REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Putin the boot in ass

POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Saturday, May 20, 2017 03:05
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 682
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, April 17, 2017 1:08 PM

THGRRI

May the Good Lord take a liking to you... but not too soon!


Putin the boot in! Trump’s supersonic stealth fighters land in Britain to boost Nato and face off Russian aggression. F-35s can reach speeds of 1,200mph and are capable of carrying nuclear weapons.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4418624/Trump-s-supersonic-ste
alth-fighters-land-Britain.html

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, April 17, 2017 1:44 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.







Care to try addressing the facts, again?

Or do you shoot nothing but blanks?


Originally posted by G:
"I coined the slogan "We Suck!"© many years ago."
G is an avowed Putin-loving, pro-Russian, anti-American troll.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 28, 2017 11:55 AM

THGRRI

May the Good Lord take a liking to you... but not too soon!


Germany says reviving G-8 with Russia 'not up for debate'

The German government says there are no plans to invite Russia to return to the club of leading industrialized nations.

Russia was kicked out of the G-8 after its 2014 annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region and assistance for pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/germany-reviving-russia-
debate-47084015







NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 28, 2017 11:56 AM

6STRINGJOKER


Topic to be revisited in late October.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 29, 2017 6:24 PM

JO753

rezident owtsidr


I get the impression that you think Russia iz a democrasy, 6string.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/russian-pro-democracy-movemen
t-resists-putin-s-oppression-932539459600


----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 29, 2017 6:31 PM

6STRINGJOKER


Nope. Just saying that when Merkel is out things might look a lot different in Germany.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 29, 2017 6:54 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them. Pity would be no more, If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake


Well, the USA forced purchase of the F-35 on its allies in order to spread the development co$ts among more more governments, and our allies bought into it in order to make lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman wealthy, poor sods.

Quote:

The F-35 descends from the X-35, the winning design of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program. An aerospace industry team led by Lockheed Martin designed and manufactures it. ... The United States plans to buy 2,457 aircraft. Its variants are to provide the bulk of the crewed tactical airpower of the U.S. Air Force, Navy and the Marine Corps over the coming decades. ... The United States principally funds the F-35 JSF development, with additional funding from ... NATO members [and] ... Australia.

... By 2014, the program was "$163 billion over budget [and] seven years behind schedule." Critics also contend that the program's high sunk costs and political momentum make it "too big to kill."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

Pentagon: Here are all the problems with the F-35
http://www.businessinsider.com/here-are-all-the-problems-with-the-f-35
-that-the-pentagon-found-in-a-2014-report-2015-3


Aside from the specific faults of F-35 components, I heard a very interesting discussion about its overall limitations. The F-35 is supposed to be a do-all, be-all fighter jet for all branches of the military. However, as a designer of previous (more successful) fighter jets explained, each use of a jet has specific requirements.

For example, a "ground support" aircraft ... one which works during the preliminary phase of an invasion ... striking radar stations, communication centers, and tanks for example ... has to have not only a heavy payload (to carry a lot of missiles and bombs) but also be fuel-efficient so it can "loiter" over a battlefield for prolonged periods of time.

On the other hand, a jet which is a "fighter" jet ... one which engages other fighter jets or missiles in the air, accompanying and protecting a main air squadron ... must be exceptionally maneuverable and fast and have excellent avionics. Payload and fuel efficiency are a secondary consideration.

Jets which are based on aircraft carriers need to be able to handle short runways, but give up on payload.

Part of the F-35's problems are that it started out "neither fish nor fowl" ... the parts overlap was supposed to be 80% across different variations. Now, the parts overlap is down to 20%, but the design flaws are still in place and the beast is unable to perform ANY of the basic tasks effectively in an attempt to perform ALL of them. At least, so I've heard.

-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

THUGR, JONESING FOR WWIII
All those guns 1kiki, are pointed towards your beloved Russia. All those cyber capabilities, pointed right at Russia. Thanks Putin, and get ready to duck.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 29, 2017 7:55 PM

6STRINGJOKER


Shouldn't we be moving beyond the primitive design of the Jet by now?

I just watched the end of season 3 of Z Nation and I'm thinking something like this is totally plausible with tech today and would render all previous jet fighters immediately obsolete in terms of maneuverability:



Maybe we already have them? Would explain a lot of supposed UFO sightings, although I do believe there is a really good chance that we are not alone out here.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, April 29, 2017 10:35 PM

RIVERLOVE


Don't fuck with the Luftwaffe. Soon they will have planes without propellers!


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 1, 2017 9:48 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them. Pity would be no more, If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake


Quote:

F-35s can reach speeds of 1,200mph and are capable of carrying nuclear weapons.- THUGR
Now THAT is a bravado of a frightened man! Anyone who has to threaten Armageddon for no reason at all... that's some serious fear at work.

-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

THUGR, JONESING FOR WWIII
All those guns 1kiki, are pointed towards your beloved Russia. All those cyber capabilities, pointed right at Russia. Thanks Putin, and get ready to duck.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 1, 2017 12:54 PM

THGRRI

May the Good Lord take a liking to you... but not too soon!


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

F-35s can reach speeds of 1,200mph and are capable of carrying nuclear weapons.- THUGR
Now THAT is a bravado of a frightened man! Anyone who has to threaten Armageddon for no reason at all... that's some serious fear at work.




Hey stupid, I just post facts here. I don't make US policy. Fact, Putin miscalculated and it's coming back to kick him in the ass. Fact, that pisses you off. Fact, loving it here.






NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, May 1, 2017 1:04 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them. Pity would be no more, If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake


Quote:

F-35s can reach speeds of 1,200mph and are capable of carrying nuclear weapons.- THUGR

Now THAT is a bravado of a frightened man! Anyone who has to threaten Armageddon for no reason at all... that's some serious fear at work. - SIGNY

Hey stupid, I just post facts here. -THUGR

Incomplete ones. ANY fighter-bomber aircraft can carry tactical nuclear weapons; it depends on the weapon not the aircraft.

But since when does a nation protected on both sides by 3,000-6,000 miles of ocean require a 1,800-mile (max) range jet carrying tactical nukes for "defense"?

When carrying nukes the F-35 is a medium-range stealth bomber, not a fighter jet, for invasions launched from forward bases. So let's be clear about its role.


In any case, the F-35 is outclassed by the MiG-31, which was last produced in 1994 but is still in service
Quote:

High altitude: 1,860 mph; low altitude 930 mph
Cruise speed: 1,550 mph
Combat range: 1,860 mi with 4xR-33E and 2 drop tanks;
3,360 mi with 4xR-33E and 2 drop tanks with one in-flight refueling


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-31



As far as you not making policy ... well, maybe its our generals who have miscalculated and are now having to rely on "last resort" weapons.




-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

THUGR, JONESING FOR WWIII
All those guns 1kiki, are pointed towards your beloved Russia. All those cyber capabilities, pointed right at Russia. Thanks Putin, and get ready to duck.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 2, 2017 11:37 AM

G

... fully loaded, safety off...


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

But since when does a nation protected on both sides by 3,000-6,000 miles of ocean require a 1,800-mile (max) range jet carrying tactical nukes for "defense"?

When carrying nukes the F-35 is a medium-range stealth bomber, not a fighter jet, for invasions launched from forward bases. So let's be clear about its role.



Let's be clear - we don't make many *if any* fighter jets or bombers to be used over the US. So yeah, no sh*t, elsewhere, and I'm fine with that - it's where the sh*t usually hits the fan. When was the last time we had to worry about Mexico or Canada? 'cept with your boy Trump of course.

FWIW: as I have have said many times, I'm a peace hawk, no wars please, so save your guilt list of all the wars we've started.

Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
In any case, the F-35 is outclassed by the MiG-31, which was last produced in 1994 but is still in service
Quote:

High altitude: 1,860 mph; low altitude 930 mph
Cruise speed: 1,550 mph
Combat range: 1,860 mi with 4xR-33E and 2 drop tanks;
3,360 mi with 4xR-33E and 2 drop tanks with one in-flight refueling


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-31



Wow - stats and all - that is like lifted from Russia Insider! "our bright shiny air force is the greatest! Our pilots have muscles of steal and nerves like bears!" Or maybe it's from Starship Troopers?

I have always wondered how you are able to perform your job - ostensibly for the US - professionally and completely when you so obviously can't stand this country to such an extent that it's palpable.

==============================

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 2, 2017 12:45 PM

THGRRI

May the Good Lord take a liking to you... but not too soon!


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:

F-35s can reach speeds of 1,200mph and are capable of carrying nuclear weapons.- THUGR

Now THAT is a bravado of a frightened man! Anyone who has to threaten Armageddon for no reason at all... that's some serious fear at work. - SIGNY

Hey stupid, I just post facts here. -THUGR

Incomplete ones. ANY fighter-bomber aircraft can carry tactical nuclear weapons; it depends on the weapon not the aircraft.

But since when does a nation protected on both sides by 3,000-6,000 miles of ocean require a 1,800-mile (max) range jet carrying tactical nukes for "defense"?

When carrying nukes the F-35 is a medium-range stealth bomber, not a fighter jet, for invasions launched from forward bases. So let's be clear about its role.


In any case, the F-35 is outclassed by the MiG-31, which was last produced in 1994 but is still in service
Quote:

High altitude: 1,860 mph; low altitude 930 mph
Cruise speed: 1,550 mph
Combat range: 1,860 mi with 4xR-33E and 2 drop tanks;
3,360 mi with 4xR-33E and 2 drop tanks with one in-flight refueling


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-31



Look at the three photos. All the armament you see on your precious MIG 31 means it is much easier to detect. The F 35 will have destroyed the MIG 31, long before it sees the F 35. Same goes for Americas' F 22 Raptor. Both American jets have radar equipment that is not detectable when it is engaged. When the Russians use their radar in an attempt to see what's out there, they become visible. Sorry comrade, no contest.

MIG 31



F 35



F 22 Raptor








NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 3, 2017 4:23 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them. Pity would be no more, If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake


PAK FA



-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

THUGR, JONESING FOR WWIII
All those guns 1kiki, are pointed towards your beloved Russia. All those cyber capabilities, pointed right at Russia. Thanks Putin, and get ready to duck.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 3, 2017 8:03 AM

G

... fully loaded, safety off...


I'm sure anyone can find a list ordered however they want. Russia Insider's is pretty funny and scary though.

http://www.military-today.com/aircraft/top_10_fighter_aircraft.htm

Sorry Sigs, this list has your vaunted SU 35 at number 7 behind France, China, the European Union (gotta hurt), and US planes.



==============================

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 3, 2017 10:37 AM

THGRRI

May the Good Lord take a liking to you... but not too soon!


Quote:

Originally posted by G:
I'm sure anyone can find a list ordered however they want. Russia Insider's is pretty funny and scary though.

http://www.military-today.com/aircraft/top_10_fighter_aircraft.htm

Sorry Sigs, this list has your vaunted SU 35 at number 7 behind France, China, the European Union (gotta hurt), and US planes.



==============================



It doesn't have the undetectable radar either. It is obvious they copied our design. Must mean their design sucks.






NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 3, 2017 11:14 AM

THGRRI

May the Good Lord take a liking to you... but not too soon!


The PAK FA is a good jet. There are only 12 in existence though. They are a work in progress with cost overruns and a lot of technical issues. Same as the F 35 but Russias' partner in financing the project India, may be thinking of pulling out.

Why F-22 Would Crush Russia's PAK FA in Fight ?









NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 4, 2017 6:22 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them. Pity would be no more, If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake


The F-35 is an aircraft still in development, as everyone involved will attest, so comparing an aircraft whose capabilities are as-yet unknown to other aircraft with a long history of performance is a cheat.

In any case, the thing that stuck out wasn't the F-35 and its capabilities .... whatever they are ... it was THUGR's fatuous assertion that they could carry nuclear weapons! As if that was some sort of distinguishing point!

I mean, who grabs for a hand-grenade when a simple sharp retort will do?

I'd hate to see THUGR in a police uniform. With that kind of over-reaction, he'd cause his employer millions of dollars in settlements!



-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake

THUGR, JONESING FOR WWIII
All those guns 1kiki, are pointed towards your beloved Russia. All those cyber capabilities, pointed right at Russia. Thanks Putin, and get ready to duck.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 4, 2017 10:39 AM

G

... fully loaded, safety off...


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The F-35 is an aircraft still in development, as everyone involved will attest, so comparing an aircraft whose capabilities are as-yet unknown to other aircraft with a long history of performance is a cheat.



Translation: "It's not fair to compare a cutting edge, modern aircraft to our old rust bucket. Just because Turkey can shoot 'em down with rocks doesn't mean they aren't air-worthy."

==============================

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 4, 2017 11:01 AM

THGRRI

May the Good Lord take a liking to you... but not too soon!


The Pentagon Will have brought 404 F-35 Jets within the Next Five Years. Many of our allies are currently buying them as well. Why do you always lie? And you did so knowing that some have been deployed in Europe as stated earlier in the thread.

"supersonic stealth fighters land in Britain to boost NATO and face off Russian aggression. F-35s can reach speeds of 1,200mph and are capable of carrying nuclear weapons."




Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The F-35 is an aircraft still in development, as everyone involved will attest, so comparing an aircraft whose capabilities are as-yet unknown to other aircraft with a long history of performance is a cheat.

In any case, the thing that stuck out wasn't the F-35 and its capabilities .... whatever they are ... it was THUGR's fatuous assertion that they could carry nuclear weapons! As if that was some sort of distinguishing point!

I mean, who grabs for a hand-grenade when a simple sharp retort will do?

I'd hate to see THUGR in a police uniform. With that kind of over-reaction, he'd cause his employer millions of dollars in settlements!

, pointed right at Russia. Thanks Putin, and get ready to duck.







NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 9, 2017 6:09 PM

THGRRI

May the Good Lord take a liking to you... but not too soon!


US to arm Kurdish fighters against Isis in Raqqa, despite Turkish opposition

The Trump administration has announced it will arm Syria’s Kurdish fighters “as necessary” to recapture the key Islamic State stronghold of Raqqa, despite intense opposition from Nato ally Turkey, which sees the Kurds as terrorists.

The decision is meant to accelerate the Raqqa operation but undermines the Turkish government’s view that the Syrian Kurdish group known as the Kurdish Peoples’ Protection Units (YPG) is an extension of a terrorist organization that operates in Turkey. Washington is eager to retake Raqqa, arguing that it is a haven for Isis operatives to plan attacks on the west.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/09/us-arm-kurdish-fighters-
syria-isis-raqqa-trump







NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 19, 2017 12:02 PM

THGRRI

May the Good Lord take a liking to you... but not too soon!


Russia, Syria fume over U.S. strike on Syrian troops

BEIRUT -- A Syrian military official said Friday that an airstrike by the U.S.-led coalition on a government military position near the border with Jordan had killed several soldiers and caused material damage.

The unnamed official's comments were carried by Syrian state TV a day after the U.S.-led coalition said a U.S. airstrike had struck pro-Syrian government forces that the coalition said posed a threat to American troops and allied rebels operating near the border with Jordan.


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-syria-anger-us-airstrike-syrian-tro
ops-bashar-assad-al-tanf
/






NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 19, 2017 1:29 PM

6STRINGJOKER


I wish we would just get out of there......

16 fucking years of this bullshit isn't enough?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, May 19, 2017 3:07 PM

THGRRI

May the Good Lord take a liking to you... but not too soon!


Quote:

Originally posted by 6stringJoker:
I wish we would just get out of there......

16 fucking years of this bullshit isn't enough?



Do some research. The Syrian war has been going on since 2011 not 2001. And what we are doing there is fighting DASH not Assad. The troops we bombed were massing on the border of an ally. They were warned a half dozen times to leave and did not.

The way you clump foreign affair issues in the Middle East into one scenario with one common solution, shows your ignorance on the subject.






NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, May 20, 2017 3:05 AM

6STRINGJOKER


Seriously dildo, STFU. It IS all the same. We shouldn't be there at all. GWB opened that door, Obama was the first president we ever had who sat in the desk all 8 years with wars going on, and now Trump isn't stopping it like he also said he would.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
The Age of Redefinition
Thu, September 21, 2017 02:25 - 19 posts
Countdown Clock to Trumps impeachment " STARTS"
Wed, September 20, 2017 21:11 - 408 posts
Dow @ 20K. Time to jump off!
Wed, September 20, 2017 18:53 - 67 posts
antibiotic resistance
Wed, September 20, 2017 18:46 - 44 posts
California lawmakers pass landmark 'sanctuary state' bill
Wed, September 20, 2017 18:06 - 38 posts
Syrian army punches through to beseiged Deir Ezzor
Wed, September 20, 2017 18:03 - 81 posts
Evidence: So where are we now(II) ?
Wed, September 20, 2017 16:26 - 5 posts
The Donald at the UN (by the Saker)
Wed, September 20, 2017 16:06 - 1 posts
The death of the dollar?
Tue, September 19, 2017 22:19 - 14 posts
Russia suspended from 2016 Olympics?
Sun, September 17, 2017 13:10 - 188 posts
Utah Nurse Arrested
Sun, September 17, 2017 11:03 - 58 posts
JO 753 for Prezident!
Sun, September 17, 2017 10:31 - 304 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL