Pakistani PM Warns of 'Full Force' Response to Future U.S. Raids - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Swilly;29733854]That was during German Success, not failure. If you read near the end of Panzer Leader when Hitler brings Guderian back during the end of the War, he gain a completely different view of the Red Army.[/QUOTE] Good to know that not everyone is believing in those stereotypes. :v:

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29733868]Good to know that not everyone is believing in those stereotypes. :v:[/QUOTE] The stereotypes came from the over-romanticized battle of Stalingrad. Why would it be punishment to be sent to Eastern Front if the Russians were bad at fighting?

[QUOTE=Swilly;29733879]The stereotypes came from the over-romanticized battle of Stalingrad. Why would it be punishment to be sent to Eastern Front if the Russians were bad at fighting?[/QUOTE] They originated from the Cold War's tensions, lack of translated Russian sources and belittlement of everything Soviet, but I'm going off-topic now. Hell, I once read a 1946 article in [i]Military Review[/i] where this British officer called the Soviet Army as "nothing more than a mass of infantry led by mediocre officers".

[QUOTE=CjienX;29733836]This is like throwing a rock at the high school bully after he takes lunch money that was really your friends that was just hiding in your pocket unknown to you.[/QUOTE] i think its more similar to a corrupt government hiding and protecting one of the most dangerous people on earth then getting mad when a country who provides you a shitload of money each year to do exactly the opposite comes in to actually get it done but thats just me i might be waaaaay off

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29733887]They originated from the Cold War's tensions, lack of translated Russian sources and belittlement of everything Soviet, but I'm going off-topic now.[/QUOTE] We went off topic a long time ago. Which is why I turned to German sources during the end of the Second World War for info on the Red Army.

An interesting article on Pakistan's terrain, if people want to know what kind of ground a US-Pakistan War would be fought on. [url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/terrain.htm[/url] [editline]9th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Swilly;29733892]We went off topic a long time ago. Which is why I turned to German sources during the end of the Second World War for info on the Red Army.[/QUOTE] For me, David Glantz has been the best source of information of the Red Army during the GPW.

[QUOTE=RG4;29733851]Is bad that 4 people have dominated nearly 3 pages of the entire thread?[/QUOTE] happens all the time in a thread with potential for natural thread derailment(anything related to military, politics, religion, or philosophy) it ends up with a small number of people arguing and discussing shit(generally completely off the original topic) for a few pages until a fresh batch of posters comes in and actually comments on the op because they didnt wanna read through a bunch of off topic banter

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29733934]An interesting article on Pakistan's terrain, if people want to know what kind of ground a US-Pakistan War would be fought on. [url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/terrain.htm[/url] [editline]9th May 2011[/editline] For me, David Glantz has been the best source of information of the Red Army during the GPW.[/QUOTE] He's a good source as well.

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29733934]An interesting article on Pakistan's terrain, if people want to know what kind of ground a US-Pakistan War would be fought on. [url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/terrain.htm[/url] [editline]9th May 2011[/editline] For me, David Glantz has been the best source of information of the Red Army during the GPW.[/QUOTE] Part of the reason they took ages to find Bin Laden was because of the terrain of Afghanistan. It's just mountains and desert.

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29733934]An interesting article on Pakistan's terrain, if people want to know what kind of ground a US-Pakistan War would be fought on. [url]http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/pakistan/terrain.htm[/url] [editline]9th May 2011[/editline] For me, David Glantz has been the best source of information of the Red Army during the GPW.[/QUOTE] "There is a lot of good tank country in Pakistan's heartland - the Punjab plain. Korea isn't good tank country. There were almost no good roads in Korea, and it was not good tank country in the Patton and Walker sense. Iran, one of the world's most mountainous countries, isn't good tank country. The border between China and India is high in the Himalayan mountains, which is not good tank country. Burma was definitely not good tank country. Two substantial rivers run north and south, the first being the great Irrawaddy and, 50 miles to the east, the Sittang. The few roads and tracks went through rice paddy fields, and were mostly underwater in the rainy season and baked hard in summer, having many banks and obstructions. Beyond the paddy fields was the jungle, almost impenetrable for tanks." what does this have to do with pakistan, i dont care if burma is good tank country or not damnit

yawmwen, your attitude leads me to believe that you would blindly approve of the US doing the "you're harboring terrorists" excuse on any other country, even if their substantiation is suspect. Got anything to say about that? [editline]9th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;29733983] what does this have to do with pakistan, i dont care if burma is good tank country or not damnit[/QUOTE] Don't read the second paragraph.

[QUOTE=Eluveitie;29733972]Part of the reason they took ages to find Bin Laden was because of the terrain of Afghanistan. It's just mountains and desert.[/QUOTE] east afghanistan is probably one of the best hiding spots in the world, so many caverns in the mountain, it would be like looking for a needle in a haystack without any tips or intelligence to point in the right direction, and even then its like finding a slightly larger needle in a haystack thats why if we got any tip that taliban or al qaeda were somewhere we would launch missiles and bombs then count the bodies afterwards

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29734005]yawmwen, your attitude leads me to believe that you would blindly approve of the US doing the "you're harboring terrorists" excuse on any other country, even if their substantiation is suspect. Got anything to say about that? [editline]9th May 2011[/editline] Don't read the second paragraph.[/QUOTE] After reading it, that sucks for Pakistan's Defense :v:

[QUOTE=Swilly;29734034]After reading it, that sucks for Pakistan's Defense :v:[/QUOTE] There are ways to survive on a desert battlefield dominated by precision weapons.

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29734005]yawmwen, your attitude leads me to believe that you would blindly approve of the US doing the "you're harboring terrorists" excuse on any other country, even if their substantiation is suspect. Got anything to say about that? [/QUOTE] not really approve of it, i didnt(dont) support shit like the iraq war this is different though, because not only did we have substantial evidence, but we were working against a government we knew tipped off osama in the past, and we didnt invade, or even conduct an actual "military" operation in a strict sense not to mention they sorta owe us a solid after we give them tons of money to conduct counter-terrorism and they couldnt even figure out that the guy was right outside their military academy because they spend the money on stupid shit like jets to compete with india rather than actually doing counter-terrorism stuff [editline]10th May 2011[/editline] but im not a big fan of invading a country for almost any reason

[QUOTE=yawmwen;29734024]thats why if we got any tip that taliban or al qaeda were somewhere we would launch missiles and bombs then count the bodies afterwards[/QUOTE] That's pretty frightening to hear. One of my history teachers a few years back told me back in the 1980s, they had computerized wargames where they regularly fired rocket salvos of cluster submunitions whenever a ground surveillance radar indicated a large mass of steel moving along some Autobahn in West Germany. There wasn't even an awareness that civilian columns might also create a radar echo and how to separate them from a column of Soviet tanks. With this in mind, what if those tips that place A has some Taliban/Al-Qaeda are rotten and the missiles fly anyways?

[QUOTE=RG4;29733851]Is bad that 4 people have dominated nearly 3 pages of the entire thread?[/QUOTE] Its called a good discussion :v:

That is scary in my opinion.

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29734102]That's pretty frightening to hear. One of my history teachers a few years back told me back in the 1980s, they had computerized wargames where they regularly fired rocket salvos of cluster submunitions whenever a ground surveillance radar indicated a large mass of steel moving along some Autobahn. There wasn't even an awareness that civilian columns might also create a radar echo and how to separate the one from the other. With this in mind, what if those tips that place A has some Taliban/Al-Qaeda are rotten?[/QUOTE] i dont think there is much going on in those cavern systems except taliban and al qaeda, osama basically commandeered a lot of it to build his fortifications and shit, i dont think many, if any, people lived there that werent hiding or conducting something nefarious, its a pretty hostile, isolated, desolate area but i understand that sentiment, i dont particularly like the shoot first ask questions later strategy but there wasnt a whole lot of choice when it could take days to get to the place via conventional methods of transportation since the area is so rugged i actually dont know how i feel about it myself

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29734102] With this in mind, what if those tips that place A has some Taliban/Al-Qaeda are rotten and the missiles fly anyways?[/QUOTE] I would certainly hope we would at least do a drone overflight of the target area before simply bombing the shit out of a place on a hunch :v:

Modern surveillance means may make it appealing not to put any real physical eyes on the ground to verify a target, but when your adversaries know that an eye in the sky is watching them, it's worth it. As for conventional methods of transportation and the rugged terrain, that's where deception comes in handy. The Soviets did it a lot of times when they were in Afghanistan with success.

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29734191]Modern surveillance means may make it appealing not to put any real physical eyes on the ground to verify a target, but when your adversaries know that an eye in the sky is watching them, it's worth it. As for conventional methods of transportation and the rugged terrain, that's where deception comes in handy. The Soviets did it a lot of times when they were in Afghanistan with success.[/QUOTE] I don't understand why we don't try it though. It really annoys me that we don't try to hide either.

[QUOTE=Swilly;29734220]I don't understand why we don't try it though. It really annoys me that we don't try to hide either.[/QUOTE] "Those petty Taliban can't hide from our advanced sensors!"

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29734230]"Those petty Taliban can't hide from our advanced sensors!"[/QUOTE] I mean, why don't we just hide as civilians, wait for the Taliban to think everything is clear and then BAM

[QUOTE=Tac Error;29734191]Modern surveillance means may make it appealing not to put any real physical eyes on the ground to verify a target, but when your adversaries know that an eye in the sky is watching them, it's worth it. As for conventional methods of transportation and the rugged terrain, that's where deception comes in handy. The Soviets did it a lot of times when they were in Afghanistan with success.[/QUOTE] what sort of modern surveillance its pretty damn hard to see into a cavern via satellite and drone, and im sure the military did verify to the best of their ability every tip, in fact i doubt we actually hit a place unless it could somehow be substantiated to a point that it wasnt a waste i dont know much about the soviet invasion of afghanistan myself, so i have no idea how their deception strategies worked

[QUOTE=Swilly;29734220]I don't understand why we don't try it though. It really annoys me that we don't try to hide either.[/QUOTE] We're too big, bad and awesome to be hiding from some cave dwellers apparently v:v:v

[QUOTE=Swilly;29734241]I mean, why don't we just hide as civilians, wait for the Taliban to think everything is clear and then BAM[/QUOTE] It's unorthodox?

[QUOTE=Timebomb575;29734252]We're too big, bad and awesome to be hiding from some cave dwellers apparently v:v:v[/QUOTE] It'd be hilarious to watch the world's reaction. "Wait, where the fuck did they come from!?" [editline]10th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Tac Error;29734265]It's unorthodox?[/QUOTE] Best part :3:

[QUOTE=Swilly;29734241]I mean, why don't we just hide as civilians, wait for the Taliban to think everything is clear and then BAM[/QUOTE] thats against geneva convention isnt it? military personnel are supposed to be identifiable from civilians if they are going to actually be fighting and there arent really a lot of civilians in that area anyways, i dont even think there are any villages in the general vicinity where it would be useful

Its like the USSR using unmarked cargo ships to Invade Seattle! WiC reference