DreDay

I completely agree. This situation is even more ironic, given our president's insistence on negotiating concessions for any friendly foreign policy move on our side. Well...we are about to see the reverse side of such primitive diplomacy.

Ok let's start out by stating the fact that Putin has never stated his goal as restoration of Soviet Union. Moreover he has taken clear steps not to pursue those steps (I.e. Insisting that Donbass stays in Ukraine) that have cost him losing a lot of support from Warhawks and nationalists. That's a fact. Second, what would be his benefit in causing the kind of damag against US Government? More sanctions and isolation? What's in it for him?

Unfortunately I will not be able to help you with exact resources, as I don't do pro-bono research. But I would suggest starting your search with Colonel Budanov (the most publicized and controversial case relating to this). I am sure that you will find links to other cases after that if you search hard enough.

There have actually been quite a few very public cases that involved Russian servicemen going on trial for crimes that they had supposedly committed in Chechnya. Not sure where you have been looking for this information; but I guarantee you that it is out there.

Look friend, If this is something that you are really interested in - I would strongly urge you to pick up a simple college manual for Business Management 101, it will help you understand the appropriation of fixed assets, basic principles of marketing (including price-setting), and a simple notion of social premium that drives governmental appropriations. I can assure you that these basics have not been changed since the 30s and 40s. It will save you a ton of time, rather than having to reinvent the wheel all over again. I would also like to welcome your decision not to put any money in my enterprise; as, based on the amount of time that you invest here - you would probably need it for more basic needs. All that I had asked you for, was a list of Russian military hardware that is noticeably more expensive than their western counterparts. That would serve your cause (which you obviously take very close to heart) much better than trying to fight the wind-mills of basic business principles. Peace, DreDay

I am with you 100%.

Really, you still want to drag this out? The pricing of Kalibr has not been announced, to the best of my knowledge. It is still a "raw" system compared to Tomahawks that have been around for 30 years; and I am not at all sure that Kalibrs are actually mass produced. Armata vs. latest Abrams comparison is futile. They are completely different generations of MBTs and Armata is still few years away from mass production. What we can do is compare equivalent generations of hardware with matching capabilities (i.e. MI-28/KA-52 vs AH-64D), (T-90 vs M1A2),(S-400 vs latest Patriot) (SU-30SM vs latest F-15) - under such fair comparison Russian equipment is almost universally cheaper. You obviously don't understand how fixed costs work either. NIIs have performed scientific research and continue to do so regardless of how long ago the Soviet system has collapsed. Their work is used not only to perform R&D, but also to test out new hardware. They are an essential instrument in Russian military industrial complex. You also seem to be confused about what forms the price of products - it has nothing to do with how expensive they were to design and to build (as long as they have any kind of profit margin of course), the price is always set by the market; and more specifically by how much your customers are willing to pay for it. PS: I am still waiting to hear about those super-expensive Ratniks...

I certainly hope that they never try out our bluff, and I can only see such development in a critical (for Russia) condition where all conventional means will be lost. However, the benefit (in a pure real politik sense) is quite clear - it will wipe out NATO infrastructure essential to supporting the invasion into Russian mainland and destroy the missile-defense systems along with any possible carriers. I honestly don't know if POTUS would be strong enough to end the world as we know it over Poland (just as an example). I honestly would don't know how I (and most of my compatriots) would feel about that. It's just eerie to even contemplate...

Alright dude, now I am convinced that you are arguing just for the point of arguing. Tell you what, please send me a list of latest Russian military hardware that is more expensive than equivalent Western systems. Hopefully you can start out your evidence list with Ratnik gear (which is what this post is supposed to be about)... PS: This is totally unfair, but I will let you in on a little secrete - Russia is more poor than leading Western countries; so they simply can't afford to build systems that cost as much or more than ours; their systems will always be comparatively cheaper - it's as simple as that.

That scares me as well, as very few people (including our dear colleagues here) seem to realize what's at stake (i.e. the destruction of our civilization as we know it). To be fair though - Russians do have a lot to loose, so I would not expect them to turn to nuclear deterrent unless they face a physical threat to their survival (as in WW2). What really scares me though, is that Russians can call our bluff and nuke some of our allies (i.e. Poland); knowing full well that we would likely have to restrain from counter-striking Russian mainland. This horrific "loophole" in our doctrine, coupled with failure to even consider Russian interests is the most dangerous legacy of Obama's administration in my opinion.

C'mon man. Do we really need this dick measuring contest here? For the record - I do hold an MBA from one of the top schools in my country; so if you want to talk finance,economics, and operations - I would accept your challenge (but very reluctantly as I really hate that **** at this point in my life). Anyways - labor is cheaper in Russia than any other major weapons manufacturer, accept for China. I am talking about labor because it includes more than just salaries; but other fixed costs associated with full time employment (i.e. social benefits, safety, training etc). You are also correct to point out that energy carriers are naturally cheaper in Russia (especially for semi-governmental military industrial complex). The new equipment (as in - not based on Soviet designs) is infact manufactured on new facilities and tools that have not yet depreciated. It was a sunk cost that Russian government had decided to swallow due to the embargo from the west and Ukraine (which was actually a bigger deal than the former). R&D is also much cheaper in Russia due to an existing infrastructure of Research Centers (aka NIIs) that they had inherited from the Soviet Union. On top of that they have somewhat less regimented manufacturing and QA practices that save quite a lot, and are supposed to be countered by the native reliability and simplicity of Russian equipment. I could go on, but that should be enough for now... PS: I will concede though that when it comes to small batches of items that Russians have no prior manufacturing (even R&D) experience with; they could in fact sell for more than equivalent items in the west. For instance, if Russians decide to get into manufacturing AR-15s; these carbines will be more expensive than what we pay for them here (with all else being equal). That probably explains the SV-98 phenomenon that I have mentioned earlier. However, this anomaly only occurs while such items are manufactured in small batches; which doesn't really apply to mass produced items such as uniforms and field gear.

My reply was not aimed at you directly, but rather at a certain portion of our forum members that you (as I thought) identify with. Yahoo Finance was an inside joke, you would have to read the whole thread to get it; so no worries.

I hate to break it to you friend, but we don't exactly share all our mistakes either; or have you forgotten our esteemed Secretary of State shaking a lab tube with backing soda in front of the whole world's audience in 2003? That does not justify the disinformation that the Russians are spreading; but as an American I am much more concerned about what our guys are not telling us as opposed to some authoritarian state half the world away. In my opinion, that is something that every responsible citizen should exercise.

It's just amazing how time after time all of our precise smart bombing inevitably leads to more casualties than Russian barbaric "smersh" that goes specifically after hospitals (as if they hold any military value). Look at the results of bombing campaigns in WW2. Vietnam vs Afghanistan. Syria vs Iraq and a clear pattern emerges - our actions result in higher number of dead civilians than anyone elses'. I am not even talking about the strategic results of our recent campaigns than have plunged already volatile middle-east into the middle ages.... Now don't get me wrong, I love my country and I love my armed forces. I truly believe and even somewhat know it to be a fact that our servicemen have truly cared to minimize the civilian suffering; but guess what - war is a bitch and this type of "clean war" (that some of the members on this forum seem to buy into) is just an illusion sold to us by those who want us to focus all our attention on Russia (I am not saying that we should apply no scrutiny to them either) while they continue to play their power games with no winner in sight... But hey - Yahoo Finance might not exactly publish that line of thought. What really bothers me is that the rest of the world knows what we are doing perfectly well and just because they are not saying anything does not mean that they are not making conclusions...

Agreed. I also think that some people are not considering the fact that every self-respecting country employs services of PR firms whose direct responsibility is to push such content to news outlets.

You are too kind good sir, I am far from knowledgeable in that realm. It's a very complicated and non-standardized system of procurement - so much so that even my Russian friends don't seem to gasp the scope and methodology of it. However, the basic procurement cycle is initiated by a "tender" (an SOW if you will) that specifies the required equipment, services, purchase amounts and prices. In theory any qualified organization can try to secure such tender; but obviously in practice the contractor is usually implicit by the language of requirements in such tender. (i.e. if you are requesting an upgraded AK-74 - only Izhmash can match such requirement). However there are a lot of other factors that go into this. Sometimes the weapon manufactures end up with extra inventory and the MOD is forced to pickup the slack; like the Algerian (I believe) Mig-29s that were returned to the manufacturer due to defects. Anyways, my point was that Russian equipment (even with the pork barrel and other wasteful spending included) tends to be cheaper than western counterparts due to the lower costs of labor and other specific aspects of Russian manufacturing. You can see that by comparing the export prices on their tanks, aircraft, artillery, etc. Now it goes without saying that Russian MOD pays less than the foreign clients; and more importantly they pay in rubles. There are some examples to the contrary (i.e. SV-98 sniper rifle and its scope were originally priced at the same tier as higher quality western counterparts); but generally I see the lower cost of Russian equipment as a rule.

I honestly don't know anything about Ukrainian paramilitaries participating in that conflict; but as an interesting side note - Ukrainian armed forces had in fact conducted their first combat operation in Transnestria. It was a result of a small action by 8th Spetsnaz Brigade that had secured one of the strategic bridges close to the border.

And what exactly do you base this information on? Would you be so kind as to send me the latest Russian MOD procurement contracts that you have studied so thoroughly to come up with such revelations?

Stop Russians from what exactly? Russia has good relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan and its national interest call for peaceful coexistence of those two states, which they have already proven on numerous occasions. And there are certainly no Russian servicemen in Karabakh. Where exactly do you get your information from?

I have nothing against vehicles like up-armored BMP-3 that can deliver heavy firepower into the zenith; although so far no one else seems to be jumping on the band wagon. My point is that BMPT is not suited for that role very well.

Oh I don't know - calling them scum and having exhibits that present them as degenerates. Sending busloads of young radicals to reason with them by means of assaulting them. Ignoring their holidays. Renaming the boulevards of their heroes that defeated fascism to Nazi sympathizers. Having a quota on how much TV time can be spoken in their language (when 75% of the country speaks the same language); bombing the **** out of their cities; arresting their leaders, assaulting and humiliating their leaders that had attempted to run for election. Oh, and didn't the seizures of police stations start by their opponents in East and then Central Ukraine first? In a way you are right I guess, everything was fine before the nationalists had started illegally ceasing the power. But I forget, this is coming from a person that thinks that bombing Libya has turned out well and wishes them on to others... Who the hell despises Lithuania's independence? What planet are you from?

Thank you for the explanation. I knew about 2 Russian VDV POWs, as well as 4 taken later; but I was under impression that they were all released. Do you have any info to the contrary? Also, if I may ask - what is your gut feeling about the overall casualty count in Ilovaysk?

I can only speak for myself. And for the record - I support CMBF. It's just that the conflict between US and RF seems so unlikely due to its potential consequences that it is hard for me to suspend my disbelief and to take it seriously... but that's just me...

True. That's one of the reasons that BMP-3 designers had taken a different route. I saw that, but then you might as well stick to a regular tank