Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)

[Chiron]

That’s pretty disingenuous. No the “youths” were not joking they were subversive and painting graffiti against the state there is a difference between political actions like that and jokes or bitching at the bar. Assad is the better side in the civil war he is the side of minority rights for Christians. The other options are Isis or moderate Islamic fundamentals.

They were school boys, the graffiti was innocuous and clearly meant to be a joke. Assad is not the good guy, his laws still discriminate against non-Muslims and the FSA has Christians in it as well so that narrative is bunk.

Assad is a monster who burnt his nation down. Also lets not forget that he released jailed ISIS and Nusra Members from his jails in a cynical effort to paint the rebellion as Islamist to gullible idiots like yourself. This on top of gassing people.

If there was anyone who deserved a kill team, its Assad. Him and his brother, both of them dying will make it possible for a peace settlement as his sons are too young to have cultivated a power base yet and no one else can unite the security apparatuses.

 

[Sailor.X]

Posted for informational purposes.

 

[JagerIV]

I do know this yes.
We also had no where NEAR the casualties the Ruskies have had in 2 weeks then what the US had in the totality of the Iraq invasion. Which lasted 24 days roughly.

And the Ruskies have had T90s, T72B3s, and plenty of non conscript militaryas well

A lot further because we would have had complete air control by the end of the forst two weeks.

Just like we did in Serbia and Vietnam?

 

[King Arts]

They were school boys, the graffiti was innocuous and clearly meant to be a joke. Assad is not the good guy, his laws still discriminate against non-Muslims and the FSA has Christians in it as well so that narrative is bunk.

Assad is a monster who burnt his nation down. Also lets not forget that he released jailed ISIS and Nusra Members from his jails in a cynical effort to paint the rebellion as Islamist to gullible idiots like yourself. This on top of gassing people.

If there was anyone who deserved a kill team, its Assad. Him and his brother, both of them dying will make it possible for a peace settlement as his sons are too young to have cultivated a power base yet and no one else can unite the security apparatuses.

Nope the only good side opposed to the security forces are Kurds. No other side is trustworthy because they are Islamists. Assad was not the one who burned the nation down the rebels did by fighting and breaking the law. The only thing you said that was true is that Assad used gas but that’s not moral wrong. We should use gas against terrorists.

 

[Zachowon]

Just like we did in Serbia and Vietnam?

How we basically had Serbia on lock down either a few lost aircraft?

Oh you mean Vietnam where we were literally always winning when we had military doing thier jobs instead of the politicians doing stuff?
We still had better air control in Vietnam then the Ruskies do here

 

[Bacle]

How we basically had Serbia on lock down either a few lost aircraft?

Oh you mean Vietnam where we were literally always winning when we had military doing thier jobs instead of the politicians doing stuff?
We still had better air control in Vietnam then the Ruskies do here

We never had true air control in Vietnam; we might have made it so the MiGs N. Vietnam had were kept back for defensive purposes, but that didn't stop the Vietcong from continuing to fuck up our planes and helos with Diska's and the like.

Also, once again, pretending the military sets the goals and objectives in a conflict, and that political angles/interference is an aberation, is being willfully blind or disingenious about the nature of the civie political vs military relationship.

 

[PsihoKekec]

How we basically had Serbia on lock down either a few lost aircraft?

I agree, USAF did excellent work at destroying the infrastructure of the country. They were absolute crap at actually hitting military targets though, leaving Serbian forces almost untouched, despite thousands of sorties dedicated to targeting them.

 

[TheRomanSlayer]

I agree, USAF did excellent work at destroying the infrastructure of the country. They were absolute crap at actually hitting military targets though, leaving Serbian forces almost untouched, despite thousands of sorties dedicated to targeting them.

Including the part where the F-117 plane was shot down though.

 

[Bacle]

Including the part where the F-117 plane was shot down though.

Yep; which happened because the US military got cocky and arrogant and kept using the same ingress corridor over and over again, thinking the Serbs had no idea where the F-117s were coming from.

 

[JagerIV]

How we basically had Serbia on lock down either a few lost aircraft?

Oh you mean Vietnam where we were literally always winning when we had military doing their jobs instead of the politicians doing stuff?

We still had better air control in Vietnam then the Ruskies do here

Would you describe the US military as "literally always winning" in WWII against the Japanese and Germans in WWII?

And sure, the US strength is the ability to expend extremely expensive equipment for minimal gain for extended periods of time. Generally inexhaustible pockets. Losing $2 trillion dollars in Iraq is "only" something like 20% of $10 trillion dollars expended across the last 20 years on the military in general.

Russia meanwhile has been spending something closer to $50 billion per year, so over the last 20 years have only spent in the ballpark of $1 trillion in the last 20 years, probably less. The Russians are probably going to be spending something in the ballpark of $200 or so billion dollars on this war, depending upon how long this lasts and how much material equipment needs to be replaced.

Russia can't afford to fight wars in the extremely expensive way the US does, and its silly to expect them to.

 

[Vaermina]

 

[Floridaman]

A list is right here, accurate to 2021

Bulk of it survived and remained in their hands and shipments from Russia plus re-captures leave them better equipped than before.



This The US spent 4 and a half years bombing ISIS into submission in Syria and Iraq and left both nations in rubble to do so. This was a foe that had no means to bring down US bombers, and it still took longer than the time span of WW1 to bring them down to disparate cells with no taxable territory in either of those countries.



Russia continues to strike depots



Another Airfield hit.



Ukraine confirms Israel told them to throw in the towel.



Russian Media Release showing them targeting and destroying UkA Ammo Dumps and Troop Concentrations.



More footage showing UkA Vehicles being destroyed

Its clear Russia's strategy is to let Zelensky hang himself on Twitter while they tease us till they hoist the victory banner over Kyiv.

After which they will amuse themselves as American Pundits keep talking about their 'incompetent campaign,' the same way they did of their Georgian Campaign. Ignoring the fact that Russia won and inflict worse losses than they received.

Except of course we mainly bombed Syria to rubble, we don’t border them so who really cares if we leave ruins behind Us, there is utility in that it is our obsession with optics wanting to try to build something that is the problem.

 

[Zachowon]

We never had true air control in Vietnam; we might have made it so the MiGs N. Vietnam had were kept back for defensive purposes, but that didn't stop the Vietcong from continuing to fuck up our planes and helos with Diska's and the like.

Also, once again, pretending the military sets the goals and objectives in a conflict, and that political angles/interference is an aberation, is being willfully blind or disingenious about the nature of the civie political vs military relationship.

Every objective within the AO unless told otherwise is military planned and operated. Unless the politicians have a set goal the military does what it needs to win.

But in Vietnam we basically owned the skies.

I agree, USAF did excellent work at destroying the infrastructure of the country. They were absolute crap at actually hitting military targets though, leaving Serbian forces almost untouched, despite thousands of sorties dedicated to targeting them.

USAF have always been decent and have to get better.
Still doing btter then the Russians.

Including the part where the F-117 plane was shot down though.

Yep; which happened because the US military got cocky and arrogant and kept using the same ingress corridor over and over again, thinking the Serbs had no idea where the F-117s were coming from.

Yeah that was because they got predictable.
Rule number one.
Never get complacent

 

[Bacle]

Every objective within the AO unless told otherwise is military planned and operated. Unless the politicians have a set goal the military does what it needs to win.

Notice the caveats you put in there, to try to pretend the military doesn't always have it's objectives and goals set by DC; we see right through them.

This is a pattern with you.

You try to deny things about how the US military and civie gov relate to each other by putting in unrealistic and rather farcical caveats, when any student of US history knows they do not hold up under any real scrutiny.

All it does is make you look like a bootlicker and propaganda agent, while hurting your cred and not doing a damn thing to help the image of the US military.

But in Vietnam we basically owned the skies.

And yet how many helo's still came down, and who actually ended up in control of that nation? The N. Vietnamese kept their MiGs for defensive purposes, and didn't contest the southern part of the country much because they didn't need to; the Veitcong could knock down planes for them without risking their MiGs.

Once again, you try to deny or deflect using rather flimsy and easy to debunk or see through caveats.

 

[Captain X]

Actually I'd say his main problem is that he just doesn't explain it very well. It's interesting that this is turning into a discussion about Vietnam, which is itself a case of how the media can effectively alter the perception people have of it vs. what the reality is. The fact is, the USAF had a list of targets that it could hit to effectively bring the North to its knees an end the conflict, but the politicians were reluctant to allow the AF to prosecute this list because they were worried about provoking WWIII, which was not an unreasonable concern. This is why stuff like "Rolling Thunder" got done instead. After much time and many lives spent, eventually the politicians agreed to let the AF go after at least some of these targets. The result of this was the Paris Peace Accords, which the communists almost immediately began to break. But since the politicians back home wanted everything to be over (thanks largely to public perception being poisoned thanks to media portrayal and the politicians' own incompetence), we go the clusterfuck that we did as we rather gracelessly withdrew ourselves from the country. Honestly Vietnam is a great case study in how the media can steer the direction of the country through controlling the public's perception of an event. It also shows us that the media being the way they are was already happening back then and is thus hardly a recent phenomenon.

 

[Zachowon]

Notice the caveats you put in there, to try to pretend the military doesn't always have it's objectives and goals set by DC; we see right through them.

This is a pattern with you.

You try to deny things about how the US military and civie gov relate to each other by putting in unrealistic and rather farcical caveats, when any student of US history knows they do not hold up under any real scrutiny.

All it does is make you look like a bootlicker and propaganda agent, while hurting your cred and not doing a damn thing to help the image of the US military.
And yet how many helo's still came down, and who actually ended up in control of that nation? The N. Vietnamese kept their MiGs for defensive purposes, and didn't contest the southern part of the country much because they didn't need to; the Veitcong could knock down planes for them without risking their MiGs.

Once again, you try to deny or deflect using rather flimsy and easy to debunk or see through caveats.

The military sets its own objectives.
I know this from doing my fucning job

We only lost Vietnam because we literally had one hand tied behind our backs.

Had we been allowed total war status, All of that area would be using the South Vietnamese flag and not ever have been communist.

But we were literally held back because worried about WW3

 

[Bacle]

The military sets its own objectives.
I know this from doing my fucning job

We only lost Vietnam because we literally had one hand tied behind our backs.

Had we been allowed total war status, All of that area would be using the South Vietnamese flag and not ever have been communist.

But we were literally held back because worried about WW3

Have you ever considered that maybe the US military keeps fighting with one arm behind your back because the US public is not interested in total war or causing WW3?

Edit: Oh, and shit like the Mai Lai Massacre also rather sours the public on giving the military a looser leash.

 

[TheRejectionist]

Out of curiosity, when was the enemy in Istanbul? Turkey's been in NATO for my lifetime.

I meant Muslims in general. That's how the propaganda I remember was.

 

[Chiron]

 

[bintananth]

Russia can't afford to fight wars in the extremely expensive way the US does, and its silly to expect them to.

^^^^ this ^^^^

When the US goes to war the US does it with a budget of "yes". The current US military budget of $782bn would bankrupt Russia.