Future South Korean carrier strike group concept from HD Hyundai Heavy Industries [2048 x 1072]
by u/rokarmedforces in MilitaryPorn
Wagner captured a russian lieutenant colonel who shot at their car. When asked "Why did you shoot at us?" he answers: "Because I don't like you"If this happened (couldn't imagine) between a US PMC & Conventional Forces I would think that the PMC would (1) get lit the fuck up or (2) told to pack their shit. Why this thing with Wagner has been allowed to fester for so long is beyond me. The leader of Wagner makes all kinds of statements that if I was leading Russian Defense would consider traitorous and now this?
by u/Hm450 in UkraineWarVideoReport
Well that explains why the US would go to the legnths of buying Gepard Anti-Air Vehicles from Jordan and the rest of the allies sending more anti-air systems.russia spent the month of May trying to terrorize us with drones and missiles. They failed. pic.twitter.com/PMIny1aUyz
— Defense of Ukraine (@DefenceU) June 4, 2023
In #Kyrgyzstan, special services are detaining participants in an alleged coup d'état.
— NEXTA (@nexta_tv) June 5, 2023
There are no details yet, as well as official information. pic.twitter.com/kJ8RYYDj5D
Read the entire tweet. This is an amazing story. More at Wikipedia herePoon Lim, a courageous Chinese sailor, demonstrated remarkable survival skills during his harrowing experience at sea. He endured an astonishing 133 days alone on a raft, employing various strategies to sustain himself. Resourcefulness became his key to staying alive, as he… pic.twitter.com/fT9zFJLFHY
— Historic Vids (@historyinmemes) June 5, 2023
via MCT
The Corps’ interest in a new utility uniform was first made public in 2021, when it signaled interest in garments that would incorporate the durability of the standard uniform with the fire protection of the flame-resistant organizational gear, or FROG, uniform.
The move would create substantial cost savings, Military.com reported at the time. The service currently pays $89 for the regular utility uniform and $184 for the flame-resistant organizational gear.
Same pattern, new materials and they're gonna get rid of the glow under IR.
I think they're trying to prime the public to the idea that the Ukrainians might/probably(?) fail in this upcoming counter offensive. Too many articles that are taking a REAL view of the war and the Ukrainian way of war have appeared over the past weeks for it to be a coincidence. If I'm right we'll hear soon from the SecDef himself (maybe his spokesman) walking back expectations and talking a bit more about the need to stand by Ukrainian.This is a sobering look at deficiencies within the Ukrainian military. Both Russia and Ukraine suffer some glaring weaknesses, but given Ukraine's numerical and material inferiority they can less afford them. A short discussion. 1/n https://t.co/1KaAz7cbR9
— Brynn Tannehill (@BrynnTannehill) June 4, 2023
via 1945.com
Recent evidence indicates the Russian side has made tactical and operational improvements that are having an impact on the ground in Ukraine.
Washington policymakers need to update their understanding of the current trajectory of the war to ensure the U.S. is not caught off guard by battlefield events – and that our interests don’t suffer as a result.
-----
What many of these analysts failed to recognize, however, is that Russia has vastly more capacity to make war, both in terms of material and personnel, and therefore has the capacity to absorb enormous losses and still remain viable. Further, Russian history is replete with examples of starting out poorly in wars, suffering large casualties, and then recovering to turn the tide. Ukraine, on the other hand, has significantly fewer resources or troops and therefore has less room for error.
-----
The United States must take these realities into consideration in the coming weeks and months. Washington has already provided Ukraine the lion’s share of all military and financial aide including many of our most sophisticated armor, artillery, rockets, and missiles. Biden has even authorized the release of F-16 jets. The United States cannot – nor should it – commit to sending an equal amount of support for the next year of war, should it continue that long. Europe must be willing to make greater contributions to any future deliveries to Ukraine.
This is a must read article. One thing that stands out to me. If the aircraft carrier as a force projection platform is dead, then does that mean a missile equipped "battleship" with tons of CIWS make a comeback??? What would we want in a 21st century battleship? Tons of long range missiles (both anti-air and land attack). High speed? Is it worth pursuing mini-nuclear reactors to power them and the lasers for close in defense? Does it need conventional guns? Does it need to be stealthy or are we gonna simply try and jam everything? Does it need to be bigger than the Burke? Bigger than the DD-1000? Real interesting. The Navy has alot of work to do if its serious about future combat.
via New Republic
Why bother building more supercarriers? Prestige is part of it. Big carriers have been useful for intimidating foreign nations when they behave badly. But carrier-killers call into question how long we can keep doing that. “Historically, the top leadership of military organizations has not abandoned obsolete prestige weapons until compelled to do so by a calamity,” Stephen Wrage, who teaches political science at the U.S. Naval Academy, says in Gregg Easterbrook’s 2021 book, The Blue Age. Easterbrook draws a comparison with the British Royal Navy’s fixation on its giant battleships on the eve of World War I. Told that the Germans were building newfangled underwater ships called submarines, “rather than adjust to a new reality, some in the British admiralty hoped that gliding below the waves could be declared piracy so that captured submariners could be hanged as common criminals.”
Another argument for aircraft carriers is that there are efficiencies of scale in being able to cram up to 90 aircraft on a single carrier, as you can on the USS Gerald R. Ford. But Hendrix told me that the retirement of various aircraft types after the Cold War brought the number of aircraft aboard a supercarrier down closer to 60, and the new planes have much shorter range at the very moment when carriers have to situate themselves farther from their targets to avoid carrier-killers.
The best argument that defenders of aircraft carriers make is that it’s harder to hit one with a missile than you might think. Ford Class carriers have fighter jets that can intercept missiles. They travel with other ships that are armed to the teeth. What assets they don’t have we can give them. James Stavridis, a retired admiral and former supreme allied commander of NATO, reeled off to me a litany of possible improvements: lasers, cyberweapons, drones, deployment of special forces, and so on. Still, he said, in the meantime, we must “only move them close to China … when we are reasonably certain we can provide protection.” In an April appearance on conservative commentator Hugh Hewitt’s podcast, Stavridis went further, predicting that after the USS Doris Miller, the latest Ford Class carrier to begin construction, the Navy will shift to “another class of aircraft carrier” that’s “smaller, so we can build more of them,” with drones instead of manned aircraft.