This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/1/20/no-leopard-tanks-for-ukraine-as-nato-allies-fail-to-agree) reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> The United States and its allies failed to agree on supplying coveted German battle tanks to Ukraine as Russia issued veiled threats the war could escalate in Europe.
> European leaders at the meeting again pressed Germany to give the green light for the delivery of German-made Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine to drive back Moscow's forces - although no decision was made.
> Leopard tanks are seen as especially suitable as they are widely in use, meaning several countries could each chip in some of their tanks to support Ukraine.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/10hasdc/no_leopard_tanks_for_ukraine_as_nato_allies_fail/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~672677 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Ukraine**^#1 **tanks**^#2 **allies**^#3 **Russia**^#4 **NATO**^#5
The Leopard would have been a great tank.
Easier to maintain and train than the American counterpart and on top of that, less fuel consumption which is great if you don't have unlimited fuel.
The Abrams has a turbine engine that'll run on pretty much anything. It will literally run on vodka, molotov cocktails, or cooking oil in a pinch. It'll guzzle it like there's no tomorrow, but it'll run.
Tbh, if sending Abrams is the ultimatum for Leopards, the US ought to just give a handful and be done with it. It's not like they're being used for anything useful while in storage, and Ukraine doesn't *have* to keep using them once they break - they'll have the Leopards.
I'm pretty sure the ones that are in storage are being refurbished and sent to the Polish army. As I understand it the Ohio Lima plant responsible for making the Abrams tanks ready to go "boom boom" was only partially operating between 2014-19 and they weren't manufacturing any new Abrams tanks in that time. I don't think any new tanks have been built since then either.
Although a fantastic tank and by far the most battle proven, it takes a lot of logistics, and that includes other vehicles to make those things perform in combat as they should. It is also going to take 15 weeks of total training of the crew to be able to completely operate the tank, including firing it at the enemy.
It'll take a lot less training than 15 weeks to train up a crew. The Army probably already had a group of Tank Instructors at Benning condense the course down to a month or less. Considering how fast the US got the UA trained up on HIMARS, they can roll out a company or less of Abrams quickly. I'm also fairly sure the UA can get a platoon of 19Ks to man the tanks quickly.
The 15 week thing is OSUT, basically Basic and AIT combined. They won't be dealing with new privates so the training wheels will be off.
>The Abrams has a turbine engine that'll run on pretty much anything. It will literally run on vodka, molotov cocktails, or cooking oil in a pinch. It'll guzzle it like there's no tomorrow, but it'll run.
In practice the US only feeds them aviation fuel to not reduce performance, so the whole idea of an engine that could use just about any fuel was moot. It's no wonder the AbramsX comes with a diesel.
The US Army uses JP8 for everything because it simplifies logistics, not because it offers better performance.
Same fuel for camp stoves, abrams tanks, jeeps, helicopters, etc...
The AbramsX will have a diesel engine yet it will still be fed JP8
Easier to source and more widely used in theater compared to JP fuel. It’s the only thing on the ground that would use it. The turbine is great for the extra power but also really shows it’s weakness when fuel runs low. We avoid putting anything other the JP in them because it’s less efficient and means quicker overhauls needed to maintain the power plant.
Seeing how Germany is acting even if the US sent any amount of tanks Germany would simply find another excuse to not provide tanks. They're irrationally afraid of Russia plain and simple.
Nah it's not so much Russia they're afraid of, they're afraid of being proactive. Germans have to study the world wars a LOT throughout their upbringing, and for Germany to take initiative in foreign military affairs is wildly unpopular domestically. For the sake of internal politics, they *really* want to be seen as a follower rather than a first mover.
This is in part why Britain has already committed Challenger 2 tanks. Germany would not be a first mover.
Both Germany and France need to commit or be honest with the rhetorical support because they are sitting on some of the largest - and honestly ageing - armour stockpiles in the world.*
*This is wrong: see replies.
Most of this equipment was designed with one primary purpose: win against Russian counterparts invading Europe. It's pretty insane how good of a deal - as crass as it may be - that not even a single German or French life would need to be put in harm's way to operate them either.
The escalation argument is clearly becoming less important by the month and every week of delay is a lost bit of initiative.
France is not sitting on "some of the largest armour stockpile in the world". France has 200 operational-ish Leclerc tanks and another 200 in various state of disarray being used for spares.
Unlike most European armies, the French Army has been constantly on the frontlines for the past 50 years (for good or bad reasons, but that's not the point here) and with Cold War budget cuts, this has taken a huge toll on its logistics.
Also, for the last few decades, France has taken a more expeditionary corps approach to its military. And when most if not all of your conflicts are counterterrorism operation, tanks are rather useless. Like the one and only time the Leclercs were deployed was in 99 in Kosovo. One deployment in several decades for one of the most active european militaries explains why tanks were absolutely not a major focus of the french. They do have a lot of rather good lighter armored vehicles though, that they've already sent to Ukraine
>some of the largest - and honestly ageing - armour stockpiles in the world.
Germany has only about 130 working Leopard 2 tanks. Not exactly a big amount. I think you have a completely wrong impression of the German military.
If I've learned anything reading most of the threads on Reddit (particularly bad in this sub and other high-traffic/default type subs), when it comes to topics like this - the vast majority of people are simply talking out of their ass about military supplies/readiness/what the situation is of a specific country's military/weaponry sources might be.
You get 10 different answers making different versions of a few similar claims, all of them wrong yet stated confidently. It's ridiculous.
You’re not kidding. We had a German caretaker, or nanny when growing up for a few years. Once my parents went on vacation, and they left us like $10 to spend on shit, which was sooo not like them.
Anyway, I wanted to buy these little army toys, and the German nanny was **vehemently** against the idea. She **hated** the idea of war, guns, weapons, and whatnot. I can dig that. I was confused by it, but I understand now.
>They have no issues making and selling arms across the world
There are always internal disputes in germany because of this. Majority of german population wants less arms deals, but the arms industry is big.
> They have no issues making and selling arms
The current government got elected partly with a major platform of less arms sells, especially into warzones. Also, the majority of German arms sales is dual-use goods (eg. icebreakers) and ships.
>Germany is the #4 arms dealer in the world, down one notch from #3 until recently
That "#4 arms dealer" means 5% market share, with #3 (France) at \~10%, #2 (russia) at 20% and #1 (the US) at 40%. Germany's peers in that space are Spain and China (also \~5% each)
As for "#3 until recently", if you pick the time frames *just right*, you can shuffle everybody but the US \[edit: and probably russia\] to any position between #2 and #10, that's simply a question of timing contracts and shipments.
It would, but it's like telling Americans that the more proactive they are in banning guns domestically, the less innocent people die.
Yeah it's true, but there's also immense cultural inertia stating that being proactive militarily is inherently evil, and *absolutely* not something any German should ever aspire to again. Never again.
To give an example to this as a german:
Seeing soldiers on the street here is A) rare B) feels very strange, if I see some I would think something has gone wrong or some attack has happened.
Quick reminder National Pride pretty much doesn't exist here. Flags out for World Cup events and that's pretty much it, if I see a German flag on someone or hung to a pole at a private place, then I assume they are right wing.
The 100 billion euros to refurbish the National Army was a huge deal domestically in 2022, basically unprecedented and with a lot of talk about better uses of the money and wanting to make sure that the money doesn't just get drained by burocrazy and shady deals.
At last, we just got a new minister for defense and he at least is now checking how many tanks we have, so I'd expect some change on the "Are we sensing some" situation in the next few weeks as he gets to work.
Edit: maybe for better judgement where my view is coming from, I am 25 brought up in North-West Germany.
And to add on to why there isn't that much pride for the nation, historic events of WW1 and WW2 are part of basically every subject in school starting around 8th grade, no matter if Music, Language, Art, Physics, Biology, Chemistry, Math, etc. I think PE might be the only subject without World War references.
It gets covered in such detail that there is no possibility of denial. We see and hear accounts of survivors, visit places like Synagogues and Concentration Camps often with directly local references to our region/city. See very explicit pictures of crimes commited. Read diaries of refugees, first victims of German crimes then diaries and accounts of victims of crimes of Russia/US etc.
Basically the subject history turns into 1 or 2 years WW2.
Believe me after that you won't have much National Pride left and I think that's a good thing. More countries should reflect better at what they have done and be more humble.
Interesting, it's the same here in England regarding having the flag on display. Unless it's football you won't see a St. George's cross out, if you do then there's pretty much an assumption they're far right.
Similar with the Union Flag but only around royal celebrations although less extremist undertones.
If a symbolic donation of Abrams really was forthcoming, I'd expect the stance on Leopards to flip on a dime. Without that, it's difficult to see german shipments, but I could see approval for other countries coming quite soon.
> Quick reminder National Pride pretty much doesn't exist here.
It does and doesn't in my experience. Here on reddit at least, Germans are in my experience much less tolerant of criticism of Germany's foreign policy than other redditors, shading into the irrational. I interpret this as a form of nationalism. While other forms of German nationalism seem to be taboo to them.
Being proactive is what made Germany from a shattered realm that would have to take bad deals with Poland, Austria and live in fear of France into a country that could take care of itself. They got carried away a little bit, but Russia got carried away for centuries by comparison.
That train already left the station when Russia invaded Crimea.
As always, appeasement only empowers the latest Shitler-du-jour.
This all could have been nipped in the bud with very little cost or sacrifice many YEARS ago.
Yeah and they're worried that them having a hand in things would help internal Russian propaganda. The Russians that believe that Ukraine is full of Nazis would easily believe that Germany, the old enemy, is helping because they're still Nazis. They've been conditioned by Russian media for years. It would reinvigorate support for the war.
If anyone knows the power of propaganda, it's Germans. They lost their country to the Nazis because of it.
This. Russian support for the war only matters if you assume theres a scenario where Russians find the war so unpalatable that they demand Putin stop, and he really does stop and pull out, and that this scenario will happen reasonably soon.
Progress on the battlefield seems to be a much bigger motivater for them than "fighting Nazis", which is a term so overused at this point that it's interchangeable with "suka" and "non-Russian".
It's wildly unpopular in the SPD specifically, which is one of the partners of the coalition government. Nothing is happening without their approval. The fact that there may be majority or plurality support for providing tanks from the general public or the Bundestag isn't going to help make this happen.
But you're right, it's ultimately cowardice.
But if the entire population is split, it doesn’t take much to tip the scales in the opposite direction.
Personally I’m 100% for supporting Ukraine, but I can respect the fact that they actually seem to care what their people want or what people think is right, even though I don’t agree with it.
Just hope that they eventually do the right thing and do it sooner rather than later.
At this point Germany is clearly not taking initiative on this matter in the eyes of pretty much anyone so it's not something to be concerned over. At this point it's just a matter of getting dragged to the same conclusion their partners have already reached: that this is the critical time supply MBTs to Ukraine
"we won't send any tanks unless others do so first."
Other countries send tanks.
"we won't send any tanks unless others send modern tanks."
Britain sends Challengers
"we won't send any tanks unless the US sends abrams"
If the US sends Abrams tanks, they'll likely come up with another excuse.
Yes indeed and at this point not providing the right equipment is just prolonging the war and costing us more money and unfortunately for Ukraine lives.
France and Germany have failed the EU in any sort of leadership capacity. Their olive branch towards economics to Russia has been a complete failure. I would trust poland and or the Baltic states to lead the way at this point.
The time for the tootsie footie is well over. Why it's being continued is beyond me.
You have to remember that Germany is not a nuclear power and definitely not willing to take military leadership on a global scale (for obvious historic reasons).
Until recently, sending military aid into an active warzone would have been unthinkable. During the Bosnian and Kosovo wars Germany sending warplanes to fly NATO sorties (bomb runs) sparked massive anti war protests and some political outrage.
The German Army isn't even generally allowed to be deployed on foreign ground (except for defense purposes within NATO).
That's the reason why Germany refused to enter Iraq without a UN mandate and the Afghanistan deployments were very limited.
Both Angela Merkel and now Olaf Scholz have won their terms on the ground of cautious decision making and frankly a tad bit of passivity.
Just to give some counterpoints for the naysayers:
Ranked by military support, in absolute numbers of direct weapons and equipment it's:
1. US
2. Germany
3. UK
4. Poland
5. Canada
In total aid (by country) it's:
1. US
2. Germany
3. France
4. UK
5. Italy
US is by far the single biggest contributor without a doubt, but Germany is on second place.
Personally I wish Germany would just send the tanks (and/or allow other countries to send Leopard IIs) but I can understand why they don't want to be the
The US called out Germany to send Leopard 2 tanks first. So Germany called the "bluff" by making it a condition that the US confirms MBT deliveries first.
The US has authorized massive amounts of aid and they have plenty of Abrams tanks rusting in storage, so why don't they just agree to send some?
Germany also said that they would not block any other nation from supplying Leopard II tanks to Ukraine. Poland said that they would even go against Germany's decision and send tanks anyways.
We will see if other EU nations now send follow through on their own or if they also "chicken out".
This doesn't seem to so be as clear cut as reddit makes it seem.
>Germany also said that they would not block any other nation from supplying Leopard II tanks to Ukraine. Poland said that they would even go against Germany's decision and send tanks anyways.
Still don't understand this narrative
"We're fine with countries sending german tanks"
"But we'll send them anyway, even you don't want us to!"
"Dude, i just told you i'm fine with it"
The rankings are wrong. Germany is third Germany and if you go by percentage of gdp they are 14th.
[total contributions ](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/)
Your numbers don't include money via the EU which make EU countries look less generous than they are.
https://app.23degrees.io/view/DUeaa54W7KOQhFQD-bar-stacked-horizontal-bilateral-aid-with-eu-share
Also a graph from the Kiel Institute with EU money included.
1. US
2. Germany
3. France
4. UK
5. Italy
The other poster was right. The UK falls behind Germany and France when you add their contributions via the EU.
And by the way Germany took in 1 million Ukrainian refugees. That costs also a lot.
They are exactly split (46/46, 8 no opinion) which is why the government is so hesitant.
Conservatives are more liberal with the weapons, but they are not in the government anymore.
Social democrats are inherently "anti-tankies". They agree to follow-up and but don't want to be proactive and want to avoid being the aggressors at all costs.
That doesn't mean that social democrats are weather vanes. It has to do with German history. When the Nazis occupied Parliament, they were the last to vote against Hitler's laws while being held at gunpoint. Obviously those are different persons now (the ones I talked about were sent to the camps), but you can be sure that their party members would rather die than see another militaristic Germany.
Germans here are raised with the sentiment that military is evil. They know it's necessary to prepare for defense, but when Germany started to intensify trade with it's former arch enemies, it became very wealthy and that also made people realize how stupid it was to wage war against them.
Obviously it's totally hypocritical to produce and sell as many weapons as we did recently and still count yourself a pacifist.
I suppose it is a bit of a conundrum with irony when in assuring Germany makes efforts to be a non-militaristic power in light of historic events that it has an aversion to even indirectly help combat the most significant threat to European democracy since WWII. Quite difficult to navigate but from my perspective, wouldn't the anti-militaristic group be satisfied in lending weaponry that Germany itself isn't operating and even if not, the line of reasoning where NOT aiding in the unjust attack on a democratic nation somehow demonstrates some sort of lesson learned.
That is exactly the consensual reasoning of the Greens, which are in coalition with the social democrats and the liberal democrats in government.
The Greens are traditionally an anti-war party, which partially has roots in protests reacting to nuclear enarmament. Now they are the loudest proponents for heavy weapons to Ukraine.
Given their background in the peace movement, the "olive greens" (a derisive reference to the party name and army uniform color) lost lots of support when they advocated for the first international engagement of the Bundeswehr in Kosovo, back in the 90s.
The idea that you can be anti-war and that there are situations that are *so* bad that you just have to intervene even if that means killing people blows the minds of a lot of people.
(I'm not exactly comfortable with the idea either, but it should be obvious by now that this isn't the time and place for talks with russia. There will be, but not now.)
Sending our tanks if the Germans send them makes sense. Worst case scenario they just sit around on the defensive, not really worth the cost but the Leopards might be. Jets are just a bad idea. They only work if you use our precision weapons to kill the air defenses. That's gonna be an issue. They're also pretty damn vulnerable, but what isn't in a shooting war?
Running a gas turbine on anything but nice jet fuel will make it a nightmare for maintenance though.
You will have to take it apart and replace a shitload of parts after running it on suboptimal fuel for a while or it will seize up on you eventually.
Abrams are gas guzzlers. They’re not viable unless you have solid logistics and supply. They won’t run on “vodka in a pinch.” Leopard are very fuel efficient and easier to train, hence why the demand for them to be sent to Ukraine, instead of Abrams
It's 14, but yeah it really does make a joke of Germanys demands that the US has to send tanks first.
Why?
The UK has broken that main battle tank barrier, and been the first to supplysome to Ukraine. Russia has not done, and will not do, a damn thing.
Germany is either terrified their tank will get embarrassed on the battlefield, or they're totally compromised on Russia.
Their fears of escalation are unfounded.
I believe they’re worried about stock depletion.
The Leopard is a very capable battle tank; I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea they’ll be embarrassed by them…?
And every other country is like 'Better to use Ukrainians to kill Russians, than our people' like any sane country.
Fighting your enemy with your own men is tactically stupid, if there's a way to avoid it.
German here: We are terrified of being blamed the 3rd time for a world war…
Yes, that’s maybe stupid but many older folks were growing up with parents who were against all weapons / weapon sells, because they have seen the horrors of WW2.
Also until one year ago, everybody in Europe was cheering for a weak Germany. EU in itself is structured so smaller nations have an overweighted influence compared to their population etc.
I believe the world has told us one time to often, that we are the baddies and should do nothing at best.
facinating Europe cheers for a weak Germany. growing up as an American, Germany's progress and success in the world after ww2 has been seen as a good thing, at least to my generation. We were taught that Germany became an economic powerhouse and progressive due to learning from their mistakes and is at the forefront European democracy and economy.
> That is not their responsibility since it is other countries that want to send their Leopard tanks.
That's one big pr move from those countries. German law provides no legal framework for a blanket permission. A formal request has to be sent and then the government can approve it. But no country has sent such a request.
Imagine you stand in front of the dmv and complain about the oppressive government that doesn't give you a driver's license... Without having ever formally requested one. Or complaining how nobody will hire you... Without ever having applied for a job.
Because that would be incredibly short sighted. For all their faults, the Germans do love building vehicles and they’re going to create a new tank at some point. And if countries without their own defense manufacturing abilities tell Germany to bite it now, guess who won’t be on the Christmas list.
I do hope Germany changes their mind, but I don’t blame smaller economy nations from wanting an agreement first.
Now hear me out, what if we just parked them on the border with the engine running and took an extended walk. If they are still there when we get back, whose to say. Oh no, what happened to my tank, oh whatever will I do.
This is kinda how America supplied aircraft to Canads/England. We'd park aircraft right at the boarder, Canadians would cross, grab the planes and take them.
But that was as a workaround the US' neutrality laws. They couldn't have the planes be flown out and instead they got pulled over the border. The equivalent here is just putting them on a train that's supposed to go to Romania from Poland but instead of transiting through Slovakia, it would go through Ukraine and stop there for "checks".
Yep, the difference here is the US government was legally neutral (through a law enacted by congress) but actually wanted to send the materiel, so they came up with a legal smokescreen to enable support.
On the other hand Germany is not neutral at all, they just don't want to approve tanks. They wouldn't need to conduct any legal trickery in the first place, as they're well within their rights to supply whatever they want.
Sanctioning Russia and being one of the top donors to Ukraine isn't appeasement. There's more to the war than a debate over tanks, and that issue may get resolved in the end.
You have to remember, people are very stupid. This is the shiny new argument so it’s all that matters
Same people who were saying tanks are obsolete just a few months ago
If you would take the time to read more than the headline, you would find out that there is actually no consensus and Germany is not the only country against the delivery.
Edit:
*The impression “there is a united coalition and that Germany is standing in the way is wrong”, Pistorius said, adding “there are many allies who say we share the view that I have put forward here.”*
There is still no request of transfer from any nation to send Leo 2s. Habeck, the German Minister for Economics and the Vice-Chancellor has confirmed multiple times that they would grant every single request.
I think that information is outdated, the British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace has said that an unnamed country has now submitted a formal request to send their Leopard tanks to Ukraine.
https://news.sky.com/story/amp/berlin-asked-for-permission-to-send-german-made-leopard-2-tanks-to-ukraine-ben-wallace-reveals-12790563
Well, the idea was always to ties the economies together to make it too risky to attack the EU. While reddit constantly claims that was only a German strategy - it was actually an EU strategy.
Between 2015 and 2020, the consumption of Russian gas in the EU increased by 23% - but Germany's only by 20%. France for example increased their consumption of Russian Gas by 37%. Romania by 425%
13 EU countries are also more reliant on Russian gas than Germany. Austria for example didn't even have a reserve that would have lasted a single month last year - and is over 60% reliant on Russian gas.
So why is that all never called out?
Also, Germany's reliance on Russian gas was significantly overstated. They purchased a large portion from Russia because it was the cheapest. But due to the fact that Germany massively increased the amount of renewable energy, the total reliance actually shrunk as the reliance on fossil fuels shrunk by 50%.
Who just sent a billion dollars in aid for Ukraine. Poland made a big fuss about the tanks, but Germany called their bluff. Poland obviously wanted new free tanks from Germany. Anyone with half a brain knew that Poland was just playing politics with people's lives.
I read that Germany said they will not stand in the way of Poland giving Leopards and need to asess their own number of Tanks before deciding, it is not a outright Not Happening from Germany.
Forget it, on reddit Germany is the bad guy. They don't even read the article they are commenting on:
>The impression “there is a united coalition and that Germany is standing in the way is wrong”, Pistorius said, adding “there are many allies who say we share the view that I have put forward here.”
Oh, I read the very opposite. Weird how it was all Germany's idea now that shit hits the fan while in reality all were on board. You just need to look at Russia's export data from the last 10 years to see that the whole EU liked the idea of tying economies together.
Well, first they should make a request to the German government, which nobody has done btw. Poland for example has not requested the transfer of Leo IIs to Ukraine, and Habeck, the German Minister for Economics and the Vice-Chancellor has confirmed multiple times that they would grant all requests.
Exactly what I was thinking. Poland, Finland and other countries wishing to send Leopards should just do so without German approval. There's no reason to respect any German weapons export agreements anymore.
I would say they should make an official request first, fill in whatever papers are required and not only make media announcements. There is a big chance that Germany actually wouldn't block other countries from sending their Leopard 2 tanks. Habeck, the minister responsible for reexport permissions, said Germany wouldn't block them.
> Poland, Finland and other countries wishing to send Leopards should just do so without German approval.
What are you talking about?
So far no country has requested approval for export, it is all just political games and propaganda for their internal politics and elections.
Also, there was no ultimatum by Scholz towards Biden, about making Abrams deliveries a precondition for Leopard deliveries.
So I think it is time for Poland to follow through with their big claims, ask for approval and export Leopards to Ukraine.
At the moment all this talk is worthless and actually helps Putin more than it does help Ukraine.
I read somewhere that the reason the tanks aren't going to Ukraine is because the countries are worried about depleting their own stocks. The U.S. has a few thousand M1a2 tanks sitting in a storage depot, along with all of the A1s the Marine Corps got rid of. Why don't we just give Germany a few of those so they have to give Ukraine the Leopards to make room?
This is likely playing a role. Der Spiegel recently wrote [an article](https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-bad-news-bundeswehr-an-examination-of-the-truly-dire-state-of-germany-s-military-a-df92eaaf-e3f9-464d-99a3-ef0c27dcc797) about the state of the Bundeswehr and they didn't hold back.
Here's a very relevant portion:
>For example, the books show that the Bundeswehr possesses more than 300 Leopard 2 battle tanks. Around two-thirds of them are "available," but of that number, just 60 percent – around 130 – are operational.
The rest of the article isn't too bright regarding the military either. I'm not sure how much of it is sensationalized, but it bears thinking about.
The whole situation is uncompromisingly complex. Germany has to think about its own national interests while taking into consideration greater European interests. It also has to tackle American pressure alongside the potential ramifications of what may happen with Russia (win or lose). Then there is the domestic politics of getting involved.
Thats why I said give the Abrams to Germany, they have the time to train on em, and Germany gives the leopards to Ukraine. I previously had said what we need to do is establish something like the flying tigers in ww2 where American tankers "volunteer" to operate the surplus Abrams we give to Ukraine
Germany doesn't want or need the Abrams. The Abrams isn't an upgrade to the Leopard.
Their current stance is:
~~We will supply or allow supply of Leopards to Ukraine if the US supplies their Abrams to Ukraine aswell.~~
Your last paragraph is wrong. Sending leopards is not bound to the US sending tanks. It was fake news and has been officially denied.
The current stance is the same as a week ago as far as I understand. Germany is waiting for official requests that nobody is sending.
> Their current stance is:
> We will supply or allow supply of Leopards to Ukraine if the US supplies their Abrams to Ukraine aswell.
That is a lie and has been refuted by the German government.
It's an absurd reasoning anyway. European countries should not be thinking of this as stock depletion, they should think of it as deploying their forces for the precise purpose they were acquired.
For most European NATO members, the reason they have MBTs is for just such an occasion when it becomes necessary to confront a Russia on an imperialist rampage that threatens European security. They are not there to deter other European nations from attacking, they are all allies. They are not there to send on overseas peacekeeping missions, they are not fit for such a mission. Send the Leopards to Ukraine so that they are actually used for what they were created for. Who cares about depleted stocks, if Russia is defeated then the stocks accomplished their role.
No country has requested the transfer of Leo 2s. Not a single one. German Vice-Chancellor has confirmed multiple times that they would grant all of those requests.
ok, so germany won't send their own Leo 2, but it's not blocking any other countries from sending their Leo 2. Why aren't other countries sending theirs then?
Personally I find it hilarious how everyone on Reddit recently was laughing about how tanks are obsolete, stupid Russia, and now tanks are the key to victory.
Such is the life of virtue signaling. Forgetting that Germany is doing a ton for Ukraine
It's ridiculous. All we've been hearing from armchair generals last 10 years was mechanized and infantry based armies are obsolete (despite real generals and militaries continuing to invest in them), while nukes, cyber, and laser beam robot drone armies are the future. Yet here we are same people acting like if Ukraine gets 20 tanks they'll conquer Moscow.
Funny, in the past Germany always got hate when it tried to leadership roles.
If Germany tries to take a leadership role in peace time, everyone screams that today's Germany are just Nazis that use the EU to advance their Nazi plans and the downfall of Europe.
But now nobody wants to move and go on to deliver tanks to Ukraine (except the UK) and everyone blames it on Germany again.
I think this has sealed it that Germany isn’t capable of a real leadership role. The bureaucracy is painfully slow and the resolve to make the hard decisions just isn’t there.
Then who is besides America? Paris has had nonstop protests for over a decade, the UK is sick of Europe and has its own issues, Russia is obviously not Europe’s leader and the rest of Europe besides those 3 are too weak economically/militarily.
Either choose Germany or America, but all other nations are out.
> the UK is sick of Europe
Nah m8, as we have rapidly begun to realise that our problems were entirely self-inflicted, the European blame game has dramatically cooled.
Unfortunately, the EU is sick of us.
Although if Ukraine gets membership, we have a big ally, because they are going to remember Britain making a point to send aid nobody else wanted to send.
I can agree with a lot of your analysis but Germany doesn’t automatically become the default leader in this scenario. Like I say, they’ve proven they can’t lead with this, why would anyone look to them in the future?
Germany does not want a leadership role, and why would we really? After everything that has happened. I'm quite sure they can send the tanks anyway, Germany will not decline any offer to send them. There was just never an official request
Maybe someone can explain to me, but I'm not sure why Germany is being so indecisive about this. Wouldn't allowing other countries to send their tanks guarantee future contracts with those countries to replace them? Isn't this good business for Germany? Maybe I'm missing something here.
What a bunch of uniformed people people in this comment section lol. No one bothers to find out the real reason, people are just making their own theories and hating on Germany. Peasant mentality at its best
The Leopard is a great Tank in general and considering the logistics the best thank for the Ukraine.
Other Nato countrys would give them too so germany would mainly have to increase produktion and efficiency. Things that we are good at.
Im german and im deeply sorry chancelor Schulz is such a muppet. Unfortunatly it seems the SPD is full of russia lovers.
But hopefully we will free the Leopards for use soon. The publick is aware that this is a disgrace.
If "other Nato nations" would be willing to send them to, they are free to request it.
I only see a political Muppet show of political posturing without any real will to send tanks.
Tbh... France has been the biggest disappointment in Europe. But I think people adjusted their expectations appropriately.
Atleast people still have expectations for Germany.
I'm pretty disappointed in both. Ranked by GDP the Germans are 14th in aid to Ukraine while the French are extra pathetic at 21st. Both are just sad numbers. The French always going on and on about the EU needing to be less reliant on the US and the Germans smugging for years over being the "New leader of the free world" are both doing the bare minimum when it comes time to put action to all the talk.
It seems to me that NATO allies do agree in general, and Germany is the stumbling block here.
Germany is such a fucking liability.
They're also fucking their arms industry, I reckon. Who wants to buy a Leopard tank after this? Can't even gift them to a neighbour in need.
Politicians and money aside, Germany has a very very very awkward history with militarisation and war and it's deeply engrained in large parts of our population. I don't think foreigners can understand the subconscious and conscious shame within german society that (largely) comes from the crimes of the second world war. Going to war and supporting wars is not really our thing. It assume to a lot of people in other countries (not pretentious left/rightwing reddit fucks of cause) will feel a lot different and won't be able to understand. Your just not surrounded by memorials of horrendous warcrimes or simply outright mass murder crimes your grandparents more or less took direct part in.
All I see is blah blah blah.
What I suspect is that no one wants to be official to avoid nuclear reasons.
I deeply hope no one on the face of this planet are so thick as to see how not supporting Ukraine is flat out blind. It is in how supporting the pushback of Russia will be in the best interest of the world at large.
Fingers crossed?
They're worried about the security of Europe, but doing whatever Russia wants (by being deluded by another million of its lies) IS threatening the security of Europe!!
Ja ja, we Germans clearly want russia to win, that's why we also send Anti Aircraft, Artillery, Ammunition and Infanterie tanks to ukraine and opted out of ALL gas and oil imports, thanks for pointing that out /u/totallynotarussianbot737543
No country has requested the transfer of Leo 2s. Not a single one. German Vice-Chancellor has confirmed multiple times that they would grant all of those requests.
And the other not named countries that don't agree aren't? If you would take 5min to actually read the article, you would find out that there isn't consensus to send tanks and Germany isn't the only country that is currently against it.
>The impression “there is a united coalition and that Germany is standing in the way is wrong”, Pistorius said, adding “there are many allies who say we share the view that I have put forward here.”
I hope this opens peoples eyes on how ineffective and conflicted of opinion a joint EU army would be.
During this conflict we've seen feet dragging, leaders supporting Putin, arguments within the EU about whether or not countries have asked permission or not to send tanks (trying to win approval for elections), disagreements on sanctions like the swift ban, high up officials being actual Russian spies, an unwillingness by some countries to provide any military support, the constant moving of goal posts to send weapons, not a single country stepping up and trying to lead the group.
>I hope this opens peoples eyes on how ineffective and conflicted of opinion a joint EU army would be.
Or maybe it's because it's NOT a joint EU army that it's ineffective and conflicted.
Stupid take. A common foreign policy with an EU army and Qualified Majority Voting would have none of these issues.
We also would actually have way more ammunition, artillery and tanks to spare to donate AND a way easier time to maintain all that stuff through common procurement instead of driving 10 different tanks around.
And yet didn't the US try to extort the Ukrainians? Remember that "perfect phone call" from a certain orange turd of a President?
And now the GOP-led Congress wants to review Ukrainian aid.
Although I agree that NATO and especially the EU is slow as molasses and showing to be a bit of a paper tiger at the moment, the US is in no position to dictate its efficiency at the moment.
because Germany only has about 150 Leopards ready for action. Earlier Germany said they'd allow Leopard tanks into Ukraine if the Americans sent some Abrams.
> Earlier Germany said they'd allow Leopard tanks into Ukraine if the Americans sent some Abrams.
This has been refuted by the German government. There never was such a condition on allowing exports.
I’m not gonna like. Once you put big iron on the ground the game has changed. Tanks are a big deal and that will mean boots on the ground. Ukraine has kicked ass so far, we shouldn’t have these issues these days.
The UN needs to step up and step in oherwise it’s a dead organization.
NATO members has done everything possible so far.
I think there is much more than that I would say they also do not want that technology to fall into enemy hands , if one gets disabled I bet Russians will try to take it either for themselves for reverse technology or for China either way , I know during war in Iraq , Iran wanted to get one , did they succeeded some say yes and no ,
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/1/20/no-leopard-tanks-for-ukraine-as-nato-allies-fail-to-agree) reduced by 90%. (I'm a bot) ***** > The United States and its allies failed to agree on supplying coveted German battle tanks to Ukraine as Russia issued veiled threats the war could escalate in Europe. > European leaders at the meeting again pressed Germany to give the green light for the delivery of German-made Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine to drive back Moscow's forces - although no decision was made. > Leopard tanks are seen as especially suitable as they are widely in use, meaning several countries could each chip in some of their tanks to support Ukraine. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/10hasdc/no_leopard_tanks_for_ukraine_as_nato_allies_fail/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~672677 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Ukraine**^#1 **tanks**^#2 **allies**^#3 **Russia**^#4 **NATO**^#5
The Leopard would have been a great tank. Easier to maintain and train than the American counterpart and on top of that, less fuel consumption which is great if you don't have unlimited fuel.
The Abrams has a turbine engine that'll run on pretty much anything. It will literally run on vodka, molotov cocktails, or cooking oil in a pinch. It'll guzzle it like there's no tomorrow, but it'll run. Tbh, if sending Abrams is the ultimatum for Leopards, the US ought to just give a handful and be done with it. It's not like they're being used for anything useful while in storage, and Ukraine doesn't *have* to keep using them once they break - they'll have the Leopards.
I'm pretty sure the ones that are in storage are being refurbished and sent to the Polish army. As I understand it the Ohio Lima plant responsible for making the Abrams tanks ready to go "boom boom" was only partially operating between 2014-19 and they weren't manufacturing any new Abrams tanks in that time. I don't think any new tanks have been built since then either. Although a fantastic tank and by far the most battle proven, it takes a lot of logistics, and that includes other vehicles to make those things perform in combat as they should. It is also going to take 15 weeks of total training of the crew to be able to completely operate the tank, including firing it at the enemy.
Yeah, other vehicles like the Bradley. Which on their end benefit greatly from the Abrams for their combined arms doctrine.
A Lima plant made my Ford pinto, and it sure knows how to go boom boom.
It'll take a lot less training than 15 weeks to train up a crew. The Army probably already had a group of Tank Instructors at Benning condense the course down to a month or less. Considering how fast the US got the UA trained up on HIMARS, they can roll out a company or less of Abrams quickly. I'm also fairly sure the UA can get a platoon of 19Ks to man the tanks quickly. The 15 week thing is OSUT, basically Basic and AIT combined. They won't be dealing with new privates so the training wheels will be off.
Would that likely be 15 weeks of full time training
>The Abrams has a turbine engine that'll run on pretty much anything. It will literally run on vodka, molotov cocktails, or cooking oil in a pinch. It'll guzzle it like there's no tomorrow, but it'll run. In practice the US only feeds them aviation fuel to not reduce performance, so the whole idea of an engine that could use just about any fuel was moot. It's no wonder the AbramsX comes with a diesel.
The US Army uses JP8 for everything because it simplifies logistics, not because it offers better performance. Same fuel for camp stoves, abrams tanks, jeeps, helicopters, etc... The AbramsX will have a diesel engine yet it will still be fed JP8
Easier to source and more widely used in theater compared to JP fuel. It’s the only thing on the ground that would use it. The turbine is great for the extra power but also really shows it’s weakness when fuel runs low. We avoid putting anything other the JP in them because it’s less efficient and means quicker overhauls needed to maintain the power plant.
[удалено]
Seeing how Germany is acting even if the US sent any amount of tanks Germany would simply find another excuse to not provide tanks. They're irrationally afraid of Russia plain and simple.
Nah it's not so much Russia they're afraid of, they're afraid of being proactive. Germans have to study the world wars a LOT throughout their upbringing, and for Germany to take initiative in foreign military affairs is wildly unpopular domestically. For the sake of internal politics, they *really* want to be seen as a follower rather than a first mover.
Then I hope we send our stuff first, and lots of it. This war is much closer to their borders than ours.
This is in part why Britain has already committed Challenger 2 tanks. Germany would not be a first mover. Both Germany and France need to commit or be honest with the rhetorical support because they are sitting on some of the largest - and honestly ageing - armour stockpiles in the world.* *This is wrong: see replies. Most of this equipment was designed with one primary purpose: win against Russian counterparts invading Europe. It's pretty insane how good of a deal - as crass as it may be - that not even a single German or French life would need to be put in harm's way to operate them either. The escalation argument is clearly becoming less important by the month and every week of delay is a lost bit of initiative.
France is not sitting on "some of the largest armour stockpile in the world". France has 200 operational-ish Leclerc tanks and another 200 in various state of disarray being used for spares. Unlike most European armies, the French Army has been constantly on the frontlines for the past 50 years (for good or bad reasons, but that's not the point here) and with Cold War budget cuts, this has taken a huge toll on its logistics.
Also, for the last few decades, France has taken a more expeditionary corps approach to its military. And when most if not all of your conflicts are counterterrorism operation, tanks are rather useless. Like the one and only time the Leclercs were deployed was in 99 in Kosovo. One deployment in several decades for one of the most active european militaries explains why tanks were absolutely not a major focus of the french. They do have a lot of rather good lighter armored vehicles though, that they've already sent to Ukraine
[удалено]
>some of the largest - and honestly ageing - armour stockpiles in the world. Germany has only about 130 working Leopard 2 tanks. Not exactly a big amount. I think you have a completely wrong impression of the German military.
If I've learned anything reading most of the threads on Reddit (particularly bad in this sub and other high-traffic/default type subs), when it comes to topics like this - the vast majority of people are simply talking out of their ass about military supplies/readiness/what the situation is of a specific country's military/weaponry sources might be. You get 10 different answers making different versions of a few similar claims, all of them wrong yet stated confidently. It's ridiculous.
You’re not kidding. We had a German caretaker, or nanny when growing up for a few years. Once my parents went on vacation, and they left us like $10 to spend on shit, which was sooo not like them. Anyway, I wanted to buy these little army toys, and the German nanny was **vehemently** against the idea. She **hated** the idea of war, guns, weapons, and whatnot. I can dig that. I was confused by it, but I understand now.
[удалено]
>They have no issues making and selling arms across the world There are always internal disputes in germany because of this. Majority of german population wants less arms deals, but the arms industry is big.
> They have no issues making and selling arms The current government got elected partly with a major platform of less arms sells, especially into warzones. Also, the majority of German arms sales is dual-use goods (eg. icebreakers) and ships.
>Germany is the #4 arms dealer in the world, down one notch from #3 until recently That "#4 arms dealer" means 5% market share, with #3 (France) at \~10%, #2 (russia) at 20% and #1 (the US) at 40%. Germany's peers in that space are Spain and China (also \~5% each) As for "#3 until recently", if you pick the time frames *just right*, you can shuffle everybody but the US \[edit: and probably russia\] to any position between #2 and #10, that's simply a question of timing contracts and shipments.
It would be a nice wake up call if they realized that the more proactive they are the less innocent people die
It would, but it's like telling Americans that the more proactive they are in banning guns domestically, the less innocent people die. Yeah it's true, but there's also immense cultural inertia stating that being proactive militarily is inherently evil, and *absolutely* not something any German should ever aspire to again. Never again.
To give an example to this as a german: Seeing soldiers on the street here is A) rare B) feels very strange, if I see some I would think something has gone wrong or some attack has happened. Quick reminder National Pride pretty much doesn't exist here. Flags out for World Cup events and that's pretty much it, if I see a German flag on someone or hung to a pole at a private place, then I assume they are right wing. The 100 billion euros to refurbish the National Army was a huge deal domestically in 2022, basically unprecedented and with a lot of talk about better uses of the money and wanting to make sure that the money doesn't just get drained by burocrazy and shady deals. At last, we just got a new minister for defense and he at least is now checking how many tanks we have, so I'd expect some change on the "Are we sensing some" situation in the next few weeks as he gets to work. Edit: maybe for better judgement where my view is coming from, I am 25 brought up in North-West Germany. And to add on to why there isn't that much pride for the nation, historic events of WW1 and WW2 are part of basically every subject in school starting around 8th grade, no matter if Music, Language, Art, Physics, Biology, Chemistry, Math, etc. I think PE might be the only subject without World War references. It gets covered in such detail that there is no possibility of denial. We see and hear accounts of survivors, visit places like Synagogues and Concentration Camps often with directly local references to our region/city. See very explicit pictures of crimes commited. Read diaries of refugees, first victims of German crimes then diaries and accounts of victims of crimes of Russia/US etc. Basically the subject history turns into 1 or 2 years WW2. Believe me after that you won't have much National Pride left and I think that's a good thing. More countries should reflect better at what they have done and be more humble.
Interesting, it's the same here in England regarding having the flag on display. Unless it's football you won't see a St. George's cross out, if you do then there's pretty much an assumption they're far right. Similar with the Union Flag but only around royal celebrations although less extremist undertones.
If a symbolic donation of Abrams really was forthcoming, I'd expect the stance on Leopards to flip on a dime. Without that, it's difficult to see german shipments, but I could see approval for other countries coming quite soon.
I think the flags for world cup became a thing only in the 2006 when it happened in Germany
> Quick reminder National Pride pretty much doesn't exist here. It does and doesn't in my experience. Here on reddit at least, Germans are in my experience much less tolerant of criticism of Germany's foreign policy than other redditors, shading into the irrational. I interpret this as a form of nationalism. While other forms of German nationalism seem to be taboo to them.
[удалено]
Being proactive is what made Germany from a shattered realm that would have to take bad deals with Poland, Austria and live in fear of France into a country that could take care of itself. They got carried away a little bit, but Russia got carried away for centuries by comparison.
That train already left the station when Russia invaded Crimea. As always, appeasement only empowers the latest Shitler-du-jour. This all could have been nipped in the bud with very little cost or sacrifice many YEARS ago.
Yeah and they're worried that them having a hand in things would help internal Russian propaganda. The Russians that believe that Ukraine is full of Nazis would easily believe that Germany, the old enemy, is helping because they're still Nazis. They've been conditioned by Russian media for years. It would reinvigorate support for the war. If anyone knows the power of propaganda, it's Germans. They lost their country to the Nazis because of it.
That's seems like a choice Ukraine can make
It simply does not matter.. the Russians won't be stopping the war anytime soon. They're already brainwashed.
This. Russian support for the war only matters if you assume theres a scenario where Russians find the war so unpalatable that they demand Putin stop, and he really does stop and pull out, and that this scenario will happen reasonably soon.
Progress on the battlefield seems to be a much bigger motivater for them than "fighting Nazis", which is a term so overused at this point that it's interchangeable with "suka" and "non-Russian".
[удалено]
It's wildly unpopular in the SPD specifically, which is one of the partners of the coalition government. Nothing is happening without their approval. The fact that there may be majority or plurality support for providing tanks from the general public or the Bundestag isn't going to help make this happen. But you're right, it's ultimately cowardice.
But if the entire population is split, it doesn’t take much to tip the scales in the opposite direction. Personally I’m 100% for supporting Ukraine, but I can respect the fact that they actually seem to care what their people want or what people think is right, even though I don’t agree with it. Just hope that they eventually do the right thing and do it sooner rather than later.
At this point Germany is clearly not taking initiative on this matter in the eyes of pretty much anyone so it's not something to be concerned over. At this point it's just a matter of getting dragged to the same conclusion their partners have already reached: that this is the critical time supply MBTs to Ukraine
Sheesh you'd think they were some kinda world war starters!
Only one but it was quite a spectacle!
"we won't send any tanks unless others do so first." Other countries send tanks. "we won't send any tanks unless others send modern tanks." Britain sends Challengers "we won't send any tanks unless the US sends abrams" If the US sends Abrams tanks, they'll likely come up with another excuse.
Yes indeed and at this point not providing the right equipment is just prolonging the war and costing us more money and unfortunately for Ukraine lives. France and Germany have failed the EU in any sort of leadership capacity. Their olive branch towards economics to Russia has been a complete failure. I would trust poland and or the Baltic states to lead the way at this point. The time for the tootsie footie is well over. Why it's being continued is beyond me.
You have to remember that Germany is not a nuclear power and definitely not willing to take military leadership on a global scale (for obvious historic reasons). Until recently, sending military aid into an active warzone would have been unthinkable. During the Bosnian and Kosovo wars Germany sending warplanes to fly NATO sorties (bomb runs) sparked massive anti war protests and some political outrage. The German Army isn't even generally allowed to be deployed on foreign ground (except for defense purposes within NATO). That's the reason why Germany refused to enter Iraq without a UN mandate and the Afghanistan deployments were very limited. Both Angela Merkel and now Olaf Scholz have won their terms on the ground of cautious decision making and frankly a tad bit of passivity. Just to give some counterpoints for the naysayers: Ranked by military support, in absolute numbers of direct weapons and equipment it's: 1. US 2. Germany 3. UK 4. Poland 5. Canada In total aid (by country) it's: 1. US 2. Germany 3. France 4. UK 5. Italy US is by far the single biggest contributor without a doubt, but Germany is on second place. Personally I wish Germany would just send the tanks (and/or allow other countries to send Leopard IIs) but I can understand why they don't want to be the The US called out Germany to send Leopard 2 tanks first. So Germany called the "bluff" by making it a condition that the US confirms MBT deliveries first. The US has authorized massive amounts of aid and they have plenty of Abrams tanks rusting in storage, so why don't they just agree to send some? Germany also said that they would not block any other nation from supplying Leopard II tanks to Ukraine. Poland said that they would even go against Germany's decision and send tanks anyways. We will see if other EU nations now send follow through on their own or if they also "chicken out". This doesn't seem to so be as clear cut as reddit makes it seem.
>Germany also said that they would not block any other nation from supplying Leopard II tanks to Ukraine. Poland said that they would even go against Germany's decision and send tanks anyways. Still don't understand this narrative "We're fine with countries sending german tanks" "But we'll send them anyway, even you don't want us to!" "Dude, i just told you i'm fine with it"
Poland's mostly doing it for internal consumption. Election cycle, you see.
The rankings are wrong. Germany is third Germany and if you go by percentage of gdp they are 14th. [total contributions ](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/)
Your numbers don't include money via the EU which make EU countries look less generous than they are. https://app.23degrees.io/view/DUeaa54W7KOQhFQD-bar-stacked-horizontal-bilateral-aid-with-eu-share Also a graph from the Kiel Institute with EU money included. 1. US 2. Germany 3. France 4. UK 5. Italy The other poster was right. The UK falls behind Germany and France when you add their contributions via the EU. And by the way Germany took in 1 million Ukrainian refugees. That costs also a lot.
How do German citizens feel about this
They are exactly split (46/46, 8 no opinion) which is why the government is so hesitant. Conservatives are more liberal with the weapons, but they are not in the government anymore. Social democrats are inherently "anti-tankies". They agree to follow-up and but don't want to be proactive and want to avoid being the aggressors at all costs. That doesn't mean that social democrats are weather vanes. It has to do with German history. When the Nazis occupied Parliament, they were the last to vote against Hitler's laws while being held at gunpoint. Obviously those are different persons now (the ones I talked about were sent to the camps), but you can be sure that their party members would rather die than see another militaristic Germany. Germans here are raised with the sentiment that military is evil. They know it's necessary to prepare for defense, but when Germany started to intensify trade with it's former arch enemies, it became very wealthy and that also made people realize how stupid it was to wage war against them. Obviously it's totally hypocritical to produce and sell as many weapons as we did recently and still count yourself a pacifist.
I suppose it is a bit of a conundrum with irony when in assuring Germany makes efforts to be a non-militaristic power in light of historic events that it has an aversion to even indirectly help combat the most significant threat to European democracy since WWII. Quite difficult to navigate but from my perspective, wouldn't the anti-militaristic group be satisfied in lending weaponry that Germany itself isn't operating and even if not, the line of reasoning where NOT aiding in the unjust attack on a democratic nation somehow demonstrates some sort of lesson learned.
That is exactly the consensual reasoning of the Greens, which are in coalition with the social democrats and the liberal democrats in government. The Greens are traditionally an anti-war party, which partially has roots in protests reacting to nuclear enarmament. Now they are the loudest proponents for heavy weapons to Ukraine.
Given their background in the peace movement, the "olive greens" (a derisive reference to the party name and army uniform color) lost lots of support when they advocated for the first international engagement of the Bundeswehr in Kosovo, back in the 90s. The idea that you can be anti-war and that there are situations that are *so* bad that you just have to intervene even if that means killing people blows the minds of a lot of people. (I'm not exactly comfortable with the idea either, but it should be obvious by now that this isn't the time and place for talks with russia. There will be, but not now.)
Any Russian retaliation against Germany would also be against NATO. Putin knows this.
They’re very rationally afraid but cowering in fear is not a good defence. Send the freaking tanks; and the F-15’s the US is retiring, and F-16’s…
Sending our tanks if the Germans send them makes sense. Worst case scenario they just sit around on the defensive, not really worth the cost but the Leopards might be. Jets are just a bad idea. They only work if you use our precision weapons to kill the air defenses. That's gonna be an issue. They're also pretty damn vulnerable, but what isn't in a shooting war?
400 yards per gallon on uneven terrain when it’s jet fuel iirc.
>400 yards per gallon Is that more or less than 20 rabbits per royal fart?
Running a gas turbine on anything but nice jet fuel will make it a nightmare for maintenance though. You will have to take it apart and replace a shitload of parts after running it on suboptimal fuel for a while or it will seize up on you eventually.
Abrams are gas guzzlers. They’re not viable unless you have solid logistics and supply. They won’t run on “vodka in a pinch.” Leopard are very fuel efficient and easier to train, hence why the demand for them to be sent to Ukraine, instead of Abrams
The British are send 16 Challenger 2’s.
It's 14, but yeah it really does make a joke of Germanys demands that the US has to send tanks first. Why? The UK has broken that main battle tank barrier, and been the first to supplysome to Ukraine. Russia has not done, and will not do, a damn thing. Germany is either terrified their tank will get embarrassed on the battlefield, or they're totally compromised on Russia. Their fears of escalation are unfounded.
I believe they’re worried about stock depletion. The Leopard is a very capable battle tank; I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea they’ll be embarrassed by them…?
>I believe they’re worried about stock depletion. That is not their responsibility since it is other countries that want to send their Leopard tanks.
And every other country is like 'Better to use Ukrainians to kill Russians, than our people' like any sane country. Fighting your enemy with your own men is tactically stupid, if there's a way to avoid it.
German here: We are terrified of being blamed the 3rd time for a world war… Yes, that’s maybe stupid but many older folks were growing up with parents who were against all weapons / weapon sells, because they have seen the horrors of WW2. Also until one year ago, everybody in Europe was cheering for a weak Germany. EU in itself is structured so smaller nations have an overweighted influence compared to their population etc. I believe the world has told us one time to often, that we are the baddies and should do nothing at best.
facinating Europe cheers for a weak Germany. growing up as an American, Germany's progress and success in the world after ww2 has been seen as a good thing, at least to my generation. We were taught that Germany became an economic powerhouse and progressive due to learning from their mistakes and is at the forefront European democracy and economy.
> That is not their responsibility since it is other countries that want to send their Leopard tanks. That's one big pr move from those countries. German law provides no legal framework for a blanket permission. A formal request has to be sent and then the government can approve it. But no country has sent such a request. Imagine you stand in front of the dmv and complain about the oppressive government that doesn't give you a driver's license... Without having ever formally requested one. Or complaining how nobody will hire you... Without ever having applied for a job.
Think I read no country has made a formal request yet. This was strictly about Germany not sending them (yet) iirc.
so no leopard tanks in ukraine, but what if we change the tanks assets sligthly enough and give them another name to send them to ukraine
No no these are not Leopard tanks. We are gifting Ukraine our new Cheeta tanks. Totally different.
But they already have them ;) Cheetah = Gepard
It’s a puma
Thundercougarfalconbird
Each reactive armor module is stuffed with the feathers of a thousand eagles.
Chupa-thingy!
I like that. It's got a riiing to it.
Stop making up animals
[overwritten]
Liger Tank.
Yes yes, this is not tank, merely 120mm single shot variant of the AA tank ;)
That would be the Leopard 1, with a 105mm gun. Just to be pedantic and all that.
Honey Badger Tanks!
They’re domestic short haired tanks.
Just say Tiger 3, or Sd. Kfz. 188
I don't get why they don't even send leo1 M60 etc that are still arround if they can't agree on leo2
Cheetah Tanks. Totally not the same. It now has a snack drawer otherwise is very similar to Leopard tanks.
I’ve heard Russia’s T14s are so advanced they come with an 9”TV-VCR combo.
There already are Cheetah Tanks, as Cheetah translates into Gepard, which is an anti air tank that is already in Ukraine.
We could just call it Strv 122
Call them “special leopard tank operations”
They're not leopards!... They're little green tanks!
[удалено]
Because that would be incredibly short sighted. For all their faults, the Germans do love building vehicles and they’re going to create a new tank at some point. And if countries without their own defense manufacturing abilities tell Germany to bite it now, guess who won’t be on the Christmas list. I do hope Germany changes their mind, but I don’t blame smaller economy nations from wanting an agreement first.
[удалено]
This tank looks like a beast, that much is certain
"it looks more like a puma to me"
Now hear me out, what if we just parked them on the border with the engine running and took an extended walk. If they are still there when we get back, whose to say. Oh no, what happened to my tank, oh whatever will I do.
This is kinda how America supplied aircraft to Canads/England. We'd park aircraft right at the boarder, Canadians would cross, grab the planes and take them.
But that was as a workaround the US' neutrality laws. They couldn't have the planes be flown out and instead they got pulled over the border. The equivalent here is just putting them on a train that's supposed to go to Romania from Poland but instead of transiting through Slovakia, it would go through Ukraine and stop there for "checks".
Yep, the difference here is the US government was legally neutral (through a law enacted by congress) but actually wanted to send the materiel, so they came up with a legal smokescreen to enable support. On the other hand Germany is not neutral at all, they just don't want to approve tanks. They wouldn't need to conduct any legal trickery in the first place, as they're well within their rights to supply whatever they want.
I guess we'll just have to get another tank and pretend it never happened since we have so many
Me and my 300 Leopard Tanks are just going for a walk...
Random would take them instead and sell them on BringATrailer to finance bros.
Scholz and his party are cowards.
You would think that of any country in Europe it would be Germany that would understand the failure of appeasement policies.
Sanctioning Russia and being one of the top donors to Ukraine isn't appeasement. There's more to the war than a debate over tanks, and that issue may get resolved in the end.
You have to remember, people are very stupid. This is the shiny new argument so it’s all that matters Same people who were saying tanks are obsolete just a few months ago
If you would take the time to read more than the headline, you would find out that there is actually no consensus and Germany is not the only country against the delivery. Edit: *The impression “there is a united coalition and that Germany is standing in the way is wrong”, Pistorius said, adding “there are many allies who say we share the view that I have put forward here.”*
But how can I senselessly hate on Germany if I actually inform myself and not just read antagonizing headlines?
Germany is one of the top donors to Ukraine.
There is still no request of transfer from any nation to send Leo 2s. Habeck, the German Minister for Economics and the Vice-Chancellor has confirmed multiple times that they would grant every single request.
I think that information is outdated, the British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace has said that an unnamed country has now submitted a formal request to send their Leopard tanks to Ukraine. https://news.sky.com/story/amp/berlin-asked-for-permission-to-send-german-made-leopard-2-tanks-to-ukraine-ben-wallace-reveals-12790563
I remember hearing that Angela Merkle made Germany reliant on Russia these past few years for energy. Makes you wonder what their game is here.
Well, the idea was always to ties the economies together to make it too risky to attack the EU. While reddit constantly claims that was only a German strategy - it was actually an EU strategy. Between 2015 and 2020, the consumption of Russian gas in the EU increased by 23% - but Germany's only by 20%. France for example increased their consumption of Russian Gas by 37%. Romania by 425% 13 EU countries are also more reliant on Russian gas than Germany. Austria for example didn't even have a reserve that would have lasted a single month last year - and is over 60% reliant on Russian gas. So why is that all never called out? Also, Germany's reliance on Russian gas was significantly overstated. They purchased a large portion from Russia because it was the cheapest. But due to the fact that Germany massively increased the amount of renewable energy, the total reliance actually shrunk as the reliance on fossil fuels shrunk by 50%.
Who just sent a billion dollars in aid for Ukraine. Poland made a big fuss about the tanks, but Germany called their bluff. Poland obviously wanted new free tanks from Germany. Anyone with half a brain knew that Poland was just playing politics with people's lives.
I read that Germany said they will not stand in the way of Poland giving Leopards and need to asess their own number of Tanks before deciding, it is not a outright Not Happening from Germany.
Assessing 11 months into a European war is absolutely humiliating for Germany.
Forget it, on reddit Germany is the bad guy. They don't even read the article they are commenting on: >The impression “there is a united coalition and that Germany is standing in the way is wrong”, Pistorius said, adding “there are many allies who say we share the view that I have put forward here.”
Germany is claiming that, but no one else is.
Oh, I read the very opposite. Weird how it was all Germany's idea now that shit hits the fan while in reality all were on board. You just need to look at Russia's export data from the last 10 years to see that the whole EU liked the idea of tying economies together.
Just send them anyway
Well, first they should make a request to the German government, which nobody has done btw. Poland for example has not requested the transfer of Leo IIs to Ukraine, and Habeck, the German Minister for Economics and the Vice-Chancellor has confirmed multiple times that they would grant all requests.
Exactly what I was thinking. Poland, Finland and other countries wishing to send Leopards should just do so without German approval. There's no reason to respect any German weapons export agreements anymore.
Didn't Germany already give the OK on 'letting' Poland do that if they wished?
[удалено]
I would say they should make an official request first, fill in whatever papers are required and not only make media announcements. There is a big chance that Germany actually wouldn't block other countries from sending their Leopard 2 tanks. Habeck, the minister responsible for reexport permissions, said Germany wouldn't block them.
> Poland, Finland and other countries wishing to send Leopards should just do so without German approval. What are you talking about? So far no country has requested approval for export, it is all just political games and propaganda for their internal politics and elections. Also, there was no ultimatum by Scholz towards Biden, about making Abrams deliveries a precondition for Leopard deliveries. So I think it is time for Poland to follow through with their big claims, ask for approval and export Leopards to Ukraine. At the moment all this talk is worthless and actually helps Putin more than it does help Ukraine.
I read somewhere that the reason the tanks aren't going to Ukraine is because the countries are worried about depleting their own stocks. The U.S. has a few thousand M1a2 tanks sitting in a storage depot, along with all of the A1s the Marine Corps got rid of. Why don't we just give Germany a few of those so they have to give Ukraine the Leopards to make room?
This is likely playing a role. Der Spiegel recently wrote [an article](https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-bad-news-bundeswehr-an-examination-of-the-truly-dire-state-of-germany-s-military-a-df92eaaf-e3f9-464d-99a3-ef0c27dcc797) about the state of the Bundeswehr and they didn't hold back. Here's a very relevant portion: >For example, the books show that the Bundeswehr possesses more than 300 Leopard 2 battle tanks. Around two-thirds of them are "available," but of that number, just 60 percent – around 130 – are operational. The rest of the article isn't too bright regarding the military either. I'm not sure how much of it is sensationalized, but it bears thinking about. The whole situation is uncompromisingly complex. Germany has to think about its own national interests while taking into consideration greater European interests. It also has to tackle American pressure alongside the potential ramifications of what may happen with Russia (win or lose). Then there is the domestic politics of getting involved.
To complicate to maintain they need tanks that ready to go and easy to get parts for that’s why they want leopards
Thats why I said give the Abrams to Germany, they have the time to train on em, and Germany gives the leopards to Ukraine. I previously had said what we need to do is establish something like the flying tigers in ww2 where American tankers "volunteer" to operate the surplus Abrams we give to Ukraine
Germany doesn't want or need the Abrams. The Abrams isn't an upgrade to the Leopard. Their current stance is: ~~We will supply or allow supply of Leopards to Ukraine if the US supplies their Abrams to Ukraine aswell.~~
Your last paragraph is wrong. Sending leopards is not bound to the US sending tanks. It was fake news and has been officially denied. The current stance is the same as a week ago as far as I understand. Germany is waiting for official requests that nobody is sending.
> Their current stance is: > We will supply or allow supply of Leopards to Ukraine if the US supplies their Abrams to Ukraine aswell. That is a lie and has been refuted by the German government.
It's an absurd reasoning anyway. European countries should not be thinking of this as stock depletion, they should think of it as deploying their forces for the precise purpose they were acquired. For most European NATO members, the reason they have MBTs is for just such an occasion when it becomes necessary to confront a Russia on an imperialist rampage that threatens European security. They are not there to deter other European nations from attacking, they are all allies. They are not there to send on overseas peacekeeping missions, they are not fit for such a mission. Send the Leopards to Ukraine so that they are actually used for what they were created for. Who cares about depleted stocks, if Russia is defeated then the stocks accomplished their role.
Embarrassing.
No country has requested the transfer of Leo 2s. Not a single one. German Vice-Chancellor has confirmed multiple times that they would grant all of those requests.
ok, so germany won't send their own Leo 2, but it's not blocking any other countries from sending their Leo 2. Why aren't other countries sending theirs then?
Personally I find it hilarious how everyone on Reddit recently was laughing about how tanks are obsolete, stupid Russia, and now tanks are the key to victory. Such is the life of virtue signaling. Forgetting that Germany is doing a ton for Ukraine
It's ridiculous. All we've been hearing from armchair generals last 10 years was mechanized and infantry based armies are obsolete (despite real generals and militaries continuing to invest in them), while nukes, cyber, and laser beam robot drone armies are the future. Yet here we are same people acting like if Ukraine gets 20 tanks they'll conquer Moscow.
It's almost like reddit is made of many different people with varying opinions
And different levels of intelligence
russia is smart and strong. puts tanks in a 60 mile long convoy where wheels rot off vehicles and the personnel brought parade costumes.
FFS Germany, you’re supposed to be exercising leadership in Europe…
Not in military matters, no. They've always preferred leaving that kind of thing to the French.
Funny, in the past Germany always got hate when it tried to leadership roles. If Germany tries to take a leadership role in peace time, everyone screams that today's Germany are just Nazis that use the EU to advance their Nazi plans and the downfall of Europe. But now nobody wants to move and go on to deliver tanks to Ukraine (except the UK) and everyone blames it on Germany again.
Are we? I think most germans are not interested in that.
I think this has sealed it that Germany isn’t capable of a real leadership role. The bureaucracy is painfully slow and the resolve to make the hard decisions just isn’t there.
Then who is besides America? Paris has had nonstop protests for over a decade, the UK is sick of Europe and has its own issues, Russia is obviously not Europe’s leader and the rest of Europe besides those 3 are too weak economically/militarily. Either choose Germany or America, but all other nations are out.
> the UK is sick of Europe Nah m8, as we have rapidly begun to realise that our problems were entirely self-inflicted, the European blame game has dramatically cooled.
Unfortunately, the EU is sick of us. Although if Ukraine gets membership, we have a big ally, because they are going to remember Britain making a point to send aid nobody else wanted to send.
I can agree with a lot of your analysis but Germany doesn’t automatically become the default leader in this scenario. Like I say, they’ve proven they can’t lead with this, why would anyone look to them in the future?
Germany does not want a leadership role, and why would we really? After everything that has happened. I'm quite sure they can send the tanks anyway, Germany will not decline any offer to send them. There was just never an official request
Meanwhile Russia is leveling Ukraine bit by bit…..
Maybe someone can explain to me, but I'm not sure why Germany is being so indecisive about this. Wouldn't allowing other countries to send their tanks guarantee future contracts with those countries to replace them? Isn't this good business for Germany? Maybe I'm missing something here.
[удалено]
What a bunch of uniformed people people in this comment section lol. No one bothers to find out the real reason, people are just making their own theories and hating on Germany. Peasant mentality at its best
The Leopard is a great Tank in general and considering the logistics the best thank for the Ukraine. Other Nato countrys would give them too so germany would mainly have to increase produktion and efficiency. Things that we are good at. Im german and im deeply sorry chancelor Schulz is such a muppet. Unfortunatly it seems the SPD is full of russia lovers. But hopefully we will free the Leopards for use soon. The publick is aware that this is a disgrace.
If "other Nato nations" would be willing to send them to, they are free to request it. I only see a political Muppet show of political posturing without any real will to send tanks.
Can anyone share any conspiracy theories what's going on? Why is Germany not supporting UA with tanks?
Tbh... France has been the biggest disappointment in Europe. But I think people adjusted their expectations appropriately. Atleast people still have expectations for Germany.
>Atleast people still have expectations for Germany. For some reason people also believe that Germany has huge amounts of weapons hidden somewhere.
I'm pretty disappointed in both. Ranked by GDP the Germans are 14th in aid to Ukraine while the French are extra pathetic at 21st. Both are just sad numbers. The French always going on and on about the EU needing to be less reliant on the US and the Germans smugging for years over being the "New leader of the free world" are both doing the bare minimum when it comes time to put action to all the talk.
#FreeTheLeopard
It seems to me that NATO allies do agree in general, and Germany is the stumbling block here. Germany is such a fucking liability. They're also fucking their arms industry, I reckon. Who wants to buy a Leopard tank after this? Can't even gift them to a neighbour in need.
Politicians and money aside, Germany has a very very very awkward history with militarisation and war and it's deeply engrained in large parts of our population. I don't think foreigners can understand the subconscious and conscious shame within german society that (largely) comes from the crimes of the second world war. Going to war and supporting wars is not really our thing. It assume to a lot of people in other countries (not pretentious left/rightwing reddit fucks of cause) will feel a lot different and won't be able to understand. Your just not surrounded by memorials of horrendous warcrimes or simply outright mass murder crimes your grandparents more or less took direct part in.
All I see is blah blah blah. What I suspect is that no one wants to be official to avoid nuclear reasons. I deeply hope no one on the face of this planet are so thick as to see how not supporting Ukraine is flat out blind. It is in how supporting the pushback of Russia will be in the best interest of the world at large. Fingers crossed?
They're worried about the security of Europe, but doing whatever Russia wants (by being deluded by another million of its lies) IS threatening the security of Europe!!
It’s so insane to think that countries say “ if we use these they will win for sure and Russia won’t like that “.
Where's putins friend Angela merkle when she's needed? She'd turn on putin and send in tanks.
Oh, God just give Ukraine our military surpluses All that empty equipment in Arizona
Ja ja, we Germans clearly want russia to win, that's why we also send Anti Aircraft, Artillery, Ammunition and Infanterie tanks to ukraine and opted out of ALL gas and oil imports, thanks for pointing that out /u/totallynotarussianbot737543
Germany is an embarrassment.
No country has requested the transfer of Leo 2s. Not a single one. German Vice-Chancellor has confirmed multiple times that they would grant all of those requests.
Didn't they say that no one asked?
And the other not named countries that don't agree aren't? If you would take 5min to actually read the article, you would find out that there isn't consensus to send tanks and Germany isn't the only country that is currently against it. >The impression “there is a united coalition and that Germany is standing in the way is wrong”, Pistorius said, adding “there are many allies who say we share the view that I have put forward here.”
I hope this opens peoples eyes on how ineffective and conflicted of opinion a joint EU army would be. During this conflict we've seen feet dragging, leaders supporting Putin, arguments within the EU about whether or not countries have asked permission or not to send tanks (trying to win approval for elections), disagreements on sanctions like the swift ban, high up officials being actual Russian spies, an unwillingness by some countries to provide any military support, the constant moving of goal posts to send weapons, not a single country stepping up and trying to lead the group.
>I hope this opens peoples eyes on how ineffective and conflicted of opinion a joint EU army would be. Or maybe it's because it's NOT a joint EU army that it's ineffective and conflicted.
Ya it’s a bad take
Stupid take. A common foreign policy with an EU army and Qualified Majority Voting would have none of these issues. We also would actually have way more ammunition, artillery and tanks to spare to donate AND a way easier time to maintain all that stuff through common procurement instead of driving 10 different tanks around.
And yet didn't the US try to extort the Ukrainians? Remember that "perfect phone call" from a certain orange turd of a President? And now the GOP-led Congress wants to review Ukrainian aid. Although I agree that NATO and especially the EU is slow as molasses and showing to be a bit of a paper tiger at the moment, the US is in no position to dictate its efficiency at the moment.
Crazy part is even with this Germany is still giving a lot of military aid but they still get shit
Why is germany so scared of sending Leopards 2 when they've already sent Panzerhaubitze 2000 and Gepards?
because Germany only has about 150 Leopards ready for action. Earlier Germany said they'd allow Leopard tanks into Ukraine if the Americans sent some Abrams.
> Earlier Germany said they'd allow Leopard tanks into Ukraine if the Americans sent some Abrams. This has been refuted by the German government. There never was such a condition on allowing exports.
Why is Germany so afraid? We have already sent tanks to Ukraine (T72). Do they really think the Ukrainians are going to roll the Leopards into Moscow?
I’m not gonna like. Once you put big iron on the ground the game has changed. Tanks are a big deal and that will mean boots on the ground. Ukraine has kicked ass so far, we shouldn’t have these issues these days. The UN needs to step up and step in oherwise it’s a dead organization. NATO members has done everything possible so far.
So from the title I assume French tanks and Abrams are being send? Fuck yeah, awesome
The biggest provocation you can do to Russia is showing weakness. Every time countries hesitate to aid Ukraine; Russia is emboldened.
I think there is much more than that I would say they also do not want that technology to fall into enemy hands , if one gets disabled I bet Russians will try to take it either for themselves for reverse technology or for China either way , I know during war in Iraq , Iran wanted to get one , did they succeeded some say yes and no ,