- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: British Army admits Russia could destroy their only remaining fighting unit...
Posted on 1/24/17 at 7:54 am to Darth_Vader
Posted on 1/24/17 at 7:54 am to Darth_Vader
Darth,
What did you say about our numbers in Europe? Personally, I don't think we could make a sizeable dent in their forces, and even if they didn't use tac nukes I don't think they could be stopped before well into Germany.
However, they know that would be total war. I'd also imagine some kind of strike (maybe on our mainland) to divert our forces. Maybe come in from Alaska.
What did you say about our numbers in Europe? Personally, I don't think we could make a sizeable dent in their forces, and even if they didn't use tac nukes I don't think they could be stopped before well into Germany.
However, they know that would be total war. I'd also imagine some kind of strike (maybe on our mainland) to divert our forces. Maybe come in from Alaska.
1
Posted on 1/24/17 at 7:59 am to terd ferguson
quote:
striking deep and fast in the enemy's rear
Is that why you like tanks so much?
Armor is the arm of decision. Which could lead from your point to something even more lascivious.
Once I was talking to a Marine tanker captain. He said their mission was to support the Infantry.
"But still the arm of decision, right?"
"Of course."
This post was edited on 1/24/17 at 8:01 am
Posted on 1/24/17 at 8:15 am to WhiskeyPapa
Simply put tanks are as vital today as they have ever been.
successful Land attacks will have to feature
1. MLRS (anti-infantry to lower the threat of ATGMs)
2. Advanced and mobile AA support
3. Mobile Artillery such as the M109A Paladin
4. Tanks to push the speed of the assault
5. Mobile infantry
6. Air and ECM support
successful Land attacks will have to feature
1. MLRS (anti-infantry to lower the threat of ATGMs)
2. Advanced and mobile AA support
3. Mobile Artillery such as the M109A Paladin
4. Tanks to push the speed of the assault
5. Mobile infantry
6. Air and ECM support
This post was edited on 1/24/17 at 8:16 am
Posted on 1/24/17 at 8:27 am to Spaceman Spiff
quote:
What did you say about our numbers in Europe?
Well, we've just deployed one armored brigade from the 3rd Inf. Div. To Poland. And we've still got one airborne brigade in Europe as well. They are based in Italy but were training in Latvia not long ago. And we did have a force of Marines in Norway, I think battalion strength. But I'm not sure they're still there or not. In addition to this we've also got a "light" cavalry regiment in Germany. Added all together we've got roughly little less than an underStrength infantry division or so sized force in Europe right now.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 8:32 am to Darth_Vader
This coincides with what Trump has been saying.
American taxpayers are paying to protect European countries who aren't paying their fair share.
American taxpayers are paying to protect European countries who aren't paying their fair share.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 9:09 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
Well, we've just deployed one armored brigade from the 3rd Inf. Div. To Poland. And we've still got one airborne brigade in Europe as well. They are based in Italy but were training in Latvia not long ago. And we did have a force of Marines in Norway, I think battalion strength. But I'm not sure they're still there or not. In addition to this we've also got a "light" cavalry regiment in Germany. Added all together we've got roughly little less than an underStrength infantry division or so sized force in Europe right now.
In other words, not very much. What about Army air assets?
Posted on 1/24/17 at 9:43 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
Well, we've just deployed one armored brigade from the 3rd Inf. Div. To Poland. And we've still got one airborne brigade in Europe as well. They are based in Italy but were training in Latvia not long ago. And we did have a force of Marines in Norway, I think battalion strength. But I'm not sure they're still there or not. In addition to this we've also got a "light" cavalry regiment in Germany. Added all together we've got roughly little less than an underStrength infantry division or so sized force in Europe right now.
Sounds about like the force we had in the Philippines in 1941.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 9:45 am to Spaceman Spiff
quote:
In other words, not very much. What about Army air assets?
I believe the US strategy is to try to delay the speed of Russian advance while reactionary forces are deployed.
You can achieve this by blowing every damn bridge in Poland and Germany with TLAMs and stealth bombers. Once Russian forces are bottlenecked, counterattacking air assets would do work to lower the numbers.
Let's also remember Russia has much more ground to cover before ever threatening Germany than they did in the Cold War.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 9:49 am to Tigeralum2008
quote:
I believe the US strategy is to try to delay the speed of Russian advance while reactionary forces are deployed.
You can achieve this by blowing every damn bridge in Poland and Germany with TLAMs and stealth bombers. Once Russian forces are bottlenecked, counterattacking air assets would do work to lower the numbers.
Good luck with that crap.
I'd rather have Nagumo planning the Battle of Midway.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 9:54 am to Tigeralum2008
quote:
Let's also remember Russia has much more ground to cover before ever threatening Germany than they did in the Cold War.
I'm not even sure they'd try for Germany. I think they want the old Warsaw Pact countries they still view as "theirs". Namely the Baltic States and Poland. Although, they miggt try for Berlin if they ever did get going.
Posted on 1/24/17 at 10:15 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
I think they want the old Warsaw Pact countries they still view as "theirs". Namely the Baltic States and Poland. Although, they miggt try for Berlin if they ever did get going.
Possible. Considering what they have already "reclaimed," do you think they are done or will they try something? I'd like to say they won't due to this administration - if the unthinkable had happened and Hillary won, then I could see a war with Russia.
How do you think our upgraded Abrams compare to the T-14?
Posted on 1/24/17 at 10:16 am to Spaceman Spiff
But, before Russia could be stopped, air superiority is a must. Don't have that - can't win the ground.
All this brings another question, would a fight with Russia be quick, or drawn out like WWII or Korea?
All this brings another question, would a fight with Russia be quick, or drawn out like WWII or Korea?
Page 8 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News