Horrifying Results if Iran/Syria attacked

Enter: Javelin Missile.
Leave: T72
www.ehowa.com...

In Vietnam. Over 1 million men were killed in the North. It wasnt a victory, it was a slaughter. Vietnam, was a war that had constraints on it and I wont go into the details. It wasnt Russian weapons that made things difficult. If it was, we couldnt have carpet bombed like we did. Ill leave it at that.

As far as the T72. Watch the Video above. Now you see it, now you dont.

As for the A1, it has an additional kevlar armor put over the top to prevent double missile strikes that can penetrate damm near any armour. Ill take an A1 over T72s any day of the week in conjuntion with AWACS support.
I wouldnt want to be sitting in that t72 when a Javeline hits you either.

See the results? Any questions. The proofs in the T72 being blown up over 400 feet in all directions.

Russia has made improvements, but dont kid yourself. America holds the trump card, the reserve trump card, and then the kick your @#$@ if things get out of hand trump card.

Its not a perspective, its a reality.

Peace

[edit on 3-7-2005 by HIFIGUY]

Originally posted by SiberianTiger
We don't need/want non Russkies, while the Elite want to DE-Americanise U.S.A. with all this Proimigration stuff.

A come on Siberian Pussycat, the real reason Russian women want out is because you and your Russian brothers are too busy drinking vodka and fantasizing about the great things you think you could be doing with imaginary weapons while reality bites you in the ass. The Soviet Union is deadski, free education and free ride for life is deadski too. It's time to learn to work like a man and pay your way through life like a man.

That's why your sisters and girfriends all want to be here, because we are better than you. No-one want to live in a crappy economy, otherwise the Mexicans would stay in Mexico.

This is what I'm saying, the reason the T-72's in the Iraqi army were defeated in Gulf War 1=(G.F.1) Is because 1. The M1's main gun shot DU Rounds, while the Iraqi 72's only had HEAT rounds, 2. The M1 MAIN gUN HAD A 2 MILE REACH ADVANTAGE, while the Iraqi T-72's could only shoot for 1 mile, 3. The M1 had nightvision& therman imaging devices, while the T-72 didn't, and of the Tankvs.Tank battles 80% of them happend at night time where the M1 had the night vision advantage, the was only one day time battle in GF1 while was 20 72's vs around 18 M1's, but again the M1's used thier 2 mile reach advantage to win the battle, never the less the 72's still managed to disable 4 M1's, most of Iraq's tanks were actually not destroyed by M1's as U.S. propagada tell it in the "History Channel"& FALSE Gulf War History Books, most of the Tanks were destroyed by Laserguided Bombs droped by F-16's-18's and Apache hellfire missiles, Now what I'm saying about Soviet T-72's is that our Tanks at that time& now have ERA, have DU rounds that can reach a 2 miles, have Night vision and thremal imaging equipment, and a T- 72 vs. M1 fight will result in at least half of the M1's not disable but destroyed, what proof is there other than my word I'll give you your own Military's 2004-2005 actions as putting skirts on the M1's in Iraq to protect from RPG-7 hits, the Iraq Gulf War 1 nonDU HEAT rounds were and still are capable of penatrating the Chobham armor part of the M1's in which 18 M1 were disabled by 72' in GULF WAR 1, you can even read it also en.wikipedia.org... and To= HIFIGUY if our SAM's and MiGs were not great the N.Vietnamies would'nt have been able to shoot down 445 F-4 phatom II, 2. 397 F-105 Thunderchief's 31 B-52's and the other countless U.S. Planes, en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 3-7-2005 by SiberianTiger]

They were FOUR HUNDRED METERS away! You're going to sit here and SERIOUSLY expect me to believe that this GREAT T-72 even firing HEAT rounds, couldn't even DISABLE an M-1 at that range. They couldn't even crack the armor at four hundred meters, but watch out, if a "real" T-72 goes into combat against it, it's going to destroy them. Let's see, same gun, same targetting system, same chassis, same amount of armor...... hmmm I wonder what would happen.

Ut oh bob. I just found a problem with your theory about Iraqi tanks only using HEAT rounds. Here's a slightly more detailed telling of the story I posted earlier.

The first fired from under 1,000 meters, scoring a hit with a shaped-charge (high explosive) round on the M1A1's frontal armor. The hit did no damage. The M1A1 fired a 120mm armor-piercing round that penetrated the T-72 turret, causing an explosion that blew the turret into the air. The second T-72 fired another shaped-charge round, hit the frontal armor, and did no damage. This T-72 turned to run, and took a 120mm round in the engine compartment and blew the engine into the air. The last T-72 fired a
SOLID SHOT (SABOT) round from 400 meters. This left a groove in the M1A1's frontal armor and bounced off. The T-72 then backed up behind a sand berm and was completely concealed from view. The M1A1 depressed its gun and put a sabot round through the berm, into the T-72, causing an explosion.

You DO know that a SABOT round is a DU round right? Now, if the Iraqi T-72s ONLY used HEAT round, what did they do, stop and pick up an M-1 SABOT round and shoot it at them? And you expect me to believe that with a SABOT round at 400 METERS they couldn't even damage the armor more than a groove, but Russian versions of the same tank, that ONLY have night vision gear, but is the SAME tank in every other respect, will be able to destroy have the M-1s they face? Especially with the M-1 being able to hit them accurately at over twice the range?

Hey, here's something else interesting for you that I found. The Russians DON'T USE any DU rounds. ANYWHERE. They use Tungsten. I was wrong in my previous post about it being a DU penetrator, but the point still stands. They used a solid shot round at 400 meters and scratched the armor. Now if the RUSSIANS use Tungsten, how are they going to kill hundreds of M-1s with T-72s.

This just keeps getting worse and worse for your argument Siberian. I keep finding all kinds of infor on the T-72 that just rips it apart. Even the UPGRADED version in Iraqi Freedom.

"The Russian T-72M1 Main Battle Tank (MBT) had been modified with additional armor in the front and rear to protect against High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) projectiles. This locally modified and locally named "Lion of Babylon" T-72 tank has some Iraqi technology. However, the soviets made all the parts and it was assembled in Iraq. This improved tank was much better in sand and mud with infrared night vision capability, and other improved systems. Many of Iraq's tanks and artillery pieces had been upgraded with both eastern and western components. Iraqi T-72, T-62 and T-55 tanks were reportedly outfitted with engines and cooling systems from the Ukraine."

"First, this tank is small. The armor protection is a little iffy, even with applique or reactive systems. It was not unheard of for sabot rounds to go completely through one T-72 and then to kill a second T-72 behind it. Next, the small size means everything is packed in closely. Ammunition storage for the tank's main gun is nestled inside the fuel tanks. This is not a good thing when the tank gets hit. Everything is going to blow apart. The T-72's nickname among American forces is "Jack in the Box" - usually because one hit sends the T-72's turret flying upwards."

"the fire-control systems are not that hot. They can be modernized, but the real problem is that the T-72 has to survive to get into firing position. The only real advantage that the T-72 brings over the Abrams, Leopard, and Challenger is that one can buy several T-72s for the price of one of these Western tanks. There's just one problem with this apparent advantage: One must find enough crew for those tanks, and keep in mind that the Western tanks often have fought the T-72 when outnumbered - and emerged unscathed while the T-72s were destroyed."

"For all the effort the designers placed into the T-72, it just simply doesn't have the ability to be an effective main battle tank in the 21st century. The tank's major flaws cannot be overcome to enable it to stand up to Western main battle tanks. In this case, buying T-72s is a case of being penny-wise and pound foolish."

"The system is intended to engage tanks fitted with ERA (Explosive Reactive Armour) as well as low-flying air targets. It has a range of 100m to 4,000m and firing requires the tank to be stationary. The systems 9M119 missile has semi-automatic laser beamriding guidance. The gun's automatic loader will feed both ordnance and missiles."

Yeah, it's going to be really effective if it can't even shoot while moving. The Abrams are going to be screaming along at top speed picking them off one after the other while they just sit there shooting back with rounds bouncing off the M-1s.

Oh, and by the way, those 18 disabled M-1s? Most of them were disabled by FRIENDLY FIRE incidents.

(6 M1A1 Abrams tanks and 15 M2/M3 Bradley fighting vehicles destroyed by friendly fire, 6 Abrams M1A1 tanks storing DU munitions burned in combat and accidents, and 2 more Abrams M1A1 tanks destroyed deliberately to avoid capture).
That's 8 of 18 right there. Almost HALF of them disabled or destroyed by our own forces.

[edit on 3-7-2005 by Zaphod58]

I think you better go back to Tank learning school, friend DU-SABOT are not the same as HEAT Rounds guy Here read 1. HEAT en.wikipedia.org... 2. DU/SABOT/APSDS en.wikipedia.org...

I know perfectly well the difference between HEAT and SABOT. SABOT is an armor penetrating round, which was fired the the THIRD T-72 that was up against the M-1. All it did was groove the armor. The Russians don't USE DU apparently, and use Tungsten, which is much less effective.
The last T-72 fired a
SOLID SHOT (SABOT) round from 400 meters. This left a groove in the M1A1's frontal armor and bounced off.

[edit on 3-7-2005 by Zaphod58]

as posted by SiberianTiger
...and a T- 72 vs. M1 fight will result in at least half of the M1's not disable but destroyed...

Not likely!
Try this one:

Also being battle-tested was the DU armor plate on the Abrams tanks, which sustained only negligible damage from Iraqi guns even when hit at ranges as close as 400 meters. The total U.S. tank damage inflicted by Iraq's armed forces consisted of a few tanks disabled by mines.

Or this one:

In one incident in the Gulf, a DU round penetrated both walls of a T-72 tank, exploding it, and then went on to destroy another T-72.

Politics of War: Tank-Plinking in the Gulf


SiberianTiger, you want to take those M1's out, you better be packing more than those T-72s. I would hazard a guess and say that those RPG-7s are more feared than much of the vaunted Russian armor/T-72s, etc.





seekerof

Not to mention that the T-72’s in Iraq were picked off before they could even spot or engage the Abrams due to the Abrams better rage and better sight systems.

whats horrifying is that the world is in the position it is know with rampant terrorism is due mostly to russian cowardice. Thats right

if russia hadn't limped out of afghanistan with its tiger tail between its legs, a young mujhadeen supporter named OBL wouldn't have felt the power of pushing a "super power" around, and wouldn't have tried to take on The US

thanks chickens.


and if the US ever had its back against the wall we'd find out what goodies they have been cooking up at area 51

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
whats horrifying is that the world is in the position it is know with rampant terrorism is due mostly to russian cowardice. Thats right

if russia hadn't limped out of afghanistan with its tiger tail between its legs, a young mujhadeen supporter named OBL wouldn't have felt the power of pushing a "super power" around, and wouldn't have tried to take on The US

thanks chickens.


and if the US ever had its back against the wall we'd find out what goodies they have been cooking up at area 51

Of course US was kind of supporting OBL with um those what are they called? Oh yeah Stinger missiles.

If it weren't for Russian cowards Nazi Germany would be alive and well today.

T-72 is a piece of crap compared to the M1. There's really no comparison whatsoever. They only got some M1 kills in GW1 when M1 drove past powered-down T-72 and they got off some flank and rear shots from extremely close range.

What do you mean Russian cowards you yanks are the ones always enyering the war long after it started, then propagandaing it as if you were there from day one and your the victor, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Originally posted by SiberianTiger
What do you mean Russian cowards you yanks are the ones always enyering the war long after it started, then propagandaing it as if you were there from day one and your the victor, HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

hey Russian, it aint our fault, the Japanese decided later to attack us. and well we provided u war materials both to Britain and to yall Russians before we enter so thats something, we just waiting for a goooood justification to go to war, so u should thank us for saving yer butts and then deciding to take us on during the Cold War. should thank us for helpin u get yer atom bomb too.

Originally posted by Seekerof
Your 'airplane' is getting a serious amount of holes shot in it and appears to be looking to crash soon....

No way man, it's not an airplane. It's a missile and a global hawk. Get with the times!

And you should that us for doing the most of the dirty work (Mopping up most of the Germans) so you could have an easy way into Berlin.

Originally posted by deltaboy

hey Russian, it aint our fault, the Japanese decided later to attack us.

and well we provided u war materials both to Britain and to yall Russians before we enter so thats something, we just waiting for a goooood justification to go to war, so u should thank us for saving yer butts and then deciding to take us on during the Cold War. should thank us for helpin u get yer atom bomb too.

Hum, you really should read your history. It's a known fact that roosevelt the US let japan bomb pearl harbor to enter WW2 to start there war machine. Its true the red army lost millions defending its city's where was the allies during that battle HUH delta boy ?. Bombing innocent women and children in Dresden to make a hasty escape.

Millions of Russian Jews have died under hew own command.

War is an ugly deal folks. Lets bring this back up on board.

To Siberians credit, I talked to a few GIs up here in the northwest regarding armament in Afghanistan and it appears that maybe Siberian may have something.

The Russians are selling newly developed weapons the from what I am understanding are very effective. While American enginuity is good and always front runner, they have not been sitting back on their haunches.

Ever read about the Granite cruise missile? So much for star wars.
The Russians have a nuclear missile that goes under water for a long way, jumps out of the water and splits into multiple war heads. That was what was on the Kursk.

So not disrediting your posts Siberian, but I am saying that M1 is king of the planet right now. And Air support wise, we pretty much have it nailed down to. Navy. No one is bigger. But, make no bones, Russia is one of the largest growing economys in the world and Im sure selling high tech weapons is going to be great business for her.

Peace