JUAN DEAG
-
Posts
184 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by JUAN DEAG
-
-
2 hours ago, GAZ NZ said:
so the discussion of gear upgrades to me is also relevant to what they need them for
Interesting that you mention that. I just watched a new episode of Военная приемка, everyone's favorite Russian TV show from everyone's favorite Russian state owned and bank-rolled TV station Телеканал ЗВЕЗДА. This week's special was on camouflage. Oh boy!
Anyways, the show featured a new camouflage costume for temperate forest environments. It appears to be a spiritual successor to the ubiquitous "berezhka" suit. The show claimed it was difficult to spot through night vision optics and it apparently provides some protection from nuclear fallout. I don't know it looked pretty spicy.
-
2 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:
Hmm, please study on Kievan-Rus.
I fail to see the relevance. If you're suggesting that Ukrainians are Russians then you are wrong.
2 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:Russification has happened. just not to Ukrainians.
So you're denying the things I listed actually happened!? To Ukrainians and many other ethnic groups in the former Russian empire!?
2 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:That's like saying explain to me why conquered Native lands of the US in school are educated mainly in English. And even then are not comparable to why many Ukrainians speak Russian.
Native Americans suffered an injustice at the hands of the United States during the westward expansion. Because of this, natives are almost treated like a protected class by the US government (scholarships, lands designated for natives only, loose government regulations, some local autonomy of police, native-only social services, etc.). On the other hand, Russians deny everything that happened because it is an inconvenient truth and they were 'justified'. Yes it is comparable. Ukrainians were conquered in the same way Native Americans were: with guns.
-
43 minutes ago, VladimirTarasov said:
Also, majority of Ukrainians speak Russian.
This is factually incorrect.
43 minutes ago, VladimirTarasov said:but this does not point to "Russification"
Explain Russian Tsars throughout history issuing decrees banning the use of the Ukrainian language. Explain the repression of Ukrainian churches during Soviet rule. Explain a systematic famine targeting Ukrainian villages in the 1930s followed by a mass migrations of Russians to the territories in which millions of Ukrainians died. Explain the complete removal of the Ukrainian language from government institutions (schools, transportation, etc.) in later Soviet rule. Explain the fact that Ukraine has the largest group of Russian speakers that are not ethnically Russian. Some might call this "Russification".
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
The difference between Russians and Ukrainians is that they do not want to fight for those beliefs because fighting is risky. Personally and nationally. Therefore, they say they want freedoms and then do nothing when they are denied to them or taken away.
It’s terrible to lie in chains,
To rot in dungeon deep,
But it’s still worse, when you are free
To sleep, and sleep, and sleep.-Taras Shevchenko (1814-1861), Ukrainian Poet and Nationalist
-
30 minutes ago, kinophile said:
Texas, sure maybe. But it's actually a better argument for the other side, as to join Mexico Texans would need to collectively lose their minds - life is obviously much better in the US. So to have sections of Texas erupting into violence, burning buildings and killing journalists in the name of 'independence', when things will very obviously be better under a US Western influenced political establishment (as opposed to a corrupt, drug cartel riddled "mexican" one) would look very suspiciously like foreign agitation.
This is a flawed example. Texas was a claim of the Spanish Empire under the protectorate of New Spain so when Mexico gained her independence from Spain in 1821 she also received Texas as a territory. During the early 1800s many colonists from the southern United States set out to settle this land as part of the "Manifest Destiny" and by 1836 the territory was majority white English speaking Protestants who, being slave owners, carried significant racial prejudices and were resentful of the centralization attempts of the majority Catholic Mexican government. These differences culminated in the Texas Revolution, an independence movement to separate from the Mexican Government and the rest is history. The reason why Texas is one of the 50 states in the US is because of the decisions of the Texans themselves. Texas is American by choice.
-
13 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:
Accept my yoke that I've had no say in? You can catch me in the nearest rebellion group in event of such wrongfulness.
So in this hypothetical roles reversed Ukrainian aggression in Russia you would support the "rebellion group" (i.e. fake republics)? Interesting. I admire your lack of a double standard but your fundamental understanding of the Maidan Revolution and the subsequent war is flawed.
Moving on....
This is kind of off topic but, why does the Russian military have such an aversion to bar armor (slat armor, cage armor, whatever you call it)? I haven't seen it used on any Russian vehicles and once saw a Russian TV show Voyenna Priemka (can't find the name in Cyrillic) that did a segment on the ineffectiveness of bar armor, basically writing it off as useless. This division is seen in Ukraine were Ukrainian security forces cover their vehicles with bar armor as soon as they learned it provided limited protection from shaped charges. The separatists on the other hand remove the bar armor from captured Ukrainian vehicles, claiming that it is only good for breaking neck when dismounting. Interestingly enough, when Ukrainians repatriate the stolen vehicles they reinstall the bar armor; if the vehicle was supplied by Russia they also install the bar armor. You're in the Russian army, right? Why does your army hate bar armor so much?
-
Sorry if I sound confrontational. Not trying to start anything with Vlad. I just want him to see through his government's smoke and mirrors and come to face with the reality of his government. Still love you babe
(no homo)(full homo). -
What if we reverse the roles on Vlad?
Vlad and his people want to overthrow the oppressive pro-Ukrainian government of Putin which has embezzled billions of rubles. They protest peacefully, but soon the protests turn violent and Putin still refuses to step down. Eventually the people gain the upper hand and Putin is deposed. Naturally, Ukraine is frustrated after losing a sphere it has maintained for 400 years so the underhanded rogues in the Ukrainian government begin plotting. On a brisk morning in Krasnodar "little green men" are spotted wearing no identification, they march around the city seizing administrative objectives, lowering the Russian flag and raising the Ukrainian flag. But the Ukrainians have not yet punished the Russians' for their cries of self-determination. The Ukrainian high command comes to the decision to carve off Novgorod and Kamchatka from Russia, these new lands will be "Novoukraina". Now they deny anything ever happened. It's a civil war, alright.
Accept your new yoke Vlad! How could you possibly complain? They were justified in protecting ethnic Cossacks in Kuban. They are of Ukrainian Cossack heritage!
-
Literally same.
-
What is your ideal application for airborne troops if you reject Russia's? By what doctrinal principles will these ideal paratroopers operate, and why? What will their TO&E look like? How will they avoid the deficiencies often associated with airborne troops (e.g. supply and logistics, organic firepower, etc.) I just want to get a cursory overview of the competing doctrines because I personally see the VDV as highly relevant force for Russia.
Russia is an expansive country that is over 17,075,200 sq km in size. Russia cannot physically maintain all the fronts necessary because of obvious logistical, manpower, and economical issues. So a unit that is slightly inferior to a mechanized force (BMP-2 > BMD-2) but retains high mobility would be seen as indispensable in my eyes. Since transporting a tank over long distances requires a train and a lot of cars and equipment as well as time to load and unload the vehicles; only applicable if the operation doesn't require an element of surprise and/or short notice. However, a large airborne force can be scrambled in no time and avoids the issue of delays (super secret CIA agent derails train loaded down with the entire 1st Guards Tank Army on the only track between Murmansk and Vladivostok with nothing but a paper clip).
-
I concur with Steve, I do feel sorry for you. You're a victim of an authoritarian pseudo-democracy and I hope that one day you can live in a peaceful, prosperous and democratic Russia.
-
2 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:
Steve, you do understand that we can freely criticize Putin? Why do feel sorry for us, sure I understand our economy got hurt badly but don't worry we aren't under a dictatorship
Walk outside and say and hold a sign saying, "путин чмо". I dare you.
You live in a country where a woman that likes a picture on social media that doesn't fit the government's dogma will be punished. http://nypost.com/2016/05/31/russians-are-getting-years-in-jail-for-their-social-media-likes/
This is also another good read. Russia got a press freedom score of not free, for comparison Ukraine got partially free, and the U.S. is completely free. I would recommend skipping to Part D Freedom of Expression and Belief.
https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2016/russia
Western lies! Western lies everywhere!
-
On 9/7/2016 at 6:03 AM, Oleg said:
BV and Bulat does not have thermals.
The T-64 Bulat actually has a thermal sight for the gunner in the form of the Buran-Catherine-E thermal imaging sight (the commander lacks a thermal sight AFAIK).
-
20 hours ago, John Kettler said:
teknika technical
Just wanted to mention that "tekhnika" translates more accurately to equipment (vehicular).
-
Don't walk into the LOS of the enemy. Let the enemy walk into your LOS.
-
2 hours ago, John Kettler said:
Presuming I didn't screw up in remembering the insignia one wore, he was a retired Army colonel general and Hero of the Soviet Union. The other one was from the Black Sea Marines. I think. If you have any interest at all in Russian military matters, block out half an hour and watch this.
This show is about the army of Republic of Belarus, not Russia.
-
1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:
No, Kadyrov (the elder) was made a better offer by Putin than what he was getting under the formally independent Chechnya. But he struck a hard bargain and his son continues to benefit from it. Kadyrov largely operates without interference from Russia as a result. He even has a private military force that is by some estimates 20,000 strong. They are personally loyal to Kadyrov, not Putin. The FSB *HATES* Kadyrov because they can't touch him. Even with Kadyrov likely being behind the killing of Nemtsov he's untouchable. Last year Kadyrov even threatened to shoot Russian security forces if they entered Chechnya without written permission (this was after a running gun battle that went into Chechnya).
Make no mistake about it... Kadyrov and Putin play the public game of whose in charge. The reality is very different. As soon as Putin tries to change the arrangement Kadyrov will bolt provided he thinks his chances are worth the risks.
Steve
My bad. I didn't know the situation was quite like this. I just thought by the way that Kadyrov spoke and continues to speak through the lens of Putin's world view that he is just a puppet. In reality, it was more complex than I thought it was.
-
15 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
The worst case for Russia is a combo of...
1. Full blown civil unrest/civil war within European Russia.
2. Kadyrov (and others in the Caucuses) going independent.
Kadyrov is always one step away from creating an independent dictatorship for himself. The only reason he doesn't is because of money coming from Moscow and a reasonably compliant Kremlin overseer. If either change, Kadyrov will likely strike out on his own. Attacking Ukraine is likely to produce one or both of these conditions.
I find the prospect of Kadyrov going independent highly unlikely. Kadyrov was put in power of Chechneya in the first place as nothing more than a puppet. A more plausible scenario is: if civil unrest ignites throughout the Russian Federation then the more nationalistic Chechens will want to overthrow Kadyrov because he will do only what Putin tells him to do and will likely be the enemy for any separatists. You know, since he kind of betrayed his separatist brothers for some extra Rubles.
-
14 minutes ago, Raptorx7 said:
Yes I took that into account when responding to your post.
How would NATO or the UN get Russia to hand over "its" territory after a loss in Ukraine?
Similar to Iraq in 1991. Iraq had violated international law several times (genocide of Kurds and invasion of Iran). The international community didn't care. But the straw that broke the camels back was the occupation of Kuwait, which led to a UN mandate and an international armed response.
Russia, like Saddam's Iraq, is a repeat offender. If Russia blatantly violates Ukraine's territorial integrity for a third time, the international community is going to respond. A Russia bogged down in a war of attrition in Ukraine might have to succumb to the demands of the international community (or have multinational troops patrolling Moscow streets).
It's an extreme scenario for Russia, but Putin wouldn't want to take a risk like that.
-
2 minutes ago, Raptorx7 said:
There is no way Russia would give up any territory like that, even if the UN says so.
(If the invasion of Ukraine is a disaster).
-
Another reason Putin would fear all out war with Ukraine is the political consequences of a loss. Russia could be stripped of it's non de jure territories by UN mandate or NATO demand. This could include:
-Crimea to Ukraine
-Abkhazia to Georgia
-South Ossetia to Georgia
-Southern part of Kurils to Japan
-Transnistria to Moldova
-Northeast Manchuria to China (if they even want it anymore)
-limits on military, etc.
Something like this would be an utter humiliation and would break the myth of a strong Russia. If Putin is only interested in popularity in Russia as a strongman than this could be devastating to his reputation (lead to more internal strife). That's why an invasion is too much of a risk for Putin's rule.
-
20 minutes ago, VladimirTarasov said:
Remember once Russia gains air dominance its largely game over.
The prospect of Russian air dominance in Ukraine is highly optimistic considering that during the Russian Invasion of Georgia the Russians lost 7 aircraft (one Tu-22M3 long-range bomber, one Su-24M Fencer fighter-bomber, one Su-24MR Fencer E reconnaissance plane and four Su-25 attack planes) in less that 5 days of fighting. This was against Georgia, a country of only 2 million and no grand systems of aerospace defence with no foreign support.
Furthermore, the Ukrainian government has put the modernization and procurement of long-range radars and air defence and missle defence systems at an absolute priority.
-
Also I completely forgot about the Russian Sprut-CDM-1 I think it could be a great addition for a expansion (although serial production begins in 2018, and the game is set in 2017).
Note the RWS and the Commander's thermal imager.
-
A map in Black Sea like the one featured in Shock Force could be more fleshed once the story develops with more modules. These modules could include more campaigns to complicate the story, and more nationalities could lead to a more in-depth explanation of the conflict on the geopolitical scale.
Russian army under equipped?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
There is nothing defensive about conquering land, mate.
Maybe you don't hold prejudice but it's difficult to say the same for your government.