Added: 5 years ago
From: Vodka59
Views: 205,589
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (818)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Comment removed

  • @OldBobo83 only one

  • @OldBobo83 as far as I know, just this one.

  • @OldBobo83 not army, Russian Navy :)

  • Off to Syria!

  • One other point: a catapult allows the carrier to operate and launch aircraft in restricted seas which might be limited by sea depth, narrow waterways etc.

  • @KB4QAA A catapult also allows for a wider variety of aircraft to be carried. One thing I think this class of carrier is really missing, is an airborne early warning/radar aircraft. I'm sure the Russians have thought about it, and have their own solution, but I couldn't imagine what that solutions is if they're too far away from land bases and only have the carrier battle group to rely on.

  • A catapult allows several things: Carrying greater payload of fuel and weapons; larger airplanes to operate, and also allows operations in a wider range of weather conditions specifically low wind conditions.

  • good thing about Russians is that the people are resilient until now. the can do attitude, like the 1960's Americans and unlike most current Americans of the lazy, selfish WANT generation(wants free stuff always, free medical hospitalization, wants to pay no fees, and half don't wanna pay even taxes).

    BUT thing is that really stupid people took power.

  • WHAT?!Are you kidding me?That Sukhoi starts without catapult!!!

    ALL HAIL RUSSIA fuck usa with their gay catapults

  • Аллё! Гаражный кооператив "Зорька2!

    3-й отсек, 27 пост- что это может быть?

  • It looks crappy ! but i am not hating it !

  • isnt this the ONLY carrier the russian navy has or am i mistaking?

  • @kornek21 Yep , only carrier.

  • @kornek21  by 2014 there will be three.

  • @kornek21 If I'm not mistaken Admiral Kuznetsov was sold to India after modernization.

  • @rustik009 your mistaken dude its one of our flagships we dont sell any of our Supercruisers

  • @matthew8897field Erm... Kuznetsov's sister ship Varyag was sold to the Chinese.

  • @rustik009 ты что?? последний никто не продаст) просто индийский модернизировали.

  • @coll565 Да, я уже в курсе.

  • Why does Russia even have an aircraft carrier when it's always been her armies and land forces that have saved and protected Mother Russia?

  • @lukebccb Well, the simple answer is that Kuznetsov is a leftover from the Cold War that Russia simply kept when the Soviet Navy became the Russian. Her role when built was to sit in the middle of the Atlantic, with her Shipwrecks, supporting the Soviet submarine force and playing merry hell with NATO's transport ships and their plans for Reforger; or at least that was the plan.

    Why fight the enemy on land when you can - attempt - to make sure many of them never arrive in the first place?

  • if you don't feel a bit scared with this.. just think on this marvel arround american coasts.

  • Well the AK-47 is strong weapon but the M16 is extremely more accurate and has higher rate of fire.....also it depents the soldier who use it

  • Russia is the largest continet and has more resources then the USA. Built more Nukes more weapons of mass destruction then any other county. Increased production of all branches then any others built more reliable military equipment, fighter jets,TANKS,Missile defense systems and very very very reliable machine guns including the world renoun AK-47! Which is way better then the M-16 lol.

  • So they just take off with pure thrust and no assistance?

  • @xGUNxBUNNYx Correct, its why the ramp is on the front

  • @xGUNxBUNNYx No assistance, true. A modernization in 2012-2017 may bring some new equipment for that....

  • @ThaTJuStSuXs Sorry could not help myself... What are you a tree hugger? :p

  • hy does amerika hate Russians?ïîòîìó that it is been afraid of

  • yeahhhhhhhh 

  • You should see all the Russian nave ships in the black see ports and StPet posts that are rotting away, they do not have much of a navy.

  • @markwchase On the contrary if you saw decommissioned ships. It means there will be new more improved replacements chock on that

  • @markwchase That's not a reflection of their 'new' ships... merely of the fact that post-Soviet Russia hasn't been interested in making much a priority of fully disposing of 'older' ones. In their former, government-run system, there was no profit to be had, and thus no incentive, in starting a scrap business; and there are relatively few in Russia now who are interested in making the investment (clean-up money) required just to make those ships salvageable (after so many years of abandon)

  • Jeez...

  • wow amazing? dont they use catapult for those planes? wow

  • remember if we go to war were all dead

  • I honestly think that Russia and American Armys are equal. if they go to war it would a Clash of the Titans thing.

  • LOVING THE YNGWIE MALMSTEEN MUSIC!!!!!!!!!

  • It still amazes me on how the plane launches from shear raw power and no assist!

  • @JerryLawMartin I WAS JUST THINKING THAT TOO!!!!! NOW THATS SOME POWER!!!!!!!!!!

  • VODKA

  • @Grambo2009 No I don't know everything. But, I obviously know a lot more than the people I addressed.

  • Very simple and efficient. That's the why I like russian military equipment and vehicles.

  • Shouldn't the comments be regarding the video. Like how cool the Su-33 looks (which IMHO does) or maybe asking which type of helos operate from this ship?

  • Shouldn't the comments be regarding the video. Like how cool the Su-33 looks (which IMHO does) or maybe asking which type of helos operate from this ship.

  • US and western propaganda works flawlessly. So many hubristic, uselessly shading the earth here with the pretense of being Homo Sapiens . Parrots commence!

  • nice how many aircraft this carrier can bring?

  • Nice ship

  • I'm amazed...very impressive

    also, how did that sukhoi take off without a catapult ? that seems very difficult to do operationally

  • @kcran5671 Well they do have the ski-ramp to help. Also I heard that those Sukois cannot take off with their full weapon capacity. -__- shame those planes could bring a world of hurt with a full arsenal.

  • russains rules...in space, in medicine, in everything...u.s.a sucks "only snobs"

  • @foxhoundmig hahahaha your an idiot!!! Try and read the newspaper or watch the news. Your country sucks ass. Too many Russians come here and get all the benefits that we offer. Your country is no where near the level of ours. Which is in every category. So stop your jealous. Because your embarrassing yourself.

  • @joseph591

    like wtf dude, every single russian military video i see, youre there hating on it. how many russians do you see hating on american videos? fuck off dude. you know hate is a form of fear

  • @barnaulishe good one man! Hello from Serbia ! cheers

  • @barnaulishe fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate... leads to suffering...

  • @roflrocketrofl sayed joda the great

  • @barnaulishe You see alot of hating on any military videos. russians are just as bad as americans. they are still in the cold war...

  • @Dynamitejoe1

    no, i think ill have to disagree with you on that one, all i see on american military videos is a a bunch of hill-billy rednecks screaming how America rules the place and eveyone else is a bitch, followed by the regular "huah". Its ironic because the origin of "huah" comes from the Russian "Ура!" which was used to motivate troops even during the tzar times.

  • @barnaulishe It is no diffrent from the russian ones, there they say: Russia rules, russia beat USA, Россию навсегда, and all that shit.

    nobody should want a war... i dont care if you dont like america, just dont be doublemoralic. because in reality, you guys are just as bad as them. :-) with no offense.

  • @Dynamitejoe1 No were not you fuck wit, Russia is a beautiful country which is not in the cold war anymore damn uneducated Americans and there propaganda

  • @Dr3aDnAuGhTz Yeap, anger mannagement issues, i smell alot of hatred, i see alot of hating on american videos aswell, you guys are just as bad as americans. face it.

  • @Dynamitejoe1 No, that smell is from your ass, maybe you should learn how to wipe if your gonna talk to the big boys. Fat boy!

  • @Dr3aDnAuGhTz bobob, i am neither american or russian, i am just saying you guys are also pretty annoying on american aircraft videos... + my own country is also pretty annoyed from all your unannouced flights with Tu-95's and Tu-160's over our territory...

  • @Dynamitejoe1 then yous probs shouldn't of shelled our villages 

  • @Dr3aDnAuGhTz You are an ass, one thing is i am from Denmark, and the only thing we remember about russia WW2 is that your aircraft relentlessly bombed and destroyed more than 800 civilian houses in Rønne and Nexø and seriously damaged roughly 3,000 more during 7–8 May 1945, and held it under control until 1946. and no offensive actions had been done by Denmark...

    Rest is that the Allies saved us for being victims of soviet territorial expansions such as east-germany.

    Know you history dude.

  • @Dynamitejoe1 I know my history I studied through school and uni for 17 years of my life don't lecture me, Stalin was a sick joke to the Russian Civilians but he also got results. I do not agree on the way Stalin approached Warfare but this was 35+ years ago the Soviet Union has broken up and Russia has become a much better place.. I do not agree with Socialist Expansion and am sorry for what my ancestors have done but too be very honest with you.... it wasn't really relevant to this video

  • @barnaulishe its the american internetwarriors who are just waiting to vore foxnews...oh I ment Republican warmongers.

  • Excuses, excuses - Georgia knew what it was to face if it proceeded. It beleived the US would kum flying to the rescue - onlu US did not thunk the Russians would retalitate - aside the fact the US fukked up in Iraq and Afgahanistan and Pakistan it can;t even defend its borders. US had a boat in the sea and did nothing knowing escalation was imminent, next scenario is when China decides to fuken take taiwan by force - and there is even warning from us to taiwan to dessist from seccesion - excuses

  • Comment removed

  • Also, to those of you who are wondering... I think that it runs on diesel, like most large ships. A nuclear engine just costs more to buy/construct. The Russian economy is still in the process of recovering from the Soviet Union, so it is not that easy to afford carriers. Besides, Russia isn't planning to engage in war with any superpowers. They don't have a need to maintain such a large fleet. As far as fleets go, it doesn't matter how large the ship is... it matters how good the missiles are.

  • no russian airshow without an ejection seat!!..lol

  • What kind of smoke is that coming out of the stack at 1:29? Does this ship run on coal-fired engines?

  • about said cruise missles by all... has ANY USA Carrier EVER launched said missles at a land based target ever? enough said...

  • its tiny

  • Nice carrier, but why cruise missiles under the flight deck? Makes no sense at for a carrier.

  • @Kwaj it is not an air craft carrier ... its a cruise air carrier ... or in russian avio - nesushii - kreiser

  • @Kwaj If you mean those white boxes running down the port side...I believe those are life rafts. If you mean the grey missile launchers near the fantail, those are self defense missiles (aircraft and ship). I'm sure you will find some automated gun platforms around the ship also, but no cruise missiles. You have aircraft auxiliary ships for that.

  • @Indogyearsimdead Just ahead of the island amidships, there are launchers for Shipwreck cruise missiles. The idea of an aviation ship embarking anti-ship missiles is just peculiar to me. Particularly given the range of a Shipwreck. Again, nice Russian ship (I like the Victor III's best), but arming it with cruise missiles seems to be a bit of overkill.

  • @Kwaj Per Wikipedia "The P-700 was designed in the 1970s to replace the P-70 Ametist and P-120 Malakhit, both effective missiles but with too short a range in the face of improving weapons of US Navy carrier battle groups." There are 12 and really it makes sense as it lets the ship defend its self and frees the aircraft to do their job.

  • @Indogyearsimdead Um, isn't the the job of the aircraft (and the escorts) to the defend the carrier? Again, what's the point of a carrier toting around anti-ship cruise missiles when the aircraft (and their weapons) have exceedingly better range? If an enemy surface combatant closes to within 300 miles of the Kuz, then her CAP and AEW must be really piss poor.

  • Comment removed

  • americans do not know how to train an army. the soliders are brainwashed grunts who have no self worth, they are all mouth and no heart. they think that spending time twiddling guns around in a silent drill is in somewhere going to protect that solider and teach him the ways of war. they enter battles gun-ho with no respect for allies or civillians as shown in the amount of friendly fire attacks against the english in afghan, and number of civillians that have been "baited" and killed.

  • @lumpyplop what does this have to do with the americans and the afghan,are you talking shit?

  • @lumpyplop pipedown small fry, the nypd would fuck up your little damp,dreary, pathetic little island. you lot certainly cannot build anything without it rattling to bits so your equipment is out of the equation. talking about heart, considering how fast the muzzies took over your country, and the lack of will your people have, we are not worried

  • @mrjimbeam2009

    we know you are not worried, cos you are too stupid to understand...just close your eyes and keep on dreaming.

  • @lumpyplop you cant even handle your own population, how are you going to take on a country? lmfao, sit back in your place

  • Comment removed

  • @mrjimbeam2009

    where the fuck do you thinki am from you fucking retard

  • I wonder why the Russians built this aircraft carrier that using fossil fuels instead of nuclear fuels like the American's own aircraft carrier?

  • Interesting warship, and a nice video.

  • It looks like they have to use afterburner for each launch.

  • I would like too see this Russian carrier vs the USS Nimitz. Will be a short battle.

    And I think ground troops and airforce are more important to Russia than a navy. Look at the map, when you own Russia it's a hell of a job to build and divide a fleet over all those parts of coast (from which half freezes over in the winter).

  • @ghostdivision7 This carrier vs the Nimitz would indeed be a short battle. They would both be sunk almost immediately. All you need is a single okay cruise missile hit, and any ship is history. That includes the Nimitz. And don't pretend that the missile defense system would help either. It helps when you have one or two missiles from a random failed boat from Iraq, but not when you have a fully fledged Russian carrier fighting you. If it goes down, you are 100% guaranteed to go with it.

  • Georgia didnt even have it's best unit at home during the War, it was in Iraq at the time. The Russians came in with 3 time sthe men, 10 times the tanks and the And air force? The Georgians don't even have a single fighter aircraft. Not that it really mattered, the Russian Air Force showed itself to be incompetent and only good at dropping unguided bombs on cities.

    The Georgians recieved very little training from the US and even less equipment. They didn't even use the M-16's we sold them.

  • @AK49Gunner Georgia had a few jet fighters, less than 10 if i recall. ALso giving figures or links would help your aurgument. So i have replied to his repley for you. =]

  • @AK49Gunner

    you're pulling numbers out of your ass.

    Russia send Georgians packing with parts of 58th army after rapid deployment and a long drive when Georgians still had a big numerical superiority.

  • you call that a carrier please dont make me laugh jejejejee lol

  • this video and song is an awesome mix. Also the Russian stuff always had a badass feel to them too. This carrier is no exception

  • It is not only aircraft carrier, that guy also armed with heavy rocket system including a long range surface-air,land,surface,under­water rockets and torpedos, also it has a wery perfect anti-air system Kortyk (Kortyk it means-ceremonial dagger of naval officer).

  • @Muddach sure it is

    i tried to say that comparing this carrier to any us-carriers is completele impossible

    because they have different missions and are used into a diferent way

    russia is using this carrier to guard thair nuclear submarines

    while the us use submarines to guard thair carriers

    hope that makes people see the difference

    us carriers - attack platform

    this carrier - defence platform

  • this carriers is not made to be a base for attacking the enemie lines

    but to protect the nuclear submarines from jets of the enemie

    its a diffenrent mission

  • I was wondering why the US navy didn't use the sky ramp method of launching aircraft than the steam catapult they're currently in use, it makes the ship more lighter & aircraft carry more ordnance during launch.

  • russian weapons kicked ass in Georgia . M4 and western equipment were largely outperformed by russian older & useful weapons

  • too bad this thing is falling apart. :-( rest in peace Admiral Kuznetsov

  • What a load of crap! One.....and I do mean ONE, US Navy Ohio class boomer would reclassify this strike force as an artificial reef.

  • @RW4X4X3006 The aircraft carrier hasn't been the ultimate superiority platform in decades. To compare an SSBN to a carrier is ridiculous. Totally different beasts.

    There is a thing called "Force Continuum." SSBN's are the last resort when all other measures fail to reverse a fatal trend. American aircraft carriers project power in support of foreign policy objectives. The carrier is only PART of a huge coordinated effort to that end. Other nations keep carriers as hobby-horses of the state.

  • How can you compare the Russian "aircraft carrier missile cruiser" with U.S. warehouses planes? He alone as the whole team escort the Americans! ;)) To attack and defend he can from everyone and everything ... The planes fly themselves - without a catapult. - That said that the aircraft and you do not yet learned ... Su-27 and MiG-29 the best and the sea;)) And what better and stronger in the world of fighting ships only in Russia! For example cruiser Pyotr Veliky

  • Gruzian army in Russia Gruzian war of august 2008 destroyed it in 5 days ...

    all Gruzian deffenses ,

    American trained Gruzian army run as fast as they could leaving behind Tanks , Trucks , Humvees , artillery , even wounded soldiers ...

  • There are a lot of planes that have retired no need to make such pathetic dramatic entries people and make your selves seem better than the next

    you all seriously need to quit being so insecure ...

  • cool , i like the ramp at the end. how many carriers does Russia have now ?

  • @tomjohnson1974

    just that 1, they should be able to make a few latter that are nuclear powered

  • PLEASE!! This is like the only Russian Carrier alive! And it's not really that hard to take a stealth bomber and bomb this whore

  • What kind of arrestor system does this thing use? It looks way different than the hook and cable we use. It's interesting how everyone attacks the same problem. USA uses steam catapults to launch and the Russia uses a longer takeoff surface, raw power from the aircraft and a ramp... they both achieve the same thing. Are most Russian Aircraft carriers nuclear?

  • this damned thing doesnt has a catapult to launch the planes ....wow

  • they lost because of russias force but russia lost 3 mig 29s, 21 t80s, and over 2000 men

  • @DimichCan Fortunately, Putin knows the CIA's game and was prepared for it. The U.S. runs drills as a camouflage for the real thing. An interesting variation of the False Flag deception.

    America's Army is full of poor quality recruits who join because our economy is in ruins. Roughly 1/5 of our Armed Forces are illegal aliens. Our biggest recruiting offices are in Mexico City and Manila. Our propaganda ministry bombards us with news over homosexuals and their problems in the armed forces.

  • thats why russia lost 3 mig 29s 1 su 29 4,000 troops 52 tanks and a destroyer

  • @DimichCan

    HOw wrong can you be?

    First, the Georgia's didn't have "the latest US weapons" you most have heard this lie from Propagana like RT.

    The Georgians had old Soviet gear, T-64 tanks, AK-47's, etc, they did get a few SP Artilery from European countyr, but not American,

    Second, the 58th army had twice as many men, and 10 times as many tanks and armored vehicles as the entire georgian military. And Georgia's best units were in Iraq at the time.

    Russia Just swarmed them.

  • @AK49Gunner propaganda rt..

    well.. keep reading your washington-propagader

    and your CNN-Propaganda-channel

  • @DimichCan

    lastest samples of us weapons? we gave them m16s and NVG's. not really anything special. the georgians arent the us and yet you think youve beaten us.

  • @mmafan1775 georgians also had humvees with mgs and rocket launching systems..

    and they were all disabled by russian forces..

    opened like a tin

  • @gazakind

    they had good some tech but the tech doesnt matter when its being operated by half retarded georgians.

  • @mmafan1775 well then i have to say.. the us forces are unable to train soldiers

  • @gazakind

    lol they trained the afghanis pretty well.

  • @mmafan1775

    and if you walk through afghanistan.. you still see flying car parts and tons of blood

  • @DimichCan Umm. You know nothing about military strategy. Georgia was not, in any way, prepared to face what Russia had coming. Russia did a complete, numbers advantage, sweep and wiped out communications before invading. Russia invading Georgia is about the same scale as the USA invading Rhode Island. It's like comparing the Federal US Military against the Rhode Island National Guard. In terms of military power, economy, and industry, Russia has nothing on the USA.

  • @wslx0195 I dont think you know what your talking about either. Russia is still a major power in the world, and NATO is still concerned about them. That speaks for something.

  • @billybobithyjo Well when you're dealing with a nation who does business with everyone NATO has a conflict with, then of course it's a problem.

  • @wslx0195 thats just bullshit. When su-37 came out US had no answet how did Russians manage to complete the engine that can fly with inverted vectors. None of US fighter are even near that kind of technology. When the ultrasonic missile (6000km/h speed) came out it was the proof that the US anti-missile shield was indeed usless. You can talk big trough your movies but we all saw how a bunch uf fanatics can steal a plane and hit your MOST GUARDED buildings in the country. Am I right?

  • @AngelsWingsINFanatis are you kidding me? America had inverted thrust vectors long before Russia! Have you heard of the Rockwell X31? It was a joined project between the US and German governments that long predates the Su-37...And yes, it wasn't a common thing to relate stolen aircraft to being possible weapons of total destruction so yeah you're somewhat right, we all saw it and are now aware of the possiblity, and so is any other government who witnessed it.

  • @AngelsWingsINFanatis Senseless Drivel!

  • @wslx0195, Georgia knew, it had US advise and that nimwit president studied in US. He underestimated Russia. Aside that, US did the same with Iraq. Now, had that been the case, why did the US not push Russia back or NATO for that fact? Russia did what US did, interventiosm to prevent genocide like in Iraq. Lets finish Iraq and Afgahanistan before we go unto Pakistan, Iran, Korea and lets not think about China or Russia for now - ya thunk?

  • @wslx0195 They defeated Hitler and they've got a whole bunch of nukes

  • @FantasticBob7000 Ok true.

  • @FantasticBob7000 it was both the Allies and soviets that Defeated Hitler

  • @superdarthrevan Russia took the brunt on the attack and loses...fact.

  • @wslx0195 US still has industry?

  • @Pseudologic Yes it's in China :D

  • @wslx0195 Yeah, that's what Napoleon and Hitler said, By the way how did those wars turn out?

  • @wslx0195 Russia didnt throw much at Georgia.....They only sent mechanized companies and special forces...

  • @999cheetos999 On top of carpet bombing...

  • @wslx0195 Russia just dropped alot of bombs from jets but not carpet bomb from thei TU-95's...If it was the population would be 0 or Georgia would be ruins now

  • @wslx0195 Department of Homeland Security Promises us that they will do everything to keep our freedom.

  • @wslx0195 what are your sources numbnuts? when russia launched a counter attack on georgia in 2008 they did it with about 15,000 troops that where in the region at the time. russia didnt have its whole army at the border so they didnt attack in "overwhelming" force like you say. and georgia had about 18,000 soilders with another 10,000 reservists. all equiped and trained by the US ARMY.now i dont know if ur quality of training is bad or if they just downright suck becuase it only showed,....

  • @KitchenSpeclol My sources are the sources all over the media. I have friend's in Afghanistan murdering on insurgents who are trained by affiliates of Russia and Russian weapons. Russian's suck.

  • @wslx0195 "My sources are the sources all over the media" So include BBC.Your points suck balls.Another ignorant American.

  • @999cheetos999 I'm not ignorant at all. Read my original post. It's true. Russia is poor. They can't feed their people. Russia has the highest crime rates and unemployment is at a sky high far beyond the US or EU. How can a country with those economical statistics be considered a super power or even a threat to any state in NATO. That's all I'm saying. Unless you come up with intelligent counter-arguments, you just got beaten in a debate with an 'ignorant American'.

  • @wslx0195 Russia can feed its people,most or portions of their land are not urban, and are usually farmlands and villages for ethnic groups.Which arent modernized in "American Standards" You dont call those poor. Russia doesnt have the HIGHEST crime rate and unemployment. In fact USA has a slightly higher unemployment rate than Russia, check 2010 statistics.

  • @wslx0195 that russia is very underated today. ofcourse you would never admit this, out of ignorance and fear im guessing, but that doesnt change the facts. and yes america has the best military but for how much longer? and dont try talking about how great you are. when was the last time you beat a credible opponent? WW2? and even then it was becuase you started after the war had already begun and with the help of russians ofcourse. beating iraq 2 times is a joke.

  • @KitchenSpeclol No fear or ignorance. Russia can't even afford to feed their own people. I pity the Russian population. The country should have stayed fascist. Moving to capitalism only allowed those with more resources and money to seize and profit off their greater investments. The enemy in Iraq and afghanistan all use Russian weapons and are trained by affiliates. It's obvious that they, and Russia, are no match to any modern country. Russia is simply moving into 3rd world as NATO advances

  • @wslx0195 Russia doesnt directly give weapons to Afghanistan and Iraq, they are first sold to Syria, and Syria exports it to anyone who needs em.Russia is probed and restricted to giving it to Iraq/afghanistan because of political tension (ofcourse).They were communist dumbass.Last time I checked the USA trained the afghans to fight the Soviet Union too bad they turned their back on you as well.

  • @999cheetos999 Ok ok. So what you're saying is that Russia is the supplier of weapons in Afghanistan? Just like I said right? They're exporting to a reseller who sells to Afghanistan. In economics, that is considered selling to because the end market is in Afghanistan.

  • @wslx0195 ? Im just saying its indirectly sold, If im pertaining to "supplier" meaning the distributor,not the sole. Russia makes the weapons, and hell any country that isnt banned can buy it,and Russia doesnt care what they do with it,its just good for business.Plus Russian equipment are cheap yet effective, w/c is pretty much the reason why poor/terrorist groups buy them. Its pretty much the same if USA isnt in any war and have cheap equipment, they will supply anyone who has the cash.

  • @KitchenSpeclol You (and other commonwealth countries) should support us Americans rather than side with 3rd world oppressive ex-super powers.

  • @wslx0195 support your campaign of terror so that the elite could fill there pockets with more money? hell noand are you really calling russia a third world country? lol that only shows your ignorance. you call russia oppresive and aggressive yet do we go and invade countries just becuase we "thought" they had WMD's? and do we have military bases in every goddamn country on earth? dude youre clearly a retard if you think your own shit doesnt stink.

  • @DimichCan

    Georgia didn't have modern U.S. weapons. As a matter of fact, Georgia uses Russian made weaponry (such as AK74's and BTR-80 APC's). They may have a had a couple small arms of U.S. design, but they didn't have an armory of U.S. weaponry. All their gear was Russian or Russian in origin.

  • @DimichCan the real threat- sexy real estate agents who are really spies.

  • Comment removed

  • @DimichCan Google " South Ossetia war", the Georgians were outnumbered, and russia did not eliminate them, Georgias kill to death ratio agaisnt Russia and her allies was actually higher than their enemies. Second of all, Georgia had a TINY airforce, russia had the backing of around 2,749 aircraft. Moreover do not be proud of what russia did to georgia, they killed almost as many civillians as they did soliders. God save the world from idiots

  • @vonkeonig cause civillians are dumbasses :D

  • @TonyFirelli And that would include YOU? 

  • @Indogyearsimdead Errrrrm No, See I look outside the box on the world so yeah...

  • @TonyFirelli Sorry but really don't understand your answer.

  • @Indogyearsimdead I'm not a dumb civilian is what I meant.

  • Really thats why the ruskies lost 1300 men and over 4000 fled the feild of battle in all

    1300 men

    21 tanks

    4 mig 29s

    and 1 destroyer

  • @steamingpoopfart I think you got things way wrong. Russia never lost a destroyer Georgia did. Russia only lost 2 tanks. Russia only lost about 15-23 troops. I think you got mixed up with Georgian casualties. There troops where running back to the capital city on civilian vehicles.

    Man you probably live in the US, everybody there is so stupid.

  • @alexvasilenko14 Fuck you you dumb shit what did u expect them to do? and By the way not everybody in the us is stupid you little cunt! U.S.A! U.S.A! U.S.A!