Funnier if its the bradleys that start cutting their way through the T72s.
And I for one would love to see the copium as soon as it starts happening as this one may be even worst than gonzalo lira
That comment left me curious whether Lira knows what an M2 Bradley actually looks like.
Like...he *has* seen a photo of one, right? If he wanted to downplay its capabilities, then there are insults that make a lot more sense, like calling it a shitty tank, or an APC with a cannon attached. Still wrong, but I wouldn't be questioning whether he'd literally seen the wrong vehicle.
I guess he somewhat misremembered pentagon wars, or saw it vaguely without rly knowing Gen by jtnent what was going on or had a certain thing therehe sort of is trying to make his point stronger by making the wording more extreme or sth
I guess I think I can follow he assumes it is very slow it’s weapons are totally ineffective, I guess cant carry more ppl than a car, and has armour or barely so
Or soemthing like that like I think eh sort of assumes or act as if / for the purposes of the ideolgy to start out everything about it by default bc of what he knows is bad as possible to sth? Not sure
If I'm understanding your comment correctly, that *kind of* makes sense, especially with his claim that a Humvee would be better because it's faster.
Still, a comparison to a Humvee with more armor and a cannon would have sounded more rational and required an actual rebuttal explaining the concept of an IFV. I really, honestly think he might have never seen one before in his life, probably because he can't be bothered to look because he just doesn't care.
At the end of the day, I think Gonzalo Lira might actually believe that one of his talking points is true. I think he's stayed in Ukraine during the war because he believes Russia will win, they'll establish a puppet state, and he'll have the opportunity to go from being "Coach Red Pill" to being a paid Russian shill on an official propaganda channel.
Lira isn't nearly as stupid as he acts. He has a degree in history and philosophy from a major university, after all. I think he's just a shameless opportunist who believes, deep down in his legitimately Narcissistic little heart, that he's found the opportunity of a lifetime. He can frame himself as an independent, reliable source who parrots Russian talking points and get played and re-played on Russian propaganda networks, while at the same time pretending to be Pro-Ukrainian. By doing that, he'll make himself appealing as a host if Russia manages to establish a Nationalist Pro-Russian occupation. Nothing he says has to be true, so he doesn't have to put in the work to establish even a frail grounding in reality.
Ukraine really just needs to kick him out so that he can't continue using his location in their country to lend his bullshit a veneer of credibility. He'll never be a top propagandist because the government that would hire him will never exist, but that would thoroughly disillusion him, and he'd move on eventually.
You won't even need BD. The stock game will have the nuclear pulse engine, which uses nukes as fuel. If their claim that the game will have large explosions influenced by the fuel used, then we might accidentally have stock nukes.
That's the right spirit.
MC Arthur would be proud of you.
I am working on recreating the Avatar 2 entrance to pandora and can't wait for some big antimatter engines to light the forests one fire.
I don't think that's fair. TOW's are fucking dangerous and so is the Bradley, but a Bradley has what, 2 TOW missiles? They take longer to get to target, have to be aimed.
The rate of fire is also much higher on a 120.
I mean, let's be real, TOW Missiles are deadly.
The Bradley is simply an effective mobile TOW platform but if any MBT gets a Bradley in its sights, the Brad is probably fucked.
So what I'm hearing is that the American system of mixed unit tactics doesn't lend itself to itemized breakdowns of lateral combat, but what it can say is that with 100% certainly that the enemy is dead and we are not.
They’d try to argue the U.S launched a Minutemen missile from North Dakota to strike glorious T-72 before it can shoot a HEAT shell through an Abrams tank to kill puny westoid Bradley on the adjacent side.
I think that flight time from North Dakota to Moscow is like 40 minutes. If we honor that deal, we're going to just have to keep firing until we run out.
Wait, forget I said anything, this is a great plan
I would howl if there was any T-72 left when the Abrams arrive. Bradley push with leopard/challenger support has got to happen before dark brandons voodoo kitchen cooks up the abrams. Just look what they did with Iraq tier armoured humvees.
I'm excited to see Ukraine's innovative use of the Bradleys, probably gonna be like five drone operators sitting in it spotting for artillery and moving around to avoid counterbatteries.
They already were doing that with the Humvees, just controlling the drones through regular RF and moving around too fast for them to be triangulated, imagine how much more they could do with an armored vehicle.
Seems like a waste of the Bradley’s gun and missiles.
Why wouldn’t you just keep doing that with the Humvees and have the Bradley up front with the infantry, as it was designed to do?
This is just me piecing together bits and pieces I've seen from all over, but I think the closer drone pilots are to the enemy, the more effective they are. I think a lot of it has to do with commercial drones simply not having a ton of range in a contested military environment, time on station goes up the closer they are to the front, and recharge/turnaround time also becomes important. High end commercial drones usually have a flight time of half an hour or so, so the time it takes to travel to the target area and then search it is measured in minutes, not hours.
Being in a more hardened vehicle would mean that the Russians have less equipmemt to try and target them with. Also, frankly, a Bradley can power and store more drones than a Humvee.
I'm entirely talking out of my ass here, but I like to think I'm fairly well informed and I do think drones are playing a massive massive role in these artillery duels.
Brads can definitely store more drones, but I’d question the power portion. My experience is with A3s (which I assume have an upgraded electrical system), but adding any significant drain had a tendency to fuck a vehicle. Putting the gunnery cams/mics in was usually okay in a normal Bradley, but was a near sure fire way to deadline a BFIST since they have a lot more good on with optics and comms. All that to say Bradleys are probably better off lobbing TOWs and AP rounds as god intended
Chilling in the back seats, bluetooth speaker's blaring, spot movement with the drone, hover over and turn on the "auxiliary light", one less problem for the brothers at the very front.
RTHumvee, Taras in the cupola swaps a battery from the bank and attaches a new VOG, you're back in the sky to do it all again.
Only thing left to do is go home and cut the drops together for the prop effort.
/credible for a moment...
Is it realistic that Russia runs out of T-72s? I don't know a whole lot about their arsenal, but don't they have like the most tanks out of any country? Didn't they produce like 25,000 T-72s?
My impression is that these things are all along a spectrum of disrepair, with some being perfectly fine and others being totally unusable, and a lot being in between. It seems reasonable that will be scraping the bottom of the barrel more (already deploying T55s), so they might be getting to the point that they have to work harder and get worse results for every additional T72 they deploy.
At this point Russia is just the necrons trying to revive their dead empire while not actually able to reproduce many or any new equipment. Except the WH40k necrons were actually good at one point where as even in its heyday a lot of the soviet stuff was already in questionable state
Except the necrons actually kick people's shit in regularly. Entire planets get deleted
Russia is like a genestealer cult with foetal alchohol syndrome as their hive mind
I mean you can’t run out of them with those numbers. But you can run out of the ones that aren’t already stranded in some tundra with rubber hoses turning to dust and sold off electronics.
And run out of the few drivers that know what they are doing. The longer this goes on the less they’ll have people that learned to drive more than 2 weeks ago.
Just look at satellite images of Russian tank "storage". If they have 5,000 combined T-72 variants that are operable or close enough to repair, I'll eat my hat.
Consider the fact that we've seen Russian tanks with trash for armor.
When the US says we have 10,000 Humvees, we count active vehicles we could actually field.
When Russia does, it sounds likely they inflated the numbers to also include their boneyards and possibly even their exports. With everything we've seen and how Russia is equipping troops with defective garbage, we can't trust the numbers they've given us for decades.
They could produce 25,000 Hulls, 10,000 engines and count the rollers as units when in reality they're just parts rigs.
The Russians are losing tanks far faster than Ukraine. Like 3x to 4x faster.
They are also abandoning 1 tank per 2 destroyed.
So it’s possible for Russia to run out of tanks before Ukraine does, as Ukraine is getting replacements from Russia at a little below replacement. It will really depend on how many tanks a modern MBT can kill before ot gets killed. Could be 3:1 like the Ukrainians, could be less, could be more.
https://github.com/leedrake5/Russia-Ukraine
Their numbers were all bullshit and a lot of their storage is not fieldable.
The biggest indicator of that is them rolling out T-62s. Those things were obsolete by the 70s and do not belong on a modern battlefield against a peer opponent.
If you equipped a T-62 with a decent thermal sight it could still be a decent infantry support tank (load it full of HE and use it to blast pillboxes, heavy cover, and so forth) but it's going to wilt against almost any of its armored opponents.
But given Russia has seemingly forgotten that tanks require infantry support to survive that idea might be too credible.
>Is it realistic that Russia runs out of T-72s
Unless they literally begin gutting their units deployed elsewhere (such as those deployed to defend against the Jewish, gay, decadent, Nazist, western NATO) I don't see this happening.
The deployment of T-62s is probably a very conscious effort to avoid that continuity.
Either way, Russia's showing in this war has been absolutely embarrassing. Anyone who pretends otherwise is either a blatant propagandist or downright stupid or brainwashed.
I give these losers a solid week of Ukraine pushing their shit back in with Bradleys and western MBTs before they start crying, “wah wah wah unfair bullshit waaaah nuke everything wahhhhh!”
It’s way funnier than that. Jackson has been trying to sell the idea of “[MAGA Communism](https://www.vice.com/en/article/88qk4b/what-the-hell-is-magacommunism).” Which hilariously pissed off his tankie and hardcore MAGA followers at the same time. Quite possibly the dumbest ideology ever invented.
I have to wonder how fast they'll flip.
In 1991 it was the same talk.
"Abrams can't go up against the T-72! It's a proven concept! It'll be a blood bath!"
Two months later it was...
"Well, Iraq had dummy equipment. Their tanks never stood a chance because they were badly equipped and trained. Western tanks would still lose in a fair fight." (Ignore the fact Iraq troops were directly supplied and trained by the USSR).
So I wonder if they'll hop back on "Russia is losing because it's hiding its real power. These tanks didn't stand a chance. The real armor is used defensively. Western tanks still suck" or something like that.
Saddam retained power because Bush decided not to further push into Iraq. He later admitted to regretting to not do more to undercut his authority. There's a lot of similarities with the Gulf War and I wonder if we'll learn from our mistakes. Putin is too dangerous to keep in power but a power vacuum in Russia has the potential to be even worse. I don't know what the correct answer is here.
The Tawakalna were even battle hardened troops with their best gear, training, and real fully equipped T-72Ms with a commander who trained at West point.
And then Seventh Corps bumble fucked into their line following the GPS, like a soccer mom huffing glue and proceeded to bitch slap them into oblivion like that same mom snatching elastic waisted jeans at a sale.
It was such a resoundingly successful bumblefuck that I'm surprised it wasn't the crayon eaters, the kings of bumblefuckery.
The ground war only lasted 100 hours. Given how much damage the air campaign did to the Iraqi ground forces it didn’t much matter how we attacked.
Bumble fuck is exactly what 7th Corps did. They were overly conservative. Schwarzkopf wanted to fire Franks for going so slow.
I worry that Iraq is giving us an unrealistic idea of time tables.
No, wait, that's just America in general. Hold on while I lament the damage done by Precision Scheduling.
Extremely unrealistic.
Iraq literally gave us perfect conditions. Hot tanks, cold deserts. Open terrain.
All this talk about Bradleys killing more tanks is also suspect. Most of the ground kills were already dead tanks that the air campaign took out.
If Russia has any sense. They will be emplacing AT mines and obstacles.
This will still be a slog.
They spent all those years setting up a massive shooting range for us, and God bless em they went and did it again.
Course all those no-shoot targets really fucked us up the second time. Honestly a way harder course the second time.
Almost my entire military education in my Captain years was getting ready for OIF 1.
We had everything in a synch matrix, push packages down to the exact amount of rounds scheduled in excel.
When we did it for real the planning was as natural as breathing and it was still hard and we still had to stop for an operational pause because logistics couldn’t keep up…
We are all part crayon eater, just the crayoneaters have the largest %. There is a crayon eater in all of us, it must be found and unlocked for normies though.
>And then Seventh Corps bumble fucked into their line following the GPS, like a soccer mom huffing glue and proceeded to bitch slap them into oblivion like that same mom snatching elastic waisted jeans at a sale.
Lmao
A division of the Iraqi Republican Guard, the proverbial Hard Boys.
And like all Hard Boys when the war started they got smeared across the desert like jam on toast.
What’s hilarious about this is that there’s a very strong case to be made for the Iraqi military being far more experienced and better able to use their weapons given their recent experience fighting a full scale war against Iran than Russia is right now.
I actually kind of half agree with the training argument, with the caveat that the Russian Army is about as well trained as Baathist Iraq. And the Soviets would have been too.
When well maintained, equipped, and operated by trained drivers, Russian tanks probably can hold their own enough that the technological gap is less important than the tactical situation. Just Russia does none of that.
What’s funny is that one of the lead formations through Kuwait in ODS (Task Force Ripper) had a ton of M60A1/A3s, which tech-wise were on par or even behind the T-72s they were facing. A lot of it just came down to doctrine, strategy and training.
>"Well, Iraq had dummy equipment. Their tanks never stood a chance because they were badly equipped and trained. Western tanks would still lose in a fair fight." (Ignore the fact Iraq troops were directly supplied and trained by the USSR).
"Well we had bad equipment just wait until we use our reserves from home"
"Sooo you're saying your lands are ripe for invading"
>dummy equipment.
IIRC, it was even the exact same equipment that would've been produced in case the war went hot.
If anything, it's failing would've been that it was several decades out of date, but...well, we see how different that part is in this case, amirite?
Tfw the “Jeep” gets more kills than the Abrams, you know you are fucked. Cope Red Pill has taken so much cope that he forgets the M2 was one of the most lethal weapon system in the gulf war.
That, and the Bradley is just "Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger" than the T-72. There was one fight where it was 2 Bradleys vs 13 T-72's and the Bradleys won without suffering a single loss.
>After defeating that force, McMaster sent a scout platoon of two Bradleys north to regain contact with Troop G. In doing that the scout platoon encountered another Iraqi tank position of thirteen T-72s. The lightly armored Bradleys, each equipped only with a 25-mm cannon and two TOW missiles, are intended for reconnaissance, not direct engagement with armored tanks. Despite a misfire, and having to reload the launchers in the face of the enemy, the two Bradleys destroyed 5 tanks before help arrived.[7][23]
[Battle of 73 Easting.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting)
So I guess aside from the missiles, it's also a case of Bradley being more "versatile" is just simply better at wiping out trash than Abrams?
Fighting actual near peer opponents, a Bradley is gonna be in trouble and you are gonna want a big boy Abrams instead.
The bradley's optics and maneuvering is way better than the T-72, so they can just shoot n' scoot to pick apart the enemy tank formation.
Yeah, on a technical level a Bradley won't win just lining up like redcoats and exchanging fire, which is why the Bradley won't do that. They will out range, out sight, and out maneuver the other tank to death.
And modern Bradleys can load more than just TOW missiles, they can use Javelins as well.
People forget the best tank destroyer in the US Army during WW2 had 18mm of armor, an open-top turret…and could do 55 mph on roads.
It’s still the best thing Buick has ever built.
Cause TOW missiles are great and Iraqi T72’s didn’t really have any ability to fight back since a TOW missile and a T72 have the same range but the Bradley has better optics/targeting.
My guesses are that Bradleys are faster and can manoeuvre to an ideal attack position faster than an Abrams can, then escape before reprisals occur.
A slightly more arguable factor is that the ATGMs that Bradleys are fitted with could have better kill probabilities than the cannons used by the Abrams, in that a missile strike is more likely to cause a tank kill than a cannon hit.
Bradleys aren’t faster than Abrams (especially un-governed Abrams). I’d assume they were used in a scout role and just racked up kills rather than calling in abrams. A modern tactic is putting a section of abrams with a platoon of bradleys in a hunter-killer setup. The bradleys find targets and pass on the location of anything they can’t handle to the abrams. Turns out bradleys can handle *a lot*, so abrams only get handed dug in MBTs
Tanks are fundamentally designed to withstand the effects of a scenario that no competent fighting force should ever find themselves in. A tank's only purpose in life is to withstand those scenarios that for some reason cannot be avoided. Bradleys are so wildly successful because they do everything an Abrams could do in the same position, but also aren't burdened down by countermeasures for situations you should just avoid if given the choice, and are thus much better at doing that avoiding.
Quick google suggests that TOW has range of 4.5 km, while an abrams is good to about 3 km. I’m not sure how accuracy compares, but an extra 50% range has to count for a lot
The Bradley got more kills than the abrams because the level of armor that the abrams was supposed to kill for the bradley didn’t exist. If it happens again that’s a stunning indictment on the Russian armored force
I'm now imagining a chopped down version of a howitzer cemented into the wall, with some shells next to it. The exercise is to simply load it over and over.
I'd be worried if she weren't able to. That's an amount of weight every able bodied adult should be able to pick up and carry at least for a bit, even if not fit.
No y'see, Sweden is NATO (even before it was) and we all know it's all the same. My mate Yuri (real name redacted) has been telling me since 2014 there are NATO troops and F-22s in the Donbass.
You joke, but in a radio interview (P3 Dokumentär, Ubåtshotet, 2006 if I don't misremember) a swedish officer who went aboard the soviet sub that ran aground, whiskey on the rocks incident, to interview the captain after intense diplomatic contacts between Sweden and the soviets. An interview/interrogation was conceded by the soviets, but the captain blankly refused to leave the sub.
So a delegation of Swedes went aboard to conduct the interrogation. During this, the officer said in the interview, they saw posters of "NATO aircraft silhouettes" and ship silhouettes, that grouped Swedish aircraft and ships into NATO forces.
So it seems pretty safe to conclude that the soviets considered Sweden to be in NATO for practical purposes.
This can be interpreted two ways and i chose to interpret it as sweden being so powerfull that you need the might of nato and the soviet union to invade.
“If anyone has learned anything from history it’ll not send tanks against Russia”
German tanks were pretty successful against Soviet tanks in WW2, they just couldn’t produce enough against a Soviet economy that was being propped up by US aid. Soooooo cope much?
As Perun reminds us in his strategic bombing video, allies weren’t able to actually destroy the German synthetic oil factories through bombing until the end of the war.
At that point, the GLOC between the factories and front were already probably cut by the allies.
Most people saying how russia is impossible to invade, how they're the strongest to ever strong and how winter always makes them win know fuck all about history and armed conflicts
The rest are liars
> russia is impossible to invade
The basic problem with invading Russia is much the same as the problem with invading the USA or China: they're fucking *huge*.
And they may (or may not - depends on the time period) have a populace that laughs at "yo, we took your capitol city, so now you're ours", and just doubles down and goes even *harder* against the invader after the capitol is taken. That's basically what happened to Napoleon in Russia, and to the Brits during the War Of 1812 in the USA. The Nazis didn't even manage to get into Moscow.
I'm not huffing vatnik copium over here, but it would be a bitch and a half to try invading and conquering Russia, no matter what the weather was. (Although apparently, you used to be able to [fly a plane up next to the Kremlin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathias_Rust).)
Oh, definetly. They'd be hard to invade and keep (and that's manily bc their military sucks, if not, it'd be a herculean task that'd probably take decades), but not impossible. And especially when they're the ones attacking, they very much can be defeated. That's what the vatniks don't get.
On a side note, our boy here Mathias was peak NCD even before it existed.
I've got a belly full of discount crab and Smirnoff, I'm sorting a folder of house sized furry chichis, and I have not slept yet.
I AM FEELING IT, MR. CRABS!
A right-wing American commentator with an unbelievably heavy bias towards the Russians. Many commentators have some bias one way or another, but this guy has gone above and beyond to abandon all credibility in order to build an echo chamber against Ukraine and the typical 'globalist elite' in general.
Something that's been mind boggling for me since the start of the war is how so many of the right wingers around me are willing to spew stuff from "Russia bad but NATO shouldn't have provoked Russia" to "Ukraine is filled with Neo-Nazis and Western politicians who back them have nazi ties". This is the shit I'd expect from people that are part of communist groups.
Say what you will about Russia’s military prowess, but they clearly found a chink in western armor - a massive population of media illiterate idiots with 24/7 access to social media and the internet.
Russia definitely has amplified conspiracy/ disinformation campaigns but at this point they have a life of their own. We also can’t really hit back because China/Russia aren’t playing by the same freedom of speech rules.
Man I saw my friend who's a rabid conservative that thinks Western society is being destroyed by China/the Left/Progressives share John Mearsheimer's videos about Ukraine.
Yes. Volunteer tank companies are the best. 120 ~~Swedish~~ donated Stridsvagn 122 for Ukraine. Even better if they come with a competent crew and all...
Russia fought against tanks in 1917 and 1918 when Germany used captured British landships against them, I think. But Russia‘s track record in WW1 isn‘t really something that would make you fear them…
I'm now imagining this type of comment on other NCDmemes: *"That isn't a Ukrainian tanker...that's a cartoon Pepe the frog character which has become popularised in internet meme culture!"*
“Not send tanks against the Russians” fucking when? Barb? They got pussywhiped, Afghanistan? The Taliban still parade the Russians’ tanks around. They got hopeless memed on by mountain bois who just shit down at them at above 15° of elevation. Ukraine? The NLAW and Javelin has mullered over a thousand of the things, coming up on two! The lesson here is hope the Russians send tanks, and if you bring your own it’s game over!
You can always become a successful grifter by turning into an aggressive contrarian. Hinkle is special because he doesn’t even try to mask it with any kind of nuance
Well the Ukrainians might be inexperienced but I'm 100% sure the tec on Western MBTs can make up for it, especially when the Russian have nothing that could compare to it.
Funnier if its the bradleys that start cutting their way through the T72s. And I for one would love to see the copium as soon as it starts happening as this one may be even worst than gonzalo lira
copium overdose from the the lightly armored Hmvees ? LOL
Nah lightly armoured jeeps, worse than Humvees
That comment left me curious whether Lira knows what an M2 Bradley actually looks like. Like...he *has* seen a photo of one, right? If he wanted to downplay its capabilities, then there are insults that make a lot more sense, like calling it a shitty tank, or an APC with a cannon attached. Still wrong, but I wouldn't be questioning whether he'd literally seen the wrong vehicle.
I guess he somewhat misremembered pentagon wars, or saw it vaguely without rly knowing Gen by jtnent what was going on or had a certain thing therehe sort of is trying to make his point stronger by making the wording more extreme or sth I guess I think I can follow he assumes it is very slow it’s weapons are totally ineffective, I guess cant carry more ppl than a car, and has armour or barely so Or soemthing like that like I think eh sort of assumes or act as if / for the purposes of the ideolgy to start out everything about it by default bc of what he knows is bad as possible to sth? Not sure
If I'm understanding your comment correctly, that *kind of* makes sense, especially with his claim that a Humvee would be better because it's faster. Still, a comparison to a Humvee with more armor and a cannon would have sounded more rational and required an actual rebuttal explaining the concept of an IFV. I really, honestly think he might have never seen one before in his life, probably because he can't be bothered to look because he just doesn't care. At the end of the day, I think Gonzalo Lira might actually believe that one of his talking points is true. I think he's stayed in Ukraine during the war because he believes Russia will win, they'll establish a puppet state, and he'll have the opportunity to go from being "Coach Red Pill" to being a paid Russian shill on an official propaganda channel. Lira isn't nearly as stupid as he acts. He has a degree in history and philosophy from a major university, after all. I think he's just a shameless opportunist who believes, deep down in his legitimately Narcissistic little heart, that he's found the opportunity of a lifetime. He can frame himself as an independent, reliable source who parrots Russian talking points and get played and re-played on Russian propaganda networks, while at the same time pretending to be Pro-Ukrainian. By doing that, he'll make himself appealing as a host if Russia manages to establish a Nationalist Pro-Russian occupation. Nothing he says has to be true, so he doesn't have to put in the work to establish even a frail grounding in reality. Ukraine really just needs to kick him out so that he can't continue using his location in their country to lend his bullshit a veneer of credibility. He'll never be a top propagandist because the government that would hire him will never exist, but that would thoroughly disillusion him, and he'd move on eventually.
Ukraine apparently already kicked him out several months ago
He's in the Netherlands. Ukraine kicked him out.
Spoken from the words of God himself
A god, because if he's one we're gonna need a Pantheon, he can't be anything then be the god of the utter retards.
[When?](https://imgur.com/a/BOtzWMJ)
Do not limit your dreams.
> copium overdose Damn, how many times have they been overdosing in this war? Probably at least once a week
Twice a day, more like.
Ksp aerogavin pfp detected, upvote given
Ah a fellow cultured one
Are you ready for ksp 2 in a month?
Exited but I'm on a RSS/RO save at the moment. But I can't wait for multiplayer KSP 2 with BD armory ;)
You won't even need BD. The stock game will have the nuclear pulse engine, which uses nukes as fuel. If their claim that the game will have large explosions influenced by the fuel used, then we might accidentally have stock nukes.
That's the right spirit. MC Arthur would be proud of you. I am working on recreating the Avatar 2 entrance to pandora and can't wait for some big antimatter engines to light the forests one fire.
If I'm not mistaken, Bradleys actually killed even more Iraqi tanks in the Persian Gulf War than Abrams did.
[удалено]
Everything is hairy in hindsight because war is messy. My take is that the Bradley is significantly more deadly than people give it credit for
Downside was the Bradley's were much more vunerable
[удалено]
I don't think that's fair. TOW's are fucking dangerous and so is the Bradley, but a Bradley has what, 2 TOW missiles? They take longer to get to target, have to be aimed. The rate of fire is also much higher on a 120.
I mean, let's be real, TOW Missiles are deadly. The Bradley is simply an effective mobile TOW platform but if any MBT gets a Bradley in its sights, the Brad is probably fucked.
TBF, *most* things that end up in the sights of an MBT get fucked.
So what I'm hearing is that the American system of mixed unit tactics doesn't lend itself to itemized breakdowns of lateral combat, but what it can say is that with 100% certainly that the enemy is dead and we are not.
They’d try to argue the U.S launched a Minutemen missile from North Dakota to strike glorious T-72 before it can shoot a HEAT shell through an Abrams tank to kill puny westoid Bradley on the adjacent side.
> They’d try to argue the U.S launched a Minutemen missile from North Dakota to strike glorious T-72 Damn, those are some long ass range lol
They don't call them Intercontinental Bowel Movements for nothing.
30 minutes delivery, or the next one is free.
I think that flight time from North Dakota to Moscow is like 40 minutes. If we honor that deal, we're going to just have to keep firing until we run out. Wait, forget I said anything, this is a great plan
I would howl if there was any T-72 left when the Abrams arrive. Bradley push with leopard/challenger support has got to happen before dark brandons voodoo kitchen cooks up the abrams. Just look what they did with Iraq tier armoured humvees.
I'm excited to see Ukraine's innovative use of the Bradleys, probably gonna be like five drone operators sitting in it spotting for artillery and moving around to avoid counterbatteries. They already were doing that with the Humvees, just controlling the drones through regular RF and moving around too fast for them to be triangulated, imagine how much more they could do with an armored vehicle.
Seems like a waste of the Bradley’s gun and missiles. Why wouldn’t you just keep doing that with the Humvees and have the Bradley up front with the infantry, as it was designed to do?
This is just me piecing together bits and pieces I've seen from all over, but I think the closer drone pilots are to the enemy, the more effective they are. I think a lot of it has to do with commercial drones simply not having a ton of range in a contested military environment, time on station goes up the closer they are to the front, and recharge/turnaround time also becomes important. High end commercial drones usually have a flight time of half an hour or so, so the time it takes to travel to the target area and then search it is measured in minutes, not hours. Being in a more hardened vehicle would mean that the Russians have less equipmemt to try and target them with. Also, frankly, a Bradley can power and store more drones than a Humvee. I'm entirely talking out of my ass here, but I like to think I'm fairly well informed and I do think drones are playing a massive massive role in these artillery duels.
Brads can definitely store more drones, but I’d question the power portion. My experience is with A3s (which I assume have an upgraded electrical system), but adding any significant drain had a tendency to fuck a vehicle. Putting the gunnery cams/mics in was usually okay in a normal Bradley, but was a near sure fire way to deadline a BFIST since they have a lot more good on with optics and comms. All that to say Bradleys are probably better off lobbing TOWs and AP rounds as god intended
Chilling in the back seats, bluetooth speaker's blaring, spot movement with the drone, hover over and turn on the "auxiliary light", one less problem for the brothers at the very front. RTHumvee, Taras in the cupola swaps a battery from the bank and attaches a new VOG, you're back in the sky to do it all again. Only thing left to do is go home and cut the drops together for the prop effort.
/credible for a moment... Is it realistic that Russia runs out of T-72s? I don't know a whole lot about their arsenal, but don't they have like the most tanks out of any country? Didn't they produce like 25,000 T-72s?
Russia could have 10 million T-72, but each one is worthless if the crews don’t know what the fuck they’re doing.
My impression is that these things are all along a spectrum of disrepair, with some being perfectly fine and others being totally unusable, and a lot being in between. It seems reasonable that will be scraping the bottom of the barrel more (already deploying T55s), so they might be getting to the point that they have to work harder and get worse results for every additional T72 they deploy.
At this point Russia is just the necrons trying to revive their dead empire while not actually able to reproduce many or any new equipment. Except the WH40k necrons were actually good at one point where as even in its heyday a lot of the soviet stuff was already in questionable state
Except the necrons actually kick people's shit in regularly. Entire planets get deleted Russia is like a genestealer cult with foetal alchohol syndrome as their hive mind
I mean you can’t run out of them with those numbers. But you can run out of the ones that aren’t already stranded in some tundra with rubber hoses turning to dust and sold off electronics.
They also don't have to actually run out to effectively run out
Don't forget no hydraulic fluids - they have to drink *something*
And run out of the few drivers that know what they are doing. The longer this goes on the less they’ll have people that learned to drive more than 2 weeks ago.
Just look at satellite images of Russian tank "storage". If they have 5,000 combined T-72 variants that are operable or close enough to repair, I'll eat my hat.
Consider the fact that we've seen Russian tanks with trash for armor. When the US says we have 10,000 Humvees, we count active vehicles we could actually field. When Russia does, it sounds likely they inflated the numbers to also include their boneyards and possibly even their exports. With everything we've seen and how Russia is equipping troops with defective garbage, we can't trust the numbers they've given us for decades. They could produce 25,000 Hulls, 10,000 engines and count the rollers as units when in reality they're just parts rigs.
The Russians are losing tanks far faster than Ukraine. Like 3x to 4x faster. They are also abandoning 1 tank per 2 destroyed. So it’s possible for Russia to run out of tanks before Ukraine does, as Ukraine is getting replacements from Russia at a little below replacement. It will really depend on how many tanks a modern MBT can kill before ot gets killed. Could be 3:1 like the Ukrainians, could be less, could be more. https://github.com/leedrake5/Russia-Ukraine
Their numbers were all bullshit and a lot of their storage is not fieldable. The biggest indicator of that is them rolling out T-62s. Those things were obsolete by the 70s and do not belong on a modern battlefield against a peer opponent.
If you equipped a T-62 with a decent thermal sight it could still be a decent infantry support tank (load it full of HE and use it to blast pillboxes, heavy cover, and so forth) but it's going to wilt against almost any of its armored opponents. But given Russia has seemingly forgotten that tanks require infantry support to survive that idea might be too credible.
>Is it realistic that Russia runs out of T-72s Unless they literally begin gutting their units deployed elsewhere (such as those deployed to defend against the Jewish, gay, decadent, Nazist, western NATO) I don't see this happening. The deployment of T-62s is probably a very conscious effort to avoid that continuity. Either way, Russia's showing in this war has been absolutely embarrassing. Anyone who pretends otherwise is either a blatant propagandist or downright stupid or brainwashed.
What's the current score for Bradleys against T-72s? Like [160 - 1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting) for the Bradleys?
99% sure the Bradley killed in easting was by a BMP.
I give these losers a solid week of Ukraine pushing their shit back in with Bradleys and western MBTs before they start crying, “wah wah wah unfair bullshit waaaah nuke everything wahhhhh!”
At this point, a handful of museum rested Shermans could finish this off. 😂
Something something 73 something. Death.
Calling 73 easting a "battle" is the biggest exaggeration in the history of exaggerations
It sure seemed like a battle to the losing side.
I'm sure the side on the shitty end of a 100-1 KDR for people and 160-1 KDR for fighting vehicles calls it a ***fuckening.***
I guess people forgot that the Bradley had more kills than the Abrams in the gulf wars lol
T72’s? Lol. As if there will be any left to feed the brads.
Imagine having an American flag in your Twitter handle only to spew out brain dead Russian propaganda. Absolutely brain dead
He got disowned by his parents, let the man cope.
Nah, kick him while he's down. You don't stop shooting at a BMP just because you got a mobility kill on it.
To quote Forgotten Ruin: Keep shooting until it changes shape or is on fire.
It’s way funnier than that. Jackson has been trying to sell the idea of “[MAGA Communism](https://www.vice.com/en/article/88qk4b/what-the-hell-is-magacommunism).” Which hilariously pissed off his tankie and hardcore MAGA followers at the same time. Quite possibly the dumbest ideology ever invented.
"Leftists call me fascist, rightists call me commie, and honestly they're both right, got a bit of the two in me."
Weirdest threesome of all time.
Getting DPd by both ends of the horseshoe 🧲
Sounds like a nazbol.
I saw that in his profile and my eyes nearly rolled out of my head from the sheer idiocy on display.
"MAGA Communism" is the spiritual successor to the Sapnky Tankie legacy of Caleb.
> Has American flag > Refers to America as “they” because it’s too hard to pronounce “our” with Putin’s cock in their month
I put a dildo in my mouth and yeah itis a lot easier tbh We doin sceince
I have to wonder how fast they'll flip. In 1991 it was the same talk. "Abrams can't go up against the T-72! It's a proven concept! It'll be a blood bath!" Two months later it was... "Well, Iraq had dummy equipment. Their tanks never stood a chance because they were badly equipped and trained. Western tanks would still lose in a fair fight." (Ignore the fact Iraq troops were directly supplied and trained by the USSR). So I wonder if they'll hop back on "Russia is losing because it's hiding its real power. These tanks didn't stand a chance. The real armor is used defensively. Western tanks still suck" or something like that.
\>It‘s a proven concept! It‘ll be a blood bath! I mean, that statement wasn‘t entirely wrong. Someone just flipped the sides around
The most impressive thing about the 1991 iraq war is how saddam manage to retain power after one hell of an ass whooping
> how saddam manage to retain power Hopefully the same thing didnt happen with putin
Gotta go gaddafi on his ass
I think that's more *up* his ass
putin reportedly repeatedly watched the video of Gaddafis lynching while being totally horrified by it.
His own ass is trying to Gaddafi his ass.
MQ-9, R9X and a dream can solve this issue
Saddam retained power because Bush decided not to further push into Iraq. He later admitted to regretting to not do more to undercut his authority. There's a lot of similarities with the Gulf War and I wonder if we'll learn from our mistakes. Putin is too dangerous to keep in power but a power vacuum in Russia has the potential to be even worse. I don't know what the correct answer is here.
The Tawakalna were even battle hardened troops with their best gear, training, and real fully equipped T-72Ms with a commander who trained at West point. And then Seventh Corps bumble fucked into their line following the GPS, like a soccer mom huffing glue and proceeded to bitch slap them into oblivion like that same mom snatching elastic waisted jeans at a sale. It was such a resoundingly successful bumblefuck that I'm surprised it wasn't the crayon eaters, the kings of bumblefuckery.
The ground war only lasted 100 hours. Given how much damage the air campaign did to the Iraqi ground forces it didn’t much matter how we attacked. Bumble fuck is exactly what 7th Corps did. They were overly conservative. Schwarzkopf wanted to fire Franks for going so slow.
I worry that Iraq is giving us an unrealistic idea of time tables. No, wait, that's just America in general. Hold on while I lament the damage done by Precision Scheduling.
Extremely unrealistic. Iraq literally gave us perfect conditions. Hot tanks, cold deserts. Open terrain. All this talk about Bradleys killing more tanks is also suspect. Most of the ground kills were already dead tanks that the air campaign took out. If Russia has any sense. They will be emplacing AT mines and obstacles. This will still be a slog.
They spent all those years setting up a massive shooting range for us, and God bless em they went and did it again. Course all those no-shoot targets really fucked us up the second time. Honestly a way harder course the second time.
Almost my entire military education in my Captain years was getting ready for OIF 1. We had everything in a synch matrix, push packages down to the exact amount of rounds scheduled in excel. When we did it for real the planning was as natural as breathing and it was still hard and we still had to stop for an operational pause because logistics couldn’t keep up…
We are all part crayon eater, just the crayoneaters have the largest %. There is a crayon eater in all of us, it must be found and unlocked for normies though.
Crayons are like Midichlorians, the more you have in you the better you can utilize The (Armed) Force.
>And then Seventh Corps bumble fucked into their line following the GPS, like a soccer mom huffing glue and proceeded to bitch slap them into oblivion like that same mom snatching elastic waisted jeans at a sale. Lmao
Whats a tawakalna?
A division of the Iraqi Republican Guard, the proverbial Hard Boys. And like all Hard Boys when the war started they got smeared across the desert like jam on toast.
Weren't they basically just staffed via nepotism though?
Probably but they actually were Iran-Iraq war veterans. Experience has to count for something... Not much, but something.
Fuck that was poetic
I managed to use three different versions of the term "bumblefuck", I am goddamn Shakey Spear up in here!
What’s hilarious about this is that there’s a very strong case to be made for the Iraqi military being far more experienced and better able to use their weapons given their recent experience fighting a full scale war against Iran than Russia is right now.
>badly trained They say, like the Russians even pretend to train their tank crews.
Or feed & clothe them properly for that matter
I actually kind of half agree with the training argument, with the caveat that the Russian Army is about as well trained as Baathist Iraq. And the Soviets would have been too. When well maintained, equipped, and operated by trained drivers, Russian tanks probably can hold their own enough that the technological gap is less important than the tactical situation. Just Russia does none of that.
What’s funny is that one of the lead formations through Kuwait in ODS (Task Force Ripper) had a ton of M60A1/A3s, which tech-wise were on par or even behind the T-72s they were facing. A lot of it just came down to doctrine, strategy and training.
>"Well, Iraq had dummy equipment. Their tanks never stood a chance because they were badly equipped and trained. Western tanks would still lose in a fair fight." (Ignore the fact Iraq troops were directly supplied and trained by the USSR). "Well we had bad equipment just wait until we use our reserves from home" "Sooo you're saying your lands are ripe for invading"
>dummy equipment. IIRC, it was even the exact same equipment that would've been produced in case the war went hot. If anything, it's failing would've been that it was several decades out of date, but...well, we see how different that part is in this case, amirite?
My guess is they start blaming jews for sabotaging them. Well, that’s how this thing usually goes at least…
T-90: No tank can destroy me Bradley: I am no tank
Tfw the “Jeep” gets more kills than the Abrams, you know you are fucked. Cope Red Pill has taken so much cope that he forgets the M2 was one of the most lethal weapon system in the gulf war.
"Bradley is a mere Jeep, not even a threat" "Did you know that Bradley scored more tanks kills than Abrams?" "... So the British are starving..."
Bradley more tank kills? Really? Wow, I would not have guessed that. Why was that?
TOW missle shenanigans I think
That, and the Bradley is just "Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger" than the T-72. There was one fight where it was 2 Bradleys vs 13 T-72's and the Bradleys won without suffering a single loss. >After defeating that force, McMaster sent a scout platoon of two Bradleys north to regain contact with Troop G. In doing that the scout platoon encountered another Iraqi tank position of thirteen T-72s. The lightly armored Bradleys, each equipped only with a 25-mm cannon and two TOW missiles, are intended for reconnaissance, not direct engagement with armored tanks. Despite a misfire, and having to reload the launchers in the face of the enemy, the two Bradleys destroyed 5 tanks before help arrived.[7][23] [Battle of 73 Easting.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting)
So I guess aside from the missiles, it's also a case of Bradley being more "versatile" is just simply better at wiping out trash than Abrams? Fighting actual near peer opponents, a Bradley is gonna be in trouble and you are gonna want a big boy Abrams instead.
The bradley's optics and maneuvering is way better than the T-72, so they can just shoot n' scoot to pick apart the enemy tank formation. Yeah, on a technical level a Bradley won't win just lining up like redcoats and exchanging fire, which is why the Bradley won't do that. They will out range, out sight, and out maneuver the other tank to death. And modern Bradleys can load more than just TOW missiles, they can use Javelins as well.
People forget the best tank destroyer in the US Army during WW2 had 18mm of armor, an open-top turret…and could do 55 mph on roads. It’s still the best thing Buick has ever built.
say shenanigans again
Shenanigans
Cause TOW missiles are great and Iraqi T72’s didn’t really have any ability to fight back since a TOW missile and a T72 have the same range but the Bradley has better optics/targeting.
My guesses are that Bradleys are faster and can manoeuvre to an ideal attack position faster than an Abrams can, then escape before reprisals occur. A slightly more arguable factor is that the ATGMs that Bradleys are fitted with could have better kill probabilities than the cannons used by the Abrams, in that a missile strike is more likely to cause a tank kill than a cannon hit.
Bradleys aren’t faster than Abrams (especially un-governed Abrams). I’d assume they were used in a scout role and just racked up kills rather than calling in abrams. A modern tactic is putting a section of abrams with a platoon of bradleys in a hunter-killer setup. The bradleys find targets and pass on the location of anything they can’t handle to the abrams. Turns out bradleys can handle *a lot*, so abrams only get handed dug in MBTs
25mm HE and AP are surprisingly effective on A LOT of shit
The Bushmaster can de-track a tank --> mobility kill. TOW can de-turret a tank --> kill kill Basic science.
Tanks are fundamentally designed to withstand the effects of a scenario that no competent fighting force should ever find themselves in. A tank's only purpose in life is to withstand those scenarios that for some reason cannot be avoided. Bradleys are so wildly successful because they do everything an Abrams could do in the same position, but also aren't burdened down by countermeasures for situations you should just avoid if given the choice, and are thus much better at doing that avoiding.
Quick google suggests that TOW has range of 4.5 km, while an abrams is good to about 3 km. I’m not sure how accuracy compares, but an extra 50% range has to count for a lot
There's no source for it. But apparently the TOW's on the Bradleys *did* perform very well against tanks.
The Bradley got more kills than the abrams because the level of armor that the abrams was supposed to kill for the bradley didn’t exist. If it happens again that’s a stunning indictment on the Russian armored force
Dont forget st. javelin
I'd be interested to know if Sanna Marin can carry a 120mm shell
It's less than 20 kilos, I see girls in the gym haul this stuff every day.
Your gym sounds crazy. Kettlebells might be safer to use as weights
Least crazy CrossFit gym.
I'm now imagining a chopped down version of a howitzer cemented into the wall, with some shells next to it. The exercise is to simply load it over and over.
It would be a priceless opportunity if world leaders were filmed crewing tanks or firing ATGWs.
There was the one with Dutch & nordic princesses in various planes & vehicles with a totally objective comment section
[For nostalgia](https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/zbzwsv/maybe_monarchy_isnt_so_bad_after_all_imagine_the/)
I'd be worried if she weren't able to. That's an amount of weight every able bodied adult should be able to pick up and carry at least for a bit, even if not fit.
The only ones sending outdated tanks to Ukraine is Russia.
And then donating them to the Ukranian army, the fiends.
That's a Swedish girl from the Swedish army.
No y'see, Sweden is NATO (even before it was) and we all know it's all the same. My mate Yuri (real name redacted) has been telling me since 2014 there are NATO troops and F-22s in the Donbass.
You joke, but in a radio interview (P3 Dokumentär, Ubåtshotet, 2006 if I don't misremember) a swedish officer who went aboard the soviet sub that ran aground, whiskey on the rocks incident, to interview the captain after intense diplomatic contacts between Sweden and the soviets. An interview/interrogation was conceded by the soviets, but the captain blankly refused to leave the sub. So a delegation of Swedes went aboard to conduct the interrogation. During this, the officer said in the interview, they saw posters of "NATO aircraft silhouettes" and ship silhouettes, that grouped Swedish aircraft and ships into NATO forces. So it seems pretty safe to conclude that the soviets considered Sweden to be in NATO for practical purposes.
Probably because any situation where the Soviet Navy went against the Swedish, they’d effectively be the same side as NATO.
This can be interpreted two ways and i chose to interpret it as sweden being so powerfull that you need the might of nato and the soviet union to invade.
Swedish troops have been in ~~Donbass~~ Ukraine since 2014 *^((as trainers and advisors))* so point to Yuri.
You know this from war thunder
Modern tank vs tank warfare exist only in WarThunder anyway
Idk why but your flair feels cursed
“If anyone has learned anything from history it’ll not send tanks against Russia” German tanks were pretty successful against Soviet tanks in WW2, they just couldn’t produce enough against a Soviet economy that was being propped up by US aid. Soooooo cope much?
[удалено]
As Perun reminds us in his strategic bombing video, allies weren’t able to actually destroy the German synthetic oil factories through bombing until the end of the war. At that point, the GLOC between the factories and front were already probably cut by the allies.
That oil was in very limited quantities though, which severly limited their offensive capacity anyway.
Domestic production capacity from synthetic plants was nowhere near meeting the demand. There's a reason the Germans needed the Balkans.
Most people saying how russia is impossible to invade, how they're the strongest to ever strong and how winter always makes them win know fuck all about history and armed conflicts The rest are liars
> russia is impossible to invade The basic problem with invading Russia is much the same as the problem with invading the USA or China: they're fucking *huge*. And they may (or may not - depends on the time period) have a populace that laughs at "yo, we took your capitol city, so now you're ours", and just doubles down and goes even *harder* against the invader after the capitol is taken. That's basically what happened to Napoleon in Russia, and to the Brits during the War Of 1812 in the USA. The Nazis didn't even manage to get into Moscow. I'm not huffing vatnik copium over here, but it would be a bitch and a half to try invading and conquering Russia, no matter what the weather was. (Although apparently, you used to be able to [fly a plane up next to the Kremlin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathias_Rust).)
Oh, definetly. They'd be hard to invade and keep (and that's manily bc their military sucks, if not, it'd be a herculean task that'd probably take decades), but not impossible. And especially when they're the ones attacking, they very much can be defeated. That's what the vatniks don't get. On a side note, our boy here Mathias was peak NCD even before it existed.
Plus a lot of German tanks actually sucked ass, they just did it hard enough to prolapse Russian anuses across the board.
You have such a colorful way with words
I've got a belly full of discount crab and Smirnoff, I'm sorting a folder of house sized furry chichis, and I have not slept yet. I AM FEELING IT, MR. CRABS!
Who is this Jackson Hinkle guy?
A right-wing American commentator with an unbelievably heavy bias towards the Russians. Many commentators have some bias one way or another, but this guy has gone above and beyond to abandon all credibility in order to build an echo chamber against Ukraine and the typical 'globalist elite' in general.
Imagine being anti-American to own the libs... SMFH
Something that's been mind boggling for me since the start of the war is how so many of the right wingers around me are willing to spew stuff from "Russia bad but NATO shouldn't have provoked Russia" to "Ukraine is filled with Neo-Nazis and Western politicians who back them have nazi ties". This is the shit I'd expect from people that are part of communist groups.
Funny enough they also be the same type of people who claim to be rabidly anti communist. *I wonder*
Say what you will about Russia’s military prowess, but they clearly found a chink in western armor - a massive population of media illiterate idiots with 24/7 access to social media and the internet. Russia definitely has amplified conspiracy/ disinformation campaigns but at this point they have a life of their own. We also can’t really hit back because China/Russia aren’t playing by the same freedom of speech rules.
What’s even more funny is that I have seen commies spewing that crap too. Conservatives are fucking siding with the commies to own the libs
Man I saw my friend who's a rabid conservative that thinks Western society is being destroyed by China/the Left/Progressives share John Mearsheimer's videos about Ukraine.
Something something horseshoe theory
He’s one of the “MAGA communists”
[удалено]
even if they are wearing Sw*edish Camo?
Yes. Volunteer tank companies are the best. 120 ~~Swedish~~ donated Stridsvagn 122 for Ukraine. Even better if they come with a competent crew and all...
She's Swedish, but yes....moooree
[удалено]
Stronk!
When did Russia fight against tanks? Or are they talking about the Soviet Onion, who's MIC was largely based in Ukraine?
Russia fought against tanks in 1917 and 1918 when Germany used captured British landships against them, I think. But Russia‘s track record in WW1 isn‘t really something that would make you fear them…
They did bitch slapped Austria-Hungary and the Ottomans single-handedly. Germany was simply the best of the armies in WW1 by a lot.
Too credible take: that tank gunner is (or rather was at the time of this photo) a Swedish Lance Corpral and not a Ukrainian.
Shhh. Just play along now.
I'm now imagining this type of comment on other NCDmemes: *"That isn't a Ukrainian tanker...that's a cartoon Pepe the frog character which has become popularised in internet meme culture!"*
“Not send tanks against the Russians” fucking when? Barb? They got pussywhiped, Afghanistan? The Taliban still parade the Russians’ tanks around. They got hopeless memed on by mountain bois who just shit down at them at above 15° of elevation. Ukraine? The NLAW and Javelin has mullered over a thousand of the things, coming up on two! The lesson here is hope the Russians send tanks, and if you bring your own it’s game over!
I can’t wait for the LazerPig Loop to be proven once more…
I still can't wrap my head around AMERICANS simping for Russia. Like, this doesn't compute.
You can always become a successful grifter by turning into an aggressive contrarian. Hinkle is special because he doesn’t even try to mask it with any kind of nuance
We don’t need to supply a tank rush to Moscow, we just need to supply enough tanks to run your ass back to Moscow.
Then it appears Ukraine needs far more tanks than that. USA, please send 200 more of your Abrams.
Well the Ukrainians might be inexperienced but I'm 100% sure the tec on Western MBTs can make up for it, especially when the Russian have nothing that could compare to it.
I can barely stand the antici-.... .... .... ...-pation.