Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Incident between Russian/American forces in Syria


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Snark said:

The Russians would do that sort of thing "for a laugh", they're mental.

So are the Americans, particularly  Private 'Mad Dog' Kowalski, Major Gene 'Mad Dog' Lipschitz,  Private Jesse 'Mad Dog' Nugent, and Corporal Mick 'Mad Dog' O'Brien.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Loki said:

They're mad dogs as long as the other dog doesn't bite back

 

I don’t think the bravery of the American forces can be called into question. Competence perhaps, in particular the strategists. Anyone catch any of “Once upon a time in Iraq”? Shocking when you see the whole tale laid out like that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, swiss_democracy_for_all said:

I don’t think the bravery of the American forces can be called into question

Yes sorry i meant more the ones that pick what helpless country to spread democracy too. They're in no danger of any repercussions while they bully them.

The soldiers themselves are absolute units

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently several of the Americans inside got injured. Seriously? Surely best to keep that quiet.

To be fair to the Russians they cornered the Yanks with superior forces on the ground and in the air. 

Don't forget, we still have this blurred story of last year where supposedly a large number of Russian 'mercenaries' were killed by US forces.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, swiss_democracy_for_all said:

I don’t think the bravery of the American forces can be called into question. Competence perhaps, in particular the strategists. Anyone catch any of “Once upon a time in Iraq”? Shocking when you see the whole tale laid out like that. 

I watched it, as usual I don't believe what they said.  The official version is that America took a city in 2003 the size of Los Angeles and lost only 34 men and two tanks.  With only 30,000 men, who were running black on ammo and hallucinating from exhaustion before the battle even started.  This was achieved through superior western weaponry and Arab cowardice, they say and imply.  Losing only 34 men as invaders, taking a city of 5 million, is so astonishing as to be highly suspicious.  Unprecedented in the history of warfare.

Most benefits from American weaponry come from range and airpower, both of these are negated in urban combat.

In the Battle of Fallujah the following year, Jihadis numbering ten times less than the Republican Guard, with inferior weaponry, inflicted ten times the number of casualties on Americans.  Something doesn't add up.

And of course, the Russians, French and Iraqis agreed in 2003.  They all said the Americans cut a deal with senior Republican Guard leaders to leave Baghdad an open city, sort of like the German/American agreement to leave Rome an open city in WW2.

This explains why the Americans invaded a country the size of Iraq with only two (!) divisions.

Edited by ElKapitan84
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ElKapitan84 said:

I watched it, as usual I don't believe what they said.  The official version is that America took a city in 2003 the size of Los Angeles and lost only 34 men and two tanks.  With only 30,000 men, who were running black on ammo and hallucinating from exhaustion before the battle even started.  This was achieved through superior western weaponry and Arab cowardice, they say and imply.  Losing only 34 men as invaders, taking a city of 5 million, is so astonishing as to be highly suspicious.  Unprecedented in the history of warfare.

Most benefits from American weaponry come from range and airpower, both of these are negated in urban combat.

In the Battle of Fallujah the following year, Jihadis numbering ten times less than the Republican Guard, with inferior weaponry, inflicted ten times the number of casualties on Americans.  Something doesn't add up.

And of course, the Russians, French and Iraqis agreed in 2003.  They all said the Americans cut a deal with senior Republican Guard leaders to leave Baghdad an open city, sort of like the German/American agreement to leave Rome an open city in WW2.

This explains why the Americans invaded a country the size of Iraq with only two (!) divisions.

Perhaps you overestimate the competence and discipline of the Iraqi army. Mosul had a total force of 60,000 Iraqi army and police stationed there, but fell quite quickly to an invading force of 1500 Isis insurgents in 2014. That doesn't add up either.

As has been shown throughout military history, fear and discipline (or lack of it) is the key. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...