- 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
0
Posted on 2/4/16 at 9:44 am to elprez00
quote:
Completely talking out of my arse here, but don't the Marines have QRF's stationed in like Deigo Garcia that can put boots on the ground within a week?
Marines make movies. The Army makes history. Sure, rapidly deployable light troops are available from the USMC and the Army's XVIIIth Airborne Corps.
So, you get the light troops to the Baltics to do what exactly? Fight Russian armor? With their initial equipment?
Recall when we planned to face the Russians in the Fulda Gap with 2 armor heavy corps (V and VII). That was considered a dicey proposition, planned only because of political considerations (as trading space for time would have been smarter, but not palatable to our German allies). And there was no better force in the world for fighting that exact threat at exactly that place and time.
This post was edited on 2/4/16 at 10:08 am
Posted on 2/4/16 at 9:46 am to elprez00
quote:
prefaced my post with "Without Russian Air Superiority".
To have any chance, Russia would have to;
- Establish air superiority immediately over the battlefield
- Deploy Air Defense forward to assist in securing AS against the inevitable US counter attack with more advanced assets.
You're exactly right. And here's the thing. As of today, we have zero bomber squadrons and only six fighter squadrons in all of Europe. Here's where those are and what planes they fly...
480th FS - Germany - F16C
492nd FS - Great Britain - F15E
493rd FS - Great Britain - F15C
494th FS - Great Britain - F15E
510th FS - Italy - F16C
555th FS - Italy - F16C
We've only got one squadron that's close to the Baltic and it's equipped with the F-16. Yes, a good fighter. But not superior to the most modern Russian fighters.
LINK
As for A-10's. The last operation A-10 squadron in Europe packed up shop almost three years ago....
quote:
On 18 June 2013, the 81st Fighter Squadron was inactivated at Spangdahlem Air Force Base in Germany. The inactivation signaled the end of A-10 operations in Europe at that time.
LINK
Posted on 2/4/16 at 9:53 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Marines make movies. The Army makes history. Sure, rapidly deployable light troops are available from the USMC and the Army's XVIIIth Airborne Corps.
So, you get the light troops to the Baltics to do what exactly? Fight Russian armor? With their initial equipment?
Exactly. These forces are not equipped to hold off a fully mechanized offensive from a huge force like the Russians would be pushing into the Baltic. To try and throw them in there like that would be to throw them away.
quote:
Recall when we planned to face the Russians in the Fulda Gap with 2 armor heavy corps (V and VII). That was considered a dicey proposition, planned only because of political considerations (as trading space for time would have been smarter, but not palatable to our German allies). And there was no better force in the world for fighting that exact thread at exactly that place and time.
And even then it was expected that we'd have to resort to tactical nukes to stop them. Remember things like the Honest John and Davy Crockett?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 9:55 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Marines make movies. The Army makes history.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:00 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
You're exactly right. And here's the thing. As of today, we have zero bomber squadrons and only six fighter squadrons in all of Europe. Here's where those are and what planes they fly...
480th FS - Germany - F16C
492nd FS - Great Britain - F15E
493rd FS - Great Britain - F15C
494th FS - Great Britain - F15E
510th FS - Italy - F16C
555th FS - Italy - F16C
Holy shite. So we only have 4 fighter and two attack squadrons in Europe now? Not sure if that's the correct nomenclature, and given the age of the F-16s, they might be relegated to attack missions, leaving you with 1 eagle squadron and 2 Strike Eagle squadrons. Wow. So if shite went down, it'd be D-Day on steroids to take it back, right?
BTW, I see your serial down voter is back, Darth.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:04 am to elprez00
quote:
Holy shite. So we only have 4 fighter and two attack squadrons in Europe now? Not sure if that's the correct nomenclature, and given the age of the F-16s, they might be relegated to attack missions, leaving you with 1 eagle squadron and 2 Strike Eagle squadrons. Wow. So if shite went down, it'd be D-Day on steroids to take it back, right?
That's pretty much what we'd be looking at as things stand today. We'd have to undertake a massive redeployment of forces. Think REFORGER on steroids x10. Ans like I said before, this would take time, a lot of time. What will take place on the ground in Europe in the meantime?
quote:
BTW, I see your serial down voter is back, Darth.
That's a daily thing. I consider them my OT case of the herpes.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:11 am to Darth_Vader
So Russia's play is to gain as much ground as possible and get the NATO Euro nations to acquiesce to Russian occupation rather than wait for US/British counterattack, right? Because if the Baltic nations resist, then it gives us time to put troops and armor on the ground.
Who's likely to stand and fight? Germany? France? Do the former Soviet bloc nations lay down?
Who's likely to stand and fight? Germany? France? Do the former Soviet bloc nations lay down?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:19 am to elprez00
quote:
So Russia's play is to gain as much ground as possible and get the NATO Euro nations to acquiesce to Russian occupation rather than wait for US/British counterattack, right? Because if the Baltic nations resist, then it gives us time to put troops and armor on the ground.
The Baltic countries could only put up token resistance before they were overrun. Poland could probably put up a decent fight for a while, maybe even long enough to allow a NATO force to come to their aid. The problem though is there's not much aid to be had from NATO. Most of their European members have really cut back their military forces since the 90's. Germany is a great example. They've cut their military to the bone. Thankfully though that's starting to change.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:22 am to Darth_Vader
Damn I could talk about this forever. 
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:28 am to elprez00
quote:
Damn I could talk about this forever.
it is a lot more interesting that the usual banter on here.
As for a solution. There's two options.
1. The US can go ahead and redeploy ground and air forces to the ETO now. An effective deterrent would be at least one corps backed up by a couple fighter wings. This option would cost us billions.
2. NATO's European members wake their asses up and start looking out for their own common defense.
Option two is what I'd prefer to see. But knowing Europe like I do, I'd say I've got about as much chance of Katy Perry offering me $1 million dollars to allow her to perform fellatio on me as Europe does of actually looking out for it's own defense.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:34 am to Darth_Vader
Mainland Europe hasn't done that since what, Napoleon?
Reminds me of the Robin Williams joke about the French. "The French hate Americans. They're all saying "frick America. I hate America"..... What? The Germans are coming? I LOVE AMERICA!!!!!"
Reminds me of the Robin Williams joke about the French. "The French hate Americans. They're all saying "frick America. I hate America"..... What? The Germans are coming? I LOVE AMERICA!!!!!"
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:35 am to DatNolaClap
frick the World...literally.
They come down...talking heads in the media win jack squat on the battlefield.
They come down...talking heads in the media win jack squat on the battlefield.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:39 am to elprez00
quote:
Mainland Europe hasn't done that since what, Napoleon?
Now that you mention it, yeah. That was the last time there was a general European war between multiple major powers that didn't see the U.S. intervene. Well, there was the Crimean War if you want to count it.
quote:
Reminds me of the Robin Williams joke about the French. "The French hate Americans. They're all saying "frick America. I hate America"..... What? The Germans are coming? I LOVE AMERICA!!!!!"
They've faced the Germans/Prussians three times since the days of Napoleon. The only times they've won is when we were there to help them.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:42 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
If
quote:
If Russian tanks and troops rolled into the Baltics tomorrow
quote:
In numerous tabletop war games played over several months between 2014-2015, Russian forces were knocking on the doors of the Estonian capital of Tallinn or the Latvian capital of Riga within 36 to 60 hours.
quote:
I've been saying it for a long time now
quote:
Darth_Vader
Lol. We're all impressed.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:56 am to lsu2006
quote:
Lol. We're all impressed.
If you cannot contribute anything of value to the conversation then just move along.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 11:02 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
2. NATO's European members wake their asses up and start looking out for their own common defense.
The non-U.S. members of NATO spend, collectively about 1/2 (or thereabouts) of what the U.S. spends on defense. For that 1/2, they buy about 10 percent of the combat power. It is a parade field force.
If the UK and France do not go nuclear, they will not last on the battlefield with a real opponent, i.e. Russia, more than about 90 days.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 11:06 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
If the UK and France do not go nuclear, they will not last on the battlefield with a real opponent, i.e. Russia, more than about 90 days.
And I'd add that Germany would probably only last a week, maybe two if it had to go toe to toe with the Russians.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 11:31 am to Darth_Vader
A sitting duck that could take about 5000 lbs of lead and still fly
Posted on 2/4/16 at 11:39 am to Mr. Hangover
quote:
A sitting duck that could take about 5000 lbs of lead and still fly
The problem isn't so much the 1950s era Soviet AA guns. It's the missiles, baw. A-10s are marvelous attack planes and are robust and survivable craft, but they're no match for even modest surface to air missile capabilities. That would all have to be cleared first with very specialized units and missions.
And it would take time. Time that Europe doesn't have. America is a big country and it warps our perspective of how things are. It's only about 2100 or 2200 miles from Paris to Moscow. That's about the same distance as Chicago to San Francisco.
And the Russians can just drive their tanks there. We would have to move them, primarily, by ship. And that takes weeks.
Page 10 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News