Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 791 posts

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#781

Post by desmosxxx »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #463
kspacewalk2 wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If this is the state of their conventional military, it raises questions about the state of their nuclear deterrent. A scary fucking thought. i.e. some of them will stay in silos, but others will be partially airworthy. >In any case, if China wanted Siberian resources, fomenting a breakaway region would be cleaner than invading. This would result in a nuclear exchange.

> This would result in a nuclear exchange Possibly. But the exchange would occur on Russian soil. China is more than capable of covertly supporting separatists. Hell, it might not even have to. Just prime the pump and then let the West take over.

or they would just nuke chinese cities?

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#782

Post by raducu »

ashwagary wrote: post #778
raducu wrote: post #769

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the DOD lies, like they lied about Russia invading Ukraine. How could glorious Russia commit more than 0.5% of their forces if they haven't won yet?

>Yeah, the DOD lies, like they lied about Russia invading Ukraine. We can't ignore the 50+ years of lies about various conflicts around the world and the coups/ assassinations where the public was purposely misled. This isn't new and ridiculing the observation is unproductive. Ignore history at your own peril. I will say, Russia has probably increased their forces at this point but it may not be as much as claimed by…

And for what reason would Russia commit so few troops?

Other than explaining away russian embarrasment of the way things are going.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#783

Post by Bayart »

rendall wrote: post #773
Bayart wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other way around. In feudal terms (where "suzerain" belongs), the US States would be vassals to the US governement.

Ok, so. Yes? The Feds are suzerains of the States?

Yep. And the States are suzerains of their Counties (thus being vavasours of the Federal governement !).

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#784

Post by UltraViolence »

lakis wrote: post #765
UltraViolence wrote: post #723

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turkey bought S-300 systems and were pummeled for it. I find this puzzling since Greece, also a NATO member, also purchased Russian S-300 systems but weren't penalized for it.

Turkey bought S-400. Greece got S-300. Different systems.

S-400 is an upgrade of the older S-300. Very similar, although the former may require internet connectivity and that's probably what worries NATO.

There are a myriad of versions of the S-300, from the original SA-10 introduced in the late 70's to the newest MPU version.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#785

Post by maccolgan »

jopsen wrote: post #596
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia fought a lot too, Georgia, Chechnya, Syria, Crimea

Murdered a lot of defenseless people is more like it..

I can't recall of a single war in this century that wasn't mostly murdering defenseless people.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#786

Post by DiggyJohnson »

Ajef wrote: post #722
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #569

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that is a factor, I can also imagine that Russia has more cost due to the size of the country and the amount of hardware they have to maintain within that budget. The other countries are a lot more compact and focused, both in terms of landmass and the amount of hardware.

Just looking at the land mass is probably misleading too. Most of the population is in the western part of Russia. As soon as you get to the mountains and Siberia there is simply not much there.

Sure, but I don’t think the person you’re replying to was forgetting this point.

Germany will have greater personnel cost, yes. In other areas, Russia will have a greater cost burden. For example, they don’t share defense resources with other nations (I.e. no. NATO equivalent).

The person you’re replying to is simply stating that Germany’s higher personnel cost does not nullify the effectiveness of relative strength of the German military versus the Russians.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#787

Post by selimthegrim »

StillBored wrote: post #768
selimthegrim wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more an issue of what the students are retaining from calculus.

I don't think this is a new problem. Its largely a problem of the way its taught, particularly at the high-school level where professional teachers and politicians choose what is important in the curriculum (and yes, I know a lot of engineering programs require an "engineering calculus" taught at the college). Nothing has changed since Feynman's little rant, if anything looking at my kids schooling its worse than ~30…

And on cue I get an email saying students have been complaining my class is "too technical" and "doesn't have enough examples"

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#788

Post by ashwagary »

raducu wrote: post #782
ashwagary wrote: post #778

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yeah, the DOD lies, like they lied about Russia invading Ukraine. We can't ignore the 50+ years of lies about various conflicts around the world and the coups/ assassinations where the public was purposely misled. This isn't new and ridiculing the observation is unproductive. Ignore history at your own peril. I will say, Russia has probably increased their forces at this point but it may not be as much as claimed by…

And for what reason would Russia commit so few troops? Other than explaining away russian embarrasment of the way things are going.

Keeping civilian casualties to a minimum seems to be the objective. I expect things will escalate rapidly until Eastern Ukraine is under Russian control but only after most civilians are evacuated.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#789

Post by truffdog »

littlestymaar wrote: post #526
truffdog wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fallujah and Mosul were pretty bad in terms of city levelling. We just don't like to remember them, or think about depleted uranium dust causing birth defects, or what happened to the refugees, or a million other things.

You can't just compare Fallujah and Grozny. Of course urban warfare is destructive to the city no matter what, but the US and Russian tactics are very different, and so is the destruction. Dropping tons of low precision thermobaric weapons on a city is a Russian thing, unmatched in its destruction. (The is no American equivalent to the TOS-1[1] for instance). That being said, that doesn't mean I approve US invasion o…

I was thinking about Syria, not Chechnya, since that's a more recent major conflict with city captures that the Russians have participated in.

Re: What happened to Russias Air Force? U.S. officials, experts stumped

#790

Post by [deleted] »

dathinab wrote: post #405
michael1999 wrote: post #269

I'd be worried that any un-married fighter pilots might just defect. A quick run to Poland, and you're done.

I don't think Russia would let you take the jet with you. I mean whatever their situation is, I'm pretty sure they still can assassinate defecting pilots. And I'm pretty sure the pilots know.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN