The awful beauty of the riots in Kiev, Ukraine

[Foppa]

Just pretend all-out mock war between U.S. and Russia without nuclear bombs. Who's the winner?

 

BTW, nuclear weapons stockpiles:

 

Russia - 8500 (more mobile i.e. RT-2PM Topol trucks)

U.S. - 7700 (mostly silos and aircraft bombers)

France - 300

China - 250

U.K. - 225

Pakistan - 100 to 120

India - 90 to 110

Israel - 80

N.Korea - supposedly 6 to 8

Iran - ???

 

I was surprised Pakistan inventory.

 

You know how many nuclear weapons Russia has, but you or your family has never heard of the Ukraine?!

 

Edit: My bad, you didn't say you hadn't heard of Ukraine. But kind of like huzkerbob said, it's no shock that Americans don't know where or what the Ukraine is. Wasn't it Leno or Letterman that had that segment that they asked people on the sidewalk simple questions and they were completely awful at it? I remember there was one about Nebraska, and the people that were asked not only had no idea where it was, some didn't even know it was in the U.S.

[Excel]

Just pretend all-out mock war between U.S. and Russia without nuclear bombs. Who's the winner?

 

BTW, nuclear weapons stockpiles:

 

Russia - 8500 (more mobile i.e. RT-2PM Topol trucks)

U.S. - 7700 (mostly silos and aircraft bombers)

France - 300

China - 250

U.K. - 225

Pakistan - 100 to 120

India - 90 to 110

Israel - 80

N.Korea - supposedly 6 to 8

Iran - ???

 

I was surprised Pakistan inventory.

.........You say full out war but what do you mean? Is it to the death as in...destroy the other's military, control his territory, capture his capital etc? Or are we fighting for a specific area or goal? Do we have allies? What?

 

No allies, both sides. Again, just pretend. And mock war will be done when unconditional surrender in which no guarantees are given to the surrendering party.

 

You remember "Amerika" B-film (or something like that) in Lincoln location just after Terms of Endearment? Russia won. Whole bunch of helicopters and one scene filmed in lite prison or rehab hospital on Pioneer Park area.

 

We still win. Just stockpile tons of poisoned vodka. Let the Russians invade, drive us back, capture and drink vodka, die, war machine collapses War of the Worlds style. fin

[Excel]

"The" is antiquated.

 

 

"The the has stirred up a lot of strong resentment in Ukraine. The feeling is that the definite article’s heavy use during the era of the Soviet Union by Russians and Westerners alike belittled, intentionally or not, Ukrainians, and demoted Ukraine from a country unto itself to a mere Soviet holding, a border region of the U.S.S.R.

Most historians and linguists agree that the name Ukraine comes from the Slavic ukraina, meaning “borderlands.” Since many countries whose names derive from a geographical feature or factor have a definite article—“the Philippines” referring to the Philippine islands, “the Netherlands” meaning “the lowlands”—the Ukraine makes sense in terms of “theborderlands.”

[Hooked on Huskers]

Just pretend all-out mock war between U.S. and Russia without nuclear bombs. Who's the winner?

 

BTW, nuclear weapons stockpiles:

 

Russia - 8500 (more mobile i.e. RT-2PM Topol trucks)

U.S. - 7700 (mostly silos and aircraft bombers)

France - 300

China - 250

U.K. - 225

Pakistan - 100 to 120

India - 90 to 110

Israel - 80

N.Korea - supposedly 6 to 8

Iran - ???

 

I was surprised Pakistan inventory.

 

You know how many nuclear weapons Russia has, but you or your family has never heard of the Ukraine?!

Not me but my wife. I was a semi-expertise for world history.

[Hooked on Huskers]

We still win. Just stockpile tons of poisoned vodka. Let the Russians invade, drive us back, capture and drink vodka, die, war machine collapses War of the Worlds style. fin

Funny! Probably true! Poor comrades.

 

[Excel]

We still win. Just stockpile tons of poisoned vodka. Let the Russians invade, drive us back, capture and drink vodka, die, war machine collapses War of the Worlds style. fin

Funny! Probably true! Poor comrades.

 

 

Those same women a year later:

 

[strigori]

Just pretend all-out mock war between U.S. and Russia without nuclear bombs. Who's the winner?

 

BTW, nuclear weapons stockpiles:

 

Russia - 8500 (more mobile i.e. RT-2PM Topol trucks)

U.S. - 7700 (mostly silos and aircraft bombers)

France - 300

China - 250

U.K. - 225

Pakistan - 100 to 120

India - 90 to 110

Israel - 80

N.Korea - supposedly 6 to 8

Iran - ???

 

I was surprised Pakistan inventory.

 

Without? It would be tough but we would win. We have a higher population but a large portion is not fit to serve. We also, even now with our depleted industry, have a larger base to draw from as far as logistics. While some Russian weapons systems get close to rivaling their American counterparts I believe we field more current generation systems, train more on them and maintain them much better.

 

Our militaries are very different and I believe ours is organized better. While militaries can be judged on their raw manpower and equipment as much can be said for leadership and we have an edge. Much of what made the German Army so formidable in the World Wars was their retention and dispersal of institutional knowledge and their training and use of operational and tactical leaders. They had better staffs, officer schools, reserves and so on. Much of our military is based on the concepts that made the Germans so successful, from the use of combined arms to our cadre system of mobilization and the establishment of ROTC programs. I think we do that better than anyone else in the world and that our Field and Company Grade Officers and especially our NCOs...the people that really win wars...are definitely the best.

 

As far as experience and training we win that. While Iraq and Afghanistan were not force-on-force fights like you're imagining there is still something to be said for thirteen years.

 

Then we can look at other things. Oil and energy which the Russians have more of or at least better access. Our Navy is unquestionably better. I know little about Air Forces but the retirement of the A-10, an aircraft designed to mow down soviet tank columns in the Fulda Gap, is disconcerting because it shows our Air Force's shift in philosophy. Still think we win that too though.

 

You say full out war but what do you mean? Is it to the death as in...destroy the other's military, control his territory, capture his capital etc? Or are we fighting for a specific area or goal? Do we have allies? What?

Lots of old war thoughts that no longer apply.

First question is who wins air superiority? The US no doubt. And after you control the skies, everything else is a forgone conclusion. Tanks, military bases, number of troops, are all victim of bombers and missiles. Sure the finish might take awhile and be ugly, but in the terms of actual warfare and not 'militia clean-up' its over if you don't have aircraft.

[zoogs]

The US no doubt? I don't know. Our total fleet of F-22s is not a very large one. Any hypothetical contest would probably necessarily involve a number of older generation US air superiority fighters that are more comparable to the MiGs and Sukhois they've got. I mean, just the thought of fighter-on-fighter combat to establish air dominance, that's an issue we've been veering in the opposite direction of dealing with since the dissolution of the USSR (and for legitimate reason, I suppose.) Ok - I'm completely not sure of the state of Russia's economy, military might, or air force. But it's not like they were never known for building extremely kickass warplanes.

 

It's hard to imagine anything other than a proxy war, though. Any real fight to the death or invasion is a pretty unsavory proposition, because the fact is the nuclear weapons do exist and you can't trust a desperate country on the ropes to totally submit and go down fighting conventional tooth and nail, rather than resorting to that option. Especially because with the destabilization that comes with being pushed to the brink, who really controls those nukes?

 

 

^ On an unrelated note, this was pretty good. What happened to that New York Times editorial, Mr. Putin? Huh? Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh, I hope you brought BURN HEAL.

[Hooked on Huskers]

The US no doubt? I don't know ................

My thoughts exactly.

 

I spent hours after hours searching for U.S. and Russia fighters contest. Bottom line, pretty much tied, pro and cons both sides. I know SU/MiGs are more maneuverable and generally faster than our fighters. But U.S. got stealth (F-22 & F-35)............Russia did not. Also, U.S. bombers are superior. But Russian SAM radars are more advance than our design.

 

Final decision, toss up, pretty much tied.

 

 

Su-27 entered service with the Soviet Air Force in 1985. Number built: 807. Ukraine got 50.

[Excel]

The effectiveness of non-nuclear strategic air power is still debatable and the idea that it, by itself, can win a war is far from accepted. We saw how it failed in World War Two. The Russians also have what is probably the strongest air defense system in the world.

[strigori]

The effectiveness of non-nuclear strategic air power is still debatable and the idea that it, by itself, can win a war is far from accepted. We saw how it failed in World War Two. The Russians also have what is probably the strongest air defense system in the world.

WWII tactics and strategy are vastly out dated. That was still an era where how many men you had in an army mattered. Numbers of foot soldiers mean very little in this theoretical type of war we are talking about. Air power would not outright win a war, but it outright cripples the loser of the air superiority fight. If you can't keep the opposing aircraft down, you lose all of your infrastructure, power, roads, telecoms, rail, fuel pipelines. It forces the loser into what amounts to a guerrilla defense.

[Excel]

You're right, it worked in Vietnam. Had we not bombed the crap out of the North I don't think we would have won so convincingly.

[carlfense]

You're right, it worked in Vietnam. Had we not bombed the crap out of the North I don't think we would have won so convincingly.

. . . that's a really terrible argument.

 

If you're comparing Arc Light B-52 runs dropping unguided munitions onto the jungle to modern air to ground tactics . . . well . . . you're doing it wrong.

 

 

Now, you're right to point out that wars can't be won from the skies alone. Also, "non-nuclear strategic air power" isn't used in quite the same way that it was in the past and tactical air power is an entirely different ballgame today.

[Hooked on Huskers]

You're right, it worked in Vietnam. Had we not bombed the crap out of the North I don't think we would have won so convincingly.

. . . that's a really terrible argument.

 

If you're comparing Arc Light B-52 runs dropping unguided munitions onto the jungle to modern air to ground tactics . . . well . . . you're doing it wrong.

 

 

Now, you're right to point out that wars can't be won from the skies alone. Also, "non-nuclear strategic air power" isn't used in quite the same way that it was in the past and tactical air power is an entirely different ballgame today.

Actually most B-52D in Vietnam missions was a precise release ('bombs away") for unguided munitions. Kinda like GPS........ not satellites but ground radar. Known as Combat Skyspot. One ground radar site was Laos........clandestine and covert operations - see http://en.wikipedia....ki/Laos_Site_85 .

[carlfense]

You're right, it worked in Vietnam. Had we not bombed the crap out of the North I don't think we would have won so convincingly.

. . . that's a really terrible argument.

 

If you're comparing Arc Light B-52 runs dropping unguided munitions onto the jungle to modern air to ground tactics . . . well . . . you're doing it wrong.

 

 

Now, you're right to point out that wars can't be won from the skies alone. Also, "non-nuclear strategic air power" isn't used in quite the same way that it was in the past and tactical air power is an entirely different ballgame today.

Actually most B-52D in Vietnam missions was a precise release ('bombs away") for unguided munitions. Kinda like GPS........ not satellites but ground radar. Known as Combat Skyspot. Ground radar sites was Thailand and one Laos (clandestine - see http://en.wikipedia....ki/Laos_Site_85 )

Are you suggesting that the accuracy of Combat Skyspot is comparable to modern guided ordinance?