Posted on 03/19/2022 2:56:37 AM PDT by dennisw
You thought you were being a smartass asking about titanuim with what you thoght were gotcha questions and then when that blewup in your face, you got all butt hurt and starting lashing out in a bizarre rant. I think you’re drunk.
(Asking for Marvin the Martian.)
This is my first guess
Pffft!
Would the Russians cause any more radiation to pollute Ukraine than Chernobyl already has?
Marvin says to make sure what you destroy costs MORE than the thing you destroy it with!
Allegedly footage of Russian Kh-47M2 "Kinzhal" hypersonic missile launched today against of the Ukrainian armed forces underground weapons depot in Deliatyn. pic.twitter.com/9cHgmiKmni— Harry Boone (@Harry_Boone) March 19, 2022
For what it's worth...
“Well, that’s informative. Thanks👍”
Same arguments were used non stop during the Cold War to claim the Soviets weren’t a threat to the US, but somehow they had us 10:1 in ICBM throw weight (and their nukes did work), 5:1 in tanks and related hardware, and 2:1 in manpower.
So, probably several factors at work, starting with conscription, low salaries (which leads to much cheaper procurement), pricing in dollars, finally, who the hell REALLY knows what Russia spends on their military? The main sources of Western currency are state-owned, such as Gazprom.
So the dollar comparison is simply a Leftists prank today, as it was back then as they obviously get FAR MORE bang for their buck than we do and we don’t even know how many bucks.
“Their economy is tiny compared to the US. About the size of California if I remember. They have decent engineers and spies.”
They certainly kept Ukraine’s supporters away from their education system, which is why they run circles around the US in that area.
Their smaller economy only matters when it’s taken advantage of to make them feel pain, as Reagan did. Right now, we barely spend jack on our military, China is building blue water navy vessels at 5 times the rate we are, and we’re lucky to get a carrier out once in a generation. Cruise ships, which are larger, take about 2 years to build, for comparison. I get that they’re not as complex, but even so, that excuse only holds so much water. I really doubt it would take more than 5 years to build a carrier, if we looked at it as a military necessity, rather than a long-term jobs program.
So, unless we do something at home to get serious about our military, these ‘number comparisons’ are meaningless, as our money buys far less, and even with that, our spending can easily be matched by China, and possibly Russia (at least given the purchasing power there).
You may want to check my 10:1 figures to determine to what extent I am wrong.
“You may want to check my 10:1 figures to determine to what extent I am wrong.”
Do you have classified access to Russian military spending?
At least I made an attempt. Have a nice day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.