Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Yeager on August 20, 2008, 01:36:46 PM
-
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92M5GM81&show_article=1
and I quote:
"When you threaten Poland, you perhaps forget that it is not 1988," Rice said. "It's 2008 and the United States has a ... firm treaty guarantee to defend Poland's territory as if it was the territory of the United States. So it's probably not wise to throw these threats around."
=====
I must have missed the part where we signed a mutual defense treaty with Poland. I suppose we have one with Ukraine and all those other ex soviet states as well.
Crap, no wonder Russia, a compulsively paranoid nation (rightfully so) is even more paranoid.
Im not so sure I like this.
-
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92M5GM81&show_article=1
and I quote:
"When you threaten Poland, you perhaps forget that it is not 1988," Rice said. "It's 2008 and the United States has a ... firm treaty guarantee to defend Poland's territory as if it was the territory of the United States. So it's probably not wise to throw these threats around."
=====
I must have missed the part where we signed a mutual defense treaty with Poland. I suppose we have one with Ukraine and all those other ex soviet states as well.
Crap, no wonder Russia, a compulsively paranoid nation (rightfully so) is even more paranoid.
Im not so sure I like this.
Some of that might have been said to make the Poles' feel better about signing...And to help get other countries' to sign as well. The question that's at the top of my mind now is this: If we have to back up one of these treaties with military force, What is that gonna entail for things' like the "war on terror"? If we have to move immediately, will we have to abandon some of our other commitments' to meet treaty obligations?
-
What is that gonna entail for things' like the "war on terror"? If we have to move immediately, will we have to abandon some of our other commitments' to meet treaty obligations?
By this time, we're all fluffied anyways.
-
Uh Poland joined NATO several years ago. The US is obligated by the NATO treaty to defend any and all countries that are members.
So.....if Russia attacks Poland, it isn't just the US that is coming to the fight, it's a NATO operation/obligation to defend Poland.
-
Russia and Syria are rekindling their old relationship.......
"A closer alliance with a resurgent Russia, flush with petro-dollars, could afford Mr al-Assad a way out of any binding commitment. Some Israeli analysts even fear it could encourage Syria to try to take back the Golan Heights, captured by Israel in 1967, by force."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article4573599.ece
Its an intersting article.......
"The conflict in Georgia has already sparked a mocking speech by Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, over the performance of Israeli-trained Georgian forces. One of the main Israeli military advisers there was reserve Brigadier-General Gal Hirsch, who commanded a division in Israel’s inconclusive war with Hezbollah in 2006 and later resigned his commission.
-
Uh Poland joined NATO several years ago. The US is obligated by the NATO treaty to defend any and all countries that are members.
So.....if Russia attacks Poland, it isn't just the US that is coming to the fight, it's a NATO operation/obligation to defend Poland.
Geeze...who invited Poland into NATO and why?
So it looks like NATO wants to encirlce Russian borders with NATO member countries then? No wonder the russians are pissed........I sure as hell hope we have our strategic nuclear forces in top shape. Cold war looks to be on.
-
Keep poking the bear I am sure he won't mind. :rofl
Russia warns of response beyond diplomacy to missile shield in Poland
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
MOSCOW - Russia is again lashing out at a deal signed by the United States and Poland to place a missile defence facility in the former Soviet ally.
Russia's Foreign Ministry says the U.S. missile shield plans are clearly aimed at weakening Russia.
It says Moscow's response to any development beyond the current plans will go beyond diplomacy.
The ministry's statement Wednesday was not as stark as the warning from a Russian general last week that Poland is risking a Russian attack, possibly even a nuclear weapons, by agreeing to host American interceptors.
But it came amid severe tension between Russia and the U.S. over the war in Georgia.
-
They weren't invited, they requested to join. A majority vote by member nations approved their application and presto, Poland is part of NATO. Same thing with Ukraine and Georgia. No one went and asked them if they wanted in, both of those countries have requested to join. Countries that request to join NATO first have to demonstrate that their military and government can effectively cooperate with NATO and be able to live up the the treaty obligations. Poland was able to demostrate this so they were let in.
You got one thing right though, Russia is pissed because all it's formaer WARSAW Pact buddies that they ran into the ground during the cold war are telling them to take a flying leap.
-
Geeze...who invited Poland into NATO and why?
So why did Poland join NATO?
I guess there's no joke there.
-
I would like to see Russia try this Georgia poop with Poland. Really.
-
That would get ugly fast.
-
That would get ugly fast.
Yeah it would. In a way, it's kinda getting ugly now.
-
Geeze...who invited Poland into NATO and why?
So it looks like NATO wants to encirlce Russian borders with NATO member countries then? No wonder the russians are pissed........I sure as hell hope we have our strategic nuclear forces in top shape. Cold war looks to be on.
I'd back a Treaty with Poland without reservation.
Brave bastards, fought the Russians and the Germans with everything they had... and continued fighting as exceptional expat forces with the brits all through WWII. Thier thanks was to be royally screwed by the west at the end of WWII. They've more than earned our support without hesitation or reservation.
-
somehow it reminds me at the Cuban Missile Crisis confrontation, the moment in which the Cold War came closest to a nuclear war. Cuba were prepared to use battlefield nuclear weapons to defend the island if it was invaded.
But this time its just at the Russian Border...
-
The tension is heading in that direction, but the reasons aren't even close to the Cuban Missile Crisis. We aren't secretly basing tactical nuclear tipped missles in Poland. We're openly installing an anti ballistic missle system that not only protects most of Europe, but Moscow as well from threats to the south (Iran). Our interceptors don't even have an explosive warhead. They use a kinetic energy kill vehicle that is designed to destroy an incoming warhead by running into the thing and smashing it to pieces.
Poland is also getting Patriot IV missile systems as well for defense against tactical missile systems (Russia).
Again Russia is just pissed because all the countires they controled back when they ran the USSR, are seeking entrance into NATO for protection from Russia. Guess 50 some odd years of being trampled on by mother Russia was enough for most of them and they are doing what they have to do to make sure it never happens again. Seeing what has been going on in Georgia is only reinforcing those beliefs. Not to mention hearing a Russian General Officer going on TV and saying that an attack against Poland is likely and that there could be a nuclear element involved, doesn't help matters either.
The boys in Moscow need to take a real hard look at Putin. They've made some real progress in joining the world community over the years and Putin is trying real hard to toss it all away. Only this time the big bad bear, doesn't have the claws and teeth it once did. Rattling the nuclear saber this early in the game proves that beyond a doubt.
Russia has absolutely nothing to gain by taking this line, but they sure do have allot to loose, and I'm not talking about Putin and his cronies, I'm talking about the Russian people in general. They really need to wake up to what their "leader" is doing.
-
I'd back a Treaty with Poland without reservation.
Brave bastards, fought the Russians and the Germans with everything they had... and continued fighting as exceptional expat forces with the brits all through WWII. Thier thanks was to be royally screwed by the west at the end of WWII. They've more than earned our support without hesitation or reservation.
Amen Hangtime. You saved me typing pretty much everything you posted.
-
Keep poking the bear I am sure he won't mind. :rofl
It's all just so much screaming, yelling and waving of arms by the Russians. They have missiles that can defeat the ABM missiles anyways.
-
somehow it reminds me at the Cuban Missile Crisis confrontation, the moment in which the Cold War came closest to a nuclear war. Cuba were prepared to use battlefield nuclear weapons to defend the island if it was invaded.
But this time its just at the Russian Border...
Using battlefield nukes (also called tactical nukes) on their own soil would have been disastrous not only for the invaders, but also for Cuba.
-
russia is walking on thin ice, and they hear it cracking, and they are scared.
-
I don't think Russia would be stupid enough to launch any ICBMs due to Mutual assured destruction
-
I don't think Russia would be stupid enough to launch any ICBMs due to Mutual assured destruction
They are.
-
They are.
Russia is so big they feel as they can take everything and still survive.
-
None of those missiles we are putting in Poland will stop T-80's and BMP's, Russia obviously is aware of that
-
Time to stock up on water, purifier tablets, canned goods, camping gear, and ammunition.
-
I remember this guy from my teenage years. Disappeared pretty quickly...but was some sort of hero, I guess.
(http://uzar.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/walesa.jpeg)
-
None of those missiles we are putting in Poland will stop T-80's and BMP's, Russia obviously is aware of that
No but a bunch of Leopard II's M1A1's and Challenger's will when you top those off with a couple hundred JSOW's, JDAM's, and Hellfires from the NATO air forces. Tank plinking form 30,000ft is nothing for our boys these days.
-
No but a bunch of Leopard II's M1A1's and Challenger's will when you top those off with a couple hundred JSOW's, JDAM's, and Hellfires from the NATO air forces. Tank plinking form 30,000ft is nothing for our boys these days.
True enough, but it's looking like WE (mebbe Britain) are the only NATO member who would lift a finger if it actually came to defending Poland. (What's the smallest satellite-guided bomb made? and how many of the can be fit to a B2, and how fast can ground targets (afore-mentioned T-80's) be identified and targeted by said bombs?)
-
True enough, but it's looking like WE (mebbe Britain) are the only NATO member who would lift a finger if it actually came to defending Poland. (What's the smallest satellite-guided bomb made? and how many of the can be fit to a B2, and how fast can ground targets (afore-mentioned T-80's) be identified and targeted by said bombs?)
Being a NATO member, Poland can (and should) expect help from the other member nations. It would take time to move forces in-country, but it's easier to do when it's mainly over land.
I'm more worried about our lack of response over Georgia. It may have given Putin the notion that we will try the same thing in any kind of invasion of Poland-some kind of "stern" diplomacy and humanitarian aid. I hope that we would honor our treaty commitments' as they are written, though.
-
Being a NATO member, Poland can (and should) expect help from the other member nations. It would take time to move forces in-country, but it's easier to do when it's mainly over land.
I'm more worried about our lack of response over Georgia. It may have given Putin the notion that we will try the same thing in any kind of invasion of Poland-some kind of "stern" diplomacy and humanitarian aid. I hope that we would honor our treaty commitments' as they are written, though.
Russia made a BIG stink before the NATO meeting in Brussels in April, and mindful of where western Europe's oil comes from, Georgia was voted down as a new member....hence, nothing but lip service from NATO on current goings-on. ...a bit more from us, but obviously our country won't get behind military intervention. Even if Europe WANTED to do something, it doesn't spend any frikkin money on its military for Georgia. If Russia started knocking off every former satellite country today, could western Europe alone stop her, and WOULD they even try? I doubt it :frown:
-
True enough, but it's looking like WE (mebbe Britain) are the only NATO member who would lift a finger if it actually came to defending Poland. (What's the smallest satellite-guided bomb made? and how many of the can be fit to a B2, and how fast can ground targets (afore-mentioned T-80's) be identified and targeted by said bombs?)
The B-2 has a payload upwards of 20 tons, and can carry SDBs. It's in the 250 pound class. They can strike in a radius of 80 miles, and attack targets well behind the bomber. With good intel, you could theoretically hit 120 or more targets simultaneously with 1 bomber. 1 B-2 with SDBs vs City = stone-age, with no nuclear fallout.
Attacking tanks with it is silly though. You don't send a battleship to take out a dinghy. A single F-16 with a couple JSOWs can basically annihilate a battalion of enemy tanks from 50 miles out in a divetoss release.
-
USAF vs russian armor= russian scrap metal.
-
Vlad's days are numbered.
-
Russia has announced that they plan to withdraw their military from NATO.
-
Putin is a putz, but he is not stupid. He has about 5 or 6 scenarios already scripted out and will react to the actions of the US and NATO. HE knows he cannot take on NATO head-to-head, plus it does not gain him anything to do that. Russia can become a global economical power if they play their cards right. They still have a lot of internal issues and need to fix those before they come out and play with the big boys. They will push and prod, but they wont be looking for a true adversary to fight.
Russia military leaders, they remind me of a 16 years old bully in a elementary school playground.
As far a the country Russia is concerned, remember that the actions of a country's government is not necessarily the will of it's people.
Sort of like our country, the United States.
-
Petrol = sovereignty, right? erm..
-
Putin is a putz, but he is not stupid. He has about 5 or 6 scenarios already scripted out and will react to the actions of the US and NATO. HE knows he cannot take on NATO head-to-head, plus it does not gain him anything to do that. Russia can become a global economical power if they play their cards right. They still have a lot of internal issues and need to fix those before they come out and play with the big boys. They will push and prod, but they wont be looking for a true adversary to fight.
Russia military leaders, they remind me of a 16 years old bully in a elementary school playground.
As far a the country Russia is concerned, remember that the actions of a country's government is not necessarily the will of it's people.
Sort of like our country, the United States.
So far, he's been batting 1000. How this country's people will feel about another foreign war, with Iraq/Afghanistan still going on, will be a determining factor in how we respond. Approval ratings' near election time tend to occupy politicians' minds, and Bush (and the republican party) are still reeling from Iraq. McCain has just started to get ahead of Obama in the Polls, although November is still 2-3 months' away, and I would believe that the party would not want to jeopardize McCains' chances if they could possibly help it. IMO, Putin timed this to play on our elections, as well as putting Europe in a cold sweat over their Energy supply (Maybe some of our European friends' can tell us when winter starts' and it get's cold there?)
I would like to see Bush do the right thing (for a change) and back up our Allies. I haven't seen him do much yet.
-
The likelihood is that first significant opposition the Russians would face in an invasion of NATO countries would be the <edit> Bundeswehr - thanks Motherland</edit>.
God help them (the Russians) if that ever happens. A conscript army against the best tanks and best tankers in the world would not be pretty.
-
The post-WWII German military is called the Bundeswehr. Means federal defence force IIRC.
Doesn't matter as we all know what you're talking about, just thought I'd point it out.
-
<REMOVED - DUPLICATE POST>
-
We should never have asked Poland to let us put the missiles in their country, Everyone knew this would cause issues with Russia. Now that we signed we better back them, But it was a bad idea to start it at all...
-
We should never have asked Poland to let us put the missiles in their country, Everyone knew this would cause issues with Russia. Now that we signed we better back them, But it was a bad idea to start it at all...
Nah......Russia is just blowing smoke over nothing really. Ten ABM missiles would get overwhelmed in an all out Russian nuclear attack. Besides, those missiles in Poland do nothing to protect the US from Russian missiles since any launch towards the US would send the missiles over the North Pole. Russia has missiles that are supposedly capable of evading ABM's anyway.
-
Russia will never attack Poland and thats the end of that. All that will happen is that Russia does what they just now said and will set up a missile shield of their own with Belarus
-
It would take alot to attack Poland. They would have to mass troops and equipment creating a large signature effect that would be quickly spotted. Russia could not hope to invade Poland without air supremicy. Their ground forces would be beaten to a pulp without it.
Georgia was a different situation, russian peace keepers were already in the area and the battle developed over a period of a week or so. An invasion of Poland would have to be an all out assualt to capture as much of Poland as possible b4 NATO could respond. This is just not possible. Any troop build up anywhere near Poland would be counterd b4 an invasion could begin.
-
Russia will never attack Poland and thats the end of that.
I agree, they would never dare to enter Poland. The Poles wouldnt be content by only kicking the Russians out. They would be trailing em back all the way to Moscow.
-
Nah......Russia is just blowing smoke over nothing really. Ten ABM missiles would get overwhelmed in an all out Russian nuclear attack. Besides, those missiles in Poland do nothing to protect the US from Russian missiles since any launch towards the US would send the missiles over the North Pole. Russia has missiles that are supposedly capable of evading ABM's anyway.
Agree that the missiles wont do any harm to Russia, It is the slow advance of Nato into what they think is their sphere of influence with us signing defense pacts with every country that is over there but Russia, It makes the Crazies paranoid
I dont believe that the Missile shield protecting Europe is in our best interest. They have enough power Tech and money over there to do it themselves if needed rather then The US reashiong arross the world and into Russia..
-
I dont believe that the Missile shield protecting Europe is in our best interest. They have enough power Tech and money over there to do it themselves if needed rather then The US reashiong arross the world and into Russia..
The missile shields primary function isn't to protect Europe, it is to protect the US from any future launch from the Middle East. I agree on the second part though, let Europe pay to defend itself.
-
The missiles are not important to Putin. Putin knows our Congress wont allow our military to be used against mother Russia. Our liberals have adored the Russian leaders for DECADES and now that they have shown distaste for military action in the mideast (I mean come on! Murtha claimed defeat from the jaws of victory!) and fully realizes we wont engage him on European soil without an EXIT STRATEGY... on and on...
Our allies are fools for even thinking about joining in treaties with us! We elect and nurture traitors.
-
I agree on the second part though, let Europe pay to defend itself.
Please remove your radar tracking station from RAF Fylingdales, if this is the attitude you are going to take. It's only 50 miles from my house and forms an integral part of the missile defence shield. Let the US find somewhere else to place its defences.
Europe is not some amorphous entity with a common foreign or economic policy. Some countries do pull their weight.
The West needs to pull together - not squabble and quibble amongst themselves.
-
Dowding we have something in this country called 'Libertarians' that would prefer to withdraw to our shores and refuse to do anything in the way of preemptive defense. They have never been and never will be in the majority. They are weak on defense and backbone and almost never vote wisely. We tolerate them just like we tolerate liberals and conservatives like me because we afford freedoms to all people regardless of their beliefs. Eventually I believe we will sack the weaker of our leaders and punch Putin in the nose but even then you will hear people express things like this.
Out 'entitled' crowd are afraid if we spend money on war there will be less for their cell phones and color tvs.
Carry on.
-
Please remove your radar tracking station from RAF Fylingdales, if this is the attitude you are going to take. It's only 50 miles from my house and forms an integral part of the missile defence shield. Let the US find somewhere else to place its defences.
Europe is not some amorphous entity with a common foreign or economic policy. Some countries do pull their weight.
The West needs to pull together - not squabble and quibble amongst themselves.
Dowding even though Britain is technically part of Europe, when I think of Europe I am not usually talking about Britain......if that makes sense.
-
Dowding even though Britain is technically part of Europe, when I think of Europe I am not usually talking about Britain......if that makes sense.
Your starting to sound like the regular racist type of guy, "i hate all blacks, but bubba my neighbour is allright".
-
Your starting to sound like the regular racist type of guy, "i hate all blacks, but bubba my neighbour is allright".
I just don't usually lump Britain in with the rest of the European metrosexuals.......I hope that's ok with you. ;)
-
I just don't usually lump Britain in with the rest of the European metrosexuals.......I hope that's ok with you. ;)
LOL... I hear yah Elfie... them Vikings eat weird stuff, and the Froggies are just... well; wrong headed surrender-monkeys. Oh and don't get me started on dem Luger-Heads... or dose EYE-talians...
Of course, England is different. They're English.
LOL!
-
Of course, England is different. They're English.
And they are on their own separate island. They also speak English but with a really weird accent. ;)
-
LOL... I hear yah Elfie... them Vikings eat weird stuff, and the Froggies are just... well; wrong headed surrender-monkeys. Oh and don't get me started on dem Luger-Heads... or dose EYE-talians...
Of course, England is different. They're English.
LOL!
The Amreekan Traitors have spoketh.
:salute
Hey dudes. Russia.
WMD - Check
Crazy arse leader - Check
Threat to the USA - Check
Gots Oil - Check
Invaded/Occupied a soverign nation - Check
What the shreck are you waiting for big boys. Ah yes, your busy in your Desert Humvee safari, killing civilians.
-
The Amreekan Traitors have spoketh.
:salute
Hey dudes. Russia.
WMD - Check
Crazy arse leader - Check
Threat to the USA - Check
Gots Oil - Check
Invaded/Occupied a soverign nation - Check
What the shreck are you waiting for big boys.
It's best if you direct that question to the White House. Joe American doesn't really know why either.
-
The Amreekan Traitors have spoketh.
:salute
Hey dudes. Russia.
WMD - Check
Crazy arse leader - Check
Threat to the USA - Check
Gots Oil - Check
Invaded/Occupied a soverign nation - Check
What the shreck are you waiting for big boys. Ah yes, your busy in your Desert Humvee safari, killing civilians.
Have you never heard the old saying, "Buisness before pleasure"? :aok
-
Have you never heard the old saying, "Buisness before pleasure"? :aok
Argh. They would both be business.
-
Naw after all the BS we had to put with them as "allies" in WWII and then the cold war....it would be pleasure this time around :devil
-
The Amreekan Traitors have spoketh.
:salute
Hey dudes. Russia.
WMD - Check
Crazy arse leader - Check
Threat to the USA - Check
Gots Oil - Check
Invaded/Occupied a soverign nation - Check
What the shreck are you waiting for big boys. Ah yes, your busy in your Desert Humvee safari, killing civilians.
Patience, all in due time.
-
We gave Saddam months to withdraw from Kuwait. Then we gave him years to comply with his terms of surrender. Should we not be so generous to Russia?
-
your busy in your Desert Humvee safari, killing civilians.
:aok
-
The Amreekan Traitors have spoketh.
:salute
Hey dudes. Russia.
WMD - Check
Crazy arse leader - Check
Threat to the USA - Check
Gots Oil - Check
Invaded/Occupied a soverign nation - Check
What the shreck are you waiting for big boys. Ah yes, your busy in your Desert Humvee safari, killing civilians.
Am I missing something here or did this diddly tard just call our boys civi killers?
-
He's looking at the grey area....holding a weapon they're insurgents and enemy combatants, drop the weapon and they're civilians....that's why our guys need to just kill everyone and be done with it.
-
Am I missing something here or did this mask tard just call our boys civi killers?
Yeah, I saw that too. Maniac, you might want to re-phrase what you said or better yet, delete that post!
-
Yeah, I saw that too. Maniac, you might want to re-phrase what you said or better yet, delete that post!
He's a popsicle if he changes it.
-
Yeah, I saw that too. Maniac, you might want to re-phrase what you said or better yet, delete that post!
Hey dude, ive seen the TV series. :rofl
No point on deleting it, its quoted all over the place.
-
We gave Saddam months to withdraw from Kuwait. Then we gave him years to comply with his terms of surrender. Should we not be so generous to Russia?
Unlike Saddam, they'll just take advantage of it. We turned our back on them since the early '90's, and now we have what is going on today. IMHO it's a mistake to do so.
-
Unlike Saddam, they'll just take advantage of it. We turned our back on them since the early '90's, and now we have what is going on today. IMHO it's a mistake to do so.
Saddam took advantage of it too, he got spanked twice.
Spanking Russia will likely have severe global consequences. Not spanking them will too. I'd rather be damned for doing than damned for not doing.
-
Saddam took advantage of it too, he got spanked twice.
Spanking Russia will likely have severe global consequences. Not spanking them will too. I'd rather be damned for doing than damned for not doing.
I can't see where Iraq between 1991 and 2003 did anything to improve their chances' against another U.S. incursion, was my point. Russia, on the other hand, didn't quit developing weapons' post-Glasnost, like a lot of people thought they would. When trade started to open up, they were able to pick up some new tech, and assimilate it into some of their newer weapons, allowing them to advance under a cloak of what seemingly was friendship.
I don't for one minute pretend it will be a one-sided asskicking ala' GWI and II. But I do believe that we should have stepped in right away, and called Putins' bluff as soon as possible.
-
I don't for one minute pretend it will be a one-sided asskicking ala' GWI and II. But I do believe that we should have stepped in right away, and called Putins' bluff as soon as possible.
I dunno... like Iraq 1 & 2, they have numbers on the ground, plenty of last generation armor. Unlike the Iraqi conflicts, they have a LOT of the best wheeled APC's in the business. They have decent close anti-air capabilities... at least initially. OTOH, Our attack heli's and armament is a generation ahead of theirs.
Where we have an 'edge', we have a big edge... Air Supremacy, and down low; force multipliers like the hellfire and javelins. Stealth. Night vision (in quantity), Communications. Our special teams are very good, as are theirs... but we got more of 'em. Our Arty and counter battery capabilities are second to none. Our ground troops, man for man are worth 10 of theirs in the field.
Given they have the 'home field' advantage, our logistics remain the biggest burden we'd carry... but the 'pipeline' is open, we're already essentially 'in theater' with a damn big assed assortment of regional basing options.
Our achilles heel at this point in time is the Naval picture. With russia's black sea fleet there.. and no US Fleet units to counter them, we're stymied. We need Poti.. logistics demands it, the russians know it.
All things considered, I'd say we could quickly overwhelm what assets they have on the ground in Georgia now, and assuming we can close down the two land routes into georgia, it'd be pretty much over... except for that damn russian fleet out there.. fast re-supply for them, and two ports right off the bat to work in on top of a not insignificant amphib deployment they've already made up in the NW.
If we see an American Task force move into the area... that could be a pretty strong indication of intent. Whadaya figure... coupla weeks before we know?
-
I dunno... like Iraq 1 & 2, they have numbers on the ground, plenty of last generation armor. Unlike the Iraqi conflicts, they have a LOT of the best wheeled APC's in the business. They have decent close anti-air capabilities... at least initially. OTOH, Our attack heli's and armament is a generation ahead of theirs.
Where we have an 'edge', we have a big edge... Air Supremacy, and down low; force multipliers like the hellfire and javelins. Stealth. Night vision (in quantity), Communications. Our special teams are very good, as are theirs... but we got more of 'em. Our Arty and counter battery capabilities are second to none. Our ground troops, man for man are worth 10 of theirs in the field.
Given they have the 'home field' advantage, our logistics remain the biggest burden we'd carry... but the 'pipeline' is open, we're already essentially 'in theater' with a damn big assed assortment of regional basing options.
Our achilles heel at this point in time is the Naval picture. With russia's black sea fleet there.. and no US Fleet units to counter them, we're stymied. We need Poti.. logistics demands it, the russians know it.
All things considered, I'd say we could quickly overwhelm what assets they have on the ground in Georgia now, and assuming we can close down the two land routes into georgia, it'd be pretty much over... except for that damn russian fleet out there.. fast re-supply for them, and two ports right off the bat to work in on top of a not insignificant amphib deployment they've already made up in the NW.
If we see an American Task force move into the area... that could be a pretty strong indication of intent. Whadaya figure... coupla weeks before we know?
It's hard to predict the diplomatic picture at this point. I'd like to say that The White House set's some kinda deadline for hard action, but will it be a week? Two weeks? A month or two? That's the big question IMHO.
I would like to point out that this is a different theatre than the middle east; It's harder to access even than Iraq or Afghanistan. Anything that could get there right now, and get there fast, will have to be airlifted. Also, for a rapid offensive through the desert, we were able to use our technological advantages' such as Laser/Thermal imaging, and High-speed Mechanized units' to their fullest. This campaign would be through Mountainous/Forested terrain. That might negate some of the long-range fights' we saw in the open desert, and the advantages' we enjoyed against Saddam's army technologically. You're right about the Black Sea fleet; If the Turks' even give us permission to get into the damn thing, It's not really an ideal place to put a CVBG. We will have an honest-to-god Naval threat, Not just a couple of missile boats, but Cruisers, Destroyers, Frigates, attack submarines, Cruise missile boats...All backed up by Russian Naval aviation in force. As far as what happens in the air...I'm under the impression that the Russians' sell all of their second-hand crap, and keep the best for themselves. They will have things' like the S-300 missile systems, and the SU-37's, etc. etc. And, their training is probably a lot better than most of the Third world countries' they sell to. I'm not sure what kind of aerial fight we could expect.
One last thing I would like to point out, Hang. To the best of my knowledge, No U.S. soldier has ever directly faced his Russian counterpart in combat. We're not talking about the same guys' that Saddam had to confiscate all of their white underclothing to try to keep them from surrendering as fast. These are the descendants' of those guys' that held tough at places like Leningrad and Stalingrad; That drove the Wehrmacht from the gates' of Moscow, back to the Reichstag in Berlin. I don't know how we could factor in their fighting spirit. They might all be like Boroda, and worship Putins' still-wet turds, for all I know. It's too much of an unknown.
It would definetaly be the toughest fight that this generations' yet to see.
-
Anyone old enough to remember the standoff between Russian and American tanks at Checkpoint Charlie in Berlin 1961? Then the Cuban missile crises.....geeze....finally get to go three for three I guess :confused:
"Ten of these tanks continued to Friedrichstraße, and stopped just 50 to 100 metres (50 to 100 yards) from the Checkpoint Charlie on the Soviet side of the sector boundary. The US tanks turned back towards the checkpoint, stopping an equal distance from it on the American side of the boundary. From 27 October 1961 at 17:00 until 28 October 1961 at about 11:00, the respective troops faced each other. As per standing orders, both groups of tanks were loaded with live munitions. The alert levels of the US Garrison in West Berlin, then NATO, and finally the US Strategic Air Command (SAC) were raised. Both groups of tanks had orders to fire if fired upon."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_ultimatum
-
Mutual defense treaties are what started the war to end all wars. What hogwash did washington push to get americans to send their sons into that meatgrinder? It would be nice for us working americans if we didn't have to pay for the military protection of western europe. Nato is washington's way of weilding influence in Europe. So now that Warsaw, formerly of the Warsaw Pact, is now well within Nato territory, washington needs reasons to justify the existence of Nato.
There was a good book written by retired general Zinny a couple of years ago that was basically about how washington and the pentagon still have not been able to make any real transition from a cold war aparatus.
And now for some Pat Buchanan.
The American people should be eternally grateful to Old Europe for having spiked the Bush-McCain plan to bring Georgia into NATO.
Had Georgia been in NATO when Mikheil Saakashvili invaded South Ossetia, we would be eyeball to eyeball with Russia, facing war in the Caucasus, where Moscow's superiority is as great as U.S. superiority in the Caribbean during the Cuban missile crisis.
If the Russia-Georgia war proves nothing else, it is the insanity of giving erratic hotheads in volatile nations the power to drag the United States into war.
From Harry Truman to Ronald Reagan, as Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, U.S. presidents have sought to avoid shooting wars with Russia, even when the Bear was at its most beastly.
Truman refused to use force to break Stalin's Berlin blockade. Ike refused to intervene when the Butcher of Budapest drowned the Hungarian Revolution in blood. LBJ sat impotent as Leonid Brezhnev's tanks crushed the Prague Spring. Jimmy Carter's response to Brezhnev's invasion of Afghanistan was to boycott the Moscow Olympics. When Brezhnev ordered his Warsaw satraps to crush Solidarity and shot down a South Korean airliner killing scores of U.S. citizens, including a congressman, Reagan did — nothing.
These presidents were not cowards. They simply would not go to war when no vital U.S. interest was at risk to justify a war. Yet, had George W. Bush prevailed and were Georgia in NATO, U.S. Marines could be fighting Russian troops over whose flag should fly over a province of 70,000 South Ossetians who prefer Russians to Georgians.
The arrogant folly of the architects of U.S. post-Cold War policy is today on display. By bringing three ex-Soviet republics into NATO, we have moved the U.S. red line for war from the Elbe almost to within artillery range of the old Leningrad.
Should America admit Ukraine into NATO, Yalta, vacation resort of the czars, will be a NATO port and Sevastopol, traditional home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, will become a naval base for the U.S. Sixth Fleet. This is altogether a bridge too far.
And can we not understand how a Russian patriot like Vladimir Putin would be incensed by this U.S. encirclement after Russia shed its empire and sought our friendship? How would Andy Jackson have reacted to such crowding by the British Empire?
As of 1991, the oil of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan belonged to Moscow.
Can we not understand why Putin would smolder as avaricious Yankees built pipelines to siphon the oil and gas of the Caspian Basin through breakaway Georgia to the West?
For a dozen years, Putin & Co. watched as U.S. agents helped to dump over regimes in Ukraine and Georgia that were friendly to Moscow.
If Cold War II is coming, who started it, if not us?
The swift and decisive action of Putin's army in running the Georgian forces out of South Ossetia in 24 hours after Saakashvili began his barrage and invasion suggests Putin knew exactly what Saakashvili was up to and dropped the hammer on him.
What did we know? Did we know Georgia was about to walk into Putin's trap? Did we not see the Russians lying in wait north of the border? Did we give Saakashvili a green light?
Joe Biden ought to be conducting public hearings on who caused this U.S. humiliation.
The war in Georgia has exposed the dangerous overextension of U.S. power. There is no way America can fight a war with Russia in the Caucasus with our army tied down in Afghanistan and Iraq. Nor should we. Hence, it is demented to be offering, as John McCain and Barack Obama are, NATO membership to Tbilisi.
The United States must decide whether it wants a partner in a flawed Russia or a second Cold War. For if we want another Cold War, we are, by cutting Russia out of the oil of the Caspian and pushing NATO into her face, going about it exactly the right way.
Vladimir Putin is no Stalin. He is a nationalist determined, as ruler of a proud and powerful country, to assert his nation's primacy in its own sphere, just as U.S. presidents from James Monroe to Bush have done on our side of the Atlantic.
A resurgent Russia is no threat to any vital interests of the United States. It is a threat to an American Empire that presumes some God-given right to plant U.S. military power in the backyard or on the front porch of Mother Russia.
Who rules Abkhazia and South Ossetia is none of our business. And after this madcap adventure of Saakashvili, why not let the people of these provinces decide their own future in plebiscites conducted by the United Nations or the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe?
As for Saakashvili, he's probably toast in Tbilisi after this stunt. Let the neocons find him an endowed chair at the American Enterprise Institute.
To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
-
Talking about going to war with russia is drooling idiocy. The only conventional war that the US and Russia will fight will be after the nuclear war. The russian attitude is that the best way to protect their missles is to launch them. The soviets used to muse that americans watch too many old western movies, where the fight culminates in a showdown at the end. Russian westerns would be very short movies.
-
Talking about going to war with russia is drooling idiocy. The only conventional war that the US and Russia will fight will be after the nuclear war. The russian attitude is that the best way to protect their missles is to launch them. The soviets used to muse that americans watch too many old western movies, where the fight culminates in a showdown at the end. Russian westerns would be very short movies.
LOL... Too Late. The decision all along has been above presidential pay grades. Globalist Multi-National Corporations have already decided they need a cold war to keep the euro, american and russian economies.... err.. profits growing.
Get used to that sword hangin over your head.
-
To start with, It appears' that Pat Buchanan has just destroyed any remaining shreds of political validity he might have had.
For, he completely forgot that we let not just an ally nation, but a partner in our own global war on terror down in a time of crisis. Remember, Georgia contributed 2,000 of their own sons' and daughters' to the occupation of Iraq. Not rushing to their aid when THEY needed help is sadly reminiscent of the way Neville Chamberlain handled Poland in 1939.
Now, I will not debate that a fight with Russia isn't the same as any other that we've faced in modern times...However, the MAD doctrine worked for more than 50 years. Why? Is it possible that the Russians' are just as afraid of a Nuclear war as we are?
I do believe any conventional conflict with Russia in the case of Georgia could be resolved without the use of Nuclear weapons, IF:
1. Fighting is confined to Georgia/Ossetia/Azkhaban, and that diplomatic channels are kept open assuring the Russians' that no direct invasion of Soviet territory will occur.
2. That if the Russians' choose to expand the conflict, say, to the North sea, Poland, or the Ukraine, that we also contain any such conflict until a peace accord can be reached.
3. When at the cessation of any such conflict, do not demand anything more than the simple enforcement of the pre-war status of national boundaries, as recognized in the U.N.-That is, Ossetia and Azkhaban remain Georgian.
4. Any further Russian demands, such as the removal of the missile shield, or no NATO control of areas' such as the Black Sea, should be contingent upon any attempted 'widening of the conflict'.
5. Don't make it impossible for the Russians' to re-integrate into the world after any such conflict. They will feel the pressure economically after a while, now that they have opened up post-Glasnost, and that the sooner they quit fighting, the sooner it will be business as usual.
BTW, Suave...the only 'drooling idiocy' will not be standing up to them. Letting them do this destroys' everything that has happened since 1989. Obviously, the Russian's have a regime in Putin that can eclipse their own constitution. Allowing this to continue only shows' the Russian people that somone like Putin can be allowed to be reckless and carefree in his dealings' with the rest of the world. And I will end it with this...When NATO was formed, this country gave it's word, that it would help to keep the free peoples' of the world out from under the heel of totalitarianism and despots. And the last I've heard, we still aim to keep that word. We definetely shouldn't break it because some sweetheartbag neo-con is afraid of fighting something more intimidating than 500,000 Iraqi soldiers trying to surrender en masse.
-
I can't see where Iraq between 1991 and 2003 did anything to improve their chances' against another U.S. incursion, was my point. Russia, on the other hand, didn't quit developing weapons' post-Glasnost, like a lot of people thought they would. When trade started to open up, they were able to pick up some new tech, and assimilate it into some of their newer weapons, allowing them to advance under a cloak of what seemingly was friendship.
I don't for one minute pretend it will be a one-sided asskicking ala' GWI and II. But I do believe that we should have stepped in right away, and called Putins' bluff as soon as possible.
The Russians are so outgunned by NATO they would be out of their skulls to start a war in Continental Europe.
Most of their domestic military money spent has been on their nuclear forces, which they cant use because if they did they would end up an ash tray. Its true theyv developed some decent systems but even most of them they try and sell. They are not capable of attacking and defeating NATO.
If we stood up to The Soviet Union you think we would blink to whats now called Russia?
-
The Russians are so outgunned by NATO they would be out of their skulls to start a war in Continental Europe.
Most of their domestic military money spent has been on their nuclear forces, which they cant use because if they did they would end up an ash tray. Its true theyv developed some decent systems but even most of them they try and sell. They are not capable of attacking and defeating NATO.
If we stood up to The Soviet Union you think we would blink to whats now called Russia?
Why did we back down from them then? That's been the big question on my mind ever since Aug. 10th.
-
Why did we back down from them then? That's been the big question on my mind ever since Aug. 10th.
Germany was expected to be the first european battlefield.. and NATO didn't expect to be able to stop the Russian Armor. The concept of Tactical Nukes was born. The Germans shuddered, knowing if they couldn't stop the russians at the german Border, West Germany would become a nuclear wasteland. Germany redoubled it's efforts in anti-armor weaponry, tactics and advanced 'fire while maneuvering' tank force multipliers. In fact, in every 'reforager' war game we ran with them thru the early 70's, they kicked our butts convincingly.
We still deployed tactical nukes in the Saar and up by the Belgian Border. Europe would be defended, even at the cost of Germany. Reality that kept the Russians outta NATO countries: Tac Nukes are a big part of the NATO gameplan.
New Gamepalan now... Poland and the Baltics stand at risk of being 'where we stop 'em if they break thru...' As you might guess, they'd very much like to see Ukraine and Georgia in NATO; becoming the trip-wire battlefield, especially since we're gonna deploy a missile defense 'shield' (translate as tactical russian nuke target) in their backyards.
Only thing that'll keep the Russian and NATO nukes on the launchers is for Russia to NOT invade a NATO country.
Without that NATO Mutual Defense Treaty that Buchannan is whining about, Euro MAD won't work, and the Russians will invade, knowing the US itself won't reply by itself for fear a much larger unsurvivable conflagration involving American instead of European cities..
So, NATO better work, or Europe is toast.
-
Why did we back down from them then? That's been the big question on my mind ever since Aug. 10th.
Why? Did you expect us to invade Russia over Georgia? Or the Georgian republics?
We had no legal obligation to come to their aid. But even still we sent American planes to their airports to deliver supplies. The supplies were meaningless. The presence of USAF aircraft on Georgian soil was not. It forced Putin to have to consider the implications of Americans coming under fire. We didnt blink. He did!
Different story if a NATO country was attacked. That would trigger the full fury of NATO, and most importantly, American military forces. It could also trigger, by accident or design, a nuclear war.
Putin knows this better then anyone. Remember NATO dismembered Iraqs military in Gulf 1 with an ease that shocked the world. We are far more Technologically advanced now. In the opening nights High value Russian targets would be struck with thousands of precision munitions alone.
And NATO would win air superiority that bordered on dominance.
-
Why? Did you expect us to invade Russia over Georgia? Or the Georgian republics?
Have another look at my earlier post. Don't invade; Force the Russians' out of Georgia, same way we did in Kuwait. Don't take any Russian territory; Stop at the border, let them realize that the war is merely over Georgia-and that any broadening will get really expensive for Vlads' gov't.
We had no legal obligation to come to their aid. But even still we sent American planes to their airports to deliver supplies. The supplies were meaningless. The presence of USAF aircraft on Georgian soil was not. It forced Putin to have to consider the implications of Americans coming under fire. We didnt blink. He did!
First of all...Not legal, but certainly Moral. As I said, Georgia's been as staunch an ally to us as any, especially considering the controversy over the war in Iraq.
Secondly...There were already American troops, a training cadre, in country even before the balloon went up. What's more, Putin had to know about it, they've been there for months. He played GWB like the monkey he is. No, we not only blinked...we cringed.
Different story if a NATO country was attacked. That would trigger the full fury of NATO, and most importantly, American military forces. It could also trigger, by accident or design, a nuclear war.
Except in this instance, NATO's not directly involved, since Georgia's not a signatory yet. However, Europe's choices on whether or not to get involved might hinge on having stability in the regions' around the pipeline. They might prefer it in the hands of a pro-western gov't., especially in light of the recent developements in Moscow. Nobody knows' the Euro response, except the Euro's. As for triggering a wider nuclear war...as Hangtime has said before, It's not the first time it's been a factor. Hell, we ran that risk back in Korea. The Russians' have yet to escalate any crisis to a WMD stage. Neither have we.
Putin knows this better then anyone. Remember NATO dismembered Iraqs military in Gulf 1 with an ease that shocked the world. We are far more Technologically advanced now. In the opening nights High value Russian targets would be struck with thousands of precision munitions alone.
And NATO would win air superiority that bordered on dominance.
This actually becomes conjecture, because as has also been said before, these are not the 'monkey models' that the old Soviets' gave to their Warsaw pact satellite's and their arms' customers abroad. All their good stuff, they kept for themselves. AFAIK, None of our aircraft have yet to encounter any of the home-based Sukhoi's or the MiG's the Russians' keep for themselves. And the S-300 missile systems' are just now starting to be seen abroad. We shouldn't make any assumptions' based on the GWI or II experience either, because Iraqi training of the time can't really be considered up to the same par as the Russian's themselves. The russian's will be better motivated, and better trained, than any third-world or Middle-eastern enemy's we've yet to face. It wouldn't be an easy fight, that much should be understood.
-
10 US and NATO war ships are in the black sea, 8 more are on the way,they are to deliver aid to Georgia ports, 1 or 2 US ships have already docked in Georgia. The russians are disturbed that we are using war ships to deliver aid.
disturbed.... :lol
-
MOSCOW - Russia formally recognized the breakaway Georgian territories at the heart of its war with Georgia on Tuesday, heightening tensions with the West as the United States dispatched a military ship bearing aid to a port city still patrolled by Russian troops.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says the decision to recognize the independence of two breakaway regions in Georgia is "extremely unfortunate."
She said the U.S. regards Abkhazia and South Ossetia as "part of the internationally recognized borders of Georgia" and will use its veto power in the U.N. Security Council to block any Russian attempt change their status.
Britain, Germany and France also criticized the decision.
The plot thickens.
-
The plot thickens.
UK Foreign Secretary's words:
He said the move "further inflames an already tense situation" adding: "We fully support Georgia's independence and territorial integrity, which cannot be changed by decree from Moscow."
The foreign secretary said he would visit Ukraine on Wednesday to assemble the "widest possible coalition against Russian aggression".
Interesting choice of words - coalitions have generally meant only one thing in recent years.
-
ruh roh.
Is it possible? A 'coalition'?
Damn. I sure hope the russians blink first this time.
Think they will?
-
Have another look at my earlier post. Don't invade; Force the Russians' out of Georgia, same way we did in Kuwait. Don't take any Russian territory; Stop at the border, let them realize that the war is merely over Georgia-and that any broadening will get really expensive for Vlads' gov't.
And what if they dont like the fact we just killed 2,000 of their sons doing it? I imagine that would really piss em off, and it wouldnt do us much good with so many of our boys deployed in other hot spots. And the rest of NATO? :lol Even the Brits would tell us were daffy and to bugger off. They dont enjoy their kids coming home in coffins for silly reasons either.
First of all...Not legal, but certainly Moral. As I said, Georgia's been as staunch an ally to us as any, especially considering the controversy over the war in Iraq.
Secondly...There were already American troops, a training cadre, in country even before the balloon went up. What's more, Putin had to know about it, they've been there for months. He played GWB like the monkey he is. No, we not only blinked...we cringed.
"Staunch ally"? Like who? Like the Brits? Gee yathink they are using us as an ally to offset Russian influence or do you think they just plain love Americans? And we have Yank training "cadres" "comrade" all over the world. In countries youv never heard of. So are we supposed to go to war every time violence flairs in everyone of those countries? Especially against another nuclear power? Use your bloody head dude. Real war aint plaing Aces High.
Except in this instance, NATO's not directly involved, since Georgia's not a signatory yet. However, Europe's choices on whether or not to get involved might hinge on having stability in the regions' around the pipeline. They might prefer it in the hands of a pro-western gov't., especially in light of the recent developements in Moscow. Nobody knows' the Euro response, except the Euro's. As for triggering a wider nuclear war...as Hangtime has said before, It's not the first time it's been a factor. Hell, we ran that risk back in Korea. The Russians' have yet to escalate any crisis to a WMD stage. Neither have we.
Exactly! Georgia is NOT a signatory yet. And I know exactly NATOs reasons, I know the reason every NATO country has. They dont want their kids coming home in coffins, risking a major war with a nuclear power, then having to pay for it all, all over a border flareup between former Soviets clients. Besides ,last time I checked, all this wasnt a threat to America in the first place.
Frodo do you have former military service? Do you have kids in the military who'd be on the front line of this great endeavor of yours?
This actually becomes conjecture, because as has also been said before, these are not the 'monkey models' that the old Soviets' gave to their Warsaw pact satellite's and their arms' customers abroad. All their good stuff, they kept for themselves. AFAIK, None of our aircraft have yet to encounter any of the home-based Sukhoi's or the MiG's the Russians' keep for themselves. And the S-300 missile systems' are just now starting to be seen abroad. We shouldn't make any assumptions' based on the GWI or II experience either, because Iraqi training of the time can't really be considered up to the same par as the Russian's themselves. The russian's will be better motivated, and better trained, than any third-world or Middle-eastern enemy's we've yet to face. It wouldn't be an easy fight, that much should be understood.
I dont see the average Ruskie being to enthused about attacking NATO. While fearless in defense of the motherland hes probably going to be less enthused about taking on a 21'st century force that outnumbers him almost 3 to 1. Most off all if when the crazy Yanks show up with their invisible airplanes, shells that hunt on their own, lunatics that can all see in the dark, and bloody phasers and photon torpedoes.
But thats only part of it. Where we really have them edged is in the field of battle space management and information technology. In short, we will know where they are while they will have to guess a lot more. And radars dont do you much good Frodo when your troops are to afraid to turn them on.
If you had any knowledge at all of the current state of systems and readiness vis-a-vis NATO vs Russia you never would have made the statement you did. And like I said, if you are so keen for this war then march your kid down to the recruiters before he/she misses it.
-
"if you are so keen for this war then march your kid down to the recruiters before he/she misses it."
i did not know you could "march your kid to the recruiters", i thought they had to volunteer.
-
ummm...
seems that the pipelines that run outside of direct russian control are the real focus of russian hostility.
We need to preserve that route to preserve some degree of independence for eastern europe. Lose georgia, lose eastern europe.
If that's what russia is focusing on... shouldn't we also?
-
"if you are so keen for this war then march your kid down to the recruiters before he/she misses it."
i did not know you could "march your kid to the recruiters", i thought they had to volunteer.
Thanks John. For your Intellectual contribution to the thread.
No really, thank you.
-
ruh roh.
Is it possible? A 'coalition'?
Damn. I sure hope the russians blink first this time.
Think they will?
The real question is, is how do they blink? Do they stand down, or let the situation escalate?
-
The real question is, is how do they blink? Do they stand down, or let the situation escalate?
Dunno, Frode. Looks to me like the real ball handling needs to be done by NATO... I'm seeing England making the appropriate noises, Poland and the Baltics are on board for a stiff resistance to the Bears threat, dunno how France, Germany or Italy will come down on this.
Turkey is passing thru NATO ships into the Black Sea... looks like a fresh cold war building, with status quo maintained in Georgia.
-
The real question is, is how do they blink? Do they stand down, or let the situation escalate?
I don't think they will without significant concessions leave the 2 rebellious territories they have taken. Certainly they considered this before invading. I see the question as what will we do about it. The ball is in our court.
-
And what if they dont like the fact we just killed 2,000 of their sons doing it? I imagine that would really piss em off, and it wouldnt do us much good with so many of our boys deployed in other hot spots. And the rest of NATO? :lol Even the Brits would tell us were daffy and to bugger off. They dont enjoy their kids coming home in coffins for silly reasons either.
They'll be pissed at the very first soldier wounded or Killed by direct American fire, IMO.
In the other 'Georgia invaded' threads, I've already stated how ridiculous our worldwide situation is, and how Putin played us as to our possible response. However, someone else mentioned that only a partial fraction of our forces are actually committed to the Middle east. Apparently, we still have considerable reserves' Here in the U.S. And, if you look at Dowding's post above, that might be an indicator of Britain's intent. I mean, if they helped us with something as farcical and inane as Iraq, I don't see them saying no to something like stemming Russian aggression in it's Pre-natal stage.
"Staunch ally"? Like who? Like the Brits? Gee yathink they are using us as an ally to offset Russian influence or do you think they just plain love Americans? And we have Yank training "cadres" "comrade" all over the world. In countries youv never heard of. So are we supposed to go to war every time violence flairs in everyone of those countries? Especially against another nuclear power? Use your bloody head dude. Real war aint plaing Aces High.
Donating 2,000 men to another's cause, in what's been an un-popular war, might be mistaken for being an 'ally' by people who have any kind of moral grounding. We have went a long way for other countries (like Kuwait) That had nothing more than embassy guards' in place. What is the difference between the two? They have both asked for our help. BTW, this isn't mere social strife, such as what's seen in Pakistan, or Iraq today. This is a regular set-piece invasion of another country...and yes, a U.S. ally, albeit outside of NATO. How hard would GWB's "War On Terror" be if all of the nations' currently helping us suddenly picked up their collective balls' and went home? Perhaps, after seeing how we treat our allies' in their time of need?
I am glad that the prospect of a real fight worries' you (as it does me) Rich. If this conflict is a lot smaller than what it has seemed, and the Russian's finally agree to the terms' of the Treaty and move out of the areas they currently occupy, that would be the best possible outcome. But letting them get away with whatever they want to could cost many more, possibly american, lives down the road. Fighting a smaller fight now might prevent the larger one later.
Exactly! Georgia is NOT a signatory yet. And I know exactly NATOs reasons, I know the reason every NATO country has. They dont want their kids coming home in coffins, risking a major war with a nuclear power, then having to pay for it all, all over a border flareup between former Soviets clients. Besides ,last time I checked, all this wasnt a threat to America in the first place.
Frodo do you have former military service? Do you have kids in the military who'd be on the front line of this great endeavor of yours?
From the moment they themselves put Ink on the paper making them NATO signatories, every country that signed has had that threat. And did have, for over half a century. And if you wish to put it in the context of threats...Saddam Hussein was a threat to his Arab neighbors, and perhaps the Kurds' that live on the Turkish/Iraq/Iran border. But not to the U.S...We could have handled him WAY differently, actually to our advantage in the WOT. But we invaded anyway. I don't think being a threat to the U.S. has any context anymore.
BTW, no, I haven't ever been in our Armed Forces. I could not show you a DD-214. and my oldest son is only 13. I'm not gonna hide behind an internet persona on this. But I am a citizen of the United States of America, and as such, I will try to uphold any future calling my country makes of me, and God willing, It's for a good cause.
I dont see the average Ruskie being to enthused about attacking NATO. While fearless in defense of the motherland hes probably going to be less enthused about taking on a 21'st century force that outnumbers him almost 3 to 1. Most off all if when the crazy Yanks show up with their invisible airplanes, shells that hunt on their own, lunatics that can all see in the dark, and bloody phasers and photon torpedoes.
But thats only part of it. Where we really have them edged is in the field of battle space management and information technology. In short, we will know where they are while they will have to guess a lot more. And radars dont do you much good Frodo when your troops are to afraid to turn them on.
If you had any knowledge at all of the current state of systems and readiness vis-a-vis NATO vs Russia you never would have made the statement you did. And like I said, if you are so keen for this war then march your kid down to the recruiters before he/she misses it.
Unlike you , I do harbor doubts' about our superiority over the Russians, both technically and numerically. As I've stated, and has been said before, The Russian's did give their W-P allies' and client states their best hardware. The MiG's they sell do not have the over-the-horizon capabilities' that their own stuff has. They don't put all of their latest laser rangerfinders, Thermal sights, or other goodies' on the T-72's they sell abroad. They don't even ship them the good Ammo!
Americans' have been really bad about judging the Russian military by it's satellite nations' performance against people like Isreal, or How we did in the Gulf Wars. This is a misconception that is someday gonna come home to roost, in a bad way. And, why are you so against any action in Georgia, if you are so confident of our superiority, anyway???
-
They'll be pissed at the very first soldier wounded or Killed by direct American fire, IMO.
In the other 'Georgia invaded' threads, I've already stated how ridiculous our worldwide situation is, and how Putin played us as to our possible response. However, someone else mentioned that only a partial fraction of our forces are actually committed to the Middle east. Apparently, we still have considerable reserves' Here in the U.S. And, if you look at Dowding's post above, that might be an indicator of Britain's intent. I mean, if they helped us with something as farcical and inane as Iraq, I don't see them saying no to something like stemming Russian aggression in it's Pre-natal stage.
Thats right, only a fraction. But they are still important units that cant leave their posts. And Putin knows what we have available, what NATO has available. This is a NATO matter, not an "American" one. Its in their backyard and any decisions must be made by NATO and not just America.
Look at it this way. Nations, especially unfriendly ones, speak in symbols, in abstracts. Russia going into this wretched helpless country was a "symbol". The fact that Yank USAF planes and USN ships are delivering supplies instead of commercial ones is also a "symbol". And its a warning.
We fought and stood up to an Empire far worse then Putins Russia and we did it on every continent in the world. I spent 4 years on ground zero myself and none of thats going to change. But that doesnt mean we are going to act precipitously and start a major war without just reason. And Putin stopping where he did was also a symbol, as was the fact neither of us raised our DEFCON levels.
Donating 2,000 men to another's cause, in what's been an un-popular war, might be mistaken for being an 'ally' by people who have any kind of moral grounding. We have went a long way for other countries (like Kuwait) That had nothing more than embassy guards' in place. What is the difference between the two? They have both asked for our help. BTW, this isn't mere social strife, such as what's seen in Pakistan, or Iraq today. This is a regular set-piece invasion of another country...and yes, a U.S. ally, albeit outside of NATO. How hard would GWB's "War On Terror" be if all of the nations' currently helping us suddenly picked up their collective balls' and went home? Perhaps, after seeing how we treat our allies' in their time of need?
No problem. Are you old enough to join? Are you a veteran? How about a child you can donate to your great crusade? PS, we "need" the freaking oil coming out of the Persian Gulf. I guess you didnt know that till now.
I am glad that the prospect of a real fight worries' you (as it does me) Rich. If this conflict is a lot smaller than what it has seemed, and the Russian's finally agree to the terms' of the Treaty and move out of the areas they currently occupy, that would be the best possible outcome. But letting them get away with whatever they want to could cost many more, possibly american, lives down the road. Fighting a smaller fight now might prevent the larger one later.
:pray..... We cant sacrafice our kids without just reason. Americas, or NATOs, safety or vital interests must be in serious threat.
When those buildings came down we were under serious threat. When Saddam wanted to control 1/2 the worlds oil we were under serious threat to our vital interests. When Saddam said "screw you" again we were under serious threat. Georgia's provinces, at this stage of the game, just doesnt cut to that level. In fact, its not even close.
BTW, no, I haven't ever been in our Armed Forces. I could not show you a DD-214. and my oldest son is only 13. I'm not gonna hide behind an internet persona on this. But I am a citizen of the United States of America, and as such, I will try to uphold any future calling my country makes of me, and God willing, It's for a good cause.
I aint "hideing" behind anything and dont get stupid. Im only one of many veterans in this game so big deal. My point is I dont believe you. And right now your just getting computer game rediculous. I would in no way allow my kid to go to Georgia to fight for those reasons and I wouldnt support a President who did.
Unlike you , I do harbor doubts' about our superiority over the Russians, both technically and numerically. As I've stated, and has been said before, The Russian's did give their W-P allies' and client states their best hardware. The MiG's they sell do not have the over-the-horizon capabilities' that their own stuff has. They don't put all of their latest laser rangerfinders, Thermal sights, or other goodies' on the T-72's they sell abroad. They don't even ship them the good Ammo!
Americans' have been really bad about judging the Russian military by it's satellite nations' performance against people like Isreal, or How we did in the Gulf Wars. This is a misconception that is someday gonna come home to roost, in a bad way. And, why are you so against any action in Georgia, if you are so confident of our superiority, anyway???
Unlike you I know something of what Im talking about. What good is "over the horizen" When the fighter your looking for has the radar return of a fly, and has 2 missiles hitting you long before you even know hes there? Or when the enemy AWACS sees you from 3 horizens away? Or when your command staff and foward fighter base was taken out by opening night strikes and your central radar command is a smoking ruin? Your army cant move or be resupplied cause the bridges are blown out?
What good is a tank laser when the Yanks are shooting off artillary with warheads that seek and detroy tanks on their own? Or when the tank that kills you is on the other side of a mountain and his shell rides the laser designating you by the infantryman hideing 1,000 yrds away?
So you may "harbor doubts" but I bet the Russians dont.
-
rich, why do you keep calling my Marines "kids" , they are men, trained to fight.
USMC vet
-
Yes they are, men and women; trained to fight.
I too was a soldier once, and young... (to steal a great book title) And now I'm a lot older. An 'old man' to your young marines... and they are kids to me. It's not intended as a slight; just an acknowledgment of the disparity of age.
As 'old men' and thru the goggles of that age divide we see a young life, just getting started. The promise of the future is carried by these kids.. these brave young men and women.. and we do not intend to disparage or demean their abilities or competence by the reference of 'Kids'.
Just as your kids refer to us age worn vets as 'old men'... no disrespect intended.
Carry On.
<S!>
-
Thats right, only a fraction. But they are still important units that cant leave their posts. And Putin knows what we have available, what NATO has available. This is a NATO matter, not an "American" one. Its in their backyard and any decisions must be made by NATO and not just America.
Look at it this way. Nations, especially unfriendly ones, speak in symbols, in abstracts. Russia going into this wretched helpless country was a "symbol". The fact that Yank USAF planes and USN ships are delivering supplies instead of commercial ones is also a "symbol". And its a warning.
We fought and stood up to an Empire far worse then Putins Russia and we did it on every continent in the world. I spent 4 years on ground zero myself and none of thats going to change. But that doesnt mean we are going to act precipitously and start a major war without just reason. And Putin stopping where he did was also a symbol, as was the fact neither of us raised our DEFCON levels.
No problem. Are you old enough to join? Are you a veteran? How about a child you can donate to your great crusade? PS, we "need" the freaking oil coming out of the Persian Gulf. I guess you didnt know that till now.
:pray..... We cant sacrafice our kids without just reason. Americas, or NATOs, safety or vital interests must be in serious threat.
When those buildings came down we were under serious threat. When Saddam wanted to control 1/2 the worlds oil we were under serious threat to our vital interests. When Saddam said "screw you" again we were under serious threat. Georgia's provinces, at this stage of the game, just doesnt cut to that level. In fact, its not even close.
I aint "hideing" behind anything and dont get stupid. Im only one of many veterans in this game so big deal. My point is I dont believe you. And right now your just getting computer game rediculous. I would in no way allow my kid to go to Georgia to fight for those reasons and I wouldnt support a President who did.
Unlike you I know something of what Im talking about. What good is "over the horizen" When the fighter your looking for has the radar return of a fly, and has 2 missiles hitting you long before you even know hes there? Or when the enemy AWACS sees you from 3 horizens away? Or when your command staff and foward fighter base was taken out by opening night strikes and your central radar command is a smoking ruin? Your army cant move or be resupplied cause the bridges are blown out?
What good is a tank laser when the Yanks are shooting off artillary with warheads that seek and detroy tanks on their own? Or when the tank that kills you is on the other side of a mountain and his shell rides the laser designating you by the infantryman hideing 1,000 yrds away?
So you may "harbor doubts" but I bet the Russians dont.
There's some things' in here that looked contradictory to me. For example...Georgia, even though it has appealed to NATO for membership, isn't a member yet. The troops' they contributed to Iraq are not for a NATO coalition; It's for one that the U.S. has set up. Therefore, how could it be any matter BUT an american one right now? I see what you mean by the usage of the U.S. military to move in humanitarian aid. That could be construed as simply not having any commercial/civilian means available, to either reach the location, or be willing to go into a combat zone, however.
I'm not convinced that even the old USSR was any worse than the current regime in Russia, simply because of the fact that although he had to step down from the Presidency, Vladimir Putin was able to sidestep his countries' constitution and democratically elected gov't. and created a position for himself that allowed him to remain effectively in power. Letting him expand, and bring back all of those nations' under his influence, would be a very bad idea, IMHO. These actions' will also bring nations' like Iran under his wing, which, if you are worried about Middle-Eastern oil, is more than going to offset anything we have accomplished in Iraq. The Russian's could aid the Iranians' in they're nuclear ambitions, which could mean ALOT more trouble for us than any threat even Al-Queada poses. "We" don't really need their oil. The U.S. chooses' to remain tied to petroleum, mainly because of a large interest that certain sectors of our own economy have in it. The electric power grids' in the U.S. could have been run off of safe Nuclear power for the past few decades, which would have dramatically reduced our dependence on oil from the Middle East. Yet, we choose to let ourselves be dependent, strategically vulnerable. Why? Because a dollar in a politician's pocket speaks' a louder voice than any 10 U.S. citizens. Europe, which includes the NATO nations which we are sworn by treaty to come to their aid, are under threat of an Energy crisis if the pipelines' running through Georgia are compromised. So, if you look at it from the aspect of needing energy...This isn't only for Georgia, but for our allies, too. While not a direct threat to the U.S. itself, It is better to keep your allies' as allies, rather than to let them drift over to the "other" side of the fence.
Under-estimating ones' enemies has led to more than one lost battle, or lost war. Overestimation can be a killer, too, although we have been able to do well in some of the recent conflicts, and the technology seemed to perform as expected. But I stand by this argument; It would be a harsher war than what has been occuring these last two decades, for we haven't seen the full capabilities' of the Russian Military yet; Chechnya and Bosnia were more of a police action, where the Russian's did not have to deploy their full capability (What they did deploy was deadly enough indeed) and if you noticed in this latest incursion into Georgia, the 58th Army, and the 19th Motor-Rifle Division in particular, of the Russian Army seemed to have an awful lot of out-dated equipment (notice the suprisingly high number of T-62's.) It doesn't take long, or very much reading, to get a grasp of what modern weapons' can do. The internet is full of this info...It's not terribly diffucult to pick up a book and read about it. This allows' people that might otherwise not have any idea as to what is going on, to be able to develop an informed opinion that can stand in debate.
BTW, no, I haven't ever been in our Armed Forces. I could not show you a DD-214. and my oldest son is only 13. I'm not gonna hide behind an internet persona on this. But I am a citizen of the United States of America, and as such, I will try to uphold any future calling my country makes of me, and God willing, It's for a good cause.
I didn't mean this as a slander or a barb at you, Rich...I answered your question...well, honestly, because there are WAY too many people on the net today who are clever enough, and willing, to masquerade as something they aren't. No matter how much info you put input into a personality/occupational profile, The internet still makes everything impossible to either verify or disprove. To give an example, look at the PETA board raids' that members' here have participated in, basically claiming to be people they aren't. We have people on this board even now, who's military service has come under suspicion...Simply because unlike meeting someone face-to-face, the glaring rectangle of the LCD monitor only gives' you enough insight as to who someone is, as to what they type on it.
BTW, Ty for your time served. :salute
-
I have always wondered, our planes may have the radar return of a bird/fly whatever, but wouldn't you be curious as to why a bird or fly is going 1000mph at 15,000 feet? Or does it disrupt signals so much they can't accurately tell speed and altitude?
-
rich, why do you keep calling my Marines "kids" , they are men, trained to fight.
USMC vet
Do I really have to explain why?
Its is a statement of concern for them. That and Im old enough to be their father.
-
There's some things' in here that looked contradictory to me. For example...Georgia, even though it has appealed to NATO for membership, isn't a member yet. The troops' they contributed to Iraq are not for a NATO coalition; It's for one that the U.S. has set up. Therefore, how could it be any matter BUT an american one right now? I see what you mean by the usage of the U.S. military to move in humanitarian aid. That could be construed as simply not having any commercial/civilian means available, to either reach the location, or be willing to go into a combat zone, however.
How many troops? Of what quality? Enough and good enough to start a war between superpowers?
We have responded. We just havnt started a major war. And man we could whistle up 100 charter airplanes and as many ships if we wanted. Those are USN warships delivering supplies. Not freighters.
I'm not convinced that even the old USSR was any worse than the current regime in Russia, simply because of the fact that although he had to step down from the Presidency, Vladimir Putin was able to sidestep his countries' constitution and democratically elected gov't.
During the cold war, if your not old enough to remember, we had our entire nuclear posture on trip wire. And it was a huge force, as was The Soviets. We had 3 classes of ICBMs when I was in and hundreds of B-52s hot wired to roll in minutes of the go. Dude I saw it. NATO Europe and the Warsaw pact were huge armed camps loaded with nuclear weapons and IRBMs. We had huge armies faceing each other at a high state of readiness.
You dont think that was worse?
Listen man, Im done with this. Now we got the one liner Queens jumping in along with people who think I actually care about their opinions on whether or not Im legit. And no insult intended, you seem like a nice guy, but to me you are doing to much talking and not enough listening. You dont know what your talking about and wont learn any better. No insult, Im just kinda blunt.
Anyway....goodby.
-
My, isn't it strange how history repeats itself....
Poland being threatened by the monster to the east.. Shades of a very scary past...
Remember that Poland was once part of the German union, until the end of WWI...
Poles were trained in German Military schools, and served the Kaiser very well...
I could never understand why the Nazi's turned on them so savagely... Considering
the manpower shortages of the German Military during the war, Just more Hitlerian stupidity...
I cant imagine Being a Pole during the first 1/2 of the 20th century, Sitting between two
totalitarian monsters, both eying my nation like a juicy morsel...
Little known is that in the early 20's, during the Russian civil war, a Bolshevik Red army
was making frequent foraging incursions into Polish territory... (you know how Russians forage right?)
Until they were completely annihilated on the field by the Polish army... (Polish WWI vets, showing their worth)
It seems that a certain person was part of the command structure for that Army... And
its destruction caused him considerable embarrassment in the eyes of Lenin... At the time
unkie Joe was involved in a nasty power struggle with Leon Trotsky, for succession as master
of the Communist Utopian state... Stalin never forgot about those rotten little Poles...
The Poles never forgot about it either...
That's why in the 30s, the Poles refused to ally themselves with the soviets... Preferring
Britain and France, even though they had no means of mutual support... Geez, talk about
being between a rock and a hard place, Hitler on one side, Stalin on the other... With the
only countries willing to help, TOO FAR AWAY!!!
Then the war came, Hitler and Stalin divided Poland between them... They both made SURE
that the leadership of the Polish Free Army, was DEAD... Between the SS, and the NKVD,
they hunted down and slaughtered, every intellectual, every school teacher, every Military officer...
Maxim Machine guns roared, and the ditches were filled... Winston Churchill said that
Europe had descended into a new dark age... The world wouldn't know how dark until the
war ended... Exact numbers are still unknown, but its safe to say that Poland suffered more
deaths per capita, than any other nation in the war...
Then to be crushed under the soviet boot for almost 50 years... But somehow their will to
be a free independent nation was not lost... Finally they are a free people again, and don't
think for an instant, that they won't flip that twofaced Putin the bird... Or go down without a fight!!!
As you can tell, I have a great respect for the Polish people... They deserve far better
than they have received from the world...
I hope the west doesn't let them down again...
RC
-
My, isn't it strange how history repeats itself....
Poland being threatened by the monster to the east.. Shades of a very scary past...
Remember that Poland was once part of the German union, until the end of WWI...
Poles were trained in German Military schools, and served the Kaiser very well...
I could never understand why the Nazi's turned on them so savagely... Considering
the manpower shortages of the German Military during the war, Just more Hitlerian stupidity...
I cant imagine Being a Pole during the first 1/2 of the 20th century, Sitting between two
totalitarian monsters, both eying my nation like a juicy morsel...
Little known is that in the early 20's, during the Russian civil war, a Bolshevik Red army
was making frequent foraging incursions into Polish territory... (you know how Russians forage right?)
Until they were completely annihilated on the field by the Polish army... (Polish WWI vets, showing their worth)
It seems that a certain person was part of the command structure for that Army... And
its destruction caused him considerable embarrassment in the eyes of Lenin... At the time
unkie Joe was involved in a nasty power struggle with Leon Trotsky, for succession as master
of the Communist Utopian state... Stalin never forgot about those rotten little Poles...
The Poles never forgot about it either...
That's why in the 30s, the Poles refused to ally themselves with the soviets... Preferring
Britain and France, even though they had no means of mutual support... Geez, talk about
being between a rock and a hard place, Hitler on one side, Stalin on the other... With the
only countries willing to help, TOO FAR AWAY!!!
Then the war came, Hitler and Stalin divided Poland between them... They both made SURE
that the leadership of the Polish Free Army, was DEAD... Between the SS, and the NKVD,
they hunted down and slaughtered, every intellectual, every school teacher, every Military officer...
Maxim Machine guns roared, and the ditches were filled... Winston Churchill said that
Europe had descended into a new dark age... The world wouldn't know how dark until the
war ended... Exact numbers are still unknown, but its safe to say that Poland suffered more
deaths per capita, than any other nation in the war...
Then to be crushed under the soviet boot for almost 50 years... But somehow their will to
be a free independent nation was not lost... Finally they are a free people again, and don't
think for an instant, that they won't flip that twofaced Putin the bird... Or go down without a fight!!!
As you can tell, I have a great respect for the Polish people... They deserve far better
than they have received from the world...
I hope the west doesn't let them down again...
RC
Polands' already a NATO signatory, if I'm not mistaken...and unlike 1939, they have a NATO ally (Germany) at their back. It should be a proposition the Russians' don't wanna face, IMHO.
-
I have always wondered, our planes may have the radar return of a bird/fly whatever, but wouldn't you be curious as to why a bird or fly is going 1000mph at 15,000 feet? Or does it disrupt signals so much they can't accurately tell speed and altitude?
Kinda off topic but since I'm a radar technician.......Due to the radar cross section of our most advanced fighters and bombers being so small a radar system can pick them up BUT here is the key part, in order to do it the system would have to have the discriminator turned all the way down. So the radar would be seeing the airplane with a radar cross section of a bird AS WELL as ALL the real birds flying around, ground clutter, and everything else, in short the system would be so overloaded with target information that the operator wouldn't be able to see anything. Stealth doesn't make you invisibe to radar, it just makes you so hard to detect that you can exploit gaps in radar coverage to go where you want to go.
Using a radar is a fine balance of putting out just enough power to detect what your looking for without overloading the receiver with too much return information. Trying to detect a stealth aircraft requires a LOT of power and when you put that much power out the front end a LOT of target data is going to come back to the receiver. Too mch and all you see on the screen is a bunch of snow because your seeing everything. It would be like trying to find one or tow pixels on your monitor that are moving out of the millions of pixels you can see.
-
Hornet, follow on question... how did the Serbians get a lock on the F117 they brought down?
Different type of radar?
-
One F-117 has been lost in combat, to the Yugoslav Army. On 27 March 1999, during the Kosovo War, the 3rd Battalion of the 250th Missile Brigade under the command of Colonel Zoltan Dani, equipped with the Isayev S-125 'Neva' (NATO designation SA-3 'Goa') anti-aircraft missile system, downed a F-117A callsign "Vega 31," serial number 82-806 with a Serbian improved Neva-M missile. According to NATO Commander Wesley Clark and other NATO generals, Yugoslav air defenses found that they could detect F-117s with their radars operating on unusually long wavelengths. This made them visible on radar screens for short times.
Reportedly several SA-3s were launched from approximately 8 miles out, one of which detonated in close proximity to the F-117A, forcing the pilot to eject. Though still classified, it has long been believed that the F-117 possesses no radar warning indicator, so the pilot's first indication of an incoming missile was likely seeing its flame. At this distance and combined speed the pilot had about 6 seconds to react before impact. According to an interview, Zoltán Dani was able to keep most of his missile sites intact by keeping them on the move, and had a number of spotters spread out looking for F-117s and other NATO aircraft, he also personally supervised the modification of his targeting radar to increase its wavelength. The commanders and crews of the SAMs guessed the flight paths of earlier F-117A strikes from rare radar spottings and positioned their SAM launchers and spotters accordingly. It is believed that the SA-3 crews and spotters were able to locate and track F-117A 82-806 visually, probably with the help of infra-red and night vision systems. He also claimed that his battery shot down an F-16 as well.
The F-117 pilot survived and was later rescued by U.S. Air Force Pararescue personnel. However, the wreckage of the F-117 was not promptly bombed, due to possible media fallout from news footage of civilians around the wreckage. The Serbs are believed to have invited Russian personnel to inspect the remains, inevitably compromising the then 25-year old U.S. stealth technology. Since the United States did not destroy the wreckage, the remains can still be seen today at the Museum of Aviation in Belgrade close to Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport. An error of assumption was made by many as to the identity of the pilot. While the name "Capt Ken 'Wiz' Dwelle" was painted on the canopy, it was made public in 2007 that the actual pilot was Lt Col. Dale Zelko, USAF.
Some American sources acknowledge that a second F-117A was also damaged during a raid in the same campaign, and although it made it back to its base, it supposedly never flew again.
What the Serbs did was modify their radars to operate on a longer pulse for the sole purpose of detecting a stealth fighter. They also had intel as to the probable flight path of the plane and placed their missile batteries along the likely flight path. They were also able to spot the plane visually. The missile did not make a direct hit, but was able to damage the plane enough to force the pilot to eject when it did detonate close to the plane.
All in all the Serbs got real lucky by trying some very unorthodox methods, and modifying their equipment.
-
Thanks!! Hugely appreciate the synopsis!
... now; I wonder how much of an edge we really have... 10 years after the first documented case of tagging one with a field modified radar.
ruh-roh.
-
Hey Hornet...Thanks for the info!
But, none of that was sensitive information, was it? I'd hate to think of someone like Boroda taking it to his friends in Defense... :noid
-
With the newer aircraft like the B-2 (not really new, but way more advanced than the F-117) the F-22, and the F-35 coming online with all their built in capabilities over the F-117, probably not too much to worry about. All the newer planes carry radar warning recievers, active and passive electronic counter meassures, and decoys (chaff and flares). The F-117's didn't have those systems because when they were built none of the "current" technology at the time could see them.
All in all though when you look at the record of the F-117, it's still spectacular. Those planes put in almost 30 years of service before the last one was officialy retired the first of this month, flew hundreds of combat missions into some of the most heavliy defended airspace in the world with only one combat loss. It's been replaced by the F-22 which is a huge leap forward capabilities. It's faster, longer range, more firepower, harder to detect, more manuverable, and multi mission capable.
In the case of the Serbs, well they got lucky and proved the old theory, "Even a blind squirel will sometimes find a nut".
-
Hey Hornet...Thanks for the info!
But, none of that was sensitive information, was it? I'd hate to think of someone like Boroda taking it to his friends in Defense... :noid
Open source, it's all on the internet.
-
With the newer aircraft like the B-2 (not really new, but way more advanced than the F-117) the F-22, and the F-35 coming online with all their built in capabilities over the F-117, probably not too much to worry about. All the newer planes carry radar warning recievers, active and passive electronic counter meassures, and decoys (chaff and flares). The F-117's didn't have those systems because when they were built none of the "current" technology at the time could see them.
All in all though when you look at the record of the F-117, it's still spectacular. Those planes put in almost 30 years of service before the last one was officialy retired the first of this month, flew hundreds of combat missions into some of the most heavliy defended airspace in the world with only one combat loss. It's been replaced by the F-22 which is a huge leap forward capabilities. It's faster, longer range, more firepower, harder to detect, more manuverable, and multi mission capable.
In the case of the Serbs, well they got lucky and proved the old theory, "Even a blind squirel will sometimes find a nut".
You know, it's funny...It hardly seems' like 30 years. I remember when I was younger seeing a stealth crash on TV, near Tehachapi I believe. And now, it's headed for retirement.