Comments by "David Houseman" (@davidhouseman4328) on "PUMA: Meet The Infantry Fighting Vehicle Which CONNECTS DIGITALLY To Troops" video.

  1. How about a normal man with a Kornet ATGM?
    5
  2.  @paggerd3210  The idea Russia can have a buffer at the expense of other countries is a problem.
    3
  3.  @212thfives8  Yep, if you'd read the thread Lary already pointed that out. But my point was about asking the right question. Puma isn't the answer to an AK47, it's overkill. The right question to ask is about anti armour systems. You might be right that it wouldn't work, but I think the more likely answer is Puma would be fine in a lot of situations but not all.
    2
  4.  @ca9968  Why is it not a good idea? It's info that would be a doddle to get hold of. Anything even remotely secret isn't included.
    2
  5.  @ca9968  it's like showing the cards in the middle in holdem, info they will already have.
    2
  6. I don't think it's ideal but I think it makes sense on a limited budget.
    2
  7.  @zhufortheimpaler4041  it's about weighing the pros and cons. You transport tracked vehicles rather than them transporting themselves. We'll still have tracked supper in Challanger and Ajax.
    2
  8.  @Lary-xg2un  aye, was looking it up while posting. My post was more that a guy with an AK47 isn't the threat (Puma would be massive over kill).
    1
  9. You think a country with a $15tr economy doesn't have even a moderate spy agency?
    1
  10.  @cp4512  What is right for others doesn't necessarily mean what is right for us. We aren't a continental army like Germany and we are set further back from the Russian border. You say all peers but France doesn't have tracked IFV, and they are our closed comparison? If we had the resources of the US army sure, we don't.
    1
  11. It would be nice to have everything but we are off the edge of the continent not on the main land.
    1