It's official - Russia enters Crimea
- Thread starter Displaced Bama Fan
- Start date
- Status
Kind of a funny Russian take on the situation.
On a more serious note (battalions):
____________Estonia___Latvia___Lithuania_______Russia
Infantry________2
Light infantry____3_______3
Mech infantry____________________2_____________5
Motor infantry____________________2_____________5
Tank_________________________________________4
Airborne______________________________________8
Marine_______________________________________3
NATO 12 - Russia 25
In mech/motorized (which is better for offensive action) 4 - 17
I just cannot believe that Latvia has a grand total of 3 infantry battalions. That amounts to about 2,000 infantrymen. That is not pulling their weight in defending themselves. Who knows what their reserve force is.
If I was the Latvia Chief of the Defense Staff, I'd be training guerrillas like nobody's business, and I'd be doing so very publicly. And I'd be prepositioning lots of AKs, RPGs, RPKs and C4. If the Russians tried to swallow Latvia again, I'd give them a bad case of indigestion.
Last edited:
Ye gods! They surrounded themselves with us!
Kind of a funny Russian take on the situation.
On a more serious note:
____________Estonia___Latvia___Lithuania_______Russia
Infantry________2
Light infantry____3_______3
Mech infantry____________________2_____________5
Motor infantry____________________2_____________5
Tank_________________________________________4
Airborne______________________________________8
Marine_______________________________________3
NATO 12 - Russia 25
In mech/motorized (which is better for offensive action) 4 - 17
I just cannot believe that Latvia has a grand total of 3 infantry battalions. That amounts to about 2,000 infantrymen. That is not pulling their weight in defending themselves. Who knows what their reserve force is.
If I was the Latvia Chief of the Defense Staff, I'd be training guerrillas like nobody's business, and I'd be doing so very publicly. And I'd be prepositioning lots of AKs, RPGs, RPKs and C4. If the Russians tried to swallow Latvia again, I'd give them a bad case of indigestion.
How many of those numbers are not CONUS, not in Korea,and only mainland Europe specifically? Reagan put a significant number of troops in Germany and the U.K. To slow down a Russian invasion of the fulda gap and possibly would enable an immediate counter offensive to Russia in order to prevent a Russian reserve force to grow to ridiculous numbers like they did in WW2. We have significantly reduced our European force since then and if our German bases were to fall then mainland Europe would most likely as well. Russian potential reserve force would trump ours if that were to happen unless we abandon Korea. We are far too spread out to fight with both Russia and Korea and Europeans are too hit or miss to rely on to stop the Bears from bulldozing them without our help. It's like the Brits vs us in the revolution. They were technologically and numerically superior in regards to full military strength, but they were too spread out and were slower to provide long term reserves to the conflict.
But then again we are thinking in conventional warfare terms in regards to numbers and strength instead of nuclear terms in which all bets are off.
Sure, there'd be a delay as we mobilized, but we could absolute handle both NK and Russia at the same time. Bring air power into he equation and we own both of those countries in a conventional war.
Would the Russians resort to tactical nukes? Those who know them seem to think they might. I'm not so sure, as just as we have people who work to understand their world view, they do the same for us and they realize we generally view nukes as 'end game' weapons - which means if they employ them, we're potentially likely to do so in a very convincing fashion.
MAD and all that.
Then again, I'm a moron, so there's that. :biggrin2:
Would the Russians resort to tactical nukes? Those who know them seem to think they might. I'm not so sure, as just as we have people who work to understand their world view, they do the same for us and they realize we generally view nukes as 'end game' weapons - which means if they employ them, we're potentially likely to do so in a very convincing fashion.
MAD and all that.
Then again, I'm a moron, so there's that. :biggrin2:
There are a number of Russian strategic thinkers who bandy about the use of nuclear weapons as bargaining chips or, worse, "de-escalatory" (sic) tactics.
Sometimes, I get the impression that it is just Russians playing "crazy Ivan" the same way Nixon played "Tricky Dick": an political actor who is a little unpredictable in order to complicate his opponent's strategic calculations. There are some, however, who probably do in all seriousness contemplate employing them, and who may actually believe their use would be de-escalatory in the sense of presenting the US with the choice of backing down or risking Chicago.
Don't be so hard on yourself. You are nowhere near 92 territory.
That's exactly my concern. I'm not Chicken Little in a tinfoil hat waiting for little red men to fall out of the sky over my hometown. I just believe that either/both of these two have enough influence and chutzpah to require of the United States clear and firm foreign policy, which we seem to lack at present.
That has actually been a proven line of thinking in Russia, going all the way back to the Cold War...
I just got finished reading the 2009 Russian National Security Strategy and the 2015 version (signed on December 31st 2015, so it is pretty new).
Both talk about achieving "nuclear parity."
And both versions express a fear of US precision weapons and "Global Strike" capabilities, and hint at offsetting US dominance in precision with Russian superiority in throw weight.
Most American strategic thinkers look at nukes as a necessary evil or a nuisance, and something only to be used if a massive Russian strike is headed over the north pole. In fact, if we could put that genie back in the bottle and "uninvent" them, I'd bet a lot of US folks would be happy. Unfortunately we can't. Meanwhile, Russians are beavering away at crafting clever ways to work them into war plans without ending life as we know it.
The problem in anything at this scale is who, what, and where is involved. If we got involved with Russian they would strike hard at ramestien, turkey, and krygystan basically crippling our deployment and air capabilities in Europe and in the Middle East. This also frees Iran to do as they please in regards to Iraq and Saudi Arabia. We can handle nk as long as China doesn't get involved. So a conflict that size has a high potential of becoming 3 or 4 wars rather than just 1. So really is a situation that is hard to judge.
But my point was with Reagan we were more prepared to resupply because the numbers of armor and troops in Germany and Britain so the Soviets had to really think twice about doing their squirrelly stuff. Putin knows that as long as he doesn't attack Poland or countries like it, then he has nothing to fear as a direct counter. The only thing that makes me mad about this is how Obama won't shut up and color about it. Everyone knew after assaad "crossed that line" that he didn't have the guts to do anything to back up his empty threats.
I didn't mean it wasn't being currently considered. I meant that it's not new in the sense that there were forces in the Kremlin arguing for it as far back as the 60s, and those documents have come to light and have been confirmed by those "in the loop."
What is funny is watching just how "recycled" Russian thinkers are. Shoigu, Gerasimov, Bogdanov & Chekinov all grew up in the Soviet Army. Take off the hammer and sickle and replace it with a double-headed eagle and, voila, Russian strategy (looks a lot like Soviet strategy, without all the "world socialist revolution" rhetoric).
During the Cold War, the Soviets acted like such jerks to so many people that, the instant anybody could get away from them, they did. All of them.
30 years ago, there were Soviet troops 170 km from the Rhine. Today, there are NATO troops 160 km from St. Petersburg.
And Soviet thieving, murder and general oppression is to blame, no matter how much Vladimir Putin and the RT Network wants to pretend that is not true.
Last edited:
They have proven that no one can ruin Russia quite like Russians. Probably the worst thing that could have happened to that country was the discovery of vast fossil energy reserves. As one former Soviet Kremlin official said "Back in business."
The most recent NSS makes reference of the need to expand their economy beyond extraction of oil and gas. The strategy addresses "rational import substitution" and leveraging the military industrial complex (which I interpret to mean selling lots of weapons to lots of people around the world, which they already do a good bit).
The bottom line is that Putin & Co. realize the hole that extraction has put them in and they are suffering now for those early decisions to specialize in extraction. They are now trying to get out of that hole. A bit late, but better late than never.
My own experience with working with Russians is that they can be very capable technically, they make some decent, but simple, kit. The Russian mentality has been subject to a lot of perverse incentives for a long time. They will have to do some modifications. Doable, but this will take time.
In the meantime, until Putin leaves the scene (and I am convinced he will die in office), change will be tough.
Four (sic, actually five) Signs of Trouble inside Russia:
Wage arrears, governors being relieved, generals being sacked, Banks closing and public protests against the regime. Sanctions appear to be having an effect on Russia.
Wage arrears, governors being relieved, generals being sacked, Banks closing and public protests against the regime. Sanctions appear to be having an effect on Russia.
- Status
Latest threads
-
-
Game One of Alabama-Texas A&M Alabama Series Moved to Friday as Part of Doubleheader- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Bama Game Thread: Bama Gymnastics - NCAA Championship Semi-finals (ESPN2 | 4/18 @ 8pm CT)- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 32
-
No. 1 Visits Tuscaloosa for Second Straight Week as Alabama Hosts Top-Ranked Texas A&M
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
-
I'm Declaring the Emperor has no clothes (NCAA rules implosion)
- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 35