Russian Weapons

Sturdy, cheap but lower quality. Lives are still cheaper in Russia so they don't invest quite as much in keeping their soldiers safe. But they're still deadly...
 
Designed for ease of mass manufacture...easy to scale up production, no frills, accurate for the task they are made for. Minor work in the hands of a smith and they are quite good.

There is a very good reason that Kalashnikov are manufactured and used all over the world.

Even their early stuff is quite serviceable. An old Mosin-Nagant from the Imperial days is still a fine rifle. As good with some minor work as a Remington 700.

If you take their philosophy of war material production all the way up to planes for example it is like the Corsair to the Zero. We usually fly faster and higher, they aim for agility and are less concerned with survivability. I don't think they have a flying tank like the a-10 Warthog, for example.

If putin had wanted to he could have delivered a nuke to alaska.
 
Last edited:
they average 7 inches and tend towards the girthy.
rumour has it they are functional for 4 hours at a time.
 
they average 7 inches and tend towards the girthy.
rumour has it they are functional for 4 hours at a time.

I was chatting at the bar in Moscow with this cute little Swiss gal much younger than me. She was looking for wild evening. There was a Russian guy close by and there was a big tall Brit boy.

She chose the big Brit boy.

I saw him the next day in the parking lot on my way back from the Kremlin and he didn't grin.
 
I was chatting at bar in Moscow with cute little Swiss gal much younger than me. She was looking for wild evening. There was Russian guy close by and there was big tall Brit boy.

She chose big Brit boy.

I saw him next day in parking lot on my way back from Kremlin and he didn't grin.
.
I liked the dropping of the indefinite article in that sentence. I took the liberty of editing out the rest to give it a Russian accent
 
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141538/alexander-lukin/what-the-kremlin-is-thinking


What The Kremlin Is Thinking
by Alexander Lukin
Foreign Affairs



...From Russia’s perspective, the seeds of the Ukraine crisis were planted in the Cold War’s immediate aftermath. After the Soviet Union collapsed, the West essentially had two options: either make a serious attempt to assimilate Russia into the Western system or wrest away piece after piece of its former sphere of influence. Advocates of the first approach, including the U.S. diplomat George Kennan and Russian liberals, warned that an anti-Russian course would only provoke hostility from Moscow while accomplishing little, winning over a few small states that would end up siding with the West anyway.

It was only a matter of time before Russia finally reacted to its encirclement.

But such admonitions went unheeded, and U.S. Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush chose the second path. Forgetting the promises made by Western leaders to Mikhail Gorbachev after the unification of Germany -- most notably that they would not expand NATO eastward -- the United States and its allies set out to achieve what Soviet resistance had prevented during the Cold War. They trumpeted NATO’s expansion, adding 12 new members, including former parts of the Soviet Union, while trying to convince Russia that the foreign forces newly stationed near its borders, in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania, would not threaten its security. The EU, meanwhile, expanded as well, adding 16 new members of its own during the same period...



http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141538/alexander-lukin/what-the-kremlin-is-thinking
 
one hour the first time, then 3 thereafter.
they're machines.

you've given me quite a bit to think about here.

i must admit it makes me a bit nervous, and i want to ask for two or three. just to test my own limits.
 
Designed for ease of mass manufacture...easy to scale up production, no frills, accurate for the task they are made for. Minor work in the hands of a smith and they are quite good.

There is a very good reason that Kalashnikov are manufactured and used all over the world.

Even their early stuff is quite serviceable. An old Mosin-Nagant from the Imperial days is still a fine rifle. As good with some minor work as a Remington 700.

If you take their philosophy of war material production all the way up to planes for example it is like the Corsair to the Zero. We usually fly faster and higher, they aim for agility and are less concerned with survivability. I don't think they have a flying tank like the a-10 Warthog, for example.

If putin had wanted to he could have delivered a nuke to alaska.

The Su-25.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-25

Su-25 vs A-10

http://defencesummits.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/su-25vsa-10_1.jpg

http://defencesummits.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/su-25vsa-10_1.jpg
 
Judging by news reports at least the worlds most important weapon at the moment is neither Russian nor American but Japanese.

It's the Toyota Hi Lux Pickup - surely the most successful high speed multi purpose platform in modern warfare. And cheap at less than 1000th the cost of the most inexpensive tank.:)
 
Judging by news reports at least the worlds most important weapon at the moment is neither Russian nor American but Japanese.

It's the Toyota Hi Lux Pickup - surely the most successful high speed multi purpose platform in modern warfare. And cheap at less than 1000th the cost of the most inexpensive tank.:)

Yes and even at full speed, add a Hellfire missile and it's guaranteed to become a smoldering pile of scrap metal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-114_Hellfire
 
Some are decent. But other than small arms and nukes the Russians are no threat except to their neighbors. Their Air Force would not last 48 hours against us or many other countries. Their Navy could not beat Iran's and they are at about the level of the 1920s.
 
Back
Top