Three Mysterious Reason Of The Leopard 2 Being Withdrawn From Ukraine's Frontlines!

In the heart of the Ukrainian conflict, a gripping saga unfolds as the formidable Leopard 2 tanks mysteriously retreat from the frontlines, leaving behind a veil of intrigue and speculation. Rumors abound, and whispers of clandestine motives hang in the air. What could have compelled the withdrawal of these Western-engineered beasts of war?
In a world shrouded in uncertainty, we embark on a journey to solve the puzzle, delving into the three mysterious reasons that lie at the heart of the Leopard 2's absence from the Ukrainian battleground. Stay tuned!
Before delving into the reasons, let’s us call back what happens in the conflict recently…
On July 3, Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu made an announcement, claiming the destruction of 16 German-made Leopard tanks provided to Ukraine by Poland and Portugal. These tanks were allegedly targeted and destroyed during unsuccessful Ukrainian attacks in the southern direction of Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia. Disturbing footage circulated on Telegram, revealing a precise strike by a Russian Lancet UAV on a German Leopard tank, resulting in its destruction and billowing smoke.
In response to the escalating situation, Ukraine has made the decision to withdraw its Leopard 2 tank fleet from the frontline of battle. This decision amidst Ukraine's intense conflict left many puzzled “What’s the real reasons behind its withdrawal? Is this just a tactical maneuver by Ukraine to deceive Russia? Allowing Russia to revel in its success and then surprising the world with a counterattack?” only time could unfold this mystery…
Subscribe Now :
/ @military-tv

[@primoseventynine1904]

The truth is that this tank was not a game changer.

[@oldhollywoodbriar]

It was but for russia😂

[@krasslofw.4393]

But Abrams will be one. Definitely. Surely. Absolutely. Almost everyone could fix gas turbines in Ukraine.

[@bagamut]

game changer is an burning Leopard 2

[@gustavoadolfovasquezperdom1208]

​@@krasslofw.4393😂😂😂😂😂 👍🏼

[@chalaz3487]

Léopard tank was just média fashion. Engage so few tanks was a joke, basicly useless... from the.begining we knew it from the start The new game changer is now F16 fighter😂. Every bullshit admited to keep this war running against the cruel reality. Ukraine as suffered astronomics losses both on véhicules and men 90% of armored véhicules destroyed on the battle field had never seen a sigle Russian soldiier....by lancet drone or artllery

[@alexanderbelov6892]

Leopard 2 tanks were mysteriously destroyed with mines, anti-tank missile launchers and helicopter based guided anti-tank missiles. What is the mystery about it?

[@Schupfnudel111]

And which Tank should have survived this?😂

[@puakagrinder2766]

​@@Schupfnudel111some said abrams and challenger tanks can be the next game changer

[@hugo-di6xm]

​@@puakagrinder2766They were trollinng.

[@StrigoiVampire]

It is a mystery to the media because they are not an expert in military weaponry. lol

[@lukasmanu]

And Lancet also.

[@EdgarSanchez-rl9zh]

reazon: Russian Tank: Light is broken, go to the store and buy a bulb, cost 1 dollar. Leopard Tank: Light is broken, Need to replace the LED module, wait 5 months and cost is $10,000Dlls.

[@winstonsmith478]

Because their destruction shows that tanks, even advanced western ones, are sitting ducks on a modern battlefield and that's bad for the tank selling business?

[@kevinallies1014]

Not necessarily but the West has failed to adapt. The Russians have already adapted in many ways one of which was the use of so called cope cages very early on which helps prevent overhead attack by small FPV drones. The Russians have also put Explosive Reactive Armor on the top of the turret. I would not be surprised to see the Russians introduce some sort of Active Protection System that works against top attacks.

[@TheCitroenman1]

👍👍👍

[@Chaldon-hl6yk]

All must buy Abrams

[@richardwilliams1986]

As battleships were weapons of WW1, tanks and aircraft carriers weapons of WW2, drones, anti tank and anti ship missiles are weapons of today.

[@brianmurray1395]

The tank has its roll as a moving gun platform and that's about it. We will see Abrams and Challengers be blown to bits and burnt as well. Its the rule of physics and explosives.

[@user-jd4ro5ed5l]

The Russians made 250,000 lancets, and they said they were going to produce 1 million this year. The Leo and M1 tanks are no longer useful. Big, heavy, old for no reason.

[@bakker071]

The Donbass is also a hell for tank warfare, forest, hedges, undulations, swamps, rivers. It’s all well reported from ww2 battles

[@angryralphs2516]

​@bakker071 That is why Ukraine only has summer window. The 3 season is hard for them. West like Hitler and Napoleon underestimate seasons. They thought they're still in Middle-East which is dry all season.

[@herbtapp3031]

Yeah, The Chinese point of view you guys can't even capture Taiwan and the last major battle for the PLA was Vietnam and they chased you guys out in two weeks.

[@alexanderbelov6892]

I may believe in 2500 lancets. This is not main weapon against Leopard 2.

[@bakker071]

@@herbtapp3031 why would China capture Taiwan?

[@tommurphy7611]

Alligators eating leopards for a breakfast 🤣

[@Fflintiii]

This is going to be the same for the Abrams and the challanger!!

[@LostSouLVL]

Any nato nazi tanks will burn good and bright.

[@dessmith7658]

Well that's the challenge, bring it on

[@TsarOfRuss]

and then the US will say the operators just werent well trained, thats why the tanks lost to Russian scrap metals

[@theashpilez]

Don"t forget Gods Chariot. What a name. Who came up with this anyway ?

[@dessmith7658]

@@theashpilez Bobby Chariot probably

[@ericdoran24]

I see that the British Challenger 2 are been kept well back from the front lines .

[@attilamarics3374]

There is a reason why they were never destroyed. XDXD

[@Flyinghigh888]

Those Challengers have to return to British if the war ended. That's why they were not deployed.

[@user-xg4lw1zo6y]

Им нужно было остаться в Британии, потому что, мы и до них доберемся!

[@john4570000]

The Abrams tanks are farther back than that. Bet they'll have a bounty on them if they ever make it to the battlefield.

[@fjubdziu]

Challenger 2's will soon shipped back to England

[@thomaslanders2073]

It's no mystery. Tanks are useless without air support 😂

[@faqirmohammadabdullah2906]

actually much more useless without dismounted infantry support

[@user-zs9fc5my1c]

Танки используются для точечных ударов, 3-5 выстрелов и отход, у этой войны специфика

[@hellmarch3043]

With air support Horse Archers can do same thing. Tanks are obsolote and metal coffins. Nothing less nothing more

[@tiagodagostini]

Not useless... just they cannot ever dominate the field. They still can support infantry.

[@hellmarch3043]

@@tiagodagostini DUDEEE. 200 dolar alibaba drones fckng tanks from behind. Stop,just stop praising tanks. people die for nothing.

[@madyak222]

Brian Beletic from New Atlas was warning that no NATO tanks would be game changers in Ukraine Many months before they came on to the front lines. A video of a Russian T-90 M taking out 2 leopards and 7 US IFV's in a matter of a minute might also have something to do with the decision to withdraw the Leopards.

[@elgigachad]

It was a lonely T-80

[@user-qe8ke5ms9l]

Когда на Майдане скакали с кастрюлями на голове , Россия проводила танковый биатлон!

[@maddog8004]

link pls

[@lelandtsnyder9684]

​@@maddog8004Link is censored by western corpo-gov, but it's real. That's why you can't see it.

[@vyacheslavmolotov9786]

It was a red eye T80. I saw the video on telegram

[@actonman7291]

The hype for these tanks was embarrasing.

[@dessmith7658]

They're so twentieth century

[@pedromatos5918]

You clearly don t know what you re talking about !!! Stay strong Ukraine

[@actonman7291]

@@pedromatos5918 you clearly dont have a clue about what you saying stay emotional with Ukraine is ok.

[@dessmith7658]

Yes, best wishes Ukraine, but under your present administration Your prospects don't look good I'm afraid

[@davidsutherland4224]

That is all the NATO/US has for Ukraine is hype....."Stay strong Ukraine" is laughable and sad at the same time. The poor bastard in Ukranian uniforms, either native or Polish or mercenary, are as duped and cheated as all these American fools believing the hype. The idiot liberal half of America thinks this another "racial" or "social justice" campaign where they and the Democrats are all saints come to the rescue of the poor oppressed Ukrianians. They are clueless of history, WW2, Nazi, Nuland, and the Maidan revolution....it is a cruel joke on the people of Ukraine and Europe. They all swallow the "hype".

[@northbuster290]

A rpg rocket glued to a 1000 dollars drone can wipe out a leopard.

[@davidsutherland4224]

You could give a US or Ukrainian politician that $1000 and they would sabotage the tank at the factory

[@thatonedude2228]

Any tank has that issue

[@rondondon7088]

😂

[@Tommy-zs6ro]

This is true

[@jamesmorrison4976]

Bullshit a Russian tank maybe because they lost already 2300 tanks already. An ATGM can destroy a Leopard but RPGs might damage but not destroy a tank fully so nice try.

[@StarFyodperor]

No one seems to be able to comprehend the sheer mass production of good enough weapons and their combined firepower as opposed to overpriced undertested glass cannons...

[@rstefan1821]

indeed as Stalin said the quantity has its own quality

[@ihl0700677525]

The expensive glass canons were designed for precision strike, while the cheap mass produced ones were designed for war of attrition. Both sides, today and in WW2, use this mixed approach. For example Nazi Germany continue producing Panzer IV and Bf-109 pretty much till the end of the war, alongside newer Panzer V/VI (Tiger and Panther) and FW-190, Me-262, etc. Ofc the Axis powers were unable to compete against the Allies in term of production capacity. But it doesn't mean they neglect the production of "cheap & good enough" equipment. Nobody criticize Stalin for wasting resources in developing and producing expensive IS-2, or questioning Roosevelt/Truman for the efficacy of the Manhattan project (within the scope of WW2). Manhattan project, an expensive undertaking that in the end only produced several bombs, which didn't really alter the war in any significant way (i.e. firebombing and carpet bombing would yield similar result).

[@daydays12]

@@rstefan1821 Stalin said many interesting things such as "one death is a tragedy one million is a statistic". Lovely feller Stalin. He also said "Everyone imposes his own system as far as his army can reach" .... Putin has just about reached his limit in that case!!!

[@petermehedov6996]

@@daydays12 There's no proof that Stalin ever said this, this quote is from 1932 essay on French humor by the German journalist, satirist, and pacifist Kurt Tucholsky. Much like Rousseau did with his "great princess," Tucholsky quotes a fictional diplomat from the French Ministry of Foreign affairs, speaking on the horrors of war. "The war?" says Tucholsky's diplomat, "I cannot find it to be so bad! The death of one man: this is a catastrophe. Hundreds of thousands of deaths: that is a statistic!"

[@daydays12]

@@petermehedov6996 Thank you very much for that.. You obviously know a lot more than I do. Are you a historian? I will search for Mr Tucholsky especially since he was writing about French humour. Greetings from a Britisher in France.

[@krankmil]

T series tanks are low profiled, faster, lighter, cheaper but have the same devastating fire power.. why not!!

[@willmorrow375]

You forgot- easy to abandon on the field and they make great fireworks idiot. Tanks lost (2203, of which destroyed: 1414, damaged: 124, abandoned: 118, captured: 547)

[@davidguy9197]

and apparently they are just as strong as those of the West, if the Ukrainians dress the leopards with "tiles" of T72, I don't think it's to increase the grip on the ground

[@thatonedude2228]

They aren’t faster though? And firepower isn’t the same. The Russians have to use old worse shells cus of the auto loader

[@mdashiquzzaman4358]

These reasons except repair issues applied to all tanks, better to keep these Leopards for exhibitions only.

[@bikechainmic]

ruzzia ought to send an example of each of theires to a museum too!

[@alexandarvoncarsteinzarovi3723]

troll

[@slavors63]

I'm sorry, there are no highways for European geitanks in Ukrain

[@TsarOfRuss]

These are the same people laughing at Russian tanks, calling it scrap metal ... Ukrainian soldiers themselves said old soviet tanks are better than this crap

[@attilamarics3374]

@@TsarOfRuss I remember they said 1 western tank can take out 10-20 Russian. Well...

[@eastsidefilmer]

The reason is NATO cannot handle the photos and videos of the graveyard of NATO tanks .

[@bui3415]

Graveyard? A bit of a hyperbole, no? Russia had lost nearly 500 tanks before the majority of NATO tanks even joined the war.

[@jackgulit943]

​@@bui3415cope

[@puranapuu4252]

@@bui3415game changing tanks turn out to be overpriced crap only good at defenceless Afghan army, not against a real army 😝

[@puakagrinder2766]

​@@bui3415those russiam tanks are not game changers 😆

[@johnweak6788]

​@@puakagrinder2766yeah, they are crap

[@ler3968]

Wow the high-quality German tanks of WW2 had the same flaws in maintenance and complexity issues that the Russians and Allies took advantage of over time.

[@johnskrelnik]

nazis didnt learn the lesson

[@pedromatos5918]

I don t think you know what you re talking about....

[@dicecorporation]

The US literally stole their doctrine from the germans after ww2. Imagine using the tactics and strategies of a side that was miserably defeated lol

[@ler3968]

@@pedromatos5918--care to expand on your hypothesis Einstein?

[@MultiYlin]

Leopard is cheap to run in the peace time but when it comes to war or high-intensity (multiple of 100K deployed) They are too expensive even to lose a couple

[@TheQuarterrat]

"If you keep breaking your toys, you won't get any new ones." I think it's to save face both for Ukraine and the West supplying the equipment. Ukraine has seen such heavy losses with these western vehicles, it just looks bad for them. Begging for material support and then squandering it in poorly planned operations. Also, it doesn't look good for those who build and pay for the vehicles. Leopard tank sales will be down for Germany after this is all over

[@orionobolon4380]

they attacked without any air support and air air support they would have would get shot down. douglas macgregor has a lot of good info on the battle tatcits they used

[@user.Green.elowston]

🤡 не біда що там міні поля , артилерії більше? А після великих втрат рф їх техніка це повний 0 , і те що показують це якраз міні поля і це війна не навчання

[@slavors63]

@@orionobolon4380 The only thing missing is the anti-advertising of the F16, the rest of Ukraine's weapons have already been shat on ?

[@vandasaragosa]

Yeah that's what I was thinking

[@slavors63]

@@user.Green.elowston The untranslatable, non-existent language of a country that fancies itself a superior race...?

[@pychoupchhoeuy2008]

This tank was good because never met the the real war.

[@Wiznuke]

its bad for business and losing trade secrets if these are captured...

[@davidsutherland4224]

don't worry, the trade secrets were sold to China, Russia, and Iran years ago by the Progressive politicians

[@tylerdurden3722]

Those were older models. But, I'm sure some of them were hauled back, since Russia's reward system is for bringing back western equipment to be studied.

[@andrewc9526]

The Russians are very clever to instill fear into these tank Crews the minute they step inside of these tanks before they even get to the battlefield. They scare the fight out of them before they even engage into it.

[@MIchaelSybi]

Keep kissing your tsar

[@steveagola9317]

​@@MIchaelSybiI'm glad u agree😂

[@daydays12]

How many tanks has Russia lost in this war? Has fear been instilled into their tank crews?

[@steveagola9317]

@@daydays12 well, they have an endless supply unlike Ukraine which started with 300 western and some Soviet tanks

[@hooywamd00pe95]

Yup, thats why Russia lost thousands of their tanks already and are pulling out tanks even from the 50s to replace the losses.

[@slavors63]

Russians say: For every tricky nut there is a threaded bolt.

[@jtwilliams8895]

They’re probably hiding in the rear with the challenger 2s. It’s certainly not a good look to be hiding from Russian shovels

[@RubbittTheBruise]

Is it because it is easier to recover their scrap metal BEFORE their running gear is destroyed?

[@MolnarG007]

I'm pretty sure the rain and mud won't affect these tanks mobility... (Europe is having huge rainstorms at the moment, and this will be more frequent as Autumn will come) M1 Abrams: 71 short tons Challenger 2: 71 short tons Leopard 2A6: 62.3 short tons T-72B3M: 49.6 short tons T-90M: 49.5 short tons similar sized, Russian tanks have 580mm tracks, the Western tanks have 635mm (25 inch) tracks. approx. ~27% better weight/track size ratio. There is a good reason Russians knowing these conditions use such size. Just saw a NATO exercise somewhere north, cold, yet those heavy brutes sank half a meter into the mud, and they tried to tow each other for 15-20 minutes... They have huge horsepower, but the issue is traction.

[@bonaanayaga]

Correct. The size and weight makes no sense for a muddy area. They think they are in the desert

[@rstefan1821]

correct and I add that 50-60tonnes is the vibration and weigh lifticapacity for the majority of the "small to medium short "bridges in the national rods and country side road networks

[@bui3415]

@@bonaanayaga Wouldn't it be built for that in the first place?

[@firip255]

Yes is a huge Problem for leopard 2. this and russian use anti Tank mines Quadratmeter for Quadratmeter. Is here no solution found - The Leopard can Doing nothing. 2. Problem is ukraine Aircraft Situation

[@ToxicPlayer1298]

t72 reverse speed -4kmh, enough said.

[@bobpowrie5970]

All the same threats ALL tanks face in modern battlefield...

[@kevinallies1014]

But the vulnerabilities are not the same. The Western tanks are simply vulnerable to things that the Russian tanks aren’t. Bustle ammunition storage means that the Lancet can hit the main gun rounds because they are in the turret protected by a thin sheet of aluminum. Bustle storage and blowout panels were designed to save the crew from the secondary explosion after an ATGM or HEAT round hit. But that same design makes it vulnerable to top attack. Also because NATO has almost no current tank production the Russians can target parts of the tank like the main gun. They can crash an Mavik FPV drone into the gun with a tiny charge and that tank is no longer a tank it is a very large four passenger vehicle. The Leopard has to at least go back to Poland to get a main gun installed and chances are the Germans don’t actually have any. If they are using their own tanks to repair the Ukrainian tanks changing a gun is simply not a viable solution.

[@thatonedude2228]

Yea but honestly I’d rather sit in an inoperable tank than be removed from existence by my own ammo

[@journeyintococo6996]

I wonder if the Challenger 2's & Abrams burn as well. Imagine being a Leopard 2 or Bradley crew member going to the frontline, and you have to pass through Leopard 2/Bradley graveyards, of which there are many! This is why the U.K. won't allow the Challenger 2 on frontline duty. They wouldn't last long either. I'm really impressed 1 Russian tank took out a column of 8 Ukrainian vehicles, including 2 tanks. I bet that crew got a bit extra in their pay packet that month!

[@belizeshuttle]

yes without combined armoured / artillery / air power every tank will die ...there is no question about that but if you keep it out of the field they can not be taken and or destroyed / that would be bad publicity and US and Uk people would wonder about the sence of this war

[@davidguy9197]

the western tanks in Ukraine, it's like the lion of the hunter on safari...(between us, does the lion have a chance?) but it's a trophy

[@bikechainmic]

No they wont burn as well. They are not ruzzian BBQs and have far better armour.

[@AndrewTakkep]

The crew of the tank was presented to the highest award of the Russian Federation - the Star of the Hero of Russia.

[@danwelterweight4137]

​@@bikechainmicAbram Armor is no better than the Leopard. Besides it has a jet fuel engine that is a gas guzzler and it's repair requirements are even worse than the Leopard. It's engine sucks a lot of dust. Every time it moves something breaks in that tank. For every hour of operation is an hour or more of repair. Challenger is too heavy, it will do horrible in the rain and muddy seasons. It will just sink and get stuck in the mud. No matter what armor it has it will be no match for the Lancet 3 , the Kornet and Russian artillery.

[@20luzer52]

So I guess ICC will now want to arrest Putin for making leopards extinct. 😂

[@zamraaj0652]

It is the West which is to blame for what happened to Leopard-2. The Western media portrayed Leopard 2 as an unstoppable juggernaut. In reality, it is just a tank which shoots quick, good and accurate but can be damaged and destroyed by the enemy powerful anti tank weapons. The Ukis and the West are under psychological shock not because the tank losses but the shattering of the aura of invincibility woven around Leapard 2. I am sure very soon this tank will be back on the front line.

[@user-hb2yr5id2f]

Будешь тут гавкать, сам окажешься на передовой.

[@fjubdziu]

of course dead and never shown again

[@schrimpf]

I am sure this tank will be seen in various museums round the globe soon…

[@rstefan1821]

indeed if there enough spare parts and repair personal n in the repair bases back in Poland... not to mention that 1000km transport take time is risky and maybe maybe the Russian army is happily waiting for the convoys to return

[@etops8086]

This is a good lesson in never smoking your own crack.

[@peterdelede3033]

They were send as the miracle tanks and that they were so good that the russian tanks were no threat to them, but without support from the air or in great numbers they are just tanks which can be destroyed.

[@ahmedaraf8188]

even the Su-57 sounds good on paper

[@itinensanzen]

​@@ahmedaraf8188Which paper? From your woke head? 😂😂😂

[@dessmith7658]

They're bomb magnets

[@yeahnope620]

Yeah they were so good that they never even made it to the frontlines 🤣🤣🤣 Feel free to send your primitive orc tech again some time.

[@bagamut]

same BS was with all other NATO "wonderweapons" before

[@bartholomewshirima7060]

What did you expect mr Leopard tank?..🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Chaldon-hl6yk]

Leopold

[@omwoyojames6592]

The Leopard seemingly may have lost her claws😂

[@user-nd2cg1yq2w]

И зубы😂😂

[@kemoibrown6478]

😂😂😂

[@jamesmorrison4976]

@@user-nd2cg1yq2w where is the famous towed T-14 and Terminator 😂 and wait 2500+ destroyed Russian tanks already officially destroyed. Russian crews burn like torches ;) or get Turret tossed into space 😂

[@user-nd2cg1yq2w]

​@@jamesmorrison4976Считал уничтоженных российских танков вместе с украинскими танками? Посчитай сколько "Бредли" и "Хаммеров" сгорело и сгорит ещё больше. И будет тебе уже не смешно.😂

[@jamesmorrison4976]

@@user-nd2cg1yq2w I am not the Kremlin which lies constantly and forgot what is truth anymore. Check Oryx they have most clear confirmed statistics about the Ruskie losses but add up 40% more for undocumented losses. Biggest sign you loser: 9th of May Russia’s loser’s parade One lonely T-34 😂 was parading 😂 what a disgrace and no T-14 Armada who was towed 😂 Putin is best president he demilitarized Russia not Ukraine 🤣

[@ranar1036]

Game Changer going into hiding. That's a lot of confidence in these schlock!

[@MartinoMartin]

Ukraine thought the leopard tanks were going to be a war hero, Russia have weapons that counter any weapons.

[@johnweak6788]

Mines and artillery😂ahah

[@klavagatas]

Western commentators: “it’s not fair! They’re not supposed to fight back!”

[@hdcandela5697]

Leopard breaks down, but even more Leopard goes boom.

[@firip255]

Thats Not True. Completly destroyed are Not many Leopards.

[@gmailbanditg6275]

Putin said that the European and US made tanks would burn just as easily as the others on the battlefield.

[@johnweak6788]

Put in put out

[@SS08947]

The Challenger 2 tanks from UK have mysteriously NEVER appeared on the battlefield.

[@harrisn3693]

Nor have the mighty Yank M1A1 Abrams

[@andretorben9995]

Two have been destroyed already. Only 12 left and UK says they're not getting any more. LOL

[@viviboeckx5478]

. Where is the t14 armata yunk???

[@eobardthaw]

That's why American tanks are apprehensive from their letdown attribute. Nevertheless, they could only prevail in GTA games ,not for big wage of offensive

[@scrubvision5652]

m1a1 is too heavy and maintaince is a nightmare which ukraine wont be able to handle

[@bui3415]

@@scrubvision5652 Logistics is a big issue if the countries aren't fully involved.

[@puranapuu4252]

Just like my glc63 cough and farts when it breathes bit of dust with constant electrical faults. Looks great on paper but no match against my 9 year old land cruiser with 143k on the clock.

[@Reflect02]

​@@scrubvision565260 tone tank can't take a hit from RPG-7, I can take it as no no

[@harrisn3693]

@@scrubvision5652 aka another yank crap

[@ilarionastreos6823]

In Greek we have a saying. “Each man believes that his dck is the biggest until he he sees a bigger one”. The same happened with nato equipment. Up to now they have never used it against another modern army. They woke up suddenly in cold sweat

[@stanleywong58]

The Leopards and the AMX 10s were at least in the fight. The vaunted mighty British Challengers didn't dare show up for the challenge !!

[@andretorben9995]

AMX10's were an embarrassing piece of garbage, lightweight armour. They were moving coffins.

[@Patendyck76]

1. It can't cope too well with the mines, 2. It's allergic to being blown up, 3.. It wants to go home.

[@andretorben9995]

I literally laughed. Very good !!!!!

[@nomaam-br549]

"Stalked by an adversary with perverse incentives". That's just too phucking precious.

[@mohammadkarimzai8057]

#1 is from ukrainian side, # 2 western war equipments are not for battle against Russian army because they have variety tactics and strategical defense system and equipments. # 3 western war equipments are against small groups of terrorist or small countries with no war technology, they are not battle tanks or equipment. # 4 Required Constance maintaining or they are fragiles equipments.

[@kubie6798]

#2 basiclly everything from western military is based on a battle against russia #3 bro you could be the western tank developer, you are braindead like them thats a match.

[@gilbertcastro6715]

it's a great tank for 1970-1980's

[@cjsteadman6217]

The technological complexity you ascribe to the leopard II, is true of ALL western made tanks. That's why the export version of the M1 Abrams is a stripped down, simplified version, of what the US Army uses.

[@Hathur]

Yep. I kept shaking my head everytime people got excited about the abrams being sent out... everyone failed to realize they were were sending the export models (which the US sells to many countries, including Egypt, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Australia, Poland and Iraq). It is significantly inferior to the US Army domestic model and most noteably lacks the depleted uranium armor available only in the domestic model.

[@alexanderbelov6892]

​@@HathurDepleted uranium armor can be penetrated like any other armor. It increases "effective" armor thickness without much added geometry armor thickness. But nothing special for 1400mm capable anti-tank missiles available now.

[@christianeng7144]

The question is how do they want to keep running the turbine engine from the Abrams tanks because there maintenance is just harder

[@yacir]

I don't think so, they may send the best version, but downplay it, so if it's beaten, the manufacturer reputation doesn't take a hit, cuz sure Rheinmetall won't be selling much more of those leop II anytime soon, clearly they failed to even detect Alligator helicopter shooting them down from 14 km away.

[@Hathur]

@@alexanderbelov6892 Of course, but DU armor has proven already in Iraq (both wars) to be highly resistant to lower and mid tier anti-tank weapons, able to outright shrug those blows off without preventing the Abrams from fighting on (whereas some hits on lesser armor will prevent death of the crew, but still cripple the tank). The DU won't save it from the biggest tank busters, but it will survive most lesser attempts by infantry or armored vehicles that hit it. The loss of it as an armor option is still significant as it will be noteably more vulnerable to infantry anti-tank weapons without it.

[@Ohnothisisbad]

It's not so much that the leopards break down more as thr video implies. It's because Ukraine doesnt have the ability to repair the tanks themselves as they lack engineers and parts for these systems... and the logistics of sending them back to Poland is untenable.

[@BRANFED]

nothing perverse about those incentives.. These incentives seem to be very effective at motivating Russian troops and demoralizing Ukrainian forces.. sounds like a win-win too me

[@johnulmer6715]

Absolutely, in a war where the west openly states they want to weaken or cripple even destroy Russia, I'd say anything is fair play. A soldier's job is to destroy the enemy and an incentive to destroy the supposed "most dangerous tanks" is only smart!

[@dannynone2784]

.The irony of these former commies using a very capitalistic reward system for taking out western tanks is rich in irony

[@Billy-Whizz]

Western tanks need to rapidly adapt defense against Russian Lancets / Drones. A BIG wake up call

[@miketurner3964]

I would suggest that in every war there’s an engineer who hangs their hook on a “Game changing” wonder weapon and the Generals lock in thinking they can save men and material. War was, and will be, a numbers game. The Russian Cold War tanks are serving the same purpose as the Sherman and T series variants used against the German tanks in WW2. As cheap as the crews, and easily repaired or replaced. The most concerning point however, is the vast majority of comments on this piece echo my observations to varying degrees, which then opens up difficult questions for NATO as to their reading of history and the use of armour and the cost(s) of prosecuting a conventional war. A cheap drone with a shaped charge does exactly the same job as tank or helicopter, with the operators being able to act with an increase in their survivability and preservation of their battle experience and their tactical capabilities. Given all of the above, in Ukraine a fast moving open country assault was, and still is no place for armour unless of course you have air superiority and more tanks than your opponent. Which unfortunately, and for the present at least, tactically and historically puts Russia in the box seat because they are, for the most part defending. The silence from NATO and the sabre rattling from Russia now (possibly) demonstrates that it has dawned on them that like every other conflict that they have tried to support, it will most likely end up with an uncomfortable peace through negotiation, or all out war in Europe.

[@ramonpilgrim6623]

Theres no mystery. Its been plain to see on TG. Mines in abundance in several different configurations, Russian anti tank teams armed with various ATGMs, Ka52s with long range anti tank missiles, electronic warfare jamming communications between units, artillery with laser guided rounds, drones, drones , drones and more drones. Not to mention the logistical nightmare of maintaining these vehicles. Its not just the tool but the system its being used in. The system is flawed and developed by people who didnt and still dont properly assess the capabilities of their adversary or their own for that matter.

[@totoshaebosha7983]

don't make up nonsense. those stupid Russians... you need to send 20 F16 and an American expeditionary force in the amount of 20,000 people. the problem will be solved

[@prabhakarsubba5208]

One thing is sure that pulling it out is never a smart strategy, it has to be a setback.

[@j0nasbs]

If they suck they should give them back. Every allied country will be tallying how much money they spend in the war and those things cost lots of money and can't do their job.

[@benabka]

Short answer... they failed.

[@actonman7291]

Hear hear

[@thisismyname007]

This reminds me of a scene in Kelly’s Heroes where the tank commander called Oddball has literary purchase a German Tiger tank. His mechanic cries out that the thing is a pile of junk!! 😮😮😮😊😊😊 Now look, Oddball. The trade for the uniforms I can understand. But to buy this tank, you got to be crazy! It's a mother beautiful tank! It's a piece of junk. The fuel system leaks all over the place! It's a piece of junk! Now look, Oddball. The trade for the uniforms I can understand. But to buy this tank, you got to be crazy! It's a mother beautiful tank! It's a piece of junk. The fuel system leaks all over the place! It's a piece of junk! Always with the negative waves, Moriarty. Always with the negative waves! Crap! Always with the negative waves, Moriarty. Always with the negative waves! Crap!

[@Chaldon-hl6yk]

funny film

[@finscreenname]

Been saying from the start that every weapon sent to Ukraine will be figured out and will also lose all of it's vail of secrecy. The west also wants weapons can take out 5 of the enemy to their one loss that are super expensive and complicated. The issue with that is when your enemy can make more and you cant.

[@billy56081]

You are one of the people who get this. This is an R&D war for the Russian and probably the Chinese and Iran. I have a feeling Russia is doing the ground work and China and Iran are supporting it.

[@greenbow7888]

Actually this war has been excellent for weapons manufacturers and western millitaries to groundtest.

[@billy56081]

@@greenbow7888 Works both ways.

[@harrisn3693]

@@greenbow7888 well not for long. The same reason why ford and GM stopped making large sedans, they lost their reliable status.

[@RawandCookedVegan]

If Russia is getting drones from Iran, it is hard to believe that Russian manufacturing is a huge threat.

[@user-Cukish-S-maslom]

Леопард- очень красивый гроб, с полным комфортом доставит бойцов до кладбища, или до поля, которое станет кладбищем.

[@johnweak6788]

У них выживаемость экипажа в разы лучше наших Т духовок

[@user-Cukish-S-maslom]

@@johnweak6788 интересно, я понимаю что у них выживаемость очень хорошая, подъезжают и съёбывают из танка. ЭТА херь, которая называется КОРНЕТ, пробивает трёх метровый монолит железо-бетона. Очень большое уважение нашим конструкторам, а вертолётные системы, ну они скромнее, но сверхзвуковые, делают любой танк. Про выживаемость ты правильно пишешь, если песка в двигун насыпать до старта, то выживаемость 100% будет. Евреев ещё не хватает, с меркавой, те бы просто не доехали. )))

[@totoshaebosha7983]

@@user-Cukish-S-maslom на каком то укроканале обсуждали про выживаемость в Бредли. там мехвод после подбития вышел живой наружу через пробоину от снаряда.. только Мюкола чуть чуть пятачок поцарапал. по всей видимости, раз такое кино, желающих залезать в эти Бредли не густо

[@rodrigoquiroga8590]

Today any tank without APS system, no matter how capable might be, is too vulnerable for the frontline

[@bobsmith3983]

APS is only tuned to high velocity objects and slow moving objects e.g. Lancets and FPV drones will still be effective against tanks. APS is also susceptible to top attack and anti tank mines.

[@joeob4194]

well, the oh so praised Leopard 2 is just a rolling metal coffin !! The time of tanks is long gone!

[@thatonedude2228]

Well not really a metal coffin the crew mostly suvives but the tank is inoperable. The time of tanks isn’t really gone per say, it’s just that currently there is a gap in technology, the first ATGMs also were really successful intime counters were developed. Countering drones isn’t as hard as you’d think, just that the military hasn’t adapted yet

[@barrywakeford1385]

I wouldn't say Long Gone. But definitely in need of a VERY serious rethinking.

[@andreww1225]

Don’t waste your best equipment use up the old Soviet equipment

[@kevinallies1014]

The turret bustle storage of ammunition on Western tanks makes they extremely vulnerable to aerial attack. The turret bustle has almost no overhead armor on it because the top of it was designed to explode up when the tank was hit from the side thus keeping the crew from taking the majority of the secondary blast from ammunition exploding. Those blast panels have now become a target which allows the relatively small explosive charge in the Lancet or on small FPV drones to detonate the ammunition in the tank. These tanks were designed to withstand other tanks and ATGM’s attacking from the side not UAVs attacking them from above.

[@firip255]

Lol no Tank is Build from attack above.

[@horacecunningham7832]

​@@vh1167no they are high explosive

[@andyf4292]

good point! so the tank is left with maybe 6 rounds

[@wernerhofgartner]

Or mines witch attacks from the ground 😂

[@potator9327]

Bullshit. The blow out panels are not thiner than the rest of the Roofarmor. They are fixed in a way that they lift off by pressure from below.

[@SamuelSchehrer]

Because they keep getting clapped by drones

[@journeyintococo6996]

Drones, mines, artillery, Kornet ATGM's and hits from KA-52's, MI-18's and the SU's.

[@ViceCoin]

Too heavy, vulnerable to mines, artillery and drones.

[@deochlaidir4042]

The thickness of the Leopard’s side hull armour is 65 mm, the thickness of the armour behind the rollers is 40 mm. This is a naturally cardboard tank.

[@jamesmorrison4976]

Still a whole lot better than the crap Russian sends - those either burn like torches or toss their turrets in a powerful explosion. 2500 destroyed Russian Mbts litter the streets, fields and forests of Ukraine.

[@lovegreenculture2851]

The drone is todays modern superior weapon. Such a strategic marvel.

[@wjalfi4216]

Tank Leopard itu menyusul pendahulunya dalam Perang Dunia II, hancur lebur menjadi rongsokan oleh Rudal Rusia.

[@Genevasplaytime]

Yeah and how many russian tanks were blown apart?

[@muratfuatgencer6631]

The important point is the human factor. No matter how complex and powerful the devices read, for what purpose and how they are used. I think that even highly advanced and complex war machines like the Leopard 2 A series, which the situation shows us, need the right strategy, the right tactics and skilled well-trained personnel to achieve the desired effect.

[@abrahamsds1277]

it seems that the right strategy to use Leo or any western tanks is to make sure firstly, that the adversary are goat shepperds or farmers in flip-flops, not a country with real armed forces

[@muratfuatgencer6631]

As it seems from the beginning of war, it applies to all tanks, not just western tanks. Human mind first for everyone

[@kubie6798]

yea but this tactics the ukrainians got trained by nato xD

[@Nobody-Nowhere]

They were assigned as primary targets by Russia, no one wanted to be inside them. They were death traps.

[@Klote3241]

3 months in Leopard 2 are still being used... the video isnt accurate.

[@01thomasss]

Your 3 reasons apply to any modern tanks, not just the Leopard 2

[@avay8726]

Proves that western tank always good for fighting farmers

[@Sebastian-gj9tc]

The volkswagen of tanks. A beast when it works but sensitive and super complex and breaks down all the time

[@John-mz8uu]

Lancet > Leopard 2 Tanks

[@bartholomewshirima7060]

The Germans thought they are making a Mercedes car.🤣🤣🤣🤣..luxury sophistication.

[@SCjunk]

Could be the reason why many AFV "experts" and "pundits" have been wary of both Leo 2 and M1 Abrabams since their innception, the position of ammunition stowage in the turret makes these vehicle significantly vulnerable to in particular tandem missile and even tandem warhead RPGs strikes -although the West derided the ex Soviet style T-64, T-80, T-72, and T-90 for its propensity to "frying pan" its turret, it seems now likely that Leo2 and possibly M1A2 when (if) it finally arrives on the Ukrainian stepp, has a propensity in their own right to catestrophically explode -despite the oft aclaimed "blow off panel system" significantly blow off / blow out systems didn't work in naval weapons when trialed back in the late 1940 early 1950s with similar 115mm, (4.5 inch) 120 mm (4.7 inch) and 127 mm (5inch) weapon loadouts -so why would it be markedly different now? That M1A2 is still applauded for it's fighting prowess in Iraq GW 1 & 2 when it effectively didn't face an effective opposition with effective 1st world weapons, just a bunch of dare one say T*wel Heads with RPG 7, 16 and BM 40 is not what is being faced in Ukraine today. It will also be significant if the Challenger 2, all 14 of them, fairs any better -but as many say "Ah doubt it".

[@johannjohann6523]

Well, the Germans can make great products,, but sometimes do have the issue of "over-engineering", thus making maintenance, a problem. Quite often German tolerances are slow little, that it takes German tools to work on them. You'd think the Germans would have included those tools along with the tanks, but I bet they didn't, and the whole thing/situation got overlooked.

[@trankt54155]

Not just the Leopards but also the Bradleys, the Huskys, M777, M109 Paladin, Caesars, Patriots, Harpoons, HUMVEES, HIMARS, etc......all "wonder" weapons became flops.....

[@ksakenify]

Вначале нацисты молились на Джавелины и байрактары, и где теперь их джавелины с байрактарами.

[@dicecorporation]

I'd say the Himars has been the most successful out of all of them

[@johannjohann6523]

The video didn't even address drones. Damn! And Russia has finally made a good strategic decision - incentivizing destroying western made equipment. Russia will probably do the same for any KIA of soldiers or equipment, because money talks. Regardless, if the soldier doing so even lives long enough to get paid.

[@manjushagongale]

The fact that the real game changers in the war are advanced and long range drones in larger quantities. If Ukraine wants to win the war it should get such drones. If Russia wants to stop Ukrainian Counteroffensive it should produce more drones of such type.

[@tylerdurden3722]

The other day I was thinking that I see this war evolving into mostly drones and infantry.

[@ic3877ttt]

Uhmmm, sorry for you but ... Ukraine can't win this war.

[@manjushagongale]

@@ic3877ttt We really can't predict what can happen. If we see news channels of Western Media they say Ukraine is winning and some other type of channels say that Russia is winning. Saying this by a Neutral Perspective, not taking anyone's side.

[@johannjohann6523]

So basically what I am getting from the video, 1) Tanks need air support to defend against aircraft and helicopters. To engage ground forces that have anti-tank missiles. Or 2) use missiles that are just as or more accurate but with a much longer range. Which means out of range of enemy aircraft, anti-tank missiles, and certainly mines. The best way to deal with a defensive position is fly over it.

[@ezwansafri8006]

or dont use tanks

[@tomhill3262]

NATO forgot its up against a country who,s intelligence , technical attack plan and arms strength outsmarts them all tactical

[@user-pp2xy9me3y]

NATO - EVIL будьте прокляты

[@smoguli]

It's not really NATO against Russia, it's Ukraine with some help from NATO... If NATO countries decided to send their armies and equipment in Ukraine they would be in Moscow in a month. I think that NATO's tactic is currently a game of attrition, give Ukraine just enough equipment to slow down the Russian army, and let Russia burn through it's money and military equipment until they're bankrupt. The Russian economy is so small, California alone has a bigger economy.

[@raiderpilot8928]

To me i would assume that the Leopard 2 still had Cold War feature techs they hadn't upgraded or replace yet that caused these downsides

[@totoshaebosha7983]

T-series tanks WWII technology

[@johnoneill192]

Also the human cost, every tank has at least 3 people in it

[@kingdom74]

35k Lancet drone > 11mil Leopard

[@winfriedbij684]

Money is not a factor. Operational availability is.

[@itchyvet]

Same thing is going to happen if the alleged F16's ever show up on the battle field. Parts for them will also be massive issue as well as techies to work on them. I've heard that langauge is also a major barrier.

[@harrisn3693]

Actually it will be an issue from a TOT standpoint. US ITAR regulations are a pain in the ass to deal with

[@sataka2546]

Leopard : I am the king of the battlefield RF drones : hold my beer 🍺

[@hithere7547]

this will be the last that russians will see lol... bevore 10 drones manage to break a track from it.. lolol : _ D

[@totoblaubar8393]

No worries, the Leopard tanks are still in service in the first line. They used, like all Ukrainian main battle tanks, during night time. At bright daylight all vehicles are easy targets for artillery and air strikes.

[@craig4867]

3 MYSTERIOUS REASONS! Leopard tanks are all being blown to smithereens! 🇷🇺

[@muthlave]

I thought this was the wonder weapon, the game changer MSM so much hyped On the other hand, I'm not surprised at Germany reliability, look at their car brands

[@fjubdziu]

I thought German cars have the same rate of collisions that other brands, I guess I was mistaken.

[@tomislavvaldec1]

biger question is where is british game changer

[@thomasboulos8368]

too heavy ,too slow , too complicated , too high of the ground makes it a big target. and the maintenance is nightmare.

[@daydays12]

How many tanks has Russia lost in this war? Answer according to Oryx is 2082. Ukraine has lost 550 ( of those they had at the beginning of the war ) and captured 545 Russian tanks which means they have more now than they had at the beginning of the war. "The West" has, in addition , delivered 471 tanks to Ukraine ( including leopard 1s and Leopard2s ). The Ukraine now has approximately the same number of tanks in Ukraine as Russia ...Why would anyone think that Western supplied tanks would be invulnerable?...About 20% of all military equipment sent to the battlefield in the early days of the (counter) offensive by Ukraine was damaged or destroyed.... the Ukrainians have since changed their tactics and hardware losses are lower now down to 10%. 34 Bradleys are estimated to have been lost. Oryx reports 24 Ukrainian tanks ( ten of which were Leopards) were lost in June 2023. In July?????? The problem for Ukraine is they lack aerial dominance.... they really need the F16 s they've been begging for. They also need systems to destroy the very effective Russian helicopters. The UK is sending some systems to help with this... but, as usual , it is not enough.

[@paolophoenix]

Ah that is why Ukrain lost 400.000+ heroic soldiers send to die in meat grinders, its because they have too many tanks that is why.

[@smoguli]

@@paolophoenix are you paid in Rubles or Bitcoins?

[@tomsawer8696]

LOL - so tanks were withdrawn so they don't get destroyed.

[@darrencorrigan8505]

thanks for the review..

[@subodhsarin4247]

The question was asked in the first 30 seconds, and answered in the next 30 (that they are ineffective).

[@mutantryeff]

Not enough toilet paper to wipes its rear.

[@ionelcheles9644]

Ok we understood these tanks are only for the show rooms and by mistake go the war....😅

[@BG-me3pc]

When Tanks are properly supported logistically and tactically they are absolute killers , BUT with out both together tanks are just a prize target .

[@KurtBoulter]

Biggest reason for the Leo2 being withdrawn, is it is a total failure! It had never been tested on a real battlefield and it has proven itself to be a drone magnet, that is it!

[@solaroid4442]

The ass whooping Russia inflicted on them is getting embarrassing at that point.

[@willmorrow375]

Hahaha in your dreams, they haven't moved an inch while in the last month 22 regions were liberated you fool.

[@adventurelover8521]

Leopard vs Bear 😮

[@oliver9465]

They got 21 Leopard 2A6 tanks. There are currently about 3000 active tanks (Ukrainian and Russian combined) in total on the battle field. The 21 tanks are basically a joke. That’s like giving someone nail scissors and say, cut the lawn…

[@user-wx9gz1pw1s]

Big thanks to kevinallies1014 for his explanation! "The turret bustle storage of ammunition on Western tanks makes they extremely vulnerable to aerial attack. The turret bustle has almost no overhead armor on it because the top of it was designed to explode up when the tank was hit from the side thus keeping the crew from taking the majority of the secondary blast from ammunition exploding. Those blast panels have now become a target which allows the relatively small explosive charge in the Lancet or on small FPV drones to detonate the ammunition in the tank. These tanks were designed to withstand other tanks and ATGM’s attacking from the side not UAVs attacking them from above."