Russian SU 24 buzzes US Navy ship; gets as close as 30 ft from it - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50136651] i own firearms and have been in physical altercations while having access to a firearm without even considering using it, i think you need to come to the US and learn a thing or two about americans before spouting off[/QUOTE] You maybe able to hold off but statistics show that a lot of people are not like you in that respect. [editline]15th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Grenadiac;50136671]i sincerely doubt if someone's pushing you around you're just gonna hunch over and try to pretend you're enjoying your drink, pushing back at someone taking a swipe at you isn't even remotely comparable to a neutral warship shooting down an unarmed aircraft buzzing them[/QUOTE] You misunderstood my analogy. I didn't say anything about physical harassment, I was talking about provocation, did you not take the context into account? Russian jet didn't hit vessel = provocation. Someone getting up in your grill = provocation. (someone physically harassing you = assault, not provocation)

[QUOTE=Bat-shit;50133152]well answer me this: if I hopped over your fence and stole some of your garbage in the yard, would you not use the opportunity to shoot me dead?[/QUOTE] No. Though, to be fair, there's a bit of a difference between one man stealing another man's trash from his yard and one nation's fighter jet exhibiting hostile and dangerous behavior directed at another nation's warship in a time of very high diplomatic tension on a historic scale. But no it's cool go ahead and just assume that all Americans are raving lunatics who ejaculate uncontrollably at the notion of murdering another human with their legally owned firearm.

so the guy in your analogy is getting up in my face and talking shit he's getting pushed and told to fuck off, which isn't an option available to a warship. it can either shoot down or not shoot down the aircraft if he comes back and takes a swing i'm gonna do something about it at that point but the warship still can only kill or not kill the harassing aircraft and i have the ability to stop long before i do any serious harm to your would-be brawler it's not a good analogy because even beating someone into the dirt isn't comparable to blowing up an airplane and killing its crew and it's still not related to us owning firearms and if you think getting physical with hecklers is an american thing take a look at your own country, i guarantee you if you went around talking shit to randoms in the UK you'd eventually get clubbed or stabbed - depending on the area the odds are good it wouldn't take you that long either. both of our countries have shitholes and both of us have reasonable, rational people.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50136729]so the guy in your analogy is getting up in my face and talking shit he's getting pushed and told to fuck off, which isn't an option available to a warship. it can either shoot down or not shoot down the aircraft if he comes back and takes a swing i'm gonna do something about it at that point but the warship still can only kill or not kill the harassing aircraft and i have the ability to stop long before i do any serious harm to your would-be brawler it's not a good analogy because even beating someone into the dirt isn't comparable to blowing up an airplane and killing its crew and it's still not related to us owning firearms and if you think getting physical with hecklers is an american thing take a look at your own country, i guarantee you if you went around talking shit to randoms in the UK you'd eventually get clubbed or stabbed[/QUOTE] actually it is an option available to a warship. at least the "tell them to fuck off" part, the pilot just ignored it. [editline]15th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Grenadiac;50136618]"many europeans arrogantly cling to a belief that americans murder each other for sneezing in theaters" != "all europeans arrogantly cling to a belief that americans murder each other for sneezing in theaters" get your head out of your ass, if you didn't believe that you wouldn't have said it[/QUOTE] Semantics. It should be pretty obvious he doesn't believe every American is the same. What he's saying is simply that it's a far more prevalent mindset in America.

the odds are good the pilot never even heard the transmission if his radio was set to whatever encrypted channel the russians probably use

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50136729]so the guy in your analogy is getting up in my face and talking shit he's getting pushed and told to fuck off, which isn't an option available to a warship. it can either shoot down or not shoot down the aircraft if he comes back and takes a swing i'm gonna do something about it at that point but the warship still can only kill or not kill the harassing aircraft and i have the ability to stop long before i do any serious harm to your would-be brawler it's not a good analogy because even beating someone into the dirt isn't comparable to blowing up an airplane and killing its crew and it's still not related to us owning firearms and if you think getting physical with hecklers is an american thing take a look at your own country, i guarantee you if you went around talking shit to randoms in the UK you'd eventually get clubbed or stabbed - depending on the area the odds are good it wouldn't take you that long either. both of our countries have shitholes and both of us have reasonable, rational people.[/QUOTE] You're not reading what I'm saying. So I'm not even going to bother correcting you when my analogy is there, clear as day without all this bullshit you're adding to it. You're pulling that comparison out your ass there, not once had I compared the two so there was no need. I'm perfectly aware of how things are. I've had to deal with plenty violent shitheads. I once knew a guy who stabbed someone else just for speaking before the other guy had finished. I live in Glasgow so I know all to well about the danger of being stabbed. [editline]15th April 2016[/editline] But at least I'm not going to get shot. [editline]15th April 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=elowin;50136754] Semantics. It should be pretty obvious he doesn't believe every American is the same. What he's saying is simply that it's a far more prevalent mindset in America.[/QUOTE] Thank you. Someone who's actually read my posts.

i'd rather get shot than stabbed, having dealt personally with both types of injuries your analogy is shit, it's missing the fact that there's a range of reasonable responses in one situation and only a black or white response in the other

Russians had an Intel ship in the area monitoring the US Destroyer. On top of that I wouldn't doubt for a second that it was a Su-24MP buzzing the destroyer. If it wasn't an MP variant (only 10 were built supposedly) then I imagine it had some pretty nice ELINT gear on board.

[QUOTE=Wickerman123;50136623]I'm going to add to this and use the analogy of being in a bar. Someone tries to start a fight with you amongst all you friends and the staff are watching. Do you: A - kick the everloving shit out of him. B - Ignore him, not fight, and get on with your night. /analogy If you're the sort of person to choose A then you haven or right to be making criticisms about a military commanders decision and you definitely shouldn't be given access to firearms.[/QUOTE] I love this blanket generalization. "If you wanted to defend yourself, you're probably a rash asshole who shouldn't own guns because we were talking about guns, not a bar fight! :downs:" Please, tell me how defending yourself in a situation as described should limit one's access to firearms.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50136651]if someone's physically harassing me i'm while i'm enjoying a drink with my friends i'm gonna send em on, you can't ignore that nobody's going to the hospital but he'll be leaving the joint with a few bruises that's called sticking up for yourself bad analogy i own firearms and have been in physical altercations while having access to a firearm without even considering using it, i think you need to come to the US and learn a thing or two about americans before spouting off[/QUOTE] What about passing you by and calling your mother a whore? Because physically the fighter did not touch the ship.

[QUOTE=Dark RaveN;50137051]What about passing you by and calling your mother a whore? Because physically the fighter did not touch the ship.[/QUOTE] It's a terrible analogy to begin with, and just because it didn't touch the ship doesn't mean a thing, this was a legally sanctioned military action with the US and Poland participating in international waters, and then the Russians came in unannounced and started buzzing the ship. There is no "he said she said" bullshit here, the Russian's were 100% in the wrong.

the russians were wrong but nobody had to pay for it with their lives and that's good

[QUOTE=Wickerman123;50132229]People really seem to be ignoring the fact that the destroyer in this incident is literally on Russia's doorstep. Whenever Russia get's the close to anywhere else, they're scared off by scrambled fighters. You can't go "Oh Russia are being real dickheads getting so close to our ship like that" when relatively speaking, the ship itself is just as close to Russia.[/QUOTE] “On April 13, the pilots of the Russian Air Force Su-24 planes took part in a training exercise over international waters in the Baltic Sea. Their route took them to an area where the USS Donald Cook was present, around 70km from a Russian naval base,”. That's a quote from Major General Igor Konashenkov which can be found in multiple sources, including RT for maximum non-anti Russian bias! [img]http://files.1337upload.net/map-3574d6.jpg[/img] A map with an overlay of 70km radius centered on the naval base in question, Baltiysk. [b]Bearing in mind that the ship was operating out of Gdynia performing exercises with the Polish Navy[/b]. Shooting the plane down would have been excessive, but at the end of the day this is aggressive sabre-rattling on Russia's part and trying to paint them as the victim here is ridiculous. Also, Russian bombers scraping NATO counties' airspace or ships transiting the English Channel aren't 'scared off' by fighters who fly right at them and barely miss them at the last possible second. They're hailed and escorted from a safe distance.

Well it's the fucking Baltic Sea. Sure, Russians acted hostile when US moved a ship right to Russian borders (I suppose you can easily target Moscow with a range of weapons from the Baltic Sea). Of course US has the right to do that. Just like Russians have the right to fly 9 meters from ships... I see the Russian dickwaving as a response to US dickwaving this time.

[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;50149550]Well it's the fucking Baltic Sea. Sure, Russians acted hostile when US moved a ship right to Russian borders (I suppose you can easily target Moscow with a range of weapons from the Baltic Sea). Of course US has the right to do that. Just like Russians have the right to fly 9 meters from ships... I see the Russian dickwaving as a response to US dickwaving this time.[/QUOTE] Ah so while performing exercises with another navy, its a good idea to fly within 9 meters of another ship, no big deal, all while ignoring radio transmissions. So how was it dickwaving on the us/poland's part?

Imo I consider it irresponsible that the ship didn't take any defensive action since they didn't know the plane wasn't armed until it was within visual range and were ignoring orders to divert their course from the ship. At the very least they should've lit up the fighter with the AA radar to let the pilot know that they don't fuck around when it comes to the safety of the crew.

[QUOTE=GoldenDargon;50149989]Imo I consider it irresponsible that the ship didn't take any defensive action since they didn't know the plane wasn't armed until it was within visual range and were ignoring orders to divert their course from the ship. At the very least they should've lit up the fighter with the AA radar to let the pilot know that they don't fuck around when it comes to the safety of the crew.[/QUOTE] Air-to-Ship munitions take some time to lock on. You're not locking on to a ship with any munition from a km or 2 away and then firing. The Air-to-Ship munitions Russia has are fired from hundreds of Km's away.

[QUOTE=GoldenDargon;50149989]Imo I consider it irresponsible that the ship didn't take any defensive action since they didn't know the plane wasn't armed until it was within visual range and were ignoring orders to divert their course from the ship. At the very least they should've lit up the fighter with the AA radar to let the pilot know that they don't fuck around when it comes to the safety of the crew.[/QUOTE] Had we not established that it's likely the automated AA would have done that anyway?

I don't know what people are talking about by lighting it up with radar, pretty much everything gets spiked by its Radar that flies close enough, even friendlies. In the end the U.S would probably let them sink a destroyer first before risk firing on an unarmed Russian fighter and causing a major incident

[QUOTE=RobBrown4PM;50151048]Air-to-Ship munitions take some time to lock on. You're not locking on to a ship with any munition from a km or 2 away and then firing. The Air-to-Ship munitions Russia has are fired from hundreds of Km's away.[/QUOTE] Radar horizon generally means that aircraft in the area are still needed.