Author Topic: Did your media mention this?  (Read 2251 times)

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #45 on: March 26, 2003, 09:59:03 PM »
i kinda have a huge dislike thing going for the chappelle show...
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline Ike 2K#

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1739
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #46 on: March 26, 2003, 10:06:33 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
How do you scrap a nuclear warhead? There is no safe way to destroy one- I'm pretty sure both nations are removing the warheads and simply storing them. The rockets themselves are what gets destroyed. If ya can't deliver 'em, they are useless.
-SW


here is the simple fix. the russ only dismantle older ICBMs that carries only 1 or 2 warheads per each rocket. When they dismantle older rockets, they will put those warheads in SS-18 or SS-20 rockets. Today, they have fewer rockets but they have 20 or 30 warheads at each rocket.

Offline udet

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2242
      • http://www.angelfire.com/nd/mihaipruna/dogfight.html
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #47 on: March 26, 2003, 10:10:13 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Do not bring your hate/bigotry to this board.


ok, I don't want to get banned, so I'll stop :p

Offline Ike 2K#

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1739
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #48 on: March 26, 2003, 10:12:30 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by udet
Boroda-face it, Russia is just a 3rd rate power. Nobody cares what your officials say anymore. The cold war is over, and the good guys won. :p


I saw Vladimir Putin do his speech on "ORBITA" network in my friend's house (3-20-03) and my friend translated to me that putin is condemning the allied forces.

Offline AKS\/\/ulfe

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4287
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #49 on: March 26, 2003, 10:14:41 PM »
Thank you for the info Ike.
-SW

Offline Ike 2K#

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1739
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #50 on: March 26, 2003, 10:20:01 PM »
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"precison weapons" that already have hit neighbouring countries and blow up buses with refugees?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yesssssss!!!!:D (a russian ARMs dealer firm says), "OUR GPS/GLONASS JAMMER WORKS." "Its time to deliver this systems to North Korea after the imperialists finishes the job in IRAQ!"  


*note that GLONASS is the soviet version of NAVSTAR satelite to run its GPS system. GLONASS has only a life expectancy of 2 years.

Offline Ike 2K#

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1739
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #51 on: March 26, 2003, 10:32:36 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by funkedup
Skuzzy

I'm not sure Boroda believes everything he says or reads.  I think some of the stuff he just posts to test it.  If you post an idea here it WILL get tested.  :)

I should also apologize to Boroda for comments about Soviet troops in Berlin.  I read Cornelius Ryan's book on this battle and it's obvious that Soviet troops fought hard and bravely to capture the capital of the enemy.


I feel kinda bad on what happened in 1990-1991 because the soviets fought really really hard and 27 million was lost and only to be traded with 5 million deutchmarks if they left berlin. Gorbachev needed these deutchmarks for reconstrunction in the dilapidated USSR.

Offline akak

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 986
      • http://www.479thraiders.com
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #52 on: March 27, 2003, 12:11:47 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda

Our Strategic Rocket corps are the only reason we are not bombet yet.




You guys still have rockets?  I thought you guys sold them all to buy heating oil for the winter.  


ack-ack

Offline akak

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 986
      • http://www.479thraiders.com
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #53 on: March 27, 2003, 12:21:08 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda

  About POWs - Iraq showed that American POWs are kept in good conditions and recieve medical treatment. Americans just show some people wearing moustache in civilian clothes standing in rows.



Tell that to the families of those dead Americans that were shown on that video.  In case you didn't notice, those bullet holes to the forehead weren't from combat but close in shots, execution style.  If you think those P.O.W.s are not being beaten or  tortured, you are seriously deluding yourself.  Why else has Iraq so far refused the Red Cross access?

You might also want to tell that to the P.O.Ws from the last war, with the torture and beatings they had to endure, including the multiple rapes of the female P.O.Ws.

Quote
I don't blame anyone, war is war, it's just the same thing we did in Chechnya.


Not quite.  I don't recall seeing videos of any U.S. planes intentionally targeting civilian populations or of roving bands of drunken soldiers looting and murdering innocent civilians.  Whether you believe it or not, the US military is taking terrible pains to minimize any civilian casualties.  For the amount of bombing and ordinance dropped in and around Baghdad, it's a miracle that less than 300 Iraqi civilians have lost their lives.  Of course, if it was the Russians prosecuting this war, they would have just leveled Baghdad to rubble, just like they did Grozny.

Quote
There is no such economical benefit that isn't vital to your people and OTOH can excuse argession against souverign nation.


And I don't see any economical benefit for the Russians to sell arms to the Iraqis in clear violation of UN sanctions.


Ack-Ack
« Last Edit: March 27, 2003, 12:37:04 AM by akak »

Offline Glasses

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1811
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #54 on: March 27, 2003, 12:35:49 AM »
Of course not Mother Russias Communist Regime never did such things Comrrade Boroda is always right. :rolleyes:

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #55 on: March 27, 2003, 12:40:33 AM »
comrade boroda is a fisherman.

methinks he needs a bigger boat.
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #56 on: March 27, 2003, 12:45:13 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Wlfgng
not only that.. what the heck does the US taking out Saddam have to do with Russia's economy unless it's because it'll stifle the sale of illegal weapons/technology to Iraq?

 be careful what you wish for...



This is what the Russians will lose when Saddam and his cronies get removed from power

Quote
Russia
According to the CIA World Factbook, Russia controls roughly 5.8 percent of Iraq’s annual imports. Under the U.N. oil-for-food program, Russia’s total trade with Iraq was somewhere between $530 million and $1 billion for the six months ending in December of 2001.
According to the Russian Ambassador to Iraq, Vladimir Titorenko, new contracts worth another $200 million under the U.N. oil-for-food program are to be signed over the next three months.
Soviet-era debt of $7 billion through $8 billion was generated by arms sales to Iraq during the 1980–1988 Iran–Iraq war.
Russia’s LUKoil negotiated a $4 billion, 23-year contract in 1997 to rehabilitate the 15 billion-barrel West Qurna field in southern Iraq. Work on the oil field was expected to commence upon cancellation of U.N. sanctions on Iraq. The deal is currently on hold.
In October 2001, Salvneft, a Russian–Belarus company, negotiated a $52 million service contract to drill at the Tuba field in Southern Iraq.
In April 2001, Russia’s Zaruezhneft company received a service contract to drill in the Saddam, Kirkuk, and Bai Hassan fields to rehabilitate the fields and reduce water incursion.
A future $40 billion Iraqi–Russian economic agreement, reportedly signed in 2002, would allow for extensive oil exploration opportunities throughout western Iraq. The proposal calls for 67 new projects, over a 10-year time frame, to explore and further develop fields in southern Iraq and the Western Desert, including the Suba, Luhais, West Qurna, and Rumaila projects. Additional projects added to the deal include second-phase construction of a pipeline running from southern to northern Iraq, and extensive drilling and gas projects. Work on these projects would commence upon cancellation of sanctions.
Russia’s Gazprom company over the past few years has signed contracts worth $18 million to repair gas stations in Iraq.
The former Soviet Union was the premier supplier of Iraqi arms. From 1981 to 2001, Russia supplied Iraq with 50 percent of its arms.



Ack-Ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #57 on: March 27, 2003, 01:19:22 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Boroda
About civilian casualities - US troops may really want to avoid them, but so far they fail. How can anyone speak about "precison weapons" that already have hit neighbouring countries and blow up buses with refugees?... :(  About POWs - Iraq showed that American POWs are kept in good conditions and recieve medical treatment. Americans just show some people wearing moustache in civilian clothes standing in rows.


Well, it's obviously working better than in Grozny where russians leveled the place and caused even more enemies :>

I doubt russia could do it better if it wanted to.


But then again I don't like that chimp at the white house either..

I find it hard to believe that even without nukes, US would have ever attacked russia after the WWII.
Simply too big for the taste of superpowers, they like to fight in smaller countries.
Neither do I believe that CCCP was such a threat for US like they've advertised in the past.

However for Finland, which is one of those small countries, it could been otherwise with CCCP behind the border.
Like we all know about 1939, when CCCP invaded Finland with made up excuses.
(just like US made up excuses to attack iraq... however with much better excuse I must say :>)

Offline --am--

  • Parolee
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 156
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #58 on: March 27, 2003, 01:38:11 AM »
March 25, 2003, 1230hrs MSK (GMT +3), Moscow - As of the morning March 25 the situation on Iraqi fronts remains quiet. Both sides are actively preparing for future engagements. Exhausted in combat the US 3rd Motorized Infantry Division is now being reinforced with fresh units from Kuwait (presumably with up to 1 Marine brigade and 1 tank brigade from the 1st Armored Division (all coming from the coalition command reserves) and elements of the British 7th Tank Brigade from the area of Umm Qasr. The troops have a stringent requirement to regroup and, after conducting additional reconnaissance, to capture An-Nasiriya within two days.

The Iraqis have reinforced the An-Nasiriya garrison with several artillery battalions and a large number of anti-tank weapons. Additionally, the Iraqis are actively deploying landmines along the approaches to their positions.

However, currently all combat has nearly ceased due to the sand storm raging over the region. Weather forecasts anticipate the storm's end by noon of March 26. According to intercepted radio communications the coalition advance will be tied to the end of the sand storm and is planned to take place during the night of March 26-27. The coalition command believes that a night attack will allow its forces to achieve the element of surprise and to use its advantage in specialized night fighting equipment.

There have been no reports of any losses resulting from direct combat in the past 10 hours. However, there is information about two coalition combat vehicles destroyed by landmines. Three US soldiers were wounded in one of these incidents.

Positional warfare continues near Basra. The coalition forces in this area are clearly insufficient for continuing the attack and the main emphasis is being placed on artillery and aviation. The city is under constant bombardment but so far this had little impact on the combat readiness of the Iraqi units. Thus, last night an Iraqi battalion reinforced with tanks swung around the coalition positions in the area of Basra airport and attacked the coalition forces in the flanks. As the result of this attack the US forces have been thrown back 1.5-2 kilometers leaving the airport and the nearby structures in the hands of the Iraqis. Two APCs and one tank were destroyed in this encounter. According to radio intelligence at least two US soldiers were killed and no less than six US soldiers were wounded.

The coalition forces are still unable to completely capture the small town of Umm Qasr. By the end of yesterday coalition units were controlling only the strategic roads going through the town, but fierce fighting continued in the residential districts. At least two British servicemen were killed by sniper fire in Umm Qasr during the past 24 hours.

The coalition command is extremely concerned with growing resistance movement in the rear of the advancing forces. During a meeting at the coalition command headquarters it was reported that up to 20 Iraqi reconnaissance units are active behind the coalition rear. The Iraqis attack lightly armed supply units; they deploy landmines and conduct reconnaissance. Additionally, captured villages have active armed resistance that is conducting reconnaissance in the interests of the Iraqi command and is organizing attacks against coalition troops. During the past 24 hours more than 30 coalition wheeled and armored vehicles have been lost to such attacks. Some 7 coalition servicemen are missing, 3 soldiers are dead and 10 are wounded.

The coalition commander Gen. Tommy Franks ordered his forces to clear coalition rears from Iraqi diversionary units and partisans in the shortest possible time. The British side will be responsible for fulfilling these orders. A unit from the 22nd SAS regiment supported by the US 1st, 5th and 10th Special Operations Groups will carry out this operation. Each of these groups has up to 12 units numbering 12-15 troops each. All of these units have some Asian or Arabic Americans. The groups also have guides and translators from among local Iraqi collaborators, who went through rapid training at specialized centers in the Czech Republic and in the UK.

The sand storms turned out to be the main enemy of the American military equipment. Just the 3rd Motorized Infantry Division had more than 100 vehicles disabled. This is causing serious concern on the part of the coalition command. The repair crews are working around the clock to return all the disabled equipment back into service. The M1A2 Abrams tanks are not known for the their reliable engines as it is, but in the sand storm conditions multiple breakdowns became a real problem for the tank crews.

All attempts by the US paratroopers to capture the town of Kirkuk have yielded no result. The Americans counted on the support of the Kurds but the latter refused to take a direct part in the attack and demanded guarantees from the US command that it will prevent a Turkish invasion. The Turkish themselves are avoiding making any promises.

Additionally, the situation [at Kirkuk] is affected by the lack of heavy weapons on the part of the US paratroopers. The aviation support alone is clearly not sufficient. The northern group of forces commander Marine Brig. Gen. Osman has requested artillery and armored vehicles.

All indications are that so far the US is unable to form a combat-capable strike force in this area.

According to satellite reconnaissance it seems likely that the Iraqis had time to remove the captured Apache Longbow attack helicopter of the 11th Aviation Regiment. The pieces remaining at the landing site following a US bombing strike indicate that the bombs hit a crudely constructed mockup.

Aerial bombardment of Baghdad has so far failed to produce the expected results. All targets designated before the war have been hit 3 to 7 times, but this had almost no effect on the combat readiness of the Iraqi army, their air defenses or the command and control structures.

It seems that during preparation for the war the Iraqis were able to create new, well-protected communication lines and control centers. There is plenty of intelligence information indicating that so far the US electronic reconnaissance was unable to locate and to penetrate the Iraqi command's communication network, which is an indication of the network's high technological sophistication.

A particular point of concern for the US command is the huge overuse of precision-guided munitions and cruise missiles. Already the supply of heavy cruise missiles like the "Tomahawk" has been reduced by a third and, at the current rate of use, in three weeks the US will be left only with the untouchable strategic supply of these missiles. A similar situation exists with other types of precision-guided munitions. "The rate of their use is incompatible with the obtained results. We are literally dropping gold into the mud!" said Gen. Richard Mayers during a meeting in Pentagon yesterday morning. [reverse translation from Russian]

The US experts already call this war a "crisis". "It was enough for the enemy to show a little resistance and some creative thinking as our technological superiority begun to quickly lose all its meaning. Our expenses are not justified by the obtained results. The enemy is using an order of magnitude cheaper weapons to reach the same goals for which we spend billions on technological whims of the defense industry!" said Gen. Stanley McCrystal during the same Pentagon meeting. [reverse translation from Russian]

Since the early morning today the coalition high command and the Joint Chiefs of Staff are in an online conference joined by the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. This meeting immediately follows an earlier meeting last night at the White House. During the night meeting with President Bush emergency actions were outlined to resolve the standstill in Iraq. The existing course of actions is viewed as "ineffective and leading to a crisis". The Secretary of State Collin Powell warned that, if the war in Iraq continues for more than a month, it might lead to unpredictable consequences in international politics.

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Richard Mayers reported on the proposed actions and corrections to the plan of the operation in Iraq. George Bush demanded that the military breaks the standstill in Iraq and within a week achieves significant military progress. A particular attention, according to Bush, should be paid to finding and eliminating the top Iraqi political and military leadership. Bush believes that Saddam Hussein and his closest aides are the cornerstone of the Iraqi defense.

During today's online meeting at the coalition headquarters Gen. Franks was criticized for inefficient command of his troops and for his inability to concentrate available forces on the main tasks.

According to [Russian military] intelligence Pentagon made a decision to significantly reinforce the coalition. During the next two weeks up to 50,000 troops and no less than 500 tanks will arrive to the combat area from the US military bases in Germany and Albania. By the end of April 120,000 more troops and up to 1,200 additional tanks will be sent to support the war against Iraq.

A decision was made to change the way aviation is used in this war. The use of precision-guided munitions will be scaled down and these weapons will be reserved for attacking only known, confirmed targets. There will be an increase in the use of conventional high-yield aviation bombs, volume-detonation bombs and incendiary munitions. The USAF command is ordered to deliver to airbases used against Iraq a two-week supply of aviation bombs of 1-tonn caliber and higher as well as volume-detonation and incendiary bombs. This means that Washington is resorting to the "scorched earth" tactics and carpet-bombing campaign.

(source: iraqwar.ru, 03-25-03, translated by Venik)

Offline --am--

  • Parolee
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 156
Did your media mention this?
« Reply #59 on: March 27, 2003, 01:38:51 AM »
March 26, 2003, 1230hrs MSK (GMT +3), Moscow - As of the morning March 26 fierce battles have resumed in Iraq along the entire front. As was previously expected the sand storm has halted the advance of the coalition forces. Additionally, the coalition troops were in serious need of rest, resupply and reinforcement.

For much of the day unfavorable weather paralyzed combat activities of one of the main attack groups of the coalition - the 101st Airborne Division, which was forced to completely curtail all of its combat operations. Combat readiness of this division is of strategic importance to the entire coalition force primarily due to the fact that the division operates 290 helicopters of various types, including the 72 Apache attack helicopters. The 101st Airborne Division along with the 82nd Airborne Division and the 3rd Infantry Division (Mechanized) forms the backbone of the XVIII Airborne Corps - the main strike force of the coalition.

In essence, the 101st Airborne Division provides suppression of the enemy while simultaneously conducting aerial reconnaissance and suppression of any newly-discovered enemy forces. It maintain constant contact with the enemy and contains the enemy until the main forces arrive.

Currently the coalition's main forces are conducting combat operations along the approaches to the towns of Karabela and An-Najaf.

During the past 24 hours the coalition units in these areas sustained 4 killed and up to 10 wounded. All indications are that one coalition special operations helicopter was lost and no communication with the helicopter could be established. The faith of its crew and the troops it carried is still being investigated. Another two coalition helicopters made emergency landings in areas controlled by friendly forces. Aircraft engines were found to be extremely susceptible to the effects of sand.

As was determined by our [GRU] intelligence even before the start of combat operations, the primary goal of the coalition command was an energetic advance across the desert along the right bank of the Euphrates river, reaching the central Iraq with a further thrust toward Baghdad through Karabela. Another strategic attack was to go around Basra through An-Nasiriya toward Al-Ammara followed by a full isolation of the southern [Iraqi] forces, effectively splitting Iraq in half.

The first part of the plan - a march across the desert toward Karabela - was achieved, albeit with serious delays. The second part of the plan in essence has failed. Up to this moment the coalition troops were unable to punch through the Iraqi defenses near An-Nasiriya and to force the Iraqis toward Al-Ammara, which would have allowed the coalition to clear the way to Baghdad along the strategically important Mesopotamian river valley with Tigris and Euphrates covering the flanks of the advancing forces. So far only a few coalition units were able to get to the left bank of the Euphrates, where they are trying to widen their staging areas.

Additionally, the prolonged fighting near An-Nasiriya allowed the Iraqis to withdraw most of their forces from Basra region and to avoid being surrounded.

Currently the coalition forces are trying to get across the river near An-Najaf and Karabela, where, all indications are, heavy combat will continue during the next two days.

Harsh criticism from the top US military leadership and pressure from Washington forced the coalition command to resort to more energetic actions. In addition to that the shock of the first days of war among the coalition troops, when they expected an easy trek across Iraq but encountered stiff resistance, is now wearing off. They are now being "absorbed" into the war. Now the coalition actions are becoming more coherent and adequate. The coalition command is gradually taking the initiative away from the Iraqis, which is in part due to the reliance of the Iraqi command on inflexible defensive tactics.

Now the main tactical move of the US troops is to use their aerial and ground reconnaissance forces to test the Iraqi defenses, to open them up and, without entering direct close combat, to deliver maximum damage using artillery and ground attack aircraft. The coalition has finally stopped pointlessly moving around in convoys, as was characteristic of the first three days of the ground war.

The tactics allowed for increased combat effectiveness and considerably increased losses of the Iraqi side. Due to such attacks by the coalition during the previous night and today's early morning the Iraqis have lost 250 troops killed and up to 500 wounded. Up to 10 Iraqi tanks were destroyed and up to three Iraqi artillery batteries were suppressed.

However, despite of the increased combat effectiveness, the coalition forces have so far failed to capture a single sizable town in Iraq. Only by the end of the sixth day the British marine infantry was able to establish tentative control over the tiny town of Umm Qasr. During the hours of darkness all movement around the town is stopped and the occupying troops withdraw to defensive positions. Constant exchanges of fire take place throughout the town. Out of more than 1,500-strong local garrison the British managed to capture only 150 Iraqis. The rest has either withdrew toward Basra or changed into civilian clothes and resorted to partisan actions.

Near Basra the British forces in essence are laying a Middle Ages-style siege of a city with the population of two million. Artillery fire has destroyed most of the city's life-supporting infrastructure and artillery is used continuously against the positions of the defending units. The main goal of the British is two maintain a strict blockade of Basra. Their command is confident that the situation in the city can be destabilized and lack of food, electricity and water will prompt the local population to cause the surrender of the defending forces. Analysts point out that capture of Basra is viewed by the coalition command as being exceptionally important and as a model for the future "bloodless" takeover of Baghdad.

So far, however, this approach does not work and the city's garrison is actively defending its territory. Just during the past night at least three British soldiers were killed and eight more were wounded in the exchange of fire [near Basra].

It is difficult not to not to notice the extremely overstretched frontline of the coalition. This frontline is stretching toward Baghdad through An-Najaf and Karabela and its right flank goes all the way along the Euphrates and is completely exposed. All main supply and communication lines of the coalition are going through unprotected desert. Already the supply routes are stretching for more than 350 kilometers and are used to deliver 800 tonnes of fuel and up to 1,000 tonnes of ammunition, food and other supplies daily to the advancing forces.

If the Iraqis deliver a decisive strike at the base of this front, the coalition will find itself in a very difficult situation, with its main forces, cutoff from the resupply units, losing their combat readiness and mobility and falling an easy pray to the Iraqis.

It is possible that the Americans are relying on the power of their aviation that should prevent any such developments. It is also possible that this kind of self confidence may be very dangerous.

Massive numbers of disabled combat vehicles and other equipment becomes a strategic problem for the coalition. Already, radio intercepts indicate, all available repair units have been deployed to the front. Over 60% of all available spare parts have been already used and emergency additional supplies are being requested.

The sand is literally "eating up" the equipment. Sand has a particularly serious effect on electronics and transmissions of combat vehicles. Already more than 40 tanks and up to 69 armored personnel carriers have been disabled due to damaged engines; more than 150 armored vehicles have lost the use of their heat-seeking targeting sights and night vision equipment. Fine dust gets into all openings and clogs up all moving parts.

The coalition command has effectively acknowledged its defeat in the information war with the strikes against the television center in Baghdad and now further strikes should be expected against television and ground satellite transmitters. The coalition is attempting to leave the Iraqis without information in order to demoralize them.

The extreme length of the resupply routes and the actions of the Iraqi reconnaissance units have created a new problem: the coalition command is forced to admit that it has no information about the conditions on the roads. Currently, as intercepted radio communications show, the coalition command is trying to establish the whereabouts of more than 500 of its troops that fell behind their units, departed with resupply convoys or were carrying out individual assignments. So far it was not possible to establish how many of these troops are dead, captured or have successfully reached other units.