7 hours ago, Cult Icon said:

 

The purpose of the gigantic Soviet/Russian reserves is to flesh out the regular forces with combatants & support personnel.  So the ground force ends up having a lot of "holding" power. Only infantry can hold ground. 

 

For sensitive missions the Russians can used their elite air and ground forces.

 

Basically this is the "two armies" principle, you have a huge heavily armed and second-rate trained force and small elite/more professional forces to do the difficult tasks.  Also the big force can defeat/pre-empt the numerically inferior opponent with sheer weight in the attack, and in the defense they have a lot of holding power because there are so many of them. 

 

The Russians like to outnumber their opponents in tactical air forces/missiles/artillery and tanks, and infantry even if qualitatively they are inferior on a per unit basis.  

 

 

Agreed. A 100%.  I was about to write exactly the same.

 

I can just add that the Russians usually have a very high morale (though I'm unsure if it is the case here).

22 hours ago, Enrico_sw said:

 

Agreed. A 100%.  I was about to write exactly the same.

 

I can just add that the Russians usually have a very high morale (though I'm unsure if it is the case here).

 

Russian slavs (white Russians) tend to have better morale. It is the many Russian minorities, including their large muslim population that are more questionable.

 

The Russian draftee in the Soviet Union/Russia's wars have had mixed morale, however Soviet military operational art and the way they designed their military (from the Russian Civil War 1930s-onward) is designed to mitigate these issues.

The Russian military ideology is to use mass tactics on the ground, mobile/manuever warfare, and use a lot of high powered but economical equipment.  Russian engineers/procurement have a knack of adopting "just good enough" equipment that are low maintenance and low cost.  The low cost means that they can be issued in large numbers.

 

The emphasis on maneuver/mobile warfare stems from the Russian Civil War 1930s with its calvary orientation.  So since then, the Russians/Soviets always maintained large tactical air and tank forces.  I think the Russians still by far have the largest tank force in the world.  Last I checked they were estimated to being equipped with 13,000 + tanks.

 

The US system is very different, its is extraordinarily wasteful.   It's very dominated by business and American generals are often on the boards of corporations that produce military goods and services.  This results in a military that is overstuffed with equipment, and has a lot of equipment that it doesn't really need.  Even the US Army is something like 95% services, and only 5% are actually combat troops.   This is a far cry from WW2, where it was more like 60% services, 40% combat.

 

Besides the enormous cost of funding/maintaining hundreds of domestic and overseas bases, the world's most powerful navy and air force, Hundreds of billions of dollars (bills in Congress) are routinely taken from the taxpayer so arms manufacturers can research/develop cutting edge technology.  So you have all these white elephant naval and air force projects, with fighter jets that cost 100 million each LOL and don't serve an immediate purpose.

 

On top of these expenses, you have the professional American officer and nco corps (volunteer and professional military) with 1st world pay and lifelong benefits. Besides healthcare/pension/free university education etc. even the American NCO corps frequently have college degrees and also maintain middle class lifestyles..  All of this is extraordinarily expensive.

 

The US military is a luxury military..

The main weakness of the US military is actually its army, and the political will/political leadership of the American people who absolutely cannot tolerate loss of American lives and drafting millions of young men to flesh out its ranks.  So we end up having an army that is much smaller than the Chinese and Russians and is very limited in what it can do.

 

Apparently making US generals become highly educated (often with Ph.Ds) and highly trained/specialized didn't create a leadership corps that could figure out how to win in the middle east..combined with terrible political leadership...

23 hours ago, Enrico_sw said:

 

The US failed in the Middle East and the retreat from Afghanistan was extremely humiliating. If I was a US soldier, I'd be very angry at the higher ups in the army. The intelligence service was mediocre and didn't foresee that the Talibans were gonna take the country back.

 

I think at this point, both veterans and at least a major portion of American people are seeing the military as more like a gigantic business/jobs program that finds excuses (like WMDs) so they can make a living..  so different than in 2000 where the military had credibility.

 

Do you have a high opinion of the UK/French/German military?

The French army is excellent, but very specialized. They don't have the numbers, but their combat units are amongst the best in the world.

 

But perhaps more important to discuss right now: Olaf Scholz has freed an immediate budget of 100 billion to bolster German defense spending.

And more consequential by far: a commitment to a minimum of 2% of their GDP to defense.

Translated through the realities of their current GDP, that is an annual investment of around 74 billion dollars.

 

That would immediately make them the fourth biggest spenders in the world in terms of their defense.

Behind the U.S., China and India, but ahead of Russia.

 

For all the talk of "poking the Russian bear", what the Ukraine invasion has actually achieved is breaking through a 7+ decade long taboo when it comes to significant defense spending for Germany. The black eagle has risen from its ashes. Great job Putin!

 

On 2/27/2022 at 12:41 AM, Cult Icon said:

Do you have a high opinion of the UK/French/German military?

 

The German military is very weak (though they just decided to increase the budget because of the recent events).

 

UK and France are the only "credible" armies in Europe (if you except Russia). Both of them are nuclear powers (though this is supposed to be more of a diplomatic asset rather than a military).

 

----

 

The French military has several strengths and weaknesses. The troop training is usually regarded as very qualitative and demanding. Special forces are very efficient (usually regarded as some of the most efficient in the world) and the combat units are very deadly. But the military personnel is small (200k active forces which is comparable to Ukraine's.... and 5x lower than Russia's)

 

There's a "military-industrial complex" (Thales, Nexter, Dassault, DCNS, mostly), like in the US, which means that there's high quality equipment in general (at least, when it's new...). But the military expenditure is small (2% of the GDP, which always was the target), which implies some logistical weaknesses (lack of maintenance, ammo, etc.). It was generally agreed upon experts that our expenditure was too small considering the number of field operations we've had in the recent years.

 

Even if we are a manufacturer (with very good gear), our main battle tank fleet is very very small (about 500, which is ridiculously small - Russia has 22k). We have around 6k armoured vehicles, which is also small.

 

Same for our aicraft capacities (good gear, but quite small fleet - around 250 fighter aircraft, but extremely good gear, especially the Rafale). Choppers are a weak point.

 

The navy is alright. It has several Ballistic Missile Submarines (which means that we can nuke the shit out of anyone - if we want to...). We have one aircraft carrier.

 

Also, our anti-aircraft and cargo aircraft capacities are usually seen as too weak. I've seen several debates about this.

 

We have 300 nuclear warheads, but we no longer have the triad, because the land-based component is out. We still have sea-based and air-based capacities. It's supposed to be highly deterrent against anyone, including nuclear powers, because we can always launch a retaliatory second-strike (I hope it never happens...)

 

Cyber capacities are limited from what I understand, but they have tried to make this up in the recent years.

^^

 

When I last checked these stats it really does seem that the UK/French/German forces are basically following the typical Western "high quality/high cost" with small forces, a lot of services, and expensive equipment.  

 

However I was under the impression that the Germany's young men all have to serve a short term in the forces.

Meanwhile, this is what's happening in the USA... Woke students calling people who don't think like them "nazis" and "fascists".

 

The whole world can watch this. Do they take the USA seriously after watching this?

 

BTW, General Milley of the US military pander to these people.

 

https://theparadise.ng/i-was-forced-to-hide-conservative-event-at-texas-college-attacked-by-antifa/

 

 

LOL! I'm familiar with that girl. She likes to provoke people for a reaction. She can't complain when she is occasionally more successful than she might have wished.

 

59 minutes ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

LOL! I'm familiar with that girl. She likes to provoke people for a reaction. She can't complain when she is occasionally more successful than she might have wished.

 

 

This girl got death threats. Please don't tell me it makes you laugh. Whoever she is, she doesn't deserve this.

 

These "activists" are supposed to be "the good guys", but they consistently behave like sadists.

 

Also, they claim their actions are anti-fascists/nazis. "Denazification", remember? So, it's OK when they do it?

I am not naive, I have seen several of her videos and posts, she goes out of her way to insult and provoke people and then she is surprised she gets the same energy back from people?

 

Perhaps she should treat others in the way she hopes to be treated?

Just now, SympathysSilhouette said:

I am not naive, I have seen several of her videos and posts, she goes out of her way to insult and provoke people and then she is surprised she gets the same energy back from people?

 

Perhaps she should treat others in the way she hopes to be treated?

 

Did she make death threat? Did she call her opponents nazis/fascists?

 

And in any case, does she deserve death threats? Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are horrible human beings who deserve to be aggressed and receive death threats. Otherwise, you can't tell me "you're the good guys". No.

 

We're democracies. Not totalitarian states. We don't behave like that. The radicals are bringing us on a slippery slope.

If I insult someone I expect a negative reaction.

That is how the world works. That is how it has always worked.

 

If I go to a bar tonight and go up to the biggest and strongest guy there and call him a stupid asshole, I would expect to be punched in the face and I would be 100% to blame.

The idea that this is somehow a great injustice is weird to me.

Like I said, if you want people to be nice to you, try being nice to them first. And if you act like a dick towards them, do not be surprised if they respond in kind.

People like her want it both ways, they want to be total assholes to anyone they don't like but they want to be protected from the obvious and quite predictable reaction to such behavior.

3 minutes ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

If I insult someone I expect a negative reaction.

 

What's your definition of insult? Is claiming that "there are two genders" an insult? Is saying that CRT is a racist teaching an insult? Is criticising the radical left an insult?

 

This is an important question, because people tend to confuse disagreement with insult.

 

4 minutes ago, SympathysSilhouette said:

If I go to a bar tonight and go up to the biggest and strongest guy there and call him a stupid asshole, I would expect to be punched in the face and I would be 100% to blame.

 

That's not how the law works in democracies. Maybe that's what happens in North Korea, but not in democracies. Rule of law matters/

 

You can't punch someone that insulted you. You can't kill someone that punched you (unless it's self defence, which requires lots of conditions). You can't send death threats (to anyone).

 

"She was mean to me" is never an excuse for death threats. At least in French laws, but I'm pretty sure it's the same in the USA.

BTW, I'm surprised to see you side with people who claim "denazification" like those antifa students. I'm pretty sure that this girl (though I don't know her) is not a Nazi.

 

 

The Ukrainians have been politically saavy and have manipulated the Western body politic and US gov't quite well, getting considerable aid which is well and good.  As part of this, they have flooded the english-reading internet/social media with propaganda and even some disinformation, creating a distorted public view of their military position vs. Russia.  Even the Western/US media has been effected by these biased narratives.  

 

However, Zelensky/URK gov't is going further, trying to manipulate US/NATO into the "No Fly Zone/WW3".  The Biden Administration must not give into this demand.  The standing ovation the US Congress gave today must be for show only, actions must not materialize towards this end.

The American taxpayer is the never-ending sucker for the world's problems.

 

ABC News, very close to the Biden Administration is literally doing propaganda to get Americans on-board for aiding Ukraine with distorted news about the war every night.

 

$XX Billions are now in UKR pocket..

I so do not care about what's happening in Ukraine.

 

 

 

Now I just dream Belgium invades France and force the whole world to re name french fries Belgium fries or else !

 

@frenchkiki I'm not a huge fan of "French fries", but it's true that the best fries I ever ate were in Brussels. There's a place (I don't remember the name) that's famous for it (among many others, so I can't remember its name - it's in a kind of kiosk on a square, that's all I remember ) and they're delicious.

 

Apparently, the Belgian fries are better because they fry the potatoes twice.