Miscellaneous News

P

pmc

Colonel
Registered Member
H2O said:
However, selling fully assembled weapons would negatively affect Russian defense industries; not exactly a Win-Win scenario.
Click to expand...
I am sure Chinese AWACS can make a difference but that will invite severe sanctions. it wont impact any of Russian defense industry. its myth that Russia does not want to import stuff that most likely disposable like drones, rockets and shells.
Russia is working on how to remove those 1300 Airbus/Boeing/Bombardier/Embraer from its fleet and than you add large Civilian chopper fleet expansion. see the 5,000 engine order in air transport context up to year 2030. and this does not include replacing engines on those 250 SSJ as they are trying to built parts to operate it. this is scale of effort needed to be independent of West.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The program for the development of the air transport industry poses a large number of tasks for us. Until 2030, Rostec enterprises must supply the country with more than 500 aircraft, at least 750 helicopters, and almost 5,000 aircraft engines.
Click to expand...
 
G

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
baykalov said:
My speculation: the US goal with these "leaks" is to discredit Russia. The US wants to show neutral and Russia-friendly countries that Russia can absolutely not be trusted because Russian intelligence is compromised with moles. In this way, the US hopes to isolate Russia in Africa (leak Egypt, denied), the Middle East (leak the UAE, denied), Asia (leak China, denied), Europe (leak Serbia, denied). Only South America is spared, but I would not be surprised if tomorrow the New York Times informs us of another "leak", for example about Mexico. The goal, I repeat, is to discredit and isolate Russia.
Click to expand...
This talk by the US is actually a way to box these countries foreign policy in so they do not support Russia later on. I think China had the right approach when the conflict started when they said it was not anyone else's business who they had military arms deals with. I think it is a mistake that the Chinese ambassador said they wouldn't supply weapons to Russia. Especially when China itself has been under Western arms embargo since 1989 and Russia was one of the few countries which supplied China with military weapons.
Even if they won't be supplying weapons to Russia they should still keep the field open for it to happen.
 
P

pmc

Colonel
Registered Member
BoraTas said:
I don't think there would be a significant change in Turkish foreign policy. We would likely be a bit "tougher" against Russia but that's about it. I want Erdogan go. His religious regressivism and plunder of national resources for himself are good enough reasons.
Click to expand...
If Erdogan replaced by some one more Europhile with no chemistry in Middle East it will create further economic decline in Turkey.
Even Chinese cars sales in Middleast will deprive Turkey of auto and parts market which is among its largest export product.
The more Turkey dependent on European engineering the lesser its competitive position. Turkey is lucky it has that market still in Russia while Russia built alternative supply chains and routes.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
supercat

supercat

Colonel
BoraTas

BoraTas

Major
Registered Member
supercat said:
Compare and contrast: 1.2 billion vs 6.3 billion:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1646387816413253635
Click to expand...
Funny thing is, without US media articles and clickbaity Youtubers riding MSM's wave talking about BRI as "China's roadmap to world domination !!!!!!", BRI wouldn't be this well known. It would be just another economic initiative by China that is only known to economy enthusiasts. They wrote many non-convincing articles villifying BRI, going as far as blaming China of engaging in colonialism. These non-convincing articles only made BRI more known.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top