Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 79

Thread: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

  1. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    are we supposed to send more ships into the black sea to counter this? we have very few friendly ports in the region.
    Nope.....we did what we needed to do with this regard. We cycled in two others before this one. Plus Biden is going there. So if they are going to invade. Better not do it when he is there. The French have 3 ships there. I don't know how many of the Brits have.

    Not to mention Poland has armed up along with some others. Now I heard the Romanians have a ship joining in.

  2. #62
    Sage
    Sherman123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,774

    Re: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Yeah, other than to sit off the Coast and show the Flag.....Even if we had 10 ships there. Its not enough to intimidate The Russians. Not when they have 50 some ships of their own.....plus the 51 they captured.
    The Black Sea Fleet is irrelevant when balanced against the massive preponderance NATO, and more specifically the United States has at its disposal. It's bottled in the Black Sea and the bulk of it's ships would be sunk effortlessly on the first day of the war. There is a reason it's the most underfunded and derelict branch of the Russian military.

  3. #63
    Sage
    Sherman123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,774

    Re: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    are we supposed to send more ships into the black sea to counter this? we have very few friendly ports in the region.
    What? Virtually every port in the Black Sea is friendly. Turkey, Bulgaria, and Romania are NATO states, Ukraine is obviously aligning with the West, and Georgia is desirous of NATO membership.

  4. #64
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,952

    Re: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherman123 View Post
    What? Virtually every port in the Black Sea is friendly. Turkey, Bulgaria, and Romania are NATO states, Ukraine is obviously aligning with the West, and Georgia is desirous of NATO membership.
    But I don't think these friendly ports have the facilities needed to support a fleet large enoungh to counter the entire black seas fleet.
    "If you can't stand the way this place is, Take yourself to higher places!"
    Break, By Three days grace

    Hilliary Clinton/Tim Kaine 2016

  5. #65
    Sage
    Sherman123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,774

    Re: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    But I don't think these friendly ports have the facilities needed to support a fleet large enoungh to counter the entire black seas fleet.
    Istanbul and it's adjoining cities has massive port facilities that dwarf Sevastopol in addition to a constellation of deep water ports and naval facilities stretching all along the rim. We regularly make carrier port visits and conduct major naval exercises from them. Not to mention that the Black Sea fleet is the least of our military concerns--it would be almost effortlessly devastated on the first day of the war. It's a shoddy fleet bottled up in the Black Sea where it can be lashed to pieces.

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherman123 View Post
    The Black Sea Fleet is irrelevant when balanced against the massive preponderance NATO, and more specifically the United States has at its disposal. It's bottled in the Black Sea and the bulk of it's ships would be sunk effortlessly on the first day of the war. There is a reason it's the most underfunded and derelict branch of the Russian military.

    Say what.....Irrelevant. Funny that's not how our own DOD assessment of the that region plays out. Nor IHS Jane. As well as what the Russians have to say about it.

  7. #67
    Sage
    Sherman123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,774

    Re: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Say what.....Irrelevant. Funny that's not how our own DOD assessment of the that region plays out. Nor IHS Jane. As well as what the Russians have to say about it.
    No it isn't. The Black Sea Fleet is the least important part of this crisis. It's a largely derelict orphan navy that would be effortlessly contained and destroyed in a war with NATO.

    "But the Black Sea Fleet "has been given very little attention over recent years," says Alexander Konovalov, president of the independent Institute of Strategic Assessments in Moscow. "There's been a bit of upgrading, but not very much."

    The fact is, he says, "Russia is a classical land power, and the navy has usually been seen as something that guards the coast. Russia could easily fight a war with Georgia or even, God forbid, Ukraine, without calling on naval forces at all."

    The officially acknowledged roster of the Black Sea Fleet includes a few dozen warships, most of them light. Many date back to the Soviet era and, experts say, are not in operational shape. The fleet has no aircraft carriers or nuclear submarines."

    Russia's naval base in Ukraine: Critical asset or point of pride? - CSMonitor.com

  8. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherman123 View Post
    No it isn't. The Black Sea Fleet is the least important part of this crisis. It's a largely derelict orphan navy that would be effortlessly contained and destroyed in a war with NATO.

    "But the Black Sea Fleet "has been given very little attention over recent years," says Alexander Konovalov, president of the independent Institute of Strategic Assessments in Moscow. "There's been a bit of upgrading, but not very much."

    The fact is, he says, "Russia is a classical land power, and the navy has usually been seen as something that guards the coast. Russia could easily fight a war with Georgia or even, God forbid, Ukraine, without calling on naval forces at all."

    The officially acknowledged roster of the Black Sea Fleet includes a few dozen warships, most of them light. Many date back to the Soviet era and, experts say, are not in operational shape. The fleet has no aircraft carriers or nuclear submarines."

    Russia's naval base in Ukraine: Critical asset or point of pride? - CSMonitor.com


    Well, with that I concur about the Deep water Navy and offensive fire power.....but then I was looking at this region being nothing but basically defensive for the Russians. Wherein they have more than just ships that can drop Torpedoes. The other issue is the Europeans an Russians have been into Geo-politics forever. The US hasn't.


    Crimea: The Revenge of Geography?

    The Obama administration claims it is motivated by the G-8, interdependence, human rights and international law. Russian President Vladimir Putin is a more traditional historical actor. He is motivated by geopolitics. That is why he temporarily has the upper hand in the crisis over Ukraine and Crimea.

    Geopolitics, according to the mid-20th century U.S. diplomat and academic Robert Strausz-Hupe, is "the struggle for space and power," played out in a geographical setting. Geopolitics is eternal, ever since Persia was the world's first superpower in antiquity. Indeed, the Old Testament, on one level, is a lesson in geopolitics. Strausz-Hupe, an Austrian immigrant, wanted to educate the political elite of his adopted country so that the forces of good could make better use of geopolitics than the forces of evil in World War II.

    Likewise, the Berlin Wall may have fallen in 1989, but Russia is still big and right next door to Central and Eastern Europe. And Russia remains illiberal and autocratic because, unlike Britain and America, it is not an island nation, but a vast continent with few geographical features to protect it from invasion. Putin's aggression stems ultimately from this fundamental geographical insecurity. Though, this does not doom him to be a reactionary. A far-sighted ruler would see that only civil society can ultimately save Russia. But Russia's geographical setting does place Putin in an understandable context.

    And Ukraine and Crimea are but prologue to a reality across the globe.

    In Asia, the crises in the South and East China seas are all about geography -- lines on the map in blue water and where they should be drawn. This is traditional geopolitics, stunningly unaffected by the advance of Western liberal thought. In the Middle East, Israel faces the tyranny of distance in its planning for any military strike against Iran -- the fundamental fact of the Israel-Iran conflict. Tunisia and Egypt, while politically troubled, are nevertheless cohesive, age-old clusters of civilization -- natural outgrowths of geography, in other words. This keeps them viable as states, unlike Libya, Syria and Iraq, which are geographically illogical within their present borders and thus have collapsed in various degrees following the weakening or toppling of their dictatorships.

    Geography is no less relevant to the 21st century than it has been throughout history. Communications technology has not erased geography; rather, it has only made it more claustrophobic, so that each region of the earth interacts with every other one as never before. Intensifying this claustrophobia is the growth of cities -- another geographical phenomenon. The earth is smaller than ever, thanks to technology. But like a tiny wristwatch with all of its mechanisms, you have to disaggregate its geographical parts and features in order to understand how it works.

    Thus, any international relations strategy must emanate initially from the physical terrain upon which we all live. And because geopolitics emanates from geography, it will never go away or become irrelevant. Strausz-Hupe had it right. If liberal powers do not engage in geopolitics, they will only leave the playing field to their enemies who do. For even evolved liberal states, such as those in America and Europe, are not exempt from the battle for survival. Such things as the G-8, human rights and international law can and must triumph over geography. But that is only possible if geopolitics becomes part of the strategy of the West.....snip~

    RealClearWorld - Crimea: The Revenge of Geography?

    Last edited by MMC; 04-14-14 at 06:35 PM.

  9. #69
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

    And this weekend Russia had 2 fighter jets buzz our ship at night. Clearly they dont care about Obama.
    News from The Associated Press

    They also launched a multi-warhead ICBM.

    Russia Tests Multi-Warhead ICBM | Washington Free Beacon

  10. #70
    Educator OnWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Last Seen
    04-07-16 @ 02:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    710

    Re: America Sends Missile-Destroying Warship Into Russian Waters.....

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Well, I guess it would have his attention if Putin said, "Oh snap!! I was going to fire off a few nuclear missiles. Now I can't." I doubt it made any difference to him actually. Just a show of support, and he already knew that.
    Conservatives have been banging the drums about how "Obama is too weak" .. now he sends a warship that is capable of intercepting any missiles Russia has in its arsenal and everyone is like "what a waste of time"... can everyone please make up their damn mind or is just a Obama did it, I hate it kinda thing?
    Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?
    - Abraham Lincoln

    Before the war is ended, the war party assumes the divine right to denounce and silence all opposition to war as unpatriotic and cowardly.
    - Robert M. LaFollette, Wisconsin Governor and U.S. Senator

    God, how patient are Thy poor! These corporations and masters of manipulation in finance heaping up great fortunes by a system of legalized extortion,
    and then exacting from the contributors--to whom a little means so much--a double share to guard the treasure!
    - Robert M. LaFollette, Wisconsin Governor and U.S. Senator

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •