I have no idea as to whether that is true or not, nor am I able to produce ballistic tragectories/data for that purpose (not surprising really!!!). I would be surprised though, if a location in Poland or central Asia would matter compared with a location in the UK or Canada or Alaska/North US or any other northern "missile" base. The Chinese developed and successfully tested a system earlier this year so I would have thought that both the Soviets and United States had similar capabilities during the cold war (and today).
If NATO launched to destroy Russian sats then a similar response would happen (and vice a versa). I can't see the reason for a launch on Russian comms other than an outright conventional attack on Russia and we all know that previous attemps have failed dismally let alone the fact that NATO simply hasn't got the capability for that kind of victory. (even if they had Russia would launch nukes if they thought they would be defeated). First nuclear strike by any of the nations capable leads to MAD.
The US defence budget has an awful lot of "pork barrel" politics associated with it. Couple this with a few decades of American foreign policy, domestic politics and you never quite know what the overall implication of such a system is.
Just for the record I would say that I'm pro American. I think that they are our closest (military) allies, however, that does not mean to say that I can't criticise their foreign policy or agree with every Whitehouse statement. I am appalled by the lack of thinking, planning, preparation, follow through and clear goals for both the Afghanistan and Iraq campaigns (irrespective of right or wrong - that's another valid debate).
These polictical failures (and the consequent focus) allow our Russian friends to quietly step up their activities in order to increase the political pressure whether on the international front or Russian domestic front.
Ooops - sorry, longer than intended but I got into the flow.
"Reality is what it is, not what you want it to be." Frank Zappa. ----------- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." Huang Po.----------- "A drowsy line of wasted time bathes my open mind", - Ride.
Im not sure its purely for domestic consumption, apparently the Soviets have been snooping around the British Isles with submarines as well. Which as at the moment the Royal Navy is kinda teeny isnt great news
Neo they arent patrolling their skys.Why shouldnt they patrol their skies and show their military might?
They are flying in and near NATO airspace around Iceland/Faroes/Scotland
Originally Posted by Arrogant American, BBC News article
Typical.
Join the HEXUS Folding at Home Team!!
Welcome to HEXUS! - Read this if you're new!
hexus trust | joshwaller.co.uk | tea review
Sir Max Hastings wrote a very good article about Putin and this pseudo-cold war posturing in the Daily Mail (I know!) yesterday.
IIRC the idea is that destruction of russian satellites would be the first response to a conventional large-scale russian invasion of eastern Europe or a former soviet republic, preferably an oil-rich one. This would have the effect of immediately taking down communications with/between advancing russian units. Location of the missile sites is critical apparently, as the satelites are in geostationary orbits and presumably the missiles have limited range.
Originally Posted by Bertrand Russell
What worries me about the grandstanding and willy-waving going on is that it would only take a small mistake or international crisis to raise the threat of war. We all still have enough nukes to make the ground glow for the next few centuries.
I've got some info about that from another site I frequent..
There's also something a while back about the B2 at an air-show when a demo Rapier unit picked up the B2 and locked onto it for over 9 minutes, the B2 apparently got spooked, cut it's airshow demo short and buggered off back to base.."There was little suprise that Typhoon, with its world-class agility and high off-boresight missile capability was able to dominate "Within Visual Range" flight but the aircraft did cause a suprise by getting a radar lock on the F22 at a suprisingly long rate. The F-22s cried off, claiming that they were "unstealthed" anyway, although the next day´s scheduled two vs. two BWR engagement was canceled, and "the USAF decided they didn´t want to play any more ."
Source: "internatinal AIR POWER REVIEW" - year 2006, issue 20, page 45. - ISNB: 1-880588-91-9 (casebound) or ISBN: 1473-9917.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
*update*
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6981541.stm
There increasing in numbers 8 this time.
'Under established Nato procedures the MoD said it launched quick reaction alert aircraft in order to identify the bombers, as is routine.
Four F3 Tornados were launched in two waves from RAF Leeming, in North Yorkshire.
A Boeing E-3D airborne warning and control aircraft and a VC-10 refuelling tanker supported the operation, the MoD said.'
Last edited by Guy; 06-09-2007 at 08:56 PM.
They are playing it fairly careful and staying in international waters though, thus far. I suspect they are figuring out what happens when you poke a stick into a hornet's nest...
Cheers,
Stephen
what concerned me is the numbers now involved, 1 then 2, now 8.
Nothing wrong with this -keeps 'everyone' on their toes.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)