Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Walter_Sobchak

Forum Nobility
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,497

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    139

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Walter_Sobchak

  1. Walter_Sobchak
    I'm not sure which particular book that is, but the artwork is by John Batchelor. His stuff got reprinted and reused in a bunch of books, such as Tank: A History of the Armored Fighting Vehicle by Kenneth Macksey and Fighting Tanks by Ian Hogg, to name a few. All decent books for their time but really of rather limited use in the internet era. Still, I pick them up if I find them cheap, I like looking at them. His art was used in a bunch of these magazine format tank books as well.
  2. Walter_Sobchak
    Nope. Wrong side of the pond.
  3. Walter_Sobchak
    Sorry for the image quality on this one. And yes, this is an actual armored fighting vehicle.
  4. Walter_Sobchak
    I actually found it in Robert Icks Tanks and Armored vehicles 1900 -1945
  5. Walter_Sobchak
    Straussler Light tank, V 4
  6. Walter_Sobchak
    Lets say if the winner of the last question takes more than a day to picture, it's open to anyone to post.
  7. Walter_Sobchak
    Yep, it looks like the back of the M60A2 turret. Is this one of the prototypes that now sits in a museum?
  8. Walter_Sobchak
    Hmm, its obviously M60ish.
  9. Walter_Sobchak
    Yep, in Hunnicutt's "Bradley" on page 305.
  10. Walter_Sobchak
    Pretty much, but it has an official designation. It's listed in Hunnicutt's "Bradley" as well as Fred Crimson's "US Military Tracked Vehicles', if that helps.
  11. Walter_Sobchak
    Since Xlucine suggested it in the general AFV thread, here is a new version of the old Tank ID thread that used to exist at the WoT forums, back before the great exodus to SH. The rules are simple. Post a picture of some sort of AFV and everyone has to try to name what it is. Try to avoid posting a new picture until the previous picture is identified. Generally, the person who was first to correctly ID the picture in question gets to post the next picture, unless they want to pass. If a picture is not ID'd in a day or two, the person that posted it should say what it is and bask in their own sense of superiority. They should then post a new picture for the sake of keeping the thread moving. Please, no fictional tanks, paper napkin drawings that never made it to prototype or pictures where the vehicle in question is obscured or particularly hard to see. Also, if posting a picture of an unusual variant of a relatively common vehicle, be sure to note that you are looking for the specific variant name, not just the general family of vehicles it belongs to (for example, if I post a picture of a Panzer IV with the hydrostat drive, I would say in the post something like "What makes this Panzer IV unusual?" since everyone can ID a Panzer IV) It is perfectly ok to shame those that make spectacularly wrong guesses. That's just how we roll around here. I'll start
  12. Walter_Sobchak
    It is. What's wrong with the tracks?
  13. Walter_Sobchak
    Looks like some sort of Marmon Harrington design. Something from their CTLS series. Its hard to say which exact model since the tops of the vehicles are not visible. Edit: Opps, I got ninja'ed
  14. Walter_Sobchak
    It's like Nexter and KMW looked at when General Dynamics slapped an Abrams turret on an M60 hull and said "we can do something even dumber!"
  15. Walter_Sobchak
  16. Walter_Sobchak
    Anyhow, I am going to take a break.
  17. Walter_Sobchak
    You just keep digging your "Whatabout" hole. Now you bring Ted Kennedy into it for no particular reason. I don't seem to recall any of these people having their own justice department pursuing an investigation into their campaign for possible collusion. You seem to keep forgetting that point.
  18. Walter_Sobchak
    And Bush looked into Putin's eyes and saw his soul. Again, what the hell does it have to do with what is going on now?
  19. Walter_Sobchak
    I'm not the one that introduced some completely unrelated point about Obama. If that ain't a classic "whatabout", then I'm not sure what is. I'm not crying any tears for James Comey. That said, your logic is faulty. If Trump fired Comey for his handling of the Clinton Email issue, that has no bearing on the Mueller investigation. Mueller is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 campaign, not the firing of James Comey or the 2016 Clinton email issue. . If Trump fired Comey because he was trying to end the FBI's investigation of Russian influence in the 2016 election, then he was attempting to obstruct justice and the Mueller probe should most certainly continue.
  20. Walter_Sobchak
    Yes, it was unfortunate that James Comey made a dumb decision which effected the election to some extent. Oh wait, are you talking about Strzok? Let's see what the report has to say on the matter. “Our review did not find documentary or testimonial evidence directly connecting the political views these employees expressed in their text messages and instant messages to the investigative decisions we reviewed,” So basically, they found nothing indicating that Strzok or Page actually did anything to act on their inappropriate and unprofessional email. As to the Obama quote, that is what we call "whataboutism." Oddly enough, it was a favorite logical fallacy used by Soviet propagandists.
  21. Walter_Sobchak
    Never doubt the incompetence of the Democrats. That said, there is no mechanism to enforce these rules. There is only the 25th amendment, or impeachment. And impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. That's why Trump and Giuliani are fighting there case in a wa that makes no legal sense, but it all about influencing the public, ie, the political realm. Anyhow, do a google search for "Trump ethics", you will find all sorts of interesting things.
  22. Walter_Sobchak
    The FBI has done plenty of shitting things for many, many years. I just think it's weird that of all the things that have finally gotten right wingers all excited is a report showing that the former head of the FBI acted inappropriately to help get the Republican candidate elected.
  23. Walter_Sobchak
    Please google the Emoluments Clause.
  24. Walter_Sobchak
    I will say this about Trump, I like that he opposed the merger of AT&T and Time Warner. I suspect his motives were based on trying to hurt Time Warner and their subsidiary CNN, a frequent target of his. For me, I just think there is too much consolidation of media in this country.
  25. Walter_Sobchak
    I lost my sense of humor regarding Trump a long time ago.
×
×
  • Create New...