the air superiority VS. overall superiority ..

[nscode]

You could have said "because they had plasma stealth" and the level of LOLability would be about the same.

 

They worked because they worked on fire and move bases (actually - fire, run, if no attack return and move) and search radars were turned on for the duration of one sweep only. Some older radars that work on longer wavelengths and are immune to ARMs could stay on for a bit longer.

 

Human shielding was not used for the simple fact that it didn't work. I'm not going to get into how much NATO cared if there were civilians around, but an ARM reeealy doesn't care if there is anyone around, especially if it's an ALARM peacefully lofting around.

[Pilotasso]

Sanakius, me thinks you should stop reading the pravda. Your view of the conflicts you described is one sided, partial, and the logic of your claims seems rather suicidal.

 

Im am not here to discuss politics but the georgian conflict is nothing like you described, at all. There are no accidental coincidences in the timing of the conflict and surely no suddenly found ideology behind it but long lasting political tensions.

[tflash]

In the Dutch selection process for a new fighter to replace the F-16 MLU, the evolution of Russian SAM systems is cited as the main reason to opt for JSF. So maybe SAMS are a speed bump, but they definitely are more than a hoax. People base multi-million dollar decisions on their assessment of these SAM systems.

 

I would say that if you need to build something like F-22 and/or F-35 to counter these SAMS, it means they are quite effective indeed.

 

In the same sense, denying that SHORAD systems are effective is absurd. They are a constant threat, often denying low-to-medium level air dominance, certainly in mountaneous/ forested and foggy regions. It is true western forces manage to successfully protect their assets and have so far minimal losses, but the threat is always there, and seriously limits and hampers operations. The first thing many European forces had to do when entering Afghanistan or Iraq ops, is investing heavily in chaff/flare solutions whatever, and seriously adapt their tactics.

 

Forcing flights to stay at 15K+ is, by any standards, a success in itself. I'm with GG though in the claim that the airborne party always has the most options. That's just the law of nature. The eye of the Eagle is upon you!

[Alfa]

Sanakius,

 

Please read this:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/announcement.php?f=67

 

Anymore political snide remarks and I will close your thread.

[hitman]

Human shielding was not used for the simple fact that it didn't work.

They were used. They used human shielding from everything to protecting their tanks to tactical targets. And yes it DID work.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

SAM's only worked because they were human-shielded with captured NATO soldiers. Thoughtfully left that part out, didnt you.

Oh yeah? So how many NATO soldiers were captured? 3000 or 4000 or 5000? NATO claimed none of their soldiers step foot in Yugoslavian territory?

 

You got your mind seriously confused with some other incidents with UN Peace Keeping forces in Bosnia and Hercegovina and Republika Srpska. Get your facts right, do your homework before making such inaccurate statements.

[hitman]

I see the special ed finally put me on ignore too. GREAT! Where exactly is the hate? Lets replace (NATO) soldiers (the few who were captured) with (civilian) human shields. Every link I post here contains reference to human shields.

 

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/europe/9905/17/kosovo.03/

 

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/kosovo/

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/1999/05/17/wkos17.html

 

http://www.webwm.com/kosovo/h/gen.htm

 

http://wearcam.org/envirotech/identity_cleansing.htm

 

http://www.kosovo.net/sk/news/news0105.html

 

http://cgi.cnn.com/WORLD/europe/9905/02/kosovo.02/

 

http://archive.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/2/7/30418

 

http://hrw.org/worldreport99/europe/yugoslavia.html

 

 

 

And thats just for starters.

Edited August 22, 2008 by hitman_214th

[nscode]

No, they used camouflage nets to protect tanks, wet blankets to cool down hot guns and abandoned tactical targets all together. What use is human shielding if you want to stay hidden? What are you going to do when a tank "protected" whith HS gets hit in the middle of a forest? Call CNN and say "Hey, look, they're attacking mushroom pickers"? When you have seconds to pack up and change location last thing you would want is to have to drag someone along.

[hitman]

Yes and I can find dozens more reports of human shields from outside sources (which btw, are linked above as well). You cant ignore the truth, nor can you hide from it.

[nscode]

And I could provide you with double that with links that show the opposite, and I can add personal testimony, but this is not the place for that. All I did is show from a military point what works and what doesn't. If you want to discuss politics and media wars there are many places out there where you can do that.

[hitman]

I am most definately NOT posting about politics. Ive posted irrefutable links to human shields being used. You can post whatever it is you have that denies all this, but I can certainly guarantee that mine isnt part of the conspiracy theory. You can deny it ALL you want. The proof is right there, my misguided friend. If you have proof, show it, Ill read it, and I will cross check it. You should be warned: Its a known FACT that human shields were used. If you throw in your own personal reference, that specifically implies you were a witness of the human shielding. If I were you, I would tread lightly.

Edited August 22, 2008 by hitman_214th

[Alfa]

The end.