[Sixstrings]

Seriously here, I don't like this that Americans and Russians are seeing each other as foes again.

My only gripe about Russia is Putin, for the same darn reasons so many Russians are against Putin. Anti-democratic, dictatorial, pushing neighbors around, strongarming, human rights problems.

And then Putin amps it up in recent years, really stoking it, pulling Russians away from the West. Russian nationalists trying to take away everyone's visa and mastercard, for goodness sake. Telling Russians they shouldn't travel to Miami, or London, and now new laws targeting dual citizen Russians. Banning Westerners from adopting Russian kids. What's the point of that?

*It's just been one thing after another*, too heavy handed and macho and bully about everything. There was Greenpeace that got such rough treatment and guns shot at their feet. There was that Dutch diplomat that got hogtied in Moscow.

And lately, Putin gets aggressive with the UK and Europe and the US in the same way he used to do with east Europe.

Our government tried the "reset." Angela Merkal has *tried* talking to Putin, and making concessions, *for years now.* The West can't seem to do anything to make Russia happy -- Putin just always has a problem with us, no matter what.

We are not the Netherlands, we are not the UK, and we aren't Moldova. *Putin cannot bully us, we will not back down, ever.* Americans don't like it. It ain't gonna work, we cannot be bullied. If Putin keeps it up, he's just going to piss off the Foxnews crowd. If he does anything too blunt and scares people, they'll be on their phone to their congressman about Russia. So how is that good, in any way, for Russia?

And it's really sad and unfortunate, because nobody has a problem with Russian people, it's Putin.

I've been observing this ever since the Bush years (W), and it just seems to me like Putin wants some intangible thing that we can't ever give him, we can't ever make him happy, no matter what. It's like a chip on the shoulder. There's just nothing we can do.

And we're never going to just ignore a democratic uprising in Europe. We're always going to sympathize with that. We sympathized with Russia itself, at the end of communism, and cheered them on with Yeltsin up there on that tank.

We'll sympathize with Belarus, if they ever have a democratic revolution. And we'll be there for Russia again, if it ever does.

So at the end of the day, just don't nuke us, bro. If nothing else we've got a lot of ethnic Russian immigrants over here, probably a million of them, and Russia supposedly cares so much about ethnic Russians so leave us alone so the Russians here can be happy, at least.

None of them are complaining. I saw group of Russians one time cleaning at Walmart. That's not a put down, that's a good small business over here and makes good money.

That's what Russian immigrants do, over here, they have businesses and work hard and live the American dream like everyone else wants to. They're not upset about anything. So why do Russians in Russia have such a problem with us?

[Sixstrings]

Take a look at this, April 23rd, Russian bombers *entered* Dutch airspace:

Dutch fighter jets intercept 2 Russian bombers in their airspace

Maj. Wilko Ter Horst said that the military learned around 3:50 p.m. (9:50 a.m. ET) that two Russian TU-95 bombers, known as Bears, had come a half-mile inside its airspace.

A pair of Dutch F-16 military jets were then dispatched to escort the Russian planes and "ensure they (flew) out of our airspace," said Ter Horst, a Dutch military spokesman.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/23/world/europe/russian-bombers-intercepted/

I read way too much news, but this is just something I've noticed over the years, that Russia (and China, for that matter) will push things farther with a Netherlands or a Great Britain, and do things they don't do with us.

We want to keep that respect. We don't want to become weak, and pushed around, whether it's China or Russia or Iran.

And another thing, let's not forget one of the Russian ministers of something or other tweeting that he might just fly a Bear bomber into Romania. This was after his plane was denied transit by the Romanian gov.

[AgentR11]

Take a look at this, April 23rd, Russian bombers *entered* Dutch airspace:

Dutch fighter jets intercept 2 Russian bombers in their airspace
Maj. Wilko Ter Horst said that the military learned around 3:50 p.m. (9:50 a.m. ET) that two Russian TU-95 bombers, known as Bears, had come a half-mile inside its airspace.

"The Russian military aircraft remained in international airspace at all times, as they are perfectly entitled to do," the spokesman said.

Truth is a funny thing. You read headlines and first couple paragraphs, you'll be certain to find outrage of the day to amp up on; but you won't find piddle for truth.

Airspace in particular is odd, in that countries have responsibility for regions that they do not have right of exclusion for. This is a particular nuisance in the North Sea, Baltic Sea, and English Channel area, since everyone is so tightly bumped up against each other; so by definition, to fly just about anywhere outside your national borders, you will cross various countries areas of responsibility. That doesn't make it an encroachment, it makes it a normal transit. Civilian aircraft are generally less interesting, because they're always ID'ing themselves to everyone and their dog; but a military aircraft may not be doing any such chatter, and may be interested in observing the response of the countries they fly by during their training/recon missions. As we do to Russia.. ALL THE TIME.

Its fine.

The only ones not fine in this instance, are the reporters to stupid to look at a map, and the readers who are not motivated enough to dig past the headline. You should be 'outraged' at CNN, not Russia, the Dutch, or the British. They were all doing exactly what they're supposed to be doing.

"Recent events have increased awareness of Russian military activity," Hammond said. "But we have always routinely intercepted, identified and escorted Russian air and naval assets that transit international airspace and waters within the UK's 'area of interest.'"

An escort is not a high drama affair. Its not Hollywood material. Its routine and boring.

[radon1]

My only gripe about Russia is Putin,

Why, why not Obama. If you want to take on Putin, relocate to Russia, go through the Russian citizenship application procedure, and vote against Putin in the elections (don't forget to report your dual citizenship in case you retain one).

Putin, at least, has been working hard lately, even if not always doing the "right" thing (i.e. what "I" like him to do).

[Sixstrings]

Why, why not Obama. If you want to take on Putin, relocate to Russia, go through the Russian citizenship application procedure, and vote against Putin in the elections (don't forget to report your dual citizenship in case you retain one).

Oh goodness, with my big mouth I'd be in a gulag bothering greenpeace vegans with second hand smoke. Or worse. Poor Snowden has to live as a robot:

Inside Edward Snowden’s Life as a Robot


http://www.wired.com/2014/06/inside-edward-snowdens-life-as-a-robot/

[radon1]

This is the way Snowden lives in the US. In Russia, he lives as a human being.

Surprisingly, he did not look particularly unhappy during his last interview. Do not know what makes him so excited, but he did not look like an unhappy person at all, despite being in exile and having to make a living somehow. He will probably develop a sense of deep homesickness a bit later, but he is not at this stage yet.

Good ad campaign for the bot device though. Entrepreneurial man.

[SILENTTODD]

Having served in the USAF as an AC&W (Aircraft Control & Warning) radar repairman in the 751st Radar Squadron, Mount Laguna California, between 1974-1977, I have a little bit of experience in this subject.

The TU-95 was the main Russian (Soviet then) bomber threat back then also. It can be thought of as roughly equivalent to USAF B-52. Consulting Wikipedia you will find these stats:


B-52
Max speed: 650 mph.

Combat range: Anywhere on earth with Air to Air refueling

Payload: 50,000 lbs internal.
70,000 lbs +external racks


TU-95
Max speed: 575 mph

Combat range: Anywhere on Earth with Air to Air refueling

Payload: 33,000lbs


Even in the mid-1970's the role of both these bombers was as a standoff platform to launch cruise missiles several hundred miles from target. Drones they could launch were easily capable of generating jamming to hide the main aircraft and the cruise missiles with warheads.

It was obvious to me the Air Force had given up on ground radar for military purposes back in the 1950's. Radar is useless in a war environment. All you have to know is its signal frequency and pulse repetition rate (not a secret, your BROADCASTING it when the radar is turned on).

The USAF site I was stationed at closed in the early 1980's, as they all were, even those ones in Alaska. There was some talk in the mid-1970's of replacing the ground sites with radar equipped C-135 aircraft, but that never came about.

My guess is since the early 1980's long range detection has been accomplished using infrared equipped satellites. The Russian TU-95 Bombers mentioned in this post were tracked from the moment they started their engines in Russia.

[careinke]

Having served in the USAF as an AC&W (Aircraft Control & Warning) radar repairman in the 751st Radar Squadron, Mount Laguna California, between 1974-1977, I have a little bit of experience in this subject.

The TU-95 was the main Russian (Soviet then) bomber threat back then also. It can be thought of as roughly equivalent to USAF B-52. Consulting Wikipedia you will find these stats:


B-52
Max speed: 650 mph.

Combat range: Anywhere on earth with Air to Air refueling

Payload: 50,000 lbs internal.
70,000 lbs +external racks


TU-95
Max speed: 575 mph

Combat range: Anywhere on Earth with Air to Air refueling

Payload: 33,000lbs


Even in the mid-1970's the role of both these bombers was as a standoff platform to launch cruise missiles several hundred miles from target. Drones they could launch were easily capable of generating jamming to hide the main aircraft and the cruise missiles with warheads.

It was obvious to me the Air Force had given up on ground radar for military purposes back in the 1950's. Radar is useless in a war environment. All you have to know is its signal frequency and pulse repetition rate (not a secret, your BROADCASTING it when the radar is turned on).

The USAF site I was stationed at closed in the early 1980's, as they all were, even those ones in Alaska. There was some talk in the mid-1970's of replacing the ground sites with radar equipped C-135 aircraft, but that never came about.

My guess is since the early 1980's long range detection has been accomplished using infrared equipped satellites. The Russian TU-95 Bombers mentioned in this post were tracked from the moment they started their engines in Russia.

It sounds like you were using the old Norad Radars in the old SW Air Defense Radars (I was a Weapons Controller at Luke AFB during that time). Anyway those were Old Radars with very little ECCM capability. However, if you have more than one radar there are things you can do like triangulation, or in the case of where you were fire up the radar that was down by San Diego that used a completely different band that seemed to always get forgotten during exercises (it worked especially well against chaff).

If you worked on the TPS 43E radar, it had quite an extensive ECCM capability, which I won't go into here because I no longer remember what is classified and what is not. Also, the E3 and the navy's E2 radar planes have both ECCM and ESM capabilities.

The old Soviet Union Air Warfare Doctrine put the E-3 AWACS as their number one target that needed to be killed first. I doubt it would have been their first priority if RADAR was not effective. I've been in a few combat situations, and RADAR is AlWAYS important.

[Sixstrings]

Not only you, Six, who doesn't like Putin

The gas talks were further clouded by a new diplomatic row that exploded after Ukraine’s acting foreign minister called Putin “a prick” while trying to restrain protesters who attacked Moscow’s embassy compound in Kiev on Saturday.

Ya, I saw that in the news. They had a big protest at the Russian embassy after pro russia rebels shot down a Ukrainian plane, killing all 49 on board, with presumably Russian shoulder launched rockets.

So, the people were mad about that, understandable. So then they show up to the embassy and were throwing things and tore down the Russian flag and raised the Ukrainian flag. They demanded the embassy be closed, and wanted to "burn it down."

Ukraine's foreign minister shows up and seemed pretty upset with Russia himself. The translation I saw was "Putin's a f*ck."

So then Russia got upset and demanded the UN condemn the breach of security at the embassy. I think I read the West blocked Russia in the UN, on that.

*These people in Ukraine are really mad, that much is clear, and they get even angrier at Russia as more things happen.*

If you're going to pick a side on who's right, just look what Russia has done in east Ukraine. They made it a Syria. Horrible violence. Pro russia rebels kinapping, torturing, killing, hundreds dead now in a month. That's what the UN says.

*And rocket launchers* shipped in there! The West never did that! With west ukraine. Russia is doing all the hardcore badass things in the east that all the pro russia people on this forum were saying our side would do with the west, back when this thing started, I remember those conversations on this forum.

Going to be an interesting (expensive) winter for us lot in Europe. The UK doesn't import gas from Russia (yet - it is planned to do so in a year or so) - but we will pay more as international prices no doubt rise this winter.

[/quote]

I don't see why. Gazprom needs your business, badly, who the hell else is going to buy if you euros don't. The Chinese drive a bargain price, so why do you and Germans have to pay so much.

They need you as a customer more than you think they do. Europeans could demand a better price, if they weren't so nice.

[AgentR11]

I don't see why. Gazprom needs your business, badly, who the hell else is going to buy if you euros don't. The Chinese drive a bargain price, so why do you and Germans have to pay so much.
They need you as a customer more than you think they do. Europeans could demand a better price, if they weren't so nice.

But see there's the rub. How do you demand a better price, when you intend to pay for the fuel in paper that you also will not permit the vendor to spend. What's the point of Gazprom selling gas to Bob, if Bob is going to pay him a trillion of some currency, but Bob also says afterwards, "btw, we won't let you use any of that currency to pay for anything fun or useful. You're allowed to pay it back to us in taxes though, and we'll think of some fines later that you can use the rest of it for." Gazprom has no reasonable expectation that sanctions will not eventually disable its ability to use dollars and/or Euro freely; they know that there is no possible future that includes Russia leaving Crimea..

At that point, why bother?

Desire, desperate or otherwise, doesn't have anything to do with it. Perhaps... Gazprom could demand payment in some other currency, cleared in some city other than NY/Brussels/London? Say... Shanghai or maybe Hong Kong clearing, I dunno, maybe renminbi?

You say China got a bargain price. I say China is paying money for gas, and the West is paying nothing. Money is spendable. If its not spendable, its not money.

[Sixstrings]

How do you demand a better price, when you intend to pay for the fuel in paper that you also will not permit the vendor to spend. What's the point of Gazprom selling gas to Bob, if Bob is going to pay him a trillion of some currency, but Bob also says afterwards, "btw, we won't let you use any of that currency to pay for anything fun or useful.

I'm not sure I follow you. The West doesn't tell Russia how to spend money.

You're allowed to pay it back to us in taxes though, and we'll think of some fines later that you can use the rest of it for." Gazprom has no reasonable expectation that sanctions will not eventually disable its ability to use dollars and/or Euro freely; they know that there is no possible future that includes Russia leaving Crimea..

Ok, look, people are going to differ on their opinion about Crimea depending on where one is from in the world.

But the majority world opinion is that Russia took Crimea -- it's not a forgone conclusion that a nation under sanction just has to have its economy implode. *The point* of the international sanctions is to *change behavior*. Whether it's Iraq that took a Kuwait, or Russia with Crimea, or North Korea, or Iran.

Russia could give Crimea back and be free of sanction, that's what why the sanctions are there. The West knows that Crimea is gone at this point, but, Russia still needs to come to the table and work it out. How about working with their neighbors on some other things. How about really getting rid of Syrian nerve gas. How about democratic domestic reforms, in Russia. Anything. Just show something, some improvement, some movement other than farther toward hard right nationalism.

Russia must come to the table and do SOMETHING. They could pull out of enabling Iran to get nukes, and that would be greatly appreciated, you'd see the sanctions lifted straight away.

Agent they can't just do whatever they want to and keep Crimea too. They need to compromise. How about not stoking east ukraine anymore? OFFER SOMETHING.

Perhaps... Gazprom could demand payment in some other currency, cleared in some city other than NY/Brussels/London? Say... Shanghai or maybe Hong Kong clearing, I dunno, maybe renminbi?

This is all fantasy. Russian finances implode without Gazprom revenue. And Gazprom depends on German and European customers.

All this talk about "demanding reminbi," it's fantasy, the Chinese just made a deal with them to buy gas at a *discount*. *And Russia has to build the pipeline too*. So what good is that. China will never pay as much as Germans.

GERMANY could CUT the money off to Gazprom and Russia would be in a real pickle. GERMANY could afford imported American nat gas. I just don't see it, Russia has no stick over Europe's head, because Russia needs gas sales even more than Europeans need to keep warm. If Europeans go cold, then Russia goes into bankruptcy.

You say China got a bargain price. I say China is paying money for gas, and the West is paying nothing. Money is spendable. If its not spendable, its not money.

What are you talking about, that Russia can't spend the money Germany gives it for gas? What are you talking about? ????

For goodness sake Agent, Germany not only sends so much money into Russia but Germany and Britain sell military gear to Putin and France does too -- multi billion dollar warship deal still going through, despite the tensions.

Europe pays top dollar for their gas, Europe invests money, Europe sells Putin weapons. What more could Russia want. If they want to be free to annex more places, then that's the one thing they cannot have.

P.S. ---- the sanctions are there because of Crimea, but worse, Russia is sending rocket launchers into east Ukraine. The sanctions will only get worse, they will not be dropped, with Russia not only keeping Crimea but upping the ante with east Ukraine.

So that's the bottom line. Russia should know when they've won something and when to quit, and make a real peace deal regarding Ukraine minus Crimea and then you'd see the sanctions dropped.

I *thought* that's what was happening. Putin had accepted the new Ukrainian government. *And then rocket launchers show up, so wtf.*

And you know, this seems to happen all the time, Putin says one thing and then does the opposite with the other hand. Same on Syria. Same on Iran. And the Obama admin just kept following along behind him.

[evilgenius]

That's right. In spite of it looking so bad for the US right now; stopped in the Ukraine, progress derailed in Iraq, prevented from expressing its will in Syria, all that the US really has to do in order to change the game is to get going with natural gas exports to Europe. This isn't sarcasm. It reflects how things have changed. The encroachment on Russia by the US, wrought in its military and economic moves mainly in the Middle East, has largely been done in the shadow of the Cold War state of things. There is a perceived need to butt heads, when all that is really needed is to use the markets in order to achieve progress. We want to be in a position to do this with pipelines, which are better at involving all of our allies, but we don't necessarily have to do it that way.

During the Cold War the main thing propping up the Soviet Union was propaganda. If the people there had realized how precarious their position really was all those years they would have given up long before they did. The coup formulated against Gorbachev only catalyzed the doubt that was already there, thus congealing an end that had been coming for some time. Putin is under the same constraints. He has to ignite nationalism, and its constituent xenophobia and jingoism, or he won't be able to keep the level of support necessary for his staying in power.

The US can tackle this many different ways, including keeping on playing these airplane games, or it can truly move against the belligerency arising in Russia. But it depends if you really see the belligerency as a real thing or not, doesn't it? Maybe in the wake of Russia's near failure as a state post-Soviet times people at the US State Department didn't think a little belligerency was such a bad thing? Maybe it still isn't, and we are just starved for news?

Putin is more afraid of what the US will do regarding the Keystone pipeline than he is of what they will do regarding policy toward the Ukraine.

[dorlomin]

How is this a story? Manned bombers were outdated crates in the late 60s. This is about as threatening as standing in Kamchatka and waving a sword at America. All those lumbering old jalopies would be good for would be to mop up what the missiles missed.

[Tanada]

The increased activity comes on the heels of another tense encounter in June, when one flight of Russian bombers actually triggered two separate military jet scrambles from NORAD aerospace control alert facilities in Alaska and Oregon. NORAD’s mission is to monitor all air activity that approaches North American airspace, and that starts with the 200-mile air defense zone, which is essentially an early-warning barrier to prevent encroachment upon U.S. sovereign air space, which begins just 12 miles off American shores and borders.

That means while NORAD can identify and track the Russian nuclear bombers, there isn’t much else they can do.

The Tu-95 bombers are capable of carrying up to 11 tons of fuel and ammunition, and have an un-refueled range of nearly 5,000 miles.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08 ... re-coming/

Those wishing for a new cold war seem to be well on the way to achieving their goal.

[dissident]

The increased activity comes on the heels of another tense encounter in June, when one flight of Russian bombers actually triggered two separate military jet scrambles from NORAD aerospace control alert facilities in Alaska and Oregon. NORAD’s mission is to monitor all air activity that approaches North American airspace, and that starts with the 200-mile air defense zone, which is essentially an early-warning barrier to prevent encroachment upon U.S. sovereign air space, which begins just 12 miles off American shores and borders.

That means while NORAD can identify and track the Russian nuclear bombers, there isn’t much else they can do.

The Tu-95 bombers are capable of carrying up to 11 tons of fuel and ammunition, and have an un-refueled range of nearly 5,000 miles.

That would be 9,400 miles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-95) and a maximum speed of 920 km/hr. If only these lazy "journalists" would make an effort to do some research.

Those wishing for a new cold war seem to be well on the way to achieving their goal.

It's always the same propaganda in the media, be it 1980 or 2014. The routine NATO, including the USA, "incursions" into Russia's ADIZ are basically never reported. The self-designated good guys can never, ever do any wrong.

http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/03/u ... -airspace/

Yeah, it's the Russians who are brazen. Only Americans have a God given right to do whatever they want and to blood libel as much as they want.

[Sixstrings]

\Yeah, it's the Russians who are brazen. Only Americans have a God given right to do whatever they want and to blood libel as much as they want.

You know, dissident, we don't give a sh*t as long Russia never drops a bomb by mistake.

And that there's never an accidental / misunderstanding missile launch out of Russia.

If Russia ever begins using the FEAR of that, with brazen gamesmanship, then really that's just terrorism -- achieving political aims by holding wmd's over the world's head.

You also have to remember that the US has crazy Foxnews too that's just like Russian tv, US has its reactionaries too just like Russia does (though far fewer of them) -- if Putin goes too far, if he ever actually scares the American people, then I'm just sayin' folks really wig out over here. It's like 9/11.

Main concern with cold war are accidents and misunderstandings. Like the norwegian science missile incident in the 90s, the generals brought Yeltsin the football with all keys activated and told him protocol was full strike.

Is it really worth it? The risk? All over nationalist pride, and whether Ukraine is in the Euro trade zone or Putin's Eurasian Union trade bloc?

[Keith_McClary]

You also have to remember that the US has crazy Foxnews too that's just like Russian tv, US has its reactionaries too just like Russia does (though far fewer of them)

That would be the Republicans and half of the Democrats.

[Sixstrings]

You also have to remember that the US has crazy Foxnews too that's just like Russian tv, US has its reactionaries too just like Russia does (though far fewer of them)

That would be the Republicans and half of the Democrats.

I actually think that's going to happen, Keith.

Putin's going to go too far.

He's already pissed Dutch people off. And all of east europe. One day he's going to piss off the American proletariat, and unlike the Dutch, US congressmen actually can do things about things and when people get in a tizzy then things will get done.

It's gonna happen, Putin's going to go too far one day, he's going to start scaring / infuriating Americans. Could have been an American ariliner, you know. Etc., etc., or some problem with their bombers they're flying over here, or some other provocative thing he may do.

[AgentR11]

Is it really worth it? The risk? All over nationalist pride, and whether Ukraine is in the Euro trade zone or Putin's Eurasian Union trade bloc?

If you believe Putin is truthful, then you can think this is over whether Ukraine trades with the West or not. If you believe that Putin is a liar, you also have to accept that he's probably lieing about the things that cause you to believe something which doesn't really impact Russian capabilities are worth war. Putin is a politician, therefore, he's a liar, and noting political success, you have to accept that Putin's a good liar.

The ONLY thing in this puzzle that effected Russian capabilities was the Crimea. The West still is pushing the idea of restoring the Crimea to Ukraine; therefore, the logical conclusion is that this is strictly about the long term fate of the Crimea and its EEZ.

And so.. Yes, it is absolutely worth the risk.. in spades.