Operation Bagration 22/6/44 to 29/8/44

[thedonster]

I would Guarantee Somali Militia's out-numbered the US Forces at least 10-1.

And US Forces are fairing a heluva lot better than the Soviets did. In fact, The Soviets had no military successes after WW2. Even when they had numerical and technological advantage. But they sure could run over civilians with tanks well.

Pardon me, but weren't US forces driven out of Somalia by those same militia?

And exactly how are US forces fairing a helluva lot better than the Soviets post WWII? Let's do a brief score:

Americans
Korea- tie.
Vietnam- loss.
Grenada/Panama- no meaningful military opposition
First Gulf War- a clear win, but mismanaged making Second Gulf War "necessary"
Somalia- loss
Afghanistan- ongoing, but possible win
Second Gulf War- pretty hard to call this one a win or even a tie. Call it probable loss.

Soviets/Russians
Hungary/Czechoslovakia- no military opposition
Afghanistan- loss
Chechnya 1- loss
Chechnya 2- win followed by quagmire/bloodbath. Also hard to call this a real win.

I would say that US and Russian post WWII military success rates are pretty similar.

 

[BuddyLee]

Pardon me, but weren't US forces driven out of Somalia by those same militia?

And exactly how are US forces fairing a helluva lot better than the Soviets post WWII? Let's do a brief score:

Americans
Korea- tie.
Vietnam- loss.
Grenada/Panama- no meaningful military opposition
First Gulf War- a clear win, but mismanaged making Second Gulf War "necessary"
Somalia- loss
Afghanistan- ongoing, but possible win
Second Gulf War- pretty hard to call this one a win or even a tie. Call it probable loss.

Soviets/Russians
Hungary/Czechoslovakia- no military opposition
Afghanistan- loss
Chechnya 1- loss
Chechnya 2- win followed by quagmire/bloodbath. Also hard to call this a real win.

I would say that US and Russian post WWII military success rates are pretty similar.

The K/D Ratio in Somalia was extremely one sided, it was politics that ended that deployment. The incompetent Leadership of Bill Clinton to be exact. His Secretary of Defence recommended not sending armor units and heavy infantry vehicles because they thought this would look like a military build up.

After what happened there, Americans didn't feel like providing humanitarian aid to people that clearly harbored a deep hatred for us, in the end, there must be some truth to the saying "people get the Government they deserve", let Somalia destroy itself was the popular mindset.

In fact some data Rss posted about the Soviet Afghan War made me sympathize with the Soviets. It seems the Mujahidin had kidnapped Russian Soldiers and Officials and beheaded them just like they do to Americans and our Allies now... before the Soviet invasion.

 

[thedonster]

The K/D Ratio in Somalia was extremely one sided, it was politics that ended that deployment. The incompetent Leadership of Bill Clinton to be exact. His Secretary of Defence recommended not sending armor units and heavy infantry vehicles because they thought this would look like a military build up.

After what happened there, Americans didn't feel like providing humanitarian aid to people that clearly harbored a deep hatred for us, in the end, there must be some truth to the saying "people get the Government they deserve", let Somalia destroy itself was the popular mindset.

In fact some data Rss posted about the Soviet Afghan War made me sympathize with the Soviets. It seems the Mujahidin had kidnapped Russian Soldiers and Officials and beheaded them just like they do to Americans and our Allies now... before the Soviet invasion.

I agree with all of the above. However the K/D ratio in Vietnam was one sided as well. I suspect it is in Iraq and was for the Soviets in Afghanistan. For that matter loss ratios in WWII would clearly favour the Germans over the Soviets.
My point was that neither the US or the Soviets/Russians have fared well with their foreign military adventures since WWII, regardless of the reasons for launching them.

 

[Nestor Makhno]

Take it to another thread please guys, I can hear the lock being oiled

 

[[3.SA]Shchekurov]

ummm . . . Bagration?

ummm . . . Bagration?

Getting back to . . .ahem . . .business . . .

Operation Bargration set the template for almost all Soviet military doctrine from that point onward and to a certain extent, vestiges remain in place today in current Russian doctrine. You could see it in the January 1945 offensive into Germany, but most definitely in August 1945 in Manchuria.

That template even to a certain extent lasted after the Soviet Union fell (since, after all, the Soviet Union may have fallen, but the Soviet Army still remained a decade afterward). In 1994, when the Russians went into Chechnya, they moved in a la Hungary/Czechoslovakia and that was rooted in Bagration's lessons (albeit on a much smaller scale).

* Interesting footnote: one of the [main] reasons the Russian regiment that stormed into Grozny got so thoroughly whacked was because the Chechen military leaders in Grozny had such an excellent command of Soviet tactics. A disproportionatley large number of Chechens had formerly been tactics instructors and staff trainers for the Soviet Army - ant took their Bagration-inspired knowledge with them.