Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "C-SPAN" channel.

This is why we need term limits on Congress ASAP
32
It called asking for help Any country can ask NATO for assistance even if they are not part of NATO
14
Well about time, now follow through and put boots on the ground
12
Oh course not Trump would have simply looked the other way
4
@marswillrule2431 I would but then deploying weapon of mass destruction like myself would be considered inhumane
3
The US has 3700 tanks in storage
2
They basically kept him as they needed him for voting their way Once things reached a point where they no longer needed him bye felicia i
2
Watching this battle for the speaker of the house is both hilarious as well truly disappointing to see elected officials act like a bunch of pre school children
2
Still no comparison here Biden is fully cooperating while Trump fought tooth and nail claiming executive privilege to documents which he no right to
2
SNL will be legendary this week especial since it failed 14 times
2
@sid2112 Trump didnt start a major conflict but it Barbara Lemons is correct, he did stir shit up with Iran and other countries
2
@madalinradion Nuked by who Russia may have been dumb enough to invade but he's not dumb try and go nuclear Quote In October 2016, Russian officials claimed research simulations of U.S. ballistic missile defense systems showed the SM-3 Block IIA was capable of intercepting missiles not only at the middle stage of their flight path, but earlier in the initial acceleration stage before the separation of their warheads Both Russia and China complained that US SM-3 is was capable intercepting their SLBMs and ICBM Quote This poses a more serious threat to the nuclear potentials of Russia and China as antimissiles of this type will be able to intercept Russian and Chinese ballistic missiles before the separation of their warheads," The US has SM-3 abroad its warships as well as part of the NATO air defense network Simply put, NATO has substantially better anti missile capability than Russia Russia S-400 and S-500 are only land based while the US and NATO have land and sea assets
1
Interesting
1
@austinlowell8829 No, they are not making new tanks for Ukraine. They are pulling tanks from storage for Ukraine. First the production takes 1 month per tank its easier to pull 31 tanks from storage for refurbishment
1
@austinlowell8829 They won't make them new as thats asinine for several reasons
1
@austinlowell8829 Building new tanks is beyond asinine The US has 3000 M1A1 and M1A2 combined storage Those tanks tech is circa 1999 which presents no security risk if captured. Its literally simpler and economical to put tanks out of storage than making new ones Its benefits the US Army because they can replace those older tanks with newer ones. Pull 31 M1A2 from storage Send the oldest US tanks that are active to storage to replace the 31 then by smartly buy 31 M1A2 SEPv3 or M1A2 SEPv4 to replace the 31 sent to storage The US Army gets newer more capable tanks while Ukraine gets old but still capable assets Why they are not going this route is ??? Something is very wrong with this picture
1
@allisonmarlow184 Which is beyond asinine
1
@allisonmarlow184 No he is not. Your detailed explanation is absolutely wrong as neither you nor him have a clue We can't give them tanks out of our stockpile for many reasons but top of the list is that our "as is" Abrams have super high tech bells and whistles that we can't risk getting into the hands of the Russians-FALSE The M1 was built in 1975. M1IP in 1984. The M1A1 between 1985-92. The M1A2 in 1992 and the M1A2 SEP since 1999 M1A2 SEP has upgraded to SEPv2, in 2007 SEPv3 in 2015 and SEPv4 in development since 2022 According to estimates from various sources, For the M1A2 upgrade programme, more than 600 M1 Abrams tanks were upgraded to M1A2 configuration at the Lima Army tank plant between 1996 and 2001. Deliveries began in 1998. February 2009, the US Army TACOM life-cycle management command (TACOM LCMC) awarded GDLS a multiyear contract worth $81m to upgrade 30 M1 Abram tanks to M1A2 systems enhancement package version 2 (SEPv2) configuration. GDL won a $2.6bn contract from the US Army to upgrade up to 786 M1A1 Abrams to the newly configured M1A2 System Enhancement Package Version 3, in December 2017. The US Army TACOM LCMC awarded a $49.7m contract to GDLS in February 2015 to upgrade M1A1 Abrams tanks to the M1A2 SEPv2 configuration. GDLS secured a $92.2m contract modification to upgrade M1A2 SEPv2 tanks to the M1A2 SEPv3 configuration in December 2015. The US Army placed orders with GDLS for the upgrade of 100 M1A1 Abrams to M1A2 SEPv3 configuration in July 2018. The US Army has awarded a $714m contract to GDLS to upgrade 174 M1A1 Abrams tanks to M1A2 SEPv3 configuration in January 2019. The US Army has ordered more than three brigades of M1A2 SEPv3 tanks, taking the number of tanks ordered in 2018 to 274 The US Army has only been upgrading a fraction of its tanks to SEPv2 and SEPv3 They still have thousands of tanks since sitting with tech circa 1999 M1A2 SEP configuration or older So the notion that tanks from 1999 represents a security risk is completely false as they don't have any of newer SEP upgrades
1
@allisonmarlow184 The simple fact is that US Army has thousands of tanks in storage so there is no reason to build new tanks for Ukraine The most numerous tank in Europe is the Leopard 2 tank which Germany has approved for export from them as well other countries The even smarter play is instead of buying Abrams. Buy Leopard 2 tanks from countries that have them in storage and have Krauss-Maffei Wegmann do the refurbishment which gets Ukraine tanks considerably faster than it building new tanks While it sounds nice for them have Challenger 2, Leclerc , Abrams and Leopard 2 logistically, maintenance and training, thats a certifiable nightmare The only saving grace is that they all use NATO standard 120mm rounds That many tanks from so many sources is idiotic
1