Comments by "" (@pwrserge83) on "Dutch Forces Mobilize (Extra Scene from 'The Russians Are Coming: NATO's Frontier')" video.

  1. The Dutch Merchant Would that be the same Dutch who can't even issue training ammo to their troops and have their soldiers running around yelling "pew pew"?
    6
  2. Tommy England You're high. Russia is not invading Ukraine, if they were, there'd be a Russian flag flying over Kiev. The Ukrainian military would be a speed bump to a single heavy corps. (Of which Russia has over a dozen.) The UK "military" is a joke. Your entire "army" has a total of less than 90,000 regulars. That's barely two Divisions. (To give you an idea, the United States Marine Corps, has an active duty roster of more than TWICE that, the Russian army has you outnumbered eight to one.) They have better small arms. They have better small unit tactics. They have more armor. They have better artillery. They have better air support. Quite frankly, you brits would be doing a reenactment of Antwerp inside a week. I served in Iraq and Afghanistan, often with your guys. Trust me, you don't want to fight a land war with Russia. They have literally never lost.
    6
  3. Gholam Hossein Salehi No combat ready unit has ever passed inspection. No inspection ready unit has ever passed combat.
    2
  4. The Dutch Merchant You mean the same "horse fuckers" who crushed every major power on the planet at the time? Really? You do realize that Russia has not lost a war for hundreds of years? Right? Who was it again that kicked Napoleon's balls up into his throat when every other European power got their teeth kicked in?
    2
  5. Tommy England Them and what army? No, seriously. What army? The UK and Germany have no military to speak of. If it wasn't for NATO, Russia would already own you.
    2
  6. DatZortaw I'd say "brigade" is generous for their formations. Their mechanized "brigade" has no armor to speak of. Their heaviest armored vehicle is a glorified IFV.
    1
  7. DatZortaw The Dutch have really become dependent on NATO. Hell without French, German, UK, or US support they can't even field a self-sufficient unit. (I'm looking at you, "mechanized" brigade with no organic armor component.) The hilarious part is that even the JSDF can do better, and their military was designed from the ground up to act in a support role to US forces. (Don't believe me? Check out their naval complement and compare it to the auxiliary and support component of a USN carrier strike group.)
    1
  8. Tiberius -I Best? Maybe... Enough to make any appreciable difference? No. You've got a total of less than 3000 troops in the entire cops. That's not even one full strength regiment.
    1
  9. dj ka Oh really? Do you count Soviet occupation of Ukraine as a "loss"? In any case, this was 1919. The Soviet Union didn't even really come into existence for almost another decade. Congratulations Poland managed to "defeat" a "country" in the middle of a civil war.
    1
  10. ***** Given that both wars were draws (at worst), they don't apply. 1919 got Russia Ukraine back and Afghanistan was no more a defeat than Vietnam was.
    1
  11. ***** Yes... You can believe what you want about the only superpower in Europe and Asia.
    1
  12. ***** You mean the same Russia that has more industrial power than the entire EU combined? The one with more firepower than every other country combined except America? That Russia?
    1
  13. dj ka You're confusing GDP and industrial capacity.
    1
  14. dj ka That's adorable. You think you know things. Fun fact trollo. Russia has one of the largest industrial bases on the planet they only thing they import is luxury goods.
    1
  15. Daniel de boer Sources say otherwise. http://news.softpedia.com/news/ammo-shortage-means-dutch-soldiers-must-shout-bang-bang-488580.shtml
    1
  16. Noah Vthof Oh really? You mean the same EU that has virtually no modern armor or airpower?
    1
  17. Noah Vthof 1. The tanks you listed are fielded in such pathetic numbers that their presence is irrelevant. For every Leopard II on the battlefield, the Russians will put up two dozen T-90s. The Germans also had the best tanks in WWII, but just like now, they simply didn't have enough of them. 2. No EU country will ever get the F-22. That's actually written into US law. I don't support Russia. It disappoints me about as much as the US does right now. I do, however, find EU posturing to be sad and pathetic. Especially since the EU militaries have been hiding behind the US for generations.
    1
  18. Noah Vthof Actually, 1. The number of tanks that the EU can field is so low as to be essentially zero. Most EU members don't have ANY armor. 2. The T-90 is more than a match for the M1A2. It has better active defenses, more efficient armor, and a better gun. Since none of the European tanks are a match for the M1A2...
    1
  19. peter w We're not talking about the US. I hate to break it to you, but the American tax payer is busy paying for your bullshit. Chances are, we're just going to sit back and let the Russians deal with your pansy asses. The entirety of the EU has less than 2000 tanks. (I would like to know where you got your 7k number from as less than 500 Challenger 2s were ever built.) Russia has over 2,000 T-90s in service. That does not count their massive stockpile of T-80s or T-70s which are easily a match for Leopard 2s or Leclercs as they lack the DU armor that the Challenger or Abrams use to compete with the active defenses of T-80s or T-90s.
    1
  20. You would be wrong. The Germans and french don't even use current generation armor systems. Nor do they have the active defense systems of the T-90. Still want to hear where you got your "7000" number.
    1
  21. Piekartz Actually, there are no such tanks produced by the EU. Nobody combines the main gun, DU matrix armor, and electronics support quite the way the M1A2 does. As I said earlier, if you don't have modern active defenses. (Retrofitted onto the vast majority of Russian T-70 series) or a DU matrix (Found only on the M1A2 and the Challenger 2), you're basically a sitting duck.
    1
  22. Piekartz Cheaper is not better. There are many types of composite armor. If it doesn't use a DU matrix, it might as well be cardboard.
    1
  23. Piekartz Composite armor, yes. Reactive armor, no.  The major advantage of a DU matrix is that it gives you multi-hit capability that reactive and traditional composite armor lacks. It is inarguably a far better armor system than reactive armor, but it comes at a rather severe production and weight cost.  The main Russian advantage is that even their modernized T-72s (Sorry, I got sloppy and was referring to the entire series by the name of a WWII tank.) have modern electronics and reactive armor systems. They are in every way competitive with a Leopard 2. (That lacks the DU matrix found in the M1A2 or the Challenger 2.) Don't forget, almost all of Russia's T-72s now have Kontakt-5 installed. That gives them the equivalent of almost three feet of armor protection against APFSDS and almost four against HEAT. That would make them comparable to even a Leopard 2A6. Sure, the Leopard is a much newer design with more bells and whistles, but the two tanks are well within shouting distance of each other. The T-80U is a better example of a direct match, while the T-90MS is an example of a superior tank.
    1