View Single Post
  #30  
Old July 10th, 2005, 08:50 AM
Backis's Avatar

Backis Backis is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 72
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Backis is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Interesting Site: Wheeled vs. Tracked AFV (US

Against better knowledge I'll bite again... I'm just friggin dumb...

Quote:
Your insults just indicate what the person you are.
Nice of you adding your own "insults" when I promise to ignore you, such an act of overt bravery!

I guess you're no better than me, being "what the person" I am.

Though you making claims you cant support then try to spin your way out of them by distraction and smokescreens say something about what kinda person you are?

If you somehow missed it the thing I am debating with you is this statement of yours;

"In everything, they are more versatile."

You refuse to even acknowledge you made this statement, instead you employ topic drift and pretend to debate something else to cover yourself from fallout from a stupid statement.


Quote:
JaM said:

Backis: Addon armor for LVTP-7 is not the same as on Zelda-2, read thread on tanknet more preciselly.
That might be so, however there is a report critical of it for failing to stop PG-7/PG-7M warheads, so I think they actually were believed to be at least resistant to that threat level and failed. But this is pretty irrelevant to the core debate between you and I anyway.

I haven't stated, nor intend to state that wheeled vehicles are "in everything more versatile" to tracked vehicles. Both have their advantages and drawbacks. The point I make is that there are missions where a wheeled vehicle have advantages over tracked vehicles, this you meet with nonsense about M113 going "through" threats, which is another daft position considering you don't specify which threat.

Even if the applique package for the Zelda 2 would be superior to the yet undeployed applique pack for the Stryker, better protection levels alone still does not equal;

"In everything, they are more versatile."

See? I can concede a point, but still your statement remain ludicrous.

Stop squirming and fess up to that it was am unsupported unfactual statement made without really considering its meaning and you'll find that we're probably closer on this subject than you think.

Sorry about being an [censored] about this, I'm usually not this bad. Must be having a bad week.
__________________
"Med ett schysst järnrör slår man hela världen med häpnad!"
–Socker-Conny
Reply With Quote