Yep. American weapons are designed and built for American battle doctrine. The Ukraine War follows a completely different style of battle. For one thing is the fact that Americans tend to go into battle with overwhelming force.
@@DrawingCartoonAnimationsPro That is a complete nonsese. If I give you something new, which you never seen before, I'm gonna spend a lot of time teaching you how to use it. Which NATO and US is doing, in Poland for example, or in Germany. I'm not gonna give you "new" tech and say here, try it on, learn it yourself. The first comment is spot on. This is no fliplop sandals army or avganis(which are amazing on its own) this is the Russian Federation. And there is NO nation on the Planet Earth who understands war better than them. RF the ofspring of the people who Won the WW2. Unlike what they teach you in the western schools, every sane normal man or woman who can read on its own is well aware that the Red Army won the WW2. 27 million died so you wouldn't be speaking german right now. Ask yourself if the alies would actually move forward against the Nazis in France, if there was no Red Army fighting in the East, alone, against the Nazis? M1 Abrams is a good tank, indeed, in desert areas, fighting against RPG wielding afgans. No tank today is safe against a swarm of drones.
Russia has never fought NATO. YOu are not fighting NATO now. You are fighting Ukraine, with the world's 22nd largest military, which is using NATO weapons. Ukrainians have fought you for ten years. ISince 224 February 2022, you have stolen less territory than the Germans stole on 22 June 1941.
@nogonenad Im not pro US friend. All im saying is his example was a bad one to mention in the context of “unprepared for war”, when the type of guys he mentions have been at war for 3000 years.
@@Taraba12 Russia doesn't pull out the latest weapons either, they fight with Soviet stocks.And those planes you listed won't fly long in the sky in front of Russian air defense.Everyone realized that Western weapons are overrated and tested only on shepherds.But with Russia they are in a puddle.Russian weapons have always been the best cheap simple and effective.Why did the West refuse Putin's proposal to conduct an experiment of pulling all their best air defenses to the place where Oreshnik will hit? Because they know in advance that they will also be embarrassed and that's it.A man like Putin knows all the capabilities of their air defenses otherwise he wouldn't have proposed a duel.They can't shoot down a single Iskander supersonic and where can they shoot down a hypersonic Dagger or Oreshnik.
ummm "russia"/rome definatly "rose from the ashes" as in ONE hypersonic "satan" missile (with 30 fkn targeted nuclear warheads) can end continents, even if they used it as an emp weapon, but putin is tryin to hope theyll stop = its not gonna happen, by design ...
The simple fact of the matter is the Abrams has an over inflated reputation because we almost never committed to battle against a peer opponent and on the rare occasion that we do fight somebody in our own weight class, we make sure The Abrams has tons of dismounted, infantry running cover for it under the envelope of billions of dollars of air power to make sure there’s literally nothing on the battlefield that can do any damage before we expose them. It’s not magic, it doesn’t survive hits from a capable enemy. We’ve just always made sure the enemy didn’t have the ability to hit it with anything big enough to do any damage.
Abrams weakness were well known for decades... poor top down defend, poor precision attack defense, poor operation in mud, and so on... Nothing new here and losses are expected per downgraded version and users
@@alfredneuman6911 Bro you spent 1 trillion to replace the taliban with a better armed taliban. In fact, name 1 war you have won? The last war you idiots won was in the 1800's against mexico.
"American weapons are papertigers", you say that but a dozen HIMARS in mid 2022 stopped the Russian advance, and helped Ukraine have a successful offensive in winter 2022.
U.S. weapons are fine although the companies rape the DoD on prices. It's just a high intensity war with a real adversary. The U.S. directed a lot of Ukraine strategy which was based on U.S. war doctrine. Even tho U.S. doctrine is based on having air superiority. The Ukrainians fought fiercely, it's just no one gives the Russians credit for actually being good. Albeit they were rusty as hell since they haven't fought a high intensity war since their new govt was formed & initially suffered from inefficiencies & old Soviet doctrine. But they've updated their strategies & are finally able to use all that heavy industry they have. Russia mobilizing convicts especially the ones with long sentences/violent crimes proved to be formible fighters. They did most of the heavy lifting & destroyed the majority of Ukranian NATO built armies. There was a notable difference on the battlefield when Wagner was pulled from the front before it was fully absorbed into the MoD.
@@themc.kennyshow6585 succesful offensive in 2022? the ukraine army could not get past the defensive lines of russia and lost lot of troops for litral nothin
@@rageagaintstheNWOeven if you put the highest version of abrams on here.. It still gonna be a hot tin can, drone doesn't give a fuck about your depleted uranium Armor when got hit from top attack😅
US Abrams can survive in battlefields controlled by low grade armies like those found in Afghanistan, Iraq & Libya. But when it comes Ukrainka battlefield, dominated by Russian MoD the story is different. MoD is a highly trained and motivated army. They have several means of destruction to meet modern challenges on battlefield.They major on assymetric warfare tactics. They use cheap kamikaze drones to take out very expensive US military assets like Abrams tanks. Russian MoD is a sophisticated army capable of adapting quickly in battlefields. They don't depend on external resources but use their scientific base to solve military problems. MoD is a war machine and has world class means of destruction/ tactics to take out threats on the battlefield. And that's what is going on in Ukraine battlefield.
Wonderful garbatge. YOu actually believe this crap. Explain why all of your "modern" tanks have the turrent vulnerability, which the double-strike javeliln takes advantage of. Your R-14 Armata has never made it to the battlefield. Seems you cant fix the transmission problem.
@@emmanuelubaha5815 you ryssians have been saying frim dat one that you destroyed them all and that they are ineffective. Why dud putin threaten nuckear war if nato gave abrans to ujraine?
@@TorontoSaurusEx PFFT 😂, nah. We know they are junk. They don't even have a proper reverse speed for tank warfare. They are getting chewed up by Bradley IFV and loitering munitions.
@@alfredneuman6911 Tanks are actually VERY limited. They are useless when deployed on their own. Tanks work the best when utilized as part of a larger force. Especially ground forces who are basically their eyes and ears.
Previous use of the Abraham tanks was on weaker foes, and the true capabilities of the tank were not tested. Now it has. All weapons will be vulnerable, given man’s ingenuity and inventiveness.
That only tells half the story. Yes Russia is the one that crossed the border and invaded Ukraine….. but they did so after eight years of diplomacy failed to achieve a workable piece between Russia and the ever aggressive ever-expanding ever belligerent NATO who essentially took over Ukraine in 2014 through soft power, political manipulation and has been pushing for a proxi-war with Russia ever since. The only reason this war didn’t work for NATO as expected was because the Russians called their Bluff and attacked much sooner than we thought they would. We had expected the Russians to continue trying to rely on diplomacy for several more years while we had more time to upgrade Ukraine’s defenses and continue to fortify the cities, making it basically impossible to invade …. Russia chose to force the issue before we had time to basically make it a killing field, and specifically before we managed to field test hypersonic weaponry. So in short, yes, Russia did take the aggressive stance in committing to open war, but the reality is far more nuanced than that and it’s not like they were unprovoked as we keep repeating over and over and over in the western media
@@Matt-yg8ub Russia did not "invade". The Territories of DPR and LPR exercised their Legally Protected Rights and followed guidelines set forth by the United Nations to seek self determination which is an Internationally recognized and protected Right. As per UN Charter ANY Territory has a right to Sovereignty and to leave its current country, and choose which country it would like to be part of. DPR and LPR sent Formal, Legal Requests to Russia for Humanitarian and Defensive Aid, this gave Russia legal and moral authority to enter contested Territories, which is backed by the UN Charter. Russia was invited, using the law, aka NOT an invasion. In 2014 NATO sponsored Terrorists committed the attack of the Maidan Massacre which resulted in the Coup against Ukraine's Legitimate Government. Which means NATO invaded Ukraine (covertly), overthrew their Government and then installed Pro NATO Oligarch who agreed to then start Ethnic Cleansing of Russian Populations of Eastern Ukraine. You have Western Brainrot.
You invaded, Ivan. Your dictator spoke to the Russian people, and to the Ukraiinian military, on that monring, 24 February 2022. You invaded with 200 thousand soldiers. Ukraine did not invade you.
You cannot praise a tank just because it has been proven affective against sandals sand fighters in the Middle East. 😅 Ukraine/ Russia conflict is different level. Early mercenaries have said so.
@@-Zardoz- Thank you for your kind observation, no I wasnt, I was referring to pre modern history which was the statement made in the video. I cannot recall drones being used before modern history, perhaps you might offer your suggestions?
1. Russia is not the aggressor in this conflict. Some people didn't need to expand their borders so close to Russia. NATO, led by (whose name is not mentioned)😁They knew perfectly well what the Kremlin's reaction would be, and they deliberately went to this provocation. Что 2. Whatever kind of tank it is.With what respect (paid by the weapons contractors) The media did not advertise it, no matter how much it was praised as the coolest and most invincible tank. Even if it was built using alien technology. He'll burn up like everyone else. It's just a matter of time.
Russia has a not so insignificant domestic chip manufacturing industry. They do not make as good chips as TSMC, but more than good enough for most purposes
The Ukranians added Kontakt-1 ERA blocks to the turret of the M1s they received along with cope cages. Didn't help as they were still destroyed by drones and Russian ATGM like the Kornet. Heavily armored Merkava tanks with ERA and APS didn't prevent destruction at the hands of the home made Yassin 105 dual warhead RPGs or the Hezbollah Almas-4 ATGM which uses a top attack like the U.S. Javelin. If anything "legendary" invincibility of the Merkava with its armor and APS was fiction.
The APS systems of the Merkava are actually very, very good, it’s just that the trade-off in those automated system systems is a lack of deployed, dismounted infantry… because you don’t wanna kill your own people, which increases the vulnerability to the tank or you have to decrease the sensitivity of those systems or redesign them much more along the lines of the Russian Afganit in order to prevent them from killing your dismounted soldiers
Kornet has been designed in the late 90s to defeat heavy western tank, it's not your old AT-3 Sagger anymore. It's a very efficient (and cheap) atgm who can easily defeat ERA armor Even APS system can be defeated
the germans had 2000 tanks in their kursk offensive and lost,and you speak about winning the war against russia with 31 abrams tanks?oh i forgot,the 50000 killed ukrainian cannonfodders
American tanks are too heavy, to expensive to maintain, and can't be mass produced. I been saying this for yrs that American weapons, and esp american tanks, are over-engineered. the US is now in same position as the Germans were during WW2. the Germans had the best weapons, even superior tanks, but they were not able to mass produced them. the US is now facing the same problem. it looks like the US did not learn any lessons from the Germans during WW2
You actually think the military industrial complex cares if our weapons work?? IMO, they are all sold as a bill-of-goods, and as long as the $$$ keep rolling in, who cares.
That tanks were not really tasted against respectable oponents. They, like a lot west produced staffs, have great MSM and promotive pripaganda suport. Now they have meet reality. Like and other weapon sistem, like F-16, AA sistems and etc. Generaly, westerner change games with broken agreements, international law, used unlimited force, fight against weaker oponents, commiting war crimes and named it as "colateral demage" ( what a unhuman disgusting hipocrisy to named killed women, children and other uncombat people as a "demage"?!), created false flag operatiins and false informatiins....
AP system wouldnt have helped. Spending $8000 to defend from $1000 drones. The system will be totally depleted in a matter of days if not hours. The only way to win is not to play!
Current generation tanks are nearly obsolete, in that they lack a practical means of detecting and destroying incoming drones prior to their close approach to the tank hull. However, it is conceptually possible to address such a shortcoming. It is possible to design an omnidirectional camera and microphone pod that can continuously monitor all approach angles of the tank. Such a sensor pod could potentially detect drones during their approach. Additionally, such an omnidirectional sensor pod could also be equipped with a large number of shotgun like barrels (aimed in omnidirectional hemispherical fashion), pre-loaded with a large number of scatter shot munitions, which could be electronically fired like implemented in the "metal storm" weapon system. Such a device could hypothetically produce overlapping bursts of omnidirectional scatter shot, which would likely hit any approaching aerial drone device, regardless of approach angle. Another design change that would likely help, would be to remove most or all of the human crew from the interior of the tank. Tanks like the M1 Abrams require a crew of 4 to operate (gunner, driver, loader, commander). With the right internal hardware, a single human can control all functions of a tank simultaneously, as frequently demonstrated in various video games involving tank combat. By reducing the crew count from 4 to 1, the required volume of internal protected space is reduced. Reducing the protected internal volume of the tank means that the tank can be made smaller in exterior dimensions, which reduces the amount of surface area of the tank. Reducing the exterior surface area reduces the mass of armor required, for a given armor thickness. Consequently, shrinking the tank means that one can place thicker armor on more places around the hull of the tank (such as on the currently vulnerable top), without exceeding the functional weight limit of tanks. Tanks have a practical size and weight limit, in that they need to be able to be transported by railroad, and they need to be able to cross normal bridges designed for lighter automobiles, without causing them to collapse. This restricts the tank's overall mass to roughly 75 tons. Decreasing the size of the tank (by shrinking the internal human crew space) would allow for thicker armor, while still staying within the approximate 75 ton weight limit necessary to avoid overstressing many common bridges.
@@Fritz_Schlunder Those tanks only have about 40 rounds and only a few days fuel. They need to be supplied by trucks, almost constantly, or they become...steel hulks. Trucks need bridges, and drones can easily find bridges and trucks, so...
War is all about propaganda, otherwise no one would go there fighting to kill. In democracies, people who want war would be the only fighters and no leader would advertise it without participating... Which is not the case. Banksters and US militaro-industrial complex are the only means that make it happen. Minsk agreements should have been respected to prevent such event, but obviously NATO and EU leaders had the strong intention to push Russia to war, as they were installing missile facilities right to Ukraine border... Just see the facts with your own eyes and do not trust MSM, their only common projeeeect is to keep civilian societies unable to ask about the responsibilities of banksters and profiters. This economic system against nature led by rapacious interests maintains slavery by coercion imposed by their armed forces. We are all prisonners complying to our state. Borders do not exist, there will not be a savior. Earth Truth and Love are the only quests, ordinary, natural, common and essential giving meaning to our simple lives, our only common interesting values. Societies are made in order to enhance cooperation for better living conditions for all, not only few minorities...... Things have changed, but we are still fruits of Earth. One planet, one people, one common destiny . Let's write together our own destiny and drive our intentions in the same direction.
We live in a world full of scarcity, there would be wars even if there weren't any bankers. Human's are cruel by nature so unless you can change human's nature war will always come back no matter what you change.
Well said. You're absolutely right as our true heritage of symbiosis with the earth was hijacked by our controllers who worship evil and feed off low vibrational frequencies. I believe that people are understanding and awakening to the fact that the history we've been taught is a lie to keep us enslaved, and make no mistake, we are slaves! The key to freedom and a prosperous future lies in understanding our past and reacquiring what was stolen from us. It's time we end this divide-and-conquer operation, come together, and take back our planet. BTW, war is the ultimate low-vibrational state.
@@notsure6182 Of course it's about propaganda! Does the name Joseph Goebbels ring a bell? The mainstream media has been on a coordinated campaign of anti-Russian propaganda since this war started. BTW, the failure of military recruiting is about policy not propaganda.
The West have been giving Ukraine second and third hand junk since day one. These are Abrams in shape only. They don't have the latest armour, the latest engines, the latest guns, the latest firing systems. Nothing. The USA stripped out all the important stuff and gave the Ukrainians a metal box on tracks just in case the Russians captured one. The same goes for Leopards and Challengers. The reason it took so long to get these tanks to Ukraine was to give time for Western countries tos trip all the improtant tech, armour and guns out of them before handing them over.
Oh, these are definitely downgraded models sporting old armor tech technologies and lacking a lot of the electronics of the most up-to-date versions, including APS…. But the fundamental question is are those much much more expensive models worth the money compared to Russia’s quantity over quality approach that seems to be winning the day in Ukraine
and the turbine engine which produces so much heat that it can be seen from a great distance using thermal imaging cameras, especially in winter. Added to this is the fact that the turbine needs a long time to warm up. In the combat theater in a cold region like Ukraine it is extremely difficult to be agile and move quickly.
3. Heavy western tanks are unadapted for Ukraine soil, who often turn to mud. Same as the Tiger I and other german heavy tanks during wwII Western tanks were designed for a mobile and defensive war against the varsaw pact, and were extremely well made for that. A modern T-90M weight only 48t
Like all Western hi-tech weapons, Abram tank earned its reputation while operating against poorly equipped and inadequately trained ragtag soldiers. Now faced with a near peer adversary, these wonder weapons are proven junk. For this very reason, we don't see the game changer F16 anywhere near the frontline.
So when you guys use your toys against poor countries that are unable to defend themselves your toys might seem invincible but when you try it against a super power like Russia its a whole different ball game.
#1 thing is they removed all the Reactive Armor Plating that protects against the same thing. Its just too expensive. So this was more political donation than any effective weapons platforms. M1A1 was sold off in bulk. As these were the oldest and not as useful. Current version is M1A2 Sep V4. Which would have survived a lot more of these sort of attacks, but doubt they want the tech to go to Ukraine, China + Russia...
The Russians defeated Napoleon Bonaparte’s “Grand Army” at Moscow in 1812 and ejected them from Russian territory. [Remember Tchaikovsky’s “1812 Overture?”]. This was the beginning of Napoleon’s downfall. The Soviet Red Army, not the US nor British armies, was primarily responsible for breaking the back of the German Wehrmacht during World War II. The six month winter battle at Stalingrad, during which 1.1 million Russians died, was THE decisive battle and turning point of World War II. Whether you like it or not, the fighting spirit and military competence of the Russians was decisive in defeating Hitler’s forces. The Russians are a martial people with a proud and distinguished fighting tradition. In other words, the Russians are not and never were a pushover as those benighted losers in Washington would have you believe. It was stupid and reckless for the Biden Administration to pick a fight with them.
If it weren't for strategic bombing and submarine warfare in the Atlantic, there would have been no victorious battle of Stalingrad. ;) I can find you a book by a Russian historian who clearly states this. Besides, the USSR, together with the Third Reich, started World War II. The Ribentrop-Molotov Pact and the attack on Poland in 1939.
@ And if the Russians had not defeated Germany at Stalingrad, there is a good chance that Hitler would have won the war. The Germans weren’t exactly pushovers either. The Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe were actually quite good. It was Hitler’s stupid decision to fight a two front ear. By the time that the D-day invasion (“Operation Overlord “) was launched, the Germans were already on their heels. If the Russians had not decisively routed Germany on the Eastern front, the Germans would likely have held on the Western front (Normandy). I recommend that you read “Stalingrad” by Antony Beevor.
The Abrams are a sight to behold, they clean the soldiers, wash them and polish them as if they were going to a party. In reality, they go to the party, but they never come back !
The next weapon system we will find is out dated will be our carriers. We will be shocked when our very expensive technological terrors become submarines. Remember the battleship Bismark was advertised as unsinkable. Then came the end of the battleship era.
Yemen already giving the carriers a run for their money. Forced USA to move out because they are very scared to lose their "Power Projection". Once that falls, they will be getting a lot more surprises.
For the last eighty plus years, the Anglo-American militaries (and by now all Western militaries) have relied on massive air superiority as an integral part of their offensive combat strategy. While it is indeed possible to conduct major successful offensive operations when lacking air superiority, there are more losses sustained and more time spent when advancing without air superiority, just to name two examples. What about the Germans' initial success in the Battle of the Bulge, one may ask. During that phase of the battle the weather was detrimental for aircraft to fly. Once the weather improved, the tide of the battle was turned almost right away. Abrams battle tank had been designed with nearly total air superiority in mind. And since Ukraine has never had air superiority in this conflict, offensive Western military hardware has never been performing at its best in this conflict.
Both in Vietnam and Afghanistan the US military faced guerrilla-type adversaries. Though when bombing North Vietnam, there were plenty of losses. Remember John McCain?
No matter what tanks one would have given to Ukraine, it wouldn't matter. They simply don't have the means to fight. They are hopelessly outgunned, outsupplied, outflanked, out-everythinged. Tank is just a big mobile decently-protected direct-fire gun. It's NOT invincible by any stretch of imagination, it has weakly-armored areas, and weapons that can penetrate it from side to side through existed for well over a decade. Iraq also happened to show that an RPG into the engine compartment disables it. And just like any other tank, it can't handle an anti-tank mine under a track. Nor can it take an artillery round into the roof. Tanks didn't fail. Ukrainian military and western planners did. To fight an opponent like Russia without air cover and long-range attacks on its positions is a recipie for failure, and so Ukrainians hopelessly lost during that 2023 summer offensive. So badly in fact that they didn't even make it within visual distance of the first belt of Dragons Teeth. They were stopped by entrenched infantry lines in the advanced positions. Russians expected Ukrainians to get to the Dragons teeth within less than a week.
😂 Pada Show😂 american Weapons Always Superior In Their Hollywood Actions Movies 😂But The Zero Survivability Infront Of The Unmatched Russian Game Changing Weapons Platforms 😂....😂😂.....😂😂😂.
This is actually a fair point because right now there is mud, there is slush, there are conditions these tanks are not built for. Shockingly, you'd think a tank would get out of a slush but nope. Not all these 'fancy tanks' - so keep talking crap about the russian ones while you get Lancetted
Not a popular comment Americunt crews no better than the trash equipment. The only purpose of Americunt military equipment is to transfer tax money to the minions of death 💀.
Everyone realized that Western weapons are overrated and tested only on shepherds and cattle herders.But with Russia they are in a puddle.Russian weapons have always been the best cheap simple and effective.Why did the West refuse Putin's proposal to conduct an experiment to pull all their best air defenses to the place where Oreshnik will hit?A man like Putin knows all the capabilities of their air defense, otherwise he wouldn't have suggested a duel. They can't shoot down a single Iskander supersonic, but they can't shoot down a hypersonic Kinzhal or Kernel.
They have used this tank in combat, which is all right, it was designed with that intention in scope. The main question is, Against what enemy is it good for? The answer is undeniable, not against the Russian Army and not in the terrain and conditions they are operating in Ukraine, they were good against rebels running around in sleepers in the middle of the desert somewhere there in the Middle East, Abrams is the king there, no question
The Chinese made 90 nm chips that are extracted from washing machines and used in cheap drones are really effective against Abram and other western tanks.
The Abrams Main Battle Tank did not fail. The Abrams has been engaged in primarily low intensity combat or against troops that had very little training in the Middle East over the last 30 years. The Russo - Ukrainian conflict is the first time that the Abrams MBT has been used in combat against a first rate adversary that is well trained and equipped and willing to use their equipment to the maxiumum effect. The provisioning of around 30 Abrams battle tanks equates to a single battalion. The Ukrainian Army has over 100 tank battalions in their MTOE. The Russian Army in the Ukrainian theater of operations is equipped with thousands of anti-armor weapons with Soldiers that are trained to use them. Therefore a single battalion, 30 tanks, was never able to be a "game changer" when the scale and scope of combat is this large. The expectation that some 30 Abrams MBT was going to be a "game changer" was a pipe dream. Next, the Ukrainain troops are simply not trained to operate the equipment on the Abrams MBT takes years of training for US Army tankers to gain the skills that enable them to operate these tanks. Additionally, the US Army operates using "Combined Arms" tactics that integrates air, artillery, and infantry in the fight. The Ukrainians are not trained or experienced enough to use the Abrams MBT. Note that the US Bradley Fighting Vehicle, German Leopard II and Marder Infantry Fighting Vehicle have also been successfully engaged by Russian Soldiers using anti-armor weapons like drones and anti-tank guided missiles. The Russians are also capable of successfully defeating the T-64 and T-72 tanks and BMP IFVs operated by the Ukrainian Army. The reverse is also true. The Ukrainians have been able to defeat T-72 and T-80 tanks operated by the Russians using anti-armor weapons like drones and ATGMs. To sum up, the Abrams Main Battle Tank was never going to be a "game changer." Neither the Abrams, Leopard, T-64s, T-72s, or T-80s failed. This is high intensity combat and these levels of equipment losses are to be expected.
like the german tiger and panther tanks, the abrahm's weakness is the ass. that is where the engine and the transmission is located, that is also where the armor is thinnest. those who know tanks knows this.
"The Abrams lacks APS which are a standard on European tanks, like the Israeli Merkava..." Is anyone proofreading this before you record? I know Israel is participating in the Eurovision, but they aren't a European nation and the Merkava is not a European tank.
Because this isn’t iraq or Afghanistan war
Yeah US Army really rely on Air Superiority, without it they are just the same as Germany in WW2
Yep. American weapons are designed and built for American battle doctrine. The Ukraine War follows a completely different style of battle. For one thing is the fact that Americans tend to go into battle with overwhelming force.
@@longshot7601 against pathetic enemies as well
And nowhere near enough tanks about 1000 to few
Because the Russians are spectucular failures an military operations.
What happened? The US finally met someone capable of defend themselves!
Yeah especially Ukraine tank operators are dog water. Abrams are good tanks , but they need good operators just like every tank.
@@DrawingCartoonAnimationsProвы серьезно думаете что опытный оператор поможет убежать на тяжелом танке от дрона или ракеты
@@DrawingCartoonAnimationsPro That is a complete nonsese. If I give you something new, which you never seen before, I'm gonna spend a lot of time teaching you how to use it. Which NATO and US is doing, in Poland for example, or in Germany. I'm not gonna give you "new" tech and say here, try it on, learn it yourself. The first comment is spot on. This is no fliplop sandals army or avganis(which are amazing on its own) this is the Russian Federation. And there is NO nation on the Planet Earth who understands war better than them. RF the ofspring of the people who Won the WW2. Unlike what they teach you in the western schools, every sane normal man or woman who can read on its own is well aware that the Red Army won the WW2. 27 million died so you wouldn't be speaking german right now. Ask yourself if the alies would actually move forward against the Nazis in France, if there was no Red Army fighting in the East, alone, against the Nazis? M1 Abrams is a good tank, indeed, in desert areas, fighting against RPG wielding afgans. No tank today is safe against a swarm of drones.
FACTSS😂
Je suis d’accord avec vous 👍👍 le pire, ils sont 50 pays cette guerre est faite pour faiblir l’Europe 😢😢 en premier et la Russie en deuxième
NATO and US fought 3rd tier opponents for the last 80 year. With total air superiority. And was never tested against a near peer military power.
Correction,a mo re intelligent and far more superior power.
"near peer" ? No; "peer".
Russia has never fought NATO. YOu are not fighting NATO now. You are fighting Ukraine, with the world's 22nd largest military, which is using NATO weapons. Ukrainians have fought you for ten years. ISince 224 February 2022, you have stolen less territory than the Germans stole on 22 June 1941.
@@alfredneuman6911🤐🤫 If wishes were horses, keep listening to your own sound.
@@alfredneuman6911and US lost small country like Vietnam, Afghanistan
The Mighty Russian Shovel is already legendary
Game changing junk
At least +200% enchantment!
Has western weaponry really won any modern conflict since the Falklands? Mission accomplished... lol.
So is the Washing Machine
My grandpa went to battle with shovels MPL50. Not because of the lack of rifles, but because lack of sables.
The Russian army is NO turban-sandal- blanket-wearing fighters!!😂😂
Yea those type of guys beat russians in Afghanistan* (mistakenly wrote Vietnam) during the peak of USSR
@@TheBadgerr Vietnam......USSR??? or USOA!!!
@nogonenad Im not pro US friend. All im saying is his example was a bad one to mention in the context of “unprepared for war”, when the type of guys he mentions have been at war for 3000 years.
@@TheBadgerr get your facts straight Russia supplied weapons and trained Vietnamizes that kicked US ass.
@@TheBadgerr USSR never fight in Vietnam USA did!
You forgot to add t-72 destroyed abrams with one shot
The whole media wants to cover this up
You forgot to add t-90 destroyed by Bradleys. 😀😀😀
@@gyulanyars6636 no need to mention that it was on every media across the world.
@gyulanyars6636 and bradleys by bmps, kornets and t-80. Shall i keep going?
You forgot to add AT 13s and 14s destroyed Bradleys Leopards and Abrams@@gyulanyars6636
50 + nato nation can't get Russia out of Ukraine.
Of course they can’t, and they won’t be able to. Because real men serve in the Russian army and not queers, LGBT people and all sorts of trans people.
tentara rusia bukan dimobilisasi tapi mereka maju kemedan perang keinggin sendiri contoh pasukan wagner buka pendaftaran banyak yang maju..
What about Russia, Iran, North Korea and China can't take Ukraine? How many F22, F35, Latest gen NATo weapons have you seen used in Ukraine?
@@Taraba12 Russia doesn't pull out the latest weapons either, they fight with Soviet stocks.And those planes you listed won't fly long in the sky in front of Russian air defense.Everyone realized that Western weapons are overrated and tested only on shepherds.But with Russia they are in a puddle.Russian weapons have always been the best cheap simple and effective.Why did the West refuse Putin's proposal to conduct an experiment of pulling all their best air defenses to the place where Oreshnik will hit? Because they know in advance that they will also be embarrassed and that's it.A man like Putin knows all the capabilities of their air defenses otherwise he wouldn't have proposed a duel.They can't shoot down a single Iskander supersonic and where can they shoot down a hypersonic Dagger or Oreshnik.
ummm "russia"/rome definatly "rose from the ashes" as in ONE hypersonic "satan" missile (with 30 fkn targeted nuclear warheads) can end continents, even if they used it as an emp weapon, but putin is tryin to hope theyll stop = its not gonna happen, by design ...
The simple fact of the matter is the Abrams has an over inflated reputation because we almost never committed to battle against a peer opponent and on the rare occasion that we do fight somebody in our own weight class, we make sure The Abrams has tons of dismounted, infantry running cover for it under the envelope of billions of dollars of air power to make sure there’s literally nothing on the battlefield that can do any damage before we expose them.
It’s not magic, it doesn’t survive hits from a capable enemy. We’ve just always made sure the enemy didn’t have the ability to hit it with anything big enough to do any damage.
Saudi-Arabia lost quite a few of Abrams fighting goat herders.
Sounds like a military industrial complex PR marketing sells commercial.
The more I think about it the more US resembles Cyberpunk2077
holy shit an honest American. you give us hope. one question tho, when has the Abrams fought a near peer?
I love this your comments.
Thank you very much
@@sunso1991 Because in that dystopian future the US is ran by three letter agencies, just like in the present.
The Russians exposed the M1 Abrams weaknesses.
Nothing to expose
right, and that weakness is it is susceptible to every Russian weapons system
Abrams weakness were well known for decades... poor top down defend, poor precision attack defense, poor operation in mud, and so on...
Nothing new here and losses are expected per downgraded version and users
The Rusisans exposted the weaknesses of the T-14 Armata, the T-90, and so on
@@alfredneuman6911 proved they were superior to everything NATO has you mean. the Armata is not in the fight so whatcha talking aboot?
its pretty simple, the Abrams is not fighting people armed with AKs in the desert.
Yet it is able to defeat you.
@@alfredneuman6911 Bro you spent 1 trillion to replace the taliban with a better armed taliban. In fact, name 1 war you have won? The last war you idiots won was in the 1800's against mexico.
@@alfredneuman6911 Look above, fpv drone comin!
@@yarp123123123123123 but…….. hang on……….what type of tanks did the Iraqi’s use ?
Anti-tank shovel is really effective
Game ching showels
Ha-ha! Good...
Yup, just ask Russia that lost half of their operational tanks already.
Russia does not have any good MPADS. You have nothing that compares to the javelin, nor do you have anything that compares to the stinger.
US tanks are overrate hype job.
US jet fighters are hype job.
US weapons are pepper tigers
"American weapons are papertigers", you say that but a dozen HIMARS in mid 2022 stopped the Russian advance, and helped Ukraine have a successful offensive in winter 2022.
@@themc.kennyshow6585 most of those same himars are now destroyed and lacks ammunition
U.S. weapons are fine although the companies rape the DoD on prices. It's just a high intensity war with a real adversary.
The U.S. directed a lot of Ukraine strategy which was based on U.S. war doctrine. Even tho U.S. doctrine is based on having air superiority. The Ukrainians fought fiercely, it's just no one gives the Russians credit for actually being good. Albeit they were rusty as hell since they haven't fought a high intensity war since their new govt was formed & initially suffered from inefficiencies & old Soviet doctrine. But they've updated their strategies & are finally able to use all that heavy industry they have.
Russia mobilizing convicts especially the ones with long sentences/violent crimes proved to be formible fighters. They did most of the heavy lifting & destroyed the majority of Ukranian NATO built armies.
There was a notable difference on the battlefield when Wagner was pulled from the front before it was fully absorbed into the MoD.
@@themc.kennyshow6585Col. D. Macgregor will not agree with You!
@@themc.kennyshow6585 succesful offensive in 2022?
the ukraine army could not get past the defensive lines of russia and lost lot of troops for litral nothin
The legendary and iconic Abrams proved to be superior against the AK 47
Yah and sandels
This is the export version, lacking the secret tech and armor the yanks have in their own.
@@rageagaintstheNWOwell that just shows you the ineptitude of u.S military strategists
Maybe
@@rageagaintstheNWOeven if you put the highest version of abrams on here.. It still gonna be a hot tin can, drone doesn't give a fuck about your depleted uranium Armor when got hit from top attack😅
US Abrams can survive in battlefields controlled by low grade armies like those found in Afghanistan, Iraq & Libya. But when it comes Ukrainka battlefield, dominated by Russian MoD the story is different. MoD is a highly trained and motivated army. They have several means of destruction to meet modern challenges on battlefield.They major on assymetric warfare tactics. They use cheap kamikaze drones to take out very expensive US military assets like Abrams tanks. Russian MoD is a sophisticated army capable of adapting quickly in battlefields. They don't depend on external resources but use their scientific base to solve military problems. MoD is a war machine and has world class means of destruction/ tactics to take out threats on the battlefield. And that's what is going on in Ukraine battlefield.
Wonderful garbatge. YOu actually believe this crap. Explain why all of your "modern" tanks have the turrent vulnerability, which the double-strike javeliln takes advantage of. Your R-14 Armata has never made it to the battlefield. Seems you cant fix the transmission problem.
I hear the Abraham tank is a formidable weapon against AK-47s. Laughing a lot😂
@@emmanuelubaha5815 you ryssians have been saying frim dat one that you destroyed them all and that they are ineffective. Why dud putin threaten nuckear war if nato gave abrans to ujraine?
MoD stands for Ministry of Defense. Otherwise great post 👍
@rinn727 they control the Russian army, air force, Navy, rocket forces,space force and the secret services.
What's wrong with them.
They run on jet fuel and have a thermal footprint that can be seen from space.
So do all of your tanks, Ivan
@@alfredneuman6911 Ivans tanks still work, though.
@@TorontoSaurusEx PFFT 😂, nah. We know they are junk. They don't even have a proper reverse speed for tank warfare. They are getting chewed up by Bradley IFV and loitering munitions.
@@alfredneuman6911 No, just the T--80. Both Abrams and T-80 are good tanks.
@@alfredneuman6911 Tanks are actually VERY limited. They are useless when deployed on their own. Tanks work the best when utilized as part of a larger force. Especially ground forces who are basically their eyes and ears.
You are not fighting against GOATHERDERS in UKRAINE. NATO is fighting a FORMIDABLE FORCE in UKRAINE.
this war is between Russia and NATO supported ukraine not NATO itself
@@FontaineLoversTry again, many nato soldiers and officers were vaporized. The truth will eventually emerge so give it time buddy!
@@FontaineLovers its more like NATO using Ukraine not supporting them
@@TjZz the guy above said it's russia vs NATO and now you said it's NATO using ukraine so which one is true?
@@FontaineLovers both
Expensive Toy 😅
Junk 😅
Obviously. ..Bloody Damn Showoff american Nothing Can Do Infront Of The Game Changing Russian High Tech Weapons Supremacy 😂
Expensive , useless toy...
@@manman-nf5de You call 31 old Abrams with Ukrainian operators up against THOUSANDS of Russia’s Junk T tanks fair???
@@umbertoalessio5069 You call 31 old Abrams with Ukrainian operators up against THOUSANDS of Russia’s Junk T tanks fair???
Previous use of the Abraham tanks was on weaker foes, and the true capabilities of the tank were not tested. Now it has. All weapons will be vulnerable, given man’s ingenuity and inventiveness.
Russians have pulled off several spectacular defeats. The Kiev pincer comes to mind
Abraham tanks...
👍 yes, very weaker opponents!
Russian aggression??
don't you know that ONLY israel has the right for self defence and if done by anybody else it's called aggression? ;)
Who cares ??!!
History will be written by the Survivors !!
Yes. Russian aggression. It was Russia that attacked another country, Ukraine, on February 24, 2022. They called it a "three-day special operation."
😂😂😂
Oh I forgot the people in this channel only listen to Russian propaganda
"Against Russian AGRESSION?"
The channel creator should rethink his editorial.
That only tells half the story. Yes Russia is the one that crossed the border and invaded Ukraine….. but they did so after eight years of diplomacy failed to achieve a workable piece between Russia and the ever aggressive ever-expanding ever belligerent NATO who essentially took over Ukraine in 2014 through soft power, political manipulation and has been pushing for a proxi-war with Russia ever since.
The only reason this war didn’t work for NATO as expected was because the Russians called their Bluff and attacked much sooner than we thought they would.
We had expected the Russians to continue trying to rely on diplomacy for several more years while we had more time to upgrade Ukraine’s defenses and continue to fortify the cities, making it basically impossible to invade …. Russia chose to force the issue before we had time to basically make it a killing field, and specifically before we managed to field test hypersonic weaponry.
So in short, yes, Russia did take the aggressive stance in committing to open war, but the reality is far more nuanced than that and it’s not like they were unprovoked as we keep repeating over and over and over in the western media
@@Matt-yg8ub Absolutely. The blood is on the USA/CIA's hands.
I think that the channel just says what the overlords who own both YT and Ukr need to hear.
@@Matt-yg8ub Russia did not "invade".
The Territories of DPR and LPR exercised their Legally Protected Rights and followed guidelines set forth by the United Nations to seek self determination which is an Internationally recognized and protected Right. As per UN Charter ANY Territory has a right to Sovereignty and to leave its current country, and choose which country it would like to be part of.
DPR and LPR sent Formal, Legal Requests to Russia for Humanitarian and Defensive Aid, this gave Russia legal and moral authority to enter contested Territories, which is backed by the UN Charter. Russia was invited, using the law, aka NOT an invasion.
In 2014 NATO sponsored Terrorists committed the attack of the Maidan Massacre which resulted in the Coup against Ukraine's Legitimate Government. Which means NATO invaded Ukraine (covertly), overthrew their Government and then installed Pro NATO Oligarch who agreed to then start Ethnic Cleansing of Russian Populations of Eastern Ukraine.
You have Western Brainrot.
gotta please the algorithm, nothing personal.
Russia is not the aggressor here.
Ummm...who invaded who?
@@Searching4ReasonUmmm … who started bombing Russia since 2013 ?
@@FnokiN And who's been attacking Ukraine? Tit-for-Tat. Russia just doesn't like having a neighboring country that's not under their control.
Russia is Russia, Ukraine is Ukraine, Simpel. A 5 year old understand.
You invaded, Ivan. Your dictator spoke to the Russian people, and to the Ukraiinian military, on that monring, 24 February 2022. You invaded with 200 thousand soldiers. Ukraine did not invade you.
You cannot praise a tank just because it has been proven affective against sandals sand fighters in the Middle East. 😅 Ukraine/ Russia conflict is different level. Early mercenaries have said so.
Effective against second-rate russians
@@Adcabrer Sandals sand fighters with all Russian equipment and tanks. 😉
"The Ukraine/Russian war is the most drone heavy in modern history". Yes, in ancient times there were a lot more drones used.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
If you’re implying that Ukraine is the only war were drones are employed in mass then you’re ignorant.
@@-Zardoz- Thank you for your kind observation, no I wasnt, I was referring to pre modern history which was the statement made in the video. I cannot recall drones being used before modern history, perhaps you might offer your suggestions?
1. Russia is not the aggressor in this conflict. Some people didn't need to expand their borders so close to Russia. NATO, led by (whose name is not mentioned)😁They knew perfectly well what the Kremlin's reaction would be, and they deliberately went to this provocation. Что 2. Whatever kind of tank it is.With what respect (paid by the weapons contractors) The media did not advertise it, no matter how much it was praised as the coolest and most invincible tank. Even if it was built using alien technology. He'll burn up like everyone else. It's just a matter of time.
Что
It’s like American cars. Crap.
The burger cars used to be stellar. What happened ?
Those chips from washing machines and fridges are really dangerous!
Russia has a not so insignificant domestic chip manufacturing industry. They do not make as good chips as TSMC, but more than good enough for most purposes
😅😅😅😅😅
All tanks fail big in Ukraine.
Ukraine destroyed your tanks with javelins and drones
@@alfredneuman6911 Can you read English please?
@@alfredneuman6911 Russia destroyed your tanks with atgms and drones
@@alfredneuman6911 Russia destroyed the so-called most powerful Western tanks with cheap drones 😂😂😂
tank designed for chasing shepherds with AKs, and is not suitable for fighting with even opponents? Who would have guessed?
where are those abrams supporters lovers.....quiet????
they are hiding under mom's rock
They are at the lgbtq parades
@@reload.8056 AHAHAHA
The Ukranians added Kontakt-1 ERA blocks to the turret of the M1s they received along with cope cages. Didn't help as they were still destroyed by drones and Russian ATGM like the Kornet.
Heavily armored Merkava tanks with ERA and APS didn't prevent destruction at the hands of the home made Yassin 105 dual warhead RPGs or the Hezbollah Almas-4 ATGM which uses a top attack like the U.S. Javelin. If anything "legendary" invincibility of the Merkava with its armor and APS was fiction.
Its legendary marketing
The APS systems of the Merkava are actually very, very good, it’s just that the trade-off in those automated system systems is a lack of deployed, dismounted infantry… because you don’t wanna kill your own people, which increases the vulnerability to the tank or you have to decrease the sensitivity of those systems or redesign them much more along the lines of the Russian Afganit in order to prevent them from killing your dismounted soldiers
Kornet has been designed in the late 90s to defeat heavy western tank, it's not your old AT-3 Sagger anymore. It's a very efficient (and cheap) atgm who can easily defeat ERA armor
Even APS system can be defeated
@ absolutely… I would suspect that the future of anti- armor warfare is to target the APS launcher first
@@Matt-yg8ub you can fool any APS system, no need for super sophisticated weaponry
By throwing 2 missiles in quick succession of 1.5 seconds
"European tanks like the Merkava". No. Israel is not in Europe.
What went wrong? Well it faced a enemy that can hit back.
🤣🤣🤣 Against Russian aggression …. WHAT ??? Against NATO provocation and against Russian liberation !
Because this is the first time the Abrams has actually fought on equal footing
the germans had 2000 tanks in their kursk offensive and lost,and you speak about winning the war against russia with 31 abrams tanks?oh i forgot,the 50000 killed ukrainian cannonfodders
To who talking buddy , average American have no clue about history, let alone understand complex tactics of modern warfare!
American tanks are too heavy, to expensive to maintain, and can't be mass produced. I been saying this for yrs that American weapons, and esp american tanks, are over-engineered. the US is now in same position as the Germans were during WW2. the Germans had the best weapons, even superior tanks, but they were not able to mass produced them. the US is now facing the same problem. it looks like the US did not learn any lessons from the Germans during WW2
That is a very true statement!
No, they learned lessons, just the wrong ones.
the us tank designers copied the german tanks
You actually think the military industrial complex cares if our weapons work?? IMO, they are all sold as a bill-of-goods, and as long as the $$$ keep rolling in, who cares.
Ещё до 2022г. наш президент и не только он, говорил, учите историю. Не надо с нами воевать, воевать мы умеем и воюем мы лучше всех.
American high tech machines are only effective in middle east against 3rd world country😂
well said.. they (cowboys ) are coward.😀. Nato has more than 30 countries)vs Rusia
Overhyped, like most of US.
That tanks were not really tasted against respectable oponents. They, like a lot west produced staffs, have great MSM and promotive pripaganda suport. Now they have meet reality. Like and other weapon sistem, like F-16, AA sistems and etc. Generaly, westerner change games with broken agreements, international law, used unlimited force, fight against weaker oponents, commiting war crimes and named it as "colateral demage" ( what a unhuman disgusting hipocrisy to named killed women, children and other uncombat people as a "demage"?!), created false flag operatiins and false informatiins....
Some corrections in your spellings .
Collateral damage
Propaganda
Inhuman, not unhuman.
Hypocrisy.
Systems .
Committing
Non - combatant not uncombat .
Informations not informatiins
Too many spellings were wrong bro, I could not help myself.
Tested not tasted
Stuffs not staffs.
Opponents not oponents
Large number of Abrams ware destroyed in Yamen too when Saudi was in war with Houthis.
Drones made tanks obsolete.
They make expensive tanks obsolete
Is that why Russia keeps pumping out T-90Ms and Ukraine is still begging for armored vehicles and tanks?
Drones will be defeated by tank remote turrets with 20 or 30mm gun and Image matching cameras operating at 360% .. drones are slow and vulnerables
Anything that flies made tanks almost obsolete
AP system wouldnt have helped. Spending $8000 to defend from $1000 drones. The system will be totally depleted in a matter of days if not hours.
The only way to win is not to play!
"Russian Aggression" How about the West/NATO aggression and proxy war?
The age of tanks is over.
Current generation tanks are nearly obsolete, in that they lack a practical means of detecting and destroying incoming drones prior to their close approach to the tank hull. However, it is conceptually possible to address such a shortcoming.
It is possible to design an omnidirectional camera and microphone pod that can continuously monitor all approach angles of the tank. Such a sensor pod could potentially detect drones during their approach. Additionally, such an omnidirectional sensor pod could also be equipped with a large number of shotgun like barrels (aimed in omnidirectional hemispherical fashion), pre-loaded with a large number of scatter shot munitions, which could be electronically fired like implemented in the "metal storm" weapon system. Such a device could hypothetically produce overlapping bursts of omnidirectional scatter shot, which would likely hit any approaching aerial drone device, regardless of approach angle.
Another design change that would likely help, would be to remove most or all of the human crew from the interior of the tank. Tanks like the M1 Abrams require a crew of 4 to operate (gunner, driver, loader, commander). With the right internal hardware, a single human can control all functions of a tank simultaneously, as frequently demonstrated in various video games involving tank combat. By reducing the crew count from 4 to 1, the required volume of internal protected space is reduced. Reducing the protected internal volume of the tank means that the tank can be made smaller in exterior dimensions, which reduces the amount of surface area of the tank. Reducing the exterior surface area reduces the mass of armor required, for a given armor thickness. Consequently, shrinking the tank means that one can place thicker armor on more places around the hull of the tank (such as on the currently vulnerable top), without exceeding the functional weight limit of tanks.
Tanks have a practical size and weight limit, in that they need to be able to be transported by railroad, and they need to be able to cross normal bridges designed for lighter automobiles, without causing them to collapse. This restricts the tank's overall mass to roughly 75 tons. Decreasing the size of the tank (by shrinking the internal human crew space) would allow for thicker armor, while still staying within the approximate 75 ton weight limit necessary to avoid overstressing many common bridges.
@@Fritz_Schlunder Those tanks only have about 40 rounds and only a few days fuel. They need to be supplied by trucks, almost constantly, or they become...steel hulks. Trucks need bridges, and drones can easily find bridges and trucks, so...
Our road worthy scrap is road . WW2 didn’t teach no one ! A drone is the game changer !
russia learned. build lots of cheap, 40-45ton tanks. build lots and lots of layered zone air defense systems.
Iran is game changers, Iran produced the idea with cheap product but powerful
Those tanks where only name for army to be scared of ,not mother Russia.
Abrams is just all hype to justify the expense but game changing it is definitely not.
Abrams is near perfect for the purpose and use it was designed for... how it is currently being used is not what it was designed for
You call 31 old Abrams with Ukrainian operators up against THOUSANDS of Russia’s Junk T tanks fair???
War is all about propaganda, otherwise no one would go there fighting to kill.
In democracies, people who want war would be the only fighters and no leader would advertise it without participating... Which is not the case.
Banksters and US militaro-industrial complex are the only means that make it happen.
Minsk agreements should have been respected to prevent such event, but obviously NATO and EU leaders had the strong intention to push Russia to war, as they were installing missile facilities right to Ukraine border...
Just see the facts with your own eyes and do not trust MSM, their only common projeeeect is to keep civilian societies unable to ask about the responsibilities of banksters and profiters.
This economic system against nature led by rapacious interests maintains slavery by coercion imposed by their armed forces.
We are all prisonners complying to our state. Borders do not exist, there will not be a savior.
Earth Truth and Love are the only quests, ordinary, natural, common and essential giving meaning to our simple lives, our only common interesting values.
Societies are made in order to enhance cooperation for better living conditions for all, not only few minorities......
Things have changed, but we are still fruits of Earth.
One planet, one people, one common destiny .
Let's write together our own destiny and drive our intentions in the same direction.
We live in a world full of scarcity, there would be wars even if there weren't any bankers. Human's are cruel by nature so unless you can change human's nature war will always come back no matter what you change.
war is not about propaganda. if it was the US would not be doing so terribly. no line ups at recruiting centers in the West.
Well said. You're absolutely right as our true heritage of symbiosis with the earth was hijacked by our controllers who worship evil and feed off low vibrational frequencies.
I believe that people are understanding and awakening to the fact that the history we've been taught is a lie to keep us enslaved, and make no mistake, we are slaves! The key
to freedom and a prosperous future lies in understanding our past and reacquiring what was stolen from us. It's time we end this divide-and-conquer operation, come together, and take back our planet. BTW, war is the ultimate low-vibrational state.
@@notsure6182 Of course it's about propaganda! Does the name Joseph Goebbels ring a bell? The mainstream media has been on a coordinated campaign of
anti-Russian propaganda since this war started. BTW, the failure of military recruiting is about policy not propaganda.
Go away. We are not one earth, neither should we be. We don't owe you anything. We don't want to be part of your stupid utopia.
The Nato met an army who can and will fight back.
In Iraq and Afghanistan, NATO has air superiority. In Ukraine, no NATO helicopters shooting soviet tanks
The only thing NATO finishes first in is money spent and donated to the MIC.
The Abraham's tank is good for the movie
The West have been giving Ukraine second and third hand junk since day one. These are Abrams in shape only. They don't have the latest armour, the latest engines, the latest guns, the latest firing systems. Nothing. The USA stripped out all the important stuff and gave the Ukrainians a metal box on tracks just in case the Russians captured one. The same goes for Leopards and Challengers. The reason it took so long to get these tanks to Ukraine was to give time for Western countries tos trip all the improtant tech, armour and guns out of them before handing them over.
European tanks
>Mentions Merkava...bro, when did Israel join Europe?
exactly. i was wondering if it was only me
It is a lie they are not downgraded ones, they are the same Abraham stand in United States armory
Not at all. Lack of composite and active armor and active defense.
Well you just displayed your stupidity for the entire world to see!
Well according to some on reddit they say , NATO can defeat all Russian forces in Ukraine in 2 weeks
Oh, these are definitely downgraded models sporting old armor tech technologies and lacking a lot of the electronics of the most up-to-date versions, including APS…. But the fundamental question is are those much much more expensive models worth the money compared to Russia’s quantity over quality approach that seems to be winning the day in Ukraine
No they are downgraded, it just doesn't matter much with drones all tanks are outdated without active defenses.
All tanks suck. Armor does not stop modern munitions. Its like the day the Knights learned of the crossbow.
Iraq,Syria and Afghanistan combined aren't anything like Russia.
the cowboys is only brave when the opponent are small countries . coward
Even the leopard 2, an excellent tank, is taking a beating.
Get USA TAX DOLLARS out of Ukraine!
Abrams Tank is really a game changes, Ukraine is changing from winning to losing 😆🤣😂
i love how these clowns say "russian aggression", like the Ukrainian forces and government are just innocent victims in all this mess.
Greetings from Malaysia
1.operating with NO air support.
2.rookie crews
3.too heavy
4.kornet.
5.Russians.
This are the biggest nails in the M1 coffin,there are others.
and the turbine engine which produces so much heat that it can be seen from a great distance using thermal imaging cameras, especially in winter. Added to this is the fact that the turbine needs a long time to warm up. In the combat theater in a cold region like Ukraine it is extremely difficult to be agile and move quickly.
3. Heavy western tanks are unadapted for Ukraine soil, who often turn to mud. Same as the Tiger I and other german heavy tanks during wwII
Western tanks were designed for a mobile and defensive war against the varsaw pact, and were extremely well made for that.
A modern T-90M weight only 48t
Like all Western hi-tech weapons, Abram tank earned its reputation while operating against poorly equipped and inadequately trained ragtag soldiers. Now faced with a near peer adversary, these wonder weapons are proven junk. For this very reason, we don't see the game changer F16 anywhere near the frontline.
Приятно видеть в комментариях такое мнение о России иностранцев 😜👍
So when you guys use your toys against poor countries that are unable to defend themselves your toys might seem invincible but when you try it against a super power like Russia its a whole different ball game.
well said.
Russian aggression?
#1 thing is they removed all the Reactive Armor Plating that protects against the same thing. Its just too expensive. So this was more political donation than any effective weapons platforms. M1A1 was sold off in bulk. As these were the oldest and not as useful. Current version is M1A2 Sep V4. Which would have survived a lot more of these sort of attacks, but doubt they want the tech to go to Ukraine, China + Russia...
In essence these versions were pre-1990s tech. Something not highlighted.
Heavily armoured for bullets and RPGs but not enough to stop Kornet and FPV drones...
priority armor is on the front. top and bottom armor is pretty thin. drones and new missiles use a top down attack
Just a matter of time before autonomous AI drone swarms enter the battlefield next.
Ukraine were the ones who started using those awful, cowardly drones.. Russia had to catch up.. now Russia is using their own tricks against them. 😂
The Russians defeated Napoleon Bonaparte’s “Grand Army” at Moscow in 1812 and ejected them from Russian territory. [Remember Tchaikovsky’s “1812 Overture?”]. This was the beginning of Napoleon’s downfall.
The Soviet Red Army, not the US nor British armies, was primarily responsible for breaking the back of the German Wehrmacht during World War II. The six month winter battle at Stalingrad, during which 1.1 million Russians died, was THE decisive battle and turning point of World War II. Whether you like it or not, the fighting spirit and military competence of the Russians was decisive in defeating Hitler’s forces.
The Russians are a martial people with a proud and distinguished fighting tradition. In other words, the Russians are not and never were a pushover as those benighted losers in Washington would have you believe.
It was stupid and reckless for the Biden Administration to pick a fight with them.
If it weren't for strategic bombing and submarine warfare in the Atlantic, there would have been no victorious battle of Stalingrad. ;)
I can find you a book by a Russian historian who clearly states this.
Besides, the USSR, together with the Third Reich, started World War II. The Ribentrop-Molotov Pact and the attack on Poland in 1939.
@
And if the Russians had not defeated Germany at Stalingrad, there is a good chance that Hitler would have won the war. The Germans weren’t exactly pushovers either. The Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe were actually quite good. It was Hitler’s stupid decision to fight a two front ear.
By the time that the D-day invasion (“Operation Overlord “) was launched, the Germans were already on their heels. If the Russians had not decisively routed Germany on the Eastern front, the Germans would likely have held on the Western front (Normandy).
I recommend that you read “Stalingrad” by Antony Beevor.
Slava Rusiji🇷🇺✅💚
Invasion of Ukraine??
The Abrams are a sight to behold, they clean the soldiers, wash them and polish them as if they were going to a party. In reality, they go to the party, but they never come back !
The next weapon system we will find is out dated will be our carriers. We will be shocked when our very expensive technological terrors become submarines. Remember the battleship Bismark was advertised as unsinkable. Then came the end of the battleship era.
oreshnik 😂
Yemen already giving the carriers a run for their money. Forced USA to move out because they are very scared to lose their "Power Projection". Once that falls, they will be getting a lot more surprises.
Didn't they say Russia ran out of missiles since 2022?
For the last eighty plus years, the Anglo-American militaries (and by now all Western militaries) have relied on massive air superiority as an integral part of their offensive combat strategy. While it is indeed possible to conduct major successful offensive operations when lacking air superiority, there are more losses sustained and more time spent when advancing without air superiority, just to name two examples. What about the Germans' initial success in the Battle of the Bulge, one may ask. During that phase of the battle the weather was detrimental for aircraft to fly. Once the weather improved, the tide of the battle was turned almost right away. Abrams battle tank had been designed with nearly total air superiority in mind. And since Ukraine has never had air superiority in this conflict, offensive Western military hardware has never been performing at its best in this conflict.
Even with superior air power, ie viet n afghan still cant win
Both in Vietnam and Afghanistan the US military faced guerrilla-type adversaries. Though when bombing North Vietnam, there were plenty of losses. Remember John McCain?
Guerilla-type warfare.
No matter what tanks one would have given to Ukraine, it wouldn't matter. They simply don't have the means to fight. They are hopelessly outgunned, outsupplied, outflanked, out-everythinged. Tank is just a big mobile decently-protected direct-fire gun. It's NOT invincible by any stretch of imagination, it has weakly-armored areas, and weapons that can penetrate it from side to side through existed for well over a decade. Iraq also happened to show that an RPG into the engine compartment disables it. And just like any other tank, it can't handle an anti-tank mine under a track. Nor can it take an artillery round into the roof. Tanks didn't fail. Ukrainian military and western planners did. To fight an opponent like Russia without air cover and long-range attacks on its positions is a recipie for failure, and so Ukrainians hopelessly lost during that 2023 summer offensive. So badly in fact that they didn't even make it within visual distance of the first belt of Dragons Teeth. They were stopped by entrenched infantry lines in the advanced positions. Russians expected Ukrainians to get to the Dragons teeth within less than a week.
😂 Pada Show😂 american Weapons Always Superior In Their Hollywood Actions Movies 😂But The Zero Survivability Infront Of The Unmatched Russian Game Changing Weapons Platforms 😂....😂😂.....😂😂😂.
Pls put the music used in the description
When you start with statement about Russian aggression we know immediately that your reporting is nothing more than thinly veiled propaganda.
It's ALL about the narrative. It always has been but we're able to recognize their BS now. Well, some of us...
What went wrong? Not obvious enough or what? No support...simple...bye
Tanks are no longer important
Zelensky is the Lady and the Chaos 😢
Think they weigh 70 tonnes each.
70 tons of junk.
This is actually a fair point because right now there is mud, there is slush, there are conditions these tanks are not built for. Shockingly, you'd think a tank would get out of a slush but nope. Not all these 'fancy tanks' - so keep talking crap about the russian ones while you get Lancetted
@Deschuttes Think the Russians tanks weight about 40-45 tonnes.
Thanks for reporting the truthful NEWS
The American crews with American support required for the Abrams to be victorious is missing.
Not a popular comment
Americunt crews no better than the trash equipment. The only purpose of Americunt military equipment is to transfer tax money to the minions of death 💀.
You would be still wiped on Ukraine, Russia is not the afghan militia
Everyone realized that Western weapons are overrated and tested only on shepherds and cattle herders.But with Russia they are in a puddle.Russian weapons have always been the best cheap simple and effective.Why did the West refuse Putin's proposal to conduct an experiment to pull all their best air defenses to the place where Oreshnik will hit?A man like Putin knows all the capabilities of their air defense, otherwise he wouldn't have suggested a duel. They can't shoot down a single Iskander supersonic, but they can't shoot down a hypersonic Kinzhal or Kernel.
Bzzzzzzz BOOOM!😂😂😂😂
They have used this tank in combat, which is all right, it was designed with that intention in scope. The main question is, Against what enemy is it good for? The answer is undeniable, not against the Russian Army and not in the terrain and conditions they are operating in Ukraine, they were good against rebels running around in sleepers in the middle of the desert somewhere there in the Middle East, Abrams is the king there, no question
Them HEATFS "Tandem" shovels strapped to a shovel drone with washing machine chips proved to be quite efficient ...
The Chinese made 90 nm chips that are extracted from washing machines and used in cheap drones are really effective against Abram and other western tanks.
The Abrams Main Battle Tank did not fail. The Abrams has been engaged in primarily low intensity combat or against troops that had very little training in the Middle East over the last 30 years. The Russo - Ukrainian conflict is the first time that the Abrams MBT has been used in combat against a first rate adversary that is well trained and equipped and willing to use their equipment to the maxiumum effect.
The provisioning of around 30 Abrams battle tanks equates to a single battalion. The Ukrainian Army has over 100 tank battalions in their MTOE. The Russian Army in the Ukrainian theater of operations is equipped with thousands of anti-armor weapons with Soldiers that are trained to use them. Therefore a single battalion, 30 tanks, was never able to be a "game changer" when the scale and scope of combat is this large. The expectation that some 30 Abrams MBT was going to be a "game changer" was a pipe dream.
Next, the Ukrainain troops are simply not trained to operate the equipment on the Abrams MBT takes years of training for US Army tankers to gain the skills that enable them to operate these tanks. Additionally, the US Army operates using "Combined Arms" tactics that integrates air, artillery, and infantry in the fight. The Ukrainians are not trained or experienced enough to use the Abrams MBT.
Note that the US Bradley Fighting Vehicle, German Leopard II and Marder Infantry Fighting Vehicle have also been successfully engaged by Russian Soldiers using anti-armor weapons like drones and anti-tank guided missiles. The Russians are also capable of successfully defeating the T-64 and T-72 tanks and BMP IFVs operated by the Ukrainian Army. The reverse is also true. The Ukrainians have been able to defeat T-72 and T-80 tanks operated by the Russians using anti-armor weapons like drones and ATGMs.
To sum up, the Abrams Main Battle Tank was never going to be a "game changer." Neither the Abrams, Leopard, T-64s, T-72s, or T-80s failed. This is high intensity combat and these levels of equipment losses are to be expected.
M1's weakness is the same weakness of every other tank in the world.
So basically Ukraine has shown Russia and China the weakness of U.S weapons systems. Only the DOD and CIA could be so stupid.😂😂😂😂
Wrong is trying to fight against Russia.
like the german tiger and panther tanks, the abrahm's weakness is the ass. that is where the engine and the transmission is located, that is also where the armor is thinnest.
those who know tanks knows this.
Everyones weakness is the ass my friend. lmao
Y que de la invasión gringa en México wueviarce todo Texas California casi la mitad de territorio de México en el ciglo 19.😊
That was open land, not Mexican land.
@jeffs4483 it is mexican land no GRINGOSUSA land.
@@SANTANECODESANTATERESA-kp9jr
Spanish claims does not mean it was Mexican. It was open land for settlement. Learn history.
"The Abrams lacks APS which are a standard on European tanks, like the Israeli Merkava..." Is anyone proofreading this before you record? I know Israel is participating in the Eurovision, but they aren't a European nation and the Merkava is not a European tank.
Go make ur own so we can see if u proof read urs !!
Well Israel was created by Britain, so in a sense it IS part of Europe, just another Colony of Western Imperialists.