Posted on 02/19/2015 4:09:25 PM PST by UMCRevMom@aol.com
Current discussions of whether U.S. should provide lethal weapons to Ukraine rarely focus on what exactly is needed to defeat Russian Army. U.S. Maj. Gen. Scales in his opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal explains why MLRSes would make Putin think twice before making another step towards escalation of the conflict in the Donbas.
With the fragile cease-fire brokered last week in Minsk, Belarus, already appearing to crumble, President Obama should begin sending Ukraine the "lethal defensive weapons" it needs-and desperately wants-to defend itself from further incursions by Russian troops and Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine.
If Washington began supplying Kiev with the latest weapons technologies now, it might deter future Russian aggression, and perhaps even dull President Vladimir Putin's apparent ambition to annex much, if not all, of eastern Ukraine. Half-measures, however, could make matters worse. A few U.S. arms in the hands of the Ukrainian army might give Mr. Putin the excuse he needs to broaden and intensify his campaign.
What to do?
Some alternatives are already off the table. Supplying aircraft to the Ukrainian air force won't work because the Russians have mobilized sophisticated missile systems along Russia's western border, effectively walling off Ukraine from aerial intervention. Sending U.S. or NATO heavy-fighting gear like tanks and armored vehicles directly into the contested zones probably won't work either because the Russians have crowded their conquered space with a vastly superior arsenal of tanks and antitank missiles.
Sending small arms, ammunition and antitank ordnance to the Ukrainians will certainly help. But at this stage in the fighting the Russians and their rebel allies possess a level of materiel "overmatch" that cannot be overcome with light infantry weapons alone.
The Russians have recently introduced artillery-locating radars linked to long-range artillery units. These "artillery strike complexes" identify Ukrainian artillery firing positions and return fire in overwhelming barrages. Pro-Russian infantry forces follow each barrage with a quick ground assault, pushing the Ukrainians steadily away from the occupied zones. The Ukrainian army has no means of countering this.
Russian targets are mostly static. They consist of command-and-control facilities and armored vehicles positioned in bunkered fighting positions in and around the contested cities of Donetsk and Lugansk. MLRS would be able to destroy Russian targets methodically, one at a time. Such a campaign could slowly eliminate Russian static targets and force the fight to devolve into a dismounted infantry campaign, a campaign the Ukrainian army can win.The only possible solution to this new Russian assault is to counter it with standoff attacks from outside the battle zone using U.S.- and NATO-supplied long-range weapons. The U.S. Army has several battalions of Multiple Launch Rocket Systems on hand, which have much greater range and accuracy than the unguided "Grad" rocket launchers Kiev has now. Simply put, an MLRS launcher is a large rectangular box containing 12 long-range rockets sitting atop a tank-like vehicle. The rocket launcher can be moved quickly about the battlefield and fired in seconds, making it difficult to locate and strike. Each rocket can range over 40 miles and has a precision warhead that is capable of hitting point targets, like tanks and artillery pieces.
Training the Ukrainians to operate the MLRS would take time. But the system is relatively simple to employ and shoot. The fire control is automated, using on-board computers and navigation systems. The rockets are loaded in sealed "pods" that can be easily stored, transported and loaded.
Recall that it was massed batteries of MLRS-the Iraqis called their barrages "steel rain"-that were principally responsible for paralyzing and then obliterating Saddam 's artillery during Desert Storm in 1991. MLRS are also found in the arsenals of several NATO allies. Perhaps a collective aid program that donates the system to Kiev from many sources would send the signal to Mr. Putin that he faces a coalition rather than a single state.
Would just one weapons system be decisive? Probably not. But it seems unlikely that Mr. Putin could stand significant losses in his precious armored forces for long. Given Russia's flagging economy, it is unlikely that he would throw the dice and escalate the conflict with a full-scale invasion of western Ukraine. A more likely outcome would be a realization by the Russians that a bloody standoff wouldn't be in their best interests. At that point a real cease-fire might become more attractive.
No material support of the Ukrainian military will work unless the U.S. and NATO begin to send the right weapons and training cadres now. Delay means defeat, should the fighting break out in earnest. But immediate action using the best options available at this late date might well preserve the sovereignty of a friendly state and turn back a tyrant who threatens Europe.
Robert H. Scales, http://en.censor.net.ua/r325423
Sure. Why get weapons to defend ones country when it's more "sensible" to appease.
I support the Ukraine over invading Russians but this article is NOT Breaking News!
First of all, quoting FDR won’t convince me of anything. The man single handedly changed the American way of life by creating most of the social programs that still plague us to this day. He then pissed on the Constitution by trying to remove judges who disagreed with him. Then, he pushed for the UN. Finally, he sat down with Stalin and literally drew the lines on the map that condemned all of Eastern Europe to Communist rule (not to mention the suppression of the Orthodox Church).
Now with that said, enlighten me on who is going to pay for all of this aid that you constantly lobby for...day in and day out.
More importantly, enlighten me on why it isn’t MORE important to send that aid to the Kurds. Or to the Assyrian Christians? ISIS has global reach. Donestsk and Luhansk militias and Russia’s “little green men” do not. I can easily make the argument that not only do the Kurds DESERVE it more (they remain loyal to us even after multiple betrayals), not only does ISIS constitute a bigger threat, but the Kurds are oustanding warriors.
You know what? I would argue that the Ethiopians, Nigerians, Malians, and Kenyans deserve that aid more than Ukraine while we’re at it!
I guess the U.S. is now Oprah handing out gifts. You get aid! And you get aid! EVERYONE gets aid!
Guided MLRS followers is an interesting concept. One guided rocket leads the others behind to target.
This article didn’t call for sending older weapons. It’s calling for sending MLRS batteries and trainers. Some people on this thread have called for sending boots on the ground.
I know where a tremendous amount of money is spent. I really do. The problem is that as the federal government spends more and more, the belt keeps getting tightened on the average Joe. We have 22 vets and active duty soldiers committing suicide a day because they can’t get the help they need, to include several friends of mine. You’ll have to forgive my hatred towards certain chickenhawks on Free Republic who are calling for World War III, when there are cracks in the system so big you can drive a tank through.
We, as a country, aren’t taking care of our people. So why should we take care of Ukraine?
I am not a fan of FDR... however, many are thankful he started to increase weapon production for our nation.
We need to re-evaluate the nation’s financial priorities.
In case you missed this: Americans Increasingly See Russia as Threat, Top U.S. Enemy
http://www.gallup.com/poll/181568/americans-increasingly-russia-threat-top-enemy.aspx?utm_source=Politics&utm_medium=newsfeed&utm_campaign=tiles
The chickenhawk comment wasn’t meant for you. Having said that, I haven’t been conventional Air Force in 6 years. So if the “combat platoons” and “sections, flights, etc” comments are a not-so-subtle attack on my credibility, then make it known directly.
On the Syrian-Lebanese-Iranian alliance.
Lebanon Is NOT Innocent (David Horowitz Slams The Lebanon “Innocent Bystander” Myth Alert)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1671142/posts
Here's some very related information about Lebanon for those acquainted with geography, sub-populations and sentiments in the area.
Maronites are the predominant Christian population in Lebanon.
Harb pledges to be forceful president [Maronite "ready to fight" Israel, "protect Hezbollah"]
Lebanese Lobby (Lebanon) ^ | 11SEP07 | Francis Matthew
"Beirut: Boutros Harb, long-serving Maronite Lebanese Member of Parliament, is standing for president and reaching out to the Shiite Hezbollah, across the political divide in the country.
[...]
"I have proposed that the Lebanese army and government must be in control of declaring war, and that we should find a way to incorporate Hezbollah's forces into the army. But this has to be on the condition that the Lebanese government and army accept the full duty of being ready to fight and protect Hezbollah if Israel attacks," he said, adding that it was also important that Lebanon had to liberate the occupied territory of the Sheba'a Farms from Israel."
Lebanese leaders call for unity [All of them support the terrorists. ...always have.]
CNN International ^ | 20JUL06 | CNN
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1668991/posts
"The ship is sinking and all of us, the Lebanese, should stick together and work together to stop the Israeli aggression," Amin Gemayel, a Maronite Christian who served as president from 1982 to 1988, told the Arabic-language TV station Al-Jazeera . . . Michel Aoun, a one-time commander in Lebanon's 15-year civil war who now serves in parliament, said . . . "I don't think that Israel has the capability to destroy Hezbollah militarily because Hezbollah is not a group of armed men," Aoun said. "Hezbollah is a major part of the Lebanese social fabric."
Lebanon Turns to the Vatican to Halt Israeli Offensive
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1668754/posts
Vatican Condemns Israel for Attacks on Lebanon
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1665678/posts
MOSCOW, Russia, July 30, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Russian nationalist youth group is encouraging youth to have more sex in an effort to combat the nation's devastating demographic crisis, reports the Daily Mail.
In a lengthy special report the Daily Mail documents the activities of the Nashi youth movement, which is sponsoring a summer camp attended by some 10,000 Russian youth this summer. Not only are Nashi organizers encouraging the youth to have more sex, but they have designated a special area at the dormitories, the Love Oasis, for young men and women to engage in sexual intercourse. According to the Mail, condoms are unavailable in the camp.
"They [The pre-historic mammoths] became extinct because they did not have enough sex. That must not happen to Russia," said a Nashi organizer to a group of assembled campers.
The nationalistic camp involves two weeks of lectures, reported by some Western sources as being little more than anti-Western "propaganda," as well as a strenuous regimen of physical exercise. Numerous young couples have also been married at the camp, with 25 couples being married at the beginning of the first week, and ten to be married at the beginning of the second.
While many people, especially in the West, are finding in the Kremlin-initiated, and Kremlin-loyal Nashi youth group a disturbing image of similar groups started up in Nazi-era Germany, the camp's approach to sex is further evidence that the Russian government is not unaware that a demographic crisis is leading the entire Russian nation towards an early grave.
Putin has created a very sophisticated youth movement made up of over 100,000 volunteers called "Nashi", much like a clone of the Nazi youth movement. It is a well-equipped, fanatical, nationalistic private army that is hostile to foreigners and to any political group opposing the Kremlin leadership. Their aggressive behavior is not only tolerated by the authorities but also even encouraged. They help re-enforce local police; wearing black attire, they aggressively beat anyone they consider hooligans or insurrectionist.
They have been taught to believe that the United States is actively preparing a pro-western revolution in their country and that they will thwart it. They have developed high-level recruiting and training camps right across the expanse of Russia. Not only are they schooled in a variety of military issues, they also have orientation courses in such esoteric subjects as gestalt therapy, to help them to survive under extreme conditions.
Russia's president devoted the largest part of his annual State of Russia speech to reversing Russia's population decline.
If Russian couples have a third child, they will get a baby bonus, better health care, and free land to build a house or dacha, Russian President Dmitri Medvedev promised in his annual State of Russia speech.
Political analysts were hoping to hear about missiles or democracy. Instead they got babies.
[...]
What he did not say is that Russia compensates for its aging workforce by importing about 10 million laborers a year from Central Asia. After the United States, Russia is now the second-largest importer of workers. This influx of overwhelmingly Muslim workers creates tensions in Russia, where the population is largely Orthodox Christian.
The war in Georgia has provoked unprecedented levels of patriosm in Russia. The majority of the population supported their army's actions in the Caucasus. And even the fiercest critics of the Kremlin have now become proud Russians.
Members of the Kremlin-loyal youth organisation "Nashi" wave flags and hold a banner during a protest in front of the US embassy in Moscow during the Georgia war.
The war in Georgia has provoked unprecedented levels of patriosm in Russia. The majority of the population supported their army's actions in the Caucasus. And even the fiercest critics of the Kremlin have now become proud Russians.
Members of the Kremlin-loyal youth organisation "Nashi" wave flags and hold a banner during a protest in front of the US embassy in Moscow during the Georgia war.
What you call “propaganda” is an opinon article by Robert H. Scales. Former major general of US army.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.