Resurgence of the Soviet Union?

[roberto]

It has everything to do with the weapons industry. The reason for the price hikes is due to the inefficiency of the production facilities, the lack of skilled personell, and the need for immediate modernization of said facilities to even be able to complete the order. Look at Sevmash and the Gorshkov/Vikramaditiya disaster. If it was just regular inflation, then why was head of Sevmash sacked shortly following?

Sevmash head was sacked because he was born and brought up in Soviet Union. He has very little experiance of pricing long term contracts under market conditions. And this happens more often than not in State firms as there executives have little exposure unlike private sector where people are hired from just every where. It seem u have never run any business.

No. But radicalized anti-government militias with massive popular support are certainly a measure of (in)stability.

where is anti government militia?. You mean in South caucses like Chechnya/dagestan etc. It is less than 2 million and is concentrated in one Place. It is not like Islamization of EU where main cities are affected by immigrants. and since EU wants energy independence from Russia they will be importing more gas from Muslim countries and when you import gas from muslim countries the people follow it.
Here is real source of long term instability. Japan is not there because it has domestic debt.

The World's Biggest Debtor Nations - Slideshows - CNBC.com
The World's Biggest Debtor Nations

And? What's your point? How many new transport choppers did the MChS receive in the last 5 years? How many new transport choppers did the armed forces receive in the last 5 years? How many of the existing choppers are operational? How many of the pilots get enough training to be effective? Finally, quit overfocusing one single aspect of logistics. Logistics in regards to global force projection means being able to sustain deployments. How many bases do we have in other countries? How many port facilities do we have in other seas and oceans?

How many heavy lift chopers and transport medium size countries emergency ministries received. Certain technologies and training that Russia developed under Soviet Union can never be matched by Medium sized countries even in next 50 years. Russia dont need to buy the same stuff every year.

Chinese firemen, quake relief workers leave for int'l drill in Russia_English_Xinhua
Chinese firemen, quake relief workers leave for int'l drill in Russia

I'm Iskander strikes on Georgian troops don't qualify as PGMs either by your perverse logic. Seriously. First you argue that no PGMs were used. I prove you wrong. Then you argue that the KAB-500 is not a PGM because of high scatter. I prove you wrong. Now you argue that it's not a PGM because it was used against fixed targets?

First show me Iskander strike. It was tockas and they were being used in 1990s.

Answer the question or admit ignorance of our future force structure. I'm waiting. And fyi the reforms aren't complete yet, but they are already in full swing.

Make no mistake it is not the structure of medium sized countries.

 

[roberto]

We can't deploy a million men. We can't even deploy 100 000 for any significant period of time, without running into problems. The Georgian war saw deployment of ~4 divisions and multiple independent units (maybe 50000 in all) and we already saw major problems emerging in terms of air and ground coordination, tactical ISR assets, and high breakdown rates. Mind you the units deployed were some of the better ones.

How many interior ministry troops currently in south Caucses?.

 

[roberto]

Russia had great GDP growth based on two factors: one is that it fell dramatically during the 90s and it wasn't too difficult to see impressive figures with the right policies and second is that Russia profited enormously from the oil bubble in the mid-2000s. Russian weapons industries are highly inefficient, look at the whole fiasco with the Gorshkov.

I already answered Gorskhov. It has nothing to do with inefficiency. Russia delivered 8 Kilo subs to China in less than 4 years time when price was right. Gorskhov was negotiated for alteast a decade so management didnot kept up with economic conditions when they finally signed it.

The answer is that the US energy market and needs are enourmous, even if the US had the daily oil output (which is slightly bigger than US daily out output) of Russia it would still need to import oil to meet its needs.

US has all the money and technology available. heck they would have built railways. It is the Oil Industry.
US daily output is only 6.3 million bbl. which is less than 9.85 even if Russia is using 40 year old technology.

European military hardware doesn't compete well against the US and can't afford to as the Pentagon, the biggest arms buyer in the world, buys the vast majority of its weapons from US companies.

It is not about US being largest buyers. European stuff is just expensive compared to US/Japan. It is the cost structure of society.
and when you add customized products for military it being even more expensive.

Bullshit. 'Medium sized powers' can easily support a deployment of 100,000 if the need arises. Hell, the unemployment rates in EU countries can easily cover that. Russia however, will face economic collapse if they deploy a million man army. Plus, judging by the quality of Russian troops and leadership, I'd rather have 100K German or British troops than a million Russians.

Russia didnot faced economic collapse when it put down Tajikistan islamice nsurgency with troops or two wars in Chechnya. Collapse of economy was due to transition from Soviet to Capitalistic structure.
EU is broke. Its forces are only good for peaced keeping. It cannot faced Islamic insurgency if supported by another great power.
Germans in Kunduz will simply surrender in front of Russian across the border. For fighting wars in distant land. u need huge amount money that US is spending or force structure that Russia has created. EU system simply wont work.

In Ex-Soviet Lands, Russian Army Can Be a Protector or an Occupier - The New York Times
In Ex-Soviet Lands, Russian Army Can Be a Protector or an Occupier

When the Soviet Union collapsed, a large part of its army was stranded outside the boundaries of the Russian Federation. American officials estimate that at least 200,000 Russian troops are still based outside Russia -- compared with 1.25 million inside -- most of them in the "near abroad," as the Russians call the former territories of the Soviet Union. The actual numbers are uncertain -- "not for the press to have," a Defense Ministry spokesman said.
According to Pavel Y. Felgengauer, a military specialist who writes for the newspaper Segodnya, General Grachev said at an internal briefing on Sept. 14 that a decision had been made not to pull back to Russia's borders, but to maintain old Soviet borders, especially in Central Asia and the northern Caucasus.

 

[Feanor]

Sevmash head was sacked because he was born and brought up in Soviet Union. He has very little experiance of pricing long term contracts under market conditions. And this happens more often than not in State firms as there executives have little exposure unlike private sector where people are hired from just every where. It seem u have never run any business.

Also because of the ancient technology involved in the shipyard industry, the chronical shortage of skilled labor, and the major problems with securing long term contracts with the subcontractors. Those (as well as bad management) are the industry-wide problems to which I refer.

where is anti government militia?. You mean in South caucses like Chechnya/dagestan etc. It is less than 2 million and is concentrated in one Place. It is not like Islamization of EU where main cities are affected by immigrants. and since EU wants energy independence from Russia they will be importing more gas from Muslim countries and when you import gas from muslim countries the people follow it.
Here is real source of long term instability. Japan is not there because it has domestic debt.

No. I'm talking about the AKM (of which I was part of at one point) and the NBP. There are also smaller movements.

How many heavy lift chopers and transport medium size countries emergency ministries received. Certain technologies and training that Russia developed under Soviet Union can never be matched by Medium sized countries even in next 50 years. Russia dont need to buy the same stuff every year.

Once again. Quit focusing on a single platform. Logistics is about more then that. Do you even bother to read what I write?

First show me Iskander strike. It was tockas and they were being used in 1990s.

Moreover, the Russian Army launched 15 Tochka-U (SS-21) short-range ballistic missiles against military targets and a few new Iskander (SS-26) short-range theater ballistic missiles.

Moscow Defense Brief

Both were used. Do your homework.

Make no mistake it is not the structure of medium sized countries.

Do you concede that you know little to nothing about future Russian force structure and are therefore in no position to make any comments on it?

How many interior ministry troops currently in south Caucses?.

Good question. But the South Caucus is within Russia territorially. So the logistic support of those troops is in no way of the same order of magnitued required to support a similar force deployment in another country, nevermind on another continent. But ok. I don't know how many. Do you know? Or do you just enjoy asking rhetorical questions?

 

[Beatmaster]

It is not about US being largest buyers. European stuff is just expensive compared to US/Japan. It is the cost structure of society.
and when you add customized products for military it being even more expensive. .

It might be expensive but it is non the less very hightech both US and EU producing 8 of 10 most advanced systems worldwide and also Japan has a little share in this, iam not a economics guy but i know this that oil prizes effect almost every market and in a modern US and a modern EU oil is almost if not the most number 1 thing you need to keep anything running
So yes it is expensive but can you tell me one thing?
What superpowers are at this moment involved in major deployment?
(if i count EU as a superpower for this example)
Then is on number 1 the US and on number 2 the EU this also raises prizes sky high for both powers, because it draining so mutch cash and the Crisis is not helping on it nfloorl:

Russia didnot faced economic collapse when it put down Tajikistan islamice nsurgency with troops or two wars in Chechnya. Collapse of economy was due to transition from Soviet to Capitalistic structure.
EU is broke. Its forces are only good for peaced keeping. It cannot faced Islamic insurgency if supported by another great power.
Germans in Kunduz will simply surrender in front of Russian across the border. For fighting wars in distant land. u need huge amount money that US is spending or force structure that Russia has created. EU system simply wont work.

Russia is able to support a serious campain but it will suffer hugly after it, its economic status is not that strong so it might not collaps directly but eventually it will due the fact that russia's economic is still very fragile.
K they do have a strong economy compared to 10 years ago but it is not strong enough to support itself in case of a serious campain.
I think they would be able to bring a serious amount of forces into battle no doubt but thats more because of their patriotic nature that gives them the option to emerge out of nowhere still, this will certainly break the economy into pieces.

EU is broke? we do have a economic crisis just like the US has but we are not broke i believe you need to readup a bit because its true that the economic situation is not good or even bad but keep in mind that :
The UK, France Germany The Netherlands, Italy and Spain are the major economic powers in the EU added to this Denmark and Sweden who are both doing well considering the current crisis then you might be suprised how mutch money they have when it comes to it.
Because having a crisis is not meaning you are broke, the members inside the EU are just holding on to their money and they do spend a lot less then they use to do when times where mutch better, but still the EU has fast amounts of cash and they can hold on to it for a very longtime without being in danger.
The US economic status is perhaps just as bad as the EU economy or even wors but it has still enough reserve to continue for several years just like the EU, taxes might rise to record hights to keep everything funded but both EU and US have still more then enough to even go to a serious war for a long time.

Germans surrender? they might did this 25 years ago or so but at the present moment they are playing a whole differend ball game, they are atm one of the dominating powers in the EU so if you like to compare the US/EU to Russia then you are mighty wrong because both the EU and the US playing on a differned scale then Russia even China is doing a better job then Russia on most parts, i do believe if China goes on like this for a nother decade then they could be sharing its economic power with US, or even outclass them on some parts.
The EU will struggle to keep up ( it can't they will have a good 3 place on this list) with the US and China but will still be in a mutch better shape than Russia.
As i said iam not an expert nor a economics guy so i could be wrong on some parts but Russia will need at least 2 or 3 full decades to match the current EU standarts not only in economics but also in overal human standarts or way of living.

But keep in mind the whole world has seen their cash value drop to a alarming low level but still the western world is doing pretty wel considering the huge ciris and loss of economics, prizes go sky high and people will find them self with every month a few euros less inside their pockets to spend and bills will for lots of family's pill up.
So yes we do suffer and yes we do have a cash problem, but our goverments where able to save fast amounts of cash in good years so are we broke or poor? NO not at all are we able to support a serious war?
If it really must then yes we are very able to do so.
But generally the EU is not so eager to give huge amount of money away so they always keep screaming about money but trust me on this one the EU has more money then you would give them credit for and i think that Kato and some others can admit that.

 

[Feanor]

Russia is able to support a serious campain but it will suffer hugly after it, its economic status is not that strong so it might not collaps directly but eventually it will due the fact that russia's economic is still very fragile.
K they do have a strong economy compared to 10 years ago but it is not strong enough to support itself in case of a serious campain.
I think they would be able to bring a serious amount of forces into battle no doubt but thats more because of their patriotic nature that gives them the option to emerge out of nowhere still, this will certainly break the economy into pieces.

Depends on where the campaign is. In the CIS we can support a major deployment without economic reprecussions of national magnitude.

 

[Sampanviking]

Regarding deployment into Central and Southern Areas of Asia, I would simply point out just how much road and rail infrastructure has/is being built connecting all the SCO countries and their main neighbours together, with modern Major highways and fast (if not yet high speed) rail links.

 

[Grand Danois]

Regarding deployment into Central and Southern Areas of Asia, I would simply point out just how much road and rail infrastructure has/is being built connecting all the SCO countries and their main neighbours together, with modern Major highways and fast (if not yet high speed) rail links.

That's interesting. How many km's of new track has been laid down?

 

[Feanor]

What numbers are you looking for? Internal railroad construction in SCO member states? Or numbers of railroad links between SCO countries (in which case kms wouldn't matter)?

Better yet, why SCO? In case of a war, or even low-key military action the SCO is unlikely to serve as the basis. The CSTO is far more likely as rapid response forces, and joint exercises are common.

 

[Sampanviking]

That's interesting. How many km's of new track has been laid down?

As Feanor indicates its not a straight forward question to answer.

Some links are from dedicated regional infrastructure projects like the Kashi to Istambul rail link, which runs (or will run) from China through Kazakhstan Turkmenistan and Iran into Turkey. You then have regional assistance projects like China's multi Billion dollar loan to Uzbekistan earlier this year specifically for road and rail infrastructure projects including International links. Add to this all the various stimulous packages in the region which are all infrastructure based.

The majority though from both China and Russia are Oil and Gas field development projects which include not just Oil Wells and Pipelines but modern Road Rail and Power links as well. As we can take it that these links must connect to something to make it worthwhile, then you get a picture of very significant connections from both Russia and China all the way down to the Persian Gulf.

Better yet, why SCO? In case of a war, or even low-key military action the SCO is unlikely to serve as the basis. The CSTO is far more likely as rapid response forces, and joint exercises are common.

Maybe, but the illustration here is the potential for deployment outside if borders and the emergence of Infrastructure capable of moving large modern armies cheaply by land across vast continental distances.

 

[Merlöwe]

I already answered Gorskhov. It has nothing to do with inefficiency. Russia delivered 8 Kilo subs to China in less than 4 years time when price was right. Gorskhov was negotiated for alteast a decade so management didnot kept up with economic conditions when they finally signed it.

It has everything to do with inefficiency as the carrier Gorshkov has been pushed back and the price raised several times. For the money the Indians have payed, they could have bought a brand-new carrier from the West and have it delivered at the same time as the Gorshkov if they ordered it immediately.

US has all the money and technology available. heck they would have built railways. It is the Oil Industry.
US daily output is only 6.3 million bbl. which is less than 9.85 even if Russia is using 40 year old technology.

Railways? What does that have to do with oil?

Technology yes, profitable and viable energy sources no. The US simply doesn't have the same oil reserves as it use to, and shale oil is only viable at a certain price per gallon.

It is not about US being largest buyers. European stuff is just expensive compared to US/Japan. It is the cost structure of society.
and when you add customized products for military it being even more expensive.

Lower production run = higher price per unit. Plus it doesn't help that the EU is competing against the most technologically nation on Earth; if you can't sell to the United States, your not going to strike it rich in the defense market.

Russia didnot faced economic collapse when it put down Tajikistan islamice nsurgency with troops or two wars in Chechnya. Collapse of economy was due to transition from Soviet to Capitalistic structure.
EU is broke. Its forces are only good for peaced keeping. It cannot faced Islamic insurgency if supported by another great power.

The EU isn't facing economic collapse; its actually riding out this storm in a bit better shape than the US and Russia. Russia on the other hand faces economic collapse as it is currently riding out on its FOREX reserves (which the EUROZONE has more of). Its also far from broke as the EU economic output grossly outmatches Russia's (2 trillion compared to 13-14)

Germans in Kunduz will simply surrender in front of Russian across the border. For fighting wars in distant land. u need huge amount money that US is spending or force structure that Russia has created. EU system simply wont work.

What proof do you have for that, or do you simply like sounding like an idiot?

 

[roberto]

It has everything to do with inefficiency as the carrier Gorshkov has been pushed back and the price raised several times. For the money the Indians have payed, they could have bought a brand-new carrier from the West and have it delivered at the same time as the Gorshkov if they ordered it immediately.

It is still cheaper than any Aircraft carrier built in West for export. thats why Indians are sticking with it. For India the next cheapest place is Israel thanks to Russian immigrants. India hasnt sign up for M2K upgrade despite 3 years of negotiation and Eurocopter 197 tender was cancelled.

Railways? What does that have to do with oil?

It reduce Oil consumption by large degree. You dont need that much trucking and short range airline routes.

Technology yes, profitable and viable energy sources no. The US simply doesn't have the same oil reserves as it use to, and shale oil is only viable at a certain price per gallon.

US has been subsidizing alot of industries for hundreds of billions of dollars. Do u think they cant put couple of hundred billion per year.

Lower production run = higher price per unit. Plus it doesn't help that the EU is competing against the most technologically nation on Earth; if you can't sell to the United States, your not going to strike it rich in the defense market.

China sent Men to space and it is building its own compass navigation system and it aint selling any thing military to US. Admit European R&D is inferior, slow and expensive. Even Israel will beat it.

The EU isn't facing economic collapse; its actually riding out this storm in a bit better shape than the US and Russia. Russia on the other hand faces economic collapse as it is currently riding out on its FOREX reserves (which the EUROZONE has more of). Its also far from broke as the EU economic output grossly outmatches Russia's (2 trillion compared to 13-14)

It seems you dont have any understanding of economics. EU is in worst shape. It is piling mountain of debt on future tax payers. Whole Eastern EU has exploded on Western EU banks. ur output solely depends on creating new debt.
Banking system is broke. Just look at Swiss losses alone. Even VW & Porshe ask for government aid. Only dependence on Chinese market.
Russia is still surplus economy despite decrease in output as out put is not soley dependent on debt.

Russia?s International Reserves | Bank of Russia

What proof do you have for that, or do you simply like sounding like an idiot?

You dont need proof for some thing so obvious.

 

[roberto]

Also because of the ancient technology involved in the shipyard industry, the chronical shortage of skilled labor, and the major problems with securing long term contracts with the subcontractors. Those (as well as bad management) are the industry-wide problems to which I refer.

Show me any country building export carrier for $3B. refurbishing old stuff is even more expensive than new one. Even South Koreans cant do it as they have no experiance.

No. I'm talking about the AKM (of which I was part of at one point) and the NBP. There are also smaller movements.

It is not a strategic threat. I will give you example. Ronald Reagon legalized moret than 10 million latin immigrants and that decision attracted far more in last 20 years and with increase birth rates. White will become minority in less than 20 years. You cannot run a Superpower like that.

Once again. Quit focusing on a single platform. Logistics is about more then that. Do you even bother to read what I write?

So you think Russians are less train in operating the chopers and transport or there air drop troops are less capable or ur just assuming thing.

Moscow Defense Brief

Both were used. Do your homework.

It is not a proof it is hearsay. Georgian would love to show pix of Iskander firing. and one or two firing dont matter unlike US which fired 500 tomhawks in three days. Precision weopons have no role in Russia victory over Georgia. Ur still not getting the point.

Do you concede that you know little to nothing about future Russian force structure and are therefore in no position to make any comments on it?

I can make that comment with certainity that they wont follow EU force structure.

Good question. But the South Caucus is within Russia territorially. So the logistic support of those troops is in no way of the same order of magnitued required to support a similar force deployment in another country, nevermind on another continent. But ok. I don't know how many. Do you know? Or do you just enjoy asking rhetorical questions?

Yeah the size of Russia is the same as all medium powers combined. if it was these medium powers they would have given up on chechnya like place long time ago. It was far harder than Northern Ireland. and it has paid off handsomely in georgian war with chechens and has forced Azerbaijan to direct flow of energy on Russian pipelines as Russian can unleash the same people on them with full international backing of islamic countries as it will be islamic force capturing Oil wells.

EurasiaNet Eurasia Insight - Azerbaijan: Russian 2008 Blitz against Georgia Eroded Ardor for NATO and EU in Baku - Expert
The Russian military’s performance in Georgia has also prompted a shift in public attitudes in Azerbaijan about the benefits of NATO cooperation, the expert added.

 

[roberto]

It might be expensive but it is non the less very hightech both US and EU producing 8 of 10 most advanced systems worldwide and also Japan has a little share in this, iam not a economics guy but i know this that oil prizes effect almost every market and in a modern US and a modern EU oil is almost if not the most number 1 thing you need to keep anything running
So yes it is expensive but can you tell me one thing?
What superpowers are at this moment involved in major deployment?
(if i count EU as a superpower for this example)
Then is on number 1 the US and on number 2 the EU this also raises prizes sky high for both powers, because it draining so mutch cash and the Crisis is not helping on it nfloorl:

Your seriously mistaken about major deployment. IF it was cold war time of 1970s/80s. I will call it major deployment as other side was likely to receive aid, weopons and training from other sides. Current deployments are mostly of providing law & order for building societies.

Russia is able to support a serious campain but it will suffer hugly after it, its economic status is not that strong so it might not collaps directly but eventually it will due the fact that russia's economic is still very fragile.
K they do have a strong economy compared to 10 years ago but it is not strong enough to support itself in case of a serious campain.
I think they would be able to bring a serious amount of forces into battle no doubt but thats more because of their patriotic nature that gives them the option to emerge out of nowhere still, this will certainly break the economy into pieces.

Russia can certainly afford large policing operation as it has large interior ministry troops. Economics is pretty strong on my measurement.

EU is broke? we do have a economic crisis just like the US has but we are not broke i believe you need to readup a bit because its true that the economic situation is not good or even bad but keep in mind that :
The UK, France Germany The Netherlands, Italy and Spain are the major economic powers in the EU added to this Denmark and Sweden who are both doing well considering the current crisis then you might be suprised how mutch money they have when it comes to it.

Swedish brands like Volvo/Saab are sold to GM. When your major engineering brands are sold off. It does not represent strenght but weakness. Russia has all the strategic industries under its own control.
Future prosperity of EU is wholly dependent on Russia. If Russia plays hard ball EU will be in economic depression for ever.

Siemens Eyes Russian Nuclear Revival - BusinessWeek
Siemens Eyes Russian Nuclear Revival

Because having a crisis is not meaning you are broke, the members inside the EU are just holding on to their money and they do spend a lot less then they use to do when times where mutch better, but still the EU has fast amounts of cash and they can hold on to it for a very longtime without being in danger.

Your still not understanding. I mean broke interms of excersing SuperPower influence. EU has wealth citizens but it is not power that can influence anything. It has no money left to finance pipelines or enter into natural resource wars with China.
It has no role to play in dollar reserve status which only Chinese/Russians can do. I predict that within three to five years most of Resources of Russia and SCO countries will flow to China. This will decrease Chinese dependence on Middleast Oil and Australlia natural resources and will establish Chinese reserve currency. EU has no power to stop this shift.

Work starts on pipe to Russian oil
Work starts on pipe to Russian oil
Vice-premier Wang Qishan, who was present at the launching ceremony, hailed the project as "an important step" towards a long-term, full-scale energy partnership between the two countries.

The US economic status is perhaps just as bad as the EU economy or even wors but it has still enough reserve to continue for several years just like the EU, taxes might rise to record hights to keep everything funded but both EU and US have still more then enough to even go to a serious war for a long time.

US still has world reserve currency so it can print its way to certain extent for some time. EU has none. EU does not have military power to force Arabs to sell Oil in Euros. Russia strategy is completly different. Its power lies in dividing opponents. Like Southern EU & Turkey against Northern EU. Eastern EU against Western EU by individual agreements. Persians against Arabs. EU does not have such cohesive strategy. Most of it are bankrupt ideas which has no relevance to present time.

Germans surrender? they might did this 25 years ago or so but at the present moment they are playing a whole differend ball game, they are atm one of the dominating powers in the EU so if you like to compare the US/EU to Russia then you are mighty wrong because both the EU and the US playing on a differned scale then Russia even China is doing a better job then Russia on most parts, i do believe if China goes on like this for a nother decade then they could be sharing its economic power with US, or even outclass them on some parts.

I think at the end Germans will fed up with subsidizing the whole Eurozone and EU will break apart.

The EU will struggle to keep up ( it can't they will have a good 3 place on this list) with the US and China but will still be in a mutch better shape than Russia.

US has far more obligations than it fund now. It is still not energy independent. and as Russia produce more and more grain & poultry some of largest exports of US will be captured by Russians. Most of financial servieces, Industrial capacity shift to Asia. Russia still controls natural resources, train and pipeline routes. so it will be forever superpower.
U can see. Russia will slowly try to tighten screws on EU as its economic diversification continues.

Russia threatens to bar Europeans who deny Red Army 'liberated' them - Telegraph
Russia threatens to bar Europeans who deny Red Army 'liberated' them

The bill gives Russia the authority to expel ambassadors or sever diplomatic relations with offending nations and to impose full transport and communications blockades on them.

As i said iam not an expert nor a economics guy so i could be wrong on some parts but Russia will need at least 2 or 3 full decades to match the current EU standarts not only in economics but also in overal human standarts or way of living.

These are false standards based on debt like Iceland/Ireland.

But keep in mind the whole world has seen their cash value drop to a alarming low level but still the western world is doing pretty wel considering the huge ciris and loss of economics, prizes go sky high and people will find them self with every month a few euros less inside their pockets to spend and bills will for lots of family's pill up.
So yes we do suffer and yes we do have a cash problem, but our goverments where able to save fast amounts of cash in good years so are we broke or poor? NO not at all are we able to support a serious war?
If it really must then yes we are very able to do so.
But generally the EU is not so eager to give huge amount of money away so they always keep screaming about money but trust me on this one the EU has more money then you would give them credit for and i think that Kato and some others can admit that.

Which is the world best performing stock market now? Russia is already a surplus economy at $50 a Oil. Point is Russia is continuing its strategic initiatives to encircle and divide EU economically.

 

[Merlöwe]

It is still cheaper than any Aircraft carrier built in West for export. thats why Indians are sticking with it. For India the next cheapest place is Israel thanks to Russian immigrants. India hasnt sign up for M2K upgrade despite 3 years of negotiation and Eurocopter 197 tender was cancelled.

Israel doesn't make carriers, and Russian Jews are a minority in Israel as I recall. Indians are sticking with it because they've already put time and money into the effort. Next time the Indians will be more wary in dealing with the Russians.

It reduce Oil consumption by large degree. You dont need that much trucking and short range airline routes.

US has been subsidizing alot of industries for hundreds of billions of dollars. Do u think they cant put couple of hundred billion per year.

It would decrease oil consumption, but not by much. The US would still be heavily reliant on foreign oil regardless.

China sent Men to space and it is building its own compass navigation system and it aint selling any thing military to US. Admit European R&D is inferior, slow and expensive. Even Israel will beat it.

Chinese military technology is still greatly inferior to that of Europe, and it is dependant on military imports from Russia to fuel its R&D programs.

It seems you dont have any understanding of economics. EU is in worst shape. It is piling mountain of debt on future tax payers. Whole Eastern EU has exploded on Western EU banks. ur output solely depends on creating new debt.
Banking system is broke. Just look at Swiss losses alone. Even VW & Porshe ask for government aid. Only dependence on Chinese market.
Russia is still surplus economy despite decrease in output as out put is not soley dependent on debt.

EU is in the worst shape? Russia's economy is heavily dependant on mineral exports, particularly oil, and that has dropped by 70 percent. Russia's credit rating has been downgraded, and the stock market has lost a trillion dollars in value while dropping dramatically. Russia has also been forced to bail out its companies and banks to prevent industries from collapsing. Don't be stupid, out of the major European countries Russia has it worst.

You dont need proof for some thing so obvious.

Germany isnt the one facing ridiculous draft evasion rates.

Professional soldiers are more reliable than conscripts.

It is not a strategic threat. I will give you example. Ronald Reagon legalized moret than 10 million latin immigrants and that decision attracted far more in last 20 years and with increase birth rates. White will become minority in less than 20 years. You cannot run a Superpower like that.

Reagan legalized 3 million Latin American immigrants, not 10, and whites are still going to be a hefty majority as half of Latin American immigrants in the US are white.

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/e...es/2008/08/20/the_myth_of_the_white_minority/

 

[Feanor]

Show me any country building export carrier for $3B. refurbishing old stuff is even more expensive than new one. Even South Koreans cant do it as they have no experiance.

The British new carrier will run iirc 2.3 billion pounds.

It is not a strategic threat. I will give you example. Ronald Reagon legalized moret than 10 million latin immigrants and that decision attracted far more in last 20 years and with increase birth rates. White will become minority in less than 20 years. You cannot run a Superpower like that.

Really? Hundreds of thousands of radicalized youth in various marginal movements, involved in regular clashes with the police is not a serious threat?

So you think Russians are less train in operating the chopers and transport or there air drop troops are less capable or ur just assuming thing.

I'm assuming that we do not have the equipment to deploy and sustain a multi-divisional deployment across the ocean. Yes or no?

It is not a proof it is hearsay. Georgian would love to show pix of Iskander firing. and one or two firing dont matter unlike US which fired 500 tomhawks in three days. Precision weopons have no role in Russia victory over Georgia. Ur still not getting the point.

I see your point. However what you do not realize is that it was NOT an advantage? It was a DISADVANTAGE that our command tried to overcome as best they could. The bottom line is that Russia is trying to enact an RMA based on what the US and Europe have done.

I can make that comment with certainity that they wont follow EU force structure.

Because Europe operates in large and inflexible divisions with centrally assigned arty and air support, right? Seriously.

Yeah the size of Russia is the same as all medium powers combined. if it was these medium powers they would have given up on chechnya like place long time ago. It was far harder than Northern Ireland. and it has paid off handsomely in georgian war with chechens and has forced Azerbaijan to direct flow of energy on Russian pipelines as Russian can unleash the same people on them with full international backing of islamic countries as it will be islamic force capturing Oil wells.

I'm going to ignore the garbage about Islam that you posted, and try to see if I understand correctly what you say. You claim that the Chechen war has led Azerbaijan to rerout energy transit? That's wrong. It's the Georgian War recently that has led to some moves in that direction.

Swedish brands like Volvo/Saab are sold to GM. When your major engineering brands are sold off. It does not represent strenght but weakness. Russia has all the strategic industries under its own control.

Mainly because nobody wants it. Iirc Renault was recently offered AvtoVaz, but the deal never materialized.