Russia Sends Long Bombers Back on Patrol - Page 4 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #31 of 41 (permalink) Old 08-21-2007, 07:57 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Jillian80's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2004
Vehicle: DeLorean DMC-12
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 5,180
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce R.
How do you get owned by someone the likes of that twat? The only stupid cunt around here would be YOU..........
For someone who claims to have psychic powers you ought to be a bit more creative in your insults.


Quote:
You should really climb back into your hole in the ground.
^^^This coming from the person who thinks 'American' is a language, ffs.


Quote:
What he calls himself, and what he really is are two different things. He really is a salesman with an ego problem................
You really shouldn't talk about things you know nothing about.



Now, since this is GS's thread, I'll lay off.














But, you're still a fucktard.
Jillian80 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 41 (permalink) Old 08-21-2007, 08:25 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
jlomon's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2006
Vehicle: 2013 VW Golf Sportwagen TDI, 2011 Mazda 2, 2000 E320 4Matic Wagon (retired),1994 C280 (retired)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 3,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Back to the original subject of this thread, I can't for the life of me understand why the world actually paid attention to a couple of Tu-95s going out for a joyride. In the grand scheme of things, it is meaningless. It doesn't change a damn thing on a geopolitical level.

Russia didn't stop flying these missions because they wanted to curry favour with the west. They stopped flying the missions because they couldn't afford to put gas in their planes. Or their tanks. Or even pay their soldiers, sailors and airmen. They were broke. Now they're flush with cash and they want to show off a little by parking their used Bentleys on the front lawn for the neighbors to see.

The only thing that a Tu-95 is good for is firing stand-off cruise missiles designed to take out aircraft carriers. We can see these things coming from a thousand miles away, way out of range of their weapons systems. Hell, we can *hear* them coming from even further away. Those engines people are arguing about are so bloody loud that SOSUS can track the fucking things. Who in their right mind thinks that the Russians are going to lead off with such a blatant and easily detected plan of attack? They don't have enough of these planes in active service (about 70, if I remember correctly, based throughout Russia) to mount an effective attack against a carrier task force. F-14s flying in their 200 mile perimeter from their carriers can take these Bears out from an additional 100 mile distance, each F-14 having the ability to independently engage 6 simultaneously. If it ever came to the Russians acting, it would be in the form of SLBMs that we wouldn't see or hear until it was far too late. They've always put resources towards keeping the subs out to sea, even when they didn't have money for anything else.

Putin is loving the press that we're giving him because it feeds his ego and makes him feel like more of a player on an international level. And yes, he loves the fact that this move has the appearance of sticking it to the US. But that has nothing to do with the timing here. We're seeing these flights simply because the Russians now have gas money and want to play with their toys.
jlomon is offline  
post #33 of 41 (permalink) Old 08-21-2007, 08:35 AM Thread Starter
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
I believe they are also making a statement regarding the continuation and even escalation of inappropriate and unwarranted global hegemony on the part of the U.S. Goodness, I hope that wasn't lost on anyone, since it was the whole point of the exersize...

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
post #34 of 41 (permalink) Old 08-21-2007, 09:02 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
jlomon's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2006
Vehicle: 2013 VW Golf Sportwagen TDI, 2011 Mazda 2, 2000 E320 4Matic Wagon (retired),1994 C280 (retired)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 3,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanStar
I believe they are also making a statement regarding the continuation and even escalation of inappropriate and unwarranted global hegemony on the part of the U.S. Goodness, I hope that wasn't lost on anyone, since it was the whole point of the exersize...
I got that, but my point is that US actions since 1992 are largely irrelevant to the Russians, who would have been pursuing a much more aggressive foreign policy if they could have afforded it. This isn't a reaction to US foreign policy. It just looks that way.
jlomon is offline  
post #35 of 41 (permalink) Old 08-21-2007, 11:57 AM Thread Starter
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
The presence of U.S. troops in Japan, S. Korea, Bulgaria, Germany, Afghanistan and Iraq is "largely irrelevant" to Russia? Discussions of installing missile defense systems in Eastern Europe to stop fictional threats is also "largely irrelevant"? The operations of secretive U.S. organizations like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization are "largely irrelevant"? It really isn't dificult for me to imagine a somewhat different perspective on their part.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
post #36 of 41 (permalink) Old 08-21-2007, 12:46 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
jlomon's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2006
Vehicle: 2013 VW Golf Sportwagen TDI, 2011 Mazda 2, 2000 E320 4Matic Wagon (retired),1994 C280 (retired)
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 3,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanStar
The presence of U.S. troops in Japan, S. Korea, Bulgaria, Germany, Afghanistan and Iraq is "largely irrelevant" to Russia? Discussions of installing missile defense systems in Eastern Europe to stop fictional threats is also "largely irrelevant"? The operations of secretive U.S. organizations like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization are "largely irrelevant"? It really isn't dificult for me to imagine a somewhat different perspective on their part.
No, that's not what I'm saying. Maybe I'm not doing a good job explaining myself. I agree with you that all of the things you have cited would be of concern to Russia. I'm certainly not trying to minimize these things. What I am arguing is that if the Russians could have afforded it, they would have been flying these missions for the past 15 years.

They didn't fly to Guam as a response to US foreign policy, no matter how uncomfortable Russia may be with it. They stopped testing NATO/NORAD air defenses in 1992 because they just couldn't afford it any more. Not because they didn't feel threatened or angered by US foreign policy.
jlomon is offline  
post #37 of 41 (permalink) Old 08-21-2007, 01:35 PM
~BANNED~
 
deathrattle's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2005
Vehicle: 1992 W126 300 SE
Location: Head in the clouds
Posts: 11,045
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Latest
From Times Online
August 21, 2007


RAF jets scrambled to intercept Russian bomber



Michael Evans, Defence Editor of The Times


The RAF has been forced to scramble its latest combat aircraft to head off two Russian strategic bombers from British airspace.
Russia added to current diplomatic tensions with Britain by sending the two long-range Bear bombers towards British airspace in what is being seen as a deliberate muscle-flexing exercise by Moscow.
It was the first time Russian bombers had threatened to penetrate British airspace since outspoken remarks by President Vladimir Putin last week when he said he had ordered his bomber force to go back on long-range patrols around the world.
The arrival of two Russian Bear-H bombers over the North Atlantic forced the RAF to scramble its Typhoon/Eurofighter for the first time since becoming operational.


The Russian leader made his comment during a military exercise with the Chinese in the Ural Mountains at the weekend. He said he was ending a 15-year suspension of bomber flights, and announced that 14 strategic aircraft had taken to the air from seven airfields across Russia.
The announcement caused irritation in the West because it seemed to reflect President Putin’s growing antipathy towards his Western partners and his determination to show the world that Moscow was once again a power to be reckoned with; Russia’s strategic bombers may not present a real military threat but their presence once again in the skies is intended to underline Mr Putin’s new tough stance, illustrated somewhat graphically by published pictures of him fishing topless.
However, it was not the first time that Britain had been earmarked for Russian bomber flights. The Russians started sending long-range bombers towards British airspace earlier this year to snoop on a maritime exercise, recalling the Cold War days when Soviet strategic aircraft regularly tested Britain’s air defence responses.
The first bombers, two Bears, appeared off Scotland in May, and RAF Tornado F3s were scrambled to escort them away from British airspace. Since then, there have been one or two other incidents when Bears have approached the UK and have had to be turned away.
The general view was that Britain had been selected for Moscow’s renewed bomber campaign because of the existing tensions with President Putin over the murder in London of Alexander Litvinenko, the former Russian intelligence officer who was poisoned with polonium-210.
Andrei Lugovoy, also a former Russian intelligence officer with the FSB, successor of the KGB, was accused by the British authorities of murdering Mr Litvinenko, but Moscow has refused Britain’s request for his extradition. Tit-for-tat expulsions of diplomats serving in London and Moscow followed Russia’s extradition decision; and last week Russian authorities named a British diplomat they claimed had been caught spying.
The latest Bear incident took place on Friday. As two of the strategic bombers headed for Britain, Typhoons from Number XI Squadron, part of a “quick reaction alert” unit based at RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire, were scrambled.
The Typhoons began providing air defence cover of the United Kingdom on June 29, its first operational mission since entering service with the RAF. The Ministry of Defence released pictures of the mid-air meeting this evening.
Defence sources said that the decision was taken to intercept the Bear bombers because they were clearly heading for British airspace. In Friday’s incident, the Typhoons shadowed the Russian Bears until they turned away.
The Typhoon F2s share the role of guarding Britain’s airspace with the older Tornado F3s, which are based at RAF Leeming in Yorkshire and RAF Leuchars in Fife.

Last edited by deathrattle; 08-21-2007 at 01:39 PM.
deathrattle is offline  
post #38 of 41 (permalink) Old 08-21-2007, 04:30 PM Thread Starter
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlomon
They didn't fly to Guam as a response to US foreign policy, no matter how uncomfortable Russia may be with it. They stopped testing NATO/NORAD air defenses in 1992 because they just couldn't afford it any more. Not because they didn't feel threatened or angered by US foreign policy.
One concept does not preclude the other. We won the cold war because the USSR essentially suicided via imperial overstretch, a path well trodden by the U.S. as well. Rather than tool down and embrace Russia as an ally in a new post cold war era, the U.S. kept tightening the screws, asserting our dominance over an enemy that had already surrendered. This was not and is not now sound policy. Sooner or later the victims of our hegemony and continued cold war posturing are going to retool and respond toward the benefit of no one. I believe that is the message Putin is sending, and it is apparently a message that needs sending.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
post #39 of 41 (permalink) Old 08-21-2007, 06:47 PM
Designo_E320
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cascade
Last thing the USA needs is this But somehow I am not surprised.

This development IS Bush's fault, he has been really bullying his way around lately, and this is a natural outcome.

Thanks again to the NEOCON nut jobs. You idiots are provoking the shit out of these people and bringing
the Cold War back again; don't you feel safe now? Thanks for nothing.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
post #40 of 41 (permalink) Old 08-21-2007, 07:07 PM
~BANNED~
 
deathrattle's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2005
Vehicle: 1992 W126 300 SE
Location: Head in the clouds
Posts: 11,045
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
I don't see the problem. The Ruskies get to play with their old toys, we get to play with our expensive new toys and Shrub gets to scare a few more Merkins like BruceR and Jayhawk. It's win all round, right?
deathrattle is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Japan sends suicide bombers to Iraq ThrillKill Off-Topic 5 07-18-2007 02:15 PM
    Rust patrol Meles W140 S-Class 2 10-04-2006 10:14 AM
    Morpheus on Patrol Morpheus Off-Topic 3 12-11-2005 08:31 PM
    Back...long irvingst R170 SLK-Class 0 11-24-2004 10:57 AM
    highway patrol + radar etc (long) j R170 SLK-Class 10 06-05-2001 05:16 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome