... so, they withstand the soviet union. there is nothing insane in that statement.
last but not least. the invasion of afghanistan had nothing in common with the problems between india and pakistan. it was just a reaction on 9/11. man, what's up with you? yes, pakistan has helped the taliban and they still do, secretly. Even so, this was NOT the reason for the war.
... so, they withstand the soviet union. there is nothing insane in that statement.
last but not least. the invasion of afghanistan had nothing in common with the problems between india and pakistan. it was just a reaction on 9/11. man, what's up with you? yes, pakistan has helped the taliban and they still do, secretly. Even so, this was NOT the reason for the war.
...The afghan people didn't want to live in communism and so they started their own revolution against the DVPA which was the communist party at the time. Finally, this was the reason for the soviet union to invade afghanistan and to build a land according to the soviet's. At this time we called the people of this revolution "freedom fighters", nowadays we call them "terrorists". It's just a point of view if you are one of the first or the second kind, mainly. ...
...The afghan people didn't want to live in communism and so they started their own revolution against the DVPA which was the communist party at the time. Finally, this was the reason for the soviet union to invade afghanistan and to build a land according to the soviet's. At this time we called the people of this revolution "freedom fighters", nowadays we call them "terrorists". It's just a point of view if you are one of the first or the second kind, mainly. ...
Leopard 2A7+ with A/C and a Great Sound System Playing Rammstein (Feuer Frei) would be My Choice of Ride! P.S The Taliban might not understand the music but they understand the Beast that's playing it!! :-)
Secondly, the gas guzzling is offset by a potent logistic line, and the ability to utilize just about any flamable liquid you can find.
Finally, you are discounting the benefits of a turbine engine, including Far better Torque at low RPMs, which is necessary for a tank, and a far smaller size and weight for the same power engine.
I don't really want to bust the balls of a wonderfull design that Leo 2A6 is but I for one am not so impressed. The interior still look quite spartan and old-days. Take a look at my favourite, the French Leclerc! On paper at least it overtakes the Leo in most respects, not to mention the Abrams or Challenger2! Both the Abrams, Chally and Leo are fine, but they are too heavy with a power/weight ratio inferior to the Leclerc. Technology wise, Leclerc outclasses them all!
@GingerbreadMan1994 ll how the leopard 2 is faster and is better protected, and has a better gun then the challenger, but the challenger is still pretty good.
@Freepepsi42 the challenger 2 ha a 120mm rifeld gun, which a very small amount of energy escapes through, but the rifling makes it much better a long range and accuracy, that makes the fierpower much superios to the leopard 2 smoothbore gun. the leopard has the best overall mobility, however the challenger is faster off road than the leopard. the leopard 2a6 has lost a driver from an IED, the challenger has not lost any crewmen it has the best armer calld chobhan KM2 it is yet to be destroyes.
The decision had nothing to do with the performance of the tank, but rather the logistic line. Canada already had the training, experience and tools to work on German tanks from the Leo1, it is much cheaper and easier to get the Leo2, than the abrams.
If the Canadians had the high tech kit that the Americans do, Their army would be more powerful hands down. They are already better trained and more disciplined, despite their smaller numbers. Canadians love the German Leopard and we are proud to use it as our MBT. The reason we buy German Leopards as opposed to American Abrams is simply because Leopard Tanks are a more deadly platform. Not to mention cost effective...for instance, the Abrams takes Jet Fuel...$400 of it just to start the engine
1. There is no evidence showing Canadians are more disciplined or better trained.
2. Canadian military's small size severely limit it's strength. One american division can roll right over us.
3. Leos according to think tanks are a bit worse than the Abrams in terms of network centric equipment, targetting equipment, ammunition, and frontal aspect armor. We bought it because we are used to German tanks. Switching a different country would be very costly.
Well, its common knowledge these days that commonwealth country has better disciplined soldiers.
Canada will never be invaded by the USA, so the second point is invalid.
Leopards and M1 Abrams were developed on the same program. The two are extremely similar, and its been said many times that the Leopard 2 is the best tank in the world today, because multiple country use it and, just like the Abrams, it has proven itself in combat well.
1. Common misconception. They are more or less equal, and cannot be distinguished apart.
2. Yes, USA will never invade Canada, but that doesn't invalidate the fact that there is simply no way in hell can we withstand even a small strike force from the US.
1. Their Skill and Discipline cannot be distinguished. Pit them against each other in a mock battle, and on average, they will come out with roughly the same outcome.
1. But they look different. :) Gotchya there smarty pants
2. Because Canada ftw man. <3 for North. Not saying we would stand much of a chance, the US has an insane budget for their army, navy and air force, so of course they could take Canada on. But they wont. Ever. EVA EVA EVA EVA.
@m1up Beliserius1 is just a brainwashed-gamer. America is only powerful as he "paints out" in video games. America could only defeat the Japanese after they were down,and the Iraqis already had their WMD's taken away. America needs 32+ countries to fight the Taliban,and aren't progressing much,against an inferior foe. Quality over quantity:The average Canadian Soldier is at US Special Forces Standards,according to the U.S,the US Army allows too many fatasses,and-
even that the use-channel of 25millimeter is closed, i've to say some words.
i have lots of points to criticise on america too, but what 25millimeter says is not true. the usa don't have the need of 32+ other countries. they can do it alone if the want. the strenght of their army is not the problem. his words are so far from reality...puh.
the story began with 9/11 and the UN-resolution 1368 which said in short words. america has the right to defend itself...
And so it invaded a country that had nothing at all to do with 9/11 for economic reasons, and then level a country they helped destabilize and destroy in the 1980s in the first place against a guy that was their former CIA agent...you couldn't make it up. Maybe those fucking morons should have employed .. oh I don't know....some AIRPORT SECURITY?!!!!
Invasion of Iraq was for economic reasons. Invasion of Afghanistan was due to geopolitical infighting of india and pakistan where the ISI was helping fund/run the Taliban which supported Al Qaeda. Not to mention the millions of tons of Lithium ore that was "suddenly discovered" recently, not to mention a large gold deposit and the posibility of building a large gas pipeline from the 'stans which are rich in gas into pakistan/india and reap money of it, as well as economically
@rantanplan178 weakening the position of China by making it compete for the gas not against a single other competitor (Gazprom which wants to sell the gas to Europe) but against three, (gazprom, pakinstan and india) as well as possibly bringing the gas to the far east market of Japan by transhipment from Pakistan.
Withstand the Soviet Union? Are you INSANE? They did the equivalent of funding a terrorist extremist local religious group against a socialist government that was elected by popular vote intially and led an insurection that toppled the government. Sort of what the Viet Minh/Viet Cong did to South Vietnam in the 1960s/1970s
phew....you should get over the propaganda of your communist history or the KSCM in your country. there was no election in the late 1970's. the daoud regime has been overthrown by a communist revolution and not with an election. Muhammad Taraki -member of the revolution- has been made president then. he died only 5 months later officially after a disease but it's generally accepted that he's been killed by an order of Hafizullah Amin, who was one of Taraki's comrades ...
The power overthrow of the Afghani king in 1973 was a power struggle; there was a local tribal meeting afterwards (the nearest thing to democracy in Afghanistan, which is a tribal election; not general popular elections used in the western world) in which the majority of the important clans agreed; then several power struggles ensued.
There were modern(by western standards!) politicians that were of a socialist cut, who wanted to modernize Afghanistan. They utilized the interest
of the Soviet union in its near-border area to help them develop afghanistan; the SU then poured a large amount of foreign aid into Afghanistan and started to meddle in Afghani politics post 1974. There were schooling programs, and local medical facilities set up under a foreign help program of the SU. Sort of what the NATO program is now trying to replicate with the PRT teams. The increased involvement of the SU was of course a "bad sign" for the US, which considers the entire
their playground and is a paranoid power-hegemon that tries anything it can to destroy the ability of any other power to exert foreign policy. As such, the second world superpower of the SU was a significant fear and therefore making the SU lose anywhere was an overriding US objective. So they started to fund religious fundamentalist psychotics like Al-qaeda and the taliban, for which one of the first actions was the extermination of an unarmed foreign assitance team of a soviet
medical team that started a clinic and school, and had only two trucks filled with medical supplies, and three armed guards armed with AKs. They proceeded to ambush the convoy, kill the guards and then behead the unarmed and defenseless medical team. You know, like that US contractor that got his head cut off in Iraq.
And so it invaded a country that had nothing at all to do with 9/11 for economic reasons, and then level a country they helped destabilize and destroy in the 1980s in the first place against a guy that was their former CIA agent...you couldn't make it up. Maybe those fucking morons should have employed .. oh I don't know....some AIRPORT SECURITY?!!!!
hey, i actually don't have a clue about what the heck you're talking about. you are replying on the first part of a two parted comment. i don't know if you have read the second part, it seems you've not. i've just made a statement about america's strenght or power and their ability to do this job alone. i haven't said anything about the reasons of this war nor if they're right or wrong. besides from that, the usa did'nt destabilize afghanistan in the 80's....
@25Milimeter ...i don't want to repeat all the steps that follows. the whole thing lasts in the ISAF-Mission under control of the UN and led by the united states. you can like it or hate it but that is fact.
in very short words you could say that america doesn't want to be called "world police" or ignorant further more. so they "invited" the world to be a part of their war on terror.
whatever you think about america or their army. fact is, america has the power to do it alone.
@m1up -and the Marines aren't as well equipped as we are,and the Abrams tank is highly flawed,and isn't doing well in Afghanistan,and the terrain is worser for it than Iraq as well. Also,according to Obama:"The U.S fifth gen fighter aircraft was a stupid idea,and is now officially dead". Not only America relies on Canada for many things,but if they cannot take the Taliban on their own,who'd think they can take us?
Abrams tank is a good tank, but has flaws. America is having success on the battlefield in Afghanistan, but not so much success with getting the people on the coalition side. Massive army < peoples hearts.
I think the choice to appoint an American commander (back in 07 or whenever) was a very poor decision, because casualties rose very high while he was in command, and little was done to get the people on the coalition side, unlike previous commanders who wanted peace.
@Beliserius1 Proof the American armor is shit: watch BlackTailDefense on youtube.
It is a fact that Canadian soldiers train as long as U.S Marines,and have a better quality boot camp. The Average Canadian infantry soldier trains like a US SF member,with equal CFT & equal weapons qual. There you go.
@Beliserius1 Actually take a look at what they do,the internet is your best friend. CF soldiers train like Marines for 13 weeks,and then BSQ for 20 weeks where they train in recon,all types of weapons,more CFT tests etc. They are equal in some things that the US SF does,and the Abrams is a terrible tank when compared to others,just watch BlackTailDefense's videos.
@Kurzb3 Germany loaned the Canadian Forces 20 of their Leopard 2 tanks to use while the Leopard 2s being purchased from Germany and the Netherlands are prepared and modified to better meet Canadian Forces needs. The Leopard 2s are badass tanks and I'm glad that our guys are getting them. The Leopard 1s, while heavily upgraded were showing their age.
@mattmatt115 yes for sure - it makes me angry to see Canadian and Danish troops in Afghanistan driving with the best tank weapon system in the world - the Leopard 2, and the silly german government says we need no tanks in Afghanistan. Our soldiers die in bombing attacks cause they drive in low armored vehicles. If they would sit in a Leopard2 they would have more chance to survive - and the Leo would be a successful scare campaign by the way...
@mattmatt115 yes for sure - it makes me angry to see Canadian and Danish troops in Afghanistan driving with the best tank weapon system in the world - the Leopard 2, and the silly german government says we need no tanks in Afghanistan. Our soldiers die in bombing attacks cause they drive in low armored vehicles. If they would sit in a Leopard2 they would have more chance to survive - and the Leo would be a successful scare campaign by the way...
@lezbian90 no actually there is a hunter killer sight that the commander looks in and it turns 360 degrees, this is a nice piece of kit, I was part a tank crew in Afghanistan.
@digoutursoul1980 Well the Leo2A6MCAN's were borrowed from Germany for a while then bought as 2nd hand with A4's. The M1A2 is a good tank, however Leo2A6M is better, higher mobility, bigger gun and better all round protection. Plus its easier to swap crews (train them) over from the Leo1 as similar systems in comparison to training on an Abrams :-)
i saw a broadcasting about m1 a2 tank. and m1 was represented as the best tank in the world. in mobility,firepower,protection and so on. i´m very suprised that our leo can be compared to m1 and that leo is even better than m1.Oo
@TankNutDave Not to nitpick but the guns on the Leo2A6M and the M1A2 are the same size (120mm smoothbore), but the Leo has the longer barrel (55calibres vs. 44) giving it higher velocity.
@TankNutDave You said the gun on the Leo2A6M is bigger than the one on the M1A2. It is not bigger, it is longer. They are both 120mm, but the Leo2A6Ms' gun is 55 calibres vs 44 on the Abrams.
It's sad to see, how my army "loses" it's tanks to the Canadians.. it's not from a company, it's directly given to them by our government, because everyone wants the army to save money, but also fight in afghanistan... without tanks, without attack helicopters... even without sufficient infantry equipment.. in THAT case: thanks, america, for supporting our troops with helicopters. america supports them more, than our own government does.
We Germans lost so many Soldiers in Afghan so I really dont know why we dont send some of these Leo2A6 down there. We got good tanks, but they are standing in a garage...
@NeoJD that's simple my friend. We russians send many tanks to adgan during intervention 79-89 and they were useless. In afgan you need good close air suport, some light art and many,many infantry units. Btw - you (NATO) will never win this war. So didn't we in 89.
@homosovietus it is impossible to win against scum that hides behind innocent women and children. the canadians go into an area, kill the taliban, build a school, move on. the taliban come back, and blow up the school, and hide behind the women and children
@TheRamthor13 Yes I know that. But we can do nothing. We did same things like you during 79-89 intervention. Besides fight with talibans (at that time supported by USA !)we also were building power plants in afgan,schools, factories - for afgan people. And look at this now - what happend? I my opinion people of northern culture (western and eastern Eu,USA,Canada)should stay at home and do nothing. you can't win with islam.Look at history,at medieval crusades.
@TheRamthor13 And 1 more thing. Why before WWI there was no problem with islamic terrorism in europe or in USA ? Because there was no american imperialism which supports israel. Israel with american support is like bug, like cancer in that aera. Israel is responsible for all wars in middle east since 1948 !
@homosovietus more often than not, israel has been attacked, granted that cutting palestine in half was a dumb idea. and while it's true, Canada in afghanistan is basicaly because the US asked us to. we hide behind the world's superpower, because our left wing government neglected our army for so long. in WWII, our air force and Navy were BIGGER than the US, and then we have left wing assholes ruin it, and close our aviation manufacturer, Avro, and now we hide behind the US
@vancouverbman IMHO NATO should be a DEFENCE alliance, meaning allied nations should only be allowed to deploy their forces into member countries to help fend off an invasion and NEVER to help invade!
@Hairysteed I agree our troops shouldn't be invading any country except to defend the interest of Canadian citizens.....we have no business in Afghanistan...especially to prop up a corrupt government of someone like Hamid Kasai....I find it ironic that we boycotted the Olympics in Russia when they did it yet no one seems to protest this action when we do it.
@vancouverbman Wake up! The fact that Canada is there should show that it is a worth while cause. Canada does not go to war lightly. So when we do its that important.
@MegaWolfgang bullshit....it was an attack on america...because they are always meddling in middle east politics...not to mention killing the people who live in the middle east
@vancouverbman Bull shit. those buildings were named the 'World Trade Center' for a reason. They weren't called the United States Trade centre. If one of those planes had ramed the UN Building which is also in New York, you would probably call that an attack on America only to??
@vancouverbman They consider all of us infidels. We ether have to brought into the reality of Ala, and if not we need to be distroyed. They still live with a mentality that we left behind after the crusades. wake up! Good thing the Americans didn't think like you 60 years ago or we would all be speeking German now.
@vancouverbman lets cut the crap. when we didn't go to iraq, the US magically found mad cow, stopped importing beef, and wood, and we lost several thousand jobs. NATO went because the Us convinced them to.
@TheRamthor13 We, the Russians made this mistake. So please, don't try to imitate us. It costs a lot of money and...human life :( But I must say that you are right. Talibans are cowards and their fight tactis show this very clear.
Best protection you still get from the British Challenger, however, it for sure is an excellent piece of equipment, and not as gas-gulping like the US tanks.
look the canadian guy he is so happy to drive a German Tank ...We german makes the best weapons you can say what do you want ..but canadian army buy German tanks not American tanks ...
@Vegatus1984 yes i must agree germany allways builded the best weapons and all other things. if germany woudnt be seperated during cold war we woud be like 20 years advance.
The decision had nothing to do with the performance of the tank, but rather the logistic line. Canada already had the training, experience and tools to work on German tanks from the Leo1, it is much cheaper and easier to get the Leo2, than the abrams.
@Vegatus1984 Absolutely. Those Leopard 2s are badass! Canadian Forces were the first to use them in Combat (Afghanistan) and they have performed incredibly well. They've been hit with mines and IEDs and kept on fighting.
@Vegatus1984 Hey pal, the reason we need tanks is because the germans can't stay within their borders, twice. The Leopard has never been tested..........As I recall much of gernany's equipment had a hard time in the snow a few years back.
@ExtremelyFlamable100 Although you seem to be a little informed, you are aware the Israeli's have a tank called the Merkavi. And I think if you do your research this tank has seen some "real" action.
Just thought you would like to know....................
@reece45 btw what do you mean with the germans can´t stay inside their borders? a lot of countrys are using the Leo 2 and I guess their will be a few good reasons why the Canadians chose to buy it and not the Merkavi (which is probably a good tank too)
@Vegatus1984 yea we know the germans make equipment. They had to clean up all that german garbage from the russian front, the desert, europe, etc, etc.........
As long as it don't snow or get hot german equipment is great.
@reece45 not true...I was in the Australian army and used Leopard 1 MBT's. We had extreme heat there...probably worse than anything you will ever see. The Leopards never overheated, nor did they have any heat related problems. The only area where they were lacking was crew comfort in the heat...no A/C, but you have to expect that with tanks, or at least the older ones. The Leopard 2's are light years ahead of the old Leopard 1's, but still maintain the reliable systems.
Well its definitely different from the Leopard II I fired, they changed the exhaust to go out the back like the Abrams but it has all kind of new stuff and now its without a doubt the best tank in the world!!
The guy from the royal canadian dragoons make me laugh by promoting this tank as the best in the world, he sounds like a car dealer:P And when I'm saying this I don't want to start a penis long wannebe discussion about wich tank is the best in the world.
Your welcome :-) I think they were just well happy to get the tank as they had been using the Leo1 AKA C1 & C2 since 1978 lol and only bought the Leo2 whilst in Afgan as the plan before was to simply use LAV's.
We'd been using the C2 since 2000 and the ones you see in the video are with a heavy uparmouring kit. They're hot, slow, and undergunned. You're fucking right we're happy to get the leopard 2.
agree with the hype up but also figure in that we FINALLY have some modern kit capable of operations anywhere as well as a shot at defeating any armour it faced. A tank is as good as its crew and when you have a switched on crew like this it can only translate to effective armour in combat. hoorah
The angles dont deflect KE, the angle simply defelects shots. The frontal armour they are talking about is the MEXAS passive armour which is the angled box. Passive armour is a type of styrofoam containing hardened beads, so when a copper jet from an ATM/HEAT trys to pass through them, the beads deflect the jets path stringing it out till it looses shape and breaks up. Behind that is the old laminate tungsten armour they added on the A4.
Made in Germany,the best.
libertatis1 3 months ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
@52111centrumcz
... so, they withstand the soviet union. there is nothing insane in that statement.
last but not least. the invasion of afghanistan had nothing in common with the problems between india and pakistan. it was just a reaction on 9/11. man, what's up with you? yes, pakistan has helped the taliban and they still do, secretly. Even so, this was NOT the reason for the war.
rantanplan178 5 months ago
@52111centrumcz
... so, they withstand the soviet union. there is nothing insane in that statement.
last but not least. the invasion of afghanistan had nothing in common with the problems between india and pakistan. it was just a reaction on 9/11. man, what's up with you? yes, pakistan has helped the taliban and they still do, secretly. Even so, this was NOT the reason for the war.
rantanplan178 5 months ago
@52111centrumcz
...The afghan people didn't want to live in communism and so they started their own revolution against the DVPA which was the communist party at the time. Finally, this was the reason for the soviet union to invade afghanistan and to build a land according to the soviet's. At this time we called the people of this revolution "freedom fighters", nowadays we call them "terrorists". It's just a point of view if you are one of the first or the second kind, mainly. ...
rantanplan178 5 months ago
@52111centrumcz
...The afghan people didn't want to live in communism and so they started their own revolution against the DVPA which was the communist party at the time. Finally, this was the reason for the soviet union to invade afghanistan and to build a land according to the soviet's. At this time we called the people of this revolution "freedom fighters", nowadays we call them "terrorists". It's just a point of view if you are one of the first or the second kind, mainly. ...
rantanplan178 5 months ago
german engineering.
schablone35 6 months ago
wow
elimperialista51 7 months ago
Leopard 2A7+ with A/C and a Great Sound System Playing Rammstein (Feuer Frei) would be My Choice of Ride! P.S The Taliban might not understand the music but they understand the Beast that's playing it!! :-)
nordhorncon 8 months ago
@Escensionify
First off, there are no heat seeking ATGMs
Secondly, the gas guzzling is offset by a potent logistic line, and the ability to utilize just about any flamable liquid you can find.
Finally, you are discounting the benefits of a turbine engine, including Far better Torque at low RPMs, which is necessary for a tank, and a far smaller size and weight for the same power engine.
Beliserius1 8 months ago
@Beliserius 1.) Leopard 2 A6 2.)Challenger 2 3.)M1A2 Abrams Period.
MrMegacurie 7 months ago
@MrMegacurie
Ooh, are we gonna play the state the claim but not back it up game?
I think I can play too!
1.) M1A2 2)Chally 2 3)Leo A6
:D
Well that was fun, how about you start backing your statement with some facts?
Beliserius1 4 months ago
I don't really want to bust the balls of a wonderfull design that Leo 2A6 is but I for one am not so impressed. The interior still look quite spartan and old-days. Take a look at my favourite, the French Leclerc! On paper at least it overtakes the Leo in most respects, not to mention the Abrams or Challenger2! Both the Abrams, Chally and Leo are fine, but they are too heavy with a power/weight ratio inferior to the Leclerc. Technology wise, Leclerc outclasses them all!
feriekonto 8 months ago
This tank gives me a hard-on. As much as I love the M1A2, I have to admit this is my favorite. lol.
biped19 9 months ago
this is boolshit. the CH2 is the best.
GingerbreadMan1994 10 months ago
@GingerbreadMan1994 ll how the leopard 2 is faster and is better protected, and has a better gun then the challenger, but the challenger is still pretty good.
Freepepsi42 8 months ago
@Freepepsi42 the challenger 2 ha a 120mm rifeld gun, which a very small amount of energy escapes through, but the rifling makes it much better a long range and accuracy, that makes the fierpower much superios to the leopard 2 smoothbore gun. the leopard has the best overall mobility, however the challenger is faster off road than the leopard. the leopard 2a6 has lost a driver from an IED, the challenger has not lost any crewmen it has the best armer calld chobhan KM2 it is yet to be destroyes.
GingerbreadMan1994 8 months ago
@GingerbreadMan1994 Leopard 2a6 has never lost a crewman - it was a danish leopard 2a5
MrMegacurie 7 months ago
70 km/h cross country? hehe yeah right. In real combat conditions NO-ONE drives that fast because you don't know what you're getting into.
gosciu555 1 year ago
@Vegatus1984
The decision had nothing to do with the performance of the tank, but rather the logistic line. Canada already had the training, experience and tools to work on German tanks from the Leo1, it is much cheaper and easier to get the Leo2, than the abrams.
Beliserius1 1 year ago
thank you for uploading, Love the clear way of explaning the beast
hardcoremedic 1 year ago
If the Canadians had the high tech kit that the Americans do, Their army would be more powerful hands down. They are already better trained and more disciplined, despite their smaller numbers. Canadians love the German Leopard and we are proud to use it as our MBT. The reason we buy German Leopards as opposed to American Abrams is simply because Leopard Tanks are a more deadly platform. Not to mention cost effective...for instance, the Abrams takes Jet Fuel...$400 of it just to start the engine
kennedy9888 1 year ago
@kennedy9888
1. There is no evidence showing Canadians are more disciplined or better trained.
2. Canadian military's small size severely limit it's strength. One american division can roll right over us.
3. Leos according to think tanks are a bit worse than the Abrams in terms of network centric equipment, targetting equipment, ammunition, and frontal aspect armor. We bought it because we are used to German tanks. Switching a different country would be very costly.
Beliserius1 1 year ago
@Beliserius1 Please, throw you're computer out a window.
challywang 1 year ago
@Beliserius1
Well, its common knowledge these days that commonwealth country has better disciplined soldiers.
Canada will never be invaded by the USA, so the second point is invalid.
Leopards and M1 Abrams were developed on the same program. The two are extremely similar, and its been said many times that the Leopard 2 is the best tank in the world today, because multiple country use it and, just like the Abrams, it has proven itself in combat well.
m1up 1 year ago
@m1up
1. Common misconception. They are more or less equal, and cannot be distinguished apart.
2. Yes, USA will never invade Canada, but that doesn't invalidate the fact that there is simply no way in hell can we withstand even a small strike force from the US.
Beliserius1 1 year ago
@Beliserius1
1. What do you mean they cannot be distinguished? Just look at them -_- PHAIL!
2. How do you know?
m1up 1 year ago
@m1up
1. Their Skill and Discipline cannot be distinguished. Pit them against each other in a mock battle, and on average, they will come out with roughly the same outcome.
2. Compare the two.
Beliserius1 1 year ago
@Beliserius1
1. But they look different. :) Gotchya there smarty pants
2. Because Canada ftw man. <3 for North. Not saying we would stand much of a chance, the US has an insane budget for their army, navy and air force, so of course they could take Canada on. But they wont. Ever. EVA EVA EVA EVA.
m1up 1 year ago
@m1up
Oh w/e, I can see you are not being serious.
Beliserius1 1 year ago
@Beliserius1
Why would I be? Youtube arguments are pointless.
m1up 1 year ago
@m1up They'll die out,without our oil xD
25Milimeter 11 months ago
@25Milimeter
Yeppers :D
m1up 11 months ago
@m1up Beliserius1 is just a brainwashed-gamer. America is only powerful as he "paints out" in video games. America could only defeat the Japanese after they were down,and the Iraqis already had their WMD's taken away. America needs 32+ countries to fight the Taliban,and aren't progressing much,against an inferior foe. Quality over quantity:The average Canadian Soldier is at US Special Forces Standards,according to the U.S,the US Army allows too many fatasses,and-
25Milimeter 11 months ago 8
@25Milimeter
even that the use-channel of 25millimeter is closed, i've to say some words.
i have lots of points to criticise on america too, but what 25millimeter says is not true. the usa don't have the need of 32+ other countries. they can do it alone if the want. the strenght of their army is not the problem. his words are so far from reality...puh.
the story began with 9/11 and the UN-resolution 1368 which said in short words. america has the right to defend itself...
rantanplan178 6 months ago
@rantanplan178
And so it invaded a country that had nothing at all to do with 9/11 for economic reasons, and then level a country they helped destabilize and destroy in the 1980s in the first place against a guy that was their former CIA agent...you couldn't make it up. Maybe those fucking morons should have employed .. oh I don't know....some AIRPORT SECURITY?!!!!
52111centrumcz 5 months ago
@52111centrumcz .... in contrary they helped them to withstand the soviet union. btw what are economic reasons?
rantanplan178 5 months ago
@rantanplan178
Invasion of Iraq was for economic reasons. Invasion of Afghanistan was due to geopolitical infighting of india and pakistan where the ISI was helping fund/run the Taliban which supported Al Qaeda. Not to mention the millions of tons of Lithium ore that was "suddenly discovered" recently, not to mention a large gold deposit and the posibility of building a large gas pipeline from the 'stans which are rich in gas into pakistan/india and reap money of it, as well as economically
52111centrumcz 5 months ago
@rantanplan178 weakening the position of China by making it compete for the gas not against a single other competitor (Gazprom which wants to sell the gas to Europe) but against three, (gazprom, pakinstan and india) as well as possibly bringing the gas to the far east market of Japan by transhipment from Pakistan.
52111centrumcz 5 months ago
@rantanplan178
Withstand the Soviet Union? Are you INSANE? They did the equivalent of funding a terrorist extremist local religious group against a socialist government that was elected by popular vote intially and led an insurection that toppled the government. Sort of what the Viet Minh/Viet Cong did to South Vietnam in the 1960s/1970s
52111centrumcz 5 months ago
Comment removed
rantanplan178 5 months ago
@52111centrumcz
phew....you should get over the propaganda of your communist history or the KSCM in your country. there was no election in the late 1970's. the daoud regime has been overthrown by a communist revolution and not with an election. Muhammad Taraki -member of the revolution- has been made president then. he died only 5 months later officially after a disease but it's generally accepted that he's been killed by an order of Hafizullah Amin, who was one of Taraki's comrades ...
rantanplan178 5 months ago
@rantanplan178
The power overthrow of the Afghani king in 1973 was a power struggle; there was a local tribal meeting afterwards (the nearest thing to democracy in Afghanistan, which is a tribal election; not general popular elections used in the western world) in which the majority of the important clans agreed; then several power struggles ensued.
There were modern(by western standards!) politicians that were of a socialist cut, who wanted to modernize Afghanistan. They utilized the interest
52111centrumcz 5 months ago
@rantanplan178
of the Soviet union in its near-border area to help them develop afghanistan; the SU then poured a large amount of foreign aid into Afghanistan and started to meddle in Afghani politics post 1974. There were schooling programs, and local medical facilities set up under a foreign help program of the SU. Sort of what the NATO program is now trying to replicate with the PRT teams. The increased involvement of the SU was of course a "bad sign" for the US, which considers the entire
52111centrumcz 5 months ago
@rantanplan178
their playground and is a paranoid power-hegemon that tries anything it can to destroy the ability of any other power to exert foreign policy. As such, the second world superpower of the SU was a significant fear and therefore making the SU lose anywhere was an overriding US objective. So they started to fund religious fundamentalist psychotics like Al-qaeda and the taliban, for which one of the first actions was the extermination of an unarmed foreign assitance team of a soviet
52111centrumcz 5 months ago
@rantanplan178
medical team that started a clinic and school, and had only two trucks filled with medical supplies, and three armed guards armed with AKs. They proceeded to ambush the convoy, kill the guards and then behead the unarmed and defenseless medical team. You know, like that US contractor that got his head cut off in Iraq.
52111centrumcz 5 months ago
@52111centrumcz
sorry for replying late. your crappy answer was so nonsense that i felt asleep immediatly and didn't woke up till yesterday.
rantanplan178 4 months ago
@rantanplan178
And so it invaded a country that had nothing at all to do with 9/11 for economic reasons, and then level a country they helped destabilize and destroy in the 1980s in the first place against a guy that was their former CIA agent...you couldn't make it up. Maybe those fucking morons should have employed .. oh I don't know....some AIRPORT SECURITY?!!!!
52111centrumcz 5 months ago
@52111centrumcz
hey, i actually don't have a clue about what the heck you're talking about. you are replying on the first part of a two parted comment. i don't know if you have read the second part, it seems you've not. i've just made a statement about america's strenght or power and their ability to do this job alone. i haven't said anything about the reasons of this war nor if they're right or wrong. besides from that, the usa did'nt destabilize afghanistan in the 80's....
rantanplan178 5 months ago
@25Milimeter ...i don't want to repeat all the steps that follows. the whole thing lasts in the ISAF-Mission under control of the UN and led by the united states. you can like it or hate it but that is fact.
in very short words you could say that america doesn't want to be called "world police" or ignorant further more. so they "invited" the world to be a part of their war on terror.
whatever you think about america or their army. fact is, america has the power to do it alone.
rantanplan178 6 months ago
@m1up -and the Marines aren't as well equipped as we are,and the Abrams tank is highly flawed,and isn't doing well in Afghanistan,and the terrain is worser for it than Iraq as well. Also,according to Obama:"The U.S fifth gen fighter aircraft was a stupid idea,and is now officially dead". Not only America relies on Canada for many things,but if they cannot take the Taliban on their own,who'd think they can take us?
25Milimeter 11 months ago 3
@25Milimeter
Abrams tank is a good tank, but has flaws. America is having success on the battlefield in Afghanistan, but not so much success with getting the people on the coalition side. Massive army < peoples hearts.
I think the choice to appoint an American commander (back in 07 or whenever) was a very poor decision, because casualties rose very high while he was in command, and little was done to get the people on the coalition side, unlike previous commanders who wanted peace.
m1up 11 months ago
@Beliserius1 Proof the American armor is shit: watch BlackTailDefense on youtube.
It is a fact that Canadian soldiers train as long as U.S Marines,and have a better quality boot camp. The Average Canadian infantry soldier trains like a US SF member,with equal CFT & equal weapons qual. There you go.
25Milimeter 1 year ago
@25Milimeter
If you want to rank Armor on tanks, most defense experts will go the line of Challenger 2 > Abrams > Leopard.
Claiming the average grunt in the Canadian Army trains like a US SF is utterly ridiculous.
Beliserius1 1 year ago
@Beliserius1 Actually take a look at what they do,the internet is your best friend. CF soldiers train like Marines for 13 weeks,and then BSQ for 20 weeks where they train in recon,all types of weapons,more CFT tests etc. They are equal in some things that the US SF does,and the Abrams is a terrible tank when compared to others,just watch BlackTailDefense's videos.
25Milimeter 1 year ago
@25Milimeter
Pal, your time lengths are wrong.
For infantry, its 17-20 weeks in total of training.
The number of weeks you are in school does not put you into "SF" status or "Marines".
Blacktail's videos are highly biased and misses several important factors.
Any defense analyst will tell you the Abrams is either the best or after the Challenger.
I can give you a full comparison between the 3 if you'd like or willing to listen, but saying leopard is simply wrong.
Beliserius1 11 months ago
nice the canadians drive with our Bundeswehr license plate number
Kurzb3 1 year ago
@Kurzb3 they are practising on German tanks in Germany
TankNutDave 1 year ago 10
@Kurzb3 Germany loaned the Canadian Forces 20 of their Leopard 2 tanks to use while the Leopard 2s being purchased from Germany and the Netherlands are prepared and modified to better meet Canadian Forces needs. The Leopard 2s are badass tanks and I'm glad that our guys are getting them. The Leopard 1s, while heavily upgraded were showing their age.
webstermr 1 year ago
@Kurzb3 Im sure you envy our Leopard 2A4MCAN
mattmatt115 5 months ago
@mattmatt115 yes for sure - it makes me angry to see Canadian and Danish troops in Afghanistan driving with the best tank weapon system in the world - the Leopard 2, and the silly german government says we need no tanks in Afghanistan. Our soldiers die in bombing attacks cause they drive in low armored vehicles. If they would sit in a Leopard2 they would have more chance to survive - and the Leo would be a successful scare campaign by the way...
Kurzb3 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mattmatt115 yes for sure - it makes me angry to see Canadian and Danish troops in Afghanistan driving with the best tank weapon system in the world - the Leopard 2, and the silly german government says we need no tanks in Afghanistan. Our soldiers die in bombing attacks cause they drive in low armored vehicles. If they would sit in a Leopard2 they would have more chance to survive - and the Leo would be a successful scare campaign by the way...
Kurzb3 5 months ago
according to many defence industry sites this is the best protected tank on the planet
marks95911 1 year ago
It just seems wierd to have a dragoon talking to me about tanks, know his stuff though....awesome tank.
dhmancam 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm Canadian and I'm proud that our army uses the German Leopard tanks. They are superior to any comparable military hardware! Good job!
lawndog214 1 year ago
I'm c\Canadian and I'm proud that our army uses the German Leopard tanks. They are superior to any comparable military hardware! Good job!
lawndog214 1 year ago
Well the guy at 3:22, shore has the right to say supreme confidence.
SwissLeo1 1 year ago
Good Job WO
CplJack1 1 year ago
does commander's seat rotate 360 degree cause you know there is no eye from your back.
lezbian90 1 year ago
@lezbian90 no actually there is a hunter killer sight that the commander looks in and it turns 360 degrees, this is a nice piece of kit, I was part a tank crew in Afghanistan.
CplJack1 1 year ago
@21891crucifer666 Deutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt,
Wenn es stets zu Schutz und Trutze
Brüderlich zusammenhält.
Von der Maas bis an die Memel,
Von der Etsch bis an den Belt, [ Deutschland, Deutschland über alles, Über alles in der Welt! ]
zyklonb1488SS 1 year ago
@zyklonb1488SS interesting, I am studying psychology and it's amazing to see that even Nazis have the ability to copy and paste from the internet.
21891crucifer666 1 year ago
@21891crucifer666 ..essen scheiße juden
zyklonb1488SS 1 year ago
german licens on it ;) hehe ..
kcopy 1 year ago
@kcopy This is a great tank, germans make the best tanks in the world!
CplJack1 1 year ago
Deutsches Metall
zyklonb1488SS 1 year ago
@zyklonb1488SS wenn dann richtig/ say it correct: Deutscher Stahl! ;)
kcopy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@kcopy halt die schnauze schweinhund
zyklonb1488SS 1 year ago
@kcopy halt die schnauze schweinhund
zyklonb1488SS 1 year ago
Comment removed
zyklonb1488SS 1 year ago
canadians buy our leopard 2 tanks?..lol..why not the m1 a2 abrams?.
digoutursoul1980 1 year ago
@digoutursoul1980 Well the Leo2A6MCAN's were borrowed from Germany for a while then bought as 2nd hand with A4's. The M1A2 is a good tank, however Leo2A6M is better, higher mobility, bigger gun and better all round protection. Plus its easier to swap crews (train them) over from the Leo1 as similar systems in comparison to training on an Abrams :-)
TankNutDave 1 year ago
@TankNutDave
i saw a broadcasting about m1 a2 tank. and m1 was represented as the best tank in the world. in mobility,firepower,protection and so on. i´m very suprised that our leo can be compared to m1 and that leo is even better than m1.Oo
digoutursoul1980 1 year ago
@TankNutDave Not to nitpick but the guns on the Leo2A6M and the M1A2 are the same size (120mm smoothbore), but the Leo has the longer barrel (55calibres vs. 44) giving it higher velocity.
cf80to01 1 year ago
@cf80to01 ????
TankNutDave 1 year ago
@TankNutDave You said the gun on the Leo2A6M is bigger than the one on the M1A2. It is not bigger, it is longer. They are both 120mm, but the Leo2A6Ms' gun is 55 calibres vs 44 on the Abrams.
cf80to01 1 year ago
@cf80to01 if its longer of course its bigger and Im fully aware the differences between the calibre Lengths, ive writtern about it lol
TankNutDave 1 year ago
@TankNutDave more barrel length for the round to accelerate during the charge's combustion
Hairysteed 1 year ago
@Hairysteed yer I already know that, your trying to teach an old dog new tricks lol go to my site mate and you will see what I mean :-)
TankNutDave 1 year ago
It's sad to see, how my army "loses" it's tanks to the Canadians.. it's not from a company, it's directly given to them by our government, because everyone wants the army to save money, but also fight in afghanistan... without tanks, without attack helicopters... even without sufficient infantry equipment.. in THAT case: thanks, america, for supporting our troops with helicopters. america supports them more, than our own government does.
jallah1202 1 year ago
god bless our allies ;)
bierflasche85 1 year ago
Sounds like he was trying to sell us the tank lol
stewart113 1 year ago
We Germans lost so many Soldiers in Afghan so I really dont know why we dont send some of these Leo2A6 down there. We got good tanks, but they are standing in a garage...
NeoJD 1 year ago
@NeoJD that's simple my friend. We russians send many tanks to adgan during intervention 79-89 and they were useless. In afgan you need good close air suport, some light art and many,many infantry units. Btw - you (NATO) will never win this war. So didn't we in 89.
homosovietus 1 year ago
@homosovietus it is impossible to win against scum that hides behind innocent women and children. the canadians go into an area, kill the taliban, build a school, move on. the taliban come back, and blow up the school, and hide behind the women and children
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 Yes I know that. But we can do nothing. We did same things like you during 79-89 intervention. Besides fight with talibans (at that time supported by USA !)we also were building power plants in afgan,schools, factories - for afgan people. And look at this now - what happend? I my opinion people of northern culture (western and eastern Eu,USA,Canada)should stay at home and do nothing. you can't win with islam.Look at history,at medieval crusades.
homosovietus 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 And 1 more thing. Why before WWI there was no problem with islamic terrorism in europe or in USA ? Because there was no american imperialism which supports israel. Israel with american support is like bug, like cancer in that aera. Israel is responsible for all wars in middle east since 1948 !
homosovietus 1 year ago
@homosovietus more often than not, israel has been attacked, granted that cutting palestine in half was a dumb idea. and while it's true, Canada in afghanistan is basicaly because the US asked us to. we hide behind the world's superpower, because our left wing government neglected our army for so long. in WWII, our air force and Navy were BIGGER than the US, and then we have left wing assholes ruin it, and close our aviation manufacturer, Avro, and now we hide behind the US
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 nato asked us...not the usa...i support our troops 100% but we have no business in afganastan
vancouverbman 1 year ago
@vancouverbman IMHO NATO should be a DEFENCE alliance, meaning allied nations should only be allowed to deploy their forces into member countries to help fend off an invasion and NEVER to help invade!
Hairysteed 1 year ago
@Hairysteed I agree our troops shouldn't be invading any country except to defend the interest of Canadian citizens.....we have no business in Afghanistan...especially to prop up a corrupt government of someone like Hamid Kasai....I find it ironic that we boycotted the Olympics in Russia when they did it yet no one seems to protest this action when we do it.
vancouverbman 1 year ago
@vancouverbman Wake up! The fact that Canada is there should show that it is a worth while cause. Canada does not go to war lightly. So when we do its that important.
MegaWolfgang 1 year ago
@Hairysteed 9/11 was an attack on all the western democrocies.
MegaWolfgang 1 year ago
@MegaWolfgang Then how come not all western democracies are involved in the war in Afghanistan?
Hairysteed 1 year ago
@MegaWolfgang bullshit....it was an attack on america...because they are always meddling in middle east politics...not to mention killing the people who live in the middle east
vancouverbman 1 year ago
@vancouverbman Bull shit. those buildings were named the 'World Trade Center' for a reason. They weren't called the United States Trade centre. If one of those planes had ramed the UN Building which is also in New York, you would probably call that an attack on America only to??
MegaWolfgang 1 year ago
@MegaWolfgang they also happen to be in the usa....just like the pentagon...
vancouverbman 1 year ago
@vancouverbman Your point is????????????????
MegaWolfgang 1 year ago
@MegaWolfgang my point is that the main target was the usa...not western democracy
vancouverbman 1 year ago
@vancouverbman They consider all of us infidels. We ether have to brought into the reality of Ala, and if not we need to be distroyed. They still live with a mentality that we left behind after the crusades. wake up! Good thing the Americans didn't think like you 60 years ago or we would all be speeking German now.
MegaWolfgang 1 year ago
@vancouverbman lets cut the crap. when we didn't go to iraq, the US magically found mad cow, stopped importing beef, and wood, and we lost several thousand jobs. NATO went because the Us convinced them to.
TheRamthor13 1 year ago
@vancouverbman You are wrong. Canada can't allways fence sit.
MegaWolfgang 1 year ago
@vancouverbman actually, it was nato for afghanistan USA for iraq, we didn't go. pardon my incorrect facts and lenghty reply time.
TheRamthor13 10 months ago
@homosovietus you just nailed it.....that's the problem.
vancouverbman 1 year ago
@TheRamthor13 We, the Russians made this mistake. So please, don't try to imitate us. It costs a lot of money and...human life :( But I must say that you are right. Talibans are cowards and their fight tactis show this very clear.
homosovietus 1 year ago
@homosovietus Of cause we wont win that war, its like you said or the vietnam war. Well may we should nuke it all togther lol
NeoJD 1 year ago
Best protection you still get from the British Challenger, however, it for sure is an excellent piece of equipment, and not as gas-gulping like the US tanks.
ThatGuyFromAustria 1 year ago
Leopard is the best tank in the world.
Abrams got nothing on it.
Further arguments on this case are invalid
LeDeux11 1 year ago 16
look the canadian guy he is so happy to drive a German Tank ...We german makes the best weapons you can say what do you want ..but canadian army buy German tanks not American tanks ...
Vegatus1984 1 year ago 35
@Vegatus1984 yes i must agree germany allways builded the best weapons and all other things. if germany woudnt be seperated during cold war we woud be like 20 years advance.
SteelCrash 1 year ago
@Vegatus1984 so DID we, the Aussies! Until.....
petethebastard 1 year ago
@Vegatus1984 Canadians have good tastes. However US highly respects the Leo2, since their M1A2 uses the Rheinmetal L44 gun
shadowdancerRFW 1 year ago
@Vegatus1984 its strange too, because the Aussies have M1's. and yes the Germans make great toys
Silnius 1 year ago
@Vegatus1984 Because it's cheaper and very good tank...
Ofionnain 1 year ago
@Vegatus1984 The Leo 2 is the best all around tank after all. Even Tom Clancy says so and who's more raw raw American then him?
jucoco1 1 year ago
@jucoco1
Most military think tanks disagrees with you, but Leo is definetly amongst the top 3.
Beliserius1 1 year ago
@Vegatus1984
The decision had nothing to do with the performance of the tank, but rather the logistic line. Canada already had the training, experience and tools to work on German tanks from the Leo1, it is much cheaper and easier to get the Leo2, than the abrams.
Beliserius1 1 year ago
@Vegatus1984 Absolutely. Those Leopard 2s are badass! Canadian Forces were the first to use them in Combat (Afghanistan) and they have performed incredibly well. They've been hit with mines and IEDs and kept on fighting.
webstermr 1 year ago
@Vegatus1984 Hey pal, the reason we need tanks is because the germans can't stay within their borders, twice. The Leopard has never been tested..........As I recall much of gernany's equipment had a hard time in the snow a few years back.
reece45 1 year ago
@reece45 they were tested in the Kosovo
ExtremelyFlamable100 8 months ago
@ExtremelyFlamable100 Not against a "real" army they weren't.
reece45 8 months ago
@reece45 than no new tank was tested against a "real" army
ExtremelyFlamable100 8 months ago
@ExtremelyFlamable100 Although you seem to be a little informed, you are aware the Israeli's have a tank called the Merkavi. And I think if you do your research this tank has seen some "real" action.
Just thought you would like to know....................
reece45 8 months ago
@reece45 btw what do you mean with the germans can´t stay inside their borders? a lot of countrys are using the Leo 2 and I guess their will be a few good reasons why the Canadians chose to buy it and not the Merkavi (which is probably a good tank too)
ExtremelyFlamable100 8 months ago
@Vegatus1984 American shit is probably too expensive to outfit the Canadians with Abrams + the fact that they have gas guzzling jet engines.
phillyZeroTen 1 year ago
@phillyZeroTen the leopard is much more expansive than the abrahams
ExtremelyFlamable100 8 months ago
And now open youre Eyes we german makes a best weapons in the world ...And the most buy german weapons..or the nation kopie thats
Vegatus1984 1 year ago 4
@Vegatus1984 yea we know the germans make equipment. They had to clean up all that german garbage from the russian front, the desert, europe, etc, etc.........
As long as it don't snow or get hot german equipment is great.
reece45 8 months ago
@reece45 not true...I was in the Australian army and used Leopard 1 MBT's. We had extreme heat there...probably worse than anything you will ever see. The Leopards never overheated, nor did they have any heat related problems. The only area where they were lacking was crew comfort in the heat...no A/C, but you have to expect that with tanks, or at least the older ones. The Leopard 2's are light years ahead of the old Leopard 1's, but still maintain the reliable systems.
MrKevvie 7 months ago
@Vegatus1984 That is something to be proud of, selling weapons to the world. Typical german or is that nazi?
reece45 8 months ago
@reece45 there is way to many eyes for the NAZI'S to rise again. i dont think there dead but i do think they will never repeat WW2
SSFTC 6 months ago
Well, if that's the case, then the Leo is number one. Thanks for your comments.
billace90 1 year ago
german tanks rocks
Schifty14 2 years ago 2
Well its definitely different from the Leopard II I fired, they changed the exhaust to go out the back like the Abrams but it has all kind of new stuff and now its without a doubt the best tank in the world!!
Krylogenic 2 years ago
Ya, all the C2's in Gagetown that spend more time in the hanger then in the field. I haven't seen any leo 2's rolling around the base yet.
combatboots711 2 years ago
A fine sample of German machinery and technology. However, does anyone know how it compares to the Merkava? Thanks!
billace90 2 years ago
@billace90 faster, better gun, better systems than merkava
Cougar545x39 1 year ago
Very interesting video, thanks for posting.
The guy from the royal canadian dragoons make me laugh by promoting this tank as the best in the world, he sounds like a car dealer:P And when I'm saying this I don't want to start a penis long wannebe discussion about wich tank is the best in the world.
Flecktarn108 2 years ago 4
Your welcome :-) I think they were just well happy to get the tank as they had been using the Leo1 AKA C1 & C2 since 1978 lol and only bought the Leo2 whilst in Afgan as the plan before was to simply use LAV's.
TankNutDave 2 years ago
We'd been using the C2 since 2000 and the ones you see in the video are with a heavy uparmouring kit. They're hot, slow, and undergunned. You're fucking right we're happy to get the leopard 2.
combatboots711 2 years ago
Uh nm you don't see it in the video, thought it was a different one I had seen before. But ya, you get my point.
combatboots711 2 years ago
Well heres the best part. The RCD aren't even supposed to be getting the Leopard 2. Haha.
combatboots711 2 years ago
Yes, and they already have them. Just check the guy beret insigna's , it's the RCD coat of arms.
Flecktarn108 2 years ago
Ya probably attached to lord strats getting deployed. From what I heard they're getting all CV-90's for 2014
combatboots711 2 years ago
@combatboots711 I really hope this does not go go down the drain. We need a Tracked IFV to keep up with the tanks in combat.
russellrush101 1 year ago
God knows the Coyotes aren't seeing another 5 years.
combatboots711 1 year ago
Good choice, my penis is bigger than yours so don't start a fight
DerAusroter 2 years ago
agree with the hype up but also figure in that we FINALLY have some modern kit capable of operations anywhere as well as a shot at defeating any armour it faced. A tank is as good as its crew and when you have a switched on crew like this it can only translate to effective armour in combat. hoorah
geshtunga 2 years ago
monster germany or münster germany^^
95predator 2 years ago
Ich glaub eher Munster, Germany :D
eisregen1983 2 years ago
@eisregen1983
denke auch, unsere schönen Y- kennzeichen=P
LeChar1989 2 years ago
yea
saskpeg 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you do know this is canadian tank right?
saskpeg 2 years ago
Well the Canadian Logo and accents kind of give it away lol
TankNutDave 2 years ago
Germans have always made good toys.
cbiwv 2 years ago 28
@cbiwv Exactly. Everywhere. Everything.
nowmyway 1 year ago
@cbiwv They just didn't play nice with them 70 years ago..............
jucoco1 1 year ago
The angles dont deflect KE, the angle simply defelects shots. The frontal armour they are talking about is the MEXAS passive armour which is the angled box. Passive armour is a type of styrofoam containing hardened beads, so when a copper jet from an ATM/HEAT trys to pass through them, the beads deflect the jets path stringing it out till it looses shape and breaks up. Behind that is the old laminate tungsten armour they added on the A4.
TankNutDave 2 years ago