Tactical Advantage: Russian Military Shows Off Impressive New Gear

[Purveyor]

Elite Russian troops are displaying a new arsenal of body armor, individual weapons, armor-piercing ammunition and collar radios — a menu of essential gear that gives them a big tactical advantage against a lesser-equipped Ukrainian army.

If President Vladimir Putin orders an invasion, the new-generation body armor, in particular, would provide exceptional protection against small arms if Russian troops go street by street to capture Kiev and other cities.

“What we saw and what was dangled in front of the West was a clear indication that Putin is on a roll,” retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales said. “It just seems to me from watching the films that their arrows are pointing up and ours are sadly pointing down.”

Weapons specialists such as Gen. Scales have been studying images of Spetsnaz, Russia’s ubiquitous special forces, and airborne troops since they conquered the Crimea region and mobilized to strike eastern Ukraine.

What they see are the fruits of a modernization plan begun in 2008, not just in tanks and vehicles but all the way down to the individual warrior. Russia now has the world’s third-highest defense budget, at over $70 billion.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/20/tactical-advantage-russian-military-shows-off-impr/#ixzz2ze7hn31v

[Junkdrawer]

1. The Awakening....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4597049

[sharp_stick]

2. The Washington Times really?

C'mon there has to be a better link than that?

Why not find a quote from newsmax, national review, the weekly standard or the good ol' standby for Conservative thought stormfront.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

6. No shit

[joshcryer]

10. Well, when you are reporting pro-Russia propaganda...

The right wing is your best bet.

[MohRokTah]

14. Nearly as bad as the Russian Times. eom

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Translation: EEEK! Send more money to the MIC to avoid the collar radio gap!!

[sharp_stick]

8. Why else would they trot out Scales?

His only function, and current career path, is to try and convince us that we must spend more and more to stay further and further ahead.

[snooper2]

9. Have you any thoughts on Simon from VICE being kidnapped by pro-Rus-Si-A assholes in Eastern Ukraine

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. About the same thoughts I have about the CIA kidnappintg (and torturing/killing) innocent people.

Or, to put it more succinctly I'm against kidnapping and violence.

You?

[NuclearDem]

13. Given how hard you work with tu quoque one-liners deflecting any criticism of Russian imperialism

I'd say snooper's question was fair.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. And, I've responded.

As far as Russian "Imperialism" goes, my stand is that we (America and NATO) should stay the hell out of it.

How about you?

[NuclearDem]

16. I'm against imperialism no matter the power.

With you putting imperialism in "", I think I know where you stand on a country that's not the US or NATO leveling one of its cities to the ground, agitating instability, assassinating dissidents, propping up dictators, and annexing part of its neighbor on nationalistic grounds.

If that's not imperialism, I don't know what is.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. I'm against it too.

So?

I just find it difficult for America and NATO having much moral standing to be outraged considering they're own imperialism. Do you feel as strongly about our ongoing adventures in the Middle East and Afghanistan? Or, our recent "destabilization" efforts in Cuba?

[NuclearDem]

20. Considering I was in Chicago for NoNATO and witnessed the horrors of Afghanistan firsthand

Yes, I would certainly say so.

I just don't take every opportunity to deflect criticism of one imperial power by listing the actions of another.

[The Magistrate]

24. And That Is What It Comes Down To, Sir: Double-Standard Driven Outrage

Most of the commentary in support of Piutin's imperial venture is at the 'I know what I am but what are you?' level. If someone actually opposes imperialism, then that person has no choice but to denounce Putin's current venture in the Ukraine. Merely saying 'he's not the only one' does not cut the mustard. It is, of course, perfectly possible to oppose U.S. imperialism only, and have no particular objection to imperialism by some other power ( that, actually, was a pretty common stance on the left in the Cold War period ), but if one holds that position, and comments from it on the present events in Ukraine, it would be better to be open about it....

"I prefer the wicked to the foolish. The wicked sometimes rest."

[NuclearDem]

29. Yeah. It's called the tu quoque fallacy.

Perhaps not coincidentally, the Soviets were the master of this tactic during the Cold War.

[agbdf]

28. Afghanistan?

So, after 9/11 you don't think we should have gone into the Taliban controlled Afghanistan? Even Howard Dean agreed with the invasion of Afghanistan.

That to you constitutes U.S. "Imperialism?"

President Obama has achieved some impressive accomplishments in Afghanistan and we are now close to being able to leave. You don't think our President is an imperialist do you? I urge you to support President Obama in his ongoing and effective efforts against international terrorism.

[former9thward]

35. Neither Obama or Bush accomplished anything in Afghanistan.

Zero. The only places not under Taliban control are those where U.S. troops are physically at -- such as bases. Even Kabul is routinely attacked. The minute we leave it will all collapse like a house of cards. A total waste of life and resources.

[agbdf]

38. Just like Iraq?

Sorry, I trust President Obama. I guess we could ask the original top leadership of the Taliban and Al Quada if President Obama has been effective...oh...wait a minute...President Obama killed them all including Bin Ladin.

I respect you intentions here and opinion, I just disagree.

[former9thward]

39. Yes, just like Iraq.

Another country which devolved into civil war the minute we left it. It is rarely covered by the U.S. media but the foreign press does a much better job. Iraq is going into three different directions -- Shia, Sunni and the Kurds. It was an artificial creation cobbled together after WW I by the British and French. It was held together by terror and dictatorship with Hussein and then the American military. With both gone it will be gone also.

[agbdf]

43. Interesting

I did a little research and I can see your point. The have held dormice attic elections since 2005. However, there still is a lot of violence. Thank you for your reply!

[dionysus]

40. we had afghanistan almost wrapped up before bush took most of the troops out and sent them to iraq.

Taliban and al queda were almost wiped out... then bush had to have his precious war in Iraq.

had we wiped out the Taliban and al queda at the time and left, would everything be cool in Afghanistan? who knows (probably not, they probably would have regrouped in the mountains of Pakistan and eventually made a comeback)

but there's no way in hell we should still be there now, or have even touched Iraq to begin with.

[former9thward]

44. Well I do agree with your last sentence.

Last edited Wed Apr 23, 2014, 07:05 PM - Edit history (1)

But I do not believe we ever had the Taliban wiped out or even close to it. The Taliban's leader from the very beginning has been Mohammed Omar and he has never been caught.

[snooper2]

17. I'm against countries annexing other countries for their own gain

I'm usually against violence but in this case Pro Rus-si-a assholes need to be knocked down hard

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. What does "knocked down hard" actually mean? Intervention?

How did that work out when North Vietnam sought to annex South Vietnam? Were you "usually against violence" then? Or, were you one of those that wanted to "knock down hard" the North Vietnamese? You might also note that there are still almost 50,000 American and NATO troops in Afghanistan.

[snooper2]

22. luckily I wasn't born then so I have no "then" to pull experiences or thoughts from

Knocked down hard means-

Ukrainian forces going in, reclaiming government buildings, arrest/shoot anybody who gets in the way

[RobertEarl]

27. Snooper 2 is usually against violence

But in this case snooper is all for violence. Especially way far away from him, on other people.

"...arrest/shoot anybody..."

Isn't expressing a desire to commit violence on people against DU's TOS? If not, it should be. That wanton desire needs to be banned from display here. Peace demands such.

[snooper2]

32. I'm also for violence for baby fuckers, rape a child, DNA proof, death penalty

Some humans are rabid

[joshcryer]

12. Two interim gov people were found dead today.

The pro-Russia fascists aren't going away.

Hope Simon is ok.

[maddezmom]

23. I had only heard of one

[joshcryer]

25. True only one was identified.

But I find it unlikely they are unrelated.

[maddezmom]

26. Thanks

Have been off line, going to go check out the google.

[Jesus Malverde]

42. fascists

Your talking about right sector amirite? Or maybe McCain? The NeoCon Neuland?

So many fascists so little time.







All the projection, if I had to support these goons I'd be sick too.

[NuclearDem]

4. Proof only that Russia can also bully less-equipped countries.

[dilby]

5. It's not like the US can talk.

We use drones on people who if lucky have ak-47's and RPG's. If they are unlucky they were just equipped with a wedding dress or a casket.

[NuclearDem]

7. Did you not see the "also" in my post?

Who did you think I meant?

[Cali_Democrat]

19. LOL. You're posting right wing perspective from the Washington Times

[Purveyor]

30. If we could only 'wish it away' then it wouldn't exist now would it. Unfortunately

we can't and I for one, am curious as to what is being said by all sides.

[Cali_Democrat]

31. Wish what away?

[Jesus Malverde]

33. I read this and it's obviously a call for more money for the pentagon and NATO...

Bit of a snooozer really.

[lumberjack_jeff]

34. Authored by General Buck Turgidson

$70 billion? That sounds like a lot.

[Jesus Malverde]

41. +1

great picture.

[tammywammy]

36. Washington Times?

LOL

[Blue_Tires]

37. This isn't news...

Putin's modernization of the military has been well documented, and it was like his #1 stated priority when he first got into office...

The old images a decade ago of the Russian army using 20-year-old rifles, driving 30-year-old rusted out vehicles, and going six months without paychecks has pretty much been erased...