Comments by "Paul Frederick" (@1pcfred) on "" video.

Scott Manley so were the machinists that operated that machinery. That was the real loss. Because the blueprints alone do not fully describe how the components were made.
6
Cuz if we don't buy them they'll sell to someone else. That someone else will have them pointed at us too. Which would cost us a whole lot to deal with.
6
The Soviets initially focused on rocketry because they knew how far behind they were with planes. With strategic bombers specifically. We flew the B-52 three years before they launched Sputnik. None of that is a coincidence. One event lead directly to the other.
1
Whoah whoah hold on there feller. We buy that commie crap so they don't go building stuff for terrorist states. Don't think it is because we can't make anything better. But buying Russian rocket components is a whole lot cheaper than defending against radical fundamentalists having that tech. It is international tech welfare that pays us dividends to fund.
1
We can afford it. What we'd rather not do is defend against too many countries with ICBM capabilities though. That can get costly.
1
We can afford it. But we have better things to spend the cash on. The USA was never interested in space exploration. We were way out in front with bomber airplanes so the Soviets decided to play a different game. Realize we were flying the B-52 three years before they put Sputnik into space. The US had no interest in missiles. But because the Soviets got a jump on is we had to prove we were superior. Which Apollo did. Been there. Done that. BTW the Space Shuttle was to make the commies look bad too.
1
It is about money but that still does not make it simple. US money keeps Russian rocket engineers from seeking money elsewhere. Elsewhere would be what we like to call terrorist states these days. Russian techs do have to eat after all. We recognize this.
1