AP sources: Russian subs patrolling off East Coast

reply to post by neformore


That is actually very funny.

We just had posted that Russia is doing this as we speak, so your Russia does not do that is sadly mistaken.

Trying to say what the US does or does not do is offtopic, this post is about the two Russian subs that are "openly" right off the coast.

Fair enough, you did actually say not only.....(sorry)

but i question that.

I have no doubt we have sub in the area, but I highly doubt we have a couple on or near the surface for all to see.

[edit on 8/6/2009 by mrmonsoon]

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
We just had posted that Russia is doing this as we speak, so your Russia does not do that is sadly mistaken.

I think you need to re-read my posts. I never said Russia doesn't do it. I said Russia isn't the only country that does it.

Please, read them carefully.

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
reply to post by neformore

 

Trying to say what the US does or does not do is offtopic, this post is about the two Russian subs that are "openly" right off the coast.
[edit on 8/6/2009 by mrmonsoon]

How it is off topic? He's merely pointing out the obvious facts about international operational procedure when it comes to naval recon. How exactly are these subs "open"? Did Russia phone Fox News and tell them that they have two Akulas operating on the eastern coast of the US?

It's just a simple case of the American navy showing off some limited victory of detecting those evil Russkies and then twisting the facts to make uneducated Americans think that the Russians are planning an imminent nuclear attack on their homeland.

I smile as I think of how many Russian subs with hundreds of active NBC warheads are actually waiting for the final countdown within American territorial waters. For superpowers, the end justifies all means and victory comes at all costs, anything less is unacceptable and embarrassing.

Well, the Navy's statement about it didn't seem geared to get people all excited, the media did that.

The Navy spokesman, when asked, said something along the lines of 'the Russians have the right to do this (patrol in international waters), and we do it too.'

Fair enough, I can respect a proper military response since they are the ones who truely have the world in their hands. All civilians can do is bitch and fear anyway.

"I'm rather ignorant of military protocol for other nations.

Would they send their destroyers to actually destroy a potential defecting submarine from their own country? Or, is it more to apprehend the military personnel and prevent the sub from becoming accessed by the US military? "

They would go all out to prevent a potentially defecting vessell reaching its destination,I do know that in the British Navy the Nuclear boats have a small detatchment of SBS and Royal Marine Troops on board to prevent such a scenario,they are also tasked with"removing" any dissenters should the order to launch be given.

Wanted to post this video.

This approach by the two Russian submarines is not "usual exercises". the two submarines were spotted 200 miles off the American coast, and Russian submarines haven't done this since the cold war.

www.youtube.com...

Another video by the BCC which states Russian submarines have not been seen this close to U.S. coast in more than 15 years.

Here it is for anyone who wants to watch it.

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Well some of us are old enough to remember when this type of thing was common place so you are going to get mixed responses from many members. For some of the younger crowd they will see this as unusual while many of us older guys will look at this and say.

Hey look who's back in the game.

The Russian admiral was right. There is absolutely nothing wrong with them patrolling their boats. This is why our military even stated. "Nothing unusual"
Besides those are attack subs not missile boats.

I'm glad to see those 30 and 40 year old subs still floating.


[edit on 7-8-2009 by SLAYER69]

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Another video by the BCC which states Russian submarines have not been seen this close to U.S. coast in more than 15 years.

Sometimes it frightens me how wrong the media is when it comes to reporting on military matters, matters which I can make a decision on without relying on the MSM. It makes one wonder, if they're so fabulous and checking the facts and miss reporting on these subjects, just what else do they mangle on a daily basis?

Also, my post from page 2.

Russian Subs Off U.S. Coast (2000)

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
reply to post by neformore

 

Trying to say what the US does or does not do is offtopic, this post is about the two Russian subs that are "openly" right off the coast.
[edit on 8/6/2009 by mrmonsoon]

How it is off topic? He's merely pointing out the obvious facts about international operational procedure when it comes to naval recon. How exactly are these subs "open"? Did Russia phone Fox News and tell them that they have two Akulas operating on the eastern coast of the US?

It's just a simple case of the American navy showing off some limited victory of detecting those evil Russkies and then twisting the facts to make uneducated Americans think that the Russians are planning an imminent nuclear attack on their homeland.

I smile as I think of how many Russian subs with hundreds of active NBC warheads are actually waiting for the final countdown within American territorial waters. For superpowers, the end justifies all means and victory comes at all costs, anything less is unacceptable and embarrassing.

I will happily explain why it's off topic.

The post is "russian subs 20 miles of east coast", Not what US does or how you like it.

But the real point that has gotten by "some" people is that the subs were not hiding in their patrolling, they were openly patrolling.

What that means is they wanted to be seen and to have the US "KNOW" two Russian subs are off the East Coast.

It's cold war politics at it's best.

Remember, just because he is not president anymore,. does not mean that Ex KGB/cold warrior Putin is not falling back on old cold-war mentality.



[edit on 8/7/2009 by mrmonsoon]

Originally posted by nake13
I do know that in the British Navy the Nuclear boats have a small detatchment of SBS and Royal Marine Troops on board to prevent such a scenario,they are also tasked with"removing" any dissenters should the order to launch be given.

I haven't heard that before. Do you have a link so I can read about it ?

reply to post by Schaden


I don't know it for a fact, but it makes sence.

If there is anaval battle and the other ship/sub is not sunk, then they"may" send a small armed force to take over the ship/sub rather than justr sink it.

Also possible, is the need for forces to remove the crew of said ship/sub and bring them on the sub as prisoners. Someone must watch them.
Then the ship/sub could be sunk if desired.

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
Remember, just because he is not president anymore,. does not mean that Ex KGB/cold warrior Putin is not falling back on old cold-war mentality.
[edit on 8/7/2009 by mrmonsoon]

Excuse Russia for being a superpower. I can't stand people who think the US only have the right to global military maneuvers.

And you know what? I love the fact that Putin is ex-KGB. He happens to be the world's most professional, intelligent and fearless leader and because of this, he is pretty much my idol (and an idol to millions more). I firmly believe that Russia is the emerging model for the current generation of superpowers and when the US finally collapses, Russia will pick up the slack with China at its side.

So the NATO forces Russia to give up half of eastern Europe, then it forces the USSR to disolve, then it affiliates with any people bordering Russia to take NATO weapons and idealogy and seeks to plant ICBM in the very places Russia once dominated after Russia lost countless and I mean countless tens of millions of Russians defending themselves from invading forces and people wonder why Russia is a little concerned?

Originally posted by deltaboy
Must have lost a submarine. Most likely a Typhoon class sub with intention of defecting to the U.S., hence why the Russian attack boats are patrolling near the east coast of the U.S.

That's a very large leap of assumption.

The UK had Russian bombers running visits to our air space a couple of years ago, and that was commented on because it hadn't been done since the cold war. But they also have every legal right to do it.

IMO this is nothing more than Russia sticking its fingers up at America again, something we should expect to see more of now that Russia is again taking control of regions previously part of the federation, America is on the slide in their previous global dominance, and Moscow is feeling emboldened by both.

Economists and military strategists have been saying for the past year that American power is slipping due to the financial crisis, and that Russia or China will become the next global leader.
China is not currently showing any interest in taking that role militarily, but Russia will certainly make that move if they think the timing is right.

This is the beginning of a long process of Russia reminding every other major player in global warfare that they are there, they are strong, and they are capable.
I'd expect to see more "buzzing" of the UK, Mainland Europe and America by Russian hardware in the next two years.

reply to post by ufoorbhunter

The only thing the Russians fear is freedom.

And by freedom, I mean having the U.S. come in, bomb the hell out of them, install a puppet government beholden to U.S. corporate interests, brutally suppress dissent, rape their lands of resources and force them to watch U.S.-sponsored propaganda on every television channel all day long.

Clearly, only godless heathen communists would oppose such glorious liberation and the promise of a better quality of life for all Americans Russians. :shk:

And that's why we're the Good Guys.

God I love America.

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
Remember, just because he is not president anymore,. does not mean that Ex KGB/cold warrior Putin is not falling back on old cold-war mentality.
[edit on 8/7/2009 by mrmonsoon]

Excuse Russia for being a superpower. I can't stand people who think the US only have the right to global military maneuvers.

And you know what? I love the fact that Putin is ex-KGB. He happens to be the world's most professional, intelligent and fearless leader and because of this, he is pretty much my idol (and an idol to millions more). I firmly believe that Russia is the emerging model for the current generation of superpowers and when the US finally collapses, Russia will pick up the slack with China at its side.

I did not mention superpower or not.

I "DID" say that Putin is running the show and do so in the manner of an Ex KGB leader/cold warrior. It is his leadership style. not an insult or complement, just his style

Now, think for a second, is it legal, yes, is it being done for political reasons as directed by Putin, also yes.

And WOW, big on Russian nationalism, aren't we.

And WOW, big on your hopeful demise of the US.

reply to post by mrmonsoon


Mr Monsoon,

You need to seriously rethink this through....

While Schaden may not choose to comment on it ...and I most certainly respect if Schaden chooses not to comment....I most certainly will.

If there is anaval battle and the other ship/sub is not sunk, then they"may" send a small armed force to take over the ship/sub rather than justr sink it.

Also possible, is the need for forces to remove the crew of said ship/sub and bring them on the sub as prisoners. Someone must watch them.
Then the ship/sub could be sunk if desired.

Not all is as appears on television/movies...or in public education standards.

Think it through ..seriously. Every submariner knows the risks and liabilities..in a shooting war...or incident.

Orangetom