Derek 2.0

A subjective perspective……..As I indicated to the OGFT: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers

We intend to, fore entertainment and discourse is the purpose of this website……….If you feel the contributions to this forum that I (or any other members) make infuriating or cluttering your ability to converse with others, as directed by the site moderator, there is an ignore feature: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers

As I said, if you’re not interested in a given exchange, don’t partake……..If you want to further discuss something more focused, post something and if others are interested, they will take part in your avenue of discussion…….some are more then capable of following differing sub-themes.........If you feel left out or slighted (for whatever reason) over the varying depths of this discussion, by all means report it in an attempt to stifle discourse amongst differing members……..

Certainly and ironically, several of the F-35’s most vocal critics in the press today, chastised the resulting Abrams tank back then…… I still think the A-12 was a victim of the times, and if it wasn’t fore the eventual Cold War draw down, we’d see the Dorito aboard carriers today…..None the less, there have been far more successful developments then abject failures.

I thought someone would catch the pun………. But it is a common theme of this discussion……Some lean towards the equipment identified as required by the military, some suggest a “cheaper alternative” as “good enough” and attempt to justify their selection by contrasting with what the Forces actually need....... As I’ve said, who better to define technical requirements then those that will use it?

Here:

I have every intention of continuing to discuss this subject, a subject encompassing all facets of costly defence procurements contrasted to the technical benefits that they will bring to a modern battlefield, versus older or less expensive legacy platforms……..be they tanks, F-35s, new ships, rifles or combat boots... From a political perspective, some consider providing the men and women that serve in our Armed Forces the equipment that they deem necessary to perform tasks placed upon them by the elected Government a very important discussion…….some don’t find such subjects interesting and of that I’m not surprised……others, like yourself and WWWTT, consider the members of our armed forces nothing more than teenagers that “just got their license” or War Pigs…. I certainly don’t feel I need your blessing to continue.......

I’m sorry if you feel our discussion lacked your level of clarity, but did you ever consider that some people are capable of having more nuanced discussions, focusing on a wider plane of a topic, then yourself?

I think I prefer Weird Al's version....that one reminded me of Pac-Man

I have to admit, most of his videos post about 1990 I hardly know which artist he’s spoofing…..but still very humorous in my view.

Ahhh but it’s also subjective to ones own tastes……..I find little interest in for example climate change, social justice or bash Israel topics, as such, I don’t normally read & partake in those threads……If you find what other people are discussing boring/bland don’t read it……seems a simple concept no?

Sorry if you were unable to follow our discussion on cost/benefit returns relating to defence procurement programs that encompass far more then the F-35…perhaps a little too in-depth and/or bland for some……..feel free to slag Harper/Americans or regale us with one of your Gumpish tales…….

Some other interesting news: I doubt many. Very few, typically only Politicians, Judges, Crown lawyers and high level police officers are deemed worthy by the Provincial CFOs to effectively defend their lives with a firearm. How would said information threaten those individuals? Bull stuffing…….gun makers have been making specific calibers and firearms to contend with all forms of potentially dangerous game found in North America…… Of course, with average Canadian metropolitan police response times being ~10+ minutes, their definition of insufficient is clearly subjective…… .......And that almost never happens........... So a Toronto city counsellor was not only granted a carry permit because he got into a scuffle with a drug dealer, but was also allowed to purchase a Glock 19, which is prohibited firearm in Canada based on being less then 1/10th of an inch under the legal length…..

The new Colt Canada (semi only) C7 and C8 line of rifles are in stores now......

Only if they are of a European design

So you’re suggesting eliminating the command structure of the Iraqi military at the onset was no benefit? How so? Did I not say both tanks (Born out of the same design process to boot), were not designed for the same threat? And if your aunt had balls she’d be your uncle But the Leopard II doesn't use the same ammo.....so in effect, it is not as effective as the Abrams. And the benefit of DU munitions is what? Sure I did…….Superior acceleration and gear ratios……mine plough and rollers I’ve spoken of…….other ones off the top of my head: -Electric traverse motor for the turret (The Leo II up to A4 relied upon hydraulics) -Superior, secured battlefield communication package since it’s inception which allowed a tank commander to directly contact artillery (M109 or MLRS) or air support (Cobras, Apaches, Kiowa and A-10s etc) without reliance on a FOO or FAC. -Net-centric data sharing between not only other tanks, but other (armoured) vehicles within it’s formation (M2/3 Bradley, LAV-25, AAVP7 etc), aircraft, artillery and the command structure. The Egyptians in ‘73, initially drove the Israelis back along the Sinai until the Americans provided modern ECM equipment so the Israeli Phantoms and Skyhawks weren’t being plucked from the air by Egyptian air defences……. And of course, I never asserted the Egyptians knew more about armoured warfare then the Germans, but that they had more recent direct experience…….I doubt the German army has any serving veterans of the Afrika Korps within their senior ranks….. Yet more personal attacks……..Again, as I said earlier, who has had more recent experience in armoured warfare? Germany or Egypt…………You celebrate German success, even though they ultimately ended in defeat, but assume the Egyptians had no successes of their own because they also lost? As to technical specifications upon the tanks in question, I’ve provided my reasoning, coupled with the Abrams proven combat record……. Clearly your inability to have a discussion without resorting to personal and emotional attacks is a clear indication of you being fatigued…….don’t worry, I certainly don’t take it personal and hope you return once you’re rested and in good spirits.

Back on topic it is then: Now I know you weren’t a Gripen worshiper: The three bids are Lockheed, Boeing (Super Hornet) and the Eurofighter.......Throughout the history of the Royal Danish Air Force, they have only ever operated a single, twin engine aircraft (a handful of 1940s era Gloster Meteors through the 50s), with the remainder all being single engine designs………And of course, the Danes have operated these aircraft, despite their single engine, for decades forward based to the Arctic through Greenland:

Russians or separatists?

I like this one:

No, going after a Soviet style, centralized military C&C apparatus does more than symbolic and psychological damage. You continually suggested the reason for development was not important to the outcome…….clearly confronting a superior force (in terms of numbers) of crappy Soviet tanks was the intent of both designs. So you won't answer the question? So refusal to employ more effective ammunition on political/moral grounds doesn’t, in your opinion, contribute or detract to the overall effectiveness of the tank? Source? So in your view the ammunition doesn’t play into effectiveness of the tank………So a Leo II armed just with smoke (for political reasons of course) would be as effective as a Abrams with a standard combat load? Now I know you feel ammunition doesn’t play into the overall tanks effectiveness, but in your view would a M1A3 with a L55 and DU rounds be no improvement over the A6? I never said the Abrams combat experience was the sole superior trait……there are far more areas were the Abrams are superior. We build our own rifles too......Yet the Egyptians are purchasing CZ rifles as opposed to Colt rifles with their American credit card. So you’re saying that it’s ok to look at individual success in an overall defeat……….So learning what works and what doesn’t is important in your view? Hey, you’re the one that suggested Egyptian armoured failures are to be renounced and decried, but German failures beggar excuses and celebration………

And some blowback: As I said to you:

Some can, but from the information released by the Pentagon, they’ve only confirmed that a missile was launched from Eastern Ukraine………What are the current battle lines in the conflict? Are they consistently static? Something also to consider, the Ukrainian military has accidentally shot down a Russian commercial airliner before (Siberian Airlines flight 1812)…….said missile was launched from Eastern Ukraine, and of course the Ukrainian military initially denied involvement……

So the American led coalition targeted the Command & Control facilities first for no reason in particular?..... In other words, wiping out the leadership of the Iraqi military, a military that is heavily centralised (based on the Soviet model), serves no strategic purpose….. What threat were the Leo II and Abrams designed to counter? And for the life of me, why do you keep referring to “East Germany”? The Soviets had no intent on fighting there…… If you answer the question, I won’t have to keep repeating it….. Well actually it does, fore DU rounds can penetrate thicker armour at greater distances then conventional ammo… What thickness of armour can the A6 penetrate at that range? Are you to suggest that conventional ammo is as effective at penetrating thick armour as depleted uranium? Actually no……said “better gun” was sought to improve the ballistics of the conventional rounds used by the Leo II, so as to approach the performance delivered by the DU rounds of the Abrams…….Of course the Americans were delayed in development and integration of the same gun, but of course, their Abrams tanks were conducting an actual war….. No I don’t, I disagree with your unfounded assertion that the Leopard is the equal to the Abrams though. I thought you said armoured personal carriers…….But since you mentioned rifles, what is the primary rifle of the Egyptian army? What will be it’s replacement? No, the Italians belonged to the 10th Italian army Group ....yet they lost. They, like the Germans lost.

And further news: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/malaysia-airlines-flight-mh17-rebels-take-custody-of-plane-crash-bodies-1.2712459 . Clearly the rebel leader is lying at the behest of Comrade Puppet Master Putin….. So I suppose the Dutch investigators will be able to determine and confirm if the savage, Vodka swilling rebels actually had their way with the bodies…….or just recovered them and put them into a climate controlled environment to prevent natural decay until they can be turned over…..