the UMP is a disposable weapon..its cheaper than the MP5
Military Thread V6, Selamat Hari Raya dan Kemerdekaan ke-54
Military Thread V6, Selamat Hari Raya dan Kemerdekaan ke-54
|
|
Mar 11 2011, 10:50 AM
Return to original view | Post
#101
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
the UMP is a disposable weapon..its cheaper than the MP5
|
|
|
Mar 11 2011, 08:44 PM
Return to original view | Post
#102
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
i thought mosin nagants give a huge kick?maybe the attachments help..LOL
|
|
|
Mar 11 2011, 11:47 PM
Return to original view | Post
#103
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
in COD when you add attachments they become more accurate and has longer range and can penetrate more...
|
|
|
Mar 11 2011, 11:57 PM
Return to original view | Post
#104
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
QUOTE(zimhibikie @ Mar 11 2011, 04:19 AM) Japan cant develope their own fighter and the F-2 is a good way to say F U china and korea,we has our own fighter..40% of the price for one F-2 goes to the US.an on top of that they need to pay licencing fees to the US.the f-2 is changed enough to mke people say its a different aircraft than a F-16.but the price is still shitbrix,a modded kancil priced like a inspira.and i thought our MKMs are expensiveThis post has been edited by heavyduty: Mar 12 2011, 12:03 AM |
|
|
Mar 12 2011, 12:28 AM
Return to original view | Post
#105
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
seeing Nuris above my house..possible SAR mission..dont know where they are from but they have set up camp at the sultan mahmud airport...
|
|
|
Mar 12 2011, 08:02 PM
Return to original view | Post
#106
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
Bosnia?OSA makes it impossible because bosnia is a SF operation
|
|
|
Mar 13 2011, 04:02 PM
Return to original view | Post
#107
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
isnt weather warfare banned by the geneva convention?
|
|
|
Mar 13 2011, 09:56 PM
Return to original view | Post
#108
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
guys,is the land rover defenders gonna be replaced any time soon?if yes with what vehicle?
im rooting for otokar cobra because ATM Added on March 13, 2011, 9:57 pmguys,is the land rover defenders gonna be replaced any time soon?if yes with what vehicle? im rooting for otokar cobra because ATM at the moment seem to be having a turkish lovefest This post has been edited by heavyduty: Mar 13 2011, 09:57 PM |
|
|
Mar 13 2011, 10:28 PM
Return to original view | Post
#109
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
QUOTE(ayanami_tard @ Mar 13 2011, 10:03 PM) well,the british have problems with their defenders,unarmored and vulnerable to IEDs.i know we are not sending an army into afghanistan or any shithole but we dont know what the future holds.the americans thought the humvee was good until the vehicle was really tested in iraq and they found it inadequate |
|
|
Mar 13 2011, 10:49 PM
Return to original view | Post
#110
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
i meant by their similar roles,utility behind the lines vehicles..who knows maybe in the future we might face another mogadishu and maybe that time we wont be so lucky and have only G-wagons and defenders.its not like every company is gonna have AV8s.Defenders are the backbone of the army and some of them will see combat..defenders are fine for now,what about the future.maybe its time for malaysia to include vehicles with V shaped hulls
the condor was thought to be good enough until it got peppered by RPGs and 7.62s |
|
|
Mar 14 2011, 09:51 AM
Return to original view | Post
#111
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
|
|
|
Mar 14 2011, 01:05 PM
Return to original view | Post
#112
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
QUOTE(DeFaeco @ Mar 14 2011, 12:11 PM) The same principle applies to the soldiers. I do not understand why they insist on wearing body armor when conducting foot patrol. All that weight slows them down and make it impossible to cross certain terrain. This makes their patrol route predictable and of course, vulnerable to planned attacks. tell that to the thousands of lives saved by their body armorin the US army,the survivability of the soldier outweights the drawbacks.there are not many foot patrols in afghanistan,most are on Humvees,Bradleys,and MRAPs.even if there is foot patrols its usually in cities and towns.the vulnerability to ambushes are because they cant tell the taliban and the normal afghan.what type of terrain they cant pass through?,they have been fighting in the mountains with body armor for years. US forces are issued lighter body armor in afghanistan depending on the terrain so i guess my argument above is invalid body armor may be hot and slow you down..but without it the attrition rate would be higher.wearing body armor is also more PC,the more lives taken the more unpopular the war will become.btw,dont malaysian soldiers conduct foot patrols in urban areas with body armor?? This post has been edited by heavyduty: Mar 14 2011, 01:14 PM |
|
|
Mar 14 2011, 01:11 PM
Return to original view | Post
#113
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
|
|
|
Mar 14 2011, 01:56 PM
Return to original view | Post
#114
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
just to nitpick,the mujahs that fought the soviets are not the taliban.those guys are in their 50s an 60s now,the warlords now were probably mujahs.some of taliban commanders maybe,not the fighters though.cant comment on the weapons though,weapons supplied by the US are now being used against them
|
|
|
Mar 14 2011, 02:32 PM
Return to original view | Post
#115
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
QUOTE(Fadly @ Mar 14 2011, 02:14 PM) The Mujahiddeens fighting the soviets are not really a single unified front. in it, there's a Kingpins, religious zealots, nationalists and mercenaries all glued together by the common enemy. once the common enemy's gone, the alliance unraveled rather swiftly. werent the mujahs united and formed the northen alliance to fight another common enemy?the taliban |
|
|
Mar 14 2011, 02:35 PM
Return to original view | Post
#116
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
QUOTE(MilitaryMadness @ Mar 14 2011, 02:23 PM) I agree with that,the Mujahideen was actually a general term used to describe Afghan Resistance fighters against Soviet occupation. you should also call the ANA and afghan cabinet as mujahs as some of them were commanders of the factions and were archnemesisSo,by that fact,I think it is fair to call the current Afghan fighters as Mujahideen (as a general term...I don't care what they call each faction as) |
|
|
Mar 14 2011, 05:09 PM
Return to original view | Post
#117
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
thats for EOD guys,although the bottom part is missing.
|
|
|
Mar 14 2011, 07:06 PM
Return to original view | Post
#118
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
QUOTE(MilitaryMadness @ Mar 14 2011, 06:52 PM) Interceptor Personal Armor Full Set the throat and thigh protectors are rarely used.groin protectors are always worn,to protect future recruits ![]() Ahhh....now that's the whole hog!!!! Really does look like an actual suit of Armor..... |
|
|
Mar 17 2011, 03:18 PM
Return to original view | Post
#119
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
|
|
|
Mar 18 2011, 06:43 PM
Return to original view | Post
#120
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
127 posts Joined: Aug 2010 |
the girl whispering what to that PASKAU personnel?asking phone number?
|
| Bump Topic Topic ClosedOptions New Topic |
| Change to: | 0.0528sec
0.33
6 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 3rd December 2025 - 08:04 AM |