Is it? I think internally is a reasonable way to read that requirement. Even failing that, somewhere else would have to be more equal and just, somehow.

Happy cake day, by the way.

I know it’s the theory that the Western lifestyle in general is built on that, but Denmark’s state budget is pretty easy to verify as coming from Denmark.

You’re getting a lot of “none” answers, but that’s overly pessimistic, given that you used relative terms for almost everything, and free healthcare and education are standard first-world features.

The usual statistics wondercountries would be my answer. Canada, the Nordics and select other places in Western Europe like the Netherlands and Switzerland. New Zealand is having problems these days, but maybe them too, I’m not sure. They all lean towards these stances relative to other countries.

Cheap food is probably hardest thing. It just comes with a certain cost to produce or ship in.

Where from? Greenland is a big resource sink.

Interesting, I’m going to have to look into that. Soviet designs usually do have larger allowances, but the fundamental way the technology works is of course the same.

It’s more doctrine than actual machine accuracy. They plan to hit a large area as their primary technique of inflicting damage, while a NATO force waits for some kind of known target or goal (like “make this route unusable”).

The first part if your comment doesn’t make sense.

It’s just a thick metal tube, and it’s designed to have explosions in it normally. Your drone might simply make dents, and if not the crew will still be safe and mobile to get back to base for repair. Then it can go back out and keep fighting.

Being out there and sending a drone is of course not risk-free for the attackers, and the reward is so much less than the hardkill they’d get without the cage being in the way.

It is a massive target with atrocious visibility and an engine that is already underpowered without adding tons of extra weight.

Compared to the tank, it’s not going to weigh much. It’s pretty typical to add stuff on to your armour. The visibility thing is legit though, and you can see they’ve tried to retain as much as possible.

We all are.

deleted by creator

That this war has generated a subgenre of funny war footage is itself, kind of funny.

Hmm, are the Russians also having problems in that department? This is a Ukrainian tank per the title.

That said, it’s a reasonable general take. Every time there’s a new weapon this debate plays out. Sometimes it’s the atom bomb and lives up to the hype, but sometimes it’s the interwar bomber that doesn’t always get through.

Yes, the Russian versions strand themselves pretty often, which is why they’ve tried to make this one pretty transparent. Since it’s only slightly larger than the tank already is, I doubt it makes a difference in terms of detection, though.

Time will tell if it’s a gamechanger or just a reasonable enough strategy both sides keep trying it.

It’s a hearty metal part, and well isolated from the much more expensive rest of the vehicle.

Like, maybe that would work and force them to go back for repairs, but it doesn’t obviously nullify the design.

Tanks are good at shrugging off non-specific light damage. That’s basically definitional. As I understand it, this design is supposed to make it much harder to target weak points (so specific damage).

According to Perun, Russian assualt sheds get softkilled by their own poor visibility more often than blown up, because they just drive into things. You can see they’ve tried to keep a degree of transparency in this Ukrainian version.

Sure. Except it itself is vulnerable to artillery fire, costs a lot, and would itself need drone-proofing.

This is just how armour fighting armour works.

They fill the role nonverbal cues do in real life. Whenever I go back to old-style forums I miss them, because everyone ends up arguing with a few trolls/nuts that would look like they’re being taken seriously otherwise.

Subsaharan Africa is not known for being well plugged in. Especially not in the 1960’s.

Yeah, but this was colonial/early postcolonial Africa, and Hitler was in Europe. How well can you tell fine African leaders from atrocity committing ones? And, the average Lemming has an actual solid education.

This is the dudes explanation as well, when the media bothers him. Dad just picked a random major European leader.

Given that the headline doesn’t even mention which country, no.

It’s good for sailing or pointing antennas.

Edit: Wait no, you need an actual geodesic for antennas over long distances. If you’re traveling, though, a constant compass heading is indispensable.