APNewsBreak: Russian jet passes near US warship

[Bosonic]

Last edited Mon Apr 14, 2014, 04:41 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: AP

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Russian fighter jet made multiple, close-range passes near an American warship in the Black Sea for more than 90 minutes Saturday amid escalating tensions in the region, U.S. military officials said Monday.

In the first public account of the incident, the officials said the Russian Fencer made 12 passes, and flew within 1,000 yards of the USS Donald Cook, a Navy destroyer, at about 500 feet above sea level.

The U.S. warship issued several radio queries and warnings using international emergency circuits, but the Russian aircraft did not respond.

"This provocative and unprofessional Russian action is inconsistent with international protocols and previous agreements on the professional interaction between our militaries," said Army Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman.

Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_UNITED_STATES_RUSSIA_SHIP?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[onehandle]

1. We should have demanded that they disarm when we had them by the balls in the 80s.

Thank you Ronald Reagan, paper warrior.

[hack89]

2. They disarmed themselves for all practical matters

it will take them a very long time to recover from decades of neglect. The big mistake the Russians made was to try to keep as much hardware as they could. They then found themselves in a double bind - not enough money and personal to keep all that equipment operational while using up the money they needed to modernize. The end result is a relatively small army with old equipment and inadequate training. They have only a handful of units trained to western standards

[1000words]

38. Thank you "onehandle," cyber warrior.

[Peace Patriot]

3. Oh, how fun! Maybe the Associated Pukes, the New York Slimes, the Washington Psst,

the Wall Street Urinal, Faux Pigs, Rotters & all their subsidiary brethren can bring us another war!

And GUESS WHAT? They've got another Bush in the wings, and the whole country rigged with 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines!

Whoopee! Here we go!

[penultimate]

4. You left out RT in that list of media companies.

[totodeinhere]

14. OK you made your point. Now what do you think of the Russian plane's buzzing

our warship?

[Scootaloo]

32. I don't

My personal ego is not wrapped around Uncle Sam's dick size.

[warrprayer]

44. ouch

[LanternWaste]

72. So the place was buzzing inside your Uncle's pants?

So the place was buzzing inside your Uncle's pants?

Well, so much for rational thought-- on to the absurd bumper-stickers with the wind at our backs, a laugh track off-stage, and a dramatic lack of relevance!!!

[arewenotdemo]

15. Agreed. Except no Bush is occupying the WH at the moment.

We (apparently) voted for Kagan's wife to pass out cookies to Right Sector.

[7962]

23. If all the voting machines are rigged, how did Pres Obama win? To throw us off track?

Bush is not going to win in '16

[AverageJoe90]

49. I think they tried in '12, at least.

And it didn't work. Obama just had too much support. And Hillary, if she runs, is likely to have the same kinda luck.

[NickB79]

27. The AP made a Russian jet buzz a US warship?

Those devious bastards!

[penultimate]

31. HAARP

[agbdf]

52. Oh no

If another Bush becomes President, I'll leave the country.

[freshwest]

63. Like the tone you use with the effing media. K&R.

[LanternWaste]

71. Cool prophecies-- reminds me of Ahijah the Shilonite.

Cool prophecies-- reminds me of Ahijah the Shilonite (I Kings) foretelling the fall of the house of Jeroboam.


Rather unlikely, but often the most entertaining scenarios are the one's which are creative, imaginative, and suspend contemporary reality-- as long as they reinforce our biases!!!


"And GUESS WHAT?"
Why should we guess when we have prophets and fortune tellers such as yourself who have absolute knowledge of both the present and the future?

[cosmicone]

5. Why is our warship even there? n/t

[Xithras]

6. Because it's international waters, and Romania is a NATO ally.

With the exception of aircraft carriers, any nation can sail a warship into the Black Sea. It's considered to be an international sea, like any other.

[cosmicone]

7. mmmm hmmmmmm n/t

[LanternWaste]

73. you will allow us a theory grounded in rational though and backed up by objective observational sour

I imagine you will allow us a counter-theory grounded in rational though and backed up by objective observations and sources, yes?

Kudos to your lack of vowels, though! It allows a thin patina of fictional knowledge to dramatically shine through the bias.

[cosmicone]

75. I see that some people react with cognitive violence

and ad hominem attacks when faced with sarcasm and ridicule.

[amandabeech]

8. Turkey, which sits on both ends of the Bosphorus Straits, is also a NATO ally.

Bulgaria is another, and I doubt that the government of Georgia would shoo us away.

[2banon]

54. Black Sea: "International Waters" - LOL!

It would be so refreshing if folks didn't regurgitate western propaganda as if it were sacrosanct
etched-in-stone Truth. I'm not arguing language written in treaties. The West has a history of ignoring agreements/treaties when it isn't convenient.

[Xithras]

56. What in the world are you talking about?

Under the terms of the Montreux Convention, which was agreed to by Russia along with everyone else, the Black Sea is open to all ships from all nations. There are a few limitations on non-Black Sea nations like the U.S., including rules saying that we can't take artillery beyond a certain size through Turkey, and we can't keep individual warships in the Black Sea longer than 21 days, but it's otherwise treated like any other body of water.

[2banon]

59. It seems to me we've had war ships in the Black Sea since early March.

Is that inaccurate? If that's accurate, then technically we're in violation of that agreement. But my point, at this particular point in time, is that it's insane that we have any warships there at all, unless we intend to engage militarily, which might be the case. But if it's about posturing "sending a message of strength", solely for that purpose, nothing could be more insane.

[2banon]

60. That doesn't answer the question.

We're not talking about Ocean Liners, Oil Tankers or Freight liners, we're talking WAR SHIPS!

[arewenotdemo]

13. Because it's a pissing contest.

And we've already spent FIVE BILLION DOLLARS to remake Ukraine in OUR image, dammit!

US Assistant Secretary of State for Europe, Nuland said: “Since the declaration of Ukrainian independence in 1991, the United States supported the Ukrainians in the development of democratic institutions and skills in promoting civil society and a good form of government - all that is necessary to achieve the objectives of Ukraine’s European. We have invested more than 5 billion dollars to help Ukraine to achieve these and other goals. ” Nuland said the United States will continue to “promote Ukraine to the future it deserves.”

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37599.htm

[jtuck004]

18. "FIVE BILLION DOLLARS". Plus cookies. n/y

[arewenotdemo]

28. Plus cookies. Must not have any left ...

Last edited Mon Apr 14, 2014, 06:38 PM - Edit history (1)

for all those pro-Russian demonstrators in eastern Ukraine.

[juajen]

67. See where all our money goes?

[TwilightGardener]

24. Why'd Russia send a military ship to Cuba?

Stick finger in eye. Except, of course, the US has enough restraint to not send a jet to maneuver overhead.

[Adrahil]

39. Why are the Russians stacked up on Ukraine's borders? NT

[cosmicone]

43. It's their border duh

Ukraine is not 7,000 miles from Russia like it is to the US.

[LanternWaste]

74. Much as the US should place combat-ready troops on the US/Canadian border.

Much as the US should place the same number of combat-ready troops on the US/Canadian border-- in case Quebecois patriots decide to entertain ambitions of sovereignty...

(Insert distinction without a difference here...)

[cosmicone]

76. We are lucky to have non-hostile neighbors.

Russia is not so lucky.

However, if Russians set up a naval base in Mexico, heads would explode in Washington.

[n2doc]

9. Oh Boy, cue up the 'Top Gun" Theme

Or is it back to the future. Boys and their toys....

[arewenotdemo]

10. Why not sail the entire Sixth Fleet into the Sea of Azov?

Just off the coast of Russia. That might get their attention.

That's what we want, right?

[hack89]

11. There isn't much left of the 6th Fleet

the Med has been somewhat of a backwater compared to the Persian Gulf and the Western Pacific. For example, there has not been a carrier permanently assigned to the 6th Fleet for several decades.

[totodeinhere]

17. Russian ships routinely sail through international waters near the coastline of the U. S. And

Last edited Mon Apr 14, 2014, 04:25 PM - Edit history (1)

one recently docked in Havana, Cuba. If they agree to steer clear of our sphere of influence, we should do that same. But we should only so it if they are reciprocating.

President Obama has conducted his foreign policy in a very level headed manner and I support him.

[Anansi1171]

26. Thank goodness, a realist !-nt

[Adrahil]

41. Get the hell outta here....

.... with your making sense!

[2banon]

66. recently as 4 years ago, under Medvedev

reported as a friendly visit to Cuba.. not exactly during a serious crises with the U.S. at the time.

I'd say that would be a distinction with a significant difference.

[totodeinhere]

70. You must have missed the visitation of a Russian spy ship to Havana in February of this year.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/02/27/russia-cuba-warship/5876249/

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russian-spy-ship-docks-havana-n40041

[2banon]

77. Nope, didn't get my attention, Ya see I thought the Cold War was over..

But apparently there seems an eagerness to return to the good old days of nuclear brinkmanship.

[Angleae]

62. Because the Montreux Convention prohibits it.

Non Black Sea nations can only have warships of 15000 tons or less in the Black Sea with a maximum of 9 ships/30000 tons total (all nations combined). Turkey further interprets the convention to exclude aircraft carriers and submarines.

[S_B_Jackson]

12. Proper response is to light the fighter up with

fire control radars at full strength. Standard cold-war "chicken" tactics....

[hardtravelin]

42. Probably what they wanted.

That bird likely had a ELINT package to record and map the radars for future "reference."

[DeSwiss]

16. Why don't they just send some missiles to Cuba again?

- That used to make us back the hell up.

And the irony of the analogy I'm using here should not be lost on anyone either, seeing how these US destroyer's primary role is to fire missiles.

We were ready to start WWIII when they brought missiles that close to us. Why should they be any different?

K&R






Boy am I sick of the fucking testosterone cowboys running things......

[totodeinhere]

19. A Russian warship did recently visit Havana. n/t

[DeSwiss]

21. They didn't look like these, did they?

Cuban-Missile-Crisis-CIA-Documents

[totodeinhere]

22. Actually Reuters is calling it a "Russian spy ship."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/27/us-cuba-russia-ship-idUSBREA1Q21120140227

[DeSwiss]

25. Probably spying on the NSA.

- They know EVERYTHING. It's like One-Stop-Shopping. Then on the other hand one has to consider that the source is coming from the Peerages: Reuters!

[totodeinhere]

36. LOL. But in fairness it was reported by multiple sources

and confirmed by the Russian government.

[jtuck004]

20. This. n/t

[NickB79]

29. So it's your assertion that this destroyer is carrying ICBM's?

Because THOSE were the missiles that got the US so pissed at Cuba; ones capable of carrying megaton-size nukes that could level entire cities at the push of a button. Before that, the USSR had supplied Cuba with THOUSANDS of anti-aircraft missiles (like this destroyer carries) with little real response from the US.

Your analogy doesn't hold water.

[penultimate]

30. That would be a good response for Russia if the US put nuclear weapons in Turkey

A more equal response for Russia would be for them to send some ships to Cuba... Kinda like these people did here

http://rt.com/news/russian-warships-visit-cuba-009/

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russian-spy-ship-docks-havana-n40041

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/venezuela-welcomes-russian-warships-ahead-of-presidential-visit-1.743361

I don't think the Russians would do what the Russians did there.

[dipsydoodle]

33. Like the Jupiter IRBMs which were removed to help resolve the Cuba missile crisis ?

The missiles, armed with nuclear warheads, were deployed in Italy and Turkey in 1961 as part of NATO's Cold War deterrent against the Soviet Union. They were all removed by the US as part of a secret agreement with the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PGM-19_Jupiter

AFTER the US had placed nuclear missiles in Turkey and Italy, aimed at Moscow, and the failed US attempt to overthrow the Cuban regime, in May 1962 Nikita Khrushchev proposed the idea of placing Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba to deter any future invasion attempt. During a meeting between Khrushchev and Fidel Castro that July, a secret agreement was reached and construction of several missile sites began in the late summer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_missile_crisis

[penultimate]

34. That's what I was referring to.

[Xolodno]

35. Nah....

Russia should put up a "missile defense shield" in Cuba to thwart off any possible attacks from "terrorists" or "rogue nations".

[xocet]

37. "APNewsBreak: Russian jet passes near US warship" is the current(?) title of the linked article.n/t

[JI7]

40. any reason other than Putin needing to feel "tough and manly" ?

[2banon]

45. U.S. Warships in the Black Sea, and we accuse Russia of provocation. Seriously?

U.S. Warship in the Black Sea isn't considered provocative? Gee, Russian Warships in Cuban waters would surely be responded to by U.S. fighter jets. This is insane.

"This provocative and unprofessional Russian action is inconsistent with international protocols and previous agreements on the professional interaction between our militaries," said Army Col. Steve Warren, a Pentagon spokesman.

[EX500rider]

46. Except Russian ships DO make ports of call in Cuba with no interference. n/t

[2banon]

48. War Ships?

[EX500rider]

50. Sure....

Just last August a Russian Navy squadron (a cruiser, a destroyer, and supply ships) paid a visit, the first in four years. (they don't get out much anymore, old ships, untrained crews and small budgets)

Why should we care, we aren't at war with them.

[2banon]

57. Interesting this didn't get much attention then or now.

Surprised I haven't seen a hundred quotes from right wing radio jocks screaming about Russian War Ships sightings in Cuban waters! But then maybe it's because we don't have intentions of stirring up regime change in Cuba.. at least not during this administration. So nothing to be concerned about. No threat. No provocation is being transmitted by either East or West. A Very different matter regarding the Black Sea at this juncture.

[freshwest]

64. Yeah, here's a link.

http://voxxi.com/2013/08/06/russian-warships-cuba-considerations/

[2banon]

65. This link is informative.. thanks n/t

[edgineered]

51. Aha, a clear thought surfaces! nt

[Cali_Democrat]

55. Except there were Russian warships near Cuba recently

and the US didn't respond with fighter jets.

So the point you're trying to make completely falls apart.

Fail.

[lutefisk]

47. Chickenhawk Sean Hannity said...

On his radio show today Chickenhawk Sean Hannity said that the U.S. ship should have shot down the Russian jet. What a dick.

[2banon]

61. Quell surprise. Why do have war ships in the Black Sea at this point in time? Swagger?

[darkangel218]

53. Holy cow..

Anyone else fees like the cold war is creeping back in?

[amandabeech]

58. Yes, but it seems for some people, like Putin, it never crept out.

That may be part of the problem.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

68. I've been more of the view that its for some people in NATO

that mindset never left.(and I've been of that view for quite a few years)

Don't think Putin's mindset is cold warish but he might have some paranoia against the west(as does most Russians) which makes his views of westerns actions seem a bit different then what they actually are (or not)

[darkangel218]

69. Even if that was true, how does that matter in this situation?

It was the Russian plane which was the aggressor.

Sorry, I don't buy it. Putin's actions are pretty clear. He doesnt respect other people's sovereignty and thinks it's ok to harass war ships in international waters.

NATO has nada to do with this.