Russia Boosts Cuba Ties

Russia Boosts Cuba Ties

www.capitolhillcubans.com

The Russian military recently dispatched a guided-missile warship to Cuba as part of what U.S. officials say are growing military, intelligence and economic ties between Moscow and Havana.

The missile cruiser is the Moskva, the flagship of the Russian Black Sea fleet, according to state-run Russian news reports.

“The cruiser Moskva and the large seagoing tanker Ivan Bubnov set off for Havana on the fourth week of their long-distance deployment,” a fleet spokesman told Interfax-AVN on Friday. On the way, the ship conducted a test launch of a cruise missile, he said.

After Havana, t

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:


Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
US to close embassies over security fears

Interesting piece of news I found this morning when I awoke. This is also on breakingnews.com but it doesn't say anything other than the headline while this link I provided gives a little more background info.

Russia seems to be rekindling her friendship with Cuba by sending her this fully functioning missile guided ship that they just happened to have test while making the trip there. Now I know this isn't as big as Russia planting nuclear missiles there, but this is pretty interesting and must be frustrating for Washington.

The U.S. and Russia NEED to work together if we want to avoid nuclear war. Instead of playing this stupid tit-for-tat game while ignoring the obvious eventual outcome we need to be working together to make this world a safer place. Instead, we're making it more dangerous.

People said the Cold War was over in the 90's but I never believed that. It was merely taking a nap while Russia began to rebuild her military power.

www.capitolhillcubans.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Jeez, the S is H the F it seems....
so much activity in the last 24 hours - and ALL of it looks scary-bad.

Ties are being broken all over the place, and the pieces are shifting too fast to keep track of!
S/F for the thread - I'm really not expecting things to blow over this time.

reply to post by concernedcitizen519


First the Moskva and then maybe Snowden?

reply to post by pteridine


Or maybe Snowden's on the ship. But I doubt that.

reply to post by concernedcitizen519


Not on this cruise. But Snowden in Cuba is a possibility in the future. No extradition, visits by parents through Canada and a chance to slip back into the US at some point to a life in hiding with familial support. Of course, the feds will be watching the parents and relatives so he'll eventually get caught.
Snowden should have gone to the IG with his info if he wanted to be a whistle blower. Instead, he just blew it. He and Manning can share a cell and try to out hero one another for the adoring masses.

reply to post by pteridine


Yeah, I doubt he'd try to sneak back into the States. I don't know if he'll end up residing in Cuba though, although I know he sent an asylum request there. Russia seems like the safest place for him right now, but nowhere will ever be really safe for Ed. He's got a target painted on this back that glows in the dark.

Ironically, there will be many in the United States who are outraged by this, completely forgetting the fact that there are three NATO members that border Russia (Estonia, Latvia, and Norway), a few others close by (Poland, Lithuania, Turkey, and Romania, just to name a few), and a cooperation with Ukraine, who also borders Russia. We've also deployed missile defense systems throughout Europe aimed at "Iran" (Read: Russia) and attempted to undermine their influence and their interests in the Middle East.

Personally, I think we have no right to object to their ties with Cuba. It would be hypocritical at best. This is how global politics works. It's a game of chess; one country makes a move, and another makes their's. Not everyone is going to submit to our will. The sooner we grasp that concept, the more likely we will be to avoid our own destruction.

Originally posted by pteridine
Snowden should have gone to the IG with his info if he wanted to be a whistle blower.

You honestly believe that was a safe option? These leaks have proven just how corrupt this government is, and you believe taking this information to the IG (or any government official for that matter) would have resulted in something other than his "disappearance"?

Originally posted by DivisiveConformity
Ironically, there will be many in the United States who are outraged by this,

Meh, it's just like them flying bombers near Guam, and our carriers. Those of us that grew up in the Cold War, that was such a non-event they didn't even bother reporting it. Unlike today when it's an "outrage" and "how dare they" is the mentality, it was just a fact of life back then. Russia has as much right as the US does to have ties where they want, and move equipment around. As long as they don't provoke something, such as flying 50 feet over the deck of a carrier at Mach 1.2, or trying to push around another aircraft that's escorting them (and yes, the same rules apply to the US as far as I'm concerned, although all the US ELINT planes are based on Boeing airliners, or other slow aircraft, not high speed, or long range bombers, so a Mach 1.2 pass ain't gonna happen, and they aren't going to try to push anyone around).

reply to post by Zaphod58


I agree with what you said about provocations, but I'm quite sure the US has made those same moves against Russia. It's just that our media would never report that.

reply to post by DivisiveConformity


They have, but they're more along the lines of "I'm going to push the limits of how far you'll allow me to fly into your airspace" than low, fast flights. US Elint aircraft include the U-2, the RC-135, the E-3, and E-2 (and obviously unmanned aircraft). None of those are fast, or armed. Russian aircraft used in overflights have included the Tu-16, the Tu-22, and the Tu-160, all of which are either armed with tail guns, or very fast (which in itself can cause damage). Both sides are guilty of provocations, just that they're different types of provocations. In the early years of the Cold War when the USAF used B-58s, B-47s, and B-57s, then there were a lot more provocations similar to what I was talking about with low high speed passes. Even a few gun fights between the sides.

During the Cold War there was a formal treaty on flight intercepts which kept allied forces from locking onto Soviet aircraft, and required Soviet aircraft with tail guns to point them up and away from any intercepting aircraft. There were a number of allied aircraft shot down by Soviet forces prior to that, including a C-130, and a DC-3.

Originally posted by DivisiveConformity

Originally posted by pteridine
Snowden should have gone to the IG with his info if he wanted to be a whistle blower.

You honestly believe that was a safe option? These leaks have proven just how corrupt this government is, and you believe taking this information to the IG (or any government official for that matter) would have resulted in something other than his "disappearance"?

Whether it is safer than his present situation is yet to be determined. Because he blabbed to the press he took himself out of the whistle blower category.

reply to post by pteridine


I don't believe he is in a safe situation by any stretch of the imagination. He's still very much in danger, I agree. But I do believe he preserved his life for at least a little while longer by handling it the way he did. If he hadn't taken it to the media, he and his evidence would have disappeared.

Originally posted by DivisiveConformity
reply to post by pteridine

 

I don't believe he is in a safe situation by any stretch of the imagination. He's still very much in danger, I agree. But I do believe he preserved his life for at least a little while longer by handling it the way he did. If he hadn't taken it to the media, he and his evidence would have disappeared.

You are assuming such. You don't know what would have happened.

reply to post by pteridine


You're right. But we can use common sense to cut through the unknowns to arrive at a logical hypothetical outcome.

Originally posted by DivisiveConformity
reply to post by pteridine

 

You're right. But we can use common sense to cut through the unknowns to arrive at a logical hypothetical outcome.

What would 'common sense' have to do with this situation? Maybe the real plan was to have Snowden leak and then provide disinformation to the world.

I doubt this is related to Snowden in any way. Don't forget that Russia has a defense treaty with Armenia, which obligates Russia to defend Armenia in case of war.

A defense treaty with Moscow obligates Russia to defend Armenia in case of war, including an escalation in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

reply to post by pteridine


So I'm wrong for assuming Snowden would disappear if he turned over his evidence to the IG, but your assumption that this is one big disinformation campaign is logical? Forgive me for not agreeing.

Originally posted by DivisiveConformity
reply to post by pteridine

 

So I'm wrong for assuming Snowden would disappear if he turned over his evidence to the IG, but your assumption that this is one big disinformation campaign is logical? Forgive me for not agreeing.

I didn't say that it was one big disinformation campaign. I said 'maybe' as a way of pointing out that we don't know enough about this to draw any conclusions.
He is not covered by whistleblower laws and he and Brad Manning will be playing cards for the next few decades if they catch him.