this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
1131 points (99.1% liked)
Funny
6993 readers
483 users here now
General rules:
- Be kind.
- All posts must make an attempt to be funny.
- Obey the general sh.itjust.works instance rules.
- No politics or political figures. There are plenty of other politics communities to choose from.
- Don't post anything grotesque or potentially illegal. Examples include pornography, gore, animal cruelty, inappropriate jokes involving kids, etc.
Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well that's an M109 Paladin. It weighs about half as much as an actual tank. But if it was fully loaded there's a pretty good chance nobody wins because it's an artillery system and it carries a lot of stuff that goes boom.
I don't care to speculate on who wins between a 70 ton tank and a train. It probably depends on what the train is pulling.
Edit to add - also we need pictures from different angles. From this angle it looks like the Paladin might have simply been de-tracked. But I'm pretty sure there's more damage as it's armor is actually comparatively light, rated for small arms and shrapnel.
So it's more self-propelled artillery?
Technically yeah, colloquially no sane person would judge another for calling such a thing a tank
It's only a tank if it comes from the Tankeshire region of England, otherwise it's just sparkling armoured vehicle.
Nah, I don't judge people for being wrong or inaccurate, particularly when the colloquial use of a term is as firmly established. Ideally, people would still know the distinction, and I'd prefer to have journalists be accurate at least, but mostly I care about knowing what's technically correct myself. I don't need to be a pedant, I just don't want to be ignorant.
That's exactly what it is.