• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

The US won that war. In 1973 North Vietnam was forced to the peace table, their military and economic powers crippled or destroyed. As part of the peace treaty, the US withdrew and they promised to never again attack South Vietnam.

Then 2 years later, they broke that agreement and attacked again.

There are 2 lessons learned form this.

1. Simple fact, the US did not loose the war. It won, it shoved a peace treaty down the throat of North Vietnam. With the very real threat that they would continue to bomb them into the stone age unless they agreed to stop attacking. It also did not hurt that their attempt to sway the negotiations in their favor (the Easter Offensive) was a complete disaster. They lost almost all of their armor and air capability in the offensive, and the US response (Operation Linebacker) destroyed much of their infrastructure, airports and bases, prevented the use of their ports because of mines, and largely reduced their capabilities to that of the 19th century.

2. Never trust Communists. They will readily say one thing, like agree to a peace treaty, or abandon a nuclear weapon and missile program. Then turn right around and do it anyways, as soon as they felt free to tear up the agreement made in the first place.

I know revisionists try to claim that the US lost the Vietnam War, but this is a fantasy they keep wanting everybody to believe. The US withdrew in 1973, the Second Vietnam War was in 1975. 2 years later.

Imagine a guy and his brother get into a fight, and their uncle breaks them up. Then later in the day they get into another fight, but blaming the uncle for not stopping it even though he was not there anymore. Myself, I think the biggest mistake in that entire war was not jumping back in with both feet the moment North Vietnam violated the peace treaty.

We went in as the Communist ass kickers

We whimpered to a pull out.

We got beat by little people in sandals and 2nd rate equipment.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

We went in as the Communist ass kickers

We whimpered to a pull out.

We got beat by little people in sandals and 2nd rate equipment.
You should probably take a history course or two. Your knowledge on the topic seems to be about as severly lacking on this as it is about the current conflicts. And that's saying a lot.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

You should probably take a history course or two. Your knowledge on the topic seems to be about as severly lacking on this as it is about the current conflicts. And that's saying a lot.

Your emotional ties are evident.

North Vietnam won by not losing.

They claimed their objective, which was control over South Vietnam.

America lost their objective, which was to save South Vietnam from the communist take over.

We lost so get over it.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

Your emotional ties are evident.

North Vietnam won by not losing.

They claimed their objective, which was control over South Vietnam.

America lost their objective, which was to save South Vietnam from the communist take over.

We lost so get over it.


Again take a history lesson. It might help.

Answer this question was south Vietnam a independent nation with a peace agreement with their northern neighbors at the time we left.


I guess you think we were just supposed to get our soldiers there forever to ensure the north didn't violate the peace deal they agreed to two years prior.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

Guerilla wars take time when you kill the enemy "by twos and tens". That and we didn't use maximum violence.

Similar to the Dresden bombings?
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

Your emotional ties are evident.

North Vietnam won by not losing.

They claimed their objective, which was control over South Vietnam.

America lost their objective, which was to save South Vietnam from the communist take over.

We lost so get over it.

Vietnam was a loss in terms of cost to benefit, however america did not withdraw because it lost, it withdrew because it could not win, it would have been an infinite war cycle or an absolute eradication of the whole north vietnamese population. Vietnam was not helped by generals who tried to run the show like we were fighting in ww2 or korea.

But overall we did not really lose the war in any conventional sense, but decided it was an unwinnable war and there was no need to keep our troops there for decades or longer for what tiny benefit we would have gained.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

Your emotional ties are evident.

North Vietnam won by not losing.

They claimed their objective, which was control over South Vietnam.

America lost their objective, which was to save South Vietnam from the communist take over.

We lost so get over it.

America did not lose South Vietnam.... It was still independent when we left. South Vietnam lost South Vietnam...
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

Vietnam was a loss in terms of cost to benefit, however america did not withdraw because it lost, it withdrew because it could not win, it would have been an infinite war cycle or an absolute eradication of the whole north vietnamese population. Vietnam was not helped by generals who tried to run the show like we were fighting in ww2 or korea.

But overall we did not really lose the war in any conventional sense, but decided it was an unwinnable war and there was no need to keep our troops there for decades or longer for what tiny benefit we would have gained.

Then I am glad to see you admit that we lost lost.

We were going to kick their Commie asses back over the border.......but we didn't.

Saigon fell and we lost.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

" country" is in no position to wage a real conflict." +1,
comments ?

"The week-long exercises, which kicked off yesterday, are intended as a show of might. But the country is in no position to wage a real conflict....

Vostok is not just a big military-training drill—it’s a massive psychological-warfare operation and a geopolitical gambit, being undertaken by Russia as it regains much of its martial mojo and its ability to mount and coordinate complex operations.

That said, there’s a difference between showing off your hardware and testing your new tactics, and actually going to war. We shouldn’t assume that Russia actually wants to fight some major conflict. If nothing else, while Vostok’s scale shows that Moscow has regained the capacity for a continental-scale operation, it could hardly afford to fight one for real. It would have a hard time mustering this kind of army during wartime, when railway lines and communication hubs would be primary targets.


This exercise is part of what I have called “heavy-metal diplomacy”: Russia’s use of its military to overawe and misdirect the West. We’ve seen this kind of undiplomatic diplomacy at work in Europe, where Moscow has responded to debates in Sweden and Finland about joining NATO with war games simulating Russian invasions. We also see this sort of diplomacy at work in the numbers game Vladimir Putin plays. In last year’s Zapad war games, Moscow lowballed the number of soldiers participating in order to keep it below the ceiling at which Western countries would be able to send inspectors under Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe rules. This time around, the Russians seem happy to play up those numbers. But the much-hyped 300,000 figure involves much false accounting—in practice, the real figure may well be closer to 150,000, which is admittedly still an impressive tally. Judging from past examples like Zapad, many of these soldiers are unlikely to leave their barracks. They’ll be “involved” in exercises at the command post, not ones out in the field." https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...9/russia-vostok-putin-army-china-nato/570034/

I seem to recall they said the same sh!t about 1930s Germany.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

I seem to recall they aid the same sh!t about 1930s Germany.

yes, and it was so, you know what make Nazi Germany N1 military power in Europe?
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

yes, and it was so, you know what make Nazi Germany N1 military power in Europe?

Litwin:

Good radios and a willingness to use them in anger.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

Litwin:

Good radios and a willingness to use them in anger.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

No , Skoda´s industries in Czechoslovakia , which you the west gave him , does it sound similar to you? Crimea, on the wish list industries of Donbas and Bielarus ...

 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

No , Skoda´s industries in Czechoslovakia , which you the west gave him , does it sound similar to you? Crimea, on the wish list industries of Donbas and Bielarus ...



Litwin:

Panzer 35(t)'s and Pz 38(t)'s didn't win the Battles of France, the Low Countries, Yugoslavia, Greece and account for the dismemberment of the Red Army in 1941-1942. What made German military might was excellent (for its day5) command and control and that was made possible by its radios. A Pz 38(t) was a self-propelled coffin if it went up against a French S-35 Somua, a British Matilda II or a Soviet T-34. What made schwerpunkt operations (and what is popularly known as blitzkreig) was well-coordinated combined arms tactics, radios for keeping some measure of control on chaotic and ever-changing battlefields, and prompt close air support and artillery support to suppress or destroy enemies while the motorised troops and the panzer forces out manoeuvred and encircled the enemy's main bodies of military might. It was radios and not tanks nor even more trucks and guns which set the conditions for Germany's many military successes between 1939 to 1942 inclusive.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

LOL.....we lost before we got there.

Almost 7000 deaths later, and you still don't get it.

We lost, and we are still there. Why? There is nothing to gain.

I will agree with you on this issue. Our soldiers are top notch; actually, too good to win against determined insurgents. They will never commit the large scale, mass atrocities that would be required to subdue some of those countries. Probably no democratic country would have success against an enemy that ignored human rights and would do anything to win. You can't win hearts and minds when they fear the insurgents more than they like what you're selling. Even the Russians, who can be pretty brutal themselves, found out what brutal really is, and didn't want to play that tit-for-tat game with the insurgents any more.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

Saigon fell and we lost.

2 years after we left, with a peace treaty in place.

I suppose we also lost WWI, because Germany took over France 20 years later.

A war or conflict ends when the major combatants are destroyed, surrender, or agree to a peace treaty. Anything that happens afterwards is a different war.

What you are saying is akin to saying Gulf War I (1991) and Gulf War II (2003) are the same war. They are not. In 1991 Saddam was beat back, and forced to agree to not attack Kuwait again. What happened afterwards was a completely different conflict.

What you are saying, is akin to saying that the Dodgers won the 2017 World Series, because they beat the Astros this season. Does not matter, different season and you can not reasonably make them both the same.

Get a grip on reality, do not try and bend it to fit your beliefs. The Vietnam War ended in 1973. What happened in 1975 (2 years after the US left) was a different war that the US had nothing to do with.

However, if the US had gotten involved again, it would have ended very differently.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

Then I am glad to see you admit that we lost lost.

We were going to kick their Commie asses back over the border.......but we didn't.

Saigon fell and we lost.

We who? Was or was not the nation of South Vietnam still standing when we left?
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

We did not get our asses kicked in Iraq an Afghanistan. Yes, we had setbacks and casualties but we did not get our asses kicked.

Yeah, a few trillion and counting worth of setbacks. That includes about $1.2 trillion for the future cost of VA medical care for the tens of thousands of broken minds and bodies. The neocons who got us into this mess really outdid themselves. And people think Trump's the idiot. :doh

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...aq-afghanistan-cost-almost-5-trillion-so-far/
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

the leading Muscovite expert about Muscovite powerful army myths


"Alexander Golts is one of Russia’s leading military analysts. He is the deputy editor-in-chief of the Russian news and opinion website ej.ru ("Daily Journal") and a columnist for The Moscow Times. He is currently a George F. Kennan Fellow at the Wilson Center, Washington, D.C. Previously, he was a visiting fellow at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation. He has written widely on the Russian military and Russian security policy."
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

No. On the contrary, as sub machine guns and rapid fire small arms became more prevalent, their ammunition position became more critical with front line units. The solution would’ve been target acquisition and sight refinement.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

No. On the contrary, as sub machine guns and rapid fire small arms became more prevalent, their ammunition position became more critical with front line units. The solution would’ve been target acquisition and sight refinement.

Sub-machine guns? What military uses those? I find it hard to think of any that use them other than for Special Forces and MP type units. The last that made large scale use of the sub-machine gun was probably Israel. And back in the 1980's they largely retired the Uzi from front-line use and moved to the M-16 series of rifles. In addition to the bullpup Tavor and Galil AK clone.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

Sub-machine guns? What military uses those? I find it hard to think of any that use them other than for Special Forces and MP type units. The last that made large scale use of the sub-machine gun was probably Israel. And back in the 1980's they largely retired the Uzi from front-line use and moved to the M-16 series of rifles. In addition to the bullpup Tavor and Galil AK clone.

MG-43,44 and 45s were highly sought after if the ammo was available. Stories of retreating units having about 30 shots between them aren’t that rare.
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

MG-43,44 and 45s were highly sought after if the ammo was available. Stories of retreating units having about 30 shots between them aren’t that rare.

STG 44 and 45s were assault RIFLES...

MG = MACHINE GUN

MP = MACHINE PISTOL (SMG)
 
Re: Don’t Fear the "Russian" Military, the country is in no position to wage a real conflict.

STG 44 and 45s were assault RIFLES...

MG = MACHINE GUN

MP = MACHINE PISTOL (SMG)
The ones that cranked out 10 rounds a second and looked like the AKs
 
Back
Top Bottom