Russia trains for large-scale war

[Tigerace117]

You forgot the Kent State shooting of 1970 by the Ohio National Guard. 4 students were killed and nine injured (one suffered permanent paralysis).

Considering a conservative said we needed another Kent State, he may be actively trying to avoid it.

 

[apdst]

:lamo

The Union Army kicked your “superior soldiers” asses over and over and over again.

Then a bunch of ragtag Mexican rebels did the same thing when some of your officers fled to try and prop up France’s little project.

Compared to the Confederates even Italy looks like a martial superpower

Ueah, that's not true. Southerners have always been superior soldiers.

Of the top 5 most decorated U.S. servicemen, 3 are from the South: Audy Murphy, Chesty Puller and James Mason.

Then there's Doris Miller - Texas. Carl Brashear - Kentucky. Julian Cook - South Carolina. Chester Nimitz - Texas. Maxwell Taylor - Missouri.

So many Army posts are named for Confederate generals because even after the war, they were recognized as superior commanders vs. any northern generals. I mean, hell! Even Braxton Bragg got a fort...lol.

Let's continue:

Robert Sink - North Carolina

Roscoe Robinson, jr. - Missouri

Jack Lucas - North Carolina

Clair Chenault - Louisiana

Carlos Hathcock - Arkansas

Chris Kyle - Texas

John Lucian Smith - Oklahoma

John Lejeune - Louisiana (Camp Lejeune is named for the son of a Confederate officer)

I could go on all day, but you now understand that the Southern culture produces superior soldiers.

 

[Westphalian]

With NATO encroaching and treaties being nullified by the US, can you really blame them?

As we prepare to invade Venezuela and build Fort Trump in Poland, can you really blame them?

They would be foolish if they did not prepare for military aggression against them. That is the stock-in-trade for the US.

On the one hand Russia is pilloried for preparing to defend itself.


On another thread people salivate over the prospect of the US 'making the first move' against Russia and China. What could possibly go wrong :roll:


Well look - maybe the US should ensure it's negotiated peace terms with the robed cave dwellers in Afghanistan, and the pick up truck machine gun armed Islamists in Iraq, before taking on capable militaries.

 

[Fledermaus]

With NATO encroaching and treaties being nullified by the US, can you really blame them?

As we prepare to invade Venezuela and build Fort Trump in Poland, can you really blame them?

They would be foolish if they did not prepare for military aggression against them. That is the stock-in-trade for the US.

Being invited the home nation = Encroachment

 

[Tigerace117]

Ueah, that's not true. Southerners have always been superior soldiers.

Of the top 5 most decorated U.S. servicemen, 3 are from the South: Audy Murphy, Chesty Puller and James Mason.

Then there's Doris Miller - Texas. Carl Brashear - Kentucky. Julian Cook - South Carolina. Chester Nimitz - Texas. Maxwell Taylor - Missouri.

So many Army posts are named for Confederate generals because even after the war, they were recognized as superior commanders vs. any northern generals. I mean, hell! Even Braxton Bragg got a fort...lol.

Let's continue:

Robert Sink - North Carolina

Roscoe Robinson, jr. - Missouri

Jack Lucas - North Carolina

Clair Chenault - Louisiana

Carlos Hathcock - Arkansas

Chris Kyle - Texas

John Lucian Smith - Oklahoma

John Lejeune - Louisiana (Camp Lejeune is named for the son of a Confederate officer)

I could go on all day, but you now understand that the Southern culture produces superior soldiers.

Yes, I’m quite sure you could indeed humiliate yourself all day. That’s all your good at, after all.

:lamo

And yet, Confederate officers got their asses kicked up and down the south by the US Army. The fact that the US government decided to appease whiskey tango losers by naming forts after confederate officers——and considering the numerous Confederates had previously serviced in the US Army, it certainly wasn’t an “acknowledgement that Confederate officers were better”—- does not change reality.

Sherman and Grant sent your fantasy southern ubermensch running home to their mommas with a stream of piss trailing behind them :lamo

Southern culture produced loud mouthed morons apparently.

But I get it. You don’t have the spine to admit you were whipped.....so you cling to fairy tales.

 

[Tigerace117]

On the one hand Russia is pilloried for preparing to defend itself.


On another thread people salivate over the prospect of the US 'making the first move' against Russia and China. What could possibly go wrong :roll:


Well look - maybe the US should ensure it's negotiated peace terms with the robed cave dwellers in Afghanistan, and the pick up truck machine gun armed Islamists in Iraq, before taking on capable militaries.

Remind us again what happened when your guys tried going after US forces in Syria again?

200 of your mercs bought it, or was it 300?

 

[apdst]

Yes, I’m quite sure you could indeed humiliate yourself all day. That’s all your good at, after all.

:lamo

And yet, Confederate officers got their asses kicked up and down the south by the US Army. The fact that the US government decided to appease whiskey tango losers by naming forts after confederate officers——and considering the numerous Confederates had previously serviced in the US Army, it certainly wasn’t an “acknowledgement that Confederate officers were better”—- does not change reality.

Sherman and Grant sent your fantasy southern ubermensch running home to their mommas with a stream of piss trailing behind them :lamo

Southern culture produced loud mouthed morons apparently.

But I get it. You don’t have the spine to admit you were whipped.....so you cling to fairy tales.

The Confederates won more battles with less combat power. Keep lying, though.

The Federals won through attritition, not combat prowess.

This humiliation you're suffering is why you shouldn't look at history through a partisan lense.

 

[Tigerace117]

The Confederates won more battles with less combat power. Keep lying, though.

The Federals won through attritition, not combat prowess.

This humiliation you're suffering is why you shouldn't look at history through a partisan lense.

The Confederates got their asses whooped. US armies ripped through Georgia and the Carolinas, not Confederate armies going through Illinois and Indiana. All the rest is just pathetic excuses to try and avoid the fact that your heroes were losers.

Oh, so defeating Robert E Lee—- just to name one example—-at Gettysburg wasn’t “combat prowess”? You are so full of **** it’s almost funny :lamo

 

[Fledermaus]

The Confederates got their asses whooped. US armies ripped through Georgia and the Carolinas, not Confederate armies going through Illinois and Indiana. All the rest is just pathetic excuses to try and avoid the fact that your heroes were losers.

Oh, so defeating Robert E Lee—- just to name one example—-at Gettysburg wasn’t “combat prowess”? You are so full of **** it’s almost funny :lamo

Meade was in the right place, at the right time and had subordinates that acted well. The Confederate infantry had broken down the North's lines in the past.

 

[Tigerace117]

Meade was in the right place, at the right time and had subordinates that acted well. The Confederate infantry had broken down the North's lines in the past.

Which does not change the fact that it was an act of “combat prowess” winning the battle.

Apdst is literally just ripping off wehraboos’ fantasies about the Eastern Front, with “The Confederacy” inserted in place of Nazi Germany and “the Union” inserted in place of the USSR.

As I said before the Southern fighting man, far from being the “most superior” like apdst claimed, don’t even crack the top twenty five all time.

 

[Fledermaus]

Which does not change the fact that it was an act of “combat prowess” winning the battle.

Apdst is literally just ripping off wehraboos’ fantasies about the Eastern Front, with “The Confederacy” inserted in place of Nazi Germany and “the Union” inserted in place of the USSR.

As I said before the Southern fighting man, far from being the “most superior” like apdst claimed, don’t even crack the top twenty five all time.

The Confederates were, man for man, better in the early stages of the war. Especially in the cavalry and command sectors.

 

[Tigerace117]

The Confederates were, man for man, better in the early stages of the war. Especially in the cavalry and command sectors.

Which, again, does not change the fact that apdst’s basic premise is hilarious inaccurate and flat out wrong.

Not to mention, of course, that traditional cavalry was already beginning to be rendered obsolete by the advance of technology.

The Confederates were not better “man for man” at Gettysburg, nor, in the end, at all.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Well that would be stupid of France to use nukes as a first resort. The deal with the whole MAD thing is that the first nation to use nukes gets nuked by everyone else. Nukes should really never be used until someone breaks the seal on them. Then whoever did that eats the nukes.

Waiting to see something that describes any official M.A.D. policy between any other nations besides US vs. USSR.
Today, the official policy of Mutually Assured Destruction appears to be nearly abandoned but it could be argued that it never was actually embraced fully by the Soviet Union, as is illustrated in one instance by the case of one Soviet naval officer who might well have singlehandedly prevented nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov (Russian: Василий Александрович Архипов, 30 January 1926 – 19 August 1998) was a Soviet Navy officer credited with casting the single vote that prevented a Soviet nuclear strike (and, presumably, all-out nuclear war) during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Richard Pipes is convinced that the Soviet Union always believed that it could not only win a nuclear war, but go on to full survivability.

On the other hand, other specialists are now convinced that US intel had misjudged Soviet apprehension about even the possibility of a successful attack or retaliation, as evidenced by recently "partially" declassified studies by a Pentagon contractor (BDM)

1995 Contractor Study Finds that U.S. Analysts Exaggerated Soviet Aggressiveness and Understated Moscow's Fears of a U.S. First Strike

My point is, using MAD as any kind of a reference is and always was a bit like nailing Jell-O to a wall, but in any case, M.A.D. was only ever an agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union, and should not be assumed to be a past or present policy between any other countries, nor would it be reliable to assume that any policy exists wherein a "first nation to use nukes gets nuked by everyone else."

Unless there are documented official policies to that effect, it's only a hunch as to how things would pan out. Furthermore, most if not all signatories to any remaining non-proliferation agreements and all nuclear signatories to current US and UN policies hinge upon criteria that is vastly different.

In any case, M.A.D. was an agreement, such as it was, between the US and the Soviets.

So was "S.A.L.T and S.A.L.T II".

(My father, SALT I and SALT II negotiator, second from Left - in Moscow)

 

[Fledermaus]

Which, again, does not change the fact that apdst’s basic premise is hilarious inaccurate and flat out wrong.

Not to mention, of course, that traditional cavalry was already beginning to be rendered obsolete by the advance of technology.

The Confederates were not better “man for man” at Gettysburg, nor, in the end, at all.

I don't speak for apdst. I respond to your statements.

And traditional cavalry carried on long after the Civil War. Long after. Your knowledge of history is a bit lacking in this subject.

It was cavalry that assisted Sheridan in the Shenandoah valley campaigns. It was the cavalry that helped subdue the West. That harried many a Native American tribe. That pursued Pancho Villa and secured our borders in many places. Calvary merely swapped horse for vehicles in the 1930s and later helicopters.

Whether or not the battle hardened veterans of the South at Gettysburg were better soldiers than the Union soldiers many of whom hadn't even "seen the elephant" yet in an interesting question.

You appear to be ranking the soldier by the outcome.

Then the Spartans were slackers since they were beaten at Thermoplyae... The British were failures because of Ishandlawana. The Marines at Wake. The Marines at Bladensburg.

 

[Tigerace117]

I don't speak for apdst. I respond to your statements.

And traditional cavalry carried on long after the Civil War. Long after. Your knowledge of history is a bit lacking in this subject.

It was cavalry that assisted Sheridan in the Shenandoah valley campaigns. It was the cavalry that helped subdue the West. That harried many a Native American tribe. That pursued Pancho Villa and secured our borders in many places. Calvary merely swapped horse for vehicles in the 1930s and later helicopters.

Whether or not the battle hardened veterans of the South at Gettysburg were better soldiers than the Union soldiers many of whom hadn't even "seen the elephant" yet in an interesting question.

You appear to be ranking the soldier by the outcome.

Then the Spartans were slackers since they were beaten at Thermoplyae... The British were failures because of Ishandlawana. The Marines at Wake. The Marines at Bladensburg.

Yes, they carried on. Carrying on and being effective are not the same thing. Not even close. Like I said before, technology had already begun to make traditional cavalry obsolete......and the failure of any southern cavalry advantage to prove meaningful is proof of that.


Cavalry repeatedly walked into slaughters out west. Pancho Villa’s obsession with cavalry charges is a big part of what wound up crushing his army. Harrying civilians was of dubious benefit at best.

Which is why I made a point of stating traditional cavalry.

And yet the Union soldiers who hadn’t seen the aforementioned elephant crushed those battle hardened southerners.

That says a lot, actually.

The Spartans didn’t lose numerous battles and surrender after Thermopylae. Neither did the Brits after Ishandlawana. Nor the Marines in the Pacific. As for Bladensburg, well, I think it’s very much fair to say the “citizen soldiers” who bolted and left the professional troops—-the artillery, in other words—-totally exposed were inferior soldiers to the Brits.

 

[apdst]

The Confederates got their asses whooped. US armies ripped through Georgia and the Carolinas, not Confederate armies going through Illinois and Indiana. All the rest is just pathetic excuses to try and avoid the fact that your heroes were losers.

Oh, so defeating Robert E Lee—- just to name one example—-at Gettysburg wasn’t “combat prowess”? You are so full of **** it’s almost funny :lamo

No, it wasn't. Gettysburg was a Federal victory, because of a Confederate mistake.

 

[Fledermaus]

Yes, they carried on. Carrying on and being effective are not the same thing. Not even close. Like I said before, technology had already begun to make traditional cavalry obsolete......and the failure of any southern cavalry advantage to prove meaningful is proof of that.


Cavalry repeatedly walked into slaughters out west. Pancho Villa’s obsession with cavalry charges is a big part of what wound up crushing his army. Harrying civilians was of dubious benefit at best.

Which is why I made a point of stating traditional cavalry.

And yet the Union soldiers who hadn’t seen the aforementioned elephant crushed those battle hardened southerners.

That says a lot, actually.

The Spartans didn’t lose numerous battles and surrender after Thermopylae. Neither did the Brits after Ishandlawana. Nor the Marines in the Pacific. As for Bladensburg, well, I think it’s very much fair to say the “citizen soldiers” who bolted and left the professional troops—-the artillery, in other words—-totally exposed were inferior soldiers to the Brits.

The failure of Southern cavalry? I suggest you do some reading on what the Southern cavalry accomplished in the war. Add to that it was the LACK of cavalry at Gettysburg that contributed to Lee's loss.

As to "walking into slaughters" WTH are you talking about? Custer? He went against a combined force of Native American tribes with only a portion of his force.

As to the Union "crushing" the confederate forces at Gettysburg remember Little Round Top was almost taken and would have exposed the Union flank. It was saved through a desperate and courageous counter change by the 10th Maine who were short on ammunition and ready to fold.

As to Panco Villa. It wasn't the cavalry that failed him. It was attacking in daytime. So the attacks could be filmed. Yeah, he was that vain.

And you keep bringing up Gettysburg as if it was the only battle fought in the civil war.

 

[Tigerace117]

The failure of Southern cavalry? I suggest you do some reading on what the Southern cavalry accomplished in the war. Add to that it was the LACK of cavalry at Gettysburg that contributed to Lee's loss.

As to "walking into slaughters" WTH are you talking about? Custer? He went against a combined force of Native American tribes with only a portion of his force.

As to the Union "crushing" the confederate forces at Gettysburg remember Little Round Top was almost taken and would have exposed the Union flank. It was saved through a desperate and courageous counter change by the 10th Maine who were short on ammunition and ready to fold.

As to Panco Villa. It wasn't the cavalry that failed him. It was attacking in daytime. So the attacks could be filmed. Yeah, he was that vain.

And you keep bringing up Gettysburg as if it was the only battle fought in the civil war.

They accomplishing nothing which actually contributed to victory(no, pinprick raids which mildly inconvenienced the north do not count as a contribution) and when the Confederates actually needed them they were prancing off out in left field being totally useless.

There were much more than just Custer.....and the fact that he was willing to walk into that in the first place is just symptomatic of the problem as a whole.

Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. The Nazis "almost" took Moscow as well. They didn't. And the 1oth Maine didn't fold.....they smashed the Confederate forces.

Actually, it was Villa's fantasy that a swift cavalry charge would work against machine guns and barbed wire....oh, and land mines. He actually attacked at midnight, by the way, but his forces got ****ed by searchlights.

Second Battle of Agua Prieta - Wikipedia

"As the Villista cavalry was charging towards the trenches, however, two searchlights illuminated the battlefield, making the horsemen an easy target for Calles' machine guns. The front trenches were manned by units led by another future president of Mexico, Col. Lázaro Cárdenas.[6] Villa's horsemen were decimated by machine-gun fire and land mines. The few who managed to make it near the trenches encountered electrified barbed wire. The charge collapsed and the attack was a failure.[5]

Villa wanted to continue with the cavalry charges on the following day, but his troops were ready to mutiny. He was also running low on supplies and ammunition. As a result, Villa withdrew and arrived at Naco on November 4. Even though while there, his men were given rest and supplies, more than 1,500 deserted from his army.[5]"

No, it wasn't the only battle of the war....it was, however, a major turning point.

 

[Tigerace117]

No, it wasn't. Gettysburg was a Federal victory, because of a Confederate mistake.

Gettysburg was a federal victory because the US took everything your heroes could throw at them and smashed it.

 

[apdst]

Gettysburg was a federal victory because the US took everything your heroes could throw at them and smashed it.

Like I said: the Confederates made mistakes.

There were only two Federal generals who displayed any talent on the battlefield and one was from Kentucky (member of a slave owning family).

 

[Tigerace117]

Like I said: the Confederates made mistakes.

There were only two Federal generals who displayed any talent on the battlefield and one was from Kentucky (member of a slave owning family).

And the Union whipped your heroes’ asses up and down the south......over and over and over again.

Sounds like your “superior fighting men” were pretty ****ing dumb given how many mistakes they made.

You done using that excuse to desperately try and handwave away the fact that the Union crushed you?

 

[apdst]

And the Union whipped your heroes’ asses up and down the south......over and over and over again.

Sounds like your “superior fighting men” were pretty ****ing dumb given how many mistakes they made.

You done using that excuse to desperately try and handwave away the fact that the Union crushed you?

That isn't going to be historically accurate, no matter how many times you post it. :lamo

 

[Tigerace117]

That isn't going to be historically accurate, no matter how many times you post it. :lamo

Ah yes, and here we have the final resort of the Neo-Confederate......plugging his ears and shrieking “no no no” because he can’t handle the reality that the US kicked his heroes’ asses.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Russians maintain aggressive training ops.

11 Russian fighter jets made mock attack on Norwegian Arctic radar

 

[Thoreau72]

Russians maintain aggressive training ops.

11 Russian fighter jets made mock attack on Norwegian Arctic radar

I guess somehow there is a price to pay for being a NATO outpost on Russia's border?