ASL Veteran
-
Posts
5,874 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Posts posted by ASL Veteran
-
-
sort of an odd part of the map where the highest incomes are. That must be where all the oil is drilled or something.
-
4 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
I have a theory about the Bucha road murders. I think this was Russia's way of compensating for the inability to beat Ukraine on the battlefield. March a bunch of citizens out onto the road, murder them so they are easy found, then withdraw with a "see, we showed you!" attitude.
I don't know from how far up the chain of command this concept came from, but I'd say it was at least company level though likely higher. I doubt a platoon would do this sort of thing on its own accord.
Note, I am talking only about the specific action of Russian troops deliberately putting bodies out on the road and/or killing them on the spot. The murders, torture, rape, and other things going on are likely being done for different reasons. More than one, I'm sure.
However, the common element here is that Russian units are inherently murderous to an extent completely alien to us in the West. What would be a horrible exception in a Western armed force is routine in the Russian. What would be the actions of a few individuals in the West is most likely being done under orders of at least a junior officer in the Russian armed forces. Then we add the FSB into the mix who are an instrument of terror and inhumanity in their own country against their own people... not difficult to explain their behavior towards foreigners.
Steve
The Russian command structure has been taking a bit of a beating so maybe that's a contributing factor. Less experienced and trained officers taking over for more experienced officers - a unit's cohesion could be adversely affected. The replacement commanders might not have as much control of the troops / or the replacement officers aren't quite as well screened or trained.
I just wanted to add that historically 'partisan activity' whether real or imagined will often cause soldiers to take out their frustrations on a civilian populace. They are perceived as 'aiding and abetting attacks on friendly troops' and suffer as a consequence.
-
-
3 hours ago, Armorgunner said:
-
There are over 150 tanks in Colossal Crack and there is an updated version for the upcoming Steam release that you have access to Probus. The updated version is better balanced than the original and the map is bigger.
-
8 minutes ago, c3k said:
"Traitor" is a fraught word when applying it to a military officer in time of war.
Being dismissed is an odd punishment: I'd think execution would be in the cards...
Of course, in a country like Ukraine, these men and their families are now going to have to flee. Is that really what Zelensky wants?
Again...odd to just dismiss.
Nobody executes traitors and spies anymore. They are too valuable to trade for your spies who get caught in enemy lands
-
Hitting inside Russia is interesting. For one thing it would allow Putin to call up reservists and fully mobilize which he was hesitating to do before. I don't think that it would make Russians more sympathetic to the Ukrainians or cause them to call for peace. Segments of the Russian population are already calling the withdrawals around Kiev a betrayal of the army in fine WW1 German fashion. The only thing hitting into Russia does is create a situation where this is now a fight to the death. The West can't effectively push Ukraine to accept a peace deal and Zelinsky has already said that any deal must be approved by referendum anyway so even if the west tried to push a cease fire it couldn't be accepted. Ukraine is now fighting for total victory and recovery of all territory previously lost - that's my take away.
-
20 minutes ago, akd said:
Guess who is now going on western TV and asking for sanctions relief?
Geez, I wonder why she would be changing her tune now?
-
1 hour ago, dan/california said:
We need to get a straight answer From the Taiwanese about how badly they don't to be conquered. If they are are convincing in their desire not become a large island gulag, we need to start pumping hardware in their like there is already a war on, the second Ukraine cools off. It will be SEVERAL orders of magnitude cheaper to convince the Chinese they shouldn't even think about trying, than it would be to rebuild the world economy after the fact.
If Taiwan has enough anti-ship missiles and Air Defense systems China couldn't even get troops on the island. If the navy got involved, it could be a blood bath. The US won't send any weapons to Taiwan though because it might upset China. It's been like that for decades IIRC.
-
6 hours ago, Haiduk said:
Twitter account of US volunteer. Many short videos
He has a slight accent, but not really too distinct. Maybe from the upper south / midwest like maybe Tennessee?
-
6 minutes ago, Machor said:
More American volunteers fighting in Ukraine - judging by the voice, this is a different guy than the one Haiduk posted:
Sounds like he might be from New York City
-
27 minutes ago, slysniper said:
Well, if people would just listen, the day of the tank as we presently know it is coming to an end.
Here is some statements from those that might have a little more insight than most of the rest of us
But there is still a need for what a tank does, what that will look like in the future will come down to what man will design to compete on the battlefield of the future at a cost they can afford.
No question we will see, unmanned, lighter faster platforms that can bring a heavy punch to a area needing clearing.
Also, I expect that counter measures to drones and drone type warfare will change and be added to soon. It really should not be hard to develop systems for the task. Because just as important as winning the skies with air power has been, winning the skies with drone power could be just as important. So ground troops will need light weapon systems that can get the job done as to removing such threats. Actually I think the US has some systems presently that can remove enemy drones from the battle.
But no question, warfare will evolve from this conflict if we don't go too far and turn this into the last war we as mankind sees.
But what we call tanks in the future (20 - 30 years) will likely change as much as what a tanks from WW1 has changed from our present day
-
1 minute ago, db_zero said:
Seriously you really think the US or NATO is going to invade Iran? The geography is worse than Iraq and the population double Iraq.
It doesn't matter who the opponent is. What matters is their capability relative to that of the US and whether or not you want to remove the tank from your arsenal given the military capability of any other random nation on the planet. I'm not sure why that's so difficult to grasp.
-
1 minute ago, db_zero said:
Using Iran and invasion isn’t relevant either…
Why not?
-
4 minutes ago, db_zero said:
Invading Iran would not be smart period. Any President sending US ground forces to invade would need to get their head examined.
Maybe so, but that's not really the point of this discussion about whether the tank is no longer viable or not, is it?
-
22 minutes ago, db_zero said:
Iran would be an awful place for armor and resupply would be a real headache. The geography looks to be unsuited for armor. Not sure under what circumstances the US would invade Iran and Iran's ability to project beyond its border is limited.
Large armor battles are limited to Europe or the Middle East if the situation warranted it, but the Middle East would probably require a long build up period.
Korea has some armor, but much of the country is not suited for armor.
Taiwan would see little if any US heavy tank formations.
Can't see where or why we would fight large battles in Africa and China....hahaha
Invading Iran with nothing but light infantry carrying Javelins would not be very smart.
-
6 minutes ago, db_zero said:
As the old saying goes “he who has the gold makes the rules”
The US has already made the Russian tank force obsolete.
it’s been put on notice for some time that if your Russian tank force comes in contact with a well trained and motivated western armed force expect catastrophic losses.
Perhaps, but then again, if the US was fighting Iran (just a random example) then I think a US force that had tanks would perform much better than a US force that had no tanks because the Iranians would have a lot of trouble dealing with American tanks. If you simply assume that your opponent has the same capabilities that you have you could end up making yourself more vulnerable to a lesser opponent since all of your assumptions are off.
-
20 minutes ago, db_zero said:
Drones are easy to shoot down and still rely on guidance that can be jammed.
Tanks aren’t going anywhere. They will change and evolve, there will probably be a mix of manned and unmanned tanks.
I’m not buying the infantry armed with missiles have become omnipotent when the Russian Army has demonstrated the complete inability to conduct reconnaissance or capabilities to suppress infantry. In most cases they are probably not attempting either.
They have also demonstrated a remarkable tendency to stick to the roads and stay bunched up.
The lack of secure communications and coordination is also shocking and a huge factor in why they can’t suppress missile infantry and are suffering huge losses.
At a higher level ask yourself who is the overall theater commander? There is nobody which means higher level assets are not being properly used or coordinated.
You match a well trained army vs a predominantly missile armed infantry force and you’re not going to get the results we’re now seeing.
It’s a huge mistake to draw a few conclusions about weapon systems and effectiveness when there is a whole lot more going on and a bigger picture of incompetence going on.
I think you make some excellent points. I think another factor is that many of these ATGM systems that are causing the chaos are so expensive that most nations either can't afford to create them or lack the capability to create them. Can the US military make the tank obsolete - maybe. Can the Pakistani army make tanks obsolete - probably not.
I should probably add that relative to a Javelin a tank is doubtless more expensive, but assuming the tank isn't destroyed you can have it sitting around for years while each Javelin fired adds up.
-
1 minute ago, Haiduk said:
I wrote in the middle - the deputy of human resourses of Black Sea Fleet commander, captain of 1st rank (=colonel)
How the heck does the deputy of human resources of the Black Sea Fleet get killed? That's like the most deskbound of deskbound jobs that anyone could have in the military - and he was in the navy to boot!
-
39 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:
Well, since the post that I quoted said that “11 diplomats and the Belarus Ambassador have LEFT THE COUNTRY” (cap emphasis is mine), I’m assuming that the Belarus Embassy is not “relocating” to Lvov.
No, but they would most likely be leaving the country FROM Lvov and not Kiev, so your point about them leaving Kiev because they think it's about to be attacked would be invalid - that's what my point was. Of course, if they remained behind in Kiev for some reason or another after all the other diplomatic missions left, then your suggestion might be a valid one.
-
22 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
From the little we know they seem to be mostly dying in artillery strikes. There was some talk of one of the first Major Generals being taken out by a sniper, but that absolutely wasn't verified and has an odor of fiction.
It is probable that at least some of these deaths are the result of Ukrainian intel on when/where to strike.
Whatever is killing them, these guys are very close to the frontlines. Experts who study how the Russian chains of command work have speculated that they are more forward than they ordinarily would be and the possible reason for that is they are having to sort out problems personally.
Steve
Given the poor Russian communications security and all the satellite coverage available to the Ukrainians (from US and others) I would assume that it would not be very challenging to identify HQ locations. Even in WW2 HQ units had to be very careful and were regularly targeted when not exhibiting communications discipline. I imagine that would still apply to modern and probably be even more of an issue.
-
27 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:
Two possibilities:
(1) The diplomatic staff and Ambassador don’t want to become “collateral casualties when the Russians “try” to raze Kyiv,
(2) There is about to be a “change of Government” in Belarus.
I believe most, if not all, embassies have moved from Kiev to Lvov.
-
The fact is that Russia has already shown that there is no 'security guarantee' that they can sign that would be worth the paper it's written on. So, I can't see Ukraine agreeing to any deal that 'limits' them in any way in exchange for any security promises that Russia might make. The only thing any agreement / cease fire would come down to in my mind would be territorial in nature.
-
Just now, Panserjeger said:
I know it is totally unrealistic of course, but I seem to remember one of the pretexts for invading was to prevent Ukraine from acquiring nukes. So Putin could put it down as a win if it was part of a peace treaty, and for Ukraine it wouldn't matter at all as they have no plans for acquiring nukes anyway.
Except that they already had nuclear weapons and signed an agreement to give them up so that doesn't really make a lot of sense.
How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted