4 U.S. Weapons of War That Need to Be Retired Now

Really? And which ones are these may I ask? Because the only major non-American defense contractor I can think of off the top of my head is BAE. But even that work is by BAE Systems Inc. (which is an American owned and operated subsidiary of BAE).

But even they are not major end-item providers (other then some vehicles like the LMTV), they primarily build subsystems for completed equipment (like the EW systems for the F-22).

 

Same peasants with AKs that defeated the Soviet Army.
Also how well did the Arabs do using top of the line Soviet weapons? in the proxy wars between Israel and Arabs.
Seriously questioning American military might is beyond stupid.

 

Arguable, considering that all objectives of the war you are talking about were achieved before the said war, consequently making the war pointless.

Exactly as well as Arabs using top of the line American/French weapons. It is not like it is our fault that Arabs cannot into war these days.

I don't. I am questioning those empty bravados about glorious US army defeating everybone in mere minutes. That is not how it works.

 

Maybe not in minutes, but going by both Iraqi wars, a couple of weeks at most. You could even make a case for a couple of days if you exclude the mopping up of the few straggler still able to hold a rifle. Keep in mind that Iraq was considered to have the 4 or 5th biggest army at the time of the first gulf war.

Partisan and other irregular forces are a pain in the ass but they don't win wars. They at most divert resources from the front but there wasn't any front left by the time they began exploding IEDs.

Soldiers, planes, ship, tank... All are needed in war, but the most important thing is logistics. Logistics wins the war. And the USA excels at logistics. Russia not so much. Look at the difference in Afghanistan between the Russian campaign and the NATO one. The USA can drop a fully stock base pretty much wherever they want and keep it stock. The Russian had to scavenge for part and fuel if they could even do that without being ambushed.

 

And how many decades that would be, going by Afghanistan campain?

Poor on moral, disorganised and without any access to spare parts for their harware straight from 60-th.
I guess it is not a secret that most part of this "army" dispersed without a fight.

They don't allow to win a war as well.

According to who?
How many private contractors are going to risk their lives, when there is anourmous risk of being shelled or being bombed or steamrolled by a sudden tank attack?

Taking into account that one liter of fuel costs you about 100$ in Afghanistan...

Oh, yes, I guess NATO impotance to establish any kind of control even over the capital was perfectly well visible and that is even without any state supplying Taliban with arms. Not very impressed.

I've seen these "bases" you are talking about. Just a bunch of guys filling HESCOs with earth without any kind of mechanisation helping them. Ah, yes, a mighty stronghold against beardies armed with AKs and Enfields. I am curious what will hapen to people inside and this "base" if it will be shelled with 152 mm artillery.

Hmm, no. How about not inventing stories?

 

Yeah, yeah, we know... You are the great military expert. After all you've spent all your free time playing Call of Duty and reading Janes stats book...
Funny enough, even the russians considers their own logistics to be (*)(*)(*)(*), especially in regard to Afghanistan. They even made a movie about how poorly prepared they were.

You like running your mouth on forums, telling us how the Nato and US armed forces are crap, yet everytime your side went against us either directly or indirectly, the result was hundreds of thousands if not millions of deads on your side and a totaly bombed out country. Too bad you can't asked those deads if they still think their side is superior.

Fact is, your side scoresheet is way worst than our. In fact, after WW2 you and your allies pretty much got creamed on every front. You practice some form of mental masturbation reading some statistique in a book and somehow believe that weapon system X is better than Y when in fact system X has either never been used at all against Nato or if it did it didn't amount to much since we still beat you to a bloody pulp.

 

I adore your self-critisizm, expert.

Nope. We don't have a hive mind, if you havn't mentioned, so even if one agrees with that point it doesn't matter that the rest of us do. NEWSFLASH!

So, tell me more about that awesome NATO logistics and 100$ per liter gas.

Yeah, yeah, lay off those wet Call of Duty and Tom Clancy fantasies for a minute. I can't recall Soviet Union or Russia fighting NATO with hundreds of thousands if not millions of deads on our side and a totaly bombed out country.

Obviously. I've grown up from talking with imaginary peole long ago. That is not your case, obviously as well.

Oh, wow, you imaginary reality is even worse than I thought. But please, continue. I want to hear more about "yadda-yadda Vietnam and Korea were major victories" bullshiт stories.

Tell me what exactly was achieved with those 100 000+ KIAs alone and a (*)(*)(*)(*)load of WIAs and a (*)(*)(*)(*)load of veterans, who have commited suicide. Waiting.

Yes, yes, I bet you would be able to ask those thousands pilots in Korea and Vietnam about glorious superior US military beating those inferior Soviets.

Whoops. They are dead. Oh, too bad for you.



Next time try avoid being butthurt for a change
Maybe you'll be able to read what I actually write instead of putting your words and fantasies into my mouth.

 

What objectives where those?
Agreed, Arabs suck at war.

I mean not easily, but the US military would win any possible war scenario against any enemy. What the US is weak in is public appetite for casualties. So any prolonged war might be lost on the home front. As in Vietnam.

 

The ratio was 5:1 in favor of the USA... That is for one US serviceman the USA killed or maimed 5 from your side. You really suck at math...

That would be quite a feat since the US and Nato didn't have thousands of planes operating in Korea...
The USA lost 78 planes and Nato 139... Again you suck at math.

Too bad for the 379 Chineese pilots and 270- North Korean ones... That math thing again...

I'm not the one suffering from an hemoroid attack of the brain here sonny. Go back to playing CoD in your basement now.

 

There is a reason I have put certain trolls on ignore in here. It is pretty much worthless to try to engage them in conversations, because to them everything is about propaganda and ideology and nationalism and has little contact with reality.

I think the final straw for me was when that individual told me about how his side would win any fight, and that the T-72 would stream to victory through Europe. I mentioned that the T-72 was a good tank in it's day but it was outdated and no longer viable on a modern battlefield. And the response back was like I had called the T-72 worthless, nothing but junk, and had kicked both his mom and dog as I said that.

Such blind fanaticism really has no point in here, taking any little criticism as an all-out attack shows that there is little connection (or maybe comprehension) and I refuse to play games like that.

Back to the OP, it really does not mean anything. In fact, if anybody notices it was made by a rabid Anti-American, targets some of the most successful weapons in the US inventory. As well as one weapon that will hopefully absolutely never be used, Period. Imagine the outrage if I had gone to the OP and said that their RT-2 missile is hopelessly obsolete and should all be scrapped.

 

Indeed. Sometimes the latter can be a good thing, if the President and the foregn policy is poorly thought out and/or implemented incompetently. Otherwise it only causes more casualties later down the road somewhere.

I get beat up for it, but I think the evidence shows the overall results of the Viet Nam action was a win for the U.S., despite the orthodox views, in a situation where all the options were bad, we did well, the USSR failed on all fronts largely as a result of our support for the South. We also learned quite a bit militarily from the experience.

 

Keeping Afghanistan under pro-Soviet goverment. There were no real reasons to think that were going to change in nearby future, unfortunatelly old farts in the goverment thought othervise.

Nope. Power projection capabilities are not endless and modern equipment is much more expensive, complicated, takes longer to manufacture and requires much more educated personal than during WW2. From day one of any serious war modern industries will be producing equipment below replacement rates. That means losing, say, half of aircraft carriers might take decade or so to re-build them and train crews for them. Same goes for strategic bombers.

So, unless you have a foothold in friendly country or bordering your enemy directly, you will eventually run out of ways to harm your enemy if it is smart enough and have proper means to defend himself.

And I am not even bringing nuclear weapons into this.

Surprisingly, when you have faced "our (*)(*)(*)(*)ty gear" manned by our military that resulted into your butts being kicked. Like in Korea, when using
MiG-15 resulted in 3.4 planes shot down for one loss. Heheheh.

Yeah, from your last Call of Duty playthrough. Which war you are talking about, fanboy?

(*)(*)(*)(*)(*), please.
http://www.dtic.mil/dpmo/korea/reports/air/korwald_date.htm


Even your own sourses say that you are worthless fanboy.

So what? Why is USSR supposed to be responsible for their fighting skills?
You are not responsible for French screw-ups in Vietnam, are you?


So, how about those 3 thousand planes lost in Vietnam.

Was that UFOs, who shot them down? I bet Soviet SAMs helped them little bit.

Yeah, yeah, go masturbate on Rembo 3 movie, armchair warrior. Seems to be your primary info sourse.






Oh, no need to play drama queen, Mushroom. We both know perfectly well, that you are just afraid to miserably fail again.

Like when you claimed Hellfire is Mach 3 rocket.
Like when you claimed there is no missile systems, designed to hit CAS aircraft, except for MANPADs.
Like when you claimed MiG-23 are still in reserve.
Like e.t.c.

Experts are wothless these days.

 

Shooo... Go away now that you've been exposed. No one takes you seriously around here anyway. Enjoy your monologue!

 

Not exactly true, most military MOS's or ratings today require less thinking and the minimum requirements have been lowered (dumbed down) because of technology.

For example in 1969 my MOS was 0849 (Shore Fire Control Party Man) In layman terms I was a naval gunfire spotter, comparable to an artillery forward observer. Back during the era the minimum GCT score one needed for the 0849 MOS was 110. There's a lot of mathematical calculations involved by the NGF spotter when conducting a fire mission. But when GPS showed up, one didn't have to rely so much on a map and compass and the minimum GCT was lowered to 105. When laser range finders came on the scene, a NGF spotter no longer had to make mathematical calculations in the head to determine the range to the target. Back then there was no hand calculators and one didn't carry a slide rule into combat, you had to use your brain housing group. During the 1990's again the minimum GCT was lowered to 100. That's a big drop from 110 to 100, comparable to a 10 point drop in ones IQ.

The same happened with aviation mechanics, electricians, radio techs, etc.

Today you have soldiers including infantry officers who don't know how to navigate across land using only a map and compass, they have become dependent on GPS.

Why does the HUMVEE have an automatic transmission ? Because you had recruits showing up in the Army and Marine Corps who didn't know how to shift a manual transmission, it was to complicated for them. They have become dependent on technology.

Today most pilots, military and civilian are not capable of flying by the seat of their pants because of technology since the 1970's when fly by wire came into being the norm with todays aircraft. A recent study showed that commercial airline pilots are so dependent on technology that if their aircraft were to lose an engine, they are up (*)(*)(*)(*) creek.

FYI: It was those WW ll vets who put a man on the moon using a slide rule, who invented the internet and developed most of the technology we use today and they did it without depending on technology but using their brains and a little help with a slide rule.

 

Actually, not to many "in the field" have a GPS unit, unless it is their own personal one. That is generally a Company level tool, Platoons and Squads in the field still do it with map and compass.

For the HMMWV, this is the case with almost all military vehicles. And it is not because of "intelligence", but the needs of the service. Manual transmissions require more skill to operate, and poor clutch skills can seriously damage or destroy a transmission. More and more today it is getting hard to find just about any car or truck with a manual transmission.

I was 20 when I bought my first vehicle with an automatic transmission (I got my first car at 15). In the last 20 years, manual transmissions have largely disappeared from our vehicles. If you look at the older 5 ton trucks, they had manual transmissions. As did the busses the military used. Now they are gone, and it has nothing to do with intelligence but skill.

I can't even begin to tell you how many people over the years I had taught how to drive manual transmission vehicles. Far to many kids today have simply never used one. Even in the early 1980's, we had problems finding and training people to use vehicles with manual transmissions (my first guard trucks were with manual transmissions - they had a higher rate of failure then the later ones with automatic transmissions).

 

This article details BOTH the PFM-1.....as the article describes a BOMB...shaped like a BIRD with 2 Wings....this is the Soviet PFM-1.

But Mushroom....they made PENS, CRAYONS and although I have never seen the Harmonica's detailed in this article...I did see some tiny DOLLS.


.Soviet Toys of Death
A powerful antiwar poster that Americans saw everywhere in 1970 showed bodies heaped in the Vietnamese village of My Lai. The caption was terse, taken from an inquiry into that massacre perpetrated by Americans: ''Q. And babies? A. And babies.''

No such posters draw attention to the ghastly, deliberate crippling of children by Soviet invaders in Afghanistan. Indeed, having grown skeptical of Presidential anecdotes, some Americans may wonder if Ronald Reagan was talking through his evil-empire hat when he accused Russians of sowing insurgent areas with bombs disguised as toys. The evidence isn't anecdotal. The evil is real.

It lies exposed in a report to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. This inquiry, the first ever by the U.N. into abuses charged against a Communist state, seems to have been scrupulously conducted by an Austrian legal expert, Felix Ermacora. Barred from Afghanistan, he gathered incontrovertible testimony of the slaughter of civilians from Afghans who fled to Pakistan.

The report asserts: ''The most horrible type of incident was that caused by the explosion of anti-personnel mines and especially of children's 'toys.' Many witnesses testified that children had been very seriously wounded, having their hands or feet blown off, either by handling booby-trap toys they had picked up along the roadway, or by stepping on them. . . .

''The types of booby-trap toys encountered include those resembling pens, harmonicas, radios or matchboxes, and little bombs shaped like a bird. This type of bomb, consisting of two wings, one flexible and the other rigid, in the shape and colors of a bird, explodes when the flexible wing is touched.

''The Special Rapporteur was also able to obtain a number of photographs, especially those of children between 8 and 15 years of age, with hands or legs blown off, either by handling booby-trap toys or during the explosion of mines.''

To the generalized horror of a war that has claimed 500,000 lives since 1979, there is thus added the special horror of toys of death. No wonder the Soviet bloc tries to defame the messenger. It contends that Mr. Ermacora is pro-Nazi because he served Hitler's army, as a private. Tellingly, the Soviet Union found nothing wrong with his credentials when he presented reports about human rights abuses in Chile and South Africa.

The issue isn't Mr. Ermacora, but the validity of his charges. If they are false or exaggerated, why not open Afghanistan to independent observers? As long as this dirty war is sealed from sight, someone should photograph those maimed youngsters and plaster posters everywhere, with the caption: ''Q. And children? A. Yes, especially children.''

LINK...http://www.nytimes.com/1985/12/10/opinion/soviet-toys-of-death.html

AboveAlpha

 

Vietnam was a disaster because our Leaders failed us.

Back then both the Soviet Union and United States were involved in a Cold War Game of....WHO CAN STOP THE OTHER FROM SPREADING INFLUENCE??

But this game is over even if Putin thinks it's still going on.

Right now....Russia is in no possition either Economically, Politically or Militarily....to continue to keep P!SS!NG OFF the United States.

It's not in the Russian Economies interests....it's not in the Russian Peoples interests....and it sure as HELL is not helping Russia make any friends!!

Putin can only draw this out for so long before his own supporters remove him from power.

AboveAlpha

 

An article from 1985, and an opinion piece. No references, opinion.

Sorry, opinions are not facts. Now when you find actual evidence of toys, let me know. Remember, I deal on facts, not opinion and propaganda.

 

Your right.

I am having difficulty finding any viable source other than what I personally know which does not help.

There was something...some evidence I am looking for right now and that was when Charlie Wilson brought in such...TOYS....to a Senate Committe Meeting.

I will continue to look.

AboveAlpha

 

Here is a few things.

Atrocities inAfghanistan
By Juliana Geran
TweetPrint PDF
(Archived document, may contain errors)

556 January 12, 1987 THE REPORT THAT THE U.N. WANTS TO SUPPRESS SOVIET ATROCITIES IN AFGHANISTAN A recent United Nations report on human rights reveals much more about the U.N. than it says about anything else. Prepared by the Special Rapporteur of the U. N . Commission on Human Rights, it is an Interim report on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan." But when the report was released officially on November 4, it had an embarrassing gaping hole. Missing from the official French, Spanish Chinese, and R u ssian versions was a 13-page Ilannexll which documents Soviet atrocities and other human rights violations against the people of Afghanistan. Although the Special Rapporteur specifically urged that his findings be brought to the attention of the General'A s sembly this annex appears only in English and then only in a very limited edition This 13-page hole, reminiscent of the 18 minutes erased from a key Nixon Watergate tape, typifies the United Nations' pervasive double standard: treating the U.S. and the We st tough but putting on kid gloves when dealing with the Soviet Union.

Assembly Affairs William B. Buffum defends his decision to omit the annex from the official version by pleading time and financial constraints. He and other U.N. officials note that an annex on Israeli practices in the occupied territories, for example, w a s also omitted from the official report. That annex is much longer--125 pages The U.N. Is Under-Secretary-General for Political and General Buffum told The Heritage Foundation that the annex on Israel is Ilfull of vicious anti-Israeli rhetoric This was, i t seems, one of the reasons for omitting the long added section on Israel. By contrast, however, the annex to the Afghanistan report is free of invective and provocative rhetoric carefully documented instances of Soviet atrocities. against Afghanistan's ci v ilian population, notably children. Another major difference between the Israel and Afghanistan reports is bulk. In addition to the 125-page annex, the main body of the Israeli practices report is 126 pages. The main Afghanistan report is only 27 pages lo ng Instead it merely catalogues When asked whether he was under any legal or any other obligation to cut any of the human rights reports1 annexes, Buffum said that he was not.

The decision of what is included in the main part of the report and what is in a n annex, Buffum explained is made at the "editorial'1 level. He declined to identify who actually made this decision in the case of the Afghan report. According to a U.S. Department of State official and other informed individuals, this decision was made inside the U.N.'s Department of Conference Services, a section heavily controlled by East bloc U.N. employees; The Department, in fact is headed by Eugeniusz Wyzner of Poland.

The problem of editing the U.N.'s human rights reports will become particularly significant this year, as a result of the decision by the General Assembly on December 4 to circulate such reports "in their'full form This decision may result in censoring information in all versions, including English.

Buffum denied that his decision to allow the Afghan report's annex to appear only in an English translation whose availability is limited was politically motivated. When asked whether he felt that the report was significant in view of the severity of the human righ violations in Afghanist a n, he responded: "It is literally in the eye of the beholder.lI ts What the Afghan report's suppressed annex indicates, however, is a brutality by MOSCOW~S troops on an appalling scale. Thousands of children have been killed by Soviet bombs disguised as t o ys; gas and chemical weapons have been used against civilians; and torture is common at interrogation centers of the Moscow-controlled Afghan secret police, the Khad. The torture involves pulling out fingernails, as well as systematic beating and psycholo g ical pressure and Afghan government and Soviet troops try to seal border areas to prevent Afghans from fleeing The U.N. censored report presents, in fact, a very conservative picture of Soviet atrocities in Afghanistan. According to its author 1. See Mark Huber Moscow*s Bastion in Manhattan: The U.N. Department of Conference Services Heritage Foundation Backarounder No. 51 8, June 20, 1986 2U.N. Special Rapporteur Felix Emacora, professor of public law at the University of Vienna, some accounts of atrociti es were omitted to save space and others because further substantiation would have been desirable.

While many egregious human rights violations were also committed by the Afghan soldiers, Ermacora emphasizes that most of the atrocities described in his report and%particularly in the censored annex, were committed by the Soviets.

The United Nations now may be in a life or death struggle for existence. Whether the U.N. survives probably will depend upon whether it can restore its credibility with the U.S. Co ngress and American people A key reason why Americans have become fed up with the U.N. is that organization's undisguised double standard which goes easy on Soviet bloc nations but thinks nothing of getting tough with atrocities in Afghanistan, prepared b y a noted Austrian jurist, is no way for the U.N. to regain credibility. Indeed, even the censored report carefully avoids stating that the USSR has invaded Afghanistan and that its forces are there committing the atrocities.

Juliana Geran Pilon, Ph.D.

Senior Policy Analyst the U.S. and other democracies. Censoring a report on Soviet 3Following are excerpts from the Annex to the report on Soviet human rights violations in Afghanistan that the U.N. has censored.

Supplementary material to the interim report on the situation of human riahts in Afahanistan prepared by the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Riahts in accordance with Commission resolution 1986/40 of 12 March 1986 and Economic and Social Council decision 1986/136 of 23 Mav 1986 A/41/7 7 8, annex INFORMATION CONCERNING RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN AFGHANISTAN 1. Situation of human riuhts in Afahanistan independent of the armed conflict a) Riaht to life 4. During the reporting period, the Special Rapporteur has received information on some c ases of death sentences b) Riuht of liberty and securitv of person; prison conditions 6. New information concerning prison conditions has been communicated to the Special Rapporteur in Quetta by two Australians, Ms. Jenny Lade, teacher of sculpture at the University of Baluchistan, and Robert Williamson, expert of forestry working on a project financed by the World Bank in Baluchistan, who were kidnapped by members of the Sassouli tribe on 18 May 1985 while proceeding to the site of the project located in the Maslakh forest reserve (west of Quetta).

Detained for two weeks in the tribal area on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, they were transferred to Kandahar by a helicopter identified as belonging to the [Soviet-controlled] Afghan military forces Tw o days later they were transferred to Kabul and detained in Sadarat Prison. During their transfer from the tribal area to Kandahar and Kabul they were blindfolded and handcuffed detention they were separated.

Jennv Lade's conditions of imprisonment During their 7. Detained from 2 June to 27 December 1985 in a cell measuring 10 feet by 10 feet with up to four political prisoners waiting to be convicted (she was told that some of them had been detained for up to 22 months without trial) she was not permitte d to inform the Australian Embassy of her detention aged between 17 and 65 years and some were accompanied by their babies. During the period of detention, although she received sufficient quantities of food, the nutritional value of the food was The women detained with her were 4- [EXCERPTS Following are excerpts from the Annex to the report on Soviet human rights violations in Afghanistan .that.the U.N. has censored.

Supplementarv material to the interim report on the situation of human riahts in Afahanis tan mepared bv the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Riahts in accordance with Commission resolution 1986/40 of 12 March 1986 and Economic and Social Council decision 1986/136 of 23 Mav 1986 A/41/778, annex INFORMATION CONCERNING RESPECT FOR H UMAN RIGHTS IN AFGHANISTAN 1. Situati.on of human riahts in Afahanistan independent of the armed conflict. a) Riaht to life 4. During the reporting period, the Special Rapporteur has received information on some cases of death sentences.

Riaht of libertv a nd securitv of person; prison conditions 6. New information concerning prison conditions has been communicated to the Special Rapporteur in Quetta by two Australians, Ms. Jenny Lade, teacher of sculpture at the University of Baluchistan, and Robert Willia m son, expert of forestry working on a project financed by the World Bank. in Baluchistan, who were kidnapped by members of the Sassouli tribe on 18 May 1985 while proceeding to the site of the project located in the Maslakh forest reserve (west of Quetta).

Detained for two weeks in the tribal area on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan, they were transferred. to Kandahar by a helicopter identified as belonging to the [Soviet-controlled] Afghan military forces. Two days later they were transferred to Kabu l and detained in Sadarat Prison. During their transfer from the tribal area to Kandahar and Kabul they were blindfolded and handcuffed. During their detention they were separated 5- [EXCERPTS Jennv Lade's conditions of immisonment 7. Detained from 2 I Ju n e to 27.-December I985 in'a cell measuring 10 feet by 10 feet with up to four political prisoners waiting to be convicted (she was told that some of them had been detained for up to 22 months without .trial) she was not permitted to inform the Australian E mbassy of her detention. The women detained with her were aged between 17 and 65 years and some were accompanied by their babies. During the period of detention, although she received sufficient quantities of food, the nutritional value of the food was so low that she eventually contracted scurvy. Accordingly [sic] to information given to her ,by an inmate, there had been cases of ill-treatment of women previously detained at the Sadarat Prison (some of them were allegedly hung up by their arms and beaten o n their legs, and she had seen an inmate with bruises on her legs The time outside the cell was limited to half an hour a day. She described the cell as being in poor condition, with a leaking roof and the floor covered with insects and rats. Other inmate s could receive parcels once fortnightly from relatives, containing food, clothes and money

AboveAlpha

- - - Updated - - -

She said that her entire family had been killed during the incident c) In March 1986, a 13-year-old child from Mazar-e-S harif in Balm Province was seriously wounded by exploding knife-like shrapnel. During this incident, which occurred during an aerial bombing 7 members of his family and 60 other inhabitants of the village perished; d) A 16-year-old boy, a native of Paktik a , had his left leg amputated following the explosion of an anti-personnel mine in July 1986 38 According to information obtained during the recent visit Soviet] booby-trap toys have been distributed along the entire length of the. Misamsha-Khost border in the Bangidar Valley, in Paktia Province d) Acts of brutalitv committed bv armed forces and other examples of warfare contrarv to humanitarian standards 39. During the period under consideration, the Special Rapporteur received information confirming that a cts of brutality by the armed forces had taken place during military operations throughout the country. He can only recall the incidents described in document A/41/778, which are largely typical of the atrocities committed particularly during raids or ret a liatory attacks against villages 40. Looting is reported to happen frequently during house and village searches [by Soviet and/or Soviet-controlled forces In particular money and jewelry are requested and people who are unable or unwilling to give them ar e shot 44. The Special Rapporteur has been informed that the Minaret of Herat, the Chesht Mosque and the Herat Great Mosque Jami have been destroyed. These are monuments to which the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the event of Armed C onflict of 14 May 1954 must apply. Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural 0r.ganization requesting additional information, the Special Rapporteur received the following reply on 24 February 1986 In response to his letter to the United AS part ofthe international campaign to save the monuments of Herat, and at the request of the national authorities 13 EXCERPTS UNESCO dispatched a consultant, Professor Andrea Bruno of Italy, on a mission to Afghanistan from 23 December 1985 to 6 January 19

LINK...http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/1987/01/the-report-that-the-un-wants-to-suppress-soviet-atrocities-in-afghanistan

AboveAlpha

 

A badly scanned report. And interestingly, trying to check any references came up blank.

As an FYI, the "booby-trapped toy" story has been around since at least WWII, when Germany made those claims against the UK and US governments (they also claimed they were placed in food containers). And similar stories circulated against US soldiers in Vietnam as well as Israel doing the same thing for decades in Palestine.

In fact, about 10 years ago similar claims were going around that the insurgents were doing the same thing in Iraq. And how many verifications have we had on this over the last 10 years?

And there has been no actual evidence that the Soviets ever did this. None. Just propaganda like claims made by those who were strongly opposed to the war in Afghanistan by the Soviets.

As I said, these are not new charges, or even unique to Afghanistan. However, what they all have in common (US 2 times, UK, Israel, Iraqi Insurgents, Israel) is that there is zero actual evidence that this ever happened. Just claims that this was done by groups opposed to the side the claims are made against. And in all the years since the Soviets left Afghanistan, not one person from the former Soviet Union has ever come forward to admit to this?

Sorry, still smells like complete propaganda garbage, and nothing behind to back it up. Just like the other "booby-trapped toy" stories that have come up over the decades.

 

Seeing as how my nation will usually insist on fighting alongside the US when it invades somebody I would hope US soldiiers with their M-16s are not that bad.

 

It will still be able to bomb poor third world countries back to the stone ages, just not as cheeply as the F-16, F-18, etc. As for a duel against the SU-35 the F-35 was mainly intended to be a cheep strike fighter (bomb truck) & the F-22 was intended to ride shootgun before the F-22 got canned & now the US is designing a 6th generation fighter to take care of it.

 

Perhaps designing fighter 6 generation will begin in 2016. Now there are only talks. On this, as reported by Reuters, said Deputy Secretary of Defense for military procurement Frank Kendall. According to him, the funds will be allocated to R & D and prototyping possibly in 2016. How much time have developed F 35? It is an illusion and propaganda.

 

Here is what I was getting at.

continue -> http://www.wsj.com/articles/automation-makes-us-dumb-1416589342

Question:
How many Air Force pilots today could shoot down a Mig-17 while in the cockpit of a radial piston powered Douglas A-1 Skyraider while in a dog fight ? It happened more than a few times during the Vietnam War.

You being over forty, I'm sure you remember what quality is and also have encountered this.

>" I am afraid that something is happening. Technology is important, but when people who are being paid to make change are incapable of subtracting $45.46 from $50.00 without a machine, we have a serious problem. Especially when it happens again, and again, and again. "<

http://brownfieldagnews.com/2014/07/10/technology-dumbing-society/