ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Thursday, October 27, 2016

Missing: US air supremacy

With the addition of their small naval force, Russians are creating a you-can-fly-but-you-probably-shouldn't zone over Syria.
The combined capabilities of the Russian naval task force and the S-300/S-400 missiles deployed in Syria give the Russians a world-class air-defense capability. If needed the Russians could even throw in A-50 AWACs from Russia protected by MiG-31BMs. What most observers do not realize that is that SA-N-6 “Grumble” which forms the core of the air defenses of the Peter the Great is a S-300FM, the modernized naval variant of the S-300. It is also capable of the amazing Mach 6 speed, has 150km range, an added infrared terminal capability, a track-via-missile guidance system which allows it to engage ballistic missiles and an altitude envelope of 27,000m. And, guess what – the Peter the Great has 48 such missiles (in 20 launchers), roughly the equivalent of 12 S-300 batteries (assuming 4 launchers per battery).

One of the major weaknesses of the Russian deployment in Syria has been the relative low number of missiles the Russians could fire at any one time. The US/NATO could simply saturate Russian defenses with large numbers of missiles. Frankly, they can still do it, but this has now become much, much harder.

Can the Russians now stop a US attack on Syria?

Probably not.

But they can make it much harder and dramatically less effective.

First, as soon as the Americans fire, the Russians will see it and they will warn the Syrian and Russian armed forces. Since the Russians will be able to track every US missile, they will be able to pass on the data to all the air defense crews who will be ready by the time the missiles arrive. Furthermore, once the missiles get close, the Russians will be able to shoot down a lot of them, making it necessary for the Americans to conduct battle damage assessment from space and then re-strike the same targets many times over.

Second, stealth or no stealth, I don’t believe that the USN or the USAF will risk flying into Russian controlled airspace or, if it does, this will be a short-lived experiment. I believe that the Russian presence in Syria will make any attack on Syria a “missile only” attack. Unless the Americans take down the Russian air defenses, which they could only if they want to start WWIII, US aircraft will have to stay outside the Syrian skies. And that means that the Russians have basically created their own no-fly zone over Syria and a US no-fly zone is now impossible to achieve.
This marks the first time that the USA has lost air supremacy in an active conflict in decades. It is yet another sign of a crumbling empire with declining military power. The danger of a Hillary presidency is that she is likely to make the mistake of past crumbling empires in military decline, which is to fail to recognize the significance of that decline, and, through overconfidence, order military action that will lead to defeat.

Neither the US military nor the USA itself is what it was in the 1980s. It is no longer the nation nor the country that won the Cold War. Donald Trump recognizes this, hence his call to Make America Great Again, which is another way of saying Make the USA American Again.

Labels: ,

218 Comments:

1 – 200 of 218 Newer› Newest»
Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr October 27, 2016 11:05 AM  

People tend to forget that the Gulf War was 25 years ago. In that quarter-century, the Russians have ditched their old gear and bought equipment that is (at least in theory) close to Western standards.

Yes, there are some areas where we dominate - an F-22 annihilates everything else - but most of our hardware is little better than what we used in 1991.

Anonymous Just another commenter October 27, 2016 11:06 AM  

High-tech is found at ever lower cost, now that the US has done the hard work of inventing the stuff, and then letting it get stolen or given away far too easily. Karma is a cast-iron bitch when it comes swinging back around.

Blogger Ben Cohen October 27, 2016 11:09 AM  

Watch for tomorrow's possibe Syria escalation - October surprise. The scum in charge will do anything to get sick Hillary elected.

Anonymous Elipe October 27, 2016 11:10 AM  

Napoleon 12pdr wrote:Yes, there are some areas where we dominate - an F-22 annihilates everything else - but most of our hardware is little better than what we used in 1991.

Simply means that we have more to lose when a single plane gets shot down.

And as they say, the plane's only as good as its pilot. So how are these wimmenz and tranny pilots in the sky?

Blogger Johnny October 27, 2016 11:13 AM  

The first problem is that Syria and the Ukraine are not all that important to us. So, why the hell should we risk a confrontation with a nuclear power over these areas?

The other problem is that if we do have a military confrontation, most likely somebody is going to lose and have to back down without going nuclear. Russia may regard these conflicts as important enough to risk it. Would Obama back down, a man whose loyalties seem to be somewhere other than in the United States? And Hillary; a woman who is in declining mental health, vengeful by nature, and gets pissed off at times and throws things? Good, bad or indifferent, one might hope that Trump would cut a deal.

Blogger Alexander October 27, 2016 11:14 AM  

I suppose at this point the only thing keeping us out of a horrific war for the moment is if Obama wants to deal with ending his presidency with a three month complete clusterfuck.

Anonymous Rezny October 27, 2016 11:25 AM  

@1
"an F-22 annihilates everything else" - and how do you know that? F-22 literally never fought another warjet, nor was it attacked by modern nation AA missile.

How can you tell about "forgetting that the Gulf War was 25 years ago" and forget about it the very next paragraph?
Don't forget also than supposedly invisible F-117 got serbed by a Soviet rocket from early 60ies.

All Euro-American escapade in Syria is an excersize in either impotent stupidity or top-class hypocrisy. Choose your poison/

Anonymous Jemison Thorsby October 27, 2016 11:26 AM  

The Air Force and Navy have been talking about the growing threat of "anti-access" systems like these for some time. The F-22 and F-35 were supposed to help restore freedom of operation. But with only 170+ Raptors and an F-35 that is far from operational (despite the party line), it's inevitable we'll find our options more constrained in the future. The last US serviceman killed by an enemy aircraft died in the Korean War. Over six decades we came to take air supremacy for granted. It's now questionable, and much of our military's concept of operations (CONOPS) is out the window if that supremacy is lost.

Anonymous genericviews October 27, 2016 11:33 AM  

The US/NATO could simply saturate Russian defenses with large numbers of missiles

Why is this even being discussed? We aren't at war with Russia. Russia is not our habitual enemies. We had a cold war against the USSR for 70 years because they were communists. They aren't communists any more. WE ARE. There is nothing going on in Syria that is of any importance to America. We can let Russia have the whole thing and suffer nothing.

Blogger Matthew N October 27, 2016 11:36 AM  

"People tend to forget that the Gulf War was 25 years ago. In that quarter-century, the Russians have ditched their old gear and bought equipment that is (at least in theory) close to Western standards."

No to mention the fact that the T-72s the Iraqis were using were substandard export models, not the top-of-the-line ones that the Russian military proper have. We don't sell our allies the same quality M1 Abrams that we use either.

Blogger Elkanah Haon October 27, 2016 11:39 AM  

"This marks the first time that the USA has lost air supremacy in an active conflict in decades. "

Do not underestimate the enormous impact the loss of guaranteed air supremacy would have on any prospective US/NATO troops on the ground as well.

I'm ex-British Army (Medic), and the supremacy of our - or allied - air forces was a given during training and deployment in Afghan/Iraq. We'd have the occasional reference to treatment or tactics if we were facing a scenario in which we didn't have guaranteed air support within a guaranteed timeline but pretty much all (actually, everyone other than special forces or real old hands in the higher ranks perhaps) soldiers have spent their careers knowing that they're a matter of minutes away from being picked up by Medevac and flown to an elite surgical team.

The prospect of Combat Medics (as good as they are, generally with limited training and certainly limited kit) and casualties dealing with conditions which see them having to go without any guarantee of advanced support will be a frightening one. And, should a 'hot war' erupt between NATO and a developed country, one which will likely see casualties well beyond the limits we've become used to - considering we're (in the UK at least) now in the habit of Prime Minsters solemnly reading out the names of every single death in conflict.

Anonymous genericviews October 27, 2016 11:39 AM  

My personal opinion, backed by nothing so don't ask me to cite sources, is that we are embroiled in Syria because Assad wouldn't pay off Hillary, and the Saudis did.

Blogger Dexter October 27, 2016 11:40 AM  

Don't agree with the word "lost" if there hasn't been a fight for air supremacy yet.

Peter the Great would be defeated, if it came to shooting, either by sinking it with one of our SSNs, or forcing it to exhaust its missiles using feint attacks and decoys. 48 missiles is not a lot, and ships can't afford to withhold fire because they can't afford to let leakers through. Most likely they'd fire two missiles per incoming target. So they could engage 24 targets and then they're fucked. Gotta sail back home to reload, and it's a loooong way.

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 11:43 AM  

@12 I agree, though I think Qatar is heavily involved too...But you can't discount the fact that Obama loves Jihadists...

Blogger Dexter October 27, 2016 11:43 AM  

There is nothing going on in Syria that is of any importance to America. We can let Russia have the whole thing and suffer nothing.

Totally agree. Saw this the other day

http://observer.com/2016/10/syrias-civil-war-is-over-russia-won/

"Syria’s Civil War Is Over—Russia Won" and my reaction was SO WHAT? The US has no interest in Syria whatsoever, so Russia "winning" that war leaves me unmoved.

And what did Russia win? A pro-Russian Syrian regime under Assad. In other words, exactly what they already had before the war started. Yay!

Blogger Elder Son October 27, 2016 11:45 AM  

Napoleon 12pdr wrote:Yes, there are some areas where we dominate - an F-22 annihilates everything else - but most of our hardware is little better than what we used in 1991.

I chuckle every time I hear Putin proclaim (paraphrase), "We know what the Americans are up to. We've had our eye on them for a long time."

Russia is well aware of the F-22 and F-35 and reacts accordingly. Russia is not bluffing when they say they are no match for their anti-aircraft systems. Russia gets a front row seat right on its border with the Baltics/Europe watching US-NATO play.

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 11:45 AM  

Has it occurred to anyone in the Media that our support for ISIS and al nusra is a huge falsification of the 9-11 report?

Blogger lowercaseb October 27, 2016 11:45 AM  

This is the times when I miss "the War Nerd." Dolan's personal politics might be incredibly asinine, but his tactical and strategic insight is top notch and cold blooded.

Blogger Ken Prescott October 27, 2016 11:46 AM  

This analysis presumes that the Russian flotilla has no major system casualties, such as propulsion, electrical generation, or weapons systems.

That isn't the way to bet. The Petr Velikye design was compromised from the start--the ship's power plant is a kludge of nuclear and oil-fired steam turbines, and none of these ships have been well maintained over the past decades.

That said, challenging the flotilla involves risk that is much higher than the potential reward.

Blogger Tom October 27, 2016 11:46 AM  

LASERS!!! What about lasers? Isn't it supposed to be pretty much impossible to fly anything bigger than a mosquito into a war zone by now? That's what "There Will Be War" told me.

Blogger Elder Son October 27, 2016 11:47 AM  

Syria is not a civil war. It is a - WAR ON - Syria, by proxy.

Blogger Azimus October 27, 2016 11:50 AM  

From the Article:
Unless the Americans take down the Russian air defenses, which they could only if they want to start WWIII...


I disagree that WW3 starts automatically. The US will try some bloodless-coup stuff with EW/EA, particularly if so much of the Russian defense umbrella is concentrated in a single ship, far out to sea where there are no neutral observers, and with the marked inferiority of Russian technology under-water, it is not outside the realm of possibility for at least an attempt.

The attempt, if successful, would probably allow them to start the bombing war without Russia doing a thing about it.

I don't say this is good or bad, only that it would be typical "try to get away it" kind of crap that Obama and Hillary have liked to pull in the past.

More likely the attempt is made, it fails badly w/zero casualties, it gets aborted and we never hear of it...

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 11:50 AM  

@2 Russians are very intelligent and very good at developing low cost high technology. Which is why many of the techies on Wall Street are Russians.

Blogger Elder Son October 27, 2016 11:51 AM  

Dexter wrote:Peter the Great would be defeated, if it came to shooting, either by sinking it with one of our SSNs, or forcing it to exhaust its missiles using feint attacks and decoys. 48 missiles is not a lot, and ships can't afford to withhold fire because they can't afford to let leakers through. Most likely they'd fire two missiles per incoming target. So they could engage 24 targets and then they're fucked. Gotta sail back home to reload, and it's a loooong way.

You know what is missing in all this? Russia subs.

Anonymous Leonidas October 27, 2016 11:52 AM  

This marks the first time that the USA has lost air supremacy in an active conflict in decades.

This isn't quite accurate. We clearly still have air supremacy. What we don't have, though, is the total air exclusivity that's been US doctrine since the early 2000s.

This is still a major shift and it has massive ramifications for US military policy. But it's also nowhere near as bad as flat out losing air superiority would be.

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 11:53 AM  

Interesting that the Russians don't even regard the Kuznetsov to be an aircraft carrier.

Anonymous Leonidas October 27, 2016 11:53 AM  

I just reread the original quote I used and realized that my brain read "air supremacy" as "air superiority." The OP was correct and I had a brain malfunction. Please disregard.

Blogger SDaly October 27, 2016 11:54 AM  

The US should send an entire squadron of pink jets into the theatre. No one would dare attack such bold support for feminisms out of fear of being called a misogynist

Blogger Derrick Bonsell October 27, 2016 11:55 AM  

The Russians are fairly confident they can detect them in their territory though it might be harder with what they have in Syria. The Raptor's BVR air-to-air combat capabilities haven't been tested in actual combat so I wouldn't count on them.

This all depends on whether they are even in condition to fly numerous sorties which seems unlikely.

Blogger Chris Mallory October 27, 2016 11:56 AM  

Elipe wrote:So how are these wimmenz and tranny pilots in the sky?

Tell us, how many of each are flying front line fighters or bombers?

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 11:56 AM  

@25 " We clearly still have air supremacy."
What are you smoking? We may have air superiority, because of superior numbers if inferior quality. But air supremacy means that essentially your air force can do what you want in an area. Obviously, that is far from the truth. And then there's the matter of USAF being short 700 pilots and 4000 mechanics....

Blogger The Other Robot October 27, 2016 11:56 AM  

There is nothing going on in Syria that is of any importance to America. We can let Russia have the whole thing and suffer nothing.

You don't understand! Hillary and the bankster think it is incredibly important that the Russians be punished for their impudence in defying the banksters!

Blogger The Other Robot October 27, 2016 11:57 AM  

@31: Nah, all those females who are joining the forces will make up the numbers and they can do twice as much as any male can anyway, so we only need half as many.

Anonymous ZhukovG October 27, 2016 12:00 PM  

With the deployment of their two most powerful surface combatants, the Russians are letting it be known that they are backing Syria; globalist wishes be damned.

Russia probably considers it likely that Hillary will be the next President and they are doing everything they can to discourage us from further aggression.

I served in the US Military during the Reagan years. I was proud, if naïve, in my small role against the 'Evil Empire'. Now the US has become the 'Evil Empire' and I find myself on the side of people I once opposed.

Crazy world.

Anonymous BGKB October 27, 2016 12:00 PM  

So how are these wimmenz and tranny pilots in the sky?

Latrina the F-22 pilot identifies as an attack helicopter.

Blogger VD October 27, 2016 12:01 PM  

LASERS!!! What about lasers? Isn't it supposed to be pretty much impossible to fly anything bigger than a mosquito into a war zone by now? That's what "There Will Be War" told me.

No, it didn't. In the near future, but not yet.

Anonymous Rezny October 27, 2016 12:02 PM  

@26
Because it isn't. It's a heavy missile cruiser with air support, and like any cruiser it can cruise alone and be a danger even without aircraft. Its function is protecting flotilla from enemy air/missile strikes & striking enemy warships with its own missiles.
Not bombing runs on gooks and sheepfuckers, nor local air supremacy.

It's also a trick to circumvent the Montreux Convention prohibiting carriers to enter the Black Sea.

American carrier is a totally different thing.

Blogger Derrick Bonsell October 27, 2016 12:03 PM  

As a former Sonar technician I'd certainly fear the Russian subss more than the Chinese.

Blogger LonestarWhacko October 27, 2016 12:03 PM  

Folks, why in the world would we fight for people who hate us? Seriously. The fact is that a modern air war over Syria is bats hit crazy. Trump has it right....we ain't thw world's policeman if we can't afford it.

Take a look at what's happening to the US military. SJW whackness. Combat has a way of killing out the effeminate.

The Russians have a clear cut goal....a major port in the Mediterranean. Russian pipelines, anyone? Putin isn't a fool.

Here's the American weakness....no coherent policy over decades. Probably be best to leave the Russians alone.

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 12:05 PM  

@30 Reportedly, Congresswoman McSally was the only female fighter pilot ever deployed with a combat wing....

Blogger tz October 27, 2016 12:07 PM  

I hear the F35 will be great if they can actually get it to fly reliably.

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 12:08 PM  

Related--http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-27/putin-asks-america-now-banana-republic

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 October 27, 2016 12:11 PM  

What are we to expect when the US military is more concerned with LGBTQRSTUV than actually killing people and breaking things.

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 12:11 PM  

@41 Air Force General said that the F-35 would have to be protected by F-22s to fly against the Russians....$1.5 trillion doesn't buy much in DC

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 27, 2016 12:18 PM  

Dexter wrote:Gotta sail back home to reload, and it's a loooong way.
Unlike ships, missiles fit on train cars, cargo ships and barges. Crimea is a day from the Eastern Med at most, and the Russians have a Naval base in Syria. I would lay down money that missiles are already there or in transit.

Do you think Russians are stupid?
Take a look at the world chess master rankings and see if you can determine which ethnic group excels at thinking further ahead.

Blogger Ingot9455 October 27, 2016 12:21 PM  

LASERS!! Was just reading an article about a tank mounted laser module that has its own mini radar and shoots down small to medium drones. Keeps the enemy from using small cheap drones to smoke you out.

Its definitely starting.

Blogger Shimshon October 27, 2016 12:24 PM  

OT. Instead of killing the Trust and Safety Council, Twitter is killing Vine.

https://medium.com/@vine/important-news-about-vine-909c5f4ae7a7

Blogger Balázs Varga October 27, 2016 12:29 PM  

Actually women make good pilots. The smaller body frame apparently makes it easier to retain some blood in the brain at supersonic acceleration. Or so I heard I think a good 15 years before in some scientific program.

Also, pilots only fly their jets side by side and punch each other in fiction. In reality they don't need much upper body strength.

It is not the female nature of the pilots that is the concern, it is their coddled nature. Coddling is never good for a soldier, ever. So yeah, feminist pilots are propably totally useless.

Blogger Stilicho October 27, 2016 12:30 PM  

Make America American Again! I even have the T shirt (cafepress wouldn't print it, but Custom Ink did a very nice job). Anyway, making the USA American again goes to the heart of the problems. National greatness and freedom are symptomatic of the identity/composition of the nation.

Blogger Rodger Smith October 27, 2016 12:30 PM  

I don't think it is a case of declining military power so much as a total lack of leadership. We have a bunch of political pussies with powerful toys but absolutely no coherent vision. But the. Again, I think we would do best to stay out of the Middle East. bush and Obama have caused enough chaos.

Blogger Cogitans Iuvenis October 27, 2016 12:32 PM  

@5
@25

I agree with both your assessment and take the opinion and that the comment of air superiority is a bit over stated though US obsession with brush fire warfare has lead to a over allocation of R&D resources in technology, while useful, doesn't help maintain a military edge against a competent foe the F-35 is also undeniably a disaster.

I think what really was lost was the martial mindset. I was only 5 when the US ventured into Iraq for the first time but I still vividly remember my father watching news where military planners were prepping for casualties in the tens of thousands. That means it has been over two decades since the US government, military and people went into a conflict with the expectation that a lot of their own would die. Ever since then we've had an expectation that we could steam roll our opponents.

Just look at the spaghetti that has been spilled over US casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan in the almost two decades we have been fighting total US fatalities number under 10,000. This isn't a defense of the war mind you, this is just an illustration of the decline of our martial mindset. We went from expectation, and accepting, thousands of dead in a single battle during pre-Vietnam war, to thousands of dead in a war in the Persian Gulf to expecting just a hand full of deaths today but some how we still expect to have the same level of results. You shouldn't expect total victory, especially against somewhat comparable opponents, if your not willing to pay the blood price.

That being said let Russia have Syria. It doesn't affect the overall balance of power and, given our recent track record with regime change, I have a feeling the Russian's will do a better job since they are actually more likely to feel the consequences if they fuck up in Syria.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 27, 2016 12:34 PM  

Shimshon wrote:OT. Instead of killing the Trust and Safety Council, Twitter is killing Vine.
Replying on the other thread.

Anonymous Sazerac October 27, 2016 12:34 PM  

Considering Russia's development post the USSR, accounting for the mess the country was in after the collapse, it would have been interesting to consider what they would have achieved and how different the world would be if the Russian State was never taken over by the non-Russian communists.

OpenID basementhomebrewer October 27, 2016 12:45 PM  

pyrrhus wrote:@41 Air Force General said that the F-35 would have to be protected by F-22s to fly against the Russians....$1.5 trillion doesn't buy much in DC

The F-35 was a make work program from the start. It was never designed to take on other top military's aircraft. Instead it was built to rely satellite communications technology and operate in a theater where we already had air supremacy or the enemy was still flying Mig-25's.

The reason the project got the green light and continues to be funded is a combination of lack of foresight and keeping DOD contractors in various congressional districts profitable.

Blogger James Dixon October 27, 2016 12:46 PM  

> The first problem is that Syria and the Ukraine are not all that important to us.

To us? No. But to the bankers and the like backing Hillary? Apparently very important indeed.

> They aren't communists any more. WE ARE.

I believe you have grasped the crux of the matter in that single statement.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan October 27, 2016 12:48 PM  

I wouldn't fight the USAF or the Navy Aviation heads up, smack the AWACs and smack their landing strips. Nor would I take on American/NATO ground power head on, but I would absolutely terrorize the rear echelon units and the fearsome fems who run them.

OpenID basementhomebrewer October 27, 2016 12:51 PM  

OT
Twitter is updating and expanding their saftey policies.

Looks like we have the answer on the amount convergence for twitter. As they are laying off 9% of their work force they sound like they are ready to unveil an even more speech stifling policy.

Blogger James Dixon October 27, 2016 12:51 PM  

> The danger of a Hillary presidency is that she is likely to make the mistake of past crumbling empires in military decline, which is to fail to recognize the significance of that decline, and, through overconfidence, order military action that will lead to defeat.

Any war with Russia will be our Battle of the Teutoburg Forest (http://infogalactic.com/info/Battle_of_the_Teutoburg_Forest)

Blogger Rodger Smith October 27, 2016 12:53 PM  

I work on the largest Air Force test base in the world. We spend almost as much time attending diversity and other SJW training as we do testing weapons. The military leadership and mindset is dramatically different from what it was when I retired from the Air Force many years ago.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 27, 2016 12:55 PM  

James Dixon wrote:To us? No. But to the bankers and the like backing Hillary? Apparently very important indeed.
Syria borders Israel. That alone makes it supremely important.

Anonymous fop October 27, 2016 12:56 PM  

Heck of a job, Barry!

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 27, 2016 1:00 PM  

basementhomebrewer wrote:OT

Twitter is updating and expanding their saftey policies.

Looks like we have the answer on the amount convergence for twitter. As they are laying off 9% of their work force they sound like they are ready to unveil an even more speech stifling policy.

Honest to God, guys, there's a social media thread going right now. I replied over there

Blogger Johnny October 27, 2016 1:00 PM  

Lets see, Jewish money, Arab money, bankers, military contractors, plus the political desire for an external enemy. The Democrat party wants an enemy and Russia is the enemy of choice.

Blogger Phat Repat October 27, 2016 1:06 PM  

Yeah, cold day in hell I'll be supporting a fight against people I have nothing against, Russians, for people I have everything against, 'elitists'.

Blogger Mad Dyeda Jørgen October 27, 2016 1:08 PM  

Good analysis, but everyone leaves out the fact that Russian response will be asymmetrical. It will be like "Yeeeeah! We just sunk the Kuznetsov! USA rules! Hey that's weird, why'd my phone just shut off by itself? And why are all the traffic lights switching back and forth from green to red twice a second?"

It ain't your father's battle space anymore.

Blogger cheddarman October 27, 2016 1:12 PM  

The most important factors in human conflict are and always will be as follows:

#1 - people
#2 - ideas
#3 - equipment

Russia has repented of the insanity of communism and is at least nominally Christian. We have fully embraced cultural marxism and bow to the god of this world. They have a military of lions lead by warriors. We have a military that is increasingly crippled by social justice insanity.

We are like the Persian Empire about to get our heads handed to us by Alexander the Great.

And the Chinese are laughing the whole time, while what was formerly known as Christendom wars against itself.

Blogger Geir Balderson October 27, 2016 1:14 PM  

The Brits and the Americans need to keep their troops home in order to defend their own borders. Deploying troops around the World is ludicrous! This is not the 19th Century or the 20th. We do not need to run around the World being the big bad Traffic cop. All that does is stir up the local populations to immigrate to the Western Sugar Daddy countries. Let all of those 17 year-old children stay and fight for their own Democracy!

Blogger Anchorman October 27, 2016 1:18 PM  

We spent how much time talking about 4GW and folks still wargame head to head fights?

Blogger Anchorman October 27, 2016 1:21 PM  

They have a military of lions lead by warriors.

WTF? Based on what?

Blogger Balázs Varga October 27, 2016 1:24 PM  

Russians are very vicious fighters. I would not call them lions, but how much of the US populace can and is willing to fight? How many are too fat or too insane for combat? How does it balance out against the alcoholism in Russia?

Blogger Ingot9455 October 27, 2016 1:31 PM  

@54 I thought that the F35 was also designed so that we could sell versions of it to other allied countries and make back some bank. So it ends up being kind of designed to suck because we don't want to give them all something too awesome that we don't control.

Our F-22 was supposed to be our awesome plane that could shoot down our F-35 if someone bought them then got uppity (like how all the Middle Eastern nations have various versions of F-16s). But then the military let Barry get elected and stop building F-22s, so.

Blogger Anchorman October 27, 2016 1:32 PM  

Russians are very vicious fighters.

They're conscripts. They typically serve 12 months and get the hell out.

I understand there's a level of "Russia love" going on, because they're giving the appearance of defending the West, but their military is poorly constructed at fundamental levels, compared to rival powers.

Blogger Cogitans Iuvenis October 27, 2016 1:33 PM  

@ 69

I think he is referring to the fact that Russians don't force their prospective officers to mark around in high heels.

Anonymous BGKB October 27, 2016 1:39 PM  

Actually women make good pilots. The smaller body frame apparently makes it easier to retain some blood in the brain at supersonic acceleration

We can make suits to compensate for g forces, nothing we can do to make girls have better spatial orientation. Wouldn't blacks being able to run short distances faster make them better pilots in your book?

would have achieved and how different the world would be if the Russian State was never taken over by the non-Russian communists.

Considering the Tesla's of the world would be the first targets for the (((Bolshiviks)))

They have a military of lions lead by warriors

We have a military of Latrinas that run away when the flag music starts to play & post videos on line about it, lead by promoted above their competency affirmative action tokens. If they run from music what will they do when under fire?

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/09/07/sailor-faces-discipline-after-viral-flag-protest.html

Blogger Stilicho October 27, 2016 1:46 PM  

Women are not better pilots. They destroy aircraft trying to land on carriers. Far far more often than male pilots.

Blogger Innostran October 27, 2016 1:47 PM  

@72

Their military overall is weak is a conventional sense due to mass conscription, but the broader population is physically and mentally more fit to fight than the American population. Plus, there is a core of professional Russian army/navy soldiers (like the Spetsnaz units) who are extremely well-trained and capable fighters that I would not be comfortable messing with.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr October 27, 2016 1:47 PM  

@54: No, the F-35 has a purpose. The biggest problem is that it's misdesignated. It's an attack aircraft - a bomb-dropper, not a MiG-killer.

Unfortunately, software ALWAYS turns out to be a lot harder and more time-consuming than the vendor's initial bid.

Anonymous genericviews October 27, 2016 1:48 PM  

@70 I would not call them lions, but how much of the US populace can and is willing to fight?

Fight what, exactly? We aren't at war with anyone. I know quite a few people who are more willing to fight our own government rather than the Russians. It is a matter of knowing who your enemy is.

Blogger Anchorman October 27, 2016 1:49 PM  

#77 I'll co-sign both of those points.

Blogger John Williams October 27, 2016 1:54 PM  

In reality they don't need much upper body strength.
Have you ever seen a fighter pilot? At high g's that helmet weights a lot. Their suit only augments the intense work they do to keep blood in their brain. After hard drilling, their weight loss will be in the double digits. Most women aren't physically capable of exertion like that, even if they have the inclination to do so.

Anonymous Wilbur Hassenfus October 27, 2016 1:54 PM  

Good enough not to need a functioning oxygen system, maybe?

Or did they fix that?

I wonder if they'd risk any F22s though. Aren't there still a lot of F15Es in the inventory?

Anonymous Wilbur Hassenfus October 27, 2016 2:09 PM  

Even non-coddled women aren't going to compare well to top-tier men on traits like aggression, teamwork under fire, and spatial awareness. The best women may compare well to average men, but military pilots aren't chosen for being average.

Anonymous Sam the Man October 27, 2016 2:14 PM  

As to Russian conscripts, they fought the German army to a standstill in 1942 and inflicted far more casualties on the German Army when it was at its peak then the allied did 2 years later when only facing the B team of the Wehrmacht.

Of course they lost a lot of men doing it, something on the ratio of 5 men lost per German causlty, but in the end they beat the Germans and it is a cultural memory of Russians, Their VE day parade is still a thing of national memory. Here in the US WWII seems to be a topic for obscure history roundtable discussion among older white men. Only 58 % of the draft age men in the US are now white.

The Russians can certainly fight, and growing up in a period of austerity does not make them less effective. My very brief time in service taught me the guys who can live on a very primitive level seem to do the best in bad circumstances. They are just used to it.

I would guess the US combat troops are still second to none, but I would suspect the combat support and service support elements have been affected by the SJW efforts.

Anonymous patrick kelly October 27, 2016 2:17 PM  

Jemison Thorsby wrote:... The last US serviceman killed by an enemy aircraft died in the Korean War....

Why don't you count sailors?

USSLibertyAttackedByIsraeliAircraft

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 27, 2016 2:23 PM  

Actually women make good pilots. The smaller body frame apparently makes it easier to retain some blood in the brain at supersonic acceleration

Women have much slower reaction times and are much less able to track the location of multiple physical objects as they move in relation to the observer.
In other words, they absolutely suck at dogfights.

Anonymous ZhukovG October 27, 2016 2:26 PM  

Under Putin and Minister Shoigu the Russian military is moving away from conscripts, who serve a two year commitment, and toward contract personnel. This is essentially the same as our volunteer personnel where an individual signs an enlistment contract with the service of their choice.

Contract personnel in the Russian military receive higher pay, better quarters and superior training. They are also used to fill out the frontline units and thus have access to better equipment.

Conscription is still important for the Russian military but mainly it serves to ensure that a good percentage of Russian adult males have had some combat training.

Blogger Balázs Varga October 27, 2016 2:26 PM  

My information is out of date, which I did note. If they got pressure suits now that do the job, indeed that weakness is countered. Also, I did not really think modern aircraft needed much spatial awareness with all that computerisation.

Sam the Man wrote:As to Russian conscripts, they fought the German army to a standstill in 1942 and inflicted far more casualties on the German Army when it was at its peak then the allied did 2 years later when only facing the B team of the Wehrmacht.

Of course they lost a lot of men doing it, something on the ratio of 5 men lost per German causlty, but in the end they beat the Germans and it is a cultural memory of Russians, Their VE day parade is still a thing of national memory. Here in the US WWII seems to be a topic for obscure history roundtable discussion among older white men. Only 58 % of the draft age men in the US are now white.

The Russians can certainly fight, and growing up in a period of austerity does not make them less effective. My very brief time in service taught me the guys who can live on a very primitive level seem to do the best in bad circumstances. They are just used to it.

I would guess the US combat troops are still second to none, but I would suspect the combat support and service support elements have been affected by the SJW efforts.


What he said.

I did not say all russians are elite fighters. I said they are extremely vicious and spiteful foes.
This is not love. This is FEAR. This is the product of us once seeing what they did to us and the germans when they went to war. You don't want to mess with Russians. They are brutal.

I am also not sure how much of the overweight SJW population is combat capable.


Blogger Johnny October 27, 2016 2:30 PM  

There is a pattern to weapons development. In general the stuff gets bigger and heavier and more feature laden, until it is so big and heavy and expensive that it is not functionally sound anymore. My take is that the F-35 is the outcome of that process and probably not a desirable fighter aircraft.

Blogger dc.sunsets October 27, 2016 2:30 PM  

All I can say is, if our (((neocons))) succeed in getting the West & East in a nuclear "lets you and him fight," someone saves the last ICBM for Israel and her resident puppeteers. If the USA & Russia get to glow, so should the people who pulled the strings to make that happen.

Blogger dc.sunsets October 27, 2016 2:36 PM  

It's beyond obvious that most Pentagon weapons procurement programs are poorly veiled systems for looting the treasury. The Age of Debt has seen an orgy of crime commensurate with the breadth and depth of the rise of the National Debt...IOW, indescribable.

High expense, expense overruns and high requirements for masses of maintenance and spare parts are features, not bugs. We're over 50 years from Eisenhower's Farewell Address...and 35 years into the greatest buildup in debt in human history.

What a combination.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian October 27, 2016 2:36 PM  

@53
Considering Russia's development post the USSR, accounting for the mess the country was in after the collapse, it would have been interesting to consider what they would have achieved and how different the world would be if the Russian State was never taken over by the (((non-Russian communists))).

Who'd that be, Goy?

Of Coursh!

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian October 27, 2016 2:37 PM  

@89
Yes. No more brother wars.

Anonymous Bz October 27, 2016 2:40 PM  

Well, when the female personnel gets shipped home due to mass pregnancy, the Russians will know something's up.

Russia clearly has a strong commitment to their ally Syria. It seems plainly foolish by the US to escalate this sort of conflict without even any great strategic interest of their own. Are they perhaps counting on the proverbial short, victorious war?

While Putin is a cool headed player, once the shooting starts, at what point will it stop? (Don't forget to guard the Persian Gulf, fellows. The Saudis would seem to be a semi-legit target if things heat up.)

Anonymous Bz October 27, 2016 2:44 PM  

Come to think of it, maybe that's why the Russians have been messing around with Sweden in the last year or so? Put the other flank in play.

Blogger Chris Mallory October 27, 2016 2:48 PM  

Jemison Thorsby wrote:The last US serviceman killed by an enemy aircraft
was
RA-5C 156633 (RVAH-13, USS Enterprise), to MiG-21 North Vietnam 28 December 1972, Lcdr A.H. Agnew POW, Lt. M.F. Haifley KIA.

Blogger Johnny October 27, 2016 2:55 PM  

dc.sunsets wrote:All I can say is, if our (((neocons))) succeed in getting the West & East in a nuclear "lets you and him fight," someone saves the last ICBM for Israel and her resident puppeteers. If the USA & Russia get to glow, so should the people who pulled the strings to make that happen.



Well, actually, it would be the last two nukes. That would probably terminate the country. Not that I would be looking forward to it.

OpenID anonymos-coward October 27, 2016 3:00 PM  

Of course they lost a lot of men doing it, something on the ratio of 5 men lost per German causlty

False, it was about 1.2 Soviet casualties per Axis casualty. The 1:5 figure is only if the German slaughter of POW's and civilians is counted too.

Blogger Anchorman October 27, 2016 3:00 PM  

I'm still waiting for someone to point out the Syrian "good guy" worth spilling American blood and treasure. Or Russian blood and treasure, for that matter.

Anonymous Sam the Man October 27, 2016 3:07 PM  

DC sunsets..

What... Why save the last bomb for Israeli?

Do you really think the Israelis want a large global war in their backyard? They do not. If you think Jews want other folks to sacrifice themselves for a stupid war for no reason, well that is not the Jews/Hebrews/Israelis I know.

Jews may seem paranoid (at times) because of statements like yours. Especially Israelis. After WWII, if you say you want to kill them they take you at your word.

Anonymous Sam the Man October 27, 2016 3:18 PM  

97) ah...no, you are wrong.

You got your figures from sites like this:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=87012&sid=953428974643eda759fddefc4c35d69f

They play games like forgetting all the soviet prisoners, (which are understated by around 500,000 in the first year) and including all the german allies as German losses, and include a lot of losses that the Germans took on other fronts, and include the vast numbers of Germans who surrendered at VE day.

When you get down to it, in 1942 the German Army inflicted around 4.8~4.9 Casualties to each one they took against the Soviets. That includes Stalingrad, as most of the Germans losses incurred at Stalingrad really were not finally inflicted until January/February of 1943.

Anonymous One Deplorable DT October 27, 2016 3:19 PM  

If this was a scenario where the US and Russia were going to fight for air superiority over Syria with absolutely no chance of escalation beyond, then the US would win. I don't doubt that we would have some losses to Russia. Neither do I doubt that we could take control quickly and decisively, and with greater losses to them.

But life is not a video game with neat little chapters and levels. We are virtually guaranteed of escalation should we engage and kill Russian fighters, SAM crews, and ships.

As is evident from past posts, I love to debate fighters and missiles and air combat with those who think the Russians have super weapons that can defeat everything we've got. But that's like debating Knights vs. Bishops when your opponent already owns the board.

Russia now has air superiority over Syria not because they have better weapons than we do, but because they have weapons that are good enough to guarantee a real fight. And they have moved those pieces onto the board. We have to decide if this particular board is worth risking World War 3.

I pray to God that Trump wins because Vox's assessment of Hillary is spot on. She has lived her entire life safe under the umbrella of US military dominance. She has no idea that the reality she grew up in is now fading. She has no more understanding of military strategy than a girl taking smartphone selfies has of photographic lens design.

To Hillary the military is that group of deplorable men you call when you want something done. And they better do it now, without questioning her, or she's going to throw a fit and a glass full of gin.

And that's a recipe for a world war if I've ever seen one.

Anonymous The Kulak October 27, 2016 3:20 PM  

Useful corrective to the 'muh invisble F-22s and swarms of cruise missiles will make any U.S. jets getting shot down or Russian cruise missiles hitting back at JSOC guys in Syria or Incirlik AFB un-possible' narrative some were spewing. Even John R. Schindler the junk pics guy who was fired by the US Naval War College and now puts out SBU disinfo is sobering up on going to war with the Rooskies in Syria. I guess he wants to keep the U.S. powder dry for his fantasy of a successful Ukie Operation Storm on Donetsk/Lugansk...

http://observer.com/2016/10/syrias-civil-war-is-over-russia-won/

Blogger Anchorman October 27, 2016 3:20 PM  

In fairness, he may be using stats that include my time playing World at War as the Russian sniper.

Blogger Anchorman October 27, 2016 3:25 PM  

From Schindler's article:

In Syria, Putin has achieved his strategic aims of saving the Assad regime while painting the West as inept villains who back jihadists.

The nerve. Making us look inept and backing jihadis is Obama's job!

Blogger Dr. Mabuse October 27, 2016 3:26 PM  

"The danger of a Hillary presidency is that she is likely to make the mistake of past crumbling empires in military decline, which is to fail to recognize the significance of that decline, and, through overconfidence, order military action that will lead to defeat."

You said yourself some weeks ago that Hillary has a little-girl's idea of military action. I remember a dialogue from an Agatha Christie mystery movie:

"I say, Stephens, would you go out and buy me a pistol?"
"A pistol, sir? What kind of pistol would you be requiring, sir?"
"The kind where you put your finger on the trigger and it goes 'bang' and goes on going 'bang' until you take it off."

That's what Hillary thinks the military is: a 'bang' machine that just works automatically when you press a button. She has no concept of a situation where the thing can't go 'bang', or the 'bang' doesn't magically drop a goodie in her lap. Just like Madeline Albright, saying "What's the point of having this superb military that you're always talking about if we can't use it?" It's just a THING to these people. I think like Saruman, liberals largely have minds of metal and wheels. Human being don't really exist for them.

Anonymous The Kulak October 27, 2016 3:26 PM  

@ 100 German not counting Romanian, Italian, Hungarian losses just at the gates of Moscow in December 1941 after five months of combat were 600,000 KIA, probably double that number seriously wounded. And that was when the Wehrmacht was advancing on average something like 12 to 15 miles a day. Once the tables were turned, which admittedly involved more Lend Lease after Stalingrad and Kursk, the Red Army slaughtered the Germans at a rate not quite matching that of the Wehrmacht against the Russians from 41-42 but pretty damn high.

At any rate, Operation Bagration was a slaughter with massed Soviet artillery/Katyushas doing much of the killing. Bringing things up to the present, here's a rare honest War on the Rocks piece admitting Russian arty would outrange, outgun and outnumber whatever NATO could field in a fight for the Baltics at Russia's doorstep (and the piece doesn't even discuss how badly outgunned any combined NATO/Ukrainian force would be in a slug fest east of the Dnieper).

http://warontherocks.com/2016/04/outnumbered-outranged-and-outgunned-how-russia-defeats-nato/

Blogger Lovekraft October 27, 2016 3:30 PM  

Hillary is a puppet. Her frailty indicates this. Kaine is one evil-looking sperg.

Blogger Lovekraft October 27, 2016 3:30 PM  

Hillary is a puppet. Her frailty indicates this. Kaine is one evil-looking sperg.

Blogger Gapeseed October 27, 2016 3:33 PM  

More and more, I long for Calvin Coolidge to walk though that door and take the inaugural oath. No foreign entanglements, no boondoggles, no giveaways, no nonsense. He would soothe our world.

Silent Cal is America's most underappreciated president, and would be perfect for the time.

Anonymous The Kulak October 27, 2016 3:33 PM  

@ 101 @ 104 I think the point has been made by all sides that the U.S. could indeed overwhelm the Russian ships and air defenses at or in Syria, but the price would be unacceptably high, and that has been Russian objective all along, to make it too costly to pay (and perhaps to get the CJCS Dunford and other reality-based military commanders at odds with the neocon nutjob civilians).

I mean losses in terms of not only shot down aircraft which might only be a couple dozen or three assuming massive Growler jamming (which the S300/400 systems can burn through but again might run out of rockets fast), but also casualties from Russian retaliation -- even assuming said retaliation remained in theater against JSOC guys at Hasakah or tit for tat bombardment of Incirlik for Kheimmim. I haven't even mentioned the possibility of spetsnaz teams killing U.S. sailors in Odessa or U.S. Army trainers at Yavoriv in Ukraine, to say nothing of the CIA guys and 'NATO vacationers' aka Polish mercs further east in Mariupol and closer to the Donbass front lines getting killed.

Again Moscow's sabre rattling and rollout of the Sarmat (next they'll emphasize that it can carry 5 to ten megaton ground burst warheads designed to penetrate any DUMB under DIA and turn Cheyenne Mountain into Cheyenne radioactive crater) aren't about deterring the batshit crazy neocons. It's about making the sane people in the military put the brakes on them. Here's a simple illustration of one neocon's sense of invincibility sitting on the upper west side of Manhattan, not realizing in a nuclear war with Russia he's dead in 35 minutes or less:

https://twitter.com/IRGC_QF/status/791395937470078976

Blogger VD October 27, 2016 3:34 PM  

If you think Jews want other folks to sacrifice themselves for a stupid war for no reason, well that is not the Jews/Hebrews/Israelis I know.

You obviously don't know many Jews in the media, then. Have you ever heard of Michael Ledeen or William Kristol or John Podhoretz, for starters?

Anonymous Deplorable S E Delenda October 27, 2016 3:43 PM  

@101

"Russia now has air superiority over Syria not because they have better weapons than we do, but because they have weapons that are good enough to guarantee a real fight. "

Precisely, the Russians have always favored the easily repairable and robust over the complicated and unreliable.

We have the F-22, whose original order was reduced by Congress by 3/4 (the bill was sponsored by supercuck McCain, working with Carl Levin at the behest of Obama and Gates) under the assumption that it was too expensive, the F-35 could fulfill our needs, but it turns out they are not reliable.

@105

The real danger of a Hillary is that she is mentally unstable. Any time her body betrays her (as it did again) or when she feels threatened, she'll want to show everybody that an amoral female with infinite ambition is just as good as an alpha male and want to project "strength". I am getting my bug out bags ready, although I'm not sure where I'll go if the crazy bitch starts WW3.





Blogger Junius Stone October 27, 2016 3:46 PM  

I agree. The problem is not equipment or the quality of our warriors. Despite the ill-advised social engineering, those in the ranks are the finest. Our gear is still top notch.

The problem is leadership, both the civilian policy makers and the top brass who have not sufficiently resisted the rainbow and unicorns nonsense from civilian policy makers who have no idea how to lead, how the real world works and live in this fantasy land of unisex marshmallow beings.

The civilian leaders at the top and some of the brass in service to them? Not warriors. Need a serious house cleaning at the top.

Blogger Junius Stone October 27, 2016 3:47 PM  

And I would say that many of our allies in the West, this could also be said.

Anonymous Athor Pel October 27, 2016 3:50 PM  

" 54. OpenID basementhomebrewer October 27, 2016 12:45 PM
...
The reason the project got the green light and continues to be funded is a combination of lack of foresight and keeping DOD contractors in various congressional districts profitable."



Profit is important but at it's core just keeping the military industrial complex alive is the real goal. All that specialized engineering and manufacturing knowledge goes away if we don't keep some of them going. No knowledge base means needed weapons don't get built because they can't be built.

Too bad that very real justification gets used by people that abuse the system for their personal profit and power.

Blogger Anchorman October 27, 2016 3:54 PM  

The civilian leaders at the top and some of the brass in service to them? Not warriors. Need a serious house cleaning at the top.

+1

There has been a lack of leadership within the civilian posts at the DoD. Worse, the Flags moving up rose during Obama's administration because they better suited his worldview. We won't be rid of them for at least four years.

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 3:57 PM  

Mig31b costs about 1/3 of F-22, at least as good a plane, much more durable...typical of Russian vs. US procurement. Russian S-300 and S-400 better than anything US has, not very expensive....US made an expensive bet on Stealth technology and lost, as radar got too good.
Russian are just better managers and more practical than the Pentagon, which is very corrupt.

Anonymous One Deplorable DT October 27, 2016 3:59 PM  

@110 - Here's a simple illustration of one neocon's sense of invincibility sitting on the upper west side of Manhattan, not realizing in a nuclear war with Russia he's dead in 35 minutes or less:

Now if only someone could make Hillary understand that.

Preferably when she's awake. And sober. Though I understand that's a hard combination to come by.

Anonymous One Deplorable DT October 27, 2016 4:07 PM  

@117 - Mig31b costs about 1/3 of F-22, at least as good a plane, much more durable...

I would have taken the bait had you said Su-35. But you're obviously trolling with a MiG-31.

You can buy Hot Wheels toy radar guns on eBay that could be used to guide missiles to that relic of the Cold War. Mattel might have even made a Barbie version.

Blogger justaguy October 27, 2016 4:12 PM  

It would be insane to engage with the Russians in their backyard and right next to their strong allies. Escalation is just about guaranteed and logistics would be a nightmare for us, not for the Russian, the Iranians, Hezbollah, etc.

Where would you base any US aircraft that are going to attack the Russians? Is there any nation that would allow basing--meaning war against the Russians? Any nation that did would be asking for Russian retaliation and an asymmetrical approach for use of force. (maybe something like for US use of Saudi airfields would be an attack against Saudi leadership with massed cruise missiles, etc.) Would NATO get involved via Turkey? We already do not have a coherent strategy nor any chance of success as we can't separate out who is who in the "rebels". Why would we risk or any allies risk escalation against the Russians and the Iranians? It isn't as if the US has a great track record of supporting allies? Haven't we left every single new ally since 1955 out to dry when push came to shove?

I'm hoping sanity prevails amongst the few military leaders left that know what they are doing and are not just SJW quotas. I'm not sure that there are very many at 2 stars or above that aren't totally converged and useless.

Blogger cheddarman October 27, 2016 4:15 PM  

The F-35 is the military equivalent of a flying piano. While it is impressive that the piano can fly, the utility of it as an instrument of war is highly questionable.

Blogger Anchorman October 27, 2016 4:21 PM  

Russian are just better managers and more practical than the Pentagon, which is very corrupt.

Pentagon has corruption. Agree.

How the heck can you mention “Russia” in a sentence with “corrupt,” not call out the rank corruption in Russia’s oligarchy, and keep a straight face?

Anonymous Rezny October 27, 2016 4:31 PM  

@83
At the end the ratio was 1 dead Ivan for 1.6 dead Hanses, Janoses and other Giovannis.
First years were terrible due to millions of Ivans voluntarily surrendering or suffering from extremely poor officer corps after the purges; after Stalingrad and Kursk it was reverse slaughter.
If Hitler wasn't a forever hurt Gamma hating on Slavs that had torn his butiful Asstria, he would have had millions of willing conscript to kill communism and establish German client-states, not millions of mistreated POWs executed or made to slave away.

So, I don't see Putin, however vile he may be and whatever ghouls he may contact with, gutting his own officer corps in search of traitors.

There's a semi-reliable conspiracy theory that Stalin was a willing informant to Okhrana ratting on his buddies, and a friend of Tukhachevsky found the documents in the archives. Such a paper would forever obliterate Stalin's power, and Stalin didn't knew which officers besides Tukhachevsky and other marshals knew, so he gutted most of the corps in the end.

Putin doesn't have to pretend to be a religious saint, having served in the KGB and lording over open thieves and scum.
And while there's surely no flaming love for the Russian state, submitting to American dominance isn't an option. The country tried that in the 90ies and only got looted and humiliated, try next time in 50 years when we'll forget what that decade was.

So I wouldn't expect Russian forcer to suffer losses in any way similar to Barbarossa. Too much inner cohesion with widespread mistrust and hate to Europe and America.

Nobody would be willing to die for Syria though. I expect equal losses and return to status quo if Hellary doesn't want to turn to radioactive ash that hard.
Russia already lost pilots and ground troops in several wars. USA didn't lose jets since Korea 60 years ago, but nothing is eternal.

Blogger Bob Loblaw October 27, 2016 4:33 PM  

I doubt the US would have much trouble getting air superiority in Syria. SAMs have proven to be quite a bit less effective in real life than they are on paper, and if we were really to go all in the first thing we'd do is sink Russian naval assets that could threaten our aircraft. The Russians didn't bring enough to the party that they could actually defend it from a serious US attack.

But I still don't see any indication US leadership is interested in getting into an actual shooting war with the Russians over Syria. For one thing, they haven't done enough preparation in the press to bring the American public along. You'll know when they're serious, because the airwaves will be flooded with news stories about all the terrible things the Russians are doing, like we heard about the Iraqis before Gulf War I. Remember the baby incubators (which was made up from whole cloth) and Chemical Ali (which wasn't)?

Anonymous One Deplorable DT October 27, 2016 4:45 PM  

@124 - give it time. Hillary has her country's 58th presidential election to steal, her Clinton Foundation bribes to arrange, Syrian citizens to murder, and Russia to blame for it. She's swamped.

OpenID luciussomesuch October 27, 2016 4:55 PM  

Every USN carrier group afloat is a sitting duck for Shanghai Pact submarines. The Kirov class battlecruisers have over a hundred point-defence SAMs in addition to the S-300 batteries which will cast a shield over Syrian airspace, as well as multiple double-gatling cannon (2 x 6 barrels) CIWS systems for taking out missiles before impact.

There is no possible low-consequence scenario for "sink[ing] Russian naval assets". Tremendously expensive and high-casualty losses of US naval assets will be incurred in any such process, and with them the illusion of FedGov unipolar supremacy.

Blogger Banjo October 27, 2016 5:14 PM  

@125 - And if she doesn't have her health, she doesn't have anything.

Wait...

Anonymous BGKB October 27, 2016 5:19 PM  

If you think Jews want other folks to sacrifice themselves for a stupid war for no reason,

The reason is jewish profit. Tell us why gay jews fear BIBI Netandyahoo more than they do moslem beheaders?

"There has been a lack of leadership within the civilian posts at the DoD.""The F-35 is the military equivalent of a flying piano. While it is impressive that the piano can fly"

Be glad that it was the army that got a gay secretary instead of the airfarce or Liberace would be flying the piano

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 5:19 PM  

Every surface ship in the Navy is a sitting duck for submarines, missiles, and soon lasers. Worse yet, cheap weapons will be destroying very expensive ships and especially aircraft carriers...

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 5:25 PM  

@128 Handwaving doesn't make it so, and if you sink theirs, they'll sink yours.....Which would be unfortunate for all those Annapolis ring wearers...

Blogger pyrrhus October 27, 2016 5:26 PM  

Sorry, that should be @124, Blogger interrupted me...

Blogger Anchorman October 27, 2016 5:34 PM  

Every surface ship in the Navy is a sitting duck for submarines, missiles, and soon lasers. Worse yet, cheap weapons will be destroying very expensive ships and especially aircraft carriers...

See: USS Cole

Blogger Gapeseed October 27, 2016 5:34 PM  

There is an expression that personnel makes policy. I think the composition of the Navy makes policy. Our carriers encourage intervention in the Third World when subs would be a much more cost-effective solution for defense and deterrent. One nuke - anywhere near a carrier task force - will mean mass casualties for the USN. If the Russians or Chinese or Iranians don't wish to escalate matters quite that much, a variety of missiles and torpedoes in a barrage would likely do the trick, at a cost far less than the cost of building a carrier task force. At 5,000 sailors and several billion a pop, it won't take much to make a full-out naval war with the Russians very expensive and cost prohibitive.

Anonymous Sam the Man October 27, 2016 5:51 PM  

111/VD

Ahhhh.... I know no Jews in the Media, but now that I think of it, yes there are a lot of Neocons/leftist folks from that background (I say background as many are functional atheists) who fit the bill. So as far as media whores, yes there are Jews who have beaten the drum for useless wars against the best interests of the US. Mea culpa

But of the normal everyday "have a working job" type and the Israeli officers I have known, no they are not looking for any wars to break out near them, so the idea of bombing Israel because our US government does something stupid is........well kind of evil.

That is my only point.

Anonymous BGKB October 27, 2016 6:38 PM  

Turns out the one pro HilLIARy general is being blackmailed https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/10/26/why-general-john-allen-is-being-promoted-in-commercials-for-hillary-clinton/

Anonymous Clay October 27, 2016 6:42 PM  

"The first kill by an F-15 was scored by Israeli Air Force (IAF) ace Moshe Melnik in 1979.[57] In 1979–81, during Israeli raids against Palestinian factions in Lebanon, F-15As reportedly downed 13 Syrian Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21s and two Syrian Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25s. Israeli F-15As and Bs participated as escorts in Operation Opera, an air strike on an Iraqi nuclear reactor. In the 1982 Lebanon War, Israeli F-15s were credited with 41 Syrian aircraft destroyed (23 MiG-21s and 17 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23, and one Aérospatiale SA.342L Gazelle helicopter)."

Yeah, I'm sure the F22 and F35 are turds with flying wings.

Blogger ZhukovG October 27, 2016 6:53 PM  

@Clay: The F35 is the 'Daikatana' of military acquisitions. The F22 however is probably the finest combat aircraft currently in service in the world; and it better be considering its price per copy.

Blogger Elder Son October 27, 2016 6:56 PM  

Anchorman wrote:Every surface ship in the Navy is a sitting duck for submarines, missiles, and soon lasers. Worse yet, cheap weapons will be destroying very expensive ships and especially aircraft carriers...

See: USS Cole


A lot of people poo-poo'ed that USS Cole thing. Then it was about 6 months later I read of Russia combat jets doing the same to some Israeli combat jets being somewhere they shouldn't be in Southern Syria providing assistance to "moderate" Jihad 4 "freedom" terrorists. The Russians just blinded the Israeli jets and politely told them to scram. And they scrammed.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 27, 2016 6:59 PM  

Sam the Man wrote:so the idea of bombing Israel because our US government does something stupid is........well kind of evil.

Jews are so put upon. Eliminating the manipulators and instigators or your destruction is just evil.

So, tell me about the "Samson Option."

Anonymous Clay October 27, 2016 7:01 PM  

Well, thanks, ZukhovG. You made me have to Google up "Diakatana".

I know the F35 is considered inferior, and over-priced in some views.

Who wants to try and prove them wrong?

Blogger Elder Son October 27, 2016 7:07 PM  

Just type: Pentagon weapons tester: F-35 fighter jet has 'significant' problems - in your search-bar.

Anonymous Clay October 27, 2016 7:14 PM  

Besides...an F22, or F15 for that matter, can't fly off a carrier. Do you know how many carriers we have?

What's the purpose of a carrier? To present firepower (aviail) to any point in the world necessary within 48 hours.

The F-18 is a fine jet, but it's getting a bit old.

Blogger Elder Son October 27, 2016 7:24 PM  

US-NATO as we speak are building improvised air bases throughout the Baltics. No need for Carriers. But then, no doubt that Russia knows where every one of them are.

Blogger Ken Prescott October 27, 2016 7:28 PM  

"Every USN carrier group afloat is a sitting duck for Shanghai Pact submarines."

Not as much as you might think. Submarines have a very severe tactical/operational constraint: the air/sea interface works both ways. Submarines have exactly one sensor available to them--sonar--and that sensor cannot significantly penetrate the air/sea interface, making them blind to air operations. The fact that they have but one sensor available to them also means that it's much, much easier to deny good sensor data to a submarine.

Because the submarine's main sensor is vulnerable to self-induced noise, tactical speeds are very low, while surface ship tactical speeds remain relatively high. The only way a submarine actually gets a carrier group is through one of three possibilities: (1) submarine is placed on a choke point (the downside being that the enemy expects the submarine to be there), (2) the carrier group gets unlucky (and submarines can get equally unlucky--or worse), or (3) the submarine makes a high speed transit (and is thus tactically and operationally blind--and hence vulnerable to ambush by ASW forces, many of which do not have the submarine's speed limitation).

Due to the limitations of physics, the high(ish)-bandwidth communications paths available to a submerged submarine are extremely limited in range, meaning that they cannot share a common operational picture beyond a few miles apart, making every boat a Navy of One, and making effective combined-arms tactics impossible. Having the luxury of fighting one adversary at a time is one heck of an advantage for the carrier group.

Look, just finding the other guy in maritime warfare is one hell of a tactical problem for anyone. It's even harder for an asset that has only one sensor path available.

Blogger clk October 27, 2016 7:30 PM  

Once again Putin does us a great favor and violates rule #1...never stop your enemy when they are doing something stupid... a lesson we know very well... russia wants to spend its very limited gold in the sand ... have they forgotten Afghanistan already ?

I dont care many "innocents" get killed in Syria. .. we have no legitimate reason to been in Syria, no national interest.. and i will not sacrifice a life of my, or anyone elses kids to get rid of Assad and put a bunch of potential terrorists in power in Syria... did that in Iraq, Egypt and Lybia... didnt work there, wont work in Syria.

Blogger Bob Loblaw October 27, 2016 7:36 PM  

luciussomesuch wrote:Every USN carrier group afloat is a sitting duck for Shanghai Pact submarines. The Kirov class battlecruisers have over a hundred point-defence SAMs in addition to the S-300 batteries which will cast a shield over Syrian airspace, as well as multiple double-gatling cannon (2 x 6 barrels) CIWS systems for taking out missiles before impact.

There is no possible low-consequence scenario for "sink[ing] Russian naval assets". Tremendously expensive and high-casualty losses of US naval assets will be incurred in any such process, and with them the illusion of FedGov unipolar supremacy.


This is a gross overestimation of Russian capability. It would only take a handful of US aircraft to send a single unattended Kirov to the bottom, and we wouldn't lose anything. The only thing that makes it interesting is the fact that she isn't unattended.

But she's not exactly well attended. The Russian surface task force in the Med consists of the antique carrier Kuznetsov, which broke down and had to be towed back to port after her last visit to Syria two years ago, Pyotr Velikiy, and two destroyers. That's it. That's enough to show the flag, but it's no more than a speed bump to US forces in a serious fight. The entire task force is less of a threat to ground forces in Syria than the single airbase at Khmeimim.

I would add if the Russians thought they might actually get into a scrap with the US there's no way would take what's left of the once-mighty Northern Fleet and move it into the Med where it's so vulnerable to land-based aircraft, which circles back to my point earlier that neither the Russians nor the US are acting like they think there's going to be combat between Russian and US forces.

Anonymous George of the Jungle October 27, 2016 7:39 PM  

Time for the vaunted US military to break out its superduper weapons: THEL's, railguns, TRB3's...

Blogger Elder Son October 27, 2016 7:41 PM  

What our fleets need to worry about, is Russian and Chinese anti-ship missiles that are the best and fastest in the world.

Blogger Ken Prescott October 27, 2016 7:55 PM  

"What our fleets need to worry about, is Russian and Chinese anti-ship missiles that are the best and fastest in the world."

They may be the fastest (assuming that they're actually in large-scale service, which I doubt). But it's a matter of degree only. Remember, Aegis can handle the BMD mission, and things don't get any faster than that.

An ASM shootout in the Eastern Med would likely result in empty magazines, few if any hits on warships . . . and a bunch of merchies getting hit by missiles that get seduced off target by soft-kill defenses.

Anonymous A.B. Prosper October 27, 2016 8:03 PM  

If it goes to large scale war no doubt the Neo-Cons in D.C will gladly fight to the last White conscript or till Russia starts hitting something they care about

As far as defeating the Russians. I suspect we could win any conventional engagements long term though with some casualties on our side and considerable expense. We might not be able to win a war and if Russia manages to bomb CONUS even with conventional weapons , we are humped. Our cities will be cannibal holocaust in days
No matter how it goes our allies won't come out well from it , even cheap and nasty weapons can be used to pound the stuffing out of Europe and I think our NATO "teammates" are well aware of this.

Use Poland as a base and its power generation eats missiles and rockets same with nearly anyone else. We "win" decide to regime change Russia and nukes fly

Neocons and ((friends)) might think that is A-OK or even winnable but its not in anyone's interest ours, Israel's or Russia's except maybe China and no one wants it. Its possible we get a WW1 style cluster-fuck that triggers the big one but my guess is that its all posturing.

Dying USA vs. Less than healthy Russia is a race to see who dies first. Slight bet its the USA myself 1:5 to 1 for the USA going down

in any case we don't need another war , enough White people have died fighting other Whites in the last century and I suspect we won't get one

Blogger GFR October 27, 2016 8:13 PM  

The F15 has a kill ratio of 100 to zero in real combat and in exercises the F22 had a kill ratio of 141 to 2. If the russians couldnt see the F22 do you think they would tell you?

Blogger Bob Loblaw October 27, 2016 8:40 PM  

Elder Son wrote:What our fleets need to worry about, is Russian and Chinese anti-ship missiles that are the best and fastest in the world.

Chinese anti-ship missiles (outside Russian imports) are crap. You realize the Houthis have been shooting them at US warships off the coast of Yemen? And that they haven't managed to get anywhere near the target?

The Russian Onyx/Moskit/Granit "streakers" aren't better than other missiles, they're just different. They have different advantages and disadvantages. On the plus side if they manage to get into the terminal phase they're difficult to shoot down because they're so fast. Not impossible, I might add. Just difficult.

But on the other side of the ledger: They stand out like a sun on IR and doppler radar, so you can't miss them. They run so hot they can't use IR guidance, which means they're easier to spoof. They very large and heavy, but at the same time relatively short range, so taking out the launch platform before launch is easier. While they're more difficult to engage at terminal phases, they're easier to engage farther out because of their size and lack of maneuverability.

You should ask yourself why the US has never produced streakers. It isn't because we can't.

Anonymous Clay October 27, 2016 8:45 PM  

I have not ever, and will not ever tell you an American carrier can't be destroyed.

Doing so, however, would mean inviting doom upon your ass and it's sponsors.

In a very quick retaliatory action.

Anonymous Isotalo October 27, 2016 8:49 PM  

This Russia stronk stuff is really getting old, fast.

If you think for a second the Russians are somehow the good guys, you're badly mistaken. They'd kill every single one of you in an instant if they thought they could get away with it. Unfortunately for the Russians, there's precisely two scenarios where they can win a war: 1) when they outnumber their enemy 10 to 1, and as history shows even this doesn't guarantee a Russian victory, and 2) when they're fighting a moron ignorant of logistical realities willing to run balls deep into Russian scorched earth only to be ambushed when go-juice runs out (Hitler and Napoleon were both this).

Never forget, Russia is to blame for much if not most of this red-green neo-communist bs that now plagues the west. True, Russians aren't the only party to blame: there's also western stupidity, Nazis, and probably some Jews as well.

As for all that noise about Russians being able to counter this and that western tech with about a fraction of the R&D budget... Let me tell you, if God was real, and entered the earth tomorrow, sinking half of Europe, a third of Asia and all of Africa under the sea with one divine word of wrath... even then, Russians would state they are fully aware of God's tricks and entirely capable of countering them. These people are so terrified of showing weakness, they'll still posture about their invincibility while you're choking the life out of their shrapnel-mutilated corpse.

If it's allies people want, it's time for a disappointment. Russia isn't it, Russia is just another sort of enemy. True, they're less dangerous than some others, because they're not crazy and they're not very brave either. But they still want you... and me, dead or kneeling, which is pretty much the same, to me at least.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 27, 2016 9:52 PM  

Isotalo wrote:Russia isn't it, Russia is just another sort of enemy. True, they're less dangerous than some others, because they're not crazy and they're not very brave either. But they still want you... and me, dead or kneeling, which is pretty much the same, to me at least.
Based on what?That's simply bullshit. Russia wants, and has always wanted, a buffer between Russia and the barbarians. That's a result of being the gates of Europe for every rampaging Central Asian tribe for 6000 years, and the gates of Asia for every monomaniacal dictator for the last 2000.
The Huns conquered Pannonia, after going through the Russians. Genghis Khan threatened Europe, after conquering Russia. The Turks sacked Constantiople, after harrassing and attacking Russia. The Cossacks, the Swedes. The poles. Even the fucking Armenians.

And maneuvering to bring the fucking barbarians to their doorstep is the one guaranteed way to invoke a violent response from Russia.

Blogger Stephen Davenport October 27, 2016 10:10 PM  

Vox, you know absolutely jack squat about this. You are seriously over-estimating Russian military abilities. The US military would wipe the Russians out if push comes to shove. Me, you and everyone who follows military history knows this, yet putzes like you continue to overhype the Russian "Bear". Their military sucks and they struggle in every single conflict they are involved in. The Ukrainians stopped their ass cold and hell even tiny Georgia smacked them around and we will not even mention that disaster that was Chechnya and Afghanistan. So please stop this libertarian we are about to have a third World War Bullshit, it makes you look silly.

Anonymous Isotalo October 27, 2016 10:15 PM  

Snidely Whiplash wrote:Based on what?That's simply bullshit. Russia wants, and has always wanted, a buffer between Russia and the barbarians.

Based on my family living next to Russia for at least three times as long as the USA have existed, and learning a few things about our sweet neighbor during those centuries.

Yes, you are partly right: Russia wants a buffer. But that's just one thing they want, the way I want my whisky but that ain't all I want. Russia wants power and safety, and a buffer around Russia is only a start towards that. The final objective? Everyone anywhere near their equal dead or castrated, meaning China and USA and Germany, because that is safety. Everyone much smaller and weaker kneeling to them, because that is how they see power.

As for barbarians, look at Russian history, and tell us how they are not barbarians themselves. Not that there's anything wrong with that: we were all barbarians once. Just that some of us are barbarians still. Like the Russians.

Now, you don't have to believe me. You really don't have any reason to. I'm just saying what I know, hopeful you'll maybe start looking into this thing with open eyes. You might ask youself, how many ethnic Russians have you spoken to during your last week? Month? Year? Your entire life? Ever fought a Russian? How much do you know of these people that you did not learn from a history book written by a German or some Englishman? Consider that.

Now, I'm not saying you're an American. But if you were, I wouldn't blame you for seeing Russians as some sort of victim and good guy. It's hard to see much from so far away, and the Atlantic isn't exactly a small duck pond. From such a distance, it's a coin toss what you'll see.

Blogger ZhukovG October 27, 2016 10:24 PM  

@Stephen Davenport: In a single short paragraph you have displayed such a breathtaking amount of false information and half-truths that I must assume that, rather than the innocence of ignorance, you are deliberately lying.

You have attempted to present these points before, and in fact this almost looks like a copy-paste job. They are no more true now then they were before.

It is silly to make wild assumptions about the outcome of a US/Russia conflict since no one knows with certainty how such a conflict would turn out.

Blogger ZhukovG October 27, 2016 10:31 PM  

@Isotalo: Just for you since you seem emotional.

Slava Bogu!
Slava Mat Rossiya!

Blogger The Other Robot October 27, 2016 10:44 PM  

I guess if we are lucky we will get to see how well each side does in the coming months.

Blogger Stephen Davenport October 27, 2016 10:52 PM  

@158 We have had this discussion before, show me this wondrous awesome military you talk about. From your name I assume you are Russian. So enlighten me, prove your point.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 27, 2016 10:53 PM  

Now, you don't have to believe me. You really don't have any reason to. I'm just saying what I know, hopeful you'll maybe start looking into this thing with open eyes. You might ask youself, how many ethnic Russians have you spoken to during your last week? Month? Year? Your entire life? Ever fought a Russian? How much do you know of these people that you did not learn from a history book written by a German or some Englishman? Consider that.
I base my assessment of Russians from spending quite a lot of my youth in the central Willamette Valley, where, in the 1960s and 70, before the Mexicans started pushing them out, Russians were the dominant ethnic group among the working and agricultural class.
Yes I've fought Russians. I've drunk with Russians. I've fucked a few Russians.
Russians are bastards. Russians are brutal. Russians are dishonest, sly and exceptionally good at sneaking.
They also know how to cut their losses.
But, the one thing they don't exhibit is a will to power. That's why they've been ruled by foreigners virtually their entire history. Lenin was the first ethnically Russian ruler since the death of Peter's sons.
Stalin was a Georgian.

Blogger Stephen Davenport October 27, 2016 10:54 PM  

Ohh, just to head you off at the pass, you have not produced in proof yet other than ww2. So please continue, let me see this proof.

Blogger Arthur Isaac October 27, 2016 10:56 PM  

Imagine you are a POG and a female (I repeat myself). Now imagine you are not somehow knocked up and are actually deployed in a distant hostile neighborhood. Now imagine there is no Navy or Air Force to get you "home".

Bataan Part Deux. This time with more raping and genital mutilation.

Anonymous Isotalo October 27, 2016 11:22 PM  

@ZhukovG

For Finns, there's not so many contexts where being emotional is allowed, except of course anything involving Russia or Sweden, and alcohol in general, so...


@Snidely Whiplash

Now it makes sense, thank you for the reply. I suspect you've been dealing with those Russians who don't like the power-hungry aspect of the home culture. That's probably one reason why they'd leave home and go as far as Willamette Valley to live their lives. Back here? We deal unfortunately mostly with those Russians who find no flaws in the culture and think they're God's chosen people to rule over everyone else. We have some of the other type of Russian too, but they're mostly not inside Russian borders. We can agree that even the... "modest" or good Russians can't seem to shake the brutality and dishonesty.

Still, don't let me get carried away: I'll much rather live next to Russians and fight them, than live next to whatever fashionable refugee of the day might be, hailing no doubt from some fantastically civilized corner of Iraq or Somalia...

Blogger Nobody In Particular October 27, 2016 11:29 PM  

Regardless of right or wrong, Russia and the US's reasons for going to war are just as good or as stupid as the reasons that led to WWI or WWII, e.g. the leap of the Panther, Sudetenland, etc..
In each case it wasn't just one thing --- likewise now there are Ukraine, Georgia, Syria, South China Sea, the missile shield, and maybe others; that's for future historians to say.
War didn't seem inevitable in either case and at various points people thought they had avoided it through negotiations. In the end it still happened.
I think there were two main reasons: neither side could trust the other (also, one side thought the other was too unpredictable) and each side was confident it could win.
I see some parallels with the current situation. Here both sides think the other is too unpredictable: the US e.g. for pushing forward with the NATO expansion and Russia e.g. for invading Crimea.
People who get to the top of governments do not get there by refusing to take chances. Trump seems like he likes risk; he didn't prepare for the debates. Clinton looks like a risk-averse person (going with the consensus), but she may not actually understand what is risky. Also, she may feel the need to prove (again, after Iraq, after Lybia, after Syria, etc.) that she is tough.
Hopefully nuclear weapons won't get used or at least not in populated areas. They don't have to be.

Blogger Nobody In Particular October 27, 2016 11:30 PM  

WWI and WWII happened between almost the same countries, but the ideologies involved in WWI and WWII were very different.
Revolutionary France fought against Europe, just like Louis XIV fought against Europe, but in the name of pretty different ideologies.
Similarly, the current situation looks like a Cold War rematch, although the Cold War ideologies are no longer in play.
It's almost as if this were a struggle between nations for world domination and ideology were irrelevant.
The upside is that, again, both sides have nuclear weapons, so this may just be Cold War II, with no direct combat between the main combatants.

Anonymous Clay October 28, 2016 12:02 AM  

Lord Have Mercy. Where did all these Commie apologizers come from?

Blogger Balázs Varga October 28, 2016 12:05 AM  

Isotalo wrote:This Russia stronk stuff is really getting old, fast.

If you think for a second the Russians are somehow the good guys, you're badly mistaken. They'd kill every single one of you in an instant if they thought they could get away with it. Unfortunately for the Russians, there's precisely two scenarios where they can win a war: 1) when they outnumber their enemy 10 to 1, and as history shows even this doesn't guarantee a Russian victory, and 2) when they're fighting a moron ignorant of logistical realities willing to run balls deep into Russian scorched earth only to be ambushed when go-juice runs out (Hitler and Napoleon were both this).

Never forget, Russia is to blame for much if not most of this red-green neo-communist bs that now plagues the west. True, Russians aren't the only party to blame: there's also western stupidity, Nazis, and probably some Jews as well.

As for all that noise about Russians being able to counter this and that western tech with about a fraction of the R&D budget... Let me tell you, if God was real, and entered the earth tomorrow, sinking half of Europe, a third of Asia and all of Africa under the sea with one divine word of wrath... even then, Russians would state they are fully aware of God's tricks and entirely capable of countering them. These people are so terrified of showing weakness, they'll still posture about their invincibility while you're choking the life out of their shrapnel-mutilated corpse.

If it's allies people want, it's time for a disappointment. Russia isn't it, Russia is just another sort of enemy. True, they're less dangerous than some others, because they're not crazy and they're not very brave either. But they still want you... and me, dead or kneeling, which is pretty much the same, to me at least.


So you are saying Napoleon was an ignorant moron. Well he still managed much more than everybody else on this webpage, what does that make you?

Anonymous Isotalo October 28, 2016 12:29 AM  

Balázs Varga wrote:So you are saying Napoleon was an ignorant moron. Well he still managed much more than everybody else on this webpage, what does that make you?

It makes me a moron far less ambitious than Napoleon was, I think.

Still, I'm not saying Napoleon or even Hitler were stupid as in they had lower than average IQs. No, I'm saying their egos, megalomania, whatever it is, was making them ignore things that they should be smart enough not to ignore. Remember your Caesar: Men willingly believe what they wish.

You believe you're The Badass of Europe, so you think you can just take your Grande Armee, march into Russia and have them cry for your mercy. It does not seem to occur to you that Russians might not be honorable morons who would throw away their ability to bleed your forces dry with scorched earth tactics that you have absolutely no counter for, due to Russia being so enormous and your logistics so limited. So what do you do? You lose. I bet, if Napoleon hadn't been emperor with his ego fully invested in it, but had been just some random hireling who'd been told to go beat Russia, he would have said it can't be done with his resources unless Russians decide they want to lose.

Anonymous The Kulak October 28, 2016 12:32 AM  

@ 163 Stephen Davenport -- as an American who used to live in Russia, I'm happy to demonstrate that your initial statement ZhukovG replied to was horsecrap. The Georgians taught the Russians a lesson in 2008? That's not how I remember it. I recall the Georgian Army which had been trained by US Marines at US taxpayer expense under Dubya attacking South Ossetia on the night of 08/08/08, supposedly on the basis of coming under fire but in fact as part of an operation Saakashvili tried to get Condi Rice to green light, and failing to secure Tskivnal after killing a few Russian peacekeepers and some Ossetian miltia. Having failed miserably to seal the Roki Tunnel from the Russian 58th Army (strange eh if it was all a Russian set up that the Georgians couldn't do even that anticipating the armor massing on the other side?) the Georgian Army then hastily retreated to fallback positions to defend Tblisi, while the Russians drove their tanks to Poti and bombed Gori. The Georgian Army did shoot down a few Russian bombers though, and I must say published photos of the damage from a Ukrainian supplied BUK on a downed TU-22 Backfire cockpit from that time looks hardly anything like what a supposed Russian BUK did to MH17...

http://thesaker.is/seeing-through-the-doublethink-primary-evidence-on-losses-of-the-combatants-at-donbass/
Actual vs admitted Ukie KIA -- between 14 and 17,000 DEAD, times two wounded, not the laughable 2,500-3,000 killed figures tossed around by the Kyiv Post

https://slavyangrad.org/2014/08/27/the-southern-front-catastrophe-august-27-2014/
The Ukie highway of death near the Russian border south of Saur Mogila, when the entire flank of the attempt to encircle Donetsk collapsed and the 'Northern Wind' volunteers with some Russian Army fire support came through on their tanks

The Russian Army learned from that combat experience and became much more proficient, such that when they intervened in very limited fashion in the Donbas of August 2014, they opened up with mass fires on those 'Ukrainians who stopped them cold' and wiped Kiev's hapless 30th brigade just about out as a military formation. The survivors retreated west while many hundreds of conscripts staggered across the border into Russia, where they were given medical treatment, food and then sent back as they weren't POWs and the Russian Federation was not officially at war with Ukraine. One of the Potomac Institute's fellows incidentally admits to this incident when he growls about the Russians using cluster and thermobaric rockets against Ukrainian Army units, but doesn't dare say where and when it happened. Do you ever ask why? Well because the Ukrainians' official casualty figures are horseshit, and every journalist with any military knowledge whatsoever (and there have only been a few) know this, but keep their mouths shut about it. According to Lost Armor estimates in the course of 'stopping cold' as you put it the 'Northern Wind' aka a Russian foreign legion advance that never went beyond Donetsk or Lugansk cities proper or involved more than brigade strength against what was a Ukrainian Army force of something like 80 to 100,000 men, the Ukies lost several thousand men and hundreds of knocked out vehicles. They lost thousands of KIA and hundreds more at Donetsk Airport where the UAF 'cyborgs' were stacked like cordwood and recovered from the rubble, along with many Ukies dead without insignia who may very well have been 'vacationing' Polish Army (Polish flags and M-16s were found in the rubble of the Donetsk Airport terminal).

Anonymous The Kulak October 28, 2016 12:40 AM  

@ Stephen Davenport

Keep in mind throughout that battle in the winter of 2014-15 the Russians didn't use a single air strike when they very easily could've fried the 'cyborg' defenders of Donetsk Airport with a couple of SU-25s smoking in low dropping thermobaric/incendiary thermite warheads (the defenders below not killed by the blast would've asphyxiated or died fighting the fire).

Isn't it interesting Stephen how no matter how many times the Ukies claim they were fighting Russian Army regulars in the course of two years of war, they can't point to a single verified air or cruise missile strike on Ukie positions? Why is that Stephen if the Russians are lying and their army is so pathetic it was beaten by the awesome Ukies?

It's because the coal miners, teenagers and hairdressers manning or womaning the front lines before Donetsk don't have aircraft or forward air controller training, that's why. Because the Russian Army per se isn't actually fighting in Donbass, only a few GRU 'Polite People' advisers, SIGINT/ELINT specialists in Donetsk city, and perhaps the occasional specialist in counterbattery fire when the Ukies get uppity and dramatically scale up their fire on the city. Being an artilleryman for that reason is probably the shittiest job in the Ukrainian Army. Check out these credible figures for how many cannons and self-propelled guns the Ukies lost, into the hundreds. Now you know why so many of the skirmishes are now fought by the Ukies using heavy mortars or old 1960s vintage Soviet calibers instead. And this attrition allows for some resupply from old Polish Warsaw Pact stocks which has surely taken place (though not as much as you'd think, given how much Warsaw Pact hardware was sold in the 1990s to African countries, the Balkans, or has since been blown on the Syrian jihadists failed effort to topple Assad via Turkey):

http://thesaker.is/ukrainian-army-losses-in-ato-anti-terrorist-operation-according-to-the-iisss-military-balance/

Once again, it is fine for you to come in here and chide us as supposedly ignorant Americans caught up in Putin's propaganda, or for a Finn to ask how many of us have ever actually met or interacted with Russians. But it's quite another for you to repeat the bullshit of known liars like Saakashvili or Poroshenko about how the Russians are paper tigers when the glorious greater Galician master race can't even defeat the Russian JV team in Donetsk and Lugansk, much less ever hope to march on Crimea without getting slaughtered. It's that part, repeating the Ukies bullshit propaganda, that gets me angry. Not because I care all that much about what flag flies over Donetsk or Lugansk, but because I as a taxpayer have to pay for it, including the SBU thugs who now doubt told the journalists to keep their mouths shut and not visit the hometown of the wiped out 30th brigade. Here're are some videos for you straight from the Ukrainian soldiers themselves who said they were abandoned by their high command, in case you want to accuse me of repeating Russian propaganda:

http://russia-insider.com/en/military/kiev-wildly-understating-combat-deaths/ri419
Watch the videos and see what I mean -- these are UAF soldiers admitting to 8,000 KIA by September 2014. How many Ukie soldiers have died since then?

Anonymous Clay October 28, 2016 12:49 AM  

Screw you and the Ukraine.

Come on over here, take over Mexico, and build a wall.

"Keep your friends close...your enemies closer."

Anonymous The Kulak October 28, 2016 12:59 AM  

It's all well and good for present and former US Navy or Air Force guys to come on here and tell us to curb our enthusiasm regarding what we think we know about Russian hardware and its export selling points. They after all are trained to believe in their equipment and its ability to overcome threats like supersonic (if not the latest generation of hypersonic carrier killing) cruise missiles. As ZhukovG says no sane person should want to find out just how well AEGIS will perform when it's shooting at drone decoys and the real Granits hit at sea level after the lead one 'pops up' to ID the target for the terminal phase. Or find out the hard way that those Iskander hypersonic rockets near Kheimmim not only can take out a good chunk of Incirlik Air Base, but also have an anti-ship capability to sink a US Navy vessel in the eastern Med.

It's quite another to believe known liars and bullshitters in Kiev about how they've been 'fighting the Russian Army' as opposed to Moscow's JV team Novorossiya/Donbass foreign legion without a single air strike loss in two years, while we see what the actual Russian air force can do in Syria daily. Give me a break.

These are the same Kiev thugs who claimed the Maidan snipers all conveniently got away like OJ's real killers from snipers nests in buildings Andre Parubiy and the Maidan Self Defense thugs controlled in February 2014. Or that the anti-Maidan activists at the Odessa Trades Union Building scores of them all burned, shot and stabbed themselves to death without any premeditation on the part of a SBU/Ukrainian Interior Ministry backed Right Sector progrom mob whatsoever in May 2014. And you know very well hell will freeze over before the U.S. intelligence community ever releases any sat pics of the Russian BUK that shot down MH17. Not because of 'muh sources and methods' or because our sat pics are so good they can't be degraded for declassified release,e but because the only sat pics they have of BUKs in the Donbass from July 17, 2014 were all Ukie-controlled. The Ukies had the means, motive and opportunity and they done it. Russia had neither the need to supply a bunch of poorly trained Cossacks with a BUK nor the inclination, unless MH17 was shot down with a BUK that was captured from the Ukies (the initial BND assessment) which would still make Kiev civilly liable for failing to close the air space and lying about the safety of aircraft above 20,000 feet.

Anonymous Poetentiate October 28, 2016 1:09 AM  

The Kulak: That is a serious load of well refined bullsh*t. I'm guessing you're paid to do this.

Anonymous The Kulak October 28, 2016 1:12 AM  

@ Isotalo -- I have often found those aspects of the Russian character you asa Finn find most distasteful about as pronounced as much or more in the Ukrainians. At least, there seems to be something in the Ukrainian character about every man a hetaman (Cossack chieftan) and a tendency to believe whatever foreign hegemon that's using them as cannon fodder at the moment really cares about them, dating back to the Swedes in the 18th century if not the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (I suspect in 50 years time Lvov will be back apart of some Polish led entity, as will Vilnius aka Vilna). But that tendency is more pronounced as you said in the homeland than in the Diaspora. The tendency towards exaggeration/big man talk in that culture which is evident in the 'volunteer battalions' like the SS flag wavers of Azov who let the regular Ukie Army bear the brunt of the fighting was told to me FWIW by a Russian with grandparents from Kiev. Maybe it has something to do with Ukraine's history as the 'kraina or 'borderland' that attracted more adventurers, Cossack warriors and cons/ex-cons than the general Russian Empire population. Something like the distinction between Aussies and Brits. But genetically, not to disappoint the Finns here, but the primary blood difference between greater Galicians in western Ukraine and ethnic Russians in Donbass is more Finno Ugric blood in the latter and more Polish genetic markers in the former. Meaning the latter may be more cold blooded and have lengthier time horizons, however infinitesmal the difference, than the former. Given the recurring cycles of Ukrainian history where various Cossack chieftans fight amongst themselves until much of the country reverts to either a Polish/Austro Hungarian Catholic or Russian Orthodox hegemony, that tiny difference could count. The Banderite-agitprop about the accursed Moskals all being Mongol descended with the exception of some Tatar blood in the boyars is horsecrap with no basis in genetic science. As you can see I like ordinary Ukrainians well enough, but as someone with Polish blood I could give a damn about the Bandera/UPA cult, and as Polish nationalism becomes more pronounced I expect more Right Sector/Ukrainian young dude reluctance to wave that red and black flag after dark on the Polish side of the border. Not everyone has forgotten Volyn or thinks dying in the Donbass alongside those who idolize the mass murderers of your great uncles in Volyn is a great expression of Polish patriotism (because we can all unite by hating Russia!).

Anonymous The Kulak October 28, 2016 1:21 AM  

@ 175 c'mon you can do better than that, starting with my point about how the Maidan snipers all conveniently got away and then proceeding to how awesome the Ukrainian Army is that it couldn't take Donetsk or Lugansk, and the 'heroes of Maidan' among the Donbass battalion leadership all whined like little bitches on their Facebook pages when they encountered a real war at Ilovaisk instead of just shooting Berkut cops who didn't even have sidearms to defend themselves on the Maidan. Yes in actual war the enemy has more than just AKs, pistols or WW2 relic anti-tank rifles to shoot back with. In particular I recall the Right Sector leader's million dollar wound which got him medevaced quickly. At least Zakharchenko comes to the front lines and has been wounded by sniper fire. Porky walks around like a fat bastard with a Saddam-style pistol holstered at his side.

Again I sympathize with the ordinary Ukrainian soldier. But the volunteer battalions tend to talk a big game while letting the conscripts bleed and die while the SS Das Reich flag wavers of Azov wage sitzkrieg in Mariupol surrounded by civilians the LDNR don't want to touch. They're scum and Gladio 2.0 idiots who will be among the first to die if Hildabeast actually prods the Russians into overtly dropping the hammer in eastern Ukraine. There won't be any shortage of locals in Mariupol who hate Azov's guts giving the GRU coordinates on where they eat, sleep, screw, and shit before the GLONASS guided bombs start dropping on their heads and the Polite People show up with thermobaric Kornets to fry them in an actual war with Russia, not the creaking/poorly manned no air support LDNR.

What time is it at NATO's Center for Information Excellence in Riga anyway? I guess we're overdue for some professional NATO trolls to step in now. Might as well do a good job boys, it's my American tax dollars that pay you. It's precisely because I'm a patriotic American that I don't want to see Hildabeast elected and sending American boys to die for Donbass which will surely happen if she is.

Blogger Bob Loblaw October 28, 2016 1:23 AM  

The Kulak, I wholeheartedly agree it's a shame US military analysts haven't spent any time thinking about this kind of stuff or wargaming it. Presumably this is all new to them, and you should forward your insights immediately.

Anonymous The Kulak October 28, 2016 1:43 AM  

Bob, Happy to oblige with some reality as opposed to wishful thinking about fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian and how easy it will be for Kiev to replicate Croatia's 'Operation Storm' without any NATO guys having to bleed and die for Donetsk or Lugansk (hence the great Ukie casualties cover up): http://www.rand.org/blog/2016/04/outnumbered-outranged-and-outgunned-how-russia-defeats.html

I'd just rather not see Americans coming back in coffins from Donbass, Syria and Yemen after Hildabeast gets elected and tries to show those Rooskies, Assad and the Iranians who's boss (and prop up the Saudis losing war in Yemen to boot).

Anonymous The Kulak October 28, 2016 1:49 AM  

"You realize the Houthis have been shooting them at US warships off the coast of Yemen? And that they haven't managed to get anywhere near the target?" You realize those were probably old Saudi vintage Silkworm pieces of junk from the 1980s and that the Navy said at least one of the 'attacks' was actually a radar error? Maybe someone in the Pentagon doesn't want to fight the Saudis losing war for them.

The great suppliers and financiers of the TOW jihad in Syria can't even protect their southwestern border from being overrun by some tribesmen. Payback for all those TOW struck SAA tanks is a bitch when we see more YouTube videos of the Kornets and Toophans frying Saudi Abrams and Bradleys.

Again I'd rather not find out the hard way just how un-untouchable those AEGIS ships are.

Anonymous Rezny October 28, 2016 3:56 AM  

@162
Ulyanov's mother was Jewish with surname Blank, and his father was from a bloodline of baptized Kalmyks.
He's quite literally a Jew-Mongol mongrel. Barely 1/4 of his lineage was Slavic.
He couldn't even speak Russian properly, his extremely Jewish inability to pronunciate Russian thrilling R has been a base for jokes here for a fucking century already.

You are so full of shit, like every post you've written.
Luckily you'll die in flames if shit hits the fan.

Anonymous Rezny October 28, 2016 3:57 AM  

@180 @162
Sorry, was meant for @161. Not a marksman am I for sure.

OpenID aew51183 October 28, 2016 5:03 AM  

The reality is the USA's military industrial complex has become a cesspool of corruption since it lost its focus at the end of the cold war.

We have endless programs which are simply "make-work" for various pork barrel projects, employing unknown millions in states which would otherwise be economic dead-zones to create weapons for "the last war".

Since that time, military theorists have discovered carrier groups can be rendered defenseless using saturation attacks by cheap missiles, tanks have been rendered obsolete by increasingly cheap, potent, and sophisticated infantry-portable systems, and even primitive insurgencies are deploying explosive drones too small for radar against entire squads of troops.

I liken the US military today to the HMS Hood in WW2, a lumbering, obsolete behemoth waiting for a shell through its un-armored deck.

The complexity of the potential interactions between the R&D efforts of the US, Russia, and China has become uncertain to the point we are likely to see these parties testing one another once again. My thought is the outcome of those tests will likely favor Russia, but either way I'm absolutely sure the corruption inherent in America's R&D systems will place her at the bottom.

Hopefully then the cabal who currently hijack America to be their jackboot upon the world's throat will turn elsewhere, allowing us the capacity to recover our identity.

Anonymous Eric the Red October 28, 2016 5:38 AM  

Historically, Russians have always been good at mathematics and chess. Now that they no longer have the yoke of Soviet mismanagement on their backs, the Russian military-industrial complex can design and build weapons systems that are technologically advanced, reliable, and designed to effectively fulfill Russian strategic goals.

Meanwhile, the US military-industrial complex has directed its time, energy and money over the past 40 years towards diversity, equality, human resources, more diversity, etc ad nauseum. Just for starters, how many women working for US defense contractors or military procurement offices have been making managerial decisions, and do you think the associated weapons systems are cumulatively better or worse off for it? And let's not even get into how many useless NAM's have been hired in lower-level positions and are getting in the way of putting out good product.

These factors have cumulative impact. Now after having thought about all that, do you really trust the vaunted efficacy of US weapons systems as they currently exist in relation to new Russian equivalent platforms.

Anonymous Eric the Red October 28, 2016 5:57 AM  

Damn it, when your buy into a false premise like diversity, you start to make mistakes. And when diversity gets entrenched in an organization like a defense contractor, it can't stop making mistakes.

But the r-selected rabbits don't give a damn, they just keep munching merrily along. Give them their free stuff for today, and accompany it with some stupid but pleasant-sounding meme as rationalization, and they are quite content to let weapons, the military, the society, the whole damn house of cards come falling down.

Anonymous Eric the Red October 28, 2016 6:32 AM  

(Damn it, I hate having to re-post something 3 times because Disqus deletes it, even AFTER I see it up on the blog. VD or markku or somebody, please fix it, ok?)

Historically, Russians have always been good at mathematics and chess. Now that they no longer have the yoke of Soviet mismanagement on their backs, the Russian military-industrial complex can design and build weapons systems that are technologically advanced, reliable, and designed to effectively fulfill Russian strategic goals.

Meanwhile, the US military-industrial complex has directed its time, energy and money over the past 40 years towards diversity, equality, human resources, more diversity, etc ad nauseum. Just for starters, how many women working for US defense contractors or military procurement offices have been making managerial decisions, and do you think the associated weapons systems are cumulatively better or worse off for it? And let's not even get into how many useless NAM's have been hired in lower-level positions and are getting in the way of putting out good product.

These factors have cumulative impact. Now after having thought about all that, do you really trust the vaunted efficacy of US weapons systems as they currently exist in relation to new Russian equivalent platforms?

Anonymous Eric the Red October 28, 2016 6:34 AM  

Historically, Russians have always been good at mathematics and chess. Now that they no longer have the yoke of Soviet mismanagement on their backs, the Russian military-industrial complex can design and build weapons systems that are technologically advanced, reliable, and designed to effectively fulfill Russian strategic goals.

Meanwhile, the US military-industrial complex has directed its time, energy and money over the past 40 years towards diversity, equality, human resources, more diversity, etc ad nauseum. Just for starters, how many women working for US defense contractors or military procurement offices have been making managerial decisions, and do you think the associated weapons systems are cumulatively better or worse off for it? And let's not even get into how many useless NAM's have been hired in lower-level positions and are getting in the way of putting out good product.

These factors have cumulative impact. Now after having thought about all that, do you really trust the vaunted efficacy of US weapons systems as they currently exist in relation to new Russian equivalent platforms?

Anonymous Eric the Red October 28, 2016 6:40 AM  

Damn it, for weeks now I have had to post 3 separate times just so my comment finally stays in the thread without being deleted. I.e., I can see it in the thread with a number and "Your comment has been posted", but then some minutes later it disappears. It's a good thing I always make a copy of my originals.

Would somebody please look into this, VD, markku, somebody ok? If it's not Disqus doing this to me, then it's one of you guys. Either way, stop it already.

Anonymous Eric the Red October 28, 2016 6:48 AM  

(3 times for this post now)..

When you buy into a false premise like diversity, you start to make mistakes. And when that false premise gets entrenched in an organization like a defense contractor, it can't stop making mistakes.

But the r-selected rabbits don't give a damn, they just keep munching merrily along. Give them their free stuff for today, and accompany it with some stupid but pleasant-sounding meme as rationalization, and they are quite content to let weapons systems, the military, the society, the whole damn house of cards come crashing down.

Blogger Daniel October 28, 2016 7:13 AM  

Loled

Anonymous Eric the Red October 28, 2016 7:22 AM  

(ok this is the 4th time for this comment)

Historically, Russians have always been good at mathematics and chess. Now that they no longer have the yoke of Soviet mismanagement on their backs, the Russian military-industrial complex can design and build weapons systems that are technologically advanced, reliable, and designed to effectively fulfill Russian strategic goals.

Meanwhile, the US military-industrial complex has directed its time, energy and money over the past 40 years towards diversity, equality, human resources, more diversity, etc ad nauseum. Just for starters, how many women working for US defense contractors or military procurement offices have been making managerial decisions, and do you think the associated weapons systems are cumulatively better or worse off for it? And let's not even get into how many useless NAM's have been hired in lower-level positions and are getting in the way of putting out good product.

These factors have cumulative impact. Now after having thought about all that, do you really trust the vaunted efficacy of US weapons systems as they currently exist in relation to new Russian equivalent platforms?

Anonymous The Kursk October 28, 2016 7:34 AM  

Blub, blub.....

Anonymous Clay Mahan October 28, 2016 8:02 AM  

The US Navy, with it's 11 carriers, cannot be trifled with.

Period. End of story.

(like I said...you can sink one, but only God can help you after that.)

Anonymous Eric the Red October 28, 2016 8:41 AM  

@188...

Maybe you're correct, maybe you're not.

If they're so invulnerable, then why don't we blockade the Spratley's with a carrier task force and see what happens?
Do you think the Chinese can make any damage?

If our carrier survives and the blockade works, then it will be the only thing that can help us regain respect in Asia.

Blogger Anchorman October 28, 2016 8:45 AM  

It's quite another to believe known liars and bullshitters in Kiev about how they've been 'fighting the Russian Army' as opposed to Moscow's JV team Novorossiya/Donbass foreign legion without a single air strike loss in two years, while we see what the actual Russian air force can do in Syria daily. Give me a break.

Give me a break indeed.

Two shitty armies battle and you're arguing the Russians are less shitty.

No one has laid awake at night fearing the Ukraine or Georgian forces.

Take a victory lap.

Anonymous Clay October 28, 2016 8:52 AM  

Eric the Red wrote:@188...

Maybe you're correct, maybe you're not.

If they're so invulnerable, then why don't we blockade the Spratley's with a carrier task force and see what happens?

Do you think the Chinese can make any damage?

If our carrier survives and the blockade works, then it will be the only thing that can help us regain respect in Asia.


Give the Chinese the Spratleys. We have no business there. Let Vietnam or the Philippines take care of their own back yard.

Blogger Anchorman October 28, 2016 8:58 AM  

Give the Chinese the Spratleys. We have no business there.

What? There's more to the Spratleys than the (disputed presence of) natural resources. Concede them and you put international shipping lanes and freedom of the seas at risk in the area.

Anonymous Clay October 28, 2016 9:02 AM  

Eric the Red wrote:@188...

Maybe you're correct, maybe you're not.

If they're so invulnerable, then why don't we blockade the Spratley's with a carrier task force and see what happens?

Do you think the Chinese can make any damage?

If our carrier survives and the blockade works, then it will be the only thing that can help us regain respect in Asia.


Sigh. Again, I never said our carriers are "invulnerable" I stated flatly I know one can be sunk.

Screwing with the Spratleys would be like a foreign navy screwing with Honduras...or, Cuba. We've seen how that went.

Anonymous Eric the Red October 28, 2016 9:14 AM  

The Chinese occupy the Spratley's, but even the damn UN has stated they belong to Philippines. So it is NOT the same as Cuba or Honduras. Obviously we would announce that we are blockading in order to restore rightful sovereignty to the Philippines.

And my question still stands.. what kind of damage do you predict the Chinese are capable of doing? I'm truly interested here... if you have some expertise, then help me out.

You should be aware that respect among our Asian allies has dropped like a rock. No wonder they are considering cozying up to the power center fait accompli, China.

Anonymous Clay October 28, 2016 9:14 AM  

Anchorman October 28, 2016 8:58 AM
Give the Chinese the Spratleys. We have no business there.

What? There's more to the Spratleys than the (disputed presence of) natural resources. Concede them and you put international shipping lanes and freedom of the seas at risk in the area.

BTW. I fear you have no damn idea what "shipping lanes", or "Freedom Of The Seas" really means.

I was involved in shipping by vessel for 28 years, had to deal with pirates in the Indian Sea...oh, that's all.

1 – 200 of 218 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts