As these lines are written, Russian men and women are calculating trajectories for rockets that will kill Ukrainian women and men.
As it is being read, Germans are debating whether it is wise to give main battle tanks to Ukraine, and the German government has not yet made up its mind to do so either.
Skeptics say the tank is not an instrument of defense after all.
On the contrary: He is the offensive weapon par excellence.
A hyper-powered, steel-packed cannon optimized for the task of seeking out and killing designated enemies at maximum speed across fields and trenches.
That's true, but it's only half the truth.
Firstly, tanks are not only designed to advance into enemy territory in an assault accompanied by their sister weapon, the infantry fighting vehicle.
The very qualities that make them the archetypal offensive weapon, their speed, armor protection, and the devastating power of their cannon, also give them the ability to meet advancing tanks in enemy attack formations in mid-movement.
Sometimes only a tank can stop a tank.
This is especially true when other defensive weapons, such as helicopters, cannot fly because the anti-aircraft defenses are too strong.
That is how it is in the Russian war against Ukraine.
Ukraine must also be able to counterattack
But that doesn't change the fact that the other half of the truth is still true: tanks are effective in defense, but they're also irreplaceable in attack.
In Germany, in the USA and in other countries that are helping Ukraine, some say that the tank is the wrong help.
Anyone who wants to prevent Ukrainians from being killed further can also achieve this by building up an effective air defense system or by using means that are less effective against attack wedges.
For example with shoulder-launched missiles like the American "Javelins", which, if they are in the right place at the right time, can destroy a Russian T-72 just as much as a tank with its cannon.
north of Kyiv,
But no matter how terribly effective such one-man missiles may be, the Ukrainian army can only keep the attackers from Russia from further conquests if they can also counterattack.
Just imagine what the theater of war would be like from the perspective of a Russian commander if the Ukrainians did not have offensive weapons such as tanks or armored personnel carriers: most of the front would be a less dangerous area for the attacker.
The Russian generals would know that their own lines were not in serious danger from anywhere, and they could withdraw soldiers and weapons from large sections of the many hundreds of kilometers of front, in order to then create the enormous superiority at a few points that is necessary to launch the attack to win.
Then they could attack Kyiv again, for example, without much worry,
because without their own offensive weapons, the Ukrainians could not threaten them elsewhere.
Because of their ability to attack, tanks and armored personnel carriers are indispensable if defense is to be successful.
Once there, their capture and kill abilities may not even need to be used.
Just being there is enough to deter Russia.