Comments by "The Immortal" (@theimmortal4718) on "Binkov's Battlegrounds" channel.

  1. The Russian definition of reservists is much different than the US. Our reserves are considered people currently in the DOD who train every month. We don't really consider the inactive ready reserve to be optimal for mobilization, let alone l be vets who have been out over a decade. The US has over a million currently drilling army reserve, army national guard, marine reserve, navy reserve, air force reserve and air national guard, ready to complement the 1.3 million active duty personnel.
    25
  2. Russia is shelling Ukraine. Why wouldn't Ukraine do the same? Would you just cuck out and let a guy take cheap shots at you without doing anything?
    23
  3.  @MM-pv5tp  And they hit civilian property in Ukraine. So?
    15
  4.  @MM-pv5tp  Who is? You're the one crying that Russia is being shelled, while Russia is shelling Ukraine. Sounds hypocritical, doesn't it?
    15
  5. Russia can't even take Bakhmut 😂
    14
  6.  @MM-pv5tp  You said it first. Literally. It's a no brainer to assume if you bomb somebody's cities, they might do it back to you. Zero Russian cities were being bombed before they invaded.
    13
  7. 15 to hostile fire, in over 40 years
    8
  8.  @johnc1873  Lol
    8
  9. The NLAW is a squad level weapon and the Javelin is a platoon level weapon. The NLAW is a better weapon to run around with than the AT4 in an armor rich environment
    7
  10. 800 m max range vs 2500 m
    7
  11.  @eduardoponce5328  No, the apache has been used the entire GWOT in Afghanistan and Iraq. Russia lost more KA-52s in the first 3 months of this war than in the US lost Apaches in 20 years. They also lost more tanks in the first 72 hours than the US lost in 20 years.
    6
  12. The nukes weren't used to beat Japan. They were used to send a message to the Soviet Union. Japan had pretty much been defeated, already
    6
  13. Aren't the Ukrainians slated to get it's biggest deliveries of western weapons so far, soon? They have roughly 400 tanks on the way....
    6
  14. I was a Bradley Gunner and BC in Iraq. They're tough bitches. Smoked the BMP, hands down
    6
  15. Past 200 m, just give it up
    5
  16.  @forhonor5768  How would you know?
    5
  17. An advantage that the Javelin has is the thermal + magnification of the CLU. We use it as a scouting observation device all the time without the missile. Its a great tool for scouting ahead for our heavy armored vehicles. A fire team with a CLU is more difficult to spot than a vehicle
    5
  18.  @bastikolaski8111  Lol. No they didn't. You're smoking crack
    4
  19. The USMC will rely on the Hero 120 loitering munition launcher to replace the 120mm mortar. Multipurpose, precision,25 mile range, 60 minutes flight time, and it weighs 40 pounds a shot. They will also rely on close and constant drone coverage and the HIMARS taking out all important targets. The ARV will be selected within a year, and will come standard with a 30mm autocannon and javelin missiles. The USMC is embracing technology and I'm willing to bet that strategy will prove to be devastating to armored formations.
    4
  20.  @icantthinkofausername2605  You've never shot one, have you? They blow all over the place after 200. There are very few ATGMs that can hit a target at 8k
    4
  21. These foreign threat countries using visually similar equipment and camouflage patterns as the west will make it more difficult to positively identify targets
    4
  22. In order to take Taiwan, they have to lay siege to it. That requires them to have an overwhelming naval presence around the nine dash line. That's millions of square miles to cover
    3
  23.  @travisvalentine8093  I don't think there's a Russian tank in Ukraine that can withstand an AT4 hit from the rear, top, or on the tracks. In a city, they are invaluable. Every US infantry squad carries a minimum of two. A hit to the engine deck or top of turret is going to be a catastrophic kill. A hit to the road wheels or tracks is a mobility kill. The crew will dismount and get machine gunned down
    3
  24. Up close, yeah, but it's limited to about 500 meters on armor. Great for MOUT and is a fantastic anti personnel weapon, too. For ambushing a tank convoy, the Jav is a better choice
    3
  25.  @bosanski_Cevap  You're actually proving the point. The afghan army folded due to corruption. The Chinese and Russian militaries are paralyzed by it. The date of the afghan army is also the date of the Chinese. I doubt most of their equipment is combat ready.
    3
  26. That's exactly what he has done 🤷
    3
  27. So you're hoping all Russians die in a fireball? Weird flex, but ok
    3
  28.  @owgdj  Turret tossing champions
    3
  29. The NLAW and the Javelin are used much differently. The NLAW is much better for close range hits, but struggles past 600 meters, which means you have to get pretty close to an armored force. The Jav can hit way past 2k, ensuring a higher chance the gunner will survive. If I were fighting in the woods near the roads and fields in the Ukrainian countryside, I would prefer to have my force to be equipped with javs to ambush tanks moving to contact in file. If I were fighting in the built up urban areas, I would prefer to be equipped with AT4s and NLAWS, as longer range shots will most likely not be offered to us, and the lighter weight would allow us to move faster in the streets. I wouldn't prefer an either or choice. You want both, in reasonable numbers. The US Army uses the AT4, The M3 Carl Gustaf, the M72A6 LAW, the Javelin, and the Tow, all for different uses. The lighter weapons are for squad sized elements, while the Jav is a platoon level weapon. Heavier weapons like the TOW are generally mounted or company level weapons. You want layered weapons with different capabilities. Generally, it's range to targets that dictates the weapon, not cost or target type. I'll hit a BMP2 with the same weapon I would hit a T80, if it's past 500 meters.
    3
  30. Pretty sure that pay and benefits for personnel and medical care account for the largest share of our defense budget. The best way to reduce our spending is to pay next to nothing to soldiers and give them no benefits. That's how most of these armies do it
    2
  31.  @bastikolaski8111  Got the name of that battle, yet?
    2
  32. Why do you care? What's the point?
    2
  33. They have to worry more about riots and crime by their new arrivals
    2
  34. Those switchblades are quite a bit more expensive than that. I believe the 600 is nearly 60k
    2
  35.  @mjk9388  It's just what I've read online. It's way bigger and has a much bigger control station. From what I've read, it's about ten times the cost of the smaller 300, and is more of a crew served weapon like a TOW rather than being man portable.
    2
  36. We didn't blitz Iraq. It took us 3 weeks to make it to Baghdad
    2
  37. It was. By the time anything is announced, things have already been moving for some time
    2
  38. I believe it's origional primary role was to kill masses of soviet tanks with a lot of Maverick missiles, while also having a gun to shoot down the helicopters that were providing cover for the tanks. In a pinch, the gun can be used for ground targets, though pilots always have said the missiles had a better kill ratio by far.
    2
  39.  @1tyhmalapsi  Those things are fantastic. Next gen past TOW and Jav.
    2
  40.  @1tyhmalapsi  True
    2
  41.  @dado-7775  You do realize that nobody in this thread is in charge of anything in this country, right? Why are you talking to him like he's a politician who sent everyone to war?
    2
  42.  @Terraraxi  Don't forget the Russian wealthy oligarchs that profit from him
    2
  43. Russia is a petro state not unlike Arabia or Venezuela. Their economy is the size of Mexico, with just a slightly higher population. 25% of all their exports are oil and natural gas. They can benefit enormously from the natural resources of Ukraine and the black sea.
    2
  44.  @nderitos  You can look it up. Pay and benefits take up a third, operations and maintenance take up another third, and procurement and R&D take up the last third.
    1
  45.  @rob5944  Not china or Russia
    1
  46.  @rob5944  Most western armies can't deploy more than a couple of battalions, max. The entire UK military is only 80k personnel. Australians only have about 60k Belgium 26k, Canada 67k, Czech Republic 22k France 208k Germany 183k You get the idea. The US has 1.38 million servicemembers. It's going to cost a lot to have that many troops and small armies with poor budgets hardly compare. The reason that these western countries can afford any kind of universal health care is because they have tiny and ineffective militaries. The US, through NATOz has been subsidizing their militaries, freeing up those funds. If these countries were solely responsible for their own defense, it would eat up more of a percentage of GDP than the US is spending right now (3-5%).
    1
  47.  @buddyspecialops  You just described the Soviet union, as well
    1
  48.  @buddyspecialops  Did you know that cost of healthcare in America is five times the cost of the military in the US? We spend more on public school 6-12 than we do on national defense. Considering the GDP of the US is 23 trillion, and our defense is under a trillion, I think calling it our biggest industry is seriously uninformed. The only way you could say that is if you just decided to ignore the entire other 96% of our economy.
    1
  49. The Soviet union in the late 80s was using up 27% of their GDP on military spending. The US didn't get above 6. Worldwide military spending has dropped by half as a share of GDP. Same with the US. The US military costs the country half of what it did just 35 years ago.
    1
  50.  @buddyspecialops  Do you spend more on food now compared to when you were a child? Do cars cost more now or in 1960? Can you still get a gallon of gas for 25 cents? The raw dollar amount doesn't matter at all. As in, not at all. What matters is the percentage of GDP. If you're unemployed and broke, buying something like a used 2000 dollar used beater car is out of reach. If you make 50k/ month, buying a 200k Ferrari is easy. The size of the economy matters. That's why the NATO agreement requires 2% of GDP rather than a dollar amount. Most Americans have nothing to do with the military or weapons companies. In fact, the GWOT barely affected Americans lives and they could just pretend it wasn't happening if they wanted. Most people just don't notice it.
    1