Pages:
Author

Topic: What US Army Can Learn From Ukraine (Read 1253 times)

sr. member
Activity: 271
Merit: 250
September 21, 2015, 05:58:57 AM
#42
Quote
I am also curious why Russians keep talking about war with he west. No one else does, just Russians sitting here talking about static war, nuclear war, economic war, whatever.

We can easily imagine a similar exchange between a critical Ukrainian and a European Union financial administrator. The Ukrainian complains: "There are two reasons we are in a panic here in Ukraine. First, we are afraid that the EU will simply abandon us to the Russian pressure and let our economy collapse…" The EU administrator interrupts him: "But you can trust us, we will not abandon you, we will tightly control you and advise you what to do!" "Well," responds the Ukrainian calmly, "that’s my second reason."  Grin Grin Grin
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1014
August 05, 2015, 02:30:23 PM
#41
There is an interesting article from defense.com (hopefully not Putin's agent)

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/08/02/us-army-ukraine-russia-electronic-warfare/30913397/

1.
Quote
"Our soldiers are doing the training with the Ukrainians and we've learned a lot from the Ukrainians," said Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges. "A third of the [Ukrainian] soldiers have served in the ... combat zone, and no Americans have been under Russian artillery or rocket fire..."

Which actually means that US troops can only finish the already disorganised troops who were bombed from above and have never been in a confrontation with an organised rival, who is willing to fight and possesses artillery, which made the most impact in the WW2. If we imagine that american soldiers are put against russian army or even ISIS or any other army which has at least old soviet artillery systems - it is not trained for the war and exposed for defeat.
This is why the americans are not sending the troops against ISIS I think. Not because they don't want to. But because they would fail without the air support.

2.
Quote
Russia maintains an ability to destroy command-and-control networks by jamming radio communications, radars and GPS signals, according to Laurie Buckhout, former chief of the US Army's electronic warfare division, now CEO of the Corvus Group. In contrast with the US, Russia has large units dedicated to electronic warfare, known as EW, which it dedicates to ground electronic attack, jamming communications, radar and command-and-control nets...

..."Our biggest problem is we have not fought in a comms-degraded environment for decades, so we don't know how to do it," Buckhout said. "We lack not only tactics, techniques and procedures but the training to fight in a comms-degraded environment."

This is not about WW2, but about the future war. If an american squad is left without the communication with the commander it loses efficiency and those ugly russians have all the chances to take the communications off, which is a surprise for US Army for now.
Also, it is necessary to say that if the Donbass miners and teachers could cope and use this type of equipment - it is easy to use for anyone. In the world. Which pretty much shrinks the ability of US army to control the just conquered area and exposes their bases for planned attacks.

3.
Quote
'Future of War Is in the Ukraine'

Forces with US Army Europe have for the last 10 weeks been training three battalions of Ukraine Ministry of the Interior troops, known as Ukraine's national guard. The second cycle of that training was paused so that troops could participate in a combined multinational exercise, underway through early August, and it will resume and conclude with the third battalion in August.
...
But Konstiantyn Liesnik, an adviser to the Defense Ministry's reform office and head of its working group for logistics and procurement, noted the US military's experience in recent years has concerned insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan, not a powerful, organized and well-equipped adversary like Russia.

"The future of war is in the Ukraine, and I think in this case our experience is very important to US personnel how war should be in this century and next century," Liesnik said.

This actually means that starting from Maidan US government used the ukrainian fascists in order to investigate what Russia would do and how it fights. Understanding that there is no chance of winning a war now US army needs to find weak spots for a fast and devastating strike which has more than 100% possibility to make a success.

The aim of US government for this and next century has been made. And it is war. Having entertained in Iraq and Afghanistan and leaving a wonderful ISIS as a result of long peacekeeping there US leadership is thinking of turning Eurasia in the same status as it has been done with arabian east. If US citizens agree with it - they should understand WHAT they do agree with and think of possible counteractions from the side of those who are being the aim of the aggressive plans.

Good commentary to the US stance.

Also, US-funded and trained Nazis are fighting Russians in Donbass, just not those Russian who live in the Russian Federations. Rather, they are exterminating the 5+ million Russian population of Novorossia, which, quite understandably, puts up a fight.
legendary
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1014
August 05, 2015, 02:27:21 PM
#40
I don't remember any cases that Russia in its history did anything like bombing Serbian schools, hospitals and bridges in order to play tough. There was only one case of russian agression against a european nation, which was the Winter war against future nazi sattelite. All the other cases can hardly compare to what the US did to the world.
Interesting that your forget Afghanistan (oh yeah You Lost), Vietnam, The Ukraine, ALL of Eastern Europe enslaved under your thumb for over 50 years. Yes, Russia has clean hands..

Afghanistan. Before Americans created Taliban there, Soviet Union was constructing infrastructure, building roads and power plants there. Some of it is still functioning there today. US just had to get and destroy it.

Ukraine. An artificial state. Actually Russia, prior to the West-funded coup d'etat of 1917 and the subsequent illegal and illegitimate split of of Russia.

Vietnam. If I remember correctly, USA got a royal beating there.

Eastern Europe. If "Enslaved"="rebuilt and financed by", then yes.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
August 05, 2015, 02:20:34 PM
#39
If it fails. If it succeeds then the war doesn't start and no victims appear. If a wquad of superultraspecial marines is blocked and forced to surrender under the circumstances of absence of the communication, then acr of war doesn't happen from their side and it turns into act of propaganda. If Russia destroys GPS sattelites then it is a possibility of the war.
But these are details which we can neglect. The balancing of modern political situation at a knife blade between cold war and nuclear war is more then obvious even from the discussion of these details itself.

You can't jam cabled communications and you can't jam runners. Any commander worth his salt is going to get word out about active jamming and have the jammers destroyed.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
August 05, 2015, 02:20:06 PM
#38
Not all jamming is created equal. What the Fencers were doing was spoofing, that is jamming active acquisition radar. That is defensive passive jamming.

Jamming enemy communications or systems like GPS are offensive active jamming. That is an act of war.

If it fails. If it succeeds then the war doesn't start and no victims appear. If a wquad of superultraspecial marines is blocked and forced to surrender under the circumstances of absence of the communication, then acr of war doesn't happen from their side and it turns into act of propaganda. If Russia destroys GPS sattelites then it is a possibility of the war.
But these are details which we can neglect. The balancing of modern political situation at a knife blade between cold war and nuclear war is more then obvious even from the discussion of these details itself.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
August 05, 2015, 02:19:40 PM
#37

Not all jamming is created equal. What the Fencers were doing was spoofing, that is jamming active acquisition radar. That is defensive passive jamming.

Jamming enemy communications or systems like GPS are offensive active jamming. That is an act of war.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
August 05, 2015, 02:18:54 PM
#36
Jamming is already an act of war. If Russia jammed US troops, they would be the ones striking first.

They say something different.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/11/13/aegis-fail-in-black-sea-ruskies-burn-down-uss-donald-duck/
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
August 05, 2015, 02:17:44 PM
#35
Who told you that nuclear response is allowed only for nuclear strike? During the carribean crisis US wanted to destroy soviet nuclear rockets with conventional weapons. And if the plan started these rockets wouldn't wait until the americans hit with their nuclear bombs somewhere near.

The jamming of signal allows to paralyse and disorganise the troops. In conditions when the troops don't have the orders to open fire they are exposed to propaganda and civil pressure. Multi-launch rocket system can only strike to kill, which is an act of war and brings the strike back. Then follows the strike back with something heavier, and heavier strike back and? And nuclear war as it was said.

Jamming is already an act of war. If Russia jammed US troops, they would be the ones striking first.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
August 05, 2015, 02:16:02 PM
#34
How? Both of those are conventional weapons.
Who told you that nuclear response is allowed only for nuclear strike? During the carribean crisis US wanted to destroy soviet nuclear rockets with conventional weapons. And if the plan started these rockets wouldn't wait until the americans hit with their nuclear bombs somewhere near.

The jamming of signal allows to paralyse and disorganise the troops. In conditions when the troops don't have the orders to open fire they are exposed to propaganda and civil pressure. Multi-launch rocket system can only strike to kill, which is an act of war and brings the strike back. Then follows the strike back with something heavier, and heavier strike back and? And nuclear war as it was said.

So you are the head of the KGB, pleased to met ya.

Did anyone speak of the psychiatrists in the thread? It's hightime!
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
August 05, 2015, 02:14:47 PM
#33

I never speak anything which I haven't thought of MYSELF.

So you are the head of the KGB, pleased to met ya.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
August 05, 2015, 02:13:51 PM
#32

Exactly. And this means nuclear war.
How? Both of those are conventional weapons.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
August 05, 2015, 02:13:15 PM
#31
Go ahead and throw on a jammer against US troops. That's a great way to get an up lose demonstration of the effectiveness of an MLRS or ATACMS warhead.

Exactly. And this means nuclear war.
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
August 05, 2015, 02:12:36 PM
#30
Go ahead and throw on a jammer against US troops. That's a great way to get an up lose demonstration of the effectiveness of an MLRS or ATACMS warhead.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
August 05, 2015, 02:11:58 PM
#29
Yes, that is all correct.

ISIS.

Quote
So again I ask, why do you guys want to go to war so badly? Is that how you guys feel you will be powerful in the world again?

I don't want. I desperately want that one of my readers would at least pray about me in our last hours and once we met in the afterlife we would have at least some possibility for the communal future. I don't hope for anything more than that.

member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
August 05, 2015, 02:10:31 PM
#28
Yes, that is all correct.

Now for extra fun, which country has taken territory by military mean in the last couple years.

So again I ask, why do you guys want to go to war so badly? Is that how you guys feel you will be powerful in the world again?
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
August 05, 2015, 02:09:47 PM
#27

Blatantly untrue.

I am also curious why Russians keep talking about war with he west. No one else does, just Russians sitting here talking about static war, nuclear war, economic war, whatever.

You guys are hilarious warmongers
Because the war is closer to Russia then it is to the westerners. Before the start of WW2 while western politician talked about 'peace for generation' and played interesting cultural games of nazis



Hitler had already annexed Czechoslovakia and started the war preparation fueling the system with the blood of racially weak jews and others. Few civilians in 1937 did understand that the war is already and the hottest phase is really close.

For the moment I myself think that the big war is imminent and I see no other way for the world to continue. If there is no dramatic change to the good, which I hope for, but don't have any reasons to believe.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
August 05, 2015, 02:08:25 PM
#26

I never speak anything which I haven't thought of MYSELF.

Blatantly untrue.

I am also curious why Russians keep talking about war with he west. No one else does, just Russians sitting here talking about static war, nuclear war, economic war, whatever.

You guys are hilarious warmongers
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
August 05, 2015, 02:07:32 PM
#25
Do you believe the nonsense you post or simply pass on the prepared answers?

I never speak anything which I haven't thought of MYSELF.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
August 05, 2015, 02:07:01 PM
#24
No, I don't defend USA here, they did evil without any doubts ... but it is totally ridiculous to claim that Russia is so peaceful and to blame the USA to be so evil, when Russia is same way evil! Only difference between both is that USA did more often as Russia, but if they do, both do the same way brutal and careless!

I was given a blame - I provided an answer. I have no reason for sophisticated constructions like "A has killed a kid every day" "B has ran across a guy once in a car". "A and B are the same killers and B can actually be considered even worse, because he wants to look better than A"... I love Russia and I am not giving up to anti-russian propaganda.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
August 05, 2015, 02:05:57 PM
#23

But if these 2 minorities in Georgia won't be part of Georgia but part of Russia and start to make rebellion, then they are again poor people and need support of Russia and this has of course nothing to do with Chechnyia too and isn't comparable etc. ... bla bla bla!

Georgia was free to perform any miracle of economy and motivate abkhazians and ossetians to join them inside their nice state. But they chose a different way. The choice was a choice of a land as for ossetians and abkhazians they didn't care. This is why Russia had to intervene. Now these minorities live in the land which belongs to them by nature and history and not by a piece of paper (as it really blongs to Georgia).

I have zero problems with eastern europeans having joined the EU. It was their national choice which I have to respect. But it seems that the way we respect their choice is far more than they respect the choice of people living east off Poland.
Pages:
Jump to: