forget shooting down planes, its fuckin amazing how this slow ass system can shoot down an iraqi scud traveling at 6000km/h!! and an altitude of 500000 feet!!!!!!
actually do you know what happened 2 years ago in Bahrain!?
one of the American soldiers(from the navy base) did something really stupid, he hit a Bahraini girl coz she fight with another American girl..and guess what.
Bahrainis went so angry, they hit the american so hard and make him doesn't understand if he is dead or still alive, then they drag him into his car with the american girl and they smashed the car, then they leaved him in bad way...so stfu :)
Bahrain doesn't fight, its a small island like hawai.
I never said that Bahrain fought a war, btw we doesn't have an actual army, we only have some few fags from Jordan, Pakistan and India works at something called Bahrain Defense Forces(they only work for money of course) they are just Mercenaries and Thugs to kill/beat the Bahraini people who is calling for democracy ...thats all
@Hacker92h Wow, you sure talk pretty big. The US already has a base in Kuwait, several in Iraq, 1 in the UAE, obviously many in Afghanistan, a base in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt, and so on.
Tell me, where are you from? I am guessing Iran..
Either way, Iran would be decimated if they tried to make a move against the US or the straits. That is a fact.
@Hacker92h Then why is it that the groups you support favor targeting US citizens?
Either way, do you think those soldiers/marines/airmen/sailors have a problem with you? Or are just serving their country? If you try attacking US servicemen, you are attacking America.
what groups i support? lol Im i another terrorist to your government? ohh okay then now you should attack my country cuz there is terrorists/massiv destruction weapons or what ever you called XD
@Hacker92h You didn't deny being Iranian. I know there are many good people from Iran, I have met many on my campus. But Iran supports organizations that openly kill Israeli and American civilians and noncombatants. That is a fact.
@Hacker92h Ha alright. You aren't really helping yourself. Even enemy countries of the US like North Korea shouldn't have all of their people die on any level. At least 20% of Israel's population disagree with their government.
Either way, the US did not form the Taliban or Al Qaeda. They supported the Taliban after they formed and supported separate entities before they forms Al Qaeda.
@Hacker92h Initially he received funding from them to fight the Soviets. After that, the US had nothing to do with him. But either way, Bin Laden had massive amounts of money he received from his father and eventually from banks in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and other countries.
@Hacker92h Created him? No way. He was in Afghanistan/Pakistan fighting the Soviets without US aid for years. Then the US gave him minor funding. Absolutely not enough to "create" him. Especially when considering his father left him literally half a billion dollars for his inheritance.
@Hacker92h The US military doesn't directly support terrorists groups on any level. Nor do they train militants and promote aggressive action against regions of the world that independent nations rely on for trade.
And the US especially isn't ruled by a totalitarian government and the US actually gives their people full rights rather than suppress them with harsh extremist laws.
We never targeted a US citizens, we only targeted your soldiers/marines in iraq cuz they are on our land.
you want to talk about afganstan? we hate taliban and al-qaida cuz they are pure terrorists...they are killing afgan citizens, and they are sending stupid creatures to iraq every year with bombs under their cloths to kill iraqi citizens.
but wait a second, taliban and alqaida are made by CIA to face the soviets now they are against you, funny how things have turned around
you will find alot of them in US government and Israel
some people are saying that 11sp is made by US government to find a reason to attack iraq, and other countrys in middle east so they killed their own people? thats a pure terrorist
what about US are using plans without pilots to bomb afgan citizens? thats a terrorist behavior, what about US bombed a pakistan military base, and what they Justify? like always..WE ARE SORRY IT WAS A MISTAKE!
Gulf States are just cowards who never fought a war, and being run and controlled by stupid fags dictators, those dictators are just interested in money, drink, live in Palaces, have some golden Ferrari, playing with money....etc while the people live in poor/hell and of course No Freedom of Speech or ANY kind of freedom.
They never thinks in there people or that kind...if anybody just thinks to make a revolution, he probably would be dead less than 16 to 24 hours.
Now you started to talk about religions and show your hates to muslims, huh we know that you Americans hates arabs, islam..etc
thats why you are killing civilians everywhere in the middle east, but i promise you all this shit will end soon the future will be sooo dark, becuz we are preparing ourselves to discipline you and we have a big surprise to your morons in israel
Independence, Freedom, Democracy, Justice, and Human Rights for Vietnam!
Độc Lập, Tự Do, Dân Chủ, Công Lý và Nhân Quyền cho Việt Nam!
Free all Vietnamese Patriots! Free them immediately!
Yêu cầu nhà cầm quyền cộng sản Việt Nam hãy trả tự do cho tất cả những người yêu nước vô tội đang nằm trong các trại tù cộng sản Việt Nam! Hãy thả ngay những tù nhân chính trị và tù nhân lương tâm, bloggers, những những tù nhân tôn giáo, những người bất đồng chính kiến! Trả lại Nhà Nước Việt cho người dân Việt!
Please somebody in the world! Engage and destroy the "Aerolula" Boeing, the official airplane of the brazilian government!!! It´s a menace to all mankind!!! Put down it!!!
Just don't emulate the Patriot's FCS --- it has a tendency completely ignore incoming threats, and has the dubious distinction of being the first air defense system in history to shoot down only FRIENDLY aircraft in battle!
On February 25, 1991, a Scud flew right through the killzone of a Patriot Battery, killing 28 servicemen. The Patriots never reacted.
This was found to be a problem with the system's ability to interpret time, and was supposedly fixed after ODS.
Note that the Israeli military found the same problem YEARS earlier, fixed it, and offered a software patch to the US military to would fix the problem in US Patriots --- which the Pentagon rejected.
@BlacktailDefense February 1991 is a long way back. The Patriot system has evolved a lot since then. It's interesting how you, anti-military liberals only speak about how the Patriot performed during the 1991 Gulf War but you say nothing about how it handled during the 2003 Iraq war... It's amazing how your all your "arguments" are 20 years old...
BTW: Patriot Batteries are COMPLETELY automated. The crews have very little control over them, other than to turn them on or off, or to override the AI's commands --- can't blame the people on this one.
But the Israelis have done that to everthing we have made. They could have probably fixed the Sgt York SPAAG. They made the VADS plenty badass lol.
And, if it's JUST software, it can be fixed indefinitely. It may be lacking there, but missile wise it's the best. There's no other SAM that has the capability of the patriot. Even that new russian S-700million lol.
The Patriot is the peak of Surface to air missile technology. That's good enougn for moi. :D Even if it's buggy D:
"They could have probably fixed the Sgt York SPAAG."
That would require a new FCS, new radar sets, a faster chassis, more manual overrides, and a more robust degraded mode.
It would have been best to just put those twin 40s into a new turret with purpose-made AAA sensors and software, and put it on the chassis of an M1, M2, or M548A3.
In fact, even the old M48 chassis could have pulled through, if Ford Aerospace up-engined them with the M88A2's powerpack, but they tried to cut every corner.
"And, if it's JUST software, it can be fixed indefinitely."
Actually, no.
Raytheon owns all Patriot Missile intellectual property in the US market, and the Generals, Congressmen, and Think Tanks that are supposed to be checks and balances on them are all in their hip pockets; Raytheon says their software is perfect, and all said parties agree with them, for obvious rea$on$.
@BlacktailDefense@BlacktailDefense Are you serious Blacktail? The batteries stopped every single other attack and you have to point out the only time it failed at intercepting a target due to a computer glitch? And with an early production model (certainly not a PAC-3)?
What do you constantly bash American systems?
If it was said to be fixed as you said, why bother with these comments?
And then when you troll on here, sensible people actually respond, rather than idiots like Vickers.
@franknbeans4761 So really, stick to your own slide shows & don't try to bash systems that a credible person like jaglavaksoldier posts. It's pathetic.
If you are honestly trying to say the Patriot is terrible because it missed only 1 missile 20 years ago then that is just pathetic on your part.
I can't complain with the substantial numbers of them in service and the fact that they are combat proven, missing only one missile isn't bad at all.
@franknbeans4761 "If you are honestly trying to say the Patriot is terrible because it missed only 1 missile 20 years ago then that is just pathetic on your part."
The Patriot failed to defeat EVERY Scud it ever hit, and it missed more than it hit. I will also reiterate that the only aircraft it ever shot down in battle were all friendlies, and the Patriot also has an affinity for shooting down the Tornado.
"So shut up."
Ooh, an Internet Toughguy! I'm quaking in my boots!
@BlacktailDefense "Ooh, an Internet Toughguy! I'm quaking in my boots!"
Are you really that sensitive to a shut up? No wonder why this comment was flagged as spam. Especially considering how you make 10 videos for every time the US screws up, but only 1-2 videos for any other vehicle.
@franknbeans4761 "The batteries stopped every single other attack..."
The Army claimed a 100% success rate in their first press releases. They reduced this to 96% in testimony to Congress; then 80%, then 70%, then ultimately 52%, with the Weasel Words that only 25% could be supported with "high confidence".
They still claim 52%, even tough MIT professor Theodore Postal proved that there was no evidence that ANY Scuds were defeated;
@BlacktailDefense Patriot is not a missile defence system, it's like tasking an M1 to shoot down frogfoots, if it managed to get 52%, that would be a good result. Yet, it is a massive screw up to know about Saddam's SCUDs and take no means of protection against tham with you.
@franknbeans4761 Moreover, the Israeli experience with the Patriot was that they INCREASED the damage done by Scuds, because they turned a unitary munition into a scrap metal and TNT *Cluster Bomb*. Specifically, the casualties were increased by 74%, and the damage to apartment buildings was increased by 340%.
@BlacktailDefense From what it seems like any other heavy SAM would of done the same thing then.
And even then, it probably is better to have the TNT spread out rather than one massive bomb that would kill everyone in a building. It might of damaged more buildings but certainly didn't kill as many people.
@BlacktailDefense You know that makes me think of the Isreali Trophy System and how it reduces collateral damage with its special warhead when it stops an RPG. Why do think the US military has taken this with 'closed eyes'?
@VickersIndependent Well that is a pretty bold statement. Especially since the US is still developing the Quick Kill, and neither of us know enough viable information to make any claims about the system. But it is a stretch to include that in this.
@franknbeans4761 "What do you constantly bash American systems?"
Wow, Loaded Argument Fallacy, much? Inserting "poor little USA" into your "argument" doesn't get you off the hook for your failure to disprove my premises. That's a gleaming Strawman Fallacy too, because I've never stated that ALL American weapons suck.
"If it was said to be fixed as you said, why bother with these comments?"
Because, as demonstrated in my last couple of replies, the US Army's "leaders" are proven to be liars.
@franknbeans4761 "And how have the US Army's leaders been liars? I would say the PAC-2/3 are much better & are capable systems."
You're Moving the Goalpost. They lied about Patriots having a 100% pK ratio in Desert Storm, when even a *hit* has little chance of neutralizing a Scud. Also, PAC-2s *were* used in Desert Storm.
"...you are still basing your arguments off of something that is 20 years old..."
The PAC-3 was introduced in 2003, and shot down a Tornado and an F/A-18C in the same year.
@BlacktailDefense I don't care about what they said that isn't true & neither should you. The debris of the SCUD damaged the area would of happened to any other heavy SAM, I already addressed all this.
Why are you honestly complaining if the Patriot batteries did intercept every single SCUD but one? Even if they launched 3 missiles per SCUD (which is smart).
And when you have hundreds of planes that are constantly moving in enemy air space, friendly fire happens. It was only 2 planes.
@franknbeans4761 It is just pathetic when you have to find arguments about any American system & troll on a video that is purely informative, not biased, & isn't voicing one sided opinions at all.
What other heavy SAM can even say is actually effective? The Patriot actually saw real combat experience & engaged unpredictable SCUD attacks, yet you have to go out of your way to bash it.
If the system did intercept almost all missiles, then don't complain. Or is it that you're just anti-American?
@franknbeans4761 "It is just pathetic when you have to find arguments about any American system & troll on a video that is purely informative, not biased, & isn't voicing one sided opinions at all."
I've already pasted links to evidence for my arguments into my comments. Facts are not bias, nor opinion.
"The Patriot actually saw real combat experience & engaged unpredictable SCUD attacks, yet you have to go out of your way to bash it."
It did a bang-up job of guarding the Dharan Barracks.
@BlacktailDefense As for Dharan, that was literally it's only failure. It stopped one missile & yes, 28 men died, but in terms of a large scale war like Desert Storm, that isn't bad at all.
And even then, what can you compare it too? The S-300? A system with no combat experience & only shooting at testing targets?
And you say Saddam was just a gangster? Then when was the last time a real war was fought? 1973? You always stick to your unreasonable standards & never take reality into account.
@BlacktailDefense The Arrow is not a rebuilt Patriot. The US even helped with that. They introduced the Arrow for the same reason the THAAD was developed.
I should of specified about the PAC-3 GEM not being used in Desert Storm. But regardless, it is still a much improved system.
And just because the PAC-3 was never used to engage enemy aircraft means nothing at all about it.
It stopped the SCUDs from being used effectively so I would say that is a good result.
@franknbeans4761 "The Arrow is not a rebuilt Patriot. The US even helped with that. They introduced the Arrow for the same reason the THAAD was developed."
Exactly --- it's an offshoot, not part of the same series,
"And just because the PAC-3 was never used to engage enemy aircraft means nothing at all about it."
It still shot down 2 friendly aircraft, and NO enemy aircraft.
@BlacktailDefense And based on your theory of "No results = no experience" then how could you bash the Patriot? Why would you go out of your way to bash something that is inconclusive? Your own argument is self defeating.
@franknbeans4761 "And based on your theory of "No results = no experience" then how could you bash the Patriot?"
158 shots + no conclusive results = failure.
"Why would you go out of your way to bash something that is inconclusive?"
I'm merely stating the facts. There is no proof that the Patriot ever defeated any missiles in combat, but it's pretty obvious that the only aircraft it ever shot down in battle were friendly. That's a track record of failure.
@BlacktailDefense If there is no proof like you say then why are you saying that? Having inconclusive results means that you wouldn't be able to take anything from it.
But even then, it obviously stopped the SCUD from fully utilizing it's warhead in a concentrated fashion & instead caused it be broken up. What would another SAM system of done differently?
@franknbeans4761 "If there is no proof like you say then why are you saying that? Having inconclusive results means that you wouldn't be able to take anything from it."
The US military wasn't able to take anything from it --- they have no way of knowing whether or not it had any effect.
"But even then, it obviously stopped the SCUD from fully utilizing it's warhead in a concentrated fashion & instead caused it be broken up."
Nope; it turned a unitary munition into a more lethal cluster bomb.
@BlacktailDefense I doubt a missile that first started successful testing in 1951 & was retired in 1974 could be considered for viable missile defense. And if they did have it in service, you would of criticized them for using a 40 year old system (much like how you criticize the USN for having older aircraft carriers in service).
Most funny part is that Iraqi R-11 that PAC did NOT intercepted with 158 shots was by the date nearly 40 years old rusty scrapmetal that was handicrafted to have >600km range at great cost of accuracy which became....3km CEP (!)
Thats wasn`t anything anyway near to even SS-21 nor Iskander.
@franknbeans4761 under that same logic the A-10 and AH-64 friendly fire incidents during Op Desert Storm count as experience too, right?
with SAM systems and other much more computerized than man operated systems, experience is of relatively low importance and low quantity of bad results is not an excuse.
"faulty" machinery needs to be fixed and issues eliminated, not just minimized.
@franknbeans4761 Who would of predicted the SCUD warheads breaking up when the Patriot hit them?
How could you truly know how effective the systems would of functioned in certain terrains? There are many things to consider. You can't just say a system is good because it functions well in trials. That certainly isn't proof enough if that is what you are saying.
@BlacktailDefense "You test them in those conditions --- as opposed to performing staged demonstrations, which is how the US Army "tests" weapons."
This is where I think you are very biased. They do this with all their weapons? The XM-25? The Boomerang Sniper Detection System? The M82 Barrett? All its weapons?
Honestly, come on. Tell me, how was the actual missile poor at taking out missiles? Describe the design to me then?
@franknbeans4761 "You can't just say a system is good because it functions well in trials. That certainly isn't proof enough if that is what you are saying."
There's a big difference between a staged demo and live-fire testing. The concept behind the Patriot was "validated" via computer models, which are easily manipulated to invariably produce a favorable result.
That's a great way to sell a weapon, but the results of live-fire testing seldom conform to computer models.
@BlacktailDefense That same statement can be applied to all SAM's that aren't firing at simulated targets. Do you think the Patriot was never used in practice against drones?
I think you just have it in your head that the Army always BS's everything, never actually tests things, & only procures systems for political reasons. Which all isn't true.
@franknbeans4761 well, it seems like any structural engineer would predict that the warhead would most likely break of the missile once it's hit, the more important feature being whether it had armed itself prior to contact.
technically, that is one of the principals of missile defense counter operation of the Oka (SS-23) and the Iskander (SS-26) shot range tactical missile.
Even if the SAM locks on and destroys the missile, the warhead itself continues on and it is untracable by radar
@MatoVuc The Patriot did in fact break apart the SCUDs. Even Blacktail said that the entire missile broke apart & that the warhead shattered & spread out across a large area.
So if you look at it, instead of absolutely blowing an apartment building apart, it just damaged several buildings over an area.
I wouldn't say it's a stunning success but it certainly isn't a complete failure.
And if it has been improved considerably over the past 20 years, then it isn't something that is bad.
@franknbeans4761 that's combat tested, not experience. maybe it's just me, but i find it very annoying that the term is thrown around so much particularly for things that it does not apply.
the variables you mention at the end of your comment are testable outside of combat as well as part of international joint warfare simulations, particularly for missile defense systems.
@MatoVuc I do think it is being thrown around too much too. It is just getting annoying now.
But the Patriot is operated by 15 countries, the main thing I was pointing out at the beginning of this was that Blacktail was yet again finding something wrong with American systems. And I have yet to see him dedicate a full series to another vehicle/system or comment on anything from another country. It is just odd.
Watch "Uncle Saddam", and see for yourself if the guy who ran Iraq in '91 was strategist material.
"Then when was the last time a real war was fought? 1973?"
Trying to throw-in a Red Herring, are we? Desert Storm wasn't a war --- even the USAF's Airpower Journal stated as much; airpower(dot)maxwell(dot)af(dot)mil/airchronicles/apj/apj98/fal98/hammond(dot)html
@BlacktailDefense And even then, the PAC-2/GEM wasn't used in Desert Storm & neither was the PAC-3. So by saying, "the PAC-3 was involved in 2 friendly fire incidents so it's bad" is a very poor & again, biased argument.
@franknbeans4761 "And even then, the PAC-2/GEM wasn't used in Desert Storm..."
You only said "PAC-2/3". Claiming a rebuke invalid because of a new claim after the fact is the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy.
"So by saying, "the PAC-3 was involved in 2 friendly fire incidents so it's bad" is a very poor & again, biased argument."
You just committed a Contextomy Fallacy. I said that the PAC-3's only fixed wing kills in combat were all friendlies, which is true. And you call MY arguments poor & biased!
@BlacktailDefense How could I not question your personal values when you have hours & hours of videos bashing American systems, & constantly going out of your way to do it.
The Patriot did intercept them & look at the range of the PAC-3 missile. It jumped from 160 km from the PAC-2 to 240 km for the PAC-3. A big difference.
And why is it that 15 countries operate it?
If the Patriot stopped the SCUD from actually being used to it's full effect, then it was effective.
@franknbeans4761 If you visited his site and watched the "failed tanks" series you'd see that majority of the videos are about non-american tanks. T-64, Pz.68, Ferdinand,
@Hairysteed I have seen his site, but the other failed tanks only have 1 video per vehicle, and they are much worse than the Abrams, Bradley, or Stryker.
It is a little odd that he makes 30-50 part series on just 1 vehicle that has seen combat success for years.
@franknbeans4761 i could argue about this, personally i dont like the M1, i think its kind of overated, but thats not my point here. my point is you are right about the 30-50 part series per vehicle. the next upcoming series are probably about M1 paintjob, and how the paint is not as good as it could be XD, there is a limit for everything
@Pcordero87 The fact that the M1 is really over-marketed and said to be the best tank ever really sets the bar high when you start studying it. I don't think it is the best either, the M1A3 will solve many of it's problems:
w w w . gdls . com/index . php/products/modernization/abrams
But as of right now they will have to make do with what they have.
I can only imagine what the future videos will be about. The paint job idea is a good guess! ha ha
@BlacktailDefense Really? Do you have any solid proofs to support this laughable claim? I know who you are. You've made a carrier of bashing the US military. I've watched some of your videos. All you do is making claims with no proofs to back them up. All you do is trying to discredit the US military. I wonder why...
forget shooting down planes, its fuckin amazing how this slow ass system can shoot down an iraqi scud traveling at 6000km/h!! and an altitude of 500000 feet!!!!!!
mahis83 1 week ago
Comment removed
pz301 2 weeks ago
s-300 number one.
ehikq 3 weeks ago
ohhhhhhh s300 russe is good Patriot fuking
draganov2008 3 weeks ago
This looks like a late 70's early 80's training video, M1 helmets on crew are a giveaway.
ColdWarWarriors 1 month ago
Spain has too
VITOLLFOTOGRAFIA 1 month ago
s-500? hahah russia can't afford to built one. the US have SM-3 that works perfect!
jayzus08 2 months ago
@jayzus08 Do not forget sm-6 that already were proved to knock down an old satellite
VITOLLFOTOGRAFIA 1 month ago
do call this shit a system? its a toy to the Russians, they have S-300 S-400 and in the future S-500 !!!
Hacker92h 2 months ago
@Hacker92h read the koran and sleep, boy
sixameleon 2 months ago
@sixameleon
haha go away you stupid little german
Russians are the best
Hacker92h 2 months ago
@Hacker92h
i belive you are a russian right?
sergeantrothe1 2 months ago
@sergeantrothe1
Nope I'm not Russian, but I'm saying the truth...patriot is shit compared to S-300 the Russian anti-aircraft + anti-missiles system
Hacker92h 2 months ago
@sergeantrothe1
Soon, the Russians will get S-500..and then the NATO and Americans should go suck a cock :)
Hacker92h 2 months ago
Comment removed
KiloByte69 1 month ago
@KiloByte69
yeah, the fags Americans are here, but wait a second!!! they are easy targets for the iranians missiles :)
U.S base in the gulf is not a good idea, cuz all those base gonna blow easily by the iranian missiles :) so good game
Hacker92h 1 month ago
@KiloByte69
Americans are chickens here XD
Hacker92h 1 month ago
Comment removed
KiloByte69 1 month ago
Comment removed
Hacker92h 1 month ago
Comment removed
Hacker92h 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KiloByte69
actually do you know what happened 2 years ago in Bahrain!?
one of the American soldiers(from the navy base) did something really stupid, he hit a Bahraini girl coz she fight with another American girl..and guess what.
Bahrainis went so angry, they hit the american so hard and make him doesn't understand if he is dead or still alive, then they drag him into his car with the american girl and they smashed the car, then they leaved him in bad way...so stfu :)
Hacker92h 1 month ago
Comment removed
Hacker92h 1 month ago
@KiloByte69
If we saw a single American here, I promise you that we will hit him severely beaten and make him cry like a kid :)
Hacker92h 1 month ago
Comment removed
KiloByte69 1 month ago
@KiloByte69
coward!? hmm the only cowards here are the americans so stfu dumbfuck faggot :)
Hacker92h 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KiloByte69
coward!? hmm the only cowards here are the americans so stfu faggot :)
Hacker92h 1 month ago
@KiloByte69
did you read what we've done with the American solder or you don't have an eyes???
Who is the coward now!?
Hacker92h 1 month ago
Comment removed
KiloByte69 1 month ago
@KiloByte69
hahaha we kicked your ass from iraq morons :)
Hacker92h 1 month ago
Comment removed
KiloByte69 1 month ago
@KiloByte69
puahahahahahahahahaha you own iraq? puhahahahaha
i don't think so, "Al-Mahdi Army" is still there so i don't think there is any american ass in iraq, otherwise americans will run like chickens XD
Hacker92h 1 month ago
Comment removed
KiloByte69 1 month ago
Comment removed
Hacker92h 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KiloByte69
yes 20,000 american ass STILL in iraq, but would they stay?! i don't think so, unless if they want their ass to blow up by a bombs XD
Hacker92h 1 month ago
@KiloByte69
you guyz are cowards at battlefield...thats not new, we already know that :P
/watch?v=80Q2On30zhg&feature=related
Hacker92h 1 month ago
Comment removed
KiloByte69 1 month ago
Comment removed
Hacker92h 1 month ago
@KiloByte69
Bahrain doesn't fight, its a small island like hawai.
I never said that Bahrain fought a war, btw we doesn't have an actual army, we only have some few fags from Jordan, Pakistan and India works at something called Bahrain Defense Forces(they only work for money of course) they are just Mercenaries and Thugs to kill/beat the Bahraini people who is calling for democracy ...thats all
Hacker92h 1 month ago
@Hacker92h Wow, you sure talk pretty big. The US already has a base in Kuwait, several in Iraq, 1 in the UAE, obviously many in Afghanistan, a base in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt, and so on.
Tell me, where are you from? I am guessing Iran..
Either way, Iran would be decimated if they tried to make a move against the US or the straits. That is a fact.
franknbeans4761 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@franknbeans4761
1- you got your ass kicked from iraq(after gettinf fucked so hard) 2-you don't have base in Egypt(you wish)
3- these base near Gulf is more disadvantage, cuz iranian missiles will reach them in less than 45 minute
4-bases in afganstan are getting fucked everyday
5-well, Im Not surprised you are from US thats why you are just trying to defend your GOVERNMENT Not your people..comeon u guyz are most hated country
6-USA sucks and its fucked USA is history...face it its a fact
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
@franknbeans4761
Be sure that we have problems with your Government NOT the people of USA
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
@Hacker92h Then why is it that the groups you support favor targeting US citizens?
Either way, do you think those soldiers/marines/airmen/sailors have a problem with you? Or are just serving their country? If you try attacking US servicemen, you are attacking America.
franknbeans4761 3 weeks ago
@franknbeans4761
what groups i support? lol Im i another terrorist to your government? ohh okay then now you should attack my country cuz there is terrorists/massiv destruction weapons or what ever you called XD
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
@Hacker92h You didn't deny being Iranian. I know there are many good people from Iran, I have met many on my campus. But Iran supports organizations that openly kill Israeli and American civilians and noncombatants. That is a fact.
franknbeans4761 3 weeks ago
@franknbeans4761
im not iranian, and israel doesnt exist, there is no israeli civilians...all israel people should die...they took our land, they shall die.
we never targeted US civilians, cuz US has its own country and own land US situation is different than israel.
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
@Hacker92h Ha alright. You aren't really helping yourself. Even enemy countries of the US like North Korea shouldn't have all of their people die on any level. At least 20% of Israel's population disagree with their government.
Either way, the US did not form the Taliban or Al Qaeda. They supported the Taliban after they formed and supported separate entities before they forms Al Qaeda.
Learn your facts.
franknbeans4761 3 weeks ago
@franknbeans4761
facts?
Osama bin laden is Made by CIA
thats a fact
Hacker92h 2 weeks ago
@Hacker92h Initially he received funding from them to fight the Soviets. After that, the US had nothing to do with him. But either way, Bin Laden had massive amounts of money he received from his father and eventually from banks in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and other countries.
franknbeans4761 2 weeks ago
@franknbeans4761
money he received from, saudi arabia, pakistan, USA!!!
you can't deny the fact that US government created bin laden, the leader of biggest terrorist group in history
Hacker92h 2 weeks ago
@Hacker92h Created him? No way. He was in Afghanistan/Pakistan fighting the Soviets without US aid for years. Then the US gave him minor funding. Absolutely not enough to "create" him. Especially when considering his father left him literally half a billion dollars for his inheritance.
franknbeans4761 2 weeks ago
@Hacker92h The US military doesn't directly support terrorists groups on any level. Nor do they train militants and promote aggressive action against regions of the world that independent nations rely on for trade.
And the US especially isn't ruled by a totalitarian government and the US actually gives their people full rights rather than suppress them with harsh extremist laws.
franknbeans4761 3 weeks ago
@franknbeans4761
bla bla bla
US always supporting terrorists, Al-Qaida + Taliban are Made By CIA
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@franknbeans4761
We never targeted a US citizens, we only targeted your soldiers/marines in iraq cuz they are on our land.
you want to talk about afganstan? we hate taliban and al-qaida cuz they are pure terrorists...they are killing afgan citizens, and they are sending stupid creatures to iraq every year with bombs under their cloths to kill iraqi citizens.
but wait a second, taliban and alqaida are made by CIA to face the soviets now they are against you, funny how things have turned around
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@franknbeans4761
you want terrorists?
you will find alot of them in US government and Israel
some people are saying that 11sp is made by US government to find a reason to attack iraq, and other countrys in middle east so they killed their own people? thats a pure terrorist
what about US are using plans without pilots to bomb afgan citizens? thats a terrorist behavior, what about US bombed a pakistan military base, and what they Justify? like always..WE ARE SORRY IT WAS A MISTAKE!
Hacker92h 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
Hacker92h 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KiloByte69
Gulf States are just cowards who never fought a war, and being run and controlled by stupid fags dictators, those dictators are just interested in money, drink, live in Palaces, have some golden Ferrari, playing with money....etc while the people live in poor/hell and of course No Freedom of Speech or ANY kind of freedom.
They never thinks in there people or that kind...if anybody just thinks to make a revolution, he probably would be dead less than 16 to 24 hours.
Hacker92h 1 month ago
@KiloByte69
Now you started to talk about religions and show your hates to muslims, huh we know that you Americans hates arabs, islam..etc
thats why you are killing civilians everywhere in the middle east, but i promise you all this shit will end soon the future will be sooo dark, becuz we are preparing ourselves to discipline you and we have a big surprise to your morons in israel
Hacker92h 1 month ago
Comment removed
KiloByte69 1 month ago
meanwhile, in 1974...
TheHal9k 2 months ago
Independence, Freedom, Democracy, Justice, and Human Rights for Vietnam!
Độc Lập, Tự Do, Dân Chủ, Công Lý và Nhân Quyền cho Việt Nam!
Free all Vietnamese Patriots! Free them immediately!
Yêu cầu nhà cầm quyền cộng sản Việt Nam hãy trả tự do cho tất cả những người yêu nước vô tội đang nằm trong các trại tù cộng sản Việt Nam! Hãy thả ngay những tù nhân chính trị và tù nhân lương tâm, bloggers, những những tù nhân tôn giáo, những người bất đồng chính kiến! Trả lại Nhà Nước Việt cho người dân Việt!
ourgodlislove 3 months ago
S-400 seems to have the edge on PAC-3 patriot at the moment.
necroticism 2 years ago
Please somebody in the world! Engage and destroy the "Aerolula" Boeing, the official airplane of the brazilian government!!! It´s a menace to all mankind!!! Put down it!!!
mbaquara 2 years ago
Hahaha! YEah!
True!
monarchiko 2 years ago 2
It sure id da number on that QF-106 drone.
Craigers22763 2 years ago
The best. period.
It can hit anything, from fighters to ICBMs and even meteorites. lol
There should be a mod of the patriot to stick on aircraft. It'd make a bad ass Phoenix replacement.
peepeevagi 2 years ago
Just don't emulate the Patriot's FCS --- it has a tendency completely ignore incoming threats, and has the dubious distinction of being the first air defense system in history to shoot down only FRIENDLY aircraft in battle!
BlacktailDefense 2 years ago
It's yet to go up against a rival airforce so i cant say that's fair. It's just dying to shoot at something other than an incoming rocket XD
And, completely ignore incoming threats? Blame the operators lol.
I'd buy it just because it guarantees a hit on the first shot every time.
peepeevagi 2 years ago
It's not the operators --- it's the FCS software.
On February 25, 1991, a Scud flew right through the killzone of a Patriot Battery, killing 28 servicemen. The Patriots never reacted.
This was found to be a problem with the system's ability to interpret time, and was supposedly fixed after ODS.
Note that the Israeli military found the same problem YEARS earlier, fixed it, and offered a software patch to the US military to would fix the problem in US Patriots --- which the Pentagon rejected.
BlacktailDefense 2 years ago
@BlacktailDefense February 1991 is a long way back. The Patriot system has evolved a lot since then. It's interesting how you, anti-military liberals only speak about how the Patriot performed during the 1991 Gulf War but you say nothing about how it handled during the 2003 Iraq war... It's amazing how your all your "arguments" are 20 years old...
StiviGun1 7 months ago
Also, recall that I said it was "supposedly fixed"?
So was the IFF system;
pogo(dot)org/pogo-files/alerts/national-security/ns-pm-20030416(dot)html
BTW: Patriot Batteries are COMPLETELY automated. The crews have very little control over them, other than to turn them on or off, or to override the AI's commands --- can't blame the people on this one.
BlacktailDefense 2 years ago
But the Israelis have done that to everthing we have made. They could have probably fixed the Sgt York SPAAG. They made the VADS plenty badass lol.
And, if it's JUST software, it can be fixed indefinitely. It may be lacking there, but missile wise it's the best. There's no other SAM that has the capability of the patriot. Even that new russian S-700million lol.
The Patriot is the peak of Surface to air missile technology. That's good enougn for moi. :D Even if it's buggy D:
peepeevagi 2 years ago
"They could have probably fixed the Sgt York SPAAG."
That would require a new FCS, new radar sets, a faster chassis, more manual overrides, and a more robust degraded mode.
It would have been best to just put those twin 40s into a new turret with purpose-made AAA sensors and software, and put it on the chassis of an M1, M2, or M548A3.
In fact, even the old M48 chassis could have pulled through, if Ford Aerospace up-engined them with the M88A2's powerpack, but they tried to cut every corner.
BlacktailDefense 2 years ago
"And, if it's JUST software, it can be fixed indefinitely."
Actually, no.
Raytheon owns all Patriot Missile intellectual property in the US market, and the Generals, Congressmen, and Think Tanks that are supposed to be checks and balances on them are all in their hip pockets; Raytheon says their software is perfect, and all said parties agree with them, for obvious rea$on$.
BlacktailDefense 2 years ago
@BlacktailDefense your really dumb... ^_^
TRONhack3r 6 months ago
@BlacktailDefense Are you in the military... hmm i dont think sooo
TRONhack3r 6 months ago
@BlacktailDefense @BlacktailDefense Are you serious Blacktail? The batteries stopped every single other attack and you have to point out the only time it failed at intercepting a target due to a computer glitch? And with an early production model (certainly not a PAC-3)?
What do you constantly bash American systems?
If it was said to be fixed as you said, why bother with these comments?
And then when you troll on here, sensible people actually respond, rather than idiots like Vickers.
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 So really, stick to your own slide shows & don't try to bash systems that a credible person like jaglavaksoldier posts. It's pathetic.
If you are honestly trying to say the Patriot is terrible because it missed only 1 missile 20 years ago then that is just pathetic on your part.
I can't complain with the substantial numbers of them in service and the fact that they are combat proven, missing only one missile isn't bad at all.
So shut up.
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@franknbeans4761 "If you are honestly trying to say the Patriot is terrible because it missed only 1 missile 20 years ago then that is just pathetic on your part."
The Patriot failed to defeat EVERY Scud it ever hit, and it missed more than it hit. I will also reiterate that the only aircraft it ever shot down in battle were all friendlies, and the Patriot also has an affinity for shooting down the Tornado.
"So shut up."
Ooh, an Internet Toughguy! I'm quaking in my boots!
BlacktailDefense 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BlacktailDefense "Ooh, an Internet Toughguy! I'm quaking in my boots!"
Are you really that sensitive to a shut up? No wonder why this comment was flagged as spam. Especially considering how you make 10 videos for every time the US screws up, but only 1-2 videos for any other vehicle.
The insanity that goes on in your mind....
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "The batteries stopped every single other attack..."
The Army claimed a 100% success rate in their first press releases. They reduced this to 96% in testimony to Congress; then 80%, then 70%, then ultimately 52%, with the Weasel Words that only 25% could be supported with "high confidence".
They still claim 52%, even tough MIT professor Theodore Postal proved that there was no evidence that ANY Scuds were defeated;
pogoarchives(dot)org/labyrinth/09-sprey-w-covers(dot)pdf
BlacktailDefense 4 months ago
@BlacktailDefense Patriot is not a missile defence system, it's like tasking an M1 to shoot down frogfoots, if it managed to get 52%, that would be a good result. Yet, it is a massive screw up to know about Saddam's SCUDs and take no means of protection against tham with you.
ORKSIZDABEST 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 Moreover, the Israeli experience with the Patriot was that they INCREASED the damage done by Scuds, because they turned a unitary munition into a scrap metal and TNT *Cluster Bomb*. Specifically, the casualties were increased by 74%, and the damage to apartment buildings was increased by 340%.
I cite the same source for that, too.
BlacktailDefense 4 months ago
@BlacktailDefense From what it seems like any other heavy SAM would of done the same thing then.
And even then, it probably is better to have the TNT spread out rather than one massive bomb that would kill everyone in a building. It might of damaged more buildings but certainly didn't kill as many people.
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 And the effectiveness of the Patriot you are talking about was in 1991 & not at all now.
And even in 1991, they still fired about 3 missiles per SCUD and like I said only 1 SCUD broke through. Which is excellent.
So stop complaining about something that happened 20 years ago because you look like a fool that is crying for attention.
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
@BlacktailDefense You know that makes me think of the Isreali Trophy System and how it reduces collateral damage with its special warhead when it stops an RPG. Why do think the US military has taken this with 'closed eyes'?
VickersIndependent 4 months ago
@VickersIndependent Well that is a pretty bold statement. Especially since the US is still developing the Quick Kill, and neither of us know enough viable information to make any claims about the system. But it is a stretch to include that in this.
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "What do you constantly bash American systems?"
Wow, Loaded Argument Fallacy, much? Inserting "poor little USA" into your "argument" doesn't get you off the hook for your failure to disprove my premises. That's a gleaming Strawman Fallacy too, because I've never stated that ALL American weapons suck.
"If it was said to be fixed as you said, why bother with these comments?"
Because, as demonstrated in my last couple of replies, the US Army's "leaders" are proven to be liars.
BlacktailDefense 4 months ago
@BlacktailDefense Obviously you don't think all American weapons are bad, but you seem to go overboard any time they might.
And how have the US Army's leaders been liars? I would say the PAC-2/3 are much better & are capable systems.
But even then, you are still basing your arguments off of something that is 20 years old, how desperate for an argument can you get?
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "And how have the US Army's leaders been liars? I would say the PAC-2/3 are much better & are capable systems."
You're Moving the Goalpost. They lied about Patriots having a 100% pK ratio in Desert Storm, when even a *hit* has little chance of neutralizing a Scud. Also, PAC-2s *were* used in Desert Storm.
"...you are still basing your arguments off of something that is 20 years old..."
The PAC-3 was introduced in 2003, and shot down a Tornado and an F/A-18C in the same year.
BlacktailDefense 4 months ago
@BlacktailDefense I don't care about what they said that isn't true & neither should you. The debris of the SCUD damaged the area would of happened to any other heavy SAM, I already addressed all this.
Why are you honestly complaining if the Patriot batteries did intercept every single SCUD but one? Even if they launched 3 missiles per SCUD (which is smart).
And when you have hundreds of planes that are constantly moving in enemy air space, friendly fire happens. It was only 2 planes.
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 It is just pathetic when you have to find arguments about any American system & troll on a video that is purely informative, not biased, & isn't voicing one sided opinions at all.
What other heavy SAM can even say is actually effective? The Patriot actually saw real combat experience & engaged unpredictable SCUD attacks, yet you have to go out of your way to bash it.
If the system did intercept almost all missiles, then don't complain. Or is it that you're just anti-American?
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "It is just pathetic when you have to find arguments about any American system & troll on a video that is purely informative, not biased, & isn't voicing one sided opinions at all."
I've already pasted links to evidence for my arguments into my comments. Facts are not bias, nor opinion.
"The Patriot actually saw real combat experience & engaged unpredictable SCUD attacks, yet you have to go out of your way to bash it."
It did a bang-up job of guarding the Dharan Barracks.
BlacktailDefense 4 months ago
@BlacktailDefense As for Dharan, that was literally it's only failure. It stopped one missile & yes, 28 men died, but in terms of a large scale war like Desert Storm, that isn't bad at all.
And even then, what can you compare it too? The S-300? A system with no combat experience & only shooting at testing targets?
And you say Saddam was just a gangster? Then when was the last time a real war was fought? 1973? You always stick to your unreasonable standards & never take reality into account.
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "As for Dharan, that was literally it's only failure."
The Israelis would beg to differ, which is why they re-developed it into a completely new system; the Arrow.
"And even then, what can you compare it too? The S-300? A system with no combat experience & only shooting at testing targets?"
The GAO proved that the results of the Patriot in combat are inconclusive, so yes; it can be compared to the S-300. No results = no experience.
BlacktailDefense 3 months ago
@BlacktailDefense The Arrow is not a rebuilt Patriot. The US even helped with that. They introduced the Arrow for the same reason the THAAD was developed.
I should of specified about the PAC-3 GEM not being used in Desert Storm. But regardless, it is still a much improved system.
And just because the PAC-3 was never used to engage enemy aircraft means nothing at all about it.
It stopped the SCUDs from being used effectively so I would say that is a good result.
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@franknbeans4761 "The Arrow is not a rebuilt Patriot. The US even helped with that. They introduced the Arrow for the same reason the THAAD was developed."
Exactly --- it's an offshoot, not part of the same series,
"And just because the PAC-3 was never used to engage enemy aircraft means nothing at all about it."
It still shot down 2 friendly aircraft, and NO enemy aircraft.
BlacktailDefense 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "It stopped the SCUDs from being used effectively so I would say that is a good result."
With 158 shots with no conclusive results isn't "stopping" anything.
BlacktailDefense 3 months ago
@BlacktailDefense And based on your theory of "No results = no experience" then how could you bash the Patriot? Why would you go out of your way to bash something that is inconclusive? Your own argument is self defeating.
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "And based on your theory of "No results = no experience" then how could you bash the Patriot?"
158 shots + no conclusive results = failure.
"Why would you go out of your way to bash something that is inconclusive?"
I'm merely stating the facts. There is no proof that the Patriot ever defeated any missiles in combat, but it's pretty obvious that the only aircraft it ever shot down in battle were friendly. That's a track record of failure.
BlacktailDefense 3 months ago
@BlacktailDefense If there is no proof like you say then why are you saying that? Having inconclusive results means that you wouldn't be able to take anything from it.
But even then, it obviously stopped the SCUD from fully utilizing it's warhead in a concentrated fashion & instead caused it be broken up. What would another SAM system of done differently?
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@franknbeans4761 "If there is no proof like you say then why are you saying that? Having inconclusive results means that you wouldn't be able to take anything from it."
The US military wasn't able to take anything from it --- they have no way of knowing whether or not it had any effect.
"But even then, it obviously stopped the SCUD from fully utilizing it's warhead in a concentrated fashion & instead caused it be broken up."
Nope; it turned a unitary munition into a more lethal cluster bomb.
BlacktailDefense 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "What would another SAM system of done differently?"
The Nike Hercules missile; ed-thelen(dot)org/kill(dot)html
A warhead that large would leave nothing left in the air but smoke and confetti, rather than a still-live warhead and a half-dozen missile sections.
BlacktailDefense 3 months ago
@BlacktailDefense I doubt a missile that first started successful testing in 1951 & was retired in 1974 could be considered for viable missile defense. And if they did have it in service, you would of criticized them for using a 40 year old system (much like how you criticize the USN for having older aircraft carriers in service).
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 And you should really use more reliable sources other than "Ed."
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
@BlacktailDefense
Most funny part is that Iraqi R-11 that PAC did NOT intercepted with 158 shots was by the date nearly 40 years old rusty scrapmetal that was handicrafted to have >600km range at great cost of accuracy which became....3km CEP (!)
Thats wasn`t anything anyway near to even SS-21 nor Iskander.
MarshallJukov 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 under that same logic the A-10 and AH-64 friendly fire incidents during Op Desert Storm count as experience too, right?
with SAM systems and other much more computerized than man operated systems, experience is of relatively low importance and low quantity of bad results is not an excuse.
"faulty" machinery needs to be fixed and issues eliminated, not just minimized.
MatoVuc 3 months ago
@MatoVuc How the hell did you get that from what I said? Are you kidding?
Just because it is computerized doesn't mean that the actual mechanical features of the missile won't have to be changed at all.
I would say there is a world of difference between the PAC-1 Patriot & PAC-3.
I never said anything that relates to your starting statement. That's moronic.
Experience is of relative importance. It's in an unfamiliar area, facing random targets, & seeing how effectively it stops the missile.
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 Who would of predicted the SCUD warheads breaking up when the Patriot hit them?
How could you truly know how effective the systems would of functioned in certain terrains? There are many things to consider. You can't just say a system is good because it functions well in trials. That certainly isn't proof enough if that is what you are saying.
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "Who would of predicted the SCUD warheads breaking up when the Patriot hit them?"
Anyone with working knowledge of SAMs and/or SRBMs, all of whom were either ignored or not consulted when the Patriot was designed.
"How could you truly know how effective the systems would of functioned in certain terrains?"
You test them in those conditions --- as opposed to performing staged demonstrations, which is how the US Army "tests" weapons.
BlacktailDefense 3 months ago
@BlacktailDefense "You test them in those conditions --- as opposed to performing staged demonstrations, which is how the US Army "tests" weapons."
This is where I think you are very biased. They do this with all their weapons? The XM-25? The Boomerang Sniper Detection System? The M82 Barrett? All its weapons?
Honestly, come on. Tell me, how was the actual missile poor at taking out missiles? Describe the design to me then?
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "You can't just say a system is good because it functions well in trials. That certainly isn't proof enough if that is what you are saying."
There's a big difference between a staged demo and live-fire testing. The concept behind the Patriot was "validated" via computer models, which are easily manipulated to invariably produce a favorable result.
That's a great way to sell a weapon, but the results of live-fire testing seldom conform to computer models.
BlacktailDefense 3 months ago
@BlacktailDefense That same statement can be applied to all SAM's that aren't firing at simulated targets. Do you think the Patriot was never used in practice against drones?
I think you just have it in your head that the Army always BS's everything, never actually tests things, & only procures systems for political reasons. Which all isn't true.
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 well, it seems like any structural engineer would predict that the warhead would most likely break of the missile once it's hit, the more important feature being whether it had armed itself prior to contact.
technically, that is one of the principals of missile defense counter operation of the Oka (SS-23) and the Iskander (SS-26) shot range tactical missile.
Even if the SAM locks on and destroys the missile, the warhead itself continues on and it is untracable by radar
MatoVuc 3 months ago
@MatoVuc The Patriot did in fact break apart the SCUDs. Even Blacktail said that the entire missile broke apart & that the warhead shattered & spread out across a large area.
So if you look at it, instead of absolutely blowing an apartment building apart, it just damaged several buildings over an area.
I wouldn't say it's a stunning success but it certainly isn't a complete failure.
And if it has been improved considerably over the past 20 years, then it isn't something that is bad.
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 that's combat tested, not experience. maybe it's just me, but i find it very annoying that the term is thrown around so much particularly for things that it does not apply.
the variables you mention at the end of your comment are testable outside of combat as well as part of international joint warfare simulations, particularly for missile defense systems.
MatoVuc 3 months ago
@MatoVuc I do think it is being thrown around too much too. It is just getting annoying now.
But the Patriot is operated by 15 countries, the main thing I was pointing out at the beginning of this was that Blacktail was yet again finding something wrong with American systems. And I have yet to see him dedicate a full series to another vehicle/system or comment on anything from another country. It is just odd.
franknbeans4761 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@franknbeans4761 "And you say Saddam was just a gangster?"
Watch "Uncle Saddam", and see for yourself if the guy who ran Iraq in '91 was strategist material.
"Then when was the last time a real war was fought? 1973?"
Trying to throw-in a Red Herring, are we? Desert Storm wasn't a war --- even the USAF's Airpower Journal stated as much; airpower(dot)maxwell(dot)af(dot)mil/airchronicles/apj/apj98/fal98/hammond(dot)html
BlacktailDefense 3 months ago
@BlacktailDefense And even then, the PAC-2/GEM wasn't used in Desert Storm & neither was the PAC-3. So by saying, "the PAC-3 was involved in 2 friendly fire incidents so it's bad" is a very poor & again, biased argument.
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "And even then, the PAC-2/GEM wasn't used in Desert Storm..."
You only said "PAC-2/3". Claiming a rebuke invalid because of a new claim after the fact is the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy.
"So by saying, "the PAC-3 was involved in 2 friendly fire incidents so it's bad" is a very poor & again, biased argument."
You just committed a Contextomy Fallacy. I said that the PAC-3's only fixed wing kills in combat were all friendlies, which is true. And you call MY arguments poor & biased!
BlacktailDefense 3 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "If the system did intercept almost all missiles, then don't complain."
The GAO found that it didn't; archive(dot)gao(dot)gov/d38t12/146350(dot)pdf
They also found that even when there WERE hits, there was no evidence to confirm a kill;
archive(dot)gao(dot)gov/d35t11/147712(dot)pdf
"Or is it that you're just anti-American?"
A Personal Attack? For real?! That's tantamount to a declaration of surrender in a debate;
nizkor(dot)org/features/fallacies/personal-attack(dot)html
BlacktailDefense 4 months ago
@BlacktailDefense How could I not question your personal values when you have hours & hours of videos bashing American systems, & constantly going out of your way to do it.
The Patriot did intercept them & look at the range of the PAC-3 missile. It jumped from 160 km from the PAC-2 to 240 km for the PAC-3. A big difference.
And why is it that 15 countries operate it?
If the Patriot stopped the SCUD from actually being used to it's full effect, then it was effective.
franknbeans4761 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 If you visited his site and watched the "failed tanks" series you'd see that majority of the videos are about non-american tanks. T-64, Pz.68, Ferdinand,
Char-B just to name a few
Hairysteed 2 months ago
@Hairysteed I have seen his site, but the other failed tanks only have 1 video per vehicle, and they are much worse than the Abrams, Bradley, or Stryker.
It is a little odd that he makes 30-50 part series on just 1 vehicle that has seen combat success for years.
franknbeans4761 2 months ago
@franknbeans4761 i could argue about this, personally i dont like the M1, i think its kind of overated, but thats not my point here. my point is you are right about the 30-50 part series per vehicle. the next upcoming series are probably about M1 paintjob, and how the paint is not as good as it could be XD, there is a limit for everything
Pcordero87 1 week ago
@Pcordero87 The fact that the M1 is really over-marketed and said to be the best tank ever really sets the bar high when you start studying it. I don't think it is the best either, the M1A3 will solve many of it's problems:
w w w . gdls . com/index . php/products/modernization/abrams
But as of right now they will have to make do with what they have.
I can only imagine what the future videos will be about. The paint job idea is a good guess! ha ha
franknbeans4761 1 week ago
@franknbeans4761 "I don't care about what they said that isn't true & neither should you."
An Is-Ought Fallacy? You're getting desperate.
"The debris of the SCUD damaged the area would of happened to any other heavy SAM, I already addressed all this."
That defeats the whole purpose of Anti-Missile Missiles.
"Why are you honestly complaining if the Patriot batteries did intercept every single SCUD but one?"
They missed most of the Scuds, and the few that WERE hit became de-facto cluster bombs.
BlacktailDefense 4 months ago
@franknbeans4761 "It was only 2 planes."
2 planes with working IFFs, which the PAC-3 failed to take into account before engaging them.
BlacktailDefense 4 months ago
@BlacktailDefense Really? Do you have any solid proofs to support this laughable claim? I know who you are. You've made a carrier of bashing the US military. I've watched some of your videos. All you do is making claims with no proofs to back them up. All you do is trying to discredit the US military. I wonder why...
StiviGun1 7 months ago