6 ms·

Two dozen retired generals are trying to stop an overhaul of the Marines

32 points by cwwc 5y ago

aurizon 5y ago
The way the Russian war against Ukraine (which was run by older generals/tactics/tanks/helicopters etc) has failed against a somewhat more modern with 2022 generalling, coupled with assorted ant-tank drone missiles and other drones from allies as well as modern NATO anti tank and ant air weapons has revealed the truth that a WW1 army can not fight a WW2 war - fast forwarded - a cold war army lagging in tech can not fight a Ukraine of 2022. We know Russia has weapons in far greater depth and can outlast and wear Ukraine down - unless saner minds prevail. In like manner, US forces need to be brought to 2022 and beyond and the old war horses need to retire - in part. I feel a hybrid approach is needed - selectively keep some of the old ways and retire the rest. There is no doubt that modern AI flown by wire planes with no pilot, capable of higher G loads - 25-35G, higher weapon loads which replace the life support systems former pilots needed can be made in larger number, be cheaper and be smaller that the current top guns. No need for WW2 thoughts any more.
- jet_32951 5y ago
  Yep. Armor and ground support A/C have been shown much more vulnerable to shoulder-launched countermeasures than they were even ten years ago, and it isn't even close, though I hate to see A-10s rendered obsolete - for that is what they are, now.
- rasz 5y ago
  Russia failed to meet its objectives (blitzkrieg), but Ukraine totally failed in actually defending its own population and strategic locations. Their tactic seems to have been inflicting loses and strategically retreating. This worked great due to dysfunctional structure of Russian Army command. Order of a General means you will repeatedly try airborne landings into enemy controller Hostomel airport under direct fire, it means you will move choppers into Kherson Airbase targeted by artillery fire 3 times in a row, etc. Handheld anti-armor weapons are great, but I would preferer my military to actually stand their ground in front of a city giving me time to evacuate. Instead Ukraine almost acted like they deliberately tried to look weak and vulnerable. Not only there was no mobilization, but they didnt even evacuate Antonov fleet (huge strategic asset) despite both direct NATO warning in early February and petition written by the pilots/crews. Its either a brilliant plan to make them look pathetic to provoke Russian overconfidence, or enormous strategic blunder by someone high up simply not believing attack would happen.
  - KptMarchewa 5y ago
    Right now they are recapturing territory on a great majority of fronts. They lost ton of Southern territory that's clearly being indicated as a work of traitors now, so your characterization of their tactics are not the most charitable.
    - sudosysgen 5y ago
      The Russians are leaving and sending the troops to break the Eastern front. They are not leaving because a Ukrainian push is making them intenable. Rather, it's because the Russians are invading with 3x fewer soldiers than the Ukrainians have deployed, so they need every soldier they can in the South, now that the southern cauldron has been formed and Mariupol is on the verge of being taken. The fact that they have just recently been able to form the cauldron lends some credence to this theory. Now, the Russians will have to push the sides of the cauldron, which will necessitate a much higher amount of troops. If they succeed, the payoff is immense - the 100k+ troops of the Eastern front will have to retreat without mechanisation, making a fighting retreat impossible. The Ukrainian army will be greatly struck, and the Russians will be able to take a lot of prime terrain and perhaps try a push all the way to the Dnieper and then up, completely cutting of Kyiv from any mechanised supply line. Some have speculated that the only reason they attacked the North is to prevent the Ukrainian army from rotating their forced to the Donbass, thus maximizing the effectiveness of their small invading force. I don't know if I buy that. In any case, it's abundantly clear the Russians are leaving the North to send the troops in the East, and are not being pushed back.
      - sn00tz00t 5y ago
        I was wondering what happened to the liveua map - There was a massive Russian arm stretching to within kilometres of Kyiv that just disappeared seemingly overnight. Does this mean the war is over soon if Russia achieves their goals for Donbass? I don't remember expansion of Crimea being a part of their goals but I also don't have good memory.
        5y ago
- imwillofficial 5y ago
  It has hardly failed. Ukraine is busy getting stomped. The end goals and milestones of Russia seem mysterious right now though.
  - matthewaveryusa 5y ago
    Seems pretty clear to me that Russia wants the east and the entire black sea coast to deny europe an easy alternative to Russian energy.
    - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
      And yet this action has provoked precisely the opposite reaction - a desire across Europe to entirely cease dependence on Russian energy altogether.
    - google234123 5y ago
      That definitely wasn’t their initial goal.
    - bloak 5y ago
      What's the connection between the Black Sea coast and energy supplies to Europe?
      - FooBarBizBazz 5y ago
        LNG tankers, I'm guessing?
    - aurizon 5y ago
      That is the end game for Russia - what level of destruction will Ukraine tolerate? Ukraine needs sea access vitally for ocean freight. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/3/why-capturing-ukraine-kherson-important-for-russia https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/3/why-capturing-ukrain... What remaining access will Ukraine fight to the end for? Russia has access and can get by without it = just greedy. The UN/Turkey can close the Dardanelles to Russian ships. (already have forbidden russian warships exiting, but allow commerce) Can Turkey stand up to Russia plus the UN? Will Russia/China Veto any of this leaving Turkey alone? It has a higher GNP, but fewer people than Russia. One hopes NATO unity plus many others will make the sanction cut deeply. If China/India support Russia will they also be sanctioned = huge hurt for them and will that curb Russia? https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/real-gdp-purchasing-power-parity/country-comparison/ https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/real-gdp-purcha...
- postalrat 5y ago
  Russia's "problem" is they aren't in a total war. If they were then Ukraine's military and population would both be devastated.

32 points by cwwc 5y ago

The way the Russian war against Ukraine (which was run by older generals/tactics/tanks/helicopters etc) has failed against a somewhat more modern with 2022 generalling, coupled with assorted ant-tank drone missiles and other drones from allies as well as modern NATO anti tank and ant air weapons has revealed the truth that a WW1 army can not fight a WW2 war - fast forwarded - a cold war army lagging in tech can not fight a Ukraine of 2022. We know Russia has weapons in far greater depth and can outlast and wear Ukraine down - unless saner minds prevail. In like manner, US forces need to be brought to 2022 and beyond and the old war horses need to retire - in part. I feel a hybrid approach is needed - selectively keep some of the old ways and retire the rest. There is no doubt that modern AI flown by wire planes with no pilot, capable of higher G loads - 25-35G, higher weapon loads which replace the life support systems former pilots needed can be made in larger number, be cheaper and be smaller that the current top guns. No need for WW2 thoughts any more.

jet_32951 5y ago
Yep. Armor and ground support A/C have been shown much more vulnerable to shoulder-launched countermeasures than they were even ten years ago, and it isn't even close, though I hate to see A-10s rendered obsolete - for that is what they are, now.
rasz 5y ago
Russia failed to meet its objectives (blitzkrieg), but Ukraine totally failed in actually defending its own population and strategic locations. Their tactic seems to have been inflicting loses and strategically retreating. This worked great due to dysfunctional structure of Russian Army command. Order of a General means you will repeatedly try airborne landings into enemy controller Hostomel airport under direct fire, it means you will move choppers into Kherson Airbase targeted by artillery fire 3 times in a row, etc. Handheld anti-armor weapons are great, but I would preferer my military to actually stand their ground in front of a city giving me time to evacuate. Instead Ukraine almost acted like they deliberately tried to look weak and vulnerable. Not only there was no mobilization, but they didnt even evacuate Antonov fleet (huge strategic asset) despite both direct NATO warning in early February and petition written by the pilots/crews. Its either a brilliant plan to make them look pathetic to provoke Russian overconfidence, or enormous strategic blunder by someone high up simply not believing attack would happen.
- KptMarchewa 5y ago
  Right now they are recapturing territory on a great majority of fronts. They lost ton of Southern territory that's clearly being indicated as a work of traitors now, so your characterization of their tactics are not the most charitable.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    The Russians are leaving and sending the troops to break the Eastern front. They are not leaving because a Ukrainian push is making them intenable. Rather, it's because the Russians are invading with 3x fewer soldiers than the Ukrainians have deployed, so they need every soldier they can in the South, now that the southern cauldron has been formed and Mariupol is on the verge of being taken. The fact that they have just recently been able to form the cauldron lends some credence to this theory. Now, the Russians will have to push the sides of the cauldron, which will necessitate a much higher amount of troops. If they succeed, the payoff is immense - the 100k+ troops of the Eastern front will have to retreat without mechanisation, making a fighting retreat impossible. The Ukrainian army will be greatly struck, and the Russians will be able to take a lot of prime terrain and perhaps try a push all the way to the Dnieper and then up, completely cutting of Kyiv from any mechanised supply line. Some have speculated that the only reason they attacked the North is to prevent the Ukrainian army from rotating their forced to the Donbass, thus maximizing the effectiveness of their small invading force. I don't know if I buy that. In any case, it's abundantly clear the Russians are leaving the North to send the troops in the East, and are not being pushed back.
    - sn00tz00t 5y ago
      I was wondering what happened to the liveua map - There was a massive Russian arm stretching to within kilometres of Kyiv that just disappeared seemingly overnight. Does this mean the war is over soon if Russia achieves their goals for Donbass? I don't remember expansion of Crimea being a part of their goals but I also don't have good memory.
      - 5y ago
imwillofficial 5y ago
It has hardly failed. Ukraine is busy getting stomped. The end goals and milestones of Russia seem mysterious right now though.
- matthewaveryusa 5y ago
  Seems pretty clear to me that Russia wants the east and the entire black sea coast to deny europe an easy alternative to Russian energy.
  - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
    And yet this action has provoked precisely the opposite reaction - a desire across Europe to entirely cease dependence on Russian energy altogether.
  - google234123 5y ago
    That definitely wasn’t their initial goal.
  - bloak 5y ago
    What's the connection between the Black Sea coast and energy supplies to Europe?
    - FooBarBizBazz 5y ago
      LNG tankers, I'm guessing?
  - aurizon 5y ago
    That is the end game for Russia - what level of destruction will Ukraine tolerate? Ukraine needs sea access vitally for ocean freight. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/3/why-capturing-ukraine-kherson-important-for-russia https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/3/why-capturing-ukrain... What remaining access will Ukraine fight to the end for? Russia has access and can get by without it = just greedy. The UN/Turkey can close the Dardanelles to Russian ships. (already have forbidden russian warships exiting, but allow commerce) Can Turkey stand up to Russia plus the UN? Will Russia/China Veto any of this leaving Turkey alone? It has a higher GNP, but fewer people than Russia. One hopes NATO unity plus many others will make the sanction cut deeply. If China/India support Russia will they also be sanctioned = huge hurt for them and will that curb Russia? https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/real-gdp-purchasing-power-parity/country-comparison/ https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/real-gdp-purcha...
postalrat 5y ago
Russia's "problem" is they aren't in a total war. If they were then Ukraine's military and population would both be devastated.