It seems you do not know a bit of latin american history and african one, Europe did terrible things there, many complaign about the nazis because they did the same things the Europeans did to the native americans and africans to fellow Europeans, but if you can not understand that seems you have not travelled a lot and lack reading

The colonies in South America consisted of mostly Europeans. The native habitants were quickly assimilated/killed/displaced. The effort needed for that was surprisingly low. People that compare Nazi expansion with European colonization of the “new” world lack basic intelligence.
Anyways, I didn’t make a point about morality but about the pure gain from colonies. And that is with few exceptions (India is one) negative. If Europeans had not colonized Africa, we had the same amount of wealth today. 95% of wealth in Western Europe was created since 1945.

An A-400 or C-130J variant procured from an European nation seems to be wishful thinking so far.

An aircraft dedicated to the mission of killing human beings is not likely to attract any government’s approval. The choice of weapons is decided to some extent by the polictical backing and the financial resources. Defence doesn’t have a lobby in EU-Europe.

And if the simple fact that a 130 million country with a GDP of 733 billion US$ is a “no threat” to a block of 500 million habitants and a GDP of 16 Trillion US$ doesn´t open your eyes, well, then you can start your own “limited but destructive war”… with your third floor neighbour, because Putin won´t start one.

And have an allie with another 300 million people and 13 Trillion USD.
Russian allies are:
– Belorussia
– Kasachstan
– Transnistrien

Rob a bank of say $100,000,000 and leave that sum of money for your son after your death and see if that sum of money wouldn’t be a fine capital for your son for further investment and development to further enrich himself if he invests it intelligently . Britain’s and Netherland’s gold reserve was purely stolen from Ghana and South Africa. Ghana is the second largest gold producing country but has no gold reserves, whatever is mined is immediately sold. Current estimates of gold which Britain took from Ghana is worth 800 billion pounds, not only that, also diamond and free cocoa. Ghana was then the world’s largest producer of cocoa. Netherlands acquired a lot from South Africa in terms gold and Diamond. The first stock exchange in the world was established by the Dutch from the Netherlands and a year latter opened one in South Africa for Gold and diamond trade. The slave trade also drained human resources— think also of the Dutch and their East India companies.

In the meantime UK had two “World Wars”, saw 15 battleships going to the bottom of the sea and was bombed for 6 years. That maybe consumed all the “gold”.
In fact the relation between colonies and wealth is more in a way, that countries with colonies became wealthy despite their colonies. For most European nations colonies were as profitable as the Iraq is for the USA: a big barrel without a bottom.
Especially in the 19th century transportation wasn’t up to really supply the European continent with resources from overseas except for some luxury products that didn’t have an effect on the economy. Much more important was the policy of the government, the acceptance of economical change and speed of transition (19th century saw most European nations start as monarchy).

That some people have different views is due to wrong connection between facts (country was powerful and wealthy) and assumed reasons (colonies). I think it is due to a mindset comparable to that of GarryB: the West is bad, so wealth must be stolen and cannot be due to more innovation and creativity. Fact is, even if Russia had colonized the whole of Africa, it had suffered exactly the same.
Side effect for some development countries: they can claim that their miserable fate was – of course – caused by the bad bad West, and – of course – not by Dear Leader’s notorious taste in Mercedes Benz 600SEL (armoured) and mass shootings of “rebels” on odd Fridays. Bob Geldorf thinks pretty similar.

I’m surprised they weren’t given them too!!! 😮 😀

That was maybe the time when the British aviation industry finally left the self-destruct mood. :diablo:

Copy? No. The Soviets have only actually copied western stuff very rarely, usually only when what they were copying was radically different and they needed time to absorb the changes in their R&D. The Sidewinder missile was so simple and basic in design, its modular design was revolutionary for the Soviets, so they copied it and then moved on from it with their own designs. The B-29 is another example of outright copying where they had neglected an area they once actually led the world in but were caught in the situation where they needed something right away.

You missed the unlicensed copy and enhancement of the Rolls-Royce Nene engine. Powering the MiG-15, -17 and Il-28. 20000 copies produced.

The Russians actually build something very similar to the TSR.2, too, but went for the swing-wing version.

And for the YAK-141. See the powerplant for the cancelled AVS (Advanced VTOL Tactical Fighter Weapons System). Program ran between 1964 and 1968 in a German/US cooperation.

[ATTACH]158960[/ATTACH]

As for the nuclear vs conventional capabilities, it is quite clear that Russia will not be able to compete on conventional forces. It is all very well and good saying that Russia doesn’t need to, as it has nuclear weapons, but this cuts both ways. NATO is never going to invade Russia, and never has had any interest in doing so – to suggest otherwise stretches credibility too far. The real question is whether or not Russia wants to become a despotic regime, by sabre rattling over all issues. If it wants to, it has to understand that other nations will not be as happy to deal with it – you don’t win friends through threats. If Europe can shake its energy dependence on Russia, then Russia would no longer have so much political power, but would also have less economic power.

I think investments in Russian military will primarily be an innerpolitical issue. The army is an important part of the society, so increased spending is famous with many people. Many work in defense industry, and weapons exports are profitable and increase overseas influence.
After all the army works as employment program, like in many western countries, too.