Oh Shit.
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7947824.stm

Happy happy joy joy?

So what? In Russia as well as in Europe and USA large capitalists rules the country's policy, those buisenessmen have major foreign assets as well as European companies have large buisnesses in Russia so nobody is interested in war. Besides remember how much people work in armaments industry, they should eat something you know... and those specialists are being underpaid and even unpaid for 2 and more months because their plant's production isn't in demand. Do you know that the Doctor's of Natural Scienses average salary is only about $500? Any way Russia's military butget is wa-a-a-y smaller than, for example, China's or USA's.

And any of that justifies raising military expenditure...how?

Yes, it justifies. Scientists and specialists working in military research and production will save their workplaces. Besides armaments trade is a major income source for the country, why do you think USA have such military butgets?

That logic is dumb, physicists can do more than build A-bombs just like blacksmiths can do more than make swords. The government should use the money that they're spending on the military to boost the economy in other ways.

EDIT: Oh and 'It's alright for them to do it because we're doing it' is probably the second most fallacious argument in existence. The best way to deter is to lower stockpiling, and somebody has to start.

But isn't that strange to you that governments of developed countries choose "spending money on the military"? Even Israel is selling arms. Armaments market brings more income than every other branch of economy. Also remember that military research was and IS the best boost for overall scienctific progress. Or why US military ordered an aircraft 79 milion dollars worth? Why have US government spent the money for the research and developement programme but not for "supporting economy"?

The answer is that military production and armaments trade DOES SUPPORT the economy!!!

Granted; conflict breeds progress but it shouldn't be conflict with such high stakes.

Is my real problem here, there really is no justification for nuclear weapons, let alone more nuclear weapons. Not in any country. Not ever. If the UN won't allow it in Iran then why should it allow it in Russia, or anywhere else for that matter? The third world war defused itself and the current fourth world war demands less from obvious bouts of heroism.

Just because something is the easiest thing to do does not necessitate it as the best thing. If that were true then we'd stop looking for renewable energy sources and keep our over reliance on Fossil Fuels.

Oh wait...

Up until the day people decide to make use of their investments, and probably over disputes about the armaments trade of other nations. I don't need to give you examples.

Yes, dealing in the tools of death is a lucrative business. And a country should have the ability to defend itself. However, justifiable defense measures and the ability to deal total annihilation are two very different things.

And it's budget. You make it sound like a gay guy from 4chan just got lucky.

I would have thought that dealing in arms would be the last thing Russia wanted, an arms race isn't exactly what we want repeated ... because of the terror it inspired.

You know ... the Cold war.

Didn't we fix that with a fake alien invasion? No. It was an attack from a blue man, right? What was it, again?

I live in the UK

So what you guys get up to over the pond usually reaches my ears in a distorted manner...

Go back to bed.

I imagine Russia probably wants to get over its status as 'Earth's Running Joke' by proving it still has a wang to spin around.

YAY COLD WAR TWO.

I think some of us might be missing the point here. Admiral Zaarin is right about certain things, with a couple of notations. Increasing the production of weapons is one thing, but it's not going to render any revenue unless you're selling it to a third party. This is how the weapons industry works. You invest a certain amount of money into increasing your stockpile of weapons (nukes excluded, since they're not sold the same way firearms are, I hope...) and then you sell parts of that stockpile to a third-world country or any other soon-to-be dictatorship that needs to be overthrown. Revenue generated.

This has been the case with Russian arms for quite some time - American too. Look at most of the NATO-countries - they have adopted weapons and military vehicles that are manufactured in the US, by US companies. *cough* Norway for instance, who just recently
chose the JSF over the Gripen.

More to the point - the fact that Russia is going to use the process of increasing their arms production as a cloak to say that they're about to man up for a 'potential threat', when in fact they're just generating more income is a perfect example of how to make money and become politically stronger without actually firing a single round.

It's just politics and psychology, I guess.

PREPARE FOR WAR, COMRADES!

FOR THE MOTHERLAAAAAAAAAAAND

Maybe back in WWII when everyone out of job due to the Depression suddenly got one on the tank, ship, and ammo-assembling lines. But I'd like to think that during these times military production is one of lesser factors on the economy.

Russia has as much right to increased military preparedness as the United States and China do.

Alcar...

Fixed.

I'm pretty sure it was a disembodied blue penis. Never erect.

I saw Watchmen and I almost came it was so good. Specifically JEHschach. of course i have my gripes wya wya

Anyway, I think it's good that the Russkies are getting nukes again. That way, we'll freak out again. Last time we did that over commies, a bunch of post-apocalyptic movies/books/etc. got made. And that is a good thing.

Plus, I live near a bomb shelter. I wanna see if it works.

I still hold that movie would have involved ten times more awesome if his penis swinged about as he moved.

It did. At times.

Meh, as long as NATO doesn't cross the border it should all be fine.