Russia and Venezuela to hold joint Sea maneuver in the Caribbean

[Richard-H]

BTW, maybe you're speaking in generalities, but bombs have been long obsolete in Naval warfare. They're way too slow. Missiles are used. Weapons systems on Naval ships can destroy most missiles long before they reach the target. You have to target a Navy ship with a lot of missiles and hope that the weapons systems aren't quite fast enough to stop all of them.

Of course whoever owns the subsurface is going to win. For all intents and purposes it's all about submarine and anti-submarine warfare, surface ships aren't worth a damn until you own the subsurface.

 

[Richard-H]

My expertise...I'm an engineer whose done things for the Navy that they couldn't do. Figure it out for yourself.

 

[dilloduck]

My expertise...I'm an engineer whose done things for the Navy that they couldn't do. Figure it out for yourself.

Since its' next to impossible for me to "figure it out my self " I thought I would simply ask you.
You are aware that China feels mighty protective of its drilling claims in the gulf too. I bet they would hate to see the Russians endanger all of them.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

I guess that your a bit thick, and just didn't get what I was saying. 'The hunt for Red October' was so factual in terms of it's description of military technology, that Tom Clancy was almost brought up on charges for violating his security clearances. (Take a hint).

You've got to be a Republican. It's so easy to tell by the way you retreat into you own fantasy world whenever someone raises some inconvenient fact.

The history of military victories is a history of nasty surprises. Anyone who thinks that they know Russian military capabilities, when they make a move as bold as this, had better be ready for some real nasty surprises.

If 'The Hunt for Red October' such a problem, then why was it first published by the United States Naval Institute? Now Clancy was under critisism for ousting Mickey Finn in the book 'The Cardinal of the Kremlin', but I have never seen anything to this effect on 'Red October.' I would genuinly be interested in this. Anything you could link up would be great.

As for the Republican comment, anyone on this board could tell you that. It has no bearing here though. Besides I could easily say that you are a Democrat because you immediately attack my ideology rather than responding to the topic at hand.

And to think I gave you some pos rep.

 

[Charles_Main]

Hmm.. they are raking in the bucks on oil profits and we are borrowing more zeros than we shot down in WWII. How long do you think we can keep our military superiority.. at least after next year we wont be protected by our feelings after looking into our adversaries eyes...

It is simple man. we have over 15000 Nukes. We will not find ourselves in a war with russia any time soon.

We also have superior technologies and superior Air and Naval forces.

I see no reason why we can not maintain that superiority in the long run. Despite all the doom and gloom ranting to the contrary.

I also think you are over stating how "well" russis is doing.

 

[dilloduck]

If 'The Hunt for Red October' such a problem, then why was it first published by the United States Naval Institute? Now Clancy was under critisism for ousting Mickey Finn in the book 'The Cardinal of the Kremlin', but I have never seen anything to this effect on 'Red October.' I would genuinly be interested in this. Anything you could link up would be great.

As for the Republican comment, anyone on this board could tell you that. It has no bearing here though. Besides I could easily say that you are a Democrat because you immediately attack my ideology rather than responding to the topic at hand.

And to think I gave you some pos rep.

Hopefully you ain't holding you breath on that link .

 

[Navy1960]

The Russian Navy is sending 4 Warships , which are Missle cruisers, to join with the Venezuelan Navy, the French Navy, the Dutch, and the Brazilian Navy in an exercise called Southern Cross. The fact that 4 Russian warhips are in our hemisphere mean only that the Russians wish to voice their displeasure at our deplyoment of a Missile interceptors in Poland. These ships while capable are in fact most likely in desperate need of repair like 70% of Russias Navy. The current Russian Navy is in the process of rebuilding itself after 15 years of neglect and has limited blue water capability.

Venezuela, Russia to hold joint naval drills in late November

 

[dilloduck]

The Russian Navy is sending 4 Warships , which are Missle cruisers, to join with the Venezuelan Navy, the French Navy, the Dutch, and the Brazilian Navy in an exercise called Southern Cross. The fact that 4 Russian warhips are in our hemisphere mean only that the Russians wish to voice their displeasure at our deplyoment of a Missile interceptors in Poland. These ships while capable are in fact most likely in desperate need of repair like 70% of Russias Navy. The current Russian Navy is in the process of rebuilding itself after 15 years of neglect and has limited blue water capability.

Venezuela, Russia to hold joint naval drills in late November

Hurry---surrender !!!! We all will be blown to hell !!
thanks for the histrioncs, Richard.

 

[DiveCon]

I'm pretty sure that they have those bases covered. They've had alot more time to study our military capabilities than we have their's. One of the unfortunate aspects of a country that goes to war too much. Did you read 'The Winds of War'? All about a U.S. naval officier that travels the world and studies German and Japanese military capabilities during the early part of WWII. He of course is always reporting back to Washington, so that when we enter the war we were well aware of what their capabilities were and how to surpass them.

uh, Russia has been a little busy in their own sphere

 

[Jeepers]

It is simple man. we have over 15000 Nukes. We will not find ourselves in a war with russia any time soon.

We also have superior technologies and superior Air and Naval forces.

I see no reason why we can not maintain that superiority in the long run. Despite all the doom and gloom ranting to the contrary.

I also think you are over stating how "well" russis is doing.

Youre kidding me right... who is the worlds largest producer of oil? Who has and or is in the process of nationalizing their oil production? Someone in this country needs to wake up to the fact that our Russian adversaries are alive and well and pose a significant threat to our wellbeing... I for one do not sleep better at night knowing that George the fucking idiot Bush says Putins got a good soul...

Who here thinks that the Georgian excursion was made to assist the Georgian Successionists...

Who here knows that the majority of oil supplied to Europe flows through Georgia and Russia... If I were Putin, I would have used this event to test the waters of the wests reaction... guess what guys... this country failed that test misserably... a week before that they suggested sending missiles to Cuba... two years before that they stopped the flow of fuel to the Ukraine and a year before that they nationalised the nations largest oil company accusing it owner of corruption...

 

[editec]

Then in 2001(?) Russia launched a super-high tech Sub that would have put them on an equal footing with the U.S., but GWB sent in attack submarine and sank the Russian sub during it's ceremonial launch (when target aquistion systems would have been turned off). No body was screwing around with torpedoes on the Russian sub - it was all pomp and ceremony going on.

Fascinating.

Of course, I certainly don't have any way of knowing if this is just a sea story is part of the silent services secret history.

But having had a friend who served on a boomer, and having heard his sea-stories/rumors about how our attack subs sometimes ventured into Russian territorial waters (can you say Russian Rivers??!! But please remember these rumors go back to the early 70s) this story at least sounds plausible from a military standpoint, but it does stretch credibility geopolitically.

As to a Russian-American military all out rumble?

I think, given our mutual nuclear capabilities, the world would lose.

My concern for the USA's ability to maintain its dominant position in the world isn't based on our technology (which I presume is still top notch) but on our governments economic weakness.

How long can we borrow based on our economy when slowly but surely that economy is failing to pay the bills?

An insolvent national government can't maintain a cutting edge military forever.

Now of all the superpowers in the world, (all two of them) I'd venture to guess that Russia knows that fact all too well.

 

[Jeepers]

eh.. good thing the world is ending this week then..

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Youre kidding me right... who is the worlds largest producer of oil? Who has and or is in the process of nationalizing their oil production? Someone in this country needs to wake up to the fact that our Russian adversaries are alive and well and pose a significant threat to our wellbeing... I for one do not sleep better at night knowing that George the fucking idiot Bush says Putins got a good soul...

Who here thinks that the Georgian excursion was made to assist the Georgian Successionists...

Who here knows that the majority of oil supplied to Europe flows through Georgia and Russia... If I were Putin, I would have used this event to test the waters of the wests reaction... guess what guys... this country failed that test misserably... a week before that they suggested sending missiles to Cuba... two years before that they stopped the flow of fuel to the Ukraine and a year before that they nationalised the nations largest oil company accusing it owner of corruption...

And yet we shouldn't drill for our own oil that we have untouched in OUR Country?

 

[Jeepers]

And yet we shouldn't drill for our own oil that we have untouched in OUR Country?

Why would we not drill for oil.?

 

[dilloduck]

Why would we not drill for oil.?

Ask the Democrats---.

 

[Jeepers]

Ask the Democrats---.

I seriously doubt that the democrats are against oil.. hell I am a prodriller and I'm on record telling the prodrilling right to fuck off... why? because #1 theyve politicised this issue during a campaign year. #2. They should have been drilling since 9/11. #3. Theyve done nothing for 6 years on this..

 

[dilloduck]

I seriously doubt that the democrats are against oil.. hell I am a prodriller and I'm on record telling the prodrilling right to fuck off... why? because #1 theyve politicised this issue during a campaign year. #2. They should have been drilling since 9/11. #3. Theyve done nothing for 6 years on this..

You joking right ? They have been the leaders in preventing new drilling in the US. Who are ones claiming ANWAR to be out of bounds for drilling?

 

[Jeepers]

You joking right ? They have been the leaders in preventing new drilling in the US. Who are ones claiming ANWAR to be out of bounds for drilling?

Really.. you cats do realize you had controll of both houses and the senate... WTF... If you cats wanted to drill atop james carvelles bald head we couldnt have stopped you....

 

[dilloduck]

Really.. you cats do realize you had controll of both houses and the senate... WTF... If you cats wanted to drill atop james carvelles bald head we couldnt have stopped you....

In 1996 the Republican-majority House and Senate voted to allow drilling in ANWR, but this legislation was vetoed by President Bill Clinton. Toward the end of his presidential term environmentalists pressed Clinton to declare the Arctic Refuge a U.S. National Monument. Doing so would have permanently closed the area to oil exploration. While Clinton did create several refuge monuments, the Arctic Refuge was not among them

Arctic Refuge drilling was again approved by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives as part of the Energy Bill on April 21, 2005,[17] but the Arctic Refuge provision was later removed by the House-Senate conference committee. The Republican-controlled Senate passed Arctic Refuge drilling on March 16, 2005 as part of the federal budget resolution for fiscal year 2006.[18] That Arctic Refuge provision was removed during the reconciliation process, due to Democrats in the House of Representatives who signed a letter stating they would oppose any version of the budget that had Arctic Refuge drilling in it.[19]

Arctic Refuge drilling controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Jeepers]

Wow.. a big gap between 96 and 2006.. how do you explain inaction during this period? Not to mention a friggin terrorist attack by oil funded saudi nationals....