Is NATO a Viable Military Organization?

[Silver Cat]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

We don’t even have to do that. A cyber attack will have the same result. Bring down the power grid, the internet, water systems.....
Then deny you know anything about it.

A cyber attack can make life uncomfortable, but nukes can actually kill people and destroy military and civilian targets.

Then there are biological attacks. We saw what can happen there

What can happen there if we are not ready to face it because we did cancel its study, you mean?

Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research - Nature

Lab-made coronavirus related to SARS can infect human cells.

www.nature.com

 

[Decus]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it. Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Moscow on crash course with Europe. Beijing lays claim to Siberia

The new

www.asianews.it

In addition to massive Siberian land lease, Beijing wants Moscow to agree to massive Chinese settlement

Transbaikal officials are working on a deal with China that would allow Chinese firms to lease more than 300,000 hectares (1.2 thousand sq mi) of land in that Russian region, but a Beijing official says that the deal won’t go through unless Moscow agrees to a massive influx of Chinese workers...

euromaidanpress.com

Power of Siberia or power of China?

How will the new gas pipeline between Russia and China affect the dynamics of their economic relations?

www.aljazeera.com

As the Chinese Cut Down Siberia’s Forests, Tensions With Russians Rise (Published 2019)

Moscow welcomes the investment from Beijing, but locals say it mostly benefits China, and they bemoan deforestation and the risk of accidents.

www.nytimes.com

Why Russia’s Vladivostok celebration prompted a backlash in China

The country’s Beijing embassy commemorated the city’s foundation with a video posted on social media, but the territory was once part of China.

www.scmp.com

 

[Silver Cat]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it.

The new postwar order will be created by the victorious powers, and based on the redistribution of wealth from losers. May be, there will be some sort of competition between Russia and China in the new world, may be even another Cold War with proxy conflicts, but more likely, process of the wealth redistribution will be rather peaceful (at least in the first post-war years).

Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Actually, there are less than 34 thousands of Chineses in Russia, and more than half of them live in Moscow. If you was a young China man, what kind of career would you prefer - a farmer in Siberia, or a shop-owner in California? Or, if you was a demobilized Chinese soldier, what job would you choose: a lumberjack in Siberia, or a clerk in the occupation administration in California?

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

The Age of Oil is going to end. The Gas Respite won't be effective in the war time. The post-war world will be a Nuclear world. And the best source of Uranium for China will be Australia.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Bla-bla-bla... First of all, Siberia never was Chinese. Actually, it was China occupied by different waves of Northern Barbarians, and the last wave were Russians. That's why Communistic part of China, Vietnam and Northern Korea is often named as "Yellow Russia" (next in the line of "Great Russia" (now - Russian Federation), "Small Russia" (now - Ukraine), White Russia (now - Belarus), Black Russia (Poland and Lithuania), etc...
And yes, even now Russian cultural and political influence (ideologies of Communism and Eurasism) in China is really significant.

 

[Decus]

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it.

The new postwar order will be created by the victorious powers, and based on the redistribution of wealth from losers. May be, there will be some sort of competition between Russia and China in the new world, may be even another Cold War with proxy conflicts, but more likely, process of the wealth redistribution will be rather peaceful (at least in the first post-war years).

Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Actually, there are less than 34 thousands of Chineses in Russia, and more than half of them live in Moscow. If you was a young China man, what kind of career would you prefer - a farmer in Siberia, or a shop-owner in California? Or, if you was a demobilized Chinese soldier, what job would you choose: a lumberjack in Siberia, or a clerk in the occupation administration in California?

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

The Age of Oil is going to end. The Gas Respite won't be effective in the war time. The post-war world will be a Nuclear world. And the best source of Uranium for China will be Australia.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Bla-bla-bla... First of all, Siberia never was Chinese. Actually, it was China occupied by different waves of Northern Barbarians, and the last wave were Russians. That's why Communistic part of China, Vietnam and Northern Korea is often named as "Yellow Russia" (next in the line of "Great Russia" (now - Russian Federation), "Small Russia" (now - Ukraine), White Russia (now - Belarus), Black Russia (Poland and Lithuania), etc...
And yes, even now Russian cultural and political influence (ideologies of Communism and Eurasism) in China is really significant.

You really do like to spin the truth. China has never shared with Russia.

• Russia had hoped to have China as an important client for it's military armaments - China bought a few copies, re-engineered them and produced their own knock-offs. Instead of being a client of Russia, China is now a competitor in the field of military arms sales.
• Russia thought that China would buy Russian produced goods but the opposite is true - China exports virtually everything to Russia
• Russia thought it would make energy sales an important facet of sales to China - China instead decided to build a pipeline to Kazakhstan and by-pass Moscow. The Siberian pipeline isn't projected to be profitable for Russia until 2030 or possibly never

"In a rare public display of frustration between Moscow and Beijing, Russian state defense conglomerate Rostec accused China of illegally copying a broad range of Russian weaponry and other military hardware."

""Unauthorized copying of our equipment abroad is a huge problem. There have been 500 such cases over the past 17 years," said Yevgeny Livadny, Rostec's chief of intellectual property projects on Dec. 14. "China alone has copied aircraft engines, Sukhoi planes, deck jets, air defense systems, portable air defense missiles, and analogs of the Pantsir medium-range surface-to-air systems.""

Russia up in arms over Chinese theft of military technology

Beijing's rise as a major armaments exporter is a double-edged sword for Moscow

asia.nikkei.com

"By becoming the first major Central Asia gas export route to completely bypass Russia, the new pipeline will play a key role in wresting the former Soviet republics in the region out of Moscow’s economic sphere of influence."

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

The Chinese influx into Asian Russia - Asia Times

On the global geopolitical stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping are best buddies, united by shared interests and

asiatimes.com

The Strategic Upside Behind Russiaâs $55 Billion âPower Of Siberiaâ Pipeline To China

December 2nd saw the first shipments of Russian natural gas to China via the much-awaited Power of Siberia pipeline.

www.forbes.com

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back? - Tsarizm

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back?

tsarizm.com

 

[Silver Cat]

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it.

The new postwar order will be created by the victorious powers, and based on the redistribution of wealth from losers. May be, there will be some sort of competition between Russia and China in the new world, may be even another Cold War with proxy conflicts, but more likely, process of the wealth redistribution will be rather peaceful (at least in the first post-war years).

Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Actually, there are less than 34 thousands of Chineses in Russia, and more than half of them live in Moscow. If you was a young China man, what kind of career would you prefer - a farmer in Siberia, or a shop-owner in California? Or, if you was a demobilized Chinese soldier, what job would you choose: a lumberjack in Siberia, or a clerk in the occupation administration in California?

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

The Age of Oil is going to end. The Gas Respite won't be effective in the war time. The post-war world will be a Nuclear world. And the best source of Uranium for China will be Australia.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Bla-bla-bla... First of all, Siberia never was Chinese. Actually, it was China occupied by different waves of Northern Barbarians, and the last wave were Russians. That's why Communistic part of China, Vietnam and Northern Korea is often named as "Yellow Russia" (next in the line of "Great Russia" (now - Russian Federation), "Small Russia" (now - Ukraine), White Russia (now - Belarus), Black Russia (Poland and Lithuania), etc...
And yes, even now Russian cultural and political influence (ideologies of Communism and Eurasism) in China is really significant.

You really do like to spin the truth. China has never shared with Russia.

• Russia had hoped to have China as an important client for it's military armaments - China bought a few copies, re-engineered them and produced their own knock-offs. Instead of being a client of Russia, China is now a competitor in the field of military arms sales.
• Russia thought that China would buy Russian produced goods but the opposite is true - China exports virtually everything to Russia
• Russia thought it would make energy sales an important facet of sales to China - China instead decided to build a pipeline to Kazakhstan and by-pass Moscow. The Siberian pipeline isn't projected to be profitable for Russia until 2030 or possibly never

"In a rare public display of frustration between Moscow and Beijing, Russian state defense conglomerate Rostec accused China of illegally copying a broad range of Russian weaponry and other military hardware."

""Unauthorized copying of our equipment abroad is a huge problem. There have been 500 such cases over the past 17 years," said Yevgeny Livadny, Rostec's chief of intellectual property projects on Dec. 14. "China alone has copied aircraft engines, Sukhoi planes, deck jets, air defense systems, portable air defense missiles, and analogs of the Pantsir medium-range surface-to-air systems.""

Russia up in arms over Chinese theft of military technology

Beijing's rise as a major armaments exporter is a double-edged sword for Moscow

asia.nikkei.com

"By becoming the first major Central Asia gas export route to completely bypass Russia, the new pipeline will play a key role in wresting the former Soviet republics in the region out of Moscow’s economic sphere of influence."

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

The Chinese influx into Asian Russia - Asia Times

On the global geopolitical stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping are best buddies, united by shared interests and

asiatimes.com

The Strategic Upside Behind Russiaâs $55 Billion âPower Of Siberiaâ Pipeline To China

December 2nd saw the first shipments of Russian natural gas to China via the much-awaited Power of Siberia pipeline.

www.forbes.com

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back? - Tsarizm

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back?

tsarizm.com

First of all, military and technological cooperation between Russia and China gives to both sides much more profit, than losses. Russian traditions of espionage and Chinese traditions of reverse engineering are perfectly fit each other. Just for illustration: in 2011 in Iran, American UAV RQ-170 Sentinel was landed by the Russian Krasukha EW-station. Then, it was reverse engineered by China, and then, the complete technological solution for the production of its illegal copy (Saegheh) was sold to Iran.

 

[Silver Cat]

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it.

The new postwar order will be created by the victorious powers, and based on the redistribution of wealth from losers. May be, there will be some sort of competition between Russia and China in the new world, may be even another Cold War with proxy conflicts, but more likely, process of the wealth redistribution will be rather peaceful (at least in the first post-war years).

Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Actually, there are less than 34 thousands of Chineses in Russia, and more than half of them live in Moscow. If you was a young China man, what kind of career would you prefer - a farmer in Siberia, or a shop-owner in California? Or, if you was a demobilized Chinese soldier, what job would you choose: a lumberjack in Siberia, or a clerk in the occupation administration in California?

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

The Age of Oil is going to end. The Gas Respite won't be effective in the war time. The post-war world will be a Nuclear world. And the best source of Uranium for China will be Australia.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Bla-bla-bla... First of all, Siberia never was Chinese. Actually, it was China occupied by different waves of Northern Barbarians, and the last wave were Russians. That's why Communistic part of China, Vietnam and Northern Korea is often named as "Yellow Russia" (next in the line of "Great Russia" (now - Russian Federation), "Small Russia" (now - Ukraine), White Russia (now - Belarus), Black Russia (Poland and Lithuania), etc...
And yes, even now Russian cultural and political influence (ideologies of Communism and Eurasism) in China is really significant.

You really do like to spin the truth. China has never shared with Russia.

• Russia had hoped to have China as an important client for it's military armaments - China bought a few copies, re-engineered them and produced their own knock-offs. Instead of being a client of Russia, China is now a competitor in the field of military arms sales.
• Russia thought that China would buy Russian produced goods but the opposite is true - China exports virtually everything to Russia
• Russia thought it would make energy sales an important facet of sales to China - China instead decided to build a pipeline to Kazakhstan and by-pass Moscow. The Siberian pipeline isn't projected to be profitable for Russia until 2030 or possibly never

"In a rare public display of frustration between Moscow and Beijing, Russian state defense conglomerate Rostec accused China of illegally copying a broad range of Russian weaponry and other military hardware."

""Unauthorized copying of our equipment abroad is a huge problem. There have been 500 such cases over the past 17 years," said Yevgeny Livadny, Rostec's chief of intellectual property projects on Dec. 14. "China alone has copied aircraft engines, Sukhoi planes, deck jets, air defense systems, portable air defense missiles, and analogs of the Pantsir medium-range surface-to-air systems.""

Russia up in arms over Chinese theft of military technology

Beijing's rise as a major armaments exporter is a double-edged sword for Moscow

asia.nikkei.com

"By becoming the first major Central Asia gas export route to completely bypass Russia, the new pipeline will play a key role in wresting the former Soviet republics in the region out of Moscow’s economic sphere of influence."

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

The Chinese influx into Asian Russia - Asia Times

On the global geopolitical stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping are best buddies, united by shared interests and

asiatimes.com

The Strategic Upside Behind Russiaâs $55 Billion âPower Of Siberiaâ Pipeline To China

December 2nd saw the first shipments of Russian natural gas to China via the much-awaited Power of Siberia pipeline.

www.forbes.com

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back? - Tsarizm

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back?

tsarizm.com

First of all, military and technological cooperation between Russia and China gives to both sides much more profit, than losses. Russian traditions of espionage and Chinese traditions of reverse engineering are perfectly fit each other. Just for illustration: in 2011 in Iran, American UAV RQ-170 Sentinel was landed by the Russian Krasukha EW-station. Then, it was reverse engineered by China, and then, the complete technological solution for the production of its illegal copy (Saegheh) was sold to Iran, and in 2016 the production was started.

 

[Decus]

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it.

The new postwar order will be created by the victorious powers, and based on the redistribution of wealth from losers. May be, there will be some sort of competition between Russia and China in the new world, may be even another Cold War with proxy conflicts, but more likely, process of the wealth redistribution will be rather peaceful (at least in the first post-war years).

Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Actually, there are less than 34 thousands of Chineses in Russia, and more than half of them live in Moscow. If you was a young China man, what kind of career would you prefer - a farmer in Siberia, or a shop-owner in California? Or, if you was a demobilized Chinese soldier, what job would you choose: a lumberjack in Siberia, or a clerk in the occupation administration in California?

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

The Age of Oil is going to end. The Gas Respite won't be effective in the war time. The post-war world will be a Nuclear world. And the best source of Uranium for China will be Australia.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Bla-bla-bla... First of all, Siberia never was Chinese. Actually, it was China occupied by different waves of Northern Barbarians, and the last wave were Russians. That's why Communistic part of China, Vietnam and Northern Korea is often named as "Yellow Russia" (next in the line of "Great Russia" (now - Russian Federation), "Small Russia" (now - Ukraine), White Russia (now - Belarus), Black Russia (Poland and Lithuania), etc...
And yes, even now Russian cultural and political influence (ideologies of Communism and Eurasism) in China is really significant.

You really do like to spin the truth. China has never shared with Russia.

• Russia had hoped to have China as an important client for it's military armaments - China bought a few copies, re-engineered them and produced their own knock-offs. Instead of being a client of Russia, China is now a competitor in the field of military arms sales.
• Russia thought that China would buy Russian produced goods but the opposite is true - China exports virtually everything to Russia
• Russia thought it would make energy sales an important facet of sales to China - China instead decided to build a pipeline to Kazakhstan and by-pass Moscow. The Siberian pipeline isn't projected to be profitable for Russia until 2030 or possibly never

"In a rare public display of frustration between Moscow and Beijing, Russian state defense conglomerate Rostec accused China of illegally copying a broad range of Russian weaponry and other military hardware."

""Unauthorized copying of our equipment abroad is a huge problem. There have been 500 such cases over the past 17 years," said Yevgeny Livadny, Rostec's chief of intellectual property projects on Dec. 14. "China alone has copied aircraft engines, Sukhoi planes, deck jets, air defense systems, portable air defense missiles, and analogs of the Pantsir medium-range surface-to-air systems.""

Russia up in arms over Chinese theft of military technology

Beijing's rise as a major armaments exporter is a double-edged sword for Moscow

asia.nikkei.com

"By becoming the first major Central Asia gas export route to completely bypass Russia, the new pipeline will play a key role in wresting the former Soviet republics in the region out of Moscow’s economic sphere of influence."

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

The Chinese influx into Asian Russia - Asia Times

On the global geopolitical stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping are best buddies, united by shared interests and

asiatimes.com

The Strategic Upside Behind Russiaâs $55 Billion âPower Of Siberiaâ Pipeline To China

December 2nd saw the first shipments of Russian natural gas to China via the much-awaited Power of Siberia pipeline.

www.forbes.com

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back? - Tsarizm

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back?

tsarizm.com

First of all, military and technological cooperation between Russia and China gives to both sides much more profit, than losses. Russian traditions of espionage and Chinese traditions of reverse engineering are perfectly fit each other. Just for illustration: in 2011 in Iran, American UAV RQ-170 Sentinel was landed by the Russian Krasukha EW-station. Then, it was reverse engineered by China, and then, the complete technological solution for the production of its illegal copy (Saegheh) was sold to Iran, and in 2016 the production was started.

China is eating Russia's lunch and if you do get scraps and leftovers from the relationship be sure to kiss their ass or you may get nothing the next time.

Too fking funny.

.

 

[Silver Cat]

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it.

The new postwar order will be created by the victorious powers, and based on the redistribution of wealth from losers. May be, there will be some sort of competition between Russia and China in the new world, may be even another Cold War with proxy conflicts, but more likely, process of the wealth redistribution will be rather peaceful (at least in the first post-war years).

Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Actually, there are less than 34 thousands of Chineses in Russia, and more than half of them live in Moscow. If you was a young China man, what kind of career would you prefer - a farmer in Siberia, or a shop-owner in California? Or, if you was a demobilized Chinese soldier, what job would you choose: a lumberjack in Siberia, or a clerk in the occupation administration in California?

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

The Age of Oil is going to end. The Gas Respite won't be effective in the war time. The post-war world will be a Nuclear world. And the best source of Uranium for China will be Australia.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Bla-bla-bla... First of all, Siberia never was Chinese. Actually, it was China occupied by different waves of Northern Barbarians, and the last wave were Russians. That's why Communistic part of China, Vietnam and Northern Korea is often named as "Yellow Russia" (next in the line of "Great Russia" (now - Russian Federation), "Small Russia" (now - Ukraine), White Russia (now - Belarus), Black Russia (Poland and Lithuania), etc...
And yes, even now Russian cultural and political influence (ideologies of Communism and Eurasism) in China is really significant.

You really do like to spin the truth. China has never shared with Russia.

• Russia had hoped to have China as an important client for it's military armaments - China bought a few copies, re-engineered them and produced their own knock-offs. Instead of being a client of Russia, China is now a competitor in the field of military arms sales.
• Russia thought that China would buy Russian produced goods but the opposite is true - China exports virtually everything to Russia
• Russia thought it would make energy sales an important facet of sales to China - China instead decided to build a pipeline to Kazakhstan and by-pass Moscow. The Siberian pipeline isn't projected to be profitable for Russia until 2030 or possibly never

"In a rare public display of frustration between Moscow and Beijing, Russian state defense conglomerate Rostec accused China of illegally copying a broad range of Russian weaponry and other military hardware."

""Unauthorized copying of our equipment abroad is a huge problem. There have been 500 such cases over the past 17 years," said Yevgeny Livadny, Rostec's chief of intellectual property projects on Dec. 14. "China alone has copied aircraft engines, Sukhoi planes, deck jets, air defense systems, portable air defense missiles, and analogs of the Pantsir medium-range surface-to-air systems.""

Russia up in arms over Chinese theft of military technology

Beijing's rise as a major armaments exporter is a double-edged sword for Moscow

asia.nikkei.com

"By becoming the first major Central Asia gas export route to completely bypass Russia, the new pipeline will play a key role in wresting the former Soviet republics in the region out of Moscow’s economic sphere of influence."

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

The Chinese influx into Asian Russia - Asia Times

On the global geopolitical stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping are best buddies, united by shared interests and

asiatimes.com

The Strategic Upside Behind Russiaâs $55 Billion âPower Of Siberiaâ Pipeline To China

December 2nd saw the first shipments of Russian natural gas to China via the much-awaited Power of Siberia pipeline.

www.forbes.com

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back? - Tsarizm

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back?

tsarizm.com

First of all, military and technological cooperation between Russia and China gives to both sides much more profit, than losses. Russian traditions of espionage and Chinese traditions of reverse engineering are perfectly fit each other. Just for illustration: in 2011 in Iran, American UAV RQ-170 Sentinel was landed by the Russian Krasukha EW-station. Then, it was reverse engineered by China, and then, the complete technological solution for the production of its illegal copy (Saegheh) was sold to Iran, and in 2016 the production was started.

China is eating Russia's lunch and if you do get scraps and leftovers from the relationship be sure to kiss their ass or you may get nothing the next time.

Too fking funny.

.

Right now the Russians are looking satisfied with their economical relationships with China. But it doesn't matter. Do you really care, who is a real leader of anti-American alliance - Putin or Xi? I think, that the USA must think about its own safety - about the detterence of the whole Shanghai Pact, first of all - about guaranteed possibility to bring unacceptable damage to both Russia and China even after their rather successful counterforce strike, and when their population is sheltered (Detterence Type I). Second - we need the Credible First Strike Capability, which depends on our possibility to counter their retaliation strike. (Detterence Type II).

 

[rightwinger]

Second - we need the Credible First Strike Capability, which depends on our possibility to counter their retaliation strike. (Detterence Type II).

We have the ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy.
No need to worry about that

 

[Decus]

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it.

The new postwar order will be created by the victorious powers, and based on the redistribution of wealth from losers. May be, there will be some sort of competition between Russia and China in the new world, may be even another Cold War with proxy conflicts, but more likely, process of the wealth redistribution will be rather peaceful (at least in the first post-war years).

Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Actually, there are less than 34 thousands of Chineses in Russia, and more than half of them live in Moscow. If you was a young China man, what kind of career would you prefer - a farmer in Siberia, or a shop-owner in California? Or, if you was a demobilized Chinese soldier, what job would you choose: a lumberjack in Siberia, or a clerk in the occupation administration in California?

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

The Age of Oil is going to end. The Gas Respite won't be effective in the war time. The post-war world will be a Nuclear world. And the best source of Uranium for China will be Australia.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Bla-bla-bla... First of all, Siberia never was Chinese. Actually, it was China occupied by different waves of Northern Barbarians, and the last wave were Russians. That's why Communistic part of China, Vietnam and Northern Korea is often named as "Yellow Russia" (next in the line of "Great Russia" (now - Russian Federation), "Small Russia" (now - Ukraine), White Russia (now - Belarus), Black Russia (Poland and Lithuania), etc...
And yes, even now Russian cultural and political influence (ideologies of Communism and Eurasism) in China is really significant.

You really do like to spin the truth. China has never shared with Russia.

• Russia had hoped to have China as an important client for it's military armaments - China bought a few copies, re-engineered them and produced their own knock-offs. Instead of being a client of Russia, China is now a competitor in the field of military arms sales.
• Russia thought that China would buy Russian produced goods but the opposite is true - China exports virtually everything to Russia
• Russia thought it would make energy sales an important facet of sales to China - China instead decided to build a pipeline to Kazakhstan and by-pass Moscow. The Siberian pipeline isn't projected to be profitable for Russia until 2030 or possibly never

"In a rare public display of frustration between Moscow and Beijing, Russian state defense conglomerate Rostec accused China of illegally copying a broad range of Russian weaponry and other military hardware."

""Unauthorized copying of our equipment abroad is a huge problem. There have been 500 such cases over the past 17 years," said Yevgeny Livadny, Rostec's chief of intellectual property projects on Dec. 14. "China alone has copied aircraft engines, Sukhoi planes, deck jets, air defense systems, portable air defense missiles, and analogs of the Pantsir medium-range surface-to-air systems.""

Russia up in arms over Chinese theft of military technology

Beijing's rise as a major armaments exporter is a double-edged sword for Moscow

asia.nikkei.com

"By becoming the first major Central Asia gas export route to completely bypass Russia, the new pipeline will play a key role in wresting the former Soviet republics in the region out of Moscow’s economic sphere of influence."

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

The Chinese influx into Asian Russia - Asia Times

On the global geopolitical stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping are best buddies, united by shared interests and

asiatimes.com

The Strategic Upside Behind Russiaâs $55 Billion âPower Of Siberiaâ Pipeline To China

December 2nd saw the first shipments of Russian natural gas to China via the much-awaited Power of Siberia pipeline.

www.forbes.com

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back? - Tsarizm

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back?

tsarizm.com

First of all, military and technological cooperation between Russia and China gives to both sides much more profit, than losses. Russian traditions of espionage and Chinese traditions of reverse engineering are perfectly fit each other. Just for illustration: in 2011 in Iran, American UAV RQ-170 Sentinel was landed by the Russian Krasukha EW-station. Then, it was reverse engineered by China, and then, the complete technological solution for the production of its illegal copy (Saegheh) was sold to Iran, and in 2016 the production was started.

China is eating Russia's lunch and if you do get scraps and leftovers from the relationship be sure to kiss their ass or you may get nothing the next time.

Too fking funny.

.

Right now the Russians are looking satisfied with their economical relationships with China. But it doesn't matter. Do you really care, who is a real leader of anti-American alliance - Putin or Xi? I think, that the USA must think about its own safety - about the detterence of the whole Shanghai Pact, first of all - about guaranteed possibility to bring unacceptable damage to both Russia and China even after their rather successful counterforce strike, and when their population is sheltered (Detterence Type I). Second - we need the Credible First Strike Capability, which depends on our possibility to counter their retaliation strike. (Detterence Type II).

The enemy to the US is clear. Sadly Russia is simply hoping that their worst fears regarding China won't be realized. They are wrong.

.

 

[Silver Cat]

Second - we need the Credible First Strike Capability, which depends on our possibility to counter their retaliation strike. (Detterence Type II).

We have the ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy.
No need to worry about that

No. Ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy in the normal situation does not mean possibility to achieve all those goals:
1) to destroy significant part of their strategic and tactical nukes to minimize their retaliation strike to the acceptable level;
2) kill at least 30 millions of Russians and 100 millions of Chineses in situation when their cities are particularly evacuated and population is sheltered;
3) destroy their recuperation potential, including conventional military forces and storage facilities.

All of this US Forces must be able to do in the situation of their active counteractions, including sabotage, espionage, active ABD, erzatz-ABD, etc...

I'm pretty sure, that right now the USA, isn't even at half-way to such possibility (even if we are talking only about Russia and China, not the whole Shanghai Pact).

 

[Silver Cat]

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it.

The new postwar order will be created by the victorious powers, and based on the redistribution of wealth from losers. May be, there will be some sort of competition between Russia and China in the new world, may be even another Cold War with proxy conflicts, but more likely, process of the wealth redistribution will be rather peaceful (at least in the first post-war years).

Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Actually, there are less than 34 thousands of Chineses in Russia, and more than half of them live in Moscow. If you was a young China man, what kind of career would you prefer - a farmer in Siberia, or a shop-owner in California? Or, if you was a demobilized Chinese soldier, what job would you choose: a lumberjack in Siberia, or a clerk in the occupation administration in California?

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

The Age of Oil is going to end. The Gas Respite won't be effective in the war time. The post-war world will be a Nuclear world. And the best source of Uranium for China will be Australia.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Bla-bla-bla... First of all, Siberia never was Chinese. Actually, it was China occupied by different waves of Northern Barbarians, and the last wave were Russians. That's why Communistic part of China, Vietnam and Northern Korea is often named as "Yellow Russia" (next in the line of "Great Russia" (now - Russian Federation), "Small Russia" (now - Ukraine), White Russia (now - Belarus), Black Russia (Poland and Lithuania), etc...
And yes, even now Russian cultural and political influence (ideologies of Communism and Eurasism) in China is really significant.

You really do like to spin the truth. China has never shared with Russia.

• Russia had hoped to have China as an important client for it's military armaments - China bought a few copies, re-engineered them and produced their own knock-offs. Instead of being a client of Russia, China is now a competitor in the field of military arms sales.
• Russia thought that China would buy Russian produced goods but the opposite is true - China exports virtually everything to Russia
• Russia thought it would make energy sales an important facet of sales to China - China instead decided to build a pipeline to Kazakhstan and by-pass Moscow. The Siberian pipeline isn't projected to be profitable for Russia until 2030 or possibly never

"In a rare public display of frustration between Moscow and Beijing, Russian state defense conglomerate Rostec accused China of illegally copying a broad range of Russian weaponry and other military hardware."

""Unauthorized copying of our equipment abroad is a huge problem. There have been 500 such cases over the past 17 years," said Yevgeny Livadny, Rostec's chief of intellectual property projects on Dec. 14. "China alone has copied aircraft engines, Sukhoi planes, deck jets, air defense systems, portable air defense missiles, and analogs of the Pantsir medium-range surface-to-air systems.""

Russia up in arms over Chinese theft of military technology

Beijing's rise as a major armaments exporter is a double-edged sword for Moscow

asia.nikkei.com

"By becoming the first major Central Asia gas export route to completely bypass Russia, the new pipeline will play a key role in wresting the former Soviet republics in the region out of Moscow’s economic sphere of influence."

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

The Chinese influx into Asian Russia - Asia Times

On the global geopolitical stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping are best buddies, united by shared interests and

asiatimes.com

The Strategic Upside Behind Russiaâs $55 Billion âPower Of Siberiaâ Pipeline To China

December 2nd saw the first shipments of Russian natural gas to China via the much-awaited Power of Siberia pipeline.

www.forbes.com

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back? - Tsarizm

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back?

tsarizm.com

First of all, military and technological cooperation between Russia and China gives to both sides much more profit, than losses. Russian traditions of espionage and Chinese traditions of reverse engineering are perfectly fit each other. Just for illustration: in 2011 in Iran, American UAV RQ-170 Sentinel was landed by the Russian Krasukha EW-station. Then, it was reverse engineered by China, and then, the complete technological solution for the production of its illegal copy (Saegheh) was sold to Iran, and in 2016 the production was started.

China is eating Russia's lunch and if you do get scraps and leftovers from the relationship be sure to kiss their ass or you may get nothing the next time.

Too fking funny.

.

Right now the Russians are looking satisfied with their economical relationships with China. But it doesn't matter. Do you really care, who is a real leader of anti-American alliance - Putin or Xi? I think, that the USA must think about its own safety - about the detterence of the whole Shanghai Pact, first of all - about guaranteed possibility to bring unacceptable damage to both Russia and China even after their rather successful counterforce strike, and when their population is sheltered (Detterence Type I). Second - we need the Credible First Strike Capability, which depends on our possibility to counter their retaliation strike. (Detterence Type II).

The enemy to the US is clear. Sadly Russia is simply hoping that their worst fears regarding China won't be realized. They are wrong.

.

Do you really care who will dominate in the post-American world?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

If Russia goes nuclear, so will we! BTW, learn to spell deterrence.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

Oh, shut up! You are throwing out words you have no possibility of understanding. By the way, what that fuck is "ezatz"?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

World domination? That's just too funny. The Chinese won't let you do it.

The new postwar order will be created by the victorious powers, and based on the redistribution of wealth from losers. May be, there will be some sort of competition between Russia and China in the new world, may be even another Cold War with proxy conflicts, but more likely, process of the wealth redistribution will be rather peaceful (at least in the first post-war years).

Hell, Russia will be lucky if the Chinese don't annex Siberia. Millions of Chinese already own property, live and work in Siberia.

Actually, there are less than 34 thousands of Chineses in Russia, and more than half of them live in Moscow. If you was a young China man, what kind of career would you prefer - a farmer in Siberia, or a shop-owner in California? Or, if you was a demobilized Chinese soldier, what job would you choose: a lumberjack in Siberia, or a clerk in the occupation administration in California?

Although the Chinese are already taking much of what they need, annexing Siberia will give the Chinese a secure source of energy and natural resources much closer to home.

The Age of Oil is going to end. The Gas Respite won't be effective in the war time. The post-war world will be a Nuclear world. And the best source of Uranium for China will be Australia.

"But Russia's expansionist interests have met with an obstacle in the East: China does not look kindly on Russian activism, which risks creating obstacles to the Japanese economic growth projects. On the contrary, the Chinese themselves are beginning to have expansionist aims towards the West, to the detriment of the Russian territories: the slogan "Give us back Siberia" is becoming viral on Chinese social networks."

Bla-bla-bla... First of all, Siberia never was Chinese. Actually, it was China occupied by different waves of Northern Barbarians, and the last wave were Russians. That's why Communistic part of China, Vietnam and Northern Korea is often named as "Yellow Russia" (next in the line of "Great Russia" (now - Russian Federation), "Small Russia" (now - Ukraine), White Russia (now - Belarus), Black Russia (Poland and Lithuania), etc...
And yes, even now Russian cultural and political influence (ideologies of Communism and Eurasism) in China is really significant.

You really do like to spin the truth. China has never shared with Russia.

• Russia had hoped to have China as an important client for it's military armaments - China bought a few copies, re-engineered them and produced their own knock-offs. Instead of being a client of Russia, China is now a competitor in the field of military arms sales.
• Russia thought that China would buy Russian produced goods but the opposite is true - China exports virtually everything to Russia
• Russia thought it would make energy sales an important facet of sales to China - China instead decided to build a pipeline to Kazakhstan and by-pass Moscow. The Siberian pipeline isn't projected to be profitable for Russia until 2030 or possibly never

"In a rare public display of frustration between Moscow and Beijing, Russian state defense conglomerate Rostec accused China of illegally copying a broad range of Russian weaponry and other military hardware."

""Unauthorized copying of our equipment abroad is a huge problem. There have been 500 such cases over the past 17 years," said Yevgeny Livadny, Rostec's chief of intellectual property projects on Dec. 14. "China alone has copied aircraft engines, Sukhoi planes, deck jets, air defense systems, portable air defense missiles, and analogs of the Pantsir medium-range surface-to-air systems.""

Russia up in arms over Chinese theft of military technology

Beijing's rise as a major armaments exporter is a double-edged sword for Moscow

asia.nikkei.com

"By becoming the first major Central Asia gas export route to completely bypass Russia, the new pipeline will play a key role in wresting the former Soviet republics in the region out of Moscow’s economic sphere of influence."

China launches landmark Central Asia gas pipeline

www.thehindu.com

The Chinese influx into Asian Russia - Asia Times

On the global geopolitical stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping are best buddies, united by shared interests and

asiatimes.com

The Strategic Upside Behind Russiaâs $55 Billion âPower Of Siberiaâ Pipeline To China

December 2nd saw the first shipments of Russian natural gas to China via the much-awaited Power of Siberia pipeline.

www.forbes.com

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back? - Tsarizm

Russia Offer To Lease 2.5 Million Acres To China In Siberia...Question Is, Will They Get It Back?

tsarizm.com

2.5 million acres is a postage stamp! By comparison, Texas is 171 million acres.

 

[Silver Cat]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

Russia faces mutually assured destruction, just like they always have. Is Putin willing to take the risk just to annex Ukraine?

"Mutually assured destruction" is a myth, you know. Good combination of EW, sudden counterforce attack, ABD and erzatz-ABD, evacuation of cities, civil defense and post-attack blackmail can decrease losses to pretty acceptable. They are going to lose two, may be three million of citizens, but they will get twenty or thirty millions of new citizens in Ukraine. What is even more important, they definitely won't stop in Ukraine. Possible loses are great, but the potential prize is literally enormous... May be, even the world domination.

Since joining NATO, the US has always committed to join in the defense of Europe. That has not changed

Really? If Americans are ready to die to protect Europeans, why don't they sell them COVID-vaccines? "F#$k the EU" as Victoria Nuland said.

Oh, shut up! You are throwing out words you have no possibility of understanding. By the way, what that fuck is "ezatz"?

Sorry, fat fingers. Of course " Ersatz-ABD". Proper ABD - A-135 and A-235 can intercept warheads outside the atmosphere. "Ersatz-ABD" S-300V4, S-400, S-500, MiG-31BM can intercept warheads in atmosphere. Not perfect, of course, but better than nothing.

 

[Silver Cat]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

If Russia goes nuclear, so will we! BTW, learn to spell deterrence.

Yes, that's the problem. American plans are concentrated on the prevention of the war, not winning the war. "If the deterrence is failed, let's do "something", or, may be, "nothing"." All, what those military planners are thinking is psychology, facades, good look, and so on. Most of American "military" scenarios begin with tensions and finish by all-out nuclear exchange. Most of Russian military scenarios begin with nuclear exchange, and finish by the delimitation of the Canada-Mexican border (or sign of unconditional surrender by American government).
The last more or less realistic American conception of the "protracted war" was created in 1982.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

If Russia goes nuclear, so will we! BTW, learn to spell deterrence.

Yes, that's the problem. American plans are concentrated on the prevention of the war, not winning the war. "If the deterrence is failed, let's do "something", or, may be, "nothing"." All, what those military planners are thinking is psychology, facades, good look, and so on. Most of American "military" scenarios begin with tensions and finish by all-out nuclear exchange. Most of Russian military scenarios begin with nuclear exchange, and finish by the delimitation of the Canada-Mexican border (or sign of unconditional surrender by American government).
The last more or less realistic American conception of the "protracted war" was created in 1982.

Really? What is your expertise in this area instead of being an armchair quarterback?

 

[AZrailwhale]

Second - we need the Credible First Strike Capability, which depends on our possibility to counter their retaliation strike. (Detterence Type II).

We have the ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy.
No need to worry about that

No. Ability to target thousands of nukes with deadly accuracy in the normal situation does not mean possibility to achieve all those goals:
1) to destroy significant part of their strategic and tactical nukes to minimize their retaliation strike to the acceptable level;
2) kill at least 30 millions of Russians and 100 millions of Chineses in situation when their cities are particularly evacuated and population is sheltered;
3) destroy their recuperation potential, including conventional military forces and storage facilities.

All of this US Forces must be able to do in the situation of their active counteractions, including sabotage, espionage, active ABD, erzatz-ABD, etc...

I'm pretty sure, that right now the USA, isn't even at half-way to such possibility (even if we are talking only about Russia and China, not the whole Shanghai Pact).

You’re really funny, delusional, but funny. Exactly where do you think Russia and China are going to evacuate those tens or hundreds of millions of civilians to ride out a nuclear war? What will they eat and drink afterwards? Nuclear war is unsurvivable and any US president who allowed a attack on the USA without retaliation would be torn limb from limb instead of merely being impeached.

 

[Silver Cat]

‘Potential Imminent Crisis’: U.S. Military Warns Of Russian Military Buildup In Eastern Europe | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

It seems to me that this would be a good time for an American President (a real President) to approach our NATO "allies" and tell them that THEY have a problem here, and we are willing to HELP.

Remember that 2%of GDP that they promised to spend on mutual defense? There is no time like the present.

Of course that would require a President with balls.

NATO is the most powerful military force in history.

Russia is nowhere close

Only because of the involvement of the United States. If the US is not in play NATO is nothing

France, UK, Germany, Italy have modern militaries with well trained soldiers and pilots.
They have been preparing for decades

Are you kidding? NATO readiness is at an all time low. Germany only has 244 tanks, many of which are inoperable with no spares to fix them, it has 212 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft, again poorly maintained. It has a total of 215,000 military personnel counting every swinging Richard, cooks, clerks doctors, everyone. France has 406 tanks, 269 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 300,000 military personnel. The UK has 209 tanks, 134 fighters, bombers and attack aircraft and 280,000 military personnel. Those the Heavy hitters of NATO. NATO has drawn down from being the well equipped and well trained force of the Cold War. The NATO countries can’t defend themselves, let alone the Ukraine. Russia has serious problems, but it’s far stronger than the European NATO members and is right on the Ukraine’s border. NATO has to move troops and vehicles hundreds of miles to get to the Ukraine.

And Russia?
No, Russia is not stronger than the European NATO members.
Their military is a shell

According the Russian Military doctrine, "Regional wars" are nuclear wars. They have thousands of tactical nukes to fight Europeans and enough of strategical nukes for "in-war detterence" of the USA. Do you believe, that Biden is going to start all-out war (and to kill tens of millions of American citizens) to protect Ukraine, or even the whole Europe? He don't care about Europe, China is his only passion.

If Russia goes nuclear, so will we! BTW, learn to spell deterrence.

Yes, that's the problem. American plans are concentrated on the prevention of the war, not winning the war. "If the deterrence is failed, let's do "something", or, may be, "nothing"." All, what those military planners are thinking is psychology, facades, good look, and so on. Most of American "military" scenarios begin with tensions and finish by all-out nuclear exchange. Most of Russian military scenarios begin with nuclear exchange, and finish by the delimitation of the Canada-Mexican border (or sign of unconditional surrender by American government).
The last more or less realistic American conception of the "protracted war" was created in 1982.

Really? What is your expertise in this area instead of being an armchair quarterback?

Really. Just believe me. Exact plans can be hidden, but not the "philosophy" of the war. There are no more or less realistic American plans of the winning (or even halting) already started all-out nuclear war.