I want to ask you about what your take is
on the CNN reporting this week that the US issued
Abrams tanks aren't performing well in the field in Ukraine.
There's this discussion about how they were really made for
the desert and obviously Ukraine,
not the desert. What do you make of that?
I will say in one word that's hyphenated.
That's BS. And I'll just use the initials.
You know, these tanks have been basically made for a
NATO environment in Europe.
I was on these tanks for almost 2 decades.
3 decades in Europe didn't have some of the problems
that I heard Nick Peyton Walsh talk about with that
tank crew.
They were upset because the tank was broken down.
I'll remind folks that I said it was not the
best tank to give to Ukraine because there are maintenance
challenges and you have to have a highly trained crew
to address some of the things.
But you know, some of the indicators they talked about
like condescension,
condensation on the instruments, that's BS.
The fact that they could,
that Russia knows how to hit these tanks,
it didn't have enough armor,
that's BS. That they couldn't clear wood lines or they
would shoot multiple rounds in a building and it wouldn't
explode.
I know for a fact,
having fired these vehicles and having been a tanker all
my life,
that this is a crew that's not either selecting the
right weapon system or isn't maintaining their tanks very well.
Now, at the same time,
I'll say this, Jessica, that whenever you get 2 disgruntled
tankers on a tank that's broken down,
they're they're going to give you every reason why it
doesn't work and how this piece of crap is something
that they shouldn't have.
But remember, Ukraine continued to ask for these vehicles even
though they knew that there was a high maintenance standard
to keep them running.