The U.S. Plans to Send M1 Abrams Tanks to Ukraine, Officials Say | Hacker News Reader

The U.S. Plans to Send M1 Abrams Tanks to Ukraine, Officials Say

nytimes.com

14 pointsbelter11 comments

This is the first US involved war ofmy lifetime with almost zero public debate over policy and universal support for escalation. Kind of concerning.

> universal support for escalation

A commanding section of the House, alongside influential pundits like Tucker Carlson, are vocally against even present levels of support.

Why bring up pundits? I'm sure that for almost all prominent government choices over the last 30 years you can find an influential pundit who was critical of them at the time.

> This is the first US involved war ofmy lifetime with almost zero public debate over policy and universal support for escalation. Kind of concerning.

> zero public debate

> pundits

How old are you, for context?

It seems inaccurate to me to say there has been zero public debate, but i's true that the war came along at a political moment when the US was already very polarized, so the sorting function of debate was minimal. If someone tends liberal, they already have a very low opinion of Vladimir Putin. Conservatives need no urging to criticize any decision of the Biden administration or anything that smacks of 'globalism.'

As far as 'escalation' goes, moving a whole army over a border into another country by force is the most basic conflict scenario there is. Either one is OK with it, or thinks the aggressing party should remove its forces and receive a bill for the damage. The notion that the injured party should restrain its self-defense efforts or that the means of same should be withheld seems strange to me.

The most-watched "news" network, Fox News, frequently airs commentary that's critical of Ukraine itself and of US involvement.

I remember the beginning of the War in Afghanistan, and it had far less debate and much more universal support.

It allows the military industrial complex to keep running without soldiers at risk.

Yemen much?

This is the strongest action by the US yet. With M1 Abrams and Leopard 2s Ukraine will have two of the most advanced tanks in the world at their disposal. Russia really doesn’t have anything that can match in any real quantity. How both tanks hold up in this type of engagement we will see.

I do worry a bit about what a cornered Putin is capable of. There is no winning this war for him and Russia.

Reportedly old fashioned artillery is responsible for most or the plurality of tank kills in Ukraine.

Tanks are only really useful for mobile tank to tank or tank to infantry warfare and mopping up operations.

Typically artillery has a range ay least ten times that of a tank gun.

Tanks are best thought of as mobile assault guns. They are powerful offensive weapons in close support of infantry. If you need to take ground you want some tanks. Most military doctrine, including the US and Russia, do not provision them for tank to tank combat unless it becomes unavoidable.

Artillery softens a target, but infantry ultimately have to take the position. Everything works in conjunction Which is why it was so baffling in the beginning of the war to see Russian tanks unsupported by infantry roaming around by themselves. It is not really how you would typically use tanks. If Russia had been coordinated in whatever it was they were attempting they may have been able to over run Ukraine’s defenses and take Kyiv.

But yes, for the past 100+ years most casualties come from artillery. It is brutally effective both in terms of the damage caused to the enemy physically and psychologically. When at any moment an artillery round can reign from the sky and rip you in two you lose your will to fight pretty quick.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com