Russian special military operation in Ukraine #25

Podlodka77 wrote:News from Ukroshitstan

TASS; September 21, 4:30 p.m
In 'elensky's office, the West called on Kiev to deploy long-range missiles and Abrams tanks


NEW YORK, September 21. /TASS/. Counselor of the office of the president of Ukroshitstan, Mihail Podolyak, urged the western countries to provide Kiev with long-range missiles for RSZO HIMARS and Abrams tanks. This is what he told the CNN channel on Wednesday, reacting to the upcoming referendums in Donbass and the implementation of partial mobilization in Russia.
"Ukraine's allies must put more HIMARS missiles on it, including those with a range of up to 300 km, as well as American Abrams tanks," Podolyak TV channel quoted. Also, he urged the Western countries to give Russia a "decisive answer" in connection with the beginning of the "new stage of the war".

https://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/15824221

ucmvulcan wrote:One more thing about the Abrams, does the Pentagon really want to risk that? Oh wait, these are the people who spend upwards of a trillion dollars on war every year without audits and oversight.  Anyways, if I were a Russian tank design team I would be ecstatic at Ukraine getting Abrams because in short order the DPR and LPR will get them, and then Russian design bureaus would be able to thoroughly test and study them.

flamming_python wrote:Guess who's gonna be celebrating

LMFS wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:News from Ukroshitstan

TASS; September 21, 4:30 p.m
In 'elensky's office, the West called on Kiev to deploy long-range missiles and Abrams tanks


NEW YORK, September 21. /TASS/. Counselor of the office of the president of Ukroshitstan, Mihail Podolyak, urged the western countries to provide Kiev with long-range missiles for RSZO HIMARS and Abrams tanks. This is what he told the CNN channel on Wednesday, reacting to the upcoming referendums in Donbass and the implementation of partial mobilization in Russia.
"Ukraine's allies must put more HIMARS missiles on it, including those with a range of up to 300 km, as well as American Abrams tanks," Podolyak TV channel quoted. Also, he urged the Western countries to give Russia a "decisive answer" in connection with the beginning of the "new stage of the war".

https://tass.ru/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/15824221

Yes please do it, and paint a bullseye in US bases al over the world  

Backman wrote:300,000 is a lot more than the guesses people had. I thought 150,000 was going to be the number. I know they all aren't infantry. No matter how you look at it 300k is lots. If we consider that the militia , PMC Wagner and the Chechens + a few new volenteer units being assembled , we are talking over 400,000.

ALAMO wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:
The following is just my opinion and therefore not authoritative;
All tanks are very heavy vehicles, which would be particularly evident on the soil of Ukroshitstan because it is not an Iraqi wasteland.

Good luck using a tank weighing 62+ tons in a road system, where bridges were built deliberately to carry less

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

ALAMO wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:
The following is just my opinion and therefore not authoritative;
All tanks are very heavy vehicles, which would be particularly evident on the soil of Ukroshitstan because it is not an Iraqi wasteland.

Good luck using a tank weighing 62+ tons in a road system, where bridges were built deliberately to carry less

Abrams was designed for Euro plains, intended to meet the advancing soviet tank formations.

So they would work fine in ukraine and most bridges can carry them easily.

0nillie0 wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

ALAMO wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:
The following is just my opinion and therefore not authoritative;
All tanks are very heavy vehicles, which would be particularly evident on the soil of Ukroshitstan because it is not an Iraqi wasteland.

Good luck using a tank weighing 62+ tons in a road system, where bridges were built deliberately to carry less

Abrams was designed for Euro plains, intended to meet the advancing soviet tank formations.

So they would work fine in ukraine and most bridges can carry them easily.

You said it yourself... Euro plains, not Ukranian. Abrams presents more problems to find solutions for, and i dont see it as an added value.
That is not to say we wont see them try to deploy them anyway.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

0nillie0 wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

ALAMO wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:
The following is just my opinion and therefore not authoritative;
All tanks are very heavy vehicles, which would be particularly evident on the soil of Ukroshitstan because it is not an Iraqi wasteland.

Good luck using a tank weighing 62+ tons in a road system, where bridges were built deliberately to carry less

Abrams was designed for Euro plains, intended to meet the advancing soviet tank formations.

So they would work fine in ukraine and most bridges can carry them easily.

You said it yourself... Euro plains, not Ukranian. Abrams presents more problems to find solutions for, and i dont see it as an added value.
That is not to say we wont see them try to deploy them anyway.

Ukraine is part of that...do they not teach you Geogprahy in school anymore....

ALAMO wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
Abrams was designed for Euro plains, intended to meet the advancing soviet tank formations.
So they would work fine in ukraine and most bridges can carry them easily.

Jesus fuckin' Christ, go and be stupid somewhere else, finally!
No, they won't you bloody moron, as the whole road, rail & transport system in ALL ex-WarPac countries was made to have one-way flow only.
You have no bloody idea what that means, as you live in a shithole where bridges are made of iron, because grandpa Roosevelt ordered the jobless mob to carry the slabs.
Most of the bridges are made with MLC60 standard, which makes them incapable to carry more than 50 tons, and 55 tons max. That attribute is  MAXIMAL, which means that ONE vessel can cross it ONE WAY, not heavier than 50t.
All western fuckin' vehicles are TOO BIG for both the bridges and the railroad system. Carrying out any maneuvers is a logistic challenge, as the tanks - both Leopard and M1 - are to high to fit some railroad tunnels. An APC with side screens attached is TOO WIDE to fit the tunnels or to bypass the other train coming in another direction.
There have already been railroad/road accidents due of that.
Aside of the fact that the US moron crews are so stupid that can't fit the lane to cross the bridge, it turns out that he speaks no English when the police come to the scene.
And we are an example of GIANT reconstruction since we joined NATO 20 (!!) years ago, with HUGE investments in the railroad and road infrastructure, that didn't help much - we can transport some stuff, in peace time, doubling the range as the special road must be taken.
Now put an Ukropistan here.
Not YOU, as you are too dumb.
I speak for the brain having part.

0nillie0 wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

0nillie0 wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

ALAMO wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:
The following is just my opinion and therefore not authoritative;
All tanks are very heavy vehicles, which would be particularly evident on the soil of Ukroshitstan because it is not an Iraqi wasteland.

Good luck using a tank weighing 62+ tons in a road system, where bridges were built deliberately to carry less

Abrams was designed for Euro plains, intended to meet the advancing soviet tank formations.

So they would work fine in ukraine and most bridges can carry them easily.

You said it yourself... Euro plains, not Ukranian. Abrams presents more problems to find solutions for, and i dont see it as an added value.
That is not to say we wont see them try to deploy them anyway.

Ukraine is part of that...do they not teach you Geogprahy in school anymore....

Not when Abrams was designed you dimwit.

I am talking about the infrastructure of the Ukrainian SSR. And the current infrastructure is probably in a worse condition now than as it was then.

Edit* Altough in hindsight, i should have made that clearer in my first post.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:



How to tell me you do know what you're talking about without telling me you don't know what your talking about.

What is considered the great planes of Europe has been that way before tanks were invented and the infrastructure is the same

ALAMO wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
Abrams was designed for Euro plains, intended to meet the advancing soviet tank formations.
So they would work fine in ukraine and most bridges can carry them easily.

Jesus fuckin' Christ, go and be stupid somewhere else, finally!
No, they won't you bloody moron, as the whole road, rail & transport system in ALL ex-WarPac countries was made to have one-way flow only.
You have no bloody idea what that means, as you live in a shithole where bridges are made of iron, because grandpa Roosevelt ordered the jobless mob to carry the slabs.
Most of the bridges are made with MLC60 standard, which makes them incapable to carry more than 50 tons, and 55 tons max. That attribute is  MAXIMAL, which means that ONE vessel can cross it ONE WAY, not heavier than 50t.
All western fuckin' vehicles are TOO BIG for both the bridges and the railroad system. Carrying out any maneuvers is a logistic challenge, as the tanks - both Leopard and M1 - are to high to fit some railroad tunnels. An APC with side screens attached is TOO WIDE to fit the tunnels or to bypass the other train coming in another direction.
There have already been railroad/road accidents due of that.
Aside of the fact that the US moron crews are so stupid that can't fit the lane to cross the bridge, it turns out that he speaks no English when the police come to the scene.
And we are an example of GIANT reconstruction since we joined NATO 20 (!!) years ago, with HUGE investments in the railroad and road infrastructure, that didn't help much - we can transport some stuff, in peace time, doubling the range as the special road must be taken.
Now put an Ukropistan here.
Not YOU, as you are too dumb.
I speak for the brain having part.

0nillie0 wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:



How to tell me you do know what you're talking about without telling me you don't know what your talking about.

What is considered the great planes of Europe has been that way before tanks were invented and the infrastructure is the same

Good thing you are not consistently proven to be full of crap every other page since you crawled from under your rock when Syria hit off...
Oh wait...


I look forward to see the nimble Abrams perform in Ukraine... This will be fine

ALAMO wrote:You have been compromised, sir.
Several times, but I suppose this is some kind of sexual pervercy that you need a different folks **** your ass hard
No worries, I don't care - I am a tolerant guy!

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Well if they do go to Ukraine (which I doubt they will)