Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 5,864
- Location
- Location, Location!
Come on then troll, lets see your excuses for the latest Russian terrorist attack.
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
Come on then troll, lets see your excuses for the latest Russian terrorist attack.
" 'This effort provided 23 vehicles for Ukraine in the space of 32 days,' the report says " shame this kind of pace wasn't picked up earlier in the war.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,711
This is the Challenger in the video the other day I think
It looks to be given the position of the other vehicles - however that wasn't the hit which disabled it - the fighting has obviously moved on at that point and there is no activity with the other vehicles obviously already destroyed.
EDIT: Also no reason for any extended burning time to be related to DU rounds - "Small pieces may ignite in a fire and burn, but tests have shown that large pieces, like the penetrators used in anti-tank weapons, or in aircraft balance weights, will not normally ignite in a fire.". (They will ignite under extreme heat and pressure but won't sustain that themselves).
EDIT2: I'd go as far as to say that was a subsequent hit with a Lancet or similar for PR purposes long after the tank was destroyed and burnt out.
Last edited:
I suspect the main reason it'd burn for a long time is that there is a lot of oil, fuel, and things like wiring in it (as much as possible designed specifically to not burn easily) and a lot of that won't burn off quickly due to lack of oxygen near where the "combustible material" is but will keep going for a long time.
IIRC in the Gulf War you could see some of the Iraqi tranks burning for a couple of days and they didn't have DU rounds.
Some of the Russian channels have reported that the missile was a "Ukrainian Storm Shadow"
He is a rusky troll. You should know by now.
Where did I say that?
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 9,727
- Location
- newcastle
Of course they are going to say that
So every time civilians die in a war they were targeted?
Afghanistan war logs: Secret CIA paramilitaries' role in civilian deaths
Innocent Afghan men, women and children have paid the price of the Americans' rules of engagement
www.theguardian.com
Maybe the Russians should pay the £1,500 per civilian corpse the Americans were paying in Afghanistan.
Afghan mission in doubt as air raid lies force German minister to resign
Dilemma for Merkel over extra troops as cover-up of civilian deaths claims third high-profile figure
www.theguardian.com
You realise this stuff is endless from the last 20 odd years of our involvement in wars? We do not have any moral high ground when it comes to civilian deaths, the idea we do is laughable. It isn't just the fact we killed civilians accidentally, we didn't do due diligence before striking, then people lied about it.
Of course Russia is going to kill civilians, they're a pretty poor military professionally, I doubt they want to waste ordnance on civilians though, I'm pretty sure they'd rather hit a military target.
Last edited:
Wild.... video out there of Ukrainian drones dropping modified TM-62 anti-tank mines!! Looks like the attach a bar and a bottle (maybe) to one edge so it drops almost straight down (rather than catching wind and getting deflected.)
Quite the innovation, because one thing I bet AFU won't be short of now, is Russian mines to use LOL. 'Return to sender' ??
Quite the innovation, because one thing I bet AFU won't be short of now, is Russian mines to use LOL. 'Return to sender' ??
So every time civilians die in a war they were targeted?
Afghanistan war logs: Secret CIA paramilitaries' role in civilian deaths
Innocent Afghan men, women and children have paid the price of the Americans' rules of engagement
Maybe the Russians should pay the £1,500 per civilian corpse the Americans were paying in Afghanistan.
Afghan mission in doubt as air raid lies force German minister to resign
Dilemma for Merkel over extra troops as cover-up of civilian deaths claims third high-profile figure
You realise this stuff is endless from the last 20 odd years of our involvement in wars? We do not have any moral high ground when it comes to civilian deaths, the idea we do is laughable. It isn't just the fact we killed civilians accidentally, we didn't do due diligence before striking, then people lied about it.
Of course Russia is going to kill civilians, they're a pretty poor military professionally, I doubt they want to waste ordnance on civilians though, I'm pretty sure they'd rather hit a military target.
Whataboutism is strong today I see.
Difference here is, America's enemy was hiding with civilians (and recruiting civilians as lookouts/spies with radios), whilst Russia is simply targeting civilians intentionally. So shove that whataboutism up your rear end.
Roar Statement: "Of course Russia is going to kill civilians, they're a pretty poor military professionally, I doubt they want to waste ordnance on civilians though, I'm pretty sure they'd rather hit a military target."
Wow, so you're saying that the preprogrammed super expensive missiles that routinely hit accurately military targets, are just coincidently not programmed to hit civilian homes? sure sure. All makes sense now. Believe what you want, but you're so far wrong here, it's offensive to the dead Ukrainians.
Last edited:
Yet about 20 years behind the same US bombs that manage to routinely kill civilians
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,210
- Location
- Billericay, UK
If you pause the video near the end there's a big hole in the turret which I'd wager is damage from a artillery shell. I can't see a Lancet going through C2 armour even where it's thinner but it may have stuck it afterwards.
I see, so they can accurately hit military targets with great precision with a hyper sonic missiles and cruise missiles, but somehow the civilian targets are not targets. OK Roar, whatever you say bud.
Last edited:
We don’t have too. Vladolf has alienated himself.
It looks like they intentionally blurred the video, just like they intentionally cut video's before impact when they fail to hit lol. I don't see anything moving towards the targets, and the explosion is straight up, which doesn't indicate a ATGM to me. (Not a military expert) - EDIT rewatching it, it is a 45 angle.
Also, the combat I believe isn't even from the direction of the explosion, it is up towards the top of the image so it doesn't make sense for a Kornet.
Last edited:
From the craters around it and especially the one just behind I'd assume, similar to the official story, it hit a mine and was possibly then finished off with artillery - the explosion in that video is almost certainly done for show later, you can clearly see everything is static with the other vehicles obviously already destroyed, even in the grainy video. Probably an ATGM or Lancet hit in that video used for a PR video later.
- Status