This incident reminds me of the Iranian warship thread.
Of course, Russia has always been a rational actor, like Iran.
Iranian warships and Russian fighter jets. Nah. Nothing going on here. Nothing going to EVER come of it. Can't happen to us. No.
Our Top Gun could take that sucker out in a heartbeat...
But our top gun will never ever have to it. Because, Russia and Iran have always acted rationally.
The destroyer (and now the Pentagon) must be really, really worried:
Pentagon officials have not yet discussed the incident with the Russian government, Colonel Warren said.
The Chicago Tribune editorials want the US to *ACT*! They talk about arming Ukraine. Is Putin prodding other nations' armed forces? Maybe other nations aren't interested in arming Ukraine, making it even more valuable to Putin and 'justifying' his invasion.
You can bet that Obama is talking more to the war profiteers than he is to Putin.
The destroyer and the fighter plane are within their rights to be in that area. One just happens to fly and one floats.
BTW, the plane did not fly "over" the destroyer, it remained 1,000 feet away.
1000 feet away. So, maybe it was just a pilot who forgot to wear his glasses. Had to get up close to see if it was one of his ships?
Was anyone hurt by the Russian fighter jet?
Yes, the US ego.
Well, at least no US sailor was blown over by the wake turbulence as the jet flew by.
Is that enough for McCain et al. to beat the war drums a little harder?
I heard on the cable news that the Russian jet was unarmed. How the US knew this was not reported. If we have sensors that can determine that we're pretty good.
Was Putin flying the jet with his shirt off, wearing gold-rimmed aviator sun glasses?
I'm just seeing Europe saying, "Let's You (The US) and Him (Russia) fight!"
Is it better if any news about these provocations is scant?
Here's what is provoking tears of anger from the let's-fight-them-Ruskies crowd (cite from Stars and Stripes):
But a U.S. Navy official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Stars and Stripes that at one point the jet came within 1,000 yards of the vessel at an altitude of only 500 feet.
The jet did not overfly the ship, according to Warren.
Warren said the aircraft did not respond to multiple queries and warnings from the Cook. No shots were fired and the plane appeared to be unarmed, based on visual observations made by those aboard the Cook, Warren said. [ . . . ]
Warren said the U.S. vessel was never in any serious danger, especially when faced with two seemingly unarmed aircraft.
Notice that in the hand-wringing over the incident, no mention is made of the USS Cook being armed with guided missiles.
Anyone remember the cowboy antics of a low-flying U.S. military jet in Italy? Exclusive: Classified Documents Show U.S. Full Responsibility For 1998 Italy Ski Gondola Disaster
Gee, you don't suppose . . . Nah. Iran, Russia and their other buddy, China are all rational actors.
Is it rational to be so upset over the actions of an unarmed jet that caused no harm?
I think it is called provocation, Nancy. It is a common tactic to get the opposition to over react. Isn't it a shame no one on the US ship took the bait? Somehow I get the feeling you would be thrilled.
What in the world is your problem? No, forget that. We know what your problem is. You think the US is the world's bully and you think the US should be punished for having a ship in the Black Sea and Russia is such a great nation and should not be interfered with as it takes over that little pissant nation that is in the way of its rightful warm water port! It is perfectly reasonable for the warplanes of such a marvelous nation to behave in a manner most would consider threatening.
Please don't worry. I am sure our President in all his wisdom will validate Chamberlain's tactics and get our horrible war mongering ship out of there.
This was a message from Putin. Make no mistake. The message was that Russia has no longer the respect for the US it once did.
He knows the US will do nothing. We are war weary and any thought of engagement is not popular at all.
12,000,000 Ukrainians were murdered by Stalin through starvation, so naturally they don't want to be part of the new Soviet Union.
But my question is, where's Europe? Where's Britain, France, Germany, et al? This is in their back yard.
Oh, never mind. I keep forgetting we are the police and defender so they can spend their money on social programs.
You think the US is the world's bully and you think the US should be punished for having a ship in the Black Sea and Russia is such a great nation and should not be interfered with as it takes over that little pissant nation that is in the way of its rightful warm water port!
Yet another straw-man argument!
We have our home-grown war mongers salivating for a confrontation with Russia, practically an industry, and a segment of the press pushes a minor event to ramp up the war fever between nuclear-armed powers. Cui bono?
PLEASE let us not respond to Putin's pokes and prods. Don't let the US go into Ukraine and provide a *valid* reason for Russia to 'come to the rescue'.
Where ARE the Europeans in this? Perhaps working behind the scenes? (I think it's called *Diplomacy*, not Appeasement.)
And after Stalin died, they were part and parcel of the USSR. From most accounts, particularly in Eastern Ukraine, not everyone is against being annexed or set up in some Russian protectorate. Keep in mind that since the fall of the USSR, Ukraine has been run by crooks, they're bankrupt, and they may wish for the good old days.
So anyway, you want to send in the Marines? Lob a few nukes at the Kremlin, show 'em whose boss? Just what, exactly, would any of people gnashing their teeth and pulling their hair want to do?
Wait, wait, wait. McDonalds pulled out of Crimea, and now, the Red Menace (This can not stand!!!
Here is a link that might be useful: link to disastrous news
I would like to repeat Davids question.
What would you people want done?
Please be specific. Name countries, name names, name desired actions
Who is eager to go first?
There is no need to wait for your name too be called - just speak up with your ideas as eagerly as you did with your complaints!
You may begin now.........
Me? I don't want anything done.
I just hope we can defend ourselves when they start it for real. And they will.
"I just hope we can defend ourselves when they start it for real. And they will."
Really???? Do you honestly believe that they will start a war with us? They did not when they caught us spying on them. They did not when we threatened them at sea around Cuba. What makes this time so dire that they will provoke us into a war? Do tell.
I wonder how this effects the relationship between our astronauts and their cosmonauts...
Frank: Why are we in Afghanistan?
Why did the Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor? Something to do with sanctions, wasn't it?
I'll let Russia, Iran and China know to consult with you, you know, to see if it's a good enough reason.
This post was edited by october17 on Thu, Apr 17, 14 at 6:17
"Why are we in Afghanistan?"
Not because a MAJOR world power attacked us.
"Why did the Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor?"
Of course that was pre-nuclear, but I suppose that does not matter.
"I wonder how this effects the relationship between our astronauts and their cosmonauts..."
Astronauts & Cosmonauts are on a slightly different level of reality as compared to Terranauts. I bet they're looking at one another with sad eyes and shaking their heads.
That's it? Lets give it a bit longer, David. Maybe they are still organizing what they want to say.
All we have thus far is one who doesnt want anything. For all the condemnation, Im sure the others are still refining their answers.
Well, then, ok. Frank you are right. It could never happen.
MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction.
How soon some forget that we're armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons.
"It could never happen."
It is certainly an unlikelihood. That is a far cry from "And they will."
I really don't see what the big hoopla is all about.
I mean, Russia, Iran and China are all rational actors.
Japan has been a rational actor too. Hear their economy isn't so hot lately.
Do any of you think it is ok to spy on communications between any of these countries?
Espionage, the world's second oldest profession.
ANYTHING can happen. It is best to worry about the most logical and likely worst that could happen because anything could happen. Me, I think Putin considers himself far too handsome to go out with that type of bang.
The question to those complaining was:
What is it you would you have Obama do?
Not the spying/communication deflection stuff that isn't anything more, really, than complaining about endless possibilities if Obama doesnt do........what, exactly?
What do you want him to do?
Anyone complaining - any ideas?
"Not the spying/communication deflection stuff that isn't anything more, really, than complaining about endless possibilities if Obama doesnt do........what, exactly?
What do you want him to do?"
Nothing. I don't think he really makes many decisions anyway. Basically a mouthpiece.
Was anybody actually "complaining?" I read speculation and commentary.
"Was anybody actually "complaining?" I read speculation and commentary."
I think that you would be hard-pressed not to see the OP as a complaint.
I don't know, Frank. I see it as a conversation starter.
The OP is sarcastic, and in keeping with a lot of the war-mongering rhetoric being tossed around lately in our media.
Ã¢ÂÂ¢Posted by nancy_in_venice_ca SS24 z10 CA (My Page) on Thu, Apr 17, 14 at 21:46
"The OP is sarcastic, and in keeping with a lot of the war-mongering rhetoric being tossed around lately in our media."
I disagree. The OP is definitely sarcastic in tone, true, but there is no talk of war-mongering, That would be in the first follow-up posting:
Ã¢ÂÂ¢Posted by tobr24u z6 RI (My Page) on Tue, Apr 15, 14 at 6:41
"Our Top Gun could take that sucker out in a heartbeat..."
which is also sarcastic in tone. I haven't heard any "war-mongering" going on in the media, in regard to this. Ukraine, yes, I've heard some of that.
I don't see any other post on this thread that I would characterize as war-mongering. Which ones do you see that way?
elvis, what are writing does have a lot to do with what I wrote. Try for a little more nuance, please, and maybe you'll see my point.
If you don't do nuance, please reread Frank's last comment.
"elvis, what are writing does have a lot to do with what I wrote."
....speaking of all the "threats" we read/hear about, we have the case of the plane in Iran.
Yes we lemmings are told of all the "threats" against our democracy/rights blah blah blah blah blah ... but under the covers and behind the scenes it is a whole nother' story.
Don't worry it was just there to "pick up a deposit" ... wink wink
Here is a link that might be useful: BOO!!
LOL. No one answered my question. (about spying on communication between these countries) Just a bunch of finger pointing at other posters. What abuncha . . .
"LOL. No one answered my question. (about spying on communication between these countries)"
This question, right?
"I really don't see what the big hoopla is all about.
I mean, Russia, Iran and China are all rational actors.
Do any of you think it is ok to spy on communications between any of these countries?"
Yes, I do. We need to know what they are up to. They shouldn't, however, spy on us. When we catch them at it, well I suppose we will do the same as they would do to us. Isn't that what is already happening? Same old, same old.
"Do any of you think it is ok to spy on communications between any of these countries?"
I suppose if we spy on our own citizens, why not spy on other countries. We just can't work ourselves into a tizzy when we catch them doing it back to us.