Su-34 Tactical Bomber: News #2

Isos writes nonsense. I wrote him nicely that some people have more cars in their collection than France has tanks and howitzers.

Isos wrote:

Isos writes nonsense. I wrote him nicely that some people have more cars in their collection than France has tanks and howitzers.

And what's the point ? We are talking about su-34 and rafale. What would be your argument with cars, tanks and howitzers that prove su-34 is better than Rafale ? Are you that dumb to see there is no link between cars and tank and planes.

Rafale is bought by many countries. Who is looking to buy su-34 ? No one. Despite veing 10 times cheaper than rafale.

Podlodka77 wrote:

Isos wrote:

Isos writes nonsense. I wrote him nicely that some people have more cars in their collection than France has tanks and howitzers.

And what's the point ? We are talking about su-34 and rafale. What would be your argument with cars, tanks and howitzers that prove su-34 is better than Rafale ? Are you that dumb to see there is no link between cars and tank and planes.

Rafale is bought by many countries. Who is looking to buy su-34 ? No one. Despite veing 10 times cheaper than rafale.

Isos, the Su-34 was never primarily a fighter, nor does your France have this category of aircraft.
Take it easy on that "dumb" because I can write to you that way too. The fact is that France is weak, very weak, and Russia has proven that airfields are vulnerable to destruction. Therefore, I ask you what will be left of the French army when a potential adversary destroys its aviation ?
And if there were no US pressure and sanctions on the Russian aviation industry, NO ONE would have bought your Rafale. We have an example with submarines for Australia, don't we, because after the termination of the contract with Australia for those submarines, they immediately appeased France with the sale of Rafale aircraft.

Isos wrote:
French don't need a big army. The neighbours aren't threatening nor do they have big militaries. French have nuks to ensure no one invade. As simple as that.

Isos wrote:
Where russian aviation won contracts against the Rafale ? Nowhere. It's just that they found put rafale was the best aircraft, specially with meteor. That's why they are buying it. Even indians have praised it over the su-30mki that is barely able to fight pakistani f-16.

Australian choosed french subs because they won the tender. They were the best option. Then it's only politicians who made it fail.

Relying on nukes alone will not ensure anything. For years untested, not upgraded and in questionable conditions. The deterrence factor almost doesn't exist. How many does France have and how many are ready to fire right now? Will France have the balls to actually pull the trigger and get vaporized as well?

Tenders have little to do who is the best option but mostly political or economical. Let alone if you are a NATO member you are not able to buy Chinese/Russian stuff anyway. They have to comply with NATO standards. The US taxpayers money also works wonders if officials of a country are getting bribed to hand them contracts and then they wait for decades for their shit. Ask the Polish, the Germans, Australia and many others where are the shit they bought from the US.

Podlodka77 wrote:"France occupied half the world"... JOKE OF THE DAY !        
Yes yes, only Isos forgot that the Germans beat the French like an old bucket in 42 days...      
Now France is increasingly occupied, but with Muslims and migrants.

Isos wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:"France occupied half the world"... JOKE OF THE DAY !        
Yes yes, only Isos forgot that the Germans beat the French like an old bucket in 42 days...      
Now France is increasingly occupied, but with Muslims and migrants.

I wrote invaded not occupied. You are too dumb to copy a word. Go back to school please.

Podlodka77 wrote:

Isos wrote:

Podlodka77 wrote:"France occupied half the world"... JOKE OF THE DAY !        
Yes yes, only Isos forgot that the Germans beat the French like an old bucket in 42 days...      
Now France is increasingly occupied, but with Muslims and migrants.

I wrote invaded not occupied. You are too dumb to copy a word. Go back to school please.

And you be so "smart" and understand what it means when someone rips you off like an old bucket in 42 days.

Mir wrote:Yes the Rafale is great but it is an old design. The demonstrator flew back in 1986. I really do like the French fighters but somehow they never built the ones I really liked - like the Mirage G8, the F2 and the Mirage 4000. I guess they were too expensive - even for the French!  

Isos wrote:
Softies   . French have invaded half of the world and you think they wouldn't use nuks on an invading army ?

Isos wrote:
Russian nuks are no better than french. They don't test them either.

Only a fool would think they don't work. French have 3 SSBN at sea since the start of the russian war. More than enough to destroy any country or invading force. They also have air launched nuks.

Isos wrote:
Like I said two times before, there is no one right now that can invade France. Neighbours are friendly country with no big armies. China and Russia can't reach France. French army doesn't need a big army since it has no objectives that require a big army.

Isos wrote:
Air forces test plane during tenders. Swiss repport official said Rafale was vetter in all areas than typhoon and grippen.

Isos wrote:Even Russians used to buy french technology before the syrian and ukrainian wars. Most export countries that buy su-30 choose french avionics when they can.

Werewolf wrote:

Isos wrote:
Softies   . French have invaded half of the world and you think they wouldn't use nuks on an invading army ?

I don't really understand what funny thing I have said?

ALAMO wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

Isos wrote:
Softies   . French have invaded half of the world and you think they wouldn't use nuks on an invading army ?

I don't really understand what funny thing I have said?

I guess that you didn't get the whole picture
The Froggies are indeed the most aggressive nation in history.
They fought the most battles and invaded most countries.
Out of all
Yet, they have lost maybe not literally "most" of those, but the most important ones indeed.
Calling them a pussies, cowards, or dedicated POWs is miserably wrong - they used to be really a pain in the ass.
Still, they have been defeated multiple times, and finally, that really broke their neck.
On the opposite, Russkie carries the second position.
They fought the battles numbered 2nd to the French, but ... they won most of those.
And all of the most important.
Brits carry the proud third place and I won't comment of the win/lost ratio as I simply never followed that close enough.

The french today are not the french from yesterday. You are like Mongolia now, a puppy compared to what it once was. No one fears Mongolia today, but everyone remembers the great Khan.

I think it is quite obvious that Russian nukes are by a big margin better than anything else that there is currently. The only updated nuclear weapons with new technologies. Of course there are shit load from Soviet times, but I would bet that they are much better maintained than France or UK maintain theirs.

On your claim "Most export countries that buy su-30 choose french avionics... Well with all claims you have so far made about Su-34 it is hard to believe you without sources to proof or at least indicate your position.

Isos wrote:
After 7 months it barely enters Ukrraine and launches missiles from outside ukraine. 0 deep strike.

It's a failed aircraft.

Isos wrote:
Pesa radar that has a 120km range against a fighter. Against new fighter with reduced it has much less range.

Isos wrote:
Proof is that airfield where it missed all the targets.

Isos wrote:
Half a dozen for 0 deep strike like it was supposed to do is embarassing

Isos wrote:
Made up and fake numbers. And in reality terrain is not flat. You fly low only to escape radars, there is no other advantage.

Isos wrote:
russians have issues detecting them 30km away which is really bad for them.

Isos wrote:
HARM lock passively on your radars. Himars is a mlrs.

Isos wrote:
No argument so you change your arguments lol1

Isos wrote:
It's you and your source who said they use kh-59

Isos wrote:
Sucking russian dicks won't help you have a better life.

Isos wrote:

Russian nuks are not better than french.

ALAMO wrote:

Isos wrote:

Russian nuks are not better than french.

Holly fuc#k, this is getting the meme

Isos wrote:

ALAMO wrote:

Isos wrote:

Russian nuks are not better than french.

Holly fuc#k, this is getting the meme

ALAMO wrote:... in the opposite of the brilliant motherfuckers from the Dassault