Putin takes swipe at US in Victory Day speech

[Lite Beer]

Putin takes swipe at US in Victory Day speech

MOSCOW (AP) — Russia showed off new machines of war, including a highly sophisticated tank, on Saturday in the annual Victory Day military parade through Red Square that marks the surrender of Nazi Germany and the Red Army's key role in the defeat.

The Armata tank drew a round of strong applause as it rumbled through the square, part of a long convoy that ranged from the World War II era to the most modern. Also on view for the first time at the parade was a lumbering RS-24 Yars ICBM launcher along with several new, smaller vehicles.

Victory Day is Russia's most important secular holiday, both commemorating the Soviet Union's huge suffering in the war and highlighting Russia's portrayal of itself as a force for peace and security. This year's parade, on the 70th anniversary of the surrender, was the biggest military parade since the Soviet Union's collapse.

In his speech to the assembled troops and veterans, President Vladimir Putin said that the carnage of the war underlined the importance of international cooperation, but "in the past decades we have seen attempts to create a unipolar world." That phrase is often used by Russia to criticize the United States' purported aim to dominate world affairs.

Later Saturday, an estimated 300,000 people walked through central Moscow to Red Square, holding portraits of relatives who fought in the war. Putin joined them near Red Square, with a photo of his naval veteran father.

The observances were shadowed by the near-complete absence of European leaders from the ceremony. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is to come to Moscow on Sunday, a visit that will include recognition of the Red Army's sacrifices.

The cold shoulder that European leaders turned toward Victory Day underlines the tensions between Russia and the West over the Ukraine crisis. As Western sanctions on Russia over its actions in Ukraine continue to bite, Russia has increasingly appeared to pivot away from Europe and focus more on developing relations with China.

Chinese President Xi Jinping was the most prominent world leader to attend the Victory Day parade and Putin took special note in his speech of China's role in the war, saying that like the Soviet Union "it lost many, many millions of people."

An air of grievance mixes with the annual commemoration of the Nazi defeat, with Russians frequently complaining that the West undervalues the Red Army's role and even tries to "rewrite history."

Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi, who met with Putin after the parade, echoed that strain. "No one can deny the role that Russia, the Soviet Union, played in the fight with Nazism and history will never forget," he said.

For veterans of the war, in which the USSR is estimated to have lost 26 million people including 8 million soldiers, the parade was an intensely emotional experience.

"When we fought, we had a couple of automatic pistols and a rifle — now look at all the amazing military equipment we've got," said 92-year-old Valentina Schulgina, who fought in the Battle of Stalingrad that is regarded by some as the bloodiest battle in history.

In all, about 200 pieces of military hardware and 16,500 troops took part in the parade, which concluded with a flyover of military aircraft. One group of warplanes flew in a tight formation depicting the number "70."

The Armata tank that was one of the highlights of the parade is regarded by some military analysts as surpassing Western tanks. It is the first to have an internal armored capsule surrounding its three-man crew and a remotely controlled turret with an automatic loading system.

Other prominent figures at the parade included Alexander Zaldostanov, the leather-clad leader of the nationalist motorcycle club Night Wolves, with whom Putin has ridden.

"There are three things to say after the parade today: The enemy will be destroyed; victory will be ours; Russia forward," said Zaldostanov, known as The Surgeon.

___

Kate de Pury in Moscow contributed to this report.

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-05-10

[Dannyboy666]

Putin ,it's Amazing how you act when you re short changed below the belt... Too Bad there New Tank broke down on Thursday..

[Dannyboy666]

Putins. Leather Clad BF, Adorable...

[Praematura]

Russia's new tank the T-14 is supposed to outclass the west. This piece of typical Russian couldn't even make it through the parade without breaking down and having to be towed away. Good luck Thailand buying your military hardware from China/Russia who have a great reputation for quality.[emoji23]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11588719/Putins-new-tank-designed-to-outclass-the-West-breaks-down.html

[Loptr]

In his speech to the assembled troops and veterans, President Vladimir Putin said that the carnage of the war underlined the importance of international cooperation, but "in the past decades we have seen attempts to create a unipolar world." That phrase is often used by Russia to criticize the United States' purported aim to dominate world affairs.

Not sure how the AP interprets this statement as taking a "swipe" at the US, when every word of it is true...

[NeverSure]

"Putin criticizes.." Putin still has very real sanctions against his country for human rights offenses, especially in Ukraine. He really should SU and focus on his economy and the needs of his people.

Putin is investing in modern tanks in an era where tanks are being taken out by stealth drones. A drone has a lot more firepower than a tank and can cover and see a lot more area. He really needs to catch up.

[Dannyboy666]

Do you think the Outdated A-10, could take this out, anyone?

[Dannyboy666]

In his speech to the assembled troops and veterans, President Vladimir Putin said that the carnage of the war underlined the importance of international cooperation, but "in the past decades we have seen attempts to create a unipolar world." That phrase is often used by Russia to criticize the United States' purported aim to dominate world affairs.

Not sure how the AP interprets this statement as taking a "swipe" at the US, when every word of it is true...

. Yeah , World Domination, and what do we have to show for it...Nothing

[Publicus]

Putins. Leather Clad BF, Adorable...

Not to be outdone however we have Vlad the Night Wolf.....

Putin's new tanks are anyway insignificant as the overall military balance in quality and quantity between Russia and all of Nato is completely one-sided. Nato is led by the United States whose military is the only one that can shut down Russia's cyber warfare capabilities. Nato was founded in 1949 because the then Russian Soviet Union had enough tanks to roll over the plains of eastern and all of Europe. Not any more.

In World War II Russia needed instant tanks that were faster and smarter than the Nazi tanks and did make them. In WW2 everyone had tanks superior to the US but if the Soviet Union then had had to fight the US instead of the Nazis, then as now the overall integrated warfare systems of the US would have prevailed.

[HLover]

In his speech to the assembled troops and veterans, President Vladimir Putin said that the carnage of the war underlined the importance of international cooperation, but "in the past decades we have seen attempts to create a unipolar world." That phrase is often used by Russia to criticize the United States' purported aim to dominate world affairs.

Not sure how the AP interprets this statement as taking a "swipe" at the US, when every word of it is true...

Because the AP is as useless as the other 'news' propaganda corporations. The comment by Putin was not a direct swipe at the American war machine but the AP just wants to rile up the zombie general population to distract them from pertinent problems.

[Publicus]

Do you think the Outdated A-10, could take this out, anyone?

Moving down a Moscow street took the sucker out.

[NeverSure]

Putins. Leather Clad BF, Adorable...

Not to be outdone however we have Vlad the Night Wolf.....

Putin's new tanks are anyway insignificant as the overall military balance in quality and quantity between Russia and all of Nato is completely one-sided. Nato is led by the United States whose military is the only one that can shut down Russia's cyber warfare capabilities. Nato was founded in 1949 because the then Russian Soviet Union had enough tanks to roll over the plains of eastern and all of Europe. Not any more.

In World War II Russia needed instant tanks that were faster and smarter than the Nazi tanks and did make them. In WW2 everyone had tanks superior to the US but if the Soviet Union then had had to fight the US instead of the Nazis, then as now the overall integrated warfare systems of the US would have prevailed.

The UK could give Russia a serious axe whooping all by itself. Seriously. The UK is well equipped, has tough people and Russia is a paper tiger.

Germany couldn't because it relies too much on the US for military including large US naval and air bases there.

Russia is logistically a long, long way from the UK, France, Italy etc. and these tanks are better for defense until one of the UK's drones arrives.

Russia can't project military power unless it's nukes. It simply doesn't have the horsepower to move and cover much area. It would never get to Germany. Unlike the US which has the massive and destructive carrier groups and bases all over the globe, Russia is a one trick pony. Putin knows it so he blusters.

Edited May 10, 2015 by NeverSure

[NeverSure]

Do you think the Outdated A-10, could take this out, anyone?

Moving down a Moscow street took the sucker out.

Right.

The A-10 is still viable and a favorite. It has missile mounts and all they'd have to do is choose the appropriate missiles. Its machine guns which are devastating probably couldn't take out the armored cage but they could disable the tracks and take out the engine. Armor at will, the tracks are vulnerable.

A-10 Thunderbolt.

[Loptr]

Putins. Leather Clad BF, Adorable...

Not to be outdone however we have Vlad the Night Wolf.....

Putin's new tanks are anyway insignificant as the overall military balance in quality and quantity between Russia and all of Nato is completely one-sided. Nato is led by the United States whose military is the only one that can shut down Russia's cyber warfare capabilities. Nato was founded in 1949 because the then Russian Soviet Union had enough tanks to roll over the plains of eastern and all of Europe. Not any more.

In World War II Russia needed instant tanks that were faster and smarter than the Nazi tanks and did make them. In WW2 everyone had tanks superior to the US but if the Soviet Union then had had to fight the US instead of the Nazis, then as now the overall integrated warfare systems of the US would have prevailed.

The UK could give Russia a serious axe whooping all by itself. Seriously. The UK is well equipped, has tough people and Russia is a paper tiger.

Germany couldn't because it relies too much on the US for military including large US naval and air bases there.

Russia is logistically a long, long way from the UK, France, Italy etc. and these tanks are better for defense until one of the UK's drones arrives.

Russia can't project military power unless it's nukes. It simply doesn't have the horsepower to move and cover much area. It would never get to Germany. Unlike the US which has the massive and destructive carrier groups and bases all over the globe, Russia is a one trick pony. Putin knows it so he blusters.

Thanks for the chuckle NS...

[Dannyboy666]

Do you think the Outdated A-10, could take this out, anyone?

Moving down a Moscow street took the sucker out.

Right.

The A-10 is still viable and a favorite. It has missile mounts and all they'd have to do is choose the appropriate missiles. Its machine guns which are devastating probably couldn't take out the armored cage but they could disable the tracks and take out the engine. Armor at will, the tracks are vulnerable.

A-10 Thunderbolt.

20mm cannon, A Workhorse, Start the Assembly line again. Edited May 10, 2015 by Dannyboy666

[thaibeachlovers]

Russia's new tank the T-14 is supposed to outclass the west. This piece of typical Russian couldn't even make it through the parade without breaking down and having to be towed away. Good luck Thailand buying your military hardware from China/Russia who have a great reputation for quality.[emoji23]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11588719/Putins-new-tank-designed-to-outclass-the-West-breaks-down.html

That's pretty ignorant thing to say. It's a new piece of kit and there will be teething problems. The real fault lies with whoever decided it would be a good idea to put it in the parade.

Russia has a history of making better tanks than their enemies.

[thaibeachlovers]

Putins. Leather Clad BF, Adorable...

Not to be outdone however we have Vlad the Night Wolf.....

Putin's new tanks are anyway insignificant as the overall military balance in quality and quantity between Russia and all of Nato is completely one-sided. Nato is led by the United States whose military is the only one that can shut down Russia's cyber warfare capabilities. Nato was founded in 1949 because the then Russian Soviet Union had enough tanks to roll over the plains of eastern and all of Europe. Not any more.

In World War II Russia needed instant tanks that were faster and smarter than the Nazi tanks and did make them. In WW2 everyone had tanks superior to the US but if the Soviet Union then had had to fight the US instead of the Nazis, then as now the overall integrated warfare systems of the US would have prevailed.

The UK could give Russia a serious axe whooping all by itself. Seriously. The UK is well equipped, has tough people and Russia is a paper tiger.

Germany couldn't because it relies too much on the US for military including large US naval and air bases there.

Russia is logistically a long, long way from the UK, France, Italy etc. and these tanks are better for defense until one of the UK's drones arrives.

Russia can't project military power unless it's nukes. It simply doesn't have the horsepower to move and cover much area. It would never get to Germany. Unlike the US which has the massive and destructive carrier groups and bases all over the globe, Russia is a one trick pony. Putin knows it so he blusters.

Russia is a paper tiger

Hitler thought that too.

The UK could give Russia a serious axe whooping all by itself.

The British government has gutted the military to the extent it probably couldn't defeat the Argies if the same situation arose today. They can't even defeat the Taliban.

Paper Tiger comes to mind.

[MaxYakov]

Do you think the Outdated A-10, could take this out, anyone?

Moving down a Moscow street took the sucker out.

Right.

The A-10 is still viable and a favorite. It has missile mounts and all they'd have to do is choose the appropriate missiles. Its machine guns which are devastating probably couldn't take out the armored cage but they could disable the tracks and take out the engine. Armor at will, the tracks are vulnerable.

A-10 Thunderbolt.

20mm cannon, A Workhorse, Start the Assembly line again.

Errr. That would be a 30mm GAU 8 Avenger Gatling-type cannon that the A-10 has it's fuselage built around and it is "one of the most powerful aircraft cannon ever flown".

But I'm with y'all on the A-10, except that we should develop an RPV/drone version (with maybe a 40mm cannon for that new Russian tank - as long as I don't have to pay for it, that is).

Edit: Actually, now that I think about it, some of the WWII de Havilland Mosquito fighter/bombers carried a 57mm auto-cannon and there's a great video on YouTube of it shooting at such things as U-boats, etc.

Edited May 10, 2015 by MaxYakov

[NeverSure]

Russia is a paper tiger

Hitler thought that too.

The UK could give Russia a serious axe whooping all by itself.

The British government has gutted the military to the extent it probably couldn't defeat the Argies if the same situation arose today. They can't even defeat the Taliban.

Paper Tiger comes to mind.

I have said over and over that I don't know of any guerrilla army that's been defeated on its own soil. You mention the Taliban. Russia invaded Afghanistan in 1979 and went home ten years later with its tail between its legs. The USA didn't do any better. These wars can't be won under today's rules of engagement which the UK and US follow or soldiers face charges and trial by their own governments.

If we're talking about a war between nations which is about attrition of equipment and personnel like WWII was, all bets are off. The UK would whip Russia because the UK's technology is so much better. The UK has a missile of its own that the US covets and gets. You'd think it would be the other way around. The UK is one of the "Club of Five" with every way there is to deliver a nuke including from a nuclear sub. That's a deterrent to other nukes.

Russia isn't that much. It's big talk but what is its latest invention? Tanks that the UK could take out with drones. The UK was flying US drones out of Afghanistan and controlling them from London. The UK has its own good drones. Russia doesn't have stealth. The UK has US nuclear subs and its own missiles.

Please don't ever forget something else. The UK can have anything it wants from the US just by whistling.

Something else. Brits are smart and tough. I'm American BTW.

Cheers

[thaibeachlovers]

Russia is a paper tiger

Hitler thought that too.

The UK could give Russia a serious axe whooping all by itself.

The British government has gutted the military to the extent it probably couldn't defeat the Argies if the same situation arose today. They can't even defeat the Taliban.

Paper Tiger comes to mind.

I have said over and over that I don't know of any guerrilla army that's been defeated on its own soil. You mention the Taliban. Russia invaded Afghanistan in 1979 and went home ten years later with its tail between its legs. The USA didn't do any better. These wars can't be won under today's rules of engagement which the UK and US follow or soldiers face charges and trial by their own governments.

If we're talking about a war between nations which is about attrition of equipment and personnel like WWII was, all bets are off. The UK would whip Russia because the UK's technology is so much better. The UK has a missile of its own that the US covets and gets. You'd think it would be the other way around. The UK is one of the "Club of Five" with every way there is to deliver a nuke including from a nuclear sub. That's a deterrent to other nukes.

Russia isn't that much. It's big talk but what is its latest invention? Tanks that the UK could take out with drones. The UK was flying US drones out of Afghanistan and controlling them from London. The UK has its own good drones. Russia doesn't have stealth. The UK has US nuclear subs and its own missiles.

Please don't ever forget something else. The UK can have anything it wants from the US just by whistling.

Something else. Brits are smart and tough. I'm American BTW.

Cheers

Russia invaded Afghanistan in 1979 and went home ten years later with its tail between its legs

You are believing your own propaganda.

Russia had won the Afghan war, but Gorbachev ordered them out. Bit like Vietnam where the US won the war and the politicians snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

Tanks are obsolete now. A man carried weapon can easily destroy them. However, it's not the thread to be getting into modes of warfare.

Brits are smart and tough

Hmmm. Britain made it's mark in the world with tough guys from the slums. Like all western countries, increased wealth and decreased activity makes for soft unfit people, and they would be hard pressed to find enough hard men to fight more than a limited war now. I think they might even have trouble repeating the march to Mount Longdon now. I could be wrong on that, but I know the US army is having problems finding enough fit men to join up, and the British army has been gutted by the government.

[jollyhangmon]

>"There are three things to say after the parade today: The enemy will be destroyed; victory will be ours; Russia forward," said Zaldostanov, known as The Surgeon.<

Harharhar, thanks for the laugh towarish.

You're also slightly incorrect comrade, as there's just one thing to say:

=> This is what you get when already mother's milk is replaced with potatobooze, moonshined of course, triple-cooked.

The Surgeon obviously (mal)practiced a bit on his very own - well, let's say 'skull contents', shall we?

[ezzra]

Sure, and why not? if I were Putin, I'd also shoot my mouth off, why? because he can and he knows

the that ninny of a president Obama will not react, he didn't react at worse things Putin did, why start now?

[wwest5829]

Sure, and why not? if I were Putin, I'd also shoot my mouth off, why? because he can and he knows

the that ninny of a president Obama will not react, he didn't react at worse things Putin did, why start now?

Yea, that ninny should take military action against Russia for its unilateral seizing of Ukraine sovereign territory, oh yes and China for its unilateral claiming of the South China Sea, and then N. Korea to halt their developing a nuclear program, hmm speaking of which, he should take on Iran for the same reason........Understand you don't like Obama being elected POTUS for 8 years. Well, I really felt the same with Bush Jr. .... 8 TRILLION spent on current wars, not to mention the young men and women sent in harm's way and you want more action? What you own "defense" manufacturing stocks?

[oneday]

In a small, lawless country this man would be called a "warlord", in Mexico he would be the "Head of a Cartel". He's just a thug, but a very dangerous thug with very dangerous toys. It's a shame Russians decided to elect a man that wants to take them back to the cold war.

[pattayasnowman]

Who's got the biggest Tank US or Russia is totally irrelevant :

[Baerboxer]

Putins. Leather Clad BF, Adorable...

Not to be outdone however we have Vlad the Night Wolf.....

Putin's new tanks are anyway insignificant as the overall military balance in quality and quantity between Russia and all of Nato is completely one-sided. Nato is led by the United States whose military is the only one that can shut down Russia's cyber warfare capabilities. Nato was founded in 1949 because the then Russian Soviet Union had enough tanks to roll over the plains of eastern and all of Europe. Not any more.

In World War II Russia needed instant tanks that were faster and smarter than the Nazi tanks and did make them. In WW2 everyone had tanks superior to the US but if the Soviet Union then had had to fight the US instead of the Nazis, then as now the overall integrated warfare systems of the US would have prevailed.

The UK could give Russia a serious axe whooping all by itself. Seriously. The UK is well equipped, has tough people and Russia is a paper tiger.

Germany couldn't because it relies too much on the US for military including large US naval and air bases there.

Russia is logistically a long, long way from the UK, France, Italy etc. and these tanks are better for defense until one of the UK's drones arrives.

Russia can't project military power unless it's nukes. It simply doesn't have the horsepower to move and cover much area. It would never get to Germany. Unlike the US which has the massive and destructive carrier groups and bases all over the globe, Russia is a one trick pony. Putin knows it so he blusters.

Russia is a paper tiger

Hitler thought that too.

The UK could give Russia a serious axe whooping all by itself.

The British government has gutted the military to the extent it probably couldn't defeat the Argies if the same situation arose today. They can't even defeat the Taliban.

Paper Tiger comes to mind.

Agree the defense cuts in the UK have been swathing and very, perhaps even too near the bone.

But no one has ever won in Afghanistan - not the British in the 19th century, not the Soviets in the 20th century and not even the mighty wonderfully resource Americans in the 21st.

Russia is good at defending itself, making best use of its extreme winters and scorched earth policies, as Napoleon and Hitler found out. In other wars - didn't do so good against Japan in 1905; or the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan. Not so good on the offensive unless it's a country that was part of the USSR.

[NickJ]

Buy gotta love those Russian motorcycles though.....oh wait, nevermind.

[guap]

bloody shameful for the lack of respect for the country that won the war and suffered such tremendous losses in doing so. The europeans should line up to kiss his ring as they would the pope.

[zydeco]

Maybe Putin can hold another parade on 23 August to celebrate the Nazi-Soviet Pact.

[Scott]

An off-topic, inflammatory post has been removed.