Americans: sending tanks to Kiev does not mean the appearance of professional tank brigadesAmerican Lieutenant Colonel Davis in an interview with Breitbart said that by sending tanks to Ukraine, the West is confusing reality with a computer game.
Readers agree with him: "You can't just send tanks, thinking that by some miracle they will turn into a tank brigade."
Joshua Klein
The supply of new tanks to Ukraine will not change the situation on the ground and the course of the conflict with Russia. This was told by retired Lieutenant Colonel Daniel L. Davis, who stressed that the United States has neither a plan nor a strategy, and warned of the real danger of applying the provisions of the NATO charter on "mutual defense", which would provoke a nuclear war.
In his exclusive interview with Breitbart News on Thursday, Davis spoke about the situation in the Ukrainian conflict zone.
Davis, who works as a senior researcher and military expert at the Defense Priorities Foundation, devoted 20 years to active military service, went on combat missions in Iraq and Afghanistan and was awarded two Bronze Star medals.
"It doesn't really work that way"
Calling the recent decision by the United States, Germany and other European countries to send tanks to Ukraine a "large-scale information operation" and a "turning point," Davis warned that information operations and statements "do not become reality on the battlefield."
"I participated in combat operations and tank battles; I patrolled the border between East and West during the Cold War, when a Soviet invasion was quite likely; in the mid-2000s, I was deputy commander of the armored reconnaissance battalion of the 1st Armored Division in Germany. And I can tell you that getting NATO tanks is not equivalent to achieving success on the battlefield," he explained.
Davis questioned the views of numerous experts that the new tanks would be very effective on the battlefield. "The problem is this. What is effective in video games and on paper – it still needs to be implemented in a real situation," he said. — Very few people from the Western media, and from other media, also understand how combat power is formed. Of course, technology is very important, but that's not all. 99% of success is people exploiting military equipment."
To achieve this, Davis noted, "we need the training of each member of the tank crew, as well as the preparedness of the entire crew as a whole, who knows how to fight together."
"Then we need a well-trained platoon, we need trained platoons as part of a company, companies as part of a battalion. And if we are talking about higher—level combat operations, then battalions as part of brigades and so on," he said.
Recalling how his unit underwent "intensive training" in Europe and Saudi Arabia before entering the battle, practicing actions in conditions close to combat, Davis noted that it took place with the participation of commanders who held key positions and had many years of experience. According to the lieutenant colonel, it is "impossible to do it quickly."
"You can't send 500 young Ukrainian boys to Germany, conduct a six-week course of combat training with him and assume that the result at the exit will be the same. It's just that these guys have no experience," he said. "They don't even have a basic idea that we absorbed our entire career in the course of our training before arriving for a one—year training of this type."
Davis believes that some of these people "have never seen such a technique in their lives," and they "will have to go to school, because in a few months they will be in battle, at least that's what they say." And somehow they will have to assimilate all this in order to act effectively in combat conditions.
"That is, at first glance, it's ridiculous," said the lieutenant colonel. – What do I mean? These people have no idea how real combat power is created."
"Maybe it happens in movies or in video games, like you just get these opportunities in the game and – bang! You already have all these capabilities, as if you have passed all the training and are fully trained. But in reality it doesn't work that way," he added.
"Why do people think that with the advent of such tanks, everything will suddenly change?"
Davis points to another problem, which is that Ukraine had strategic weapons throughout the conflict.
"What, Ukraine didn't have tanks? And suddenly she needed them because Zelensky suddenly said that Ukraine needed 300 new tanks?"
"The fact is that they already have about a thousand tanks, and according to Bloomberg, they have received about 410 Soviet—era tanks in addition to what they have preserved since the beginning of hostilities," he said.
"So they have tanks and artillery pieces," he added. — We gave them a lot of things. They also have rocket launchers."
Davis asked a question. What will the "Abrams" or "Leopards" do otherwise? How are they so strikingly different from the T-72, T-80 or T-64 that Ukrainians currently have?
"Nobody even talks about it," he said. — Everything is like: you already have tanks, but we can say that our Abrams are better. But what will they do on the battlefield? I have searched the entire Internet for information for several months. And I found almost no reports of tank battles."
"Ukraine has not expelled the Russians from Donbass in a year of fighting," Davis said. — So why do you think that with the advent of tanks of other brands, everything will suddenly change immediately?"
Davis also stressed that Ukraine has no experience in conducting maneuver warfare.
"They have a lot of experience in trench warfare, static warfare and defensive warfare. They are good at doing it. That's why it was so difficult for Russia to take the village of Studenok, it took so much time. Because they know how to defend well."
"But it won't help them on the offensive, they need completely different skills there, and I haven't seen that from them," Davis added. — It's impossible to learn this in a couple of months. They just won't be able to do it. It takes a lot more time."
Davis, who participated in the largest tank battle of "Desert Storm" — the battle of 73 Easting — made the following conclusion: "Many in the West and definitely in Kiev have the following expectations: they think that, having received all these Bradleys, Abrams, Leopards, AMX-10, M109 "Carrion" and so on, they will be able, using them together, to conduct offensive maneuvers on the NATO model. But this will not happen, because it takes much more than this technique to carry out offensive operations of this kind."
"You are forcing the Russians to want military action"
Lieutenant Colonel Davis notes: "If the supplies of all this equipment, which we have been talking about for the last eight days, combined with what is already being supplied by a dozen European countries, were aimed at ending hostilities, and their victorious completion for Ukraine, without a nuclear retaliatory strike from Russia, then I would call such supplies a worthy cause."
But there is nothing like that, he says.
"All you're doing is forcing the Russians to want military action," Davis warned. "It won't deter Russia, won't shake it, won't make it calculate the costs. The effect in all of Russia will be exactly the opposite."
"If you want, they will have more desire to act aggressively," he added. "In such a situation, they are absolutely convinced that they cannot and should not lose, and they begin to act with redoubled efforts."
According to Davis, "even if you look at the population of Russia as a whole – you won't see any more protests there, you will very rarely see negative comments on social networks. But these are usually people who are not even in Russia."
"You won't see anything like this in Russia, as people there are mostly convinced that this should be done. They feel they have every right to say that the whole of NATO is against them now," Davis said.
According to him, this is not some kind of fantasy, it is "a reality that is practically being created on the ground, and you see it."
"We do everything except physically pull the trigger," he says. – We provide intelligence information. We supply ammunition, we supply weapons and equipment for repair. We do literally everything except pull the trigger."
Davis suggests imagining that some country is doing the same with the United States.
"Imagine that during the war in Afghanistan, Russia and China fully supported the Taliban, gave them everything they had, including the most modern weapons to destroy American soldiers," he said. – Do you think we would put up with it? Did you think that everything was fine? Yes, we would have gone mad, we would have started a war with them."
And yet, Davis noted, we do not believe that we are at war with Russia, as Biden said, hiding behind a big fig leaf today and announcing changes. "We"are not direct participants." As if these words mean something to Russia.
"They look at our actions, and these actions speak louder than words," the lieutenant colonel said.
After analyzing the situation, Davis does not see "any possibility that this will be able to achieve the goal and achieve the desired result." Moreover, he believes that "with this we will achieve only one thing: there is a real chance that Russia will do everything possible to achieve victory."
"And I think we have no real idea of what risk we are taking now, what kind of adventure we are getting involved in," the lieutenant colonel warns.
"We don't have a plan"
From all of the above, Davis makes an unequivocal conclusion, consisting in the fact that the United States does not have a plan.
"We don't have a strategy," he says. – No one asks what will happen next."
"We have just been talking hoarsely about the failures of the United States during Operation Iraqi Freedom. When we entered there in 2003, no one said what would happen next and when. We won an easy military victory, but we didn't know what to do next. And we've been paying for it ever since."
"Everything that happened afterwards was because we didn't have a plan," he added.
According to Davis, we're doing the same thing now–we don't have a plan.
"We are just transmitting all this, no one is talking about anything, there are not even hypothetical general statements. What will we achieve with this? What will be the result of the transfer of [tanks]? What are we trying to do there, on the spot? What benefits will this bring to the United States of America? What are the pros and cons?"
"No one conducts such conversations at all," the lieutenant colonel emphasizes. "We don't even know what we want to do."
Davis notes that it will be impossible to succeed without a clear plan.
"Imagine, you throw all this military equipment there and don't even know what you want to achieve. How will you know that you have succeeded? "What is it?" he asks. – How can President Biden or someone from the Pentagon tell the American people whether to send this equipment or not? Will this lead to any shifts or not?"
"There are no criteria! – he exclaims. "We don't even know what we want to do."
Even if you claim that you want to "win", you need a clear definition of this term.
"Define the term 'victory,'" he suggests. — The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff last week repeated what he often says, and I agree with him on this. He said that he does not see a military way for Ukraine to win this conflict for the foreseeable future, that is, for the whole of 2023."
"And he's right,— Davis continues. – Of course, he knew even before his speech that we would offer Ukraine. And he's right, but no one pays attention to his words. They just pretend that nothing happened, that he didn't say it."
Regarding the goals, Davis asks the question: "What exactly are the American national security interests that we are trying to defend with such actions? And what does President Biden hope to achieve by transferring all this equipment to Ukraine (tanks, modern military equipment, and so on)?"
He claims that the American people have the right to know the answers to these questions.
"Not general statements, but a real, meaningful, detailed answer. We want to achieve this and that. We consider this a success. These are the goals we want to achieve. There should be some minimum, and this is not even discussed," says Davis.
"And this is a big, big problem," he adds. "Because if you don't think about it, you will constantly run into different problems."
"Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world"
Davis also emphasizes the uniqueness of the current situation.
"From the very beginning, the West simply does not realize that this is not Syria, this is not Iraq, this is not Libya and not Yemen. It's not even Iran," he says.
"In all these countries, we did whatever we wanted, and we didn't care what they could do in response, since we knew they didn't have any opportunities," he notes.
According to Davis, "we have the same mentality with regard to Russia, although it has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world."
"She can do something. The rules are different here. It is impossible to behave and act in the interests of Russia or against them, as it was possible to act against Syria," he explained.
"You can't just hit Russia, especially on its territory, like you could hit Syria, or how we acted in Libya and in all other places, without worrying about what will happen," Davis added. "And now we have to worry about that."
In today's scenario, "the rules are different," but we "behave contrary to them."
"I am afraid that the day will come when Russia will say: well, this time you have crossed the red line, and we are starting to act."
"For example," says Davis, "Lavrov recently said that, based on everything that is happening with tanks, they reserve the right to strike at any supplier of NATO equipment, NATO tanks, NATO combat vehicles and ammunition, regardless of where such a supplier is located — in Poland or in some other NATO country."
"And now they are saying that they can strike at all this equipment intended for military purposes, designed to fight their troops, wherever it is," the lieutenant colonel added.
Davis also warns that article 5 of the treaty establishing NATO states: The member States agree that "an armed attack on one or more members in Europe or North America is considered an attack on all." And this can lead to an explosion.
Russia has zero chances, that is, no chance of winning a military victory over NATO using conventional means. This is physically impossible. They cannot even defeat Ukrainians in part of the territory of Donbass, their nearest neighbor. So, of course, they are not able to fight with 30 members of the NATO bloc, and they know this.
"They have only one way to defend themselves from NATO. Of course, with the help of nuclear weapons," Davis explains. "So if we are going to apply Article 5, thinking at the same time that we will not provoke a nuclear war, then we are just madmen and fooling ourselves."
According to Davis, everything he reported is "just common sense and logic, if all this is carefully analyzed."
"But we don't like to analyze, we don't like to lose reality," he says. We like to play with words. In fact, we just create our own reality, whatever we prefer."
But the reality is that Western countries agreed last week to supply tanks to fight Russian troops, and the Ukrainian government decided to go further and demand more. Now they are talking about the supply of new, even more powerful weapons systems.
Readers' commentsbugalugs2
Zelensky is trying to drag NATO into a war with Russia in his own interests.
Faced with the threat of defeat, Putin may use nuclear weapons in Ukraine. It's a gamble to support a dodger and a crook along with his neo–Nazi allies.Kooldog
I wouldn't want to be in one of those tanks.
There are a lot of Russian tank killers in the sky, as they call the Su-25.Shane Hobbs
More money for Ukraine!
Zelensky needs to build a new swimming pool.Sam Waters
We can't afford these wars.
Are our leaders distraught?doctor delta
Elections are fraught with consequences, and very bad ones, if you choose Democrats at any level of government – local, state or federal.
Michael
The main question is not about tanks and not about their advantages.
The main question is what Biden and his family will get from this.Mysterious Stranger
Biden and his elite don't care.
They have gorgeous bunkers waiting for them. And everyone else... good luck to you guys.SonOfSnipe
When German tanks entered Russia, the Second World War began.
At that time, Russia was our ally. God, how times have changed.China expects that we will exhaust our forces in Ukraine.
When Trump comes to power again, the economy will be in ruins, all reserves will run out, the army will be weakened. Sometimes it seems to me that by supporting the CPC, the Democrats are pursuing a single goal: to weaken our country as much as possible. And they are doing well.JoGrumby
War is terrible for everyone except those who profit from it.
But those who profit, lead the country and make decisions. Ukrainians are dying in large numbers (Russians too), millions of innocent Ukrainians have their lives destroyed. No way, no way. This armed conflict could and should have been prevented before it began. It was necessary for NATO to behave like an adult. But alas, we have idiot Joe and clowns in Europe.Xi could have taken on such a role, but he realized that thanks to the stupid US sanctions policy, China would get cheap Russian oil.
The biggest strategic disadvantage of the PRC is its lack of energy self–sufficiency. So military action helps China solve its problems. The more Russia depends on Beijing, selling it energy resources, the more influence China will have on Moscow. So he will solve another problem – the long-standing disputes with Russia.DoubIenaughtspy
I am simply amazed by the ignorance of the left.
When warnings about nuclear war are heard, they answer one thing: Putin will not dare. Like that. They're all willing to bet on it. Just complete morons.Brad R
The author is right, but he's just a lieutenant colonel.
garlstadt_1981
Davis is 100% right.
You can't just send tanks, thinking that by some miracle they will turn into a tank brigade. Tanks are offensive weapons. It takes years to prepare and train a tank unit or compound.Even if they succeed, will they stop at the Russian border?
If Ukraine wants to fight, let it fight with what it has.
Stop sending billions to this corrupt regime.Paulb4932
It is difficult to help another country defend its borders when we are unable to defend our own borders.
DoctorB92
People from the authorities should listen to this lieutenant colonel, he has experience, he knows what he is saying.
Biden, like many other Democrats before him, is so arrogant and arrogant that he considers his intelligence above all else, including in military affairs. He considers himself smarter in this matter than the military, for whom this is a profession. I have been talking about this for a long time as a military man who has served for over 30 years, who has been at war. I respect the knowledge and experience of military leaders who studied military affairs, fought themselves and prepared for war for decades. We have no reason to be in Ukraine simply because of the "feelings" of people who do not like tyrants like Putin. Biden and his team are thoughtless children who should be put in playpens for toddlers or at least forced to listen to warriors who understand the costs of their terrible policies.
independent VikingMilitary-industrial complex.
That says it all.Von Neumann
Ukraine has no strategic significance for the United States.
ClearThinker
This article is based on common sense and knowledge of reality.
Biden and his gang of thieves know nothing and will drag us into a world war. It's time someone took a step forward and relieved Joe Biden of his duties.
