Welcome to PatsFans.com

A more aggressive Russian army is still no match for NATO, but is strong enough to sc

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by reflexblue, Sep 23, 2008.

  1. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,265
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +58 / 3 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    In honour of Fog Busters paranoia about all things Russian.

    Russia's armed forces | Advancing, blindly | The Economist

    WHEN Russian armoured columns rumbled into Georgia last month, an early casualty was General Anatoly Khrulyov, the head of the 58th Army, who was wounded by shrapnel and evacuated. The Russians lost their most senior commander in the field because, by their own accounts, they did not know where Georgian units were. Russian forces lacked surveillance drones and night-vision equipment. Radios worked poorly, and commanders resorted to using mobile phones. Troops barely co-ordinated with the air force, which lost several jets (among them a Tu-22 strategic bomber) and dropped mostly old “dumb” bombs rather than modern smart ones. The wonder is how the Russians routed the Georgians so swiftly....con
  2. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    Re: A more aggressive Russian army is still no match for NATO, but is strong enough t

    A bear in a china shop may be clumsy, he may be crude, and he may be inept, but he still breaks a lot of things and makes a mess of peoples' lives. He still needs to be tamed, if you bring him into the china shop.


    //

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>