Putin's Warning / Missile Defense Systems Active

a reply to: RAY1990

Russian blood has anti-freeze in it, I don't envy their weather but it sure has served it's purpose over time.

Over time, including twelve time zones. Thats a lot of real estate to conquer. Napoleon and Hitler both froze trying, the dummies.

Given that today the use of nukes would supplant the knockdown dragout of yesteryear... it seems we're thinking that now we can use technology to win without fully engaging on the ground. It is NATO doctrine from way back. Why we have bases with nukes on them in Germany and Britain, Turkey to this day. Why we also developed the helicopter gunship, the A10, and other close air support platforms to defeat Soviet armor columns.

Now it seems the roles of these are reversed to push the opposite way. What we also forgot is NATO doctrine of old doesn't have the Russians as modernly armed now as us, with cruise missiles and offensive capability. The launches of cruise missiles into Syria from the Caspian Sea that day was really telling. They could have just as easily been nuclear tipped and headed to various NATO targets instead.

a reply to: intrptr

I've all but convinced myself that Russia would EMP itself, it's what I would do to counter the air capabilities of the west.

War became mechanized a long time ago and I know EMP counter-measures exist plus weaponry that requires no electronics but at the end of the day a huge portion of modern warfare isn't possible without the electronics that helps it all run.

You're right, those missiles could have easily been holding a nuclear payload or they could have been launched from one of their many submarines. Russia has a lot of shedding and growing to do but it's clear to me they have a great sense of direction.

a reply to: RAY1990

couldn't agree more. all the world's a stage right?

i fully anticipate the current conflict to only make up for less than 40% of the story.

the only thing i see these days between nations is intended obfuscation, dressed up as good reasoning.

Plus Russia has a 400 square mile under ground bunker outside Moscow fully stocked


I will hide under my table

a reply to: tommyjo

you think this is tolerated by the united states?

both of those articles claimed that these were the result of HEIGHTENED TENSIONS between the two countries.

seriously, exactly why do you think these journalists found it important enough to write these articles? to display how friendly we are to one another?

directly from your second link:

The spying comes amid heightened U.S.-Russia tensions over the crisis in Ukraine, where Russian forces annexed the Crimea last year and are continuing to arm pro-Moscow rebels in the eastern part of the country.

The Kings Bay base is homeport for the Navy’s Submarine Group 10, with six nuclear-armed missile submarines and two conventionally armed missile submarines.

“It’s been all in international waters and all perfectly legal,” said a defense official familiar with efforts to monitor the ship. “But it’s interesting that it is operating, collecting on us where it is.”

does this sound like the U.S. is tolerant of russian spy ships in their territory?

..do you just really badly want your point of view to be true? because that's exactly what it looks like.

EDIT: More from the first article where you picked and chose the most benevolent paragraph you could find:

“A Russian AGI and an SSN in the same geographic area as one of the largest U.S. ballistic missile submarine bases—Kings Bay—is reminiscent of Cold War activities of the Soviet navy tracking the movements of our SSBN’s,” said a third U.S. official, referring to the designation for ballistic missile submarines, SSBN.

Continuing..

“As was their primary mission during the Cold War, Russian SSNs [nuclear attack submarines] would likely be trying to track U.S. nuclear missile submarines deploying from Kings Bay, Ga., and to monitor U.S. naval deployments from Norfolk, Va.,” Fisher said in an email.

I mean, this article literally states that the United States is actively responding to the threat of Russian bomber subs. Why would you pick that one paragraph out of an article that's clearly meant to convey something else?

Then on July 4, in an apparent Fourth of July political message, a Russian Bear-H flew the closest to the U.S. West Coast that a Russian strategic bomber had flown since the Cold War when such flights were routine.

In both incidents, U.S. military spokesmen sought to downplay the threat posed by the air incursions, apparently in response to the Obama administration’s conciliatory “reset” policy of seeking closer ties with Moscow.

Based on the information you yourself posted, how in the world can you maintain that the U.S. and Russia currently tolerate each other's military vehicles in their air space?

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

But the writing was on the wall months prior regarding the referendum in Ukraine, it's not like the idea popped up overnight. I'm sure the moment there were stirrings of it happening Putin was enabling contingencies.

Still doesn't mean it was a land grab. Doesn't mean it wasn't. it's just not that black and white IMHO

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Obviously he had intelligence of the US planning a coup.

He had a contingency plan, so what?

originally posted by: facedye
a reply to: tommyjo

So when the U.S. conducts large scale military exercises in and around the States, would we ever tolerate a Russian spy plane flying in our general airspace?

100% yes we would tolerate them as long as they don't interfere in a hostile way.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Care to provide anything that shows the US was planning a coupe?

Tell you what can you explain why Russia made the president their own stooge in office and then pressured him to stay with Russia and forget thhe EU when everything was set for them to join it?

Here is a nice little article that shows Russia had plans to destabilize Ukraine and even said exactly what we saw months before it happened...

www.theguardian.com...

Now when they were about to sign the agreement with the EU their president decided he would not honor it and the people took to the streets...and the little fact of impeachment for corruption also took them to the streets against the president.

Here you go a bit more on Mr. Yanukovych and his corruption...

newrepublic.com...

yanukovychleaks.org...

That's why the people revolted it wasn't any kind of coupe the president fled from Ukraine to run from justice of his impeachment.

When you actually do research you find the truth.

a reply to: LightAssassin

Really Putin was the reason for the referendum which was a farce as shown by Mr. Strelkov.

And the fact that it was planned months before any actual referendum was even discussed shows it was a land grab...they used the referendum to cover the fact of what was planned...Putin has admitted this so how is it not a land grab?

Also he took land from a sovereign country...that is a land grab as he had no right to take Crimea from Ukraine...but feel free to show where he has that right?

a reply to: facedye

very accurate and timely assessment. The US and NATO cannot expect to encircle Russia without waking the Bear up.
The sad part is that we are all pawns to the criminal Cabal that controls Washington/Pentagon & UK

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: RAY1990

Russian blood has anti-freeze in it, I don't envy their weather but it sure has served it's purpose over time.

Over time, including twelve time zones. Thats a lot of real estate to conquer. Napoleon and Hitler both froze trying, the dummies.

Given that today the use of nukes would supplant the knockdown dragout of yesteryear... it seems we're thinking that now we can use technology to win without fully engaging on the ground. It is NATO doctrine from way back. Why we have bases with nukes on them in Germany and Britain, Turkey to this day. Why we also developed the helicopter gunship, the A10, and other close air support platforms to defeat Soviet armor columns.

Now it seems the roles of these are reversed to push the opposite way. What we also forgot is NATO doctrine of old doesn't have the Russians as modernly armed now as us, with cruise missiles and offensive capability. The launches of cruise missiles into Syria from the Caspian Sea that day was really telling. They could have just as easily been nuclear tipped and headed to various NATO targets instead.

I wouldn't discuss there cruise missiles several fell short of there target. Unless you believe they meant to attack Iran and kill people.And others appeared to strike nothing though Russia declared it a success there targets seemed to cause limited damage in syria. Or the test firing in Dec of 2015 that slammed into an apartment building in Nyonoksa. I'd like to think Russia didn't mean to attack it's own citizens. Let's just say they still have alot of bugs to work out on there 3M-54 Klub.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

No doubt it was a land grab. Russia even had thr opertunity to stop the troube in Ukraine he chose not to. Why would he want a conflict on his front door it gave him the excuse to take Crimea. Strategically it was a smart move. But yo claim it had anything to do with Nato is stupid. Therr were no Nato forces anywhere near there. And blaming it on a missile defence system that didn't exist is stupid as well. His actions are causing NATO to put troops in Poland at there demand. Prior to this it would have never happened.

Putins actions has caused many of the things he claimed he was trying to stop. At the time before Crimea Russian military was active members of NATO and even had offices in there HQ. In fact missile defense was even offered to Russia as part of the plan to deal with rogue states. The only request that was denied was when they wanted to have control of when they could be launched. That would add time to the process you don't have when your trying to intercept an incoming ICBM from the middle east.

But what I find funny Russia has a missile defence system but doesn't want Europeans to have one. But we see this alot in Russian policies.

A missile defense system.
How does that merit a warning?

Now, if it were an offensive system...
en.wikipedia.org...

Oh, wait. We already know about that.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Are you really gonna pretend that you haven't heard or read about this coup business before? Every time there's a thread on Russia or Ukraine it's almost a given that you'll be on here spouting the same pro US rhetoric. You've been doing this for years now so this is almost like a job for you. So please don't insult my intelligence by pretending that you haven't ever read the hundreds of replies to you containing articles describing the US coup.

Russia gotta do what Russia gotta do.

To survive.. US aggression.

www.globalresearch.ca...

But by all means, side with the Nazis on this one.

a reply to: Phage

A missile defense system. How does that merit a warning?

You should watch more movies....lol...a good defense is a good offense or is it a good offense is a good defense.........meh who cares just strike first you stand more chance of winning....

Analysis of Russia and Putin's behavior today should keep in mind the Russian loss of 28 million civilians and soldiers in WW2 and 24 million after the Marxist revolution in 1917. the latter self inflicted by the Marxist takeover of the Russian elite, the former by invasion from the West, mostly Germany. The US has never experienced such losses and hence cannot really comprehend Putin.

a reply to: Pyle

looks like you haven't read my extended response to tommyjo's post.

they've already been interfering in a hostile way. so have we.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Care to provide anything that shows Putin had no geostrategic motivations for taking Crimea?

Looks like you haven't responded to my lengthy rebuttal and keep pushing the same confused rhetoric.

a reply to: dragonridr

I wouldn't discuss there cruise missiles several fell short of there target. Unless you believe they meant to attack Iran and kill people.And others appeared to strike nothing though Russia declared it a success there targets seemed to cause limited damage in syria

Got any thing to back all that up link wise?