Author Topic: Kerry on the military (Read 1194 times)

rpm · « **Reply #30 on:** February 25, 2004, 01:05:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Finrod
Thats very true RPM, the stink raised resulted in a better vehicle. For which I am grateful.

Damn you, John Kerry! You forced a better weapon on the military! Off with his head!:D

Finrod · « **Reply #31 on:** February 25, 2004, 01:09:43 PM »

Thats what they are calling it right now, at least thats what Army Times says its called. I think it might be a Stryker mod, 6 wheels, 105mm main gun, 3 man crew, full enviromentals and very advanced ballistic computer.The idea is basically to build a light tank for quick deployment, M1A2 is the worlds best but the blasted thing is very very heavy. If the new vehicle does what they say...it will easily be the class of the field in armor vehicles. Like I said though, I will be long gone by then.

Ping · « **Reply #32 on:** February 26, 2004, 07:10:02 AM »

Guys, this argument isn't goin Rips way, cut it out.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #33 on:** February 26, 2004, 08:11:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ping
Guys, this argument isn't goin Rips way, cut it out.

??

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #34 on:** February 26, 2004, 09:33:05 AM »

Yeah, cmon! We're supposed to be bashing kerry here.

Frogm4n · « **Reply #35 on:** February 26, 2004, 10:36:14 AM »

You do realize that it was just one military spending bill that he voted against that had some funding to all those items on the list. He voted against 1 pork barrell bill in '91.

pugg666 · « **Reply #36 on:** February 26, 2004, 07:34:42 PM »

Heya GS

All those gv's you posted suffer the same problem as the Brad..25-30MM auto cannons (except the CV90 with 40MM option)

the Merkava Mk. 4 seems to be the best choice of the bunch, 8 troops and a 120MM. I always thought it was a pure tank, not a troops carrier.

I think Finrods main problem with the BMP is the rough ride.

pugg666 · « **Reply #37 on:** February 26, 2004, 08:02:12 PM »

Sorry I meant in the fire support role GS. the 120 on the Merkava and the 100 on the BMP make quite a diference IMO.

BTW haven't seen you online lately.

Finrod · « **Reply #38 on:** February 28, 2004, 08:39:46 AM »

Ooops, sorry been away for a few days and just now saw the thread. The BMP 3 is small inside, I mean really small. The average American GI is going to have a very difficult time getting in it and add a full ruck sack and assorted weapons and the thing is almosy unusuable for the US. The russian designers were not big on safety for the vehicle's interior, there are a few hundred "head bangers" as GI's call them, inside all the BMP models. The armor is thin and sustained .50 cal fire will chew one up. The 25mm on the brad eats BMPs for breakfast. The engine is model sensitive, what I mean is the BMP 1 had a simple design with low maintenance problems, the BMP 3 has a hybrid turbine engine that has this annoying habit of blowing engine oil through the exhaust right into the vehicle commander's face and creating a real nice cloud of smoke for the bad guys to see. Oh yeah the brad weighs in at 34 tons combat loaded. If I was to say the brad had any one problem...it would be size. The brad is tall, 8" taller then an M60A3 MBT. Thats why many of the Army's scout units switch to the hummer for recon work and forsaked the comfort of the 25mm gun. Allot of our discusion is academic, the new and changing battlefield climate has forced us (the US military) to totally relook how we fight, with a strong emphasis on light, fast, lethal and most importantly portable or easily deployable. This is a great discusion, as taxpayers, you have a right to know what your tax dollars are buying.

Finrod · « **Reply #39 on:** February 28, 2004, 10:31:57 AM »

I think the current Pentagon administration is ruling nothing out when it comes to new vehicles and designs. The merkava has allot of fans, I've never been in one, so no opinion here. I haven't seen the CV90 except pictures in mags like Armour Magazine, it has some impressive stats.

Hortlund · « **Reply #40 on:** February 28, 2004, 10:43:34 AM »

Not sure I remember correctly now, but isnt the 40mm option for the CV90 only for the anti-air variant?

(Didnt know Norway bought the CV90, nice)

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #41 on:** February 28, 2004, 10:47:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by rpm371
What the Republicans are banking on is the ignorance of the average American voter. They don't mention that there are multiple votes on each weapons system. Voting against a funding measure does not mean that the same measure wasn't later passed after the pork was trimmed or defects fixed. But they don't want to confuse you poor ignorant voters with FACTS.

This crap again. If you thgink this is such an obvious and good defense for Kerry then why isnt his team spinning it that way... So far the best they have come up with is that he was youndg and misinformed when he voted to cancel all those weapons.

Read your post above. Going by that one could say Trent Lott is a great champion of black civil rights because he voted against so many laws as they were not perfect, just yet....

Face it rpm, kerry is a left wing extremist and his voting record proves it. Stand by your candidate, be proud of his voting record, dont make excuses for it..

pugg666 · « **Reply #42 on:** February 28, 2004, 11:12:19 AM »

wow awesome pic there GS. That's one hell of a muzzle flash!

Finrod · « **Reply #43 on:** February 28, 2004, 01:01:59 PM »

Unfortunately no...never got a chance to get to Norway or Sweden. Dang infantry guys get all the good assignments.

pugg666 · « **Reply #44 on:** February 28, 2004, 01:17:40 PM »

Vid doesn't work GS.