Military Review

Russia in the system of world arms exports

137
Recently, Russian President Vladimir Putin took part in a meeting of the commission on military-technical cooperation between Russia and foreign countries. One of the topics discussed during the meeting concerned the export of Russian arms and the volume of orders from foreign countries.


Russia in the system of world arms exports


According to the data presented, it can be said that the Russian defense industry in terms of exports continues to beat its own records. According to Vladimir Putin, in the first five months of 2016 alone, the volume of deliveries of military equipment and armaments for export in monetary terms amounted to 4,6 billion dollars (more than 320 billion rubles). At the same time, the total portfolio of orders for military equipment and weapons from Russia exceeded the value of 50 billion dollars (about 3,6 trillion rubles).

Kremlin press service quotes a statement by the country's president regarding the main operators of Russian weapons and the expansion of sales markets:
It is important that the geography of supplies is consistently expanding, new intergovernmental agreements are being signed, and bilateral working groups are being created. At the same time, it is necessary to further improve the effectiveness of military-technical cooperation, to act in this area more clearly and more coordinatedly. At the same time, it is necessary to be prepared for the fact that the intensification of our efforts will certainly exacerbate competition. (...) Patriotic weapon and military equipment prove their effectiveness and reliability in a variety of conditions. They are in service in Europe, Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America. In this regard, I would like to thank the Russian arms exporters, who, under the conditions of tough competition, are successfully working in the new realities, adequately respond to the sometimes unfair actions of our opponents.


Under the unscrupulous actions of opponents (note that the Russian president called opponents just opponents, not “partners”), Vladimir Putin understands, of course, those restrictive anti-Russian measures of an economic nature that rival countries are also trying to narrow down the market for Russian sales . In particular, one of such measures led to the fact that even small arms from the Russian Federation, not to mention large military equipment, were not allowed to the exhibition in Paris.

Among the traditional buyers of substantial shipments of Russian weapons are India and China. At the same time, against the background of the growth of the Indian share of Russian arms exports (5,5 billion dollars in 2015), the Chinese share is declining (2,6 billion dollars). And if a few years ago, the PRC occupied a leading position in terms of the volumes of military-technical cooperation with Russia, now the situation has changed. There are several reasons for this.

First, the technological resource of China has significantly increased along with a significant increase in Chinese GDP (over the past few years, the average bar of Chinese economic growth was at 7-9% per year); secondly, the Chinese negotiators with all confidence can be called too stubborn. Virtually any contract for the supply of Russian weapons Chinese opponents (or "partners) tried (try) to link either with the simultaneous transfer of technology, or even with the licensing of Chinese production of certain Russian technology. If the arms seller does not go to such a deal, then China reserves the right to “save and paste” - that is, technological copying with renaming and issuing Chinese military-technical production as a product.

However, this does not mean at all that contracts for the supply of arms from Russia with other partners are, as they say, one or two times. No less complicated negotiations are being conducted with India, rather than with China, and often a contract is concluded only on the basis of New Delhi’s participation in cooperation with Moscow.



11 July in Yekaterinburg opens the exhibition Innoprom-2016, whose partner country this time is India. The organizers of the exhibition are planning to conclude a whole list of contracts with their Indian colleagues, and these contracts are planned to be concluded not only in the sphere of direct military-technical cooperation. The issues of concluding agreements in the field of energy, space exploration, transport, engineering, urban projects are being worked out.

Press office Innoprom-2016:
The business program of INNOPROM will begin on July 11 from the Russian-Indian business forum, in which the heads of government and major business of both countries will take part. A number of bilateral events are planned in the INNOPROM program on topics such as engineering, pharmaceutical industry, mining, IT in industry, in addition, Indian experts will take part in the overall business program of the exhibition.


One of the main mysteries of the Russian export military-technical market is interaction with Saudi Arabia. In November 2015, the media announced the largest contract for the supply of Russian weapons to the Saudis between Moscow and Riyadh. Newspaper "Vedomosti", then referring to the sources in "Rostec" and "Rosoboronexport", reported on the estimated amount of the contract - 10 billion dollars. At the same time, information about the interest of Saudi Arabia in acquiring the C-400 “Trumph” anti-aircraft missile systems from Russia was announced for the first time.

The information that Russia could put the C-400 air defense system against Riyadh caused a great stir. The reason for the hype is connected with far from the benevolent relations in the Middle East - for example, between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Moreover, Russia has just started to deliver C-300, which should have been delivered several years ago, to a more loyally-minded Iran.

There is still no official confirmation that Saudi Arabia is ready to purchase weapons from the Russian Federation immediately for $ 10 billion. Frankly, this is not the first time that the Saudis have made promises to “buy” weapons from Russia for an impressive amount. So, in 2009, the Russian media, citing certain sources in Riyadh, also published material that Saudi Arabia was going to buy a large batch from Russia (more than 150 units) tanks T-90S and about 250 BMP-3. As a result, after long discussions on this topic, it turned out that the Saudis were not going to buy Russian armored vehicles in such quantities. The main argument for the T-90S tanks is the need for the installation of air conditioners (in hot desert climates). While discussing the topic of installing air conditioners, information came that the Saudis signed a contract with France for the supply of Leclerc tanks. A number of Western sources then came out with materials telling that Riyadh refused to purchase weapons from Russia for the reason that Russia did not refuse to support Iran’s nuclear program.

Now Iran has no nuclear program (even the EU and the US partially removed sanctions from Tehran), and therefore, with what Riyadh is trying to link its 10-billion-dollar promises, one can only guess. With Moscow’s refusal to support Bashar Assad? .. If we consider that there is no official confirmation of the signing of the contract, then it is quite possible, especially given the fact that signing the contract for the Saudis is a serious political step, which the United States is watching and simply so obviously they will not allow it to be done, having lost part of the traditional market for themselves ...

Against this background, Russia continues to increase its presence in its traditional markets: Algeria, Vietnam, Indonesia, Iraq, and Latin American countries. Thus, one of the stages of development of cooperation with Latin American partners are agreements on the placement of capacities for the repair and maintenance of helicopter technology, as well as on the training of flight personnel, who in the "forever preoccupied" West have already dubbed "the creation of Russian military bases."

In terms of total arms exports, Russia consistently ranks second - 24-25% of the world market (after the USA - about 33% of the market), keeping a large lead over the third position. In third place, by the way, is China (according to the estimates of the Stockholm Peace Research Institute). The Chinese share rose almost to 6%, beating the French share on 0,3-0,4%.

Attention is drawn to the fact that the share of European arms manufacturers in the world export system has declined amid the growing share of the US. This is an eloquent confirmation of the fact that the North Atlantic Alliance, with its delusions and phobias, is one of the levers for promoting Washington products of American military-technical companies. And in the face of increasing competition, Russian successes in the field of arms exports cannot but cause respect. As respect in the world market, it also causes Russian weapons themselves, effectively demonstrating their capabilities not only during training events, but also during military operations against international terrorist groups in Syria.
Author:
Photos used:
http://function.mil.ru
137 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Tatar 174
    Tatar 174 11 July 2016 05: 57
    +7
    The production of weapons can serve as one of the locomotives that will pull out our economy, especially since we are able to make weapons from childhood, and moreover, almost everyone. Remember the bows with arrows from the talnik, then set on fire and what else did we shoot)))
    1. Professor
      Professor 11 July 2016 08: 46
      +6
      Quote: Tartar 174
      The production of weapons can serve as one of the locomotives that will pull out our economy, especially since we are able to make weapons from childhood, and moreover, almost everyone. Remember the bows with arrows from the talnik, then set on fire and what else did we shoot)))

      Can not. The military-industrial complex never pulled the economy, but on the contrary, drove it into a hole. An example is the USSR and North Korea. On the other hand, South Korea, Japan, Germany, Taiwan. It is necessary to develop the means of production, Hi Tek. Moreover, today a citizen is more technologically advanced than military products. In the 1990s, there was even such a "joke" in the bourgeois fleet that when all the electronic systems on the ship fail, Sony TV continues to work in spite of this.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 11 July 2016 08: 50
        +9
        Quote: Professor
        Can not. The military-industrial complex has never pulled the economy, but quite the opposite, drove it into a hole.

        USA.
        The military-industrial complex pulled the economy out of the pit of the Great Depression Fact

        Germany.
        The military-industrial complex pulled the economy out of the pit twice. Under Hitler and after his defeat.
        1. Professor
          Professor 11 July 2016 09: 03
          +1
          Quote: Spade
          USA.
          The military-industrial complex pulled the economy out of the pit of the Great Depression Fact

          Germany.
          The military-industrial complex pulled the economy out of the pit twice. Under Hitler and after his defeat.

          Not a fact, but a profound error. And the first and second were primarily engaged in the production of means of production. The United States sold machines in the USSR during the Great Depression. Krupovsky pre-war machines still operate at ChSZ. And they got out of the depression by purely financial means: devaluing the dollar and pumping the American economy with the same dollar, increasing government spending and domestic consumption. And only as a result of increased government spending was the purchase of weapons. The same situation is with Germany. And the second time it was not pulled out by the military-industrial complex, but by the same American dollar. Marshall Plan.
          1. captain
            captain 11 July 2016 09: 13
            +2
            If only we had a civilian aircraft industry developing like this. Machine tool industry, electronics, robots, the chemical industry ... Otherwise, the electronics in our armaments are mainly imported.
            1. weksha50
              weksha50 11 July 2016 20: 42
              0
              Quote: captain
              If only we had a civilian aircraft industry developing like this. Machine tool industry, electronics, robots, chemical industry ...



              Then I came across information that pleased:

              "At least seven new serial production of machine tool products with a total investment of about 4,5 billion rubles will be created in the Russian Federation in 2016 with the support of the Russian Fund for Technological Development, according to the certificate to the government decree, which approved the rules for providing the fund with appropriate subsidies "...

              Source: http://social.rusvesna.su/blog/43393593632/V-Rossii-budet-sozdano-ne-menee-7-sta

              nkostroitelnyih-proizvodstv? utm_campaign = transit & utm_source = main & utm_medium = page

              _0 & domain = mirtesen.ru & paid = 1 & pad = 1

              God forbid that not chatter and Manilov’s projects ...
          2. Imperialkolorad
            Imperialkolorad 11 July 2016 09: 36
            +3
            So what is characteristic in the USA is everything is very interconnected. A powerful military-industrial complex is one of the levers to make the whole world recognize the dollar as the world’s payment currency, and the dollar, in turn, allows you to maintain the military-industrial complex and a huge army. For some reason, our gallant liberals are very fond of forgetting about this and many people who love to ride on our ears and hang pasta on them.
          3. gray smeet
            gray smeet 11 July 2016 13: 11
            +3
            Quote: Professor
            Quote: Spade
            USA.
            The military-industrial complex pulled the economy out of the pit of the Great Depression Fact

            Germany.
            The military-industrial complex pulled the economy out of the pit twice. Under Hitler and after his defeat.

            Not a fact, but a profound error. And the first and second were primarily engaged in the production of means of production. The United States sold machines in the USSR during the Great Depression. Krupovsky pre-war machines still operate at ChSZ. And they got out of the depression by purely financial means: devaluing the dollar and pumping the American economy with the same dollar, increasing government spending and domestic consumption. And only as a result of increased government spending was the purchase of weapons. The same situation is with Germany. And the second time it was not pulled out by the military-industrial complex, but by the same American dollar. Marshall Plan.


            I agree with the Professor 99%. And for both of his comments I put him +.
            The military-industrial complex did not pull either the United States or Germany - I can bring a bunch of documents. In Russia, everything else that could work after the 90s was the military-industrial complex (and the patient was more likely dead than alive), civil production was completely destroyed, and the production of means of production is still not in Russia.
            1. Achilles
              Achilles 11 July 2016 15: 01
              +6
              I agree with the Professor 99%. And for both of his comments I put him +.
              The military-industrial complex did not pull either the United States or Germany - I can bring a bunch of documents. In Russia, everything else that could work after the 90s was the military-industrial complex (and the patient was more likely dead than alive), civil production was completely destroyed, and the production of means of production is still not in Russia.

              Almost 60% of civilian production came from the military-industrial complex of different countries, the same computer was originally military, the same optical cable was originally from the military, and almost 60% of the production was made in one way or another, or discoveries (research) were made using the military-industrial complex, and then it grew into a civilian industry. 40% of technical solutions in the USA, born in the defense industry complex, found wide civilian (commercial) application.
              The military-industrial complex is the engine of progress, the focus of high technologies, the locomotive of the economy’s exit from the crisis. Unfortunately, his role in this regard is greatly underestimated. The military-industrial complex is like a start from the conclusion of the economic crisis, and of course, at the same time, other industries need to be developed with this, no one can argue with this, but to begin the development of the economy, the military-industrial complex is really an engine, no one says what kind of the account of the military-industrial complex must live in the whole country, everyone is talking about the start, the beginning of development, do not confuse the concept.
              1. Professor
                Professor 11 July 2016 15: 05
                +3
                Quote: Achilles
                Almost 60%

                Please, confirm your numbers with their sources.
                1. Achilles
                  Achilles 11 July 2016 15: 29
                  +4
                  Please, confirm your numbers with their sources.

                  And you yourself can’t turn your head on, anyway, with the help of the military, a lot of inventions and studies were made, then in turn it was applied to the civilian industry. Even the Internet appeared thanks to the military:
                  In 1957, after the launch of the first artificial Earth satellite by the Soviet Union, the US Department of Defense decided that in case of war the United States needed a reliable information transfer system. The United States Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has proposed developing a computer network for this, as the Internet came about.
                2. gray smeet
                  gray smeet 11 July 2016 15: 46
                  0
                  Quote: Professor
                  Quote: Achilles
                  Almost 60%

                  Please, confirm your numbers with their sources.


                  Talking about the military-industrial complex as a locomotive:
                  The military-industrial complex of the USSR at the end of 1970 felt great, because the war in Afghanistan required more and more weapons, more and more perfect (Mi-24, D-30, etc.), it would seem that the locomotive of the economy is loaded, but what happened next? By 1986, the USSR was forced to pull from the economy, according to various estimates, from 4 to 5,5 billion dollars a year for "Afghan". At the same time, the real locomotive of the economy of the USSR (as well as today's Russia), the oil and gas industry was then crucified by the United States (Saudi Arabia). Saudi Arabia, under graceful pressure from the United States, brought down oil prices almost 3 times (1985) (today - a similar topic), as a result of this - the USSR lost several billion dollars in revenue in the global arms market: Iran, Iraq and Libya, which sharply reduced their export oil revenues, and could not pay for the import of Soviet weapons. And more about oil ... - The United States, starting in the fall of 1984, carried out a 25% devaluation of the dollar during the year. Oil traded in dollars. But the USSR bought equipment and materials in Europe for national currencies, which, accordingly, went up in price .. I can go on for a long time, what the US was still pressing at that moment, but this is not about that ... MIC did not go then (as indeed now) locomotive - it was a consequence of the economic development of the country ...
                  1. Achilles
                    Achilles 11 July 2016 16: 02
                    +1
                    Of course it’s hard to disagree with you gray smeet. It’s not who doesn’t say living at the expense of the military-industrial complex, it’s about the beginning of growth, about the driver, if the state does everything correctly, it can contribute to a crisis, but I repeat it all depends on our government, which I personally have no faith in, and there time will tell.
                    1. gray smeet
                      gray smeet 11 July 2016 16: 19
                      +2
                      Quote: Achilles
                      Of course it’s hard to disagree with you gray smeet. It’s not who doesn’t say living at the expense of the military-industrial complex, it’s about the beginning of growth, about the driver, if the state does everything correctly, it can contribute to a crisis, but I repeat it all depends on our government, which I personally have no faith in, and there time will tell.


                      Remember how Putin started - he "crushed" the oil and gas complex under the state - and the state got at least some money .. And then the philosophical dispute - what is the primary egg or chicken? .... We need to make money and we can afford a lot including in military affairs!
                      1. Al1977
                        Al1977 11 July 2016 16: 32
                        +1
                        Quote: gray smeet
                        Remember how Putin started - he "crushed" the oil and gas complex under the state - and the state got at least some money .. And then the philosophical dispute - what is the primary egg or chicken? .... We need to make money and we can afford a lot including in military affairs!

                        Why then is the economy not growing?
                      2. gray smeet
                        gray smeet 11 July 2016 16: 40
                        +2
                        Quote: Al1977

                        Why then is the economy not growing?
                        I do not understand your question - is he sarcasm?

                        but I will answer .. in short - we work badly; not effective; oh-oh-there is a lot of corruption and imitation of work in the echelons of power; do not want to learn new things; not ready to radically change the field of activity (most likely due to poverty); legislation lives "its own life" .....
                        For example, if we make a PAZik bus, then we will do it for 40-50 years, and nothing can make us update the model ... wassat
                      3. tatra
                        tatra 11 July 2016 16: 58
                        0
                        And for what then, you, critics of the USSR, after 1991 both in Russia and in all the former republics of the USSR, have received many times, dozens and more times greater incomes and salaries than most people
                        For your criticism of how the Communists and their supporters worked and fought in the USSR?
                      4. Al1977
                        Al1977 11 July 2016 16: 59
                        +2
                        Quote: gray smeet
                        I do not understand your question - is he sarcasm?

                        but I will answer .. briefly - we work poorly; not effective; oh, a lot of corruption and imitation of work,

                        He is with pain and sadness.
                        What prevents you from working well?
                        And you believe that corruption in Russia will be defeated sometime ????
                        I don’t (Saltykov-Shchedrin and Gogol wrote about it yet), and based on your logic of perspectives, zero, it turns out. So what?
                      5. gray smeet
                        gray smeet 11 July 2016 18: 48
                        +2
                        Quote: Al1977
                        Quote: gray smeet
                        I do not understand your question - is he sarcasm?

                        but I will answer .. briefly - we work poorly; not effective; oh, a lot of corruption and imitation of work,

                        He is with pain and sadness.
                        What prevents you from working well?
                        And you believe that corruption in Russia will be defeated sometime ????
                        I don’t (Saltykov-Shchedrin and Gogol wrote about it yet), and based on your logic of perspectives, zero, it turns out. So what?


                        Corruption is not defeated - it is limited by law! (They even shoot in China - but they take bribes anyway!) Ask how they restrict? - Well, at least taxation - A person's salary, say 10000 rubles, and his car costs 6 rubles, or a house was built for big millions - who asks us where he got the money for this? Yes, no one! Show the wonders of entrepreneurship in the "black" - you can not pay taxes, and you are rich and "respected"! And for example in Spain, even the royal passion was tried for tax evasion, Montserrat Caballe and she went to court ... What about us? Vasiliev? laughing That's how we live. In our country, the tax system itself encourages the concealment of income - i.e. payments to various budgets of our state. At the same time, we are eager to receive a decent old-age pension.
          4. Anglorussian
            Anglorussian 12 July 2016 01: 28
            0
            The military-industrial complex is the engine of progress, the focus of high technology,
            The Haber process (atmospheric nitrogen fixation) was designed to supply Germany with explosives. Now 80% of the nitrogen in the human carcass has passed through an iron catalyst, and nitrogen fertilizers have changed the picture of the world.
        2. Al1977
          Al1977 11 July 2016 16: 30
          0
          Quote: Achilles
          Almost 60% of civilian production came from defense industries of different countries,

          In our country, everything is a little different, at least with all the development and records in the military-industrial complex, I don't have these miracles at home. All China-America-Korea. Maybe everything there came out of the military-industrial complex, but we have the opposite. "What we do not produce, we get a Kalashnikov assault rifle"
          1. Anglorussian
            Anglorussian 12 July 2016 01: 34
            +1
            Maybe it all came out of the military-industrial complex, but on the contrary
            Do you use rubber? The whole world is crawling with synthetic rubber, developed by Professor Lebedev to rid Russia of the import of rubber. (Just in case of war, he came up with technology, because natural then cost less than that made from alcohol)
    2. aksakal
      aksakal 11 July 2016 23: 20
      0
      Quote: Professor
      Not a fact, but a profound error.

      - Well, yes, yes, ENIAC was not created by the military for commercial purposes, but purely for its own purposes, but it turned out to be an excellent commercial product with now trillion turnover. But you do not know this product. Again, the military was wise for something there with the transfer of data, they really wanted an intercepted means of communication, something worked out ... No, it didn’t work out intercepted, but the new commercial product came out of it great. America has been warming his hands for years now, and during anti-Amer’s fasts, all the time Americanophiles have been harassing us, then throw these products to hell, if you take the anti-Amer’s position. The founder of SONY recalls that the special services ordered him a small-sized listening-recording device that fits in his chest pocket - while paying for both R&D and the first batch. And then they disappeared. What to do with the finished product, under which the factory already stands? Everything is paid ... They let it into the people, they called it a player. Young people do not understand why they liked ... Japan did not warm his hands on this?
      Professor, what is the manner of proving otherwise to obvious things? Do you hone the ability to argue? Well, nonetheless, it doesn’t work out very well. Throw, save the remains of your image, that you still take something))))
      1. Professor
        Professor 12 July 2016 07: 24
        0
        Quote: aksakal
        Professor, what is the manner of proving otherwise to obvious things?

        Obvious? Figures in the studio where it will be obvious how useful the military-industrial complex is for the economy. And then I will show you the numbers how harmful it is to the economy.
        Only a complete ignoramus (not about you) can decide that tens of millions of Kalashnikovs manufactured at the warehouse helped the economy. Let this money go for infrastructure development, science, medicine or consumer goods and the economy will trample up.

        PS
        One more example. In northern Israel, there is a company producing wafers. They have a couple of their fabs. Tower Semiconductor. Not far from it is another company that also has a microelectronics production including element base. Raphael. Guess three times which of these companies is ahead of progress and which of them is the forge of personnel in microelectronics?
        1. aksakal
          aksakal 12 July 2016 22: 07
          0
          Quote: Professor
          One more example. In northern Israel, there is a company producing wafers. They have a couple of their fabs. Tower Semiconductor. Not far from it is another company that also has a microelectronics production including element base. Raphael. Guess three times which of these companies is ahead of progress and which of them is the forge of personnel in microelectronics?

          - In short, the debate about whether alcohol is poison or medicine? Does alcohol disinfect and when taken orally in certain doses relieve tension or is it poison, which leads to personality degradation? Alcohol is alcohol. The military-industrial complex is the military-industrial complex. And whether these two things will benefit, does not depend on alcohol or the military-industrial complex, not on the results of our dispute, but on completely different things.
  • ivanzu87
    ivanzu87 11 July 2016 10: 17
    +1
    I agree with you in half. In the medium term, the military-industrial complex "pulls out" the economy, but in the long term it leads to negative moments.
  • tatra
    tatra 11 July 2016 10: 34
    +1
    Yes, you, the enemies of the Communists, do not need anything at all but parasitize at the expense of the labor of the Communists and their supporters, the export of natural resources and the import of food and products.
    The Soviet military-industrial complex is, firstly, a powerful science, and secondly, half of the products of the Soviet military-industrial complex are non-military products - refrigerators, televisions, motorcycles and so on.
    And you ruined both agriculture and the production of Class A and Class B products, and imagined that you have at least some right to criticize the work of the Soviet people.
    1. Professor
      Professor 11 July 2016 10: 50
      +2
      Quote: tatra
      The Soviet military-industrial complex is, firstly, a powerful science, and secondly, half of the production of the Soviet military-industrial complex is non-military products -refrigerators, televisions, motorcycles and so on .

      Judging by this half about the quality and advancement of the entire military-industrial complex, you fall into a deep depression. Discuss shovels washing machines? I have a lot of experience fixing them. wink You can discuss the quality of Soviet motorcycles and my 6-volt non-Soviet Java.
      1. tatra
        tatra 11 July 2016 11: 00
        0
        After the capture of the republics of the USSR, you, the enemies of the Communists, are so obsessively obsessed with discussing and criticizing everything that the Communists and their supporters in the USSR did, how they worked and fought, and don’t like it when they discuss and criticize what you yourself did for a quarter of a century of your well-paid work, because you perfectly understand what you have NOTHING to boast about, nothing to prove to you that you yourself know how to work better than Soviet people, that you honestly earned your many times, tens and more times higher incomes and salaries than most people after 1991.
        You can only exist like this "OTHERS are bad, so we are better than them."
      2. lesnik1978
        lesnik1978 11 July 2016 17: 16
        +7
        Let's discuss. The "Donbass" refrigerator has worked for 30 years without repair. The Cinderella washing machine worked the same. A friend had an "IZH Planet-3" 35 years on it went. The technique must be properly looked after. And not a "scoop", but the Soviet Union, we do not call Israel a Jew on this site, so you can do without Russophobia and Soviet-phobia.
        1. Professor
          Professor 12 July 2016 07: 02
          +1
          Quote: lesnik1978
          And not a "scoop", but the Soviet Union, we do not call Israel a Jew on this site, so you can do without Russophobia and Soviet-phobia.

          It is the scoop and I, as a citizen of that country, I have the right to call her that. Will you forgive the citizen of Israel?

          Quote: alexej123
          Professor, Java is not that example. Take Ural and Dnepr? Bad technique?

          Then was the limit of dreams. How could we dream of Kawasaki or BMW?

          Quote: alexej123
          I hate the word scoop, are you from the janitors?

          No, I come from the USSR.

          Quote: alexej123
          And with your beloved F-35 what kind of mat. investments, under a trillion? This is normal?

          These are their problems. By the way, pragmatic Americans will repel these investments.

          Quote: Kotischa
          I am the owner of a motorcycle ural 78 onwards Technique 38 years in operation, my grandfather traveled. No problem!

          The pre-war Harley and BMW are also still on the move.
      3. alexej123
        alexej123 11 July 2016 17: 19
        +3
        Professor, Java is not that example. And take Ural and Dnepr? Bad technique? By the way, they were created for the "defense industry". The owners of these brands, as well as UAZ, Niva, Luaz were obliged to register with the military registration and enlistment offices. One of the members of the forum is right. Everything is good in the right parts and proportions, poison in small doses is a medicine, in large doses it is fatal. It was the same in the USSR. I hate the word scoop, are you a wiper? When everything is good in moderation. And with your favorite F-35, what a mat. investments under a trillion? This is normal? And the camp can afford such a waste of a mattress due to the fact that it robs the whole world and dictates its own terms of the "game".
        1. Cat
          Cat 11 July 2016 21: 01
          +3
          I am the owner of a motorcycle ural 78 onwards Technique 38 years in operation, my grandfather traveled. No problem!
  • vlad_vlad
    vlad_vlad 11 July 2016 13: 29
    -2
    professor (6) IL Today, 08:46 ↑ New
    Quote: Tartar 174
    The production of weapons can serve as one of the locomotives))
    Can not. The military-industrial complex has never pulled the economy, but quite the opposite, drove it into a hole.


    I decided to support you in writing:

    the time when the military-industrial complex was the basis of economics may have been, but gone. Today, for example, only VW produces and sells more product than all the German military-industrial complex. in terms of technology development (the old defense industry chip), the civilian sector has run so far forward that the defense industry is not visible in the rear mirror. The amount of investment in scientific research at Siemens seems to be greater than the military budget of many countries. The military-industrial complex barely manages to adopt a small part of what is invented in the civilian world.

    But, professor, on this site I’m afraid that we don’t shine - a convinced communist / VPKist is like a TV: speaks - but does not listen. otherwise it would be arguable.
  • NEXUS
    NEXUS 11 July 2016 13: 32
    +5
    Quote: Professor
    Can not. The military-industrial complex has never pulled the economy, but quite the opposite, drove it into a hole.

    Dear, before you write this, you should at least familiarize yourself with the subject of the conversation. For example, do you know that one defense worker is provided by 7 to 9 workers of non-defense industries? What does this mean? Apparently, the defense industry stimulates not only itself, but also civilian production. And this is the movement out of this economic "hole".
    Quote: Professor
    Need to develop means of production, Hi Tech

    That is, in your opinion, the thoughts and scientific developments in the defense industry are not the same high-tech that moves high-tech production forward in the civilian industry?
    Quote: Professor
    Moreover, today a citizen is more technologically advanced than military products

    Sure? Then explain to me, if everything is so simple and clear, why from scratch, for example, a combat fighter (from start to finish) can create only a few of the states in the world?
    1. vlad_vlad
      vlad_vlad 11 July 2016 13: 42
      +1
      Professor, can I answer for you?

      For example, do you know that one worker in the defense industry is provided by 7 to 9 workers in non-defense industries?

      where is the link to the source? then I argue that one employee on Mercedes provides 20-30 workers on the adjacent

      Sure? Then explain to me, if everything is so simple and clear, why from scratch, for example, a combat fighter (from start to finish) can create only a few of the states in the world?


      sure. and a computer from scratch can make even fewer states. And Apple could do one thing, come up with MP3 one thing, make an antivirus - 3.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 11 July 2016 14: 23
        +1
        Quote: vlad_vlad
        where is the link to the source? then I argue that one employee on Mercedes provides 20-30 workers on the adjacent

        Dear, do not be clever ... this is statistics, and if you turn on your head, you will understand that it is the way I said. And about the link ... so poyuzayte in the internet, a little tense and you will be happy.
        Quote: vlad_vlad
        make an antivirus - 3.

        Exactly 3? laughing
        Quote: vlad_vlad
        and a computer from scratch can make even fewer states.

        With a half of Chinese components ...
        Quote: vlad_vlad
        coming up with mp3 is one thing too

        Well, Popov invented the radio, and then what? Even in the USSR, almost all production was dual-purpose. An example ... aircraft manufacturing. The same GAZik was created for the military, but it is still used in civilian sectors.
        1. Al1977
          Al1977 11 July 2016 16: 43
          +1
          Quote: NEXUS
          Even in the USSR, almost all production was dual-purpose. An example ... aircraft manufacturing. The same GAZik was created for the military, but it is still used in civilian sectors.

          That is why cars are full of G ..., and aircraft are uncompetitively comparable in comparison with Western ones.
          Or refute the FACTS, they say the whole world flies on TU 154 and goes to Gaziki.
          But Apple, which is many times richer than Gazprom, did not make dual-use goods and is a mega-successful company.
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 11 July 2016 17: 43
            +1
            Quote: Al1977
            That is why the machines are full of g ...,

            Full d, you say? Dear, before writing such a vyser, would you bother to look a little at the story and move your brain. Let's start with Kamaz. Remember how clever how many times did Kamaz master win in Dakkar?
            This humpbacked UAZ will pass where neither "Gelik" nor "Land" will pass and this is a fact. What about high-tech cars ... about Marusya-B2, for example, have you heard something? What about "the whole world drives Gaziks "... so in the field of cars, everything is just beginning to straighten out in Russia. Until that moment, there was a coma in the car industry.
            Quote: Al1977
            Or refute the FACTS, they say the whole world flies on TU 154

            No, it doesn’t fly. However, fighters and bombers are purchased regularly.
            With regard to civilian aircraft, for 25 years Airbus and Boeing have monopolized this market, despite the fact that long-range new aircraft have not been produced in the Russian Federation for a very long time, but let's see in the future.
            Quote: Al1977
            But Apple, which is many times richer than Gazprom

            And do you think this is an indicator? By the way, are you sure that Apple does not produce dual-use products?
            I’ll tell you one thing, only you don’t be offended - ALL WORLD COMPANIES RELATED TO HIGH TECHNOLOGIES SO OR OTHERWISE RELATED TO DEFENSE. And according to your logic, it’s completely free. laughing
            1. Al1977
              Al1977 12 July 2016 10: 34
              +2
              Quote: NEXUS
              Dear, before writing such a vyser, you would have bothered to look a little at the story and move your brain. Let's start with Kamaz. Remember how smart the Kamaz master won in Dakkar?

              Once the insults went, then the arguments are over .. which is not surprising.
              Ok, let's "wiggle the brain".
              How many cars from the Kamaz-master series we delivered for export or the domestic market.
              Let’s go on the other side. Kamaz is one of the top 10 manufacturers of trucks? I mean I hope Google? And the most interesting thing is of course the facts:
              Clutch: one-disk company "Fichtel und SАСНS"
              Gearbox: 16S251 from "ZF"
              Radiator double, tubular-tape type of "VENR" company,
              Power Pump: ZF 7674

              You can dig further. But I think you already realized that just PUK was left from your post.
            2. Al1977
              Al1977 12 July 2016 10: 36
              +1
              Quote: NEXUS
              With regard to civilian aircraft, for 25 years Airbus and Boeing have monopolized this market

              How is this possible with our best planes in the world?
              Okay, Obama bedding, but ours are friends in the dancer countries, of which we feed plentifully, what are they flying on the A320 and B737, and not on the Tu154M
      2. alexej123
        alexej123 11 July 2016 17: 29
        +2
        I'll try to answer you - does Daimler release electronics? No. Let's write down conditionally 1, then Software Daimler releases? No, let's write down one more conditionally. Further, does Daimler release new materials, synthetics, alloys? No, let's write down conditionally another 1. Further, "rubber", Daimler releases? No, but rubber factories are based on oil production, processing, petrochemicals. Can you count, count?
        1. aksakal
          aksakal 11 July 2016 23: 41
          +1
          Quote: alexej123
          I'll try to answer you - does Daimler release electronics? No. Let's write down conditionally 1, then Software Daimler releases? No, let's write down one more conditionally. Further, does Daimler release new materials, synthetics, alloys? No, let's write down conditionally another 1. Further, "rubber", Daimler releases? No, but rubber factories are based on oil production, processing, petrochemicals. Can you count, count?

          - So what? In Russia, there has long been a technology for producing ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, but Russia, and the whole world, does not go into serial production. Why? Because to organize mass demand, you need to immediately organize mass production at low prices, for which you still need to convey to the mass consumer that a new product has appeared. Polyethylene companies do not want to risk so much, therefore UHMWPE is so spanked to order in laboratory conditions, they did it for Plushenko when he was in support of some blue singer (who won Eurovision from Russia, Plushenko's wife works as a producer for this singer), skated on skates on a piece of this plastic (UHMWPE is this unique material, ultra-strong, with a low coefficient of friction, lubrication is not needed for UHMWPE parts) ... So, only when the military industrialists, when developing the Armata, came to the conclusion that they were somewhere in Armata This particular UHMWPE is needed, they came and ordered such a batch of manufacturers that the manufacturers are building (Astrakhan polyethylene, if I'm not mistaken) capacities for large-scale production of this material. And there the civilian consumer will get a taste and start purchasing UHMWPE. But the civilian consumer is larger than the military one and brings more profit, only few people can afford to enter the market, for example, the Astrakhan people definitely did not take risks and did the right thing until a guaranteed customer appeared. In this respect, those who argue that the military-industrial complex does not raise the economy are right, but only partially. The military-industrial complex is precisely the driver of the economy, the catalyst and accelerator of both scientific and technological progress itself, and the introduction of inventions into a series, and not its "elevator". The booster of the economy is a mass consumer after all.
          1. alexej123
            alexej123 12 July 2016 08: 54
            +1
            Yes, I agree with you. I disagree with those who shout "The military-industrial complex is a devourer of the people's welfare."
      3. Stas157
        Stas157 11 July 2016 20: 17
        +4
        Quote: vlad_vlad
        Apple could do one thing,

        You can do better, but no one will buy. This hour is not enough to do a good thing, you also need to be able to sell it!
        Here, Russian kvass is much tastier and healthier than Pepsi cola. But, the whole world drinks only acid Coca-Cola and does not know what natural kvass is!
      4. Stas157
        Stas157 11 July 2016 20: 20
        +2
        Quote: vlad_vlad
        come up with MP3 is one thing, make an antivirus - 3.

        Not true, there are audio formats like MP3s. There are as many antiviruses as you like!
    2. Professor
      Professor 11 July 2016 13: 57
      +3
      Quote: NEXUS
      Dear, before you write this, you should at least familiarize yourself with the subject of the conversation. For example, do you know that one defense worker is provided by 7 to 9 workers of non-defense industries? What does this mean? Apparently, the defense industry stimulates not only itself, but also civilian production. And this is the movement out of this economic "hole".

      Every ruble / dollar / shekel spent on the defense industry is a lost investment. There is no and will not be return from them. This is a necessary measure and it negatively affects the economy. The money spent on the tank will never return, the money spent on the excavator goes into the development of the economy.

      Quote: NEXUS
      That is, in your opinion, the thoughts and scientific developments in the defense industry are not the same high-tech that moves high-tech production forward in the civilian industry?

      No, this is not the high tech you need. Their research is classified and dies in the vaults of the first department. Civilian high-tech leads to progress faster, cheaper, and more efficiently. Until they survived, the military bought satellite photographs from civilian companies. laughing

      Quote: NEXUS
      Sure? Then explain to me, if everything is so simple and clear, why from scratch, for example, a combat fighter (from start to finish) can create only a few of the states in the world?

      I am 100% sure. Your mobile phone has more sensors, it is more productive and advance on the locks than the army portable communication device.
      Fighters are "ready" to create only a few countries, and not "capable" of creating only a few countries, since this is money down the drain. It's cheaper and easier to buy than to create. All highly developed bourgeois countries are capable of creating a fighter from scratch: Sweden, Germany, France, Britain, Korea, USA, Canada, Japan. Even the "giant" Israel has made its own fighter. How many countries are capable of making their processor? wink

      Quote: vlad_vlad
      Professor, can I answer for you?

      Be my guest. hi
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 11 July 2016 14: 35
        +4
        Quote: Professor
        The money spent on the tank will never return, the money spent on the excavator goes into the development of the economy.

        Sheer nonsense. Are we exporting tanks for thanks? Are you ignoring the country's defense capabilities? Or do you think that it is cost-effective and profitable to feed someone else’s army?

        Quote: Professor
        No, this is not the high tech you need. Their research is classified and dies in the vaults of the first department.

        One more nonsense. I will repeat. Aviastroenie. Cosmonautics suggests a dual purpose in fact. What civilian satellites do they bring out? The same Voivode, when removed from duty, will use not only military satellites to put satellites into orbit.
        Quote: Professor
        Your mobile phone has more sensors, it is more productive and advance on the locks than the army portable communication device.

        But why in the army portable communications device bluetooth, camera, flashlight, etc., do not explain? laughing
        Quote: Professor
        Fighters are "ready" to create only a few countries, and not "capable" of creating only a few countries, since this is money down the drain.

        Do not distort, dear. Readiness and ability are two completely different values. With regards to the money ... it’s observed that now only the lazy one does not declare that they are developing a 5th generation fighter. At the same time, they are gathering in cooperative alliances with other states.
        Quote: Professor
        Cheaper and easier to buy than create.

        If you want to sell. Remind you how the mattresses showed you a cookie asking to sell the Raptor. Besides, if you hypothetically assume a war between Israel and the United States (not nuclear), how will you solve the issue of service, ammunition and navigation? Can you tell me?
        Quote: Professor
        Sweden, Germany, France, Britain, Korea, USA, Canada, Japan. Even the "giant" Israel has made its own fighter.

        And from this place in more detail. wassat What, have you done it yourself? Can you look at these creations? laughing
        1. Professor
          Professor 11 July 2016 14: 51
          +5
          Quote: NEXUS
          Sheer nonsense. Are we exporting tanks for thanks? Are you ignoring the country's defense capabilities? Or do you think that it is cost-effective and profitable to feed someone else’s army?

          Tanks are a necessary measure. I already wrote about this. Export of tanks does not cover the costs of their creation.

          Quote: NEXUS
          One more nonsense. I will repeat. Aviastroenie. Cosmonautics suggests a dual purpose in fact. What civilian satellites do they bring out? The same Voivode, when removed from duty, will use not only military satellites to put satellites into orbit.

          Satellites display civilian carriers. Moreover, private traders. I understand that in the Union everything was imprisoned for war, all for dual purposes. Women's leather boots during the war became charter shoes. So they looked. Well, where is the Union? wink

          Quote: NEXUS
          But why in the army portable communications device bluetooth, camera, flashlight, etc., do not explain?

          But why are they only now trying to introduce them into the army?

          Quote: NEXUS
          With regards to money down the drain ... it is observed that now only the lazy one does not declare that they are developing a 5th generation fighter. At the same time, they are gathering in cooperative alliances with other states.

          "Only the lazy" can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

          Quote: NEXUS
          If you want to sell. Remind you how the mattresses showed you a cookie asking to sell the Raptor. Besides, if you hypothetically assume a war between Israel and the United States (not nuclear), how will you solve the issue of service, ammunition and navigation? Can you tell me?

          They will not want to sell some, others will sell. They wanted to get the Raptor for free. In a hypothetical war, we will fight hypothetically-telepathy.

          Quote: NEXUS
          And from this place in more detail. What, have you done it yourself? Can you look at these creations?

          Which of the following?

          PS
          How is it with the processor? wink
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 11 July 2016 15: 57
            +1
            Quote: Professor
            Tanks are a necessary measure. I already wrote about this. Export of tanks does not cover the costs of their creation.

            You tell this to those countries that are armed with both t-55 and t-54, and t-62/72 ... Although it is clear that tank building is unprofitable in Israel, merkavas are by and large not sold to other countries.
            Quote: Professor
            I understand that in the Union everything was imprisoned for war, all for dual purposes.

            Both in the USSR and in Russia and in the USA ... Boeing, Lockhit are engaged not only in the development of civilian aircraft. As well as NASA and Darpa, they are not imprisoned under one defense.
            Quote: Professor
            But why are they only now trying to introduce them into the army?

            What exactly? A flashlight in a radio or bluetooth? laughing
            Quote: Professor
            "Only the lazy" can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

            State and create slightly different concepts. I already told you.
            Quote: Professor
            They will not want to sell some, others will sell.

            Purely Jewish production. laughing Dear, you didn’t hatch from Odessa by accident, otherwise it looks like a friend Uncle Monya.
            Quote: Professor
            Which of the following?

            Yes, can I see everyone? laughing
            Quote: Professor
            How is it with the processor?

            All is well. Baikal, for example. By the way, I believe that its appearance is a direct influence of the defense industry.
            1. Professor
              Professor 12 July 2016 06: 53
              +2
              Quote: NEXUS
              You tell this to those countries that are armed with both t-55 and t-54, and t-62/72 ... Although it is clear that tank building is unprofitable in Israel, merkavas are by and large not sold to other countries.

              Tank building is unprofitable everywhere. Somewhere they are trying to recapture at least part of the money spent.

              Quote: NEXUS
              Both in the USSR and in Russia and in the USA ... Boeing, Lockhit are engaged not only in the development of civilian aircraft. As well as NASA and Darpa, they are not imprisoned under one defense.

              That's just about the United States is not necessary. There, women's leather boots are designed for women to go out into the world, and not like in the USSR; on command, they also go into battle.

              Quote: NEXUS
              What exactly? A flashlight in a radio or bluetooth?

              I don’t know about the fanarik, but bluetooth, Wi-Fi, GPS, accelerometer, jair, compass, thermometer and other gadgets already introduced on the civilian.

              Quote: NEXUS
              Purely Jewish production. Dear, you didn’t hatch from Odessa by accident, otherwise it looks like a friend Uncle Monya.

              Have you switched to nationality? The conversation with you is over.
              1. aksakal
                aksakal 12 July 2016 22: 28
                0
                Quote: Professor
                Tank building is unprofitable everywhere. Somewhere they are trying to recapture at least part of the money spent.

                I repeat - the argument about the military-industrial complex is like the argument about alcohol, is alcohol a poison or a medicine? Dose dependent. In the case of the military-industrial complex, everything is exactly the same.
                Professor, accusing tank building of unprofitability, you take into account only direct gains and losses. And indirect? Any new developments in tank building can not affect the tractor industry? The development of Almaty has already helped Astrakhan polyethylene finally begin to prepare for serial production of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, it turned out immediately for civilian consumers, although later the profit from the civilian consumer will be incomparably greater. Well, the economy is stupid. And most importantly - the engineering and technical corps, which is nurtured for tank building and in the tank building enterprise itself - is the golden fund of the nation, whatever one may say. And it costs a lot of money.
                I agree that the millions of Kalashnikovs lying in the warehouse and now demanding funds for their disposal is an unprofitable and unpleasant thing. But in Russia, the revival of civil aircraft construction was started by the military-industrial complex, namely, Sukhoi and Irkut, not Tupolev, not Ilyushin, which lie on their side, namely the military-industrial complex, which afloat and decided to diversify a little. How successful is another conversation, in this case the fact itself is important. And the fact is that it is the enterprises of the military-industrial complex that are reviving the civil aircraft industry. It is the Tula and Izhevsk people, in addition to military small arms, who also export huge amounts of hunting, security and sporting weapons. This is not oil, but a product of fairly high technologies. In Russian conditions, the military-industrial complex is really a driver and catalyst of the economy, the main thing is that you cannot get an overdose of the military-industrial complex. Everything is poison and everything is medicine, it depends only on the dose.
                1. Professor
                  Professor 13 July 2016 09: 00
                  0
                  Quote: aksakal
                  In the Russian context, the military-industrial complex is indeed a driver and catalyst for the economy; most importantly, an overdose of the military-industrial complex cannot be obtained. Everything is poison and everything is medicine, it depends on the dose only.

                  There are no Russian or non-Russian "conditions". Economic laws know no boundaries, and those who tried to go "a special way" were dying of hunger. The military-industrial complex is a brake on the economy. It is gluttonous and ineffective. It takes away funds from advanced industries. The military-industrial complex has never been the driver of the econokiki.
                  1. aksakal
                    aksakal 13 July 2016 23: 43
                    0
                    Quote: Professor
                    The military-industrial complex is a brake on the economy. He is voracious and not effective. From takes away money from advanced industries. No where and never was the military-industrial complex a driver of econokiki.

                    - Dogma
                  2. Professor
                    Professor 14 July 2016 06: 48
                    -1
                    Quote: aksakal
                    - Dogma

                    The harsh reality of no one and never refuted. hi
      2. vlad_vlad
        vlad_vlad 11 July 2016 18: 35
        0
        NEXUS (3) MD Today, 14:35 ↑ New

        Sheer nonsense ...


        Dear Nexus,
        usually you started your post with the address "Dear". Don't break with this tradition.
        The alternative start "Sheer nonsense" is not an equal substitute.

        and if in the case - without demagogy - name at least a few innovations of the military-industrial complex over the past 20 years that would not have cheaper and more massive analogues on the citizen and would be invented by the military-industrial complex in particular?

        take a list of the 100 (well, or 20 or 50) largest companies in any country and calculate what percentage of the products they take defense industry.
    3. Achilles
      Achilles 11 July 2016 15: 11
      +2
      Until they survived, the military bought satellite photographs from civilian companies.

      And who brought out the satellite? Who invented the satellite at all? Correctly all this was done by the military-industrial complex.
      1. Al1977
        Al1977 11 July 2016 16: 52
        0
        Quote: Achilles
        And who brought out the satellite? Who invented the satellite at all? Correctly all this was done by the military-industrial complex.

        Invented and put on a commercial basis, two big differences.
        You can invent as much as you like in closed laboratories, but this will not take the country to a new level of technological development. Only civilian businessmen can make marketing attractive product out of military garbage.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 11 July 2016 18: 25
          +2
          Quote: Al1977
          You can invent as much as you like in closed laboratories, but this will not take the country to a new level of technological development.

          Let me give you one simple example ...
          Take a simple cartridge 7,62. And we will analyze what is needed in order to make it.
          The cartridge is metal, so ore is needed (I will not say anything about the search for deposits). Excavators, sappers, crane operators, etc. are needed to develop the ore mine. And of course, the military does it all. wassat
          Further ... the production of the metal itself and the blanks for cartridges ... metal foundries, this, of course, the military also produces. laughing
          Further ... the production of gunpowder. Is such a component as nitrate used only in gunpowder? But the same saltpeter must be produced, packaged, transported, etc. ... and of course the military are also engaged in this, and civil enterprises have nothing to do with it.
          Further, for all this to work and be done, we need machines, assemblies, and of course people. Apparently also military.
          At the same time, with all this breakthrough of the people it is necessary to feed something.
          Hence the conclusion, according to your logic, that the military-industrial complex is unprofitable, since it works only in minus. fellow
          To make it easier for you, this is sarcasm.
          1. Al1977
            Al1977 12 July 2016 16: 27
            0
            Quote: NEXUS
            Take a simple cartridge 7,62. And we will analyze what is needed in order to make it.

            Why not take a ballpoint pen? (To make it easier for you, this is sarcasm.)
            How much material and labor does it take?
            Or do you want to say that cartridge 7,62 is a product with high added value? And that they will save the budget of Russia ... Well, I'm not an expert in this ... but at first glance it looks like some kind of nonsense.
        2. Achilles
          Achilles 12 July 2016 10: 33
          +1
          Invented and put on a commercial basis, two big differences.
          You can invent as much as you like in closed laboratories, but this will not take the country to a new level of technological development. Only civilian businessmen can make marketing attractive product out of military garbage.

          That’s the point, if it weren’t for the military, there wouldn’t be commercial satellites and there wouldn’t be carriers delivering these satellites, and it’s just because of the military-industrial complex that the economy can be boosted, you just have to do this when you come up with developments, conduct research, you need everything it should be translated and applied into the civilian sphere, but I need to repeat once again to deal with it in a paid one, and if the state does not take advantage of it, this is another conversation
          1. Al1977
            Al1977 12 July 2016 16: 29
            0
            Quote: Achilles
            That's just the point if it weren’t for the military there wouldn’t be commercial

            Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooob easy. And TV, and the Internet, with navigation? These are ABSOLUTELY commercial products that bring money. How much money the military brings ... I don’t know, but I’m sure that Internet and TV users are tens of times more.
            1. aksakal
              aksakal 12 July 2016 22: 41
              +1
              Quote: Al1977
              Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooob easy. And TV, and the Internet, with navigation? These are ABSOLUTELY commercial products that bring money. How much money the military brings ... I don’t know, but I’m sure that Internet and TV users are tens of times more.

              - In short, I’ll explain why there is no way without the military ... There came an innovation that theoretically will benefit humanity, but the product is new, no one can guarantee 100% success. It is because of these risks that civilian business women will not be in a hurry to introduce this innovation. Military approach differently. They see that emerging innovation can improve some kind of weapon. The military do not care about commercial success or failure, they do not care how much it will cost, they see that this innovation can improve their weapons, and to get it, they are willing to pay as much as necessary. In short, the military has a task, and they carry it out. The result is improved weapons, serial production of the innovation appears, which already greatly facilitates the promotion of the described innovation. That is why the military-industrial complex is needed, but not in too large doses. For military needs - no more than 2% of the country's GDP.
  • Al1977
    Al1977 11 July 2016 16: 36
    -2
    Quote: NEXUS
    That is, in your opinion, the thoughts and scientific developments in the defense industry are not the same high-tech that moves high-tech production forward in the civilian industry?

    Specific examples will be for modern Russia? The words are beautiful ... but nothing more.
    Actually, I don’t see anything in our store that I planned to buy in the near future and was proud of it.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 11 July 2016 17: 46
      +1
      Quote: Al1977
      Specific examples will be for modern Russia? The words are beautiful ... but nothing more.
      Actually, I don’t see anything in our store that I planned to buy in the near future and was proud of it.

      Here I have a question for you and sorrow-skeptics like you. And what did YOU personally do to be proud of your country?
      Regarding the question. Example-GLONASS.
      1. Al1977
        Al1977 12 July 2016 10: 49
        0
        Quote: NEXUS
        Here I have a question for you and sorcerers like you.

        When a person becomes ill, then you need to make the correct diagnosis and begin treatment.
        And not to say "that you are a skeptic, you walk while ... breathe, then everything is fine ... it will pass by itself." Everyone has their own life, I try not to rely on "but everything will be fine" in mine, so I look at things realistically.
  • alexej123
    alexej123 11 July 2016 17: 24
    +2
    Total 4 - USA, Russia, France and the UK. And then, the last two are in question, too many components from other countries.
    And nuclear plants can build, from scratch, also 4 countries - Russia, the USA, France and Japan. The last two have joined forces in this area. And an atom is a direct military-industrial complex. And also a high-tech, highly intelligent civilian product with high added value.
  • dmi.pris
    dmi.pris 11 July 2016 06: 18
    +3
    I agree with you, the military-industrial complex is one of the engines of progress .. But, do not forget about other industries that are now put it mildly in the pen .. And it’s easier-plundered, neglected-light industry, machine-tool building, etc. according to the list.
    1. vlad_vlad
      vlad_vlad 11 July 2016 13: 35
      +4
      dmi.price (4) Today, 06:18
      I agree with you-VPK is one of the engines of progress


      Give an example - what has the industry advanced in progress over the past 10-15 years? I do not mean only Russia, including the whole world.
      1. Yeraz
        Yeraz 11 July 2016 14: 36
        +5
        Quote: vlad_vlad
        Give an example - what has the industry advanced in progress over the past 10-15 years?

        It’s useless. Knocking on the wall is simple. There is one reason for them.
        1. Al1977
          Al1977 11 July 2016 16: 56
          +1
          Quote: Yeraz
          It’s useless. Knocking on the wall is simple. There is one reason for them.

          They will pretend that they missed the message))) No one will answer you)))
          I support the theory that the military-industrial complex is one of the ordinary areas, there is nothing outstanding there.
          Koreans build great cars, machine tools, ships, and electronics. And they are sold at times more than our tanks. Although our tanks are the best)))
      2. alexej123
        alexej123 11 July 2016 17: 34
        +2
        Listen, take an interest in the GLONASS and GPS systems? Sources, goals? Learn a lot of new things. The initial versions were created for the needs of the military.
        1. Professor
          Professor 12 July 2016 07: 10
          -1
          Quote: alexej123
          Listen, take an interest in the GLONASS and GPS systems? Sources, goals? Learn a lot of new things. The initial versions were created for the needs of the military.

          You have been asked for the past 10-15 years. Yes, even in the last 30 years. Well?

          Now my example. The notorious military quality. The American military standard MIL STD 105 provides for 1.5% of marriage. Imagine what would happen to Mercedes, Apple, Toyota or Bosch if they had 1.5% of the marriage? At my company, the average number of customer complaints is 7 ppm (7 complaints per million items sold). Moreover, only 25% of these complaints are justified. Well, where's your defense industry? wink
          1. alexej123
            alexej123 12 July 2016 09: 06
            +1
            Professor, as in a joke, the man's words: "Tell me that you are a Jew, if you answer a question with a question?", "No, but what?" I was asked what the military-industrial complex has moved in progress over the past 10-15 years? I gave an example of GLONASS. Initially, the prototype of GLONASS was created for the needs of the military, and now I think the satellite constellation is used not only for civilian purposes. Prospective? Yes, especially since only the United States has the same system, well, probably a little better and more proven. Nobody else. You are now trying to introduce me simply into a verbal "fornication".
            1. Professor
              Professor 12 July 2016 10: 01
              +1
              Quote: alexej123
              Professor, as in a joke, the man's words: "Tell me that you are a Jew, if you answer a question with a question?", "No, but what?"

              Does my or your nationality matter?

              Quote: alexej123
              I was asked that such a defense industry has moved in progress over the past 10-15 years? I gave an example of GLONASS. Initially, the prototype of GLONASS was created for the needs of the military, and now I think the satellite constellation is used not only for civilian purposes. Promising? Yes, especially since the same system, well, probably only the United States has a little better and more verified. No one else.

              GLONAS was created 40 years ago. The first satellite was launched back in 1982. I'm not even asking you about the last 10-15 years, but about 30 years. By the way about GLONASS. Only thanks to the civil sector, or rather the company Quelcom GLONAS was able to become what it was intended to be. The military-industrial complex was unable to create an acceptable receiver. They have this receiver the size of a "brick".

              Quote: alexej123
              Now you are trying to introduce me simply into a verbal "fornication".

              Not at all. I repeat: The military-industrial complex is not the engine of the economy, but its brake.
              1. Achilles
                Achilles 12 July 2016 10: 51
                +2
                GLONAS was created 40 years ago. The first satellite was launched back in 1982. I'm not even asking you about the last 10-15 years, but about 30 years. By the way about GLONASS. Only thanks to the civil sector, or rather the company Quelcom GLONAS was able to become what it was intended to be. The military-industrial complex was unable to create an acceptable receiver. They have this receiver the size of a "brick".

                Don't you understand the point? If it weren’t for the military-industrial complex, there wouldn’t be GLONAS. It is a question that the military-industrial complex is the start of development no more, the military-industrial complex came up with GLANAS, the civil sector was picked up and put into the best direction, this is what the civil sector should do (and deal with) and pick up the military-industrial complex and develop all this. These are obvious things, the most advanced one way or another was invented by the military, and the civil sector picks up and applies all this at home. This is how the economy develops, only the military-industrial complex and the civilian sector should work closely
                1. Professor
                  Professor 12 July 2016 12: 52
                  +1
                  Quote: Achilles
                  Don't you understand the point? If it weren’t for the military-industrial complex, there wouldn’t be GLONAS. It is a question that the military-industrial complex is the start of development no more, the military-industrial complex came up with GLANAS, the civil sector was picked up and put into the best direction, this is what the civil sector should do (and deal with) and pick up the military-industrial complex and develop all this. These are obvious things, the most advanced one way or another was invented by the military, and the civil sector picks up and applies all this at home. This is how the economy develops, only the military-industrial complex and the civilian sector should work closely

                  I understand the point very well. The military-industrial complex is a brake, not a catalyst. If it weren’t for the military-industrial complex, GPS would be all the same. The civilian market would have made it itself, as well as the commercial communications satellites that the military also use. Where would the Internet be if it remained with the military? Whose developments do warriors use to ensure the security of the same Internet? Maybe the military sent ships to Mars? Etc.

                  Quote: alexej123
                  Then one member of the forum asked for GLONASS system performance figures. I can bring on our company. When installing sensors on cars and agricultural vehicles, fuel and lubricant savings per year ranged from 30 to 40%. With a fleet of equipment of about 3 units, fuel and lubricants are purchased per year in the amount of about 500 million rubles. Here is the real economic effect of the defense industry initiative.

                  1. Satellite navigation would be without the military.
                  2. Your receivers are civilian since the military does not meet the requirements, nor mass-size, but for energy consumption.

                  Quote: Achilles
                  This is how the economy develops, only the military-industrial complex and the civilian sector should work closely

                  They cooperate, but for a long time not on equal terms. The military-industrial complex slows down progress.

                  Quote: alexej123
                  On the topic - that’s the point that the military-industrial complex kind of gives impetus to the development of other sectors.

                  It does not, but it slows down. The defense industry takes up valuable resources.
                  1. alexej123
                    alexej123 12 July 2016 14: 15
                    0
                    Oleg, following your logic and fecal fighter, because it only carries two passengers. So we will argue up to us.ru. In theory, and from the T-90 taxi is not very, so the military-industrial complex is a brake. And drones, also in civilian life are not used and do not bring economic benefits?
                    1. Professor
                      Professor 12 July 2016 14: 38
                      -1
                      Quote: alexej123
                      Oleg, following your logic and fecal fighter, because it only carries two passengers. So we will argue up to us.ru. In theory, and from the T-90 taxi is not very, so the military-industrial complex is a brake. And drones, also in civilian life are not used and do not bring economic benefits?

                      Following my logic, the creation of a fighter does not advance the economy, but only slows it down. This is not Jumbo or Dreamliner. Creating a tank slows down the economy even more. Well, what technology developed when creating the T-90 made a breakthrough in civilian life? The same story with drones. Further more. Civil drones go to the army, and not vice versa.
                      1. alexej123
                        alexej123 12 July 2016 18: 59
                        0
                        But who first came up with the idea of ​​using drones and for what purposes?
              2. alexej123
                alexej123 12 July 2016 10: 52
                0
                Oleg, if I offended you - I apologize. Nationality did not mean, he was born and raised in the multinational Dagestan. The best childhood friend lives in Afula. The joke is old. On the topic - that’s the point that the military-industrial complex kind of gives impetus to the development of other sectors. The same GLONASS, because the initiators of the creation were the military. Created. Now it uses the civilian sector to the full. Then one member of the forum asked for GLONASS system performance figures. I can bring on our company. When installing sensors on cars and agricultural vehicles, fuel and lubricant savings per year ranged from 30 to 40%. With a fleet of equipment about 3 500 units, fuels and lubricants are purchased per year in the amount of about 300 million rubles. Here is the real economic effect of the defense industry initiative.
        2. Al1977
          Al1977 12 July 2016 09: 40
          -1
          Quote: alexej123

          Listen, take an interest in GLONASS systems

          Tell us how GLONASS is pulling out our economy.
          It is just a navigation tool.
          It's about the engine of the economy, not about what they came up with.
          1. alexej123
            alexej123 12 July 2016 10: 55
            0
            Read the post above. Count. This is a primitive means of control, the simplest function of the system.
    2. Al1977
      Al1977 11 July 2016 16: 53
      -1
      Quote: dmi.pris
      I agree with you-VPK is one of the engines of progress ..

      Recession of the economy as consistent with the set of revolutions of this engine? Low-power engine?
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 11 July 2016 17: 55
        +5
        Quote: Al1977
        Recession of the economy as consistent with the set of revolutions of this engine?

        And the recession in your opinion because of the military-industrial complex occurred? wassat The rearmament of the army was laid down in the state budget. It did not grow out of nowhere, and no one buries social spheres either.
        You probably need to - "take it out and put" after a 25-year collapse and a breakthrough and economic recovery and a salary of 5 million a month.
        For your information, now, and for the past 25 years, a war has been going on against us. That is why NATO is pulling the missile defense system to our borders, that’s why the info war is on, that’s why the sanctions are burning in the Middle East and Ukraine, and that’s why they gouged Yugoslavia, Libya, etc.
        At the same time, you have nothing to eat and nowhere to sleep, dear? Or is your "rise" of the economy an opportunity to travel not to Egypt but to the Maldives?
        1. Al1977
          Al1977 12 July 2016 09: 44
          0
          Quote: NEXUS
          And the recession in your opinion because of the military-industrial complex occurred?

          No, in my opinion, the decline was not due to the military-industrial complex, just as an economic recovery is not possible due to the military-industrial complex. You at least study the essence of the dispute, and do not tear out individual phrases.
      2. alexej123
        alexej123 11 July 2016 18: 17
        0
        The recession in the USSR had both objective and subjective reasons. Several of them: 1. It was unnecessary to get involved in an arms race, not in the development of the military-industrial complex, not in development, namely in the arms race. How much equipment is now on conservation is dead weight?
        2. Help "brotherly countries and peoples". How many tens or even hundreds of billions of tallers have been spent?
        3. Feeding "freeloaders" inside the country. Only 2 Republics earned more than they spent - the RSFSR and the BSSR. The rest lived "for free".
        1. tatra
          tatra 11 July 2016 18: 24
          +1
          And here you are wrong.
          Large spending on the military-industrial complex is a consequence of the Cold War unleashed by the West against the USSR, the protection of the Soviet people from the West's “democratic bombing”.
          Helping "friendly regimes" is geopolitics, spheres of interest.
          Those Soviet "freeloaders" are nonsense in comparison with the maintenance of the peoples in the former republics of the USSR, the enemies of the communists who seized the USSR.
          1. Al1977
            Al1977 12 July 2016 09: 46
            0
            Quote: tatra
            And here you are wrong.

            That is, they were right in everything, but the USSR fell apart))))
        2. NEXUS
          NEXUS 11 July 2016 18: 33
          +1
          Quote: alexej123
          How much equipment is now on conservation is dead weight?

          And how many military equipment do you have for preserving the US?
          Quote: alexej123
          2. Help "brotherly countries and peoples". How many tens or even hundreds of billions of tallers have been spent?

          We haven’t "helped" for 25 years, and what do we have, tell us?
          Quote: alexej123
          3. Feeding "freeloaders" inside the country.

          If you are about liberal husk, then I fully agree with you.
          Quote: alexej123
          Only 2 Republics earned more than they spent - the RSFSR and the BSSR. The rest lived "for free".

          Quote: alexej123
          Only 2 Republics earned more than they spent - the RSFSR and the BSSR. The rest lived "for free".

          Oh, how ... two republics were sewn up right, and the remaining 13 were burials and parasites.
          You would have listened to some teenager, would have thought, well, what the hell is this USSR ... everything was so bad there.
          Everything would be good in your reasoning would be if most of the members of the forum did not live in that very USSR.
          1. alexej123
            alexej123 11 July 2016 22: 05
            0
            Nexus, I was born and raised at that time. I expressed my point of view, not saying that it is the Truth, it's just my opinion. It makes no sense to compare with the storage volumes with the USA - I explained the reason above, they can afford such expenses, we cannot. They dictate the rules in this world. For "fraternal assistance" - here one said Geopolitics. So, Geopolitics cannot be empty, it must be filled with economic content, otherwise - the example of the Union is fresh, and how many "fraternal countries" later spat in the back. And "freeloaders" - now I will not find numbers, but the level of gasification of households in Russia was lower in the Baltics and Ukraine, in the Baltics they spent so much money to modernize production, look at the life of Moldova, Georgia, etc., when Russia only said - Nothing personal, business only. And I think this is correct. We need to help those who, with their blood, have proved their communion with us - South Ossetia, southeastern Ukraine, and for the rest I follow my own course.
            1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Al1977
            Al1977 12 July 2016 09: 47
            0
            Quote: NEXUS
            If you are about liberal husk, then I fully agree with you.

            That is, we have and still have the richest "liberal husk"? Are you sure you don't live in virtual reality? Maybe Forbes look and you will not write the uttermost nonsense? Or the goal is to do the stuffing and that's it?
          3. Achilles
            Achilles 12 July 2016 11: 00
            0
            Quote: alexej123
            Only 2 Republics earned more than they spent - the RSFSR and the BSSR. The rest lived "for free".


            According to UN statistics, Ukraine in 80 years in terms of living ranked 5th in the world, I think they were not parasites
            1. Parsec
              Parsec 12 July 2016 12: 42
              +1
              Quote: Achilles
              According to UN statistics, Ukraine in 80 years in terms of living ranked 5 in the world


              Please tell me the source.

              The newspaper Literary Ukraine and posters from the Maidan should not be offered.
            2. atalef
              atalef 12 July 2016 13: 03
              +3
              Quote: Achilles
              According to UN statistics, Ukraine in 80 years in terms of living ranked 5 in the world

              belay belay
            3. Parsec
              Parsec 12 July 2016 13: 24
              +1
              Quote: Achilles
              According to UN statistics, Ukraine in 80 years in terms of living ranked 5th in the world, I think they were not parasites


              What kind of idiots do you need in order to start up the fifth place in the world in terms of standard of living, which turns into impotence with the further loss of territories and civil war?

              You dipped the whole of Ukraine in the calo on a grand scale without the ability to wash for centuries.
            4. alexej123
              alexej123 12 July 2016 14: 06
              0
              I will take my word for it, one "But" - give the statistics due to what income Ukraine ranked 5th in the world in terms of living standards. That is why the freeloaders, you only confirmed my opinion.
            5. Al1977
              Al1977 12 July 2016 16: 31
              0
              Quote: Achilles
              According to UN statistics, Ukraine in 80 years in terms of living ranked 5th in the world, I think they were not parasites

              drinks
      3. vlad_vlad
        vlad_vlad 11 July 2016 18: 43
        +1
        Quote: Al1977
        Quote: dmi.pris
        I agree with you-VPK is one of the engines of progress ..

        Recession of the economy as consistent with the set of revolutions of this engine? Low-power engine?


        it’s just the wrong honey, i.e. recession. and in general UTB Yeltsin is to blame. well, or pin .. there.
        and the Dutch / Finns / Norwegians / Singapore / ... have few military-industrial complex, but they have a lot of GDP, but because they smoke or drink there or because they are gay or narrow eyes, they don’t see well.

        and in general - give more money, we will build something else well, or we will complete what you gave us money for yesterday.
  • Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov 11 July 2016 06: 38
    0
    Our weapon, proven over the centuries, if the world wants it, it must be given to it (or rather, sold), it is Kalash and Kalash in Africa, you can rest assured that for at least a hundred years, at least, AK will go nowhere.
  • Sars
    Sars 11 July 2016 07: 20
    -1
    With arms exports, you need an understanding of where something cannot be supplied.
    Two examples: they armed Azerbaijan, now it is in conflict with our ally Armenia;
    they almost signed an agreement on deliveries to KSA of the Iskander, in time someone had the mind to stop.
    1. Beefeater
      Beefeater 11 July 2016 08: 10
      +2
      Quote: SarS
      With arms exports, you need an understanding of where something cannot be supplied.
      Two examples: they armed Azerbaijan, now it is in conflict with our ally Armenia;
      they almost signed an agreement on deliveries to KSA of the Iskander, in time someone had the mind to stop.

      Azerbaijan is also our ally. Half of the population of this country permanently or temporarily resides in Russia. In power there is generally a Russian person - he spent half his life in Moscow.
      1. Blondy
        Blondy 11 July 2016 08: 28
        0
        Quote: Beefeater
        Azerbaijan is also our ally. Half of the population of this country permanently or temporarily resides in Russia. In power there is generally a Russian person - he spent half his life in Moscow.

        Once again, about our two allies, or not?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 11 July 2016 08: 35
          +3
          Army and Armenia?
          1. Sodom897
            Sodom897 11 July 2016 09: 23
            +2
            army from Armenians fellow
          2. Sodom897
            Sodom897 11 July 2016 09: 26
            0
            war so-so, but what roads will be !!! laughing
        2. stoker
          stoker 11 July 2016 12: 34
          0
          Quote: Blondy

          Once again, about our two allies, or not?

          And where were "our only allies" in 1991, and especially in 1993? "Remind me or not"?
      2. Yeraz
        Yeraz 11 July 2016 14: 43
        0
        Quote: Beefeater
        Half of the population of this country permanently or temporarily resides in Russia.

        and a half you certainly bent.
        The population of Azerbaijan is 9.5 million.
        About 2.5 million Azerbaijanis moved in. And already the children who were born in Russia are not considered residents of Azerbaijan. they are plus Russia, not Azerbaijan. Of the 2.5 million, 200 thousand more are Azerbaijanis of Georgia, who are citizens of Georgia.
        Therefore, in fact, in Russia 2.3 million residents of Azerbaijan have the majority, who have 2 passports in their hands, the Russian and Azerbaijani and the children of these people who were born in Russia and do not fall into 9.5 million residents of Azerbaijan.
        Therefore, half is strongly said. Here in Baku and 4 million live, and this is half of the inhabitants of Azerbaijan.
  • Vivan
    Vivan 11 July 2016 08: 47
    +2
    Quote: Spade
    Army and Armenia?

    You are a comedian. Even I (Vietnamese) know that the only allies of Russia are A and F.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 11 July 2016 08: 54
      +1
      Then Armenia, it turns out, is also the same "non-ally" as Azerbaijan? After all, it does not apply to either the army or the navy ... 8)))
    2. Imperialkolorad
      Imperialkolorad 11 July 2016 09: 38
      +1
      Quote: Vivan
      You are a comedian. Even I (Vietnamese) know that the only allies of Russia are A and F.

      You have an enviable erudition, which so many of our compatriots do not have.
    3. Al1977
      Al1977 11 July 2016 17: 01
      +1
      Quote: Vivan
      You are a comedian. Even I (Vietnamese) know that the only allies of Russia are A and F.

      Not to fig friends .. maybe then the question is not in others, but in us? No?
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 11 July 2016 18: 00
        +1
        Quote: Al1977
        Not to fig friends .. maybe then the question is not in others, but in us? No?

        Or maybe it’s the liberals who are sitting in Russia and taking care of their wallet? No?
        Tell me friends of the United States, since you are so interested in this question. Or friends of Germany ... there is no need to splurge. There is NO FRIENDS IN GEOPOLITICS AND WILL NEVER.
        Russia is the richest country in terms of minerals, forests, water and land in general. Who would not want to grab even a piece from such a pie? That is why at all times the fleet, the army, and now the VKS, are the only friends of the country.
        1. Al1977
          Al1977 12 July 2016 10: 58
          +1
          Quote: NEXUS
          Or maybe it’s the liberals who are sitting in Russia and taking care of their wallet? No?

          Or maybe in Obama?))))
          By the way, which of the liberal values ​​bothers you very much?
          Freedom of speech and press? Or leave only the first channel and Kiselev propagandist?
          Free movement? Or close the borders?
          Freedom of choice or leave one EP and choose the Tsar?
          What is the essence of the claims to liberalism and what in return? Communism? The second time on the same rake?
          And let's look at developed countries. Germany, France, Sweden, USA, .. Korea is already with Singapore.
          What is the system and standard of living?
          Or again we have our own way?))))
  • darksoul
    darksoul 11 July 2016 09: 06
    0
    The news is positive ... but not unambiguous ... you can’t chase the quantity ... We’ll sell 20 su35 to China and write +2 billion and tomorrow China will copy it and push without us
  • Old26
    Old26 11 July 2016 09: 15
    +1
    Quote: Dmitry Potapov
    Our weapon, proven over the centuries, if the world wants it, it must be given to it (or rather, sold), it is Kalash and Kalash in Africa, you can rest assured that for at least a hundred years, at least, AK will go nowhere.

    At the same time, we must not forget that time has changed. And if we used to supply weapons to the third world countries that we had, and we were the "main", now sometimes it becomes customer... He needs not what we sometimes give him, but what he needs. The same example with tanks for the SA is very indicative. If this contract was starting to move from the "let's discuss" stage to the "let's see" stage, then it was hard to guess that air conditioning would be required in a desert climate?
    The second disadvantage of our sales system was, and still is, the sale of "export" samples, which in terms of their performance characteristics are lower than those that we have. And it turns out that we sell weapons with deliberately cut characteristics compared to what we showed the "buyer" characteristics. And our competitors sell the same things that they have in service. I am not saying that we need to violate the agreements that we signed (control of missile technologies), but nevertheless, we also need to think about this.

    Quote: SarS
    With arms exports, you need an understanding of where something cannot be supplied.
    Two examples: they armed Azerbaijan, now it is in conflict with our ally Armenia;
    they almost signed an agreement on deliveries to KSA of the Iskander, in time someone had the mind to stop.

    It has been in conflict with Armenia since the time of the USSR. And do not forget about the even more southern neighbor - Iran. With whom we now seem to be on friendly terms. But this country with its ambitions, with its desire to dominate the region, and until recently, our relations were far from friendly. And Azerbaijan could be that buffer between Russia and Iran
    And it seems to me that in vain that they did not sign. All the same, the same export option (under the agreement on MCT) would go there. And they, the Arabs, have a well-developed sense of "monkeyism" on the one hand (as it is, the neighbor has, but I do not), it would still be necessary to maintain a sense of "balance" in the region. On the other hand, they would become, in one part or another, "attached" to us. So you always have to look at what this will give in the long run. Allies come and go, but buyers stay ...
  • 3vs
    3vs 11 July 2016 09: 54
    0
    It would not be bad if ours, along with technology, for that matter, ours and
    under this business, the products of our machine tool industry were sold!
  • Volksib
    Volksib 11 July 2016 10: 32
    +1
    The production of weapons is a locomotive, a driver for the economy. First of all, for the development of new technologies, and their transfer to the civilian sphere. But as for money, in 2015 the export of foodstuffs exceeded the export of weapons twice. on development. And here the situation is different, all successful agricultural enterprises work on "Dominators" and "Jondir". The equipment, although much more expensive than domestic, but more efficient. The same Germans are equally good at making weapons, machines, and combines with tractors ... All sectors of the economy require attention for the development of our state.
    1. tatra
      tatra 11 July 2016 10: 42
      -4
      And why is it that you exported so much food if even after a quarter of a century Russia produced LESS agricultural products than the RSFSR in 1991?
      What, all the "daragie rasiyane" are provided with high-quality and cheap products, that it is possible to "feed the whole world", as fans of "Russia they lost" in 1917 like to "boast" about?
      1. shonsu
        shonsu 11 July 2016 12: 48
        0
        To get started, study the question of who, when, what, and how much they produced.
        1. tatra
          tatra 11 July 2016 12: 55
          -2
          I studied, and you? You, the enemies of the communists, have ruined ALL the former republics of the USSR and ALL branches in them with your well-paid job, and what you seriously expose for your "achievements" can only be considered achievements as the enemies of the country and the people.
  • Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn 11 July 2016 11: 10
    0
    The article is kind of vague, like quite recently by the same Volodin, about the growth of our economy, based on the growth of the capitalization of our banks. Here is the same, some abstract figures, without any specifics - what did we sell specifically to the Indians for such huge sums of money ?! With the Chinese, at least one can recall the contracts for the supply of S-400 and Su-35, but the author must also describe all this, and not repeat the mantra about the "order book" for the GDP.
  • a-cola
    a-cola 11 July 2016 12: 07
    +2
    Quote: Professor
    Quote: Tartar 174
    The production of weapons can serve as one of the locomotives that will pull out our economy, especially since we are able to make weapons from childhood, and moreover, almost everyone. Remember the bows with arrows from the talnik, then set on fire and what else did we shoot)))

    Can not. The military-industrial complex never pulled the economy, but on the contrary, drove it into a hole. An example is the USSR and North Korea. On the other hand, South Korea, Japan, Germany, Taiwan. It is necessary to develop the means of production, Hi Tek. Moreover, today a citizen is more technologically advanced than military products. In the 1990s, there was even such a "joke" in the bourgeois fleet that when all the electronic systems on the ship fail, Sony TV continues to work in spite of this.

    Why is this categorical? Never say never. Do not duplicate common cliches. I won’t say anything about the DPRK, but the USSR was not driven into the pit at all by the military-industrial complex. In addition, the USSR did not so much sell its weapons as it donated. If today you can make good money on weapons, thanks to the global instability created by our friends, then it's time to take advantage. I think that to whom to whom, but you understand this.
    1. tatra
      tatra 11 July 2016 12: 22
      +2
      The USSR was driven into the pit by the enemies of the Communists, Socialism, the Soviet people who seized power in the USSR in 1985, as they drove into the pits and ALL the republics of the USSR they seized in 1991, turned them into impoverished, backward, dying raw materials appendages and markets, sold out to foreigners.
    2. Professor
      Professor 11 July 2016 13: 02
      +1
      Quote: a-cola
      Why is this categorical?

      Math, sir.

      Quote: a-cola
      I won’t say anything about the DPRK, but the USSR was not driven into the pit at all by the military-industrial complex.

      The military-industrial complex only helped the Soviet economy pass away.

      Quote: a-cola
      If today you can make good money on weapons, thanks to the global instability created by our friends, then it's time to take advantage. I think that to whom to whom, but you understand this.

      Not the military-industrial complex is getting richer in the country, but civilian products.
      1. tatra
        tatra 11 July 2016 13: 08
        -2
        As always, you, enemies of the communists, have an inadequately high self-esteem, unfounded, unsubstantiated statements, accusations, a manic passion for criticism, and your cowardly "and we have nothing to do with" everything that you did first with the USSR during the anti-Soviet coup of 1985-1991 , and with the former republics of the USSR and the peoples in them after 1991.
  • Blackmokona
    Blackmokona 11 July 2016 15: 52
    0
    I will bring to the ongoing dispute figures
    US exports
    Exports $ 1.62 trillion (2014) (Wiki)

    In 2014, Russia's exports amounted to $ 497,8 billion
    http://www.vlant-consult.ru/information/board/478

    Arms exports for the same year.
    USA
    US military exports in fiscal 2014 reached $ 34,2 billion. This was reported by the press service of the Pentagon’s Military Cooperation Office (DSCA).

    https://lenta.ru/news/2014/10/28/allies/
    Export of Russian military products abroad exceeded $ 2014 billion in 15. According to President Vladimir Putin, the Russian military-industrial complex signed new contracts for $ 14 billion.

    http://www.rbc.ru/economics/27/01/2015/54c7b4c39a7947c8a32b060b
    Total
    U.S. arms exports account for 2.1%
    In the export of Russia, weapons make up 3%
    These are insignificant values ​​in general.
    1. Al1977
      Al1977 11 July 2016 17: 05
      0
      Quote: BlackMokona
      I will bring to the ongoing dispute figures

      Here's another thing, now the move is for those who consider arms exports to be the locomotive.
      We are waiting for killer statistics that the military-industrial complex is becoming a locomotive, engine, rocket, I don’t know what else ...
      Three, his mother, a percent !!!!
      1. alexej123
        alexej123 11 July 2016 17: 43
        +1
        Why are you all in numbers. GLONASS system. The prototype of the system was created for the Navy of the USSR. Then came the modern version. This is so offhand. The initiators were the military.
        1. Al1977
          Al1977 12 July 2016 11: 11
          0
          Quote: alexej123
          Why are you all in numbers. GLONASS system.

          What is the GLONASS system. What do you want to say?
          What has she changed life in Russia? This is the most successful commercial project in Russia, does the Russian budget depend on this? What do you mean by that? And the invention of a paper clip? Not for military purposes, but sold to the whole world in billions. What does GLONAS have to do with the engine of the economy, which side ????
      2. tatra
        tatra 11 July 2016 17: 43
        +1
        Yes, first you yourself will figure out what you are writing about arms exports, or about the development of the military-industrial complex in the country.
  • kotuk_ha_oxote
    kotuk_ha_oxote 11 July 2016 17: 46
    0
    Quote: tatra
    As always, you, enemies of the communists, have an inadequately high self-esteem, unfounded, unsubstantiated statements, accusations, a manic passion for criticism, and your cowardly "and we have nothing to do with" everything that you did first with the USSR during the anti-Soviet coup of 1985-1991 , and with the former republics of the USSR and the peoples in them after 1991.

    And what about the statements of the anti-communist professor? Did the military-industrial complex of the Soviet Union strengthen the material situation of the workers and peasants of the Soviet Union? Was the USSR military-industrial complex, often producing a bunch of outdated and unsuccessful equipment, not wasting the country's production resources to the detriment of the economy? Is a portfolio of export orders worth several tens of billions of dollars worth the annual cost of 50 billion?

    Since when did the Bolsheviks become afraid to speak the truth and began to cowardly bury their heads in the sand, ignoring the problems? What, the USSR had no problems? Only the Jews are to blame? Shaw, again?
    1. tatra
      tatra 11 July 2016 17: 58
      0
      You only confirmed my words about you, the enemies of the Communists.
      You are your manic anti-Soviet propaganda from the end of the 80's and are trying to justify your capture of the USSR, and all that you have done with the former republics of the USSR and the peoples in them with your highly paid work and business.
      For more than a quarter of a century, you did not have anything.
      You are so persistently trying to prove that the Communists and their supporters in the USSR were bad, they worked badly and fought, that you understand perfectly well that you have nothing to prove that you are at least somewhat better than them.
  • kotuk_ha_oxote
    kotuk_ha_oxote 11 July 2016 22: 50
    0
    Quote: tatra
    You only confirmed my words about you, the enemies of the Communists.
    You are your manic anti-Soviet propaganda from the end of the 80's and are trying to justify your capture of the USSR, and all that you have done with the former republics of the USSR and the peoples in them with your highly paid work and business.
    For more than a quarter of a century, you did not have anything.
    You are so persistently trying to prove that the Communists and their supporters in the USSR were bad, they worked badly and fought, that you understand perfectly well that you have nothing to prove that you are at least somewhat better than them.

    I haven’t done anything to anyone. I then ran under the table on foot. As for anti-Soviet propaganda, it used quite objective errors of the country's leadership in the socio-economic development of the country.

    My sun, breathe deeper! What kind of communist are you if you didn’t even read Lenin and Stalin? If you read, then such nonsense would not be carried. Read, I highly recommend the smartest people who give ideas about what should be the political programs and reports on the results of the country's leadership.
    1. tatra
      tatra 11 July 2016 23: 22
      0
      In general, you have a senseless verbiage with a claim to "cleverness".
      And yes, if the communists and their supporters, who took the country away from the bourgeoisie, immediately took responsibility for the country and the people, then you, the enemies of the communists, always have nothing to do with what you have done with the republics of the USSR and the peoples you have captured in them, but always "with what", to have many times, tens and hundreds of times higher incomes and salaries than you gave the people after 1991.
      And none of you is capable of honestly and objectively, as citizens of your country and people who wish them well, to assess neither the Soviet period, nor the reign of the "Saint" Nicholas II, whom you praise, nor the post-Soviet period, in which all of you "and now are better than in the USSR "because you all HAVE GOT a lot of things, and it is useless to ask you what you have DONE useful for the country, which was taken away from the communists and their supporters.
      You didn’t capture it.
  • Karelof
    Karelof 12 July 2016 11: 43
    0
    I agree with the professor in one thing, if you make tanks and put them in a warehouse - this is negative for the economy.

    But if you make them and sell them, you get the same "excavators" in return - this is positive for the economy.

    In fact, of course, everything is much more confusing, since it is interconnected. Without tanks in the warehouse, excavators and so on cannot be protected.
    1. Al1977
      Al1977 12 July 2016 16: 33
      +1
      Quote: Karelof
      Without tanks in the warehouse, excavators and so on cannot be protected.

      Do the Japanese know about this?
  • MrCollins
    MrCollins 30 July 2016 16: 16
    0
    Trade in military complexes may indirectly make it clear that we are not doing so badly in secret military units.