Home » Aviation » Russian Fighter Buzzes U.S. Destroyer in Black Sea


Russian Fighter Buzzes U.S. Destroyer in Black Sea

By:
Published: • Updated:
Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) transits the Dardanelles en route to the Black Sea. US Navy Photo

Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) transits the Dardanelles en route to the Black Sea. US Navy Photo

A Russian fighter spent 90 minutes making low-level passes near a U.S. ballistic missile defense (BMD) guided missile destroyer on station in the Black Sea, a defense official told USNI News on Monday.

The incident occurred on Saturday when a Sukhoi SU-24 Fencer flew as close as 1,000 yards from USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) at an altitude of only 500 feet, the official said.

The fighter made up to 12 passes on the destroyer after not responding to several attempts by the ship to contact the Fencer via radio. There was a second SU-24 in the region but did not engage Cook.

“This provocative and unprofessional Russian action is inconsistent with international protocols and previous agreements on the professional interaction between our militaries,” Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren told reporters on Monday.
“We’ve seen the Russians conduct themselves unprofessionally and in violation of international norms in Ukraine now for several months, and … these continued acts of provocation and unprofessionalism do nothing to help de-escalate the situation in Ukraine, which is what we’ve called on the Russians to do.”

A Russian Sukhoi SU-24 Fencer.

A Russian Sukhoi SU-24 Fencer.

Cook entered the Black Sea on Thursday on a presence mission to reassure U.S. allies flowing the Russian invasion of Crimea.

The Fencer fly-by follows accusations from Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov the U.S. had violated the so-called 1936 Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits.

Montreux rules call for warships from countries with out a coast on the Black Sea to depart after 21 days.

Cook is armed with a BMD variant of the Aegis air and missile defense combat system. The ship is designed to intercept and destroy rogue ballistic missiles as well as aircraft.

Donald Cook is more than capable of defending itself against two Su-24s,” Warren said.

  • Nat Helms

    Who would have thought it? Nothing provocative about sending a US destroyer into the Black Sea. ! I’m sure we would welcome a Russian Black Fleet visit to Lake Superior with equal enthusiasm..

    • Marcd30319

      First, the Montreux Convention allows non-Black Sea nations to operate two warships in the Black Sea at any given time. Turkey is the gatekeeper of the Dardanelles and the Bosporus, and the Black Sea is not Russia’s Mare Nostrum. Period.

      Second, between 1972 and 1990, the United States and the Soviet Union followed the Incident at Sea Agreement (INCSEA) to avoid the very kind of incidents that occurred in this article.

      Third, the INCSEA was superseded by the Dangerous Military Activities Agreement (PDMA), and this is still in force.

      Fourth, given the invasion if Crimea and the ongoing aggression against the Ukraine by Putin’s Russia, having a U.S. destroyer exercising out right to navigate in the Black Sea is hardly a provocative action.

      • Steve

        Crimea was not ‘invaded’.

        • Marcd30319

          Welcome to the Neville Chamberlain Memorial Society of Appeasement, Steve. Nat Helm will demonstrate the secret handshake and share the society’s style guide on how to rationalize the entire Russian foreign policy away.

          This book was brought to you by the same people who told useful idiots that the Soviet Union was just a poor country many times invaded in the past and therefore its territorial expansion was because it wanted to have safe borders. Naturally, to become absolutely secure, the USSR had to take over the entire world.

          Just the record, Putin’s Russia invaded Crimea in contravention of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances guaranteeing the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine which the Russian Federation signed.

        • Marcd30319

          No, Crimea was “conquered.”

          BTW – In 1994, the Russian Federation signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances that guaranteed the territorial integrity of Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons. That includes the Crimea.

          • Steve

            Seems to me the People voted pretty overwhelmingly for their own agreement and the People always retain the right of veto. Yankees are always waving around treaties when it suits them and conveniently ignoring them when that suits them. It was ‘conquered’ via Democracy. You should be happy that Justice was served.

          • Marcd30319

            First, in 1991, the Ukrainian people voted by over 90 percent for their independence from the old USSR.

            Now, if you are talking about that trumped-up plebiscite in the Crimea, that was no more democratic that the recent “re-election” of Kim Jong-un in North Korea.

            The rest of your post is slanderous, and an insult to the brave men and women of the United States sea services.

        • Ilja Shebalin

          Crimea was invaded. When in the beginning of March various reports began pop-up about unidentified armed men with vehicles that supposedly were part of Russian Armed Forces Putin denied his connection and called them “self-defense forces”. These men were quickly nicknamed “pink elephants” that is wordplay of the original literal “green men” (after the color of the uniform) – the synonym for the illegal presence of a military unit of a foreign country on the territory of other country. During the following month and a half Russian authorities were dismissing any claims of this fact despite sporadic confessions made on several occasions by some of these men about national affiliation of their units recorded by russian and ukrainian journalists. A journalist of “Novaya Gazeta” even talked to some of the “fighters” in the town of Kramatorsk, occupied by “the insurgents” of self-proclaimed Donetsk Peolples’ Republic (the East Ukraine and one of them said: “c’mon, enough of this comedy: we’re spetznaz of GRU”. On April 17 during his “traditional” online Questions-Answers marathon Putin finally OPENLY admitted these units to be the part of the Russian Armed Forces, marched into Crimea “to ensure safety of voting during plebiscite”. Isn’t this rationale cool?

          • Marcd30319

            Thank you, Ilja. Given conditions for the press in Russia, it’s good the truth is getting told to the people.

    • Marcd30319

      First, the Montreux Convention allows non-Black Sea nations to operate two warships in the Black Sea at any given time. Turkey is the gatekeeper of the Dardanelles and the Bosporus, and the Black Sea is not Russia’s Mare Nostrum. Period.

      Second, between 1972 and 1990, the United States and the Soviet Union followed the Incident at Sea Agreement (INCSEA) to avoid the very kind of incidents that occurred in this article.

      Third, the INCSEA was superseded by the Dangerous Military Activities Agreement (PDMA), and this is still in force.

      Fourth, given the invasion if Crimea and the ongoing aggression against the Ukraine by Putin’s Russia, having a U.S. destroyer exercising outr right to navigate in the Black Sea is hardly a provocative action.

      • Nat Helms

        Never can understand folks that want to go to war. Used to be that way when I was a teenager,,, until my buddies started getting turned into meat chunks. Maybe the Ukrainians will form a foreign brigade and you can put your life where your mouth is. To bad you can’t ask Napoleon or Hitler – or the Poles – how it worked out for them. Twenty five million Russians died… you want to go against that?

        • Marcd30319

          Like you said elsewhere, you “… haven’t a clue.”

          BTW – I pay membership dues to the Naval Institute to post here. Are you a USNI member? If not, then get off this blog and keep your clap-trap confined to the Daily Kos or Huffington Post.

          • Nat Helms

            Google me.

          • Marcd30319

            Mr. Nathaniel R Helms, you may be an “Author at Naval Institute Press” but I have been a USNI member since 1974.

            As a journalist, you know what research entails, and stating you “… haven’t a clue” doesn’t pass muster at a city desk or an editorial conference.

            If you want to learn about INCSEA and PDMA, read Cold War at Sea. It was a Naval Institute Press book.

          • Nat Helms

            Dear Mr. Marccd30319. Good for you… a worthy endeavor.
            Proceedings is a wonderful magazine and the mission of USNI is a noble one… but so what? You are advocating war in a place we have no viable interest. This isn’t a Third world target in waiting. We don’t have a single tank in Europe. The Air Force is still waiting for the F-35. The Navy is scrambling for money and planes and ships while the Russians are building up like there is no tomorrow… and they have good stuff. You apparently missed some of these developments during your admirable membership. Treaties don’t mean squat, never have. Sovereignty is owned by the sword. .

          • Marcd30319

            Mr. Helms, where did I advocate going to war?

            Or more precisely, what is the problem of a U.S. warship peacefully operating in recognized international water in accordance with the Montreux Convention and showing the showing the flag?

            What is remarkable is that you did not merely mis-characterize what I said, but what I wrote. Anyone reading my posts can see this.

            You say that we have no vital interest. This isn’t just about Ukraine, Crimea, Georgia, the South China Sea, etc. This is about the post-Cold War international system that is being undermined.

            Look at post-Napoleon Europe. After constant upheaval and warfare going back to the fall of the western Roman empire, a new international system was devised at the Congress of Vienna. It was not perfect but it worked. For the next century, Europe was remarkably peaceful, and British seapower was its guarantor. With the 20th century, that system broken down, and two world wars were fought.

            After World War 2, the United States and its Navy assume the role of the guarantor from the British. This international system was also not perfect, with the USSR and turmoil in the former European colonies, but it did maintain a Cold Peace

            But with the end of that Cold Peace, a new international system was forged with the United States continuing as its guarantor. It wasn’t perfect, with the Kosovo crisis, but it did provide for the peaceful independence of sovereignty of the former Soviet republics of the non-defunct USSR.

            The one constant thread is the need to back up the international through a strong, respected guarantor to that international system. No one said it better than George Washington who noted in 1790:

            “To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.”

            That is why Georgia and Crimea matters. This is why I prefer an international system defined by law and defended by United Sates, and not one defined by naked aggression and supra-nationalism of Vladimir Putin.

            In closing, I read the Naval Institute Proceedings and Naval History cover-to-cover, but thanks for that heads-up about recent developmenst.

          • Ilja Shebalin

            Perfectly stated, however in Post-Napoleon, wasn’t Russian Empire the guarantor of the Viennese system on the continent?

          • Marcd30319

            Sorry, Ilja, but with its overseas colonies, the European system was primarily maritime in nature, and Great Britain had the biggest navy, as well as the biggest economy and banking system during the Industrial Revolution.

          • Ilja Shebalin

            1. No need to excuse :)

            2. What do you mean by “the European system was primarily maritime in nature”? System of what? If you meant “economically” then it may be the truth, though it was a long ago when I used to read a lot of historical literature, but from the political and military viewpoint the largest contribution to defeat of France on the continent in 1812 – 14 belonged to Russian ground combat Forces and the anti-Napoleonic coalition got its second chance only when Napoleon was crushed in Russia. So the driving force ON THE CONTINENT behind ground operations on the part of that coalition was Russia. All diplomatic intricacies aside, as far as I remember (if I’m not missing smth), the Russian position during the Viennese congress regarding the role of post-Napoleon France and conditions of occupation was considered (especially by the French) to be of prime importance as well as constructing the new order. Also, the foundation for the Viennese system in the first 30 years was laid with creating so called Holy Alliance of Russia, Austria and Prussia. So, you’re right that UK were the strongest sea power, but at that time (up to the Crimea war of 1853 – 56) the major ground power in the continental Europe used to be Russia.

            3.And, by the way, you’re saying that the Viennese system lasted till WW I: there’re many chronologic conceptions on that matter, but I though that the Viennese system existed till the other major congress – the Berlin congress in 1877-78.

            Anyway, thanks for civilized discussion.

          • Marcd30319

            I base my arguments on
            Mayday: The Decline of American Naval Supremacy by Seth Cropsey, as well as the writing of Alfred Thayer Mahan. During the Napoleonic wars, seapower shaped the land war, particularly after the Battle of Trafalgar removed the threat of invasion of Great Britain.

            The era between Napoleon’s final defeat and the First World War has be called Pax Britannica because the Royal Navy kept the sea lanes open, and the rise of the great colonial empires.

            Russian was a great power, with a huge army, but like the United States, Russia’s focus was on internal improvements. Consequently, both Russia and the United States are primarily continental powers during this period.

          • Ilja Shebalin

            Ok, now I got it and yeah I knew of Pax Britannica but never quite understood what it meant :) I’ll try to find and read these books, thanks for sharing their titles.

          • Marcd30319

            Iija, history is rarely simple but always fascinating.

            The system that the Congress of Vienna stared to breakdown with the unification of German, the sacking of Bismarck by Kaiser Wilhelm, the forging of competing alliances between the great European powers, and the introduction of the gig-gun dreadnought battleships that ironically sparked a naval arms race. Throw a burning match into the tender-box of the Balkans, and you got yourself World War One.

            You did a good summary of the post-WW1 era, and this supra-nationalist mood didn’t help keep the peace.

            Thanks for sharing and Happy Easter.

          • Ilja Shebalin

            You too, Marc.

  • Kevin W. Woodruff

    Just as a note, I think “cook” should be capitalized and italicized since it is the name of the ship. Additionally, I think “acquisitions” should be “accusations.”

  • muzzleloader

    If the Russians try that again, I would hope that the captain has the chutzpah to lock his fire control radar on the offending Russky.

  • Chris Kennedy

    What are “rouge ballistic missiles?”

    • Marcd30319

      ICBMs possessing a rosy disposition?

      • Marcd30319

        Or weapons of mass destruction seen through rose-color glass like this current administration does to Iran.

  • Nat Helms

    Hi Marcd30319. Good day, sir. Thanks for info. Can’t argue about the treaties… haven’t a clue. Still wondering about Russian “invasion!” But it doesn’t take a State Department treaty wienie to realize that we are flaunting our “prestige” and naval “power” in Putin’s face. And to say the Black Sea is not Russia’s private ocean is simply ignoring reality. Do you really think the Turks or NATO is ready to go head to head with the Russians just because the Bosporus and Dardanelles is ostensibly Turkish? The Black Sea is traditionally Russian, culturally Russian and politically locked in the Russian sphere of influence… and it spent hundreds of thousands of lives and great treasure to keep it so during WWII. No doubt Eastern Ukraine will be next and the US can’t do more than make a symbolic gesture that pointlessly puts American lives and treasure at risk over symbolism. More stupid, ill conceived crap… extension of bomb now, think later… unless of course the US intends to provoke the Russians to keep alive the boogie man myth so we can justify rearming for WWIII.

    • Marcd30319

      First, Putin’s Russia invaded Crimea in contravention of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances guaranteeing the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine which the Russian Federation signed. By doing so, Putin undermines the entire post-Cold War international system of secure borders and territorial integrity. Putin is the provocateur and Russia is the aggressor.

      Second, the Black Sea is an international body of water like the Gulf of Mexico. The Balck Sea was never Russia’s mare nostrum. The U.S. has a perfect right to operate its warships in the Black Sea consistent with the Montreux Convention. It is called freedom of navigation (FON), and we did so during the Cold War through Operation Silver Fox because if you do not exercise your FON rights, then you set a set a precedent and abrogate your FON rights in that body of water.

      Third, naval presence and freedom of navigation exercises are not merely symbolic but an assertion of American rights and a reminder that aggression will be be ignored.

      Fourth, during the Cold War, useful idiots falsely asserted the Soviet Union was just a poor country many times invaded in the past and therefore its territorial expansion was because it wanted to have safe borders. Naturally, to become absolutely secure, the USSR had to take over the entire world.

      Finally, the very same useful idiots branded the United States as being a war-mongering nation when we responded to the USSR’s aggressive behavior. Those same useful idiots urged a policy of appeasement and disarmament, not containment or rollback, in the face of Soviet expansionism.

      It looks like that same playbook is being deployed by useful idiot to rationalize Russian aggression and justify American inaction.

      • dmitry gubin

        it was a troops from Black Sea fleet, not an invasion.

        • Marcd30319

          Dmitry, with all due respect, it does not matter which branch of the Russian Federation armed forces were initially involved.

          The fact remains that Russia occupied Crimea, aided and abetted by fifth columnist Russian-speaking supra-nationalists.

          This naked, imperialist aggression undertaken by Vladimir Putin and his fellow hooligans is in direct violation of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances guaranteeing the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine that the Russian Federation had signed.

          End of story. Period

          • dmitry gubin

            you are understand in Krimea question not more when me in US history. Probably, even less. How can you say that if 97% people (of which 60% native russians) voted to go back to Russia?
            Budapest memorandum, by the way, was not ratificated, also not approved by Duma. No matter what Elstin (not Russian Federation) signed.

          • Marcd30319

            Dmitry, the chairman of the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) declared the Crimean referendum was illegal because it did NOT conform to the Ukrainian constitution or international legal norms.

            Beacuse of this, the OSCE did not send independent monitors.

            Russia signed the 1995 Budapest agreement on respecting Ukrainian sovereignty in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapon.

            Russian also signed the 1975 Helsinki Final Act which guaranteed the territorial integrity and sovereignty for those OSCE nations.

            Russian also signed the United Nations Charter which call for member to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of its member-nations.

            Dmitry, Russia signed these treaties, agreements, memorandums, etc., and they are part of international law.

            This was how the world was to operate in the post Cold War era, and ow the world is asking — when can Russian be trusted to act in a civilized manner on the world stage, and not like a lawless bunch of hooligans and imperialists.

            If Russia is going to solve its grievances with the bayonet, masked fifth column supra-nationalists, and lawless land grabs, then Russian better be prepare to accept the consequences because history can repeat itself and demographics don’t lie.

          • Dusan

            Marc ,You’re like the U.S. government : the right to holding only when it suits you . Constantly talking about the obligations of the various conventions . Interpret the situation from his point of view not by observing how you look at the other side .U.S. government sent Donald cook to show the world that the most powerful force and how it can be what she wants . It was pure provocation . Yes , it was not there would be no meeting of this aircraft with the ship .I ask you a hypothetical question : How would the Americans behaved when the Russians in support of Cuba, Panama, Venezuela, … , provocatively sent some of their ship in the U.S. Gulf. And not just a ship , but a ship that can fire a ballistic missile . They felt that it was pure provocation and would probably warned him to stay away and then it sunk if it is not done .Russia has not made any invasion of the Crimea. Under the contract there could be 25 000 Russian soldiers . Since it can be called if an invasion capture without firing a shot .Let me point out what the real invasion : Vietnam, Iraq , Afghanistan , Kosovo, …And another thing , America is committed that NATO would not expand eastward . This was the disintegration of the Warsaw Pact . Nothing is respected . She attacked Iraq after lying about the existence of weapons of mass destruction . She attacked Yugoslavia staged events for the mass murder of civilians and sees that her only goal was to make another base closer to Russia’s borders . Look what she did with Libya. Where are the Americans went there remained misery and desolation .

          • Marcd30319

            Dusan, I know that you have been brainwashed by Putin’s propaganda trying to gin up support for his not-so-excellent adventure in the Crimea to divert Russia’s stagnant economy, lack of basic human rights, freedom of the press, and a downward spiral in the population. So I am going to repeat this inconvenient facts to you.

            Russia signed the 1995 Budapest agreement on respecting Ukrainian sovereignty in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapon.

            Russian also signed the 1975 Helsinki Final Act which guaranteed the territorial integrity and sovereignty for those OSCE nations.

            Russian also signed the United Nations Charter which call for member to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of its member-nations.

            Russia signed these treaties, agreements, memorandums, etc., and they are part of international law.

            Next, the destroyer USS Donald Cook operating in International waters in the Black Sea in accordance with the Montreux Convention that allows non-Black Sea nations to operate two warships in the Black Sea at any given time. Both the frigate Taylor and the French signals intelligence ship Dupuy de Lôme also in accordance with the Montreux Convention .

            Between 1972 and 1990, the United States and the Soviet Union followed the Incident at Sea Agreement (INCSEA) to avoid the very kind of incidents that occurred in this article.

            In 1990, the INCSEA was superseded by the Dangerous Military Activities Agreement (PDMA), and this is still in force.

            This was how the world has operated in the post Cold War era, and now the world is asking — when can Russian be trusted to act in a civilized manner on the world stage, and not like a lawless bunch of hooligans and imperialists.

            If Russia is going to solve its grievances with the bayonet, masked fifth column supra-nationalists, and lawless land grabs, then Russian better be prepare to accept the consequences because history can repeat itself and demographics don’t lie.

      • czech

        If anyone is idiot , it is you Marc.
        I wonder what you would say, if Russia installed the bases in Venezuela , in Cuba. You operate by quoting some pacts, agreements , that were not adhered to by USA. That country invaded so many other countries under false circumstances, destroyed them, killed hundred thousands of innocent people . As a matter of fact, every USA war adventure since WW2 ended in fiasco.

        • Marcd30319

          czech, has the United States invaded Ukraine?

          No, we did not.

          We are a signatory to the 994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances guaranteeing the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine just as the Russian Federation did.

          Now, who invaded the Ukraine?

          The Russian Federation.

          Case closed.

          • James

            When you have Assistant Secretary of state Victoria Nuland caught in telephone conversation discussing the overthrow of the Ukraine govt and spending 5billion to make sure it happens puts the US as the trouble maker. Then we have the VP meet with the unelected party as if the legitimate government which is a violation of our own constitution. Now the frosting on the cake having the CIA director also arrive in the Ukraine tells the world we are out to take over the Ukraine. You dont need to be a rocket scientist to figure why and its to threaten Russia. Its the why that no one is asking and that reason is becuase there is a move to remove the dollar as the global reserve and Russia and China are both leading the BRICS to do just that because the dollar is causing extreme inflation everywhere except the US. THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE DOLLAR.

          • Marcd30319

            Right, it’s everybody’s fault but the Russians.

            The people of Ukraine wanted closer ties to the EU, and Putin sock-puppet Yanukovych wanted to get cozier to Moscow. Yanukovych got a well deserved boot by his own people, and Putin unleashed his hooligans and fifth columnists to take over Crimea.

    • Marcd30319

      First, during the Cold War, there were people who believed that the Soviet Union was so misunderstood. Because it had been so victimized and invaded throughout its history, the only thing the USSR wanted was territory sufficient for it to feel secure. Of course, the only way that the Soviet Union would ever feel truly secure was to take over the entire world.

      These same Soviet apologists blamed the United States for all that was wrong with the world. America was the problem, and the poor Soviets were just so misunderstood, ignoring Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, the Cuban missile crisis, the Berlin Wall, Angola, Afghanistan, etc.

      Second, the Black Sea was never Russia’s mare nostrum. To confirm that, during the Cold War, the United States exercised its right to sent warships into the Black Sea in accordance with the Montreux Convention. This was done under Operation Silver Fox. By doing so, the United States was able to exercise its freedom of navigation in the Black Sea. Russia has no veto over our operation there.

      Third, as previously noted, the Dangerous Military Activities Agreement (PDMA) was designed to prevent the very kind of reckless kind of incident that this article described. The PDMA us still in force, but the Russians are deliberately flaunting their obligations.

      Fourth, naval presence and free of navigation demonstration are not provocative, and they are certainly are equivalent to the naked aggression of Russia’s seizure and its illegal annexation of the Crimean peninsula.

      Fifth, in 1994, the Russian Federation signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances that guaranteed the territorial integrity of Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons. That includes the Crimea.

      • czech

        So, where were you Marcd(USA) when Soviets occupied those countries ,you mention. Who gives you right to go to the other side of the world to meddle with internal affairs of any country, who gives you right to go and “export” the democracy by napalm, by bombs, by missiles. Is Meditereean sea your sea, is China sea your sea , is Indian ocean your territory. In all those you operate your navy in the sign of
        “defending” the safety of USA. What utter hypocrisy you try to print in here

        • Marcd30319

          So, where were you Marcd(USA) when Soviets occupied those countries ,you mention.

          The history is too complex to summarize but we supported the people held under Soviet aggression throughout the Cold War up to and including the Solidarity movement in Poland. In any case, it was Soviet aggression that caused this suffering in eastern Europe.

          Is Meditereean sea your sea, is China sea your sea , is Indian ocean your territory. In all those you operate your navy in the sign of “defending” the safety of USA. What utter hypocrisy you try to print in here

          It’s called international water, czech, and the US Navy has been the guarantor for access of the world’s maritime commons since the end of World War Two, taking over this role from the Royal Navy. This is because we shared the British belief in freedom of navigation and an international system to resolve international disputes.

          • KuracPalac

            Marcd30319 you just lost the battle in arguments. Sit down and cry coz you can hate RUSSIA as much as you want. usa wont win this fight how ever much you’d like that. ;)

          • Marcd30319

            That wasn’t my point, but trolls never discuss that … point with their finger in frustration at their inability to offer any reasoned or mature discourse.

            Or is that another appendage, and is that your source of frustration?

          • KuracPalac

            You are the one frustrated here and you should be because your native country is less and less american for every day that passes. I can only watch how it falls in the dirt where it belongs while small minorities take over cities and states for every month that goes. I understand why you are so anti russian. You feel scared and you should be because not even with NATO’s help will the zionist usa have chances to beat the undefeatable RUSSIA! ЖИВЕЛИ БРАЋА РУСИ!

          • Marcd30319

            Thank you for proving my point. It’s the only time that trolls are useful — by showing how ineffectual ignorance is.

            BTW – I am not anti-Russian, just anti-Soviet. Also, You are anti-semitic although that is hardly surprising.

  • 2IDSGT

    Don’t get mad, get even. Next time the Russians venture out on one of their token sorties… pretty sure we could do them several better.

    • Вайс Вайсович

      Why is my post deleted? America does not like the truth about Su-24?

      • gumersindo

        America does not like the “improper truth”.

        • Marcd30319

          We don’t like Putin’s propaganda, comrade.

  • statepark

    How about a weapon that launches something that would burst a cloud of volcanic ash in front of a jet flying passes like the Fencer did?

  • Raul

    Marcd30319 – “Fourth, in 1991, the people of the former Soviet republic of the Ukraine voted overwhelming for its independence”

    Really? )))
    What about this…
    You recognize the results of the All-Ukrainian referendum in 1991 , but refuse to recognize the results of the referendum of the Crimea in 2014 .

    You recognize Kosovo , but do not want to recognize the Crimea.

    You overthrown inconvenient and uncomfortable political regimes under the slogan ” we are freedom and democracy ” in countries thousands of miles from the United States, throughout the twentieth century, every U.S. president undertaken a one – two wars far from the U.S. border , and at the same time you enter Russia at that that it should do and what not to do.

    Your intelligence agencies around the world tapped telephone lines, kidnap people put them in secret prisons without trial , your Air Force bombed Belgrade – the capital of a European country , your country is the only country that has used nuclear weapons for offensive purposes , on your hands the blood of hundreds of thousands of innocent people on your conscience ruined tens of millions of refugees , and you think you have the right to dictate the terms of Russia in relation to its historical territories .

    • statepark

      Russian propagandist stooge.

      It must suck for you to read about how bitchin our Navy is. Russia can’t even float ONE carrier.

      • dmitry gubin

        Russia have one. And several carrier killers. The reason why Russia doesn’t neet them – they only defence it’s own territory, not like US, preseenting its military force and acting in thousands miles away.

        • Marcd30319

          Tell that to the good people of Chechnya, Ukaraine, Georgia or the entire eastern Europe between 1946 and 1991.

          • dmitry gubin

            most of all of them were a part of Russian Empire for more than hundrid years, so you can learn from UK or Franch or other empires history. sometime its positiv sometime negative. Georgians should have nothing to do in osetia and abkhasia, especially, together with their US teachers. pls don’t tell us what to do on our former territory, there are a lot of things to improve in Western semisphere.

          • Marcd30319

            The Soviet Union signed the 1975 Helsinki Final Act which guaranteed the territorial integrity of all countries in Europe, not just the one the Soviets didn’t want. The Soviet Union and now the Russian Federation signed the United Nations Charter which also is founded on the territorial integrity of all its member-nations.

            Now, if you follow the logic of wanting back your “former territory”, then why don’t you turn the land taken from the Tatars and the Ottomons?

            Oh, wait, the Tartar empire doesn’t exist anymore. Ditto the Ottomon Empire, too.

            Dmitry, the Soviet Union is dead and gone. Live with it.

          • Aktheon

            USSR has gone, but people and culture left..
            Every russian-speaking person knows that Belarus, Ukraine and Russia is the same nation and should be ONE country. There a lot of discussions about that. We are actually speaking same language and have open borders with easy migration.
            I personally know many people from ex-USSR territories.

            so agruing “USSR is gone” is not valid

          • Marcd30319

            Aktheon,

            Russia signed the 1995 Budapest agreement on respecting Ukrainian sovereignty in exchange for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapon.

            Russian also signed the 1975 Helsinki Final Act which guaranteed the territorial integrity and sovereignty for those OSCE nations, which now includes Belarus and Ukraine.

            Russian also signed the United Nations Charter which call for member to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of its member-nations, including Belarus and Ukraine.

            Russia signed these treaties, agreements, memorandums, etc., and they are part of international law.

            And for at least 20 years after the end of the Cold War, the this was the status quo, and while not perfect, it did work.

            That is until Vladmir Putin, ex-KGB thug, came on the scene.
            Now, to divert attention from Russia’s stagnant economy, lack of basic human rights, freedom of the press, and a downward spiral in population, Comrade Putin wants to reconstitute the old USSR.

            So, when you say: “so agruing “USSR is gone” is not valid,” tell that to Putin.

          • Rusky

            Russia has not ratified the “Budapest Memorandum”, however as the UK and USA, which casts doubt on the Memorandum, however, he was not disturbed. Russian troops are not introduced into the territory of Ukraine, as Russian troops stationing in the Crimea adequate arrangements between Russia and Ukraine.
            Crimea came from Ukraine on the basis of people’s right to self-determination and the results of the referendum, which created a precedent in U.S. Kosovo.

          • Marcd30319

            Rusky, your arguments are risible, legalistic, self-serving

            double-talk.

            The fact remains that Russia signed the 1994 Budapest Memorandum with the United States and Great Britain to guarantee the territorial integrity of Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine giving up its Soviet-era nuclear weapons. Russia got a helluva deal, and now it is reneging on that agreement.

            Additionally, the old Soviet Union signed the 1975 Helsinki Final Accord that guaranteed the territorial integrity for those nations that are part of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, including Ukraine. The later Paris Charter created the current Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) built on the principles of the Helsinki Final Accord.

            Finally, the Russia signed the United Nations Charter, and Chapter 1, Paragraph 2 clearly states:

            1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.

            2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.

            3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.

            4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

            Russia signed these treaties, agreements, memorandums, etc., and they are part of international law. Therefore, Russia’s actions are in clear violation of 1994 Budapest Memorandum, the 1975 Helsinki Final Accord, and the United Nations Charter.

            Period

            Regarding this nonsense about “Russian troops are not introduced into the territory of Ukraine, as Russian troops stationing in the Crimea adequate arrangements between Russia and Ukraine“, it does not matter which branch of the Russian Federation armed forces were initially involved. The fact remains that Russia occupied Crimea, aided and abetted by fifth columnist Russian-speaking supra-nationalists aided and abetted by Russian foreign intelligence.

            Period

          • chateaux

            I’m from over 1000 years old Eastern European country, hundreds years older than Russia. Russian invaded my country at the end of XVIII century and occupied by 120 years. Than we defeated Russians in 1920 war, stopping their attempt to conquer entire Europe under bolshevicks rules, and than together with rest of Eastern Europe Russia again slaved us with significant help of F.D. Rossevelt in Teheran and Yalta betrayals. And again, in 1989 we liberated ourselfs from your occupancy

            So do not even try to repeat, that you Russian nationalists , fascists and imperialists have any rights to Eastern and Central Europe.

          • Marcd30319

            Well said, sir, and thank you!

          • Chinaman

            Hahaha, Marc you really sound like some ego hurt eastern Europian citizen who recently got US citizenship. The inferiority complex is so strong in you haha. Also your every post screams with Rusophobia. But that wont change the fact that world is going in a direction a little bit different than you would like it to be. Unipolar world dominated by US alone with its puppet NATO states is slowly (or not so slowly) progressing toward a state of multipolarity.

          • Marcd30319

            Sorry, CM, but I am a native-born American but thank you for the complement of suggesting that I am a former eastern European who survived so greatly the Soviet imperialistic occupation during the Cold War.

            I am not Rusophobic, CM, but I am anti-Soviet. Putin is Soviet but without the ideological rationalizations of Marx, Engels, and Lenin to hide behind.

            As far as that multi-polar utopia who are getting so sweaty about, all I can say is good luck with that.

            It sounds like a return to great power competition and spheres of influence. Wait until the big guys start gobbling up the little guys, and you start asking where the United States is to save you. Like we did in World War One, World War Two, the Cold War, Kosovo, Kuwait, etc.

          • zag1

            hummm. you need to learn some real history.

            Australia ended WW I, US troops ran away, leaving the AUstralian’s to wipeout the last german fortress, once gone germany was gone.

            USSR wiped out the Germans in WW II.

            The cold war only stopped because the government in USSR changed.

            It be the UN doing stuff to stop the Kosovo war.

          • Marcd30319

            hummm. you need to learn some real history.

            Australia ended WW I, US troops ran away, leaving the AUstralian’s to wipeout the last german fortress, once gone germany was gone?

            Really? So that extra million-plus U.S. Army that deployed to the western front had no effect during World War I? Of the war materiel and U.S. finances for a materiel-decimated and cash-strapped Allied powers had no effect?

            USSR wiped out the Germans in WW II.

            Really?

            Okay, for argument’s sake, let’s assume you are right, which you are not.

            Where did the Soviet get their war materiel to “wipe ot the German” since the Wehrmacht had devasted the heavily-industrialized European zone of the USSR following Operation Barbarossa?

            It was Allied convoys, American-produced war materiel, and the Allied victory in the Battle of the Atlantic that did that, zag1.

            The cold war only stopped because the government in USSR changed.

            No less an authority as historian John Lewis Gaddis in his The Cold War: A New History credited Reagan and the USA, as well as Pope John Paul II, Lech Walesa, and Margaret Thatcher as being the principle “actor” who closed out the Cold War.

            It be the UN doing stuff to stop the .

            And how many divisions did the UN deploy?

            The fact is that it was the USA that organized the NATO mission Kosovo war before the UN Security Council could not act because of the certain Russian veto of any UN mission there.

            The Kosovo War ended because US air-power and sea-power during Operation Allied Power and Operation Deliberate Force, plus the American-led negotiations that resulted in the Dayton Peace Agreement and the deployment of the NATO-led IFOR mission.

            So much for “real history.”

            Only only remaining questions is why you are responding to a three-month old posting at this message board, and how an supposedly educated person can conjugate this sentence:

            “It be the UN doing stuff to stop the Kosovo war.”

          • Secundius

            @ Marcd30319.

            hummmm. Been keeping busy I see! Up to you usual HIGH-STANDARDS, TOO !!!

          • Marcd30319

            Hey, Secundius. Hope all is well with you.

            Yeah, it’s Summer, so there are a lot of mosquito and other annoying, buzzing insects that need swatting.

            :D

          • Secundius

            @ Marce30319.

            Yeah, and that Stupid Hornet’s Nest, Fire Ant Hill and Dorylini Army Ants. And the Unknown Extraterrestrial Invasion too.

          • Marcd30319

            Like Ortho and Getz, where ever they come from, I am ready for ‘em.

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            You really need to read about the exploits of US Army Reserves, Major Charles White Whittlesey; “The Lost Battalion” in the Argonne Forest Offensive of 2 through 8 October 1918 CE.

        • statepark

          Post a link for the Russian carrier. They are trying to buy some helicopter ones from France, but I am talking about REAL carriers able to launch supersonic all weather fighter jets.

          • 02144pomroy

            Carriers are the new battleship. Admirals still fighting the last war.

          • statepark

            US carriers will be launching unmanned stealth drones soon. They still have a long life ahead. Too bad for the Ruskies.

          • KuracPalac

            The drones will be taken down by the RUSSIANS like when you take candy from a kid. usa’s army consists only of drug addicts from low class areas in usa. usa haven’t won any war. They only ruined other peoples lives. Well, a good thing is that the latinos in the usa are getting more and more and that they are taking over neighborhoods like never before. statepark, soon your native language will be SPANISH and not english, COMPRENDES MARICON? :D

          • zag1

            Why would they bother with Stealth all the coatings come up on 1970’s radar tech.

            The US learned how poor the stealth is on the B2 bomber when going over Middle east. Iran and Iraq picked it up and had that out in the news straight away and then lots of other countries started saying the same thing in South America.

            Also not hard to pick up on newer radar tech as well.

            ANd funnily enough it was Russia to have made the very first stealth airplane back in 1932 before WW II. They also had the first all steel/single wing fighters as well, in the 30’s.

            But shhh don’t tell anyone in the USA that they might get scared.

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            The current Russian Military Establishment, would be HARD-PRESSED to fight and win, a Air, Land and Sea battle with the ISRAELI’s.

        • statepark

          The US wouldn’t have to project military force so often if Russia/USSR wasn’t always exporting unrest, discord, and misery in Eurasia and the Middle East.

          • disqus_pSVYWdDQ98

            Pot meet Kettle.

          • statepark

            If the US is so horrible, I guess all these people scrambling into the country are just lost. They thought they were going to Russia.

          • Marcd30319

            So says the another of Lenin’s useful idiots.

          • KuracPalac

            When an idiot (you) calls someone else an idiot it just shows everyone how small your IQ is. Enough said.

          • Marcd30319

            The term “useful idiots” was first coined by Vladimir Lenin to characterize people in the West who were more than willing to ignore the excesses and barbarity of the Soviet system while singing its alleged virtues.

            That is my only use of the word “idiot” was in that context.

            if you did your due diligence, you would have seen that is the context that I used and not as a personal pejorative. I leave that behavior to trolls.

            Speaking of small, is that your finger or some other appendage?

            Enough said, indeed!

          • zag1

            Don’t be so quick on that, the US gov have given lots of stuff away.
            US is given syrian rebels heavy weapons now and set off Bio Weapons.
            US gave taliban and Al Qaeda weapons and money.
            US gave many of the african warlords weapons and money.
            US have given weapons to the Mexican drug cartels.
            US gave liberian rebels weapons and did airstrikes.
            US have given ISIS weapons and money.
            US tried to give Georgian army abrams tanks which got captured by the Russian special forces.
            US tried to send special forces into Iran and they got captured.

            and plenty more that’d be the last 10 years in a basic run down

          • El_KaBong

            List all the places Russia sent weapons to.

      • ZeroTheHero

        Carriers are quickly becoming obsolete technology. All you need is 1 supercavitating long range torpedo and that big boat is sunk. It’s sensible for the Russian Navy not to waste money on them and focus more on Submarines….which is what they’re doing.

        • Marcd30319

          Given you knowledge and analytical abilities, you are aptly named. In every crisis the first thing asked is where are the carriers. In Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. carrier aviation was first on the scene.

          Carriers are four and a half acres of U.S. sovereign territory that can go anywhere, without permission or restrictions. In the case of Afghanistan, the only land-based aviation that could go into theater was B-52 operating out of Diego Garcia.

          Your assertion that carriers are “obsolete technology” is a real howler since it is the carrier air wing and their aircraft that allows carriers to continue to evolve technologically. With the stealthy F-35C and unmanned aircraft, carriers will have even more capable.

          Typical millennial nonsense from the selfie generation.

          BTW – The Russian nave does operate a carrier, is buying some Mistral-class heli-carriers from the French, and Putin has stated he plan to build more aircraft carriers although I doubt their shipbuilding industry is up to doing that.

          • ZeroTheHero

            The main purpose of carriers is power projection and a mobile platform for combat aircraft. Carriers are extremely vulnerable to undersea attacks as well as attacks by anti-ship missiles. The US Navy is gravely concerned about Chinese DF-21 missile and its potential to destroy carrier vessels. Moreover, carriers have submarine escorts because without them they are defenseless. The threat of supercavitating long range torpedos simply cannot be taken lightly. But you don’t have to take my word for it!

            https://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/87bcd2ff-c7b6-4715-b2ed-05df6e416b3b/The-Future-of-Aircraft-Carriers.aspx

          • zag1

            Australia has sunk a US aircraft carrier in war games so it can be done.

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            The current Russian Navy, is VIRTUALLY NON-EXISTENT !. What Naval Forces they do poses is Under-Manned, Under-Payed, and has a High Desertion rate. They don’t even have the funding to Maintain their OWN SHIP’s, much less BUILD THEM !

          • Marcd30319

            Anything can be sunk, zag1, from a rowboat to a cruiser liner like the Costa Concordia. Your argument is specious and flaccid.

            And if the Australian were so down on carriers why are they buying two Canberraclass big-dech amphibious helicopter carrier that has a ski-jump ramp to operate F-35B S/VTOL jets?

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            Anyone can win a war game, Two teenager’s, a pair game controllers and PS 360, CAN WIN A WAR GAME. Virtual is not the same a REAL. In a virtual world you have programmable variables of know values. In the REAL world, you have Unknown variables, with Unknown Values. Take can HIT YOU at ANY TIME. In a Virtual World you have the luxury to replay and weed-out your MISTAKES. In the REAL WORLD YOU DON’T. Once Done, IT’S DONE. You don’t have the luxury of undoing your mistakes!!!

          • El_KaBong

            A war game?

            LOL!

        • statepark

          Russia doesn’t have year round warm weather ports, except the stolen one in Crimea, and doesn’t have the technology and experience are more likely reasons.

          • ZeroTheHero

            Russia isn’t even interested in developing the technology for aircraft carriers because these boats are extremely vulnerable to attacks from the air and beneath the waves. Sources confirm that the Russian Navy is focused on submarines rather than surface ships. The US Naval War College has already expressed uncertainty about the future of aircraft carriers.

          • statepark

            Russia can’t afford to build them, doesn’t know how to build them, and would love to have 11 supercarriers, plain and simple. The rest is a bunch of obvious Russian BS in a poor attempt to mask their weaknesses.

          • ZeroTheHero

            They actually can afford to build more carriers, but the Navy is more interested in submarines. I’m tired of ignorant people like you underestimating Russia.

          • statepark

            I don’t underestimate Russia. It is a third world country with a nuclear arsenal run by a midget fascist with a Napoleon complex. It’s people are either happy to be ruled or are duped into believing they are fairly governed. Either way, it is a recipe for disaster.

            Russia’s economy is tanking. Building 11 supercarriers, AND the submarines you speak of, would be too much. The US can do it, Russia can’t. Putin has awoken the West, and the arms race will drain Russia yet again.

          • ZeroTheHero

            US Navy budget shortfalls mean that the USS Abraham Lincoln lacks the funds to be refueled. The US Government is facing massive debt that will affect its military budget.

            Russia is no longer a third world country, son. Their economy is doing fine and has been for the last 10 years because of somethin’ called OIL. They have plenty of it, the world needs it, and that’s what fueled their economic recovery. 15 years ago what you’re saying about Russia was true. But that was then and this is now. End of story.

          • statepark

            Are you kidding me? Russia can’t even produce a SINGLE automobile model for the global market. Their domestic air service safety is on par with an African country. What contributions have they made to modern medical science? Alcoholism is rampant (buy some Putin vodka, comrade). Why are they desperate to stop their population DECREASE? Their army is nothing compared to the US. Navy? Give me a break! Yep, they really have it together.

            And, I’m not your son.

          • zag1

            LOL, you might want to be worried if that’s what keeps you sleeping at night.

            Russia probably will just steamroll through the US like they did to the Narzi’s

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            The Russians, don’t have the capability to STEAMROLL anyone, if they did. THEY WOULD ALREADY STEAMROLLED THEIR WAY THROUGH the Ukraine!

          • zag1

            You do know that the US can’t afford it’s forces anymore and by Oct 2014 they have to start scaling back the army from 540,000 troops to 380,000 to break even.

            The F-22 as of 2013 is a scraped plane.

            The F-35 doesn’t have a release date due to it being delayed past 2020.

            Europe, Russia, China, all have fleets of gen 5 stealth fighters up and running, well China has 2 gen 5 stealth fighters but hey they couldn’t decide which to build so doing the 2 together now.

            Russia should have the T-50 in a fleet and up and running before the end of the year if not already.

            Europe got fed waiting for the F-35 and went with the eurofighter

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            If your referring too the Sukhoi PAK FA T-50 Air Superiority Fighter, Its not scheduled to enter service unit mid 2016. Because it is having teething problems with its engines.

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            I live just outside Washington, DC. in Northern Virginia. And I see quite a few F-22 Raptors, flying out of Langley Air Force Base in Northern Virginia and Andrews Air Force Base in South-Eastern Maryland. On a daily bases.

          • zag1

            Us gov did budget cuts to the armed forces, besides the army being cut down to 380,000.

            The f22 and a10 warthog is scraped.

            Some of the navy ships are scrapped.

            F35 for the navy is scrapped.

            How you live in the us and not know this i don’t know, because it was big news this was at the end of and start of this year.

            F22 is a much better plane than the f35 yet it’s being scrapped, probably due to all the countries that have put in money for the f35.

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            Then their full-size cardboard cutouts with afterburners.

          • El_KaBong

            How many Russian submarines are currently seaworthy?

          • Secundius

            @ El_KaBong.

            Not just seaworthy, but a paid crew?

          • zag1

            New stealth missile boats make aircraft carriers pointless anyway.

            You just send over a ton of missiles and only 1 has to hit it at the front and you use it to send out planes anymore.

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            As soon as a Stealth Boat launches a missile. Its no longer a Stealth Boat, If you can detect the Missile, its NOT going to be very long before they FIND the boat that FIRE’D IT.

          • zag1

            Sigh… Most middle frigates aren’t even in radar range of the shop they are attacking.

            The s300 has a range of 1000+ KLM its also the fastest anti shipping rocket in the world, so Russia from land can easily hit a usnato ship with in 2 mins of launching from Russian land.

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            The s300 Cruise Missile does not launch in a flat trajectory, and fly too its target a supersonic speeds. Why? Because the missile airframe would melt and come apart. Its Launched Vertically, climbs to operating altitude where the air is thin and the coldest. Its only the last 100-miles or less when it drops altitude, and flies on the deck to the target. For the missile to be truely effective, it would have to be launched at close range so you can’t set-up a Defensive Countermeasure against it. The Grumman E-2D Advanced Hawkeye II operational patrol radius is approximately 400-nm. from the carrier, and can detect anything metallic from an altitude of 100,000-feet above sea-level to sea-level. With a 250-nm radius or 500-nm diameter detection range. This would give a carrier Battle Group ample time to prepare a defensive posture.

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            Believe it or not, every ship and boat leaves a wake, A wake can be picked up by Airborne Surveillance Radar. Even a Stealth Ship and/or Boat leaves a wake. You don’t have to see the Ship and/or Boat. All you have to do is see the WAKE.

          • zag1

            Stealth ships leave very little or no wake.
            Norway are the kings of stealth ships.

            Stealth ships don’t use props for power transfer. There’s no hull in the water and use jet propulsion to have as little wwakeak, like 3 meters at most, if there’s any wake at all.

            Some hide the wake under the ship so there’s no wake to be seen at all from the air.

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            Really! The next time you watch a video of the FREEDOM class LCS. Its a Stealth Ship, it has water-jet propulsion, and it leaves a WAKE.

          • zag1

            What stolen naval base in Crimea? it’s always been an russian owned naval base.

            Russia was paying Ukraine gov rent for the land. Now they simply don’t have to pay for any rent.

    • Marcd30319

      Raul, the difference between the 1991 Ukrainian referendum and Putin’s trumped-up plebiscite was the total lack of transparency and international monitors. Also, the International Court of Justice ruled that Kosovo’s independence met international norms. No one can say that about what Russia did in Crimea.

      Regarding Russia’s historical territories, it gave up those rights when it signed the 1994 Budapest agreement as it pertains to Ukraine. In exchange for signing this agreement, Ukraine turned over its nuclear weapons. Also, the bane of the 20th century was using nationalistic identity as a justification to invade, attack or undermine the integrity of another nation by dictators like Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, etc. And your buddy, Putin.

      Regarding the more turgid comments you made, you need to grow up.

      • dmitry gubin

        Dont tell about untransparency during plebescite – there were OSCE representatives.

        • Marcd30319

          The OSCE did NOT send independent monitors, and consider the Crimea plebiscite to be illegal.

          It was reported by Rueters and the Moscow Times. Also, there is a news release on the OSCE web site.

          • zag1

            Ah yes they did, As Russia asked them to send monitors and they did.

            PACE has reports about this.

            it also has the reports on the Ukraine voting as well, As only 38% of the population voted with 98% of the votes coming from outside Ukraine.

            OSCE is managed by PACE. also only some of the western european countries consider it illegal for Russia to have annexed Crimea, not the actual voting done with in the area.

            The other countries don’t have a problem with the vote within crimea.

            Alas though it’s actually Russian land anyway, and the signing away was in error but wasn’t fixed as the land was within the USSR at the time so they never bothered to fix the error.

            When Ukraine broke away Crimea should never have been given away in the first place.

          • Marcd30319

            Ah, no, OSCE did not.

            More precisely, OSCE president Didier Burkhalter declared the Crimean referendum in its current form to be illegal. It is on their web site dated 11 March 2014, and no less than the Moscow Times stated in its headline ”

            OSCE Will Not Observe ‘Illegal’ Crimea Referendum” in an article dated 13 March 2014.

            Try googling “osce crimea referendum” and see for yourself.

            If you can’t get something that basic correct, then anything that you post here is worthless.

          • zag1

            Different countries do different things with in pace.

            One can say one thing another will say something else.

            The Crimea monitors came from. Turkey and Belarus.

            You need to keep up with the news in many places to keep up with everything going on. There’s more countries than just the 5 main western ones.

          • Marcd30319

            It took you fourteen days, but thank you for confirming that I was correct that the OSCE did not send monitors to that illegal, bogus vote in Crimea, which was the original point of contention in your continued postings at this message board.

            The fact that Turkey and Belarus sent “monitors” is irrelevant since the discussion was about the OSCE did not sending monitors to the Crimea because its president declared that referendum to be “illegal” in its current form.

            You said in your last post:

            Different countries do different things with in pace. One can say one thing another will say something else.

            A lie is a lie, and mis-direction is a clever word for deceit. You don’t have to “keep up with the news in many places” to recognize that. It is so all too obvious that even a snarky, superior pose cannot conceal this

            It also confirms what I said that if you can’t get something that basic correct, then anything that you post here is worthless.

          • Secundius

            @ zag1.

            It’s an OXYMORON! How do you send in, Independent Monitors, if you Control the Monitors.

          • zag1

            Pace does all the monitoring, in Europe.

            Pace run osce, the monitors come from different countries with in Europe.

            Pace stands for parliament of European Assembly.

          • Marcd30319

            “parliament of European Assembly” crimea

            This is on PACE’s web site:

            Strasbourg, 09.04.2014 – “The so-called referendum” in Crimea was unconstitutional. Its outcome and “the illegal annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation therefore have no legal effect and are not recognised by the Council of Europe”, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) stated today in an resolution adopted at the end of an urgent debate.

            Try googling “parliament of European Assembly” crimea” and see for yourself.

            The news release included the report and the actual text of the resolution. It was dated 9th of April 2014, which is contemporaneous to the events in question.

            Like I said previously, if you can’t get something that basic correct, then anything that you post here is worthless.

      • Rusky

        And anything that 80% of the population of Crimea is Russian? Why do they have to ask whether they can be Ukrainians make choices and live with Russia? And finally, no one asked the residents of the Crimea in 1991 if they want to be Ukrainians, but simply made ​​them Ukrainians.

        • Marcd30319

          That is demographic and historical nonsense. The fact remains that all of Ukraine, including Crimea, voted overwhelmingly to stay together in 1991.

          • ZeroTheHero

            Marcd30319, 1991 was a loooooooooong time ago my friend. A lot can change in 23 years and the folks living in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are displeased with the new Kiev regime and want out.

          • Marcd30319

            Typical millennial nonsense — anything that happens before I was born to sooo old.

            The U.S. Constitution came into effect in 1789, and like, Dude, it’s so old. Like, dude, let’s forget about individuality, the Bill of Rights and the Enlightenment. That’s so, like 18th century, man.

            More to the point, there are ample methods of redress for the people of Ukraine short of foreign annexation in the case of Crimea or holding a bogus, illegal plebiscite without international monitors.

            Take the very public pro-EU demonstrations against Yanukovych and his tilt to Putin and Moscow. At least they were exercising their peaceful right of speech and assembly, not hooded fifth columnist thugs and Russian agents provocateur.

          • ZeroTheHero

            Ummmm, Marc? The Ukraine is not the USofA. Your analogy fails on so many levels. The US is geographically isolated from its enemies whereas this does not apply to Russia and the Ukraine.

            Crimea was actually given to the Ukraine by Nikita Khrushchev and there was no attempt by Crimeans or East Ukrainians to split until the coup that ousted Yanukovych earlier this year! The new government in Kiev wants to integrate Ukraine into the west while folks in those specified regions are opposed to it.

          • Marcd30319

            Clearly, analogies and irony aren’t your bag so I will explain. Yes, geography has its place, but there are also underlying principles of individuality, liberty, and constitutional law, too. Ukraine has a constitution, and so does Russia except, at best, old Putin gives it lip service.

            For a guy who is hung up on “1991 was a loooooooooong time ago” when Ukarain voted for its independence from the old USSR, you don’t seem so hung-up about old Nikita giving Crimea to Ukraine. That is “a loooooooooong time ago” times 2.6. Not that I am expecting consistency.

            As far as the rest of your post goes, it was superficially accurate except:

            1. There was no coup since it was the political leadership, not the military, that prompted Yanukovych’s unlamented departure.

            2. The reason the political leader compelled Yanukovych’s exit was because of the pro-EU demonstrations opposed Yanukovych’s embrace of Moscow and Putin.

            3. It was the military annexation of Crimea, as well as hooded fifth columnist thugs and Russian agents provocateur orchestrated by Putin that is at the heart of the current unrest.

          • ZeroTheHero

            Liberty you say? Liberty comes at a PRICE. And that price is that there is no economic security. Anything in life that can be acquired can be lost….especially money. One of the most pervasive myths in Western culture is that freedom and equality(economic, social, and all the rest)can coexist with each other. And in some countries the people have decided that the price of freedom just isn’t worth it. And in the case of the Ukraine you have a nation that is divided. The political leadership was backed by some Ukrainians but not others. I guess you don’t want to face the fact that some Ukrainians supported Yanukovych.

            True individuality is not possible among people who are living in groups. Particularly in very large groups like socities. If you truly want individuality then go live out in the wilderness and learn the real meaning of self-reliance.

          • Marcd30319

            True individuality is not possible among people who are living in groups. Particularly in very large groups like socities. If you truly want individuality then go live out in the wilderness and learn the real meaning of self-reliance.

            Really?

            I do agree that society should be based on laws, and the ultimate law is based on the principle of limited government. Leave it to the people to figure things out, not some elite or dictatorship of the proletariat. That tends to spawn monsters like Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, Chavez, and Pol Pot.

            Sorry, Zero, but collectivism is so 19th century, and its failure rate is a lot higher and more devastating than anything that the pursuit of liberty ever caused. Ditto identity politics or supranational appeals. Really bad outcomes.

            I do thank you for allowing me to unlimber Ronald Reagan, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek, and Thomas Sowell. Hopefully we will become re-acquainted with these gentlemen in the upcoming election cycles.

          • Marcd30319

            And in the case of the Ukraine you have a nation that is divided. The political leadership was backed by some Ukrainians but not others. I guess you don’t want to face the fact that some Ukrainians supported Yanukovych.

            Given the size and persistence of the Euromaiden movement, I think the vast majority of Ukrainians were outraged that Yanukovych betrayed them and decided to pursue closer ties with Putin’s Russia over embracing the European Union.

            And who can blame theme, with the EU’s broad-based, economically diverse $18.4 trillion GDP compared to Russia’s $2.1 trillion GDP base nearly exclusively on petroleum and natural gas. The EU isn’t perfect, with its high unemployment, bloated welfare system, and anemic military, but the only things Putin realistically have to offer are supranationalistic appeals and security. As noted earlier, when you trade security for freedom then end up with neither.

          • Sebastien Terrie

            bullshit, euromaiden was 45.000 persons, with backup of u$a.. don’t you remind that Orange revolution, that was the bis. A lot of money, and enough people to gather images…

          • Marcd30319

            Thank you for such a timely, insightful, fact-filled contribution.

          • Marcd30319

            And in some countries the people have decided that the price of freedom just isn’t worth it.

            That is their loss, and when you trade security for freedom, you then end up with neither.

        • Anton C.

          @Rusky: yes, and 95 % of the population of Austria was German. Putin did exactly the same thing as Hitler. Right?

    • Tamara Borisova

      Браво!!! Bravo!!!

  • dmitry gubin

    Russian military expert major general S.Kanchukov said that in the Black Sea Russian military tested the newest Khibiny electronic warfare complex. According to him that fact was the very reason of fear of USS Donald Cook sailors. They trusted in its power, as they knew it was equipped by the Aegis ballistic missile defense system and the Phalanx close-in weapon system.
    After closing-in with Russian aircraft all electronic air defense and missile defense systems of USS Donald Cook were brought out of operation. All engineers’ efforts to bring it back to life for air defense and missile defense targeting failed. American sailors had nothing to do but keep an eye on Russian plane imitating twelve bombing and leaving them with best regards.

    • Marcd30319

      Dmitry, what exactly is your point? That the Donald Cook was carrying out intelligence gathering. And Russian military assets don’t carry out intelligence gathering operations? That’s pretty naive.

      First, the facts remain that the USS Donald Cook was operating in international water in accordance with the Montreux Convention.

      Second, The actions of the Su-24 of repeatedly buzzing the Donald Cook was a clear violation of the Dangerous Military Activities Agreement (PDMA). This agreement was signed by the Russian Federation in 1990 and it is still in force.

      Third, based on yous comments, the fact that the Su-24 employed electronic countermeasures (ECM) against the Donald Cook means that these aerial maneuvers were not just PDMA violations but potentially hostile acts against a ship exercising its legitimate freedom of navigation in international waters.

      Not cool, Dmitry. Your Su-24 pilot acted like a hooligan.

      Finally, even if what you said about the effectiveness of the ECM was correct, which I strongly doubt, what can an unarmed Su-24 do but flip the middle finger at the U.S. ship and go home?

      Now that was a mature response, and another brilliant Russian victory over the decadent West and those damned Yankees.

      Congratulations, comrade, and enjoy the vodka will it lasts!

      • gumersindo

        It was russian-style of power demonstration.
        For example, american-style is “Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombing”.

        We are different.

        • Marcd30319

          Right, I guess going into a fight shooting blanks is “russian-style of power demonstration.” LMAO

          At least Japan was kept intact after World War Two, and after 1954, unoccupied to prosper. No Russian bear to muck things up.

          Can’t say the same for Eastern Europe which you occupied, terrorized, and exploited for nearly 50 years. Hungary in 1956. Czechoslovakia in 1968. Afghanistan in 1979. East Berlin. Cuban missile crisis. Yeah, that was russian-style of power demonstration. Good job, comrades.

          Or that you light off your first A-bomb in 1949 and kept all those tactical nukes so many jellybeans.

          Yeah, you guys are so different, and in a bad way.

          • gumersindo

            I feel like deja-vu.

            Оh, yarhs! I’ve read the same demagogy-style “thoughts” couple hours ago from other net-warrior:

            “The united states have done some horrible things in its past (ie the atrocities we committed towards the native americans, and the african american heritage) but in comparison I have to say that you dear Russians make us look like saints”.

          • Marcd30319

            The truth hurts, doesn’t it, comrade. If guess you are like that Su-27 — no ammo, just bluster.

          • gumersindo

            Hm… Let’s try.
            Does it hurt for you?

            google > US crimes against humanity Robert Elias

          • Marcd30319

            I googled Russian crimes against humanity, and I got 221,000,000 hits

            I googled soviet union crimes against humanity, and I got 491,000 hits.

            I googled soviet crimes against humanity, and I got 11,000,000 hits.

          • Human_Meteor

            You check Google for historical facts???…and your ‘facts’ are based on number of Google hits??? what an idiot…god help US….US has indeed become a land of complete imbeciles…

          • Marcd30319

            My dear Mr. Meteorite, gumersindo suggested that I google something, and I googled him back. Yet you confine your outrage towards me. How selective of you.

            Speaking of which, other than your outrage, what was your contribution here. Nothing. You, sir, are a fact-free zone. In other words, you are a vacuous vacuum. Congratulations.

          • 02144pomroy

            The people in charge of the US have lost their friggin’ minds. As you can see they are very arrogant. Their attitude of superiority combined with their arrogance will be their downfall.
            They used to be humble men of honor.

          • Marcd30319

            And Putin is a man of honor? LMAO!!!

      • 02144pomroy

        what can an unarmed Su-24 do but flip the middle finger at the U.S. ship and go home?

        Russian “Bear” D tail gunners and F-106 pilots used to do that to each other all the time during the good ol’ days of the Cold war.

        • Marcd30319

          Clearly, you didn’t read my post, pomroy. It was because of this nonsense that the Incident at Sea Agreement was negotiated.

          Stuff like killing some Soviet sailors were killed when a Soviet destroyer collided with the British carrier Ark Royal in 1970.

          Of the entire flight crew of a Soviet Tu-16 bomber getting killed after aircraft crossed the bow of the carrier USS Essex at wave level and crashed into the sea.

          Also, directing any weapons or EW systems at another vessel or aircraft is considered a provocative act under these agreements.

          Not cool, man.

        • Marcd30319

          Have you ever heard of the Wild Weasles?

          These are U.S. war aircraft that specializes against air defenses known as Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD).

          Basically, these former fighter aircraft are crammed with electronic warfare gear to bring down the air defense radar and electronic systems. In doing so, this immobilizes the anti-aircraft missile systems.

          BTW – These Wild Weasels are inarmed except for the EW equipment.

          So that so-called unarmed Su-24 was hardly harmless, and if the other Russian aircraft was armed, it could have attacked the Donald Cook.

          This is not just bad. In fact, it is both extremely provocative and downright dangerous.

  • Phil

    One crucial/funny information is missing – during the provocation flight, all defence systems on Donald Cook went down, total blackout… The airplane was not armed, but theoretically could destroy the vulnerable ship. Russia tested new system Khibiny. Success.

    • Marcd30319

      Phil, thanks for providing a reliable, verifiable source on that assertions. In any case, U.S. warships carry Stinger missiles onboard as backups. And since Stinger missile are heat-seekers, that SU-24 Fencer would have had a Stinger up his tail-pipe.

      • 02144pomroy

        John Kerry would not appreciate that kind of behavior. This is the 21st Century you know!

        • Marcd30319

          Anyone who equates the States of Israel with apartheid doesn’t have all his oars in the water.

    • Jackie Puppet

      And I heard the entire crew went to port (Romania?) and resigned.

      • Marcd30319

        Hey, Jackie, really stand up of you not posting in response to any of my posts to avoid any direct reply.

        BTW – The USS Donald Cooksuccessfully completed its first deployment patrol as a unit of the permanently forward-based Destroyer Squadron 60 with the U.S. Sixth Fleet.

        The USN new release for this is NNS140725-04. Check it out , and stop living and posting in ignorance.

        Have a wonder day.

      • Secundius

        @ Jackie Puppet.

        Yeah, I heard the put the beach chairs and a keg of beer, and a great showing of Russian Stupidity in a 30-year old poorly-maintain fighter, too.

    • Secundius

      The so called Test your suggesting, would have in recorded and effected Electronic Intelligence Ship/Aircrafts and AWACS in the area. It didn’t. It sound like your looking for gremlins.

  • 02144pomroy

    “Donald Cook is more than capable of defending itself against two Su-24s,” Warren said.

    Hey Colonel! If it wasn’t would you really tell us!

    • Marcd30319

      pomroy, the Donald Cook is the first of four Burke-class guided missile destroyers that are equipped as ballistic missile defense (BMD) warship based at Rota, Spain, as part of the European Phased Adaptive Approach BMD initiative. So, yes, the Donald Cook us more than capable of defending itself against two Su-24s. period

  • Jim Brown

    Crimea actually had referendum back in 1991 to split ways with Ukranian SSR. Over 90% (I don’t remember exact number) voted to break up with Ukraine.

    • Marcd30319

      Evidence? Anyone? Or are you confusing that with the 1991 vote by Ukarine for independence, with over 90 percent voting in favor. Sorry, but I think you are either confused or misdirecting.

  • oplix

    “I’m gonna tell my dad!” – Col Steve Warren

    • Marcd30319

      Another intelligent contribution to the discussion here. Good job. Here’s a dog biscuit.

  • http://batman-news.com sweetie64

    this is a war between putin and america. Putin won’t let ukraine to join America and NATO because he does not want american rockets on his border

  • http://batman-news.com sweetie64

    Right now Putin will be taking Donetsk and Lugansk (may be). It will be interesting to see if he will take Odessa, Herson and Nikolaev. When that happens Ukraine will lose access to Black sea alltogher. American ship Donald Cook came to Black Sea but could not stay longer than 21 days according to international agreement.
    American special forces group called Academy is operating in Kiev and other cities.
    Right now there is no good candidate for ukrainian president seat.
    I keep telling myself that these are not my countries and not my people so why should i think or care about their problems. But like every thinking individual i do have an opinion in every matter including this one. Sometimes i wonder if god punishes ukraine and ukrainians for crimes commited against jews. Ukrainians who were so called banderovtsi had jewish blood on their hands and their children are not any better. Igor Miroshnichenko called a Hollywood star Mila Kunis who was born in Ukraine “jidovka” and refused to apologise. After war there were no jews in Ukraine because all were murdered. Nikita Hruschev went public and said that jews who evacuated to other republics should not come back to Ukraine. He said jews don’t come back, Ukraine does not want you. For those jews who did come back college education was not available and jobs were impossible to get. May be god works in unknown ways and punishes children of murderers, haters and in general bad people.

  • ZeroTheHero

    The Donald Cook was fortunate that there were no Iskander missiles within range.

    • Marcd30319

      Since the USS Donald Cook is a Burke AEGIS-equipped guided-missile destroter with ballistic missile defense capabilities, it is indeed fortunate that there were no Iskander missiles there because these SS-20 short-range ballistic missiles would be toast if launched.

      • ZeroTheHero

        The Iskander was given the NATO designation SS-26 and is not the same missile as the obsolete SS-20 which was first introduced 38 YEARS AGO and is no longer in service with the Russian armed forces. The Iskander would have to be detected in flight to be intercepted and it is far more maneuverable and difficult to detect by radar than you seem to think.

        • Marcd30319

          The SS-26M may very well also be in violation of the Intermediate Nuclear Force Treaty, and again the Donald Cook is a BMD-capable ship so I have little to worry. I have been a member of the Naval Institute for nearly 40 years so please spare me your snide aside.

  • Secundius

    The next time some stupid pilot tries to make a close-in approach on a US Warship, I think the Captain of that ship, should boost the power and gain of their SPY-1 Radar System and give the approaching pilot a ZORCH. Then see how far his plane gets after receiving one!

  • Secundius

    > A treaty with Putin?

    Better draft it on toilet paper, because in only has one use.

  • some2example2

    the russians are claiming that it jammed the aegis system, remember, this is the same navy that destroyed a passenger jet because it thought it was making an attack run.

    this time, it made 12 simulated attack runs and the destroyer didn’t defend itself.

    the captain, was within international treaties to defend his ship, from jet fighters making attack runs at it, if he choose not to defend his ship, he put 280 lives at risk, because the 13 pass could have been a real anti ship missile launch.

    so it leads me to believe, the russians have the capability to jam u.s. destroyers, this one at least.

    unless the u.s. navy rules of engagement are, to not fire back to defend yourself, until you’re hit with 17,000 pounds of anti ship ordinance and you can’t and are about to sink.

  • Secundius

    It seem to me that both the TICONDEROGA class Cruiser and the AREIGH BURKE class Destroyer have some pretty formidable defensive armament.

  • Secundius

    Yeah, I guess they didn’t want to lose one of their newer designs, like MiG-35 or the Su-35. After selling most of them too the Chinese. Much easier and cheaper to lose
    a pre-1983 design. Then it is to replace one of the newer ones. But too bad for the pilot if he actually crashed and died. But what is the death of a Russian Pilot, too Putin. After all he has no more love for his own people, let-alone the Ukrainian people.

  • paladin58

    If I was the USS Cook CO, I would greet this intruder with a lock on of my fire control radar and missiles/guns at the ready position.

    • Secundius

      @ paladin58.

      I got a better idea, Turn up the power and crank up the gain on the SPY-1 Doppler Phased-Radar Array to Full Power. And Fry all the Electronics and Electrical Systems of the Russian Fighter, and if your really, really lucky the next time the Russian Pilot has children. Their all probably be “two-headed” children. That’s called a ZORCH.

  • El_KaBong

    Since when has an Su-24 Fencer become a fighter?

    That’s like saying an F-111 was a fighter…

    • Secundius

      @ El_KaBong.

      The General Dynamics F-111 Airframe was “A-Jack-Of-All-Trade” Aircraft. The F-111A/C/D/F/K Aardvark, were all Air Force model Air Superiority Fighters. Also know as the “Pig” by the Australian Air Force. The F-111B, was a US. Naval Test Bed model for the Grumman F-14A Tomcat. The FB-111A/G, were Air Force Fighter Bombers or an Intermediate Supersonic Penetration Bomber. And the EF-111A Raven, was a Electronics Warfaire model simular to the US. Navy Frowler. The Sukhoi Su-24 Fencer, was never more then Short-Range Fighter/Interceptor in name only. The Fencer, was never meant to be anything then a Cheap Mass Produced Stopgap Fighter and Replacement to the MiG-21 design. It simply didn’t have any range.

      • El_KaBong

        So?

        I know that about the F-111 and more.

        Thanks.

        It’s anything BUT a fighter.

        The F-111B was not a ‘test model’ for the F-14.

        The F-111B was cancelled and replaced by the F-14.

        The F-111K was cancelled and never made it out the door.

        “The Sukhoi Su-24 Fencer, was never more then Short-Range Fighter/Interceptor in name only.The Fencer, was never meant to be anything then a Cheap Mass Produced Stopgap Fighter and Replacement to the MiG-21 design. It simply didn’t have any range.”?

        Not even close.

        You’re mixing up quite different aircraft.

        The F-111/Su-24/Tornado were/are all similar long range, twin seat, twin engined, variable geometry interdictor aircraft.

        The F-15E replaced the F-111 in USAF service.

        The MiG-21 is a single seat single engine light fighter.

        • Secundius

          El_KaBong.

          Don’t shot the Messenger, Shot the the Message. I didn’t give it the Fighter designation. The Powers-To-Be and the Air Force, gave it the designation. It must be because of the internally mounted, General Electric M61 6-Barrel 20x102mm Vulcan, Auto-Cannon. Remember, these are the same people that designated the F-117A Nighthawk, as “Fighter.”

          • El_KaBong

            Oh, good grief….

            Do some research, please.

            The OPTIONAL gun pack on certain F-111 models was rarely if ever used.

            It was useless even for strafing, since the crews knew using a huge F-111 for strafe runs was unwise, at best.

            http://bayourenaissanceman.blogspotDOTca/2010/11/weekend-wings-37-f-111-aardvark-part-1.html

            “As far as I know, the cannon was never carried operationally by USAF or RAAF F-111’s.”

            Or:

            http://www.airforce-technologyDOTcom/projects/f111fighter/

            “The tactical combat variants, excluding the EF-111A or FB-111A/F-111G, could carry a M61 Vulcan 20mm cannon with a 2,084 round ammunition tank. It was, however, never used in any combat and was removed from the aircraft by the early 1980s.”

            Remember, the F-101, F-102, F-106, F-105 and F-104 were designated as ‘fighters’…

          • Secundius

            @ El_KaBong.

            As I said, I wasn’t a member of the Naming Convention.

          • El_KaBong

            So what are you going on about then?

            The M61 has nothing to do with this story….
            The Su-24 is not a Fishbed replacement…

          • Secundius

            @ El_KaBong.

            I said the Fencer, WAS intended to REPLACE the Fishbed. I didn’t say IT REPLACE the Fishbed. The Fishbed is a piece of crap as a fighter and as an interceptor. And truth be told the Fencer isn’t much better. The Soviet MiG-21 and Japanese ZERO have one thing in common, pull too many G’s, and the wing’s come off.

          • El_KaBong

            No it was not.

            The Su-24 Fencer is a BOMBER.
            It was never intended to replace a MiG-21.
            EVER.

            You are making things up regarding Zeros and MiG-21’s, BTW.

          • Secundius

            @ El_KaBong.

            Sukhou Su-24 (Nato-Designate, Fencer) Supersonic Swept-Wing All-Weather Attack Aircraft!

            > Just like the US. Navy, Grumman A-14D Bobcat, Swept-Wing All-Weather Attack Aircraft-version of the Tomcat
            > Just like the US. Air Force, FB-111A Aardvark, Swept-Wing All-Weather Fighter-Bomber.
            > Just like the Australian Air Force, F-111G Pig, Swept-Wing All-Weather Fighter/Bpmber.
            > Just like the Royal Air Force, Panavia GR4 Tornado, Swept-Wing All-Weather Ground Attack Aircraft.
            > Just like the German Air Force, Panavia IDS Tornado, Swept-Wing All-Weather Interdiction/Strike Aircraft.
            > Just like the Italian Air Force, Panavia IDS Tornado, Swept-Wing All-Weather Interdiction/Strike Aircraft.

            DO YOU HAVE THE PICTURE, BY NOW! Or, Should I keep going on, and on, and on!!

          • El_KaBong

            My, my you are a cranky one…

            I said the Su-24 is not a fighter.

            I also said it had nothing to do with a MiG-21 Fishbed.

            And now you’re bringing the F-14 into it?

            Thanks for proving my point.

            Please if you feel the need to display your ignorance, keep going on, and on, and on….

          • Secundius

            @ El_KaBong.

            You brought the subject of Variable Swept-Wing Aircrafts.
            The Sukhoi Su-24 (Fencer Nato designated) is a Variable Sewp Wing Aircraft. Well, so is the Grumman F-14D Tomcat. And all the others I mentioned You said the Su-24 is a BOMBER, it’s not. It’s All-Weather Attack/Strike Aircraft.
            Guess what, so is the Hornet and the Super Hornet and Lightning II. And believe it on, not, so is the Warthog.

          • El_KaBong

            Good lord…..

            The original topic was the incorrect identification of the Su-24 Fencer as a fighter.

            The Su-24 Fencer is NOT a fighter.

            The F-111 is NOT a fighter.

            The Tornado IDS is NOT a fighter.

            You’re the one who muddled things and mentioned F-14’s which I never did.

            I didn’t mention MiG-23/27 Floggers, Su-22 Fitter’s either.

            Want to talk about those?

            They aren’t relevant to the topic, but that isn’t stopping you from bringing up irrelevant items.

            “You said the Su-24 is a BOMBER, it’s not. It’s All-Weather Attack/Strike Aircraft.”?

            LMFAO!!!!

            “It’s All-Weather Attack/Strike Aircraft.
            Guess what, so is the Hornet and the Super Hornet and Lightning II. And believe it on, not, so is the Warthog.”?

            Again…..ROTFLMFAO!!!!!

            Go back. Re-read the comments.
            Then come back and apologize.

            The first thing you should do when you find yourself in a hole, is to stop digging.

          • Secundius

            @ El_KaBong.

            Are you whacked in the head, or, just plain stupid. I’m apologizing too you. It’s you who seem to grasp that modern day aircrafts are Multi-Functional Platform, doing more, than what they were intended to do. What was an Interceptor, yesterday. Is a Fighter today, and a Bomber/Strike aircraft tomorrow.

          • Secundius

            @ El_KaBong.

            Its like a Cordless Drill. Its a Left-Hand Cordless Drill if I hold it in my Left-Hand. And, a Right-Handed Drill if I hold it in my Right-Hand. DO YOU GET TO PICTURE NOW. Its a Name, a Classification, It’s Not carved in stone by the hand of God.
            Its totally meaningless. Its whatever you what it to be.

  • Secundius

    @ El_KaBong.

    The General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark, is and has been, used as Fight, a Very Large Fighter. But, still, it hase been used as a Fighter. Just like the Douglass A-4 Skyhawk, has been used as a Bomber. A very Small Bomber. But, still a Bomber.