This comparison shows how Russia’s latest nuclear weapons dwarf America’s (and everyone else’s)

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by Destroyer of illusions, Jul 21, 2018.

  1. Tofiks

    Tofiks Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Again this bullshit. The fact that you just do not understand, that noone will buy expensive thing if there is a possibility to buy same thing cheaper do not mean, that those who understand this simple thing are idiots. Oposit is more likely.. . So you can try to sell one liter of milk for 1 000 000 dollars, but noone will buy it and you will add to GDP 0 dollars not a 1 000 000 dollars.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2018
  2. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    10,048
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do you want an example when expensive garbage is bought with pleasure? You are welcome. For example, iPhone, Harley Davidson, liquefied American gas ... I can show you infinite number of examples. Starting from tickets to Madonna’s concert and ending with F-35.
    Or see how shares such as Facebook or Twitter are resold.
     
  3. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    9,217
    Likes Received:
    610
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And what stopped them from attacking between 1945 and 1949, when the US was the only country that had the atomic bomb?

    Or from 1949-1965, when the US inventory was on average 10-20 times that of the Soviets?

    You know, it makes absolutely no sense to try and make that claim, when it is in complete contradiction of history.
     
  4. Tofiks

    Tofiks Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    28
    You can argue, why this are"expensive garbage"? Again, because you said so? Why russian oil for more than 100 dollars per barrel is not expensive garbage? You offer to link up all economic estimates on your subjective opinion? Isn't it strange?

    And economic is very logical science, there is demand and offer, between these two is the price as a compromise. The fact that you have problems with logical thinking and you just do not understand, that there is impossible to rise price of goods just like that without any logical background, do not mean that thousands and thousands economists, politic and other people are idiots and you one are the smart man.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2018
  5. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    10,048
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For example, where is the logic in Facebook's big capitalization? There is no logic in it. All capitalization is a bubble to fool idiots.
    Another example. Motorcycles HD. Honda is 100 times more reliable, more high-tech, but the price of HD is higher than similar models of Honda. Where is the logic? Samsung or Chinese Xiaomi smartphones are better than iPhones, but iPhones are several times more expensive. Where is the logic?

    Or one more example. Crowds of idiots go to the concert of the Madonna and pay for it. In other words, they pay to listen to the soundtrack of an old woman with spoiled alcohol and smoking voice. Where is the logic?

    The price of Russian oil is comparable to the price of oil from other regions. Sometimes the price of Russian oil is even cheaper. But Russian gas for the EU is almost two times cheaper than liquefied gas from the United States. In this case, the Poles are going to buy American liquefied gas. It is clear that there are political motives in this, but we are talking about a clean economy. Where is the economic logic?
     
  6. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    10,048
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Invincible Red Army
     
  7. Tofiks

    Tofiks Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    28
    So you are not only the world-class expert in economy, but also the main expert in cellphones, motorcycles and entertainment to wich opinion whole world should line up, otherwise there are idiots? Man, put you boots on the ground...

    Maybe you can tell me, how capitalization of Facebook links with GDP calculation? Or you do not now this?

    And what you can compare with Madonna, Apple production or Harley from entertainment and goods which are produced in Russia? The answer is nothing, Russia do not produce hi tec, world-class experiment or motorbikes for export. Russia are raw materials exporter, "dig out and sell it" thing. Russia are far behind from the West in innovations and hight added value production. Thats why it got only 1.8% of world GDP and this share continue to decrease.
     
  8. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    10,048
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Russia produces a lot of goods.
    For example.
    The best in the world of nuclear power plants. In 2014, Rosatom accounted for 30 nuclear power units under construction, which represents 41% of the total number of nuclear power units under construction worldwide. Now even more. A week ago, we launched the world's first floating nuclear power plant. No one in the world has such technology. Of course, nuclear power plants and nuclear technologies are not a motorcycle, but still. :roflol:
    In Russia release very good software. For example, Kaspersky Anti-Virus and Doctor Web Antivirus are the best in the world.
    See how the Metro was built in Moscow and compare it with any other.
    Home Internet in Russia speed of 100 - 300 MB / s is standard. I wonder what is the speed of the internet in Canada?
    95% of aluminum alloy parts for Boeing are produced in Russia.
    Russia №1 in space.
    And of course, the Russians produce hypersonic rockets, new tanks, the Sarmat, the Bulava .... S400 and S500 (the S700 is currently being developed). And like a cherry on the cake "Status 6", and "Poseidon."

    But Russia does not produce an iPhone. It is made by China.:roflol::roflol::roflol:
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2018
  9. Tofiks

    Tofiks Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    28
    So i do not understand, why Harley or iPhone are **** and should not be included in GDP calculation, but russian aluminium is not and should be included? Just because you are thinking, that you are the most clever person in the world and all economic indicators in the world should line up with your subjective opinion?

    Question number two - why as soon as oil and gas prices fell, russian economy is hit by fewer? Maybe because a these nuclear power plans and all other best in the world things produced in Russia have not significant impact on russian economy and can not replace raw materials sale?

    And for you to know, number one producer of Aluminium in the world is China. Only US industry is in the size of whole Russian economy. And iPhone can be put together in Taiwan, but it is developed in US by the US citizens. anyone can put together microsomes, but not everyone got intellectual potential to create iPhone.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2018
  10. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    9,217
    Likes Received:
    610
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The "Red Army" was hardly invincible. It was simply huge, and swamped their enemies through piling more and more bodies on top of them.

    The simple fact was, they did not care about losses, and could throw more enemies at an enemy than they had bullets. I never understood the people who praised the Red Army in WWII, as their losses were appalling when compared to that of the Germans. Looking at the numbers on the Eastern Front shows this clearly. The Soviets attacked with a roughly 2 to 1 or even 6 to 1 advantage in numbers, and killed twice as many of their own men as they killed Germans.

    Compare that to the Western Front. At their peak, their numbers were roughly on par with those of the Germans (and most of the time they were outnumbered). Yet they still took only 3 deaths for every 5 German deaths.

    Ultimately in the end, the Western Front had around 3 million Allied casualties, compared to 5-5.4 million German casualties.

    And a later war that used similar tactics ended with very similar numbers. The Chinese Army has never impressed my because of Korea.

    They threw in 1.3 million soldiers into Korea, and lost almost half of them. Over 1.6 million Chinese and North Korean forces could not win against less than 1 million UN forces. And took casualties 3-5 times higher in doing so.

    So the "Invincible Red Army" is largely a myth. In gamer terms, they won by "Zerg Rush". And those figures follow pretty much every Soviet campaign in the war. From Stalingrad and Bagration to the Battle of Berlin. Going in with overwhelming numbers, and taking overwhelming casualties.
     
    APACHERAT likes this.
  11. Tofiks

    Tofiks Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    28
    actually allied forces almost every time got significant advantage against germans in numbers, materials and firepower.
     
  12. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    9,217
    Likes Received:
    610
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, and I even stated so. Generally they outnumbered them by a factor of 1.5 to 1.

    On average, the Soviets outnumbered the Germans by a factor of 5 to 1 or more, and still took horrible losses far in excess to that of the Germans.

    The Allies, with their 1.5 to 1 advantage took far fewer losses than the Germans did. The Soviets with their vastly overwhelming numbers took losses far in excess to that of the Germans. And took twice as many casualties (or more) than the Germans did.

    This is why I never took the Soviets (Russians) all that seriously as opponents. They require overwhelming numbers in order to defeat an enemy, and also take overwhelming losses. And that is true throughout their history. The Winter War shows it even more strikingly.

    They are not invincible, they simply defeated their enemy in WWII by piling more bodies on them than the Germans could withstand.
     
    ArmySoldier likes this.
  13. Questerr

    Questerr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    62,625
    Likes Received:
    4,849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That army wouldn't be very invincible when all of its logistic centers are nuclear craters.
     
  14. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    10,048
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What do you think? If I write "Your comment does not make sense," your moderators will ban me?
     
  15. Questerr

    Questerr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    62,625
    Likes Received:
    4,849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How does my comment not make sense? No army can be invincible when its logistic network is destroyed. Field armies run out of fuel and ammo pretty damn quickly.
     
  16. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    10,048
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You write nonsense.
    Combat casualties of the Red Army in the Second World War - 11.932.069 people.
    Fighting German losses - 8.725.600

    But the whole of Europe fought against the USSR except Germany.

    For example.

    Romania:
    The Romanian 3rd Army (Mining and Cavalry Corps) and the 4th Army (3 Infantry Corps), totaling about 220 thousand people, were intended for military operations against the USSR.

    Italy:
    The Italian Expeditionary Corps for the war against the USSR was created on July 10, 1941, consisting of one cavalry and two infantry divisions, with corps artillery and two air groups (reconnaissance and fighter). In total, there were 62 thousand soldiers and officers in the corps. There were - 220 guns, 60 machine-gun tankettes, aviation - 50 fighters and 20 reconnaissance aircraft.

    Finland:
    On June 30, 1941, Finnish troops (11 infantry divisions and 4 brigades, totaling about 150 thousand people) launched an offensive in the direction of Vyborg and Petrozavodsk.

    Hungary:
    On July 1, 1941, Hungary sent the Carpathian Group to the war against the USSR (5 brigades, totaling 40 thousand people), who fought as part of the German 17th army in Ukraine. In April 1942, the Hungarian 2nd was sent to war against the USSR army (about 200 thousand people).

    Slovakia:
    One division (consisting of 2 infantry regiments, artillery regiment, battalion of light tanks, numbering 8 thousand people) fought in Ukraine in 1941, in Kuban in 1942, and served as a guard in Crimea in 1943-1944. Another division (consisting of 2 infantry regiments and artillery regiment, 8 thousand people)

    Croatia, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Sweden, Denmark, Spain, Norway .... fought against the USSR.

    I can’t say the losses of these countries right now, but they were also big. For example, there were more Frenchmen killed near Moscow than the French who fought against Hitler.

    Therefore, if we count the number of military killed, the losses are approximately equal. The enormous losses of the Russians are due to the fact that the Germans and their allies killed the civilian population of Russia.
    This is about how the Americans in Vietnam killed many civilians. Therefore, the loss of the Vietnamese was higher than the American losses. Same in Iraq or Afghanistan. Americans and their allies kill civilians.
     
  17. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    10,048
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Tell me, do you think my comment "Your comment does not make sense," an insult or violation of forum rules? I ask this question because I received a warning for a similar comment. I ask this because I do not speak English and maybe I can not understand the rules of the forum.

    Now my answer. The United States and its allies in the years 1945-49 were powerless against the Red Army. It is a fact. No atomic bomb could change anything. These bombs did not matter even for Japan. (Japan signed a surrender only because the Russians destroyed the Kwantung army. All Japanese historians wrote about it) Therefore, if little Japan ignores atomic bombs, then big Russia spits on them even more. After 1949, Russia itself became a nuclear power.

    Russians can fight in any conditions. The US Army lost the war in Vietnam. At the same time, the Vietnamese army is much weaker than the American one. And the Vietnamese did not have the "Orange" and nuclear bombs.
     
  18. Questerr

    Questerr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    62,625
    Likes Received:
    4,849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Russians cannot fight without fuel and ammunition. The Allied strategy would have targeted Soviet logistic and transportation centers in Eastern Europe and cut the Soviet armies off from resupply. An army without supplies dies.
     
  19. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    9,217
    Likes Received:
    610
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Funny, but notice that every country you mention was run by a Fascist government, predominantly controlled by Germany.

    The French for example, they did not "fight against the USSR". The majority of "soldiers" in France during WWII never left France. When the country was occupied you had the GMR founded, which was used exclusively inside of France.

    However, you did have the 33rd Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS Charlemagne. And as it sounds, it was a German (not French) SS Regiment that was composed of French citizens. It started as the Legion of French Volunteers Against Bolshevism (LVF), and recruited POWs who were pro-Fascist. There were plans to create an entire Division out of it, but it was never even the size of a Regiment in numbers.

    Of the roughly 2,000 members this unit had, another 5,000 were pumped in by either ethnic French Germans or volunteers from other Western European volunteers. It was this 7,000 man strong force that met the Soviets in Eastern Germany.

    As part of their idea of "Brotherhood", the Germans tried to create as many SS units as they could. Netherlands, Croats, Norwegians, Finns, even Estonians and Cossaks had Waffen-SS "Divisions". One of the strangest was the "British Free Corps", made up of POWs from England and the Dominions. But only 54 ever joined this unit, never more than 27 at any one time.

    So yea, if you count a few thousand French and other people as being "The whole of Europe", right. How about stepping off of the propaganda and sticking to facts. Most of those who joined in fact were much more "Anti-Communist" than "Pro-Fascist".

    And wow, Finland had issues with the Soviets. No surprise, considering the Soviets had earlier tried to lop off a chunk of Finland in the Winter War. Then you wonder why so many found it easy to join forces opposing the Soviets.
     
  20. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    10,048
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But why do you think that the United States can destroy Russian logistics centers? With the same success, you can assume that the Russians will destroy the logistics centers of the US Army.
    In addition, the Russians can fight without supplies. For example, small Garrison of the Brest Fortress fought with the much superior forces of the Germans in full surroundings and without supplies for more than a month. At the same time, the Germans were able to capture it only completely destroying the Russians. This is a fact, but not fiction. The second example is besieged Leningrad. A city with a population of one million people, not having full supplies, the Germans and their allies could not seize in full surroundings in spite of everything.
    The Russians died of hunger in the literal sense, but the strongest army in the world at that time, the German army, together with their allies, could not defeat the Russians.
    The siege of Leningrad lasted 872 days. Or almost two and a half years. No one is able to withstand this, except the Russians.
     
  21. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    10,048
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    113
    [/QUOTE]
    What is not clear?

    Combat casualties of the Red Army in World War II -11.932.069 people.
    Combat casualties German - 8.725.600

    If you add representatives of other nationalities who fought against the USSR, then the death toll will be approximately equal. Therefore, your statement that the Russians have won only because of the number of Russians killed is a lie.

    For some reason you write about the French, but keep quiet about the Italians, Hungarians, Romanians. But they were full-fledged allies of Germany. And they fought with their troops under their flags.

    Here is a curious archival document-list of prisoners of war who surrendered to Soviet troops during the war. Recall that a prisoner of war is one who fights in uniform with a weapon in his hand.

    Germans-2 389 560,
    Hungarians-513767,
    Romania-187 370,
    Austrians-156 682,
    Czechs and Slovaks-69 977,
    Poles 60 280,
    Italians-48 957,
    French-23,136,
    Croats-21 822,
    Moldovans-14 129,
    Jews-10 173,
    Dutch-4 729,
    Finns - 2 377
    Belgians-2 010,
    Luxembourgers-1652,
    Danes-457,
    Spaniards-452,
    Roma-383,
    Norwegians-101,
    Swedes-72.

    During the war against the USSR, all of Europe fought. Three hundred and fifty million people, regardless of whether they fought with weapons in their hands or stood at the bench, producing weapons for the Wehrmacht, did one thing. During the Second World War, twenty thousand participants in the French resistance were killed. And two hundred thousand Frenchmen fought against the USSR. The Russians also captured sixty thousand Poles. Two million European volunteers fought for Hitler against the USSR.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2018
  22. Questerr

    Questerr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    62,625
    Likes Received:
    4,849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In 1945-49, the US would destroy Russian logistic centers with atomic bombs. The Russians had nothing comparable and no way to deliver them.
     
  23. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    25,056
    Likes Received:
    6,619
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Golly....Russia has the bestest weapons that no one can use.
     
  24. Destroyer of illusions

    Destroyer of illusions Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2014
    Messages:
    10,048
    Likes Received:
    998
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The United States also could not deliver atomic bombs. In addition, one should not exaggerate the capabilities of atomic weapons of that time. For example, the United States and Britain bombed Dresden with conventional ammunition — the destruction and death of civilians was several times greater than after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagosaki. Or see what happened in Stalengrad.
    Once again I am writing. No one in the world can destroy Russia. If there was at least a small opportunity to do this, those in the White House and the Pentagon would do it. In the US, power is in the hands of cynical and aggressive crazy. They lied to the whole world, showing a test tube with chalk to the UN only to start the war in Iraq. Therefore, only due to the fact that Russia has powerful weapons, there is still a peace in the world.
     
  25. Questerr

    Questerr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    62,625
    Likes Received:
    4,849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes we could deliver atomic bombs, as we showed in Japan. In fact, during that time period we had both the B-29 and B-35 to deliver atomic bombs. It’s not the civilian casualties that would have mattered. It would have been the destructions or roads and rail links along with factories and supply depots.

    You cut off the Russian field armies from logistics and they run out of supplies and become unable to fight within days. That was most definitely in the capacity of the United States in 1945-49.
     

Share This Page