The full 180 TEW has done from earlier in this thread is amusing to watch.

2 hours ago, we_gotta_believe said:

The full 180 TEW has done from earlier in this thread is amusing to watch.

No one is doing any 180's. That's just you sitting on it and spinning.

15 hours ago, TEW said:

Now that I have a little more time to respond, let’s have a reality check:

The S-500 isn’t even in service yet. And it’s procurement is being delayed because Russia can’t win in Ukraine — an exercise even the US military thought Russia would win easily. So your stuck with S-400’s which have only been tested against a RCS of 0.4 meters. For comparison, the F-35 and B-2 have a RCS of less than 0.005 meters.
 

This idea that US stealth aircraft are going to magically be falling out of the sky is pure fantasy. Yes, it is a legitimate air defense system, but your dreams of an impervious SAM shield doesn’t stand up to Russia’s own reported abilities. Russia can’t even control the skies of Ukraine against legacy Russian garbage. The S-400 has how many kills again? 
 

So now we’re on to an air war. Russia has a grand total of 6 SU-57’s in operation, which is the only "modern” fighter in their inventory. That’s compared to 187 operational F-22’s, all of which are far superior to anything Russia is even capable of producing.

And then you want to talk about the F-35 and crashes? There are a total of over 700 F-35’s among multiple air forces across the globe. They have something like 350,000 hours flown, many from aircraft carriers, and there have been a total of what, 5 crashes of the F-35? With no fatalities? It’s literally the most successful military fighter in history to this point as far as safety is concerned. And, oh yeah, it would absolutely smoke anything in Russia’s Air Force.

But perhaps funniest of all, you want to level accusations about imperialism.  

Putin is literally an imperialist who is literally trying to cobble together the former Soviet Union into a neo-Russian empire. JFC, read your own side’s books. They aren’t shy about telling people this!

The S-500 is in service. It's been deployed around Moscow and industrial centers. There's even hints that an even longer range system called A-235 has been developed. The S-500 has a range of 600km, the A-235 is a whopping 1000km. Contrast that with the THAAD system which has a paltry 200km range. The Russians have the best air defense system in the world and it's not even close.

All those F-22s and F-35s better be topped off with fuel because the tankers in the area will be toast. Sentry and satellite communications coordinating operations will be targeted as well. So, the question is how many of the fighters are you going to lose before you even get to the target? That's assuming many of them aren't destroyed on the ground or sunk still on a carrier. The Kalibr, Kinzhal and Zircon hypersonic missiles will take out many of those fighters before they even reach the skies. The U.S. has NO DEFENSE against these systems. 

The SU-57 is already better in range, combat radius and maneuverability than the F-22 and F-35. Russia may not have many of them but they don't need hundreds of them. They are not an imperial force. Despite the hysterical claims about Russia trying to reconquer former Soviet territory, their military posture says otherwise. They are not  amassing the kinds of men and material needed to take and hold vast amounts of territory. How many bases does Russia have outside it's own territory? A handful. The U.S. has nearly 800. Everyone knows who the real imperial power is so give it a rest.

The vaunted F-35 has a mission capable rate of 69%, it's supposed to be 80%. That's pathetic! Firing the main gun has been known to crack the F'ing fuselage for christ's sake. It breaks so often that there's parts shortages. It costs $44, 000 per hour to fly the damned thing. Imagine it's performance in a hot war. The U.S. is in for a rude awakening.

21 hours ago, TEW said:

Dude, Russia is having difficulty controlling the air space of Ukraine. They stand absolutely no chance in a direct head to head confrontation with the US.

Abra is like the dog barking behind the protection of a fence

No crap!

404 in full retreat now. 

Killing civilians is all they've got now. U.S. satellites take the pictures for intel. Aiding war crimes is the U.S. calling card.

 

4 hours ago, Abracadabra said:

Killing civilians is all they've got now. U.S. satellites take the pictures for intel. Aiding war crimes is the U.S. calling card.

It's hilarious how in three posts you go from "Russia has the best air defense system in the world" to "Russia was attacked by the air".

 

Bravo, buddy. This is a level of crap posting I didn't think was possible. 

15 minutes ago, Bill said:

It's hilarious how in three posts you go from "Russia has the best air defense system in the world" to "Russia was attacked by the air".

 

Bravo, buddy. This is a level of crap posting I didn't think was possible. 

If you follow the story, you'd learn that the missiles were shot down but debris fell on apartments occupied by, believe it or not, Ukrainians who fled Kharkiv, and killed four. 

Besides, the Russians have not deployed their best system around Belgorod. 

So, tell us Mr. Call of Duty, how goes the battle for Lugansk? 

7 hours ago, Abracadabra said:

Besides, the Russians have not deployed their best system around Belgorod. 

Obviously. 

 

 

9 hours ago, Abracadabra said:

If you follow the story, you'd learn that the missiles were shot down but debris fell on apartments occupied by, believe it or not, Ukrainians who fled Kharkiv, and killed four. 

Besides, the Russians have not deployed their best system around Belgorod. 

So, tell us Mr. Call of Duty, how goes the battle for Lugansk? 

Also something funny that I noticed is that you spelled it with a g, and not an h. In the US, UK, and Ukraine, when anglicized, it's spelled with an h. Because in Ukrainian, even though there's a г in the name, Ukrainians pronounce it with an h sound. 

But in Russian, it's pronounced with a g sound. So it's curious to me why you would spell it in English, not the way it's spelled in English, but the way it sounds in Russian. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Я знаю кто вы. 

10 minutes ago, Bill said:

Also something funny that I noticed is that you spelled it with a g, and not an h. In the US, UK, and Ukraine, when anglicized, it's spelled with an h. Because in Ukrainian, even though there's a г in the name, Ukrainians pronounce it with an h sound. 

But in Russian, it's pronounced with a g sound. So it's curious to me why you would spell it in English, not the way it's spelled in English, but the way it sounds in Russian.

 

You do know that he is Russian, right?  He isn't an American.

24 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

 

You do know that he is Russian, right?  He isn't an American.

That's 100% obvious. I'm just curious why the mods/admin haven't banned him yet. 

15 hours ago, Abracadabra said:

The S-500 is in service. It's been deployed around Moscow and industrial centers. There's even hints that an even longer range system called A-235 has been developed. The S-500 has a range of 600km, the A-235 is a whopping 1000km. Contrast that with the THAAD system which has a paltry 200km range. The Russians have the best air defense system in the world and it's not even close.

All those F-22s and F-35s better be topped off with fuel because the tankers in the area will be toast. Sentry and satellite communications coordinating operations will be targeted as well. So, the question is how many of the fighters are you going to lose before you even get to the target? That's assuming many of them aren't destroyed on the ground or sunk still on a carrier. The Kalibr, Kinzhal and Zircon hypersonic missiles will take out many of those fighters before they even reach the skies. The U.S. has NO DEFENSE against these systems. 

The SU-57 is already better in range, combat radius and maneuverability than the F-22 and F-35. Russia may not have many of them but they don't need hundreds of them. They are not an imperial force. Despite the hysterical claims about Russia trying to reconquer former Soviet territory, their military posture says otherwise. They are not  amassing the kinds of men and material needed to take and hold vast amounts of territory. How many bases does Russia have outside it's own territory? A handful. The U.S. has nearly 800. Everyone knows who the real imperial power is so give it a rest.

The vaunted F-35 has a mission capable rate of 69%, it's supposed to be 80%. That's pathetic! Firing the main gun has been known to crack the F'ing fuselage for christ's sake. It breaks so often that there's parts shortages. It costs $44, 000 per hour to fly the damned thing. Imagine it's performance in a hot war. The U.S. is in for a rude awakening.

It’s "deployed” to the interior of the country, not to an actual battle space where we can see it perform. To this point, Russia’s capabilities have been proven to be overestimated by the west, not under estimated, so until Russia shows otherwise we have no reason to believe these are silver bullets. 

How many US jets would be hit by these things? ZERO. Forget about the planes themselves, an initial US attack would use our own cruise missiles. Each S-500 is a $600 million weapon system. Each unit has 2 missiles and around 35 have been built, for a total of ~70 missiles.

A Tomahawk cruise missile is a $2 million weapon system. And it has over four times the range of a S-500 at a "whopping” 2500km. Oh, and ours are proven to actually hit their targets. The US has thousands of them. But that’s just the Navy’s. The USAF has the AGM-158 JASSM, with a max range of 1,900km, we have roughly 2,000 of them in stock, and they only cost $1.2 million per missile. Oh, and they’re stealth.

So to answer your question, even if Russia can actually hit with 100% accuracy, the S-500’s are going to be completely spent shooting down the literal thousands of cruise missiles we can throw at Russia. In the real world hitting a missile with another missile (especially a stealth missile like the JASSM) is very difficult and Russia has proven to be far behind the US in its targeting systems. So, no, Russia isn’t going to be shooting our planes out of the sky because their entire stock pile is going to be used up trying to protect themselves from US missile volleys that are 300 times less expensive. Or, you know, you can just let your country get obliterated on day one.  

Now, on to the fighter debate, the only thing the Su-57 is better at is target practice. The JSF is actually cheaper and easier to maintain than previous fighters in our arsenal. And, again, unlike Russia’s dogsh** excuse for a 5th gen fighter, we actually have them in the hundreds. Russia is afraid to even use the Su-57 in Ukraine in anything besides a stand-off role. THAT’S pathetic.

Sure, the JSF has teething issues. It’s also the most advanced aircraft in the world, and was designed to be used by multiple service branches and nations. The situational awareness and flexibility it provides is absolutely incredible. And you’re acting like the Su-57 didn’t go through a decade of delays itself. And that Russia hasn’t spent over half of its munitions. And that Russia isn’t having severe engine issues. And that there isn’t a global supply chain issue that also impacts Russia.

As far as US military bases, yeah, we have them all over the world. Want to know why? Because everyone looks at countries like Russia and thinks to themselves, "gee, if we don’t want to be taken over by people like that, we had better get under the US defense umbrella.” Unlike the USSR/Russia, the overwhelming number of countries in the world let us build military bases willingly. And yeah, sure, the US isn’t perfect and we have our own national security interests just like Russia. But to say the US is imperialist when we could have basically taken over the entire world after WW2 is laughable. The US is the most restrained superpower in human history. And it’s really not even close. 

40 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

 

You do know that he is Russian, right?  He isn't an American.

I knew he was Russian but thought he was a dual citizen or something. How’d he end up here?

1 hour ago, TEW said:

knew he was Russian but thought he was a dual citizen or something. How’d he end up here?

We can have fun and say he is a Russian propaganda plant

7 hours ago, TEW said:

It’s "deployed” to the interior of the country, not to an actual battle space where we can see it perform. To this point, Russia’s capabilities have been proven to be overestimated by the west, not under estimated, so until Russia shows otherwise we have no reason to believe these are silver bullets. 

How many US jets would be hit by these things? ZERO. Forget about the planes themselves, an initial US attack would use our own cruise missiles. Each S-500 is a $600 million weapon system. Each unit has 2 missiles and around 35 have been built, for a total of ~70 missiles.

A Tomahawk cruise missile is a $2 million weapon system. And it has over four times the range of a S-500 at a "whopping” 2500km. Oh, and ours are proven to actually hit their targets. The US has thousands of them. But that’s just the Navy’s. The USAF has the AGM-158 JASSM, with a max range of 1,900km, we have roughly 2,000 of them in stock, and they only cost $1.2 million per missile. Oh, and they’re stealth.

So to answer your question, even if Russia can actually hit with 100% accuracy, the S-500’s are going to be completely spent shooting down the literal thousands of cruise missiles we can throw at Russia. In the real world hitting a missile with another missile (especially a stealth missile like the JASSM) is very difficult and Russia has proven to be far behind the US in its targeting systems. So, no, Russia isn’t going to be shooting our planes out of the sky because their entire stock pile is going to be used up trying to protect themselves from US missile volleys that are 300 times less expensive. Or, you know, you can just let your country get obliterated on day one.  

Now, on to the fighter debate, the only thing the Su-57 is better at is target practice. The JSF is actually cheaper and easier to maintain than previous fighters in our arsenal. And, again, unlike Russia’s dogsh** excuse for a 5th gen fighter, we actually have them in the hundreds. Russia is afraid to even use the Su-57 in Ukraine in anything besides a stand-off role. THAT’S pathetic.

Sure, the JSF has teething issues. It’s also the most advanced aircraft in the world, and was designed to be used by multiple service branches and nations. The situational awareness and flexibility it provides is absolutely incredible. And you’re acting like the Su-57 didn’t go through a decade of delays itself. And that Russia hasn’t spent over half of its munitions. And that Russia isn’t having severe engine issues. And that there isn’t a global supply chain issue that also impacts Russia.

As far as US military bases, yeah, we have them all over the world. Want to know why? Because everyone looks at countries like Russia and thinks to themselves, "gee, if we don’t want to be taken over by people like that, we had better get under the US defense umbrella.” Unlike the USSR/Russia, the overwhelming number of countries in the world let us build military bases willingly. And yeah, sure, the US isn’t perfect and we have our own national security interests just like Russia. But to say the US is imperialist when we could have basically taken over the entire world after WW2 is laughable. The US is the most restrained superpower in human history. And it’s really not even close. 

I knew he was Russian but thought he was a dual citizen or something. How’d he end up here?

The S-500 is just the latest in Russia's defense systems. The S-400 and S-300 are formidable and more plentiful. Not claiming these are silver bullets. My point is that an attack on Russia will be very costly. Do you think Russia would sit back and allow the U.S. to get thousands of missiles in range of Moscow? Do you think they have no way of striking back directly at American territory? 

The Russians are behind the U.S. in targeting systems?  The Patriots system is a lemon. It performed poorly against Iraqi scuds. 

Quote

"The results of these studies are disturbing. They suggest that the Patriot's intercept rate during the Gulf War was very low. The evidence from these preliminary studies indicates that Patriot's intercept rate could be much lower than ten percent, possibly even zero." (Statement of Theodore A. Postol before the U.S. House Of Representatives Committee on Government Operations, April 7, 1992)

Imaging how they'd perform against hypersonic weapons. Oh, that's right we don't have to imagine. 30 of them hit targets right under the nose of the Patriot just a few months ago. 

How do you know Russia has spent half of it's munitions? Western estimates have been wrong since the start of the SMO. They were supposed to run out months ago. Instead, the rate of use has only increased. The supply issues are being resolved fairly quickly. It's not as if Russia is incapable of producing spare parts or building their own engines. Their aviation sector is one of the best in the world. Who's engines do you think get astronauts up to the space station? 

The F-35 is so great the Pentagon is slashing orders by 35%. 

The Cold War ended 30 years ago. Did the number of U.S. bases decline when the threat declined? No. The opposite occurred. With no credible threat during a "uni-polar" moment, the number of bases increased. The idea that the U.S. has so many bases because of a perceived threat is complete BS. The U.S. has so many bases in order to project power and intimidate nations into submitting to U.S. hegemony. Those days are over.

Not Russian, btw. Born in Hartford Connecticut, raised in south Philly. Currently domiciled in MD. 

6 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

We can have fun and say he is a Russian propaganda plant

So, if he has a different point of view - he has to be considered as Russian spy... At minimum... 🙄

happy 4th, Abra

1 hour ago, Dave Moss said:

happy 4th, Abra

Happy Independence Day

3 hours ago, ilross2003 said:

So, if he has a different point of view - he has to be considered as Russian spy... At minimum... 🙄

You obviously haven’t been paying attention. 

3 hours ago, Abracadabra said:

The S-500 is just the latest in Russia's defense systems. The S-400 and S-300 are formidable and more plentiful. Not claiming these are silver bullets. My point is that an attack on Russia will be very costly. Do you think Russia would sit back and allow the U.S. to get thousands of missiles in range of Moscow? Do you think they have no way of striking back directly at American territory? 

The Russians are behind the U.S. in targeting systems?  The Patriots system is a lemon. It performed poorly against Iraqi scuds. 

Imaging how they'd perform against hypersonic weapons. Oh, that's right we don't have to imagine. 30 of them hit targets right under the nose of the Patriot just a few months ago. 

How do you know Russia has spent half of it's munitions? Western estimates have been wrong since the start of the SMO. They were supposed to run out months ago. Instead, the rate of use has only increased. The supply issues are being resolved fairly quickly. It's not as if Russia is incapable of producing spare parts or building their own engines. Their aviation sector is one of the best in the world. Who's engines do you think get astronauts up to the space station? 

The F-35 is so great the Pentagon is slashing orders by 35%. 

The Cold War ended 30 years ago. Did the number of U.S. bases decline when the threat declined? No. The opposite occurred. With no credible threat during a "uni-polar" moment, the number of bases increased. The idea that the U.S. has so many bases because of a perceived threat is complete BS. The U.S. has so many bases in order to project power and intimidate nations into submitting to U.S. hegemony. Those days are over.

Not Russian, btw. Born in Hartford Connecticut, raised in south Philly. Currently domiciled in MD. 

 

Dude, the Gulf War was thirty years ago. There have been numerous upgrades to our weapons systems since then because, unlike Russia, the US can actually afford to keep its military modern.

The Su-57 was delayed for a decade. That’s a fact. The engines still have major problems. That’s a fact. The US uses SpaceX to launch things to space. That’s a fact.

The F-35 is so bad that literally every modern country that is offered it takes it. The competition reviews show that it is both better and cheaper than all other options.

The Cold War never really ended and Russia’s actions have proven this. That’s why Finland, Sweden, Bosnia, Georgia and Ukraine all want to be a part of NATO now, because they see Russia’s intentions. Yeah, we have bases all over the world so we can project power. No ish. Because countries like Russia exist all over the world that are aggressive if not faced with a counterbalance.

You say US hegemony like it’s some terrible thing. News flash: we saw the alternative in the second half of the 20th century and the result was countries like Russia and China murdering tens of millions of people. The US isn’t perfect but it’s the absolute best thing to ever happen to the world.

Gotta keep Ascension Island, nestled in the middle of the South Atlantic Ocean, safe from those pesky Russians menacing them from 8500km away.

5 hours ago, TEW said:

 

Dude, the Gulf War was thirty years ago. There have been numerous upgrades to our weapons systems since then because, unlike Russia, the US can actually afford to keep its military modern.

The Su-57 was delayed for a decade. That’s a fact. The engines still have major problems. That’s a fact. The US uses SpaceX to launch things to space. That’s a fact.

The F-35 is so bad that literally every modern country that is offered it takes it. The competition reviews show that it is both better and cheaper than all other options.

The Cold War never really ended and Russia’s actions have proven this. That’s why Finland, Sweden, Bosnia, Georgia and Ukraine all want to be a part of NATO now, because they see Russia’s intentions. Yeah, we have bases all over the world so we can project power. No ish. Because countries like Russia exist all over the world that are aggressive if not faced with a counterbalance.

You say US hegemony like it’s some terrible thing. News flash: we saw the alternative in the second half of the 20th century and the result was countries like Russia and China murdering tens of millions of people. The US isn’t perfect but it’s the absolute best thing to ever happen to the world.

TEW: Nobody understands Putin intentions, he invaded Ukraine because he wants a buffer zone against NATO. He's a brilliant leader and this was a perfectly calculated move.

Also TEW: Finland, Sweden, Bosnia, Georgia, and Ukraine now want to join NATO. Putin knew this would happen, he planned for this!

18 hours ago, ilross2003 said:

So, if he has a different point of view - he has to be considered as Russian spy... At minimum... 🙄

There is an easy way to fix ignorance on a subject. Go back and read his posts.