posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 11:22 AM
Moscow June 20 RIA Novosti - Russia's Armed Forces will receive up to 250 types of advanced weaponry in 2006, a deputy defense minister said Tuesday.
"This year we will finish testing about 250 new types of weapons," General Alexei Moskovsky said. "I hope that all of them will be put into
service with the Russian army." The general said that Russia's orbital group would receive new satellites, and that Glonass system of navigational
and global positioning satellites would be fully restored to operational condition.
Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said the Russian orbital group consisted of 96 satellites, of which 59 are used for military purposes. The Glonass
system currently has 17 satellites and two laser reflectors in orbit. Moskovsky also said the Russian Air Force would receive modernized Su-27
Flanker fighters, Su-24 Fencer tactical bombers, and Su-25 Frogfoot close support aircraft and the Land Forces would get modernized T-72 and T-80
tanks, and new T-90 main battle tanks. A government minister said in May that Russia's state defense order would increase by 20% to 303.7 b. rubles
($11.2 b.) in 2007.[Edited by Don W]
CBS 60 Minutes had a blip showing Russian spending $19 B. on defense - American euphemism for war - which was less than Japan, Germany or Italy. This
story said the US spends $455 B. On budget. Not counting “off” budget. Point? Sure, the Ruskies may get a new main battle tank, but so how many?
I’d say a half dozen. 6. Six. Compared to the US stock of 8,000 M1A1s. Big deal. Same ratios in the new jet planes. The Russian’s will be lucky to
get enough to fill one squadron. Satellites? Most are “dead” and cannot be resurrected. Face it, only the US is fully committed to war and the
weapons of war.
The"problem" with the US approach to the world, is that our presidential advisors have no other options open to them. It is war or it is our way.
This is not their fault, altogether. We have been buffaloed since the 1979 Hostage thing. We're a one track mind-set and one track won't always take
you to the best destination, or even to one you'd like yourself.
posted by rogue1
The Red Army died in 1991, even then it was a shadow of it's former self. It's not as though you could invade Eastern Europe again. LMAO. Most new
developments in military are basically modernization of old excising ones . . [Edited by Don W]
The US military intelligence industrial complex found it useful to bloat up the USSR’s military potential and inflate its industrial capacity.
Foreign governments knew this all along but could do nothing about it. If US leaders and the American people were so enamored with war and the weapons
of war, who could/would dare stop them? Afghan? Iraq? NK? Iran? Hmm? True Cold Warriors!
Meanwhile, around the world, a lot of ordinary people are improving their lot in life while in America, 80% of our population is worse off in 2006
than 20 years ago. And sure as heck not safer despite the child-like “look’em in the eye” braggadocio of our Magnificent Leader.
Plus, the R&Fs are putting a half trillion dollar a year of the cost of our own bloated government - especially our military looking for an enemy -
Gads! - scraping the bottom of the barrel with North Korea an Iran - onto our grand-children. Geez.
How low can you go? Talk about “no child left behind” most of our poorer kids won’t get out of the starting gate.
[edit on 6/21/2006 by donwhite]