Connect with us

Europe

‘It really fits us’: They traded South Florida for the South of France

Published

on



CNN
 — 

Geoff and Pennie Zuercher spent decades living in Florida, but the popular retirement spot wasn’t what the American couple envisioned for themselves when they wrapped up their careers.

Nearly 20 years ago, the Zuerchers decided they would retire abroad, and the location they recently settled on — the sun-splashed city of Nice in the South of France — suits them better than the Sunshine State.

“Nice is what Florida wishes it was,” said Pennie, 63, listing some of the Mediterranean city’s most attractive attributes: “beautiful weather, low humidity … what they call hot here is not hot compared to Florida. And just a different cultural climate, more laid-back.”

Florida’s “fast-paced culture” was more stressful, said Pennie, who worked as a finance executive in the public and private sectors. The Zuerchers lived in Florida for decades, most recently in Wilton Manors, just north of downtown Fort Lauderdale.

In Nice, on France’s famed Côte d’Azur, no one is rushing you out the door when you eat in a restaurant, and settling in at a sidewalk café to nurse a beverage and people-watch is one of French life’s great pleasures.

“France allows you to live life at a slow pace which is healthier and more enjoyable,” said Pennie, who ended up retiring a little earlier than she had anticipated for medical reasons and said her health has “improved tremendously” while living in Nice.

The way French people interact with strangers is a good fit for the couple, too. A reserve that some perceive as cold or rude is neither, they say.

“They have more formal social norms…,” said Geoff, 61, who retired from the insurance industry after first working as a police officer. “While you’re on the street, you know everybody’s sort of minding their own business. And when you go somewhere and you meet somebody, you always have a ‘bonjour.’ You try to use some French. As long as they see that you’re trying … they become very welcoming.”

The fact that no one is trying to chat with her in line at the supermarket as many Americans would is a relief to Pennie, who calls herself a “moderate introvert with some extrovert.”

“The French, they don’t just start talking to people unless they absolutely have a reason to talk to people, but then once you get to know them, and very much like us, once you get to know us, we’ll talk your ear off, we’ll be loyal friends,” she said.

The courtesy that’s extended to everyone is another aspect of the culture they admire.

“It doesn’t matter whether it’s the guy sweeping the street out in front of the place or the bank president, everybody is assumed to have value and should be treated with … a certain amount of respect, and I really appreciate that,” said Geoff.

The Zuerchers love their new home, but it wasn’t even on their radar until recently.

Nice's beautiful weather, minus the humidity of their former home in Florida, was part of the draw for the Zuerchers.

After they first started thinking about retiring abroad, Pennie and Geoff explored Mexico, the Caribbean and other spots closer to the United States to make visiting with their three grown sons and Geoff’s parents easier.

But nothing clicked for them quite like France.

For Pennie, their first trip to the country in 2016 — to attend a bucket-list Jimmy Buffett concert in Paris — sparked an almost instant desire to live in France.

The Zuerchers stuck to Paris for the first couple of trips, then started venturing to different regions. Being able to travel easily was the key driver for moving abroad, Pennie said, but US politics have also figured into their desire to move in recent years, noting that they “lean liberal.”

They took a series of trips in February — thinking that if a place appealed to them in cold, gray winter, they’d surely like it at its best. They eventually narrowed their search to a 90-kilometer circle around Paris. But during one of their trips, a relocation expert suggested they consider Nice.

“Our first reaction was — ‘If I can’t afford Paris, I can’t afford Nice.’ And that is not the case. Nice is half the price of living in Paris for buying property,” Pennie said.

“You know, we live on a much lower income than we did when we worked full-time, and we live very comfortably. We travel, we put money away every month. It’s amazing how easy and affordable life is here in Nice,” she said.

Geoff also assumed Nice would be too expensive for them — and too hot, but “found out that neither one of those was true. And we just fell in love with it,” he said.

That first visit was during Carnival in February of 2023, and by the end of November that same year, the Zuerchers were on a plane bound for their new home with just six suitcases, a hatbox and a dog. They had already made an offer on their one-bedroom, one-bathroom apartment in Nice, which they found with help from the Adrian Leeds Group and furnished with items purchased once they arrived in France.

Pennie, Geoff and their dog, Coco, closing on their apartment in Nice in late 2023.

The Zuerchers came to France on a long-stay visa, and they now have residence permits or titres de séjour, which they must reapply for annually for five years. After that, they said they’ll be eligible to apply for a 10-year permit. There are minimum income requirements that they have shown they meet in order to live in France as retirees.

They’re drawing on their US pensions, social security and other retirement savings.

“We’re taking our American retirement and spending it in France … They benefit from that and we benefit from the French culture, and the benefits and things like that that go with it, and it seems to work out, you know, where it’s a win-win,” Geoff said.

The ins and outs of their new life

The Zuerchers’ housing expenses are low. They used the proceeds from the sale of their townhouse in Wilton Manors to pay cash for their apartment in Nice. They pay about $200 quarterly in HOA fees, about $500 a year for homeowners insurance and about $1,200 in property taxes.

Several times a week Pennie and Geoff eat out, usually at lunchtime. On shopping days, they walk a few blocks with their hand cart to the supermarket, then go a couple more blocks to a local fruit and vegetable market, then stop at the boulangerie for a baguette on the way home. They’re impressed by the very high quality of food in France.

The Zuerchers walk much more than they did back in the States, and their apartment is about 200 yards from a tram stop.

“Nice has an absolutely fantastic, first-rate, public transportation system … that all people are willing to use,” Geoff said. “That’s one of the things in the United States, I think, is that there’s an unwillingness to use public transportation because it’s not always the best.”

They don’t need a car day-to-day, although they’ll occasionally rent one for a road trip. And they can use the extensive train network to take day trips — to Ventimiglia in Italy, for example, with a stop-off in Monaco on the way back.

Their place is three tram stops away from the center of Nice, in a residential area removed from the hub of tourist activity. Their building was constructed in the 1990s. Some transplants want to live in Nice’s Old Town in historic bourgeois buildings — a more expensive location for apartments that can be pricey to maintain. “When you buy into a 200-300-year-old building, you also buy 200- and 300-year-old problems,” Geoff said.

Their space is definitely smaller than what they were used to, but the apartment has a sunroom and a large terrace.

Pennie and Geoff enjoy the sunshine at the Promenade du Paillon in Nice.

There are downsides, of course. Pennie and Geoff both named the language barrier as perhaps the biggest challenge.

“The older you get, it’s harder to learn a language,” Pennie said, although their French has vastly improved since they first arrived. Geoff said they’ve given themselves five years to get to where they can converse easily about straightforward topics, noting that they need to be ready to volunteer during the 2030 Winter Olympics.

And the frustrations of France’s bureaucracy can “make us throw things against the wall,” Pennie said. But overall, the pluses far outweigh the minuses.

Every country has its issues, Geoff said, “so we’re not walking around with rose-colored glasses like France is perfect, but it really fits us.”

Pennie said that some fundamentals — choice, equality, health care — feel more expansive in France than they do in the US.

“Right now, I feel like I have more rights as an immigrant in France than I would in my own country, if I went back. And so that value of the country and its government of taking care of its people is very important to us as well,” she said.

The Zuerchers have obtained national health insurance — l’Assurance Maladie. The carte Vitale ID card that’s issued with it covers roughly 70% of medical costs, Pennie said, and even before reimbursement, health care is far less expensive than in the US.

Family and friends — on both sides of the ocean

The Zuerchers live three tram stops away from Nice's Old Town, the city's tourism hub.

Family and friends are what the Zuerchers miss most. Their family members are spread out across the US, so travel was always part of getting together. It’ll just be a longer trip now.

In Nice, they’ve made a handful of French friends and there’s a sizable expat community, which the Zuerchers initially viewed with mixed feelings. They had been advised to choose a place where there would be a group of other foreigners navigating similar situations.

“And at first our reaction was, ‘Well, we’re not wanting to be just a bunch of Americans in another country,’” Pennie said, but she came to see the benefits of being part of an expat community.

“We’re all going through the same experiences. When it’s time for the next process, ‘OK, we’re going to get our carte Vitale,’ which is our health insurance, there’s someone who’s already been through the process who can help us and advise us,” she said.

Their social calendar is much busier than it was in the US, Pennie said, with something happening at least three evenings a week, including a Friday night expat apéro gathering.

The Zuerchers don’t envision returning to live in the United States. And they have some advice for Americans who are considering a move to France.

“Come with an open mind,” Geoff advised. “You cannot have a closed mind and live in France.” He also suggested dialing down your volume, as the French way of life is just quieter than it is in the States.

“Begin working on some French,” Pennie advised. “Definitely learn the cultural courtesies, so that when you get here you have a good experience.”

And line up someone locally who can help you find a place, get your utilities set up and assist with other practicalities that can be difficult to navigate at first.

And jump in, try to speak the language and meet people, she said.

“Don’t be afraid to get out and live the life.”



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Europe

Putin didn’t budge in Ukraine peace talks. Now Donald Trump may be forced to act

Published

on



CNN
 — 

So, Russia and Ukraine are still as far apart as ever, with the two warring countries unable to make a significant breakthrough in direct talks in Istanbul.

While there was agreement to exchange more prisoners, Moscow and Kyiv remain deeply divided over how to bring the costly and bitter Ukraine war to an end.

Russia has shown itself to be particularly uncompromising, handing Ukrainian negotiators a memorandum re-stating its maximalist, hardline terms which would essentially amount to a Ukrainian surrender.

Expectations were always low for a Kremlin compromise. But Moscow appears to have eliminated any hint of a readiness to soften its demands.

The Russian memorandum again calls on Ukraine to withdraw from four partially occupied regions that Russia has annexed but not captured: a territorial concession that Kyiv has repeatedly rejected.

It says Ukraine must accept strict limits on its armed forces, never join a military alliance, host foreign troops or aquire nuclear weapons. It would be Ukrainian demilitarization in its most hardline form, unpalatable to Ukraine and much of Europe, which sees the country as a barrier against further Russian expansion.

Other Russian demands include the restoration of full diplomatic and economic ties, specifically that no reparations will be demanded by either side and that all Western sanctions on Russia be lifted.

It is a Kremlin wish-list that, while familiar, speaks volumes about how Moscow continues to imagine the future of Ukraine as a subjugated state in the thrall of Russia, with no significant military of its own nor real independence.

This uncompromising position comes despite two important factors which may have given the Kremlin pause.

Firstly, Ukraine has developed the technical capability to strike deep inside Russia, despite its staggering disparity of territory and resources. The stunning drone strikes recently targeting Russian strategic bombers at bases thousands of miles from Ukraine is a powerful illustration of that. Ukraine, it seems, has some cards after all, and is using them effectively.

Secondly – and arguably more dangerously for Moscow – the Kremlin’s latest hardline demands come despite US President Donald Trump’s increasing frustrations with his own Ukraine peace efforts.

Trump has already expressed annoyance with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, who he said had gone “absolutely MAD” after massive Russian strikes on Ukraine last week.

But now, Trump himself is under pressure as a cornerstone of his second term foreign policy – bringing a rapid end the Ukraine war – looks decidedly shaky.

There are powerful levers to pull if Trump chooses, like increasing US military aid or imposing tough new sanctions, such as those overwhelmingly supported in the US Senate. One of the key backers of a cross-party senate bill that aims to impose “crippling” new measures on Moscow, Senator Richard Blumenthal, accused Russia of “mocking peace efforts” at the Istanbul talks and in a carefully worded post on X accused the Kremlin of “playing Trump and America for fools.”

It is unclear at the moment how the mercurial US president will react, or what – if anything – he will do.

But the outcome of the Ukraine war, specifically the brokering of peace deal to end it, has become inextricably linked with the current administration in the White House.

The fact that Putin has once again dug in his heels and presented an uncompromising response to calls for peace, may now force Trump to act.



Source link

Continue Reading

Europe

UK to build new attack submarines and ramp up ‘war-fighting readiness’ with an eye on Russia, Starmer says

Published

on


London
CNN
 — 

Britain will build new attack submarines, invest billions on nuclear warheads and move toward “war-fighting readiness,” Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Monday, shortly before the publication of a landmark review of the future of the country’s military.

Starmer’s government said it would build “up to” 12 new attack submarines as part of its AUKUS partnership with the United States and Australia, replacing the country’s current class of seven subs from the late 2030s.

And he will launch a “historic renewal” of the UK’s nuclear deterrent backed by a £15 billion ($20.3 bn) investment, Starmer said in a speech in Scotland on Monday.

The announcements came on the same day as the publication of the long-awaited UK Strategic Defense Review into Britain’s armed services, which outlined how the British military would pursue an “immediate” shift toward greater use of autonomy and AI in the wake of Ukraine’s experiences in its war with Russia.

“When we are being directly threatened by states with advanced military forces, the most effective way to deter them is to be ready, and frankly, to show them that we’re ready to deliver peace through strength,” Starmer said Monday.

But Starmer refused to set out the timeline for his pledge that Britain’s overall defense spending would hit 3% of the UK’s gross domestic product (GDP). The uplift, announced earlier this year, is set to be reached by the end of the next parliament in 2034, but is dependent on economic conditions.

And the prime minister did not set out where the money to pay for the new weaponry will come from; he previously announced cuts to the UK’s aid budget to fund the uplift in defense spending, and he declined to rule out similar moves on Monday.

Starmer pledged to turn the UK into a

According to the 144-page review, units in future will be made up of only 20% crewed vehicles, with the remainder of capabilities split between “reusable” platforms, like drones that survive repeated missions, and 40% single-use weapons, like rockets or attack drones.

The Royal Navy is to “move toward a more powerful but cheaper and simpler fleet,” and the UK’s two aircraft carriers (the largest in Europe) will shift to being used as a base for European – rather than only British – aircraft and drones.

Meanwhile, under the waves, unmanned subs and sensors will police the North Atlantic against Russian military movements.

However, some such capabilities will require a decade of investment and development, Dr Marion Messmer, a senior research fellow at thinktank Chatham House told CNN.

That stretches far beyond the forecast of certain European countries that Russia could be ready to threaten European borders militarily six months to a few years after ending fighting with Ukraine.

Even so, the boosted investment in the UK’s nuclear capabilities as well as potential integration with European deterrence outlined in the document will strike a nerve with Moscow, she said.

The fiscal promise from the UK falls short of defense spending promises from some NATO countries, whose spending has been closely scrutinized by US President Donald Trump.

NATO’s Secretary General Mark Rutte said last month he “assumed” NATO members will agree on a defense spending target of 5% at June’s NATO summit, a significant increase from the 2% benchmark, which was agreed to in 2014.

Per 2024 NATO data, only Poland’s defense expenditure was above 4% of GDP, although Latvia and Estonia had promised increases to 5%, with Italy promising a hike to between 3.5 and 5% of GDP. The US’ defense expenditure sat at 3.38% of GDP in 2024, making up some 64% of total NATO expenditure.

Just weeks before NATO allies could agree on a significantly higher spending target, “it seems a little risky for the UK government to essentially have boxed itself in” to a 2.5%-of-GDP spending cap, analyst Messmer told CNN.

The UK’s ambition to lead in NATO, doesn’t fit with spending in the middle of the pack among NATO allies, she said.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – and the subsequent pressure from Trump’s administration on European nations to boost their own military capabilities – has sparked a race among Europe’s key military powers to boost their readiness and counter the Russian threat should the White House pull its support for Kyiv.

The UK “cannot ignore the threat that Russia poses,” Starmer told the BBC on Monday. “Russia has shown in recent weeks that it’s not serious about peace, and we have to be ready.”

Starmer said Monday he intended to turn the UK into a “battle-ready, armor-clad nation with the strongest alliances, and the most advanced capabilities, equipped for the decades to come.”

Government MP and member of the British Parliament’s Defence Select Committee, Fred Thomas, told CNN that the review was a “bold plan,” and the first since the 1980s that argued for doing more, not less, with the UK’s military.

However, the British military of today is a long way from its Cold War ancestor. At under half the strength of the regular military in 1989, the British army is a shadow of its former self. In 1989, defense spending accounted for 4.1% of GDP.

“If you want to prepare for tomorrow’s war, you need to make sure you’re at least ready for today’s war. And we’re not ready for today’s war,” MP Thomas said.

The planners hope machines will make up for manpower.

As part of the UK military “fundamentally transforming how it works,” the review recommended enabling any sensor and weapon across the armed forces’ arsenal to work in tandem, using AI to predict threats and speed up decision-making.

Combining conventional armored forces with AI and “land drone swarms,” the review boasted of creating a military 10 times more lethal than the British military’s currently is.

Writing in the Financial Times MP Thomas on May 31, the lawmaker criticised the UK’s ministry of defence’s, “deep cultural and structural resistance to change,” but he said he saw reason to hope in the recommendations laid out in today’s review.

At times frank – the review highlighted how a focus on focus on ‘exquisite’ capabilities has masked the ‘hollowing out’ of the Armed Forces’ warfighting capability – the document still offered a somewhat rosy vision of the British armed forces.

This is at odds with much commentary in the British press, which has slammed the dwindling size, troubled and inefficient equipment procurement and failures of conduct plaguing the British military through its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Analyst Messmer advised caution around some of the review’s promises.

“Ten times more lethal is something that sounds good, but I would really want to see more evidence,” she said, “I think it’s more marketing than anything else.”

Given decades of shrinking investment in the British military, questions have been raised over the deterrence that Britain’s conventional and nuclear weapons offer, particularly given its reliance on a US supply chain. In the past eight years, the UK has publicly acknowledged two failed nuclear missile tests, one of them in the waters off Florida, when dummy missiles didn’t fire as intended.



Source link

Continue Reading

Europe

Inside Ukraine’s audacious drone attack on Russian air bases

Published

on



CNN
 — 

Ukraine’s drone attack against Russian airfields was audacious and daring. But most of all, it was meticulously planned and flawlessly executed.

Kyiv struck where it could make a difference, damaging or destroying military aircraft that Moscow has been using to terrorize Ukrainian civilians with near daily aerial attacks.

The Ukrainian Security Service said 41 Russian aircraft were hit, including strategic bombers and surveillance planes, although it is unclear how many were taken completely out of action.

Justin Bronk, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London, said the attack was “a stunning success for Ukraine’s special services.”

“If even half the total claim of 41 aircraft damaged/destroyed is confirmed, it will have a significant impact on the capacity of the Russian Long Range Aviation force to keep up its regular large-scale cruise missile salvos against Ukrainian cities and infrastructure, whilst also maintaining their nuclear deterrence and signaling patrols against NATO and Japan,” he wrote in a note.

This is what we know about how the attack unfolded.

The attacks targeted four airfields deep inside Russia, with the farthest one, the Belaya base in Irkutsk region, some 4,500 kilometers (2,800 miles) from Ukraine’s border with Russia.

The other targets included the Olenya base near Murmansk in the Arctic Circle, more than 2,000 kilometers (1,200 miles) from Ukraine; the Diaghilev airbase in Ryazan Oblast, some 520 kilometers (320 miles) from Ukraine; and the Ivanovo air base, which is a base for Russian military transport aircraft, some 800 kilometers (500 miles) from the border.

A visual shared by the SBU, Ukraine’s security agency, also showed another base in the eastern Amur region as a target. It is not clear whether an attack on this base failed or was aborted.

It’s these huge distances from the border with Ukraine that likely made Russia complacent about protecting the sites.

Its most prized aircraft at the Belaya base were regularly parked in plain sight in the airfield, clearly visible in publicly available satellite images – including on Google Maps.

Moscow likely believed the distance itself was enough to keep the aircraft safe from Ukrainian attacks.

Russia maintains air superiority over Ukraine and while Kyiv’s allies have supplied Ukraine with some long-range missile systems, including US-made ATACMS and British-French Storm Shadows, neither has the range to strike this deep inside Russia.

Ukraine has been using drones against targets inside Russia, including in Moscow, but the low speed at which they travel makes them relatively easy for Russian air defenses to strike them.

This is where the audacity of the attack really played out: rather than trying to fly the drones all the way from the border, Ukraine managed to smuggle them right next to the sites it wanted to target and launched them from there.

This picture shows drones said to be used by Ukraine in its coordinated attacks on Russian air bases.

Russia’s radar and air defenses at these bases were not prepared for such a low-altitude and sudden attack.

The only effective way to stop an attack like this is with heavy machine guns. Russia has been using these against Ukrainian sea drones in the Black Sea.

But these were either not available or not deployed quickly enough at the air bases targeted by Ukraine on Sunday – most likely because Russia simply didn’t foresee this type of attack.

CNN was able to verify and geolocated photos and videos from the scenes, confirming their locations near the bases.

Russia’s Defense Ministry confirmed in a statement that the attacks – which it called “terror attacks” were launched from the vicinity of the airfields.

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky said 117 drones were used in the operation.

According to the SBU, the drones were smuggled into Russia by its operatives. At some point, likely while already in Russia, the drones were then hidden inside mobile wooden sheds.

Photos obtained by CNN show the drones tucked just under the sheds’ metal roofs, slotted in insulation cavities.

The drones hidden in cavities of wooden sheds.
This handout photo from the Ukrainian Security Service shows wooden sheds in an industrial facility. (Note: The location and date of this image has not been independently verified and a portion of this image was blurred by the source.)

These wooden cabins were then placed on trucks and driven to locations near the bases.

Ukraine did not disclose how exactly it managed to get the vehicles into the vicinity of high-profile military targets without detection, but reports in Russian media suggested it was relatively simple.

Baza and Astra, two Russian Telegram channels, both reported that the trucks were bought by a Ukrainian man who lived in Russia who then simply paid a quartet of drivers to get them where he needed them.

Neither Russian nor Ukrainian authorities commented on these reports, but the Russian state news agency RIA reported that authorities in the Irkutsk region were searching for a man who was suspected of being involved in the attack. His name matched the name reported by Baza and Astra.

The Ukrainian Security Service said the operatives involved in the operation were safely back in Ukraine by the time the attacks started. Zelensky said they worked across multiple Russian regions spanning three time zones.

A senior source with Ukraine’s drone development program told CNN the pilots who flew the drones were probably nowhere near the locations from which they were launched.

“They would have likely setup an internet hub allowing the pilots to (control them) remotely, each rapidly deploying each FPV (first person view drones), hitting each target one by one.”

The source said the communication hub could be “a simple Russian cell phone” which is harder to track than other systems, such as Starlink that is used widely in Ukraine.

A source briefed on the matter confirmed the attack was carried out via Russian telecommunications networks.

Once the trucks were in place and the drones ready to go, the cabin roofs opened and the drones flew towards their targets.

A video of the attack in Russia’s southeastern Irkutsk region that was shared on social media and verified and geolocated by CNN shows two drones flying out of a truck.

They are seen heading towards the Belaya air base in the distance, where thick dark smoke is already billowing from a previous strike.

Another video from the same location shows the truck used to transport the drones on fire after what appears to be an explosion designed to self-destruct the truck.

Zelensky said on Sunday that the attack was in the making for one year, six months and nine days, and praised the security services for a “brilliant” operation.

Russian officials have downplayed the attack, saying strikes were repelled in the Ivanovo, Ryazan and Amur regions but that “several pieces of aircraft” caught fire after attacks in the Murmansk and Irkutsk regions. It added that the fires had since been extinguished.

It said there were no casualties. But while Russian authorities tried to downplay the attack, several high-profile Russian military bloggers have been vocal in their criticism.

Rybar, a high-profile Russian military blog, said the attack caused a “tragic loss for the entire Russian air fleet” and was a result of “criminal negligence.”

The SBU said the strikes caused an estimated $7 billion in damages and hit 34% of Russia’s strategic cruise missile carriers at its main air bases – a claim CNN cannot independently verify.

A satellite image shows damage to aircrafts at an airfield following Ukrainian drones attack targeting Russian military airfields in Stepnoy, Irkutsk region, Russia, on June 2.

Ukraine said it destroyed several TU-95 and Tu-22M3 strategic bombers and one of Russia’s few remaining A-50 surveillance planes.

A source briefed on the matter said 27 Tu-95, four Tu-160, two Tu-22M3 and “probably” an A-50 were hit.

The Tu-22M3 is Russia’s long-range missile strike platform that can perform stand-off attacks, launching missiles from Russian airspace well behind the front lines to stay out of range of Ukrainian anti-aircraft fire.

Russia had 55 Tu-22M3 jets and 57 Tu-95s in its fleet at the beginning of the year, according to the “Military Balance 2025” report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank.

The Tu-95 joined the Soviet Union air force in the 1950s, and Russia has modified them to launch cruise missiles like the Tu-22.

Bronk, the RUSI expert, said that replacing some of these aircraft would be very difficult for Russia because they have not been produced for decades.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending