Comments by "" (@charlesmartin1121) on "Task & Purpose" channel.

  1. 13:48 "Is that a missile in your pants Joe, or are you just happ...oh it is missile."
    1
  2. Peaceful reconcilation with Taiwan? Think the J. J. Jameson meme.
    1
  3. A bankrupt army using a phoney, bankrupt currency. Sounds about right.
    1
  4.  @dylanwalker7624  Interesting.
    1
  5.  @yeoshenghong4802  Excellent point. And the tank doesn't even need a proper active countermeasures system at that point, because it can just pop smoke grenades and move.
    1
  6. The Army has tried to adopt so many vehicles of this type it's ridiculous. With the single exception of the Sheridan, all these projects crap out. Leaving nothing.
    1
  7.  @BaconSlayer69  Actually depends on the specific rifle and barrel length, and the specific 5.56mm round used. A Mark 18 firing the Mark 262 round (77 grain bullet) will get out well beyond 500 meters.
    1
  8. There is no serving anti-aircraft variant based on the Leopard 2.
    1
  9.  @ConstantinosDrymiotes1  Well darn if you are not correct. The Finns transferred their 7 Marksman turrets from T-55's to Leopard 2. I was in error.
    1
  10. You don't speak for Russian state television who think their country is battling imaginary nazis and winning.
    1
  11. You mean Putin's overconfidence in his incompetent army.
    1
  12. In a hair's length? Oh sweet Rapunzel.
    1
  13. 10:20 Whats Masada got to do with anything?
    1
  14. Fortunately most American voters did not support Donald Trump in the last election. Israel should be careful of getting to chummy with one of our political parties over another.
    1
  15.  @MasterBlasterSr  That is why they could use some TOS-1 or a homemade equivalent.
    1
  16. The Subscribe button might as well be a Redcoat. For a good reason.
    1
  17.  @dashikashi4734  Not sure I agree. I can't believe China, Russia or any nation would contemplate invading any of the 4 main islands of Japan. The smaller islands disputed by China...yes.
    1
  18.  @kukulroukul4698  Oh I think we all know a lot more about Russian military capabilities than we did a year ago.
    1
  19.  @dashikashi4734  Yes both countries are aggressors, but invading Japanese territory brings American military involvement.
    1
  20.  @dashikashi4734  I didn't say that...nor did I say Japan shouldn't have some MBT's...I was talking about the probability of China or Russia attacking Japan, in light of the likely response from the United States. But if I were Japanese I would want to see naval and air assets given priority.
    1
  21.  @dashikashi4734  Huh? Are you talking about Ukraine or Japan?
    1
  22.  @dashikashi4734  I agree.
    1
  23.  @kameronjones7139  Which unfortunately will not takeout a reinforced bunker.
    1
  24.  @kameronjones7139  Well short of a direct hit (with impact or better delayed fuze) anyway.
    1
  25.  @nickolasortiz8045  No there are not always partisan groups left behind. It depends on many factors. In the Allied campaign in NW Europe of WWII, there were no significant German partisan groups left behind, as the front moved forward (excepting some coastal ports still held by the Nazis).
    1
  26.  @aflyingcowboy31  Ok I don't have time to look up a bunch of references so this will have to due: "the V Corps advance was interrupted from 24 to 30 March due to a severe Shamal or sandstorm, attacks by Iraqi paramilitary forces or Fedayeen, the need to secure supply lines, and the need to relieve 3 ID units from rear area and supply line security roles." That citation is from "Sustainment of Army Forces in Operation Iraqi Freedom: Battlefield Logistics and Effects on Operations." pp 6-7 Eric Peltz, et.al. Rand Corporation. The pdf is available online. I have read the same or similar in other works. The Fedayeen who were attacking the supply lines for the most part were not organized for combat into large complex units and they typically operated in a distributed fashion. And yet they caused delay (along with other factors). In my above post I indicated there 'might' be Ukrainian units in the shaded area, and if so they 'might' cause problems for the advancing Russian forces, I certainly never implied that their potential presence could by itself prove decisive. Ok. Now I have to get on with my day.
    1
  27.  @carlosjavierpalacios6793  Unfriending Saudi Arabia would not lead to World War III.
    1
  28.  Tin Watchman  It could lead to short term recession, but the long term result could well be worth it. Now is the time for standingby our true friends and allies. "You can run faster with ten who want to go, than one around your neck."
    1
  29. 'It is what it is.' BUT IS IT?
    1
  30.  Tin Watchman  The correct answer is no. Sorry no cash prize for you.
    1
  31. The basic equation is WRONG! There is a persistent effort in the US Army to make light infantry into something akin to light mechanized or motorized infantry. Not counting counterinsurgency operations where all personnel operate from MRAP type vehicles, the Army should just build more mechanized and motorized units, and fewer light infantry units.
    1
  32.  @RomanHistoryFan476AD  True. But they were still draftees/conscripts.
    1
  33.  @spidermann5000  Absolutely.
    1
  34.  @AthenaNKnight  You are not wrong. But the word nuclear freaks a lot of people out. Now excuse me while I go get batteries for my Geiger Counter.
    1
  35.  @AthenaNKnight  Bananas aren't too bad. Now if you happen to have any old Fiestaware you should definitely beware.
    1