Added: 3 years ago
From: discoverysweden
Views: 172,542
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (469)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • 1:06 yep, the name is "the rpg magnet". But due to the tires, it is also better on roads and shit offroad, making it passes on predictable places, so is also a good ied "detector", when it blows up on em.

  • a lav is quicker because the nzarmy got a speed ticket in a 100 km area

  • Infantry Fighting Vehicle IFV is not Armor Personal Carrier APC

  • watch BLACKTAILDEFENSE CHANNEL and you'll see a well-founded series exposing the Stryker scam !!!! THE STRYKER SUCKS FROM HORIZON TO HORIZON NUMBER 4 ON THE BULLSHIT LIST Who made that list , anyway ? The neighbor's dog ?!?!

  • for my taste is the stryker not strong enough armored(maybe the award for the ability to cross water) and a little too expensive.

    but still a good adaptable concept.

  • @gOtze1337 it has to be fast to keep up with other fast, light vehicles. it is supposed to provide support for fast units that are otherwise too light on fire power.

  • I can not take seriously this broadcast, because they assume the production rate....

    its like: "hey, a honda civic is better then a BMW, because the production rate is higher..."

  • wtf its just an an lav and these things are canadian

  • the old and venerable french VAB whive his 40 years of service made the same work ....

  • the guy that talks sounds GAY

  • Why the hell do so many of you find any excuse to make some juvenile comment against America? This is a great vehicle that has proven its worth in combat for many years.

  • @Rammagith Nonsense. Its a costly, clumsy, badly armored vehicle with dubious utility. No one outside the US buys it. The Stryker variants almost invariably suck, too. Watch the "real stryker" series here in utube

  • @Rammagith cause its just a canadian vehicle with a few difrent things on it.

  • @TheTemplarnight My real point was is that it has served its purpose very well in combat over the last decade. There may be better IFV's out there but the real reason I think it deserves a place in the list is because of the extend of combat it has seen compared to others, the results it produced, and the many modifications its had over the years, not to mention the mission oriented way the US has used them in Iraq during many victorious missions.

  • @Rammagith if thats how u where classifying this than the m8 greyhound would be a better choice simply because it was used in almost every battle in world war 2 and some in other battles etc.. it has a far better history and it also moved faster and had a better gun and it was from world war 2. That shows how the military standards have decreased over the years. Its realy sad.

  • ...I feel like this place should have gone to the LAV III that the Stryker is a lightly-armed version of.

  • Hey mumpfi1994. That's because they are both manufactured by gm.

  • hmm looks the swiss Piranha 4x4

  • @mumpfi1994

    yeah, that's because it's a modified Canadian LAV III which is based on the MOWAG Piranha 8x8.

  • The idea that this unbelievable piece of shit is at number four is a disgrace. No country outside the US has bought it (ok Canada has bought some, but only specialized variants). This is a pathetic performance compared to BMPs and Gavins.

  • @TheTokkin Jealous?

  • @QBisbest jealous of this trashy pathetic excuse of an apc? hah. I'd rather equip an army with a modernized m113.

  • @TheTokkin But, this vehicle has been successful.. more than successful.

  • @QBisbest umm, no. No one outside the US uses it. Watch the "real stryker" series by user blacktaildefense

  • @TheTokkin They have an entire brigade based around this thing.

  • armor classified hahahahaha bullshit

  • Stryker pales in comparison to the LAV III lol

  • @reidmeyers I hope you are kidding. Strykers are LAV3s.

  • @1spoon1fork ...they are the American variant of the LAVIII yes. But the Americans decided they needed less armour and no 25mm cannon. Sure you can mount a 105 on it...but seriously? So I'm going to stick to what I said thanks ;).

  • this thing is sick!

  • Does he really have the "anti-RPG " magnetic(?) shield? Or does even exist something like it is in CoDMW2? thx :)

  • @csapilot1

    CoDMW2 is full of crap, stuff like heartbeat sensor don't exist in real life... same goes for magnetic shield... don't exist... You only have reactive armor or cage armor for tanks/ vehicles.

  • @csapilot1

    I dunno but I saw this article about an automated anti-RPG system where it can shoot the RPG out of the air without any human control or something like that.

  • @CSRgamer It does exist in that sense but is still being worked on. Army Active Protection System (IAAPS).

  • @azndude1789

    Aight thanks

  • @csapilot1 well it the anti rpg weapon in mw2 is a bulletstorm weapon, firing 1000000 bullets a second.

  • btr-90 with Brezhok turret is very good but have 20.000kg weight is amphibious and berezhok turret have 4 kornet

  • lol the LAV3 has been in canada for a long time and we have a 25mm on it

  • @34kibble The LAV 25 has been used by the USMC since the 80's and we have a M242 Bushmaster 25mm cannon.

  • @NatedogJr Canada has been using the LAV25 for just as long with the same gun.

  • @34kibble LAV 3 = LAV 25???

  • @NatedogJr We use both the LAV3 and the Lav 25 the LAV 3 is bigger and holds more men and we use the Lav 25 as a scout.

  • I always wonder why the armor would be classified but they say what the weapons are.

    anybody wanna give me an input on that?

  • @ZGzoids Armor is 7.62mm/14.5mm, but they don't want to say how they put the armor so a potential enemy won't copy it or make a better version, or destroy it.

    Weapons are a variety. M1126 can use a M2 Browning or a Mk 19 grenade launcher. M1128 Mobile Gun System has a M682A2 105 mm cannon.

  • @NatedogJr thanks, now i understand.

  • Just as useless FYI, the Stryker Family has been based off the Canadian design of the LAV III, which is also used in the New Zealand forces as well. Source wikipedia... Nonetheless an amazing piece of kit to have outside the wire.

  • Comment removed

  • @scassidy0526 Hey shithead! Time for you to take your medication Einstein!

  • i survived a recoiless rifle attack because of my stryker, it is an outstanding vehicle. RIP C-22 you were the best truck i ever had. I had the Recon Vehicle not the ICV

  • BTR is meaner, and probably more agile than this shit.

  • @LynxSr

    Especially the BTR-3 that the ukrainians are now building; also the AMV patria is exceedingly good.

  • @LynxSr Is it as modular? Is it battle proven? Can it stop RPG hits? Can it even stop 14.5 mm fire? And is it designed to fight asymmetric warfare like the Stryker? No way. The Stryker is only made to fight in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. That is why it doesn't have 20 mm guns or 30 mm guns as standard armament. And it is the same reason the BTR-90 and BTR-80A isn't used by the Russians for asymmetric warfare. The US uses the Bradley for what the BTR-90/4/80A series does.

  • The Styker is junk, it's the LAV III with less firepower, the Yankee's would like to think it's all american but this baby is Canadian as back bacon.

  • @FinnBears

    no, the original design is swiss, from mowag, not canadian.

  • I wonder if any of you were ever in a stryker brigade?

  • Why the hell does this vehicle get 4th place?! It has so many weaknesses, it doesn't deserve to be in the top 10! A better candidate for 4th place would be hmm maybe the South African Ratel, it performed very well for the South African army during their wars with Angola.

  • @KelbAlrai1990 its because its American propaganda, The Lav3 went in service in 99, later on different version were made, Stryker, NVLav etc...

    Agreed south African RG series too, have a far superior survival rate with road side bombs too. Canada only used them as road cleariers in Afghanistan, and the U.S did not bother until the death toll went up from IED's, now i believe they use a version of them as a standard.

  • @Baseshocks Despite the whole armour classified as in material, it can only withstand officially 14.7mm rounds. Its a very weak vehicle in comparison to others. Purely a corporate lobby sale.

  • Don't forget the LAV!!!

  • from the night vision ,to the best assault rifles and rocket programs ... german technology everywhere

  • @91SPB

    Germans weren't only people who had night vision systems in use.

  • @91SPB you r total retard ... germanz invented the night vision and use late in the war ....later americans and russians coppied like everything else

  • fucking american liar twats.. LAV my ass morons.. its ot-64..

  • Concept is copied from Czechoslovakian OT-64 SKOT..

  • too easy, use rocket launcher to blow any inf. carrier vehicle

  • not the first wheeled vehicle since WWII dumbass Discovery Channel...

  • I has held up well to IED attack.

  • Why is its turret so tall? It gives it a very high profile.

  • The Stryker is a logistical nightmare, largely bound to easy terrain, under armored, overweight, poorly armed, uncooled and is not airliftable at combat weight by a C-130.

  • @Chinomareno Do you think the army commission vehicles without working this sort of thing out?

  • @tantorecords

    Yes, corruption and indifference to the combat effectiveness and safety of US forces allows mistakes like the Stryker to happen. The attitude is the US army is too big to fail and the enormous logistical support of the US can cope with and obscure beastly guzzlers like Stryker and the M1.

  • @Chinomareno This is in your 'opinion'... are you in the forces? I doubt it. My brothers in the 3rd armored cavalry, word on the sand is that these things are sick. I bet you're just a little geek flunky who spends their entire life thinking they know better than everyone else. Sorry dude, but your full of shit. Largely bound to easy terrain? Under armored? IT FITS A NICHE YOU MORON. It's got more armor than a humvee, less than an abrams, they have to find a balance between efficiency & weight

  • @tantorecords

    Being a road bound APC isn't a niche... you are just being naive and defensive, it's rather pathetic. Stryker doesn't bring any new capability to the fight, gets stuck in multiple terrain types, flips over due to it's high center of gravity injuring and killing crew in the process. It's flat bottomed, meaning no mine resistance, it's suspension means there's no escape hatch. Why do you think they put 3 tons of slat armor(failed concept) on them if they were well armored?

  • @Chinomareno who cares it gets the job done until you and the chinomareno company makes a better apc please shut the fuck up

  • @ak907jk

    Yeah totally, who cares who gets killed driving around in these things or the billions wasted making an obsolete armored car? I'm not that invested in it either I just think it's crazy.

    Maybe until you start manufacturing APCs you can't comment on APCs or until you are a politician you can't complain about politics, make sense right? herpyderp..

    Think before tearing up, getting angry and telling others to please do anything you fucking dolt, it's a piece of hardware not you.

  • @Chinomareno ounce again i am not the one bitching about it you are so until u make a better one STFU and if you dont like how the US spends their money then why dont you leave go to russia because they are so much richer than the US, man those russians have it so easy. its not like youve driven their apcs before in combat but yet you know they are better you must be the smartest person in the world, can I worship u? please tell me of this knowledge u magically posses lol your a fuckin moron=)

  • @ak907jk

    It's pitiful how upsetting this is to you, it's obvious a basic level of logic eludes you. Far out, were you wiping the drool off the keyboard at the same time as typing that mess? One sentence at a time buddy, baby steps, someone out there believes in you.

  • @Chinomareno yes i called you out for bitchin and you got all pissy over it and then i did it again and now since you dont have shit on me you are talking about my youtube grammar you are pathetic lol

  • @Chinomareno please can you make a better apc for us we will gladley use it if you make one

  • @ak907jk

    You already have better APCs than this, EU members and Russia make better armored transports than this.

  • @Chinomareno I am pretty fucking happy with mine... it is much easier to work on than the Bradley...

    people tend to forget that if you are doing recon work you need something quiet and easy to dismount from. Stryker dominates the recon world.

  • @JCavScout Its noisy as fuck - same as LAV 25 , its just a an upgraded stretched hull really.

  • This APC was designed in canada

  • M1128 IS MORE BETTER

  • @80atilla LMAO it has a fucking huge ass canon on it!!! Ya but were talking about IFV's not artillerys capable of going over 100km

  • I FEEL LIKE I'M FIGHTING OFF A RAPE. AND, THE ENTIRE BLACK RACE IS MOVING SILENTLY AND SWIFTLY GETTING IN POSITION TO SLAP ME DOWN. THEY ARE CALLING ME A RACIST BECAUSE I JUSED THE N-WORD TO COMMUNICATE THE LEVEL OF THE VIOLATION THEY BLACK RACE IS DOING TO ME AS WELL AS THE SHOCK OF SURPRISE. THEY ARE USING POLITICAL CORRECTNESS TO BURY ME ALIVE IN FRONT OF PEOPLE.

  • @billslusser Your an idiot!

  • Same as the Soviet BTR

  • i wish they would give a bit of credit to the canadians since both the LAV_25 and the Stryker were based on canadian designs

    AVGP->LAV-25->Bison->ASLAV->Co­yote->LAV-III->Stryker->NZLAV

    see what i'm getting at

  • @maxrocks19 your Canadian stuff was based on the swiss MOWAG Piranha. so swiss>canada>america

  • hmm stryker brigades huh, more like German armored warfare crap

  • I like to see the Vehicle in a civlian aplication

    used as a rescue platorm instead of only military , 

  • copying russia much?

  • These pecies of Shit was were being blown up by IEDS in Iraq lol Sorry .

  • @15thsquadron01 To be fair they really cut down on casualties for a few months. To take these things out took a small tooled factory churning out dozens of shaped charges every day - rather than individuals rigging up old artillary shells to explode in their backrooms as they were using in the early day of the insurgencies.

    So the stryker forced the insurgents to become better organised and equiped.

  • True that the stryker put cages around them so that soviet or russian rpgs could explode away form its kill zone. Strykers also are called silent death Because there fast and Quiet. Strykers have been modified to deal with the threats. I love the styrker I see alot them here at schofield baracks on ohau in hawaii. Strykers can be outfitted with a variety of weapons.

  • @15thsquadron01

    1) The flat belly prone to mines cannot be engineered away

    2) The burst prone tires are easily set on fire

    3) the view is poor and so the Stryker is easily ambushed

    4) the "slat" armor prematurely detonates only 1 in 2 shots, and a direct RPG hit means KIAs

    5) The vehicle has the same fuel efficiency as the M113 which can have modern NERA on it, which the stryker isn't designed for

    6) It costs as much as 4 M113A3s (!!!!!)

  • What is the meaning of steel bars on the sides and front of Stryker?

  • @Imprudentman It makes it a bad-ass bumper car!

  • Comment removed

  • @Gemini838 Yes. But behind the door in Stryker. Your statement is meaningless. Though you are right. These guys already know how it is possible to quick ruin the this car..

    

  • @Imprudentman the steel bars are designed to detonate rpgs and other explosives before they reach the main armor. You can google bird cage armor and it will turn up stuff. In theory, the extra distance of a few inches will reduce the amount of force applied to the main hull of the vehicle, increasing armor effectiveness.

  • Comment removed

  • @xxwarsmithxx think that all the electronics go out after the first hit RPG in the machine frame or not?

  • @xxwarsmithxx It seems to me that these bands, they weld to be loaded into these tanks stolen Iraqi good. Is not it?

  • Your welcome america

  • everything in modern armies > copied from nazi germans :(

  • @91SPB Well,Nazi Germans revolutionized tonss of war doctrines and equipment.

    1st jet fighters,assault rifles,ICBMs,cruise missiles.

    1st to have mechanized infantry,Blitzkrieg(revolution use of combined assault).

  • When I first read your comment, I immediatly started to object, just out of natural reflex. Once I thought about your statement, the more I had to (albiet reluctantly) agree. Thank God they were led by and idiot, or we would have probably lost. Their equipment (not their soldiers) were far superior to anything we fielded, and we just beat the shit out of them in the arena of production. 10 inferior tanks were just too much for one superb tank.

  • @91SPB

    so true

    i once saw a show that stated that the nazis defeated themselves(not hitler with hist stupidity or the russians/allies) by creating weapon sytems that were too good(in terms of construction cost-time)

  • @91SPB Its sad to say, but it is true!

  • Comment removed

  • @ThugCologne stop putting this in every videos you see. WE KNOW THE DIFFERENCE! you don't need to put false information to back you up.

  • @91SPB Just shows how smart ze Nazis were. But frankly, the germans had the hanomag half track in ww2, which is imho better than this.

  • @91SPB yes the Germans may have originated the designs but they did not perfect them =)

  • @ak907jk thats not true

  • @91SPB Well... Germans are the best engineers and historically create the best of anything mechanical

  • @91SPB As opposed to Bulgaria which has pretty much not made any contribution to the world other than gypsies.

  • @snipski0894 learn some history of the innovations and u'll see that much of the most important things ever created have bulgarian patent ... I'll tell you only one >>> the FIRST COMPUTER was created by John ATANASOV ... ATANASOV ! thats sounds bulgarian i think? we are now in the information age with the computer the core of this age SO >? is that shuts your mouth u fucking scum ???

  • @91SPB He was born in New York, if he was born in Bulgaria his biggest achievement would be eating grass of a gypsy whores asshole.

  • @snipski0894 whatever u write u still a fag ...snipski sounds serbian or other slavic slave shit ..so go suck nazi's cock

  • @91SPB Take your meds and we just might listen to your bullshit lies cherry boy!

  • @91SPB

    Their ideology was the issue, not their genious.

  • This machine has a 24 mm armor ... ;)

  • The Basic desing is a LAV 25 witch is he American Version of the Piranha III... so that meens all the bushwacking abou American ore Soviet designs are over...ITS SWISS BUILT!!!!!

  • @Rschaltegger AMEN!

  • Striker is a copy-paste from the BTR, just like the T-50 is a copy-paste from the reptor. Every designer today is really innovative in his thinking....

  • lool these stupid guys contradict themselves...they say it's a very mobile vehicle etc etc..and marks for mobility are average....WTF !

  • @MrMadpenguin No, hes wrong. But like i said in my last comment, I dont think that the Stryker should be called an IFV. The Stryker is more like an APC. But what me, you, or him think dosent matter...That fact is that the Stryker is classifide as an IFV even tho we dont think it should be. Once again, i consider the Stryker an APC, but for some reason they call it an IFV. I also try to point out the fact that the Stryker can also have a 105mm main gun.

  • @786killzone The Stryker should not be called an IFV. The Army considers it to be an ICV or Infantry Carrier Vehicle. Certain models have the armament of a tank and it can work as a tank destroyer but it is not a tank.

    What really sets it apart from IFVs is the fact that it is so versatile. Almost all IFVs cannot be good at recon operations, AT purposes, engineering, and many more. It is not an IFV but something that is completely unique which makes it very valuable in it's own way.

  • @Sismiques Are you that stupid. The Stryker can be fited with a 105mm gun. IDK WTF your on. But i do have to say that i dont agree with it being called an IFV...its more like an APC. And you are wrong, "An IFV is any vehicle capable of carrying an infantery squad on land with an armament greater than 20mm", I dont know where you got that bullshit off of but your wrong. Even tho I consider the Stryker an IFV...Its still an IFV. So STFU.

  • @786killzone Well he is kind of right though, the Stryker should not be that high, it is overrated becouse it is American (BTW Im not criticizing American design, they got good stuff, but the Stryker is not one of those).

  • @786killzone

    The BMP-1, whose name means Infantry Fighting Vehicle, carries an infantry squad, has a 73mm gun, can fire ATGMs, and is amphibious.

    The Stryker is no "IFV"

    Makes for a lousy IFV if it is one.

  • это БТР 80!

  • Stryker is not an IFV.

    Lightly armed, overweight, limited amphibious capabilty.

    

  • @Sismiques Stryker is an IFV, By definition and IFV is a vehicle that can Carry infantry into and out of battle and is able to provide firing support for the infantry.

    So yes it is an Infantry Fighting Vehicle.

  • @packstack15

    Funny, IFVs typically have an armarment of 20mm or more.

    The Stryker is an APC.

  • @Sismiques you can say what you feel. But By Definition, The Stryker is an IFV , AFV , APC. Because really what your saying that it is an Armored personnel carrier and every single thing that is made to hold infantry is an APC that include BMP's to.

    What your also saying is that anything that typically has an armament of 20mm or more is an IFV. Thats wrong because an IFV is made to support infantry in a combat zone. As long as the vehicle can provide firing support for infantry than it is IFV.

  • @packstack15

    No, an APC has an armarment of less than 20mm.

    A BTR-80 is an APC, BTR-90 IFV, get it?

  • Comment removed

  • @Sismiques what im trying to say is your saying "an APC has an armarment of less than 20mm"

    There have been APC's in the Past that had more firepower than a 20mm, but still are Classified as APCs. What your saying is wrong and misleading. If you look at the Damn Definition of an APC it Does not include the Saying "Anything Less than a 20mm".

  • @packstack15

    So the BMP-2 isn't an IFV?

  • Comment removed

  • @Sismiques Where in my last comment do I say, "The BMP-2 isn't an IFV"? Can you even read English correctly?

  • @packstack15

    Ok,since you belive I can't read English, I will tell you in Russian!

    Смотрит на Русскии язика!

    Стйкер не боевая машина пехот!

    Ладно?

  • @Sismiques say what you want man. You can go ahead and say that the Stryker is not an infantry fighting vehicle.

    But just remember this, what you where saying is that a IFV is anything that has a caliber lager than 20mm, If that is true than that will still make the Styker MGS and the MK19 version an IFV as well.

    What im trying to say to you is, Don't go around the world saying that an IFV is anything with a caliber lager than 20mm. Because that will make a Battleship an IFV as well.

  • @packstack15

    An IFV is any vehicle capable of carrying an infantery squad on land with an armament greater than 20mm, idiot!

    If the Stryker is an "IFV", it makes for a very lousy one.

    Not well armed.

    Not well armoured for it's weight.

    Not fully amphibious.

    Lacks firing ports.

    No ATGM or large bore gun.

    Real great "IFV" you got there.

  • @Sismiques ok let me say this to you. GO ON GOOGLE RIGHT NOW, And Search for the following -- "Stryker MGS" and you will see that a Stryker does have an armament greater than a 20mm (105mm Fucking Cannon)

    And one more time read you own comment -->> "An IFV is any vehicle capable of carrying an infantry squad on land with an armament greater than 20mm, idiot!" <<--- After you have read your own comment you should understand that your still saying that a stryker is an IFV

    Your a Dumbass. DONE!!

  • @packstack15

    And that Stryker carries an infantry squad?

    I am talking about the regular Stryker, the one only armed up to .50 BMG!

  • @Sismiques Cool you got that one gone But now you still have another problem, What About the Styker MK-19 Version? That has an armament of a 40mm

    So in the end the only point im trying to get across your thick head is that an "IFV DOES NOT NEED TO HAVE A 20MM TO BE A IFV"

    Because if you still want to follow your own words than you are still calling the Styker a IFV. Not only that your comment is also so misleading that you can Call a Humvee with a MK-19 on it an IFV as well.

  • @packstack15

    A rather short ranged 40mm, but hey this is such a great "IFV", that is why it can't swim, can't hit far away targets, not well armoured for it's weight.

    Good luck when facing BMPs and BTR-90s.

    And not all are armed with the Mk19.

  • @Sismiques you do know that theres a 120mm smoothbore version rite?

  • @153masterchief not 120 it is 105mm high velocity barrled rifle like the old m60s :D

  • @Sismiques do you think that the army cares for the stryker to swim? if so they would of have done that. But the main point you keep missing (because your such a dumbass) is that an IFV does not need a 20mm or more just to be called an IFV. If you keep saying "an IFV needs a 20mm or more" then Yes the Stryker is an IFV

    I'm just trying to say that you need to EDIT what your saying and cut out the "IFV needs a 20mm or more" because your just keep contradicting your self.

  • @packstack15

    It lacks pretty much most IFV qualites.

    The BMP-1, eventhough it is a very old design, does way more, larger main gun, has a coax machinegun, can fire ATGMs, can swim, and has firing ports.

    Stryker is a joke!

  • @Sismiques Your a dumbass. You completely keep missing what im saying to you. Learn to read jackass.

  • @packstack15

    Haha, read Serbian!

    Јебем ти маму пичку!

    Ја знам БМП, ти не!

  • @Sismiques

    איר זענט שטום רוסישע הור יאָ. פּאַק אָנלייגן געזאגט טאַנק סאַקס טאָכעס. זויגן מיין דיק איר לאָך. שפּראַך טאָן ניט ענין

  • @packstack15

    Курвин син!

  • @packstack15 fuck knows what you just typed there.. use english idiot.

  • @MrAzzman31 if you were smart you will not say anything about it. Only dumbasses replay to comments that is not even in there language.

    Then again you cannot even begin a English sentence correctly. So you cannot type good English yourself jackass.

  • @packstack15 suck my grammer and dick after it asshole !

  • @MrAzzman31 Im sorry, I've stopped reading your comment after the word "Grammar". Reason being is that you've failed to achieve proper English grammar. Not only that you've also failed to spell gammar Right.

    Its spelled with an "ar". Not with an "er" at the end.

    Try again.

  • @packstack15 so did you quote "grammar. Not only that you've also failed to spell gammar Right.

    Its spelled with an "ar". Not with an "er" at the end." idiot

  • @MrAzzman31 Now you've fail to read sarcasm correctly.

    Please learn to read and type correctly, then come back and try to make fun of me. I hate trying to make fun of users on YouTube when they cannot even type English correctly. It pretty much already does that for me.

    If it may help you, You know that you can type what your going to say on Microsoft Word then "Copy, Paste" here onto YouTube. So your spelling won't look so repugnant.

    Try going to school ! That helps also !

  • @packstack15 i dont know in what fucked up 3rd world country you are living in mate but as long as you understand what i am typing i dont give a shit if it is right or wrong spelled. and i congratulate you becuz you just proved that you are not an oxygen waste my friend. i am actualy happy to talk with you even if it is over internet :) but admit that "gammar" was not sarcasm you just forgot the r there :)

  • @MrAzzman31 I've stopped reading your comment after "becuz" Because of, well you might know why. However Skipping the capitalization mistakes you've made I did read a part of your comment.

    Its lovely when ignorant humans always still try to use the "3rd World Country" Taunt. Whats even better is the fact that you use it on me "The person with proper English typing skills". Its like your saying that 3rd world speaks much better then 1st and 2nd world.

    Throw your keyboard away stupid human.