The shills are strong in this comment section. I summon thee u/Qanaut !
In all seriousness, this is factual. Russia id growing its military while we are shrinking. Russia is getting valuable hands-on experience in modern fifth generation warfare and the West is just emptying its stockpiles to let that happen.
No army is equipped to fight a land war in today's world. China could potentially mobilize enough industry to equip an army that way, but they don't really have anyone to fight that way.
Other than that, every single modern war depends on air superiority as an absolute requirement. You destroy the enemy before any of your guys are on the ground.
But you absolutely cannot do that against modern integrated air defense without losing a sizeable portion of your planes and pilots, which are too expensive to risk.
There is one comment in this thread that is accurate. Everything else is speculative and unthinking.
Including Macgregor. He is either out of the loop or is promoting BS.
NATO will never win. NATO is against the Trump/Putin/Xi alliance.
Russia will not fight the US. The US will not fight Russia. Same with China.
As to air power, you all need to do your research. The only F-type we have that compares to The SU-67 is the F-22. As to ground forces, US orients towards head-to-head; Russia does not, in case you haven't been following. Ukraine and all the others fooling around there haven't won shit.
Any of you gone head to head with Spetznaz? No? Thought not. Or US SpecOps? No? Thought not.
I suggest you quit speculating and concentrate on what's happening in your locale. That's where the real war is.
Keep in mind that Col MacGregor commanded the last huge tank battle in history in the Gulf War and led the charge that routed ALL the armored forces of Iraq. He is on a par of the other armored commander, Patton.
No he isn't. Patton fought german's who were 100xs better fighters than the Iraqis and Patton had a technological disadvantage compared to macgregor. He was no Patton.
In reading this thread, I have learned much more about the state of readiness and leadership-so I admit I was wrong about my assumption. I just hope there IS a strategy that parts from mere reactionary tactics and that politicians stay the hell out of the theater of action..
The U.S wouldn't need ground forces. What we dont possess is the need to go to war with the only country destroying the deep state in Europe. Also, biden doesn't control the u.s military. Plus anyone who has had any strategic training in war planning k ows that geography is not a place to fight. The cold war was planned in the pentomic system which envisioned the use of battlefield tactical nukes. I spent years on the trace being trained and training soldiers to hold off the soviets invasion of Europe. Look up the Hayward doctrine and understand why our entire strategy would have been a failure. We only had 30 days sustained combat supply relying on merchant marine resupply within 20 days... until... we discovered a dual rail line from the far east Russia that would over whelm our ability to resupply moving soviet troops and equipment. Under Reagan, Admiral Lyons took a fleet off the west coast of the yakutz peninsula. First time since WWII. This let the soviets know we would invade there and forces the soviets to reconsider moving troops out of that area. There's lots more i could share but it would take too long. We would be fighting the wrong enemy if we attacked Russia.
Literal nonsense. If you really believe that then you are hopelessly brainwashed.
There is no universe in every possible other world that this is plausible. A ridiculous example of the BS narrative foisted on the world.
And Russians ground forces are not a serious challenge to superior air forces and superior naval forces. And USA still owns those advantages over every other country, by a HUGE margin. Not even close. The USA’s greatest weakness isn’t our military capability. It’s our sold out political class betraying us from within.
Our military was designed for a massed enemy. It needed to be retooled for onesie, twosie forces. I offered the solution but was under bid by a group that failed. I also offered a solution to the IEDs but JIEDO was stuck on mega stupid.
But the real story in the end is that it was given back to the Taliban.
Seriously, this is such bullshit it's beyond belief.
The US doesn't have the logistics to occupy Crimea, let alone win anything against a +- peer opponent.
You literally need about 100x of everything to fight a land war similar to WWII. No body has that much of anything, and only China could potentially make enough war materiel, but they wouldn't have the logistics to fight anyone except Russia.
More like the mega steroid users long after they stopped using steroids. The army today is nothing like what it was during the Gulf War. And it was a coalition of like 6-7 countries, all of which are either no longer friendly towards the USA or have armies that are now completely pathetic.
The US makes like 20 tanks a year, and they aren't new tanks. They're refurbished shit from years ago. The US couldn't field 1000 of them, much less multiple thousands.
And this is exactly the case across every single military system except the space satellite and drone stuff.
And Iraq wasn't occupied during the Gulf War, despite there being like a million guys involved in the conflict. Most of the damage was done by a massive bombing campaign due to supreme air superiority.
Air superiority that wouldn't exist today against Russia in any shape or form. Not only because the planes no longer exist to achieve this (you have 1/2 as many bombers as there were in the early 90s), but because Russia has one of the best integrated air defense systems in the world. Literally only 4-5 countries in the entire world have systems like this.
If you can't use bombers (of which you have like 100 to begin with), you need to use men (which no longer want to enlist so you don't have enough), or tanks (which you don't have in sufficient battle-ready numbers) with artillery (which is wildly depleted after all the shells were given to Ukraine).
The only thing that would work is tactical nukes, but good luck there considering Russia has better and newer nuclear everything.
You would be surprised at how fast the vaunted air defense system would go down. It would take very little time to achieve air superiority. Then, every military vehicle west of a given line would be toast in short order.
Tanks are for the victory party.
My primary concern would be spare parts. The military runs on spare parts. The democrats always deplete our stockpiles of these. But I seem to recall Trump topping off our supply.
We would probably add some NATO exchange pilots to optimize sortie rates.
The whole point of massive integrated air defense systems is that you cannot take them out easily from the air and the USA absolutely doesn't have any other methods besides attacking by air.
Your only real method is to oversaturate the air around a specific region so that something gets through to hit the nodes of the system.
That is exactly what Russia is doing by using literally thousands of cheapo drones originally designed in Iran. Also the same tactic used by the Houthis and Hamas.
Get what the USA army has zero of? Cheap shit that flies that can be used to saturate AA systems.
Every single weapon made in the USA is designed to be complex and as expensive as possible, because this sells for the big bucks.
I won’t talk about how you do it, but we are quite capable. And yes our stuff is expensive. But it becomes very cost effective in combat. One of the keys to accelerated warfare was just a software upgrade.
Like I said above. The only true weakness is our traitorous political class. And Vietnam is a perfect example of this. We could have wiped their entire country off the face of the earth. But politicians were running that war. Not the military.
So we can blame you specifically for making the US army a lopsided lolcow that specializes in force projection that it can't project because all the "cool toys" are too expensive to actually use?
Seriously anyone who refers to weapons as "cool toys" instead of "tools" is, ironically, a giant tool. The type of douche who thinks he's a leet haxxor for knowing about SQL injection attacks.
Can we just make a different board for all users who want to talk about how much better and stronger Russia is than the US? I’m so sick of reading this shit.
Without China's support Russia cannot defeat NATO in a conventional war. This is fact. They simply don't have the manpower. Yes, they are destroying NATO equipment in Ukraine, but at the cost of their own. They have openly stated they know they can't beat NATO and will immediately turn to the nuclear option if NATO gets directly involved.
The shills are strong in this comment section. I summon thee u/Qanaut !
In all seriousness, this is factual. Russia id growing its military while we are shrinking. Russia is getting valuable hands-on experience in modern fifth generation warfare and the West is just emptying its stockpiles to let that happen.
It's not just that.
No army is equipped to fight a land war in today's world. China could potentially mobilize enough industry to equip an army that way, but they don't really have anyone to fight that way.
Other than that, every single modern war depends on air superiority as an absolute requirement. You destroy the enemy before any of your guys are on the ground.
But you absolutely cannot do that against modern integrated air defense without losing a sizeable portion of your planes and pilots, which are too expensive to risk.
A WILD QANAUT APPEARS!
u/#farva
There is one comment in this thread that is accurate. Everything else is speculative and unthinking. Including Macgregor. He is either out of the loop or is promoting BS. NATO will never win. NATO is against the Trump/Putin/Xi alliance. Russia will not fight the US. The US will not fight Russia. Same with China. As to air power, you all need to do your research. The only F-type we have that compares to The SU-67 is the F-22. As to ground forces, US orients towards head-to-head; Russia does not, in case you haven't been following. Ukraine and all the others fooling around there haven't won shit. Any of you gone head to head with Spetznaz? No? Thought not. Or US SpecOps? No? Thought not. I suggest you quit speculating and concentrate on what's happening in your locale. That's where the real war is.
This war isnt ground. It is 5th gen. It is currently taking place. I agree, no ground war loke ww2 will happen
*SU-57
Typo. Finger twitched, I guess. SU-57.
Keep in mind that Col MacGregor commanded the last huge tank battle in history in the Gulf War and led the charge that routed ALL the armored forces of Iraq. He is on a par of the other armored commander, Patton.
No he isn't. Patton fought german's who were 100xs better fighters than the Iraqis and Patton had a technological disadvantage compared to macgregor. He was no Patton.
Thank you. He made a shit declaration.
Lol new worst military take
In reading this thread, I have learned much more about the state of readiness and leadership-so I admit I was wrong about my assumption. I just hope there IS a strategy that parts from mere reactionary tactics and that politicians stay the hell out of the theater of action..
The U.S wouldn't need ground forces. What we dont possess is the need to go to war with the only country destroying the deep state in Europe. Also, biden doesn't control the u.s military. Plus anyone who has had any strategic training in war planning k ows that geography is not a place to fight. The cold war was planned in the pentomic system which envisioned the use of battlefield tactical nukes. I spent years on the trace being trained and training soldiers to hold off the soviets invasion of Europe. Look up the Hayward doctrine and understand why our entire strategy would have been a failure. We only had 30 days sustained combat supply relying on merchant marine resupply within 20 days... until... we discovered a dual rail line from the far east Russia that would over whelm our ability to resupply moving soviet troops and equipment. Under Reagan, Admiral Lyons took a fleet off the west coast of the yakutz peninsula. First time since WWII. This let the soviets know we would invade there and forces the soviets to reconsider moving troops out of that area. There's lots more i could share but it would take too long. We would be fighting the wrong enemy if we attacked Russia.
Duh you never fight a land war in Eurasia.
The only way to win a war against Russia or China is by nuclear strikes. And no one wins that war.
Especially considering Russia has a way newer and better nuclear arsenal
Lack of military power or a viable strategy will not deter these morons.
Fake news. The US would win a conventional war in about three weeks. Accelerated warfare. Nukes are the wildcard.
USA lost even to Taleban.
Literal nonsense. If you really believe that then you are hopelessly brainwashed.
There is no universe in every possible other world that this is plausible. A ridiculous example of the BS narrative foisted on the world.
And Russians ground forces are not a serious challenge to superior air forces and superior naval forces. And USA still owns those advantages over every other country, by a HUGE margin. Not even close. The USA’s greatest weakness isn’t our military capability. It’s our sold out political class betraying us from within.
Our military was designed for a massed enemy. It needed to be retooled for onesie, twosie forces. I offered the solution but was under bid by a group that failed. I also offered a solution to the IEDs but JIEDO was stuck on mega stupid.
But the real story in the end is that it was given back to the Taliban.
Seriously, this is such bullshit it's beyond belief.
The US doesn't have the logistics to occupy Crimea, let alone win anything against a +- peer opponent.
You literally need about 100x of everything to fight a land war similar to WWII. No body has that much of anything, and only China could potentially make enough war materiel, but they wouldn't have the logistics to fight anyone except Russia.
It’s not WWII or the Cold War anymore. The Gulf War took 45 days against the third largest army. We are now on mega steroids compared to then.
More like the mega steroid users long after they stopped using steroids. The army today is nothing like what it was during the Gulf War. And it was a coalition of like 6-7 countries, all of which are either no longer friendly towards the USA or have armies that are now completely pathetic.
The US makes like 20 tanks a year, and they aren't new tanks. They're refurbished shit from years ago. The US couldn't field 1000 of them, much less multiple thousands.
And this is exactly the case across every single military system except the space satellite and drone stuff.
And Iraq wasn't occupied during the Gulf War, despite there being like a million guys involved in the conflict. Most of the damage was done by a massive bombing campaign due to supreme air superiority.
Air superiority that wouldn't exist today against Russia in any shape or form. Not only because the planes no longer exist to achieve this (you have 1/2 as many bombers as there were in the early 90s), but because Russia has one of the best integrated air defense systems in the world. Literally only 4-5 countries in the entire world have systems like this.
If you can't use bombers (of which you have like 100 to begin with), you need to use men (which no longer want to enlist so you don't have enough), or tanks (which you don't have in sufficient battle-ready numbers) with artillery (which is wildly depleted after all the shells were given to Ukraine).
The only thing that would work is tactical nukes, but good luck there considering Russia has better and newer nuclear everything.
You would be surprised at how fast the vaunted air defense system would go down. It would take very little time to achieve air superiority. Then, every military vehicle west of a given line would be toast in short order.
Tanks are for the victory party.
My primary concern would be spare parts. The military runs on spare parts. The democrats always deplete our stockpiles of these. But I seem to recall Trump topping off our supply.
We would probably add some NATO exchange pilots to optimize sortie rates.
That's just magical thinking and stupid talk.
The whole point of massive integrated air defense systems is that you cannot take them out easily from the air and the USA absolutely doesn't have any other methods besides attacking by air.
Your only real method is to oversaturate the air around a specific region so that something gets through to hit the nodes of the system.
That is exactly what Russia is doing by using literally thousands of cheapo drones originally designed in Iran. Also the same tactic used by the Houthis and Hamas.
Get what the USA army has zero of? Cheap shit that flies that can be used to saturate AA systems.
Every single weapon made in the USA is designed to be complex and as expensive as possible, because this sells for the big bucks.
I won’t talk about how you do it, but we are quite capable. And yes our stuff is expensive. But it becomes very cost effective in combat. One of the keys to accelerated warfare was just a software upgrade.
Right, the geheime wunderwaffen. It vill help uns gewinnen ze war wiz ze radio waves und space lasers und so on.
That shit always works, especially worked for the reich.
Just like Vietnam, we had air superiority, fully supplied combat units and a Navy with no adversary. Went well as it could have.
The Vietnam war was a case of the coach throwing the game.
This^. Winning was not the goal. Where's the MIC payoff winning a war?
Brainwashed. Deep state narrative.
Like I said above. The only true weakness is our traitorous political class. And Vietnam is a perfect example of this. We could have wiped their entire country off the face of the earth. But politicians were running that war. Not the military.
Three weeks lol
It’s what I used to do. I am the guy behind most of the cool toys and strategies.
Yeah it’s this sort of blindness and ego that got the US exactly where it is today.
Give yourself a big ol’ pat on the back cool guy.
Our definition of Revolutionary: Change the nature of warfare.
So we can blame you specifically for making the US army a lopsided lolcow that specializes in force projection that it can't project because all the "cool toys" are too expensive to actually use?
Seriously anyone who refers to weapons as "cool toys" instead of "tools" is, ironically, a giant tool. The type of douche who thinks he's a leet haxxor for knowing about SQL injection attacks.
Tools are such a mundane and political expression. That is why I used toys to get the right people’s attention.
Can we just make a different board for all users who want to talk about how much better and stronger Russia is than the US? I’m so sick of reading this shit.
Having Senior Military leadership get excited about what they are going to wear to the invasion; never used to be an issue
Sub Russia for Asia...
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YmT0_hKSUrw
Without China's support Russia cannot defeat NATO in a conventional war. This is fact. They simply don't have the manpower. Yes, they are destroying NATO equipment in Ukraine, but at the cost of their own. They have openly stated they know they can't beat NATO and will immediately turn to the nuclear option if NATO gets directly involved.
REALLY, we can’t send in our Woke and gender soldiers (satire)
Ok? A ground invasion of Russia is insane anyway. Two great leaders tried and failed horribly.