Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Because we are predominantly all very wealthy, fairly capitalist economies. Because the Irish, Canadians, Australians and to a lesser degree Americans are our brethren. Because Russia won't submit to western norms.
    The Russians have always treated Western norms with suspicion, as far as they are concerned their ideology is superior to ours, and if we are honest with ourselves we have enough broke windows to be throwing stones at other countries.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    It has about 500 good stuff, the rest is soviet crap.
    based on what? back up your statement with facts.
    All your claims are dumb statements based on 0% evidence.
    Soviet crap.
    our Navy is more powerful than theirs
    china is more powerful.

    Based on what are you making these silly claims?
    I can give you countless sources that state that Russias airforce is far from crap, and that in fact the F-35 is an expensive piece of ****.
    I can give you countless sources that state that Russias navy is more powerful than ours, especially with the buildup of brand new submarines.
    I can give you countless sources that prove that china is not more powerful than Russia (China is the third most powerful country in the world, behind russia and the US)
    It just sounds to me like your holding some grudge or hatred towards Russia so your making baseless claims in order to make yourself feel better.
    Its all rather silly.
    • Study Helper
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by Jasonpt)
    You mean the "Soviet crap" that recently disabled all electronics on the USS Donald Cook in the Black Sea? I would be concerned...
    I never knew Walter Mitty worked as a pro-bono journalist for the Russian media.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lionheart96)
    I can give you countless sources that state that Russias airforce is far from crap, and that in fact the F-35 is an expensive piece of ****.
    Please do. According to the publicly available information, the Russian air force has far fewer than 500 modern aircraft, although its very large number of variably maintained 1980s and 1970s aircraft wouldn't be completely irrelevant in a conflict either. It doesn't currently have any equivalent to the F35 let alone the F22.

    I can give you countless sources that state that Russias navy is more powerful than ours, especially with the buildup of brand new submarines.
    Again, I'd be interested to read those sources since while one can make that argument it isn't necessarily strong. The Russians have two to three times as many attack submarines as the Royal Navy, but none that were laid down after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The submarines they have are poorly maintained and have not received necessary upgrades; they were also behind the curve even when they were designed in the 1980s. The individual effectiveness of Russian submarines is significantly lower than that of Royal Navy submarines.

    This is the realm in which the Russian Navy is strongest. The Russian surface fleet is of negligible value. They have no modern air defence escort and their single aircraft carrier is barely functional.

    I can give you countless sources that prove that china is not more powerful than Russia (China is the third most powerful country in the world, behind russia and the US)
    Again it depends somewhat on the method of accounting. Both are nuclear powers, so in a sense their power is equal. In a conventional war, it is hard to say what would happen. In terms of military potential, the PRC is greatly superior to Russia due to its much larger economy. The PRC is certainly of much greater diplomatic and strategic importance than Russia currently.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Lionheart96)
    based on what? back up your statement with facts.
    All your claims are dumb statements based on 0% evidence.
    Soviet crap.
    our Navy is more powerful than theirs
    china is more powerful.

    Based on what are you making these silly claims?
    I can give you countless sources that state that Russias airforce is far from crap, and that in fact the F-35 is an expensive piece of ****.
    I can give you countless sources that state that Russias navy is more powerful than ours, especially with the buildup of brand new submarines.
    I can give you countless sources that prove that china is not more powerful than Russia (China is the third most powerful country in the world, behind russia and the US)
    It just sounds to me like your holding some grudge or hatred towards Russia so your making baseless claims in order to make yourself feel better.
    Its all rather silly.
    Russia's military is still in something of a state. Whilst Putin's modernisation progam has made a difference, so far it has not spread across the entirety of the military. You can point to some things that suggest it is powerful again, resumption of bomber flights, orders of new subs, the modernisation of the Russian nuclear deterrent. But it is still far from a functioning force, or what it was in it's soviet heyday. There is still a reliance on conscript forces, which will always lack against a professional military. Much of it's equipment and navy IS old and from Soviet times, whilst somewhat good it is still nothing on what the West has. No doubt the current low level of energy prices will have an impact on the modernisation program.

    Another issue is that Russia simply does not have the combat testing of Western forces. You don't know if a system is good until you actually use it, no doubt Ukraine is helping somewhat with that.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whorace)
    I'd like to see Churchill mobilize the Allies in 1938 towards war against Nazi Germany. He would have been laughed out of the house and even if he did pass the legislation required the conscripted army would flat out refuse due to the decimation of the first world war. Chamberlain was not stupid, he began rearming in 1937, although he still hoped a diplomatic settlement could be reached, convincing the people to go fight another pointless war about a country they didn't know anything about was another matter entirely.
    That's exactly what Churchill wanted to do and you are quite right that almost everyone else disagreed with him.

    He was right and they were wrong.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by interact)
    Every time I go on on the DailyMail, Russian planes have been flying over the UK, what is going on?????
    offer the russian pilots a British passport, NHS care, housing,
    benefits, voting rights, job opportunities and integrate them into
    society.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For those unaware: the flight was planned. We could do the same in Russia is we booked some air time. The deal is that they turn off their gps box so they can't record anymore than the eye can see, but they probably don't play by the rules. Russians and that.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Oh god, please. This is ludicrous. Funnily enough I wouldn't put it past the UK government in trying to use fear to manipulate our citizens, and also to pretend that our country is more important than it is, and allow them to do something statesmanlike.
    • Study Helper
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    Oh god, please. This is ludicrous. Funnily enough I wouldn't put it past the UK government in trying to use fear to manipulate our citizens, and also to pretend that our country is more important than it is, and allow them to do something statesmanlike.
    The government has been rather silent on the resumption of cold war style Russian probing. It's the tabloid and sensationalist media that stirs the ****.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lionheart96)
    and that in fact the F-35 is an expensive piece of ****.
    If you think the F-35 is an expensive piece of ****, I honestly hope you do some research.

    The reason the F-35 receives a lot of flak from media is because it has been the most open defense program to date. And even in the older days, F-16 and Typhoon received a ton of flak for being delayed and or media hysteria and what not.

    From what I've read, the F-35 is a force multiplier compared to a F-16, F/A-18 or AV-8B, and will be cheaper to run in the long run. (The program cost is estimated a $1 trillion from 2005 to 2065 for the development, production and maintenance of 2,400 F-35, whilst maintaining the current legacy fleet for the USA for that period of time is estimated to cost $4 trillion).
    • Study Helper
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by RoflSeal)
    If you think the F-35 is an expensive piece of ****, I honestly hope you do some research.

    The reason the F-35 receives a lot of flak from media is because it has been the most open defense program to date. And even in the older days, F-16 and Typhoon received a ton of flak for being delayed and or media hysteria and what not.

    From what I've read, the F-35 is a force multiplier compared to a F-16, F/A-18 or AV-8B, and will be cheaper to run in the long run. (The program cost is estimated a $1 trillion from 2005 to 2065 for the development, production and maintenance of 2,400 F-35, whilst maintaining the current legacy fleet for the USA for that period of time is estimated to cost $4 trillion).
    The people who denigrate the F-35 mostly compare it to existing 4th generation planes and the way in which those older aircraft were used in combat in previous wars.

    The military strategists realised long ago that fighting that kind of war against a modern technologically sophisticated adversary would result in a huge attrition rate and likely mission failure.

    For instance, AWACS are the most vulnerable and desirable battlezone targets, hence long range missiles like the S300 and S400 SAM systems and BVR missiles are designed to neutralise them as a primary threat. So they need to be kept even further back reducing their efficacy.

    The F22, F-35 and supersonic drones extend the range and stand-off distance of AWACS and eventually will make them redundant because of data and sensor fusion which will produce an unprecedented 3D battlefield management awareness available to all network fused assets.

    Suddenly, the AWACS does not need to be in the air, it's job can be passed down to any number of other assets including aircraft carriers, destroyers or even frigates for number crunching.

    i.e. the network advantages of resilience and redundancy are applied to the battlefield. Old game: take out any AWACS and it's game over. New game: how many command capable assets spread throughout the globe need to be taken out in order to neutralise the threat? Answer: all of them.

    Stealth is only one part of the system which allows the drones, F-22 and F-35 to become the forward sensor suite passing battlefield information to all network connected assets which then can autonomously launch the best weapon. In essence, these stealth aircraft extend the range and penetration depth of sensor information, whilst simultaneously reducing the time the enemy has to react to the threat.

    The Russians, Chinese, Indians et al have nowhere near this level of battle management integration, resilience and technology capability. But guess who shouts the loudest that the F-35 is crap?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by uberteknik)
    The government has been rather silent on the resumption of cold war style Russian probing. It's the tabloid and sensationalist media that stirs the ****.
    Fair point yeah, it is the media that makes the politicians worse rather than vice versa.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by interact)
    Every time I go on on the DailyMail
    Hmmm
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Russia is not a real place its just something Margaret Thatcher invented in the 80s to scare the miners.

    Have you ever been to russia ? Its not real place. Notice how every so called russian in london is really rich ? Its because they are all paid actors
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Russia aren't going to nuke us. Its as simple as that. They're flexing their muscle showing that they have the willpower to do what will, mainly over this whole nasty business of Europe poking its nose in Russias affairs over the ukraine crisis.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jlsmp)
    yes, start learning russian if you want to have a job in the future. And name your son Vladimir
    lmfao
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James222)
    Russia is not a real place its just something Margaret Thatcher invented in the 80s to scare the miners.

    Have you ever been to russia ? Its not real place. Notice how every so called russian in london is really rich ? Its because they are all paid actors
    I've been to Russia, and I support this statement. St Basils Cathedral is actually a massive cardboard cutout - I was surprised too. According to some of the locals the only reason you see it from the red square side is because the back they never bothered to paint.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by King Boo)
    I've been to Russia, and I support this statement. St Basils Cathedral is actually a massive cardboard cutout - I was surprised too. According to some of the locals the only reason you see it from the red square side is because the back they never bothered to paint.
    At the end of the day the world is run by lizard people. We all know steel beams dont melt under jet fuel
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I'm on holiday, I think you guys need to calm the hell down, I've asked quite a few Russian and they're deffo not planning on nuking us.
 
 
 

2,796

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.