Russian bombers intercepted off Alaska

[Amelia]

Russian bombers intercepted off Alaska

Moscow says long-range patrol was 'escorted' by NATO jets

March. 26, 2008

Reuters

MOSCOW - NATO forces sent jets to escort two Russian long-range air force bombers patrolling neutral skies near Alaska on Wednesday, Russian news agencies quoted the defense ministry as saying.

Russia's military has resumed its Cold War practice of flying regular patrols far beyond its borders, and in the last year has also sent turbo-prop Tu-95s over U.S. naval aircraft carriers and the Pacific island of Guam.

Accompanied by two Il-78 refueling tankers, the two Tu-95 Bear bombers flew for 15 hours over the Arctic and Pacific oceans, Interfax news agency quoted Russian Air Force spokesman Alexander Drobyshevsky as saying.

"In the course of the air patrol, long-range aviation aircraft were escorted by NATO jets in the region of Alaska," said Drobyshevsky.

'The Russian B-52'

Originally designed to drop nuclear bombs, the Tu-95, Russia's equivalent of the U.S. air force's B-52, is a Cold War icon refitted for surveillance and maritime patrols.

Russia, in the eighth year of an economic boom driven by high global oil prices, has raised military funding after years of neglect following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The Russian navy has finished construction of mothballed submarines and restarted large-scale naval exercises that shortages of fuel and spare parts had made a rarity.

Analysts say the Kremlin is using its reviving military might to support a policy of projecting Russia's power again on the world stage.

But some military observers say the Russian armed forces are still hampered by a shortage of combat-ready assets and that the exercises are primarily a public relations exercise.

[Neil D]

Well, not only has the US lost credibility with the world at large, the US is being challenged by our former competetor in the world market.

And our ultra conservative leadership has put our reputation into the toilet, our economy into the brink of rescession, and our grandkids will be paying for our debts....

How much longer will it be before China will challenge us with the taking over of Tiwan?

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

not only has the US lost credibility with the world at large, the US is being challenged by our former competetor

One has nothing to do with the other. I am not sure what credibility the US has lost. The value of the dollar has fallen quite a bit but it is still accepted all over the world. Russia is rebuilding their military because the price of oil is providing them enough revenue that they can. Europe is a major purchaser of Russian goods so they have more to do with Russia being able to rebuild their military than anything the US is doing.

Quote:

our ultra conservative leadership has put our reputation into the toilet

"Ultra conservative leadership"?

[fccool]

The Soviet Union fell in the same manner it had started... without much blood shed. The Russian military remained intact... it did not disappear. So there was hardly anything to rebuild. Just update. The mandatory military service of 18 months is still intact for people who do not go educational route. The public schools still have mandatory ROTC classes for men ... and the majority of male population knows how to use a weapon. US will be insane to do anything that would provoke Russia to war, because they would turn 3/4 of the known world against them (China today sides with Russia more than they do with US). But in then end these are nothing more than peacocks spreading their feathers. Russia is probably of of the main reasons that US is not in war with Iran right now, and thank God for that.

[John317]

I totally disagree that Russia is the main reason we are not at war with Iran right now. The main reason we are not a war is that the US doesn't want a war with Iran. The US wouldn't fight a war in Iran like it is in Afghanistan and Iraq, with ground troops. That wouldn't serve any purpose. When it happens, it will be an air-strike only, such as Israel's attack against Saddam's nuclear reactors back in the 80s, only on a much bigger scale.

However, if the US and Israel believe that Iran is close to having nuclear weapons, one or the other will take them out before they can be used. Russia across the border won't have anything to do with it. I am sure that if Bush is convinced Iran could have those weapons within a few years, they will be destroyed before he leaves office. We can't afford to let Israel do it, and they would do it if the US does not.

[fccool]

The nation as a whole does not want either war with Iraq or Iran. The administration is a different story though, and especially McCain coming into the picture who is all for the preemptive strike against Iran.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

. I'd like to see anyone justify this attitude.

Many Russian workers right now working on those nuclear sites and Russia would without a doubt see this as a strike on its citizens and would throw some weight around. I think that they invested into Iran nuclear energy for no other reason than that... to stop US from occupying the whole Middle East.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4301889.stm

[John317]

Do you think the US/Israel can or should allow Iran to make or obtain nuclear weapons?

And do you believe they will?

Finally do you believe, based on what you know about Obama, that he would allow Iran to complete the building of a nuclear weapon?

[fccool]

Do you think that Israel or US should have nuclear weapons and dictate which nations can and can not posess these? Don't you think it's a bit of a double standard?

I certainly don't think that Iran should be denied it's right to switch to a cleaner nuclear energy as they are open about it. You don't develop atomic bombs in one or two years, even if it had proper technology to do it right now... which it does not.

If North Korea can have nukes and US is fine with it, then why can't Iran have these? They are not as mad as Israel would like you to believe they are. They are rational and very educated people there who want peace.

PS... if Ahmedinejad would sing "Bomb Bomb US" in an interview, there would be an international uproar followed by declaration of war. But I guess in case of McCain it's ok... with people apploading around him not even realizing the consequences of such actions bringing about WWW III.

[John317]

Yes, it is our survival to keep nuclear weapons out of the hands of those who have said they would destroy Israel and who support terrorists. One bomb would destroy all of Israel and the Israelis know it. They won't permit it. It would be national suicide to do so.

It could also mean a nuclear device in Los Angeles or anywhere else in the US, including off the coast of the US. It would make the Twin Towers look like child's play.

[fccool]

John... I think your heart is failing you for fear. Ajmedinejad never said he desire to wipe Israel off the map. Israel would like people to believe so. The accurate translation would be ... erase Zionist regime from pages of history... plus he was quoting another person when he said it. Of course it did not sound that bad, so he was to be turned into a warmongering mad man... just like Kruchev was portrayed banging on the podium with a shoe. That's the image that people remember.

The truth is that Iran does not want war, neither they support terrorism as a nation. To say that they support terrorism is like saying that USA supported Natzi Germany. Certain people perhaps do, but let's not carry it too far and make the entire nation to blame. Iran simply would like to convey the story from the Palestinian side, which today is largely ignored. You hardly see any Palestinian side of the story in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I feel deeply for both sides as real people suffer and they are very tired of living in fear, hatered and without hope. Unfortunatly, the hatered now is inbred into everyday mentality in both sides. I got a chance to speak to ex Israeli IDF soldier, and the realities are that people see what's going on ... and they know what needs to be done, but they are not willing... because they really hate each other from birth to grave.

Iran getting nukes for a reason. They feel threatened by US presense, and just like in case of North Korea... the only thing that would make them back off is presense of that undisputed capability to end the world as we know it . Do I want that? Of course not! Do I understand where they are coming from? Yes I do .

[John317]

I'm not talking about the Iranian people as a whole supporting terrorism. I'm talking about the revolutionary guards and the government. They don't exactly have a government there that represents all the people like we have here. "Presidential candidates must be approved by the Council of Guardians prior to running in order to ensure their allegiance to the ideals of the Islamic revolution."

Yes, I remember Kruchev. I remember when he went on tour of the US. After he went back, I got a book of all his speeches that he gave and all the interviews. He said, "We'll bury you," but it didn't happen. I was interested in those kinds of things as a kid. I remember the practice drills for a nuclear attack in 1962.

Do you believe that Obama if elected would allow Iran to have nuclear weapons?

[John317]

John... I think your heart is failing you for fear. Ajmedinejad never said he desire to wipe Israel off the map. Israel would like people to believe so. The accurate translation would be ... erase Zionist regime from pages of history... plus he was quoting another person when he said it.

Of course it did not sound that bad, so he was to be turned into a warmongering mad man...

No, my heart is not failing me at all.

Are the following reports false in your view?

Iran's Revolutionary Guards on Monday predicted Hezbollah would destroy Israel, in a new verbal onslaught against the Jewish state after the murder of a top commander of Lebanon's Shiite militant group.

"In the near future, we will witness the destruction of Israel, the aggressor, this cancerous microbe Israel, at the able hands of the soldiers of the community of Hezbollah," the ideological force's commander, Mohammad Ali Jafari, was quoted by the Fars news agency as saying.

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

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - The president of Iran again lashed out at Israel on Friday and said it was "heading toward annihilation," just days after Tehran raised fears about its nuclear activities by saying it successfully enriched uranium for the first time.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called Israel a "permanent threat" to the Middle East that will "soon" be liberated. He also appeared to again question whether the Holocaust really happened.

"Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading toward annihilation," Ahmadinejad said at the opening of a conference in support of the Palestinians. "The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm."

Ahmadinejad provoked a world outcry in October when he said Israel should be "wiped off the map."

On Friday, he repeated his previous line on the Holocaust, saying: "If such a disaster is true, why should the people of this region pay the price? Why does the Palestinian nation have to be suppressed and have its land occupied?"

The land of Palestine, he said, referring to the British mandated territory that includes all of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, "will be freed soon."

He did not say how this would be achieved, but insisted to the audience of at least 900 people: "Believe that Palestine will be freed soon."

"The existence of this (Israeli) regime is a permanent threat" to the Middle East, he added. "Its existence has harmed the dignity of Islamic nations."....

[John317]

... Ajmedinejad never said he desire to wipe Israel off the map. Israel would like people to believe so. The accurate translation would be ... erase Zionist regime from pages of history... plus he was quoting another person when he said it...

But is a man such as Ajmedinejad reliable and mentally stable-- a man who denies that his country has any homosexuals and denies the holocaust?

Do you believe this report to be correct?

In a speech given on 14 December 2005 in the city of Zahedan, and carried live on Iranian television, Ahmadinejad made the following comments:

Why have they come to the very heart of the Islamic world and are committing crimes against the dear Palestine using their bombs, rockets, missiles and sanctions. [...] The same European countries have imposed the illegally-established Zionist regime on the oppressed nation of Palestine. If you have committed the crimes so give a piece of your land somewhere in Europe or America and Canada or Alaska to them to set up their own state there. Then the Iranian nation will have no objections, will stage no rallies on the Qods Day and will support your decision.

They have invented a myth that Jews were massacred and place this above God, religions and the prophets. The West has given more significance to the myth of the genocide of the Jews, even more significant than God, religion, and the prophets, (it) deals very severely with those who deny this myth but does not do anything to those who deny God, religion, and the prophet. If you have burned the Jews, why don't you give a piece of Europe, the United States, Canada or Alaska to Israel? Our question is, if you have committed this huge crime, why should the innocent nation of Palestine pay for this crime?

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

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday challenged a university audience to look into "who was truly involved" in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, defended his right to question established Holocaust history and denied there were gay Iranians.

When pressed about the harsh treatment of women, homosexuals and academics who challenge Iran's government, Ahmadinejad painted a rosy picture, saying, "Women in Iran enjoy the highest levels of freedom," he said.

He elicited laughter and boos from the audience at Columbia University when he said, "In Iran, we don't have homosexuals, like in your country."

His remarks, which lasted about an hour, made several general references to God, religion and science. He portrayed himself as an academic, misunderstood and unfairly criticized in the United States.

[fccool]

It does not matter who gets elected, either candidates are pro-Israel, and anti-Iran. At this point it's hard to tell who is right or who is wrong in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I for sure would not like Iran to get nuclear weapons , and I for sure would not like Israel to have those either... or any country for that matter. But realistically we all know that countries will act in their best self(selfish?)-interests. And you right... by countries, I'm talking about people who think they are "gods" to decide who's to live and who's to die. Ordinary people don't want war. You have to show them the enemy and give them the adequate reasons to die for once country. I think it's ludicrous.

Again, nuclear weapon grade technology is not something that any country can just get or even develop from scratch easily. Especially if other countries oppose it. There is just too much involved to go from civil grade uranium to weapon grade one. Right now, it seems that Iran does not have that capability. Even if they did, they are not anymore mad than North Korea and they know that it would be a national suicide to launch nuke against Israel. They are not insane. Listen to Ahmedinejad in interviews. He is a rational and very intelligent person. Far more rational than McCain at his best . All he wants is to alleviate the pressure from Palestinians, who he feels are the victims in this conflict as they are left with sticks and stones against the fourth strongest military force in the world.

As far as Obama letting Iran get nuclear weapons. I highly doubt that he would. It's not up to Obama to decide. President is only a front man behind a team and there are certain pressures involved I'm sure. But I don't think he is insane enough to bomb Iran, or let Israel do it either. I don't think that US economy can survive another war and shortage of oil.

[John317]

Listen to Ahmedinejad in interviews. He is a rational and very intelligent person. Far more rational than McCain at his best .

What is the craziest thing that you have heard McCain say? Anything crazier than to deny the existence of homosexuals in his country as Ahmedinejad has, or to deny the existence of the holocaust?

Quote:

As far as Obama letting Iran get nuclear weapons. I highly doubt that he would. It's not up to Obama to decide. President is only a front man behind a team

You mean you don't think the president of the United States is able to decide these matters? Do you think there are people telling him what he must do? Where is the evidence of this? Who is the team?

Quote:

But I don't think he is insane enough to bomb Iran, or let Israel do it either. I don't think that US economy can survive another war and shortage of oil.

I'm not talking, of course, about dropping nuclear bombs on Iran. We're talking about dropping large conventional bombs that would destroy the nuclear capability of Iran. It wouldn't be a war as such but an air attack on the nuclear facilities of that country. We wouldn't be interested in occupation or even in a ground war.

I do not believe that the US would stop Israel from destroying the nuclear reactors in Iran if they decided Iran was close to completing the construction of a nuclear bomb. The only way we could stop Israel is if we do it ourselves. Israel knows it would be destroyed by a single nuclear weapon.

You say you don't want Israel to have the bomb. But most authorities on the subject believe Israel is already in possession of it. http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cpc-pubs/farr.htm

[fccool]

But is a man such as Ajmedinejad reliable and mentally stable-- a man who denies that his country has any homosexuals and denies the holocaust?

Again, you have to understand Middle Eastern mentality before you question mental stability. You could say that tribal people in amazon rain forests are mentaly unstable simply because of the culture shock. I lived in Turkmenistan for 9 years, and I've never heard of such thing as homosexuality. I have not. I had not idea what it was. This concept is simply foreign in Middle East. Sure that there are closet homosexuals probably, but that's an entirely different concept.

As far as holocaust goes. I can relate. Between 29-31 probably between 7-10 million people died due to the Stalin's forced collectivization policies. People starved to death, and people ate people. It was a giant and countrywide zombie horror film. You can hardly hear of it anywhere in history today. When Hitler attacked the Soviet Union, the Ukraine took the major blow. People were murdered, left without food, raped... The civilian casualties exceeded those of the approximation of the holocaust. The point is, that these people are virtually forgotten and a selected group of people is remembered to the point that people objecting certain historical facts are being jailed. Holocaust denial is not a correct term. The correct term is revisionism. Revisionists do not say that the event never happened, they say that the numbers are overstated. Whether it is in the right mind for anyone to question the numbers it's up to you to decide. I simply say that I was not there, and I don't know. But I think people have right to ask questions. I also think it's ludicrous to remember atrocities against one group of people while ignoring the other more horrid ones. And I think this is the point that Iranian president is trying to make... at least in the interviews in the US. What do Palestinians have to do with the holocaust? I know it's a difficult question to consider... but do you think that the State of Israel would exist today if holocaust did not happen?

I do think that he goes overboard with his anti-Israel retoric at times, but I hardly think that he is capable of taking lives of millions of people.

[John317]

I have a friend who recently went to the concentration camps in Poland and took many photographs.

Have you ever read Anne Franks Diary? I've been in her Secret Annex myself.

Check out this link to my friend's photographs of Auschwitz II-Birkeau. 1.1 million were murdered but the number could be as high as 5 million.

http://homepage.mac.com/ronaldrobertgrantham/PhotoAlbum1.html

Remember that the Iranian leader calls it a "myth."

[John317]

What have you heard McCain say that causes you to believe that Ajmedinejad is more rational or reasonable?

[fccool]

I do not believe that the US would stop Israel from destroying the nuclear reactors in Iran if they decided Iran was close to completing the construction of a nuclear bomb. The only way we could stop Israel is if we do it ourselves. Israel knows it would be destroyed by a single nuclear weapon.

You say you don't want Israel to have the bomb. But most authorities on the subject believe Israel is already in possession of it. http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cpc-pubs/farr.htm

John, It's been known for a while that Israel does posess nuclear weapons. They are probably the only nation on earth right now that would have insentives to use those, as they will do anything to preserve their nation (as any nation would). I don't defend Iran's feud with Israel in the same way I don't defent Israel's feud with Palestine. Yet I do try to understand where each nation is coming from. It's not longer about who threw the first punch. It is far beyond it.

To attack Iran based on "would have" is like shooting a baseball player in a middle of a baseball game claming that he is planning to club you with a bat.

Do you remember what happened in Chernobil? Bombing a nuclear power station in Iran will have similar consequences. I pray to God that will not happen. Again, I don't think US can handle $8 per gallon gas right now. This is exactly what would happen if Iran is attacked.

[fccool]

John,

I don't deny holocaust . I don't even deny the numbers. I think it's wrong to demonize people for questioning historical facts. It's stupid to begin with. Truth does not need to be enforced with a jail sentence.

[John317]

Quote:

I lived in Turkmenistan for 9 years' date=' and I've never heard of such thing as homosexuality. I have not. I had not idea what it was. This concept is simply foreign in Middle East. Sure that there are closet homosexuals probably, but that's an entirely different concept. [/quote']

I'm going to be very direct here. That is simply not true that there are no homosexuals. Of course they have to hide it because if they don't they are killed. But I know people from Afghanistan and they have told me that during the war with Russia and even until the fall of the Taliban, it was common for men in the army there to have "boys" as their lovers. There were articles about this in the Time magazine a few years ago.

For anyone to say that this does not exist in the middle east simply is not true. Perhaps you did not know about it, but it is well documented. Andre Gide, a very well known French author, winner of a Nobel Prize for literature, wrote a journal about his travels in the Middle East. He was gay. He wrote about what he experienced there. You also have the experiences and writings of Lawrence of Arabia. I don't know if you are familiar with what I am talking about. In any case, the fact that there are homosexuals in the Middle East is a well established fact, but these people have to hide it because, as said before, it is very unhealthy not to. You get hanged or shot or cut. You are treated like a dog.

Not too long ago there was a homosexual who was hanged in Iran. And one young gay man in England is fearful of being sent back because he knows if he is, he will be executed.

[fccool]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

Immature and irresponsible:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/hongop.shtml

racist, but he did apologize for it though to his credit

Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.

Funny, yet ignorant . Definetly unfit quote for a president.

I don't think that Ahmenidejad ever advocated bombing anyone to send them a message .

[John317]

John,

I don't deny holocaust . I don't even deny the numbers. I think it's wrong to demonize people for questioning historical facts. It's stupid to begin with. Truth does not need to be enforced with a jail sentence.

I don't think anyone is being demonized. I just think it needs to be pointed out truthfully that he is questioning whether something happened that it is very important for the whole world to realize did happen. People questions these kinds of things for a reason, usually political. In this case the reason is rather obvious, I think.

It would be the same as saying that blacks were never slaves. There's a reason why people deny that blacks were mistreated.

We have to ask the question how do the victims of the holocaust or their descendants feel when they hear it all being denied? What if the world forgets what happened there?

[fccool]

I don't say that there are no homosexuals. I'm saying that it's not an openly approved behavior, and I think that's what he meant by it. Whether it is right or wrong it is up to you to decide. In these cultures the punishment for such behaviour since the ancient times was and still is death. Is it wrong... definetly. Are they mentally unstable to think that this is a behavior that is virtually non-existant. No.

Army and jail is what I call a "forced homosexuality" due to the lack of the opposite sex, and has very little to do with desires for another man. I definetly don't think it's better , but you can hardly compare it to the homosexuality you encounter in US. Rape cases are very low too, because honor of your relatives esteemed to be of the highest matter. If your sister is raped it is up to you to carry out justice, and police in many cases would look the other way.

[fccool]

Originally Posted By: fccool

John,

I don't deny holocaust . I don't even deny the numbers. I think it's wrong to demonize people for questioning historical facts. It's stupid to begin with. Truth does not need to be enforced with a jail sentence.

I don't think anyone is being demonized. I just think it needs to be pointed out truthfully that he is questioning whether something happened that it is very important for the whole world to realize did happen. People questions these kinds of things for a reason, usually political. In this case the reason is rather obvious, I think.

It would be the same as saying that blacks were never slaves. There's a reason why people deny that blacks were mistreated.

We have to ask the question how do the victims of the holocaust or their descendants feel when they hear it all being denied? What if the world forgets what happened there?

The world already forgotten most of the atrocities that going on and went about. Ignorance is very prevelant. Cases like these do not help either, as people seek profit from other people's misery. These are widespread and they leave many to question things. I certainly can't imagine how you can deny that the event happend and think that thousand of survivors somehow conspired to lie! It's ridiculous! But then again you have to try to understand why people question these things. They have reasons. Here's Iran's president answering this question himself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykd-syzZ4ZY

To sum it up, his problem is not with event. His problem with aftermath and Israel's usage of the memory of the event to gain sympathy. I think that is equaly unfair to the holocaust victims.