Russia displays military might

Youtube News Video



News Article





-----------

My opinion:

Russia is still a force to be reckoned with. I have deep respect and admiration of the Russian armed forces. This is NOT a good idea for Russia to display its military might. Sure, displaying aging equipment and taking it for "a ride" as the pentagon spokesman puts it is okay but it gives even more justification to uphold USA's outrageous military spendings. I mean, its a lose-lose situation. USA's justification for war spending for the War on Terror is now as high as it was during the Cold War without Iraq and Afghanistan war cost. Add the Russian threat to this combo, and you won't see a greater annual increase in US military spending, which Russia does not want and should not want unless it can match or exceed US's annual increase in military spending.

Overall, Russia is symbolistic in its attempts I think. However, the repercussions of inciting the nostalgic days of the cold war might bring more bad than good if such provacative diplomatic acts continue.

I offer an alternative story. Increasing spending may not be a lose-lose. The US has tasted dominance and will not give it up easily. But dominance is significantly more expensive than parity. By increasing spending moderately, Russia goads the US to increase spending by much more. Reagan claimed to have spent the USSR to collapse. Perhaps this time Putin is returning the favor.

interesting viewpoints, I know not which is correct.

RedMercury said:

I offer an alternative story. Increasing spending may not be a lose-lose. The US has tasted dominance and will not give it up easily. But dominance is significantly more expensive than parity. By increasing spending moderately, Russia goads the US to increase spending by much more. Reagan claimed to have spent the USSR to collapse. Perhaps this time Putin is returning the favor.

Click to expand...

Considering the state of the US civilian economy, it's probably a lot closer to the truth than some would care to admit.

planeman said:

interesting viewpoints, I know not which is correct.

Click to expand...

A look at the percentage of GDP being spent may reveal some answers. The US does outspend everyone else...no doubt. But it is a very small part of the entire GDP.

Despite whatever economic troubles going on now in the US (and I live here and am experiencing them), they are mild when compared to a lot of the world, and they are addressable as soon as the US public makes up its mind it wants to address them.

IMHO, the US has huge oil reserves in the Dakotas, in ANWR, off the Pacific and Gulf coasts and elsewhere. We have huge low sulfur coal reserves tied up in national monument areas, and certainly has the technology to excel in nuclear power plants.

The US is also very capable of building more refineries.

The American public simply has to reach a point where they are willing to commit to these things and force their political leadership through the ballot box to comply.

For whatever reasons (and there are several), the US public hasn't reached that stage yet...but the US has the resources to make good on it once they do.

Again, all of this is strictly my opinion.

Jeff Head said:

A look at the percentage of GDP being spent may reveal some answers. The US does outspend everyone else...no doubt. But it is a very small part of the entire GDP.

Despite whatever economic troubles going on now in the US (and I live here and am experiencing them), they are mild when compared to a lot of the world, and they are addressable as soon as the US public makes up its mind it wants to address them.

IMHO, the US has huge oil reserves in the Dakotas, in ANWR, off the Pacific and Gulf coasts and elsewhere. We have huge low sulfur coal reserves tied up in national monument areas, and certainly has the technology to excel in nuclear power plants.

The US is also very capable of building more refineries.

The American public simply has to reach a point where they are willing to commit to these things and force their political leadership through the ballot box to comply.

For whatever reasons (and there are several), the US public hasn't reached that stage yet...but the US has the resources to make good on it once they do.

Again, all of this is strictly my opinion.

Click to expand...

Very enlightening viewpoints. America's days of monopolization of power is only beginning if you think about the resources that lay untouched in Alaska and areas that you have mentioned. So the extent to which America is utilizing foreign oil and energy is probably a preconcieved idea to put off using our own resources as long as possible. Drain the Saudis and Russians of their oil. :nana:

Very enlightening information. thanks for sharing!

Phead128 said:

Very enlightening viewpoints. America's days of monopolization of power is only beginning if you think about the resources that lay untouched in Alaska and areas that you have mentioned. So the extent to which America is utilizing foreign oil and energy is probably a preconcieved idea to put off using our own resources as long as possible. Drain the Saudis and Russians of their oil. :nana:

Very enlightening information. thanks for sharing!

Click to expand...

Don't mind Jeff he has some rather idealistic notions about the United States and its position in the world.

I don't think Russia alone can force the American empire to collapse. However, like the British the U.S. is trying to counter multiple threats throughout the world. Many of our imperial devices have grown beyond our control like the European Union and it seems we are trying to further limit our own superiority by encouraging Japan's militarization.

Ultimately the American empire will fall because of a combination of factors not just Russia. Of course, the Soviet Union itself didn't fall from increased defense spending so it's not like it is even a possibility.

Russia has been successful in limiting US power through diplomancy rather then relying on its weapons. Russia has an advantage they are not constrained by ideological beliefs. If Russia offered a nation like Congo, billions of dollars aid and the US did the same. I expect Congo to go with Russia because of less political baggage. Russia and also China are using the language of business to make inroads (politically) in foreign nations. Ironic, these semi-capatalist economies are out monevoeuring free market economies through language of business.

The military display is to show that they have the capability to have global reach with their ICBMs.

A common belief around the world is that if a nation only spends a very small percentage of its GDP on its military, then everything is OK. This is an incorrect belief.

When looking at the ratio of military budget over GDP, the Soviet Union spent a lot more money on its military than the US did. The Soviet Union was able to spend like this for many decades before facing economic collapse. It is amazing the Soviet Union was able to do this. The US built so many national and international business plans so the US was able to easily afford its large Cold War budget, and then watch the Soviet Union labor to keep up.

Now the US is still spending a little of its GDP on its military, but the US is NOT OK. Today the US is spending a little too much over a long period, so the sum result is the US is spending too much. The US needs to end its current Middle East military plans and completely restart new plans that focus more on sensible economics. Most people around the world disapprove of the US wars in the Middle East. Most AMERICANS disapprove of the US wars, too.

The US has ignored sensible economics for too long so now the US has large debts to many nations around the world right now. This what happens when the US focuses too much on military production and not enough on civilian production. The price of oil in the US is more or less at $3.80 per gallon (depending on where you live). The US is dealing with inflation of the US dollar and the falling international value of the US dollar. The US has a major banking and mortgage problem. The US is accepting lots of illegal immigration to depress inflation.

The US cannot pay for its current Middle East wars for an indefinite period. If the US extends the war into Iran, then the US will pay an even greater cost (including injuries and fatalities). If the US goes into Pakistan, then the US will have an even harder time with the snowballing costs. Keep in mind that the Afghan and Iraqi wars do not have clear good outcomes for the US despite all these US costs. Then there is the humanitarian cost in Afghanistan and Iraq . . .

Russia is able to easily afford this military parade, especially since Russia is a major energy supplier and weapons seller, but if Russia tries to return to former Soviet Union glory, then this "revived" Russia will collapse in a few decades again. If Russia learned from past mistakes, it would have a sensible military budget within its overall sensible economic framework. This is true for all nations.

Jeff Head said:

A look at the percentage of GDP being spent may reveal some answers. The US does outspend everyone else...no doubt. But it is a very small part of the entire GDP.

Despite whatever economic troubles going on now in the US (and I live here and am experiencing them), they are mild when compared to a lot of the world, and they are addressable as soon as the US public makes up its mind it wants to address them.

IMHO, the US has huge oil reserves in the Dakotas, in ANWR, off the Pacific and Gulf coasts and elsewhere. We have huge low sulfur coal reserves tied up in national monument areas, and certainly has the technology to excel in nuclear power plants.

The US is also very capable of building more refineries.

The American public simply has to reach a point where they are willing to commit to these things and force their political leadership through the ballot box to comply.

For whatever reasons (and there are several), the US public hasn't reached that stage yet...but the US has the resources to make good on it once they do.

Again, all of this is strictly my opinion.

Click to expand...

Jeff, I have to disagree with you on this point. I think America has to worry a lot more about paying the social security and retirement for public servants. These are long terms issues that people just keep on putting in the back burners and ignoring the entire time. Anyway, I'm going to have a post on this on my blog pretty soon discussing the impacts of the monetary system and how it could prove to be a far bigger problem.

Anyway, sorry to the other mods for going so off topic.