1MANThe point is that you have made a claim and refuse to back it up.:mad:
I gave my sources.;)
1MANAmerica has a death star. I dont need to provide any proof because you can not disprove it.
WHAT, is your point??
1MANWhy the Russian scrapped the silo/rail mobile SS-24 ICBM ? I was looking into the program and specs ,This 100 Ton beast is as good as the US Land Based Peacekeeper ICBM with 10 MIRV .
Well if the Ukrainian connection is the reason then there are other operational missile in Russian inventory which needed Ukranian assistance like SS-18 and SS-19
From what I’ve read the “PeaceKeeper” had 6 warheads and each 330kt yield.
1MANBack during Soviet times being an officer was something. Girls would want to marry you because of it. Something of this attitude is still there.
But generally speaking Russians don’t have a clue about defence matters, esp technology and equipment, and what the state of affairs in the West is. Only know that it is not desireable to serve as a conscript and try to avoid it, which is quite easy with enough money to go to university.
Even highly educated Russians only care if Russia could kick the US’ butt with ICBMs (of which they are equally highly convinced).
The mass majority of Russian don’t believe that, only a certin % do, and the west enflats their ( those who object to “conscrition) argument 10x inorder to paint a picture of Russian’s as a whole against their military, also there are a number of anti-Military groups in Russia, just like those in the west who try and paint a more bad picture of Russia they like to lie and claim there are 4000 deaths from conscripts a year, which is a 100% lie, other than that Russians are just like people in the west.
1MANThe coaltion forces in 1991 did use the same doctrine and weaponary against the Iraq, they may have used in a conflict with the WP. That did work well behind exspectations and did prove a lot of estimates into own capabilities. The Iraq was not the WP in general as none did claim. Despite that it did offer some striking similarities, when it came to “second echolon” and even some “first echolon”, their equipment at hand. They may not have suffered in a similar disastrous way like the Iraqis, but some have suffered too.
The Iraqis did have loose, even when they have had top-end equipment at hand. “The fighting spirit” inside the WP did differ considerably too.
The coalition used airstrikes to weaken Iraq, if Iraq had “top-end equipment” as you say, they would have had more modern SAM’s but the didn’t and, were using 30+ year old SAM’s which the U.S. had more then ample amount of time to counter with counter measures, so there is no (even when they have had top-end equipment at hand. “The fighting spirit) as you say, p.s. I can assure you the “fighting spirit” of W.P. especially Russia is much more higher than anything the U.S./NATO has ever delt with, all that U.S.’s (fan-boy theory) fighting spirit is higher than our oponents, and thats what gives us another edge, is a myth to the fullest degree, lets face it U.S. picks on weaker nations, and then stands on the hill, and proclaims, “were the most powerful military in history” hah ha ha, as far as I’m conserned ha ha ha only those that don’t study will believe this.
1MAN1. I’ve never claimed they don’t have them. 2. You are the one who claims they do therefore if you want to have any credibility at all you will start producing figures to back your claims. Simply saying “I don’t have to you need to prove they don’t exist” is not only childish it positively SCREAMS “I’m a fanboy”. You decide how you want others to view you here.
If I’m a fanboy, the posts I posted would have been debunked as false, but scince it can’t, it shows just how weak your argument is.
1MANThe truth probably is a mixture of “can” and “will”. The Soviets knew that Syria not exactly was a safe place for latest Russian technology, and that was in the beginning of the 70ies the not really mature MiG-23M. Giving away those was not acceptable, the Arab nations already leaked other aircraft to the West (think of Have Doughnot).
The Syrians later got MiG-23MF and (if I remeber correctly) also MiG-23ML, but that was later. Large part of the “failure” of Soviet aircraft in the conflicts against Israel can indeed be blamed to the Syrians themselves (esp. in 1982). The GDR air force hat many aircraft in inventory Syria trashed in 1982. The MiG-29 the got did differ too significantly from those the Iraq got.However, the Soviets could deliver very useful air defense assets and they did. The SA-6 and SA-2 did cause considerably headache for the Israelis in 1973. For those systems the deployment of “advisors” was less critical. I once read that the Egyptians were unable to put an SA-2 site apart and together again in acceptable time. The MiG-25R were also operated by the Soviets, as long as it was reasonably safe.
The Middle East was a pulverkeck since we can think. Both superpowers did not want to threaten the others superpower’s influential zone, and in case of the USA not to disturb the other Arab nations too much. The USA could have delivered F-111 or other very capable aircraft in the early 1970ies.
Tank-wise even latest T-72 models wouldn’t have changed the game in Iraq in 1991 too much. Against Iran even less so.
If it was Tank vs. Tank with the Kontakt-5, Thermal/Nightvisionit, DU Rounds, and 2 Mile reach it would have, remember most of Iraq’s Tanks (T-55/62/64 and 72) were destroyed by L.G.B.’s/Hellfire missiles by F-16/18 Apacheys.
1MANYou need to learn to read 1BOY. I made no claim at all other than that you weren’t able to provide any specific info. You didn’t. So give us some specifics.
Your post implys they don’t have them anymore, the second part f your post you imly they just “worked” on them, after reading those links if you insist they just “worked” on them, I can’t help you, your living in denile, BTW why can’t YOU just look it up your self, what the problem:confused:
1MAN“and anywhere the west operates bombing small countries into submission” lol dude, you must lose sleep at night over us evil ‘westeners’ -awesome- but your now trying to tell us it wasn’t heavily defended and it wasn’t a decent system. I think you’ll find it was a pretty dam profesional set up they had, wasn’t the controlling system designed by the French and known as KARI? Yes ive just pulled some info here from a book, it was indeed a highly sophisticated system Gerry, 400 observation posts,73 radar reporting stations,which in turn fed into 17 intercept ops centres, four sector ops centres then controlled the intercept ops centers. Anyway point is it was highly sophisticated for the time, try and wriggle and spin it all you want but it won’t change whats written in history.
Why do you keep saying, we’re trying to change history, we are not saying Iraq won, we are saying, Iraq did loose, but a carfull look into why they lost, shows, they had “downgraded” weaponry, you CAN’T/HAVE NOT disproove that, because that’s the documented, fact, BTW Iraq did take down 63 coallition planes, now just imagine if they had real soviet weapons on mass, but I’m sure you’ll still answer with your “FANTASY” beliefes that they would have been crushed.
1MANoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
1MANDidn’t find anything eh? No surprise there. :diablo:
You claimed there not operational, (another U.S. discrediting campain), so put your money where your mouth is AND show the SOURCES,cus all I see is you “DIDN’T FIND ANYTHING”.
1MANWhere did I say anything at all about the types or numbers of systems developed? All I said was that it is a fact that both the USA and USSR were developing ASAT systems for a rather long time. Why you have to make that simple comment into some sort of “us vs them” debate, when I was in fact trying to back you up, is beyond me.
I know what you said, and your 10% figure is debatable. Where did you find such a pitifully low number, especially given the rearmament of older silos (for example, the silos near Tatischevo) with SS-27s?
Because the post cold war disarmament treaties, only alow small amount of silo’s, and from what I hear what Russia did was take 80% of there silio based missiles and put them on moble launchers, and only about 10% of the silo’s Russia had in the cold war are still operational.
1MANShould be pretty easy for you to dig up the specifics then shouldn’t it? Or is your position so weak that you can’t even manage that? Put up or shut up.
You didn’t even know Russia had those, I HAD to show it to you, so if YOU can’t go from there and look for your self, and proove they don’t exist anymore, then SHUT UP.;):D
1MANWhat ASATs does Russia have in operation RIGHT NOW? Specifics please, not links with vague descriptions of something they “may have” worked on 20 years ago.
Those links discribe what they have, if you can’t get it then thats your problem, now if your going to respond by saying those things are not operational now, provide the sources, as you know the U.S. NEVER let the public know they had/have those things, but the U.S. was just brainwashing the public saying, “were ahead of Russia”, like Starwars it was about lasers knocking out Russia’s lasers, but U.S. wanted the public to think it was about knocking down incoming Soviet ICBM’s.
1MANOh, and as an aside, yes, the Russians have had ASAT programs for a very long time. So has the USA. Big deal, move on.
The U.S.’s ASAT capabilites are NO WHERE near what Russia has is Technology AND in numbers, please give us the info if ya disagrea, and I said around 10% of Russia’s silo’s are still “Operational” go back and re-read.
Sign In
