3 ms·
paganet says>""why should we assign so much money to the Navy when we're most worried about a continental war?"."< Russia values the coastal territory it has g
by giardini 5y ago
paganet says>""why should we assign so much money to the Navy when we're most worried about a continental war?"."<
Russia values the coastal territory it has grabbed b/c d they can use it to support a navy, something Russia has historically always wanted and needed (to project military power). But they have always done poorly and continue to do so:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-russias-military-is-so-shabby-214049654.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-russias-military-is-so-sh...
Thwarting Russia's naval progress is cost-effective since it takes tremendous resources and history to run a navy effectively. Only Great Britain and the USA have been successful at establishing modern multi-ocean navies.
- bluGill 5y agoRussia can't operate the little Navy it has, better bases won't help.
- paganel 5y agoI do think Russia/USSR has focused primarily on the "heartland" [1], they have had some navy power but it looked almost always as an afterthought (their nuclear subs are a special, almost separate, case, they're more nuclear-oriented than sea/ocean-oriented). The US (following Britain) has of course almost been a world power that has focused on the Rimland-like spaces (plus islands like Japan). Having one aircraft carrier or ten-eleven won't make that much of a difference when the battle happens on the steppes of Eurasia (like it is now happening in Donbas), there are only so many such carriers that one can place inside a "small" sea like the Black Sea (assuming that they'll be allowed to pass the Bosphorus). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_J._Spykman#Geostrategic_ideas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_J._Spykman#Geostrateg...