Sublime

I think Cooper woulda $hit a brick at yankee know how - IIRC he was a thru and thru southerner. Jokes aside youre right and Stephen Ambrose used to be the worst in books for that. I remember distinctly the Ambrose craze in the late 90s. It also sucked because I was only 13 or 14 but loved history and was pretty aware that Ambrose minimized every other Allies achievements versus the US on Germans; and I felt that he insulted the memory of a lot of men by either exagerrating or deflating the quality and numbers of the Germans facing US troops to whatever suited his narrative better. Of course try telling some grown up thats not into history but just read Citizen Soldiers that you think he.s a moron cuz x y and z lol no one is willing to take you seriously or if they do theyre not gonna allow a teenager to one up them amd will deny it regardless. Sigh. The days before I could argue with someone, challenge them to put money on some obscure bs, and then whip out my phone and google my free 5 bucks

We can invade and destroy the troll farm that keeps hitting the site? Maybe thw BFC omen will shine and the real world troll farms will get hit with a few JDAMs. Sorry not sorry

Ikalugin no Im not saying they dump people in those roles and yes I understand completely and also would rather have volunteers in combat etc Im just saying as time goes on Id be wary of that end of things to become a sort of dumping ground. I think at this point the Russian military is reorganizing itself so much they probably dont even have a dumping ground they all agree on yet Ive heard serving on the Kuznetsov is hell though. Or maybe getting sent to the Far East districts. No but anyways Ikalugin i understand what youre saying perfectly - you take me too seriously as an American citizen with a casual interest, as I noted Im sure the professionals in the Ru military have it in hand. Im extremely glad I missed the draft because I was a mess. However if America was run like it was at the end of its draft ironically my misbehavior would probably have ended up with me in the army tryn to get out of legal problems. Nowadays they dont want people like me, and theyre honestly the better off for it Im sure. If the draft was applied evenly and genuinely, almost like how you saw a willingness to serve from every class in say WW2 Id agree it.d be good for our society. As it ended with Vietnam... You could fix your way out of it if you had means and it wasnt fair. Considering that was where we left it over here and the current state of things I think if it ever was reinstated bar a national crisis it.d be much the same. A place for have nots. (Not the military, the draft pools)

Whats your feelings on the whole matter? Im glad we dont have conscriptiom in America...

That sounds really good... But I wonder if that means the support and rear elements become a dumping ground and province of the superbly inept. I obviously would do the same thing given a choice on who Id prefer to be in the combat roles, just saying Id also want a good professional core still in areas where Id send mostly conscripts. Im pretty sure if this occurred to me its definitely occurred to the professionals however. If I was in charge I might add another 6 months across the board to the conscripts time in. IIRC service in Russia for conscripts is short right? Im gonna google that now... Yeah Im getting a year which is what I had thought but wasnt sure of. It seems like the military is missing out almost on a sweet spot of competency time after training. It IS good for pumping out a MASSIVE number overall of people who are trained and have been in uniform; and now that I think about it I bet thats probably part of why it is a year. Still 'if I was Stalin' it.d be 2 years. I lied about it only going up 6 months

Done and done

Ill be that jerk and post without reading all previous responses. 2 things. First initially in a battle you can usually achieve fire superiority in several places at once. Once the battles gotten messy your best bet to achieve or regain fire superiority is to localize the fights. Use terrain features, movement and smoke amd try to pick apart the enemy by localizing engagements and stacking the odds by pouring your strongest guys on each objective. Second you usially begin a battle with the ability to have superiority (especially as attacker) im several areas or a broad front. Perhaps consider cutting out one or two lanes of attack, and put the units earmarked for that attack in reserve or in line to continue the attackbin a direction another units already going in. It also really helps to try NOT to get into pitched grinding battles. This is war not sport. You dont want even fights. If youre shooting the enemy in their backs you did something right. I also will use the organic unit transports at the start of a battle to try to evenly distribute all the ammo to my men. Yes it loads them down but those soft skinned vehicles go up really easy and that extra several k rounds of ammo can be crucial, along with the added bazookas or fausts etc. Any light mortars are really useful for me in cm. I facepalm when i see people use 60mm US mortars as indirect assets from the get go. Of course if the situation changes thats fine but i always try to place my 60mm and even 81s in positions to direct fire. When using the mortars i always give them target light orders. Theyll fire a round about every time they see the previous hit - those mortars are sooo useful in infantry engagements that if you use regular target with them you.ll absolutely waste some precious rounds. Id add finally judicious use of artillery and with your armor's main gun rounds in support. I see too many noobs use up their tank HE in 2 turns of shelling. Noway. Ill pump 3 or 4 rounds in a bldg, then let my tank instead sit there spraying the building with mg fire. This also is good to just let rip all the way to your men kicking that door in, the game is forgiving for small arms and your men wont get killed by the mg fire.

I found it interesting in thebarticle that they claimed the Blitz was no good to study because it was more or less continous from summer 40 to spring 41, then goes on to point out that Allied aircraft also carried heavier payloads and made it easier to measure. Couple of things that made me think - wouldnt anything the Luftwaffe have done to Britain be nowhere near as continous as the bombing by the Allies from 43 onward? I do get it that the massive amounts of planes and way heavier payloads would be more measureable (making larger 'spikes' as it were) but I seem to be missing something fundamental about understanding the article. Im amazed they.re able to study or measure any of this at all 70 years later. Also of note theres an article on WiB IIRC about a team thats mapping and notating every American bomb ever dropped since Ww1 and the location to help with UXO efforts. Naturally WW1 and WW2 had a lot of stuff and Korea but most of us will know that the US dropped waaaaay more ordinance on just S Vietnam let alone all of SE Asia from 65 to 75 than all of WW2 by far. And we also heavily used cluster bombs which seem to alwaus leave one or two unexploded clusters and cause a lot of uxo headaches.. Apparently the teams been stuck on processing Vietnam quite some time... One other question for everyone - France apparently has a "zone rouge" where there was too much chemical weapons and explosives used that to this day people arent allowed to wander around in this area (s) Where is this area, how big is it? Is this just because chemical weapons or do we have similar European sites for WW2. I was just very surprised to hear about this as Western Europe is so wealthy and dense..

I remember. I was one of the people that had one guy go outta his way to downvote every and every post i made, opinion, game mechanics, real life, even just anyone want a pbem? Crazy. Whatever yeah i agree it should have stayed dead. For example one of the most intelligent posters Ive ever encountered on the boards JasonC, I havent seen post in years so Im assuming he.d have 0 points which would be incredibly deceptive to his vast knowledge. It also favors heavy posters and - I admit people like me -who sometimes post stuff thats really nothing - like thanking someone, making a dumb assed joke or the like. Some of the best posters on here disappear a lot, go on deployment ( i believe codename duchess is deployed or recently was god bless him) or only come out to post sparingly or if summoned like a genie (panzersauerkrautwerfer ) Though to be fair, is this -in my opinion- something that at the moment Id want to see BFC spend even 10 minutes on again? No Id rather they just stop messing around with it leave it and hurry up with more games!

@DerKommissar im sure its totally unsustainable. After all theres a reason Im not in charge. Yes that Defense Minister incident was sad really, he tried to say he completely planned and commanded a major operation in Afghanistan

Thanks. First I agree Id choose between one army or the other. And frankly given the investments Russia has made since the 2008 war Id move the conscripts into units modelled more on like a hybrid US natl guard/reserve status and pour my money into my professional military and best units. Part of the issue or problem is Im taking an entirely western mind on the next part - Id really have a sit down and get real about where any real prospect of invasion could happen (east not west) and that likelihood is so low Id free up a lot of what I see as unnecessary units and downsize and use the extra money, etc to also help my reforms along. This is all given mind I really would have changed the Russian militaru after the 08bwar but I would have gone back to a more Soviet style. i wouldnt shy away from mass conscription and Id get away with it to. id realistically know noone, even if they were dumv enough to invade would survive such an endeavour, and spend the next ten years building an absolutely gargantuan army that nearly crushes my countries economy but thats ok because half the men are in the army and thr other half are on call and the women are too tired from 12 hr shifts. Then Id set about bullying the hell out of my neighbours and generaly giving the finger to the west and using extreme scare tactics in every situation. Im talking Stalin acting like a Nork the Soviets actually were pretty conservative

Sorry i had missed your post with the turbine specific reply If you had like Stalin like power ad it were over Ru Army and its future what would you choose for current andnfuture tanks and apcs and assault rifles? Do you agree the strategy air wise of going after hi value western assets (nato/awacs) and more robust A2/AD than say the western traditional wrest control of the air approach? Or a hybrid?

ok so BTR and D Kommissar fuel expense aside is the turbine T80 the better tank engine wise? Are turbines the future? And this doesnt answer my question. I know the Russian military has some really smart people. People who would see how the battle of Grozny played out and I literally know as much as I said above about T80s in Grozny. How did they end up to blame for poor tactics unless Theres actual real performance problems im unaware of id like to know This is a rare instance of an awesome tank gttn trash because the time peripd was a perfect storm of rapidly shrinking military and corruption and so to cynicaly save jobs for generals and not lives for young draftees a machine got blamed for a humans errors?

So its just Americas enormous military budhet and wealth that allows us to operate turbine M1s, diesel Marine M1s, diesel M2s, etc? I mean at one time, in the mid to late 80s there were a lot of T80s in GSFRG and they were expected to be the prime time break through to the channel troops. One would imagine they must have had a fu*kton of turbine gas around for that little party no? Unless of course its like the shocking nugget I got when my father told me in the late 90s that " I suppose I can tell you this since the Cold War is over but it was a dark secret amongst the fighter pilots in NATO in the late 70s early 80s that NATO ONLY HAD ENOUGH A2A MISSILES IN THEATER FOR 3 DAYS OF COMBAT!!!" After that it woulda been guns only fighter combat until more supplies! i dont know if this speaks to how truly the ppwers that be thought we.d all be tossing nukes by then anyways or the insanity of some of what was going on in the West during the Cold War

BTR Ive always wondered - now mind I cant read cyrillic - everything Ive managed to find specific to T80s doesnt point to the turbine being bad, to my American eyes it looks like the tank just got named as junk when some crap general rolled a ton of T80s without infantry into Grozny and that the tanks gun elevation limits sucked and they couldnt hit rooftops. I point this out because Abrams turbine engines seem to have worked pretty well, from what I gather, being quiet and making the tanks fast. Can you please elaborate what about the actual tank made it so hated and almost phased out immediately after 94? What are the advantages besides gas use of a diesel over a turbine? Diesels probably more robust and in line with Russian tradition of field tough equipment?

So is thisbthread the wargamer equivalent to women fan clubs going to ted bundys trial, or richard ramirez, etc? Lol

Idk they dont do it for me the same way those loveable Russian Rascals though

the TOS does seem to be a very popular weapons system.. I certainly think it.s a "cool" sounsing tank, but since Im American it all sounds pretty bad since in the unlikely event I ever do get shot at with heavy Russian equipment it would be in a WW3 scenario where TOS' would be the weapons of nightmares. Its basically a T72 with a MLRS on top that shoots FAB rockets right?

you and the PRC guys better get more definitive border zones on your Siberian border - all Trump/Nixon comparisons aside if Putin calls Trump offering a massive nuke strike on PRC we may say yes this time

also @ikalugin on the supposed US strikes on Wagner group troops several months back - is this getting any coverage in Russia? Or is it considered bs?

Im surprised - of course I could just be completely ignorant of it - that Russias leaders arent more wary of contractors becoming a shadow army of sorts. I guess perhaps thats why theyre technically illegal. I wonder how the PRC handles this - they have odd approaches (to western eyes) on mil matters, like militarizing their fishermen..

interesting. I wonder if they.ll have more luck than we.ve been having with ours.. Do you think China will become a threat to its neighbors for example say in another 20 years? See for example the South China Sea.. Seems like the US govt handles them the same way except theyre not illegal. It also makes deniability a lot easier, depending on the situation. They also seem to be a liability in some ways, if you look at the US in Iraq those Blackwater contractors getting killed in 04 forced the military to conduct not one but two seperate major offenses to clear out Fallujah. ( to be fair to the contractors that would probably have happened anyways in some form, the city was out of control, but it forced the military to DO SOMETHING) - the 2nd offensive Phantom Fury probably being the heaviest ground combat seen in large numbers by US troops since Vietnam.

Absolutely. I cant read cyrillic and I just was reading your observation of the PRC units. Now as Im sitting on a subway with my $hit 4g connection can you explain what you mean by the Chinese mix in guns? You mean wheeled like towed or like Strykers? Overall whats your opinion of the PRC? (military) How DO you feel this exercises relates to the Donbass anyways? The 5 BTG comment, do you think there.ll be a Russian surge as it were just to end the situation? Would Russia ever tolerate Chinese 'volunteer' troops in Donbass ( I doubt it too close to home ) or Syria in your opinion? Whats your opinion on contracter groups. Wagner group for example? But also lately in the news theres been worry amongst some Mr Prince of the now defunct Blackwater USA will convince Trump to make Afghanistan a contractor war.. Opinion? I think its asking for disaster. I point to Fallujah early 04 and also note those contractors had a huge US military prescence in country with them.

You may very well have me on Switzerland. I still think its almost a joke exercise to compare the US and Russian regimes and how cynically they practiced policy. Oh yes the US killed hundreds of thousands but when the margin is vs tens of millions... well. The civil war is a stretch. For one the South seceded then attacked the North. Its not like they simply left. And theres a lot of other issues tied up in the Civil War I dont think its very applicable. As far as CIA vs GRU/SVD/KGB Id say we have WAAAAY more (and I distinctly remember when my father got grounded from flying and moved into intel he always insisted that US intel sucked vs Soviet in everything, especially HUMINT, except for SIGINT. Yea we had a bunch of silly hare brained plots to kill Castro. None worked and the fact theyre so well known attests to how epically they failed. You take that vs the infamous ricin pellet, the Skripals, etc etc etc. Iran flight is a good point and Id forgotten about that. Of course a few points because Im me: The US didnt double down and start blaming EVERYONE else. IIRC the Captain got canned and there were apologies blah blah. Contrast this with KAL007 or MH370 for example. Its actually not your bad on OT, Ive been the worst offender on the thread and Ikalugins comment was directed at you. You didnt do anything wrong.. P.S. I gotta add the Swiss the more I think about it is dubious. As in who is worse the hitman or the person who helps someone hide the murdered persons money for example? Most would say the murderer is the worst of course. As far as US law for almost the entire country if youre there for a murder, even just as a driver or to dig a hole youre in the same boat as the actual killer. I think this example is a little harsh on the Swiss but its an example, the Swiss hardly have a monopoly on being good in the world.. Just because they dont bother many people how many do they help? How many nations send out the amount of plain food and medicine in aid as the US for example? I honestly think also Switzerland is so small.. I think you can only perhaps see the true character of a nation when theyre in a truly strong position and you see how they work with it. In this way history will be very harsh on Nazi Germany the SU and unfortunately America as well. Its just by degrees.. Ah who am I kidding the human race has less than 50 years left IMO Switzerland may have been neutral a long time now but that doesnt mean they didnt turn a blind eye to what the Nazis were doing and also doing quite healthy business with them. Sometimes trying to help people and killing other people along the way may sadly be justified. If 90 percent of the globe acted like Switzerland leaving the Nazis and another 9% what would have happened? No this isnt justification for Grenada or Iraq 03 or any nonsense, its just the Swiss are hardly angels, theyve just hidden their horns and pitchforks behind a facade of gold.

well first of all I often go with the intent part of war. War is messy and no nation has clean hands. I do challenge anyone on this forum to find a nation thats as consistently gone out of its way to help other nations, and gone out of its way at the expense of American lives to minimize civilian casualties. Yes the US wasnt invited into Syria. Of course I believe that Assad has used Chem weapons on civilians and he turned peaceful protests during the Arab spring violemt by machine gunning crowds. I can get behind a limited US campaign of bombing and SF to try to let the Syrians get rid of Asad on their own. I certainly see more honor in that than propping up a blatantly murderous regime. I do have major problems with the US turning a blind eye to Saudi and Paki perfidy especially towards the west. ll things considered Id say NO our hands are NOT as. dirty as the Russians unless you want to count American history back to the indiands but discount Russian history until post 91. Even then still iffy. Ikalugin is right though its OT we can PM back and forth but I believe youre russian ( right? ) and Im American and we.re probably not goung to reach a concensus. Last thing. Maybe Crimea was like an Anschluss. The Donbass is definitely not though. Thats a bonafide real war. Also how many airliners have any western countries cold war or post cold war downed? How many nerve agent or journalist assasinations have been laid at the feet of the west vs Russia? I could go on and on... The US is no innocent lamb and trust me Im under no illusions as a convicted felon in the US the govt wouls probably either put me in a camp for the duration or in a grunt unit if a major war broke out. I dont think any govt really cares about people like me ( poor money wise ) I digress though. P.S. Dezert Storm WAS NOT NATO. It axtually was a bigger coalition than the Allies in Ww2 for christs sakes even the Soviets were ok with it. OIF 2. DEFINITELY wasnt NATO the Germans and French were apopoleptic we invaded as was much of the world. In favt the ONLY time NATO has ever invomed article 5 for defense was the US for 9/11 ( insanely ironic we.re bitching NATOs a drag on us considering the only time it got forced into war it was on our behalf) Libya was NATO but I disnt rlly agree with it I mean Gaddafi finaly was xooperating. I think that was cery short sighted because he.s held up as the dictators nightmare/why the US cant be believed nowadays. And dont get me wrong the US ended up 100 percent on board but the initial Libya effort was spearheaded mainly by the French and Brits and we kinda got sucked in.