Comments by "Spring Bloom" (@springbloom5940) on "What does loss of Ukraine's Challenger 2 tank mean?" video.

  1.  @harryf1ashman  'Looks pretty intact' Yeah, that'll buff right out 🤦🏽‍♀️ It blew the turret, bruh
    4
  2. It means they've lost 7% of their Challenger 2s, without getting a shot off.
    4
  3. ​ @oldbloke135  And very soon, copious cope about burning M1s.
    4
  4. ​ @bobgarner9228  An ATGM broke it. Because its a tank, not a Saint.
    3
  5.  @patclark2186  If the crew is safe, its because they weren't in it. Anyone in that tank when it got hit, is still in it.
    3
  6.  @davedraycott5779  Wow. The cognitive dissonance is deep. It blew the turret off, bruh and flames coming out of every hole, including the one the missile blew in it.
    2
  7.  @wyunaboy  The claim is that the tank was abandoned, before it was hit; which is plausible. I don't know if anyone was in it, or not. But, anyone that was in it when it was hit, is still in it.
    2
  8. It means the internet will be toxic with cope, until we see a Challenger killing someone. Besides its crew, I mean.
    1
  9. Or, another way to cite that statistic, is 7% of of Ukraine's Challenger 2 tank force destroyed, before firing a shot.
    1
  10.  @richardsanders.4624  🤦🏽‍♀️
    1
  11.  @d.i.l.l.i.g.a.f.594  Weird thing to say on a video about a Challenger 2 getting rekt before getting close enough to the enemy to fire a weapon.
    1
  12.  @ConradAinger  Dont get me started on Iraq. I did ISR, BDA and CA for the 3 big armor engagements in Desert Storm. That victory lap has gone on 30 years too long.
    1
  13. @@user-jt4pk8ii4z Its almost like fighting an actual army, is harder than fighting dudes in dresses and flipflops, with 30 year old AKs and RPGs they dug out of a dune.
    1
  14.  @johnridgeway5265  CITATIONS NEEDED Two Challenger 2s hit with anti armor weapons, two catastrophic kills, two turret ejections and at least one BBQ'd crew.
    1
  15.  @johnridgeway5265  Allegedly. Which is irrelevant cope. A common ATGM blew the turret off it. Anyone that was in it, is still in it. As will be the next one that gets banged.
    1
  16.  @johnridgeway5265  Sure. Its intact. Its just not where its supposed to be.
    1
  17.  @davedraycott5779  Cope
    1
  18. ​ @obelic71  Yes, I performed onsite BDA for about 2 dozen of them. And thats how I know there are no 'lessons' to learn from this burned out wreck. We already know missiles penetrate armor. Its like... what they're made for.
    1
  19. How's the weather in St Petersburg, bot? That'll buff right out. Maybe Brits cant fix that, but Glorious Ukrainian Godman will have it mowing down orcs by tea time.
    1
  20. What it shows is the insidiousness of the mass brainwashing and damage to the Western psyche. Completely inconceivable that this Holy Relic could be lost from the hands of Glorious Ukrainian Godman.
    1
  21. Irrelevant, it was hit with a missile. There's one tank in service that might survive a missile hit, the T14 and it's pretty much vaporware.
    1
  22.  @robhoward8344  Imbecile
    1
  23. The biggest danger is to the mental health of the collective West. Everyone is so hopelessly brainwashed, the cognitive dissonance is causing physical brain damage. The amount and level of cope around the internet is off the charts.
    1
  24.  @Banana.69699  No
    1
  25.  @Banana.69699  Imbecile
    1
  26.  @patclark2186  Its irrelevant where the ammo is stored. Its the type of ammo that causes catastrophic failure. A HEAT round detonating inside the armor, will destroy the tank and kill the crew, regardless of what kind of compartment its in, or how many 'blowout panels' it has. Those protections are only relevant to propellent burn off, with kinetic rounds. The reason tanks in Ukraine are going up like Hiroshima, is because they're all packed to the gills with HE. This C2, however, appears to have been carrying kinetic rounds.
    1