Is he right?

Is he right, PrepHole? These are tanks, right?

  1. 7 days ago
    Anonymous
    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Wow this man is fucking retarded. Why talk so smugly about something you clearly have no fucking knowledge on?
      >howitzers are tanks

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        >Why talk so smugly about something you clearly have no fucking knowledge on?
        He was a member of the Young Turks and supported Bernie Sanders - they're all like this.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        >Why talk so smugly about something you clearly have no fucking knowledge on?
        He was a member of the Young Turks and supported Bernie Sanders - they're all like this.

        It's an internet generation thing. The terminally online manbaby who thinks a google search makes him an instant expert on everything.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >paladin
      >tank
      good god this level of retardation is actually painful to behold.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Well I've always thought paladin would be a cool name for a tank, but maybe better suited for a British or French one

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          >paladin
          >better suited for a British or French one
          bro

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            >Has gun
            >Will travel
            >A knight without armor
            He's *that* close to being a tank.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Do normies really think a tank is any tracked vehicle with a gun?
      That said both are capable of easily destroying any Russian tank in service, so good enough.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Some normies would think that a Bradley is a tank, but for the most part they would STFU instead of digging out citations from WWI when told that they were wrong (he literally did this)

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Plenty of people wouldn't even go that far, they just think any military vehicle with tracks is a tank. If you took a random selection of people and showed them an unarmed M113 at least a third of them would consider it a tank.

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >Do normies really think a tank is any tracked vehicle with a gun?
        As long as the gun looks like a turret, then yes.
        Shit I've personally handled and processed ABCD data files for paladin vehicles and my first thought at seeing the paladin picture up top was "That's not a tank?"

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Dat is a Schützenpanzer, nein a Panzerwagen! Both are Panzerfahrzeuge.

      Dat is a Panzerhaubitze, nein a Panzerwagen! Both are Panzerfahrzeuge.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Scheiße, forgot mein image!

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      He is so fucking retarded he got fact checked on Twitter... You gotta be REALLY fucking stupid to get fact checked on Twitter

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >normie finds out proper nomenclature exists
      >has a meltdown

      Many such cases.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      takes literally 3 minutes to google why they're classified the way they're classified. or just ask any 14 year old who played a bit of military vidya games.

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        Retard here, care to explain it to me?

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          A tank is a tracked vehicle that's designed to support infantry with direct fire.

          This is distinct from an IFV (a heavy vehicle designed to carry infantry and also provide fire support), an APC (lighter than an IFV, also carries infantry), a self propelled gun (an artillery piece with armor and tracks) and a bunch of other shit.

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            I see now, thanks.

          • 4 days ago
            Anonymous

            >A tank is a tracked vehicle that's designed to support infantry with direct fire.
            The Howitzer and Bradley are and can be tracked.
            You can support infantry with direct fire from either.
            Therefore.
            Howitzers and Brads are tanks.

            Next time watch your definitions.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      neverserved noguns pacifist tourist here's my idea of how this works based on my BF2142 knowledge:
      MBT>modern IFV>light tanks>IFV>everyone else>ATGMs>AFV
      This is excluding planes, ships, artillery and all but you might want to consider attack helicopters somewhere below IFVs and my ranking does of course generalize things a fair bit.

      also I just learned this to fall under assault gun because it's a self propelled artillery platform with auxiliary machine gun

      I don't understand why my autism compells me to learn this but please r8 my wikipedia snippets and bradley is a modern IFV, but I don't know anything about it specifically

      >with a rotating turret
      Please you explain what stridsvagn 103 is

      >stridsvagn 103
      looks like a tank destroyer which I have omitted from my ranking because it's an obsolete concept from what I gathered on 4chin

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        It's not really a ranking thing so much as a role thing

        >MBT

        A tracked vehicle designed to serve as a general purpose tank, combining the mobility of a medium tank with the lethality of a heavy tank. In modern contexts, generally the only kind of tank that a military uses

        >IFV

        A heavy vehicle that carries infantry but is also designed to participate directly in combat, including against enemy tanks

        >light tanks

        A lighter tank designed for reconnaissance, airborne operations, or other tasks where a heavy tank is too logistically difficult to field. Was obsolete for a while, but is coming back in some roles because of how difficult force projection is in a world with cheap missiles.

        >ATGM

        A missile designed to destroy tanks

        >AFV

        A general term for vehicles that engage in combat, including tanks, IFVs, APCs, and so on.

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        The S-tank was built, designed, and used as a main battle tank. In testing it legitimately gave the M60 a run for its money.

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          >looks like a tank destroyer
          And that's wrong, it's a MBT.

          thanks for the update, I'll be more careful about the identification of turretless tracked armored fight vehicles in the future

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >looks like a tank destroyer
        And that's wrong, it's a MBT.

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >I just learned this to fall under assault gun
        Not really. It's a self propelled howitzer, i.e. indirect fire long range artillery piece put onto armored chassis to give it protection and mobility to increase it's chances of survival against counterbattery fire, enemy air assets and other nuisance.
        Assault guns were armored vehicles intended to bring big guns to forward areas (i.e. into direct combat) mostly to blow up enemy fortifications, buildings etc. plus a little bit of that good old shelling. A bit of an outdated concept now when tanks with 100+ mm guns can do most of the direct fire work themselves and modern communications let you precisely direct artillery from far away. There was some overlap between assault guns and tank destroyers, and they fell out of favor some time after WWII, with Swedes being probably the last ones to design and put into service new assault guns (they mostly repurposed older tank chassis for that to extend their useful lifespan and give their infantry units more firepower).

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Has anyone ever been retarded enough to use self propelled artillery as a front line tank?

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        I play war thunder all the time.

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          war thunder handholds SPGs with timetravel though, it's horseshit that the bkan 1 can bonk WWII attacker planes with HE-VT.

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        Depends on if theres a real difference between a Casemate Tank Destroyer/Assault Gun, and Self propelled Artillery, but yes it did happen a lot in WW2, including using direct fire SPAA.
        A Casemate TD/assault gun is or was an artillery gun on a chasis designed for direct fire, but could also be used for indirect fire, being essentially mobile artillery pieces. However they were generally more useful as multi-role Tank Destroyers as well as assault guns, despite them not being originally intended for that role. Ones which received a heavily armoured superstructure (Stug, SU-85, SU-152, Bishop) and those which received a more lightly armoured and open top superstructure (Sexton, Hummel, Marder) were both extremely similar and often used for direct fire as well as indirect fire, although the more open top ones had more elevation and so were better at indirect fire but more vulnerable for direct fire.
        Even vehicles which were just cars or tractors with guns attached on for mobile artillery or AA support could and did use them in direct fire, often by neccessity in the early war when the long 88s were pressed from AA/artillery into killing KV-1s which panzer III's were having a hard time with.

        That being said, depending on the vantage point and elevation, direct fire and indirect fire can just be the same thing. For example the FV4005 tank destroyer was designed to lob 183mm explosive shells across the fulda gap to blow up T-55s, it wasnt designed for front line use but was intendended to see its target directly, although it was absolutely capable of acting like artillery, is it direct fire or indirect fire when its at a vantage point where it can see enemies 10km away? Modern self propelled howitzers arent designed for direct fire but are still capable of it, its just if theyre used for that, then 'direct fire' is ideally (unless theyre caught out of position) going to mean from a good vantage point where they can directly see what theyre shooting at.

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        I have an unwavering faith that during ww2 Russians probably tucked at least one [pic related] in a city alley to point blank a passing panzer iv from 2 yards away

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous
    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      arent paladins tanks in cnc generals/zero hour? i thought they were the big brother of the crusader tank

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Umm but it has tracks and a turret? It's a tank, deal with it chuds

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      is not a tank because the gun is too skinny, but is a tank with what looks like not very much armor

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        the second image is a self propelled artillery and it is exactly what it sounds like.
        It's not supposed to fight on the front line or survive any anti vehicle munitions, and is wholly incapable of preforming independent operations.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Depends on context imo.
      By strict technical/academic definition, no, SPGs and IFVs arent tanks. But if a giant armoured box turns up in your town and starts blowing things up, then sure its a tank. If youre looking at it from a. distance and cant tell, then sure its a tank. If youre getting shot by it and dont have heavy weapons, then as far as youre concerned, its a tank. Really originally tanks were anti infantry weapons, and todays IFVs arent a million miles away from interwar or early ww2 light or medium tanks in terms of their calibre and (base) armour. The difference between an artillery gun and a tank cannon is a bit wishy washy, especially as many WW2 SPGs outright did just have howtizers, and the origins of many famous tank guns are in repurposed artillery guns, e.g. Long 88. So yeah sure, if youre a military planner its not a tank, if youre on the receiving end then its a tank as far as you care, the difference is role related, which you wont care about if its trying to kill you.

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >The difference between an artillery gun and a tank cannon is a bit wishy washy,
        Artillery is rifled while modern tanks are smoothbore (except for British ones).
        You might say that mortars are also smoothbore but they have far lower pressure.

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          Yes but thats just a prevalent modern feature, not entirely inherent to tank cannons. Imo a SPG is of the class of 'tanks', even if it isnt a 'tank' in its modern role, as its a heavily armed armoured box with tracks. If you saw it from a distance or were subject to direct fire, you'd say its a tank. In ww2 the class of SPGs were often used in a direct fire role or specifically built as tank destroyers, in fact they most commonly were built as multi-role vehicles capable of being tank destroyers, they were tanks as far as anyone was concerned. Its not the intended role of modern ones, as theyre ot primarily intended for direct fire, but theyre able to fill that role if need be, and so can be called 'tanks' imo. Its just MBTs are a lot better at being a tank as opposed to artillery.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      >ITS A CONSPIRACY OF THE HIGHEST ORDER AGAINST RETARDED JOURNOS LIKE ME
      kek. They aren’t sending their best.

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      This is what happens when journos are retarded drunk micks instead of amoral high iq garden gnomes

    • 5 days ago
      Indian Shill

      Thank God nobody takes these retards seriously

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      these are the exact same people who think every gun is a 'glock' an 'ar' or an 'ak'

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous
    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      >it's real lmao
      https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1615799112708026368

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      >Light or medium armor
      >Made for reco, to be in a mechanized infantry unit or as arty
      >Tanks

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      Has a Paladin ever been recorded going head to head with an actual tank? And if not, could it feasibly do so? Does the gun aim low enough to shoot in a straight direction?

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        There were stories of AS90 engaging Iraqi tanks in direct fire.
        M109 is capable of doing to the same.

  2. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Michael Tracey is cheating

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/D2SGS72.png

      Wow this man is fucking retarded. Why talk so smugly about something you clearly have no fucking knowledge on?
      >howitzers are tanks

      https://i.imgur.com/7kyrp5L.jpg

      The evolution of Michael Tracy

      >"The Russians won't invade Ukraine"
      >"The Russians are only putting their troops into the separatist regions to stop Ukrainian aggression. This is just like when the West supported Kosovo but I condemned that and support this."
      >"Okay, the Russians invaded but it's too late to support them and it was the West's fault for starting all this."
      >"Heh, you say Ukraine is doing well but how come the Russians took Mariupol after two months HMMMMM?!"
      >"Bucha didn't happen, and I will turn down multiple offers to go to Bucha to see for myself what's going on because it could be used for Pro-Ukraine propaganda."
      >"Ukraine is losing and any other news is false. Also if the West sends ammunition to Ukraine it will start World War 3!"
      >"If the West trains Ukrainian troops it will start WW3."
      >"If the West provides military intel it will start WW3!"
      >"If the West provides anti-tank weapons it will start WW3!"
      >"If the West sends HIMARS it will start WW3!"
      >"If Ukraine takes Kherson it will start WW3!"
      >"The Crimean Bridge Attack was a terrorist incident comparable to 9/11" (Fucking seriously)
      >"You keep comparing stopping Putin to stopping Hitler? Actually stopping Hitler in World War 2 wasn't justified either." (Fucking seriously)

      Is this guy trolling or legit retarded?

      Former ex-Young Turk guy was talking about the donation of US tanks to Ukraine. He stated that the US donating the Paladin was them using 'official military jargon' to get around the fact that had actually already donated tanks. Because the Paladin is a tank. After all, it has a gun, it has SOME armour and it has tracks. So it is tank. People called him out on it and went 'Yeah that isn't a tank' and he went on an autism rant going
      >UM WELL THIS BOOK SAYS THAT THERE IS NO DEFINITION OF TANK SO FUCK YOU LOL
      Instead of admitting he was wrong, he doubled down for days and is now so mindbroken he is calling Bradley's tanks because... um... um... THEY JUST ARE, OK?????

      You guys are either not mentioning or haven't seen him have a mental breakdown and get arrested after he couldn't get an autograph from Ann Coulter. Enjoy
      https://twitter.com/haramcart/status/1437608552395378690

  3. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    What would happen if you shot an Abrams with a self propelled howitzer directly?

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      the crew of the abrams would turn into ragù sauce

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        >the crew of the abrams would turn into ragù sauce
        LOL

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Depends on the ammo user but it would be incredibly painful.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        bump

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        It’s a big tank

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      I did a simulation and everybody died.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        >UFP
        You stupid retard moron, now try the turret cheeks or LFP

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      tanks can be killed by 155mm splinters so I'd say it wouldn't go well

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Follow-on question: What are the direct-fire sights like on modern SPGs?

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      The crew would die and their platoon commander would be court-martialed for being so incompetent a howitzer was able to somehow ambush a tank in his unit and direct fire on it.

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >howitzer was able to somehow ambush a tank
        in full concealment under foliage with engine off laying in ambush

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          >boy that sure is a lot of teeth and blood
          >better stick my head in there
          Literal birdbrain move

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Direct hit with a 155mm HE? Best case is that the tank is mission killed by all its optics being shattered by overpressure and shock, worse case is that said shock and overpressure both ruptures the crews organs and makes it look like they slammed into a concrete wall at 50 miles per hour.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      It would kill the tank. However, the M109 doesn't have the direct-fire fire control, the sensors, the rate of fire, or the armor to survive an encounter with a M1 unless it gets very, very lucky. Dueling tanks is *not* an intended mission for a howitzer; it's a capability reserved for self-defense when there are no other options.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      One could call this a tank yes, an enclosed heavily armed and armored combat vehicle that moves on tracks, but it would make as much sense as calling a M16 a machine gun.
      The concept evolved.
      This age old nerd debate was reignited by the delivery of the AMX-10 and now involves normies, so there is a lot a of brain fart gas filling the forums.
      If the AMX-10 is a tank then pic related was one too, because the have the same role on the battlefield.

      The first use of a tank was in the battle of the battle of the Somme. British Mk.I tanks were used.
      >Enclosed, on tracks, integrated guns and armored

      >M1A2 sep v3
      >Hit in the turret cheek by PzH. 2000 using dm121 with full propellant load
      -Turret ring bent, turret stays slightly lifted, potentially letting pressure enter the tank
      -All optics shattered
      -Most electronics fucked
      -Cannon bent
      -Suspension in the front blown out
      -Upper front plate of hull potentially deformed so much that it tore and let the pressure enter the tank
      -Crew deaf and shell shocked at best and dead from internal bleedings at worst

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >but it would make as much sense as calling a M16 a machine gun.
        According to the ATF it is.
        There's various assault/battle rifles with a machine gun equivalent that simply has some modifications to easier sustain automatic fire such as a heavier barrel, option for belt feeding or a swapping mechanism.
        The difference between assault rifle and machine gun is more a question of doctrine than design.

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          >The difference between assault rifle and machine gun is more a question of doctrine than design.
          That was the point.

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        >Enclosed, on tracks, integrated guns and armored
        Behold, a tank!

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        [Take 2]
        >Enclosed, on tracks, integrated guns and armored
        Behold, a tank!

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          Nailed it.

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          Heh, you got me.
          The alternative name for trains is tank engine though so it's not that far off the mark.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      It would be extremely painful

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      bro what do you think

  4. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >Is he right, PrepHole? These are tanks, right?
    Just because it's stupid to hold tanks as some hyper special thing when compared to other military vehicles they sent, doesn't mean you can play fast and loose with the definition of a tank... that's Sweden's job.

  5. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    I'll agree with you that the bradley is a tank OP as long as you agree my bobcat is also a tank

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      HELL YEAH

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Put a cannon on it and we'll talk.

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        Oh?
        What definition of a cannon are you using?
        This is a cannon.
        It can launch projectiles (slowly and downwardly)
        It can move to aim.

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          Cannons use chemical propellents, that's clearly a gravity powered siege engine more the vein of a Trebuchet

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            Bulldozers are propelled by diesel. Diesel is a chemical. Checkmate atheists.

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            a creative guerrilla warfighter could turn use it as a cannon. a very inaccurate, short barreled cannon.

          • 4 days ago
            Anonymous

            >use chemical propellents,
            Shovels of excavators can use chemical propellents too.

            [...]
            how would you keep the cannon stable?

            There is no need for the cannon to stay stable to be considered a tank.

            >What definition of a cannon are you using?
            A cannon is a large-caliber gun.
            That is not a gun of any caliber.

            What is a gun?
            It moves something something something in a direction. Yaddah yaddah yaddah, it's a cannon because it can move something by propelling it downward using the shifting apparatus.

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              >What is a gun?
              A ranged weapon designed to launch projectiles through a barrel.

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                A shovel is a type of barrel.
                It's half a barrel that is used for scooping.

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          >What definition of a cannon are you using?
          A cannon is a large-caliber gun.
          That is not a gun of any caliber.

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        Best I can do is a moronwhipper.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Put a cannon on it and we'll talk.

      if you install the cannon on the scoop you can shoot over buildings from behind cover

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        Put a cannon on it and we'll talk.

        how would you keep the cannon stable?

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      baby killdozer

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah.

  6. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Is soda water because its a liquid? This moron literally went into a mental. breakdown after people from both sides dog piled on him.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      >This moron literally went into a mental. breakdown after people from both sides dog piled on him.
      He thought because he can shitpost in normie Twitter and masturbate to the angry replies that he could cope with angering tank posters. Silly man. Silly, silly man.

  7. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    The evolution of Michael Tracy

    >"The Russians won't invade Ukraine"
    >"The Russians are only putting their troops into the separatist regions to stop Ukrainian aggression. This is just like when the West supported Kosovo but I condemned that and support this."
    >"Okay, the Russians invaded but it's too late to support them and it was the West's fault for starting all this."
    >"Heh, you say Ukraine is doing well but how come the Russians took Mariupol after two months HMMMMM?!"
    >"Bucha didn't happen, and I will turn down multiple offers to go to Bucha to see for myself what's going on because it could be used for Pro-Ukraine propaganda."
    >"Ukraine is losing and any other news is false. Also if the West sends ammunition to Ukraine it will start World War 3!"
    >"If the West trains Ukrainian troops it will start WW3."
    >"If the West provides military intel it will start WW3!"
    >"If the West provides anti-tank weapons it will start WW3!"
    >"If the West sends HIMARS it will start WW3!"
    >"If Ukraine takes Kherson it will start WW3!"
    >"The Crimean Bridge Attack was a terrorist incident comparable to 9/11" (Fucking seriously)
    >"You keep comparing stopping Putin to stopping Hitler? Actually stopping Hitler in World War 2 wasn't justified either." (Fucking seriously)

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Oh, can't forget: "You say the US doesn't have boots on the ground in Ukraine? Then how come they have embassy guards?"

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        Embassy is US soil.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >"You keep comparing stopping Putin to stopping Hitler? Actually stopping Hitler in World War 2 wasn't justified either." (Fucking seriously)
      We know what stopped hitler.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Hitler was stopped by appeasement. Chamberlain appeased him then Hitler shot himself.

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          the chain of events is undeniable

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >Major witness "mysteriously" commits "suicide"

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          My god. The truth has been in front of our eyes this whole time.

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        >that 3rd post
        hello r*ddit!

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        Holy fucking reddit
        The Ukraine War tourists have really done a number on this board

      • 4 days ago
        Anonymous

        The power of love, obviously

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Who is this soiboy looking chud and why do you guys keep spamming him?

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      >>"You keep comparing stopping Putin to stopping Hitler? Actually stopping Hitler in World War 2 wasn't justified either." (Fucking seriously)
      based

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      >"You keep comparing stopping Putin to stopping Hitler? Actually stopping Hitler in World War 2 wasn't justified either."
      Many Ukranians would agree lol

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      I wonder if people like this are FSB assets or they do it FOR FREE

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      >"You keep comparing stopping Putin to stopping Hitler? Actually stopping Hitler in World War 2 wasn't justified either." (Fucking seriously)
      My God, so he's actually based?

  8. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Glad PrepHole found a new vatnik lolcow to follow after Armchair Copelord left twitter and gave up on chudgram.

  9. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    it's a troop carrier.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Kek. Say what you will about the historical and technical accuracy of the movie, but that whole sequence is hillarious.

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      "If we put a turret on it, people will think it's a tank!"

  10. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    It's a tank if you are in 1938.

  11. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Bradley is just an armoured Jeep!

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >rig debate to your own favor
      >”if you ragequit, you lose, this is blood sports!!”
      >a fat gay drunk scotsman manages to stick it out
      >get angry and triggered
      >kick fat gay scotsman out of debate after yelling at him that you hope he dies horribly

      I really hope he didn’t think he won that retarded debate

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        Russians had one job while they were bombing Ukraine and they fucked this one as well

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      can you believe that this guy used to make youtube videos on how to pick up women?

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Yes. I'm pretty sure all those PUA will eventually look like aging pedophiles. Ironically not all their advice is bad. I do wish there were people trying to install confidence in men that wasn't a grift.

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      Seeing Viva and Barnes act like this guy was some type of war correspondent made me realize just how shit youtubers are, did literally 0 research on him, or they are propagandists themselves, so sketch. Felt like Alex in Clockwork Orange seeing your former droogs working as police officers

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      Is there a reason he's always wearing the same shirt? I was wondering if theres an in-joke with his audience or if it's some kind of schtick but I dont want to watch hours of this retard to find out. Every thumbnail, grey shirt orange hat.

  12. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    According to Russia, this area is also "Russia" because something something something.
    Hence: official Russian jargon isn't about describing things accurately, it's about creating reasons to grab land from other countries for it's resources. Labels are funny that way.

  13. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Is this guy trolling or legit retarded?

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      He's a Russian shill, so the question is if he's legit stupid or a kompromat pedo.

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        He spent much of his early career snorting coke off prostitutes in Moscow and writing about it like some wannabe Hunter S. Thompson, I'm not entirely sure if that makes him easier or harder to blackmail.

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          Oh wait no, I confused him with Matt Taibbi, my bad.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      He's been defending his shit for over two days now or so. So...

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      He was so retarded even the Young Turks wouldn't keep him.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Yes

  14. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    I don't even get the autism anyway. Okay you think an SPG is a tank. So? What does that change? What does this mean? That USA has been giving tanks to Ukraine since the start so why not Abrams? I mean if so, go for it. But I don't get what this actually means.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >But I don't get what this actually means.
      It means that USA bad

  15. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >he is still seething
    did some tank expert rape his kids or something?

  16. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    This is Michael Tracey, who is simultaneously intelligent, but also retarded about how the world works. Chalk it up to being an insulated leftist. A life changing moment for him was when he was canvasing for Obama's election campaign. He was shocked, floored, flabbergasted, gobsmacked when a woman called Obama a moron, but also said that she was going to vote for him because he is a Democrat and also half White.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >who is simultaneously intelligent
      He acts like he was the smartest kid in high school and felt like he never needed to learn anything new. The guy is an idiot.

  17. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    What have I missed? Are bluechecks driving themselves into a frenzy about what constitutes a tank?

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Some retard on twitter is doubling down on being wrong instead of just admitting fault. No idea why this seems to be such a foreign concept to these sorts of people.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Former ex-Young Turk guy was talking about the donation of US tanks to Ukraine. He stated that the US donating the Paladin was them using 'official military jargon' to get around the fact that had actually already donated tanks. Because the Paladin is a tank. After all, it has a gun, it has SOME armour and it has tracks. So it is tank. People called him out on it and went 'Yeah that isn't a tank' and he went on an autism rant going
      >UM WELL THIS BOOK SAYS THAT THERE IS NO DEFINITION OF TANK SO FUCK YOU LOL
      Instead of admitting he was wrong, he doubled down for days and is now so mindbroken he is calling Bradley's tanks because... um... um... THEY JUST ARE, OK?????

  18. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >tracks
    >turret
    = IT'S A TONK

    This is how normalfags have always seen things.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Shit, wait, I have to revise that.

      >tracks
      >turret
      >gun
      = IT'S A TONK

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        >not armored
        here you go
        now it’s a tank

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          It doesn't need to be armored.
          It just needs tracks and a turret with some kind of gun. Maybe tape a .22LR rifle to the door?

          • 7 days ago
            Anonymous

            best i can do is this FN Mag on a tracked armored vehicle

            • 6 days ago
              Anonymous

              That's an S-tank, right down to the bulldozer blade and slat armor.

          • 7 days ago
            Anonymous

            >killdozer is a tank

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/hHZQijf.jpg

        >not armored
        here you go
        now it’s a tank

        It doesn't even need to be armored or have a turret, just tracks and a gun. Most people will call SPG's tanks and a lot of them don't have turrets.
        In short the killdozer is a tank.

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          so this

          https://i.imgur.com/xvv06J9.jpg

          best i can do is this FN Mag on a tracked armored vehicle

  19. 7 days ago
    Anonymous
  20. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    I still don't get what he gains by being a retard. There has to be a goal here.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Fame? Some kids are always willing to be the class clown if that makes them popular.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      His first post was just misinformed but he's riding it into the ground because his ego won't let him leave it.

  21. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    wow this broh has spent days trying to defend his tweets about "tanks" and he's mad that people don't agree with him

  22. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Sure why not.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      >A tank is to be used for breakthrough and exploitation into the enemy rear
      >Strv103

      This chart is retarded.

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      This is what I thought of

      this is not okay, someone needs to explain themselves. Someone built this shit.

      Probably the kurds
      I think it took some initiative. There were a bunch of them

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        Is there any consensus over whether tank destroyers are tanks?
        Is there even a consensus on what a tank destroyer is beyond a vehicle that can destroy tanks?

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          A tank destroyer is a thing that fills the doctrinal role of a tank destroyer.

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/CO9BBGz.png

          A tank destroyer is a thing that fills the doctrinal role of a tank destroyer.

          Makes me think of creating that chart for a tank destroyer

          But the bottom right box is a guy with a javelin, instead of a Toyota technical

          • 5 days ago
            Anonymous

            Nah, doctrine radical + structure radical Tank Destroyer is a booze bottle with matchsticks tied to it.

            • 4 days ago
              Anonymous

              Kek
              And what kind of match sticks are those?
              Seems.... Aggressive

              • 4 days ago
                Anonymous

                Heavy duty storm matches.
                Those things are impossible to put out once lit.

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          They're not. Naming conventions in militaries are doctrinal, not based on their external features. A tank destroyer is a tank destroyer, no matter if it would qualify as a tank based on its other features. It's the stumbling block most people have when they try to understand what constitutes a certain piece of equipment.

          • 5 days ago
            Anonymous
            • 5 days ago
              Anonymous

              For me, it's the Marder.

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          A tank destroyer with wheels is an armoured car or an SPG.
          A tank destroyer with tracks is a tank or SPG.
          An IFV is a specialised light tank.

  23. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >literally an entire whole ass shitlib documentary bitching and moaning about the Bradley's existence
    >"hurr durr, its a tank"

  24. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    What's the PrepHole approved definition of what is a tank then?

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      >a heavily armored, tracked, self propelled gun carriage designed for direct fire and optimized for the rapid assault of enemy positions primarily using its gun, as opposed to the transportation of infantry or the use of missile launchers

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        A heavily armor high mobility land vehicle with powerful direct fire capability. Whatever form that takes is secondary I think. A very heavily armored 8-wheeler with a VLS array could be a tank for all I care as long as it can be used as one.

        >heavily armored
        M22 Locust is a tank, MBTs must be armored to resist their own firepower but that hasn't historically been a requirement for light tanks or tankettes

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_battle_tank

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      You know it when you see it. Only normoids lack a fully internalized definition of every possible armored fighting vehicle, warplane, warship, or firearm. You're not a loser, right anon?

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      A tensor is an object that transforms like a tensor.

      A tank is an object that fulfils the doctrinal role of a tank.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      A tank is a container for storing liquids or gases.

      The military hardware with big guns, heavy armor and tracks should be called something else.
      >armored wagon
      Panzerwagen, panssarivaunu
      >battle wagon
      stridsvogn, stridsvagn, kampvogn
      >armed wagon
      carro armato
      >assault vehicle
      char d'assaut
      >battle vehicle
      sensha, jeoncha, zhànchē

      "Tank" was a secret codename bongs used for their first ones and somehow it stuck. It's stupid. MBT is okay I guess.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Several languages call it some version of "Tank" too. It's "Tank" in Russian. But I guess "tank" probably does not also mean "water tank" there.

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          >russians got memed on by bongs
          wew

          • 7 days ago
            Anonymous

            I also don't know what "Zhanche" is. In Chinese I have always just heard "Tan ke", i.e. transliteration of "Tank". ZTZ = Main Tank for Battle in Chinese and T stands for Tank

            • 7 days ago
              Anonymous

              Sorry - upon further inspection sources suggest ZTZ actually stands for "Armored Tank, Medium". Point remains.

            • 7 days ago
              Anonymous

              >what "Zhanche" is
              It's 戦車. Same kanji as Japan's "Sensha"

              • 6 days ago
                Anonymous

                >Literally battle chariot lmoa

                No wonder they got dabbed on so hard by 外人将軍

              • 6 days ago
                Anonymous

                Many of the terms for "tank" have roots in chariot, from French to the many Scandinavian languages.

                Then you also have a series of tanks named Merkava, which is Hebrew for chariot.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        A tank is an armored, tracked container with a rotating turret for storing and expelling direct fire munitions.

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          >with a rotating turret
          Please you explain what stridsvagn 103 is

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        >"Tank" is a dumb name
        >MBT is fine
        You do realize what MBT stands for, right?

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          Main battle tank is no longer ambiguous.
          Unless you try really, really hard to confuse it with military hydration packs.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      A heavily armor high mobility land vehicle with powerful direct fire capability. Whatever form that takes is secondary I think. A very heavily armored 8-wheeler with a VLS array could be a tank for all I care as long as it can be used as one.

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      It's kinda like the different between the nude model in a medical text book, and a nude model in a porno mag.
      One was made to be fapped to. The other is just reperposed

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      a metal box

    • 5 days ago
      Indian Shill

      A tank is something that can literally tank high explosive damage and support infantry.
      A howitzer cannot tank these RPGs or atgm's, they can barely handle Anti Material rifles.
      Anybody armed with anything above 14mm amr can fuck up a spg with afucking amr.

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      an armored fighting vehicle intended to engage enemy vehicles and personnel in direct fire for the purposes of breakthrough, exploitation, or reconnaissance but specifically without the ability to carry troops because then it's an IFV and IFVs aren't tanks

      whether tracks are necessary be called a tank is personal preference

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        So the M3 Bradley is a tank as are a lot of self-propelled guns.

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          M3 Bradley should probably be considered a tank in a vacuum, people don't want to call it a medium tank because it's a repurposed IFV and IFVs are specifically not tanks and shouldn't be used as such

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          Exploitation and reconnaissance, sure. But is the M3 Bradley doctrinally meant to be a breakthrough vehicle?

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      If you can take a main gun round to the snoot and not die, you're a tank.

  25. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    A featherless biped

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      >A featherless biped *with broad, flat nails*
      ftfy,

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >Featherless.
        Yep.
        >biped
        Tanks typically have two sets of tracks
        >with broad, flat nails
        That's basically what tank tracks consist of.
        Does a tank meet Plato's revised definition of a man?

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          >Diogenes walks into Plato's lecture hall
          >holds a plucked bird in it with broad, flat nails
          >"HAHA, PLATO! IS THIS A TANK?"
          >"Fuck off Dio, Jesus Christ what did you do to that chicken."

  26. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    He's mad that not all armored tracked vehicles are tanks. Imagine having such a great life that you go batshit crazy over terminology.

  27. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    No one should (or does) give a shit what the "offical" terminology is. Tank being short for armoured tracked vehicle makes more sense than the autistic distinction between MBTs and IFV.

    Pic related is what they should be called

  28. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >basedboy amerimutt from twitter has an opinion

  29. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Why is the Bradley such a widely hated meme? I genuinely don't know, it looks like a decent enough troop transport...

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      It's okay. Its mobility isn't very impressive though.

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Does any APC have really great mobility? I think their general use and dimensions kind of limit how manoeuvrable they are.

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          >Does any APC have really great mobility?
          Sure, for example the cv90 has a better ability to climb steep inclines than leo2s and does much better in deep snow.

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          >their general use and dimensions
          You might have noticed that these are quite different on the Bradley compared to your average APC...

          • 7 days ago
            Anonymous

            It's not an APC

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        bullshit. don't even respond please.

  30. 7 days ago
    Anonymous
    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Vaguely related

      • 7 days ago
        Anonymous

        Brown leftypol fingers posted this.

        • 7 days ago
          Anonymous

          It's a PrepHole classic from about a decade before 4chan and you.

          • 7 days ago
            Anonymous

            It was. And then your brown leftypol fingers got hold of it and started posting it.

            • 7 days ago
              Anonymous

              okay kid

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            God, old memes were so much better than endless wojaks.

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        LEL

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        Always thought the video that was the source of this meme was funnier than the actual meme

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          https://i.imgur.com/KKvETY4.png

          Vaguely related

          The whole thing was hilarious.
          >Reuters journos are accompanying insurgents armed with clearly identifiable AKs and RPGs right next to a spot where a patrol was attacked earlier that day
          >there is another patrol on the ground at the time
          >journo points his fuckoff huge telescope at a Humvee, making the pilot think it's another RPG
          >the whole huddle is vaporized by 30mm HEDP
          "What do you mean that if I'm hanging out with armed insurgents, I'm also gonna get lit the fuck up?! Warcrimes REEEEEEE!!!"

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      rank my austism PrepHole

      >Rifle side
      AKM
      M16
      P90
      Uzi
      some sort of Barrett 50. cal anti material rifle (but not an m80 because its a bullpup)
      A childs pellet gun
      Nerf Vulcan EBF-25
      RPG7 (with optic)
      Some kind of Glock
      Some kind of Ford

      >Pistol side
      Walther ppk
      Taser
      Classic toy pirate pistol with "bang" flag
      Browning Hi Power
      Hand crossbow
      Classic water pistol (fill with lemon juice for maximum effect)
      Some kind of Colt revolver (I think chambered in .45)
      Flintlock dueling pistol (too short for actual combat)

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >Browning Hi Power
        Please turn in your PrepHole membership card and leave the premises RIGHT NOW

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          dammit I knew I'd fucked that one up I thought it was the browning because of that bit at the front of the barrel

  31. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    He must be doing this on purpose to get more attention.

  32. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Just did a quick scroll of his Twitter and he's a massive fucking retard. He even doubled down on the Paladin being a "tank" because this fuckin retard legitimately thinks "tank" is a catch-all term for something with armor and a gun.

  33. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    Michael Tracy is a dumb basedboy that can't understand APCs/IFVs.

  34. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    How is this a tank but a bradley isn't? Is this some sort of stupid prank?

  35. 7 days ago
    Anonymous

    >These are tanks, right?
    In C&C Tiberian Dawn the vehicles Nod calls light tanks are shown in a cutscene to be Bradleys

    • 7 days ago
      Anonymous

      Early game devs are retarded, or genius.
      I chose to believe that the Nod light tanks (Bradleys) are heavily modified, considering they have a real single shot gun and not an autocannon.
      In the remaster, they retconned them to be fucking t64s or something similar.

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >In the remaster, they retconned them to be fucking t64s or something similar.
        No one tell him about NOD Light Tanks in Renegade

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/pMqLa3Q.jpg

      Early game devs are retarded, or genius.
      I chose to believe that the Nod light tanks (Bradleys) are heavily modified, considering they have a real single shot gun and not an autocannon.
      In the remaster, they retconned them to be fucking t64s or something similar.

      They are heavily modified Bradleys, yeah, with the troop transport replaced with more ammo and the autocannon replaced with something more comparable to the tank cannons used by GDI.
      Later in the war they would replace that moron-rigged stupid contraption with the actual purpose built light tanks we see in Renegade.

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        its amazing how long Renegade has had populated multiplayer servers

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          cause it's fucking fun and there's very little like it. You'd think an RTS game but it's a wide open shooter where you play as one of the units would have been a no-brainer but Renegade is kinda 'it' as far as the subgenre goes.
          Oh, and if you're interested check out Renegade X. It's a freeware, standalone remake of Renegade's multiplayer on the unreal engine, and got a reasonably active playerbase.

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      >In the remaster, they retconned them to be fucking t64s or something similar.
      No one tell him about NOD Light Tanks in Renegade

      https://i.imgur.com/XRRsDc2.png

      [...]
      They are heavily modified Bradleys, yeah, with the troop transport replaced with more ammo and the autocannon replaced with something more comparable to the tank cannons used by GDI.
      Later in the war they would replace that moron-rigged stupid contraption with the actual purpose built light tanks we see in Renegade.

      Bradley's appear in some of the first games cutscenes but there was also a unique light tank design used in one of the cutscenes where it follow 2 recon bikes and 2 Nod buggy's. Here are all Nod light tanks in the cutscenes.

  36. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    this is a tank
    oh it's not?
    >yaddah yaddah reason reason reason
    It's a tank and that's final.

  37. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    Bradley's are basically tanks destroyers

  38. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    something like these would make more sense

    ?t=33

  39. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    yes this was part of an insidious plot dating back to the BMP so that the west could transfer tanks to Ukraine without saying they are transferring tanks to Ukraine because some how tanks would be different

  40. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    finally the west will wake up and realize sending MBT is no different

  41. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    I wish someone explained the difference between casualty and killed in action to normies more than the difference between APC, IFV and Tank.

  42. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    It's like non car people equating a shitty little FWD biased AWD crossover to a true 4x4 with a transfer case and locking diffs etc. They simply do not understand the objective mechanical differences. The Bradley is great but it is not a MBT. Simple.

  43. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    Okay, it's a tank. Fuck yourself

  44. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    A tank only holds the crew it needs to operate.

  45. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    It's a medium tank

  46. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    Tanks are faster

  47. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    It may not be a tank but it is SECOND TO NONE

    ?t=26

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Man look at that thin zip around on golf courses

  48. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    >Michael Tracey
    >Is he right?
    No, he's marginally more retarded than what he thinks he's pretending to be.

  49. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    A tank is a land battleship. It features powerful armor, powerful weapons and decent mobility.

  50. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    typical retard trying to make arguments based solely on appearances despite is very obvious extreme ignorance of the subject matter.
    this is exactly the type of people who freak out over barrel shrouds and shit and throw around the term "assault weapon" at anything that looks scary.
    This shit isn't confusing and it doesn't take anything beyond some basic research and an IQ over 90 to understand it.

  51. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    tanks dont have turrets, they have sponsons.
    what kind of idiot does not know this.

  52. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    >Kampfpanzer
    >Schützenpanzer
    >Spähpanzer
    >Panzerhaubize
    Yes, depending on your language most tracked and armed military vehicles are technically tanks.
    Not that it fucking matters.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Literally:
      >battle armor
      >infantry armor
      >recon armor
      >armored howitzer

      So "depending on your language", where are the tanks, exactly?

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        "Whats an armoured column? Where are my tanks you idiot?"

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        >imagine being this autistic
        Panzer translates as Armor/Shell,/Carapace /Casing or TANK.
        But sure, pick one translation and pretend to be retarded.

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          Panzer in this case is short for Panzerkampfwagen, literally "armored fighting vehicle", but sure, pretend that it means something other than armor in this context, retardo.

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            >Panzer in this case is short for Panzerkampfwagen
            That's not how language works you absolute mongoloid.
            Panzer is not short for Panzerkampfwagen it is a word on it's own that can, depending on context, mean armor OR tank.
            Or are you going to tell me that Kampfpanzer is short for Kampfpanzerkampfwagen?

            • 6 days ago
              Anonymous

              Let me translate that to german.
              >That'snothowlanguageworksyouabsolutemongoloid. PanzerisnotshortforPanzerkampfwagenitisawordonit'sownthatcan, dependingoncontext, meanarmorORtank. OrareyougoingtotellmethatKampfpanzerisshortforKampfpanzerkampfwagen?

              • 6 days ago
                Anonymous

                do americans really

            • 6 days ago
              Anonymous

              >That's not how language works you absolute mongoloid.
              t. absolute cretin

              • 6 days ago
                Anonymous

                >look mom I found something on wikipedia
                At least look at the German version of the article and you will learn that Panzer can be an abreviation of Panzerkampfwagen, Panzerwagen or Panzerfahrzeug or and really try to wrap your head around this one, can be used on it's own as a translation for "tank".
                And now kindly have a nice day in the attic.

                Let me translate that to german.
                >That'snothowlanguageworksyouabsolutemongoloid. PanzerisnotshortforPanzerkampfwagenitisawordonit'sownthatcan, dependingoncontext, meanarmorORtank. OrareyougoingtotellmethatKampfpanzerisshortforKampfpanzerkampfwagen?

                >most linguistically gifted American

              • 5 days ago
                Anonymous

                Germans love to put existing words together to make new ones, panzer means armor and thats it, but its used by retards to say "tank".
                My language calls tanks "Combat wagons"

  53. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    he's still going at it?
    i guess some people just can't accept being wrong.

  54. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    it can pierce a t-72 so technically yes

  55. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    Tracked+big indirect fire gun=SPG/tank
    Tracked+big direct fire gun=tank
    Tracked+autocannon=light tank/IFV
    Wheel+big indirect fire gun=tank destroyer/SPG
    Wheel+big direct fire gun=tank destroyer/armoured car
    Wheel+autocannon=armoured car/IFV

    IFVs are light tanks, SPGs are tanks, multiple terms can be used for any single AFV, arent really many strict definitions, its mostly role related.

  56. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    It's not a tank, it's a troop transport.

  57. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, the AMX-10 RC sent to Ukraine were also tanks.

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      STRYKER-SAN IS A PROUD IFV, SHE IS NOT TREADED!!!!

  58. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    > Claims to be a war-reporter
    > Doesn't fucking know what tank and self-propelled howitzer is

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      >> Claims to be a war-reporter
      >> Doesn't fucking know what tank and self-propelled howitzer is
      that checks out for Journalism

  59. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    >tank thread
    >No one posting tanks
    Let's fix that

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous
    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous
  60. 6 days ago
    Anonymous
    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      this is not okay, someone needs to explain themselves. Someone built this shit.

  61. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    It seems a lot of people want to use them as tanks rather than supporting the infantry.

    Or put the mounted infantry in danger and have them engage tanks while mounted.

  62. 5 days ago
    Anonymous
    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      That gear train literally won't move

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        da vinci intentionally made such "mistakes" in the designs so that if someone copies them they would not have a working design

  63. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    Technically a Leo-1 variant.

  64. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    >has tracks
    >has weapons
    >can take a few hits
    This is a tank.

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      Also this.

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        >Krupp
        >Siemens
        checks out

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      No, thats a tracked MLRS system.

  65. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    They hated him because he told the truth.
    >takes out the troop compartment of the M3 Bradley so they can carry more shells and missiles
    >bro it's still not a tank bro even though it's a 30-ton tracked vehicle with an integrated cannon that can't carry troops it's uhhhhh a cavalry vehicle

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      >it's not a tank it's a cavalry vehicle
      correct, see picrel

      • 5 days ago
        Anonymous

        >The M1 Combat Car, officially Light Tank, M1,
        DisCARded.

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          To allow U.S. Army cavalry units to be equipped with armored fighting vehicles, the tanks developed for the cavalry were designated "combat cars".[note 1]
          [note 1] The same loophole was used for Japan's Type 92 heavy armoured car, a light tank for the cavalry.

          As far as Congress knows it's not a tank :^)

        • 5 days ago
          Anonymous

          It *was* official called the M1 Combat Car by the cavalry. They wouldn't have been able to operate it otherwise, as only the infantry was allowed to have tanks under the National Defense Act of 1920.

  66. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    The 1992 Treaty On Conventional Armed Forces in Europe attempted to formalize the classifications a bit. An APC was said to be a self-propelled armored vehicle with an integrated gun of less than 20 mm, an IFV was the same but with a gun of 20 mm or more (and usually also missiles), and a "battle tank" was one with an integrated gun of 75 mm or more. Both IFVs and APCs were further distinguished from battle tanks by the requirement that they're "designed and equipped primarily to transport a combat infantry squad", and that a battle tank had to be at least 16.5 tons while the APC and IFV classification had no weight limit. Self-propelled guns, weirdly, were not classified, though the battle tank classification did have its own requirements of "360-degree traverse gun" and "high self-protection" to seemingly avoid self-propelled guns being classified as such.

    No, I don't know where this leaves the M3.

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      the US Army just refuses to use the term "light tank" for some reason. The M551 Sheridan was officially a "Armored Reconnaissance/Airborne Assault Vehicle."

  67. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    Is he butthurt because they changed the name to "not a tank" due to possibly losing funding for new tanks? Or is he just too retarded to realize tracked vehicles have more than one purpose and don't need to be officially called "water tanks" because we're not trying to hide their production for war?

  68. 5 days ago
    Anonymous
  69. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know the details either, but I'm definitely not going to pretend I know more about it than the people that deal with it every day.

    Better question is who is this blue mark asshole, and who was the asshole who started this twitter screencap thread?

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      A former Young Turk who had a melt down because he couldn't get somebody's autograph and got arrested. Has doubled down on his retardedness. Russia propagandist consumer and promoter.

  70. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    lol
    lmao

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      > heavy, direct fire weapons
      > talks about a fucking Bradley
      Kek

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      But the the M119 & M109 aren't protected weapon platforms, so that isn't a tank using his own definition.

  71. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    If I were Russia I'd be declaring war on these countries sending shit that's killing my troops. Not dropping bombs or sending troops, just declare war and see what they do. It's an act of war what they're doing after all. The US is especially brash for pulling the Ukraine coup in the first place and putting a bunch of their suHispaniciously gnomish agents in place.

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      >It's an act of war what they're doing after all.
      If It wasn't an act of war when Russia did it to the west in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan I don't see why it would be an act of war when the west does it to Russia now

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      >putting a bunch of their suHispaniciously gnomish agents in place
      Anti-Semitism is illegal in Russia as Putin is gnomish by blood.

  72. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    tonk

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      MLR-tonk

  73. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    That's not a tank, that's a tink

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      These have been recorded destroying enemy tanks in combat
      Not with the tinker though

  74. 5 days ago
    Anonymous

    is the Centurion AVRE FV4003 a tank?

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, why wouldn't it be?

    • 5 days ago
      Anonymous

      Yes
      >Armoured
      >Tracked
      >Cannon as main gun
      >Thick armour that can resist heavy fire

  75. 4 days ago
    Anonymous

    Today the Bradley fighting vehicle system, takes mobility and firepower a leap forward, giving the United States Army a combined arms team. to keep paste with the main battle, move troops rapidly and towards it's own survivability. Bradley has outstanding mobility, mobility that results from a optimium combination of enginepower, powertrain efficiency and suspension. The commercial proven Cummins 500 horsepower turbocharged diesel engine deliver rapid acceleration and battlefield agility. The hydromechanical transmission by General Electric combines steering braking and gearselection as a single unit. resulting in outstanding movability and the capacity to climb slopes at 60%. The suspension sytem with 14 inches of vertical wheeltravel and high performance shock absorbers carries the vehicle over rough terrain with minimum shock and stress to troops and vehicle. Firepower, mobility and survivability make a potent weaponsystem. operating on a mechanized battlefield with the Abrams main battle tank, artillery and the attack helicopters the bradley fighting vehicle guarantees the united states army as a combined arms team that is SECOND TO NONE

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *