They blow up like in this video and they blow up like the javelin test and they blow up throwing the turret like a frisbee and they blow up in a few other ways. The tank wasn't atomized, in the javelin test. It B L E W U P. If the projective warheads explode, the effect is different than the propellent burning off first and opening pressure vents (hatches, turret ring seals).

Probably safe to say that those are not licensed Victoria Secret clothing.

Well in the javelin test video it blows up to small pieces and there is almost nothing left. Is it even possible to aim at specific spots on a tank with a Javelin?

This seems more real.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUMxZ34Ptco&feature=player_embedded#!

It's a rigged test. The tank doesn't brew up in that video, it pretty much disintegrates, it looks to me like they packed it with C4 or something that doesn't burn off, like ammunition. In this Syria video, you can hear the machine gun bullets cooking off, with that Javelin video, nothing like that happens. Even the tank hull is just gone- it's just ridiculous.

What's funny is that even smaller tanks like T-55s hit by TOW missiles- which aren't even man portable, they are much heavier than a Javelin, don't reduce a an armored vehicle to pieces like that.

See, if you notice in this clip, other than the turret blowing off, the tank isn't reduced to such small scraps. The turret is still whole, the hull is still more or less a hull. But in that Javelin clip, the hull vanishes.

Jeezus...I guess those big pieces flying about in the video Oblivion posted are styrofoam packing or something. There is no significant difference in the javelin video (top attack) and the improved TOW video (top attack). If the TOW hit tank in the video 'brewed up' I guess I missed it due to the BFE. And from the brief view of things, there isn't much left of the TOW hit tank either...about as much as in the javelin test. So the reasonable thing to conclude is that both tests were rigged...everything tested is rigged, the universe is rigged!

The tank vanishes in the Javelin video. In the OP's video, it does not- the whole thing is engulfed, and it's still going down the street on fire. In the Javelin video, there's no vehicle fire, there's no vehicle. Where did they get the ammunition for a T-72? My guess is that they bought a surplus T-72, they aren't necessarily that hard to get, and because they aren't sold loaded with ammunition from collecters and dealers, they included explosives in order to simulate a loaded T-72, however, the effect turned out different than what tanks normally look like when they explode.

Do an Internet search, query 'destroyed T-72', you will hundreds of T-72 images from every war they've ever been knocked out, and you will not find another example of a tank disappearing like that. Why would a Javelin do that, what makes it so special? It doesn't matter whether a tank is destroyed by a Javelin, or 120 mm APFSDS round or a TOW missile- the effects would be the same, and they don't dissappear like that. That is the only instance you will find like that. You could never show me another one apart from that Javelin video.

In hindsight,driving a tank or any armoured vehicle through an urban environment like that with the abundance of RPG's and the willing hands to use them was probably not a great idea in the first place?

There are some areas of Atlanta and Chicago that I wouldn't want to drive that tank through.

What else would you expect Muslim Brotherhood Jihadis to shout?