Russian Bomber Fly By Activity

[WmGO]

The Telegraph reported last week that Russian Tu (Bear) bombers have recently began doing fly bys of U.S. military base in Guam and also fly bys adjacent to British airspace.

They quoted Maj. Gen. Pavel Androsov as stating that "yesterday we revived this tradition" of long range bomber flights to "greet" U.S (and apparently British also) forces.

Sounds like classic saber rattling. Maybe they forgot the Cold War is over and we don't do that anymore?? Are our respective diplomatic corps so inept that they cannot keep something like this from happening? Is is just a reponse to American proposal for anti missle radar sites in the Czech Republic? Is the Bear just crying for attention (respect)?? Has America peeved them off that bad that they do and say such foolish things like "retargeting Europe" with it's nuclear missles?

Interesting stuff. Bust very serious stuff..........

[phantom]

Maybe our dumber than a monkey president, should quit p***ing off the Russian government

[William3rd]

And uhhhhhhhhh what has the idiot boy in the white house been doing for the last 7 long long years? We elect to break treaties, act unilaterally, etc.  and expect no response?

[bgreed]

Putin would like everyone to think and believe that Russia is a super power.  He has been increasingly making such noises for along time.  Thing he forgets is he doesn't have the stuff to back it up.

[timothe]

I know!!  I know!!

Let's change the name of the American military to "American Humanitarian Police" and we'll send them all to Africa to feed the children.  Then, the next time there is a terrorist attack at home or in any other friendly nation, we can tell them that we were busy helping the needy and everyone will still like us!!  (at least those who weren't victims)

Then, with all of the money we saved, we'll retrain the troops that came home to build footbaths in all of the airports, train stations, and federal buildings so that our good Muslim extremist friends will feel loved.

The world was such a peaceful place before George Bush!!  I mean, he did cause 9/11 didn't he?  (and Katrina...and the wildfires)   

[William3rd]

This previous post is a repeat but then so is most of the foolish rhetoric coming out of the White House.

The terror banner has gotten a wee bit frayed around the edges and so has the flight-suited moron in chief's screaming that the sky is falling but only be afraid when I want something outa yew dumazz mericans.

What do those polls show again?

Anyway, I try to keep my foreign policy views off the boards since they dont involve russian women but sometimes. . . . .

[deccie]

Putin would like everyone to think and believe that Russia is a super power.  He has been increasingly making such noises for along time.  Thing he forgets is he doesn't have the stuff to back it up.

Hmm.. A 400 Billion cash reserve would seem to pay for rather a lot of military hardware.
Exactly what "stuff" doesn't he have? When comparing the US military and the Russian it seems to me the only great disparity is in terms of Carrier Battle Groups.

Perhaps you should look at the state of the US military as well? It is not exactly, indeed not even close to, the strength it was in the early 1990's. The UK is in an even worse state than that.

[I/O]

Deccie: When one has seen first hand some of the Russian military equipment and staff first hand one realises they are of little consequence at the high end level. They have heaps of gear but it is largely very old technology although the equipment is often quite new. As for the majority of the staff, many are disgruntled with low to no wages and the whole outfit is basically in disarray.

Having said that, it only takes one lucky shot to cause mayhem and of course the Russian military is well capable of that, but lined up against some of the USA equipment and people (I've seen both) there is simply no comparison at the moment.

The 400 billion in the stabilisation fund (As I understand it) is simply not going to fix Russias military issues in the wink of an eye. They have training and staff issues which would take years to fix even if they started today and threw every rouble they could find at it. Russia's military as a high tech, modern battle machine is a spent force.

I/O

[timothe]

This previous post is a repeat but then so is most of the foolish rhetoric coming out of the White House.

The terror banner has gotten a wee bit frayed around the edges and so has the flight-suited moron in chief's screaming that the sky is falling but only be afraid when I want something outa yew dumazz mericans.

What do those polls show again?

Anyway, I try to keep my foreign policy views off the boards since they dont involve russian women but sometimes. . . . .

Now William, you're not one of those wackos like CameraGuy that thinks 9/11 was an inside job, are you?

We did get attacked on American soil by people who used aircraft as weapons, no?

I'll grant you that invading Iraq may have been a very significant overreaction to 9/11, but to say there was no continued terrorist threat to the USA after 9/11 and that continued inactivity by the US military against terrorism would result in no additional attacks seems kinda naive to me.  21 Islamic extremists willingly sacrificed their lives to ram airplanes into buildings.  There are certainly more where they came from.

I contend that the consequences of the USA acting without the UN are very small compared to the consequences of continued inactivity or worse yet, the consequences of invading a country and then leaving it in complete chaos as it has been suggested by Congress for the last 18 months.  

[William3rd]

Yeah- we were attacked by mostly saudis, werent we? And that pesky evildoer whats hisname? Now where is he again?


Never should have gone there-
war under false pretenses, etc .etc. etc.

Does that help you in your bride search? I remember listening to guys spouting limbaugh crap at girls during the tours back in 03 and the guys couldnt figger out why they wernt gettin no second dates. . . . . . seems to me that the wimmen were a little more educated than them thar men could handle. . .

[GreyScales]

Unfortunately William3rd, this topic is very relevant to those of us still searching for our RW.

Let us not forget that the FSU countries are still communist regimes - regardless if Putin were "elected" or appointed.  The bulk of the FSU countries are still driven by central planners and comities.  I read recently about the number of people both leaving the FSU, and dieing.  I remember reading how the population is dropping and Moscow has added an "incentive" for ladies to have more kids.

The fact of the mater is, we WM ARE removing a very precious resource from the FSU - it's women.  The very ladies we pursue are the ones that will not have children in the FSU.  They will not help stabilize the population decline.  Some RW will encourage their friends and family to follow them out of the FSU.  Heck, how many sites on the web are run by ladies that have already made the journey???

Lest we not forget our history...  How many wars have been started by men over women?  Next to land, I can't think of a single greater reason to go to war that exceeds women (except religion...  But I'll leave the crusades out of my thinking - for the moment...)  Our histories are full of stories of villages going to war over women - or a lack there of...

Moscow is already making life for we WM much more difficult.  They are attempting to counter our removal of ladies with incentives (as already mentioned...)  Can you imagine what will happen should the central planners ever really get up in arms over the numbers of ladies leaving?  Can you imagine how they'd react if they knew how many ladies are willing to leave?  (I read somewhere that something less than 5% of the ladies ever seek a WM thru agencies or on the net.)

I see the number of "profiles" from ladies that are in their 30's and have no kids.  Biology tells us they have a finite amount of time left to have kids.  If a significant percentage of those 30-ish ladies never have kids...  The population of the FSU will suffer even worse.

Just my 2 roubles for my first post here...


GS

[deccie]

Deccie: When one has seen first hand some of the Russian military equipment and staff first hand one realises they are of little consequence at the high end level. They have heaps of gear but it is largely very old technology although the equipment is often quite new. As for the majority of the staff, many are disgruntled with low to no wages and the whole outfit is basically in disarray.

Having said that, it only takes one lucky shot to cause mayhem and of course the Russian military is well capable of that, but lined up against some of the USA equipment and people (I've seen both) there is simply no comparison at the moment.

The 400 billion in the stabilisation fund (As I understand it) is simply not going to fix Russias military issues in the wink of an eye. They have training and staff issues which would take years to fix even if they started today and threw every rouble they could find at it. Russia's military as a high tech, modern battle machine is a spent force.

I/O

I agree with the low wages and staff disgruntlement comments. However, I am not convinced about the High tech argument.  I've seen the inside of quite a few Russian aircraft and I'm aware they are not on par with the western equivalents in terms of the electronics. However, I think one needs to see a difference between a conflict like the first gulf war and a sustained conflict.

Also, that western military powers have gone down the stealth route for almost everything I see as a long term dead end. The reason being that an airframe has a longer development and inservice lifetime (and higher development costs) than the technologies used to defeat it. In the western sphere costs are blowing out astronomically. Most western forces have gone down the route of having far fewer aircraft types and numbers (same also applies to both ships and vehicles) the argument being greater efficencies and "force multipliers". Well, for one thing "force multipliers" only apply when you are actually on your way to, or delivering a weapon on, an objective.

They do not apply if you caught on the ground. Nor do they apply in terms of being in two places at once.

As for the efficencies of one or two aircraft types, what happens if you suddenly have to withdraw the type due to an unforseen failure? Anyone remember the British Valiant? It had to be suddenly withdrawn due to fatigue in the wing spars. Do you really want to place national defence, where you get no second chances in real life at such a risk? If Russia can actually get their maintenance systems up to spec then their balance of ruggedness and electonic capability seems far better for a sustained conflict. Whereas the Western forces seem to do far better at short term intense conflicts.

Certainly they do need to pay their people more.

[I/O]

Whereas the Western forces seem to do far better at short term intense conflicts.

......which if you saw a scrap involving the USA and Russia on direct opposite sides, that is exactly what it would be. Short and not very sweet.

BTW, I am not talking only of aircraft technology. Think back to the 91 gulf war and the difference between Scuds and Patriots. The technology gap is still much the same, however, as I mentioned before, a lucky shot can do a good deal of damage.

I read somewhere that something less than 5% of the ladies ever seek a WM thru agencies or on the net.

G/S: Having been around Russia a bit, I'd suggest the number or percentage is much lower than that. As for the overall number of women who might be prepared to consider a western man, it is miniscule in the populous of Russia. Don't think we'll be exchanging war heads with Russia over girls anytime soon. Think you are letting your imagination get in the road of common sense here.

Can you imagine how they'd react if they knew how many ladies are willing to leave? 

And.........how many would that be exactly?

Moscow has added an "incentive" for ladies to have more kids.

We've trumped that, 4K at last I heard here to put a child on the deck and that isn't because of population decline.

2 roubles

Yep.....that's about right, 10 cents AU and slightly less than a dime USA.

I/O

[Kuna]

Unfortunately William3rd, this topic is very relevant to those of us still searching for our RW.

Let us not forget that the FSU countries are still communist regimes - regardless if Putin were "elected" or appointed.  The bulk of the FSU countries are still driven by central planners and comities.  I read recently about the number of people both leaving the FSU, and dieing.  I remember reading how the population is dropping and Moscow has added an "incentive" for ladies to have more kids.

The fact of the mater is, we WM ARE removing a very precious resource from the FSU - it's women.  The very ladies we pursue are the ones that will not have children in the FSU.  They will not help stabilize the population decline.  Some RW will encourage their friends and family to follow them out of the FSU.  Heck, how many sites on the web are run by ladies that have already made the journey???

Lest we not forget our history...  How many wars have been started by men over women?  Next to land, I can't think of a single greater reason to go to war that exceeds women (except religion...  But I'll leave the crusades out of my thinking - for the moment...)  Our histories are full of stories of villages going to war over women - or a lack there of...

Moscow is already making life for we WM much more difficult.  They are attempting to counter our removal of ladies with incentives (as already mentioned...)  Can you imagine what will happen should the central planners ever really get up in arms over the numbers of ladies leaving?  Can you imagine how they'd react if they knew how many ladies are willing to leave?  (I read somewhere that something less than 5% of the ladies ever seek a WM thru agencies or on the net.)

I see the number of "profiles" from ladies that are in their 30's and have no kids.  Biology tells us they have a finite amount of time left to have kids.  If a significant percentage of those 30-ish ladies never have kids...  The population of the FSU will suffer even worse.

Just my 2 roubles for my first post here...


GS

Greyscales,

Welcome to RWD... Perhaps you might like to make an introduction post in "the appropriate place".

It's always good to see newbies here...

BTW....  I don't agree with what you posted above but each to his own... at least until after the intro post anyway...    

Just kidding...  but welcome to RWD anyway!

Kuna

[Mir]

How many wars have been started by men over women?  Next to land, I can't think of a single greater reason to go to war that exceeds women

Hmmm, can't think of any WAR over women except one, and that one was over 3000 years ago.
Most wars have been over possesion, yes women have been one of the possesions that men wanted but not THE cause of the war.
In fact in medieval times when it was common to release enemy hostages on payment of ransome, a woman's ransom was much less then a man's.

[William3rd]

Hey Kuna- Australia just signed on to Kyoto-one of the last remaining hold outs. Is that one of those things you were talking about?

[LiveFromUkraine]

Greyscales,


It's always good to see newbies here...

Just curiosity hitting me Kuna but how do you know he is a "newbie"?


Thomas

[KenC]

Unfortunately William3rd, this topic is very relevant to those of us still searching for our RW.

Let us not forget that the FSU countries are still communist regimes - regardless if Putin were "elected" or appointed.  The bulk of the FSU countries are still driven by central planners and comities.  I read recently about the number of people both leaving the FSU, and dieing.  I remember reading how the population is dropping and Moscow has added an "incentive" for ladies to have more kids.

The fact of the mater is, we WM ARE removing a very precious resource from the FSU - it's women.  The very ladies we pursue are the ones that will not have children in the FSU.  They will not help stabilize the population decline.  Some RW will encourage their friends and family to follow them out of the FSU.  Heck, how many sites on the web are run by ladies that have already made the journey???

Lest we not forget our history...  How many wars have been started by men over women?  Next to land, I can't think of a single greater reason to go to war that exceeds women (except religion...  But I'll leave the crusades out of my thinking - for the moment...)  Our histories are full of stories of villages going to war over women - or a lack there of...

Moscow is already making life for we WM much more difficult.  They are attempting to counter our removal of ladies with incentives (as already mentioned...)  Can you imagine what will happen should the central planners ever really get up in arms over the numbers of ladies leaving?  Can you imagine how they'd react if they knew how many ladies are willing to leave?  (I read somewhere that something less than 5% of the ladies ever seek a WM thru agencies or on the net.)

I see the number of "profiles" from ladies that are in their 30's and have no kids.  Biology tells us they have a finite amount of time left to have kids.  If a significant percentage of those 30-ish ladies never have kids...  The population of the FSU will suffer even worse.

Just my 2 roubles for my first post here...


GS

Welcome to RWD, Grey Scales,
Interesting first post.  I don't think that Putin would go to war over MOB's leaving the Motherland, but I would not put it past him to clamp down on the exodus young women leaving though.  No matter how small the percentage is, it would seem to follow right into his line of thinking.  As we all know, the true facts are less important than the perception.  Someone in Russia is taking the shrinking population seriously other wise they would not have put a bonus on babies as they have.
KenC

[timothe]

Does that help you in your bride search? I remember listening to guys spouting limbaugh crap at girls during the tours back in 03 and the guys couldnt figger out why they wernt gettin no second dates. . . . . . seems to me that the wimmen were a little more educated than them thar men could handle. . .

One thing I've learned when arguing with liberals is that it's not enough for them to discuss the topics at hand.  There is always the personal back-handed slap.  (as if the insults somehow strengthen their arguments...how does that work in court, William?)

So what you're saying is that since I challenged your comment about Bush, that means I'm a some backwoods banjo-playing, wife-beating hick?  Is that what you are insinuating with this comment?

[William3rd]

One thing I've learned when arguing with liberals is that it's not enough for them to discuss the topics at hand.  There is always the personal back-handed slap.  (as if the insults somehow strengthen their arguments...how does that work in court, William?)

So what you're saying is that since I challenged your comment about Bush, that means I'm a some backwoods banjo-playing, wife-beating hick?  Is that what you are insinuating with this comment?

Not at all- just recalling a personal experience in Volgograd that I still find humorous. Especially since it was the 60th anniversary of the German surrender, some of these comments were spewing out on hallowed ground (soaked in the blood of the defenders), and the general consensus of the listeners were that the speaker was either ignorant, as in ignoring history, or disturbed, meaning that he could not possibly believe what he was saying.

Now-exactly where was it that you challenged a comment that I made about Bush? I have been looking real hard and all I saw was some inane comment by you about "whackos like photoguy." You can find all the whackos that you need on EIB network.

Lib, lib, lib-is that all the EIB fascisti have to say? Guess they have to label so they can demonize. . . . As a moderate, I am not sure how I should address that . . . . . so I wont.

Anyway- enjoy your bride search and remember- other people have views that are different than yours. And with that- you and I will just have to agree to disagree and wait on the will of the American people in a just few short months. . . . .

[BillyB]

Is is just a reponse to American proposal for anti missle radar sites in the Czech Republic?

Russia is pissed that we are putting anti missile hardware in places they once had influence in. It's good to know they respect the capabilities of that hardware.

Talking with a few Ukrainian men a few years ago, Russia's fleets are in need of serious repair. Many of it's front line ships are parked instead of sailing because of the fact.

Russia's top line fighter is supposed to be an equal match for America's F-15. But our new F-22 Raptor can beat the F-15 with a 20-1 kill ratio based on mock wargames.

In the first Gulf war, An Iraqi battalion commander said after 30 days of bombing, he lost 10% of his tanks. But after less than 1 day of engaging in battle with America's M-1 Abrams tanks, he lost all his remaining tanks.

  Has America peeved them off that bad that they do and say such foolish things like "re-targeting Europe" with it's nuclear missiles?

It's silly to believe Russia ever quit targeting Europe. If they did, re-targeting probably could be done in a matter of seconds. Did America ever have a treaty with Russia or was the treaty with the USSR?  Nuclear war with Russia is not to be feared. They are too smart for that and understand mutual destruction will not get them the desired results of winning a war and living to see it. America did purchase much of Russia's nuke material to bury it on our land. So little thanks for so many things we do for World peace. But many nations are thankful and invited us to park America's military equipment on their land, and broker the Middle East peace talks.

Bush may have low ratings but the Congress controlled by Democrates have even lower ratings. What does this all mean? American's expect more from their leaders. That's always a good thing.

Hasn't Belarus taken steps to make it harder for their ladies to get married to foreigners? Russia doesn't have it as bad as other FSU nations. Although many are leaving, many native Russians are coming home to mother Russia after leaving other FSU countries. Other non ethnic Russians are simply looking for better job opportunities and a better life by coming to Russia. When my fiancee travelled to St. Petersburg from Uzbekistan, the plane was full, when she went back home, the plane was nearly empty.

[deccie]

Russia is pissed that we are putting anti missile hardware in places they once had influence in. It's good to know they respect the capabilities of that hardware.

Or perhaps they recognise this is more about the politics of such a move than the actual capabilities of the hardware itself.

Talking with a few Ukrainian men a few years ago, Russia's fleets are in need of serious repair. Many of it's front line ships are parked instead of sailing because of the fact.

Many of those ships are 1960's,1970's or 1980's vintage. It it doubtful Russia will ever repair them. I certainly hope they will remove them though I doubt it. I would suggest they are likely to commence new build programs over time.

Russia's top line fighter is supposed to be an equal match for America's F-15. But our new F-22 Raptor can beat the F-15 with a 20-1 kill ratio based on mock wargames.

This is the same F-22 which you have drastically reduced the quantities you are going to purchase yes?
And exactly how is an F-22 going to take out 20 of any aircraft? It has the same limitations of limited missiles and ammunition as any modern fighter.

In the first Gulf war, An Iraqi battalion commander said after 30 days of bombing, he lost 10% of his tanks. But after less than 1 day of engaging in battle with America's M-1 Abrams tanks, he lost all his remaining tanks.

The vulnerability of the M1 is not the tank itself but its requirement for fuel. It's a thirsty beast indeed. I heard it takes 16 gallons to simply start it.
Why attack the tank when you can attack the tankers? Stop the flow of fuel and you will stop the tanks.

It's silly to believe Russia ever quit targeting Europe. If they did, re-targeting probably could be done in a matter of seconds. Did America ever have a treaty with Russia or was the treaty with the USSR?  Nuclear war with Russia is not to be feared. They are too smart for that and understand mutual destruction will not get them the desired results of winning a war and living to see it.

Really. Now that's a pretty big call.
Particularly if you are ever proved wrong you won't be around to admit it.

America did purchase much of Russia's nuke material to bury it on our land.

I would suggest there is some self interest here too.

So little thanks for so many things we do for World peace. But many nations are thankful and invited us to park America's military equipment on their land, and broker the Middle East peace talks.

<sarcasm mode on> I know Billy, I mean any civilian toll the the US causes is just "collateral damage", it's not like Americans ever kill civilians or anything now is it? I mean the business of clearing US made weapons from the countries you have helped will keep them going for decades! It's a goldmine! </sarcasm mode off>

Bush may have low ratings but the Congress controlled by Democrats have even lower ratings. What does this all mean? American's expect more from their leaders. That's always a good thing.

Or perhaps people just have generally low expectations from their politicians and the pollies themselves strive to deliver on those (low) expectations.

[BillyB]

This is the same F-22 which you have drastically reduced the quantities you are going to purchase yes?
And exactly how is an F-22 going to take out 20 of any aircraft? It has the same limitations of limited missiles and ammunition as any modern fighter.

20-1 kill ratio means if the F-22  was in 21 battles with an F-15 with equally talented pilots, it would lose only once. Besides, superior performance, it leaves no or a very small radar footprint. It's hard to fight what you can't see.

Here's some videos of fighter jets in action.

http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=2719.0

Most of America's military equipment capabilities are underated. A friend of mine said he was on a carrier when Libya was causing trouble in the 80's. They had orders to get to the Medditeranian as quickly as possible and the carrier was passing other models of ships. They were going so fast plowing through the water that it felt like a constant earthquake. The nuclear reactors have so much power that if all of it was used, the ship would fall apart against the pressure of plowing through the water. Unlike the M-1, those ships refuel every 20-25 years.

Isreali F-15's once shot down over 80 Migs in one battle and lost no planes of their own. America's F-15's and F-16's have undeafeated records in real combat so I suspect that is one reason for reduced the production of the F-22 which is highly expensive.

Deccie, cutting off fuel supply to tanks is common sense but it's hard to do when you can't get past your oppositions tanks and fighter jets.

Deccie, if not the USA, who do you want to be top dog to keep this World a safe place and what do you think they have to do to become the top dog?

[Kuna]

Hey Kuna- Australia just signed on to Kyoto-one of the last remaining hold outs. Is that one of those things you were talking about?

William,

Kyoto is indeed one of those things... a symbolic international treaty that does bugger all to address the real problem (if in fact a problem exists).

I'm not a one eyed conservative but I can't help but think things here are about to change - and for the worse.  Political correctness will probably rear its head again in time and we'll generally move further to the left.  After having a conservative government for 11.5 years the community seems to think it was time for a change.  A change we got...  and how that ends up is yet to be seen.

Kuna




Thomas...  GreyScales had one post.

[Gator]

Billy,

Yes, we are the only country willing to pay to be the top dog.  Huge price, however, to be the top dog.  

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm

I would prefer NATO taking over that role and diminishing our role (and our expenditures).  

What the world would like to see is no top dog.  Yet, throughout history, some collection of people have always filled the void, sometimes as a tyrant.