Why would they have to strip down a T-72 to retrofit T-90 parts, and what parts are you referring to.In my search for reliable information on the matter I often ran into mysterious references to the MBT-2002, which is supposedly a stripped down T-72 variant with retrofitted T-90 parts.
If a war breaks out between both countries either side will make it happen during the winter months when the ground and most rivers are frozen.Im sure the North Koreans would rely heavily on there winter as some form of natural defense. Waht tactics do you think there infantry would adopt? Would they stay with there "launch waves of people at ROK-US lines"?
Ah - good old Wiki, I would not put much stock into that rumor, there is a reason why they went to Iran for their reactive armor suite that is placed on the Chonmaho, most likely due to cost of Russian K5 packages and the reluctance of Russia just wanting to sell it to them, also they do manufacture there own 100mm and 115mm tank ammunition and I cannot see them wanting to gear up for 125mm due to the cost factor. Heavy tanks for North Korea hasn`t really been a top priority for them due to the terrian which will cause major choke points.Here's the rumors on the new tank that I found.
www. atimes.com/atimes/Korea/DG06Dg01.html
english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200206/200206170010.html
www. encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-136652432.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%27okpoong-Ho#Production_history
I left a space between the www. and the rest of the address. When c&p don't forget to get rid of the space, and to add http:// before the address.
So, is this a rela threat or just a call to join US-Japan TBMD and order more PAC-3s for the ROK?..upgrades in the PAC-3 Patriot missile defense system have improved protection for critical U.S. facilities in South Korea.
"However, there is a significant shortage of PAC-3 missiles currently available on the peninsula to counter the North Korean missile threat," ..North Korea maintains 70 percent of its ground forces within 90 miles of the Demilitarized Zone that has separated the peninsula on the northeastern coast of Asia since the Korean War ended in an armistice, not a peace settlement, in 1953. The DMZ is 30 miles (50 kilometers) north of metropolitan Seoul, South Korea's bustling capital area of more than 20 million people.
North Korea has 250 long-range artillery systems capable of reaching the capital, Sharp said.
"North Korea still has the capacity to inflict major destruction and significant military and civilian casualties in South Korea with little to no warning," Sharp wrote.
On the missile defense question, Sharp wrote, "North Korea continues to build missiles of increasing range, lethality and accuracy, bolstering its current stockpile of 800 missiles for its defense and external sales."
In a flurry of missile testing in mid-2006, North Korea tested an intercontinental ballistic missile in July that is said to have had the capability of reaching U.S. territory.
South Korea "does not currently possess a ballistic missile defense capability" that can join seamlessly with U.S. defensive missiles. Sharp wrote.
It is urgent that South Korea develop such a system, Sharp wrote and added: "South Korean military and civilian facilities are currently highly vulnerable to North Korean missile attacks."
http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=113787
That might be one factor, but it was my understanding that it was manly economics that caused the melt down of the iron curtain.North Korea will not start another war because it does not enjoy the support of China or Russia as it used to during the cold war. Besides, the North Korean leader is simply too fond of his dynasty, he is not going to spoil all that for the glory of his nation. This is how most communist dictators are. Recently the discovery channel showed one documentary of one famous FBI agent (who was the leader of one fake communist party in America and he was given awards by the Soviet leaders for his contribution to the communist movement), this agent had passed on to Washington how scared the Soviet leaders were of a war between then Soviet Union and the US. The US took advantage of this key information and won the cold war. Perhaps someone can find out and post the name of this FBI agent, I've written it down somewhere.
The Soviet economy was slowing down before Reagan was elected. The pressure wasn't so much from military spending (though that did consume a hell of a lot of resources, & certainly made things worse) as from the inefficiencies inherent in trying to run a modern(ish) economy by central planning. Note that other Soviet-bloc countries were having similar, or even more severe, economic problems at lower levels of military spending than the USSR.That might be one factor, but it was my understanding that it was manly economics that caused the melt down of the iron curtain.
President Reagan went on a military spending spree of a six hundred plus ships for the US Navy alone, the Russians just could not keep up with dollars be spent on the US Defense machine ,it put to much pressure on it own economic systems to compete.
Regards,
tom
IIRC that was due to high Central Asian birthrates, not population decline.No. Some time ago i read an article which stated the CIA were predicting the SU downfall because of demographic pressures, one of their long range forcasts they made in the early 70s. Unfortunately i didn't keep the article but it might be out there somewhere on the internet
Ah, usual western myths...IIRC that was due to high Central Asian birthrates, not population decline.
Haha! Good one! Only one problem - in collective eastern block mind (stupidly) democracy = capitalistm. Or, better to say, Western paradise = democracy + capitalism. So most peoples didnt opted for just democracy or capitalism - they wanted things exactly as they were in the West. But not in the real West - in the imaginary West, pictured partially by western propaganda, partially by they own wild dreams, partially by they own leaders lies.I disagree about the causes of collapse. People in Russia weren't protesting for the sake of capitalism. They were protesting for the sake of democracy. What they got instead was capitalism.