Vet 0369

This is exactly my point. After the Mai Lai was investigated and all of the Officers (mostly West Point graduates) were found not guilty (one of the Officers on that board of inquiry was Colin Powell), the USMC required that all Marines participate in classes known as "Human Relations" where we found that we were, in fact, distantly related to humans. Basically, the classes didin't go into combat at all. They concentrated on the populations. That basically, all people just want a shelter, to be able to raise their families in peace in the same culture in which they were raised, and their next bowl of rice. In other words, to lose empathy for the for those who suffer through no fault of their own, is to demonize them during which they become the objects of prejudices. We actually had a name for removing someone from command in the field who was unnecessarily getting men killed or wounded. It was called "Fragging." And, I can guarantee that it is occurring in the Russian Army in Ukraine also.

I must say that I feel extreme sympathy for any combatant in this war who is not actively participating in war crimes. I enlisted in the U.S.M.C. In 1969 in the middle of our conflict with North Viet Nam. I can say for a fact that not everyone with whom I served supported the U.S. position, however, they still fought and some died. After I learned “both” sides of the conflict, I can understand why North Viet Nam invaded South Viet Nam, and can’t fault their reasoning (side note: the United States was the first country to recognize the sovereignty of North Viet Nam after it declared independence from France). All that said. We had a saying, “My Country, may She always be right. But, right or wrong, She’s my country!” I will never condemn, enblanc, the fighting men and women of an enemy just because they choose to remain loyal to their country regardless of how f’d up I think that country is. Point of fact Steve, we live in an area where during one particular rebellion, one ninth of the population was in active rebellion (one third of the total population supported the rebellion). One third of the population actively opposed that rebellion and stayed true to their country, and we should condemn them because they stayed loyal to their country?

A strange thought has occurred to this old Jarhead who was born not long after WWII ended. I apologize in advance for going off topic. I’m beginning to wonder if the Marshall Plan that was used to re-educate and rebuild Germany and Japan after their surrenders didn’t work “too” well. I’m sure that the “short-term” goals of the plan (and yes, McArthur was responsible for Japan, but he also reported to Marshall). The short-term goal was to demilitarize both countries and to make sure they didn’t threaten “the peace” again. Rebuilding the countries was secondary to that, but the re-education policy and forcing the collective guilts for their crimes against Humanity down their throats have caused both Countries to extremely pacifist world policy stances. Based on that thought, I would venture to suggest that the German reluctance to supporting the war is probably the fault of the U.S.A. Due to our extreme re-education of the German society.

Unfortunately, I have become accustomed th the German Government stating that they are going to do something, and then stating all kinds of excuses why they can’t do it now. I’ll wait until actions back up the promises.

Exactly! More to the point, if a formal, EU arms document excludes the requirement for tracks, than that should settle the argument. If it has a large main gum on a turret that revolves 360 degrees, then it is a tank regardless if it has wheels and can carry passengers inside. If we look at WWII, at the beginning of the war, some of the “tanks” of the belligerents didn’t even have a main gun, just machine guns (Pz2 IIRCj. Take for example the U.S. M-3/M-5 vs the M-4. To settle the argument, we really need a negotiated and accepted arms definition agreement that defines the features of a “tank” as was presented previously, not opinions. Remember the definition of an “opinion.”

And there-in lies the issue. I would ask that someone who says they are tanks, or someone who says they aren’t tanks, to provide a definitive definition of what constitutes a “tank.” I wager that, in reality, a definition doesn’t exist!

Turboprops are jets! In fact, even the most modern turbofan engine is nothing more than a turboprop engine with a whole bunch of short propeller blades with a duct around them.

Yes, but they weren’t Ukrainian!

In a word, Market Futures. The Commodity Traders either panicked about the gas supply being cut off and driving up the price of future gas supplies, or they got greedy and bought up the futures in anticipation of making a killing on the afore said future gas supplies.

Personally, I’m at a loss to understand why the “Western” calendar starts the “new year” on January 1 just because a megalomaniacal French King decided to “decree” it start on January 1 instead of April 1 (which was the traditional start of planting season). Many farmers kept to the April 1 New Year date instead of switching which gave rise to “April Fools Day.” The New Year should start on the Winter Solstice when the day begins to get longer (December 21 or 22 in the Northern Hemisphere or June 21 or 22 in the Southern Hemisphere. Off topic done!

Whelp, I realize I’m about 50 years out of date with “combined arms” tactics, but in my day , as soon as “enemy” armor was spotted, the Battalion 81mm mortars would fire on them (not to do much conceivable damage to the armor, but to knock out any Infantry support with them). If the armor was within range of the Company weapons section, we’d open up with them to. As infantry, we’d never get that close to our supporting armor either.

Welcome back friend! I’m glad you made it through. Merry Christmas (whether you’re celebrating on December 25 (Roman Sect) or December 27 (Eastern Sect as I understand it), all are Christians. You are a valued and trusted leader in this Forum, and we value you greatly!

Yup, they already are. On Mi8s, they’re called “undercarriage or landing gear.”

For ideas that you consider “bad” yes. Unfortunately, they may be ideas that I consider to be perfectly valid GOOD ideas. How do you resolve that conflict of values and beliefs?

When I was working for a pretty significant U.S. Government Agency, I read a saying in a in a CocaCola bottle cap that I felt applied to the propensity of “group think” of most Agency Managers. The saying was, “When everyone’s thinking the same thing, someone’s not thinking!”

OK, let's put this in prespective. Putin WANTS NATO to respond. He lacks even passive support of the majority of Russian Federation populations, BUT, historically, any attack or threat to the "Rodina" causes ALL the populations to rise to the defense of the "Mother Russia!" Perhaps that's exactly what he wants. Then, he'll be able to say that Russia (and by extension he) were beaten by the evil west NATO, and not the subhuman inferior Ukraines.

LOL, loved the bobblehead imitation at the end!

The Russian immigrant community and the Ukrainian Immigrant community joined together to provide support to the Ukrainian refugees who arrived in the Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A. area, so not all Russian immigrants are “bad.” As SBurke said, I”m sure there are many similar occurrences happening all around the would that we never hear about.

Yeah, I can see it now, one bus of civvies and 50 mixed military trucks, tanks, and heavy weapons on each ferry (if they even have that many left)!

I’m not surprised at all about the possibility of the U.S. House of Representatives flipping in these mid-term elections. In my half century plus of voting in U.S. elections, the party opposite of the President tends to gain more seats in the House. When the President’s party also controls both houses of Congress (the House and Senate), the opposition tends to flip the House. I think U.S. voters as a whole want at least some “balance” in the Legislative Branch so one Party can’t “run roughshod” over the other, and can’t ”run amok” passing legislation that’s either “far left” or ‘far right.”

Also, if the U.S. Government charges Musk under this law, they will be able to charge other violators, who world have immediately accused the U.S. of discrimination, under the same law (looking at you Dennis Rodman).

Nah, wouldn’t be historically accurate. BFC works very hard at keeping everything as accurate as possible for the given timeframe. In the case of CMBS, that would be 2014. The only thing that should be changed is the performance of the Russian Army. The UKR Army is actually pretty well modeled as they wouldn’t have adopted the NATO tactics yet.

Sweden has applied for membership in NATO, but, as far as I know, has not yet been accepted. However, that also means that Sweden is not constrained by Article 5, so they might actually be able to do more than NATO at this point in time if the sabotage occurred on Swedish “territory” happened as in the NORD Stream pipelines.

Nope, I tried a Soviet/Russian cigarette in Asia back in 1970 when I was in Fleet Marine Corp Pacific (FMFPac), scared the crap out of me. Those things could kill you!

We might be looking at the 1930’s “Bitter Harvest” of 2023.