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

Monday, November 09, 2015

US military defeat expected

And as they debate the best way to prepare to fight the Russians, they're not even looking at the more serious problem presently facing the U.S. military forces in Europe:
Ironically, this Washington war of ideas has pitted against each other two brainy career Army officers who fought together in one of the most famous battles of modern times.

On one side is Macgregor, an outspoken and controversial advocate for reform of the Army — whose weapons he describes as “obsolescent,” its senior leaders as “self-interested,” and its spending as “wasteful.” Viewed by many of his colleagues as one of the most innovative Army officers of his generation, Macgregor, a West Point graduate with a Ph.D. in international relations (“he can be pretty gruff,” a fellow West Point graduate says, “but he’s brilliant”), led the 2nd Cav’s “Cougar Squadron” in the best-known battle of Operation Desert Storm in February 1991. In 23 minutes, Macgregor’s force destroyed an entire Iraqi Armored Brigade (including nearly 70 Iraqi armored vehicles), while suffering a single American casualty. Speaking at a military “lessons learned” conference one year later, Air Force General Jack Welsh described the Battle of 73 Easting (named for a map coordinate) as “a stunning, overwhelming victory.”

In the wake of the battle, however, Macgregor calculated that if his unit had fought a highly trained and better armed enemy, like the Russians, the outcome would have been different. So, four years later, he published a book called Breaking The Phalanx, recommending that his service “restructure itself into modularly organized, highly mobile, self-contained combined arms teams.” The advice received the endorsement of then-Army Chief of Staff Dennis Reimer, who ordered that copies of Macgregor’s book be provided to every Army general.

But Macgregor is still fighting that battle. In early September he circulated a PowerPoint presentation showing that in a head-to-head confrontation pitting the equivalent of a U.S. armored division against a likely Russian adversary, the U.S. division would be defeated. “Defeated isn’t the right word,” Macgregor told me last week. “The right word is annihilated.” The 21-slide presentation features four battle scenarios, all of them against a Russian adversary in the Baltics — what one currently serving war planner on the Joint Chiefs staff calls “the most likely warfighting scenario we will face outside of the Middle East.”

In two of the scenarios, where the U.S. deploys its current basic formation, called brigade combat teams (BCTs), the U.S. is defeated. In two other scenarios, where Macgregor deploys what he calls Reconnaissance Strike Groups, the U.S. wins. And that’s the crux of Macgregor’s argument: Today the U.S. Army is comprised of BCTs rather than Reconnaissance Strike Groups, or RSGs, which is Macgregor’s innovation. Macgregor’s RSG shears away what he describes as “the top-heavy Army command structure” that would come with any deployment in favor of units that generate more combat power. “Every time we deploy a division we deploy a division headquarters of 1,000 soldiers and officers,” Macgregor explains. “What a waste; those guys will be dead within 72 hours.” Macgregor’s RSG, what he calls “an alternative force design,” does away with this Army command echelon, reporting to a joint force commander — who might or might not be an Army officer. An RSG, Macgregor says, does not need the long supply tail that is required of Brigade Combat Teams — it can be sustained with what it carries from ten days to two weeks without having to be resupplied.

Though it may sound to outsiders like a disagreement over crossed t’s and dotted i’s, the dispute is fundamental–focusing on whether, in a future conflict, the U.S. military can actually win. Even inside the Pentagon, that is very much in doubt. A recent article by defense writer Julia Ioffe reported the “dispiriting” results of a Pentagon “thought exercise” between a red team (Russia) and a blue team, NATO. The “table top” exercise stipulated a Russian invasion of the Baltics, the same scenario proposed by Macgregor. “After eight hours of gaming out various scenarios,” Ioffe wrote, a blue team member concluded that NATO “would lose.”
What I find more worrisome is the possibility that the U.S. government will decide to throw its weight against the nationalists who have overthrown, either electorally or by other means, a European government, as they did in the case of Serbia. I can envision a situation where U.S. forces step in to create a Ukraine-style puppet government in defense of the poor Muslim refugees, in which case they'll be faced with European 4GW opponents far more lethal than anything they have seen in the Middle East or in Asia.

It may seem unthinkable, but there are already serious tensions inside the German government, where the Interior Minister is accused of having mounted a semi-coup against the Chancellor, and his new stricter policy was overruled, not by the Prime Minister, but by her Chief of Staff. It would be surprising, but not entirely unexpected, for Merkel's government to collapse before the end of the year. And there are tens of thousands of American troops still stationed in Germany; the temptation to use them to dictate German government policy on the migration crisis will be difficult for any U.S. president to resist.

Whatever happens, there can be little doubt that the rising European nationalist forces will have the backing of Russia, and probably China as well, as both of those countries clearly recognize the threat the globalist U.S. now poses to world order.

Labels:

160 Comments:

Blogger Mr.MantraMan November 09, 2015 8:11 AM  

One of the SJW gimps in Obama's DoD mentioned in a recent speech that nationalists in Europe were probably a bigger threat than just about anyone else on the planet.

Blogger Gordon November 09, 2015 8:20 AM  

Well, that's a pisser. One of the "reassuring" things about Russia is how shocked they were about how fast we rolled over Iraq's Russian-trained-and-equipped army in 1991. Of course, fighting in the desert against an opponent which has no air support is different from fighting one in mixed forest and hilly farmland. And in this case, we might not have months to build up enough material to sustain whatever air campaign we could mount.

I remember reading The Third World War by Sir John Keegan in the early 1980s. At the time, the scenarios the USAF used in an exercise showed the Russians rolling ever further west until things went nuclear; first tac nukes and then the big exchange. Keegan's book assumed neither side really wanted a general nuclear war. And it ended with the Russian advance stymied, and negotiations to return to prewar lines.

I just know I don't know enough to evaluate the claims.

"the threat the globalist U.S. now poses to world order." Eh...I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

Blogger Durandel Almiras November 09, 2015 8:21 AM  

I have a similar feeling that the US & EU would sooner turn on the nationalists than prepare against Russia (and how is it that I find myself supporting Russia's outlook?). They hate us more and see us as a greater threat.

We need a cleansing fire to spread throughout the entirety of the West. And I do hope Merkel's government collapses. Worst, but sadly is probable more healthy for the continuation of the German people, I hope Germany collapses into civil war. I know that sounds terrible, but I don't see a political fix being possible.

As to the US military, would a lot of soldiers really turn on their fellow Americans at the whim of Obama or any of the other SJW elite?

Blogger S1AL November 09, 2015 8:23 AM  

About time we got our troops out of Europe and let them handle their own problems.

Blogger Chris Mallory November 09, 2015 8:26 AM  

The army should be restructured as a citizen's militia,forbidden from ever being deployed outside our borders. Nothing in Europe is worth one more drop of American blood or one more ounce of American gold.

Anonymous TroperA November 09, 2015 8:31 AM  

The army should be restructured as a citizen's militia,forbidden from ever being deployed outside our borders. Nothing in Europe is worth one more drop of American blood or one more ounce of American gold.

The small number of elites who profit off of military spending would beg to differ with you.

Blogger Phillip George November 09, 2015 8:32 AM  

would a lot of soldiers really turn on their fellow Americans at the whim of Obama

would a sniper at Waco really shot people running out of a burning building?
They're soul wiped.
Vertical compartmentalization plus secrecy covenants in the national interest = mass murder.

Blogger Cail Corishev November 09, 2015 8:32 AM  

One of the SJW gimps in Obama's DoD mentioned in a recent speech that nationalists in Europe were probably a bigger threat than just about anyone else on the planet.

Always have been, always will be. Makes you wonder: how were there wars in the past, without white European nationalists to start them?

OpenID paworldandtimes November 09, 2015 8:33 AM  

What I find more worrisome is the possibility that the U.S. government will decide to throw its weight against the nationalists

The 1999 Serbian campaign makes it clear that the US is the greatest existential threat to Western civilization. Back then most Americans had accepted the media narrative, they supported thwir government, and our armed forces were not yet purged of White competence.

A lot has changed over the past 17 years. The internet's challenge to the narrative, the passing of blindly patriotic members of older generations, Bush and Obama-inflicted cynicism, stagnating economy, and the acceleration of anti-White developments here and in Europe.

Will any of DOD's anti-nationalist actions in Europe run into effective opposition and non-cooperation from Americans?

-PA

Blogger ZhukovG November 09, 2015 8:33 AM  

New military doctrines always face an uphill battle, until actually tested in real battle. Heinz Guderian and his book Achtung Panzer!, faced the same hurdle until France 1940.

Also, though I am an avowed fan of the new socially conservative Russian Federation, I tend to be skeptical of military exercises that paint the current bogeyman du jour as an overwhelming threat. The military, ever desirous of more funds, often paints even the most pathetic adversaries as existential dangers that require investment in expensive new weapons to overcome.

That said, I believe that Russia's reforms of its military now make it one of the most potent land forces on the planet. Also, while we talk about 'Distributed Lethality', Russia's navy demonstrated it with the 'shot across the bow' that Russia performed against NATO using Kalibr Cruise Missiles.

Blogger Orville November 09, 2015 8:33 AM  

More troublesome to me is the neocon fantasy of a nuclear firststrike. Leaving the arguement of whether nuclear wars are winnable, in a scenario where the first person to pull the trigger wins, the likelyhood of pulling the trigger rises.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan November 09, 2015 8:41 AM  

Maybe this is something to think of, American grand strategists have used the Muslim threat against the Soviets, then Russia, but now the Diversity Cult has unleashed them upon Europe.

So basically grand strategy from the American Empire is being drawn up by the retarded clown posse of the campus radicals, this going to end well.

Anonymous Rick Johnsmeyer November 09, 2015 8:49 AM  

Perhaps the one big benefit of increasing "vibrancy" in the US is that it will become more difficult to rally public support for what we might call "patriotarded" wars in the vein of Iraq II.

The second Iraq war had around 60% support in prewar polls (Gallup's last poll in March 2003 before the invasion itself was 63% as I recall), but that rose sharply among white Americans, and among older Americans. Their natural patriotic impulses were milked for malign purposes.

That 2003 cohort has already gone through a dozen years of die-offs, contraction, and dilution via immigration. It's not going to be as easy for a future administration to launch an Iraq II-style adventure without getting trashed in the next mid-terms.

Anonymous Geoff November 09, 2015 8:49 AM  

Russia should be a great ally in the fight against the Muslims and the Chinese.

What a shame.

Blogger Hammerli280 November 09, 2015 8:50 AM  

Interesting.

I think we have to recognize that there are three very different issues here.

First is the tendency of the modern Army toward a very top-heavy command structure. This is a legacy of the much larger force deployed in the 1980s, and the refusal to consolidate units when the force structure was drawn down. There are a lot of one-brigade divisions, complete with a divisional staff. Which means more staff positions, fewer trigger-pullers.

Second is the approach to warfighting. Part of the Army is very concerned with post-victory pacification - Iraq all over again. The problem being that politically, the American electorate has NEVER been willing to support a war lasting much longer than 36 months. The political leadership has three years plus the time to the election...after that, if the public does not see victory within sight or a disengagement being attempted, they will tear the party in power OUT of power. Kindly note that this affects weapon selection quite a bit. If you are planning on a lot of counterinsurgency and peacekeeping, Strykers make sense. If you are planning on heavy warfighting, you need tanks.

Third is American strategic policy toward the rising nationalist movements. Here, I think the best policy is to stay out of European local politics. Although I agree with the nationalists, sometimes it's wiser to remain a friendly neutral.

As for Putin, I think we need to cut him in on the political action more...but not let him conquer his neighbors. And it's possible to do both. Putin is trying to increase Russian political power - and that's not necessarily a zero-sum game. I can see a Civilization League that coordinates efforts to contain the Moslems. Giving Russia a respected place in it does not decrease American power.

Blogger Chris Mallory November 09, 2015 8:52 AM  

“obsolescent,” its senior leaders as “self-interested,” and its spending as “wasteful.”

Has there been a time in the last 100 years, other than a brief periods around 1944 and Gulf War I, when this wasn't true of the US military?

Blogger Tom Kratman November 09, 2015 8:52 AM  

Breaking the Phalanx is dangerously preposterous nonsense. In order to comment on or design tables of organization, one must understand something about tables of organization. MacGregor doesn't, generally. Rather, he understands armored cavalry organization which is useful for many things but not particularly good for most.

Anonymous BrerFox November 09, 2015 8:52 AM  

It's been much discussed, with wringing of hands in certain circles, that the combat arms specialties are packed with the hated white male. Naturally that means other groups are over represented in the logistics tail. It's arguable this RSG structure raises effectiveness by further increasing the percentage of white male soldiers involved. Social justice convergence would ensure this idea is buried on that alone, regardless of actual combat effectiveness.

Blogger ZhukovG November 09, 2015 8:53 AM  

@14. Geoff

Indeed; and all Russia asked for was to be respected as a Great Power, with its own national interests. But we insist, that if you are not kowtowing to us then you are an adversary.

Blogger Jourdan November 09, 2015 8:53 AM  

As decisive as 73 Easting was, and I have a great deal of regard for its commander, the bottom line is that as the U.S. needed to maintain active combat patrols, nearly all troops in theatre and then engage in the same war again some years later, the Dept of Defense lost the Gulf War.

It lost Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War, Afghan War and the Iraq War.

Perhaps this table-top exercise is wrong, but it hardly matters. The war-fighting machinery is broken in any case, as its political underpinings are non-existent.

Blogger VD November 09, 2015 8:59 AM  

Breaking the Phalanx is dangerously preposterous nonsense.

So why not write a critique of it? We can put it in RTRH v2.

Blogger Gordon November 09, 2015 8:59 AM  

@3: " I hope Germany collapses into civil war."

The last time that happened it lasted 30 years and it took the Germanies 200 years to recover. After that it was Bismarck, Kaiser Bill, WW 1 and 2.

It's difficult to imagine what the world would be like today if a bit of sense had prevailed in August 1914. Never mind the treasure and blood, would we have developed the cuckifying sense of self-hatred that dominates much of western thought?

Blogger Jourdan November 09, 2015 8:59 AM  

The U.S. bombed Belgrade at the drop of a hat and still is the funding and protecting power of the new Muslim states it created, all of which are largely organized criminal organizations.

There is zero doubt that USG would use forces in Europe to maintain the EU and the current political consensus. Any European nationalist who doesn't have a plan to get those troops out of his territory and a means to survive the emnity of USG is simply not serious.

Blogger Tom Kratman November 09, 2015 9:08 AM  

Because I was going to do a fictional piece in 4/0GW versus our domestic left?

Anonymous Roundtine November 09, 2015 9:08 AM  

Putin is mixed on nationalism. The nationalism of Eastern Europe is anti-Russian, more anti-Russian than anti-EU.

An anti-European policy could fully isolate USG, not only in world politics, but in domestic politics as well. An anti-Western regime acting against its allies and its own citizens would be besieged on all sides. Only someone as stupid as Obama would take such action, but it would also require someone bold. Rubio or Clinton, the two neocons, might be candidates for such stupidity.

Blogger pyrrhus November 09, 2015 9:11 AM  

For a view of the chaos going on inside Germany as the millions of "refugees" arrive, http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2015/11/an-exit-strategy-for-traitors.html

Blogger Gordon November 09, 2015 9:13 AM  

Get thee to a typewriter, Colonel.

Blogger Skylark Thibedeau November 09, 2015 9:18 AM  

Pournelle's Co Dominion reborn (but with the Russian Federation and China)?

Blogger ZhukovG November 09, 2015 9:21 AM  

@25. Roundtine

Not entirely. I believe Hungary wants to friends with Russia. Poland of course is anti-Russian, but that animosity goes back centuries. However Polish nationalism is still a net positive for Russia since it weakens the EU.

In the West the French Nationalists would like to revive the old Franco-Russian alliance.

Germany... ach du meine güte! That's going to get messy.

Anonymous Geoff November 09, 2015 9:26 AM  

@19 Zhuchov

I realize it's fiction but I always appreciated the way Tom Clancy portrayed the Russian/USA relationship in his novels. There was always a mutual respect, even a sense of admiration for the Russians. Can't say the same for the way Clancy portrayed the Chinese, the Indians, or even the Japanese.

Blogger Steve, the Dark Ninja of Mockery November 09, 2015 9:27 AM  

Putin will be shitting anvils at the thought of taking on NATO.

How's he going to take on our elite transgendered warriors?

Blogger James Dixon November 09, 2015 9:28 AM  

> "the threat the globalist U.S. now poses to world order." Eh...I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

The US is directly responsible for or supported the overthrow of existing government throughout the Middle East. We backed what was effectively a puppet government in Ukraine. China wouldn't be at all surprised if we tried the same thing in Tibet.

> ...would a lot of soldiers really turn on their fellow Americans at the whim of Obama

Ask Lon Horiuchi,

Anonymous Hrw-500 November 09, 2015 9:30 AM  

@8 Cail Corishev.

I guess imperialism also played a role as well like the Seven-year war between England and France. If there wasn't an "Entente cordiale" between the UK and France in 1904. WWI would had been different.

Blogger Steve, the Dark Ninja of Mockery November 09, 2015 9:32 AM  

I always appreciated the way Tom Clancy portrayed the Russian/USA relationship in his novels. There was always a mutual respect, even a sense of admiration for the Russians. Can't say the same for the way Clancy portrayed the Chinese, the Indians, or even the Japanese.

Tom Clancy was a racist, sexist, cis-privileged white man.

Petition to have Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell renamed in honour of Octavia Butler.

OpenID paworldandtimes November 09, 2015 9:35 AM  

Lon Horiuchi was taught by the USG that Vicki Weaver kept him interned during WWII.

The question is, will young White American service members say "hooah, sergeant Ahmed!" And pull triggers.

-PA

Blogger Dexter November 09, 2015 9:42 AM  

there are tens of thousands of American troops still stationed in Germany; the temptation to use them to dictate German government policy on the migration crisis will be difficult for any U.S. president to resist.

Eh, they are mostly support troops. The few combat troops that are there could not impose their will on the Germans, weak as they are. Though they could "help" the German government suppress any naughty expressions of "hate" by the German people.

The defense of the Baltics is not a matter of "how NATO troops are organized". The Baltics are indefensible no matter how the NATO troops are organized. Put Macgregor's ideal force in there and NATO still loses. Put a much, much larger and "best organized" NATO force in the Baltics, and the Baltics would still be indefensible.

Blogger Dystopic November 09, 2015 9:44 AM  

@31: "Putin will be shitting anvils at the thought of taking on NATO. How's he going to take on our elite transgendered warriors?"

Just imagine what the Muslims will think. Quivering in their boots, I'm sure. The battle slogan of the elite transgendered warriors will be something like "fear our vagenis!" Upon exposing themselves, the enemy will faint from the sheer horror.

Blogger Jourdan November 09, 2015 9:48 AM  

Judging the likely strength of U.S. military power used to uphold the EU/U.S. consensus by comparison with how it's used its power against Muslims is a huge error. The U.S. would not use naked military force against Muslims in any serious way. It would have NO PROBLEM whatsoever using it against right-wing Europeans.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus November 09, 2015 9:50 AM  

Best way to begin reforming the military to return it to being an effective fighting force?

Drum all the faggots and cross-dressers out.

Blogger Steve, the Dark Ninja of Mockery November 09, 2015 9:53 AM  

"fear our vagenis!"

Anonymous Roundtine November 09, 2015 9:53 AM  

I always appreciated the way Tom Clancy portrayed the Russian/USA relationship in his novels

I assumed he was relaying more that his personal feelings and was representing some pro-Russian sentiment in the defense establishment. I've never seen anything about Russia wanting to continue the Cold War, but I have seen the U.S. break promises to Russia, bomb Serbia and expand NATO. Maybe Russia is way better at propaganda, but I have to think if the U.S. has some dirt on Russia, we would have seen it.

Blogger Doom November 09, 2015 9:57 AM  

This isn't a new argument. It happened in Germany, in WWII. Hitler chose otherwise, regardless of what many people and historians think. Many believe the blitzkrieg was how the Germans fought, but in truth, they only did that for a short time at the beginning of the invasion into Western Europe. Their first hits to the East didn't involve it, mostly, either. Hitler, and his favored generals, split up tanks, and paired them with troops, perhaps artillery, and such. As well, US forces found themselves being turned into mixed units rather than armored alone, usually much sooner than later. This has been a frustration since tanks were invented, perhaps even artillery. At least for their commanders.

Whether the blitzkrieg model is genuinely feasible has never been tried for long enough to be absolutely certain. Initial results seem extremely positive. Without long term data, it really isn't a sure bet. And they really can far outpace their supply train. Absolute air superiority, in such cases, is vital.

As to US versus Russia? I would happily take 10 to 1, Russia to US. If that is NATO, not US, even with US mixed, I'd call for Russia easily. NATO had a difficult time with a third world former Soviet puppet king. Pure gut feeling, but it's good enough for a money bet if I were a better. And yet I would bet every nickle I own on a US versus Russia straight up, put down, all out, non-nuke. With or without revision to command. With revision? I would lend a few points so as not to really hurt your wallet.

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 November 09, 2015 10:00 AM  

@3As to the US military, would a lot of soldiers really turn on their fellow Americans at the whim of Obama or any of the other SJW elite?

No, many of them wouldn't, but it depends on the racial makeup. If there is a largely Hispanic group of soldiers, they will fire on white people without hesitation. Same with blacks.

On the other hand, the Left has a lot of money and they would be more than happy to hire mercenaries from foreign countries to attack US targets.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey November 09, 2015 10:04 AM  

I share your concerns. If (or when) fighting breaks out in Europe, some of us who want to participate on the Nationalist side may find ourselves in the awkward position of facing American military personnel. It does, however, offer some interesting combat possibilities.

The US bombing of Serbia was a complete game-changer for me. I was in London at the time and volunteered with some Serbian expat activists. The episode demonstrated to me that the real enemy of the American globalists is nationalism.

Anonymous roo_ster November 09, 2015 10:07 AM  

"An RSG, Macgregor says, does not need the long supply tail that is required of Brigade Combat Teams — it can be sustained with what it carries from ten days to two weeks without having to be resupplied."

Familiar with BCT, not so much with Mac's RSG, since I have not read BtP. Very curious as to how Mac manages to get 10-14 days of operations without external log support. That is a rather large volume & mass of POL, parts, chow, potable water, and such.

Blogger Red Jack November 09, 2015 10:08 AM  

We have been training for a WWII refight, when we didn't actually fight that well in WWII.

I have been studying the actions in the West Front and in the East, and let's just say the East had the better fighters on both sides.

Blogger Jourdan November 09, 2015 10:13 AM  

@46 - I participated in a large oral history project while an undergrad on WWII vets and let me tell you that the American GIs I interviewed were under no illusions on point: the Germans were the better fighters and had better equipment. There as near 100% agreement on that front. We used numbers and better improvisation ability to swarm and defeat, though our real prowess lay in logistics.

I can't tell you how many armor folks I interviewed who told me their tank's main guns were completely ineffective against German armor.

Blogger Dexter November 09, 2015 10:15 AM  

I have been studying the actions in the West Front and in the East, and let's just say the East had the better fighters on both sides.

Nah. The Reds just had lots of bodies, and Stalin was happy to use them to stop German bullets.

Blogger JDC November 09, 2015 10:22 AM  

Because I was going to do a fictional piece in 4/0GW versus our domestic left?

That is something I want to read.

Blogger Red Jack November 09, 2015 10:22 AM  

@48 At first, you are right. But experience was a harsh teacher. Kursk wasn't throwing bodies into the fire, it was a well coordinated defense. The partisan groups raised all sorts of heck in the back field.

In the West, most of the troops were reserves. Not first line guys.

Blogger Jourdan November 09, 2015 10:24 AM  

I think that's right, Red Jack. While I didn't speak to many Red Army vets, I did speak to some in the Los Angeles area and they were all pretty convinced that the Red Army pre T-34 deployment was one thing, post T-34 deployment something else entirely.

Blogger The Other Robot November 09, 2015 10:26 AM  

The Russians don’t do many things well, but they have been subverting, destabilizing, invading and conquering their neighbors since Peter the Great — Douglas Macgregor

It seems that the man has been drinking the cool aid.

Perhaps Putin has already realized that to preserve his markets for O&G in Europe he needs to supply arms to those who seek to prevent their countries sliding into chaos.

Anonymous The Obvious November 09, 2015 10:32 AM  

Of interest:

New Russian Armour Part One

New Russian Armour Part Two

Anonymous A Visitor November 09, 2015 10:36 AM  

"I’ll bet the armor and airborne guys are furious. Reform my ass: Macgregor has walked into the zoo and slapped the gorilla.”

Though armor hasn't played a truly decisive role in wars since the Second World War, the Russians have plenty of it. Keep in mind if we were to fight in eastern Europe, that's right on their door step. Resupply and deployment would be like us sending material and men from North Dakota to Nicaragua.

"In January of 2001, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld insisted that U.S. Central Command General Tommy Franks and his Iraq war planning staff meet with Macgregor, who argued that the U.S. should scale back its Iraq fighting force, racing to Baghdad with a mobile blitz using just 50,000 troops."

If we were simply planning on taking down Hussein, that may have been able to do it. Occupation, which we (I personally believe) would have invariably done, probably required closer to 500,000 troops (see the old Desert Crossing exercise for more).

In response to Majumdar, I'd say we've been damn fortunate thus far to generally not have faced competent militaries in the past thirty years. You can have the greatest equipment on Earth but if you're men can't use it, it might as well not exist. For example, early predictions during the First Gulf War is that we'd lose 10,000 men. That was based on, in part, the Iraqis being well trained and competent. Responding to Johnson's comment, keep in mind the Russians' export models of their equipment usually doesn't contain all the bells and whistles that they have for themselves.

@2 I just re-read Red Storm Rising last week for the third time. Fuel constraints not withstanding a fight against Russia would be bloody as hell. I doubt much of the public would have the stomach for it.

@3 There was a blog I used to read, written by a now retired major. He was a proponent of rule of 1/3rds: 1/3rd of the military joins the populace, 1/3rd stays home, 1/3rd fights the populace. Hopefully we'll never have to find out. Nonetheless, si vis pacem, para bellum.

@4 On the one hand I am in agreement. On the other hand, western Europe and our fate is linked pretty solidly in historical terms.

@11 I wouldn't say it's a neocon fantasy. Having taken an entire semester long course on nuclear warfighting, I'd say the Russians are bluffing: they know that a tactical first strike by them could easily escalate into a strategic strike by us. Assuming rational actor theory, and as much as I despise Putin he does seem rational, he doesn't want to be dictator over a glass parking lot or to be a collection of various gases. He's having enough fun screwing over the Russian people.

@15 Well said, concur 100%.

@24 I'd love to see that.

Blogger Dexter November 09, 2015 10:38 AM  

In the West, most of the troops were reserves. Not first line guys.

On the contrary, the Wehrmacht in the west was "more elite" than in the East - with a higher concentration of panzer and panzergrenadier divisions - because Hitler wanted to stymie the invasion.

Blogger Hammerli280 November 09, 2015 10:43 AM  

@47 Jourdan:

It's my understanding that the matchup between American and German equipment in World War II depended a lot of the type of equipment. Panthers and Tigers ate Shermans for lunch. The Germans had more experienced troops...and a better replacement policy that treated men as something other than mere cogs in a machine. On the other hand, American artillery was fearfully good, and the U.S. Army had worked out a fire allocation system that made the most of it. And airpower was the Allied trump card.

Blogger Cataline Sergius November 09, 2015 10:51 AM  

MacGregor was one of Rumsfield's Chosen Ones. I am deeply skeptical of the man.

His battle plan for the capture of Bagdad could most easily be summed up as a spearhead with no spear behind it. Things were screwed up enough as it was. My old unit rolled into Bagdad with three rounds per man, one MRE per day and a live chicken for NBC detection gear.

Naturally the boys adopted a local stray dog, who promptly eat the chicken.

Blogger Red Jack November 09, 2015 10:51 AM  

@55 http://smile.amazon.com/DAY-Through-German-Eyes-Hidden-ebook/dp/B00VX372UE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1447084232&sr=8-1&keywords=normandy+through+german+eyes

There are two books in this series. Also read "Tigers in the mud" and other books. The West was stripped by the German army because they were more worried about the Rus than the Ame's

Blogger jason van November 09, 2015 10:55 AM  

U.S. Soldiers turning on their own. Sadly, many would. The ranks have been filled with folks collecting a paycheck. Those who have been trained to see civilians as beneath them. It's not hard to turn a super "patriot" against his countrymen, when he has been convinced his countrymen are traitors and a danger to his nation.

Blogger kudzu bob November 09, 2015 10:57 AM  

If Russia and America get into a conventional shooting war, what is the likelihood that it would go nuclear?

Blogger Sheila4g November 09, 2015 11:03 AM  

@31 I happened to glance at the tv while at the gym last evening, and at some football game the camera carefully panned to two White men in army camo kissing. Really helped fuel my anger to get through a killer leg workout.

I know little to nothing about military strategy or composition of forces (and my husband's permanently stuck in WWII and won't read fiction). That said, I've been following Vox's commentary about 4g warfare. I recently read (and greatly enjoyed) a series by an author recommended on Larry Correia's blog, Peter Nealan (former recon marine). It's the Praetorian Guard series about a mercenary group in the near future (after collapse of the US dollar) and seems to me to employ a lot of 4g tactics. Note it's quite different from Tom Kratman's Battalion books (much smaller force) but the tension is unrelenting. I was initially interested because the first book begins at Camp Lemonier, where my son was briefly posted. If anyone else here has read the books, I'd appreciate any comments or explanation. Am I correctly understanding/interpreting 4g warfare?

Anonymous smedley butler November 09, 2015 11:11 AM  

Perhaps it'll end up like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qc8jJ0TjSY

Blogger The Other Robot November 09, 2015 11:14 AM  

If Russia and America get into a conventional shooting war, what is the likelihood that it would go nuclear?

Pretty high. The affirmative action types in the WH would shit themselves when it starts going against them and pull out the nukes.

Blogger Timmy3 November 09, 2015 11:20 AM  

Obama's approach to funding defense will defeat the military. We are unable to defend ourselves and unlikely to win a war with our current policies irrespective of our military strategies. This is a structural problem. Obama is happy to have our proxies fight our battles. We barely have any forces in other countries despite having undeclared wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (which we returned in small numbers). A war with Russia and China is unlikely and even if it occurs, we can't or won't fight them. So Russia can continue to push its luck unless we get a President willing to call his bluff and somehow win a pullback. Maybe reversing the ridiculous Iran deal is the first step. Then we have that ridiculous free trade deal where we give away our sovereignty. Oh well.

Blogger Hammerli280 November 09, 2015 11:25 AM  

At least Vox wasn't the only person to notice.

http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2015/11/the-scots-irish-and-battle-for-mind-of.html#disqus_thread

Blogger ZhukovG November 09, 2015 11:25 AM  

60. kudzu bob

It is highly unlikely that we would be in a shooting war with Russia. The most likely scenario, is an unintended firefight, followed quickly by much phone calling between DC and Moscow to cool things off rapidly.

However, lets suppose that Putin does send the Russian army into Ukraine. Ukraine of course will be overrun quickly, one Ukrainian General confessed that they would have to surrender within hours if this occurred.

For retaliation, we would be unlikely to strike at Russia's strength in the West, it would be difficult for us and would cause rapid escalation.

I think we would try to strike something more symbolic such as grabbing their little base a Tartus, Syria. If we are feeling ballsy we could try to take Petropavlovsk, but that's a tough nut to crack, however Russia might feel like it could keep the conflict conventional and try to drive us out with 4G warfare tactics.

Ultimately though for the DoD, Russia is primarily used for fund raising purposes and not to be opposed in open warfare.

Blogger The Other Robot November 09, 2015 11:27 AM  

IMO, the migrant crisis in Europe is all about siphoning more public money to the Oligarchs, for the provision of humanitarian aid, you understand.

Blogger Dexter November 09, 2015 11:28 AM  

Panthers and Tigers ate Shermans for lunch.

The thing to keep in mind about this is that tank-on-tank engagements were rare. Tanks were mainly used to support infantry. US infantry had lots and lots of tank support. Only about 40% of US tanks were lost to German tanks - mostly to AT guns, field arty, panzerfausts, etc.

Also, Panthers and Tigers had a high breakdown rate, caught on fire spontaneously a lot, and were chronically short of gas. Thus the German "tank advantage" could never be used to its fullest.

The West was stripped by the German army because they were more worried about the Rus than the Ame's

Nope. 50% of the German armor fought the western allies 1944-45.

Blogger Matamoros November 09, 2015 11:35 AM  

When dealing with Germany we must realize that she has not been a free agent since her occupation in 1945. The lawful government under Admiral Karl Doernitz (named successor to Adolf Hitler) was taken into custody, and placed off shore on allied ships, with Germany then being declared without a government. The Federal Republic was then set up in the West and the GDR in the East as occupation governments, and their “basic law” established.

The Russians lost the GDR in 1990, which fused with the FDR. However, the FDR remains under its law a creature of the Allies, the U.S. in particular. Thus, it is not a free agent and all high level decisions must be made in consonance with the U.S. This is why Putin has referred to Germany as a U.S. Colony.

One may google for various articles on this situation. Here is one by Lady Renouf: http://www.europaeische-aktion.org/Artikel/PDF/RELATIONS/19/en_The-Constitutional-Legitimacy-of-the-Current-German-State-by-Lady-Renouf.pdf

Another is: http://justice4germans.com/2013/07/22/world-war-ii-never-ended-for-germany-it-remains-occupied-to-this-day-part-1/

In any event, this defacto situation hobbles Germany’s ability to deal with the muslim invasion; and the defense of Europe because it is not a true independent State, capable of unilateral defense.

Anonymous Bz November 09, 2015 11:40 AM  

That unsurpassed doddering fool Merkel shouldn't make any long term plans, except possibly acquiring a tasteful villa through means unknown in some Washington DC suburb.

Have you not damaged Germany and Europe enough already, you vile incontinent bitch?

Blogger kudzu bob November 09, 2015 11:47 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger ncartist November 09, 2015 11:47 AM  

@ 53
Accompanies with Russian armor

Blogger DadOfTen November 09, 2015 11:48 AM  

Was Patton's use of tanks significantly more mobile than other generals? He has the legend of being very good. Why? How does that apply to this discussion?

Blogger kudzu bob November 09, 2015 11:48 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger kudzu bob November 09, 2015 11:50 AM  

A non-answer. You apparently believe that a shooting war between Russia and America is such an obviously bad idea that it won't be allowed happen. Of course, letting the Third World hordes enter America and Europe unopposed is also an obviously bad idea, and yet that is happening as I write this. So my question stands.

Anonymous Donn #0114 November 09, 2015 12:12 PM  

So could we beat the Russians head to head in the Baltics? If we stick to conventional weapons who wins? They're way closer to their supply lines. How many European countries would sit it out and not allow fly over or resupply through there?

Blogger Cinco November 09, 2015 12:16 PM  

Wow as a guy with 16 years of service (most in SOF) I need to record this day in history where an officer agrees that, 'too many officers is a bad thing.'

OpenID Jack Amok November 09, 2015 12:20 PM  

I can't tell you how many armor folks I interviewed who told me their tank's main guns were completely ineffective against German armor.

They did feel this way, but there's some debate about how accureate their memories and observations were. There was definitely a penchant for US armored men to think every German tank they came up against was a Tiger and to overestimate the combat ability of the enemy (which is common anytime someone is facing a competent foe).

Nicholas Moran gave a talk this summer on US Armor Myths in WWII. He's Wargaming.net's historian. He digs through archives trying to find factual information about tanks. Around 22 minutes in, he starts talking shell penetration. At 28 minutes, he talks about how many Sherman's it took to kill a Tiger or Panther (and how many times US forces actually fought Tigers - guess how many before you listen). Panthers and Tigers most certainly did not eat Shermans for lunch.

Blogger Hammerli280 November 09, 2015 12:23 PM  

@73 Dad of Ten:

Patton's use of EVERYTHING was far more mobile than anyone else, on either side. Guderian was his only near-peer. He was operating his OODA loop at about twice the speed of his opponents - and had a full set of options planned.

Example - in December of 1944, Patton was slowed for lack of gas. His intelligence officer was counting German divisions, came up short. Patton realized that the Germans were preparing for a counterattack, correctly predicted that the blow would fall on VIII Corps (which was not moving at all), and had his staff prepare to pivot the entire 3rd Army...in one of three directions (NE, due N, or NW). When the blow fell, Patton was ready to mount a flanking attack. The only problem was that Eisenhower wanted to relieve Bastogne (the due N option), Patton would have cut NW and bagged just about every German solider east of the Rhine.

OpenID protestmanager November 09, 2015 12:27 PM  

"I can envision a situation where U.S. forces step in to create a Ukraine-style puppet government"

Um, the "puppet government" was the one sucking up to Putin.

Here's a simple, but just about failproof, heuristic: there is no honestly created / valid government, anywhere in the world, that works with Putin.

There's authoritarian dictatorships (hi Belarus, Syria!), there's kleptocracies (hi Russia!), there's even Islamic theocracies (hi Iran!). But no one who's not been bought, or who's not selling out their country to Putin in exchange for power and support, wants anything to do with him.

So, call the not controlled or bought by Putin Ukrainian gov't a "puppet gov't all you want", but understand what you're accomplishing is to tell the rest of us that your understanding of Eastern European politics is worthless.

Anonymous Sam the Man November 09, 2015 12:29 PM  

Patton was a good cavalry officer, but did not do so well in the Lorraine campaign, when a better understanding of Infantry and combined arms operations was required. His third army was stopped by the dregs of the German army replacement system and a number of inexperienced undertrained panzer brigades (which he did destroy)

Blogger Dystopic November 09, 2015 12:31 PM  

America just doesn't have the right mindset for a ground war against a determined, intelligent opponent. Patton aside, I don't think it has in the last century. Where America has traditionally excelled is in the naval sphere. Defeating the Japanese navy was no small accomplishment. And even today the fleet of carriers and support vessels is unmatched anywhere. Even with the questionable development of the F-35, and some of the other boondoggles, the Air Force remains potent.

Seaborne or airborne invasion of America is near-impossible, even if the entire rest of the planet were determined to do it. More or less immune to conventional attack, America hasn't needed to be terribly good at fighting land wars in Asia. It just needed to be good enough to make the prospect difficult.

Unfortunately, America's enemies have discovered an alternate way to invade the country, which renders the air and sea power a moot point: immigration. And America's leaders are unwilling to even attempt to stem the tide.

It makes me wonder if the book Victoria is going to be prophetic...

Anonymous Quartermaster November 09, 2015 12:33 PM  

@16 @21
I’d be interested in reading such a critique.

@24
That’s a pretty weak excuse.

@22
The Thirty Years War was not a German Civil War. I would suggest reading Pages history on the war. He deals with the people who were actually involved in the fighting. What became modern Germany was just the battleground.

@66
Or as general Curtis LeMay put it, “The Soviets are the opponent. The enemy is the Navy.”

OpenID protestmanager November 09, 2015 12:36 PM  

Geoff November 09, 2015 8:49 AM
Russia should be a great ally in the fight against the Muslims and the Chinese.

What a shame.


You're right, they should be. But Putin is a corrupt KGB man-child who's got his ego in a twist over US power and so has been obstructing the global war against Islamist thugs for more than the last decade. Until he's lined up against a wall and shot, Russia will never be our ally against anything important.

Blogger Emmanuel Mateo-Morales November 09, 2015 12:42 PM  

@20

"it lost Korea..."

The existence of South Korea begs to differ with you on your historical revisionism there.

Blogger kudzu bob November 09, 2015 12:46 PM  

@84

That you call Putin a "man-child" makes it difficult to take anything else in your comment seriously.

Blogger Dystopic November 09, 2015 12:48 PM  

Putin may be corrupt, but he's no man child. Obama is the man child here.

Blogger VD November 09, 2015 12:48 PM  

Um, the "puppet government" was the one sucking up to Putin.

The current government is a U.S. puppet government. It is actually less legitimate than its predecessor.

Anonymous BGS November 09, 2015 12:49 PM  

led the 2nd Cav’s “Cougar Squadron” in the best-know

By the time we go to war the Cougar Squadron will be wearing heavy makeup.

I have a similar feeling that the US & EU would sooner turn on the nationalists than prepare against Russia

American general, Wesley Clark, who was in charge of the NATO bombing of Serbia in 1999. As he explained:
“There is no place in modern Europe for ethnically pure states. That’s a 19th-century idea, and we are trying to transition into the 21st century, and we are going to do it with multi-ethnic states.”
"I am the oldest son, of the oldest son, of the oldest son - at least five generations, and they were all rabbis."
Gen. Wesley Clark revels in his Jewish roots speaking to students at a Brooklyn yeshiva 1999. (Ron Kampeas, The Jewish Telegraphic Agency)

Breaking the Phalanx is dangerously preposterous nonsense.

How does medical support work in his idea? Special forces medics are trained up to the level of physicians assistants, you wont have someone like that in every little group. When I was in someone at that skill level was at least 2 terrain features away from action. DO they think people will actually carry 12 days of food+ammo+medical supplies?

How's he going to take on our elite transgendered warriors? The 401 ultra heavy black tranny light infantry marches on its stomach

would a lot of soldiers really turn on their fellow Americans at the whim of Obama

Maybe the next Brad Manning will add some hemlock to Weasely Clark's food.

"it lost Korea..."The existence of South Korea begs to differ with you on your historical revisionism there.

How many days would South Korea exist if the US entirely pulled out only leaving the buildings and minefields?

OpenID protestmanager November 09, 2015 12:53 PM  

@19. ZhukovG November 09, 2015 8:53 AM

Indeed; and all Russia asked for was to be respected as a Great Power, with its own national interests. But we insist, that if you are not kowtowing to us then you are an adversary.


Russia isn't a Great Power, it's a pathetic kleptocracy, a Third World country dependent upon natural resources for all it's wealth because it's too corrupt to be able to produce anything of value (worthwhile manufacturing really can't happen when everything's for sale, including product quality).

And so far Russia's "national interests" as defined by Putin are "support corrupt and brutal dictators who owe their everything to Putin", "enslave all other nearby neighbors", and "obstruct US war on Islamic terrorists" (see Iraq 2003, where Saddam was most certainly funding Islamic terrorists).

You want Russia to be a "Great Power"? Fine!

1: The USSR is dead. Let it go. You lost. All those countries are gone, you can't have them back. Want them to work with you?

2: Focus on making Russia a great, or at least worthwhile, country. Establish the rule of law. Shoot the Communist apparatchiks.

When Russia has something to offer the rest of the world other than alcoholics, corruption, brutality, and petroleum products, you might find people willing to associate with you. Until then, you'll get no respect, because you will deserve no respect.

You want us to respect your "legitimate interests"? Fine, become a legitimate country.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey November 09, 2015 12:53 PM  

For a supposed "man-child," Putin keeps out-maneuvering and humiliating the kids currently running the West.

Blogger Dystopic November 09, 2015 12:55 PM  

@91: If Putin is a man-child, Obama is a toddler.

Blogger ZhukovG November 09, 2015 12:57 PM  

@90. protestmanager

You clearly have almost no knowledge of global affairs and are merely parroting what you have been spoon fed by the MSM.

Seriously, you are way out of your depth here.

Also, I am an American by birth and Southern by the grace of God.

Anonymous Throw_Away_Name November 09, 2015 12:58 PM  

Equipment to fight a major war with the Russians has long been pre-positioned in/around Europe. Enough to fully equip at least 200,000 to 300,000 men (even if they got there wearing nothing but blue jeans, and athletic shoes). By now, there may be even more, as my info is vastly outdated. In a full-out war with the Russians, we need only move the men there, NOT the materials/food/weapons/vehicles/armament.

Whether you choose to believe this or not is up to you.

Blogger Dystopic November 09, 2015 1:04 PM  

@90. Russia being a Great Power has nothing to do with what Americans think, or how 'respectable' a country is. If it has economic and military clout sufficient for the job, it's a Great Power regardless of what your feelings say.

OpenID protestmanager November 09, 2015 1:07 PM  

Putin is a "man child" because he's a whiny little baby whos' got his knickers in a twist over the fact that the USSR is no more. So he stands there, pouting, stamping his foot, and demanding "Russia is TOO important!"

Thus opposing the US is the Global War against Islamic extremists, a war that was entirely in Russian national interest, but that Russia sabotages because US success is a blow to Putin's ego, and that's more important than Russia's national interests.

Us, Obama is a pathetic man child. But Bush wasn't. And compared to him, and dealing with him, Putin most certainly was.

OpenID protestmanager November 09, 2015 1:08 PM  

@VD, and how is the current Ukrainian gov't "less legitimate" than the previous, bought and paid for by Putin, gov't?

Blogger ZhukovG November 09, 2015 1:11 PM  

@94. Dystopic

It definitely says something that if we want to send an astronaut to the ISS, we have to thumb a ride from the Russians.

Blogger Chris Mallory November 09, 2015 1:20 PM  

Protestmanager, you would be better off if you remembered that Billy Boy Kristol's and Lil Chuckie Krauthammer's rantings were meant to be read as parody, not serious policy.

Blogger kudzu bob November 09, 2015 1:28 PM  

@95

Saying that Putin is a "whiny little baby" is simply a re-statement of your earlier remark that he is a "man-child," and makes you sound like the childish one. Do you have any concrete evidence to back up your claim, or does what you say simply boil down to "because I say so"?

As for the matter of Russian support (or lack thereof) for our Global War on the Emotion Called Terror," I seem to recall that in the aftermath of 9-11 Russia was quite supportive of our efforts, even though they had been angry over our previous intervention in the Balkans. They even allowed us to set up military bases in parts of the former USSR instead of opposing our doing so. This seems to have slipped your mind, if you ever knew it.

Blogger Brad Andrews November 09, 2015 1:35 PM  

Vox,

It would be great if CH could get the rights to the Uncle Eric books, especially the ones that discuss war stuff, though that runs through all of them.

They don't have e-versions and perhaps something could work out there.

http://www.bluestockingpress.com/uncle-eric-books.htm

Blogger Brad Andrews November 09, 2015 1:35 PM  

Vox,

It would be great if CH could get the rights to the Uncle Eric books, especially the ones that discuss war stuff, though that runs through all of them.

They don't have e-versions and perhaps something could work out there.

http://www.bluestockingpress.com/uncle-eric-books.htm

Blogger ZhukovG November 09, 2015 1:42 PM  

99. kudzu bob

I believe you found an answer of mine unsatisfactory, concerning the likelihood of a nuclear war between the US and Russia arising out of a conventional conflict.

It is a difficult question to answer, because much would depend on the nature of the conventional conflict.

If the conflict developed into an existential threat to one of the nations then I would say very likely. If however it was a much more limited conflict then not likely at all.

Blogger ncartist November 09, 2015 1:44 PM  

@ 69. Matamoros
Very interesting reads. Thanks.
From reading those articles, one can only come to the conclusion that the German "government" is acting under duress; and that traces it right back to Obama.

Anonymous roo_ster November 09, 2015 1:52 PM  

BGS wrote:
"The 401 ultra heavy black tranny light infantry marches on its stomach"

The "Panniculus Brigade"

Anonymous The Kulak November 09, 2015 2:51 PM  

@ 90 "Russia isn't a Great Power, it's a pathetic kleptocracy, a Third World country dependent upon natural resources for all it's wealth because it's too corrupt to be able to produce anything of value (worthwhile manufacturing really can't happen when everything's for sale, including product quality)."

With a name like ProtestManager, one wonders if someone from the NED/NRI or RFE/RL ISP just checked in. According to this: http://www.unz.com/akarlin/made-in-russia/ 40% of the nuclear reactors either under construction or on order worldwide belong to Rosatom. Plus there's that whole pesky and embarrassing to John "Russia is a gas station posing as a country (actually that's McInsane's buddies in Saudi Arabia and Qatar when you throw in the Al-Jazeera studios) McCain and Sen. Queenie Ms. McCain Graham fact that the U.S./NASA is dependent on the Russians for booster rockets.

Setting Izmash USA and weapons aside since Obummer seems determined to use anti-Russian sanctions as a pretext to stop private citizens and Alabama sheriff's offices from buying Saiga shotguns, there's still the fact that Russia is rapidly climbing in car manufacturing albeit Russians mostly want 'foreign' makes made in their country over Ladas. Volkswagen just set up an engine plant in Kaluga south of Moscow and BAM, Washington suddenly discovers they have lied about their diesel emissions (which is itself a lie and one designed to punish German industry for being too connected to Russia).

In response to ProtestManager, the sooner Balts and Russophobic Eastern Europeans get over their U.S.-endorsed and fueled sense of perpetual victimhood at the hands of the Russians, the faster they''ll repulse the real invaders who aren't 'polite people' but from the Third and Islamic worlds. NATO is not their friend no matter how desperately they kiss butt or pretend anyone Russian or American wants to fight a nuclear war over Narva, since the point of the article above is that the Baltics and probably NE Poland where U.S. forces would be indefensible in the event of a real shooting war without tactical nukes.

No Russia is quite respectable as a manufacturing power goes thanks to the foreign investment of the last several years, Indians and Chinese are quite happy to import Kamaz trucks, and India which is supposedly the world's largest democracy enjoys quite good relations with Moscow as its number 1 arms supplier. So much for ProtestManager's theme that only govmts slavishly devoted to Washington and NATO's whims and willing to commit open borders suicide for the EU(SSR) to prove how 'Western' they are count or are duly elected.

Blogger jadair04 November 09, 2015 3:09 PM  

I wouldn't be surprised if the VW 'crisis' is not being sent as a 'warning shot' over the bow of the German government. Play ball... js

Anonymous A.B. Prosper November 09, 2015 3:10 PM  

I'm glad I'm not the only wondering if the USG might pull another Kosovo in Europe.

It might be easier said than done though with the Russians and other involved.

This would be the 1st time that CONUS was actually vulnerable and a few sub launched non nuclear missiles shot at key locations could tip the house of cards, we have like what one or two large ship building and repair areas left? Its pretty hard to mess around in Europe or anywhere else with a critically wounded Navy.

Also quite a lot of the military people dislike the regime to the point of disloyalty They might end up with foreign and domestic problems with "rogue" units or worse.

Blogger Geir Balderson November 09, 2015 3:19 PM  

We should be allies with the Russians against any and all Muslim Islamists otr Aram Islamists or any Islamists. The Koranians are the true enemy today, not the Russians.

Anonymous BGS November 09, 2015 3:24 PM  

It definitely says something that if we want to send an astronaut to the ISS, we have to thumb a ride from the Russians.

It says the Russians don't have affirmative action failures taking up space.

Blogger Danby November 09, 2015 4:20 PM  

@protestmanager
Let me guess, ethnic Ukie? Or maybe an Eskimo.

Blogger Theproductofafineeduction November 09, 2015 4:21 PM  

It definitely says something that if we want to send an astronaut to the ISS, we have to thumb a ride from the Russians.

It says we have about a year an a half until the Dragon V2 capsule is fully cleared for use to ferry US astronauts to ISS. Obama hasn't done much, if anything, right but taking manned launches away from NASA and letting private companies figure it out is one of them.

Blogger Wormwood November 09, 2015 4:39 PM  

Macgregor’s RSG shears away what he describes as “the top-heavy Army command structure”


That's why it won't be adopted. The current administration is interested in more, and more control, and not less.

Blogger Sithicus November 09, 2015 4:41 PM  

@ 5. Chris Mallory
Nothing in Europe is worth one more drop of American blood or one more ounce of American gold.
So how about returning all the gold that European Countries keep in USA?
Germany kept 1500 tons in US, when they asked for it back they've been told that they'll be given 300 tons by 2020 - so far they managed to get back 90 tons.
One of the conspiracy theories surrounding the current crisis in Germany states that the whole thing was caused by USA to prevent Germany form further pursuing the gold repatriation.

Blogger Sithicus November 09, 2015 4:45 PM  

@ 24. Tom Kratman
Any chance for new book? I'd buy it ;)

Blogger Jack Ward November 09, 2015 4:56 PM  

@21 and 24

Why not do both, Col Kratman? I would love to read both. So would most of the Ilk, I dare say.
And, when the next in the Peace series? The natives are getting restless.

Blogger Chris Mallory November 09, 2015 5:39 PM  

@114,

Come and take it or consider it payment for keeping the Asian hordes out of Paris in 1946. I don't care one way or the other. Doesn't change the fact that Europe is a cesspit and has been for centuries.

My ancestors knocked the dirt of Europe from their feet 350 years ago. Don't ask me or mine to waste any more on the place.

Anonymous 0007 November 09, 2015 6:06 PM  

116 Jack - forget more "Peace" books, I want to know what happened after "Caliphate", doggone it. Somebody needs to steal the good Colonel's scotch and cigar and tell him to get back to writing... not me, not me, not me

Blogger Sithicus November 09, 2015 6:12 PM  

@ 117.
The problem is that your goverment has sold it long time ago.
My country is trying to get theirs from Bank of London.
As for keeping Asian hordes from Paris I care not for the French, backstabbing chease eating surrender monkeys. Now they have to deal with African hordes.
Franklin D. Roosevelt and Churchil sold us to Stalin and we were left behind the iron courtain for 50 years.
As for your claims that Europe is a cesspit - sure, we got our own problems. But look at your own backyard - you've had a great country and now it is being slowly turned into a third world shithole.

Anonymous ykwcommenter November 09, 2015 6:26 PM  

Since when has Julia Ioffe been a "defense writer". Last I heard of her she was a Ferguson social justice activist lecturing us on how awful we "white people" are.

Blogger Phillip George November 09, 2015 6:28 PM  

"slowly turned" / the train wreck in slow motion. You can see it coming but all that momentum just has to play out

If you need a political base it's this:

Multiculturalism is a betrayal of Jesus Christ. End of story.

all other arguments are wasted words. all the utopian/ do-gooders are simply well mannered traitors to their history/ heritage.

Islam is a war declaration. Just read their book.

Blogger Matt@Occidentalism.org November 09, 2015 6:33 PM  

It seems likely that the US government will not tolerate a nationalist government in Europe unless it is a turncoat nationalist government like that of the Ukraine.

All we can hope for is the US army filling up with trannies and people prone to panic attacks. What we definitely don't need are refomers like this MacGregor character that want to make the pentagram more efficient. It's going to be used against us.

Blogger Derrick Bonsell November 09, 2015 6:40 PM  

@90 I suggest you stop believing that Russia only runs on oil: http://russia-insider.com/en/made-russia-not-just-oil-and-gas/ri10919 It's simply not true.

Anonymous redsash November 09, 2015 6:43 PM  

Protestmanager: Confess. You're just peeved at Putin because he halted your gay pride parades.

Putin has many Christian friends in the South, and they are finally realizing that the governing elite of the USA is their enemy and not Putin.

Blogger Geir Balderson November 09, 2015 6:44 PM  

@82

America's mindset now equates to British policy 1937.

Blogger Cogitans Iuvenis November 09, 2015 7:01 PM  

@122

The US, or the rulers of the US, don't give two shits whether or not a government is nationalist/socialist so long as it follows the world order established by the US.

Anonymous Ratso November 09, 2015 7:38 PM  

Russia is not as strong as she looks. Russia is not as weak as she looks.

Blogger Hunsdon November 09, 2015 7:48 PM  

I thought about beating on ProtestManager some, but I showed up a little late, and he's been thrashed enough so far. Of course, if he keeps spewing his nonsense . . . .

Anonymous map November 09, 2015 7:48 PM  

Vox,

"What I find more worrisome is the possibility that the U.S. government will decide to throw its weight against the nationalists who have overthrown, either electorally or by other means, a European government, as they did in the case of Serbia. I can envision a situation where U.S. forces step in to create a Ukraine-style puppet government in defense of the poor Muslim refugees, in which case they'll be faced with European 4GW opponents far more lethal than anything they have seen in the Middle East or in Asia."

This is already happening. America is dispatching troops to Germany, ostensibly to defend Germany from Russia.

Anonymous map November 09, 2015 7:55 PM  

It's easy to see why MacGregor is touted as some kind of military genius. Basically, the government will tout something if it saves the government money. If, for example, the government supports breastfeeding, then it's obviously there to save money on formula.

MacGregor is saving money on logistics. Just carry what you need for two weeks, and the government won't need to deploy firebases with extensive supply chains.

What else get's axed? Oh, the career bureaucrats that manage the supply chain. Wheeeeeeee...money saved all around.

Anonymous Quartermaster November 09, 2015 8:09 PM  

@118
I'll call the Class 6 store and tell them no more scotch or cigars for the Colonel until he gets back on the follow on to Caliphate. No galley proofs, no booze. I'd like to see more in the Peace Series as well.

@106
Eastern Europeans have good reason to distrust Russia. The small mater of the period from 1945-1991 still hangs over Russia's head. Particularly so when you see its behavior in the Crimea and Donbas.

@97 @88
The previous regime was put in place as a result of the Orange Revolution. Yanukovich ended up moving towards puppet status with Russia and a large number of people found that intolerable. Yanukovich fled the country and he was then removed through constitutional means, with elections being held that put Poroshenko in instead. I see no evidence that the current regime is any less legit than the previous regime. The attempts to delegitimize the current regime are an effort of Russian agitprop.

@89
Methinks you underestimate the ROKs. In the past, we have been sitting on the ROKs. The NORKs are the ones that are nervous. The ROK Army is one of the toughest, most proficient in the world. The NORKs have good reason to be nervous. They are poorly equipped, poorly fed, and poorly led. They may look nice on parade, or at Panmunjom, but there is far more to an effective Army than how they look on parade.

@90
I would agree that Russia is not a world power, but they are a great power on the continent, for now. They have long been a 3rd world country with nukes. They came up in the world over the last 25 years. It has been painful, and Putin is in the process of squandering the progress, but he can do some serious damage to anyone within reach. I certainly agree that Russia is not, however, a great country as it is simply a kleptocracy. Putin's behavior has delegitimized the country and his actions have been irresponsible.

I recently heard that oil exploration contracts had been let for Black Sea bed off Crimea by Ukraine. It has been speculated that was the true reason Putin moved on Crimea.

@96
Putin is a man-child. Obama is a boy-child.

@106 @107
VW Execs have owned up to what they did. They're trying to deal with the results of their stupidity. When the perp admits to the charges, you've got a hard road if you want to claim there is some sort of US caused crisis here.

@109
Alas, Putin has caused Russia to be mistrusted. Russia would be a natural ally, but the manner in which the US has acted towards them over the past 7 years has not laid any sort of foundation for such cooperation. Putin, instead, has started moving towards China, which is not in Russia's long term interests. Unfortunately, the current US administration are a bunch of fools.

@117
366 years for my family. But, I'm afraid what is going on the Europe now is a danger to us, not that dumbo cares as he's trying to get the Latin Americans to do the same thing here.

@124
Who are these “Christian friends” of Putin you speak of? From what I am seeing even the people of the Donbas and Crimea want the Russians out.

@126
That's a concern of the NWO types in DC. It appears the Ukrainians may have escaped the corral. Heaven forfend they remove a politician who was approved by the neocons.

Anonymous Floyd Looney November 09, 2015 8:20 PM  

The only puppet government in Ukraine was the one installed by the Russians. The idea that the US invaded Ukraine and installed a puppet government is pretty absurd. You should not be listening to Kremlin propaganda. How many US divisions are in Ukraine?

Other than that, all good points.

OpenID paworldandtimes November 09, 2015 9:13 PM  

Franklin D. Roosevelt and Churchil sold us to Stalin and we were left behind the iron courtain for 50 years.

The American occupation of Europe has been more corrosive in the long term than the Soviet ocupation of Waraw Pact countries.

-PA

Anonymous redsash November 09, 2015 11:19 PM  

#130: So the people of the Crimea who are 90% Russian, have been governed by Russia from Catherine the Great until Khrushchev, and recently voted to be returned to Russia by over 85%, want the Russians out? Does twilight zone music constantly play in your head?
Putin is a Russian patriot and nationalist. He bemoans the fall of the Soviet Union because so many Russians were left behind in now foreign lands (Latvia, etc.)
Putin is a free market capitalist, not a crony capitalist, as evidenced by bringing to justice many Jewish oligarchs who made fortunes under Yelton.
Last year Putin celebrated Christianity having been in Russia for 1025 years. At the small church north of Moscow where he was baptised and his parents are buried, Putin celebrated Christmas with the local people and their priest. He had tears in his eyes as he told how special that church was to him. He also always wears the cheap metal cross his mother gave to him after nearly losing it in a banya fire.
While our children may be forced to read Heather Has Two Moms, Russian parents can take comfort in knowing that the propagandists who push this vile evil will be sent to prison.
Who are these Christian friends who admire Putin? Christians who see the lies from the MSM, Christians who have had their fill of being ruled over by secular pagans, Christians who study the Word of God and have not been deceived by the god of this world as you apparently have been deceived.

#131: Soros spent 4 billion dollars on his color revolution and NGO's to disrupt, riot, and destroy the elected President of the Ukraine whose main sin was not the usual bribes and corruption, but siding with Russia instead of the NWO directed EU. Why, even ole John McCain showed up in Kiev to stir the pot.

Blogger ZhukovG November 10, 2015 12:02 AM  

@133. redsash

While I agree with you that 130 and 131 display an ignorance of Russia and Ukraine that is embarrassing to behold, I would like to make one slight correction to your figures.

Crimea is 60% ethnic Russian and 20% ethnic Ukrainian. Crimean Tatars make up 11-14%. The people of Crimea did in fact overwhelmingly vote to be reunited with Russia. Which is unsurprising to anyone with even scant knowledge of the Cultural and Economic situation.

Putin is definitely one of the few 'adult' leaders in Europe at this time, and he has demonstrated great restraint in face of repeated provocations by the US and its various puppet states.

Anonymous Quartermaster November 10, 2015 8:00 AM  

@134
Perhaps they really did vote to go with Russia. The manner in which the plebiscite was handled, however, leads one to believe that the result was predetermined. Stalin had no problem with elections, as long as he was the one counting the votes.

I don't have any confidence that the population of Crimea actually wanted to go with Russia. As things are working out, even those who did want it, will probably change their minds and wish they hadn't. Putin is simply a man-child out of his league and dragging Russia back down into the pit it was crawling out of so painfully. In his own way, he's as bad as Obama.

I'm embarrassed for you. Your ignorance is a wonder to behold.

Anonymous Quartermaster November 10, 2015 8:04 AM  

@133
Putin is a kleptocrat. The winter Olympics at Sochi was an exercise in cronyism and corruption. If Putin is a Christian, he needs to bear the fruits. So far, his behavior belies anything of the sort. Liars will not enter the Kingdom of God.

Blogger Tom Kratman November 10, 2015 8:22 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Tom Kratman November 10, 2015 8:24 AM  

By the way, a subtext not really addressed here is that WE DON'T WANT OR NEED TO FIGHT THE RUSSIANS; we have too many of the same enemies and too many common interests. Moreover, our problems with Russia are largely of our own making, starting with Bill Clinton and intervention in Bosnia. For fuck's sake, Putin is doing for us a great deal or what we should be doing for ourselves.

Blogger JohnG November 10, 2015 8:45 AM  

We’d lose initially. We haven’t fought anybody that’s been capable of fighting back in a long time. The lessons learned by the Gulf War were all the wrong ones, if any of you remember it was Air Power can win everything and “Push Button” Warfare. Clinton floated the Women in Combat idea then and the underlying subtext was that nobody was really going to fight anymore anyway, it was all going to be technology.

Blogger JohnG November 10, 2015 8:46 AM  

Our guys haven’t dealt with NBC at all in the last 20 years, most Chem officers are detailed to some support role in a TOC, S2, S3, JISE or what not. The Central Issue Facilities issue and reissue the same chemical gear in the same shrink wrapping over and over as people deploy and come back in – it’s never been opened. We’ve got 14 years of officers that have never had to deal with anything more significant than a road side bomb and the various makes and models of IEDs you might run into on a foot patrol. Fire fights are still a bunch of disorganized militia types that have no concept of fire discipline, or cover and concealment – and when the going actually got tough because bad guys were in good cover (buildings, or high points in the terrain) there was air support available nearly every time and within a matter of minutes to put 30mm fire down or a 500lb bomb on target. Incoming even at its worst at the US Embassy, 04-06 (they aimed at the Green Zone daily), scores of shots per day – almost never hit anything. Sometimes they’d even had the wrong detonators in the tips of the rockets or mortars. Currently we’re taking about 1 shot a week at Baghram Airbase where we’re at north of Kabul, they don’t hit anything… it just astounds me that after all these years, Jihadi organizations have never once managed to find a guy or train a guy to put down accurate mortar fire.

Blogger skiballa November 10, 2015 8:46 AM  

@138

Exactly that Col, we could really find common interest, and it might be beneficial to do so. Probably unlikely with our current administration though.

Was it you TK, or another article I recall, that said a US-Russian military alliance would be possibly the greatest the world has seen, with the world's foremost sea and land power together. If one were of a mind to end the threat of Islam anyway.

Fighting against Russia would be asinine in any case. The US has repeatedly demonstrated an inability to win (or maintain victory anyway) at a strategic level for a while, and it looks like we wouldn't do too well at a tactical level. Just the disparity in small arms and body armor would be telling. Plus, it seems the Russians have some fun toys in terms of EW/ECM we haven't had much experience with yet, having spent too long fighting farmers with AKs. All our fun toys like FBCB2 and the Duke might be worth fuck all, i'm not sure the CoC would know how to react.

Blogger JohnG November 10, 2015 8:46 AM  

Back to the officers that I was training a year ago, Command and General Staff College tried to push out training that involved a real war type situation (the new Officers “Common Core” – I kid you not), but it was mostly an IPB exercise, Decision Making Process EX. They had an early 90’s era war SIM that they got a couple days to mess with, but it was like an 80s table top game (but digital and with crap graphics) that was so obnoxious to set up and “take a turn” that the students mainly got “what a piece of crap game” instead of when the enemy actually shoots at your unit, a crap load of your vehicles get blown up and a lot of your troops are dead – and there’s no guarantee that we have permanent air superiority.

Blogger JohnG November 10, 2015 8:47 AM  

I don’t really find it all that much of a coincidence that the Russians are getting their Military Operations in Urban Terrain live fire training done as we speak. Everybody has probably forgot about those M1s we lost in the first weeks of Baghdad – which wasn’t mysterious at all, they were the latest generation of man-packable anti-tank weapon, which toasted the M1 Abrams in one hit.

Blogger JohnG November 10, 2015 8:47 AM  

Meanwhile, the Army has been sitting around in Afghanistan for the last two years with its thumb up its collective ass. They said “be gone by Oct 2014” so the Army pulled the plug on everything and withdrew as much as it could. Since we’ve extended twice, the Army has simply said screw it, let’s defend Kabul and screw the Afghans. The only people doing anything are SOF and even we have limitations. We get info at the same time the “regular” guys get it, it’s a fast moving target. The Army ends up being ready two days after the guy is long gone and it ends up being a SOF mission to actually track down and kill a friggin Neanderthal. The Air Farce is supposedly in charge of the security of BAF, they don’t have a clue. Some idiot was doing his bi-weekly mortar attack on the base (which essentially shuts down operations as everybody runs for cover) and the AF is powerless. They can spin up some F16s and have them up 30 minutes after the attack, but by that time Haji has gone back to his sheep and isn’t launching mortars anymore (when they’re not simply putting a time delay on the thing). The Air Farce thought it would be slick and put Phalanx guns (Technology will sure show those Jihadis!) up all around the perimeter, but they’re not that effective and entirely ineffective against rockets (lower, flatter trajectory). So something else SOF has to take care of, which they did, we haven’t had incoming in three weeks.

Blogger JohnG November 10, 2015 8:48 AM  

No, if there’s a dustup between us and the Russians, it’s going to be a rude awakening. Frankly tho, our foreign policy for a generation has been a bully/coward foreign policy. If a bad actor has a nuke, we won’t do a damn thing to them (like the Pakistanis taking our money and providing training, funding, weapons and explosives to Taliban, HIG, HQN literally within a stone’s throw of the AFG border), but we’ll invade and kill people that don’t stand a chance. I think Vlad has all the cards.

Blogger skiballa November 10, 2015 8:51 AM  

@140
JohnG, I'll have to agree with your assesment, NBC, or CBRNE as it's now known, hasn't been keeping up with the times, and the military has gotten complacent. The only real change in the past few decades is the name, which apparently counts as doing something, I'm sure it made a nice bullet point on someone's OER.

Blogger skiballa November 10, 2015 8:59 AM  

Oh, I agree with the rude awakening part, an actual organized military, with access to the US Army FM 7-8 could probably roll us up at a tactical level easily.

This is the issue I was referring to earlier:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/20/tactical-advantage-russian-military-shows-off-impr/?page=all

Key point:
"The Russians, in their new 6B43 model body armor, issued chest and back plates made of titanium and hard carbide boron ceramics.

“The stuff they have is impervious to 5.56, whereas our body armor is not completely proven against their weapons,” Gen. Scales said.

Gen. Scales said the Russians carry AK-74s whose magazine is loaded with 5.45 “steel core” ammunition — a round that on April 8 the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives banned from importation because the agency deemed it armor-piercing.

Gen. Scales described the 5.45 as “extremely lethal against any kind of body armor.” "

Blogger ZhukovG November 10, 2015 9:08 AM  

@138. Tom Kratman

Spot on, Colonel.

Blogger JohnG November 10, 2015 9:17 AM  

@146 I know it's CBRNE, I just figure it'll go back like ISR did.

Blogger Dexter November 10, 2015 9:37 AM  


The American occupation of Europe has been more corrosive in the long term than the Soviet ocupation of Waraw Pact countries.

Poles, Hungarians, and Czechs might disagree.

How many days would South Korea exist if the US entirely pulled out only leaving the buildings and minefields?

If the South can't or won't defend themselves with a population twice as large and an economy over forty times as large, then fuck 'em.

Blogger skiballa November 10, 2015 9:38 AM  

Meh, no big deal, point is that's the only major update in a while. The Army has a bad habit of doing such things, like turning the Main Support BNs where I spent much time into Combat Sustainment Support BNs, sounds nice right, but what actually changed?

Blogger ZhukovG November 10, 2015 9:58 AM  

@150. Dexter

The Hungarians are upset enough over the Islamic Invasion of Europe so they seem ready to let bygones be bygones.

The Poles, God bless them, have elected a Nationalist Govt. The new Polish government doesn't like Russians, Germans, or Moslems and would apparently appreciate it if Ukraine gave Galicia back.

The Polish animosity with Russia goes back centuries, so that's likely never to get better.

The Czechs and Slovaks, I'm not sure about, but they certainly don't want any trouble.

I agree with you on South Korea, they have a military that is more than capable, at least on paper, of absolutely destroying the North. The thing that frightens South Koreans more than anything is that the North might actually surrender and want to reunify. It would be an economic disaster for the South.

Blogger The Other Robot November 10, 2015 11:03 AM  

I'm embarrassed for you. Your ignorance is a wonder to behold.

Thread winner with an own goal!

Anonymous Quartermaster November 10, 2015 11:57 AM  

@138
I second Marshall Zhukov's statement. Putin may be doing serious damage to his own country, but he's doing what we should be in the ME.

Blogger Anonymous Robot November 10, 2015 12:47 PM  

“There is a whole different culture about ‘commo’ in the Russian army than there is in ours,” Mr. Kipp said. “We tend to want everyone to report in whenever they do something. The Russians lay out an assignment and tasks and give it a timeline and you report in if you are not on your timeline, or if you run into unexpected opposition.”

So, they learned something from the Germans after all.

Blogger Cataline Sergius November 10, 2015 2:06 PM  

Off Topic:

Happy Birthday, my brothers!.

You know who you are.

Anonymous The Kulak November 10, 2015 7:16 PM  

Reply to Quartermaster @ 135
@134
"Perhaps they really did vote to go with Russia. The manner in which the plebiscite was handled, however, leads one to believe that the result was predetermined." Says the guy who thinks Yanukovich's removal was done in a constitutional manner, when he fled for his life rather than face the choice of being sodomized in a ditch like Gaddafi before getting the chance to defend himself in court. Let's not forget the armed 'Maidan Self Defense' thugs (you know, the same ones who sat on their asses as the 'Heavenly Hundred' were allegedly gunned down by Yanukovich's snipers on the Maidan and let those same snipers get away despite having a mini-arsenal of hunting rifles, shotguns, pistols and Molotov cocktails) being present in the Rada when the impeachment vote was taken. No wonder so many members of Yanukovich's own party voted for his removal, the alternative was being beaten, thrown into a rubbish bin or worse seeing something done to their wives and children.

"I don't have any confidence that the population of Crimea actually wanted to go with Russia." Then you're an idiot who clearly knows nothing about the peninsula or as other commenters have pointed out here, its demographics. "As things are working out, even those who did want it, will probably change their minds and wish they hadn't." Yes of course they would rather go back to blessed deindustrializing, no hope of ever paying back its tens of billions in IMF debts Ukropia. "Putin is simply a man-child out of his league..." out of his league against whom, exactly? Fat arsed Saudi princes? The neo-Ottoman Sultan in Turkey? Or the Ukrainian supermen A.H. Bonenberger assured Forbes readers are set to march on Crimea after defeating the Russian army any day now, after failing to beat Donetsk and Lugansk truck drivers armed by Russia?

"I'm embarrassed for you. Your ignorance is a wonder to behold."

Right back at your Quartermaster, you sound like a well brainwashed old Cold Warrior with no concept of anything in Eastern Europe besides German and Russian guilt. Particularly the whole business of the Nazis not having to get their hands dirty in Lvov which used to be a majority Polish and Jewish city or at Babi Yar because Ukrainian Banderites did all the dirty work of murdering Jews for them. And if you buy into the greater Galicia svidomy cult Narrative and insist that's all Soviet propaganda, do me a favor and go talk to a first or second generation Polish nationalist and bring up "UPA" "Volyn" and "Roman Shushkeyvich". See what kind of response you get.

Anonymous The Kulak November 10, 2015 7:31 PM  

I'm not going to give any speeches about the sincerity of Putin's Orthodox Christianity or whether it's simply neo-Tsarist symphonia. I'll only say this, you know someone is really ignorant badgering others about theirs when they say stupid stuff like this:

"@126
That's a concern of the NWO types in DC. It appears the Ukrainians may have escaped the corral. Heaven forfend they remove a politician who was approved by the neocons." Yanukovich approved by the neocons? Since when? Seems like Quartermaster got Yanuk confused with Petro "Porky" Poroshenko, who is most definitely the neocons guy along with Arseniy 'Yats' Yatsenyuk. All you have to do is listen to the leaked phone conversation between neocon witch Victoria (married to Robert Kagan) Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine (aka ruling proconsul to those of you who took issue with the 'puppet government' descriptions of the current Kiev regime): http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957

Of course to hear the State Dept. apologists and .gov trolls all over the web after that audio leaked, Nuland and Pyatt were merely expressing preferences, like baseball or pro football fans, not actually deciding who would take over the government of a sovereign country after its duly elected president was forced to resign or overthrown by a mob Uncle Sam surely had nothing to do with.

And of course the Kiev regime having a legitimacy problem is solely due to Russian agitprop, which surely made President Porky say this about making Donetsk kids hide in basements:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHWHqj8g7Bk

Nothing at all to do with the fact that Ukraine is a bankrupt, failing state now that its trade with Russia has been destroyed, it relies on the EU and IMF to pay for its gas and avoid freezing, its currency has lost over half its value to the dollar despite draconian capital controls that don't exist in Russia, and its most industrialized region has been destroyed by an unnecessary even after Ukrainian nationalists said the country would be better off without the 'sovoks' and 'vatniks' of the Donbass in the fold.

But don't take Russian agit-proppers word for it folks, here's Reuters and Bloomberg throwing up their hands now that the EuroMaidanPR RFE/RL bullshit about the wonderful post Maidan Ukraine success story and it's all Putin's fault narratives aren't working:

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/11/08/the-continuing-soviet-collapse/

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-11-06/unreformed-ukraine-is-self-destructing

Blogger Serge December 12, 2015 9:32 PM  

To: Gordon
"2. Gordon November 09, 2015 8:20 AM

Well, that's a pisser. One of the "reassuring" things about Russia is how shocked they were about how fast we rolled over Iraq's Russian-trained-and-equipped army in 1991. "

Nobody was shocked. This was absolutely expected. My dad who was colonel then and me were spending summer vacation in Crimea. He blantly told me that Iraqi military leadership were idiots, army badly trained, T-72 and many other wepaons monkey versions meant only for export to Third world countries an that munition for T-72 was pre 1973 already long time discontinued in USSR and unable to penetrate M-1 armor. No shock whatsoever. We were spending time in military sanatorium Crimea where yazov was at the time as well. Nobody, absolutely nobody we were talking to was in shocked state. Iraqis with all equipment could not do anything against Iran back in 1980. ,...

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts