If Germany had several hundred to part with immediately, and the capacity to regularly replenish those stocks, that would make a significant difference on the battlefield, but I doubt it would make Putin sue for peace.

But of course, Germany does not have those kind of stockpiles or manufacturing capacity to maintain that.

Still, it would be nice to see more European politicians picking up the banner of supplying Ukraine in the face of likely diminished, or eliminated, American transfers.

[–] nexusband@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh, believe me...we have that manufacturing capabilities. I live near where parts of Taurus are made... It's just that there's no "demand" and the bundeswehr doesn't have enough money to just order them to stockpile.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Capability and capacity are two very different things.

Yes, I understand the manufacturing capability exists, but it's capacity is limited i.e. existing facilities could not maintain a strategically significant production volume relative to Ukraine's needs, much less to deter Putin.

[–] MrMakabar 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Taurus would be used more or less like Storm Shadow against high value strategic targets. The big difference is that Germany would have to default to allow its use on targets inside Russia, since activly being part of the targeting might very well be unconstitutional. So what could be expected are a bunch of Russian jets, ammunition stockpiles and maybe the Kerch Bridge being blown up. Ukrainian drones are not stealthy, so they are much easier to intercept or to warn against. Hence something like Taurus can make a difference.

So it is usefull, but it is not going to change the war fundamentally.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I understand exactly what it is. What I'm saying is that Germany does not have the volume on hand, or the manufacturing capacity to produce such a volume, where it could generate the effect the candidate is implying it can.

[–] MrMakabar 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The point was more that there are not many strategic targets, which Taurus could hit inside Russia, which can not be hit by a cheaper Ukrainian made drone due to air defence. So if Germany would send thousands of them, it would still not make that much of a difference. The main value is that Russia has to move assets further back.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago

Operational targets can't all just simply be moved further and further back from the front lines of a conflict, to say nothing of high value tactical targets.

Supplying several hundred low observable air launched cruise missiles per month would absolutely make a significant difference on the battlefield, that's not even a question.

But that doesn't mean I believe that would enough to cause Putin to reverse course, or to deliver a strategic defeat to the Russian army.

Regardless, Germany doesn't have that manufacturing capacity to begin with, nor do I believe they have the political will to do that, even if it were possible, but again, it is not.