Russia is planning on building new naval ships.
Russia's weapons are on par with the U.S. The only problem they have is producing them. However, they have no problem producing them for other nations.
Russia's weapons in some departments > U.S tech.
Russia's weapons are on par with the U.S. The only problem they have is producing them. However, they have no problem producing them for other nations.
Russia's weapons in some departments > U.S tech.
Concerns were growing yesterday over a new bout of east-west confrontation, after Russia unveiled a big increase in military spending in the wake of the American decision to site parts of its controversial missile defence system in eastern Europe.
Russia's hawkish defence minister, Sergei Ivanov, revealed an ambitious plan for a new generation of intercontinental ballistic missiles, nuclear submarines and possibly a fleet of aircraft carriers. Moscow also intended to revamp its early warning radar system. This major overhaul of Russia's military infrastructure would cost $189bn (£97bn) over eight years, he said, adding that he wanted to exceed the Soviet army in "combat readiness".
The sharp rise in expenditure comes at a time of growing coolness in US-Russian relations. Vladimir Putin has been incensed by the Bush administration's intention to site missile defence systems in Poland and the Czech Republic.
The US says the installations are being built to shoot down possible long-range missiles fired by Iran or North Korea. But Mr Putin has dismissed this claim as ludicrous, and has said the real target of the missile shield is clearly Russia and its vast nuclear arsenal. In a speech tomorrow in Munich, the president is expected to deliver Russia's scathing response.
Defence and security leaders are to meet in the German city over the weekend to wrestle with issues such as Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iran. President Putin and Mr Ivanov will deliver speeches, as will the new Pentagon chief, Robert Gates, the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, and Ali Larijani, the key Iranian official for Tehran's suspect nuclear programme.
Yesterday analysts said Moscow was worried the defence shield in eastern Europe could turn into a Trojan horse.
"This is irritating for Russia," said Yevgeny Miasnikov, a senior research scientist at Moscow's Centre for Arms Control. "When the Soviet Union collapsed a vacuum was created in the countries of the former Warsaw bloc. The US has tentatively moved into the vacuum and is creating infrastructure that might threaten Russia. The Bush administration's system is not justified. Iran doesn't have a missile capability yet to hit the US. The logical place to put a defence system would be in Turkey, or in Russia itself."
In his speech to Russia's parliament, Mr Ivanov announced that the military would get 17 ballistic missiles this year, compared with an average of four in recent years. The plan envisages the deployment of 34 new silo-based Topol-M missiles and control units, as well as another 50 such missiles mounted on mobile launchers by 2015, he said. Russia has already deployed more than 40 silo-based Topol-Ms.
Writing in a Munich newspaper yesterday, Mr Ivanov said: "The deployment of American missile defence in Europe has not only a military but also a symbolic significance. Fifteen years after the end of the cold war a situation is obviously being created in which the continent again can only manage with American protection and with reinforced American military presence."
In 2002, Mr Putin and George Bush signed a treaty obliging both sides to cut strategic nuclear weapons by about two-thirds by 2012. But Russian-US ties have since worsened steadily over disagreements on Iraq and other global crises, and US concerns about an authoritarian streak in Russia's domestic policy.
The modernisation of the armed forces has been made possible by Russia's spectacular economic resurgence based on oil and gas revenues. After the Soviet Union's demise, Russia's vast military economy collapsed. The squeeze continued in the 1990s, but since 2000 spending has gone up, with this year's budget of $31bn almost four times the amount spent in 2001.
Russian defence analysts point out, however, that defence spending is still well below that of the mid-1980s Soviet Union, and only a 20th of the US's current military budget.
Russian aviation was better than the US but we got ahold of all of it....They sold their sonobouys to researchs and the rest of their fleet is obsolete.
They dont have the money to regroup....Im not saying that we dont need a navy or a military byt we have 13 Carrier battle groups...I think
DarkThinker
Platinum Member
- Mar 17, 2007
- 2,822
- 0
- 0
The only thing the U.S has over Russia in aviation is stealth aircraft.
Russia is building a stealth fighter aircraft. SU-35 I believe?
Russia is building a stealth fighter aircraft. SU-35 I believe?
Jaskalas
Lifer
- Jun 23, 2004
- 35,466
- 9,686
- 136
You're right the Middle East is just a small potato, like the heart to the body. Asia, Africa, and Europe are all in the middle of their conversions. The war is a global ideology that?s taking control of more nations every decade.
So your belief that ?There is no Jihad? is a reflection of our distance from the heart of the ideological plague. We are, perhaps, the furthest nation from Jihad reaching a military strength, but that does not mean we will escape future attacks from foreign nations and their nuclear technology, or box cutters.
More so, until we recognize that Jihad is an ideology stemming from violent Islamic teachings, we?ll never lift a finger to prevent its rise in our homes. Therefore, it?s merely a matter of time until enough of our disenfranchised youths accept conversion to seek bloody vengeance on us. They are already doing it in small numbers, sending cash and support back ?home? to the Middle East terrorist groups. They have already been operating on our soil for decades; it?s only a matter of time before it?s a home grown military operation.
If you want to claim there is no Jihad, look this century towards our own home as we handle questions of tolerating religious oppression, towards Europe as it dawns the crescent, and towards Pakistan where the radicals seeking bloodshed seize control of the nuclear weapons. This century has only just begun, you haven?t seen anything yet, so your conclusion of disbelief is only natural. Continue to watch and learn as millions die in the name of Allah.
DarkThinker
Platinum Member
- Mar 17, 2007
- 2,822
- 0
- 0
Ya right, look buddy I was born and raised in the middle east, I have witnessed some ****** through my lifetime with my own bare eyes that would make your hair go white in an instance and send you to your moma's lap crying. I'll tell you one thing, your just another one of those bandwagonners that like to throw the word Jihad with Islam and add a sprinkle of Middle East throw it in a blender and then paint his posts with it, and then seem to the rest like you have a freaking clue of what you are talking about!!
Let me tell you another thing, you have failed miserably!
Trust me you sound just like one of those extremists but just yelling from the other side of the pond!
TallBill
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2001
- 46,017
- 62
- 91
The Irananian population isn't entirely anti American. They like the western way of life, which intimmidates the Irananian government. This lead to the ban on American words such as Pizza. Now, I'm not saying that they'd help us invade, but they would be similar to the Iraqi population.
Anyways, as far as their military goes, yes they have a larger one then Iraq did and they have some better weaponry, but our current military is better trained and armed then ever.
Sure, we'd probably lose more troops then in Iraq, but we'd still be quite swift about our business. Iraq did have quite a large military force even after this first Gulf War. I wish I could find some stats, but the web is littered with so many Iraq articles its impossible to find.
All of that being said, I don't see it happening unless Iran provokes it. Only time will tell.
You're in Iraq. When you walk in Baghdad is everyone out to kill you?
No of course not.
If you were inside Tehran everyone would be out to kill you and everyone would have weapons. Iranians would not be going around killing each other.
U.S could never occupy Iran unless they started a draft and put over a million troops inside Iran and faced the reality that they would lose 15,000-20,000 troops a year.
Iran might not be anti-American, but in no way shape or form would they want American troops on Iranian soil.
Iraq was for an Invasion because they were oppressed and poor. Sanctions made the economy beyond horrible (6th world country - so bad new word has to be created) and 50% of the population was anti-govt. Another large percentage to the North was already independent. Then we had a large Christian population that wanted an Invasion.
That left a handful of people who were loyal to Saddam. In the end most of those men ran like cowards.
Iran is nowhere close to being compared to Iraq. Neither is Afghanistan.
It would be like the U.S invading Mexico. Mexicans are not anti-U.S, but I guarantee every Mexican soldier would fight and every man and woman would go seek arms.
A Jihad means a war on an invading force that's purpose is against Islam. It has to be declared by a very high powered individual who is usually one of the most senior ranking Islamic leaders. Cannot be declared by a non-religious leader.
When Muslims attack non-Muslims it has nothing to do with Islam. It has to do with the fact that they are probably idiots in their country and the non-Muslims are doing better or have more power. They get jealous. Same reason many people hated the Jews or continue to hate Jews today, especially in the U.S. Jews in the U.S are the most targeted for hate crimes. Why?
For example the Jews inside Iran are not being targeted because they are like everyone else. Now if the Jews inside Iran had money and power and the Muslims did not then of course the Muslims who were dirt poor idiots who never went to school would start attacking them.
The problem with militant Islam is not the religion. It is a lack of education and severe poverty.
Educated Muslim nations do not go around acted barbaric and blowing people up.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter