|
#41
●
11-22-2014, 01:24 PM
| ||||||||
 My Rank: MAJOR Poster Rank:95 Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 16,772 Mentioned: 261 Post(s) Quoted: 8276 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Ukraine Crisis: Russia Demands Guarantees from Nato
They do cost billions to build. To developed the technology, to build them, to maintain them. A nuclear arsenal is extremely expensive. You're so narrowly focused as usual. How much do you think it cost just to build the facilities and the hardware needed to make tactical nukes? Let alone running and maintaining that. Who hasn't built any in 25 years? Surely you don't mean Russia.. You're numbers are based on nukes built 30+ years ago. And don't accurately account for the actual cost. A pack of gum only cost a company 10¢ to produce. Does that mean that's the real cost to produce that product? No. Millions are spent to produce it. |
|
#42
●
11-22-2014, 05:51 PM
| ||||||||
 My Rank: MAJOR Poster Rank:185 Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 8,103 Mentioned: 18 Post(s) Quoted: 4490 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Ukraine Crisis: Russia Demands Guarantees from Nato
 It's fine, think whatever you want. Maybe Russia is lying about their military spending I can't be 100% positive. All I do know is based on their GDP, they don't have that much extra they could secretly hide and spend. Ours is 6 times more than Russia. US - $2.45 trillion Russia - $416.80 billion Our reduced yearly military budget of $450 billion is still larger than the entire value of their economy in a year.  |
|
#44
●
11-22-2014, 06:12 PM
| ||||||||
| My Rank: MAJOR Poster Rank:185 Join Date: Jan 2014 Posts: 8,103 Mentioned: 18 Post(s) Quoted: 4490 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Ukraine Crisis: Russia Demands Guarantees from Nato
I'm not worried, but Russia's annexation of Crimea and military presence in Eastern Ukraine is causing worldwide instability. As a global entity the first world nations have invested interest in protecting the sovereignty of all nations borders from invasion. Russia can do what they want, as long as it doesn't involve forceful military takeovers. |
|
#45
●
11-22-2014, 08:14 PM
| ||||||||
| My Rank: MAJOR Poster Rank:95 Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 16,772 Mentioned: 261 Post(s) Quoted: 8276 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Ukraine Crisis: Russia Demands Guarantees from Nato
I think most people are just speculating on what's being released. After all, Russia and China are growing their militaries at a great pace. So one has to ask why? What just because we live in America we shouldn't take notice? Who is threatening them? Nobody. Nobody is threatening to do anything to Russia or China. So are they planning to fight each other? It's all just speculation, the only thing I'm against Russia doing is expanding its Nuclear capabilities. After they threw a fit over the missile defense shield, they start building newer better first strike weapons. |
|
#47
●
11-23-2014, 12:22 AM
| ||||||||
 ★ Legacy Member ★ Poster Rank:100 Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 16,280 Mentioned: 62 Post(s) Quoted: 8638 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Ukraine Crisis: Russia Demands Guarantees from Nato
A lot of people would say that building a missile shield is a provocative act. It gives the person with the shield an advantage. |
|
#48
●
11-23-2014, 04:19 AM
| ||||||||
 My Rank: FIRST SERGEANT Poster Rank:414 Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 2,795 Mentioned: 6 Post(s) Quoted: 1044 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Ukraine Crisis: Russia Demands Guarantees from Nato
Well, missiles are offensive, ABM's are defensive. First there was a sword, then a shield. Then a tank, then anti-tank. Now the most deadly missiles can be counteracted. Its an umbrella; if it rains, you put up an umbrella; why would anyone be scared of an umbrella? |
|
#49
●
11-23-2014, 11:56 AM
| ||||||||
| My Rank: MAJOR Poster Rank:95 Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 16,772 Mentioned: 261 Post(s) Quoted: 8276 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Ukraine Crisis: Russia Demands Guarantees from Nato
Obviously it's a provocative action. But it's a defensive weapon. In response to the upgrade in first strike weapons. I think if you look at how volatile the world is measures to intercept missiles is appropriate. Not only to intercept missiles, but as a deterrent to fire them. Contrary to what some here who believe they are on the cutting edge of information. Nobody that represents a true threat is threatening Russia. And what threats Russia has seen are of their own making. It's all about positioning for power, like I said previously, Russia doesn't need to be a Super power again to prosper. In fact the military build up is counter productive to reaching prosperity in Russia. As well as Russian control of the media. The Russian people are fed ridiculous conspiracy theories on a daily basis. For everything. From other nations trying to assassinate Putin, to a invasion to slaughter it's people. Russian media lies so much they make msnbc look upstanding. Everybody knows Russian weapons and Russian soldiers have the blood of the Malaysian flight that was shot down on their hands. You know what the Russian people believe? That Putin was flying over that flight path just hours earlier, and it was a attempt to kill Putin by the Ukrainian government. |
|
#50
●
11-23-2014, 11:59 AM
| ||||||||
| My Rank: MAJOR Poster Rank:95 Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 16,772 Mentioned: 261 Post(s) Quoted: 8276 Post(s)
| ||||||||
|
Re: Ukraine Crisis: Russia Demands Guarantees from Nato
That's a respectful position. I don't agree so I'm going to call you dumb. Wow, that position totally makes you seem superior. Especially when you site zero examples of threats that would constitute a build up of nuclear capabilities. I think you have your head buried in the vodka. You want to believe America is a threat to Russia, and the proper response is a arms race. I disagree. |
Secondly they have less nukes than we do(5000), and refurbishing our 7000 for 30 years only costs $250 billion. That means refurbishing their entire arsenal would be around $175 billion. If spread out over the 30 years to refurb them as they "expire" would cost Russia only 5.83 billion a year. That would constitute only 8.5% of their $69 billion dollar "hypothetical" budget. Not much of a stretch.. 
