• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Russian Military’s Tighter Purse-strings to Impact Operations

Rogue Valley

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
94,262
Reaction score
82,620
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Russian Military’s Tighter Purse-strings to Impact Operations – Think Tank

2C4F8E0800000578-0-image-a-73_1442244168264.jpg


The Moscow Times
5/2/18

Russian military spending fell by a fifth last year, its first decline in nearly two decades, with tighter purse-strings likely to affect Moscow's military activity ahead, a report by defense think tank SIPRI showed on Wednesday. Russia has flexed its military muscles during the last few years with its 2014 annexation of Ukraine's Crimea and deep involvement in the Syrian conflict serving as examples of its more belligerent stance. But while global military spending rose one percent to $1,739 billion last year, Russia's fell 20 percent in real terms to $66.3 billion, the report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) showed.

President Vladimir Putin has also called for higher living standards and higher spending on social infrastructure, such as healthcare and education. Some government officials have called for lower military spending to free up funds for such initiatives. The Kremlin said in March Russia would cut its defense budget to less than 3 percent of gross domestic product within the next five years. The United States remains the world's biggest military spender by far, accounting for 35 percent of global expenditures, more than the next seven highest-spending countries combined. Its defense budget was unchanged in 2016 and 2017 but a significant rise is expected this year. China's spending as a share of world military expenditure rose to 13 percent last year from 5.8 percent in 2008.
Click to expand...

Cutting back on military spending to initiate/buttress domestic improvements is a sound economic move at this time.

Related: SIPRI | Global military spending remains high at $1.7 trillion
 
WillyPete said:
Say what you like about the Russians, they aren't scared of making big changes.

Can you imagine the uproar just the suggestion of a 20% cut in defense spending would cause in the U.S. ?
Click to expand...

Would cause in Congress. Too many lobbyists and too much pork to even dream of cutting back 20%.

The beast must be fed.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Would cause in Congress. Too many lobbyists and too much pork to even dream of cutting back 20%.

The beast must be fed.
Click to expand...

That combined with blind nationalism. To even suggest such a thing means you hate the troops and America like Kaepernick.
 
Depends on where that 20 percent comes from.

Doing so in certain areas would create entire ghost towns, especially in the north east.
 
WillyPete said:
Say what you like about the Russians, they aren't scared of making big changes.

Can you imagine the uproar just the suggestion of a 20% cut in defense spending would cause in the U.S. ?
Click to expand...

Russia isn't cutting military because it wants to, it is cutting military because it has no choice.

Their annual budget of $295 billion means that, even AFTER a 20% cut, they are spending roughly 22% of their budget on the military, or 5% of their GDP.

In the US the government spends about 14% of the budget on the military, or 3.2% of GDP.
 
jmotivator said:
Russia isn't cutting military because it wants to, it is cutting military because it has no choice.

Their annual budget of $295 billion means that, even AFTER a 20% cut, they are spending roughly 22% of their budget on the military, or 5% of their GDP.

In the US the government spends about 14% of the budget on the military, or 3.2% of GDP.
Click to expand...

3.5% to be more precise. Yet that is more than the next dozen nations combined.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Would cause in Congress. Too many lobbyists and too much pork to even dream of cutting back 20%.

The beast must be fed.
Click to expand...

Yup, there's that government of the sheeple by the sheeple for the sheeple Ole Dishonest Abe mesmerized y'all with.
 
jmotivator said:
Russia isn't cutting military because it wants to, it is cutting military because it has no choice.

Their annual budget of $295 billion means that, even AFTER a 20% cut, they are spending roughly 22% of their budget on the military, or 5% of their GDP.

In the US the government spends about 14% of the budget on the military, or 3.2% of GDP.
Click to expand...

And the fact that the US uses this money, your money, to murder people the world over and steal the bread from the mouths of children, when the US isn't killing them, bothers you not at all.

Isn't this, in fact, the case?
 
Odd how some highly misguided folks think the truth equates to hate. This seems to be an affliction that effects a lot of Americans.
 
Rogue Valley said:
In another thread, he was telling me where I've been :screwy
Click to expand...

You present a lie, RV. You know what I said. It revolves around you spreading lies. When I pointed out your lie, in bold and in red, you switched to this diversion. Why don't you address this in that thread?
 
Rogue Valley said:
3.5% to be more precise. Yet that is more than the next dozen nations combined.
Click to expand...

And? If we used the same "sound economic reasoning" as Russia the US military budget would be $900+ billion.

If you removed the military spending from the US budget the US spends approximately $10,000 per citizen while Russia spends... $1,500.
 
camlok said:
And the fact that the US uses this money, your money, to murder people the world over and steal the bread from the mouths of children, when the US isn't killing them, bothers you not at all.

Isn't this, in fact, the case?
Click to expand...

It is, in fact, not the case. Whose bread are they stealing? :roll:
 
camlok said:
You present a lie, RV. You know what I said. It revolves around you spreading lies. When I pointed out your lie, in bold and in red, you switched to this diversion. Why don't you address this in that thread?
Click to expand...

You have no idea where I'm from, where I've lived, or where I've been.

You have no working knowledge of the personal lives of anyone on this board beyond what they willingly divulge.
 
Rogue Valley said:
You have no idea where I'm from, where I've lived, or where I've been.
Click to expand...

And your lame point/lie means what?

You have no working knowledge of the personal lives of anyone on this board beyond what they willingly divulge.
Click to expand...

Why aren't you discussing this in the thread where it was brought to light? DISHONEST
 
camlok said:
And your lame point/lie means what?



Why aren't you discussing this in the thread where it was brought to light? DISHONEST
Click to expand...

I am. You're just not paying attention, as usual.
 
Quote Originally Posted by Rogue Valley
You have no idea where I'm from, where I've lived, or where I've been.

camlok: And your lame point/lie means what?

Quote Originally Posted by Rogue Valley
You have no working knowledge of the personal lives of anyone on this board beyond what they willingly divulge.

camlok: Why aren't you discussing this in the thread where it was brought to light? DISHONEST



Rogue Valley said:
I am. You're just not paying attention, as usual.
Click to expand...

In this very thread you provide clear cut evidence, with your own pen, that you are lying.

RV: [in Post #13 of this thread] "In another thread, he was telling me where I've been"

That thread, that you refer to in the quote above, which shows you are lying, is called, "Name the ****iest countries in the world". Post #100 of

https://www.debatepolitics.com/inte...e-iest-countries-world-10.html#post1068475921
 
Last edited:
KevinKohler said:
Depends on where that 20 percent comes from.

Doing so in certain areas would create entire ghost towns, especially in the north east.
Click to expand...

It is probably in their aquisitions and r&d, russia has been expanding and modernizing their post soviet military rapidly in the last decade, And their modern stuff ain't cheap, even cutting out bloated military industrial complex since their defense companies are mostly state owned. For example a new russian su35 costs between 25-60 million a jet, depending on who estimates as russia never gives exact figures but does leave hints. the research area would be things like their t-50/su-57 which is mostly operational with it's engines hitting issues so they rely on the same engine as the su-35, also they relied on outside funding for a project that big to get done that darn fast, india pulled out as a backer, and instead chose to buy older su-35 and 30 jets as well as mig 29's while also using their in house designed jet, they switched half way funding it deciding quantity over quality, and with indias budget issues I would not blame them, they are a large country with a large military and gearing it ain't cheap even with cheap gear.


Russia probably will not pull the plug on the su-57 but likely put it on the backburner and focus on more upgrades to other jets in the su-27 flanker class. The other big cut will probably be the t-14 armata, Supposedly better than an abrahms, however they are extremely expensive even by western standards, and they already have transmission problems with their direct shift gearbox. They will likely cancel new production and aquisition and instead focus on testing out the ones they have for flaws, maybe by the time they get the budget for the numbers they need they will have fixed the flaws, but for a budget strapped russia the older gen tanks grant them armor superiority by sheer numbers over the west, combined with their upgradeability, an older t-60 or t-90 tank may not be a one on one match for a western tank, but russia does have numbers on their side, while a budget for mass produced super advanced tanks is not on their side.


End result they will suspend their pet projects and slow down building of existing projects and research, but I doubt that will make them any less formidable, they have went leaps and bounds ahead of where they were when the soviet union collapsed and their military was a shell of it's former glory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom