Putin puts troops in western Russia on alert in drill 1.1

[Tierbook]

Yes and it's already said to be a fake info.



You're so used to defeating inferior armies that have the technology similar to the stone age that you don't even realize that Russians are modernizing their army, no matter what your media says that they're incapable of anything.



Fought wars? With whom?

That's just unfair to say about inferior armies.... seeing as no nation is remotely able to fight us 1 on 1.

[ringpriest]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/10/world/...html?hpt=hp_t2

B-2 Stealth Bombers deployed to Europe.

Tee hee hee, don't mind us. We're just becoming "familiar with air bases and operations in the area."

I seem to remember someone on this forum a few months ago commenting on how sending strategic bombers on intercontinental trips to put on a show was "completely useless". (Or is this another one of those things that's doubleplusgood when the United States does it, but doubleplusungood when done by anyone else? Because, jingoism.) And the article isn't exactly informative - it doesn't mention that the B-2s are being deployed to RAF Fairford, one of only three airfields capable of supporting the B-2s and their delicate skin, and probably won't be spending long anywhere else, lest they be caught in the rain. (But what else should we expect from CNN, the crappy US equivalent to RT? They're probably only interested because someone told them the B-2s might disappear untraceably. )

And seriously, "Tee hee hee"? At least have a little class and go for the mustache-twirling, "Bwa ha ha ha!"

[Skroe]

Of course they are right. Instead of allowing Southern Europe to get cheaper gas the EU is pressuring small countries. Such heroes.

Tough. It's time to wean you people off Russia's garbage.

No pain, no gain.

But given that you've spent about two amazingly futile years bemoaning the Eurozone bailout, I know that's a foreign concept to you.

[Cybran]

Tough. It's time to wean you people off Russia's garbage.

http://www.euractiv.com/sections/glo...-stream-302684

Not up to you to decide. The project is far too ahead to be stopped now and Renzi wants it done as well. Once the situation in Ukraine calms down after the de-centralization and federalization the project will be done.

[Skroe]

You're so used to defeating inferior armies that have the technology similar to the stone age that you don't even realize that Russians are modernizing their army, no matter what your media says that they're incapable of anything.


Fought wars? With whom?

(1) Russia's "Modernizing Army" is a relative term. It's modernizing compared to the stone age level they were at a decade ago. that is to say, they are finally catching up to the United States circa 1982.

Exhibit A: Buying the Mistral Class Helicopter carrier. They can't build it themselves... such a ship would require a crew of 1000. French automation makes it have a crew of 150.

But that's actually an import driven success. It's the flops that stand out. Remember the Bulava? There was a time a few years ago where you couldn't turn your head without running into some goddamn Russian crowing about how their Trident IID equivalent was some revolution in sumbarine launched ballistic Missiles. Problem is, the thing doesn't work. You know what is happening right now, to the Borei class subs they were being built to carry them? Being converted to Attack Subs.

And to pay for it the have moved all but one of their Typhoon class Ballistic Missile Subs, to the scrap yard.

So really, Russia can "modernize" all it likes. It's been such a huge success so far.


(2) European armed forces fought in Iraq (some of them, as part of the MNF-Iraq), Afghanistan (ISAF) and Libya (NATO). That's actual combat experience.

[ringpriest]

Maybe you haven't been paying attention to troop/asset movements, and announcements, but the US is doubling down on our European presence. And Poland particularly is begging for that big new permanent base we'll likely build sooner rather than later. The US isn't leaving Europe, ever.

"Roughly 120 American soldiers from the 173rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team arrived here last week to train with Latvian soldiers and reassure the country of the U.S. commitment to the region in the wake of Russia’s land grab moves in Ukraine."

"A total of 600 U.S. troops have now been deployed to Poland and the Baltics for infantry exercises, where they are expected to remain on rotation until the end of the year."

There's a big difference between "doubling down" and "penny ante".

Get used to it. We'll know more what it looks like in the Fall after the NATO planning Summit, which was called to reassesses continental defense from Russia.

So "real soon" has moved to "the Fall" now? Your endless predictions of imminent "significant action" are really starting to resemble Blizzard's release dates for WoD. (With the difference being that WoD will eventually happen.)

I hope Crimea was worth it!

Naval Base at Sevastapol - $8 billion
Black Sea Oil & Gas Reserves - $2 trillion
Ruining Western Imperialism's Game Plan? Priceless.

But anyway I'd love to see Russia try to enforce a no fly zone. I would pay to see it. I don't think their sorry excuse for an Air Force, filled with mostly Soviet Hand-Me-Downs, is up to the task. I don't think their competent, nor capable enough to do it. I think they could do it for a few weeks maybe, and then it would fall off as flight hours started to pile up and Russia's limited number of Air Refueling Tankers found themselves increasingly grounded.

Something tells me the deadliest thing the Russian Air Force would face in a sustained air operation of any type, is the ongoing joking known as the Russian Air Force itself.

I don't suppose you have any nifty links to the readiness status of the Russian Air Force? (Titans forbid, that you actually contribute anything to the thread that isn't pure jingoism.)

[Tierbook]

Speaking of the US military.... how long until TALOS starts being used? Also Railguns go up next year right?

[Skroe]

I seem to remember someone on this forum a few months ago commenting on how sending strategic bombers on intercontinental trips to put on a show was "completely useless". (Or is this another one of those things that's doubleplusgood when the United States does it, but doubleplusungood when done by anyone else? Because, jingoism.) And the article isn't exactly informative - it doesn't mention that the B-2s are being deployed to RAF Fairford, one of only three airfields capable of supporting the B-2s and their delicate skin, and probably won't be spending long anywhere else, lest they be caught in the rain. (But what else should we expect from CNN, the crappy US equivalent to RT? They're probably only interested because someone told them the B-2s might disappear untraceably. )

You twisted my words and you know it! Hahaha. I was refering to Russia's antique strategic bombers (like the piston engined powered Tu-95s which carry about half the amount as a B-52) and TU-160s. It's not that shows of force like this are useless at all. It's rather WHAT COMPRISED of the show of force. In fact, I've advocated for the US doing patrols like this, before. I in fact, believe I said in the prior thread on this issue, I wanted the US to resume these style flights.



US stealth bombers are clearly a different story than the antiques that Russia flies. It's just like comparing a US Carrier Battle Group when it does a show of force (like when Clinton sent two through the Tiawaneese Strait) to that hilarious Russian analog from a few weeks ago when they sent their only carrier, 3 oilers, an amphibious assault ship and a tug boat (for the carrier) through the English Channel.

Basically: if you're gonna do a show of force, have it actually be a show of force, rather than a show of impotence. When Russia does shows of force, it shows it's weakness. B-2s would have free reign over Russia and Russia knows it. Tu-95s or TU-160s? Wouldnt even get in range to launch their ALCMs.



And of course it's at RAF Fairford. You think we'd ever deploy them deeper into Europe, in range of the Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles Russia has even though it isn't supposed to? Why do you think we keep them in Missouri of all places? It's isolated. They'll have a long enough heads up to take to the air.

They only have to get in the air from RAF Fairford and then it's a quick flight to Russia. I don't even think during the 1990s when this kind of thing was more routine, there was ever the intent to put B-2's closer to Russia. I mean, consider Asia, where we have been flying B-2s for a few years. They fly out of Guam (and less often nowdays, Diego Garcia). Why would we put them in Japan, which could readily support them? Because where do you think China would aim it's IRBMs?


Oh and P.S. The B-2's skin was redone in the mid 2000s and now is refurbished robotically, rather than manually. This is the biggest reason their reliability rate has gone up. You're referencing a fact that's a solid 10 years out of date. It's not nearly F-35 or F-22 level in terms of having the stealth "baked into" the skin *by design*, but it's a very, very, very long way from where it was a decade ago.

And seriously, "Tee hee hee"? At least have a little class and go for the mustache-twirling, "Bwa ha ha ha!"

Yes seriously. B-2s are a reminder of what we're capable of, and Russia plainly isn't.

[Deleted]

(1) Russia's "Modernizing Army" is a relative term. It's modernizing compared to the stone age level they were at a decade ago. that is to say, they are finally catching up to the United States circa 1982.

Exhibit A: Buying the Mistral Class Helicopter carrier. They can't build it themselves... such a ship would require a crew of 1000. French automation makes it have a crew of 150.

But that's actually an import driven success. It's the flops that stand out. Remember the Bulava? There was a time a few years ago where you couldn't turn your head without running into some goddamn Russian crowing about how their Trident IID equivalent was some revolution in sumbarine launched ballistic Missiles. Problem is, the thing doesn't work. You know what is happening right now, to the Borei class subs they were being built to carry them? Being converted to Attack Subs.

And to pay for it the have moved all but one of their Typhoon class Ballistic Missile Subs, to the scrap yard.

So really, Russia can "modernize" all it likes. It's been such a huge success so far.


(2) European armed forces fought in Iraq (some of them, as part of the MNF-Iraq), Afghanistan (ISAF) and Libya (NATO). That's actual combat experience.

I remember Bulava, they're fixing their problems. I also remember how "modern" F-117A was shot down by 38 years old piece of crap S-125. I was laughing. I also remember how your GMD failed tests over and over again. What was it, like 47% success rate?

You're good at obliterating Middle East armies, I give you that.

[Skroe]

"Roughly 120 American soldiers from the 173rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team arrived here last week to train with Latvian soldiers and reassure the country of the U.S. commitment to the region in the wake of Russia’s land grab moves in Ukraine."

"A total of 600 U.S. troops have now been deployed to Poland and the Baltics for infantry exercises, where they are expected to remain on rotation until the end of the year."

There's a big difference between "doubling down" and "penny ante".

It's a start. It's also not the end, as shown by the B-2 deployment, the meetings held. This is a process that will take many, many months even years, to put into action. For example, if Obama says "we're building a Polish base" tomorrow... an announcement likely some time this year given how much the Polish are pushing for it... it wouldn't be ready until, at the earlier, 2018.

There is no "Rush to Europe". But you just have to look at Obama's Feburary defense budget, which cut European troops by a third, to the ones passing through Congress right now (not yet reconciled) that allocate more to European defense.

The entire direction has shifted.

So "real soon" has moved to "the Fall" now? Your endless predictions of imminent "significant action" are really starting to resemble Blizzard's release dates for WoD. (With the difference being that WoD will eventually happen.)

I don't know what to say? That's NATO's time table and it's appropriate. They had their meeting in May. It was substantial at the policy level. They decided on a direction and an emphasis on European defense post-Afghanistan, and a recomittment to specific defense goals (targeted at Russia), and now they break up for a few months to allow their subordinates to hash out the details until the planning conference in the fall.

Are we going to war against Russia in August? Did I miss that memo? Of course not. The plan plainly now, is to contain Russia yet again. So they're gearing up to put the policy - and finances - in order for that. And you know what, going by what I said previously... if in the fall they decide to lets say, start putting Western European troops in Eastern Europe in larger numbers, it'll be the Spring of next year before they start arriving in substantial numbers. And if NATO starts opening news bases, it'll be a few years.

Sorry if you don't like the timetable. But tell me again: we create a base some place, and how long do we stay? If I were you, I'd think long term.

Naval Base at Sevastapol - $8 billion
Black Sea Oil & Gas Reserves - $2 trillion
Ruining Western Imperialism's Game Plan? Priceless.

- A naval base in a death trap of a sea that, were it in NATO hands, would rarely host any US vessels. It's only value would be Russia didn't have it.
- Glad to see you approve of literally, war for oil. Also $2 trillion over decades is a lot less than it looks like.
-"Western Imperialism". Glad to see how far gone you are. Counterpuch wants their talking points back.

I don't suppose you have any nifty links to the readiness status of the Russian Air Force? (Titans forbid, that you actually contribute anything to the thread that isn't pure jingoism.)

Happily
https://russiandefpolicy.wordpress.c...bat-readiness/

Kommersant’s Ivan Safronov and Yelena Kiseleva wrote Monday (28 October) on the status of devolving Oboronservis’ Aviaremont into a subsidiary of the United Aircraft Corporation (OAK). In the process, they indicated less than half of Russia’s combat airplanes are serviceable.

Aviaremont enterprises will become OAK-Servis subholdings. The factories will repair aircraft for the Defense Ministry, and for other power ministries and agencies. OAK and the MOD already have an 84-billion-ruble contract for repairs in place. Meanwhile, Aviaremont owes the MOD 115 billion, which OAK has promised to make good.

OAK-Servis is supposed to provide life-cycle support for MOD (mainly VVS) airplanes. And it will “correct an unfavorable situation in the condition of the current inventory of the Air Forces, which still aren’t guaranteeing the necessary level of technical combat readiness,” Kommersant writes.

OAK-Servis will establish service centers and 24-7 mobile repair teams, then, in 2015-2018, modernize capital equipment in its repair plants. It will also grapple with a problem it can’t solve in the short-term, “the cessation of industrial output of components and systems used in the repair of old aircraft models and the rising price of spares and parts.”

It gets better

But Safronov and Kiseleva report only 42 percent of VVS airplanes overall, and 49 percent of its combat airplanes, are serviceable.

The most serious situation with fitness for flying is found in Tu-160 and Tu-22 [Tu-22M3] bombers, the MiG-29 and MiG-25, An-22 transports, L-39 trainers, and others for which serviceability hovers around 20-25 percent.

In 2013, the VVS had 696 airplanes in need of repair, but as (or if) new ones reach the inventory toward 2020, the number in need of repair will reportedly decline to just 49.

The sidebar says, along with repairing MVD, FSB, and MChS platforms, OAK repair plants will also have to maintain and overhaul exported airplanes.

Recall for a moment the MOD’s Action Plan to 2020 . . . the section on equipping the armed forces indicated year-end VVS aircraft serviceability rates will be 55 percent in 2013, 75 percent in 2014, and 80 percent in 2015.

These numbers require pretty fast improvement.

So as I said... the Russian Air Force is a joke.

[Cybran]

You're good at obliterating Middle East armies, I give you that.

On a side note. They are also good at creating and spreading propaganda.

http://www.les-crises.fr/wp-content/...aite-nazis.jpg

In 70 years they managed to completely twist the realities of their involvement in the European theater. Just like they are twisting them now in Ukraine. The question asked is "Which country defeated Nazi Germany?".

[Tierbook]

I remember Bulava, they're fixing their problems. I also remember how "modern" F-117A was shot down by 38 years old piece of crap S-125. I was laughing. I also remember how your GMD failed tests over and over again. What was it, like 47% success rate?

You're good at obliterating Middle East armies, I give you that.

Looking at the wikipedia article on the 117 it says that was the only combat loss and it just caused the plane to become uncontrollable. The pilot of course ejected but the plane was still intact for the most part after crash landing. Also Russia can't even claim that it's any good at crushing ME armies, though i suppose you were invited by the Afghan government the people through you out themselves.

- - - Updated - - -

On a side note. They are also good at creating and spreading propaganda.

http://www.les-crises.fr/wp-content/...aite-nazis.jpg

In 70 years they managed to completely twist the realities of their involvement in the European theater. Just like they are twisting them now in Ukraine.

From what I've seen RT makes Fox news look fair and balanced.


Oh ya speaking of having that naval port in the Black sea.... have fun getting anything out of there so long as Turkey is in NATO.

[Skroe]

I remember Bulava, they're fixing their problems. I also remember how "modern" F-117A was shot down by 38 years old piece of crap S-125. I was laughing. I also remember how your GMD failed tests over and over again. What was it, like 47% success rate?

They've been fixing Bulava for years. And it's so dire that the next Borei sub is being designed as an attack sub from the start. If it's ready, it won't be until around 2020 according to projections. And then... congratulations, Russia will have something we had since 1988.

Also the F-117A wasn't modern in 1999. It was state of the art in 1979. It was aging by 1999. It was flying for a decade before it's existence was acknowledged. The F-117A, by the way, have all been retired (since 2007), although some have been photographed covertly flying out of Ares 51... likely as test platforms. It's level of stealth is no longer effective.

GMD is a work in progress. It's come a long way in a decade, but it still has likely another decade and a half to go (with an entirely new interceptor) until it is truly ready as opposed to rudimentary ready (which it is right now). It's worth noting that tests don't fire the number of interceptors a real world scenario would see.

You're good at obliterating Middle East armies, I give you that.

You speak as if the Russian military is significantly more capable than Saddam Hussein's. See above.

Also I didn't realize that Afghanistan, which is where most of our European allies fought, was in the Middle East.

[Cybran]

Also I didn't realize that Afghanistan, which is where most of our European allies fought, was in the Middle East.

He only meant Iraq. Afghanistan is a failure of biblical proportion.

[Deleted]

Looking at the wikipedia article on the 117 it says that was the only combat loss and it just caused the plane to become uncontrollable. The pilot of course ejected but the plane was still intact for the most part after crash landing. Also Russia can't even claim that it's any good at crushing ME armies, though i suppose you were invited by the Afghan government the people through you out themselves.

Wikipedia article you say?

Unknown to NATO, Yugoslav air defenses operators had found they could detect F-117s with their "obsolete" Soviet radars after some modifications. In 2005, Colonel Zoltán Dani confirmed in an interview suggested that those modifications involved using long wavelengths, allowing them to detect the aircraft when the wheel well or bomb bay doors were open. In addition, the Serbs had also intercepted and deciphered some NATO communications, and thus were able to deploy their anti-air batteries at positions best suited to intercept NATO planes.

That's what happens when you fight against people that aren't from Middle East.
And intact?


Afghanistan? You mean that war that SOVIETS fought against 200000–250000 Muhajideens (and obliterating them) supported by your government?

On a side note. They are also good at creating and spreading propaganda.

http://www.les-crises.fr/wp-content/...aite-nazis.jpg

In 70 years they managed to completely twist the realities of their involvement in the European theater. Just like they are twisting them now in Ukraine. The question asked is "Which country defeated Nazi Germany?".

Wait, you mean that Russians fought in WW2???

They've been fixing Bulava for years. And it's so dire that the next Borei sub is being designed as an attack sub from the start. If it's ready, it won't be until around 2020 according to projections. And then... congratulations, Russia will have something we had since 1988.

Also the F-117A wasn't modern in 1999. It was state of the art in 1979. It was aging by 1999. It was flying for a decade before it's existence was acknowledged. The F-117A, by the way, have all been retired (since 2007), although some have been photographed covertly flying out of Ares 51... likely as test platforms. It's level of stealth is no longer effective.

GMD is a work in progress. It's come a long way in a decade, but it still has likely another decade and a half to go (with an entirely new interceptor) until it is truly ready as opposed to rudimentary ready (which it is right now). It's worth noting that tests don't fire the number of interceptors a real world scenario would see.


You speak as if the Russian military is significantly more capable than Saddam Hussein's. See above.

Also I didn't realize that Afghanistan, which is where most of our European allies fought, was in the Middle East.

Russia - fixing Bulava for years.
The US? Work in progress.

Bulava: failure, success, success, success, failure, failure, failure, success, success, success, failure, failure, failure, success, success, success, success, success, success, failure.
GDM: success, failure, failure, success, success, success, success, failure, failure, failure, success, failure, success, success, failure, failure, failure.
You don't know how to fix it. Russians do.

Oh, you know where Afghanistan is? Cute.

[Tierbook]

Wikipedia article you say?

That's what happens when you fight against people that aren't from Middle East.
And intact?


Afghanistan? You mean that war that SOVIETS fought against 200000–250000 Muhajideens (and obliterating them) supported by your government?



Wait, you mean that Russians fought in WW2???

The airframe was intact, also the edges on that look pretty smooth for a crash landing.... Can i point out that the war if Iraq involved nearly half a million enemies, 375k in the army and more than 125k assorted terrorist groups.

[Skroe]

Wikipedia article you say?

Afghanistan? You mean that war that SOVIETS fought against 200000–250000 Muhajideens (and obliterating them) supported by your government?

I seem to recall a different outcome. An outcome where a broken Soviet Army that sustained 10,000 combat deaths in 8 years limped out of Afghanistan (which then devolved into an orgy of violence) and back into a broken superpower in it's death spiral.

Yeah we backed the Muhajideens and we were damn smart to do it. It handed our enemy, the Soviet Union, a devastating loss at the time it was most fragile.

The 1980s for Russia where:
The death of 3 Leaders in 4 years.
Gorbachev's reforms, which upended the internal dynamics of the USSR
Chernobyl
The CIA blowing up a major oil pipeline.
The meat grinder of Afghanistan
The US massively rearming itself.
An economic depression (while the West boomed).
A precipitous fall in oil prices thanks to Saudi Arabia flooding the market (and new sources of oil flooding the market as a reaction to the 1973 oil embargo that bore fruit).
The Warsaw Pact and other allies abandoning the USSR one by one.


I've said it once and I'll say it again. In 1988 my American family got it's first personal computer (Mac IIcx). You know what we weren't doing? Standing in a bread line, like Russians were.

Alone the USSR could have survived any of these. All together, it broke it's back. And to be clear lest our Team Russia friends make a mistake: This country does look back at the Fall of the USSR with pride and happiness.

Frankly, the only mistake the West made was not going for a more comprehensive break up in the 1990s. Hopefully at the other end of this new era of NATO/Russian animosity, we see the balkanization of the Russian Federation. May seem hard to imagine now. But the USSR looked pretty stable in 1975 too.

[Kellhound]

Your citizens will beg your government to pull back your soldiers when they start dying against someone who isn't as incompetent as Middle East.
Yes, Crimea was worth it, it's extremely rich for resources. People didn't die.
They should, they won't. But because Ukrainians are shelling their own cities, it's only strengthening the so called separatists. I now wonder what's better - force Ukrainian army to go back to Kiev, or to ensure that eastern Ukraine won't join the western one?

The Russian military would crumble against NATO almost as fast as Iraq did. NATO has a technical advantage, a training advantage, a combat experience advantage, and a numerical advantage over Russia. The only thing that MIGHT prevent Russian ground troops from being overrun is if Russian SAMs work as well as advertised and NATO SEAD does not.

- - - Updated - - -

I seem to remember someone on this forum a few months ago commenting on how sending strategic bombers on intercontinental trips to put on a show was "completely useless". (Or is this another one of those things that's doubleplusgood when the United States does it, but doubleplusungood when done by anyone else? Because, jingoism.) And the article isn't exactly informative - it doesn't mention that the B-2s are being deployed to RAF Fairford, one of only three airfields capable of supporting the B-2s and their delicate skin, and probably won't be spending long anywhere else, lest they be caught in the rain. (But what else should we expect from CNN, the crappy US equivalent to RT? They're probably only interested because someone told them the B-2s might disappear untraceably. )

And seriously, "Tee hee hee"? At least have a little class and go for the mustache-twirling, "Bwa ha ha ha!"

It is useless. It is intended for civilian consumption, Russia knows full well the B-2s can conduct combat operations against Russia from their bases in the Midwest.

[ringpriest]

It's a start. It's also not the end, as shown by the B-2 deployment, the meetings held. This is a process that will take many, many months even years, to put into action. For example, if Obama says "we're building a Polish base" tomorrow... an announcement likely some time this year given how much the Polish are pushing for it... it wouldn't be ready until, at the earlier, 2018.

There is no "Rush to Europe". But you just have to look at Obama's Feburary defense budget, which cut European troops by a third, to the ones passing through Congress right now (not yet reconciled) that allocate more to European defense.

The entire direction has shifted.

I don't know what to say? That's NATO's time table and it's appropriate. They had their meeting in May. It was substantial at the policy level. They decided on a direction and an emphasis on European defense post-Afghanistan, and a recomittment to specific defense goals (targeted at Russia), and now they break up for a few months to allow their subordinates to hash out the details until the planning conference in the fall.

Are we going to war against Russia in August? Did I miss that memo? Of course not. The plan plainly now, is to contain Russia yet again. So they're gearing up to put the policy - and finances - in order for that. And you know what, going by what I said previously... if in the fall they decide to lets say, start putting Western European troops in Eastern Europe in larger numbers, it'll be the Spring of next year before they start arriving in substantial numbers. And if NATO starts opening news bases, it'll be a few years.

Stuff like this is why I cannot take you seriously. (And why I don't think anyone else should, either.) You write well (better than most who share your views), you're usually on top of your facts (again, unlike most of those who share your views), but when it comes to analysis and synthesis, your praxis, you go off the deep end into blind support of whatever the establishment party line is. For example, here's you on foreign policy last year, singing the praises of the then-current "pivot to Asia":

The Asia Pivot is the single most important foreign policy event of the 21st century thus far, and has been executed masterfully. Yes, more important the Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Drone Strikes, Climate Change Treaties... everything. The Asia Pivot is something that could last for sixty years and the foundation he, State and the Pentagon built is very strong.

Now, in this thread and related threads, you can't praise Cold War version 2.0 enough. It's as though you're a waiter, committed to singing the praises of the Dish of the Day, no matter what it may be. So which is more important, 'encircling Russia' or 'pivoting to Asia'. (And, more importantly, what kind of idiocy in America's foreign policy establishment makes it "think" that antagonizing and isolating both China and Russia is a good idea?)

- A naval base in a death trap of a sea that, were it in NATO hands, would rarely host any US vessels. It's only value would be Russia didn't have it.
- Glad to see you approve of literally, war for oil. Also $2 trillion over decades is a lot less than it looks like.
-"Western Imperialism". Glad to see how far gone you are. Counterpuch wants their talking points back.

It was a parody of MasterCard commercials. From Russia's viewpoint, I very much expect that Crimea was and will be 'worth it', although, no, I certainly don't personally approve. (I doubt Putin or the Russian government cares, though.)

Happily
https://russiandefpolicy.wordpress.c...bat-readiness/

It gets better

So as I said... the Russian Air Force is a joke.

Thanks for the link. I knew the strategic bomber fleet was in 'poor shape' but didn't realize just how bad, or how widespread the rot was. It'll be interesting to see how long it takes to (or if they even can reach) the readiness numbers they want. (For the sake of MAD, I guess I'd better hope that they do, and quickly.)

[Kellhound]

I remember Bulava, they're fixing their problems. I also remember how "modern" F-117A was shot down by 38 years old piece of crap S-125. I was laughing. I also remember how your GMD failed tests over and over again. What was it, like 47% success rate?

You're good at obliterating Middle East armies, I give you that.

Bulava STILL has a horrible launch record, especially when compared to the Trident missiles.

Modern? The F-117 was 1970s tech, hardly modern. And ONE was shot down in its entire history.

Middle East armies equipped and trained by Russia by and large.....