How would the us army have taken azovstal?

How would the us army have taken azovstal?

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Level everything above ground
    >Block all tunnel access
    >Either starve out or gas the defenders
    But they couldn't deal with the tunnels during Nam (albeit that one was more expansive, numerous and not a fixed structure with blueprints and whatnot), so who knows.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Anon comparing the modern US mil to Vietnam is pretty retarded kek

      https://i.imgur.com/7AQ1MY2.jpg

      How would the us army have taken azovstal?

      Bunker busters out the ass, level the ground, wait

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Probably would have not got into situation where they needed to take it in the first place.
    But in the case it happened due some fuckup in the planning, they would have probably deployed some bunker busters or just sieged them out. In extreme case maybe some overwhelming spec ops assault, but I doubt they would have went for it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Azovstal is a perfect target for a MOAB strike.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    weapons free my friend

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    We would have put Janet Reno in charge, and she'd burn the whole thing down!

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Surround and wait.
    Bunker buster when possible.
    Send UGV to have a look.
    If it gets shot, repeat from step one.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Siege. Thermal imaging,radar, and sigint to detect tunnel entrances, and then just seal them with concrete.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah. Reminder that in the first gulf war one the response to elaborate Iraqi trench systems full of the more well trained part of their army was to just bury them alive in it with what were basically armored bulldozers.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah except thats never been proven and was basically a fantasy story

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          https://www.tampabay.com/archive/1991/09/13/pentagon-confirms-iraqi-soldiers-were-buried-alive-by-bulldozers/

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >pentagon says

            Ive never seen a single shred of evidence of this assault, or any buried iraqis. The iraqi government only found 40ish bodies at the location and u.s burial detail reports dont match up

            Le epic armored bulldozer charge with arms sticking out of the ground is a cartoonish propaganda story

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah man Patrick Sloyan (notorious Pentagon asset) cooked it up and PFC Joe McQueen got a bronze star for going along with it, all while the US government covered it up for months because that's how you run a propaganda campaign

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                i dont see any evidence buddy

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Your only thing allegedly disproving the evidence (eyewitnesses who carried it out) is the Iraqis (notoriously trustworthy, effective, and credible - especially under Saddam) saying uhhh yeah we only found 44 bodies. Cope.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                prove it happened big boy. even one photograph

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >pentagon says

          Ive never seen a single shred of evidence of this assault, or any buried iraqis. The iraqi government only found 40ish bodies at the location and u.s burial detail reports dont match up

          Le epic armored bulldozer charge with arms sticking out of the ground is a cartoonish propaganda story

          i dont see any evidence buddy

          prove it happened big boy. even one photograph

          >Country admits to warcrimes that make it look bad
          >It's just propaganda!!!!!1111
          Are you retarded, only in your Adderall addled mind do you think the US benefitted from releasing this information.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yeah lol they straight up admitted we may or may not have executed an unknown amount of wounded enemies who couldn't surrender but oops

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    GBU-57

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous
  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    level whole site, capture surface then collapse every underground entrance except one and wait for azov surrender. You can do such things if you are not some third world military without thermals and competent NCOs

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I know some people might think chemical weapons are off the table, but if the US viewed Azov like the Russians did, which is to say as terrorists and not members of a professional military, then we would absolutely use gas if we could confirm civilians are not present.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >we would absolutely use gas if we could confirm civilians are not present.
      No, we wouldn't. The U.S. signed a treaty agreeing to end its use of chemical weapons. We're destroying all of our stockpiles that we know about. Not sure what's left but it isn't much.

      > Only the stockpiles in Kentucky and Colorado remained. Both ACWA facilities are scheduled to complete chemical weapons destruction by the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty commitment of Sept. 30, 2023. U.S. Public Law mandates stockpile destruction by Dec. 31, 2023.[17]
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_chemical_weapons_program

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The ideal weapon for clearing bunkers is flames (gas can be countered with masks). Pump the place full of gas fumes then light a match.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    With isis-american anti gachimuchi combat tactics

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >How would the us army have taken azovstal?

    B-1/B2-2/B-52 carpet bombing until it looks like the moon, then it is "operation send in the morons first".

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    detonate explosives at tunnel entrances to turn it into a catacombs.

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Get the civilians out. Bury the rest inside. News still throws a fit because they didnt kill them humanely enough or some shit.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >news still throws a fit

      yep

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >how
    successfully

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    They would flood it

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Collapsed the exits.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The same way they deal with any major strongpoint.

    Bomb it to shit, constant observation, kill anyone coming or going from it with airstrikes. You can have 1,000,000 men with 13 inch dicks and 10,000 confirmed kills each and it means nothing if they get smeared by a hellfire every time their thermal signature shows up on satellite imaging.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    b-2 bombers dropping bombs equivalent in weight to the azovstal steel structure that makes up the entire area

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Same way Russia did? Besiege it until they surrender.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Probably doing the same thing as the Russians did only that they wouldn't suffered as many casualties from their side. There was this prison break of Al-Qaeda and Taliban prisoners in the early stage of Afghan invasion, killing some CIA guy in the process and the Americans unleashed an overwhelming response against them by dropping multiple bunker busters on the prison, lobbing grenades onto them like that scene in Die Hard 2 and ultimately flooding them with cold water. I'd reckon they would've done similar things to Azovstal if the resistance is as overwhelming like the one i mentioned.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Air Assault into plant itself. That would have a zero dark thirty infiltration and they would have used bomb suicide drones the cops use to clear mines and booby traps. Then set up speakers and blasted music to get them out like Noriega.

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    With F-15s and nukes of course :^)

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Had the Americans stayed and fought it wouldn't have happened. People always point to 'revolutions' and shit like that as proof that a force can overcome a governments military but every single time that rebellion/freedom fighters/revolutionary army is backed up by a super power somewhere. From the War of Independence in America (France, Spain, Netherlands and Poland) to Vietnam (China, Russia) and so on. So chances are, yes, you would need F-15's to defeat the US military... but chances are a large % would side with the revolutionaries so they get their aircraft that way.

      Dumb thing to say and try and reference the Taliban. Had the Afghani army stood its fucking ground and wasn't a Russian tier paper army scamming the US and UK for gibs, then it would have stopped the fight back.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Had the Americans stayed and fought it wouldn't have happened. People always point to 'revolutions' and shit like that as proof that a force can overcome a governments military but every single time that rebellion/freedom fighters/revolutionary army is backed up by a super power somewhere. From the War of Independence in America (France, Spain, Netherlands and Poland) to Vietnam (China, Russia) and so on. So chances are, yes, you would need F-15's to defeat the US military... but chances are a large % would side with the revolutionaries so they get their aircraft that way.

      Dumb thing to say and try and reference the Taliban. Had the Afghani army stood its fucking ground and wasn't a Russian tier paper army scamming the US and UK for gibs, then it would have stopped the fight back.

      literally just gave up hope that the Afghani forces would hold their ground. US again shows it wasn't there to conquer or puppet in the first place. propaganda bots from the imaginary multipolar world once again fail to understand just how deep the US isolationist streak is.

      if it wasn't, Iraq and Afghanistan would be fucking US states

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    When the US found a suspected ISIS tunnel complex in Nangahar they used a MOAB to destroy it.

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >How would the us army have taken azovstal?
    They just bypass it and bullsdoze over the vents

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    US logistics means they can realistically bypass hard targets and only need to engage with strategically critical objectives

    their goal is to goad the enemy into committing to an advance to counter-encircle and destroy their forces
    while soviets focused on taking and holding ground, NATO strategy leans closer to grinding down the enemy weapons and denying maneuver until their capacity to wage war is reduced

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    With bunker busters that actually fucking work.

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Chicken winging marines would have cleared it with grenades and WP.
    Just like Fallujah.
    You are now aware that Fallujah was one of the greatest feats of modern warfare, and yet it was sold to the American public as a failure.

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Glowies acquire drawings for the plant
    >JDAM kitted bunker busters to all underground locations large enough to act as barracks
    Pre-PGM era cluster bombs to clear out defenders on the outside followed by ~16-32 plane sortie to just bomb the shit out of the place

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Open a McDonald's and a Levi's at every entrance and give all the defenders scholarships to come study in the U.S. for a year.

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    flood their neighborhoods with crack

  32. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >How would the us army have taken azovstal?
    Reality?

    >Walk up to front gate waving American flag
    >"Hi there, the United States has decided to claim Ukraine as a territory. Ok?"
    >[cheering and rejoicing noises]
    wa-la

  33. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Pretty similar, bomb the fuck out of the top of it till it was flat, locate all the entrances via drone, have a thermal drone 24/7 plinking at any thermal popup with hellfires that aren't hands up flag waving, and sit out and starve till the civies all leave/accept surrender.
    But they'd have taken Mariupol with less losses on the way anyway.

    If you mean if they didn't want to destroy any buildings?
    Night time pushes, thermals, actual logistics and facilities, more than just Alibaba drones scouting everything. Probably would have taken about 30-40 days of slow pushes to take all but the entrances.

    The only reason Azovstal was a slow push was mostly because the attackers were too pussiefied to actually attack due to months of their comrades being shot to death in urban warfare with little support, so were relying on drone visuals of which they barely had any, to make any sort of push.

    They would have also sent in a talking drone to ask for mediation. The US doesn't tend to kill POW's, so they would have been willing to surrender.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the US also respects evacuation corridors. meaning US forces would be actively trying to get civilians out of the facility.

      if Azovstal was occupied by the same group, there would have probably been a functional ceasefire and it would've ended with relatively mundane surrender negotiations. in a hostage situation, the dynamics are much different - bunker busters likely wouldn't be used, but the facility would probably be surrounded and swept from all directions while attempting to negotiate hostage release. how well those negotiations go depends on the demands being made.

      basically, there's no scenario where the US isn't trying to get people out without killing a bunch of them or leveling the facility unless the US thinks it's entirely full of intractable hostiles - in which case the whole structure very rapidly and violently ceases to exist under heavy bombardment from positions as safe from the Azovstal defenders as the Azovstal defenders are from a dude outside with a shovel.

      if it's important to keep the structure, the US is more likely to level and then rebuild it than try sweeping it room to room.

  34. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > 1st park a big ass fuckoff Cartier stike grup
    > 2nd bomb the shit out of the designated place of attack
    > 3rd bomb it again because why not
    >4rth deploy the muhreens
    >Th bomb it again just to ne sure
    >6th let the muhreens clear the area
    >7 victory

Your email address will not be published.