War with Russia
Discussion
Cobnapint said:
Mr Whippy said:
Does it really matter unless something DOES happen?
The USA seems quite intent on wanting to rise to the most trivial things which is what worries me most.
Yes, it matters alot. People could end up, erm...dead?The USA seems quite intent on wanting to rise to the most trivial things which is what worries me most.
The USA is quite right to complain about irresponsible high speed manoeuvres right next to one of its aircraft in international airspace, as it is right to complain about multiple threatening passes to one of its ships in international waters.
The US is also right to be keeping an eye on Putin too.
This stuff happens all the time on both sides and it was only news because of some tasty footage.
swisstoni said:
If you look at an atlas and see how far the US ship was from the US and how close it was to a Russian base. If the tables were turned, I'm fairly sure the US would pay a Russian ship a 'visit' of a similar nature.
This stuff happens all the time on both sides and it was only news because of some tasty footage.
They'd pay it a visit - that goes without saying, but they wouldn't be doing barrel rolls etc. All encounters are recorded these days in the event of something kicking off and evidence of who was to blame being required at the UN.This stuff happens all the time on both sides and it was only news because of some tasty footage.
It doesn't matter whether it happened 50 km or 50 thousand miles from Russian airspace - it was international airspace.
And the same argument goes for international waters.
And will people please stop coming the old 'this stuff happens all the time' routine, like they're renowned experts on East/West relations.
Putin is supposed to be the leader of a responsible nation. He needs to act like it.
Cobnapint said:
Putin is supposed to be the leader of a responsible nation. He needs to act like it.
Putin is a ex-KGB dictator whose primary aim is to apply Russian political power in his own interests and those of a his closest personal allies. He doesn't give a flying fig about how others "think" he ought to behave. He has zero obligations to anybody else. Suggesting that he has is just hot air and posturing.
Countdown said:
Cobnapint said:
Putin is supposed to be the leader of a responsible nation. He needs to act like it.
Putin is a ex-KGB dictator whose primary aim is to apply Russian political power in his own interests and those of a his closest personal allies. He doesn't give a flying fig about how others "think" he ought to behave. He has zero obligations to anybody else. Suggesting that he has is just hot air and posturing.
"America, f
k yeah!"In the end there are too many assholes and pussies in this world, and sometimes it takes a dick to f
k the assholes and pussies. Putin is that dick!Cobnapint said:
Mr Whippy said:
Does it really matter unless something DOES happen?
The USA seems quite intent on wanting to rise to the most trivial things which is what worries me most.
Yes, it matters alot. People could end up, erm...dead?The USA seems quite intent on wanting to rise to the most trivial things which is what worries me most.
But it didn't.
I've not read too much, but was it a P3 and an Su27?
Chances of that Su27 pilot hitting a P3, even if flying like a douche? Pretty damn low. They're not suicidal idiots. It's just show-boating flamboyance.
The Pentagon report is for us muppets to go all 'fear' over to string along a narrative that makes Putin 'evil' and so when the USA decides they need to go blow him up we all think it's a "good thing"
Mr Whippy said:
Cobnapint said:
Mr Whippy said:
Does it really matter unless something DOES happen?
The USA seems quite intent on wanting to rise to the most trivial things which is what worries me most.
Yes, it matters alot. People could end up, erm...dead?The USA seems quite intent on wanting to rise to the most trivial things which is what worries me most.
But it didn't.
I've not read too much, but was it a P3 and an Su27?
Chances of that Su27 pilot hitting a P3, even if flying like a douche? Pretty damn low. They're not suicidal idiots. It's just show-boating flamboyance.
hidetheelephants said:
Mr Whippy said:
Cobnapint said:
Mr Whippy said:
Does it really matter unless something DOES happen?
The USA seems quite intent on wanting to rise to the most trivial things which is what worries me most.
Yes, it matters alot. People could end up, erm...dead?The USA seems quite intent on wanting to rise to the most trivial things which is what worries me most.
But it didn't.
I've not read too much, but was it a P3 and an Su27?
Chances of that Su27 pilot hitting a P3, even if flying like a douche? Pretty damn low. They're not suicidal idiots. It's just show-boating flamboyance.
But just getting in any of these combat aircraft and flying CAP/recon/intercept missions is all risky stuff to begin with.
I get your drift, but it'll defer to the reality that these are combat personel flying machines that kill.
If two countries want to go to war over an accident then chances are the accident was just an excuse than a trigger.
Dave
Cobnapint said:
swisstoni said:
If you look at an atlas and see how far the US ship was from the US and how close it was to a Russian base. If the tables were turned, I'm fairly sure the US would pay a Russian ship a 'visit' of a similar nature.
This stuff happens all the time on both sides and it was only news because of some tasty footage.
They'd pay it a visit - that goes without saying, but they wouldn't be doing barrel rolls etc. All encounters are recorded these days in the event of something kicking off and evidence of who was to blame being required at the UN.This stuff happens all the time on both sides and it was only news because of some tasty footage.
It doesn't matter whether it happened 50 km or 50 thousand miles from Russian airspace - it was international airspace.
And the same argument goes for international waters.
And will people please stop coming the old 'this stuff happens all the time' routine, like they're renowned experts on East/West relations.
Putin is supposed to be the leader of a responsible nation. He needs to act like it.
Cobnapint said:
I, and everybody else knows that things like this have happened in the past. We're not stupid and don't need the 'calm down, nothing to see' routine thanks.
These things have happened in the past, are happening now, and will no doubt happen in the future.What is strange is you suggesting that the Russians are especially unique or culpable in "not behaving like a responsible nation"....
Mr Whippy said:
If two countries want to go to war over an accident then chances are the accident was just an excuse than a trigger.
Dave
There wont be war but it will cause unnecessary friction and a worsening of relations.Dave
It's not without precedent, harking back to the Chinese/American J-8/P-3 incident back in 2001
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Island_incide...
skyrover said:
Mr Whippy said:
If two countries want to go to war over an accident then chances are the accident was just an excuse than a trigger.
Dave
There wont be war but it will cause unnecessary friction and a worsening of relations.Dave
It's not without precedent, harking back to the Chinese/American J-8/P-3 incident back in 2001
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hainan_Island_incide...
There is nothing unusual in SIGINT, Here is a list of platforms operated around the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signals_intelligence...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signals_intelligence...
skyrover said:
There is nothing unusual in SIGINT, Here is a list of platforms operated around the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signals_intelligence...
SIGINT is par for the course, but when you start messing about with a nations nuclear deterrent, that is pushing the envelope. How would the UK react with a Russian Tu-95, 30 km from Faslane, or the US, 30 km from Pearl harbour or Norfolk Naval Base? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signals_intelligence...
Gathering intelligence on nuclear capability is nothing new and has never ended.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_Open_Skies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_Open_Skies
skyrover said:
Gathering intelligence on nuclear capability is nothing new and has never ended.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_Open_Skies
A NATO member country, that recently prevented Russia from exercising its rights, according to that treaty. A country with US nuclear weapons on its soil.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_Open_Skies
https://theaviationist.com/2016/02/10/turkey-has-d...
Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Saturday 30th April 21:28
QuantumTokoloshi said:
we have a NATO spy plane within 30 km of a Russian SSBM nuclear submarine base.
It was the Baltic. In International airspace.Just what SSBN base do the Russians have in the Baltic? That's SSBN BTW (Submarine, Nuclear, Balistic Missile).
The last time I looked, the Russian coastline on the Baltic was the little bit around St. Petersburg and the little bit around Kaliningrad. Territorial waters extend to 12 miles.
Given that the Baltic consists of relatively shallow, littoral waters, with a very narrow choke point into the wider seas (The Skaggerak) please tell me how you think an SSBN is going to operate there.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Saturday 30th April 21:38
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
QuantumTokoloshi said:
we have a NATO spy plane within 30 km of a Russian SSBM nuclear submarine base.
It was the Baltic. In International airspace.Just what SSBN base do the Russians have in the Baltic? That's SSBN BTW (Submarine, Nuclear, Balistic Missile).
The last time I looked, the Russian coastline on the Baltic was the little bit around St. Petersburg and the little bit around Kaliningrad. Territorial waters extend to 12 miles.
Given that the Baltic consists of relatively shallow, littoral waters, with a very narrow choke point into the wider seas (The Skaggerak) please tell me how you think an SSBN is going to operate there.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Saturday 30th April 21:38
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
It was the Baltic. In International airspace.
Just what SSBN base do the Russians have in the Baltic? That's SSBN BTW (Submarine, Nuclear, Balistic Missile).
The last time I looked, the Russian coastline on the Baltic was the little bit around St. Petersburg and the little bit around Kaliningrad. Territorial waters extend to 12 miles.
Given that the Baltic consists of relatively shallow, littoral waters, with a very narrow choke point into the wider seas (The Skaggerak) please tell me how you think an SSBN is going to operate there.
SSBN Ship submersible bomber nuclear,Just what SSBN base do the Russians have in the Baltic? That's SSBN BTW (Submarine, Nuclear, Balistic Missile).
The last time I looked, the Russian coastline on the Baltic was the little bit around St. Petersburg and the little bit around Kaliningrad. Territorial waters extend to 12 miles.
Given that the Baltic consists of relatively shallow, littoral waters, with a very narrow choke point into the wider seas (The Skaggerak) please tell me how you think an SSBN is going to operate there.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Saturday 30th April 21:38
Anyway the link was about the asian SSBN base and incident, but agree with you totally about the baltic, the layest russian test was off Archangel normal test range, well has been for about 40 years for them.
Nothing to see apart from the yanks crying wolf, and sticking standing forces in to the baltic states, the P3 and J8 was also USA and China, but hey ho
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff