| Forum Index > General Forum |
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. | ||
CosmicSpiral
United States15275 Posts
On July 11 2023 08:41 KwarK wrote: Sounds like an excellent proxy for Russia. The only difference would be the lack of rampant alcoholism in the Iraqi army. Russia is hardly similar to 1990s Iraq. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9163 Posts
On July 11 2023 09:08 CosmicSpiral wrote: The VDV, Spetsnaz, Wagner, the National Guard? Absolutely. The main army? No. Do you know how bureaucratic bullshit he would have to wade through to deal with all the pragmatic issues, let alone the international ones? Wtf are you talking about, Putin signed a decree to award the 64th motor rifle brigade for their valor. Wagner and Rosgvardia were nowhere near Kyiv. The giant column was all RF, we had non stop updates of which specific brigade was moving where. The alternate reality gibberish you are dumping here is not even something that Russians ever claimed. | ||
|
CosmicSpiral
United States15275 Posts
On July 11 2023 09:44 Dan HH wrote: Wtf are you talking about, Putin signed a decree to award the 64th motor rifle brigade for their valor. Wagner and Rosgvardia were nowhere near Kyiv. The giant column was all RF, we had non stop updates of which specific brigade was moving where. The alternate reality gibberish you are dumping here is not even something that Russians ever claimed. Oh...I see. I thought Sermokala was talking about the fighting after the Revolution of Dignity (which also resulted in sham elections). Yes, the initial invasion had elements of the army: the 64th Separate Motorized Rifle Brigade, 4th Guards Tank Division, 138th Separate Guards Motor Rifle Brigade, etc. And notice they were only elements. The 4th Guards Tank Division would have been deployed as part of the 1st Guards Tank Army if there was an actual war. Similarly, the 64th would've been operating as part of the 35th Army. So if this was a straightforward invasion intended to conquer Ukraine, why didn't Russia just send the entire 1st Tank Army? Only utilizing the 4th Guards means they lack the support of the dedicated reconnaissance, engineering, and logistics brigades that also compose the 1st. They are meant to work together as a unified group. This same glaring oversight applies to the other districts that were used as launching pads. The problem, again, is Putin's hands are constrained. The initial justification for their deployment was as peacekeeping forces to protect the LPR and DPR and this was only due to recognizing them as independent republics a few days beforehand. He refused to do this during 2014-2017, insisting they remain autonomous republics at best, so "little green men" had to be used for plausible deniability (which is what I was referring to before). But since Russia wasn't technically at war with Ukraine for the first seven months, he cannot mobilize the entire army. He would face significant legal hurdles from the Duma and Federation Council over things like reallocating the state budget, commissioning orders of tanks, and so on. Hence the reliance on LPR and DPR militias, National Guard, the VDV, Wagner, and Chechen paramilitary organizations for regenerating personnel. Putin required annexation of the four oblasts in order to legally justify mobilizing reservists: attacks on those regions are now attacks on Russia proper, therefore he can bypass the parameters of a "limited military operation". Point being, regardless of whether you hold his actions as illegal he still had to go through the legislative motions to give them legitimacy. If he was a dictator, he wouldn't have had to bother with any of that gibberish. He could've just invented new laws like Hitler or forced his decrees via fiat like Saddam. | ||
KwarK
United States43513 Posts
In as much as 90s Iraq had more modern equipment? | ||
|
CosmicSpiral
United States15275 Posts
On July 11 2023 10:46 KwarK wrote: In as much as 90s Iraq had more modern equipment? Do you realize how antiquated the Iraqi army was at the point of Operation Desert Storm?  | ||
|
KwarK
United States43513 Posts
On July 11 2023 10:51 CosmicSpiral wrote: Do you realize how antiquated the Iraqi army was at the point of Operation Desert Storm? Do you realize how antiquated the Russian army is now? They're using the same equipment but the Russians left it out in a field for an extra two decades. | ||
|
CosmicSpiral
United States15275 Posts
On July 11 2023 10:53 KwarK wrote: Do you realize how antiquated the Russian army is now? They're using the same equipment but the Russians left it out in a field for an extra two decades. The core of the Iraqi Air Force was the export version of the Mig-21, which first saw service in 1959. The mainstay of the modern VVS is the SU-34/35 and they debuted in the late 2000s. True, there are a considerable number of Su-24s still in service, but they are largely used in a supporting capacity. Similarly, the Iraqi Army were dependent on tanks from the same time period: Type 59s and 69s from China, T-62s, and a few T-72s. Notably, these did not include upgraded versions. They were easily outclassed by the M1 Abrams and Challengers - couldn't even break the ceramic plating. The most numerous tank these days was the T-72B3, but it is being phased out for the T-90. We can go on and on covering the minutiae. The fact is the Iraqi Army was a pitiful relic of 50-60's military history that Hussein actively resisted investing into or reforming due to fears it would be used to overthrow him. He deliberately fomented division within the ranks, cultivated a poor officer corps, and deprived them of modern communication tech to coordinate their actions. U.S. forces had a field day destroying their AA capacity, hitting command posts at operational depth, and running over their poorly organized and disciplined divisions. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43513 Posts
On July 11 2023 11:23 CosmicSpiral wrote: a pitiful relic of 50-60's military history actively resisted investing into or reforming due to fears it would be used to overthrow him. He deliberately fomented division within the ranks, cultivated a poor officer corps, and deprived them of modern communication tech to coordinate their actions. Did you forget that you're trying to argue that they're nothing like Russia? | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4742 Posts
On July 11 2023 10:46 KwarK wrote: In as much as 90s Iraq had more modern equipment? In as such it is so large that most missiles and nontransport planes wouldnt even be able to get to bases around Ural simply because of range. The size makes it impossible to tottaly supress its air defence/ air force. The early stages of Desert Storm was mostly a supression of air defence and BOMBING, BOMBING and MORE BOMBING and geagraphy makes it a tottaly different game with Russia. Not to mention they have nukes. Lots of them. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
Checks out. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22068 Posts
Their flagship got an involuntary conversion to a submarine and since then the prestigious black sea fleet has been cowering hoping to not follow it to the bottom of the sea. But yeah sure, amazing naval projection. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7040 Posts
| ||
zatic
Zurich15359 Posts
On July 11 2023 17:47 Gorsameth wrote: Oh man, thanks for the laugh of calling Russia at the forefront of naval projection. I needed a good laugh this morning. Their flagship got an involuntary conversion to a submarine and since then the prestigious black sea fleet has been cowering hoping to not follow it to the bottom of the sea. But yeah sure, amazing naval projection. Yeah that bit was hilarious. Can't believe the "Russia isn't even trying" meme is still going strong among the tankie crowd after 500 days. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4742 Posts
On July 11 2023 17:28 Magic Powers wrote: So the argument so far has been: Russia has the best ICBMs in the world, their Navy is the greatest in the world, their military is far superior to Ukraine's, and Ukraine has no offensive potential, and Putin could end the war any moment if he wanted. But at the same time Russia's military is completely antiquated and ending the war would cost Putin too many men. Checks out. Nobody in the right mind can claim Russia has best navy in the world. They can't even build a working carrier. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On July 11 2023 17:53 Silvanel wrote: Nobody in the right mind can claim Russia has best navy in the world. They can't even build a working carrier. Don't jinx it! I'm sure they're about to complete development of ICBMs that can be sent straight into NYC by letter, and they'll task their world famous mail carriers with it. Mail cruisers operational! | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
France will provide Ukraine with Scalp long-range cruise missiles to help Kyiv's forces strike targets deep behind Russian lines, President Emmanuel Macron said Tuesday, July 11. Arriving at a NATO summit focused on Kyiv's battle against Moscow's invasion, Macron said the new missile delivery was designed to allow Ukraine to strike at Russian occupation forces "in depth" during its counteroffensive to liberate its territory. The SCALP/Storm Shadow is an Anglo-French weapon with a range of 250 kilometers, the longest of any Western weapon supplied to Ukraine so far, and Britain announced in May that it would supply a batch of the advanced weapons. Russia reacted with fury, warning that London risked being dragged directly into the conflict, and even some Western allies were concerned that Kyiv might conduct strikes into Russia itself. Macron implied, however, that Ukraine had given an undertaking not to use SCALP against such targets, saying that they had been given "in coherence with our doctrine, that is to say to permit Ukraine to defend its own territory." Macron did not say how many of the missiles would be sent, but France is understood to have an arsenal of less than 400, according to specialist defense review DSI. "From our point of view, this decision is a mistake with consequences for the Ukrainian side, because this will, of course force us to take countermeasures," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said of France's decision to supply Ukraine with long-range missiles. Germany for its part will pledge another 700 million euros in military assistance to Ukraine on Tuesday, government sources told Agence France Presse. Berlin, Ukraine's second biggest supplier of arms to resist the Russian invasion, had already announced a new weapons package worth 2.7 billion euros for Kyiv in May, ahead of a visit by President Volodymyr Zelensky. A senior government official on Monday had said that Germany would make a "very substantial" new pledge of military equipment for Ukraine at the NATO meeting. Berlin earlier this year started sending advanced Leopard battle tanks to Ukraine, after months of pleas from Kyiv for the heavy weapons to bolster its fightback against Russia. Ukrainian and German politicians have been calling for rapid resupply of tanks given the destruction of the armaments by Russian forces. Source | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On July 11 2023 22:42 JimmiC wrote: Russian support on the internet is so strange because it far left who act like it’s still the USSR or going back to it. And then it is the far right who hate communists and think Putin is the ultimate macho man and will crush the feminized west. And those far right also want to denazify, without realizing that the Nazis were far right. Not referring to anyone who has posted here because I do not know their politics but it is just wacky when you see what strange bedfellows there are in support of the Russian side. Like if you could get them talking about other issues they would hate each other super quickly. I also find it strange that these people who “believe” Russia is so amazing are not moving there ASAP. Their currency is super devalued and they are short in workers, why not buy low on such a great power under such amazing leadership? I thought people were mostly joking, but I'm starting to think the Russian narrative is indeed that the enemy is both weak and strong at the same time. Russia is superior in every way, but defeating the enemy comes with downsides, so it's better to delay victory indefinitely because that's preferable and totally up to Russia and only to Russia. Basically Putin isn't struggling to win, he's just optimizing his victory. Very smart and capable man. | ||
| ||
|
|
|
EPT
