U.S. defense officials say that a Russian fighter jet flew as close as within 3 meters of a US Navy P-8A Poseidon aircraft in international airspace:
The Pentagon says a Russian fighter plane flew within about 10ft (3m) of one of its reconnaissance aircraft operating over the Black Sea. US officials described the intercept by the SU-27 jet on Wednesday as "dangerous and unprofessional". Russia's defence ministry said the US plane had been approaching Russian territory and the SU-27 pilots had adhered to international rules. Russia is currently carrying out military exercises in the Black Sea.
Pentagon spokesman Capt Jeff Davis said the US Navy P-8A Poseidon aircraft had been conducting routine operations in international airspace when the Russian fighter made the unsafe manoeuvre. "These actions have the potential to unnecessarily escalate tensions, and could result in a miscalculation or accident," he said. A US defence official quoted by AFP news agency said the Russian plane had flown within 30ft of the P-8A before closing to just 10ft.
Also at Reuters. You may remember this similar incident.
Related: UK Defence Minister: New Cold War "Warming Up"
US Jets Scramble to Intercept Russian Planes near US Aircraft Carrier
Related Stories
UK Defence Minister Michael Fallon has made a number of statements following the incident on Wednesday, 18th February, in which Russian Tupolev Tu-95 "Bear" bombers were escorted away from UK sovereign airspace by RAF Typhoon and French Mirage fighters. Asked if the world was facing a new Cold War, he said:
"It is warming up, you have tanks and armour rolling across the Ukrainian border and you have an Estonian border guard who has been captured and not yet still returned."
Mr Fallon added Mr Putin had also flown two other bombers "down the English Channel two weeks ago".
"It's the first time since the height of the Cold War, it's the first time that's happened."
Russia's Air Force spokesman said, concerning these incidents:
... [The] air patrol flights were carried out according to an approved plan, and conducted in strict compliance with international regulations of the use of airspace above neutral waters, without violating other countries' borders.
The Tupolev Tu-95 "Bear" is classed as a strategic missile and bombing platform, only currently in service with Russian Federation air forces, with a payload capacity of 15,000 kg (33,000 lb). Footage of the incident has emerged, shot from the Russian bombers themselves showing the NATO aircraft closing on the Bears. Interestingly, it appears from the footage that the contra-rotating propellers of the bomber engines are actually shut down at the time the footage was shot, turning very slowly and visually distorted by the curved canopy the footage is shot through using a hand-held camera.
CNN reports that the US Navy launched four armed F/A-18 fighter jets to intercept two Russian Tu-142 Bear aircraft that were flying near the 100,000-ton aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan while it was participating in a bilateral training exercise with South Korea in the Pacific Ocean. "It is standard operating procedure for U.S. planes to escort aircraft flying in the vicinity of U.S. Navy ships," says Navy Cmdr. William J. Marks. "This type of interaction is not unprecedented. Overall I would characterize the interaction as safe." The Nimitz-class nuclear-powered USS Reagan is essentially a floating airport, complete with an air traffic control center that tracks and communicates with nearby aircraft. When the carrier engages in flight operations, it institutes a carrier control zone, which extends up to 2,500 feet and within a five-mile radius, according to the Navy's flight training instruction carrier procedures.
The lack of communication by the Russian aircraft conflicted with general aviation practice. Even commercial airports of any significant size generally expect two-way radio contact when aircraft fly as close as the Russians did, according to international aviation guidelines. Encounters such as these were common during the Cold War. They subsided with its end but picked up again under current Russian President Vladimir Putin. "Over the last few years and particularly this year and last year, with the start of the Ukraine crisis, Russia has picked up the number of sorties," says Nick de Larrinaga. adding that Putin wants to show Russia is "still a global military power and a force to be reckoned with."
Just days after Russian fighter jets flew within 10 meters of a U.S. warship in the Baltic Sea, a similar incident has occurred, involving a U.S. reconnaissance plane:
A United States Air Force reconnaissance plane was barrel-rolled by a Russian jet over the Baltic Sea during a routine flight in international airspace, U.S. European Command said Saturday. The incident on Thursday occurred when a Russian jet "performed erratic and aggressive maneuvers" as it flew within 50 feet of the U.S. aircraft's wing tip, Danny Hernandez, a spokesman for European Command, said in a response to a question from CNN.
The Russian SU-27 began the barrel roll from the left side of the U.S. RC-135 and went over the top of it to end on the right side of the aircraft, European Command said. The U.S. RC-135 aircraft was "intercepted by a Russian SU-27 in an unsafe and unprofessional manner," Hernandez said, adding that the U.S. plane never entered Russian territory.
Secretary of State John Kerry said that under the rules of engagement the U.S. could have shot down the jets buzzing the USS Donald Cook.
[The craft involved: Boeing RC-135 and Sukhoi SU-27. -Ed.]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @03:51PM
.. maybe you shouldn't try to poke the BEAR INSIDE ITS OWN FRIGGIN' CAVE, cowboy?
Unless, of course, you 're done with that finger. And with your face.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bob_super on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:07PM
Old meme, still pretty accurate: http://i.imgur.com/UzaEGyw.jpg?1 [imgur.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @10:42PM
Funny meme, but it's very disingenuous.
First, remember Ukraine. I think there is plenty of evidence in recent past of Russian adventurism. I'm sure some apologists will say how they really did want to join Russia... and for all I know that could be right and all the hints it was military annexation are propaganda. However, I'm sure you agree there is evidence of Russian expansionism.
Second, your link intentionally confuses cause and effect. I would suggest it is a "country (e.g. Germany) wants protection against external threats, including Russia expansionism, so asks that a US base be built in their country." If you weren't aware, the hosting countries pay quite a bit for those military bases. They may not pay 100% of the operating costs, but they still aren't cheap. They presumably are getting something for that money they spend.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 09 2016, @09:22AM
Crimea voted to join Russia. The west is just refusing to acknowledge the results (we only like democracy when it's in our favor). Not because of any fraud, we intentionally refused to send people to monitor the vote because we were afraid that without fraud we would have to acknowledge the result.
The rebels in the other part of the country are still fighting. Yes, they get unofficial support from Russia, but Russia has not moved to take over that part of Ukraine.
Oh, and guess what. The rebels in Ukraine have gotten less support from Russia than ISIS got from the west (ISIS could basically walk in because the west bombed anything Syria had to keep them out).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 09 2016, @03:47PM
Crimea voted to join Russia. The west is just refusing to acknowledge the results (we only like democracy when it's in our favor). Not because of any fraud, we intentionally refused to send people to monitor the vote because we were afraid that without fraud we would have to acknowledge the result.
Like I said, it could be the truth that Crimea wanted to join. I do know that my BS meter triggers like mad at the idea that this was a grassroots movement (the voter turnout numbers are exceedingly high and bias, the Russian military "volunteers" and "vacationers" entering the country, the timeline of the military entering prior to the votes, etc). However, I don't know ground truth. All the news reports I've heard have been propaganda... I doubt it, but it colud be true.
Regardless, like I said, even if it were a legitimate request in Crimea, certainly you'll agree that there is at least things which can be interpreted as evidence of Russian adventurism by those who want to perceive it as such.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Saturday September 10 2016, @01:46AM
The Crimean referendum didn't offer voters the option of remaining part of Ukraine on the same terms as before the revolution.
A return to the 1992 Constitution — adopted after the Soviet collapse but quickly thrown out by the post-Soviet Ukraine — would effectively provide for Crimea’s independence, while remaining part of Ukraine.
--http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/15/world/europe/crimea-vote-does-not-offer-choice-of-status-quo.html [nytimes.com]
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday September 09 2016, @07:17AM
If you want to make a far stronger point, ignore NATO, just look at *US* military and intelligence installations around the world - there are *way* more of them than there are NATO bases. I honestly can't think of more than a tiny handful of sovereign countries where I'm sure there are no US installations.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 10 2016, @02:03AM
Imagine that Canada, France [wikipedia.org], the Bahamas and Mexico formed a military alliance that excluded the United States. Would United Statesians not feel nervous about that? Recall the Cuban Missile Crisis. [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by turgid on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:11PM
That nice Mr Putin [youtube.com] is widely maligned and misunderstood in the West. He only has our best interests and well-being at heart. He's a true hero, brave, and shining example [youtube.com] to us all.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:18PM
Wait, which bear owns International Airspace?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:32PM
The ManBearPig aka Putin owns it all. The north pole, international airspace and everything any Russian has even thought about once.
(Score: 2) by turgid on Thursday September 08 2016, @09:00PM
Probably Poland and Romania too, soon.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @03:54PM
Are we really only ever the recipients of these actions, or are we doing this to them too, and the mainstream press just isn't reporting it?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Thursday September 08 2016, @03:56PM
I'd like a "+1 Good question" mod option please.
(Score: 3, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 08 2016, @04:10PM
Good question. I can answer the question, circa 1980, and the Cold War. We routinely provoked each other back then. It was common for us to pull crazy stunts, and they returned the favor, tit for tat.
I can't say WTF today's military is all about. Whining about a close approach like this? FFS - WHINING!! This is what the new gay armed forces is all about? This is what we get for allowing women on the "front lines"? Jesus H. Christ. All the supernatural powers from mankind's mythology have to be turning over in their graves. Mars, Odin, you name one - they'd slap our pussified military down just for being so damned presumptuous.
Good soldiers and sailors have always bitched, but we never whined. "OOOhhhhh, Mommy, the enemy is being BAAAAD!!!"
Excuse me, while I go puke.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @04:14PM
Yeah. If we could only go back to the way it was during the cold war.
That would be great. We'd all be so much more manly!
How are you not voting for Trump?
(Score: 4, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 08 2016, @04:20PM
Trump is a weenie. Jill Stein actually has balls. She spray painted some heavy construction equipment yesterday. http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/07/politics/jill-stein-pipeline-protest-trespassing-charges/ [cnn.com]
I'm starting to like her bull dyke haircut too. She looks more manly than either Trump or Clinton. And, that evil grin - she'll keep the Russians guessing!
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday September 08 2016, @04:36PM
NumberOfBalls( Trump + VP ) < NumberOfBalls( Hellary + VP )
What doesn't kill me makes me weaker for next time.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 08 2016, @04:48PM
Trump + VP = ~1.5, give or take a little bit.
Shrillary + VP = ~1, give or take a little.
Stein has ~1 ball, I think. I don't know about her pick for VP. Ajamu Baraka? Funny looking bastard, of the four-eyed geek variety, kinda brown colored, with a bit of a beard that matches Trump's hair piece. Total balls is an unknown and probably imaginary number.
http://www.jill2016.com/jill_stein_selects_ajamu_baraka_as_vp [jill2016.com]
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:33PM
Oh noes!
Runaway is voting for a ball-less muzzie lover. [blackagendareport.com]
Did hell just freeze over?
How are you not voting for Trump?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:41PM
I hate to break this to you, but Stein will keep the military gay and feminine.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday September 08 2016, @07:42PM
On the plus side, they're both in agreement on the question of color, green, so no issues there.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @10:47PM
Wow. +10 to Jill Stein for having principles and taking obvious and semi-risky actions for them. -10 for acting as a presidential candidate should, though.
Imagine what the press would do to Donald Trump for taking such an action, let alone to Hillary Clinton.
I fully think the media is unfairly bias against 3rd party candidates... but with actions like this, I can't help but wonder if we are unfairly bias for them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @11:33PM
> I fully think the media is unfairly bias against 3rd party candidates...
> but with actions like this, I can't help but wonder if we are unfairly bias for them.
The blessing and curse of being a candidate who is not taken seriously is that the press does not pay attention to you.
Another "3rd party" kinda guy, Bernie Sanders, wasn't ignored out of conspiracy, he was ignored because he didn't have enough support to be taken seriously. When he got that support, he got press and scrutiny. Same thing with Stein and Johnson, the later of whom just wilted a bit in the glare of that scrutiny with this Aleppo gaffe.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by tibman on Thursday September 08 2016, @04:42PM
Older military is more racist, sexist, and unprofessional. Newer military does not play these kinds of games anymore (they shouldn't be, anyways). Bunch of idiots flexing muscles at each other. Be serious and take the situation seriously. Anyways, era rivalry is nothing new. WW2 vets looked at Vietnam vets like they were a bunch of whining babies. Vietnam vets look at Iraq/Afghanistan vets like they are whining babies. My theory is that there has always been whining babies.
When an Air Force pilot calls another pilot "unprofessional" this is actually a pretty bad cut-down. Insinuates they don't know their craft and they don't take it seriously. Like "go join a flying circus or something where fucking around is appreciated."
Also, a woman or gay man can shoot you dead just as easy as a straight man. Especially after a thousand hours on the range and a few years of deployments under their belt. Crazy deadly.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 1) by pTamok on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:51PM
Anyone who thinks homosexuals don't belong in military forces don't know their classical history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_the_militaries_of_ancient_Greece [wikipedia.org]
and especially
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_Band_of_Thebes [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @06:24PM
The word homosexual didn't even really exist until about a century ago when it was explicitly created to group a large variety of sexual behavior into a single diagnosis of mental disease. Since then our whole concept of sexuality has been forced into this binary paradigm that didn't, and really shouldn't, exist.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:02PM
Yes, just boys being boys. Oh, and don't forget these whiners [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Thursday September 08 2016, @08:08PM
It's propaganda for the american public to feed on. It has nothing to do with a "pussified military" and whatnot. Remember, the elections are coming up.
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Thursday September 08 2016, @09:42PM
What you've described can be summarized as the transition from the Cold War (which included some proxy wars) to a public relations war.
In general, though, all the reports of Russian fighters acting aggressively sound to me like cold war tactics. Perhaps they long for the glory days....
Overall, though, they seem to at least have the flying skill to pull it off. I'll change my mind on that if there is ever a collision (like the EP-3 and Chinese jet over Hainan Island), of course.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @10:08PM
> Perhaps they long for the glory days....
It sure seems like that is exactly how Putin feels.
It just occurred to me that his entire reign can be summed up as "Make Russia Great Again!"
And its working out better than Trump could ever do.
(Score: 2) by archfeld on Friday September 09 2016, @02:09AM
Odin wouldn't slap anyone's face without his mother's permission. Diana, Brigid, Artemis might all have something to say about it as well. Hell hath no wrath like that of a woman/goddess scorned.
For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
(Score: 3, Funny) by FatPhil on Friday September 09 2016, @07:20AM
Top Gun is not a reliable news source, Runway1956.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @04:11PM
Are we really only ever the recipients of these actions
"The recipients"?
- It is their backyard, literally;
- Turkey in their South, has shown aggression and shot down a Russian bomber recently;
- Greece and the Mediterranean in their Southwest, has become an EU puppet and is being taken over by German admiralty, and
- The Russian Federation has DECLARED that they are doing a military exercise, as per protocol
Still, some idiot decides to order a US plane to fly right into their nostril. Who is the "recipient of such action" here?
To bring this into your perspective, imagine the Russians flying a recon plane towards Miami, right after the US declares a military exercise into the Gulf of Mexico, a couple of months after Cuba, backed by Russia, shots down a US bomber flying close to the Cuban border. And then the Russians claim that they are "harassed", because their military plane got intercepted (as it should). Would you see that as aggression from the US then?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 08 2016, @04:32PM
Actually, I think it's their front yard, or at least it's their side yard. The back yard would be Siberia, and the Arctic Circle.
(Score: 5, Funny) by DannyB on Thursday September 08 2016, @04:43PM
You seem to think Americans should or would know Geography. And seem to think the public school system would have a duty to teach something basic about this subject -- which would distract from important matters like which Kardashian is getting the fattest.
God invented wars to teach Americans geography.
What doesn't kill me makes me weaker for next time.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @06:59PM
You seem to think Americans should or would know Geography
"Flamebait"? This is, like, one of the best touches I have ever been served! I had to google "Kardashians", they are some sort of professional stupid persons with big muscles. Yes, I live in a cave.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday September 08 2016, @07:32PM
> Yes, I live in a cave.
If you find an ancient manuscript down there, please don't touch it and call the anthropologists first. That would save much trouble.
It would also give you extra witnesses if it turns out to be someone's old Playboy...
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday September 12 2016, @01:48PM
If that ancient manuscript is written in Perl, just hide it and pretend you never found it.
What doesn't kill me makes me weaker for next time.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:55PM
In other words we're pretty aggressively positioned. Okay. We've been like that my entire adult life so I'd become acclimated to it. I hadn't thought about how they might see it. Something to think about.
It doesn't sound like the soldiers are whining to me. It sounds like the politicians (the soldiers quoted sounded more political than technical) and press is trying to play it up. Calling it "unprofessional" to approach someone zipping towards your territory with their transponder off is probably a little much.
Thank you for the reply.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday September 09 2016, @07:39AM
http://news.postimees.ee/3826371/russian-warplanes-cannot-switch-on-transponders
And as someone living in Estonia, this story isn't news, this happens all the time.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Informative) by tangomargarine on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:58PM
- Turkey in their South, has shown aggression and shot down a Russian bomber recently;
It wasn't by any chance inside Turkish airspace, was it? Totally unprovoked, I know.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @07:15PM
It wasn't by any chance inside Turkish airspace, was it?
According to Russia, no. According to Turkey, yes (for, like, 40 seconds).
Totally unprovoked, I know.
I get the vibe that you are being sarcastic, but whichever way you turn it, it was a true backstab: someone got edgy, because according to Russian published intelligence they were bombing ISIS convoys ferrying oil outside of conflict zones and occupied territory from ISIS, to be sold and 'legitimized' in Turkey. Perhaps it was a move of desperation when they saw the bomber approaching, as (again according to Russian surveillance data) it turns out that Turkish military and para-military elements where handling the whole operation, all in nice and sharp high-definition multi-megapixel images.
The Russians were relaxed up to that point having normal diplomatic relations with Turkey, and the bombers were executing sorties without fighter escorts. Such an incident will hardly be repeated, because now each bomber is accompanied by a pair of SU-27 fighter aircraft, Syria has S400 systems (read: NOTHING flies without their permission), and the Latakia base is permanent.
Having to deal with a lazy bear is difficult enough; but pissing it off, and then having to deal with an alert and wise bear in full-plate shiny armor, that is entirely different: Erdogan managed to paint himself into a corner pretty nicely.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday September 08 2016, @07:48PM
Don't know if it was a factor in that case, but there is long historical enmity between the Turks and the Russians. Also Erdogan just survived another coup attempt from the army, so playing the strong man a la Putin could well be meant to face that sort of thing down. Maybe a Solentil with better knowledge of internal Turkish politics could say.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Thursday September 08 2016, @08:38PM
As opposed to letting the bear rummage around in your trash and generally wander around your yard?
You don't go mucking around in somebody's private airspace without an explicit invitation, no matter who you are. And when said plane is fully outfitted with weapons I'd say you're well within your right to shoot it down.
I suppose somebody could always try flying an armed warplane into *Russia's* airspace and see how that goes ;)
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 10 2016, @03:21PM
I suppose somebody could always try flying an armed warplane into *Russia's* airspace and see how that goes ;)
That exact scenario has yet to happen. But hey, elsewhere, you know, legend says that some heavy metal jet-powered flymachines have been crashed into tall buildings and brought them down in a spectacular show. Another legend tells of something similar flying and flying and flying and flying and kamikazeing onto a building shaped like a pentagram. And dudethe place where these things happened was the most secure and protected and well equipped and top-of-the-planet military, mind you. It's difficult bussiness defending the airspace there and they have tight security; your 10yo kid flies a drone in the park, in minutes you're in a shithole for years. If they could not intercept them big slow flying metalball there, come on bro, it would be a piece of cake to sneak in some brand new invisible F-35 lightning fast piloted by the latest unparalleled AI, and crash it in the middle of Red Square. Those kommie minded ruskies with their clumsiness and their stoneage tech would never know what hit them. They'll invent some story about meteors or ufos and cover it up to save public face. That will teach them bloody bastards a good lesson, hm yea.
Your stars and stripes themed slip is showing though.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Sunday September 11 2016, @03:32PM
I'll just interrupt your troll post here to point out one thing:
[wordy way of describing 9/11] It's difficult bussiness defending the airspace there and they have tight security;
Yeah, that mostly was put in place *after* 9/11 when the PATRIOT Act got passed and the government collectively cranked up their paranoia to 11.
We're talking about Russia vs. Turkey and somehow I'm being patriotic to the U.S.? The fuck?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Thursday September 08 2016, @11:50PM
Can't have been far inside Turkish airspace, considering it crashed in Syria, not Turkey.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @09:53PM
Didn't they pull the same stunt a couple months ago in the Baltic? Parked a destroyer on the doorstep and whined about a fly-by?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 09 2016, @09:34AM
To be fair, that bomber was on the way to bomb Turkeys good friends ISIS. Oh, Turkey doesn't admit it in public, but remember that both Turkey and ISIS are what's left of the Ottoman empire. They dream just as much (if not more) of returning to those days, as Putin does of returning to the Soviet days.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @04:54PM
‘US spy planes approaching Russian territory with transponders off a provocation’:
https://www.rt.com/op-edge/358644-us-jets-black-sea-russia/ [rt.com]
(Score: 4, Touché) by Dunbal on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:38PM
Any number of people will immediately discredit you simply because you cited RT. Apparently it's not news unless it comes out fresh, laundered and appropriately spun and scented via a US news network. Cos - you know - Russia.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @07:13PM
Rightly so if the story has anything to do with an RT story about Russia. They reported NOTHING within their borders about the fighting they were doing against Ukraine.
Are you THAT fucking stupid, or do you think being all "the lame stream media" makes you sound smart or insightful?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @09:07PM
They reported NOTHING within their borders about the fighting they were doing against Ukraine.
Because Russia did not fight Ukraine. Why would they report American propaganda. Are YOU that stupid?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:51PM
Maverick did it first...
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by DutchUncle on Thursday September 08 2016, @06:27PM
From the other side's perspective, flying RIGHT NEXT TO their boundary is the provocation. And, frankly, it's sort of provocative. Heck, if they flew right up to the West Coast, we'd be pretty peeved. It's the kids in the back seat going "I'm not touching you . . ." until the fistfight breaks out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 09 2016, @09:27AM
Living in Denmark, a NATO country not too far from Russia, we read about the opposite happening more often.
When Russia does it, it's "they flew a spyplane close to our border, and we had to send up a fighter jet to keep them out of our airspace".
When the west does it, it's "they sent a fighter jet up close to our spyplane".
Thus, we are always on the receiving side. That's how propaganda works.
(Score: 2) by donkeyhotay on Friday September 09 2016, @03:02PM
We do it too, and always have:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/F-14_with_Bear.jpg [wikimedia.org]
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:08PM
I would.
(Score: 2) by Kromagv0 on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:33PM
How are you? [wordpress.com]
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @10:43PM
Starting WW3, awesome, good plan brah
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:34PM
Whining about safety on the job. Yes, flying on or near another country's border in a military/spy aircraft is not "safe". It never has been, and it never will be. But whinging and moaning about it like a schoolgirl makes you look like - a schoolgirl.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @06:02PM
If they can fly a plane that close to another without incident that really isn't the suitable word.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @06:21PM
The Chinese can't do it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @07:14PM
They'll keep doing it unless we shoot. The open question is if it's worth all the likely drama to shoot, or just let them buzz around.
It could be good practice for our pilots to chase the buzzers around and fire lots of warning shots.
(Score: 3, Funny) by wonkey_monkey on Thursday September 08 2016, @07:47PM
Just develop a paintball gun that can paint a nearby enemy jet in rainbow colours.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by Bogsnoticus on Friday September 09 2016, @03:41AM
Better still, have the american pilot come out as gay, and mention that the Grindr app on his phone started pinging like crazy the closer the MiG got.
Let Putin's anti-gay crusaders take care of the Russian pilot from there.
Genius by birth. Evil by choice.
(Score: 1) by FunkyLich on Saturday September 10 2016, @03:38PM
Better still, have the american pilot come out as gay, and mention that the Grindr app on his phone started pinging like crazy the closer the MiG got.
Let Putin's anti-gay crusaders take care of the Russian pilot from there.
No no no. The MiGs are what Tom Cruise was shooting down. These are Su-27 planes. Laughable machines man, I tell you.
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Thursday September 08 2016, @11:55PM
Yes I can see it now. America forced to defensively shoot down a Russian fighter in the Black Sea just off Sevastopol, because of Russian "aggression". And Americans see nothing wrong with this.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Yog-Yogguth on Thursday September 08 2016, @07:29PM
A huge radar signature (or two) without any transponders heads directly towards your airspace and are about to cross into it. They're big enough to be bombers or airliners or as it turns out: large surveillance & electronic warfare aircraft (which actually still makes it a potential nuclear first strike scenario).
It could be anything but most likely it is, as usual in the case of Russia, some Usians/Natodes testing your awareness so instead of shooting the targets down (it would take less effort but is stupid i.e. Turkey) you send up some interceptors to do a visual confirmation that indeed it is the usual suspects and not anything else and "yes hello we see you now too" and to have a little fun (aka training) and make the idiots in the US DoD Press department wail and whine again like the last time or the time before while parading some pussified general in front of them to the chagrin of anyone on their side with a clue.
Well I laugh, I've even kept a cockpit video of a NATO F-16 of my own country being intercepted like this, the reaction is hilarious. Fucking scary for the pilot (and oh boy can you hear it if you understand the language LOL) but hilarious as hell afterwards.
Don't like it and don't want a missile instead? Then stop doing it; it's as simple as turning on your transponders or staying the hell away.
Or simply accept the status quo like it has been for over half a century: we do it to them as well, all the fucking time, hundreds of times each year (or thousands if you're Turkey —against everyone).
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @08:06PM
How did you decide the US had transponders disabled?
(Score: 2) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday September 09 2016, @11:20AM
Because that's the normal procedure "everywhere by everyone" including Russia of course when anybody does this kind of prodding. The whole point is usually (unless it's an actual attack) to test the responsiveness of the opponent. Transponders are always off in this case because that introduces more uncertainty into the picture (the opposing force then only has radar rather than radar plus your transponders) and forces an interception for the purpose of finding out when, how fast, from where, and so on the interception takes place and compare it to previous prodding for continued analysis. This is sort of accepted behavior but whining about being intercepted is just funny and silly since the whole point is to be intercepted and everyone involved knows it.
If that's not what is being attempted then there would be no reason not to utilize the the Treaty on Open Skies [wikipedia.org] which enables the US and other signatories like Russia to fly unarmed observation planes without any drama in a normal fashion just the same way it enables any other signatory to fly over any of the countries. Transponders are always on in this case.
The fact that the US even attempts to whine is because they know most people have no fucking clue at all and might buy into their bullshit , particularly if that's all they hear anywhere (the usual MSM stooges) and parrot the "evil Russians" or "Russian propaganda" nonsense they popularize.
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 4, Touché) by EQ on Thursday September 08 2016, @10:22PM
Transponders were on - its standard flight rules for the USAF/USN has transponders for IFF on and generally use of Mode I or II is routine. Also they can call on GUARD frequency as well. International flight rules were obeyed and the actions were all in international airspace- except by the bozos flying way too close (10 f!). Got any more Russian propaganda you want to regurgitate?
(Score: 2) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday September 09 2016, @09:10AM
And how do you know the transponders were on?
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @11:04PM
I've even kept a cockpit video of a NATO F-16 of my own country being intercepted like this
(or thousands if you're Turkey —against everyone)
Ouroboros
You are Greek then, let me guess: irc groovy network era?
(Score: 2) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday September 09 2016, @09:09AM
Nope.
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @09:51PM
Electronic Emissions Intelligence (ELINT)... look it up & learn.
We have been doing it to them and they have been doing it to us. Welcome to the oldest game in the world...
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 09 2016, @12:00AM
Putin's Russia is tanking economically so he wants foreign military adventures to distract from his problems at home.
Basically, he is restarting the "cold war", and not-so-cold in Ukraine.
He wants another military incident with the West.
Why do you think he sent a Russian Military aircraft through Turkey's airspace?
Why do you think Russia is using cyber attacks against US?
Why do you think he is creating provocation with NATO?
Putins wants a conflict with the West so his people can focus on it and not their internal problems.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 09 2016, @02:28AM
Why do you believe everything that comes from our very Jewish media? Jewish bankers and businessmen want war so they can make a bunch of shekels. Just like pretty much every other war between whites.
Oy vey, dis is annuda shoah, Putin won't let homosexuals recruit kids into their degenerate lifestyle and promotes Russians having children! We need to liberate them with some IMF loans and bombing their historical cities into craters!
(Score: 2) by donkeyhotay on Friday September 09 2016, @02:58PM
In my day, the Russians used to send out their Bears to try to find us every day. And when they got close, we would launch a Tomcat or two to "escort" them. This kind of thing happened EVERY day during the cold war, and they would "escort" our recon aircraft.
I have to wonder why the media seems hell-bent on getting us into a war with Russia. This shouldn't even be news.
Here is a typical pic from those days:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/F-14_with_Bear.jpg [wikimedia.org]