Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

EEU = Soviet Lite

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • At Donetsk Airport they lost 4 times more than UA.UA means also a force capable of doing at least 5 Grozny's.
    6 to 1 can be achieved as local superiority.But in un urban environment even more is needed.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

    Comment


    • There is no substitute for high quality intelligence along with troop preparedness. As such it renders these "maxims" regarding force ratios irrelevant. 3:1, 6:1, 9:1 pales against the historical evidence of success and failure because and/or in spite of these odds.

      Much, much more is ALWAYS in play once crossing the LD/LC.
      "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
      "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

      Comment


      • The question is do we have hard data on the state of preparedness of the new Russian forces? Also, what could Putin do with them that will lead to some sort of payoff even short term. I assume they come with an expiration date after which 100,000 trained and armed men in a war torn region with no other jobs become more of a liability than an asset.

        Comment


        • Croatia
          No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

          To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by citanon View Post
            The question is do we have hard data on the state of preparedness of the new Russian forces? Also, what could Putin do with them that will lead to some sort of payoff even short term. I assume they come with an expiration date after which 100,000 trained and armed men in a war torn region with no other jobs become more of a liability than an asset.
            Which 100,000 men? The trained army in the occupied Donbass that the Colonel has conjured? Il n'existe pas. Let me find a newspaper article... Well that took all of 3mins to find: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a6672621.html Let me quote the relevant section (as I see it);

            "Col-Gen Muzhenko confirmed that while a ceasefire has largely held since 29 August, reconnaissance groups have remained active along the front lines. A significant enemy military presence – “more than 40,000” – remains inside the separatist enclaves, he said, and “all of them are answerable to a Russian chain of command”.
            The article is dated 29th September and if the Colonel wishes to argue with the Chief of Staff and other Officers returning from the area then that is his prerogative.

            Nor are there 80,000 Muscovite troops over the border! They are building a new base in Voronzeh for sure but it has been scouted apart from the photos that have appeared online. It's basically a tank and fuel dump it looks like, and sure they have more weapons in Donbass now than people who can use them but this is a preparation for a sit in not for a push forward.

            Nor are frankly ludicrous numbers of 50,000 Ukrainian troops anything but a figure pulled out of hat to be honest. If this was true then by a process of attrition Ukraine would already have lost this war long ago. Do you think they be sending troops to get training from UK, US, Polish and Canadian troops if this were true? I have spent most of the last two years in Ukraine and I simply know from the evidence of my own eyes that the Colonels numbers are vastly out.

            Nor frankly do I believe in the 6 to 1 dogma; it is in part a game of numbers but there are many other factors involved also. Defence of your homeland I would suggest is a great motivator.

            Comment


            • If you want to play that game

              http://en.voicesevas.ru/news/yugo-vo...-militias.html

              The DNR President mobilization orders came into effect yesterday, February 9. The next-door Lugansk People's Republic has launced its mobilization too. The target level for the combined DNR and LNR force is 100,000 men.
              And a simple wiki search

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia...ons_since_2010

              Showed two field armies, 49th and 58th, within striking distance of Kiev and another 3, 1st Tank, 6th and 20th Armies within a weeks march.

              As far as the 6 to 1 "dogma" is concerned, you were questioning why the rebels haven't stampeded the Ukrainian Army. The response is that the Russian Field Army HQs ain't comfortable with the numbers. Nothing to do with national determination. Hell, to take you at your word, Russian Army HQ would prefer 10 to 1 odds.

              As for the 50,000 Ukrainian number, your own President cited those numbers, not me.

              http://www.unian.info/politics/10833...oroshenko.html

              Take it up with him. Looks like I do know my shit.
              Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 03 Oct 15,, 13:51.
              Chimo

              Comment


              • Sara,

                Seriously, what are your creditenials. You keep dropping names and shoulder rubbing that I find hard to believe. I had the impression that you're nothing more than a clerk. Please correct my assumptions if you are senior than that BUT IN NO WAY DO I TAKE YOUR FOR A DIRECTOR!

                You don't have the discipline to shut the hell up! There are things that I take from senior members of this forum. They don't have to prove anything. They make a statement and events prove them right. You make a statement and events proved you wrong ... and yet, you keep spewing you know it all when events kept proving you wrong and wrong again.

                When you keep dropping names by General such and such and later, I found that your statements are actually false, it does discredit to your claims. You've cried wolf far too often. Never mind the sheep dogs, the sheep ain't even listening anymore.

                Currently, you're no more than Kiev's propganda's machine. You couldn't even be bothered to vefifyied my claims of two field armies over the Russian border.
                Chimo

                Comment


                • Colonel the last date in the wiki you cite is 2013, the Unian article you note is dated 29th May and refers specifically troops within the "ATO zone alone". The ATO zone is of course Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts and as I said the numbers of Ukrainian troops in that specific area has risen to closer 60,000 since May. Nor is the Dnieper or the Crimean front undefended; the troops in the 'ATO zone' do not represent half the current Ukrainian army. Nor are Russian armies elsewhere proof of your vastly overestimated claim that there are 100,000 armed 'separatists' in the occupied area. Quoting General Muzhenko is not a statement about myself; merely suggesting that the Ukrainian Chief of Staff may be better informed than you in this regard.

                  Comment


                  • Actually the good Col us right.The 40000 need twice as many support troops.Just because they're across the border is irelevant.For them Donbas is Russia,the same TO.
                    As for the number games,yes much is at play.However,the Russian Army still can't do 5 Grozny's.
                    I don't think the military show is their main effort.They will go for a stab in the back.
                    Beating someone,while always doable,does not guarantee love and acceptance.The Russians need to gain hearts and minds.The lost them like fools.The only thing that can anger Ukainians back in their hands is Western betrayal.
                    They will try to make themselves indispensable to the West.And that means they create troubles elsewhere.
                    Those who know don't speak
                    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by snapper View Post
                      Colonel the last date in the wiki you cite is 2013, the Unian article you note is dated 29th May and refers specifically troops within the "ATO zone alone". The ATO zone is of course Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts and as I said the numbers of Ukrainian troops in that specific area has risen to closer 60,000 since May.
                      Find, let's do 70,000 Ukrainian troops in the battle area. Still too much for the LNR and DNR to go on the attack with their 100,000 full mobilization plans.

                      Originally posted by snapper View Post
                      Nor is the Dnieper or the Crimean front undefended; the troops in the 'ATO zone' do not represent half the current Ukrainian army.
                      You do note that I wrote "the battle area." The Russians can cut off and isolate the battle area from re-enforcements. The same cannot be said of the Ukrainians.

                      Originally posted by snapper View Post
                      Nor are Russian armies elsewhere proof of your vastly overestimated claim that there are 100,000 armed 'separatists' in the occupied area. Quoting General Muzhenko is not a statement about myself; merely suggesting that the Ukrainian Chief of Staff may be better informed than you in this regard.
                      He's talking about actual combattants currently in the field. I referred to the DNR and the LNR mobilization plans. They achieved that back in Feb of this year. Moscow can cut all Ukrainian LOCs while you can do shit all to theirs. Meaning, Moscow can bring all their armies forth, including DNR and LNR mobilization. You can't.
                      Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 05 Oct 15,, 08:32.
                      Chimo

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                        However,the Russian Army still can't do 5 Grozny's.
                        Isolate and reduce. Flatten the cities with artillery. Leave a blocking force to protect the LOCs from any stragglers and move on. The reason why the Russian Army fought Grozny is because they needed to fight in Grozny, the final prize in their campaign but the towns and villages surrounding Grozny were flattened and those roads that were still blocked? Russian engineers built roads around them.
                        Chimo

                        Comment


                        • col yu,

                          for my SA, why did the Russians bother to fight in Grozny at all? why not just cut off the supply lines and starve 'em all out?
                          There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                          Comment


                          • They were doing exactly that. The Chechens had to break out through a minefield under artillery fire. Then, it was a mopping up operation after that.
                            Chimo

                            Comment


                            • Full Dutch investigation on WHAT downed report downloadable here (apparently the Muscovites on the team disagreed): http://mh17.onderzoeksraad.nl/

                              Guess what! It was a BUK... :Zzzzzz:

                              Comment


                              • http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2015.../?oref=d-river

                                With Putin on the March, US Must Bulk Up Its European Forces

                                November 25, 2015
                                By Colonel Michael R. Fenzel
                                Aaron Picozzi
                                Council on Foreign Relations

                                Over-the-horizon deterrence will simply not work—either to fend off Russia or reassure NATO allies.

                                NATO / Russia / Commentary

                                The November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris and late October bombing of Russian Metrojet flight 9268 have not only crystallized the threat of the self-declared Islamic State to the world, but also created an unlikely opportunity to open a dialogue with Russia. However, these tragedies do not change the long-term threat Russia poses to stability in Europe. Russia’s encroachment in Eastern Europe is a threat to the security and stability of the continent and tests the resolve of NATO in an unprecedented way. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent military intervention in Syria is further evidence of his ambition to broaden Russian influence and capitalize on regional instability.
                                Subscribe
                                Receive daily email updates:

                                Subscribe to Defense One Today.

                                Be the first to receive updates.
                                Authors

                                Colonel Michael R. Fenzel, U.S. Army, most recently served as the chief of staff for the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. Previously, he commanded the Airborne Division’s 3rd Brigade Combat Team and the 1st Armored Division’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team. His other assignments ... Full Bio

                                Aaron Picozzi is research associate for military fellows at the Council on Foreign Relations. Full Bio

                                One thing appears certain: Putin will not be swayed by tough talk from our allies and friends. The failure to take bold action, even amidst a potential collaboration against ISIS, only serves as tacit acceptance of Putin’s violations of international law. Through an increased military posture, an increase of our ground forces specifically, the United States must take the lead to stem the tide of Russia’s advances with tangible efforts to protect our interests in Europe and strengthen the resolve of the NATO alliance.

                                Nine Eastern European members of NATO recently met in Romania to discuss the Russian threat and the challenge of refugee flows from Syria into Europe. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg also used the meeting to call for increased pressure from member countries to respond to Russian aggression, particularly stressing the importance of military presence. The challenge of maintaining a heightened posture comes in the midst of the last stage of U.S. troop reductions in Europe, from a force of 40,000 in 2012 to 26,000 planned for this year. Maintaining this course runs counter to NATO requests for additional U.S. troop presence and to our national interests. Over-the-horizon deterrence will simply not work—deterrence must be real, observable, and project strength.

                                The commander of NATO’s Allied Land Component, U.S. Army Lieutenant General John Nicholson, reiterated the importance of maintaining U.S. troop presence, stating unambiguously, “If we get there late, then we may have to fight.” The current effort to deter Russia with U.S. presence in Europe is problematic given the number of troops available—an enduring force of two combat brigades can neither be considered an offensive force nor an effective deterrent. The roughly 30,000 American troops on the ground in Europe today are all that Lieutenant General Ben Hodges (U.S. Army Commander in Europe) has at his disposal. Yet Hodges is faced with the very same task that his forebears faced through the Cold War: deter Russian aggression and expansion. U.S. Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter, recognizing these challenges, has called for a “new playbook” for Russia.

                                See also: Forget NATO; France Taps the EU in Its Fight Against ISIS

                                The recent deployment of U.S. F-15C model aircraft to Incirlik, Turkey provide a hedge against continued Russian expansion and a bulwark to their actions in Syria. These aircraft are equipped with only air-to-air weaponry, designed to counter assets that ISIS does not possess, but they are fully capable of responding to threats from Russian fighter planes. This is one example of a number of prudent measures taken by the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, General Philip Breedlove, to address Russian attempts to distract from its actions in Ukraine. The introduction of Russian tanks into the Rostov region, along their southern border, is another echo of Cold War-era saber rattling. Carter responded to this maneuver by rotating two U.S. armored brigades to Eastern and Central Europe. Positioning additional mechanized forces in Europe is the only effective method to counter Russian posturing.
                                Preserving peace in Europe demands action now or it will lead to an even more volatile situation in the future.

                                In order fortify the tenuous NATO position in Eastern Europe and the Baltic States, the United States has undertaken a direct training mission in Ukraine. A primary focus for the U.S. Army in Europe is now to train Ukrainian soldiers to utilize their Soviet-era weaponry against Russian separatists. This effort puts one U.S. airborne brigade directly across from Russia’s “little green men” who are conducting operations to further Putin’s aim of consolidating gains. Our training teams in Ukraine, Latvia, Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, and Slovakia are focusing their efforts on training these militaries to fight while staying well clear of direct combat operations.

                                Under the tenets of Operation Atlantic Resolve, the United States has begun a yearlong training exercise that spans six NATO countries. This mission not only continues to boost military readiness, but also serves to ease the fears of Eastern European allies. The further expansion of this set of training missions is a prudent method of assuring security and stability in a region that is fearful of what Russia will do next. By rotating U.S. Army combat brigades on a temporary but recurring basis, the United States continues to operate within the confines of the NATO Founding Act while sending a clear message to Russia—the United States will not stand by idly in the face of aggression.

                                Russia remains the only country on Earth that possesses the nuclear capability to destroy the United States. Russian encroachment and efforts to expand and consolidate gains at their borders is a direct threat to our vital national security interests. In order to avoid a future conflict and prevent further encroachment, the United States and NATO must increase their commitment to rolling back Russian advances. This can only be done by projecting military force in the same manner that was so effective for over fifty years through the Cold War. Preserving peace in Europe demands action now or it will lead to an even more volatile situation in the future. Even in the midst of global collaboration against ISIS, a clear message must be sent to Russia when it comes to Europe—an attack against one NATO nation is an attack against all.

                                This post appears courtesy of CFR.org.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X