Military Review

What do American analysts think about the modernization of the Russian army

228
What do American analysts think about the modernization of the Russian army "Strategy Page" - An American online publication, positioning itself in the media market as a source of fresh information on military topics. This resource publishes a lot of materials about the armed forces of the world, gives analytical articles about wars and events in “hot spots”. Here you can read about various weapons systems (armored vehicles, artillery, naval aviation etc.), about the software used in military affairs, about information wars and the like. Lately, judging by the summer materials, the Strategy Page has been very interested in the Russian army - in particular, issues of its modernization.


For example, in a recent article (from 5 August) "Strategy Page" reports on the dispute "Russian military officials," breaking spears in the controversy about the usefulness of the launched military modernization. On the American website, they note that the trouble with Russian modernization lies in the very approach to it: only a few people have access to the secret thousands of pages of analysis and calculations to improve the sun.

It is noted that not all of these people find meaning in the “State Armaments Program” (or SAP). But how can society debate on this program, if no one is able to criticize it specifically and specifically? After all, it is covered with the darkness of mystery. Existing critics say that SAP is a “hodgepodge” made from Soviet military science of the era and scattered facts and goals. Moreover, SAP, apparently, does not give any realistic suggestions on how to cope with corruption in the military and defense industries, as well as solve the problems of bad management of the defense industry.

The authors of the material believe that corruption and poor governance have created serious problems in Russia. Many officers are not interested in SAP proposals aimed at improving combat capability. Many senior officers, American analysts write, are still much more concerned about their own enrichment than the creation of modern armed forces, which is relevant since the end of the Cold War.

As for the officials who are in charge of the defense industry of Russia, they are apparently incompetent in the field of new weapons. In the army for many years complain about it. SAP critics want more "realism" in relation to solving urgent problems in the army, especially in the fight against corruption and in overcoming the obsolescence of Russia's defense industry.

Meanwhile, Americans say, military modernization efforts have been underway for almost a decade: the government has realized that something needs to be done with rapidly aging military equipment.

In many cases, the site notes, procurement is important, because the Russian armed forces still use military equipment and equipment from the Cold War era - what was made in 1970 and 1980, and even in 50 s and xnumx's.

The attitude to the Russian modernization of the armed forces at “Strategy Page” is as follows: the defense industry of Russia is not at all world-class; the Russian military usually receives updated equipment from the Cold War, which cannot compete with new generations of Western technology.

From some information about SAP, the authors conclude that in the next decade at least one third of the existing equipment will be replaced in Russia, and in some categories (usually high-tech) - and more than 80%.

The Russian government is making big plans. But if it does not fulfill them, the morale of the army will drop below the plinth. This will happen especially quickly on navy. The authors note that from 1991 until recently, Russian warships are idle on the docks, and as a result, a whole generation of sailors has almost no marine experience. This is "the path to defeat in wartime, and sailors, especially senior commanders, are well aware of this."

Also on the site it is noted that a big problem is the fact that the new equipment, which was received by the troops, the army "is not impressive." The military can go online and see the technical characteristics of many types of modern Western technology. Russian weapons rarely look good by comparison, analysts say.

In conclusion, the authors write that no one knows exactly how much money the Soviet Union spent on armaments during its glory days — when its army was called the Red Army, and the powerful naval forces were known as the Red Fleet. The authors believe that the USSR spent on armaments more than ten percent of GDP ("no one is sure about the exact figures, since the Communists were not big fans of accounting and accurate financial reporting").

Today, Russia plays by the Western European rules, trying to keep military spending at the level of 3-4 percent of GDP. Moreover, a significant part of these means will only replace the weapons of the Cold War. Moreover, this will happen if the prices for oil and natural gas do not drop - and this cannot be, the authors of the material are sure. Therefore, the current Russian army will be nothing more than a “shadow” of the Soviet army in the days of its glory.

Observed and translated by Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
228 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. andrey777
    andrey777 7 August 2013 08: 33
    61
    Another propaganda of Western weapons. As they say business and nothing personal
    1. experienced
      experienced 7 August 2013 08: 51
      -59 qualifying.
      Which set minus? I ask the moderators to bring Judah to clean water am
      1. Corsair
        Corsair 7 August 2013 12: 20
        18
        Quote: seasoned
        Which set minus? I ask the moderators to bring Judah to clean water

        Oh, how not beautiful, A-Z-YA lol
      2. Radoslav
        Radoslav 7 August 2013 17: 06
        0
        Ss..ka selling, Let's see after a while Russia will once again put the whole world in cancer, and there is no need to read articles with such chases, such as boobies, cowards, experienced ones, these nicknames speak for themselves about these little people
        1. Apologet.Ru
          Apologet.Ru 7 August 2013 18: 06
          23
          hi
          Well, if they blame them, then what? That's right - go the right way, comrades!
          1. cdrt
            cdrt 8 August 2013 09: 46
            +6
            So why do they blame it?
            Take away the author, replace with someone’s name from for example site commentators wink - all the main conclusions then coincide:
            1. Yes, what is this weapon of the 1980s, ie times of the cold war
            2. Yes, what is supplied for the most part from the "reserve" of the USSR
            3. Yes, the situation in the fleet is awful (for example, if we take the number of ships)
            4. Yes, the rearmament plans are very ambitious and, given the need to restore many chains / technologies, a priori in full, probably until 2020, are impossible (you can look at the same shipbuilding and postpone the delivery of ships).
            5. Its only not lazy to react wink

            Total: American experts perceive our rearmament in fact the same way as ours.
            There are no cries for over militarization. Well well wink
            Praised our own - well done, we also praise our own, and their hai wink
            1. Don
              Don 8 August 2013 12: 54
              +7
              Quote: cdrt
              1. Yes, what is this weapon of the 1980s, ie times of the cold war

              So what? Look when the F-16, F-18, F-15 began to enter operation. It was necessary to rearm the army in the 90s with a weak economy?
              Quote: cdrt
              2. Yes, what is supplied for the most part from the "reserve" of the USSR

              Again this nonsense. And that they should not have been used? That would be stupid. US that does not use the backlog of the 80s? The Russian Federation uses the backlog and is developing a new one.
              Quote: cdrt
              3. Yes, the situation in the fleet is awful (for example, if we take the number of ships)

              This is your personal opinion. What is it based on? The number in relation to the fleets of other countries? Which ones? USA? So it's silly to compare. Strength to protect territorial waters?
        2. Lopatov
          Lopatov 7 August 2013 18: 11
          10
          What, throw caps?
          1. SPACE
            SPACE 7 August 2013 21: 20
            +6
            Quote: Spade
            What, throw caps?

            nuclear
        3. Donvel
          Donvel 7 August 2013 18: 38
          +2
          Is the whole world cancer? When was this?
          1. popoves
            popoves 8 August 2013 02: 10
            +6
            Not a single country in the world was able to launch a volley of 16 nuclear missiles from a submarine at a depth, they controlled the boat in manual mode (when launching, the storm is cooler than on attractions) !!!
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sh7-9vNWBk
            1. Donvel
              Donvel 8 August 2013 13: 18
              -5
              And did these boats save the country from collapse?
          2. German
            German 8 August 2013 03: 44
            +1
            can and cancer .... but later (a variation on the theme of x / f DMB)
            1. Donvel
              Donvel 8 August 2013 13: 19
              -3
              And caps from strategic bombers, caps!
        4. Vovka levka
          Vovka levka 7 August 2013 20: 19
          12
          Quote: Radoslav
          Ss..ka selling, Let's see after a while Russia will once again put the whole world in cancer, and there is no need to read articles with such chases, such as boobies, cowards, experienced ones, these nicknames speak for themselves about these little people

          The grandmother said that she was still wow. Yes, only a good fellow did not ride.

          Chickens in the fall count, so time will tell. It is necessary to work, and not to shout Hurray, otherwise all forces will go to a cry.
          1. poquello
            poquello 7 August 2013 22: 23
            +1
            Quote: Vovka Levka

            The grandmother said that she was still wow. Yes, only a good fellow did not ride.

            Chickens in the fall count, so time will tell. It is necessary to work, and not to shout Hurray, otherwise all forces will go to a cry.


            Well, if you don’t judge others so profitable by yourself, I’m sure that I won’t lose a gram from me, and adrenaline works from a scream. A western resource is a western resource, one thing is really true - it’s bad for the bourgeois from our military secrets.
        5. Anat1974
          Anat1974 7 August 2013 20: 33
          +1
          He set Rodoslav +. Although it sounds optimistic.
        6. experienced
          experienced 7 August 2013 20: 38
          -3
          Quote: Radoslav
          Ss..ka selling, Let's see after a while Russia will once again put the whole world in cancer, and there is no need to read articles with such chases, such as boobies, cowards, experienced ones, these nicknames speak for themselves about these little people

          Bugaga, the accuser was found ... wassat Vanek, don’t you take a lot on yourself? wink
      3. cdrt
        cdrt 8 August 2013 09: 41
        0
        if it was set by one person (it was -51, I set +), then this is really strange sad
    2. Vadivak
      Vadivak 7 August 2013 08: 55
      30
      Quote: Oleg Chuvakin
      The trouble with Russian modernization lies in the very approach to it:


      Thank you Oleg, the trouble of course, earlier for me modernization was associated with the improvement of the existing one, and after this word surfaced in the speeches of politicians, it became a symbol of the devastation of the time of perestroika


      “You understand my idea,” he repeats every day to the ruler of the chancellery, “what do I want?” I wish that industry flourished in my life, that the sacred property right was fully ensured, that order was not violated under any circumstances, and finally, that the hand was visible everywhere and on everything! You understand: "hand"! This is the program with which I speak in the administrative field, and it is natural that until I fulfill all my assumptions, until, so to speak, crown the buildings, I will not be able to calm down. ... wherever I may be, my hand will still everywhere make itself feel not burdensome, but nevertheless by even pressure - until then, I say, I will not lay down my arms. And now we will sign the papers. (...)
      Days go by days and Mitenka is still talking ....

      M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, “Pompadours and pompadurs”,
      1. Orel
        Orel 7 August 2013 09: 03
        44
        They found all the bad that they could and did not say a word about the good. Wrong approach. The main thing is not a word about strategic nuclear forces and submarine missile carriers. Apparently, if something is good with us, then for the West this is as it were.
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 7 August 2013 09: 06
          21
          Quote: Orel
          They found all the bad that they could and did not say a word about the good.

          Well, they are the same, the most, and in Russia there is no democracy, and therefore there can be nothing good in Russia. Well, the brains of American observers work like this.
          1. Natalia
            Natalia 7 August 2013 09: 37
            37
            The attitude to the Russian modernization of the armed forces at “Strategy Page” is as follows: the defense industry of Russia is not at all world-class; the Russian military usually receives updated equipment from the Cold War, which cannot compete with new generations of Western technology.

            Hello everyone!)
            I have only one answer to this: Let them fill up their fucking havalnik and poison the bikes to their children before going to bed.
            1. Natalia
              Natalia 7 August 2013 09: 44
              33
              The authors note that from 1991 until recently, Russian warships have been idle on the docks, and as a result, a whole generation of sailors has almost no marine experience.

              No comment ... winked
              1. little man
                little man 7 August 2013 09: 58
                15
                It’s just here that it’s hard to disagree with them. After all, just started to go to the Mediterranean. Yes, and it's crumbs.
              2. Ulysses
                Ulysses 7 August 2013 10: 34
                37
                In the Mediterranean Sea there is always an interflot group.
                Ships of different fleets succeed each other, a great practice for officers and sailors.
                I’m generally silent about the BDK, they go to Syria as scheduled.
                The Russian fleet is no longer standing at the wall, as in the nineties-zero.
              3. Lucky
                Lucky 7 August 2013 19: 48
                +2
                BEAUTY !!!!!! good
            2. Albert1988
              Albert1988 7 August 2013 17: 44
              14
              An excellent comparison with the Germans - I immediately immediately remembered the German pan-cook Guderianchik, who in 41 said that the T-34 was an example of primitive Bolshevik technology, which should not scare the brave soldiers of the Wehrmacht, and in his memoirs, which he had scribbled after the war, he wrote that 34- the twerk was an ubertank and a child prodigy, who almost sawed out the coolest German tanks in batches, from which the Russians won.
              1. chehywed
                chehywed 8 August 2013 02: 10
                +8
                An excellent comparison with the Germans - I immediately remembered German Guderian, who in 41 said that the T-34 is an example of primitive Bolshevik technology, which should not scare the brave soldiers of the Wehrmacht, but in its memoirs, which he had already scribbled after the war, wrote that the 34-verka was an uber-bank and a child prodigy, who almost sawed the coolest German tanks in batches, from which the Russians defeated


                Young man, learn to respect the enemy. "Kastrylevod Guderianchik" reached Moscow in 41st. By scornfully speaking about the enemy, you belittle the feat of the soldiers who died and survived in the battles with the "pot-maker". History repeats itself.
                1. Albert1988
                  Albert1988 8 August 2013 17: 24
                  +3
                  Quote: chehywed
                  Young man, learn to respect the enemy.
                  I agree with you - he didn’t choose the fastest Heinz characteristic, just after reading his memoirs he was imbued with a great disgust for this person as a person - for recognizing the heroism of our soldiers and commanders, just like his mistakes, he can be said to be completely absent, but in the whole circle difficult weather conditions are to blame, Russian wunderwafers-shushpatsers, dumb superior Wehrmacht commanders, in general, everyone except him is handsome and smart. Although it must be admitted, the talent of the commander was great.
                  1. chehywed
                    chehywed 8 August 2013 21: 48
                    +2
                    I am glad that we understood each other. And the memoirs of the German generals are remarkable in that they individually won all the battles, and for some reason all together lost the war.
                    1. p-159
                      p-159 9 August 2013 20: 04
                      0
                      in NATO, too, can’t agree
          2. domokl
            domokl 7 August 2013 10: 12
            37
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            something like the brains of American observers.

            Hi Sasha. Everyone’s brains work the same way, it seems to me. Oleg just gave an overview of not only the article, but also the comments on it. The picture is similar on our website if an article about Western weapons is published.
            But in general, I got the feeling that the Americans were panicking. They were panicked because they could not understand what was happening in Russia, they were panicked that modernization was going on (unlike the West and the USA), they were panicked because vaunted special services cannot obtain more or less serious information about the plans of the government of the Russian Federation.
            1. rolik
              rolik 7 August 2013 14: 39
              14
              Quote: domokl
              But in general, I got the feeling that the Americans are panicking. They are panicked because they cannot understand what is happening in Russia.

              Absolutely right. Everything did not go according to the plan of the CIA and Pentagon analysts. Quite the opposite. Instead of gouging everything to the end and staying with weapons of the 50s of the last century, worthless Russians begin to develop and produce new weapons. Yes, and at the same time they begin to supply him to the army. Conducting large-scale exercises. This new Minister of Defense is just crazy. This is not at all what it was necessary to do and what the Yankees expected. The Russians are increasing the military budget, and mattresses are cutting at an accelerated pace. Everything is all wrong, that’s what they cannot suck in.
              1. p-159
                p-159 9 August 2013 20: 09
                0
                I had a friend who served in Tajikistan a few years ago, so he said that NATO’s technicians in Afghanistan are mostly from the 70s, so they don’t have much technical equipment either
            2. Andrey Skokovsky
              Andrey Skokovsky 7 August 2013 16: 48
              +2
              Quote: domokl
              Quote: Alexander Romanov
              something like the brains of American observers.

              Hi Sasha. Everyone’s brains work the same way, it seems to me. Oleg just gave an overview of not only the article, but also the comments on it. The picture is similar on our website if an article about Western weapons is published.
              But in general, I got the feeling that the Americans were panicking. They were panicked because they could not understand what was happening in Russia, they were panicked that modernization was going on (unlike the West and the USA), they were panicked because vaunted special services cannot obtain more or less serious information about the plans of the government of the Russian Federation.

              I agree with everything except serious information about the plans of the government of the Russian Federation
              there they have enough ears so far ...
            3. Blackgrifon
              Blackgrifon 7 August 2013 23: 24
              +3
              Quote: domokl
              Hi Sasha. Everyone’s brains work the same way, it seems to me. Oleg just gave an overview of not only the article, but also the comments on it. The picture is similar on our website if an article about Western weapons is published.


              Do not make me laugh. Why should they panic? Our army is weakened (especially after the reforms), the fleet has practically not been updated. 2/3 of the ships in 30 or even 40 years. The officer corps and the corps of warrant officers (who formed the basis of contract soldiers) are either reduced or destroyed. The profession of a soldier is not honorable or respected. As well as are not respected and socially protected professions in the defense and scientific environment. Whether the population has confidence in government agencies (the army, law enforcement agencies, executive authorities) or not, or citizens are neutral. All three branches of the service are discredited. Patriotic programs are not effective enough. An attempt to raise the self-esteem and self-esteem of the people with the help of the church stumbles upon the active "muddying" and "discussing the linen" of the ROC by the "creative" class.
              They have nothing to fear - they, at least, are informational.
              1. p-159
                p-159 9 August 2013 20: 10
                0
                and we will go our own way
          3. Good Ukraine
            Good Ukraine 7 August 2013 11: 33
            +3
            hi Article "ordering".
            But she was amused by the fact that earlier they sprayed poison saliva in all directions, but now it is just drooling. And the snot appeared.
            "Wipe the snot and see everything in a different light" good
        2. Fin
          Fin 7 August 2013 09: 26
          10
          And it's good that they don't really know anything. As usual, the "analysis" is made from the Russian media. Some general phrases. Yes, there are enough problems, but if the military-industrial complex is raised as promised, they will be unpleasantly surprised. Until then, let them consider us backward.
          1. Constantine
            Constantine 7 August 2013 09: 35
            24
            Quote: Fin
            And it's good that they don't really know anything. As usual, the "analysis" is made from the Russian media. Some general phrases. Yes, there are enough problems, but if the military-industrial complex is raised as promised, they will be unpleasantly surprised. Until then, let them consider us backward.


            Given the level of organization of their intelligence, they know as much as they need. Unless on some, over secret samples they do not know. Simple equipment has long been shown and felt by them, or their experts have carefully watched this technique.

            PS
            But if it does not fulfill them, the morale of the army will drop below the plinth.


            So they did not realize that the Russians were fighting not because of money and pathos, but were standing for death for their homeland, albeit with an oar to the advantage. smile So many times the West raked here and never delivered the main lesson. smile
            1. Natalia
              Natalia 7 August 2013 10: 26
              +5
              Quote: Constantine
              So they did not realize that the Russians were fighting not because of money and pathos, but were standing for death for their homeland, albeit with an oar to the advantage. So many times the West raked here and never delivered the main lesson.

              You speak the truth good + + +
            2. Blackgrifon
              Blackgrifon 7 August 2013 23: 26
              +1
              Quote: Constantine
              So they did not realize that the Russians were fighting not because of money and pathos, but were standing for death for their homeland, albeit with an oar to the advantage.


              They will NEVER understand this, but morale must be reinforced with good technology, proper organization and solidarity of the people.
          2. Alexei
            Alexei 7 August 2013 19: 18
            +1
            Quote: Fin
            but if they raise the military-industrial complex, as promised, they will be unpleasantly surprised

            They will raise money in the treasury. We will melt our money into bullets ... wink
          3. poquello
            poquello 7 August 2013 22: 47
            +1
            Quote: Fin
            And it's good that they don't really know anything. As usual, the "analysis" is made from the Russian media. Some general phrases. Yes, there are enough problems, but if the military-industrial complex is raised as promised, they will be unpleasantly surprised. Until then, let them consider us backward.


            + and let them wonder how they are hammering them with these backward weapons
        3. Vadivak
          Vadivak 7 August 2013 10: 03
          +9
          Quote: Orel
          The main thing is not a word about strategic nuclear forces


          Only numbers and only the USA and the Russian Federation without NATO

          As of March 1, 2012, Russia had 1492 deployed nuclear warheads on all types of carriers, and the United States had 1737. At the same time, deployed carriers, that is, intercontinental ballistic missiles, heavy bombers and ballistic missiles in submarines, had 494 in Russia and 812 in the USA . Total deployed and non-deployed media in countries 881 and 1040, respectively
          The United States has now succeeded in surpassing any state in a whole host of new classes of weapons: miniature nuclear munitions that are not prohibited by anything, variable power ammunition, deeply penetrating nuclear munitions

          In addition, just in case, the United States holds part of the removed warheads as a return potential and does not destroy them like us, but stores them in warehouses, they also produce miniature nuclear warheads
          1. Wedmak
            Wedmak 7 August 2013 10: 08
            +3
            In addition, just in case, the United States holds part of the removed warheads as a return potential and does not destroy them like us, but stores them in warehouses,

            So such charges have some shelf life. Himself cast iron the charge becomes worthless.
            1. alone
              alone 7 August 2013 10: 21
              +3
              Do you think the amers do not know this? Surely all this is quietly replaced by new charges
              1. Wedmak
                Wedmak 7 August 2013 10: 32
                +7
                Surely all this is replaced by new charges

                Everything would be so beautiful, if not for one BUT. They have no production of weapons-grade uranium and plutonium. Their only factory closed.
                It was not for nothing that they bought weapons-grade uranium - HEU-LEU - processed for nuclear power plants from us. And now this program has ended ... a mustache ... now there is no nuclear industry in the USA. So .. the flaws remained.
                1. SASCHAmIXEEW
                  SASCHAmIXEEW 7 August 2013 11: 05
                  -11 qualifying.
                  Listen to you, and there is no splash, they have spread all over the world. And RUSSIA then where? AU RUSSIA, WHERE WHERE?
                  1. Wedmak
                    Wedmak 7 August 2013 11: 15
                    10
                    I do not quite understand your comment .. He generally what?
                    Why not the USA? There, they are still floating AUGs and under a striped flag. And as before, the scammers make Syria. And they decided to supply weapons to the militants. And money for the revolution is regularly printed.
                    Where is Russia? Russia has already plunged its face into the barrel of the G20, has already sent the United States with Snowden, is no longer running half-bent at home-grown Democrats. And you still ask where? Russia is actually a monopolist in putting cargo into orbit. Russia launches unique orbital radio telescopes, the largest producer of titanium, ... more examples are needed? Or compare with the US? With US achievements over the past 20 years?
                  2. iSpoiler
                    iSpoiler 7 August 2013 14: 26
                    15
                    Here I don’t stink)
                  3. Boa kaa
                    Boa kaa 7 August 2013 23: 10
                    +2
                    Quote: SASCHAmIXEEW
                    AU RUSSIA, WHERE ARE YOU?

                    "Yes, here I am, dear one! I am putting in order the administration, industry, the Armed Forces ... Ali does not live in the country and you see nothing of that, dove?"
                    1. Donvel
                      Donvel 8 August 2013 18: 37
                      +1
                      I don’t see, mother. Governors steal, tsar’s people rob the Orthodox people, the tsar wants a lot, but a little can. What really is there, Mother Rasseya herself says through the mouth of an overseas party
                2. alone
                  alone 7 August 2013 11: 13
                  +6
                  I wouldn’t be so confident in saying that there is no nuclear industry there. Americans are stupid, but not so much as to get everything at home. they are not our liberals who ruined everything that normally stood))
                  1. Wedmak
                    Wedmak 7 August 2013 11: 22
                    +4
                    Industry not. There is sneezing and coughing nuclear energy. The fuel for which ends. And there’s nowhere to take a new one from. That is, the reserves of weapons-grade uranium and plutonium are (in warheads), but who will process them into fuel? It’s not for you to distribute sour cream with milk.
                    ... it also became known that the last delivery of low enriched uranium to North America as part of the HEU-LEU program is scheduled for November 2013.

                    The United States also converts weapons-grade uranium into fuel for nuclear power plants from its nuclear warheads, but does not use it, but leaves it for storage. Experts note that the Megatons to Megawatts program initially drove the US uranium industry into stagnation, and the country would need significant cash injections to revive it.

                    But whether the United States will find money to revitalize the uranium industry is a big question.
                    1. abdrah
                      abdrah 7 August 2013 15: 50
                      +6
                      Do you think that for the United States, the big problem is to draw zeros on a computer and then withdraw them from your economy in the form of long-term obligations? it was more than once, for example, as during the crisis of 2008 - allegedly 1 trillion were printed, but in fact 4 ...
                3. AleksUkr
                  AleksUkr 7 August 2013 11: 39
                  +3
                  EARLY JOY. WE WILL HELP THEM ...
                  Timeline of the sale of Russian weapons-grade uranium in the USA for 1995-2012
                  First shipment 1995 of the year. Delivery of the first batch of LEU in the amount of 186 met. tonnes (metric tons) recycled from 6.1 met. t. HEU, equivalent number of 244 warheads.
                  Grand Total: Destroyed 244 warheads, sold 6,1 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                  1996 shipments of the year: USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 479 to nuclear warheads, namely 370.9 met. m. LEU derived from 12 met. t. HEU.
                  Grand Total: Destroyed 723 warheads, sold 18,1 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                  1997 shipments of the year: USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 534 to nuclear warheads, namely 358.5 met. m. LEU derived from 13.4 met. t. HEU.
                  Grand total: 1 257 warheads destroyed, 31,5 sold tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                  1998 shipments of the year: The total number of shipments of the 1998 calendar year is approximately 764 nuclear warheads, namely 571.5 met. m. LEU derived from 19.1 met. t. HEU. Part of the 1998 order is delayed by Russia with pending agreements with the US government and three Western companies at the location of the natural uranium received from USEC for the natural component of uranium LEU.
                  Grand Total: 2 021 destroyed and the warhead sold 50,6 tons of weapons-grade uranium sold.
                  1999 shipments of the year: USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 970 warheads namely 718.7 met. m. LEU derived from 24.3 met. t. HEU.
                  Grand Total: 2 991 destroyed and the warhead sold 74,3 tons of weapons-grade uranium sold.
                  2000 shipments of the year: USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 1 462 nuclear warheads namely 1037.8 met. m. LEU derived from 36.6 met. t. HEU.
                  Grand Total: Destroyed 4 453 warheads, sold 111,5 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                  2001 Shipments of the Year: September: USEC and TENEX Reach 5 000 Warheads Destroyed by Megatons Megawatts Agreement. USEC obtains a material equivalent of approximately 1 201 nuclear warheads namely 904.3 met. m. LEU derived from 30.0 met. t. HEU.
                  Grand Total: Destroyed 5 654 warheads, sold 141,5 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                  2002 shipments of the year: USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 1 201 nuclear warheads namely 879.0 met. m. LEU derived from 30.0 met. t. HEU.
                  Grand Total: Destroyed 6 855 warheads, sold 171,5 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                  2003 shipments of the year: USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 1 203 nuclear warheads namely 906.0 met. m. LEU derived from 30.1 met. t. HEU.
                  Grand Total: Destroyed 8 058 warheads, sold 201,6 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                  2004 shipments of the year: USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 1 202 nuclear warheads namely 891.0 met. m. LEU derived from 30.1 met. t. HEU.
                  Grand Total: Destroyed 9 260 warheads, sold 231,7 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                  2005 shipments of the year: September: USEC notes that a weapon-grade uranium volume equivalent to 10 000 warheads has been destroyed. USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 1 206 nuclear warheads namely the 846.0 met. m. LEU derived from 30.1 met. t. HEU.
                  Grand Total: Destroyed 10 466 warheads, sold 261,8 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                  1. AleksUkr
                    AleksUkr 7 August 2013 11: 42
                    +4
                    2006 shipments of the year: USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 1 207 nuclear warheads namely 870.0 met. m. LEU derived from 30.2 met. t. HEU.
                    Grand Total: Destroyed 11 673 warheads, sold 291,9 weapons-grade uranium tones.
                    2007 shipments of the year: USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 1 212 nuclear warheads namely 840.0 met. m. LEU derived from 30.3 met. t. HEU.
                    Grand Total: Destroyed 12 885 warheads, sold 322,2 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                    2008 shipments of the year: USEC receives a material equivalent of approximately 1 204 nuclear warheads namely 834.0 met. m. LEU derived from 30.1 met. t. HEU.
                    Grand Total: Destroyed 14 090 warheads, sold 352,3 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                    2009 shipments of the year: USEC receives the tangible equivalent of approximately 1,204 nuclear warheads namely 834.0 met. t. KNOW obtained from 30.1 met. t. HEU.
                    Grand Total: Destroyed 15,294 warheads, sold 382,4 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                    2010 shipments of the year: USEC receives the tangible equivalent of approximately 1,200 nuclear warheads namely the 857.9 MT met. t. KNOW obtained from 30 MT met. t. HEU.
                    Grand Total: Destroyed 16,494 warheads, sold 412,4 tons of weapons-grade uranium.
                    CURRENT STATUS OF TRANSACTION
                    And so, during the “uranium deal”, on July 12, 2012, Russia sold 450 metric tons (out of 500 tons agreed) of weapons-grade HEU to the USA, which were converted into 13258 tons of LEU, which is equivalent to the elimination of 18000 nuclear warheads. The deal is 90% complete.
                    http://www.usec.com/russian-contracts/megatons-megawatts

                    Whatever the Judas who stand behind this deal and justify this wild betrayal of national interests, this wild blow to national security, the United States since 1945, to this day only 550 tons of weapons-grade uranium has been able to produce.
                    It is an open question for me, what do Americans do with their uranium being removed from their dismantled nuclear warheads? And how does this process control Russia ??
                    But in spite of all the protests of the public, deputies of all levels, military, scientists, and other public figures - this “deal” has retained its strength to this day.
                    PS. Delivery is now complete. By the end of 2013, the United States will lose one of its sources of energy - low-enriched uranium from Russian nuclear warheads, Forbes magazine writes.
                    1. rus9875
                      rus9875 7 August 2013 13: 31
                      +4
                      At the same time, one must take into account the fact that there are practically no uranium deposits on the territory of Russia - all uranium was mined in the USSR on the territory of Central Asia and Kazakhstan, in the republics which our "strategists" declared at one time unnecessary ballast and got rid of them. fields in Namibia and South Africa
                      1. Wedmak
                        Wedmak 7 August 2013 16: 02
                        +3
                        At the same time, it is necessary to take into account the fact that there are practically no uranium deposits on the territory of Russia - all uranium was mined in the USSR on the territory of Central Asia and Kazakhstan

                        And what will Central Asia and Kazakhstan do with it if all its processing facilities are located in Russia?
                        And to the services of the USA, the uranium deposits of Namibia and South Africa

                        This uranium still needs to be removed and processed. And ore must be exported in hundreds of tons. Whether such transportation pays off, I find it difficult to say.
                      2. rus9875
                        rus9875 7 August 2013 19: 26
                        +2
                        if you think that uranium from Central Asia was brought to Russia in the form of ore, then you are deeply mistaken - the ore was processed on the spot, there are a lot of mining plants that were involved in this. Surely they are in South Africa And the United States bought and buys uranium in Africa, its deposits from they are also not dense, so apparently transportation pays off
                      3. dustycat
                        dustycat 7 August 2013 20: 48
                        0
                        Quote: Wedmak

                        And what will Central Asia and Kazakhstan do with it if all its processing facilities are located in Russia?

                        What about Dzhezkazgan and Karaganda?
                        It is quite enough for enrichment and primary processing.
                        In addition, the French are pushing there.
                        They have enterprises for final processing.
                        And they calmly supply plutonium to mattresses.
                        Plus recycling of old mattress charges.
                        The British also updated a lot of obsolete charges for mattresses.
                        So it makes no sense that the mattress covers have closed their processing plants.
                      4. aksakal
                        aksakal 7 August 2013 22: 43
                        0
                        Quote: Wedmak
                        And what will Central Asia and Kazakhstan do with it if all its processing facilities are located in Russia?
                        - Ust-Kamenskaya Ulbinka is already making nuclear pills - just download and get e / energy.
                        Quote: Wedmak
                        This uranium still needs to be removed and processed. And ore must be exported in hundreds of tons. Whether such transportation pays off, I find it difficult to say.
                        - carry a yellow hake, and it pays off. But there are already technologies for underground leaching, and the yellow hake mined in this way is quite cost-effective for long-distance transportation
                    2. alone
                      alone 9 August 2013 00: 18
                      0
                      Rus9875 - now it became clear why the United States suddenly turned its eyes to Central Asia starting to give its unnecessary army junk. deposits of uranium, which is most likely not exploited due to lack of specialists
                  2. kris
                    kris 7 August 2013 17: 55
                    +2
                    Quote: AleksUkr
                    But despite all the protests of the public, deputies of all levels, military, scientists, and other public figures - this "deal" has remained valid to this day

                    And why did our "raising the country from its knees", "pursuing an independent policy" not raise the issue of denouncing this agreement?
                4. zub46
                  zub46 7 August 2013 23: 37
                  0
                  Thanks to Chernomyrdin.
              2. Su-9
                Su-9 8 August 2013 00: 55
                0
                The Witcher, you would not write about what you know poorly. And then you can gullible and confuse here. For your information, in the United States produce weapons-grade radioactive substances in 4 factories. Right now.
                If not scrap, read at least here: http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_weapons_and_global_security/nuclear_weapons/techni
                cal_issues / us-nuclear-weapons-facilities.html
        4. Uralean
          Uralean 7 August 2013 11: 25
          +8
          Yes, even the United States will have a million nuclear warheads, and we only have 1500 ... Will this save the United States if only part of it passes through missile defense? What will remain of the earth if nuclear warheads fly in different directions from both sides? So, the USA’s expenses for production, and storage of excessive quantities of Nuclear weapons, fall on the US government spending, aimlessly, and mediocre ... What the USA were so nervous when Sev. Korea, did not create a perfect (in technical performance, and rather small in terms of radius of destruction) missile? After all, they have much more? It means not in this matter, but in the show-offs ... This was especially shown in the 5-day war of Georgia (armed, and trained according to American standards), and Russia .. The next DE Ms. View, as well as the competition of equipment and people in North Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, etc.
          1. alone
            alone 9 August 2013 00: 20
            0
            )) I do not think that someone will be saved from this, most likely the whole world will have to wave a pen
        5. iSpoiler
          iSpoiler 7 August 2013 14: 22
          +2
          Be calm, even this will be more than enough for the States and China, and will remain .. !! Do not underestimate. wink
        6. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 7 August 2013 23: 05
          +1
          Quote: Vadivak
          new classes of weapons: these are miniature nuclear munitions that are not prohibited by anything, variable-power munitions, deep-penetrating nuclear munitions

          No need to be so upset. These ammunition were developed and were in service even during the USSR. The Navy adopted special ammunition (warhead torpedoes, for example) with the explosive power that was changed during the preparation of the vehicle.
        7. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 7 August 2013 23: 29
          0
          Quote: Vadivak
          In addition, just in case, the United States holds part of the removed warheads as a return potential and does not destroy them like us, but stores them in warehouses, they also produce miniature nuclear warheads


          I will add that, judging by the press and the published developments, they are betting on a massive surprise attack on WMD carriers, key objects, etc. That will suppress strategic forces before retaliating.
      2. AleksUkr
        AleksUkr 7 August 2013 11: 21
        +2
        Why should we be offended? They actually tell us our bottlenecks. We even need to say thank you to them for this. And our officials and industrialists have something to work on. When our "sworn" friends have nothing to pick up on Russia, we can breathe a little.
        AND WHILE WE HAVE WHAT WE HAVE ...
        1. alone
          alone 7 August 2013 12: 31
          +3
          Do you think the military confrontation will look like Operation Barbarossa? Most likely it will be with the massive use of nuclear weapons. by the way, I notice that many members of the forum exclude the possibility of using nuclear weapons during the discussion
          1. Cap-3 USSR
            Cap-3 USSR 7 August 2013 16: 17
            0
            Under the CFE Treaty on January 1, 2011
            Former Soviet Union countries: 8 tanks, 511 BBM, 15 artillery systems of 263 mm caliber or more, 9 combat aircraft, 904 attack helicopters. (Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan)
            NATO countries: 11 tanks, 624 armored personnel carriers, 22 artillery systems of caliber 788 mm or more, 13 combat aircraft, 264 attack helicopters. Including: • Bulgaria - 100 tanks, 3 armored personnel carriers, 621 artillery systems of 1 mm caliber or more, 085 combat aircraft, 524 attack helicopters • Hungary - 738 tanks, 1 armored personnel carriers, 161 artillery systems of 100 mm caliber and more, 57 combat aircraft, 19 attack helicopters • Romania - 155 tanks, 599 armored personnel carriers, 30 artillery systems of 100 mm caliber or more, 50 combat aircraft, 23 attack helicopters.
            And the real forces in Europe are Turkey and Germany.
            1. alone
              alone 9 August 2013 00: 23
              0
              nobody reacts to CFE for a long time
        2. Cap-3 USSR
          Cap-3 USSR 7 August 2013 15: 41
          +3
          Do you really believe in this table?
        3. Igor39
          Igor39 7 August 2013 18: 56
          0
          Why scare us with their number? in a real war they will piss play with us.
          1. Lucky
            Lucky 7 August 2013 19: 59
            -1
            There will be a nuclear war, they will not attack, there will be too many losses for them personally, and this will cause a storm of indignation in their country, then they have few soldiers, the bulk of the people are not soldiers, they don’t need it, for the first Enough time for soldiers, and then there will be problems! a war is being fought to seize territory, it will be a priori nuclear attack, then the seized land will not be suitable for use, so they won’t attack while there are nuclear weapons!
        4. vladimirZ
          vladimirZ 7 August 2013 19: 27
          +2
          "Why should we be offended. They actually tell us our bottlenecks. We even need to thank them for this. And our officials, industrialists have something to work on."
          AleksUkr (1)  Today, 11:21 ↑


          Speak correctly. Our leadership needs to draw conclusions from the disastrous situation: - on the collapse of industry (after all, we all know to what extent it is ruined by the work of the Yeltsinoids); - the collapse of the army, through its reform, under the leadership of Putin-Medvedev.
          It is urgent to correct the mistakes made, and maybe not mistakes, but deliberate actions. And do not engage in hatred controversy.
      3. njvcrbqgfhnbpfy
        njvcrbqgfhnbpfy 7 August 2013 11: 26
        +2
        There is once again the double standards of a campaign towards Russia .. and this is already constantly ............
      4. 11 black
        11 black 7 August 2013 11: 53
        +4
        Quote: Orel
        They found all the bad that they could and did not say a word about the good. Wrong approach. The main thing is not a word about strategic nuclear forces and submarine missile carriers. Apparently, if something is good with us, then for the West this is as it were.

        I agree - Antey (949), moment 31, with 300 / 400 / 500, t 50, ka 52, mi 28н, Boreas, Orlans, Iskander, Solntsepeki, Tornadoes and Tornadoes for them ... still - any of these samples any Western competitor will be bent into an arc, especially air defense and MLRS, I am silent about 949 - the AUG thunderstorm
      5. Skiff-2
        Skiff-2 7 August 2013 12: 16
        +7
        In the American media, confusion and panic - cities and entire states became bankrupt, sequestration of the budget began manually, cuts in the army and navy (three aircraft carrier groups of the 90s are preparing for descent under the knife), combat aircraft are written off as whole squadrons, the army refuses to wunder the wunder F-35, downsizing in all branches of the armed forces, as well as civilian personnel ... Well, you have to somehow reassure the electorate, for example, the weakness and backwardness of the Russians. In general, they will not be envied - there is no money, there is no sea of ​​ambition, and here Al Qaeda was thrown (in Syria, Egypt and in general), they were naturally offended and now they have to close embassies in the entire region. In my opinion this is a panic - whom God wants to punish, deprives the mind. The main thing now is not to bother them ...
      6. Ivan.
        Ivan. 7 August 2013 12: 39
        +4
        Quote: Orel
        They found all the bad that they could and did not say a word about the good. Wrong approach. The main thing is not a word about strategic nuclear forces and submarine missile carriers. Apparently, if something is good with us, then for the West this is as it were.

        And what's wrong with the fact that they underestimate our prospects? If they convince their readership that Russia is "blown away" militarily, it means that they will not be able to justify the large military budget and, on the contrary, are reducing it. This is good.
    3. Tersky
      Tersky 7 August 2013 10: 36
      +1
      Quote: Vadivak
      Days go by days and Mitenka is still talking ....

      From Vadim’s despair, because this is the only thing he’s great at ... and considering his latest pearl about 08.08.08 events. just unfriendly.
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. ShturmKGB
    ShturmKGB 7 August 2013 10: 04
    +1
    As always, arrogant pro-Western propaganda ... let them think that we are weaker and dumber, there will be a surprise ...
  4. vvi84
    vvi84 7 August 2013 10: 07
    +2
    Rather not propaganda of Western weapons, but an attempt to present Russian weapons as uncompetitive. Although some developments since the Cold War era scare our "Western partners" very well.

    Well, as for corruption ... It is probably incurable for both us and them. Question in what size?
    But we will NEVER find out.
    1. dustycat
      dustycat 7 August 2013 20: 52
      +1
      Quote: vvi84
      Well, as for corruption ... It is probably incurable for both us and them. Question in what size?
      But we will NEVER find out.

      Hmm ... In Singapore, we somehow managed ..
      The truth is a little scoring on Roman law.
  5. eplewke
    eplewke 7 August 2013 10: 48
    +5
    There is, of course, some truth ... It’s impossible to achieve former greatness, but the country was different, and now the interests are different. Well, we can create an excellent and efficient army! It is a fact! Let's remember the story!
    With which army did we meet Hitler and with which escort? With which deplorable army did we meet Napoleon, and with which we spent. It is the matter of time. Our and any state has ups and downs. And I think the path to the top is just beginning. Do you remember the state of our army 20 years ago! it's just awful! and now? there are already positive trends. And if all Western politicians are pouring mud on us, then comrades are on the right path! Because we were always afraid, afraid and will be afraid !!!
    1. fzr1000
      fzr1000 7 August 2013 11: 05
      +3
      With which deplorable army did we meet Napoleon, and with which we spent.


      What are you talking about?
      1. alone
        alone 7 August 2013 11: 17
        +1
        what was the deplorableness of the Russian army from the Napoleonic? except that the strength of the deplorable army could not defeat Napoleon. The army was just more united in Russia than Napoleon, judging by the national composition of the French army, where the Austrians, Prussians and Italians were gathered, who reluctantly fought for other people's ideas.
  6. Deniska
    Deniska 8 August 2013 13: 36
    +1
    1.) Most likely, propaganda aimed at calming the potential enemies of the Russian Federation. Though they reassure themselves.
    2.) "The military can go online and see the technical specifications of many types of modern Western technology." --- Apparently theirs are military, journalists and analysts do not have the skills to access the Internet and cannot find information that, in addition to "modernized" equipment, new samples are supplied !!! Yes, perhaps a little, but this is the beginning. And for example --- How is the S-400 inferior to the LAMER M901 air defense system "Patriot" ??
  7. Su24
    Su24 8 August 2013 16: 22
    +1
    Russian military usually get updated Cold War equipment


    Actually amers do the same!
  8. psdf
    psdf 10 August 2013 04: 55
    0
    Our non-technological-looking weapons, during the events of 08/08/08, contributed to the delivery of high-tech-looking weapons to an exhibition in Moscow.
  • svp67
    svp67 7 August 2013 08: 34
    11
    The attitude to the Russian modernization of the armed forces at “Strategy Page” is as follows: the defense industry of Russia is not at all world-class; the Russian military usually receives updated equipment from the Cold War, which cannot compete with new generations of Western technology.
    Well, this is the "battlefield" for Messrs. Rogozin and Borisov - and prove to the West and, above all, to your people that American analysts are "spoiling nonsense .." We hope for your ability not only to speak, but also to organize important state affairs ...
  • vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 7 August 2013 08: 34
    12
    There is such a phrase: Vaska listens, but eats. So let yourself write and think anything, only Russia has repeatedly proved its ability to concentrate at the right time. And who will reveal to them all the secrets of modern weapons, ready or prepared for production.
  • serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 7 August 2013 08: 36
    13
    Politically unbiased sources evaluate the Russian army quite correctly.
    On the one hand - not all at once. Refreshing at least what is is already good.
    But on the other hand, without eradicating corruption, educating professionals, restoring production and science, the Russian army will not even look like the Soviet shadow.
  • Alexey
    Alexey 7 August 2013 08: 37
    +7
    There are a lot of cliches and mythical stereotypes in action. These "analysts" are not particularly deep.
    1. sub307
      sub307 7 August 2013 12: 24
      0
      Any analytical reviews can be criticized, especially if there are doubts about their objectivity. Or out of rejection when patriotic feelings suffer.
  • Alez
    Alez 7 August 2013 08: 40
    +3
    But in the USA everything is cloudless, a huge deficit, if a deflot occurs (and it does happen), the USA army will be buried without war.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 7 August 2013 08: 56
      +3
      Not cloudless. But at least they work, and are not involved in the development of funds.
      1. Regis
        Regis 7 August 2013 09: 36
        11
        I apologize right away if I misunderstood you, but you should not rush from one extreme to another.

        It is certainly possible to say that the Americans do nothing but work for the good of the Motherland, and the Russians only "master the means," but this statement will have nothing to do with reality.

        Like where it says that in America everything is bad and they are about to fall apart.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 7 August 2013 09: 46
          +3
          Quote: Regis
          and Russians only "master the means"

          But what if, in most cases, the way it is? Like ostriches?

          The Americans have the opportunity to use market mechanisms to make their defense industry work for the country. We can't do it. On the contrary, all business initiatives in the right direction are extinguished at the root, which can be seen in the example of BAZ or "Corporation Protection". And the purely mercantile, aimed at "disbursing funds" receive all-round support.
          1. Regis
            Regis 7 August 2013 10: 33
            10
            I apologize again. I don’t want to offend anyone, but in my opinion none of the people on the forum can fully know "how it really is" Neither in Russia nor tembolee in the United States. One can only make certain assumptions.

            It now reminded me of my old work) I was a worker and sincerely considered the authorities idiots) Because it periodically made decisions that I considered incorrect. Other workers did not understand them either.
            And a few years later, when I myself became the head of the same organization, I realized that most of the "idiotic" decisions were quite logical and correct in the current situation.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 7 August 2013 10: 52
              +4
              Quote: Regis
              I do not want to offend anyone, but in my opinion none of the people on the forum can fully know "how it really is"

              And this is fortunately. Most likely, everything is much worse than we know.
              For example, again BAZ. It is being squeezed out of the market for chassis manufacturers for weapons and military equipment. What for? It is correct that the corporation "Rostekhnologii" was able to master the funds for the creation from scratch of production capacities similar to the BAZ, already on the basis of KamAZ.
              There is a clear sacrifice of the interests of Moscow Region for the sake of another cut of funds.

              That is, we are observing a change in the very ideology of "rearmament of the army." The original task of rearmament itself was replaced by the task of absorbing funds and redistributing income to the pockets of the right people.
              1. Gato
                Gato 7 August 2013 13: 47
                +2
                Quote: Spade
                The original task of re-equipment itself was replaced by the task of utilizing funds and redistributing income into the pockets of the right people.

                Apparently, therefore, the mentioned rearmament plan is so secret.
              2. Very old
                Very old 7 August 2013 21: 04
                0
                Lopatov, I have already said here that the BAZ is being rotten by the "pushers" and the State Duma lobbyists in favor of KamAZ, they shouted at me as if the lobbyists themselves. BAZ also has production experience, developments for the future, ready-made personnel, opportunities. Well, what else do you need?
                1. Boa kaa
                  Boa kaa 7 August 2013 23: 54
                  +3
                  Quote: Very old
                  Well, what else do you need?

                  Its production, new jobs, a new technological base, new machines for the country and the army. And the necessary, scarce personnel will be lured by a high salary, an apartment, career growth. Yes, you never know the baits from marketing staff.
              3. Boa kaa
                Boa kaa 7 August 2013 23: 49
                +3
                Quote: Spade
                It is correct that the corporation "Rostekhnologii" was able to master the funds for the creation from scratch of production capacities similar to the BAZ, already on the basis of KamAZ.

                NOT to use the funds, but to create a domestic production of heavy multi-axis machines (chassis for PGRK ICBMs). You somehow cunningly forget that BAZ is the production base of another (yes, allied, but different!) Country. With your budget, social network, etc. Then, who will feed their KAMAZ employees? Lukashenko? He has his mouth full of citizens of the Republic of Belarus.
                So, dear, it's time to think about the realities of today, and not the stereotypes of the USSR. Although, personally, I myself will gladly vote for the renewed UNION OF SLAVIC REPUBLIC and KAZAKHSTAN and other republics of the former Union that freely joined it.
  • valodavoodoo
    valodavoodoo 7 August 2013 08: 43
    +3
    And it seems to me that John (Russian Ivan) sits somewhere in Texas and writes articles for these analysts to calm American souls, and comes on vacation to Russia to his homeland. Well, let them think. Russia, it's time for you to wake up and take up arms (development, production) !!!
  • Lopatov
    Lopatov 7 August 2013 08: 45
    +5
    They correctly described our problems. Well done.
    1. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 7 August 2013 09: 07
      +1
      Quote: Spade
      They correctly described our problems.

      This apparently Oleg correctly translated the article laughing
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 7 August 2013 09: 13
        +1
        There is a source. You can see for yourself.
  • Slevinst
    Slevinst 7 August 2013 08: 46
    +3
    well, they did not compare the new model of our technology with foreign, they just know how to make allegations
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 7 August 2013 09: 01
      0
      They do not need to compare. They are right - there is no progress. Stuck.
    2. Fire
      Fire 7 August 2013 10: 33
      +6
      For some reason, the Americans do not look at their M-16s of the 60s, "Abrams" of the 70s and other rubbish that is still used, but it is necessary to dig deeper into "someone else's underwear" ... We have many developments of the 70s. 80s and to this day surpass their Western counterparts. I still hope that Mr. Shoigu will improve our army and equip it with more modern and RELIABLE military equipment.
      1. dustycat
        dustycat 7 August 2013 21: 01
        +1
        Quote: feuer
        Something Americans do not look at their M-16s of the 60s, "Abrams" of the 70s and other rubbish,

        How many Abrams of the 1970s are equipped with the latest thermal imagers, communication systems and modern BIUS?
        How many of our tanks are equipped with thermal imagers?
        How many BMP and BMD equipped with thermal imagers were purchased by the RF Ministry of Defense?
        I am silent about BIUS (Redoubt) and communication facilities (P161 and clones) - upbringing does not allow obscene expression in the media.
    3. dustycat
      dustycat 7 August 2013 20: 55
      0
      Quote: Slevinst
      well, they did not compare the new model of our technology with foreign, they just know how to make allegations

      What is new?
      Which did not have time to accept in the USSR?
      1. Slevinst
        Slevinst 8 August 2013 08: 42
        0
        In Soviet times, there was no such electronics as they are now, and modernization of a successful Soviet chassis is the new technology. development is carried out on the example of tanks, even if you take it. Armata for example, and God forbid that the platform would be better than from T72. t72 has an excellent platform reliable and not whimsical.
  • shoroh
    shoroh 7 August 2013 08: 46
    +7
    two hundred dryers of generation 4 ++ simply annihilate "modern western technology". in general, this dull choir is simply ridiculous to listen to. after all the gay pride parades, it's ridiculous to think of Europeans as wars.
    1. svp67
      svp67 7 August 2013 08: 51
      +8
      Quote: shoroh
      two hundred dryers of generation 4 ++ simply annihilate "modern western technology".
      If only it were all that simple. Even a thousand "dryers" and MiGs of generation 10 ++++++++ will turn out to be just a heap of metal if they are not skillfully used and they do not have the appropriate support and weapons. The time of "kladens swords" was only in fairy tales. In reality, only a well-trained and reasonably balanced army equipped with modern weapons wins.
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak 7 August 2013 08: 58
        +6
        Quote: svp67
        Even a thousand "dryers" and MiGs of generation 10 ++++++++ will turn out to be just a heap of metal if they are not skillfully used and they do not have the appropriate support and weapons.


        That is why Americans are focusing on drones, a gamer who does not experience overloads and remorse is capable of much.
        1. Gato
          Gato 7 August 2013 13: 49
          0
          Quote: Vadivak
          gamer without overload and remorse

          So it’s not easier for us
        2. dustycat
          dustycat 7 August 2013 21: 03
          0
          Quote: Vadivak

          That is why Americans are focusing on drones, a gamer who does not experience overloads and remorse is capable of much.

          Nevertheless, they take flying pilots to the Dron operators.
          He knows better how not to dump Dron into a flat corkscrew.
  • Airman
    Airman 7 August 2013 08: 46
    +8
    I agree with the author of the article. Until we have a clear military doctrine of the state, there will be constant shyness from side to side. And corruption in the army is a consequence of corruption at the state level, and until state corruption is eradicated, it will also be in the armed forces, as they make up the state. Everyone wants to live beautifully, and the generals too.
    1. KG_patriot_last
      KG_patriot_last 7 August 2013 09: 37
      +4
      I agree, the doctrine is important. For me, a mass of average-priced weapons will crush a bunch of expensive last word of technology.
    2. Fin
      Fin 7 August 2013 20: 12
      0
      Quote: Povshnik
      Until we have a clear military doctrine of the state, there will be constant shyness from side to side. And corruption in the army is a consequence of corruption at the state level, and until state corruption is eradicated, it will also be in the armed forces, as they make up the state. Everyone wants to live beautifully, and the generals too.

      Military Doctrine - a declaration of state policy in the field of military (defense) security. This is a system of official views and regulations, establishing the direction of military construction, preparing the state and the armed forces for war, methods and forms of its conduct.
      Declaration (French declaration - declaration) - 1) in constitutional law the name of a normative legal act with the aim of giving it a solemn character, emphasizing its particular importance for the fate of the relevant state. A specific feature of the declaration as a normative legal act is the general, non-specific nature of the provisions contained in them, requiring additional legislative regulation.

      Well, where does the military doctrine?
  • MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 7 August 2013 08: 46
    +6
    An article to reassure civilian western plankton ..
    1. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 8 August 2013 00: 25
      +2
      Quote: MIKHAN
      An article to reassure civilian western plankton.

      I agree with you, Vitaly. The little thing is weak, in my opinion wretched, for an amer chewing a hamburger. So that he sleeps peacefully.
      All military analysts argue with splashes from the pen, which is better: F-22 or our PAK FA. Here is silence. And why? Ours is much cheaper and TTX higher than an American.
      Armata is the highlight of the tank technology exhibition program. The show was canceled for reasons of secrecy, so the insinuations went: "nothing is ready, nothing to show!"
      Ash and Borea is so, childish pranks. What to write about them. And these are the quietest boats to date in the world. Well and so.
      Do we have a problem? Yes, even eat your ass! But why only bubble about them? What, little chernushka recently in the press has become, you need to spoil?
      I do not blame Oleg for anything: what they wrote, then translated. Although, as giving this forum material, it could have kicked the scribblers for the tendentiousness and one-sidedness of the material.
      I never belonged to cheers-patriots, I didn’t deal with hatred. Moreover, I consider this practice to be extremely harmful and dangerous for the training of the armed forces. But, not to see the shifts, not to rejoice at them, not to provide, at least, moral support to the leaders and laborers of the military-industrial complex, I consider it a black ingratitude for their titanic work. IMHO.
  • buzuke
    buzuke 7 August 2013 08: 49
    +2
    Well, there are some fair statements, but we know them without the snotty ones. this is material for their consumer. I do not think that the army is upset by new helicopters, submarines, air defense, etc., although there are areas in which we are clearly sagging. moving slowly - yes. not always high-quality performance - it also happens. but the main thing is that the process is ongoing. it's like a steam locomotive - the main thing is to disperse
  • ed65b
    ed65b 7 August 2013 09: 00
    +9
    Well, yes, and the T-50 is certainly just a miserable shadow of a raptor. Keep documents secret? And they wanted to be given something to read? naive people. And what they are interested in modernizing the Armed Forces, it means that things are going in the right direction, so the probable friends stirred.
  • Dumb cattle
    Dumb cattle 7 August 2013 09: 02
    13
    Complete nonsense that it is somehow very doubtful that, for example, the same Su-34 or "Iskander" is worse than Western models. Well, it made me laugh at all: @ after all, the Russian armed forces still use military equipment and equipment from the times of the Cold War - something that was made in the 1970s and 1980s, and even in the 50s and 60s "Yeah, but they themselves massively use the same F-15, F-16," Abrams ", etc. - what are the latest models of technology of the 21st century ?! lol
    1. Ulysses
      Ulysses 7 August 2013 10: 44
      10
      Dig deeper:
      "Despite the fact that B-52 was developed in 50s under the requirements of the Cold War, it still remains the main long-range bomber aircraft of the US Air Force and will remain so until at least 2018 or 2030. [5] "
      So "whose cow would bellow." laughing
      1. Very old
        Very old 7 August 2013 21: 13
        +2
        Alexei, the current B-52 and his grandfather of the 50s are two big differences, as they say in a famous city. From the grandfather there was only a skeleton, a platform - it was too painful for them to succeed. The picture clearly shows this, even the novice engines. What about the filling? And what is in the belly?
      2. Very old
        Very old 7 August 2013 21: 15
        0
        TU-160 will be modernized. White Swan - long life!
    2. Donvel
      Donvel 7 August 2013 19: 46
      0
      But they keep them on alert and constantly modernize. And ours are rusting. Often in the news I read "MI-8 / Su-27 crashed here and there."
  • Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 7 August 2013 09: 04
    +4
    Wishful thinking. They are right about the problems of doctrine and corruption, but in terms of technology and weapons they simply do not know the characteristics and are based on data of the "half-finger-ceiling" type. smile
    And this is good.
    1. pensioner
      pensioner 7 August 2013 09: 15
      +3
      Hello Ivan! they also have enough corruption in the military-industrial complex. And that's putting it mildly. And nobody canceled the bias. And for sure they are "under supervision".
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 7 August 2013 09: 23
        +1
        I will advise you: type in a search engine Army Weapon System 2012 download
        Their system is very different from ours, including its openness.
        1. pensioner
          pensioner 7 August 2013 10: 12
          0
          Quote: Spade
          I will advise you: type in the search engine Army Weapon System 2012 download
          Thank you! hi
        2. Gregazov
          Gregazov 7 August 2013 10: 46
          0
          Scored. But I did not find the desired data either by Avax or by F22
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 7 August 2013 11: 10
            0
            F-22 should be looked at in old ones. As well as "Avaks". This is a report on what was done last year.

            Try to see here:

            http://pentagonus.ru/publ/perspektivy_razvitija_sistemy_upravlenija_vozdushnym_k

            omponentom_obedinjonnykh_operativnykh_formirovanij_ssha / 16-1-0-1600

            http://pentagonus.ru/publ/16-1-0-587

            http://pentagonus.ru/publ/16
      2. Reserve buildbat
        Reserve buildbat 7 August 2013 10: 58
        +6
        Hello Jura! I know about their corruption. But what bothers me is not their mess, but ours. Russia is somehow closer to me. And even if they steal, we would have to lean our thieves against the wall. hi
        1. pensioner
          pensioner 7 August 2013 11: 12
          +2
          Hello Ivan! Even under Stalin they were stealing, they were not afraid ... And even under the present ... So that they cannot be leaned against the wall. It is still possible to minimize losses from their "activity" by fighting the most egregious cases of theft. But in general: you have to get used to it. Capitalism, however. From Monday on vacation. I will be 02.09. already in the city. Well, somewhere until 10.09. let's go you know where.
          1. alone
            alone 7 August 2013 11: 23
            +5
            so they stole under Stalin at their own peril and risk. In our time, there is no fear and no risk. on the contrary, the one who does not steal in the eyes of the others looks like crazy.
          2. Reserve buildbat
            Reserve buildbat 7 August 2013 14: 24
            +4
            smile Agreed! In the meantime, I’m probably going to roll back to Pyshma again, update the pictures, look, I’ll post some interesting things.
  • Bigriver
    Bigriver 7 August 2013 09: 11
    +1
    American analysts who think to inform a wide audience and analysts who think for decision makers are different people.
    This is like our HBO.
  • rugor
    rugor 7 August 2013 09: 15
    +2
    Good whine on unfulfilled hopes. We are clearly shocked by the modernization that has begun, and this is an indicator!
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 7 August 2013 09: 17
      +1
      Of course in shock. Money goes somewhere, but there are no results. They do not understand how this is possible.
      1. Slevinst
        Slevinst 7 August 2013 09: 28
        +4
        Come on shovels facts or are you also on the bait of the State Department?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 7 August 2013 09: 39
          0
          On the contrary, agents of the State Department should shout "everything is fine with us", "we have no analogue in the world" "we will throw our caps over" "any criticism is unfounded statements."

          Here's how you, for example.
        2. IRBIS
          IRBIS 7 August 2013 10: 13
          +7
          Quote: Slevinst
          Come on shovels facts or are you also on the bait of the State Department?

          Well, let's say, will the facts on "Oboronservis" and "Slavyanka" suit you?
          And the facts of a systematic disruption of the defense order, about which power men constantly resent?
          1. Slevinst
            Slevinst 8 August 2013 08: 44
            0
            Well, something is still done after such a long stagnation, this can be considered normal. but they steal everywhere only f35 what it costs
        3. alone
          alone 7 August 2013 10: 30
          +7
          you know, as soon as someone starts to say real things, screams immediately begin: agent, spy. in fact, say Lopatov the truth. each new minister begins the modernization of the army and navy, which ends with nothing. take and summarize all the funds allocated to the defense industry as a whole and think about why the military uses mainly Soviet equipment
          1. Ulysses
            Ulysses 7 August 2013 11: 20
            +1
            Retrofitting is a type of "big" home renovation.
            As you know, "you cannot finish it, you can only stop it." winked
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 7 August 2013 11: 27
              +3
              Weapon modernization, unlike repair, can neither be completed nor stopped.
  • pensioner
    pensioner 7 August 2013 09: 18
    +3
    Thanks to Oleg for the review! And the “Strategy Page” is a very interesting resource. I don’t speak languages ​​myself, but we went there several times with our guys. Liked.
  • master_rem
    master_rem 7 August 2013 09: 20
    +5
    Well, the T-50 has come out cheaper, the elites are slowly nationalizing - today, by the way, is the last day for officials to get rid of foreign assets. Again, LGBT people do not favor. Not everything is certainly rosy, far away. Well, honestly, most participants in this forum have the opportunity to feed themselves and their families, have housing, cars, etc. And now try to take all this away!
  • ded10041948
    ded10041948 7 August 2013 09: 27
    +1
    I was especially pleased with the phrase: "sailors, especially senior commanders." What is it like?
  • GELEZNII_KAPUT
    GELEZNII_KAPUT 7 August 2013 09: 48
    +9
    And also the old-fashioned Russian heterosexual military, are not able to withstand the advanced NATO combat bastards! hi
  • zvereok
    zvereok 7 August 2013 09: 50
    +1
    Also on the site it is noted that a big problem is the fact that the new equipment, which was received by the troops, the army "is not impressive." The military can go online and see the technical characteristics of many types of modern Western technology. Russian weapons rarely look good by comparison, analysts say.


    This is more of a cultural lag. If the author knew not only English, but also Russian, he would honor the characteristics of weapons on the other side of the barricades. And flying irons for many yards and oblique air defense, he would have dreamed in nightmares about the 3 world.

    Although in fairness for something, the author is right - there was a lag in the navy. In electronics, quite large, as in drones.
  • USNik
    USNik 7 August 2013 09: 52
    +3
    The military can go online and see the technical specifications of many types of modern Western technology. Russian weapons rarely look good in comparison, analysts say.

    Yeah, internet war is as cool as pen-ping. I can also advise "noting analysts" to drink less and read more specialized forums, where they can learn a lot of interesting things about their military trash.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 7 August 2013 10: 19
      +4
      Do you want me to describe to you the mechanism of what you call "war on the Internet"?

      The military begins to become interested in what the probable enemy has in terms of counter-battery struggle. Yeah, tactical ACS artillery AFATDS. in the troops of 5100 sets, modernization is being carried out. C-RAM (Counter-Rocket, Artillery, Mortar) - counter-battery control system, the new ARSOM Enhanced Q-36 radar, and the modernization of the light LCMR. Powerful.

      The military reads: the troops received N units of 2S34 "Host". The military man wonders what they are. Oops, yes, these are castrated "Veins", machines with the level of automation of the 80s.

      Given the American successes in the field of counter-battery combat, the military concludes: disposable self-propelled guns adapted only for war with the Papuans enter the troops.
      1. Wedmak
        Wedmak 7 August 2013 10: 34
        +2
        Yeah, tactical ACS artillery AFATDS. in the troops of 5100 kits, modernization is underway. C-RAM (Counter-Rocket, Artillery, Mortar) - counter-battery control system, the new ARSOM Enhanced Q-36 radar, and the modernization of the light LCMR. Powerful.

        The names are beautiful, inspire. But in fact?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 7 August 2013 11: 02
          +3
          And then we no longer have the two minutes that the old Takfaer system gave. That is, the ideology of counteraction, embedded in the old 2S19 "Msta-S" - "one minute fire raid, and knocked down" no longer works.
          Decentralization only. Like the Americans. And we have only "Vienna", 2s19m2 and "Tornado-G" of such samples, which the cat cried. And there are even fewer ASUO complexes for them
          1. alone
            alone 7 August 2013 11: 06
            +4
            and someone tried hard to ensure that the "Vienna" 2s31 system was not adopted, instead they offered mine 2s18,
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 7 August 2013 11: 22
              +1
              They got their way. "Vienna" was put into service, but 2C34 "Hosta" and 2C23 "Nona-SVK" are going to the troops
              1. alone
                alone 7 August 2013 12: 32
                +1
                very sorry. the "Vienna" system bought by ours shows good results with us
  • Wedmak
    Wedmak 7 August 2013 09: 58
    +5
    Russia's defense industry is not at all world-class, the Russian military usually get updated equipment from the Cold War, which cannot compete with new generations of Western equipment.

    S ... look at your technique.
    Also on the site it is noted that a big problem is the fact that the new equipment, which was received by the troops, the army "is not impressive." The military can go online and see the technical characteristics of many types of modern Western technology. Russian weapons rarely look good by comparison, analysts say.

    Rarely? Come on? How many samples of the latest technology are in the US Army? Do they serve, not test sites? Yes, you can count on the fingers!
    And already what problems have ripened and something is not visible movements in the direction of their solution, even scary to estimate.
    As usual, the United States used its most effective weapon - the media. The rest of the weapons are only for the Papuans.
  • makst83
    makst83 7 August 2013 10: 00
    0
    There are some statements that are true ... and so - wipe the article!
  • badabing
    badabing 7 August 2013 10: 02
    +2
    self-confidence of course they are always full
    we know very well about our problems ourselves, but to make such one-sided conclusions is very silly for them
    they’ll snatch at a bread box in any story (God forbid of course this happens)
    the whole world, damn it, is fighting "outdated samples of weapons of the Cold War times" against ultra-modern samples of the Western and even not noticeable tangible advantages of NATO technologies
  • pluton
    pluton 7 August 2013 10: 08
    +5
    Russian soldiers usually get updated equipment from the Cold War era, which cannot compete with new generations of Western equipment.


    New generations is that Abrams with Leopards, F-16 and F-18, etc.?
    Everything was developed before the end of the Cold War. The lion's share of equipment (which is now in service), both in the West and in Russia, was developed before the end of the Cold War and it (this equipment) is being modernized, which is quite normal. If everything they had was new, then no, far from all.
  • Basileus
    Basileus 7 August 2013 10: 11
    +5
    when his army was called the "Red Army"

    The Red Army ended in February 1946. After that, it was called Soviet.
  • Russ69
    Russ69 7 August 2013 10: 19
    +4
    The article, although the problems of our military-industrial complex are indicated, but somehow everything is one-sided.
    If they write that their technique is superior to ours, it depends on what. Somewhere better, somewhere worse, and in the Soviet Army it was. It’s strange, do their analysts really don’t know what to call the Red Army
    in the year 46. Too many cliches in the article ...
    Such articles should be more detailed. In general, minus ...
    1. Gato
      Gato 7 August 2013 13: 59
      +2
      Quote: Russ69
      It’s strange, do their analysts really don’t know what to call the Red Army
      in 46 year.

      This is too deep a level of analytics for them. If even American DOCUMENTARY serials show the "chronicle" of the Finnish war, in which the Red Army men flaunt in uniform ...
      And all would be nothing - he and Hollywood are for that, but in the credits are military consultants with the rank of brigadier generals and colonels.
  • vel77
    vel77 7 August 2013 10: 22
    0
    If anything, then We Russian are not going to attack anyone ....
  • Grigorich 1962
    Grigorich 1962 7 August 2013 10: 29
    +1
    disgusting ordering .....
    all armies have problems ... I’m sure that in the American army they are no less ...
    but that disgusting tone of the article conjures up the idea that, as it were, denigrate the Russian army ......
    1. alone
      alone 7 August 2013 10: 40
      +3
      Yes, everyone has problems. But there is one but strict report on the work done, strict control over each dollar - what is spent where. Agree that in Russia and in general throughout the former union no one knows where and what the money is spent for. For example A proton exploded with three satellites. Damage to billions, who in response-Popovkin. Than punished. going to remove from work. and all. billions of state money can be threatened, and one sentence can be removed from work. Each defense ministry as soon as it takes office begins to change its uniform in the troops. Is the problem in the army only how the soldier or officer is dressed? all who come basically starts with cutting dough
  • Rusik.S
    Rusik.S 7 August 2013 10: 32
    +1
    Do not forget that this report is made for ordinary people
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Raptor75
    Raptor75 7 August 2013 10: 40
    +1
    Quote: "Therefore, the current Russian army will be nothing more than a" shadow "of the Soviet army in the days of its glory." Only with this one can agree, with the rest went to the train ...
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak 7 August 2013 10: 47
      +3
      Yeah, compared ... 15 countries worked for the USSR army. The Russian army contains only Russia. And who will be whose shadow there, we will still see.
  • andrei332809
    andrei332809 7 August 2013 10: 45
    +1
    that's because the bastards beat the patient. on corruption and indifference. but a speck in someone else's eye ... would have looked at themselves, "analysts"
  • kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 7 August 2013 10: 49
    +5
    A disgusting libel, and what to expect from our implacable enemies. Only denigrating our Army and its weapons, for some reason, they write like boiling water only when they hear that VVP will supply S-300 to Syria and Iran. And their vaunted Patriots did more harm to Israel than Iraqi SCADs. And we also remember how their vaunted troops skedaddle from several SS formations in the Ardennes and at the same time yelled: "Uncle Joe help me" and Joseph Vissarionovich helped, otherwise they would have flown to the Atlantic Ocean. And Vietnam showed what they were standing on delo.Mnogo mind does not need to bomb a weak enemy, if Russia were weak, they would not fail to "make us happy"! The verbiage and manipulation of facts, and especially the military secret, we have not forgotten how to keep, thank God. Well, I really want to take a look at Russia's plans to modernize the Army and Navy at least with one eye.
  • pahom54
    pahom54 7 August 2013 10: 56
    +2
    Any modernization of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation is a thousand times better than their collapse. Suppose that at some level our some technique is inferior in some way to some of their technique, but !!! The spirit of the Russian peasant has not yet been completely exterminated by diapers and sneakers. God forbid, they will produce and master the normal technique, which, if necessary, will be given to the head on steep Americans.
  • LM66
    LM66 7 August 2013 10: 59
    0
    I wonder if the pain of trying to conclude agreements on the cessation of the development and production of new models, for example tanks, artillery, could save a lot of money smile
  • me
    me 7 August 2013 11: 04
    +1
    And what did you expect to hear if the president and the defense ministry themselves are not satisfied with the quality of military equipment, plus new facts of corruption in the military department. who then will sing praises to us.
    1. zvereok
      zvereok 7 August 2013 23: 50
      0
      So far, the facts are old, that's how Shoigu descends to the left of who he has there - new ones will appear. But the fact that he will change is not a fact.
  • Egen
    Egen 7 August 2013 11: 06
    +3
    Well, in many respects the "citizens" are right in stating the facts, but we already know them. But their conclusions do not agree with the facts :):
    "From some information about SAP, the authors conclude that over the next decade in Russia will be replaced at least a third of the available equipment, and in some categories (usually high-tech) - and more than 80%."
    - how so, everything is bad, but here - wow! :) Something in the USA, I have not heard about such plans, even China seems to have less appetite :))
  • Valery Neonov
    Valery Neonov 7 August 2013 11: 10
    0
    Quote: Orel
    They found all the bad that they could and did not say a word about the good. Wrong approach.

    The "pure American" approach - what is not American is not right ... hi
  • pensioner
    pensioner 7 August 2013 11: 27
    +1
    The abundance of minuses of respected people is striking. Hand of the Professor, not otherwise.
  • alabin
    alabin 7 August 2013 11: 43
    +3
    The "value" of Russian (Soviet) weapons has always been in its "simplicity" AND TECHNOLOGY (t-34.AK-47.)
  • PROXOR
    PROXOR 7 August 2013 11: 44
    +1
    Let them think so. An important moment, they themselves will not recall the report of this publication with warm words !!!!
  • 1961NNN
    1961NNN 7 August 2013 11: 46
    +2
    In the 90s, according to these "fucking" analysts, everything was "OK!" - and now everything is bad! Fuck they ...
  • yura9113
    yura9113 7 August 2013 11: 59
    +3
    put + article, let it be so I think that the more such experts from the United States there are, the easier it will be for us in the future)))) although there are many problems to be denied.
    1. starhina01
      starhina01 7 August 2013 12: 47
      0
      absolutely agree with you hi
  • Idolum
    Idolum 7 August 2013 12: 06
    +1
    Well done, they calmed themselves ...)))
  • Manager
    Manager 7 August 2013 12: 24
    +1
    Well, of course, reading a lot is ridiculous. The only thing they are right in is that no matter how modernizable and rearmable we are, all this will be only a shadow of the power that was once in the USSR army. See the same teachings of the 70s. It seems that when they were held, the whole world was shaking under the pillow! This is power. But still, God forbid, we still get up from our knees! At least the latest news only says that we are buying new weapons and modernizing the old ones, and not like 15 years ago we cut and sell the regime.
  • vitas
    vitas 7 August 2013 12: 44
    +3
    The army needs a TOTAL modernization and updating, and this is possible only when we eradicate corruption, apparently not soon. recourse

    Z.Y. Such a country profuci recourse Now you need to build a new one. soldier