The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewThe Saker Archive
Making Sense of a Few Rumors About Russian Aircraft, Tanks, and Aircraft Carriers
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_1085529599

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Russians are typically good at some things, and not so good at others. One of the things which Russian politicians are still terrible at, is avoiding self-inflicted PR disasters. Remember how Russian officials mismanaged the entire topic of “S-300s for Syria” (if not, then check out “part six” of this analysis)? Something similar is happening again, but this time with the procurement of new advanced and expensive weapons systems.

We have all seen the “Russia is canceling the Su-57!” and “Russia cannot afford the new Armata T-14 tank!” headlines. Pretty soon I expect to see something along the lines of “US sanctions force Putin to abandon the XXXX” (fill the blank with whatever weapon system you want). So is there any truth to any of that?

Well, yes and no.

Aircraft and main battle tanks

What is true is that Russian officials have been way too eager to declare that the Russian military will soon have many weapons systems much superior to anything produced in the West. Alas, these same officials rarely bothered explaining where, why, when and how many of these weapons systems actually would be deployed. That kind of ambiguous message makes it look like Russia is zig-zagging (again!). Perfect example: Russia deploys 4 Su-57s to Syria and then appears to more or less cancel or, at least, dramatically reduce the procurement of this weapons system. The reality is both much simpler and a little more complex. And to explain what is taking place we need to first understand the difference in military procurement in the West and in Russia.

In the West, the main goal of any procurement of any weapons system is the transfer of as much money as possible from the government to the pockets of the private individuals controlling the Military-Industrial Complex. Put differently, Western force planning (especially in the US) is not threat or mission-driven, but profit driven. And while some outrageously expensive weapons systems do get canceled (like the Boeing–Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche attack helicopter), other even more expensive and poorly designed ones remain funded (such as the F-35). This is the kind of situation only a fantastically corrupt country with no real threat to itself can afford. In contrast, Russia is far less corrupt and has potential enemies right across most of her borders.

Russian force planning is threat/mission driven. This means that before the Russian military decides that it needs X number of Su-57 or T-14s it has to make the case that there is a threat which only Su-57s and T-14s can counter (or, at least, that it makes more sense – human, economic or tactical – to use new systems)

During the Cold War, the general rule (there were exceptions, of course!) was that the US was typically the first side to deploy a new technology/capability which the Soviets then studied before developing a counter-capability once the strengths and weaknesses of the new US technologies/capabilities were fully understood. The price to pay for that method was that the Soviets were usually one step behind the US in deploying a new technology. The main advantage of this dynamic for the Soviets was that their weapons systems typically ended up being both cheaper and superior. A good example of this kind of dynamic is the development of the Su-27 in response to the US development of the F-15 or the development of the Akula-class SSN in response to the Los Angeles-class SSN by the USN.

Today the situation is quite different. If you compare Russian and western weapons systems (say, the latest versions of the Su-35/Su-30s vs the latest versions of the F-15s/16s/18s or the T-90/T-72B3/B3M vs the Abrams/Leopard MBTs) you realize that the current Russians systems are at least as good as their US/EU counterparts, if not better. This happened because with the official end of the Cold War US/EU force planners decided to waste money on hugely expensive weapons systems instead of modernizing their aging aircraft or tanks. After all, 20-30-year-old tanks and aircraft were more than adequate to deal with such “threats” as Iraq or Yugoslavia, so why waste the money: nobody expected Russia to be able to rebound as fast as she did.

All this begs the question of what threats the Su-57s or T-14s were supposed to deal with? Logically this threat would have to be a threat which already existing Su-35s or modernized T-72/80/90s could not deal with. Can such threats be identified? Probably yes, both in the West and, in the case of aircraft, in the East. But how big (in terms of numbers) this threat will actually be is a huge question. For example, I would argue that the only strategic direction in which the deployment of T-14 would make sense is the West, specifically for the First Guards Tank Army which would have to fight NATO in case of a war. And even in this case, there is an optimal mix of old/new MBTs inside the two divisions composing the backbone of this Army which would make more sense than replacing all their current MBTs with T-14s (this will be especially true if a 152mm gun version of the Armata is ever deployed). As for deploying the T-14s to the South or East of Russia, it would make no sense at all since no opposing force in these directions would have armor superior to the Russians. In the case of air-power, this issue is not so much a geographical one (tactical air-power can be rapidly moved from one location to another one) as it is the number of F-22s/F-35s/(X-2s?) the US and its allies could deploy against Russia (assuming air-to-air refueling and that the F-35 actually works as advertised).

ORDER IT NOW

In reality only comparing tactical aircraft to tactical aircraft and MBTs to other MBTs is a gross oversimplification; in the real world you would have to compare the full spectrum of capabilities of both sides, such as MBTs vs anti-tank weapons or attack helicopters (in the case or air combat this would be even much more complicated), so I kept it simple just for illustration purposes.

For the foreseeable future, the threat to Russia will come from the latest iterations of the F-16/15/18s in which case the Su-35s/Su-30SM/Mig-25SMT/MiG-35/MiG31BM will be more than enough to deal with that threat, especially with their new radar+missile combos. And for a more advanced threat, a combination of Su-57s and already existing generation 4++ aircraft makes more sense than trying to deploy thousands of 5th generation aircraft (which is what the US is currently doing).

Finally, there is the issue of exports. While exports can help finance the costs of new and very pricey systems, the export potential of already existing Russian systems is much bigger than the one of recently deployed systems. Originally, the Russians had hoped to basically co-develop the Su-57 with India, but the pressures of the very powerful pro-US lobby inside India combined with differences in design philosophy and technical requirements have made the future of this collaboration rather uncertain. Of course, there is China, but the Chinese also have to ask themselves the question of how many Su-57 they would really want to purchase from Russia, especially considering that they have already purchased many Su-35s and are still working on their own 5th generation aircraft.

The Cold War years illustrate how the Soviet Union dealt with this problem: both the advanced and expensive Su-27 and the cheaper, but still very effective, MiG-29 were developed and deployed more or less simultaneously (along with some very good missiles) and while the Sukhoi was a much more complex aircraft with a much bigger upgrade potential, the MiG was cheap, fantastically maneuverable and superbly adapted to it’s “front line fighter” mission in spite of not even having fly-by-wire! It is therefore hardly surprising that Russian force planners today would like similar options.

Which makes me wonder which major weapon procurement program will be “mothballed” next?

Russian aircraft carriers and aircraft-carrying assault ships

My vote goes for the much announced Russian Project 23000 “Storm” super aircraft carrier (check out this article by Andrei Martyanov on this topic). Without going into the issue of whether Russia needs aircraft carriers and, if yes, what kind exactly (I personally think that the Russian Navy has more important programs to spend money on), it strikes me as extremely premature to declare, in 2018, that Russia plans to deploy not one, but three or even four (!), such super aircraft carriers. The reality is that for the foreseeable future budgetary and technological constraints will only allow Russia to build one carrier and that that carrier will probably be what Martyanov calls a “niche” carrier. Oh sure, if the Russian military budget was anywhere near the US one and if the Russian MIC was anywhere near as corrupt as the one of the United States, three or four carriers would be possible, but as long as every ruble has to be accounted for and justified through a comparison of opportunity costs and mission requirements, this will not happen. I am still waiting to see if the Russian Navy will ever get the promised “Priboi” universal assault ships to replace the French “Mistrals” and, if that happens, what the Priboi-class will actually look like, how they will be equipped and when they will be accepted for operation by the Russian Navy.

Conclusion: less hype, more common sense please!

Russia has, and will developed, new, expensive and advanced weapons systems simply because she needs to maintain the technological and industrial capabilities to keep up with the evolving threats. You cannot build a 6th generation fighter if you have not ever developed a 5th-generation one. However, Russia has had to tackle the immensely complicated task of replacing all the systems components previously developed abroad (say, in the Ukraine) with indigenous ones. Following western sanctions, it has become absolutely self-evident that Russian weapons systems must be built exclusively with Russian technologies and components (which, by the way, their US counterparts are not). While Russia did benefit from the brain-drain from the Ukraine (and other ex-Soviet republics) which saw many highly skilled engineers and scientists leave following the collapse of the Ukrainian industrial base, Russian resources have still been severely stretched by the urgent need to create a truly autonomous military-industrial complex, most of it ex nihilo. Furthermore, there are still technological and industrial bottlenecks which need to be dealt with before Russian can produce her new weapon systems in sufficient numbers (that is especially true of large warships). As of today, the goal of full “import substitution” has not been fully realized, even if immense progress towards it has already been made.

The one thing Russia could – and should – immediately do is learn how to present a consistent and balanced message to her public opinion. Every time loud and triumphant declarations are followed by more sober assessments, the anti-Putin forces in Russia (and abroad) scream to high heavens about “Putin” having promised the sky and delivered nothing (again, the entire mess with S-300s for Syria is a perfect example of this). So yes, Russia public relations still often suck. But there is nothing wrong with Russian force planning.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: NATO, Russia, SU-57 
Hide 60 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Sheeple says:

    The “PR Disaster” you speak of, are may plain that the Russians don’t give a fuck about the opinions other Nations about this Topic. If anyone insane enough to proof his statement of “Weak Russia” should remember of the Donald Cook Black Sea incident.
    The Russian Public seems sane enough to get that the Western like trumping about “superior” or “we have that in this many numbers” isn’t something that decided wars. So they don’t give a fuck about “not deliver promised Projects” either.

    Like you say “more common sense” and that is something that seems to be in Russian public.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    should remember of the Donald Cook Black Sea incident.
     
    There was NO any Donald Cook "incident", Su-24 merely flew by (close enough--I experienced same sh.t from NATO aircraft in 1980s). There was no anything remotely reminiscent of what internet warriors ascribed to a rather routine event of close passes. Russia's EW capabilities are extremely impressive but in the foundation of EW is the power-capacity (energovooruzennost') of a system. Power-capacity of Su-24 and DDG of Arleigh Burke-class are simply from different leagues.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. @Sheeple
    The "PR Disaster" you speak of, are may plain that the Russians don't give a fuck about the opinions other Nations about this Topic. If anyone insane enough to proof his statement of "Weak Russia" should remember of the Donald Cook Black Sea incident.
    The Russian Public seems sane enough to get that the Western like trumping about "superior" or "we have that in this many numbers" isn't something that decided wars. So they don't give a fuck about "not deliver promised Projects" either.

    Like you say "more common sense" and that is something that seems to be in Russian public.

    should remember of the Donald Cook Black Sea incident.

    There was NO any Donald Cook “incident”, Su-24 merely flew by (close enough–I experienced same sh.t from NATO aircraft in 1980s). There was no anything remotely reminiscent of what internet warriors ascribed to a rather routine event of close passes. Russia’s EW capabilities are extremely impressive but in the foundation of EW is the power-capacity (energovooruzennost’) of a system. Power-capacity of Su-24 and DDG of Arleigh Burke-class are simply from different leagues.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Scalpel
    What you say about the "Donald Cook incident" is probably true, but unlike what you imply, it is not impossible. Under the right cicumstances, a single bee sting can kill a human even though the "power capacities" are from "different leagues".

    This can happen through a combination of a novel "toxin" and by turning the target's systems against itself.
    , @Anonymous
    "...the foundation of EW is the power-capacity (energovooruzennost’) of a system." This then leads to engineers trying to circumvent EW beams/pulses from overloading the detectors/arrays. With highly directional array elements and shorter wavelengths, this can be done, while maintaining the capability of the array to work. Mimic of insect compound eye vs mammalian eye. Automatic gain cutoff/shutdown for array elements that overload.
    , @Sheeple
    Pls not jumping on conclusions. I didn't say anything other than that something happens.
    And i totally aware of the impossibility that some assume about this incident.
    But matter of facts is that the Donald Cook after this, literally fleeing to Romania.
    Whatever happen there has frighten the US command.

    the 2nd incident in the Baltic.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=51&v=ylONaw4ODuk

    and btw: any of those "Fly by's" are "incidents" even if they are only a pissing contest.

    ANY military contact of this kind of the both atomic superpowers they are alone able to kill the whole world are "incidents" no matter if you are used to it or not. And yes there was many of them.
    , @Philip Owen
    Agree. I said so at the time on Untimely Thoughts. But one Russian military comment on the affair said Algorithim rather than all the weapon systems on the ship. If the Russian Air Force did temporarily have access to some codes, they still couldn't have shut down the whole ship. So, it was still PR generated by trolls. Again, the switch to algorithim may just have been an attempt to side step the physics problem which was ignored.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. The Saker mentions this in this fascinating interview he did for Heel Turn https://youtu.be/ztBsTzDizu8

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. The Scalpel says: • Website
    @Andrei Martyanov

    should remember of the Donald Cook Black Sea incident.
     
    There was NO any Donald Cook "incident", Su-24 merely flew by (close enough--I experienced same sh.t from NATO aircraft in 1980s). There was no anything remotely reminiscent of what internet warriors ascribed to a rather routine event of close passes. Russia's EW capabilities are extremely impressive but in the foundation of EW is the power-capacity (energovooruzennost') of a system. Power-capacity of Su-24 and DDG of Arleigh Burke-class are simply from different leagues.

    What you say about the “Donald Cook incident” is probably true, but unlike what you imply, it is not impossible. Under the right cicumstances, a single bee sting can kill a human even though the “power capacities” are from “different leagues”.

    This can happen through a combination of a novel “toxin” and by turning the target’s systems against itself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    This can happen through a combination of a novel “toxin” and by turning the target’s systems against itself.
     
    I am in no position to speculate on any techno-biological parallels here since issue of signal processing algorithms actual hardware in EW is a highly classified thing.

    What you say about the “Donald Cook incident” is probably true
     
    By far more impressive for USS Donald Cook would have been not some routine close pass by SU-24 but actual impact by by far more capable EW systems based on shore and those do exists and make whatever is installed on Su-24 (from the top of my head Khibiny complex, or something like that). There is another purely tactical and operational dimension to all this Donald Cook myth--nobody would allow the aircraft to demonstrate its allegedly fantastic capabilities in what amounts to a pretty routine visual identification of NATO warship in Black Sea's international waters; well that, plus a bit of a pissing contest--normal thing among military professionals. I know one thing which would make people really nervous and this was done before--with warning systems going into screaming upon being tracked (I doubt there was any lock on) by target acquisition radar for something like P-800 Oniks/Bastion. Per routine.

    Thus is Breguet Atlantic flying our ship by in 1984 Biscay.

    http://files.balancer.ru/cache/forums/attaches/2015/03/640x640/06-3766767-dasseau1.jpg

    Here is F-16.

    http://files.balancer.ru/cache/forums/attaches/c4/b8/640x640/c4b80a340109ccda588281ae555b1bed.jpg

    Here is venerable P-3 Orion doing its thing recently.

    http://files.balancer.ru/forums/attaches/2015/03/14-3774401-orion001.jpg

    I still don't get it--what's the big deal to start with.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. FB says:

    This makes two extremely poor articles from this author, in succession…

    If I were to ask this author exactly what characteristics define a ‘fifth generation’ aircraft…I’m sure I would have a very good laugh…because ‘fifth generation’ is a marketing gimmick for the MIC to bamboozle the purse strings of the US govt…nothing more…

    There is no such thing as a ‘fifth generation’ aircraft…unless you want to count so-called ‘stealth’…which is useless against modern adversaries with capable air defense radars…

    There are no new types of sensors or any fundamental advance in the physical flight capabilities of the airplane…the most we have is more use of information sharing among platforms…ie aircraft to aircraft, aircraft to ground etc…this is nothing new…the MiG31 interceptor was the first combat aircraft to be data networked more than 30 years ago…in this case for a very practical reason…so that four ships flying in a line of 800 km abreast could share data from their powerful onboard radars…[also btw the first use of phased array, or electronically steered antenna]…

    This airborne data networking designed for detection and destruction of low-flying cruise missiles over a wide swath of territory in the most effective way possible…

    Since then we have seen incremental use of data sharing in the cockpit…in the case of Russian fighters an important one is getting radar vectors of enemy aircraft from the big ground radars that are part of the S300/400 air defense systems…the US has long used the same technique for offensive tactics using AWACS to fighter/bomber…

    These capabilities are increasing incrementally…not by one big generational leap which is absurd to anyone who actually knows anything about air combat on a professional level…

    Then we have weapons…both kinetic and electronic…there has been no new fundamental advance either in missiles or their guidance systems, nor in electronic attack and countermeasures technology…the state of physics is still the same…

    This also goes for aircraft flight performance…which is actually decreasing with the so-called ‘fifth generation’ F35 in comparison to the teen series fighters…and made no progress on the F22 over the F15…

    Some ‘very smart’ individuals now argue that flight physics is no longer important in the ‘new world’ of ‘data fusion’ and other such bullshit…this is of course good enough to ‘fly’ in the funding offices of the govt…but it certainly does not FLY in the real, physical world…

    Bottom line is that even talking about airplane generations is the mark of an amateur…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. Anonymous[381] • Disclaimer says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    should remember of the Donald Cook Black Sea incident.
     
    There was NO any Donald Cook "incident", Su-24 merely flew by (close enough--I experienced same sh.t from NATO aircraft in 1980s). There was no anything remotely reminiscent of what internet warriors ascribed to a rather routine event of close passes. Russia's EW capabilities are extremely impressive but in the foundation of EW is the power-capacity (energovooruzennost') of a system. Power-capacity of Su-24 and DDG of Arleigh Burke-class are simply from different leagues.

    “…the foundation of EW is the power-capacity (energovooruzennost’) of a system.” This then leads to engineers trying to circumvent EW beams/pulses from overloading the detectors/arrays. With highly directional array elements and shorter wavelengths, this can be done, while maintaining the capability of the array to work. Mimic of insect compound eye vs mammalian eye. Automatic gain cutoff/shutdown for array elements that overload.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    If I understood you correctly, and this goes for active electronically-scanned arrays (AESA), they are difficult to jam. I agree.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. Sean says:

    Iran paid for delivery of S-300s and Russia did not fulfill the contract due to objections from Israel.
    As a foreign power, Israel does not have the F22 Raptor because Congress forbade such sales of world lead US technology.

    American politicians are not in thrall to the military industrial complex, or to Israel. Russia on the other hand has joint exercises with Israel, which lets Israel know all about the ways Russia technology such as the S-100 can be bested, so by the by the time Iran gets what it has paid for the weapons system is not worth the price.

    In the case of air-power, this issue is not so much a geographical one (tactical air-power can be rapidly moved from one location to another one) as it is the number of F-22s/F-35s/(X-2s?) the US and its allies could deploy against Russia (assuming air-to-air refueling and that the F-35 actually works as advertised).

    It should be, but in the Battle Of France it wasn’t. The most formidable part of French Air Force simply did not participate, being away from the fighting in its original deployment area.

    All Russia needs to do is to be strong enough to make any victory over it a very costly one, and more importantly let no one be in any doubt that Russia has weapons it would not hesitate to actually use (ie conventional weapons). Russia’s strong point has always been artillery and it should concentrate on that.

    Never mind about mocking the F35, it would be the A1o , in a pinch the B52, that Russian tanks would have to fear.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Moi
    Neither Russia nor the US are to be trusted....?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @The Scalpel
    What you say about the "Donald Cook incident" is probably true, but unlike what you imply, it is not impossible. Under the right cicumstances, a single bee sting can kill a human even though the "power capacities" are from "different leagues".

    This can happen through a combination of a novel "toxin" and by turning the target's systems against itself.

    This can happen through a combination of a novel “toxin” and by turning the target’s systems against itself.

    I am in no position to speculate on any techno-biological parallels here since issue of signal processing algorithms actual hardware in EW is a highly classified thing.

    What you say about the “Donald Cook incident” is probably true

    By far more impressive for USS Donald Cook would have been not some routine close pass by SU-24 but actual impact by by far more capable EW systems based on shore and those do exists and make whatever is installed on Su-24 (from the top of my head Khibiny complex, or something like that). There is another purely tactical and operational dimension to all this Donald Cook myth–nobody would allow the aircraft to demonstrate its allegedly fantastic capabilities in what amounts to a pretty routine visual identification of NATO warship in Black Sea’s international waters; well that, plus a bit of a pissing contest–normal thing among military professionals. I know one thing which would make people really nervous and this was done before–with warning systems going into screaming upon being tracked (I doubt there was any lock on) by target acquisition radar for something like P-800 Oniks/Bastion. Per routine.

    Thus is Breguet Atlantic flying our ship by in 1984 Biscay.

    Here is F-16.

    Here is venerable P-3 Orion doing its thing recently.

    I still don’t get it–what’s the big deal to start with.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    Very simple. The ship (named after a rather foolhardy officer who managed to become the first Marine captured in Nam) was the first U.S warship into the Black Sea after Russia’s annexation of Crimea. It got buzzed so closely that the US secretary of state Kerry said US would have been within its rights to shoot down Russian aircraft that flew close to one of its warships in the Baltic Sea, says Kerry. A Russian SU-24 attack plane came within 30 feet at one point and so low it created wakes in the sea. The willingness to actually use whatever weapons Russia possesses was convincingly demonstrated.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. @Anonymous
    "...the foundation of EW is the power-capacity (energovooruzennost’) of a system." This then leads to engineers trying to circumvent EW beams/pulses from overloading the detectors/arrays. With highly directional array elements and shorter wavelengths, this can be done, while maintaining the capability of the array to work. Mimic of insect compound eye vs mammalian eye. Automatic gain cutoff/shutdown for array elements that overload.

    If I understood you correctly, and this goes for active electronically-scanned arrays (AESA), they are difficult to jam. I agree.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. I’m more interested in autonomous weapons and counter-technology weapons. When you pull the crew out of a tank you can shrink its size, lighten its armor, increase its ammunition. It is also disposable or at least more so than manned weapons systems.

    Satellites, command and control become primary targets. So you could develop shrouding technology. fire a smoke grenade type “flare” into the air over the battle zone then hit it with some RF to jam reconnaissance, infra red and all that.

    The moment a system rolls of f the assembly line, it starts to rust. So maybe it would be best to design various weapons platforms with enhanced upgrade abilities so you can tweak the platform for specific tasks.

    Some upgrades simply software updates.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  11. Sean says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    This can happen through a combination of a novel “toxin” and by turning the target’s systems against itself.
     
    I am in no position to speculate on any techno-biological parallels here since issue of signal processing algorithms actual hardware in EW is a highly classified thing.

    What you say about the “Donald Cook incident” is probably true
     
    By far more impressive for USS Donald Cook would have been not some routine close pass by SU-24 but actual impact by by far more capable EW systems based on shore and those do exists and make whatever is installed on Su-24 (from the top of my head Khibiny complex, or something like that). There is another purely tactical and operational dimension to all this Donald Cook myth--nobody would allow the aircraft to demonstrate its allegedly fantastic capabilities in what amounts to a pretty routine visual identification of NATO warship in Black Sea's international waters; well that, plus a bit of a pissing contest--normal thing among military professionals. I know one thing which would make people really nervous and this was done before--with warning systems going into screaming upon being tracked (I doubt there was any lock on) by target acquisition radar for something like P-800 Oniks/Bastion. Per routine.

    Thus is Breguet Atlantic flying our ship by in 1984 Biscay.

    http://files.balancer.ru/cache/forums/attaches/2015/03/640x640/06-3766767-dasseau1.jpg

    Here is F-16.

    http://files.balancer.ru/cache/forums/attaches/c4/b8/640x640/c4b80a340109ccda588281ae555b1bed.jpg

    Here is venerable P-3 Orion doing its thing recently.

    http://files.balancer.ru/forums/attaches/2015/03/14-3774401-orion001.jpg

    I still don't get it--what's the big deal to start with.

    Very simple. The ship (named after a rather foolhardy officer who managed to become the first Marine captured in Nam) was the first U.S warship into the Black Sea after Russia’s annexation of Crimea. It got buzzed so closely that the US secretary of state Kerry said US would have been within its rights to shoot down Russian aircraft that flew close to one of its warships in the Baltic Sea, says Kerry. A Russian SU-24 attack plane came within 30 feet at one point and so low it created wakes in the sea. The willingness to actually use whatever weapons Russia possesses was convincingly demonstrated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @JR
    The Donald Cook is modified to some ABM capability.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Donald_Cook#Upgrade

    The Russians do not appreciate having such capability close to its borders and from that position possibly be able to intercepts ICBM in boost or coast phase before MIRV separation thus facilitating a US first strike capability under MAD.

    https://www.rt.com/news/us-destroyer-black-sea-289/

    Cook's silence probably isn't more than application of EMCON in order to avoid disclosing radar signal information..
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Sheeple says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    should remember of the Donald Cook Black Sea incident.
     
    There was NO any Donald Cook "incident", Su-24 merely flew by (close enough--I experienced same sh.t from NATO aircraft in 1980s). There was no anything remotely reminiscent of what internet warriors ascribed to a rather routine event of close passes. Russia's EW capabilities are extremely impressive but in the foundation of EW is the power-capacity (energovooruzennost') of a system. Power-capacity of Su-24 and DDG of Arleigh Burke-class are simply from different leagues.

    Pls not jumping on conclusions. I didn’t say anything other than that something happens.
    And i totally aware of the impossibility that some assume about this incident.
    But matter of facts is that the Donald Cook after this, literally fleeing to Romania.
    Whatever happen there has frighten the US command.

    the 2nd incident in the Baltic.

    and btw: any of those “Fly by’s” are “incidents” even if they are only a pissing contest.

    ANY military contact of this kind of the both atomic superpowers they are alone able to kill the whole world are “incidents” no matter if you are used to it or not. And yes there was many of them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Whatever happen there has frighten the US command.
     
    Most likely tracking by some serious radar systems capable of providing targeting to Bastion. They would know on Donald Cook by what they were tracked. I will go out on a limb and propose that they could have been locked onto by something.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. @Sheeple
    Pls not jumping on conclusions. I didn't say anything other than that something happens.
    And i totally aware of the impossibility that some assume about this incident.
    But matter of facts is that the Donald Cook after this, literally fleeing to Romania.
    Whatever happen there has frighten the US command.

    the 2nd incident in the Baltic.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=51&v=ylONaw4ODuk

    and btw: any of those "Fly by's" are "incidents" even if they are only a pissing contest.

    ANY military contact of this kind of the both atomic superpowers they are alone able to kill the whole world are "incidents" no matter if you are used to it or not. And yes there was many of them.

    Whatever happen there has frighten the US command.

    Most likely tracking by some serious radar systems capable of providing targeting to Bastion. They would know on Donald Cook by what they were tracked. I will go out on a limb and propose that they could have been locked onto by something.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. Anonymous[209] • Disclaimer says:

    “All this begs the question of what threats the Su-57s or T-14s were supposed to deal with? ”

    I don’t know about that. I might raise the question though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus
    Actually, given that the F-35 program started in the early 2000s and was hyped as something far beyond the state-of-the-art F-22, I'd guess that a few Russian design bureaus and military procurement officers took the hype at face value and felt they had to respond to the challenge. From what is known of the SU-57, they turned out a peerless aerial combat platform, but as it now turns out it's almost certainly surplus to real requirements.
    The F-22's limitations are now better known, and the F-35 turned out to be a flying pig. The Russians have a lot of different and capable aircraft in numbers, so the SU-57 will probably see life as a technology test platform only.

    As for the T-14 Armata and its derivatives, the Russians do love their tanks and if Russia's geo-political goal of becoming guarantor of Eurasian security and arbiter of its energy flows is to be realized, they need to be able to field a ground force that is indisputably as good as it gets. As with the SU-57, whether the T-14 goes into serial production or not, a great deal was learned in the process of designing it that will find its way into other armoured hardware such as self-powered guns, drone tanks, etc. In fact, those derivatives are already showing up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. nexusxyz says:

    The most interesting thing to me is the philosophical difference with respect to how technology is applied and what dives the need and purpose behind defence asset procurement. Lots high tech mixed with asymmetrical strategies on the Russian side. Potentially the biggest vulnerability I think is the US reliance on ‘network centric warfare’. The more complex and critical the network the bigger the effect when it collapses/is disrupted.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  16. Erebus says:
    @Anonymous
    "All this begs the question of what threats the Su-57s or T-14s were supposed to deal with? "

    I don't know about that. I might raise the question though.

    Actually, given that the F-35 program started in the early 2000s and was hyped as something far beyond the state-of-the-art F-22, I’d guess that a few Russian design bureaus and military procurement officers took the hype at face value and felt they had to respond to the challenge. From what is known of the SU-57, they turned out a peerless aerial combat platform, but as it now turns out it’s almost certainly surplus to real requirements.
    The F-22′s limitations are now better known, and the F-35 turned out to be a flying pig. The Russians have a lot of different and capable aircraft in numbers, so the SU-57 will probably see life as a technology test platform only.

    As for the T-14 Armata and its derivatives, the Russians do love their tanks and if Russia’s geo-political goal of becoming guarantor of Eurasian security and arbiter of its energy flows is to be realized, they need to be able to field a ground force that is indisputably as good as it gets. As with the SU-57, whether the T-14 goes into serial production or not, a great deal was learned in the process of designing it that will find its way into other armoured hardware such as self-powered guns, drone tanks, etc. In fact, those derivatives are already showing up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    Dear Erebus, off-top, can you get me to your post on economy when reduction in manufacturing was actually increasing GDP? I would really appreciate this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. George says:

    “Russia is canceling the Su-57!” and “Russia cannot afford the new Armata T-14 tank!”

    The question isn’t if Russia can afford it, the question is if India and China will buy or license it.

    Both weapons are obsolete and will not survive top tier opponents, but who cares. The Armata is the first step towards crewless tanks and was based on lessons learned in Syria when Soviet era tanks faced more modern anti tank missiles. BTW, the US Abrams is an obsolete death trap.

    Su-57. India is the key player. The start of delivery of f-35 prototypes might be delaying the final production model of the SU-57. Doesn’t it make sense to wait for Turkey to test a few F-35s first?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. This article would be more effective if Saker wouldn’t hedge every substantive claim he makes with a lot of “on the one hand this, on the other hand that” language. It does not require an analyst to tell somebody that, in the absence of further information, all possibilities are possible. This is the sort of a priori truism that does nothing to assist decision making. You come away from an article such as this no more informed than when you started it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nagra
    Kh~47 M2 is only info you need to consider for the start
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. peterAUS says:

    “US sanctions force Putin to abandon the XXXX” (fill the blank with whatever weapon system you want). So is there any truth to any of that?

    Obviously.

    …look like Russia is zig-zagging (again!).

    Kremlin is zig-zagging.

    …For the foreseeable future, the threat to Russia will come from the latest iterations of the F-16/15/18s in which case the Su-35s/Su-30SM/Mig-25SMT/MiG-35/MiG31BM will be more than enough to deal with that threat, especially with their new radar+missile combo

    Hardly.
    It will come from within Russian society with, as always, help from abroad.

    Following western sanctions, it has become absolutely self-evident that Russian weapons systems must be built exclusively with Russian technologies and components (which, by the way, their US counterparts are not).

    Looks like it.

    Every time loud and triumphant declarations are followed by more sober assessments, the anti-Putin forces in Russia (and abroad) scream to high heavens about “Putin” having promised the sky and delivered nothing (again, the entire mess with S-300s for Syria is a perfect example of this).

    Pretty much.
    Works well for the regime in Kremlin, though, and that’s all what matters.
    For now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  20. A fine article but allow me to add a different dimension in the purpose of procuring new military systems, one that seems to be largely ignored by Russia with regards to conventional weapons (but paradoxically exaggerated in regards to nuclear ones). That is the psychological factor, the symbolic value of fielding high-tech weapons and its ramifications for the enemy.

    Sure, the “What do we really need?-What does really work?” questions seem to be prominent in Russian force planning and rightly so, but one must also not forget the nature of the enemy. The US (Europeans are a non-factor) is obsessed with high-tech superiority in all aspects of life, it is a deeply cultural aspect of the way americans view the world, ingrained in the US psyche ever since the country’s founding.

    By proving that it can match the latest creations of the US military industrial complex-and do so in only a fraction of the cost it takes the US R&D to design them-Russia can send a strong message that resonates beyond the Pentagon and affects US foreign policy and its reckless adventurism versus Russia.

    Putin said “They will listen to us now.” If they are meant to listen because of the new nuke arsenal-no, they won’t. This arsenal does not fundamentally change the MAD doctrine-even though it was essential to negate any thoughts of US fielding a missile shield of any sort. But by introducing into service with its conventional forces items of equal or superior value to those fielded by NATO, Russia would indeed be heard and respected the way Kremlin wants to.

    One final thought-it is of the out most importance for the industry to go ahead with serial production of next modern systems if it desires to keep pace. Manufacturing prototypes or limited batches is a sure path to oblivion. Case in point, the ridiculous notion that Russia will miraculously produce a 6th gen aircraft without fielding a 5th gen example first.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    "By proving that it can match the latest creations of the US military industrial complex-and do so in only a fraction of the cost it takes the US R&D to design them-Russia can send a strong message that resonates beyond the Pentagon and affects US foreign policy and its reckless adventurism versus Russia."

    The message would be lost. US policy is vanity-driven, Russian policy is common-sense driven. Vanity is blind to common sense. US policy is globalist. Russian policy is sovereignist. The USA wants to rule the world, so it needs weapons that have a psychological effect. Russia only wants to rule Russia so she only needs the concrete capability to defend Russia. Russia's mission is not to save the world. Russia annexed Crimea and saved Syria because Crimeans and Syrians asked her to and because it was in her national security interest to do so.
    If the rest of the world doesn't want to be ruled by the Anglo-Zionist cabbal, it shouldn't have elected US controlled corrupt politicians for decades.
    The West has got what it has voted for. Russia has no business in saving people who have through centuries craved for subjugating her.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Moi says:
    @Sean
    Iran paid for delivery of S-300s and Russia did not fulfill the contract due to objections from Israel.
    As a foreign power, Israel does not have the F22 Raptor because Congress forbade such sales of world lead US technology.

    American politicians are not in thrall to the military industrial complex, or to Israel. Russia on the other hand has joint exercises with Israel, which lets Israel know all about the ways Russia technology such as the S-100 can be bested, so by the by the time Iran gets what it has paid for the weapons system is not worth the price.

    In the case of air-power, this issue is not so much a geographical one (tactical air-power can be rapidly moved from one location to another one) as it is the number of F-22s/F-35s/(X-2s?) the US and its allies could deploy against Russia (assuming air-to-air refueling and that the F-35 actually works as advertised).
     
    It should be, but in the Battle Of France it wasn't. The most formidable part of French Air Force simply did not participate, being away from the fighting in its original deployment area.

    All Russia needs to do is to be strong enough to make any victory over it a very costly one, and more importantly let no one be in any doubt that Russia has weapons it would not hesitate to actually use (ie conventional weapons). Russia's strong point has always been artillery and it should concentrate on that.

    Never mind about mocking the F35, it would be the A1o , in a pinch the B52, that Russian tanks would have to fear.

    Neither Russia nor the US are to be trusted….?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. Tanks, tanks, tanks. Cheep tanks the better.
    Tanks buried in the ground in line dense enough create impenetrable defensive line.
    In the attack also the number of tanks is more important then performance.
    Russia needs at least half a million tanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  23. This is just the latest version of the author’s standard “Russia’s military is superior to the US military” propaganda line.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bluedog
    With out a doubt some of Russia's weapons are more advanced then ours for we are finding that with all our wonder weapons that still a bunch of goat herders with little more that AK'S can give us all we want,we create far to many weapons that are more of a far out pipe dream then being of any practical use, or simply a pipeline to drain the taxpayer pockets all to benefit the MIC..
    , @nagra
    Russia is military superior to USA
    that's fact even US generals admit
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. @Andrei Martyanov

    should remember of the Donald Cook Black Sea incident.
     
    There was NO any Donald Cook "incident", Su-24 merely flew by (close enough--I experienced same sh.t from NATO aircraft in 1980s). There was no anything remotely reminiscent of what internet warriors ascribed to a rather routine event of close passes. Russia's EW capabilities are extremely impressive but in the foundation of EW is the power-capacity (energovooruzennost') of a system. Power-capacity of Su-24 and DDG of Arleigh Burke-class are simply from different leagues.

    Agree. I said so at the time on Untimely Thoughts. But one Russian military comment on the affair said Algorithim rather than all the weapon systems on the ship. If the Russian Air Force did temporarily have access to some codes, they still couldn’t have shut down the whole ship. So, it was still PR generated by trolls. Again, the switch to algorithim may just have been an attempt to side step the physics problem which was ignored.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Russia is a Christian nation once again after shedding the satanic Zionist communist gov that was placed upon Russia by western Zionist bankers, see Wall Street and The Bolshevik Revolution by Anthony Sutton , can be had on Amazon, and Russia is no threat to the U.S. or any other country in the world, what we have here is a Zionist controlled America that has been turned into the terror of the earth for the Zionist goal of a Zionist controlled One World Gov.

    Zionist Israel did 911 and got away with it with the help of the zionist controlled U.S. military and the zionist controlled deep state and last but not least the zionist controlled U.S. government and that was the excuse to blow the hell out of the mideast for zionist israel and to spend over 7 TRILLION dollars and more importantly cost the lives of thousands of Americans and millions of civilians in the mideast and the slaughter in the slaughter house continues to this day in Syria and Yemen , all for the benefit of zionist Israel.

    May God bless Russia and Syria and may God save America from the zionist communism which is destroying our country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nagra
    Russia is Ortodox Cristian nation
    not just any Cristian nation
    like the Catholics

    and blaming Israel for everything in this world is not just ridiculous but pathetic as well
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. bluedog says:
    @Michael Kenny
    This is just the latest version of the author's standard "Russia's military is superior to the US military" propaganda line.

    With out a doubt some of Russia’s weapons are more advanced then ours for we are finding that with all our wonder weapons that still a bunch of goat herders with little more that AK’S can give us all we want,we create far to many weapons that are more of a far out pipe dream then being of any practical use, or simply a pipeline to drain the taxpayer pockets all to benefit the MIC..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. TG says:

    A few thoughts on judging modern weapons systems.

    In world war II you could pretty well judge the relative effectiveness of (for example) fighter aircraft by looking at their top speed, range, turning radius, time to climb to altitude, and the total weight of metal they could shoot per second. That would give you a pretty good idea of how planes stacked up against each other.

    But today, that doesn’t work. We are so reliant on very high tech signal processing, and this cannot be judged just by the technical specifications or press releases. The speed, turning rate, and number of missiles of a fighter, are now almost irrelevant.

    For example, in the Iran-Iraq war, just two dozen badly maintained Iranian F14 fighter planes basically shut down the entire Iraqi air force. If you had simply looked at the raw specs of the opposing forces, you would have thought the Iranians doomed. It just happened that, at the time, the radars on the F14s actually worked so much better in combat than the Soviet equipment, that all those fast and well-armed Iraqi planes were little more than targets.

    That was then – now may be different. Always, it may be different. Certainly the Russians are not technically inept. No country that can build and maintain its own global positioning satellite system is without considerable technical skill. But still. You may have a multi-band 100 Kw multi-tracking radar with frammus buckles and hypergonticle processors and bells on top, but how will it really work against an opposing system in combat? You can’t tell that from the description. And it doesn’t matter if your missile can fly at mach 6 and carry two tons of high explosive, if it can’t track its target…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Si1ver1ock
    Also, attacking human beings is morally questionable. Attacking the technology is less so.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. JR says:
    @Sean
    Very simple. The ship (named after a rather foolhardy officer who managed to become the first Marine captured in Nam) was the first U.S warship into the Black Sea after Russia’s annexation of Crimea. It got buzzed so closely that the US secretary of state Kerry said US would have been within its rights to shoot down Russian aircraft that flew close to one of its warships in the Baltic Sea, says Kerry. A Russian SU-24 attack plane came within 30 feet at one point and so low it created wakes in the sea. The willingness to actually use whatever weapons Russia possesses was convincingly demonstrated.

    The Donald Cook is modified to some ABM capability.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Donald_Cook#Upgrade

    The Russians do not appreciate having such capability close to its borders and from that position possibly be able to intercepts ICBM in boost or coast phase before MIRV separation thus facilitating a US first strike capability under MAD.

    https://www.rt.com/news/us-destroyer-black-sea-289/

    Cook’s silence probably isn’t more than application of EMCON in order to avoid disclosing radar signal information..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. In contrast, Russia is far less corrupt and has potential enemies right across most of her borders.

    Far less corrupt? Russia is a kleptocracy headed by a thug. It even scores lower on Transparency International’s ratings than Ukraine. Saker, the best that can be said for you is that you are an unobservant moron.

    Beyond that line, the rest of the article is irrelevant. Saker is simply a Putin shill.

    Read More
    • Troll: bluedog
    • Replies: @Herald
    Oh dear, Saker seems to have stood on somebody's sensitive toes. Not wearing your MIC issue gold plated toe protectors then? Now perhaps you could remind us all of how many trillions have vanished, without trace, down the Pentagon plughole since 9/11.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. nagra says:
    @DESERT FOX
    Russia is a Christian nation once again after shedding the satanic Zionist communist gov that was placed upon Russia by western Zionist bankers, see Wall Street and The Bolshevik Revolution by Anthony Sutton , can be had on Amazon, and Russia is no threat to the U.S. or any other country in the world, what we have here is a Zionist controlled America that has been turned into the terror of the earth for the Zionist goal of a Zionist controlled One World Gov.

    Zionist Israel did 911 and got away with it with the help of the zionist controlled U.S. military and the zionist controlled deep state and last but not least the zionist controlled U.S. government and that was the excuse to blow the hell out of the mideast for zionist israel and to spend over 7 TRILLION dollars and more importantly cost the lives of thousands of Americans and millions of civilians in the mideast and the slaughter in the slaughter house continues to this day in Syria and Yemen , all for the benefit of zionist Israel.

    May God bless Russia and Syria and may God save America from the zionist communism which is destroying our country.

    Russia is Ortodox Cristian nation
    not just any Cristian nation
    like the Catholics

    and blaming Israel for everything in this world is not just ridiculous but pathetic as well

    Read More
    • Replies: @DESERT FOX
    Zionists are to blame for the degeneration of America as they rule America and have been the agent provocateur for the wars that America has fought beginning with WWI and right down to the war foisted upon Syria by the U.S. and ISREAL and BRITAIN who created ISIS aka AL CIADA and therefore are the main terrorists as those who created the terrorist are the worst terrorists.

    It is the Zionists who have been the terrorists as in the Bolshevik revolution where 60 some million Russians were murdered by the Zionist Bolsheviks as per Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Robert Conquests Harvest of Sorrow and there destroying millions in the Mideast, the Zionists are the real terrorists of the world.

    Read the 10 planks of the communist/Zionist manifesto and you will see how far down the road the road the Zionist/Bolsheviks/communists have taken America and Israel is the Zionist creation to promote the Zionist goal of a NWO/ONE WORLD GOV..
    , @skrik

    blaming Israel for everything in this world is not just ridiculous but pathetic as well
     
    'Political correctness' means that one cannot criticise anyone for their 'difference,' like being a raging homosexual bull dyke misfit or a head-chopping Wahhabist psychopath. Such correctness is being pushed [by you know whom], to provide a general rule from which they hope to benefit in two ways, a) being some 'zzz' could possibly be seen as a 'lesser' offence than the two examples given above, and b) by blocking criticism of such 'nasties,' these shifty zzzs hope to neuter any who might point out zzz-failures [myriad!]. Asking 'whom you may not criticise' answers the Q: Who rules over you? Assuming you may not actually be a 'native hasbarat,' good luck trying to vote yourself out of that!

    PS IF [as it seems], you are not aware of Israel's multiple 'sins' [supreme international war crimes; starting with 'colonisation by force' via ethnic cleansing via murdering violence for Lebensraum, aka land-theft as punished by hanging perpetrators at the Nuremberg trials, etc.] THEN you must be ignorant indeed: Be ashamed.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. nagra says:
    @Michael Kenny
    This is just the latest version of the author's standard "Russia's military is superior to the US military" propaganda line.

    Russia is military superior to USA
    that’s fact even US generals admit

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. nagra says:
    @Intelligent Dasein
    This article would be more effective if Saker wouldn't hedge every substantive claim he makes with a lot of "on the one hand this, on the other hand that" language. It does not require an analyst to tell somebody that, in the absence of further information, all possibilities are possible. This is the sort of a priori truism that does nothing to assist decision making. You come away from an article such as this no more informed than when you started it.

    Kh~47 M2 is only info you need to consider for the start

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @nagra
    Russia is Ortodox Cristian nation
    not just any Cristian nation
    like the Catholics

    and blaming Israel for everything in this world is not just ridiculous but pathetic as well

    Zionists are to blame for the degeneration of America as they rule America and have been the agent provocateur for the wars that America has fought beginning with WWI and right down to the war foisted upon Syria by the U.S. and ISREAL and BRITAIN who created ISIS aka AL CIADA and therefore are the main terrorists as those who created the terrorist are the worst terrorists.

    It is the Zionists who have been the terrorists as in the Bolshevik revolution where 60 some million Russians were murdered by the Zionist Bolsheviks as per Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Robert Conquests Harvest of Sorrow and there destroying millions in the Mideast, the Zionists are the real terrorists of the world.

    Read the 10 planks of the communist/Zionist manifesto and you will see how far down the road the road the Zionist/Bolsheviks/communists have taken America and Israel is the Zionist creation to promote the Zionist goal of a NWO/ONE WORLD GOV..

    Read More
    • Replies: @nagra
    America doesn't need any third party for its degeneration
    they didn't created neither some Isis or Al Qaida
    they've helped them get organised

    USA is definitely terrorist country but not for the reasons you've mentioned
    I would still ask the real pope to come forward, and explain all this mess
    if he is not too busy covering and placing news you would like to hear
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Herald says:
    @Quartermaster

    In contrast, Russia is far less corrupt and has potential enemies right across most of her borders.
     
    Far less corrupt? Russia is a kleptocracy headed by a thug. It even scores lower on Transparency International's ratings than Ukraine. Saker, the best that can be said for you is that you are an unobservant moron.

    Beyond that line, the rest of the article is irrelevant. Saker is simply a Putin shill.

    Oh dear, Saker seems to have stood on somebody’s sensitive toes. Not wearing your MIC issue gold plated toe protectors then? Now perhaps you could remind us all of how many trillions have vanished, without trace, down the Pentagon plughole since 9/11.

    Read More
    • LOL: Mike P
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. May the Russian nation and the Russian people never die and may they live for eternity, especially their beautiful women.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. I’m certainly no expert. But this one trick pony (that being Russian Military superiority) “The Saker” continues to ride in the direction of the nearest glue factory seems to have finally collapsed under the weight of the author’s endless hypotheticals.

    I wish Russia no ill will. Nor do most Americans I know. That said, I am willing to bet the farm that the armies of the US and Russia will never meet on the battlefield in my lifetime, so all of this cock measuring seems pretty useless.

    Perhaps The Saker can find a new The Topic to The Pontificate about, other than his The Fetish with The WWIII. Based on the current comment count, I’d say I’m not the only one holding this opinion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    I’m certainly no expert. But this one trick pony (that being Russian Military superiority) “The Saker” continues to ride in the direction of the nearest glue factory seems to have finally collapsed under the weight of the author’s endless hypotheticals.
     
    Agree.

    I wish Russia no ill will. Nor do most Americans I know. That said, I am willing to bet the farm that the armies of the US and Russia will never meet on the battlefield in my lifetime, so all of this cock measuring seems pretty useless.
     
    The last, on the contrary. The "measuring" keeps the proles in Russia docile. That's all the guys in Kremlin and their friends need.

    Perhaps The Saker can find a new The Topic to The Pontificate about, other than his The Fetish with The WWIII.
     
    Of course he can and, if he were really a Russian nationalist he would. Should he do it, though, Kremlin will get unhappy.
    Enough said.

    Based on the current comment count, I’d say I’m not the only one holding this opinion.
     
    Well, again, as long as proles in Russia buy it, all good.
    As for most of the non-Russians, that no-show in Syria was probably the turning point.

    No fear. The true believers will remain steady on the course. Double down actually. Faith and such. The need to believe.
    , @Kiza
    I believe that you live on another planet, not in US. Or perhaps in US on another planet.

    On this planet US is one inch away from intentionally or accidentally starting a war on Russia and is excreting so much anti-Russia bile that I had to stop consuming any public dumb-fuck media. The impotent frustration of US at not being the top dog any more is sickening.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. peterAUS says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike
    I'm certainly no expert. But this one trick pony (that being Russian Military superiority) "The Saker" continues to ride in the direction of the nearest glue factory seems to have finally collapsed under the weight of the author's endless hypotheticals.

    I wish Russia no ill will. Nor do most Americans I know. That said, I am willing to bet the farm that the armies of the US and Russia will never meet on the battlefield in my lifetime, so all of this cock measuring seems pretty useless.

    Perhaps The Saker can find a new The Topic to The Pontificate about, other than his The Fetish with The WWIII. Based on the current comment count, I'd say I'm not the only one holding this opinion.

    I’m certainly no expert. But this one trick pony (that being Russian Military superiority) “The Saker” continues to ride in the direction of the nearest glue factory seems to have finally collapsed under the weight of the author’s endless hypotheticals.

    Agree.

    I wish Russia no ill will. Nor do most Americans I know. That said, I am willing to bet the farm that the armies of the US and Russia will never meet on the battlefield in my lifetime, so all of this cock measuring seems pretty useless.

    The last, on the contrary. The “measuring” keeps the proles in Russia docile. That’s all the guys in Kremlin and their friends need.

    Perhaps The Saker can find a new The Topic to The Pontificate about, other than his The Fetish with The WWIII.

    Of course he can and, if he were really a Russian nationalist he would. Should he do it, though, Kremlin will get unhappy.
    Enough said.

    Based on the current comment count, I’d say I’m not the only one holding this opinion.

    Well, again, as long as proles in Russia buy it, all good.
    As for most of the non-Russians, that no-show in Syria was probably the turning point.

    No fear. The true believers will remain steady on the course. Double down actually. Faith and such. The need to believe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kimppis
    No-show? Have you been following the Syrian conflict at all? The latest US/NATO missile strike was pure PR, at "best". Most missiles didn't even reach their targets (they really didn't), the Americans were obviously lying.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Milton says:

    [Comments with proper spacing and punctuation are more likely to be published.]

    America is an Israeli colony administered by the Lodge. The two competing forces in America (Freemasons and god-fearing-though imperfect Christians like John Adams, etc.) came to a head on November 22, 1963. The Freemason faction won on that day in Dallas and whored America out to the Zionists in Israel. This conflict was inevitable in America because America at her very founding was divided internally between Freemasons who worshiped the goddess Liberty and those who realized that Christ the King is sovereign over every nation and people. It’s why there was once a “golden era” in America. That “golden era” ended the day Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. We’ve had an illegitimate government ever since, one that refuses to acknowledge Christ the King and instead worships the spirit of Antichrist which will eventually center on one man ruling the World from Jerusalem just as the Church Fathers warned against. Russia is currently in the crosshairs because she was the last Christian Monarchy to fall to the Freemason Revolution that toppled all Christian monarchies, one by one, finally ending with Russia in 1917. 1917 was also the year of the Fatima apparitions which ended with the Miracle of the Sun – witnessed by over 70,000 people (including hardened Freemasons) in October, 1917. The message of that apparition was clear: a great Triumph is coming, but we must choose the path: Chastisement or Penance. If the world chooses to continue offending God, then Russia was prophesied to become God’s instrument of Chastisement. We are at the very end of the story. Trump was a stopgap measure to buy more time. But the writing is on the wall: Trump is in the process of being overthrown and soon the Deep State will once again provoke Russia, only this time it will be much worse than the previous provocations like Maidan, MH17, Odessa, Karlov Assassination, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  39. @TG
    A few thoughts on judging modern weapons systems.

    In world war II you could pretty well judge the relative effectiveness of (for example) fighter aircraft by looking at their top speed, range, turning radius, time to climb to altitude, and the total weight of metal they could shoot per second. That would give you a pretty good idea of how planes stacked up against each other.

    But today, that doesn't work. We are so reliant on very high tech signal processing, and this cannot be judged just by the technical specifications or press releases. The speed, turning rate, and number of missiles of a fighter, are now almost irrelevant.

    For example, in the Iran-Iraq war, just two dozen badly maintained Iranian F14 fighter planes basically shut down the entire Iraqi air force. If you had simply looked at the raw specs of the opposing forces, you would have thought the Iranians doomed. It just happened that, at the time, the radars on the F14s actually worked so much better in combat than the Soviet equipment, that all those fast and well-armed Iraqi planes were little more than targets.

    That was then - now may be different. Always, it may be different. Certainly the Russians are not technically inept. No country that can build and maintain its own global positioning satellite system is without considerable technical skill. But still. You may have a multi-band 100 Kw multi-tracking radar with frammus buckles and hypergonticle processors and bells on top, but how will it really work against an opposing system in combat? You can't tell that from the description. And it doesn't matter if your missile can fly at mach 6 and carry two tons of high explosive, if it can't track its target...

    Also, attacking human beings is morally questionable. Attacking the technology is less so.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Russian equipment has been good enough for conflict against the likes of Georgia and Ukraine. Not so much anywhere else.

    The Germans were convinced all the way to the end of WWII that they would come with “super weapons” to save the day. It never happened. Russian vapourware is in this category which is a shame because sooner or later they will feel real pressure from the Chinese.

    Siberia is a vast empty treasure trove right next to the most populated nation on earth and the Chinese are arming themselves fast. Russia will never be able to keep up. I do not see much discussion about the multiple between Chinese and Russian military expenditure

    Let us not forget Russia/USSR and China have already fought serious battles in this area in the not so distant past.

    USA is starting a “Space Command”. For how long after that will ICBM’s be relevant?

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    USA is starting a “Space Command”. For how long after that will ICBM’s be relevant?
     
    They might remain relevant long after that. It's simply not easy to catch such a fast object. And the Russians seem to be moving away from that anyway.
    , @reiner Tor

    The Germans were convinced all the way to the end of WWII that they would come with “super weapons” to save the day.
     
    Were they? I think the Ministry of Propaganda and Goebbels spread these rumors, but they were known to be false by the people spreading the rumors, and the only people believing it were the ones who truly wanted to believe it. So, only committed Nazis.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Vojkan says:
    @Ioannis Andris
    A fine article but allow me to add a different dimension in the purpose of procuring new military systems, one that seems to be largely ignored by Russia with regards to conventional weapons (but paradoxically exaggerated in regards to nuclear ones). That is the psychological factor, the symbolic value of fielding high-tech weapons and its ramifications for the enemy.

    Sure, the "What do we really need?-What does really work?" questions seem to be prominent in Russian force planning and rightly so, but one must also not forget the nature of the enemy. The US (Europeans are a non-factor) is obsessed with high-tech superiority in all aspects of life, it is a deeply cultural aspect of the way americans view the world, ingrained in the US psyche ever since the country's founding.

    By proving that it can match the latest creations of the US military industrial complex-and do so in only a fraction of the cost it takes the US R&D to design them-Russia can send a strong message that resonates beyond the Pentagon and affects US foreign policy and its reckless adventurism versus Russia.

    Putin said "They will listen to us now." If they are meant to listen because of the new nuke arsenal-no, they won't. This arsenal does not fundamentally change the MAD doctrine-even though it was essential to negate any thoughts of US fielding a missile shield of any sort. But by introducing into service with its conventional forces items of equal or superior value to those fielded by NATO, Russia would indeed be heard and respected the way Kremlin wants to.

    One final thought-it is of the out most importance for the industry to go ahead with serial production of next modern systems if it desires to keep pace. Manufacturing prototypes or limited batches is a sure path to oblivion. Case in point, the ridiculous notion that Russia will miraculously produce a 6th gen aircraft without fielding a 5th gen example first.

    “By proving that it can match the latest creations of the US military industrial complex-and do so in only a fraction of the cost it takes the US R&D to design them-Russia can send a strong message that resonates beyond the Pentagon and affects US foreign policy and its reckless adventurism versus Russia.”

    The message would be lost. US policy is vanity-driven, Russian policy is common-sense driven. Vanity is blind to common sense. US policy is globalist. Russian policy is sovereignist. The USA wants to rule the world, so it needs weapons that have a psychological effect. Russia only wants to rule Russia so she only needs the concrete capability to defend Russia. Russia’s mission is not to save the world. Russia annexed Crimea and saved Syria because Crimeans and Syrians asked her to and because it was in her national security interest to do so.
    If the rest of the world doesn’t want to be ruled by the Anglo-Zionist cabbal, it shouldn’t have elected US controlled corrupt politicians for decades.
    The West has got what it has voted for. Russia has no business in saving people who have through centuries craved for subjugating her.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mike P

    The message would be lost. US policy is vanity-driven, ...
     
    Vanity (hyper-patriotism) is only for the proles, to dupe them into "supporting the troops." The actual U.S. "policy," if we even want to call it that, is simply compliance with the corruption and extortion imposed by the criminal MIC. Ironically, the very degeneracy of the U.S. political and military establishment is also the world's best hope for peace, or more accurately avoidance of WW3 - the U.S. military has feet of clay, and the brighter bulbs in Washington know it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. It’s impossible to know with any degree of certainty how well the strongest militaries would perform against each other. Because there hasn’t been a major war for several decades (since 1973, but actually since 1945), major weapons systems have not really been tested against each other. So technologies and doctrines have diverged, and no one knows what to expect. The last time we had such a long gap between greater power wars was back before 1914, and each of the powers was surprised and had to modify everything from uniforms through weapons through tactics.

    Probably something similar would happen now, but because of the divergence, the surprise would be even larger. It’s also very likely that one or two of the superpower (the US) and near-superpower (China and Russia) militaries would vastly overperform expectations, though expectations would be an overwhelming American victory. So an American victory while suffering serious, devastating losses would be a significant underperformance, and an overperformance for the enemy, be it China or Russia.

    But it’s important to keep in mind that the opposite outcome is just as likely, namely, an overwhelming US victory with minimal losses.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bill
    • Replies: @Kiza
    What a silly comment of someone with little or no historical perspective. Is this what you learned from the Discovery Channel?

    With stand-off weapons raining down any war with US would last a week or two at most, even without nuclear weapons. But the chances of US not using the nuclear weapons when they start paying the price of initiating a war with a peer power are minimal, that is nuclear war is a certainty. Most of the US military power is pure marketing, even taken captive the US soldiers cry like babies let alone to real dying. My favourite expression is - in a war on Russia US would have a good day when fewer US shitbags die then during the whole of its attack on defenceless Vietnam. Of course, many Russians would die too, but the Russians are much better at hardship.

    I never stop being amazed by the sheer stupidity of the US population well exhibited here at Unz. It is simply legendary.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Kimppis says:
    @peterAUS

    I’m certainly no expert. But this one trick pony (that being Russian Military superiority) “The Saker” continues to ride in the direction of the nearest glue factory seems to have finally collapsed under the weight of the author’s endless hypotheticals.
     
    Agree.

    I wish Russia no ill will. Nor do most Americans I know. That said, I am willing to bet the farm that the armies of the US and Russia will never meet on the battlefield in my lifetime, so all of this cock measuring seems pretty useless.
     
    The last, on the contrary. The "measuring" keeps the proles in Russia docile. That's all the guys in Kremlin and their friends need.

    Perhaps The Saker can find a new The Topic to The Pontificate about, other than his The Fetish with The WWIII.
     
    Of course he can and, if he were really a Russian nationalist he would. Should he do it, though, Kremlin will get unhappy.
    Enough said.

    Based on the current comment count, I’d say I’m not the only one holding this opinion.
     
    Well, again, as long as proles in Russia buy it, all good.
    As for most of the non-Russians, that no-show in Syria was probably the turning point.

    No fear. The true believers will remain steady on the course. Double down actually. Faith and such. The need to believe.

    No-show? Have you been following the Syrian conflict at all? The latest US/NATO missile strike was pure PR, at “best”. Most missiles didn’t even reach their targets (they really didn’t), the Americans were obviously lying.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    Most missiles didn’t even reach their targets
     
    I don't think it's proven. The Russians and Syrians still have yet to show us some proof they took down any of the incoming missiles.

    On the other hand, after having promised a more serious strike than the previous time, the US clearly backed down: they struck three empty warehouses. So the strike - despite promises and threats to step up from the strikes in 2017 - was actually scaled back relative to the previous one, except that it apparently involved more missiles and other weapons.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @Leander Starr
    Russian equipment has been good enough for conflict against the likes of Georgia and Ukraine. Not so much anywhere else.

    The Germans were convinced all the way to the end of WWII that they would come with "super weapons" to save the day. It never happened. Russian vapourware is in this category which is a shame because sooner or later they will feel real pressure from the Chinese.

    Siberia is a vast empty treasure trove right next to the most populated nation on earth and the Chinese are arming themselves fast. Russia will never be able to keep up. I do not see much discussion about the multiple between Chinese and Russian military expenditure

    Let us not forget Russia/USSR and China have already fought serious battles in this area in the not so distant past.

    USA is starting a "Space Command". For how long after that will ICBM's be relevant?

    USA is starting a “Space Command”. For how long after that will ICBM’s be relevant?

    They might remain relevant long after that. It’s simply not easy to catch such a fast object. And the Russians seem to be moving away from that anyway.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. @Kimppis
    No-show? Have you been following the Syrian conflict at all? The latest US/NATO missile strike was pure PR, at "best". Most missiles didn't even reach their targets (they really didn't), the Americans were obviously lying.

    Most missiles didn’t even reach their targets

    I don’t think it’s proven. The Russians and Syrians still have yet to show us some proof they took down any of the incoming missiles.

    On the other hand, after having promised a more serious strike than the previous time, the US clearly backed down: they struck three empty warehouses. So the strike – despite promises and threats to step up from the strikes in 2017 – was actually scaled back relative to the previous one, except that it apparently involved more missiles and other weapons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    I don’t think it’s proven. The Russians and Syrians still have yet to show us some proof they took down any of the incoming missiles.
     
    It was demonstrated by Russian MoD and, actually, created quite a shitstorm in US media. Let the Google be with you--but I have photos and my post in my blog with those was sabotaged by powers that be. You may also try this--by high positioned CIA officer.

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/trumps-big-flop-in-syria-by-publius-tacitus.html#more

    , @reiner Tor
    To be more precise, there are two possibilities:

    1) The Americans lie, and the Russians tell the truth. In that case, Russian military credibility got greatly enhanced, and their conventional superiority (at least the superiority of their air defense vis-à-vis Western cruise missiles) made it unnecessary to start a nuclear war or anything close to it. However, the Americans didn’t blink, so their psychological credibility got enhanced. So now there are the crazy (crazier relative to earlier perceptions) Americans against the more capable (relative to earlier perceptions; but less crazy) Russians. Also, the Americans didn’t dare follow up the (ineffectual) strikes, so basically after realizing Russian capabilities, they just walked away.
    2) The Russians lie, and the Americans tell the truth. In that case, Russian military credibility stands close to zero (i.e. they were unable to shoot down even one missile, and lied about it), and their psychological credibility also hit new lows: despite earlier threats, they did nothing against the strikes. On the other hand, the Americans also blinked: they only dared targeting empty warehouses. So both sides credibility suffered, but perhaps Russian credibility more so.

    There’s also a combination of the two.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. @Leander Starr
    Russian equipment has been good enough for conflict against the likes of Georgia and Ukraine. Not so much anywhere else.

    The Germans were convinced all the way to the end of WWII that they would come with "super weapons" to save the day. It never happened. Russian vapourware is in this category which is a shame because sooner or later they will feel real pressure from the Chinese.

    Siberia is a vast empty treasure trove right next to the most populated nation on earth and the Chinese are arming themselves fast. Russia will never be able to keep up. I do not see much discussion about the multiple between Chinese and Russian military expenditure

    Let us not forget Russia/USSR and China have already fought serious battles in this area in the not so distant past.

    USA is starting a "Space Command". For how long after that will ICBM's be relevant?

    The Germans were convinced all the way to the end of WWII that they would come with “super weapons” to save the day.

    Were they? I think the Ministry of Propaganda and Goebbels spread these rumors, but they were known to be false by the people spreading the rumors, and the only people believing it were the ones who truly wanted to believe it. So, only committed Nazis.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @reiner Tor

    Most missiles didn’t even reach their targets
     
    I don't think it's proven. The Russians and Syrians still have yet to show us some proof they took down any of the incoming missiles.

    On the other hand, after having promised a more serious strike than the previous time, the US clearly backed down: they struck three empty warehouses. So the strike - despite promises and threats to step up from the strikes in 2017 - was actually scaled back relative to the previous one, except that it apparently involved more missiles and other weapons.

    I don’t think it’s proven. The Russians and Syrians still have yet to show us some proof they took down any of the incoming missiles.

    It was demonstrated by Russian MoD and, actually, created quite a shitstorm in US media. Let the Google be with you–but I have photos and my post in my blog with those was sabotaged by powers that be. You may also try this–by high positioned CIA officer.

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/trumps-big-flop-in-syria-by-publius-tacitus.html#more

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. @reiner Tor

    Most missiles didn’t even reach their targets
     
    I don't think it's proven. The Russians and Syrians still have yet to show us some proof they took down any of the incoming missiles.

    On the other hand, after having promised a more serious strike than the previous time, the US clearly backed down: they struck three empty warehouses. So the strike - despite promises and threats to step up from the strikes in 2017 - was actually scaled back relative to the previous one, except that it apparently involved more missiles and other weapons.

    To be more precise, there are two possibilities:

    1) The Americans lie, and the Russians tell the truth. In that case, Russian military credibility got greatly enhanced, and their conventional superiority (at least the superiority of their air defense vis-à-vis Western cruise missiles) made it unnecessary to start a nuclear war or anything close to it. However, the Americans didn’t blink, so their psychological credibility got enhanced. So now there are the crazy (crazier relative to earlier perceptions) Americans against the more capable (relative to earlier perceptions; but less crazy) Russians. Also, the Americans didn’t dare follow up the (ineffectual) strikes, so basically after realizing Russian capabilities, they just walked away.
    2) The Russians lie, and the Americans tell the truth. In that case, Russian military credibility stands close to zero (i.e. they were unable to shoot down even one missile, and lied about it), and their psychological credibility also hit new lows: despite earlier threats, they did nothing against the strikes. On the other hand, the Americans also blinked: they only dared targeting empty warehouses. So both sides credibility suffered, but perhaps Russian credibility more so.

    There’s also a combination of the two.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    https://sputniknews.com/world/201804251063889631-russia-mod-us-missiles-syria/

    Don't try to "rationalize" something which requires more than just reasoning skills but access to a reliable data, not to speak of knowledge.

    , @Philip Owen
    There were claims by RT from vague sources that no Syrian airfield was damaged as all the US missiles heading for them were shot down. On the other hand, the US/UK/France never claimed to be targetting airfields. The kind of targets that they said they would hit, elastically defined, were hit. Maybe the Syrians lied?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. @reiner Tor
    To be more precise, there are two possibilities:

    1) The Americans lie, and the Russians tell the truth. In that case, Russian military credibility got greatly enhanced, and their conventional superiority (at least the superiority of their air defense vis-à-vis Western cruise missiles) made it unnecessary to start a nuclear war or anything close to it. However, the Americans didn’t blink, so their psychological credibility got enhanced. So now there are the crazy (crazier relative to earlier perceptions) Americans against the more capable (relative to earlier perceptions; but less crazy) Russians. Also, the Americans didn’t dare follow up the (ineffectual) strikes, so basically after realizing Russian capabilities, they just walked away.
    2) The Russians lie, and the Americans tell the truth. In that case, Russian military credibility stands close to zero (i.e. they were unable to shoot down even one missile, and lied about it), and their psychological credibility also hit new lows: despite earlier threats, they did nothing against the strikes. On the other hand, the Americans also blinked: they only dared targeting empty warehouses. So both sides credibility suffered, but perhaps Russian credibility more so.

    There’s also a combination of the two.

    https://sputniknews.com/world/201804251063889631-russia-mod-us-missiles-syria/

    Don’t try to “rationalize” something which requires more than just reasoning skills but access to a reliable data, not to speak of knowledge.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. skrik says:
    @nagra
    Russia is Ortodox Cristian nation
    not just any Cristian nation
    like the Catholics

    and blaming Israel for everything in this world is not just ridiculous but pathetic as well

    blaming Israel for everything in this world is not just ridiculous but pathetic as well

    ‘Political correctness’ means that one cannot criticise anyone for their ‘difference,’ like being a raging homosexual bull dyke misfit or a head-chopping Wahhabist psychopath. Such correctness is being pushed [by you know whom], to provide a general rule from which they hope to benefit in two ways, a) being some ‘zzz’ could possibly be seen as a ‘lesser’ offence than the two examples given above, and b) by blocking criticism of such ‘nasties,’ these shifty zzzs hope to neuter any who might point out zzz-failures [myriad!]. Asking ‘whom you may not criticise’ answers the Q: Who rules over you? Assuming you may not actually be a ‘native hasbarat,’ good luck trying to vote yourself out of that!

    PS IF [as it seems], you are not aware of Israel’s multiple ‘sins’ [supreme international war crimes; starting with 'colonisation by force' via ethnic cleansing via murdering violence for Lebensraum, aka land-theft as punished by hanging perpetrators at the Nuremberg trials, etc.] THEN you must be ignorant indeed: Be ashamed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. @reiner Tor
    To be more precise, there are two possibilities:

    1) The Americans lie, and the Russians tell the truth. In that case, Russian military credibility got greatly enhanced, and their conventional superiority (at least the superiority of their air defense vis-à-vis Western cruise missiles) made it unnecessary to start a nuclear war or anything close to it. However, the Americans didn’t blink, so their psychological credibility got enhanced. So now there are the crazy (crazier relative to earlier perceptions) Americans against the more capable (relative to earlier perceptions; but less crazy) Russians. Also, the Americans didn’t dare follow up the (ineffectual) strikes, so basically after realizing Russian capabilities, they just walked away.
    2) The Russians lie, and the Americans tell the truth. In that case, Russian military credibility stands close to zero (i.e. they were unable to shoot down even one missile, and lied about it), and their psychological credibility also hit new lows: despite earlier threats, they did nothing against the strikes. On the other hand, the Americans also blinked: they only dared targeting empty warehouses. So both sides credibility suffered, but perhaps Russian credibility more so.

    There’s also a combination of the two.

    There were claims by RT from vague sources that no Syrian airfield was damaged as all the US missiles heading for them were shot down. On the other hand, the US/UK/France never claimed to be targetting airfields. The kind of targets that they said they would hit, elastically defined, were hit. Maybe the Syrians lied?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Russia would go nuclear very soon. The folks in San Francisco would beg for peace. America would back down immediately.
    Russia and the PRC are more than happy to unleash their pit bull, N. Korea, to destroy S. Korea and San Francisco. That would crater the stock market.
    Kim will soon start acting up. Trump is a bull in a China closet and is destroying too many things . NATO certainly would not do Trump any favors in a war with Russia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia would go nuclear very soon.
     
    I hope not;-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. @Erebus
    Actually, given that the F-35 program started in the early 2000s and was hyped as something far beyond the state-of-the-art F-22, I'd guess that a few Russian design bureaus and military procurement officers took the hype at face value and felt they had to respond to the challenge. From what is known of the SU-57, they turned out a peerless aerial combat platform, but as it now turns out it's almost certainly surplus to real requirements.
    The F-22's limitations are now better known, and the F-35 turned out to be a flying pig. The Russians have a lot of different and capable aircraft in numbers, so the SU-57 will probably see life as a technology test platform only.

    As for the T-14 Armata and its derivatives, the Russians do love their tanks and if Russia's geo-political goal of becoming guarantor of Eurasian security and arbiter of its energy flows is to be realized, they need to be able to field a ground force that is indisputably as good as it gets. As with the SU-57, whether the T-14 goes into serial production or not, a great deal was learned in the process of designing it that will find its way into other armoured hardware such as self-powered guns, drone tanks, etc. In fact, those derivatives are already showing up.

    Dear Erebus, off-top, can you get me to your post on economy when reduction in manufacturing was actually increasing GDP? I would really appreciate this.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Prof Watson
    Russia would go nuclear very soon. The folks in San Francisco would beg for peace. America would back down immediately.
    Russia and the PRC are more than happy to unleash their pit bull, N. Korea, to destroy S. Korea and San Francisco. That would crater the stock market.
    Kim will soon start acting up. Trump is a bull in a China closet and is destroying too many things . NATO certainly would not do Trump any favors in a war with Russia.

    Russia would go nuclear very soon.

    I hope not;-)

    Read More
    • Replies: @nagra
    start sinking US Navy might initiate the compromise
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. nagra says:
    @DESERT FOX
    Zionists are to blame for the degeneration of America as they rule America and have been the agent provocateur for the wars that America has fought beginning with WWI and right down to the war foisted upon Syria by the U.S. and ISREAL and BRITAIN who created ISIS aka AL CIADA and therefore are the main terrorists as those who created the terrorist are the worst terrorists.

    It is the Zionists who have been the terrorists as in the Bolshevik revolution where 60 some million Russians were murdered by the Zionist Bolsheviks as per Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Robert Conquests Harvest of Sorrow and there destroying millions in the Mideast, the Zionists are the real terrorists of the world.

    Read the 10 planks of the communist/Zionist manifesto and you will see how far down the road the road the Zionist/Bolsheviks/communists have taken America and Israel is the Zionist creation to promote the Zionist goal of a NWO/ONE WORLD GOV..

    America doesn’t need any third party for its degeneration
    they didn’t created neither some Isis or Al Qaida
    they’ve helped them get organised

    USA is definitely terrorist country but not for the reasons you’ve mentioned
    I would still ask the real pope to come forward, and explain all this mess
    if he is not too busy covering and placing news you would like to hear

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. nagra says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia would go nuclear very soon.
     
    I hope not;-)

    start sinking US Navy might initiate the compromise

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Mike P says:
    @Vojkan
    "By proving that it can match the latest creations of the US military industrial complex-and do so in only a fraction of the cost it takes the US R&D to design them-Russia can send a strong message that resonates beyond the Pentagon and affects US foreign policy and its reckless adventurism versus Russia."

    The message would be lost. US policy is vanity-driven, Russian policy is common-sense driven. Vanity is blind to common sense. US policy is globalist. Russian policy is sovereignist. The USA wants to rule the world, so it needs weapons that have a psychological effect. Russia only wants to rule Russia so she only needs the concrete capability to defend Russia. Russia's mission is not to save the world. Russia annexed Crimea and saved Syria because Crimeans and Syrians asked her to and because it was in her national security interest to do so.
    If the rest of the world doesn't want to be ruled by the Anglo-Zionist cabbal, it shouldn't have elected US controlled corrupt politicians for decades.
    The West has got what it has voted for. Russia has no business in saving people who have through centuries craved for subjugating her.

    The message would be lost. US policy is vanity-driven, …

    Vanity (hyper-patriotism) is only for the proles, to dupe them into “supporting the troops.” The actual U.S. “policy,” if we even want to call it that, is simply compliance with the corruption and extortion imposed by the criminal MIC. Ironically, the very degeneracy of the U.S. political and military establishment is also the world’s best hope for peace, or more accurately avoidance of WW3 – the U.S. military has feet of clay, and the brighter bulbs in Washington know it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Kiza says:
    @reiner Tor
    It’s impossible to know with any degree of certainty how well the strongest militaries would perform against each other. Because there hasn’t been a major war for several decades (since 1973, but actually since 1945), major weapons systems have not really been tested against each other. So technologies and doctrines have diverged, and no one knows what to expect. The last time we had such a long gap between greater power wars was back before 1914, and each of the powers was surprised and had to modify everything from uniforms through weapons through tactics.

    Probably something similar would happen now, but because of the divergence, the surprise would be even larger. It’s also very likely that one or two of the superpower (the US) and near-superpower (China and Russia) militaries would vastly overperform expectations, though expectations would be an overwhelming American victory. So an American victory while suffering serious, devastating losses would be a significant underperformance, and an overperformance for the enemy, be it China or Russia.

    But it’s important to keep in mind that the opposite outcome is just as likely, namely, an overwhelming US victory with minimal losses.

    What a silly comment of someone with little or no historical perspective. Is this what you learned from the Discovery Channel?

    With stand-off weapons raining down any war with US would last a week or two at most, even without nuclear weapons. But the chances of US not using the nuclear weapons when they start paying the price of initiating a war with a peer power are minimal, that is nuclear war is a certainty. Most of the US military power is pure marketing, even taken captive the US soldiers cry like babies let alone to real dying. My favourite expression is – in a war on Russia US would have a good day when fewer US shitbags die then during the whole of its attack on defenceless Vietnam. Of course, many Russians would die too, but the Russians are much better at hardship.

    I never stop being amazed by the sheer stupidity of the US population well exhibited here at Unz. It is simply legendary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @yurivku
    Agree. That's why I abandon writing here. Seems like time to talk passed, now's time to die hard coming.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Kiza says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike
    I'm certainly no expert. But this one trick pony (that being Russian Military superiority) "The Saker" continues to ride in the direction of the nearest glue factory seems to have finally collapsed under the weight of the author's endless hypotheticals.

    I wish Russia no ill will. Nor do most Americans I know. That said, I am willing to bet the farm that the armies of the US and Russia will never meet on the battlefield in my lifetime, so all of this cock measuring seems pretty useless.

    Perhaps The Saker can find a new The Topic to The Pontificate about, other than his The Fetish with The WWIII. Based on the current comment count, I'd say I'm not the only one holding this opinion.

    I believe that you live on another planet, not in US. Or perhaps in US on another planet.

    On this planet US is one inch away from intentionally or accidentally starting a war on Russia and is excreting so much anti-Russia bile that I had to stop consuming any public dumb-fuck media. The impotent frustration of US at not being the top dog any more is sickening.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. yurivku says:
    @Kiza
    What a silly comment of someone with little or no historical perspective. Is this what you learned from the Discovery Channel?

    With stand-off weapons raining down any war with US would last a week or two at most, even without nuclear weapons. But the chances of US not using the nuclear weapons when they start paying the price of initiating a war with a peer power are minimal, that is nuclear war is a certainty. Most of the US military power is pure marketing, even taken captive the US soldiers cry like babies let alone to real dying. My favourite expression is - in a war on Russia US would have a good day when fewer US shitbags die then during the whole of its attack on defenceless Vietnam. Of course, many Russians would die too, but the Russians are much better at hardship.

    I never stop being amazed by the sheer stupidity of the US population well exhibited here at Unz. It is simply legendary.

    Agree. That’s why I abandon writing here. Seems like time to talk passed, now’s time to die hard coming.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All The Saker Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?