First off I find the source suspect. Never mind the way the two seem to talk to each other is surreal. The wiki leaks docs I've read of Saudi isn't anything like this article depicts. Lastly Saudi doesn't have direct/indirect control of the Chechen jihadists. SaudiFuryThere are other source for this as well. The Saudi's have been supporting/controlling the chechen's since the 90s, and Russia is well aware of that. But to threaten Russia like this and expect no consequences is very foolish. Putin doesn't take terrorism lightly, he is known to retaliate, just read up on what he does to the terrorists, like the Moscow bombing ones.
muscleserge's forum posts
Can you source that, cause the words from Putin's mouth are quite different. The above statement would be correct about 15 years ago, today is a whole different story. http://politicom.moldova.org/news/russia-implements-its-most-radical-military-reform-in-200-years-201380-eng.html Still a fairly recent quote.[QUOTE="muscleserge"][QUOTE="chaplainDMK"]deeliman
Also consider the fact that Europe and its countries have a long history together, and any European knows not to fvk with Russia.Â
The EU isn't a military force some people make it out to be, many countries have 0 military experiance, Please tell me about all the recent military experience that the Russian army has. and Europe was a stomping ground for a conflict between the Americans and the SU for a long time and even the Americans knew/know now that Europe won't stand a chance in a Russian Invasion, That might have been true in the cold war, but not today. in fact NATO is still trying to encircle Russia, NATO hasn't really been afraid of Russia for quite some time now. if the EU could stand up to the Russians on their own, they wouldn't be kissing American ass for about 70 years now. Any examples of recent butkissing of the Europeans? The quote sound more like counter-intel and mis-information for which the Russians are very well known for. Think about it, why would any self-respecting world power let something like this slip into the mass media. Recent Russian military experience? How about Afghanistan, Chechen Wars, Kosovo, Georgia, etc. Even if you lose you still learn from the experience and improve, plus all the wars listed apart from Georgia were unconventional wars, with lots of foreign funding. Russia learned all too well from the experience, experience which the EU countries lack. How do you figure that NATO isn't afraid of Russia, all evidence points to the opposite. In fact Georgia suffered because of this. Are you seriously asking me of examples of the EU kissing American ass? Ok, how about the most recent one, the Bolivian President's trip back home, this is an example of EU countries not kissing ass, but bending over and taking one up with a smile, shows whos really the boss doesn't it. Or how about the whole UK foreign policy, it might as well say, listen to the master in big bold letters.
[QUOTE="muscleserge"][QUOTE="theone86"]Tell that to the new S400 systems being operated by Russian personnel, or that brand new radar system the Russians put in Syria for Iran. There are a few reports of Russians moving supplies into Syria, and I am not surprised if Russian troops are already there. If Syria falls that the Middle East will fall into complete chaos, and the Syrian war would be a starting point for attacking Iran. China probably won't do anything, but the Russians are already preparing. Last year the Americans urged Russia not to deliver the new AA systems because it would make Syria a no fly zone, make no mistake just these systems alone will cause lots of casualties and who know what else the Russians are doing over there. BTW, amateurs are the ones starting a war without grounds or UN approval, amateurs are arming the very same people they are fighting else where, amateurs are the trigger happy idiots, who have no regards for the consequences that follow. Good thing we have cruise missiles then. The S-400 shoots down cruise missiles, and thats the only way to minimize the loss of life on the NATO side, the S400 system is the only reason so far why there were no bombing campaigns over Syria. Now the plan is to use missiles, which cost hundreds of millions per unit. How is any of this making any sense I don't know, why is NATO so trigger happy these days, when will it all stop. I hope Russia flat out invades Syria, invited by Assad or not. This is the only scenario where there is a good chance for a possitive outcome. No NATO involvement, quell the terrorists, start negotiations, put Iran/Israel at ease. Hopefully the Russian public goes along with something like this. IMO, only hope.Seriously, dude, they're not going to kill shit, they're not going to do shit, they're a bunch of F*CKING AMATEURS!
Person0
Also, just gonna throw this in for everyone to chew on: [QUOTE="Defense Update"]Aging weapons, poor maintenance and 'rank-and-file officers who don't want to do anything' mean the Russian military was on the verge of a 'catastrophic crisis' and if forced into action would most probably have to rely on the use of strategic nuclear weapons, which seem to be the only ones still fully operational. Such a somber assessment came recently not from a junior coop-seeking reporter, but from the top itself, none other that Russian Chief of the General Staff and First Deputy Defense Minister Army-General Nikolai Makarov. The General warned, among others, that the Russian air force is not procuring sufficient numbers of new modern aircraft and has fewer serviceable aircraft, manned by insufficiently combat-trained pilots, which are incapable of conducting modern era combat operations.chaplainDMKCan you source that, cause the words from Putin's mouth are quite different. The above statement would be correct about 15 years ago, today is a whole different story. Also consider the fact that Europe and its countries have a long history together, and any European knows not to fvk with Russia. The EU isn't a military force some people make it out to be, many countries have 0 military experiance, and Europe was a stomping ground for a conflict between the Americans and the SU for a long time and even the Americans knew/know now that Europe won't stand a chance in a Russian Invasion, in fact NATO is still trying to encircle Russia, if the EU could stand up to the Russians on their own, they wouldn't be kissing American ass for about 70 years now.
Well Russia and China don't want Assad to lose, but they ain't gonna do anything about the U.S/Nato air striking Syria.[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="Sir_Graham"]
Iran isn't going to do anything and the idea Russia or China would is even more laughable. They will make a speech about the evil imperialists to win political points with their own populations and then where applicable enjoy the oil profits and weapons sales in private. People shouldn't make the mistake of thinking what they tell the public they want is what they want.Â
theone86
Seriously, dude, they're not going to kill shit, they're not going to do shit, they're a bunch of F*CKING AMATEURS!
Tell that to the new S400 systems being operated by Russian personnel, or that brand new radar system the Russians put in Syria for Iran. There are a few reports of Russians moving supplies into Syria, and I am not surprised if Russian troops are already there. If Syria falls that the Middle East will fall into complete chaos, and the Syrian war would be a starting point for attacking Iran. China probably won't do anything, but the Russians are already preparing. Last year the Americans urged Russia not to deliver the new AA systems because it would make Syria a no fly zone, make no mistake just these systems alone will cause lots of casualties and who know what else the Russians are doing over there. BTW, amateurs are the ones starting a war without grounds or UN approval, amateurs are arming the very same people they are fighting else where, amateurs are the trigger happy idiots, who have no regards for the consequences that follow.Sure some of the equipment is from the 70s but there is nothing wrong with it, remember the abrams are from the early 80s, the F-16s are from the 60s, the b-52s even before that, the m-16s are also from the 60s. There is nothing wrong with using proven equipment and replacing it with something marginally better isn't efficient or smart. Are you daft? All modern western armies are replacing those old things. Dou you think 5th generation fighters are only marginally better? The F-35 which will replace the F-16 in a lot of countries is a huge improvement, and will absolutely obliterate any 4th gen fighter. The EU doesn't use Abrahams, they use Challenger 2's and Leopard 2A6M's and AMX-56 Leclerc's, which are all better than the T-72's or T-90's ( which are only a small improvement over the T-72)[QUOTE="muscleserge"][QUOTE="chaplainDMK"][QUOTE="muscleserge"][QUOTE="deeliman"]deeliman
 What abou the PAK-FA, the T-90, the s300 and s400 systems, the ak 101/103s, also check out their field hospitals, best in the world, the KA-52s gunship, the sunburn missiles, Peter the great missile cruiser, the tu-160, the su-37, the mig-35, topol-M, the iskandhars, and so on. Russia is producing high tech military equipment that is only rivaled by the US. Also keep in mind the Russian rhetoric when it comes to mil. equipment, it is supposed to be reliable and as simple in design as possible. They prioritize reliability over everything. Is it wrong? no, its just a different approach.Only rivaled by the US?
- A400MÂ
- ASCODÂ IFV e
- Meteor
- ASRAAM and IRIS-TÂ
- Eurofighter TyphoonÂ
- Eurocopter TigerÂ
- EH101Â &Â NH90
- PzH 2000
- F-100 Class Frigates
- S-80 class submarineÂ
- ATF Dingo
- Fennek
- Patria AMV
- GTK Boxer
- Horizon class frigate and FREMM multipurpose frigat
- Rotterdam and Galicia class LPD,
- Type 212Â submarine
- 7 Provinceën class frigate
- Horizon Class Destroyers
Name any military hardware, and the EU has multiple state of the art weapons for it.
Â
Russian jets, missiles, and rifles constantly outperform their western counterparts during war games, when operated by Russian staff, and not some ill-trained 3rd world personnel, who don't even maintain their equipment properly. I remember a while back a Russian official had to go on TV to rant about this as well as CEOs of major defense firms. China is infringing on Russian patents all the time. They would buy a batch of say jets and then just copy them, badly, but still. Russia doesn't maintain their equipment very well either. They maintain only about half of their MBT's, the rest are in bunkers just rusting away. Same story for pretty much everything in the Russian arsenal. Nukes too for example. That 5 figure number people are always throwing around only exists on paper. The majority of their nuclear arsenal is just scrap on a shelf in some bunker.
Having other sources of energy is great, but don't forget this is still a globalized economy and Russia withdrawing energy from the EU would raise prices, and switching supplyers of such an asset isn't as easy as you think, even in wartime. Northern oil fields would be a bad idea since Russia basically controls the north. So the EU would heavily depend on Americans and Canadians. South America would Side with Russia, some OPEC countries too, since they are dependant of Russian exports and aid. Point is, having everything at home is a huuuuuuge advantage. I wasn't aware that Russia controled the north sea? :roll:Â
You have still failed to answer the question of what you think would happen to the Russian economy when a large portion of their income vanishes in thin air.
Edit:
Also a note on defense spending. You can't just add up individual country's spending, it doesn't take into account variables and inefficiencies of separate budgets and doctrines. Russia spends close to $100 billion of defend and will spend closer to $120 billion after 2014, also take into account that Russia equivalent equipment costs half as much, would bring Russia quite a good bit on par with the EU, and thats not even war mode Russia, where as many EU nations are NATO and have to have budgets like that to meet standards(Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa). But still there is a downward trend in the EU in relations to defense spending, where as the Russian budget increases every year. The EU spends about 267,66 billion dollars on defense, are you really suggesting that those small inefficiencies are enough to close that gap? And what do you think Russia will be able to spend on their military during wartime, aside from the fact that both russian and EU's GDP would decrease.  The US used about 50% of their GDP for the military during ww2, so I'll go by that. That would leave Russia with about 1,690 trillion dollars and the EU with about 8,283 trillion dollars. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.
Edit 2:
Russian civilian tech is lacking simply due to capitalism, and an economic concept of comparable advantage (look it up). I'm going to assume you mean comparative advantage. A capitalist economy shifts all the time especially with globalized trade, and because of this they are shifting resources towards more lucrative ventures such as energy and other "heavy" resources, while importing the civilian crap because its cheaper to do so. Its economics. It's not just easier to do. It is infact impossible for Russia to do the same, they just lack the experience and industrial base. But Putin is heavily shifting away from this and is developing the Russian civilian tech sector quite aggressively, especially now after the Snowden leaks, since trust in foreing tech fell and for national security reasons they are switching to domestic tech, even if its more expensive. It will stiil take decades to catch up to th elikes of the EU, US and Japan. So expect the Russian tech industry to get a very big leap n the coming years. Wishful thinking at best. Russia doesn't have the means to catch up to the EU and that won't change for a while.
On a side note, the recent "anti gay" law is a product of democracy, the Russian populace is largely conservative when it comes to "family" values", something like 70%, so their representative government had to pass the legislation, and Putin had to sign it. Thats democracy for you. They didn't "have to". People in a democracy (the one commen in the world now, not the ancient greek version) only get to choose people who will represent them and make the decisions for them, they don't get too choose which law passes and which doesn't.
[QUOTE="muscleserge"][QUOTE="deeliman"]chaplainDMKTimber is a very valuable resource war or not, plus having the resources at home is vastly better than having to depend on imports. Russia is world's #2 exporter of arms, so I don't think their defense industry is lacking much, in fact it is doing very well, you just don't see it in the west, after all western nations still hold Russia as an adversary, so no good things are ever said about it, in fact facts are skewed in the media in regard to Russia and its affairs all the time. (hence the stereotype) The brain drain was a 90s thing, infact Russia is investing heavily into the tech sector and R&D right now, they even built their own silicon valley. Even under a single leadership, your always going to face issues because those are separate countries, many don't really like each other. One other important fact is that the Russian populace is much more ready for war than the EU, they are generally fitter and due to conscription are much more war ready. Current day Russia still has a deep military tradition, where as the EU countries don't, at least not any more. It is much easier to find someone to sell energy to than to find a good, reliable supplier who won't charge you more due to desperation. Imagine war starts tomorrow, Russia cuts off the energy suppy, by the time the EU gets an new supplier, Russia will be half way done, and if they do it in the winter, even faster, cause the EU will divert some of its energy reserve for heating people's homes. Russian tech you ask? There is a good Russian TV show abou ttheir military kinda like the discovery channel did for the US, let me see if I can find it with subtitles, they show a lot of modern Russian equipment, high tech too. I am not blaming you for the opinion you hold, its just that no one in the west gets any of this and their main source of info is Hollywood or the biased media. But trust me, Russia isn't lacking in that department. You're still forgetting the fact that the Russian army is mostly armed with late 1970s equipment. And again, Europe has plenty of natural gas and oil reserves to last a long time, North Sea Oil fields ring any bells? Sure some of the equipment is from the 70s but there is nothing wrong with it, remember the abrams are from the early 80s, the F-16s are from the 60s, the b-52s even before that, the m-16s are also from the 60s. There is nothing wrong with using proven equipment and replacing it with something marginally better isn't efficient or smart. What abou the PAK-FA, the T-90, the s300 and s400 systems, the ak 101/103s, also check out their field hospitals, best in the world, the KA-52s gunship, the sunburn missiles, Peter the great missile cruiser, the tu-160, the su-37, the mig-35, topol-M, the iskandhars, and so on. Russia is producing high tech military equipment that is only rivaled by the US. Also keep in mind the Russian rhetoric when it comes to mil. equipment, it is supposed to be reliable and as simple in design as possible. They prioritize reliability over everything. Is it wrong? no, its just a different approach. Russian jets, missiles, and rifles constantly outperform their western counterparts during war games, when operated by Russian staff, and not some ill-trained 3rd world personnel, who don't even maintain their equipment properly. I remember a while back a Russian official had to go on TV to rant about this as well as CEOs of major defense firms. China is infringing on Russian patents all the time. They would buy a batch of say jets and then just copy them, badly, but still. Having other sources of energy is great, but don't forget this is still a globalized economy and Russia withdrawing energy from the EU would raise prices, and switching supplyers of such an asset isn't as easy as you think, even in wartime. Northern oil fields would be a bad idea since Russia basically controls the north. So the EU would heavily depend on Americans and Canadians. South America would Side with Russia, some OPEC countries too, since they are dependant of Russian exports and aid. Point is, having everything at home is a huuuuuuge advantage. Edit: Also a note on defense spending. You can't just add up individual country's spending, it doesn't take into account variables and inefficiencies of separate budgets and doctrines. Russia spends close to $100 billion of defend and will spend closer to $120 billion after 2014, also take into account that Russia equivalent equipment costs half as much, would bring Russia quite a good bit on par with the EU, and thats not even war mode Russia, where as many EU nations are NATO and have to have budgets like that to meet standards(Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa). But still there is a downward trend in the EU in relations to defense spending, where as the Russian budget increases every year. Edit 2: Russian civilian tech is lacking simply due to capitalism, and an economic concept of comparable advantage (look it up). A capitalist economy shifts all the time especially with globalized trade, and because of this they are shifting resources towards more lucrative ventures such as energy and other "heavy" resources, while importing the civilian crap because its cheaper to do so. Its economics. But Putin is heavily shifting away from this and is developing the Russian civilian tech sector quite aggressively, especially now after the Snowden leaks, since trust in foreing tech fell and for national security reasons they are switching to domestic tech, even if its more expensive. So expect the Russian tech industry to get a very big leap n the coming years. On a side note, the recent "anti gay" law is a product of democracy, the Russian populace is largely conservative when it comes to "family" values", something like 70%, so their representative government had to pass the legislation, and Putin had to sign it. Thats democracy for you.
Log in to comment