Umm Kyivsisters, i thought they ran out of T-90Ms long ago?

Umm Kyivsisters, i thought they ran out of T-90Ms long ago?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Select image
    >Copy image
    >Ctrl+v x10
    Simple as

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous
    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      I think I have this imaged saved approximately 50 times.

  2. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    They really pulled classic this time

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      my thoughts exactly

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      ohnononono alliedbros, its unironically over!

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's like they have a checklist of shit the Nazi Germany did and are just going ham at this point.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Maybe it's because a fair amount of Ukrainians sided with the nazis so they're trying to get some Ukrainians on their side

  3. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    I estimated 300 tanks in total.
    Many rows were T-62M with Kontakt 1 blocks.
    They don't show if they have T-90M electronics/optics. A T-90M is as good as its electronic because the tank gun and armor isn't remarkable.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      A T-90 is basically a T-72 with add-on armor and better electronics and FCS (though I think T-90M 'Breakthroughs' have a different gun? I can't remember). Without those electronics and FCS it is strictly a worse T-72B3.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >lol more like 30, 50 if we're being generous.
        Look at the video. Although even 300 tanks (including many T-62M) are barely 2 months worth of Javelin fodder.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Think you replied to the wrong person, anon.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Oh, my bad. Thx

            lol more like 30, 50 if we're being generous. They show the same tanks in tight shots and every time you could see past 15 tanks there's a conveniently placed vehicle in the middle of the path to stop you from seeing further. Also half of them don't appear to be T90's

            >lol more like 30, 50 if we're being generous.
            Look at the video. Although even 300 tanks (including many T-62M) are barely 2 months worth of Javelin fodder.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          count the barrels, there's really not that many in frame at any one point.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            ~25 tanks per row, I only can see one (apparently) complete row of T-90s. There's a lot of T-62Ms. Resolution is bad and most of tanks rows are too far.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              >lose 1900+ tanks
              >pose with something like 100 tanks as if it's going to be a game changer
              Thirdies really are something.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                > >pose with something like 100 tanks as if it's going to be a game changer
                ?

                Stop the cheap straw man bs. My post before that:
                >are barely 2 months worth of Javelin fodder.
                Game changer, huh?

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Calm your tiddies bro, I'm having a laugh at the video.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              you need crew to man them, you need competent crew to win with them, you need competent command to help the competent crew to win
              they have neither

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              Lol lmao even for propaganda shoot, russians cant scrounge enough frick up enough T-90s and have to bulk it up with museum relics

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              why are those tanks parked at concrete pads?
              is this some kind of long term storage?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      lol more like 30, 50 if we're being generous. They show the same tanks in tight shots and every time you could see past 15 tanks there's a conveniently placed vehicle in the middle of the path to stop you from seeing further. Also half of them don't appear to be T90's

  4. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Russia has a dozen tanks upgrade to late-90s technology standards. It’s over for hoohools

  5. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    that's... not that much tbf with you tbh senpai

  6. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    My name is John Smith from washingtown, please let's make peace, givw Russia all the land in the old soviet SSR and stop the sanctions!

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      No, we enjoy the enemy destroying it's future.

  7. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Russians have to gather a bunch of tanks in a spot and take a narrow angle photo so it makes it look like there's a lot
    >there are thousands of m1 abrams in a depot in the Nevada desert and they don't try to hide it

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Seriously why is the USA so unsure about sending them. They are just collecting dust (sand).

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        it's not about the tanks themselves.
        The line rebuilding abrams tanks for foreign sales is working at capacity to send rebuilt tanks to Poland, Taiwan, Australia, etc.
        The DoD does not want a SEPv3 with a HAP package analyzed or God forbid captured - it'll get an FMS armor package similar to the M1A1 AIM

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Nah you're missing the point: the us doesn't want this war to be over quickly. That's why they withheld Patriot, M109 Paladin, Bradley and Abrams for so long. Why they still withhold ATACMS and F-16.

          Ukraine is supposed to be too strong to loose, but to weak to win. russia is supposed to be ground down in a long process, not beat fast.

          They are boiling the frog.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Like a death by a thousand cuts.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            I don't think this is true, because it's mainly peddled as a line by vatniks to try to imply that the west is to blame for Ukraine's misfortune and not, you know, Russia which is the one doing the invasion.

            The real reason is escalation. Whether Russia has functioning nuclear weapons is unknown, and rather than test it by immediately intervening and slaughtering the Russian armed forces in a direct western intervention which might (if Russia has nukes) provoke them into just using nuclear weapons, the west is preferring to do minor stages of escalation so that Russia has no one event they can point to as justification for nuclear war. Ever step is minor. Russian nuclear weapons staff aren't going to turn the key because Ukraine got some Turkish drones. Russian nuclear weapons staff aren't going to turn the key because Ukraine got some rocket artillery. Russian nuclear weapons staff aren't going to turn the key because Ukraine got some Bradleys. Etc. Each event is too minor for the Russian soldiers who would actually have to fire nuclear weapons to agree to do it.

            The west would prefer the war to be over as quickly as possible so they can hurry Ukraine into the EU and NATO and station American troops at the border, and western companies like Shell can get in on Ukraine's natural resources. But they can only escalate gradually, just in case Russia actually has working nukes.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              Your premise that "the west" isn't doing all at once because they fear russian nuclear strike is beyond dumb.
              >The west would prefer the war to be over as quickly as possible
              Long war has it's benefits, Ukraine is getting in debt, which will allow NATO to get a strong influence over it. Also, NATO has a strong proxy country to grind russian military down. And long war allows "the west" to impose sanctions and turn russian aligned countries against them - therefore push russia forwards to another collapse.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >thinking America operates on China-style debt traps rather than making friends via generous giveaways
                IQ of a snail.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Didn't we forgive soviet debt and then hold the UK by the balls for 60 years?

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                UK also forgot soviet debt so yeah. But USA wanted to end the British Empire so held them accountable.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                No, the Soviets told us to frick off and we didn't want to start a war over it, while the UK would like the option to do it again in the future so making sure to pay their debts is a good way to do so, on top of maintaining a good relationship with the US. We let them pay over such a long time scale with minimal interest because it was good for them since inflation ate away most of the actual debt while they symbolically paid the money back.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                UK still did well out of that, by letting the US use its military bases it got a near deterrent for free while it sorted its own out.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                More like the soviets refused to pay. UK got a decent deal out of it.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                The entire US executive branch of government is composed of israelites at this point, that’s exactly what they do.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Long war has it's benefits, Ukraine is getting in debt, which will allow NATO to get a strong influence over it.
                >[The goal is to collapse russia]
                Most expensive thing on earth right now for countries is a large population of young healthy professional men. That might not have been the case in the past even if you ignore the odd genius that manages to survive a war, but birthrates are way down and the global number of young healthy professional men in the world has massively shrunk. I'll give you a hint as for what all those evil western capitalists' really want in life; its more people to buy more stuff. Speaking as a moderate, I think moscow should be glassed.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                Ukraine is so dirt poor as a country that even poland could buy out all their economy and poland isn’t exactly an economic superpower. There’s no need to debt trap them, especially since they’ll either be tied to russia or eu within a decade

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                There is no point in giving Ukraine extra debt through long term when they could simply give Ukraine 5000 Abrams and then charge them for it which is way more debt.

                Long war has no benefits for anyone in the West right now politically.

                Are you saying the US is completely willing to let Joe Biden lose in 2024 simply so Ukraine can have extra debt?

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              >The real reason is escalation
              No the real reason is that we want to keep as much of our capabilities hidden as possible, see all the threads about the Patriot shooting down the Kinzhal for that.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              Just another Kremlin propaganda piece. By giving the ukies only what's absolutely necessary to push them the Russians out means they're less likely to even think of going across the border and attacking Russia proper and making it into an even bigger shitshow. Plus the US has no need for a collapsed Russia, as trying to secure every warhead from every Russian microstate resulting from such a collapse would be an exercise in futility.

              >proipaganda
              >Vatniks

              Russia is in the wrong, don't be moronic and expect us to pretend the people running the US are not psychopaths willing to destroy Ukraine with a slow war to weaken Russia.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              wow an accurate take on /k/, how rare

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Just another Kremlin propaganda piece. By giving the ukies only what's absolutely necessary to push them the Russians out means they're less likely to even think of going across the border and attacking Russia proper and making it into an even bigger shitshow. Plus the US has no need for a collapsed Russia, as trying to secure every warhead from every Russian microstate resulting from such a collapse would be an exercise in futility.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              Everyone understands that when Russia is driven out of Ukraine, it will most likely be necessary to proceed further into Russia itself to get them to agree to a peace treaty. Ukraine could kick them out of every square inch of Ukraine and Russia would continue to engage in missile strikes on civilian targets and refuse to agree to a peace treaty just to keep Ukraine from joining NATO. Russia will need to be pushed into a position where they are in danger of having substantial parts of their country occupied indefinitely before they'll agree to frick off.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Russia would continue to engage in missile strikes on civilian targets and refuse to agree to a peace treaty just to keep Ukraine from joining NATO
                That's not how it works.
                Also, what peace treaty? According to russia they're not at war with Ukraine.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >necessary
                Uh no? Ukraine can let Russia rot inside its own borders.
                >missile strikes and NATO
                Missiles don't grow out of trees and a few impotent strikes don't affect policy as much as you'd think it would or else we'd still be in the 1990s timeline-wise with the Koreas. Plus NATO membership isn't a win condition for Ukraine, they can perfectly exist outside it. Russia as a pariah state excluded from most of the world's economy can't.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            I think it's less that they want the war to last, and more that they want to send the bare minimum needed so as to not reveal the full capabilities of all their most advanced shit unless they absolutely have to. Probably a bit of both though.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            This has been the worst point of the entire war. Continuously made, but entirely wrong.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            This has been the worst point of the entire war. Continuously made, but entirely wrong.

            Yeah it's bullshit. It was completely moronic when the vatniks pretended that was Russia's strategy, it's almost as moronic when applied to the US.

            The truth is the West simply wasn't super bullish on Ukraine's chances and showering a non-ally with serious weapons is generally avoided.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            This is so obvious but look at these replies. Shills are everywhere lol

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              >This is so obvious but look at these replies. Shills are everywhere lol

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah if you think anything else but then you're a vatnik or moronic. Let's consider the advantages of dragging out this war: 1) Russia has been threatening to destabilize the West for several decades now. The longer they can be sanctioned the weaker they become and the less they compromise western government and diplomacy. 2) The only militaries of real concern to the west is (was) Russia and China. Once it became clear that Ukraine could hold it's ground against Russia, the west was given the opportunity to violently disarm one of their last two enemies in a way the whole world approves of. Even China has began to approve of the west's proxy war against their former largest ally. 3) This war is cheap and has massive public approval. Ukraine has been fighting with only surplus and the public is in no rush for this war to be over. 4) This destabilizes the shit out of Putin, who is perhaps the largest antagonist of Western relations with Russia. The west wants to westernize Russia and force them to be 100% dependent on western trade, effectively making them a vassal. 5) Russia interferes with the US's playtime in the sandbox and the US doesn't like it. If its military can be reduced to a garrison force (which is where it is presently pretty much), Russia could no longer project it's power and the US would be able to gain more global influence and control. 6) The US wants to sell it's energy to Europe and destroying the Russian state is a good way to make that happen. 7) The US is the worlds largest arms dealer and the ukraine war is the largest advertising campaign in history. Pretty much every country the US sells to has expanded their military as a result of this war, and that's good for the US. And finally 8) the west has hated Russia for most of the last century. Watching them be eviscerated is highly satisfying.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              self posting bc of limit.
              inb4 muh nooks: Russia has very few working nuclear weapons due to slavic management practices. Russia also probably doesn't know which nukes are the working ones and which aren't Russia also likely doesn't know which of it's launchers (the missile) work. The Russian military is also not efficient enough at communicating orders that any ordered strike would take much longer than expected to execute.

              Realistically, if Russia tried to nuke the US (or anyone else), a good number of missiles would launch. The strike would be slow and uncoordinated, and missiles would slowly trickle out. Some would get intercepted, but most would make it to the US. Of these, most would fail to detonate. Nonetheless, some working nukes would make it and millions would die. And then the Russian state would permanently be removed from history. We know this and Russia knows this. Russia is effectively not a nuclear state as far as MAD goes. Nukes were never an option.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                i'd be much more worried about western/northern europe since afaik russia has a ton of shorter-range nukes and not so many long-range nukes. i doubt russia could ever pose a meaningful threat to the US but europe would probably be fricked due to cope nukes being launched at them. but as an european myself i don't give a frick, we should never give any concessions to russia ever again out of principle and if they wanna start throwing nukes at us for it then so be it

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        They need to be repaired. The Army is also anal about its vehicle hulls. Even though they didnt want to build that many in the first place.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        This

        Nah you're missing the point: the us doesn't want this war to be over quickly. That's why they withheld Patriot, M109 Paladin, Bradley and Abrams for so long. Why they still withhold ATACMS and F-16.

        Ukraine is supposed to be too strong to loose, but to weak to win. russia is supposed to be ground down in a long process, not beat fast.

        They are boiling the frog.

        but theres some other factors as well. Firstly and most obvious is that russia is getting completely humiliated even without them so why put in the money and effort, and second is that if a Ukranian mishandles one and it gets destroyed in an embarrassing way it'd seriously upset top brass since they sell them constantly.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        because its still a complete toss-up as to whether the ukrainains can even USE all this western armor properly.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous
      • 11 months ago
        Yukari

        here's another for your collection

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Grey Abrams are so sexy.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      have to gather a bunch of tanks in a spot and take a narrow angle photo so it makes it look like there's a lot
      are thousands of m1 abrams in a depot in the Nevada desert and they don't try to hide it
      Average A vs B brainer be like

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Is it true that the US keeps building Abrams despite their military having more than enough because the tank factory workers will crucify the sitting Congressman who allows them to stop getting more tanks?

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        They've changed over from making completely new ones to upgrading the existing ones, but more or less, yes.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Why can't they give a few tanks to Ukraine?

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Abrams are gas hogs and need a lot of logistics support compred to other western tanks, that's why they're getting first Leo 2s, and Abrams will come later.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >need a lot of logistics support compred
          midwit

  8. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Probably been sitting there for the past year waiting for internal components to be fitted.

  9. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    probably sitting there because valuable optics or radio equipment was dismantled and sold on the black market.

  10. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    This doesn't even replace the T-90Ms that they've lost. Their yearly output is dogshit.

  11. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    one brigade of tanks. neat

  12. 11 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >They put fricking ERA on the cope cage.

      If any of your frickers had predicted this two months ago, I would have congratulated you on a good shitpost. And here we are.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >era blocks on the cope cage

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Would K1 on the cope cage even work? The explosive has to be against a solid base to direct it back out against the incoming projectile, wouldn't this just cause the cage to cave in?

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        No it doesn't. See ERA mounted on side skirts?
        Will it work, doubt vs Javelin, that comes in at around 45 degrees

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          doesn't matter anyway, javelin duel mode is designed to push it all out the way

  13. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Aight

  14. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Who gives a shit if they've got 500 more T-90M's? They still suck, they're practically little better than T-62Ms.

  15. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >i thought they ran out of T-90Ms
    Where did you read that? I haven't.
    It's a news story every time a T90M is knocked out. It's happened what, a dozen times? I don't know.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      19 visually confirmed losses of T-90M's. 7 T-90S. 1 T-90AK. 35 T-90A.

      There are many 'unknown' because they can't be visually identified due to various reasons.

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

      Aight

      Yeah but those aren't all T-90M's.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >19 visually confirmed losses of T-90M
        Phew just 20% of all in existence

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Well some of them were captured so it is possible they were recaptured by Russia. Haha! We know for a fact that the UK has had a T-90A for months upon months and USA got one (confirmed) in USA itself a few months ago. As for T-90M's? I assume any captured have gone to Poland then to UK then to USA. If they have multiple I suspect UK and USA will be going over them.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            One T-90M was spotted at a gas station in Louisiana. Literally

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              That was a T-90A

  16. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >filling a 2tb hdd with black wieners to OWN the libs

  17. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >i thought they ran out of T-90Ms long ago?

    Your ESL is showing Vatnick.

  18. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >, i thought they ran out of T-90Ms long ago
    I mean, a lot of those are T-62M's so... yeah?

  19. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    I am not getting into this without a cope cage with era on top.

  20. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Don't worry Medvedev said Russia will produce 1,500 T-90M's a year. Russian MoD said 'hundreds' had been delivered at the start of the year. Trust the plan.

  21. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    And not a microgram of copper left in the lot of them.

  22. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    We knew they didn't months ago by virtue of OSINT. They're out of decent crews though.

  23. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Literally nobody said that.

  24. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >DA JOOOOOOS
    well, we got what we were waiting for

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Usury and debt slavery?

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        unfortunately not, instead we got dry-dicked, square glass wearing gays from /misc/

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Throw insults all you want, plebbitor. The truth is self evident.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Jews are as much the demons you make em out to be as gender is a large and wide spectrum.

            It's both bullshit.

  25. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >command wants you to find the difference between this image and OP's

  26. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >one row of T-90s
    >rest is T-62s
    RASHA STRONK

  27. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Hell of a lot more than this https://twitter.com/elintnews/status/1654761734685556736?s=46&t=BFFhc0UL-CnNLrDuOAjmTw

  28. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Russia would lose a war of attrition to even fricking Mexico.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >4.4% unclassified transactions
      drugs

Leave a Reply to Yukari Cancel reply

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