rump Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 Here are some articles about the Abrams coming to Afghanistan:http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/tanks-to-afghanistan-analysis/http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/tanks-to-afghanistan-the-more-things-change/http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/22/sending-tanks-to-afghanistan-part-i/http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/22/tanks-to-afghanistan-a-soldier-writes/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 Well you need to park them somewhere after thinning out in Iraq. This way you are still next door to Iran or a "short drive" from North Korea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted November 23, 2010 Share Posted November 23, 2010 oooo thats a hot plate right there lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgehog Posted November 24, 2010 Share Posted November 24, 2010 Hoooah! Go get 'em Marines! (You know, sometimes I wish the Royal Marines had an Armoured Company.)Nothing like 60 tonnes of Grade A offensive firepower to keep those dismounts safe. A HEAT round through the building Terry Taliban is hiding behind/in, would make a good game changer.Just wish our Govt would stop their bloody penny pinching and get some Charlie 2 tracks on the ground. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted November 24, 2010 Share Posted November 24, 2010 Hoooah! Go get 'em Marines! (You know, sometimes I wish the Royal Marines had an Armoured Company.) Surely it would be a Squadron! I know a bunch of M1 jockeys in Darwin who also don't understand why our SF dudes (and some Mentors) are the only ones having fun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted November 24, 2010 Share Posted November 24, 2010 Hoooah! Go get 'em Marines! (You know, sometimes I wish the Royal Marines had an Armoured Company.)Nothing like 60 tonnes of Grade A offensive firepower to keep those dismounts safe. A HEAT round through the building Terry Taliban is hiding behind/in, would make a good game changer.Just wish our Govt would stop their bloody penny pinching and get some Charlie 2 tracks on the ground.because they've got our cavalry and tankie boys in "dismounted" roles. I hate it when they do that, if the jobs going to get done why not go all they way and stop fannying about. I know the RDGs have split into 3 squadrons, 1 squadron has the jackal 2, another has the Ridgeback Mastiff and the 3rd the Bv206 Bronco. When they get back to the UK they will go back to challenger 2s, so I dont see the point on having so many of those vehicles when we should be making them skid their pants. I know its necessary for cut backs but Liam Fox (Im not going to rub his ego and call him doctor, he doesnt deserve that respect) is an absolute tool.But about korea, heard about todays news? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted November 24, 2010 Share Posted November 24, 2010 But about korea, heard about todays news?Yes hence post #2 above! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted November 24, 2010 Share Posted November 24, 2010 Well i ment the update lol korea is treading a very thin line, even china dosent like what north koreas done and chinas its ally lol I wouldnt like to get on the wrong side of china. One of the toughest and The biggest Armed force in the world. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommanderA9 Posted November 25, 2010 Share Posted November 25, 2010 Heh heh, no armor critics here! Send more, damnit (and stop giving them away in Iraq ) I heard about North Korea bombing the South. Is this artillery strike (and the North's sinking of a South Korean destroyer) nothing short of an act of war? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted November 25, 2010 Members Share Posted November 25, 2010 It may well be, but you you want to risk an all-out war when North Korea might launch a nuclear strike on Seoul (even if it turns out to be a fizzle at just one kiloton) over "just" a provocation?It is a shame that people's lives were taken as the price for an internal NK power struggle (at least that's what most currently seem to assume it is). But the price for picking up the glove is probably much higher than that. Of course you'd have to draw the line somewhere, and of course everybody would just love to kick the NK leadership in the groin and see them out of power. But if you have to take responsibility for the lives of hundreds of thousands that are at stake if you go all in, well, I can understand why they are hesitant even though it is pretty clear that there is no way how North Korea could actually win a war against the south. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rump Posted November 25, 2010 Author Share Posted November 25, 2010 On the Korea thing, (hijacking my own thread!), it's claimed that the South took out most of the Norths Artillery (used in the attack).Source: http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2928852 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibsonm Posted November 25, 2010 Share Posted November 25, 2010 Even if it doesn't go nuclear there is a very large slice of the mainland South Korean population within range of North Korean medium guns, BM-21, etc.We still have an obligation to go back there (as we were part of the foces currently enjoying the "cease fire") and I'm not really looking forward to it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redmouse Posted November 25, 2010 Share Posted November 25, 2010 On the Korea thing, (hijacking my own thread!), it's claimed that the South took out most of the Norths Artillery (used in the attack). frankly, damages of NK are still unknown officially. Our first counterattack hit the garrisons not their artillery because of TPQ36 had a problem. and second one hit the area as radar directed but Nk had some fortified artillery positions in their cliffs so we doubt the effectiveness of counterattack. A marine in the scene, sry about big pic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemolitionMan Posted November 25, 2010 Share Posted November 25, 2010 Considering that the South must be prepared for counter battery fire in quite large dimensions(arty is the North´s biggest asset initially) it strikes me as odd that their response would have been largely ineffective. Still I´m not sure wether to wish for the whole thing to cool down or tend to say "enough of northern incidents-act now!" ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted November 25, 2010 Share Posted November 25, 2010 (edited) I dunno, this is pretty big considering what each countries allies are. This really does go beyond just the act but who else will get roped in aswell. Also if N.K decides to use its ultimate arsenal, US taking counter measures and Russia detects a nuclear threat. We are in much more poo then can think we are. Lets just hope it doesnt come to that and the diplomats do a good job of settling it all. I doubt it'll happen but we can live in hope I guess. It seems a repeat of the 20th century, 2nd Gulf War, soon to be 2nd Korean War, what would it be next? and we all know what happend before the Korean war. Edited November 26, 2010 by FletchRDG 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenny Posted November 25, 2010 Share Posted November 25, 2010 frankly, damages of NK are still unknown officially.Our first counterattack hit the garrisons not their artillery because of TPQ36 had a problem. and second one hit the area as radar directed but Nk had some fortified artillery positions in their cliffs so we doubt the effectiveness of counterattack.Condolences for your fallen comrades...Good to hear from someone close to the scene.Stay sharp fellows, and good luck! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mp96 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 A US Marine from 1 Marines division, 1 Tanks, Delta company, 3 platoon sits in his M1 Abrams tank as others refuel their vehicles at FOB Edinburgh base, Helmand province, on February 2, 2011. A US Marine from 1 Marines division, 1 Tanks, Delta company, 3 platoon refuels his M1 Abrams tank at FOB Edinburgh base, Helmand province, on February 2, 2011. A US Marine from 1 Marines division, 1 Tanks, Delta company, 3 platoon refuels his M1 Abrams tank at FOB Edinburgh base, Helmand province, on February 2, 2011. http://kostyukov.livejournal.com/98555.html#cutid1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarball Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 http://kostyukov.livejournal.com/98555.html#cutid1cool pics 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mp96 Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 Cool USMC! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.