Oops! Russian Military In Nato Country

Except that the days when China was dependent on Russia for high tech weapons systems have largely passed. Apart from a few key technologies like military jet fighter engines and anti aircraft defense systems China has largely become self sufficient in military tech. Largely by reverse engineering everything they can buy or steal of everyone else (especially Russia). A decade at best there wont be any systems China needs Russia for.

By and large they have no choice but to refurb. They simply can't afford to produce next generation fighter jets, tanks and armored fighting vehicles etc in mass because they can't spread the R&D cost over large production runs. Unless India or China (increasingly less frequent customers BTW) agree to purchase a large number of units of weapon system X it doesn't get built. Even the US struggles with the cost of developing new systems but at least when they do there are usually queues of ready customers waiting to place orders. Russia doesn't have that and as a result its stuck in a viscous cycle.The less customers they have the less new systems they can put to market, which leads to less customers etc. etc. etc.

Its also the reason most of Russia's defense investment gets put into their nuclear arsenals i.e. new SSBs and upgrades to their land based missiles. This literally gives them the best bang for their buck. Everything else is slowly losing capability compared to the West, especially their surface navy.

And their demographic outlook is bad, probably worse than Western Europe which is nothing to right home about.

 

America carriers have been plying the Pacific since the 1930's.
What "threat" are they to China?

Do they "threaten" their seizure of the Taiwan Straits?
Do they "threaten" their man-made islands in the unfortunately named South China Seas?
Do they "threaten" Chinese bullying of the Vietnamese?

 

China and Russia - and India - have been working together on missile technology and in other areas for 2 decades. The majority of the toys in the US arsenal have been made obsolete - and that is in a conventional sense.

No Nation will be invading the homeland among any of these nations because of nukes "MAD" So offensive conventional weapons are pointless against each other in this respect.

The difference here is that every other major power in the world has figured this out - except the US - which is still pouring way too much money into antiquated technology.

When the wall fell Russia realized it could not match the US plane for plane - ship for ship. Russia has a total of one (1) aircraft carrier and we are not even sure if the one they have is seaworthy. What is Russia going to be using tanks for .. other than Lithuania

What they did is focus their efforts in niche technologies such as missiles and electronic warfare ... subs. Russian missiles are second to none - and folks continue to buy - including a NATO member of late .. and India. Syria obviously - Iran.

Saudi Arabia should perhaps check the S-400 system out - given the poor showing of the Patriot System
That was a bit unfair .. it is ridiculously difficult to hit a missile when it is going on a predictable. parabolic trajectory (and no .. the home made fireworks Hamas fires at Israel are not missiles - even so the dome misses quite a few of those)

A super sonic - and now hypersonic - cruise missile hugging the terrain - taking evasive maneuvers - stealthy and smart ? There is no reliable defense that anyone has in the present.

Much of the Russian spend goes into nukes simply because that is what keeps their homeland safe - they don't need much of anything else.

The war waged on the geopolitical chessboard is not military - its economic. Both Russia and China realize this (and the EU for that matter) - so they focus their efforts more on economic, military being secondary. The US is still heavily focused on military on the basis of a flawed assessment of the position on the board - thinking that Military is the strongest piece when it is Economic.

 

I know that China always feared the American 7th fleet since it's commerce and survival depended on the sea export of its goods. To protect themselves somewhat, they began their 'silk roads' a few years back. Lately though our fleet has been running around trying to assert its dominance throughout the Far East and China is reacting by building air craft carriers.

The difference here is that we're fighting to maintain our dominance, while China is fighting for its survival. They have a lot of mouths to feed. I think we should pull out of the Far East and leave them to their own resources - but we won't.

 

The so called queues for American equipment has nothing to do with being better. Washington knows they can't compete with Russia on quality and price, so they blackmail and bully nations through sanctions and economic pressure not to buy from Russia. If you read the news from the different countries and the pressure they're under, you would know that.

 

Sadly, many Americans are generous with their enemies.
America, they say, wants to dominate the world. China,
Russia and Iran don't seek dominance but fear containment
and bullying by America.
I would rather live in an American pond (Aust) than in a world
under the rule of the Chinese Communist party. I would be
treated no differently than their govt treats their own citizens.

 

... and in the U.S. too.

 

It goes without saying.

 

This is true. The U.S. has been feverishly trying to make us shiver and tremble at the word "Russia" or "Putin" or "Socialism". The U.S .is geographically isolated so it isn't too difficult for the CIA-clan to get their countrymen to dive for cover at the mention of those words but we have been Russia's neighbour since ..... uh ..... er .... forever. We know Russian/Soviet/Socialist/Communist good deeds along with the bad ones so we evaluate our neighbours on their actions, not on what Washington buffoons dream up in their heads in order to scare the crap out of their own people.

 

What do you reckon? Do you think the world should sue China for the deaths of
so many people and the destruction of their economies?

 

Ever read a book on the huge number of Westerners who wrote glowing reports on
Lenin's and Stalin's collectivization in the 1920's, 1930's? People like Walter Duranty,
Tauger, Carr, Furr, Davies, Losurdo, Bolton etc and today Putin. Millions upon millions
died, or were tortured or served brutal sentences in the Gulags.
And a similar thing happened with Mao. Even today many Western left wing intellectuals
still admire this mass murderer.

THE PROBLEM WAS THAT THE WEST DIDN'T FULLY UNDERSTAND HOW BAD
RUSSIA AND CHINA REALLY WERE (and still are to some extent.)

 

Keep telling yourself that if it helps you sleep at night. Russia can and does produce a competitive range of military transport helicopters, conventional submarines (Kilo derivatives) anti- aircraft systems and corvette to frigate sized warships. There are a few others but those a big ticket items

Plans for other new systems have fallen through. Oh the government issues lots of press releases and impressive drawings of proposed systems but nothing ever happens. It still hasn't managed to put a 5th generation fighter into high level production, nor a new generation main battle tank because it's electronics and aeronautical engineering industries ect simply haven't managed to stay competitive and it shipyards struggle with any ship larger than a frigate.

Partly this is due to sanctions, partly its due to a loss of expertise & capacity following the fall of the Soviet Union and partly as I noted previously due to economies of scale. And of course the fact that so much of the Russia defense budget is tied up in its nuclear deterrent.

And its not just the Americans Russia is competing with Europeans arms manufactures are competitive with the US in most areas except fighter aircraft.

Finally bullying really? People literally queue up to by the C130 Hercules. Hows the Russian equivalent doing? America competes on technical superiority, enhanced combat effectiveness plus post sale guaranteed support. Where it is competitive Russia sells its gear as being sturdier, more reliable and cheaper. A And yes I am aware the US puts pressure on nations not to buy Russian, to the extent it can Russia does the same.

In the end Russia's economy is simply to small to R&D, mass produce and constantly update every possible weapons system in the modern arsenal from A to Z. At the moment only the US and possibly China can do this. If Russia was integrated into the Western democracies & economies it could prosper on international arms markets by selling products it has expertise in (as mentioned above) and importing the rest. Thanks to Putin it's not.

So the invertible result is a continued decline in the effectiveness of its conventional forces which can only be partly mitigated by reducing their size or spend less on nukes. So until something gives the Russian military is stuck in a negative feedback loop. The smaller it gets the less it can buy and the more Russia has to sell offshore just to break even.

 

P.S. What's the most effective way of destroying an aircraft carrier?

A: have it serviced in a Russian naval yard.

 

Quote - "If Russia was integrated into the Western democracies & economies it could prosper on international arms markets by selling products it has expertise in (as mentioned above) and importing the rest. Thanks to Putin it's not."

I might like to add that if Russia was integrated then
1 - the world's arm trade would be a lot less because there would be less tension.
2 - Russia's economy would boom because it would be an open economy.

I went to a Russian industrial exhibit in the 1990's. The quality of the machinery
was poor - rough castings were a particular surprise. It felt like so Retro.

 

The exhibition would have been interesting. The closest I ever got to examining Russian industrial products was one time briefly getting to drive a Lada. Which didn't entice to me 'buy Russian' BTW. As for a smaller global arms industry ? Perhaps. You'd still have US/Chinese geopolitical rivalry heating things up.

 

You mean... when there is a regime change that does our bidding... than we will remove all the restrictions we put in place that restrain the country from prospering. Ergo... the type of government itself has no to very little influence if it prospers.


Do you realize that the democracy comes as a massive cost?
Not really relevant if you like Obama or Trump... but as for the example....
Obama ruled for 8 years. For 8 years he put in all kinds of legislation.
Trump looked at it, and he got rid of most if not all of it.
The next democratic leader will undo what Trump did.
Crap like that is costing trillions. You know how many people live in poverty in the US?

Trillions as in.. lets have a war in Iraq and Afghanistan. And than lets not. That's just 1 example! Trillions lost. You don't see China or Russia doing that. And I got my doubts if the level of inefficiency from there + corruption is more than what the US is tossing away by changing their policies like the wind blowing leaves around.

 

The Russia propaganda is aimed at the US citizen in many cases as well. Fear of an external threat to take away Liberty - the age old tactic to get the citizens to trade liberty for security .. over some threat. Stalin called his program "Security for the Motherland" .. Hitler "Fatherland Security" .

Bush - lacking the creative ability to come up with a new name - "Homeland Security" - whereupon it became our "Patriotic Duty" to give up essential liberty for security - aka The "Patriot Act".

Russia is not the threat it once was - during the cold war - when we almost nuked each other into oblivion. The Emperor has no clothes.
The war is now Economic - not Military as the "necessary illusion" must suggest in order for the people to buy into the agenda.

Folks are not likely to give up essential liberty over some Economic War - the "Fear Factor" is not high enough.

Folks in the EU do not buy into that illusion like in the US.

 

Compare the societies. Western nations are like people on a raft at sea, everyone paddling
in a different direction. Nations like Russia are like the Titanic - magnificent in their outward
political efficiency. But that raft isn't going to sink.
And I wonder if political efficiency leads to a loss of economic efficiency. Stalin and Mao
never had to worry about political conflict and overturning of laws - but their economies,
with their "five year plans" left people poor, queuing for staples and under-employed in
state industries.

 

See it as a Titanic, and the west are tossing the icebergs.
You really are not putting in the equation that the west is economically blocking Russia.

And life in the US might be better. But for loads, it doesn't seem to matter.
People raised up in the ghetto's of the US don't seem to prosper,... by default.
And it certainly not is because they like to be exceptionally poor.
We're talking about millions living on or under the poverty line.

 

Did you know in America that about 75% of poor people have air conditioning
in their cars? Air conditioning in the late 1940's cost about 18 months wage.
In the 1920's you couldn't get it at all. And in 1880 the rich traveled by horse
or steam train.
Today the poorest of Western poor live a live preferable to that of monarchs
of just two centuries earlier - as measured in health, entertainment, variety of
food, travel, education, mod cons, cleanliness, security etc..

Who tosses ice bergs at Communism? Well, take away people's land, and
their sovereignty, religion, economic freedoms, political rights and so on ....
and pretty soon, no matter how many you kill (Stalin about 20 million and
Mao two or three times that) the peasants will continue to toss ice bergs
at your collectivized state.

 

Here's a word for you: Kalashnikov.

 

P.S. What's the best way to acquire a WMD?
A: Have the CIA plant it there.

 

You mean STG44.....Sturmgewehr?

 

Rather weak rebuttal....LOL. And misleading.

 

In the 1990's when the USSR broke up, the Russian people were given shares in the different industries, but they couldn't eat shares, so the international bankers loaned money to certain individuals and they bought up the shares and Russia's wealth at a very low price. These oligarchs refused to pay taxes, gave the workers very low wages if anything since many went hungry, and sent the money to foreign banks.

When Vladimir Putin took over, he made an agreement with the oligarchs that they could keep the industries if they pay their taxes and do not get involved in politics. The ones who refused to pay taxes, ran out of Russia with their money, and were welcomed with open arms by London and Washington. They're the ones that started the anti Putin propaganda.

More recently with the poisonings, some of the tax evaders realized that maybe Britain might not be too safe a place for Russians, so their lawyers began arrangements for them to go back to Russia. Putin said he could care less if they came back, but he wants them to bring back the money they ran out with.

Vladimir Putin always found ways to supplement government costs so he wouldn't have to raise the flat tax rate of 13% which is the either the lowest in the world, or one of the lowest. One of the means recently was by clamping down on corruption, after realizing how much the government coffers was losing because of it.

He also likes to make the billion oligarchs support projects that would benefit the country rather than burden the tax payers - like building up the infrastructure of Socchi for the hotels before the Olympic Games, and turning it into a first class resort. Also establishing green houses to stop imports from other nations after the sanctions, so that Russians can have vegetables all year round.

I might not be exact in everything I stated, since I'm depending on my memory, which is not 100% accurate. But I want you to realize why Vladimir Putin is the best thing that ever happened to Russia - and so much so, that many Russians are relating him to their legendary hero Alexander Nevsky who fought off the Swedish and German invaders during Kievan Rus.