German tanks unable to defeat Russian tanks

[Aktas]

I cuss the German Shits.

 

[Liminal]

OP is a fallacy since the Russian economy would collapse if it chose to wage war on the west.

The OP isn´t about a Russian war on the west but about the world´s best rated tanks that a incapable of defeating other tanks. German medias chose to take Russian tanks as example due to their general fear mongering since the crisis started in Ukraine.

Tanks are still important, but nuclear weapons are what gives the Russians strategic credibility. A theoretical nuclear bombardment of Warsaw was part of their tactical exercises during the recent Russian war games.

Tha Nato defense plan for Europe bases on nuclear weapons. As it is largely known that the Nato has no chance against the threefold Russian superiority and it would wait for the Russian gatherings in Germany and nuke them.

Three fold superiority of what?

Both soldiers and equipment.

Please feel free to cite those figures.

 

[Bleipriester]

I cuss the German Shits.

Yeah, we know it.

 

[Derideo_Te]

OP is a fallacy since the Russian economy would collapse if it chose to wage war on the west.

The OP isn´t about a Russian war on the west but about the world´s best rated tanks that a incapable of defeating other tanks. German medias chose to take Russian tanks as example due to their general fear mongering since the crisis started in Ukraine.

Too bad your own OP contradicts your deflection!

"Honestly, if the Russians would attack, any resistance with 328 tanks is suicide whether they are able to destroy Russian tanks or not."
​

And so does your post #6!

"The Jelzin times are over and the Russian army´s stroll through Europe would be a piece of cake."​

Please explain the contradiction. I can´t find it.

You said..."The OP isn´t about a Russian war on the west "

But you contradicted that by saying this in the OP..."if the Russians would attack".

Why else would the Russians attack unless there was a war on the west?

You then compounded your contradiction with this statement..."the Russian army´s stroll through Europe".

What would that be except an invasion which would be an act of war?

I just explained that it doesn´t matter if the few German tanks can destroy Russian tanks or not.

You asked for an explanation of your contradiction.

A normal person would be polite and say thank you.

 

[there4eyeM]

The French Army is right next door and, despite what you will doubtless hear as a response following this post, they can defeat Russian tanks. Their helicopters alone would rapidly neutralize a 'panzer' advance? Their Air Force would prevent Russian air dominance.
That, without mentioning that the Americans would be all over such a preposterous Russian undertaking.
In this case, then, the German armor would be reserved for counter attack against infantry, etc., and would probably confront very few T90s or other.

 

[Bleipriester]

The OP isn´t about a Russian war on the west but about the world´s best rated tanks that a incapable of defeating other tanks. German medias chose to take Russian tanks as example due to their general fear mongering since the crisis started in Ukraine.

Tanks are still important, but nuclear weapons are what gives the Russians strategic credibility. A theoretical nuclear bombardment of Warsaw was part of their tactical exercises during the recent Russian war games.

Tha Nato defense plan for Europe bases on nuclear weapons. As it is largely known that the Nato has no chance against the threefold Russian superiority and it would wait for the Russian gatherings in Germany and nuke them.

Three fold superiority of what?

Both soldiers and equipment.

Please feel free to cite those figures.

The world saw that Russia can occupy foreign territory without any response from Nato.
Read here:
NATO Is In No Position to Protect Eastern Europe From Russia The New Republic

 

[Bleipriester]

The French Army is right next door and, despite what you will doubtless hear as a response following this post, they can defeat Russian tanks. Their helicopters alone would rapidly neutralize a 'panzer' advance? Their Air Force would prevent Russian air dominance.
That, without mentioning that the Americans would be all over such a preposterous Russian undertaking.
In this case, then, the German armor would be reserved for counter attack against infantry, etc., and would probably confront very few T90s or other.

Wet dreams.
NATO Is In No Position to Protect Eastern Europe From Russia The New Republic

 

[Bleipriester]

The OP isn´t about a Russian war on the west but about the world´s best rated tanks that a incapable of defeating other tanks. German medias chose to take Russian tanks as example due to their general fear mongering since the crisis started in Ukraine.

Too bad your own OP contradicts your deflection!

"Honestly, if the Russians would attack, any resistance with 328 tanks is suicide whether they are able to destroy Russian tanks or not."
​

And so does your post #6!

"The Jelzin times are over and the Russian army´s stroll through Europe would be a piece of cake."​

Please explain the contradiction. I can´t find it.

You said..."The OP isn´t about a Russian war on the west "

But you contradicted that by saying this in the OP..."if the Russians would attack".

Why else would the Russians attack unless there was a war on the west?

You then compounded your contradiction with this statement..."the Russian army´s stroll through Europe".

What would that be except an invasion which would be an act of war?

I just explained that it doesn´t matter if the few German tanks can destroy Russian tanks or not.

You asked for an explanation of your contradiction.

A normal person would be polite and say thank you.

A normal person is still unable to discover a contradiction here.

 

[Liminal]

Tanks are still important, but nuclear weapons are what gives the Russians strategic credibility. A theoretical nuclear bombardment of Warsaw was part of their tactical exercises during the recent Russian war games.

Tha Nato defense plan for Europe bases on nuclear weapons. As it is largely known that the Nato has no chance against the threefold Russian superiority and it would wait for the Russian gatherings in Germany and nuke them.

Three fold superiority of what?

Both soldiers and equipment.

Please feel free to cite those figures.

The world saw that Russia can occupy foreign territory without any response from Nato.
Read here:
NATO Is In No Position to Protect Eastern Europe From Russia The New Republic

No, you don't seem to understand. I asked for actual figures, not more opinions.

 

[there4eyeM]

Did anyone else notice what happened to Russian tanks when confronted by French and American forces in
Iraq I?

 

[Bleipriester]

Tha Nato defense plan for Europe bases on nuclear weapons. As it is largely known that the Nato has no chance against the threefold Russian superiority and it would wait for the Russian gatherings in Germany and nuke them.

Three fold superiority of what?

Both soldiers and equipment.

Please feel free to cite those figures.

The world saw that Russia can occupy foreign territory without any response from Nato.
Read here:
NATO Is In No Position to Protect Eastern Europe From Russia The New Republic

No, you don't seem to understand. I asked for actual figures, not more opinions.

Facts aren´t opinions. I am not going to post any figures because they differ on each source.

 

[Bleipriester]

Did anyone else notice what happened to Russian tanks when confronted by French and American forces in
Iraq I?

You think, that old Russian tanks with cheap Iraqi ammunition are a good comparison for this case?

 

[Liminal]

Three fold superiority of what?

Both soldiers and equipment.

Please feel free to cite those figures.

The world saw that Russia can occupy foreign territory without any response from Nato.
Read here:
NATO Is In No Position to Protect Eastern Europe From Russia The New Republic

No, you don't seem to understand. I asked for actual figures, not more opinions.

Facts aren´t opinions. I am not going to post any figures because they differ on each source.

Evasive and non responsive. I think we're done here.

 

[Bleipriester]

Both soldiers and equipment.

Please feel free to cite those figures.

The world saw that Russia can occupy foreign territory without any response from Nato.
Read here:
NATO Is In No Position to Protect Eastern Europe From Russia The New Republic

No, you don't seem to understand. I asked for actual figures, not more opinions.

Facts aren´t opinions. I am not going to post any figures because they differ on each source.

Evasive and non responsive. I think we're done here.

Yeah, you have proven to be misinformed and politically incited.

 

[Liminal]

Please feel free to cite those figures.

The world saw that Russia can occupy foreign territory without any response from Nato.
Read here:
NATO Is In No Position to Protect Eastern Europe From Russia The New Republic

No, you don't seem to understand. I asked for actual figures, not more opinions.

Facts aren´t opinions. I am not going to post any figures because they differ on each source.

Evasive and non responsive. I think we're done here.

Yeah, you have proven to be misinformed and politically incited.

We'll start with some actual figures.

World Military Strength Comparison

 

[Bleipriester]

The world saw that Russia can occupy foreign territory without any response from Nato.
Read here:
NATO Is In No Position to Protect Eastern Europe From Russia The New Republic

No, you don't seem to understand. I asked for actual figures, not more opinions.

Facts aren´t opinions. I am not going to post any figures because they differ on each source.

Evasive and non responsive. I think we're done here.

Yeah, you have proven to be misinformed and politically incited.

We'll start with some actual figures.

World Military Strength Comparison

Go to other websites and see other figures. When the Russians invade Europe, how many American soldiers and weapons are there for the defense, by the way?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Too bad your own OP contradicts your deflection!

"Honestly, if the Russians would attack, any resistance with 328 tanks is suicide whether they are able to destroy Russian tanks or not."
​

And so does your post #6!

"The Jelzin times are over and the Russian army´s stroll through Europe would be a piece of cake."​

Please explain the contradiction. I can´t find it.

You said..."The OP isn´t about a Russian war on the west "

But you contradicted that by saying this in the OP..."if the Russians would attack".

Why else would the Russians attack unless there was a war on the west?

You then compounded your contradiction with this statement..."the Russian army´s stroll through Europe".

What would that be except an invasion which would be an act of war?

I just explained that it doesn´t matter if the few German tanks can destroy Russian tanks or not.

You asked for an explanation of your contradiction.

A normal person would be polite and say thank you.

A normal person is still unable to discover a contradiction here.

Your comprehension problem is all yours.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Please feel free to cite those figures.

The world saw that Russia can occupy foreign territory without any response from Nato.
Read here:
NATO Is In No Position to Protect Eastern Europe From Russia The New Republic

No, you don't seem to understand. I asked for actual figures, not more opinions.

Facts aren´t opinions. I am not going to post any figures because they differ on each source.

Evasive and non responsive. I think we're done here.

Yeah, you have proven to be misinformed and politically incited.

Ironic!

 

[Camp]

Did anyone else notice what happened to Russian tanks when confronted by French and American forces in
Iraq I?

German Leopard 2 A6's were used extensively in Afghanistan and proved to be one of the best tanks in the world. Since the Russian upgrade of a small percentage of it's T-72 to either T-80's or T-90's, NATO, including Germany have been upgrading the Leopard to the A7+ series. In addition the fleet of leftover Russian tanks in Poland are steadily being upgraded to the now called P-91 model which is compatible with the Russian T-90. NATO tanks are as good or better than anything Russia can produce. The catch is that Russia can only afford to upgrade and produce the newer versions in limited quantities while it's main force includes older versions, even T-64's and 55's. NATO tends to upgrade in large quantity and their entire fleets.

 

[Liminal]

No, you don't seem to understand. I asked for actual figures, not more opinions.

Facts aren´t opinions. I am not going to post any figures because they differ on each source.

Evasive and non responsive. I think we're done here.

Yeah, you have proven to be misinformed and politically incited.

We'll start with some actual figures.

World Military Strength Comparison

Go to other websites and see other figures. When the Russians invade Europe, how many American soldiers and weapons are there for the defense, by the way?

NATO s Military Capabilities in Europe Should Deter Russian Aggression - US News