The Russians Are Coming!

[+Typhoid 231]

If you know there are cruise missiles incoming, there are F-15Cs, Super Hornets, and Raptors equipped with the latest AMRAAM model optimized for cruise missile defense available. However, if you DON'T know...

 

 

if you DON'T know, you can't get your fighters there. And even if you DO know, you can't get your fighters there, in position, and able to lock onto the many targets, unless the fighters were already on station and in the right place and already know where to look.

[+Typhoid 231]

I've heard the russians were developing some kind of rocket torpedos allegedly called something like "shkval", meaning "squall", and it's supposed to be the s**te... If russian subs carrying such torpedos got near a carrier group and would be able to lock onto the carrier... Man... those things are supposedly able to carry nuclear warheads even...

 

that is supposedly what blew up in the Russian Oscar a few years ago. The Iranians even made the claim to have developed them (using some pirated film clips dumped on the dumb reporters who were too stupid to recognize the con....)

[eraser_tr 29]

"Assuming we had more air cover than on 9/11."

 

meaning what? meaning perhaps that after a decade of meat axe budget cuts our air defense over the entire North American airspace of only 20 fighters on air sovereignty alert was perhaps a bit thin?

 

Exactly.

[+Typhoid 231]

Exactly.

 

Glad to see you will vote for the representative and senator, then, who will vote a much bigger budget for homeland defense.

 

(hint: it's not any of the DemocRATS.)

[eraser_tr 29]

Ah, but congress writes the checks, and the republicans were the majority back then, they're as much to blame as anyone for budget cuts. Another one of those incorrect stereotypes.

 

It doesn't look like anyone will be cutting defense spending anytime soon now. Between the middle east, a resurging russian threat and ever present china. Though I'd rather see the spending go to Jets, rifles and armor than to handouts for well connected companies.

[JediMaster 451]

Right, Congress pays the bills and holds the purse strings. While you can blame a president for what the military does, you can't blame him for its size or equipment.

[+Typhoid 231]

Right, Congress pays the bills and holds the purse strings. While you can blame a president for what the military does, you can't blame him for its size or equipment.

 

well.............

 

I'd say that its definitely a joint effort. Or in the case of most of the dems - a "joint" effort.....

 

The Republican Congress was beat into submission by a very astute and manipulative Democrat President - anyone remember the government "shut-down" and who won that political-budget dustup? Clinton did - hands down.

 

The President in fact submits the budget. Of course, he doesn't do that in a vacuum as he will address those issues that he knows will and will not sell in Congress.

 

At the end of the day, the President has a lot a more to do with the budget than one might think. But Congress is the one that passes it after adding and deleting those items (pork) near and dear to each representative and senator, and then sustaining that budget against veto threats and actual veto's. Clinton was a master at that political game - Bush (both) is not by any stretch of the imagination.

 

Looking back in the years of defense appropriations and hardware acquisitions - there is a distinct downturn in military procurement that occured under Clinton's watch. It is always referred to charitably in DoD graphs as an "acquisition holiday" where we essentially bought almost no new equipment during most of Clinton's regime, and at the same time drastically cut force levels. That absolutely cannot be denied. Did the Republican controlled Congress share part of that blame? absolutely but with the caveat referred to above - they got their @$$ handed to them in their confrontation with the President over defense and other budget items. Only at the end of his regime when it was clear that the gutted military procurement was going to be a key item in the Presidential race did any slight increase occur, but not sufficient to address most of the critical shortfalls in force structure.

 

When Bush came into office they started a defense review in order to most effectively target any increases in capability. That was the right answer although many of us were rather impatient to see some faster relief. What Bush and Rumsfeld wanted to do was make sure that as they rebuilt our atrophied military capabilities, they bought the right kinds of stuff for the future and not just add obsolete equipment to an ancient force structure to fight in the Fulda Gap. Right answer, right approach but a slow and for us on the line, a fustrating process. But again, the correct approach. Even if, however, they had just turned the spending spree on, it takes time to rebuild force structure. One does not add divisions, ships and combat airwings overnight. It takes years to rebuild force structure, as it turns out, years we did not have. In a manner of a few months, the war was again brought to our shores in attacks that had been planned for years.

 

With respect to the NORAD air defense structure available on 9/11 - we had been absolutely gutted through the Clinton Decade and had a miniscule shell of an air sovereignty capability. We had no pretensions of being able to field an actual air defense of North America posture with the handful of Air National Guard squadrons available in the CONUS, two alert aircraft in all of Canada, and two USAF fighters to cover all of Alaska. Our sum total was 20 fighters to cover all of North America and in the complete absense of information available to us, because of the Gorelick memo that barred the sharing of intelligence data between agencies, of any potential threat. When the attacks came, we in NORAD had no warning and for several precious minutes no understanding of what was actually happening. We were completely dependent upon getting the phone call from the FAA that they had a hijack and when they did call us - 6 minutes prior to the first impact - they had no idea of where the hijacked aircraft were or where they were going. So we had none of the information we needed to make an intercept in time nor did anyone have any idea that this hijacking was not going to end as all of the previous ones had - with public negotiations on the tarmac and the eventual release of hostages. It was a horrendous change of environment.

 

Our posture today is drastically different. We are far better prepared for the unexpected and have a much greater alert capabilty and airborne posture available to us, ground based SAM capabilities, and updated ROE and communications. We are no longer dependent upon the call from the FAA, we hear as soon as the FAA hears of any problem and posture to meet any potential escalation.

 

We still have a long way to go to meet the entire range of potential air and cruise missile threats to our homelands. But we are substantially better protected today than we were on 9/11. So the self-rightous who throw rocks at our 9/11 posture can go pound sand.

 

rant off.

[TX3RN0BILL 3]

Well, bring on the truly innovative new tech, like naval rail guns!

 

All the rest is more or better of the same, but I'd like some new weaponry to toy with in Cold War 2 scenarios... :nyam:

[+Typhoid 231]

Well, bring on the truly innovative new tech, like naval rail guns!

 

All the rest is more or better of the same, but I'd like some new weaponry to toy with in Cold War 2 scenarios... :nyam:

 

we have some really cool stuff down the road....

[eraser_tr 29]

Clinton was a master at that political game - Bush (both) is not by any stretch of the imagination.

 

That's what Karl Rove was for. And I get to put him on the hotseat thursday!

 

But Rummy and Cheney were no good for the military either, I've already ranted about them cutting weapons programs. They may try to look like pro-military hawks, but they're no better than Clinton.

[JediMaster 451]

Just remember this--who killed the F-14D??

[DWCAce 19]

Gerrrrrrr.....

[+Typhoid 231]

we have some really cool stuff down the road....

 

just to clarify -

 

the "really cool stuff" coming down the road refers to actual procurement programs (not flight sims), of which I cannot speak further at the present time. Some of it isn't even in actual programs yet.

[+Typhoid 231]

That's what Karl Rove was for. And I get to put him on the hotseat thursday!

 

But Rummy and Cheney were no good for the military either, I've already ranted about them cutting weapons programs. They may try to look like pro-military hawks, but they're no better than Clinton.

 

not going to argue about those two! We were all harving a party when Rummy left!! I'm still stuck trying to fix some of his nonsense.

 

what do you get to do with Karl?

[+Viggen 516]

Just remember this--who killed the F-14D??

 

EVIL! I have fear! I have anger! And I use them becuase of that.

 

(Twisting the Dukoo line) And he is closing all those bases. Some of which I believe are had Air Defense jobs such as Otis Air National Guard Base on Cape Cod, MA. Of course has any one else heard of Chenney threating now to do a Gulf War/ 1981 Osirak style stike on Iran soon? (allegedly?)

Edited September 17, 2007 by JA 37 Viggen

[eraser_tr 29]

Wow! me and typhoid are agreeing. Saywhat, this needs to be stickied!

 

For this "really cool stuff down the road" would you have use for an older IT specialist who worked on the hubble space telescope?

 

I'm taking this "Road to the White House" course, in which C-SPAN has us able to interview various political figures. Thursday Karl Rove is scheduled, and will leave wimpering with his tail between his legs when me and my friend are done.

 

Seymour Hersch broke that story, I think it's something like April 6th or 8th they want to use tactical nuclear weapons for a purely aerial strike against Irans nuclear facilities. Which utterly defeats the purpose of trying to stop a nation from making nuclear weapons. There'll be no digging our world image out of this hole anytime this century after that.

[+Typhoid 231]

Wow! me and typhoid are agreeing. Saywhat, this needs to be stickied!

 

For this "really cool stuff down the road" would you have use for an older IT specialist who worked on the hubble space telescope?

 

I'm taking this "Road to the White House" course, in which C-SPAN has us able to interview various political figures. Thursday Karl Rove is scheduled, and will leave wimpering with his tail between his legs when me and my friend are done.

 

Seymour Hersch broke that story, I think it's something like April 6th or 8th they want to use tactical nuclear weapons for a purely aerial strike against Irans nuclear facilities. Which utterly defeats the purpose of trying to stop a nation from making nuclear weapons. There'll be no digging our world image out of this hole anytime this century after that.

 

who wants to use tacnukes? sounds like a phony story to me. Arclights should be plenty.

 

we'll see who leaves wimpering.....

 

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

You guys are agreeing?! Sh*t, it's the Rapture, I knew it! I knew I shouldn't have gotten out of bed this morning...

[eraser_tr 29]

It's supposedly the white house wanting to use them, and the joint cheifs rare opposed to it.

 

Oh I'm quite sure it will be him, we didn't place first in the world's largest MUN competition for nothing. My only worry is getting to actually do so me of the questioning, there are a good ~25 people in the class.

[JediMaster 451]

Maybe we should ask the Russians if we could use their bomb?

[+Typhoid 231]

It's supposedly the white house wanting to use them, and the joint cheifs rare opposed to it.

 

Oh I'm quite sure it will be him, we didn't place first in the world's largest MUN competition for nothing. My only worry is getting to actually do so me of the questioning, there are a good ~25 people in the class.

 

of course the new standard for tough questioning has been set -

 

http://www.local10.com/news/14138122/detai...ia&psp=news

 

 

"It's supposedly the white house wanting to use them," I don't buy it. someone's fabricating a story and the nutroots are falling for their own cannard.

 

"and the joint cheifs rare opposed to it." imagine that.......! something along the lines of "YGTBSM!!!"

Edited September 18, 2007 by Typhoid

[+Typhoid 231]

Maybe we should ask the Russians if we could use their bomb?

 

HA!!!

 

[eraser_tr 29]

Wow, what pricks. Not gonna happen, and I intend to be tactful. Being respectful makes a hard hitting question all the more sharp and effective. Though it wouldn't be unheard of hear, they called the NYPD on students protesting the president's absurd salary raise when tuition is a record high and enrollment was a record low. But I'm well connected here, I'll be left alone.

 

Well it was Seymour Hersch of the New Yorker who broke the story, not some tabloid hack who doesn't have to worry about credibility. Considering how known it was we were going to invade Iraq long before any of the official diplomacy or military buildup started, it would not be the slightest bit surprising to be true.

[+Typhoid 231]

Well it was Seymour Hersch of the New Yorker who broke the story, not some tabloid hack who doesn't have to worry about credibility. Considering how known it was we were going to invade Iraq long before any of the official diplomacy or military buildup started, it would not be the slightest bit surprising to be true.

 

sorry. any reporter for any rag doesn't have any real understanding of what is, might, or is not going on in military contingency planning. Its either utter fabrication on his part in the firm understanding that no one is going to call him on it, or its a leak involving high treason.

 

For the record - military contingency planning is always at the TS/compartmented level. So there is no way he or anyone else in the press would have any insight into such things. The other point to remember is that contingency planning is just that - "what if". It doesn't reflect actual intent to do anything or not do anything. Its just being prepared and thinking through the problems ahead of time.

 

so even if there was or is any pentagon planning going on that may or may not involve tacnukes, it does not neccessarily reflect any actual intent to move forward.

 

and no, I have no idea if any such a thing is going on. But I would surprised if someone, somewhere has not been tasked to give some thought to "what if".

 

For Seymour Hersch to be pontificating about such stuff and fabricating his stories as he usually does is the height of journalistic irresponsibility and a complete lack of ethics and integrity.

 

"not some tabloid hack who doesn't have to worry about credibility. " He has absolutely no credibility with me and never has had and the New Yorker is not a credible source. He is tabloid hack and the New Yorker is a tabloid.

Edited September 18, 2007 by Typhoid

[eraser_tr 29]

That may be what you think, but not the rest of journalism. Considering you call fox news fair and balanced, I'll go with the rest of journalism. And yes, I tried to watch fox, the typical story is the same as every other network(they get everything from AP and rueters just like the rest) but anything political or war related, they're just a 24 hour white house press conference, and do a horrible and demeaning job of representing anything left or center.