So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

User avatar
GBNATO
General
Posts: 5884
Joined: Sun 14 Apr 2013 12:20
Location: The Republic of Dave
Contact:

Re: So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

Postby GBNATO » Wed 4 Feb 2015 03:04

Putin is managing to step on pretty much everyone's toes; the Norwegians, the British, the Portugese and the Turks. Only a matter of time before one of these provocative little flights goes awry.
Image

User avatar
orcbuster
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12362
Joined: Fri 7 Sep 2012 21:04
Contact:

Re: So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

Postby orcbuster » Wed 4 Feb 2015 03:06

LoneRifle wrote:We STOPPED doing it though Orc. Both sides did it and it stopped because the Cold War was over.


Still do it from time to time, also against north korea and china as well as russia.

Again, same old same old.
Image
Viker for ingen!

User avatar
another505
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13128
Joined: Sun 21 Jul 2013 05:18
Location: Hiatus
Contact:

Re: So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

Postby another505 » Wed 4 Feb 2015 03:12

All hail putin overlord
Image
Of Salt

User avatar
Yakhont
Colonel
Posts: 2870
Joined: Sat 31 Mar 2012 04:33
Contact:

Re: So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

Postby Yakhont » Wed 4 Feb 2015 03:12

The Tu-95MS cannot carry antisub weapons, much less a nuclear one

Also

http://sputniknews.com/military/2015020 ... z3Qb4ik02h
Image

User avatar
Mitchverr
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 10646
Joined: Sat 24 Mar 2012 18:08
Contact:

Re: So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

Postby Mitchverr » Wed 4 Feb 2015 03:19

Yakhont wrote:The Tu-95MS cannot carry antisub weapons, much less a nuclear one

Also

http://sputniknews.com/military/2015020 ... z3Qb4ik02h


Huh from what i heard they were flying and not squawking IFF making themselves highly dangerous towards any civillian traffic forcing them to alter course in the regions also, not really following the rules that is it? :lol:

I also love how he says we are provoking them when they are the ones flying the damn aircraft messing with us, lol.


http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/555757 ... times-2014

Also that, but heh.
Image

User avatar
OpusTheFowl
General
Posts: 6660
Joined: Sun 26 Feb 2012 19:52
Location: White Rock, Canada
Contact:

Re: So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

Postby OpusTheFowl » Wed 4 Feb 2015 03:26

Mitchverr wrote:I also love how he says we are provoking them when they are the ones flying the damn aircraft messing with us, lol.

"I'm gonna keep swinging my fists, and if they happen to hit you its your own fault!"
- Bart Simpson

Image

User avatar
Kraxis
Major-General
Posts: 3909
Joined: Wed 10 Jul 2013 11:56
Contact:

Re: So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

Postby Kraxis » Wed 4 Feb 2015 03:29

Mitchverr wrote:
Yakhont wrote:The Tu-95MS cannot carry antisub weapons, much less a nuclear one

Also

http://sputniknews.com/military/2015020 ... z3Qb4ik02h


Huh from what i heard they were flying and not squawking IFF making themselves highly dangerous towards any civillian traffic forcing them to alter course in the regions also, not really following the rules that is it? :lol:

Yup. About a month ago there was a serious incident at Copehagen's International Airport where the Swedes ended up having to call the airport flight controllers and tell them that there was a Russian plane coming in that was a serious risk to the jet liners. Of course the flight controllers diverted the jet liners, but that was a serious dickish move by the Russians.
Of course they said "hey we were in international airspace." As if that matters when the civilian liners coming into Copenhagen occupy airspace all the way into Sweden (and thus also the international airspace in between). I'm not sure Russia would be terribly happy if NATO planes decided to mess with St. Petersburg's airport in the same way.
[EUG]MadMat wrote:MadMat says so many things ... :twisted:

User avatar
LoneRifle
Major-General
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed 3 Jul 2013 17:11
Location: Cackalacky
Contact:

Re: So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

Postby LoneRifle » Wed 4 Feb 2015 03:49

orcbuster wrote:
LoneRifle wrote:We STOPPED doing it though Orc. Both sides did it and it stopped because the Cold War was over.


Still do it from time to time, also against north korea and china as well as russia.

Again, same old same old.


We buzz China and NK. We don't Buzz China and NK with Nukes onboard. America can be petty, but we try to be above thuggishly petty.
Image

User avatar
Ghostweed
Warrant Officer
Posts: 485
Joined: Fri 17 May 2013 02:25
Contact:

Re: So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

Postby Ghostweed » Wed 4 Feb 2015 04:50

@OP Let me remind u who started this - USA.

On December 13, 2001, George W. Bush gave Russia notice of the United States' withdrawal from ABM treaty without previous warning.

In reaction to this and to planed US missile defense in Europe, Russia withdrawed from the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe on July 14, 2007 after several warnings.

On February 5, 2011 the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty entered into force. On August 3, 2011 China, the largest foreign investor in U.S. government securities, joined Russia in criticizing American policy makers for failing to ensure borrowing is reined in after a stopgap deal to raise the nation’s debt limit. On November 4, 2011 United States publicly accusing China and Russia of being the top offenders in the theft of U.S. economic and technology information. On November 25, 2011 the UK stopped sharing military data with Russia.

On November 12, 2014 Russia resuming Cold War-era bomber patrol due to the emerging anti-Russia inclinations on the part of NATO and the increasing foreign military presence in the immediate vicinity of Russian borders (there were 8 mid/large scale NATO exercises near Russian borders from October 2013 till September 2014 - Steadfast Jazz, Saber Guardian, Saber Strike, Rapid Triden, Cold Response, Dynamic Mongoose, Breeze, Steadfast Javelin).

And at the end, the most brilliant thing: Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman, declined to call this a Russian provocation. He said the Russians have a right, like any other nation, to operate in international airspace and in international waters. The important thing, Warren said, is for such exercises to be carried out safely and in accordance with international standards.

User avatar
frostypooky
Lieutenant General
Posts: 4334
Joined: Thu 1 Aug 2013 14:12
Contact:

Re: So, we're back to 1983 then ... ?

Postby frostypooky » Wed 4 Feb 2015 05:37

Ghostweed wrote:wat


how much BMD does Russia have or plan to have, going back to the end of the Cold War?

how much BMD does USA (or any country) have or plan to have in Europe, going back to the end of the Cold War?

answer these questions objectively and you will find the between-the-lines answer to Russia's 'concerns'.

Return to “Off-Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: alejandraleo, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 18 guests