TF A66 Armor - Baghdad Raid, Iraq, spectacular "Thunder Run", Heavy Fire 4-5-03 - General

Sorry no youtube video. [url]http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1185503718759384620#[/url] Some info: [quote] A day after the 1st Brigade Combat Team (BCT) moved against the airport, Colonel David Perkins, commander of the 2nd BCT, had driven his powerful formation against the Iraqi forces south of the city in the vicinity of Objective Saints. This was the intersection of Highway 8 from the south and Highway 1 running east and west. After hard fighting, the 2nd BCT secured Objective Saints, and on 5 April, had launched Task Force 1-64 Armor on a spectacular "Thunder Run" deep into the center of Baghdad and then hack out west to airport. Major General Buford C. Blount III. commander of the 3rd Infantry Division, wanted to increase the pressure on the regime even more, and to do that he again chose the 2nd BCT. He and COL Perkins developed a plan to attack out of Objective Saints against the heart of Saddam's government. The commander's intent was to demonstrate his ability to operate large-scale armored and mechanized forces deep within the capital city, thereby disproving the claim that U.S. forces were unable to penetrate Baghdad and to put unbearable pressure on the regime. Supporting our military men and women, American, Allied & Iraqi Troops in the war on terror. coonlakebeach.com/support_mn_troops.htm« [/quote]

this some good shit right here [editline]20th February 2011[/editline] HOLY shit that technical at 6:00 gets destroyed

Was that Vodnik burning?

jesus christ that rpg team got destroyed also at the end sympathy for the devil makes that entire slideshow look more like a vietnam flashback

I don't understand that pickup truck. Why did it even try to pass them?

because insurgents / iraqi military are stupid as fuck or should i say were

[QUOTE=Swebonny;28167044]I don't understand that pickup truck. Why did it even try to pass them?[/QUOTE] Probably armed with anti-tank weapons(mounted ones or RPG dudes) or a suicide bomber. [editline]20th February 2011[/editline] Would be great if you guys can find more info.

[QUOTE=Swebonny;28167044]I don't understand that pickup truck. Why did it even try to pass them?[/QUOTE] It seemed like he was driving by while firing at the convoy.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;28167213]It seemed like he was driving by while firing at the convoy.[/QUOTE] Gee what a genius thing to do with a tank RIGHT FUCKING THERE.

I just can't understand it... This: [media]http://www.anlayalim.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/m1-abrams-tank-3.jpg[/media] vs this: [media]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Ram-pickup.jpg[/media] And they attacked it from the front.

So much badassness.

That video buffers extremely slow. :saddowns:

I kept wanting the tank gun in front of the camera to fire And then it did :buddy:

[QUOTE=toastedspyro;28173766]I kept wanting the tank gun in front of the camera to fire And then it did :buddy:[/QUOTE] It was pretty unrewarding though.

Who needs smoke grenades when you can just fire the main cannon.

Guns sounds remind me of BF2.

Technicals can be pretty deadly not to mention that they are fast and agile on a highway. Mount a recoilless rifle and you got a cheap way to fight tanks.

[QUOTE=Brage Nyman;28175713]Technicals can be pretty deadly not to mention that they are fast and agile on a highway. Mount a recoilless rifle and you got a cheap way to fight tanks.[/QUOTE] I encountered a AT launcher mounted technical in ArmA II, you're right when you say those things are deadly. I can only imagine how bad it would be in real life. I don't think that truck had an AT launcher on it though. What would a machine gun mounted on one of those things do against an M1 Abrams?

[QUOTE=Monomiro;28176213]I encountered a AT mounted technical in ArmA II, you're right when you say those things are deadly. I can only imagine how bad it would be in real life. I don't think it had a AT gun on it though. What would a machine gun mounted on one of those things do against an M1 Abrams?[/QUOTE] I dont know if that first part was a joke but considering those tanks can take multiple direct hits from rpgs and still function I highly doubt and small AT gun much less a machine gun pose much of a threat.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;28176643]I dont know if that first part was a joke but considering those tanks can take multiple direct hits from rpgs and still function I highly doubt and small AT gun much less a machine gun pose much of a threat.[/QUOTE] How was the first part of that a joke? ArmA II is a military combat simulator, it has the potential to be almost as realistic as you can get without actually going to war. You could say its a soldier's Bad Company 2, only a hundred times more realistic. Also, there is no such thing as a 'small' anti tank launcher. I don't think you understand that the last part was a rhetorical question. I know that a machine gun would do jack shit to an abrams. What I meant was, "What were they trying to accomplish?"

i love arma 2 too but IN ARMA2 EVERYTHING HAS HITPOINTS AN ABRAMS CAN BE DESTROYED WITH ENOUGH 9MM SHOTS [editline]20th February 2011[/editline] also the destruction is pretty shit

[QUOTE=W0w00t;28177814]i love arma 2 too but IN ARMA2 EVERYTHING HAS HITPOINTS AN ABRAMS CAN BE DESTROYED WITH ENOUGH 9MM SHOTS [editline]20th February 2011[/editline] also the destruction is pretty shit[/QUOTE] I agree with you, perhaps I should clarify what I mean by deadly. I meant that combination wise, maneuverability combined with destructibility, a technical with an AT launcher mounted on it can easily fuck over an abrams if they have enough ammo. I never had a situation where a technical took out an abrams, but I've been blown up plenty of times by those damn things and couldn't do crap cause they were always moving. An abrams' main cannon obviously won't do anything, the only chance of taking it out is the coaxial or the other gun mounted on the cannon. Three technicals with AT launchers mounted on them could have the potential to overwhelm a single abrams.

Loving how you're comparing a video game to real life. We're talking about a tank with armor that can deflect multiple MBT shells and still function.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;28178991]Loving how you're comparing a video game to real life. We're talking about a tank with armor that can deflect multiple MBT shells and still function.[/QUOTE] Milsim* Not a video game. There is a difference. Bad Company 2 is a video game, the Call of Duty franchise are video games, ArmA II is nothing like any of those.

[QUOTE=Monomiro;28177264]How was the first part of that a joke? ArmA II is a military combat simulator, it has the potential to be almost as realistic as you can get without actually going to war. You could say its a soldier's Bad Company 2, only a hundred times more realistic. Also, there is no such thing as a 'small' anti tank launcher. I don't think you understand that the last part was a rhetorical question. I know that a machine gun would do jack shit to an abrams. What I meant was, "What were they trying to accomplish?"[/QUOTE] Oh gawd, I have a feeling your 12. [editline]20th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Monomiro;28179795]Milsim* Not a video game. There is a difference. Bad Company 2 is a video game, the Call of Duty franchise are video games, ArmA II is nothing like any of those.[/QUOTE] feeling confirmed

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;28179966]Oh gawd, I have a feeling your 12. [editline]20th February 2011[/editline] feeling confirmed[/QUOTE] The only thing confirmed is your own stupidity and general ignorance. You're resorting to false ad hominems for what? There is no doubt that a mere military simulator can't do anything to physically or emotionally prepare you for war, but strategically a great deal can be learned from them. But it doesn't take a military strategist to realize that those men in the technical were either incredibly stupid or just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

mono arma2 is not perfectly realistic

"BMP at 300 metres" Reminds me of ArmA :v:

[QUOTE=W0w00t;28180127]mono arma2 is not perfectly realistic[/QUOTE] Can you read? I know that ArmA II is severely lacking in several aspects, but strategy is definitely not one of them.

[QUOTE=Monomiro;28180087]The only thing confirmed is your own stupidity and general ignorance. You're resorting to false ad hominems for what? There is no doubt that a mere military simulator can't do anything to physically or emotionally prepare you for war, but strategically a great deal can be learned from them. But it doesn't take a military strategist to realize that those men in the technical were either incredibly stupid or just in the wrong place at the wrong time.[/QUOTE] I never said it wasnt stupid to drive a pickup into a convoy of tanks, it is stupid to evaluate how dangerous that said truck is to a tank based on a video game. Thats like me saying New York City traffic is bad because I played gta 4. And yes ARMA 2 is just as much a video game as Call Of Duty.