Former Tank Commander | L2A4/L2SG 🇸🇬 | Talks To Himself Online (biz📧: [email protected])
Australia
Joined April 2013
- Tweets68K
- Following704
- Followers1.9K
- Likes84.7K
Pinned Tweet
Obligatory link tweet for pinning.
Twitch: twitch.tv/panzerpaw/
Instagram: instagram.com/panzerpaw/
YouTube: youtube.com/channel/UCDvSzWX…
As a former tank commander, it's pretty hard to defend your mainland with simulators instead of actual tanks.
Hope this helps.
In case it isn't blindingly obvious...
A first aid kit can save a life in an emergency. Defence equipment (such as tanks) does a similar thing if your country is attacked.
Dear aussie govt, 1984 is NOT an instruction manual.
🚨BREAKING: The Online Safety Amendment (Digital Duty of Care) Bill 2026 has passed in the House of Representatives by Labor, Independents and the Greens.
96 YES, 38 NO.
Voted against by Liberals, Nationals, One Nation and Rebekha Sharkie.
Andrew Hastie didn’t appear at any divisions.
This bill will force online businesses to conduct annual risk assessments, report to eSafety and face penalties for non-compliance.
It gives the government power to influence platform design features and impose age-assurance requirements.
It authorises eSafety to operate covert “sock puppet” accounts for government surveillance and information warfare.
It will classify content that “encourages or promotes hostile attitudes towards women or gender equality” as harmful, including legitimate criticism of feminism.
Public hearings are set for 9–10 November, with the inquiry report due 20 November. The bill must still pass the Senate.
This reminds me of an incident that occurred in my service time for very similar reasons. The loader wanted to get the next round in quickly during live fire movements and so he was carrying a round in his arms. Unfortunately, because the tank was moving, he lost his balance and dropped the round.
Normally, dropping a round is bad enough as the combustible casing is prone to cracking if you hit it hard enough or bend it badly. And, using both hands to hold it at the time meant he had no easy way to steady himself.
So, the round fell. As it did, it landed in the breech basket (shown in the pictures below). At the same time it landed, the gun fired and breech recoiled into the round splitting the casing and tossing propellant pellets everywhere.
Given the circumstances, this is still probably the best outcome. Had the loader himself fallen behind the breech, it could've been significantly worse. Thankfully, the exercise was stopped immediately and the crew was evacuated until the tank could be cleared and made safe.
We got lucky that day.
It's always important to remember that the drills we practice have reasons for being. The moment you think you can take shortcuts is the moment you compromise on the safety standards put in place. This is why we always emphasise dilligence in training. Leaving things out or skipping steps may not seem like a big deal until you find out (hopefully not the hard way) why those steps were there in the first place.
So, fun fact: we actually used the FN MAG (M240) on our Leopard 2s instead of MG3s. The modified mount worked well enough although the trigger was temperamental. Feed issues were less common but we did find that exact issue shown in the video when using belts more than 250 rds long. I wonder if that's what's causing it for the crew in the video too.
Something was missing #AceCombat
Honestly, what's the reason that claimaints aren't forced to prove the own the rights to something before they can make a claim?
And why are there no verification steps in place to ensure an entity is even legitimate before they have access to the system?
I've had a copyright claim submitted over a few small Tesla clips in my latest video while talking about some of the sweet Roadster thruster footage. Obviously all fair use. How is it fair @YouTubeCreators that a baseless claim like this can be made by a company that has absolutely nothing to do with Tesla? All monetisation removed again for up to 30 days including shopping and I just need to take it until my dispute expires. Add to that I need to tick boxes in my dispute submission agreeing that
"I understand that filing fraudulent disputes may result in termination of my YouTube channel."
For creators this stuff scares them into being bullied into having their earnings taken away. It only needs a 2 second glance to see that the claim itself is fraudulent, so such claims should never make their way to a creator in the first place.
All the power is with the claimant, almost nothing with the creator. 🥺
Getting a sponsor offer from company claiming to be in Germany but has many (now deleted posts from China) and uses a phone number from Hong Kong.
Yep, nothing to see here. 🚩🚩🚩
Finally some good news
🚨 BREAKING: V8 ENGINES ARE RETURNING TO F1 IN 2030!
FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem has confirmed the return of V8 engines, with plans for:
• Cars approximately 80 kg lighter
• At least 50% lower engine and R&D costs
• A return to the iconic V8 sound
The countdown to 2030 begins. 👀🔥
(via. @Racingnews365c) #F1
When Australia moved to ban social media, I said it was to control information and had nothing to do with "protecting the kids".
Now, they want absolute control over information with the ability to censor anything they want. As well as use false identities online to conduct surveillance and enforce censorship.
This isn't speculation or tinfoil hat conspiracy, it's blatant and written out in the bill itself.
And if it sounds like some sort of "secret police" type bullshit, it's because that's exactly what they want to achieve.
Well, that was wild. I'm at the Australian Parliament and just left a meeting with two staffers for the governing party. They told us that the government needed more power to censor things like the upcoming US execution of Nidal Hasan.
When I asked why they needed to censor that video, one said it was to prevent copycat killings. Copycat killings by governments? I asked. Er, no, they said. Copycat killings like of a backpacker, several decades ago.
So, under that logic, I pointed out, the government should censor things like last year's Bondi massacre, where two Muslims killed 15 people, no? Well, that was news, they said. Didn't they realize their bill would allow the government to censor news? They didn't seem to know, or care.
They also admitted that they did not know that the bill would allow the government to create and operate an unlimited number of fake social media accounts to attack its political enemies and spread disinformation. Having presented them with information they had never heard about a bill they had clearly not read, they emphasized to us, strenuously, that they were moving forward with the bill.
So there you have it. The government wants the power to arbitrarily censor scenes of violent crime, or violence, for any reason. And it wants the power to use an unlimited number of fake accounts to wage offensive disinformational warfare against the Australian people.
Given that the Bondi massacre last year increased public opposition to mass migration, and support for the populist One Nation Party, it seems obvious that the government wants to censor such events in order to protect its political power.
It's quite telling how obediently governing party members insist such a law is needed without even knowing what's in it.
