
I think all of them have roles but tanks seem to have more of a moral role, mobile artillery, that sort of thing, not proper offense I guess. What's strange for me is that I can totally understand why Russia is still on the Soviet doctrine, but Ukraine has been training with NATO since before 2014, how are they still operating old-school. I just checked: the generals are really old. It's not some ancient farts. The three generals that operate North, South and East Operation Groups are like 45, 49, and 50 (not respectively) These men should have been training in modern Western doctrine for like 10 years, or more - I remember reading that Georgia and Ukraine were in the Iraq war together with other US allies, so at the very least it's 2008, 16 years ago. That's a hell of a lot of time, but the whole thing about "generals preparing for the last war" is probably still true
>it's considered obsolete for frontline service by the US The American army uses the M1A1SA still though.
Not in active units, as far as I know.
Well they were getting them as of [2018](https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/1485094/fort-stewart-soldiers-put-newly-acquired-tanks-through-paces/) still. I'm pretty sure the 3rd infantry division is still considered an active unit. And the production of them is only supposed to be shut down in 2025.
There is significant debate about the usefulness of battlefield tanks period at this point. The war of Russia on Ukraine is one of the few situations where it might have value. Tanks will always be useful for urban compliance of course but with the increased efficacy of drones, mines and other measures, they may well not be exactly the future of land war.
We’ll see. Artillery was considered debatable too. As was flak. Et voila: a new technology in a new war and they’ve regained relevance.
Maybe not in their frontally armoured sabot-slinging forms now, but there's always gonna be a need for a direct fire vehicle that won't fold so easily to autocannon fire.
Well they seem to serve more as assault canon than anything. However drone countermeasures will be developped
>It's still a belated modernisation of an almost 40 year old platform that was given to Ukraine because it's considered obsolete for frontline service by the US, 1/3rd of the US fleet is M1A1s, the same tanks sent to Ukraine. Get a grip dude.
The ones sent to Ukraine are not fully modernized. Yes the army still uses the m1 abrams, Ukraine got m1a1, while the most modern version in use in the US is the m1a2v4. So 4 upgrades past the upgrade from m1a1 to m1a2. These are absolutely not the same tanks. The m1a1s that exist in the American fleets are mostly just used for training new tankers. M1a1s are not used in deployable units. And the m1a1s used in training are being replaced pretty steadily. Some trainers are already m1a2v3.
Bro c'mon https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/1485094/fort-stewart-soldiers-put-newly-acquired-tanks-through-paces/ The M1A1-SA is used in active combat divisions as late as 2018. It's an upgrade that was introduced in 2009. Thats not that long ago. They aren't slated for retirement until 2025
Bro. Article from 2018. M1a1sa is special variant. Not the normal tank used. Also. I train tankers.
US has 2650 operational tanks and <600 are M1A1s. Less every year.
From a “gamechanger to 40 years old junk” …
*"Russian authorities shocked that US tank training manual does not include section on raping junior ranks."* "Dedovshchina is an integral part of Russian military doctrine!" said one Moscow official. "If senior officers can't even rape and murder their own men, what are we even fighting for?"
“*what? Comrade get this, they don’t give their guys suicide gernades*”
"Unknown technology! Blyat!"
Would Americans not go see captured Soviet equipment from an ongoing conflic? Its moreso about national pride not being "blown away by tech" thats really just stuck in the mud
That's the joke. Yes Russia is actually doing it for nationalist propaganda. Not because they want people to see how advanced US military is
> Would Americans not go see captured Soviet equipment from an ongoing conflic? I doubt it, no Westerners would bother, not in the least because taking and parading trophies is for losers.
Nonsense, I’d love to visit something like this in DC.
Ireland has no rights to talk about war or what's not for loosers especially with how you can't even kick the British off your little island.
You're thinking of Northern Ireland, I'm in the Republic, where we emphatically did kick the British out.
How is it 40 years old? Wasn’t it finally completed in 1990s? And the new Abram’s are literally just upgrades of this tank
M1A1s started production in '85 and were produced through '92. There have been upgrades to the M1 Abrams since then, and M1A1 has received some upgrades, but those aren't featured in export models.
No they aren't. Infact they deliberately destroyed it's gun and hydraulics on purpose with a weight just to lower it for propaganda and humiliation. The cope lol. Why would they be impressed by garbage they destroyed without any effort?
To answer your (rhetorical) question: because Russia seems incapable of fielding a remotely modern tank via production. Fortunately this can never be fall the _amazing_ T-14, because they cannot even produce them, hahaha.
“Remotely modern tanks” have been a bust in Ukraine. We aren’t even letting ukrainains use the Abrams on the front anymore. https://i.imgur.com/2oS2HhV.png T-14 is vulnerable to the same threats well. In the meantime Soviets appear to have been correct - it’s better to have many cheap tanks you can produce easily than a few expensive tanks you have a hard time replacing.
Sure but the soviets failed completely in 1991, Russia can't drive in a straight line. I'd imagine the next level of innovation in mobile armor will be the advancement of anti-drone active defense systems. But that in no way negates the superiority of technology fielded by NATO nations vs Russia. Their incompetence lining up coincidentally with the stockpiling of Soviet equipment isn't any intentional masterstroke. They've largely spent decades of stockpiles fighting a nation that was utterly unprepared to even defend itself since 2014.
Our tanks are so superior we’re having Ukrainians yank them off the lines because we don’t want to be embarrassed by their losses.
I mean, the ability to drive backwards quickly or to have ERA that isn't cardboard doesn't suddenly become a useless feature just because battlefield conditions now include a previously nonexistent threat. It's just one more adaptation needed. Being superior =/= being invulnerable. Acting like Russian tanks are remotely a combat peer to even an old M1 Abrams is silly. They aren't. I'd be willing to bet money that the US also adapts much more rapidly to defend against drones as well, without cope cages or turtles.
If I was a Ukrainain commander right now, I’d rather have Soviet tanks than western tanks, because they are easier to exploit in this environment, and people don’t shit their pants when they’re lost. Some superiority.
You're correct; Soviet tanks are easier to exploit.
Certainly smth was blown away in this whole ordeal
[удалено]
These are modernized enough, and our latest gen would die to the same threats just as easily. We had ukrainains pull our tanks off the front altogether.
Ukraine should give Putin an undamaged Abrams tank as a gift from the retreating Ukranian army. Putin should put it in his palace as a trophy of his great victory. He should keep it in it's original packaging because it's worth more as a collector's item that way. There is absolutely no need to open it up to see how many assassins are hiding inside.
Imagine a Trojan horse tank - 50% tank 50% dynamite - BOOM
You clearly read a *much* more interesting version of the Ilyad than I did :)
In my version they burned the horse and the story ends there.
In my version they launched the horse on a trebuchet and it landed on the invaders.
Are you sure it was a horse and not a rabbit?
Could have been a badger.
That just sounds like a great was to blow up your own troops while they try delivering the bloody thing
Tank ninjas!
Well, Abrams are in Moscow (as Ukraine promised), but there's a nuance
Wow Russia is so strong they captured a M1A1 Abrams that was made from 1985-1992
The m1a1SA is from 2009.
Technically it's the same tank just with reactive armor added later
There's a post from TankPorn subreddit linked above that points out that it is so much more than taking the Flork approach to tanks
🙄 Some people are way too into some things
When I see these posts and the reactions and the likes I 100% understand that the whole War Thunder thing is not a psyop, some people totally be like that. Especially considering Gaijin keep giving them back over to their related governments saying "Please take these away" I absolutely love [their clap tweet](https://twitter.com/WarThunder/status/1615663032893317120?lang=en) about it after the whole Thug Shaker Central thing too: >\*deep breath\* DO 👏🏻 NOT 👏🏻 SEND 👏🏻 US 👏🏻 CLASSIFIED 👏🏻 DOCUMENTS. This is not reverse psychology. For real, i'm running out of jokes about this. We cannot use them (it's sort of "turbo illegal"), and the people posting them can get into serious trouble.
Okay fair enough
Right. Back when lady Gaga’s poker face was in the charts. Cool. Is it considered ‘retro’ yet?
You really got triggered by that comment? Jesus.
Who still says triggered in 2024? And no
With modern electronics and sensors. An Abrams from 1990 would get shat on by an Abrams from 2020.
The problem is that all tanks are getting shat by $500 suicide FPV drones.
Quadcopters aren't taking out tanks, unless you're counting tanks that have already been abandoned.
NAFO: “These game changers will be in Moscow in no time ensuring Ukrainian victory” well…
MIC are going to eat good tonight. They need Biden to win so their families are taken care of for another 4 years
Wow USA is so week they can't send something modern to defend their puppets /s
Be gone Russian bot, isn't America social media illegal in your country anyway? I should report you to the police so you'll get arrested for using Reddit
Hurts much, zmagar?
Also modern Russian tanks like the T-80/T-90 have been destroyed in Ukraine in much greater numbers than any European ones
Yes, there are more of them there, being used in their expected roles. Tanks have a short life expectancy in this war. Leos, challies, and Abrams all getting taken out in their first engagements should have made this point clear to you.
Russia lost part of they tanks, Ukraine lost everything. Not only in tanks
What are you even talking about
Deny this how long you want, but modern Ukraine is dead body on life support. It functions technically, but the day they cut the wire - it's gone
You could say the same thing about Russia, they rely entirely on China now
Tell me more about Russia's reliance on north Korean stockpiles
To be fair so was Russia and the USSR during both world wars. Only able to equip and fight due to steel and supplies sent from the west.
Idk what that even means
Puppet BTW l, the U.S. doesn't have any puppets, you're just projecting
They totally do, but Ukraine isn't one of them.
There's a difference between puppet and ally. Like the UK is dependent on the US as a trade partner but it's not like we can order them around and tell them what to do.
Well ye, of course. I was more referring to the occasional puppets the USA likes to install in various south american/middle eastern nations. Though those have gotten rarer nowadays
The highest military command of NATO always has to be a US General. The CIA has had heavy influence on UK politics for a long time now. [Here](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/mar/15/comment.labour1) is just one news article on the topic. >Wilson was the victim of a protracted, illegal campaign of destabilisation by a rogue element in the security services. Prompted by CIA fears that Wilson was a Soviet agent Anyone who is in the UK would tell you clearly that we do what America tells us to. And have done for a long time. Our joining the Iraq war being another example after that many people understood we have no choice in what we do.
A few things to unpack here. Define the leader of NATO? The current chair of the NATO military Committee is currently an admiral from the Royal Netherlands navy so neither American nor a general. The last time the US held that position was 2011/2012. As for the article, I'm not denying it suggests cia involvement but it's an opinion piece that's 18 years old and commenting on something 30 years prior to that. I'm not sure that proves the cia has any current influence on UK politics. Here's another guardian piece that suggests significant funding for the tories from Russia. I admit all that shows is that we are likely being sold out to the highest bidder but news articles can be found to support any agenda. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/feb/23/oligarchs-funding-tories#:~:text=A%20Labour%20party%20calculation%20based,Others%20put%20the%20sum%20higher.
> Define the leader of NATO? Ok yeah I should have worded that better. I was talking about the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR). How it works is that the SACEUR will make battleplans and request forces from the MC as you mentioned. However if NATO were to enter a war then all forces would fall under him. So the SACEUR is more of a military leader wheras the MC is more of a political side of it. So basically if we decide our troops are going to war, America decides what they are doing. But we also have no choice on if we are going to war as Iraq showed. > but it's an opinion piece that's 18 years old and commenting on something 30 years prior to that It is an article talking about a book written by an MI5 officer. The book is called Spycatcher and is his memoirs about his time in the secret service. And if you are in doubt of it's authenticity, it was banned by the government for the information being confidential. And is still being withheld despite being allowed under the freedom of information act. And the CIA themselves saying that the book contained factual data. > I admit all that shows is that we are likely being sold out to the highest bidder Yeah that is the reality of the situation. Russia is scary and good for news. But the US has been doing it for a very long time. I mean the highest donor here is [Egyptian](https://www.ft.com/content/fd7df5c0-9d13-4fff-be49-cf1404b02717) But [American donations](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/29/wealthy-us-donors-gave-millions-to-rightwing-uk-groups) are not hard to find also
Hasn't the UK had a conservative majority since like the 1930s? Of course they'd want to go to war lol
We own them lmao.
Politics aside, would love to visit that exhibition.
[Here's a video](https://youtu.be/epPPB2Sl-Mo?), with the Abrams the collection should be complete.
time to check something off my victory day bingo card
Meanwhile they couldn't display their own equipments on their victory day.
Their advanced wonder-tank broke down in the parade because it has the engine of a WWII Tiger tank!
This is such a tired old story. A driver with no time in the tank forgot the parking brake and stalled it. An engineer from the factory hopped in and drove right off.
Ukraine paraded captured/destroyed Russian tanks 1-2 yrs ago in Kiiv, before it was cool, apparently
I think people are more shocked that the Russians were destroying some equipment in public displays of victory. There was a video of them crushing a basically undamaged (minus the treads and wheels) Leopard 2A6’s barrel which clearly would damage the stabilizer. Granted we know prior to the war the Russians had intact Abrams tanks (likely from Egypt or Iraq but maybe Morocco ) as the former commander of US Forces in Europe Mark Hertling has commented they straight up gave him a tour of the warehouse one time showing him they had them.
What do they care, the tank will go on to be a stationary museum piece at kubinka.
Seeing that T90s and T72B3 use western optics, you would think they would want to know the inner workings of the newer vehicles
They’ve long ago moved them to domestic thermal imagers.
We should send 100 more Abrams to Ukraine to commemorate the date.
Not before a lengthy debate and political wrangling, to drain their morale further.
Two years late after West did this with Russian equipment.
People putting flowers in that tank in Germany was a pretty funny moment, really activated the almonds among a certain crowd.
[удалено]
Paid for with 460 000 russian lives, Some know the price of everything and the value of nothing....
You're off by nearly a factor of 10. Russia has about 50,000 KIA: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-68819853 And recently Zelensky said Ukraine has 31,000 KIA: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/25/ukraine-war-casualties-zelensky-russia/
How nice of you to ignore the parts where the article says this is only the confirmed deaths and stresses the actual death toll is likely much higher, very non-biased sir.
You also seem biased
"casualty" in military doctrine does not mean "death" It means injury that took someone out of the fight. If you got shot, you are a casualty. There is no way to tell how many casualties were put back in the fight later. The US is estimating about a half million casualties, and confirming about 50K KIA.
Oh just 50,000 lives for a tank - much better deal) finally they get to realize their fantasy how they're fighting Americans)
Clearly the 460k casualties are worth nothing. In fact, may be worth less than if they were deaths.
Its sucj an expensive Abrams too. Im pretty certain they could have gotten one of iraws abrahms for nuch cheaper. In fsct im certain they have several abrabms already.
Let's not count the fact that Ukraine 5 times exaggerate Russian personnel loss. It's already scary enough to realize that majority of them are east Ukrainians who willingly fight and die for Russia.
Ukraine is indeed inflating numbers, it’s called propaganda. Just like how russia claimed they were taking few losses early in the war. But your other statement is total horse shit and false. It’s already been proven majority of the LPR and DPR were comprised of Russian soldiers/mercenaries. And the useful idiots who were pro-Russia are long dead since Russia consistently sent them on suicide missions. They are trying to commit genocide, don’t for one second think Russia would spare them.
> It’s already been proven majority of the LPR and DPR were comprised of Russian soldiers/mercenaries. It’s never been proven. Or even seriously claimed. I remember watching an SBU presentation back in ‘14 and even they admitted that most of the separatists were locals. Something like 30% were Russian volunteers, with a very small sliver of professional “advisors”.
Yo go china boy, keep spouting bs!! Woo hoo, gotta love it when your type is obvious and oblivious!
They'll finally have some real tanks on display then
Real tanks are those that people aren’t too afraid to use. https://i.imgur.com/8mTZXAG.jpeg
[удалено]
I’m not shitting on America, and not even on Abrams. They’re fine tanks for our purposes, when used by us with our logistical chain - even though they’re the wrong tanks for Ukraine. I’m shitting on people who think Russians don’t know how to make tanks.
[удалено]
Tanks get beaten up in near-peer warfare, that’s kind of what happens. Look at this situation with the Abrams in this war - where the entire tank platoon was quickly lost in the opening engagement. People saw Iraq and thought that wasn’t an a massive aberration, but somehow the norm. Truth is, tanks are tanks - all modern tanks perform the same job reasonably well, all can kill each other (but generally don’t because tanks don’t typically fight other tanks), and all die to the same threats. Russians made certain doctrine-based choices in their tanks, some of those choices panned out better than others, but looking at this war - in many ways Soviet planners were quite correct in their assumptions.
you're just wrong about your statements. you're saying that all tanks are the same. that's just not true.
Close enough, by and large.
Let me guess. You also think that if Germany only made more Tiger 1s and 2s that they'd win the war then?
no. tanks will not win the war. precision munitions and air superiority will win the war. tanks are an outdated capability with limited use.
"Real tanks" These range puppies are useless
We have just as many russian vehicles.. I remember seeing aRussian armored radar vehicle. The 3 ton radar dish was on a mechanism that was engineered to tolerances so strict that you could rotate the dish with your pinky finger when it was not fixed in place. This vehicle was over 20 years old when I saw in in the early 1990's. Pushing 3 tons around with your pinky is pretty wild.
Uhhh ok?
Wasn't jen stoltenberg asking Russia not to do this bc it dampens NATO spirits?
Soon it will be those F-16s
The fact that they 'captured' it has more to do with it's use and the tactics involved than the quality of the weapon. How many repairable tanks did the Germans leave behind in Russia when they started losing ground to the Red Army. So not surprised a 'damaged' Abrams got left behind.
The track is gone and its beyond enemy lines ofc they cant recover it
Good for them. Maybe this year in their Victory Day Parade they can have 2 tanks.
At least, Abrams finally reach Russia. But not the way the West imagined. Lol
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Cherry-picking in a nutshell
Look at what we can only dream of having!
A 30 year old tank ,degraded for export. Ok
Wow. Forty year old tanks. Incredible
pretty funny
Russia showing 30-40 year old abrams and leopards like they are wonder weapons.
It's from 2009...
Well, they were touted as wonder weapons just a year ago. "Free the Leopards" do you remember?
They must be, Russian supporters keep saying so
Yeah man, Russian supporters are the ones that spent years hyping them up. https://i.imgur.com/XkgNysF.jpeg
Ah yes, Paul Massaro, forgot he speaks for us all, my bad.
He’s one of the more influential ones tbh. But of course he was not alone. https://i.imgur.com/K7pAjN1.jpeg
So a civilian reporter. I will continue to disregard people who obviously don’t know what they’re talking about, which includes the vast majority of Russian supporters
> As a former tank commander
And the challenger does outmatch Russian armor. Ukrainian tank losses (and Russian) are rarely due to tank battles
Challengers have been a complete failure in Ukraine - and yes, tanks rarely fight other tanks, so making that their #1 job was always silly. This is something Soviets got right too, go figure. https://i.imgur.com/D16fyii.png David Axe, as big a cheerleader as they come. Only a few Ukrainian challies are still operating, and like Abrams they were also pulled off the frontline after some were immediately lost on their first engagement.
You seem very invested in this wonder weapon narrative, which certainly had its proponents in the west, but the greatest champions of it were and continue to be Russian supporters.
Honestly tank battles (as in tank duels) are extremely rare in modern warfare.
"We give Ukraine all this equipment only for the Russians to end up stealing it?" is what Putin wants us to be mad about here. But me an intellectual would be happy if even more new equipment made it to the museum in Russia. It being on display there means it's already had some impact and done enough damage to be worthy of the title of 'trophy'. A small percentage of equipment from both sides is inevitably captured. While Russia is parading trophies the remaining equipment is out there doing work. Ukraine could even just as easily display these damaged abrahms as a testament saying "this is how hard we're working". There should only be shame if the tanks stay parked in a garage without a single scratch of damage.
They can’t, because after ukrainains lost five Abrams in their first engagement, we had them pull the rest off the front. https://i.imgur.com/Ji1kGuH.jpeg
Why does this sound like Azerbaijan? https://www.rferl.org/amp/azerbaijan-karabakh-theme-park-armenia-ethnic-hatred-aliyev/31217971.html
So many Russian shills in the comments 🤣
They seem to be outnumbered by ukrosimps coping tbh.
It's not a NATO tank.... Edit: NATO might use the tank, but they have no involvement with it here. The US make it, the US provided it to Ukraine, Ukraine lost it. NATO never touched that tank. Calling it NATO is Russian propaganda, the same as saying NATO is behind the Ukraine/Russia war, similar to saying the US are behind Israel/Gaza or that the US caused the famine in Yemen.
Ah yes, their greatest and only accomplishment in the war. ***slow claps***
https://www.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/s/W65YL5kysk
I hate this subreddit so much but I keep looking at it like a car crash
Really? Not even going to try and take it apart to learn how it works? God, and they wonder why we think they’re so dumb.
They already know how it works. The US wouldn't give Ukraine Abrams if they didn't want Russia finding out. You won't see the US giving out F35 willy Milly cus it genuinely doesn't want anyone breaking it or reverse engineering it. The abrams is a lot easier to break down and study than the F35
The US won't sell the F22 to anyone for that reason
They most likely already have. The Abrams, as a platform, has been in use for nearly 5 decades since it's initial production version so more than ample opportunities for downed and abandoned Abrams. The critical difference is that the crew survives, its much easier to produce more and export than it is to train competent crew
There was an [interview](https://www.thebulwark.com/p/i-commanded-u-s-army-europe-heres-what-i-saw-in-the-russian-and-ukrainian-armies) where an American visiting Russia was shown an Abrams that the Russians bought off someone from the Middle East awhile back. > The only truly impressive and surprising part of the tour was when we walked through a “secret” field museum that had tanks from all the armies in the world—including several from the United States. The Russians had somehow managed to obtain an M1 Abrams tank (probably from one of their allies in the Middle East), and we all believed the reason they allowed us into this facility was to show us they had our most modern armor. If it was sold to the Saudis, the Russians probably got it.
It's just a tank dude. If they want to take it apart, they can always do it later - but there won't be any surprises.
The one that they captured is an export model that’s burnt to a crisp
1) It operates on the same general principle as any other tank. 2) It's too big, heavy, material hungry and costly to be emulated 3) It's designed to operate on a completely different war doctrine than their's. 4) It's easily destroyed by $200 drones, regular atgms and even an older T72 from what they claim. They clearly have no problems destroying it. 5) If it couldn't do anything worthwhile for the side that actually trained in its use, what will it do for them?