Russian Fighter Jet Collides with US Drone

originally posted by: Mahogany
a reply to: IAMTAT

Not a smart move for the Russians.

1. They're not going to recover the drone, so they can give it to the better engineers, the Iranians, to reverse engineer.
2. They're not going to provoke us into a conflict.
3. Another drone is already being built and will be paid for by all the frozen funds and oligarch mansions and yachts.

There is literally billions upon billions of frozen funds waiting for reparation payments once the conflict ends. No Russian will ever see this money again, but anyone with any injury or loss will be able to make a claim against it.

You really want to destroy American military property? Go for it. You're digging your own grave and we're replacing them with your money.

Russia 1

America 0

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: DerBeobachter
What would the US air force do if a russian combat drone would fly around near the US border? Giving it a nice welcome present and invite it to a coffee while saying thanks for the visit to Russia?

Air Force jets intercept Russian aircraft near Alaska

We would do what we always do... follow international law, not cause an incident and peacefully warn the intruding aircraft away, before it has a chance to enter actual US airspace. All of this is done in international airspace and in accordance with international laws. EVERY time they try to do it, and they try it on schedule pretty much.

Did you really not remember ANY of these recent incidents and how we responded before you posted that?

Not the same, not even close. The US is in a proxy war with Russia if you havent noticed? The US is supplying 100s of Billions of dollars worth of aid and military war weapons with a country that is using these weapons to attack Russian military and kill Russians.

This drone was not out sightseeing, nope they weren't just out enjoying the view and hoping to see a rare Black sea Bottlenose Dolphin in the water. The drone was obviously on a military mission to spy on Russian bases in Crimea and Russian forces in Ukraine and Russia.

Russian military Jets up near Alaska (your article) are also near Russia and Russia was not in a proxy war with the US, let's just say for argument sake with Canada, since Canada and THE US are neighbors like Ukraine and Russia are. Russia was not giving a US enemy that they were in a war with 500 trillion billion dollars

If the US wants to fly their drones why not fly them up above Siberia over the Artic Ocean somewhere? That would be more similar to Russia flying their jets over the artic ocean near Alaska (where Russia basically borders Alaska)

Anyway you spin it, the US drone was on a Military Mission to spy on Russia/Russian forces and send that information to Ukraine, a country that Russia is in a war with and a country that the US has spent more money in the past 1 year on by sending 100+ Billion dollars of war machines and ammunition then most countries spend on themselves in decades or ever have (think about that)

That's just great, WW3 over a drone.

Love how the liberal media is portraying this with the repeating of the word "deliberate" verbatim.

One news anchor was caught off guard when another asked him what he means by deliberate... His long winded reply was basically a retraction.

libtards I tell ya...

The Russians thought is was a UFO or a Chinese balloon!

putnam6, I agree with you,
"Aint it amazing a drone can get splashed by a
Russian jet in the Black Sea and we know
details immediately and definitively? "

originally posted by: The GUT
Bueller can't answer so I'll throw this out there for anyone: Does anyone actually think our involvement in Ukraine is about protecting the peoples? Or even our "national security." If you lean towards "national security" can you make a case for it in existential terms?

Why not non-existential? If by existential you mean situations that threaten the whole existence of the US. I think it's better to deal with problems proactively before it gets that bad.

originally posted by: Cutepants

originally posted by: The GUT
Bueller can't answer so I'll throw this out there for anyone: Does anyone actually think our involvement in Ukraine is about protecting the peoples? Or even our "national security." If you lean towards "national security" can you make a case for it in existential terms?

Why not non-existential? If by existential you mean situations that threaten the whole existence of the US. I think it's better to deal with problems proactively before it gets that bad.

It's even better to not create problems that then need a pre -determined resolution.

a reply to: incoserv

Good things and better things are all good.

originally posted by: ColeYounger
By dumping fuel and downing the drone, the Russian pilot was “further polluting the fragile Black Sea

I guess the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage was okay, because that was the Baltic Sea.

Yeah, definitely the hypocrisy of some people here really manifest.

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: DerBeobachter
What would the US air force do if a russian combat drone would fly around near the US border? Giving it a nice welcome present and invite it to a coffee while saying thanks for the visit to Russia?

Air Force jets intercept Russian aircraft near Alaska

We would do what we always do... follow international law

Ummm...according to international law...that drone...collecting intell and passing it on to Ukraine...is a party to the conflict...and fair game for the russians to take out...legally...

The Russian bombers flying in International airspace close to alaska...are not a party to any conflict with the US...the US is however a party to the Russian...Ukranian conflict by using assets to provide targeting intell to the Ukranians...

So...apples...oranges...



YouSir

originally posted by: YouSir
Ummm...according to international law...that drone...collecting intell and passing it on to Ukraine...is a party to the conflict...and fair game for the russians to take out...legally...

When can we expect you to cite the relevant 'international law' statute? I'm thinking never, since one doesn't exist.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: YouSir
Ummm...according to international law...that drone...collecting intell and passing it on to Ukraine...is a party to the conflict...and fair game for the russians to take out...legally...

When can we expect you to cite the relevant 'international law' statute? I'm thinking never, since one doesn't exist.

Ummm...How about now

And specifically...

The last sets of targets we may see in a war are things. Any military
vehicle, ship, tank, or aircraft is a legal target,

To reiterate for the impaired...Russian jet collides with Reaper

The U.S. should not respond with direct force against Russia, said Notre Dame Law School professor Mary Ellen O’Connell, an expert on international law and the use of force.

While the drone was probably conducting surveillance for Ukraine,Russia’s disruption of the Reaper was within the laws of armed conflict, even if Russia had better ways of doing so, she said.

“The U.S. has been successful to date in assisting Ukraine without direct confrontation with Russia,” O’Connell said. “That approach needs to continue.”

Bold added to highlight for the impaired...





YouSir

originally posted by: Cutepants

originally posted by: The GUT
Bueller can't answer so I'll throw this out there for anyone: Does anyone actually think our involvement in Ukraine is about protecting the peoples? Or even our "national security." If you lean towards "national security" can you make a case for it in existential terms?

Why not non-existential? If by existential you mean situations that threaten the whole existence of the US. I think it's better to deal with problems proactively before it gets that bad.

This theater needs no proactive solution, they've already given us two world wars... thanks fellas.

It's time for concessions (diplomacy) the goal is to end the killing.

originally posted by: YouSir
Ummm...How about now

Uh, nope, that's a Peterson Air Force Base memorandum and deals with internal military tribunals, not 'international law'.

Just like I suspected would happen, I ask for facts and I get YouSir Story Hour instead.

Latest reports say Russia intends to salvage the splashed drone.
US has no naval presence in the area.

This will be a major loss to the US...and an intelligence coup for Russia.

Thanks, Joe.

a reply to: IAMTAT

If there was no "this drone will self destruct" message before we splashed her down then I'd assume it wasn't extremely vital.

Flankers can dump a lot of fuel. Usually used as a party-trick at airshows, but you can see how it can be used as a tactic during an intercept of a UAV.

a reply to: iamthevirus

Hard disagree. America needs to think much more in the long term and not just reactively when the # hits the fan, like the post I replied to seemed to suggest.

originally posted by: iamthevirus
a reply to: IAMTAT

If there was no "this drone will self destruct" message before we splashed her down then I'd assume it wasn't extremely vital.

This administration has absolutely no problem with handing over our advanced military technology to our enemies through incompetency.
See Afghanistan.

a reply to: Cutepants

I am quite certain we are beyond all that and some insignificant civil suit somewhere in eastern Europe.

Masters pulling the stings at the UN is where the game is at, we're not concerned with Ukraine independence, they're independent... how many independence's will this be now.

Taiwan and the mainland dissidents will unite the American left/right.

Then you will see action you seek...

a reply to: IAMTAT

China is doing all this, that's one thing I'm sure we can be certain of. UN politicians and nations are all sell-outs to China.

Russia can't sustain them either, sure the money is good atm but with a population in decline why would they? unless that is they want the Chinese to be like our migrants.

China and Russia aren't so buddy buddy and Russia could easily become allied forces again if that all went down, Russia has a lot to worry about in their far east.

Throwing Biden up in front of the world has been amusing, everyone started showing their cards.

China and Russia aren't so buddy buddy

Their interpretation of Marxism differs historically and has unfolded in the past.