And yet you are the most arrogant of all!
But then your arrogance just makes you look silly.
But then your arrogance just makes you look silly.
You said 'with the USA', I was talking about all of NATO. The USA is NATO? The Soviets had the USA beaten badly when it came to the spending game. But, they had to outspend all of NATO combined, which they did. Moron. Learn to read.
It is. Without the US NATO would be a strictly defensive alliance that would lose an all out war to Turkey (happily the Turks are NATO themselves so this is simply an illustration of my pint rather then a prediction). Ditto the UN.
You truly do underestimate the strength of NATO. You believe that Turkey could destroy NATO? *ROTFLMAO* Where are you getting this propaganda? Britain alone could destroy Turkey. I would suggest you learn to read up on NATO. I know everything about the Soviets, and I know for a fact they were never afraid of the USA alone. They were barely afraid of NATO, if only due to excessive losses they would suffer due to nukes. In a conventional war, the Soviets would have destroyed NATO, even if they suffered massive losses. NATO WAS a strictly defensive alliance. They were not strong enough to take on the Warsaw Pact nations.
I have read everything on Soviets by Soviets who defected to the West. The Soviets were only concerned with NATO's collection of nukes. It is the ONLY REASON they did not sweep through Europe, which they had planned to do for so long. The Soviets were constantly puzzled by American military expenditures. They could not understand why the USA would spend such incredible amounts of money for so little hardware. It is why EVERY SINGLE TANK ever built by the Soviets remained in service, right down to old T-54s. They believed in numbers, a system proven again and again. It is what won them WWII. You Americans threw away hardware that was not that old, replacing them with new, highly-sophisticated hardware. A defecting Soviet general once asked the CIA 'why do you build such beautiful tanks which were barely our match, stuffed with such expensive advanced technology? How is that advanced tank going to fare against say 20 T-54s we leave in storage, costing us nothing?'
Last edited:
Dimitry Medvedev has already endorsed Putin for presidency. In 2012, Putin will most likely assume power once again. Medvedev could very well become Prime Minister.
Medvedev has made tremendous progress in Russia, especially with honest business growth and making her more modern and technologically advanced. He has also pushed for them to be less dependent on foreign oil.
I am afraid under another reign og Putin, they could take a step backward.
But make no mistake about it, Medvedev has done a world of good for Russia and the country will most likely take a step backward without him.
Medvedev has made tremendous progress in Russia, especially with honest business growth and making her more modern and technologically advanced. He has also pushed for them to be less dependent on foreign oil.
I am afraid under another reign og Putin, they could take a step backward.
But make no mistake about it, Medvedev has done a world of good for Russia and the country will most likely take a step backward without him.
Russia has fallen behind in many aspects regarding the modernization of their society and economy. Medvedev even made that a key and important part of his presidency. And they have indeed made great progress under his tenure and plan.
From Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medvedev_modernisation_programme
Russia has fallen on hard times. They were even, and in many cases, more advanced than the USA during Soviet times. As their empire collapsed, so did their economy, which led to stagnation in their technology. Do not compare your country with that of the Russians. It is utterly ridiculous.
Hence why they have fallen behind and the genesis for the program by Medvedev. He saw they were lacking in that department and made that a major part of his platform.
There were some aspects where they were equal, but for the most part during the Cold War, the Americans were superior in the technological department. It is one of the major hand-full of reasons the Soviet Union collapsed. They could not keep pace in the arms race for technology and more powerful and accurate nuclear weapons.
And when the Soviets knew they could not produce as precise nuclear weapons regarding long-range, they attempted to make up for it by building more powerful bombs.
The Tsar was produced because of this.
Watch the video, but pay attention to 3:02.
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOMsvuPUMTU[/YOUTUBE]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOMsvuPUMTU
Which was the point I made. You just contradicted yourself with your own words that I bolded.
In one post, you say they have always been technologicaly advanced, and in the next, you say they have been stagnant.
Last edited:
Wrong. The SOVIET UNION was at par with the USA in terms of technology. It is only recently the Russians have fallen behind somewhat because they are broke. The same would happen in the USA. It is Russian lack of money that caused them to fall behind, not a lack of brains of innovation. The Soviets kept pace with the USA in terms of technology. It is MONEY they were having problems with. Techology COSTS MONEY. The USA had plenty of it, the Soviets were spending all of theirs in the goal of worldwide communism. Their expenditures far outstripped your own.
Sputnik, and the Americans were more-advanced? *ROTFLMAO*
Similar threads
