The Military Thread

Technically. But not anywhere near to the degree of World War 1. Another Great War episode!

What about the 1904 Russo-Japanese War? I recall reading how the Russians had to use the Trans-Siberian to shuttle all their reinforcements from European Russia to the eastern garrisons in Manchuria. The Japanese strategy was thus based around achieving dramatic battlefield victories before the next wave if Russian reinforcements could arrive. Nicholas II could have prolonged the war by shuttling another wave of troops, but decided to fold after Tsushima wrecked his Baltic Fleet.

The Russo-Japanese War wouldn't be funny if you're on the Russian side.

Specially because they lots a large chunk of their fleet trying to get the Pacific ocean and a few of their ships to themselves.

Whelp, THAAD is live in South Korea.

And mighty mite had to walk back all that talk about having South Korea "pay for it". I think Mattis smacked POTUS with a rolled up TSOP^note A secret document that is the SOP for a war and made Trump smell the mess he made.

Personal feelings about Mattis aside, the image of him smacking Trump as if he was a dog that just peed on the carpet is hilarious.

South Korea more or less politely refused when he asked anyway.

Looks like Soeul is doing the same thing that Berlin and Ottawa are doing with regard to Trump: ignore what he says (because he changes his mind and lies through his teeth, so there's no point) and only react to what he actually does.

A long article (in PDF form) on the FDF and Finnish defence policy by Jane's Defence Weekly: "Northern composure". There's some stuff missing though.

edited 3rd May '17 4:20:43 AM by TerminusEst

Hi there,

The Russians actually did send in more troops to reinforce the Manchurian Army after the battle at Mukden—four army corps, and battle losses were largely replenished by June 1905. General Linevich (commander of all the Far Eastern forces after Kuropatkin's relief) wanted to continue the ground war during the summer, but as you say, the Tsar didn't want to continue the war (not to mention revolution at home!).

I think the Russians accomplished quite a logistical feat during the war given the incomplete state of the railway, and how Japan only entered the Russian general staff's strategic planning after the 1894-95 Sino-Japanese War. Up to 1914, Russia still lagged behind her European military rivals in rail infrastructure, with serious implications in intelligence gathering and war mobilization.

edited 3rd May '17 4:55:16 PM by Breakerchase

Pity the Russians' luck at logistics couldn't compensate for their technological shortcomings. Wasn't it that the Russians' guns were fixed in place while the Japanese could rotate theirs via electric power?

I wouldn't put technology as decisive factor. Russian battleships' 12-in/40-cal guns were installed in French-style electrically powered turrets. While the extreme naval buffs may pay attention to things like differences in fire control and the parameters of the Borodino-class battleships, the Russians had excellent weapons (Maxim, Mosin rifle, field artillery) to fight the Japanese with. We have to expand our perspective beyond technology and the technical parameters of weapons. For a sampling, check out this excerpt from Bruce Menning's Bayonets Before Bullets—which is an excellent history of the pre-WWI Russian Army:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B06GppuET3sAVmEwZk1RZ1pmdWc

The Japanese did receive intelligence on sea mine emplacements as well.

Holy crap its Breaker good to see you again.

Quality of troops, situational factors at the time of combat, and other variables would go into how good a unit is. Technology is great as a force multiplier but there are situations where it is not the deciding factor.

Hey, y'all US veteran types... are you aware of Experticity?

Gjal: No but a quick search turns up some info on Utah based branding and product management company.

Technology tends to have a much greater impact in the naval dimension of things though, particularly because you can't exactly evoke We Have Reserves with trained personnel such as technicians and gunnery officers worth their salt whose skills take far longer and more resources to hone than a fine infantryman.

I'm confidant in saying that most historians agree that IJN's British-made warships gave them an edge over the Russian ones in some form or matter.

Bingo. It's basically a thing that was made for manufacturers to connect with retailer workers to offer them discounts so that they could be wearing/using high-end gear, and have a good feeling towards such and such manufacturer for giving them a discount. Anyway, they decided to make a veteran/active military thing, which includes a buncha discounts on shit. They used to have a rewards program for signing people up, but afaik, it's over. You can go to experticity.com and should be able to sign up yourself.

I have no desire or reason to do business with them but thanks for the heads up.

I feel you, but it's a discount thingie that's pretty quiet, and actually worth it unlike Gov X, so I do try to spread the word.

Hello,

Indeed many historians like Evans and Peattie in Kaigun will credit the technical advantage to the Japanese in the Mahan-style set-piece fleet battle, contributing to their decisive victory at Tsushima.

But I would divert from this perspective because I find it gives an impression that the Russian Navy could not hope to play a useful role in the naval theater. This is not to denegrate the role of technical aspects in narratives and analyses, but to discover answers to Russian failures (even in the naval dimension) we need to cast a wider net.

I find Julian Corbett's view in his classic work Maritime Operations in the Russo-Japanese War a very comprehensive analysis in this regard. In short, he argues that until the destruction of the Russian Pacific Fleet (and a lesser extent Tsushima) the Japanese were not in "command of the sea", and that the Pacific Fleet had windows to give the Japanese a sour time. I've scanned and attached the conclusion from Corbett's book below:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B06GppuET3sAeGg5UmdFUG9vQW8

In regards to the original topic on railways, I've shared some knowledge on the Russo-Japanese War and hope I've made myself informative.

@Tuefel Hunden IV: Good to see you too Tuefel!

edited 3rd May '17 8:27:09 PM by Breakerchase

I think I've shown it before, but The Great Courses Plus (think Netflix for college lectures) had a professor from the Naval War College explaining Corbett through the Russo-Japanese War example.

The lecture went through history's great strategic thinkers, from Sun Tzu to Mao.

edited 4th May '17 1:21:30 AM by math792d

Latvia Pursues ‘Total Defense’ Concept, Rejects Conscription

Question for the service members here:

How is it handled when a number of unit members all have the same surname? I'm particularly aiming this at dRoy, because I can only imagine the organizational nightmare of having half a platoon be named "Kim" while the other half is "Lee" or "Sung".

In my unit back in Spang, it was broken down into which shop (Aka: what job do they do) you were talking about, first name, what rank were they and ethnicity.

You'd be extremely hard pressed to get that specific and get a person mixed up with someone else.

Hey, that's just wrong! You might get lucky and have a Baek. Or, maybe a Soek.

edited 4th May '17 9:20:10 AM by Euodiachloris