sburke

That is hilarious! Hold on while I wipe my eyes .

just a word of advice, if i saw that expression posted without context I'd think the generals were laughing so hard they had tears in their eyes. That would be general use here.

busssssinga!

there is a mod pack for the Task Force Spartan Resolve campaign that has a nice replacement.

better yet, just toss smoke grenades so the enemy burns through ammo

I would question most of this. You first have to figure what is objective and what is cost. Yes Russia could attack locally and likely make some successes from a strictly "can they make some gains in land" view. Sure, but is that of any value at all to Russia considering it hardens attitudes in the west and will result in even harsher sanctions? I would not consider that success at all. That just digs the hole deeper. I see no value at all to Russia of launching any attacks whatsoever and no goal they could obtain that would make it truly worth it to Russia in either the short or long term. Strategically speaking what does Russia really need most? Stabilize the economy Diversify the economy and establish new industries to reduce the dependence on oil Get sanctions removed as they are hitting some long term aspects of Russia's economy for example the ability to develop new oil fields Politically, economically and militarily, there really is nothing to gain in Ukraine at this point. It is hurting Russia internationally and economically. There is really nothing they can do to make the relationship with Ukraine any better. Essentially they are throwing good money after bad now. There is no argument I have heard that gives Russia one iota of reason to escalate the conflict and tons of reasons to try and look for an exit strategy. If I were Putin I would make a national address on television and yell "hey look over there!" point somewhere off camera and while everyone was looking I'd pull everything out of the Donbass and tell Russian media, you breath a word of this and it is off to the Gulag or worse, I'd then push for an end to sanctions and start trying to get foreign investment back and when the economy got even the slightest puff of wind I'd extol Russians for their patriotism and how they had survived the worst the West could throw at them blah blah blah and call it a win. I'd also cut back most defense spending in favor of investments in the economy. Russia's military is already tough enough to handle any potential threats it really faces. Then again that is all a rational approach.

1. I'll believe Russia's air power is overwhelming when I see it. So far the overall performance in the conflicts we've seen including Syria have not been particularly "awesome". 2. Assuming no western power will intervene in an all out Russian attack is the kind of planning that got Russia where it is now. (Sorry those pilots are volunteers and they just happen to be flying the aircraft we loaned Ukraine. They are not American air force units. 2 can play the "denial of what everyone knows" game. Maybe they bought those aircraft online the same place the DPR guys bought their arms.) 3.What is Russia gonna do about it? Escalating against an enemy vastly more powerful than you is a losing game.

and here i was thinking you were trying to say the Marines were getting fat.

Other than fewer reliable units back home with fewer tanks to break up protests.

Let's keep this respectful- it is Mr. Dude please. As to the Putin bot comment, it is factual that the Russian gov't runs an organization that's sole purpose is to confuse and alter public debate on the internet. There has even been a lawsuit in Russia over the pay. The point is that those efforts will fail in the face of the reality that is people's lives. Getting back to the point if Russia attempts a large scale military adventure and gets bogged down in a bloody conflict the already existing fault lines in Russian public opinion will crack. Not much different than what happened in the US over Vietnam or Iraq or in Russia over Afghanistan. A costly unpopular war is always a bad thing. Having that in a situation where there are real economic issues not being addressed just compounds it. Mr Dude out.

I'd pay full price just for that as long as the uncons and IEDs came with it.

? Not sure what that is in reference to. Not like this thread has been on topic to the OP in quite a few pages.

And it gets even more complicated for Russia in that it isn't just dealing with a Ukrainian insurgency, but it risks issues at home. Lots of Putin bots wave the Russian flag about Crimea and how great it is that Putin stood up for Russia's territorial integrity...but then you start having the flip side. Russians who resent the cost that Crimea represents. This is from last year. Add that to the fact that the Crimea bridge is eating up a massive portion of Russia's infrastructure budget. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russia-battle-university-places-deflates-063000493.html;_ylt=AwrTcdlzIJ1XjWcAOnknnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTE0bjcxMW5vBGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDRkZVSTJDMV8xBHNlYwNzcg-- https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/the-preservation-white-elephants Nowhere is this philosophy more evident than in the Crimean Bridge, a combined railway and motorway passage that is now being built between Russia’s Krasnodar region and the Crimean city of Kerch. Its price tag of 228 billion Rubles (3.5 billion in today’s U.S. dollars) is comparable to that of the Oresund bridge between Sweden and Denmark (about 4 billion euros or 4.5 billion in today’s US dollars). While the Danish-Swedish bridge, in operation since 2000, was at the time of construction expected to recoup its cost by 2037 (it will likely take longer), the Russian-Crimean bridge did not even have a clear economic model behind it. It is simply being funded from the federal budget and is needed because, having annexed another country’s territory, one apparently needs to secure a passage to it (as there is no land connection between Russia and Crimea). The top contractor, Stroigazmontazh owned by Arkady Rotenberg (a personal friend of Vladimir Putin), will likely be paid in full. Lesser ones, including the venerable Mostotrest, a Stalin-era bridge-constructing behemoth that is doing most of the actual work, are in peril. In the meantime, it is already clear that the Crimean bridge will eat up 70 percent of this year’s funding for all roads and bridges in the entire Russian Federation. (my bold) Sooner or later self interest of Russians over the declining living standards is going to take center stage over Putin's military adventurism. Fighting an insurgency will only make that worse. At some point there will be a backlash on the "foreign instigated" food protests and Russians will start shooting Russians. That news then gets back to soldiers at the front etc. It is a death spiral Russia can not afford.

I think this is just a communication issue. Proxy war is different than what folks refer to as Hybrid. Hybrid originated with Crimea where it was not a proxy, but actual Russian units which Russia simply denied were theirs preceded by some other PsyOps work. It was actually a pretty damned smart move that left their opponents in a confused state unable to coordinate a response. Probably not going to be as effective in the future, but at the time it accomplished it's goals completely. The US action against Russia in Afghanistan would be more a straight up proxy. We helped arm an indigenous group along with a very small group of advisers. Russian support to Vietnam and N Korea during those wars would be somewhat along the proxy end, even though there was some more direct Russian participation. Western opinion is Donbass is not the same as DPR/LNR would not survive without direct Russian units in support. They are incapable of withstanding the Ukrainian army no matter how much material support Russian gives. Hell they wouldn't even have existed until Russian created the movement (the armed movement versus some sporadic dissatisfaction with corruption in Kiev and political backlash.) It would be more akin to the US taking advantage of dissatisfaction in Afghanistan and sending in armed units to create an insurrection, then arming them with heavier weapons, providing support services units and actual military task forces when the "indigenous" units were at risk. However I wouldn't label Ukraine as hybrid war anymore either. Personally I consider it to be direct Russian occupation, but that is just my two cents. Ukraine is not fighting some indigenous LPR/DNR force. Those guys are a just a joke. They are at war with Russia whether it has been formally declared or not.

Word of caution- I never said there wasn't an issue. In fact I explicitly stated " How often they do so and if there are other issues I have no idea, but it is apparently a bit more complicated than "they never ever ever fire ever." Don't throw the kornet out with the bath water..... err something like that. My only point is if there is an issue it is a little more complicated. Target facing may matter for example or acquisition issues. Mine was about as basic a test as you can get. It was not going to expose any complicating issues. Hattori might actually have an answer. In my case the BMPs took over 20 seconds to spot and fire. This is on a billiard flat map, no vegetation, 1km distance good weather. I haven't run the US side of that save to see how quickly the Abrams spotted the BMPs, but I'd suspect it was faster than 20 seconds. It could be simply that the spotting/acquisition cycle for the BMP 2M is just too slow to complete the job. With only two crew.... well it isn't far fetched.

Agreed while I totally agree with the sentiment, this is gonna get shut down. Too much politics. Discussing options in the event US does do something stupid relative to NATO is likely fine.

This has been repeatedly stated on this forum is fact so I decided, what the hell let me do a test run. I put 4 Abrams 1 km away from 8 BMP 2 Ms I gave the Abrams a tight cover arc. I let er rip. 23 seconds in one BMP fired 2 Kornets one after the other. Another fired a single Kornet, but by then the Abrams had shrouded themselves with smoke. I have the save, here you go. There is no password. https://www.dropbox.com/s/k9so8d0inpqidkm/bmp 2 m 001.bts?dl=0 Is it still BS? It took me all of 5 minutes to see that "elusive as a unicorn" double salvo. How often they do so and if there are other issues I have no idea, but it is apparently a bit more complicated than "they never ever ever fire ever."

Beware who you piss off Steve, you never once mentioned the Marines. .

It was bound to happen sooner or later..... These men were told to recon the area up the road. Friggin fresh out of boot camp and what are they doing...PokemonGo. Recon means hunt for Pikachu? WTF?!

Excellent news, thanks Chris would it be correct to assume that artwork for these guys would unit specific? I.e. Shoulder patches etc

I haven't been able to find anything for certain. There seems to be a bit of confusion as to whether the Spitz was led by a Pz IV or Panther unit. Cole's seems to imply Panzer IV. Cole makes mention that Peiper's recollections later seemed to confuse events and timelines so it is hard to use him as a source. This is in reference to Stavelot. Stavelot and its bridge were open for the taking. The only combat troops in the town at this time were a squad from the 291st Engineer Combat Battalion which had been sent from Malmedy to construct a roadblock on the road leading to the bridge. For some reason Peiper's advance guard halted on the south side of the river, one of those quirks in the conduct of military operations which have critical import but which can never be explained. Months after the event Peiper told interrogators that his force had been checked by American antitank weapons covering the narrow approach to the bridge, that Stavelot was "heavily defended." But his detailed description of what happened when the Germans attacked to take town and bridge shows that he was confused in his chronology and was thinking of events which tran- Page 266 spired on 18 December. It is true that during the early evening of the 17th three German tanks made a rush for the bridge, but when the leader hit a hasty mine field, laid by American engineers, the others turned back-nor were they seen for the rest of the night. Here is a link to the interview with Maj. Yates describing the action at Trois Pont. The interview is from two months later, but I see no reason to doubt the man. http://www.battleofthebulgememories.be/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=486:defense-at-trois-ponts-company-qcq-51st-engineer-combat-bn&catid=1:battle-of-the-bulge-us-army&Itemid=6

true, it wasn't to say the 57mm was somehow super effective, but it also wasn't a completely useless piece of equipment either. In this instance I vaguely recall this being a mobility kill though geezer that I am my memory may be faulty. Considering the state of the German armor force though, how much opportunity is a 57 mm going to have to make a difference anyway at this stage of the war? In this particular instance it came through big.

From Cole's The Ardennes: Battle of the Bulge "Company C, 51st Engineer Combat Battalion, occupied Trois Ponts, so important in the itinerary of the kampfgruppe. Quite unaware of the importance of its mission, the company had been ordered out of the sawmills it had been operating as part of the First Army's Winterization and Bridge Timber Cutting Program, and dispatched to Trois Ponts where it detrucked about midnight on 17 December. Numbering around 140 men, the company was armed with eight bazookas and ten machine guns. Maj. Robert B. Yates, commanding the force, knew only that the 1111th Engineer Group was preparing a barrier line along the Salm River from Trois Ponts south to Bovigny and that he was to construct roadblocks at the approaches to Trois Ponts according to the group plans. During the night Yates deployed the company at roadblocks covering the bridge across the Amblève and at the vulnerable highway underpass at the railroad tracks north of the river. On the morning of 18 December a part of the artillery column of the 7th Armored Division passed through Trois Ponts, after a detour to avoid the German armor south of Malmédy; then appeared one 57-mm. antitank gun and crew which had become lost during the move of the 526th Armored Infantry [267] Battalion. Yates commandeered the crew and placed the gun on the Stavelot road to the east of the first underpass where a daisy chain of mines had been laid. A quarter of an hour before noon the advance guard of Peiper's main column, nineteen or twenty tanks, came rolling along the road. A shot from the lone antitank gun crippled or in somewise stopped the foremost German tank.. The hit on the lead tank checked the German column just long enough to give warning to the bridge guards, only a few score yards farther on. They blew the Amblève bridge, then the Salm bridge, and fell back to the houses in the main part of town. In the meantime one of the engineer platoons had discouraged the German tank company from further advance along the side road and it had turned back to Stavelot. " Granted it is only 1 instance, but it had a pretty effective impact on that specific tank and an over size impact on KG Peiper as a whole. The tank was purportedly a Panther as well.

porn http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/porn-found-osama-bin-laden-evidence-trove/story?id=13599025 and some other stuff.

Cpt Heverly (3rd from left) of A company and his XO Lt McAndrews (2nd from left) report back to Bn that the Madrassa has been secured. He's lost 7 men and a Stryker. He does not know that at that moment he lost an 8th soldier to a sniper in the Saddam Mosque. Sgt Garcia and 2nd platoon infantry firing on the sniper.