• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is the Russian S-400 air defense system, and why is the U.S. upset Turkey bought it?

If the S-400 is "the best anti-air missile system available today", why is the US forcing everyone to use second-rate equipment?

Because we don't necessarily have the best technology in the world?
 
Because we don't necessarily have the best technology in the world?

Wouldn't you think that NATO would be just dying to get its hands on a fully functional S-400 (including trained crew and all operator's/maintenance manuals)?
 
You chopped off my quote. Quite dishonest. Next time, quote the entire sentence and not just a part of it.

Your exact words were "(the S-400) is perhaps the best anti-air missile system available today".

I asked "IF the S-400 IS "the best anti-air missile system available today", WHY ...".

If you are unable to recognize how taking a theoretical (your "perhaps") and then asking a question based on that theoretical being true is NOT "being dishonest", then I suggest that a course of remedial English is in order.


Your first link sounds interesting, but it doesn't work for me.

Your second link says, essentially, "If you have well trained crews that are part of a well integrated defence system then you are likely to be more successful than if your crews are not well trained, or if your defence system is not well integrated, or both.". This is what is known as "a blinding flash of the obvious".

You do know that a system based on the M51 Skysweeper (but upgraded as to its radar, ammunition, and computers) is highly likely to be quite effective against drones, don't you? And the M51 Skysweeper is 1950s technology (it's also incredibly cheaper, much easier to maintain, and much easier to train crews to operate effectively than either the Patriot or the S-400).
 

No, I asked "Wouldn't you think that NATO would be just dying to get its hands on a fully functional S-400 (including trained crew and all operator's/maintenance manuals)?".

If Mr. Trump hadn't made such a big stink over Turkey buying the S-400, then NATO joint training exercises and personnel exchanges would have given the other NATO members a real chance to actually examine a fully functional S-400 system. Now that chance is decreasing (as are the potential profits of American armaments manufacturers).
 
No, I asked "Wouldn't you think that NATO would be just dying to get its hands on a fully functional S-400 (including trained crew and all operator's/maintenance manuals)?".

If Mr. Trump hadn't made such a big stink over Turkey buying the S-400, then NATO joint training exercises and personnel exchanges would have given the other NATO members a real chance to actually examine a fully functional S-400 system. Now that chance is decreasing (as are the potential profits of American armaments manufacturers).

As usual, you're dreaming here.

Why the S-400 and the F-35 Can’t Get Along

Graham tries to provide Erdogan with an off-ramp.....

Graham: I Told Turkey They Can Avoid Sanctions If They Don’t Activate Russian Radar

which Erdogan promptly kicks to the curb.....

Erdogan Reiterates That Russian S-400 Will Be Operational By April
 

Again, not responsive to "Wouldn't you think that NATO would be just dying to get its hands on a fully functional S-400 (including trained crew and all operator's/maintenance manuals)?".


Anyone who trusts anyone in the US government when they say that Mr. Trump will NOT do something is a fool.

Anyone who trust Mr. Trump when he says that he will NOT do something is an even bigger fool.


For some reason the government of Turkey appears to think that Turkey is an independent and sovereign nation (and not a profit fountain for American businesses) and that their job is to promote the best interests of Turkey and the Turkish people (rather than the best interests of the owners of American businesses).

I have absolutely no idea why anyone would think that - do you?

PS - You do know that the US is currently unable to provide sufficient spare parts for its own F-35s, don't you?
 
Again, not responsive to "Wouldn't you think that NATO would be just dying to get its hands on a fully functional S-400 (including trained crew and all operator's/maintenance manuals)?".

Providing Turkey with unfettered F-35 access is not worth the trade off. There are other ways to obtain S-400 data.

PS - You do know that the US is currently unable to provide sufficient spare parts for its own F-35s, don't you?

You actually think this problem is insurmountable? Lockheed-Martin and the DoD F-35 spokeswoman Brandi Schiff insist the F-35 will attain an 80% readiness rate by 2020.
 
Providing Turkey with unfettered F-35 access is not worth the trade off. There are other ways to obtain S-400 data.

Indeed there are. Most of them involve exposing NATO assets in areas where the S-400 is operating to see if the S-400 can detect them. (Actually, "to see if we can tell if the S-400 has detected them" would be more correct.)

You actually think this problem is insurmountable? Lockheed-Martin and the DoD F-35 spokeswoman Brandi Schiff insist the F-35 will attain an 80% readiness rate by 2020.

Those would be the ones that were only flown by little old ladies on Sundays when they went to church, wouldn't they?

PS - Were you aware that an "80% readiness rate" actually means "of the aircraft that haven't been flown within the past two days, we sort of hope that 4 out of 5 of them will be able to get off the ground and actually perform their assigned missions (provided that nothing actually goes wrong with them when you press the start button) because we don't currently know of anything wrong with them"? Anyone who has had any actual experience with operating military equipment is well aware that the more complex the equipment is the closer to being mythical any assigned "readiness rate" numbers are. Given "peacetime" standards of routine maintenance, the rough working figure of 75% "operational readiness" applies to equipment as complex as trucks, and it drops off from there.
 
Back
Top Bottom