Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 LordofHats wrote:
Because there's a lot more in who you buy weapons from than the quality of weapons. I can only imagine all the gakky tanks and aircraft the US pawned off on other countries back in the 50s and 60s simply because the big names in the game were America and Russia, and no one would buy from Russia unless they wanted to be associated with Communism. Even today, the purchase/transfer of weapons is a lot less about quality than it is about establishing trade agreements and bolstering relations. How do you think the US actually managed to sell the F35 to anyone

Of course the Russian gear is crap joke is a myth propagated during the Cold War. I think someone did a study on it some time ago and found that Russian equipment had about the same range of suck/not suck as most arms manufacturers. That Russia tends to make cheap but reliable weapons, probably helped to further the myth because in the West "cheap" is often falsely equated with "crap."

That rule only worked well when we had stand off between the two political camps. Since the communist idea is somewhat dead beyond a handful of rogue nations which only use it as a tool to control their own people and don't project it on anyone else, the modern customers have plenty of choice to chose from. Guelph States buy a lot of Russian-made weapon systems, and they have plenty of money and choices. Even Mexico, which you can call a US colony, uses Russian-made Mi-8 for their Marines and finds no problem with them. The same with the other armaments, only price, quality and service affects who buys what now.

And the Prices here at Crazy Ivan's are so low, we must be INSANE!

In reality though there are still only a few big providers of military hardware, and Russia is the Wal-Mart box store of the international arms market.

Regardless of communism, many nations still continue to do business with their old trading partners.

Mexico has always bought a certain amount of Russian hardware. If you think they're an American colony, I refer you to their recent response to Donald Trump.

And it's also an assertion that's quite possibly the most ignorant thing I've seen you post.

 BaronIveagh wrote:


No, the hypocrisy comes in because if someone said the average Russian would not know what an ATGM was, you'd have rageposted about what a terrible, nasty, Russophobic racist they were. But it's A-Ok for you to insinuate that the poster who suggested that the TOW was possibly a Russian made missile because it had a similar flight characteristic, rather than being informed on the subject, was most likely an ignorant bigot who couldn't possibly know anything about Russian missiles.

I am glad that you can see the future. I wish I had the same abilities. That or you just making an bigoted assumption about me. See how that works? I think there is a very high probability that some random UK poster knows horse shiRt about anti-tank weapons than him posting a very knowledgeable reply on the video, that depicts a trace of a flying missile for less than 21 seconds and apparently I am not the only one.

Well, one, because China isn't selling atm. They do have a knockoff, though, sadly, it's performance is, supposedly, much superior to the Russian original, with a range increase of almost a quarter. Thus far, though, we're all waiting on seeing it for ourselves.

Yes it does. Turkey was trying to buy it but was told by NATO that if they do they will lose access to NATOs integrated air defense system because Chinese will require an access to it in order to make their knock-off operational with the Turkey's specifications.

Two, because Iran has been buying Russian made equipment since the Iran-Iraq war, and has people with technical experience in maintaining and servicing Russian aeronautic equipment.

Iran was buying and still has a lot of Western military equipment. Just because they were buying from USSR, doesn't mean they suddenly forgot everything they knew before.

Three, Russia's prices are so low that I can buy a T-72M, fully loaded, for slightly over what I'd pay for a car in the current market. Comparable western tanks will set you back about a quarter million. Low prices do tend to offset inferior quality, and there's a lot of poor countries out there that want something they can at least call a tank and not have people laugh.

Low Russian military equipment prices are a myth. Surely, they were dumping a lot of stuff on the 90s when they needed cash badly, but those days are over. And you can still buy a car for a "a quarter million" thus your example is dubious.

 Yaraton wrote:
That rule only worked well when we had stand off between the two political camps.

Not really. Arms deals are and always have been about foreign politics more than anything (cost is certainly a factor, but military prestige usually overrides cost concerns. State's that want arms want what they think will be the best arms, and they'll pay extra if they think it's worth it). Who you want to be friends with, and who your presumed enemies are. The USSR might be gone, but for many parts of the world its specter remains and will for many years, and Russia doesn't exactly help with that going away what with Georgia and Ukraine and Syria making everyone nervous. The US doesn't help either, with it's dogmatic and hypocritical foreign policy producing a "your with us or against us" dynamic in foreign politics.

the modern customers have plenty of choice to chose from.

Yep. This is probably the biggest thing that's changed. Lots of countries that used to have no domestic manufacturers now do. However lots of them still buy heavily from foreign makers and will for at least a few more decades. Particularly in Europe, where the market has recovered since WWII and is often the go to for countries that are alienated by the US, and either can't make something themselves or can't for whatever reason buy it from Russia or China. Some things are likely to always be imported for many countries, particularly aircraft and naval ships. Some countries are likely to just never have the interest in developing a domestic market so long as there is an ample foreign one to fall back on.

Guelph States buy a lot of Russian-made weapon systems, and they have plenty of money and choices.

Lots of those countries also don't like the US, and hardly want to be solely dependent on us for arms They have pretty good reason too. Monroe Doctrine is a two century long international disaster.

Even Mexico, which you can call a US colony

That would be stretching the word colony to pointlessness @_@

 BaronIveagh wrote:

In reality though there are still only a few big providers of military hardware, and Russia is the Wal-Mart box store of the international arms market. .

No, that would be China. Not investing in full R&D and making money off knock-offs is there main business.

Regardless of communism, many nations still continue to do business with their old trading partners.

Yeah, like the former Eastern Block. Wait, no.

Mexico has always bought a certain amount of Russian hardware. If you think they're an American colony, I refer you to their recent response to Donald Trump.

And it's also an assertion that's quite possibly the most ignorant thing I've seen you post.

Thus I am right that they chose quality over anything else. If the US-made helicopters are not that reliable and require a lot of expensive and special maintenance, I guess the nation who has this covered wins. Mexico is a country completely under political, economical and military control of US. A definition of a colony. You may disagree with but it doesn't make it less true.

I'm here to tell you that russian arms are mostly top end. The difference is western gear is many times too fragile for the hard wear of the field. Russian gear is not only hard to break, it almost always works when you need it to.
I was a passenger on a hind d in country, and it was no different than a blackhawk as far as shaking/noise fear of chrashing goes. It was a bit cramped in back, tho.
I own one rifle and its a red jacket ak74. My range friends thinks its funny i don't own a m4. I keep the ak74 because it ALWAYS works. I've been badly scared under fire. I was scared because the m4 is a pos when firing anymore than 4 mags rapid fire.
THE AK WORKS.

 BaronIveagh wrote:
And it's also an assertion that's quite possibly the most ignorant thing I've seen you post.

Did he call you a bigot again?

 Yaraton wrote:
Turkey was trying to buy it but was told by NATO that if they do they will lose access to NATOs integrated air defense system because Chinese will require an access to it in order to make their knock-off operational with the Turkey's specifications.

I'll admit, that's news to me. Last I heard, their latest knockoff wasn't even fully distributed among their own troops, but God only knows with the Chinese.

 Yaraton wrote:

Iran was buying and still has a lot of Western military equipment. Just because they were buying from USSR, doesn't mean they suddenly forgot everything they knew before.

...um, I hate to fill you in on Western/Iran relations, but I think they got cut off from western supplies back in 1980. It was sort of the reason that Russia was able to sell them the Mig 29. On paper they have a lot of US equipment, but (until recently) they haven't had any way to do practical maintenance on a lot of it, so most of it was mothballed, or slowly stripped for parts. I know they got some newer stuff from Iraq when the Iraqi air-force bailed during the first Gulf War.

 Yaraton wrote:

Low Russian military equipment prices are a myth.

$50k online right now. Willing to bet you buy enough they'll toss in free shipping.

 Yaraton wrote:

And you can still buy a car for a "a quarter million" thus your example is dubious.

True, but the car I'm buying at a quarter million is a hell of a lot nicer than the one I'm buying for the 20-50k that a T72 goes for.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Did he call you a bigot again?

No, he was calling Mexico a US colony. I wonder if he has the slightest grasp how offensive Mexicans would find that?

 LordofHats wrote:
Not really. Arms deals are and always have been about foreign politics more than anything (cost is certainly a factor, but military prestige usually overrides cost concerns. State's that want arms want what they think will be the best arms, and they'll pay extra if they think it's worth it). Who you want to be friends with, and who your presumed enemies are. The USSR might be gone, but for many parts of the world its specter remains and will for many years, and Russia doesn't exactly help with that going away what with Georgia and Ukraine and Syria making everyone nervous. The US doesn't help either, with it's dogmatic and hypocritical foreign policy producing a "your with us or against us" dynamic in foreign politics.

You contradict yourself. First you state that military equipment is bought for prestige but then you refer to the mythical "Russian Threat" giving as an example of conflicts which Russia didn't even initiate itself. How is apparently inferior Russian equipment, which is only bought because of the low price is anywhere "prestigious"? How is "Russian Threat" even a factor in buying Russian-made equipment if Russia, apparently, is a threat? Your statement has no logic whatsoever.

Yep. This is probably the biggest thing that's changed. Lots of countries that used to have no domestic manufacturers now do. However lots of them still buy heavily from foreign makers and will for at least a few more decades. Particularly in Europe, where the market has recovered since WWII and is often the go to for countries that are alienated by the US, and either can't make something themselves or can't for whatever reason buy it from Russia or China.

The only country in Europe that sells its arms without looking at US to get a permission is Serbia. Not much of a choice.

Lots of those countries also don't like the US, and hardly want to be solely dependent on us for arms They have pretty good reason too. Monroe Doctrine is a two century long international disaster.

What are you talking about? All countries in the Middle East love US. If they don't, they get ran over either by their neighbors that love US, or Israel, who is the best US buddy out of all Middle East or they have freedom and democracy delivered to them under the wings of B-52s and have their oil liberated. Syria wanted to stay neutral and got itself a SA, Turkey, Qatar and NATO financed military intervention via proxy "rebels" and Jihadists.

That would be stretching the word colony to pointlessness

"Tomato, Tomahto"

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
Did he call you a bigot again?

No, he was calling Mexico a US colony. I wonder if he has the slightest grasp how offensive Mexicans would find that?

Offensive and, dare I say it...bigoted?

bound for glory wrote:
I was a passenger on a hind d in country, and it was no different than a blackhawk as far as shaking/noise fear of chrashing goes. It was a bit cramped in back, tho..

Was is a real Hind D though (As in the Russian one) or the MI-25 'export version'?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yaraton wrote:

The only country in Europe that sells its arms without looking at US to get a permission is Serbia. Not much of a choice.

And Serbia magically sells them Russian made gear.

BTW: both Germany and France would like to have a word with you... because they will sell to pretty much anyone. Dassault Systèmes and Rheinmetall AG are not particular, nor is Finmeccanica over in Italy.

 Yaraton wrote:

Syria wanted to stay neutral and got itself a SA, Turkey, Qatar and NATO financed military intervention via proxy "rebels" and Jihadists.

Yes, the cloning facility is massive to generate enough fake Syrians to keep it going. It's like something out of Star Wars.

 Yaraton wrote:
You contradict yourself. First you state that military equipment is bought for prestige but then you refer to the mythical "Russian Threat" giving as an example of conflicts which Russia didn't even initiate itself.

That's... not a contradiction. That's not anything. This statement makes no sense.

How is apparently inferior Russian equipment, which is only bought because of the low price is anywhere "prestigious"?

Are you even following the conversation? I stated two posts ago this has been studied, and Russian equipment is no more or less inferior than that made by others. In fact lots of countries and private persons really like Russian stuff, because it's a lot less mechanically complex, and thus more reliable (which helps facilitate the lower price point for many Russian Arms). That's a good thing. A positive point.

I was pointing out that military arms is a black hole money goes down and never comes back out for the most part. Countries that are looking to arm themselves, don't care as much about costs as they care about results, and that's all about salesmanship. And that really only comes into play when there isn't a larger political game to be played. Poland isn't exactly going to be eager to buy arms from Russia anymore than Iran is going to be eager to buy them from the US or Europe. When you have political rivals and enemies, and those relationships get heated, you're market options have a tendency to narrow.

How is "Russian Threat" even a factor in buying Russian-made equipment if Russia, apparently, is a threat? Your statement has no logic whatsoever.

You complain an awful lot about logic for someone who can't follow a conversation. I'm not sure how half of what you've put on the board here is even related to what I said, and a lot of it is innately illogical.

The only country in Europe that sells its arms without looking at US to get a permission is Serbia. Not much of a choice.

France has a massive foreign Arms industry. So does Germany. And Italy. And all three have at times sold to countries that US wouldn't (France was going to sell Russia aircraft carriers man come on how does this need explaining?). Plus a fair chunk of the Middle East and South East Asia.

What are you talking about?

Well you said Guelph and then talked something about Mexico, so I assumed you meant the Gulf of Mexico.

All countries in the Middle East love US.

You don't get bogged down fighting in a region for 30 years because the people there categorically love you.

Israel, who is the best US buddy out of all Middle East

Do you pay attention to foreign politics at all? Israel treats the US like an annoyance it has to live with (because it needs at least one friend in the world) and the US uses support for Israel as electoral cannon fodder. That's not a relationship that results in best buddies for life.

"Tomato, Tomahto"

Then the answer would be no? Good to know.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

...um, I hate to fill you in on Western/Iran relations, but I think they got cut off from western supplies back in 1980. It was sort of the reason that Russia was able to sell them the Mig 29. On paper they have a lot of US equipment, but (until recently) they haven't had any way to do practical maintenance on a lot of it, so most of it was mothballed, or slowly stripped for parts. I know they got some newer stuff from Iraq when the Iraqi air-force bailed during the first Gulf War.

Are you anywhere near the Intel comunity to know the operational state of the Iranian Air Force? The Wikipedia says they still operate a lot of America-made equipment. I am guessing they managed to find a way for the replacement part unless you have a solid proof that this information is totally wrong. If you tell em it's your job to learn all about the Iranians I will believe you, otherwise it's all hearsay.

$50k online right now. Willing to bet you buy enough they'll toss in free shipping.

I would really love to know where it's located and what state it's in.

True, but the car I'm buying at a quarter million is a hell of a lot nicer than the one I'm buying for the 20-50k that a T72 goes for.

You peaked my curiosity. Maybe I'll crowdfund buying one and send it to fight Nazis in ukraine.

 Yaraton wrote:
Are you anywhere near the Intel comunity to know the operational state of the Iranian Air Force?

Why are you posting if only 'experts' are allowed to comment? Because honestly, you seem to consistently fall on the wrong side of that line to be making such a claim that no one should comment unless they're "totally in the know" or some such.

 BaronIveagh wrote:

Was is a real Hind D though (As in the Russian one) or the MI-25 'export version'?

It doesn't matter. Mi-24 is not a dedicated troop carrier like UH-60, it's a gunship that also can carry 8 troops in theory.

And Serbia magically sells them Russian made gear.

Nope. They sell Soviet-designed, Serbian-improved and made weapon systems.

BTW: both Germany and France would like to have a word with you... because they will sell to pretty much anyone. Dassault Systèmes and Rheinmetall AG are not particular, nor is Finmeccanica over in Italy.

The last time France tried to sell two landing ships to Russia it had to cancel the contract. Germany had to cancel a contract to build a state-f-the-art military training facility after the sanctions were imposed.

Yes, the cloning facility is massive to generate enough fake Syrians to keep it going. It's like something out of Star Wars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_rebel_fighters_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

 Yaraton wrote:
The last time France tried to sell two landing ships to Russia it had to cancel the contract. Germany had to cancel a contract to build a state-f-the-art military training facility after the sanctions were imposed.

Is it really so hard to fathom that a country that keeps punching its neighbors teeth in is eventually going to run into trouble buying brass knuckles?

 LordofHats wrote:

Why are you posting if only 'experts' are allowed to comment? Because honestly, you seem to consistently fall on the wrong side of that line to be making such a claim that no one should comment unless they're "totally in the know" or some such.

In this particular instance, he said that Iranian Air Force now only uses equipment they bought from Russia. The Wikipedia says otherwise. If he has a documented prove I would love to hear that.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:

Is it really so hard to fathom that a country that keeps punching its neighbors teeth in is eventually going to run into trouble buying brass knuckles?

That wasn't the topic of the discussion. We were talking about how European countries are not exactly free to sell their military equipment to anyone at anytime.
You are trolling and I suggest you stop doing that.

 Yaraton wrote:
In this particular instance, he said that Iranian Air Force now only uses equipment they bought from Russia. The Wikipedia says otherwise. If he has a documented prove I would love to hear that.

We sold them a lot of stuff back in the 70s, because until the 80s US-Iranian relations were really good. Then they got so-so, and then after we didn't remove Saddam from power the first time they decided they hated us (they were totally right about that one btw). We dumped a bunch of stuff on them in 90s as a 'we're sorry.' Namely, our entire inventory of F4s and spare parts plus some F14s I think. They've probably been cannibalizing the sales that ever since. We gave them more than enough spare parts.

As to sales since then, yeah. They've bought nothing from us since the 90s. And they haven't been buying solely from Russia. They've been buying a fair deal from China.

That wasn't the topic of the discussion.

You were just complaining about how France never gave Russia the goods. It's completely on topic.

You are trolling and I suggest you stop doing that.

Disagreeing with you and pointing out that what you say makes no sense doesn't make me a troll.

Meanwhile you're demanding someone prove their point beyond wikipedia while you were using wiki (incorrectly I'd add) to argue with that same user two weeks ago.

 Yaraton wrote:
the nation who has this covered wins. Mexico is a country completely under political, economical and military control of US. A definition of a colony. You may disagree with but it doesn't make it less true.

This is factually incorrect in every conceivable way.

Don't call other users trolls, it's an impolite way to try and shut down an argument.

 Psienesis wrote:

 Yaraton wrote:
the nation who has this covered wins. Mexico is a country completely under political, economical and military control of US. A definition of a colony. You may disagree with but it doesn't make it less true.

This is factually incorrect in every conceivable way.

Yeah he is wrong, the correct term would be satellite state.

 Tyran wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:

 Yaraton wrote:
the nation who has this covered wins. Mexico is a country completely under political, economical and military control of US. A definition of a colony. You may disagree with but it doesn't make it less true.

This is factually incorrect in every conceivable way.

Yeah he is wrong, the correct term would be satellite state.

That would also be factually incorrect.

It's like people don't care what words mean.

Really the weird thing in this conversation is that we're talking about Mexico. No Panama? South Korea? Kuwait? Hell Kuwait might as well be a US client state these days! They let us build the world's largest firing range in the middle of their country XD EDIT: Most of the country is desert I guess but still.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:

 Yaraton wrote:
the nation who has this covered wins. Mexico is a country completely under political, economical and military control of US. A definition of a colony. You may disagree with but it doesn't make it less true.

This is factually incorrect in every conceivable way.

Yeah he is wrong, the correct term would be satellite state.

That would also be factually incorrect.

It's like people don't care what words mean.

Really the weird thing in this conversation is that we're talking about Mexico. No Panama? South Korea? Kuwait? Hell Kuwait might as well be a US client state these days! They let us build the world's largest firing range in the middle of their country XD EDIT: Most of the country is desert I guess but still.

Mexico is in a very close and one-sided relationship with the US, that's inevitable when your neighbor is the world's super-power. Of course the Mexican government isn't America's mind slaves, but Mexico needs to please the US for the simple reason that Mexico needs the US more than viceversa.

It's not a totally one-sided, as the very close economical, social and ethnic ties means that the US can't simply abuse its power, but Mexico is deep in the American sphere of influence, so satellite state should be the correct term.

 LordofHats wrote:

We sold them a lot of stuff back in the 70s, because until the 80s US-Iranian relations were really good. Then they got so-so, and then after we didn't remove Saddam from power the first time they decided they hated us (they were totally right about that one btw). We dumped a bunch of stuff on them in 90s as a 'we're sorry.' Namely, our entire inventory of F4s and spare parts plus some F14s I think. They've probably been cannibalizing the sales that ever since. We gave them more than enough spare parts.

As to sales since then, yeah. They've bought nothing from us since the 90s. And they haven't been buying solely from Russia. They've been buying a fair deal from China..

I know my English is not that great, so I would talk slowly to you. The subject of what Iran had before Iran-Iraq war is not debatable. We are talking about what equipment they bought recently and currently operate. He said they only operate the Russian air tech. I have another information. I asked to provide any prove Iran does not operate US-made air equipment. Are you O.K. now?

You were just complaining about how France never gave Russia the goods. It's completely on topic.

No I didn't. He said that Germany and France are big independent players on the military market. I've proved their "independence" wrong. You are trolling again.

Disagreeing with you and pointing out that what you say makes no sense doesn't make me a troll.

You are not disagreeing. You are switching the subject and making it personal. That's trolling.

Meanwhile you're demanding someone prove their point beyond wikipedia while you were using wiki (incorrectly I'd add) to argue with that same user two weeks ago.

I use open sources which everyone has access to and can check for themselves.. If you don't like it, stop noticing my posts. Referring (and most likely lying) about something that no one remembers because it was "two weeks ago" and not giving a quote as a prove is... trolling.

If you try to troll me one more time I will put you on my ignore list.

 Yaraton wrote:

No I didn't. He said that Germany and France are big independent players on the military market. I've proved their "independence" wrong. You are trolling again.

No you haven't. France didn't sell the Mistral-class amphibious assault ships to Russia because France, as a part of the EU, was leveraging sanctions against Russia. Good luck proving that the US controls the EU.

Don't. Try. And. Shut. Down. Arguments. By. Saying. Someone. Is. Trolling.

I thought I was clear last time.

 Yaraton wrote:

It doesn't matter. Mi-24 is not a dedicated troop carrier like UH-60, it's a gunship that also can carry 8 troops in theory.

It does matter, as he was discussing it's performance, and the crux of the matter was that Russia sells a cheap knockoff that resembles a 'true' Hind D. So, was the helo he was in a actual Hind D, or the knock off?

 Yaraton wrote:

Nope. They sell Soviet-designed, Serbian-improved and made weapon systems.

Riiiight... so over-stamping and reselling is 'improving' now?

 Yaraton wrote:

The last time France tried to sell two landing ships to Russia it had to cancel the contract. Germany had to cancel a contract to build a state-f-the-art military training facility after the sanctions were imposed.

The fact that France is a member of the EU, who are still putting the screws to Russia's economy in retaliation for the invasion of the Ukraine, obviously has no bearing on their decision to not sell Russia any baby flat tops.

 Yaraton wrote:

I would really love to know where it's located and what state it's in.

Apparently in fully operational condition, as they offer to demill to local legal requirements for a nominal fee. (Not worried, I have all my papers order to keep them 'live' both here and in the US)

ATM they say they have 'large' lots for sale in Serbia and Czech republic.

If you do buy one, for service and aftermarket upgrade kits, I recommend contacting:

Uralvagonzavod
Vostochnoye Chaussee 28
Nizhny Tagil
Sverdlovsk 622051
Russian Federation
Phone: (3435) 23-17-74

 Yaraton wrote:

You peaked my curiosity. Maybe I'll crowdfund buying one and send it to fight Nazis in ukraine.

I'd ask 'on which side' but I think the Nazis you're looking for, you're about 70 years late.

 motyak wrote:
Don't. Try. And. Shut. Down. Arguments. By. Saying. Someone. Is. Trolling.

I thought I was clear last time.

In Yaraton's Russia, poster bans Mod!

 Psienesis wrote:

 Yaraton wrote:
the nation who has this covered wins. Mexico is a country completely under political, economical and military control of US. A definition of a colony. You may disagree with but it doesn't make it less true.

This is factually incorrect in every conceivable way.

...so that's how you're going to build that wall !

 BaronIveagh wrote:

 motyak wrote:
Don't. Try. And. Shut. Down. Arguments. By. Saying. Someone. Is. Trolling.

I thought I was clear last time.

In Yaraton's Russia, poster bans Mod!

Mod must be bigoted.

I'd say(not 100% certain) that it was an "export", but i really could'nt say for sure.
It was'nt the early hind with the 3 man front. It had the 2 man "double bubble".
I know i have pics somewhere, if anyone wants to see...