>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.
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 frickup 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.
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.
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
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
2 years ago
Anonymous
i dont see any evidence buddy
2 years 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.
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 moronic, only in your Adderall addled mind do you think the US benefitted from releasing this information.
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
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.
>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
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.
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.
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.
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 fricking ground and wasn't a Russian tier paper army scamming the US and UK for gibs, then it would have stopped the fight back.
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 fricking 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 fricking US states
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
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.
>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
>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
Pretty similar, bomb the frick 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.
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.
> 1st park a big ass frickoff 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
>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.
Anon comparing the modern US mil to Vietnam is pretty moronic kek
Bunker busters out the ass, level the ground, wait
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 frickup 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.
Azovstal is a perfect target for a MOAB strike.
weapons free my friend
We would have put Janet Reno in charge, and she'd burn the whole thing down!
Surround and wait.
Bunker buster when possible.
Send UGV to have a look.
If it gets shot, repeat from step one.
Siege. Thermal imaging,radar, and sigint to detect tunnel entrances, and then just seal them with concrete.
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.
Yeah except thats never been proven and was basically a fantasy story
https://www.tampabay.com/archive/1991/09/13/pentagon-confirms-iraqi-soldiers-were-buried-alive-by-bulldozers/
>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
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
i dont see any evidence buddy
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.
prove it happened big boy. even one photograph
>Country admits to warcrimes that make it look bad
>It's just propaganda!!!!!1111
Are you moronic, only in your Adderall addled mind do you think the US benefitted from releasing this information.
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
GBU-57
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
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.
>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
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.
With isis-american anti gachimuchi combat tactics
>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 Black folk first".
detonate explosives at tunnel entrances to turn it into a catacombs.
Get the civilians out. Bury the rest inside. News still throws a fit because they didnt kill them humanely enough or some shit.
>news still throws a fit
yep
>how
successfully
They would flood it
Collapsed the exits.
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.
b-2 bombers dropping bombs equivalent in weight to the azovstal steel structure that makes up the entire area
Same way Russia did? Besiege it until they surrender.
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.
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.
With F-15s and nukes of course :^)
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 fricking 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 fricking US states
When the US found a suspected ISIS tunnel complex in Nangahar they used a MOAB to destroy it.
>How would the us army have taken azovstal?
They just bypass it and bullsdoze over the vents
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
With bunker busters that actually fricking work.
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.
>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
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.
flood their neighborhoods with crack
>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
Pretty similar, bomb the frick 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.
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.
> 1st park a big ass frickoff 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