Its pretty senseless slaughter, especially when we consider that Terror Bombing has NEVER worked, ever.
Its has worked a couple times, with a huge fucking asterisk:
Its never gotten a population to capitulate, but it has either sped up the collapse of a wartime economy or affected the tactical situation.
The few times it has "worked" were
US firebombing Japan. The leveling of Tokyo & other cities with incendiaries, making the elites see and feel the war in their backyards, played a part in the emperor's decision to surrender.
Israel bombing Syria in the 6-days war. The bombing of Damascus didn't accomplish much strategically but caused Syria to freak out effectively pull back its elited and armored divisions to deploy around the capital. Though its difficult to call one day with a handful of missions a terror bombing campaign, it was done by Jews.
Spain(Germany) bombing Spain. The inability of the Commies to match/counter Franco's german-supplied airpower sped up the disintegration of the commies and made the war less attractive to foreign volunteers - its one thing to die in glorious combat against the fascists its another to die pointlessly against a weapon you cannot stop. It made the complete cluster fuck that was commie command apparent, destroyed morale and caused desertions. It definitely didn't do Franco any favors with the civilian population afterwards though.
You can make an argument for Desert Storm. But that wasn't intended to break the population so much as it was to hit mostly SAM/AA sites in the city and it disrupted Iraqi command.
Japan in the Phillipines, big asterisk there. They never did the big strategic bombing we usually think of, but the behavior of bombers IN COMBINATION with the gives zero fucks actions of the ground commanders got the US/Phillipines to do their fighting outside of the urban centers. There was an active, armed resistance to the level that it was able to put together fieldable units when the US returned, so you can question how successful it really was.
The US didn't terror bomb NV - though its portrayed that way - as bombing civilians was actively avoided. They bombed every economic target possible, many of them less valuable than the bomb that did them in. The issue was North Vietnam wasn't running their own war economy they were being externally supplied and Kennedy/LBJ/Nixon were too pussy to level the harbors.
They did terror bomb the shit out out da Natzis though. This did minimal economic damage but did fuck with German logistics.
Anyway, indiscriminate bombing is a shit tactic with usually shit results in the opposite effect, but everyone does it any way.
All it does is harden resolve. The big issue for generating war fatigue in a population has always been them feeling uninvested in a conflict that is costing them sons and national treasure. When that war blows up your downtown market square, suddenly you don't really care how much tax money you are spending to kill the bastards lobbing those bombs, and you will probably demand to know why your youngest son hasn't joined their brothers on the front line yet.
Pretty much exactly this. If they didn't think you were there to kill them before, they do now.
But Slavs gonna Slav.
He talks as though the war is entirely our doing. He says many innocent young people have been killed, so why do we do it?
"Its a complete travesty that US picked up Russian troops inside russia, gave them orders to invade, and then dropped them off inside Ukraine. How can Biden keep getting away with this"
Introducing the newest iteration of Russian drone countermeasures, a Cope-Kennel; meticulously designed by the Traktorno-fermerskiyzavod №11 & heroically built by crippled soldiers before their return to the front.
That looks like a death trap. Does the gun just shoot though the chainlink? How do you get out if something happens like a mine?
I would like a very autistic report on the effectiveness of cope cages.
Wouldn't a suicide drone still be able to fuck up the vehicle by slamming into the sides or front/back?
@mindlessobserver has it right: That is going to stop a Alibaba quadcopter that has some grenades strapped to it, and nothing else.
Depending where its operating I'll give it upto a 4/7.
@mindlessobserver points out correctly that it almost doubles the height of the vehicle. An alert AT team or tank gunner is going spot you that much easier and won't even need to see you to get a bead on you. Its going to make droning you harder - though they could just fly under the vehicle and explode there, or take out the treads. Its harder, and you're more likely to see the drone coming.
But if you are cruising behind the front, or operating in areas that are cleared of UKA ground troops and drones are your main threat, it'll stop the hilarious open-hatch videos we've been seeing now that the weather's warmed up.
Two Major issue's I'd take is I don't see a door uptop. You can presumably use the loading doors enter/exit the vehicle, but good luck bailing out of a burning BMP through the fueltank.
Second, related issue: I'm assuming the 360 protection is to allow you to drive around with your hatches open for cooling and visibility, and prevent previously mentioned issue where the yooks fly a drone into said hatches. But while they have top high enough to prevent lethal shrapnel while the hatches are open, the drivers forward screen is too close. You could fly your drone head on into the vehicle and kill or maim the driver.
To answer
@Kendall Motor Oil 's question: That gun is going to fuck the ever loving shit out of that chainlink copecage like it doesn't even exist. There had better not be any open hatches or dismounted infantry around when they start shooting or they are going to get shards of steel shrapnel embedded in them when that chainlink gets obliterated.
