From the mouth of Aristotle

[Boron]

Arryn said:

Israel has never used Soviet-made weapons (except what they might capture on the battlefield from the Arabs for later study). You really do need to do a better job of studying history.

Well in a book which i have they write that knowledge Israel had about soviet tanks + new developments thanks to the mossad that this flew into the Design of the Merkava I tank as well .
So knowing how well the Mossad works why shouldn't i believe this then when i read it in a book about tanks ?
Furthermore as you said they used captured soviet tanks from the Arabs very inventive for e.g. their APC Achzarit .


With your further comments i guess you are just kidding or do you really work for the american government in a position with insight i as an european can never get ?

[Arryn]

Boron said:
Well in a book which i have they write that knowledge Israel had about soviet tanks + new developments thanks to the mossad that this flew into the Design of the Merkava I tank as well .

Studying a Russian weapon (on testing grounds, or how the enemy has employed it) is not the same thing as using it operationally as a part of one's own equipment. You are using the knowledge gained from the weapon, not the weapon itself.

Boron said:
So knowing how well the Mossad works why shouldn't i believe this then when i read it in a book about tanks ?

No offense, but you seem to have trouble understanding what you read/see, in interpretation thereof, and/or in coming to conclusions. I don't think it's an issue of your being German, either, because I don't see this problem with other Germans I correspond with.

Boron said:
Furthermore as you said they used captured soviet tanks from the Arabs

As I said above, they studied them, not employed them. I think you are mistranslating the word "used" in the context being discussed.

Boron said:
With your further comments i guess you are just kidding or do you really work for the american government in a position with insight i as an european can never get ?

I was joking.

However, I did serve decades ago in the US Army (in an armored unit), and I stay current with things that are of interest to me, insofar as I can as a civilian. I am also active politically, and I voraciously read history and tech books (as well as SF/fantasy) and I'm pretty skilled at information research (which I first learned to do for science fair projects in high school, then later in college when I was majoring in physics). You'd be amazed at what you can learn on your own when you put your mind to it. The hard data on nukes I pulled from the web in a few seconds while I was replying to you. The rest was from my memory.

[Zen]

Arryn said:
However, I did serve decades ago in the US Army (in an armored unit), and I stay current with things that are of interest to me, insofar as I can as a civilian. I am also active politically, and I voraciously read history and tech books (as well as SF/fantasy) and I'm pretty skilled at information research (which I first learned to do for science fair projects in high school, then later in college when I was majoring in physics). You'd be amazed at what you can learn on your own when you put your mind to it. The hard data on nukes I pulled from the web in a few seconds while I was replying to you. The rest was from my memory.

Most of the information you can find about operational limits and theoretical analysis of nuclear payload, distance, and detonation time along with hypothetical responses can be found all across the 'net. It's major currency for conspiritorial nuts.

[Arryn]

The only conspiracies (besides the GOP, which is one big conspiracy masquerading as a political party) that I believe in are that of the JFK assassination, and that various governments know more about UFOs than they are letting on. But I prefer not to speculate on just what the info that's being hidden is.

I don't believe in the Illuminati, or in secret Vatican cabals (a la Prince of Darkness and other such movies), or in some nether plot by game publishers to deny us ever seeing a decent successor to MOO2/FO2/XCOM2.

[Cainehill]

Arryn said:
I don't believe [...] in some nether plot by game publishers to deny us ever seeing a decent successor to MOO2/FO2/XCOM2.

You don't? How else can you explain it?

[Boron]

Arryn said:

As I said above, they studied them, not employed them. I think you are mistranslating the word "used" in the context being discussed.

Well you showed simply that you either didn't read my full post or made the wrong quoting with purpose .

The whole sentence was

Furthermore as you said they used captured soviet tanks from the Arabs very inventive for e.g. their APC Achzarit .

So a few words further in the sentence i gave you the PRACTICAL example how they used them .

And what about the Tiran 4/5 tanks ? They were captured T54/55 which Israel used a long time first without much modifications , later with new turrets / armor improvements and now because they became obsolete they removed the turret and built their APC Achzarit out of them . This is very inventive as i wrote and you say they didn't employ them .

[Arryn]

Boron said:
And what about the Tiran 4/5 tanks ? They were captured T54/55 which Israel used a long time first without much modifications , later with new turrets / armor improvements and now because they became obsolete they removed the turret and built their APC Achzarit out of them . This is very inventive as i wrote and you say they didn't employ them .

My apology. I was wrong about that. I was unaware of the Israeli Tiran series tanks, as they were all withdrawn from service by Israel before I served in the US Army. (There was Tiran 6, also, which was a captured T62. Israel never had more than 100 of these.)

The Achzarit has been so heavily modified/rebuilt that it hardly counts. About the only thing that's original is the base hull and road wheels. The suspension, engine, controls, weapons, and pretty much everything else has been changed. The only thing the Israelis have done by re-using the base chassis is save themselves the cost/effort of casting a new hull. Still, technically you are correct in that they did use them since rather than casting a new hull for a new APC they reused captured hulls.

[Cainehill]

Boron said:
With your further comments i guess you are just kidding or do you really work for the american government in a position with insight i as an european can never get ?

Boron, it seems that anyone who doesn't take Tom Clancy and JR Tolkien as reputable sources for real world information have an insight that you'll never have.

Rather like the way you've been sharing your "insights" on game balance, when you just posted that you'd never gotten to the end game before.

I guess you've been using the 1-900-psychic friends network to know how end game balance works out, eh?