Page 68 of 97 FirstFirst ... 1858666768697078 ... LastLast
Results 1,341 to 1,360 of 1935

Thread: Ukraine (closed; covers till August 2014)

  1. #1341
    Council Member Fuchs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    Russians are arguing that they need now their own rating agency but that is 10 years away and with Russian criminal activity no one would trust the agency so they are tied to the three US rating agencies forever so to speak.
    Hardly.
    The U.S. rating agencies have no competence in their core business to speak of - they merely have market shares and reputation.

    Plenty smaller rating agencies exist which could easily jump start subsidiaries or joint ventures.

    Besides, rating agencies are so very useless, nobody "needs" them - other than for rackets. It's about time we establish test runs to expose how useless the financial sector's judgement on risks is. I've seen it myself many times; flipping coins would be quicker, cheaper and in no way inferior to bankers deciding on business loan requests.

  2. #1342
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,007

    Default

    Last June there was roundtable in Nezavisimoje Vojennoje Obozrenije office, where colonel in reserve Igor Strelkov (the FSB guy now in Eastern Ukraine. Sitting by general Balujevski) explained how to fight terrorism in Russia. First you have to kill the leaders of terrorist, destroy their bases outside war theatre and close your borders for resupply. How Ukrainians should follow this advice?

    http://anna-news.info/node/11634

    What is Strelkov group doing in Eastern Ukraine? Here is nice explanation.

    Many terrorist factions care about the level of popular support they enjoy within
    a population they claim to represent. Empirically, this level of support can either rise
    or fall in the aftermath of a campaign of terrorist violence. Under what circumstances
    is the use of terror an effective tactic for mobilizing political support for an extremist
    group? This paper models a scenario in which an extremist faction considers attacking
    a government in the hopes of provoking a counterterror response that will radicalize
    the population, increasing the extremists' support at the expense of a more moderate
    faction. In our scenario, such radicalization can result either from the economic damage
    caused by counterterror operations or by the way in which such operations change the
    population's assessment of the government's motivations. We demonstrate that such
    attempts at mobilizing public support can be, but need not be, successful, discuss
    factors that make both the initiation of a terror campaign and successful mobilization
    more or less likely, and relate our results to several empirical cases
    http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/politic...propaganda.pdf
    Attached Images Attached Images

  3. #1343
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,007

    Default

    To mirhond (Sorry moderator for text in Russian). Russian Kremlin connected statistical firm's analysis from January 2012 explains why Putin has chosen nationalist rhetoric to stay in power. Huge amount of Russians (most of them in countryside) support nationalistic ideas + nostalgie for Soviet time, when life was much better. Putin has choosen for his third term Prohhanov, Dugin and Kurginjan as his official ideologues. Kurginjan was the guy, who protected putch in 1991 and gave working place to head of KGB Krjutchkov (member of coup commitee).

    Основной общественный запрос русского большинства в регионах явно направлен в
    левонационалистическую сторону. По данным ВЦИОМ (2011), либеральный путь развития
    сегодня готовы поддержать лишь 18% россиян. Гораздо больше тех (62%), кто готов
    поддержать противоположный — скорее силовой сценарий, который мог бы радикально обновить российские элиты, политический класс, централизовать ресурсы на решение
    стратегически значимых задач1. Однако и это консервативное большинство общества все в
    меньшей степени связывает свои надежды с нынешним государством и его властными
    институтами. Учитывая стремительную актуализацию националистической идеи, пусть в
    относительно мягкой, приемлемой для большинства форме, именно от
    левонационалистической идеологии можно ожидать статуса наиболее актуальной, способной
    объединить новорусскую нацию в период ее становления. Это «русское большинство» при всех
    накопившихся претензиях к путинской власти, все же относится к Путину намного более
    терпимо, чем к большей части «сахаровских» лидеров, и на предстоящих выборах, вне всякого
    сомнения, поддержит его. В своих программных статьях в «Известиях» Путин обращается
    именно к этому провинциальному большинству, говоря об олигархах, разбогатевших на
    залоговых аукционах середины 90-х и скупающих в Европе футбольные клубы. Но условная
    поддержка Путина со стороны этой части электората еще не означает, что
    левонационалистическая повестка будет снята, напротив, время ее еще только начинается. За
    русских националистов борются и власть, и оппозиция. Власть приглашает на высокую
    должность в правительстве Д. Рогозина, ее поддерживают ветераны национал-патриотической
    мысли А. Проханов, А. Дугин и С. Кургинян.
    http://wciom.ru/fileadmin/Monitoring...07_4_Byzov.pdf

    Look at this Kurginjan organised pro Crimea meetin in the center of Moscow (15.03.2014). Is this style copying somebody? You can find Hitler's Nurmberg rally yourself. Kurginjan's event is of course joke in comparsion.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0vyneLOuWI
    Last edited by kaur; 04-30-2014 at 10:04 AM.

  4. #1344
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    Russian Air Force helicopters began flying on the border with the Baltic countries

    MOSCOW, April 30 - RIA Novosti. Helicopters Army Aviation WEST Russia began flying over the North-West of the country, told reporters on Wednesday the head of the press service of the Western Military District, Colonel Oleg Kochetkov.

    "Army Aviation Brigade crews Western Military Region, stationed in Pskov region, started planning a training flight in the skies over the North-West of Russia. First rise in the sky at the same time a squadron of different types of attack helicopters were armed WEST, Mi-28N" Night Hunter "and Ka-52" Alligator "- said Kochetkov
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  5. #1345
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan View Post
    Russian Air Force helicopters began flying on the border with the Baltic countries
    Stan---was behind four US Army Sustainment convoys headed from Berlin to Poland via Frankfurt Oder---three with four trucks each carrying two shipping containers.

    Sustainment trucks were from KTown and they handle all container shipping for deploying units---were being accompanied by German MPs running flashing blue lights and were not maintaining required speeds then they were picked up by Polish MPs---looks like they were headed eastwards in a hurry.

    Looks like the 173rd is in for a longer stay where they landed.

  6. #1346
    Council Member Fuchs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    3. GDP is estimated at right now .02% and sinking to potentially zero or lower if that is technically possible
    It's not because you forgot to add "growth" behind "GDP".

  7. #1347
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    kaur---a good find---the use of reservists is the Russian way of plausible deniability ---meaning hey we have no active duty personnel or the ground because you have not asked about nor mentioned reservists. The US does not seem to get the current Russia word usage meaning if they say red then they really mean yellow if they say green then they really mean pink---really does goes back to the Communist term dialectic materialism.

    Secondly, watch the tactics actively shifting now as the population has not been pulled along with the buildings being taken over as in the Crimea so now they are trying to build a center of gravity around how many buildings equals the inability to hold the 25th of May elections so they can argue hey see we did not vote for the illegitimate government so we want Russia to step in and protect us.

    Interesting is the fact that the local population while proRussian still does not want to de facto shift to Russia even with the massive agitation going on by the KGB/FSB/GRU and the Russian TV/radio media reports.

    Like these two quotes on dialectic materialism from the past:

    "Motion is the mode of existence of matter. Never anywhere has there been matter without motion, or motion without matter, nor can there be."

    "Change of form of motion is always a process that takes place between at least two bodies, of which one loses a definite quantity of motion of one quality (e.g. heat), while the other gains a corresponding quantity of motion of another quality (mechanical motion, electricity, chemical decomposition).

    "Dialectics, so-called objective dialectics, prevails throughout nature, and so-called subjective dialectics (dialectical thought), is only the reflection of the motion through opposites which asserts itself everywhere in nature, and which by the continual conflict of the opposites and their final passage into one another, or into higher forms, determines the life of nature."

    Fredrick Engels
    Dialectics of Nature

    But dialectical materialism insists on the approximate relative character of every scientific theory of the structure of matter and its properties; it insists on the absence of absolute boundaries in nature, on the transformation of moving matter from one state into another, that from our point of view [may be] apparently irreconcilable with it, and so forth.

    Vladimir Lenin
    Materialism and Empirio-criticism
    kaur---when one looks at how the self defense leaders all of a sudden assumed leadership check the Russian term "samoswanzy" from the 1584 period---it goes along way in explaining how they think and act.

  8. #1348
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    wm---you mentioned a number of posts ago that USAREUR/USECOM did not doubt they could stop a Soviet attack and I responded that I was not sure you understood the conditions in Europe up to 1989 and why Reforger was doomed to fail because USECOM could not hold the Soviet up long enough to get US based troops over in time.

    This link confirms what I mentioned when I indicated that it was up to selected SF teams to try to slow them down until help arrived.

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article..._backpack_nuke

  9. #1349
    Council Member wm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    On the Lunatic Fringe
    Posts
    1,237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    wm---you mentioned a number of posts ago that USAREUR/USECOM did not doubt they could stop a Soviet attack and I responded that I was not sure you understood the conditions in Europe up to 1989 and why Reforger was doomed to fail because USECOM could not hold the Soviet up long enough to get US based troops over in time.

    This link confirms what I mentioned when I indicated that it was up to selected SF teams to try to slow them down until help arrived.

    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article..._backpack_nuke
    Nice try but your FP article does not prove your contention. The fact that US SF teams trained to use SADMs in eastern Europe does not prove that EUCOM did not believe it could beat a Soviet /WP invasion of Western Europe. What do you know about MADMs and TADMs? Plans existed for their use as well. BTW, I believe the US stopped making/deploying SADMs in 1989.
    Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit
    The greatest educational dogma is also its greatest fallacy: the belief that what must be learned can necessarily be taught. — Sydney J. Harris

  10. #1350
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wm View Post
    Nice try but your FP article does not prove your contention. The fact that US SF teams trained to use SADMs in eastern Europe does not prove that EUCOM did not believe it could beat a Soviet /WP invasion of Western Europe. What do you know about MADMs and TADMs? Plans existed for their use as well. BTW, I believe the US stopped making/deploying SADMs in 1989.
    Come on wm---just where were you in 1989?---by the way officially yes the SADMs were negated out in 1989 but not everyone gave them up until 1991(remember US Army Berlin did not leave until 1994) and secondly was not the entire Cold War ended in 1989/90 so the further need was not a given. Having been on a specific team in a particular point in time in West Berlin I did in fact know what the USECOM wartime contingency planning was to be for us---slowdown, channeling, area denial deep in the GDR as well as in other Warsaw Pact countries---literally a one way mission to gain time.

    If in fact channeling/slow down/area denial efforts were in fact part and parcel of the USECOM war planning ---slowdown until further troops arrived means just exactly what---slowdown until help arrives---help to arrive took on an average Reforger exercise over eight weeks to get everyone on the ground---do you really think without the nuclear piece in play US Army units could have hung on for eight full weeks until reinforcements arrived?---come on wm just how many Reforger exercises were you part and parcel of---you would not be saying this then.

    There were some planners that felt in 1989 with the T72/80s in place in the numbers that were in the SGFG in the GDR the slowdown would have been at the Rhine---and that is defined as what by yourself---winning?

    So wm exactly where were you in 1989 when the last Reforger actually exercised the USECOM war plan across all of Germany with all of NATO involved from Rotterdam to the inner German border and oh by the way with massive use of all US/NATO SOF units for the deep fight?

    I know where I was---I lead the "Soviet" Anti SOF Response Company using Soviet TTPs against US/NATO SOF to verify if they would be effective---they were by the way--so again USECOM practiced seriously in 1989 the complete war plan and it foresaw a massive slog just to get back to the inner German border---far from a complete "win' we were a tad short --so I am not sure where you get your facts concerning a "win".
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 05-01-2014 at 09:26 AM.

  11. #1351
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    Come on wm---just where were you in 1989?---by the way officially yes the SADMs were negated out in 1989 but not everyone gave them up until 1991(remember US Army Berlin did not leave until 1994) and secondly was not the entire Cold War ended in 1989/90 so the further need was not a given. Having been on a specific team in a particular point in time in West Berlin I did in fact know what the USECOM wartime contingency planning was to be for us---slowdown, channeling, area denial deep in the GDR as well as in other Warsaw Pact countries---literally a one way mission to gain time.

    If in fact channeling/slow down/area denial efforts were in fact part and parcel of the USECOM war planning ---slowdown until further troops arrived means just exactly what---slowdown until help arrives---help to arrive took on an average Reforger exercise over eight weeks to get everyone on the ground---do you really think without the nuclear piece in play US Army units could have hung on for eight full weeks until reinforcements arrived?---come on wm just how many Reforger exercises were you part and parcel of---you would not be saying this then.

    There were some planners that felt in 1989 with the T72/80s in place in the numbers that were in the SGFG in the GDR the slowdown would have been at the Rhine---and that is defined as what by yourself---winning?

    So wm exactly where were you in 1989 when the last Reforger actually exercised the USECOM war plan across all of Germany with all of NATO involved from Rotterdam to the inner German border and oh by the way with massive use of all US/NATO SOF units for the deep fight?

    I know where I was---I lead the "Soviet" Anti SOF Response Company using Soviet TTPs against US/NATO SOF to verify if they would be effective---they were by the way--so again USECOM practiced seriously in 1989 the complete war plan and it foresaw a massive slog just to get back to the inner German border---far from a complete "win' we were a tad short --so I am not sure where you get your facts concerning a "win".
    wm---just a side note---some of us were especially far more in tune with what the actual war plans were for USECOM than even USECOM fully understood up to 1984 and then into the 1989 Reforger exercise as some of us spent literally hours dissecting them down to our operational/tactical levels as we were major players in the first critical initial hours and days until the rest of the US Army came over.

    The unit that some of us worked for over the years has been finally allowed to have it's existence declassified 30 years (Jan 2014) after it's deactivation ---what we did, where we did it, and how we did it is still classified until 2044 as some of the techniques and procedures that we developed are still in use worldwide today by several elite units.

    So there will be no books, no stories/rumors nor leaked articles on what we did---we will literally disappear as veterans into the world of silence having played major unsung roles for years during the Cold War and will take those successes to the grave with us.

    So again some of us fully understood the USECOM war plans as well as the limitations of US/NATO Forces in Germany up to 1989 and a "win" it would not have been---better yet call it a "draw" if USEOM had been able to make it back to the inner German border.

    http://www.fayobserver.com/news/loca...fe4c4a0bf.html
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 05-01-2014 at 01:16 PM.

  12. #1352
    Council Member wm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    On the Lunatic Fringe
    Posts
    1,237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    Come on wm---just where were you in 1989?---by the way officially yes the SADMs were negated out in 1989 but not everyone gave them up until 1991(remember US Army Berlin did not leave until 1994) and secondly was not the entire Cold War ended in 1989/90 so the further need was not a given. Having been on a specific team in a particular point in time in West Berlin I did in fact know what the USECOM wartime contingency planning was to be for us---slowdown, channeling, area denial deep in the GDR as well as in other Warsaw Pact countries---literally a one way mission to gain time.

    If in fact channeling/slow down/area denial efforts were in fact part and parcel of the USECOM war planning ---slowdown until further troops arrived means just exactly what---slowdown until help arrives---help to arrive took on an average Reforger exercise over eight weeks to get everyone on the ground---do you really think without the nuclear piece in play US Army units could have hung on for eight full weeks until reinforcements arrived?---come on wm just how many Reforger exercises were you part and parcel of---you would not be saying this then.

    There were some planners that felt in 1989 with the T72/80s in place in the numbers that were in the SGFG in the GDR the slowdown would have been at the Rhine---and that is defined as what by yourself---winning?

    So wm exactly where were you in 1989 when the last Reforger actually exercised the USECOM war plan across all of Germany with all of NATO involved from Rotterdam to the inner German border and oh by the way with massive use of all US/NATO SOF units for the deep fight?

    I know where I was---I lead the "Soviet" Anti SOF Response Company using Soviet TTPs against US/NATO SOF to verify if they would be effective---they were by the way--so again USECOM practiced seriously in 1989 the complete war plan and it foresaw a massive slog just to get back to the inner German border---far from a complete "win' we were a tad short --so I am not sure where you get your facts concerning a "win".
    In 1989, I was not a member of POW Camp Berlin. Not that it matters, but I was preparing for an assignment to SOUTHCOM J2 where planning was ongoing for a little live fire exercise called Operation Just Cause.. But, like many people outside POW Camp Berlin, I was also happy to find that the Wall was coming down and GSFG would soon be out of the former DDR. I suspect that REFORGER 89 went forward as it did because its planning had been going on for at least a year. For most units involved in REFORGER, the exercise was the capstone event of an annual training cycle. And not uncommonly in training exercises, enemy forces' worst case scenarios are used; exercises are usually designed to stress the system. BTW, this last point goes quite some way toward explaining the array of Russian forces across the border from the Ukraine.
    Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit
    The greatest educational dogma is also its greatest fallacy: the belief that what must be learned can necessarily be taught. — Sydney J. Harris

  13. #1353
    Council Member wm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    On the Lunatic Fringe
    Posts
    1,237

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    wm---just a side note---some of us were especially far more in tune with what the actual war plans were for USECOM than even USECOM fully understood up to 1984 and then into the 1989 Reforger exercise as some of us spent literally hours dissecting them down to our operational/tactical levels as we were major players in the first critical initial hours and days until the rest of the US Army came over.

    The unit that some of us worked for over the years has been finally allowed to have it's existence declassified 30 years (Jan 2014) after it's deactivation ---what we did, where we did it, and how we did it is still classified until 2044 as some of the techniques and procedures that we developed are still in use worldwide today by several elite units.

    So there will be no books, no stories/rumors nor leaked articles on what we did---we will literally disappear as veterans into the world of silence having played major unsung roles for years during the Cold War and will take those successes to the grave with us.

    So again some of us fully understood the USECOM war plans as well as the limitations of US/NATO Forces in Germany up to 1989 and a "win" it would not have been---better yet call it a "draw" if USEOM had been able to make it back to the inner German border.

    http://www.fayobserver.com/news/loca...fe4c4a0bf.html
    I find it interesting that you claim to know the war plan better than the planners, but I doubt the veracity of that statement. More importantly, a plan is just a plan; it is axiomatic that no plan survives first contact. In fact, nearly every op plan I have seen executed was frago'ed before it was converted from a plan to an opord. At the lowest tactical level that may not be the case so much, but then units at , say, battalion and below do not normally write op plans, at least not in my experience. YMMV
    Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit
    The greatest educational dogma is also its greatest fallacy: the belief that what must be learned can necessarily be taught. — Sydney J. Harris

  14. #1354
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wm View Post
    I find it interesting that you claim to know the war plan better than the planners, but I doubt the veracity of that statement. More importantly, a plan is just a plan; it is axiomatic that no plan survives first contact. In fact, nearly every op plan I have seen executed was frago'ed before it was converted from a plan to an opord. At the lowest tactical level that may not be the case so much, but then units at , say, battalion and below do not normally write op plans, at least not in my experience. YMMV
    wm---you still have not mentioned where you where during the very last 1989 Reforger exercise ---were you at least in an European based Army unit that participated---a yes or no will do and yes I do know the plans very well from 1989 as I was tasked to fulfill them both operationally as well as tactically and yourself? And then differently from you I had to exercise the Soviet doctrine against the opord.

    See when you mentioned every plan you have seen was frago'ed then you are way past the 1989 timeframe in active service and in those years all plans were submitted as opords in 1989 as they Army then adhered strictly to MDMP not as they do now and simply frago everything that walks and talks and acts like a plan---AFG in some units was up into the 300/400 series ranged frago numbers---come on wm--served there as well.

    Quit sidestepping that every plan does not survive first contact---the wartime contingency planning for Europe was drilled at every Reforger exercise (in addition to surprises thrown in to mimic opord adaptions on the fly) if you had participated in them which you have not so I am not sure why you assume you are in fact correct and you challenge other's veracity who actually participated in them.

    Come on wm you really do not believe units such as the 2/3ACR or 11ACR could have "won" against the Soviet Ground Forces Germany Tank Divisons who had already the T80s in 1985/86 in large numbers---even the Abrams in Europe initially had the 105mm gun not the 120mm which came into theater later in larger numbers. The ACRs only had the Bradley's and a bunch of 113s come on.

    If you have participated in the last Reforger from 1989 then we can talk and exchange experiences on long the 141 rides over the Atlantic we both had just to get to Germany.

    Again when you speak of SDAMs and the other related weapons--speak from experience as I have been trained on the darn thing and deployed with it out a C130 all based on an USEOM opord not a frago have you? Then we can converse and exchange experiences.

    Until then continue thinking USECOM was "winning" as this conversation is going nowhere.

    WM---by the way just to refresh your knowledge of Soviet Army units based in just the GDR as of 1989 not counting their back up units in Poland---in 1989 we had only a max of 270K and it was a lot of combat support mixed in. A majority of these units were deactivated after 1994 when they pulled out of the then GDR after reunification.

    By the way count the number of actual Soviet Divisions (yes they are smaller than ours) inside the GDR and then tell me just how many Divisions we had along with NATO on the ground physically located inside Germany and you wonder why we worried every time there was a troop rotation on their side as the size actually doubled as units came in and units went out and often overlapped for several weeks increasing the actual number of Soviet troops on the ground by a factor of 2.


    Soviet 1st Guards Tank Army (HQ Dresden) · 8th Guards Mechanised Corps, the 11th Guards Tank Corps
    2nd Guards Tank Army (HQ Fürstenberg) · Soviet 1st Mechanized Corps, 9th Tank Corps, 12th Guard Tank Corps
    4th Guards Tank Army (HQ Eberswalde) · 5th Guards Mechanised Corps, 6th Guards Mechanised Corps ; 10th Guards Tank Corps
    2nd Shock Army (HQ Schwerin) · 109th Rifle Corps (46th, 90th, 372nd Rifle Divisions), 116th Rifle Corps (86th, 321st, 326th Rifle Division) 40th Guards Rifle Corps
    3rd Shock Army (HQ Stendal) · 7th Rifle Corps (146th, 265th, 364th Rifle Divisions) ; 12th Guard Rifle Corps (23rd Guards, 52nd Guards, 33rd Rifle Divisions); 79th Rifle Corps (150th, 171st, 207th Rifle Divisions) 9th Tank Corps
    5th Shock Army (HQ Berlin) · 9th Rifle Corps (248th, 301st Rifle Divisions); 26th Guard Rifle Corps (89th Guards, 94th Guards, 266th Rifle Divisions); 32nd Rifle Corps (60th Guards, 295th, 416th Rifle Divisions); 230th Rifle Division; three independent tank brigades
    8th Guards Army (HQ Nohra) 4th Guards Rifle Corps (35th, 47th, 57th Guard Rifle Divisions) · 28th Guard Rifle Corps (39th, 79th, 88th Guard Rifle Division) · 29th Guard Rifle Corps (27th, 74th, 82nd Guard Rifle Divisions) · 11th Tank Corps
    47th Army (HQ Halle) · 77th Rifle Corps (185th, 260th, 328th Rifle Division) · 125th Rifle Corps (60th, 76th, 175th Rifle Divisions) · 129th Rifle Corps (82nd, 132nd, 143rd Rifle Divisions) · 1st Guards Tank Corps and the 25th Tank Corps.
    Last edited by OUTLAW 09; 05-01-2014 at 04:17 PM.

  15. #1355
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    firn---an interesting aspect of the sanctions that is now hitting the Russian companies on the sanctions list---they are potentially losing their US software licenses as they have been initially informed of such a move by the leading US software companies such as MS, HP, IBM.

    They are some serious worries about being penalized if caught using turned off licenses plus the loss of technical support will hurt as well as well as the loss of security updates as well.

  16. #1356
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    ... the very last 1989 Reforger exercise
    Outlaw,
    Do you have some special link that the rest of us are unaware of regarding the last REFORGER? I have 1993, regardless of how effective or level of troop participation was. The date is either 89, 90, 91, 92 or 93.


    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    Soviet 1st Guards Tank Army (HQ Dresden) · 8th Guards Mechanised Corps, the 11th Guards Tank Corps
    2nd Guards Tank Army (HQ Fürstenberg) · Soviet 1st Mechanized Corps, 9th Tank Corps, 12th Guard Tank Corps
    4th Guards Tank Army (HQ Eberswalde) · 5th Guards Mechanised Corps, 6th Guards Mechanised Corps ; 10th Guards Tank Corps
    2nd Shock Army (HQ Schwerin) · 109th Rifle Corps (46th, 90th, 372nd Rifle Divisions), 116th Rifle Corps (86th, 321st, 326th Rifle Division) 40th Guards Rifle Corps
    3rd Shock Army (HQ Stendal) · 7th Rifle Corps (146th, 265th, 364th Rifle Divisions) ; 12th Guard Rifle Corps (23rd Guards, 52nd Guards, 33rd Rifle Divisions); 79th Rifle Corps (150th, 171st, 207th Rifle Divisions) 9th Tank Corps
    5th Shock Army (HQ Berlin) · 9th Rifle Corps (248th, 301st Rifle Divisions); 26th Guard Rifle Corps (89th Guards, 94th Guards, 266th Rifle Divisions); 32nd Rifle Corps (60th Guards, 295th, 416th Rifle Divisions); 230th Rifle Division; three independent tank brigades
    8th Guards Army (HQ Nohra) 4th Guards Rifle Corps (35th, 47th, 57th Guard Rifle Divisions) · 28th Guard Rifle Corps (39th, 79th, 88th Guard Rifle Division) · 29th Guard Rifle Corps (27th, 74th, 82nd Guard Rifle Divisions) · 11th Tank Corps
    47th Army (HQ Halle) · 77th Rifle Corps (185th, 260th, 328th Rifle Division) · 125th Rifle Corps (60th, 76th, 175th Rifle Divisions) · 129th Rifle Corps (82nd, 132nd, 143rd Rifle Divisions) · 1st Guards Tank Corps and the 25th Tank Corps.
    If you insist on copying and pasting, at least provide the link and give the real author credit.

    Such as...

    Group of Soviet Forces in Germany

    The Group of Soviet Occupation Forces, Germany, was formed after the end of the Second World War from formations of the 1st and 2nd Belorussian Fronts. On its creation on 9 July 1945 it included:
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  17. #1357
    Council Member Firn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,297

    Default

    Outlaw, I think the statement of the RCB does actually reflect to a good extent the difficult position Russia is in. I wouldn't overestimate the impact of the software sector, but it is of course one aspect among many.

    I think the RCB statement shows gives in it's condensed form a good quick snapshot of the difficult phase the Russian economy is in, especially if you have done first your in-depth homework.

    From an economic point of view Russia suffers so far clearly much more as it was predictable and predicted. Stil it is important to remind oneself that it looks like a long conflict, with lots of unknowns.
    Last edited by Firn; 05-01-2014 at 06:26 PM.
    ... "We need officers capable of following systematically the path of logical argument to its conclusion, with disciplined intellect, strong in character and nerve to execute what the intellect dictates"

    General Ludwig Beck (1880-1944);
    Speech at the Kriegsakademie, 1935

  18. #1358
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stan View Post
    Outlaw,
    Do you have some special link that the rest of us are unaware of regarding the last REFORGER? I have 1993, regardless of how effective or level of troop participation was. The date is either 89, 90, 91, 92 or 93.

    Such as...
    That marvelously dependable source Wikipedia lists the last REFORGER as 1993. Interestingly, it does not list 1989.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  19. #1359
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    Meanwhile, the counter-Maiden in eastern Ukraine continues to escalate as the authority of Kiev collapses. From New York Times, quoting the (unelected) President in Kiev:

    “Inactivity, helplessness and even criminal betrayal” plague the security forces, the acting leader, Oleksandr V. Turchynov, told a meeting of regional governors in Kiev. “It is hard to accept but it’s the truth. The majority of law enforcers in the east are incapable of performing their duties.”
    What has Kiev done to ensure the loyalty of its security officers? Probably not as much as Moscow has done in trying to subvert them. And as I've mentioned previously, the austerity program will continue unabated and without regard for the political consequences:

    On top of nerves, Ukraine’s economy is worryingly frail. The board of the International Monetary Fund voted Wednesday to approve $17 billion in loans for Ukraine, with conditions that will undoubtedly be felt as hardships by ordinary Ukrainians. Igor Burakovsky, head of the Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting, said on Wednesday that Ukraine’s foreign debt amounts to $73.2 billion.
    It's easy to blame Moscow for the complete failure in political strategy, and to suggest that there's an SVR/GRU boogeyman behind every unhelpful event, but the truth of the matter is that the Kiev administration has done nothing whatsoever to rebuild its legitimacy in the eastern regions and with ethnic Russians. The anti-Kiev sentiment is strong, and the organization and resources (allegedly) provided by Moscow does nothing to help matters. But this is an eastern mirror of the Maiden events in Kiev that ousted Yanukovych, and like Yanukovych, the Kiev administration has been careless in providing opportunities for its opposition to exploit.

    And of course, in desperation with the failure of the regular army and the national guard units to actually secure the eastern territories by force, Kiev introduces conscription (which was originally abolished by Yanukovych):

    Ukraine's pro-Western leaders conceded on Wednesday they were 'helpless' to counter the fall of government buildings and police stations to the separatists in the Donbass coal and steel belt of eastern Ukraine, source of around a third of the country's industrial output.
    From BBC:

    On Thursday, his office said in a statement that conscription was being introduced "given the deteriorating situation in the east and the south... the rising force of armed pro-Russian units and the taking of public administration buildings... which threaten territorial integrity".
    It appears that Kiev administration's political position is increasingly untenable.
    When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

  20. #1360
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,007

    Default

    mirhond, thank you for forcing me to think

    — Если отталкиваться от типа населенных пунктов, то где поддержка Путина выше, а где ниже?

    — Максимум поддержки Путина сегодня приходится на большие и средние города. Особенно те, где сохранились остатки советской промышленности, которые заставляют людей ориентироваться на поддержку государства. Затем, по убывающей, идут малые города с населением до 250 тысяч и средние депрессивные города. Еще более низкая поддержка Путина — в селе. В совокупности малые, средние депрессивные города и село представляют собой консервативную провинцию, где фиксируется сильное напряжение и недовольство, связанное с отказом государства от выполнения социальных обязательств. А ниже всего поддержка Путина в Москве.
    Если мы возьмем охват аудитории Первого канала, ВГТРК и НТВ, то он составляет более 90% населения, в то время как интернетом для получения новостей пользуются не более 20% россиян. Соответственно, люди зависят от того, что им говорит телевидение
    .

    http://www.gazeta.ru/politics/2014/0..._5948629.shtml

    AmericanPride, wouldn't it be more easy to handle Eastern Ukraine problems without Russian special services guys acting as provocators? I speculate that without Taliban it would be easier to promote peaceful solutions in Afganistan. Isn't easier to solve problems without spoilers?
    Last edited by kaur; 05-01-2014 at 10:40 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 457
    Last Post: 12-31-2015, 11:56 PM
  2. Replies: 4772
    Last Post: 06-14-2015, 04:41 PM
  3. Shot down over the Ukraine: MH17
    By JMA in forum Europe
    Replies: 253
    Last Post: 08-04-2014, 08:14 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •