Ukraine Crisis - Page 166

There is a new policy in effect in this thread. Anyone not complying will be moderated.

New policy, please read before posting:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=21393711

r.Evo

Germany14080 Posts

March 03 2014 20:33 GMT

#3301

http://webtv.un.org/live-now/watch/security-council-ukraine/3086187116001

Live now.

m4ini

4215 Posts

March 03 2014 20:33 GMT

#3302

On March 04 2014 05:26 SilentchiLL wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 04 2014 05:22 Godwrath wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:16 SilentchiLL wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:13 Godwrath wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:12 SilentchiLL wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:10 Godwrath wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:08 SilentchiLL wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:06 corumjhaelen wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:03 xDaunt wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:55 m4ini wrote:
[quote]

I just looked up his "source", which is a book calling hitler not just a normal german leader, but a normal western leader, the same as chamberlain, daladier or stresemann.

It's only this book (weirdly enough, A J P Taylors most controversal book, who wouldve thought) that could be used as a source for bs like that.

Quoting this as a source by someone who is "well versed in history" is, well.

The obvious point that he's missing is the clear technological superiority of Western (particularly US) forces to Russian forces. No where is this disparity more apparent than in comparing the air forces. That's why it is stupid to even make the comparison in the first place.

Only the US. The EU military power is extremely weak and diluted, I really doubt we'd stand a chance in a conventionnal war against Russia. That being said the US military superiority changes a lot of things compared to the 30s, making the situation really different. Who would have thought.

I don't know, I talked to a guy who served in the russian army already and according to him their equipment had quite a lot of... experience.

So does most of the equipment for regulars in EU countries. That's not exclusive of Russia. Or atleast, that was my experience in the army.

So you shot a cannon that was probably from WW2 as well?

Even better, i carried a MG42.

Noice, though I don't think we should hold the rest of europe up to spanish standards in regards to their armies... no offense.

None taken, but mind you, in my experience the only ones with modern equipment was GB, and France to a lesser extent. I had no experience with German army, so you could count that one in (even tho we already had a poster with similar experiences as mine).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_modern_equipment_of_the_German_Army
Looks okay to me, though to be honest, with the German weapon manufracturers it'd be pretty disappointing if we wouldn't have modern equipment.

Depends what you consider "modern". Most of the modern equipment shown on that page is not existant or only existant in dismissable numbers (SPz Puma for example, replacement of "my" marder - looks good on paper, but we don't have it yet).

It's off topic though, sorry.

Until 2 weeks ago, we didn't even know why our superduper awesome G36 fails to hit anything after 30 minutes of combat... (while other nations had no issue with the G36)
Turned out the outer parts of the ammo by some German manufacturer melted under the heat... brilliant, truly brilliant

That's not the only problem with the G36. Try shooting with it after you dropped it by accident. Was fun.

SilentchiLL

Germany1405 Posts

March 03 2014 20:33 GMT

#3303

On March 04 2014 05:31 Eisregen wrote:
The german army does not lack that much in technology, even though the armoured infantry still uses a 70s model "Marder", which still is okish looking at what it might face and for what purpose it was built for.

But the problem is much more the whole stuff behind the operating forces and their material. We lack the capability to supply enough spare parts (many vehicles are down for maintenance or serving as spare part sources), to re-locate heavy gear and troops in sufficient numbers and the numbers of vehicles overall (downsized several times, as the german army was intended as a pure defensive army).

And dont call my beloved MG3 a downgraded MG42 please! the MG3 is a beast and a better MG than the MG42 was. =P

Well, the German army IS designed as a defensive force, as you said.
Contrary to some other bigger countries like France or the US we also don't really have good reasons to get in smaller countries for economical reasons, so I really don't mind that.

On March 04 2014 05:33 m4ini wrote:

Show nested quote +

That's fine, since the army is mostly defensive and any operations outside of our country would be made with only a small part of the whole army that's not an actual problem.

likeasu

Russian Federation88 Posts

March 03 2014 20:34 GMT

#3304

hey, guys from US, UK and another. Relax, ok?
First of all, I wanna You switch ON your brains. Russia will never start war against Ukraine. NEVER.
The only one thing why Russia can enter troopers on Crimea- is save Crimea people from quality of new Ukraine goverment. New Ukraine politic faces (Turchinov, Yaceniuk, Klichko) are EMPTY places in fact. They are only PR-persons. They havnt a really power in country. Anothers person rules Ukraine now- people with money and guns in hands (far right extremists form "Praviy sektor" UNA UNSO and so on). And these extrimists used Euromaidan to take power in hands. People who was on Euromaidan are about 0,1% of all Ukraine. The most of them were standing for bright and good ideas. And do you think these ordinary people won? NO! They were just used and fucked by terrorists and Ukraine aligarhs (if you dont belive my words - check up that 2 aligarhs are already now regional governors).
And dont blame Russia if you know all facts. Better ask yourself about United States.
USA bombed more then 10 countries last 15 years. USA supported military revolutions is East, S.America, Africa. And now in Ukraine. Goverment of USA is really hypocriticals fucking bustards.

Russia WILL NEVER FIGHT against Ukranian. Casual people of Russia and Ukraine are brothers.

Fjodorov

5007 Posts

March 03 2014 20:34 GMT

#3305

btw I thought russia was in the middle of a modernization and upgrade of their army? From Putins perspective I guess the timing is still good and I guess he couldnt help himself from jumping on the oppurtunity

Liman

Serbia681 Posts

March 03 2014 20:34 GMT

#3306

On March 04 2014 05:11 Nyxisto wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 04 2014 05:10 xDaunt wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:06 corumjhaelen wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:03 xDaunt wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:55 m4ini wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:47 xDaunt wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:42 BronzeKnee wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:41 xDaunt wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:34 BronzeKnee wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:33 SilentchiLL wrote:
And next time you tell your conversational partner that you completely ignored his opinion, don't write such a long post yourself, since that's the point where people stop taking you serious.

I did not ignore your opinions, I judged your opinions that were based on statements that were not factual, and were false. I was arguing with someone ignorant of history.

This situation (Russia invading Crimea) has far more in common with what happened in Czechoslovakia than than most people know, because they don't understand history. The claims you've made to try to prove that wrong, has just shown how ignorant you are regarding the situation prior to WW2.

You could admit "hell I was wrong, this situation does have a lot in common" but I don't expect you to do that. Why? Because people who don't know often can't admit they are wrong, otherwise they would know (people who can admit they are wrong and change their views become right more often because of this trait).

On March 04 2014 04:33 SilentchiLL wrote:
Putin can't afford a full-out war with the west, which is why he isn't read to do so,

Hitler couldn't either. And that ended really well didn't it?

You can't really compare the relative strength of Putin's army now to Hitler's in 1938. American/NATO forces would ROFLstomp the Russian military in a way that the Allies could only dream of doing in World War II.

For the third time:

A J P Taylor in his book "The Origins of the Second World War" writes:

"In 1938-39, the last peacetime years, Germany spendt on armaments about 15 percent of her gross national product. The British proportion was almost exactly the same. German expenditure on armaments was actually cut down after Munich and remained on this lower level, so that british production of aeroplanes, for example, was way ahead of Germany by 1940. When the war broke out in 1939, Germany had 1,450 modern fighter planes and 800 bombers; Great Britain and France had 950 fighters and 1,300 bombers. The German had 3,500 tanks; Great Britain and France had 3,850. These numbers do not suggest that Germany had planned and prepared a great war that they started in 1939."

Throw Poland's forces into the mix, and the Allies greatly outnumber the Germans prior to WW2. It isn't even close. Look this stuff up guys before you blindly state such stuff.

Who gives a shit about the numbers that you're quoting when Hitler turned around and buttfucked France and drove the British out of Europe in 6 weeks? Russia couldn't do anything similar to that today.

I just looked up his "source", which is a book calling hitler not just a normal german leader, but a normal western leader, the same as chamberlain, daladier or stresemann.

It's only this book (weirdly enough, A J P Taylors most controversal book, who wouldve thought) that could be used as a source for bs like that.

Quoting this as a source by someone who is "well versed in history" is, well.

I think you're shortselling EU power a bit and overestimating the Russians. Correct me if I am wrong, but the Russians are more or less using the same shit that Saddam used back in 1991. The EU has better stuff than that.

Apart from the nukes the EU military could probably blast the Russians off the map in a week.

Wow this went way off topic.

As for military might it is not just about armament,important factors are combat experience and motivation.

Only EU troops which have serious combat experience are British (Afghanistan and Iraq).As for Russians they have some experienced troops from Chechnya and Caucasus conflicts.

Motivation.No EU soldier will be motivated enough to fight for foreign country.On the other side Russian soldier is motivated to fight for its people and,more importantly,for restoring great Russia.

As for armament,the most important part of every modern war is air control.
Russian air force is slightly outdated but still numerous and capable,however they have extremely strong anti air defense systems,S300,S400,etc.

In a military conflict between EU and Russia in Ukraine,Russia would be clear winner (dont forget they have bases near and ready).

Anyways as i said this is way of topic,there wont be any conflict between EU or NATO with Russia.
They all know where that would lead.

Saumure

France404 Posts

March 03 2014 20:36 GMT

#3307

On March 04 2014 05:10 xDaunt wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 04 2014 05:06 corumjhaelen wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:03 xDaunt wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:55 m4ini wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:47 xDaunt wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:42 BronzeKnee wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:41 xDaunt wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:34 BronzeKnee wrote:

On March 04 2014 04:33 SilentchiLL wrote:
Putin can't afford a full-out war with the west, which is why he isn't read to do so,

Hitler couldn't either. And that ended really well didn't it?

Russia has this http://english.irib.ir/news/world/europe/item/180619-russia,-china-‘in-agreement’-on-ukraine

On March 04 2014 05:09 Sermokala wrote:
Article 4 is just people coming togeather to talk. Article 5 is the one that means war is coming and has only been invoked once after 9/11 2001 for obvious reasons.

If anything I think the largest thing to come out of this may be that ukraine joins NATO as well possible the baltic states.

I laughed at that one

r.Evo

Germany14080 Posts

March 03 2014 20:36 GMT

#3308

UNSC in session now.

Godwrath

Spain10137 Posts

March 03 2014 20:37 GMT

#3309

On March 04 2014 05:26 SilentchiLL wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 04 2014 05:22 Godwrath wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:16 SilentchiLL wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:13 Godwrath wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:12 SilentchiLL wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:10 Godwrath wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:08 SilentchiLL wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:06 corumjhaelen wrote:

On March 04 2014 05:03 xDaunt wrote:

I don't know, I talked to a guy who served in the russian army already and according to him their equipment had quite a lot of... experience.

So does most of the equipment for regulars in EU countries. That's not exclusive of Russia. Or atleast, that was my experience in the army.

So you shot a cannon that was probably from WW2 as well?

Even better, i carried a MG42.

Noice, though I don't think we should hold the rest of europe up to spanish standards in regards to their armies... no offense.

At this point, we don't have much to envy germany to be honest. What i was speaking about with "regulars", was the meat, the numbers. At this point for example we use the G36 (i was one of the first to actually get and shoot one, lucky me), but you don't have the modern equipment for everybody, specially if you need to pull from reserves in case of a war.

I don't know if it was you, but you are definitly short selling Russian army when it comes to operational companies using "saddam's era" equipment, when they are likely to have gear to match our operational ones, with a few exceptions. Regulars will (again, the meat) have the shitty equipment, as would ours.

I don't know how knowledgeable you are on mechanized vehicles, but maybe you can clear this out for me. As i remember a few years ago, most of German's leopards were not upgraded to L2A6, while most of them being L2A4 or lower, which aren't exactly top notch when it comes to tank technologic (filters, computer, etc). I see they are planning for the 2A6, so i guess most of them are L2A5 now or i am wrong in my assumption.

Disgregard that, let's not de rail the topic. Just say we agree to disagree.

Makro

France16890 Posts

March 03 2014 20:37 GMT

#3310

if gb is a bit more ok compared to france for exemple in term of army technology is that they have a lower ground army to equip too, and considering that our magnificent socialist president did some cut into the army budget (while launching 2 wars and wanted to go to syria .. lol)

plus our nuclear dissuasion cost us too much, we can cut it and still be able to launch nuclear missile all over the planet (they replaced our perfect m45 by m51 who did the same .. 15 billions of euros in it)

but i agree with some people here that we(major european power) have still a very efficient air army that could crush russia

Adreme

United States5574 Posts

March 03 2014 20:38 GMT

#3311

The thing about motivation to fight in a war no matter how you feel about was best described by my brother one time "getting shot at is an excellent motivator" because I feel this basically summarizes the condition of any soldier. Even if they don't support the war in question they support not getting shot so they will be plenty motivated to get the job done.

lolfail9001

Russian Federation40190 Posts

March 03 2014 20:38 GMT

#3312

On March 04 2014 05:34 likeasu wrote:
hey, guys from US, UK and another. Relax, ok?
First of all, I wanna You switch ON your brains. Russia will never start war against Ukraine. NEVER.
The only one thing why Russia can enter troopers on Crimea- is save Crimea people from quality of new Ukraine goverment. New Ukraine politic faces (Turchinov, Yaceniuk, Klichko) are EMPTY places in fact. They are only PR-persons. They havnt a really power in country. Anothers person rules Ukraine now- people with money and guns in hands (far right extremists form "Praviy sektor" UNA UNSO and so on). And these extrimists used Euromaidan to take power in hands. People who was on Euromaidan are about 0,1% of all Ukraine. The most of them were standing for bright and good ideas. And do you think these ordinary people won? NO! They were just used and fucked by terrorists and Ukraine aligarhs (if you dont belive my words - check up that 2 aligarhs are already now regional governors).
And dont blame Russia if you know all facts. Better ask yourself about United States.
USA bombed more then 10 countries last 15 years. USA supported military revolutions is East, S.America, Africa. And now in Ukraine. Goverment of USA is really hypocriticals fucking bustards.

Russia WILL NEVER FIGHT against Ukranian. Casual people of Russia and Ukraine are brothers.

Russia won't have to fight, actually.

nunez

Norway4003 Posts

March 03 2014 20:38 GMT

#3313

On March 04 2014 03:31 BronzeKnee wrote:
You want recent history?

Let's talk about Georgia.

embarassing that you think the south-ossetian conflict speaks your case, but welcome to the club.

m4ini

4215 Posts

March 03 2014 20:38 GMT

#3314

That's fine, since the army is mostly defensive and any operations outside of our country would be made with only a small part of the whole army that's not an actual problem.

It is, though. Last time on that topic, but it's important that you consider that people are not trained on those vehicles (Puma, Boxer etc). There is no experience whatsoever in these. After 25 years in a tank as analog as the SPz Marder, i bet alot of my former Kameraden will have trouble using the SPz Puma efficiently.

Sorry again. -,-

edit

I don't know how knowledgeable you are on mechanized vehicles, but maybe you can clear this out for me. As i remember a few years ago, most of German's leopards were not upgraded to L2A6, while most of them being L2A4 or lower, which aren't exactly top notch when it comes to tank technologic (filters, computer, etc). I see they are planning for the 2A6, so i guess most of them are L2A5 now or i am wrong in my assumption.

All Leo2s in the "crisis intervention force" are A6s, plus some PSOs.

SCST

Mexico1609 Posts

March 03 2014 20:39 GMT

#3315

Russian propaganda.

hzflank

United Kingdom2991 Posts

March 03 2014 20:39 GMT

#3316

You have no proof of anything that you say here The fact that we do know is that Russia has already invaded Ukraine. Would it be okay for us to send troops into Russia to protect Russian people from their own government? That is exactly what you are saying that Russia is doing.

Sub40APM

6336 Posts

March 03 2014 20:40 GMT

#3317

Save them from what? Elections that were going to happen in May?

New Ukraine politic faces (Turchinov, Yaceniuk, Klichko) are EMPTY places in fact. They are only PR-persons. They havnt a really power in country. Anothers person rules Ukraine now- people with money and guns in hands

The way Medvedev was a PR-person for Putin?

(far right extremists form "Praviy sektor" UNA UNSO and so on). And these extrimists used Euromaidan to take power in hands. People who was on Euromaidan are about 0,1% of all Ukraine. The most of them were standing for bright and good ideas. And do you think these ordinary people won? NO! They were just used and fucked by terrorists and Ukraine aligarhs (if you dont belive my words - check up that 2 aligarhs are already now regional governors).

So the fascists are in control of Ukraine or the Russian speaking, Jewish oligarchs who were appointed in the East?

And dont blame Russia if you know all facts.

We seem to know more facts than you do.

Better ask yourself about United States.
USA bombed more then 10 countries last 15 years. USA supported military revolutions is East, S.America, Africa. And now in Ukraine. Goverment of USA is really hypocriticals fucking bustards.

So far the only troops on the territory of Ukraine pointing guns at Ukrainian soldiers and demanding that Ukrainian soldiers surrender are Russians.

Deleted User 137586

7859 Posts

March 03 2014 20:40 GMT

#3318

+ Show Spoiler [SC session] +