Russia vs Nato
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
Do they stand a chance against nato ?
>>30357814
Nato pisses their pants when someone brown screams something, you think Russia is scared of those cucks?
Nukes exists.
Your question is irrelevant, any hot conflict *will* end in the destruction of both sides.
>"russia vs NATO"
>not "CSTO vs NATO"
how can you expected to be taken seriously if you don't even know what the CSTO is?
>>30357916
Op here , ikn CSTO , it makes me hard when i think about that damn arma 3 campaign flashbacks
If nukes, NATO will lose hundreds of millions of dead and Russia will cease to exist.
If no nukes, NATO will simply beat the shit out of Russia.
NATO: Wonder what's gonna happen now? Oh what Ruskies gonna pop out and go "Boogity-Boo!"
>>30357814
Russia has way more military personel and hardware close to the european borders than all NATO countries in Europe (+ US Forces in Nato countries combined).
The US can however transport a large part of its forces comparably fast to europe.
And the fact that russian equpment is complete garbage.
Destroy entire Russian oil industry including pipelines.
Russia collapses.
The End.
>>30358089
>Russia has way more military personel and hardware close to the european borders than all NATO countries in Europe (+ US Forces in Nato countries combined).
Not even fucking close. The EU has enough capability to take Russia in a conventional war alone anyway. Russia doesn't even have close to the economic or logistical power to push through the entirety of Europe before being halted and thrown back.
Baltic States and Ukraine would be overrun, yes. But the moment they got toward Germany and Poland they would just halt. The UK, France, Italy and Spain would have gathered by that point along that line with Germany and Poland. No hope for Russia after that.
>>30357859
>>30357859
See Pic
>>30358215
I agree with you that their logistics are shit and that they would never be able to reach further than Germany.
They do however have more equipment and soldiers as I stated. This is because they have huge numbers of B-type reserve units. The units are shit tier but NATO forces do not really have any reserves.
Without using Nukes Russia would be stopped dead at Poland, and from there it would get really ugly for Russia.
>>30358215
>>30358641
Why would they need to "overrun" Europe? Why are people on this board so retarded? Russia's entire military strategy is defensive: saturated IADS and deep battle warfare to eventually exhaust supply lines and reinforcements.
Russia has never maintained non-contiguous colonies. Russians have never even established autonomous ruling ethnic immigrant communities beyond their historical Eurasian sphere. Russian political philosophy is based on geography, and the maintenance of defensible barriers. It cannot and will not attempt to hold land beyond what were essentially the old boundaries of the Russian Empire. Anything beyond that is unsustainable for their social, economic, and military model, and they know it (it's why Alaskans don't speak Russian). It is to misunderstand Russian identity and history to fear an expansionist ethno-nationalist movement along the lines of the Third Reich. The best thing to do is to hold the line more or less at the Dnieper, and allow them to pacify the rest of their historical domain for the sake of stability.
It's NATO who keeps encroaching towards their borders for the last two decades, anyone but an utter imbecilic homunculus can understand that just looking at the fucking map.
>>30358428
>white pride
>guy in far right in the 2nd row is obviously a Tatar
>Turkic ethnic group of Russia
>>30357814
Millions dead, Russian domination.
>>30360306
>VOX
...lol
>>30360306
That's the dumbest shit I have read all day
>>30358878
Kaliningrad is a thing.
>>30360372
Elaborate. How are the listed options incorrect?
>>30360376
What about Kaliningrad is related to his post? Please, don't be a /pol/tard that thinks it's a German land full of oppressed Germans that should be returned to Germany.
>>30360401
No, the question is, how are they correct?
>>30357814
Two Russian tank commanders meet in Paris and one asks the other "I wonder how the air war went"?
How soon could NATO establish air superiority vs. how far Russia can advance on the ground. This is the crucial question.
Canadian here....Please kill me before I have to fight for NATO :(
>>30357885
It will not
You can count Finland on NATO's side. We have a common enemy, so it would be impossible to stay out of a war between NATO and Russia.
>>30357814
abroad? unknown?
if invaded? yeah.
a cornered bear is dangerous.
>>30358878
>Russians have never even established autonomous ruling ethnic immigrant communities beyond their historical Eurasian sphere.
>It cannot and will not attempt to hold land beyond what were essentially the old boundaries of the Russian Empire.
>It is to misunderstand Russian identity and history to fear an expansionist ethno-nationalist movement along the lines of the Third Reich.
I'll take the Cold War and Soviet satellite states for $500, Alex.
>>30360513
Russia's land army is shit.
Read about the first and even second Chechen War. It would take them months if not years if ever to penetrate into Paris on land.
>>30358878
>Russia's entire military strategy is defensive
I guess those special forces we have here in Finland are just on a vacation and the estates bought near strategic locations are also just for vacation purposes...
>Russia has never maintained non-contiguous colonies
Königsberg.
>old boundaries of the Russian Empire
Russian Empire already occupied areas that didn't belong to it. From my point of view the most notable were the areas where Finno-Ugric people live/lived. And Finland was once a part of the Russian Empire, so your statement about holding the old borders doesn't really sound too good to my ears.
>It is to misunderstand Russian identity and history to fear an expansionist ethno-nationalist movement along the lines of the Third Reich.
Many Eastern Europeans might disagree and the last time I checked, Russia still occupied a large part of Finland.
Don't talk about things you don't know about.
>>30357814
If NATO decides to invade, yeah. If they are on the offensive? Not a chance,EU doesn't even need the US to stop them.
>>30358141
Seriously guys.
Just destroy Russia's oil industry and you win before the game even really takes off.
>>30357814
of-course Russia would win comrade! )))))
>>30358641
>The units are shit tier but NATO forces do not really have any reserves.
NATO has the entire United States Armed Forces as reserves. The European members only have to hold out long enough for REFORGER to kick in and the burgerfat pipeline to start flowing.
After that, the only way NATO loses--offensively or defensively--is if America pusses out.
>>30362178
I wonder if the public would have the stomach to fight Russians who'd had a week to dig in.
>>30362304
>who'd had a week to dig in.
Russians are most likely to attack. NATO is a defensive reactionary alliance. Any NATO member that initiates a conflict does so knowing that its allies are entitled to not support the member because it is not reacting to an outside threat, but initiating the conflict (see Second Iraq War, Libyan civil war).
if a NATO member is attacked it most likely means that some of its territory will be occupied and possibly some of its civilians killed amidst the fighting. This would in turn put an onus on the civilians to support the fighting because its their lives at stake as well, so in the end they'd support it because it is in their vested interest as citizens of the nation to make sure their homes and country come out of the war as unscathed as possible (same goes for the Russians).
>>30360513
>How soon could NATO establish air superiority vs. how far Russia can advance on the ground. This is the crucial question.
Poland by itself has a decent chance of stopping Russia's army in its tracks.
>>30362304
> I don't see much future for the Americans ... it's a decayed country. And they have their racial problem, and the problem of social inequalities ... my feelings against Americanism are feelings of hatred and deep repugnance ... everything about the behaviour of American society reveals that it's half Judaised, and the other half negrified. How can one expect a State like that to hold together?
> Adolf Hitler, 3 weeks after declaring war on the US
Americans? involve themselves in an European War? President Wilson will never do that.
>>30363207
I'm not talking about a NATO initiated war. I'm talking about Russians moving first, grabbing what they can, and burrowing in like chiggers.
>>30363346
This is precisely what Japan's strategy was.
It doesn't work well.
>>30363346
if you read my post, I respond to what you're talking about. I might have made the mistake of not making a sentence to transition from the NATO aspect to the civvies support for the war effort, but I did indeed talk about that.
>>30363346
> Make a sudden land-grab attack
> dig in and wait for the Americans to come
> fight them in the mother of all battles
> cause so many casualties that they give up and let you keep your conquered land
This plan sounds pretty familiar, can anyone recall what happened the last time?
>>30357885
I want OPpenheimer to come in and smack your shit silly
>>30360401
Well, my favourite is
> Increasing tensions with Russia
> Tensions reminiscent of Cuban missle crisis
>NORAD detects incoming
>Obama/Clinton calls Putin
> Mister Putin, did you fucking launch missles at us?
> Noooo noooooo! Russia say we no strike first, must be glitch
> Leaders of Europe screaming for us to launch, or send aid for the incoming nuclear Holocaust
> Obama: "ok mister Putin, I belibe in you"
> NORAD ignored
> Europe vaporized
> America severly crippled but still nuclear capable.
> Obama/Clinton : wow I wasn't expecting that, oh well
Yea nah brah that's not happening.
>>30358089
When the wall came down NATO got to take a close look at the MiG-29. The displays were very simple because doctrine dictated that aircraft would be directed from the ground. A flight might be directed into much greater numbers of enemy craft, and the pilot wouldn't know. NATO craft and doctrine let the pilot decide on the target, and gave him much more information.
>asking /k/ about anything Russia related
Crimea made sure this baord will never say anything good about Russia again.
>>30363642
Even if we loved them, it isn't realistic for a country with a GDP the size of Italy to beat a country with the same percentage of military spending per capita and about 20 times the GDP.
>>30363642
True, their moves in Crimea pissed me off, but you gotta also look at the larger picture. They have the possibility to become a US ally once China grows to the extent that even Russian interests are threatened. Hell just look at Putin's moves in Vietnam and Japan, I wouldn't say those moves are exactly what China would like to see (Plus Assad is my boy, and Russian are killing Al Nusrats and ISIL while pissing off the Turks, so I'd say they aren't all that bad).
Allies become enemies, and enemies become allies. All it takes is some time and the balance of power to shift.
>>30363649
>unironically still falling for the GDP meme
Before flippers come and accuse me of being a Vatnik, I have no interest in Russia.
>>30363669
Please this.
Please, please this.
Russia and US alliance.
Please.
t. Expat vatnik
>>30363676
this, Russia has been hit hard by sanctions but manage to keep thier internal economy working fine. GDP means little in this situation
>>30363463
Saddam got fugged.
>>30363346
>I'm talking about Russians moving first, grabbing what they can, and burrowing in like chiggers.
> 2016
> Talking about fixed fortifications in Europe.
Do you even history, anon?
Russia "wins" wars by falling back on its strategic depth. Giving up their one advantage to hold the line in western Europe against an American army of liberation would be pants-on-head retarded.
>>30363757
>russia
>depth with no ukraine
>>30360540
will too
>>30358023
This
Russia's only advantage is the social and political weakness of the West. They are a shadow of their former selves and have an economy smaller than Italy. Militarily, Russia is utterly outclassed by NATO in every category by a massive margin. If NATO states decided to get their shit together they'd wreck Russia in any kind of engagement.
Russia is the little kid poking the bigger kid with a stick.
Not enough fuel and bombs on both sides.
NATO troops will run out of fuel before reaching Russian border. Russian ones will out of it in Poland. There's simply not enough supplies for a total war, for now.
>>30363463
yeah
> fight them in the mother of all battles
> cause so many casualties that they give up and let you keep your conquered land
>why are they still here
>oh fuck oh fuck they just keep coming
>jesus christ how many are there
>what the fuck do you mean they've overrun our lines
>how have they gained so much ground in 6 months?
>why is our infrastructure completely fucked
>how do we keep fighting
>USA USA USA USA
To my knowledge this is basically both world wars
>>30363669
>Putin's moves in Vietnam and Japan
Wait what? What memo did I miss out on?
>>30357814
No, fuck off.
Texas alone has a bigger army, more money than Russia.
>>30364051
The "military contractors and lobbyists need more money so just fear monger some more" memo.
>>30363886
At least the Americans don't run out of fuel.
Desert Storm and Iraq War 2: Electric Boogaloo both had very little fuel problems keeping thousands of tanks in the field.
Russia has less than 1000 truly modern tanks. The meme about Russian Ground Forces running over Europe is just a meme. They get right over the Polish border at best.
In the air the situation is completely hopeless for the Russians. They have good air denial systems, but their ability to carry out offensive air operations is basically zero. There's simply not enough modern fighters in the RUAF to take on just the Euros, never-mind the USAF and their 180 F-22's.
>>30358007
Isn't it CSAT?
>>30360306
>ethic conflicts in baltic states
Hilarious
>>30364318
The meme about meme's being memes is just a meme, meme guys.
>>30364051
Russia is trying to reset relations with Japan in hopes that it can keep the land they hold in the Kuril islands. Plus they want to balance their reliance on China. With Vietnam, they have been natural allies with the Viet and have sold them decent stuff in the past. With the US moving in to snag Vietnam as an ally, Russia is trying to persuade the Vietnamese to keep their alliance strong. Which might mean more military sales to appease the Vietnamese concerns about China.
But also Chinese and Russian interests In central asia are starting to clash as the Chinese silk road project requires the Chinese to bankroll the countries in the region which are already in the Russian sphere of influence. As bad as it looks, countries will only remain as allies as long as it's in the vested interest of both states. Russia and China might not split soon, but eventually their proximity and interests will mean that they will become enemies. Especially since Russia is trying to rebalance towards Asia
>>30360306
>sources: RT.com Pravda.com
>>30360306
What a crock. Is that considered journalism?
>>30363495
>>30360540
Do you guys think one side would just not fire their nukes? Or that we secretly have the ability to stop MIRVs?
Or that first strike will actually work?
Because none of those seem all that realistic
>>30357814
Russia would be curb stomped and even they know it, which is why their geostrategy is based on aggressive diplomacy and subterfuge.
>>30357814
No
Combined NATO forces would BTFO of Russia. Combined European armies would BTFO of Russia but individually they'd have no chance against Russian military might with the exception of US.
Russia is strong like hell but it can't even compare with the US.
>>30364945
>Do you guys think one side would just not fire their nukes?
Depends if both sides are willing to provide a path to war cessation that allows one side to accomplish its goals and the other side a post-conflict order that is preferable to rolling the dice with a nuclear attack.
>Or that we secretly have the ability to stop MIRVs?
Not enough to matter.
>Or that first strike will actually work?
They can work. Lots of variables, just like any battle.
>>30364318
Your entire post is a meme. It took 5 months to prepare Desert Storm, and the US military was much larger and in much better shape 25 years ago.
http://index.heritage.org/military/2016/assessments/us-military-power/us-army/
Under Obama administration the Army has been reduced to 200k trained shooters, only 1/3 brigades are combat capable and every motor vehicle needs replacement. The state US military is in now, it won't be able to take on fucking Iran. Furthermore, both Gulf wars have been won in uncontested airspace, whereas a war against Russia throws away any presumption of air superiority.
>Russia has less than 1000 truly modern tanks.
Define "truly modern tanks". The only ones in existence right now are K-2, Type10 and T-14. Russia puts out 200 modernized T-72B3's at annual rate. Net-centric capability, thermals with night vision, updated armor and armament put them at least on par with 2A7, the bulk of NATO armor in Europe. Furthermore, mechanized warfare isn't won by sheer numbers but by the speed of deployement, A swift Russian attack could establish a fait accompli before NATO decision-makers convened to agree on what had transpired and how to respond.
>There's simply not enough modern fighters in the RUAF
Iskander and Kaliber wipe out airbases in Ramstein and Italy through the first hours of the war, BM-30s glass airfields in Baltics, Poland and Romania. Ain't much use in overwhelming airpower when you can't get it in the air
>>30360306
so when russia comes to dominate its just "millions dead", but when russia loses its "millions die needlessly"
keep choking on that russian cock vox
>>30364125
Cool story jackass
>>30363669
But, Russia is busy bombing US supported rebels in Syria, not ISIS.
>>30364981
> they can
the scariest words you have ever written here, Oppen
do I need to start having nightmares about the end of the world again?
>>30365009
>and every motor vehicle needs replacement.
And you have the gall to talk about memes.
Where is the trashman?
>>30365009
"My dad could beat your dad" the post.
I agree with you that no ones military is in good shape, that being said neither is yours vatnik. No one is steam rolling anything.
>>30365009
>Iskander and Kaliber wipe out airbases in Ramstein and Italy through the first hours of the war, BM-30s glass airfields in Baltics, Poland and Romania.
Raamstien is protected by pac-3 and THAAD launchers, poland recently got ageis ashore.
Furthermore, pretty much all of europe is under the ageis BMD net from offshore seabased launchers.
Furthermore, even if russia were to get every airbase, offshore USN naval airwings alone would be enough to hold back russian airpower.
>>30357814
implying that NATO does shit, ever
>>30357814
Why ask who wins when we don't know the war?
Who attacked first?
Was it sudden or based on a long period of increasing tension?
Even with Nukes NATO wins hands-down. bye bye Russia lol
>>30363234
This, Poland may be a NATO member, but unlike every other NATO member they've actually been growing their military and making themselves worth a damn (looking at you France and Germany). Becuase unlike those comfy western yuropeans theyve been living with the Ukraine situation and its "totally not russians" literally next door for the last few years and they arent taking any fucking chances. Hell theyve been holding joint exercises with the US pretty much non-stop since the Ukraine thing kicked off.
>>30358428
really makes you think......
>>30365009
>only 1/3 brigades are combat capable and every motor vehicle needs replacement
Holy vatniks Batman. Im practically drunk off the vodka fumes eminating from this post.
If you think that US armed forces are that bad off, how on earth do you think that Russian forces, with 1/30th the spending amount? Are russian vehicles that cheap to maintain? (I wont ask about aircraft or navy because everyone knows you dont fund those anymore).
>>30365233
CYKA BLAAAAT THE GLORIOUS RUSSIANS DONT USE MERE MONEY FOR ITS PROCUREMENTS!!!*
>*the actual vatnik response.
>>30365254
>he thinks Russia pays in dollar
>>30365264
Im not sure if you're a ruseman or just retarded
Ive been drinking, but the currency-adjusted numbers for military spending are out there for anyone to look at.
>>30365264
>he thinks russian procurement is immune to fiscal realities.
>he thinks the inflation of the ruble does not effect russian procurement
Top kek, i actually stole the state funded response right out of your mouth, huh?
>>30365280
>>30365291
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/04/china_and_russia_combined_now_at_military_spending_parity_with_us.html
>>30365315
So Russia is only able to spend 1/3 of what the US does, and it takes up a much larger % of their GDP to do so.
>>30365315
Uhhhhh
>>30365315
kek
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
Even wikipedia has two entirely different sources and they both contradict your claims.
Keep reading RT vatnik
>>30365315
>american thinker
>PPP
>"PPP is the international currency"
>not just russia, but russia china and iran to the US
>russia only about 25% PPP of US spending anyways, as if it mattered
WEW LADDY, WHERE TO START?
I mean, if you believe anything you read on the internet, let me give you this gem...
http://timecube.2enp.com/
>everything you know is a LIE.
>>30365344
>>30365346
His source uses purchasing power parity as a way to make China and Russia seem scarier than they are
>>30363701
>Russia has been hit hard by sanctions but manage to keep thier internal economy working fine
>>30365353
Now thats what I call Pentagon Budget Reports 2016
>>30357814
>Russia couldn't singlehandedly-destroy USA in a week
TOP KEK AMERICAN PIG SHIT!!! Oh believe you me, us Russians are ITCHING for a war with USA. We will fucking ANNIHILATE your dirty country. There wouldn't be a square meter of American soil that has running water, electricity, or petrol that isn't on fire, once our airforce and navy is done bombarding your defenseless country. Then, our army boys (we'd send the tatars and other mongrel races first) would swoop in, raping your women, and killing EVERY American pig shit they see. When Russia's done with you, we will have committed acts of genocide. Of course no one is gonna do shit about it
>>30358023
>hundreds of millions
And number would fall into the billions lad, and most of the united states.
>>30365353
>yfw if Russia was a NATO member it would be chastised for not meeting defense spending requirements
They can't even defeat Ukraine yet alone the entire NATO.
>>30365366
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZkwZdo9puc
>>30358428
Kek...
Disgraceful.
>>30358023
>NATO will lose hundreds of millions of dead
Not just that. Practically all the accrued advantages the West has gathered over the centuries evaporates in one fell swoop. The Chinks will inherit the Earth.
>>30358215
>But the moment they got toward Germany and Poland they would just halt. The UK, France, Italy and Spain would have gathered by that point along that line with Germany and Poland.
Russia only really has to worry about the couple divisions UK and Poland can muster- only problem is they have armies, and even a goddamn tank army just across the border.
France is a wildcard, but in this dangerous game its likeliest they just sit back on their side of the Rhine and launch nukes right of the bat when the Russians invade French proper and weren't kept back via conventional means.
>>30358641
>I agree with you that their logistics are shit and that they would never be able to reach further than Germany.
Dude. If they managed to transport tens of thousands of men, and thousands of tons of material across thousands of kms of wilderness with sparse infrastructure they won't have a much harder issue with Europe's well developed transportation infrastructure.
>>30362304
>I wonder if the public would have the stomach to fight Russians who'd had a week to dig in.
They won't have just a week. Desert Shield took 5 months to complete and that's with readily available bases and ample ports of embarkation and the enemy doing nothing while you are building up.
>>30358428
>Army
Well there's your problem friendo
>>30365233
>Are russian vehicles that cheap to maintain?
Yes?
>>30365386
why is Russia depicted as a drunken hamburger helper glove?
>>30365497
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatnik_(slang)
http://readrussia.com/2015/06/09/vatnost-%E2%80%93-why-the-west-cant-understand-russia/
>>30360306
wish vox was at the top instead of the bottom
>>30365512
oh, so hed be kinda like making a character made out of mossy oak and rebel flags and calling it "redneck".
>>30365174
>>30363234
>Poland by itself has a decent chance of stopping Russia's army in its tracks.
No it doesn't. Just because they ordered a few hundred NATO gear doesn't mean they can go toe-to-toe with the Big Boys.
From what I've heard from service men of truly 1st world militaries like US, France and UK they aren't that much better than other Eastern European NATO states on the lower levels, and we don't know anything about the operational and strategic level how they perform.
Plus consider where their forces are concentrated: they have a division and a couple lower units across Kaliningrad itself- which has
"In the army of the Kaliningrad special district at the beginning of 2010 there were 811 tanks, 1,239 armored vehicles and armored personnel carriers of various types, 345 artillery and rocket systems", a division and lots of other units on the wrong side of the border and the rest smattered all over Eastern and Central Poland. Yeah. that small enclave matches pretty much the entirety of the Polish ground forces- Polish High command would scramble all of those to the Kaliningrad border just to match the Kalinigrad encalve's forces which would then in turn leave them vulnerable to getting themselves encircled when the rest of the Western MD comes pouring across the border 2-3 days later.
>>30365120
>pac-3 and THAAD
Impressive.
A 20km altitude joke barely capable to go after a fucking Scud, and a kinetic hit-to-kill interceptor designed against purely ballistic threats. Nigger, Iskander-M is a Mach 6.7 missile with quasibalistic flightpath, it's an aerodynamically maneuvering target designed specifically to evade US missile shields. When Iskanders are launched their initial phase they fly near vertically towards space like ICBM does. Patriot, Aegis, jesus fucking crist.
>offshore USN naval airwings
Point taken. Snuff the Burkes with Backfires and Flankers and Oscars armed with Kitchens, Moskits, Clubs and Granits and then launch the Iskanders.
>>30365233
The Heritage foundation link is there. There's just few paragraphs, but yeah, trailer trash and reading comprehension.
>>30365344
>>30365346
>still posting dollar based statistics
So if ruble lost half of it's value, that must means Russian military was also slashed in half, because they pay their soldiers and buy T-90s in dollar right?
The military budget for this year is 3.14 trillion roubles and will continue being so regardless of how much the ruble is worth in the international market.
>>30357814
Fun fact, Russia has been mediocre at best in every single war it's been in. The one they "won" they won by throwing themselves into machine gun fire until one got through while Germans were reloading after slaughtering hundreds of slavs in one go.
The Russian military has never ever been strong and isn't, but manages to look cool and badass while being by definition average.
>>30365546
>Value of currency not tied to the economy
>Budgets not affected by the economy
>>30363770
>What is a globe
>>30358428
like slavs are white lel
>>30364901
>Russia is trying to reset relations with Japan in hopes that it can keep the land they hold in the Kuril islands.
The Nips are in no position to threaten Russia's grip of the Kurils. They are in for the mother of all Deflationary spirals and a shooting war would just jumpstart a much further collapse, nevermind that Japan neither has the resources or the men to risk in such an endeavour.
>But also Chinese and Russian interests In central asia are starting to clash as the Chinese silk road project requires the Chinese to bankroll the countries in the region which are already in the Russian sphere of influence.
That's the exact opposite of bad. Those states need as much money they could get and Russia can not give them that- better to let the Chinks pick up some of the slack in exchange for much needed stability of the region. Besides the core of Russia's influence in the region stems not from its economic largesse- its the Russian diaspora forming the upper class in those states, the shared Russian culture, and of course a day's drive from the nearest Russian border. None of which China can manage to replace no matter how much dosh it throws.
how many NATO members actually made the quota?
>>30365552
Tbh the T34 was a pretty great tank. Both in field capabilities and ease of manufacture. Sure the Russians could focus on churning out NOTHING but them because the US was handling the rest of the logistics, but it was a damn good tank for its time. Superior to the Sherman I'd wager.
>>30365647
5 out of 28
an equal amount of non-nato countries are more than willing to make that commitment, thank you east asia for pulling your weight.
>>30365542
US also has Israeli made SAM, David's sling defeats Iskander.
>>30365558
Vatniks gonna vatnik
>>30365546
That's a fair point, however, it has severely damaged the russian economy, both consumer and market values have gone into the dump. Especially the first, seeing as Putin took the money straight from russian social security.
That the russian economy is recovering is bullshit to attract investors and to spur consumption. Real wages are falling, retail sales are falling, business climate has gone to shit and gdp probably fell around 2% this quarter. They are expending their reserves rapidly to promote growth, which will never work. At this rate, russia has something like 18 months worth of liquid reserves left.
>>30364966
Diplomacy can accomplish remarkable things when it works, but makes no difference when everyone already considers you as a threat. After what NATO did in Yugoslavia, any negotitations with Washington and Brussels just postpone the inevitable anyway. If Americans will deploy Sm-3 block IIB in Poland like they repeatedly claimed they would, Russia will be left with no choice but to launch preemptive conventional attack. Assault, inflict enemy unsustainable casualties, wipe out his offensive potential close to your borders, obtain limited territorial gains. Then you can talk.
>>30365722
>At this rate, russia has something like 18 months worth of liquid reserves left.
Reserves are rising, not decreasing.
Reserve spending is a myth invented by Estonians, because they dream of Russia getting fragmented. They know there is no way to get rid of Russia without a fight and a single Iskander could destroy the Estonian military, unlike Poland which would require at least one or two Topol-Ms.
What Estonians don't understand is if Russian economy collapse, that's what will trigger Putin to invade all Baltics, because then Russia has nothing to lose. It will be a now or never situation.
>>30365009
Hello vata. I see you had your dose of vodka today.
>>30360729
>1990s Russia is 2016 Russia
Lol
>>30360524
Fuck off cuck
>>30358641
>I agree with you that their logistics are shit
If that's true, how does Russia regularly and successfully complete the biggest combined arms training operations? Many of them are done over complete wilderness with no real support infrastructure even.
>>30365542
THAAD is for all threats in terminal, from short range missles to ICBMs, you silly man.
Its a short range solution, meant to kill the missle in its final stages. It does not care of you are a scud or a iskander.
Pac-3 is for the kalibr's.
>Snuff the Burkes with Backfires and Flankers and Oscars armed with Kitchens, Moskits, Clubs and Granits and then launch the Iskanders.
Issue with this is there is a metric fuckton of burkes (and ticos, for that matter) and they all like to hang around CVNs.
You are also trying to fight a fight that the USN has been practicing to fight since before you or i was born.
>>30365366
Oh so we're doing this?
>>30365931
>within or directly next to their own borders
Meanwhile NATO (see the US) is holding joint ops in Poland, Japan, and Worst Korea, while sustaining operations in the middle east.
Sorry slavaboos the US has been the logistics king for the last 100 years, and that shit isnt changing any time soon.
How is this even a question? NATO has more soldiers, a bigger industry, a bigger population, better tech, better intelligence, more resources and on top of that would be on the defense on their own turf.
Only in the vodka filled dreams of a Vatnik does Russia stand a chance
>>30365366
You sure deserve your daily ration of Putinka.
>>30365035
Calm down Ivan.
If it makes you feel better, with something like the same wealth as Italy, Russia is one of the most efficient countries military, tech wise (space, nuclear, etc). Despite stereotypes otherwise.
But that ain't enough.
>>30365969
lawl
>>30365997
>>30365542
> Snuff the Burkes with Backfires
The US Navy has more Burkes than the VMF has Backfires. Throw in the ones from the VVS and you have around 2.5:1.
I guess next you'll say that 2.5 backfires can launch enough missiles to overwhelm a Burke.
While at it, why not claim that a single Su-27 is a match for 10 F-22's.
>>30363524
Can I remind you that ignoring early warning on a number of occasions is exactly the reason we are still talking right now?
>>30364901
>keep the land they hold in the Kuril islands
Ignoring the fact that Japan is no threat what so ever to Russia I'd say this is fairly irrelevant.
All of Japans claims on Russian islands are questionable, especially now that the majority of the people there are Russians and the the Japanese lost a number of islands at the end of the war. I doubt anyone in Russia is worried about this at all.
>>30365366
Russia is much weaker than the Soviet Union at its peak. Meanwhile, NATO is bigger and stronger than it was in the Cold War. It's overkilled.
>>30364981
And here he is.
Hi Oppenheimer. I miss your threads.
Sorry we can't have nice things.
>>30365075
In my personal non-professional opinion; no.
There is no need to worry about an "end of the world" scenario.
>>30365120
>pac-3 and THAAD
>To intercept Iskander
Lol.
>>30367019
There is zero reason why thaad could not intercept it.
>>30366414
Yes, but the islands are the biggesf stumbling block for Japan-Russia relations. Russia has held on to Sovereign Japanese territory since the second world war, and bringing in Russians won't reduce Japan's claim considering that there was no treaty for the annexation of the islands.
So if Russia wants to engage with Japan more, they have to out the Kuril dispute behind them or at least overshadow it with other things, such as increased trade ties.
>>30365386
>>30365988
>>30366429
C is for copypasta.
>>30367434
>Russia has held on to Sovereign Japanese territory
Thats what happens when you get your ass whooped hard. Pieces of your clay get annexed, get over it LDP-shill.
>So if Russia wants to engage with Japan more
They don't, really. Sure its nice if they invest but South Korea and China are much easier to deal with and much more productive.
>>30365466
The build up to the ground war took 5 months. The air war started much earlier and was superbly successful. America can deploy squadron upon squadron of aircraft to Europe in as little as five days(probably less) . They would be striking ground targets just as fast regardless of what area denial systems the Russians would have set up. Naval forces would be already be performing defensive strikes from the med. This is on top of what NATO could muster in that time.
Russia will always lose if they are the aggressor vs NATO. Russia knows this and thus will only use proxy-wars from now on to achieve any of its goals. The retaking of Crimea to preserve their naval base for example was brilliantly done as well as their part in the smuggling of arms and men from Russia into Ukraine. In a defensive war Russia stands a very good chance at winning that conflict as they've learned how to take their geography and put it as an advantage. Millions would die in a land war if Russia was the aggressor and no nukes and multiple millions more would die if NATO had to invade Russia. Most of these deaths would be civilians no doubt.
>>30366623
>Russia is much weaker than the Soviet Union at its peak. Meanwhile, NATO is bigger and stronger than it was in the Cold War. It's overkilled.
Actually no. Both are way, way smaller than their respective Cold War peaks. Just compare Raygun buildup military to today, or Germany's Bundeswehr or lack of today as well as the rest. In terms of strength both sides would handily stomp their past selves; tech has really became that good.
>>30367827
>They would be striking ground targets just as fast regardless of what area denial systems the Russians would have set up
mmm, upholding noble kamikaze traditions. that's admirable, i can respect that
>>30365906
You're right, 1990s Russia had newer equipment.
>>30366140
Actually I won't be surprised if those Russkies introduce very agile short range IR missiles like the Morfey as an upgrade to the Backfires. They can fit tens of the missiles per Backfire without even eating up into the antiship weapon stations. Thats a very handy way of negating most of the Burke's extended range capability and opens up the option for the Backfires to close in and use smaller ranged but more numerous weapons to saturate defences even further.
>>30360306
>Vox
It might as well have a fucking happy merchant rubbing his hands in the bottom right corner.
Those fucks cannot be trusted, and should not be believed.
>>30365537
Are we just assuming Germany doesn't get involved and Merkel starts sucking Putin's dick?
Because that would be accurate.
Russia could mobilize a lot of heavy divisions, and supply them on an offensive.
Could europe? Nope, maybe france has 1
How many YEARS would it take the US to transfer over sufficient supplies & troops to fight a ground war against russia?
I'd give them 50/50 to make it to the atlantic
>>30368731
This is all assuming nobody notices Russia building up the goces necesssary for such an attack. It took the US and Coslition forces MONTHS to prepare to invade Iraq. How long do you think it would take Russia to gather up everything it needs to assault EUROPE?
Currently, all of Russia's military exploits have occurred in friendly territory or adjacent to their own borders. They've shown no indication of being able to sustain a large expeditionary force.
>>30360401
Russia wouldn't use nuclear weapons first. We would. It's why we have a highly developed tactical nuclear arsenal.
>>30360621
What satellite states whose policies they were largely in control of existed outside of Eastern Europe/former Russian Empire tho? I can't think of any.
>>30363642
>newfag detected
we never said anything good about russia before that too
>>30365843
>Poland which would require at least one or two Topol-Ms.
and will get nuclear annihilated by the west
>What Estonians don't understand is if Russian economy collapse, that's what will trigger Putin to invade all Baltics, because then Russia has nothing to lose. It will be a now or never situation.
>roaaawwww
>le very dangerous russia bear maymay
cute
also, it's adorable that you think that russia, the russian people and pootin is a entity and that pootin will risk anything for "the pride" of the whoreland
putin doesn't give a shit about the russian people or his nation
he will certainly not risk losing his multi billion dollar villa near sochie, nor his money on a bank account, nor his gold covered rooms in the kremlin.
>>30365537
>Just because they ordered a few hundred NATO gear doesn't mean they can go toe-to-toe with the Big Boys.
I know this conflicts with your worldview, but Poland is one of the 'big boys'.
>>30366006
>pushing a few thousand conscripts around the nation in a train
>somehow this is a accomplishment
wew
where to begin?
>>30365843
>What Estonians don't understand is if Russian economy collapse, that's what will trigger Putin to invade all Baltics, because then Russia has nothing to lose. It will be a now or never situation.
>invading a group of countries for no economic, strategic or political reason other than you can
k
>>30362178
That's not the US's war mate, you can't hate the US and then expect them to bail your ass out every single time you fuck up an up in a shit situation
>>30369333
>t. "true american" aka. a filthy slav
>>30369145
>putin doesn't give a shit about the russian people or his nation
Putin is actually Stalin-tier crazy. The oligarchs do love their money and life, but Putin doesn't care about wealth, the annexation of Crimea cost billions to all oligarchs, some of them can't even go to their London homes anymore which is where they spent most of their time.
Russian soldiers will follow orders blindly and will shoot at anybody they're ordered.
>>30368085
>opens up the option for the Backfires to close in
>for the Backfires to close in
>Backfires close in
against a ship designed around anti-air capabilities and almost certainly sailing with a carrier
>>30358141
>implying Russia will leave them totally defenseless
>>30366140
>The US Navy has more Burkes than the VMF has Backfires
There are enough Backfires to fire a Kh-22 into every single ship in every single CSG in the USN.
>>30368935
>Russia wouldn't use nuclear weapons first
It would if the existence of the state is in danger.
>It's why we have a highly developed tactical nuclear arsenal.
No, it's why the US literally begs Russia to declassify its tactical nuclear arsenal. Which they will naturally never do.
>>30357859
true nato has shitty leaders
>>30357814
Short answer; no.
Long answer; hell no.
Basically, everyone outside of NATO has the same problem; lack of force projection.
It doesn't matter how many troops planes and bombs you have. If you lack the infrastructure to get them to the fight, you're just sitting ducks until someone with better mobility comes along. Also, non NATO militaries are pretty far behind tech wise
tech>mobility>firepower>numbers
>>30365955
>THAAD
>To intercept ICBMs
It becomes more and more hilarious with your every post.
>>30369800
>No, it's why the US literally begs Russia to declassify its tactical nuclear arsenal. Which they will naturally never do.
If only listing those numbers was a requirement of a treaty or series of treaties dating back decades or something..
>>30369822
The only relevant NATO members are USA, UK and France.
Everyone else are cannon fodder.
>>30369167
>Huge ass exercises among all military branches
>Pushing a few thousand conscripts around the nation in a train
Yeah, where to begin?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0UXyOv2j_4
>>30369145
>Western nations going to a war for a random Eastern European shithole
Sweet Estonian dreams.
>>30369837
Yeah, if only. The US dreams of such a treaty to this day, but too bad for them Russia just keeps telling them to fuck off.
>>30369883
>UK and France
>relevant
Only because they are theoretically capable of limited nuclear retaliation. If only they also had balls.
>>30369167
Wew lad, aparently you forget what the exercises are all about. The accomplishment is consistent improvement in deployement speed, combat readiness, branches cohesion, force composition and operational mobility. Western exercises pale in comparison, there's hardly ever more than one branch present on the field, and most of the participants are staff anyway. In fact the latest shitfest in Poland might have seen the first NATO attempt to simulate combined arms offensive at company size, whereas the Russians regularly organize them on divisions level.
>>30368974
>newfag detected
Why are you talking about yourself?
If a war escalates and Russia puts nukes in the air, do you think the US/NATO would fire back??
Because I know they wouldn't.
>>30360306
I have never cringed so hard in my fucking life, that infographic radiates cancer.
>>30357814
I'm currently reading "2017 War With Russia" written by Gen Sir Richard Shirreff, who was NATO's DSACEUR until recently
I'm about 2/3 through, and damn is it concerning.
>>30369776
> Kh-22 literally unable to be intercepted.
> You can shoot 100 SM-2/6 at a Kh-22 and none of them will do anything
> Kh-22 immune to any sort of detection, you only notice it after it hits
> KH-22 100% reliability, will never fail under any circumstance
I thought I heard it all until Vatniks say a single Tu-22M can take out an Aegis equipped DDG with 100% certainty.
>>30372026
My post contains nothing you've "quoted". There is no need to be upset.
>>30372070
Your implications are Hilarious though.
What was your point then? What would one kh-22 accomplish?
>>30371880
Clearly not written by an economist.
Real war with Russia would be the Russian economy imploding the moment Europe cuts them off and being unable to pay their military. Then it ends.
>>30369719
Close-in here being 300 km, and the weapons employed Kh-15s or modern derivatives of.
>>30368935
>It's why we have a highly developed tactical nuclear arsenal.
You don't. tactical nukes aren't actually that much useful as compared to conventional munitions nowadays except in the antiship role.
>>30373171
And this post is clearly written by a moron.
>>30373171
>this post
Dude, are you from /int/ or /pol/?
>>30373081
No, anon. Only hilarious thing here is your post that contains exactly nothing but dull implications, strawman arguments and false quotes in a pathetically obvious attempt to put words your opponent never said in his mouth.
As for the point, it is that even if the entire CSG force of the entire USN was to gather for an attack, Russia would still have at least one Kh-22 per every single ship in it to accompany other missiles, so tying to build an argument around an implication of some kind of a "deficit" of Backfires is nonsensical.
>>30358428
It should be noted this Army ROTC detachment got fucked real hard for this fiasco. They lost their commander if I remember correctly.
t. AFROTC Cadet who played in a basketball tournament with them, the little one in the pic was an absolute bitch by the way.
>>30360306
>Deathshead
>Russia loses control of nuclear arsenal
Oh I am laff
>>30373994
You are implying it takes only one missile to sink a ship, and ships have no defense against missiles nor the bombers that carry them.
This may surprise you, but the Ticonderoga and Arleigh Burke classes were designed to defend against massed missile attacks. Anything short of a an attack by multiple regiments of Naval Bombers has a small chance of overwhelming a CSG's escorts.
CSG 1 for example, has no less than 4 Aegis equipped ships, packing 400+ VLS cells. Assuming an abysmal accuracy of 30% for the SM-2 and SM-6, that's still the better part of 100 ASHM's before the CSG runs out of long range interceptors.
>>30363770
>>russia
>>depth with no ukraine
Exactly. Russia would have to occupy Ukraine just to create strategic depth. NATO would be ready and waiting long before they entered western Europe.
So much for the "week to dig in" scenario.
>>30364018
And also Desert Storm.
>>30374498
>You are implying
No, I am not. It may surprise you, but trying to set a strawman second time in a row doesn't make it any more effective.
>>30374858
then how can you say there isn't a "deficit of backfires".
Russia only has 150 working backfires across all of their armed forces, while the Soviets had almost 500.
Average out the number of Backfires over the number of DDG/CG and you get an abysmal ratio of about 2 to 1.
Do you think 2 backfires/ DDG or CG is enough? If not, then Russia has a deficit in Naval bombers.
Since there isn't a deficit of bombers, then 2 Tu-22M's should have zero problems taking out a DDG with their 2 KH-22 missiles a piece.
>>30373626
>"Hey Bill, should we provide air cover for that destroyer operating solo and/or that carrier group?"
>"Nah, man. They got it."
>"Not even an AWACS?"
>"Nope."
>>30360306
>the world is destroyed and Russia would still claim they won
>>30373171
No, i clearly stated it was written by an ex British and NATO General based on Russia's effectiveness in Ukraine
>>30375049
Just to add something to conversation. Every Su-27, Su-33, Su-35 and Su-32/34 is capable of carrying a single X-35 missile, and most likely, new "Kalibr" missile. So, talking about "Backfire shortage" is REALLY silly. There is more than enough carriers to sink anything that floats close enough. And I am not even talking about shore defence and naval units.
>>30375049
Because there is no such a deficit, since even when opposed by all CSGs in the USN together the fleet of Backfires would still have a missile for every single ship.
>>30369971
You mean the thing Putin just asked for, like, verbatim just asked for like yesterday?
>>30376614
Only MiGs have been tested to carry Kalibr.
>>30377127
>Only scotsmen have been tested to carry caber
>>30376670
So now you are outright saying that one missle per ship is enough to overcome its defenses.
Otherwise, thats a defacto deficit.
>>30376614
Sm-6 far out ranges the kh-35.
>>30360306
>little green men
>far-right
Nazi Ayyy Lmaos?
>>30365794
Let's go over Yugoslavia. Serbs start three wars, commit ethnic cleansing, genocide on live TV and are proud about it. NATO intervenes and bring Serbs to table, gives them more than they deserve by any metric and than 3 years later serbs start another war, start executing entire families NATO tells them to stop they double down on killing and NATO spends the next three months bombing infrastructure and military objectives. If NATO was as bad as people present it they would have taken every piece of land in Serbia inhabited by minorities.
>>30377288
Didnt the NATO bombs do luke zero actual damage. If my memory serves me right, the the serb army rolled out of the occupied regions nearly unscathed
>>30365009
>Russia puts out 200 modernized T-72B3's at annual rate. Net-centric capability, thermals with night vision, updated armor and armament put them at least on par with 2A7
Oh, boy. Just No.
Annual rate is around 100 and they are old hulls getting modernized. No new tanks are produced.
How is t-72b3 on par with leo2A7? Firepower? No. Protection? No. Mobility? Well... kind of.
Truthfully T-72B3 is far inferior to 2A7. Barely on par with 2A4.
Autoloading system limits the cardridge length which results in lower penetration than the unitary munitions of L44. Not to mention the L55. Base armor of B3 is old soviet production which was penetrated by 105mm HEAT in testings conducted in West Germany. Now it just has some applique ERA on turret front. Ergonomics of gunner are just bad. The thermal sight is weirdly placed to the left side of the gunner who has to lean to operate it.
>>30377388
The Serbs were very good at hiding their stuff and setting out decoys, the only disadvantage being they couldn't actually use any of their equipment for anything.
>>30377150
>Obninsk fired a Kalibr after modernization
>All Victor III can fire Kalibr
Any source on Sukhois carrying Kalibr?
>>30357814
>Do they stand a chance against nato ?
No
Every vatnik in this thread somehow assumes that russia will be free to spend half a year building invasion forces on the border without NATO not noticing, that russia could fly bombers over hostile territories without being intercepted to attack carriers, that carriers won't launch interceptors or AWACS for protection, that russian equipment will have a 100% availability rate, that russia won't suffer any kind of logistical friction whatsoever, that the countries about to be invaded will be taken by surprise and that the US will keep the same leisurely preparation rate as they did during the gulf war when fucking WW III is at hand.
>>30377127
MiGs have shorter range and lower payload than Sukhoi. So, if MiG-29 can use Kalibr, Su-27 can use it too.
>>30377497
>>30365578
Whiter than you, that's for sure.
>>30358141
And then you woke up, found out nothing has changed and you are still an immense dumbass.
The End.
>>30360306
>NATO fails to intervene in Estonia
>NATO demonstrates it won't hold up its obligations and falls apart immediately
Yeah because that totally happened with all those countries who had treaties with Ukraine regarding Ruski aggression (UK, Germany, US) wait no they all know that appeasement is a better strategy. Chart is too black and white.
>>30377577
The only treaty signed, defense wise with the US, was also signed by russia.
>>30377545
What about the 27, thats the one i care about.
There are only about 50 or so SU-35
>>30377534
It probably physically can, but what about software integration?
>>30369836
>The THAAD Radar is an X-Band active electronically scanned array Radar developed and built by Raytheon at its Andover, Massachusetts Integrated Air Defense Facility. It is the world's largest ground/air-transportable X-Band radar. The THAAD Radar and a variant developed as a forward sensor for ICBM missile defense, the "Forward-Based X-Band - Transportable (FBX-T)" radar were assigned a common designator, AN/TPY-2, in late 2006/early 2007.
>>30377008
I think it was real in your mind, anon.
>>30377127
>Only MiGs
>Posts a picture of Su-35S
Anon, what?
>>30377612
>What about the 27
SM upgrades are more or less unified with Su-35S and do carry Kh-35.
>There are only about 50 or so SU-35
There's an order for 50 more.
>>30377814
>putin has TEN TIMES more nukes than nato
What the actual fuck.
>>30377696
>B-but wikipedia mentions ICBMs, and a radar based on a number of other radars, so THAAD must be totally capable of intercepting an ICBM...
More and more entertaining with every new post.
>The FBX-T Radar will provide early detection, tracking, and discrimination of threat missiles, providing data to the BMDS sensor network.
>Raytheon will leverage existing technology from its open architecture-based family of radars which includes the Theater High Altitude Area Defense radar, the Ground Based Radar-Prototype, the Sea Based X-band radar, and the sea based High Power Discrimination radar.
>The Forward Based X-Band Radar-Transportable (FBX-T) will provide a capability to detect ballistic missiles early in their flight and provide precise tracking information for use by the BMDS
>The radar is a defensive system with no offensive capability
http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/fbx-t.htm
>The boost phase defenses can defeat ballistic missiles of all ranges including Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs), but it is the most difficult phase in which to engage a missile. The intercept "window" is only from one to five minutes. Although the missile is easiest to detect and track in the boost phase because its exhaust is bright and hot, missile defense interceptors and sensors must be in close proximity to the missile launch.
>Terminal phase interceptor elements include the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) now being delivered to the U.S. Army
>These mobile systems defend against short- to medium-range missiles.
http://www.mda.mil/system/elements.html
So what does it mean exactly? It means that FBX-T is just a related development not directly relevant to THAAD, which itself is just the same old bullshit to intercept Scuds. And we all know how "good" Americans are in intercepting Scuds.
>>30377183
Nope anon, still not even close to set a proper stowman that I will bite.
>>30377612
Su-27 have virtually the same airframe as Su-35, main difference is in the engines.
>>30377635
Software?! On my Su-27?! Lol. No, seriously speaking, Su-27SM is unified with Su-35S in terms of avionics, software, etc. Backward compartibility rules the sky.
>>30365578
Are you saying that immigrants from all over Europe that formed America 300 years ago,brought niggers from africa and mixed with the indians are whiter than eastern europe?
read a book nigga
>>30357814
>Russia
>extremely corrupt and inefficient army
>standing a chance in an open conflict
The average Russian soldier would sell his equipment and defect in the next best moment, see Afghanistan and Chechnya.
None of you fuckers realise all Russia has to do is roll into Ukraine and the Baltics and we can do dick all to stop them. Once they have them we can't counterattack without risking major escalation, as the Russians will formally annex the countries top Russia, and will then claim any NATO attack is a strategic threat to Russia itself.
Only ignorant fucks underestimate their enemy like you fuckers are doing, they don't need to take half of Europe to have NATO by the short and curlies.
>>30377926
> It means that FBX-T is just a related development not directly relevant to THAAD,
But it is.
Ready to get blown the fuck out?
>effective against..
>all classes of ballistic missiles
>all
>THAAD does not use a FBX-T
WEW FUCKIN LAD, what exactly do you think it uses?
>>30377960
>Su-27 have virtually the same airframe as Su-35, main difference is in the engines.
No, anon, it is not. Among the main differences are the new airframe, new engines and new avionics.
>Su-27SM is unified with Su-35S in terms of avionics, software
However this is correct.
>>30377993
>Ready to get blown the fuck out?
Are you? Oh wait, you already got BTFO by my previous post. So let me repeat:
>These mobile systems defend against short- to medium-range missiles.
http://www.mda.mil/system/elements.html
>>30377998
In term of payload carrying capability it is virtually the same. And that is what could in theory prevent the use of "Kalibr"
>>30378070
ur moms payload is bigger
>>30377992
> annex Baltics
Ever heard of article V?
>>30378104
Thats what he is saying though. Once Russia annexes Baltics, NATO loses its meaning and power, even though western countries might be untouched by the war. Its NATO who loses, not the western nations themselves.
>>30365578
low quality bait cyka blyat
>>30378104
Where was NATO?
>>30377442
>Annual rate is around 100 and they are old hulls getting modernized. No new tanks are produced.
Annual rate is actually 300, they just recently halved it though.
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1776063.html
>150 units
>How is t-72b3 on par with leo2A7? Firepower? No. Protection? No. Mobility? Well... kind of.
Its not meant to match the latest 2A7, that's why the T-90MS exists.
>Barely on par with 2A4.
The T-72B3 is actually much, much better than the vanilla Leo 2A4. Better sensors first of all- 2000s era thermals are way, way better than 80s vintage. In the firepower department the B3s boast modernized guns with much better pressure as well as utilizing longer ammo that upgraded T-90s were only able to use until now. This is the same combo that would require extensive uparmoring to withstang that we have seen in Leo 2 Reveolution and the likes- unfortunately 2A4s don't have them. Plus Relikt + base armor actually needs the very best DM-53/63 ammo shot from the L/55 to stand a chance of penetrating- which the 2A4 again does not have.
>Autoloading system limits the cardridge length which results in lower penetration than the unitary munitions of L44.
Again it no longer applies. The maximum projectile length is stretched to 740 mm, making it on par with the DM-53/63. Plus the Russians utilize both DU and WHA APFSDS.
>Base armor of B3 is old soviet production which was penetrated by 105mm HEAT in testings conducted in West Germany
BS. Show me a source. This is the first I heard of a 105 mm HEAT doing such.
>The thermal sight is weirdly placed to the left side of the gunner who has to lean to operate it.
Much better than the potato on the 2A4 still.
>>30378163
Is it north of the Tropic of Cancer?
Did Portugal even invoke Article V?
>>30378169
>BS. Show me a source
He will now bring you some forum post about random T-72M side hit and go bonkers when you will note how irrelevant it is.
>>30364981
Oppenheimer I genuinely don't understand why you think MIRV's are these magic undefendable and undetectable devices.
I understand that there are decoys and that you won't NECESSARILY know which ones are hot or not, but the fact still remains that an object entering our atmosphere, even initially, is going to be easily tracked and targeted. There are multiple quick launch systems both space borne and ground based that have been released to public knowledge that could defend against a past-past separation MIRV threat. The only reasoning I can see behind you thinking we can't intercept them is just numbers. We don't know the numbers though, and can only make a wild guess as to how many defenses are in place and ready.
>>30378104
Once Russia invades the Baltics to "protect the ethnic Russian non-citizens" we would have a fucking job at dislodging them.
NATO would be slow to respond, and Russia would no doubt threaten escalation if we threatened defeating their forces.
>>30378169
>LiveJournal
>>30378216
OK serious question.
Why would Russia invade the Baltics?
What's in it for them?
