This is for those “conservatives” on this forum who have been touting the superiority of the Russian military and how, by comparison, our country is a failed state. You know who you are.
Bottom line, the flagship of the Russian navy and their ONLY real aircraft carrier is a rusting hulk and cannot even be moved under its own power.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
The military isn’t the only place Russia is failing. According to Business Insider, “almost half of top foreign-policy experts think Russia will become a failed state or break up by 2033.”
https://www.businessinsider.com/experts-think-russia-will-fail-or-break-up-by-2033-2023-1?fbclid=IwAR1nuEaFuq0kEwMqVlNCcE2FcoeD24G34z7QsEyNprVUhlN2zKPpO8Z48xI
It’s what happens when you have a handful of corrupt oligarchs lining their own pockets at the expense of a country’s government. Defund all of the watch dogs; abolish all of the ethics committees; what could possibly go wrong?
LikeLiked by 3 people
RE: “According to Business Insider, ‘almost half of top foreign-policy experts think Russia will become a failed state or break up by 2033.'”
So what? According to Business Insider, slightly more than half of top foreign-policy experts DON’T think Russia will become a failed state or break up by 2033. Surely you can appreciate that on almost any question, about half of respondents will be wrong and about half will be right.
Besides, your source doesn’t identify any “corrupt oligarchs [who are] lining their own pockets at the expense of [Russia]’s government.” I think you are making that part up.
LikeLike
You aren’t really a student of Russian history are you?
LikeLiked by 2 people
More so than you, I’ll wager. What is your point?
LikeLike
I’d try to explain it but I’m tired of the worn out responses you give. Here, let me help you. Pick one:
– So what?
– Fake news!
– That’s ridiculous!
– What’s your point?
LikeLiked by 2 people
I get it, Ms. Radford. You are all hat and no cattle.
What do you know of Russian economic policy in the immediate aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union? Have you been following any of the recent discussions about the events of that period by Western experts who participated, such as Jeffery Sachs?
LikeLike
No. Tell me everything you know.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“You are all hat and no cattle.”
And you are ALL bs, all the time.
LikeLike
Start with Sachs. You’ll find other commentators from there.
The story line you should learn concerns the U.S. strategy to destroy Russia. Personally, I see no value in harming others.
LikeLike
“You are all hat and no cattle.”
Uh, no, Mr. Roberts. She is simply tired of your “goofy counterfactual obtuseness.”
In this case, you flatly reject the objective truth that the Russian economy is dominated by a gang of ruthless oligarchs who seized economic power with force and violence as the Soviet system collapsed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The fuller story is that U.S. advisors, like Jeffery Sachs, helped those Russian oligarchs come to power after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
LikeLike
RE: “Bottom line, the flagship of the Russian navy and their ONLY real aircraft carrier is a rusting hulk and cannot even be moved under its own power.”
Russia’s aircraft carrier is (obviously) not the flagship of the Russian navy. If you are looking to compare Russia’s naval forces with the USA’s you should start with understanding that Russian surface ships and submarines are being outfitted with Zircon hypersonic cruise missiles.
A few days ago, Russia deployed a Zircon-equipped frigate to patrol the Atlantic Ocean:
https://www.foxnews.com/world/putin-deploys-frigate-atlantic-ocean-hypersonic-zircon-cruise-missiles
Only an idiot would scoff at Russia’s military capabilities. Currently, the U.S. has no viable defense against hypersonic weapons, either on land or at sea.
LikeLike
A flagship is the vessel used by the commanding officer of a group of ships. It is typically the largest, fastest, most heavily armed ship in the group. In modern navies, it is usually an aircraft carrier. Russia no longer has a seaworthy aircraft carrier.
The Moskva was the flagship of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. It wasn’t an aircraft carrier, it was a cruiser. In April 2022, Ukrainian forces hit it with two missiles. It caught fire, had to be towed away, and sank “in stormy seas.”
The greatest strength of the Russian navy is its nuclear submarines. Seven of them have sunk. The most notorious sinking was the Kursk. It sank in 2000 when there was an explosion in the torpedo room, killing all 118 men aboard.
Nukes are nice to wave about, but only a fool would use them. Even the dumbest fascist knows whoever makes a first strike will be the target of every nuclear armed country in the world within minutes of the first mushroom cloud.
They remind me of the Knights Templar who covered themselves in armor and rode giant war horses into battle. The first time they met up with the lightly armed Arabs on their tiny, fast Arabian mares, they got their asses kicked too. It’s not who has the biggest dic to wave around. It’s who has brains enough to do the waving.
For years we’ve heard about the “mighty Russian army.” But the first time that army went up against a country armed with anything more than hand guns, they got their asses kicked. Ukraine has driven the Russian army back and fought them to a standstill. And the Ukrainian army wasn’t even in the top 10 armies of the world.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “The greatest strength of the Russian navy is its nuclear submarines.”
That’s debatable, now that hypersonic Zircon cruise missiles are being deployed on Russia’s surface ships, but Russia’s submarine fleet is at least a peer to our own. My dad served on U.S. submarines during the Cold War. Two that sunk during his career (an in my memory) were the Thresher and the Scorpion. Others almost sunk, including one – the Barbel — that my father was on at the time.
I’m sure there are many uninformed and misinformed Americans who want to believe that Russia operates a substandard military. Too bad for them. They can’t see past the noses on their faces.
LikeLike
Can I take it that you are in favor of increasing military funding?
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Can I take it that you are in favor of increasing military funding?”
No, not exactly. I am in favor of improving U.S. military strength and capabilities, but I don’t see more funding as the most important factor.
I was a proposal manager for one of the world’s largest defense contractors for 20 years. If I learned anything at all through that experience it was that ideas and good analysis are vastly more important than money.
LikeLike
Russia had SEVRAL incidents of lost submarines, as well. So you idea is that ONLY US subs have sunk? Or are just SOOOOO forgetful that including relevant facts is just not convenient?
LikeLike
OMG! You just proved that Mr. Roberts is NOT the smartest man in the room. Congrats!
LikeLike
Even a blind pig finds an acorn now and again. In this post you have found something that is true. The Admiral Kuznetsof is NOT the flagship of the Russian Navy. It WAS. but it lost that designation when it first became inoperable FIVE years ago and has not returned to that status as the failing Russian state has been unable to carry out routine maintenance.
Ironically, the ship was built by Ukraine because Russia did not have and does not have the facilities to build that class of ship. A sister ship was abandoned by Russia when the USSR broke up and Ukraine sold it to China where it is now one of their two operational carriers.
As for the Zircon missile system, it is – according to Russian propaganda – a formidable weapon. But then, can Russian propaganda be believed? I am tempted to say that “only an idiot” would believe Russian propaganda, but I won’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It must be nice to live in a world where you can ignore any facts you wish simply by calling them propaganda. The Three Wise Monkeys would be proud.
LikeLike
Uh, what fact am I ignoring? That the mighty Russian military is unable to subdue Ukraine after planning an invasion that was supposed to be over in a couple of weeks? No, that would be the fact that YOU are ignoring.
As for the Zircon missiles, knowing that they have barely been tested and mainly against stationary targets, that they have not been produced in numbers, and that Russia is the home of the Potemkin Village is not the same as ignoring their existence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“It must be nice to live in a world where you can ignore any facts you wish”….
SHEET! You do that every day.
LikeLike
The purpose of aircraft carriers is to project power globally. As Russia is not interested in dominating countries beyond its immediate area, why would they spend money on carriers?
LikeLike
Russia doesn’t need to spend much on the military. So long as they can force citizens to the fronts with no training, equipment or leadership, why bother to add to the costs.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Now we have Russia Derangement Syndrome to contend with.
How about instead asking why the US has twice as many aircraft carriers as the rest of the world combined.
Our CIA has been financing provocations in Ukraine since the USSR fell.
LikeLike
“Russia Derangement Syndrome”
Predictably, you an Mr. Roberts are displaying your standard fallback of calling people looking at reality in the face “deranged.”
Anyone who could see Trump for what he is – generously, a con man – is “deranged.” Anyone who can see Putin for what he is – a murderous, fascist aggressor – is “deranged.” Anyone who can see the Russian military for what it is – third class – is “deranged.”
The real derangement on display is by those who have come to hate their own country so much that they constantly offer aid and comfort to our enemies and adversaries.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ok, ask away.
I have supported less military spending for decades. Conservatives regularly want huge military spending, tax cuts and divert funds from the poor to sports stadiums for millionaires (see Mississippi).
Well, maybe the stadium scandal is just Mississippi…today.
Source for Ukraine “provocations”, along with your meaning of the word as applied here, would be appropriate.
LikeLiked by 2 people
From the Guardian in 2014 regarding the Maiden Revolution
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/30/russia-ukraine-war-kiev-conflict
LikeLike
The Maiden Revolution occurred because a Russian puppet they had put in power – a la Donald Trump – overturned the decisions of the Ukrainian parliament to seek closer economic ties with the EU. The Euromaidan protests leading up to the upheaval were massive – far beyond the ability of our country or anyone else to stage. The PEOPLE of Ukraine were not willing to return to the Soviet system of Russian dominance. And they were sick of the violence, repression and corruption of the Russian puppets running THEIR country. They rose up against tyranny – something that you love to talk about.
The “provocation” that started the confrontation was Russian meddling in the processes of Ukrainian democracy – something they have been doing all over the world.
LikeLiked by 1 person
…”to sports stadiums for millionaires (see Mississippi).”
You do know that Youngkin is trying to lure the Commanders to VA?
LikeLike
The Mississippi scandal is worse. The poorest state with so many low income families, and no expanded Medicaid to boot, redirected federal funds for child support to well connected wealthy folks. Included was a retired football quarterback star who got millions for a sports facility he wanted.
It’s sad, despicable and so red state. IMO, of course.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t disagree. And there is no real scandal YET with trying to lure the Washington Football Team to VA.
LikeLike
“How about instead asking why the US has twice as many aircraft carriers as the rest of the world combined.”
Who do you ask? The folks responsible for that are long gone. And like you, there has been no evolution of thought on the topic.
However, the events in Ukraine and Taiwan are reason enough to be ready to fight wars on two fronts (a la WWII). And, especially in Taiwan, sea power is very important.
This is NOT an endorsement of the idea. Just comments from an old, retired Senior Chief PO who spent 24-plus years serving in the Navy, with over 14 of those years at sea.
LikeLike