Comments
1 - 20 of 195 Comments Last updated May 5, 2013
First Prev
of 10
Next Last
Abe

Bronx, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Aug 16, 2008
 

Judged:

3

2

1

From www.MichaelSavage.com today Aug. 16-2008

Analysis and Observation of Russian Army in Georgia by Colin Bennett

Is Russian Army Low Quality??

From:

http://www.michaelsavage.com/

A military observation ...Many journalists reporting on the present situation in Georgia use standard phrases expressing Russian "power" and "might" etc. But if the photographs show the present state of the Russian army, then it is not in a good state at all.

For first-class Russian frontline units, there is strange mixture of obsolete and semi-obsolete armoured vehicles, with tanks in particular ranging from truly ancient T-54s to mid-life T-70s smothered in reactive armour. The use of this appliqui armour alone shows somewhat primitive tank thinking as compare to up-to-date Western models.

Reactive armour is a cheap and cheerful form interim anti-tank protection pending the arrival of new tank models, and never used on Western tanks. Ceramic Cobham armour is used on Challenger 2 and Abrahams tanks, and the Russians appear not to have developed this.

Also, it is surprising for a first-class tank unit to have some of its vehicles show appliqui armour whilst others show no such things. Also there appears to have been no attempt by lackadaisical tank crews to camouflage their vehicles and break up profiles.

The Russian transport, mainly, 1960s-design Ural trucks, is equally as ancient, and their thinly-armoured BTR armoured personnel carriers are of a model which hardly compares as with such advanced vehicles as the British Warrior, the US Bradley, or the US state-of-the-art Stryker vehicles, all of which which sprout multi-tasking aerials all over the place. On the Russian BTRs, here is no sign of anti-RPG bar armour, and absolutely no sign of mine-protected vehicles which have proved so necessary in Iraq.

The Russians columns appear not to be alert as concerns mines or possible ambushes.

The single aerials installed on all vehicles show that the internal VHF communications suites are almost of 1960s standard.The state of the Russian infantry as observed is even more worrying. Their uniforms are not standard, their vehicle discipline looks casual, and the foot deployment of infantry is sloppy, with rifle and kit not properly adjusted, with Kalshnikovs pointing all over the place.

Frankly, it is enough to make a British Sergeant-Major go apeshit. Also, the infantry have no body armour (or even steel helmets), and lacking man pack aerials, appear to have no good communications kit at all.

The age range of some of the Russian infantry must also be worrying to Russian trainers and instructors. I have seen men of well over thirty in infantry sections, and any number of over-plump tummies on display. There is also a racial mix which must present problems to any basic training programme as concerns language difficulties.

Infantry appear in particular are drawn from every conceivable area in Russia, which must make for training and co-ordination difficulties.Frankly, on detailed technical observation, this display the Russian army shows it appearing to have sunk to a third-world standard which only succeeded in this case by confronting a numerically inferior force.

If the Russians had any alert propaganda sense at all, on this spotlight occasion, they would have fielded a modern elite force instead of the dog's breakfast as observed. On this evidence, goodness only knows what their second line units are like.

Colin BennettAuthor, LondonThe New Fortean Timeswww.com bat-diaries.co.uk
Tad Glover

Bullhead City, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Aug 16, 2008
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Napoleon attacked Russia, Germany in WW 1, Hitler in WW 2, and they all lost their asses and froze their feet. Would be a very bad idea to ignore this history lesson. Some Israeli soldiers wore bushes on their heads,and cried like little girls.And do try to remember how some US tanks got stuck in the sand, and weapons jammed from the sand. War never makes anyone look good.It's a racket.
Abe

Bronx, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Aug 16, 2008
 

Judged:

1

Tad Glover wrote:
Napoleon attacked Russia, Germany in WW 1, Hitler in WW 2, and they all lost their asses and froze their feet. Would be a very bad idea to ignore this history lesson. Some Israeli soldiers wore bushes on their heads,and cried like little girls.And do try to remember how some US tanks got stuck in the sand, and weapons jammed from the sand. War never makes anyone look good.It's a racket.


When did Israeli soldiers wear bushes on their heads and cry like little girls?

But anyway, don't get me wrong.

Sometimes quality of an army is not everything. As Soviet Russian dictator Stalin said "Quantity is Quality". Russians only had average equipment in WWII (with help from the West) but won against the Germans because they had large hordes of soldiers and tanks to throw at the Germans. Sometimes large quantities trump quality.

And war is a racket many times.
Peter

Kitchener, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Aug 16, 2008
 
Tad Glover wrote:
Napoleon attacked Russia, Germany in WW 1, Hitler in WW 2, and they all lost their asses and froze their feet. Would be a very bad idea to ignore this history lesson. Some Israeli soldiers wore bushes on their heads,and cried like little girls.And do try to remember how some US tanks got stuck in the sand, and weapons jammed from the sand. War never makes anyone look good.It's a racket.
You are right napoleon and hitler lost and it is because they did not provide winter clothing for their men. Also WW2, without western aid russia would have lost. As for tanks getting stuck in the sand it is a major problem for the russian wars. During israei-arab wars russian made tanks used by arabs became sitting ducks for the isreali air force.
Peter

Kitchener, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Aug 16, 2008
 
....problem for russian tanks.
New York

Long Beach, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Aug 16, 2008
 

Judged:

3

1

1

Tad Glover wrote:
Napoleon attacked Russia, Germany in WW 1, Hitler in WW 2, and they all lost their asses and froze their feet.
Napoleon lost to the Prussians, it has nothing to do with the Russians, they were cowards who hid in the forest most of the time or running away.

The Russians lost to the Germans in ww1.

The Russians only defeated hitler because of hitler's stupidity in not listening to his brilliant commanders.

Everyone knows you cant win a war on two fronts. He was also fighting the allies in the west.

You russians don't really have anything to be proud of, well you can be proud of the fact you rape and killed more people than hitler ever did.

“Land of the Rus - Sweden”

Since: Mar 08

muscow

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

1

Reactive arour is only useful for anti tank missiles, they don't protect you from enemy tanks. Also, the Swedish anti tank missiles hit on the roof, the weakest spot on the tank and they also have two warheads. The first one takes out the reactive armour and the other, larger one, penetrates. If these had been on the Georgian side, the muscovites hadnŽt dared to attack.
&fe ature=related
A muscovite tank has to come closer than 500 meter to be sure that they knock out a Leopard 2 A5/6 tank. A Leopard 2 A5/6 has a 90% hit probability, when firing at 50 km per hour in terrain and in darkness. Congratulations muscovites. It is highlt probable that the EU send EU forces as true peace keepin forces. IŽll bet that one Swedish battalion will ve in that force. I so, that battalion will be equipped with Leoprd 2 tanks and CV90 APCs. Swedish antitank weapons and Swedish anti air weapons...
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

“Land of the Rus - Sweden”

Since: Mar 08

muscow

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

2

1

1

I agree with you Abe that the muscovites we saw showed that the muscovite army is crap. The soldiers were sitting on their APCs - if they had been shelled with artillery, they had been sliced and there would only had been a pool of blood on the roofs of the APCs. You also see that they lack discipline, no unified unforms and weaponry. They had columns that were very vulnerable for ambusches with anti tank weapons etc etc. If the Georgians had been better prepared, the muscovite troops had been massacred.
russo

Severodvinsk, Russia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

there a aphorizm in russia

"if grandmother had balls she would be grandfather".

russian - are the best warriors in the world

“Trust no one in politics.”

Since: Apr 08

Pompano Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

2

1

1

New York wrote:
<quoted text>
Napoleon lost to the Prussians, it has nothing to do with the Russians, they were cowards who hid in the forest most of the time or running away.
The Russians lost to the Germans in ww1.
The Russians only defeated hitler because of hitler's stupidity in not listening to his brilliant commanders.
Everyone knows you cant win a war on two fronts. He was also fighting the allies in the west.
You russians don't really have anything to be proud of, well you can be proud of the fact you rape and killed more people than hitler ever did.
When Napoleon fled Moskva it was the Prussians who followed him all the way back to France and took Paris? Where precisely did you learn history?
Obviously you are a moron.

“Trust no one in politics.”

Since: Apr 08

Pompano Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Abe wrote:
<quoted text>
When did Israeli soldiers wear bushes on their heads and cry like little girls?
But anyway, don't get me wrong.
Sometimes quality of an army is not everything. As Soviet Russian dictator Stalin said "Quantity is Quality". Russians only had average equipment in WWII (with help from the West) but won against the Germans because they had large hordes of soldiers and tanks to throw at the Germans. Sometimes large quantities trump quality.
And war is a racket many times.
Quantity over quality was America's decision when rather than try and match German and Russian tanks it was decided to keep the assembly lines going instead.
We took on German Tiger and Leopard tanks with numbers and certainly not quality.

“Land of the Rus - Sweden”

Since: Mar 08

muscow

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

1

uther pendragon wrote:
<quoted text>
Quantity over quality was America's decision when rather than try and match German and Russian tanks it was decided to keep the assembly lines going instead.
We took on German Tiger and Leopard tanks with numbers and certainly not quality.
But you don't have the numbers anymore - the numbers are equal but not the tanks. Please, do sit in an T90 and IŽll be in a Leopard 2 A5/6 and lets meet... for the last time. Ha ha ha ha! Sweden only have 280 Leopard 2 tanks... muscovy has about 1300 T90 of which 300 are modernised T72s. In total, muscovy has about 23 000 tanks but then most are old vintage... These tanks are distributed along the muscovite border - I guess half are east of the Urals. The Nordic countries together have about 600 Leopard 2 A5/6 on their own... Germany has 400, Poland 128, France has 400 Leclerc, UK has 400 Challenger 2, Italy has 200 Ariete, Greece has 400 Leopard 2, Turkey has 300 Leoprad 2, Switzerland has 400 Leopard 2, Netherlands has 100 Leopard 2, Spain/Portugal about 400 - the EU ~ about 3000 NEW main battle tanks. If you count Switzerland and Turkey, add another 1000 tanks. The US have about 14 000 Abrams in their inventory... You don't have the numbers!

“Trust no one in politics.”

Since: Apr 08

Pompano Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

1

1

Swedish_Viking wrote:
<quoted text>
But you don't have the numbers anymore - the numbers are equal but not the tanks. Please, do sit in an T90 and IŽll be in a Leopard 2 A5/6 and lets meet... for the last time. Ha ha ha ha! Sweden only have 280 Leopard 2 tanks... muscovy has about 1300 T90 of which 300 are modernised T72s. In total, muscovy has about 23 000 tanks but then most are old vintage... These tanks are distributed along the muscovite border - I guess half are east of the Urals. The Nordic countries together have about 600 Leopard 2 A5/6 on their own... Germany has 400, Poland 128, France has 400 Leclerc, UK has 400 Challenger 2, Italy has 200 Ariete, Greece has 400 Leopard 2, Turkey has 300 Leoprad 2, Switzerland has 400 Leopard 2, Netherlands has 100 Leopard 2, Spain/Portugal about 400 - the EU ~ about 3000 NEW main battle tanks. If you count Switzerland and Turkey, add another 1000 tanks. The US have about 14 000 Abrams in their inventory... You don't have the numbers!
So you wish to pit Swedish tanks against ours? Ask the Iraqis how good the Abrams is. ;)
But perhaps due to limited cranial capacity you failed to notice I am in the USA and was talking about American tanks in WW II?

“Land of the Rus - Sweden”

Since: Mar 08

muscow

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

2

1

1

uther pendragon wrote:
<quoted text>
So you wish to pit Swedish tanks against ours? Ask the Iraqis how good the Abrams is. ;)
But perhaps due to limited cranial capacity you failed to notice I am in the USA and was talking about American tanks in WW II?
You can mentally stay in WWII - I'm talking about the next war. Leopard II is better than the Abrams but the Abrams are far better than the T90.
Also, today, muscovy doesn't have a quantity advantage. Quality, here the muscovite materiel is a joke... No sane person would sit in a T90 and try to counter an Abrams, Leopard II, Leclerc or Challenger II. That's the facts!
AlfaCentavra

Ukraine

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

1

2006 LEBANON WAR

Hezbollah also engaged in guerrilla warfare with the IDF, attacking from well-fortified positions. These attacks by small, well-armed units caused serious problems for the IDF, especially through the use of sophisticated Russian-made anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs). According to Merkava tank program administration, 52 Merkava main battle tanks were damaged (the vast majority by different kinds of ATGM), missiles penetrated 22 tanks, but only 5 tanks were destroyed. Hezbollah caused additional casualties using ATGMs to collapse buildings onto Israeli troops sheltering inside

“Land of the Rus - Sweden”

Since: Mar 08

muscow

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

3

1

1

52 hits and only 5 destroyed??? muscovite quality! Ha ha ha ha!!!
robert

Skopje, Macedonia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

1

Swedish_Viking wrote:
52 hits and only 5 destroyed??? muscovite quality! Ha ha ha ha!!!
What is "muscovite"?
Boo

Tyler, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

1

robert wrote:
<quoted text>
What is "muscovite"?
A Russian duck or a Russian.
Boo

Tyler, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Aug 17, 2008
 

Judged:

2

1

robert wrote:
<quoted text>
What is "muscovite"?
I'm just joking about the duck part, but Muscovite is a Russian.

“Trust no one in politics.”

Since: Apr 08

Pompano Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Aug 18, 2008
 
Swedish_Viking wrote:
<quoted text>
You can mentally stay in WWII - I'm talking about the next war. Leopard II is better than the Abrams but the Abrams are far better than the T90.
Also, today, muscovy doesn't have a quantity advantage. Quality, here the muscovite materiel is a joke... No sane person would sit in a T90 and try to counter an Abrams, Leopard II, Leclerc or Challenger II. That's the facts!
What next war? The Swedes are far too gutless to challenge anybody?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 10
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••