Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

What happens if the bad guys win this time?

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

What happens if the bad guys win this time?

Old 14th Jun 2022, 07:18
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 907
And many millions of Russians died before WW2 at the hands of their own government. The definition of who the "bad guys" are and who the "good guys" are changes with the shifting sands of history. In the 30's the "good guys" were the Germans in the minds of many in Europe and America. After all they were reducing unemployment, keeping the trains to schedule, building autobahns ( a good way of moving military supplies around) and keeping the pesky Communists under control (aka the bad guys). Then came the land demands and the burgeoning military so now there is a shift from good to not so good guys. Still there were a lot of admirers and their persecution of their Jewish population was not a concern to the "good guys" September 1 1939 changed everything and to make things worse they joined forces with the other bad guys and divided Poland between them.

I think the mindset is that it was well worth it for the territory gained.
Now 1942 is the year that the bad guys go to war against each other and the former bad guys become the good guys because they are now less bad than the real bad guys.

Fast forward to the present, who are the bad guys? Well its obvious, the ones who are not the good guys. Some think that the CCP are the good guys as they just want to help poorer nations develop their road,rail and ports infrastructure.( a good way of moving military supplies around) The Uyghurs are their problem. Their economic prowess makes them worthy of respect and their burgeoning military is for self defense only.
As a generalisation I think ultimately what can define a bad guy is:
  • an authoritarian system of government,
  • a desire to conquer other countries that "belong to them" and
  • the creation of a burgeoning military to support items 1 and 2 of my bad guy definition.
Where does Russia, China and North Korea fit with that definition?
Lookleft is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 07:25
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: X marks the spot
Posts: 50
Yeah good point, the cost is what you give up in return to get it. So it's going to be tough one to convince anyone that the landgrab in Donbass at the moment is a success, even if Russia eventually will get it. If they get access to the oil/gas under ground then there maybe it is but not sure where it's possible to tap it. Maybe Ukraine can get a bigger straw and suck it out themselves in that case from elsewhere...The costs on the other hand in lost lives, destroyed equipment, loss of rep, sanctions and Ironcurtain Mark II on top needs much more to call it a win...
Clop_Clop is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 07:45
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2022
Location: France
Posts: 39
Originally Posted by 1201alarm View Post
CVividasku, tell me more? We know that there are a lot of authoritarian countries, however most of the worlds economical power is in countries where voting-out functions properly. The G7 is nearly 50% of worldwide economics, and they are all democracies with a lively political competition.
There is a political competition, but it is about who will best serve the money.
I don't know about all countries, but for each and everyone I know, there are a few billionnaires who own more than 90% of the media.
The media then forge the public opinion. The media tell people if not directly what to think, what topics are more important than others.
They present some candidates to the public and observe whether they're successful or not. If yes, they will be encouraged, they will be talked about more, etc..
If not, they will find another suitable candidate to best serve the interests of the billionnaires.

I did not invent anything, Noam Chomsky did. Another guy in my country observed how our president was elected.
Five years before he was a nobody. He managed to seduce some people with the right contacts (actually, the guy who almost selected or approved every president for the previous 20 years) to become a minister. Then thought he could become president, he convinced some billionnaire-philanthropists, and within a few weeks his face was all over the news and the newstands.

That was about how someone becomes president (or prime minister, or any other national top political office)
Lastly, about how candidates are allowed to exist : all candidates proposing anything other than pursuing capitalism will be banned in a way or another. Sure, some will be allowed to talk. But then, either the media will ridicule them, or they will have selected incompetent anti-capitalists to discredit their anti-capitalist movements. In my country, we even had a policital debate cut in two separate times : one with the "big candidates" and one with the "small candidates". But obviously they were big and small candidates mainly because of their own treatment of their campaign in the previous months.

If despite all that, the wrong candidate is chosen (which can happen), many politicians in the past happened to "commit suicide" or "die in accidents" or were sometimes plainly assassinated.
I'm not saying that behind every suspect death there is an occult conspiracy, but necessarily it is the case for some of them.

Once you understand you can make people believe almost anything you want (provided the media puts enough efforts in that), you can forget about your dreams of democray.

I'm not saying a democracy is like a dictatorship, that's false. But we have to talk openly about matters like this.
You can always oppose things like "in a democracy you still can criticise the government" but it's less and less true. In my country, who's supposed to be a very good democracy, some people who simply asked difficult questions to the top politicians received some police officers at home under a false pretense. The citizens said the police intimidated them, police said they were talking about a different matter and helping said citizen, but no one denies that the police paid a visit, which is, in itself, problematic.
If you don't try to improve your democracy day after day, it will probably become more and more authoritarian until one day you won't be able to improve it.
Originally Posted by 1201alarm View Post
All you guys should really live in China or Russia for ten years, criticise the system there like you do it here, and then see what happens with you.
Oh, you're complaining because your speed is in the orange zone (alpha prot) of the speed scale ? Why bother push on the stick or add thrust ? You should go see the pilots of AF447 who famously stalled and crashed, they would have loved to have a speed in the orange zone !
CVividasku is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 08:24
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 56
Posts: 2,401
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
A really eye opening experience for me was to visit the War Museum in HCMC. Lots of critics of that museum say it’s just one sided anti American propaganda, and whilst that may be how they perceive it the content of the museum is what the Vietnamese perspective of the war was (along with some shocking photos of atrocities, My Lai in particular), and not really any more biased than some war museums I’ve been to in Western nations that present their side as glorious and the other side as “pure evil” and always having good intentions. The Vietnamese museum just shows the perspective from the “other” side.
Do they show their atrocities then as well ? To their OWN kin ? The countless murders of non communist non combatants ? The defacto invasion of non vietnamese terretory for eg. the Ho Chi Minh trail ? No ? How surprising ! Them being the good ones etcetc..
His dudeness is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 10:04
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2022
Location: France
Posts: 39
Originally Posted by His dudeness View Post
Do they show their atrocities then as well ? To their OWN kin ? The countless murders of non communist non combatants ? The defacto invasion of non vietnamese terretory for eg. the Ho Chi Minh trail ? No ? How surprising ! Them being the good ones etcetc..
Exactly ! Everybody claims to be the good guys.
So the bad guys are more exactly the other guys
CVividasku is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 13:30
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Tranquility Base
Posts: 54
Ahhh, CVividasku, I see, you are a from the conspiracy fraction of the society.

Originally Posted by CVividasku View Post
There is a political competition, but it is about who will best serve the money.
Is that why France has one of the biggest tax rates, thickest code de travail and hugest redistribution of money amongst citizens in the western world?

What you say is pure conspirast thinking.

I don't know about all countries, but for each and everyone I know, there are a few billionnaires who own more than 90% of the media.
The media then forge the public opinion. The media tell people if not directly what to think, what topics are more important than others.
They present some candidates to the public and observe whether they're successful or not. If yes, they will be encouraged, they will be talked about more, etc..
If not, they will find another suitable candidate to best serve the interests of the billionnaires.
So tell me: which billionaire ownes LE MONDE? Which billionaire ownes LA LIBERATION? Which billionaire ownes LE FIGARO? For sure these are newspapers with clearly different political opinions.

Again: What you say is pure conspiracy thinking.

I did not invent anything, Noam Chomsky did. Another guy in my country observed how our president was elected.
Five years before he was a nobody. He managed to seduce some people with the right contacts (actually, the guy who almost selected or approved every president for the previous 20 years) to become a minister. Then thought he could become president, he convinced some billionnaire-philanthropists, and within a few weeks his face was all over the news and the newstands.

That was about how someone becomes president (or prime minister, or any other national top political office)
So who is that guy "who almost selected or approved every president for the previous 20 years"? Let us know what weeeeeeee sheeeeep don't know.

This is conspiracy BS. Macron was and is just a brilliant guy. I would also vote for him. Certainly better than the left extreme and right extreme crooks in France.

Lastly, about how candidates are allowed to exist : all candidates proposing anything other than pursuing capitalism will be banned in a way or another. Sure, some will be allowed to talk. But then, either the media will ridicule them, or they will have selected incompetent anti-capitalists to discredit their anti-capitalist movements. In my country, we even had a policital debate cut in two separate times : one with the "big candidates" and one with the "small candidates". But obviously they were big and small candidates mainly because of their own treatment of their campaign in the previous months.
So why is it that Melenchon is all over the voting competition, all the media, all over TV, etc?

What you say is again conspiracy BS. It is much simpler: most people came to realise that the freedom of contract is an extremely valuable thing for your own freedom of life.

If despite all that, the wrong candidate is chosen (which can happen), many politicians in the past happened to "commit suicide" or "die in accidents" or were sometimes plainly assassinated.
I'm not saying that behind every suspect death there is an occult conspiracy, but necessarily it is the case for some of them.
Again conspiracy BS. Who "commited suicide" or had an "accident"? Let's talk names, not just some unspecific conspiracy.

Once you understand you can make people believe almost anything you want (provided the media puts enough efforts in that), you can forget about your dreams of democray.
Problem is, it doesn't work in reality, because many interest groups are trying to do exactly that, and none of them really reaches their goal, because people in the west inform themselves with a variety of sources.

I'm not saying a democracy is like a dictatorship, that's false. But we have to talk openly about matters like this.
Of course we have to, and it is done every day, in every normal newspaper, on every normal TV station etc, it is the usual normal daily political debate about everything.

You can always oppose things like "in a democracy you still can criticise the government" but it's less and less true. In my country, who's supposed to be a very good democracy, some people who simply asked difficult questions to the top politicians received some police officers at home under a false pretense. The citizens said the police intimidated them, police said they were talking about a different matter and helping said citizen, but no one denies that the police paid a visit, which is, in itself, problematic.
Again, conspiracy. Where are these people? What happened to them? Sources please, not just unsubstantial claimes.

If you don't try to improve your democracy day after day, it will probably become more and more authoritarian until one day you won't be able to improve it.
Agree. So why don't you start with yourself and stop dispersing unsubstantiated conspiracies? Nowadays we do not have a problem of not being informed enough, we have a problem that there are way to many poisonous "news" sources undermining trust in society, politicians and institutions.

Oh, you're complaining because your speed is in the orange zone (alpha prot) of the speed scale ? Why bother push on the stick or add thrust ? You should go see the pilots of AF447 who famously stalled and crashed, they would have loved to have a speed in the orange zone !
We are not in the orange zone, we live comfortably as we have never done before in the west.

However what we have: people are more and more mad and furious from so called "news" of which noone knows where they come from or if they are true. For me it is clear: authoritarian regimes are faking these stories with a lot of efforts to poison our democratic discourse. And in the US unfortunately the right-wing big party has also taken this course of action. That is worrying.

So which side are you on?
1201alarm is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 13:34
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 865
Originally Posted by Toadstool View Post
Respectfully I disagree. Millions of Russians died in WWII and it is because of this that the Russians want space between themselves and an “enemy”. In their eyes, that is all that matters and their whole psyche is about protecting the motherland. Not one Russian thinks that the number of deaths for resultant territory was worth it.
Space between themselves an the ‘enemy’ is a propaganda argument that is bought into by the useful idiots(a Lenin term). And exactly how much space is needed? Always more than there is at any given time. How convenient for an empire.

Perhaps that desired space is why they went into Poland along with Germany. Just needed a little more space.
punkalouver is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 14:14
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: london
Posts: 0
quiet intertesting,
the bad guy depenps on which side you are in
cfs200 is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 15:58
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 63
Posts: 6,088
Originally Posted by MechEngr View Post
The Russians don't need space. They have nukes. That is literally what the nukes are for. That also ignores that they were invaded by Germany/Hitler because of fear Stalin was a back-stabbing liar who would take advantage of the German war towards the west and invade from the east. It's like America worrying the Mexican Army might try to take Texas back.

I get that they are filled to the gills with propaganda, but no one in the West is interested in a war to take over Russian territory; We walked out of Iraq and they had oil as well. I still think the US should use all that corn and instead of wasting it on fuel, prepare to send millions of gallons of ethanol to Russia as a sign of friendship; give every village and town a tanker truck filled with it.
That's some great 'out of the box' thinking.
OTOH, the central government of China is far more effective at directing big projects than Russia ever has been, brutally effective if required and would primarily be resource limited. I'm less sure about India for now, but it may not be too long and a huge climate change leading to millions dying of heat or starvation might motivate India to head to cooler areas with more food. India's industrial base seems to be expanding nicely and Russia's is crumbling, no doubt part of the reason Putin wants to expand his oil and food holdings.
Realpolitik in action.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 15:59
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,752
Originally Posted by punkalouver View Post
Space between themselves an the ‘enemy’ is a propaganda argument that is bought into by the useful idiots(a Lenin term). And exactly how much space is needed? Always more than there is at any given time. How convenient for an empire.
Errrrr “Monroe doctrine” anyone......
dr dre is online now  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 16:05
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 63
Posts: 6,088
Given that you obviously don't understand it, no.
Nothing to do with "space" and everything to do with "spheres of influence."
America's space is provided by two oceans. (See Churchill's oft quoted bon mot as regards America's 'splendid isolation').
Note the map: Russia does not have the luxury of that kind of space.

So that you may understand it, that assertion by President Monroe was a position that was aimed explicitly at the crowned heads of Europe in the 19th century.
You may be surprised to learn that his term (1817–1825) overlapped heavily with the era of Bolivarian revolutions in Central and South America.
FWIW: Maximillian (a Hapsburg) was able to sneak into Mexico (ended in tears for him, though) without American push back because the US was involved in intramural homicide at the time (also called the Civil War, 1861-1865).
Has it been used as justification for a variety of moves since then? Yep, the early 20th century banana wars included, with the Spanish-American War being one of the more salient exercises of same.
I am pretty sure that Urgent Fury was the last explicit exercise of that Doctrine.
Working bilaterally or with OAS is, politically, a better (if more difficult) vehicle for regional security in the present day.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 16:34
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,752
“Space”, “spheres of influence” whatever you want to call them.

How do we determine which countries are allowed to have “spheres of influence” and those who are not? It was pretty obvious the US did not want anything remotely non US influencing Central and South America during the Cold War (and beyond too), that’s why so many nations in the region got to experience a CIA backed coup whenever they elected a slightly left leaning government.
dr dre is online now  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 16:46
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 120
The sanctions are starting to bite ....... us on the bum.

Pain is being inflicted, but only on the people of Western and Central Europe. Looks like life continues just fine in Moscow despite what the BBC would like you to think


And before we get the gasps of horror from the geriatric Cold War warriors, jealous that they didn't get to fight those nasty nasty Russians, dig a little deeper into this channel and decide for yourself if this is a fair picture.

Are YOU really willing to put up with these high prices to support the Nazi-lovers of Ukraine? Our grandfathers shot Nazis, they did not collect money for them or go fight alongside them.
piesupper is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 17:01
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 63
Posts: 6,088
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
How do we determine which countries are allowed to have “spheres of influence” .
Who is this "we" that you speak of?
There isn't any we.
It's realpolitik: spheres of influence are either recognized (formally or informally, it varies) or they are not.
And yes, the Cold War was a very real thing. Deal with it.
(I am glad that it ended, which is not to say that the multi polar world that has since evolved is any less dangerous, it isn't.

I suggest that you look at the recent assertion of the Taiwan Straits by China as their national waters for a classic example of an attempt at 'might makes right' - it's a very old political habit in power politics to assert a right and see who agrees or disputes it.
Other examples include the Argentine government in 1982, Russia in Cirmea in 2014, Qhadaffi's "Line of Death" in the Gulf of Sidra, heck Saddam's assertion that Kuwait was in reality the 19th province of Iraq in 1990/1991.
If you figure that you can get away with it you can try and see if you can pull it off.
It's a very, very old game.
Nothing new under the sun.
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
So after the US carpet bombed Laos relentlessly for almost 10 years
You are caught yet again in a deliberate falsehood.
Carpet bombing is a particular thing, and while there is no question that Laos got dragged into the Southeast Asian war, to assert that for 10 years it was carpet bombed is to utter a falsehood.
(The most recent bombing mission that cold be classified as 'carpet bombing' that I can point to was in 1991, a part of the preparation of for the offensive that was intended to kick the Iraqis out of Kuwait, but apparently people are still bickering over that).

North Vietnam got a substantial number of bombs dropped on it over an 8 year period, even though there were times that no bombs could be dropped on it based on the political winds changing.
And even that nation only got something subjected to carpet bombing sometimes during that period.
Was Laos subject to American bombs for a decade or so as a part of that war? Yes.
Was Laos carpet bombed for ten years? No.
Were some of the missions of that nature? Probably some of the ones along the Ho Chi Minh trail in Laos were.
Was a part of the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos? Yes.
Were NVA military personnel and material moved along the Ho Chi Minh trail? Yes.
Were they bombed? Yes.
Were the bombs generally gravity bombs? Yes.
Does the act of dropping a gravity bomb constitute carpet bombing? No.

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 14th Jun 2022 at 17:31.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 17:36
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: X marks the spot
Posts: 50
Originally Posted by piesupper View Post
Pain is being inflicted, but only on the people of Western and Central Europe. Looks like life continues just fine in Moscow despite what the BBC would like you to think

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJbXmpmxwYc

And before we get the gasps of horror from the geriatric Cold War warriors, jealous that they didn't get to fight those nasty nasty Russians, dig a little deeper into this channel and decide for yourself if this is a fair picture.

Are YOU really willing to put up with these high prices to support the Nazi-lovers of Ukraine? Our grandfathers shot Nazis, they did not collect money for them or go fight alongside them.
Sorry to say it but they are not really making a strong case for it, it's a 5 minute video on youtube, and then we are supposed to put a 1-1 to society at large and think nothing is happening. When it clearly is... Reuters on the other hand is reporting a 15% GDP contraction and a brain drain elsewhere...

https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/russias-economic-slWmp-will-wipe-out-15-years-gains-iif-2022-06-08/
Clop_Clop is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 17:47
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 120
Who pays for Reuters?


I would expect to hear very little different from Reuters.

"Is that true or did you hear it on Reuters/BBC?" etc etc etc?


The European public will run out of food, fuel and enthusiasm for the Ukrainian Nazis long before the US runs out of Ukrainians and mercenaries to fight the Russians. Much to the disgust of the Yanks who thought they could fight a proxy war this time, seeing they were so crap at fighting real wars.

Last edited by piesupper; 14th Jun 2022 at 17:52. Reason: Premature Enterculation
piesupper is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 18:07
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 195
Considering that the Russian police apparently were arresting people for holding blank sheets of paper it's expected that anyone not backing the Putin line is aware of the consequences. And it makes sense that Putin would ensure that Moscow was insulated 100% from the blow-back, though how they are explaining the sudden departure of Western businesses that have no direct ties to Ukraine must be interesting as well as explaining just what happened to all the jobs the Russian workers in those businesses had.

I bet that having stolen goods from Ukraine will lower Russian prices for a while, particularly if redirected to Moscow.

But, who knows, Right?

The tougher job will be to explain all the Russian soldiers who aren't ever coming home. Or is that not a price Russians will notice?
MechEngr is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 18:12
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: X marks the spot
Posts: 50
No one will stop you if you want to put your trust in this danish guy moving to rural russia over more credible sources... Why would Reuters lie for example about it? They have no reason to lie about it...
Clop_Clop is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 18:22
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 1,340
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50 View Post
Who is this "we" that you speak of?
There isn't any we.
It's realpolitik: spheres of influence are either recognized (formally or informally, it varies) or they are not.
And yes, the Cold War was a very real thing. Deal with it.
(I am glad that it ended, which is not to say that the multi polar world that has since evolved is any less dangerous, it isn't.

I suggest that you look at the recent assertion of the Taiwan Straits by China as their national waters for a classic example of an attempt at 'might makes right' - it's a very old political habit in power politics to assert a right and see who agrees or disputes it.
Other examples include the Argentine government in 1982, Russia in Cirmea in 2014, Qhadaffi's "Line of Death" in the Gulf of Sidra, heck Saddam's assertion that Kuwait was in reality the 19th province of Iraq in 1990/1991.
If you figure that you can get away with it you can try and see if you can pull it off.
It's a very, very old game.
Nothing new under the sun.
You are caught yet again in a deliberate falsehood.
Carpet bombing is a particular thing, and while there is no question that Laos got dragged into the Southeast Asian war, to assert that for 10 years it was carpet bombed is to utter a falsehood.
(The most recent bombing mission that cold be classified as 'carpet bombing' that I can point to was in 1991, a part of the preparation of for the offensive that was intended to kick the Iraqis out of Kuwait, but apparently people are still bickering over that).

North Vietnam got a substantial number of bombs dropped on it over an 8 year period, even though there were times that no bombs could be dropped on it based on the political winds changing.
And even that nation only got something subjected to carpet bombing sometimes during that period.
Was Laos subject to American bombs for a decade or so as a part of that war? Yes.
Was Laos carpet bombed for ten years? No.
Were some of the missions of that nature? Probably some of the ones along the Ho Chi Minh trail in Laos were.
Was a part of the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos? Yes.
Were NVA military personnel and material moved along the Ho Chi Minh trail? Yes.
Were they bombed? Yes.
Were the bombs generally gravity bombs? Yes.
Does the act of dropping a gravity bomb constitute carpet bombing? No.
I don't know about 'carpet bombing', but the record shows Laos got about 2mm tons of bombs dropped on it by the US, which is about the same total as the US forces dropped in Europe during WW2.
So choose your own label, but the place was massively bombed, especially considering that Laos is less than half the size of Axis occupied Europe in WW2.
etudiant is offline  
Old 14th Jun 2022, 19:08
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 63
Posts: 6,088
Originally Posted by etudiant View Post
I don't know about 'carpet bombing', but the record shows Laos got about 2mm tons of bombs dropped on it by the US, which is about the same total as the US forces dropped in Europe during WW2.
So choose your own label, but the place was massively bombed, especially considering that Laos is less than half the size of Axis occupied Europe in WW2.
Europe was bombed by the US for less than three years.

Spoiler
 
As noted, the conflict America was involved with in Southeast Asia that included Laos went on for a decade, or more.
IIRC, there were operations on going there before LBJ's escalation in 1965.
I well remember a TV program in the late 1960's called "Laos: the forgotten war" which was intended to raise awareness of what was going on there while the Viet Nam war was eating up all of the front page.
But make no mistake, hell yeah, that's a lot of bombs.
Not disagreeing with that. Where was the most common area bombed?
Ho Chi Minh trail, which in military parlance was a Main Supply Route for the NVA. Not precision bombing, no.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...C3%A0_1973.JPG
(Interesting tidbit from a summary: about a third of that ordnance didn't explode. There's a full time job for EOD ...)

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 14th Jun 2022 at 20:21.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.