Upgrading M60s for Ukraine

Pic related is M60 upgraded by Leonardo package.

Russia is now bringing to the front hundreds of T55 tanks, many of which are inferior to the normal M60/M68 tanks.
While they are very outdated we have seen that the threat environment on the frontlines in Ukraine offers little discrimination between the most modern T90M and the oldest T55, both of them are knocked out by javelins, mines, drone rpg (when hitting spots not covered in ERA), heavy artillery, ATGMs and so on.

The main advantage of more modern tanks are modern sights but nowadays it would be relatively easy to add a coaxial digital cameras/thermal setup run a wire to the inside of the tank and set up a tablet to use as a modern alternative to the old analog sights.

Also tanks are more and more used either as area weapons like indirect fire artillery or at extremely close range to clear trenches.
Tank duels are so rare that they are nearly negligible.

So adding ERA panels, some modern digital coaxial sights would make the M60 if they haven't been upgraded yet.

There are around 14.000 M60 still around the world.
Turkey alone has nearly 900 upgraded and operational.

Wouldn't it make sense to trade a couple of dozens aging F-16s to turkey for a few hundred upgraded M60s for the Ukrainians?

1000 tanks, as old as they might be, are still a force to be reckoned with.

And getting 1000 M60s should be relatively easy as many Nato members still have them mothballed in some warehouse or even still in service.

Ultimately even just using them as minefield plows instead of wasting Leopards or Abrams in their mine clearance configuration would be worth it.
And regardless how bad the CEP is when using them in indirect fire you can easily understand how a few dozens of them can easily suppress an area while being hard to hit back as they can shoot and scoot.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Just slap on an Abrams turret on a M60. It might scare off some Russian conscripts.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Also tanks are more and more used either as area weapons like indirect fire artillery or at extremely close range to clear trenches.
    no they arent

    >Tank duels are so rare that they are nearly negligible.
    no they arent

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You're literally wrong on both

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        primary weapon is a smoothbore gun for a reason

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >105mm ammo
    Good luck building another assembly line for an obsolete ammo.

    Ukraine loves the Bradley and 25mm ammo is plentiful and cheaper, it makes more sense to give them thousands since they're not going to use them in combined arms anyway.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >since they're not going to use them in combined arms anyway.
      >are exclusively used in mechanized units
      >with artillery and tanks

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Depending on what upgrade package we are talking about the gun might be a standard 120mm one. The best M60 upgrade packages actually make it somewhat decent although still inferior to modern ones. From what I remember the most extensive upgrade packages upgrade everything from the engines to the turret and the fire control system.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Ukraine loves the Bradley and 25mm ammo is plentiful and cheaper, it makes more sense to give them thousands since they're not going to use them in combined arms anyway.

      We have LAV-25 and LAV-6 IFV by the thousands and they use 25mm ammo. We should give those as anything is better than the bmp shit boxes Ukraine mostly uses. Anything to increase survivability and to win long-term against Russia during this attritional period of fighting.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I suppose they’re marginally more survivable than a BMP but since we can’t just give them everything due to domestic political pressure, it makes since to prioritize more effective platforms like the Bradley. Also, not sure they would do that well in the post-thaw mud compared to literally any tracked vehicle

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Canada's 199 LAV-II's are being phased out for the LAV6's, so it'd be perfect to give them away. Canada also has 900 LAV-6's.

          Canada has given them 39 of the Super Bison, or support vehicle variants, but not the offensive ones. Oh and the Saudis have hundreds too and I'm sure they could spare a few.

          If you look up the aid given so far, many countries have donated literally hundreds of these really shitty outdated APCs when it's IFV that they really need. Anything is better than BMP tincans, and Ukraine just needs quantity not as much quality. They just need more of everything.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Modern Euro-American IFV:
            >186 M2A2 ODS Bradleys [Delivered from April 2023 onwards][563]
            >60 Marder 1A3s [March and September 2023].
            >40 Marder 1A3s [To be delivered].
            >50+ CV9040s (Equipped with the Barracuda Thermal Camouflage System) [June 2023].[499][498]

            Total: 336

            They need WAY more modern IFV than that. Most of the IFV are Soviet surplus shitboxes, or outdated shitbox APV's. Dont' see anything about UK sending any warriors either.

            >Kuwait Kuwaiti Army – 254 Desert Warriors received between 1995 and 1997.[29]

            So Kuwait and UK have some, and surely could spare a few? Even 10 could help a lot. Kuwait sends 50, orders 50 more, everyone wins out.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              I don’t think Kuwait is particularly inclined to do so, not without some sort of compensation. If we had to compensate them by sending new military equipment to replace what they donate, it’d make more sense to just give Ukraine the new stuff.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                UK has 789 so I'm baffled why they haven't sent any to Ukraine yet. Kuwait is sending their version of T-72's to Ukraine. Expect more from states like Kuwait and Greece, as USA works behind the scene on exchange deals.

                https://mil.in.ua/en/news/kuwaiti-m-84ab-tanks-heading-to-croatia/

                I keep hearing about 10 to 50 veichles here and there.

                Russia is still refurbishing hundreds of shit boxes that work just enough to be a problem.

                With the M60s you could at least one thousand which alre already modernized without needing refurbishing and several thousands if you decide to upgrade the mothballed ones.

                They need more of everything, and granted they have been getting hundreds of Soviet shitbox BMP's, but it's the more modern survivable IFV that they need more of, especially the tracked kind. 300+ is pathetic, and 600 of them is a start, then ideally 1500 of them. So they literally need 5x more than what they have now.

                They need light tanks as well, and older MBT. Like 300 Leopard 1A's would help a lot.

                Not saying I'm against M60's, as they just need EVERYTHING.

                Oh and I missed this:
                >23 FV107 Scimitar Mk IIs [August 2023].[158]

                30mm gun, nice.

                > Belgium Belgium – 153 units,[20] withdrawn from active service in 2004.[21]

                Come on Belgium, send those 153 units to Ukraine!

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/08YOxBS.jpg

                Modern Euro-American IFV:
                >186 M2A2 ODS Bradleys [Delivered from April 2023 onwards][563]
                >60 Marder 1A3s [March and September 2023].
                >40 Marder 1A3s [To be delivered].
                >50+ CV9040s (Equipped with the Barracuda Thermal Camouflage System) [June 2023].[499][498]

                Total: 336

                They need WAY more modern IFV than that. Most of the IFV are Soviet surplus shitboxes, or outdated shitbox APV's. Dont' see anything about UK sending any warriors either.

                >Kuwait Kuwaiti Army – 254 Desert Warriors received between 1995 and 1997.[29]

                So Kuwait and UK have some, and surely could spare a few? Even 10 could help a lot. Kuwait sends 50, orders 50 more, everyone wins out.

                Adding all together with scimitars:

                > 359

                That is it. They need ideally like 1500 modern IFV as a start. Ukraine asked for over 600 before their counter-offensive.

                Bradleys seem the most ideal and USA and their allies should send another 500 of them. They're so damn good.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              I keep hearing about 10 to 50 veichles here and there.

              Russia is still refurbishing hundreds of shit boxes that work just enough to be a problem.

              With the M60s you could at least one thousand which alre already modernized without needing refurbishing and several thousands if you decide to upgrade the mothballed ones.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              pretty sure the warrior production line has been closed for years at this point
              but i could be wrong

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            M60s with the Turkish upgrades have ERA which is a big deal since the Russians use a lot of RPG drones too now.

            Also Ukraine needs more artillery and the M60s can help fill the gap while the production of standard artillery rounds ramps up.
            Ammo can be bought from turkey and other Nato members should still have large stockpiles like Greece.

            Also loads of spare parts everywhere.

            Big issue with IFV is that everything kills them now. Drones in particular. And they lack the engine power to push the plows to remove minefields efficiently

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              IFVs are armored against 14,5mm rounds, which is enough for their role
              protection comes from using their autocannon to destroy targets

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Tanks aren’t really that great when shoved into artillery roles. It works, I guess, but there’s a reason SPH’s exist

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Thanks for the great insight, so please tell us what SPG we can send by the thousands which we could get easily like the M60 without countries complaining that they are left defenseless and that has large stockpiles of ammo already sitting around which won't need to be fed the same rounds at the other artillery which is already low on munitions.

                There are many Nato countries with stockpiles of HE ammo for the M60 just sitting in warehouses since the 70s and turkey still makes them.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Canada needs military aid. No infantry SAMs, F-18s from craigslist. The list goes on.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Good luck building another assembly line for an obsolete ammo.
      phew good thing the US didnt adopt anything in 105 they'd be screwed

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        No, the US always has the option to make whatever ammo it desires.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah, and the US is supplying Ukraine. In this hypothetical, if they were updating an M60 and keeping the 105 to give to Ukraine they would also have two braincells to rub together and work out that they need to send ammo with them.

          We're also just going to ignore the whole "all the Leo 1's they got that have 105's and all the ammo that was sent with them".

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            There's shitloads of sources for 105mm ammo though. Australia produces a significant amount and so do a lot of other South East Asian countries. I don't think 105mm is as much a problem.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              ???? anon are you missing the original post I was responding to? the one that says "Good luck building another assembly line for an obsolete ammo."? that's the key part here, that's what I was mocking

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Not very feasible and I'm saying this as a raging M60 fan. Export model M1A1s or M1A2s are more available, and so are cheaper and faster in the short term on top of being better tanks. Turkey would also be difficult to work with.
      The M60A3 TTS would be competitive with the majority of Russian tanks and the Sabra would absolutely frick them though.
      >M68 tanks
      When tf did the Panzer 68 come into the equation

      M10

      T-55 is far better tank than M60

      You are a fricking idiot and I am surprised you can breathe. At least compare the M60 to the T-62.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Turkey would also be difficult to work with.

        is this why turkey buildin ships for ukraine or currently working with bulgaria and romania to demine black sea?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Nice, a genuine moron. It's always pleasant to see one.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      ammo
      >Good luck building another assembly line for an obsolete ammo.

      This gun is still in use, the new moron US Army "assault gun" uses it. I think it was called the buford or something.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >buford
        can't tell if this is epic bait or what

        >T55 tanks, many of which are inferior to the normal M60/M68 tanks.
        The T55 still has superior armor,weight, and size. No idea about optics and/or upgrades for both.

        >The T55 still has superior
        lol no

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >buford
        can't tell if this is epic bait or what

        [...]
        >The T55 still has superior
        lol no

        Dang I miss Rallys

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I think it was called the buford or something
        b***h were you in a fricking coma for the last 25 years

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Good luck building another assembly line for an obsolete ammo.
      The fact that only one of your (yous) is calling you out for being a literal fricking moron shows you dumb this fricking board holy shit.

      There are more “M60s for Ukraine” threads in the archive than there are serviceable M60s in the United States.

      This. Any of them that are not rusted to shit or used for gunnery practice somewhere are part of a monument or museum. I think Turkey still has some and maybe a few other poorer countries in extremely limited numbers, but I doubt they’d be willing to give them up without some sort of deal on modern replacements, in which case we would be better off just giving Ukraine the modern stuff anyway.

      >This. Any of them that are not rusted to shit or used for gunnery practice somewhere are part of a monument or museum.
      The USA gave up all their M60s in the 1990s but their allies still use them (and M48s) heavily which they could give up if they really wanted. The harsh reality is that NATO could have flooded Ukraine with tons of Cold War era tanks that are (or upgraded so they could be) superior to the junk Russia is currently rolling around but they didn't because the political will is not there anymore.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    There are more “M60s for Ukraine” threads in the archive than there are serviceable M60s in the United States.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This. Any of them that are not rusted to shit or used for gunnery practice somewhere are part of a monument or museum. I think Turkey still has some and maybe a few other poorer countries in extremely limited numbers, but I doubt they’d be willing to give them up without some sort of deal on modern replacements, in which case we would be better off just giving Ukraine the modern stuff anyway.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Any of them that are not rusted to shit or used for gunnery practice somewhere are part of a monument or museum
        they do still exist, mostly for the purposes for foreign sales or as parts donors for people who already have M60s

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Who’s even buying anything that old anymore? Any country I can think of that’s poor enough to want them is a country I doubt the US would approve a sale to. The more modern A3 derivatives aren’t really that bad, but if I were a poor country I’d probably just try to get some sort of IFV variant with a tank cannon, which is what most of them seem to do.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Who’s even buying anything that old anymore?
            turkey and taiwan both have them on active duty
            israel pulled them out of active duty but still has a lot of them in reserve

            https://i.imgur.com/ahdGBhA.png

            [...]
            lol

            >using israel as an example
            >when their M60s have confirmed T-62 kills

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >woooww you cant use israel as an example theyre only the most US-aided ally fighting against desert monkeys using monkey model soviet union tankls

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                do you hear yourself right now?
                israeli M60s demolished egyptian T-55s and T-62s
                how does that support the argument that they are worse than T-55s?

                and the upgraded M60A3 vastly exceeded the T-62M at the ends of their respective lives
                while post-cold war upgrades further widen the gap between them

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                lol

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >not answering the question
                T-62s were pit against M60s in yom kippur for the first time, and the end result was about 2000 egyptian tanks being destroyed in return for 400 israeli tank losses

                but this doesnt truly capture the disparity in losses between them because most of the 400 israeli losses were to sagger missiles and RPGs
                while most of the T-55s and T-62s were lost to gunfire

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah but they got those decades ago at this point and have been modernizing them because they can’t afford to outright replace them all yet. Who is actually buying ‘new’ M60 hulls?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                the hulls are most likely just being as donor vehicles

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Turkey which is Nato literally has a thousand of recently upgraded M60s and the ammo stockpiles and they are upgrading to Leopards.

          My idea is since they are already upgraded to just trade them for some of the F-16 that turkey really wants.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I think Turkey still has some and maybe a few other poorer countries in extremely limited numbers,
        Turkey has a decent storage/active use and they also have the upgraded ones ~150 of them I think. They can deliver. They were actively using them in Syria.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There are still a lot of decommissioned M60s sitting around in storage, but they're mostly donor vehicles so we can sell parts to allies who still operate them.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    T-55 is far better tank than M60

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      highly unlikely, considering the M60A1 was considered an equal to the T-62, the successor to the T-55
      and upgrades to the M60 often exceeded what was present on the T-72, like thermal sights

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/uFezEwq.jpg

        lmao

        lol

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Why did you crop out the battle name?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous
        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/ON6poLP.png

          lol

          >claiming that those kills were from the T55 and not from the rpg, sagger, or attack helicopters
          you really are a special kind of moron

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      lmao

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >T-55 is far better tank than M60

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why? The M10 Booker offers the same capabilities and more while not being older than its crew.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Because there is exactly a 0% of the US ever donating the booker to the Ukrainians even if US aid to Ukraine resumes. The M60 even with the best possible upgrade packages is not new tech whereas the booker contains technology that the US intends to field in the near future. The m60 upgrade packages are at least theoretically fast to produce as well.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Leonardo
    What are they, really?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      They make just a bit of everything, they essentially took over most of the Italian military industrial complex and merged it and also have shares in other European weapons factories outside of Italy.

      From radars to artillery shells to parts of F35 to torpedoes to tank upgrades they do a bit of everything but very few finished products.

      The components they make are making their way into all sorts of weapon systems

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Don't they also make full on helicopters? Or is that a subsidiary?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah, they bought AgustaWestland, that is now called Leonardo helicopters.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgustaWestland

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Instead of talking about m60s, which is incredibly stupid as well as tired out by now, we should be talking about all those fricking Chieftains.

    How do you modernise them? If Europe put it's collective might to upgrading the hulls of 900 chieftains, what does the end result look like?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      But chieftain upgrade might take over an year to do.

      M60s that are already upgraded to 2010s standard and running are in the hundreds if not over a thousand.
      Plus thousands more to be upgraded for replacement and thousands more good for spares.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        From now? Cool. Try not being arbitrary. Say to yourself that the British, the Australians and the US put together a long term plan to bring the Chieftains back as a back up in case '23 didn't work out. EOS ands other Australian defence tech companies were already signing on to projects to Upgrade shit for Ukraine, Britain was trying to provide all the support it could, and US, actually quite self aware, threw money at this idea trusting that Anglogang were a more certain bet than others. What have they managed to achieve so far in nearly two years?

        You have to keep in mind and accept, there are NO m60s for Ukraine. They will NOT be making an appearance.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Weren’t some Challenger 1s sent over?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        no, only about fourteen Challenger 2s

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    best timeline

    all the old US weapons in locked armories around the world are starting to click and whirr in their spirit.

    >The old enemy.
    >Him? I thought He was defeated.
    >They have sons and they have sons of sons.
    >Not many of us left.
    >More for the rest of us, old friend.

    The door is unlocked and pushed open...

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      There's no m60s for Ukraine. The US has none.
      Turkey has made exactly ZERO efforts to provide tanks to Ukraine. In reality most placed that used to have them in reserve have sold them on or scrapped them.

      Unlike shit we actually know about like the old Marders, leopards and chieftains.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I'm responding here than to continue to the move thread since it's focused on Counter-offensive equipment.

    [...]

    >no
    >the missing piece was always aerial superiority

    F-16 training only now is completing, so they wouldn't have been in time for the summer counter-offensive.

    [...]

    >US wanted Ukraine to fail. No other reason. The only question is why.

    USA and Europe was always reacting and there is NO plan. When Russia was getting the upper hand, they then only sent in Himars, and when Russia was pounding air defenses they sent in Patriots. It's a reactive policy, and trying to not ESCALATE at all costs, and slow pushing. It's just too little too late at each turn. They should have been sending this kind of equipment before the war started.

    The fact that we're years into this conflict and we're still debating whether to send x tank, or x ifv, or x fighter jet, and when and how much. We're scrapping the bottom of the barrel for the out-dated systems with 100 t-72's from kuwait, a few more slavic shitboxes from there, etc. The answer should have just been more of "everything" and 10x the amount sent. 500 Bradleys, 250 Leopard 1A's, 250 Marauders, etc.

    Zelushny explained all this in his essay, which was honest and gave me a lot of respect for him. It was like a doctor telling you the cancer treatment they tried wasn't working, so they're trying to switch it up. Honest no bullshit appraisals and a rational path forward are what we need.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I'm responding here
      sheer bloody luck I found this lmao
      >F-16 training only now is completing, so they wouldn't have been in time for the summer counter-offensive
      yes I know
      the 2023 counteroffensive was probably one of those 1943 Invasion of Italy things, like, "we should be politically seen to be doing something instead of sitting on our asses for 2 whole years while waiting for the air force to get trained up / amphibious ships to be built"

      and there will always be Patton-type hotheads who insist "we can attack now we may be able to catch them off guard"
      >spoiler alert: they weren't

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It could have worked had they:
        1. Gotten slav-shit Migs and SU's by the boatload.
        2. Gotten like 10x more IFV and tanks.
        3. Never gave russia hte break to lay minefields but kept probing.

        The F-16's weren't gonna be ready until 2024 anyways. If they kept attacking the south rather than giving them half a year to lay mines, then the minefields are a fraction as deep and big, and they can keep pushing harder and faster.

        Ukraine and allies just got too wienery, and thought the rough shambling Russia they faced in the first phase was gonna be the same Russia they faced after that. After the mobilization, Russia had infinite manpower to ensure all their trenches and positions were manned.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >1. Gotten slav-shit Migs and SU's by the boatload
          they've gotten all that can be given, and it's not enough, not with those monkey models; they need NATO tech for both battlefield success and superior attrition rates
          >2. Gotten like 10x more IFV and tanks
          and artillery, but that would have needed further mobilisation
          >3. Never gave russia hte break to lay minefields but kept probing
          they didn't have either the manpower or the aircraft for it

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Zelushny explained all this in his essay,

      Share link plz.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Here's what Leonardo's website says about the upgrade package.
    >The modular solution presented by Leonardo integrates a 120/45 mm cannon that has the advantage of limiting structural stresses on the vehicle. The cannon is the same as that fitted to the Blindo Centaur II, with a state-of-the-art fire control system (FCS) and protection systems suitable for current threats. Leonardo's solution, which allows current maintenance and logistics assets to be maintained, requires only additional training for personnel relative to the new equipment, moreover. The technologies used for the modernization of the M60 (FCS, Infrared Vision, and the 120 mm gun) are entirely designed and manufactured by Leonardo, as are the systems that enable improved turret performance (translated from Italian)
    Apparently it doesn't use 105mm so that anon was wrong.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Fug.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >He's trying again

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The Zelensky x Zelushny fight is well documented, and they are clashing over mobilization. Mobilize another 500,000 to defend, but you crash the economy. Don't, and you don't have enough men. There is NO good answer.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >There is NO good answer.
          there is. negotiate peace

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            And face another invasion in ten years.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              if you understand the situation as a new cuban missile crisis it can be solved like the old one was. if ukraine just keeps pushing to join nato it will be attacked forever. if it doesn't the war is over

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                biden is no kennedy

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Did you know Kennedy?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                why do you ask such a moronic question. I know him for his work as a diplomatic great compared to joseph IRA biden

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Oh sorry. I didn't know you were moronic.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >if ukraine just keeps pushing to join nato it will be attacked forever

                literal abuser mindset.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                if you understand the situation as a new cuban missile crisis it can be solved like the old one was. if ukraine just keeps pushing to join nato it will be attacked forever. if it doesn't the war is over

                If Ukraine joined NATO in like 2008, then none of this would have happened. Thousands of Russiand and Ukrainians would be alive today and Russians and their far left/right allies (lol) would shake their fist in Anger at American imperialism.

                And nothing would happen because Russia would know if they started shit they'd get smashed so hard. They only attacked ukraine because they thought it was weak and could take it before anyone could mount a defense of it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            LOL.

            1. Russia owns 2/3 of Ukraine's coastline and have used it to try to strangle Ukraine, and prevent grain shipments. The only reason there's any movement of grain is because Ukraine fought back.

            2. They've proven that they can't be allowed to keep Crimea which they used as a staging ground for attack.

            3. Russia would settle down and start extracting trillions in oil-gas in their controlled lands, that they would use to rebuild.

            4. There's been multiple ceasefires and peaces, and even agreements to respect Ukraine's sovereignty, and Russia violated all of them. Why trust Russia this time?

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >can't be allowed
              This is delusional, they've owned Crimea for 10 years, now they own a land bridge too. Ukraine will never get either back.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They "own" Crimea, but that means near daily stealth cruise missiles raining down on their depots, airfields, command posts, radar systems, and air defenses, as well as weekly attacks on the black sea fleet. They're up to 20% of the black sea fleet gone and Turkey will not allow any more ships to replace them.

                Yes, Russia can hold onto this forever, but it will be such an insane drain on their resources, and eventually there will either be no more black sea fleet or 100% of them will relocate to Russia proper.

                This will never end. If Russia starts to setup oil/gas extraction in the east, Ukraine will hit it with UAVs or cruise missiles.

                Russia then will have to hold 200-400 men at all times forever in their land. Can Russia sustain that?

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Ukraine is getting domestic production up and ready for these. How many per year? They say 6 months until it's up and ready.

    How does the Lynx IFV compare to others?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynx_(Rheinmetall_armoured_fighting_vehicle)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TPz_Fuchs

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://english.nv.ua/nation/german-arms-maker-to-launch-a-plant-in-ukraine-as-early-as-2024-to-make-fuchs-and-lynx-50373136.html

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    make bugs and Vatnigs seethe and just send all of the taiwanese M60 tanks to ukraine and replace them with Abrams

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >T55 tanks, many of which are inferior to the normal M60/M68 tanks.
    The T55 still has superior armor,weight, and size. No idea about optics and/or upgrades for both.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The T55 still has superior armor
      M60A1 had thicker hull and turret armor

      >No idea about optics and/or upgrades for both.
      M60 has essentially been superior in fire-control since day 1
      original T-54 and T-55 had a telescopic sight and stadiametric range finder built in, and thats about it
      the M60A1 had a mechanical ballistic computer and coincidence rangefinder

      the T-62 had a stabilized gun and first gen night vision that helped even the odds but still did not have a ballistic computer or rangefinder, so the T-62 had an advantage at close range but a disadvantage at long range
      though the situation changed when the M60A1 recieved a stabilizer, meaning the only advantage the T-62 had was with the high muzzle velocity of its 115mm
      the ultimate M60 in US service, the M60A3 handily outperformed the T-55M and T-62M, with a thermal sight, laser rangefinder, and digital fire control, while the modernized T-55 and T-62s only got mechanical ballistic computers and a laser rangefinder

      post-cold war upgrades have heavily favored the M60
      the israeli magach 7, on which the turkish sabra is based on, has composite armor, commander thermals, and a 120mm gun on the turret

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the M60 isn't just superior to T-55s, it has defeated T-62s in the Yom Kippur War and T-72s in Desert Storm

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >The RISE Patton looked amazing but that thing just looks like ‘Leo2 at home’

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >pic
    I hate it.
    also, with the Ruskies fielding t55s, it kinda seems like overkill.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >it kinda seems like overkill.
      Wanting to fight at remotely close to parity is stupid. Grow up.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Israel has dismantled many of there's for parts nowadays. Turkey, Taiwan and Brazil are other big users of them but all of those countries are still actively seeking to keep and upgrade what they have as all three of them are facing delays in their next gen tank acquisitions, so it's not like they have a lot to give away. Egypt and Saudi Arabia would be the choice potential donors but I suspect they'd only give them away if the US financed the acquisition of more Abrams for them. Combat use by the Israelis has demonstrated they outperformed Soviet equipment pretty well. They'd do even better if they had upgrade packs like the Aselsan or Elbit modernization packs. Pic related is the Turkish upgrade with an autoloader and bustle ammo rack with blow out panels.

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Wouldn't it make sense to trade a couple of dozens aging F-16s to turkey for a few hundred upgraded M60s for the Ukrainians?

    what does this mean? turkey has money to buy whole f-16 modernization package.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *