Sputnik: Pentagon Expert Says Russians Would ‘Annihilate’ US Army on Battlefield
Despite the size of its military budget, the US Army isn’t as strong as one might think it is and it would certainly lose to the Russian Army in a direct confrontation on a battlefield, retired US Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor said, according to Politico Magazine.
The deployment of the US Army 2nd Cavalry Regiment from Germany to Hungary that was intended to scare Russia was a joke and it wouldn't help in a real-life fighting scenario, said Macgregor, who also holds a Ph.D. in international relations from the US Military Academy at West Point.
Previous Post: Pentagon Still Unsure On How Best To Respond To Russia In Eastern Europe
Update: Russia Would ‘Annihilate’ US Army In A Direct Confrontation -- Vikas Shukla, Value Walk
WNU Editor: I have trouble visualizing the U.S. - Russian armies battling on the battlefield. If all-out war should ever break out .... nuclear missiles will be the weapons that will be used .... not one armoured brigade facing another in some Baltic country.
16 comments:
The US Army has excellent equipment and lots of Blooded troops, I'm sure they will make a very good account of themselves when the time comes. The only thing that I worry about is what effect will Obama's purge of senior officers will have.
Armoured brigades facing off in a baltic country is the plausible scenario. No one will evet ever use nukes the MAD doctrine still holds in every leaders rationale.
The u.s would beat the russian forces please look at how their equipment gas fared in every conflict in the past 30 years.
I suppose it would depend on the theatre. Anywhere close to Russia and any opfor is toast. Further away, advantage to the US.
Either way, Canada should get out of NATO and refrain from participating in a test of the theory.
WNU Editor,
As near as I can tell, having seen the full report a couple of days ago, and the milblog's analysis, the report is accurate.
It's also a political report aimed at a variety of targets.
In it's 8 and counting failed wars, the BB Concept and the BB formations have been gutted and run down in favour of COIN and light deployable Expeditionary and Occupation Forces. Heavy Armour and Artillary Forces have been "neglected", and compared to the throw weight of a Russian Armoured Division, two decades behind and under strength.
It's also a warning to the Bomb Russia crowd that at this time, things are not going to turn out "well".
The U.S. would have to show up to fight. It has relatively few troops and heavy equipment in theater. Given the current U.S. European posture and its ability to project heavy forces in Europe, there would not be much of a conventional fight at this point in time. I would like to see a table comparing Russian forces in just Kaliningrad and total U.S. forces in all of Europe. It could be quite informative. Then add all the other units in or around the borders. As far as other front line countries pitching in to repel any Russian adventure, one need only look at TO&Es and readiness reports to see that one needs to pray that Russia does not move on Europe.
I remember vacationing in West Germany before the wall came down. As we drove on the autobahn with young Germans hanging out the windows partying to music blaring from their cars, to our right were long columns of U.S. heavy vehicles and troops in full battle gear and camo faces moving around the country. Another location and F-4s flying over us at tree height with full load outs. In the north of Germany I remember waking up to NATO at war. Choppers firing rockets, artillery booming and crashing, bombers bombing and we thought it was WWIII! Scared the hell out of us until an English speaking German saw my pale face and said "NAATOW".
We cannot afford to think in cold war terms because the troops, equipment, and will to fight are just not there.
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/british-columbia/harjit-sajjan-badass-canada-defence-minister-1.3304931
He better be a super badass if we keep Russia baiting has we've been wont to do of late.
In short, an army of police/security guards instead of soldiers.
In Europe, the US as in Kuwait, relies on PP forces,
http://www.army.mil/article/119213/
The armour is already there , (3 Divisions worth), and the US can have the men there to man it in 48 hours.
Jay Farquharson said...
In Europe, the US as in Kuwait, relies on PP forces,
http://www.army.mil/article/119213/
The armour is already there , (3 Divisions worth), and the US can have the men there to man it in 48 hours.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Westerners often have difficulty comprehending the size and fire power that Russia has forward deployed and in reserve. The U.S. always thinks and portrays Russia as weak and America Strong. That is why the U.S. can still make movies and documentaries today that tout the U.S. as winning WW2 almost single handed with the Russians filling sandbags waiting for the U.S. to bail them out.
As stated previously, the U.S. would have to show up to use their PP equipment. Given the glacially slow U.S. response to just about any emergency, I find it hard to see the U.S. moving between 30,000 to 60,000 troops in an air bridge to Europe and having the forces combat ready in 2 days.
I was in D.C. during 9/11 by the White House. The U.S. military could not even get 2 loaded choppers to the White House in time to do anything useful. I was there and watched the U.S. military in non-action. To get a fighter cap over D.C. they had to bring in jets from the Mid-West. After seeing that debacle, can one really see the U.S. up and ready to fight a continental power in 2 days? I am not convinced.
So, your concept of readiness smacks of a war gaming board, not in reality.
Fazman
A have read memoirs of German soldiers tha survived ww2 battle of Stalingrad , and they said that red army soldiers would rather eat each other before surrender literally . there is also accounts of this happening in Leningrad ..Russians are very stubborn and will eat the bark of a tree ,so how do you deal with that and in the other hand you have the US The couldn't defeat thousand iraky fighters for days in Central Irak with everything we have . the US army unfortunately has been filled with political correctness . Equal opportunity soldiers is what they are promoting G L T is what we are getting for the battlefront so in my opinion and experiences the only way that I know you could win a war is by holding morality on the high ground. Something that when many soldiers drop dead filling the battlefield like the Battle of burden.
Still have enough courage to hold the lines
As I said, "I find the report accurate".
And I also noted that the report is intended for a "domestic" audience, predominantly targetting the COIN/BB schism in the U.S. Army.
Hubris has never stopped the U.S. From going to War.
jay .... so true about the hubris.
Tales of tenacity and canabilisim do not a modern army make.
It comes to equipment training morale and motivation and experience in logistics and planning a modern war.
This is where russias aviators armoured divisions soldiers and sailors have very little experience.
They had their hands filled subduing georgia who were u.s trained.
The problem with the russian army in my humble opinion is their reliance on central command and being paralysed by inaction
At a battallion or platoon level as they do not operate nco as free thinking soldiers as per their western counterparts
It is the western politicians who are the biggest hinderance to us mounting a successful defence . If the russians new what they know now they would have sent their tanks across the fulda gap and have been in Germany before the allies could agree on the wording of a response.
I actually admire Putin he has done in amonth more than the states has done in a year.
If the Ukrainians had Javilins,Carl Gustav rocket launchers and 120mms rifled mortars they would have slaughtered the Bolshevik nutjobs😉
Javelins yes the other 2 are junk that most western armies dumped years ago.
Look, two things, first of all, while our army is exhausted, it is still highly professional with senior NCOs and field grade officers witha decade or more of combat experience. The Russian army has conscripts and little or no combat experience against a peer or superior force.
Second, Russians fight like madmen when their country is being invaded, no doubt about that, but how well do you think an unblooded army of conscripts will do against NATO troops fighting for their lives (but not outnumbered) on their home soil?
Also, Russia will not be able to stop resupply from North America, and their air force is outnumbered and doesn't have nearly the flight hours of the average US squadron.
Plus, the Air Force has the A-10, which should do very well against the Russians.
Post a Comment