Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lwarmonger
We don't need Russia's manufactured products, because we produce more, better. And so there is nothing we can offer Russia, short of outright bribes.
|
I guess you did not get my point. Who cares do you need these products or not. If you don't buy them there are others to buy them. And they need them. Very simple.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lwarmonger
And all we have to do is "follow our interests" in other pro-Moscow regimes in Central Asia to upset Russia's sphere of influence..
|
You already do it up to your possibility. But you are limited. To play with central asian regimes you need to accept those bustards who rule them. But this is against your principles (which I admire). On the other side revolutions in the regione are against your interest..... your Central Asian policy now in deep crisis. I follow it on daily basis. There is only one thing you may to do to help CA nations and reduce Russian influence - independent pipeline routes... like Baku - Ceihan.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lwarmonger
There governments won't... but their people will.
|
I traveled to all of those states many times in a year. Like this year I was in Georgia, 3 times in Ukraine, 4 times in Kazakhtan, 2 times in Uzbekistan, once in Kyrgyzstan, and once in Belorussia. (in general I travel a lot in FSU and globally). I am not Russian so people talk to me freely about what they think of Russians. The are only one territory where Russians are really hated - Lvov region of Ukraine. There is a strong tention in Georgia. In general many people are quite nostalgic about Russian rule, or very friendly about them.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lwarmonger
Joke is on you buddy. The Soviet Union couldn't manage things in Afghanistan, and I don't think the Russian government had anything to laugh about in Chechnya. We could arrange similar situations all over Russia's southern frontier if we truly wanted to. I'm not talking about selling weapons.... I'm talking about giving them.
|
The weapons are not really problem for Chechens... because Russian soldiers sell them at much cheaper price than you can even imagine
and supply them regularly.
As for other mentioned nations. These nations have no shortage of simple weapons but shortage of advanced weapons like helicopters, aircraft, radars, SAMs etc.... giving this would enhace them. But I don't really see how it will harm Russians. They still depend on Russia up to the ears..... look on average around 60% of trade ballance is with Russia..... and around half of all capital investments come from there. The state which punished itself bitter was Georgia - the country is in deep powerty since Russia banned only one of their products - organges..... if Russia bans their wine and cuts off electricity for overdue debt they are just doomed. Most of them really depend on trading with Russia.......
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lwarmonger
And do you think our current administration is particularly worried about Russian conventional forces? 
And are there nukes in Cuba now? We had a test of wills, and Russia lost. Russia is a lot weaker compared to the United States today then it was back then (if you honestly believe that Russia will escalate to nuclear weapons for Iran...). |
There are so many bad consequences of the war - like confiscation of emeny's property on your territory. Let's say LUKOIL loses all of its refuel stations in US. But US companies will lose all of their oil fields in Russia..... you know they simply don't let your administration to do this stupid thing.
In addition to that - conventional war with Russia will end with smoke over the plannet. Nobody will even dare of this risk for hypothetical Iranian bombs.
As for Cuba. There was a trade. US pooled off a whoe class of missiles from Europe. Russia pooled off from Cuba. They settled this without direct encounter....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lwarmonger
If we see it in an Iranian harbor, we sink it. Nothing illegal about that. You enter a warzone, you take your chances.
The only revenge Russia could exact would be nuclear. Conventionally, Russia would lose hands down. A nuclear conflict we would both lose... however it would not be the US starting that..
|
I doubt that first revenge would be nuclear. Russia can send a regiment of T-160 and sink few of your ships in Persina gulf from Astrakhan base.... with a large salvo of 3,000 km range missiles. Lets say 15 bombers shoot 10 missiles each - this would make a salvo of 150 missiles..... This is not a Pacific Ocean.... targeting and positioning of groups is really easy in Persian gulf even with once in a day mode.... you can't escape there + Iran will give its base for Tu-142 reconnaisance aircraft.....
No need for Russia to fight in Europe..... in case of war Russia can help Iran on land war with you..... all those tanks/aircraft/artillery guns roasting now in Siberia you meet you in Iran/Iraq border...... Make sure that you deploy enough soldiers there to counter an armed shia riot. The stuff may be easily delivered through Casian Sea.... Russian piliots will go to Iranian to protect their skys. And we all see what is really cooler - Eagle or Flanker
Wow.... lots is fantasy ha? Actually this will never happen. You will not sink a most lousy of Russia ships in neutral waters. Declaration of war zone does not release from responsibility for sinking ships here. If you did it you call for a war. Nobody will ever do it......
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lwarmonger
Clinton adminstration... Bush administration. Very different.
|
Every politician understands this even Bush - the attack of Russian civilian cargo aircraft would have resulted in much more harm to US than letting it go.... Same regarding transport ships. Same was with Russian deliveries to Vietnam and Chinese railroad to Vietnam. While sorting out small problems don't mess with really big ones....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lwarmonger
We don't need to just use A-10's. We have a large number of other aircraft in our inventory, which are perfectly capable of taking out vehicles.
Meh. They could consider this repayment for not supporting us in the last war. They will hardly go to war with the United States over it. And I doubt we would have to officially grant statehood to the Kurds (although I am in favor of doing just that). Just continue to ship them weapons for free, and use American troops on their soil to guarantee their protection against the Iranians, Turks, and Iraqis, and we're both happy.
|
I guess you don't understand what Kurds really want. What ever they do it is all about getting closer to one goal - INDEPENDENT KURDISTAN
Tor-M1 are easy to knock out. They are too short-range. But they are cheap... and the large number of them.... As I told earlier the whole purpose of Russian policy is to enhance Iran only margnally. To keep it dependent on future help..... once the help would be neede Russians will think if they want to go further.
The S-300PMU is very mobile.... it can be delivered by a cargo aircraft and stationed in just few minutues.... Iranians are in Moscow for last 4 years.... they study how to use Russian stuff.