Shuriff

Just to let you know - currently the main idea about conscription in Russian Army is to create several "permanent readiness" units, consistint excusively of professional soldiers. These units are to be used in all local conficts. For example,right now 42nd Guards Mot. Inf. Div., stationed in Chechnya is purely professional.

But! This doens't means the conscription will be banned in any near future. We still need mobilization reserve, and in our case this means we need consription. There is no way we can fill our ranks with pros only in any forseeable future - maybe we'd even like to, but currently this is not an issue.

Shuriff

Remind we again when was the last time western military equpment met contemporary soviet/russian one on the battlefield? Not obsolete, not some downgraded export version? I'm afraid that would be WWII. Maybe I'm wrong, PLEASE correct me.

Anon

"Remind we again when was the last time western military equpment met contemporary soviet/russian one on the battlefield? Not obsolete, not some downgraded export version? I'm afraid that would be WWII. Maybe I'm wrong, PLEASE correct me."

Vietnam and Korea. In some respects, Desert Storm.

Dima

that's their entire defense budget

"That even a T-80 can beat? Perhaps if the M-1A1 is caught from behind at close range, but other than that... The T-80 is a tank with a lot of flaws, and in a 1 on 1 match with an original M-1 it would die in all but the most extreme circumstances."

can an Abrams fire while moving at full speed, no, but a T-80 can, also, it depends which version of the T-80 you're referring to, the T-80 itself wasn't that impressive, only a 1,000 hp gas-turbine engine, the T-80U was amazing, and the T-80UM1 is an awesome tank, the UM alone is great as well

"What a load of crap. Canada has a 58,000 man professional force. Do the math!"

duhh, that's why we rely on America to protect us, and Canada is not known for having an army, it's a very small issue, i wish we'd spend more money on the military, you heard they agreed to spend $5.6 billion over the next 10? years on military

also, Canada does not face any immediate serious threat, as the only nation that they touch with is their closest ally, America, while Russia has to be afraid of the Muslim insurgencies, NATO expansion, China etc.

"Russia has a police issue, not a military one."

that's not really true, Russian police are doing an amazing job lately in capturing rebels in Chechnya, i think since the beginning of the year, something like 105 rebels captured, that's more than one a day, and the Russians ahve only lost 35 soldiers so far, leading to a total of only 140 losses by the end of the year, compare with 1,100 in Iraq over 2 years(in Chechnya, would amoutn to only 280 losses in 2 years)

are you kidding, 380,000 man force to stare down Muslim rebels that could number possibly 1,000,000 people easily or more(because if support from Iran etc.) plus the 5 million large army of China, the nuclear threat from North Korea etc. a lot more threats

the Russian military does very little in Chechnya recently, after the death of Aslan Maskhadov, now, it's personal secuiryt teams, such as Regional police anf the FSB, especially the FSB

Vietnam, that was nominal, Korea, kind of long ago, but that was a good fight, remmber watching it on History channel, the Northerners were whooping the Southerners, and somethnig happened, and they were pushed back

but i looked on map, and they had so little territory left

Desert Storm, no, they weren't properly trained and the equipment was not prperly maintained

__________________
for MOTHER MOLDOVA

lwarmonger

But the KGB (and interior ministry as well) had troops in the way that a regular (say, American) police force does not (as well as far greater powers for liquidating dissent). The KGB was not a police force, but a secret police. Very different.

lwarmonger

Since when could the T-80 fire accurately while on the move? Also, the T-80 cannot survive a hit from a 120 mm cannon. An M-1 (original) can, and has, survived multiple hits from the 125 mm cannon standard on Soviet tanks. Firing stabilization (for shooting on the move) and greater range are among the M-1's other advantages. And don't forget the auto loader. Slower than a human loader, by far. So an M-1 can shoot farther, faster, and get more kills with the hits it does make. I'd say that is a superior tank.

Anon

"Desert Storm, no, they weren't properly trained and the equipment was not prperly maintained"

So you can say the same thing about the Russians themselves.

That's just an excuse for poor performance, it does not change the fact that the Iraqis did have many modern Russian systems.

Anon

"Since when could the T-80 fire accurately while on the move?"

Since it was introduced in 1980.

Officer of Engineers

That about sums up your entire post.

__________________
Chimo

Officer of Engineers

Not really, worldwide, the norm is a bigger police force than the military force and amongst them, the secret police which is the norm.

Shuriff

1. In NKoreans have fought on t34/85s and IS-2s, which are of course great tanks, but were already obsolete by then - in SU they've been massively brought out of service by that time. The only modern thing there was MiG-15 which showed themselved quite nicely AFAIK.
Anyway, overall war ended with a stalemate, isn't it?

2. Vietnam - again only SAMs and MiGs where anyway modern. Even without mentioning the difference in the overall number of aircraft on both sides, can't say it was an easy ride for you.

3. Iraq - don't make laugh. What iraqy piece of equipment was modern in 1991, not even mentioning 2003? Name just one for a start. It's all been obsolete.

Shuriff

KGB had only Border Guards units as their military force. The main idea was that KGB was to catch all possible spies not only by counterintelligece means, but also by border control.

Shuriff

Uh, sorry to disappoint you, but tanks are not created for dueling other tanks.
1:1 Abrams vs T80 duel has been discussed countless times before (all inconclusive, of cource), but I still can't understand why - tanks are not supposed to fight other tanks at all. Sometimes they have to, but its not their main job.

PS. Man, have you EVER lifted any tank cannon shell by yourself? Or even seen it?

Anon

"1. In NKoreans have fought on t34/85s and IS-2s, which are of course great tanks, but were already obsolete by then - in SU they've been massively brought out of service by that time. The only modern thing there was MiG-15 which showed themselved quite nicely AFAIK."

The Mig-15s were piloted by top WWII aces, and got smacked down by F-86s at the rate of 10:1.

"Anyway, overall war ended with a stalemate, isn't it?"

That's irrelevant to the question at hand.

"2. Vietnam - again only SAMs and MiGs where anyway modern. Even without mentioning the difference in the overall number of aircraft on both sides, can't say it was an easy ride for you."

You said, "When has the US ever faced modern soviet systems?" The Mig-21 and SA-2 were both very modern systems during the vietnam war. Therefore Vietnam qualifies.

"3. Iraq - don't make laugh. What iraqy piece of equipment was modern in 1991, not even mentioning 2003? Name just one for a start. It's all been obsolete."

Well in 2003 the Iraqis used the 'state of the art' GPS jammers supplied by Russia.

During ODS the Iraqis had all manner of modern Soviet equipment, from the Mig-29, to various air defense radars and SAM systems.

dalem

And primary Soviet personnel and equipment are known for their proper training and maintenance?

Please. This is reality.

-dale