Trump says We Have Much Better Weapons than Russia

[Lincoln1976]

..we had a HUGE advantage with air and naval supremacy --and the NVA still kicked some ass in Nam..if he wasn't for choppers and air, it would've been a lot different
...no--you hold your horse---the Chinese kicked our asses in Korea--plain and simple--when we had air and naval supremacy!!

..Vietnam was unwinnable --my wife's uncle died in one of the biggest ambushes in Nam.....they gave the USMC a good ass whooping--the NVA were very smart--very smart.....we had amphib carriers and land based choppers plus tanks at that battle AFTER the ass whipping
..considering the HUGE advantage the US had with carriers, amphib carriers, choppers, land based air, the NVA proved they were just as good, if not better

OK...in order to address your points, I guess we have to get into more detail...air superiority is nothing, if you can't see your enemy...foliage was the problem and even when agent orange was used, it often ment shit all....we all know, where the VC hid, right? and yes, that is cunning....yet it wasn't a military success that got them winning the war...it was a PR win..the ted offensive was a desaster for the VC since it led to the death of 80 000 of it's members...basically the whole group was knocked out of action for years to come....thing was, nobody knew that and the US public had made up it's mind that the war was unwinnable...
as for ass wooping: superior training and leadership has played a huge part in the huge losses inflicted on the enemy forces in Nam and that is what it boils down to.

US military doctine has learned a lot from Nam as well..it was a beter army after the war than at it's beginning and that is, what makes the US military so outstanding in the world today....Russia for instance had very few military actions in it's Soviet and post Soviet era...just look at the 90s war in Chechnia and every war thereafter....sure, they won most of them but it took them decades...
Russia still suffers from bad leadership even though the low morale of the early post Soviet era has past.

China is in an even worse position...they have not fought any major battle since the invasion on Vietnam and that back fired badly...they like to show of their latest suff..like that aircraft carrier they got from Ukraine (and never paid the Chinese private businessman for it...lol)
The most effective army beginning of the 20th century was the German army and it showed a lot, what good leadership down to squad level make out and I think the US military is today very much in the same position

 

[harmonica]

..we had a HUGE advantage with air and naval supremacy --and the NVA still kicked some ass in Nam..if he wasn't for choppers and air, it would've been a lot different
...no--you hold your horse---the Chinese kicked our asses in Korea--plain and simple--when we had air and naval supremacy!!

..Vietnam was unwinnable --my wife's uncle died in one of the biggest ambushes in Nam.....they gave the USMC a good ass whooping--the NVA were very smart--very smart.....we had amphib carriers and land based choppers plus tanks at that battle AFTER the ass whipping
..considering the HUGE advantage the US had with carriers, amphib carriers, choppers, land based air, the NVA proved they were just as good, if not better

OK...in order to address your points, I guess we have to get into more detail...air superiority is nothing, if you can't see your enemy...foliage was the problem and even when agent orange was used, it often ment shit all....we all know, where the VC hid, right? and yes, that is cunning....yet it wasn't a military success that got them winning the war...it was a PR win..the ted offensive was a desaster for the VC since it led to the death of 80 000 of it's members...basically the whole group was knocked out of action for years to come....thing was, nobody knew that and the US public had made up it's mind that the war was unwinnable...
as for ass wooping: superior training and leadership has played a huge part in the huge losses inflicted on the enemy forces in Nam and that is what it boils down to.

US military doctine has learned a lot from Nam as well..it was a beter army after the war than at it's beginning and that is, what makes the US military so outstanding in the world today....Russia for instance had very few military actions in it's Soviet and post Soviet era...just look at the 90s war in Chechnia and every war thereafter....sure, they won most of them but it took them decades...
Russia still suffers from bad leadership even though the low morale of the early post Soviet era has past.

China is in an even worse position...they have not fought any major battle since the invasion on Vietnam and that back fired badly...they like to show of their latest suff..like that aircraft carrier they got from Ukraine (and never paid the Chinese private businessman for it...lol)
The most effective army beginning of the 20th century was the German army and it showed a lot, what good leadership down to squad level make out and I think the US military is today very much in the same position

..you and Longknife think this is 1945 0r 1950 still
if it wasn't for air and choppers at a lot of battles, the US troops would've been defeated

heavy air support was called in to halt the North Vietnamese advance. As it arrived over the field, it inflicted major losses on the enemy

etc to infinity
First Blood in Vietnam: Battle of Ia Drang
have you ever read about air support/air resupply at Khe Sanh?
massive is bot even the word for it

During the siege, the U.S. Air Force flew an average of 11 three-plane B-52 formations per day, and Air Force, Marine and Navy fighter aircraft averaged some 300 attacks daily. Two-thirds of the fighters dropped bombs or napalm under radar direction from the base. Night bombing runs were conducted using flares, and the night skies around the base were patrolled by AC-47 and AC-130 gunships armed with cannons and miniguns

Air Power in the Siege of Khe Sanh
etc

 

[harmonica]

..we had a HUGE advantage with air and naval supremacy --and the NVA still kicked some ass in Nam..if he wasn't for choppers and air, it would've been a lot different
...no--you hold your horse---the Chinese kicked our asses in Korea--plain and simple--when we had air and naval supremacy!!

..Vietnam was unwinnable --my wife's uncle died in one of the biggest ambushes in Nam.....they gave the USMC a good ass whooping--the NVA were very smart--very smart.....we had amphib carriers and land based choppers plus tanks at that battle AFTER the ass whipping
..considering the HUGE advantage the US had with carriers, amphib carriers, choppers, land based air, the NVA proved they were just as good, if not better

OK...in order to address your points, I guess we have to get into more detail...air superiority is nothing, if you can't see your enemy...foliage was the problem and even when agent orange was used, it often ment shit all....we all know, where the VC hid, right? and yes, that is cunning....yet it wasn't a military success that got them winning the war...it was a PR win..the ted offensive was a desaster for the VC since it led to the death of 80 000 of it's members...basically the whole group was knocked out of action for years to come....thing was, nobody knew that and the US public had made up it's mind that the war was unwinnable...
as for ass wooping: superior training and leadership has played a huge part in the huge losses inflicted on the enemy forces in Nam and that is what it boils down to.

US military doctine has learned a lot from Nam as well..it was a beter army after the war than at it's beginning and that is, what makes the US military so outstanding in the world today....Russia for instance had very few military actions in it's Soviet and post Soviet era...just look at the 90s war in Chechnia and every war thereafter....sure, they won most of them but it took them decades...
Russia still suffers from bad leadership even though the low morale of the early post Soviet era has past.

China is in an even worse position...they have not fought any major battle since the invasion on Vietnam and that back fired badly...they like to show of their latest suff..like that aircraft carrier they got from Ukraine (and never paid the Chinese private businessman for it...lol)
The most effective army beginning of the 20th century was the German army and it showed a lot, what good leadership down to squad level make out and I think the US military is today very much in the same position

also, the Marines were resupplied a lot by air in Korea
.....ever read about the Chosin?? a lot of wounded Marines were FLOWN out of there--my dad included
...air power is not just air attacks---it is much, much more
...air superiority is not just fighters getting supremacy---it's recon, arty observation, resupply, evacuation, etc

 

[harmonica]

..we had a HUGE advantage with air and naval supremacy --and the NVA still kicked some ass in Nam..if he wasn't for choppers and air, it would've been a lot different
...no--you hold your horse---the Chinese kicked our asses in Korea--plain and simple--when we had air and naval supremacy!!

..Vietnam was unwinnable --my wife's uncle died in one of the biggest ambushes in Nam.....they gave the USMC a good ass whooping--the NVA were very smart--very smart.....we had amphib carriers and land based choppers plus tanks at that battle AFTER the ass whipping
..considering the HUGE advantage the US had with carriers, amphib carriers, choppers, land based air, the NVA proved they were just as good, if not better

OK...in order to address your points, I guess we have to get into more detail...air superiority is nothing, if you can't see your enemy...foliage was the problem and even when agent orange was used, it often ment shit all....we all know, where the VC hid, right? and yes, that is cunning....yet it wasn't a military success that got them winning the war...it was a PR win..the ted offensive was a desaster for the VC since it led to the death of 80 000 of it's members...basically the whole group was knocked out of action for years to come....thing was, nobody knew that and the US public had made up it's mind that the war was unwinnable...
as for ass wooping: superior training and leadership has played a huge part in the huge losses inflicted on the enemy forces in Nam and that is what it boils down to.

US military doctine has learned a lot from Nam as well..it was a beter army after the war than at it's beginning and that is, what makes the US military so outstanding in the world today....Russia for instance had very few military actions in it's Soviet and post Soviet era...just look at the 90s war in Chechnia and every war thereafter....sure, they won most of them but it took them decades...
Russia still suffers from bad leadership even though the low morale of the early post Soviet era has past.

China is in an even worse position...they have not fought any major battle since the invasion on Vietnam and that back fired badly...they like to show of their latest suff..like that aircraft carrier they got from Ukraine (and never paid the Chinese private businessman for it...lol)
The most effective army beginning of the 20th century was the German army and it showed a lot, what good leadership down to squad level make out and I think the US military is today very much in the same position

''''air superiority is nothing''''???!!!!???????
it was the NVA that won the war--not the VC!!!!

as for ass wooping: superior training and leadership has played a huge part in the huge losses inflicted on the enemy forces in Nam and that is what it boils down to.

LEADERSHIP----you are way off track
seems like you don't know the DETAILS of Vietnam
leadership was FKed!!!! they were rotating leaders out every 6 months!!!!!!!
......this is a recipe for disaster--the troops can't get used to a leader--the leader leaves just when he is beginning to learn the ropes

During the Vietnam War, the U.S. Army used a personnel rotation policy that at first blush defies military logic. The Army rotated soldiers through Vietnam on one-year tours. Officers also spent a year in country, but only six of those months were in a troop command.

‘The rotation policies operative in Vietnam,’ Gabriel and Savage argued, ‘virtually foreclosed the possibility of establishing fighting units with a sense of identity, morale, and strong cohesiveness….Not only did the rotation policy foreclose the possibility of developing a sense of unit integrity and responsibility, but it also ensured a continuing supply of low quality, inexperienced officers at the point of greatest stress in any army, namely in its combat units.’

etc etc
in general, NO ONE rotated out in WW2
read this:
Vietnam War: The Individual Rotation Policy

 

[Lincoln1976]

''''air superiority is nothing''''???!!!!???????
it was the NVA that won the war--not the VC!!!!

Dude, the NVA wasn't the main enemy in Vietnam...the VC was and the Ted offensive was mostly composed of VC (even though NVA officer and specialists were send down to participate)...as I said and that was a fact: the VC was cripploed after Ted...yet Ted was the turning point....NV won the war on the backs of the corpses of it's guerilla organisation...simple as..

Yes, rotation was a big problem..what was considered to be morale boosting just led to a drain of skilled personnel and yes, it had a bad effect..yet, training and doctine adjustment did make up for it to some extend...the biggest effect on the war was morale and once morale was broken at home, the war was lost.

You have to see the upside of the rotation policy as well: you rotate people, who are sick and tired of the quagmire out and rotate people with high morale in...it became a problem once people realized that nothing moved...you kill VCs ion one place, fly out and they occupy the same territory over night again...

Big diffenrence when you can pin needles in territory conquered and move these needles towards the enemy's heartland every day.Vietnam looked to the people more and more like a senseless cause with rising costs of money and lives

 

[harmonica]

''''air superiority is nothing''''???!!!!???????
it was the NVA that won the war--not the VC!!!!

Dude, the NVA wasn't the main enemy in Vietnam...the VC was and the Ted offensive was mostly composed of VC (even though NVA officer and specialists were send down to participate)...as I said and that was a fact: the VC was cripploed after Ted...yet Ted was the turning point....NV won the war on the backs of the corpses of it's guerilla organisation...simple as..

Yes, rotation was a big problem..what was considered to be morale boosting just led to a drain of skilled personnel and yes, it had a bad effect..yet, training and doctine adjustment did make up for it to some extend...the biggest effect on the war was morale and once morale was broken at home, the war was lost.

You have to see the upside of the rotation policy as well: you rotate people, who are sick and tired of the quagmire out and rotate people with high morale in...it became a problem once people realized that nothing moved...you kill VCs ion one place, fly out and they occupy the same territory over night again...

Big diffenrence when you can pin needles in territory conquered and move these needles towards the enemy's heartland every day.Vietnam looked to the people more and more like a senseless cause with rising costs of money and lives

..surely you troll

 

[Lincoln1976]

..surely you troll

Dude, please...I like you, OK? and I don't want to spank your ass on basic history...

so,absolute softball here: the picture is from April 30,1975...after the US withdrew officially from the conflict and North Vietnam openly declared war on South Vietnam..it shows a T55 breaking through the perimeter fence of the presidential palace.

During the Paris accord, a truce was declared which NV broke as soon as the US officially withdrew from the conflict....sorry dude, you've got the wrong war here, cause that war was fought soley between North and South Vietnam

 

[harmonica]

..surely you troll

Dude, please...I like you, OK? and I don't want to spank your ass on basic history...

so,absolute softball here: the picture is from April 30,1975...after the US withdrew officially from the conflict and North Vietnam openly declared war on South Vietnam..it shows a T55 breaking through the perimeter fence of the presidential palace.

During the Paris accord, a truce was declared which NV broke as soon as the US officially withdrew from the conflict....sorry dude, you've got the wrong war here, cause that war was fought soley between North and South Vietnam

hahhahahahahha
much laughter
how are you so great on history but your spelling and grammar are 3rd grade??
....since you want to talk shit---I let spelling and grammar mistakes go by--since I make them also--but since you want to talk shit--you have been making mucho [ Spanish ] mistakes
..I can understand a FEW mistakes--but not as many as you've made--and you want to teach ME about history???!! hahahhahahah
.....I thought you might be from a non-English speaking country--your grammar and spelling are so bad
your posts:

that's not what I've ment...his conduct during the civil war was very aggressive and daring towards the enemy....his actions at Gettysburg speaks here volumes...he lead the cavalary counter attack against Picketts charge and he collapsed it

Rommel split up his forces at several occasions, at Mersa El Brega for instance where he severally spanked the british arses, even though the outnumbered him considerally..

cavalary tactics did not emphasis

.lot's of cultural characteristics have led to (rightfully) fought conflict and we wouldn't be, where we are as human and humane societies (the western world that is) if we hadn't fought those, who practice barbarism and savagery

and you think you can ''spank'' someone???hahhahahahah

Ia Drang 1965
Operation Buffalo 1967
Khe Sanh
etc to infinity
the VC were not taking over/were not going to take over/etc

 

[harmonica]

..surely you troll

Dude, please...I like you, OK? and I don't want to spank your ass on basic history...

so,absolute softball here: the picture is from April 30,1975...after the US withdrew officially from the conflict and North Vietnam openly declared war on South Vietnam..it shows a T55 breaking through the perimeter fence of the presidential palace.

During the Paris accord, a truce was declared which NV broke as soon as the US officially withdrew from the conflict....sorry dude, you've got the wrong war here, cause that war was fought soley between North and South Vietnam

..I'm nice and civil--until someone starts talking crap

 

[deanrd]

Russia has the single best weapon. They own Donald Trump.

 

[longknife]

The main difference between the Soviet - and Chinese - military and the US is simple - the education level of the operators. Also the command and control strategy.

Soviet and Chinese people cannot make any decisions for themselves. Even the most simple of changes has to be approved by "higher headquarters" often going to the very highest level.

Americans can and often do make instant decisions based upon their view of the situation.

You can have all the technology in the world. But, without the ability to use it wisely and in a timely manner, it's worthless.

what exactly are you saying?
1. all that education and all that technology and the HUGE advantage of air and naval supremacy did not help in Vietnam or Korea
2. the Chinese gave the US a monumental ass whooping in Korea--not once, but twice--except for the Marines ..and this was 1950
..the Chinese are not stupid
.....MacArthur underestimated the Chinese right before they kicked our asses--twice--kicked a whole Corps off the peninsula--plus beating the crap out of the other units

1. You do not win wars when politicians thousands of miles away micromanage and ignore the military situations. We did not lose a single engagement in Vietnam. Not One. Even the Tet Offensive was a massive loss for the VC and north.
2. We had the North whupped when, knowing that our political leaders didn't have the guts to finish the war, the Chinese unleashed a massive influx of troops. While our losses were terrible, the Chinese lost tens of thousands. We cared about our troops while the Chinese threw theirs into the meat grinder.
Dugout Doug knew exactly what to expect of the Chinese and Truman tied his hands - before firing him.

Take the time to study a little history before spouting off.

 

[Bleipriester]

If we have such great weapons, why haven't we won a war since WWII?

The USA has won wars, in Iraq for example or in Serbia. But all shiny tools of war are not very useful in asymmetric warfare, where ideologists and even fanatics have the better cards.
That a Russian engine failed is only proof for that the Russians are working on new stuff, by the way. That can happen to anyone.

 

[Bleipriester]

The main difference between the Soviet - and Chinese - military and the US is simple - the education level of the operators. Also the command and control strategy.

Soviet and Chinese people cannot make any decisions for themselves. Even the most simple of changes has to be approved by "higher headquarters" often going to the very highest level.

Americans can and often do make instant decisions based upon their view of the situation.

You can have all the technology in the world. But, without the ability to use it wisely and in a timely manner, it's worthless.

what exactly are you saying?
1. all that education and all that technology and the HUGE advantage of air and naval supremacy did not help in Vietnam or Korea
2. the Chinese gave the US a monumental ass whooping in Korea--not once, but twice--except for the Marines ..and this was 1950
..the Chinese are not stupid
.....MacArthur underestimated the Chinese right before they kicked our asses--twice--kicked a whole Corps off the peninsula--plus beating the crap out of the other units

1. You do not win wars when politicians thousands of miles away micromanage and ignore the military situations. We did not lose a single engagement in Vietnam. Not One. Even the Tet Offensive was a massive loss for the VC and north.
2. We had the North whupped when, knowing that our political leaders didn't have the guts to finish the war, the Chinese unleashed a massive influx of troops. While our losses were terrible, the Chinese lost tens of thousands. We cared about our troops while the Chinese threw theirs into the meat grinder.
Dugout Doug knew exactly what to expect of the Chinese and Truman tied his hands - before firing him.

Take the time to study a little history before spouting off.

Helicopters unloaded US soldiers without cover and anything. The US lost over 8000 aircraft. These soldiers then had the task to elicit the enemy forces that then would be subjected to airstrikes.
There were no Chinese forces in battles.
Out of the 300.000 North Vietnamese troops, including Viet Cong, 1,1 million died or were wounded, lol.

 

[22lcidw]

America today is an empire. Just like the British had an empire. Militarily though, we do not like to see many deaths by our soldiers. The British had no problem with that as their doctrine was different in that regard. We win battles. Policing has been an issue at times.

 

[Lincoln1976]

Russia has the single best weapon. They own Donald Trump

get medical help dude...you sound barking mad

 

[Lincoln1976]

how are you so great on history but your spelling and grammar are 3rd grade??

because English isn't my native tongue...makes sense?

How many languages do YOU speak? wanna continue in my language?

Pretty arrogant of you btw....just because I live in Scotland, doesn't mean that I am Scottish and I actually said that in my introduction...or is that the level you're at?

 

[Lincoln1976]

America today is an empire. Just like the British had an empire. Militarily though, we do not like to see many deaths by our soldiers. The British had no problem with that as their doctrine was different in that regard. We win battles. Policing has been an issue at times.

yes and no....the biggest British defeat was the desaster at Isandlwana in which 1500 sodliers were killed.During Victorian times, the strenght of the army never exceded 270 000.

 

[Lincoln1976]

..I'm nice and civil--until someone starts talking crap

crap is everything, someone else disgrees with you on, is it?

As was stated by Longknife: the NVA lost every major engagement and after Khe Sanh, The NVA layd low. Ted was their big gamble and militarily, it back fired...or do you dispute that?

Politically, it succeeded in doing what North Vietnam wanted to achieve: it knocked the US out of the war...the picture you've posted is that of the storming of the presidential compound and that was after Januarly 1973 now, was it

 

[harmonica]

..I'm nice and civil--until someone starts talking crap

crap is everything, someone else disgrees with you on, is it?

As was stated by Longknife: the NVA lost every major engagement and after Khe Sanh, The NVA layd low. Ted was their big gamble and militarily, it back fired...or do you dispute that?

Politically, it succeeded in doing what North Vietnam wanted to achieve: it knocked the US out of the war...the picture you've posted is that of the storming of the presidential compound and that was after Januarly 1973 now, was it

the NVA won--not the US
..how did it backfire??--they WON
..you say you can ''spank'' on history = you are talking crap
--hahahahhahahaha

 

[harmonica]

The main difference between the Soviet - and Chinese - military and the US is simple - the education level of the operators. Also the command and control strategy.

Soviet and Chinese people cannot make any decisions for themselves. Even the most simple of changes has to be approved by "higher headquarters" often going to the very highest level.

Americans can and often do make instant decisions based upon their view of the situation.

You can have all the technology in the world. But, without the ability to use it wisely and in a timely manner, it's worthless.

what exactly are you saying?
1. all that education and all that technology and the HUGE advantage of air and naval supremacy did not help in Vietnam or Korea
2. the Chinese gave the US a monumental ass whooping in Korea--not once, but twice--except for the Marines ..and this was 1950
..the Chinese are not stupid
.....MacArthur underestimated the Chinese right before they kicked our asses--twice--kicked a whole Corps off the peninsula--plus beating the crap out of the other units

1. You do not win wars when politicians thousands of miles away micromanage and ignore the military situations. We did not lose a single engagement in Vietnam. Not One. Even the Tet Offensive was a massive loss for the VC and north.
2. We had the North whupped when, knowing that our political leaders didn't have the guts to finish the war, the Chinese unleashed a massive influx of troops. While our losses were terrible, the Chinese lost tens of thousands. We cared about our troops while the Chinese threw theirs into the meat grinder.
Dugout Doug knew exactly what to expect of the Chinese and Truman tied his hands - before firing him.

Take the time to study a little history before spouting off.

Helicopters unloaded US soldiers without cover and anything. The US lost over 8000 aircraft. These soldiers then had the task to elicit the enemy forces that then would be subjected to airstrikes.
There were no Chinese forces in battles.
Out of the 300.000 North Vietnamese troops, including Viet Cong, 1,1 million died or were wounded, lol.

Vietnam was unwinnable --I just created a thread on it