[Winnipegger]

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Two Sukhoi SU-24 fighter jets and a surveillance plane circled a Canadian ship in the Black Sea.
...
We would do the same, if we only had the hardware to do so.

We have CF-18 fighter jets. They escourt Russian aircraft away when they fly too close to our air space. They haven't violated our airspace (yet), just flown over international waters. And we have CP-140 Aurora Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Aircraft. The only question is whether Aurora have equipment to measure how quickly a ship turns on equipment.

[BartSimpson]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

$1:

Fuck man, does being a chickenhawk retard come naturally or did you study for it?

well he once suggested that we use our secret underwater bases to protect the West Coast.

Got to use them for something besides leasing them out as lairs for evil geniuses out to take over the world, right? Of course, BC might miss the revenue from the evil lair business.

[herbie]

Russians can read the newspapers too.
Unarmed, circled slowly so they got a good look. Maybe if they'd monitored the radio too they would've heard
Is new Sukhoi Su24 with sleek modern styling and updated avionics. Available now with 0% financing or lease for only...

[saturn_656]

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/russians-sh ... -1.1998265

$1:

One of the fighter jets came within 300 metres of the ship. HMCS Toronto locked its radar weapons system on the Russian aircraft, but took no further action because the planes were unarmed, sources said.

The friendly way of saying "I can kill you at my leisure"?

[BartSimpson]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/russians-shadow-american-warship-after-canadian-frigate-buzzed-1.1998265

$1:

One of the fighter jets came within 300 metres of the ship. HMCS Toronto locked its radar weapons system on the Russian aircraft, but took no further action because the planes were unarmed, sources said.

The friendly way of saying "I can kill you at my leisure"?

Even better way to do so is to have the CIWS active and tracking them with a radar lock so their butts pucker.

[saturn_656]

At 300 meters either the 57mm or Phalanx would be sufficient to turn it into confetti in moments.

[BartSimpson]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

At 300 meters either the 57mm or Phalanx would be sufficient to turn it into confetti in moments.

And the radar will cook their manly bits.

[Jabberwalker]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Two Sukhoi SU-24 fighter jets and a surveillance plane circled a Canadian ship in the Black Sea.
...
We would do the same, if we only had the hardware to do so.

We have CF-18 fighter jets. They escourt Russian aircraft away when they fly too close to our air space. They haven't violated our airspace (yet), just flown over international waters. And we have CP-140 Aurora Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Aircraft. The only question is whether Aurora have equipment to measure how quickly a ship turns on equipment.

We're not allowed to use them lest they get worn out. You have to take care of your gear, you know or Mom and Dad won't buy you new ones! They will have to last about the same length of time as the lifespans of their pilots if your party gets back into power.

[Winnipegger]

[saturn_656]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

saturn_656 saturn_656:

At 300 meters either the 57mm or Phalanx would be sufficient to turn it into confetti in moments.

And the radar will cook their manly bits.

Maybe if your ship has SPY. Doubt the radar set on the Toronto has that kind of power.

[Jabberwalker]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

[moon]

You've already done that to the services in another thread. DO re-think what you wrote, there. Talk it over with someone who knows something about defence. If you really need to run, it s your duty to learn these things.

Seriously.

[Winnipegger]

Not to the services. Just you.

[Jabberwalker]

Nope. ... didn't get it. Why bother, eh?

Your thought that the Forces shouldn't be given replacement ships any more frequently than every half century and that they should take better care of their "gear", after all is quite possibly the stupidest thing that I have ever read on an internet forum. It is mind bogglingly so, I might add.


What else can I say? You're Federal Liberal cabinet material!

[Winnipegger]

We've been over this. I have no respect for the irresponsible spending of the Conservatives. Those who justify Conservative policies, and claim they're "absolute", who claim that attacking Conservative policies are attacking the "Service"? We've been over this. If you continue with that, then why should I respond? If you really want to know what I want to do for the Service, I could explain. But I've explained before. You obviously ignored that.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

And in typical Russian fashion, they denied the whole thing.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... e20478538/