fireship4

Military is not army, air force, navy.  The KGB was not the intel and strategic 'arm'.

If you look under fruit in the dictionary you may find a picture of a banana.

It is best not to bog down this thread with our disagreement.  You made two statements that are incorrect (to be clear, the first is too narrow a definition, the second is simply wrong), and later justified the former (perhaps assuming I was saying that military did not include your examples, when I was instead refuting them as a definition of such) with a link to an online dictionary, which is a tool and not the source of meaning of the words in the English language.  You finally posted a picture of a uniform I assume you found when searching for the word military, again perhaps presuming I think the word military does not cover uniformed personnel.  The fruit example was illustrative of the latter statement.
If you wish to continue this discussion perhaps we can do so over PM, with the understanding that I would rather die of gangrene.

A good tip, thanks.

I don't think that Soviet Armoured Infantry stayed on their tanks till shot to pieces as some robotic zombies. I made some movements so they keep their formations with their armor. Give them a move order so that they embark their tank but give the tank a move order first. 
. 
They will on foot follow the tank till the tank's last waypoint.


The engine generates automatically an extra waypoint so that the unit will embark the tank. If you don't want the unit to embark just backspace the last waypoint. The unit will take position near the tank. Cons The Soviet Desant Infantry keeps formation with the their tank, C2 when embarked they have access to the radio (Superior C2) Not as vulnerable getting from A to B.

 

WRONG, it is the remains of the English cricket team.
Nice.  The targeting reminds me of some of the firing solutions used for straight-run torpedoes.

WRONG, it is the remains of the English cricket team.
Nice.  The targeting reminds me of some of the firing solutions used for straight-run torpedoes.

I would like to say I am surprised how easily people offer up their warped views and justifications, without the minimal effort it takes to consider their magnitude and logical consistency, not to mention the social penalty when this is done in public. 
Here you have made equivalence between the SS, who had a clear genocidal goal, and the Israeli state of today, which obviously does not, and is the only democratic state in the entire middle east, which came into being through terrorism, revolution, displacement etc. during the rule of the British, creating one of the worlds longest and most bitter ongoing conflicts. 
You have done it out of nowhere, as the discussion is about the SS and has nothing to do with Israel.  It indeed is suspicious that mention of the SS spurs you into criticism of Israel.  You know you don't need to support the nazis to be critical of Israel right?  Nor hate the Jews?  Discovering within yourself an anger toward Israel does not in fact indicate that the SS of the past has been misjudged.
I should note that 'goy' means nation, and has been used in the past to refer to the jews as well as gentiles, though modern usage has it for the latter, it is not derogative by nature I believe.
Lastly I should also note that the nazis supported Zionism.

I would like to say I am surprised how easily people offer up their warped views and justifications, without the minimal effort it takes to consider their magnitude and logical consistency, not to mention the social penalty when this is done in public. 
Here you have made equivalence between the SS, who had a clear genocidal goal, and the Israeli state of today, which obviously does not, and is the only democratic state in the entire middle east, which came into being through terrorism, revolution, displacement etc. during the rule of the British, creating one of the worlds longest and most bitter ongoing conflicts. 
You have done it out of nowhere, as the discussion is about the SS and has nothing to do with Israel.  It indeed is suspicious that mention of the SS spurs you into criticism of Israel.  You know you don't need to support the nazis to be critical of Israel right?  Nor hate the Jews?  Discovering within yourself an anger toward Israel does not in fact indicate that the SS of the past has been misjudged.
I should note that 'goy' means nation, and has been used in the past to refer to the jews as well as gentiles, though modern usage has it for the latter, it is not derogative by nature I believe.
Lastly I should also note that the nazis supported Zionism.

'We don't have to see nazism and racism in every little thing do we?'  No, indeed.  But if we can't at least suspect nazism in a guy dressing as an SS guy all the time and enjoying it, not to mention all the people in the stream mentioning the letters A and H, then we might as well be blind.  There are those who over-react to certain things, indeed.  I am simply making the observation that you have to be seriously lacking in human sympathy to dress up and enjoy playing a member of such a famously murderous organisation.  There are people here who remember those killed in the name of the ideology whose badge he wears for fun.  Him saying he has no political agenda is nonsense, at some point you cannot separate the two.  The uniform means nothing without the ideology.

'We don't have to see nazism and racism in every little thing do we?'  No, indeed.  But if we can't at least suspect nazism in a guy dressing as an SS guy all the time and enjoying it, not to mention all the people in the stream mentioning the letters A and H, then we might as well be blind.  There are those who over-react to certain things, indeed.  I am simply making the observation that you have to be seriously lacking in human sympathy to dress up and enjoy playing a member of such a famously murderous organisation.  There are people here who remember those killed in the name of the ideology whose badge he wears for fun.  Him saying he has no political agenda is nonsense, at some point you cannot separate the two.  The uniform means nothing without the ideology.

I won't directly accuse this man of being a neo-nazi. 
He seems to be entirely uncritical of the SS, even recanting his earlier view that they were 'just a bunch of murderers forced to fight' in another video: apparently 'things are not always as they seem', as he has learnt they were not forced to fight.  In apparently ignoring the political, idelogical, and genocidal side of the organisation and the war, instead of solemnly and soberly decrying it, or reflecting on what it means for whatever honour or virtue the members believed themselves to have, he does a disservice to their victims. 
I am deeply suspicious of anyone who takes such an interest in roleplaying as a member of such an organisation, other than for precisely the length of time necessary for a documentary, film or reenactment, before taking the uniform off for fear of being sullied by it.  The live stream seems well attended by neo-nazis.  I wouldn't be inclined to give this channel time or views.

'We don't have to see nazism and racism in every little thing do we?'  No, indeed.  But if we can't at least suspect nazism in a guy dressing as an SS guy all the time and enjoying it, not to mention all the people in the stream mentioning the letters A and H, then we might as well be blind.  There are those who over-react to certain things, indeed.  I am simply making the observation that you have to be seriously lacking in human sympathy to dress up and enjoy playing a member of such a famously murderous organisation.  There are people here who remember those killed in the name of the ideology whose badge he wears for fun.  Him saying he has no political agenda is nonsense, at some point you cannot separate the two.  The uniform means nothing without the ideology.

I won't directly accuse this man of being a neo-nazi. 
He seems to be entirely uncritical of the SS, even recanting his earlier view that they were 'just a bunch of murderers forced to fight' in another video: apparently 'things are not always as they seem', as he has learnt they were not forced to fight.  In apparently ignoring the political, idelogical, and genocidal side of the organisation and the war, instead of solemnly and soberly decrying it, or reflecting on what it means for whatever honour or virtue the members believed themselves to have, he does a disservice to their victims. 
I am deeply suspicious of anyone who takes such an interest in roleplaying as a member of such an organisation, other than for precisely the length of time necessary for a documentary, film or reenactment, before taking the uniform off for fear of being sullied by it.  The live stream seems well attended by neo-nazis.  I wouldn't be inclined to give this channel time or views.

'We don't have to see nazism and racism in every little thing do we?'  No, indeed.  But if we can't at least suspect nazism in a guy dressing as an SS guy all the time and enjoying it, not to mention all the people in the stream mentioning the letters A and H, then we might as well be blind.  There are those who over-react to certain things, indeed.  I am simply making the observation that you have to be seriously lacking in human sympathy to dress up and enjoy playing a member of such a famously murderous organisation.  There are people here who remember those killed in the name of the ideology whose badge he wears for fun.  Him saying he has no political agenda is nonsense, at some point you cannot separate the two.  The uniform means nothing without the ideology.

I won't directly accuse this man of being a neo-nazi. 
He seems to be entirely uncritical of the SS, even recanting his earlier view that they were 'just a bunch of murderers forced to fight' in another video: apparently 'things are not always as they seem', as he has learnt they were not forced to fight.  In apparently ignoring the political, idelogical, and genocidal side of the organisation and the war, instead of solemnly and soberly decrying it, or reflecting on what it means for whatever honour or virtue the members believed themselves to have, he does a disservice to their victims. 
I am deeply suspicious of anyone who takes such an interest in roleplaying as a member of such an organisation, other than for precisely the length of time necessary for a documentary, film or reenactment, before taking the uniform off for fear of being sullied by it.  The live stream seems well attended by neo-nazis.  I wouldn't be inclined to give this channel time or views.

'We don't have to see nazism and racism in every little thing do we?'  No, indeed.  But if we can't at least suspect nazism in a guy dressing as an SS guy all the time and enjoying it, not to mention all the people in the stream mentioning the letters A and H, then we might as well be blind.  There are those who over-react to certain things, indeed.  I am simply making the observation that you have to be seriously lacking in human sympathy to dress up and enjoy playing a member of such a famously murderous organisation.  There are people here who remember those killed in the name of the ideology whose badge he wears for fun.  Him saying he has no political agenda is nonsense, at some point you cannot separate the two.  The uniform means nothing without the ideology.

@John Kettler
A couple points on what you found.
Russian Nuclear Exercises: This is concerning, but I wouldn't freak out just yet. The 2019 exercise was simply an exercise (although any large-scale nuclear exercise is concerning, of course), and I suspect that what happened in March was just a you-know-what measuring contest to show the new president what kind of toys Russia has available. Russia wants to continually show off their new equipment, as it would, in theory, give them an advantage over the US in a nuclear exchange. What a lot of people don't get, however, is that these new toys may not actually mean much. Despite all the hype about the S-500 and other ABM systems, a US nuclear strike/retaliation on Russia would convert the overwhelming majority of the country to a parking lot, even if Russia manages to strike first with their various fancy missiles, torpedoes, unnecessarily large warheads, etc. Putin's obsessed with getting his name in the history books. This requires a few people to be around to read those history books. You must remember that simply possessing a capable nuclear stockpile (even if you have no intention of ever using them) is of massive strategic value.
Mass Graves: After talking to a few friends and colleagues from Russia and who focus on Russian governance, I'm reasonably certain that preparations for mass graves were strictly COVID related. It's an open secret that Russia's official covid fatality numbers only cover a fraction of the true number of deaths. Hell, just about every Russian I know has lost a family member due to covid. If I remember correctly, the document was released shortly after the Omicron variant of COVID was discovered, when we knew it was more transmittable but did not know that it caused less severe illness. If the Russian government expected a new, more dangerous covid wave, it makes sense to begin preparations for the digging of mass graves as was necessary as previous waves threatened to overwhelm morgues across the country. Further, while the number of burials detailed in the manual may be useful in the event of casualties due to a conventional war, 1000 a day is a joke when you've got millions dead in a single city alone as you would during a nuclear exchange. The document mentions CRBN dead, but I suspect that the N in this case is something like a Chernobyl- type incident, rather than a nuclear detonation. Hell, if there's a nuclear detonation due to a strategic nuclear exchange, burying the bodies is probably pretty low on the to-do list.
 
There's a lot of evidence that indicates that Russia could be launching an invasion of Ukraine, and there's no professional consensus as to whether or not Russia will do anything. Time will tell about that part. But I don't see a nuclear exchange any time soon being a realistic possibility.

Thought I'll chime in here. I wouldn't go as far as to call myself an expert, but I am about a semester away from an MA in International Relations with a focus on Eastern European security, so I'm not exactly talking out of my ass here.
First off, Hal Turner is a bumbling idiot. That's probably the least credible source out there. If you see anything by him, COMPLETELY disregard it. He peddles in conspiracy theories, instead of doing any kind of "analysis".
With that out of the way, what's going on in Eastern Europe right now is still concerning, and I would go as far as to say that this is the most dangerous crisis that we've seen since Able Archer. Even if we strip away the whole NATO-Russia angle, there is a realistic chance of war between the two largest military forces in Europe. If that turns into a full on conflict it would not be crazy to imagine a six figure death toll. That said, I am growing increasingly convinced that this is just Russia trying to increase pressure on the West and roll back their expansion to a state that Russia would feel more comfortable with. In fact, I don't think the Russian buildup has as much to do with Ukraine as it does with Belarus. One of the main areas where Russian equipment is being stockpiled is Yelnya. Most analysts that I've seen works from or talked to personally agree that Russian forces in Yelnya (even prior to this current buildup) serve two purposes: for a rapid drive on Kyiv should the situation in Ukraine devolve into open warfare, or to transit through Belarus and cut off the Baltic states in the event of hostilities with NATO. Given the fact that most of the rhetoric from Russia about this mess has been about NATO (instead of Ukraine), I find it hard to believe that they'd build up forces there, then use them to attack Ukraine, removing one of their main assets in conflict with NATO from the board, so to speak. Instead, I think they're building up forces so that they can establish a military presence, including a large portion of the 41st CAA as well as ballistic missiles, in Belarus should this week's talks fail. This isn't necessarily a preparation for war, but is instead Russia's way of saying "NATO expanded uncomfortably close to our borders, so we'll do the same thing and send our troops uncomfortably close to your borders as well". They could also up the intensity of their efforts in Donbas, but the most aggressive move I can see Russia making in the near future would be a move for Mariupol, MAYBE Kharkiv, but the latter is incredibly unlikely.
 
A couple other notes about crap from the Turner piece
I have not seen any good evidence for a Ukrainian buildup in preparation for a military operation to retake the Temporarily Occupied Territories. Can't say 100% that it doesn't exist, but I suspect that at least someone I know would have heard about it. Plus it Zelensky has been fairly passive regarding the war, and such an operation would be out of character for him.
I have also not seen any evidence that the mess in Kazakhstan is related to the Ukraine/NATO-Russia situation. Timing seems to have been a coincidence. That said, Central Asia is a bit out of my wheelhouse so I can't comment much beyond that.
The whole "NATO missiles in Romania" thing is mostly BS. The US Army has been developing a ground-launched version of the Tomahawk, possibly to be deployed to Europe, but those are not yet operational, and despite all the complaints from Moscow, there is no good evidence that the Aegis Ashore system in Romania is anything but defensive in nature.
There is also no evidence that the US has deployed tanks to Europe (Moving that number of vehicles without somebody noticing is nearly impossible), nor is there evidence of American aircraft being moved to Ukraine. Russia would be publicly freaking out if either of those happened.
 
 

Believe this is directly related to CMBS and provides a wealth of detailed information on the reorganization and reconfiguration of US Armored Cavalry, including the end of the M3 CFV and its replacement by the more capacious M2A3 BFV.
 

Regards,

John Kettler

Let me start by saying that those of you who find Blinkov's military analyses with its frog puppet jarring are going to really have an issue with Lazer PIg. That said, if you can get past the bizarre front end and a super abundance of NSFW language throughout, there is a wealth of material here on the realities of the T-34, not the propaganda, self-serving analyses, rigged tests, erroneous assumptions and writings of lazy historians. This makes that long online piece called The Myth of T-34 Superiority seem like a passing thought by comparison, slaughtering sacred cows, "known facts", "reliable data" and other structures built not just on sand, but weak sand at that, with wild abandon, even using statements by Stalin about major T-34 reliability problems. Some long time CM hands talk about depicting Tiger and Panther reliability by reducing the percentage actually available for battle, but that seems highly unfair when you learn that in a 500 km road march, HALF of all the T-34s broke down en route. The Russian crew survival rates were shocking if a. tank was hit and penetrated. Russian figures in Dunn's Hitler's Nemesis showed that when a tank was destroyed, so generally were all the crew members killed or incapacitated by wounds.  This became a huge problem for the Red Army which, unlike the British at GOOD WOOD, who had plenty of replacement tanks and crews with a pretty high overall survival rate (typically 1-2 casualties per tank knocked out), the Russians were being forced to replace the tanks and the crews. This is but one of many topics discussed in this wide-ranging, take no prisoners hour-long video. Frankly, I wish it had been longer, for as deep as it went, there simply wasn't time to really get deeply into various maters. If you've ever heard of the expression "drinking from the fire hydrant", you can experience that by watching this most impressive video. There is a wealth of material, too, in the comments and Lazer Pig's replies. Net net, I believe you will never again look at the T-34 quite the same way again.
 

Regards,

John Kettler

FORECAST SERIES: Putin’s Likely Course of Action in Ukraine.
This was written this past December. Forum members will probably find it interesting.
https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/ISW-CT-Forecast-Series_Piece-2.pdf?x91208

As an aside, I found that you can assign UAVs to the highest HQ and subordinate units (including FOs) should be able to call artillery within observed areas while HQ gets up to the minute recon.

Yes, and then their field of view seems to be passed on to subordinate units when it comes to artillery.

Was trying to find a good writeup on the Soviet conclusion that Direct Fire was 10 x as effective as Indirect Fire (called by them "Fire from covered positions"). As I result I found this, the translated notes. of the Voroshilov Academy introductory course on Soviet Artillery. It is replete with detailed info, explanations of Soviet artillery related acronyms, types of fire and more, including a bunch of norms in the form of tables. When it comes to counterfire from US and NATO, can tell you the planning figure from, I believe, Sidorenko's The Offensive they were using in assessing time before counterfire landed was 4 minutes, and that was from the generation of counter mortar and counter battery radars before the far more capable TPQ-36 and TPQ-37 Firefinder radars. Thus, the figures in here are conservative to say the least and presumably reflect much older data.

http://www.xenophon-mil.org/archivevoro2/lesson1.htm

Regards,

John Kettler