.png.91b60a5bafb4dcb6f45c202eabcb3ba8.png){kind=avatar}
exsonic01
-
Posts
415 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by exsonic01
-
-
7 hours ago, IMHO said:
- Kontakt-5 was developed by Moscow NII Stali.
- Nozh ERA is a product of Ukrainian Mikrotek company. The same that produced a copy of Soviet APS.
- I'd seriously doubt Morozov's design capabilities - 35 years passed since their glorious time in Soviet Union. They're absolutely cash-starved - unable even to pay salaries in full. They've received pre-payment for BTR-4E and still were not able to deliver the vehicles and produced one new tank for the Ukrainian Army during the past 10 years (sic!).
Well, design of Nizh is not Mikrotek, but Morozov. And yes K-5 development was in NII Stali but it wouldn't make sense if Morozov have no idea about K-5's design principles and techniques, because they designed a tank with K-5. Morozov should have enough knowledge about K-5 which they could exploit to design their own ERA.
Fair about budget issue, but we never know what and how they dealt with budget issue - they could just delay the project instead of downgrade the Nizh project. Or they could keep the Nizh R&D budget intact but just cut or delay budget for manufacturing. We just would never know about Nizh project. We can only assume, based on those reports, that Morozov did learned something from ERA of cold war designs, and applied such lessons to their ERA.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nozh_(explosive_reactive_armour)
Looks like Nozh and Nizh are the same ones.
-
Recent conference of armored vehicles presented research / observation data for Ukraine Nozh ERA.
http://sd.net.ua/2020/01/20/donbass-tanki-artylleriya.html
https://diana-mihailova.livejournal.com/4420448.html
I'm relying on google translator.
Most of the armored vehicles were destroyed or damaged by artillery (total 45% of armored vehicle damage)
Nizh ERA successfully defended against 3BM42 Mango and 152mm top attack EFP (probably from ICMs)
Ukraine researchers examined 55 Bulat tanks operated during Donbass war, and they found 17 vehicles were protected by Nizh
One of observation of Nizh ERA on Bulat was defense against 9M133 tandem Kornet.
I think Bulat and Nizh's defensive performance is underestimated in CMBS. But if carefully think about this, this performance of Nizh shown in Donbass campaign presentation makes sense. Morozov design bureau has an experience of designing K-5 ERA during cold war. They should be able to develop something better than their old cold war era armor. There were a lot of underestimation or negative speculation about Nizh ERA around here and there, but based on those facts, I think Nizh ERA should be upgraded as well in this game. Accordingly, I think Bulat tank's survivality should be buffed for next version of this game.Other interesting point is that, artillery HE on top armor would not be likely to penetrate top armor of tanks. I mean, if it hits weak engine room or thin places, of course it will wreck tank. But if HE dropped on top of the armored area, it would not guarantee a kill. But of course it will bring huge damage. I mentioned before somewhere in this forum, but HE rounds are not meant to penetrate something. In this example, ERA cover can even defeat EFPs.
We really need DPICM / FASCAM for this game. There is no question about it if this game truly want to depict the "realistic" armored warfare. Doctrine & TO&E of forces during Donbass war would not be the same with the ones of full scale war between US and Rus, I got that. However, it is also true that the damage potential & role of artillery is greatly limited in this game. Forcing artillery to not to use ICMs and FASCAMs and claiming "realistic combat" does not makes sense. Of course, to prevent arty spam, it would be needed to introduce off-map counter battery action. The presentation data also indicates very active CB missions during Donbass campaign (65% of arty killed by arty). I know, Donbass campaign cannot be compared with hypothetical US-Rus war, but technology and artillery doctrine wouldn't be hugely different from what we saw from Donbass war.
In addition, for next version, so many things are needed for CMBS. More operations of drones (UA drones should be included of course), more recon ability (GSR and thermal) and more light infantry / low tier SF team to faster speed and better stamina as recon teams. Plus, I wish, (and I guess many others also think the same) new module of CMBS should leave from assumption of previous versions. Rather, it would be better to start from more realistic situations and more realistic weapons of 2015. Or, how about move to 2020?
If next module depicts 2020 or at least late 2010s, (which I really wish), then new weapons would be needed: T-90AM should be moved to T-90M, T-72B3 obr.2016 should be introduced as well as T-72B3, and T-80BVM maybe? Also there should be Stryker with autocannon / Javelin ATGM. A-10 is still in service so should be included. And plus we need new M1A2C. And of course there are more.
I'm not sure about T-14, as the program is very likely to further delayed.
-
I'm not sure how ATGM missed. If APS defended ATGM from airstrike or gunship, that should be a bug. As far as I remember, CMBS APS has a range of angle and projectile speed to engage against projectile, shouldn't react against ATGM from air. I remember, the old patch fixed this issue, wasn't it? But I can't remember. Too long time ago I played CMBS.
I'm not sure if 152mm/203mm really could one shot one kill the Abrams. Well, top armor is weaker than front, but HE rounds are not designed to penetrate something. (If it is DPICM then it is totally different story. ) But I agree that such direct hit of 152mm/203mm on Abrams would wreck all subsystems and takes out all observation/detection abilities, and has a good chance to wreck the cannon barrel. IMO that Abrams is already a dead one, so you can approach your RPG team and score a home run. This reminds of the meme "Omae Wa Mou Shindeiru" "NANI?"
Anyway, speaking of killing Abrams in CMBS.... this really depends on geometry and luck. Back in the day when I used to enjoy CMBS PBEM, I relied on several elements I could try.
1) Smoke and Khriz (only works in no-wind day)
Find the hill top or any good open position to observe enemy approach. Deploy the smoke curtain using BMPs or BTRs. Then move Khriz inside the smoke curtain. Khriz can aim and guide his missile using MMW radar, which can see through IR blocking smoke. Smoke curtain usually being blown off (even in no wind condition) ~1 min, so you need to retreat your Khriz, or redeploy smoke in good timing. While opponent's Abrams are killed or hide behind the cover, you can fast move your vehicles to the position you want. I usually purchase elite Khriz regardless of expensive price tag, to ensure high accuracy.
2) T-72 spam, try to engage within 500m or closer distance.
Using T-90AM or T-90A is a waste, because they are not good against Abrams anyway. So I usually rely on regular experience T-72s, try to purchase them as much as possible. Then, approach to the enemy line, circumvent the possible kill zone, use cover as much as possible like infantry. I only moved cover to cover. Then engage Abrams within 500m, sometimes tried to within 100m. This really depends on map. With close distance, weakness of poor long range detection and long range accuracy is minimized, and weakness of weaker APFSDS can be decreased as well. I always try this method in many cold war tactical games.
3) You can min max 1)+2)
Use Khriz + smoke, force your opponent to cover his Abrams behind the cover. If you are lucky, you can kill one or two. Then, rush your mechanized infantry and tanks to target town or forest and hide them well. Deploy your forces to key terrain before enemies do under Khriz+smoke cover. Later, those forces will make a good ambush homerun in the future.
If the wind is heavy, your smoke cover will be blown off very fast, like 30 second. This is a problem because 30 second is less than 1 min turn time, which not allow you to control your Khriz before the smoke is gone. In this case, just use T-72s, or use one Khriz very carefully, like place them in curtain 30sec and retreat it...
4) Use mortar + recon wisely.
Pre-design artillery strike or call mortar on possible enemy infantry deploy position to deny or harass Javelin team. Proper mortar can reduce enemy infantry number, which is very important. I always bring mortar, small or medium ones, because they have fast reaction speed and quite good to kill infantry and light vehicle. You also need a good recon control to figure out where the enemy troops are. Don't just throw them into the fire, they have better chance to detect enemy elements than your T-72s. So use them wisely, try to save them as long as possible.
All of those needs some practice, and they are not easy of course (especially recon part), but once you get used to it, you can score good number of Abrams during CMBS PBEM... Still, it is really hard to win US with Rus in CMBS. The real problem for me was Javelin launchers. They are hard to detect, quite cheap, but never forgives my mistake. I sometimes scored a good exchange rate against Abrams using T-72s, but eventually I lost a lot of tanks due to Javelin, and some are killed by Bradley. In some games I got all Abrams tanks, but eventually lose in score because I lost too many T-72s by Bradley and Javelin... This is the reason why one need to practice how to properly use recon teams and mortars to hunt down Javelin teams. If you play a good hour of CMBS PBEM, you will be able to deduct / predict possible Javelin position.
I don't use Russian airforce or gunships in CMBS, because Stinger is damn good. They are infantry, usually hide behind the line, very hard to detect or counter them, and not that expensive so easy to field 3+ number of Stinger teams. Stingers are accurate, so if there are 3 teams, usually they score at least one air asset at the first salvo. Airforces are usually expensive too. I rather buy more mortars.
Even with those, it is not easy to win against good US player. While playing CMBS PBEM repeatedly, several opponents get used to my tactics and my "meta", and he begin to counter them with Abrams and Bradley. I won them several times, but my opponents getting smarter and cunning enough not to fall to my traps. So, playing Russian in CMBS is getting more and more geometry dependent. It is really important to find proper place to maximize your merit.
So, what I wish to say is: It is true that Abrams in CMBS is very tough and difficult enemy to deal with. In that sense, CMBS Russian forces has much steeper learning curve than US. But still, it is more important how to manage them and how to set the tactics. They you can get a good score in the future.
-
I'm not sure if this topic has been discussed or not. If it is repeating post than please move this post to proper thread.
Stryker with 30mm autocannon is already issued to US army from last year.
https://www.dvidshub.net/news/257951/2cr-receives-first-30mm-stryker-europe
Plus, Javelin Strykers are under initial fielding process, and more numbers will be fielded 2020 and later.
If are there any plan for CMBS2 or next module of CMBS, can we expect those? They are already issued to field units.
-
Is this just upgraded version of CMSF1, which bring same units and same maps based on circa 2008 based technology, but only with new game engine?
Or is this something new one, with new units and new maps based on 2018 technology, with new game engine?
-
After long while, I returned to here, but why this thread become warzone about Trump? Lets focus on Korea guys. As a thread starter, I feel some responsibility to open such battlefield. If this thread flows in this way, this thread will be closed.
-
This is the true reality of DPRK. No propaganda, no politics, but the true testimony from a person who escaped from DPRK for her life. (Not only her, but also the most of DPRK defectors have more or less similar opinion) True face of DPRK communism is pure evil. I really can't understand why everyone is hyped about such peace deal with crazy Kim. Everyone knows what happened after Neville Chamberlain made Munich agreement with Hitler!! PEACE always looks cool and sounds great. But if anyone too obsessed with PEACE and commit a stupid mistake, then the outcome will be unfathomable. Peace without weapon and will to fight is just surrender, nothing more. I would rather be a person who prepare more weapon and ammunition, rather than a person who open the door to pure evil in the name of PEACE.
Trump's deal need to pass the congress. Let's see what will going to happen. But many senators and congressmen are worrying about the deal.
-
Yesterday's summit deal was really really bad deal. I think Trump is dreaming of Nobel peace prize way too much, so that he is doing the same mistake again.
This is just opinion, not official news article. But I agree with this one.
And yeah, I agree with this one too. Crazy Kim doesn't even need to give up anything. There's no "CVID" in the agreement paper.
If Trump really thinks that he can "deal & solve" with crazy Kim dynasty and DPRK with the same methods of last two decades, then this mistake will eventually return to him, maybe during his re-election campaign or other time. They will cheat us again and they will come back with better nukes in their hands. Then, what Trump will going to say? He can't do anything at that moment if he is under other burdens on his hands.
I don't know what is the mind of Trump and his cabinet. But if we can't do strict and broad CVID within very short period of time, we will fail. If DPRK does not accept that, we need to cancel the deal and increase the level of pressure to DPRK.
https://www.jpost.com/International/Did-Trump-achieve-what-Obama-couldnt-559770
Look at this, even Israeli paper is criticizing this talk and Trump XD lol I really didn't expect this. All of those shows how bad the Trump's deal was.
-
On 2018. 5. 27. at 1:19 PM, Sublime said:
sigh. politics.
Hmmmmm... at least I tried not to be political about this topic, I only do when "someone" being political first. I will try not to be political more in the future.
-
Pompeo and Kim Yong Chul is having a meeting now. Pompeo mentioned that there is a "real progress" but "significant challenges remained and predicted more “tough moments and difficult times” as the two sides negotiated." And he mentioned it is not clear yet whether the talk will be held at 12th June or not.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/31/world/asia/trump-kim-korea-summit.html
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/31/politics/us-north-korea-talks-new-york/index.html
Besides, Taiwan and HongKong news suggests the possibility of Russia - PRC - DPRK summit talks before US-DPRK talk:
https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3443887
SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) is the block of Russia, PRC, and old-soviet nations except Pakistan and India. While I'm not sure would whether Kim will really be at Shanghai, maybe very high ranking profile might be there and have a talk with Russia and PRC. This is not a good sign for US-DPRK summit talk.. If this talk (Kim-Putin-Xi meeting) really happens, this might be a good indication of incoming era of "new" cold war.
Personally, I'm really not sure, is the talk really good idea. Strict level of CVID will require a lot of things, I'm suspicious if DPRK will accept it. Even though they agree with strict CVID, what if they lie to us again? What would we do if they dig a nuke in very deep deep mountain of the northern part of DPRK or somewhere very ordinary & plain place, and bring it later in their convenient time? Also, some sources say DPRK already hide key scientists by "identity washing" like our Witness Protection program. How do we find those people if they lie to us? Any "talk" requires the trust between each other, but they have so many ways to cheat us again.
Recent CIA report suggests that DPRK will never give up their nuke program:
Let's watch what will happen from Pompeo-Kim talk, and see what kind of DPRK reaction will be there.
-
11 hours ago, IanL said:
I'm sorry but Trump is getting played. NK (I don't like associating that dictatorship with democracy) has managed to take advantage of the comments by US officials to get them to be the ones who cancelled the summit all the while continuing to talk with the officials in SK. The SK officials where surprised by the US move and that is what Kim wants - space between those allies. Now Trump is talking about talking again. What a mess.
I mentioned in previous post that current RoK leadership is very pro-DPRK and pro-PRC. Those Korean liberal groups are mostly stands for Korean-ethnic nationalism and socialism. The most of cabinet members and president himself of RoK were members of ultra-left organizations like "University student front" or etc, almost all of them were linked with DPRK directly or indirectly. They only little bit changed their attitude toward US and DPRK.
This is not the first time RoK behaves strangely like this. RoK liberal leaderships in the past were also pro-DPRK and pro-PRC, more or less. Robert Gates once mentioned president Roh as "anti-American and probably a little crazy" in his book. Current president Moon was the secretary general of president Roh at that time. Novel peace prize winner, president Kim dae jung was also involved in illegal money transfer to DPRK back in 2003.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/02/13/kim.scandal/
Under this circumstance, I don't see why and how we are played. It is current RoK leadership who doesn't want to stand with us, not us who want to push them or being fooled by DPRK's plan to create space between US and RoK. See what current RoK advisor said about US-RoK relation:
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/05/moon-south-korea-us-alliance/560501/
I think Koreans, especially Korean liberals, are very two-faced. I'm curious about whether they consider us as an ally or not. They want to sell their car, steel, phone, and all those goods to us, and they want to "look good" with us so that foreign investors & banks keep invest to RoK and they can keep their credit rating high enough. Yet, at the same time, they wish to turn down the relationship between us and them when we need their help as an alliance. I'm very suspicious that some of current RoK cabinet might be DPRK spies, maybe or maybe not.
Anyway, what I want to say is, it is not our fault if RoK get away from us, it is their fault. And I don't think we need to beg to RoK to keep alliance with us. If they don't want us, fine, let them go. But considering the dependency of overall Korean economy on us, I think they can't just neutralize US-RoK alliance.
11 hours ago, IanL said:The problem is this summit has very little meaning since there isn't even a framework for an agreement let alone a draft. So, no one knows what the goal is and Kim is taking full advantage.
In some sense I agree with you, I already expected and mentioned that there will be a US-DPRK talk, but any draft or agreement will be very ambiguous, and deal will be crushed due to collision on details, like recent Iran deal was broken. Key is, DPRK can't accept CVID, while we wish to push not only CVID but also hacking issues and overall NBC(Nuke Bio Chemical) weapons. And "maximum pressure" will be applied. Kim wants to earn some time before full weaponization of their nukes, so we better hurry if we want to do something. But I don't see what kind of advantages he get.
11 hours ago, IanL said:The NK leadership has a long history of talking out of both sides of thier face and bouble dealing and not living up to its commitments. The US seems to have forgotten that. In my opinion any US president should only sit-down with the NK leader after they have signed a deal and started executing that deal - which would need to be fully verifiable. And all this talk of incremental moves on both sides is silly give NK's past history.
I agree with this. I also think those talks with commies might be a waste of time honestly, because DPRK will never accept CVID. (I think Bolton expressed his concern in similar fashion) But at the same time, this can work as the final warning to DPRK, and I think Trump maybe wish to check by himself about what Kim is really willing to do. After this talk, they will be forced to choice something. If they keep their nuke program after the talk (which I expect), then the pressure will never be the same as before, and I think this time the pressure will include PRC.
Honestly, I think all of those recent events are aiming towards PRC, and DPRK issue is just one of the way to find a good reason to take an action against PRC. This is just my guess, but I think Trump himself maybe knows that DPRK will not accept CVID plus etc, then pressure will be applied, then PRC will support DPRK, then we can start big sanctions against PRC and so on.... Not sure about this part regarding PRC so take a bit salt on this opinion XD
7 hours ago, sburke said:Good luck on that. Everybody who has bet on Trump prior has lost money. (Check out the wonderful Atlantic City experience). Trump and Bolton don’t even agree so you can’t really bet on both. My bet is Trump eventually blames Bolton for the “missed opportunity” when he fires him.
I think they are doing typical good cop bad cop approach towards DPRK. When Bolton throws very hard ball, then Trump and Pompeo try to look "soft" during interview or etc.
7 hours ago, sburke said:Trump is getting played by both NK and China. His lack of real experience in international diplomacy, his frankly horrible negotiating skills and his guttting of the professional diplomatic corps all spell disaster. The ZTE debacle alone should tell you how good Trump’s negotiating skills really are. ZTE we are gonna punish you by making you buy more of the products from us that you wanted in the first place! Take that!
In some sense I agree, maybe PRC can playing against us using ZTE network and machines in the future, but I think it is not such a huge disaster like your claim. This can be an another leverage for us. ZTE sanction is another warning sign to PRC, let them know what can we do against them. Remember, we can give sanction again whenever we want, or when we find ZTE doing suspicious. So that PRC won't do any stupid things against us in the future regarding DPRK issue, South china sea and Taipei China issue and etc....
-
Well, Trump canceled the meeting yesterday, which I also didn't expect. I was skeptical about meaningful result, but I thought at least they would have a talk. But I think this was a good decision.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-05-24/north-korea-talks-trump-can-win-by-walking-away
This is just one of the reader opinions from Bloomberg, but I mostly agree with this article.
Then suddenly, DPRK changed their mind, saying aggressive comments were DPRK diplomat's personal opinions, and mentioned they want to start the talk. Plus, they mentioned "President Trump" in their official statement. LOL, they never clearly stated "President Trump" before, and it was not long ago that DPRK statement blamed Trump, Bolton and Pence like "crazy warmongers will be on hellfire if they do anything stupid on 'holy' Juche nation". Funny to watch them in panic. Where have all those guts were gone? XD Typical cowards.
Not sure whitehouse will re-accept the talk offer, but IMO pressure to DPRK and PRC will be increased. Folks are saying that strict financial sanction like BDA account squeeze will be also considered.
-
10 hours ago, sburke said:
not gonna get into a debate about communist block philosophy etc. I will say however your experience I think colors your perceptions. The communist block does not have a lock on oppression Name a country and I am sure I could with very little difficulty find a period when they too participated in a heinous act on some other group. Humanity as group is evolving only ever so slowly. Human beings are only too ready to blame someone else for their woes or covet what someone else has. Don't even get me started on the perils of power.
Haha. You may say that I'm biased, but I'm not biased, and those examples I listed in previous post are 100% truth. Look at the history, communist nations were used to rely on control and force, and they are still the same. I met a person who escaped from DPRK for better future and human dignity, a person who lived in Russia (including Soviet Union era) and moved to US for better opportunity, and Chinese American who lived the most of his life in China. Conclusion from conversations with those people were always the same: communism is failed system. I can list more and more examples of commie backstabbing in international relation and commie style oppression to their own people. And now you are blaming humanity to advocate the failed system...... lol. You, or anyone can't hide the failure of communism by watering down the truth using 'noble' concepts like humanity.
-
4 hours ago, sburke said:
I am surprised you bought that "China surrenders to us regarding trade deficit" Even if they wanted to we don't have several billions of dollars worth of what they typically buy from us to alter the deficit. That was a sop for Trump. The only thing that could really change that deficit is if Americans stop buying Chinese goods and that isn't gonna happen even after that crap sheetrock that caused so many issues to homeowners. We are very short sighted.
PRC agreed to reduce trade deficit, which they officially and unofficially refused/denied to do so for last several months. Now they agree with that term without any condition. For that part, I think we got a small advantage. However, there are no any details are mentioned about how, so I can understand your concern about this. We shall watch this part. I think part of the reason why we didn't included the detail is to watch the DPRK situation, and resume tariffs and leverages against PRC if it is necessary. On the other hand, I still believe that there are other methods to give some pressure to PRC.
4 hours ago, sburke said:As to the Iran deal, that actually was a good deal regardless of Trump's pronouncements. No it did not alter Iranian thinking about geopolitics, but that was not the goal. It was successful at reducing their Nuclear capabilities. Our allies felt so, our intelligence agencies felt so. Only Trump and folks who never want Obama to ever be able to be credited with a single thing disagreed. US violation (no we don't get to just cancel, we are now in violation) completely undermines US negotiating with DPRK. That was the US showing we negotiate in bad faith and even if we pen a deal forget any guarantee we will honor it if we decide it better serves domestic political aspirations to walk away.
I was thinking like you until I watch this:
At least one thing is true: There are lots of Israeli spies in wide aspect of Iranian social/political/military infrastructure and hierarchy, and they are good at their job. I think there should be a serious level of mole hunt in Iran now. While I agree with your point that the intention of previous deal was legit and good enough, but it fails to push Iranians to give up their nukes, failed to broke the will of Iranians to continue their nuke problem. Continuation of previous deal might be a losing game to us. Yes, we broke the deal, but they played bad first, why should we? I think this is another declaration from us that we will never going to be fooled again, whoever the opposite is.
4 hours ago, sburke said:And no I don't really feel like hearing how "commies" negotiate in bad faith. That they do is not going to surprise me. Just about everyone negotiates in bad faith. How much varies. The continuing use of "commies" though is kind of cartoonish. It is a generic term that really means very little and ignores the many cultural and nationalistic aspirations of those countries that have had or have a communistic oriented gov't. The communist world was never a solid block of mindless bureaucrats all thinking and acting the same no more than the western powers all acted and thought the same. Failure to understand that seriously hurt our ability to take advantage of and manipulate differences in the cold war.
You have some misjudgment about me.
I have a Chinese neighbor, office mate from Guangzhou , and fishing mate came from Hong Kong, and my academic adviser when I was PhD came from Russia. I knew some DPRK defectors when I was in Korea. Me and my wife have a good relation with all those folks, we respect them and their culture and they respect ours, they were truly good humans with nice character, and I'm in still in contact with some of them. I have no emotion towards normal individuals, BUT, still, I hate government and leadership of PRC and DPRK, and overall communism system with ultra maximum prejudice. If anyone who zealously advocate such broken and corrupt system, I will call them 'commies' whatever others say to me.
As a half Korean / half American, I have some good personal reason to hate commies. Both of my family (my mom's and dad's) lost some of family members to the communists during battle from Korea and Vietnam. On top of that, I myself served in RoK army for 26 months long time ago and I was able to learn some about history of cold war and communists strategies. Not everyone negotiates in bad faith. Usually, we approached to the problem in good will and hope and good intention, and it is them who exploits the our good gesture and trust to maximize their gain. Similar history repeated over and over again.
4 hours ago, sburke said:The communist world was never a solid block of mindless bureaucrats all thinking and acting the same no more than the western powers all acted and thought the same
Their system is corrupt and good enough to compare with mindless block. Communism is failed system and it is too ideal to realize. Unlike its original intention, communism make their own strict authoritarian structure, which largely rely on force and terror from brutal leadership and strong control over communities. Soviet Union crushed, PRC become Oceania of George Orwell's 1984, DPRK become crazy dynasty, Cambodian Khmerokraham made "Killing Field", Mao's Great Leap Forward movement killed huge number of innocent people. DDR is another great example, please check the movie "The Lives of Others", which depicts the true face of communism behind the curtains of propaganda.
Speaking of cold war, IMO we are approaching to new cold war era really fast, which is totally different and more complicated from the Cold War in the past. I maybe wrong, but it feels like the war among idealogies is far from over yet, at least to me.
-
4 hours ago, sburke said:
well to be totally frank it isn't just the "commies" who negotiate like that. It is pretty much the way everyone does. The whole point is to give up as little as you can for as much as you can get. The extent to which you have the upper hand and your skill determines (usually) how well you do. Right now the US sucks at it - badly. So no I don't expect much if anything. Not exactly sure how we are going to economically pressure the PRC. That hasn't seemed to work out to well so far even for addressing a simpler issue of trade balances.
The only real upside at the moment is the nuclear test site appears to be a wreck. Expecting DPRK to pick back up on the missile launches before too much longer, but they'll probably play a bit more pitting members of the administration against one another as why not, it seems to be working for them so far.
I agree that US is really bad at negotiating, previous deals only allowed Iran and DPRK to let them play what they want. Regarding commie strategy, I think you may right, but I can add more to help to understand. Maybe I can add later in this post, about how "commies" behave during any conflict and peace talks during cold war.
We still have some cards to press PRC economically. China surrenders to us regarding trade deficit, but detail is still left to be finished.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/19/us/politics/china-trade-deal.html
But there are other issues like unfair trade, intellectual property & copyright infringement and etc. IMO copyright issue is the one of the prime weakness of so many PRC companies. We'll see what will happen.
Nuclear test site is another show.
https://abcnews.go.com/International/north-korea-dismantling-nuclear-test-site/story?id=55287694
"Can the process be reversed?
If the political winds change once more, the collapsed tunnels could easily be re-excavated.
Ankit Panda of Asia-Pacific affairs magazine The Diplomat reported that a U.S. intelligence assessment determined it would take mere "weeks to months" for Pyongyang to reverse course."
They can recover test site whenever they want, and they can rebuild another one in different place.
-
I was very busy with real life so couldn't update, but I think everyone in this forum saw what happened recently so far.
A lot of people around me (and in this forum) were very very hyped about RoK-DPRK talk. Some even expected the "perestroika" in DPRK. But see what is happening now. I think people are tooooooo optimistic or too easily hyped/triggered by concepts like 'peace'. We need to see this realistically. Such naive thinking based on hope is the one commies love to exploit and use.
When commies says "peace talk", never trust that. Commie's "peace talk" is usually to show something useful for them, or they have another purpose. They never say "peace" when they have good cards in their deck. History proves it, and it can happen again now. See how Kim flipped the RoK-DPRK head talks now. See what happened during and after Paris Peace Accords.
I already mentioned that I'm skeptical about talks (Both US-DPRK and RoK-DPRK). Regarding US-DPRK talk, I think it will not gonna happen. Even though they have a talk, I think it will not that positive. Maybe they can agree something, very vague and unclear one, but detail contents will never be agreeable between two parties. Because DPRK will never accept CVID, but US will never allow weaponized nuke in DPRK. Furthermore, US want to include chemical and bio weapons, and hacking issues as well. Kim will never going to accept that.
Same goes to 'perestroika' in DPRK. Kim will never give up his dynasty and he knows the opening/exposing his system to outside will surely bring the end of the dynasty. If Kim dynasty ever thought about 'perestroika', they've already done, during grandpa Kim or papa Kim. But instead, Kim dynasty purged anyone who claims about 'change'. So better throw away the hope of any natural change from inside DPRK, unless coup.
Also, naivety of RoK is way too serious than my expectation, I mean, IMO they really think they can make peace deal with Kim dynasty, which is total stupidity. To me, it seems that the current RoK leadership desperately want to repeat the same mistake again - trusting DPRK and Kim.
I think the next step will be the naval blockade, and increase economic pressure to PRC to prevent any support to DPRK. Let's see what will going to happen.
-
On 2018. 5. 12. at 7:05 AM, StieliAlpha said:
Looks like you need to change the focus to Iran now.
Well, looks like we need to put more focus to DPRK
-
9 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
they do have quite a few troops & weapons stationed on Korean soil, whereas the Chinese & Russians, to date, do not
This is because Kim Il Sung (first king of Kim Dynasty, the man who initiated Korean War) refuse PLA and Russian forces inside DPRK territory back in 1950s. PLA stationed in DPRK until 1958, and Mao really wanted to continue the station of PLA forces inside DPRK, but grandpa Kim strongly wanted to remove them. DPRK-Soviet-PRC relations were much more complex than nowdays. DPRK-PRC relation was really bad around 1958 after withdrawal of PLA troops, and Kim tried to close to Soviet. On the other hand, after ~10 yrs later, during Sino-Soviet border conflict, Kim supported Mao. In my opinion, grandpa Kim never fully trusted PRC and Soviet.
Also, grandpa Kim was afraid of too much intervention or influence from foreign communist nations, and he doesn't want pro-PRC or pro-Soviet communists take power inside DPRK politics (which could be the potential threat to Kim Dynasty) so he purged almost all pro-foreign DPRK generals and politicians after Korean war. IMO politics around Kim family is more cruel and cold-blooded than any mafia around the world.
This is the reason why there are no PLA or Russian army in DPRK. Fair now?
-
13 hours ago, DerKommissar said:
How come politicians are not asking for the denuclearization of Pakistan or India, or plenty other countries?
India and Pakistan developed the nuke during cold-war era and US and Soviet had their own plan and thinking about their nukes. It is totally different story from the situation of 2018. On top of that, the fundamental difference between DPRK and your examples is the stability and reliability of DPRK system. At least modern India and Pakistan is not dynasty. What happens if hardliners of DPRK attempt a coup and get the control of nuke? Another issue is the credibility. DPRK has been ignored every single treaty, promise, agreement and etc.... and they developed long range missiles and weaponized nukes despite of all those talks, supports, or sanctions. Kim's regime just cannot be trusted at all. Risk of DPRK nuke is fundamentally and entirely different problem. Yeah, his nuke and missiles are not even close to the level of US or Russians and hard to threat US mainland now, but it is matter of time after he get one operational. Not to mention DPRK nuke will be threat to our allies like Japan and ANZAC. Plus, DPRK nuke will bring next level of nuke domino.
13 hours ago, DerKommissar said:This is just another rumbling that will come and pass without consequence.
We'll see what will happen.
13 hours ago, DerKommissar said:Before you lose your worlds, I am not referring to any specific conspiracy -- but a model of supply and demand (Complexes not Complex). Geopolitical tensions and the mere threat for mobilization creates demand. Demand that allows for investing more money in one's military budget. As the ruling party, you would want demand for your government's services and your industry. If all goes well, you can increase your public support and create factories, security and jobs. It can also make headlines really /pop/.
Walmart and Apple are massive, but they mostly sell consumer products. The military industry mostly relies on government contracts, and there is nothing wrong with that. I am not suggesting any conspiracy here. I am not making an ethical or political argument. I am stating the audience cares about potential threats to their safety, and are rarely interested in frozen conflicts with hermit states. Traditional journalism is struggling to be relevant and there was a lot of elections happening recently. Is it possible that Cold War 2 may just be a popular pathos?
The basic problem of mentioning MICs is that people, including you sir, way too much overestimates their ability and influence. Profit margin and annual revenue of those MICs are barely close to 1% of total GDP of US, and not comparable to top 10 US companies. They are small companies, and they are not 'specially treated' by politicians like liberals or hollywood movies depict. MICs are just same companies like others, wish to make profit and survive. Defense industry is very competitive and it is very hard to make a significant margin from the current system. Jobs? Yes, they can make jobs, but do you know how many jobs GM created, and how many jobs top 5 MICs created last year? Can you find any weapons or defense-related contents are included in top 10 US exports list last year? Position and scale of defense industry is not that massive neither politically influential like some people think. I wish to point this out.
-
http://time.com/5216544/north-korea-kim-jong-un-beijing-xi-jinping-donald-trump-denuclearization/
Some experts are saying that the visitation of Kim to PRC may implies Kim wish to show his will to continue the nuke program and will not yield to western nations. Or, Kim wish to talk to Xi that DPRK's nuke program is ready finished, and he wish to assure more support / supply.
Despite of all those sanctions, Russia recently decided to restart the bridge building between DPRK and Russia, this may suggest that Russia will resume its DPRK support/trade program.
This is already cold war 2 in Asia instead of Europe, PRC + DPRK + Russia vs RoK + Japan + US. It seems that DPRK-US tension regarding denuclearization will not going to be finished soon.
-
9 hours ago, DerKommissar said:
I do not think anyone involved truly wants reunification -- via diplomacy or war. There's nothing to be gained, hence the conflict has been frozen for decades. Fear sells and there's massive Military Industrial Complexes on all sides. Barking, shaking fists and feeding the media allows one to retain relevance. Nuclear weapons are nothing new. I think just about anyone who's anyone these days has at least two. No one is overly worried about Pakistan and India, and they constantly get into skirmishes. I say, there are many more pressing issues plaguing the western world than some little hermit that thinks it's still the 1950s.
It is not about reunification but about denuclearization. Trump already mentioned to Xi on the phone that he is not interested in the fate of Kim Dynasty, saying if DPRK gives up nuke then US will not gonna touch DPRK system.
And another Military Industrial Complex conspiracy believer.... I lost my worlds. Well, before I finish my reply, search for the revenue of top 5 MICs and compare them with other companies. You will found out that the sum of revenue of top 5 MIC are less than a half of Walmart or GM. Do you know how much profit margin of Apple last year and top 5 MICs? If MICs are so massive and influential, MS or Samsung or Walmart CEO and board members are secretly controlling the entire world with Freemason, right?
-
Things are rapidly moving, and US is pushing China really hard.
US is considering visa limit, indefinite tariff and investment restriction against China.
Unconfirmed reports of US support for Tibet. "Emperor" Xi will not gonna happy about it
http://www.savetibet.org/us-congress-confirms-support-for-funding-for-tibet-programs-in-2018-budget/
Today, some reports are saying that Kim Jung Un (or at least very very top-level high profile) is secretly visiting China
IMO Kim is now feeling that we are really serious more than ever, and probably got scared so he went to his big boss' home, asking for help.
Some says that this secret visit to China is act of fleeing, after Kim feels that the uncertainty about his and regime's future. Please remind that those mentions are just speculations, but it is true that Kim or his relative or trustworthy high-level profile is visiting China.
On 2018. 3. 24. at 2:23 AM, John Kettler said:Urban sprawl has probably changed things considerably, but the problem with SK back in the. late 1970s. and early 80s when I worked on the K-TOW (Korean-TOW). analyses at Hughes, was that there wasn't any. real defrensible. terrain until the Han River, and stopping the gigantic NK armored force from crossing it in strength was essential to holding SK. K-TOW was built around a force. of Hughes 500 helicopters armed with 4 x TOW each.
Northern part of the Seoul become very urbanized, and there are lots of structures and building north of the Han River when compared to 1970s. Any armored column who pushed inside the metropolitan area would have very bad day. Things are changed so much, and major battle plans are also changed a lot. AFAIK major part of US-RoK army OP is no more defense & counter strike. Rather, it is mostly preemptive strike and continuous offensive, but not sure about detail.
On 2018. 3. 24. at 8:48 AM, Erwin said:Seriously doubt any war there and not losing any sleep over this. Trump is playing a good game getting Bolton, a known Hawk, in there b4 mtg with NK. It's all psychology.
I agree getting Mr. Bolton in is kinda working. Everyone now feels that we are dead serious after his appointment. It is good pushing to RoK, DPRK and PRC. However, I think there are still a good possibility of radical action, because I think DPRK will never gonna give up the nuke, and never gonna accept any suggestion to threaten or weaken his regime.
Giving up nuke will might bring the coup from KPA hard-liner generals, and Kim's regime will be threatened because hard-liners will going to think that Kim is too young and weak. Like all dictators of communism, Kim must looks strong and cruel. Any weak behavior will bring uncertainty to his regime and will threaten his position by hard-liner generals. That is why Kim executed his uncle and other generals during the early stage of his regime. On top of that, he saw what happened to Gaddafi after denuclearization of Libya. That is why IMO he can't accept the total denuclearization and full scale inspection. But we'll see what will going to happen.
Again, I wish the miracle happens like voluntary denuclearization of DPRK. But that is really a miracle....
-
20 hours ago, Erwin said:
To put the NK-China situation in perspective one can think of it as nuclear Scotland vs England. Or, maybe nuclear Luxembourg vs Germany. Lots of things China can do, but they will have to be forced.
Yes, that depends on how much we push PRC. But they will try secretly to support DPRK. Anyway, newspaper says that Mr Trump will meet Kim. I'm not sure whether it is a good idea or not. But I really do wish he get the full scale inspection and total denuclearization of DPRK, instead of getting fooled again.
Some says that this secret visit to China is act of fleeing, after Kim feels that the uncertainty about his and regime's future.
Recent presentation about Nozh ERA
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by exsonic01
What I want to say is the final decision of equipping K-5 for T-80U was people in charge in Morozov. They should had adequate knowledge about K-5 and its principle and capability to make that decision. And I think that experience somehow helped them to design their own. After all, ERA is not that seriously difficult mechanism to understand, neither serious degree of metallurgical knowledge is required to design and research one. Not to mention ERA is not related with thermal too.
You and I are not in the position to make any call about UA's R&D capability and manufacturing at all, neither in position to correctly comment about reasons behind how they decided to develop Nizh and delay Thaliand order. (Unless you are UA government official. And I'm not related with UA in any forms)
In this case, we can only speculate and express our 'opinion', at least we both agree about that, right? Your idea is also your opinion based on what you believe, but you don't need to undermine other's opinion as "fairy tale" before you bring your support evidence for your version of "fairy tale", right? To answer your claim, I don't know and I maybe wrong. But evidences shown in the report (presentation in 20th international armored vehicle conference I linked in original post) is suggesting that UA made a descent ERA and they fielded in Bulat tanks.
I also agree, I don't expect they made totally something new. I also wrote in this post and previous post, they get some hint or they take some advantage from what they learned from experiences with K-5 and knowledge related with past doctrine / design principle of T-64 series and T-80 series. My opinion is, based on those, they developed something upgraded when compared old cold war soviet design such as K-5. Again, I am not saying their ERA is revolutionarily upgraded, but they just made something more or less better presumably based on their cold war experience.
Report means the presentation in 20th international armored vehicle conference, which supports Nizh showed good operational capability in Donbass war.
https://defence-ua.com/index.php/en/publications/defense-express-publications/5144-oleksandr-guchenkov-we-develop-innovative-reactive-armor-protections-while-simultaneously-upgrading-and-improving-legacy-designs
http://uamicrotech.com/2018/11/23/oleksandr-guchenkov-we-develop-innovative-reactive-armor-protections/
Well I only have UA sources so... I don't know, all I'm sure is Morozov "participated" in research and they made final decision to put Nizh in Bulat. But who knows? Maybe you are right.