Russian Iskander, US-Made ATACMS Face Off In Ukraine | Which Missile Is More Powerful? Comparison

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 14 มิ.ย. 2024
  • While Russian Iskander-M missiles have been wreaking havoc in the war in Ukraine, the US-made ATACMS* have just entered the war zone. A former US soldier said the Iskander-M tactical short-range ballistic missiles are a "more capable weapon system" than its "equivalent", the ATACMS. Russian defence analysts also hailed Iskander-M’s performance on the battlefield, underscoring why it is recognised in the West. However, the entry of ATACMS missiles into the Ukraine war stirred a debate over which is the more lethal and superior weapon.
    #russia #moscow #russiaukrainewar #ukraine #putin #usa
    Video: AP/AFP/Reuters/Twitter
    0:00 - INTRODUCTION
    0:25 - PUTIN’S ISKANDERS BATTER ZELENSKY’S MEN AS ATACMS MAKE LATE WAR ENTRY
    1:25 - RUSSIA’S ISKANDER-M MISSILE
    3:22 - UKRAINE’S US-MADE ATACMS
    5:26 - ISKANDER-M VS ATACMS
    n18oc_world n18oc_crux
    CRUX is your daily video news guide to the big events that are shaping our world. We track news, geopolitics, diplomacy and defence strategies and explain how they shape national policies. Crux makes sense of global developments, and analyses their impact on daily lives.
    Follow CRUX on Telegram: bit.ly/3fnlLua
    Follow CRUX on Instagram (@crux.india): bit.ly/3qSFx1K
    Follow CRUX on Facebook: bit.ly/2Lte7iF
    #GetCloserToTheNews with latest headlines on politics, sports and entertainment on news18.com bit.ly/2Y4QccL
    Also watch:
    Crux Decode: bit.ly/3MjzIoG
    Crux+ : bit.ly/35mm97B
    Crux Most Watched: bit.ly/3KhJ8iX

ความคิดเห็น • 570

  • @weikwanglee4383
    @weikwanglee4383 หลายเดือนก่อน +37

    Atacms are limited while iskandar are in full production and direct supplies. No prize for guessing.

    • @randym7961
      @randym7961 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Seems the Army is letting Ukraine have most their inventory of them so not so limited, you know the US army they don't do small . They have a new missile system and were already phasing them out . Funny how older western tech is as good as or often better than the newest Russian tech

    • @margelatu79
      @margelatu79 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@randym7961 Funny how the West with all their "game changers'"' are ALWAYS the losers in a war against Russians!

    • @weikwanglee4383
      @weikwanglee4383 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@randym7961 I don't think so. You forget the recent need to approve 65 billion for Ukraine and Israel. Besides, US is bound to mark up the price of each weapon reaching Ukraine. Besides, where did you think US black ops get their billions in funding. The hidden paper money trail. We are not even talking about corruption.
      Nay. Think. uS has thousands of Abrams m1. Yet we are seeing less than 100 supplied to Ukraine.
      You got the wrong end.
      US ain't life and soul into Ukraine.

    • @D-E-S_8559
      @D-E-S_8559 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      ​ @randym79619K720s are soviet era systems---the kremlin to would like to expedite old stocks, and there are vast stocks russia is a huge country and defending it is a full-time industry and effort. i am impressed with the russian maintenance culture of its systems....

    • @randym7961
      @randym7961 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@D-E-S_8559 If you are talking about the Iskanders who knew the Soviet Union was still around in the 2000s lol the USSR fell almost 20 years before they went into service . Also maintenance and Russian equipment are not two words that should be used in the same sentence ! If Russia maintained its equipment better it wouldn't have lost so much of it from breaking down .. A good portion of the Tanks APCs etc etc that Ukraine has captured were because of poor maintenance by your military ! We have all seen the many many videos of farmers hauling tanks etc off with their tractors . And you guys get excited over to 40+ year old western tanks that were broken down when you found them and then you guy shot them lol..

  • @KlodianHysi
    @KlodianHysi หลายเดือนก่อน +26

    Even the KIMskander is better than ATACMS .

    • @jacobngolane1105
      @jacobngolane1105 หลายเดือนก่อน

      😂😂😂

    • @gregnelson5022
      @gregnelson5022 หลายเดือนก่อน

      💯 %

    • @Tom-yy2cm
      @Tom-yy2cm หลายเดือนก่อน

      ATACMS is destroying a lot of fuel depots and s400 defense systems. S400 can not defend itself against ATACMS. Just destroyed fuel depot in Luhansk. Cold hard facts hurt. So do ATACMS

  • @trevorsutherland5263
    @trevorsutherland5263 หลายเดือนก่อน +147

    Seriously? Iskander never been shot down in two years of combat, while ATACMS shot down in first week of use. What an insult....

    • @JustMe-zu2ml
      @JustMe-zu2ml หลายเดือนก่อน +38

      Yeah, OK. They've apparently taken down F-16s that haven't even reached Ukraine yet too 🤣

    • @johnwi-l_l-iamsf3763
      @johnwi-l_l-iamsf3763 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​​​@@JustMe-zu2mlstop crying now , desperation can't disprove the fact that ATACMS were shot down .. and we know the faith of F 16s .. like those game changer , abrams , leopards , challengers , HIMARS etc .......

    • @mayhem4899
      @mayhem4899 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Go and take more copium.😂​@@JustMe-zu2ml

    • @chinaKoronaVirus
      @chinaKoronaVirus หลายเดือนก่อน

      😂😂😂😂😂

    • @chinaKoronaVirus
      @chinaKoronaVirus หลายเดือนก่อน

      Iskander is failed missile😂😂
      Not accuracy .
      Only hit in homes,house complexes,schools,hospitals 😢

  • @samipetkannen2226
    @samipetkannen2226 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    ISKANDER of course, massively produced over handful of atacms that are being donated.

  • @KonstantinVinnichenko
    @KonstantinVinnichenko หลายเดือนก่อน +36

    Two important caveats. First, Iskander operates on a quasi-ballistic trajectory in the final section, which makes it a much more difficult target for air defense. Secondly, Iskander also has a version with a cruise missile, which, due to the low altitude, is also difficult to detect. And I hope everyone understands that the 500 km range limit is an artificial restriction due to compliance with the treaty on medium and short-range missiles, which is no longer valid?

    • @bekeneel
      @bekeneel หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Both are ballistic, but not that rus s400 etc is so succesful shooting down missiles, as like 15 of those systems got destroyed by Ukraine lol, many more buks, tors, strella, pantsir etc too.

    • @goodintentions5189
      @goodintentions5189 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@bekeneel Ukraine has systems too ?

    • @JeffGordon-ph4vz
      @JeffGordon-ph4vz หลายเดือนก่อน

      The Russians already shot down a salvo of atacms over Crimea the other day.

    • @tomvlodek6377
      @tomvlodek6377 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@bekeneel 🙄

    • @josealvaro-bc7zv
      @josealvaro-bc7zv หลายเดือนก่อน

      sempre foi a guerra do t3..... só atinge civis com kinzalius, zircons , iskanders e armas químicas.
      Com as mãos atadas,sem munições e com o tra.mpas americano contra o Zelenski , mesmo assim ,, bummmmmmm 💥
      tropas putins derrotadas na Ucrânia?
      Simples . 483 mil mortos __ Inutilizados, paralíticos e evaporados no éter ___ desaparecidos ? 80 mil.Wagners extintos a 78% em Bakmut , todos aniquilados ,normal .
      Prisioneiros russos? 20 mil para a troca ahahaha.
      Aviões,barcos, refinarias? Bummmmmm 💥 ás dezenas .
      Refinarias ? 22 % da produção mosk0w off.
      __ 7350 tanques e 70 mil veículos diversos bummmmmm 💥
      ____ Cercados pela nato,, Finlândia, Suécia, Bálticos, Polónia e Noruega rsssssskkkkkkkl hurraaa vivaaaaaaa urraaaa
      Ou seja ,os heróis Ucranianos sòzinhos devastaram 70% do fraco exército russo,se fosse com a NATO ou América, putinsss estavam derrotados há 23 meses na Ucrânia .
      Depois,por vingança, putinsss envia kinzalius , zircons , ataca a central nuclear e armas químicas para atingir mulheres, acamados, idosos, bebés, crianças, patos e galinhas na Ucrânia.
      Go Crimeia sempre foi e será Ucrânia livre 🇺🇦🔱🇺🇦

  • @mbxcutang7918
    @mbxcutang7918 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    The refrigerator parts defeated the West.

  • @avraniladhikari2622
    @avraniladhikari2622 หลายเดือนก่อน +52

    ATACMS loose the economic war against Iskandar

    • @chinaKoronaVirus
      @chinaKoronaVirus หลายเดือนก่อน

      😂😂😂

    • @user-qk9he7se5w
      @user-qk9he7se5w หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Does it really though when atacms be hitting russian s400, oil refineries and russia airbases in russia and occupied territory of ukraine

    • @Chivalry2Clips
      @Chivalry2Clips หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      no it doesnt because the US is significantly more stronger economically than Russia. literally look at the budgets.

    • @Lionking65816
      @Lionking65816 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      Atacms missile cost $1.47 million 👍
      Iskander missile cost $3 million 😂😂😂😂

    • @Ryan-ms3fk
      @Ryan-ms3fk หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      ⁠when has it hit an oil refinery it has 300km range acting like it’s unlimited 😂😂

  • @bereketdamtew7766
    @bereketdamtew7766 หลายเดือนก่อน +16

    Which US-made toy ever won in Ukraine?

    • @kamalchandramoney3541
      @kamalchandramoney3541 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      That why they are officially sending troops now . The Himars did had some success though in the first months .took the Russians slightly longer to figure out how to deal with them!

    • @efghggdxlmfn33
      @efghggdxlmfn33 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      PR-brainwashing mashine

    • @Gdb987
      @Gdb987 21 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@kamalchandramoney3541troops won’t help, they will only get droned into oblivion

    • @johnback0007
      @johnback0007 9 วันที่ผ่านมา

      ​@@kamalchandramoney3541How is the s-400 and s-300 doing in Ukraine getting pooped on by himars and atacms left and right? 😂😂

    • @fridaynight3181
      @fridaynight3181 4 วันที่ผ่านมา

      F35?

  • @bagonza9593
    @bagonza9593 หลายเดือนก่อน +57

    comparing which weapon can devastate more truly shows how far we have fallen as people. hope to see a day when we all live peaceful regardless of our political system, race or status.

    • @christopheropio3656
      @christopheropio3656 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      It is quite a long time to read a very sensible comment to a very stupid heartless comparison by CRUX.

    • @Jogrm575
      @Jogrm575 หลายเดือนก่อน

      We surely as humans riding the speed train to self destruction, most countries now spend more on military than education and health care

    • @JamesStreet-tp1vb
      @JamesStreet-tp1vb หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      Tell Pooty to stop invading his neighbors to steal their territory and resources

    • @bjvoorhies
      @bjvoorhies หลายเดือนก่อน

      I agree! Unfortunately, it hasn't happened yet in the history of Humans - from prehistoric to the present. It doesn't say much for Humans....

    • @margelatu79
      @margelatu79 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@JamesStreet-tp1vb Tell NATO warmongers to stay away from Russia's border!

  • @mbr9106
    @mbr9106 หลายเดือนก่อน +50

    Don't forget ATACMS might cost 10x more

    • @sylviesirikhun9321
      @sylviesirikhun9321 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Les peuples payent une guerre, qui est celle des costumes cravates, du CAC 40, Davos....Des centaines de milliers de pauvres gens en meurent ☪️☦️✝️❤️🕊️🌏☮️🙏🏼

    • @jtf2dan
      @jtf2dan หลายเดือนก่อน

      Dont forget america has thousands of them....and has the money, parts and labour force to make ten times as many...russia is broke and sanctions for parts limits them

    • @deepnurmom1737
      @deepnurmom1737 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      It's old outdated tech us mil doesn't even use it anymore
      It's 1960 tech

    • @brandonlongdikjones8117
      @brandonlongdikjones8117 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      ​​@@deepnurmom1737does that mean it still doesn't cost ten times more than the Iskander or no?

    • @Leadbelly.
      @Leadbelly. หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      @@brandonlongdikjones8117 ATACMS are old stock, if Ukraine doesn't use them they would be discarded anyway. There are thousands of them, just sitting there already made.

  • @mokotjolegodi9753
    @mokotjolegodi9753 หลายเดือนก่อน +13

    It is an insult to compare the 2 since it is proven that Russia was able to shoot down more than 50 percent of atacms whereas Ukraine has shot 0 per ent of iskander

    • @loudtim265
      @loudtim265 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Proven where? Source? It’s just a short range ballistic missile from the 1980s.

  • @dragodragic-zl5yt
    @dragodragic-zl5yt หลายเดือนก่อน +19

    ATACMS is replaced with PrSM missiles, so the warehouses are emptied for new goods, so its price is irrelevant because it is being disposed of. Anyone who gets it in large quantities can do a lot of damage with this precise and deadly weapon.

    • @hksp
      @hksp หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      everytime uki use it, they got strike back 10x n then selinski cries for armament

  • @user-ni6wx9in9p
    @user-ni6wx9in9p หลายเดือนก่อน +41

    Iskander-M is more destructive.

    • @jader9356
      @jader9356 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      😂

    • @jader9356
      @jader9356 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Ok bot

    • @darkangel_21
      @darkangel_21 หลายเดือนก่อน

      🤡

    • @feriferi7134
      @feriferi7134 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      🙋‍♂️iskander-M

    • @onelov3288
      @onelov3288 หลายเดือนก่อน

      😆

  • @raphael3620
    @raphael3620 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    You should be comparing ATACMS to North Korea missile

  • @jubantympuina2964
    @jubantympuina2964 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Islander M is more deadly

    • @user-ht8dd8kc3x
      @user-ht8dd8kc3x หลายเดือนก่อน

      ATACMS distroyed russian made s-400 to scrap metals......hahahaha

    • @gregnelson5022
      @gregnelson5022 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      ​@@user-ht8dd8kc3x😂according to who jewlensky

    • @user-ht8dd8kc3x
      @user-ht8dd8kc3x หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@gregnelson5022 😁🤣according to who PuTIN he is the best comedian and joker🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

  • @Spartan12317
    @Spartan12317 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I bet for Iskander M

  • @Greenbay-bn3yk
    @Greenbay-bn3yk หลายเดือนก่อน +40

    Difference : ATACMS is a missile designed for Hollywood. Iskandar M is designed for wars

    • @RUTHLESSambition5
      @RUTHLESSambition5 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      The iskandar has shown it's worth. The ARACMS is very expensive and not that great. America should have kept the good weapons back

    • @JustMe-zu2ml
      @JustMe-zu2ml หลายเดือนก่อน

      Apparently Iskander was designed for attacking civilian infrastructure and post offices (based on what it's currently being used for)

    • @JamesStreet-tp1vb
      @JamesStreet-tp1vb หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yastreb AV destroyed by HIMARS before the new car, vodka smell was even gone. Lol. Two hours after it was deployed--to stop the HIMARS the HIMARS found it and it destroyed exactly ONE HIMARS missile.
      To date 6 S400's burned to ashes. That doesn't include the aircraft, Russian soldiers, and ammo dumps destroyed by the HIMARS. The orcs had to move their Black Sea fleet because they were afraid of the HIMARS. Keep talking. Your tears betray you

    • @RusselTanTing-kf8zm
      @RusselTanTing-kf8zm หลายเดือนก่อน

      Awesome take!

    • @zelectric09
      @zelectric09 8 วันที่ผ่านมา

      really?

  • @PerceivedREALITY999
    @PerceivedREALITY999 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Saying US can defeat Russia is like saying biden can run up the stairs without stumbling.

    • @etronicw2729
      @etronicw2729 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Ignore my previous comment and I apologise, I misread what you wrote 🙏

  • @stephenhall3515
    @stephenhall3515 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    "Sub-munitions" means cluster weapons which are banned by most countries. Russia still uses Soviet era cluster warheads but ceased developing them and does not manufacture any. This is because although it is not an official signatory of the UN Convention on Cluster Munitions (2010), CIS affiliated states voted to end production and use. Russia was in no position to disagree and had learned horrible lessons in the Chechen War.
    The USA is the only known manufacturer of cluster munitions and deploys 3 especially cruel types, some with timers.
    The USA, Poland, Romania, Latvia and Estonia are not signatories to the 2010 UN law.
    The 1992 raid on a Russian Navy airfield in disputed Crimea used timed cluster weapons which could not have been launched by Ukraine.

    • @Tom-yy2cm
      @Tom-yy2cm หลายเดือนก่อน

      Russia cluster munitions have a much higher rate of failure to explode than the United States. Russia has used them against Ukraine long before Ukraine received the United States older cluster munitions . Claiming unlimited supply .Putin bragged about Russia's massive stock pile of them. Besides the new and improved cluster munitions that are a much lower failure rate then Russia. The US has powerful cluster bombs that do not explode. It’s steel spheres that devastate enemy soldiers. But does not leave un exploded ordinance on the ground. Being much safer than Russian cluster munitions. Unexploded ordnance kills people long after wars end. And it’s all over Ukraine. If you think Russia is ethical and worried about civilian casualtiesJust look at the Ukraine landscape. And all the leveled cities. The US does not send its latest upgraded weapons to Ukraine. Keep up the wishful thinking!

  • @nesseihtgnay9419
    @nesseihtgnay9419 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Id say the ATACMS just because it can be reloaded much faster getting more shots in, and its smaller so it can hide better

    • @johnnewman1483
      @johnnewman1483 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      😂 copium .....ATACMs has been destroyed while on the move by iskander but iskander has not been shot down, talklsa its luncher being hit

    • @najiv8797
      @najiv8797 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      "Its smaller so it can hide better" it doesnt work like that bro. Size doesnt matter. 😂

    • @nesseihtgnay9419
      @nesseihtgnay9419 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@najiv8797 do you even get what the point is? guessing no you dont. smh

    • @hksp
      @hksp หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      9m54- series 300mm glonass guided mlrs, 250kg multipurpose warhead, he frag, cluster dpicm and Ap ,120km listed, 200km is good to go too,

  • @joshboyer3655
    @joshboyer3655 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Iskander wins.

  • @bpyangyang2153
    @bpyangyang2153 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    With the mentioned comparison and destructions caused by, Iskander is more superior than the ATACMS.
    As shown several of the latter were shot down and failed to do havoc on the target.

  • @chegekariuki4744
    @chegekariuki4744 หลายเดือนก่อน +15

    Iskander definitely.❤ Russia

  • @lattehour
    @lattehour หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    lol atacms are less than half the size of a istakender why would you compare them totally different weapons

    • @Tom-yy2cm
      @Tom-yy2cm หลายเดือนก่อน

      Because they can’t persuade the uninformed with facts.

  • @roryjoseph7645
    @roryjoseph7645 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    numbers will overwhelm technology :)

  • @Tsongpogi
    @Tsongpogi หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    To be fair compare iskander to USA stealth missiles. Someone just fast and someone hard to detect.

  • @israel_illuminati_Rothschild
    @israel_illuminati_Rothschild หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    iScandal is definitely more advanced...

  • @najiv8797
    @najiv8797 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Didnt even close to Iskander.. while Russia have Kinzhal. 😢

  • @rated-gr3983
    @rated-gr3983 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Iskander is like a tiny nuclear blast, accurate and faster than ATCMS.

  • @abcdbridge1824
    @abcdbridge1824 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    ATACMs are being destroyed over Russia but Iskander has been invincible. Where is the comparison charlie ?

  • @Testio26
    @Testio26 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    According to Putin it’s also nuclear weapon capable!

  • @MrEdmundF
    @MrEdmundF หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    ATACMs has higher mobility and much faster load times

  • @user-kb7ic2pi6x
    @user-kb7ic2pi6x หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    ❤Come on Guyz this is an insult .Even non military guyz know thez no answer to Iskander missiles. NO nation has absolutely none has an answer to Iskanders

  • @carlitos2k2
    @carlitos2k2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Well considering Iskanders slam Odesa and Kharkov on a regular basis while all ATACMS fired at Crimea were downed the answer is clear

    • @Tom-yy2cm
      @Tom-yy2cm หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      That is completely false.

    • @carlitos2k2
      @carlitos2k2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Tom-yy2cm prove it!!

  • @deven6518
    @deven6518 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iskander, especially the domestic variant, is in a league of its own. That isnt to say atacms arent good, but yk

  • @SnakePliskin762
    @SnakePliskin762 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Ones about as accurate as a German V2,the other can hit a target within 5 metres cep.

    • @tomvlodek6377
      @tomvlodek6377 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I think atacms are a little better than a V2, not a good comparison

    • @SnakePliskin762
      @SnakePliskin762 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@tomvlodek6377 you've got the comparison the wrong way round.

    • @tomvlodek6377
      @tomvlodek6377 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@SnakePliskin762 uhhh, no, you’re the one who’s shameless and continues embarrassing himself after given the opportunity to slither back into the hole he crawled out of…

  • @indiamylove4833
    @indiamylove4833 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iskander is the Secendar of battlefield❤❤❤❤

  • @Babuka54
    @Babuka54 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Российская Армия не меряется письками-она воюет!

    • @najiv8797
      @najiv8797 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      🔥🔥

  • @pacificventure
    @pacificventure หลายเดือนก่อน

    had to swith the sound off....

  • @Aboulhabass260
    @Aboulhabass260 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    You have compared the inncomparable

  • @VINLAND_777
    @VINLAND_777 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iskandaler? The Hyper-Tonic Missile?

  • @tazanddo
    @tazanddo หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Russia created a purpose built Iskander missile with it's own military industrial complex. NATO purchased a profit driven ATACMS missile from it's own military industrial complex, sold from the lowest bidder. Purpose built probably wins, but that remain to be seen.

  • @tmafungo84
    @tmafungo84 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Atacms not cost effective.

    • @bekeneel
      @bekeneel หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      3x cheaper than iskander, muppet.

    • @Tom-yy2cm
      @Tom-yy2cm หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@bekeneel Direct! Accurate! Funny!!!

  • @user-vh8wj9id9e
    @user-vh8wj9id9e หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    The Iskander an equal to nuclear weapons

  • @ahokkumar2775
    @ahokkumar2775 หลายเดือนก่อน +19

    Iskander super

    • @iamTheSnark
      @iamTheSnark หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      But the vehicle is much larger and heavier. HIMARS can get to many more places easily.
      Iskander, not so much.

    • @johnwi-l_l-iamsf3763
      @johnwi-l_l-iamsf3763 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@iamTheSnarkHIMARS is useless now , it's been taken down like nothing with electronic warfare systems

    • @raphael3620
      @raphael3620 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@iamTheSnarkislander doesn’t need to get to anywhere that’s why they have a longer range

    • @bekeneel
      @bekeneel หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@johnwi-l_l-iamsf3763 u haven't been paying attention son 😂😂 himars still very effective.

  • @SilverBear568
    @SilverBear568 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iklander must be a priority to stop

  • @Blackcain
    @Blackcain หลายเดือนก่อน

    People treating this war as if supporting their favorite sport team

  • @Bacahonest
    @Bacahonest หลายเดือนก่อน

    What type of news it is?

  • @kingomedlanki6151
    @kingomedlanki6151 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Cue all the strategic analysts and missile system procurement experts

  • @templeosigwe3545
    @templeosigwe3545 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Wow

  • @sajedakhan133
    @sajedakhan133 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iskander ❤

  • @rahulrathnayake1104
    @rahulrathnayake1104 หลายเดือนก่อน +19

    ⚒⛏nowadays Russian shovels are more lethal than ever -- U.S weapon analyst 😅

    • @AnthonyKypros
      @AnthonyKypros หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      And their washing machines are pretty good too.

    • @jajasaria
      @jajasaria หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      okay kid. its seem you are happy to repeat the "shovel" word but forgot the "days".

    • @brandonlongdikjones8117
      @brandonlongdikjones8117 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@jajasariaAnother day, so what, you going to the front t count how long it takes or no , plus you don't even know who said that "days" thing to begin with obviously 😅

    • @hassannasir8401
      @hassannasir8401 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      ​@@AnthonyKyprosi am an indian. I bought russian made pressure cooker from saudi arabia and brought to my indian. home. That was wonderful cooker. Russians Russians make

    • @rahulrathnayake1104
      @rahulrathnayake1104 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@jajasaria right , that's plural. I mean the present time and the future except the past. Mr. English 😎

  • @macpj12j
    @macpj12j หลายเดือนก่อน

    iskander making havoc while there are defenses like patriote and arrow and so forth

  • @michaelanderson3096
    @michaelanderson3096 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Advanced manufactured items = Jobs

  • @loudtim265
    @loudtim265 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iskander is a current model. ATACMS is from the 1980s 😂

  • @nuke_Godjira
    @nuke_Godjira หลายเดือนก่อน +14

    Iskandr is a lot cheaper to produce with the same capability.

  • @JohnnyD45
    @JohnnyD45 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    🇺🇸✌🏻🇺🇦

  • @callwar-zr1xm
    @callwar-zr1xm หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Russian budget when Putin seated has been able to use it by upgrading the Russian weapons meanwhile USA used their economic by starting a war 😂😂

  • @swaggie8
    @swaggie8 หลายเดือนก่อน +18

    Iskandar is combat proven missile

    • @chinaKoronaVirus
      @chinaKoronaVirus หลายเดือนก่อน

      😂😂😂failed missile😂
      Cant be compare with Atacms😂

    • @user-ht8dd8kc3x
      @user-ht8dd8kc3x หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      also ATACMS was distroyed s-400 to scrap metal

  • @gustavooliveira-qm3ek
    @gustavooliveira-qm3ek หลายเดือนก่อน

    Atacms n1

  • @leestimpson1838
    @leestimpson1838 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iskander.

  • @ahmedomarabdallah2052
    @ahmedomarabdallah2052 หลายเดือนก่อน

    😮

  • @neojupyter322
    @neojupyter322 หลายเดือนก่อน +19

    Iskander is 10x cheaper to produce but 10x stronger than ATACMS.

    • @mattyboy456
      @mattyboy456 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      Source: pooty bot farm.
      A simple Google would say iskander costs 3 million apiece and atacms costs barely a million apiece 😊.

    • @user-qk9he7se5w
      @user-qk9he7se5w หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Yet islander can be shot down by a patriot while atacms blows up russian s400 air defence

    • @Lionking65816
      @Lionking65816 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      Atacms missile cost $1.47 million 👍
      Iskander missile cost $3 million 😂😂😂😂

    • @neojupyter322
      @neojupyter322 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @user-qk9he7se5w mach 7 Iskander missile is shot down by mach 3.5 patriot missile. So funny🤣

    • @neojupyter322
      @neojupyter322 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @user-qk9he7se5w "atacms blows up russian s400 air defence"-claimed by joker Volodymyr Zelenskyy🤣🤣

  • @JamesSmith-bo3po
    @JamesSmith-bo3po หลายเดือนก่อน

    Compare the price tag. I'm sure the US one will win...

  • @allanbaldoque2578
    @allanbaldoque2578 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I dont believe cruxx because iskander is effective only in times that Ukraine is luck of air defence while atacsm is effective while russia has enough airdefence and modern, atacsm is better than iskander, islander is considiered as old model😮😮😮😅

    • @najiv8797
      @najiv8797 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yup.. you need a wakey wakey buddy!

  • @davidparsons2391
    @davidparsons2391 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Like asking someone if a .22 hurts more than 9. Y’all love violence

  • @ijatpingrhyb
    @ijatpingrhyb หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Us weapons aren't that good

    • @najiv8797
      @najiv8797 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Its only good against habibi

    • @Tom-yy2cm
      @Tom-yy2cm หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      They are good enough to be better than anything Russia had made. By a superior margin.

  • @maheshreddymanyam1524
    @maheshreddymanyam1524 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    World Powerful 💪 Military Russia 🪖❤️☝️💪💞🇮🇳🤝💞🇷🇺💪❤️

  • @ds-jm8mf
    @ds-jm8mf หลายเดือนก่อน

    No 1 wins.

  • @MacDonaldkachala-cm5gc
    @MacDonaldkachala-cm5gc หลายเดือนก่อน

    Every one knows which is superior

  • @MarkAngelo166
    @MarkAngelo166 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Atacms is Powerfull

  • @JustARandomFio
    @JustARandomFio หลายเดือนก่อน

    Difficult to compare since Ukraine and Russia target different sorts of objects. In theory, we could find out which system works better the next time Russia targets Kharkiv by sending the exact numbers of ATACMS and drones to Belgorod. In practice, this won't work since Ukraine is not Russia.

  • @D-E-S_8559
    @D-E-S_8559 หลายเดือนก่อน

    i feel this is a mismatch atacms are no better than 9k58/9a52-2 smerch...

    • @hksp
      @hksp หลายเดือนก่อน

      tornado s glonass guided mlrs 300mm 200km 552 9m544 heat frag 160mm rha, 9m549 72 he frag

  • @niva0809
    @niva0809 หลายเดือนก่อน +45

    Russia shoots down Atakams, but Iskander cannot be shot down by Western air defense forces, which is a big difference. Iskander is cheaper and more powerful in terms of accuracy.

    • @delldell191
      @delldell191 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

      Everything is better in Russia, even the advertising. Russia's invincible missiles have been destroyed.

    • @oldowleye3161
      @oldowleye3161 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

      Lol…joke of the century … russian as never shot an atacams and iskander misdiles have been intercepted many times…nice try bot …😂

    • @niva0809
      @niva0809 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@oldowleye3161 Iskander has never been shot down, while Atakams, according to the latest data, have been shot down 11 times. It's a fact. Google it well and make sure.

    • @niva0809
      @niva0809 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@oldowleye3161 Iskander has never been shot down, while Atakams, according to the latest data, have been shot down 11 times. It's a fact. Google it well and make sure.

    • @niva0809
      @niva0809 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@oldowleye3161 Iskander has never been shot down, while Atakams, according to the latest data, have been shot down 11 times. It's a fact. Google it well and make sure.

  • @francisMuriuki-rr5bw
    @francisMuriuki-rr5bw หลายเดือนก่อน +15

    Iskanders are more powerful than attacms

  • @andreww1225
    @andreww1225 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Well it’s hard to say considering Russia uses their missiles on civilian targets.

    • @efghggdxlmfn33
      @efghggdxlmfn33 หลายเดือนก่อน

      only military targets

    • @andreww1225
      @andreww1225 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@efghggdxlmfn33 no all you have to do is watch the evidence. Russians target civilians, they can’t hide their crimes anymore because everyone films everything. Only a fool would believe Russia only attacks military targets.

  • @franktunde3090
    @franktunde3090 9 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Off course Putin is chess player.

  • @michaelfaraday8391
    @michaelfaraday8391 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Iskander is too powerful and difficult to intercept

    • @Babayaga97111
      @Babayaga97111 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      It's a music i have heard already....👂

    • @bekeneel
      @bekeneel หลายเดือนก่อน

      so is Atacms apparently.

    • @Tom-yy2cm
      @Tom-yy2cm หลายเดือนก่อน

      You should read up on that false statement

  • @charleschin6497
    @charleschin6497 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iskander very expensive

    • @efghggdxlmfn33
      @efghggdxlmfn33 หลายเดือนก่อน

      much cheaper than american wunderweapons

  • @LutherusPXCs
    @LutherusPXCs หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iskandar and not even close

  • @novemberalpha6023
    @novemberalpha6023 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Winner is the North Korean Missile 😉😉

  • @fiddler9804
    @fiddler9804 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Shovel vs ATACMS, who wins?

  • @jerwynjames8312
    @jerwynjames8312 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Change the war balance? Like seriously? That was humour.....as if Russia don't have dagger(khinzal) to throw after the stone is not effective enough and when iskandar can hit from over 200km further where is the competition?

  • @everTriumph
    @everTriumph หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    The main shackle on ATACMS is the US insistence on Ukraine only using them within its internationally agreed borders, which includes Ukraine and other territory illegally seized by the invasions. If Ukraine was allowed to hit sources within Russia, maybe Russia would not be crowing.

    • @ILUVATAR228
      @ILUVATAR228 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Да,она бы сравняла Украину с землей

    • @tomvlodek6377
      @tomvlodek6377 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Ohhhh, they’ll be crowing all the way to the Moldovan border 😂

    • @tazanddo
      @tazanddo หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      To be fair Ukraine isn't the originator of these arms so it must abide by the dictates of it's arms suppliers. Russia produces it's own arms so it can use them as it sees fit.
      There is no fairness in war and these two brothers need to patch up their differences. That may ruffle some feathers, but it's the only way for these two civilizations to move forward some day once all the mutual anger is flushed out.

  • @zpqm693
    @zpqm693 หลายเดือนก่อน

    60,000 Billion is USA?

  • @1973oiler
    @1973oiler หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Isnt Iskander hypersonic?

    • @mayhem4899
      @mayhem4899 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Iskandar is hypersonic.

    • @1973oiler
      @1973oiler หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@mayhem4899 that's what I thought. Iskander wins then. Hands down

    • @Tom-yy2cm
      @Tom-yy2cm หลายเดือนก่อน

      No

    • @1973oiler
      @1973oiler หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Tom-yy2cm no what?

  • @kamalchandramoney3541
    @kamalchandramoney3541 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The Russian shovel is the king of weapons in Ukrainian battlefields!

  • @eddiehah9842
    @eddiehah9842 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iskander will win hands down.

    • @Tom-yy2cm
      @Tom-yy2cm หลายเดือนก่อน

      But it’s not

  • @fevakurniawan5689
    @fevakurniawan5689 หลายเดือนก่อน

    That is different type from weight or range, Iskander is more powerfull that the fact

  • @PerceivedREALITY999
    @PerceivedREALITY999 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The proxy war in Ukraine is the first time NATO has tried to pick on someone their own size and NATO is getting humiliated.

  • @SP-qm6bi
    @SP-qm6bi หลายเดือนก่อน

    What are you comparing
    Details would vary but roughly one can say that the Iskander is 2X speed, 3X warhead weight, 2X range compared to the ATACMs
    The 300 km range ATACMs barely carries a warhead of 174 Kgs
    Creating sensational sounding videos are you

  • @hansb.8
    @hansb.8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    except nuclear, nothing can stop Russias actions in Ukraine.

  • @KDY3
    @KDY3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Nato has made Ukraine a testing ground for all its weapon except for jets

    • @najiv8797
      @najiv8797 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Because there is not enough air defense in Ukraine. Its make US had no guts to send their best Jet Fighters.. it will end up as metal scraps. And automatically will make a vertical drop for tge price market.

  • @user-mm6uc8xg7b
    @user-mm6uc8xg7b หลายเดือนก่อน

    A Rússia só está fazendo á cobrar fumar mesmo 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

  • @b21raider27
    @b21raider27 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Iskander M cost $3 million each (see Wiki), under 200 left. Mach 5+.
    Atacms $820k to $1.7 million, 3,700 built. Mach 3+.
    Precision strike missile replaced the Atacms for the US: range 500km to + variants (upcoming). Mach 5+.

  • @Babayaga97111
    @Babayaga97111 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Lets find out😛🇺🇳

  • @PerceivedREALITY999
    @PerceivedREALITY999 หลายเดือนก่อน

    biden: do we have hypersonic missiles?
    Military expert: No sir, we are not that advanced sir.
    biden: But we have more money.
    Military expert: I understand sir, but the Russians have more brains.

  • @christophermwaka2735
    @christophermwaka2735 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Western weapons were over hype as game changers but Ukrainian war has humbled them and has destroyed their reputation ,it works well against a third rate army like Iraq ,Afghanistan and Civilian militias etc

  • @ayupilyasilyas3560
    @ayupilyasilyas3560 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Iskandar m lebih baik dan memiliki beberapa keunggulan kompetitif bila ledakan di area musuh jangan harap hidupnya normal kembali karena dasatnya suaranya ledakan serta pecahan nya yang mematikan di area 100 mtr persegi sudah cukup cacatnya itu pasukan menderita tangisan bayi

  • @pabloboy6491
    @pabloboy6491 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    😂