| Author |
Message |
e
VIP
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 654
|
 Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 9:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | Does anyone remember a few years ago when George Bush met Putin for the first time and in an interview that day said something really mawkish and cringe worthy like "I shook his hand, looked into his eyes and saw his soul"?And when Barbara Walters interviewed Putin she read the quote to him and he responded with something gay like "Oh George Bush, he's the greatest, nicest guy"?They came out like the world's two biggest fags.
I was sitting there and going like "OMG, does Laura know?!" |
Look at how stiff Laura Bush is. You can tell she's getting no good play from Premier Bush at home. Gotta make you wonder what Bush does with Putin all of those world leaders at that "ranch" of his?
Twister mayber? Ride em cowboy?   |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Vic
Talk Show Host
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 298
Location: Moscow, Russian Federation
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 9:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Paul Holmes wrote: | | Russian equipment is considered to inferior to western models. Sorry it is fact which can be noted to exports to foreign countries. Why do you think that this is the case? You are a Russian Patriot and I am curious on your view. |
Actually, one word - propaganda. What "e" said, I will just elaborate.
I am only familiar with aerospace, so that is the only thing I can speak for.
It is common knowledge that there was a 50 year-long campaign in the west that everything and anything Russian was of poor quality. Take for instance civil aviation. The aircraft built during Soviet times were not efficient (there was no need for this, we had plenty of oil at dirt cheap prices) but they were just as, and in many cases MORE reliable than their western counterparts. They were built to function in extreme conditions, which they did. Newer Russian aircraft (Tupolev Tu-204, -334, Illyushin IL-96, Yakovlev Yak-42D and the soon to come out Sukhoi RRJ) are just like their Boeing and Airbus counterparts in terms of efficiency, comfort and reliability but cost LESS. The problems stopping export of these airliners to the U.S. or western europe are:
1) Propaganda - as mentioned above but OKB Sukhoi's new RRJ is working in partnership with Boeing, Boeing doing the marketing and also the maintanence on this airliner in the west (next point) I guess we should want and see.
2) Maintanence - Russian airliners that are used in the west would have a hard time with maintanence because Tupolev, Illyushin... only have facilities in the eastern bloc countries, during the cold was we did not sell aircraft to the west anyways. So, unless airlines are willing to pay the cash to build these maintanence bases with their own cash, it is a nightmare. Look at Cubana, they have to ferry their Yak 42's to Russia. There is an airline in Australia that operates Yak-42D's though, and there are western carriers that operate Tu-204's (Although mainly the Rolls Royce powered -120 version rather than the Aviadvigatel powered -100.
As far as military aviation goes, most Russian aircraft (Sukhoi and MiG interceptors) ARE superior to their western counterparts (If comparing the same generations, ofcourse) They are cheaper and and they come will less "political strings" attached. The Su-27 (in all its derivatives) is more manueverable and has better performance than its counterpart, the F-15. The new Su-37 (sometimes called Su-47 or Su-35) is superior to the F-22 counterpart, they even admitted it. Keep in mind, both the Su-37 and F-22 were built in the end of the 90's, and we will not export the Su-37 for 10 years after its creation - its a law. The U.S. wasn't able to put Thrust Vectoring (exhaust can be vectored in any direction, allowing EXTREMELY sharp turns and evasive manuevers) on their F-22, which they tried to do. Another factor is that we do not export state of the art technology that we have just created (the U.S. usually doesn't either). And yet another thing you have to consider is that nomatter how well you build something, it doesn't matter if you have poor maintanence, especially when it comes to interceptors. India has a thing for buying new Su-27's (and taking good care of them) while completely forgetting about the previous generation of interceptors that it uses (MiG-21, for instance), so there really is no question when you see MiG-21's come down at a rate of 1/half year in India due to maintanence errors. I do admit that U.S. strategic bombers have better stealth technology (B2), the only thing we have in the way of Strategic aviation is the Tu-95 (B-52's counterpart) and the Tu-160 (B1's counterpart) These ARE NOT exported at all. Just like the United States, we do not export strategic long-range aviation due to the possibility of it being used against us.
Lada's story is different, it is poor quality compared to other cars.
| e wrote: | | Way to go Vic! =D> A aquaintance of mine just got his pilots license and he's having a blast. So when I see an Airbus or an Tupolev flying really wobblily in the air that'll be you right? I'll just start ducking for cover then..... |
Remember the old saying - You can run, but you cannot hide ?
Thanks  I agree with your buddy, it is a blast and I do enjoy flying the "little stuff"! No computer to think for you and correct you, laxed regulations regarding flights (only if VFR, ofcourse)  Yeah |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
El-Casey
Lounge Lizard
Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Posts: 87
Location: Мелбурн, Флорида США
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 10:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Paul, the figures you quoted were 1) from the late 1990s, 2) not cited and 3) way obsolete. Anyhow, we're getting off-topic since this is supposed to be about Putin.
But seriously, if you want to quote figures, try getting some from last year, not 7 years ago, and cite where you got those figures. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e
VIP
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Russia is surviving on oil and resources, not technology. They have the education and they have the people, but cannot get a demand for their product. USA puts a dead horse between a piece stale bread and sells many McDonald's Hamburgers. Why? |
Cuz McDonalds is a private company that has its own resources to spend on propaganda which is why McDonalds is so popular. It has nothing to do with the US government. The only thing the US government wants of McD's is that it pays its taxes on time. If Lada wanted to market its cars worldwide, it would do the same thing like what Skoda of Czech Rep did. Or generally what all of the Japanese car companies did and do now.
2. Food is a universal money maker. Weapons aren't . A lot of countries produce their own weapons or buy the trademarks off of Russia and the USA, tweak it to their needs, and produce it themselves. India has its own version of the AK47 as does China, as Israel has its own version of the F-15 and the M-16. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
El-Casey
Lounge Lizard
Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Posts: 87
Location: Мелбурн, Флорида США
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
To be fair, E, the government (especially current administration) does plenty to generate and disseminate propaganda singing the praises of rampant consumerism! Sure, the private (technically public, since they're traded on the stock market) companies do plenty of this as well, but it can definitely be tacked down as a cultural thing in the US, as well as an economic one.
**EDIT: I'm pretty sure China never paid for a license to produce Kalashnikov designs, nor Israel (Israeli AK = Galil. Basically a 5.56mm AK). India and Pakistan most likely paid for all necessary design and production licenses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e
VIP
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Remember the old saying - You can run, but you cannot hide Laughing ?
Thanks Very Happy I agree with your buddy, it is a blast and I do enjoy flying the "little stuff"! No computer to think for you and correct you, laxed regulations regarding flights (only if VFR, ofcourse) Razz Yeah |
Yeah, he rents a cessna, gasses it up and goes anywhere he wants. And its much faster than a car. We've gotta go flying sometime! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e
VIP
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | To be fair, E, the government (especially current administration) does plenty to generate and disseminate propaganda singing the praises of rampant consumerism! Sure, the private (technically public, since they're traded on the stock market) companies do plenty of this as well, but it can definitely be tacked down as a cultural thing in the US, as well as an economic one. |
Yeah I remember how it was after 9/11: DON'T BE BLUE, EVERYONE GO SHOPPING. BUY AND CONSUME BECAUSE FEARLESS LEADER BUSH SAYS SO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vic
Talk Show Host
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 298
Location: Moscow, Russian Federation
|
| Posted: Mon May 02, 2005 11:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Paul, I am not saying that your source is wrong, but Sukhoi recieved a little over 1 Billion U.S. from India and Malaysia last year. Maybe this source does not consider the fact that both India and China produce Sukhoi aircraft under liscence and supervision from Sukhoi representatives? This could be similar with other countries producing under liscence. Does this count as an export? In any case, in 2003 Sukhoi did have a slow-ish year, but I still do not understand how they got $134. Do they calculate profit only? As in price sold minus the constuction costs? A Su-27MK costs around $30Mil and Malaysia recieved half a squadron in 2003.
| e wrote: |
Yeah, he rents a cessna, gasses it up and goes anywhere he wants. And its much faster than a car. We've gotta go flying sometime! |
Nice! If he has enough cash, he should look into a partnership. You can get a 1/6 share for just over $7,000. Next time I am in the U.S. or you come here we should get in touch and go up for a flight. Regarding the recklessness thing though - when I was flying in Canada this summer, the pilot I was with (my friend and the owner of the aircraft - a Cessna 172) got the wise idea to "buzz" some of the farmers that were on the final to the small airport where we were doing touch and go's. It was pretty entartaining, we would "accidently" come in too low on the final. The best part was that there was a road 150m from the threshhold of the runway and there was a guy (in his late teens probably) there riding his bike. Apparently he did not see/hear us coming untill we were about 15m away from him and a bit to the side (and at a height of about 5m, when we should have been at 11m). This guy reacted by slamming the brakes and going off the road and probably crashing into the airport's chain-link fence. That is probably the only irrisponsible thing that I did that was on purpose
Vic |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wwwadim
Lounge Lizard
Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Posts: 145
Location: Moscow Region, M-7 Highway, Noginsk
|
| Posted: Tue May 03, 2005 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| e wrote: | | Quote: | | Russia is surviving on oil and resources, not technology. They have the education and they have the people, but cannot get a demand for their product. USA puts a dead horse between a piece stale bread and sells many McDonald's Hamburgers. Why? |
Cuz McDonalds is a private company that has its own resources to spend on propaganda which is why McDonalds is so popular. It has nothing to do with the US government. The only thing the US government wants of McD's is that it pays its taxes on time. If Lada wanted to market its cars worldwide, it would do the same thing like what Skoda of Czech Rep did. Or generally what all of the Japanese car companies did and do now.
2. Food is a universal money maker. Weapons aren't . A lot of countries produce their own weapons or buy the trademarks off of Russia and the USA, tweak it to their needs, and produce it themselves. India has its own version of the AK47 as does China, as Israel has its own version of the F-15 and the M-16. |
Plus
And the mister Kalashnikov - the inventor of AK-47 - now is living at Izhevsk town (City?) in a small 2-bed room appartment in an old building. His annual income in not more than 3000 dollars and he has no car and the Russian Government dosn't care of him at all!
Now he is 78 years old, AFAIK. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e
VIP
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: Tue May 03, 2005 1:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Plus
And the mister Kalashnikov - the inventor of AK-47 - now is living at Izhevsk town (City?) in a small 2-bed room appartment in an old building. His annual income in not more than 3000 dollars and he has no car and the Russian Government dosn't care of him at all!
Now he is 78 years old, AFAIK. |
Now that's just sad!
And Vic, you're on! But i'm just gonna duck for now everytime I see a Cessna; it just might be you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
El-Casey
Lounge Lizard
Joined: 15 Apr 2005
Posts: 87
Location: Мелбурн, Флорида США
|
| Posted: Tue May 03, 2005 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm, pretty sure old Mikhail makes more than that. He was guest at the SHOT Show in '03 or '04 in Orlando. Being a big firearms enthusiast myself and having an uncle in the industry, I heard about this. My uncle and father went to the show, while I slaved at work for a shitty wage and never got to meet Comrade Kalashnikov. 
Speaking of which, there has GOT to be a place near(ish) Moscow where I can pay, say, $100 and shoot AK-47, AK-74, RPK, PKM, DPShK, etc. Right? Maybe it's more than US$100, but I know I can do this somewhere. If you can fly in a goddamn MiG-25, you can go shoot machineguns, and this is what I want to do on some weekend! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jutrzenkapolska
VIP
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Posts: 534
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vic
Talk Show Host
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 298
Location: Moscow, Russian Federation
|
| Posted: Wed May 11, 2005 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| El Casey wrote: | I'm, pretty sure old Mikhail makes more than that. He was guest at the SHOT Show in '03 or '04 in Orlando. Being a big firearms enthusiast myself and having an uncle in the industry, I heard about this. My uncle and father went to the show, while I slaved at work for a shitty wage and never got to meet Comrade Kalashnikov.
Speaking of which, there has GOT to be a place near(ish) Moscow where I can pay, say, $100 and shoot AK-47, AK-74, RPK, PKM, DPShK, etc. Right? Maybe it's more than US$100, but I know I can do this somewhere. If you can fly in a goddamn MiG-25, you can go shoot machineguns, and this is what I want to do on some weekend! |
Well, you can go to a shooting range and shoot come handguns for pretty cheap. They do not have automatic rifles there. However, at my cottage in Abkhazia (where everybody has a AK-47 rifle as reservists) You can go out any time to anywhere and take a few shots! Bullets (off centered) cost 3 roubles each - it is legal if you are a reservist in Abkhazia.
Fighter jets can be bought easily - it is no big deal really. MiG25's are over 40 years old. http://www.controller.com/listings/forsale/detail.asp?OHID=1084742
(Its a 21, but still) If you have $150,000 lying around, give me a call and I will take it up for you
Vic |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spartacus
Frequent Guest
Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 76
|
| Posted: Fri May 13, 2005 5:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Vic wrote: | Mogsfan - Syria and Iran? Terrorist states? I think that the largest and most prominent terrorist state in the world is the United States of America. As a matter of fact if you look at the meaning of the word "terrorism", the United States under Bush pretty much falls into the category.
Terrorism- Using terror (fear brought upon people by cruel and violent acts) as means to attain a political objective.
I would say an illegal attack upon a sovreign state of Iraq, in the process inciting fear and commiting cruel acts against it's citizens constitutes terrorism. |
Terrorism is commiting violence against civilians for political purposes. I know that communists and liberals (most liberals are too poorly educated or mentally ill to realize that they are the same thing) may like to change the meanings of words when it suits them, but thats not logical argumentation, it is dishonesty.
We spent billions avoiding civilian casualties.
| Quote: |
Now the United States is trying to inspite fear in the citizens of another sovreign nation - Iran. Iran and Syria are NOT terrorist states, we are NOT funding terrorism. We are selling Syria weapons that can be used to defend it's sovreignty (Most likely from a terrorist nation, such as the United States). We are aiding Iran in building a Nuclear Power Station, but under the condition that they give up ALL used up Plutonium rods, so this excludes pretty much any chance that they will be made into Nuclear weapons or dirty bombs. |
The USSR supported dozens of terrorist groups to distract and harrass the free nations. All those European terrorist groups, the Bader Meinhof Gang, Red Brigade, etc. were financed by the USSR. Syria and Iran are also terrorist states, unless you think Hamas and Hezbolla are just Boy Scouts in different uniforms. The USSR made ties with terrorist groups and terrorist nations for political reasons, now russia still sells them weapons for pure greedy reasons. Iran has stated that they with to develop nukes, and they have stated that they would sell them. They also have admitted to giving intelligence on US targets to terrorists. We busted a Iranian spy shooting video and taking pictures of bridges and tunnels in the eastern US
| Quote: |
ALL U.S. claims that Iran is creating weapons of mass destruction are baseless accusations They have no proof - just like Iraq. The Labeling of ALL MUSLIM NATIONS AS TERRORIST NATIONS is not the best way to go about it. Terrorist does not = muslim. |
Who said terrorists=mulsims? You cannot win this argument on facts, so you try to put words in our mouths so you can refute them. That is dishonest.
| Quote: | Just for the record, the United States of America has very good relations with a country that has many (proven) direct links to Islamic terrorist organisations, it is Saudi Arabia. Unlike the many baseless accusations of "terrorism" in Iran and Syria. It is there, but the terrorism is coming from the United States. Ironic isn't it?
Vic |
Saudi is in the process of reform. They suck human-rights wise, and we should not have played patty-cake with them for so long, but the alternative would have been imperialism to secure oil supplies.
Just keep in mind that all the head-chopper-offer type people in the world use AK-47's. That alone tells you where these guys get(got) their support. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spartacus
Frequent Guest
Joined: 03 Oct 2004
Posts: 76
|
| Posted: Fri May 13, 2005 5:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bush cannot force Putin to do anything, so he has to be gentle and that means making the hardest pushes behind the scenes, while allowing Putin to save face. Bush did get pretty tough on the fact that the end of WWII marked the beginning of Soviet occupation of much of Europe, because whenever a western leader acts like a wussy (think Jimmy Carter), the bad guys take advantage of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
