<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Russian Tactics</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.isegoria.net/2011/07/russian-tactics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2011/07/russian-tactics/</link>
	<description>From the ancient Greek for equality in freedom of speech; an eclectic mix of thoughts, large and small</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2026 14:48:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Buckethead</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2011/07/russian-tactics/comment-page-1/#comment-308944</link>
		<dc:creator>Buckethead</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 13:20:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=25444#comment-308944</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Borepatch, one of Isegoria&#039;s earlier excerpts says that the Soviets were masters at infiltration.  So which of our opponents were using Soviet doctrine?

My uncle was a Marine machine gunner who did exactly that against the Chinese.  I think the real distinction between the NoKos and the ChiComs is that the Chinese had more troops.  Their infiltration at the very start was significant &#8212; with strategic surprise &#8212; but less so afterwards.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Borepatch, one of Isegoria&#8217;s earlier excerpts says that the Soviets were masters at infiltration.  So which of our opponents were using Soviet doctrine?</p>
<p>My uncle was a Marine machine gunner who did exactly that against the Chinese.  I think the real distinction between the NoKos and the ChiComs is that the Chinese had more troops.  Their infiltration at the very start was significant &mdash; with strategic surprise &mdash; but less so afterwards.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Isegoria</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2011/07/russian-tactics/comment-page-1/#comment-308443</link>
		<dc:creator>Isegoria</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:08:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=25444#comment-308443</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Was it obvious when we were facing Red Chinese and when we were facing North Koreans?

Anyway, the second-hand stories I&#039;d heard involved firing machine-guns at hordes of Red Chinese until the guns overheated, then calling in &quot;danger close&quot; artillery and air support, while praying for the best.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Was it obvious when we were facing Red Chinese and when we were facing North Koreans?</p>
<p>Anyway, the second-hand stories I&#8217;d heard involved firing machine-guns at hordes of Red Chinese until the guns overheated, then calling in &#8220;danger close&#8221; artillery and air support, while praying for the best.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Borepatch</title>
		<link>https://www.isegoria.net/2011/07/russian-tactics/comment-page-1/#comment-307979</link>
		<dc:creator>Borepatch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2011 01:54:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.isegoria.net/?p=25444#comment-307979</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Actually, it was the North Koreans who used Soviet doctrine, and who suffered immense losses doing it.  The Chinese used infiltration tactics which caused much more trouble for the American Army.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, it was the North Koreans who used Soviet doctrine, and who suffered immense losses doing it.  The Chinese used infiltration tactics which caused much more trouble for the American Army.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
