1341
.45 acp
Let's be honest, what are the mutual benefits for both sides. The russians will get a bunch of clowns to be minesweepers and the nk's will have alot less mouths to feed, because they aren't coming back.
Things are heating up in the Donbass
- Thread starter holdover
- Start date
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Seriously? That statement qualify s you to work on the Whitehouse staff. NK is just a small part of a bigger picture that some cant seem to notice.
Expect NK to act up at the same time china moves on Taiwan and Iran on Israel.
Expect a few thousand NK "advisors" to get a masters level curriculum on modern peer to peer engagement that they will bring back with them to share and update NK doctrine for attacking the south.
Ukraine is a great comparison to the Spanish civil war pre WW2. It was used as a live battle lab to study and learn from.
The US cannot possibly manage all these separate theaters effectively with our current military, manufacturing and logistics.
You need to be reminded how a bunch of clowns in pajamas with junk boat navy won the war 50 years ago.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Napoleon once said, ""lost Territory I can regain, lost Time ,I cannot"" If the enemy can destroy your weapon systems faster than you can replace them , somewhere down the road your going to have a a major problem . A problem even money can't solve.
A tiger or panther is superior to a t34 or a Sherman. But a tiger or a panther lose to 5 t34s or 5 Sherman's.
At some point it becomes a war of attrition and manufacturing and logistics.
I think there was a quote in not sure what general or admiral said it but it's something like "only a fool fights a fort from a ship". The ship will run out of supplies first.
The same thing is happening with the west, we are depleting our reserves and stock piles rapidly. We are not manufacturing "new" munitions anywhere near the rates needed for high intensity conflicts and no where near the rates of production for Russia.
Sure western stuff is better but tell that to the Ukrainian who can only fire 10 shells a day because he has no resupply when he's taking 100 incoming.
1341
.45 acp
Seriously, your response shows that you have proven yourself to be nothing but a putin apologist. What you haven't noticed is that NK has been a small part of a bigger picture since 1950.
1341
.45 acp
Did they? I believe the goal of that invasion was to unite Korea into 1 country under communist leadership. So if you look at things in 2024 did that happen?
JaguarJaguarGolf
6.5 Creedmoor
We could have had 10 new aircraft carriers for the amount of aid we’ve given Ukraine.
Or fixed our ghetto cities, reshored manufacturing and repaired failing infrastructure.
Not a good day for arithmetic on NY Gun Forum. 2024 minus 50 is Vietnam.
1341
.45 acp
Kinda figured your arithmetic was wrong because the post was about NK or did you miss that.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Why would you call me an apologist? Makes no sense. Oh I noticed, but there are people on here who cant see that.The ones who think they are clowns
Last edited:
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
This is exactly what is happening in Ukraine
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
The Pajamas really gave it away.
JaguarJaguarGolf
6.5 Creedmoor
Yea, Kind of like Vietnam....
I know two sides of the story, you know only one. However the fact is there are American forces still deployed in S. Korea and their government is obedient to Washington. There are no foreign troops in N.K.
Last edited:
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
spat
.700 Nitro Express
Only a moron is paying for rounds fired. What's important is targets destroyed.
So, if I can only fire 10 rounds, but I destroy 5 targets with that, and my enemy fires 100 rounds, 99 of them land in an empty cornfield, I'll take that every day.
Plus, my 10 rounds can be delivered by a single truck with one driver.
My enemies 100 rounds need a whole convoy. That whole convoy needs to be supplied too.
The economy of that is huge.
The US hasn't moved to a wartime economy yet.
It's true, we're maxing out our "in our spare time" production. If things escalate as you suggest, we might need to get serious.
When the US gets serious, very impressive things happen. Should I remind you of the time we were building whole aircraft carriers at a rate of a couple dozen a year ? We were pumping out multiple other capital ships a day ?
We went from essentially nothing to over a billion artillery shells in just a couple years.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
ANd the other targets you couldnt hit destroys your position and I move forward again. . What is happening is that trained people . weapons and ammo are being destroyed at a faster pace then can be than can replaced. The russian weapons themselves ane'nt bad . the Russian doctrine and officers leave a lot to be desired .
The monkey wrench in the gears for both sides was the effectiveness of cheap drone warfare and how to counter it.
Ok your going to have to clarify that for this moron. Nobody is paying for rounds?
spat
.700 Nitro Express
You don't want to spend money to fire rounds.
You want to spend money to destroy targets.
100 rounds fired is useless if it doesn't have an effect.
It's a common management problem everywhere. They mistake what's easily measured for what's important.
Imagine you have 2 sales guys. One makes 100 calls a day and only makes one sale. The other guy only makes 10 calls, but he gets 6 sales out of it.
Obviously the second employee is the better salesman, and is far better for your company.
But, all over the place shitty management will track number of calls (and maybe even pay per call) rather than a more difficult to measure metric.
I.e. they get a spreadsheet in their email every morning with calls completed, so that's what they care about. Finding out the sales figures per employee is harder, so they ignore it.
Pretty soon, the really smart employees are just making calls and getting the customers to say "no" as fast as they can to get on to the next call and improve their metric.
Next month, management pats themselves on the back for doubling their call volume, and the next level of management is wondering why their sales have dropped.
That comes from not understanding what you are paying for. You are paying for sales not calls. If you *think* you're paying for calls, you're going to precipitate a disaster.
So, "rounds fired" is a terrible metric to judge by. While not every round is even intended to hit, you want to judge by how effective they are, not how numerous.
Imagine if the marine Corp rifle qualifications were "how fast can you dump a magazine". You'd get some really shitty marines out of it.
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Your still looking at the problem wrong.
Say you have a a team of 50 of the best well trained marksmen delta force veterans . And the Russians attack their position from three sides with a division . You know what happens to those those troops? they all die . The russians take that Position and do it again. the Russians are victorious because they have achieved the objective set out for them by their command. Maybe your guys kill 20 to 1 , doesnt matter because they lost the objective . Now the next problem is where are you going to get another 50 delta force vets? Theres only so many.( I think 2k actually) They take years to produce You cant replace your losses while the Russians can .
Obviously your delta force guys are extremely efficient. but numbers matter too, and the quality of your defense has just declined by 50 top notch experts that you cant replace. You have better troops and training but your losing the war. You can only trade lives for territory until you run out of territory. Your efficiency doesn't = victory. You look at the numbers and come away saying we are far better than the Russians, but the Russians are taking and holding ground . Your going to run out of ground!
Correct! so the Russians hire 10 more salesman at one sale a day, who's winning? Obviously you have the better salesman, but my company is making more sales . Now your salesman is KIA or gets a better job which ever comes first. how are you going to replace him? the guys an expert, years of experience , You cant just take a guy off the street and expect similar performance
Your viewing the metric wrong. succcess on the battlefield isnt measured in lives or armor, its measured in ground taken and held.
Stalin's truism is correct. ""Quantity has a quality of its own ""
What happened to the vaunted German army in Russia? the Germans were not able to produce thier high end weapons and troops faster than the Russians could destroy them. The historic parallel is the same .
For some reason it doesn't click with you. the situation is that for the cost of a 5k drone (or much less) you can knock out a 5 million dollar tank . the drone can be produced at 10,000 a month, antitank missles at 1-2K per month vs 400 tanks a month , the math should be obvious .
Armors effectiveness on the battle field is limited until one side can produce an effective countermeasure
the secondary weapon is the infantry (rah) of which Russians have massive resources for and Ukraine does not
Last edited:
Russia signing an agreement with North Korea is a sure sign of weakness not strength. I can't believe what I'm reading. They might have numbers but they have no real experience whatsoever. Does anyone really think of north Korea as a goddamn military powerhouse? Seriously? Korean conscripts in Ukraine would be a sign of desperation by the Russians.
North Korea has the fourth largest military in the world, which can be upgraded by the Russian missile technology. Curious to see how the transfer of long range missiles to Ukraine is coming along after this N.K./Russia treaty.
Not a lot of talk about new transfer of long range missiles to Ukraine anymore.
Not a lot of talk about new transfer of long range missiles to Ukraine anymore.
Last edited:
A genuine question as I honestly have no idea
Do you think that if SHTF big time, we could really produce a massive supply of weapons in a short time?
Do we still have that capability?
Do we still have enough in house manufacturing capabipity that could be switched over?
I hope so !
holdover
.475 A&M Magnum
Is the US weak because we run NATO? the agreement was a military pact between Russia, China, NK, And Iran. stating if one is attacked the others are obligated to fight with them. If Russia is attacked by NATO it would mean NK will attack US bases in SK and japan as will China , Iran can block the straights of Hormuz . We dont have the troop strength to fight them all at once. Sure they are a small country but so was vietnam and they will do thier share of spreading US forces thin.
Hey, do you think the north koreans born and raised during the famine (you know, the ones that survived despite severe malnutrition) are just "itching" to go into combat? Is that fourth largest military really the well oiled machine you imply? The first world war proved that a good machine gun squad meant that numbers don't mean shit. Here we are over 100 years later and you think sheer numbers means a goddam thing? You were blind about the evils of the soviet union so it's logical you are blind to other things as well.
I call bullshit on that. The north koreans have been doing a circle jerk for 60 years. Lots of numbers and bluster but no real combat experience. Unless you call lobbing the odd shell and some sabotage teams experience. Despite the "fourth largest military" and "30-50" nukes they haven't even managed to secure their own isthmus. Yet they now will be killers and victors in ukraine. I'm not buying that at all.
Soviet propaganda was Mr. Rogers show compared to lies and misinformation told to the American public. Not only that, most people in the Soviet Union were very skeptical about state propaganda, unlike idiots in this country who think they are lied to only about domestic matters, but well informed on what is going on in the outside world.
North Koreans are more fit and ready for the hardships of war by far more than young multi-gender in this country.
Last edited:
spat
.700 Nitro Express
The battle of Conoco fields says you're wrong. The Russians tried that and it turns our they got their asses kicked and the US troops were just fine.
Battle of Khasham - Wikipedia
And we haven't been talking about armor and tanks, we were talking about artillery.
That is why a single F35 can conduct a more effective bombing mission than 1000 WWII B17s
In fact, a single flight by a single F35 can do what would take all 1000 of those B17s flying half a dozen times to do.
Now, admittedly an F35 needs a lot more support than a B17, and it's pilot a lot more training than a B17 crewman.
But, not 6000 times as much.
So, you are out ahead.
People all seem to forget that modern warfare is all about logistics. Tactics and even strategy are solved problems.
So, if you are responsible for logistics, do you want to transport 100,000 artillery shells, or 50 smart munitions?