Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   Even Russia is throwing shade at France over their submarine tantrum, pointing out that the French reneged on the Mistral deal and wouldn't know how to roll coal underwater if they tried   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Followup, shot  
•       •       •

2093 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Sep 2021 at 3:51 PM (3 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



68 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-09-20 3:08:12 PM  
Original Tweet:

 
2021-09-20 3:45:06 PM  
Crimea river
 
2021-09-20 3:48:28 PM  
They'll get over it.
 
2021-09-20 3:54:46 PM  
Twitter really is just a thing for cocksuckers.
 
2021-09-20 3:55:33 PM  
You know...I'm not upset that France didn't deliver 2 amphibious assault carriers to Russia.
 
2021-09-20 3:55:50 PM  
Whatever. Let the French biatch.
 
2021-09-20 3:56:19 PM  

dothemath: Twitter really is just a thing for cocksuckers.


No, that's Grindr.
 
2021-09-20 3:57:40 PM  

iheartscotch: You know...I'm not upset that France didn't deliver 2 amphibious assault carriers to Russia.


Me either, but it does make their outrage at this seem rather hypocritical.
 
2021-09-20 3:57:42 PM  
It was a huge contract that Australia backed out on, and France has a right to be angry about it.

But recalling ambassadors and pitching a huge fit in front of the entire international community? Have some self-respect, France.
 
2021-09-20 3:59:54 PM  

We Ate the Necco Wafers: It was a huge contract that Australia backed out on, and France has a right to be angry about it.

But recalling ambassadors and pitching a huge fit in front of the entire international community? Have some self-respect, France.


A huge contract for the sub equivalent of those gas station roller sandwiches....
 
2021-09-20 4:09:14 PM  
The Australians wrote a crappy contract that awareded a 50+ year long program to a single vendor based on whoever won the first phase, didn't have a complete design, wanted the program to serve as a massive infrastructure project, and let the dude who wrote that contract get hired by the French to design their bid, all after leaving the Japanese at the altar first.

The aussies screwed themselves at the outset and it was never going to work. The French had to realize it was doomed.
 
2021-09-20 4:11:52 PM  
I still remember when France left it's supposed allies holding the bag in Vietnam...
 
2021-09-20 4:11:57 PM  

We Ate the Necco Wafers: It was a huge contract that Australia backed out on, and France has a right to be angry about it.

But recalling ambassadors and pitching a huge fit in front of the entire international community? Have some self-respect, France.


Evidently France being diplomatic drama llamas is a bit of a thing at the moment.  There are news reports that France canceled scheduled talks between Marcon and Switzerland's President and Economic Affairs Minister Guy Parmelin due to the Swiss decision to buy F-35s over Eurofighters.  I've also seen speculation that Marcon is using the opportunity to do some grandstanding as he's in an election cycle right now.
 
2021-09-20 4:12:02 PM  

zbtop: The Australians wrote a crappy contract that awareded a 50+ year long program to a single vendor based on whoever won the first phase, didn't have a complete design, wanted the program to serve as a massive infrastructure project, and let the dude who wrote that contract get hired by the French to design their bid, all after leaving the Japanese at the altar first.

The aussies screwed themselves at the outset and it was never going to work. The French had to realize it was doomed.


lh3.googleusercontent.comView Full Size
 
2021-09-20 4:13:40 PM  
The Mistral deal was cancelled because of Russia's actions in the Crimea.  Not sure if France did anything like that recently.
 
2021-09-20 4:13:53 PM  

We Ate the Necco Wafers: It was a huge contract that Australia backed out on, and France has a right to be angry about it.

But recalling ambassadors and pitching a huge fit in front of the entire international community? Have some self-respect, France.


you realize we are talking about France, right?
 
2021-09-20 4:15:02 PM  
upload.wikimedia.orgView Full Size


/ Really bad movie about French submarines
 
2021-09-20 4:15:51 PM  

Mindlock: The Mistral deal was cancelled because of Russia's actions in the Crimea.  Not sure if France did anything like that recently.


Its fark, i can reach back to the Teutonic Age to justify my outrage.
 
2021-09-20 4:21:13 PM  

dothemath: Twitter really is just a thing for cocksuckers.


I thought that was Grindr?
 
2021-09-20 4:21:33 PM  
Slight tangent, but I bet Canada is next for nuclear subs, & as long as they've crossed that bridge, they might as well throw in some nuke icebreakers too.
 
2021-09-20 4:21:46 PM  
NTTAWWT
 
2021-09-20 4:24:23 PM  
So they are going with the hoagie design rather than the baguette configuration.  Good for them.
 
2021-09-20 4:25:04 PM  

J_Kushner: Slight tangent, but I bet Canada is next for nuclear subs, & as long as they've crossed that bridge, they might as well throw in some nuke icebreakers too.


Icebreakers are so last century.
 
2021-09-20 4:26:43 PM  

iheartscotch: You know...I'm not upset that France didn't deliver 2 amphibious assault carriers to Russia.


They tried to stick to the deal but Russia kept doing Russia things. Egypt ended up buying the ships if I recall. Both, I think. I doubt this was done without help from the US putting out feelers to find alternative buyers so France didn't get stuck with that bill.
 
2021-09-20 4:32:18 PM  

J_Kushner: Slight tangent, but I bet Canada is next for nuclear subs, & as long as they've crossed that bridge, they might as well throw in some nuke icebreakers too.


It has been a bit since we were last swindled by military contractors...
 
2021-09-20 4:38:09 PM  
Screw France.

I'll tell you what. When they stop using their national Intelligence assets to practice industrial espionage on their 'allies' only to turn their discoveries over to French firms I'll give a shiat about them.
 
2021-09-20 4:48:58 PM  

LewDux: Crimea river


I'm pretty sure they can Crimea River any time they want.

Also, cancelling the Mistrals got Russia it's money back and forced it to build their own Rollin Coal Mistralskis with Hookers and Blackjack:

https://navalpost.com/zaliv-kerch-pro​j​ect-23900-udc-amphibous-assault-ship/

Bonus: They could be called Sevastopol or Kerch (Crimean names).

Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-09-20 4:52:17 PM  

J_Kushner: Slight tangent, but I bet Canada is next for nuclear subs, & as long as they've crossed that bridge, they might as well throw in some nuke icebreakers too.


Just don't buy them from the UK
 
2021-09-20 4:52:49 PM  

J_Kushner: Slight tangent, but I bet Canada is next for nuclear subs, & as long as they've crossed that bridge, they might as well throw in some nuke icebreakers too.


I've seen speculation about this as well.  The Canadians have been looking to replace their current submarines for several years now, and Russia's increasing presence in the Arctic might make them decide to go for a nuclear propelled option.  Whatever mix of American and British technology the Australians get might be a good, and cost effective as far as nuclear submarines go, option for them.  Canada is also part of the five eyes, so that makes the transfer of the many sensitive technologies involved with nuke boats a lot easier.
 
2021-09-20 4:55:50 PM  
pbs.twimg.comView Full Size
: LewDux: Crimea river

I'm pretty sure they can Crimea River any time they want.

Also, cancelling the Mistrals got Russia it's money back and forced it to build their own Rollin Coal Mistralskis with Hookers and Blackjack:

https://navalpost.com/zaliv-kerch-proj​ect-23900-udc-amphibous-assault-ship/

Bonus: They could be called Sevastopol or Kerch (Crimean names).

Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

[Fark user image 423x750]
 
2021-09-20 4:57:56 PM  
France pooched the deal all on their own. Stupid bastards.
 
2021-09-20 4:59:04 PM  

zbtop: The Australians wrote a crappy contract that awareded a 50+ year long program to a single vendor based on whoever won the first phase, didn't have a complete design, wanted the program to serve as a massive infrastructure project, and let the dude who wrote that contract get hired by the French to design their bid, all after leaving the Japanese at the altar first.

The aussies screwed themselves at the outset and it was never going to work. The French had to realize it was doomed.


Aussie here.  farking up submarine contracts is an important part of our heritage and culture, which broad support all the way across the political spectrum.
 
2021-09-20 4:59:38 PM  

ColonelCathcart: Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea


You guys really are dazzlingly insecure, aren't you?

Someday you'll get over being excluded from Club Europe, I'm sure of it.
 
2021-09-20 5:00:00 PM  
They didn't fail to deliver Mestral, he chose to stay behind with the humans to experience their culture.

4.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size
 
2021-09-20 5:00:27 PM  

LewDux: [pbs.twimg.com image 257x257]: LewDux: Crimea river

I'm pretty sure they can Crimea River any time they want.

Also, cancelling the Mistrals got Russia it's money back and forced it to build their own Rollin Coal Mistralskis with Hookers and Blackjack:

https://navalpost.com/zaliv-kerch-proj​ect-23900-udc-amphibous-assault-ship/

Bonus: They could be called Sevastopol or Kerch (Crimean names).

Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

[Fark user image 423x750]


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-09-20 5:02:56 PM  

BigNumber12: ColonelCathcart: Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

You guys really are dazzlingly insecure, aren't you?

Someday you'll get over being excluded from Club Europe, I'm sure of it.


Nord Stream 2, tighter integration with Belarus, Import Substitution, record exports (in dollar terms, no less), and planting the flag back in the 'Stans says we're over it friend.
 
2021-09-20 5:09:43 PM  

ColonelCathcart: LewDux: Crimea river

I'm pretty sure they can Crimea River any time they want.

Also, cancelling the Mistrals got Russia it's money back and forced it to build their own Rollin Coal Mistralskis with Hookers and Blackjack:

https://navalpost.com/zaliv-kerch-proj​ect-23900-udc-amphibous-assault-ship/

Bonus: They could be called Sevastopol or Kerch (Crimean names).

Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

[Fark user image 423x750]


Unfortunate that Russian GDP, birth rates, and budgets are flatlined or going south with little sign of turning 'round. attempting to digest and incorporate Crimea into the Russian Federation turned out to be more expensive than y'all thought. Having an economic and export output that, outside of the defense and nuclear energy sectors, is basically identical to that of a developing nation the midst of industrialization makes realizing those ambitions difficult.
 
2021-09-20 5:09:56 PM  

Polish Hussar: We Ate the Necco Wafers: It was a huge contract that Australia backed out on, and France has a right to be angry about it.

But recalling ambassadors and pitching a huge fit in front of the entire international community? Have some self-respect, France.

Evidently France being diplomatic drama llamas is a bit of a thing at the moment.  There are news reports that France canceled scheduled talks between Marcon and Switzerland's President and Economic Affairs Minister Guy Parmelin due to the Swiss decision to buy F-35s over Eurofighters.  I've also seen speculation that Marcon is using the opportunity to do some grandstanding as he's in an election cycle right now.


The French have always been drama llamas, not just diplomatically.
 
2021-09-20 5:11:14 PM  

Dave2042: zbtop: The Australians wrote a crappy contract that awareded a 50+ year long program to a single vendor based on whoever won the first phase, didn't have a complete design, wanted the program to serve as a massive infrastructure project, and let the dude who wrote that contract get hired by the French to design their bid, all after leaving the Japanese at the altar first.

The aussies screwed themselves at the outset and it was never going to work. The French had to realize it was doomed.

Aussie here.  farking up submarine contracts is an important part of our heritage and culture, which broad support all the way across the political spectrum.


I mean, Australia wouldn't be the first, and won't be the last in that respect, they're just the one with the current doozy.
 
2021-09-20 5:15:49 PM  

ColonelCathcart: BigNumber12: ColonelCathcart: Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

You guys really are dazzlingly insecure, aren't you?

Someday you'll get over being excluded from Club Europe, I'm sure of it.

Nord Stream 2, tighter integration with Belarus, Import Substitution, record exports (in dollar terms, no less), and planting the flag back in the 'Stans says we're over it friend.


You could've fooled... everyone...
 
2021-09-20 5:16:38 PM  

whither_apophis: J_Kushner: Slight tangent, but I bet Canada is next for nuclear subs, & as long as they've crossed that bridge, they might as well throw in some nuke icebreakers too.

Just don't buy them from the UK


Well, don't buy used from the UK (*laughs Upholder-ishly*).  If you want a nuclear submarine ASAP, it actually looks like the British are your best option.  The American yards are fully booked for the near future with orders for the latest block of Virginia's and the new SSBN's.  However, with most of the hulls for the Royal Navy's Astute order laid down, BAE's submarine facility in the UK is going to have build slots coming open pretty shortly.
 
2021-09-20 5:17:36 PM  

zbtop: ColonelCathcart: LewDux: Crimea river

I'm pretty sure they can Crimea River any time they want.

Also, cancelling the Mistrals got Russia it's money back and forced it to build their own Rollin Coal Mistralskis with Hookers and Blackjack:

https://navalpost.com/zaliv-kerch-proj​ect-23900-udc-amphibous-assault-ship/

Bonus: They could be called Sevastopol or Kerch (Crimean names).

Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

[Fark user image 423x750]

Unfortunate that Russian GDP, birth rates, and budgets are flatlined or going south with little sign of turning 'round. attempting to digest and incorporate Crimea into the Russian Federation turned out to be more expensive than y'all thought. Having an economic and export output that, outside of the defense and nuclear energy sectors, is basically identical to that of a developing nation the midst of industrialization makes realizing those ambitions difficult.


$400,000,000,000 of exports (after the ruble has been devalued to drive exports, so in double terms this is like $800B of 2014 rubles) - of which half is not related to Petroleum. The 90's want their talking points back.

Fark user imageView Full Size


Complexity rank of 45 is not that bad, considering how much oil and gas is in the mix.
 
2021-09-20 5:18:52 PM  

Polish Hussar: J_Kushner: Slight tangent, but I bet Canada is next for nuclear subs, & as long as they've crossed that bridge, they might as well throw in some nuke icebreakers too.

I've seen speculation about this as well.  The Canadians have been looking to replace their current submarines for several years now, and Russia's increasing presence in the Arctic might make them decide to go for a nuclear propelled option.  Whatever mix of American and British technology the Australians get might be a good, and cost effective as far as nuclear submarines go, option for them.  Canada is also part of the five eyes, so that makes the transfer of the many sensitive technologies involved with nuke boats a lot easier.


They really should look into the two-fer. There may be ways to split the work between Canadian and Australian shipyards to speed up deliveries, even if more submarines are needed to fill both orders.
 
2021-09-20 5:23:02 PM  

ColonelCathcart: zbtop: ColonelCathcart: LewDux: Crimea river

I'm pretty sure they can Crimea River any time they want.

Also, cancelling the Mistrals got Russia it's money back and forced it to build their own Rollin Coal Mistralskis with Hookers and Blackjack:

https://navalpost.com/zaliv-kerch-proj​ect-23900-udc-amphibous-assault-ship/

Bonus: They could be called Sevastopol or Kerch (Crimean names).

Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

[Fark user image 423x750]

Unfortunate that Russian GDP, birth rates, and budgets are flatlined or going south with little sign of turning 'round. attempting to digest and incorporate Crimea into the Russian Federation turned out to be more expensive than y'all thought. Having an economic and export output that, outside of the defense and nuclear energy sectors, is basically identical to that of a developing nation the midst of industrialization makes realizing those ambitions difficult.

$400,000,000,000 of exports (after the ruble has been devalued to drive exports, so in double terms this is like $800B of 2014 rubles) - of which half is not related to Petroleum. The 90's want their talking points back.

[Fark user image 425x515]

Complexity rank of 45 is not that bad, considering how much oil and gas is in the mix.


Ah, an extraction economy, like Saudi Arabia or Venezuela
 
2021-09-20 5:27:54 PM  

ColonelCathcart: zbtop: ColonelCathcart: LewDux: Crimea river

I'm pretty sure they can Crimea River any time they want.

Also, cancelling the Mistrals got Russia it's money back and forced it to build their own Rollin Coal Mistralskis with Hookers and Blackjack:

https://navalpost.com/zaliv-kerch-proj​ect-23900-udc-amphibous-assault-ship/

Bonus: They could be called Sevastopol or Kerch (Crimean names).

Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

[Fark user image 423x750]

Unfortunate that Russian GDP, birth rates, and budgets are flatlined or going south with little sign of turning 'round. attempting to digest and incorporate Crimea into the Russian Federation turned out to be more expensive than y'all thought. Having an economic and export output that, outside of the defense and nuclear energy sectors, is basically identical to that of a developing nation the midst of industrialization makes realizing those ambitions difficult.

$400,000,000,000 of exports (after the ruble has been devalued to drive exports, so in double terms this is like $800B of 2014 rubles) - of which half is not related to Petroleum. The 90's want their talking points back.

[Fark user image 425x515]

Complexity rank of 45 is not that bad, considering how much oil and gas is in the mix.


Sure it's not all petroleum, but again, outside of Defense and Nuclear energy, it's mostly stuff pulled out of the ground.

Almost nobody is buying Russian automobiles, Russian civil aircraft, Russian electronics, Russian software, Russian services, etc.

Looking at countries with a similar outputs, we're looking at...Egypt, Colombia, Georgia, Sri Lanka, Armenia, Guatemala, Albania, Vietnam, El Salvador, etc.
 
2021-09-20 5:31:56 PM  

kbronsito: Polish Hussar: J_Kushner: Slight tangent, but I bet Canada is next for nuclear subs, & as long as they've crossed that bridge, they might as well throw in some nuke icebreakers too.

I've seen speculation about this as well.  The Canadians have been looking to replace their current submarines for several years now, and Russia's increasing presence in the Arctic might make them decide to go for a nuclear propelled option.  Whatever mix of American and British technology the Australians get might be a good, and cost effective as far as nuclear submarines go, option for them.  Canada is also part of the five eyes, so that makes the transfer of the many sensitive technologies involved with nuke boats a lot easier.

They really should look into the two-fer. There may be ways to split the work between Canadian and Australian shipyards to speed up deliveries, even if more submarines are needed to fill both orders.


I was listening to a podcast about the Aussie submarine deal over the weekend, and I think within the first 10 minutes one of the hosts brought up how he thought it would make a lot of sense for the Canadians to get involved with this.  Canada has a federal election today, I can't say I'd be shocked if there's an announcement about how they're investigating this once the politicians don't have to worry about their jobs for another couple years.  I do wonder how much Canada would be willing to invest in infrastructure beyond the cost of the boats themselves.  Unlike the Australians, would they just have the boats built abroad and rely on American shipyards for maintenance involving the nuclear bits?  That's a big risk you'd get bumped down in line by the U.S. Navy at the dry dock come repair time, but might be an easier sell to the taxpayers if you're not spending a big sum up front on facilities in addition to the boats.
 
2021-09-20 5:34:01 PM  

BigNumber12: ColonelCathcart: zbtop: ColonelCathcart: LewDux: Crimea river

I'm pretty sure they can Crimea River any time they want.

Also, cancelling the Mistrals got Russia it's money back and forced it to build their own Rollin Coal Mistralskis with Hookers and Blackjack:

https://navalpost.com/zaliv-kerch-proj​ect-23900-udc-amphibous-assault-ship/

Bonus: They could be called Sevastopol or Kerch (Crimean names).

Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

[Fark user image 423x750]

Unfortunate that Russian GDP, birth rates, and budgets are flatlined or going south with little sign of turning 'round. attempting to digest and incorporate Crimea into the Russian Federation turned out to be more expensive than y'all thought. Having an economic and export output that, outside of the defense and nuclear energy sectors, is basically identical to that of a developing nation the midst of industrialization makes realizing those ambitions difficult.

$400,000,000,000 of exports (after the ruble has been devalued to drive exports, so in double terms this is like $800B of 2014 rubles) - of which half is not related to Petroleum. The 90's want their talking points back.

[Fark user image 425x515]

Complexity rank of 45 is not that bad, considering how much oil and gas is in the mix.

Ah, an extraction economy, like Saudi Arabia or Venezuela


Russia's economy is about the size of Spain's... and it only took them 100 million more workers, 35x the territory, and Spain having no oil, to pull off that economic miracle.
 
2021-09-20 5:44:28 PM  

kbronsito: BigNumber12: ColonelCathcart: zbtop: ColonelCathcart: LewDux: Crimea river

I'm pretty sure they can Crimea River any time they want.

Also, cancelling the Mistrals got Russia it's money back and forced it to build their own Rollin Coal Mistralskis with Hookers and Blackjack:

https://navalpost.com/zaliv-kerch-proj​ect-23900-udc-amphibous-assault-ship/

Bonus: They could be called Sevastopol or Kerch (Crimean names).

Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

[Fark user image 423x750]

Unfortunate that Russian GDP, birth rates, and budgets are flatlined or going south with little sign of turning 'round. attempting to digest and incorporate Crimea into the Russian Federation turned out to be more expensive than y'all thought. Having an economic and export output that, outside of the defense and nuclear energy sectors, is basically identical to that of a developing nation the midst of industrialization makes realizing those ambitions difficult.

$400,000,000,000 of exports (after the ruble has been devalued to drive exports, so in double terms this is like $800B of 2014 rubles) - of which half is not related to Petroleum. The 90's want their talking points back.

[Fark user image 425x515]

Complexity rank of 45 is not that bad, considering how much oil and gas is in the mix.

Ah, an extraction economy, like Saudi Arabia or Venezuela

Russia's economy is about the size of Spain's... and it only took them 100 million more workers, 35x the territory, and Spain having no oil, to pull off that economic miracle.


At PPP it is just behind Germany.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_​o​f_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)
 
2021-09-20 5:51:13 PM  

Polish Hussar: kbronsito: Polish Hussar: J_Kushner: Slight tangent, but I bet Canada is next for nuclear subs, & as long as they've crossed that bridge, they might as well throw in some nuke icebreakers too.

I've seen speculation about this as well.  The Canadians have been looking to replace their current submarines for several years now, and Russia's increasing presence in the Arctic might make them decide to go for a nuclear propelled option.  Whatever mix of American and British technology the Australians get might be a good, and cost effective as far as nuclear submarines go, option for them.  Canada is also part of the five eyes, so that makes the transfer of the many sensitive technologies involved with nuke boats a lot easier.

They really should look into the two-fer. There may be ways to split the work between Canadian and Australian shipyards to speed up deliveries, even if more submarines are needed to fill both orders.

I was listening to a podcast about the Aussie submarine deal over the weekend, and I think within the first 10 minutes one of the hosts brought up how he thought it would make a lot of sense for the Canadians to get involved with this.  Canada has a federal election today, I can't say I'd be shocked if there's an announcement about how they're investigating this once the politicians don't have to worry about their jobs for another couple years.  I do wonder how much Canada would be willing to invest in infrastructure beyond the cost of the boats themselves.  Unlike the Australians, would they just have the boats built abroad and rely on American shipyards for maintenance involving the nuclear bits?  That's a big risk you'd get bumped down in line by the U.S. Navy at the dry dock come repair time, but might be an easier sell to the taxpayers if you're not spending a big sum up front on facilities in addition to the boats.


I think you are right about the issue of funding in Canada. They may not be willing to invest a lot in the infrastructure to build the submarines. But if they were inclined to join an expensive project such as this, they may want to be able to claim some local jobs for their shipyards. I'd guess that even if they didn't invest heavily to upgrade their shipyards, there'd still be ways to split the work so that they'd still produce various components that would be shipped to Australia to finish the job.

Did the podcast mention anything about the risks of more countries spreading nuclear propulsion tech? I doubt most countries have allies they trust enough to just give it away. The US happens to have special relations with the UK, Australia (and theoretically Canada) to do something like this. France is butthurt about the deal but they were spreading the tech to Brazil before the US signed a deal with Australia. Sure, Brazil designed the nuke reactor. But France bought 40 percent of the Brazilian Naval company building it. They have a contract for four diesel submarines and one nuclear one to be built around the Brazilian reactor. Then, Brazil is gonna want five more of the nuke submarines. France is not gonna let that contract go to hell if there are problems with the Brazilian reactor during construction. They'll sure as fark give them technical data to make that shiat work if it doesn't. Plus, France builds the Scorpenes in partnership with Spain's Navantia. What if butthurt about the Aussie deal, they decided that Spain is cool enough to deserve nuke submarines and transfer the propulsion tech to them?
 
2021-09-20 6:02:02 PM  

ColonelCathcart: kbronsito: BigNumber12: ColonelCathcart: zbtop: ColonelCathcart: LewDux: Crimea river

I'm pretty sure they can Crimea River any time they want.

Also, cancelling the Mistrals got Russia it's money back and forced it to build their own Rollin Coal Mistralskis with Hookers and Blackjack:

https://navalpost.com/zaliv-kerch-proj​ect-23900-udc-amphibous-assault-ship/

Bonus: They could be called Sevastopol or Kerch (Crimean names).

Double Bonus: Built in (our) Crimea

[Fark user image 423x750]

Unfortunate that Russian GDP, birth rates, and budgets are flatlined or going south with little sign of turning 'round. attempting to digest and incorporate Crimea into the Russian Federation turned out to be more expensive than y'all thought. Having an economic and export output that, outside of the defense and nuclear energy sectors, is basically identical to that of a developing nation the midst of industrialization makes realizing those ambitions difficult.

$400,000,000,000 of exports (after the ruble has been devalued to drive exports, so in double terms this is like $800B of 2014 rubles) - of which half is not related to Petroleum. The 90's want their talking points back.

[Fark user image 425x515]

Complexity rank of 45 is not that bad, considering how much oil and gas is in the mix.

Ah, an extraction economy, like Saudi Arabia or Venezuela

Russia's economy is about the size of Spain's... and it only took them 100 million more workers, 35x the territory, and Spain having no oil, to pull off that economic miracle.

At PPP it is just behind Germany.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o​f_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)


And on a Per Capita basis it's less than half that of Germany, still way below Spain, it's below Romania, Latvia, Greece, Turkey, Poland, Croatia, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of​_​countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita


The Russian Federation (and the Soviet Union and Russian Empire before it) has the problem that it invests a lot in expensive defense sectors with little return to the larger economy, selling high-volume-low-margin commodities it pulls out of the ground (used to be wheat and agricultural stuff, now its petroleum and gas) to finance that, with minimal investment in anything else, resulting in something of a magnificently armed nation that's 30 years behind its contemporaries in every other arena and reliant on exports for state funding, technology transfers, and consumer goods.
 
Displayed 50 of 68 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.