| 24 AUG 2009 at 12:34am |
DA 1775Centurion
Posts : 761
Joined: 24 MAY 2009
Status : Online | ??????? ??????????? ???????? ???????? ?????. ?????????? ??????? ???? ????? ? ??? ??????????.
I do not speak or write Russian. I don't understand it. I believe the above means: Cold War Warsaw Pact soldiers. Please contribute to this discussion.
Does anyone have Russian (Czech/Pole/DDR German) language suggestions which may bring some Warsaw Pact first-hand to this discussion? I would like to ask former Pact warriors. Please make Russian language suggestions. This thread has yielded nuke roll-out, international roll-out, boot-leg main gun firing pins, arms rooms full of MG's/small arms and NBC rooms full of gear and NATO troopers queuing and rolling-out in less than 90 minutes or longer than 3 hours. I wonder if the Pact found M1 and Bradley easier or harder to target-identify (DU signature/heat signature) as compared to homogeneous steel. What was Pact alert/deployment like ? How did they intend to respond to their commanders in the field when faced with catastrohpic losses. Did they have a dependent evacuation program ? How would they deal with refugee road blocks.
In the FRG the potential refugee road block situation was addressed through demonstrations of tanks driving over and crushing privately owned vehicle types (and some real-time accidents). Land forces routinely maneuvered through designated small towns and countryside at will during Reforger and paid for damages to people/structures/flora/fauna. Has any wargame ever dealt with the refugee road block issue ?
There was some discussion of mines earlier. The Pentagon once wargamed Herc air-dropped mines and the CRT was NO EFFECT. They also concluded that ZSU 23/4 external target acquisition array would not tolerate off-road and through-the-forest advance.
Are there any Warsaw Pact Vets monitoring this discussion? Does anyone know any Pact vets that might contribute first-hand?
Olde Tyme SPEARHEAD Soup ! Two (2) Diced Trunion Bearings, One (1) Minced O-Ring water obstacle crossing seal. One (1) Chopped Loader's Hatch Gasket-- beat gasket with Bore Evacuator Spanner Wrench until tender...
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 7:46am |
Nicholas BellCenturion
Posts : 91
Joined: 17 MAY 2005
Location: US, Alaska
Status : Offline |
You dont set up defenses where you only have a 500 meter LOS. Where the hell did you come up with that figure? Now that I think about it that cant be right. Anyone who has been to Germany knows that in most places you can see for up to a few kilometers. Hell I cant think of many areas outside of obviously the cities where you could only see 500 meters.
Sorry I don't remember the source after all these years. I fully acknowledge there are plenty of locations with much greater LOS. I think the operative word is "average". All one has to do is look at some topo maps (and I have dozens of 1:50,000 maps of Germany) to see there are large areas of forests which affect that average. Then add in all the elevation changes which will also impact the LOS. But more to the point, not every MRL is going to be like some set-piece firing exercise at Graf' where the conditions are perfect for long range gunnery. During a real war your position usually isn't yours to decide unfortunately, especially given the limited area to work in and the need to protect as much German real estate as possible. So the odds are there would more more occasions where some hill, village or tree line is going to mess up your LOS. The perfect position won't work because it's too far forward, too far back, you can't tie-in to your units of the flanks etc.
Reminds me of the SPI boardgame Fire Fight created originally for the US Army bacl in the 70's, where the designers were forced to redo the maps because they didn't fit the Army's need to show off how the superior long-range gunnery and TOWs allowed us to win despite the numbers (no M1 Abrams either, M60A2 and A3's). The real world maps didn't allow the NATO forces in the game to attrite the WP forces enough to "prove" our ability to win. So the maps were redone without the interfering hills and woods.
I know I don't need to tell you, but I've had to explain to a lot of wargamers the the "Gaps" so frequently mentioned (Fulda, Hof, Meinigen, etc) where not wide open tree-less plains between mountains as so often depicted in wargamers. Driving in the Fulda Gap, you would be hard pressed to even know you were in it.
Anyway, Germany is no desert and IMO the WP forces would have been able to close with the NATO forces too quickly to allow for the lop-sided scores in the Arab-Isreali conflicts. And we have not even mentioned all the smoke barrages the Soviets would be throwing to even further reduce the LOS. Not much equipment had thermal sights back then, nor was the effectiveness and reliability so great that one could simple flip a switch and expect it to work.
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 9:15am |
ActionJackColonel
Posts : 7881
Joined: 19 SEP 2005
Status : Offline | I think for any scenario one has to (IMO) assume that launching a major surprise offensive against NATO forces would be near impossible. I just can't see how they could do it. They could probably disguise their intentions for a while, and thus delay our own preparations, but we'd know it was coming.
I want to agree with this assessment, but then I think of Egypt's crossing of the Suez which suggests anything that seemed impossible in hindsight is indeed possible. Even the attack on Pearl Harbor more than a year after Britain's attack at Taranto probably seemed impossible until it happened.
"Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 10:09am |
bboyer66Colonel
Posts : 4709
Joined: 17 APR 2006
Location: US, Pittsburgh PA
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Nicholas Bell
You dont set up defenses where you only have a 500 meter LOS. Where the hell did you come up with that figure? Now that I think about it that cant be right. Anyone who has been to Germany knows that in most places you can see for up to a few kilometers. Hell I cant think of many areas outside of obviously the cities where you could only see 500 meters.
Sorry I don't remember the source after all these years. I fully acknowledge there are plenty of locations with much greater LOS. I think the operative word is "average". All one has to do is look at some topo maps (and I have dozens of 1:50,000 maps of Germany) to see there are large areas of forests which affect that average. Then add in all the elevation changes which will also impact the LOS. But more to the point, not every MRL is going to be like some set-piece firing exercise at Graf' where the conditions are perfect for long range gunnery. During a real war your position usually isn't yours to decide unfortunately, especially given the limited area to work in and the need to protect as much German real estate as possible. So the odds are there would more more occasions where some hill, village or tree line is going to mess up your LOS. The perfect position won't work because it's too far forward, too far back, you can't tie-in to your units of the flanks etc.
Reminds me of the SPI boardgame Fire Fight created originally for the US Army bacl in the 70's, where the designers were forced to redo the maps because they didn't fit the Army's need to show off how the superior long-range gunnery and TOWs allowed us to win despite the numbers (no M1 Abrams either, M60A2 and A3's). The real world maps didn't allow the NATO forces in the game to attrite the WP forces enough to "prove" our ability to win. So the maps were redone without the interfering hills and woods.
I know I don't need to tell you, but I've had to explain to a lot of wargamers the the "Gaps" so frequently mentioned (Fulda, Hof, Meinigen, etc) where not wide open tree-less plains between mountains as so often depicted in wargamers. Driving in the Fulda Gap, you would be hard pressed to even know you were in it.
Anyway, Germany is no desert and IMO the WP forces would have been able to close with the NATO forces too quickly to allow for the lop-sided scores in the Arab-Isreali conflicts. And we have not even mentioned all the smoke barrages the Soviets would be throwing to even further reduce the LOS. Not much equipment had thermal sights back then, nor was the effectiveness and reliability so great that one could simple flip a switch and expect it to work.
I agree for the most part but 500 meters is a pretty darn small area. Here is a map of my units initial defensive position.
[link=http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=50.161285,10.332642&spn=0.107772,0.351563&t=k&z=12]http://maps.google.com/....351563&t=k&z=12[/link]
As you can see in almost every area except for the dense forest you are going to be able to get off 1000 meter plus shots. Obviously the more east you go towards the Czech border and the further south you go the more hills and forests you encounter limiting your LOS. The good thing about the more numerous forests is that it would funnel a Warsaw Pact attack into some nice kill zones. If the Warsaw Pact wanted to try and go through the forests, all the better, for that would take a quite a bit of time and allow NATO reinforcements to appear. Germany is weird in that the forests kind of just pop up in the middle of an area of farmland. They are also very dense and im not sure you would be able to move mechanized vehicles through them. I remember once going on a Volkesmarch in the country thinking to myself that the land looked just like the land you would see in the M1 gunnery trainer.
These are few photos taken near our defensive area.
[image]http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/6137892.jpg[/image]
[image]http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/6648103.jpg[/image][image]http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/17231602.jpg[/image]
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 2:23pm |
booboo130Centurion
Posts : 5
Joined: 18 AUG 2009
Status : Offline | First time poster on this site. In the above pictures, if it was taken from the point of view of the inside of a modern tank, about how far away could it hit a target based on landmarks in the picture?
Someone above asked a question about refugee rules in wargames. In Victory Games NATO, there are refugee rules that allow NATO units to use a slower travel rate for the first few turns. Also, in The Next War by SPI there are refugee rules that allow only tactical movement for the first turn or so.
Also, in regards to the talk about nuclear warfare, in the book The Soviet War Machine, the author feels the Russians would never initiate a nuclear war because it is the opposite of what they are trying to due, take over Western Europe.
Dan
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 2:26pm |
booboo130Centurion
Posts : 5
Joined: 18 AUG 2009
Status : Offline | Also, in regards to modern era computer games, I have North German Plains '85 by HPS. You can get a free download for that game that has the entire central front from the southern parts of Denmark to the Austrian border. The scale is regiments and battalions but you can break the NATO units down into companies if you want. The game allows you to change supply states, morale, etc. Its turn based and big but playable.
Dan
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 9:01pm |
bboyer66Colonel
Posts : 4709
Joined: 17 APR 2006
Location: US, Pittsburgh PA
Status : Offline | First pic: Could hit everywhere
2nd pic left: Treeline beyond the town
2nd pic right: Steeple center top of hill
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 9:08pm |
ActionJackColonel
Posts : 7881
Joined: 19 SEP 2005
Status : Offline | Also, in regards to modern era computer games, I have North German Plains '85 by HPS. You can get a free download for that game that has the entire central front from the southern parts of Denmark to the Austrian border.
Where do you get the free download?
"Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else." Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 9:08pm |
SchwerpunktCommander
Posts : 1295
Joined: 29 JUN 2009
Status : Online | Whoa, whoa. That is some SERIOUS cut & paste.
"Forty years after a battle it is easy for a non-combatant to reason about how it ought to have been fought. It is another thing personally and under fire to direct the fighting while involved in the obscuring smoke of it."
-Herman Melville
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 10:20pm |
SwatterCommander
Posts : 1280
Joined: 31 AUG 2003
Location: US, MO
Status : Offline | I got back to the university library today and have found just tons of books on the subject. I was just knocked over to see so much material. Of course much of the material dealt with the nuclear arms race and Soviet intentions, but there are several books that deal directly with what we are talking about. Lets see over the coming weeks what I can find out.
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 10:35pm |
jnierCenturion
Posts : 419
Joined: 29 JUN 2004
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By booboo130
Also, in regards to the talk about nuclear warfare, in the book The Soviet War Machine, the author feels the Russians would never initiate a nuclear war because it is the opposite of what they are trying to due, take over Western Europe.
Dan
Would be interested to hear perspectictives on the political consequences of a first strike (lets assume a conventional war for the sake of argument) by either side. I would imagine that the we never had WW3 because it never made political sense for either side.
If the Soviets invaded the West (or the West invaded the Warsaw Pact) as a first strike, the losses would have been devastating for the invader, and any political will to invade would have quickly evaporated, and whoever started it would have been thown out before too long. Right?
|
| 24 AUG 2009 at 11:45pm |
DA 1775Centurion
Posts : 761
Joined: 24 MAY 2009
Status : Online | Someone above asked a question about refugee rules in wargames. In Victory Games NATO, there are refugee rules that allow NATO units to use a slower travel rate for the first few turns. Also, in The Next War by SPI there are refugee rules that allow only tactical movement for the first turn or so.
Thank you. What a mess-- I don't even want to think about such a situation. Praise God it never happened. Would have been worse than reports of 'the junkyard'.
I do not believe HPS NGP '85 is available as a freebie. It appears to be USD fiat $49 something. I did get distracted by GUNS GIRLS LAWYERS and SPIES while surfing for such a download:
[link=http://www.battle-fleet.com/pw/his/T80%20Main%20Battle%20Tank.htm]http://www.battle-fleet.com/pw/his/T80%20Main%20Battle%20Tank.htm[/link]
Those are lovely pictires of RAD-land beneath a golden sun. Too often those skies are iron gray. Deutschland, Deutschland wunderschon. Easy to see how come they fight for that land. I believe the 'Gap' forests were carefully maintained with an eye toward funneling the Pact into kill zones-- though I have no first-hand. In some areas of Germany the forests are thin enough to accomodate combined arms and 'Gunship Meadows'. The Germans often maintain their forests like parks. There is an excellent video link posted elsewhere in forum of a Warthog dry-fire gun run. NATO allies were capable of such passes even in old F-100's, sucking the air out of open turret hatches in passing. Thrilling pilot skill and nerve. The Pact certainly had such pilots too. Someone pointed out the use of Pact smoke. That Willie Pete would have had EVERYONE buttoned and in gas masks and degraded NATO gunnery. WP is a proven WWII Tiger-buster. M-60A-1 Passive/Rise brought thermal M32 periscope to the table
errata:
M36E1 passive periscope for night vision
[link=http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product.php?prodID=475&printmode=1&PHPSESSID=cfe5d76b42647a7f3df70f64a7b792ce]http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product.php?prodID=475&printmode=1&PHPSESSID=cfe5d76b42647a7f3df70f64a7b792ce[/link]
and I don't think the Pact had any widespread ability to shoot through smoke accurately, but I have no first-hand. I have always wondered how come NATO did not upload MBT Bee Hive as in 'Nam-- that would have been the perfect answer to Pact infantry. The whole Iron Curtain situation was very carefully orchestrated.
"Also, in regards to the talk about nuclear warfare, in the book The Soviet War Machine, the author feels the Russians would never initiate a nuclear war because it is the opposite of what they are trying to due, take over Western Europe. "
I think the Russian is correct. War is about population management and nukes would leave dominant elites nothing to manage. Chernyobl was probably the medicine the Pact Old Guard needed. Poor Pripyat and Ukraine-- too many RADS, but I don't have any first-hand.
Olde Tyme SPEARHEAD Soup ! Two (2) Diced Trunion Bearings, One (1) Minced O-Ring water obstacle crossing seal. One (1) Chopped Loader's Hatch Gasket-- beat gasket with Bore Evacuator Spanner Wrench until tender...
|
| 25 AUG 2009 at 4:04am |
ComradePColonel
Posts : 6889
Joined: 1 JUL 2006
Location: NL
Status : Offline | The defensive "bonus" provided by German forests should not be overrated. They're forests, composed of certain types of trees. Depending on the kind of tree, the forest is more - or less likely to become an inferno if set on fire.
German (and Dutch) forests tended to be managed like parks so they would have fire ditches and such between concentrations of trees, but the Warsaw Pact had a LOT of guns, so they could still have set the forest on fire in a dry season.
In World War II, the Soviets and Germans in northern Finland often didn't do more than set the forest the other side was in on fire, as it was very difficult to actually find the enemy. Artillery concentrations were limited, but phosphoric rounds could still be employed for good effect. Also in World War II, the US used phosphoric rounds for a variety of tasks and they were/are considered to be effective against soft targets.
I'm guessing that in case of war the UN CCW convention, which the US and Soviet Union ratified (to an extent, as the convention was not the same then as it is now), would be thrown out of the window and that neither side would stop using damaging conventional weapons like white phosphor in urban areas if it served an important purpose.
Forest fires in dry climates can be almost impossible to control, recent examples: California, Portugal, Spain and now Greece. Keep in mind that in all those cases, fire fighting equipment was available. In case of a war, nobody would basically be able to fight the fires. The heat generated by incendiary rounds would be enough to burn most medium sized forests to the ground in a very short while.
The Soviet/Russian military has been fighting "the poor mans war" for a while now, developing complicated and effective munitions, but poor/mediocre quality equipment and/or weapon systems. In case of a war, I would not want to be in a German forest near the West-East German border in late spring/summer.
|
| 25 AUG 2009 at 6:19am |
booboo130Centurion
Posts : 5
Joined: 18 AUG 2009
Status : Offline | You have to buy the game North German Plain '85 for $50.00. Then there is a download available that combines NGP'85 with the game Fulda Gap'85. This basically covers battles from southern Denmark through the Meningen Gap. Also, it comes with a scenario for the battle for Berlin. That is an interesting one. Here is the link to the game and at the bottom of the page is the expansion pack.
[link=http://www.hpssims.com/Pages/products/ModBat/NGP85/ngp85.html]http://www.hpssims.com/Pages/products/ModBat/NGP85/ngp85.html[/link]
I think the game is pretty good although the AI is not great. However, you can adjust the AI to make it tougher or easier if you like.
Dan
|
| 25 AUG 2009 at 12:54pm |
bayonetbrantColonel
Posts : 7052
Joined: 18 MAR 2007
Status : Offline | Current USAREUR Stationing
[link=http://www.hqusareur.army.mil/images/maps/USAREUR-Stationing_2008_06_24.pdf]http://www.hqusareur.army.mil/images/maps/USAREUR-Stationing_2008_06_24.pdf[/link]
Check out GrogNews for wargaming / mil news.
http://grognews.blogspot.com
|
| 25 AUG 2009 at 3:25pm |
Warspite44Centurion
Posts : 35
Joined: 5 JUL 2009
Status : Offline | Im realy begining to wonder about the refugees and the urban sprawl. I realy wonder if NATO frontline units can be reinforced and rearmed.
Im also wondering about WP Vs Greece/Turkey would Russians realy be able to fight not only a war on Germman soil but also the Cacuases and Balkens?? With the Soviets history in Afghanistan it realy makes me wonder if they can defeat people who are fighting for there survival. With the Red armies repuatation known around the world it just seems that they realy have little chance of total victory.
Its also been talked about the WP nations who would fight but for how long?? Once the Russians have moved out of Budapest, Vienna, Prague and Warsaw and are trying to subdue Bonn, Athens, hannover, Dresden and Kiel wont that be the time for revolution and an oppertunity for innsurection??
|
| 26 AUG 2009 at 1:51pm |
GDS StarfuryGeneral
Posts : 16394
Joined: 26 MAY 2001
Location: 0, Starbase 10
Status : Offline | Ive been re-reading Hacketts 2nd WW3 book and its a fair bit better then when I first read it. he hits on a lot of the things brought up here in so far as nukes, chemical weapons, refugees ect are concerned.
|
| 26 AUG 2009 at 3:49pm |
SchwerpunktCommander
Posts : 1295
Joined: 29 JUN 2009
Status : Online | Originally Posted By DA 1775
Thank you. What a mess-- I don't even want to think about such a situation. Praise God it never happened. Would have been worse than reports of 'the junkyard'.
Poor Pripyat and Ukraine-- too many RADS, but I don't have any first-hand.
wtf ???
"Forty years after a battle it is easy for a non-combatant to reason about how it ought to have been fought. It is another thing personally and under fire to direct the fighting while involved in the obscuring smoke of it."
-Herman Melville
|
| 26 AUG 2009 at 5:05pm |
DA 1775Centurion
Posts : 761
Joined: 24 MAY 2009
Status : Online | This discussion has first-hand of awesome M1 fire power [i]and[/i] I consider Bradley Guns picking-off Pact ground pounders trying to clear avenues of advance between 'Gap' forest obstacles... Given that situation the elite Pact Old Guard leadership may have been willing to Willie Pete and Tac Nuke the FEBA, send their shock troops through and write them off as dead within 72 hours-- too many RADS. As I evaluate this discussions first-hand and arm chair it appears Pact armor would have suffered catastrophic losses in a conventional all-up set piece confrontation and would NOT have broken through. In a worse case scenario Pact Old guard may have felt like catastrophic losses and a breakthrough would have merit. I'm suggesting that Chernyobl may have been an abject lesson geared toward Pact extremists and no elite Russian 'Rodina' nationalist Hawk or Dove would lament the eradication of Ukrainian separatists in the coming age of USSR disintegration. I'm theorizing that there may be more to Pripyat than meets the eye. I believe we need to look east of the Iron Curtain and deep within the USSR in order to understand how extremist Pact Old guard were defanged. I base this partly upon US Ranger Black Ops behind the Iron Curtain. I served with a Ranger who Helo inserted with his team behind the Iron Curtain. I believe those kinds of activities HAD to be carefully coordinated between NATO and Pact elites in order to avoid fire fights. Such insertions would serve as powerful information gathering tools for both sides and enhance the perception of preparedness. I've seen front line Pact and NATO operate along the Iron Curtain, Mauer Strasse, and check Point Charlie. Those people were willing to pop caps, bayonet, and give chase. I find routine Helo insertions crossing the Iron Curtain to be 'beyond the pale'-- it is evidence of high level coordination and conspiracy. Who here would step back in time, saddle-up in Blackhawk and cross into Pact Territory ? Any takers ? Explain how you would conduct this mission and survive ? Let's keep it simple-- You only need to Reece 25 Klicks into Pact territory BUT you must get your Rangers on the ground by rope or touch-down, they must ground pound, and you must get them out in one piece. No repetitive miracle act-of-God scenarios, please.
Olde Tyme SPEARHEAD Soup ! Two (2) Diced Trunion Bearings, One (1) Minced O-Ring water obstacle crossing seal. One (1) Chopped Loader's Hatch Gasket-- beat gasket with Bore Evacuator Spanner Wrench until tender...
|
| 26 AUG 2009 at 5:09pm |
SchwerpunktCommander
Posts : 1295
Joined: 29 JUN 2009
Status : Online | Originally Posted By DA 1775
Let's keep it simple-- You only need to Reece 25 Klicks into Pact territory BUT you must get your Rangers on the ground by rope or touch-down, they must ground pound, and you must get them out in one piece.
[image]http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/army-ranger-5.jpg[/image]
Originally Posted By DA 1775
No repetitive miracle act-of-God scenarios, please.
wtf ???
"Forty years after a battle it is easy for a non-combatant to reason about how it ought to have been fought. It is another thing personally and under fire to direct the fighting while involved in the obscuring smoke of it."
-Herman Melville
|
| 26 AUG 2009 at 10:37pm |
bboyer66Colonel
Posts : 4709
Joined: 17 APR 2006
Location: US, Pittsburgh PA
Status : Offline | I second the WTF?
|
| 27 AUG 2009 at 2:50am |
ComradePColonel
Posts : 6889
Joined: 1 JUL 2006
Location: NL
Status : Offline | I'm guessing he means that, in the situation for Ranger insertion you would suggest, there should not be miracle upon miracle in favour of the Rangers. Things won't always go right, so I'm guessing he's asking us to make both an insertion/extraction plan and a contingency plan.
My question for the moment is: why would we want to insert Rangers by air? In the 1980's, the Iron Curtain had some rather obvious flaws that you could basically walk through if needed.
|
| 27 AUG 2009 at 3:05am |
KaalCenturion
Posts : 5
Joined: 20 AUG 2009
Status : Online | About the use of tactical nukes, I remember that several years after the reunification of Germany, Time magazine had an article about all the WP documentation that the German found in the East German army bases.
No smoking guns there, but Time reported that allmost all training scenarios for large scale exercises involved a brutal, full-on assault on the West with [b]initial use of tactical nukes and chemical weapons[/b]. The article was not based on hearsay but on actual documents. It had reproductions of strategic maps with the typical Russian graphical look.
|
| 27 AUG 2009 at 1:27pm |
DA 1775Centurion
Posts : 761
Joined: 24 MAY 2009
Status : Online | Good point-- every fixed defensive position has weaknesses.
Tri-Border first-hand: It was common to patrol the Iron Curtain on foot in No Man's Land, visually identify Pact patrols engaged in the same activity, and leave presents for each other such as rations, cigarettes, etc.
Czech first-hand: US Army Rangers went in-country by Helo. How and why ? Unknown. Some Rangers thought that made them something special as it was an impossible feat. 90% of warriors never direct aim-fire at human target OpFor and many of that number never fire at all. What about the 10% on the Iron Curtain that would have delivered aim-fire ?
SPMBT off-the-shelf scenarios could wargame such Reece without too much modification, but I have never understood how come Ranger assets would be put at such pointless risk.
It would be informative to hear from an era Pact warrior who hauled around Tac Nukes. Perhaps this discussion will be blessed with some first-hand. There has been Nato nuke first-hand here.
I have never seen or heard of cross-Iron Curtain underground tunnels beyond the Berlin area, but there had to be some. Cross US-Mexican border tunnels are evidence of such initiative. Such tunnels might still have Speznaz weapons caches. One may still find Nazi underground caches and the Pact had many more years of preparation time and such caches could serve as elite forces insurance and retirement funds. There has been some talk about Speznaz. Would they have inserted and run amok like the WW II Brits at Arnhem Bridge or did they have weapons caches in the west ?
Olde Tyme SPEARHEAD Soup ! Two (2) Diced Trunion Bearings, One (1) Minced O-Ring water obstacle crossing seal. One (1) Chopped Loader's Hatch Gasket-- beat gasket with Bore Evacuator Spanner Wrench until tender...
|
