Ukraine has pulled US donated M1A1 battle tanks from combat after proving ineffective in battle conditions.

 

 Secretary of the Army Christine Wormuth with an M1A2 Abrams. AP.

Ukraine has pulled US donated M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks from combat after they proved to be ineffective against Russia. AP. The US sent 31 of the tanks to Ukraine with promises that they would change the course of the war and would allow Ukraine to break Russian lines. However, the tanks proved unable to deal with Russian drone attacks and were not able to even drive without being spotted due to Russian reconnaissance drones. At least five of the tanks were destroyed in combat already. The United States is now trying to devise new tactics that can make use of the tanks. 

File photo of M1 Abrams tanks in Greece. Newsweek/AP.

In related news Russia will display a captured M1A1 Abrams in Moscow. Newsweek. The tank will be shown in public along with other captured western weapons. Video released by Russia shows the tank being hit by two missiles and being destroyed. Video also shows the tank burning and Ukrainian soldiers fleeing from it. 

The first US-made M1 Abrams tank destroyed near Avdeyevka is shown by the Russian Defence Ministry

The Russian MoD released footage of the destruction and evacuation of the American "legendary" tank, also showing photos of the pile of metal — all that was left of the "best tank… pic.twitter.com/uTqwruQEGq

— Sputnik (@SputnikInt) April 29, 2024

My Comment:

The M1A1 debacle has been playing out for the last week or so and it's clear that the deployment was a failure. Why NAFO thought a small deployment of a 40 year old tank design, and not even the most modern version either, was going to change the outcome of the war is beyond me. If the Leopard and Challenger tanks, modern tanks from Germany and the UK, didn't change much, why would the Abrams? 

So why did the Abrams fail? First of all, they barely sent any of them. 31 tanks is not going to do much in a war involving hundreds of tanks and thousands of vehicles. Second, the tanks are not going to have much to do when the war has switched from an offensive war to a defensive one. These tanks are meant for breaking Russian lines, but since Ukraine is on the retreat, they don't have much to do. 

It's also clear that armor is a lot less useful than it used to be due to drones and high powered missiles. Ukraine is claiming these tanks were unable to do much against Russian drones, either because they were blowing them up or because they were instantly spotted. I think there is a lot of truth to that, neither side of the war has used tanks all that effectively. Indeed, for a long time the war had degraded into World War I tactics with trench warfare being the rule, not the exception. That is changing now due to Russia's air superiority and widespread use of KAB glide bombs, but it's clear that Ukraine is an infantry and artillery war.  

The M1A1's in particular had some major issues as well. They are extremely heavy which is not good for famously muddy Ukraine. They are fuel hogs which makes them expensive and difficult to run. And they are also heavy on the maintenance, which Ukraine is probably not able to provide. The modernized M1A2's are even worse in this regard so it does raise the question, does the United States need a new main battle tank? 

This is another example of western Wunderwaffen not actually having that much of an effect on Russia's war effort. It's also why that I don't think that the supposed delivery of F-16 falcons will do much either. F-16's are old tech too but Russia has the advantage in air power and air defenses. A few 4th generation fighters won't change anything and even if Ukraine got F-35's or F-22's it wouldn't matter much. 

As for Russia's display of captured Western equipment, it is a humiliation. The M1 tank will be the biggest trophy, but far from the only. Most of the weapons we have sent there have been captured and destroyed and if we deploy F-16's, I am sure the same thing will happen again.

Finally, I do have to say that it's not  western weapons Ukraine needs. We could give them all the weapons in the world but it won't matter if they don't have the troops to use and maintain them. Ukraine is running out of troops and won't be able go on the offensive again anytime soon, if ever. They still have enough troops to keep fighting but any new aid is probably going to be utterly wasted, barring some kind of divine intervention or an unprecedented collapse of Russia's armed forces or government, Ukraine will lose the war. 

States file lawsuits against Biden Administration's Title IX transgender rules.

 

Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt. AP.

Several states have filed lawsuits against the Biden Administration's new Title IX transgender rules. AP. The officials argue that the policy would hurt women and girls and damage free speech rights. The rules would add "gender identity" to the groups that Title IX, a 1972 regulation that prohibits sex based discrimination at schools that receive federal funds. Biden's change of the legislation would bar many recent laws in conservative states that protect girls and woman's sports by barring biological males from them. Laws that disallow people from using opposite sex bathrooms would be at risk as well. Biden's rule would also bar teachers from "mis-gendering" students, which means teachers would not be able to refer to children by their actual sex. Some states have said they will not enforce Biden's ruling regardless. 

My Comment:

Biden's unilateral evisceration of Title IX was not going to be taken lying down. With several states filing separate lawsuits against his new rules, I am guessing that this will be put on a judicial hold before it would go into effect this August. 

This is also a rare issue where the right can agree with portions of the left on. In reality the trans-positive part of the Democratic coalition is small. There are a lot of people on the far left that are anti-trans, though for different reasons than most Republicans. Both groups agree that transgender "women" aren't actually women, but for different reasons. The left are often trans-exclusionary radical feminists (also known as the slur TERFs). They believe that male-to-female transgender (MTF's) people are just trying to oppress actual women. 

I do think that these anti-trans laws are necessary. I don't think that transgender children are a thing that would exist naturally and it's mostly cultural contamination that causes them. Transgenderism is literally a meme by the original Richard Dawkins meaning of the word, an idea transmitted via culture. Stopping it should be a cultural priority, at least when it comes to children. Adults can and will do what they want but children do not have the maturity to make decisions that will affect them for the rest of their lives. That's why they aren't allowed to consent to sex, marriage or other body modifications, like tattoos.   

The desire by pro-trans people to get opposite sex students in sports is extremely disruptive to woman and girl's sports. Sexual dimorphism is a thing that exists in humans and pumping someone full of hormones is not going to change that. Almost any MTF transgender will have a major advantage over almost all women in woman's sports just because of basic biology. It has lead to the absurd situation where women are simply unable to meaningfully compete against MTF's. This isn't even speculation, there have been dozens of reports of transgender students absolutely destroying female competitors. 

The bathrooms use is disturbing as well. Bathrooms and locker rooms are vulnerable places for women and girls and there have been several cases of sexual assault by transgender students in bathrooms and locker rooms. The most notable case was the one that propelled Glenn Youngkin to the Governor's office in Virginia, but that was far from the only one. 

What really gets me is the compelled speech present in Biden's Title IX rules. Most people don't believe that transgender people are really their perceived sex. And many people have ideological or religious objection to transgender ideology. Forcing them to conform to things they believe to be false is a huge violation of the 1st amendment and should not be tolerated.

The real question is why Biden tried to do this now? This is the kind of unpopular policy that it makes zero sense to do in election year. It's going to be a huge issue and one that will take away voters from Joe Biden in a year where he can't afford to lose even a single vote. If it was his 2nd term this might make sense to try and push, even though there would be backlash against it. But that's not the case so it's impossible to see this as anything other than an own-goal. 

Ukraine retreats from three villages in Donetsk...

 

An Ukrainian solider of the 22nd Separate Mechanical Brigade. Reuters

Ukraine has retreated from three villages in Donetsk. Reuters. General Syrskyi, Ukraine's top commander, said that the situation at the front has worsened and the area around the captured city of Avdeeka. President Zelensky begged for new weapons despite a $61 billion funding bill passed in Congress. They are especially calling for Patriot missile batteries. General Syrskyi said that Ukraine had withdrawn from Berdychi, Semenivka and Novomykhailivka. A forth town, Novobakhmutivka, was claimed by Russia as well. Fierce fighting is also occurring near Chasiv Yar, a major strategic hub that Russia is trying to capture. Russia is also building up forces near the major city of Kharkiv, also known as Kharkov, but Syrskyi said that he didn't believe that an offensive there is coming. 

My Comment:

This retreat follows the Russian victory at Ocheretino in the same general area and shows that Ukraine is not doing well at the moment. Losing four more villages after Ocheretino is not at all surprising but what is surprising is that the media is reporting it and Ukraine is admitting it. 

Of course, it is being used as propaganda to try and get Ukraine more weapons, despite the fact that Ukraine just got $61 billion in funding. Much of that funding isn't going to Ukraine though, much of it is to buy new weapons for the United States, not Ukraine. 

The begging for Patriot missile systems is very telling. Russia has control of the skies at this point and are able to drop KAB glide bombs on Ukrainian positions at will. Indeed, that is what they have been doing, deploy small infantry units to hold the enemy and drop dozens of KAB's on their positions until there is basically no cover left and then letting the infantry take the positions. 

Would Patriots help with that? Probably not. Russia has gotten pretty good at destroying Ukrainian anti-aircraft systems. Indeed, that's the reason why Ukraine needs new air defenses in the first place. Those systems have problems defending against hypersonic missiles and are often baited into firing at drones and then being hit by missiles. 

The problem for Ukraine though is not equipment, it's troops. They do not have anywhere near enough to actually fight Russia at this point. Indeed, Russia outnumbers Ukraine at this point, which wasn't true for much of the war and a major reason why Russia had difficulty before last year's summer offensive. Ukraine doesn't have anywhere near enough troops to stop Russia and it's too the point where units are not getting the rest they need to stay effective. I had to laugh at the line in the article that said the holes in Donetsk were going to be plugged with "fresh" troops when I doubt there is a fresh unit left in Ukraine. 

The real question is if this was just Ukraine pulling back due to a Russian breakthrough or if it's a start of a general collapse. Both are plausible. Ocheretino opened up a pathway behind their defensive lines and once breached those defenses were useless. It would make sense to pull back to better defensive lines instead of staying in positions that are vulnerable. If so that would mark a change in Ukrainian strategy because they have been infamous for holding positions long after they have become indefensible. Perhaps Ukraine has finally decided to try and trade territory for lives?

But it's also possible that Ukraine is facing serious problems with their troops wanting to fight. Ocheretino was a rout with troops refusing the fight to the city, just like what happened in Adveeka. Their troops are having demoralized and exhausted. Weapons are a problem as well as Ukraine just doesn't have the air defenses and armor to hold back Russia anymore. I think it's possible that we will just see a general collapse of Ukraine's fighting men before any of the aid from Congress arrives. 

Ukrainians on the front line dismiss new aid from US saying it will only prolong the war.

 

Ukrainians mourn a dead soldier. The Daily Beast/Reuters.

Ukrainians on the front line dismiss new aid from the United States saying it will only prolong the war. The Daily Beast. One civilian said "are you serious? Now this war will just continue" when informed that Congress had passed a new aid package. Another said that the money would be a drop in the bucket and doubted new weapons would stop the Russians from winning. A third man lamented the corruption in Ukraine and said the money from Congress will go to the wrong people, and detailed a personal experience with corruption. A woman said that she actually supported Russia and didn't care which side won. Finally a soldier who was in treatment in a mental ward for PTSD and a psychotic break said with tears in his eyes that the new weapons would not help. The interviews by The Daily Beast occurred in Kharkiv, also known as Kharkov, a city that is likely to be Russia's next target and is under heavy attack. 

My Comment:

Some rare real journalism from the Daily Beast. They are not an outlet I use often since they are mostly biased, but in this case it's a good viewpoint that you rarely see in western media. I will give the Daily Beast credit for showing another side of the conflict and being fair to both sides as they also gave the more mainstream opinion that the aid will actually do something. 

Is this opinion widespread in Ukraine? It's hard to tell. It's important to note that Kharkov is a city that mostly speaks Russian and has a lot of Russian people. It's also near the front lines and is under frequent attack, unlike cities in Western Ukraine. Even Kiev has been less affected by the war than Kharkov has been. 

I am guessing that the people in Kiev don't share there views, for what should be obvious reasons. Those folks are mostly sheltered from the worst effects of the war and are where much of the graft and corruption is being sent too. And many of them are racists that hate both Russia and Russians and want the war to continue at all costs. 

But I think that the people The Daily Beast interviewed are pretty much right. Russia is pretty obviously winning the war and a few billion dollars in aid and weapons is not going to matter. Russia has a huge advantage in manpower and technology and has been steadily rolling back Ukrainian lines since their failed offensive last year. 

I do have to say that the human tragedy here is immense. Most of the folks interviewed by The Daily Beast had a rough time of it. The soldier interviewed was clearly traumatized and broken and probably had some serious physical damage along with the mental damage. He said he had 30 concussions and was still fighting on the front lines, which just shows how bad Ukraine's manpower issue is. And everyone seems to have lost someone...

I also think that they are right, peace talks should be happening. There is no reason for this war to continue until the last Ukrainian soldier is dead. And Ukraine itself would probably get a better settlement if they negotiate an end to the war instead of a unconditional surrender, which is now the most likely outcome for this war. But the Biden Administration won't allow any serious discussion with Russia to end the war, which means that everyone interviewed in this story will probably end up dead or crippled... 

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson confronts pro-Hamas protesters at Columbia.

 

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson at Columbia. Politico/AFP/Getty.

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson confronted pro-Hamas protesters at Columbia University. Politico. Johnson announced that he said he would call Joe Biden to send in the National Guard to break up the protests. Speaking over the protesters heckling him, Johnson said that the protests did not count as free speech and criticized the president of Columbia University, Minouche Shafik, for being weak and ineffectual. He is joined by his criticism of Shafik by many other Republicans and at least one Democrat, Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman. The protests at Columbia have lasted a week and have spread to other campuses across the country. There have been incidents of outright antisemitism at the Columbia protests. 

 

My Comment:

I've got mixed feelings about this. I think Mike Johnson was pretty obviously trying to distract against the fact that Ukraine aid got passed. That was hugely unpopular among the Republican base, especially since Johnson didn't secure any border security measures. Taking on the Columbia protesters is a very good way to get that out of the news. 

With that being said, I do think the Columbia protesters do need to be confronted. They have been acting terribly to the Jews on campus and it's clear that they aren't protesting Israel's actions in Gaza, they are protesting the existence of Jews themselves. That's absolutely not acceptable and the protests need to be broken up.

Is Johnson right that this protest isn't protected under the 1st Amendment? I would believe so. Protest is protected under free speech but civil disorder is not. Occupying campus and preventing people from using it goes beyond simple protest and harassing Jews on campus is disorderly conduct at best and a hate crime at worst. 

That being said, I am concerned about free speech when it comes to Israel and Judaism. I don't support bans on the ideas that the protesters spout, as misguided and inaccurate they are. I also don't support laws about denying the Holocaust or other similar laws against antisemitism, people should be able to say whatever they want whenever they want. 

Regardless, I think there is a huge difference in how this is being handled at Columbia and other campuses compared to what happened at UT-Austin today. When an unlawful protest broke out there, police didn't waste time in breaking it up. The protest was disrupted and the leadership was arrested. Compare that to other campuses where the protests have lasted weeks. 

I haven't made a secret of my disdain for left wing protests in general and the pro-Hamas position specifically. These protests are absolutely pointless as Israel does not care at all what happens on American campuses, at least in terms of foreign policy. They do care about the Jewish students being threatened, but they absolutely aren't going to stop their war on Hamas regardless of what happens at college campuses in America. 

I think the idea is to put pressure on Joe Biden which also seems pointless. Biden no longer has any influence on Israel's actions, which is proven by their strike on Iran and their refusal to change their war plans. Any change in foreign policy by Biden won't actually do anything to stop the war in Israel. It could be this could be another effort for the progressive left to take over the Democrats, but that seems pointless when they basically have done so already. Biden, instead of shifting to the center, has gone hard left outside of his Israeli policy, so there isn't much of a point. 

As I have mentioned before, Biden is in a no-win scenario here. If he goes hard against the pro-Hamas wing of his party, he risks losing them, and he has indeed lost quite a few of them already. If he goes in their favor he risks losing Jews for Democrats for good. He has no good options and no matter what he chooses he will be hurt for 2024. Which side will he choose? I am not sure, both options are bad for him. I'd hope that he would side against the protesters but who knows what he will do? I doubt even Biden knows...