Planet-Love.com Searchable Archives
November 24, 2024, 02:48:39 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This board is a BROWSE and SEARCH only board. Please IGNORE the Registration - no registration necessary. No new posts allowed. It contains the archived posts from the Planet-Love.com website from approximately 2001 through 2005.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Deadly Ruskies?  (Read 2318 times)
BURKE89
Guest
« on: May 25, 2003, 04:00:00 AM »

Yikes, where is the "real enemy?"

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/16/102442.shtml

Logged
LP
Guest
« Reply #1 on: May 29, 2003, 04:00:00 AM »

... in response to Deadly Ruskies?, posted by BURKE89 on May 25, 2003

..taking over the Earth isn't good enough for the USA.

http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20030522S0050

Logged
Travis
Guest
« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2003, 04:00:00 AM »

... in response to Deadly Ruskies?, posted by BURKE89 on May 25, 2003

This is a joke right? I toured Soviet ships in '90. They weren't much of a threat then and I doubt they are now. This is probably nothing more than generals wanting to flex what muscle they have. Iraq was Soviet equipped and trained and they performed miserably in the first gulf war. They did worse in the second.

Don't get me wrong, I don't consider Russia a US enemy and I hope they don't consider us an enemy. In my opinion, we are both much better off being allies as we were in WW1 and WW2. And the war on terrorizm which we have both been plagued with.

Logged
BURKE89
Guest
« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2003, 04:00:00 AM »

... in response to We should be allies!, posted by Travis on May 25, 2003

I've seen the inferences from two distinct sources; so, I would call them accurate, indeed.

You're correct, in Iraq's training and the origin of their equiptment, however. I would venture to say: it's in the national character of the soldier - not their weaponry, (quality, that is) that creates decisive results..

I simply don't enjoy "mock nuclear attacks," of which several are within 6 miles of my home, due to the proximity of government installations!

V.

Ps. No joke, dewd! Despite the assurances of FOX!

Logged
vagn
Guest
« Reply #4 on: May 25, 2003, 04:00:00 AM »

... in response to We should be allies!, posted by Travis on May 25, 2003

Putin wants an all volunteer army.
The army brass doesn't want any changes.

They will trumpet their nuclear capabilities,
since they are the world leader in megatons
ready to launch.  What they won't mention is
that there is no plausible scenario for
launching one, let alone all, of their nukes.

So the interesting bits will be the stuff they
don't talk about--the non-nuke stuff.
I suspect the army will have to show how they
would succeed where the iraqies failed.

russian military doctrine (post iraq):
1. put raw recruits and field pieces all in a row
2. watch the tanks and guns get blown up from the air
3. Huh
4. Victory!

Right now all they've got for step 3 is nukes,
which they are not prepared to use unless they
get nuked first.  So, they don't have a step 3,
and that's what this exercise is all about.
It's a political necessity for Putin.  The
brass needs to step on it's collective crank
before they will admit there's a problem.

As to their choice of imaginary opponents:
Tradition, pride, and practical considerations
all require that they plan on taking on the
biggest bad-asses on the planet.  Don't let
it bother you.

Logged
Travis
Guest
« Reply #5 on: May 25, 2003, 04:00:00 AM »

... in response to don't read this as sabre rattling, posted by vagn on May 25, 2003

nt
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!