Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[gogis]

Why you asking me like I have no idea what we talking about? I provided you with a link to incredibly long and thorough documentary of Napoleon life with hundreds of numbers and details provided about everything and you keep arguing. Spanish campaign started before Russian, was not supervised directly by Napoleon most of the time and economic woes doesnt affected ability of Napoleon to field enormously huge grand army to march towards their demise in Russian wastelands. And if you don't know simple facts that there was plenty of guerilla warfare in Russian campaign including scorched earth tactics, setting Moscow ablaze, cossacs raids etc then I have no intention to discuss this topic with you. You are way ignorant to simple historical facts, it's like arguing with idiot, which never works. You was caught so many times on posting bullshits it's beyond my patience.

Deny reality all you want buddy.  Simple fact is more French soldiers served in Spain then in Russia.  It's not complicated, the Grande Armee was big but was only around for six months.  The Iberian occupation was less big but still very large and lasted for six years.

But thank you for that documentary, I'd never had the amazing opportunity to see a documentary about Napoleon before.

Watch it before you spew more bullshit. Then we will have period conversation (my favourite by far). Before that I am going to cease talking with you.

p.s. Good luck finding half million of french allies in Spain at once

edit, wikipedia

Grande Armée[edit]
On 24 June 1812, the 450,000 men of the Grande Armée, the largest army assembled up to that point in European history, crossed the river Neman and headed towards Moscow. Anthony Joes in Journal of Conflict Studies wrote that:


Lets pretend it never happened

[Ukrainian Ranger]

That S-300 is a SAM from freaking 1978, 35 years old. No modernization can make it compare  to modern developments
S-400 is renamed S-300PMU-3 to pretend that it is a new SAM
S-500 is a system under development and does not exists yet.

As for numbers. Who said you that speed of the missile is that important? One can make a missile that will fly fast and far... but in straight line.  What numbers tell about ability to detect target? Probability to hit it?  Reliability of the missile?  It's ability to change direction to neutralize evading maneuvers? It's resistance to jamming?
Let's not forget about the size of the missile. Barak 8 is a rather compact missile made mainly for Naval use. S-300 is much larger.
Here are another Israeli competitor of S-300 look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_3  Yeah it is purely anti-balistic. Because
a) modern militarizes tend to not have  one against everything surface-to-air missile like S-300 tries to be.  It is not practical to use huge missile for hunting UAVs , helicopters or anti-ship missiles
b) Airforce is not a treat for rich countries, their likely enemies have shitty aviation.

[gogis]

That S-300 is a SAM from freaking 1978, 35 years old. No modernization can make it compare  to modern developments
S-400 is renamed S-300PMU-3 to pretend that it is a new SAM
S-500 is a system under development and does not exists yet.

As for numbers. Who said you that speed of the missile is that important? One can make a missile that will fly fast and far... but in straight line.  What numbers tell about ability to detect target? Probability to hit it?  Reliability of the missile?  It's ability to change direction to neutralize evading maneuvers? It's resistance to jamming?
Let's not forget about the size of the missile. Barak 8 is a rather compact missile made mainly for Naval use. S-300 is much larger.
Here are another Israeli competitor of S-300 look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_3  Yeah it is purely anti-balistic. Because
a) modern militarizes tend to not have  one against everything surface-to-air missile like S-300 tries to be.  It is not practical to use huge missile for hunting UAVs , helicopters or anti-ship missiles
b) Airforce is not a treat for rich countries, their likely enemies have shitty aviation.

I like when individuals come with bogus links to wikipedia to prove their point then come with even more links. It's universally accepted that russian anti-air is top notch. It's accepted by NATO, yet reluctanlty. What exactly you try to achieve? Win argument by links? Whats your opinion on Iskander though?

It is not practical to use huge missile for hunting UAVs , helicopters or anti-ship missiles

You will be surprised that it's not just s-300+. I need to provide links or you going to make your own research?

edit: or you didnt' read tunguska mention?

[mainiac]

p.s. Good luck finding half million of french allies in Spain at once

I never once even came close to saying that and that's not remotely what we were talking about.  If you are moving the goalposts, I will take it as an indication that you realize you were wrong but are too proud to admit it.

[gogis]

a) modern militarizes tend to not have  one against everything surface-to-air missile like S-300 tries to be.  It is not practical to use huge missile for hunting UAVs , helicopters or anti-ship missiles
b) Airforce is not a treat for rich countries, their likely enemies have shitty aviation.

a) there is no analogues in characteristics to current s-300
b) also airforce is not threat to countries with well-up-to-date anti airforce technologies. Which solidifies my point.

[gogis]

p.s. Good luck finding half million of french allies in Spain at once

I never once even came close to saying that and that's not remotely what we were talking about.  If you are moving the goalposts, I will take it as an indication that you realize you were wrong but are too proud to admit it.

If you ignoring numbers which is real and documented, I see a reason to ignore your big wording. Was there half millions of french + allies? Nope. You lost argument. Keep harder.

edit: Actually wait. I am pretty sure right now, that you unaware of fact who directed most of operations in Spain soil in course of war. I think you still think it's Napoleon, and it's just strengthen my belief I shouldnt even discuss this topic with you

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Whats your opinion on Iskander though?

Another weapon that wasn't tested in a real combat. Most likely unreliable crap produced by badly corrupted Russian Defense Industry with characteristics elevated by Russian propaganda

[mainiac]

If you ignoring numbers which is real and documented, I see a reason to ignore your big wording. Was there half millions of french + allies? Nope. You lost argument. Keep harder.

You are putting words in my mouth that directly contradict what I said:

The Iberian occupation was less big but still very large and lasted for six years.

Once again, you seem to be insisting that I'm saying what I'm not, from which I conclude that you see you were ignorant and don't want to admit it.

[gogis]

p.s. Good luck finding half million of french allies in Spain at once

I never once even came close to saying that and that's not remotely what we were talking about.  If you are moving the goalposts, I will take it as an indication that you realize you were wrong but are too proud to admit it.

If you ignoring numbers which is real and documented, I see a reason to ignore your big wording. Was there half millions of french + allies? Nope. You lost argument. Keep harder.

I... uh... saw no big words in what he said there. None that are even that complicated.

He said that Peninsula war was bigger than Russian war. What do you think? Bare facts?

[gogis]

If you ignoring numbers which is real and documented, I see a reason to ignore your big wording. Was there half millions of french + allies? Nope. You lost argument. Keep harder.

You are putting words in my mouth that directly contradict what I said:

The Iberian occupation was less big but still very large and lasted for six years.

Once again, you seem to be insisting that I'm saying what I'm not, from which I conclude that you see you were ignorant and don't want to admit it.

Wait a second? Spanish Guerilla and English Fleet? Your meaning?

[misko27]

The real question is why the dick-measuring contest always comes back to invading Russia, where there is an obvious defensive advantage, and not on what might realistically happen. Face facts folks: No one will be invading Russia any time soon, and believing otherwise is ignorance or paranoia. Any military engagement will be limited to Ukraine, not to marching into Moscow. Power correlates solely to how military might can be projected in Ukraine, not how many SAMs protect your capital. I mean if you're making up situations with no respect to reality, why not have Russia invade Europe? Equally unlikely, and yet it's not mentioned; perhaps because we know how that would work out.

And really, Napoleon guys? North Korea could wipe out Napoleon now. The Afghani Army would be a fair match. Military technology has changed so much it's not even funny. He thought steam power was stupid, the average army has flying machines and assault weapons, come on guys.

At least pretend it isn't petty sniping.

[gogis]

Oh man, I need a french in the thread, anybody?

[ChairmanPoo]

Why do you need a french in the thread?

[mainiac]

Wait a second? Spanish Guerilla and English Fleet? Your meaning?

I don't understand your question.

[gogis]

The real question is why the dick-measuring contest always comes back to invading Russia, where there is an obvious defensive advantage, and not on what might realistically happen. Face facts folks: No one will be invading Russia any time soon, and believing otherwise is ignorance or paranoia. Any military engagement will be limited to Ukraine, not to marching into Moscow. Power correlates solely to how military might can be projected in Ukraine, not how many SAMs protect your capital. I mean if you're making up situations with no respect to reality, why not have Russia invade Europe? Equally unlikely, and yet it's not mentioned; perhaps because we know how that would work out.

And really, Napoleon guys? North Korea could wipe out Napoleon now. The Afghani Army would be a fair match. Military technology has changed so much it's not even funny. He thought steam power was stupid, the average army has flying machines and assault weapons, come on guys.

At least pretend it isn't petty sniping.

Napoleon was much bigger than just "wipe". Republic, Cons Monarchy, Universities, Enlightment. Why you talk about technology?
The real problem that west thinks *again* that russians invade everyone (in reality they dont want). History continues.