bush_cheney2004 Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 No sorry, Cory and Trevor but both of you are wrong. Neither side is EVER going to be absolutely sure what the other sides response would be to any act of aggression. All thats required is a reasonable suspicion that response might come in the form of a nuclear strike to make MAD work. Nonsense....you clearly have no idea of what the concept means or how it has evolved, including arms limitation treaties that actually enhanced MAD with several measures. Nope thats not true at all. Its impossible to ever be "absolutely sure" what the other side will do. Just the presense of nuclear weapons themselves is enough to set up a MAD dynamic between two countries, regardless of their stated policies or intentions. Wrong again...the presense [sic] of a few nuclear warheads in the DPRK does not constitute a credible MAD dynamic for the United States, and it has been specifically singled out for a nuclear attack under certain conditions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted August 5, 2010 Report Share Posted August 5, 2010 Wrong again...the presense [sic] of a few nuclear warheads in the DPRK does not constitute a credible MAD dynamic for the United States, and it has been specifically singled out for a nuclear attack under certain conditions. What's madder still is that the presence [sic] has and still does constitute an incredible opportunity to use fear as a pretense to redirect ridiculous gobs of public money and resources towards the purchase of conventional weapons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 17, 2010 Report Share Posted August 17, 2010 So you're saying that the average Saudi citizen isn't mired in poverty? The average Saud has a standard of living near that of the average european...on top of wages which pay well, they ofetn get free housing, education, healthcare and gas for less than 25 cents a litre Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 18, 2010 Report Share Posted August 18, 2010 Looks like Ivan is up to his old tricks again, the world economy goes bad the first thing that happens is that countries start looking for resources in places that don t belong to them. If one of these Tu-95's ("Bear") or Tu-160's enters our airspace we should bring down with a sidewinder....send a message to Russia they would do the same if we entered their airspace. These occurences is exactly why we need a majority Conservative government,somebody that will rearm this country against a threat that never really went away just subsided for awhile. Ivan will always be a threat....we just have to build an armed force to challenge it. Good luck with that. Last country that tried that was Georgia - it looks two little bits smaller on the map now Besides our Big Brother to the South will probably take whatever they believe is theirs without Canada being able to do much about it as we depend on them for our national defence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 26, 2010 Report Share Posted August 26, 2010 (edited) Two more Tu-95s... http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/08/25/cf-18s-russians-airspace.html The Tu-95 Bear is similar to the B-52 Stratofortress in its capabilities. Edited August 26, 2010 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted August 26, 2010 Report Share Posted August 26, 2010 Do we approach Russian airspace? Should we be chiding allies of our's that do so given we seem to think it's such an unfriendly thing to do or is it okay when our side does it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted August 26, 2010 Report Share Posted August 26, 2010 Yeah right... They're lauching a full scale attack with two bombers... That little game has been played for decades... They test our (Canada and U.S.) defense, get inside our airspace just long enough for our fighters to show up, then turn back. And we do the same. when have the Russians ever entered our airspace?...it's just a routine training flight they're not even spying they have satellites that do that far better than any plane could...and just what secret info do we have on the barren wastelands...the Tories are just sensationalizing harmless training flights for the banjo picking crowd of Alberta...Stephan Harper standing on guard protecting our ice flows ...but when it comes to actually declaring our sovereignty of the NWP in regards to the USA contrary claims Harper has nothing to say... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted August 26, 2010 Report Share Posted August 26, 2010 I don't really see how supply ships are going to scare the Russians though. What I'd like to see is a squadron of F18s on permanent station in the arctic. which is logical but pointless at the same time as they protect what from whom? Russia despite what the tories claim are not a threat or an enemy...we have nothing that they need or don't already have more of themselves so for what reason would the russians attack us? the russians actually recognize our territorial claims the USA does not, claims over the resources on the seafloor of the arctic are being mediated in a civilized manner...the only threat to our soveriegnty comes from our allies, does anyone think the tories would send in CF-18s to threaten american ships entering the NWP without permission?... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted August 26, 2010 Report Share Posted August 26, 2010 does anyone think the tories would send in CF-18s to threaten american ships entering the NWP without permission?... A ha ha ha ha ha! Now that's funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 26, 2010 Report Share Posted August 26, 2010 when have the Russians ever entered our airspace?...it's just a routine training flight they're not even spying they have satellites that do that far better than any plane could...and just what secret info do we have on the barren wastelands...the Tories are just sensationalizing harmless training flights for the banjo picking crowd of Alberta...Stephan Harper standing on guard protecting our ice flows ...but when it comes to actually declaring our sovereignty of the NWP in regards to the USA contrary claims Harper has nothing to say... Re: spy satellites. Russia can no longer afford an aggressive spy-sat program (Kobalt). The usual schedule was around 8 launches a year. Now they're lucky to get one per year up...this year's launch went up in April and has several months life-span. Re: Tu-95 flights. They are not training flights but a revival of the old Cold War bomber patrols started in 2007. Reconnaissance (spying) is the primary mission. I believe the CAF have a military exercise going on up north at the moment which is probably what the Russians were taking a boo at. Tu-95s, Tu-160s et al are a bit of an issue as they are often armed with nuclear weapons (Raduga Kh-55 and such)...just in case. So if we view it that way...yeah...they are a bit of a problem. Headlines could have read "Nuclear armed aircraft approach Canada" but that might get folks more upset than needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted August 26, 2010 Report Share Posted August 26, 2010 (edited) Simply stupid. Oh my gosh he walked next to me, ahh the world is ending. They didn't enter Canadian Airspace, what is the point here? Oh no.. planes are flying in international air or their own air.. oh no. this is a GOOD thing, because it means the CF can actually respond in the event of a rogue. The US use to overfly Russia - .. it still overflys china.. etc.. Canada is allied with US so said... hello? Who is the offensive one here. Plus russia has stealth systems, if it didn't want to be seen it could just use them. Russia has far more advanced attack technologies than 50 year old bear bombers. Be concerned when people report them in Northern Ontario instead of just saying they see a jet up there. That is when the CF has severe grounds for concern. I'm guesssing 95% of Canadians wouldn't even know what one looked like in the air. Edited August 26, 2010 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 26, 2010 Report Share Posted August 26, 2010 Simply stupid. Oh my gosh he walked next to me, ahh the world is ending. They didn't enter Canadian Airspace, what is the point here? Oh no.. planes are flying in international air or their own air.. oh no. this is a GOOD thing, because it means the CF can actually respond in the event of a rogue. The US use to overfly Russia - .. it still overflys china.. etc.. Canada is allied with US so said... hello? Who is the offensive one here. Plus russia has stealth systems, if it didn't want to be seen it could just use them. Russia has far more advanced attack technologies than 50 year old bear bombers. Well they have the Tu-160...Bears are like B-52s. Old...sure. You can mention that as it blows you to kingdom come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 Re: spy satellites. Russia can no longer afford an aggressive spy-sat program (Kobalt). The usual schedule was around 8 launches a year. Now they're lucky to get one per year up...this year's launch went up in April and has several months life-span. nor do they need to, Canada has no top secret programs to spy on...plus they can easily do it with in our borders using private planes or driving right up to any sight they please, we're an open book with nothing to hideRe: Tu-95 flights.They are not training flights but a revival of the old Cold War bomber patrols started in 2007. Reconnaissance (spying) is the primary mission. I believe the CAF have a military exercise going on up north at the moment which is probably what the Russians were taking a boo at. Resolute Bay is well out of the range of any spy plane in international air space, a tanker refueling excersise and a mock oil spill, ya really top secret stuff....Tu-95s, Tu-160s et al are a bit of an issue as they are often armed with nuclear weapons (Raduga Kh-55 and such)...just in case. So if we view it that way...yeah...they are a bit of a problem. Headlines could have read "Nuclear armed aircraft approach Canada" but that might get folks more upset than needed.we're going to be taken out by a surprise attack with two old bombers for what reason???? tell us honestly you believe the Russians would enter a MAD situation for what resources they already have more of than we do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YEGmann Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 Bears are like B-52s. Old...sure. You can mention that as it blows you to kingdom come. The Russian Bears - they are called Tu-95MS - in no way are old like B-52. In fact they are newer than our CF-18 (CF188 to be precise). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 The Russian Bears - they are called Tu-95MS - in no way are old like B-52. In fact they are newer than our CF-18 (CF188 to be precise). Some are, some aren't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 The Russian Bears - they are called Tu-95MS - in no way are old like B-52. In fact they are newer than our CF-18 (CF188 to be precise). Old design, pardon: 1954 was its first flight. The airframe is still essentially a very modified Tu-4 Bull (B-29). As aircraft go, I'm a huge fan. Saw the airliner version once (Tu-114). Still waiting to see a real one up close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 (edited) nor do they need to, Canada has no top secret programs to spy on...plus they can easily do it with in our borders using private planes or driving right up to any sight they please, we're an open book with nothing to hide You're privy to what the Canadian Armed Forces are doing? Do they call you up first or something? Resolute Bay is well out of the range of any spy plane in international air space, a tanker refueling excersise and a mock oil spill, ya really top secret stuff.... The Tu-95 doesn't have to fly over a given target to spy on us. we're going to be taken out by a surprise attack with two old bombers for what reason???? tell us honestly you believe the Russians would enter a MAD situation for what resources they already have more of than we do? Well, you can worry about that. What's more likely is a Tu-95 crashing in Canada for various reasons ranging from bird strikes to engine fires. You certainly can't say it'll never happen as an American B-36 did just that after ejecting its weapon off the coast of British Columbia. What's left of that unpitted bomb is still down there and the bomber crash site a popular hiking destination. Edited August 27, 2010 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 we're going to be taken out by a surprise attack with two old bombers for what reason???? tell us honestly you believe the Russians would enter a MAD situation for what resources they already have more of than we do? Thats how you explain it by putting your head in the sand and convince your self there is nothing to these flights...with the size of Russia why can't these supposed "training flights be held well within Russian airspace"...why risk provoking anything, with North America..or maybe there is more to it..maybe they are testing our response time, tracking where we refuel, which routes our fighters take, do we scramble any other support aircraft, what ground support stations are active during the interception.... This info would be why, they would risk flying so close to our air space, it's this info that would be crictical in event of a real attack...As for using the bears to accomplish this, can you imigine the panick that 2 or more jet powered TU 160 flew the same route in a third of the time...shit our airforce would blow a gasket, along with most of NORAD...i think you'd find more than just 2 F-18 doing the interception.... Your pretty confident that the US would use Nuk wpns to defend our northern areas.... conventional forces perhaps, but stepping it up to nuk wpns....somehow i don't think so.... not for some ice, and resources not available all year round.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 You're privy to what the Canadian Armed Forces are doing? Do they call you up first or something? we don't do little significant weapon research and if we did it's done in the industrial south, we're of zero military importance...a puny training excersie in the arctic is of no significance...you're trying to make our military relavance something it is not...The Tu-95 doesn't have to fly over a given target to spy on us.other than intercept radio signals that's all they can do...they can and likely do any their spying from inside the country...Well, you can worry about that. What's more likely is a Tu-95 crashing in Canada for various reasons ranging from bird strikes to engine fires. You certainly can't say it'll never happen as an American B-36 did just that after ejecting its weapon off the coast of British Columbia. What's left of that unpitted bomb is still down there and the bomber crash site a popular hiking destination.so now you're concern is for military crashes why not concern for the same from US armed planes flying over Canada? or US nuclear submarines cruising through our arctic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 The Russian flights are probes. They gauge and measure our response times to their flights. They fly different routes and at differnt times and see how long it takes for us to repsond, where we respond from...how long we remain on station. As our planes get older, that job gets harder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 Thats how you explain it by putting your head in the sand and convince your self there is nothing to these flights...with the size of Russia why can't these supposed "training flights be held well within Russian airspace"...why risk provoking anything, with North America..or maybe there is more to it..maybe they are testing our response time, tracking where we refuel, which routes our fighters take, do we scramble any other support aircraft, what ground support stations are active during the interception....the same reason the USA does it, navigation training, no landmarks at day, at night...our Navy has no need to leave our costal waters yet they go on long range excerises why? practise...,despite any training we do we are insignifcant... our airforce could be swept aside buy the Russians in first day of action if they should so wish...a dozen cruise missile hits on our paltry airbases and our f-18 response is eliminated without the loss of a single russian plane. This info would be why, they would risk flying so close to our air space, it's this info that would be crictical in event of a real attack...As for using the bears to accomplish this, can you imigine the panick that 2 or more jet powered TU 160 flew the same route in a third of the time...shit our airforce would blow a gasket, along with most of NORAD...i think you'd find more than just 2 F-18 doing the interception....which confirms they're training runs..Your pretty confident that the US would use Nuk wpns to defend our northern areas.... conventional forces perhaps, but stepping it up to nuk wpns....somehow i don't think so.... not for some ice, and resources not available all year round....you're pretty confident the Russians are convinced there wouldn't be a nuclear response, the premiss by everyone here is these old Russian bombers are armed with Nukes and they're going to use them in a sneak attack to steal our ice flows DogOnPorch claims they have nukes on board, for what possible reason would the Russians send old planes on their own to spy on ice flows while armed with nukes. it's absurd....our own Deparment of Defence sees no threats to our arctic, our airforce intercepting russian planes is a training excersise just as the russians conducting their own...the Russians are such a threat that we have joint military excersises with them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 Again, the Tories are playing politics with this and making things up, but what's new? The Canadians jets had to come from Albeta so they already knew they about the Russians plane heading our way, But nothing happened as usual. Remember, Harris Ontario gov't member Snoblen, he said where there isn't a crisis, make one and that's exactly what this Tory government is all about ...making crisis. http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/08/25/cf-18s-russians-airspace.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 (edited) As our planes get older, that job gets harder. It's not actually that difficult with the updated jets at the time. The commander or NORAD says they are far more modern now than much of what the US has devoted to NORAD (other than the F-22). In 10 years, it'll be time for a new plane, though. Edited August 27, 2010 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 Not to mention the fact that a lot of people don't pay tax in Russia And this is why they 'paid' for it? If no taxes, how do you pay for a military? This is a statement which is certainly up for debate. There really should not be a debate about it. If the North West Passage opens up, which is claimed to be Canadian Sovereign territory, then we need to be able to protect that. We have the second largest land mass for a country on the planet with a population that ranks #36. We are already at a disatvatage because of our small population for the size Canada is. How do you expect to even exercise any means of protecting Canadian soil with the even the current military. The world is going to change a lot in the next 20-30 years. Would you rather be prepared for it? I am a kind of a pacifist myself, but I do understand the need to at least have a standing military to protect what we claim is ours. If we can't do that, then what is the point of even having a military? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted August 27, 2010 Report Share Posted August 27, 2010 as an American B-36 did just that after ejecting its weapon off the coast of British Columbia. So all Canada needs is a pit and a salvage crew to have a nuclear bomb? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.