>

At the rate he's going, there might not be one. Hitler, bin laden, those types don't get monuments to their lives.
Thank you >

Yahoo comments are hilarious. You can tell that the only people still using Yahoo are old people and russian trolls. >

News website comment sections in general are the worst.
I have never felt more disillusioned when going to one. It's not even the whole "ohh they have a different opinion. That's whack".
It's more how bare bone and lowest common denominator these sections are. They feel barely human. >

Careful with the dehumanizing... buuuuuut I too sometimes don't know how these people survive the winter with their neolithic worldviews. >

I guess my comment sounds dehumanising. Which is fair.
To me it's just soo weird how different these comments read compared to actual social media websites.
In reddit there are so many subreddit that clash with my (political) views. But in the end it still feels real and written.
But news website comments are just so "different". It's extremely hard to explain. >

Perhaps you're detecting the lack of humanity behind the comments on news sites. Perhaps there's a reason for that. >

thats good news, they have a reputation of being tough on tanks. >

Former Bradley gunner here, can confirm >

Former driver here, I concur! >

As a former commander, we have a trifecta. >

Y'all should team up and go to Ukraine. Reddit Bradly Crew >

Funded by Reddit gold and sarcastic comments. >

This is such a huge deal because of the optics. Like it’s great for offenenses, but I just can’t integrate enough how important optics are. In the modern day and age, he who sees first wins >

2nd this. But hey mobiks will tell you how u just need will to drive swarms of t62s and win by sheer numbers lmao.. like the Bradley will one tap ur antique arse before you can even see it / return fire >

Are they destroying tanks with the mounted gun, or the TOW rockets? >

The TOW kills tanks outright, and can do it from a longer range than any tank cannon. The 25mm autocannon doesn't outright kill, tanks are too heavily armored. But it'll absolutely shred tank treads for mobility kills, and tactically speaking that's almost as good. Bradleys got more kills than Abrams during the first Gulf War. >


Bradleys got more kills than Abrams during the first Gulf War.

Interesting, where did you see that info? >

I’m not sure where they got it from, but I wonder if they’re talking about armored vehicles alone or just kills in general. Obviously an IFV would roam around a good bit more than a mbt and probably kill more trucks and personnel. >

It’s usually from bad phrasing or misunderstanding of the sources.  Kills came with the TOW, but any implication the 25mm played a role in killing tanks in DA is unsubstantiated.  Neither official reports nor interviews with those present put forward the idea that the 25mm got kills.  
In fact, first hand accounts are that the 25mm bounced off the turrets, even from extreme close range.  The cannon only has a chance on the lightly armored hulls, and only then after repeated hits. >

Look at the wiki source. It doesn’t say what a lot of people think it does.  
Anyway, yes, they did not say the 25mm did it, but they imply that with their phrasing.  
I’m a Brad guy and love the 25mm for what it is, but when people talk about the 25 and then throw out that “killed more!” line, without mentioning the confirmed kills were all from TOWs, it too easily deludes the uneducated. >

It seems like Ukraine has the greatest logistics and field manuals with all this international tech, while Russia logistics is non existent. >

This is old news. The ship they were put on is supposed to arrive in the UK on the 9th. >

It has already left the UK and is about to enter the port of Antwerp >

Well then. I guess they had fair winds and following seas. >

ON THE MOVE! >

High-speed, low drag >

DOUBLE TIME! >

Nothin' to stop me! >

Rockets in the sky. >

T72s are tanks, with medium to heavy armor and big guns. Bradley's are infantry fighting vehicles with AT missiles sure, but a Bradley's armor isn't designed to survive a direct hit from a tank, it's designed to carry troops and provide direct fire support to the infantry against other infantry and other infantry fighting vehicles like the BMP.
A hypothetical one on one between the two systems comes down to who spots who first. It plays out similarly in real life but battles ha e plenty of other things going on. The Bradley should have dismounted infantry in a forward or flanking position providing information. The T72 should likewise have other tanks and IFVs with troops in support.
It's worth mentioning the T72s faced Iraw were export versions of the T72. Domestic version can have comparatively improved armor and Optics systems. >


Domestic version can have comparatively improved armor and Optics systems.     

It seems as if the Russian storehouses for tanks were largely looted of vital parts like optics, so I while I am sure an optimal domestic tank is better than the exports, I am not sure the average domestic tank is better than the average export.      
An exported tank must work because they will be inspected by foreigners on arrival, and future sales are contingent on todays good inspections.       
Meanwhile a tank in a warehouse or field can get away with being a pile of rust, because the inspectors are all part of the same organization and is bribable.     
Those giant oligarch yachts don't buy themselves. >

There's hasn't been such a clear good vs evil battle in so long. Support Ukraine, support the right to exist without fear of extermination, support humanity! >

It says video shows over 60 IFV's. And then has a link to the video on twitter which the article is about. >

Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. 
Gen. Omar Bradley >

Russia is a combination of the two. >

Good I hope the Ukraine people use them to slaughter the Russian cowards killing young kids and innocent civilians to appease thier pathetic leader putin. 
I can wait to dance on putins grave and piss on his headstone.