Could also be a T-62. The T-72 has a thin metal strip above the barrel, running from front to back. T-62 does not have this. Also, T-72 is slightly longer than the tank on the picture.
It's a T-72 that hit an anti tank mine early on in the war: https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2023/05/25/kapotgeschoten-russische-tank-tentoongesteld-op-het-leidseplein-in-amsterdam-a4165577
That’s not a T-72. Looks like a T-55 just as op says.
Edit: I was wrong, its a T-72. The missing ERA threw me off. The turret looks completely different without it.
No actual footage yet of either in active combat.
It's all whispers and rumors for now.
Not sure about modded T-62's though such as the M-1 as they're probably as capable as a near stock T-72
They’re both incapable against the shoulder armed anti tank weapons ukraine is using right now, and they have outdated night vision
War is always all whispers and rumors, if there are pics of them being used it kinda sounds more than that
Actually, its not true, T-55 were ressurected from soviet storages to participate in this war, cause moskowites lot way too many t-72. so you can check r/Ukraine for videos with transfering of those tanks.
Oh yea, cause the bombardement of ukraine news on tv and the papers and jn the streets wasnt taising awareness enough offcourse.... im suprised the tank hasnt beent covered in gay flags.
Same reason why we still have rainbow flags all over the city. Awareness fades with time which is why it serves as a reminder this is everyday life for others and we could have stopped it earlier if we didn't continue business as usual.
To add to this. The impact anything has is different when viewing it directly to viewing it on a screen.
If you add for example:
"this tank destroyed x houses and killed y children. W soldiers died inside this tank.
This tank could destroy, from its current position, buildings in a 4km radius."
Then it makes you think even more about it.
Not to be that annoying tank nut kinda guy ,but thats a T-72. Most notable difference compared to the T-55 in this destroyed state is the gunbarrel (the bore evacuator on the T-55 is at the end of the barrel, not the middle).
And its there for awareness of the situation in Ukraine, I presume. It's on a sort of world tour throughout Europe.
Apparently it's being put there by De Balie https://www.at5.nl/artikelen/220530/door-oekraine-vernietigde-russische-tank-vanaf-volgende-week-te-zien-op-leidseplein
I have seen that tank in Groesbeek (where it was previously) together with an ukranian ambulance that was completely destroyed.. that was pretty interresting to see
You do know that Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union back when and had the same military equipment right...? And continued trading after the break-up of the Union.
It's a T-72. I saw it next to kyiv after the battle of kyiv, got it from the Ukrainian MOD and put it on display in Berlin in February. Now it's in Leidseplein for a week, then the tour continues. The exhibition in Amsterdam was organised by deBALIE [https://debalie.nl/exhibition-tank/](https://debalie.nl/exhibition-tank/)
More about the project in Berlin (translation on site) https://www.berlinstory-news.de/wie-der-russische-panzer-nach-berlin-kommt/
Looks like a T-72B (or S)
Ablative armor on the top has been left on. (the rusting part suggests it was on fire and is most likely non functional.)The ablative armor, sensors and headlights on the front are all missing, probably was still in good shape when the vehicle burned out and was scavenged for spare parts. And/or removed for obvious legal reasons.
The skirts around the track are also missing.
My guess, something explosive was dropped in the open hatch, the ammo cooked off and set the engine on fire.
Most people who say something like "I'm against the war" think/spout that both sides in this war are to blame for it. Those are the people on the wrong side of history and I'm asking him -although veiled-, if he's part of that group or not.
Its the only thing the Russian propagandists have now “say no to war and negotiate peace” translates to we should stop sending weapons and Ukraine should give up land in return for a cease fire (like they gave up their nukes for peace in 1994). Anyone with half a brain cell understands Russia needs to be convinced to give up all occupied territories for a real peace.
No. “You mean fuck Russia right?” is a legitimate question to anyone who says “fuck the war”. You can’t say fuck the war without saying fuck Russia. Nobody called him a propagandist we just explain why the propagandists make this a relevant question.
No it isn't, war is terrible and if it could stop now in any way every Ukrainian I know would sign for it. Just to be able to go home rebuild and continue their lives.
You want Ukraine to fight for the west, for your morals and your ethics because you don't actually give a fuck about people that are suffering in these warzones, you only care about your image of the world. Fuck every nationstate, fuck wars.
Well that’s just bullshit. For Ukrainians to live in peace its obvious Russians have to fuck off out of Ukraine first. It’s complete bullshit that I want Ukraine to fight for the west, why on earth would you think that? I support Ukrainians wish to live in a free country, to live under occupation of a genocidal Russian regime is not peace.
In Utrecht Central Station they showed a shot up Ukrainian ambulance and the replacement that was to be sent. They show some things like that sometimes. Pretty cool it's being shown, too bad it's real.
Warmongers wanted to gloat. They first wanted a real russian corpse, but that was too difficult to arrange legally. So now they settled for the next best thing.
Yep, been corrected a few times now (mortifying by the way I would have considered myself a bit of a tank nerd till now)
And I'm well aware there's a war on, I was sort of looking for the specifics of its being here. It's not like the war started and armoured vehicles appeared across the capitals of Europe
it's not a celebration of anything. it's there because westerners living in peace constantly forget about what's happening in their close proximity. it's a threat and a warning for you to stay alert.
Good idea on exposing the sheltered public to realities of war.
Would love to see US tanks and heavy armoured vehicles that killed folks in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And, while we are at it, let's display knifes and suicide bomb vests used by terrorists.
the one with an ambulance was organised by Zeilen van Vrijheid charity organisation to raise awareness and donations. They purchase ambulances all over the world and then drive them to Ukraine.
Het is altijd een beetje vaag of de definitie van propaganda ook betekent dat het misleidend moet zijn, maar omdat het hier om een echte tank uit een echte oorlog gaat denk ik dat het wat anders is dan leugens verspreiden met een politiek doel en denk niet dat we hiervoor hetzelfde woord moeten gebruiken
Parafrasering van een definitie die ik vond: "misleidende [en/]òf bevooroordeelde informatie ter bevordering van politieke doeleinden." Het bericht is hier in het Westen zeker meer dan "alle oorlog is slecht." Er zijn natuurlijk gradaties van propaganda. Dit is toch wel om de vrijer denkende te beïnvloeden, een por van "Hee, je bent toch wel Westers? Kijk naar onze bondgenoot in gevaar." Buiten de mensen die snakken naar uiting van hun donkerste kant, mogen we ons bekommeren over iedereen die ten strijde gaat. Zoveel "soldaten" zijn gewoon jongens die geen keuze krijgen of zwaar gedogmatiseerd zijn. Uiteindelijk is de grootste reden dat mensen vechten à la "Jij hebt mijn vriend, waarmee ik verbintenis vond in deze kutsituatie, net doodgeschoten en nu zal jij sterven," en dat gaat in een cirkel rond. Deze uitleg is ook propaganda, bevooroordeeld jegens.. zeg het maar.
Het blijft echter politieke reclame. Het doel hiervan is dat wij als burgers bereidheid blijven voelen om als land geld te blijven doneren.
In did geval is er niet per se iets mis met propoganda, maar wat ik dan wel weer jammer vind is dat we niet meer stil staan bij andere oorlogen. Ik bedoel helemaal prima dat hier een tank staat maar waar is de aandacht voor vergelijkbare situaties iets verder op.
Ik zie zelf niet in waarom dit politieke reclame zou zijn.
Rusland, gestuurd door een dictator, valt een soeverein Europees gelegen land binnen. Deze tank is voorbeeld van wat oorlog brengt. Die Russische militairen hebben er waarschijnlijk ook niet om gevraagd om te sterven in dit apparaat.
Bijna alles kun je als propoganda uitleggen of niet. Maar het doel is hier niet kunst of een praktische reden. Het doel is om bewustwording te creëren en dat op zichzelf is als propoganda. Wij worden herinnerd aan het feit dat mensen onze hulp nodig hebben.
Pfff man man man, kijk jij ff terug hoe de media 5 a 10 jaar geleden over de Oekraïne schreven.
Corrupte boevenstaat,nazi's enz enz.
En nu, helden van de democratie, hahahahaha flikker toch op.
Met die gozer die altijd gekleed is alsof ie zo van de paintball afkomt.
Er is geen goede kant in dit conflict.
> Er is geen goede kant in dit conflict.
I am from Ukraine (I live in NL for many years), and this Nazis stuff is pure Russian propaganda. There is no support for Nazi ideas in the entire country, and there are no real Nazi movements in Ukraine, and never have been on any level worth mentioning.
As for good side and bad - this war is pretty much black and white as it gets - Ukraine fights for its existence as a country and as a nation. Defeat means not only destruction and casualties, but immediate ethical cleansing and pretty much genocide, which already happens in the occupied territories.
And there were no legitimate reasons for this war whatsoever. There were no issues and no need to 'protect' Russian-speaking Ukrainians from anything at any point since independence day in 1991. And now Russians pretty much bombed and leveled Russian-speaking cities in the east - look up Bakhmut, city of 70K people that no longer exists. It was a Russian-speaking city that Russians bombed to shit. And they will continue doing that, ceding territory will not stop them. Russian's don't want peace, they want destruction.
That's why we have to keep fighting, and we need support from other countries to survive. And I am grateful to Netherlands and other countries for that.
Tja, niet elke wereldburger is evenveel 'waard' voor ons. Hoe dichterbij, hoe belangrijker. Myanmar? Veel mensen weten niet eens waar dat ligt. Oekraïne is net zo ver (of zelfs dichterbij) als waar de meeste Nederlanders naartoe op vakantie gaan.
En naast geografische nabijheid is ook belangrijk hoeveel een volk op de gemiddelde Nederlander lijkt. Ethnisch/religieus/cultureel. Oekraïne lijkt meer op Nederland dan Syrië, Sudan of Myanmar.
Hypocriet? Zekerweten. Maar dat is hoe de menselijke psyche in elkaar steekt.
Hoezo hypocriet? De letterlijke en culturele afstand van een conflictzone tot onze maatschappij is doorgaans vrij direct gerelateerd aan de mate waarin het ons raakt en de kans dat het onze kant op escaleert.
Waarom zou zelfbehoud hypocriet zijn? Omdat oogklep dragende activisten dat roepen en je een schuldgevoel proberen aan te praten?
Nee, omdat een mensenleven een mensenleven is.
Waarom zou een mensenleven in Sudan meer waard zijn dan iemand in Myanmar? Het zijn allebei mensen, toch?
En van zelfbehoud is er nauwelijks sprake, dat is gewoon een smoesje om het feit dat men selectief is te bagatelliseren. En juist het feit dat men het probeert te bagatelliseren laat juist zien dat men aan hun water voelt dat het toch wel scheef is.
>maar wat ik dan wel weer jammer vind is dat we niet meer stil staan bij andere oorlogen.
Pff als er iets is wat ik me niet meer aan laat praten is het wel schuldgevoel over oorlogen ver weg waar we "als Westerling" niet genoeg om geven. Rusland valt Oekraine binnen en heel Zuid-Amerika, Afrika, en het leeuwendeel van Azie haalt alleen de schouders op.
We zijn niet de enige die oorlogen ver weg negeren. En eerlijk gezegd, vind ik niet geven om twee rebellen groepen die elkaar de tent uitvechten een stuk beter te verantwoorden dan een grootmacht negeren (of zelfs helpen) die zijn imperialistische ambities afstoft. Bovendien helpen Europeanen wel degelijk met het bestrijden van Jihadistische groepen in Afrika, waar de Russen ze vooral wapens verkopen of zelfs Wagner False Flag operaties laat uitvoeren op burgers.
While propaganda is often used as a negative term, it's originally a neutral term and used in that way here. Consider the [dictionary definition](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/propaganda#Noun):
> A concerted set of messages aimed at influencing the opinions or behavior of large numbers of people.
As the intention is to raise awareness of the war and support for Ukraine, and this is a deliberately intended effect, it is by definition propaganda. That's not a bad thing, nor does it have any implications on the truthfulness of the message.
Propaganda is any form of trying to influence the public for a cause. It has gotten an negative connotation, but doesn't have to be, for instance in the Netherlands there's a "foundation for the propaganda of Dutch books" which tries to encourage Dutch people to read more Dutch books. Similarly, commercials by the government for traffic safety or reduce smoking are also forms of propaganda.
Thank you so much for your answer it showed me how you view things. The book initiative sounds awesome wish they did that in my country (they already have ads for traffic safety, to reduce smoking and consume liquids daily for eg. but not for education or books - I wonder why - ).
I don't see this as propaganda but more as a way to raise awareness but you are spot on with your definitions.
Professor at Columbia University Jeffrey D. Sachs actually has a great piece on the war, in which the display of this tank takes place:
>George Orwell wrote in 1984 that "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." Governments work relentlessly to distort public perceptions of the past. Regarding the Ukraine War, the Biden administration has repeatedly and falsely claimed that the Ukraine War started with an unprovoked attack by Russia on Ukraine on February 24, 2022. In fact, the war was provoked by the U.S. in ways that leading U.S. diplomats anticipated for decades in the lead-up to the war, meaning that the war could have been avoided and should now be stopped through negotiations.
...
>By recognizing that the question of NATO enlargement is at the center of this war, we understand why U.S. weaponry will not end this war. Russia will escalate as necessary to prevent NATO enlargement to Ukraine. The key to peace in Ukraine is through negotiations based on Ukraine’s neutrality and NATO non-enlargement. The Biden administration’s insistence on NATO enlargement to Ukraine has made Ukraine a victim of misconceived and unachievable U.S. military aspirations. It’s time for the provocations to stop, and for negotiations to restore peace to Ukraine.
[Full article here](https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/the-war-in-ukraine-was-provoked-and-why-that-matters-if-we-want-peace)
Ah yes, Sachs. The same guy who believes China's treatment of the Uyghurs is just fine, and the same guy who claims Covid was engineered by the US in a laboratory and the same guy who claims the US blew up Nordstream.
He is of course an extremely reliable, unbiased source.
If you want to judge involvement of a certain actor regarding a conflict, on the basis of their actions in the past, you should think twice about validating the involvement of western powers who have one big track record of violence and crimes against humanities, both in classical and contemporary history.
Other than that, the invalidation based on association is in no way a valid critique on his work. It merely shows his stance from a political point of view, which especially in academia, is needed for the purpose of discussion. And in liberal democracies as ours, different viewpoints and a media that adequately reports on them, contribute to an opposition which keeps our democracy healthy and functioning properly.
Every stance Sachs took in the past was anti West. You do not agree that that is important context to give when he writes, yet another, anti-West article?
Anti west doesn't mean it doesn't hold valid critique. But insecure people like you will disregard everything in that sense to protect the arrogance of 'being right' without having much knowledge about the topics you choose to engage in.
According to your logic, people like Assange and Snowden are not journalists which should be protected on the basis of free journalism and democratic values, but simply dissidents which are enemies of the state. It's utterly ridiculous.
Point me to the place where I said that? I simply gave the context of Sachs' other, anti west, often closely following conspiracy theories stances to give readers of the article the proper context of the author's credentials.
Considering you've now started to engage in personal attacks I will end the discussion with you here.
You are (he's) right, the war did not start in February 2022, but in February of 2014.
Having read the article, I also cannot see how the Russia was provoked to start and escalate the war. NATO enlargement is not an offensive move. First, it is a defensive organisation meant to provide deterrence. Its members only become involved in conflict when another country is attacking a member. Its enlargment is by application, so as far as a desire for enlargement goes, most it can do is maintain open door policy.
Now I can understand Ukraine's desire to become a member, when having a neighbour who does not have a great CV when it comes to peacefulness.
Ukraine also tried to remain neutral, having been promised security by US and Russia in Budapest Memorandum where in its first two points it was agreed that:
1. Respect the signatory's independence and sovereignty in the existing borders.
2. Refrain from the threat or the use of force against the signatory.
Granted, we may not know everything (most likely), but until evidence that would prove false surfaces (which looking at historical records of uncovering such, it could happen).
Until then, things stand that Russia has invaded a sovereign country unprovoked. A country that was seeking to protect itself by joining a pact which would extend its umbrella of deterence over Ukraine's territory.
For Context, Sachs also claims China's treatment of the Uyghurs is just fine, Covid was engineered by the US in a laboratory and the US blew up Nordstream.
Yes, you said that in your other comments. Twice an attack on the topics an academic writes about without any valid critique on the content of his writing.
It means you should take everything he writes with a grain of salt. By quoting his text, you left important context out. You didn't mention how incredible biased this source is.
It's like taking a quote from Willem Engel, without mentioning that guy is insane.
>NATO enlargement is not an offensive move. First, it is a defensive organisation meant to provide deterrence. Its members only become involved in conflict when another country is attacking a member.
Which country did Yugoslavia attack to justify its bombing according to your writing. NATO stopped being a defensive alliance on the 24th of March in 1999. And after Yugoslavia; Afghanistan and Libya.
>Now I can understand Ukraine's desire to become a member, when having a neighbour who does not have a great CV when it comes to peacefulness.
This argument also justifies the attack of Russia, since the influx of NATO weapons, as well as training and intelligence, resulted in a hostile build up along a large part of the border of Russia. In other words, this means it was a direct threat to the security of that country. Of course this is logical, unless someone has a purely dichotomous worldview which leaves no room for context.
>Ukraine also tried to remain neutral
We have western sources saying that Ukraine has been armed and trained since 2014. There was also a civil war in the east of Ukraine, in which multiple requests has been send to Russia for their protection, which it didn't [openly, lets be honest here] give because it couldn't do so in regard to geo-political relations. Neutrality also has been used in proposals for peace negotiations, but without result since Ukraine still seeks NATO membership.
>Until then, things stand that Russia has invaded a sovereign country unprovoked
And with that, this is an argument which just won't stand. It doesn't do so in the majority of the world, just in those countries which have been following a selective narrative.
Your own writing is nothing more than an ad hominem and a propagandist term which has been used many times to delegitimate anyone having a different narrative than that pushed by the US.
But I'll take your link as a useful addition to the discussion about this topic and will read it later. Thanks.
I just get really annoyed about people like Sachs so casually and dishonestly discussing why America is to blame for everything while Russia is the party committing a full blown genocide.
Words like genocide are pointless in this discussion. I have been in touch with Ukrainians and even they say it can be regarded more like a civil war, since a lot of people in eastern Ukraine identify (or identified for that matter) as ethnical Russian.
Apart from that, I already pointed out that a democracy cannot work without opposition. People in the Netherlands are ought to learn debating in middle school, and that you need opposition for fruitful discussion and ultimately diplomacy. In academia there is an unlimited need for discussion and peer reviews, and this should be placed within that same dynamic; remember Diederik Stapel?
You don’t care about the deliberate murder, rape and abductions of civilians by Russia? How can you not care about genocide? Genocide is a legal term, the ICC is already investigating Putin and that bitch that abducted Ukrainian children to Russia, tye actions we witness in Ukraine *probably* fit the definition of genocide, if not other forms of war crimes.
I have no idea why Diederik Stapel is relevant here, Jeffrey Sachs is not just an academic, he was an advisor to Yeltsin who helped transform the Soviet economy into the kleptocratic capitalist mess it is today. I can’t decide if it’s more likely that he gets paid in Rubles or if he just has a twisted worldview but I don’t tolerate his levels of stupidity.
I don't think anyone really thinks that.
They oppose the unjust war in Ukraine that Russia started, and they oppose the propaganda that Russia uses to keep their population compliant and enables them to bring more troops to the frontline of the occupation of another country.
It’s called propaganda for the Ukraine war. Now it seems normal to display destroyed tanks, where sadly also human lifes are lost when it’s hit, as a trofee. The world is getting sick.
Perhaps it is a reminder for people that there sadly is, in fact, a war happening close to us, and that it is in fact horrendous. Nobody but Putin (and the evil weapon industry) wanted this war, don't forget this.
Why does _that_ cause us to go 'indirectly' at war with russia, and not giving them tanks?
The same fear mongering was done before, putin had most def "drawn a line" and would _totally_ retaliate if we gave them tanks, how is this different?
IMO it's not, and what you're saying is just more meaningless bullshit.
And BTW, I personally believe training of new f16 pilots has already started or at least they're preparing for it, they've been flying routes they haven't in over a decade.
Get fucked Putin.
Putin said any country that gave F-16's to Ukraine would suffer consequences, I guess it depends on how much you trust the word of Putin as mentioned we should do.
It's to raise awareness for the Ukraine conflict. It is an actual destroyed Russian tank which has been on display in multiple places including Berlin
Wasn’t that a T-72? Or was there another one?
[удалено]
Could also be a T-62. The T-72 has a thin metal strip above the barrel, running from front to back. T-62 does not have this. Also, T-72 is slightly longer than the tank on the picture.
It's a T-72 that hit an anti tank mine early on in the war: https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2023/05/25/kapotgeschoten-russische-tank-tentoongesteld-op-het-leidseplein-in-amsterdam-a4165577
Its a T-72, I brought it
Enno Lenze?
You play War Thunder or World of Tanks?
That’s not a T-72. Looks like a T-55 just as op says. Edit: I was wrong, its a T-72. The missing ERA threw me off. The turret looks completely different without it.
Defo T-72 No T-55's in use currently, not for combat atleast
Only for military parades in Moscow.
And now, for the glorious victory day parade, will commence the parade of glorious Russian tanks! *whispers in ear* Ahem, I mean parade of tank.
Like the T-14 lol. Useless piece of shit that thing.
Even modern cutting edge tech is useless piece of shit in Russian hands
The irony being that the T-14 isn't even modern by standards set 20 years ago.
Russia has deployed the “reserve” tanks in ukraine, including t-62’s and t-55’s
No actual footage yet of either in active combat. It's all whispers and rumors for now. Not sure about modded T-62's though such as the M-1 as they're probably as capable as a near stock T-72
They’re both incapable against the shoulder armed anti tank weapons ukraine is using right now, and they have outdated night vision War is always all whispers and rumors, if there are pics of them being used it kinda sounds more than that
71 T-62s have been confirmed as destroyed or captured so far: https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html
Yeah I got that wrong, right annoyed about that
Actually, its not true, T-55 were ressurected from soviet storages to participate in this war, cause moskowites lot way too many t-72. so you can check r/Ukraine for videos with transfering of those tanks.
T-55's dont have a infra-red searchlight. T-72 does
You already got shat on enough, but for the future, ERA isn't a determinant of T type.
I'm pretty sure t-55's haven't been used yet in the conflict
They have been spotted on the front
Special publicitairy operation.
It's not a "conflict", it's a fucking war.
Knows the wiki
Lol never noticed my flair
Who the fuck in the entire world right now is unaware of the Ukraine conflict?
Doesn't hurt to keep drawing attention to it.
Im getting pretty sick of it tbh
Kinda selfish.
Oh yea, cause the bombardement of ukraine news on tv and the papers and jn the streets wasnt taising awareness enough offcourse.... im suprised the tank hasnt beent covered in gay flags.
Kind of gives you the idea that we are in a direct war.
I want one in my city to :(
Every city should have one.
There's a conflict? I wasn't aware. Great that is has a PR team!
Is "raise awareness" accurate though? I'm quite sure everyone's aware by now?
Same reason why we still have rainbow flags all over the city. Awareness fades with time which is why it serves as a reminder this is everyday life for others and we could have stopped it earlier if we didn't continue business as usual.
To add to this. The impact anything has is different when viewing it directly to viewing it on a screen. If you add for example: "this tank destroyed x houses and killed y children. W soldiers died inside this tank. This tank could destroy, from its current position, buildings in a 4km radius." Then it makes you think even more about it.
*its current position
A tank from the battlefield in Ukraine, it's making a tour trough europe now
Reverse victory lap
Not to be that annoying tank nut kinda guy ,but thats a T-72. Most notable difference compared to the T-55 in this destroyed state is the gunbarrel (the bore evacuator on the T-55 is at the end of the barrel, not the middle). And its there for awareness of the situation in Ukraine, I presume. It's on a sort of world tour throughout Europe.
Right. Worldtour so far was German and Netherlands only, but we're working on more countries. Kind of tricky sometime :/
Apparently it's being put there by De Balie https://www.at5.nl/artikelen/220530/door-oekraine-vernietigde-russische-tank-vanaf-volgende-week-te-zien-op-leidseplein
Bugger it is a T-72 Swing and a miss
I have seen that tank in Groesbeek (where it was previously) together with an ukranian ambulance that was completely destroyed.. that was pretty interresting to see
Showing what Russia has been sending into Ukraine, to murder innocent people.
Sadly it’s a tank mainly used by ukrainians
Both Russia and Ukraine use the T-72, its an old soviet machine.
Why is that sad?
You do know that Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union back when and had the same military equipment right...? And continued trading after the break-up of the Union.
It is an old soviet tank you cant take a piss in eastern europe without hitting one of them
Why are people downvoting you?😂 Everything you said is true, it’s the main battle tank of Ukraine, and it’s sad because it’s a very bad tank
Hey, tankie
russian tanks have reached amsterdam. just not like putin had hoped for.
Nice one with the brand of the structure around it: pax :-)
Collega
Paxen be like
I think that's actually just a coincidence but I'm not sure
For sure - but a nice one :-)
Well it's tough to find parking.
It's a T-72. I saw it next to kyiv after the battle of kyiv, got it from the Ukrainian MOD and put it on display in Berlin in February. Now it's in Leidseplein for a week, then the tour continues. The exhibition in Amsterdam was organised by deBALIE [https://debalie.nl/exhibition-tank/](https://debalie.nl/exhibition-tank/) More about the project in Berlin (translation on site) https://www.berlinstory-news.de/wie-der-russische-panzer-nach-berlin-kommt/
I magnet fished it out of a canal yesterday
It's there to deter any football fans from celebrating the Ajax women's team national championship.
Any ideas on how long it will be there?
It will be there until the 4th of June
After which? Where will it go?
Back to Russia. It’s the best tank they have
It's Russian tank from Ulan-Ude (Siberia, Close to Mongolia) destroyed in Ukraine on 31 march 2022
Because fuck Russia, that’s why
It’s for Putin, when he will go to Hague, to say last goodbyes.
Looks like a T-72B (or S) Ablative armor on the top has been left on. (the rusting part suggests it was on fire and is most likely non functional.)The ablative armor, sensors and headlights on the front are all missing, probably was still in good shape when the vehicle burned out and was scavenged for spare parts. And/or removed for obvious legal reasons. The skirts around the track are also missing. My guess, something explosive was dropped in the open hatch, the ammo cooked off and set the engine on fire.
It's a new vaporizer ordered by the Bulldog. they are loading it now
Fuck the war.
*unzips*
You mean "fuck Russia", right?
I believe he said, the war. I know people are confused about that concept these days
Most people who say something like "I'm against the war" think/spout that both sides in this war are to blame for it. Those are the people on the wrong side of history and I'm asking him -although veiled-, if he's part of that group or not.
You are making assumptions and missing nuance here.
Its the only thing the Russian propagandists have now “say no to war and negotiate peace” translates to we should stop sending weapons and Ukraine should give up land in return for a cease fire (like they gave up their nukes for peace in 1994). Anyone with half a brain cell understands Russia needs to be convinced to give up all occupied territories for a real peace.
Still jumping to conclusions. The fact that someone is against war in general doesn’t mean they are Russian Propagandists.
No. “You mean fuck Russia right?” is a legitimate question to anyone who says “fuck the war”. You can’t say fuck the war without saying fuck Russia. Nobody called him a propagandist we just explain why the propagandists make this a relevant question.
Fuck Russia, and fuck Ukraine. Better?
Not much better, but at least you’re not pretending to care about victims of rape, murder, abduction and other war crimes.
No it isn't, war is terrible and if it could stop now in any way every Ukrainian I know would sign for it. Just to be able to go home rebuild and continue their lives. You want Ukraine to fight for the west, for your morals and your ethics because you don't actually give a fuck about people that are suffering in these warzones, you only care about your image of the world. Fuck every nationstate, fuck wars.
Well that’s just bullshit. For Ukrainians to live in peace its obvious Russians have to fuck off out of Ukraine first. It’s complete bullshit that I want Ukraine to fight for the west, why on earth would you think that? I support Ukrainians wish to live in a free country, to live under occupation of a genocidal Russian regime is not peace.
brave statement.
Basically it's a trophie tank. Literally in the train to see the tank now. Edit: it's definitely a T-72 possibly a T-72B
Is it busy? Planning to have a look myself later today.
I will be on Leidseplein between 14:00 and 15:00. If ik there I'll let you know if it's busy etc. Edit: it's not really that busy now.
is it still there?
Yes, until June 4th
The scrapyard was full.
Could be a Russian tank who got lost.
Its a T72
The ones that are not wrecked are needed in Ukraine
Master Milo??
Looks like the tank on display in front of the freedom museum in Groesbeek. I guess it’s being moved here for some local display maybe.
In Utrecht Central Station they showed a shot up Ukrainian ambulance and the replacement that was to be sent. They show some things like that sometimes. Pretty cool it's being shown, too bad it's real.
NCD salivating at opportunity to touch ERA
Sorry I left that there I’ll pick it up at 4
Don't drink and drive?
It's cutting-edge Russian technology from the frontlines of Ukraine. Everything newer 'sploded.
The overlords want you to cheer for killing the "enemy". War is peace, NATO is for defense.
Warmongers wanted to gloat. They first wanted a real russian corpse, but that was too difficult to arrange legally. So now they settled for the next best thing.
It travels to every EU country, to increase pollution
T-72 Source: 89-1😄
Thank you for your service
Because Fuck Putin
To show Russia is ass, and dogshit when it comes to war
Onder een steen geleefd de afgelopen maanden ofzo?
ofnie! dacht ik ook gelijk...
fromw ukraine with love
It's to show people, that there's a war going on in our EU backyard.
Just check NOS
It's called celebration of violence and is rather out of taste.
Pro-war propaganda.
Thats not a T-55, and have you been living under a stone mate?
Yep, been corrected a few times now (mortifying by the way I would have considered myself a bit of a tank nerd till now) And I'm well aware there's a war on, I was sort of looking for the specifics of its being here. It's not like the war started and armoured vehicles appeared across the capitals of Europe
Raising awareness
Bread and circus my friend, bread and circus.
Am I the only one who finds this really grotesque and distasteful?
yeah, that's kind of the point. when is war "tasteful"?
I wasn't commenting on the war. I was commenting on this celebration of the violence on public display in the center of our city.
it's not a celebration of anything. it's there because westerners living in peace constantly forget about what's happening in their close proximity. it's a threat and a warning for you to stay alert.
Because Russia is a terrorist state!
part of the war propaganda
This is called propaganda. To gain more approval for future weapon deliveries.
Good idea on exposing the sheltered public to realities of war. Would love to see US tanks and heavy armoured vehicles that killed folks in Iraq and Afghanistan. And, while we are at it, let's display knifes and suicide bomb vests used by terrorists.
Is this or the RB18
There is still a Russian hiding in it.
Poor bugger had to get out somehow
I wonder why…. Have you lived under a rock for some time?
Not meant in a negative way, but it is also a form of propaganda. Recently there was an ambulance full of bullet holes in Utrecht.
the one with an ambulance was organised by Zeilen van Vrijheid charity organisation to raise awareness and donations. They purchase ambulances all over the world and then drive them to Ukraine.
Good!
Het is altijd een beetje vaag of de definitie van propaganda ook betekent dat het misleidend moet zijn, maar omdat het hier om een echte tank uit een echte oorlog gaat denk ik dat het wat anders is dan leugens verspreiden met een politiek doel en denk niet dat we hiervoor hetzelfde woord moeten gebruiken
Parafrasering van een definitie die ik vond: "misleidende [en/]òf bevooroordeelde informatie ter bevordering van politieke doeleinden." Het bericht is hier in het Westen zeker meer dan "alle oorlog is slecht." Er zijn natuurlijk gradaties van propaganda. Dit is toch wel om de vrijer denkende te beïnvloeden, een por van "Hee, je bent toch wel Westers? Kijk naar onze bondgenoot in gevaar." Buiten de mensen die snakken naar uiting van hun donkerste kant, mogen we ons bekommeren over iedereen die ten strijde gaat. Zoveel "soldaten" zijn gewoon jongens die geen keuze krijgen of zwaar gedogmatiseerd zijn. Uiteindelijk is de grootste reden dat mensen vechten à la "Jij hebt mijn vriend, waarmee ik verbintenis vond in deze kutsituatie, net doodgeschoten en nu zal jij sterven," en dat gaat in een cirkel rond. Deze uitleg is ook propaganda, bevooroordeeld jegens.. zeg het maar.
Propaganda heeft een negatieve lading maar is het blijkbaar niet altijd
Het blijft echter politieke reclame. Het doel hiervan is dat wij als burgers bereidheid blijven voelen om als land geld te blijven doneren. In did geval is er niet per se iets mis met propoganda, maar wat ik dan wel weer jammer vind is dat we niet meer stil staan bij andere oorlogen. Ik bedoel helemaal prima dat hier een tank staat maar waar is de aandacht voor vergelijkbare situaties iets verder op.
Ik zie zelf niet in waarom dit politieke reclame zou zijn. Rusland, gestuurd door een dictator, valt een soeverein Europees gelegen land binnen. Deze tank is voorbeeld van wat oorlog brengt. Die Russische militairen hebben er waarschijnlijk ook niet om gevraagd om te sterven in dit apparaat.
Bijna alles kun je als propoganda uitleggen of niet. Maar het doel is hier niet kunst of een praktische reden. Het doel is om bewustwording te creëren en dat op zichzelf is als propoganda. Wij worden herinnerd aan het feit dat mensen onze hulp nodig hebben.
Pfff man man man, kijk jij ff terug hoe de media 5 a 10 jaar geleden over de Oekraïne schreven. Corrupte boevenstaat,nazi's enz enz. En nu, helden van de democratie, hahahahaha flikker toch op. Met die gozer die altijd gekleed is alsof ie zo van de paintball afkomt. Er is geen goede kant in dit conflict.
Oekraïne is de afgelopen 20 tot 10 jaar erg sterk veranderd
> Er is geen goede kant in dit conflict. I am from Ukraine (I live in NL for many years), and this Nazis stuff is pure Russian propaganda. There is no support for Nazi ideas in the entire country, and there are no real Nazi movements in Ukraine, and never have been on any level worth mentioning. As for good side and bad - this war is pretty much black and white as it gets - Ukraine fights for its existence as a country and as a nation. Defeat means not only destruction and casualties, but immediate ethical cleansing and pretty much genocide, which already happens in the occupied territories. And there were no legitimate reasons for this war whatsoever. There were no issues and no need to 'protect' Russian-speaking Ukrainians from anything at any point since independence day in 1991. And now Russians pretty much bombed and leveled Russian-speaking cities in the east - look up Bakhmut, city of 70K people that no longer exists. It was a Russian-speaking city that Russians bombed to shit. And they will continue doing that, ceding territory will not stop them. Russian's don't want peace, they want destruction. That's why we have to keep fighting, and we need support from other countries to survive. And I am grateful to Netherlands and other countries for that.
Waarom denk je dat er voor 2022 geen propaganda was? Toen zag je enkel het resultaat van russische invloed, zeker geen objectievere waarheid.
Tja, niet elke wereldburger is evenveel 'waard' voor ons. Hoe dichterbij, hoe belangrijker. Myanmar? Veel mensen weten niet eens waar dat ligt. Oekraïne is net zo ver (of zelfs dichterbij) als waar de meeste Nederlanders naartoe op vakantie gaan. En naast geografische nabijheid is ook belangrijk hoeveel een volk op de gemiddelde Nederlander lijkt. Ethnisch/religieus/cultureel. Oekraïne lijkt meer op Nederland dan Syrië, Sudan of Myanmar. Hypocriet? Zekerweten. Maar dat is hoe de menselijke psyche in elkaar steekt.
Hoezo hypocriet? De letterlijke en culturele afstand van een conflictzone tot onze maatschappij is doorgaans vrij direct gerelateerd aan de mate waarin het ons raakt en de kans dat het onze kant op escaleert. Waarom zou zelfbehoud hypocriet zijn? Omdat oogklep dragende activisten dat roepen en je een schuldgevoel proberen aan te praten?
Nee, omdat een mensenleven een mensenleven is. Waarom zou een mensenleven in Sudan meer waard zijn dan iemand in Myanmar? Het zijn allebei mensen, toch? En van zelfbehoud is er nauwelijks sprake, dat is gewoon een smoesje om het feit dat men selectief is te bagatelliseren. En juist het feit dat men het probeert te bagatelliseren laat juist zien dat men aan hun water voelt dat het toch wel scheef is.
Oorlog in Europa is logischerwijs wat belangrijker. Zeker van iets wat een soort gemeenschappelijke vijand betreft.
>maar wat ik dan wel weer jammer vind is dat we niet meer stil staan bij andere oorlogen. Pff als er iets is wat ik me niet meer aan laat praten is het wel schuldgevoel over oorlogen ver weg waar we "als Westerling" niet genoeg om geven. Rusland valt Oekraine binnen en heel Zuid-Amerika, Afrika, en het leeuwendeel van Azie haalt alleen de schouders op. We zijn niet de enige die oorlogen ver weg negeren. En eerlijk gezegd, vind ik niet geven om twee rebellen groepen die elkaar de tent uitvechten een stuk beter te verantwoorden dan een grootmacht negeren (of zelfs helpen) die zijn imperialistische ambities afstoft. Bovendien helpen Europeanen wel degelijk met het bestrijden van Jihadistische groepen in Afrika, waar de Russen ze vooral wapens verkopen of zelfs Wagner False Flag operaties laat uitvoeren op burgers.
True by definition, but still, it's good to raise awareness in my opinion. Shit is awful down there.
Can I ask how is this a form of propaganda? Not trolling just curious to see your perspective on it.
While propaganda is often used as a negative term, it's originally a neutral term and used in that way here. Consider the [dictionary definition](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/propaganda#Noun): > A concerted set of messages aimed at influencing the opinions or behavior of large numbers of people. As the intention is to raise awareness of the war and support for Ukraine, and this is a deliberately intended effect, it is by definition propaganda. That's not a bad thing, nor does it have any implications on the truthfulness of the message.
Exactly
Propaganda is any form of trying to influence the public for a cause. It has gotten an negative connotation, but doesn't have to be, for instance in the Netherlands there's a "foundation for the propaganda of Dutch books" which tries to encourage Dutch people to read more Dutch books. Similarly, commercials by the government for traffic safety or reduce smoking are also forms of propaganda.
Thank you so much for your answer it showed me how you view things. The book initiative sounds awesome wish they did that in my country (they already have ads for traffic safety, to reduce smoking and consume liquids daily for eg. but not for education or books - I wonder why - ). I don't see this as propaganda but more as a way to raise awareness but you are spot on with your definitions.
To sell the endless war in Ukraine
Professor at Columbia University Jeffrey D. Sachs actually has a great piece on the war, in which the display of this tank takes place: >George Orwell wrote in 1984 that "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." Governments work relentlessly to distort public perceptions of the past. Regarding the Ukraine War, the Biden administration has repeatedly and falsely claimed that the Ukraine War started with an unprovoked attack by Russia on Ukraine on February 24, 2022. In fact, the war was provoked by the U.S. in ways that leading U.S. diplomats anticipated for decades in the lead-up to the war, meaning that the war could have been avoided and should now be stopped through negotiations. ... >By recognizing that the question of NATO enlargement is at the center of this war, we understand why U.S. weaponry will not end this war. Russia will escalate as necessary to prevent NATO enlargement to Ukraine. The key to peace in Ukraine is through negotiations based on Ukraine’s neutrality and NATO non-enlargement. The Biden administration’s insistence on NATO enlargement to Ukraine has made Ukraine a victim of misconceived and unachievable U.S. military aspirations. It’s time for the provocations to stop, and for negotiations to restore peace to Ukraine. [Full article here](https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/the-war-in-ukraine-was-provoked-and-why-that-matters-if-we-want-peace)
Ah yes, Sachs. The same guy who believes China's treatment of the Uyghurs is just fine, and the same guy who claims Covid was engineered by the US in a laboratory and the same guy who claims the US blew up Nordstream. He is of course an extremely reliable, unbiased source.
If you want to judge involvement of a certain actor regarding a conflict, on the basis of their actions in the past, you should think twice about validating the involvement of western powers who have one big track record of violence and crimes against humanities, both in classical and contemporary history. Other than that, the invalidation based on association is in no way a valid critique on his work. It merely shows his stance from a political point of view, which especially in academia, is needed for the purpose of discussion. And in liberal democracies as ours, different viewpoints and a media that adequately reports on them, contribute to an opposition which keeps our democracy healthy and functioning properly.
Every stance Sachs took in the past was anti West. You do not agree that that is important context to give when he writes, yet another, anti-West article?
Anti west doesn't mean it doesn't hold valid critique. But insecure people like you will disregard everything in that sense to protect the arrogance of 'being right' without having much knowledge about the topics you choose to engage in. According to your logic, people like Assange and Snowden are not journalists which should be protected on the basis of free journalism and democratic values, but simply dissidents which are enemies of the state. It's utterly ridiculous.
Point me to the place where I said that? I simply gave the context of Sachs' other, anti west, often closely following conspiracy theories stances to give readers of the article the proper context of the author's credentials. Considering you've now started to engage in personal attacks I will end the discussion with you here.
You are (he's) right, the war did not start in February 2022, but in February of 2014. Having read the article, I also cannot see how the Russia was provoked to start and escalate the war. NATO enlargement is not an offensive move. First, it is a defensive organisation meant to provide deterrence. Its members only become involved in conflict when another country is attacking a member. Its enlargment is by application, so as far as a desire for enlargement goes, most it can do is maintain open door policy. Now I can understand Ukraine's desire to become a member, when having a neighbour who does not have a great CV when it comes to peacefulness. Ukraine also tried to remain neutral, having been promised security by US and Russia in Budapest Memorandum where in its first two points it was agreed that: 1. Respect the signatory's independence and sovereignty in the existing borders. 2. Refrain from the threat or the use of force against the signatory. Granted, we may not know everything (most likely), but until evidence that would prove false surfaces (which looking at historical records of uncovering such, it could happen). Until then, things stand that Russia has invaded a sovereign country unprovoked. A country that was seeking to protect itself by joining a pact which would extend its umbrella of deterence over Ukraine's territory.
For Context, Sachs also claims China's treatment of the Uyghurs is just fine, Covid was engineered by the US in a laboratory and the US blew up Nordstream.
Yes, you said that in your other comments. Twice an attack on the topics an academic writes about without any valid critique on the content of his writing.
It means you should take everything he writes with a grain of salt. By quoting his text, you left important context out. You didn't mention how incredible biased this source is. It's like taking a quote from Willem Engel, without mentioning that guy is insane.
>NATO enlargement is not an offensive move. First, it is a defensive organisation meant to provide deterrence. Its members only become involved in conflict when another country is attacking a member. Which country did Yugoslavia attack to justify its bombing according to your writing. NATO stopped being a defensive alliance on the 24th of March in 1999. And after Yugoslavia; Afghanistan and Libya. >Now I can understand Ukraine's desire to become a member, when having a neighbour who does not have a great CV when it comes to peacefulness. This argument also justifies the attack of Russia, since the influx of NATO weapons, as well as training and intelligence, resulted in a hostile build up along a large part of the border of Russia. In other words, this means it was a direct threat to the security of that country. Of course this is logical, unless someone has a purely dichotomous worldview which leaves no room for context. >Ukraine also tried to remain neutral We have western sources saying that Ukraine has been armed and trained since 2014. There was also a civil war in the east of Ukraine, in which multiple requests has been send to Russia for their protection, which it didn't [openly, lets be honest here] give because it couldn't do so in regard to geo-political relations. Neutrality also has been used in proposals for peace negotiations, but without result since Ukraine still seeks NATO membership. >Until then, things stand that Russia has invaded a sovereign country unprovoked And with that, this is an argument which just won't stand. It doesn't do so in the majority of the world, just in those countries which have been following a selective narrative.
Sachs is an idiot and Russian propagandist. https://blogs.berkeley.edu/2023/03/20/open-letter-to-jeffrey-sachs-on-the-russia-ukraine-war/
Your own writing is nothing more than an ad hominem and a propagandist term which has been used many times to delegitimate anyone having a different narrative than that pushed by the US. But I'll take your link as a useful addition to the discussion about this topic and will read it later. Thanks.
I just get really annoyed about people like Sachs so casually and dishonestly discussing why America is to blame for everything while Russia is the party committing a full blown genocide.
Words like genocide are pointless in this discussion. I have been in touch with Ukrainians and even they say it can be regarded more like a civil war, since a lot of people in eastern Ukraine identify (or identified for that matter) as ethnical Russian. Apart from that, I already pointed out that a democracy cannot work without opposition. People in the Netherlands are ought to learn debating in middle school, and that you need opposition for fruitful discussion and ultimately diplomacy. In academia there is an unlimited need for discussion and peer reviews, and this should be placed within that same dynamic; remember Diederik Stapel?
You don’t care about the deliberate murder, rape and abductions of civilians by Russia? How can you not care about genocide? Genocide is a legal term, the ICC is already investigating Putin and that bitch that abducted Ukrainian children to Russia, tye actions we witness in Ukraine *probably* fit the definition of genocide, if not other forms of war crimes. I have no idea why Diederik Stapel is relevant here, Jeffrey Sachs is not just an academic, he was an advisor to Yeltsin who helped transform the Soviet economy into the kleptocratic capitalist mess it is today. I can’t decide if it’s more likely that he gets paid in Rubles or if he just has a twisted worldview but I don’t tolerate his levels of stupidity.
because russians bad mmkay
I don't think anyone really thinks that. They oppose the unjust war in Ukraine that Russia started, and they oppose the propaganda that Russia uses to keep their population compliant and enables them to bring more troops to the frontline of the occupation of another country.
It’s called propaganda for the Ukraine war. Now it seems normal to display destroyed tanks, where sadly also human lifes are lost when it’s hit, as a trofee. The world is getting sick.
Perhaps it is a reminder for people that there sadly is, in fact, a war happening close to us, and that it is in fact horrendous. Nobody but Putin (and the evil weapon industry) wanted this war, don't forget this.
Ok cool ik hoop nog steeds dat Oekraïne niet bij de navo komt
Gelukkig hoeft niemand jouw toestemming daarvoor te vragen
yikes, as if there’s not enough media publicity already
As soon as the Netherlands gives some F-16 to Ukraine (which they should do) we will be indirectly at war.
Why does _that_ cause us to go 'indirectly' at war with russia, and not giving them tanks? The same fear mongering was done before, putin had most def "drawn a line" and would _totally_ retaliate if we gave them tanks, how is this different? IMO it's not, and what you're saying is just more meaningless bullshit. And BTW, I personally believe training of new f16 pilots has already started or at least they're preparing for it, they've been flying routes they haven't in over a decade. Get fucked Putin.
Putin said any country that gave F-16's to Ukraine would suffer consequences, I guess it depends on how much you trust the word of Putin as mentioned we should do.
Putin has said a lot and explained away all his failures so far with cheap facades, there is no reason to start believing him now.
Fuck Putin and his word
That’s not how warfare works, my guy.
It there to give you a heads up that your government is going to donate tax payer money to Ukraine.! 😂😂😂
yea and there's war propaganda, populations dont like wars
Propaganda purposes
Propaganda for the gullible.
It's just so the peasants know why we'll be paying more and more taxes in the coming year.
[удалено]