What's next?, next war Romanians could be part of

And you think the US will have no economic problems in the next 50 years? Add to that uncertainty the fact that in 50 years' time military equipment needs a lot of overhauling and replacement. The more the US uses its military in distant wars or deployments the more it has to deal with wear and tear. Meanwhile estimates are that by 2030 China will be the world's biggest economy. So as China affords to invest more in the military the military gap between the two will gradually shrink.

And you think the US will have no economic problems in the next 50 years? Add to that uncertainty the fact that in 50 years' time military equipment needs a lot of overhauling and replacement. The more the US uses its military in distant wars or deployments the more it has to deal with wear and tear. Meanwhile estimates are that by 2030 China will be the world's biggest economy. So as China affords to invest more in the military the military gap between the two will gradually shrink.

It is also about the efficiency of using the money spent for defense.
In this moment the U.S. indeed is spending on defense more than the rest of the world combined, but this does not give a complete picture.
An American combat helicopter used to cost about 10 years ago 6 times more than a Russian combat helicopter, but this did not mean it was 6 times better. Indeed, on one to one check the Russian helicopter was not as good as the American helicopter, but it was "almost there", so some countries preferred to buy 6 Russian helicopters instead one American, for a given amount of money.
If you start to compare the cost with Chinese equipment, it is even more obvious. The Chinese equipment may not be "first class", but when needed it will do its job.

In countries tightly controlled by government the profit of the military manufacturers is always under scrutiny. In America the profit of the private manufacturer can be a very big fat slice, and the money funneled into profit do not become useful equipment.

This post has been edited by Florin on June 04, 2014 04:35 pm

It is correct that US stuffs are many times (much) more expensive then lets say Russian one (the European ones are as well expensive). However, US spend I think something around 5% of its budget for military during Cold War, and USSR, having at most half of US GDP had spend 25 % of its budget for defense and basically colapsed economically when Americans pushed more with that "Star Wars" program.

In the same time some of bigger money spent for research and development bring results in advancement of technologies. An F-16 engine may have a 4000 hours functioning cycle, an older Mig-29 just 400 hours. This mean Russians needed to build 10 times more engines, even if they were more cheap then American ones.
Then more money floating around tend to atract people from foreign countries as well, to work there, depleting their countries of "brains" and adding that to the other side.

Another example, the new Russian SLBM Bulava have a failure rates around 40% during tests (they delayied for this the Borei submarines program too). And that percent was officially recognized, some think that for real was even bigger.

Then comes the stealth, were Americans are far in front, and it might be a capability that can help win wars even against stronger oponents.

It doesnt mean that Russian (or others) stuffs arent sometimes better then American ones, even if they are much cheaper

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2013080...nly-8-Carriers-

Udar give you an answer.
And, to be a main power today, you must achieve some items. First, you need to be a powerful nuclear power. Second, you must control the seas. I remind you that USA have a military fleet that is stronger that all the next 13 fleets combined, from whom eleven are their allies. Third, you must have an important submarine fleet, and not anytype, but nuclear subs. After that, you must be in frontline of military technology, including space, sthealth and drones.
Do you think there is some important competiitor for USA in next decades?

Is yet to be seen how many they will have at the end. Is more like a proposition (the article is from almost a year ago, way before Crimea crisis and even the another rise of China agressivenes in her area) and is not nailed. I understand members of US parliament already complained about the possible shrink of carrier fleet.

Which is anyway bigger then all other in existance today, both as numbers and as capabilities of single ships (their size, air wings and such).

Wikipedia (I know, not the best source but dont have time to search more now) said they have planned 10 ships of a new super-carriers class, however, Americans have planned as well 11 amphibious assault ships that can carry all sort of helicopters but as well the future F-35 B (short take off vertical landing variant replacing Harriers).
Such a ship even if is not considered a carrier it is as big as French or Indian aircraft carriers.

The only ones able to improve their capabilities seem to be China, but they still have a lot to do until to come close to US fleet, let alone to surpass it.
Japan try to counteract that by building some "destroyers" that actually have close similarities with US "amphibious assault ships" and will be able to have a fleet of F-35 B on board (I think Japan already send an order for those planes, not sure).

In rest Americans still rule by far at submarines, airplanes, fighters, bombers (not long ago was a hot debate and controversies about some photos showing a supposedly new triangular plane seen in Texas and another US state), drones (X-47B or RQ-180 for ex.) and even spacecrafts, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37 and various theories about its possible missions, sure, not officially recognized) and even missiles (stealthy cruise missiles, advanced research in hypersonic cruise missiles of which prototypes were already tested, more reliable ICBM or SLBM).

As things look now I for one wouldnt dismiss them yet, nor in the medium or even long future (maybe another century or so)

Thanks, udar, but the question asked before remains.

So, what do you think about the recent developments in Ukraine. It appears from all EU countries the Romanian president reacted the most radically calling Russian government supporters of terrorists. Meanwhile EU is thinking what new sanctions to adopt against Russia, like the previous ones had any significance.

And what happened to Mr. Cristian Negrea? I expected him to be more active these days

He might have fallen victim to one of his own conspiracy theories...

Gen. Dénes

See this link:
http://rt.com/news/177740-ukrainian-military-russia-refuge/

Same event from BBC's point of view:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28637569

Another link from BBC, more in tune with the first link that is from RT:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28652096

This post has been edited by Florin on August 05, 2014 06:05 am

It looks that he is back:

http://www.cristiannegrea.ro/geopolitica/2...mele-concluzii/

At the moment when the leadership of Soviet Union collapsed, the Red Army had at its disposal about 40,000 tanks. After the signature of the disarmament treaties at the beginning of 1990's, they had to get rid of these tanks.
The Russians decided that it was too expensive to dismantle them in factories or workshops, so they simply buried them into the ground - literally !

R I P !

It looks that he is back:

http://www.cristiannegrea.ro/geopolitica/2...mele-concluzii/

From article:
"Un alt perdant este Ucraina, desigur. A pierdut Crimeea, poziția dominantă în Marea Neagră. Cine stăpânește Crimeea, domină Marea Neagră. Mai mult, anul trecut, flota ucraineană se afla pe locul patru între puterile maritime militare din Marea Neagră, în urma celei rusești, turcești și române. Azi, practic nu mai există. Chiar și Bulgaria are o flotă maritimă militară superioară."

So according to him, before the events from the beginning of this year, in the days when Ukraine still had a navy, this navy nevertheless was weaker than the Romanian Navy.
Does he know something that I don't know ?

This post has been edited by Florin on August 08, 2014 07:50 am

Before March 2014, Romanian Navy was quoted that it was better that Ukrainian Navy.