Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Endolph t1_j6ibpvg wrote

NONO noel its fine man , you dont want the German planes anyway , f16 is the best and only good choice for Ukraine , those German planes are inferior and it would be a logistical nightmare to train men to repair them .

Scholz loves to be the center of attention

−6

IndeterminateYogurt t1_j6iipez wrote

>Scholz loves to be the center of attention

...by answering a question in an interview with a german newspaper if he wants to send jets?

9

Reselects420 t1_j6ic34h wrote

Which are the German planes?

1

TheOneAndOnlyPriate t1_j6ig8tb wrote

Tornado and Eurofighter. However ukraine wasn't asking for those but regardless. Now that tanks are on the way everybody immediately starting bitching about germany for not sending jets as if it was the sole important thing to give germany shit no matter what they do.

It was the same with tanks. They said the whole time they will do it if other nato nations join by sending MBTs. Everyone bitched about germany not sending any, noone talked about the US while neither sent MBTs. And to nobodys surprise they did just that immediately after the US also pitched in. It like "germany i dare you to not do the thing i am also not doing while the whole time you said you do it if i will"

8

The-Entity t1_j6iv602 wrote

The Abrams is just going to cause them grief. The US knows this which is why they didn't want to send them. The maintenance is just way too high.

1

TheOneAndOnlyPriate t1_j6iwuwl wrote

Maintanance is high with leopards too, it is an excuse that only the US has maintanance intensive MBTs. The only difference really is the increased logistical effort for high fuel consumption of more specialized fuel.

Training, maintanance, ammo logistics are all comparable otherwise. And if engines (where the only increased maintanance complexity for abrams would be justified) are that heavily damaged it needs to be shipped to poland for repairs anyway. But thats no different for leos. Ukrainians will be trained for operating them in the short, not for having crews being able to maintain every possible failure or damage under battlefield conditions.

And it is not like the US wasn't able to provide tanks and fuel over this distance. They did it in the middle east too and now would need to provide the same but with way less tanks and even without their own personnel except some maintanance staff and supply staff in poland.

5