Ukraine 'forced to withdraw US-supplied Abrams from frontline' as losses mount 

Slava Shovelii 🇷🇺

😂😂😂

Bahahahahaha

Bum fight with shovels.

DIGGY DIGGY HOLE

They used them in Dessert storm with great success.

@@ThePhantom712Against illiterate Iraqi conscripts.

@@ThePhantom712 hilarious and delusional proves their point entirely, the usa has never fought even close to a near pear in its live time, even in ww2 japan was stretch on all fronts fighting with 21 other countries at the same time as the usa and the ija and the ijn were fighting a civil war too. so it was 30% of the japanese forces who were underfunded vs the entire us military and it still took so long to even do anything against a population 1/10th the size and no natural resources

@@JustSomeGuy8492 and it was the Iraqi after long years of war with Iran, with outdated equipments, especially no great power like Soviet back them up. And most of Iraqi force were focused on Kuwait, they didnt prepare much to be flanked, if they got better defense preparation, thing gonna be quite different

to be fair the iraqi t72s were downgraded versions of the russian t72s coupled to the fact that iraq was fighting a coalition of Nato Countries that have a pretty large military (US, UK,france etc.)

i came here to say this too !

Exactly!

The Ukrainians can use NATO tactics if they can find a way to get through the minefields into open areas, and the way the west does that is by controlling the skies so ground forces can clear the mine field.

Cope and seethe

Even you have air dominance... it's useless if you fight a country who can pulverized you in a moment. It works in a country like Iraq, Afghanistan but in Russia if you punch him in the face he will punch you in the face too.

😂😂😂😂😂

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Hahahaha

Haha remembered when they started sharing posters of the leopard hahaha now its in moscow for public viewing lol

Keep coping

@@diegoflores9237 Ukraine sent in the Abrams to help secure the retreat from Avdiivka, within 2 days 5 were lost, of the 31, and Bradleys and more galore. There is to coping lol, they're dying....... if they weren't getting destroyed Ukraine wouldn't pull them from the front.

@@diegoflores9237 Seethe. No air power = no win.

​@@daemon7225 bro thinks air power is an automatic against a peer power..lmfao read a book lol

@@AApnah13 I’m agreeing with you. But my point was nato/USA always enjoyed air supremacy in most of the conflicts

Not even $5k drones. Russians and ukrainians are making home-made (trench-made actually) drones with ducktape

I think it was $500

its cuz they are attacking the weak points, the russians came with a very smart and good idea to build metal armor all around the tank which only exposes the front of the tank to fire which was a very genius method but adds a lot of weight to the tank obviously

Only ru trash say lol about mass murdet

What do you think “cope” would stand for in terms of military speak/abbreviations?.😂

Yet when the Israelis use it, it's not called that 😂

​@@user-op8fg3ny3jbecause its "aNti-SeMeTiC" whilst they are not even 1% semetic at all lol.

@@Zero95011 "customizable overhead protected enclosure"

Drones have been around since 1918, the Kettering Bug mean anything? In the mid 1930's the US Navy were flying drones by remote for use as target practice. Loads of examples. Check your facts buddy.

@@mauricetoussaint7283 They weren't really used for combat, their effectiveness was questionable.

Didn't see this qoute when T-72 was fighting in ukraine

​​@@mauricetoussaint7283You are taking advantage of the blurry definition of what a drone actually is. What he is referring to are the cheap to produce, live battlefield coverage, anti everything drones that can be created using civilian products. These are the drones that will change war.

@@mauricetoussaint7283 In 2015 the most a drone could do was burn a flag down with a lighter and a spray can attached to it. Now they're dropping bombs and kamikaze striking ships and tanks.

In other words, NATO tactics is mainly effective against guerrilla forces.

@strangelylookingperson Considering the U.S. Air Force is the worlds largest Air Force with the U.S. navy being the 2nd largest airforce in the world. It’s a safe bet to say that the U.S. would still rely on its air dominance, even over Russia.

@@Keith-jp6jw Considering all of that, you fled like there is no tomorrow from a bunch of bare footed poor equipped, although very well motivated, Taliban warriors.

​​@@strangelylookingpersonoccupied the country for 20 years the taliban only slithered out of their caves when the coast was clear you make out they won some historic battle 😂 on the otherhand the soviet union was destroyed and booted out of Afghanistan and this contributed to the soviet union collapsing entirely 😂😂😂

​@Erwinelwormo That is correct

It’s just a way of the western media trying to make sense of their defeat. Russia has lost way more tanks than Ukraine (says who the same people that told us Russia would be defeated by Bradley’s then patriots missiles then leopard tanks). It’s a way of west coping with the defeat of their weapons. They are also now saying part of the problem is Ukraine not using Western tactics but then again the Ukrainians said their counteroffensive failed because they used Western tactics.

Tonight Russians brought damaged M1 Abrams to exhibition in Moscow.

​@@DanAth-il1uqwhat defeat the fact after 3 years still raising the flag and not going full vietcong proves how "powerful russia is"

​@DanAth-il1uq I mean forces news isn't just western media, its basically the british mod news channel so it's going to be biased

Yeah, Ukraine is winning! They keep advancing to the rear, while Russia retreats to the front

Did you take a break from welding tool sheds to your superior tanks? I heard the Russian tanks did really well in Afghanistan too

@@mikeB-sg1zs He didn't say Russian tanks are superior. Learn to read before typing. You'll looks less daft that way. His point was correct. American stuff only looks great when killing poor people in the sandpit.

@@mikeB-sg1zs Murica #1 main battle tank gets smashed like every other superweapon NATO sends, and all you can do is cope about a war that happened 50 years ago that was also a proxy war between the US and the USSR. Speaking of, how well did the US do in afghanistan? 8 billion dollars of tanks, jets, helicopters and small arms left behind, aftyer spending trillions of dollars, twenty years of invasion got toppled in two weeks? Sounds like a massive win to me.

@@mikeB-sg1zs cope yankee. your wonderweapons are on display in moscow.

@@ReikerForge Russian combat deaths in Ukraine: 150000. NATO combat deaths in Ukraine: 0.

3k killed tank is indeed propaganda but nonetheless russian got heavy tank casualties duo the overly aggresive tactics in the beginning and the use of improvised anti tank weapons ending up being threatening and dangerous yet cheap and widely avaiable like the drones droppinh anti armour rounds from the above.

Probably not 3k but definitely significantly large amount have been lost

From the oryx blog Russia has lost at least 1982 Tanks destroyed 155 damaged 318 abandoned 514 captured as of may 7.

@@LucasYoung-uc2ek right the pro ukrainian "osint" that totally not biased at all...

It's hard to say how much they really lost. That goes for both sides. ORXY has a list of destroyed,abandoned,captured. That list ain't very good to go off of. Mainly because Russia and Ukraine were using the same equipment throughout the majority of this war and we can't really tell the difference between them. You need to have a item list to prove the loses. You could easily take a photo of the same tank 20x and call it 20 different tank loses. For instance. First it was damaged, then it was abandoned, then it was captured. Now that is listed as three different tanks, but it's all the same tank. The only ones we actually can keep track of is the western equipment because only one side is using them and we have a list of equipment sent. We will know years later.

За натовскую технику нашим солдатам хорошо платят.

Quite - or it was stupid to send the Abrams. Just as it is stupid to send European troops this week, Ukraine has been losing badly from the start. What is clear is that Russia have been learning about Drone warfare for 2 years (and therefore so have Iran and China). But US hasn't learnt and is still teaching Ukraine the tactics to fight Iraq 20 years ago with complete air control. Heaven help the Europeans if they fight in Ukraine or the Americans if they send carriers to fight over Taiwan..

What makes you think nato will,we saw first hand in Vietnam,Afghanistan and currently in gaza how superior air power means nothing if the enemy can counter it with concealed positions and underground tunnels,in fact the Russians have already started tunnel tactics to literally undermine Ukrainian positions.

@@antique-bs8bb Losing badly? They have recovered over 30% of the land Russia took, and are pushing back on all fronts, only Russian drone infantry are appearing to win. However even those loses are unsustainable for Russia in the long run. Mean while the Challenger continues to obliterate Russian armour unabated.

​@@thetruthhurts7675 But most of that land Russia didn't care about - much of it wasn't even occupied by Russian troops (ie anything between Kharkov and Russian border). And in doing that they didn't kill Russians - hence the laughter at Izium - look at how the Russians ran... which of course means they left before we got there. Meanwhile Ukrainians have died in large numbers every month of the war, Ukraine hasn't won a single battle in 2 years, and Russia hasn't chosen to withdraw from a town or city of over a year. The Spring/Summer/Autumn offensive crossed the first of 3 lines of defence only at Robotno and just ended up as a killing pit that Ukraine threw men into and they died. Challenger - watch the clip - another complete western failure. Withdrawn out of embarrassment. Russian losses are some 50k dead, while Russian volunteers are some 400k on top of the 300 K reservists called up in 2022. Ukrainian dead are some 500k. That after starting with 700k and calling up at least 1m (well dragging many off the streets). Probably 500k wounded (survival as an untrained Ukrainian is tough) and at least 100k AWOL and quite a lot of POWs. There ought to be 500K left but it is probably half that (more dead? More AWOL?) Unsustainable is a strange world where Ukraine does not have the troops to use the weapons it has now and European troops are appearing in W Ukraine in uniform).

True but at the end of the day Ukraine needs aircraft more than tanks. Ukraine just got the ATACMS with 190 range able to carry 500lbs warhead Thats going to be a major bane for Russian forces Submunitions are good for materiel and light armor but a 500lbs warhead is excellent for pin point strike against high value targets The Kerch bridge for example

True, which is why russia had these “cope cages” to defend against drones and now the russians just welded on a massive steel shed onto a tank to protect against drones

I don't think so. Just add an AA gun like the German Gepard and/or cope cages and drones are pretty much back to being useless other than for reconnaissance.

​@@FarmerSchinken I agree, why can't they have miniguns on tanks firing at drones as they come in. A , AA gun on a tank would work brilliant for a drone.

​​​@@Blastoice Well clearly it is unnecessary for a tank to add anti air guns instead of heavy machine guns because of their main purposes of being an offensive force combined with Infantry, Aviations and now also be used as Self-Propelled Gun by Russia or Ukraine in the conflict. Besides a tank with an additional Chain gun or four 30mm cannons, a big ass radar and an AA missile launcher and is not really a "tank" anymore right? imagine the weights, the logistical problems, the budget of actually building one to do well for both roles. I can't tell you the practicalities and tactics of how a hybrid tank can possibly do, i am not a Military designer, but i can tell you that the tank will be the best and most reliable when it gets its designed jobs done. Tanks are like Vanguards, they are built to be in the front and support firepower for friendlies as well as being aided by them. They don't need an independent AA system, a ground Platoon or an SPAA can do the things for them more effectively.

@@Blastoicethat would just slow the tank even more

@@FarmerSchinken You have to detect it to shoot it down. Drones dive at a target at high speed, which means there is little time to shoot them down.

all abrams that were sent are the old versions that arent in service in the us military anymore

It doesn’t matter whether it’s old or new. Win is win

@@testsurname5679 blah blah butt hurt Russian bot.

​@jaydenmadden6986 hmmm sounds like cope to me

​@@jaydenmadden6986Doesn't matter, if a captured American tank is paraded around Moscow it isn't a good look.

Bro just casually forgets the main war it was used for. Iraq had the fourth largest army in the world when the U.S. invaded in 2003.

Only in the west and in English. Do you have some evidence the factory calls them that?

Not when its israeli

Kyiv in 3 days!

​@@mikeB-sg1zsyou keep quoting general milley

Who told you that, the MSM? The same MSM that has been lying to you 100% of the time ever since this war started,

The Challenger is in the front line. Tovarish.

With your dad?

@@1chish In Poland!

@@rogerjensen5277 Well not according to Ukraine videos and media. But the British Army has Challengers in Eastern Europe right now. Some may well be in Poland ....

@@1chish yes the barbequed ones.

They have experience war. Problem is that they haven’t experienced modern watergate against a near peer adversary.

@@KungFuWizardOfJesus They haven't experienced a modern war in reality. They've come up against some very old Russian and Iraqi equipment which were no match for them. They haven't experienced a modern army with high tech and drones etc. They are now and they are getting destroyed.

@@myrants5836 Iraqi tanks in Desert storm were the best available for a foreign nation. Iraq was ranked 5th best Army at the time. The fact is you cannot use NATO tanks properly without NATO air support and air dominance. Just look at the Number of Russian tanks destroyed, literally hundreds because Russia doesn’t have air superiority.

The issue is not the tanks as theybhave proven themselves to be very capable in Iraq etc.. The issue is drones. And both parties suffer the same issues.

@@KungFuWizardOfJesus Air superiority or not, both sides will take casualties, lots of them! You can use tanks without air support but they are very large, vulnerable targets to air power and artillery!

You mean china because russias are worse than consumer grade

all tanks are now useless in this war

Yeah you can only do so much damage to infrastructure until the enemy dosent have any yeah drones are being made in a factory which in future wars is target 1 and what drones then same with mines

Kyiv in 3 days. 450K Russians rotting in the ground. And you’re on RU-vid lmaoo

​@@mikeB-sg1zs meanwhile Ukraine is running out of troops and ammo while Russia is still spewing out troops. Never go to a prolonged war with Russia. Y'all never learned since the 1700's. They literally have more bodies than you have bullets. Napoleonic war , WW1 , WW2 has shown this very well. You can't change that fact. No matter how much copium you suck in. History has told this story so many times and I'm just mentioning 3 examples on the top of my head hahaha

​@@mikeB-sg1zshahaha, moan harder

​@@mikeB-sg1zsyup, i remembered it was gen Miley said that.... Wait... he's russian right?.... right?

They are.... but Strong シャベル[Shovel] it's indeed, too strong

No it does not, Ukraine just needs air defences. Drones have not changed warfare, they do the same thing as missiles, just alot lot, cheaper.

It really doesn't, though. Drones can easily be defeated, whether by specific anti-drone or jamming weapons, or more SPAAG units - but we aren't supply Ukraine with anywhere near enough of them. The doctrine is not the issue - the equipment is.

It needs to change its whole doctrine full stop. It is losing big time, it needs to stick to fighting countries it can bully like Libya. More important Nato has to realise that the US is destroying Ukraine for its own purposes while economically destroying Germany and much of Europe by cutting it off from cheap gas and oil. This is as much a US war against Germany as a US slaughter of Ukrainians.

​@@EnglishScripterYou literally have no idea what you're on about. Lol One drone now can avoid detection and spot troops many many miles away, even hidden in cover if it has a thermal. Able to call in precise artillery, airstrikes or drones with explosives. Then fly back to base. That alone removes the need for troops forward doing recon to try find targets and call in assets to knock out threats. But it's much more risky because of personnel, now drones are watching too. One cheap drone can become the eyes and ears of its owner or a deadly bomb. Drones have been the most important asset in this war. If they weren't so accessible say like 12-15 years ago Ukraine would of lost by now.

@@BroadHobbyProjects Ground Based radar can easily detect these drones, he is talking about drones being the threat themselves, and not acting as scouts. We have had more expensive version of these scouts for the past 3 decades, They have been used in Iraq, Afghanistan etc. It is only going to take a few years, till drones will be made very venerable. Also, how dare you say drones have been the most important asset, when there are hundreds of thousands of men dying or suffering on the front, these drones have not replaced these warriors. That is very disrespectful to all the great veterans, and serving soldiers are great nations have. Ukraine lost by now? You really have no clue. Anti tank guided missiles, have destroyed the majority of Russian armour, not drones.

Allies had overwhelming air superiority in Europe from d day to the end.

​@@daniellee2343but d day was in 1944, when Germany was destroyed by USSR basically

@@user-ee6nb9ec6v is that why they kept going? Most of the luftwaffe was directed towards the west to protect against bombers. The allies weren't going to do ground force invasion until air superiority was achieved.

@@daniellee2343 not make that big sense, cause all sources were for the east front.

@@user-ee6nb9ec6v learn to speak. You are speaking gibberish. Only the western allies threatened German cities with bombers.

A drone can still fly in low and hit the engine deck or tracks, stopping it from moving. Then artillery has a stationary target. That is the issue they're talking about. Never mind the fact that Russia has remote minelayers (ie an artillery system that fires mines on mass over a wide area) and they seem to also hurt the tracks on a tank that will also immobilize it, so they don't even necessarily have to hit it with a drone to stop it from moving.

@@Scar626Mines can be cleared by using mine sweeper tanks sent ahead of other tanks. So, mines are an old issue that have a solution. But drones and attack helicopters are novel anti-tank platforms that can use anti-tank missiles more effectively than the ground forces can. And, this is the reason air cover is essential in modern warfare :)

Keep coping

@@syedhasan8181 yeah, normally minesweepers can cope with mines, but did you miss the "remote" of remote mine laying? An artillery launcher launching mines far behind the front lines. In other words, minesweeper advance and then the remote mine laying equipment lays more right behind and around those minesweepers, ie when infantry or supply trucks want to follow or the minesweeper wants to reverse it's "gg, well played". Did you miss the part that the counter offensive failed?

No my guy it's just because the US has never fight an army but rebels

The cutting edge turtle tanks have been immune to drones

russia - visually confirmed tank losses ~3,000 America - loses 5 donated tanks, of which it has 3,700 in storage This guy: "US Industrial complex will be ruined if losses mount." !!!1!1

The same way Russian tanks and APV's get smoked all the time by Ukranian POV drones. Tanks on either side can't survive a battlefield swarmed with drones.

@@Theveganshift77 duh

​@@Theveganshift77​​@shinji1264 lol, really?. So Ukraine is winning? And now in Moscow? Are you serious?

@@JayJay-xy5ch never said. Only stated the same as Ukraine is losing tanks to FVP drones Russia is also losing them and also IFVs

Difference is the c2 and abrams crews are living to fight another day.

😂😂😂😂

The claimed number itself is incredible. Yes, Russia lost a number of tanks. But THREE THOUSAND TANKS??? Now that's grade A bullshyte

​@@ebiekem3000 Destroyed Russian Tanks is confirmed, and why are you surprised? Ukraine frontline is like a road from Warsaw to Barcelona, it's huge territory, and Russia has a lot of Soviet tanks, and Ukraine received thousands of Javelins at the beginning, additionally Ukraine first used drones against tanks.

Western propaganda

​@@ebiekemthere's this thing called Google, use it sometime. It's well over 3 thousand tanks.

Where was the tank battle?

They are using the M1A1 abrams not the most advance m1a2 sepv3

​@@f50koeniggThey're fighting old russian tanks as well

​@@yuno1707 it is not about tanks fighting against tanks. Abrams is still better then russian scrap metal. But drones can wrek all of them

😂😂😂​@@photonicemitter9227

I guess you could call Meatwave attacks retreating forward

@@anthonyhulse1248please Provide proof nato bot

@@anthonyhulse1248 AH yes the Russian Washing machines with shovels using ww1 tactics ghosts, as we can only hear them in word but never see them in video :D

Whats the count of Russian KIA? At this rate all China has to do to take eastern Russia is to walk over the border.

​@anthonyhulse1248, well if you call precision bombing with FAB-500 bombs as meat wave attacks, then so be it! Ask yourself why the western media has stopped showing Frontline views? It's not pretty to watch for the NATO bullies!

There is no Caucasians in the front line🤷Russkies only.

i smell cope

Would've helped if you told us 8 months ago

now you said it mate. i barely cant hear that opinion last year

Are they now? Oh I remember the hype prior to the counter offensive. "The M1A1, Leopard A2, Stryker, Bradley, etc were in town, so watch out Russia! Turrents will fly sky high!!" Then the counter-offensive offensive began...and Russians began to use their washing-machine-chip-powered shovels blessed in Vodka. First the world's "best" tanks (Leopard 2s) went up in flames, and Bradley Square was created by Russian shovellers. French Armoured vehicles basically ran away with a few now on display in Moscow along with CV-90s. The Challenger 2 then showed up only for 2 to get piped in the bum with Russian shovels; the rest were withdrawn. And now the famous M1A1 Abrahms....apparently they burn pretty well. You folks thought you were fighting a bunch of farmers in sandals. Well, too bad cos its the RUSSIAN FEDERATION. So here's a free advice: Never EVER underestimate the Russian Grizzly Bear armed with a shovel.

​@@ebiekemyeah but all those losses are litteral pennies compared to russias

You mean Russia also?

Tonight Russians brought damaged M1 Abrams to exhibition in Moscow.

USA 🏳️‍🌈🤕

How about the thousands of tanks Russia lost? Who's the paper lol

​@@sudfacWOW you guys captured a 40 year old tank. Congratulations.

NATO's answer would be air dominance.

The victorious , is the one who can sustatin the logistics on war times. Ukraine is losing bad.

Russia seems to have already solved it with 'Turtle' Tanks

MGCS does. If germany can make it quickly that is

​​@@cyber8000"Shoigu's funnies" only work for now in some cases because ukraine is low on artillery shells.

No stalemate there have been big advances by russia for weeks. A entire ukrainian brigade routed and was disbanded for that

Stalemate? That would be hilarious if it wasnt so morbidly depressing that so many believe it...

Stalemate? The Russian just went balls deep lol

Keep coping

Stalemate? Oh man, someone get this man a newspaper, ASAP!

Both sides are.

Adaptation requires critical thinking and free will, but critical thinking and will will are the enemy of western democracy, hence the mindless rush into minefields and drones and losing half a million troops.

I'm afraid it's too late.

F15 104 and 0

They do but not by using Abrahms.

Abrahams is unsurprisingly to most not as effective as the Americans hype it up to be,.

​@@Amradar123​​@shinji1264 lol, really?. So Ukraine is winning? And now in Moscow? Are you serious?

What msm are you watching because they're all saying Ukraine is in danger of losing and desperately needs ammunition.

@@JayJay-xy5ch is russia winning?

LOL, are the Russians suffering MASSIVE armour losses or not IVAN?

@@peterstubbs5934lol the amount of coping you’re going through must be tough. unfortunately, your precious ukraine wont last until 2026 so why dont you go there and fight some orcs, banderite fanboy?

@@UgandanWarriorofHell russia is literally falling apart and they are dying en masse. It will only get worse for them as more aid arrives and aid will keep coming and only incraese. B9 countries are preparing a MASSIVE tank/ifv package for next year.

You yourself contacted Ukraine, time will pass and Zelensky will call you traitors for giving too little and too late, you can’t expect gratitude

That's the record that the administration must stand on. It was never enable UA to win, only ensure UA doesn't loose. With a subtext of believe Crimlin lies and that 'escalation' would put ConUS at risk FSB misinformation is all going to plan..

They are literally a drop in the ocean, insignificant in the overall scheme of things

mmm 14 challengers aren't enough but neither is 31 Abrams. Ukrainian tankers are using the challengers to punch through Russian defenses behind tree lines. So far they have managed to escape the drones that the Abrams suffer from. Apart from that one tank I'm not sure what got that chally 2?

they use the chally to snipe and the otherone more in the offense, or thats what it looks like to me

The weapon the challenger uses is great for range, and the US has been criticizing for ages, but its the reason the challenger is still effective.

Doubt any of them still working lol

In Vientnam war Vietnamese always used T-55 , PT-76 and even T-34-85 at front line. T-55 was comletly superior against American tanks of those times. Saigon was taken by T-55 columns attack. T-55 was superior against M48 in all aspects. and Usually americans just ran away. Same as Abrams tanks in this conflict.

@@AlexanderTch Technically speaking the T-55 has a slight advantage over the M48A3 but American crews were better trained and with superior air support the T-55 can't win. The same with an Abrams Tank crewed by Americans with massive air support no enemy can defeat an Abrams! Any tank or armoured vehicle are sitting ducks without air cover. NVA T-55 and PT-76 appeared in numbers when the US decided to pull out and the Air Force were ordered to stand down.

@@codfusilli5879 Yes, American tankmen in Vietnam was better trained for sure than Vietnamese tankmen. But Vietnamese were not cowards at all. They didn't run and were always ready sacrifice their lives. So, you statement, about "they ran away when saw M48" is complete fake and your fantasty. And numbers of T-55s in Vietname were much less than American types. Vietnamese even used decent amout of WW2 machines like T-34, Su-100, and IS-2 /IS-3. And they still won. Statement about PT-76 is comletely silly. PT-76 is not actually tank. it's boat with trucks. In areas with lots rivers, swamps, lakes it can be very useful. but it's not suitable for confronation agaist real tank. Americans didn't have total air superirity in Vietnam. You lie. Americans lost 40% of their aviation there. You can visit central park in Khanoi and see remnants of B-52 lying in swamp there. RUssia delivered there all kinds of SAMs. Besides, there were some amount of Mig-21, Mig-19s, Mig-15s. Mig-21 had total superiority against all american types. To destroy Abrams even in case of total air superiorty of the enemy is not very hard once you have at least good ATGMS, drones, artillery. Tank is huge, not maneuverable, easy to detect with hot engine. It's not big deal for a guy with ATGM to burn it. Plenty number of them was burnt in Iraq that even didn't have good ATGMs. So, anyone who wants can burn Abrams. It's not undefeatable and unbreakable whatever you fantasize.

They didnt deployed it to fight US, because NVA werent supported with tanks to deployed until the end stage of the war. The nature of the war in each stages were different. The early and mid stage were to build up the force and war infrastructure, they relied heavily on infantry to wage guerilla warfare. Only when the time was right, which their enemy severely weaken and their force grow stronger enough to fight conventional warfare, tanks and armor could be effective. There's no point for guerilla force to deploy tanks if you not going to fight conventional battle, and the supply line was still in developing in early and mid stage too so heavy equipments can rarely be transfered south VN. But in the end stage, they did deploy in 1971/1972, at that time ARVN still have US equipment and US air support, so T-55 did have fight with US equipments and air firepower

Except as this video demonstrates, tanks are fast becoming redundant on the battlefield, so we need to develop drone technology asap as they are fast becoming more efficient? 🫡🇬🇧🇸🇪🇺🇦

@@lascm5237 Western tanks are becoming redundant. Just because the video claims (well repeats Oryx claims) that Russia has lost all its tanks does not mean anyone takes it seriously.

@@antique-bs8bb nope, ALL tanks are becoming obsolete. They are vulnerable, slow, expensive, logistically challenging to actually get to theatre, difficult to maintain particularly in the field and need a supremely well trained and drilled crew. In a word, they are fast becoming obsolete and a relic from both World Wars. They have a limited future if any.

@@lascm5237 Top Peer to peer warfare I agree. It is all stand off weapons. But much of the Ukraine war is not peer to peer. Ukraine are very much the weaker side. And the idea that Nato can fight in E Ukraine while supplying itself from 1000km away in Poland is not realistic, so tanks will serve a purpose for Russia (and unfortunately probably for Israel too till they face Iran).

So if photographic evidence is unacceptable to you where do you get your information?​@@antique-bs8bb

No tank with a cope cage has ever been knocked out right? "Land is where you are, and so you will carry it around with you." "Dirt. This is a jar of dirt." "Yes." "Is the jar of dirt going to help?" "If you don't want it give it back." "No". "Then it helps."

That’s Ruzzia in Ukraine

Just look at Afghanistan. Clearly the enemy is not afraid.

And remember Afghanistan you commie? That war collapsed the whole soviet union lmao

Lol what? They hid in the hills and gave up the main cities in the firet few weeks. They survived the united states by just giving up meaningful territory for 17 years until policy change brought us home. Oh, and the over 10 to 1 kill ratio in favour of americans does not mirror russia's losses at all lol. We took the "kiev" of afgahnistan and all the other major cities succesfully within a few weeks, russia had to give up most of the terrirtoy it gained in the first 6 months. ​@maemilev

​@@thezombiepotato1and still you lost both of these wars in Vietnam Americans were killed like dogs and Russia is fighting literally all of NATO alone without US aid Ukraine won't even last a month

Well the abrams got the same treatment as those Ts. So you can't really say much, we didn't really even see a tank to tank battle, these attacks against the abrams were drone and missile based attacks. These tanks are dependent on air support, which is something that ukraine lacks. Like every tank they are extremely vulnerable to the enemy if not properly protected, also ofc these tanks got targeted first, it was done to purposely humiliate NATO. All of a sudden you destroy 5 tanks from your most hated enemy and that makes you superior to the enemy. Abrams vs the Ts is like AR vs AK. Though we are yet to see true fair fight between the two.

No they wouldn't F16 will be the next "game changer" that fails to deliver.

'All humanity will pay', really? If they had F16s and the necessary infrastructure to maintain them, they would still have been destroyed by the Russians! And no doubt, a few of them would have been delivered to Russia by Ukrainian pilots who realize that their corrupt government uses them as cannon fodder and of course, the Russians will offer a reward for their surrender with NATO equipment intact! Fighting with a gun pointed at the back of your head isn't courage!

5 vs1 lose

Can atacms hold the line?

@@operator9858 apparently Abrams can't

@@TheIvanMilky touche.

yes the russians have better

@@operator9858 No ATACMS would wipe out that line Ukraine is not going to win this fighting tactically they have to fight strategically Abrams holding the line does nothing In two ATACMS strikes, Ukrainian shredded two Russia airfields. The first strike destroyed 18 helos which cost Russia 10 KA-52s The damage from the second is still unknown but that also was home to Russian gunships That is the kinda of fighting Ukraine needs to do massive asset denial

ikr. fools