APNewsBreak: Russian jet passes near US warship

[The2ndAmendment]

Observing the problems concerning the NSA, Nevada Ranch and NDAA, we have enough problems inside our own country right now.

 

[ron4342]

Hey ron4342 and Pheonixops,

Do you guys even remember what this thread WAS about?

It used to be an interesting topic.

Good point Willie. Oh, and my posts were not addressed to Pheonixops. They were primarily addressed to GreenBean. His/her view of history seems to be seriously flawed.

 

[Edgetho]

Russia Test Fires Advanced Multi-Warhead ICBM…

They really think they can intimidate Barack Obama? . . . Wait, actually, they probably can.

Via Free Beacon:
Russia Tests Multi-Warhead ICBM | Washington Free Beacon

Russia’s military carried out a flight test of a new multi-warhead intercontinental ballistic missile on Monday amid growing tensions with the United States over the crisis in Ukraine.

The SS-27 Mod 2 road-mobile ICBM was launched around 2:40 a.m. EST from Russia’s Plesetsk launch facility, located about 500 miles north of Moscow.

“The main purpose of the launch is to validate the reliability of a batch of this class of missiles made at the Votkinsk Plant,” Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Yegorov told state-run Interfax-AVN.

An unspecified number of simulated nuclear warheads landed at an impact range on the Kura test range on the Kamchatka Peninsula, in the Russian Far East, Yegorov said. The distance is around 3,500 miles.

The SS-27 Mod 2 is Russia’s newest ICBM and has been touted by Russian officials as designed specifically to defeat U.S. missile defenses.

Mark B. Schneider, a missile specialist with National Institute for Public Policy, said there is evidence indicating the Russians have violated the START arms treaty by developing the SS-27 Mod 2 with multiple warheads.

“The original missile that Russia called the Topol M Variant 2 and we call the SS-27 was a single warhead missile,” Schneider told the Free Beacon. “START prohibits increasing the declared number of warheads.”

the lying cocksucker in chief is such a quivering mass of pussy that he is defeated before he even begins.

Against real adversaries, those who don't play by his rules, those who can't be cowed by the DISGUSTING FILTH in the LSM, he is shown to be what I've ALWAYS said he is...

A faggot pussy of a lying coward.

Putin is going to bend him over and fuck him in the ass.

And he just fired an ICBM to let the lying cocksucker in chief know that he still has them and is not afraid to use them.

People, this is what happens when you send a lying cocksucker and a coward to the White House.

As to what Putin can or will do to Europe or NATO?

You gotta be kidding me, right? The lying pussy we have in office right now wouldn't do anything if Putin marched into Europe.

Remember, one of the first Foreign Policy acts of the lying cocksucker in chief and his lesbian Sec State, Hitlery, was to remove the missile shield we had promised to Poland and the Czech Republic.

Don't you scrunts that worship your pimp-daddy, the lying cocksucker in chief, remember that?

the lying cocksucker wouldn't do shit if Putin decided to take Poland or the Czech Republic or any other Country for that matter. He's a coward. He's afraid of Putin.

Here it is people..... It's too late to stop Putin. Not gonna happen.

And he doesn't have to invade Europe to influence them, to make them give him sweetheart deals, to make them buy his oil and gas at his prices, to make them bend over and grab their ankles.

Russia, under Putin, is seeking to be the dominant player in Europe and Western and Southern Asia. It's called 'Hegemony' and few, if any, of you have a clue how bad we're getting fucked in all this.

But then again, most of you are dimocraps, which means you are stupid beyond belief.

 

[GreenBean]

Sorry Pal , your post bothers my eyes , I shant read it - perhaps you should learn the art of high lighting -

1. Do not use Bold Print on 80% of your post as it detracts from your primary points and bothers viewers eyes.

2. Do not use Red Print on 80% of your post it detracts from your primary points .

3. Use a spell checker, it keeps you appearing as an ignorant and inarticlate Socio-Facist Lieral Jack Ass

4. Get your facts straight, not that I read your shit anyway, but I can see you are just another "Useful Idiot" so I can pretty much ascertain from there that you are more than likely parrotting left wing verbal diarhea as most socio-facistsd not in the ruling circle are wholly incapable of independant thought.

5. Summary: The Sum and Substance of my response to you - Fuck Off

Hummmm ..... What a fragile person you must be not to be able to handle bold red print. One has to wonder why you use it to call me a name: "Use a spell checker, it keeps you appearing as an ignorant and inarticlate Socio-Facist Lieral Jack Ass"
Oh, and by the way, "inarticulate" is really spelled 'inarticulate,' "lieral" is really spelled 'liberal,' and "Jack Ass" is really spelled 'jackass." Perhaps you should spend some time with your spell checker. If you are so small you need to condemn me for spelling errors you should make damn sure you have none in your post. It really lets the air out of your attack.

My post was in bold red because I wanted to answer each of your points and I wanted to make clear where your statement ended and mine began. I have done it in the past and as you are not in charge of the board I will do so in the future. It is a shame you are so closed minded that when presented with truths you cannot disprove your only recourse is to resort to insults and name callings. I had thought better of you. My mistake! But then again, anyone who still really thinks we weren't lied into Iraq and who cannot recognize a war profiteer when proof is given to them certainly cannot be very smart.

Oh, and one final note, you condemn my posts and claim I have my facts wrong. Yet you are incapable of disproving what I posted <sigh> Maybe it is you who are the "Useful Idiot" of the right. You appear to be willing to swallow every piece of shit they feed you.

Oh, and by the way, "inarticulate" is really spelled 'inarticulate,' "lieral" is really spelled 'liberal,' and "Jack Ass" is really spelled 'jackass."

They were intentional mis-spellings - Jack Ass referred to the Denoncratic mascot , IMO if you associate yourself with their bankrupt ideologies and blatant propaganda you are a Jack Ass.

So far as war profiteers, they've been around since the revolutionary war. The same people profit off peace as well , they are opportunists , they are capitalists and some as Lenin stated will sell the Marxists the rope with which he wanted to hang them.

you condemn my posts and claim I have my facts wrong. Yet you are incapable of disproving what I posted

And you are incapable of proving it . You appear to be willing to swallow every piece of shit they feed you.

 

[GreenBean]

Hummm ..... We warned Syria that if they did not get rid of their WMD, we would. They first denied that they had poison gas and then when the US didn't back down they admitted that, yes they did have poisoned gas. To avoid American intervention they agreed to turn the gas over to the UN for destruction and that is taking place now. All of this was accomplished without America firing one shot or losing one life. Seems to me what we did was very effective.

Too bad it didn't work with Sadaam Hussein , He sent his to Syria as our troops approached and thwarted UN Investigators at every turn.

Ahhhhh ........ A history re-write. You have absolutely no proof that Saddam sent his weapons anywhere. If you have produce it. Eye will not hold my breath. It would have made zero sense to give his best weapons away. He especially would not give them to Syria who was a regional enemy. They had been destroyed after Gulf War 1 and only someone in denial would think otherwise.
And initially Saddam did try to block UN investigators from searching Iraq. When it became clear bush was really planning an invasion he allowed the UN in and gave they full power to search anywhere and everywhere. Had the UN and Hans Blix had time to do a full search he would have proved that Iraq had no WMD. bush, realizing this, ordered the UN out of Iraq so he could start the war he wanted.
Now, before you go on another name calling rant perhaps you should do a bit of research on Iraq's WMD. Or, alternately you can ignore the facts and get down to name calling. It seems to suit you.
Oh, by the way, did you catch my misspelling? I put that in especially for ewe.

The U.S.-Russia agreement to dismantle Syria’s chemical weapons is reigniting a controversy over the 2003 covert operation by Russian special operations forces to remove Iraqi weapons — including chemical arms — and move them to Syria and Lebanon prior to the Iraq War.


“My people on the ground definitively tracked the Russian movement of Iraqi [chemical weapons] and high explosives to three locations in Syria and two in Lebanon in 2003,” Mr. Shaw told Inside the Ring.

Russian convoys of trucks that carried the arms were photographed by satellites and confirmed by the chief of Ukraine’s intelligence service, who provided the Pentagon with specifics on the special operations units involved and the material they removed, he said.
“Now we have the Russians ostensibly about to certify quantities of weaponry that until a few weeks ago no one admitted existed in Syria, much less that part of it had been moved from Iraq, or that all of it is Russian,” Mr. Shaw said.

Inside the Ring: Syria, Iraq and weapons of mass destruction - Washington Times

 

[martybegan]

When has a Russian fighter ever buzzed a US Destroyer 12 times for 90 minutes at 500ft?

Do you have some reading comprehension difficulty or just don't know the difference between distance and altitude? Perhaps you are just giving an attempt at a little dishonest embellishment. Either way, the type of probe being described is normal for both the US and Russia.

"This provocative and unprofessional Russian action is inconsistent with international protocols and previous agreements on the professional interaction between our militaries," said Army Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman.

They always say that, because officially it isn't what you are supposed to do. Unofficially both sides do it, and the press drones in the pentagon and the Kremlin are left to bitch about it.

 

[martybegan]

The Russian fighter made 12 passes at 500ft..............12............and the U.S. Destroyer did not respond. After the first pass, the Captain of the U.S.S. Donald Cook should have activated his 'Phalanx Defensive Cannon' and neutralized the fighter. That would have sent a strong signal to Putin that we mean business and won't allow a threat to put our crews in jeopardy. What the Russians are doing is taunting putative president Obama, something that would never have happened in this situation under Reagan, Bush 1 and 2 or even if Palin was president. They are making this putative president look extremely weak on the international scene and it is a utter embarrassment to us all. In 2016 we need a strong pro-military president who will use common sense and take a strong stance on agression around the world when peaceful nations are threatened by hardline goverments.

They were in International airspace - "neutralizing" the Rusky would've been an act of war - True under Reagan and Gorbachev they probably wouldn't have taken that chance .

Do you think one of our fighters should buzz by a Russian Warship off the coast of Florida - Damn Straight they should ! do you think the Rusky would have the right to shoot it down ?

In another era, the ruskie would have had an F-18 up his tailpipe. That was not a proud moment, nor was it the way a navy crew is supported.

If this happened in the North Atlantic or the Sea of Japan we would have a carrier there, but any admiral that risked a carrier in the black sea would be demoted back to able seaman. I'm not even sure a US carrier can enter the black sea physically.

So we have a tin can there, and its gonna get buzzed by ruskie planes.

 

[martybegan]

Its unfortunate that our skippers have to phone in request for rules of engagement, but it sure would have been funny if that Destroyer decided to 'paint' that Russian. I wonder if he would have soiled himself...

I have a feeling enough radio waves were directed at that fighter to fry an egg.

 

[Camp]

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.

Bump, for those who may have forgotten what this thread is about.

 

[GreenBean]

They were in International airspace - "neutralizing" the Rusky would've been an act of war - True under Reagan and Gorbachev they probably wouldn't have taken that chance .

Do you think one of our fighters should buzz by a Russian Warship off the coast of Florida - Damn Straight they should ! do you think the Rusky would have the right to shoot it down ?[/QUOT

In another era, the ruskie would have had an F-18 up his tailpipe. That was not a proud moment, nor was it the way a navy crew is supported.

If this happened in the North Atlantic or the Sea of Japan we would have a carrier there, but any admiral that risked a carrier in the black sea would be demoted back to able seaman. I'm not even sure a US carrier can enter the black sea physically.

So we have a tin can there, and its gonna get buzzed by ruskie planes.

The Black Sea connects to the Medditeranean and it would need to pass through Greek and Turkish Waters to get there. I believe that the super-carrier USS George H.W. Bush is already in the Black Sea.

 

[Edgetho]

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) The fighter was unarmed? Right. From the same people who gave us Benghazi. Sure.

2) Putin risked the life of the young pilot? Not so sure of that. Kinda hard to hit a Jet flying at 450 knots 500 feet off the deck. Doubt you could get a lock on him. Or even see him.

3) Had the destroyer fired on the Fighter, the crew would have died within the hour. The Russians are not the Iraqis. They can fight. Just ask the Nazis.

4) If it's one thing we should all know by now, it is that this administration lies as a matter of course. Everything that comes out of this cesspool is a lie and not to be believed.

5) The disgusting dimocrap scum who frequent this board are just as bad as the administration. They pick shit up from one of their communist hate sites, knowing it's a lie, and they bring it here. With no repercussions. Ever.

6) Give the Navy the 'benefit of the doubt'? Not when the Navy is commanded by the lyingest piece of shit this Country has ever known.

 

[Camp]

If this happened in the North Atlantic or the Sea of Japan we would have a carrier there, but any admiral that risked a carrier in the black sea would be demoted back to able seaman. I'm not even sure a US carrier can enter the black sea physically.

So we have a tin can there, and its gonna get buzzed by ruskie planes.

The Black Sea connects to the Medditeranean and it would need to pass through Greek and Turkish Waters to get there. I believe that the super-carrier USS George H.W. Bush is already in the Black Sea.

Don't need a carrier in the Black Sea. We have air assets and bases on land in Turkey and Romania. Incirlick is in southern Turkey, but there are Turkish bases close to the sea that could be used. The base in Romania is almost on the sea at Bezmar.

 

[dannyboys]

Allegedly it was unarmed and a half mile away.
BTW, you got pictures to post?

How the fuck do you know the fighter jet was unarmed? B/c one of Putin's Generals said so?
Christ man fucking wake up.
No one in Putin's military takes a leak without his say-so. Putin: "I want you to disarm one of our fighter jets then order it to make a dozen close action passes on a US war ship". Ya fucking right!
God you're an idiot!

 

[GreenBean]

The Black Sea connects to the Medditeranean and it would need to pass through Greek and Turkish Waters to get there. I believe that the super-carrier USS George H.W. Bush is already in the Black Sea.

Don't need a carrier in the Black Sea. We have air assets and bases on land in Turkey and Romania. Incirlick is in southern Turkey, but there are Turkish bases close to the sea that could be used. The base in Romania is almost on the sea at Bezmar.

It's my understanding that the base in Romania - a former Soviet satellite- is only a temporary and tansient thing. As for the Turkish Bases - true we wouldn't need an aircraft carrier in the region with those there. Good Point.

 

[Edgetho]

The Black Sea connects to the Medditeranean and it would need to pass through Greek and Turkish Waters to get there. I believe that the super-carrier USS George H.W. Bush is already in the Black Sea.

Don't need a carrier in the Black Sea. We have air assets and bases on land in Turkey and Romania. Incirlick is in southern Turkey, but there are Turkish bases close to the sea that could be used. The base in Romania is almost on the sea at Bezmar.

There is a centuries-long hatred of Turks by the Russians. It wouldn't take much for the Russians to decide to clean their clocks for them.

It would solve a lot of Russia's Naval problems.

Will they do it? No.

Could they do it? Yes.

Would they like to do it? Yes.

Would the lying cocksucker in chief (or any other dimocrap) do anything about it?

Putin is feeling his oats, people. And he might be crazy but he isn't stupid.

He knows there's a time limit on his adventurism. He knows it as surely as I know it.

He's got until the lyingest, the most cowardly, the faggiest, most gutless, effeminate scumbag to ever hold the off of potus is gone.

And he knows it. This is why things could get out of control real quick. Before you even know it.

Well.... Unless another dimocrap takes the place of the coward in chief.

But he's not going to count on that happening. Putin is going to get everything he can get until he is forced to stop. By a real president.

One with a set of balls. Even a Republican female has more courage than a dimocrap fag like obama. And Putin knows it.

That's why I'm concerned. Putin is gonna push pretty hard in the next 2-1/2, 3 years.

 

[dannyboys]

Pretty hard to get through when VJ's well lubed hand is up Barry's ass.
"Can he call you back Admiral?"

 

[martybegan]

If this happened in the North Atlantic or the Sea of Japan we would have a carrier there, but any admiral that risked a carrier in the black sea would be demoted back to able seaman. I'm not even sure a US carrier can enter the black sea physically.

So we have a tin can there, and its gonna get buzzed by ruskie planes.

The Black Sea connects to the Medditeranean and it would need to pass through Greek and Turkish Waters to get there. I believe that the super-carrier USS George H.W. Bush is already in the Black Sea.

Its actually in the North Arabian Sea.

CV Locations

 

[Camp]

Allegedly it was unarmed and a half mile away.
BTW, you got pictures to post?

How the fuck do you know the fighter jet was unarmed? B/c one of Putin's Generals said so?
Christ man fucking wake up.
No one in Putin's military takes a leak without his say-so. Putin: "I want you to disarm one of our fighter jets then order it to make a dozen close action passes on a US war ship". Ya fucking right!
God you're an idiot!

Because these aircraft don't sit around with munitions strapped to the underside of their wings, which is how the aircraft carry their weapons. Somebody has to give orders to load weapons onto the aircraft. No weapons, no chance for a mistake. Why would some Russian commander want to put weapons on a recon flight? Anyhow, the aircraft being spoken of were no threat to the US ship. Even if the aircraft had weapons. Both the aircraft and any weapons they could carry could and would be knocked down in a flash.
In answer to your question of how the fuck would you know that a fighter jet was unarmed, the arms would be clearly visible on the underside of the wings. The first pass of the aircraft would have been made with the knowledge that various methods of inspection were being made, including cameras with lens that are so powerful they remain available only to the military and as a last resort, a sailor with a set of binoculars so massive they are mounted because they are to heavy and big for a man to physically handle. So, you could tell by looking.

 

[Wildman]

The US and Russia used to play games like this all the time.

All the fighter did was give the US ship some tracking and General Conditions training.

I'm sure the Russian fighters radar detector was zorched the whole time.

right, this is not a one-time incident, happens quite frequently on both sides. We are not going to war with Russia, and we don't need a war monger in the whitehouse. we need a president that the world respects and a military second to none--------peace through strength is real.

i wouldn't actually say it "happens all the time"..., BUT !! i rode an aircraft carrier across the wide Pacific 7 times on each return to the states we were buzzed by "Russian Bears" every time we got near Midway, we responded by sending our fighters to fly with them, one of our pilots with the call name of "Hoppalong Cassidy", flew upside down over a "Bear" and took photos, he said he could see the pilots acting quite strangely by his "close encounter", which he said was about 25 feet above them, the photos looked like about 10 feet.

the point is, all our (the ship) and escorts had all tracking devices on the bear and well over 2,000 cameras, i have 35mm stills and 8mm movie film of the passes over our ship.

 

[GreenBean]

The Black Sea connects to the Medditeranean and it would need to pass through Greek and Turkish Waters to get there. I believe that the super-carrier USS George H.W. Bush is already in the Black Sea.

Its actually in the North Arabian Sea.

CV Locations

Actually probably Aegean - but simply academic ....