Great footage but goddamn that is hard to watch, guys all burnt and still alive it seems.
Reminds me of the opening scene of [*Afghanistan Breakdown.*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8GlPniN1u4&t=139)
(Also my shameless plug for that movie. If you feel like there's too few movies where they're *actually using live rounds* then this is for you.)
In the 1985 movie ['Come and See'](https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1036052-come_and_see) the director used live ammunition to get the right sort of reaction out of the actors. It is a gut wrenching WWII movie set in Bylorussia.
This film was made in the Soviet Union where 30 million people died in that war and they really understand that war is not John Wayne or Sgt Rock but real people who suffer unimaginable horrors and the director Elem Klimov did use live ammunition to motivate his actors.
Pretty sure they machine gunned a cow too death too
>they used live ammunition to get the right sort of reaction out of the actors
Was...was that legal?
It was in the USSR and they had their own rules. Anything supported by the government had pretty much *carte blanche.* The movie was about communist partisans against the evil Nazis so the gov't was behind it.
Come and See was released during the Perestroika era so not really, you could make almost anything at that time. They even released films like "My Friend Ivan Lapshin" which was directly critical of Stalin and the Communist Party.
I really wish people knew more about the history of the USSR than just memes, I know a lot of people on this subreddit are kids though. Just want to see people's heads explode or some fucked up shit.
Thats not true, esp in the 80a. Film was like the one medium for artistic expression against the Soviet government. Its why Soviet animation is so surreal; it was designed to be subtle critiques against the system.
Look into soviet science fiction, even more than TV it was critisism of the state.
"Live ammunition" or just blanks? Because the first one is crazy in a movie.
Real bullets out of conventional machine guns. You can see the rounds hitting the trees as they run into the forest and that's just the one scene I am positive about. The movie is really one of the best that ever came out of the USSR and ranks right up there with [All Quiet on the Western Front 1930](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0020629/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0)
Its on youtube: am watching it meow
The first two minutes are uh... interesting. Rest of it looks good though, thanks for sharing.
That's a real circumcision y'all
It's a phenomenal war movie - although obscure and hard to find. I can very much recommend it if you like darker, rather realistic looks on conflicts.
Down to the flares coming from the planes when taking off the runway it's a very authentic.
Even more interestingly, it's a Italian-Soviet co-production, with some of the cast being genuine Italians. Maybe another fruit of the rather positive Italian-Soviet and later [Italian-Russian relations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italy%E2%80%93Russia_relations)?
Why would you drop flares while taking off?
I can’t speak as a direct source however I’ve read on various military subreddits that planes and helicopters would drop flares while taking off as a preventative measure against being targeted by I believe heat seeking infantry based missiles. I know during the air lift out of Afghanistan it appeared to be standard procedure.
Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong. It’s hear-say based off comments from similar threads in similar subreddits.
After taking off, possibly, not on the runway. If you've got enemies with clear vision within a few km at best really any weapon system with range is going to be enough. I'm a nut for these kinds of things and I've never heard it mentioned before.
Once you're a few km off the runway you have enough speed, altitude, visibility to maneuver and have a chance against munitions. However, not so much when you're just 100ft off the ground; you're incredibly slow, and you've already exposed yourself for a vast distance(distance to horizon is almost 11nm at 100ft, at 500ft you're still fairly slow and exposed to 24nm, good luck securing that. Is that what you called "a few kilometers at best"?) to anyone who has crawled their way into range with a shoulder launched.
It's not like aircraft carry a small amount of countermeasures, either, you have a lot of them and they're worth a lot less than your machine and your lives. It is absolutely sensible to launch them on takeoff in anything but the most secure environment, this is what they are for, those old munitions were easily fooled by flares. I see no reason not to reduce your chance of dying.
At any rate, in a defensive fight, it's sensible not to bother, and offensive air operations are rarely filmed so never having seen it before makes sense. They don't want that footage leaking out and exposing their air activity...
Planes are vulnerable when taking off, it's a counter measure to stop any heat seaking missiles.
It’s on YouTube. Not hard to find
Better movie than 9th company imo
Gonna watch this now
Just watched it. Good movie.
Just be glad you dont have to smell it
Foreign invaders get the worst deaths.
I could be wrong but I think this is part of a longer video where they execute two or three wounded Russians by slitting their throats.
You are wrong. You are thinking about another incident, Tukhchar massacre, which was in Dagestan not Afghanistan... Chechen militants beheaded 6 Russian PoWs, filmed the incident, and distributed the film for propaganda purposes.
That video was disturbing.
That was the first truly horrific footage I ever saw, back when it was new and I was around 20 years old in 2000 or thereabouts. Stuck in my head 'till this day, that's when I learned to self-censor and always be ready to nope out of a video.
Those poor lads, what a way to go. Damn I wish I never saw it. Still comes back to haunt me every now and again.
Think I seen this on napster/Kazaa when I was 12
Poor 12 year old you. You know what, I believe that's where I saw it too, on one of those.
I did not go looking for such things and the Internet was very different back then, the Wild West days of the online world. I downloaded a video file simply called "knife" and that's what I saw, the Russian conscripts video.
Damn, you saw that when you were 12 years old. That footage is stuck in my head and I can still see it all too clear in my mind even today and many times over the years it came back to me although I only ever viewed it once.
The only good that came of seeing it was that I learned early on that this shit is not good for you to see. Maybe once so you know a brutal truth but don't keep looking for more. If you become genuinely desensitised you lose a piece of your humanity, I believe.
I did not even watch this video, just came to see the comments.
All the best to you mate.
I’m 26 and everyone I know my age grew up seeing stuff like this on the internet at a young age. Ass you said it was the Wild West back then and you could find any number of gore / shock sites easily. I wonder how that affected us all lol
The longer version of this video got a lot of play on cable TV news at the time and on the internet once it got going in the 90's.
Yes. There were scenes of prisoners being executed but there were always questions as to whether the executions shown were part of the same action.
There was a journalist at the scene of the ambush. He actually interviewed the wounded Russian you see crawling and IIRC, pleaded on his behalf with the Mujahidin to spare his life. I do not recall if he was successful.
That's in Dagestan/Chechnya. Mujahideen generally didn't execute soviet prisoners, often opting to use them for prisoner exchange. They were completely different than ISIS/AQ/Taliban in that regard.
Taliban is much closer to the mujahedeen rather than isis or AQ seeing as they were like the successors to the mujahideen with many of the original members
Yeah you're right about this, confused why the other comment is so upvoted. Obviously it still happened, but it was the norm in Chechnya.
Isn't the video of them slitting their throats essentially what launched the second Chechen war?
No. It was the apartment bombings in Moscow.
The apartments were bombed by the FSB
The false flag that gave them the impetus to kick it all off again.
The second chechen war started on the 7th of August 1999 with the invasion of Dagestan. The Major Combat phase started on the 26th of August 1999. So the second chechen war was already a few days old when the apartment bombings happened from the 4th of September 1999 until the 16th of september 1999.
The events are closely linked and the blasts were responsible for increased public support for a much larger operation in Chechnya and were indeed the impetus for the second Chechen War. Even though they (Russians) were indeed active in those regions before the bombings I stand by the assertion that the apartment attacks did indeed give the impetus to "kick it all off again."
I followed all this going on at the time, the 2nd Chechen War arguably being the first war widely reported on the Internet with rebel commanders and supporters taking great interest in this new way of spreading information.
It was a brutal yet fascinating time, being able to get reports and videos from the front line via the Internet for the first time.
The Russians won that one (the second one), didn't they?
I think so. Remember seeing something similar, but they had a few more people up against a tree.
Happened more often than not.
There was a Mujhadeen guy with an axe killed hundreds of prisoners for them.
I remember seeing him in a video once, utter vacuum of a human being.
They’d take prisoners to him, tell them to confess then kill them under Islamic law as now allowed as they’d confessed. Poor guys thought cooperating would save them and it was a sham to allow them to be executed in a compliant way.
The justification/excuses that some people accept. Sounds like he wanted to murder them with an axe, so he did.
The bear jew is a fictional movie character not based on any real person.
We do have an Eddie Gallagher or an Oliver North, though
Pretty sure that was Chechnya too
There’s some truly awful videos from there. Strong contender for worse place on earth. Dead heat between the two.
> I remember seeing him in a video once, utter vacuum of a human being.
If you have been invaded by Russians you would understand, the Russian army is not really a follower of "human rights" and in return thats the treatment their soldiers get.
If you look at our track record with drone strikes, the US hasn't done so well either. All war will have collateral damage. Best to avoid it unless absolutely necessary.
But, it seems like our on the ground forces aim to do better/ do well.
I don't recall the US purposefully wiping out countless villages.
No, but killing civilians and journalists due to bad Intel is still pretty bad.
Hey! I got an idea… how about don’t invade them? This way, you will never meet said man with an Axe
> Happened more often than not.
Not true at all, the Muj were not keen on slitting throats whenever they went, like like current extremists do
Sure about that? It was very well know that Russian soldiers used to carry grenades to kill them selves rather than being taken prisiones 🤷♂️
Soldiers carrying grenades while fighting in a war?!? That’s unheard of!
> It was very well know that Russian soldiers used to carry grenades to kill them selves rather than being taken prisiones
Where did you get that from? Also yes I am very sure since it's been covered extensively after the iron curtain fell, along with Soviet desertion rates and them staying in Aghanistan after the war.
Got a link?
I think it was one. He steps on his head and stabs him in the neck cutting outwards. I could be wrong, its been like 20 years since I have seen it.
OMG watching this exact video scarred me to this day.. the visual was terrible but I remember the sound more than anything.
ah yes the brave freedom fighters of the mujahideen
If you're American and you have this sass, remember we armed them.
Otherwise, please carry on
Don't for get about the death squads in places like Guatemala or how about the party in Nicaragua or any of the other fun things the US has kicked off!! 🥳🥳
Oh buddy, I'm Cuban. You don't even have to start to tell me, lol
^^I'm ^^sorry ^^I ^^said ^^anything ^^😬
Did we forget to give them M16s though?
so this APC was alone just rolling along a road with lots of tree cover and in what looks to be a valley with a full compliment of men in the back? Sounds like a good way to get killed quickly.
Helicopters are expensive.
They get more pricey when stingers are getting thrown about like candy
As others have noted, there are two different vehicles. The first is an 8 wheeled BTR APC, the second, the one that we see burning at the end, is a four wheeled BRDM scout car.
Gotcha. The footage cut was confusing. I saw the tire, or stack or whatever, sticking up over the hill and didn’t think it looked like the 1st vehicle.
If you count the tires at the beginning, and very end, you can clearly see what you were saying.
It’s the scout variant so uh yeah kind of it’s purpose really…. Also it’s 3 guys not packed with 12…
Can't believe how long these guys have been at war, generations of fighters, I wonder how many of these blokes servived 40 years of war
Go look at the average age in Afghanistan.
Then look at how the population has climbed to nearly 40 million currently from 20 million in 2001.
Its doesn't matter if the Taliban's new government is as progressive as Denmark... without the capital the US occupation was injecting into the country a migrant crisis is inevitable.
I’m still trying to find examples of this new “progressive” and “business like” taliban people speak of. All I’m finding are beheadings of ANA guys.
There aren't any examples. We'd be lucky if they behaved as well as the Sinaloa.
Ayyy my country was named.
*happy danish noices*
Some these guys will have just unlocked Prestige lvl 3. Completed the AK challenges and now moved on to the new M4 meta.
It's crazy how little armor soviet APCs appear to have had. I've seen my fair share of videos from the Chechen wars and from their involvement in Afghanistan, and it seems as if they're just tin can death traps.
Looks like a BRDM burning, essentially a scout car, bare in mind the west saw all that happened in Afghanistan and my country still invaded with Land Rover defenders. Took us far too long to learn.
US went into Iraq and mainly used Humvees until about 2009 and even further, when what happened in Rhodesia, South Africa and even SE Turkey just around the same time frame was very clear for eyes that see. All those young boys killed, maimed scarred for life, because they were too slow to adapt.
People believe all these conspiracies about a big evil super intelligent government, reality is they’re just idiots with the biggest stick.
“Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”
THIS!!! People think the government is composed of the smartest and best people when really it’s just the same people you work with just imagine them with endless money and power.
Lighter vehicles were used very effectively in Rhodesia and Angola/SWA. There were multiple instances of APCs outperforming and destroying Russian heavy armour in that terrain. The terrain in Iraq and Afghanistan cannot be compared to the bosveld of Southern Africa.
>when what happened in Rhodesia, South Africa and even SE Turkey just around the same time frame was very clear for eyes that see
What was that?
It's definitely not a BRDM, it has 8 wheels so it is some spec of BTR. Point still stands of it not exactly being heavily armoured against much more than small arms.
edit: oh you know what you're right, I didn't really take notice of the 2nd half of the video, I was focused on the start
Haha you’re cool man, my dad has a BRDM and BTR-60 from Czech, they’re cool but I wouldn’t wanna be in one with basic RPGs on the enemy side!
who is your country?
UK, we used to use Landys a lot
They weren't meant to be driving through the thick of combat with enemies all around them, they were built as Taxicabs that could stop small explosives like hand grenades, and most gunfire, but they're not like an MRAP or IFV that was ever designed to get targetted and have any survivability.
they're armored yes, but pretty much just against peashooters.
The US equivalent, the M113, wasn't much better. And it was Slower
So like a more armored humvee, but less than an MRAP
Up-armored Humvees were actually fine for small arms except for higher caliber such as 12.7mm, and of course IED's. They were still death traps, they lacked the V hull shaping that most if not all MRAPs have to deflect IED blasts.
They should've been around sooner for Iraq and Afghanistan. The US knew they would have to face an Insurgency, especially in Iraq (because Iran was on the border and was ready to support an insurgency).
Iranian-supplied insurgents switched to [EFPs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_formed_penetrator) to penetrate through MRAPs and up armored Humvees later in the Insurgency.
No, M113 wasn't better. Yes, it was slower because of tracks. But that also gave it more versatility on terrain wheels may falter.
Trades offs, advantage and disadvantages.
I basically meant that they were both on par with each other.
Pretty much. Both Russian and American APCs in the 80's and 90's had much too thin armor. I think it might have been the first iteration of the Bradley that you could penetrate with an AK47
Those APCs sound more like anti personnel carriers rather than armored personnel carriers /s
They were trying to go for lightweight and speed, but it turns out that when you weld a thin giant metal turtle onto a heavy truck engine, all you got is a really loud box on wheels that screams *"shoot at me*".
That last part is certainly untrue
> it might have been the first iteration of the Bradley that you could penetrate with an AK47
You're thinking of the M113, which couldn't be penetrated by 7.62x39mm but could be by 7.62x45mm
Standard 7.62 NATO will penetrate it, that's why I wrote 7.62x45
Interesting. Not sure why they'd analyze it with their own rounds. I've done engineering work on helicopters and we analyzed using Russian calibers.
Lots of damage done to NATO forces with US made weapons.
Do you mean x51?
7.62x51mm is 7.62 NATO
That's the one. Thank you for the correction.
BMPs were designed with fuel tanks in the doors. This made sense in a nuclear environment because it cuts radiation exposure, but against irregulars with RPGs and recoilless rifles it just made them deathtraps. I've heard claims heavy rifles could destroy the vehicles by setting off the fuel and then the ammunition.
A military designed for total war against other industrial powers will always struggle in irregular war.
And it's not like it's some weird western weapon cutting through them. It's an RPG. You'd think the design of the apc would take at least that much penetration power into consideration
For defense against an RPG-7, you'd need armor so thick the vehicle would be ridiculously heavy and slow. Not sure when the Soviets started using reactive armor.
They adopted it in the late 90's, but it hasn't seen real usage until sometime in the mid-2000's if i remember
The first ERA the Soviets adopted was Kontakt-1 in 1984 and then Kontakt-5 in 1985, and they spread it out pretty fast. But it was really only designed for usage on tanks, it wouldn't have been practical to put it on BRDMs. Putting ERA on APCs and even IFVs is overall still a pretty modern concept.
Is ERA even applicable for lightly armored vehicle like BRDM or BTR? Isn't the explosion going to harm those lightly armored vehicle and their crew?
There are special kinds of ERA made to be mounted on lightly armoured vehicles. The stuff you see on MBTs however would be very deadly if it was mounted on a lightly armoured vehicle.
The doctrine with APCs is to get troops near combat, not deliver them to the front lines. That’s a job for an IFV, which can hold up better in a combat zone. APCs got used outside their design and still do to this day. Mismanagement from the people in charge
Tanks have thick, ceramic and metal plating and it can still not be enough. This is supposed to be fast.
It's not like MBTs are protected against even old RPGs without additional armour either. Somethings like the M60 was protected against 14.5mm HMG ammunition perpendicular to the hull sides and the M1 can also only survive them from a frontal angle (45° left/right IIRC) if it's not uparmoured.
I mean. It’s designed to withstand shrapnel blasts and small arms fire not an AT rocket….
I can understand why a lot of soldiers choose to sit on top of those things instead of inside of them.
I’m not sure, but the person at the bottom of some of the top comments mentioned those are two different vehicles (there is a big cut in the footage.)
If you look closely at the wheels. The first has 4 on each side. The one at the every end has 2 on each side.
The second was likely a scout vehicle, while the 1st was a more armored BTR.
IFV’s and such as pretty well armors against small arms and RPGs.
Camera man with massive balls. No go pros back then, dude had a huge shoulder mounted camera.
Any war cameraman astounds me. With the exception of the mounted GoPro
Hit so hard it turned a BTR into a BRDM.
BTR personnel carriers generally have very thin armour which is strange
Not strange at all if you look at other kind of APC:s around the world. They are not ment to be bulky like tanks but rather support to ground units by heavy weaponry and transport.
If they had to much armor they wouldnt be able to do that since there would be no room for the infantry.
Namer tends to disagree
The Namer is a purpose built urban-combat APC/IFV. It doesn't have nearly the same longevity as the BTR, Stryker, or LAV due to that single-minded design purpose. What it trades for armor is the ability to trek across most bridges, being able to ford shallow rivers, and generally being fast.
Since Israel has no reason to deploy beyond their borders (or nearby their borders) of course they'd choose the armor over that, but for larger countries like the US, Russia, or countries with expeditionary troops, being able to move farther on less fuel is a major factor when designing APCs.
And I don't disagree with any of that. I am just pointing out the error with "APC=Shit armor that cant compare with tanks" logic that previous poster commented
I wouldn't say it's an error in logic if an exception exists. I haven't counted but I'd venture he's right about 95% of the time.
homie it's a personnel not personal
Glad that it's nothing personal.
Yeah my bad I edited now
Pretty sure the burnt up vehicle was a BDRM, please enlighten me if I am wrong.
You're right BTR-60 at the start, BRDM-2 that gets hit
When I was a soldier we have a Soviet armored vehicle graveyard where we were able to put rounds down range to see the effect on the target.
A BTR 60 could stop most small arms except for armor piecing mag 58 (7.62m). Its job was to ferry troops to and from the field of battle, and offer some CBRND defense, not stopping RPGs that are designed to defeat armor.
Pretty interesting considering how tanky they are in BF4.
So annoying how even in hardcore you can only deal like 30 damage max to pretty much any land vehicle
Where is Big Boss hiding in this one ?
My mother's first serious BF got killed in Afghanistan. She still has PTSD from it. That war was a meatgrinder.
EDIT: she was Russian.
Alot are unaware of this, but the middle east as a whole is a PTSD fuckfest... literally even in countries where wars like this seems non-existent alot of people just hide their trauma or unaware of it's existence even.
The Iran Iraq war scarred a generation and more.
Imagine one of the last things you see is a war journalist recording your agony. War is hell.
Two different vehicles. First is a BTR-80? And second is BRDM-2 I believe.
Ik the Soviets we’re not right to invade Afghanistan, but damn most of these poor guys just were following orders, sent here in the name of “communism” bless everyone who died fighting there be it Soviet/Afghan/American/etc.
Everyone follows orders, whether it's from his chain of command or from his ideology. In the end of the day it's sad to see humans slaughter each other like that but it's the cycle of life, nothing we can do to stop the bloodshed.
they were invited to afganistan lul
Thanks for the correction, I’m not an expert about anything lol just tryin to honor those who fell
They were not invited. The Soviets launched a coup to overthrow the Afghan government because they feared it was becoming too pro-U.S. and then invaded the country to prop up their communist puppet government.
Poor BRDM-2 :( such cute vehicles
damn, they thought the APC was safe...
You would think they would patrol or travel with more friends than one lonely BRDM-2
I do apologize if this has been pointed out already but it would appear that the BTR-70 and the BRDM-2 were possibly in a convoy. The BRDM got hit and burned. It should be noted that the BRDM-2 is an armored scout car. In essence this would be roughly comparable to an up-armored humvee in terms of protection.
The gear whine from the transmissions on those things sounds like cop car sirens in old American cop shows.
First vehicle is an BTR but the when that is biting is a BRDM
Back when IEDs weren't a a thing yet?
Sorry your govt fucked you gents, we can empathize
Why no infantry support?
Have you ever seen a us humvee go across a long desert road going slow as fuck with infantry covering the sides?
At this point this phrase should be a meme of this sub.
The sound here seemed straight from 80's holywood movies. The brdm engine sound, the explosion... weird
What's with the dude sliding down the hill about halfway through?
BTR in the first video, BRDM burning in the second? I don't understand, this video is spliced for propaganda by the Mujahideen?
So the A in "APC" is not that serious it seems.
This is panjshir valley Afghanistan
Now we fight against fucking taliban
this film is dedicated to the brave mujahideen fighters of Afghanistan
If only there was a way to abbreviate that title a bit
Would you just lay down and take it if your country got invaded?
“That part of the world” bro these people just live there lol. They keep getting invaded by world powers.
I gotta ask who loves war more….the guys who start fighting in their homeland or the guys who keep sending soldiers to that land.
Lol you got the world figured out don’t you? Better and brighter than all us simple minded idiots.
Most people see the bias at the center of your comment. You might as well call them savages and at least wear your ignorance with pride.
Yes that is how it used to be everywhere, except unlike other places they kept getting attacked.
"BUt tHEy haVE BEen kilLING eCHh otHEr evER siNCe beFORe any WorLD pOWers invoLVMEnt"
How would your description be any different if USA kept getting invaded? ANy **smartass** who thinks the rest of the people are **simple minded** could have made the same comment about the US.
Afghanistan was peaceful for decades before the king was overthrown in the 70s. They've had periods of peace and periods of war. Calling others simple minded...
I mean they were kind of invaded...?
How is the Soviet war in Afghanistan different from the US one?
I didn’t see you calling the US intervention in Afghanistan and invasion
I don’t really see this guy making a distinction between Russian occupation or American but idk maybe he does
I don’t tho
It was an invasion and occupation.
Oh so when they were fighting the soviets they werent terrorists?
The Mujahideen were not comparable to the Taliban. The Muj was not a single movement but dozens of groups which varied widely from more left-leaning to relatively liberal to right-wing religious fundamentalists. The Taliban were formed after the Soviet-Afghan War by refugees in Pakistan who returned to fight in the civil war during the 90’s.
ikr they even get funding and training