Is there any weapon available to civilians that could resist an M2 Bradley? asking for a friend

Is there any weapon available to civilians that could resist an M2 Bradley? asking for a friend

Other urls found in this thread:

imdb.com/title/tt0144550/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
youtube.com/watch?v=aXQ2lO3ieBA
youtube.com/watch?v=8XPxxWBY0v0
wikihow.com/Make-Thermite
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

30 pounds of tannerite under the belly should do it

AT7 rockets and maybe IEDs.

Why do you hate IFV's so much OP?

That could resist or destroy/damage?

Anzio 20mm

A simple Molotov cocktail could damage sights and possible force crew to exit. Mixed with Styrofoam or some other thickening agent could cause it to stay and melt rubber on tracks.

Enough .50 cal could damage the track if you hit the same area enough time.

You just gotta be creative.

Hello there ISIS

Mustard Gas

Define "resist". It has TOW missiles and a 25mm gun that can switch between AP and HE rounds. You cannot go toe to toe with it, just outrun it or dodge from it on a fast quad or dirt bike.

PS - Bradley's took out more tanks in the gulf war than Abrams tanks did.

You can beat it with love.

A home-made explosively formed penetrator could even penetrate tank armor.

bear spray
moltov

A knife to the tank operators' wife & kids

Another M2 Bradley

this is all you need

Shooting the fuel truck drivers

pothole

hornets nest

Who is this semen demon

...

This is the important question.

I think people really over-estimate the power and effectiveness of tanks.

There's a reason modern military forces are switching to use pretty much all fast light moving vehicles. Small arms are becoming more powerful and effective. So much to the point where tanks, even light tanks, can't keep up.

I legitimately feel bad for tank crews, knowing what they face on the battlefield.

Tanks are more so better as distraction/intimidation factor in modern warfare, their actual combat effectiveness, compared to a group of fast moving light vehicles, is far less.

The 4chans if you can get enough momentum behind it.

a shovel, dirt, and water

How would fast light moving vehicles fare against a barrage of 50bmg?

This bad boy can punch through 150mm plate, it should do the trick

Modern tanks can haul ass and have composite armor that will shrug off small arms fire and RPGs.

Sneak up on it and put one of those rainbow bumper stickers on it.

These things

If Ahmed and Taliq can find ways to take IFV's out of commission you bet your ass Cleetus and Jethro can do it better.

I don't think anything can really "shrug off" RPGs. If you mean that the crew will probably survive a hit, them ja, sure.

They are adapting lighter more maneuverable vehicles for urban combat. The tank is too destructive and cumbersome in narrow city environment.

After the initial invasion of Iraq tanks were pretty much parked so they wouldn't tear up the asphalt and houses.

...

Fulton anti-armor balloons

Light vehicles

>faster
>lighter
>quieter
>better maneuverability
>much easier to use, maintain and refuel
>can carry handheld weapon systems that out-range any MBT's main gun and pierce any MBT's armor.


Tanks only work well when you have

1. Space.
2. Lots of tanks in the space supporting each other.

Modern warfare doesn't work like that, therefore, they're a liability.

An RPG 7 round will do very little to modern tanks outside of maybe damaging the track. It will cause damage on a Bradley but very unlikely will it be catastrophic.

An RPG 29 will penetrate the armor of a modern tank.

Take it out with one of these.

+underrated

Not sure why you're even talking about these kinds of weapons when even sand-nigger Islamic militants have access to all kinds of modern weapon systems that melt through modern MBT's armor like butter.

They're not only being supplied by the US, they're also being supplied by Chinese knock-offs from the Saudi's, that seem to work just as well, if not even better, than the US armaments.

Yes I'm sold on their benefits. But they are vulnerable to 50bmg right?

Panzerfaust 3

Yes, a spade and ten men.

Dig a tank trap. Disguise it.

Stop it ANTIFA, we know it's you

tell your friend hes going to need The A-Team
ps B.A don't like flying

>Memerite

You best be baiting ya shitcunt

Insert the beam between the wheels, from the top to throw a blanket to cover triplexes.

.improvised homemade shaped shearing charge.

and if nothing else. tar and fire

You surely mean disable. In which case anyway to damage the tracks significantly will force it to stop and that my friend is ambush time

...

>PS - Bradley's took out more tanks in the gulf war than Abrams tanks did.

Why did this occur? Were the tanks not performing well in their role?

Are you kidding antifa couldn't handle a shotgun and they probably think 45 is the biggest round. I just want to know what would be in my dream arsenal so I could take on anything when shtf

Bullcrap! yall just want outside verification
(Performance capabilities not covered in manuals) To see if you're fancy new anti materiel rifles can exploit weak points in modern armor.

Tow missiles

go watch the Battle of the 73 Easting videos on youtube, it'll explain it to you.

It has good ATGMs and there are more of them. Technically though it's a weird vehicle that bears no relation to what it was originally supposed to be, a low-profile high capacity APC. That design was horribly compromised in committee by Generals acting like 12 year old boys drawing more rocket launchers and guns on it.

There's a funny film on the subject, "The Pentagon Wars" - imdb.com/title/tt0144550/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

just make some fertilizer bombs and go in the sewers under whatever street it's parked on.

???, profit, etc.

>Small arms are becoming more powerful and effective. So much to the point where tanks, even light tanks, can't keep up.
That must be why light vehicles are now becoming tanks and tanks are becoming bigger tanks.

...

this is my starting point tho

with enough explosives, anything is possible.

youtube.com/watch?v=aXQ2lO3ieBA

We're just trying to knock it out of commision, not wipe out half the eastern seaboard user.

>Is there any weapon available to civilians that could resist an M2 Bradley?
Throw Rosie O'Donnell stark naked in front of it. The motor will kill itself in shame, taking out the crewmembers who will also commit the swiftest method of suicide possible. The people who have to salvage the vehicle and the crewmen will see the footage of their last five minutes and will commit suicide. The people after that will stumble across the same footage and the vicious cycle continues. Soon, an entire battalion's worth of men will die by their own hands at the mere sight of Rosie's cellulite-ridden fat rolls jiggling carelessly in the open.

when will we finally sever the underwater internet cables

Weakened bridges.

Not soon enough, and besides, it's too late. The shitposter virus is out in the open infecting the internet and we are powerless to stop it. Grab an oversized can of piss-tasting Australia beer and welcome your new upside down overlords.

You can rig a simple land mine to fuck the tracks up. Could take them a few hours to repair depending on how bad you nail them.

Aka giant caltrops

>Sneak up behind tank
>Climb up
>Poop into hand
>Smear poop on cameras/glass

Let's see how a Bradley does in a city with Skyscrapers. In the end it is up to the Infantry no matter what.

A famas

I've literally seen a couple of them destroyed and one fatality during training accident. Was shot by a practice round.

Tracked vehicles are easy to kill.

Answering the question in general. You can shoot the optics of most vehicles. This is something scout teams do when they have to retreat under fire.

Put strands of wire where they'll get sucked up into the sprockets. Guaranteed mobility kill.

Why not equip tanks with tow missiles then?

That sounds like the generals screwed the vehicle over and made it worse but yet somehow it still kicked ass in the Gulf war. Did it just not matter because the Iraqis were shit anyway and not even remotely on our level?

A kike-ette

Yes.
There's a much more effective method.
My thoughts exactly.
You going to drop a building on a tank column there, Germany?
>mw3.jpg

Lads, if anything happened where the American people needed to fight armored targets, there are no doubt (and we know for sure) people who can dispatch them more easily than any insurgency or past army has managed to do.
The silence is our friend in this matter.

> no military anti-armor training
> identifying, and then shooting the optics out of a Bradley from 200-300m away without getting seen and BTFO.

anti tank rocket from building.

explosives are your best bet I'd imagine.

> available to civilians

OP is talking about domestic US insurgency.

Great imagination.

Big hole in ground covered with a few boards. Put a few buckets of gas in the bottom for more fun and games.

Armor crewmen make great crispy critters.

>You going to drop a building on a tank column there, Germany?
i think he was saying the tanks can't clear skyscrapers

youtube.com/watch?v=8XPxxWBY0v0
if isis can get it so can you.

IED

Pajeet pls just because the tanks are in streets doesn't mean you treat them like streets.

The Brads are cheaper, and they got more kills because we deployed more of them.

What is this autism?

well if you look at how the sand niggers combat amour i'd say an explosives ambush is probably the most effective method.

Thermite will go through any tank in existence. Just place it on top of the engine block and you'll disable it and if you place a good chunk on the turret you'll irreparably damage most of the inside. wikihow.com/Make-Thermite

Maybe after a civil war starts and Russia supplies insurgents in the US with arms, but not, not without extreme international criminal ties currently.

NO SHIT

I thought you retards could buy stuff like AT4 rockets legally?

If not just strap some explosives to a drone and fly it on top of the fucking thing.

>Having to walk right up to the tank
If your able to get that close someone in charge on the enemies side fucked up

It's not so much about having invincible units. It's about having effective units that can be mass produced - A philosophy the yanks have lost sight of in recent years. But then again, nukes did change the game.

/k/ might know better

>there are no doubt (and we know for sure) people who can dispatch them more easily than any insurgency or past army has managed to do.
>The silence is our friend in this matter.
That's a good point, good to know. thx m8

yes so you agree that I gave OP the best solution to his question. Thank you user.

You gents realize who would lead a U.S. insurgency?
People like pic related who build "pocket nukes".
The U.S. has the most battle-tested CT units in the world, both active and retired.
The vets are already retirees and the active are going to fuck the system before the system fucks them.

Our veterans, if organized, could take over our country.
The ordinance, info, and skill set they posses (this means everything from NG to DevGru) could challenge the U.S. full scale.
I think they could manage it easily as well.
Everything is just a clusterfuck now because bureaucracies ruin everything.

Have fun running up to an active Bradley, placing the thermite, igniting the magnesium starter, and running away without getting caught. Let alone the thermite burning through the armor before someone knocks it on to the ground with the butt of a rifle.