Thermobaric munitions, also known as vacuum bombs or fuel-air bombs, are not explicitly banned by the Geneva Conventions. However, their use against civilians is prohibited by the Geneva Conventions and could be considered war crimes.
Russia’s weaponry is powerful. The advancements in warfare has made them obsolete tech wise and ability to hit a target they’re still technically powerful though
10:05 That footage is real. A lot of people point to the camera, but: 1) Do you think they'd be that dumb to forget that the cameras would be destroyed? Lol. 2) In 1957, we had cameras capable of filming one frame per millisecond to capture footage of Operation Plumbbob. (Go watch the Fat Electricians video on it.) Why wouldn't we have the ability to get a big lens and zoom in a lot and take a video? We had telescopes back then. It's not hard to put a camera behind one and video it. And don't give me the shockwave argument lol. That's BS. I can't draw it over text, but you can look it up.
Russia like China tends to exaggerate their capability. For instance, Russia's so-called hypersonic missile. The United States shot one down in Ukraine with a Patriot Missile. The Patriot missiles are from the early 1980s. And it easily shut down Russia's supposedly most advanced missile they make.
That's why they advertise their stuff so hard. The fear of what it might do is part of what they plan on. It's funny how all these systems always turn out disappointingly far less capable than the claims.
They've shot down dozens of them. In one day last year they shot down 6 out of 6 fired. They've also shot down several "zircon" missiles as well. Patriot has proven to be the most desired air defense in the world.
Said a guy whose top-tier multi-milion if not multi-billion drones are being shot down by Yemen weekly 🤣 Yemen is stronger than Russia/China, sure, I believe that Your delusion of being invisible just because you're sepetated by an ocean from the countries you're fucking with and no one will do anything will be shattered this or next year, mark my words
What i´m really interested in is... how does a royal marines commando not know the buratino? Shouldnt you guys know at least something about (possible) enemy weapon systems? And the TOS-1 should be known...like for example... if someone says "challenger tank",you know it´s from the brits. and you know at least one or two things what differences them from a leopard 2 for example. ofc you cant know everything,and i hope i dont sound to "angry" about it or it feels like i´m "looking down on Mr.Forrest to be a commando and not knowing this or that"
Ugly? Your beautiful aircraft carrier is still in port. A beautiful Trident recently fell next to the carrier boat. He just looked out of the water and plopped back down like a heap from a cow... BUT, the Aircraft Carrier and Trident are Beautiful... Hah.
@@frankrenda2519 Our Bradleys were taking out their most high-tech tanks. The soldiers' body Armor was cardboard, but most of all, their way of fighting is outdated. We sent some of our howitzers that were not fully technologically complete, and the Russians couldn't even outshoot them or reach them.
@@markacamacho thats why all your shit artillery got taken out along with your Bradley's that's why the meme Bradley square got made. western equipment in ukraine got exposed as substandard and everybody saw this
@@markacamacho you mean the Bradley that's captured or the one's destroyed, it also didn't fully take out the T-90M that was a drone that dropped a grenade into the tank because the hatch was opened. And by high tech you mean only a T-90M. Also those howitzers got destroyed. so I don't know what all the yapping is about.🤣 Where are the Abrams at. 🤷♂😂
The Archer can shoot seven shells at different trajectories and have them all land at the same place at the same time. Several can link and have 28 shells go off at the exact same time 😆
The US Army uses a lot of CROWS units (Common Remotely Operated Weapons System) on top of vehicles. They can mount 7.62 machineguns, 5.56 machineguns, M2 Brownings, miniguns, TOW missiles, just about any gun that can be mounted on a vehicle can be set up for CROWS. The CROWS module is a turret that rotates and can elevate or depress the weapon to shoot targets right in front of the grill. I got to look at one up close mounted in a Hummvee, but they're on Strykers and Buffalo's too. On the Hummvee, the headrest of the passenger seat has an LCD screen which sees what the CROWS unit sees. There's a UV laser range finder and a ballistic calculator that adjusts the reticle to match the range for the weapon and the target. It has a UV camera and a thermal camera that can also record and transmit what the gun and operator sees. The gun is "steered" by a joystick from a fighter jet operated by the rear passenger from inside the uparmored Hummvee, or whatever vehicle it's mounted to. It's remotely operated, but there's a human steering it and pressing the fire button after getting the go ahead. Drones should never become truly autonomous, humans need to be "in the loop". Funny thing, the San Francisco police department was given permission to weaponize their bomb disposal robots not long after a Houston police department used one of their bomb disposal robots to blow up an active shooter by strapping an explosive device to its claw and then driving the robot behind where the shooter was hiding and then extended its arm and setting off the explosive behind his head to avoid officers getting in the line of fire.
This is military equipment. It shouldn't be beautiful. It's in England and America that they create beautiful packaging, but inside it's complete crap.
The US has the M-109 Paladin Self propelled Howitzer. It's been around longer than the Swede's gun. It has a 155mm gun with a ballistics calculator so accurate, it can land three shells in the same target zone simultaneously, adjusting the trajectory and power load for the second and third round while the first one is still in the air. It can fire 5 rounds a minute for 3 minutes until it runs out of ammo in its battery, requiring a field reload. It also can fire the Excalibur rounds, which are rocket assisted shells with GPS guided fins to increase range and accuracy. The Army was developing an upgraded gun that could land 5 shells simultaneously and could fire even faster using liquid propellant instead of powder, just like fuel injection in a car engine, but then the Excalibur shell was developed and they figured the Paladin was plenty good enough, since it's better than anything the Chinese or Russians have. :)
This is a foolish question to ask. Just because Russia values human life less than America and is willing to suffer immense casualties to achieve military objectives doesn’t make it anywhere near as capable as the US.
Nope, sure doesn’t. We are the nastiest military on the planet. We play by the rules and nobody else has to, and we still win with our hands tied. We invented nukes and we are the only to drop on another country being the youngest countries to be a superpower. We have numbers, equipment, and skills. What’s funny is America is never United until you piss us off as a whole by attacking us directly ie osama binladen or ask the naval commander for Japan when he said we await Ken the sleeping dragon 🤣 then we leveled them twice ending the war on all fronts. Russia already went broke in the Cold War trying to keep up. They know we would end them directly but nobody wants a nuke war so they push the envelope a bit especially when they know how our freedom works 🤣 ie democrat gets in the whole world plays. The double edged sword of freedom itself.
The first "miniguns" were actually used before WW1 in the US Navy when they mounted electric motors and drum magazines onto their Colt Bulldog Gatling guns. They fired .45-70 cartridges, which could kill a buffalo up to a mile away from a buffalo rifle and could hit a 10 foot x 10 foot target two miles away from a US Army rifle in the late 1800's. The Navy used them in the Spanish American war, mounted to the rails of the ships to provide suppressive fire for Marines storming the beach. Years later, when jet fighter aircraft were outrunning the standard .50 BMG and 20 and 25mm guns, an Air Force officer re-invented the old Navy rail guns, but had them bumped up to 20mm and 25mm, the Vulcan family of electric gatling guns. Then the Army figured they could use .30 caliber (7.62) versions to mount on helicopters and ground vehicles. GE stopped making them because it was bad for their image, so another company took over the repair contract and redesigned them. One change was slowing the firing rate from 6000 rpm to 4000 rpm. Since the motor has a rheostat to control the speed, you can fire 0 or 1 round per minute. You can shoot miniguns for $$ at gun ranges like Battlefield Vegas in Las Vegas, Nevada. One of my friends paid for his wife and his mother-in-law to shoot one in Vegas one year. There are several big machine gun shoots where people rent their machineguns to attendees, under supervision. There are very few privately owned miniguns. They're mostly owned by dealers and manufacturers or special effects prop houses for movies. A used dealer only law enforcement "sample" costs about $50,000 if you are a machine gun dealer or manufacturer. The privately owned miniguns rarely sell at auction because they're usually inherited. About 30 years ago a privately owned one sold for $150,000. They would probably fetch a million now, if one became available. The really cool ones coming out now are chambered in .338 Lapua, a MUCH heavier round than 7.62 NATO, but they're 50 lbs lighter with 5 barrels instead of 6 and a lot of printed titanium and alconel parts to reduce wear and tear and friction and use 40 volt cordless batteries instead of relying on the vehicle's power. You can change the battery when you load a fresh belt of 1000 rounds, put the battery on the quick charger, and it's recharged for the next belt. .338 Lapua miniguns have a 1500 meter longer effective range. On the opposite of the spectrum, there's a 5.56 Microgun which is man portable and fires 5.56 up to 4000 rpm and can fit in a carry on bag when stowed.
There is a channel called "Suchomimus" that shows FPV footage and other videos of Ukraine taking out Russian stuff. I'm sure I've seen a TOS-1 shown being hit and it looked like a small nuke. (very small, but I'd not want to be within a couple hundred m)
Today you can walk into any gun shop (that carries them) or go online to Tippmann Ordnance and buy a legal, functioning, Gatling Gun!! Same paperwork as any "long gun".(not wanted or a felon) The calibers as of now are, .22 LR and 9 mm. As long as they are not electrically or hydraulically driven (hand crank only).
Wow, I'm with you, super scary nukes. I'm in North Carolina and the winds/storms most often come to us from Texas, so there's that too... just saying, no place to hide when who knows what are in the wind/jet stream currents.
The footage you were asking about is actually test footage from the Manhattan Project during the development of the Fat Boy atom bomd dropped on Hiroshima in 1945.
Funny thing about all of these Russian motorized super weapons, they're not that scary when confronted with precision guided artillery and drones. Russia has their own version of the CWIS on their ships, however it cannot traverse downward to engage Sea Babies and other aquatic drones.
The camera for that nuclear footage was in housing designed to survive the winds and heat. When Joe sees that footage, he thinks its fake without ever giving thought to the fact they put that camera there needing to get that footage so they built the housing to survive while watching the fake town get obliterated. It's like engineering cams for rocket launches. They build the housing to survive so they can get super slow motion shots of the engines firing.
They could put a bunch of concrete around it and very thick glass. But if I remember he was talking about the house scene. That could easily have a wedge piece of concrete 6’ thick and easily survive.
The uran reminds me of somone gping i want a drone buy it needs to be tracked and needs to be on steroids. Man the capabilities of that little guy, infantry support on foot and in vehicle, Defense and reconisence support for patrol bases
They used a few during the start of the war. They didn't last long but were somewhat effective in urban areas. The last time I saw a video of a uran in ukraine whas when foreign legion troops rammed one with a btr
Negative, its Israeli. I assume you heard the word Rafael, and thought of the french because of there fighter jet the Dassault Rafale, which is understandable. Israeli company Rafael, same bunch that developed the iron dome
The US used thermobaric warheads in Iraq and Afghanistan against bunkers and cave systems. Regular munitions wouldn't reach. Thermobaric rounds are actually more "humane" because they don't do as much collateral damage compared to regular bombs and missiles.
thats the thing, i believe it is against geneva but america my country also have used these in iraq and also in vietnam with napalm. so if it is against geneva then no country really cares unless theyre sadly on the receiving end of it. idk im not sure ill have to check geneva
@5:36 you mention something about not wasting 50 cal on humans, which makes sense.. but aside from the waste, I thought it was a war crime to use anti-material weapons against human targets. (I'm definitely not an expert and don't even remember where I heard that, so maybe I'm misinformed?)
The Phalanx uses radar to track the targets and it's own bullets and pretty much can't miss. The drones used against Russian ships wouldn't get close 😀
The first weapons system is very vulnerable to destruction by relatively small munitions. The Ukrainians have destroyed dozens of these by dropping a simple fragmentation hand grenade on them. They tend to explode like an entire truck load of fireworks. The detonation is absolutely massive. The second robot tank has not shown up in the Ukraine conflict.
The Russian weapons seem to be all powerful but none of them seem to be reliable. There have been several Russian military members who have defected over the years who have said that in the event of a nuclear war that 60 to 70 percent of their missiles would fail to launch because of shitty maintenance. One defector stated that the missile base he was stationed at was so lacking in proper maintenance that all of the silos had between 9 and 13 feet of water accumulated in the bottom. Moisture is very bad for electronics and the guidance systems are probably corroded to junk.
This is bull crap lol. There new wonder weapon there hypersonic missle we were afraid of . Is being shot with the patriotic missle system developed in the 90s I think. Wasn't even meant for that purpose. Love your videos but I think this one has already been proven wrong in Ukraine?
Thermobaric munitions are not against the Geneva Conventions. They are conventional weapons. Just very powerful ones.
The US used thermobaric weapons to clear out caves in Afghanistan
Thermobaric munitions, also known as vacuum bombs or fuel-air bombs, are not explicitly banned by the Geneva Conventions. However, their use against civilians is prohibited by the Geneva Conventions and could be considered war crimes.
The TOS 1"Buratino", by modern standards has a relatively short range (10 km for latest version) hence the use of a tank chassis.
@@Marty_RUclipsr I don't think Russia cares either way.
@@aaronrichards19886 lol I was gonna say, pretty sure that's not the issue here.
Anyone can use the threat of nukes but only one has followed through with the threat of using them.
Russia’s weaponry is powerful. The advancements in warfare has made them obsolete tech wise and ability to hit a target they’re still technically powerful though
10:05 That footage is real. A lot of people point to the camera, but:
1) Do you think they'd be that dumb to forget that the cameras would be destroyed? Lol.
2) In 1957, we had cameras capable of filming one frame per millisecond to capture footage of Operation Plumbbob.
(Go watch the Fat Electricians video on it.)
Why wouldn't we have the ability to get a big lens and zoom in a lot and take a video? We had telescopes back then. It's not hard to put a camera behind one and video it.
And don't give me the shockwave argument lol. That's BS. I can't draw it over text, but you can look it up.
Russia like China tends to exaggerate their capability. For instance, Russia's so-called hypersonic missile. The United States shot one down in Ukraine with a Patriot Missile. The Patriot missiles are from the early 1980s. And it easily shut down Russia's supposedly most advanced missile they make.
That's why they advertise their stuff so hard. The fear of what it might do is part of what they plan on. It's funny how all these systems always turn out disappointingly far less capable than the claims.
They've shot down dozens of them. In one day last year they shot down 6 out of 6 fired. They've also shot down several "zircon" missiles as well. Patriot has proven to be the most desired air defense in the world.
Even though the Patriot system came out in the 1990's, they have gone through several generations of improvements and upgrades.
Said a guy whose top-tier multi-milion if not multi-billion drones are being shot down by Yemen weekly 🤣
Yemen is stronger than Russia/China, sure, I believe that
Your delusion of being invisible just because you're sepetated by an ocean from the countries you're fucking with and no one will do anything will be shattered this or next year, mark my words
There is no evidence that a single Khinzal or Zircon was ever shoot down by a Patriot system 🤣
They cant even react fast enough to these systems
The smerch could probably be scarier if it didn’t have 8 flats. Love the vids bro bro.
What i´m really interested in is... how does a royal marines commando not know the buratino?
Shouldnt you guys know at least something about (possible) enemy weapon systems? And the TOS-1 should be known...like for example... if someone says "challenger tank",you know it´s from the brits. and you know at least one or two things what differences them from a leopard 2 for example.
ofc you cant know everything,and i hope i dont sound to "angry" about it or it feels like i´m "looking down on Mr.Forrest to be a commando and not knowing this or that"
@@chrisrey2930 The West does not know the way Russia makes wars, nor the armaments.
crazy crap! cant wait for part 2
Ugly? Your beautiful aircraft carrier is still in port. A beautiful Trident recently fell next to the carrier boat. He just looked out of the water and plopped back down like a heap from a cow... BUT, the Aircraft Carrier and Trident are Beautiful... Hah.
The numbers of weapons on this list from Russia has me suspicious not to mention that a lot of well know weapons from the USA and England are missing.
Yeah
I expected 1 or 2 from Russia 3 or 4 from Britain and the rest from America
But I am a bit biased
Russia always talks big. We are finding out that it's just a paper tiger.
Yeah it's China, Europe or the US, nothing else atm (India could become a competing power in like 30-60 years or so though.
how by defeating all of natos weopans
@@frankrenda2519 Our Bradleys were taking out their most high-tech tanks. The soldiers' body Armor was cardboard, but most of all, their way of fighting is outdated. We sent some of our howitzers that were not fully technologically complete, and the Russians couldn't even outshoot them or reach them.
@@markacamacho thats why all your shit artillery got taken out along with your Bradley's that's why the meme Bradley square got made. western equipment in ukraine got exposed as substandard and everybody saw this
@@markacamacho you mean the Bradley that's captured or the one's destroyed, it also didn't fully take out the T-90M that was a drone that dropped a grenade into the tank because the hatch was opened. And by high tech you mean only a T-90M. Also those howitzers got destroyed. so I don't know what all the yapping is about.🤣
Where are the Abrams at. 🤷♂😂
The CIWS is so badass. Never gets old seeing that thing flex.
I’ll just say this the Russians have great ideas, it’s the execution of the build that makes most of there equipment suck.
Glad I found your channel
The scariest of all is the X-37
The Archer can shoot seven shells at different trajectories and have them all land at the same place at the same time. Several can link and have 28 shells go off at the exact same time 😆
Tos1a is being used in Ukraine, but the limited Range kills them a 300 dollar drone kills them and creates an EXTREME explosion
Yes because Russia NEVER lies about its equipment capabilities
coming from western countries talking about washing machine chips no one takes then serious
The US Army uses a lot of CROWS units (Common Remotely Operated Weapons System) on top of vehicles. They can mount 7.62 machineguns, 5.56 machineguns, M2 Brownings, miniguns, TOW missiles, just about any gun that can be mounted on a vehicle can be set up for CROWS. The CROWS module is a turret that rotates and can elevate or depress the weapon to shoot targets right in front of the grill. I got to look at one up close mounted in a Hummvee, but they're on Strykers and Buffalo's too. On the Hummvee, the headrest of the passenger seat has an LCD screen which sees what the CROWS unit sees. There's a UV laser range finder and a ballistic calculator that adjusts the reticle to match the range for the weapon and the target. It has a UV camera and a thermal camera that can also record and transmit what the gun and operator sees. The gun is "steered" by a joystick from a fighter jet operated by the rear passenger from inside the uparmored Hummvee, or whatever vehicle it's mounted to. It's remotely operated, but there's a human steering it and pressing the fire button after getting the go ahead.
Drones should never become truly autonomous, humans need to be "in the loop". Funny thing, the San Francisco police department was given permission to weaponize their bomb disposal robots not long after a Houston police department used one of their bomb disposal robots to blow up an active shooter by strapping an explosive device to its claw and then driving the robot behind where the shooter was hiding and then extended its arm and setting off the explosive behind his head to avoid officers getting in the line of fire.
Yes, Russia has been using Vacuum Bomes in Ukraine.
Glad to see you back reactin'!
Thanks man
This is military equipment. It shouldn't be beautiful. It's in England and America that they create beautiful packaging, but inside it's complete crap.
The US has the M-109 Paladin Self propelled Howitzer. It's been around longer than the Swede's gun. It has a 155mm gun with a ballistics calculator so accurate, it can land three shells in the same target zone simultaneously, adjusting the trajectory and power load for the second and third round while the first one is still in the air. It can fire 5 rounds a minute for 3 minutes until it runs out of ammo in its battery, requiring a field reload. It also can fire the Excalibur rounds, which are rocket assisted shells with GPS guided fins to increase range and accuracy. The Army was developing an upgraded gun that could land 5 shells simultaneously and could fire even faster using liquid propellant instead of powder, just like fuel injection in a car engine, but then the Excalibur shell was developed and they figured the Paladin was plenty good enough, since it's better than anything the Chinese or Russians have. :)
This is a foolish question to ask. Just because Russia values human life less than America and is willing to suffer immense casualties to achieve military objectives doesn’t make it anywhere near as capable as the US.
Nope, sure doesn’t. We are the nastiest military on the planet. We play by the rules and nobody else has to, and we still win with our hands tied. We invented nukes and we are the only to drop on another country being the youngest countries to be a superpower. We have numbers, equipment, and skills. What’s funny is America is never United until you piss us off as a whole by attacking us directly ie osama binladen or ask the naval commander for Japan when he said we await Ken the sleeping dragon 🤣 then we leveled them twice ending the war on all fronts. Russia already went broke in the Cold War trying to keep up. They know we would end them directly but nobody wants a nuke war so they push the envelope a bit especially when they know how our freedom works 🤣 ie democrat gets in the whole world plays. The double edged sword of freedom itself.
heheheheh geneva convention
The first "miniguns" were actually used before WW1 in the US Navy when they mounted electric motors and drum magazines onto their Colt Bulldog Gatling guns. They fired .45-70 cartridges, which could kill a buffalo up to a mile away from a buffalo rifle and could hit a 10 foot x 10 foot target two miles away from a US Army rifle in the late 1800's. The Navy used them in the Spanish American war, mounted to the rails of the ships to provide suppressive fire for Marines storming the beach. Years later, when jet fighter aircraft were outrunning the standard .50 BMG and 20 and 25mm guns, an Air Force officer re-invented the old Navy rail guns, but had them bumped up to 20mm and 25mm, the Vulcan family of electric gatling guns. Then the Army figured they could use .30 caliber (7.62) versions to mount on helicopters and ground vehicles. GE stopped making them because it was bad for their image, so another company took over the repair contract and redesigned them. One change was slowing the firing rate from 6000 rpm to 4000 rpm. Since the motor has a rheostat to control the speed, you can fire 0 or 1 round per minute. You can shoot miniguns for $$ at gun ranges like Battlefield Vegas in Las Vegas, Nevada. One of my friends paid for his wife and his mother-in-law to shoot one in Vegas one year. There are several big machine gun shoots where people rent their machineguns to attendees, under supervision. There are very few privately owned miniguns. They're mostly owned by dealers and manufacturers or special effects prop houses for movies. A used dealer only law enforcement "sample" costs about $50,000 if you are a machine gun dealer or manufacturer. The privately owned miniguns rarely sell at auction because they're usually inherited. About 30 years ago a privately owned one sold for $150,000. They would probably fetch a million now, if one became available.
The really cool ones coming out now are chambered in .338 Lapua, a MUCH heavier round than 7.62 NATO, but they're 50 lbs lighter with 5 barrels instead of 6 and a lot of printed titanium and alconel parts to reduce wear and tear and friction and use 40 volt cordless batteries instead of relying on the vehicle's power. You can change the battery when you load a fresh belt of 1000 rounds, put the battery on the quick charger, and it's recharged for the next belt. .338 Lapua miniguns have a 1500 meter longer effective range. On the opposite of the spectrum, there's a 5.56 Microgun which is man portable and fires 5.56 up to 4000 rpm and can fit in a carry on bag when stowed.
Ryan every time I saw a fully autonomous weapon I thought "Weapon designers don't get the point of the Terminator movies!'.
There is a channel called "Suchomimus" that shows FPV footage and other videos of Ukraine taking out Russian stuff. I'm sure I've seen a TOS-1 shown being hit and it looked like a small nuke. (very small, but I'd not want to be within a couple hundred m)
Joe Rogan obviously doesn't know about telephoto lenses. That's why the resolution of the footage was so grainy, the camera wasn't close...
The TOS flamethrowers were used HEAVILY in Bakmut. They are very short range and inaccurate relative to other self propelled rocket platforms.
Today you can walk into any gun shop (that carries them) or go online to Tippmann Ordnance and buy a legal, functioning, Gatling Gun!! Same paperwork as any "long gun".(not wanted or a felon) The calibers as of now are, .22 LR and 9 mm. As long as they are not electrically or hydraulically driven (hand crank only).
Part 2 Sounds good
Wow, I'm with you, super scary nukes. I'm in North Carolina and the winds/storms most often come to us from Texas, so there's that too... just saying, no place to hide when who knows what are in the wind/jet stream currents.
Man i hope to meet ypu one day and talk military woth you. Ypur one of my favorite channels
The footage you were asking about is actually test footage from the Manhattan Project during the development of the Fat Boy atom bomd dropped on Hiroshima in 1945.
Funny thing about all of these Russian motorized super weapons, they're not that scary when confronted with precision guided artillery and drones. Russia has their own version of the CWIS on their ships, however it cannot traverse downward to engage Sea Babies and other aquatic drones.
Thanks
The camera for that nuclear footage was in housing designed to survive the winds and heat. When Joe sees that footage, he thinks its fake without ever giving thought to the fact they put that camera there needing to get that footage so they built the housing to survive while watching the fake town get obliterated. It's like engineering cams for rocket launches. They build the housing to survive so they can get super slow motion shots of the engines firing.
Im not saying joes correct but his logic makes sense to me. How would the camera survive?
They could put a bunch of concrete around it and very thick glass. But if I remember he was talking about the house scene. That could easily have a wedge piece of concrete 6’ thick and easily survive.
lol that's like asking how the camera captures footage of the launches of the space shuttle etc.
@@Timmycoo no it is not. One is clearly far enough away that its out of blast zone and the other is so close its in the blast.
Also lets be clear im saying i can undertand his logic not that i thought it was fact.
Maybe they used ac special camera. I mean they are scientists pretty sure the camera can be in a anti radiation case
Yess
Ive always seen eveeyonr describe russia as bount and brute force versus usa which goes for precision and stealth
never underestimate a country no matter if other countries think it's military is shit I'm not picking sides here 👍
Oh man you stopped at the coolest weapon of all
Ryan you are right USA has stuff we don’t even know about.
Thank you for sharing! 😊 I would sit through your reaction even if you did a 60+ minute video! 👍😎🫡
The uran reminds me of somone gping i want a drone buy it needs to be tracked and needs to be on steroids. Man the capabilities of that little guy, infantry support on foot and in vehicle, Defense and reconisence support for patrol bases
They used a few during the start of the war. They didn't last long but were somewhat effective in urban areas. The last time I saw a video of a uran in ukraine whas when foreign legion troops rammed one with a btr
The spike is the French version of the Javelin ATM.
Negative, its Israeli. I assume you heard the word Rafael, and thought of the french because of there fighter jet the Dassault Rafale, which is understandable. Israeli company Rafael, same bunch that developed the iron dome
The US used thermobaric warheads in Iraq and Afghanistan against bunkers and cave systems. Regular munitions wouldn't reach. Thermobaric rounds are actually more "humane" because they don't do as much collateral damage compared to regular bombs and missiles.
thats the thing, i believe it is against geneva but america my country also have used these in iraq and also in vietnam with napalm. so if it is against geneva then no country really cares unless theyre sadly on the receiving end of it. idk im not sure ill have to check geneva
@5:36 you mention something about not wasting 50 cal on humans, which makes sense.. but aside from the waste, I thought it was a war crime to use anti-material weapons against human targets. (I'm definitely not an expert and don't even remember where I heard that, so maybe I'm misinformed?)
1960 fpr the mini gun sure but took its design from the gatling gun from 1861. Think about that
Yeah, all that shit would be killed with a coordinated attack from the F-35. If it has to be.
Always like watching Ryan’s reaction. As an American we don’t always have the best. Other countries do better
The Phalanx uses radar to track the targets and it's own bullets and pretty much can't miss. The drones used against Russian ships wouldn't get close 😀
The first weapons system is very vulnerable to destruction by relatively small munitions. The Ukrainians have destroyed dozens of these by dropping a simple fragmentation hand grenade on them. They tend to explode like an entire truck load of fireworks. The detonation is absolutely massive. The second robot tank has not shown up in the Ukraine conflict.
The Russian weapons seem to be all powerful but none of them seem to be reliable. There have been several Russian military members who have defected over the years who have said that in the event of a nuclear war that 60 to 70 percent of their missiles would fail to launch because of shitty maintenance. One defector stated that the missile base he was stationed at was so lacking in proper maintenance that all of the silos had between 9 and 13 feet of water accumulated in the bottom. Moisture is very bad for electronics and the guidance systems are probably corroded to junk.
Russia just got some FAFO
Comment for the algorithm. 😜
Ukraine is making mincemeat out of the Pantsir s1 with $400 hobby drones. They have destroyed over 30 of these.
It's like I said I think they're just cleaning out their storage.
navel legends yamato reaction
Russia has shit electronics. Paper tiger. USA is pin point. Don’t worry dude
i like most of your videos, but this one.... not so much
This is bull crap lol. There new wonder weapon there hypersonic missle we were afraid of . Is being shot with the patriotic missle system developed in the 90s I think. Wasn't even meant for that purpose. Love your videos but I think this one has already been proven wrong in Ukraine?