TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- The BEARS are back!

The BEARS are back!

Ya, thats right.

i do believe "bears" is the generic term we give to Russian long range bombers, not that bear in particular but your right. they're back.

...but are they holdin? thats the question.

The Russain bears are flying the friendly skies again. How exciting..

But they can't fly round-the-world missions like the USA can!!

they use these now.



they're hopeless but if it's all you got...whatever.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo they use these now. they're hopeless but if it's all you got...whatever.

i love technology. i mean that amazing piece of machinery is "hopeless" compared to what the world produces now....

simply amazing.

One day, those planes will be unmanned.

The F22 is so maneuverable that the G's would kill the pilot, so they put flight limits on the plane's movements. If there was no pilot to worry about, imagine the performance of THAT machine.

quote:

Originally posted by nchs09 i love technology. i mean that amazing piece of machinery is "hopeless" compared to what the world produces now.... simply amazing.

i meant "hopeless" by the fact that it's an obsolete way to deliver a warhead from ranges longer than another continent.

they're too slow, too vulnerable, and a suicide mission for the pilots if you want to deliver nukes to the Western Hemisphere.

Europe? sure, but they're still vulnerable.

Aren't all nukes from relatively advanced military powers delivered by submarine or ballistic missiles?

Anyway, this exact same thing happened a month ago as well (and think Magnetonium said it had happened several times before)

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Aren't all nukes from relatively advanced military powers delivered by submarine or ballistic missiles?

yes. there's no more efficient way.

Don't f*ck with Russia, thats the message. And don't f*ck with me either. Yes, Russia has started once again its regular long-range bomber flights. A sign of increasing military strength and political influence. Gotta love the rising oil/gas prices.

In 1992, many of the regular long-range bomber flights were grounded due to lack of financing from Kremlin. Now its all back. I think its a bit silly just flying those machines (its not cheap and not free) for no serious reason for great distances, but they can do as they please.

I'd like to add that despite the jealous and selfish replies by some of the neo-con sympathizers here, these long-range bombers are the real deal. There's a reason for Russia being the second biggest arms seller in the world markets ... we make good weapons and our technology is pretty dam good. If it wasnt for Russia, for example, you could've kissed the I.S.S. goodbye already ...

Nobody can dare attack Russia today apart from some terrorists bands. And Russian military technology, when used properly and professionally, has been successful and will continue to be.

But Lambert & Butler cigarettes are probably one of the most popular brands in the UK - not because of their quality (they're horrible) but because they are cheap and affordable!

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium I'd like to add that despite the jealous and selfish replies by some of the neo-con sympathizers here, these long-range bombers are the real deal. There's a reason for Russia being the second biggest arms seller in the world markets ... we make good weapons and our technology is pretty dam good. If it wasnt for Russia, for example, you could've kissed the I.S.S. goodbye already ...

that bomber was made for one thing and that is to run a suicide gauntlet across the Urals into Europe and maybe over the pole into our Northern territories. aside from that it's useless.

the Russians make better ICBM's

quote:

And Russian military technology, when used properly and professionally, has been successful and will continue to be.

when?

i'm all for Putin waxing nostalgic for the good-ole-days. whatever makes him feel like a man.

but there is a gap on the modern battlefield about as wide as Michael Moore's waistline that he has to overcome if he wants to stay competetive.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo that bomber was made for one thing and that is to run a suicide gauntlet across the Urals into Europe and maybe over the pole into our Northern territories. aside from that it's useless.

Thats not what those bombers are designed for, not for fun toy-rides or passenger express. And they can go half-way around Earth (far enough).

quote:

when?

Russian weapons have not been used widely outside of Russia since 1950s, and mostly they have lacked other important logistics ... air support, for example. I mean, how can you protect a top-of-the-class Russian tank without air support in a battle? In Korean war, Soviet plans dominated the skies. In WW2 we smashed the powerful Nazi armies. For most part Russian arms have been used in proportions during conflicts since WW2, and they didnt break down or stopped firing ... the politics of war can sometimes defeat much better armed troops. But the experience of using these arms has shown these buyers of Russian arms to buy what they expect ... AK-47, for example is a classic proven successful assault rifle that is unparalleled in cost, design and efficiency. Though you cant give credit to it for winning any large conflicts, it has had it parts.

When USA is on the other side of any conflict, it will be hard for Russian weapons to make the impact that they have been waiting for in the last 50+ years ...

P.S. Don't forget, it was only the Russian-made missiles that have so far been able to shoot down American stealth craft ... imagine having these guns in big numbers and supported by strong army and air defense ... then they'll make a difference. One-two Russian anti-missile batteries cant make much difference against NATO forces many thousands strong.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo i'm all for Putin waxing nostalgic for the good-ole-days. whatever makes him feel like a man

Unlike the bunch of neoconservatives that managed to infest your own government right? (Or you OWN comments on the Chavez thread?!)

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Russian weapons have not been used widely outside of Russia since 1950s, and mostly they have lacked other important logistics ... air support, for example. I mean, how can you protect a top-of-the-class Russian tank without air support in a battle? In Korean war, Soviet plans dominated the skies. In WW2 we smashed the powerful Nazi armies. For most part Russian arms have been used in proportions during conflicts since WW2, and they didnt break down or stopped firing ... the politics of war can sometimes defeat much better armed troops. But the experience of using these arms has shown these buyers of Russian arms to buy what they expect ... AK-47, for example is a classic proven successful assault rifle that is unparalleled in cost, design and efficiency. Though you cant give credit to it for winning any large conflicts, it has had it parts. When USA is on the other side of any conflict, it will be hard for Russian weapons to make the impact that they have been waiting for in the last 50+ years ... P.S. Don't forget, it was only the Russian-made missiles that have so far been able to shoot down American stealth craft ... imagine having these guns in big numbers and supported by strong army and air defense ... then they'll make a difference. One-two Russian anti-missile batteries cant make much difference against NATO forces many thousands strong.

wtf are going on about dude?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Unlike the bunch of neoconservatives that managed to infest your own government right? (Or you OWN comments on the Chavez thread?!)

yeah, but we're on a mission from God.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo wtf are going on about dude?

You asked when they were successful ...

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.