So why would you abandon us in our desperate, internets surfing, entertainment seeking, time of need? Is it the lack of things going on in Russia at the moment? If it is, so what?! Since when did you let "news" get in the way of a good story? I don't care if Putin is out marlin fishing with Bush instead of trying to claim Santas Village for oil mining. I don't care if all the hot and dumb Russian skanks are getting tag teamed by nappy headed, Tunisian cabana boys instead of giving you fodder for your nightlife columns (thank god Hannah Katz is gone, btw). I don't care if your editorial staff finally has the money to go somewhere decent in August. I mean, what kind of Gonzo journalists are you? If there is no news, make news. If you can't make news, make up news.
Anyways, the bottom line is that you have a responsibility to us losers to act like the losers that you really are deep down and sweat out this horrible, hot, boring, August with us. Just remember, at one time, you were us, before you got all paid holiday, and money generating, and stuff. Don't forget your roots.
As a loyal subscriber to your free internets site I demand more. In protest I will not click on the advertisment for [NAME DELETED BECAUSE WE VALUE EACH AND EVERY ADVERTISER, AND ABSOLUTELY DO NOT VALUE A SINGLE ONE OF OUR LETTER-WRITING READERS - ED.]. But because I am still cool with you guys, I will click on the Russian Brides advertisement. Are those chicks really real? I mean, fuck, I'll take me the 18-year-old, big canned, brunette in the bikini! How does that work? Do the chicks just show up at your door and fuck you for food and shelter? Is there a money back guarantee if she's like 10kilos bigger than the photos or has a kid or something?
Dear Mr. Slovak, Wow, this letter was your big day in the alt-media sun. You really have the edgy-writing tone down pat. How's it feel? You know, being all edgy like you are. How's it working out for you?
SURELY YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS
War Nerd, Sir:
Just a quick comment on your discussion of the M-1. You're right that it's being misused. The heaviest armor is on the turret and front slope, (called a Glacis Plate by the English). It was intended specifically to duel with other tanks, much like the old German Tiger II was. That's why it came with the ability to fire only two rounds, Armor Piercing Fin Stablized Discarding Sabot, (APFSDS), or High Explosive Anti-Tank, (HEAT).
My old mount, the M-60A1 (RISE), was a far more flexible machine. It was designed to handle not only antitank operations but infantry support, and it's 105mm M68 main gun, (US copy of the British L7 which was fitted to the Centurian Mk 5 onwards) could in addition to SABOT and HEAT, could also fire APERS-T, (AKA Beehive--several thousand fleschettes-- replaced Canister from the old M-48 series) HEP, (US version of the British Squash Head) and SMOKE, (White Phosporus.)
It was far from clumsy. We actually had more agility that our peer antagonist, the T-62, and our gunnery support systems were much better. The T-62 only had a Stadia Z type gunner's telescope. We had both the M105D gunner's telescope, which was comparable to the Morozov product's sight, but we also had an analog ballistic computer which was linked to the gunner's periscope and it not only adjusted for the varying charistics of the ammo, but by using the superelevation handcrank on it, we could compensate for barrel erosion from previously fired rounds. And we had a nice, dual coincidence optical rangefinder which fed the range to the computer. The Russians had an early model laser range finder which would find the range, but the gunner still had to compensate for it on the Stadia Z type sights.
The internal layout of the tank was better. We had our loader on the right side so that he could use his right hand which is the strong side for most people, to shove rounds weighing around 55 pounds each into the breech. And we could do burst on target, which means adjusting aim from observed hits, which the Russians could not do, because the gun would elevate every time it was fired so that the automatic shell ejection system would more or less work. In our tanks, the loader was the automatic shell ejection system. And we could fire several rounds without being slowed down by the automatic shell ejector on the Russian machine. Their loader had his problem further complicated by being on the left side of the gun, which meant that he had to load with his left hand. Our turret basket rotated with the turret, so that the ammo in the ready racks always had the same relationship to the loader and the gun no matter which way the turret turned. The floor on a T-62 does not rotate and this complicates the loader's problem....[From here the letter goes on and on - Ed.]