This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Russia Sends Its Only Aircraft Carrier To Syria, Signals It Is Just Getting Started
As should be abundantly clear by now, The Kremlinis adopting a “slightly” different strategy when it comes to combatting terror in the Mid-East than that adopted by the US and its Western and regional allies.
The strategy of the US and its allies seems to go something like this: 1) covertly arm and train groups who you know might ultimately become terrorists because arming and training these groups may be a way to destabilize unfriendly regimes, 2) wait for blowback, 3) launch serious effort to combat terror if unfriendly regime has been “successfully” replaced by puppet government, or launch half-hearted effort to combat terror if situation still fluid and regime still clings to power.
Obviously, that strategy is prone to all types of problems, and sensing that the US and its allies might have finally met their foreign policy blunder Waterloo in Syria, Russia decided to call everyone’s bluff by launching a real war on terror. Of course, this war conveniently restores the regime of one of Moscow’s allies, but in the end the result is the same: anyone who is a terrorist and who is also fighting Assad in Syria is in for big trouble because Russia is using this is as an opportunity to reassert itself on the world stage and also to fire up a long-dormant military juggernaut.
Now, on the heels of hundreds of airstrikes accompanied by dramatic video footage as well as cruise missile attacks launched from Russian warships in the Caspian, The Kremlin is sending its lone heavy aircraft carrier into the fight. This is only the ship's sixth deployment in history.
Here’s more from Flashnord (Google translated):
Heavy aircraft carrier (heavy aircraft), "Admiral Kuznetsov" is Russia's only aircraft carrier, the weekend will go from Murmansk to the shores of Syria, said FlashNord source in the Northern Fleet command.
"The cruiser dock repair completed until the end of the week go to the coast of Syria, where he joined the operation to destroy the group" Islamic State "," - a spokesman said.
According to him, from May to August this year was held aircraft carrier dock repair 82 Shipyard in Roslyakovo (Murmansk region). Then, on a regular docked in Murmansk, he walked up to the restoration of full combat readiness.
Since September 30, Russia carries out air operations in Syria with the aim of destroying the objects of the "Islamic state."
Here are some images:
Here's a bit of color via Reuters from earlier this year. Notably, the Kuznetsov isn't known for being in particularly great working order which probably makes the chances of some kind of accident that much greater:
When the Soviet Union launched Kuznetsov in 1985, it was a major technical accomplishment for the then-superpower. Moscow began assembling Varyag, a sister ship of Kuznetsov, around the same time. It also started work on a true full-size carrier, as big as anything the United States builds.
But the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991 abruptly halted the carrier program.
Russia was left with Kuznetsov as its sole flattop and, deprived of funds and Ukraine’s assistance, has struggled to keep the vessel in working condition. Since the ship was commissioned into frontline service in the early 1990s, Kuznetsov has deployed just five times. Each deployment, lasting between three and six months, saw the flattop sail from its home port in northern Russia around Europe and into the Mediterranean as a show of force and to demonstrate support for Russia’s allies in the region, including Syria.
»
- 157078 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Hope they didn't forget the tugboats...this thing breaks down...ALOT
And you know this, HOW? What are your sources?
He heard it on CNN of course.
I'll just leave this here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEt41bYQBgE
When Russia fired cruise missiles from the Caspian, the aircraft carrier Theodore R. bugged out of the Persian gulf. Flat tops against the latest missile tech and subs are sitting ducks.
Adios 063...your days are numbered....Iran is going to accidentally sink you.
nice ramp boat vlad.
The Soviets never referred to the Kunetzov as an aircraft carrier, but as a heavy battle cruiser.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuznetsov-class_aircraft_carrier
There is no question that America has far superior aircraft carriers to anything that the former soviet union or russia has ever produced, or likely will produce. Unlike Amerika, Russia does not need to project naval power across the Pacific. Instead, Russia is a land power, and has focused upon countering naval power via superior subs and missle tech,
The US has 19. 19 PEOPLE!!!! You're attacked because you're free and prosperous not because of the Military industrial Complex. Sarc, bitch.
Make NO mistake about it -->
*
Putin Goes Ballistic In Syria, Obliterates The USA’s Secret ‘Mideast Strategy’http://stateofthenation2012.com/?p=23524
What can the USA possibly do when ISIS is a Zio-Anglo-American creation?
make "greater Israel" the size of Texas. that's what.
thats what they want..........
More systems testing.
A newer Trabant.
Putin's a dolt. His country is utterly broke. So what does he do? He starts a war with Islam. What a moron.
Stuff written by people living in the dark.
Somebody drank too much of Peter Popoff's "Miracle Spring Water."
Peter Popoff Sent Me Miracle Spring Dirt!
Certainly the US has more than 19 PEOPLE!!!
Peoples. The PC policed term is peoples, peoples.
Stan Marsh: I've been PC for two weeks now...
They have 10.
19 expensive ($6B each) easy targets (except for 3rd World militaries) with loads of servicemen and women (>6000 in each for Nimitz class)
explain away the cost and casualties when a few of them sink
(a pro imperialist would say, think of the destruction each of them can do on innocent civilians of a targeted for looting country)
Thanks for my hourly Krugman moment.
...and the Admiral Kuznetsov is unsinkable. Thanks for clarifying.
The MIC is plenty evil, but according to the Navy we only have 11 in operation:
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/ships/carriers/cv-list.asp
The Ronald Reagan finally got all the cesium-137 cleaned off its hull (from Fukushima) and they replaced all those pesky cancer-ridden service men (http://www.globalresearch.ca/cover-up-us-navy-sailors-disappear-as-gover...).
This is because aircraft carriers are banned from passing through the Bosporus under the 1936 Montreux Convention and otherwise it could never enter the Black Sea. So they call it a "battlecruiser that carries planes" or the like.
I doubt that Tongstun. Check your maps of the MENA.
Comment from the Reuters Link:
Russia doesn’t need aircraft carriers like the US military does. Aircraft carriers are used to “project power” around the globe, which is Pentagon-speak for “threaten or attack foreign countries who don’t submit to the rule of the US oligarchy.”
The US government seeks continual warfare and world domination to satisfy wealthy special interests such as the “defense” manufacturing lobby, the Israel lobby, and the oil lobby. In contrast, Russia merely seems to wish to defend its own territory and vital interests. (The USSR was another matter. It was more like the modern US: an aggressive empire seeking to expand its control over vast regions of the planet.) The conflict in the Ukraine, which was initiated by a US-sponsored coup intended to install another puppet government on Russia’s borders, is an illustration of this.
Ever since the development of nuclear weapons and ICBMs to deliver them, the true national defense of countries like Russia and the US has rested on nuclear deterrence. Russia still has more than enough nukes to blow the US off the map, which is why you’re not likely to see the US launch a direct military attack on Russia any time soon. No, we’ll keep using our aircraft carriers and other outrageously expensive assets to bully small, defenseless countries.
Factor in the DF-21D (and similar tech) and it's questionable if carriers are anywhere as useful as they used to be, though stage one of a world war would be to take out all satellites...
They never were except for a short period.
Glory hound admirals are not going to have their 'flag' flying from a pigboat.
I truly love carriers, but not recognizing their shortfalls is a big mistake.
i think thats why the Russians stopped at one, you can learn a lot in their development,to
use against them.
I don't know about you folks but I am pretty tired of the global military conflicts the USA seems to deem necessary to keep us taxpayers free.
...or were we freeing Syrians this time around?
My antenna goes up whenever some government sock puppet uses the word "FREE." "Free" Syrian Army, "Free" Day Care...
Well, B Hussein O is sending troops to Cameroon to free black people from other black people who may or may not worship a 7th century barbarian, so more "free" is coming.
1200 CARRIER KILLER MISSILES AT THE COST OF ONE AIRCRAFT CARRIER. WELCOME TO WORLD OF ASYMMETRIC WARFARE.
Yes, and I guess you're welcoming us to the world of ALLCAPS too. Should be fun.
Haters gonna hate
Peeps with thoughts that are organized use Capitols and punctuation in a way that does not display them as complete cretins.
They're called capitals. Lmfao.
Wacked my funny bone with that one FM! Had to log in to upvote.
Let morans be
Yes, they use Washington, London, Paris, Berlin and Moscow. And not to forget Peking and Tokyo too!
You really cannot get it through your head that the is no "the" before Ukraine.
Let's this.
I went to the France.
I see the Germany is being invaded.
Last night the Greece rejected auterity.
Sounds pretty stupid when someone prefaces the name of a country with "the", does it not?
And it that vein, of NYC's five boroughs, only the Bronx is prefaced with 'the'.
"Sounds pretty stupid when someone prefaces the name of a country with "the", does it not?"
You mean like, THE United States, THE United Kingdom, or THE Netherlands?
Yeah.... stupid.
"Sounds pretty stupid when someone prefaces the name of a country with "the", does it not?"
You mean like, THE United States, THE United Kingdom, or THE Netherlands?
Yeah.... stupid.
He actually meant that countries prefaced with 'the' are stupid.
The usage dates from the times when Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union and before that of the Russian Empire. The word "Ukraine" means "borderland" in Russian/Ukrainian so when you say "the Ukraine" you're saying "the borderland". Old habits die slow.
In 2015 there are two kinds of naval vessals, Submarines and targets
Exactly right. Latest diesel/electric and air independent engines are quieter than nukes and just one fish gets through the destroyer screen and now we have 18...
" Flat tops against the latest missile tech and subs are sitting ducks."
Nice huge surface for the new generation of supersonic incoming missiles to hit.
Something to bear in mind --
Aircraft carriers such as this without a catapult system lack the length to launch aircraft that can be launched from Latakita, even with its elevated bow.
I would guess after we dropped all those (lets be honest) anti-aircraft missles to the ISIS ehrm Al Qaeda damn, the "moderate rebels" -- I would imagine that some will think that Russia is going to establish a "no-fly" zone over Syria with this.
This is tactically bad -- as the first to establish a No-Fly zone in a proxy war has to enforce it, else look like a pussy. If Russia establishes a No-Fly Zone over Syria -- the US and UK will be breaching it constantly just to tell Putin "I dare you." If we establish a "no-fly zone" over Syria, Putin will be breaching it constantly to tell DC "I dare you." If anyone shoots -- WWIII -- if no one does -- whomever doesn't will have huge egg on their face.
The only reason for this move if not for a no-fly zone --
a) A show of force, which I think is unlikely. Russia has one flat top, the US has like 14. Pointless as Russia definitely has the short end of the stick. Shit, if the UK and the French showed up with their carriers in a show of force, we have something stupid like 20 aircraft carrier battle groups in the Med at one time. Show of force likely isn't it.
b) My bet -- Russia needs more aircraft for CAS as the Syrians, Iranians and Chinese are about to wipe ISIS and the US's "moderate" assets off the map, putting the ball in the US's court to distinguish between Syrian, ISIS, Chinese & Iranian soldiers from 50,000 feet on a 21" LED some 10,000 kilometers away. If the Chinese black dots look like Syrian black dots -- shit would get real. If the US bombs a Chinese convoy -- all hell will break lose. This would establish a no-fly zone over Syria without having to Establish one, and still putting the ball in the West's court to fire the first shot, or have 4 years and billions of FIAT liquified in a matter of weeks.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/610286/China-preparing-to-team-up-wi...
We'll see if the Chinese *actually* send their flat top to the Med as well, as was reported last week. If they do, not only does this shit show have the potential to get explosive more quickly then it already is, but for those religious -- it also starts fitting nicely into the Book of Revelation.
The Chinese sending a carrier group to the Med would be a significant risk in itself. Two accesses to the Med, Suez Canal and Straights of Gibralter, I can't imagine NATO not trying to block a Chinese carrier group's access.
My guess is that the Russians are using the carrier to show their resolve/committment.
Block a foreign navy's ship into the Med in a time of "peace" would be an act of war in & of itself.
I agree. Doesn't mean the crazy bastards wouldn't try it. :/
I'd like to correct a misstatement from my original post (because I am a fucking moron)
It isn't CAS -- its CGS. Combat air support is aircraft supporting aircraft, and absent this thing going WWIII that isn't necessary.
CGS is combat ground support and is aircraft supporting ground assets, which is much more likely.
My bad.
I think it is much simpler than you are making it.
Battle cruiser, show of force, armament resupply, troops, aircraft. Think of it as more like a US Marine expeditionary Force, might be loaded with helos to support ground missions.
armament resupply, troops, aircraft
Yes, the LAAS are not able to bring enough and bring it quick enough.
None of this Floating Yuan or Rubble expenditures have any combat experience.
High level systems testing.
"I think it is much simpler than you are making it."
Yes, it's a dick waving contest...
With Obama's labia waving in the wind no dick contest necessary.
CAS = Close Air Support, not Combat Air Support. It is in used when aircraft support troops in contact. CAP = Combat Air Patrol, where the air-to-air shooters do their business. Problem now is all sides flying can do both on the same mission...
Gilnut,
"My guess is that the Russians are using the carrier to show their resolve/committment."
I am in complete agreement with you on that statement.
Russia likes to put on a good show.
It´s for CAS for sure, and having a back up airbase is a huge asset. Putin has gone all in because he must win. His biggest enemy is time.
Also, you have to consider that the Russians are out of practice at carrier ops. Sending the carrier is both a show of commitment and a chance to run their naval crews through real operations
I think you are spot on. The Kaliber launch from the Caspian was cool but completely unnecessary except as a demo. (My view is that it was multifold, a customer preso for export missiles as well as a display of tech capability to the West.)
This isn't likely to really be needed from a military planning view but there isn't a better way to tune up your capabilities that to run these ops.
It also showed another thing.
Russians can mount cruise missiles on rowboats if they choose to.
For such a dogmatic peoples, they are always full of surprises.
They have their very own way of doing things, and our 'in the box' military thinkers are
sure to get surprised in many unpleasant ways if this escalates.
"Russians can mount cruise missiles on rowboats if they choose to."
Even more importantly, they can modify standard commercial containers to hold a battery of 4 missiles (from memory) per container. Good luck countering that potential threat.
Your forgetting about the big sub and the Moskva parked off the coast. Russias flagship for a reason. It has lots of nice unused toys including 64 SAM missles> What kind? Who knows but Putin is just smirking.
Putin said he was going to wrap this little project up in about 3 months. So far he looks to be on schedule.
This video at the D day celebration tells you all you need to know about what Putin actually thinks about the jivin majic negro. Its classic, LOL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqAGjFCKaAQ
UPDATE: false alarm. Old russian carrier will not go to Syria
http://sputniknews.com/world/20151014/1028520336/russia-syria-aircraft-c...
UPDATE: false alarm. Old russian carrier will not go to Syria
http://sputniknews.com/world/20151014/1028520336/russia-syria-aircraft-c...
Durn!
yes, just game out the scenarios if they took it down to the eastern Med and parked it in Gaza harbor. That's it, just a port call. I venture to say that Russia would win the hearts and minds of every moderate Muslim on the planet. It would certainly expand their latitude and ease of movement. As long as it was properly insured, of course. Upgrade on Lloyd's dime.
The current UK carrier is far superior to this rust bucket, although the one technical hitch is we have no planes to go on it, although on the bright side and in light of our current foreign policy, it stops us from doing anything dumb with it.
As for the condition of the Russian carrier, I have seen pictures (freely posted elsewhere on the net, arrse has a few threads there), showing details onboard this ship, a few tell tale ones are obvious, like the wiper blades on the windows are moved onto the metalwork showing that they never move, overall it looks old and quite primitive even for 1980.
But there is a mention about the main generator for heating being broken, thus it has no heating and therefore most of the toilets do not work due to frozen piping, also it is said apparently getting assigned to sail on it is not an honour. Whatever the truth in it, the ship is fairly old, and definitely not in great shape, it is curious they are bothering with it really since they have airstrips they can use already for operations in Syria (and they're doing a great job so far, much to the dismay of the Saudi Mullers), so this is purely for propoganda value.
I'd love to see photos of the interior.
Makes you think that the Russians wouldn't mind if it got sunk.
"Remember the Maine!".
Those poor fucking sailors. No heat, no crappers and now this.
Its a sitting duck, and probably crewed by some of Putins less than favorite people.
It would be a double shame to lose both a worthless rust bucket and a couple of hundred unwanteds to a stray missile.
Perhaps the ruskies are going to pull a false flag of their own...?
wow 20 carriers!, i thin k china might get tempted at that target, after all its not cities or anything
I believe anti air missiles were what was dropped. But Russia had to have seen the air group as they flew over to make the drop and then saw the drop occur. Yet they did not send a cruise missile over to wipe out those critical missiles. It was a daring move and Russia blinked on that one.
No matter what they will continue to push the boundry and if not stopped will reinforce the insurgents in such a way to cause losses for Russia. Stand up now and stop it (or promptly target the supplies) or have a bigger mess later. Russia should have had a cruise missile on it's way ASAP or should have taken the brave step and flown a couple jets gets over and bombed the supplies while ignoring any planes. Maybe Russia has the ability to accurately track the movement of those weapons and thus are not worried about timing their destruction.
A no fly zone could be established in segments. Use Syria's govt to make it legit by international law and declare any attempts by outsiders to do likewise as void. But Russia appears to be playing is safer and doing a progressive tide type movement and then later a no fly I would think.
At one time Syria had a large army and a motivated public. It the actions being taken now were taken then much of Syria might not have been destroyed and Syria would have been able to supply a large army in the effort. The men saw Syria was not sufficiently assisted and chose to leave and the Syrian army suffered much greater losses than required.
Blinked my ass. The air drop was in NE Syria, an area controlled by Kurds, leading to this response from Erdogan.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-10-14/us-arming-kurdish-rebels-syria-unacceptable-turkey-warns
It's a nice way to ship a few aircraft and show the flag. Spare parts and aircraft maintenance as well. Also, the Russian admirals probably want some action too.
"If the US bombs a Chinese convoy -- all hell will break lose."
Wars cost money... unless you have a few hundred million troops who don't eat much. But then you have to figure out how to get them to the combat theater alive... tough assignment for china since they are so far broke, it's not even funny. Yeah... they've been hoarding gold (supposedly), but it would take a LOT of gold to buy the stuff they'd need to be part of a truly global conflict. I'm not thinking china will be part of it except for maybe sending ground troops overland (West then South - ie follow Ghengis Khan's route.)
>we have something stupid like 20 aircraft carrier battle groups in the Med at one time
Standard Disclaimer: Krugman would be shouting from the rooftops that we need to drop nukes in the Med to destroy that terrorist body of water.
Difficult to accomplpish with only 10 carriers, but voted up for a good Krugman reference.
No need to show off more than one or two Flattops when you've shown the World that your Cruise Missiles - which you just launched from your "Home Turf and Surf" have the Legs to cover the entire Theatre of Operations in question.
Need I mention Blackjacks and Bears?
China should throw their hat in the ring, let everyone know they're serious about securing their energy supplies for the future.
If they're going to have the PetroYuan they have to show people they stand behind it and it isn't merely a paper tiger.
In addition, it's actually better for Russia not to announce a No Fly Zone, just let the US/UK/France et al keep flying over Syria. The West can't very well be handing out SAMs to every terrorist in Syria if they've got their own planes flying into harms way.
As long as the US/UK/France keep flying over Syria the Russians don't have to worry too much about all their birds being shot down.
If the West announces a unilateral campaign from the Syrian air campaign, you just know that's a signal to start handing out SAMs.
I think this song represents present-day Russia much better than the old communist one. Although I hope very much that the last words will not come true: "Angels are trumpeting for the last battle. For the faith, for the tzar, go, do not be afraid." This is a modern day Russian war song, from 2001:-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-m01lI-5kaI
That's cool. ;) I leave this here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umEDct4BoGc
Russia sends their only begotten aircraft carrier? I'm not very good at this but lemme guess:
ISIS looks underneath the WWF wrestling ring and finds an anti-aircraft-carrier-submarine! Goodness gracious! How did that get there? Who leaves such dangerous things just lying around??? Who knows what might happen now? What was a WWF wrestling ring doing in Syria???
And then things get serious ...
Like I said, I'm not very good at this, so appropriate corrections and embellishments are welcome!
The russians defaulted on two froggy boats.
http://www.ibtimes.com/france-russia-mistral-ships-update-malaysia-buy-a...
Default.
You keep using that word. That word does not mean what you think it means.
I'm not too bad with language precision,
If the former Soviet was able to pay, Sarkozy would have allowed delivery.
The boats weren't built on spec.
OK. So you are self-described precise on language and therefore you are just simply ignorant on facts. Ignorance can be cured so you have that going for you.
The Russians pre-paid for the carriers. They were not delivered from political pressure and it had nothing to do with finance. The French cut a check back to the Russians for about a Billion or so to cover payment and expenses. AFAIK, the Russians waived the penalty clauses to avoid a court fight and to get their cash back.
Nope.
Your lack of how large MIC projects are funded and delivered is not surprising.
Between countries , it is even more "political".
No one keeps up.
I agree that politics has a factor, mainly in this case, for political cover.
I do not use the word Default often, in fact this was the first time in memory, but to boil it down to it's essence, that is what the former Soviet did.
The problem is that the distortion of semantics - a clear sign of trying to distort the meaning of the word. In your posts, this phenomenon is pronounced. And you with the knowledge sparsely.
Mistrals were prepaid as mentioned commenter previous. Not possible to default on prepayment.
Difficult with a moron, but I can try again: re-read that above written. If you do not understand - read again, squalor brainless.
Consider me brainless then, a blind spot in your knowledge.
Ahh yeah. Whatever.
So, according to you, the Russians defaulted on payment so the French not only didn't send the carriers but refunded a Billion on the defaulted payment.
I retract my statement that you are merely ignorant. You have sunk to the moron level. That, unfortunately, is not curable.
You seem to have forgotten already, so let me clarify a few things for you. The US did not want France selling these Mistrals to Russia, and imposed a ten billion dollar fine on a French bank the day Russian sailors arrived in Nazarre for training. France was stuck between a rock and a hard place, and ultimately followed American orders, selling the ships to Egypt instead.
Within two years Sisi will sell them to Russia. Problem solved. Hope that clarifies a few things for you.
Even better, the Saudis actually paid for the Mistrals on Egypt's behalf.
I guess we picked the wrong time to pull the USS Roosevelt out of the Persian Gulf for maintenance.
According to NBC: USS Roosevelt — a massive, nuclear-powered aircraft carrier — has had a central role in the fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria since August 2014, when the U.S.-led coalition started bombing the Islamist extremists.
Looks like the central role against ISIS isn't so key anymore, with the Russians doing in a few weeks that which we couldn't do in a year.
Looks like those Russian cruise missles from the Caspian Sea can hit anywhere in the Persian Gulf.
The same sources that produce Ukrainian youtubes used by the USA as proof!
History shows Russia does not need aricraft carriers to beat their enemies --- just patience and long ice cold winters.
Russia does not need to project power outside of it's near abroad. The USSA has 19 aircraft carriers to spread freedom and democracy (tm).
I count 10 Nimitz class carriers which are the true US aircraft carriers. Are you including the large deck gator-freighers too? I can see including those but just wanted to clarify.
No, there are nine assault carriers that have a compliment of 20 or so Harriers and maybe Hornets and a number of helos for USMC land assault.
These are such ships as America, Iwo Jima, Makin, etc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasp-class_amphibious_assault_ship
You can't run hornets off of those. They are the large-deck amphib ships. They have docks in them too for carrying landing craft. These are known as "gator-freighters" in the Navy. Because of the Harriers I could see counting them but they are not the same as the 10 Nimitz class ships.
https://www.stratfor.com/sites/default/files/styles/stratfor_full/public...
Stratfor map of US Navy locations.
"--- just patience and long ice cold winters."
and mud
Ukraine news is an anti-Russian lie fest. I can barely force myself to watch those idiots spew. Credibility is not their first concern. They are actually worse than CNN.
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/05/27/russias-navy-more-rust-...
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8df_1431792202
http://the-naval-report.blogspot.com/2014/04/admiral-kuznetsov-leaves-me...
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/u-s-navy-feared-crappy-russian-aircraft...
http://russia-insider.com/en/military/russia-has-badass-navy/ri402
Google it kids...Well known fact the ship is a POS..
If this ship is such a white elephant (am I allowed to apply such a racist adjective as 'white' to an elephant?) then perhaps Putin will plant a false flag on it. Let the ship sink and pin blame on the US or NATO or Israel. Whee, spinning conspiracy theories can be such fun!
At the least, it will make a lovely artifical reef...
While I like Putin, the above articles are good reads.
Lots of anti-Russian propaganda in there, but it does illustrate over and over (which is factually correct) -- what kind of moron bases their naval capabilities off of foreign produced-ships.
Makes me scratch my head.
Needless to say -- an American aircraft carrier shadowing the Russian aircraft carrier in case it sank, is such and utter bullshit -- I literally laughed out loud.
I believe the Mistral deal reflected political dealings that has relatively little to do with the actual helicopter carriers. There is no question that the US Naval ability to project force is far superior to anything Russia and China will develop within the next 20 years. Unfortunately, with their advanced missile tech, they can take out carriers. Moreover, if Russia and China 'control' Asia, the ME and Europe, the rest of the world really doesn't matter except as threats.
"Lots of anti-Russian propaganda in there, but it does illustrate over and over (which is factually correct) -- what kind of moron bases their naval capabilities off of foreign produced-ships."
Dunno, HT - Rookies in a specific Genre of Naval Warfare?
RUS's a bit of a newcomer when it comes to Amphib Assault Warfare, so they had the French Design and incorporate a Platform for them. RUS does sell Ships, Subs, Aircraft, and Missile Systems to other countries.
They did a questionable job of refurbishing and selling its old Heavy Cruiser/Carrier to IND, though - so bad that the INDians are thinking about working with the USA for their NextGen Carriers. .
This matters because the terrorists they are fighting have a navy?
Big fucking deal, kid.
So the US doesn't have a Navy, or you are just confused as to who ISIS works for?
http://sputniknews.com/world/20151014/1028520336/russia-syria-aircraft-c...
Russia denying that it is heading Syria unless syria has moved it's location South. :p
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/your-aircraft-carrier-is-a-piece-of-cra...
hahahahah! freedumb fanboys shagging at it again. This whole talk of being "ahead" is a feel good moment and reassurance for muritards. Their carrier get things done for them. End of story . I can see why you upvoted yourself , believing in your own crap is a tough thing to appreciate.
fact, deal with it
Lol whatever helps you sleep. No wonder why these western military fanboys keep strutting like pigeons. War is Boring blog has little credibility when it comes to Russia, their facts about Russian Military is as poor as US stink tanks. I follow their military so i know the facts instead of fanboys peddle frustration. :D ( Self appreciation , i like that.)
LL, just another troll. "28 weeks and 6 days"! They come crawling out of nowhere when things get dicey.
LL, just another troll. "28 weeks and 6 days"! They come crawling out of nowhere when things get dicey.
The US has spent the last 14 years blowing up one country after another, justifying the slaughter because they were fighting "terrorists" in their "war on terror". But when ISIS appears, apparently an entire army of Islamic fundamentalists who commit wholesale murder, the US runs 25,000 sorties in 2 years that accomplish nothing . . . while none of the western presstitutes bother to ask how ISIS is supplied (despite German photos of daily caravans of supplies going across the Turkish border, a NATO member state).
Russia understands that all these "terrorists" have been trained and supplied by the US, and that their real target is Russia (which has a very large muslim population that could be stirred up). Putin went to the UN and told the world that Russia would no longer tolerate this threat, and 2 days later the Russians started destroying ISIS, as well as the rest of the terrorists we are supporting in Syria. In a couple weeks, they have totally kicked ass and ISIS is on the run, with Iranian troops now moving in to help.
The neocons are twisitng in the wind trying to explain how the US can support the "moderate" terrorists, which include Al-Queada! Remember, the guys who they blamed for blowing up the Twin Towers? The guys they used as justification for destroying the US Consititution! Have people here become so stupid that they can't see the absolute hypocrisy here?
So the choice now is to let the Russians clean house or start World War 3, the war the neocons have always wanted.
Yes. Putin is ready for WWIII. After years of backing the bear into a corner, it has now come out swinging. Never back a wild animal into a corner.
whatever... show me a bear, I'll show you a bear rug...
Hey!
years ago 'reasonable" middle-East governments did the math and decided selling their oil in dollar-denominated reserves ceased to be logical. Sometime around the year 2000.
The result has been a forced alliance between Fed.Gov and "unreasonable" insane radical extremists-who quickly realized that all they need to do to keep Uncle Sam on their side was promise him they would continue oil sales in dollars.
Unfortunatley their insanity has proven contagious
Designed by skate boarders.
the fact that you have more down than up votes for stating this plain fact tells me A LOT about the third world ankle biters and shameless fifth column subversives that troll this site... they're all fucking clueless... the USA could resurrect its WW2 designs and put them to sea and _still_ field better carrier fleets than most nations could ever dream of, let alone the Nimitz and Ford classes out there today... I laugh heartily in the face of _any_ Russian or Chinese advocate who thinks otherwise, if they do it's pure delusion mixed with a very healthy dose of raw unadulterated jealousy...
holy fuck, the USA has forgotten more than any other nation knows about building carrier fleets... this fucking piece of shit fossil is supposed to impress people? the only thing we're impressed with is you managed to keep it floating while its flotilla of ocean going tugs stands by for the next dead-in-the-water breakdown... pathetic, just like the nation that fields it while swinging from the nuts of its second-rate Bond villain that it calls a leader... you people make me laugh, I can't wait until the USA empire grinds your bones into dust... it is inevitable...
due to geography, surely the soviets didn't really need carriers.
Exactly. Russia comprising 1/7th of all the landmass in the world, connecting Asia to Europe, is an army based land power.
Geography indeed, but also climate and military posture. Climate means the whole northern coast of Russia is better defended by subs than carriers; and military posture means Russia is set up for defending its territory, not for projecting its military power thousands of miles from its borders.
Probably at least two weeks before it could get there, maybe a lot longer given the amout of stores etc needed to be loaded.
Russia will only send it if it really needs to, they want an absolutly minimum chance of egg on face if they are to be compared with the very slick and practiced US/NATO carrier operations.
Also if they can get supplies into Syria they really don't need it, especially if they get access to another airfield.
Just curious, how many carriers does NATO have?
- Ned
From my count, 10 US Nimitz class and 1 French. The old UK carriers are scrapped and 2 are under construction. I don't count amphib carriers although they could probably be counted into the mix as well if you wanted to stretch the definitions.
That's where I'm coming from as well. CdG has as good a maintenance record as Kudnetzov. We can't see any NATO carriers. And I'm with you on not counting the gators in this type of discussion.
- Ned
Clearly Syria needs to be blockaded to stop weapons from reaching ISIS.
"Clearly Syria needs to be blockaded to stop weapons from reaching ISIS." -Quinvarius @8:17
Indeed. As stated yesterday, the 50 ton air drop of ammunition by the US, can be seen as an opportunity, if appropriate countermeasures and resources are applied in a clever manner.
There is no reason that surveillance drones cannot monitor and their operators relay the intel associated with US drops. These drops can then be either confiscated -- Thanks, Uncle Sam! -- or destroyed with a rocket from an attack drone.
The best way to force people back to the negotiating table, if they are inclined at all, is to bring an updated version of Carrot & Stick, with the "Negotiating Table vs. Shock & Awe therapy":
"Fighting is futile. You will be killed. Your arms supplies and trade routes will be cut off. Prepare to negotiate in a civil manner, or remain miserable and perish."
Obutter tells Vlad he will be more flexible in his third term
Didn't that clown just say 'give me a few more years in Syria'??? God forbid. We could take that literally, try him for treason and then hand him to Assad.
This is getting real now. Obama has apparently launched 25,000 airstrikes against ISIS with no effect. Putin has proven to be far more effective in less than a few hundred strikes
I guess trying to flatten ISIS with crates of supplies is less effective than using live explosives.
WTF is Obama doing in Syria? Dropping white Nike sneakers to ISIS? Or care packages for ISIS?
“We have very few specifics which could explain what the US is exactly doing in Syria and why the results of so many combat sorties are so insignificant,”Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told Russian channel NTV. “With, as far as I know, 25,000 sorties they [US-led air campaign] could have smashed the entire [country of] Syria into smithereens,”the minister noted.
US refuses to meet Russian delegation to coordinate anti-terrorist actions in Syria
http://www.sott.net/article/303919-US-refuses-to-meet-Russian-delegation...
The US plan in Syria you ask? Is to inflict maximum suffering on the Syrian people so that they will end up overthrowing Assad. So far it has not worked. The suffering has been top notch but the overthrow part is just not materializing.
The Syrians, being attacked by US proxies, rush to areas safeguarded by Assad's Syrian troops.
Assad is safeguarding their lives, the US is destroying their lives, they've seen what the US did to Iraq (before, during and after the regime change), not hard to choose, Assad and Putin all the way.
Ha, touche'
Americans are cowboys. Have you seen the US military GoPro videos in Afghanistan? They literally just fire off into the air at nothing. YeeeHaw - grenade launchers, .50 caliber, M16s all firing into the air in random directions. Exactly the same behaviour as the Jihadis firing their AK47s randomly into the air.
Sometimes you just have to blaze.
Especially if some MIC CEO needs a new yacht. What was the average ammo use per kill in Afghanistan? Something like 1 million rounds per man?