>
Sometimes I think all this back and forth is planned rhetoric. They don't want to go rushing into Ukraine, possibly causing a wider conflict. It's terrible to think about all the lives that are lost while the world is getting used to sending heavier weapons to Ukraine. This is the reality when faced with the remnants of the Soviet Union that still has many nuclear weapons. They are boiling the frog here. The frog is Putin and his cronies. By going slowly, they're robbing him of the power to unite his country against the west over a single incident. >

And it's working. Don't get me wrong, it's a terrible strategy in terms of life lost, but it's the one thing that is keeping this from spreading wider. ruZZians are attritting away and soon they'll be so small of a threat we can drown them in a proverbial bathtub for good. >

It’s an investment in the future. The US and NATO has the opportunity to take out a long-time geopolitical antagonist without sending a single one of their own soldiers to fight. Russia has long been an international menace that has sown dissent, violence, corruption, bigotry, and inflamed fascist sentiments around the world. Russia deciding to invade Ukraine is the perfect opportunity to strike back at them for all the shit they’ve pulled over the years.
Also, after the war, Ukraine will be flush with cash and foreign investments. Not only will Ukraine be rebuilt bigger and better than ever, they’ll also be a powerful and grateful Western ally in Eastern Europe. From a cold, calculated, geopolitical perspective, it’s a win-win for the US and it’s allies. The fact that it’s also morally the right thing to do is just the icing on the cake. >

This is pretty much it. Even if Ukraine doesn’t win - Russia has been pretty much wiped out as a military. Including  leadership, soldiers, weapons, hardware, etc. If I remember correctly they lost a bunch of special forces early on in a failed operation. We also know how they operate in the field and the limits of their technology- including their communications and drone capabilities. Russia will just be a 3rd rate power after all is said and done. Granted they will still have nukes and natural gas, but that is all they will have. >

"The Biden administration was shrewd to understand and carefully address German concerns without publicly pressuring Scholz as some other Western governments have done, analysts said after his comments."
Dark Brandon is master of foreign policy.  Got em to willingly send 2 battalions of tanks w their allies and made them feel good about it. >

Germany, despite its reluctance on some weapons systems, has sent the 3rd most amount of military hardware, behind the US and UK.
Germany should be treated as a disagreement among friends.
Hungary on the other hand... >

Idk how Hungary is even part of nato. >

Say hello to my friend Abrams, Jack >

Because fuck Putin. >

To beat back a terrorist regime- The Rest of Us >

Summarized for the fox news crowd: Russia mean. Make big boom on Ukraine. We give tank to stop Russia booms. Yay Ukraine. Yay tank. >

Since we spend so much on our military, we might as well put them to a good cause and stop Russian aggression. >


Biden Explains Why U.S., Allies Are Sending Tanks To Ukraine

No explanation needed.  The is a war to be fought. >

For free field testing! - General Dynamics >

I was just gonna say, this sounds like R&D. They’ll send tanks to Ukraine, see how well they do, what weaknesses they have, combat efficiency etcetera. Then they’ll go back to the military and government saying they found indispensable and most importantly, costly ways to upgrade current tanks or even bid to make a new one down the line. The War Machine rolls on. >

If that were the plan, we should have done it when they would have a chance to fight modern Russian T90/80 tanks instead of old soviet-era 72s and 64s.
Desert Storm already gave us plenty of data on M1s vs. T72s... >

Only advertising a few dozen tanks. Wonder how many will actually arrive there. Hope they get 500+, as thats what would be needed to make a real difference. A few dozen isnt going to do much. >

U.S. allies are sending tanks to Ukraine because the U.S. is sending tanks to Ukraine.  Europe did not want to be seen as escalating the conflict, waiting for the U.S. to send tanks provides them cover in case the action of escalation all goes to shit.
It has been Bidens plan all along to escalate conflict with Russia and prolong conflict.  This has been increasing costs of food, energy, and fuel.  In Europe you are already seeing politics shift to the Right as a result.  In the U.S. Biden has asked the American public to sacrifice for the benefit of Ukraine...it is undecided how that will play out in the coming election in 2024.
Anyone who isnt paying attention or who will try and dismiss the consequences of this policy are just inviting disaster down the road.
People commenting on reddit ignore the fact that Ukraine has tanks and vehicles already that they havnt used due to the terrain.  Instead they have been using their personal vehicles because they are lighter.  Even If they use the tanks there is the training, and maintenance and supply of parts and materials to keep them operational.  This is not going to have an immediate affect on the conflict, it will likely prolong it and increase the chances there is no equitable outcome.  This conflict is on track towards lasting many many years. >

There are some situations where one must initiate conflict to resolve a tension. But with some opponents all you have to do is prepare and wait because they will naturally begin conflict of their own accord.
Ego can be a cruel master. >

Because they need equalizer Russian tanks and other Armaments that they're using.