Russia Approaching Canadian Airspace!

[Oleg Bach]

Now I'll have to say yes and no to that. I think as a country we can trust the United States more than we can trust Russia. They may not be our enemies....but they're certainly not our best friends.

Russia is far enough away that if they betray you, they don't have to look you in the face latter...America is close enough they don't want the burden of embarassment that comes with betrayal...can you imagine having to be face to face for eterntity with someone you double crossed - we are to close to America - If we were on the otherside of the world we could be an Iraq...but we look white and like them so maybe not.

[bluegreen]

Russia is far enough away that if they betray you, they don't have to look you in the face latter...America is close enough they don't want the burden of embarassment that comes with betrayal...can you imagine having to be face to face for eterntity with someone you double crossed - we are to close to America - If we were on the otherside of the world we could be an Iraq...but we look white and like them so maybe not.

Hmmm. America doesn't seem to be too embarrassed at standing face to face with Mexico. Incidentally, do you know how the States of Texas and California were founded?

[Oleg Bach]

Hmmm. America doesn't seem to be too embarrassed at standing face to face with Mexico. Incidentally, do you know how the States of Texas and California were founded?

Not quite like the Louisiana purchase from France - but more like the spanish american war and america won and took what is now Texas and Cal. MEXICO is a disgrace...America can look Mexico in the eye and know one thing for certain - that America is but a crook - Mexico is a filthy murdering lieing crook..So America looks like an angel in comparission.. It would be like two prisoners - one convicted of molestation and the other of armed robbery - one is the high arch - the other is the sludge.

[bluegreen]

Not quite like the Louisiana purchase from France - but more like the spanish american war and america won and took what is now Texas and Cal. MEXICO is a disgrace...America can look Mexico in the eye and know one thing for certain - that America is but a crook - Mexico is a filthy murdering lieing crook..So America looks like an angel in comparission.. It would be like two prisoners - one convicted of molestation and the other of armed robbery - one is the high arch - the other is the sludge.

Please, you have to stop being so reticent and shy with your opinions. If you feel something, you should just out and say it.

[wulf42]

The big investment if i were in the Government would be to get fully operational aircraft a small top of the line Fighter squadron whether it be revamped f-18's or the new F-35's that we are supposed to buy and as someone said on here have them stationed up north ,the Russians have to know we mean business and if forced to we will shoot them down! Entering our airpace should be regarded as an attack whether it's two aircraft or hundred....so far the Russians always turn back when we intercept them but Ivan is always looking for weakness and always will if they ever thought our reponse is weak it could be alot more then a couple of Bear's coming over the next time!

Edited March 1, 2009 by wulf42

[Progressive Tory]

Coderre made the comment to the French press. They did not catch his goof. I did. It's an issue because what the Liberal Defence critic says about the matter is quite relevant. As Defence critic, Coderre needs to increase his knowledge of such basic facts as which countries NATO represents.

You translated it yourself but Russia is represented in NATO through the Nato-Russian Council. Take up your beef with NATO. Fortunately most journalists know that so wouldn't question it. However, the more important goof, the one that really did make a difference was MacKay's:

"... what motivated a full day of blather, not just from MacKay, but also from Harper (of course) and a question in the House from Conservative MP Rick Norlock to Laurie Hawn, MacKay's parliamentary secretary? That's right, during question period a Conservative MP asked another Conservative MP a staged question in which the esteemed parliamentary secretary set the questioner right on the matter of Russian bombers invading Canadian airspace.

Parliamentary secretary: "The Russians never entered Canadian airspace. Our fighter pilots met them and turned them around."

Right. And wrong. In that order. Never entered Canadian airspace. Never do. They were met by air interceptors. They turned around of their own accord. Which raises the next question.

MacKay originally said there was one Russian bomber, without mentioning the type. That seemed rather odd since Russian patrols almost always fly in groups of two or more on long range patrols. The standard patrol is two... Later on, MacKay's office, confirmed by NDHQ, said it was two Tu-95MS Bear-H bombers. What a strange detail for a briefed minister to miss. If this was such hot button to push, you'd think he would have that fact on the paper in front of him.

Sure glad MacKay isn't writing Conservative press releases.

This was for show, but at a time when the U.S. is trying to gain support from Russia for the War in Afghanistan, they might want to think or at least get the facts straight before they start shooting their mouths off.

[Progressive Tory]

Entering our airpace should be regarded as an attack whether it's two aircraft or hundred....so far the Russians always turn back when we intercept them but Ivan is always looking for weakness and always will if they ever thought our reponse is weak it could be alot more then a couple of Bear's coming over the next time!

Your own Conservatives are on record in the House of Parliament as saying that the Russians did not enter Canadian Airspace. Are they lying? You tell me.

The big issue is what the hell does Peter MacKay think he's doing?

I hope this is not one of Peter’s games’

Paul Dewar: Well you know, I, all I can say is I hope this is not one of Peter’s games. If, if Mr. MacKay is trying to ramp up the rhetoric to either, you know, promote himself to, you know, get another position in NATO and not doing what he should be doing, and leaving the whole business of diplomacy to the Foreign Affairs Minister. And by the way, right now what we need to see in, in the Arctic is, is cooperation and putting out wedge issues and planting this kind of rhetoric on, in the, in the, you know, atmosphere of what is some very, very serious issues in the Arctic is not helpful.

Question: So do you think he’s taking advantage and those kind of comments can damage Canada-Russia relations?

Paul Dewar: Absolutely. I mean when he (inaudible) a comment like this, and where is the context for this? What is the process, by the way, of Canada-Russian relations? Is this the way he looks at building bridges? Right now we have an opportunity when it comes to the Arctic to build bridges and what it seems Mr. MacKay is he’s playing, you know, a little bit of Russian Roulette here. And if he’s going to continue that, then he has to explain to, I guess his colleague, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, what the plan is because when you start doing this kind of thing, what it means is it can come back and haunt you. So why is the Minister of Defence putting out these comments when it’s clearly something that should be dealt with by our Foreign Affairs Minister.

Question: Why do you think he, why do you think he brought it up?

Paul Dewar: I have no idea what Mr. MacKay was thinking. I think Mr. Harper needs to, you know, question what his Minister of Defence is actually doing. And by, what is the plan here? What is the engagement with, with Russia? And you know, I know in Washington, they’re looking at multilateralism again, thank goodness. I don’t know, is he looking to get behind the defence mechanism in the North? Are we going to be seeing that raise its head again? And is he planting the seeds for that? I don’t know. And Mr. MacKay is the one who has to explain himself. But again, I would turn to Mr. Cannon and say what do you have to say regarding your colleague’s comments and have you talked to the Russians about this issue? This is very serious diplomatic, a very serious diplomatic issue. And I guess I just question why is the Minister of Defence out there planting this rhetoric

"...News flash to Mr. MacKay, we actually are working with all polar countries. We have (inaudible), which is a legal agreement about who owns the North and how it’s going to be organized and sovereignty over the North. Those are the things that are already going on. I don’t think it helps at all to build those bridges when you come out with comments like this. And as I stated before, this is the role for the Foreign Affairs Minister. This is not the role for the Defence Minister. And I think Mr. Harper has to actually have his Minister account for this."

Looks like Harper is losing control. This makes us look like idiots.

[Oleg Bach]

You have to protest..the Russians were testing Obama and Canada. Our military enforcement via our air force worked well - but what good is it if the commander does not support them...but this is just like our poor police officers who bring in the violent offender and the judge releases the nut...frustrates the law enforcers and our military enforcers..there is no law without enforcement - without police the poiticals are a joke. Now the Russians are going to think we are a joke. The administration in Russia is very tough and mafiaish...You at least have to say - don't do that again..but to ignore - is an invitation to be pushed around.

[capricorn]

You translated it yourself

Yes, I always do when I use a French quote, as a courtesy to forum members who don't read French.

but Russia is represented in NATO through the Nato-Russian Council.

That doesn't make Russia a NATO member. Like Coderre, you don't seem to know the difference.

Take up your beef with NATO.

It's more fun here on the forum.

Fortunately most journalists know that so wouldn't question it. However, the more important goof, the one that really did make a difference was MacKay's:

"... what motivated a full day of blather, not just from MacKay, but also from Harper (of course) and a question in the House from Conservative MP Rick Norlock to Laurie Hawn, MacKay's parliamentary secretary? That's right, during question period a Conservative MP asked another Conservative MP a staged question in which the esteemed parliamentary secretary set the questioner right on the matter of Russian bombers invading Canadian airspace.

Parliamentary secretary: "The Russians never entered Canadian airspace. Our fighter pilots met them and turned them around."

Right. And wrong. In that order. Never entered Canadian airspace. Never do. They were met by air interceptors. They turned around of their own accord. Which raises the next question.

MacKay originally said there was one Russian bomber, without mentioning the type. That seemed rather odd since Russian patrols almost always fly in groups of two or more on long range patrols. The standard patrol is two... Later on, MacKay's office, confirmed by NDHQ, said it was two Tu-95MS Bear-H bombers. What a strange detail for a briefed minister to miss. If this was such hot button to push, you'd think he would have that fact on the paper in front of him.

Do you think you could provide a link for what you quote?

Sure glad MacKay isn't writing Conservative press releases.

Hey, that's my line. No harm done. They say that imitation is the highest form of flattery.

This was for show,

Whether it's for show or not is irrelevant. Canadians like to know that their government takes Canada's sovereignty seriously.

but at a time when the U.S. is trying to gain support from Russia for the War in Afghanistan...

Let the US worry about their negotiations with Russia. Our input or lack thereof won't make a damn bit of difference to the outcome of those negotiations. BTW, US military escorts were also in on chasing the Bear away from our airspace. Joining the party didn't seem to worry the US insofar as Afghanistan talks are concerned.

[Oleg Bach]

How can we say our PM takes our sovereignty serioursly? Leading us into Afghanistan because the Americans order us to go - is not very sovereign minded if you ask me.

[punked]

How can we say our PM takes our sovereignty serioursly? Leading us into Afghanistan because the Americans order us to go - is not very sovereign minded if you ask me.

Well let's be fair the Liberals lead us into Afghanistan, Harper just kept his word and kept us there.

[capricorn]

How can we say our PM takes our sovereignty serioursly? Leading us into Afghanistan because the Americans order us to go - is not very sovereign minded if you ask me.

Wrong Oleg. We did not enter Afghanistan because the US told us to. Our participation is the result of a United Nations decision and the mandate for the mission was given to NATO.

[Oleg Bach]

Wrong Oleg. We did not enter Afghanistan because the US told us to. Our participation is the result of a United Nations decision and the mandate for the mission was given to NATO.

You could have said no...what you are saying sounds very fancey and offical and legal..but I would say I am correct. Are you saying that not one request was sent north to Ottawa by the Americans in these regards...that's not probable. As for that UN - they have no authoriship over Canada - you could have said no to the UN also...and lastly what is this NATO buisness..Natos range does not extend as far east as Afghanistan...eastern Europe though to north america - hence the north Atlantic TREATY orgainization...there was no mention when Nato was formed to enter into areas that were not part of the conflict of 39 too 45...Nawh - you are dreaming - at least Chretian rejected the Americans because he is french - where as Harper did what Toronto told him to do and Toronto was told what to do by Washington.

[KingIggy]

Harper is merely a puppet of the Republican party. He was 100% FOR the Iraq invasion initially. I bet Harper is being less militaristic now, because he sees that a vast majority of Canadians are anti-war, and he wants a majority gov't.

Therefore, his apparent diminshed militarism is purely deceptive, manipulative political strategy. He's a snake, and his band of Cons DO believe in exponentially increasing military funding, and launching preemptive wars. They are trigger-happy, paranoid gunslingers.

News to Neo-Cons : Canadians are overwhelmingly anti-war, pro-pot and pro-socialized health care.

Edited March 2, 2009 by KingIggy

[Progressive Tory]

Do you think you could provide a link for what you quote?

Canada 'turns back Russia bomber' Single

Defense Minister Peter MacKay said the bomber never entered Canadian airspace Single

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said yesterday after it was disclosed that two Russian bombers were intercepted Two Bombers

MacKay originally said there was one Russian bomber, without mentioning the type

Initially there was confusion over the number of Russian planes involved — it turned out to be two, not one

“So the statements from Canada’s defence ministry are perplexing to say the least and cannot be called anything other than a farce,” Russia’s Interfax news agency quoted an unnamed source as saying, according to Reuters.

[Progressive Tory]

News to Neo-Cons : Canadians are overwhelmingly anti-war, pro-pot and pro-socialized health care.

I agree and this silly 'the sky is falling' over the Russian planes was an attempt to lure some of the Conservative base that has been slipping away after the 180 the Cons took on the budget and just about everything else in their platform.

It was ridiculous and an attempt to make an international incident over something that is a regular occurence. The Russians call it a farce and I think they're right.

It's interesting that the original headline from National Post was 'Russia, Norad complicate bomber tale with conflicting reports' (google that sentence and see) but it was later changed to Harper warns Russians after two bombers intercepted.

Who says Conservatives control the media?

[Alta4ever]

Harper is merely a puppet of the Republican party. He was 100% FOR the Iraq invasion initially. I bet Harper is being less militaristic now, because he sees that a vast majority of Canadians are anti-war, and he wants a majority gov't.

Therefore, his apparent diminshed militarism is purely deceptive, manipulative political strategy. He's a snake, and his band of Cons DO believe in exponentially increasing military funding, and launching preemptive wars. They are trigger-happy, paranoid gunslingers.

News to Neo-Cons : Canadians are overwhelmingly anti-war, pro-pot and pro-socialized health care.

you are a 100% puppet to the liberal party, no better then a shep in the red flock....baaaaaaaa.

News to you king iggy it id a widely known fact that it is a conservative government in power one that has eceived as much of thee popular vote as Chretien did. You veiw of Canadians seems a little misguided.

[Alta4ever]

I found this whole thread really misguided. Both the Russians and Nato have been baiting eachother since the early 50's.

Our CF-18 fleet is due to for some additions while on paper we have 85 I doubt more then 30 of them are servicable. If we want to beable to police our airspace more are needed, just like we are in need of navy ships. Our military is in deploable shape, but has improved since Stephen Harper was elected to power. The Liberals of the 90's cut and cut and much like pearson, trudeau and mulrooney. Our military needs better equipment and more personal.

Unlike you PT most people understand and do not like or revel in war, but because of human nature it becomes a necessity, this is something the left in this country has trouble grasping you can only talk so long (TALK IS CHEAP), sometimes back u that talk with consequences and action is required and that is what wulf was probably getting at.

As for your thoughts on the defense ministry and you quote, I and most could really careless what crap is spewed from a political office, that fact of the matter is that these two Russian aircraft were identified by Norad an interecpt was preformed and the Russians were turned back, the system works as well today as did 50 years ago and the right people were given the right information to act on it within the miltary structure. Had someone like you ben responsible for this intercept they probably would have over flown the whole country.

Edited March 2, 2009 by Alta4ever

[Progressive Tory]

Had someone like you ben responsible for this intercept they probably would have over flown the whole country.

It is a very common occurance and Conservative hype was unfounded. All countries are trying to work together to sort out the Arctic issue but Canada's claim is low on the list.

The original report said that NORAD did receive notification, and in fact the only way our planes could have got their so fast, is if they were waiting in preparation, based on the info that NORAD provided.

It was all smoke and mirrors.

[Alta4ever]

It is a very common occurance and Conservative hype was unfounded. All countries are trying to work together to sort out the Arctic issue but Canada's claim is low on the list.

The original report said that NORAD did receive notification, and in fact the only way our planes could have got their so fast, is if they were waiting in preparation, based on the info that NORAD provided.

It was all smoke and mirrors.

They were there so quickly because Canada keeps aircraft fuelled and ready to scamble at a moments notice. They are ready alert fighters, it was Norad that actually asigned the task to them not the Canadian command.

Edited March 2, 2009 by Alta4ever

[Progressive Tory]

They were there so quickly because Canada keeps aircraft fuelled and ready to scamble at a moments notice. They are ready alert fighters, it was Norad that actually asigned the task to them not the Canadian command.

Exactly. NORAD were notified that the Russians would be making another routine flight, they let us know and we were on alert. MacKay suggests that it was a clandestine attempt to spy on our polar bears and we sent them running. His version of events does not fit official reports.

Now that America is the new bff of China and the U.S. has put Russia on their 'family and friends' party of five list, because they want access through Russia to assist with Afghanistan, MacKay's blunder could have hurt those relations.

It was a ridiculous attempt at much needed publicity.

[Alta4ever]

Exactly. NORAD were notified that the Russians would be making another routine flight, they let us know and we were on alert. MacKay suggests that it was a clandestine attempt to spy on our polar bears and we sent them running. His version of events does not fit official reports.

Now that America is the new bff of China and the U.S. has put Russia on their 'family and friends' party of five list, because they want access through Russia to assist with Afghanistan, MacKay's blunder could have hurt those relations.

It was a ridiculous attempt at much needed publicity.

These are schedualled routine flights, these flights are the Russians testing North American Airspace! Russian miltary aircraft do not schedual and notify NORAD of their flight paths. NORAD picks up the bombers on radar or other suveleince equipment coming over the poles and then assign an intercept.

Russian Military flights are not filed with NORAD.

[Progressive Tory]

These are schedualled routine flights, these flights are the Russians testing North American Airspace! Russian miltary aircraft do not schedual and notify NORAD of their flight paths. NORAD picks up the bombers on radar or other suveleince equipment coming over the poles and then assign an intercept.

Russian Military flights are not filed with NORAD.

"Moscow hit back at Defence Minister Peter MacKay on Friday, calling the minister's comments about the flight of two Russian bombers a "farce," the Russian news agency Ria Novosti reported Friday. The rhetorical sparring comes after two long-range Russian bombers flew near Canadian airspace in the arctic less than 24 hours before President Barack Obama visited Ottawa on Feb. 19 - an occurrence which MacKay called a "strong coincidence."

But Russia sent a clear response to MacKay's warnings. "The Canadian defense minister's statements concerning the flights of our long-haul aircraft are totally unclear," a Russian military source said Friday, adding that the flight was routine. "The countries adjacent to the flight path had been notified and the planes did not violate the airspace of other countries. In this light the statements by the Canadian Defense Ministry provoke astonishment and can only be called a farce," the source told Ria Novosti.

A Russian air force spokesman said Friday that the flight was planned in advance and was part of routine patrols. Canadian navy Lt. Desmond James, a spokesman at Norad headquarters in Colorado Springs, Colo., told The Canadian Press that the Russians include long-range flights as part of their training. "On our part, we go up to make sure they know that while they are doing their training, we do know that they're there and we are watching ... "

Norad spokesperson Michael Kucharek said it is not atypical to see Russian aircraft engaging in training exercises so close to Canadian airspace. "This has happened quite often, this is a pattern that we generally see through Russian exercises of this type," he told CTV Newsnet on Friday afternoon. He estimated that Norad had seen Russian fighters undertaking similar training exercises at least 20 times "over the course of the last couple of years."

MacKay tried to turn this into an International incident and the original post suggested that we should have shot it down, despite the fact that it never entered our airspace. It was also suggested that if the Conservatives had a majority they would not use reason but automatically shoot it down. I defended them by saying that I hoped the Conservatives were not that stupid, and if they were, thank gawd they don't have a majority.

And for the record, semantics aside:

NORAD initiative intended to strengthen ties with Russia, better fight terrorism

"PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. – The North American Aerospace Defense Command is pursuing an initiative that could build a stronger relationship between the United States, Canada and Russia and better confront the War on Terrorism.

NORAD proposes to share an air surveillance program with Russia along the Bering Strait, the border between Alaska and Siberia. The program would expand a Cooperative Airspace Initiative that currently exists in Eastern Europe and consists of an agreement among NATO countries and Russia."

Someone should tell Mackay that the Cold War is over and he couldn't be a bigger idiot if he tried.

[Smallc]

Our CF-18 fleet is due to for some additions while on paper we have 85 I doubt more then 30 of them are serviceable.

Well, you would be wrong. We have 72 which were just completely redone (8 are in the process of being redone). They are fitted with the latest systems. I remember reading that about half are ready for launch within one hours notice. There are others in mothball if necessary. Our military is not in nearly as deplorable a condition as you seem to think.

Edited March 2, 2009 by Smallc

[Oleg Bach]

Well, you would be wrong. We have 72 which were just completely redone (8 are in the process of being redone). They are fitted with the latest systems. I remember reading that about half are ready for launch within one hours notice. There are others in mothball if necessary. Our military is not in nearly as deplorable a condition as you seem to think.

You have to keep the family club in the closet...trick is to know how to use that stick to ward off intruders - the second trick is being prepared and skilled to the point you NEVER have to resort to using the stick (military)...now that is a real peace keeping force - a force to be reaconed with but never used....force is to guarentee peace - not war.