• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Russian Armys Weaknesses Exposed

#1
With all the talk on other threads of possible wars looming, this article in The Moscow News Weekly could be of interest (if I can get the link to work) showing up weaknesses in the army following the recent Georgian escapade.

http://mnweekly.ru/trend/mn36-2008

Failing that, if you can get onto their website, it's an article in their 11Sept, Moscow News No 36 2008 edition.
 
#3
We'll only end up at war if that fcukwit Miliband talks us into one. We do not have the resources or a reason, nor are we in any position, to initiate another Cold War. We have our enemy at the moment; he's in the Middle East. Funnily enough, he's the Russians' enemy as well; that's why they are training the Afghan National Army.

We rely on Russian oil and gas, they rely on Western food; war is in no-one's interest.
 
#4
Topic of the thread aside. Why is that almost every other Countries MPs (or equivilants) look the part, where ours all just look like a bunch of whimps and mummy's boy's. They should all be made to go to the 'School of Maggie's Hardness Approach to Bullying'. :D :D :D

Sorry, back on thread...
 
#5
Maybe it's just my interpretation, but this is not a serious lessons learned into the performance of the Russian Army in Georgia. This is a deliberate piece of political spin aimed at the international community to say:
a) the Georgian's are to blame - 'look how they caught us on the hop'; and,
b) we're going to spend lots of cash on a rearmament programme.
 
#6
whitecity said:
Maybe it's just my interpretation, but this is not a serious lessons learned into the performance of the Russian Army in Georgia. This is a deliberate piece of political spin aimed at the international community to say:
a) the Georgian's are to blame - 'look how they caught us on the hop'; and,
b) we're going to spend lots of cash on a rearmament programme.
Read the last couple of lines on the article;

"Unfortunately, the Russian Army is unlikely to receive new weapons and combat-support systems after the South Ossetian conflict. Although Russia has once again paid a high price for victory, its generals and politicians often prefer empty talk to candid and sober-minded assessments."
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#7
whitecity said:
Maybe it's just my interpretation, but this is not a serious lessons learned into the performance of the Russian Army in Georgia. This is a deliberate piece of political spin aimed at the international community to say:
a) the Georgian's are to blame - 'look how they caught us on the hop'; and,
b) we're going to spend lots of cash on a rearmament programme.
It's a bit like the DOD doing the same thing - look, war on terrorism is going to be very hard, and some of this stuff we have doesn't work too well - give us better bombs, planes, helichoppers and vehicles. Cool, thanks.

The Russian armed forces are saying "Phew, nearly got our arrses handed to us on a plate there - time we re-evaluated this kit, look at some of the stuff out there, and think very hard about matching Western technology and modus operandi in terms of command and control!!!"

The Russians are not so much behind on the technology as not having it deployed and trialled in the field. They've saved a fortune by not trialling this stuff or even going to war for that matter, but the time is now coming, especially with the rearmament program, when they have to back up their sabre rattling, and that means trying to model their forces on ours - after all, we've been succesfully testing our integration, command and control and new toys on a massive scale since 1991.

I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if Russia finds itself a war or peacekeeping operation in it's locality at some point in the near future so that it can battle train troops, practice new forms of warfare, and build some technological, comms and tactical cohesion back into its forces. There's no point rattling a sabre when everyone else is rattling link ammo.
 
#8
whitecity said:
Maybe it's just my interpretation, but this is not a serious lessons learned into the performance of the Russian Army in Georgia. This is a deliberate piece of political spin aimed at the international community to say:
a) the Georgian's are to blame - 'look how they caught us on the hop'; and,
b) we're going to spend lots of cash on a rearmament programme.
looks like they went with B

link
 
#9
ouyin said:
whitecity said:
Maybe it's just my interpretation, but this is not a serious lessons learned into the performance of the Russian Army in Georgia. This is a deliberate piece of political spin aimed at the international community to say:
a) the Georgian's are to blame - 'look how they caught us on the hop'; and,
b) we're going to spend lots of cash on a rearmament programme.
Read the last couple of lines on the article;

"Unfortunately, the Russian Army is unlikely to receive new weapons and combat-support systems after the South Ossetian conflict. Although Russia has once again paid a high price for victory, its generals and politicians often prefer empty talk to candid and sober-minded assessments."
Oh yes indeed....

Now compare that with what the president said last week: http://www.rg.ru/2008/09/12/medvedev-armia.html

In short, and in English: "we're now going to spend lots of petrodollars on new equipment."

They're talking a 30% increase in defence spending this year and next.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#11
Well thank all that is sensible that the UK gobmet is not jumping on this bandwagon of military follies. Indeed, we are going in the opposite direction - we are going to give our potential adversaries one hell of a surprise if it all comes on top . . . . . we simply won't be there to attack! Nosirree! The massed hordes of the enemy will wash over our shores with all their expensive and hi tech weapons and millions of troops . . . . only to find some chavs stealing their tank tracks and spitting at them.
 
#13
Biped said:
Well thank all that is sensible that the UK gobmet is not jumping on this bandwagon of military follies. Indeed, we are going in the opposite direction - we are going to give our potential adversaries one hell of a surprise if it all comes on top . . . . . we simply won't be there to attack! Nosirree! The massed hordes of the enemy will wash over our shores with all their expensive and hi tech weapons and millions of troops . . . . only to find some chavs stealing their tank tracks and spitting at them.
partly true but im guessing theyll agree with this

rapid reaction force

just to get out of spending lots of money. though i would be expecting it to be used to grab russian oil fields if a war does go off (doubt that will happen) as it is very unlikely that it will have any decent manpower to stop or even slow down an invading russian force
 
#14
Hmm..... after reading that (which can only be described as a class 1 clusterfuck), me doth think it's a good job The 58th Army meet a bunch of Georgians who are still essentially just East Beasties with a bit of spit and polish.

Would hate to think of the attrition rate of that unit if some kremlin muppet said, "hey go smash headlong into a battle group equipped for modern theatre"... ouch.

Good job for them we're on the same side really... put it there Partner :D
 
#15
Given the context, the Russian's didn't perform that well, and an honest lessons learned debrief will indicate a whole range of deficiencies.

Unfortunately for the Georgians, they performed even worse!
 
#17
whitecity said:
ouyin said:
whitecity said:
Maybe it's just my interpretation, but this is not a serious lessons learned into the performance of the Russian Army in Georgia. This is a deliberate piece of political spin aimed at the international community to say:
a) the Georgian's are to blame - 'look how they caught us on the hop'; and,
b) we're going to spend lots of cash on a rearmament programme.
Read the last couple of lines on the article;

"Unfortunately, the Russian Army is unlikely to receive new weapons and combat-support systems after the South Ossetian conflict. Although Russia has once again paid a high price for victory, its generals and politicians often prefer empty talk to candid and sober-minded assessments."
Oh yes indeed....

Now compare that with what the president said last week: http://www.rg.ru/2008/09/12/medvedev-armia.html

In short, and in English: "we're now going to spend lots of petrodollars on new equipment."

They're talking a 30% increase in defence spending this year and next.
Keep in mind inflation in Russia is running at 10% a year

http://www.rbcnews.com/free/20080917144530.shtml

No word as to if this a 30% increase in real terms.
 
#19
whitecity said:
parapauk said:
Keep in mind inflation in Russia is running at 10% a year

http://www.rbcnews.com/free/20080917144530.shtml

No word as to if this a 30% increase in real terms.
Whether it's 20 or 30% in real terms, how does it compare to the UK?
It doesn't. After allowing for 'defence inflation', the UK figure is negative despite ever increasing commitments and immense wear and tear on personnel, equipment and infrastructure.
 
#20
whitecity said:
parapauk said:
Keep in mind inflation in Russia is running at 10% a year

http://www.rbcnews.com/free/20080917144530.shtml

No word as to if this a 30% increase in real terms.
Whether it's 20 or 30% in real terms, how does it compare to the UK?
In terms of an increase it compares well, but if what we are talking about boils down to a 5% increase a year for the next two years, this is a non-story. Keep in mind we arn't trying to hold a front stretching from Estonia to North Korea, nor are we about to suffer a major demographic implosion.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top