Greatest Ever Tanks - T72 (7)

Greatest Ever Tanks - T72 (7) feared soviet eastern Communist 125 mm 2A46M smoothbore deathtrap Iraq war Soviet war in Afghanistan

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Greatest
• Ever
• Tanks
• T72
• feared
• soviet
• eastern
• Communist
• 125
• mm
• 2A46M
• smoothbore
• deathtrap
• Iraq
• war
• Soviet
• in
• Afghanistan

[pacus123]

LOL! Tom Clancy ... what a retard. That man never ceases to amaze me with the BS coming out of his mouth.

[AceKylar]

In U.S. u break vehicles, In soviet Russia Vehicles breaks you!! 

[TheTokkin]

@mower2008 The T72s in the gulf war were little better than t 55s. They were degraded export models and the Iraqis were undersupplied, poorly trained and organized. The reason why coalition tanks defeated them had nothing to do with ammunition storage. The t 72 was in service in the Finnish armed forces and I've never heard anyone complain about the supposed dangers of the autoloader: theres plenty of space for the crew to operate safely without losing their arms.

[Frauenman]

@SMGJohn What you describe as manpower- and firepower focus are both attrition and quantity based. I.E. there are really little difference between them. However the soviet union did not have an attrition based perception of warfare, rather they emphasized mobility and maneuver. This shows especially in how they regarded the usage of tanks. They were not to be pitted head on against the enemy, they were to exploit oppertunities and act in the strategical depth.

[SMGJohn]

@Frauenman I was talking about cold war. They where mostly mechanized troops and little infantry moving on foot. And no I didn't just randomly pull it out of Hearts of iron I don't even play those games...

This are from Soviet military

[Frauenman]

@SMGJohn It seems like someone have been playing a little to much Hearts of Iron. I suggest that you regard popular computer games a little more criticly in the future. Soviet tanks of the cold war and even ww2 era was not intended for frontal assault en masse. They were intended to operate with high speed and mobility in the strategical depth, hence the concept of deep operation.

[SMGJohn]

@Frauenman It's called Manpower focus. You focus a massive mechanized army towards the enemy at a high speed with tons of firepower. Breaking the enemy defences with fear and destruction. It seems this method is much better then the allies firepower focus just throwing all their shit at the enemy and then sneaking behind them.

[mower2008]

@RetroPaintball You really need to work on your penmanship and calm down. Were you not paying attention to the fact that the T-72's ammunition is exposed? That is why American and British tanks chewed them up in the Gulf War. Besides, the Soviets no doubt did everything they could to keep their soldiers from talking about the dangers of the autoloader.

[Frauenman]

0:50 That retard really got some inside information on soviet army strategy and tactics. I had no idea they readopted ww1 doctrines.

I always thought the t72 was meant for strategical exploitation (thus the emphasis on high mobility and low visability) and not to be an infantry support, frontal assault vehicle. Discovery channel really furthers ones knowledge...

[RetroPaintball]

@mower2008 Tom Clancy knows s*** all about russian tech, what evidence supports your view they are death traps? it is more of a rumour than fact about the deadly auto loader, Can you tell me one case where that has actually happenned? Finland used T-72 from early 90's until 2004 and it never was reported, please give evidence to back up your claims!



[KSGAxAirsoft]

@XxxSakura101 A lot of technological advancements can be made within 5 years.