US general warns Russia on nuclear bombers in Cuba

Perhaps we should base a couple of B2s in Turkey. Thats something the Russians were pissed off about ballistic missiles back in the 60s. Start sending some bombers towards Russia just to make them scare and scramble fighters like they did to the U.S. and Europe. Send them a message that the U.S. is still powerful and not to be taken lightly.

if I were in charge of russia I would just sit back and wait for them to build it then I would go in with planes and destroy it just like Israel would.I'd tell Bush hey tit for tat

This missile defence shield is for the US and no-one else. They say its for shooting down rogue nations warheads, where are the rogue nations and do they threaten the US?

Some say its to protect its European allies ...... do me a favour! I am dammed sure the US is going to spend millions of dollars just to protect some allies out of the kindness of their hearts ....... Bull! There is a catch somewhere.

Where are the US's southern, northern and western missile shields? Do they have any?

These shields are nothing more than a tool so the US can once again interfere in European and Medittereanean affairs. This is their idea of shaking the stick about.

I say again, put these shields in your own backyard ........ Europe does not want them.

I don't like the idea of Russian nuclear bombers planes being 90 miles off our country, but in all reality it wont matter. Bombers carrying nuclear weapons are out dated technology.Even if they were to get them in the air and start heading toward the US mainland the Radar that extends over Cuba will pick them up immediately.They will be watched 24/7...they wont be able to make a move without us seeing it.Not to mention we already have a base down there.It is a tit for tat move on Russia part.There is a big difference between defensive weapons an offensive weapons.

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
I don't like the idea of Russian nuclear bombers planes being 90 miles off our country, but in all reality it wont matter. Bombers carrying nuclear weapons are out dated technology.Even if they were to get them in the air and start heading toward the US mainland the Radar that extends over Cuba will pick them up immediately.They will be watched 24/7...they wont be able to make a move without us seeing it.Not to mention we already have a base down there.It is a tit for tat move on Russia part.There is a big difference between defensive weapons an offensive weapons.

They don't carry bombs....

I am amazed you guys think they carry bombs....

The severity of this issue is not easily seen.

The reason is the planes are just a delivery truck for what they carry.

That still does not speak to the real issue.

People hear bomber and think it has to fly over the land it is going to bomb.

The problem is these planes "ONLY" carry cruise missiles now with a
a range possibly as far as 5,000 kilometers, or about 3,500 miles.

They could be flying around south of Cuba, launch and still hit anywhere
in the US except the most northern states.

Also most people think, ahhh its a cruise missile and we can shoot it down.

The problem with that is during the war with Serbia they shot down an F-117
stealth fighter and reverse engineered the technology.

It is now part of their advanced cruise missiles that carry 200 Kilo-ton nukes.

So you have a Stealth Cruise Missile on a delivery truck somewhere near Cuba, and the Russians are upset about our missile shield, and are willing
to replay the Cuban Missile Crisis scenario to make their point.

The baseline for the cruise missile is the KH-55 from the 1980's.

en.wikipedia.org...

It has been upgrade since then, but we do not fully know for sure its abilities.

That upgraded critter is now officially known as the KH-102

www.globalsecurity.org...

The fact that is has Stealth abilities is now PUBLIC knowledge in the above article in paragraph # 5.

Hints at a newer and even better Stealth Cruise Missile the KH-555
are mentioned as well.

So when people laugh about the old planes, think of them as an old
truck delivering a high tech package.

This may be a second Cuban Missile crisis,
but the person in the Whitehouse is not JFK.

Like the 60's nothing may happen, or some religious zealots may
think it is time for revelations to take place.

en.wikipedia.org...

Just another heads up here.

My bug out bag is packed, and my Evac locale to the west is prepped.

Originally posted by Ex_MislTech



People hear bomber and think it has to fly over the land it is going to bomb.

The problem is these planes "ONLY" carry cruise missiles now with a
a range possibly as far as 5,000 kilometers, or about 3,500 miles.


Also most people think, ahhh its a cruise missile and we can shoot it down.

The problem with that is during the war with Serbia they shot down an F-117
stealth fighter and reverse engineered the technology.

The baseline for the cruise missile is the KH-55 from the 1980's.

en.wikipedia.org...

It has been upgrade since then, but we do not fully know for sure its abilities.

That upgraded critter is now officially known as the KH-102

www.globalsecurity.org...

The fact that is has Stealth abilities is now PUBLIC knowledge in the above article in paragraph # 5.



So when people laugh about the old planes, think of them as an old
truck delivering a high tech package.
nd my Evac locale to the west is prepped.

incorrect , Soviets had developed plasma stealth generators for hypersonic kh-90 missile in 80's and now it is used for subsonic Kh-102(which was developed in 80s'..........

these stealth generators are called 'Marabu' , though russians failed to modify it for fighters



[edit on 23-7-2008 by manson_322]

Well if it is true that the Soviets had developed plasma stealth generators for hypersonic kh-90 missiles to which I have not seen any evidence of other than poorly put together private websites with no credibility...than I would think that we will have this guy flying around the island of Cuba full time just wating:




And that guy is real.

www.liveleak.com...

www.liveleak.com...

www.liveleak.com...

[edit on 7/23/2008 by CaptGizmo]

Humans are lame! How retarded to fight and fight and kill and kill! We're one planet, one race! Instead of putting all our efforts into better life for the planet as a whole, putting all our money into research for cures of Aids, Cancers and all other horrible deseases and instead of putting all our collective efforts into space exploration for future generations we fight and fight and kill and kill .... FOR WHAT????? OIL? POWER? This human race is a disaster and we dont know what we have! Jews, Muslims, Christian, Americans, Russians, Iranians etc etc etc ALL THE SAME!!! WHEN WILL THIS BE REALIZED??? Maybe when its too late!

For one thing this article is utterly misleading. Some Russian military officials are simply presenting a "what-if" situation as a way to show their anger at U.S. ABM plans for Eastern Europe. Perhaps by toying around with this idea the U.S. will actually understand the consequences of its arrogant foreign policy and what it can lead to.

To make it clear - there has been no official proposal from Russia's side to actually place any military assets in Cuba. Nor has Cuba even had any say in this - and it is unlikely that Cuba will agree to host the Russians. Remember that during the Cuban missile crisis Castro did not want to host the Soviet missiles, and he was pressured into it. After Russia withdraw he was even more irritated.

Furthermore Russia has absolutely no need to station bombers or any military assets in Cuba other than to try and intimidate the U.S. Such stationing and maintenance would be very expensive sabre-rattling, and Russia has more pressing needs for budgetary spending. It is much cheaper and just as effective to continue current T-95 patrols which have resumed in recent years.



And finally - if Russia ever decides to station its military assets in Cuba it has every right to do just that, and the U.S. is the last country in the world that should criticize it for obvious hypocrisy. It's not just about the ABM. Since Bush came to power U.S. began stationing various military assets including offensive ones all around Russia. Now U.S. is holding training exercises with Ukraine and has plans to develop military bases there. Add to that the fact that U.S. has aircraft carriers deployed in large numbers, given them offensive capability almost anywhere in the world on short notice.

So if Americans want to whine and bitch about offensive nature of Russia's proposal, they should look at themselves first. As far as Russia and many other countries are concerned, U.S. is the #1 threat in the world. No one has anywhere near the global offensive capability that the U.S. does. And if you want to step on Russia's toes do not expect Russia to sit and take it forever. Criticize Russia's foreign policies and sabre-rattling all you want, but in the end it is purely reactionary to the actions of the U.S.

Pffft. The US has nuclear armed subs wandering around the globe, Aircraft carriers doing the same... Russia has every right to put nuclear arms on the US doorstep.

If the US didn't want it to be like this, they wouldn't have done it themselves.

At least with Russia on their doorstep, there might finally be a country for the US to answer to when it decides to start it's next ridiculous war.

These radical capitalists will attack anyone if it means they can make a buck off it. It's high time they had something next door to keep them in line.

[edit on 23-7-2008 by johnsky]

Who cares if they carry cruise missiles or nuclear bombs..The point is there is no reason to park bomber in CUBA unless the payload is in the country with them.What the SENSE of putting bombers in Cuba if the payload in still in Russia?

We offered for Russia to be a player in the missile shield...They are point blank afraid of it with the old world thinking they have.The missile shield is in nato countries.They are ABM's that don't carry nuclear warheads.This is just a AGGRESSIVE move by Russia period.They already have a missile that defeats the missile shield and currently placed new missile strikes destinations in those hosted countries such as Poland etc.

There is no reason but insanity to defend this Russian response to the shields!

All that is being accomplished is posturing. Russia really has no need to put missles in Cuba because they already have ICBM's that can reach us from Russia. We have no need to put nukes near Russia because we can do the same. So, we have a smaller scale cold war. Except for one thing.

Iran and Russia are in this together whether Russia likes it or not. When Israel attacks Iran,because you can be mostly assured that they will, Russia will be right there to protect their Iranian interests.

This can't end well.

Originally posted by centurion1211

Another one that just doesn't get it. Thinks that somehow the U.S. missile defense system and russian offensive nuclear capable bombers are the same thing, or somehow equal.

Unfortunately its you that doesn't get it.

It's just another example of Americas double standards. Americas Missile defence systems in the Czech Republic are there to stop Russia firing anything. America is like the school ground bully and when someone stands up to them and says "well fine if you want to build in our backyard we'll put missiles in yours" they don't like it.

reply to post by johnsky

Exactly.

[edit on 23/7/08 by Liamoville]

Originally posted by alienstar
Who cares if they carry cruise missiles or nuclear bombs.

Well U.S. certainly does as evident by the amount of talk this minor piece of news generated. It's obvious that U.S. media is trying to generate fear out of nothing.

Originally posted by alienstar
The point is there is no reason to park bomber in CUBA unless the payload is in the country with them.

Which is exactly why Russia will not go ahead with this, and has no serious plans to. The point of the vague proposal was to get the U.S. thinking that its global hegemony has some consequences. The chances of a nuclear war are as slim as they ever were, but the U.S. and NATO's posturing in Europe has Russia and its allies concerned. The best answer Russia has is to create similar concerns for the Americans, even if they have little actual threat.

Originally posted by alienstar
What the SENSE of putting bombers in Cuba if the payload in still in Russia?

Because Tu-95's are very very scary supposedly. They can scare the U.S. media enough for it to create a panic out of nothing and for Pentagon to petition for extra funds to fight off the scary Russians. In response Russia can escalate its military spending - the possibilities are endless. That's one theory. Military is but a profitable business for large countries like Russia and U.S., since actual chances of war between them are practically zero.

Originally posted by alienstar
We offered for Russia to be a player in the missile shield...

What if Iran offers you to be a partner in building its nuclear reactor and uranium processing plants? You want to be their parter. Both Russia and U.S. lack the trust needed in any such parternership, and it will only be a waste of Russia's time while giving the U.S. the time its needs.

Russia also offered a partnership far more realistic given U.S.'s stated goals of preventing an attack from Iran. Russia offered to use their advanced radar positions from the Cold War in Azerbijan (right on the border with Iran). This position is far more realistic and less given that U.S. expected use for ABM is to monitor Iran, and is far less expensive. U.S. refused the proposal without providing any reason. No one has any doubt that ABM is aimed at Russia, not Iran.

Originally posted by alienstar
They are point blank afraid of it with the old world thinking they have.

Who is it that has the "old world thinking" here? Perhaps it's the U.S. that never scaled down military spending after Cold War ended, that continued aggressive NATO expansion long after NATO is no longer needed, and that has done everything crawl up to Russia's borders by military partnerships with nations that have historically has close ties to Russia.

Russia turned off its Cold War mode in 1991, but U.S. never did. In fact since 9/11 U.S. appears to be playing and imaginable Cold War with the "Axis of Evil" (which in reality is not a threat to anyone armed with something bigger than a stick) and Russia. Under Putin Russia decided to restart its Cold War mode, seeing that U.S. will not scale down its military build-up and aggressive foreign policy.

And speaking of old world thinking - McCain is one seriously schizophrenic fellow. Did someone actually inform him that the Cold War ended, and Putin has little interest in invading the U.S.? I think you better before he wins your election, which he very well could. The idiot actually said that he plans to target Russia with the ABM.

Originally posted by alienstar
The missile shield is in nato countries.

And Russian bombers will supposedly be placed in a country of Russia's ally. NATO is but a thin veil for U.S. hegemony now that the Cold War is over. The majority of the citizens of the countries you speak of want nothing to do with the ABM shield. Unfortunately their politicians have strings attached to them.

Originally posted by alienstar
They are ABM's that don't carry nuclear warheads.

In a nuclear super-power world nuclear offensive capabilities could be just as important as defensive capabilities meant to neutralize the offensive means. Technically if two countries each have one nuclear missile, but one country also has an ABM, that country is ahead in offensive stature. It has the ability to carry out a decapitating strike with reasonable means to insure against retaliation. Of course both Russia and U.S. have far more ICBMs, but you get the point.

Originally posted by alienstar
This is just a AGGRESSIVE move by Russia period.

Fair enough. But how do you think Russia perceived such U.S. actions as invasion of Iraq, threats against Iran and India, military exercises in Ukraine and Georgia, and military asset placement on Russia's borders? Equally aggressive? I think far more aggressive, given that U.S. actual does, and Russia only threatens to do.

Compared to U.S. foreign policy, much of the world appears as pacifists.

Originally posted by alienstar
They already have a missile that defeats the missile shield

Which is what they say. That missile is stills years from being deployed, and it is largely unknown what ABM capabilities U.S. is secretly developing behind the scenes. Russia's concern is that this developing technology will eventually make its way to Eastern Europe. Placing the current ABM is but a first step in a long march God knows where.

Originally posted by alienstar
and currently placed new missile strikes destinations in those hosted countries such as Poland etc.

Only a brick brained moran would expect Russia not to target those countries with a part of its nuclear arsenal. Its like calling someone a d***head and being surprised when he calls you a d***head back. Seriously - how do you not expect Russia to target countries hosting technology meant to neutralize Russia's nuclear deterent capabilities.

Originally posted by alienstar
There is no reason but insanity to defend this Russian response to the shields!

There is no reason but insanity to defent this aggressive U.S. agitation of already heated world politics, this aggressive expansion of NATO, this aggressive U.S. stance towards Iran, this arogant U.S. behavior towards the rest of the world.

reply to post by maloy


Great post and i agree.They us media does love putting fear in Americans to sell newspapers etc.Put as most scientist agree with the collapse of the Soviet Union the clock was reset to 20 mins before midnight.As today with the nuclear terrorism and 911,Russia rebuilding the ICMB forces only and the upgrade with the total Russian military spending that has been pointed out 7 months ago.Not to mention whats going on with N Korea few years ago,Iran and Russia today..the clock has been moved ahead 5 Minutes to Midnight.Thats not so great in my books.

Originally posted by deltaboy
Perhaps we should base a couple of B2s in Turkey.

Why bother when your aircraft carrier fleets place virtually every region in the world in the offensive grasp of the U.S. Add to that the fact that U.S. has enough military bases spread around the world to enable them to carry out a prolonged strike without placing their troops in danger.

Really - placing B2's in Turkey would be a bit of an overkill. Of course given that they don't fall out of the sky and end up being a $2 billion fireworks display.

Originally posted by deltaboy
Start sending some bombers towards Russia just to make them scare and scramble fighters like they did to the U.S. and Europe.

Actually Russia would love to play some military training games with U.S. Russian bomber patrols do little but bring some excitement to U.S. interceptors who can train more realistically intercepting them. I am sure it would be the same for Russia. And your carriers are already roaming casually roaming the globe.

Again if you want overkill I am sure no one would hold U.S. from playing military charade. But again - gotta watch for those bombers dropping from the sky.

Originally posted by deltaboy
Send them a message that the U.S. is still powerful and not to be taken lightly.

Oh no - not to be taken lightly the least bit. I think your "friends" in Iraq learned that the hard way. Now Iran and Syria and reading the message loud and clear, while the rest of the world is left to ponder WTF is the U.S. doing exactly.

When enough people learn that your threats are not be taken lightly, they will seek to unite against you. And then you will whine about why they are acting aggressively towards you.

U.S. is sending a message to the world alright. That message is to arm themselves to their teeth or be forced to give in to your demands. At least the military industry has a bright future ahead, and so does my investment portfolio.

Originally posted by alienstar
As today with the nuclear terrorism

What nuclear terrorism? So far there has not been one instance of a serious plan by any terrorists to use any nuclear device anywhere in the world. Seems to me like this is nothing more than media fairy tales and propagandistic means to boost the U.S. defense budget.

Originally posted by alienstar
Russia rebuilding the ICMB forces

Russia is focusing on avancing its ICMB technology becouse this is the most cost effective way for Russia to boost their military might and power status. Russia cannot hope to match U.S. capabilities on the seas - what with all the U.S. carriers, and it is a long way off from catching up with U.S. in aircraft technology. Ballistic missiles are Russia's sole ace in the card deck, which is why there is increased focus on it.

Furthermore Russia is not as interested in offensive weapons like carriers or bombers because unlike U.S. it has no intention to wage wars around the world. Russia's main goal when it comes to its military is to have an active detterent. In today's world nuclear ICBM are little more than a detterent.

Originally posted by alienstar
the upgrade with the total Russian military spending that has been pointed out 7 months ago.

Russia's current and planned military spending still lags very far behind its Cold War levels (1989). And it useless to even compare it to the military spending of U.S., which overshadows the entire world and leaves many people pondering why.

Originally posted by alienstar
Not to mention whats going on with N Korea few years ago.

What you mean their restarting of the nuclear program (include means of providing energy) because the Bush administration dropped U.S.'s previous agreement to provide oil to North Korea. How dis you expect them to generate energy? Exercise bikes connected to elecrtic generator or hamster wheels? And North Korea's ICBM are perhaps a threat - to North Korea itself before anyone else. Those flying cans were as threatening to the U.S. as brick on the bottom of the ocean.

Originally posted by alienstar
Iran

How is Iran a direct threat to U.S.? It is at least a decade away from developing ICBM technology capable of reaching U.S. As for U.S. allies in Europe - Iran wants to attack them about as much as George Bush wants to institute universal health care. Metaphors aside, Iran realistically threatens absolutely no one, and Israel is capable enough to protect itself from any nuclear threat, given that its "Dead Hand" retaliatory capabilities would wipe out all of Middle East and Persia.

Originally posted by alienstar
Russia today.

Russia has had sizeable offensive and defensive capabilties since 1945, and there is no reason to think they would disappear. The fact that Russia has ICBMs and likes to sabre rattle is not a threat, unless your media turns it into one.

Face it - your perceived enemies are of your own making. Don't expect the rest of the world to play your schizophrenik games along with you.

Originally posted by alienstar
the clock has been moved ahead 5 Minutes

... the minute George Bush was elected as President. McCain is sitting on the clock and your media is playing along.

reply to post by maloy


I take is your Russian correct?Please tell me your views if you are on all this thats going on.You seriously think our missile shields in former Warsaw location such as Poland etc pose a threat to Russia?Im just asking your point of view,not the whole countries.

Couple of things:

Tyndell AFB is close by. It would take only minutes for their fighters to scramble and shoot down the bombers. We'd know when they were moving on the airfield prior to take off.

Cuban AF is crap. I know, they have MiG 29s. They are still crap.

Its always Russia troubling the United Stated and other NATO countries with its nuclear bombers.Just the past 3 years ago there have been incidents in UK,US,Norway,Scottland etc.One practically buzzed a aircraft carrier.That i know of the United States don't even do this behavior.I never hard of the us flying in Russian airspace with bombers

news.sky.com...
RAF Tornados have intercepted eight Russian bombers as they approached UK airspace.
abcnews.go.com...
Navy Intercepts Russian Bombers
www.globalsecurity.org...
Russian bombers flew undetected across Arctic - AF commander
www.airforcetimes.com...
More Russian bombers flying off Alaska coast.

What would Russia do if we started with b52 runs on their coastline or buzzing the ships up there with b2s????Shoot them down....i would think so..