Gomig-21
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2016
- Messages
- 7,901
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
- Location
Except the US made it a condition through the Camp David Accords and the peace treaty that the military aid would be guaranteed under a non-belligerence status and maintaining the peace treaty.
The US doesn't seem to have any qualms about donating $3.2 billion in military aid to Israel, more than double what Egypt gets so then why should less than half of that amount to Egypt be an issue?
BTW, that's only what is listed under the peace agreement but in reality, because of joint military projects and licensing to create supplementary products to existing US equipment as well as a budget to perform their own R&D, Israel actually receives a heck of a lot more than that $3.2 billion per year. The actual figure is not published but from what experts have guessed, it's staggering!
Another example that is even crazier is the recent Biden package for Ukraine which is proposed at $32 billion!!! That's almost 30 years of military aid to Egypt in one shot yet no one except for a few conservatives seem to be complaining about it. So why is it difficult to supply Egypt when these other examples far exceed what she's getting compared to those "real paying customers"?
So you can understand why it would piss us off a little bit when we seem to get singled out for the aid that was part of a major agreement the US decided on and offered in the first place, then get criticized or called out for it. Not saying that's what you did, just pointing it out in general because there seems to be a severe bias without understanding the context and the details.
Interesting. It does appear like the chassis and hull is almost identical, but they designed the turret to look quite differently. Here's another example of the US giving huge leeways to allies who don't get challenged or called out for it. Korea is a huge recipient of US generosity including the US fighting a major was and suffering huge casualties in 1953.
Looking at the K2.
Hey does the umbrella come as standard equipment? What a great idea and perfect for our harsh, desert environment! Love it.
It actually weighs approximately the same as the Abrams at roughly 60 tons. This is what seems to be more appealing to the Egyptian Armed forces in the T-90MS coming in at roughly 40 tons because now it becomes a much less weight burden on the Mistrals' displacement. They can load up more T-90MS' and achieve the same weight and resulting displacement of the LHD as the lesser number of Abram tanks that would meet the maximum allowable weight.
I really hope that ERA combined with the ARENA APS helps protect that ever so vulnerable area right there between where the turret ERA ends and the top of the hull begins and you can see the circular spinning track for the turret where it's been getting blown off and tossed 500 feet away in the Russian T-72s in Ukraine. Granted those don't have the adequate ERA and also have a very defective design with the storage of amo and the auto-loader that leaves the rounds exposed to get cooked off once that Javelin round penetrate the hull and makes contact with that amo. Waaay too much of that happening in the Ukraine I'm sure the Egyptian generals in charge of this deal have taken notice of that.
Although there is local talk in papers and on TV about how and what is the Egyptian military thinking at this point.
1) They want to upgrade the M1A1 Abrams to the M1A2 (???)
2) Then they also are interested in the K2 Black Panther? Why?
Is it going to add to the Abrams count or what is their plan for
the placement of that tank? Is it replacing the A60M3s? Egypt has close to 1700 M60A3s that have a lot of life left in them with beneficial upgrades. Not sure where they're thinking that K2 fits.
3) The T-90 and the M1A2 upgrade are the two that make the most sense. If the K2 is planned to replace the M60s, I suppose that is also a good idea and might not be that costly in the end, provided the Abrams upgrade is free.
Last edited:
