Russia to increase defence budget by 22%

Although Russia hit a depression in the 90's it sounds like it's improving, which is good news for all of us, even us Americans. I don't think too many people here underestimate Russian technology, it's mostly a matter of Russia hasn't been capable of demonstrating it's abilities recently.

Either way, can't wait to see a few new planes, who knows, maybe even a half decent Raptor competitor to give us some good competition. I sure can't wait for another period of aerospace competition. Ever since the cold war the only good thing we've developed was the F-22, and maybe the B-2 (not sure of it's year).

PBscientist - America has the best economy ; erm , actually it doesn`t , not with the debt to each new born baby running at over $25,000 the moment it is born.

Originally posted by DaVirus
WOW The weapons are looking good. But I think Russia ought to spend more on the people. Before the military.

We`ve heard this many times before about just about every country `India needs to put its people first , Singapore needs to deal with poverty`

Maybe the USA needs to deal with the high level of illiteracy and massive level of poor before buying , say the raptor.....

Originally posted by PBscientist
I don't know where you are from, because America hands down has the best economy right now (I don't think anyone will dispute that), overall has the best military technology (individual pieces may be behind, but the average is higher here), and in a conventional war we do have the best military. Provide some evidence to the contrary and I will look at it, but these seem to be facts even foreign patriots (ie. people who like their country) that know even a little bit about real military technology agree on.

The "America best " is basically due to media coverage ..most of the internationally accepted media (eg BBC, CNN ) are basically US backed irrespective of the country to which they belong .Here is one of billions of such example ........when discovery takes off for a single trip to ISS .......it becomes a world news but when Russia continues to be the only transporter of astronauts to the ISS since the Colombia disaster there is a minimum media coverage (if any )

well let me compare some aspects

Economy
yes America has the biggest economy (GDP) but not the best economy (gdp per capita )
Luxembourg has a higher GDP per capita
In Growth rate USA has 101th rank
www.cia.gov...

The public debt is high too when compared to other countries
www.cia.gov...

It ranks 86th in industrial growth rate
www.cia.gov...

even with the highest GDP it ranks 10th when it comes to reserves
www.cia.gov...

so the US supremacy is a media myth

Technology
well NASA didn’t have the technology to transport astronauts to the ISS after the Colombia disaster was forced to rely upon Russian technology

well even when it comes to military tech there is a big question mark specially when the USAF was continuously being dominated by IAF both in USA as well as in India . I was shocked to hear the Indians used Russian technology of 1955….I had some respect for the US technology before hearing the news
(some of you people claim that the US had a number of limitations ....well your points have been already been defeated in the related thread ...so please dont show excuses )

"""""conventional war we do have the best military""""""""

have you ever fought a real war since WW2 ?
You haven’t dared to fight against any real power in spite of having a military spending greater than that of the whole world combined together

you have fought against Vietnam...and you prefer to forget what happened there

you didn’t dare to fight with the Afghans fearing casualties and used the rebel afghan “Northern alliance “ against the Talibans instead

And in Iraq you are still fighting to escape

Nodoubt the USA is a great country with great power but I don’t believe that they are best in everything specially when its a country which doesn’t have any language any tradition and most importantly any
"brain" of her own

Originally posted by prelude
The "America best " is basically due to media coverage ..most of the internationally accepted media (eg BBC, CNN ) are basically US backed irrespective of the country to which they belong .Here is one of billions of such example ........when discovery takes off for a single trip to ISS .......it becomes a world news but when Russia continues to be the only transporter of astronauts to the ISS since the Colombia disaster there is a minimum media coverage (if any )

Ironically enough, my uncle works for NASA (he is the one who married a Russian, he met her Father when he was over there doing something with the Russian NASA equivelent and when he went to his house for dinner he hit it off with her). It sounds like we could have used one of our Shuttles, but we didn't know for sure that they were safe. It was more of an over cautious thing than a we don't have the technology thing.

well let me compare some aspects

Economy
yes America has the biggest economy (GDP) but not the best economy (gdp per capita )
Luxembourg has a higher GDP per capita
In Growth rate USA has 101th rank
www.cia.gov...

I would just like to point out that Luxembourg only has 500,000 people, so it isn't the best example to compare to a giant like the US. Anyway, we don't really need to grow too much, we just need to maintain our position. Russia is doing great growth wise, but it needs it because it doesn't have a high amount of money right now.

The public debt is high too when compared to other countries
www.cia.gov...

Yes it is. We should really do something about that.

even with the highest GDP it ranks 10th when it comes to reserves
www.cia.gov...

Not completely sure what this means (not an economy major). I thought they did away witht he old gold reserves and it is all tracked by some computer in switzerland or something.

so the US supremacy is a media myth

What you have shown so far is that we have some problems. Everyone does. I still think we average out on top though.

Technology
well NASA didn’t have the technology to transport astronauts to the ISS after the Colombia disaster was forced to rely upon Russian technology

As I said before, we could have launched the shuttles, but NASA didn't want to take the risk of another disaster.

well even when it comes to military tech there is a big question mark specially when the USAF was continuously being dominated by IAF both in USA as well as in India . I was shocked to hear the Indians used Russian technology of 1955….I had some respect for the US technology before hearing the news
(some of you people claim that the US had a number of limitations ....well your points have been already been defeated in the related thread ...so please dont show excuses )

Where was the related thread? From what I heard it was basically just a scenario where their equipment was in the perfect environment (right range, speed, altitude etc.) and ours wasn't. We didn't have any support either (AWACS and such). It wasn't meant to be a realistic example of India vs. US, it was supposed to represent the airforces of the region. If you have evidence to the contrary, please show it.

"""""conventional war we do have the best military""""""""

have you ever fought a real war since WW2 ?
You haven’t dared to fight against any real power in spite of having a military spending greater than that of the whole world combined together

The thing is, Nuclear powers don't fight, so we haven't had a whole lot of good enemies that have real militaries.

you have fought against Vietnam...and you prefer to forget what happened there

Yep, don't we all hate it when our politicians screw things up? Anyway, I am guessing that the Russians don't like the name "Afghanistan" any better.

you didn’t dare to fight with the Afghans fearing casualties and used the rebel afghan “Northern alliance “ against the Talibans instead

And in Iraq you are still fighting to escape

Since when was indigenous support a bad thing? And if we wanted to leave Iraq, we could do it pretty quickly.

Nodoubt the USA is a great country with great power but I don’t believe that they are best in everything specially when its a country which doesn’t have any language any tradition and most importantly any
"brain" of her own

Your right, we just take the best that everyone else has. It is kind of funny how tradition became so important for determining how powerful a country is right after the "new kids" got powerful. I never said we had the best in everything either. I said that we had the best overall.

The whole cope india thing has been debated and flammed for the longest of times on this forum : basically it comes down to ; wether you think it was a farce just to buy raptor , or the usaf agreed to the conditions (out numbered by 30 year old aircraft , and no BVR missiles - AESA was an option but wasn`t taken up due to logisitc reasons) and got an unpleasant surprise.

The `rematch` when the SU-30MKI was used was an even bigger upset (so i understand)

But hey , Raptor is coming on stream and in squadron numbers so.....

Originally posted by PBscientist
If you have evidence to the contrary, please show it.

Please check out this link and the other links that are given in it

www.abovetopsecret.com...&singlepost=1611809

www.abovetopsecret.com...&singlepost=1608901

Also, i request members not to spill the alredy extensively debeted air exercises topic to this thread as well. If anyone wants to dispute anything about, here is the dedicated thread >> www.abovetopsecret.com...&singlepost=%20995226 .

Thank You.

Regards,
Stealth Spy


[edit on 25-8-2005 by Stealth Spy]

I just checked a few of those links, and they basically supported what I said. India has good pilots, but the US techonological advantage was brought down in the name of fair play (which wouldn't happen in a war). It wasn't meant to be a simulation of US vs India, it was just a friendly excersize to test the capabilities of the planes.

We probably shouldn't discuss this anymore though, since it is off topic.

Yeah you are right PB. But are these weapons going to be put into mass production? Or are they platforms for newer weapons? It would be interesting if China would also try to increase Military Spending, and research on future weapons...

1 Increased defense spending helps revival of Russian Armed Forces

quote from the article
"Major military exercises conducted this summer, including the Peace Mission 2005 joint Russian-Chinese military exercise, demonstrated the high combat readiness and professional skills of the Russian military, the official said."
"The Chinese military leadership shares this point of view," Pekhtin added.






[edit on 26-8-2005 by prelude]

Yeah, I don't think that they will make any new fighters... They've got plenty... and 22% wouldn't even be close to the budget needed to build all those... Tanks might be the thing...

Originally posted by Figher Master FIN
Yeah, I don't think that they will make any new fighters... They've got plenty... and 22% wouldn't even be close to the budget needed to build all those...

Tanks might be the thing...

you are mistaken
according to Russian Sources and other estimates by experts by 2011 70 % of Russia's air fleet will have new technology (ie post 1995)
at present, since 2002 the old Russian Sukhoi planes (below su 27 ) are being upgraded to Su 34 which will continue up to 2012 when all of them are scheduled to be upgraded (google for the links)

and 22% wouldn't even be close to the budget needed to build all those

Many people in this forum are ignorant about the Russian Defense budget

their budget has decreased from what it was during the Soviet times but still According to most defense analysts Russia is the 2nd largest defense spender in this planet (after USA)
according to a few others they are the 3rd largest defense spender (after China /Saudi Arabia)
one more thing should be noted that both Russia and China officially publishes a very reduced defense spending .In the last article I saw that the Chinese OFFICIAL Defense budget was approx 16 Billion US$ actual figures are much much higher(40 –50 Bn $) ...
same is the case with Russia the official budget is around 22 Billion $ but the real budget is much much higher ...lets see what experts say :

1 According to the strategy page Russian budget is 70 Bn $ 2nd largest in the world followed by China (40bn $)
Link :
Russian budget :
www.strategypage.com...

Chinese budget :
www.strategypage.com...

2 According to this link too Russian budget is the second largest (65.2 Bn $)followed by China (56 Bn $)
www.globalissues.org...

3 According to this link Russia(50bn $ )spends slightly less than China(51Bn $)
64.177.207.201...

but the figures are 2002 figures ...since then Russian Defense budget has increased by approx 20% per year and in 2005 it has been increased by 40%

4 this link puts Russia(70 Bn $) in third position after Saudi Arabia (72 bn $) China lies in 5th position (40bn $)
www.scaruffi.com...


so there are differences in opinion among the experts about the military budget but two things are clear

1 the actual budget Ranged between 50 bn and 70 bn $ until 2002 (and since then it has been subsequently increased by 20% per year and 40% in 2005)

2 Russia is among the top 2 (or top 3)defense spenders in the world

so your claim that 22% wont be close enough to build New aircraft doesn’t hold good
specially when China with a budget of 40 Bn $ and India with a Budget of 15Bn $ can afford new fighters


[edit on 26-8-2005 by prelude]

Erm, prelude, might want to get a bit more accurate numbers there.
Those numbers you are pulling and citing are 2003 numbers/figures [as denoted by the * and citations at bottom of the pages of your links].
It is now the year 2005.

Anyhow, national budgets for Russia and the US, as with other nations, are being set for 2006 already. The topic article references a 2006 budget amount:
As the initial topic article indicates, which happens to be a 2005 article refering to a 2006 budget:

A draft 2006 budget allocates 668.3 billion rubles (24 billion dollars, 19.5 billion euros) for spending on national defense, an increase of nearly 22 percent on this year's defense budget and a figure equivalent to about 2.75 percent of Russia's projected gross national product.

Link to topic article reference






seekerof

[edit on 26-8-2005 by Seekerof]

Wow, a lot of nations are beafing up on their military right know. I hope they stay with us, if we get in a conflict with China. Either way, maybe they will help us to have a country to compete with, which is always good for increasing spending on training, and new weapons systems. And sometimes joint exercises.

With a TOTAL of 24 billion, they certainly aren't going to be able to afford developing a next gen fighter on par with the Raptor...(or even close).

Not that they couldn't, they could (and it'd probably be prettier, hehe....), but the time and money isn't there...

As the spokesman himself said, it is to upgrade existing weapons....and even a cursory glance at the numbers will bear that out....

IF they are truly developing a next gen fighter, it definitely isn't coming out of that 24 billion budget, hehe....it's not going to show up in the press.

Originally posted by PBscientist
I just checked a few of those links, and they basically supported what I said. India has good pilots, but the US techonological advantage was brought down in the name of fair play (which wouldn't happen in a war). It wasn't meant to be a simulation of US vs India, it was just a friendly excersize to test the capabilities of the planes.

We probably shouldn't discuss this anymore though, since it is off topic.

yeah so I'm gonna have the last word on it!

Those f-15s weren't AESA equipped and agreed i na war-like situatoin that will not be the case, but note that India has been of superhornets/F--16s with the same configurations.. India has not jumped at the offer..
Makes you wonder then if AESA & co. are the best in the world in their resp. fields..

Is this right?

After a 22% increase Russia is spending $24Billion on defense?!

Wow!
......and some have claimed the UK is a low spender with a budget of £28billion (approx $50 billion)?!

budget2005.treasury.gov.uk...

.....meanwhile the USA is to spend $447billion in it's 2006 budget?
www.dod.mil...

Proportionate?
Appropriate?
'Defence' contractors and their buddies in gov gouging the nicely taxpayers?

First of all
. ll like to put emphasis on the point that the 22Bn $ is the official declaration not necessary the real figure the real figure is around 50-80bn $ ....well that's not only my view ALL the Military specialists I have read say that:
(just another copy paste ):
1 According to the strategy page Russian budget is 70 Bn $ 2nd largest in the world followed by China (40bn $)
Link :
Russian budget :
www.strategypage.com...

Chinese budget :
www.strategypage.com...

2 According to this link too Russian budget is the second largest (65.2 Bn $)followed by China (56 Bn $)
www.globalissues.org...

3 According to this link Russia(50bn $ )spends slightly less than China(51Bn $)
64.177.207.201...

but the figures are 2002 figures ...since then Russian Defense budget has increased by approx 20% per year and in 2005 it has been increased by 40%

4 this link puts Russia(70 Bn $) in third position after Saudi Arabia (72 bn $) China lies in 5th position (40bn $)
www.scaruffi.com...

I feel anti Russins are delibarately overlooking my links ...after all ignorance is bliss



[edit on 29-8-2005 by prelude]

Ok dont believe on my links just believe in what the Ofiicials say.....and lookmat the OFFICIAL budjets of China India etc they are still less than the Russian Official budget

and tell me are you sure you are ready to accept what Russian Officials say? then i have a thousands of links by russian officials which you wont like to accept (as I said ,ignorance is bliss).....Shall I?

yes serkhof Thankyou for reminding that the links I provied dates back to 2003/2002 (however i DID MENTION IT IN MY CONCERNED POST you overlooked) , today the figures are much much higher .....But i am sorry that I didnt find any 2005 ANALYSIS about the budget ...If have it please provide the link

Wow.

It would appear that either the UK outspends or is - just - behind the Russian and Chinese military spending.

So much for those who claim the UK is a low military spender.

Proportionate?
Appropriate?
'Defence' contractors and their buddies in gov gouging the nicely taxpayers?

Of course it’s appropriate, and as we are engaged in ongoing conflicts and other countries such as China are on a military build up the US DOD budget should be higher.
Now sminkey you cannot possibly say that the UK’s military needs are the same as that of the US, hence our bigger budget.