War in Ukraine

#28,576
#28,576
volgr said:
Virtually none of that is true, except possibly comparing the losses.
Click to expand...

Umm Iraq had one of the largest militaries in the World in 91, including thousands of tanks, had just gotten out of a decade long war with Iran, and were fighting on their home territory against a US force not prepared for desert combat. Afghanistan was ruled by some of the same military leaders that had decimated the Soviet army. You don’t have a clue what you are talking about as usual
 
  • Like
Reactions: rocytop2624, marcusluvsvols, tbh and 4 others
#28,577
#28,577
volgr said:
Doesn't effect my sleep, it is the truth. The US is just as much, if not more, to blame for the whole fiasco in Ukraine as Russia is. There is no other way to spin it. Unless you have been in a coma for the last 10 years and woke up in February.
Click to expand...

You are beyond ignorant on the history of Ukraine and Russia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rocytop2624, marcusluvsvols, AM64 and 2 others
#28,578
#28,578
landscapingvol said:
Umm Iraq had one of the largest militaries in the World in 91, including thousands of tanks, had just gotten out of a decade long war with Iran, and were fighting on their home territory against a US force not prepared for desert combat. Afghanistan was ruled by some of the same military leaders that had decimated the Soviet army. You don’t have a clue what you are talking about as usual
Click to expand...
At the time of the 91 Gulf War I believe they were the 4th largest army in the world and were loaded up with fairly servicable equipment some of which was fairly modern
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64 and FLVOL_79
#28,580
#28,580
volgr said:
Virtually none of that is true, except possibly comparing the losses.
Click to expand...
It is 100% true, which is why it makes you so upset comrade.

Russia getting smoked by a military that didn't even have a SOF unit until 8 years ago. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

1000 tanks gone by the end of April. 25% of their active armor gone. POOF. Thats horrendous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rocytop2624, Rocky_Top_Vol13, marcusluvsvols and 6 others
#28,581
#28,581
NorthDallas40 said:
At the time of the 91 Gulf War I believe they were the 4th largest army in the world and were loaded up with fairly servicable equipment some of which was fairly modern
Click to expand...
Loaded with Russian equipment so it kind of explains why they got their asses handed to them in what, a few weeks?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rocytop2624, marcusluvsvols, AM64 and 1 other person
#28,582
#28,582
volgr said:
Doesn't effect my sleep, it is the truth. The US is just as much, if not more, to blame for the whole fiasco in Ukraine as Russia is. There is no other way to spin it. Unless you have been in a coma for the last 10 years and woke up in February.
Click to expand...
Step 3 from the Russian Botnik playbook:

3. Remind everyone of how the US and the West are warmongering agitators. Putin had to invade Ukraine because they were being threatened.

You gotta get some new material from your handlers. Tell them Vyacheslav Kozlov said so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64, allvol123 and 2 others
#28,587
#28,587
FLVOL_79 said:
It is 100% true, which is why it makes you so upset comrade.

Russia getting smoked by a military that didn't even have a SOF unit until 8 years ago. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

1000 tanks gone by the end of April. 25% of their active armor gone. POOF. Thats horrendous.
Click to expand...

They were trained in Russian armor tactics and were absolutely humiliated by US army tactics and technology. They were dug into the sand using anti tank defenses. US forces simply charged straight at them and Iraq couldn’t defend it. In many cases US tank platoons were outnumbered 2-1, and lost fewer than 5 tanks in combat with half from friendly fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64, FLVOL_79 and 1 other person
#28,588
#28,588
landscapingvol said:
They were trained in Russian armor tactics and were absolutely humiliated by US army tactics and technology. They were dug into the sand using anti tank defenses. US forces simply charged straight at them and Iraq couldn’t defend it. In many cases US tank platoons were outnumbered 2-1, and lost fewer than 5 tanks in combat with half from friendly fire.
Click to expand...
It didn’t hurt that the Bradley’s engaged tanks with TOW and more than held their own.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#28,589
#28,589
Russia's army is in a woeful state - Economist Briefing
renderTimingPixel.png

Russia's army is in a woeful state The fiasco in Ukraine could be a reflection of a bad strategy or a poor fighting force...

"...On the eve of war, Russia’s invasion force was considered formidable. American intelligence agencies reckoned that Kyiv would fall in days. Some European officials thought it might just hold out for a few weeks. No one thought that the city would be welcoming such dignitaries as Antony Blinken and Lloyd Austin, America’s secretaries of state and defence respectively, two months after the fighting started. The belief was that Russia would do to Ukraine what America had done to Iraq in 1991: shock and awe it into submission in a swift, decisive campaign. This belief was based on the assumption that Russia had undertaken the same sort of root-and-branch military reform that America underwent in the 18-year period between its defeat in Vietnam and its victory in the first Gulf war. In 2008 a war with Georgia, a country of fewer than 4m people, though successful in the end, had exposed the Russian army’s shortcomings. Russia fielded obsolete equipment, struggled to find Georgian artillery and botched its command and control. At one stage, Russia’s general staff allegedly could not reach the defence minister for ten hours. “It is impossible to not notice a certain gap between theory and practice,” acknowledged Russia’s army chief at the time. To close that gap, the armed forces were slashed in size and spruced up.

Ambition in spades Russian military expenditure, when measured properly—that is, in exchange rates adjusted for purchasing power—almost doubled between 2008 and 2021, rising to over $250bn, about triple the level of Britain or France (see charts). Around 600 new planes, 840 helicopters and 2,300 drones were added to the arsenal between 2010 and 2020. New tanks and missiles were flaunted at parades in Moscow. Russia tested new tactics and equipment in Donbas, after its first invasion of Ukraine in 2014, and in its campaign to prop up Bashar al-Assad, Syria’s dictator, the following year.

A retired European general says that watching this new model army fail reminds him of visiting East Germany and Poland after the end of the cold war, and seeing the enemy up close. “We realised how shite the 3rd Shock Army was,” he says, referring to a much-vaunted Soviet formation based in Magdeburg. “We’ve again allowed ourselves to be taken in by some of the propaganda that they put our way.” Russia’s army was known to have problems, says Petr Pavel, a retired Czech general who chaired nato’s military committee in 2015-18, “but the scope of these came as a surprise to many, including myself—I believed that the Russians had learnt their lessons.”

The charitable interpretation is that the Russian army has been hobbled in Ukraine less by its own deficiencies than by Mr Putin’s delusions. His insistence on plotting the war in secrecy complicated military planning. The fsb, a successor to the kgb, told him that Ukraine was riddled with Russian agents and would quickly fold. That probably spurred the foolish decision to start the war by sending lightly armed paratroopers to seize an airport on the outskirts of Kyiv and lone columns of armour to advance into the city of Kharkiv, causing heavy casualties to elite units.

Yet, this coup de main having fizzled, the army then chose to plough into the second largest country in Europe from several directions, splitting 120 or so battalion tactical groups (btgs) into lots of ineffective and isolated forces. Bad tactics then compounded bad strategy: armour, infantry and artillery fought their own disconnected campaigns. Tanks that should have been protected by infantry on foot instead roamed alone, only to be picked off in Ukrainian ambushes. Artillery, the mainstay of the Russian army since tsarist times, though directed with ferocity at cities such as Kharkiv and Mariupol, could not break through Ukrainian lines around Kyiv...

...The battle for Donbas will not entirely settle this debate. A Russian army that prevails in a war of attrition through sheer firepower and mass would still be a far cry from the nimble, high-tech force advertised over the past decade. More likely is that Russia’s plodding forces will exhaust themselves long before they achieve their objectives in southern and eastern Ukraine, let alone before mounting another attempt on Kyiv. The world’s military planners will be watching not just how far Russia gets in the weeks ahead, but also what that says about its forces’ resilience, adaptability and leadership. Like a knife pushed into old wood, the progress of the campaign will reveal how deep the rot runs."
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64, pattiycake and 1 other person
#28,590
#28,590
landscapingvol said:
They were trained in Russian armor tactics and were absolutely humiliated by US army tactics and technology. They were dug into the sand using anti tank defenses. US forces simply charged straight at them and Iraq couldn’t defend it. In many cases US tank platoons were outnumbered 2-1, and lost fewer than 5 tanks in combat with half from friendly fire.
Click to expand...
Not to mention the M1’s main gun had a longer range than the Russian armor. I talked to tank drivers that said Iraqi rounds were falling 2-300 meters short.

We also had the A-10, which the Iraqis had no answer for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MontyPython, marcusluvsvols, tbh and 3 others
#28,592
#28,592
landscapingvol said:
They were trained in Russian armor tactics and were absolutely humiliated by US army tactics and technology. They were dug into the sand using anti tank defenses. US forces simply charged straight at them and Iraq couldn’t defend it. In many cases US tank platoons were outnumbered 2-1, and lost fewer than 5 tanks in combat with half from friendly fire.
Click to expand...
You can see videos of Russia still using their tired old "we barely made it out alive in WW2" strats. I love the tank carousel tactic. Their soldiers even do that..one guy shots, jumps back, another guy jumps to his exact spot (where enemy fire is coming to now) and tries to shoot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#28,594
#28,594
31 Russian tanks lost yesterday. 47 BTRs.

Wholly unsustainable.

With his May 9th "victory parade" dreams, Putin has forced his Generals into an offensive they're not ready for and can't win.

This can only go on for so long until the Russian military offensive literally collapses.

Russian Losses in Ukraine - Home
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, tbh, pattiycake and 1 other person
#28,596
#28,596
I know Russia has a surplus of old armor that they thought may never be used because conventional war is mostly a thing of the past, so some loss is acceptable to them, but the amount of losses they have sustained in such a short amount of time in this "military operation" is incredible. I can't even imagine what the response would be if the US was in a similar situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64, pattiycake and 3 others
#28,598
#28,598
MercyPercy said:
I know Russia has a surplus of old armor that they thought may never be used because conventional war is mostly a thing of the past, so some loss is acceptable to them, but the amount of losses they have sustained in such a short amount of time in this "military operation" is incredible. I can't even imagine what the response would be if the US was in a similar situation.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL_79
#28,599
#28,599
MercyPercy said:
I know Russia has a surplus of old armor that they thought may never be used because conventional war is mostly a thing of the past, so some loss is acceptable to them, but the amount of losses they have sustained in such a short amount of time in this "military operation" is incredible. I can't even imagine what the response would be if the US was in a similar situation.
Click to expand...

Boom.

In the end he might have been able to achieve his goals through evil means, but at this point he has crossed a line of no return. You are talking about a man who has killed, with intent, several hundred thousand, and threatened the safety and security of a free planet. He will have to go one way or another for the safety of the rest of humanity. Russia will remain free either way. We have no interest in "ending Russia". We have interest in ending Putin. Some are already saying he lost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top