Russia vs. Ukraine predictions OT
Comments
-
This thread fucking sucks. Put this on the nobody gives a fuck bored already.
-
Derek should create a bored for all your posts with that title.He_Needs_More_Time said:the nobody gives a fuck bored
-
The irony coming from you.........PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Derek should create a bored for all your posts with that title.He_Needs_More_Time said:the nobody gives a fuck bored
-
If you don't like the Russia and Ukraine and politics discussion in the "Russia vs. Ukraine" thread, you can geeeeet out!He_Needs_More_Time said:
The irony coming from you.........PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Derek should create a bored for all your posts with that title.He_Needs_More_Time said:the nobody gives a fuck bored
-
http://hardcorehusky.com/forums/#/discussion/9394/if-anyone-knows-of-a-way-where-i-don-t-have-to-hear-the-words-boston-strong-ever-again-pm-mePostGameOrangeSlices said:
If you don't like the Russia and Ukraine and politics discussion in the "Russia vs. Ukraine" thread, you can geeeeet out!He_Needs_More_Time said:
The irony coming from you.........PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Derek should create a bored for all your posts with that title.He_Needs_More_Time said:the nobody gives a fuck bored
Funny in another thread you were the one bitching about the general bored invading the football board. Now you are disagreeing with me saying the same damn thing in here.
Thanks for disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing like always. -
I was being sarkastic in that other thread, brahHe_Needs_More_Time said:
http://hardcorehusky.com/forums/#/discussion/9394/if-anyone-knows-of-a-way-where-i-don-t-have-to-hear-the-words-boston-strong-ever-again-pm-mePostGameOrangeSlices said:
If you don't like the Russia and Ukraine and politics discussion in the "Russia vs. Ukraine" thread, you can geeeeet out!He_Needs_More_Time said:
The irony coming from you.........PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Derek should create a bored for all your posts with that title.He_Needs_More_Time said:the nobody gives a fuck bored
Funny in another thread you were the one bitching about the general bored invading the football board. Now you are disagreeing with me saying the same damn thing in here.
Thanks for disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing like always. -
everything is the general bored in the offseason
-
I don't really buy a whole bunch of the interservice rivalry bullshit - in the real world, there should be one service: "U.S. Armed Forces." NO wait, that spells "USAF," er, "U.S. National Defense, " fuck, "USN..." maybe "U.S. Military Command..." Goddammit.
But seriously, we should copy the IDF model of force integration and keep the pretty banners and flags as unit insignia. -
That being said, America's defense establishment is way bought and sold - which is why we are getting less lethal equipment at 5x the price than we used 20 years ago. BUT STEALTH! All bullshit. Modern militaries (i.e. Brazil on up) can beat stealth tech.
It's like the fucking AK74. Best infantry weapon in the world, but the Army spent ohmygod billlion on the M4, which is basically a tricked-out M16, which is just the fucking AR15. Ours has better muzzle velocity and more accuracy beyond 300m. Now ask any company commander how many of his guys can hit targets with any regularity beyond 300m. Ask him twice, because the first time he will lie to you.
There's a thing called "massed fire," which we used to effect a whole bunch in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Russkies are good at it too. And their weapon is cheap, can be dragged through mud and serviced by beet-farming illiterates, which makes it perfect. But ours is badass looking, so we've got that going for us.
Sometimes tech =/= lethal.
The real challenge is beating asymmetric threats, which we just got really good at in Iraq/Afghanistan. -
Hi there, I'm an idiot. Signed PGOS.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
I see I've struck a nerve. I know you're current or former military, so I'll phrase the following nicely.AZDuck said:This has to be a contender for "stupidest fucking comment ever made on this website." Way stupider than anything I ever said about grunge music.
PGOS - please to be explaining how the Navy and the AF were able to combat the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan, and how the Navy and the AF provide a land-based deterrent in Korea. For that matter, what happens to the AF and the Navy when the Army goes away? Here's a clue: the Army provides logistical support to all services in deployed environments. The Army provides the water purification specialists and the cooks and the doctors and the medics (except for Marine corpsmen). But you can automate that shit, right?
Real_God knows that all those private contractors Rumsfeld hired worked out great, you know, on time and below budget and all that shit, right? Oh, EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE HAPPENED? Never mind.
Fact: At the end of the day, wars are won by boots on the ground. The Air Force is dominated by flyboys that want to be Top Gun, and the Navy clings to a belief that expensive carrier fleets are viable when ballistic missiles are cheap and so are the submarines that fire them.
Now, if you were just saying this to troll me - I compliment you.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
The army, while not totally irrelevant, is still pretty fucking irrelevant. The Navy and AF are of far more importance, and I bet 99% of the shit the army does can be automated.AZDuck said:Probably going unnoticed by Putin is the SECDEF calling for the Army to reduce end-strength to 420K from 490K over the objections of the Chief of Staff. Oh, and all that gear we have in Afghanistan? It has to leave either by truck through Pakistan (hardy har har), via very expensive airlift, or via train through Russia (hardy har har har).
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/defense-secretary-chuck-hagel-recommends-reducing-army-to-pre-ww2-levels/
FYFMFE (but especially me)
1) We shouldn't have been in Afghanistan anywhere near as long as we were, or in Iraq at all. The Iraqi military got trampled, yes, but the Taliban and other insurgents cost the US countless needlessly wasted lives, and billions in needlessly wasted cash. It's easy for the US to win a war against an overmatched foe in days; loitering around to get blown up by ied's, carbombs, and rpg's in urban areas is a much messier matter. You can't really "win" against the insurgents in a traditional sense. In order to do that, you have to Nuke the entire country, desert, mountain caves, cities, all of it. As long as Islam exists in its current form, organizations of radicals are going to cause problems and kill people.
2) Now that we've gotten the inefficient clusterfuck that was the Afghan occupation/Iraq war out of the way, let's discuss the significance of the army. The army is important, don't get me wrong. The US army and marines fucked up Saddam's Royal Guard in 2 battles with minimal causalities. You can't have a supply chain in hostile territory without the army. I get that.
The Navy and AF are just more important in the postmodern world, especially for America. America rules the world in a form of modern hegemony tied to its currency and military. In order for any aggressor to even reach American soil, it has to defeat both the US Navy and AirForce. The US Navy is bigger than the rest of the world's combined, and the AirForce is 10 years more advanced than its closest rivals.
"The only currently combat-ready fifth-generation fighter, the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, entered service with the U.S. Air Force in 2005.[2][3][4]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor
Whenever America is gong to wage war on an enemy, it's naturally going to send the Navy and AirForce in first. The US planes alone will simultaneously sink the enemies navy/bomb the enemy country into submission/strategically strike enemy bases/defeat the enemy AirForce. Only once all that has been done, will the truly badass footsoldiers in the Special Forces/Marines come into combat, followed by the army and armored brigades. And even that is changing with the use of drones and automation in warfare...why risk American lives if robotic weaponry can accomplish the task? Soldiers are expensive to train and maintain; in the long run, a $10,000 drone strike on a fortified location is better than sending a marine squadron in worth millions in invested dollars. Granted, drones and automation don't always make things better and more efficient, but it's still only 2014. Things are only going to accelerate in that direction, by 2050 the US military will be unrecognizable compared to its current form.
Also, the Army's traditional logistical tasks are being given to PMC's.
TL, DR the Army is important, but significantly less so than the Navy and AirForce, and the gap is widening. That said, if hostile aliens invade and wipe the floor with the AirForce, it doesn't hurt to have a strong ground force...
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/b14605887e2b6b59902271a0095c9265_100.png)
