Russia Sends Warships To The Caribbean

reply to post by DataWraith


Hallo DataWraith ,i do not think that you are right by saying you are scared,i know That the third world war is not far off.

These people that think it is not,are going to wake up tooooooo late.

Get yourself ready for the worst time in your life.Do not let these people tell you otherwise.

Penkop.

I hope Russia remembers all our peoples have a common dimentiality.
We are not so removed from each other.

How I wish we could stop the war and hate mongering. And get on the same page.

I can dream.

[edit on 9/24/2008 by jpm1602]

Originally posted by elderban


This warship, "Peter the Great", is armed with 20 nuclear cruise missiles and up to 500 surface-to-air missiles. And this is only the first ship they are sending. They're working on getting an entire fleet there.

I think Chavez is trying to provoke WWIII.

www.timesonline.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

I don't think that is entirely correct. The Russian vessel might have cruise missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads instead of conventional explosive warheads but simply saying that these cruise missiles are nuclear is misleading because we don't know that.. Although, it is obvious that this is not just an exercise. They could do that in their own waters..This is meant to be a message to the West regardless of what weaponry this vessel has onboard.

For all we know U.S. ships have been doing the same thing to Russia.. I highly doubt that it would be in the media if you know what I mean.. Especially if we are talking about stealthy nuclear subs (just as an example) and it's even quite possible that Russia has nuclear subs already operating within striking distance and vice versa (although it really doesn't matter since most of the missiles launched in the case of a nuclear exchange would be ICBM's anyway). Although, a nuclear submarine alone could obviously do significant damage to any country..

Tensions have been rising between the U.S. and Russia ever since the disputed missile defense sheild in Europe and then the crisis in South Osettia.. I believe Russia stills receives most of it's money from the oil industry (not to mention whatever arms and weapons they can sell to other countries). Yet another reason we need to "get off oil"...

I wouldn't be surprised if our most distrusted enemies in the international community have already been planning something together.. We have ALOT of enemies right now.. And alot of them have some pretty sophisticated weapons platforms and firepower even if they don't have the kind of technology we have. If you are an enemy of the U.S., it makes sense to make allies with the leaders of like-minded countries...

There's also something else I've been thinking about. If we do end up getting off oil (if the U.S. eventually enters a widespread alternative energy revolution), that makes the price of oil go down immensely compared to what it is now just because of the demand going down. As long as the demand goes down globally, the price of oil lowers globally. That means that developing nations have less money they have to use for oil and gas consumption from countries like Russia whose backbone is built upon the oil industry itself. What that really means is that developing nations have less to pay on energy and more to pay on whatever else they want.. Military weapons and hardware, research and development, purchases of foreign military hardware, etc.. That could be very bad for the West.. I'm not saying that an alternative energy movement here in the U.S. would be a bad thing but it obviously would have its downsides..

-ChriS

[edit on 24-9-2008 by BlasteR]

[edit on 24-9-2008 by BlasteR]

Emotionally it is easy to say: "Let the Missiles Fly, and Destroy Russia", but logically you must be beyond that. Sure, Russia would lose a Military engagement with the United States, as the technological gap has done nothing but widen, and they have done nothing but allow their capabilities to wither. However, there is too much going on in the World right now to enter a Hot War with Russia when we have already played this game before, and we are thus experienced in how to go about it. There are certain rules to the game, and lines which no sane individual will cross. Not to mention that there are smarter and much more lethal methods available to take on Russia as opposed to simply launching ICBMs. For the most part, these methods are bloodless as well. Being able to take on an enemy without a direct firefight is the most ideal war that can ever be fought. There is no reason to elevate and thus destroy such an idealistic opportunity.

reply to post by seejanerun

Possibly Russia see the movement of missles by America to the bordering states to Russia as a similar threat.
America seem intent on continuing to create unrest in all areas outside its own backyard.

As Russia and several other countries also have "Weapons on Mass Destruction" (besides America), the only difference having the Russian Missles close to the USA is that the Missles will arrive a little earlier.
The result will still be the same.
American arrogance has finally been challenged. You have every right to feel worried. Get used to it!.
America's War on Democracy has finally found a challenger.

A reply to those idiots who think America is the best country in the world.......

America is far from being "great" anymore. Yea they have a few nukes and are capable of blowing some crap up......so what? Today, America is one of the most corupt nations in the world, right next to many of those countries in Africa. Russians didn't start the confrontatin, Americans did by pushing Georgia to attack Ossetia. America wants the war, not Russians. Russia could care less about America, all they care about right now is making money, not spending it on stupid wars. By sending thier ships over to Venezuela they are reminding America that they are also a Super Power. That a confrontation would be stupid because it would cause the death of milions of people. The main problem, as i see it, is that America has too mnay politicans, and people in power who are stuck in the "Cold War state of mind" MaCain being one the main ones. They hate Russia. Why? I really don't know. So don't start saying all this bullcrap that America " could wipe the Russian losers off the planet" Because first of all they couldn't, and second of all at this point in time it looks like America is the loser

Oh yea and another thing i forgot to mention........

The missle defense shield in Europe? Why is America setting up a missle defense sheild in Europe. If it wants to defend itself against missles then place the defense sheild in the US or off shore or something, not in Europe. As they say: The best defense is also a good offense, and this is a prime example. It takes next to nothing to take a defensive measure and turn it into an offensive weapon.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
So, you are saying that this action doesn't cost anything?

No I am not. This exercise is no doubt costly, but the expense is not exceedingly high so as to prevent the exercise from taking place.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
The cost of this exercise is far outside the normal.

Just what do you know about how much it costs to operate a ship with nuclear propulsion? And what do you know about the normal operating costs of the Russian navy?

Originally posted by eaganthorn
Unless the ship is for sale and who in South America could afford such a thing?

Why the hell would Russia bring a ship half a way around the world to show it to a potential buyer? Business like this is typically acomplished by either having the buyer fly to the country of origin to inspect the ship.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
So, you are saying that a world power sends their large ships half way around the globe for regular training?

Yes. Look at U.S. navy. American carrier fleets traverse the oceans all the time, part of that time being for nothing more than training - especially if there are no active wars or engagements going on.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
A military exercise like this has a purpose just like the ones we have initiated, they had a purpose.

And what according to you would such purpose be? To launch a surprise attack on Jamaica? Or invade French Guiana maybe?

Originally posted by eaganthorn
So, you want me to think that this is all "normal" or "standard" operations?

Not yet - the Russian navy is only starting to come out of the shell it has been under for the last 15 years. As I said - the primary focus of this exercise is to test the equipment and crew, most specifically the nuclear propulsion system - in order to obtain information on designing the next generation of Russian war ships.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
Let’s see, when was the last time another super power conducted “exercises” like this so close to our Southeast coast

For one thing - Russia was invited by Venezuela. That is the reason why Russian ships are taking part in this.

Also, very few countries today possess the navies that are capable of global engagement. Most modern navies (except for U.S. and NATO) are designed either for defense or for activities close to their country. Russian navy however has the equipment capable of global deployement, yet for the last 15 years it was unable to utilize it due to lack of funds. Now the Russian navy is making a comeback. If Russia wants to have a navy capable of global-desployement again, it must test its current equipment.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
Ok, and what is the range of the missiles onboard and what active warheads do they have onboard?

The missiles are primarily anti-air and anti-ship, with moderate-to-long range operating effectiveness. Information on this battle cruiser is widely available online - you can look it up. As for the warheads - the information is secret, just as it should it be.

But believe me - if Russia wanted to sneak in a nuclear attack against the U.S., ultimately it won't make much of a difference whether it involves a ship or an ICBM.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
So, you are saying that there isn't anything here that is out of the ordinary or should seem strange?

Define strange and ordinary. International politics are quickly changing, as they were for much of the last century, and there is nothing "strange" about it. New - yes. Different from before - yes. Reason to worry or expect the end of times - no.

Any time something new and exciting happens in international politics - you have countless people running for the shelter and yelling WW3 and armaggedon. And so far 100% of the time these people were proven wrong.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
Sorry, I don't think you made any headway with your retorts and I am not convinced.

Fair enough. You can hold whatever opinion you want. I am simply stating the point of view of the Russian navy, and trying to explain why its doing what it is doing.

Of course if you want to think that Russia is preparing to invade Jamaica or land at Key West - go right ahead. In a couple of weeks everyone will forget about this thread, and move on to some new event.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
This should be a major concern to everyone in the USA, not a panic, but a concern.

Yes - people in Miami should set up patrols on the beaches and start laying-up mine fields. Of course Russia could pull a nice surprise, and sail straight up the Potomac - just in time for elections.

And don't forget - the mighty Venezuelan navy will be side by side with them. Maybe even a Cuban patrol boat or two (no doubt full of illegal immigrants) and a couple of Nicaraguan tugs will join in. The undefeatable armada is at your doorstep.

Originally posted by eaganthorn
I still smell something wrong. Our country is in a multitude of crisis, …ripe. Our forces are focused elsewhere,… the fruit is hanging low.

Yes - because there is absolutely no one left to defend mainland U.S.....

However shall you defend yourself?

Originally posted by eaganthorn
Any military action against us would be catastrophic, even if that action was an accident or a misunderstanding, regardless of the outcome of that skirmish we could very well find ourselves in the “basket”.

Just to imagine - U.S. cowarding at a sight of a single 30-year old battle cruiser. I think not. What would you do if you saw a dreadnaught? Raise the white flag?

Originally posted by eaganthorn
And while I am not one to subscribe to fear mongering, I am vigilant when faced with a real threat and the potential is here, now.

What can Russia possibly do with a single battle cruiser, that U.S. would not be able to effectively retaliate against?

Originally posted by eaganthorn
But maybe I am over re-acting, after all, Russia hasn't conducted any questionable military actions lately, right?

Russian carrier fleet toured the Medditerranean less than a year ago. There was lost of panic about that. For a moment we had people contemplating on ATS whether Russia could invade Italy or UK. Sadly - it didn't even try.

Then we saw Russia resume the Cold-War era bomber patrols above international waters. Oh what panic was raised then - people in Britain and Japan were awaiting bombs to start raining down on them. They are still waiting.

But hey - keep those binoculars out if you live in Florida. You never know - maybe Russia is eyeing Miami as a nice warm-water sea port.

Originally posted by vance
It is nothing. They will send ships, we will monitor ships. They will go away and send more planes. We will monitor planes, they will go away. I spent 28 of my years watching this "cat and mouse" game. Nothing to it.


And spooky, what an embarrassment sigh. I hope you are too young to cast a vote in the elections and that is why you would even post such moronic drivel - too young to know better.

[edit on 9-23-2008 by vance]

You know they would have to plan out something before jumping to the gun to attack right? Surveying is nescessary to carry out plans. Without spying on each others backyard how can you tell what they are doing? The level of trust is slim to none, which of course by all means is necessary to know what is going on. When there is a high threat alert, then they will attack when it is necessary.

To tell you the truth I do agree with ya that people do make a living career spying on the same country for years and years. But things are happening and changing at a faster pace. Forget the 20 years in the past look at what is happening now currently. Events are just unfolding like a toppling deck of cards.

i realy hope that this is all just going to fade away. i dont want a war with russia or any other country. im an american, allways will be and i love my country..........i just dont love the people that run it at this time. i dont like there policys and the way they think the united states is invincable..........we arent!!!, all this "war game" stuff that we play and russia plays and isrial and iran plays is a very dangerous game........one little misteak or accident and many MANY people will die!!

im sure there are ordinary people in russia, iran ect. who just want to live and raise there familys and hopefull live long enough to see there grand children grow up, i know i do!! but if all the countrys of the world cant get along and help each other.....we as a race of scared humans will pay the ultimate price..............OUR EXTINCTION!!!


be safe people

Originally posted by Nick655
Oh yea and another thing i forgot to mention........

The missle defense shield in Europe? Why is America setting up a missle defense sheild in Europe. If it wants to defend itself against missles then place the defense sheild in the US or off shore or something, not in Europe. As they say: The best defense is also a good offense, and this is a prime example. It takes next to nothing to take a defensive measure and turn it into an offensive weapon.

The Missile Defense Shield in Europe is a brokered deal amongst NATO. It has very little to do with the defense of the United States itself, it is more so an attempt to allow NATO Nations an opportunity to defend themselves. These missile are Patriot Batteries, they are absolutely in no shape or form an Offensive Weapon.

As for "America hating Russians", what allowed you to reach such conclusions? There is a sizeable population of Russians not only living within the United States, but also composing a well established segment of it's citizenry as well. If you actually believe that Americans harbor some animosity to people just because they are Russian, then you are sorely mistaken. If the Kremlin had not been hijacked by a 5th Dir. Madman, then Russia and America would be closer than ever at this current point in time. Russia is descending back into the CCCP, and that is what has been of much concern to a number of Nations around the World.

[edit on 9-24-2008 by TheAgentNineteen]

Originally posted by maloy
And as you have just shown - you are keeping up with the times and reality very well.

Putin knows what he is doing - as evidenced by the quickly growing Russian economy.

[edit on 23-9-2008 by maloy]

Putin doesn't behave like he has a grasp of what a post-communist world is all about. Instead, he's reverting back to old-diehard communist geopolitics, as his public relations stunts with nutcase leaders of Iran and Venezuela prove. Same with your rhetoric.

There's no reason for Putin to be antagonistic against the US, unless it still has global dominion ambitions? And why would he? To promote his keen "expertise" functioning in a "capitalistic" world economy? How long has he been an expert at that? What does he have to offer the world? His poor judgment as a KGB Marxist? He choice Marxism and when it proved to be a flop what did he do? Did he apologize to the world for trying to impose the dictatorship of the proletariat upon the world? No, he just arrogantly reverts back to being a dickhead who thinks life is about being king of the hill. I guess when you've been raised to believe in a materialistic, Darwinian view of the world, he can't do much else.

Relatively speaking, Russia is morally and ideologically bankrupt and Putin's actions of late show it. He's going through an identity crises and pulling Russia down with him. I don't think the Russian mafia model is something the 21st century needs being implemented or promoted. We should move forward and find avenues of cooperation and harmony, not continue the competition of weaponry. If Putin is really on the side of capitalism, then he's going about it all wrong.



Fixed quote

[edit on 25/9/08 by masqua]

reply to post by Jon Paine


My post was purely based on economics. I think you're projecting an entirely different argument that has nothing to do with what I wrote. You are making a big assumption moralizing to me when you don't even know what my views are, other than my stating Russia is basically handicapped because of its history of inept economic choices the last 90 years. Marxism does not work. It's not a subjective judgment. It's a historically established fact.

I have been seeing snippets of Russia in the news posturing in the Middle East and now at our footsteps. This tells me they are making a statement to us (the United States) and Israel that we should be hands off on Iran denuking or they will possibly make us pay.

All this is alarming and bodes ill for us in terms of possible war not only with Russia and Iran, but also possibly N. Korea, Venezuela and goodness know who else.

With the economic crisis hurting us presently (as well as most of the world), the Iraq occupation by American troops and the upcoming political elections, we are seriously distracted and this would be a prime time to take us out with our military occupied.

From my observations of the world's leaders and power players, they certainly aren't pillars of good morals and ethics and I am coming to believe that concept of war as a money maker is perhaps being utilised by not only the United States, but all other agressive countries. It is one thing to defend one's country; it is another to make war to fill one's pockets. This is how it appears to me whenever there are wars initiated.

I am certainly no expert, but these are my observations and opinions.

Originally posted by TheAgentNineteen

Originally posted by Nick655
Oh yea and another thing i forgot to mention........

The missle defense shield in Europe? Why is America setting up a missle defense sheild in Europe. If it wants to defend itself against missles then place the defense sheild in the US or off shore or something, not in Europe. As they say: The best defense is also a good offense, and this is a prime example. It takes next to nothing to take a defensive measure and turn it into an offensive weapon.

The Missile Defense Shield in Europe is a brokered deal amongst NATO. It has very little to do with the defense of the United States itself, it is more so an attempt to allow NATO Nations an opportunity to defend themselves. These missile are Patriot Batteries, they are absolutely in no shape or form an Offensive Weapon.

As for "America hating Russians", what allowed you to reach such conclusions? There is a sizeable population of Russians not only living within the United States, but also composing a well established segment of it's citizenry as well. If you actually believe that Americans harbor some animosity to people just because they are Russian, then you are sorely mistaken. If the Kremlin had not been hijacked by a 5th Dir. Madman, then Russia and America would be closer than ever at this current point in time. Russia is descending back into the CCCP, and that is what has been of much concern to a number of Nations around the World.

[edit on 9-24-2008 by TheAgentNineteen]

Putin might not be the greatest leader of all time i agree, but Russian is far from descending back into the CCCP. Things they show yu on the news and you may read on news website in the US is extreamly far from the truth. Its what they want you to see. And i wasent saying that everyone in America hates Russians, i was saying people in power hate them, and again not everyone. MaCain is a prime example, I don't remember where or when but he said something which pretty much ment that he wants to go to war with Russia. If the "nations around the world" are afraid of Russia going communist then why don't they first consentrate on other communist countries like China, they have a HUGE army and can force every able bodies citizen in the country to go to war. I think that is what we should all be worried about.

And before u start accusing Russia's leaders as madmen take a look, frst at the people who ahve been in power in the US for the last 10 years, and then look at who is Running this year. If Obama wins i think the US will be decsending into the CCCP, not Russia.

reply to post by maloy


You honor me with your dedication and the special attention to my post, and I appreciate your sense of humor. I especially like the way you worked the sarcasm in there for a discrediting effect.

In regards to the cost of the exercise, you have suggested that the exercise is not cost prohibitive, which is a condition of relativity, which confirms my point. You’ve asked me what I know of expenses to operate such a ship and I can safely say that the cost of any large ship increases with the greater distance it travels away from home port, regardless of the propulsion system as that is not the only factor in a vessels expenses. What do I know of the Russian Navy, you ask? Nothing, nada, Я не знаю что-нибыдь о линкоре или русском военно-морском флоте*. And if I did know anything, I probably couldn’t say.

As far as my concerns of the Russian Navy sending a battleship to the Southeastern coast of the US, something that has never been done before, I guess since they were invited by Venezuela, that makes it all better and far less suspicious. I mean, Chavez is a reliable person, right?

As I said before, at this point in our history, we are very vulnerable, at the current state of our military and economy, it wouldn’t take but a single act, whether intentional or by “accident” to send the remaining precarious balance of our economic assets into a downward spiral. Since we have openly displayed our status via the world news media, the world knows this and I would suspect Russia knows this as well.

No, my friend, this move is more than an exercise or routine training excursion, perhaps a demonstration of affection or support for a paranoid dictator in SA, perhaps a fortuitous happenstance to advance a presence in this hemisphere, perhaps a misdirection of some kind. Perhaps Venezuela wants to aggressively collect some debts from one of their neighbors, needed to buy a shipload of weapons and wanted some extra muscle in place before they advanced, I can only guess, but the potential is there.

* Translation provided by Babelfish

reply to post by maloy

Maloy my old chum, I didn't panic when Russia resumed bomber patrols. In a crazy unpredictable world it was quite a comfort seeing the 'Bears' again. It's finding Polonium in my Sushi that scares me.

reply to post by maloy

Maloy my old chum, I didn't panic when Russia resumed bomber patrols. In a crazy unpredictable world, seeing the 'Bears' again was a comfort. It's finding Polonium in my Sushi that frightens me.

Originally posted by Fang
It's finding Polonium in my Sushi that frightens me.

So did you find any yet?

Keep looking. I am sure the FSB has wiretapped your communications, and Putin's henchmen are engineering the best way to get rid of you.

Originally posted by Matrix1111
Putin doesn't behave like he has a grasp of what a post-communist world is all about.

How would you want him to behave? Like Yeltsin behaved? Yeltsin and his era politicians might have been amusing to the West, but they were quiet a disappointment for Russia.

And is Bush in your opinion behaving as if the Cold War is over, or is it the U.S. foreign policy that is stuck in Cold War mode?

Originally posted by Matrix1111
Instead, he's reverting back to old-diehard communist geopolitics

So you are saying that Putin is supporting Communist movements of foreign states, in an attempt to incite bolshevik revolutions there - in the spirit of Marxist Leninst ideals?

Please provide some examples to back that up.

Originally posted by Matrix1111
as his public relations stunts with nutcase leaders of Iran and Venezuela prove.

Nutcase leaders? How would you classify Bush from a relative standpoint? Whom you see as a nutcase, others may see as an opportunity.

Originally posted by Matrix1111
There's no reason for Putin to be antagonistic against the US, unless it still has global dominion ambitions?

What if U.S. is antagonistic towards Russia, and Russia's actions are replies?

And how do you tie together "antagonism against the U.S." and "ambitions of world domination"? What do these two have in common.

France at one point a few years ago was highly antagonistic towards the U.S. So according to you - France had ambitions for world domination.

Originally posted by Matrix1111
To promote his keen "expertise" functioning in a "capitalistic" world economy?

How is the current Russian economy not capitalist, relative to other established capitalist countries?

Originally posted by Matrix1111
What does he have to offer the world?

Nothing. What does anyone have to offer to the world? Every country watches out for its own interests. Period.

Originally posted by Matrix1111
He choice Marxism and when it proved to be a flop what did he do?

What are you talking about. "Choice Marxism"? Huh?

Who is "he"? Are you talking about Lenin, Kirov, Trotsky, Stalin, Mao, Dzerzhinsky?

Originally posted by Matrix1111
Did he apologize to the world for trying to impose the dictatorship of the proletariat upon the world?

You lost me buddy. At first you were talking about Putin, and then you reverted to some revolutionary Marxist "he". Got some communists mixed up?

Originally posted by Matrix1111
Relatively speaking, Russia is morally and ideologically bankrupt

Based on what facts? The ones that dwell deep within your prejudice?

Originally posted by Matrix1111
I don't think the Russian mafia model is something the 21st century needs being implemented or promoted.

Ok - so your conversation starts with Putin > then Revolutionary Marxist > then morally corrupt dickhead > then mafia? Anything else to throw in the mix? Maybe "terrorist" "evil" "empire" "genocidal" "mushrooms"?

Originally posted by Matrix1111
If Putin is really on the side of capitalism, then he's going about it all wrong.

Whether he is right or wrong will be left for the future generations to decide looking back at history. Russia is slowly prospering for the first time in over a century. Russians are content with their leadership. For now that is what matters the most.