Chavez: Venezuela to buy more tanks over US threat

[Bacchus39]

Source: AP



CARACAS, Venezuela – President Hugo Chavez said Wednesday his government will buy dozens of Russian tanks because Venezuela feels threatened by a pending deal for the U.S. military to increase its presence in neighboring Colombia.

Chavez announced the plan for to boost Venezuela's military while condemning Colombia's negotiations on an agreement to let U.S. forces use at least seven of its military bases.

"We're going to buy several battalions of Russian tanks," Chavez said at a news conference with international correspondents, saying the deal is among accords he hopes to conclude during a visit to Russia in September.

Chavez's government has already bought more than $4 billion worth of Russian arms since 2005, including helicopters, fighter jets and Kalashnikov assault rifles.


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090805/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_venezuela_colombia

[Pavulon]

1. They did great in GW1 and 2, great idea..

your oil dollars at work..

[Sherman A1]

2. Agreed

This will work out so well for him. It's sort of like recycling, the Russians unload a bunch of old equipment and get some petrol dollars for it.

[happyslug]

59. The Russian Tanks, when used properly, did well in GWI and GWII

The problem in GWI was Saddam mis-used them (Once he lost Air Cover he should have withdrawn and revert to a infantry/Guerrilla defense but that was NOT possible given that most of the people of Southern Iraq AND Kuwait are Shiites who hated Saddam more then they hated the US). In at least one case (And this is the only case I have read of a US M1 Tank being "defeated") was when a company of T-62s tanks were in a defensive position. The rest of the Company's tanks were quickly detected and destroyed based on the heat of their engines, but one tank never turned on his engine and thus was a "Cold" Tank as the M1 tanks came within range of his gun. The T-62 then took out one M1 tank, and then destroyed itself. This appears to be what Serbia did during the Air War Against Serbia (And why so many Serbian Tanks survived the Aerial attack), i.e. the real tanks never turned on their engines (or if they did just to move to a new location) but older tanks (Mostly WWII era T-34s) were reinforced with Concrete and had fires running under where their engines should have been (But instead had concrete). These "false" tanks drew all the attentions of the NATO pilots so all the real tanks were not hit (The Serbian forces were only hit hard after NATO had converted the Kosvo troops into a decent, but not great, land force. Those Kosovo forces forced the Serbs to concentrate their forces which made then easier targets (Through even here the Serbs managed to save most of their tanks).

In GWII, Saddam had NOT been able to get new tanks since BEFORE 1992 and most of the parts needed for his T-72s were in short supply, thus most of the tanks he had available were 1950s era T-54s (Unlike GW1 were Saddam had 1970s era T-72s to be used as his main tanks). The T-54 series is noted for one thing, one of the easiest tanks to repair in the field. Thus Saddam had plenty of T-54s during GWII, but in the open deserts that surround the Tigris and Euphrates river Valleys sending out the T-54 would have been suicidal. Saddam had learned his lesson, he did not waste his T-54s in the open desert, he kept them back for to counter any attack into the area between the above two rivers.

Now what happen as the US forces entered Baghdad is unclear. The US did force itself into the city but those first attacks seems to be more reconnaissance in force then an full scale assault on the city. There are indications that Saddam never had any attention of putting up more then a token effort to keep the Americans out, planning from day 1 to revert to Guerrilla War after putting up a good front. At the same time Saddam did send his Conventional units to fight off US forces, but then never gave any local commanders the option to destroy any of the Bridges in their area of operations (this seems to be to keep the option open of sending troops to suppress the Shiites of South Iraq, if the Shiites did a revolt like they did at the end of GW1). The best explanation is that Saddam wanted to keep complete control until the very end, he wanted to be able to suppress the Shiites if they joined in with the Americans, at the same time he wanted to option of going Guerrilla. As the US neared Baghdad Saddam seems to have decided that time was right for him to go Guerrilla and thus left his headquarters. Once Saddam left, the command system he had developed over the previous 20 years of his rule could not function without him and collapsed and with it all organized Resistance. This occurred even BEFORE the first US units held onto any land between the rivers (Through as the US was about to launch an attack on Baghdad).

My point was the US Attack was so overwhelming all Saddam could hope for was to delay the US attack. If he had support from the Shiites he may have been able to do a better job but given that 1/2 the country was Shiite and that is the 1/2 with most, but not all, of the oil is in, Saddam's ability to stop the US forces were slim to begin with (US pre-War War games seems tended to through Shiite support for Saddam, something Saddam himself could not and did not count on).

Anyway, the T-54s in Iraq did their job of keeping US forces out of the area between the two rivers till the whole country collapsed. The US avoided taking them on in the area between the rivers for most of the advantages of the M1 disappeared in that terrain (And where the price of losing one M1 tank to one T-54, a tank that cost only 1/10th of an M1 was not only possible but to high to even risk M1s in that terrain). Thus the T-54 did its job in GWII, it kept the US forces out of the area between the Rivers BEFORE the Government itself collapsed and that all that could be expected of it and the T-54 did that job well.

[IndianaGreen]

3. More air to surface and anti-tank missiles will be a big help, PLUS

training and arming a large people's militia to defend the homeland against imperialist invasion.

Our troops should not be used to defend the interests of Wall Street!

And it's one, two, three, four
What you think we're fighting for?
Don't know, and I don't give a damn
We're all going to Vietnam

[The abyss]

21. Hi Indiana – I didn’t recognize your new image/icon/thingie.

Good call! Well, actually I think you meant surface-to-air stinger type devices rather than air-to-surface. Anyway – well stated!

Anti-tank rocket systems, both personal infantry platforms and crew systems are a much better purchase.

Instead of buying he should be licensing production!

The goal should be to put a rifle/rpg/rpd behind every blade of grass. Train in simple schools, two weeks – no more. Map reading skills, simple squad tactics, weapons handling & maintenance, essential communication skills. No quad bashing.

I thought that was his program?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

4. This would be really laughable if the $$$ were not needed for domestic programs in Venezuela

However, Russia has a large inventory of tanks in mothballs and they could use the money.

[IndianaGreen]

9. Chavez would be derelict if he allowed Venezuela to go the way of Iraq

and the same can be said about any responsible leader in any country.

Why is the US increasing militarism in Latin America when there are needs at home?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

17. How could anyone seriously think Obama is going to invade anywhere in Latin America

[Sezu]

25. lol but if he does, Chavez better have a

better hidey hole than Saddam

[saigon68]

35. After Obama is out the door

There is a huge right wing backlash coming.

Imagine BrownBack, Sessions or someone like that as Pres. Frightening.

They are starting here FRIGHTENING


Green Bay, WI, last night, town hall meeting, 500 folks booed/shouted (at Democrat Steve Kagan...)

MY REP it was horrid

[RedCloud]

78. good point. Cheney's left behinds are already sniffing Vzla's oil fields.

[endarkenment]

41. indeed one only needs to reflect on the long history

of direct and indirect military intervention by the USA in Latin America, and to learn about the network of military bases we maintain in the region, including a huge presence in Venezuela's neighbor Colombia, to realize how silly it would be to think that we would interfere militarily, directly or indirectly in the region.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

54. Huge presenece?

Which divisions and what air wing?

[jakeXT]

47. Decades ago you even needed congress for a war, but those times are over it seems

[vadawg]

48. thats what i was thinking, above it looks like some serious belief that

A: the obama admin is going to invade and that
B: there was much that venezuala could do to stop it

[Flaneur]

61. Right. The US typically backs coups instead of invading.

We let those little brown people down there do all the dying.

[ro1942]

19. thanks for your comments

spot on

[Pavulon]

37. This is not directed at the US, it is pointed at neighbors..

you see the US spends trillions to be able to break toys and destroy infrastructure on a grand scale. He can buy all the soviet shit he likes without altering the bottom line. Now colombia, they may be a bit worried.

[endarkenment]

42. Colombia, where we have spent over 2B this decade on military aide.

Colombia and our military presence there are a threat to Venezuela. But you knew that.

[Pavulon]

45. No, every modern weapon we use

is a threat from south florida. Being in colombia is no more a threat to them than being in the southeast us.

[endarkenment]

50. that is just nonsense

but carry on it is quite amusing

[ProgressiveProfessor]

53. To a point...

Yes the US has a long military reach, but to be effective tactically you need a combined arms force including a ground troops and close air support. That hard to do well from Florida and why the US has carriers and the gators. Deep strikes etc would be flown from the US.

[Flaneur]

62. So, then, why do we need seven bases in Colombia?

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

39. Well, if Venezuela invades Kuwait, we might go in

Or some country closer.

But yes, our money is better spent on health care, education, etc.

[Regret My New Name]

84. "This would be really laughable if the $$$ were not needed for domestic programs in Venezuela"

"This would be really laughable if the $$$ were not needed for domestic programs in Venezuela"

That can be applied to pretty much any country. Particularly a certain one who spend more than the rest of the combined. Of course that doesn't make your point any less relevant.

[Tejas]

5. Wonder how many he will give the Columbian rebels?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

6. Tanks require support infrastructure and open country/road. No use to FARC

or for that matter Venezuela. Only winners in this deal are the Russians who get the $$$

[SeriousEbony]

7. The will need time to grind off the serial numbers first

Hugo does not want another Swiss incident. Hope he got a clunker deal on the tanks.

[IndianaGreen]

8. Did you know that the Colombian insurgency has been raging for 50 years?

Did you know that the Colombian insurgents put down their arms and came down the mountains only to be subsequently murdered by US-trained death squads?

Did you know that a few years ago there was a truce in place, a modus vivendi, in which the insurgents kept themselves in areas they controlled, and that this truce was broken by former death squad leader and current President-for-life Uribe?

All you know is the propaganda you have been fed by the corporate media.

[Wilms]

10. Thanks. I didn't know that.

This underscores the value of having these parrots re-issuing every gasp of the corporate media.

I have learned so much researching this subject.

I think I made a co-worker ill by mentioning that listening to, and repeating word for word, that which is broadcast on NPR doesn't make one a progressive.

[Tejas]

23. "All you know is" - you have no clue as to what I or anyone else knows.

Thank you for playing.

[Vidar]

34. Thanks for the reminder.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

56. That is your spin on it, there are others...

[harmonicon]

11. who knows....

I do know that he could never afford to give them what the US has given to the right-wing Columbian death squads.

[Kurska]

12. Tanks are useless without air superiority

Something Venezuela could never achieve even if they were only up against US carrier groups and not the entire might of the US Airforced rebased in Colombia airfields.

Chavez is a fool, and fools and their money are soon parted.

[MADem]

31. The Shah put his tanks to work intimidating HIS OWN POPULATION.

It's one of the reasons it took so long for the Revolution to take hold, even with him fighting cancer. There were tanks at every square, on every streetcorner, at the bazaar, by all the shops....everywhere you went, you were under the watchful eye of nervous guys in tanks.

It did keep people in line for awhile.

I rule out nothing!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

75. You presume a US attack, consider if he decides to do more saber rattling at this neighbors?

[Lagomorph]

13. Well...

Seeing how Columbia doesn't have ANY tanks, a few dozen armored cars and APCs(Venezuela already has more tanks than Columbia has armored vehicles, and another 400 APCs on top of that), ZERO dedicated helicopter gunships, a grand total of 25 1960's era Israeli and French fighters, I gotta wonder what Chavez has in mind. Seems like an asymmetrical response to the US anti-drug & Columbia's anti-insurgency efforts. The US wants to send military people to Columbia to improve four bases so we can actually land our current C-17 cargo aircraft on them. Columbia, frankly, doesn't have any offensive military capabilities to speak of. It's all low intensity, counter insurgency assets. Even Chavez couldn't prove Columbia poses a military threat. Columbia would be nuts to try an offensive operations outside their own borders.

To each his own...

[clixtox]

24. Perhaps, as a country with oil resources in the ground, he is paranoid...

about the intentions of the USA. I doubt anybody could blame him, or the Venezuelans, for being very concerned about the USA now, and going forward.

Any prudent leader of a country floating on oil, after the unmistakeable lesson offered by our ongoing war crimes & plundering in Iraq, has to ramp up their defensive capabilities to, hopefully, deter all potential thieving aggressors.

When that potential enemy, the USA, (Us, you and me!), has a historical record of dispicable war crimes and genocide, it has to expend limited resources, hopefully as prudently as possible.

The USA has a history of literally bankrupting their rivals to maintain their/our empire. That is one of our few successful strategies in our undeclared wars against our empires rivals, dissidents and insurgents.

[proteus_lives]

14. Old Soviet junk.

Waste of money.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

18. Soviet tanks are not junk...just not up to the latest MBT standards.

However since Columbia has no tanks and no offensive capability to speak off, it there would not be much of a fight against a potential Venezuelan invasion.

[proteus_lives]

20. What's the ground like?

Is the Columbia/Venezuela area good ground for tanks?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. Varies, but over all, not really

FARC hides in the forests on both sides of the border.

[Lagomorph]

26. Right you are.

Even those old Soviet tanks will be the King of the Battlefield against anything Columbia has. I saw T-54's in Vietnam. I sat in one in the City of Kontum, during the battle in 1972. It had been hit by several LAW rockets, but never burned. The crew abandoned it when they ran out of fuel and ammunition. They wouldn't have stood a chance against our M60A3's, at the time, but then, we didn't have any M60A3s in Vietnam, so the T-54's were quite effective against ARVNs light M-41's.

Russian equipment is nothing to scoff at. Their RPGs have killed more armor than any tank. The AK speaks for itself. We didn't have a better tank until the M1 showed up. It's biggest advantage is the 2.5 mile main gun.

[sofa king]

30. Tanks in general are nothing to scoff at.

Most of us would run away from a 90-year old Rennault if all we had was feet and a rifle.

[Lagomorph]

32. True, but with a little training...

...you could have one in your garage.

In many places in the world, it's a "must have" item. You are either "no threat" or, if you even have a TV, you are a threat. If somebody on TV says something bad about the local power structure, you're a traitor, spreading counter revolutionary lies.

[timeforpeace]

15. He is so smart.

Putin, that is. You were thinking Chavez? LOL!

[bitchkitty]

16. omigod omigod omigod OMIGOD!!!!!

RUN!!!!

[fujiyama]

27. .

[sofa king]

28. Oh, man, there's a job I don't want.

Perhaps it's changed, but when the Soviets made their bread and butter by selling crummy T54/55s around the globe, they never put in climate control systems. In the tropic sun, those things heat up just like rocks or black plastic car seats. And some poor sonofabitch is going to be expected to crawl around in those things. Above a certain temperature--around 130 deg. F, I think--the human brain actually forgets to breathe, and you have to do it consciously or suffocate. Screw that!

But tanks work surprisingly well in the jungle, if you have plenty of people to tend 'em and occasionally drag them around (yes, drag, with human muscle power when necessary). One tank showing up to a jungle fight has sometimes been enough to end it. At the Battle of Kohima, British soldiers bulldozed a trail to a mountain summit, then dragged a single Grant tank up it, then turned it loose on the Japanese position below at the Deputy Commissioner's (former, totally destroyed) tennis court, which helped to crack the entire Japanese line.

[democracy1st]

29. i told you guys he was nuttier than a fruit cake!

[Pavulon]

38. You cant criticize christ che the water walker..

i am waiting for the actual event that will cause his disciples to acknowledge he is doing his own thing.

[endarkenment]

44. How is having an armed force equipped with actual weapons

proof of anything regarding this person you refer to as "christ che the water walker.."?

Why exactly is Venezuela not allowed to purchase tanks from Russia? Why would such a purchase be wrong?

[Pavulon]

46. Not wrong, just stupid

venezuela has plenty of 3rd world poverty in the form of ranchos around caracas, and I am sure there is less visible poverty outside of the city. They should spend my citgo dollars on that first. That equipment is useless against the "us threat" however would be helpful in a war with colombia or in the streets during civil unrest.

[Flaneur]

63. Gee, maybe you should run for parliament there.

You seem so well attuned to what Venezuela needs.

[Tejas]

69. Maybe you should go back to geography class,

Pavulon understands logistics, come back when you have an inkling.

[DatManFromNawlins]

57. Simple

The US attacks via air first. By the time any US forces actually invaded via the ground, there'd be very few tanks left to fight with.

Chavez has become more and more paranoid about losing his power as time has gone on.

[endarkenment]

68. so if I understand your answer to why Chavez should not

be purchasing weapons, it is because we will blow them all up? Is that your final answer?

[Tejas]

70. No, the point is that you refuse to understand.

You refuse to understand that when it comes to military equipment, tanks are the last thing Chavez needs.


eta: except when it comes to blowing up radio stations. :sarcasm:

[endarkenment]

71. Oh they are buying other stuff too, like air defense systems

so you should not worry so much that it is just tanks.

[endarkenment]

43. yeah this proves it

how dare Venezuela actually have a military equipped with weapons? That's nutz!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

55. He is well over armed WRT to his neighbors and could never have enough to stand up to the US

[endarkenment]

67. Don't let any facts hit you on the way out the door.

Venezuela
Active personnel 100,000 budget % gdp 1.2, rank 130 $1.6 billion

Colombia
Active personnel 421,428 budget % gdp 3.4 rank 37 $3.5 billion

various sources, cia fact book, wiki, and global security.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

73. Looks at the hardware, not just the # in uniform...some "facts" are more important than others.

[Vidar]

33. Good move by Chavez, though deathsquads are the preferred US method.

[sufrommich]

36. What US threat? Is Obama threatening Chavez again?

:rofl:

[rabs]

40. You are jesting, right? But just in case you are not ...

... nah, Obama himself is not threatening Chavez. But so far BO has been powerless to rein in the leftover bushwhack hawks running the Pentagon. Therein is the problem.

You have heard of the Pentagon's "seven" in Colombia and of the Orinoco "gold" in Venezuela, I assume. If not, see below.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-08/06/content_11833825.htm

[Bacchus39]

49. all you are doing is repeating Chavez's wild accusations n/t

s

[WriteDown]

51. Its too bad B is such a stupid and ineffective...

leader. :eyes:

[hack89]

66. But Chavez will never be able to purchase enough weapons

to defend his country if America was to attack. He hasn't enough money.

[UTUSN]

52. Rec to try to undo the UnReKKK-ing but Huguito's UnReKKK-ers are impenetrable!1 n/t

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MinM]

58. Latin scholars recently bought an ad in CJR to out fabrications by AP

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/04/venezuela-media-freedom-chavez

...MacShane is taking advantage of the fact that after 10 years of media misrepresentation with no significant countervailing force, anyone can say anything about Venezuela and Chávez and it will not be challenged. A group of Latin America scholars recently bought a full-page ad in the Columbia Journalism Review to call attention to outright fabrications by the Associated Press...
http://www.borev.net/2009/07/heres_an_interesting_question.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x468949

[happyslug]

60. I notice Chavez does NOT mention what Russian Tank he is looking at

If I was him I would go with the BMP-3. Now the BMP-3 is technically an Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle (MICV) but that was just so the old Soviet Union could have a Tank that was NOT a tank under the Conventional Arms Reduction Treaty of the 1980s. MICVs were NOT tanks under that Treaty and thus the BMP-3 did NOT count as a Tank for that treaty purpose.

In reality the BMP-3 is a Light tank, it has a 100mm cannon for Anti-Armor purposes with a 23mm co-axial gun for Anti-Aircraft defense. Its engine is in the rear, like a tank's, but it can haul troops in the rear between the Turret and the Engine (The Troops vacating through Roof Hatches). The BMP-3 is amphibious and thus a good choice for combat in Jungle areas (During Vietnam the US preferred to use its M113 in such areas, the M48s Tanks the US had been using in Vietnam would get stuck in the mud of the jungles of Vietnam, memories of such was the reason the US demanded the M1 tank be amphibious itself, so it could keep up with the M113s and the later M2 Bradley MICV).

Now do to its size the BMP-3 is a large tank, but fairly light weight. Can it go one on one with an M1? NO, but the BMP-3 with its Cannon and AA Gun could provide good fire support to guerrillas and given it is a "Light Tank" easier to maintain then any much heaver Main Battle Tank. The BMP-3 would give any invading force fits and for a much lower cost then more expensive Tanks (This is true not only of the M1 tank but the T-72s and its more recent developments, and the T-64 and how the Russians have developed it).

As to the T-72 and T-64 (and the more recent tanks developed from those two tanks lines) those were designed more for the steppes of Russian then any place else. While usable in the Jungle of South America, the fact that all of the Russian tanks have a limited ability to lower its turret means it MUST expose more of its front to enemy fire then a technically taller western tank do to the western tank greater ability to lower it gun much further then you can on a Russian tank. Western Tanks were designed for the more hilly terrain of Western Europe where such hull down fighting behind hills has been the norm since WWII. I personally think the tanks he has now are good enough, any Russian main battle Tank will NOT be much of an improvement (if any at all). On the other hand the BMP-3 would increase the ability of his infantry to resist any invasion and increase his ability to project power to other countries (Based on the fact the BMP-3 can operate in Muddy and Water terrain).

The drawbacks on the BMP-3 are immense, Russian equipment is the easiest to work on, but one of the reason for this is how poorly such equipment comes out of the factory (The average Russian is considered the best mechanic in the world today, for the same reason US soldiers had that reputation during WWII, both group of young men had to work with junk to get it to work so the more their work to get the junk to work the better mechanics they became, practice of any art, including repairing junk, makes one better in that art).

Having said the above, the issue is going to be what "Tank" is Chavez planning on buying? The BMP-3 would be a good buy if his plan is defensive, the T-72 would NOT be a good buy unless he engage in a war against someone other then the US (and even then marginal compared to what he has at present, mostly 1950-1960 era Main Battle Tanks).

[ProgressiveProfessor]

74. Interesting analysis but the problem is you are looking at it practically

when in fact there is no military need for them. Instead they are really a phallic substitute for Chavez and his ego.

Given the additional complexity of the treads, a BTR-80 might also make a good choice. However, both the BMP and BTR are much more lightly armored than a MBT and more susceptible to portable anti tank weapons.

[Lagomorph]

77. So far he's asked for....

100 T-90's. Russia's newest MBT
135 BMP-3's, their latest IFV
20 TOR-M1, Russia's current frontline tactical air defense system (He's received 12)
3 Kilo Class Submarines

Night Vison scopes for "every single rifle in the Venezuelan army."
He is also looking for several battalions of additional Russian tanks, type not determined and long range multiple rocket launchers.

This is all state of the art, modern firepower. He wants highly mobile equipment with heavy day/night firepower. He could sweep aside any army in South or Central America with this gear.

Unfortunately, if recent history is to be considered, this will lead to a South American arms race as Brazil, Argentina, Columbia and Peru scramble to match their deterrents to his offensive capabilities. His comments about intervening militarily in Honduras will not be dismissed with an Army like that.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

79. Hmmm, not sure where you got your data

But depending on variant, most of that list in not the newest nor the best. Russia does not sell its top tier SAMs, and the TOR-M1 is certainly not the newest or most effective.

[Lagomorph]

81. The Russians have many more systems....

....and much larger systems, but it looks like Venezuela will be fielding the best gear in it's class, the same gear Russia uses on the same tactical level. He has asked for what it takes to fight United States, not his South American neighbors. That takes the technology to a much higher level.

T-90 is the same tank the Russian are upgrading to.

"The T-72 and its successor, the T-90, will probably form the mainstay of the Russian tank force. Production of the T-95 tank, due to be unveiled in 2009, could be launched in the next two or three years."

The BMP-3 is, in fact, Russia's latest IFV.

The Tor is the latest short range layer in Russia's multilayer Air Defense system. The S-300, S-400 and SA-17 are all longer range systems. Russia usually deploys them at higher organization levels than Venezuela has created. They may provide him with another layer or some Tunguska gun/missile systems to roll with his T-90's, but the latest orders have yet to be finalized.

If he wants to take on the US, he's gonna need a lot more air defense. The Russians know this, as they have developed the systems they think they need.

Hugo is getting many high tech weapons, laser guided bombs, TV guided cruise missiles, air to surface missiles and anti-radiation missiles, all of which he would need in a fight against the US.

http://russiadefence.englishboard.net
http://engforum.pravda.ru
http://www.roe.ru

I've been following military developments for 35 years. I learned that arms buildups frequently precede conflicts. If I were a little more cynical I'd probably think that wars are just a business played by the G8, G20, WTO.....whoever. It seems Obama is the first president we've elected who wasn't a Player. Since we're still in Iraq & Afghanistan, and moving into Columbia, I gotta wonder if he has been co-opted.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

82. Again, the details are important,

The BMP-3 has been around for a generation, first seen in 1990. It is indeed current Russian equipment, but there are multiple variants as well as significant changes since its introduction, so which model is important. There are also 3rd parties providing significant upgrades to them as well.

The SA-15A is older stuff, from the late 80s. The 15B is better, has been exported and many of the A versions were upgraded to B models in Russia and abroad. The latest is the TOR-M2 which is not exported and is just getting to Russian troops this year. http://en.rian.ru/russia/20071225/94119712.html Its been described as a "deep modernization". Also Russia historically removes some functionality from their export version. There is no confirm combat kill by a Tor of any variant, though some give it credit for one in Georgia. Good article with pictures is here: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-PLA-PD-SAM.html#mozTocId123582 . Without the rest of a functioning IADS (not just the longer range SAMs) units like the TOR have a hard time providing the point defense they are designed for. Low flying smart weapons (its primary target) are hard to acquire/track/launch without prior cueing.

The T-90 is not unlike the BMP. It was introduced in the early 90s with multiple variants and at least one major manufacturing upgrade and export variants. Its interesting to note the India bought the 5-90 and immediately upgraded key components. http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/T-90S.htm

Its clear that Hugo does not need this kind of firepower to defend his nation, so his motivations for this kind of firepower are questionable. The answer I like best involves a diminutive phallus on his part. The non-humorous answer would be to intimidate neighboring nations and possible internal challengers to his power. It not like there is going to be any US direct military action for the next 8 years. This stuff is also not cheap. The $$$ would go a long way to address serious needs in Venezuela

[Lagomorph]

83. I'd love to have a conversation.

I'm sure it would be a great learning experience for me.

This is a hobby for me, greatly enhanced by the internet, but I consider staying informed just a part of "due diligence".

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

65. Time to invade Mexico.

:think:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

72. Laughable.

Ancient shitty Russian tanks pose no threat to a US force.

[Akoto]

76. This is a pointless waste of Venezuelan money.

For one thing, I really doubt that Obama wants to participate in an attack on Venezuela. He has more than enough on his plate.

Setting that aside, a few battalions of old tanks would count for zip if we did attack. What's the first thing we do during an invasion? Assaults from the air. Until he has superior control over Venezuela's airspace, those tanks will just be ground targets waiting to be picked off.

I can't help but question his motives in this. The tanks won't do any good against us, but they might against his neighbors, or his own people. Not that we're one to talk, given recent history, but Chavez seems to have grabby hands lately in many respects.

[TankLV]

80. He's just being PRUDENT...

I can't fault him for that...

especially in light of the RECENT PAST...

[hack89]

85. They serve no purpose against the US military

they are, however, useful against his neighbors and own population.