Russian Jets and Ship Taunting The UK!

originally posted by: neformore
Thats not taunting.

Thats ferreting - and its nothing new.

It happened every single day from the mid 50's to 1990, took a break for 10 years when the cold war ended and then started again.

The BBC recycles such stories on slow news days. Now that David Moyes has been sacked they need something sensationalist to use as a headline.

If anything it is a symbolic gesture of the re-start of the Cold War. Not that it ever really went anywhere, but this is Russia acknowledging it in a public display.

Your headline is very misleading and scaremongering IMHO.....

From the same link you posted in your OP

The spokesman added that Russian military flights have never entered UK sovereign airspace without authorisation.

The bolded bit is mine.

This is the actual headline from your link...

RAF fighter jets scrambled to investigate Russian planes

and then there's this.....

Defence Secretary Philip Hammond, said: "Recent events have increased awareness of Russian military activity, but we have always routinely intercepted, identified and escorted Russian air and naval assets that transit international airspace and waters within the UK's 'area of interest'.

Rainbows
Jane

a reply to: JiggyPotamus

There is an interesting article on the BBC written written by a chap called Oliver Bullough (who has extensive experience in Russia) which does point out that Putin does have the desire to, as much as is possible, restore the old Soviet Empire...

An interesting read with some well made points - make of it what you will

a reply to: Wookiep

It's been going on quite regularly for several years now - they took a hiatus from the 90's to early 00's because, well, they couldn't afford to get any birds in the air, but they have been doing these runs for a long time now.

It's nothing new, just "newsworthy" given the headlines of late.

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Maxatoria

An independent Scotland a member of NATO? I doubt it.. They have nothing to offer and wouldn't be able to (and do not wish to) meet the minimum Defence spending requirements.

We have nothing to offer???... other than some of the finest, hardest bastards in the Army...35% of the SAS have been Scots and that stat exists today....for a small nation of 5.5 million that tells it's own story of what we have to offer...maybe not to Westminster after Sept 18th, but to our own people...we will do just fine.
We Keep England, not the other way around.

Here is an article from 2010 where it states that, up to that point, Russian aircraft were intercepted 20 times in a year flying these sorties, so nothing new.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Righto..

That's not what I meant though, so put your hairy chest away.

I meant, you have no military and no plans to even build one, instead a small "defence force". Made of some small fisheries protection vessels and barely a brigades worth of soldiers.

There is a minimum GDP spend to be in NATO and minimum standards or training and equipment, plus the ability (and willingness) to send forces abroad in defence of allies. Salmonds stated defence policy won't even come close to meeting these, yet he wants to be part of NATO. Just another ill-thought out pile of crap from the soggy-looking wierdo.

besides, like the Irish, all the "real men" you love so much who want a proper military career will join the British Army.

If Scotland goes independent, which by all accounts they won't (and not even come close), it doesn't mean you get to keep any of the kit or units. You'll have to start from scratch.

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: minusinfinity
If and when Russia does something all the haters will cry to the evil empire aka the USA.

Maybe the USA should say KMA.

Get the USA involved and we are all dead.
No thanks.

We're all dead?

Sorry bud, but the US of A thrives off war, we don't die.

And have you seen the news? We're involved.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Maxatoria

An independent Scotland a member of NATO? I doubt it.. They have nothing to offer and wouldn't be able to (and do not wish to) meet the minimum Defence spending requirements.

We have nothing to offer???... other than some of the finest, hardest bastards in the Army...35% of the SAS have been Scots and that stat exists today....for a small nation of 5.5 million that tells it's own story of what we have to offer...maybe not to Westminster after Sept 18th, but to our own people...we will do just fine.
We Keep England, not the other way around.

BaaWaa.....Calm down. this is why i moved out of Scotland.
There is a lot more to life than being a "Hard Bastard"

originally posted by: rigel4

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Maxatoria

An independent Scotland a member of NATO? I doubt it.. They have nothing to offer and wouldn't be able to (and do not wish to) meet the minimum Defence spending requirements.

We have nothing to offer???... other than some of the finest, hardest bastards in the Army...35% of the SAS have been Scots and that stat exists today....for a small nation of 5.5 million that tells it's own story of what we have to offer...maybe not to Westminster after Sept 18th, but to our own people...we will do just fine.
We Keep England, not the other way around.

BaaWaa.....Calm down. this is why i moved out of Scotland.
There is a lot more to life than being a "Hard Bastard"

we were talking about the Military.. not civvy street.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

I am also curious how you could possibly know that "35% of the SAS are Scottish", as members of the Regiment rarely go around telling anyone who they are. Sounds to me like you're just thumping that big, hairy, ginger chest of yours

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Oh yeah, I forgot about this - NATO told the SNP that they could sod off about membership

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Righto..

That's not what I meant though, so put your hairy chest away.

I meant, you have no military and no plans to even build one, instead a small "defence force". Made of some small fisheries protection vessels and barely a brigades worth of soldiers.

There is a minimum GDP spend to be in NATO and minimum standards or training and equipment, plus the ability (and willingness) to send forces abroad in defence of allies. Salmonds stated defence policy won't even come close to meeting these, yet he wants to be part of NATO. Just another ill-thought out pile of crap from the soggy-looking wierdo.

besides, like the Irish, all the "real men" you love so much who want a proper military career will join the British Army.

If Scotland goes independent, which by all accounts they won't (and not even come close), it doesn't mean you get to keep any of the kit or units. You'll have to start from scratch.

your posts are long and full of nonsense. i could prove you wrong on so many subjects. it's just not worth my while.

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Oh yeah, I forgot about this - NATO told the SNP that they could sod off about membership

Proof....c'mon....lets here it...Barrosso or whatever he's called..?
And remember......it's not the SNP you are talking about....it's SCOTLAND and it's people...dont be so disrespectful..

a reply to: Soloprotocol

In other words, you can't.

Everything I have said there is the stated policy of the SNP for Scotland after any independence vote. If you like, I could provide you with evidence rather than you taking my word for it?

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Oh yeah, I forgot about this - NATO told the SNP that they could sod off about membership

Proof....c'mon....lets here it...Barrosso or whatever he's called..?

Proof? The post you quoted had a bloody link in!

You're thinking of of the EU - NATO isn't the EU...

Seems someone doesn't know what they are talking about

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Can you give us just two instances of where stu mason
is wrong in the above post please.

If it's not worth your while to respond .. then why make the claim?

originally posted by: stumason

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Oh yeah, I forgot about this - NATO told the SNP that they could sod off about membership

Proof....c'mon....lets here it...Barrosso or whatever he's called..?

Proof? The post you quoted had a bloody link in!

The Telegragh is your proof.....get real.

originally posted by: incoserv
The OP says: "I really do think people need to seriously consider the sanity of Putin."

Yeah, probably so. But, then again, at this point in history people need to seriously consider the sanity of pretty much every leader of every major power. They're all b*****t crazy, every one of them. They're all intoxicated by power and greed, and all manipulated and controlled by the monied interests that are choking off the economies of nations.

Nope, it's not just Mr. Putin who's crazy, buddy.

I know it is not just Putin, but he is putting the peace of Europe at risk. That is the worrying part. To date wars have been fought in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan etc but Putin is now threatening multiple countries. If he takes Ukraine, what is stopping him from rolling tanks into Poland, Czech Republic or the Baltic

originally posted by: rigel4
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Can you give us just two instances of where stu mason
is wrong in the above post please.

If it's not worth your while to respond .. then why make the claim?

What was the questions....and as far as stu goes....he's reads and believes the main stream media....dont know why he even comes here.