Posted on May 24, 2016
4
4
0
Let's see now.
Someone is surprised when a weapons system shows that it could be improved once someone else actually starts using it for what it is intended instead of under controlled circumstances?
Come ON now!!!
Someone is surprised when a weapons system shows that it could be improved once someone else actually starts using it for what it is intended instead of under controlled circumstances?
Come ON now!!!
Syria operation exposes drawbacks of Russian helicopters | IHS Jane's 360
Posted from janes.com
Russia
Helicopters
Weapons
Technology
Combat
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
1
1
0
COL Ted Mc between this event exposing vulnerabilities in Russian aircraft and the events in the Ukraine exposing TTP and vulnerabilities in Russian armor, maybe the fear of the Russian war machine will have less value in the world as a whole and force them to rethink their global approach.
(1)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
LTC (Join to see) - Colonel; The Sherman tank was quite capable of destroying a German Panther tank. All that was required was that the Sherman gunner hit the Panther tank right on the turret ring (there was about an 8" wide place all around the base of the turret where this could be done).
Equally, the Russians don't actually have a really extensive (recent [say since 1960]) history of invading and conquering (or attempting to conquer) other countries. There are other nations which cannot say the same thing.
Equally, the Russians don't actually have a really extensive (recent [say since 1960]) history of invading and conquering (or attempting to conquer) other countries. There are other nations which cannot say the same thing.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The sad part is that wouldn't even be an issue, if our current administration not allowed ISIS to expand in the first place.
(1)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SSG Pete Fleming - Staff; I can (and do) respect your opinion without agreeing with it.
As to whether President Obama is the "worst" President the US has ever had, I think that Buchanan, Pierce, Wilson, G. W. Bush and Fillmore are all going to give him some serious competition for that distinction.
While the odds on President Obama being America's "worst" president are low, the odds on him being America's "best" president are even lower. (Although, with the effluxion of time, he might make it into the "Top/Bottom 20 list for either category.)
As to whether President Obama is the "worst" President the US has ever had, I think that Buchanan, Pierce, Wilson, G. W. Bush and Fillmore are all going to give him some serious competition for that distinction.
While the odds on President Obama being America's "worst" president are low, the odds on him being America's "best" president are even lower. (Although, with the effluxion of time, he might make it into the "Top/Bottom 20 list for either category.)
(0)
(0)
SSG Pete Fleming
COL Ted Mc - I think you forgot Carter on your list... Thank you sir, opinions are good... informed opinions are better. I think you should write a book, I mean that seriously, because all sides of an argument should be available. I can cover some aspects of publishing, if you wish...
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SSG Pete Fleming - Staff; Mr. Clinton makes it into the second quartile (ranked as number 20 of 43) based on the average of 18 major polls since 1948. Mr. Obama ranks 17 out of 43. Mr. Bush (GW) ranks as number 34.
Of the top ten - one has no party affiliation (Washington), one is a "Democrat-Republican (Jefferson), five are Democrats and three are Republicans.
Of the bottom ten - four are Whigs, three are Democrats, and three are Republicans.
Statistically the Republicans and the Democrats are equally likely to have their elected Presidential candidate turn out to be a "disaster" BUT the Democrats are 1.66 times as likely to have their elected Presidential candidate turn out to be "great".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States
Of the top ten - one has no party affiliation (Washington), one is a "Democrat-Republican (Jefferson), five are Democrats and three are Republicans.
Of the bottom ten - four are Whigs, three are Democrats, and three are Republicans.
Statistically the Republicans and the Democrats are equally likely to have their elected Presidential candidate turn out to be a "disaster" BUT the Democrats are 1.66 times as likely to have their elected Presidential candidate turn out to be "great".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States
Historical rankings of Presidents of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In political studies, historical rankings of Presidents of the United States are surveys conducted in order to construct rankings of the success of individuals who have served as President of the United States. Ranking systems are usually based on surveys of academic historians and political scientists or popular opinion. The rankings focus on the presidential achievements, leadership qualities, failures, and faults.[1][2][3]
(1)
(0)
SSG Pete Fleming
Thank you for that... one thing most people don't consider, you never fully feel the effects of a President until after they are out of office. The next gets the credit and/or the blame. Often they make choices that the effects are felt right away, Bush invades Iraq, Obama forced healthcare. Other times it takes awhile Truman's failure to let MacArthur win in Korea. Or Clinton's involvement in the Balkans (but not Rwanda)... just throwing out obvious examples... others might be Roosevelt's New Deal or Eisenhower getting involved in Vietnam... Each President has good points and weak points. But one must look at the entire picture... Is putting the nation almost 20 Trillion dollars in debt, and seeing 94 million American unemployed the sign of a great President, only history will tell.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google