Posted on 06/24/2024 2:28:04 PM PDT by hardspunned
You have a knack for making yourself sound glorious.
The truth is that we are two old men amusing ourselves on the Internet.
Just a suggestion, come to Spain off-season (it gets mad in the summer) and give it a try. Its a great place to park your ancient bones until the inevitable shows up.
Yeah...I can see them wanting to take out a militarily significant site. So, is this just Putin trying to make hay from injuries and deaths sustained by civilians in a shoot-down attempt?
LOL, “gentleman’s agreement? You think the evil empire and NATO made massive world changing/empire changing agreements and permanent and binding decisions for the nations of Europe and their forever future and involving millions of troops without bothering with ratified and binding treaties?
Of course. If you have a bloody shirt, you use it.
Why not? Everyone seems ready to accept whatever narrative “their side” posits.
Like.
Cluster ATACMS are mainly used as anti-material weapons. They are ideal for suppressing or destroying SAM sites or radars, as has often been done in this war. They are also excellent vs parked aircraft in revetments.
Wicked, for sure. tanks.
I wish us Grunts had had that kind of added support in Nam.
No, you’ve got that wrong. Khrushchev transferred Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 after 300 years of Russian control. Remember, at the time both were part of the Soviet Union. Crimea is Russian.
In 1954, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union transferred the Crimean Oblast from the Russian SFSR to the Ukrainian SSR. The territory had been recognized within the Soviet Union as having “close ties” to the Ukrainian SSR, and the transfer commemorated the Union of Russia and Ukraine Tercentenary.
A large number of modern weapons were developed to cover deficiencies found in Vietnam. Or the Arab-Israeli war of 1973.
SAM suppression became a very big deal.
Ukraine can not possibly win the war with Russia. Ukraine does not have the manpower which is necessary, therefore we see attempts to provoke Russia so USA troops can enter the fight.
Israel doing the same thing in Hope’s USA will enter the fight against Iran.
Biden’s foreign policy is a total failure.
That’s right.
After the first Gulf War, Russian generals said they wouldn’t want to fight the United States with its fine troops and weapons.
How things have changed.
All things considered, especially with unit cohesion so damaged by Woke, Critical Race theory indoctrination and critical manpower shortages and worn out equipment, the US would have a time of it with Russia now.
At one time we could take up the slack with our technology. Not now.
They still wouldnt want to.
The US rules SEAD - suppression of enemy air defense. That is burned-in USAF doctrine, and that goes back to Vietnam. The US now has a vast preponderance of abilities and tech in this space - the Army ATCMS with cluster warhead is just one minor bit.
Russia, as we see, has no counter to this, within its range. They have lost about a dozen S400 and S300 batteries in Crimea/Ukraine just this year, and just to ATACMS (or maybe a couple fell to UK/French SCALP). And that with Ukraine having limited ammo and no long range ATACMS variants until just a couple of weeks ago.
In a hypothetical US-Russia war, the US would have at least 100x Ukrainian resources for SEAD. ALL weapons and tech would be brought to bear. Given Russian performance so far their air defenses would be gone very quickly under such a hammer.
Once the air is clear the USAF would get to work disassembling the opposing army.
That’s reassuring. Thanks
What about our navy dealing with Russian hypersonic missiles? Can the Arleigh-Burkes protect the carriers? I’ve heard not.
Your perspective is I think far away from reality.
This is a problem for partisans seeing only selected news items or commentary. I suggest a higher diet of military journals, aerospace trade publications, and foreign press.
Maybe so but we’re not up to par overall...especially in leadership.
I sent you a question about our navy dealing with hypersonic missiles. I’m anxious to see what you say. Thanks in advance.
No idea. The real problem with any missile isnt its speed but its targeting and guidance system, much more so if its to hit a moving point target hundreds of miles away. How good is the Russian stuff at doing that? Is there some US secret squirrel stuff that gets in the way? How good is the latest upgrade/patch of Aegis/Standard at intercepting “hypersonics”? Etc.
I would bet on the USN, but its going to come down to details, about which we have no information.
This is why wars are always surprising. Its these details that get revealed once its on for real. Like the US torpedo scandal of 1941-42.
And the US doesnt need to use carriers against Russia. The USAF has lots of airfields they can use in Europe. I guess the Russians can shoot a few missiles at those, but they are lousy targets, and NATO has lots of hard aircraft shelters, unlike, apparently, the Russians.
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.