- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
- worldnews@lemmygrad.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
I don't want to sound like a Putinist gigafascist, but I think Ukraine may have more than one problem.
I prefer "Munitions Stand-Off Fence" but I just call them cope cages normally
Also as far as I’ve heard Iraq’s army just simply sucked at tank warfare strategizing
it's slightly cope to say that the iraqi army was incompetent imo
like it was probably about as good as the nva, coalition just had an enormous advantage in sensors tech. proto-digital army vs analog army
can I see the pictures?
found some of the aftermath
Show
could someone tell me what exactly I am seeing in this video? https://twitter.com/MyLordBebo/status/1766891196989706377/video/2
They should just do what I did in every game of Command & ConquerSend every single tank they have out on a Death or Glory strikeThen when the Brotherhood of Nod (Russia[the bad guys]) is busy fighting the tanks, you send an APC holding a single engineer to capture their Mobile Construction Unit and win the gameWell, give it another year or so and it'll get its pejorative nickname
Something like Zelensky's Folly or the Kursk Krunch
I'm wondering if the traditional tank is just plain obsolete in the age of drones.
Shit against Russia's navy drones were pretty effective. Those things are something else
we need to retvrn to napoleonic warfare where both sides march in unison to the front lines, and only shoot when commanders on both sides give the signal at the same time
I know you're meme'ing but there were good reasons why warfare was done that way for hundreds (if not thousands) of years. WWI completely changed everything we thought we knew about fighting wars. WWII was where the technology of WWI was fully realized with the tactics to go with it.
I seriously wonder if the future of warfare is going to be about who can field the most drones and there are few (if any) actual troops anywhere near the battlefield. Even a little 8" drone armed with a 9mm firearm could be more effective than having a rifleman that needs to eat, sleep, and is at risk of dying. If your drone "dies," it's not an issue because the operator with experience is 100 miles away and just switches to a different drone.
Nations with more manufacturing capabilities and stronger economies no longer have to worry about troops. Their experienced pilots can't be harmed, so they're only limited by how much material they can send out into the field. Casualties become a thing of the past. Even better is you can salvage your damaged drones or even enemy drones. That's something you can't do with people.
Can't wait for the first F-16 to be shot down by the Russians. Ukraine already lost one, but it supposedly crashed instead of being shot down by the Russians. There is also a high chance that it was shot down by their own air defence lol, either way the air chief was canned instantly.
These US/NATO wunderwaffe are not so wonderful when faced with an equal foe. Their biggest selling points were that they were tested in real world combat, but it's easy to look amazing against much weaker armies. Same thing with all these American mercs who thought it was gonna be another walk in the park like Iraq lol
Last week I had one of my libs grinning while talking about how Ukraine has Russia on the ropes after their own "special military operation" into Russian territory.
The tanks can be as realiable as can be, but ain't nobody can do smth about the air being full of drones...
They suck anywhere that doesn't have infrastructure to support their 65+ ton heavy asses
I was like, "no fucking way", so I looked it up:
it is one of the heaviest tanks in service at nearly 73.6 short tons (66.8 metric tons).
This motherfucker weighs more than a Ferdinand tank destroyer......... that is one thicc main battle tank...American weight creep. Like the newest Bradleys weight like 30 tons, slightly heavier than a WW2 medium tank and twice as heavy as a BMP (which the Bradley was suppose to be a copy of).
Does this mean the US will actually try to create Bolo tanks due to sheer hubris?
Namer is basically a main battle tank with people instead of a gun
i wonder what the carbon footprint of running one of them for a day is
They should have sat on them all and used them in the Kursk offensive primarily on roads instead of having them sink in soft soil across Ukrainian fields where they get wrecked by artillery and drones.
Honestly would've been light-years ahead of the strategy they used
electronic warfare is absolutely a thing
- https://defencesecurityasia.com/en/increasing-number-of-us-smart-weapons-fail-due-to-russian-ew-systems-in-ukraine/
- https://www.forsige.com/news/russia-electronic-warfare-and-air-defense-that-are-making-ukraines-drone-ineffective/
Seriously though I don't know why they thought a few dozen Abrams would do anything. The US deployed over 2,000 tanks during Desert Storm and that was basically a skirmish compared to what's going on in Ukraine.
My theory is that the NATO MIC is treating the war like a lab experiment. They give Ukraine a handful of export versions of all sorts of different hardware, then see how the Russian military takes them out for their own R&D purposes.
IIRC there were reports done about that happening in the Middle East. Various NATO countries were testing weapons against whoever was in the way. I think one of the studies done was on the effects of depleted uranium ammunition.
It is time to work on my stormworks tank again (has a tiny turret, light weight)
Expect that autoloader variant of M1A2 Abrams, AbramsX would lose soon.
