Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "Britain's \"Newest\" Tank: Challenger 3, Failing to Learn Lessons from Ukraine" video.

  1. Meanwhile, Russia is producing 125 tanks per month! NATO/USA has made the same mistake about tanks that Nazi Germany made. Yes, they had tremendous firepower and super-thick front armor. But when it's 5 super-fantastic tanks versus 100 cheap tanks, the enemy can surround and fire at your super-tank from all angles. Tanks are for infantry support against small arms. The enemy will always be able to build munitions that can pierce any kind of armor, so it's a futile endeavor. If you have a sound combined-arms strategy, and prepare the ground ahead of time, tanks have a role to play, but it's not this glorious charge of 100s of tanks, without both infantry or air support. Napoleon was criticized for his rejection of rifled firearms. The British could reach out from 300 yard away and target officers and artillery crews. The French would drive the rifles off with artillery and the threat of cavalry overrunning the infantry. Advantage France, because they could train up musket infantry quickly. And even though their skirmishers only had muskets, their tactics were impeccable, and they had skirmishers galore. The advantage of the rifle's range was match for well-trained skirmishers (Voltigeurs). Napoleon could draft people off the street and make them effective fighters in mass formations.
    3
  2. Government doesn't "run society." It's purpose is to provide a safe, civil landscape for the PEOPLE to run things. We won the debate on socialism decades ago, but American leadership is totally top-down socialist of the fascist variety. The only difference between fascism and socialism is that under the former arrangement, you can still own your stuff, but a government official will have total say on what you can do with your own stuff. Functionally indistinguishable from socialism from the point of view of the average citizen.
    1