S-400 technology helps Seoul blunt Pyongyang threat

[Deleted]

You do realize that the US jumps for joy at this prospect right? What am I saying. Of course you don't.

The US loves when allies have some Russian/Soviet stuff. How else can we gain access to it and figure out how they work and how to beat it?

Hell the US even bought MiG 29s from Moldova before:
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...fighters-14486

So please. Sell away your crown jewels. Do us a favor.

S-500 r the crown jewels.

[Corvus]

It is nice that Seoul is getting some defence against NK missiles but from all accounts it will get swamped by the sheer number of missiles aimed at it - not to mention the alleged 10,000 artillery pieces all zeroed in on the capital.

Seoul will get pretty badly wrecked before all of that stuff gets taken out. Still, every little bit will help save a few lives.

[Uzkin]

Invited by who? There is a three-way civil war going on in Syria; Russia was invited by one side, the USA was invited by another. "Legality" of the government is really irrelevant, given that half the country doesn't recognize it any more.

Oh, great. Then Russia didn't invade anything in 2014, either. Your judgment is selective and subjective, might as well summarize it as "Anything Russia does abroad counts as invasion whilst nothing the US does, does.

[Mavett]

You need to understand that S-400 are part of an integrated a/a defense network: S-400+Tor-m2 /buk m3 + pantsir-s2
S-500 will not replace S-400, rather it will be part of it. The outer layer of the A/A defense (onion) ring.

And yes, S-400 is the undisputed A/A champ of it class in the world.

- - - Updated - - -



I really doubt that they will get anything more than a lesser working "export" version. I am pretty sure they know that SK is USA vessel.

Your AA world champ and buddies™ will struggle against a SEAD by a well equipped and trained air force.

[May90]

Oh, great. Then Russia didn't invade anything in 2014, either. Your judgment is selective and subjective, might as well summarize it as "Anything Russia does abroad counts as invasion whilst nothing the US does, does.

"Green men" occupying the whole peninsula leading to annexation of it is not an invasion, but a few strikes against terrorists is? Wonder who is biased here.

Also, my previous comment provided two counter-examples to your summarization. They say about people like you, "He can't say good morning without lying twice".

[Ulmita]

Did you just make that argument just after arguing the russian system is great because it can reach targets in space? Is the lack of self awareness really that bad?



Wow, you actually did.

You have reading comprehension issues.

- - - Updated - - -

So you celebrates a Russian ABM system that can destroy intercontinental ballistic missile but condemns a american ABM system? What happened to your important balance? Especially now that Russia is planning to build a larger amount S-500 (more then 3 batteries)

Those will be installed around Moscow and in any case inside Russia.

Russia as well as America have already in place ABM, like the Russian A-135 and soon the A-235 (armed with nukes to intercept nukes). When the Russians say nuclear missiles patrol Moscow streets (as we speak) they mean that system. S-500 will work in conjuction with that to seal off air space above high importance targets like cities, military infrastructure etc.

[Slant]

Selling to both sides of conflict is more profitable then selling to just one side, duh, once ideology stops getting in the way.

Plus inviting South Korean investors, researchers and trade connections to make arms sales from joint enterprises to the rest of the world can pay too.

- - - Updated - - -

Those counter-mortal radars you given to Ukraine were also nice, thank you :P

I think this is the first time I've actually seen a Putinista openly cheer for the fucked up moral standard that seems to be so innately Russian. You do realise that selling to both sides of a conflict makes you a major asshole, don't you? Almost any conflict on the Planet uses Russian tech, because you lot are just profiting from the misery of others, fucking leeches that you are. If the ME didn't have your tech, it'd be a lot less bloody.

You actually disgust me right now.

[Ulmita]

I understand that math is hard for you, but range is a rather important factor in intercepting ballistic warheads. I also know that the only information you "know" is "Russian SAM always superior, will sweep the skies clean!"

I know simple logic is hard for you, so let me explain that simple"ier" for you.

Moscow is developing an A/A system to seal off skies above cities, so lets say it put it around Moscow to defend it from incoming ICBM warheads.
Please explain me how S-500 range isn't enough to defend Moscow..

Again you are saying nothing but nonsense.

[May90]

I think this is the first time I've actually seen a Putinista openly cheer for the fucked up moral standard that seems to be so innately Russian. You do realise that selling to both sides of a conflict makes you a major asshole, don't you? Almost any conflict on the Planet uses Russian tech, because you lot are just profiting from the misery of others, fucking leeches that you are. If the ME didn't have your tech, it'd be a lot less bloody.

You actually disgust me right now.

Well, that's what they did during Iran-Iraq war. It is not exactly novelty for them...

[Ulmita]

Your AA world champ and buddies™ will struggle against a SEAD by a well equipped and trained air force.

I'd love to see you trying to send some airplanes inside Russia land to contact the said SEAD.

[Uzkin]

"Green men" occupying the whole peninsula leading to annexation of it is not an invasion, but a few strikes against terrorists is? Wonder who is biased here.

Yes, your bias is exceedingly obvious from that statement.

(The "green men" didn't occupy the whole peninsula, their main function was to non-violently halt the operation of Ukrainian military bases in Crimea. There was no need for whole-scale occupation due to popular support from the locals. And the US has done more than just perform a few strikes against terrorists in Syria.)

[Ulmita]

Again allow me to question the validity of the article:



Russia Has No Plans to Deliver S-400 Missile Systems to China Before 2018

[May90]

Yes, your bias is exceedingly obvious from that statement.

(The "green men" didn't occupy the whole peninsula, their main function was to non-violently halt the operation of Ukrainian military bases in Crimea. There was no need for whole-scale occupation due to popular support from the locals. And the US has done more than just perform a few strikes against terrorists in Syria.)

*sips Cola* Keep talking.

[Shalcker]

I think this is the first time I've actually seen a Putinista openly cheer for the fucked up moral standard that seems to be so innately Russian. You do realise that selling to both sides of a conflict makes you a major asshole, don't you?

While they do not engage in actual war? No, not really.

Almost any conflict on the Planet uses Russian tech, because you lot are just profiting from the misery of others, fucking leeches that you are. If the ME didn't have your tech, it'd be a lot less bloody.

Same for America. Saudis are bombing Yemen cities with American tech right now.

You actually disgust me right now.

And Germany, for that matter:
In the first half of this year (2015), Germany sold guns or ammunition to Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, Lebanon, Mali, Chile, India, Indonesia and the United Arab Emirates (among others). That's apart from the military vehicles, ships, and other larger military equipment sold to Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Russia, China and Israel - all of which are involved in conflicts or have widely reported human rights abuses.

If you're so principled you should work against your own country actions in this regard.

[Ulmita]

While they do not engage in actual war? No, not really.

Same for America. Saudis are bombing Yemen cities with American tech right now.

And Germany, for that matter:
In the first half of this year (2015), Germany sold guns or ammunition to Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, Lebanon, Mali, Chile, India, Indonesia and the United Arab Emirates (among others). That's apart from the military vehicles, ships, and other larger military equipment sold to Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Russia, China and Israel - all of which are involved in conflicts or have widely reported human rights abuses.

If you're so principled you should work against your own country actions in this regard.

Hahaha Greece spends all its money in German arms. Greece had more Leo2 tanks than Germany or any other EU nation. They bought subs from Germany, trucks, guns etc.

Germany also supplies Turkey =)

[Deleted]

Those will be installed around Moscow and in any case inside Russia.

I do not get your logic, US plane to build 3 fixed ABM batterier and it thereaten the balance, Russia plane to build atlest 10 ABM mobile batterier (that is clamed to be superior to US missiles) and that is not a thereat to your important balance.....double standard?

- - - Updated - - -

Hahaha Greece spends all its money in German arms. Greece had more Leo2 tanks than Germany or any other EU nation.

and they also have the bigest economic crise in EU...

[Uzkin]

*sips Cola* Keep talking.

/popcorn

[Slant]

While they do not engage in actual war? No, not really.

Same for America. Saudis are bombing Yemen cities with American tech right now.

And Germany, for that matter:
In the first half of this year (2015), Germany sold guns or ammunition to Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, Lebanon, Mali, Chile, India, Indonesia and the United Arab Emirates (among others). That's apart from the military vehicles, ships, and other larger military equipment sold to Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Russia, China and Israel - all of which are involved in conflicts or have widely reported human rights abuses.

If you're so principled you should work against your own country actions in this regard.

That's cute. You do realise that nobody comes even close to the AK gun sales of the soviet union, right? RPGs from Russia are found on every battlefield with these insurgencies. It's not ours, it's yours. Apart from Iraq, none of those countries are having domestic civil wars going on. And none of them are fighting each other. What a pathetic attempt to twist what I said and then pretend the facts match your narrative. You're the evil gun dealer that pits both sides against each other for profit. No morals or ethics at all.

- - - Updated - - -

Hahaha Greece spends all its money in German arms. Greece had more Leo2 tanks than Germany or any other EU nation. They bought subs from Germany, trucks, guns etc.

Germany also supplies Turkey =)

Both are in NATO and hardly fighting each other... but go on, I'm waiting for your big argument.

[caervek]

As a key U.S. ally and loyal customer of American weapons, South Korea is an unlikely buyer of Russian weapons. In fact, Seoul's defense trade with Moscow grew in an unlikely way. In 1991, after the Cold War ended, South Korea extended $1 billion in cash loans and a $470 million commodities loan as a reward for Moscow's recognition of South Korea. However, the Soviet Union went under the same year.

Unable to repay the loans in cash, Russia began supplying what it had in plenty – military equipment such as T-90 tanks, infantry combat vehicles and helicopters. The first two arms-for-debt deals – all known as Brown Bear – were inked in 1995 and 2003.

Didn't know that, good read.

[Mavett]

I'd love to see you trying to send some airplanes inside Russia land to contact the said SEAD.

You're truly naive if you think that Russian layered AA defense would be a major obstacle in achieving air superiority.

Their layered defense was proven absolutely useless in the 80's when their state of the art SAM Network in Syria (same network that was used for the defense of Moscow) was a mere pile of burning heap in a span of two hours.

Individual systems improved since, but so does measures to counter them.