Email Roundup #25 - A-10s and Ukraine, Israeli Bullpup Rifles, and Napalm
Your Questions Answered
This week we talk about:
Why the A-10 hasn’t been sent to Ukraine 0:28
Why don't we see much use of Napalm or Thermite munitions on fortifications? 4:00
Why doesn’t Ukraine Invade Transnistria? 5:30
Why is Israel still using the M4?
7:06 Does the Army have a SHORAD Deficit? 11:20
❌ Disagree re Transdnisra: Pres Zelenskyy in fact proposed sending Ukrainian forces to restore law and order over there, but Moldovan leadership simply didn’t have the guts to go ahead with it, although it would be extremely beneficial for Moldova—restoring control over Transdnistra would clear its way to the EU or/and reunification with Romania. It would be a pretty straightforward op for the UAF—it is highly unlikely that tiny isolated Russian force who never seen any hostilities would want to offer any meaningful resistance to battle-hardened Ukrainian troops. At the same time, this would be a serious political and propaganda blow to Russia, and—importantly—there is a major storage of old Soviet artillery ammo in Transdnistra, which obviously will be useful too. There's still time for Pres Sandu to change her mind, she totally should do it.
Great program. In a conversation with a Israeli batallion commander last February, I asked about the adoption of the Tabor weapon.
His comments were simple. The Tabor is a close combat weapon. Paratroopers, old city units and mounted troop were issued the weapon versus the M-4. Reservest units used M-16s. Like you said, Israel never throws anything away. Regardless, weapons are issued to what the expected combat needs will be. This has resulted in several weapons resets. Since the officer I was speaking to was a reservest, his personal weapon was a M-16, but since he was working with vip groups, he was upgraded with A M-4 with full electronics. Same for our driver. Everywhere we went in the south, we had upgraded security versus my prior trips...