Another member who can clearly define intelligence quotient class room scoring order of the board's bottom five.
Biden Weighs Deploying Thousands Of Troops To Eastern Europe & Baltics
- Thread starter 2012Bearcat
- Start date
my son just graduated boot camp
during a night exercise he watched a-10’s do what they do all night long
you are solely speaking your opinion
Agreed, it his opinion. Where did your son do his boot camp?
Co-worker has 2 sons who went in to the NAVY and are getting out ASAP it is going so woke. Both wanted to serve a long time, but they don't feel like they have a place or a voice. One naval ship did not allow MAGA hats but allowed BLM shirts as an example. If you were a conservative you could not speak your mind. We have a bunch a good enlistees, not saying that does not exist.
The military is changing.
IF we have a 9/11 type event, I have no doubt we will have many good young men that will enlist and go fight. I just hope the wokesters stay the hell out of the way and not hurt morale more than it already has over Afghanistan and focusing on "social justice" in the US.
Appreciate their service, I hope your son does not end up in a conflict, especially for this Prez, I don't trust him.
did basic and doing AIT at leonard wood
i took my friend that’s was in the first cav in 1966 to his basic graduation to explain the facts of life
4 years then he can make his own decisions about where his career in the army goes
that’s the deal we made
my son is 165# fireman’s carrying his buddy up and down the barracks that’s 6-5 260
his buddy carried him but had to do lunges
some real woke stuff there
you said ARMY which is a different branch of service than the NAVY
I did Basic at Fort Leonard Wood (many moons ago). The only AIT back then (Viet Nam era) in Missouri was transportation (truck drivers). I did AIT at Ft Gordon, Ga. I did 6 years in the army. My "Zero Week" test scores at Ft. L Wood qualified me for a non-combat MOS with a superior path for promotion and advancement. They were the most formative years of my life.
If you look at the talk from the top, I can't see how it makes a difference. You kept track of Milley's comments this past year? That is not your son's fault. Milley called China on his own to assure them Trump was not attacking, should have been fired for that. He also said he wanted to understand white rage. WTF does CRT and white rage have to do with being prepared for war unless you are grooming a military to eliminate "white rage" in the US?
Your son would probably be a better leader than Milley. We are very weak at the top.
Army video....
Our forces stuck their noses in the politicization and the divisive rhetoric that was taking place before Trump took office and was blamed on Trump.
I pray your brave son does not have to fight under this President and military leadership, that is not his fault.
The days of getting gut punched or getting your ass kicked by a drill sgt is long past. The hands-off soft training rules crept into the military in the mid 80s. I hosted 6 marine MPs from the USS Samuel B Roberts in Dubai for 5 days in 1988. Their military experience was far from mine.
cool story
thanks for sharing
he’s doing heavy equipment training
past that it’s up to him
The USA IMO is the number one corrupt government on the planet and the media lie their ass off- I believe the only way tonat least attempt to get the truth is have outside this country news you can weigh it against as the one poster gets some of that news.
Again 6 companies (Blackrock, vanguard et al) own all of our news. Then direct tv gets rid of OAN who did try to get things right- what a cluster sold out country we have.
Again 6 companies (Blackrock, vanguard et al) own all of our news. Then direct tv gets rid of OAN who did try to get things right- what a cluster sold out country we have.
Until you have dealt with governments other than the US you are not qualified to grade the US level of corruption. I have been to 96 different countries. I had business interactions with 30 or so different governments. The US is not in the top 20, maybe 30, as far as I am concerned. The US is corrupt for certain but the corruption is very covert and by fewer offices. My top 4 in no particular order, Nigeria, Russia, Viet Nam and Indonesia. The least corrupt, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland & Austria.
Dark money in the southern part of Italy is a part of doing businesses, taxes so high it is the only way to get paid fairly.
You are greatly underestimating Russia's capabilities, and over estimating NATO's. The Russian army is nothing to sneeze at. The Russian Air Force has greatly recovered after the end of the USSR. If you think it will be like Iraq, it will not. Not sure NATO countries have the stomach for what it would take, and the fortitude to take casualties. The US especially can ill afford any casualties politically speaking. If Putin thinks he can win through a political issue with the US he may take that chance. I would not like to be placing bets for a game of chicken between Biden and Putin. That being said what is to say that the US would honor article 5. Biden's track record here is scary.
Yes, I know all too well. I was involved with the Trans-Med Pipeline from Tunisia to Sicily to Calabria (the toe of the boot) with an Italian prime contractor (Saipem-ENI) that I know from around the world. Even they could not insulate our operation from the "black hand" of business on the European side.
Even liberals in the leftist MSM know. Kind of pathetic watching fan-boys like you hold on to the very last strand.
He's incompetent.
What does total population and GDP have to do with his post? I believe he is referencing military might. NATO by definition has ZERO military hardware. Under the current situation in the Ukraine there is ZERO chance of any NATO presence in this powder keg.
Ask the CSoA how such demographics affect ones ability to wage war. Not to mention that the west industrial capacity also dwarfs Russias and total firepower when you include Turkey and the USoA also dwarfs Russia.
Turkey and Russia are frenemies and Putin thinking that throwing Armenia to Turkey will appease his fellow dictator Erdogan is amusing. Erdogan has his own designs for regional hegemony.
Canada already has "advisers" in Ukraine and the UK is sending in their own. I believe they are NATO members.
I believe you, especially, have seen how advisers lead to troops.
Thanks for the back up on that, I was just trying to get back to it and you beat me to it. Valid question. Yes, I was referencing military might.
Say some NATO members invokes article 5 and Turkey or any other nation part of NATO doesn't respond what does that do to the alliance?
Addressing Russia military capabilities, how many NATO nations can put aircraft into the air with the ability to take on Russian Migs?
Russia AF: 190,000 personnel (2021), est. 4,509 aircraft; they are essentially the US AF with their own version of 5th gen aircraft. Bombers, fighters, tankers, and support aircraft. Of the OTAN members only the US, has the capability to match them in the sky. Most of the other members are still working on 4th gen aircraft and have few 5th gen supplied by the US. This mismatch is a problem, and I would just be getting started.
Half of Saskatchewan are Ukrainians that speaks the language. I am 90% certain that Canada will not deploy armed combat troops. UK same same.
Under those circumstances, I don't believe anything happens. I believe each NATO member can opt in or out without repercussions.
In my opinion, none. Who would it be? France? Germany? Neither have expressed a an opinion to Putin's terms. We know Germany does not support Biden's plan regardless of what it is.
I am impressed with your history lesson but you are completely off-base concerning what applies to the current situation in the Ukraine and the Caucuses. Putin throwing Armenia? Putin has no interest in stirring shit in the independent South Caucuses. This region are proud members of the CIS. Russia will not allow a CIS member (Armenia) to be thrown to anyone (Turkey) outside the CIS circle.
During my travel days, I picked up a new employee with my company in Cheyenne. I drove him to one of my main offices in Boise. He was an AF fighter pilot who resigned his commission because he couldn't stomach Clinton. I know the AF suffered a fighter pilot shortage under Clinton that took years to recover.
I worked closely with the doggies (army) at Fairchild AFB and Homestead AFB. I admire Rdcldad son and hope him the very best. I can only imagine what it's probably like working under a commander-in-chief such as Brandon.
I worked closely with the doggies (army) at Fairchild AFB and Homestead AFB. I admire Rdcldad son and hope him the very best. I can only imagine what it's probably like working under a commander-in-chief such as Brandon.
They have 14 Su 57 s
UK has 21 F35s
Belgium 24
Denmark 4
Italy 12
Netherlands 24
Norway 31
Poland 32
OK quantity noted. The point is that there is almost no chance that anyone other than UK would activate their military against Russia for the Ukraine
Seems about right from what I can remember. I would point out that Russia will be getting a total of about 72 of those and are currently fielding more each year.
Here is the issue I have with the F22 and F35. Both of these aircraft are highly training intensive. To this point, and I'm a little out of the loop on this but I'll be sure to catch up over the weekend, the training for these countries has not been up to par and additional aircraft may not be coming anytime soon. Add in the rest of Russian aircraft available to defend thier home territory I would give a huge nod to the Russian AF if tested over Russia. That's about as much as I would want to get into as after that with aircraft being so secretive I would not want to try to make comparisons.
Nice list though. I will say that my experience with NATO is a bit disappointing in that most of the member nations have officers that are not as well trained as our NCOs, but Germany, England, and Canada do match up well. The other problem is joint training is limited for NATO countries as well. Russia enjoys a very robust training program at this time.
The overall point of all that is to say that many in the West have underestimated what Russia can do and during the 90s they were a shell of thier former selves. Putin has fixed that and they are quickly catching up technologically. Thier Army is still a very tough force that will match up well against any western nation. Underestimate Russia at your own risk. I have a lot of respect for what they are capable of, and from the Russians officers I have met they are professional.
I hope that is helpful, and I am not trying to argue with you but pointing out there is more to consider than what most understand. Not saying that you do not, but I have some insight on this and wanted to share.
Here is the issue I have with the F22 and F35. Both of these aircraft are highly training intensive. To this point, and I'm a little out of the loop on this but I'll be sure to catch up over the weekend, the training for these countries has not been up to par and additional aircraft may not be coming anytime soon. Add in the rest of Russian aircraft available to defend thier home territory I would give a huge nod to the Russian AF if tested over Russia. That's about as much as I would want to get into as after that with aircraft being so secretive I would not want to try to make comparisons.
Nice list though. I will say that my experience with NATO is a bit disappointing in that most of the member nations have officers that are not as well trained as our NCOs, but Germany, England, and Canada do match up well. The other problem is joint training is limited for NATO countries as well. Russia enjoys a very robust training program at this time.
The overall point of all that is to say that many in the West have underestimated what Russia can do and during the 90s they were a shell of thier former selves. Putin has fixed that and they are quickly catching up technologically. Thier Army is still a very tough force that will match up well against any western nation. Underestimate Russia at your own risk. I have a lot of respect for what they are capable of, and from the Russians officers I have met they are professional.
I hope that is helpful, and I am not trying to argue with you but pointing out there is more to consider than what most understand. Not saying that you do not, but I have some insight on this and wanted to share.
Russia will NOT field 72 Su57s in the near future let alone soon enough if war comes this year. They need buyers to help them afford to build their own and are not getting them and the Su75 has no buyers either and will likely stay on the drawing board. They have hypersonic glide vehicles and that is a nice toy that changes nothing strategically when 1 nuke sub can wipe out 192 Russian cities.
I respect them and understand that should they invade they will not be dislodged by the USoA/NATO/EU.
Whoever holds the ground will keep it. That is how it works between nuclear armed states.
So my position is that NATO should be first in if the intent is to prevent invasion. Otherwise tuck tail and hand over Ukraine and wait until Putin makes demands on the Baltics and Poland and cave again.
Fair enough, but I do not think a few small units from England and the Baltics is going to change the playing field. One of Putin's goals is to weaken or destroy NATO, and if he can move in and take a small bit of Ukraine that will accomplish his goals. The US is the only country that stands a real chance to stop him. Everything else is just pawns on the table. I have a strong feeling that we will as you say be back at this with the Baltics states and Poland in the future. I am no Nevil Chamberlain but I don't think the American people are up for that fight right now, and if we can push it to the future there is chance if we can get rid of our current leadership. That being said I can look at this from Russia's point of view and see the moves they are making and why, and I don't blame them. The biggest thing in our favor right now is that Russia is no longer a Communist Nation, and diplomacy may be able to win out, but a line will have to be drawn at some point. Good back and forth.
What little I know. The US nuclear sub fleet can destroy the world in 20 minutes.
The oceans of JP-4 jet fuel I loaded onto jets became extinct in 1994. Today jets burn diesel fuel. I learned this at an air show at TSTC in Waco a couple years ago. KC-135 tankers and B-52's no longer use water assist for take-off.
The oceans of JP-4 jet fuel I loaded onto jets became extinct in 1994. Today jets burn diesel fuel. I learned this at an air show at TSTC in Waco a couple years ago. KC-135 tankers and B-52's no longer use water assist for take-off.
24 missiles x 8 MIRVs = 192 targets per sub. Each MIRV has a yield of 100kt ~ 5x that of the bomb dropped on Nagasaki.
18 subs can deliver almost 3500 warheads to enemy targets. 17000 Nagasakis in 20 minutes.
Now do that for the Russian subs. In all honesty I'm curious about the Russian subs.
Did not use Janes nor was it cut and paste. I was old school and used a calculator and typed it myself. But you are welcome anyway.
LOL ...lets say they have parity for argument sake then we have 34000 Nagasakis
So the real math is a function of 5 gallon pails x the number of family members x how long you have to stay below ground before you can come back up (surprisingly physics.org article written many moons ago said 2 weeks) + how long before you can grow food etc. Assuming you survive the hit.
Last I checked the Russians have more nukes than we do. The Czar bomba could look like it was going to destroy the world on its own. I was just curious about the subs. Their navy is something I don't know enough about. That's the scariest part of even talking about a possibility of USA v Russia. They can each destroy the world more than once. Fun discussion.
