I don’t know if that means a whole lot. My brothers (former US Navy) have participated in training exercises throughout the world with the Russian Navy involving anywhere from battle groups to coordinating the majority of the Atlantic or Pacific fleet.
They could be heading over to the Indian ocean to practice some anti-sub warfare with us for all we know.[/quote]
I bet the US has a sub on this boats ass at all times. It flinches and we will blow it out of the water.
[/quote]
Yeaaaah. That won’t cause any problems. [/quote]
Oh no, Putin will be totally convinced that his ship was afflicted with a sudden onset hole in the bottom problem, which would make for a shitty acronym so why bother.
Check out this Russian talking shit after the Navy Yard shootout.
“A new shootout at Navy headquarters in Washington ? a lone gunman and 7 corpses. Nobody’s even surprised anymore. A clear confirmation of American exceptionalism,'” he wrote on Twitter.
He went on, saying “The U.S.A. should part with the notion of American exceptionalism. It contradicts the principles of equal rights and smells of political racism.”
I don’t know if that means a whole lot. My brothers (former US Navy) have participated in training exercises throughout the world with the Russian Navy involving anywhere from battle groups to coordinating the majority of the Atlantic or Pacific fleet.
They could be heading over to the Indian ocean to practice some anti-sub warfare with us for all we know.[/quote]
I bet the US has a sub on this boats ass at all times. It flinches and we will blow it out of the water.
[/quote]
That would be like tying a string of tin cans to the back of your car so that I knew where you were driving to. They can ping one of our subs from half way across the atlantic, and we can do the same with theirs.
I don’t know if that means a whole lot. My brothers (former US Navy) have participated in training exercises throughout the world with the Russian Navy involving anywhere from battle groups to coordinating the majority of the Atlantic or Pacific fleet.
They could be heading over to the Indian ocean to practice some anti-sub warfare with us for all we know.[/quote]
I bet the US has a sub on this boats ass at all times. It flinches and we will blow it out of the water.
[/quote]
Yeaaaah. That won’t cause any problems. [/quote]
Oh no, Putin will be totally convinced that his ship was afflicted with a sudden onset hole in the bottom problem, which would make for a shitty acronym so why bother.[/quote]
Almost all military ships in the ocean have subs tailing them. Russia does this and the US does this. That is usually why military exercises are announced.
there is a lot of posturing going on. The question is will anyone do anything, or will someone call someone else’s bluff. Only time will tell. I will say this stuff is getting real.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The American sub tailing the Russian carrier killer wouldn’t be the problem. The American sub torpedoing the Russian carrier killer would be.
I can think of few things less worth starting a shooting war with Russia over than a few gassed Syrians. [/quote]
Do you really think this is just about a few gassed Syrians?[/quote]
No of course not. It’s about finding a casus belli for a confrontation with Iran. A few gassed Syrians will do, but I’m sure that Iranians taking the babies out of the incubators would have been just as good.
We may get a conflict after all, only not the one we wanted, and more of one than we bargained for.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The American sub tailing the Russian carrier killer wouldn’t be the problem. The American sub torpedoing the Russian carrier killer would be.
I can think of few things less worth starting a shooting war with Russia over than a few gassed Syrians. [/quote]
Do you really think this is just about a few gassed Syrians?[/quote]
I don’t. I think this is more like Vladimir Putin assuming the international leadership role.
Just speculation, but from this point forward people aren’t going to be looking at the US and taking their cues the same as they used to.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The American sub tailing the Russian carrier killer wouldn’t be the problem. The American sub torpedoing the Russian carrier killer would be.
I can think of few things less worth starting a shooting war with Russia over than a few gassed Syrians. [/quote]
Do you really think this is just about a few gassed Syrians?[/quote]
I don’t. I think this is more like Vladimir Putin assuming the international leadership role.
Just speculation, but from this point forward people aren’t going to be looking at the US and taking their cues the same as they used to.
[/quote]
Wouldn’t it be funny if Obama turns out to have been just a Manchurian Candidate planted by the Russians in Chicago a decade ago with ex-KGB political handlers to nursemaid him to the presidency, with the sole purpose of making the United States look like a bunch of incompetent fools on the world stage, so that Russia could seize this very moment and take over its position as de facto world hegemon without firing a shot?
I think its funny that Twitter is somehow a great, even better, resource for news than the actual news channels.
So they have a carrier destroyer being tailed by one of our subs, that is most likely being tailed by one of theirs. Its like a giant circle jerk. I do believe we have technology for subs to remain unseen until they go “combat mode.”
Does anyone have any idea on Russia’s air capability? We see all the time how awesome our new F-22’s are, but has Russia produced anything?
I’d honestly think if we went to war with Russia, they’d win. Not because our men and women are outclassed, but Russia requires everyone to serve, we dont. And again, the leadership. Putin will be willing to make decisions (and capable of doing so) that Obama simply would not.
I think the leadership role has been handed over quite handily. And Hillary certainly won’t be taking it back. I just see posturing though. Putin knows that the US’s infrastructure is weak . Let it eat itself from within and watch from the outside with amusement. If he lifts a finger he’ll bring unity to the US. Just let the frog slowly boil.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The American sub tailing the Russian carrier killer wouldn’t be the problem. The American sub torpedoing the Russian carrier killer would be.
I can think of few things less worth starting a shooting war with Russia over than a few gassed Syrians. [/quote]
Do you really think this is just about a few gassed Syrians?[/quote]
I don’t. I think this is more like Vladimir Putin assuming the international leadership role.
Just speculation, but from this point forward people aren’t going to be looking at the US and taking their cues the same as they used to.
[/quote]
Wouldn’t it be funny if Obama turns out to have been just a Manchurian Candidate planted by the Russians in Chicago a decade ago with ex-KGB political handlers to nursemaid him to the presidency, with the sole purpose of making the United States look like a bunch of incompetent fools on the world stage, so that Russia could seize this very moment and take over its position as de facto world hegemon without firing a shot?
Boy, that sure would be embarrassing. [/quote]
That is nefarious enough to be very interesting, and they have been smartin’ pretty good since Reagan bluffed them with that Star Wars missile defense ploy in the '80s.
In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if they did exactly that! Fall of communism my ass, they were just setting us up for part II.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The American sub tailing the Russian carrier killer wouldn’t be the problem. The American sub torpedoing the Russian carrier killer would be.
I can think of few things less worth starting a shooting war with Russia over than a few gassed Syrians. [/quote]
Do you really think this is just about a few gassed Syrians?[/quote]
I don’t. I think this is more like Vladimir Putin assuming the international leadership role.
Just speculation, but from this point forward people aren’t going to be looking at the US and taking their cues the same as they used to.
[/quote]
Not at all, if there’s more public support for attacking Syria it’d have already happened. Western nations have been backing the rebels for a long time. Russia started projecting power/tried to project more power since its economy picked up and it wanted to make a run at being viewed as a world power again. That’s before Bush even left office.
[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
I’d honestly think if we went to war with Russia, they’d win. Not because our men and women are outclassed, but Russia requires everyone to serve, we dont. And again, the leadership. Putin will be willing to make decisions (and capable of doing so) that Obama simply would not.
[/quote]
Neither provides any real advantage. America covers the spread.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The American sub tailing the Russian carrier killer wouldn’t be the problem. The American sub torpedoing the Russian carrier killer would be.
I can think of few things less worth starting a shooting war with Russia over than a few gassed Syrians. [/quote]
Do you really think this is just about a few gassed Syrians?[/quote]
I don’t. I think this is more like Vladimir Putin assuming the international leadership role.
Just speculation, but from this point forward people aren’t going to be looking at the US and taking their cues the same as they used to.
[/quote]
Not at all, if there’s more public support for attacking Syria it’d have already happened. Western nations have been backing the rebels for a long time. Russia started projecting power/tried to project more power since its economy picked up and it wanted to make a run at being viewed as a world power again. That’s before Bush even left office.
[/quote]
All true, but in light of the play that Russia and China are making with the world currency, plus facing down Obama, he’s comming on strong as a highly effective nation builder and world leader, all at a time when the US is looking tired, economically hamstrung, and led by a straight up clown.
All true, but in light of the play that Russia and China are making with the world currency, plus facing down Obama, he’s comming on strong as a highly effective nation builder and world leader, all at a time when the US is looking tired, economically hamstrung, and led by a straight up clown.
[/quote]
“We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail.”
I heard those word on a scratchy little portable radio, on a frigid night in October near the top of Mt Fuji, shortly after the first bombs started falling on Afghanistan.
God, that seems like such a long time ago. So much has changed.
All true, but in light of the play that Russia and China are making with the world currency, plus facing down Obama, he’s comming on strong as a highly effective nation builder and world leader, all at a time when the US is looking tired, economically hamstrung, and led by a straight up clown.
[/quote]
“We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail.”
I heard those word on a scratchy little portable radio, on a frigid night in October near the top of Mt Fuji, shortly after the first bombs started falling on Afghanistan.
God, that seems like such a long time ago. So much has changed. [/quote]
Yeah. A lot has changed.
I think that a better leader would not have made that bold of mistake as Obama and his statement.
He drew a line and now Syria and Russia are playing jump rope with it.
[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
You could claim lack of experience, but this isn’t exactly his first term or rodeo. At this point, we’ll just claim his ego got in the way.[/quote]
Or this was his plan all along. Make America weaker.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The American sub tailing the Russian carrier killer wouldn’t be the problem. The American sub torpedoing the Russian carrier killer would be.
I can think of few things less worth starting a shooting war with Russia over than a few gassed Syrians. [/quote]
Do you really think this is just about a few gassed Syrians?[/quote]
I don’t. I think this is more like Vladimir Putin assuming the international leadership role.
Just speculation, but from this point forward people aren’t going to be looking at the US and taking their cues the same as they used to.
[/quote]
Wouldn’t it be funny if Obama turns out to have been just a Manchurian Candidate planted by the Russians in Chicago a decade ago with ex-KGB political handlers to nursemaid him to the presidency, with the sole purpose of making the United States look like a bunch of incompetent fools on the world stage, so that Russia could seize this very moment and take over its position as de facto world hegemon without firing a shot?
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The American sub tailing the Russian carrier killer wouldn’t be the problem. The American sub torpedoing the Russian carrier killer would be.
I can think of few things less worth starting a shooting war with Russia over than a few gassed Syrians. [/quote]
Do you really think this is just about a few gassed Syrians?[/quote]
I don’t. I think this is more like Vladimir Putin assuming the international leadership role.
Just speculation, but from this point forward people aren’t going to be looking at the US and taking their cues the same as they used to.
[/quote]
Not at all, if there’s more public support for attacking Syria it’d have already happened. Western nations have been backing the rebels for a long time. Russia started projecting power/tried to project more power since its economy picked up and it wanted to make a run at being viewed as a world power again. That’s before Bush even left office.
[/quote]
All true, but in light of the play that Russia and China are making with the world currency, plus facing down Obama, he’s comming on strong as a highly effective nation builder and world leader, all at a time when the US is looking tired, economically hamstrung, and led by a straight up clown.
[/quote]
Some of those things are true. Obama is a clown. Whenever he’s to make a decision that could be a poor reflection of himself or his party [Maersk Alabama, Benghazi] he just quits making decisions and makes someone else handle it. Tired? Yeah, in some ways. Economically hamstrung for sure. But if Putin really had some strength with this there wouldn’t be any chemical weapon resolution.
Honestly, I think the approach to this was just stupid. Assad should have been taken out whenever Syria had a nuclear facility on its soil on Iran’s behalf. This is about Iran anyway, why not go after them more directly? The game plan is to pour money and resources knowing that a good percent of it’ll end up in the Iraq AQ affiliate’s hands just hoping they’ll be able to take Assad out.