Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

G4YeGKBWgAASO2y?format=png&name=large

 

How do they have any kind of institutional knowledge?  All of those lieutenants should be leading companies by now instead of pushing up sunflowers, and all of those captains and majors should either leading companies or in staff or executive officer positions.

That's the equivalent of 7 years' worth of West Point grads being killed.

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted

keep in mind, these are just the confirmed kills. 

there is a reason the Jr LT & LT are showing fewer KIA than the Sr LTs, and thats because in many cases the junior officers familes havent been able to afford a memorial or obit that would get noticed by the folks running that page. 

 

The Jr LT rank is equivalent to a what we would call a 3rd LT- which is a ROTC or West Point Cadet in their 3rd summer training with actual troops.  They arent Warrant Officers, those would fall under the "Other" section. 

but the LT and Sr LT are what we would call a 2nd (O1) and 1st LT (O2).

 

Here is a breakdown of the officers killed in Vietnam.  We didnt often send butter bar LTs into combat, and their KIA numbers show that. basically we only had 1/3 the number of 2LT killed vs 1LT, and half the number compared to Captains.

 

but what these numbers show is that it was the PILOTS who were a massive majority of the senior officer losses. for us in Vietnam.    Air Force lost 9X the number of Full Bird Col as the Army.   Russia isnt flying sorties much anymore, mostly because their planes are short of parts, fuel or functionality. 

 

our losses below are from 1963-1972,   we lost a total of 7,877 officers in NINE years of fighting.  the Russians are getting very, very, very close to that number in just 4 years.

 

Of the 12 Generals lost in the war, only 5 were killed by enemy action, 2 of natural causes and the other 6 all died in helicoper crashes or air to air collisions. 

 

Officer casualties by rank (Army, USMC, Navy, and Air Force)
 
Rank  Army USMC Navy Air Force
O8 2 1 2 N/A
O7 5 1 1 N/A
O6 19 7 25 184
O5 117 30 92 187
O4 253 78 166 399
O3 1,017 212 167 653
O2 1,475 309 153 236
O1 496 284 18 8
W1-W4 N/A N/A N/A N/A

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Posted
28 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

Of the 12 Generals lost in the war, only 5 were killed by enemy action, 2 of natural causes and the other 6 all died in helicoper crashes or air to air collisions. 


Did someone die twice? 

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

So did the B-52….but that’s crazy for a fighter.

50 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

our losses below are from 1963-1972,   we lost a total of 7,877 officers in NINE years of fighting.  the Russians are getting very, very, very close to that number in just 4 years.

And the Russians are doing it in a country next door to them.  We had to go to the other side of the world to do that.

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
44 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

So did the B-52….but that’s crazy for a fighter.

And the Russians are doing it in a country next door to them.  We had to go to the other side of the world to do that.

No doubt re the B-52.  I went down the rabbit hole of planes of similar capabilities and age.  Turns out the F-5, which debuted the same year as the Mig-21, is still operated by a number of countries as well.  

Posted
1 minute ago, bolverk said:

I'm no hunter, but this guy seems like one helluva shot.

 

Damn that's some incredible marksmanship - a world champion shotgun shooter had trouble knocking them down with his specialized M4

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

Hate to be the bearer of bad tidings.

From the Kyiv Independent: With a web of drones and infiltrating infantry, Russian troops overrun Kupiansk
image.png.7c557c3d500f7a531f318a95a6b33b75.png

 

image.thumb.png.741885abe000f027b9ed36bc9a160716.png
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/us-intelligence-agencies-see-no-sign-russia-ready-compromise-ukraine-rcna239645

Quote

 

A recent U.S. intelligence assessment warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin is more determined than ever to carry on the war in Ukraine and prevail on the battlefield, according to a senior U.S. official and a senior congressional official.

The analysis, which was communicated to members of Congress this month, indicated the agencies see no sign Russia is ready to compromise on Ukraine as President Donald Trump seeks to broker peace talks.

The assessment is consistent with how U.S. and Western intelligence agencies have viewed the Russian regime’s stance since February 2022, when Putin ordered an unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, according to two other people with knowledge of the matter.

But Putin is now believed to be more dug in than ever, according to the senior U.S. official and the senior congressional official.

Facing steep Russian troop losses and economic setbacks at home, he is committed to securing Ukrainian land and expanding his country's footprint to justify the human and financial toll, the intelligence assessment found, according to the officials.

In a sign of Trump's growing frustration, last week he called off a planned meeting with Putin in Budapest, Hungary, and for the first time since he returned to office in January he imposed punitive measures against Moscow, slapping sanctions on two major Russian oil companies.

“I just felt it was time,” Trump told reporters, describing the new sanctions as "tremendous" and adding that he had "waited a long time” to implement them but hopes "they won’t be on for long."

“We hope that the war will be settled,” he said.

The White House declined to comment on the recent intelligence assessment and pointed to Trump’s public comments on efforts to reach a peace deal.

“As the president stated, these are tremendous sanctions against their two big oil companies which he hopes will help bring about the end of the war," the official said in a statement. "He has been clear that it is time to stop the killing and make a deal to end the war. The United States will continue to advocate for a peaceful resolution to the war, and a permanent peace depends on Russia’s willingness to negotiate in good faith.”

Trump has long vowed to broker an end to the war in Ukraine, and as a candidate he promised he would secure peace within 24 hours of his return to office. But his efforts to persuade Russia to come to the negotiating table and agree to a ceasefire have failed so far.

Trump’s rhetoric has shifted in recent months, as he has expressed growing frustration and impatience with Putin, accusing him of failing to take action to back up positive statements made in their conversations.

“Every time I speak with Vladimir, I have good conversations, and then they don’t go anywhere. They just don’t go anywhere,” Trump said last week.

Trump even said publicly that he might provide long-range U.S-made Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine this month, though he later backed away from the idea after a phone conversation with Putin.

Ukraine has appealed to Washington for longer-range missiles to strike at targets inside Russia, and European powers have endorsed its request.

Ukrainian officials, European governments and Kyiv’s supporters in Congress have repeatedly urged Trump to exert pressure on Russia through arms shipments and sanctions to push Moscow to agree to a ceasefire and peace negotiations. The announcement of sanctions on Russian oil companies was the first time Trump has followed through on threats to introduce economic penalties against Moscow.

The new sanctions on Russia, Ukraine’s drone attacks on Russia’s oil and gas facilities and European efforts to provide more weapons to Kyiv’s forces could alter the Kremlin’s calculations over time, according to European diplomats, former U.S. intelligence officials and experts.

In August, the White House portrayed a summit in Alaska between Putin and Trump as a promising step toward possible peace negotiations. But the war has raged on, and Russia has stuck to the same hard-line demands that would effectively disarm Ukraine, ban it from joining the NATO alliance and block the deployment of any Western-led peacekeeping forces.

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
40 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I'm no hunter, but this guy seems like one helluva shot.

 

Not to diminish his marksmanship, but hitting a flying object like that with iron sights is incredible.  I think it falls under the category of "it's better to be lucky than good."  

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
Just now, texastough said:

Maybe knowing Russian forces are stretched/stressed, UA will start laying traps to entice RUS into advances that get blowed up. Hopium

Like bottles of poisoned vodka?

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, bolverk said:

Hate to be the bearer of bad tidings.

It's been coming for weeks now - Ukrainian forces are outnumbered anywhere from 5 up to 8-to-1.  It's one of the places that Ukraine has been using to kill a lot of Russians and destroy a lot of Russian vehicles. It's going to be a Pyrrhic victory for Russia.  They've tied up something like 10,000 - 15,000 Russian troops there, and wiped out a lot of mobile troops.

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...