APNewsBreak: Russian jet passes near US warship
- Thread starter kidrocks
- Start date
elektra
Diamond Member
Just the Russian Air Force being allowed to learn everything it can about our defenses, most likely this jet is armed with high tech surveillance equipment. Obama most likely was giving away defense secrets, letting the jet gather all the defense data as we pinged the jet with all our defense technology.
Pheonixops
Proud Liberal
Thanks for the information. I don't know why we need to make such a statement, I do agree that is was just posturing between both parties.
Why do you think that Obama "MUST do something"? How would it hurt us if Russia goes back to being the USSR? We got along quite well in the 1980's and the decades during the Cold War.
HenryBHough
Diamond Member
We can - but the best chance of that is for the Marx-O-Crats to nominate Hillary.
blackhawk
Diamond Member
I'm not sure if being involved in a nuclear arms race with Russia for decades would be considered getting along quite well we were fortunate neither side did anything stupid enough to give us a nuclear war though the Cuban missile crisis came close.
Pheonixops
Proud Liberal
I could have worded that better. I meant that as a Nation, we were pretty prosperous and safe. Besides an arms race, we tended to use proxies to "fight" each other. I agree that we were fortunate that neither side did anything stupid enough to launch us into an all out nuclear war.
My main question is how would it hurt us if Russia annexed Ukraine? How would it makes us any less safe and how many of us are willing to fight a war over the Ukraine? I certainly don't think that it's financially viable for us to get involved in such a war and I certainly don't think that it's worth the lives of our service men and women.
whitehall
Diamond Member
I doubt if the pilot was ordered by Putin to buzz a US warship. If that that is true the situation is more dangerous than most people understand. It indicates that the Russian military is out of control.
RandallFlagg
PROUD Tea Party Member
- Dec 5, 2012
- 8,578
- 2,335
- 280
Frankly, as a guy who actually fought "The Cold War", I find it extremely troubling that you would even ask a question like that.
Tell you what.....let me bring a foreign country into your neighborhood with tanks, planes and troops. They shut down your rights, destroy the press, forbid you to travel ANYWHERE except where THEY tell you, put you or your family into labor camps OR shoot you in the back of the head if you disagree and tell you that you are now a "communist comrade". Now, that might be welcomed by you - I have no idea. However, ask the people of Germany how much they enjoyed it. Or the people of Poland. Or the people of Czechoslovakia how much they enjoyed it, or Albania or the Ukraine on and on.
Why MUST Obama do something? It's simple and straightforward. If Putin is allowed to go on "unchecked" and decides to put the "band back together" - What's next? World War III? Expansion all over the world? This president (OBarry) is the "leader of the free world". It is HIS responsibility to ensure FREEDOM - not stand by idly and watch as it is exterminated across the globe.
It's time for this "man" to stop drawing red lines and actually become a man and stand up for the free world. I would also suggest that he understand that Putin isn't playing around. If you are going to challenge this guy - you had damn well be ready to back it up - or just keep your mealy mouth shut and continue be the worlds biggest metro-sexual.
elektra
Diamond Member
Ignorance of History is almost as dangerous as History forgotten.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/70561.The_Gulag_Archipelago_1918_1956
R.C. Christian
Gold Member
He started it and now he can't finish it. The Russians are going to take that place and there won't be anything we can do except raise everything to Defcon II. The U.S. is going to lose it's hegemony. It's run out of cards.
Last edited:
blackhawk
Diamond Member
The problem I see is where does Putin stop if we do let that happen this started with the Crimea we let that go because historically it had been Russian now he's looking at Eastern Ukraine if he takes that and he goes for all of Ukraine after that is there any reason to think he would stop with Ukraine? This has very similar feel to what Hitler did in the 1930s I'm not saying Putin would go that far but the world refused to confront Hitler till he controlled most of Europe and the price to undo that was very high. My gut feeling with Putin will keep going as long as there is no serious opposition to him.
HenryBHough
Diamond Member
Putin knows he has free reign until January, 2017.
AT LEAST until then.
AT LEAST until then.
GreenBean
Gold Member
- Dec 4, 2013
- 5,407
- 616
- 155
Two of the men killed in the Marine Barracks in Lebanon were people I knew, one from Basic the other from A-School. It was just a toss of the dice that I wasn't with them - so I did take it very personally.
When we invaded Afghanisan I cheered for Bush and out Boys, ditto for Iraq and I still stand by the decisions our President made.
But I repeat There's a big difference between a handful of tinpot terrorists taking over a plane with boxcutters and a major world power that could reduce entire cites to smoldering ash in the blink of an eye.
CONFIRMATION: steve mcgarrett is one of the most ignorant people on this board. Name someone else on this board who is ready to goad Russia into an all out nuclear war?
We shoot down one of their jets.
They shoot down a few of our jets.
We take out one of their ships.
They take out one of our carriers.
We take out one of their military bases.
They take out New York.
We take out Moscow and Leningrad.
They take out Washington and the whole east coast.
We fire our nuclear arsenal, they fire their nuclear arsenal and nuclear winter comes early and takes out mankind.
Yep!!! mcgarrett, a real fine military brain you have there. Let's play chicken with Putin.
IT IS A GAME NO ONE ON EITHER SIDE WILL WIN!!!
How in the name of God did people like you get to be so stupid? I would really like to see you because I seriously doubt if you have the ability to walk upright.
GreenBean, I thank you for your service. I agree with you, bush was right to send troops to Afghanistan. That is where bin Laden and al Qaida were and it was clear they were the people responsible for 9/11. But I have to ask you this, with bin Laden and al Qaida on their heels and victory in sight how can you justify pulling the troops from Afghanistan to send them into Iraq? How can you justify starting a second war based on the threat of WMD that DID NOT EXIST? How can you can approve of bush's action when it has been shown he had cherry picked Iraqi intelligence to make it appear that WMD existed? How can you approve of starting a war that would kill over 4300 Americans based on lies that would make Halliburton (and by extension cheney) wealthy? The bottom line on Iraq is that you are approving of the actions of a war criminal and a war profiteer. If you are really a soldier as you post, then you take the lives of other soldiers seriously and you do not throw them away for profit and that is exactly what bush and cheney did. In a million years I will never understand your defense of these pieces of human garbage.
Would you be screaming about this if there was a republican in the White House? I doubt it. Of course you will claim that a republican would have handled this differently. Hummmm ...... Differently??? When Putin grabbed Georgia in almost exactly the same manner a republican was in the White House. And what did bush do about Putin's land grab? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
The thing is, I have watched you people in the past and I know exactly what you are doing. You are condemning Obama for not sending troops to the Crimea. But the thing is, IF Obama were to send troops to the Crimea you would be among the first to scream "War monger! War monger!" Your hate is so profound that it makes exactly zero difference what Obama does. You will condemn him for any action he takes and that is why I write you off as a dishonest, ignorant, and close minded person.
GreenBean
Gold Member
- Dec 4, 2013
- 5,407
- 616
- 155
"WMD that DID NOT EXIST ?" ... unknown at that time and still uncertain today. What is known is that Sadam was perfectly willing to engage is mass murder/genocide as is evidenced by his gassing of the Kurds, intelligence indicated that he had Weapons of Mass Destruction - not Nukes like the Ruskies - but still highly lethal - that some of these WMDs did not cross the border into Syria as our troops approached is uncertain.
war criminal and a war profiteer ? - unsubstantiated speculation. People such as Haliburton, the Koch Brothers and George Soros for that matter will engage in profiteering in war or peace .
"If you are really a soldier as you post, then you take the lives of other soldiers seriously" - I was a Navy Corpsman stationed with the Marines - the Marine Barracks bombing was in 1983 - I was honorably discharged in 1985. I was nowhere near Lebanon when it happenned, in fact I was nursing a hangover in Norfolk Va.
Anyone who joined the Military was never promised a rose garden, most who fought and died did so over an extreme sense of patriotism , honor, duty and obligation to our country , our society and our way of life.
Last edited:
obama is not going to do anything. Nor should he. The mistakes made were made long ago. They can't be rectified now. obama really needs to just shut up because he's only making this country look more foolish. The recent chemical attack in Syria met with silence was just more proof of how ineffective we really are.
blackhawk
Diamond Member
Go **** yourself dip shit all your phony ass I used to be a republican and now I'm a superior highly intellectual evolved liberal bullshit is as fake as a three dollar all you are is a loud mouth far left asshole who can do nothing but spew hate towards anyone who disagrees with you. You picked the wrong night and the wrong person for this shit tonight ************ I can be as respectful to someone as they are to me or can be just as vile and disrespectful as they are to me if this is the road you want to go down so be it but leave no doubt you will get back what you dish out and more.
williepete
Platinum Member
- Banned
- #100
I've noticed two positions on this thread that have been repeated.
1. This happened all the time during the Cold War so no big deal.
2. The fighter was unarmed so no big deal.
May I add a bit of perspective from a fighter pilot who flew fighters during the Cold War:
1. We did approach Soviet ships. There was a strict protocol (at least in the USAF
).
You never pointed the nose of your fighter at the ship and you never crossed its bow. You approached the ship in as non threatening way as you could--let me explain. If your intent is to attack a ship, you approach in a certain way. If your intent is to attack a warship, you approach in a very careful way--as if you were slowly inching close to a 50-gallon pool of gasoline with a lit road flare in each hand. The ship captains know the difference between an attack profile and a recon profile. I won't go into detail about our radar, countermeasures or weapons but I'm sure by now you'll understand that the pilot would want to project to the captain as much information as possible that he means no harm. The term "buzzing" is used. It was against maritime protocol to buzz a ship. Now as a young stupid fighter pilot would I buzz a Soviet freighter? Yes. A disabled Soviet submarine forced to the surface off Okinawa in 1985? Maybe a little. A Soviet warship? No way in Hell!
2. The "news" article says the fighter "appeared to be unarmed" and conducted the passes for over 90 minutes. I haven't read or heard what type of Russian fighter conducted the low passes. Someone help me here if you have a link to this information. 90 minutes is a long time for a fighter to be over a location unless his base is very close by. If his rails and hard points are empty, the sailors can see he's not armed with missiles or bombs. What they can't determine is the status of his gun. For example, the MiG-29 and Su-27 carry a 30mm GSh-30L cannon with 150 rounds internally. No way to determine from the deck of a ship if the cannon has a full or partial load.
The reporter or the Navy news release was irresponsible in stating that the fighter "appeared to be unarmed". If it was the Navy supplying that line, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that the absence of external ordinance counts as a non lethal threat to a warship and in a gesture of deescalating the incident used the phrase "unarmed".
My take is this is a big deal. Tensions are very high in the region. All the Russian front line pilots in the area are briefed, primed, cocked and locked and walking a razor's edge. They won't do anything to aggravate the tense situation unless ordered to do so. This was provocative. I guaran-damn-tee you that fighter pilot didn't cook that up on his own. The nanosecond he came up on the destroyer's sensors, he was lit up like a Christmas tree and he knew he was one whisper from the Captain's lips away from being converted into primordial ooze.
This was a deliberate display of disrespect but more, it was a test of resolve. Putin risked the life of that young fighter pilot to gain information. He got it.
Another take I have is this story stinks on facts. From the Navy or from a reporter ignorant of these types of matters. Something ain't right. Not enough information for this old bird to hang his hat on.
1. This happened all the time during the Cold War so no big deal.
2. The fighter was unarmed so no big deal.
May I add a bit of perspective from a fighter pilot who flew fighters during the Cold War:
1. We did approach Soviet ships. There was a strict protocol (at least in the USAF
). You never pointed the nose of your fighter at the ship and you never crossed its bow. You approached the ship in as non threatening way as you could--let me explain. If your intent is to attack a ship, you approach in a certain way. If your intent is to attack a warship, you approach in a very careful way--as if you were slowly inching close to a 50-gallon pool of gasoline with a lit road flare in each hand. The ship captains know the difference between an attack profile and a recon profile. I won't go into detail about our radar, countermeasures or weapons but I'm sure by now you'll understand that the pilot would want to project to the captain as much information as possible that he means no harm. The term "buzzing" is used. It was against maritime protocol to buzz a ship. Now as a young stupid fighter pilot would I buzz a Soviet freighter? Yes. A disabled Soviet submarine forced to the surface off Okinawa in 1985? Maybe a little. A Soviet warship? No way in Hell!
2. The "news" article says the fighter "appeared to be unarmed" and conducted the passes for over 90 minutes. I haven't read or heard what type of Russian fighter conducted the low passes. Someone help me here if you have a link to this information. 90 minutes is a long time for a fighter to be over a location unless his base is very close by. If his rails and hard points are empty, the sailors can see he's not armed with missiles or bombs. What they can't determine is the status of his gun. For example, the MiG-29 and Su-27 carry a 30mm GSh-30L cannon with 150 rounds internally. No way to determine from the deck of a ship if the cannon has a full or partial load.
The reporter or the Navy news release was irresponsible in stating that the fighter "appeared to be unarmed". If it was the Navy supplying that line, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that the absence of external ordinance counts as a non lethal threat to a warship and in a gesture of deescalating the incident used the phrase "unarmed".
My take is this is a big deal. Tensions are very high in the region. All the Russian front line pilots in the area are briefed, primed, cocked and locked and walking a razor's edge. They won't do anything to aggravate the tense situation unless ordered to do so. This was provocative. I guaran-damn-tee you that fighter pilot didn't cook that up on his own. The nanosecond he came up on the destroyer's sensors, he was lit up like a Christmas tree and he knew he was one whisper from the Captain's lips away from being converted into primordial ooze.
This was a deliberate display of disrespect but more, it was a test of resolve. Putin risked the life of that young fighter pilot to gain information. He got it.
Another take I have is this story stinks on facts. From the Navy or from a reporter ignorant of these types of matters. Something ain't right. Not enough information for this old bird to hang his hat on.
Similar threads
