We don't have the list of what both parties will exactly have and external support is probably decisive.

They can definitely "achieve" something on the modern battlefield. I think its unlikely we would see large pitched tank battles, similar to desert storm; and rather combined armed operations with infantry, tanks, air cover.
Something the Russian military doctrine is less suited for. They learnt in Chechnya that sending IFV's and tanks into urban areas without supporting infantry, basically makes them sitting ducks.
They didn't change in Ukraine, hence the mass loss of armor early in the war.

I agree the decision to send the equipment that is now being sent, should have been made sooner. Probably before winter, after successful counteroffensives by Ukraine. But actually now the decision has been made, the equipment is arriving quickly.

It will be interesting to see if the Russians send the much hyped T-14 Armata tanks to Ukraine. British intelligence expects they will send them, but more as a propaganda/PR move rather than an actual effective force.

The new tanks, as we speak, requires like 1 year of training. Desperates wokies..

False. In peacetime, maybe.

You think Ukrainians will be taking 2 hour lunch breaks? Get a grip.

Whatever you say, there is no matrix technology where you can be a master in few seconds. Not like ukrainians are nobel prizes to begin with lmao
deal with it woketardy

This post was edited by Melatonina on Feb 8 2023 03:04am

The bulk of Russia's tanks are just as ancient T-72s and T-62s. Russia's hypermodern Armata tanks only exist in extremely limited capacity; their main purpose is being paraded around and creating the illusion of a modernized Russian army.

Generally speaking, I doubt that the core performance metrics of the tanks will prove decisive. Imho, logistics and the effective coordination of different types of weapons (MBT, artillery, helicopters, infantry) will be more important.

NATO accession is a process that takes months at the best of times. It's well possible that starting the formal accesion process in 2008 would have triggered an immediate Russian invasion to stop it before it becomes finalized and Ukraine is officially under the umbrella of article 5.

That was Putin's threat and by accepting that ultimatum Merkle undermined the alliance.

But I agree it takes a long time for accession. Which further debunks this justification for Putin invading now. As if Ukraine was even close to joining NATO.
The EU? Well that is another questiom.

This post was edited by Prox1m1ty on Feb 8 2023 03:22am

If the United States, UK and Canada isn't in NATO.
The Russians wouldn't give a shit if Ukraine join NATO or not.

can't edit post anymore,

I don't disagree but I think there had to be a stronger deterrent/cost of aggression. Most of the EU was unprepared to deter an aggressor.

Were they unwilling to invest in defence? Were they overexposed to Russian gas supply? Probably both to an extent.

This post was edited by Prox1m1ty on Feb 8 2023 03:56am