Moscow Increasingly Ready for Major Military Confrontation

Reports on current military activity
User avatar
Drumboy44
DWS Staff
DWS Staff
Posts: 3465
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:29 pm
Contact:

Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:59 pm

In the last several years, the Russian military has drastically increased its battle readiness in apparent preparation for a possible major conflict with an opposing massive ground force (see EDM, September 29, 2016; December 6, 2017; January 15, 2019). The massive buildup was first publicly reported in September 2016 by first deputy defense minister and chief of the General Staff Army General Valery Gerasimov. He discussed the issue in a briefing to Russian journalists following the conclusion of the Kavkaz 2016 military exercise which was centered on Crimea and the Black Sea region. Kavkaz 2016 has since been overlapped by even larger Russian war games, but in 2016 they were the biggest such maneuvers since the 1980s.
In 2016, Gerasimov told journalists that front-line combat units—so-called battalion tactical groups (BTG)—will be primarily manned by contract soldiers to increase their battle readiness and will be supported by new special logistical field units. According to Gerasimov, at the time of the Kavkaz 2016 exercise, the Russian Land Forces together with the Airborne Troops (Vozdushno-Desantnye Voyska—VDV) had 66 standing BTGs. These units are reinforced battalions with additional armor (tanks), heavy guns, other artillery and multiple-rocket launch systems (MRLS), anti-aircraft capabilities, sapper or pioneer detachments, and other auxiliaries that may be added in accordance with possible specific missions. A typical Russian BTG is 800–900 men strong. The BTG as a basic fighting unit appeared within the Russian military organization during the Chechen wars. Because a BTG is reinforced with armor, firepower and added capabilities, it can be deployed in battle separately or easily merged with other BTGs to form flexible task forces. In September 2016, Gerasimov disclosed plans to double the number of standing BTGs to 125 by 2018 (Nezavisimaya Gazeta, September 15, 2016).

In September 2018, while promoting the massive Vostok 2018 war games, Gerasimov proudly announced, “There are 126 permanently battle-ready BTGs in the army and the VDV, manned by contract soldiers,” with two or three BTGs in each regiment or brigade (Mil.ru, September 6, 2018). The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), in contrast, has deployed four multinational BTG-type units across the Baltic republics and in Poland to deter the Russian military.
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articl ... 14274.html
" man fears time, but time fears the pyramids "

Obreid
Regular contributor
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 1:51 am

Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:27 pm

Probably true but short sighted. The USSR tried this once before and didn’t pan out.
Yes their proposed or announced weapons platforms are dangerous but Russia has a GDP the size of Texas and only one real rainmaker, oil and natural gas. Their defense budget is only slightly larger than India’s.

A 100megaton bomb going off under water isn’t new technology it’s just a further perversion of how nuclear weapons can kill and poison life on earth.
All that radiation they threaten the east and west cost with would all wash back into the two largest oceans and possible sterilize them as well for generations.
“Where the hell is Greenpeace”

In my mind kind of illustrates the conundrum of any full nuclear exchange. Your nation might in fact win the “war” but still lose in the end anyway.

Encyclopath
Regular contributor
Posts: 1035
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2015 10:26 am

Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:39 pm

Their leveraging of a profit motive by heavily utilizing contractors/mercenaries is a fundamental shift from the soviet paradigm, at least domestically.

Obreid
Regular contributor
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 1:51 am

Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:45 pm

Encyclopath wrote:
Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:39 pm
Their leveraging of a profit motive by heavily utilizing contractors/mercenaries is a fundamental shift from the soviet paradigm, at least domestically.
Interesting could you expand on a bit.
By contractors do you mean “contract Spenatza” or industrial complex.

User avatar
Ben D
.
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:22 pm
Location: Australia

Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:11 am

Now that the Trump - Russia collusion claim has been shown to be fake, Donald and Vlad may be able to get back to improving relations. So long as Donald was under constant attack by the fake msm news for being an agent of Moscow, he had to be seen to be hard on Russia. :D

Obreid
Regular contributor
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 1:51 am

Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:59 am

Ben D wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:11 am
Now that the Trump - Russia collusion claim has been shown to be fake, Donald and Vlad may be able to get back to improving relations. So long as Donald was under constant attack by the fake msm news for being an agent of Moscow, he had to be seen to be hard on Russia. :D
To a degree true but Trumps election was not what Putin wanted. A lot of Russian Rubals were spent to win the Clintons favor and there will not be any new uranium deals soon for Rosatom.

User avatar
Ben D
.
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:22 pm
Location: Australia

Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:54 am

..there is that point. :)

Encyclopath
Regular contributor
Posts: 1035
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2015 10:26 am

Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:22 am

Obreid wrote:
Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:45 pm
Encyclopath wrote:
Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:39 pm
Their leveraging of a profit motive by heavily utilizing contractors/mercenaries is a fundamental shift from the soviet paradigm, at least domestically.
Interesting could you expand on a bit.
By contractors do you mean “contract Spenatza” or industrial complex.
I was referring to contract soldiers, such as have been noted in Donbas. Mercenaries, really.
I think they're wise enough not to rely upon nationalism and ideology to compel soldiers to serve and fight, nor upon conscription, lest they do it poorly.

Obreid
Regular contributor
Posts: 1199
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 1:51 am

Sun Mar 24, 2019 4:24 am

Encyclopath wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 3:22 am
Obreid wrote:
Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:45 pm
Encyclopath wrote:
Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:39 pm
Their leveraging of a profit motive by heavily utilizing contractors/mercenaries is a fundamental shift from the soviet paradigm, at least domestically.
Interesting could you expand on a bit.
By contractors do you mean “contract Spenatza” or industrial complex.
I was referring to contract soldiers, such as have been noted in Donbas. Mercenaries, really.
I think they're wise enough not to rely upon nationalism and ideology to compel soldiers to serve and fight, nor upon conscription, lest they do it poorly.
Did you read about the incident in Syria where around 300 Russian mercs supposedly made the mistake of attacking what I suppose they thought the were attacking a rebel outpost? Turned out to have quite a few US SF there instead.
Reports from some of the Russians after the fact said it was hell. Evidently the US troops called in everything available in theater. There were few survivors and strangely at the time, at least, Russia had very little to say about it.
I’m interested and conserned what Putin mid to long term goals are. Assad is stabilized but there is significant disagreement between Russia and Iran. Putin want Iran to pull out and Iran thumbed their nose at him.
Alliegences are ever changing in the region as ever.
I hope Russia they will be content stabilizing there satellites but it remains to be seen.

User avatar
DEFCONWarningSystem
Director
Director
Posts: 5991
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2010 10:26 pm
Contact:

Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:11 pm

Obreid wrote:
Sun Mar 24, 2019 4:24 am
Did you read about the incident in Syria where around 300 Russian mercs supposedly made the mistake of attacking what I suppose they thought the were attacking a rebel outpost? Turned out to have quite a few US SF there instead.
Reports from some of the Russians after the fact said it was hell. Evidently the US troops called in everything available in theater. There were few survivors and strangely at the time, at least, Russia had very little to say about it.
I don't recall this incident. Can you link something to it?

Post Reply