AngusThermopyle Posted August 22, 2008 Report Share Posted August 22, 2008 The entire spectrum is open for consideration.....as are countermeasures. Well put. Thats what I was trying to say in my overly cumbersome way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 22, 2008 Report Share Posted August 22, 2008 The Soviets and Russians certainly tried, but too often their countermeasures were outpaced by American technology. From Russian made tanks with simple stadimeter rangefinders sent to slaughter against M1's with a better gun and standoff range, to GPS jammers that were already defeated with multi-channel + laser guidance. The other aspect that bears repeating is that the Americans an Israelis get to use their kit far more often than the Russians....from training to real wars. Plus the Russians would often copy western designs, which is hardly an advantage (famously, the B-29 was copied by Stalin right down to defective rivets.)Air defense systems are an open admission that the enemy will penetrate your air space, which means defense suppression will also be a reality. The Americans are very methodic about this, from destroying power grids, communications links, air bases, tankers, fuel depots, search and fire control radar, etc. The American combination of technology, experience, and the will to use both is a winning combination for air superiority. It really isn't a fair fight anymore. Dedicated and multi-role platforms, in-flight refueling, avionics suites, GPS weapons systems, pilot training, and logistics supply to support it all can't be effectively countered by Russia. The entire spectrum is open for consideration.....as are countermeasures. One of the biggest problems facing stealth technology is the black hole they make in cell phone saturated areas. Shoot at the RF black hole and you might get lucky! Your arguments sound pretty convincing... I hope it doesn't get to NATO generals' heads... or else they may be actually crazy enough to attack Russia... How long is Bush still in the office? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 23, 2008 Report Share Posted August 23, 2008 Your arguments sound pretty convincing...I hope it doesn't get to NATO generals' heads... or else they may be actually crazy enough to attack Russia... How long is Bush still in the office? No need to attack Russia....it is easily marginalized by true exconomic and political freedoms. As I have said before, Russia has never figured this out, and I really don't know why. Russia's pathology can only be understood by Russians (and Vodka). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted August 23, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 23, 2008 (edited) No need to attack Russia....it is easily marginalized by true exconomic and political freedoms. As I have said before, Russia has never figured this out, and I really don't know why. Russia's pathology can only be understood by Russians (and Vodka). The U.S. and Russia will never confront each other in any serious matter! War between the U.S. and Russia will always be fought through other countries such as Vietnam...or in todays case Iran or maybe Syria....both the U.S. and Russia have thousands of Nukes more than enough to kill everyone on the planet many times over....neither side will ever have enough of an advantage to attack the other without commiting suicide...the U.S. has actually a better chance of launching a first strike because of its stealth technology but this would never happen unless some unforseenable mishap or misunderstanding occured ,the Russian have old tech the TU-95'S make so much noise that U.S. submarines can actually hear them while submerged....lol....i think more scarey is the islamic terrorist groups getting hold of a Nuke! those animals will have no misgivings about using such weapons! Edited August 23, 2008 by wulf42 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 23, 2008 Report Share Posted August 23, 2008 The Tu-95 is right up there with the Concorde and SR-71 as one of the world's noisiest aircraft. ------------------------------------------------ During a wise man's whole life, his destiny holds his philosophy in a state of siege. ---Victor Hugo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 23, 2008 Report Share Posted August 23, 2008 The Tu-95 is right up there with the Concorde and SR-71 as one of the world's noisiest aircraft. Yes, and I've also noticed that the Russian tanks in Georgia haven't had their emission test done in a while Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted August 24, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 24, 2008 Yes, and I've also noticed that the Russian tanks in Georgia haven't had their emission test done in a while lol......very true...those tanks were creating smoke screens! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 28, 2008 Report Share Posted August 28, 2008 http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/29622 August 28, 2008, 18:22 Russia tests intercontinental missile in Kamchatka Russia has successfully tested an intercontinental ballistic missile. The country's Defence Ministry has reported that it hit the target on the testing ground in the far eastern region of Kamchatka. The Ministry claims the weapon is capable of bypassing the most advanced missile defence systems. Although it has been on stand-by for 21 years, the Ministry said the weapon has shown it can effectively hit high-security facilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted August 28, 2008 Report Share Posted August 28, 2008 Russia tests intercontinental missile in Kamchatka Wow! Another first for Russia! Not! Face it, for the most part Russian military equipment is very second rate, if that. As for their conscripts, well we won't even get into that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Wow! Another first for Russia! Not!Face it, for the most part Russian military equipment is very second rate, if that. As for their conscripts, well we won't even get into that. Old Russian offencive equipment can still penetrate most modern US defensive systems, so there's no point in modernizing it yet. 30% of Russian army (which is over 1 Mil) are professionals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Old Russian offencive equipment can still penetrate most modern US defensive systems, so there's no point in modernizing it yet. Is that why the battlefileds of the middle east are littered with the burnt destroyed hulks of russian armour? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 (edited) 30% of Russian army (which is over 1 Mil) are professionals. Yeah yeah, thats nice. The West having 100% of its forces as volunteers and therefore professionals just can't compare to that 30% eh. Old Russian offencive equipment can still penetrate most modern US defensive systems, so there's no point in modernizing it yet. Russian equipment is substandard and in many cases obsolete. You keep kidding yourself as to how good that stuff is, at least you'll believe it even if no one else does. The simple fact is that Russia never produced equipment that was on par with the West. This has only gotten worse since the collapse. New tech, it just doesn't exist in Russia. Edited August 29, 2008 by AngusThermopyle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 (edited) Old Russian offencive equipment can still penetrate most modern US defensive systems, so there's no point in modernizing it yet. Ya, modernizing is not good. Look what happened to uber submarine K-141 Kursk. 30% of Russian army (which is over 1 Mil) are professionals. While the rest are rank amateurs! Edited August 29, 2008 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Yeah yeah, thats nice. The West having 100% of its forces as volunteers and therefore professionals just can't compare to that 30% eh.Russian equipment is substandard and in many cases obsolete. You keep kidding yourself as to how good that stuff is, at least you'll believe it even if no one else does. The simple fact is that Russia never produced equipment that was on par with the West. This has only gotten worse since the collapse. New tech, it just doesn't exist in Russia. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206..._8&refer=us Georgia War Shows Russia `Force to Be Reckoned With' (Update1) By Sebastian Alison Aug. 28 (Bloomberg) -- When British General Sir Michael Rose commanded United Nations forces protecting Bosnia in the mid-1990s, he gained first-hand knowledge of Russia's army, which participated in the mission. ``They were worse than useless,'' the 68-year-old retired officer said in an interview. Not any more. Russia's five-day drubbing of the U.S.-trained and equipped Georgian military this month followed a 5 trillion ruble ($200 billion) buildup undertaken in 2006 and lessons learned from misadventures in Afghanistan and Chechnya. ``Today they're a reinvented institution and a military force to be reckoned with'' after ``10 years of humiliation and pressure from NATO,'' Rose said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Ya, modernizing is not good. Look what happened to uber submarine K-141 Kursk. A necessary sacrifice... Nothing like supersonic torpedoes to sink those behemoth aircraft carriers I think China has them on their subs too now. Chinese subs should be more expendable While the rest are rank amateurs! The rest are conscripts... wouldn't want to be one of them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Today they're a reinvented institution and a military force to be reckoned with'' And the same could be said of the majority of NATO countries. Put NATO together and you don't just have "a force to reckoned with", you have a force that does the reckoning. If that were not so then Russia would not tread lightly around NATO, they know they can't beat them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 A necessary sacrifice... Nothing like supersonic torpedoes to sink those behemoth aircraft carriers I think China has them on their subs too now. Chinese subs should be more expendable Yes, the Russians whined that the Americans made them get stupid (again). The rest are conscripts... wouldn't want to be one of them... Yes, it is bad enough just be Russian in Russia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 And the same could be said of the majority of NATO countries. Put NATO together and you don't just have "a force to reckoned with", you have a force that does the reckoning. If that were not so then Russia would not tread lightly around NATO, they know they can't beat them. Yes, Angus, I agree. It would be foolish not to recognize that NATO (an alliance of 26 countries, G7 included, at least half are highly developed and industrialized with their own powerful military) is stronger than a single country Russia (even with whatever little satellite countries it may have. So there's no question as to who's stronger. The question is: Why is NATO needed? To protect who from whom? Or to attach who? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 A necessary sacrifice... Nothing like supersonic torpedoes to sink those behemoth aircraft carriers wink.gifI think China has them on their subs too now. Chinese subs should be more expendable biggrin.gif Now this is interesting, I've mentioned these torps before. Yes China has them, Canada gave them to China. Didn't know that did you? It was a Canadian who stole the plans for them, I believe it was that bonehead Trudeau who gave them to the Chinese. (May be wrong about the Trudeau part) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Now this is interesting, I've mentioned these torps before. Yes China has them, Canada gave them to China. Didn't know that did you? It was a Canadian who stole the plans for them, I believe it was that bonehead Trudeau who gave them to the Chinese. (May be wrong about the Trudeau part) Can you give me a link? I'd like to educate myself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Now this is interesting, I've mentioned these torps before. Yes China has them, Canada gave them to China. Didn't know that did you? It was a Canadian who stole the plans for them, I believe it was that bonehead Trudeau who gave them to the Chinese. (May be wrong about the Trudeau part) Do you mean the "Shkval"? Russian and Chinese navies are great on paper, not in blue water. Talk is cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Do you mean the "Shkval"? Yep, thats the puppy. I figure it can't be that great or we wouldn't have given it to China. If it was all that then I'm pretty sure the US would have it or some variant of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Yep, thats the puppy. I figure it can't be that great or we wouldn't have given it to China. If it was all that then I'm pretty sure the US would have it or some variant of it. I think US banned the use of solid-fuel torpedoes back in the 60's... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wulf42 Posted August 29, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 Yeah yeah, thats nice. The West having 100% of its forces as volunteers and therefore professionals just can't compare to that 30% eh.Russian equipment is substandard and in many cases obsolete. You keep kidding yourself as to how good that stuff is, at least you'll believe it even if no one else does. The simple fact is that Russia never produced equipment that was on par with the West. This has only gotten worse since the collapse. New tech, it just doesn't exist in Russia. Well there is one piece of Russian equipment that has stood the test of time...and that is the good old AK-47 you got to hand it to the Russians this rifle is very good and very tough...you can run the thing over with a truck.. drag it through mud pick it up and fire it without hesitation!! This weapon is more popular today with many countries than ever! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted August 29, 2008 Report Share Posted August 29, 2008 It is a good rifle in that its tough and cheap, thats about it. If you watch high speed footage of an AK firing you'll be amazed by the barrel flex, its not a very accurate rifle. In this day its becoming obsolete pretty fast, I'll look some stuff up for you. The new weapons are amazing, how about a .45 cal sub machine gun with almost no barrel drift on full auto. Or a full auto shotgun with almost no kick or climb, saw that one on Future Weapons, it was absolutely devastating. Or the P-90, a nice little sub machine gun accurate to about 300 yards, thats simply unheard of in sub machine guns. Simply put the Russians bring nothing new to the table and are far outclassed by modern western weapons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.