Russian subs patrolling off East Coast of U.S.

[babylonsister]

AP sources: Russian subs patrolling off East Coast

By LOLITA C. BALDOR
The Associated Press
Tuesday, August 4, 2009; 8:47 PM


WASHINGTON -- Two nuclear-powered Russian attack submarines have been patrolling in international waters off the East Coast for several days, in activity reminiscent of the Cold War, defense officials said Tuesday.

U.S. Northern Command would not comment on the Russian submarines' movement. But in a prepared statement, Northern Command spokesman Michael Kucharek acknowledged the patrols and said the U.S. has been monitoring the two submarines.

Two senior U.S. officials, however, said the submarines had been patrolling several hundred miles off the coast and so far had done nothing to provoke U.S. military concerns. The officials provided details on condition of anonymity in order to discuss intelligence reports.

While the incident raises eyebrows, it did not trigger the more intense reaction by the U.S. military that Russia prompted when two of its bombers buzzed an American aircraft carrier in the western Pacific in February 2008. U.S. fighter planes intercepted the two Russian fighters, including one that flew directly over the USS Nimitz twice at an altitude of about 2,000 feet.

The event did not escalate beyond that, but it signaled a more aggressive military agenda by Moscow.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/04/AR2009080402863.html

[Captain Hilts]

1. GWB cut 60,000 sailors from the Navy in six years. 'Nuff said.

Go get 'em boyz!

[Zywiec]

2. So you support increasing the size of the military to head off this "threat"?

:shrug:

[Captain Hilts]

3. I acknowledge that one of the reasons they Russians have been able to get so close

is that the Navy has been cut so much with more 'sailors' serving in Iraq on the ground than on ships.

THIS is their mission, not desert warfare.

I also point out that the Bush Administration tried to gut anti-submarine warfare even more than it was.

[MercutioATC]

10. Well, that and the fact that they're in international waters...

I don't care if our Navy was triple its current size...the Russian subs would still be "able to get so close".

[Captain Hilts]

12. Yes, they would but the USN would have no motivation to discuss it in public.

This is a plea for funding after six years of severe cuts by the Bush Admin.

So, this is a confluence of events for both countries. The Russian Navy wants to re-establish its relevance and its role.

It's a political move by both sides:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/08/05/2009-08-05_russian_attack_submarines_patrolling_off_east_coast_of_us_confirms_top_russian_g.html

[MercutioATC]

15. Possibly true, but that argument would only work on complete idiots.

Then again, considering the caliber of people we elect, you might be dead-on.

[CrispyQ]

4. "...and we will listen to their rock & roll..."

;)

[GCP]

5. They've been doing this forever as far as I know

Why are we suddenly making a big deal of this?
We do the same to them, in fact we've got more of these subs than they have.

[TexasObserver]

6. There are always Russian subs within a few hundred miles of the US.

And ours are all over the world, too.

[Captain Hilts]

7. No, there are not. Russian subs have basically been tied to their piers for 15 years. nt

[TexasObserver]

8. Bullshit.

[Captain Hilts]

9. You do not know what you are typing about. One of the reasons the US sub force

has gone from 106 attack subs in 1991 to 50 now is that satellite photographs have shown that Russian subs have barely left the pier.

It's that simple.

[TexasObserver]

11. Tell Gilligan I said "hi," Captain. Ginger and Mary Anne, too.

It's that simple.

[Captain Hilts]

13. I'll have mercy on you and end this one.

Battle of wits with an unarmed - and uninformed - man and all that.

[TexasObserver]

14. The good ship Lolly Pop needs your attention, I'm sure.