Lethaface

Corrections: Na Vaske = Russian Hister = Slovenian The Netherlands went to Iraq because of geostrategic reasons, IIRC article 5 was not invoked. We should indeed have learned something from that episode. However, why does it need a few airplanes in the Twin Towers to get this kind of response? There is plenty of other groups in power around the world with on their agenda the hurting of people amongst other things, however they are not intervened upon. Congo, Rwanda, Liberia, Sudan, etc. What to think of Saudi Arabia? It's extreme laws are not that far away from the Taliban, but because of some liquid in the ground the The West deals with them as friends. A large part of people in the Middle East loathe western governments for their hypocrisy when dealing with the Middle East states. (Almost) all are dictatorships, although some more than others I agree that at some point armed intervention may be required to prevent an even greater evil. If employed on consequent basis (no hypocrisy) and with MUCH more emphasize on post-intervention strategies, I am not opposed to armed intervention in area's were the regime's are hostile upon it's people. While I think the League of Nations and subsequent the UN was created partly for this sort of thing, they have always been a toothless institution. Having been on meetings with more than 15 people sitting in, I do NOT wonder why that is. So acting outside of the UN is IMO permissible in certain situations. However operating outside International Law is a dangerous route to thread and can create a 'dangerous' precedence where hypocrisy comes around the corner. Now the (postulated) fact that most US armed interventions since and including Vietnam have caused the greater evil instead of preventing it, coupled with the host of clandestine operations, makes me believe that 'preventing evil' is not on top of the US agenda when deciding an 'armed intervention' must take place. So, all in all it's not much more than warmongering to me. Obviously I understand reasons to push allies in helping with the warmongering effort And the interests the various industries have in continuing this warmongering is surely notable on media and in politics around the world. All leaders are judged upon by those they lead. As the leader of the West/World the US has many peers and thus is judged by many people. Like always failures are more emphasized than successes. Now some may not like that, but good leaders take responsibility and deal with the criticism. Nobody ever said it's nice to be a leader To conclude that Hister said it very well: although I dismiss some of it's actions, I'd have US world boss over any other current candidates. I dare not even speak of the EU, which barely is able to govern itself let alone global events. Please forgive my effort derailing this thread even further .

More wise words! Borders are after all a strange concept, carving out the earth in zones with special passes (passports) required for entry.

Nazdrovje! To get back on Ukraine VS Russia: while Ukraine seemed to have prevented an official invasion by Russia still the Crimea was annexed in short order. Shortly after the start of the conflict in Donbass region I was contemplating Russia created the separatists in Donbass for the negotiation table: Putin's help stopping the separatists in exchange for establishment of fait accompli Crimea. If played right he could have prevented a lot of sanctions imo, and have the international tensions tuned down with Crimea under the belt. Things turned out differently, although I still I don't see Crimea going back to Ukraine without a major direct and open war. What would be your estimate of Ukrainian success in case of a spring Ukrainian offensive?

Well I have to admit that at the time I was also thinking that Saddam gone couldn't be a bad thing, be it under dodgy pretense. In hindsight however it is quite open for debate whether under Saddam a lot less people would have been killed or suffered. Libya was a dodgy affair too.

I don't challenge any of this. Still, Powell's speech had it's effect and the general philosophy behind it is similar to the Russian propaganda which facilitates war on behalf of ones interest, whatever these are. The fact that we knew the WMD trucks were a lie (I see Powell as an intelligent man, so he knew too) and were able to pronounce that freely, unfortunately didn't enable us (critical thinking free man of the west) to stop the invasion. So Democracy vs Tyranny is in certain ways the difference between being screwed over knowingly or unknowingly. While I prefer to be screwed knowingly, I'm still being screwed P.S. The world should know the reasons for war in Iraq were lies and the after-war plans fatally flawed, but there are plenty of (academic) schooled people even in my country that still don't know.

I'm not so sure of that. There was coming a lot of signals from intelligence that they couldn't find proof of anything WMD related. But, the higher ups had already decided there was going to be a war anyhow. He was just doing his job, but he ain't that stupid

Well, Powell's lies in front of the UN (WMD trucks) did enough for the time being to convince the necessary people to fight (army personnel), support it(governments) or just do nothing about it (the general population watching the Biggest Loser). Same tricks, different execution Poor Powell.

They all die in the explosion

Bit of a non discussion, comparing apples to oranges imo. I think it's obvious no one wants to engage a single panther with a single sherman on exactly equal terms. Losing 4.000 tanks and crew sounds like a butchery to me, even if the enemy lost more. And I would be demoralized as a tanker if I had regularly faced enemy tanks with superior protection and firepower losing many comrades in the process, even if 'we' won the war. This doesn't say a thing about performance of amored units on the battlefield, you can perform very good with average kit and still feel demoralized about not having the best kit.

In fact the RPO-M "Shmel-M" features a reusable launcher.

This is my most important lesson in life. Growing up among researchers I have long felt that critical thinking was common sense. In fact I am still continuously learning how uncommon common sense actually is, it should be called uncommon sense :-D

It could fire without deploying, can't remember whether it was restricted to the plenty of balconies or could also be fired from inside an actual room. Have you played a lot of H2H in CMSF? In urban area's a side shot from a RPG-29 was quite lethal even for most MBTs. Not to mention Bradleys or Strykers. Obviously as the Syrians one should hide or use a target arc to make sure they only open up when close.

Yep, my lesson was to always expect ATGMs when there are long sightlines. Bait, pop smoke, scout, whatever; just don't move up a convoy onto an open field/road/area without calculating in losses.

IIRC the AT-13 was able to fire from inside a building in CMSF. Besides, RPGs were also able to fire from withing buildings. Especially deadly were Syrian RPG-29 toting Special Forces in ambush. Although imo the most deadly were AT-14 in concealed positions far away. Basically they don't miss so you'll spot them after one of you tanks started smoking From >1km away it isn't easy to spot one even after it has fired, plus artillery takes some time to call in. If playing H2H expect the ATGM team to move shortly after firing! At least that's what I used to do.

I think the difference between WWII and CMBS isn't fast vs slow, but how lethal are the mistakes one makes. There is nothing wrong with moving fast or being cautious, it all depends on the context. For example Bill is much more fast moving in this CMBS AAR when compared to the previous WWII AARs. However, IMO this has more to do with the map and available forces than with Modern vs WWII. Right now he has the ability to take favorable ground. If he waits he might have to face the enemy operating from the favorable ground. Hence, it is worth taking now and given the open areas around it & the enemy pocket in his back, it is more wise to rush than to take it slow.

Not too hard to believe I would say. Special forces aren't that special anymore when fighting 'normally' on an established front and especially not very good at taking accurate incoming, just like the rest of us humans

Same in The Netherlands. AFAIK almost all new buildings, be it major urban centers, suburbs or villages are built with concrete (with rebar frame). Been like that for a long time, older built with heavy brick. The concrete may not be bunker grade (no expert on this), but you definitely need a good hammer drill if you want to put something on the wall ;-). Inner walls not supporting the structure are more often made of plasterboard or similar stuff. In my current apartment (built in 67) I melted a supposedly 'diamondtip' brand new concrete drill into the rebar in the wall

I thought he is Austrian, not there should be a difference between general Austrians or Canadians ;-)

Cheers!

I have certainly seen many vehicles from both sides carrying around large flags. I guess the danger of not carrying one is significant, otherwise the Darwin effect would have stopped this practice very soon!

A drop by from lurking this thread to share my appreciation for the well dug up info from everyone here, and the so far civil way of discussion. Due to more pressing personal affairs I haven't really been able to follow this conflict in detail, not had the time to dig up and filter all the available info. So it is great to have some good quality notes, pre-filtered and (more) local info available for 'free'. Obviously like all info not 100% first hand will still pass my own filters @Jargotn, on a political level I somewhat agree with you. I'm using Steve's kindly offered option for a time allowance to a political post in this thread Although Russia has (predictably) shown some of it's shined up old Soviet era 'dirty' tricks, it is imo only because it isn't on par with the more civil type of tricks NATO / "The West" excels at with the same goal: serving one's own interests by bringing the Ukrainian regime into 'orbit' or influence sphere. Being from the West and having experience working (and personal) with a lot of governmental institutions/organisations, I am happy that I can freely talk about how I agree with Churchills classic paradigm “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”. Russia has one of the more worst forms of government, which is partly also why it doesn't excel in the type of tricks 'The West' specializes in: lobbying, NGOing, economic benefits, NATO protection, 'agents provocateur', covert military advisers, etc. So, while I think that for the people of Ukraine steering West is favorable to steering East, I think the 'Western Powers' show the usual hypocrisy regarding the issue of Ukraine. There has been, in my opinion, a lot efforts to 'influence' Ukraine to the more western hemisphere and for the most part this has nothing to do with freedom/quality of life for the average Ukrainian but with simple cold coinage and power. Every well informed foreign relations / intelligence personnel could have predicted that Russia would wag it's tail after and how Janoekovytsj left the field. Taking everything into account I'm of the opinion that Russia isn't the sole responsible party for the current bloodshed, although it has a large part in it and the Putin clique operates it in quite fitting 'bully' role Anyway, just couple of cents worth. And from here I'll (try to) post no more politics in this thread, although I'll be looking out for a (civil) thread on the General forum. Back to military stuff; at the time I was surprised of Ukraine's successful counter offensive. Given the largely corrupt governments which had ruled the country for a long time I hadn't thought much of it's army. However it seems that like in Syria (and currently Iraq) real battle experience makes all the difference, coupled with the fact that Ukraine does have quite some shiny toys (non-monkey model) and actual relevant companies specialized in producing them. The mid/end August massive counter attack by 'separatist' forces was obviously not something manageable by locally organised insurgents, using captured or black market equipment. Look at ISIL, they probably have all the money needed to buy what they want and plenty of manpower (and evidently training by some professionals), but could NEVER organize a full scale conventional mechanized offensive like we have seen in in East Ukraine and towards Marioepol. It is clear for anyone that wants to see it. Later, after the successful Russian/Separatist counter attack I had actually expected it to succeed in taking the full Donbass region. Like others stated, the Ukraine military seem to have improved quite a lot. I have seen some pictures of a destroyed Bulat tank but none BTR-4E or Oplot, I guess they are not currently employed in the ATO? P.S. I surely have noticed and appreciated the tactical minded read from the Ukrainian Lieutenant Colonel!

+1, great effort on the immersive backstory writing!

Volunteers that are allowed to take along their service equipment are not volunteers on vacation. Besides, I have seen plenty of video evidence of (limited) full Russian units in Ukraine. Source: the interwebs. Apart from Russian military intervention it is naive to think the 'West' was not actively supporting Maidan and subsequent happenings.

Fully agree on this, Fox is more on the level of RT ;-) Be it for different reasons. Although also CNN is obviously pushing an agenda other than genuinely informing the people of real events. As are most media outlets. I don't really watch any 'news' anymore because of it, or take it with a good hill worth of salt. In The Netherlands I have found a gem 'De Correspondent': crowd funded online medium, no 'news' just well researched and verified long reads. All used references are linked. Had some good stories about The Ukraine as well. Costs about a big CM bundle per year They seem to do translations as well: https://decorrespondent.nl/en

This. @Umlaut, I understand and respect your opinion and applaud the initiative starting a discussion, speaking out for a functional feedback system (because the repository isn't) and offering suggestions. Although, be careful what you ask for since, like Transporter has nicely written, feedback will in general be in a critical form. Not everyone is able to give constructive feedback. Many people will still complain about a small detail, forgetting how great of a time they had. In general my life experience advice is literally: keep your expectations (of others) low and you wont be disappointed (easy). I am guilty too of not posting feedback on the repo, iirc I once tried to find a scenario I played but couldn't find it. I did however, at times, provide feedback on the forum. I have tried your scenario a few months ago but due to RL issues haven't continued it. Until a in game rating function is available, best strategy would probably be to ask for feedback proactively by use of this forum (on a continued basis). While it takes some effort, there is result (as you can see from the number of posts in this thread). I sincerely hope you will be continuing making scenario's available for the community. It is what drives a large part of it, imo. Perhaps you could try to let others help with writing briefings etc, to make the burden of work to release it for the public a bit less. Another lesson from my life is that if you want something changed for the better (even if you don't gain anything from it), you'll have to bite the bullet yourself. In general random people will only do something you want them to do if there is some direct incentive in it for themselves. So if you want feedback, go ask for it (again and again)! You could create incentive by starting a new thread about a fancy new scenario you are thinking about, but that you need more input from a current scenario with a link to it Now I've written all this down I'm thinking how it is possible that I am still an optimist by conviction! Probably by nature