US says Russian warplane hits American drone over Black Sea
"KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — A Russian fighter jet struck the propeller of a U.S. surveillance drone over the Black Sea on Tuesday in a “brazen violation of international law,” causing American forces to bring down the unmanned aerial vehicle, the U.S. said.
Moscow said the U.S. drone maneuvered sharply and crashed into water following an encounter with Russian fighter jets scrambled to intercept it near Crimea, but insisted its warplanes didn’t fire their weapons or hit the drone.
The incident, which raised tensions over Moscow's war in Ukraine, appeared to mark the first time since the height of the Cold War that a U.S. aircraft was brought down after being hit by a Russian warplane.
WHAT ! ----- "U.S. President Joe Biden was briefed on the incident by national security adviser Jake Sullivan, according to White House National Security spokesman John Kirby. He added that U.S. State Department officials would be speaking directly with their Russian counterparts and “expressing our concerns over this unsafe and unprofessional intercept." Please read more. https://www.aol.com/news/russian-missil … 17233.html
As I always say what is next? Meant to be sarcastic.
America is floundering, under this administration.What would you do if you were President, Sharlee?
This act as provocative as it seems, appears more like an accident than a deliberate action on the part of Russia.
I would be prudent in handling the matter bringing Moscow's attention to it, while not exacerbating an already tense situation with an impulsive response.
So, what would you do that Biden is not doing?From the report from CBS it was no accident. Over and over, Russian jets approached, diving under and then right back up in front, putting the $57M drone in their jet exhaust. The last one clipped the propeller when diving. The jets also dumped fuel on each pass, trying to harm or disable our drone.
Personally, I would arm our drones and defend them. Let Russia rattle their sabers and see if they wish to spread Ukraine to the rest of the world.I think they are working on just that. Or at least knock us down a peg.
I don't think this will become WW III. I don't think Biden will even address the issue more than he has today.
White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said President Joe Biden had been briefed on the incident.
“It is not uncommon … for there to be intercepts by Russian aircraft of US aircraft over the Black Sea,” Kirby told reporters.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/1 … -black-sea
“It is not uncommon … Yes intercepts US aircraft over the Black Sea,” never forced an aircraft down. What a tool!
What a ridiculous comment and I guess we have just never been aware of Russia intercepting our aircraft over the Black sea.
I have never read anything about his claims. It would seem he out and out lied."Personally, I would arm our drones and defend them. Let Russia rattle their sabers and see if they wish to spread Ukraine to the rest of the world."
----------
I can see this as a reasonable remedy to prevent this from happening again, without starting WW III.I don't think this will become WW III. I don't think Biden will even address the issue more than he has today.
White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said President Joe Biden had been briefed on the incident.
“It is not uncommon … for there to be intercepts by Russian aircraft of US aircraft over the Black Sea,” Kirby told reporters.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/1 … -black-sea
“It is not uncommon … Yes intercepts US aircraft over the Black Sea,” never forced one down. What a tool !
What a ridiculous comment and I guess we have just never been aware of Russia intercepting our aircraft over the Black sea.
I have never read anything about his claims. It would seem he out and out lied.I don't think this will become WW III. I don't think Biden will even address the issue more than he has today.
----------
I would rather avoid the precipice than to needlessly approach it, but again, that is just me.To "avoid" it likely means have no US presence in that area of the world. Unacceptable - it is international waters and if we don't enforce our rights we will soon lose them.
We are already in it. There is no avoiding what has already begun.
People in 1930 didn't see WWII coming, they had no clue, even as one event after another dragged nation after nation into it.
WWIII can be seen coming, from a mile away, but most won't see it, don't want to see it. We have everything we need, economies nearing collapse, a fading Super Power / Society being challenged by a up and coming Super Power / Society. Its a fight over resources and who controls them, its a fight over which currency the world is going to trade in, its a fight over which industrial alliances are going to supply the rest of the world.
Russia is sitting on over 50 Trillion dollars worth of Natural Resources, Energy. Russia and Ukraine are critical to China's Silk Road initiatives and access to Europe without the necessity of using the Seas.
The stakes are enormous, the very dominance of the world going forward will lay in the hands of Russia and China, or remain in control of America.
WWIII is here, its just taking its time, progressing like all major global conflicts have.Ken, the idea is to stay in international waters and not trespass.
It has been almost 80 years since the end of WWII. The world has held together in spite of many, what can be called, close calls. The nuclear genie has not come out of the bottle since Nagasaki.
Putin is attacking a sovereign nation, with its independence agreed to by Moscow in 1991. What gives Putin the right to renege on it? What does he want, I mean really, short of total capitulation of the Ukraine. That, from a Ukrainian standpoint has to be non-negotiable.
No single nation gets to dominate the planet, rather, there will be spheres of influence.
Without a crystal ball, no one could have known what to expect in 1930. Hitler was increasing the numbers of his Nazi Party. And Japan's " rape of China" was yet to come. And how much of a global threat was Mussolini, at the time?
Putin has had a year and has yet to subdue a nation of considerably lesser resources. If he intends to bring out the "big guns" what is he waiting for?You are arguing particulars, based on your perspective as an American.
Those facts, those perceptions, are not the same as those who are making the decisions in Russia, or China.
Russia has its perceptions, facts, on what was promised about NATO.
Russia has its perceptions, facts, on what was promised in regards to Ukraine.
With that said, it is merely the excuse for the much larger war to come.
I stated many months ago, that this would escalate, that it was always the plan to escalate this conflict.
Saying this is about Ukraine is like saying WWII was about Poland.
This is just the starting point of what is to come. We are funding and arming a massive war effort on Russia's border... how the significance of that, the meaning of that, is not sinking in with you I don't know... you have military experience, you have travelled outside the US... you are not some typical isolated American that doesn't have those experiences to work with.
So many billions and so many weapons sent or going to Ukraine right now. More and more troops get deployed around Ukraine, more ships, more drones, etc. etc.Perhaps, I do have an American perspective, but the perspective of any adversary has to be self preservation and a nuclear exchange will benefit no one. MAD "mutually assured destruction" is the only reason that we have not had WW3 or WW4 over the last 80 years. I am willing to bank on that as a restraint that everyone will have to observe.
You haven't told me yet what authority does Putin have to attack a sovereign nation, that unlike the situation in Taiwan, Russia was in fact a signatory to Ukraine independence in 1991.
I know what you said, Ken, and I am sure that while I have been around, as an armed forces 20 year man, you have a good understanding. But, you are neither an expert nor infallible.
The only hard anti-Ukraine attitude in our politics are found amongst the rabid Republican right. I am going to suspect them of ulterior motives at the start from Biden Bashing to an anti-democracy foundation.
I am still content to just wait and see. America is not in this affair without help and support from allies who assist in this effort to thwart aggression, knowing that we do not want to give Putin evidence of the West's weakness and lack of resolve.Yes, that is interesting isn't it, how the Democratic Party has seemed to become the rabid dogs in search of war, in our current times, and its some Republicans that seem squeemish about it.
Depending on your sources of information, and what you choose to believe, one can find information that shows America has orchestrated the reasons for us to be in this war.
Did we not support the anti-Russian government, the revolution to overthrow the elected government in 2014, the build up of their military since 2014?
Are we not fully supporting this war and Ukraine's economy today... without America funding this war, there would be no war, it would have never even have started.We talk about all these high sounding words like self determination of people, and not do anything to promote that in the modern world, what does that make us? Why would anyone see the United States as a viable partner in maintaining the peace? You were the one so afraid of America losing it hegomony in the world, what do you think would be the ☁️components of that leadership?
You have been right about the incursion of NATO and the West getting out of line. But, in my further reading it more appears that Putin wants to overthrow an elected government and install a puppet in its place. Without America and western allies funding much of the Ukraine defense there would only be capitulation and concern that Putin has no reason to stop there. There remains pressure upon Russia and I can hope that the pressure coming to Putin in all directions will either force him to an acceptable armistice or see his unfortunate demise from within.
It is not America against Russia, but the West and other Democratic societies against Russia. I have seen charts of many of them paying an equal or greater amount of their GNP toward this end.The context matters.
American and Western injection and interference into Ukrainian politics going back to 2004, 2014, etc matter.
America's funding of the Ukrainian war effort, it's training of Ukrainian forces matters.
It's refusal to recognize Crimea as part of Russia, it's strong arming other nations through coercive politics to take up the same position on Crimea matters.
Choosing to ignore Crimea's history, it strategic importance to Russia, the fact that it's population was overwhelmingly Russian matters.
That Crimea seceded when there was a overthrow of the elected government and while a puppet regime hand selected by Western powers was put in control matters.
This is an American funded and created war, Russia sees it no other way... From Russias perspective they have been lied to and provoked every step of the way.
"No single nation gets to dominate the planet, rather, there will be spheres of influence."
No single nation should be held predominately responsible for protecting the world either.
Perhaps, Biden should never get us into a war where we are now the predominant supporters and protectors. Perhaps the strength that most previous presidents showed, kept Putin at bay... Note when and how this war started. Note choices could have been made long before Russian troops walked into Ukraine.
This administration has set America back in so many ways. Biden's foreign policies are at the top with inflation smack under it.I don't like the US to play the role of globe-cop, but want a posse of several nations working together to discourage blatant aggression. We are part of a European alliance that existed long before Biden by the way, where we are mutually providing defense to each other.
So, what is your solution? Let Ukraine fall? We could have said the same about England in 1940.
We are not at war with Russia, but are engaged with allies to provide military armament to allow the country to defend itself. That combined with the incredible resourcefulness and resolve of the Ukrainians and the ineptitude of Russian forces has kept the country on the map up to now.
Your presumption that Biden foreign policy has been reckless and such, is just speculation on your part....So what is NATO really suppling to the this War effort? Very little. Facts show
"How much oil does the European Union get from Russia?
Russian oil imports into the European Union and United Kingdom fell 35% to 1.7 million barrels per day (bpd) in August from 2.6 million bpd in January, but the EU was still the biggest market for Russian crude, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).Oct 13, 2022"
So what about the sanctions? Seems they are pretty much on paper and have failed. And do you have the facts on what the EU is spending on the War? They are dismal. I know you realize what the US has spent.
Maybe the EU should step up and join in protecting their own
continent. Yes, certain nations such as the UK, and Poland have stepped up, but what about the rest?
Your sentiments in regards to helping a neighbor are well founded, but maybe that neighbor should pull some weight, and not sit by, and actually call many of the shots. Laughable.
We can't afford our haughty nature any longer... We look like fools on the world stage. Complete fools. IMO
"We will stand firm" - What the hell does that even mean, when it comes from the atop of a blow-up pedestal? POP!The neighbors have pulled weight, I could see them pulling more. But Britain and other countries in the closest vicinity with Russia have taken a substantial amount from their economies to help. I would certainly insist that they step up to greatest extent possible.
Sometimes, it is not all about dollars and cents but intangibles that effect our alliances and ultimately world peace by not provoking a tyrant with our weakness and indifference.Provoking a tyrant --- the US and other nations are arming a war... Not sure one could provoke in any greater respect than that.
We have a war that is a proxy world war against Russia. Not sure why more don't see this.I think most people understand we are in a proxy war with Russia. I think most Western nations, and especially NATO nations, understand this too.
The 'why' is arguable and so is the 'what to do' argument, but I think few nations believe it is solely for Ukraine's benefit.
GA
'Oh my gosh, this war, in my view, has very little to do with Ukraine. It is ground to fight Russia close to home, and use proxy citizens to do the fighting and dieing. We offer up tools, alone.
Please offer an off-the-shoulder response --- do you think this war could have been prevented when Russia started over a year moving masses of troops to the Ukraine border?
Yes, that water has gone under the bridge, and now is muddy as hell.
What a society we have become.As with Ken, I wouldn't argue against your view. The logic makes sense to me. The national interest behind that logic makes sense too.
I thought of an analogy to describe my logic: you can't be a little bit pregnant. You also can't be a 'little bit' responsible for a pregnancy, you are or you aren't.
Consider the US as the boy that seduces the girl for selfish reasons. The girl is receptive and gets pregnant. My view is that the boy is responsible for his actions.
Before the pregnancy, the boy could have 'legitimately' avoided responsibility by changing his actions by dumping the girl. Or, he could have changed his actions due to determinations, revelations, and condemnations, i.e. Ken's points, and again would have a way out.
Once the girl is pregnant reality changes. What would you think of the boy that dumps the pregnant girl because she won't have an abortion?
GAInteresting analogy.
But, what do you do now, have the baby or abort?I know I am opening a door here, but . . . In typical situations, the boy is not the one to make that decision. He is the one that has to live with the decision made necessary by his choices.
GAWell in this case, he does.
If he stops funding, arming, escalating his involvement... It ends.What about the 'girl', does it end for her too? Does the pregnancy go away?
We created the responsibility I am talking about. We knew the dangers and we chose to do it anyway. Now, our choices have caused great harm to the 'girl', shedding that responsibility will cause much greater harm to the girl and tremendous harm to the character and status of the US.
Or, I could be completely outdated and now folks think it's okay to shirk personal integrity and responsibilities when they aren't convenient. *shrug
GAWell I have to retract the pro-analogy comment.
Are we willing to directly engage Russia, invade Russia, and take the war right to Moscow's doorstep?
I believe Biden and some in the Pentagon and elsewhere, may want to do just that.
Otherwise, Russia will win, Russia was always going to win IF the West's sanctions did not work and IF they didn't assassinate or otherwise eliminate Putin.
Russia is growing stronger, we are weakening, our banking system falters, our military will now need hundreds of billions in spending to replace what we have thrown away in Ukraine and before that Afghanistan.
Look...
We supported making the regime change happen in Ukraine, back in 2014 and long before that. Then we spent 8 years leading up to this conflict training up Ukrainians to fight this war.
It didn't work.
Ukraine has lost... they aren't taking back Crimea, they are barely holding on, and Russia is just getting its War Machine humming, it now sees that the West is gunning for it and is not looking for a compromise, Russia is not waiting for the eventual attack, its is focusing its industry and people for all out war.
So now is the time to admit Ukraine is screwed, and it had better be happy to keep what it has left and hope Russia doesn't push for more during the negotiations for peace.
If not....
Then it will be Americans officially dying in this war by 2024.
Those are the options.
Our direct involvement which triggers WWIII.
Or you accept that Russia won. And make the best deal possible to save what is left of Ukraine.
Anything else being considered now is nonsense that helps ensure this becomes WWIII, eventually, as it becomes one step too far.The choice of making 'the best possible choice' is the 'abortion' choice of the analogy. That one belongs to the girl. The 'deal' choice belongs to Ukraine.
The only choice 'we' can make is whether to stand for right or bow to wrong.
If we bow to wrong now, if we discard our integrity in exchange for stopping this aggression, how long before our next bow brings us to the world status of Singapore or Hong Kong, or Taiwan? How many years and 'next bows' will there be before we reach Belarus' status?
GAThat's a false argument.
We did bow to the Taliban in Afghanistan.
We did bow to Assad in Syria.
We did bow to China in Hong Kong.
Ukraine was avoidable.
No, Ukraine was of our own creation.
We put a pro-Western puppet regime in charge of Ukraine in 2014.
After we funded and directed the opposition to the democratically elected Government.
Before there was a properly elected new government, Crimea seceded.
Then Biden went to Ukraine and promised that Crimea would be taken back, the U.S. twisted arms and pulled strings to ensure the U.N. did not sanction the secession and instead condemned it.
Since then, we have been a continual presence in Ukraine, in their elections, in their training of military units, in their preparation to attempt to take back Crimea, and the Donbas regions.
We are not any more "Right" than Russia is. We are more in the "Wrong" for instigating this than Russia is.
Half of Ukraine was filled with Russians, half of Ukraine wanted to keep strong ties to Russia. Crimea had repeatedly in the past tried to join with Russia since the fall of the U.S.S.R.
America (the West) sticking its nose in Ukraine's politics and then funding and arming an army against Russia is even more of an improper interdiction than if Russia was funding and arming a anti-American Mexican government that was intent on taking California back because it was once part of Mexico.
That is how insane I feel our involvement is in Ukraine... we don't belong there, we never did, we are going to have our asses handed to us one way or the other because a bunch of idiots in the Pentagon and DC think they know what they are doing. They don't. They are proving just how little they really knew.
This gentlemen gives a rundown of many of the same things I think, and have been trying to relate the last year(s). Heck go back and read my articles relating to our relations with Russia and China, written before Trump was elected:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8iUqaKAHFgNothing you've stated about Ukraine is true.
You do not know the history of Ukraine or the people of Ukraine. You know nothing about Ukraine.
I've been part of Ukraine my entire life. I have friends and relatives who live there. I've visited there many time. I listen to Ukrainian media on a daily basis.
What you are disseminating here is nothing more than Russian propaganda.
I'm hoping you are not being influenced by Russia. You wouldn't be the first to sell out Ukraine for the right compensation. I've seen it before, and I hope this is not the case with you.Yeah, I know Mike you are the only expert on Ukraine and you know what everyone thinks and feels in Ukraine.
About as much as I speak for everyone in America.
There are more than a few Ukrainian's that despise Zelensky and his efforts, especially in the Crimean and Donbas regions."more than a few Ukrainian's that despise Zelensky"
This is true. That is the way of politics in every country.
There are some very unflattering names for people that want to give the Donbas and Crimea to the Russians. In most parts of Ukraine right now, you don't want that label.
Vladimir Putin has had an arrest warrant put on him by the International Criminal Court. This is mostly symbolic, but it does help.
The death and destruction to Ukraine by Russia is difficult to put into words
Ukraine was invaded. Why they were invaded is irrelevant right now. Ukraine if fighting a much larger country simply to remain a sovereign nation.
Too much to tell and I don't have the time.
OMG Ken--- I am thinking maybe we NATO and the US, should have never let the guy that got the girl pregnant into Ukraine—maybe sent him home to a cold shower!
We have a president that mishandled this issue, saw it coming, and more or less invited Putin to do whatever he pleased.No we have a President (and those in DC that wanted him) that went looking for this fight.
Don't believe me?
Then believe what Reuters was reporting back in 2014:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukra … XX20140311
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-ukra … 6I20141120
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukra … IH20141121
And lets not forget some of the other motivations - APress:
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-eu … 577fc5937f
This didn't start in 2022, it didn't even start in 2014... though Biden's and America's direct engagement in Ukrainian affairs certainly did.Thank you, Ken, for connecting all the dots. Funny the facts have always been right in front of our eyes. But our dumbed-down society doesn't have the ability to recognize them. I mean the internet is a wonderful reference, and if one takes the time, as you have, the picture of what occurred in Ukraine is staggeringly clear. It is very clear to me, that the war could have been prevented if NATO and the US wanted to prevent it. The US has there Russian war, and it is so convenient to have it in another country.
The problem, it certainly does not look as if Russia will buckle, and this could mean that the Ukrainian citizens will pay the great price of this proxy war. I mean, should the US's history not show we do poorly in fighting our wars on other lands? Look at Vietnam and the long list of failures. I mean won't we just one day as we did in Vietnam just one day up and pull out? Not to mention Afghanistan. I mean are people so blinded to facts?
GA comment sticks in my thought "The only choice 'we' can make is whether to stand for right or bow to wrong."
Much of our history shows us standing up for "right" until it becomes too inconvenient. Then we just walk off into the sunset and let all the chips fall where they may.
Funny, how jaded many Americans have become to really look into the eye of facts, and history.
So where now? A new administration, that will turn the tables and walk out of Ukraine?
Words -- NATO is doing much of nothing in this war. In fact, they are actually still getting energy from Russia. "How much oil does the European Union get from Russia?
Russian oil imports into the European Union and United Kingdom fell 35% to 1.7 million barrels per day (bpd) in August from 2.6 million bpd in January, but the EU was still the biggest market for Russian crude, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).Oct 13, 2022"
https://www.statista.com/chart/27331/co … raine-aid/
There is evidence that many of our allies are taking this defense seriously based on what portion of their GDP they contribute to the effort.
So, if you can bash, then you can Biden bash
The Biden Bash Is it rightwing trash?
So, do we just let Russia take over the Ukraine, is that what the Hard core Republican Right is suggesting? There appears to be a schism between the hard Right chicken Hawks, who are content to blame America and do nothing and the mainstream Republicans (Rhinos) who want to drop a nuke on Moscow in response to the drone issue. Either way, Biden is to blame in a no win scenario. The only President that you considered strong in your example would be Trump, without your having to say it. Well, I say that Goldie Locks would get into bed with Putin both figurately and literally, diss the allies and the alliance and just make things that much worse, when has he ever done otherwise?You deflect, I have not indicated we should not help Ukraine. My point is there should never have been a war in Ukraine --- period. I note a stronger US president would have avoided the conflict, that's my view. This has nothing to do with Trump. Russia took a shot once more to make a move on another country while he saw presidents that were very weak, and none effective. Such as Obama, and Biden. Putin merely got while the getting was good.
I certainly am empathetic toward the Ukrainian people. And now it is obvious they need assistance. I feel they have been put in a war that could have been prevented.
I am hopeful Russia and China back away from saber-rattling. But, I don't think they will.
From what I read this type of drone is used armed and unarmed. I have not seen any reports that the address of the drone was armed or was not.
The descriptions I have heard don't sound anything like an accident. It sounds like a provocation.
But I'm with you on what the president should do. Standing firm without an escalatory reaction can also be a strong message.
I bet we'll soon hear from people that do know what they're talking about (from both perspectives), but it won't be from the early presenters that are speculating, almost, as much as we are.
To that point, one of the early talking points most stations were using described the Russian pilot's actions as; reckless, irresponsible, and incompetent.
I don't think so. The descriptions of their actions brought to mind the flying in the movie 'Top Gun'. I think that if a pilot can maneuver to dump fuel in the drone's path, or ease up behind it and poke its propeller he sure as hell isn't incompetent.
We're all guessing, but it sounds like a very purposeful and competently done action to me. Our response better be just as purposely calculated.
GAGot to ask -- "But I'm with you on what the president should do. Standing firm without an escalatory reaction can also be a strong message."
What do you feel would be a firm action? "Stand firm"... What does that allude to? A red line type of response? History proves Russia loves red lines, does it not? Sanctions, have they worked thus far? NO
In my view, and not by any means am I trying to imply we should take any strong military action? T hat water has long passed under the bridge. We have a weak administration, with a man sitting in the White House that is clearly aged poorly, and not able to handle the job of President of The United States. He has weakened our reputation on the world stage and provoked rough nations to act while he is sitting in the White House. Rouge nations meaning Russia, and China. This mess is not his hands alone, he makes problems, and has no ability to solve problems.
At this point, the US has no choice but to take what they hand up. In a strong administration, this proxy war would have not occurred.
So, please do offer your "standing firm" solution. Very much confused as to what that action would be.
All I have heard thus far our of Washington is words like --- "this was irresponsible" "it is not unusual for Russia to intercept our aircraft",
And this is where the media takes us --A Look here not there ploy to bury the serious nature of Russia taking out one of our drones ---
"Without getting to too much detail, what I can say is that we've taken steps to protect our equities with respect to that particular drone, that particular aircraft and its United States property," Kirby said. "We obviously don't want to see anybody getting their hands on it beyond us."
I will be interested, in hearing what your stand-firm solution is. I guess maybe go retrieve our dead drone?A while back I had an epiphany about second-guessing and armchair-quarterbacking. I generally choose my words to convey not only the obvious message but also the tone and inflection of that message. Kinda like purposely saying ain't instead of isn't, it adds a bit of flavoring to the message. Which can add inflection to the message—hopefully helping to define the message.
So "Stand firm" didn't mean "firm action." Speculating on what firm action he should take is way above my paygrade. Asking for that speculation even before we have anything more than the first day's public media presentations of the 'facts." (surely you don't think the nations in Russia's sphere of influence are hearing the same presentation we are?)
It also didn't allude to redlines or trigger points. It meant what it said, stand firm, don't reflexively react.
The only response I have to your request for a 'standing firm solution' is one I already offered Credence2 in a tangent about arming the drones:
Perhaps I watch too many movies, but surely there is some possible appropriate military response that doesn't hand Putin more reason to do something he already wants to do."
GAActually, that drone action was one wilderness put forth. I am a curious person. I like to assess the mindset of anyone I am observing in conversation. It leaves me open to being, well. "who the hell does she think she is?"
I think one needs to put a bit of stuffing into who is on the other side of the keyboard.
So, I think your answer helped n that respect. Thank you for responding.
"Perhaps I watch too many movies, but surely there is some possible appropriate military response that doesn't hand Putin more reason to do something he already wants to do."
In my view, my blunt view, Putin needs no other reason than us paying for what I feel is Quasi-War in simple terms. America is conducting its war against Russia just by using another nation's blood to conduct that war.
In my view, this war was unnecessary, and most likely could have been prevented with a stronger US president. Russia reacted at the opportune time, as it did under Obama, moving swiftly into Crimea. Or perhaps a coincidence?
In regards to getting more information or facts. Do you really think we will see much more on this issue? I mean, have you not witnessed how quickly all issues with this administration become well and brushed well away before the next crisis occurs?
Moreover, what would have we done to prevent such a gesture? We have only had one aircraft shot down by Russia -- Yes, they shot down the U-2. A spy plane that Flew so high that we thought the Russians could not reach it with their missiles. Anyway, they confronted Eisenhower who denied it, Not knowing at the time that the Russians had the wreckage and the pilot Gary Powers who had miraculously survived. When they presented the downed pilot at a press conference it was a huge embarrassment for Eisenhower to get caught lying on the world stage.
It would appear that Biden is thought of as a weak do-nothing president. We had China pulling his strings with balloons, and now Russia. I am with Ken... We are a laughing stock at this point.
I have hopes Ken will comment on this thread, he predicted these kinds of issues would be happening for Russia and China a bit back. I guess China and Russia are hell-bent on putting the US in its place. They got the right administration to do that, and they can see that. As I always say, what next?
Oh well, your logic escapes me.
To be blunt - I will leave it at that, not much chance I can respect your view on this one.I am not ready to dangerously escalate our involvement situation over a drone. As wilderness suggests, warn Russia and arm the drone to provide defense to the extent that they can be for next time.
Very similar to the way we had to arm our shipping that moved between the US and Europe after WWII began to protect against Nazi U-boats even as we were neutral. The acts were defensive in nature. We were not at war with Germany, but had an interest in defending our ships and cargoes. Such is the case now, as we are supposedly neutrals in international waters.
That is ok, we don't have to agree, I come at things from a different angle."I am not ready to dangerously escalate our involvement situation over a drone. As wilderness suggests, warn Russia and arm the drone to provide defense to the extent that they can be for next time."
I very much agree. However, with Biden's attitude do you think he will do anything?What about Biden's attitude? I will have to wait and see what he does. I believe that there will be a reprisal of sorts, but not of the nature that would aggravate the situation unnecessarily.
A red line type of response? Been there and done that - History proves Russia loves red lines, and smears are faces into red lines.
In my view, and I am not by any means trying to imply we should take any strong military action. We have a weak administration we have no choice but to take what Russia, and China hand up. In a strong administration, this would have not occurred.If Biden does what I suggested, we could avoid strong military action such as one would expect from a combatant rather than a neutral. But, I will see if there is to be any reprisal from the administration, measured and commensurate to the Russian offense.
It is only you and right that consider Biden a weak leader, while I say that he is prudent one. Again, my perspective will always be different from any right wing leaning person, but that is a given.Biden has done what he is going to do --- go clean up the mess the drone made in the black sea. He is retrieving the drone. He is not going to do anything else. Hopefully, they keep him well away from the public stage. Who knows what he will say to denature our foreign standing?
Prudent? Prudent would have been to not have let this war ever come to fruition. Note who was in power each time that Russia decide to move on its neighbors. (In February and March 2014, Russia invaded and subsequently annexed the Crimean Peninsula, taking it from Ukraine.)
We had a weak do nothing leader, as we do now. Maybe Joe could offer up a red line to try that failed ploy. Russia loves red lines.
And please don't read me wrong -- I do not want this administration to do anything about the current mess they have us in. They are scary as hell, and hopefully don't do anything. Because thus far they have created one big ass mess all around.
Hey --- what next?What should Biden do? The South Carolina senator suggested that we shoot down a Russian aircraft in retaliation. That is over the top. Is there a diplomatic solution? I doubt it. My point is that it is obvious that the attack on the drone was deliberate and needs to be address by putting Moscow on notice, or otherwise retaliating in some way. As GA mentions, we don't want to give Putin anymore justification and encouragement in this case. But, we cannot simply ignore it.
Putin has failed to subdue a second rate military force for over a year. With his having to draft prisoners, it does not sound much like a crack military unit to me. What is next? What will he do in desperation?
Did Biden say that he was going to do nothing? Is there a link for that?I think you are reading me wrong. I suggest doing nothing, we are in no position to do anything at this point we are well-cornered. We have no cards at this point to play.
My point, the time for doing is well past. Russia should have never been let to cross into Ukraine period. This is where we had a chance to stop a war. We have a war now. The strength of NATO with the US should have never, I mean never let Russia move into Ukraine.
Your last question is profound --- What will he do in desperation?
In my view, Bden will do nothing. Because there is nothing he can do. Maybe this should be our main concern. We have a president that creates unnecessary problems, and when his problems become insurmountable he hides.
I don't think the administration is weak, it is just a current challenge that his predecessor never faced, no credit to him. It was just the way the cards were dealt during Biden's watch.
Just keep putting on the conventional pressure until something breaks, always being wary of not provoking an escalation toward nuclear exchange.
My first thought is that arming the drones 'for self-defense' (now and relative to this instance, not as a general operational thing) could make things worse. It might be the type of response Putin wants.
Consider this: from an adversarial perspective, what is the difference between a drone armed for self-defense and one armed for attack? Then consider this incident on, or in the fuzzy area on each side of the international waters line. Same encounter, except that our drone 'defends' itself and shoots a Russian plane that crashes in Ukrainian or Russian (Crimean) waters.
Giving Putin such a situation to exploit, primarily nationally but also globally, doesn't sound like a good idea. That's just saber-rattling on our side. If that is our level of response, Putin will have brought things down to his level and will beat us with experience. (yeah, that's a butchered Twain thought)
GAGA, interesting view...
The difference between a drone armed for self defense and one armed for attack is only found in the intent of the operator.
History has revealed at least during Hitler's rise that there was a lot of neutrality sentiment here, fearing that arming ourselves and taking "aggressive" defensive posture might offend Hitler.
If we stayed in international waters and airspace, our defensive posture should be no more provocative than that of anyone else.Alright, damn it. You need another poke. There is no reason to introduce "Hitler." Your point could have been as equally clearly made with a simple reference to previous wars, specifically WWII if that was the finger you wanted to point. Readers would have recognized what you were talking about.
To clear some of that 'Hitler' fog (which came from a misunderstanding of the comment), my thought about arming the drones has nothing to do with neutrality or strength or weakness. It was about the danger of this specific action—arming surveillance drones.
Once a drone is armed it is no longer just a "surveillance" drone, now it is also an attack drone.
Consider the political and public implications of that change. Even if the specific Russian pilots' actions are disputed, and even if the geolocation, whether that location is in or out of international waters is disputed, the one undisputed fact—that also credits the non-aggressor's (us) presentation of 'facts' vs. 'Putin's claims that our facts are wrong, is that it was an unarmed surveillance drone.
Now consider if that drone had been armed and Putin could legitimately falsely (figure out that apparent contradiction, it works for the point) claim that our armed attack drone entered his territorial waters.
That was my point. We would be handing Putin an opportunity that is dangerous and bad for us and is one we don't have to give him.
He is already (reported to be?) using the incident (blaming the US) to hold up the deal for Ukraine grain exports.
Perhaps I watch too many movies, but surely there is some possible appropriate military response that doesn't hand Putin more reason to do something he already wants to do.
GALet's use Iran and the Persian Gulf, if you don't like Hitler.
I guess that I am missing your point, why am I at fault for wanting to protect my asset within international waters?
The fact that this was an unarmed drone in international waters gives credibility to the fact of its non-aggressive purpose. But can Putin be allowed to shoot our drones down with impunity? Where do we ever allow for such a thing?
Putin blames us for everything that has gone wrong in Ukraine militarily anyway. Putin would still find grounds to destroy such a drone even if it were unarmed and engaged in reconnaissance activity. They are not just flying around for nothing. So, how do you win? Surveillance activity is justification in itself to shoot done the drone, we surely wanted to do that with the Chinese balloon. Whether we entered his territorial waters or not is immaterial because Putin can easily lie about that, as an excuse to shoot down anything that is contrary to his goal.
Putin is without honor and to impugn that he has any is the first mistake. He is going to do what he wants, regardless.
I say that something has to be done in response to the deliberate attack on our drone short of exacerbating the conflict toward any deeper involvement. It should be measured and appropriate, but it has to be something.Yes, you missed the point, twice. None of what you vented about relates to the point of my comment.
I didn't say we shouldn't protect our "assets," I said I didn't think we should do that by arming them and turning them into a more serious threat as an attack vehicle. I think it's a bad idea.
From listening to the military talking heads, this kind of escapade, minus the actual contact, has been fairly common since the war started. We haven't heard a lot about them before this, so maybe, militarily and politically, those provocations are viewed as just part of 'the game.'
So, if this incident, involving an unarmed surveillance drone is making such a national and global fuss, imagine if the drone had been armed. We would have handed Putin a kernel of truth to put into whatever claims he makes. And in the worse case, a vehicle that could be claimed to have fired upon or shot down a Russian plane flying to innocently check out an intrusion into Russian territorial waters.
Surely you don't think it's a good idea to give him that opportunity. Even if the fact it was an armed drone is true and everything else is false, consider the audiences of the world. That one kernel of truth might be all it would take to cause a pause and consideration, And just that little pause is to Putin's benefit.
Scale the percolation of that little pause. Up from the folks, to their elected Reps, to the nation's diplomats and decision-makers. Once again, a pause at those levels is a plus for Putin. Also once again, we don't need to give it to him. Just find another way that has more substance than the simple saber-rattling of arming the drones.
GAWell, i disagree with your standpoint on this occasion.
If I were sitting where Joe Biden is, I would gather officers from the State Department and DOD and ask, what are you going to do to prevent this from happening again? I don't want a policy of appeasement and I am on the hot seat if the people believe that I am going to do nothing. Doing nothing has no substance at all. Who gives Putin any credibility now?
Arming the drones is just a suggestion, but I believe that something has to be done, so we don't have a repeat performance.I also believe we must respond in some manner. I am not promoting a 'turn the other cheek' response. I think that is the point you missed and the misapplied reasoning behind your disagreement.
GA
Actually, what is "non aggressive" about America?
How is America "neutral"?
Are we not funding the Ukrainian efforts?
Are we not arming them?
Are we not providing Intel, drones, internet, without which, their efforts would falter?
Without American intervention hundreds of thousands of Russians would be alive today.
From a Russian perspective, this is America's war, Russia and much of the rest of the world, OPEC, China, India, etc recognize this fact.I'm not sure where the 'non-aggressive' thought came from, it wasn't in my comment. With a couple of clarifications, I agree with most of the points you listed.
Using the invasion as a starting point, America has been very aggressive in its support of Ukraine and opposition to Putin. We were never neutral.
We are funding and arming them, but so are most other Western/NATO nations. and even beyond all the intel and training stuff, I see the probability that we also have 'unofficial' trainers on the ground.
We also got some civilian support: wasn't Musk responsible for providing internet access for their military operations? (and civilians)
Considering that I am speaking of post-invasion circumstances, I think all of those actions are good ones. The arguments of whether we should have gotten involved, or purposely promoted our involvement, are secondary. They became secondary once the invasion started.
From that perspective, your other points about who would be alive or dead or which part of the world believes what, are 'yeah, but . . .' tangents to the issue.
GASee my above recent post to Credence in regards to context.
Our involvement began long before the "invasion".Ken, It would appear the US has really cornered itself. I can't see any logical response that the US could make in regard to the drone being taken down, can you?
I find it actually very silly of some in Washington to call for action, yet offer no suggestions. Blowing off steam.
I guess we have cornered ourselves pretty well. We could threaten a red line, we have witnessed that failed ploy with Seria. We could just bluster a bit and threaten Putin, or we could put more meaningless sanctions.
Or we could start a world war... We sure F---ed this one up.The drone is a drop in the bucket, it is not really an issue.
The problem is that whatever the Pentagon/DC intended or believed would occur when they forced Russia to engage in this war or back down and submit to their will of "Westernizing" Ukraine (and any other nation they chose)... I don't believe it is occuring.
It hasn't caused the overthrow of Putin, it hasn't caused the Russian economy to collapse, it hasn't caused the Russian army to be destroyed.
It has garnered Russia allies, there is a strengthening alliance against American efforts right now, agreements made between OPEC nations and China, for example.
Russia, instead of imploding, has put itself on war footing, mobilizing the nation to manufacture ammo, weapons, missiles, etc. it is mobilizing, training, and deploying more forces.
Right now, this looks as if Russia is going to come out of this far stronger, and with more solid alliances for their efforts, and America and the West weaker for it.Wow...you are detached from the reality of this situation.
Russia's military has been significantly depleted of soldiers and equipment. Last week there was a major tank battle between Ukraine and Russia. Ukraine won. They were able to use captured Russian tanks against the 1960s tanks Russia is forced to use now. Their supply of everything from APCs to combat helicopters and other hardware have been significantly depleted. Their losses are staggering.
Maybe you don't comprehend the reality that Ukraine was invaded.You are correct, we have very different sources of information, which are telling us very different things.
Here is a non-MSM take on current events:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeQLk2vRwWk
Here is another, far less "produced" opinion, just to show how opinions vary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhyJQH7wKoc
I share your view. It would just seem like Russia has gotten stronger, and making allies that they really did not completely have prior to this conflict.
Sanctions have failed, the EU is still getting part of its energy needs filled by Russia, and their economy has only taken a slight hit.
It appears they are in for the long run.
I haven't disputed that we were involved long before the invasion. I would argue the point that the US has pushed that involvement, rather than being pulled into it by Ukraine. We don't disagree on those points.
GA
Russia hasn't deployed troops along America's borders.
America HAS deployed troops along Russia's borders.
Russia, as far as I know, is not flying drones in or near American airspace.
America IS flying drones in or near Russian airspace.
Russia, as far as I know, is not supporting Mexican or Canadian efforts against America in a war.
America is spending hundreds of billions, and sending its best weapons, into a war against Russia.
You have to be pretty thick not to see who the aggressor is, when it comes to who is at fault, Russia or America. And there is no question this will escalate, you are correct, I said it would, its been planned.
My only surprise is it has taken this long... if a few more banks go under, they will likely start WWIII with gusto, to distract from the collapsed economy... heck, they will blame the Russians, of course. Might even drag in the Chinese as well. Make it a challenge (insert eye roll)I feel you are 100% correct. I mean why aren't more Americans more aware of the writing on the wall? This war is a proxy war, and Russia is not going to back away as so many predicted. The media from the beginning has been playing down Russia's abilities to keep this war raging. In fact, many had predicted that Russia is losing the war greatly. Yet have they backed off, are they even willing to talk... No
In my view, Russia will become more aggressive against the US, and it's coming fast. They can and have seen from the start the war they are fighting is against the US.
Yeah! Cause like, its our American right to fly drones in or near Russian airspace!
Russians want WWIII we will give it to them!
Who the F do they think they are, we're F'n America, if we want to fly those drones over Moscow they better damned well roll out the red carpet for them. Or else!Yes, we have the right to fly "near" Russian airspace. Meaning, of course, international territory.
It was not an ordinary drone that flew to Crimea, but an air object stuffed with reconnaissance equipment or weapons, and therefore representing a clear danger.
Of course and then surprise, surprise, there is a hit in Crimea on a Russian Train delivering missles.
A good watch you may find interesting regarding this conflict and other related issues:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2F0lrdyOhA
If you want to know the truth of what is happening in Crimea right now here is an article from the Ukrainian newspaper called "The Day."
I think it has a translation tab on it to translate it into English.
https://day.kyiv.ua/article/polityka/kr … s-chekayutIt's a fake copy. Yesterday Putin was in Crimea. He freely traveled by car around the cities, met people, went to visit people who called him to them. Everyone says thank you that Crimea is being built, the salaries are good and they are glad that no one else will touch or seize them.
I don't think so.
Russians control their media and what is posted very carefully. I believe what people saw was probably staged. It wouldn't be the first time the Russians staged a media event. It is part of being part of the Russian media.If the Ukrainian troops did not kill civilians, none of this would have happened. They robbed churches, killed priests. They just caught men on the street and sent them to fight. Do you think anyone would want to live in such a country? So they asked Putin to intervene... And it started 10 years before the war.
That is some good Russian propaganda you are stating.
NONE of it is true.
"Inside the Kremlin's Year of Ukraine Propaganda"
"But researchers say the deepfake is just one example of a barrage of disinformation, manipulated imagery, forged documents, and targeted propaganda unleashed by Russia and pro-Kremlin activists that may have had a significant impact on audiences over the last year of war."
https://time.com/6257372/russia-ukraine … formation/Yeah, we have plenty of disinformation, manipulated imagery, targeted propaganda right here in the US of A.
In fact, there is no country better at it, then the US of A.
But you know that, I've seen you trying to counter plenty of those lies over the years.
Time is a rag of misinformation right there with the rest of them.
Who was their "Man of the Year?" ... Zelenskyy
No bias or propaganda there.At least you don't deny the intense propaganda efforts of Russia to its people concerning the war in Ukraine. I've spoken to many Russian people who are very upset by the lies told to them.
I approach this from a different perspective.
You see this FAR more personally, from the perspective of a certain side in the Ukraine conflict.
I see it from the perspective of what this will cost Americans, how we are paying the price for this power/political tug of war between America and Russia, between BRICS and the Dollar, I also see how the world, outside of UK & EU is aligning against us... OPEC, BRICS, are working closer together and in a collaborative effort to offset the efforts of America and its allies against Russia.
Related Discussions
- 312
Is Russia Going to Invade Ukraine? Should America care if they do?
by Readmikenow 39 hours ago
I guess in this situation I do have a bias. I'm Ukrainian. I have relatives in Ukraine. I've been to Ukraine more than once. I have a bias, but I may also have a bit more insight into the situation.Russa invaded Ukraine in 2014. The propaganda will say it was Ukrainian...
- 41
Ukraine Accepts U.S. Ceasefire Deal Awaiting Russia’s Response
by Sharlee 6 days ago
Ukraine has agreed to a deal put forward by the Trump administration during a meeting in Saudi Arabia, marking a big step toward securing a ceasefire and potentially ending the war with Russia. (Sratement from President Zelensky posted on X --- ...
- 21
Biden's Staunch Support for Ukraine vs. Trump's Diplomatic Aspiration
by Sharlee 3 months ago
Since the war in Ukraine escalated in February 2022, I’ve been observing President Joe Biden’s firm stance against Russian aggression. He has made it clear that supporting Ukraine is a top priority, implementing extensive sanctions against the Kremlin and pushing for strong military and financial...
- 791
What to do About Russia and Ukraine?
by Scott Belford 7 months ago
The consequences of how this aggression by Putin unfolds are enormous. The worst, of course, is the possibility of nuclear war. The best (which would be negatively consequential to Putin) is that Russia has an epiphany and removes its troops from the Ukrainian border. Any move at...
- 144
Focusing on American Improvement
by Kathryn L Hill 2 years ago
Trump wanted to make America great, (again?) Biden wanted to build America back better, (than what?)What if we take both ideas and attempt to Make America Better.What would that look like? Even if impossible to do at this point in time, how could we improve America?or at least begin to improve it?...
- 20
POTUS Immunity? If the SC is not a Rightwing Tribunal, why are we here
by Credence2 14 months ago
It was interesting to note a recent Supreme Court ruling:“On the self-executing issue, the unsigned majority “per curiam” decision is not merely evasion, but error. It rewrites Section 5 of the 14th Amendment. Where the section says that Congress may enact legislation to enforce the amendment, the...