- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #41
Really? Do you have a source? I only remember reading about the 7th VDV from Novorossiysk, and the 76th VDV from Pskov.
Russian Iskanders Pointed at BMD Sites
- Thread starter Feanor
- Start date
The Russians recently said that they'll deploy them only in responce to interceptors in Poland, not before.
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews+articleid_2781440.html
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gf597jyCz32lFZ4VtaSc3XTi0HSwD94BGVGG0
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-russia-missilesnov10,0,7326758.story
They still hope for a miracle.
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews+articleid_2781440.html
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gf597jyCz32lFZ4VtaSc3XTi0HSwD94BGVGG0
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-russia-missilesnov10,0,7326758.story
They still hope for a miracle.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #44
Do you have the number of the division in question?
That is a terrible analysis of the positioning of BMD systems. The Mid Course BMD system needs to be located a reasonable distance from the launcher area to be effective. Turkey is far to close to Iran to host the system going into Poland and Czechia.
ur confusing counter insurgency troops (which u need in greater numbers but with less heavy equipment) with large scale conventional war where heavy long range artelliery/MLRS is used. Russian did light surgical strikes but nothing like carpet bombing what US did in linebacker operations in Vietnam.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #48
That's beside the point. Your claim about it being a local war that did not involve out of district assets was wrong. Obviously the 58th Army alone was not considered enough for the operation. Keep in mind the MoD did their best to keep conscripts out of the war zone (only a few went in with the initial 19th Motor-Rifles, and iirc none from there on out) so that might have been a reason for additional troops to be flown in. There is also the question of the Tu-22M (3/R ?). If it was an M3 model, then strategic aviation was involved.
And like it was mentioned there are no parallels to be drawn with Vietnam here. Naturally the sortie rate for bombings was much lower then in Vietnam. The current VVS is much weaker then the USAF was then, has fewer planes, and is facing a much smaller opponent. At the same time there have been quite a few advances in technology since Vietnam that have made carpet bombings all but useless.
Reports: Kremlin rejects US missile defense
The anclave of Kaliningrad could become another Crimea- it was never in Russia proper, and Germany with Poland have more historical rights there. I'm sure there are alternatives to Iskanders in the said area. In the long term, longer range missiles could be assigned the same role from elsewhere.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NneenMWS9mM"]YouTube - Medvedev's interview to Le Figaro (full version)[/ame]
The anclave of Kaliningrad could become another Crimea- it was never in Russia proper, and Germany with Poland have more historical rights there. I'm sure there are alternatives to Iskanders in the said area. In the long term, longer range missiles could be assigned the same role from elsewhere.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NneenMWS9mM"]YouTube - Medvedev's interview to Le Figaro (full version)[/ame]
Last edited:
Of course but long range missiles need more time and this parameter may be critical.
about Kaliningrad it is not worth to discuss
I mean S/IRBMs or CMs (there are several classes, and they can be spread out) that have ranges adequate to be deployed well outside of the anclave.
Lukashenko of Belarus also wants Iskanders!
More articles in English.
Lukashenko of Belarus also wants Iskanders!
More articles in English.
Last edited:
Comparision is correct. When u want compare wars in airsuperiority terms that it means u have to use overhelming sustain force worth hundreds of billions of dollars. u cannot expect half billion dollar war preparation to yield similar result even if weopons are same vintage.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #55
You're making no sense. Comparing the wars is completely incorrect because the Vietnamese had a dense and very effective SAM network, where as the Georgian one was smashed in the few days of the war, the Vietnamese had an active and effective air force, where as the Georgian air force didn't even have any air superiority assets. Vietnam is a large country, with dense terrain, and a had a large and well developed resistance that was supplied by Soviets from North Vietnam. Georgia had a rather large, but conventional military that completely lacked the ability to fight as an army. There are no parallels to be drawn here. Naturally establishing air superiority over Vietnam was far more difficult, and bombing campaigns had to be far more intense, then over Georgia.
Georgians were part of Soviet Union and had pretty much similar training as other CIS countries. They were well funded and also supplied and trained by Ukranains and Israel. There equipment was not inferior to Russians.
On other hand Vietnamese were simple peasants who havent drivien a car before sitting in a jet cockpit. The scale of opposition to Russians were much modern and funded in terms of information and communications and they had mountaneous train with different altitudes.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #57
The Georgian military was completely incapable of acting coherently as a large scale force. And no their equipment was not similar to the rest of the Soviet Union. The amount of aid they received was much smaller then the aid N. Vietnam got from the Soviet Union (which isn't surprising give the context). Their SAMs were mostly outdated, even the fairly dated S-200's weren't present. Their best units were the Buks which they recently acquired from Ukraine. Their airforce had no air superiority assets whatsoever.
Militarily, Russians don't give a damn, they understand as well as anyone else those puny systems in PL and CZ are no danger to them whatsoever, not now not in future. The whole fuss is about permanent American military presence in their "near abroad". However putting it this way is politically incorrect, and Americans won't call their bluff (McCain actually did), hence this elaborate dance.
And we in Russia REALLY think that all these puny systems are the threat to national security and may be preperations to the first strike. This opinion is said by many military experts in Russia
and this is right
Even if Turkey is less than ideal to site radars & interceptors, Romania or Bolgaria- both now in NATO- could be an alternative- they are too far South to engage Russian ICBMs and still close to the path of hypothetical Iranian missile strike on Europe or N. America. I posted this idea before. Also, and without going too much into political details, the US doesn't want Iran (or anyone else in the ME, for that matter) to have any retaliatory long range missile strike capability.
Russia Threatens to Pull Out of Arms Treaty Over NATO Expansion
Russia Threatens to Pull Out of Arms Treaty Over NATO Expansion