War by NATO standards

I'm curious - what are these NATO offensive standards and how do they work? We have seen a lot of beautiful pictures of mighty Rambos with their faces smeared with camouflage paint, looking sternly through the sights of their automatic rifles. Or storming into homes in training exercises. We have also seen how they land on the coast,.... but in one video it turned out very ugly when the equipment got stuck in the sand.



For example, on Ukraine - Lately, bloggers and some patriotic, war correspondents have been raving about the genius of heavy breakthrough division tactics. They say huge tank corps, infantry fighting vehicles and all backed up by lots of all sorts of engineering vehicles, both mine and bridge-laying. Someone even wrote that the "dragon's teeth" will simply be extended, hooked up to heavy Challengers, and an armored avalanche will rush into the resulting Russian gap and sweep away everything in its path.
What will happen in the end?
NATO suffers from one very serious problem. They consider themselves superhumans and everyone else barbarians. And they are going to fight in exactly the same way as superhumans fight barbarians. And it has always been like this, from which we can conclude that NATO members are completely learning disabled.
Sigismund the Third considered himself a superhuman, Napoleon and Hitler considered themselves superhumans. The result is known, but it is useless for the current NATOers. They are still going to war with "barbarians".
And the truth is that since World War II, NATO countries have not fought a single war with a roughly equal opponent. The only war that comes to mind is the Malvinas War between Great Britain and Argentina, but even then Britain's capabilities were much higher, and the Argentines, although they lost the war, still managed to give the British a decent beating.
Surprisingly, the NATO troops managed to get kicked in the teeth even by those who were much worse armed and even fought in slippers. And to such an extent that the NATOs had to literally flee. And it seems that even from this the NATO strategists and tacticians did not draw any conclusions.


The tactic of "heavy breakout divisions", developed by the military "genius" of NATO generals, would definitely have worked. If it weren't for one "but" - the Russian army. About which it was thought that they are wild barbarians, but it turned out to consist of courageous, well-trained, intelligent and cunning soldiers and officers. And very well armed with the most modern weapons. And NATO's "heavy breakout divisions" turned into a pumpkin.

It turns out that their charters are completely useless against a real military force. But most importantly, they are not going to rewrite them. They are confident in the correctness of their tactics and strategy, and in the failure of the counteroffensive they have begun to blame absolutely everything, from the "untrained" Ukrainians to the vegetation on the battlefield. But not themselves. NATO is repeating the historical mistakes of the West, which have been made for centuries.
And this speaks volumes.

 

By the way, the Americans had the doctrine of "Shock and awe" already during World War II (if anyone doesn't believe me, "Shock and awe" is easy to Google). True, it was rewritten several times, but the essence did not change.
And it didn't work then just like it doesn't work now. Never worked, to be more precise. Which doesn't stop the stupid cowboys in Washington from blindly following it all these decades.

 

Oh, I think "Shock and awe" is very productive.
At least the unlucky Germans on Normandy would tell you it is.
And the Iraqi's, they'll tell you it's very effective.

 

The Germans spit on "Shock and Awe." They know Russian tactics are much more effective.



As for the Iraqis, again, "Shock and Awe" is complete nonsense. "Donkeys loaded with gold" was decisive.

 

NATO is going to dust off the armored warfare doctrine from the Cold War.

 

They would love to do it immediately, but ... no NATO country has a full tank production cycle. Only repairs and minor modifications. The system is broken.
The Russians can build new tanks because they have managed to keep the system intact.

 

Shock and awe may be other than the most effective strategy, but when we've applied it we've succeeded, eh?

 

Sorry to burst your bubble but wars are not won with words. They are won with death and destruction.

 

Yes indeedy.
One pissed off 19 year old marine with his boot on your neck is far more convincing than all the rhetoric ever uttered.

 

The NATO military is nothing more than the military of the member nations. There is no NATO mentality. In short, this is BS.

By the way, I worked for US Army Europe and Seventh Army which was part of the NATO command structure.

 

Is this Russian really telling us how to win a war when his ass backward country is being repelled by a much smaller force? If Ukraine has taught us one thing it is that the Russian army is a disgrace. God help them if they ever get into a ground war with US or any other European power.

 

@Destroyer of illusions you do know that NATO IS NOT fighting in Ukraine don't you?

 

Where have you been successful?

 

That's right. Yes.
The US has not won a single war on its own. (Panama and Grenada, if you compare the strength of their economies and military capabilities to the U.S., are more of an embarrassment than a victory. It's like a boxing champion bragging about knocking out a five-year-old).
Sure you can talk about "dumb politicians", insurmountable circumstances and other such things, but not Vietnam, Afghanistan, Somalia...nowhere has the US been successful.
The only high-profile victory was when the US allied with the Russians at the end of WW2 and got the laurels of victory thanks to the Russians.

By the way, a bit off topic, but I think this comment is newsworthy.

Macron is wanted in Niger.

 

Ahahaha.... Tell that to the Vietnamese or the Afghans.

 

For real?
Who supplies weapons to Ukraine? Who supplies ammunition to Ukraine? Who is supplying intelligence to Ukraine? Who is planning military operations in Ukraine? Who is doing PR for Ukraine? Who (at your expense, by the way) is funding Ukraine? Who trains Ukrainian soldiers.... etc.?

You hired a killer, gave him a target, financed him, trained him to kill, provided all the necessary information, gave him weapons and ammunition.... but you are not involved?

 

You couldn't resist another anti-American slam. Your propaganda is getting a little boring.

 

He didn't say NATO was not involved. He said NATO is not fighting in Ukraine. Try to laugh at yourself for a change.

 

We at least held Saigon and Kabul. Have you guys taken Kiev yet?

The truth is that you can’t liberate a people who don’t want to be liberated. That’s why we lost Vietnam and Afghanistan. But that wasn’t a military failure.

 

Is this 3 day war still going on? I am shocked and in awe.

 

That's a joke, right??

Give me a single platoon of US M1A2 tanks, with their supporting Bradley's and Infantry (why is the sky blue?) resources, and I could probably single-handedly take out the entirety of the Soviet MBTs that remain, and they might be able to rebuild the vehicles, but without the modern electronics they can no longer acquire, and never have had the ability to produce, they simply can't make any more, not that work anyway. And if I am overestimating what a humble platoon might be able to do, imagine a modern Armored Brigade Combat Team... And it's game over!

BTW, wasn't it you that stated, what, a year and a half ago or so by now, that it was all over but the mopping up? You are as wrong now, as you were then, and for that matter, about roughly 98.4% of everything else you've had to say since Puteen's thugs invaded the sovereign country of Ukraine, something they had no right or justification to do, hence the reaction from the rest of the world, save China and a couple of other thuggish countries.

 

As a direct result of the Vietnam war, rather than being a failed Soviet satellite, the country today looks a lot like the United States and is highly productive and wealthy, and a good partner to it's trade partners, including myself. I'm a big fan of a lot of Vietnamese electronics. Win or loss on the battlefield (and we won way more than we lost, until the politicians lost their nerve and pulled out prematurely, just like has been done to Afghanistan), the bigger strategic picture went our way. I'd like to think eventually Afghanistan will, too, but they are still a tribal people stuck in the 5th Century, especially with their oppressive and backwards ideas towards spirituality.

 

ruZZian tactics was (and today still is): smother the enemy in the corpses of your own soldiers. So they lost round about 10 Million of their own specimens in WW2.

Ruzzkies are a barbaric half-human-half-demon race (Orcs). They follow a culture of death. Comrade Pooteen's people are thinning out too, so they have to steal Ukrainian children to do their dirty work in the future.

 

There aren't any true U.S. military operations any longer. The tactics are managed by politicians and lawyers in the U.S. instead of commanders in the field. Not only is it against common sense to operate a war that way but it is against any opportunity to create the death and destruction necessary to win a war.

 

We lost vietnam because the politicians tried to be military strategists. The lesson from nam was, give the military the mission (kill those guys and smash their stuff) and let the military prosecute the mission.