"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (7 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

It's only a matter of weeks before the AFU figure out how to install a wrecked BMP-2's 2A42 30 mm autocannon into the ACSV.

Here it is below, ready for innovative Ukrainian engineers to drop-in and go, courtesy of Tankograd



Here's your standard LAV-3 turret being installed at GDLS in Canada. Looks like the BMP's turret will be a tight squeeze.



We should have sent them the armed version below to begin with.

 
Last edited:
Are these EU level votes useful beyond aspirational? I wonder how Germany's EU reps voted?
Long answer short: No.

Most of the resolutions of the EU parliament are aspiracional and, although it had gained power in the XXI century, it lags far beyond the legistative power of any national parliament and the politics are decided, mainly, by Germany and, some, by France.

Edit: the members come from the different countries but come from tradicional parties, so the votes are mainly in ideological lines, more than in national lines, so probably far left (Die Linke) and far right (AfD) members had voted no or abstained and the rest (liberal, SDP, CDU) yes.
 
House is responsible for budget, taxing, and spending, Senate for foreign affairs, treaties, and judiciary. Financially, what the House wants, the House gets. Only POTUS can stop them.

Not exactly correct. All finance bills must start in the House, meaning they can define the expenditures, but those bills must still gain Senatorial and Presidential approval before becoming law and funds being released. Until then, what the House decides it wants must still take into account the possibility of failure in the Senate or a veto from the Oval Office.
 
What does short range and direct line of sight have to do with it?
I believe the suggestion was to hit the Kerch bridge linking Russia to Ukraine with a TOW missile. This would require the shooter to be within range of the bridge and be able to see it for aiming purposes. But if that's not the intent, then disregard.

Edit: I see it now, we were to TOW a hypothetical bridge our troll was hiding under. Still, destroying a bridge sufficiently to injure someone below it with a TOW antitank missile might not work. A mortar or howitzer is better.
 

I'm glad you got the joke…

As for the Tow missile, though, while I agree it is not the most ideal, all you have to do though is take out a structural support or leg, and TOW might be sufficient for that.
 

Users who are viewing this thread