Posted on 11/19/2014 1:21:32 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Some define "militarism" as when political leaders prefer using military solutions for every problem they face, and two recent events have brought this idea to mind. The first was the decision to station near the shores of Australia practically every vessel of Russia's Pacific Fleet that could make the trip during President Vladimir Putin's attendance at the Group of 20 summit in Brisbane. That deployment included the missile cruiser flagship Varyag, the large anti-submarine ship Marshal Shaposhnikov, the oil tanker Boris Butoma and the salvage tug Foty Krylov.
The second was Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu's words concerning Russia's strategic aviation that he delivered at a recent Defense Ministry meeting. "In the current situation we must use long-range aircraft to provide a military presence in the western Atlantic Ocean and eastern Pacific Ocean, in the waters of the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico, and to conduct aerial reconnaissance activities of foreign armed forces and maritime communications," Shoigu said.
Moscow undoubtedly ordered this strange military "response" to the deep and decidedly non-military problem of Russia's growing international isolation. With more than two dozen of Australia's citizens killed on Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, the Kremlin expected that Putin would face harsh criticism over the Ukraine conflict from other leaders at the summit. And how did Moscow respond? By deploying a naval squadron to the Australian coast and threatening to send strategic aircraft to the "soft underbelly" of the U.S.
None of these escapades makes much sense from a military point of view. Deploying four very old warships to the Australian coast does not exactly impress anyone, and if the U.S. had sent a couple of carrier battle groups to those same waters, the Russian ships would have looked like so many tugboats by comparison.
The same is true of Russian strategic bombers patrolling the Gulf of Mexico. If the Defense Ministry carries out Shoigu's instructions, Russian bombers will begin making regular patrols of the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico. Russian strategic aircraft already fly "around the corner," skirting Scandinavia and darting up to the Faroe Islands where they simulate a cruise missile attack against U.S. territory.
Now Moscow threatens to the do the same in the Caribbean. The problem is that, in contrast with the almost empty skies in the far north, in the south the Russian bombers will have to operate amid extremely heavy air traffic. That greatly increases the likelihood of a wide range of incidents, any one of which could have disastrous consequences.
What's more, it makes little military sense to fly strategic bombers without cover from fighter aircraft: In the event of hostilities, it is a simple matter to shoot them down. Russia would have to create permanent military bases in South America to provide such fighter cover. But even if Russia did manage to give the U.S. the sense of an imminent threat, Washington is more than able to respond. It could launch regular air patrols along the Russian border — not a difficult task considering that the U.S. has exactly twice as many strategic bombers as Russia.
But it seems that Russia's naval deployment to Australian waters and the threat of sending aircraft with nuclear bombs to the Caribbean is more a symbolic move than a military one. Moscow feels it is necessary to remind every last person that Russia is a great military power and that it can "scare the sh-- out of the Americans," as former Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev once said. Well-known pro-Kremlin journalist and Rosneft vice president Mikhail Leontyev said it even more clearly. "That bastard [Australian Prime Minister Tony] Abbot is planning to ask [Putin] some tough questions, eh? How would he like a tough response — a fist in his ugly mug?"
It seems that the minute U.S.-Russian relations sour, it triggers a reflex making Moscow leaders want to send bombers off to Florida or some such place. Offended that Washington sent a ship laden with humanitarian aid to Georgia immediately after the Russia-Georgia War in 2008, Moscow sent two strategic bombers to Venezuela. Both now and in 2008, Washington did not tremble in terror, but coolly responded by saying that such statements do not demonstrate a responsible approach to international security.
According to reports from Brisbane, there was no shortage of tough questions directed at Putin. It seems the only one who did not "have his turn at" the Russian president was the koala bear Putin posed with for photographs. It was no coincidence that he left the summit even before the end of the planned activities. The presence of Russian warships off the Australian coast did nothing to improve the credibility of the Russian president. Even the 16 Vulkan anti-ship missile systems on board the Varyag cruiser did not help.
How many carriers does Russia have again?
I no longer care what Putin does. It is as bad or worse here in our own country.
We have already been taken over. Who gives a rats ass about Ukraine?
Carriers?
One.
I no longer care about your ignorant opinion regarding our mass-murdering terrorist Russian enemies. Stick your head back in the sand.
One, built by Ukraine, and they never leave port without a tug boat in case it breaks down.
"In December 1991, she sailed from the Black Sea to join the Northern Fleet. Only from 1993 on did she receive aircraft."
"In December 1991, she sailed from the Black Sea to join the Northern Fleet. Only from 1993 on did she receive aircraft"
"At the end of 1997 she remained immobilized in a Northern Fleet shipyard, awaiting funding for major repairs, which were halted when they were only 20% complete. The overhaul was completed in July 1998, and the ship returned to active service in the Northern fleet on 3 November 1998. "
"Kuznetsov apparently remained in port for about two years before preparing for another Mediterranean deployment scheduled for the winter of 2000–2001. This deployment was cancelled due to the loss of the nuclear-powered submarine Kursk."
"In late 2003 and early 2004, Kuznetsov went to sea for inspection and trials. During the 2005 exercise, one of her Su-33 fighters was involved in an accident, and fell from the carrier into the Atlantic Ocean."
"On 27 September 2006 it was announced that Admiral Kuznetsov will return to service in the Northern Fleet by the end of the year. The ship will undergo another modernization refit, in an attempt to correct some of her many technical issues."
"On 5 December 2008 the aircraft carrier and several other vessels left Severomorsk heading for the Atlantic on a tour which was announced would be lasting several months and which would include combat training including joint drills with Russia's Black Sea Fleet and visits to several ports in the Mediterranean. On this tour while the Admiral Kuznetsov anchored off Turkey on 7 January 2009 a small fire broke out on the ship. One crew member was killed by carbon monoxide poisoning. The fire was caused by a short-circuit.
On 16 February 2009, Admiral Kuznetsov, along with other Russian naval vessels was involved in a large oil spill while she refuelled off the south coast of Ireland."
"Although financial and technical problems have resulted in limited operations for the ship, it is expected that Admiral Kuznetsov will remain in active duty until at least 2030."
Ditto. Putin, ISIS, China, Iran... it’s all so laughably pointless when your own country is dead and gone, replaced by a lawless, third-world dictatorship. And wallowing in a culture of sheer depravity.
I can walk and chew gum at the same time. Pat Buchanan calls me a neocon for it.
They were going to buy two helicopter carriers from the French but stupid Putin screwed up that deal with his pointless invasion of Ukraine. Maybe he can buy some carriers from his Chinese comrades. snicker.
Take your damn gum and choke on it. This is your usual remark. You suck!
You are stoopid.
Obama is going to be a bad memory but KGB Putin will still be dictator for life.
Once patriotic Christian Conservatives take our country back, what excuse will you have to badmouth the USA then?
Take it easy.
LOL, not after tomorrow night idiot.
I see you are another typical product of the public school system.
If you hate the USA and love Russia so much, then why don’t you leave the USA and go to Russia to kiss Russian ass where you belong? We won’t miss you here at all. We are too busy taking our country back to worry about whining losers like you.
shaddup, you are a dolt.
If America is bound and determined to legalize such depraved insanity as fag-marriage, and the courts force my state to adopt it, I would just as soon see the American republic collapse and die. I won’t lift a finger in its defense.
If you are dedicated to the destruction and collapse of the Republic, then might I suggest that you have accidentally wandered into the wrong place. You have FREEREPUBLIC.COM confused with something else.
This guy has been over the top in his nastiness for a very long time. I cannot believe you would back him up!
Did you tell him to ease up? Probably not. I did not resort to the foul mouth that he did.
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.