Stand proud my Russian brothers (our arsenal of Russia)

[RomanS]

NO new prototypes, and disabled units are listed. Everything below is operational readiness under Ministery of Defence .

As of 2002

http://topgun.rin.ru/cgi-bin/texts.pl?category=state&mode=show&unit=18&lng=rus


Personell: 1 700 000 человек.

Militarized subdivisions: 200 000 man in the internal army
250 000 man in the border forces

The defense budget: 12 billion US dollars.
Assembly: on the call. Period of the service term of 24 months


Strategic troops. The personnel: 125 000 people
Strategic rocket forces of the ground-based basing: 188 SS -18, 170 SS -19, 46 SS -24 and 318 SS -25.

Strategic rocket forces of the sea basing: 684 rocket installations with 2500 warheads on 45 submarines.

6 submarines of Akula class, 7 classes dolphin (Delta THE IV), 13 class squid (Delta III), 4 class Delta II, 15 class Of murena (Delta I).

Strategic rocket forces of the air basing: 1074 warheads on 83 Tu-95MS, 240 on 24 Tu-95M/K, 192 on 20 Tu-160 Blackjack.

Ground forces. The personnel: 850 000 people
Structure: 8 military districts - Moscow, Ural, Siberian, Transbaikal, Volga, Leningrad, North-Caucasian, Far-Eastern.

Armaments. Tanks:
5000 T -80
9000 T -72
4000 T -64
13,000 T -62 and T -55

BMP and BTR:
2400 BRDM
700 BMP-3
25 000 BTR-50, BTR-60, BTR-70, BTR-80, BTR-90, BTR-T,
2000 BMD
4000 MT-LB

Artillery: 40 000 122мм, 130мм, 152мм; 122мм и 152мм
Mortars: 14 000 82мм, 120мм, 160мм, 240мм.
Recoilless Artillery: 73мм SPG-9.
MLRS: 7 500 122мм, 140мм, 220мм и 240мм,
6,000 Smerch 300мм,

Anti-tank complexes: 8 000 57mm 76mm, 85mm, 100mm, АSU-57/85
90,000 АТ-2 Swatter, AT-3 Sagger, AT-4 Spandler, AT-6 Spiral, AT-7 Saxhorn, AT-8 Songster, AT-10, AT-11, Kornet.

Rocket installations surface-to-surface with the rockets SS -21.

PVO - AIR DEFENSE: about 4 900 units. Army aviation: 4 300 helicopters Mi-2, Mi-4, Mi-6, Mi-8, Mi-10, Mi-24, Mi-26.

Air force troops. The personnel: 167 000 people. Structure: long-range aviation (strategic forces), tactical aviation, military cargo fleet, air defense aviation, training subdivisions, aviation NAVY

Armaments. Bombers:
28 Tu-160,
100 Tu-22M,
43 Tu-95,
87 Tu-95SM.
Attack aircraft:
500 Su-24.
Destroyers:
450 MiG-29,
150 Su-27,
250 MiG-27,
300 MiG-23,
130 Su-22,
30 MiG-31,
20 MiG-25,
250 Su-25.
Reconnoitering aircraft and aircraft REB:
80 MiG-25P,
80 Su-24.

Helicopters:
300 Mi-1,
600 Mi-2,
50 Mi-4,
300 Mi-6,
1 900 Mi-8,
50 Mi-26
60 Mi-28.

Refulers:
10 m-th (Bizion),
20 Tu-16

The cargo fleet: about 700 aircraft of the following types:
320 An-12,
24 An-124,
45 An-22,
300 Il-76,
300 An-2,
100 An-24,
50 An-32,
30 An-72,
20 Tu-134/154,
150 L -410.

Training aviation;
2 000 Yak-18, L-29 и L-39, Mig-23У, Mig-25У, Su-7У, Su-11У, Tu-22У.

PVO. the force of space observation, rocket forces, antiaircraft-missile troops, 4 armies PVO - AIR DEFENSE, warheads, technical sections.

Armament. Interceptors:
180 MiG-25,
320 MiG-31,
250 MiG-23,
200 Su-27.
DRLO: 15 A -50

Mainstay, An-12 and Il-14/18. AntiBallistic rocket installations:
33 ABM -1 of Galosha.
Rocket installations surface-to-air. The fixed systems: 300 SA -2 (Gudeline),
200 SA -3 (GOA),
600 SA -5 GAMMON.

Mobile systems: 2 000 SA -10/12.
Radars PVO - AIR DEFENSE: 9 radars of long-range, 9 000 other radars at 1 200 points.





PLEASE LET ME TAKE A BREAK, and I will do NAVY, and Special Warfare UNITS next.

[George W. Bush]

Looking good :lol:

[RomanS]

Naval Power.Personell: 420 000 people (including 65 000 people in the aviation NAVY, 15 000 marines, 7 000 coast artillery),
plus 500 000 in the reserve

Structure: 4 basic fleets - Black Sea, Baltic, Pacific Ocean and northern. Fleet.

Aircraft carriers: 1 class Admiral Kuznetsov.
Aircraft carriers with the aircraft of the vertical takeoff: 1 class Admiral Gorshkov

The SSBN: The nuclear-powered submarines:
10 class Oscar
5 class of Charlie
5 class of Charlie 2

Nuclear attack submarines:
12 class shark,
2 sierra,
1 class Alpha,
8 class Victor I,
5 class Victor II,
26 class Victor III

Diesel submarines:
24 class Kilo,
18 class Tango,
25 class Foxtrot,
4 class Bravo,
2 class India,
1 class Lima,
1 class Beluga.

Cruiser:
3 class Admiral Ushakov,
3 class Moscow,
5 class Nikolayev.

Destroyers:
2 class Admiral basistyy,
11 class of Udaloi
20 class Sovremenni

Frigates:
2 class Neustrashimy
33 class Of krivak.

The destroyer escorts:
2 classes crake,
65 classes Of grisha,
10 classes Of mirka,
22 classes Pete,
12 classes Parshim,
40 classes tarantula,
36 classes Of nanushka,
1 classes seal lion.

Light subdivisions:
1 vessel on the hydrofoils of class locust,
30 patrol launches of the class Of tyura,
15 rocket launches of class womb,
1 vessel on the hydrofoils of class butterfly,
1 vessel on the hydrofoils of class fly.

The mine layers:
3 classes of Ales,
3 classes Andryusha,
45 classes of Yevgeny,
35 classes Of natya,
45 classes is brisk,
1 classes T -58,
60 classes dormouse,
3 classes marrying,
7 classes spider,
2 classes of Poti,
65 classes Vanya,
10 classes Sasha,
40 classes K -8,
4 classes Of olya,
10 classes Of il'yusha,
10 classes Of pidanka.

The landing ships:
3 classes Ivan rogov,
25 classes Of ropucha,
13 tank-landing launches of class alligator,
36 classes the midnight,
10 tank-landing launches of class otter,
40 classes ondatra,
15 classes SMB.

Ships on the air cushion:
3 classes Of pomornik,
33 classes gas,
20 classes stork,
5 classes sea-eagle,
20 classes Cygnus,
2 classes duckling.

Ships of support and supply:
7 classes Of ugra,
1 classes Of berezina,
6 classes Of chilikin,
6 classes the Don,
8 classes Susanin,
6 classes lama
4 classes Of amga.

Aviation NAVY:

Destroyers:
20 Su-33,
90 Su-17,
35 MiG-29,
30 Su-27.

Bombers:
140 Tu-22M Backfire,
100 Su-24 Fencer.

Antisubmarine aircraft and the helicopters:
55 Tu-142 Bear- F,
50 b -12 Mail,
36 Il-38 May,
70 Mi-14 Haze,
85 Ka-25 Harmone- A
90 kA -27 Helix.

Transport: about 100 aircraft of the following types:
Il-14 Crate, Il-18 Coot, An-12 Cub, An-24 Coke, An-26 Curl and 8 Tu-16 Badger.

Reconnaisance aircraft and the aircraft of electroninc warfare:
24 Tu-95 Bear,
6 Tu-22M,
20 Su-24.

Helicopters: about 100 Mi-8 and 50 Mi-6.

The marines: 100 tanks PT-76,
80 BRDM,
600 BTR-80,
50 ZSU-23-4.

Coast artillery and the rocket forces: 7 000 units.


Now this is not counting the SPETSNAZ WORLD hehehe

What EUROPEAN COUNTRY SHOULD I COMPARE NOW.... this is fun

[ShadowNeo]

Compare it to the UK :D.

[RomanS]

ON MY WAY :)

UK ladies and gents coming up

[MVSpartan117]

U S of A
Sorry its not as organized as Permanski's

Population: 281 404 thousand people.
The military budget is 293,3 billion dollars (2001).
The regular forces are 1 367 700 people.
The reserve - 1 200 600 people.
The reserve consists of the National Guard - 464 100 people (land forces - 357 200, air force - 106 900) and the reserve of the branches - 710 900 (land forces - 363 700, air force - 74 400, naval forces - 173 000, marines - 99 800). The reserve of the 2nd turn - 25 600 people (land forces - 700, air force - 16 800, naval forces - 7 200, marines - 900). Militarized formations (patrols of civil aircraft) - 53 000 people. Recruitment for the army is voluntary.

Land forces: 477 800 people (71 400 women), 3 army headquarters, 4 army corps headquarters (1 airborne headquarters), 10 divisions: 2 armoured (3 headquarters of brigades, 5 tank and 4 motorized infantry battalions, 3 self-propelled artillery battalions, the MLRS battalion, 1 anti-aircraft battalion, 1 army-co-operation aviation brigade), 2 mechanized, 1 mechanized (3 headquarters of brigades, 4 tank and 5 motorized infantry battalions, 3 self-propelled artillery battalions, the MLRS battalion, 1 anti-aircraft artillery battalion, 1 army-co-operation aviation brigade), 1 mechanized (3 headquarters of brigades, 4 tank, 3 motorized infantry and 2 airborne battalions, 3 self-propelled artillery battalions, 1 anti-aircraft battalion, 1 army-co-operation aviation brigade), 2 light infantry (3 headquarters of brigades, 9 infantry battalions, 3 self-propelled artillery battalions, 1 anti-aircraft battalion, 1 army-co-operation aviation brigade), 1 airborne (3 headquarters of brigades, 9 airborne battalions, 3 artillery battalions, 1 anti-aircraft battalion, 1 helicopter support battalion, 1 army-co-operation aviation brigade) and 1 airborne (3 headquarters of brigades, 9 airborne battalions, 3 artillery battalions, 2 army-co-operation aviation brigades: 7 helicopter battalions); 11 detached brigades (5 army-co-operation aviation, 6 artillery: 3 self-propelled artillery, 3 artillery battalions), 11 MLRS battalions, 3 detached armoured cavalry regiments, 1 detached infantry battalion, 1 airborne tactical group, 11 detached SAM battalions (10 Patriot, 2 Avenger). The National Guard: 357 200 people, 8 divisions (1 armoured, 3 mechanized, 3 middle, 1 light infantry), 16 detached brigades (2 armoured, 5 mechanized, 7 infantry, 1 light infantry, 1 armoured cavalry), 17 headquarters of artillery brigades, 1 detached infantry battalion, 36 artillery battalions, 19 army-co-operation aviation battalions, 37 engineer battalions, 11 detached SAM battalions (2 Patriot, 9 Avenger). The reserve - 363 700 people, 12 training divisions, 13 regional commands.

The command of special operations of land forces: 15 300 people, the headquarters, 5 special groups, the ranger regiment, the psychological operations group (5 battalions), the battalion for relations with civil authorities, 2 battalions (intercommunications and general support), the air regiment of special operations. The reserve of the command of special operations: 2 800 people - National Guard, 7 800 - the reserve; 2 special groups, 4 commands and 8 brigades for relations with civil authorities; 2 groups of psychological operations, 36 divisions for relations with civil authorities.

Arms: 7 620 battle tanks M1 Abrams of all modifications, 110 armoured reconnaissance vehicles Fuchs, 6 710 infantry fighting vehicles Bradley, 15 400 ATC of all modifications, 1 547 towed guns (434 M102, 416 M119, 697 M198), 2 476 self-propelled guns M109A1, 881 MLRS (able to launch the rockets ATACMS), 1 556 mortars (932 M120/121, 624 M252), 19 000 antitank missile systems Dragon, 950 antitank missile systems Javelin, 626 self-propelled antitank missile systems M901 Toy, 6 710 antitank missile systems Toy on M2 / МЗ Bradley, 1 379 multi-purpose automobile Hammer with antitank missile systems Toy, 785 SAM systems Avenger, 483 surface-to-air guided missile systems Patriot, 271 planes (128 C-12 of various modifications, 43 C-23, 11 C-26, 2 T-34, 3 C-20, 22 UC-35, 2 C-31, 2 C-182, 1 PA-31, 2 UV-20A, 4 UV-18A) and about 4 715 helicopters (of them 1 340 combat ones): 370 AH-1S, 740 AH-64A/D, 64 EH-6QA, 452 СН/MH-47, 387 OH-58A/C, 385 OH-58D (194 combat), 36 AH-6/MH-6, 735 UH-1 H/V, 1 405 UH-60/MH-60/VL/K, 135 TH-67, 4 UH-60Q, 2 RAH-66, 7 pilotless vehicles Hunter (5 are mothballed), 51 amphibian vessels, 89 boats LCM-8, surface radars: 122 AN/TPQ-36, 70 AN/KPQ-37, 66 AN/TPQ-32, 15 AN/TSQ-138, 24 AN/TSQ-138A.

[RomanS]

GREAT BRITAIN


Defense budget of Great Britain in 2001 was 34 billion US dollars. Composition Armed Forces of Great Britain as of end of 2001:

Regular Armed Forces of 211 430 men (of them 16 430 women). Reserve of 247 100 men

Ground Forces -177 400,
Airforce -43 350,
NAVY -26 350,
territorial troops - 40 300.
Staffing: on the voluntary basis

Ground forces: 113 950 men,
the staff of command of ground forces,

the command of rear in Germany, 3 staffs of divisions (instead of the reorganized military districts),

armored (3 brtbr, 3 art., 4 eng., zen. art. regiment AA) and mechanized (2 mechanized and airborne brigades, 3 art., 3 engineering,
antiaircraft artillery regiments and regiment AA) of division, 3 Armed calvary regiments,
2 regiments RSZO MLRS,
2 anti-aircraft rocket and engineering regiments,


14 staffs of infantry brigades,
the staff of brigade AIR DEFENSE,
the brigade of air support,
aeromobile brigade.

In all the warheads: 6 armored,
4 armored cavalry regiments,
6 motor-infantry (on BTR Of sakson),
9 mechanized (on BMP Of uorrior),
25 infantry,
3 airborne battalions,
the regiment Of spN (SAS),
11 artillery are regimental (2 regiments RSZO, 5 cap, 3 art. of regiment, training art. regiment),
4 antiaircraft artillery regiments.
10 engineering it is regimental,
4 regiments AA,

Territorial troops: 2 regiments of special purpose (SAS),
3 artillery (RSZO MLRS, PA, instrument reconnaissance),
4 rocket,
5 engineering and air regiments,
15 pb,
4 light reconnaissance battalion.

Armament: 636 tanks (of them 294 Challenger -2),
1018 Armored vehicles,
467 Armored Recon,
more than 2320 APC,
475 instruments PA (in Vol. h. 179 self-propelled),
63 RSZO MLRS,
543 mortars of the caliber of 81 mm,
more than 900 PU GPUR,
687 ZRK,
258 combat helicopters (133 Sa-341,125 Lynx AN-1, -7 and -9),
6 aircraft Bn-2.

AIR: 53 900 men,
Tactical subdivisions: 10 ibae, 5 IAE PVO -

AIR DEFENSE,
Aircraft and helicopter park: 217 Torr of modifications GR.1,1Ai of yV, F.3 (89 V of resume),
53 jaguars of modifications GR. 1a and GR, 1 v and T.А and T.2V (26 additional V of resume).
60 Harrier modifications Gr-7 (27 in the cut.) and T -10,
121 Hawks Of t.y (22 V of resume),
4 S -17A, 7 Canberra, 24 Nimrod, 21 Mr-2, 7 e-3d, 9 TriStar, 2 S -А, 24 vc-10, 3 K -2,4 K -3,5 the k-th, 55 Hercules -S.1 and - S.e, 16 VDe-y2shch, 8 SS -2 and -3, 2 Islander Cmk2, 2 bAe-146, 84 toucan (44 V of resume), 11 Dzhetstrim, 106 Bulldog, 43 Fayflay, 15 Uesseks, 34 SN -47, 39 sa-330, 25 SI King, 38 As -350 JB, 2 As -355, 9 Bell

NAVY: 43 530 men (3 330 women).

Commands - fleet, to terr. Great Britain, aviation, MP, training.
Fleet: flotilla - NK, PL. MTS, the squadron of Fishguard and hydrography.

Ship composition:
4 PLARB Vanguard,
12 PLA (5 Sviftshur, 7 Trafal'gar),
3 AULUS invinsibls,
11 3m URO (4 Manchesters, 7 Sheffield),
20 FR URO (5 Kornuoll, 15 Dyuk),
22 MTK (11 Hunts, 11 Sendaun),
1 ABB Oushn,
1 DVKD Of fearless,
4 KVP Of griffon,
12 W, YYADKA, 7 PK (2 Kasl, 5 Island), 1
6 PKA Archer,
24 VSU (2 UGRS, 7 TNZ, YATRS, 6 TO HIS, 1 PM).


SOrry for incorect leters and translation. It was very very HARD

[RomanS]

The military budget is 293,3 billion dollars (2001).

This is WHERE US bends everyone OVER, and doesn't even use vaseline.

[Operation Ivy]

293,3 billion dollars

293.3billion dollars! are you sure??

And Perm dont you guys have some T-90's??

[RomanS]

Poland, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, Germany, Italy
added together EQUALS 1/3rd of the Russian Arsenal

:lol:

we rule

[RomanS]

293,3 billion dollars

293.3billion dollars! are you sure??

And Perm dont you guys have some T-90's??

As of 2001 yep

I think now its in 300's

Russia only has around 40 T90s
its not in service yet

[MVSpartan117]

293,3 billion dollars

293.3billion dollars! are you sure??

And Perm dont you guys have some T-90's??


If it's on the internet it must be true! I donno if it's right I just copyed and pasted!

[EODSGT]

I say this as a willing puppet of the American imperialist forces - heehee!

Capitalism has been good to us! p-)

[RomanS]

Finland - 160 T-72s

Russia - 9000 T-72s

L O L

[Operation Ivy]

300billion jeez, even i think thats spending a little to much :P

[RomanS]

Looking at the lists I must say the only country that can give Russia a huge fight, and hurt us is USA. China comes close as well. The rest of the world must remember. Nobody can take Russia militarily.

With the list above, I think it should be enough for Europe to relax, and stop the flames.

Your evidence is above.

Thank you

[RomanS]

and it actually has the English version heheh
silly me

http://topgun.rin.ru/cgi-bin/texts.pl?category=state&mode=select&letter=A&lng=eng


enjoy

[RSK]

Countries, for which no information is available, are not included in this list.

Rank Country Military expenditures - dollar figure Date of Information
1 United States $ 276,700,000,000 NA
2 China $ 55,910,000,000 FY02
3 France $ 46,500,000,000 2000
4 Japan $ 39,520,000,000 FY02
5 Germany $ 38,800,000,000 2002
6 United Kingdom $ 31,700,000,000 2002
7 Italy $ 20,200,000,000 2002
8 Saudi Arabia $ 18,300,000,000 NA
9 Brazil $ 13,408,000,000 NA
10 Korea, South $ 13,094,300,000 FY02
11 India $ 11,520,000,000 FY02
12 Australia $ 11,390,000,000 FY02
13 Iran $ 9,700,000,000 NA
14 Israel $ 8,970,000,000 FY02
15 Spain $ 8,600,000,000 2002
16 Turkey $ 8,100,000,000 2002 est.
17 Canada $ 7,861,000,000 FY01/02
18 Taiwan $ 7,574,000,000 FY02
19 Netherlands $ 6,500,000,000 FY00/01 est.
20 Greece $ 6,120,000,000 NA
21 Korea, North $ 5,217,400,000 FY02
22 Singapore $ 4,470,000,000 NA
23 Sweden $ 4,395,000,000 FY01
24 Argentina $ 4,300,000,000 NA
25 Egypt $ 4,040,000,000 FY99
26 Mexico $ 4,000,000,000 NA
27 Poland $ 3,500,000,000 2002
28 Colombia $ 3,300,000,000 NA
29 Norway $ 3,113,000,000 NA
30 Belgium $ 3,077,000,000 FY01/02
31 Pakistan $ 2,964,000,000 FY02
32 Switzerland $ 2,548,000,000 FY01
33 Chile $ 2,500,000,000 NA
34 Denmark $ 2,470,000,000 FY99/00
35 Oman $ 2,424,000,000 FY01
36 Kuwait $ 1,967,300,000 NA
37 Algeria $ 1,870,000,000 NA
38 Finland $ 1,800,000,000 FY98/99
39 Thailand $ 1,775,000,000 NA
40 South Africa $ 1,746,000,000 FY02
41 Malaysia $ 1,690,000,000 NA
42 United Arab Emirates $ 1,600,000,000 NA
43 Austria $ 1,497,000,000 FY01/02
44 Morocco $ 1,400,000,000 NA
45 Iraq $ 1,300,000,000 FY00
46 Libya $ 1,300,000,000 NA
47 Portugal $ 1,286,000,000 FY99/00
48 Czech Republic $ 1,190,200,000 FY01
49 Hungary $ 1,080,000,000 2002 est.
50 Indonesia $ 1,000,000,000 NA
51 Peru $ 1,000,000,000 NA
52 Philippines $ 995,000,000 NA
53 Romania $ 985,000,000 2002
54 Venezuela $ 934,000,000 NA
55 Syria $ 858,000,000 NA
56 Ethiopia $ 800,000,000 FY00
57 Jordan $ 757,500,000 FY01
58 Qatar $ 723,000,000 NA
59 Ecuador $ 720,000,000 NA
60 Sri Lanka $ 719,000,000 NA
61 Ireland $ 700,000,000 FY00/01
62 Serbia and Montenegro $ 654,000,000 2002
63 Vietnam $ 650,000,000 NA
64 Zimbabwe $ 625,100,000 FY02
65 Ukraine $ 617,900,000 FY02
66 New Zealand $ 605,700,000 FY02
67 Sudan $ 581,000,000 NA
68 Bangladesh $ 559,000,000 FY96
69 Lebanon $ 541,000,000 NA
70 Bahrain $ 526,200,000 FY01
71 Afghanistan $ 525,200,000 FY02
72 Croatia $ 520,000,000 2002 est.
73 Yemen $ 482,500,000 FY01
74 Mali $ 419,700,000 FY02
75 Nigeria $ 417,900,000 FY02
76 Slovakia $ 406,000,000 2002
77 Cyprus $ 384,000,000 NA
78 Slovenia $ 370,000,000 FY00
79 Bulgaria $ 356,000,000 FY02
80 Tunisia $ 356,000,000 NA
81 Brunei $ 329,700,000 FY02
82 Congo, Democratic Republic of the $ 250,000,000 NA
83 Uruguay $ 250,000,000 1999
84 Bosnia and Herzegovina $ 234,300,000 NA
85 Lithuania $ 230,800,000 FY01
86 Angola $ 222,700,000 FY02
87 Kazakhstan $ 221,800,000 FY02
88 Botswana $ 207,300,000 FY02
89 Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of $ 200,000,000 NA
90 Uzbekistan $ 200,000,000 NA
91 New Caledonia $ 192,300,000 FY96
92 Kenya $ 185,200,000 FY02
93 Dominican Republic $ 180,000,000 NA
94 Belarus $ 176,100,000 FY02
95 Estonia $ 155,000,000 2002 est.
96 Guinea $ 154,000,000 FY02
97 Luxembourg $ 147,800,000 FY01/02
98 Bolivia $ 147,000,000 NA
99 Cote d'Ivoire $ 143,500,000 FY02
100 Armenia $ 135,000,000 FY01
101 Panama $ 128,000,000 NA
102 Paraguay $ 125,000,000 NA
103 Uganda $ 124,700,000 FY02
104 Azerbaijan $ 121,000,000 NA
105 Guatemala $ 120,000,000 NA
106 Cameroon $ 118,600,000 FY00
107 Cambodia $ 112,000,000 NA
108 El Salvador $ 112,000,000 NA
109 Eritrea $ 95,750,000 FY02
110 Trinidad and Tobago $ 90,000,000 1999
111 Turkmenistan $ 90,000,000 NA
112 Latvia $ 87,000,000 FY01
113 Congo, Republic of the $ 84,000,000 FY01
114 Gabon $ 81,900,000 FY02
115 Benin $ 80,800,000 FY02
116 Namibia $ 73,100,000 FY02
117 Costa Rica $ 69,000,000 NA
118 Senegal $ 68,600,000 FY02
119 Malta $ 60,000,000 2000 est.
120 Rwanda $ 59,570,000 FY02
121 Nepal $ 57,220,000 FY02
122 Albania $ 56,500,000 FY02
123 Laos $ 55,000,000 NA
124 Madagascar $ 52,300,000 FY02
125 Haiti $ 50,000,000 FY00
126 Burkina Faso $ 45,830,000 FY02
127 Burundi $ 42,130,000 FY02
128 Chad $ 40,740,000 FY02
129 Papua New Guinea $ 40,210,000 FY02
130 Fiji $ 39,210,000 FY02
131 Burma $ 39,000,000 NA
132 Mauritania $ 37,110,000 FY02
133 Ghana $ 36,010,000 FY02
134 Tajikistan $ 35,400,000 FY01
135 Mozambique $ 35,100,000 NA
136 Honduras $ 35,000,000 NA
137 Maldives $ 34,460,000 FY02
138 Lesotho $ 34,000,000 1999
139 Zambia $ 33,460,000 FY02
140 Equatorial Guinea $ 30,000,000 FY02
141 Jamaica $ 30,000,000 NA
142 Djibouti $ 26,530,000 FY02
143 Nicaragua $ 26,000,000 NA
144 Togo $ 23,720,000 FY02
145 Mongolia $ 23,100,000 FY02
146 Georgia $ 23,000,000 NA
147 Niger $ 20,540,000 FY02
148 Bahamas, The $ 20,000,000 FY95/96
149 Swaziland $ 20,000,000 FY01
150 Tanzania $ 19,680,000 FY02
151 Kyrgyzstan $ 19,200,000 FY01
152 Somalia $ 17,100,000 FY02
153 Central African Republic $ 13,430,000 FY02
154 Malawi $ 13,010,000 FY02
155 Seychelles $ 12,800,000 FY02
156 Sierra Leone $ 10,260,000 FY02
157 Mauritius $ 9,712,000 FY02
158 Bhutan $ 9,300,000 FY02
159 Cape Verde $ 9,300,000 FY02
160 Liberia $ 7,800,000 FY02
161 Belize $ 7,700,000 NA
162 Moldova $ 6,400,000 FY02
163 Comoros $ 6,000,000 FY02
164 Guinea-Bissau $ 5,600,000 FY02
165 East Timor $ 4,400,000 FY03
166 Bermuda $ 4,028,000 January 2002
167 Gambia, The $ 1,200,000 FY02
168 San Marino $ 700,000 FY00/01
169 Sao Tome and Principe $ 400,000 FY01
170 Iceland $ 0 NA

[mustamato]

Poland, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, Germany, Italy
added together EQUALS 1/3rd of the Russian Arsenal

:lol:

we rule

And 1 Finn is as good as 10 Russians and it only becoms a problem when the 11th comes.
Old classic saying, and so far the Ruskies has not done much to contradict that. I mean, if
one Chechen is as good as 5 Ruskies... oh well.


Finland - 160 T-72s

Russia - 9000 T-72s

L O L

+ 124 Leopard 2´s in terrain like this:

http://virtual.finland.fi/finfo/english/nature/natu2_b.jpg

Welcome with your rusty tanks anytime :lol:

[SeanAshi]

The rest of the world must remember. Nobody can take Russia militarily.
For the sake of mankind lets hope we never have to find out.

[n_shanygin]

p-)

[wholagun]

well call me ignorant but isn't Russian stuff kinda old and outdated? I mean your comparing T72 and t90s to a Leo2a5 2a6 and a Challenger 2, and a Mig 29 and a Su 27 to Euro fighter etc you get the point.

[wholagun]

then you have to consider industrial might and mobalization and money and stuff its not just how much tanks I got at the start is more complicated then that.

Japan attacked the US general Yamamoto said "we just woke up a sleeping giant".

Anyhow Russia has nukes which is scary and can wipe out the rest of Europe till kingdom come.

[memphiz]

CANADA
total military spending- $7.861 billion
estimated miltary personal - over 100 000
ARMY:

Approximate strength of Army (Regular Force): 19, 500
Approximate strength of Army (Reserve Force): 15, 500
Approximate number of civilians employed by the Army: 4, 200

Employment Equity
Number of women in the Army: 1, 781
Number of women in the Combat Arms
(Infantry, Armoured, Artillery, Engineers) 252

Deployments
Number of Army personnel deployed overseas (forecast for 2002): 3, 927
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 2001: 3, 281
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 2000: 3, 831
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 1999: 5, 599
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 1998: 3, 470
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 1997: 3, 881
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 1996: 3, 818
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 1995: 2, 615
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 1994: 4, 586
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 1993: 5, 949
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 1992: 4, 834
Number of Army personnel deployed on overseas missions in 1991: 534

Major Vehicles and Equipment:
Tanks and Armoured Vehicles
651 LAV IIIs
203 Coyote Armoured Reconnaissance Vehicles
114 Leopard C2 Tanks
74 Bison Ambulances
60 Bison Mortar vehicles
35 Bison Recovery vehicles
16 Bison Mobile Repair Team vehicles
14 Bison Electronic Warfare vehicles
341 M113 A3 / MTVL tracked vehicle variants
9 Badger engineer vehicles
8 Taurus armoured recovery vehicles
9 Beaver bridge-layers
52 AVGP Personnel Carriers
80 AVGP Command Posts
10 AVGP Radio Relay vehicles
20 AVGP Unit Access Node vehicles
70 AVGP Mobile Repair Team vehicles

Artillery
96 C3 Towed Howitzers 105mm
76 M-109 Self-Propelled Howitzers
28 LG1 Mark II 105 Towed Howitzers
18 AVGP Artillery Gun Tractors


Air Defence
20 GDF 005 Twin 35mm Air Defence Guns
34 Air Defence Anti-Tank Systems (ADATS)
10 Oerlikon Skyguard Mark II
24 AVGP Very Short Air Defence vehicles

Support Vehicles
99 Griffon Helicopters (in the CF)
1,212 HLVWs (Heavy Logistic Vehicle Wheeled)
2,500 Iltis jeeps
2,879 LSVWs (Light Support Vehicle Wheeled)
2,769 MLVW (Medium Logistic Vehicle Wheeled)
78 BV 206 all-terrain vehicles

AIR FORCE
2200- personnel
Budget- approximately $2 billion
fighter:
118 (60 operational/59 fighter training, testing and rotation)- CF-18's
patrol:
18- CP-140 Aurora

Training:
4- CT-133 Silver Star's
26- CT-156 Harvard II
12- CT-155 Hawk
22- CT-114 Tutor

transport:
6- CC-144 Challenger
32- CC-130 Hercules
6- CC-115 Buffalo
4- CT-142 Dash 8
5- CC-150 Polaris
4- CC-138 Twin Otter

Helos:
28- CH-124 Sea King
3- CH-113 Labrador
15-CH-149 Cormorant

NAVY
12- Halifax Class (Multi-role Patrol Frigate)
HMCS CALGARY
HMCS CHARLOTTETOWN
HMCS FREDERICTON
HMCS HALIFAX
HMCS MONTREAL
HMCS OTTAWA
HMCS REGINA
HMCS ST-JOHNS
HMCS TORONTO
HMCS VANCOUVER
HMCS VILLE DE QUÉBEC
HMCS WINNIPEG

Iroquios Class Destroyer (Guided missile area air defence destroyer):
HMCS ALGONQUIN
HMCS ATHABASKAN
HMCS HURON
HMCS IROQUOIS

PROTECTEUR class(Operational support ships):
HMCS PROTECTEUR
HMCS PRESERVER

Kingston class (coastal defence vessel):
HMCS BRANDON
HMCS EDMONTON
HMCS GLACE BAY
HMCS GOOSE BAY
HMCS KINGSTON
HMCS MONCTON
HMCS NANAIMO
HMCS SASKATOON
HMCS SHAWINIGAN
HMCS SUMMERSIDE
HMCS WHITEHORSE
HMCS YELLOWKNIFE

Victoria class (long range patrol submarine):
HMCS CHICOUTIMI
HMCS CORNER BROOK
HMCS VICTORIA
HMCS WINDSOR

[/u]

[UkrainianAmerican]

Russia > Canada
USA > Canada
:P

[RomanS]

Russia > Canada
USA > Canada
:P

?

[UkrainianAmerican]

Russia > Canada
USA > Canada
:P

?
Izdevayus :P

[RomanS]

а я пива хочу

[UkrainianAmerican]

а я пива хочу
Ya guinness napilsya na St. Patricks day!
YUMMY!

[koster]

Блин, а я уже месяц как ничего не пил...

[UkrainianAmerican]

Блин, а я уже месяц как ничего не пил...
Ti shto, musulmanin? :P

[koster]

Нет, а что, похож ? :lol:

[UkrainianAmerican]

Нет, а что, похож ? :lol:
Trudno skazat :lol:

[RomanS]

все бля, сегодня иду в Русский магазин, покупаю ящер Балтики, нажираюсь как свин, и иду мочить терористов.

[UkrainianAmerican]

все бля, сегодня иду в Русский магазин, покупаю ящер Балтики, нажираюсь как свин, и иду мочить терористов.
Hmm, ya baltiku nekogda ne pvoboval.
A horoshaya vesch?

[RomanS]

Заебательская

[UkrainianAmerican]

I mne ostatki prishli!

[RomanS]

да ты че охуел братуха
Ты же в NY у вас там етой Балтики заливы в Русских магазинах.

[memphiz]

Russia > Canada
USA > Canada
:P
yeah i know that your militaries are FAR larger than ours, but look at our population its 36 million. and we have extremely well trained soldiers.

Russia 1.17% of population is in military
USA .86% of population is in military
UK .76% of population is military
Canada .33% of population in military
i was bored so i did this^ (correct me if im wrong ;) )

[UkrainianAmerican]

да ты че охуел братуха
Ты же в NY у вас там етой Балтики заливы в Русских магазинах.
YUa blya v okupirovannim-albancami Bronkse :(
Yest paru magazinov rydom no tam vse peresrochenoe :(
A kstati a gde ti v Arizone russkiy magazin otkopal? :)

[mustamato]

она говорит по-шведски

[UkrainianAmerican]

Tvoya mat neploho sebya vedet v posteli!

[memphiz]

Армия России огромна, намного больше чем Канада ;)
i used an online translator

[UkrainianAmerican]

Армия России огромна, намного больше чем Канада ;)
i used an online translator
I noticed :P
But nice try!

[RomanS]

а в Аризоне чего только и нет

[George W. Bush]

Arizona has lots of Russians for some reason. Baltika is good stuff, it comes in different numbers, 1 is light lager and 6 is stout or some **** like that. :lol:

[UkrainianAmerican]

Arizona has lots of Russians for some reason. Baltika is good stuff, it comes in different numbers, 1 is light lager and 6 is stout or some **** like that. :lol:
:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
Nothing more embarassing then being SCHOOLED about russian beer bye Dubya!
(j/k, :hug: )

[RomanS]

George Bush is from Russia himself

[UkrainianAmerican]

а в Аризоне чего только и нет
Ya priedu i liquidiruyu tvoyo pivo, i tvoyo oruzhie. :)

[RomanS]

по пипиське получишь
:lol:

[UkrainianAmerican]

по пипиське получишь
:lol:
Hmm, ya peredumal :oops:

[UkrainianAmerican]

George Bush is from Russia himself
Is he really lol?

[RomanS]

надо вообще то собрать всех наших на шашлык у нас в Аризоне
заодно и по палить из автоматов

[RomanS]

А ты знаешь что у Мустомато пизда пришита. Его поймали злыдни из Разпиздюринска, отрезали пысю, и пришили пиписю.

У Мармота похожая история. Его надо бля в чечню отослать, там его будут ебать в присядку, с присвистом и в под-прыжку.

щас ети пидергоги будут делать вид что они все понимают.

[UkrainianAmerican]

надо вообще то собрать всех наших на шашлык у нас в Аризоне
заодно и по палить из автоматов
woot :hug:

[UkrainianAmerican]

Priezhay suda letom. Y a tebe Brighton Beach so vsemi sukami pokazhu. Ih letom mnogo!

[SeanAshi]

http://www.dallasdancemusic.com/photos/data/500/6243regan-thumb.gif Ronny can't speak Russian.

[RomanS]

Priezhay suda letom. Y a tebe Brighton Beach so vsemi sukami pokazhu. Ih letom mnogo!

было бы пиздато, можно было бы заехать к глазному шпиону и надавать пизды.
"не той которой с волосами, той что бьют руками и ногами"

[memphiz]

переводчики онлайн сосут шары американского лося.

я только понимаю половину того, что Вы парни говорят :|

[UkrainianAmerican]

Priezhay suda letom. Y a tebe Brighton Beach so vsemi sukami pokazhu. Ih letom mnogo!

было бы пиздато, можно было бы заехать к глазному шпиону и надавать пизды.
"не той которой с волосами, той что бьют руками и ногами"
A vspmnil. Ya medlenniy.

[RomanS]

переводчики онлайн сосут шары американского лося.

ahahahahhahahahahaha hahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahaah
ahahahahaha
hhha
ah

rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl OMG

dude this translated so ****ed up funny, my stomach hurts

[UkrainianAmerican]

переводчики онлайн сосут шары американского лося.

я только понимаю половину того, что Вы парни говорят :|
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Comedy GOLD!

[RomanS]

the spheres of American moose.

[RomanS]

а ты переведи про себя на английский

[UkrainianAmerican]

а ты переведи про себя на английский

глаз

и

шпион
Ya uzhe dognal :oops: , i editnul moy post.

[UkrainianAmerican]

Yemu i ego druzyam mi sobiraemsya dat po shee do tvoyego prihoda, chtob raboti u tebya menshe bilo :)

[AK-Lover]

I want to **** Paris Hilton!

[RomanS]

гаси туда где будет ярко видно, маски не забудь одеть

[ShotOver]

The rest of the world must remember. Nobody can take Russia militarily.

Chechnya did a pretty good job of it :)

Use english, since this is an American website.

[RomanS]

The rest of the world must remember. Nobody can take Russia militarily.

Chechnya did a pretty good job of it :)

Use english, since this is an American website.

No

[ShotOver]

No, what?

[RomanS]

глянь пришел бляд тут со своими кенгуру, петух вылез из хуй знает откуда
сегодня революция бля, мы сегодня ебем многих

[Ratamacue]

The rest of the world must remember. Nobody can take Russia militarily.

Chechnya did a pretty good job of it :)

Use english, since this is an American website.

I think what Permskii meant was that no one can take on Russia in a straight-up full-scale war, not necessarily a guerrilla war.

[ShotOver]

Aaah, yeah. Heh, typical commie view on things.

:roll:

[RomanS]

No, what?

http://www.gigglepotz.com/images/croc.gif


to those from far far far away, Chechnya is Russian territory. We can't take ourselves partner,

[UkrainianAmerican]

глянь пришел бляд тут со своими кенгуру, петух вылез из хуй знает откуда
сегодня революция бля, мы сегодня ебем многих
Da, sovsem ohurel blya

[UkrainianAmerican]

Aaah, yeah. Heh, typical commie view on things.

:roll:
Well if you going to call ME (of all the people on this board) a commie then your grandpa is a schmuck who got exiled :P

[memphiz]

the spheres of American moose.
LOL rofl this is what i wrote in the translator

online translators suck moose balls

i only understand half of what you guys are saying
Russians a fun language :P

[ShotOver]

Hook line and sinker *Reels in his commie catch*

hahahah, idiot :roll:

[RomanS]

Aaah, yeah. Heh, typical commie view on things.

:roll:

What did the commies ever do to australia?

maybe this
http://www.knigi.ru/mulkrok.GIF

[UkrainianAmerican]

Hook line and sinker *Reels in his commie catch*

hahahah, idiot :roll:
Why are you being a **** all of a sudden?

[UkrainianAmerican]

Aaah, yeah. Heh, typical commie view on things.

:roll:

What did the commies ever do to australia?

maybe this
http://www.knigi.ru/mulkrok.GIF
LOLOLOL!
Good one!

[UkrainianAmerican]

V lesu rodilas yolochka
I kto yeye rodil?
Mariya Lopez Durachka
I Gena Krokodil!

Ya sleduschi Pushkin!

[RomanS]

Хуюшкин

чего то меня колбасит

[UkrainianAmerican]

Хуюшкин

чего то меня колбасит
Ti baltiku uzhe vipil?

[RomanS]

не я на работе сейчас

жду девку свою, она машину сегодня мою спиздила у меня.

[UkrainianAmerican]

не я на работе сейчас

жду девку свою, она машину сегодня мою спиздила у меня.
Blya skolko u vas vremya?

[RomanS]

20:22

[UkrainianAmerican]

20:22
Cho ti na rabote delayesh blya, nogi ta dlya chego? :D

[RomanS]

загружаю мп3

да бля в падлу 30 миль пешком херачить

[UkrainianAmerican]

загружаю мп3

да бля в падлу 30 миль пешком херачить
30 mil. Dauzh, nehoroshaya u tebya devka :)

[UkrainianAmerican]

Ti slushaesh lube?

[RomanS]

ну я бы не сказал......

хотя ето :lol: ощущение не на долго
;)

[RomanS]

вот Любе как раз и гружу. новый альбом

[RomanS]

бля мне кажется мы с тобой сейчас местных разозлим

[UkrainianAmerican]

вот Любе как раз и гружу. новый альбом
Aahhh, A vot ya nachel slushat nedelu nazad i ne ploho. A ti gde skachal?
Y ahodil na vse russkie sayti a oni, gadi, ne daut normalno skachat :(

[RomanS]

club.mp3search.ru

за деньги

[von_Moo142]

PermskiiOMON:

AFAIK, your naval data for Russia is somewhat inaccurate, you might want to check your source. Although would gladly welcome being corrected here, as I can't find entirely up to date or unambiguous stats.

I suppose it all depends on how you define active sevice units. The Victory is still in service with the RN, but it's not going to the gulf any time soon ;-)


Boring stuff follows:

Your figures seem to me to be from the mid or early '90s to me, but I'm no expert :-)

If you want to use the US classification for your anti-carrier missile subs like the Oscars and Charlies, then the best definition would be SSGN.


8 class Victor I,
5 class Victor II,

5 class of Charlie
5 class of Charlie 2

I'm fairly sure that any of these which remain in existance are not active.



26 class Victor III

I think there are only 8 of these units still in active service.



18 class Tango

Are there any Tango subs still active?



25 class Foxtrot,

Unless we recycled the Foxtrot NATO reporting name to a different class of subs then this is surely wrong.



3 class Admiral Ushakov

This should really be 2 (and even then these ships are not without problems). This was a 4 unit class. Although to the best of my knowledge the first two units of this class still exist, they are very far from active service. Ushakov hasn't seen service since 1990 and Lazarev wasn't in service for much longer after that. Although there has been interest in recent years in restoring 3 units to fully operational status (of which one would apparently be Ushakov [ref: Global Security] which suffered a fairly serious nuclear accident in 1990), so who knows... In theory, the latter two ships of this class have the best point defense in the world.

Hows Petr Velikiy doing these days anyway?



5 class Nikolayev

Only 1 of the Nikolayev class ships is still in active service, AFAIK, and it was doubtful if it could move under its own power. I belive that at least one unit was being restored though...



2 class Neustrashimy

I thought the second(and third) ship was cancelled ages ago...


The Krivak class are too hard for me to keep track of as there are so many different versions. I know there was some modernisation work considered for some of these ships though. Do you have any current info on that?

[RomanS]

I don't know much about Russian Navy to be honest with you

[b00n]

Now you just need the money to keep all this **** in a working condition right?

[RomanS]

10 years baby

10 years

[von_Moo142]

I don't know much about Russian Navy to be honest with you

Thats fair enough :-) I like your picture posts, BTW


It's pretty difficult to find good info on the Russian navy anyway, short of going to a library and looking in Janes I guess...

[ShotOver]

Im not being a prick, i was just seeing how easy it was to throw out some bait (Lil comment) and catch me a russian.

Was easier than i thought it would be.

[martinexsquaddie]

they got the internet in the penal colony's wow :lol:

[ShotOver]

hahahahaha, funny stuff! hahahahah

:roll:

Yeah, we got cars and **** too. Pretty amazing.

[martinexsquaddie]

but no decent rugby players rofl
game over :lol:

[Nizark]

So the 45 subs that russia has...are those operational as in go to sea more than once a year, or do the mothballed/ ones who sit in the ports forever count to the total as well?

[Elmo]

Finland - 160 T-72s

Russia - 9000 T-72s

L O L

Yes, Russia is powerful.

Where do you use BTR-50's?

MTLB's are widely used to plow fields in Russia nowadays, correct?

[tooms]

Russian military budget = 12 Billion USD
European military budget = about 170 Billion USD

A big part of russian materials is already obsolete or doesn't work anymore.

:petting:

[intelligenzija]

Russian military budget = 12 Billion USD
European military budget = about 170 Billion USD

A big part of russian materials is already obsolete or doesn't work anymore.


SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS




(destructive comment)

[HELEX]

Russian military budget = 12 Billion USD
European military budget = about 170 Billion USD

@tooms

Do not confront PermskiiOMON with reality, he usually starts crying and leaves the thread.

rofl

[von_Moo142]

For a nice article in the excellent (and free!) Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists go here:

http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/nukenotes/ja03nukenote.html

It focuses on nuclear forces.


The article, and others in the journal, is well worth the read. I'll quote the conclusion for the naval part:


Economic problems, a shrinking SSBN fleet, and safety concerns after the sinking of the Kursk in August 2000, have led to dramatic decreases in the number of annual SSBN patrols, from 37 in 1991 to zero in 2002, according to the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence. Patrols of nuclear-powered attack submarines (SSNs) and cruise missile submarines (SSGNs) also declined from 18 patrols in 1991 to only three in 2002.

[M_S]

9000 T-72.......= 27000 toasted soldiers...

[Dalleer]

Where does he get the 9000 T-90's ?

I doubt that there's that many of them even assembled at the point.

[Brzeczyszczykiewicz]

700 BMP-3s...

That number is questionable. AFAIK there are only 2-3 brigades that use BMP-3s. My source- http://www.warfare.ru says that there are ca. 122 BMP-3s in service

[Herrmannek]

I see Russian forces are melting like ice on sun.. :)

[Haiw]

I haven't read the last 5 pages, but there's something I sincerely doubt; how much of the stuff is servicable.

[Herrmannek]

I haven't read the last 5 pages, but there's something I sincerely doubt; how much of the stuff is servicable.

Probably all need lots of service :)

[Operation Ivy]

Where does he get the 9000 T-90's ?

I doubt that there's that many of them even assembled at the point.

he said they got about 40 of those ;) you just read it wrong ;)

[Dalleer]

Where does he get the 9000 T-90's ?

I doubt that there's that many of them even assembled at the point.

he said they got about 40 of those ;) you just read it wrong ;)

Well, I sure do hope so despite what he wrote on the Finland/Russia comparison.

Would someone care to show me that comment?

[M_S]

[b]Armaments. Tanks:
5000 T -80
9000 T -72
4000 T -64
13,000 T -62 and T -55

.



13000 T-62 and T-55.......i thought only 3:d world countries use those as MBT these days... :|

300 T-55 = 1 M1A2 (if the t-55's are lucky) p-)

[mustamato]

300 T-55 = 1 M1A2 (if the t-55's are lucky) p-)

Yeah in a desert, but most T-55´s is not used as MBT´s nowadays but rather
as infantry supporting guns, think civil war in Bosnia where they were used
pretty much as mobile artillery and avoided to come too close to the enemy.

[HELEX]

300 T-55 = 1 M1A2 (if the t-55's are lucky)

No, the M1A2 has only 55 Rounds for its Main Gun ready :lol:

It will be not so easy to destroy more than 2 Tanks with one Shot....

[M_S]

they will be able to fire 300 round before the t-55 see them....and mustamato im not that serious :lol:

[Dalleer]

Well, as I've understood the T55's used by Russia are heavily modified ones called "T55AM2PBK" that can carry AT-10 missiles and all.

Of course all of that is just minor improvements, but I guess that those tanks could still do their tasks as support vehicles or something.

I've always played around with the idea of Russia attacking Finland with at least two armored brigades, now from what these figures give us I'd say that we'd be seeing T72's and T80's for the most part, perhaps a couple of T90's or so.

Now of course we have to remember that the T72's that the Russians use nowadays are heavily modified (T72BM1 and T72BM) so they would still be superior to almost anything we could bring against them (the Leopard 2A4 brings stability to the battlefield, I would guess).

[SAS Britain]

BTW it is the other way round, 10 fins for 1 Russian. and so on. The Russians are the toughest race in the world the same for Britain and South Africa and everyone can just for get it.

[Operation Ivy]

ok

[Dalleer]

BTW it is the other way round, 10 fins for 1 Russian. and so on. The Russians are the toughest race in the world the same for Britain and South Africa and everyone can just for get it.

Really? I don't think so.

From the experiences that I've gained in the terrible and gruesome battles that the 69th Chairborne regiment "AKA home before dinner" has taken part in, I must tell you that the Samoans fight the hardest.

Not to mention the people of Nauru-islands.

[Haiw]

BTW it is the other way round, 10 fins for 1 Russian. and so on. The Russians are the toughest race in the world the same for Britain and South Africa and everyone can just for get it.
It's already been proven in other threads that you're just an ignorant prick who doesn't know ****, but now you've proven you're an ignorant prick who doesn't know history as well...

[Macs.]

BTW it is the other way round, 10 fins for 1 Russian. and so on. The Russians are the toughest race in the world the same for Britain and South Africa and everyone can just for get it.

Really? I don't think so.

From the experiences that I've gained in the terrible and gruesome battles that the 69th Chairborne regiment "AKA home before dinner" has taken part in, I must tell you that the Samoans fight the hardest.

Not to mention the people of Nauru-islands.

And don't forget the great job of the Zulu paras when they did invade London. They are badass.

[HELEX]

Soooo, we are talking about races now :roll:


The Russians are the toughest race in the world the same for Britain and South Africa and everyone can just for get it.

rofl

[Haiw]

rofl just read on the first page...they spend 12 billion on their military each year. Damn...even us Dutch guys with our small army spend 6,5 billion a year.

Oh and btw... 'Russian' isn't even a race...and Russians are from several different races.

[ShadowNeo]

From what SAS Britain posts I think you can pretty much discount them for being anything remotely credible.

Russia seems to have an overwhelmingly large amount of forces on paper, but alot of it as people have pointed out, seem to be somewhat outdated when compared to the units other countries possess.

I don't think you could also imagine a scenario in which one European country was attacked by Russia, as it is very possible that all the European countries would rally round them. The combined Military budget and forces would, unfortunately, give Russia a run for its money.

Also, you will see that the big spenders are obviously those with big countries (i.e China and the US). Other countries can justify lower military spending due to geographic location and size.

On a side note, I thought the UK's Military budget was now in the 35 billion pounds region?

[-Max2-]

just read on the first page...they spend 12 billion on their military each year. Damn...even us Dutch guys with our small army spend 6,5 billion a year.



Yeah, and the Netherlands has a greater GDP than Russia...

http://www.worldbank.org/data/databytopic/GDP.pdf

[Jehuty]

The Finns alone would still give the Russians a hard time.
Manpower isn't enough now.

[Haiw]

just read on the first page...they spend 12 billion on their military each year. Damn...even us Dutch guys with our small army spend 6,5 billion a year.



Yeah, and the Netherlands has a greater GDP than Russia...

http://www.worldbank.org/data/databytopic/GDP.pdf
Damn...we rock! :lol:

[Macs.]

rofl just read on the first page...they spend 12 billion on their military each year. Damn...even us Dutch guys with our small army spend 6,5 billion a year.

Oh and btw... 'Russian' isn't even a race...and Russians are from several different races.

Yeah, but they don't buy any food for theire soldiers so they save alot of money.

[-Max2-]

Yeah, but they don't buy any food for theire soldiers so they save alot of money.

rofl

[HELEX]

Stop all this Russian bashing and flaming please! http://www.smiliemania.de/smilie.php?smile_ID=1753

This is a thread of Love and Peace from now on. http://www.smiliemania.de/smilie.php?smile_ID=1755

I will make the first step:

PermskiiOMON you are a nice guy and I like your opinions. http://www.smiliemania.de/smilie.php?smile_ID=1734

Lets make this a better Place. http://www.smiliemania.de/smilie.php?smile_ID=1598

Come on....

[Hullebullen]

My mom can kick you mom's ass...

[HELEX]

@Hullebullen

This is no Place for stupid jokes!


My mom is much stronger than yours.

[Collosus]

The thing is that the 90%+ of the 12 bilion $ Russia spent at home, the food, equipment etc is way cheaper there and if one was to compare that to the western prices the 12 bilion would be more like 40-50bilion $.
But i quess nobody thought of that....

[ShadowNeo]

I don't see where your going in your comparison, sure the Russian equipment may be somewhat cheaper, but look at the equipment that is in use, alot of it is fairly old, somewhat less advanced in comparison to other countries.

But still, you can't really judge the effectiveness of spending in sheer numbers, the effectiveness will be seen in the use of the assets a country has.

[Collosus]

I don't see where your going in your comparison, sure the Russian equipment may be somewhat cheaper, but look at the equipment that is in use, alot of it is fairly old, somewhat less advanced in comparison to other countries.

But still, you can't really judge the effectiveness of spending in sheer numbers, the effectiveness will be seen in the use of the assets a country has.

I just wanted to put the spending(budget) in a different perspective, on paper it doesn't look like alot (12 bilion$) but it has a different "buying power" in Russia and thats it.
I am not trying defend Russians or anything like that, just trying to be fair.
I have to agree with you , i tgreatly matters how they use the money they have.

[wholagun]

But Russia has the equipment but can it keep on quickly producing it in its factories? Russia doesn't have exactly the most high tech factories. They have more labour intensive production lines where as in the west its more robotic.

[George W. Bush]

Russia employs cheap labor. They pay a lot less to manufacturers.

[tooms]

Russia employs cheap labor. They pay a lot less to manufacturers.

if we think like that, China has the first army in the world ?

[wholagun]

Russia employs cheap labor. They pay a lot less to manufacturers.

it has nothing to do with how much or how little you pay, Im talking about actual factoreis not being as highly productive as the western ones.

[Operation Ivy]

You dont have to have the best tech to win ;)

[M_S]

tell that to the iraqi :lol:

[wholagun]

the less tech advanced army will suffer greater losses, but it can still win provided its willing to accept the sacrifices.

[Kingpin]

Russia employs cheap labor. They pay a lot less to manufacturers.

it has nothing to do with how much or how little you pay, Im talking about actual factoreis not being as highly productive as the western ones.

How can robotic factory help in producing submarine? Bomber plane?

May be it can help in producing ammo but such factories already automated.

[Kingpin]

300 T-55 = 1 M1A2 (if the t-55's are lucky) p-)

Wrong :)
Imagine 300 T-55 attacking lone M1A2. Poor american tankers. M1A2 will be blown into smaaaall pieces within minutes rofl rofl rofl

[wholagun]

Russia employs cheap labor. They pay a lot less to manufacturers.

it has nothing to do with how much or how little you pay, Im talking about actual factoreis not being as highly productive as the western ones.

How can robotic factory help in producing submarine? Bomber plane?

May be it can help in producing ammo but such factories already automated.

i see you point, and Im sorry for not making myself clear. Submarine bomber etc are all finished products. However, bombers are made in sections as are subs and the components such as cockpit windows to sock absorbers etc anything and everything that make the whole design is produced faster with robotic production. Not only that but you need parts to make other parts and so on. Patria is giving Poland its first batches of AMV and then production will be switched over the Polish side because initally it woul take too long for us to have them deployed

[SAS Britain]

Operation Ivy"]You dont have to have the best tech to win "

Actually they do. Look at the KA-50, KA-52, Highly modified Mi-24, MI-28, Mi-26. Su-37, MIG-29, BE-103(Sold to US for field testing of amphibious aircraft), AN-124(Amazing),SU-39(can run on diesel fuel and easy to maintain),SU-35,TU-22M backfire(understandable American over reaction),SU34, SU30. You get the picture. The list goes on and on and on of amazing and very interesting aircraft.

[fantassin]

The data on US expenditures are old; the last US defence dudget was 404 billions USD.

France was 32 billions Euros.

[GazB]

I disagree with some of your figures.

The TU-160 is only available in numbers of about 15. More are being made now, very slowly, but there are not almost 30 of them yet.

Also there are not 30 Mig-31s... there are closer to 400.

Apart from a few EW and recon versions of the Su-22 pretty much all single engine jet fighters in Russian service are in storage... that means Mig-21, Mig-23, Mig-27. Tha tis why the Mig-29s are getting the SMT upgrades to make them fully multirole to replace these aircraft in the light strike role.


and a Mig 29 and a Su 27 to Euro fighter etc you get the point.

How many Eurofighters are in service? How many fully trained Eurofighter pilots are there? A Su-35 is not that bad compared to a Eurofighter and upgrades of Su-27s to Su-35 standard are being introduced... There are currently more Su-35s in service than Eurofighters...


Aaah, yeah. Heh, typical commie view on things.

Therefore it must be the Ausralian view that the Vietnamese can take on the US and win?


Now you just need the money to keep all this **** in a working condition right?

Nope, they could just dump the old reactors it in a really deep part of the ocean... like the English channel or somewhere off Denmark or sell some stuff to the palestinians but the West suddenly decides to free up its purse strings to "help out" with such problems. Other issues like lack of medical or education infrastructure in some regions of Russia are not as important to the west. What great humanitarians we of the west are.


Russian military budget = 12 Billion USD
European military budget = about 170 Billion USD

A big part of russian materials is already obsolete or doesn't work anymore.

Truck mounted ICBMs are not expensive to maintain. And of course do you honestly think the war in chechnia and maintaining a large military could be done for 12 billion. You are very funny... you should take our show on the road.


The article, and others in the journal, is well worth the read. I'll quote the conclusion for the naval part:


Considering that the Russian ballistic missile submarines can hit all of their likely targets from port and the rest of the fleet was really just to support them it is no real surprise that they don't seem very active. US subs are also very inactive and there are many demands that the Seawolfs be withdrawn and that the old Los Angelas class be the main SSN. The Russians have always had a much lower sailing rate than the west due to different doctrine. Each western sub had three crews... one sailing, one training, and one on leave so US subs sailed much more often. Currently they sail much less than they have ever done in the past too. Liek the Russians they have other things to spend their money on at the moment.


Where does he get the 9000 T-90's ?

I doubt that there's that many of them even assembled at the point.

Where do you get 9000 T-90s from? Learn to read.


13000 T-62 and T-55.......i thought only 3:d world countries use those as MBT these days...

300 T-55 = 1 M1A2 (if the t-55's are lucky)

Not every enemy requires the latest vehicle. The BTR-T is based on the T-55 chassis.

How many M1A2s have 5km range laser guided missiles that can take out helos?

They would likely be used in rear areas for clearing up paratroops, or for sale to thrid world countries that can't afford anything better.


seem to be somewhat outdated when compared to the units other countries possess.


And has been proven time and time again it is the newest weapon that wins... that is why the Americans won in Vietnam and the Russian won in Afghanistan.


The combined Military budget and forces would, unfortunately, give Russia a run for its money.


Yes, launching one or two Topols would be very expensive...


Yeah, and the Netherlands has a greater GDP than Russia...


Yes, and GDP wins wars too...


but look at the equipment that is in use, alot of it is fairly old, somewhat less advanced in comparison to other countries.


Can you give examples please? For example can you tell my why Harriers and Tornados are better than Mig-29s and Su-27s?

Also why are British bombers are better than Tu-160 Blackjacks, or even Tu-95 Bears? What sort of nuclear armed cruise missile do Danish bombers carry and can they outrange the Kh-101 that is currently entering Russian Service?

Equally if NATO cannot stand ethnic cleansing in Europe and therefore invaded Kosovo why does it not do the same in Chechnia? Surely it will be able to kick Russia's ass... after all NATO includes not just all of civilised Europe but the US and Canada as well? After three months of bombing NATO couldn't defeat Serbia's air defence network. Russias air defence network is rather more extensive and includes a ballistic missile defence network around Moscow.


I just wanted to put the spending(budget) in a different perspective, on paper it doesn't look like alot (12 bilion$) but it has a different "buying power" in Russia and thats it.
I am not trying defend Russians or anything like that, just trying to be fair.
I have to agree with you , i tgreatly matters how they use the money they have.

It is not just "spending power". For decades the Russians matched the US rouble for dollar in an arms race that led to large amounts of weapons being bought and logisitics and command and control stuctures being built up. The fact that they only spend a fraction of that now on defence does not remove what is there and available if needed.


Russia doesn't have exactly the most high tech factories. They have more labour intensive production lines where as in the west its more robotic.

But the latest high tech stuff the Russians are making is every bit as good as the stuff made in the west. In fact in many areas they are ahead in important technologies. How many mach three antiship missiles are in service in the west? The Russians have more than 30 years experience with them. The S-300 series is widely rated as being rather better than its western equivelent... the Patriot. How many western torpedos can travel at 200knts?
The best short range heat seeker missile is probably the ASRAAM at the moment, but how many aircraft carry it? The next best is the R-73 Archer, a Russian weapon in service for more than 20 years.


tell that to the iraqi

Tell it to a vietnamese, or an Afghan... both have defeated many world powers in their time... US, Japan, and France for the vietnamese and the Soviets once and the British three times and soon probably the Americans too, though if the americans have any brains they will declare victory and leave before they get kicked out.


Patria is giving Poland its first batches of AMV and then production will be switched over the Polish side because initally it woul take too long for us to have them deployed

And all of the Russian equipment is hand made... hahahahahahha.... why do you think the Akulas are so respected by the US? Is it because they made them scary and black or the fact that their propellers are made with a high precision japanese machine that ground them to within 1,000ths of a mm in accuracy? Or the stealth attributes of the Tu-160 which has a radar cross section much smaller than a B-1B even though the B-1B is a much smaller aircraft of very similar design?

[wholagun]

your taking my statements out of context. I didn't say Russian stuff was hand made you did.

And what I mean with more modernized production is that in the end you have greater manufacturing output.

[fantassin]

Not to mention the Directed Energy weapons that the Russians are currently experimenting.

[wholagun]

Not to mention the Directed Energy weapons that the Russians are currently experimenting.

what they are? Wow I though that kind of stuff was expensive and the US was the only nation to actually afford playing with that kind of stuff.

[Herrmannek]

Not to mention the Directed Energy weapons that the Russians are currently experimenting.

what they are? Wow I though that kind of stuff was expensive and the US was the only nation to actually afford playing with that kind of stuff.

lasers, blinding lasers, EMPs and such

[fantassin]

I have no specific infos on them but recently i spoke to a US civilian (former USMC Major) working for the DoD who told me that, in his opinion, the USA were foolish to sink so much money in programs like the F22 that serves no purposes (the F15E and F18E were, in his opinion, more than sufficient for the expected threats) while real threat, like the DE weapons were neglected.

He quoted the DE weapons and the attacks on command and control systems (like the attack done by the Chineses on the US systems during the war in Kosovo after the US bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade) as the main technological threats of the coming decades.

He was more than happy about the demise of the Comanche and said that the only US service that understood how to fight a war was the USMC; in his opinion, the other services are too obsessed by technology and don't pay enough attention to "warfighting".

[tooms]

The data on US expenditures are old; the last US defence dudget was 404 billions USD.

France was 32 billions Euros.

You are right for the US budget but french military budget is 41 Billion USD in 2004

[Kilgor]

But the latest high tech stuff the Russians are making is every bit as good as the stuff made in the west. In fact in many areas they are ahead in important technologies. ?

Where are the B2's
the F22's ?

Russia has no where near the research funds available like in the good old days, all the good engineers have probably left for overseas where the pay is better, and maybe its a generalisation most parts are sourced off shore anyway.

Russia in the hight of the cold war was spending a staggering amount of its budget on the military, I just cant see how that can be mainatained without the serious side effects of cutbacks.

[fantassin]

[quoteYou are right for the US budget but french military budget is 41 Billion USD in 2004[/quote]

Note that I gave the French budget in Euro which has been standing around 1,25 USD for a Euro for a while now; the sum of 34 billion Euros is also quoted in some sources.

[tooms]

Note that I gave the French budget in Euro which has been standing around 1,25 USD for a Euro for a while now; the sum of 34 billion Euros is also quoted in some sources.

yes you are right

[Guttorm]

Peter the Great isn't sailing? :(

The greatest warship of all time isn't operational?

That sucks moose spheres...

[ShadowNeo]

And has been proven time and time again it is the newest weapon that wins... that is why the Americans won in Vietnam and the Russian won in Afghanistan.

Don't think thats the best of comparissons, think of the way in which the Vietnamese and Afghan forces conducted war - much different to that of the US and Russia. When comparing the modern forces of the world and Russia's modern forces, they seem to be extremely simmilar in terms of the way they operate, something that in my opinion may give the side with the most advanced technology an advantage.


Also why are British bombers are better than Tu-160 Blackjacks, or even Tu-95 Bears? What sort of nuclear armed cruise missile do Danish bombers carry and can they outrange the Kh-101 that is currently entering Russian Service?

Didn't say that British bombers in particular were better. Its also hard to compare them to the examples you stated, as to my knowledge, we don't use long-range strategic bombers. The only planes used for bombing missions are Tornados.

[execrable]

300 T-55 = 1 M1A2 (if the t-55's are lucky) p-)

Wrong :)
Imagine 300 T-55 attacking lone M1A2. Poor american tankers. M1A2 will be blown into smaaaall pieces within minutes rofl rofl rofl
Problem is, Green Berets would already have "laser painted" the tanks and they would be piles of smoking Russian scrap when the American tanks came rolling in. rofl

[RuSoKaR]

you all are just bitching like little children, while have no idea about Russians are developing.

Underestimation is a mistake which can lead to the lose.

[HELEX]

On the MIG-29:

German Army tested them for more than ten years, on very short ranges it is superior to the F-4 Phantom because AA-11 system is better than Sidewinder.
But on normal combat ranges the MIG looses because of its really crappy Radar and Radar guided Missiles. Because of that they decided to replace MIG-29 first and than F-4 with the Eurofighter. Range of MIG-29 is much to short too.

[BlackRain]

Updated March 19, 2003

Selected Countries Military Budget ($Billions)

United States $399.1 Billion
Russia* 65.0
China* 47.0
Japan 42.6
United Kingdom 38.4
France 29.5
Germany 24.9
Saudi Arabia 21.3
Italy 19.4
India 15.6
South Korea 14.1
Brazil* 10.7
Taiwan* 10.7
Israel 10.6
Spain 8.4
Australia 7.6
Canada 7.6
Netherlands 6.6
Turkey 5.8
Mexico 5.9
Kuwait* 3.9
Ukraine 5.0
Iran* 4.8
Singapore 4.8
Sweden 4.5
Egypt* 4.4
Norway 3.8
Greece 3.5
Poland 3.5
Argentina* 3.3
United Arab Emirates* 3.1
Colombia* 2.9
Belgium 2.7
Pakistan* 2.6
Denmark 2.4
Vietnam 2.4
North Korea* 2.1
Czech Republic 1.6
Iraq* 1.4
Philippines 1.4
Portugal 1.3
Libya* 1.2
Hungary 1.1
Syria 1.0
Cuba* 0.8
Sudan* 0.6
Yugoslavia 0.7
Luxembourg 0.2

Figures are for latest year available, usually 2002. Expenditures are used in a few cases where official budgets are significantly lower than actual spending. The figure for the United States is from the annual budget request for Fiscal Year 2004.

* 2001 Funding

Table prepared by Center for Defense Information.

Sources: International Institute for Strategic Studies, Department of Defense

[BlackRain]

====================================

FUTURE YEAR US MILITARY BUDGET AUTHORITY

====================================

(Function 050)

FY 2003 $382.2 billion

FY 2004 $399.1 billion

FY 2005 $419.6 billion

FY 2006 $439.7 billion

FY 2007 $460.0 billion

FY 2008 $480.4 billion

FY 2009 $502.7 billion

=====================================================

MAJOR CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS REQUESTS (in millions of dollars)

=====================================================

FY 2003 FY 2004 WEAPONS PROGRAMS (state of prime contractors in parentheses)

5,374.4 5,170.2 F-22 Air Force Raptor (22 planes made in GA, TX, WA and FL)

3,418.6 3,210.2 F/A-18 E/F Navy Super Hornet - (42 planes made in MA, MO, MD & CA)

3,406.7 4,365.8 JSF Navy-Air Force-Marine Joint Strike Fighter (TX, CT)

1,640.0 1,654.0 V-22 Osprey - (11 aircraft made in TX, PA and IN)

4,430.2 3,686.3 C-17 Air Force airlift aircraft - (11 planes made in CA and CT)

770.0 734.5 C-130J cargo aircraft (5 planes made in GA and IN)

874.0 1,079.3 RAH-66 Army Comanche light helicopter (made in CT, PA, AZ, IN)

924.3 776.7 AH-64 Longbow Apache helicopter (74 helicopters made

in MD)

1,199.1 1,390.3 UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (28 aircraft)

2,624.9 3,404.0 DDG-51 Navy Aegis destroyer - (3 destroyers made in ME and MS)

2,341.5 2,640.5 Virginia class submarine (1 sub made in CT and VA)

855.3 1,525.8 CVN-77 Nimitz Class carrier (1 carrier in VA)

594.3 1,200.0 LPD-17 Navy transport dock ship (1 ship made in LA, ME, CA & AL)

Source: Program Acquisition Cost By Weapons System, Department of Defense Budget for Fiscal Year 2004

===============================

MOST EXPENSIVE WEAPONS SYSTEMS

===============================

(TOTAL PROGRAM COSTS)

Up to $1.2 trillion Layered missile defense

$ 226.5 billion JSF Joint Strike Fighter 2,866 planes

$ 73.4 billion Virginia class submarine 30 subs

$ 69.7 billion F-22 Air Force Raptor 295 planes

$ 66.0 billion DDG-51 Navy AEGIS destroyer 64 ships

$ 59.0 billion C-17 Air Force airlift aircraft180 planes

$ 48.8 billion F/A-18 E/F Navy Super Hornet 548 planes

$ 47.9 billion RAH-66 Army Comanche helicopter1,213 helicopters

$ 46.2 billion V-22 Navy Osprey 458 aircraft

$ 37.5 billion D-5 Navy Trident II missile568 missiles

$ 15.4 billion LPD-17 Navy transport dock ship 12 ships

Source: Selected Acquisition Report, September 30, 2002; Missile defense cost from Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation and ECAAR report

=============================

FISCAL YEAR 2004 BUDGET BY TITLE

=============================

$ 98.6 billion - military personnel

$117.0 billion - operations and maintenance

$ 72.7 billion - procurement

$ 61.8 billion - research, development, testing and evaluation

$ 5.0 billion - military construction

$ 4.0 billion - family housing

$ 17.9 billion - other Pentagon programs

$ 2.8 billion - other

$379.9 billion - TOTAL DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ONLY

$ 19.3 billion - Department of Energy and other

$399.1 billion - TOTAL NATIONAL DEFENSE

[BlackRain]

The data on US expenditures are old; the last US defence dudget was 404 billions USD.

France was 32 billions Euros.

You are right for the US budget but french military budget is 41 Billion USD in 2004

Can you provide a source for this?

[ibstolidude]

He quoted the DE weapons and the attacks on command and control systems (like the attack done by the Chineses on the US systems during the war in Kosovo after the US bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade) as the main technological threats of the coming decades. - what attacks on C2 are you refering to by the Chinese?

[BlackRain]

The data on US expenditures are old; the last US defence dudget was 404 billions USD.

France was 32 billions Euros.

You are right for the US budget but french military budget is 41 Billion USD in 2004

Can you provide a source for this?


http://www.senat.fr/rap/l03-073-341/l03-073-3416.gif

[RomanS]

Russia* 65.0


Союз нерушимый, республик свободных
Сплотила навеки великая Русь



Sweden 4.5
Norway 3.8
Poland 3.5

Finland is not even on the list.

buahahahahahahahaha Ukraine by themselves have more money than those above

[BlackRain]

Russia* 65.0


Союз нерушимый, республик свободных
Сплотила навеки великая Русь



Sweden 4.5
Norway 3.8
Poland 3.5

Finland is not even on the list.

buahahahahahahahaha Ukraine by themselves have more money than those above

I thought you would appreciate that list of military budgets. I thought your 2002 figure was a little low.

[Dalleer]

Russia* 65.0


Союз нерушимый, республик свободных
Сплотила навеки великая Русь



Sweden 4.5
Norway 3.8
Poland 3.5

Finland is not even on the list.

buahahahahahahahaha Ukraine by themselves have more money than those above

Laugh all you want, I might still remind you that underestimating the enemy is yet again the mother of all foock ups.

[Marmot1]

BTW you mentioned 2 Aicraft Cariers at the begining as operational

AFAIK none of your caries is operational (BTW one is sold to India AFAIK)

...

[koster]

Братва, я думаю что по Русски лучше на ВВешном (http://www.bratishka.ru) форуме базарить, там все свои, злится никто не будет :).

[RomanS]

Russia* 65.0


Союз нерушимый, республик свободных
Сплотила навеки великая Русь



Sweden 4.5
Norway 3.8
Poland 3.5

Finland is not even on the list.

buahahahahahahahaha Ukraine by themselves have more money than those above

I thought you would appreciate that list of military budgets. I thought your 2002 figure was a little low.

Thanks bud!

Just to think Putin will even throw more money to restore our power once again!

[BlackRain]

Finland Military Data

The reductions in the Defence Forces wartime strength will be continued, reducing the maximum strength to 350,000 men by the end of 2008.


Contents of the Finnish 2003 defence budget

Expenditure under the Ministry of Defence main
heading in the 2003 budget

The appropriation for the Ministry of Defence’s segment of
administration totals €1,952.2 million in the budget for
2003.

As can be seen from the table below, two categories
of expenditure are markedly bigger than the others: Defence
Forces wages and procurement of defence matériel.

These two categories together account for about 61% of the total
defence appropriation. Other large individual expenditure
categories are the property costs included in rents, VAT as
well as training and upkeep costs for conscripts.

The appropriation under the Ministry of Defence main
heading in the 2003 budget represents about 5.5% of the
budget total. There have been no major changes in this level
in recent years.

VAT costs amounting to €165 million, which were earlier
included under the Ministry of Finance main heading, have
been transferred to the Ministry of Defence in the 2003
budget. The budget also includes €45 million for costs arising
from a restructuring of the defence establishment’s arrangements
concerning land and other real-estate assets.

The defence budget as a share of GDP

The Finnish defence budget’s share of GDP, about 1.3% in 2003, is low in comparison with the figures for the other EU member states and the non-EU NATO members.

Defence spending as a share of GDP has fluctuated within the range 1.65–1.2% in the period 1994–2003

Source: http://www.defmin.fi/chapter_images/1161_Puolustusbudjetti_gp.PDF

[Kilgor]

Even us Australian's spend more than some of those European countries.

rofl

[RomanS]

Even us Australian's spend more than some of those European countries.

rofl

rofl rofl rofl


they talk a lot more than they spend on their military.

[Marmot1]

Here is your Goroszkov.... ooopppssss.. sorry Vikramaditya now :lol:

http://www.imageshack.us/img2/285/Image5.jpg
Left "Goroshov" Right after planed modernisation as "Vikramaditya"


*sorry for bad quality it was not scaned but photographed

[Kilgor]

We can make comments about the current state of russia's military... but im guessing they are a hell of alot better prepared that some euro countries !

[RuSoKaR]

BTW you mentioned 2 Aicraft Cariers at the begining as operational

AFAIK none of your caries is operational (BTW one is sold to India AFAIK)

...

Admiral Kyznezov is back! woot

http://www.vesti.ru/p/b_65100.jpg
http://www.vesti.ru/p/b_65098.jpg
http://www.vesti.ru/p/b_65097.jpg
http://www.vesti.ru/p/b_65101.jpg
Kyznezov have anti-sub missels, and some other stuff with which he can defend him-self.

[Marmot1]

Armaments. Tanks:
5000 T -80
9000 T -72
4000 T -64
13,000 T -62 and T -55

BMP and BTR:
2400 BRDM
700 BMP-3
25 000 BTR-50, BTR-60, BTR-70, BTR-80, BTR-90, BTR-T,
2000 BMD
4000 MT-LB

Artillery: 40 000 122мм, 130мм, 152мм; 122мм и 152мм
Mortars: 14 000 82мм, 120мм, 160мм, 240мм.
Recoilless Artillery: 73мм SPG-9.
MLRS: 7 500 122мм, 140мм, 220мм и 240мм,
6,000 Smerch 300мм,

And chechens are still fighting after 5 years since last invasion... rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl

So I preseume to conquer finlad in conventional war would take you like 50 years... rofl rofl rofl rofl

[tony6]

Just to be strict:
This year Poland spend 798 mln $ for Army modernisation-this is 16,2% of the whole military budget (2001: 9,5%, 2002: 12%, 2002: 13,4%).
That makes our military budget this year (2004): 4,9 billion $.
Data from the march issue of "Raport" magazine.

[RuSoKaR]

Do you want to say that Findland has ties with rich arabian countries which will supply them with weaponary and funds?

and cheches aren't that active right now...
the conflict is almost over woot

[Marmot1]

Do you want to say that Findland has ties with rich arabian countries which will supply them with weaponary and funds?

and cheches aren't that active right now...
the conflict is almost over woot
No but I's sure they would have much more support in case of invesion than chechens ever had... I can bet my dinner that Norway and Sweden would be first to send whatever finns need and rest of europe would support them as well also finland is bigger and terain is much more dificult this prevent use of armour and due to forests air superiority is limited. (just imagine how difiicult is to hit with precise guided weapon tank which is betwen woods . It is easy to do so on open desert but sorry, in forest probably 5 out of 6 rockets would hit trees before tank)

[RuSoKaR]

Do you want to say that Findland has ties with rich arabian countries which will supply them with weaponary and funds?

and cheches aren't that active right now...
the conflict is almost over woot
No but I's sure they would have much more support in case of invesion than chechens ever had... I can bet my dinner that Norway and Sweden would be first to send whatever finns need and rest of europe would support them as well also finland is bigger and terain is much more dificult this prevent use of armour and due to forest air superiority is limited too (just imagine how difiicult is to hit with precise weapon tank which is betwen woods . It is easy to do so on open desert but sorry in forest probably 5 out of 6 rockets would hit trees before tank)

and why does Russia need something swampy like Finnland?

[Marmot1]

Do you want to say that Findland has ties with rich arabian countries which will supply them with weaponary and funds?

and cheches aren't that active right now...
the conflict is almost over woot
No but I's sure they would have much more support in case of invesion than chechens ever had... I can bet my dinner that Norway and Sweden would be first to send whatever finns need and rest of europe would support them as well also finland is bigger and terain is much more dificult this prevent use of armour and due to forest air superiority is limited too (just imagine how difiicult is to hit with precise weapon tank which is betwen woods . It is easy to do so on open desert but sorry in forest probably 5 out of 6 rockets would hit trees before tank)

and why does Russia need something swampy like Finnland?

Maybe becouse PermskyOMON have obsesion about Finland and Sweeden :D :lol: :D (and Poland)

ahhh... almost forgot they have nice NOKIA phones ;) and chicks p-)

[RuSoKaR]

OMON iz permi ny chto ti nac co ckandinavami cravnival?
me y6 kak nikak lytshi nix.

oh and for the wooden terrain have you heared about TOS Marmot1?

[Dalleer]

Do you want to say that Findland has ties with rich arabian countries which will supply them with weaponary and funds?

and cheches aren't that active right now...
the conflict is almost over woot
No but I's sure they would have much more support in case of invesion than chechens ever had... I can bet my dinner that Norway and Sweden would be first to send whatever finns need and rest of europe would support them as well also finland is bigger and terain is much more dificult this prevent use of armour and due to forest air superiority is limited too (just imagine how difiicult is to hit with precise weapon tank which is betwen woods . It is easy to do so on open desert but sorry in forest probably 5 out of 6 rockets would hit trees before tank)

and why does Russia need something swampy like Finnland?

Well duh, the Russkies here are the ones flashing their defence budget around and comparing it to ours like it was the freakin' eve of the winter war.

And Marmot1, I think that we'd use guerilla-war tactics if a possible enemy would be able to penetrate deep enough to our territory, and surely there would be enemy casulties. What happens in Iraq and Chechnya right now seems to confirm the effectiveness of guerilla-tactics, not to mention Vietnam.

And since we are a EU-member, I'm sure that there'd be help offered to us in one way or another during a crisis. I'm sure Sweden would participate in some sort of a "way", not to mention the bigger EU-countries.

Not to mention what'll become of this "Eurocorps"-matter...

[wholagun]

Well duh, the Russkies here are the ones flashing their defence budget around and comparing it to ours like it was the freakin' eve of the winter war.

And Marmot1, I think that we'd use guerilla-war tactics if a possible enemy would be able to penetrate deep enough to our territory, and surely there would be enemy casulties. What happens in Iraq and Chechnya right now seems to confirm the effectiveness of guerilla-tactics, not to mention Vietnam.

And since we are a EU-member, I'm sure that there'd be help offered to us in one way or another during a crisis. I'm sure Sweden would participate in some sort of a "way", not to mention the bigger EU-countries.

Not to mention what'll become of this "Eurocorps"-matter...

isn't there a clause in the European convention that if one country gets attacked all have to help?

[Jehuty]

If Russia attack one of the EU countries, Russia is dead. p-)

[RuSoKaR]

Finland is a member of NATO (isn't it?)

NATO :lol: rofl :cantbeli:

[Marmot1]

Well duh, the Russkies here are the ones flashing their defence budget around and comparing it to ours like it was the freakin' eve of the winter war.

And Marmot1, I think that we'd use guerilla-war tactics if a possible enemy would be able to penetrate deep enough to our territory, and surely there would be enemy casulties. What happens in Iraq and Chechnya right now seems to confirm the effectiveness of guerilla-tactics, not to mention Vietnam.

And since we are a EU-member, I'm sure that there'd be help offered to us in one way or another during a crisis. I'm sure Sweden would participate in some sort of a "way", not to mention the bigger EU-countries.

Not to mention what'll become of this "Eurocorps"-matter...

isn't there a clause in the European convention that if one country gets attacked all have to help?
It's Article 18 North Atlantic Treaty (NATO)

[Kilgor]

It's Article 18 North Atlantic Treaty (NATO)

btw.. wasnt that invoked for 9/11 ?

[Marmot1]

Finland is a member of NATO (isn't it?)

NATO :lol: rofl :cantbeli:

No they are not in NATO... but still their tactic is to use guerilla not to fight in convetional war and as it was proven in Vietnam,CHechenya,Afghanistan,Iraq and other places unconventional warfare is best way to deal with stronger enemy...

[wholagun]

Well duh, the Russkies here are the ones flashing their defence budget around and comparing it to ours like it was the freakin' eve of the winter war.

And Marmot1, I think that we'd use guerilla-war tactics if a possible enemy would be able to penetrate deep enough to our territory, and surely there would be enemy casulties. What happens in Iraq and Chechnya right now seems to confirm the effectiveness of guerilla-tactics, not to mention Vietnam.

And since we are a EU-member, I'm sure that there'd be help offered to us in one way or another during a crisis. I'm sure Sweden would participate in some sort of a "way", not to mention the bigger EU-countries.


Not to mention what'll become of this "Eurocorps"-matter...

isn't there a clause in the European convention that if one country gets attacked all have to help?
It's Article 18 North Atlantic Treaty (NATO)


Yes thats NATO, but what I am talking about is the EU (European Union convention which us and the Spainiards the French and the Germans didn't agree on, that convention). I believe, im not sure that somewhere in there it states that if one country gets attacked all need to help.

Isn't it article 3 not 18 of the NATO Treaty?

[Marmot1]

It's Article 18 North Atlantic Treaty (NATO)

btw.. wasnt that invoked for 9/11 ?
Yes fot the first time in history of Nato

[Dalleer]

Well duh, the Russkies here are the ones flashing their defence budget around and comparing it to ours like it was the freakin' eve of the winter war.

And Marmot1, I think that we'd use guerilla-war tactics if a possible enemy would be able to penetrate deep enough to our territory, and surely there would be enemy casulties. What happens in Iraq and Chechnya right now seems to confirm the effectiveness of guerilla-tactics, not to mention Vietnam.

And since we are a EU-member, I'm sure that there'd be help offered to us in one way or another during a crisis. I'm sure Sweden would participate in some sort of a "way", not to mention the bigger EU-countries.


Not to mention what'll become of this "Eurocorps"-matter...

isn't there a clause in the European convention that if one country gets attacked all have to help?
It's Article 18 North Atlantic Treaty (NATO)


Yes thats NATO, but what I am talking about is the EU (European Union convention which us and the Spainiards the French and the Germans didn't agree on, that convention). I believe, im not sure that somewhere in there it states that if one country gets attacked all need to help.

Isn't it article 3 not 18 of the NATO Treaty?

I do believe that an article like the "if one gets attacked, all will help" is (or is going to be) included into the EU constitution or something.

And there would surely be a military "intervention" of some sort from the EU nations if Russia would attack Finland or any other of it's neighbouring EU countries.

Now what comes to us being in NATO or not, there's more than one side to it. There's a huge debate going on about should we, or should we not join NATO at all. The people voting against it are surely winning at the moment, and I am also a supporter of this cause despite the fact that the "mutual defence alliance" that we'll be joining sooner or later might not be called NATO but rather something else.

Even us Finns have to face the fact that when you are a member in the EU the defence is going to be something that all of us are going to handle, more or less.

I wish we'd be like Switzerland, but unfortunately dreaming is not a reality in our world so Finland is going to have to take part in an "alliance" of some sort.

[Marmot1]

Well you know there is joke in poland:

GOD is creating a world he placed all the nations on earth and then he talks to the angells:
-And we will make a joke to Poles and we will put them betwen Russia and Germany...

I think that preety much the same joke was with you Finns but you were lucky (or not) to get only Russians while we were also awarded with bonus pack (Germans) ;)

[GazB]

Where are the B2's
the F22's ?

The Sukhoi S-60 and PAK-FA are not ready yet and the former is is more tactical than strategic, but then the air defence networks of the west are based on fighters not SAMS so stealth bombers are a contradition in terms... why spend billions to use a B-2 when you could and do do the same job with B-52s?

How many F-22s are in front line service ready to go to war? Most reports I have read the US AF is not happy with them.


The only planes used for bombing missions are Tornados.

So what is a Vulcan? What is a Buccaneer? What is a Jaguar? What is a land based Harrier?

Some people here suggest the Russian stuff is crap by comparing it with the latest most expensive American or western stuff... a lot of which isn't even in service. Which other armed force could even be compared to the US? The fact that it is possible even on on paper and that on paper in some areas they come up better does not make them crap.


German Army tested them for more than ten years, on very short ranges it is superior to the F-4 Phantom because AA-11 system is better than Sidewinder.
But on normal combat ranges the MIG looses because of its really crappy Radar and Radar guided Missiles. Because of that they decided to replace MIG-29 first and than F-4 with the Eurofighter. Range of MIG-29 is much to short too.

Actually during BVR tests it was found to be about as capable as an F-15 armed with Sparrows. So if it was armed with the Soviet equivelent of the AMRAAM there is no reason to believe it would not perform as well as an F-15 in BVR combat. The lack of range was mainly because it was the low part of a high low mix with it as the short range defence fighter while the Su-27 was the long range fighter type.

The German Mig-29s were Mig-29As downgraded for export. No Soviet Mig-29 was that basic. They could have fully upgraded to a level where it was better than many western fighters but as they are partners in building Typhoon there wasn't much point in spending the money to do it. They even derated the engines to extend their lifespan which also reduced fuel efficiency further. The Mig-29A downgraded export version can only carry the ancient R-27Rs. It can't even carry the BVR IR guided weapons nor the Extended range R-27ER or R-27ETs. A bit like describing the performance in terms of the original F-16A with only sidewinder missiles. Of course with the R-73 and helmet mounted sight it was unbeatable in WVR fights and the kill probability of Sparrow like missiles was so poor that WVR are likely the main sort of combat even in Europe.


BTW you mentioned 2 Aicraft Cariers at the begining as operational

AFAIK none of your caries is operational (BTW one is sold to India AFAIK)


Which just means you know wrong.

The Kuznestov has just completed a refit and is fully operational. The Admiral Gorshkov is to be altered and overhauled and is to be sold to the Indian navy with a compliment of Mig-29Ks.


Kyznezov have anti-sub missels, and some other stuff with which he can defend him-self.

Not anti sub missiles... they are antiship missiles... very large and very fast and very long range.


And chechens are still fighting after 5 years since last invasion...

So I preseume to conquer finlad in conventional war would take you like 50 years...

They actually want the land in Chechnia... they could care less about the land in Finland... the difference between using nukes and not using nukes.


It is easy to do so on open desert but sorry, in forest probably 5 out of 6 rockets would hit trees before tank)


And if you don't need to take the land you just burn the forests...


If Russia attack one of the EU countries, Russia is dead.

And vice versa... being rich and civilised doesn't seem to get you much these days does it?


No they are not in NATO... but still their tactic is to use guerilla not to fight in convetional war and as it was proven in Vietnam,CHechenya,Afghanistan,Iraq and other places unconventional warfare is best way to deal with stronger enemy...

Guerilla warfare only works if there is an occupier to rebel against. If your enemy doesn't want your land and doesn't want to occupy you then guerilla warfare doesn't work. ie If the Russians really did want to exterminate all chechens all they would have to do is secure its borders and bomb it relentlessly. Anyone trying to leave would be killed. Any guerilla forces trying to leave the area could be bombed too.
Finland is not part of Russia and the prevailing wind blows away from Russia. A few dozen nukes would suffice... nice low yield dirty ones with ground contact to really make life there tough.

[Marmot1]

Do you know that probably use of nukes against any western country would lead to a total war... Ant this is war where everyone loose

[RomanS]

Brothers,

why explain this to Europeans. They will never get it. The point is Europeans are not muslims. They are not hardcore, and won't die for their religion or god.

You're right Gaz. Russia wouldn't send the regular infantry. Couple of nukes, bye bye.

Most of the Europe is nothing but talk talk talk talk
look at them today. Spain is a good example

The Europe doesnt have much experience in surviving the bad times pass WW2. The new generation ain't **** compared to decades ago.

Even back than, who did all the fighting? Russia, USA and Germany.

As we know USA is not a country to **** with

Russia is not a country to **** with. We survived through some serious ****, and some little chuhuahua barking (squicking) at us just makes me laugh.

They tell us Chechens are giving us hard time, but their thick dumb sculls don't understand that Chechnya is internal problem. A bunch of thugs already lost the war against Russia. They couldn't govern themselves after we let them live and gave them their independance.

Chechens after loosing major fights in 1999 in Dagestan turned into terrorism. Just like the other scum muslim bitches that can't stand against American Democracy face to face. They hijack planes, and crash them into WORLD TRADE CENTER (key word WORLD) not AMerican Trade Center.

WORLD TRADE CENTER
not enough balls to face US in a man to man fight.

Same with Chechens. Look at them now, crying for help from alqueda, and being shot in Pakistan. buahahahahaha. Their days are over now.

I don't even know why we have this argument. Russia doesn't give a **** about Europe anymore. What is there in Europe?

Russia and Americans have the best natural resources in on the planet. Europe depends on us.

We don't even have to nuke the poor bastards. Just caught their life support, and watch them cry.

I'm out of this conversation.

[Marmot1]

R.I.P. Permski

[Kingpin]

I think we should test current state of our armed forces on field. And I think Kosovo is good place for it.

It's time to drive those ****ing Albanians back to Albania. Kosovo and Metokhia is native Serbian territory.

[wholagun]

I don't even know why we have this argument. Russia doesn't give a **** about Europe anymore. What is there in Europe?

Russia and Americans have the best natural resources in on the planet. Europe depends on us.

We don't even have to nuke the poor bastards. Just caught their life support, and watch them cry.

I'm out of this conversation.

oh no no no this is not done yet..

Im am assuming that you are talking about EU when you say Europe. Correct me if im wrong, but pan Europa is made up of 25 EU states Balkan states and then Russia.

you say that Russia does not need Europe? Nothing could be further from the truth.. You sound really pround and nationalistic when you talk on this fourm and its really sick and its quite sad, but entertaining.

EU is Russia number 1 trading partner, EU accounts for 25% of Russian trade while Russia accounts for just 4% is year 2000. If you look at the investmnet in Russia I'd say you need EU more then EU needs Russia for capital. The only one important thing that Russia has is oil and natural gas.

Oh I almost forot with the 10 new members joinging this May not a month and half from today the statistics are going to go up for both so keep that in mind. These stats are 2002.

Have a look below:


EU-Russia Trade

1. The EU is Russia's largest trade partner, accounting for nearly 25% (close to € 20 billion) of Russia's imports and some 35% (€ 45 billion) of her export trade. Russia's share in EU external trade in 2000 was 4.4% of imports and 2.1% of exports. Thereby, Russia was the EU's sixth largest trading partner after the USA, Switzerland, Japan, Norway and China. She is likely to rank higher in 2001 as a result of considerable growth in bilateral trade. The structure of bilateral trade continues to display a marked imbalance, with fuel and primary products representing the bulk of Russian exports (Russia provides over 15% of the EU's needs in imported fuel. Oil and gas enter the EU at zero tariffs.) - as opposed to the predominance of finished industrial goods in imports from the EU.

Bilateral trade showed a dramatic downward trend in the wake of the 1998 financial crisis, which had a particularly strong impact on EU exports. The devaluation of the rouble assisted Russian exports to the EU, which increased spectacularly (60% year-on-year growth over 1999). The subsequent modest recovery of the Russian economy has enabled a small increase in imports from the EU, which have, nevertheless, not returned to pre-crisis levels - not least due to the persistence of certain protectionist measures, e.g. regarding the import of alcoholic beverages and automobiles.

2. A significant proportion of Russian goods entering the Community market benefit from the EU’s General System of Preferences (GSP). Furthermore, Russia has applied to benefit from the GSP social preference clause. This application is still being examined.

EU imports from Russia are to a very large extent liberalised.. Remaining EU restrictions in the steel and textiles sectors are being removed progressively under bilateral agreements. The possibility of an agreement in nuclear materials is foreseen in the PCA.

In 1998, the EU antidumping rules were modified to allow the treatment of Russian enterprises as operating in a market economy environment on a case-by-case basis, thus reflecting the extent of economic reform in Russia. Less than 1% of Russia’s exports to the EU are currently affected by anti-dumping measures.

Industry leaders from both sides meet in the EU-Russia Industrialists’ Round Table (IRT) that has been founded in 1997 as an advisory body to both governments. The IRT is a business-driven process, whose objective is to present joint business recommendations to the European Commission and the Russian government with regard to improving the investment climate, promoting market economy principles, removing obstacles to free trade and contributing to scientific and industrial co-operation.

For more information on the Industrialists’ Round Table : www.eu-russia.org

EU-Russia trade, 1997-2002 (€ thousand)
Year
EU Exports
Δ %
EU Imports
Δ %
Trade balance

1997
25.539.262,2
27.037.650,2
-1.498.388,0

1998
21.170.478,5
-17,11
23.172.575,1
-14,30
-2.002.096,6

1999
14.726.941,9
-30,44
25.976.756,1
12,10
-11.249.814,2

2000
19.916.559,9
35,24
45.723.581,5
76,02
-25.807.021,7

2001
27.961.087,3
40,39
47.685.918,6
4,29
-19.724.831,3

2002
30.407.134,4
8,75
47.560.364,2
-0,26
-17.153.229,8


(source: Eurostat, Comext)

For information about Trade relations

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

The Europe doesnt have much experience in surviving the bad times pass WW2. The new generation ain't **** compared to decades ago.

Even back than, who did all the fighting? Russia, USA and Germany.

As we know USA is not a country to f*** with

Russia is not a country to f*** with. We survived through some serious ****, and some little chuhuahua barking (squicking) at us just makes me laugh.

I have to disagree with you there buddy, theres alot of nations you missed that fought in both world wars. It wasnt just USA, Russia and Germany.

This thread should be locked, this constant country bashing is bull****. You guys really must find something better to do, because sitting here and going over numbers of "who's country has what" and getting into huge "what if" statements makes this seem childish.

Its not what you have, its what you can do with it.

[wholagun]

EU dumps billions in aid to Russia.


EU Assistance to Russia

1. The EU is the largest provider of economic and technical assistance to Russia. She received € 2.281 billion in EU assistance between 1991 and 2000.

2. The bulk comes from the Tacis programme in support of the economic and democratic reform process in Russia1. The focus is on institutional, legal and administrative reform, including the development of independent media and civil society; fiscal and banking sector reform and social reform. Assistance is aimed at facilitating the implementation of the EU-Russia Partnership and Co-operation Agreement as well as Russia’s eventual accession to the WTO.

In January 2000 the Council adopted a new Tacis Regulation, covering the period 2000-2006. During this period, Tacis should be used increasingly in support of PCA implementation. The programming cycle for TACIS implementation covers three levels: Country Strategy Papers (CSPs) – adopted for the period of 2002/2006 in December 2001; National Indicative Programmes – adopted for 2002/2003 at the same time; Annual Programmes – to be developed for each budget year.

Between 1991 and 2001, € 1.489 billion have been allocated within the framework of the Tacis National Action Programmes. In 2001, Russia received € 96 million within the framework of Tacis. For 2002 and 2003, Russia is expected to be allocated € 90 million.

The stock of programmes in implementation or at the planning stage covers a total number of 87 projects including 48 which are to be contracted.

In 1991-2001, approximately € 890 million for Russia have come from Tacis regional programmes (including, as from 1996, Cross-Border Cooperation and nuclear safety programmes). The EU also contributed to coordinated measures supported by other donors as well (such as the International Science and Technology Centre in Moscow) and provided support for preparation of EBRD loans and other programmes.

2. Other Main Assistance Instruments

The European Commission Humanitarian Office (ECHO) provided € 60 million between 1993 and 1998 (including 30 million for the Northern Caucasus), in targeted humanitarian aid for groups in need. In addition to this, since 1999 € 50 million has been supplied to the victims of the second Chechnya conflict.

A major EU Food Delivery programme (€ 415 million) for Russia was launched during the global financial crisis of 1998. Delivery of food began in 1999 and was completed in 2000, except for special food distribution in Chechnya which continued last year.

The European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) has assisted Russia with approximately € 8 million between 1997 and 2000, for projects covering a wide range of the policy objectives of the EU aiming at fostering a civil society and democratisation including raising human rights awareness. For years 2002-2004 focus will be on democratisation, good governance and the rule of law. Some of the key areas for support will be projects to strengthen the capacity of civil society, human rights education and training, freedom of expression and independent media. The main implementing partners for these projects are national and international NGOs as well as international organisations such as the Council of Europe and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Links to EIDHR

The Europa site: Human Rights & Democratisation
For more information on the EIDHR Compendium 2000 which outlines the Russian initiatives (http://www.ehrfoundation.org/compendiu.pdf)
Evaluation of the Joint Programmes between the European Commission and the Council of Europe
Details on joint programmes of the Council of Europe: http://jp.coe.int/
4. Over the period 1996-1999, Russia has also benefited from € 520.88 million of financial assistance from member-states (credits actually disbursed - including € 13.58 million in debt cancellation) and from € 1.577.50 billion in EBRD credits.

TACIS funds allocations to Russia in million €

Russian Federation Action Programmes



if Russia is all that powerful why is EU giving you aid, and is the biggest provider of aid to Russia. Come on Permiski you surely must admit that Europe is not all you said it was.

[wholagun]

This thread should be locked, this constant country bashing is bull****. You guys really must find something better to do, because sitting here and going over numbers of "who's country has what" and getting into huge "what if" statements makes this seem childish.

locked ? why. no
don't lock this one, its just getting good, what we have here actual number and figures and we are debating. Sure the beggining was rough but now its all good.

[execrable]

Russia - The Army (Russia)


The army is slowly building back its power base in Russia and the CIS but is still as disheveled and unruly as a Moscow drunk. When Russian troops stormed Pristina airport in the Balkans, the politicians were red faced. Seems like the generals were doing a little internal foreign policy planning. When the Kremlin made some mumbles about easing off in Chechnya in the fall of 1999, the military made it clear that they could run the country just fine without the benefit of spineless politicians. That doesn't mean the Russian army will be all it can be. It's still made up of drunken lifers brutalizing ill-trained farmboys and working for corrupt mafyia-controlled generals. The only difference is they are drunk officers and scared, pink-cheeked boys with guns, and in Russia that guarantees a decent living. And the mafyia is a more regular employer than the government.

In some areas, army commanders rent out weapons and men are hired out as mercenaries to the highest bidder. It's not a very tight ship. More than 6,000 crimes involving corruption and embezzlement were committed in the Russian armed forces in 1996, double the figure of three years ago. More than 20 generals were being investigated as of mid-1997, many in housing schemes. An estimated 110,000 troops lack proper housing, and 428 soldiers committed suicide in 1996. In the spring of that year, Yeltsin announced that conscription would end in Russia by 2000, causing Moscow's Generation Xers to party in the streets. It was an empty campaign pledge. Russia cannot afford an all-volunteer army until 2005 at the earliest, Boris' defense minister has said. Bummer. Induced by a chronic food shortage, many soldiers have resorted to begging. And thousands of soldiers died in 1996 from acts of torture and ill treatment by other soldiers. The Kremlin's army has shrunk to a measly 1.7 million soldiers. Russia's version of web-surfing is draft-dodging. A reason for the army's decline is quite simple, really: Russia took over 85 percent of the Soviet Union's armed forces and only 65 percent of its economic potential.

[tooms]

The data on US expenditures are old; the last US defence dudget was 404 billions USD.

France was 32 billions Euros.

You are right for the US budget but french military budget is 41 Billion USD in 2004

Can you provide a source for this?





http://www.senat.fr/rap/l03-073-1/l03-073-124.html

i read here 41 000 millions €

[tooms]

Brothers,

why explain this to Europeans. They will never get it. The point is Europeans are not muslims. They are not hardcore, and won't die for their religion or god.
You're right Gaz. Russia wouldn't send the regular infantry. Couple of nukes, bye bye.
Most of the Europe is nothing but talk talk talk talk
look at them today. Spain is a good example
The Europe doesnt have much experience in surviving the bad times pass WW2. The new generation ain't **** compared to decades ago.
Even back than, who did all the fighting? Russia, USA and Germany.
As we know USA is not a country to f*** with
Russia is not a country to f*** with. We survived through some serious ****, and some little chuhuahua barking (squicking) at us just makes me laugh.




I don't even know why we have this argument. Russia doesn't give a **** about Europe anymore. What is there in Europe?

Russia and Americans have the best natural resources in on the planet. Europe depends on us.

We don't even have to nuke the poor bastards. Just caught their life support, and watch them cry.

[-Max2-]

Brothers,

why explain this to Europeans. They will never get it. The point is Europeans are not muslims. They are not hardcore, and won't die for their religion or god.

You're right Gaz. Russia wouldn't send the regular infantry. Couple of nukes, bye bye.

Most of the Europe is nothing but talk talk talk talk
look at them today. Spain is a good example

The Europe doesnt have much experience in surviving the bad times pass WW2. The new generation ain't **** compared to decades ago.

Even back than, who did all the fighting? Russia, USA and Germany.

As we know USA is not a country to f*** with

Russia is not a country to f*** with. We survived through some serious ****, and some little chuhuahua barking (squicking) at us just makes me laugh.

Stop with your ultra-nationalist ****. You are really ridiculous you know.

You give a very bad image of your country...


I don't even know why we have this argument. Russia doesn't give a **** about Europe anymore. What is there in Europe?

Russia and Americans have the best natural resources in on the planet. Europe depends on us.



Are you serious ? Russia need more Europe than Europe need Russia...

Russia doesn't give a **** about Europe ? I doubt. Its rather the opposite. For many Europeans, Russia is just another Third World country and they are tired to give money to keep your head above the water...

[wholagun]

Stop with your ultra-nationalist ****. You are really ridiculous you know.

You give a very bad image of your country...

you noticed that too ehh... p-)

[Marmot1]

Only reason why Europe care about russia is WMD and control over them since EU and probably rest of the europe is afraid that russian nukes may fall in bad hands (If they didn't so far, AFAIK you have some problems to count your nukes since there is less than it should be especialy smaller - tactical ones, since strategical ones are are counted quite well)

[tony6]

Russia* 65.0

Sweden 4.5
Norway 3.8
Poland 3.5 (by the way-it's 4.9)
It's funny that you compare yourself with those countries.
Try someone with your league-for example USA: 400 billion. Looks pretty ****ty, huh? But You always keep talking about big bear ("tha playa") and some small chuichauas (like Scandinavian countries) so why don't you try someone Your size? The answer is simply-you cannot compare with USA (good oll times, huh?) so you compare Russia with for example Finland so it look like you're something. It's pathetic.
We all now how ****ty your military budget is and so on.
By the way-you keep bashing Finnish guys here. Some complex?
We all now how they kick your arses during Winter War and that's a reason you don't like them. We also know that today situation would be pretty similar. For God sake-you cannot even handle a couple of thousands Kaukaz highlanders with kalashnikovs!
And finally-some numbers (also march issue of "Raport" magazine):
in 2004 Russian army will buy:
1 (one!) Tu-160 bomber
1 (one!!) Mi-28N chopper
6 (six) RS-12M2 Topol-M ballistic missiles
6 army satellites (+4 rockets to launch them)
also 5 Su-27 planes will be upgraded.
That's how it looks like-our "superpower" buys 1 airplane and 1 combat helo per year. Bravo! I'm impressed.
Even poor Poland buys 48 F-16 fighters (deliver date: 2006)
Sorry-I don't like to kick laying person but that's hoe it looks like and I wasn't the one who started this ****.

[Kingpin]

Russia* 65.0

Sweden 4.5
Norway 3.8
Poland 3.5 (by the way-it's 4.9)
It's funny that you compare yourself with those countries.
Try someone with your league-for example USA: 400 billion. Looks pretty ****ty, huh? But You always keep talking about big bear ("tha playa") and some small chuichauas (like Scandinavian countries) so why don't you try someone Your size? The answer is simply-you cannot compare with USA (good oll times, huh?) so you compare Russia with for example Finland so it look like you're something. It's pathetic.
We all now how ****ty your military budget is and so on.
By the way-you keep bashing Finnish guys here. Some complex?
We all now how they kick your arses during Winter War and that's a reason you don't like them. We also know that today situation would be pretty similar. For God sake-you cannot even handle a couple of thousands Kaukaz highlanders with kalashnikovs!
And finally-some numbers (also march issue of "Raport" magazine):
in 2004 Russian army will buy:
1 (one!) Tu-160 bomber
1 (one!!) Mi-28N chopper
6 (six) RS-12M2 Topol-M ballistic missiles
6 army satellites (+4 rockets to launch them)
also 5 Su-27 planes will be upgraded.
That's how it looks like-our "superpower" buys 1 airplane and 1 combat helo per year. Bravo! I'm impressed.
Even poor Poland buys 48 F-16 fighters (deliver date: 2006)
Sorry-I don't like to kick laying person but that's hoe it looks like and I wasn't the one who started this ****.

Are you sure that Poland will <buy> <new> 48 F-16? It will cost you almost all your military budget (spares, training accessories and so on). Even

[Adri]

to compair russia to Norway is very smart ! (ironi)

Russia: 144,526,278 (July 2003 est.)

Norway: 4,546,123 (July 2003 est.)

EDIT: ops, forgot to write: above is the population

if you want to compair any thing, you will have to compair it in %



in 2004 Russian army will buy:
1 (one!) Tu-160 bomber
1 (one!!) Mi-28N chopper
6 (six) RS-12M2 Topol-M ballistic missiles
6 army satellites (+4 rockets to launch them)
also 5 Su-27 planes will be upgraded.


Norway will buy new figther planes, it looks like it will be the F-35.
at this time it is planed too buy 48 F-35A figthers

[Kingpin]

Actually it is very wrong number - 65 bns.

Real Russian military budget for 2004 is about 411 billions roubles what is approx. 12 billions dollars.

[HELEX]

Just to say it, Russia is a PART of Europe and will join it on the long term!
As a JUNIOR Partner...... ;)


http://www.globaldefence.net/deutsch/europa/europa.png


Russia (Defence Budget): ca. 11,5 Mrd. Dollar (2003)

[tony6]

Are you sure that Poland will <buy> <new> 48 F-16? It will cost you almost all your military budget (spares, training accessories and so on).
Yes-I'm sure of that. Contract was signed last year. Money for those planes will be divided on to 10 (or 12-I don't remeber) years to come.
There are also some extra money for that purpose.

[tony6]

Real Russian military budget for 2004 is about 411 billions roubles what is approx. 12 billions dollars.
No comment :D

[Dalleer]

It would surely cause alot of trouble to Russia as well if they would nuke a nearby country, since the fact that alot of the Russians and their beloved supporters have seemed to forget is that the winds would indeed hit Russia as well, especially if Finland would be targeted.

Nukes have a pretty flash and a nice explosion, but at the end of it everyone looses if one get's used.

[tony6]

Not to mention that it would destroy their gas/oil pipelines-the basements of their economy :D

[volfram]

Only reason why Europe care about russia is WMD and control over them since EU and probably rest of the europe is afraid that russian nukes may fall in bad hands (If they didn't so far, AFAIK you have some problems to count your nukes since there is less than it should be especialy smaller - tactical ones, since strategical ones are are counted quite well)
Only reason why europe care about russia is tradition.Russia can be ignored in every field without consequences.The reason world dont do it is a rememberance of russian past glory.

[tony6]

Only reason why europe care about russia is tradition.Russia can be ignored in every field without consequences.The reason world dont do it is a rememberance of russian past glory.Sorry to tell You so but I don't agree with that.

[16 OBr SpN]

WTF has this thread come down to?!!
My God... :(

[Backis]

WTF has this thread come down to?!!
My God... :(

Gee, whiz, I wonder what wen't wrong...

Oh, yeah, I forgot, this is what Pokey intended all along! :roll:



Poland, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, Germany, Italy
added together EQUALS 1/3rd of the Russian Arsenal



we rule



Finland - 160 T-72s

Russia - 9000 T-72s

L O L



Looking at the lists I must say the only country that can give Russia a huge fight, and hurt us is USA. China comes close as well. The rest of the world must remember. Nobody can take Russia militarily.

With the list above, I think it should be enough for Europe to relax, and stop the flames.

Your evidence is above.

Thank you

Pokey=Troll

[HELEX]

WTF has this thread come down to?

Maybe to the sad truth? :roll:

[tony6]

This thread was a disaster from the very beggining (the subject).

[sierraone]

I can't believe there is 235 replies to this topic...236 now..

by the way, why are signatures disabled?

[ShadowNeo]

So what is a Vulcan? What is a Buccaneer? What is a Jaguar? What is a land based Harrier?

Some people here suggest the Russian stuff is crap by comparing it with the latest most expensive American or western stuff... a lot of which isn't even in service. Which other armed force could even be compared to the US? The fact that it is possible even on on paper and that on paper in some areas they come up better does not make them crap.

Vulcan Ended Service in around 1984
Buccaneer Ended Service in 1994

Jaguar The whole fleet recently underwent a major upgrade program to GR3 standard (http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/jaguar.html) granted, the Jaguar is also capable of bombing missions but not to the same extent as the Tornado GR4.

Harrier Current RAF fleet is GR7 standard, being upgraded to GR9. Also used for bombing missions, but not to the same extent as the Tornado GR4.

[intelligenzija]

nationalistic poverty certifications only


short form:
russias tanks ar rusty
-russia will fart one time and there will be no langer any europe
hahaha you aircrafts can't even start, because you can't buy fuel, you're so poor lol past glory a country that is 20 times smaller has a greater GDP than russia lol..
-you turned this thread into a trashcan - good bye
good bye...asshole

[Russian Texan]

Oh My God, reading this thread in the morning works for me better than drinking coffee.

My dear European Union friends lets look at real life facts and not some hypothetical numbers compiledby some foreigner who has no clue about the way russian society and economy works.

#1 I do not recall people starving in USSR despite having virtually no trade with the west.

#2 Russia sits on top of 41% of this planet's natural resources.

#3 Russia can build a wall around itself because it is absolutely self-sufficient (raw materials, industries, services, etc), can EU?

#4 I understand that y'all are very proud of how much money EU has but why does it matter? I mean what if tommorrow Russia cut off its gas and oil pipes to you and Saudies will refuse to sell you theirs, what is EU going to do - fuel cars and heat houses with paper bills?

#5 Money are good during peaceful times but ones "push comes to shove" - natural resources and manpower are the only things that matter... Did Hitler pay a single penny for all his tanks and airplanes - no, did Stalin - no. In the times of an all out conflict, economy laws becomes irrelevant.
Btw, computers and other electronic equipment use gold and platinum, how many gold and platinum mines are in EU? What about armor for tanks, aluminum for airplanes, steel, rubber, etc.?

#6 Someone mentioned EU giving money to Russia - pure BS, prove me wrong... Russia hasn't gotten a loan from IMF for years and even back in the '90s it didn't need any, certain people in the government needed them. Not to mention that Russia is paying off entire USSR's debts(I personally think it should have said "screw everyone", but hey - we are generous people), as well as paying off IMF loans way ahead of the schedule, so please stop the BS....

#7 "Foreing investments in Russia" I am not going to make any comments about it because the amount of those is not even funny, I'll just let you indulge yourself with the thought that Russia is kept afloat by the "foreign investments"...HAHAHAHAHA NAIVETY IS A BLISS....

#8 Military aspect. I do not see EU as a military power because:
- to many countries speaking different languages - a recipe for a dissaster on a bettlefield
- equipment compatibility issues
- different training standards
- different mentalities!!!! (that one is huge) for example: what do turks have in common with germans?
- western europeans are way too soft and lack resilience, toughness and will to die for the cause/their country. For God's sake - Sweden has housekeeping services in its army/civil defence force, how can anyone take them seriously after that....?

In the end: Chinese are willing/able to die and absorb those losses in large numbers, Russians are as tough as it gets, Americans just love to fight and Europeans, well, Europeans are very civilized.....


P.S. To our very proud and almost europenized polish members, not to everyone, just for those with an attitude and lack of the ability to think clearly:
Dear guys, I am sorry to rain on your parade, but when most people think EU, they think Germany, France and UK. They are the "playas", Poland and other members to be - are just sidekicks with no say on real issues...
It is kinda like when a wealthy family invites their poor friends/neighboors to come to their country club....
Sorry, but thats the way it is.

[Elmo]

Brothers,

The Europe doesnt have much experience in surviving the bad times pass WW2. The new generation ain't **** compared to decades ago.

Even back than, who did all the fighting? Russia, USA and Germany.

Russia is not a country to f*** with. We survived through some serious ****, and some little chuhuahua barking (squicking) at us just makes me laugh.

I'm out of this conversation.


Russians are tough. Especially those who are basking in the sun in the USA. Nothing compared to soft europeans.

I bet you got irritated when Ikurinturbiini made you look stupid in "why is Grozhny not glowing" -thread. That's why you bash Finns now, right?

Nice exit, BTW.

[Backis]

Oh My God, reading this thread in the morning works for me better than drinking coffee.

Good, since mommy probably don't let you have any... :roll:



My dear European Union friends lets look at real life facts and not some hypothetical numbers compiledby some foreigner who has no clue about the way russian society and economy works.

We will all bow down to your wisdom... err... no.



I do not recall people starving in USSR despite having virtually no trade with the west.

No starvation in the USSR, eh? No imports of grain either. Nope?

Thank you for showing just how bad your historical education is.



Russia sits on top of 41% of this planet's natural resources.

LOL, ok, sure.



Russia can build a wall around itself because it is absolutely self-sufficient (raw materials, industries, services, etc), can EU?

Yes, you try that and lets see if it works better this time... remeber that you can't use your old "friends" this time, they've moved West.



I understand that y'all are very proud of how much money EU has but why does it matter? I mean what if tommorrow Russia cut off its gas and oil pipes to you and Saudies will refuse to sell you theirs, what is EU going to do - fuel cars and heat houses with paper bills?

Remember that all that cash comes from somewhere, we didn't "inherit" it from rich old grandpa. We have apparently been a HELL of a lot better at amassing wealth than you have...

How come us weakling Euros have so much more money than you, because we sure are nowhere near competent in anything, according to you...



Someone mentioned EU giving money to Russia - pure BS, prove me wrong... Russia hasn't gotten a loan from IMF for years and even back in the '90s it didn't need any, certain people in the government needed them. Not to mention that Russia is paying off entire USSR's debts(I personally think it should have said "screw everyone", but hey - we are generous people), as well as paying off IMF loans way ahead of the schedule, so please stop the BS....

Yes... Russian for "generous" is paying what you owe folks...

Good lession, I'll remember that. Great business practice btw. :roll:

There are probably a lot of Russians that would be insulted by the implications of your statement.



"Foreing investments in Russia" I am not going to make any comments about it because the amount of those is not even funny, I'll just let you indulge yourself with the thought that Russia is kept afloat by the "foreign investments"...HAHAHAHAHA NAIVETY IS A BLISS....

And you are living proof of that.



Military aspect. I do not see EU as a military power because:

- to many countries speaking different languages - a recipe for a dissaster on a bettlefield

Yes, no problems with that at your place at all...

NATO, remeber that organisation... but I guess they never thought about such things...

- equipment compatibility issues

Again, nothing NATO thought about either... STANAG is a myth for instance, so is JTIDS/MIDS and Link16...

- different training standards

Every Russian a Spetznaz, eh? Didn't know that. NATO never exercises together either? Got it. Sort of your guys getting to train exactly how much? Better to have poor or no training than differing ones? Remember, you don't have enough kontraktniki to man all those rusted T-72/62/55's...

- different mentalities!!!! (that one is huge) for example: what do turks have in common with germans?

YES, Russians and Udmurtians united! No difference in f e the mindset of Russians and Chechen's either...

Oh wait, I forgot all that NATO cotraining didn't happen... I'm sorry...

- western europeans are way too soft and lack resilience, toughness and will to die for the cause/their country. For God's sake - Sweden has housekeeping services in its army/civil defence force, how can anyone take them seriously after that....?

Yes, the Germans were way to civilized with you last time... we Euros just don't have it in us.

In the end: Chinese are willing/able to die and absorb those losses in large numbers, Russians are as tough as it gets, Americans just love to fight and Europeans, well, Europeans are very civilized.....

Yes, way to civilized over here, yessir!

Swedish saying; The biggest fish lures in the calmest waters

P.S. To our very proud and almost europenized polish members, not to everyone, just for those with an attitude and lack of the ability to think clearly:
Dear guys, I am sorry to rain on your parade, but when most people think EU, they think Germany, France and UK. They are the "playas", Poland and other members to be - are just sidekicks with no say on real issues...
It is kinda like when a wealthy family invites their poor friends/neighboors to come to their country club....
Sorry, but thats the way it is.

Yes, sure... they really don't wan't to join the EU, if they know whats best for them, now what I mean, wink, wink, nudge, nudge. :roll:

Russia would most likely join in a flash if we'd let them. :P

[Kingpin]

Brothers,

The Europe doesnt have much experience in surviving the bad times pass WW2. The new generation ain't **** compared to decades ago.

Even back than, who did all the fighting? Russia, USA and Germany.

Russia is not a country to f*** with. We survived through some serious ****, and some little chuhuahua barking (squicking) at us just makes me laugh.

I'm out of this conversation.


Russians are tough. Especially those who are basking in the sun in the USA. Nothing compared to soft europeans.

I bet you got irritated when Ikurinturbiini made you look stupid in "why is Grozhny not glowing" -thread. That's why you bash Finns now, right?

Nice exit, BTW.

Yes, he have nice discussion skills. Especially in digging in words and posting times of others. And also in citating different anti-Russian sources. But he didn't contribute anything valuable into discussion. He just repeat widely known opinions and showed good English knowledge in defending them. Yawn! Western politicians do this all time. If something sounds good it doesn't means that it is really good.

[Kingpin]

Russia would most likely join in a flash if we'd let them.

For what purpose?

[tony6]

Oh My God, reading this thread in the morning works for me better than drinking coffee.
So good that You've just decided to take part in this pissing-contest?
:D

[Backis]

Russia would most likely join in a flash if we'd let them.

For what purpose?

Access to markets. It would greatly benefit the Russian economy.

You would also become a, if not the, major player in the EU politically.

Mainly the comment was in jest though.


Note that I am mainly taking opposition against Rus-Tex, and not Russia. I think you have lots of promise to rise, but are not there yet. Give it a couple of decades.

[Kingpin]

Backis,

About EU army i say you one good argument why it is anyway impossible - every EU country have its own governement and its own politicians. One this fact makes whole idea almost impossible no matter of real fighting skills of european nations :)

[Backis]

So good that You've just decided to take part in this pissing-contest?
:D

Isn't that why he visits this forum to begin with? :lol:

[Kingpin]

Russia would most likely join in a flash if we'd let them.

For what purpose?

Access to markets. It would greatly benefit the Russian economy.

You would also become a, if not the, major player in the EU politically.

Mainly the comment was in jest though.


Note that I am mainly taking opposition against Rus-Tex, and not Russia. I think you have lots of promise to rise, but are not there yet. Give it a couple of decades.

European politicians never do this. This is almost the same like allow China to join EU and give them full access to markets. The rest of Europe will become jobless within decade :)

[Backis]

Backis,

About EU army i say you one good argument why it is anyway impossible - every EU country have its own governement and its own politicians. One this fact makes whole idea almost impossible no matter of real fighting skills of european nations :)

If NATO accords are activated by a physical attack on the EU...

NATO trained to hold of the Russian steamroller during the whole cold war, that means something. The reason we squabble is because we see no clear and substantial enemy. Terrorism has always been an intelligence and police matter, not something for the army to deal with (exception; Ireland).

You have to admit the figures Permski posted are a bit "funny", most of those tanks are stored because they are too expensive to scrap. Even if they were mint, they are hardly something you wan't to sit in in a modern world war.

But the days of landwar between Europe and Russia are gone, both sides have much more to gain by trade than invading each other.