1. About 3‘500 Leopard 2 tanks were built until today. About 2‘500 are still in use in the EU. Germany had 250 in service, expanding again to 350, Spain had 350 and Poland has about 200. those are the big users and I assume they will all send some.

    1. @Wolf Larsen The question is not about what you want, but about what you can get and Ukraine can’t get beyond 120 at best 200 Leopard 2 tanks.

    2. @Not Armchair Historian Russia had 13000 tanks overall before the war. 6000 T72 & 3000 T80 in storage with 3500 T72B3 and 500 T90 along with a marginal number of T-80 in service.

    3. Do you wish to see through your third eye 👁️?…be enlightened today and become powerful enough to face both the physical and spiritual boundaries surrounding the earth…Become illuminated

    1. @Gloon Nug U are missing a point here comrade. Ukraine is a independent country. They have rights to choose if they want to join EU or NATO. Since Pootin is brainwashing you to believe that NATO is a threat to Russia- when last time NATO attack Russia? Never! So start using your brain and stop spreading Putler propaganda

    2. Do you wish to see through your third eye 👁️?…be enlightened today and become powerful enough to face both the physical and spiritual boundaries surrounding the earth…Become illuminated

    3. @Gloon NugIf an insane bear wandered in your back yard, don’t poke it.

      If an insane bear wandered into my back yard, I would shoot it dead.

    4. @Gloon Nug are you stupid ? these countries applied to nato to join it not the other way around it wasnt an expansion it was a cry for help from the fear of russia. if russia would just behave like a reliable friend to other nations there would be no reason to join a defensive alliance.

    5. @Tam Bui D. on both sides but finally it is russia that will lose they dont even know what they are fighting for most should surrender and run away from their facist country

  2. “It can run on pretty much anything, actually. But as a matter of practice, most US military ground vehicles including the Abrams are fueled with jet fuel (JP-2, I believe; CORRECTION, JP-8), which they use because nobody else does. That means that if an enemy somehow captures an Army or Marine fuel supply, it’s worse than useless to them. It’s also less flammable than something like gasoline, so it’s much safer.” here is a random quote from the internet, the us uses jet fuel probably because of doctrine not because the engine cant use anything else. Maybe there are some additional maintenace concerns with diesel or spent frying oil, but i cant imagine its that bad if it is indeed designed for different types of fuel.

    1. Russia will show the west that old colonels will regret playing games with Russia as at least Russian men can get warm from burning 🔥 west tanks Ireland 🇮🇪 stands with Russia we no who the criminals colonels are long live Russia

    2. @xMurk it’s all over the new world order is here and America will have to fall in to place behind Russia and do what they are told the dollar will be finished very soon and please stop being a sheep for the west how sad

  3. Finally the decision to deliver! As a German, it was almost unbearable for me, this hesitation. Germany will initially hand over 14 Leopard 2A6 main battle tanks to the Ukraine from Bundeswehr stocks! The Leopard 2A6 is technically up to date from 2001 and should be far superior to most Russian tanks! With its L55 cannon, it shoots the same ammunition as the American Abrams tank, but this only has the L44 cannon, so the German Leo can shoot even further and more precisely! I’m very happy about that! I am sure that the 22 Leopard 2A4 and 88 Leopard 1 that are still with Rheinmetall will also be given to the Ukraine in the near future! Other countries like Poland, which also use Leopard 2, will follow! 🇺🇦🇩🇪💪 for the freedom of Ukraine our brothers in spirit!

  4. One of the things critics have about the Abrams is the turbine engine needs jet fuel. It doesn’t need jet fuel but can use jet fuel. The US army runs its Abrams tanks on #2 diesel. The turbine engine will run on just about any fuel. The ammunition is nato compatible, just like the other western tanks. The Abrams is a heavy beast, and the supporting equipment has to match it, so that is a legitimate issue. Half assing this with a handful of different tank models is going to be a bigger logistics mess. Sometimes you just have to make a decision and go with it.

    1. People’s shouldn’t be so hash on Germany. They gave many different weapons to Ukraine.
      Remember, they neglected their own military for so long. Germany military disgracefully had to borrow other NATO countries for equipment.

  5. Jordan has around 400 British Challenger 1 main battle tanks in storage, surplus to requirements. Available to buy, these could be used as is, or updated to NATO standard Challenger 2 tanks, and would massively support Leopard 2 tanks in Ukraine. In the Gulf Wars, British Challenger 1’s destroyed approximately 400 Soviet tanks, with not a single loss to enemy fire. No Challenger tank has ever been destroyed in enemy conflict. Challengers have the longest recorded tank kill of any NATO battle tank. A formidable main battle tank available right now. And let’s not forget, it’s not just European countries that operate Leopard 2 tanks. Canada has well over a hundred, as well as other allies around the World. Ukraine will need many hundreds to decisively defeat Russia.

    1. @Bob C Primus that Col guy, are you by any chance trying to undermine him. I wonder why.
      How do you know about the exact loses of the Russian tanks, if your information is coming from the Ukrainian government, direct or via the MSM then how do you trust it. I mean it is not like they don’t have a motive to exaggerate the figures. Also they have been caught out lying so often that their credibility is shot. The Ghost of Keiv, Snake Island and the missile strike in Poland to name but a few. Does your information come from other sources on the internet and would these sources have a motive to exaggerate figures.
      I have heard the electronic rumours, but very skeptical that Russia cannot make or obtain the parts from other countries like China.
      One report I did read suggested the Russians have over 10,000 tanks in storage, if true Ukraine has problems.
      Have you listened to Oleksiy Arestovych lately, very interesting, but not very good for Ukraine.

    2. @Brian Nielsen The Ukrainians are just taking the tanks to be destroyed they have decided not to die for America so it’s a waist of time sending tanks

    3. Do you wish to see through your third eye 👁️?…be enlightened today and become powerful enough to face both the physical and spiritual boundaries surrounding the earth…Become illuminated

    1. I’ll get to meet my relatives in heaven again. I don’t know if the same goes for you🛐✝️

    2. @The Great US Seal I pray for payback against those that wish me and mine pain. You seem great, none of it is directed at you or the hardworkers. I just can’t help my ill-feelings towards generally way too many of you😔

    3. @lettheflamestakeover7374 If your country is invading others they are wrong and the occupiers will walk into the consequences of that. Putin is sending thousands of prisoners to battle for his own selfish goal of conquest and power. Where is your human brain to understand very clearly who is wrong? You are just another blind fool. Shame on you.

  6. Leopard 2 and TOW where made with 1 goal to kill Russian armor. Hence why so many NATO countries use them. There’s also a number of other countries with large numbers who are willing to send Leopards. Spain, Netherlands, Denmark, and Finland, for now.

    1. didn’t Spain say earlier in the war, their Leopards are in bad shape and would need refurbishment first before anyone can use them? and didn’t the Netherlands get rid of almost all their heavy tanks and had to lease back a few of them from Germany?

    2. @Embreis Spain is upgrading theirs but have over 100 A4s in storage and yes the Netherlands have upgraded 45 of theirs to A7s but have about a dozen A5s. Theres time to get all in combat order as its going to take until mid March to complete training

    3. @хорошая жизнь well, the Ukrainians hopefully won’t make the same mistake as the overconfident or careless Turkish commanders and send their tanks out into the open field without coverage. well protected with infantry in Bradleys/Marders and some air coverage and there is no way something similar would happen. nice try, ivan

    4. @Embreis Of course, I can describe everything in detail with technical specifications and military analysis, but I think you still won’t understand. Therefore, we will make do with more accessible terminology for ordinary people.
      First, no modern tank can resist artillery. In second place, the enemy is an average UAV with aerial bombs. Which is already being used on the battlefield. In third place are Russian ATGMs, which can, for example, such as the AT-14 Spriggan punch an Abrams tank in the forehead. From a distance of 100-5500 meters.
      Therefore , it makes no difference whether there is support or no infantry . Planes and helicopters are not a strong feature of the Ukrainian air forces at all.(Their lives are too short).

  7. I don’t think those Abrams tanks will see battle, but that’s not why the US is sending them. Ukraine wants the tanks Poland, Finland, the Baltic states and others will send. For Ukraine to get them Germany must give the ok. But for some reason the Germans wouldn’t do that without the US pledging its own tanks. The UK offered up its tanks so Germany wouldn’t be “alone,” but they still wouldn’t do it without the US. So here we are.

    1. As long as the Germans send their tanks or allow them to be sent into Ukraine I am very happy about it. Says a German.

  8. It’s the combined capabilities that are key, and they should also have the aerial support of helicopters if they need to call for it.

    1. I’m not going to take the opinion of someone who types incoherently in caps like they’ve lost their mind years ago.

    2. @Joe Bloe the Abrams is considered the best tank in the world , that being said for countries other than the US. it is a logistical nightmare, They move fast and and use a lot of fuel so the supply chain has a hard time keeping up with them

    1. @Joe Ch That’s what I’ve been saying; it’s the Kremlin that needs to be de-Nazified of Vladolf Putler.
      The de-militarizing they are doing themselves by transferring surplus equipment to Ukraine.

    2. @Mit Seraffej because there is a difference if nato would join the war and actually throw the biggest army on earth into russia the kremlin would be perished in 5-7 weeks by conventional forces no nukes used and they would kill putin his corrupt government and help rebuild russia like they did with germany after removing the nazis in WW II
      so why cant they do that? because attacking russia directly would corner them into using a nuke. that why they will never ever do that.

  9. Interestingly, Abrams tanks were armed with Rheinmetall’s 120mm smoothbore gun under license since 1984 and can fire the same projectiles as Leopards. Both are equiped with the same canon. Except that those on the Abrams are a bit shorter ( L44) and those on the Leopards are longer. ( L55) Perhaps one thing they have to do is an adjustment of the fire control computer.
    In terms of effectiveness of the tanks, what kind of morale boost do you think the ukrainians will get from this. Unlike the Russians. 😁

    1. @Jospeh Moore Oryx mentains a database of all vehicles and aircraft lost in ukraine by both sides. All claims are visually verified, geo-located and cross referenced for duplicates. The numbers in the data base are lower than either the claims by the Ukrainian or Russian defense ministries, and provide a solid baseline for losses from both sides. If they can’t verify what the vehicle is they list it as unknown

    2. NATO standard ammunition has been the design. It’s an ingenious plan as those who run out of Ammo are sitting ducks

    3. @Joe Bloe The M1 tank is awesome uses jet engines and armor and fire system is superior. However the German Leopard 2 is lighter and more nimble used less fuel. No M1 tank has ever been destroyed since its inception. Russian tanks with their top loader turret pop off like a Jack in the box. If Russia continues and gets directly involved with NATO they will lose everything in conventional warfare. 30 NATO countries with 3.3 million personal combined forces and the best equipment in the world. Russia seems to be more advanced in hypersonic missiles but their tanks suck.

    4. Do you wish to see through your third eye 👁️?…be enlightened today and become powerful enough to face both the physical and spiritual boundaries surrounding the earth…Become illuminated

  10. USA produced a lot of misinformation about the Abram tanks. True they need 50% more fuel than the Leopard II, but the Abram can run on all burnable liquids and it includes; diesel; gasoline; jet fuel; marine diesel and if needed wodka 🙂 The weight of both tanks is in the same range and both newest models are 66 tons, for the older models the Abram is lighter. Both tanks use the same 120mm canon based on a German design of Rheinmetal. The area is suitable for heavy tanks, because 70 miles to the north is the city Kursk, that saw the largest tank battle ever. Here Germany used the heavier King Tiger with its 70 tonnes.

    The maintenance excuse is BS too. The USA sold a few hundred Abrams to Iraq and they were used in e.g. the fights around Mosul and in support of the Kurds. If Iraq can operate Abram tanks, Ukraine can surely operate those tanks too.

    1. @gdhs You should update that, your info is about 20 years out of date.
      Since the M1 was used in Iraq 1991, there have been a continuing series of bolt on upgrades to the tank that addressed the weak points and vulnerabilities.

    2. @Pogo M1 one is a shitty tank. Sure it has a good armament and okay armour. But guess what Russian T90 is either equal or better in every aspect.

    3. @gdhs No point hyping up the T90 tank when the explosive reactive armour can’t even be installed as due to sanctions they do not have the properties to even properly defend their tanks anymore as they cannot replace their reactive armour the M1 Abrams Tank is more logistically challenging as M1’s run on essentially jet engines compared to basic diesel engines. This requires specialist maintenance crews compared to just regular maintenance which doesn’t require as much expertise in maintaining fossil engines, not to mention all over Europe there is more widely interconnected infrastructure facilities of Leopard 2 tanks to maintain them where they are needed near the battlefield, and each Abrams maintenance facility requires atleast 250 personnel excluding defense and anti air crews to protect the base so yes before you comment the US attempting to BS logistics reason please try to educate yourself, as there are real and valid reasons as to why the US will struggle logistically in supportin Ukraine compared to the Leopard 2

    4. The King Tiger was not used at Kursk, it wasn’t operational in 1943 yet. Tiger 1’s were used, also it was the debut of the Panther. But indeed, the landscape is certainly suitable for tanks.

  11. This opens the way for the Leopard Tanks to be sent,
    From at least 4 or 5 European countries almost immediately who are ready to send them
    And who are already training Ukrainian troops on how to operate those types of tanks,

    So they should start to arrive on the battle field by March along with the US Bradley which looks awesome,
    But I think the Bradley will be in the battles by late Feb or before

    Those are already on the way + the soldiers are been trained 500+ at least to date

    1. @Human Beings R Thinking Beings well this war will sort that out and the question should be answered by 2024

  12. Abrams is a multifuel vehicle, commonly it uses diesel. Its 1,500hp Honeywell turbine engine can burn a variety of fuels including diesel, jet fuel, gasoline, and marine diesel.

    1. @Jason Larawan Does our news suck that much? Or was it a ploy to slow down the cries for us to send our tanks? Thank you very much for the informaion, @beach side

  13. The Abrams can run on diesel too, it’s gas turbine engine is dual fuel. But it does like jet fuel better. I wonder if these are coming from the National Guard, or 40 year-old M1’s from storage.

  14. Every time I hear Wesley Clark’s commentary it is always the best. His comments about why the Ukrainians are fighting so hard in Bakhmut is very illuminating.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.