On Russian Army readiness

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

I found this post elsewhere, I cannot verify or confirm anything in it.

 

Here’s a couple of things to consider:

1. One of Quora’s Russian contributors put up an answer several months ago, before all of this kicked off, where he toured around a Russian military base, and noted how crap and generally run-down everything was. He compared the Russian military to a ‘Potemkin village’ - it looks great on the outside when visitors come, and it is carefully stage-managed to make to look like everything is high-quality and high-class, in order to ge the viewer to assume that this is the case across the entire system, not just this little bit of it. But the rest of the system, outside the village, is, in actuality, falling apart and failing. He re-posted his earlier answer a couple of days ago, bascially saying: ‘I told you so’.
2. It is so well-known that it is barely worth stating that the Russian oligarchs get rich by plunder and embezzlement.
3. It has been widely noted that the expression on the faces of half Putin’s staff when he made a speech announching the invasion was ‘oh crap’ terror.

So we have a situation where the chiefs of the army are asked to use the forces that they are in charge of. The expressions of fear on their faces has been widely assumed to be because they didn’t want war, because they knew it would be bad for the country, and they were unwillingly following their leader.

But… maybe it was because they know that the forces they are in charge of only really exist effectively on paper. But now they have to try to use them for real.

And maybe they’ve been lying to Putin about their effectiveness for years, while in actuality strip-mining them and pocketing the money they should have used to make them effective. They’ve ‘Potemkin village’d’ Putin for their own enrichment.

And maybe Putin has misjudged much much they are lying to him about the effectiveness of theose troops, so he didn’t realise quite how ineffective thay actually are.

So the expression of terror on their faces was actually ‘I’m about to be busted, and likely very shortly afterwards will be ‘disappeared’ ‘.

And Putin, assuming that he was more mlitarily powerful than he actually is, has overstepped.

And this additional pressure may well have caused something of a slap in the face and an ‘unravelling’.

But who knows?

Edit 19/03/22: There are reports that several miltary leaders have been arrested or removed from their roles, which seems to lend weight to that part of the theory. And there are reports of things like tyres on APCs simply falling apart because they are using a cheap and shoddy version that isn’t up to spec, with the difference in cost between the cheap version and the up-to-spec version likely disappearing into someone’s pocket.

[Pat Riot]

When a “leader” (Napoleonic Tyrant)  realizes he can’t do as he pleases he may over react and do the unthinkable and pop a small nuke over a city and dare other countries to respond. 
 

This has been in the back of my mind since this whole thing started. 

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

10 minutes ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

When a “leader” (Napoleonic Tyrant)  realizes he can’t do as he pleases he may over react and do the unthinkable and pop a small nuke over a city and dare other countries to respond. 
 

This has been in the back of my mind since this whole thing started. 

In the back of a lot of people’s minds.  Sometimes not just the back.

[Chantry]

I think many of us who even casually follow military affairs thought the Russian military wasn't that good, but I never expected them to be this bad.  I also did not expect the apparent refusal of the average conscript to fight.

 

The generals are right to be scared, not only are they not winning a war that should have been over by now, but the performance of the Russian military has embarrassed Putin and made Russia look weak.  I see Russia in a downward spiral economically and militarily and I don't see a way out for the current government.

 

I very much hope no one is stupid enough to push Putin into a corner where he feels he has no other choice but to use one or more nuclear weapons.  With the possible exception of the Cuban Missile Crisis, I don't think we have ever been closer to the horrible possibility that a nuclear weapon may be used.

[Utah Bob #35998]

 

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

Does anyone have a viable solution to this mess or are all the other countries sitting with their heads buried and hope none of this s--- falls on them?

 

Seems to me there is precious little leadership anywhere on the planet.

[Utah Bob #35998]

32 minutes ago, Forty Rod SASS 3935 said:

Does anyone have a viable solution to this mess or are all the other countries sitting with their heads buried and hope none of this s--- falls on them?

 

Seems to me there is precious little leadership anywhere on the planet.

It’s fear. A vicious dictator with nukes. Lots of nukes. Is he crazy enough to use them or not? Nobody knows. The USSR got away with a lot of crap during the Cold War once they had the bomb. Hungary, Czechoslovakia, brushfire wars all over the globe. Then we thought it all went away with the fall of the Soviets. Then Putin shows up.

Everybody seems to hope eventually Vlad’s regime will fall. I don’t see it. He still has half the people behind him.

I have no solution and no crystal ball. 

[Texas Jack Black]

 He does not need a well trained army on foot. He has artillery and missiles Lots of both.  

[Utah Bob #35998]

17 minutes ago, john brown said:

 He does not need a well trained army on foot. He has artillery and missiles Lots of both.  

No. Bomber Harris thought the same thing. As did Curtis LeMay. We dropped more ordnance on Vietnam than in all of WW2

You can only destroy things from the air. Troops can dig in or move away. We would flatten bridges and anti aircraft sites and the N Vietnamese would immediately rebuild them. Boots on the ground are needed to occupy territory and win. The Russian strategy in WW2 was using massed artillery, literally hundreds of cannons at a time, to pound an area into smithereens. But it had to be followed up with infantry. Barring nukes, you cannot win a war from the air. And if it becomes nuclear, nobody wins.

[Texas Jack Black]

1 hour ago, Utah Bob #35998 said:

No. Bomber Harris thought the same thing. As did Curtis LeMay. We dropped more ordnance on Vietnam than in all of WW2

You can only destroy things from the air. Troops can dig in or move away. We would flatten bridges and anti aircraft sites and the N Vietnamese would immediately rebuild them. Boots on the ground are needed to occupy territory and win. The Russian strategy in WW2 was using massed artillery, literally hundreds of cannons at a time, to pound an area into smithereens. But it had to be followed up with infantry. Barring nukes, you cannot win a war from the air. And if it becomes nuclear, nobody wins.

 He has pressure bombs short range ballistic missiles cruise missiles to name a few .This is not ww11 or Vietnam Although his strategy so far resembles  the old ww2 style of fighting. with his armor and infantry.

 If he unleashes his arsenal  less the Nukes he would win with shear numbers.  IMHO.

 

[Utah Bob #35998]

4 minutes ago, john brown said:

 He has pressure bombs short range ballistic missiles cruise missiles to name a few .This is not ww11 or Vietnam Although his strategy so far resembles  the old ww2 style of fighting. with his armor and infantry.

 If he unleashes his arsenal  less the Nukes he would win with shear numbers.  IMHO.

 

I’m aware this is not WW 2 or Vietnam, but as you point out the tactics have definitely been the same. Only perhaps less competent. But to ignore the lessons learned in previous conflicts would be foolhardy.

It’s also not Afghanistan. We used a lot of smart weapons there over 20 years. The amount of ordnance you expend may flatten cities but flattened cities are great spots for motivated defenders. Stalingrad comes to mind. I think that regardless of the technology, and it’s doubtful he has a significant amount of smart weapons according to intelligence assessments. Even without the financial difficulties that will continue to hamper the effort, occupying a country the size of Texas is not a task I believe the Russian military is capable of performing with any degree of success.

Militarily I do not think there is a chance of Russia winning a decisive victory without throwing virtually their entire arsenal into the fray. Replacing their hi tech stuff unless China bails the out would be well nigh impossible.

[Father Kit Cool Gun Garth]

But they do have submarine tanks! 

[Capt. R. Hugh Kidnme]

12 hours ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

When a “leader” (Napoleonic Tyrant)  realizes he can’t do as he pleases he may over react and do the unthinkable and pop a small nuke over a city and dare other countries to respond. 
 

This has been in the back of my mind since this whole thing started. 

But, doesn't there ned to be a radioactive component in those missiles to make them work???? That stuff was sold off in a garage sale five years ago. Wait til Uncle Vlad finds that out.

[Texas Jack Black]

1 hour ago, Utah Bob #35998 said:

I’m aware this is not WW 2 or Vietnam, but as you point out the tactics have definitely been the same. Only perhaps less competent. But to ignore the lessons learned in previous conflicts would be foolhardy.

It’s also not Afghanistan. We used a lot of smart weapons there over 20 years. The amount of ordnance you expend may flatten cities but flattened cities are great spots for motivated defenders. Stalingrad comes to mind. I think that regardless of the technology, and it’s doubtful he has a significant amount of smart weapons according to intelligence assessments. Even without the financial difficulties that will continue to hamper the effort, occupying a country the size of Texas is not a task I believe the Russian military is capable of performing with any degree of success.

Militarily I do not think there is a chance of Russia winning a decisive victory without throwing virtually their entire arsenal into the fray. Replacing their hi tech stuff unless China bails the out would be well nigh impossible.

 Let us all hope we do not find out.

 

Best wishes

[Patagonia Pete]

Holy Cow!! Rocky IV must have been on TV last night!! 

[Utah Bob #35998]

1 hour ago, Patagonia Pete said:

Holy Cow!! Rocky IV must have been on TV last night!! 

Huh?

[Buckshot Bear]

The world is changing (as it always has) but its a serious worry now.

 

This ain't good for Australia -

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-60896824

 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania/solomon-islands-in-danger-of-becoming-a-puppet-state-of-china-20220329-p5a8rz.html

 

What the world needs is a strong United States of America, all the Western bemoaners and whiners about the US, the ones that gloat every time the US caned again in public for whatever......have no idea what the new world order will be like to live in without the US being the strongest country on the planet and the leader of the free world. 

[Wallaby Jack, SASS #44062]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

  He's right, you know ........   

[Pat Riot]

30 minutes ago, Buckshot Bear said:

The world is changing (as it always has) but its a serious worry now.

 

This ain't good for Australia -

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-60896824

 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania/solomon-islands-in-danger-of-becoming-a-puppet-state-of-china-20220329-p5a8rz.html

 

What the world needs is a strong United States of America, all the Western bemoaners and whiners about the US, the ones that gloat every time the US caned again in public for whatever......have no idea what the new world order will be like to live in without the US being the strongest country on the planet and the leader of the free world. 

It seems to me we cannot do it alone. We need good allies. 

[Buckshot Bear]

57 minutes ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

It seems to me we cannot do it alone. We need good allies. 

 

Yes and not just fair weather friends, true Allies when things get tough.

[Wallaby Jack, SASS #44062]

2 hours ago, Buckshot Bear said:

 

Yes and not just fair weather friends, true Allies when things get tough.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 He's right, you know ...................... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Chantry]

10 hours ago, Buckshot Bear said:

The world is changing (as it always has) but its a serious worry now.

 

This ain't good for Australia -

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-60896824

 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/oceania/solomon-islands-in-danger-of-becoming-a-puppet-state-of-china-20220329-p5a8rz.html

 

What the world needs is a strong United States of America, all the Western bemoaners and whiners about the US, the ones that gloat every time the US caned again in public for whatever......have no idea what the new world order will be like to live in without the US being the strongest country on the planet and the leader of the free world. 

 

You're not wrong, but there is an increasingly vocal segment of Americans who are tired of the U.S. always being the "World Police" and especially tired of some countries*, primarily NATO members in Europe,  who aren't willing to spend their own money on their military.  Below is a link, sortable by a percentage of GDP, of how much a country spends on it's own defense.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

 

 

 

*Australia is not one of the countries that I am referring to

 

 

 

 

[Ozark Huckleberry]

For decades the Cold War analogy for the U.S. and the Soviet Union was that we were like two men stumbling around in a dark  room, each one certain the other was better armed and had perfect vision. 
 

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

It’s true, the Soviets were giving school kids gas mask training until the end as can be seen in the schools in Pripyat (Chernobyl) in preparation for nuclear war.

 

Did your school do that?

 

Yeah, I know gas masks would have been useless.  )))))

[Rip Snorter]

I'm older than some and younger than others here, but both of my grade schools, the first in a major Metro area, the other in a burgeoning suburbia conducted air raid drills in the early '50's.  We had everything from a hide under your desk drill, to march into a below grade basement corridor and sit on the floor with our backs against the wall that faced the City / potential blast.  In 1962 my college created shelters in nearly every building, marked with signs and supplied with food, water and sanitary necessities.  It was the cause of considerable hilarity, up to a production run of T shirts marked with the trefoil and  "Fallout Shelter Cap 1".  Even College freshmen were cynics in those days.

[Eyesa Horg]

In the 60's we just had fire drills. 

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

Stormin’ Norman learned about the need for better combined arms coordination during the Grenada invasion.  The Rooskies have not learned that.

 

 

 

[Cypress Sun]

As a kid, I always thought the kids whose parents had build bomb shelters were the coolest kids. Heck, they had a bomb shelter. Even though I lived in middle/lower Florida during the Cuban Missile Crisis, the only thing that I remember from then is the constant sonic booms of jets.

 

The citizens of Russia are fed what the government of Russia wants them to know. Graft and corruption are customary. Been that way for centuries. Putin didn't get his riches by legitimate means, if there even is such a thing in Russia.  I just hope that the US objectively takes a long, hard look at our own military abilities.

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

I am going to make a total guess here. Recently Russia announced a hypersonic rocket, I think that’s what it was called. It has often been their modus operandi to really hype something they didn’t quite have. Then the west would develop a competing weapon and spies would steal the technology.

[Buckshot Bear]

17 hours ago, Chantry said:

 

You're not wrong, but there is an increasingly vocal segment of Americans who are tired of the U.S. always being the "World Police" and especially tired of some countries*, primarily NATO members in Europe,  who aren't willing to spend their own money on their military.  Below is a link, sortable by a percentage of GDP, of how much a country spends on it's own defense.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

 

 

 

*Australia is not one of the countries that I am referring to

 

 

 

 

 

That's a problem with Nato....the USA shouldered far TOO MUCH weight and cost.....it should have been spread around a LOT fairer.