NATO - Russia relations:

They can't contain illegal immigration let alone Russia.

IMO mostly ammo. Most of eastern european armies still use soviet stuff. That should be in million of dollars.

I would have thought most eastern european countries would be making their own ammo if they are still using soviet calibres... otherwise the US would be pressuring them into switching to their calibres and their weapons rather than buying ammo for them...

Equally I would think they would buy Soviet ammo like 7.62 x 39mm ammo and 7.62 x 54mm ammo for their surrogate terrorist groups around the world from those same eastern european countries... as a reward for changing sides.

Spare parts for vehicles/planes/helis.

That would make more sense... parts for Hips in Afghanistan etc etc.

According to an article from Al Jazeera, the UK is to lead the struggle to contain Russia so that the US can focus on China...yeah baby!

Which is good news for Russia as it means toothless UK is going to be more of the same, and the US is going to be distracted with other stuff.

Most of the sanctions were led by the US, or should I say pushed by the US... and implemented by the EU, because the UK and US don't have huge ties with Russia, so I wonder how the US thinks the UK is going to influence the EU when they can't even agree fishing rights and border agreements...

They can't contain illegal immigration let alone Russia.

If the US stops looking I suspect Johnson might try to start getting more trade with Russia with potentially lucrative oil contracts etc etc rather than less relations... but either is fine.

franco wrote:According to an article from Al Jazeera, the UK is to lead the struggle to contain Russia so that the US can focus on China...yeah baby!

"The United Kingdom is leading the fight against the Russian threat and is trying to expand its influence, relying on an agreement with Washington, according to which the United States is engaged in China and the United Kingdom is opposed to Russian influence," the publication said.

https://www-gazeta-ru.translate.goog/army/news/2021/11/17/16873753.shtml?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=nui

They have good stuff there but should take half a dose from now on ...

I would have thought most eastern european countries would be making their own ammo if they are still using soviet calibres... otherwise the US would be pressuring them into switching to their calibres and their weapons rather than buying ammo for them...

Equally I would think they would buy Soviet ammo like 7.62 x 39mm ammo and 7.62 x 54mm ammo for their surrogate terrorist groups around the world from those same eastern european countries... as a reward for changing sides.

Yeah until they see the price for switching all their weapons for NATO ones.

Producing its own ammo isn't cheap. Even France can't. You need to invest a lot but also have many clients to make sustainable. Few countries do it.

Yeah until they see the price for switching all their weapons for NATO ones.

Which would be why they need to keep their own ammo factories running, though it must be worth while to start making HATO standard ammo to sell to HATO partners because there is likely a good margin for sales involved for the makers.

Producing its own ammo isn't cheap. Even France can't. You need to invest a lot but also have many clients to make sustainable. Few countries do it.

If you don't have it then setting it up is complex and expensive, but for instance Yugoslavia made good ammo... the ironically named Privi Partizan ammo I have for my Mosin rifles is rather nice brass soft nose stuff. I would think they would find it worth their while to make 223 and 308 even just in the civilian hunting configuration let alone the HATO standard.

But as mentioned I would think spare parts for equipment used by allies like Afghanistan (Hip replacement parts are expensive... ask any pensioner... ).

I suspect most of the ammo goes to ISIS or the Kurds in Syria and a dozen other "freedom fighting terrorists" around the planet... but I wonder why they buy from Russia rather than their new eastern european allies... they certainly wouldn't give money to Russia if they didn't have to... which makes me think it is more likely stuff they don't make like engine parts and aircraft parts etc.

flamming_python wrote:

This is no longer just a social problem, but a question of national

I suspect the Americans will only be deploying missiles there if Russia proceeds with equipping the Zirkon on its SSGNs

Because that situation will also give Washington absolutely no warning; a Russian sub can launch a salvo of Zirkons at Washington D.C from 600-700km off the eastern seaboard of the US and hit all the targets they wish withing 5-6 minutes of launch

This is probably what is being discussed between Putin and Biden, one of the issues

I believe the US is more afraid of the Circons in the SSGN because it poses a huge threat to the US Navy. This missile offers tremendous potential for VMF. They are not about ground-based targets at CONUS.

Kiev is the wests problem... Russia should not invade or interfere unless they do something stupid like what Suckarse Milli Vanili did in South Ossetia.

Because Girl you know it true...

The suffering in the Ukraine is not Russias problem, the west can spend some money and fix them up... that is what allies are for.

Russia just needs to point out that any attack from Ukrainian territory will be considered an attack from HATO so all HATO targets become targetable in response... including the holders of the leash in the US...

The real difference between missiles in the Ukraine hitting Moscow in 5-6 minutes and Russian hypersonic missiles hitting Washington in 5-6 minutes is that Moscow has an ABM defence system operating 24/7 to shoot that sort of crap down... Alaska is on the wrong side of the US of A to stop a Zircon from a Yasen in the North Atlantic from hitting the Pentagon or White House.