Thank you for providing this insight and continued good luck! It would be interesting to hear what the Ukrainian soldiers think about the more numerous older model, the Leopard 1.

I like the color filter you used on this video. It reminds me of 1970s photography.

you gotta be kidding me here? lol

@@meso8848Go home, Putin Troll Bot...

I only said that I wished I could do something so that you would get more of these. My comment got deleted immediately. I suggest to found a Euro-KZfaq. This here is no good anymore.

@@krollpetermaybe your post was misinterpreted by youtubes shoddy algoritm... as the post you made now is there :D

@@TheInfidel_SlavaUA We need to make sure everyone understands that it is in our own interest that Ukraine wins and remains an independent country.

About 6 million in the EU. Mostly women and children or elders. We should stop congratulate ourselves on a national level. Germany is Europe and we're all in it together. The European Project was always about peace but now it's about defending that peace. With Ukraine!

In that case I hope the Ukrainians will gracefully forget the cowardice of our current chancellor. 😬

Dear German neighbor, yes there were atrocities in multiple places and in multiple levels. But as a Dutch citizen I don't hold you accountable for what your grandparents did. There is a lot of blame to go around if you look back far enough in history. I do thank you for supporting Ukraine.

agree

@@reinmarvonzweter666 Oh man, you guys should absolutely come to terms with germany doing things how, when and if at all it wants. Your little rants about us only causes the german government to doubt that we should entrust Ukraine with our most high tech systems. How could we trust Ukraine if they and their closest allies have only disrespectful and derogatory views on us? I believe the Taurus dilemma is caused by the way our ALLIES behaved towards us at the beginning of the conflict. Consequences.

You were on on the same side from 40-45

@@stolek6908 The death counts on both sides proof your wrong

​@@stolek6908yes and no, ukrainians were on both sides

Also not to forget the Holodomor, the soldiers of the Wehrmacht were often greeted like heroes in many parts of Ukraine and Russia in the early parts of WW2

sadly the delivered 60 pieces are basicly all thats left. the rest got scrapped. But ukraine recieves the vastly more capable and advanced sucessor system, the Skyranger, even before the Bundeswehr

Bundeswehr had 400 at peak. Upgraded the most modern version, Gepard 1A2, that Ukraine has were 147. That upgrade was performed between 1996 and 2000. Since these SPAAG were extremely expensive back then, the numbers were limited. When the Gepard entered service it cost 5.4 million German Mark per unit. For comparison: A regular Leopard 1 tank, on which the Gepard is based on (modified Leopard 1 hull), cost "only" 1.7 million German Mark at that time. The Gepard would cost 8.7 million Euros (9.5 million US$) today, the Leopard 1 MBT 2.6 million Euros (2.8 million US$). And also the ammunition was changed with the upgrade. Higher pressure, that's the reason you can't use the new ammunition in the old guns. What looks like a flash hider on the Gepards guns are actually sensors. The measure the velocity of the projectiles and send that data to the ballistic computer, and the computer corrects the aiming if necessary.

@@Marcel_GermannYeah, it has to be said, the Gepard was ALWAYS a very expensive system for a AAA vehicle. But hey, today it is pretty good that it was designed that way. You once got around 8 Shilkas for the price of one Gepard, but today, even Russia has problems bringing Shilkas in the field or use them effectively against UAVs. A single Shilka already needed way more ammunition against an aircraft than the more precise Gepard, I don't want to imagine the logistics there, especially Soviet "Hands over Brains" kind of logistics.

@@ghoul_john8556 so why is Germany delivering also skyranger to Ukraine?

@@ghoul_john8556 That explains why we gave Ukraine the IRIS-T SLM before we ordered them for ourself.

This. Veteran Ukrainian tankers trained by the german army made a huge difference here.

I wish the americans who use that as a claim the abrams is better would understand

i would say that right now its better to keep a working system instead of fucking around and finding out

🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺Wir sind alle Brüder

Heroyam Slava!

It wasn't due to trusting Putin. Putin wasn't even in the picture when most of the decisions were made. He was too worried figuring out how to steal his East German state issued washing machine and take it all the way home since his deployment to East Germany as a KGB Agent was coming to an end. All four Allied Powers (meaning those of WW2: The US, Britain France and the Soviet Union) set a strict arms reduction programme as one of the requirements to greenlight the reunification of the country. Back then, other countries in Europe legitimately shat their pants over the West German Bundeswehr and the East German Nationale Volksarmee - both considered among the finest armed forces of their respective bloc back then - ending up side by side under singular German Command. We weren't even allowed to mothball most of the equipment we had to reduce. It was premeditated to be either sold off or destroyed in predefined quantities each year. Most of it was gone by the time the new Millenium waltzed around and until then, the only thing anyone had to fear from Russia was Yeltzin coming for your booze cabinet... Up until 2014, any further commitment to disarmament made by Germany was met with almost unilateral approval among our allies and partners. This only shifted with the invasion of Ukraine in 2014, the election of Donald Trump as US-President (and therefore, the US becoming a lot less reliable of an Ally) and now the full-blown war in Ukraine.

All european nations reduced their militaries after the cold war ended. Germany in particular was contractually obligated to do it though, as it was a demand that was made to make the reunification possible

@@patta8388it was only obliged to reduce her number of soldiers to a maximum of 370,000. Because with the GDR, there would've been over 700,000 German soldiers.

I disagree ...its not only about Scholz who has the drive of a lame duck, its about his Social Democrat Party..and her constant collusion, bromancing, and economic connections with the RF/kremlin which go back decades ...its refusal to disavow and expell Gerhard Schroeder and hold him accountable for publicy supporting a war criminal which he once declared to be a "pristine democrat"...and the snail speed of getting stuff done in general. Schroeder in my book deserves to be losing his german citizenship and declared a traitor hes bromancing still with RF which vows constantly to destroy the West and colonize all of Europe. His ties with Putin go WAAAaay back and im sure he was a person of interest back in his Juso days for the KGB. His regional SPD home base just scandalously celebrated his 60th party membership year...despite massive outrage on how tone deaf and outright suspicious this statement of allegiance to a shameless putin/ruscist apologist is. I am german as well and im not even a conservative. I think this government needs an upgrade fast.

No, Scholz is still a naive sheep, but there are other politicans in his coalition, wich pushed him. Look at Taurus, never ending story with him.

@@Atlantis838i am not sure how much of that is true. Sometimes sure. But i also have the feeling that in the past when they gave their ok to some things, leo2, pzh 2000, it went surprisingly fast afterwards. Almost as if they had been working on it already while scholz was still telling everyone its not gonna happen. That of course is just my impression.

@@TheAljaScholz is holding back more support. The german government are three parties. The other two parties are for more support. The party from Scholz is the same party where a former chancelor was a manager at Gazprom. ... and the biggest opposition party is for more support.

@@GalharaThe other two parties? AfD, CDU and "die Linke"? Sometimes I think that the AfD is some kind of Putin muppet as well as parts of die Linke, Sarah Wagenknecht for example. @Atlantis838 Macron send no nukes, why should Scholz send taurus?

You might ask Russians then.

Exact,i refuse to live under an Russian nazi dictator.

he will win because germany will decrease their support

@@franzmustermann760 There are more people in the world than Germans

when germany and the USA wilm dtop their support it will be over. Trump wont support rhe Ukraine. everybody knows it

@@franzmustermann760 decreasing our support? putlers pointless war litteraly made us start up the production and developement like back before ww2. our production has gone up by like 400-450% allready and we are pumping out all new technology soon

I suppose with the Panther you mean the KF51 MBT from Rheinmetall. Unfortunately that was only a technology demonstrator. However if Rheinmetall gets the factory up and running in Ukraine, and it gets the go-ahead to produce those nasties, it would be an incredible product demonstration under live conditions. If it performed even half as good as advertised it would mean an insane increase in Ukrainian firepower. The Lynx and the Puma would need to get some faults ironed out first. Or the Ukrainian could give feedback on the actual battlefield results which would allow for reasonable incremental improvement for both of these vehicles. That in turn would reduce the cost of production and improvements in Germany as well, so in essence a win-win for both partners in this venture.

Could be possible. if Germany wanted to. but they dont. and its understandable. you wouldnt give your most advanced systems to an army that can at best be trained to basic operation level at these vehicles. would be a technological nightmare if those would get scrapped by russians.

@@djneverblock7300 Thats true…the captured Leopards will also result in copying technology.

@@d.m.umminger6799which wont matter, since ukraine only got leo 2 a4 which is not in service for the german bundeswehr and has seen battle enough to be transparent enough already.

@@djneverblock7300Not correct, Germany gave Leopard 2A6, together with atleast one other country I cant remember. All other delivering nations were in fact sending Leopard 2A4.

one must also take in regard what the support is in relation to the donor countries GDP , and by that metric... All the "big spenders" on this list appear in a totally different light ^^

@@TheInfidel_SlavaUA that would be true for Norway in relation to Germany, but not for the UK in relation to Germany.. Looking at % of GDP, the UK has provided less than half of what Germany has (including its share of EU aid). For that metric, Norway leads by 0,6% of GDP compared to Ger. But no matter what metric we choose, the bar chart is wrong.

@@TheInfidel_SlavaUA the % of GDP is totally useless to look at tho. A war isnt won on thoughts and prayers, its the absolute numbers that count.

@@Matze239 no.. gdp is literally how much a country can afford so.. its like.. kinda the thing that matters the most. cuz it means the country took a high expense BECAUSE just prayers wont work.

@zero.Identity and still it's the absolute numbers that actually count. Let me give you an example. Which package would be more useful to Ukraine. A: 5 howitzers that make up 2% of the country's GDP, or B: 20 howitzers that make up only 0,5% of GDP.

Yeah but the Pzh2000 is a german Artillery and the Netherlands can only send it with the permission of Germany.

@@Halivera If that is the criterium, then the Patriot missile system should not be in the video, because that is a US system and Germany can only send it with permission of the US. No sorry, you should mention: Netherlands sent almost the same number of PZH2000 to Ukraine, Patriot systems, a few 100's YPR765 APC's, Some Leopard 1's and Leopard 2's.

His name is Scholz. And there is a lot negative to say about him. He always delayed help like he did with tanks and now the Taurus missiles. Others are quite faster. Liberals and Greens who are both also members of the government would like to provide more and faster help, but Scholz is delaying it with a lot of nonsense.

@@hermes667 yes and no. we also have to keep in mind, that he puts the pressure on those EU Partners but also the USA, to keep up their aid packages. Without Scholz it would just have been Leopard 2´s from Germany and maybe Poland, after the export was greenlighted, as basicly all other partners retracted ther offers and it was only due to german negotiations and financing that other partners even deliver stuff.

@zhufortheimpaler4041 and per capita actually Germany (1 state) send more than USA lately (50 states). So thank you Schultz.

@@nataliiateteruk585 germany is a federation of states. it has 16 states federated into one big federal state

@@zhufortheimpaler4041"... we also have to keep in mind, that he puts the pressure on those EU Partners but also the USA, ... " He did this, that he can explain in germany why he will not do more support. That was a politician move. The german government are three parties. The other two parties are for more support. The party from Scholz is the same party where a former chancelor was a manager at Gazprom. ... and the biggest opposition party is for more support. The Ukraine needs more support and the leading government party is this holding back.

I was at the introduction of the leopard at the time. Some US Generals almost fell out of their chairs in amazement at what the Leopard can do. It's been a while, but still very effective.

🇩🇪 👍🌻🇸🇪

@@RedbadvanRijn-ft3vv its really not it gets destroyed even quicker then soviet and russian tanks because it has litterly 0 drone protection, its not as versetile way to fn heavy and costs 3times more then a t90m despite being worse in almost every aspekt

keine sorge selbst wenn die munition würde für vlt 3 tage reichen die 40 kampffähigen pzh sind halt ein absoluter dreck gegen russlands 8000 arty systeme xD

nope

USA has often proven to be a traitor to its allies. Look at how they have betrayed the Kurds and now Europe is learning the lesson that the USA cannot be trusted.

Ukraine did not have the financial means for a nuclear weapons program at the time. So it would only have been a question of how long they would have had nuclear weapons anyway. You have to completely replace the nuclear part of a nuclear weapon every 10 years to keep it safe and operational. The treaties were mainly concluded to have a solution for the nuclear weapons. At the time, there was a fear that that the nuclear weapons or parts of them would be sold and end up somewhere else in the world. Many weapons systems and other military material were sold at the time to raise money for the state. Ukraine also had long-range bombers from the Soviet era, for example, which were later sold to Russia. But regardless of the treaty, nowadays Ukraine should be given all the military means it needs to defend itself.

@@kevinj24535 It didn't need a nuclear weapons program, it inherited 2,000 nuclear weapons from the USSR. It only needed to maintain a fraction of those to deter Russia from ever attacking it. And considering what Ukrainians are currently doing while under massive attack by Russia they would have had no problem maintaining a nuclear deterrent. Which they obviously needed.

@@dougcoombes8497 Of course you need a nuclear weapons program for maintenance. It doesn't matter whether you want to keep 10 or 100 nuclear weapons operational. Someone has to be trained to carry out this maintenance and renewal, plus the technical equipment and machinery for enrichment. This capability must be maintained at all times. Otherwise, every country could simple have a handful nuclear weapon in stock as a deterrent. It also makes no difference whether they had 100 or 2000 nuclear weapons from the Soviet Union. After 10 years, they will no longer be operational and everyone knows that. You have to maintain the capability and the technical requirements throughout. Why else would Ukraine have given up its nuclear weapons? They could have simply kept their nuclear weapons and still concluded treaties on security and cooperation. If, according to your logic, there is no need for a nuclear weapons program, why didn't they simply build new nuclear weapons after 2014?

@@kevinj24535 50% of the R&D and science in the USSR and 40% of military production was done in Ukraine. Not to mention that Ukraine has had a large domestic nuclear power sector for decades. This idea that Ukraine lacked the means or the knowledge to maintain a few nuclear weapons out of the very large stockpile they were left with is ludicrous. It was a political decision that included the Russian government that also wanted to see Ukraine disarmed. As to your earlier comments about the security of those weapons, since the fall of the USSR Russia has increasingly come under the control of former members of the Soviet spy apparatus combined with Russian organized crime. It's hard to think of a worst security threat than that. In combination with Russia the west forced Ukraine to give up its nuclear arsenal for diplomatic security assurances under the Budapest Memorandum that aren't worth the paper they were typed on. Russia which signed that undertaking to always respect Ukrainian independence and sovereignty is now attempting to wipe out both the nation and the culture. And the US under the control of far right fanatics like Mike Johnson has stopped sending military support to Ukraine. Like I said, if Ukraine had been allowed to keep those nuclear weapons NONE of this would be happening. Clearly the only thing Russians understand is force.

Mainly the UK and Germany. Now its mainly Germany.

Germany pays about 20% of the full EU household. France is paying alot too but they take a bit more out so they are a smaller "net provider". So the german numbers kinda add up, considering the money the EU gave was generated by credit and gets payed back over the years. Germany is by far the biggest net contributor to the credit.

Germany pays around 25% of the EU budget. Deducting distributions from the EU financial pool, Germany pays an average of 25 billion euros, France around 12 billion and the Netherlands around 7 billion. The biggest beneficiary within the EU was Poland, with an incredible 12 billion euros received. However, the numbers are from 2021, so every share will certainly be larger now. Especially Poland, considering the crazy shopping spree theyre on atm.

ne

@@nekko5778 doch

theres no technical supirioity anyways

why would they? its a pure waste of money they do this to f with russia a bit while ukros are paying with their lives litterly getting swatted like flies

@@nekko5778 russian troll.

@@tacticalsapper shh nafo bot

It's not always the channel. It is sometimes youtube. I also had random comments deleted for no apparent reason on other occasions.

@@Micha-qv5uf It's because YOU TUBE is VERY Pro Russian

Ich denke es ist ein Programm, das verhindert das man zuviele Kommmentare hinterlässt, in sehr kurzer Zeit! Anti spam software!

The CDU/CSU is the reason why the deliveries aren't what they are. They cut funding of the German Bundeswehr over 20 years when they were the leading party of the government. It was their decision to sell or scrap thousands of Leopard 1, Leopard 2, Marder, Gepard and closing tons of ammunition storages to save money. All that stuff could have put back in action but most of them wanted cheap Russian resources and ignored all the signs that Russia isn't the friend we believed in the 1990s. Scholz is the elephant in the room when it comes to the actual problems, because parts of his party are still not understanding what it means if Ukraine would lose that war.

You guys should come to terms with germany doing what it wants and when it wants. Pray that it's in your favor. Or try asking politely.

The Russian T72 is ancient. So the leopard is still top of the bill. Only + for the T72,they have more time in space with there exploding turrets,than all those Russian fighter jets Those tank commanders must have a lovely vieuw so high in the sky hahhaha

Overall its not our war. And i wish it keeps that way.

No other worries?

The Ukrainian army is one of a kind. Let them have their individualism if it helps keeping the morale up. Everything that isn't stopping them from preforming their tasks is only a problem in *your* head.

@@Squee7e The army is no democratsy you must look decent when you when you precent a weapon system!

@@FrankWego No thats all for now.

@@pernykvist3442The general appearance rules for soldiers are only really strictly executed during peace time. During war, nobody gives a shit about your haircut as long as it didn't interfere with your work.

Nachdem 50 T-72 oder 20 T-90 zerstört worden sind. Russen verlieren ihre Panzerkräfte wie manche Männer ihre Haare auf dem Kopf.

The Leoparden sind schon nicht schlecht, aber gegen Russischen High-Tech wie T-55 ... dagegen kommt kein anderer MBT an. Aber du hast ja recht, die Russen brauchen schließlich 3 Panzer weniger um einen Challenger zu erlegen - also nur 15.

Germany did not lose a single time against Russia, Russia lost in ww1 and collapsed.

germany traditianally fight war against the complete world... and lost.. Now germany is part of the world, and russia is alone.

WW1 would stand as the anti-thesis to that. Remember Tannenberg?

Has nothing to do with the topic of the video. Nobody was downplaying US support.

@@Micha-qv5uf Just offering a suggestion for another video. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

the problem is, that the USA is actively withholding certain components. For example the M777 artillery pieces were delivered without the GPS guidance unit. Why does the USA not deliver more M142 HIMARS and more modern models of ATACMS than the oldest production version from the 1990s? Currently the US does not deliver weapons with a range over 160km. Why s the USA only delivering 31 M1A1SA while it has close to 2000 M1 Abrams in storage? Why does the USA scrap 600 M2 Bradleys in relatively good condition, instead of delivering them to Ukraine? etc.

The thing is in a war you don't have a perfect weapon. Losses are expected. Western equippment is designed for survivability. The Leopard and Abrams dont differ that much in that regard. Both have save compartments with blow out pannels for their ammo for example. But if your tracks get damaged from a mine it doesn't matter if you got the newest tank or a world war 2 tank. A mobility kill is basically a lost tank. You have to abandon that tank, otherwise you are just a sitting duck. The losses of equippment in ukraine now peak a little bit as they are throwing a lot of stuff in there to keep the front somewhat stable to prepare defensive positions and not give the russians a chance to roll through - thats the sad reallity. Thats why for example the himars was much closer to the front than they usually are. They are trading gear for time. There were news out that the ukrainians did not prepare positions at all behind the front which is a huge mistake. They basically started building new defensive lines when Adviivka was about to fall. Overall western equippment in general is just super similar there is no need to compare leopards to abrams or whatever. Especially since there were basically only a couple of actualy tank vs tank combats in ukraine. Tanks are more used for hit and run tactics or firesupport. Mines and Drones have just gotten too dangerous and especially without air support tanks can not really do a lot right now.

Es gibt verluste die sind aber bis jetzt Moderat es wurden zb bis jetzt 5 Marder zerstört und 5 Leopard 2 und 0 Panzerhaubitzen 2000

And how do those negotiations come about? People act as if Putin is willing to make a deal? Russia has clearly stated their goals for this conflict, yet again, just a few days ago. They're not going to stop or negotiate unless everything they demand is granted which would include lifting the sanctions against them, stopping military aid to Ukraine and for Ukraine to officially recognize the loss of their territories. So let's say that happens, what follows? Putin will rearm and replenish his losses and prepare to take over the rest of Ukraine once he's ready. In the meantime we'll be spending billions trying to help Ukraine rebuild and once Putin is rdy to resume it'll get blown to pieces. I don't exactly know how often history has to repeat itself for people to learn that people like Putin will always keep testing the limits and try to gain more if they perceive any kind of weakness. Matter of fact, several high ranking russian officials have already speculated about what countries to take next. If you think it's going to be cheaper for us to let Ukraine fall you're sorely mistaken. Every cent spent in helping Ukraine stand up to Russia is money wisely spend cause ultimately it's gonna cost a whole lot more if Putin, after having appeased him constantly and letting him do as he pleases, tries to test out wether or not NATO countries will actually defend each other or not. The real tragedy here is the insane reluctance with which we've been providing the aid needed to deal with this, but aslong as Ukrainians are willing to fight we should give em everything we can scrape together to keep going.

Call yourself whatever you want, you're a traitor. Putin ends up in Den Haag. The only thing he'll be able to negotiate is the cell he'll be in. Russia doesn't have the economic power to win militarily against the EU. We won't give up Ukraine. Like the Soviet Union, Russia will go bankrupt. And by the way, some of the 18 Leopards are still fighting against how many Russian tanks, planes and artillery? Just like the 14 Pzh2000 or the Cheetahs and Marder. What do you think will happen when Taurus, F16, Leopards, Bradley and above all more ammunition arrive?

In hindsight you may state that. The attempt of change through trade was for a long time a successful option to bind Russia closer to Europe. That Putin went all out Pariah was unforseeable. B.t.w. the monster lives of its gigantic military stockpile inherited from the USSR.

We all were dependent on Russian gas. But Germany was the fastest to cut it.

Russia was a business partner - but it was never really big one. EU, China and USA are the biggest. While trade with Russia was stagnating the last decades the trade with China was exploding. It was also Putin himself who stopped the gas delivery. That we Germans got so much involved in this conflict has simply reasons. Putin’s attack on Ukraine came together with an offer to the USA to divide Europe again in two influence zones like in the Cold War. Totally unacceptable for everyone who once lived behind the iron curtain like Poland etc. His attack is obviously also a try to damage EU and NATO and stop democratic revolution threatening his power. The EU is primarily an European peace concept and Putin hates it. Germany is the political Corel of the European Idea and so it is no incident that his propaganda- and hacking-efforts are focused on germany. We also have 1.1 Million ukrainean refugees and when Putin would conquer the Ukraine we would have 10 Million refugee’s. You also has to understand that a German chancellor is operating different from other country leaders. Germany has gathered the diplomatic role of a international mediator. Unlike other country leaders a German chancellor will never speak in a blowhard way - instead he will work backstage to find out what interests european partners and the USA have in a topic and try to negotiate a solution to overcome differences. So, while every other country is brawling patriotic speeches the German chancellor stays silent and gets busy in the background until a common solution is ready and can be declared in public. In the beginning ukrainean leaders were irritated by the reluctant German politic style but lately they learned that EU and transatlantic policy is propelled by the German diplomatic backstage machinery. Putin has learned it also - his real enemy is Germany.

Germany is also federal. It consists of 16 states. And about 100 million europeans are native german speakers. How old are you, kid?

OK, boy, here are the ten countries that helped Ukraine and Ukrainians the most (% of GDP, Kiel Institute, graphs: 2nd + 8th) (2022-01-24 - 2023-10-31): * Poland - 3.65% (= 0.67% + 0.55% + 2.43%) * Estonia - 2.86% * Lithuania - 2.52% * Latvia - 2.50% * Czechia - 2.46% * Slovakia - 2.38% * Bulgaria - 2.30% * Norway - 1.76% * Denmark - 1.72% * Germany - 1.29%. The wealthiest contribute most because they can well afford it, and so they should, yet the Yanks dither and Germany refuses to send Taurus as that may upset poo tin. @@samuelsamenstrang6069

Unfortunately volume matters. Your per Capita argument is irrelevant. The US has provided the lions share of arms. No one else even close. Without them Ukraine has a very big problem. Germany would have to commit over 50% of its military budget. Your argument is ridiculous and childish

LOL you weirdo!

Measures by GDP it’s Latvia or Estonia I think.

Heroyam Slava!

Heroyam Slava!