Europe
News and information from Europe πͺπΊ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)
view the rest of the comments
There are some tank types that provide capabilities necessary or beneficial to non-aggressive military operations. Bridge laying tanks and recovery tanks ensure retreat options, engineering tanks enable forces to fortify positions, anti aircraft tanks should be self explanatory, mine removing tanks can not only clear enemy minefields but also your own after a war. Those are tanks that are necessary not only for offensive capabilities and many models of these types aren't even armed.
IFVs offer protected mobility to infantry, howitzer tanks offer mobility and protection to artillery (and according to Ukraine, artillery is still quite important in their defensive efforts), etc.
Cheap drones may be or become the prime anti tank weapons on modern battlefields, but warfare has always been and will always be an arms race. Sooner or later, someone will find a counter to drones, tanks will be upgraded (and probably future tanks could be crewless, too, and be another drone type), and the wheel keeps spinning.
Offensive and defensive isn't that simple.
Pretty much anything armoured on tank chassis is armoured and built on tank chassis to give it the capability to operate alongside tanks while under fire. This is very well an extremely offensive capability. Especially with things like bridge layers, demining vehicles, and anti-aircraft systems, because they allow tanks (and other mechanised units) to advance into places otherwise not reachable or untenable for them.
On the other hand, tanks can also be used defensively, and some are built especially with defensive use in mind. The entire Leopard family for instance was designed specifically for the purpose of defensive (delaying) warfare against overwhelming tank forces (The Warsaw Pact had way more tanks than NATO during the entire Cold War) using "shoot and scoot" tactics, which is a big reason for their focus on very high mobility. (for example, they can go backwards as fast as forwards, and sacrifice quite a bit of armour for speed)
Indeed. The tank has been declared dead for so often (pretty much every time someone invented a new anti-tank weapon) that it's very likely to be a false alarm once again. There are many things that can take out a tank, including another tank. (With current technology it's impossible to armour any practical vehicle in a way that gives complete immunity to a tank gun, common wisdom for tank on tank combat is whoever sees the opponent first and shoots first, wins the engagement, because one well placed shot will at least disable a tank) Pretty much any modern war is fought using a combined arms approach, tanks are just one part of this. Cheap mass produced Drones are a relatively new addition, and countermeasures are still evolving. Radio controlled drones can be jammed, and the wires of wire guided drones can be cut. In the end, especially the small drones typically used for anti-tank work can be shot down with something as simple as a shotgun, which is centuries old technology, fires cheap "dumb" ammunition, but has seen relatively limited use in warfare.
Yes, the local construction site also has a lot of βtanks" by that loose definition π
Your local construction site has armoured vehicles capable of doing their jobs while under enemy fire? Why?
A caterpillar with some armor plating is now a tank?
Is this just "a caterpillar with some armour plating"? Or this one? What about this bridge-layer currently operated by Ukraine (among others)?
Do you think a tank is only a tank when it has a big gun?
If I understood the nomenclature used in English discussions, for them a tank indeed is an armoured tracked vehicle with a big gun, i.e. a MBT. In opposite, in German a Panzer is (almost) any heavy armoured 'all terrain' vehicle, e.g. also the PzH 2000, bridge layers (Bieber, Leguan), engineering vehicles (Dachs), Recovery vehicles (BΓΌffel), IFVs (Marder, Puma) or the armoured multi purpose vehicles like Fuchs and Boxer.
I used the german Wikipedia page for types though.
Edit: the english Wiki page has a similar list, it's just on a different page (german Wiki has a types list in the "Panzer"-article while the types I pointed out are referred to as Specialist tank in the article "Tanks Classification").
Yes, because "tank" isn't defined by armor plating or tracks, but by operational capabilities the weapon category offers.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer#Typen
Maybe the German definition is derived differently, but notice that in all the English links to military sources a careful distinction is made between "armored vehicles" and "tanks".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_classification#Specialist_tank
The chassis of tank models have been repurposed for other tasks, yes. That doesn't make those armored vehicles tanks.
I mean, everyone but you classifies them as tanks, but ok.
Difference is the above mentioned are armored.
An army is not only tanks with big fat guns. All the mentioned assets lay the groundwork for any meaningful operation. What good are drones, if you cannot get a foothold and bring in forces to occupy landscapes?
None of these are tanks though. They are tracked vehicles with some armor plating (and even that isn't necessarily the case for artillery or mobile air-defense). A tank as it is commonly understood has specific operational capabilities and those are are mostly denied by anti-tank drones.
If you adhere to the strict definition of "A tank is an armoured fighting vehicle intended as a primary offensive weapon in front-line ground combat." you are right.
Still. While we see less tank on tank combat, we see a lot of tanks shooting at fixed positions. Same goes with IFVs as they unload troops or enable tactical advances. They are far from being obsolete but they're using smaller windows of opportunity. And sometime it takes a lot of anti tank drones before a tank had a mission kill. They're still valuable tactical assets.
Edit: found the image which explains the definition problem at reddit.