Russian Ground Forces: News #1

AlfaT8 wrote:

Austin wrote:Russia's Military Is Back

Oooh god, where to start.  

First of, comparing the Russian and U.S navy via there budgetary spending is stupid, rookie mistake.

Second, if NATO is "concerned" about there "out of area operations" then perhaps they should stop expanding eastward.

Third, harping (bitching) on about the Bulava and Admiral Gorshkov/Vikramaditya Standard western tactic as of late.

Fourth, Questioning whether Russia can locally produce anything of the next generation, because some nitwit (Serdyukov) decided to import some equipment like the Iveco, Mistral and some Israeli drones, then at the same time claiming that Russia is importing these systems to Reverse-engineer cause no analogue can be produced locally.
Sadly for this guy, i can read, now if i recall the Iveco's were practically useless ones there off-road, the Mistral are more of a stopgap for now and the only thing that Russia would revers-engineering are those UAVs from Israel.

Fifth, Oooowh, doubt in the Russian economy and population, again standard western tactic.

Sixth, Russia losing competitive edge to U.S, Euro and even Chinese defense firms cause it can't "keep pace with newer developments in defense technology"
Ooh yeah, i think we all know how far Nato is with there superduper very advance subsonic cruise missiles and China is still reliant on whatever Russia lets them have.

Seventh, "Whether the newfound confidence that results will make Russia more cooperative or obstructionist in the international arena is an open question."
No, the open question is, will the west continue there push eastward and continue their idiocratic crusade or will they stop before getting us all killed.

Pretty much

What's really scary is that this is the peak of Western intellectual discourse; or rather not the peak - but what passes for it all too often.
You will have US military officers, intelligence analysts, policy-makers, etc... read this biased non-article and will actually believe that they're reading a balanced report on the issue; a condensed version of what a subscription to Jane's might have led them to believe (a far more objective publication but one that few people other than select military professionals will ever take the time to keep on top of).

And then there is straight-up propaganda, like you can read about Russia's demographic, economic, military situation in some many US and European newspapers, websites, etc... although I'd imagine that most serious people will recognize them for what they are.

Not so with an article like this however. It retains just enough balance to keep its cover and and not be called-out for its subtle fact-twisting and biased reporting.

Whether the newfound confidence that results will make Russia more cooperative or obstructionist in the international arena is an open question

This quote was a favourite of mine too.
I mean is it really necessary to see all international relations through the prism of whether it directly serves American interests or not? Has the hubris and overconfidence really reached the point where it's fair to call any Russian defense of its legitimate interests even if they are odds with American - 'obstructionist'? And likewise call a situation where Russia might choose to serve American interests 'cooperative'?
Is it really that hard to just write:

'whether the newfound confidence that results will make Russia more inclined to compromise or more assertive of its interests in the international arena is an open question'

I guess it really is just that hard to write something like that. It's something I noticed with almost all Western journalists and political analysts - they practice a form of self-censorship; whether as a result of pressure from their editorial board or because of their own fears of not getting taken seriously if they dare to deviate too far from the accepted norm.
In this case - there is clearly no incentive for the author to be objective; there is nothing for him to gain in terms of appealing to his target audience, and few people will call him out on his writing I suspect - the soft propaganda and half-truths suit and soothe everybody I suspect..

AlfaT8 wrote:

Austin wrote:Russia's Military Is Back

Oooh god, where to start.  

First of, comparing the Russian and U.S navy via there budgetary spending is stupid, rookie mistake.

Second, if NATO is "concerned" about there "out of area operations" then perhaps they should stop expanding eastward.

Third, harping (bitching) on about the Bulava and Admiral Gorshkov/Vikramaditya Standard western tactic as of late.

Fourth, Questioning whether Russia can locally produce anything of the next generation, because some nitwit (Serdyukov) decided to import some equipment like the Iveco, Mistral and some Israeli drones, then at the same time claiming that Russia is importing these systems to Reverse-engineer cause no analogue can be produced locally.
Sadly for this guy, i can read, now if i recall the Iveco's were practically useless ones there off-road, the Mistral are more of a stopgap for now and the only thing that Russia would revers-engineering are those UAVs from Israel.

Fifth, Oooowh, doubt in the Russian economy and population, again standard western tactic.

Sixth, Russia losing competitive edge to U.S, Euro and even Chinese defense firms cause it can't "keep pace with newer developments in defense technology"
Ooh yeah, i think we all know how far Nato is with there superduper very advance subsonic cruise missiles and China is still reliant on whatever Russia lets them have.

Seventh, "Whether the newfound confidence that results will make Russia more cooperative or obstructionist in the international arena is an open question."
No, the open question is, will the west continue there push eastward and continue their idiocratic crusade or will they stop before getting us all killed.

Problem that a lot of people don't understand about anything of anything of late, is Russian demographics and economy. While it is true that there are issues with things like stagnation and drug/alcohol abuse, things are changing. Alcoholism is down first time in over a decade, but drugs is a real issue.

Economy that people cannot seem to look past is that yes, stagnation is now becoming a semi-reality, but there are manouvers in place and MANY westerners are not getting that news, actually, even if they are, they learned to ignore it and just look at the problem black and white. What people don't know is that Russia's economy is changing big time, like domestic consumption is increasing while external is decreasing, foreign investments are up, and the middle class as well as lower income are increasing quite a bit in a short period of time. Economy for Russia as well has a big impact on military and in that response, Russia's military budget is highest since the Soviet Union; but don't let that stand in a way of a good ragefest from westerners.

Russian MiC couldn't be competitive now? So when they have more money, they are less competitive than in the days of the 90's where they were considered competitive, with no money? That makes very little sense. Common Sense is an oxymoron, as it really isn't common (it isn't hard for even a non-Russian speaking person to find news on development in Russia). USA is producing a 5th gen jet at same time as Russia now (F-35 vs PAK FA), and it seems that F-35 is forever in conflict with media and politicians, yet they love to tout it when they compare it to other countries equipment. So what is USA developing forever in, over Russia, that makes Russia less competitive? Actually, lets see China?

Only thing China creates is nice looking shells with no public knowledge on subsystems, so it is really hard to judge. China has trouble developing jet engines, so how can we expect them to make leaps in other technologies that are NOT off the shelf? Their air defence systems are not impressive at all, actually, just knockoffs of other technology.

USA has not produced any supersonic missiles, and their hypersonic development is about as close as Russia's in terms of R&D. Only recently USA has been able to be able to set up an air defence system capable of ABM that is semi-mobile, while Russia's S-300 series have had ABM capabilities for decades and is mobile. Their tank and armoured force is no longer brand spanking new, while Russia is investing in the Armata, Kurganets and Boomerang which is the way the west wants to move, a unified system using similar components, but they are not even close to something yet. USA is definately ahead in UAV technology and navy, and the NAvy is an easy understanding as their funding is astronomical for decades, and UAV technology was mostly shared with Israel for over a decade.