Chinese ATGM discussion

AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Viktor Jav said:
Well coming from those coloured lens of yours, I am would be surprised if it appeared any other way. I brought up the opaqueness of Chinese and Pershmerga military news to counter your assertion that they trustworthy.
But I have to give you some credit. At least you are honest about your intentions of not seeking the truth. But you fail utterly at everything else, for starters by accusing me of Chinese prejudice you convienently ignore my other posts in other threads, more specifically this

or this

In which I give due credit to China when it is due and only due.
Second off you fail utterly to negate my claims and evidence, with only bare denial and your own rhetoric as a rebuttal.


From here

And they being who ? It is either the US or the Iraqis at this point. So don't try to wiggle out of this one. The Pershmerga's aren't exporting tanks to anyone as far as I know. And only the Iraqis have access to the supposed wreckage. For all your boasting of destroying other people's argument you aren't very clever at formulating your own.
And did you actually missed the links to which I have posted ? My my, that is some oversight there kiddo.
And do you have any evidence to suggest that I don't that the Pershmerga are ostensibly US allies ? Or are you again selectively ignoring my earlier posts that stated that I knew that all along. If you are going to argue rhetoric at least try to sound intelligent and fact check your posts.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]


You mean like you proved your point when you didn't know of that video until I posted it where you made all sorts of assumptions without any evidence? You conveniently left out the most important fact that an M1 was destroyed.
 
D

Deleted member 13312

Guest
AssassinsMace said:
You mean like you proved your point when you didn't know of that video until I posted it where you made all sorts of assumptions without any evidence? You conveniently left out the most important fact that an M1 was destroyed.
Click to expand...
And where in that post of mine did I ever alleged that I have no idea of the video existing in the first place ? Oh please show me. What I stated is that the M1 depicted in the video is a Iraqi M1A1, once which do not have the DU armor of the M1A2 and 3s. Which I backed up with evidence via link, which also proves that I know the existence of the video in question and it's contents. And one which you DID NOT disprove with evidence.
I never left out that a M1 was destroyed, but I do pointed out that it is a VARIANT Of the M1 that was destroyed so stop fabricating lies here.

But if you are insistent on plugging your ears screaming "LALALA I don't here you, a M1 was destroyed that is all that matters!!!" Without actually understanding the point of my contention, then that is your prerogative. I am just here to set the record straight.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 13312

Guest
AssassinsMace said:
All I see is an M1 destroyed which ain't suppose to happen. I don't see a blast area for a larger unconventional weapon. So it was destroyed by a conventional weapon which is not suppose to happen given the M1's reputation. I recall one aerial video also showing the tank crew's bodies executed to the side. They were able to survive to be executed meaning it wasn't a powerful weapon if the crew survived to escape the tank but it was enough to destroy the tank by fire and that's all that matters.
Click to expand...

And you expect any other tank to fare better, like the ZTZ-99. In these situations ? To claim that the M1 isn't a powerful weapon is to ignore the tactics that were used in this scenario, with no infantry support to cover the flanks and scout for ATGM nests, driving along a open road like that is suicidal.
But also, the M1A1 have shown their worth against common anti tank weaponary as shown in this video
With multiple hits withstood and the crew only bailing out of fear. The tank itself is still in remarkably fine condition. Moreover, it is noteworthy to point out that the Saudis uses the M1A2 variant, which does contains DU layers in its armor package.
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Viktor Jav said:
You mean like you proved your point when you didn't know of that video until I posted it where you made all sorts of assumptions without any evidence? You conveniently left out the most important fact that an M1 was destroyed.
Click to expand...
And where in that post of mine did I ever alleged that I have no idea of the video existing in the first place ? Oh please show me. What I stated is that the M1 depicted in the video is a Iraqi M1A1, once which do not have the DU armor of the M1A2 and 3s. Which I backed up with evidence via link, which also proves that I know the existence of the video in question and it's contents. And one which you DID NOT disprove with evidence.
I never left out that a M1 was destroyed, but I do pointed out that it is a VARIANT Of the M1 that was destroyed so stop fabricating lies here.[/QUOTE]


Because you're waiting for an investigation to an incident that happened around a year ago. You don't think an investigation would've been done by now? Unless you thought it was recent meaning you didn't know about this incident until now. You're guilty of everything you accuse.


Moresoever we have not seen actual footage of the HJ-8 impacting and destroying the said Abrahams, and even the extent of the damage is debatable, a blackend and scorched front does not mean a penetration. The The front of the tank actually looks pretty much intact, the ammo storage is destroyed but that is part of the Abraham's design (blow off panels), moresoever such a damage can be achieved by attacking the flanks of the Abrahams, a common and very much encouraged ATGM tactic.
Click to expand...

All that is pretty irrelevant unless you want to claim the M1 was still operable or the Iraqis destroyed their own tank. The type of damage to the tank says nothing. It was destroyed... period.
 
D

Deleted member 13312

Guest
AssassinsMace said:
Because you're waiting for an investigation to an incident that happened around a year ago. You don't think an investigation would've been done by now? Unless you thought it was recent meaning you didn't know about this incident until now. You're guilty of everything you accuse.
Click to expand...
lol this gets even better, now you are lying about me wanting an investigation about the incident ? Man you do have a pencent for imagination do you not?
Plese just stop embarrassing yourself already, that hole you are digging yourself in is already deep enough.
Here just to make it easier for you I will highlight my own post here:
Viktor Jav said:
To be fair the Iraqis used a watered down variant of the M1 that excludes depleted uranium layers from it's armor, and exact details of the kill are sketchy at best. The Iraqis understandably are loath to give any revealing statements on the matter.
Click to expand...
And I challenge you to show me any words in the video in which I wanted an investigation to be done. Please go on. Point it out. Oh, wait you can't.


AssassinsMace said:
All that is pretty irrelevant unless you want to claim the M1 was still operable or the Iraqis destroyed their own tank. The type of damage to the tank says nothing. It was destroyed... period.
Click to expand...
At this point of time you have stretched that goal post of yours all the way across the Pacific Ocean. And till now you still fail to understand what I or all the links and evidence are trying to convey. But I would expect nothing lower in form in this kind of forum.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Viktor Jav said:
And you expect any other tank to fare better, like the ZTZ-99. In these situations ? To claim that the M1 isn't a powerful weapon is to ignore the tactics that were used in this scenario, with no infantry support to cover the flanks and scout for ATGM nests, driving along a open road like that is suicidal.
But also, the M1A1 have shown their worth against common anti tank weaponary as shown in this video
With multiple hits withstood and the crew only bailing out of fear. The tank itself is still in remarkably fine condition. Moreover, it is noteworthy to point out that the Saudis uses the M1A2 variant, which does contains DU layers in its armor package.
Click to expand...


Making up stuff again, huh? Where did I say the 99 was invincible? Did I say that any anti-tank weapons can easily destroy an M1? No I said it happens to which people like you want to make excuses. that are actually irrelevant all together.
 
D

Deleted member 13312

Guest
AssassinsMace said:
Making up stuff again, huh? Where did I say the 99 was invincible? Did I say that any anti-tank weapons can easily destroy an M1? No I said it happens to which people like you want to make excuses. that are actually irrelevant all together.
Click to expand...
True I never said that, but I brought that up to show that no other tanks can be expected to perform any better in this regard.
From someone who is caught with their pants down on downright fabricating evidence of my posts and disregarding evidence this is just downright hilarious.
 
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Viktor Jav said:
lol this gets even better, now you are lying about me wanting an investigation about the incident ? Man you do have a pencent for imagination do you not?
Plese just stop embarrassing yourself already, that hole you are digging yourself in is already deep enough.
Here just to make it easier for you I will highlight my own post here:

And I challenge you to show me any words in the video in which I wanted an investigation to be done. Please go on. Point it out. Oh, wait you can't.



At this point of time you have stretched that goal post of yours all the way across the Pacific Ocean. And till now you still fail to understand what I or all the links and evidence are trying to convey. But I would expect nothing lower in form in this kind of forum.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

This is not to say that the HJ-8 in its current iteration would fare poorly against modern MBTs like the Abrahams with all it's upgrades, but it is still an open question until we actually get solid evidence of it being used against the likes.
Click to expand...

Where else do you get solid evidence except through an investigation? I never said you wanted an investigation. I said you were waiting for an investigation to confirm or deny it was an HJ-8. Hence you thought the incident was recent.
 
D

Deleted member 13312

Guest
AssassinsMace said:
Where else do you get solid evidence except through an investigation? I never said you wanted an investigation. I said you were waiting for an investigation to confirm or deny it was an HJ-8. Hence you thought the incident was recent.
Click to expand...

You are misunderstanding or willfully misinterpreting that post in so many ways. I will set it straight as simply as I can, what I mean from that post is that until we get factual credible evidence of HJ-8s being used against the M1A2s and 3s (not 1s, but 2s and 3s), as in actual video footage or official statements that detail the engagement clearly. It is still an open question to whether the HJ-8 will reliably defeat the Abrahams with all its upgrades in combat.
Get it ? That post is not about the video. I have made my response to that clearly in another posts. That post concerns itself with issue of undisputed HJ-8 engagements with the M1A2 and M1A3 Abraham tanks which to my knowledge have not happened as of yet.
Are we clear ? Crystal ? Capish ? You get the words " WIth All its Upgrades ?" Upgrades which the Iraqi M1 does not have. The words "solid evidence" as in no shaky blurry video footage that cuts from a missile fired to a wreckage of a tank ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AssassinsMace

AssassinsMace

Lieutenant General
Viktor Jav said:
You are misunderstanding or willfully misinterpreting this post in so many ways. I will set it straight as simply as I can, what I mean from this post is that until we get factual credible evidence of HJ-8s being used against the M1A2s and 3s (not 1s), as in actual video footage or official statements that detail the engagement clearly. It is still an open question to whether the HJ-8 will reliably defeat the Abrahams in combat.
Get it ? This post is not about the video. I have made my response to that clearly in another posts. This post concerns itself with issue of undisputed HJ-8 engagements with the M1A2 and M1A3 Abraham tanks.
Are we clear ? Crystal ? Capish ?
Click to expand...

Yeah and they're not going to investigate because the M1 was destroyed. An investigation doesn't help it at all because no one can reverse a destroyed M1 with excuses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top