Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Russian attack sub discovered just 200 miles from the East Coast and given safe harbor...
Daily Mail ^ | 11/06/12

Posted on 11/06/2012 2:04:52 AM PST by Libloather

Russian attack sub discovered just 200 miles from the East Coast and given safe harbor from Hurricane Sandy
By Daily Mail Reporter
UPDATED: 00:15 EST, 6 November 2012

U.S. defense officials are downplaying the potential threat of a Russian attack sub detected just 200 miles from the East Coast and given safe harbor in Florida during Hurricane Sandy.

The Russian Seirra-2 class submarine was believed to be part of the country's Northern Fleet, outfitted with SS-N-21 anti-submarine warfare missiles, SS-N-16 anti-submarine warfare missiles, and torpedos.

**SNIP**

Officials said the submarine was likely conducting anti-submarine warfare efforts against U.S. ballistic and cruise missile submarines at Kings Bay, Georgia.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: hurricane; russian; sandy; sub
Flexibility...


1 posted on 11/06/2012 2:05:02 AM PST by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Libloather

There’s flexibility and there’s accommodation. Maybe Obama wants to offer the Soviets a base in Florida. Much more convenient than Cuba.

Strange, because I heard that the U.S. Navy sent the fleet in Norfolk out to sea to avoid Sandy. Ships at anchorage bang into things.


2 posted on 11/06/2012 2:12:29 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Obama: Brought to you by the letter "O" and the number 16 trillion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Absurd and silly election time exageration. We are not at war with Russia. 200 miles is international waters. It was a friendly gesture and would be expected to be reciprocated. If a US sub was off the coast of Russia and they refused safe harbor and there was an accident what would we say? By calling it an “attack sub” it is made to sound incendiary, but it isn’t.


3 posted on 11/06/2012 2:18:16 AM PST by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Using profanity gives people who don't want information from you an excuse not to listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
However, the Russian sub was considered safe enough that it was given a safe harbor in Jacksonville, Florida's commercial port during Hurricane Sandy, within listening range of Kings Bay.

I'd expect that the last place you'd go in a nuc boat is into ANY harbor during a storm and especially a harbor full of potential adversaries with cameras and other surveillance equipment. Assuming this isn't a wholesale fabrication, was it possible to get a hotel room in Jacksonville, or did the intelligence agencies have them booked solid?

I imagine it sailing away again covered in everything from graffiti to hull-attached transponders and trailing a bunch of tin cans on strings- the naval equivalent of falling asleep drunk at a rowdy frat party. :-)

4 posted on 11/06/2012 2:23:40 AM PST by Riley (The Fourth Estate is the Fifth Column.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather; TigersEye; Beckwith

Nuclear subs travel so far beneath the sea’s storm surges that they do not have to “port” in any storm.

This article is CRAP. If the sub ported, it certainly was not because of hurrican Sandy.


5 posted on 11/06/2012 2:26:04 AM PST by Candor7 (Obama fascism article: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather; TigersEye; Beckwith

Nuclear subs travel so far beneath the sea’s storm surges that they do not have to “port” in any storm.

This article is CRAP. If the sub ported, it certainly was not because of hurricane Sandy.


6 posted on 11/06/2012 2:26:19 AM PST by Candor7 (Obama fascism article: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Exactly. Since when do subs, which can DIVE, need to be protected from hurricanes?


7 posted on 11/06/2012 2:27:22 AM PST by Amberdawn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Nuclear powered attack submarines have no need to surface into the middle of a hurricane, unless thunseaworthy about them. So, why would a Russian nuclear powered attack submarine need a safe harbor in a U.S. port unless the boat was in distress?


8 posted on 11/06/2012 2:29:26 AM PST by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
OK, I imagine an attack sub is nimble and quick, soooo ... why does it need a safe harbor?

Subs go way down in the ocean, and again I imagine there's not that much hurricane activity (I'm sure there's some .. ) a thousand or more feet below the surface, soooo .. why does it need a safe harbor ?

By what method did we deem it 'safe' and allow it safe harbor ?


So now we have a Russian attack sub, tricked out for war .. invited into the house after they rang the bell and said, "trick or treat"

?????

9 posted on 11/06/2012 2:30:50 AM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit

It is an attack sub, meant to attack other subs and ships, as opposed to a missile boomer. It’s not intended to be incendiary, just descriptive. Attacking things is what warships do and submarines are definitely at the pointy end of the spear.

There are protocols about the distance missile boomers are supposed to keep off shore, a gentleman’s agreement. Their isn’t any evidence that they were in distress. When a Russian freighter was in Boston Harbor, we were not allowed to test certain waveforms for a Navy radar at a land site twenty five miles away. Every Russian ship is an intelligence platform.


10 posted on 11/06/2012 2:32:46 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Obama: Brought to you by the letter "O" and the number 16 trillion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2955363/posts

http://freebeacon.com/russian-subs-skirt-coast/


11 posted on 11/06/2012 2:40:40 AM PST by 1_Rain_Drop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1_Rain_Drop

for cross reference


12 posted on 11/06/2012 2:41:40 AM PST by 1_Rain_Drop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Ridiculous! Subs go under the water for safe refuge in storm. What a bunch of socially promoted, naive, pretenders in DC to allow this move.

Really, in a world of suicide bombings what exactly stops the sub from launching on DC to achieve victory by mugging. MAD? I wouldn’t trust that doctrine anymore with this commie sympathizing Potemkin President and his czars pulling strings.


13 posted on 11/06/2012 2:46:51 AM PST by exPBRrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

‘Hunt for Red October’ or Target Practice?


14 posted on 11/06/2012 2:55:20 AM PST by meyer (Proud member of the 53%.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

We have an Islamic radical in the White House and Russia can’t trust him!


15 posted on 11/06/2012 2:58:41 AM PST by Broker (November... VICTORY or DEATH!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Candor7

>>Nuclear subs travel so far beneath the sea’s storm surges that they do not have to “port” in any storm.

I sailed very smoothly under quite a few storms in my submarining days. Since subs have round bottom, the last place they want be in a storm is on the surface or in port. There is definitely more to this.


16 posted on 11/06/2012 2:59:41 AM PST by Bryanw92 (Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Election monitors. Everyone else seems to think it’s OK to stick their nose into our elections.

Maybe Putin wanted to see what he was getting for his money to support Hussein’s re-election.


17 posted on 11/06/2012 3:03:01 AM PST by listenhillary (Courts, law enforcement, roads and national defense should be the extent of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1_Rain_Drop

The search function doesn’t work for me right now. I gave it an honest shot.


18 posted on 11/06/2012 3:03:20 AM PST by Libloather (The epitome of civility.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Bryanw92

Any thoughts about what it could be?

I have a bad feeling about Obama’s lame-duck period. The Clintons trashed the White House before leaving, but I’m afraid Obama will trash a lot more.


19 posted on 11/06/2012 3:10:45 AM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: exPBRrat
Apparently The Daily Mail completely botched the story.

If you read the other articles, the claim is that a Russian AGI (Intelligence ship)
was given safe harbor, NOT the submarine.

20 posted on 11/06/2012 3:12:35 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Just Russia needing to pick up its spies prior to the administration change!


21 posted on 11/06/2012 3:16:27 AM PST by tired&retired
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tired&retired

“The weather is getting bad here in the USA for them.


22 posted on 11/06/2012 3:20:06 AM PST by tired&retired
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit; Jeff Head
By calling it an “attack sub” it is made to sound incendiary, but it isn’t.

Uh...a Sierra-2 IS an attack sub.

The Russians have figured out that they can cruise the U.S. coastline with impunity.

23 posted on 11/06/2012 3:39:25 AM PST by Timber Rattler (Just say NO! to RINOS and the GOP-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

You did fine :)

The other thread has a different source.


24 posted on 11/06/2012 3:39:59 AM PST by 1_Rain_Drop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler

Two things:

1. The grammar of my sentence makes it seems like I am not aware that the sub is an attack sub due to the placement of “but it isn’t”. What I meant was that it was not incendiary because we are not in a state of conflict with Russia.

2. What would you suggest that the US do when those subs approach the US coast? Should we sink down some depth charges and start a war? Also, isn’t 200 miles the extended economic zone. Anything beyond it - and the article does not indicate that it was closer than this - would still be completely international waters.


25 posted on 11/06/2012 3:44:27 AM PST by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit (Using profanity gives people who don't want information from you an excuse not to listen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Candor7
Nuclear subs travel so far beneath the sea’s storm surges that they do not have to “port” in any storm. This article is CRAP. If the sub ported, it certainly was not because of hurrican Sandy.

Exactly.

26 posted on 11/06/2012 3:55:15 AM PST by bgill (Evil doers are in every corner of our government. Have we passed the point of no return?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
What would you suggest that the US do when those subs approach the US coast? Should we sink down some depth charges and start a war? Also, isn’t 200 miles the extended economic zone. Anything beyond it - and the article does not indicate that it was closer than this - would still be completely international waters.

Your general point is correct, but It's perfectly legal for a warship of any country to be within 200 nautical miles of any other countries' coast. Territorial waters are only 12 nm from the coast.

The entire Russian Navy could be 15 nm from the US coast and it would be perfectly legal, and we certainly wouldn't be sinking anyone.

Soviet vessels (and aircraft) were routinely within 200 nm of the US during the Reagan administration, and we didn't sink a single one of them. And throughout most of the cold war there were Soviet SSBNs with short range missiles on continuous patrol near Bermuda and Hawaii. Indeed, people need to calm down a bit.

27 posted on 11/06/2012 3:57:19 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bgill

If you read the replies and the other links, The Daily Mail embarassingly botched what they copied from the Free Beacon - the claim in the orginal story is that a Russian AGI was in Jacksonville, not a submarine.

And embarassingly and amusingly, both stories managed to misspell “Sierra.”


28 posted on 11/06/2012 3:59:54 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

Well, that’s a world of difference.


29 posted on 11/06/2012 4:03:44 AM PST by bgill (Evil doers are in every corner of our government. Have we passed the point of no return?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

It was given safe harbor?? Baloney.........


30 posted on 11/06/2012 4:04:19 AM PST by Sacajaweau (r)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

Still don’t believe it. All it had to do was travel away from the storm.


31 posted on 11/06/2012 4:06:29 AM PST by Sacajaweau (r)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Candor7

I agree, this article is crap.


32 posted on 11/06/2012 4:26:24 AM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

Well, I’m not endorsing the veracity of any of the story - Bill Gertz is not reliable.

However it’s more plausible that an AGI would seek port than an SSN.

The Russians would let an SSN sink before they requested safe harbor in the US.


33 posted on 11/06/2012 4:27:36 AM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Russian attack sub discovered just 200 miles from the East Coast and given safe harbor...

Safe harbor, a nice warm meal and the democrats sent a bus to drive them all to the nearest voting location.

34 posted on 11/06/2012 4:29:21 AM PST by Caipirabob (Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

Yes, it was an AGI. Still, there is going to be a lot of spooks running around Jacksonville Harbor. As soon as the ship is out of harbor they are going to send divers down to check the hull for all bugs we attached to it, LOL.


35 posted on 11/06/2012 4:29:46 AM PST by RadiationRomeo (Step into my mind and glimpse the madness that is me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

Makes no sense. There is something they are not telling us.

Perhaps there is a really good BBQ joint in Jacksonville.


36 posted on 11/06/2012 4:30:34 AM PST by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
U.S. defense officials are downplaying the potential threat of a Russian attack sub detected just 200 miles from the East Coast and given safe harbor in Florida during Hurricane Sandy.

A submarine seeking safe harbor from a storm at sea? This is BS ... a submarine simply dives to say 450 ft. and cruises along with little or no disturbance from wave action above.

37 posted on 11/06/2012 4:38:08 AM PST by BluH2o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Russia must be convinced that the USA is not their enemy, China is a much greater threat. China is right on their boarder, its over populated, resource hunger and selling their products in the traditional Russian markets.
38 posted on 11/06/2012 4:40:36 AM PST by 2001convSVT (Going Galt as fast as I can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

it was a good gesture. And we get to take lots of close-up pictures. The ocean is not particularly clam under a the surface in a hurricane. Even subs need to get out of the way of big storms. A Soviet captain would have faced loss of command and worse, faced charges of being a spy at home for going into an American port like that.


39 posted on 11/06/2012 4:41:11 AM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINE www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Candor7

I went through a hurricane in a US Submarine at > 400 feet. You slight roll slowly at that depth.


40 posted on 11/06/2012 4:41:25 AM PST by bmwcyle (45% to 47% of American voters are stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Caipirabob

OK, you win for best quip!


41 posted on 11/06/2012 4:42:48 AM PST by Portcall24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
What I meant was that it was not incendiary because we are not in a state of conflict with Russia.

Heh...keep on beliving that.

What would you suggest that the US do when those subs approach the US coast?

Back in the good ol' days of the Cold War, U.S. Navy ASW crews would be pinging the heck out of it and herding it back out to the deep blue ocean, with a Los Angeles-class 688 attack sub in close, quiet pursuit.

42 posted on 11/06/2012 4:52:33 AM PST by Timber Rattler (Just say NO! to RINOS and the GOP-E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle; Candor7

That is interesting. I’m actually a bit surprised that the sea is affected at all at 400 ft.


43 posted on 11/06/2012 11:10:01 AM PST by TigersEye (dishonorabledisclosure.com - OPSEC (give them support))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

We were deeper but I can not say.


44 posted on 11/06/2012 11:47:20 AM PST by bmwcyle (45% to 47% of American voters are stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: bmwcyle

I understand. I find it amazing even for 400 ft. Obviously not a threatening situation for the sub. It makes me wonder about the physics of it. Would it just be a mechanical disturbance from the churning going on above reverberating into the depths or is convection involved from the storm pulling heat from the water? I’m not expecting you to answer that just a rhetorical question.


45 posted on 11/06/2012 11:54:55 AM PST by TigersEye (dishonorabledisclosure.com - OPSEC (give them support))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Libloather

“Russian attack sub...”

If it was French would it be a “retreat sub?”


46 posted on 11/06/2012 12:10:20 PM PST by PLMerite (Shut the Beyotch Down! Burn, baby, burn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PLMerite

Sacrebleu! That’s going to leave a marque.


47 posted on 11/06/2012 12:28:11 PM PST by TigersEye (dishonorabledisclosure.com - OPSEC (give them support))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson