Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This was a total turnaround comparably to the events of the 2016(?) in Europe.
My guess is that Russian gov. literally sent the message to the "fan clubs" ( in Moscow in particular) - "no more B.S. - you hear me?"
That's my impression.
To be fair that kid is half Russian. His mom is from St. Petersburg and his dad lived there in 90s so his dad speaks Russian.
For example. Absolutely useless weapon in real war.
Wrong. The same thing was said about the T-60 light tank. While it did not perform well in open country, the forests and swamp land is where it excelled. Small, maneuverable, light weight and with a powerful 20mm gun it was an asset and used with great success evicting your forefathers from their warm izbas back out into the cold, cold night.
The T-35 was meant as a heavy assault tank but was a failure because it was used incorrectly, supported incorrectly and obsolete almost from the minute it left the assembly line. One of those used and supported correctly would have been a true menace.
Americans gave the native lands of Serbs to muslims, and created a "partially recognized state" Kosovo.
And?
That's actually quite an interesting topic right there. Albanians claim that Kosovo was theirs before Serbia took over, while Serbs claim it as their land.
Ichoro is right in saying that the Albanian population increased dramatically post WW2. That was largely due to Tito and his policies.
As far as losing Kosovo?Had Serbia played its cards right that wouldn't have happened. The best thing about NATO intervention was that it finally got Milosevic booted out. It's a shame that it had to happen that way, though. NATO should have punished all involved parties to level out the playing field. That includes Croats and Bosnians as well as the Kosovar.
On the other hand, the US was also the country that helped Serbia secure its independence following WW1. It was one of Wilson's 14 points.
You missed my and Alec's point then. Russia has a long history of building fake weapons/equipment/machinery to produce an appearance of capabilities that don't exist.
The let him demonstrate that, instead of ranting about something that about every country and industry does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alec Solano
For example. Absolutely useless weapon in real war.
The migration was due to refugees fleeing Albania during a long period of continuous wars involving Albania: Italy-Albania, Italy-Greece, and Greece-Albania.
Wrong. The same thing was said about the T-60 light tank. While it did not perform well in open country, the forests and swamp land is where it excelled. Small, maneuverable, light weight and with a powerful 20mm gun it was an asset and used with great success evicting your forefathers from their warm izbas back out into the cold, cold night.
The T-35 was meant as a heavy assault tank but was a failure because it was used incorrectly, supported incorrectly and obsolete almost from the minute it left the assembly line. One of those used and supported correctly would have been a true menace.
Study some tactical armored warfare theory.
LOL okay well despite your contradictory statements, I can agree that the T-35 was obsolete the minute it left the assembly line. That's why they never made more than a few dozen, they were garbage cheap knockoffs of 20's British Vickers.
The T-60 was a counterpart to the Panzer 2. Suited for fighting in the mountains and forests against anything but other tanks but neither were a major feature of the eastern front.
If the Soviets used proper tactics maybe Guderian would not have easily destroyed so many Soviet armies (including in your beloved Smolensk)...
LOL okay well despite your contradictory statements, I can agree that the T-35 was obsolete the minute it left the assembly line. That's why they never made more than a few dozen, they were garbage cheap knockoffs of 20's British Vickers.
The T-60 was a counterpart to the Panzer 2. Suited for fighting in the mountains and forests against anything but other tanks but neither were a major feature of the eastern front.
If the Soviets used proper tactics maybe Guderian would not have easily destroyed so many Soviet armies (including in your beloved Smolensk)...
In its time the T-35 was a viable design, for a very short time. You need to read up on the T-60, being small has advantages and as I said it was real handy when it came to evicting German troops from their holes. They also made great resupply vehicles because of their mobility.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
