- 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 5/6/15 at 9:42 am to Champagne
quote:
The Warthog will soon no longer exist as part of the US inventory. It is being phased out.
thats not true
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:43 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
thats not true
At least its getting easier to pick out the ones who have 0 idea what is going on in the real world
This post was edited on 5/6/15 at 9:44 am
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:44 am to Champagne
quote:
In that case, my guess is that Putin would go medieval on the Polish people. The response to every IED or guerilla attack on Russian supply or garrison troops would be the razing of the local Polish town to the ground without warning and while the civilians are still at home.
The goal would be to indiscriminately kill Polish civilians in response to terror attacks.
He would have to do that to each former Soviet country, once again stretching his military thin.
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:44 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
This isn't WWII, and logistically no other nation can match what we can do.
You're right, it's not WWII. But you're not taking into account the sheer volume of stuff we would be expending daily in a war in Europe against Russia. If we were to try to rely on nothing but C-17s to keep a front fighting against Russia, here's what each C-17 could take....
quote:
Capacity:
102 paratroopers or
134 troops with palletized and sidewall seats or
54 troops with sidewall seats (allows 13 cargo pallets) only or
36 litter and 54 ambulatory patients and medical attendants or
Cargo, such as an M1 Abrams tank, three Strykers, or six M1117 Armored Security Vehicles
Payload: 170,900 lb (77,519 kg) of cargo distributed at max over 18 463L master pallets or a mix of palletized cargo and vehicles
We have like 223 of these planes total. There's no way, even if we used every single one of them round the clock, which would be impossible BTW, they simply could not keep up with the demand for everything we'd need from replacement troops, tanks, ammo, food, and all the general supplies it requires to keep a fighting force in the field maintained.
quote:
Russia on the other hand would have a nightmare logistically pushing west.
do you honestly think the Russians would have more trouble driving truck convoys and trains across Poland than we would trying to supply our army across the Atlantic using nothing but air cargo aircraft?!? Come on now.
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:45 am to GrammarKnotsi
quote:
At least its getting easier to pick out the ones who have 0 idea what is going on in the real world
I had to do an 8min speech on saving the A-10 in Airman Leadership school. They are throwing billions to upgrade the airframe as we speak.
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:45 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
Darth_Vader
I like the new you
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:48 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
You're right, it's not WWII. But you're not taking into account the sheer volume of stuff we would be expending daily in a war in Europe against Russia. If we were to try to rely on nothing but C-17s to keep a front fighting against Russia, here's what each C-17 could take....
Not just C-17's brother. That was a C-5 I posted. Those pilots fly those routes daily. Also we have so much shite stockpiled in europe, we would be fine until a major resupply happened.
quote:
We have like 223 of these planes total. There's no way, even if we used every single one of them round the clock, which would be impossible BTW, they simply could not keep up with the demand for everything we'd need from replacement troops, tanks, ammo, food, and all the general supplies it requires to keep a fighting force in the field maintained.
C-5 and C-130 also man.
quote:
do you honestly think the Russians would have more trouble driving truck convoys and trains across Poland than we would trying to supply our army across the Atlantic using nothing but air cargo aircraft?!? Come on now.
Like myself and others have posted. Poland would become an IED waste land and the Russian non combat arms troops would be in a world of shite.
This post was edited on 5/6/15 at 9:49 am
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:48 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
I had to do an 8min speech on saving the A-10 in Airman Leadership school.
I had some training at Eglin and they let us sit on a 30mm(?) that was being serviced...Was the size of our rental car..
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:48 am to GrammarKnotsi
quote:
I like the new you
Thanks.
But I'm the same old dude I've always been.
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:49 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
I'm the same old dude I've always been.
You seem less.....
mudstompish...
in this thread..
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:50 am to GrammarKnotsi
quote:
I had some training at Eglin and they let us sit on a 30mm(?) that was being serviced...Was the size of our rental car..
I wish I could PSC back to that area and retire. I loved Hurby and Pcola right down the road was a blast, unless a ship just got back from a rotation.
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:54 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
I had to do an 8min speech on saving the A-10 in Airman Leadership school. They are throwing billions to upgrade the airframe as we speak.
A quick internet check will reveal that the Air Force wants to retire the aircraft from their inventory. Steps were taken in Congress to do that. Further debate in Congress, prompted by military advice to retain the A-10, continues, but, the plan to phase out the A-10 remains.
This military advice came from other armed services. The Air Force has not waivered from its plans to phase out the A-10.
Plans to phase out the A-10 would not abruptly halt upgrades and improvements of current A-10s in the inventory.
Correct me on anything that I've written that is wrong.
This post was edited on 5/6/15 at 9:55 am
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:58 am to Champagne
quote:
A quick internet check will reveal that the Air Force wants to retire the aircraft from their inventory. Steps were taken in Congress to do that. Further debate in Congress, prompted by military advice to retain the A-10, continues, but, the plan to phase out the A-10 remains.
This military advice came from other armed services. The Air Force has not waivered from its plans to phase out the A-10.
Plans to phase out the A-10 would not abruptly halt upgrades and improvements of current A-10s in the inventory.
Correct me on anything that I've written that is wrong.
Keyword- Wants to phase
A huge push with in the AF to keep it came up. Once again Billions are being throw at it to keep it flying at least until the 35 has its shite together.
The A-10 will be around another 10 years
Mccain even though hes a scumbag senator made the huge push to keep it(probably to keep AZ residents happy).
Up and down the AF people are saying getting rid of it right now is a bad idea for a few generals pet projects. 3 or 4 years ago you would be right saying this.
This post was edited on 5/6/15 at 9:59 am
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:58 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Not just C-17's brother. That was a C-5 I posted. Those pilots fly those routes daily. Also we have so much shite stockpiled in europe, we would be fine until a major resupply happened.
quote:
C-5 and C-130 also man.
Even if we went and pulled all the old retired transports out of mothballs, that's still not enough to keep a sufficient force that we'd need in a war against Russia supplied and equipped. Even in ammo alone we'd be going through literally thousands of rounds of everything from 9mm up to 155mm every single day. Hell, just to defend Central Poland we'd need at least a Army sized formation of at least two corps. I'm talking about a force of at least 2 or 3 armored divisions (We currently only have 1 BTW, 2 if you count the 1st Cav) and probably about 4 or 5 infantry divisions. I don't think you're comprehending the supplies a force of this size would require daily.
quote:
Like myself and others have posted. Poland would become and IED waste land and the Russian non combat arms troops would be in a world of shite.
And as others have said, the Russians would ruthlessly crush any uprising in their rear areas. Unlike the U.S., the Russians have zero problem with rounding up however many people they need and killing them outright to get the message across to everyone else. Plus, where would all these IEDs come from? Poland is not the middle east where everyone is walking around with an AK and has the benefit of a regime like Iran sowing weapons everywhere like they were planting corn.
Posted on 5/6/15 at 9:58 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Poland would become an IED waste land and the Russian non combat arms troops would be in a world of shite.
How long would the Polish resistance last once the Russians started to demolish Polish cities and begin mass executions of Polish civilians in retaliation for terror attacks?
WOLVERINE! Is great, but, once the Russians begin to execute 100 civilians for every Russian killed in a terror attack, the local Polish civilians will probably recommend termination of the Wolverine Movement.
The highways would run red with the blood of Polish mothers and children should Polish guerillas choose to engage in terror attacks against Russian soldiers.
This post was edited on 5/6/15 at 10:01 am
Posted on 5/6/15 at 10:00 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
And as others have said, the Russians would ruthlessly crush any uprising in their rear areas. Unlike the U.S., the Russians have zero problem with rounding up however many people they need and killing them outright to get the message across to everyone else. Plus, where would all these IEDs come from? Poland is not the middle east where everyone is walking around with an AK and has the benefit of a regime like Iran sowing weapons everywhere like they were planting corn.
Doing that would mean taking combat troops off the front line. You can't have it both says.
Posted on 5/6/15 at 10:01 am to Champagne
quote:
How long would the Polish resistance last once the Russians started to demolish Polish cities and begin mass executions of Polish civilians in retaliation for terror attacks?
WOLVERINE! Is great, but, once the Russians begin to execute 100 civilians for every Russian killed in a terror attack, the local Polish civilians will probably recommend termination of the Wolverine Movement.
The highways would run red with the blood of Polish mothers and children should Polish guerillas choose to engage in terror attacks against Russian soldiers.
I think you are high underestimating the Polish hate for the Russians.
Posted on 5/6/15 at 10:04 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Doing that would mean taking combat troops off the front line. You can't have it both says.
The Russians have always had rear echelon security forces who's sole mission and training focus on controlling civilian populations. Those formations are totally separate from their front line forces.
Posted on 5/6/15 at 10:06 am to StraightCashHomey21
Russian reserve and militia forces with lots of explosives can be used for retaliation attacks. It's not hard to kill mothers and children -- all that's required is a strong sense of ruthlessness and a healthy lack of sentimentality.
I do believe that Russia has an almost endless supply of manpower and womenpower. Russian women can be armed and used for Retaliation/Revenge attacks against Polish women and children.
Front line Russian forces would not be used to retaliate for Polish terror attacks.
I'm not saying that any of this will happen, my point is that people who firmly believe that their own view of the future is absolutely infallible are usually wrong.
NATO must remain strong and vigilant, and, civilian guerrilla movements in Europe's towns and cities won't be a huge factor.
I do believe that Russia has an almost endless supply of manpower and womenpower. Russian women can be armed and used for Retaliation/Revenge attacks against Polish women and children.
Front line Russian forces would not be used to retaliate for Polish terror attacks.
I'm not saying that any of this will happen, my point is that people who firmly believe that their own view of the future is absolutely infallible are usually wrong.
NATO must remain strong and vigilant, and, civilian guerrilla movements in Europe's towns and cities won't be a huge factor.
Page 13 of 25
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News