there are no Abrams that ever broke down? why does western media always need to put such a huge spot light on something so insignificant? it broke down, so what? it's a new concept and bugs need to be worked out... I guess they need to keep going with propaganda machine

link ?
for me it was obvious...but I still think that it could be 70 % provocation (like ukrainian jets flying nearby, allowing civil aircraft to fly in that zone) and 30 % of rebel's stupidity....
strangely, just suddenly after plane crash world was so disgusted that they saw no problem in imposing sanctions on Russia....

??? ??? «???-?1» - ????????????? - ????? ??????

now they claim it was the Ukraine that shot it down with a BUK - because their reason to do so was..... ?

Air superiority is king in today's battlefield.

If planes could have taken on tanks during WWII, it would have been a vastly different war.

America spent $1.5 trillion on a jet that can't turn, can't climb and can't run.

http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2...px-Hk-tank.jpg

5000 of these will be ready by 2025
@lolz#terminators

"Coming to a battlefield in your hometown soon"

Seems to have worked out well in Vietnam. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy about our navy and air force in case we encounter a war similar to what the British had in the Falklands.

LOL :) At least it was different than what you think it was.

Not about being expert, but our army did send/ sends letters to 900 000 Finns about their current position in army (whether they have assigned position, what it is, or are they in reserve). It is because of changes in our army, etc. I got mine this week.

So, quite many knows at least something.

aka123 got his Lahti L-39

looking forward to the state of the art 2017 ruskie battleship for a trifecta.

I'm surprised that you have to ask about it. reasons are obvious - to present Russians as "monsters", to simplify imposing sanctions on Russia, to increase support for "opressed" Ukraine and so on.
why I dont say that Ukrainians did it **directly**, I see these potential reasons and motivations without problem...
what is really funny is the fact that Dutch government need almost one year already to simply check blackboxes...which can lead to the other conclusion - potential results are not comfortable for two sides, Russian backed separatists and Ukrainian government.
like for example: 10 km before MH the other, military jet was flying and separatists shoot MH by mistake....or other reasons

http://www.winterwar.com/Weapons/Fin...e/l-39side.jpg

Naah.. that pea gun. I use Big Bertha.

i don't even argue over this bullshit anymore - there is no indication that anything else happened as that those idiot separatists shot it down - like they posted first and then quickly deleted.

then you have Strelkov/Girkin/whatever giving interviews how he was involved

Russia's Igor Strelkov: I Am Responsible for War in Eastern Ukraine | News | The Moscow Times

and even Putin saying how russian troops were involved (unlike some GFY posters claiming anyone can buy a uniform in a shop - haha)

it doesn't matter anymore, if the plan was to bring cold war back it was successful

nah, the plan was to secure western borders and stop NATO expansion close to Russian borders.
if you call that all Russian's fault and "coming back to cold war"...
well, good luck with that :-)
now lets think for a moment - for example- about Falklands/ Malvines situation and how one of NATO holy members acts over there...do you need 100's of more samples like that or you are tired of bullshit ? :-)
well, I'm also tired of bullshit :winkwink:

:2 cents::thumbsup:thumbsup

That's loads of assumptions but the facts are:

Russia invaded Georgia and grabbed its land in 2008.

Russia invaded Ukraine and grabbed its land in 2014.

Russia keeps their nuclear weapons just by NATO border (Kalinigrad).

NATO agreed to keep nuclear weapons away from Russian borders.

Russian officials keep threatening Western countries with nuclear assault.

I don't see NATO troops leaving NATO countries towards Russia but I see Russian troops moving from Russia towards NATO.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh
Kolargol is a product of mass media in his country :)

remind me last successful US battlefield experience please

vietnam, irak, afganistan or ... ?

Ahahahaha... :) You are laughing to this tank and Putin? Go ahead... :) :thumbsup

how amusing to see the USA pretend that they would ever ever ever have the balls to engage in conflict with russia...

thin thin skinned US pussies LOL never really won a war in their entire history, just bombed some 3rd world defenceless shit holes and made a mess anyway...

I was 100% sure that saddam did not have WMD the moment they invaded him...the US army simply does not have the balls to attack anybody with WMD...

we can debate left and right about "superiority" but fact is:

if putin decides to invade any country, the USA will be a good little bitch about it and keep quiet...like a good little bitch...

and we all know this :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

now go back to your mental masturbation how the USA multi billion dollar aircraft can bomb some 3rd world farmer :1orglaugh

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

come on, nukes will end this shit of planet

Agreed. it's especially funny how easy F-4 Phantom's were turned into fireballs by old and "weak" Soviet MiG-21 in Vietnam. Yeah man, that was a real fun :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

P.S. Right now I'm watching Discovery channel on how shamefully the US "superior" jets lose the fight over Vietnam. I bet your taxpayers paid a lot of money for those flying coffins :pimp

Horseshit. Only 33 went down as result of MIG attacks.

"A total of 445 Air Force Phantom fighter-bombers were lost, 370 in combat and 193 of those over North Vietnam (33 to MiGs, 30 to SAMs, and 307 to AAA).[74]"

USAF F-4C/D/E crews scored 107 MiG kills in Southeast Asia :1orglaugh