Added: 5 years ago
From: PeterFutaba
Views: 76,656
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (276)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Technology so advanced it can only be captured in 240p.

  • 6:23 favorite part-using the mule

  • @elanonimazo fuck off paranoid conspiracy nut.

  • 0:43 ALEX JONES: -Ya don't intimidate me!

    -" You make me ANGRY; -You little maggots."

    '& I SEE YOU.* -Protectors of the BANKSTER Crooks. *!^_^!*

    -Vote RON Paul only.

  • >& I SEE YOU!!*

    Our weapons are our arm-cuff devices,

    We don't run out of bullets- we pierce your armor using real-life laser light technology.

    We Reptoids will raise an army underground unseen for what they've done.

  • fuck the new world order

  • Just one question: Who are we at war with in this video? China? Is China supposed to invade Europe? (Speculative and I believe improbable). What's going on here? I like these videos.

  • @tubecraft7 it's just action and boom. Nothing serious...

  • @midgetman2142 75% of these systems have already been developed....It's not smoke and mirrors...

  • @tubecraft7 In the Mission District of San Francisco. War against hipster terrorists armed with their fixie bikes and iPhones.

  • @tubecraft7 Iran, maybe?

  • bad news no coaxial or anti personnel guns on the new XM1203. that very bad.

  • Ghost Recon!

  • Why do the guys sitting on the computers wear full combat gear helmets/body armour etc?

  • @Wolfbite09 just in case they need to get out and kick some ass if the vehicles are damaged...

  • best oxymoron ever...french military.

  • this is all good but aren't the american forces worried that someone like the russians could form their own counter system

  • @Adjei88 nah the russia don't have the money for a ounter system like this.Aleast not in this generation!!

  • you are all missing one thing here, everything that they show that is actually doing the killing and the fighting is either the normal infantryman of the present or a modified howitzer with improved rate of fire, precision guided rockets just made more accurate etc.

    You people are missing the point the army is trying to implement this system and create a network that can provide better battlefield awareness and communication. The infantryman is still effective we r just adding this on to them.

  • FCS is already been replaced by BCT Ground Combat Vehicle Program. The reason US Secretary of Defense cancel FCS ground vehicles program because it was too expensive. All FCS Active Subsystems like UAV, Robots, & other are part of BCT program. The BCT/GCV are replacing M113 APC by 2018, the M2 Bradley later, and the Stryker ICV in the midterm. BCT/GCV already design Infantry Fighting Vehicle and now working on second design GCV. Also probably make more design. The GCV are cheap to built

  • Realistically, the U.S. could achieve a similar goal through simply taking more time to train its soldiers and by focusing on actually teaching them instead of throwing everything at them and hoping it sticks. There is way too much of an emphasis on being "tough" and "fit" in the US Army/Marines... totally disproportionate to combat effectiveness. Combat education is the key to a better military, not sci-fi gear.

  • you can't teach experience but they won't live long enough if they aren't tough and fit no quotes needed that is what makes soldiers. and tech has always been a force multiplier

    this is not real

  • This whole operation seems extremely cost, manpower and time ineffective.

    This might be a glance into ideas, but not very realistic. More simplistic solutions are the trend.

    Does anyone recall the "future soldier" advertised in 1999? Never came about... because it wasn't effective.

    I'm guessing the same here.

  • true that is true though. Mainly they "adapt" more to the technology.

  • This makes me wanna buy and play GRAW 2 !

  • USMC is too poor to purchase this technology but are more better trained. But I gotta admit that this technology can be useful in counter-terrorism ops & some other missions.

  • The Corps benefits from Navy and Army research projects, then implements their tech.

  • hmm... only one thing can stop these tech heavy war machines. EMP, unless they discover how to protect from such attack they are still vulnerable

  • I was reading a magazine about how China would use EMPs if the U.S. ever attacked. I'm pretty sure our military isn't exactly preparing to fight China, though haha. Companies like Future Combat Systems are really only making weapons for the "War on Terror". Or against lesser countries.

  • what magazine was that? pls. share it to me. I believe that United State still does not have the capability to shield its defense system from such an attack

  • Hmm, it was some form of military history magazine at Barnes and Noble. I can only remember the story being called "Red Dragon Rising" or "Rise of the Dragon". It was a special about the advances made by the Chinese Army and their tactics. It also gave a small scenario of what would China do if the U.S. did so and so... we basically get wooped lol :/

  • or world war 3 when the oil runs out lol

    Coalition vs the Commies haha

  • Even with that, theres still to many of them... A repeat of before, we'd run out of ammo and they would be still coming... MILLIONS OF THEM.

  • How are the coming again? Swiming? and even if they do, the American people will easily suplament active and guard forces with 80 million fun owners with over 200 million firearms. No country or coaltion of countries can ever successfully invade and occupy the United States.

  • the command and control networks of all NATO and U.S. allies are either shielded or immune to EMP blasts. and with the U.S. early warning network units have plenty of time to unhook batteries and and turn off an vulnerable equipment.

    and as someone else said how is china going to invade here? their military is set up to oppress its neighbors and internal populations.

  • @imscary2 I agree. The US military is far more set up to oppress the whole world then any other force in the world.

  • I like the video but it was too "Hollywood". Everybody seemed too realxed.

  • Take it from someone who's done it for real. It's your job to stay cool when shit is hitting the fan. We handle our business, then joke around afterward. My team leader bitched about the new plates being heavy b4 an air assault. He got shot up only an hr later. As I loaded him on the medivac bird I said, "You still wish you didn't have to wear that shit?" EPIC LOLz.

  • Lol look at the helmets they are wearing. Fucking worthless lol.

  • helmets are generally worthless unless in trenches, atleast these ones give data, and allow better communications.

  • a headshot will break your neck anyway. all a helmet has to do is to stop shrapnel from shredding your head.

  • Modern helmets are capable of stopping 7.62 rounds...

  • even if they could stop SABOT rounds, the impact of a direct hit WILL break your neck. if its just shrapnel or a round bouncing off something, your still good (unless it hits you in the face)

  • Well then why are there stories about men getting knocked down, and then realizing they had a bullet in their helmet? Oh, and they are told by men who were there...I know them personally.

  • in that case..but it still "just" be a ricochet..

    anyway..its not as if helmets are of no good..

  • true story I watched a dude get hit in the dome as he was getting out of a guard tower. I ran up & was like dude, why'd u fall dumb ass? he dropped his pot & was like. "I didn't slip, I was sniped, asshole" then I was like holy shit! when I saw where the round hit. Other than a mild concussion he was fine.

  • Helmet are useful... They stop shrapnels and bullets ( not direct hit, or only small rounds though )... I know soldiers in Kosovo that survived a direct sniper headshot

  • I agree. THESE helmets however, seem to have much less coverage than the modern helmets, the ears, back of the neck, and side of the head are completely open. Why even wear a helmet at that point? I hope they change the design.

  • All it would need is two Rpg-7s at the same time.

  • What's that anti rocket thingy at 3:43?

  • A anti-rocket thingy

  • Good show marine HAHA

  • ??? ?

  • the french would surrender if i held out a toothpick.

  • @american277 LMAO!

  • @american277 come on man, stop picking on the French. This is not 2003 anymore. Their soldiers are fighting hard and dying just like ours.

  • damn 3:37 that auto turret is so cool

  • FCS worries me. More high tech stuff that will break when hit with anything greater then a RPG-7.

  • EXACTLY! This is the problem that the generals and the contractors don't fucking mention! IEDs? Somehow we will "know" where they are and defeat them. Enemy tanks? Same thing.

  • The Russians already developed a simple countermeasure for APS. The RPG-30, a simple precursor rocket sets it off then a RPG-29 Rocket finishes the job. A 20mm anti tank rifle could take most of these things out.

  • it's not that easy and cool in real life. This FCS system is too expensive and it works only in local warfare.

  • thats why not even a battalion gets it.

    they got to be a large spec op group in a sense.

  • The program, at some point in the later future, is inevitable. However, implementing that infrastructure in the time frame that we are saying and providing training with it is ridiculously expensive.

  • the FCS ( Future Combat System )

    is the perfeckt battle system for rangers

  • If you think about it enimes in the future will not stand a chance against our troops they will be more fierec than ever :)

  • Machines are no fucking substitute for a well trained soldier, which is what it seems like the army has been doing for a while (like they like to send fucking national guardsmen out to combat and then marines have to go rescue them). We need to concentrate on giving our boys the best shit now and quit trying to establish the mobile infantry from starship troopers. Not to mention a machine can be taken and used by the enemy, but a soldiers skill dies with him.

  • This the future of combat right here, and the Army is doing a great job on it!!!! I love this. I can't wait to use it once I'm in the Army. The 360 controllers make it even better for controlling the robots since they're so simple to use. Awesome!

  • PadawanOsswe, you're a fucking idiot. This saves lives, everyone I've talked to LOVES it. Everyone now is familiar with computer technology, and FCS is going to come about sooner or later. In reality, it's coming sooner, and we need it.

    I don't think they're checking their "e-mails" during incoming fire you fucking retard. I hate ingnorants like you. You'd rather save money than save lives. Join the Army before you start criticizing it.

  • LoyalFalcon do not take issue with someone criticizing a system even if they never used it before. If you are joining the arm, forces as you say. It is critical that everyone intensely judge a system before it is fielded by our grounds troops. Your life and the life of your team member might depend on rather a system has a minor or major failure. At the point that equipment is fielded, troops will often not share their opinions for fear of retribution. Good fortune and God bless you.

  • but thats a combat situation of a asymetric war. how would it show if they fight to a nation which is as well equiped? it would be not really different to todays battles.

  • we still use the m 16?

  • ya m-16 A3. certain guns are near repalcing it but. will see.

  • YEAH! lolololol

    yall foreal believe the armie gonna bust in. save ur life

    than shoot u up with valium (diazapam)

    roffle

  • who the hell released this?

  • sctanker that's not what i'm saying, but the average grunt also isnt computer a whiz or very gracefull! everything in the field needs to be rugged, for grunts will find a way to break something wether intentional or not! and I think checking e-mail whilst taking incoming fire is out of the question!

  • dude all the people I talk to who used it hated it! even special operators wont go near this!

    honestly war is high tech enough,what DOD should be doing is working on better small arms and body armour and ear protection systems. our groundpounders allready kill everything that stands before them with efficiency. all that this sytem would do is be a hinderance.

  • Hahahha. Point made, it's all about make sure our boys get home alive, and that we have the upper hand. Ina full combat scenario this will be truly useful. Specially if you equip a battalion with all of this. We are half way there, and we have most of the technology they show here.

  • thing to remember is, the only trouble that the military has with war nowadays comes from the government bureaucracy and the civilians of america. if both groups would shut up and just let the military do their job,a lot can get acomplished quicker.

    otherwise no 3rd world country has any upperhand as far as conventional fighting goes,and our enemies are even shit at unconventional fighting!

  • Your a moron!!! Saving the lives of our troops is what the FCS (Future Combat System) is all about!

  • oh and N9QJA, I have sources to back this stuff up, the grunts dont need this! its stupid, it just adds more weight to carry around, and more shit to mangage!

  • Padawan...unless you assume the average soldier is a knuckle dragging bottom-feeder, you may have a point. What IS the answer when the technology is being developed to improve lethality, agility, and survivability.

    I just can't help thinking of all those loyal Catholics during the English civil war that didn't need those funky flintlock muskets...too complicated and easy to break.

  • i think the tank had a .30cal!IT was badass how the tank destroyed the rpg rocket with one of his own tank bullets"what i call them"!!!

  • Everything seems to work fine and ok on demonstrations.

    They wanna sell us the idea of a fast, efective, costless (in lives) - easy war.

  • Will these soldiers also know how to fight, if their batteries are low? :D ...ok, technics are good, but in a real combat, there is not so much time to concentrate on some supercolored computerscreens ;) And all these robots and technologies are way to expensive to eliminate some cheap equiped milicia-guys. But if an operator could sign the targets for you (like in flashpoint ;) ) it would be pretty helpful.

  • FCs is too complicated too much electronic nothing is manuel all automaticly. and too much hollywood-style and its very expensiv ( 100 billion $. so i think FCS is not good. the tecnology is good but not in our time

  • i would be lying to myself if i said that was not cool...

  • I was wondering where Hollywood was hiding.

  • I take it all the Videos that are related to this one was aired on the Military Channel?

  • The enemy may use EMP devices. But what if we develop Anti-EMP technology? Then the enemy develops Anti-Anti-EMP. Then we develop Anti-Anti-Anti-EMP. Then it just all goes into a loophole?

  • True, to a point. Mosy Military electronics are so expensive and hard to manufacture because they are EMP hardened completely. While in many way alot of arms races have gone strike, counter-strike, EMP Hardening uses inescapeable physics.

  • this is not going to happen any time soon

  • And you think by 2014 it will? I mean maybe by 2014 special forces will have that ability but not by the military at large. What happens if you are in combat and you use your HUD? You can only see with one eye if you are ambushed. Besides, an EMP bomb would fuck up communication pretty good. America has to stop spending so much on future military tech and use money to help its citizens get healthcare and food and get poverty down and shit that stabilizes the dammn country.

  • This Land Warrior stuff is never gonna happen. One, this shit takes billions of dollars in investing in artificial intelligence, Exoskeletal research and nanotechnology research and then money to actually put it all together in one system. Billions the USA does not have. The US is 9 TRILLION dollars in debt from just the Iraq War in War on Terrorism and War on Drugs. Equiping about 1,000,000 soldiers in this when it takes 5 or 10 soldiers captured for this technology to be replicated is stupid.

  • lol skynet from the terminator movies

  • eh clappy you again huh well, dont you think they have thought of attacks like that, i suggest you look up future weapons EMP, and stop watching false news, you guys havent lost as many troops as us, infact if you no faith in us military just stfu and stop watching videos on "US" combat systems u dumb ass,

  • If an EMP is dotonated we fight like the way we fight now dumbshit.

  • How you figure that? You wouldnt have an electrical equipment in use. So you wouldnt fight the way you do now. And no need to call me a dumbshit. I'm serving British personnel. A mate of mine has been shot by US forces 3 times during Operational Deployment so you know what FUCK YOU ARSEHOLE!

  • Friendly Fire happens. I don't hear the Danes screaming about what happend in Afghanistanwhen the British fired on them."Danish sources said the British troops fired between six and eight Javelin heat-detecting missiles at a 14-man Danish unit." So don't act like you guys don't make grave mistakes either.

  • One example there. You Americans have fired on every ally you have! So don't compare your forces to ours! Different ball game!

  • A Example? 2 fucking people died you act like its a pissing contest after you whine about your buddy getting shot at. Your suppose to be a soldier and your acting like a fucking child who wants to say my toy is better than yours. You better grow the fuck up and wipe the tears off your rosey red cheeks.

  • skewed view on the friendly fire part. If they didn't think up the possibilty of an EMP attack when regular people on youtube have, i'd be surprised.

  • Perhaps in te future, wars will involve only robots. So its robot vs robots and the govt just needs money 2 buy them n brains to develpp them. At e end of the battle, its just natural resources used up, no lives lost. Perhaps in the future winning a war depends on technology, not size of fitness of army.

  • Spending resources often has a human cost. Think of how many people could have health insurance and how many lives could be saved if it wasn't for the war in Iraq. Not very many soldiers die in battle but the cost on the nation is great.

  • if thats what the us army will look like in 6 years, i will be amazed

  • if its like that in 6 years, hell, i'm going to enlist

  • nah im more interested in the marines then the army, but im pretty sher they'll be simiuler

  • Why more interested in the Marines, they have lacking equipment and vehicles compared to the Army. The Marines just have a reputation of being crazier in combat.

  • because there better trained(at least thats what i hear)and there equipment look more effective( thats pretty funny though "The Marines just have a reputation of being crazier in combat."

  • what has that to do with the normandy?!

    looks more like an Iraq or Somalia- scenario?

  • the target building their assulting is code named normandy its not the location they're at

  • ahwkay, must have missed that

  • lol yea, this looks more like a special forces attack than army, what with the lack of air or tank support on the enemy side.

  • 4 cardinal directions yes each man watches an area pan of about 45-60 degrees, yes it's how they survive but distract them by making them relay info over a network, other than talking makes it just that much harder to watch that small area of 45 degrees. and this is gorilla warfare here cover from enemy fire almost equates to nothing

  • one more thing...why is the american flag on the medic's arm backwards

  • It's kind of an odd thing. American service men and women where backwards American flags as symbolism to show that they are moving forward and the flag is trailing in the breeze. There has been a suggestion to move the patch from the right side to the left but i don't know what ever happened to that.

  • First of, why does this video make it look like the US are the only people who have advanced in military technology? i mean look at the guy at 7:21 he's holding an MG42 clearly. it cant be anything else.

    Second of all this system would never work, the more one man is capable to do the more presure he has, there for the workload for 1 individual is far too great.

  • Dude this is for urban warfare! Also you seem ti be misinformed because the U.S is the most technologically advanced military in the world! Anyone even close to them would be their allies like Germany or Britian!

  • i'm not saying there not the best in war tech, infact they are, i'm just saying, it seems as though they think they are the ONLY ones advancing there tech since ww2, also all this tech is useless unless the soldier using it can use it. i mean look all this technology is great but the US are still just gonna bomb the hell outa the place as ussual before using any of this, making it pretty much pointless, I mean look at the Fallujah incident, easily avoidable

  • After wiping out 2 japanese cities with 2 bombs, going up to the moon and back, creating a floating lab in space, creating aircrafts that are almost invisible to radar, spending 300 billion and counting on this project and years of research and development, your telling me the most advanced country and military in the world cant make afew pieces of technology work on a soldier?? Who do you think is creating this some high school students?

  • Blackwater, the technology works. what i'm trying to get at here is can the man you put it on use it efficiently enough to make it worth implementing? and i think i high schooler would do a better job cause these guys sittin in the labs, they dont know he kind o stresses involved in the field, all this in the video where the guys are sending info back and forth is all based on how it's "meant" to work not how it "will".

  • BringerOfD,

    I think you're right completely. Sure we can do everything that we want to advance tech for soldiers btu the fact is that when there are three enemies upstairs and civilians there too you aren't going to be getting out the computer to see if a droid can check it out for you you're going to try to get up there and get to your objective. Screw this stuff!

  • canadianwwifan...since you like planning war games so much how about this; would tactics and methods would you use and what types of forces would you utilize to succeed in the scenario you described. Are you gonna go in blasting your weapons hoping you hit the bad guys and miss the civilians?

  • Well for one thing in that situation they did that wrong. They managed to identify the civlians, that means that you aim low. But you have to remember that there was a sniper that should be been giving defense fire taking out some of those guys and either forcing them back into the room maybe the hall or to the windows to atract fire. Still if I was the Sergeant, aim low and get in and clear the rooms one by one. Besides no one is stupid enough to put hostages in front of a door.

  • refer to the Art of war under the Movement of Forces. also i forgot to mention below, that upgrading vehichles and aircraft do not add more strain on the pilot/crewman. having infantry relay messages eficiently in battle does

  • But I do have to ask this. Are you saying the military we have will be fine for the first 2 decades of the 21st century? Do you think the F-22 is not worth procuring, because F-15s and F-16s work fine and cost almost 5 times less per unit?

  • I think that the Americans are to far advanced, be prepared for a global conoflict on the ground, not a battle of tactics and robots. But yes the F-22 is a valuable plane it should be built in mass.

  • thats not exactly what i'm talking about, vehicles and aircraft technology advance is a must, and is effective, because youactualy have less to do. but strap a computer onto a soldier and tell him to relay all info, is another thing, he has to watch his front, back and all other directions to stay alive, fire his weapon and transmit all that info. its just not practical

  • The soldiers are not carrying laptops. the have small modules attached to their helmets which is no different than carrying night vision goggles. the soldier does not rely the information, as you can see from the video, all of that is done by unmanned autonomic robits. The soldier has only to look at a camera and realize what is happening.

  • i'm not talking about weight here, i'm talking aout work load, the man is stressed out enough from being shot at and now he also hasta report everything via a head up dsplay which also is a bad idea cause it screwes around with your fiel of vision

  • This is why soldiers operate in squads, so they have four men watching all four cardinal directions. If you work together you survive. Soldiers never stand out in the open, they use cover so as to eliminate enemy threats from their flanks. It can be practical, you just need time and practice and soldiers willing to pioneer it on the battlefield. Parts of FCS were used in the 2003 drive to Bahgdad.

  • if your left eye sees one thing but your right eye sees another, your brain no mtter how little the difference between views would become confused, and the drive to bagdad was a drive, not a fight

  • Yeah, that's what pilots said about their hands when HOTAS was first invented on the F-15 Eagle. The solution: practice makes perfect. We're not talking about looking at two things at once. You take a quick glimpse at your HUD, realize what's happening, then figure out where the enemy is. You're not staring vividly at your HUD in the middle of the street getting shot at and trying to shootback.

  • It's like driving and looking at a map while being giving verbal instructions. You drive, listen, glimpse, drive...same thing here. They don't have to relay information; their unmanned robatic survelliance vehicles do that. If you notice in the video, the soldiers are never shooting and looking at their HUDs at the same time. They switch off their awareness from eyesight to sensors and back to eyesight.

  • your theory is of course plausible i'm just stating mine, and from what i've seen, and have researched about, its not apealing to me, so lets stop posting, i do believe the constant youtube emails are getting annoying to you as well?

  • Lol, yes, well spoken indeed. The next 10 years will tell whether of not FCS will be practical.

  • indeed, oh and FCS is the company who makes this stuff, god i dont think they'd be dumb enough to name it future combat systems, lol, too generic

  • FCS is not a company who makes anything. FUTURE COMBAT SYSTEMS is a term the U.S. Army & Congress created for there new fleet of APCs, IFVs, Tanks, IDFS, UMVs, UAVs etc...

    Different companies take part in different aspects of the technology.

  • and by the way this tech is as seen in the video expected by 2014 so we wait 6 years and see

  • Blackwater your comment is Inaccurate. A-bomb wasnt made by an American, going to outer space and the moon was done by German Scientists and Invisable plane concept was began by the Nazi's in WW2 to defeat allied Rader.

  • say hi to propaganda

  • Look at these Tanks Looks like Battlefield 2142 The go and Copy mans from Games . When than make this modern they give money for nothing like shit this programm was shit . the tank has only a 30 mm Armory

    and a 120 mm Cannon . to easy to desrtroy this anks with a RPG-7 or else . The M47 Dragoon can destroy these Crap of Tanks . To modern and against all ideologie of soldiers

  • dont know if you saw, but one of the soldiers fired an rpg at the tank, and it intercepted it. i believe its called force field or somethin like that. Also games can be a good place to find ideas(same with ideas from books and such). course you're on your own when tryin to figure out how to make it work

  • lol force field? no, its called an interceptor... a device at the top of the vehicle is constantly sweeping for any detections of a threatening missile and once it picks one up, for this instance an rpg, it fires a mini explosive projectile that explodes in a fashion that sets off the threatening projectile before it reaches the vehicle its protecting... force fields are barriers of energy around an object keeping projectiles out of its "bubble"... im pretty sure were far from that.

  • We are very close to to a ATGM interceptor for AFV's

  • I hate the FCS Program . It destroy All Ideologie of War . in 100 Years Yes than soldiers are not Mans who

    risk their life . They are then Fat and ugly Mans who sit in front of the the desk and Play War . 2 it Cocts 100 Mrd . $ per anno not all systems . Also this was stupid . USthink they fight against Russia or China or India now . To noobish . I go and Join a Normal Army but i dont know witch army :P

  • i don't know about you, but I'd rather be safe in a vehicle directing unmanned robots than out in the field getting my ass blown off :P. pretty sure almost any soldier whos been in combat would say the same.

  • Cram it, yes there is FF but this is the future lol. And they have positive ID of friendly and enemy forces, this explains why the UGV is running around and they're hitting almost every target on first burst. And lol, they need to mount a gun on that drone they threw in that window, it would make things way easier. I like the new army too! :)

  • if this is meant to be a accurate representation of the U.S army where are the friendly fire incidents?

  • the U.S army could spend less on flashy adverts and promo videos and more on training the rednecked idiots it employs?

  • does anybody see it.......is like METAL GEAR!!!!!

  • No, it's like Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter.

  • see "Future Combat Systems" @wikipedia

  • WOW, americans do love propaganda that has nothing to do with reality do they?

  • hater!!

  • 4:09 LMAO Korny as hell. "Srg were gonna need more guys" "no not today" rofl.

  • shut up Streamenterers, normandy is a codeword not a reference to the actual beach... and having only ied's and vbied's as an effectiv weapon against an enemy is not something to brag about.. its desperation

  • Hey, i'm French, and I see a video about the futur French Soldier (FELIN), it's really funny to see difference betwen USA and France :) You'r really more ASSAULT, and we are more tactical :)

    Really good army have too !

    Vive la France et les USA :)

  • Assualt on normandy lol ???? :/. Who decided to choose that for a location to demonstrate the FCS, lol. Who are you gonna fight in normandy ?, your own allies ? lol. You `should` demonstrate how the IED`s of the future will rip through the newly desined armour like butter. Its all show and will be no better than the current millitary equipment. What a waste of money.Russian scientists will just test samples of FCS armour, and teach terroists how to counter it, and make new types of IED`.

  • I hate you fucking amies with your self-assertive behavior. With your war and weapon shit you aren't better than hitler! And how good you really are we see in Iraq!!!

  • I smell a raving liberal idioooooooot. Shaddup you turd.

  • shut up you pussy

  • HAHAHA that guys name is SHMOOMAKER!

  • your company should also build non-flammable US flags soon

  • there's no money and scientifics to cure the AIDS, cancer, and rare sickness, but you've got resources enough to create this? who are you trying to deceive?

  • 3000 networked soldiers, all the equipment and vehicles used just to enter into a house... do you know how much will any mission cost compared to simply deploying some soldiers?

    war is much more than pressing a buttom, and pressing it once is very expensive.

    the technology and the money expended on it should be used to cure illness, not to improve ways to kill more people.

  • if you answer me that this way will be less casualties the logical response is this one: instead of killing militars armed with your weapons don't sell equipment to them and negotiate.

  • instead of killing militars armed with your weapons don't sell equipment to them and negotiate.

    does anybody know how much does a simple deployment cost? nothing in comparison with the one in this video!! furthermore, do you think Americans are the only country in the world with scientifics who can develope these weaponry? what will happen when this technology be sold to other countries militia or when other countries make them too?