Comments by "" (@tomk3732) on "The Wall Street Journal" channel.

  1.  @kali7148  You don't need a simulation to figure out who would win in the long run - China. Why? They have well over 2x production capacity of US. Just like in WWI and WWII the stronger wins. Its that simple. And to make it worse for US - China is only getting stronger vs. US.
    1
  2. Yep - German unification good. Chinese bad. Supporting rebels in Taiwan good, supporting rebels in Donbass bad. West is a joke.
    1
  3.  @Lawre.J  Not according to 99.99% of the world. For that 99.99 the one China is PRC as seen by where there are embassies - they are in Beijing not in Taipei. US uses idiots in Taiwan to bang against China (PRC) for its own purposes - even it does not recognize Taiwan as anything more then part of PRC.
    1
  4. And remember it was not b/c Patton tank sucked that T-55 made a burning wreck of it in Indo-Pakistani war.
    1
  5.  @davetdowell  Challenger 2 is one of the worst tanks of NATO - worst newish tank as Ariette from Italy is quite bad. But otherwise it is a terrible tank. We will see most or all 14 Challenger 2 tanks destroyed in Ukraine very soon. This tank is so bad, there are multi series videos devoted to explain why you should not make such tank like object - you cannot fit it all in one video ;) It is British version of India Arjun ;) The tank of shame. Go get some Leopards and see what a tank should be. Heck even T-72 - T-90 lineup is a step up.
    1
  6.  @BlatentlyFakeName  T-62 had... better armor package than Centurion, at about 1/3 more thickness, better mobility at 14.5 vs. 13.5, better gun at 115mm smoothbore vs. L7 105mm rifled and potentially better sensors. Clearly T-62 was a much better tank - Centurion was a 1946 design, dated in 1970s. As for Israeli victories I always remind everyone that Iraqis managed to loose 60 M1A1 Abrams tanks in just few days to pickups driven by ISIS.... So I doubt Iraqi performance with T-62 / T-72 etc. was fault of the tank - they simply sucked in anything given. Similar can be said of other Arab nations.
    1
  7. Wait, that what Lancet 3 is.
    1
  8. Another idiotic episode. Other then to denazify Baltic states what exactly would be Russian purpose? And no one invaded anyone yet just b/c their government has Nazi tendencies. Taking land that has 90%+ Russians now heavily discriminated is a possibility. But I doubt this is worth a war. Maybe NATO should look into largest in the world population of non citizens? So much so for "democracy".
    1
  9. 3:27 one of the most strategic locations in Donbass in this war is "symbolic" victory .... LOL!!!!!! Next year, Kiev did not hold any strategic meaning and is mostly symbolic Russian victory.
    1
  10. It will sink Biden even more!
    1
  11. We see how well cope offensive will do - once it is over we see what Ukies do... fight to the last one? Surrender?
    1
  12.  @augusto8821  Maybe, as long as they continue what they are doing - they are going to be fine. Better is always better but not needed for victory.
    1