Russian boots on the ground in Syria. Another Afghanistan?

Count Dooku

weisses wrote: »

Known fact so mute point

Only ballistic missiles with nukes - not cruise missile with conventional warhead

weisses wrote: »

Doesn't fly either because it can easily be verified by both countries

mea culpa, I should write "give some hope to West"

dav32cs

weisses wrote: »

America is as untrustworthy as they come if they can get an advantage out of a situation, but I cannot see what their gain would be in this instance by spreading mis information

Portraying the Russian military as incompetent and dangerous compared to the US and trying to get people to question their military effectiveness in relation to hitting targets accuratly.

Will wait to see if there is any evidence of confirmation rather than just blindly believing these anonymous sources that are rolled out regularly to score points.

The last one was in regard to the Russian general barging in to an office in Bagdad and demanding the Americans get out of Syria. Anyone that knows Russians know they don't operate like this through threats and shouting. All it seemed to try do was to whip up tension with Americans superiority complex to be outraged that another country would dare give these demands. Again, anonymous sources with words like 'probably' and 'allegedly' the general tone of the story.

weisses

Count Dooku wrote: »

Only ballistic missiles with nukes - not cruise missile with conventional warhead

Below a list of missiles the russian have

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missiles_by_country

I think no one panics with another addition added

Count Dooku wrote: »

mea culpa, I should write "give some hope to West"

Hope what for ?

K-9

Closing this for revie. Just seems to be people taking childish, nonsensical digs at each other.

K-9

K-9 wrote: »

Mod:

OK, if somebody posts that another user supports or is fine with bombs and deaths, quote them, or expect to be banned from the thread.

This putting words in people's mouths because of what side they are on, I don't care what "side", stops now.

OK, enough warnings. Any more of the above, and posts flaming and looking to get a reaction from others, gets a ban from the forum. Most of ye are regulars to threads like these so there's no excuses.

Focus on the quality of the content of your posts, not personally attacking others.

gandalf

TBH until the "stray missile" story is confirmed by a credible source it's just hersay.

I wouldn't hold your breath expecting Iran to confirm it because it makes their lives very difficult indeed if their population think that a foreign power is dropping munitions (even mistakenly) on their sovereign soil.

Iran and Russia are propping up Assads regime. They probably don't want to fracture this relationship.

Iran would be obliged to respond if they confirmed this event.

From a Russian perspective if this is true then it really calls into question the accuracy and effectiveness of their precision munitions. For a weapon that is suppose to get within 3 metres of its target a shortfall of ~800kms is pathetic. It's WW2 V1 territory.

We'll see if any credible sources become available over the next couple of days. If the failure rate of around 15% is consistent and the Russians fire off more of these cruise missiles we will see more of these incidents and in todays world it's only a matter of time before one comes down somewhere where it will be noticed.

If the Russians cease missions using these munitions then it is pretty telling as well.

Stealthfins

There was a lot of so called friendly fire in the gulf war.
Actually during the gulf war the Russians stood back and didn't interfere.

They laid out their concerns but stood back.

This stuff about knocking the Russians is more or less people's ego's getting deflated,therefore stirring fear due someone else getting the limelight.

Think of it like one person got a Raleigh Burner for a Christmas and the other guy got BMX...

It's the man who makes the cloth not the cloth that makes the man....

Dohnjoe

Stealthfins wrote: »

This stuff about knocking the Russians is more or less people's ego's getting deflated,therefore stirring fear due someone else getting the limelight.

There is focus on Russia because the country hasn't been involved in a large international conflict in quite some time. Likewise if China were to enter the conflict their actions would be put under a microscope.

To up the ante, Russia is there to prop up Assad, something which many countries are averse to

Also, Russian nationalism and propaganda haven't been higher since the Soviet era, the possibility of any incidents getting out of hand has increased

glued

I think the key issue here is that NATO probably know there is no chance of convincing the Russians or Iranians to stop supporting Assad. He's a key strategic ally for both and as much as Iran would ideally like more control in Syria they know that having Assad in power is better than anyone else for their own interests.

On the other hand, if Russia and Iran weren't involved, Syria would be completely overrun by Salafists which nobody bar Saudi Arabia and Qatar wants.

Also, Iranian-Turkish relations are at an all time low. Nobody really trusts Turkey in the Middle East. Even Israel is no longer co-operating with Turkey who were allies until 2011. Turkey have a very warped view of the region and their treatment of the Kurds has been a disgrace.

I think it's only a matter of time before everybody bangs their heads together and redraws the borders of Syria. It's not going to be ideal for everyone especially the Alawis who are fighting with the FSA and are anti-Assad.

I don't think you'll see peace in the East of Syria for a long time especially with NATO involved as both the Salafist Rebels and ISIS will have to be defeated. Britain and the US rely heavily on Saudi intelligence and have allowed the Saudis to bankroll countless terrorist organisations. Unless NATO start upping the pressure on Saudi Arabia I can't see Eastern Syria being at peace for a long time.

gobsh!te

Anyone know the source for the stray missiles?

glued

gobsh!te wrote: »

Anyone know the source for the stray missiles?

It's from an unnamed US source. We probably won't know for sure until a couple of days but my first instinct is that the report is just a fabrication.

IrishTrajan

glued wrote: »

I think the key issue here is that NATO probably know there is no chance of convincing the Russians or Iranians to stop supporting Assad. He's a key strategic ally for both and as much as Iran would ideally like more control in Syria they know that having Assad in power is better than anyone else for their own interests.

I don't think NATO actually cares that much about Assad. It's the Arabs and Turks who are pushing for his removal the most, everyone else is just giving lip service and political support to his removal from power. Hell, if the US, or the French, or the British really wanted him dead, they'd send a stray cruise missile his way.

glued wrote: »

On the other hand, if Russia and Iran weren't involved, Syria would be completely overrun by Salafists which nobody bar Saudi Arabia and Qatar wants.

Also, Iranian-Turkish relations are at an all time low. Nobody really trusts Turkey in the Middle East. Even Israel is no longer co-operating with Turkey who were allies until 2011. Turkey have a very warped view of the region and their treatment of the Kurds has been a disgrace.

Nobody trusts Turkey, because Turkey has the capacity to become the regional hegemon. Turkey has the second largest population (only a few million behind Iran), it has the second largest number of soldiers in NATO, it has the largest GDP in the region. It's forces don't really suffer from terrible morale (like the Saudis) and their military hasn't been isolated from world weapons markets (like Iran's). Turkey's return to the region as an active player could herald a quasi-Ottoman Empire

Also, Israel and Turkey's "falling out" can be attributed to Erdogan. Every time a domestic threat pops up at home, he rattles some sabres at the Israelis and gets the Turks hyped up behind him again.

glued wrote: »

I think it's only a matter of time before everybody bangs their heads together and redraws the borders of Syria. It's not going to be ideal for everyone especially the Alawis who are fighting with the FSA and are anti-Assad.

Syria's border being redrawn looks almost inevitable, and some analysts speculate that the recent reports of an Iranian/SAA/Hezbollah build up is to secure the industrial hinterlands for the Alawites. If it's true, it would fit in with the Russian psyche. They'll provide air support for offensives by Assad to ensure the survivability of the regime after negotiations.

glued wrote: »

I don't think you'll see peace in the East of Syria for a long time especially with NATO involved as both the Salafist Rebels and ISIS will have to be defeated. Britain and the US rely heavily on Saudi intelligence and have allowed the Saudis to bankroll countless terrorist organisations. Unless NATO start upping the pressure on Saudi Arabia I can't see Eastern Syria being at peace for a long time.

Turkey would be instrumental in maintaining peace in "Sunni Syria", and they'd likely do what Russia did in Georgia. Position nominal "peace-keeper" garrisons and let the region function largely autonomously. Having a friendly Sunni power to their south would allow them to counter Iranian and Rojavan Kurdish influence.

Count Dooku

gandalf wrote: »

TBH until the "stray missile" story is confirmed by a credible source it's just hersay.

I wouldn't hold your breath expecting Iran to confirm it because it makes their lives very difficult indeed if their population think that a foreign power is dropping munitions (even mistakenly) on their sovereign soil.

Iran and Russia are propping up Assads regime. They probably don't want to fracture this relationship.

Iran would be obliged to respond if they confirmed this event.

From a Russian perspective if this is true then it really calls into question the accuracy and effectiveness of their precision munitions. For a weapon that is suppose to get within 3 metres of its target a shortfall of ~800kms is pathetic. It's WW2 V1 territory.

We'll see if any credible sources become available over the next couple of days. If the failure rate of around 15% is consistent and the Russians fire off more of these cruise missiles we will see more of these incidents and in todays world it's only a matter of time before one comes down somewhere where it will be noticed.

If the Russians cease missions using these munitions then it is pretty telling as well.

Russians introduced Kalibr only in 2013, it is a new weapon which have been test only 3 times(each test must informed to Pentagon)
USA still have issues with Tomahawks, which are been fired thousands of times and still they 10% failure rate during launch
As example - USS John McCain Tomahawk Failure
Oops - something wrong with name of this US Navy ship

Gatling

Count Dooku wrote: »

Russians introduced Kalibr only in 2013, it is a new weapon which have been test only 3 times(each test must informed to Pentagon)
USA still have issues with Tomahawks, which are been fired thousands of times and still they 10% failure rate during launch
As example - USS John McCain Tomahawk Failure
Oops - something wrong with name of this US Navy ship

So what your saying is russia is lobbing untested very in inaccurate munitions across several countries and your only come back is a blog written that has no varified sources to its claim and one single live leak video

Count Dooku

Gatling wrote: »

So what your saying is russia is lobbing untested very in inaccurate munitions across several countries and your only come back is a blog written that has no varified sources to its claim and one single live leak video

How do you know that it is inaccurate?

Gatling

Count Dooku wrote: »

How do you know that it is inaccurate?

Fire 11 loses 4 that's pretty inaccurate by any means wouldn't you agree

cerastes

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Would be awfully nice of the Syrian people could decide their government.

real politik aside, its hard to make an argument that a murderous dictator must retain power.

Maybe democracy or the form allowed isn't suited to everyone, I'm not even convinced it's suited to anyone in its current western form, it usually seems less democratic then its made out to be with token inputs considered/allowed from the proles.

http://www.retrospectjournal.co.uk/usademocracy/

http://www.euractiv.com/sections/global-europe/russia-tells-eu-abandon-messianic-project-exporting-democracy-317262

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

I just can't buy that the killer of 100,000 of his own citizens and displaced milllions remains the best choice..... it sure wouldn't be my choice.

There are democratic movements in Syria.... its too ridiculously black/white to consider it a choice between secular & islamist tyrany,
Lets be honest, that is no choice at all.

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

No one can guarantee that for most nations.

But again, if a fledgling democracy falls, it falls..... Worrying about a hypothetical coup should not deter from allowing people a say in their future!

Using it as a flimsy dismissal of democracy at all holds no water.

Not you, not anyone has the right to tell Syrian men women & children, young & old that they must accept tyrany.

There is no argument for the continuation of dictatorship, whether Assad or islamist that bests serves the Syrian people.

Tyranny? you wonder who was promised what by who? All well and good so long as you arent having your head lopped off by a fundamentalist nut job I suppose, so very easy to say. Ive met some Syrians before and spoken to some since all this started, before I was told about how pleasant Damascus was at that time of year and how they missed home, after, from others, its how bad things are because of interference.

Gatling wrote: »

There should now be a strict No fly zone imposed over all of syria ,
Put and end to Putins game before he does more damage

Whos going to impose that? and by what right? The Russians have made gestures to the US, which have been ignored, Im fairly sure the Russians have air to air missles, shooting down an aircraft first by anyone could escalate things rapidly and threats of such or its like should not be made, lest it ratchets up the tension and makes someone pre-empt a threat or take it seriously and be ready to return fire.

Magico Gonzalez wrote: »

Russians making the same mistakes as their american cousins, these countries are redundant entities. Syria, Iraq etc. These entities have never recovered from the fall of the Ottoman empire and the ensuing loss of stability. Somehow these countries need to be allowed to fracture into their natural states. That might, as always, involves wars, winners and losers. Long term stability cannot come from hundred year old mistakes imposted by the British, French and Americans.

Its true, but they including Libya were all stable before foreign intervention, as much or more so than many countries in the world, and there are plenty worse than any of them, they had revenue from oil, more secular, and relatively moderate compared to Saudi and gulf states, certainly not as bad as them.

dav32cs wrote: »

The last one was in regard to the Russian general barging in to an office in Bagdad and demanding the Americans get out of Syria. Anyone that knows Russians know they don't operate like this through threats and shouting. All it seemed to try do was to whip up tension with Americans superiority complex to be outraged that another country would dare give these demands. Again, anonymous sources with words like 'probably' and 'allegedly' the general tone of the story.

More like the US really, Every now and again, John Kerry pipes up banging the war drum and rattling the sabre? astonishing considering the last 24 years of US foreign policy.

Count Dooku

Gatling wrote: »

Fire 11 loses 4 that's pretty inaccurate by any means wouldn't you agree

Fired 26, only one lost

cerastes

Gatling wrote: »

So what your saying is russia is lobbing firing untested new very in inaccurate munitions (you claim, whats the percentage of hits to misses?) across several countries (which it has agreed permission with) and your only come back is a blog written that has no varified sources (get out of here, you were citing an unverified source stating that the cruise missiles missed) to its claim and one single live leak video

Gatling wrote: »

Fire 11 loses 4 that's pretty inaccurate by any means wouldn't you agree

Are you going to provide a source? or is that just something other people have to provide?

Gatling

Count Dooku wrote: »

Fired 26, only one lost

One. source at all ?

Gatling

cerastes wrote: »

Are you going to provide a source? or is that just something other people have to provide?

Already provided a link several pages back do keep up.
Careful with the edits

cerastes

Gatling wrote: »

Already provided a link several pages back do keep up.
Careful with the edits

Well, is this the one about the unverified source, or did I miss one, because I was following the thread, maybe I missed a page, couldnt you be a bit grown up and just provide it again? or is it hogswash? it saves me the inconvenience of reading it all back, but it looks like youre deflecting from providing real information, if it was verifiable, why dont you just provide it to convince me?
Churlish comments like "do keep up" makes you appear immature, what do you mean careful with the edits, I refrained from punctuation correction as best I could, simply inserted the corrections I saw fit, didnt delete anything if thats what your suggesting, unless it was by accident, maybe I naturally corrected some spelling, what did I edit out? (edit, oh I see, I took out an extraneous "in")

So how about you answer my question?

Count Dooku

Gatling wrote: »

Already provided a link several pages back do keep up.
Careful with the edits

Any photos/videos?

cerastes

Gatling wrote: »

Already provided a link several pages back do keep up.
Careful with the edits

So, I went back a few pages expecting something new that showed some truth, but all I can find is the link you had before by some unverified source, so that was a waste of time and sums up your contribution, you make statements and dont back them up and waste time by deflecting as above as you could easily have said what that link/contribution was but didn't.

You are making hyperbolic statements as if they are fact, and a lot of people read stuff like that and expect because they wouldn't say it unless it was true, others would not say it unless there was a shred of truth in it either, and if there is you'd have a verifiable source, which you yourself insisted on above, if you could provide that I'd accept it, you may have made some statements that are accurate in some posts as Ive even thanked a reply of yours in this thread, but your slant is very one sided amounting to whataboutery, you have discredited yourself by making unreliable statements and then demanding a higher exacting burden of proof from others, unfortunately now all I have you pegged as, is as having a serious Tom Clancy collection.
If you have proof Putin howls at the moon and eats babies, stick it up for all to see.

Gatling

cerastes wrote: »

So, I went back a few pages expecting something new that showed some truth, but all I can find is the link you had before by some unverified source, so that was a waste of time and sums up your contribution, you make statements and dont back them up and waste time by deflecting as above as you could easily have said what that link/contribution was but didn't.

You are making hyperbolic statements as if they are fact, and a lot of people read stuff like that and expect because they wouldn't say it unless it was true, others would not say it unless there was a shred of truth in it either, and if there is you'd have a verifiable source, which you yourself insisted on above, if you could provide that I'd accept it, you may have made some statements that are accurate in some posts as Ive even thanked a reply of yours in this thread, but your slant is very one sided amounting to whataboutery, you have discredited yourself by making unreliable statements and then demanding a higher exacting burden of proof from others, unfortunately now all I have you pegged as, is as having a serious Tom Clancy collection.
If you have proof Putin howls at the moon and eats babies, stick it up for all to see.

Disprove what I said then even a pro russian said only one missle missed which would mean there is some consensus missles missed or do you only question certain posters ?

Gatling

Can't seem to save links at the moment,

Seems another Iranian General has been killed in Aleppo Syria while advising the Syrian army ,this is taken from our own rte news ,

"An Iranian Revolutionary Guards general has been killed near Aleppo, where he was advising the Syrian army on their battle against Islamic State fighters, the guards have said in a statement.

General Hussein Hamedani was killed late on Wednesday, the statement said.

Iran is the main regional ally of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and has provided military and economic support during Syria's four-year-old civil war."

I believe around 10 Iranian generals have been killed this year alone in syria and else where in the same region

BoJack Horseman

Gatling wrote: »

"An Iranian Revolutionary Guards general has been killed near Aleppo, where he was advising the Syrian army on their battle against Islamic State fighters, the guards have said in a statement.

The general was synonymous apparently with the put down of reform protests after the Iranian 2009 presidential election.

ZeroThreat

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

The general was synonymous apparently with the put down of reform protests after the Iranian 2009 presidential election.

No doubt a thug specialising in attacking unarmed crowds wouldn't last long against a side who actually fight back.

smurgen

ZeroThreat wrote: »

No doubt a thug specialising in attacking unarmed crowds wouldn't last long against a side who actually fight back.

How do you know what his job was or who he was fighting?If he was fighting Isis are you happy that he lost?I'm genuinely confused at some of the posts here.

smurgen

ZeroThreat wrote: »

No doubt a thug specialising in attacking unarmed crowds wouldn't last long against a side who actually fight back.

How do you know what his job was or who he was fighting?If he was fighting Isis are you happy that he lost?I'm genuinely confused at some of the posts here.

smurgen

Gatling wrote: »

So what your saying is russia is lobbing untested very in inaccurate munitions across several countries and your only come back is a blog written that has no varified sources to its claim and one single live leak video

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147 it seems like both the U.S and Russia are both using highly inaccurate weapons.

BoJack Horseman

smurgen wrote: »

How do you know what his job was

The articles reporting his death mention he was there "advising" Iranian forces fighting for the Assad dictatorship.

or who he was fighting?

As mentioned, the enemies of the Assad dictatorship.

Gatling

smurgen wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/24/-sp-us-drone-strikes-kill-1147 it seems like both the U.S and Russia are both using highly inaccurate weapons.

I wouldn't see it that way based off totally different situations ,
The hellfire missle happens to be tried and tested for decades deaths from drones are either colterial damage or poor intelligence based off a drone operators decision vs a cruise missle that according to a poster on here was only previously tested 3 times personally I find that hard to believe ,
But the cruise missiles in question is been fired over several countries and happened to miss targets by several hundred miles if all reports about the incidents are true

Count Dooku

Gatling wrote: »

One. source at all ?

So far all news mentioned only one village where explosion been heard, as for Iranian social networks

Shurimgreat

Is the inaccuracy of these weapons really a surprise? A large percentage of russian military spending is lost to fraud, corruption and kickbacks, possibly up to half. The rest has to cover salaries of over 1 million servicemen, running of the airforce, navy including nuclear subs as well as army. How much do people think they have to spend on research and development? Very little. There is little or no chance these weapons are accurate.

smurgen

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Is the inaccuracy of these weapons really a surprise? A large percentage of russian military spending is lost to fraud, corruption and kickbacks, possibly up to half. The rest has to cover salaries of over 1 million servicemen, running of the airforce, navy including nuclear subs as well as army. How much do people think they have to spend on research and development? Very little. There is little or no chance these weapons are accurate.

The Russians have been some of the greatest engineers throughout history.they manage to do alot with little resources. The Soyuz space craft for example was first developed by them in the 1960's and is the main transport vehicle nowadays, being hsed by nasa and the ISS.your portrayal of russian engineering sounds very different from reality.

Dannyboy83

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/469341/Russia-Turkey-jet-plane-shot-down-airspace-Syria-ISIS-Islamic-State

Unconfirmed reports that Turkey have shot down a Russian jet

Gatling

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/469341/Russia-Turkey-jet-plane-shot-down-airspace-Syria-ISIS-Islamic-State

Unconfirmed reports that Turkey have shot down a Russian jet

If that's true this situation just got even more dangerous

glued

I'd imagine if it was true the Russian media would be all over it. Putin is looking to throw his weight around and this would give him a big reason to escalate knowing that NATO won't want to go to war with Russia, Iran and probably China.

In fairness if they're constantly entering Turkish airspace there is not much else they can do but I really can't see NATO standing behind Turkey if this escalated into something much bigger.

glued

None of the Turkish media or Syrian media are reporting it so I would assume it's false. Turkey aren't going to mess up the nuclear plant in Akkuyu over a few Russian planes violating its airspace which apparently hasn't happened since the second incident.

Gatling

glued wrote: »

None of the Turkish media or Syrian media are reporting it so I would assume it's false. Turkey aren't going to mess up the nuclear plant in Akkuyu over a few Russian planes violating its airspace which apparently hasn't happened since the second incident.

There playing smart russia wants to build an oil / gas pipeline though turkey and a nuclear plant but turkey can now make Russia pay way over the odds to be facilitated but turkey have publicly stated they will go else where are aren't indebted to Putin

BoJack Horseman

Dannyboy83 wrote: »

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/469341/Russia-Turkey-jet-plane-shot-down-airspace-Syria-ISIS-Islamic-State

Unconfirmed reports that Turkey have shot down a Russian jet

The only sources are twitter and "news" sites that said the chinese aircraft carrier has been off the coast of Syria for the past week... 75,000 tonnes of stealth apparently!

An explosion in the sky could well have been an engine failure.....

BoJack Horseman

Over at Foxtrot Alpha, they have some videos of Russian Mi24s engaged over Syria.... the top video shows some fantastic maneuvers as 2 helicopters come in for a strafing bomb run just feet off the ground....

It also shows very one flying stationary as it drops more dumb bombs....

remarkably none have been shot down.

The rebels in the area seem lacking for a MANPAD or two!

(also from the blog... check this beautiful image of an A-10 bathing in the northern lights, on station in Estonia)

glued

Gatling wrote: »

There playing smart russia wants to build an oil / gas pipeline though turkey and a nuclear plant but turkey can now make Russia pay way over the odds to be facilitated but turkey have publicly stated they will go else where are aren't indebted to Putin

Russia have already started building the plant and it needs to be ready by 2020. Turkey have no upper hand here as the plant is owned 93% by Russian investors so I'm not entirely sure why you think that Turkey can hold Putin to ransom especially considering that the plant is a VVER.

Also Russia already has a pipeline to Turkey through the Blue Stream 1. Turkey relies on Russian gas. I'm not sure how you think that Turkey can hold Russia to ransom over either project considering Russia can just turn off the gas as it has done to other countries before leaving Turkey badly short of energy.

Hande hoche!

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Over at Foxtrot Alpha, they have some videos of Russian Mi24s engaged over Syria.... the top video shows some fantastic maneuvers as 2 helicopters come in for a strafing bomb run just feet off the ground....

It also shows very one flying stationary as it drops more dumb bombs....

remarkably none have been shot down.

The rebels in the area seem lacking for a MANPAD or two!

(also from the blog... check this beautiful image of an A-10 bathing in the northern lights, on station in Estonia)

On a similar note here is a site with some footage of the aircraft
http://theaviationist.com/2015/10/09/new-stunning-footage-of-the-russian-su-34-fullback-bombers-attacking-ground-targets-in-syria/

IrishTrajan

smurgen wrote: »

The Russians have been some of the greatest engineers throughout history.they manage to do alot with little resources. The Soyuz space craft for example was first developed by them in the 1960's and is the main transport vehicle nowadays, being hsed by nasa and the ISS.your portrayal of russian engineering sounds very different from reality.

Comparing Russia's historic capacity with their current capacity is also naive. Russia of the 60s is not the Russia of today. They've lost most of their technical expertise and their military-industrial complex is antiquated at best.

Russia has been pouring billions into trying to revamp their pool of scientists and to shake-up their industry but so far, little has been gained from it. You need only look at their "routine maintenance" of nuclear submarines (where fires break out)

InTheTrees

smurgen wrote: »

The Soyuz space craft for example was first developed by them in the 1960's and is the main transport vehicle nowadays, being hsed by nasa and the ISS.

The Soviet Union was a super power with a population close to three hundred million people.

Russia is just the old core thats left. Barely more people than france and germany combined. And with a crumbling economy.

InTheTrees

smurgen wrote: »

your portrayal of russian engineering sounds very different from reality.

ha ha ha ha!!

Lets see...look around your house. Can you see any technology that was developed by the russians?

Maybe your car outside? your tv? The software in your devices? Your washing machine?

Medical technology or research? Science?

What does Russia export?

smurgen

InTheTrees wrote: »

ha ha ha ha!!

Lets see...look around your house. Can you see any technology that was developed by the russians?

Maybe your car outside? your tv? The software in your devices? Your washing machine?

Medical technology or research? Science?

What does Russia export?

What does it say of us engineer if they have to use old soviet rockets to take their astronauts into space?just because something is old doesn't mean it isn't effective. The new Us 5 generation fighter jets are plagued by problems and went over budget by billions.rocket technology is actually an area the russians excel in.

karma_

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Comparing Russia's historic capacity with their current capacity is also naive. Russia of the 60s is not the Russia of today. They've lost most of their technical expertise and their military-industrial complex is antiquated at best.

Russia has been pouring billions into trying to revamp their pool of scientists and to shake-up their industry but so far, little has been gained from it. You need only look at their "routine maintenance" of nuclear submarines (where fires break out)

Historic capacity? You are completely disregarding a good point because you don't understand Russian doctrine or strategy. I mean, I can easily see how someone like yourself would argue the very same point in 1941, and whilst you would be technically correct, Russian doctrine however had very different ideas.