SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold Price Monitor
GDXJ 92.99+2.9%Nov 7 4:00 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Richnorth who wrote (78015)10/6/2001 1:19:13 PM
From: E. Charters  Read Replies (3) of 116753
 
One thing that should be pointed out is that the SU controlled Afghanistan for ten years and lost 17,000 men. The Afghanis lost 1 million. After a while it became more trouble than it was worth. On the other hand I would hardly call that losing. It was more like a weapons checkout. In Chechnya they again demonstrated that they were against durable tanks and lost many to former SU soldiers (firing from behind), now loyal Chechnyans. (The SU is against too durable a tank as once they pass into enemy hands, they become dangerous if unstoppable.)

What the SU demonstrated is that it is hellish hard to outfit a soldier with enough weaponry to reliably defeat an enemy and make him mobile enough to catch the guerilla soldier. They also demonstrated that engineers thinking in ivory towers about weapon systems produce bad weapons for a generalized war. It may be a mistake to make a weapon that fires only 400 yards if military stats says most of your kills take place at that range. All that proves is that the soldiers are not trained to use weapons reliably at greater ranges. In Afghanistan, a desert mountain country, the Nato 500 yard, 64 grain round auto weapons are useless and soon run you out of ammo. What is needed there is long range light frag and heavy round 2500 yard sniper rifles, sort of like the 30-06 Super Springfield. Ask any soldier in Vietnam or Korea what weapons defended the best and you should get a fast answer. The BAR, which had an 800 yard effective range and would outshoot any sniper, and the pre targeted mortar. Today semi-balllistic light mortar rockets can be made computer-laser targetable and first shot capable. This would make an enormous difference in hill fighting.

EC<:-}
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News