Military Crisis in Ukraine

[sivispacem]

Well, that sounds just like the kind of thing we've been hearing from the rebels for ages now- totally confusion and no coherent public line.

[Eutyphro]

I do find it fantastically ironic that Russian propaganda victims always seem to refer to anything they dislike as "Nazi". I know it harks back to the great patriotic war and the triumph of Stalinism over Fascism but that analogy doesn't really work when the closest government in ideology and behaviours to the Third Reich in the Northern Hemisphere is that of Russia. All-pervasive counterintelligence state? Check. Oppression of homosexuals? Check. Policies praising Russian exceptionism and promoting ultranationalism? Check. Entrenched anti-Semitism and racism? Check. Expansionist foreign policy with the goal of a greater, cross-continental superpower? State run, all-encompassing propaganda machine? Checkmate.

USA:

1. All-pervasive counterintelligence state number one by miles ahead of anyone else.

2. Oppression of homosexuals, to an extent. Definitely nowhere near as bad as Russia, sure. Still no gay marriage in most states though. This is oke on US tv

but this isn't

(so female homosexual gestures are accepted, but male ones are not)

3. Policies praising USA exceptionalism and labeling anyone critical of foreign policy labeled as 'anti-American'.. check (if in the Netherlands you would label someone as anti Dutch people would laugh in your face)

4. Oversensitive to criticism of Israel and labeling anyone who does it an anti semite, except maybe if you are jewish, but in that case you must be a 'self loathing jew'.. Very racist towards arabs and muslims. Long history of racism towards black people and native Americans.

5. Imperialist foreign policy with the goal of remaining the number one superpower by military operations and support of suppressive regimes (Saudi-Arabia, Egypt, etc..)

6. Business run all-encompassing propaganda machine.

Checkmate.

[Svip]

I consider myself anti-Dutch.

[Brad]

 

I do find it fantastically ironic that Russian propaganda victims always seem to refer to anything they dislike as "Nazi". I know it harks back to the great patriotic war and the triumph of Stalinism over Fascism but that analogy doesn't really work when the closest government in ideology and behaviours to the Third Reich in the Northern Hemisphere is that of Russia. All-pervasive counterintelligence state? Check. Oppression of homosexuals? Check. Policies praising Russian exceptionism and promoting ultranationalism? Check. Entrenched anti-Semitism and racism? Check. Expansionist foreign policy with the goal of a greater, cross-continental superpower? State run, all-encompassing propaganda machine? Checkmate.

USA:

1. All-pervasive counterintelligence state number one by miles ahead of anyone else.

2. Oppression of homosexuals, to an extent. Definitely nowhere near as bad as Russia, sure. Still no gay marriage in most states though. This is oke on US tv

but this isn't

(so female homosexual gestures are accepted, but male ones are not)

3. Policies praising USA exceptionalism and labeling anyone critical of foreign policy labeled as 'anti-American'.. check (if in the Netherlands you would label someone as anti Dutch people would laugh in your face)

4. Oversensitive to criticism of Israel and labeling anyone who does it an anti semite, except maybe if you are jewish, but in that case you must be a 'self loathing jew'.. Very racist towards arabs and muslims. Long history of racism towards black people and native Americans.

5. Imperialist foreign policy with the goal of remaining the number one superpower by military operations and support of suppressive regimes (Saudi-Arabia, Egypt, etc..)

6. Business run all-encompassing propaganda machine.

Checkmate.

 

 

1. A counterintelligence state that actively suppresses political opposition, where there is little distinction between the executive and the intelligence apparatus and that the intelligent services have no public accountability qualify as a "counterintelligence state" -- the US allows all three of these things.

 

2. This is the product of the US -- Obama on record has spoke of his support for same-sex legislation but he is only the President. The whole system of the US is designed to be inefficient so that local governments enjoy political power. This is a lot different than the state-sponsored propaganda campaign against homosexuals that Moscow exports.

 

3. I've seen plenty of people in the US media critical of US foreign policy. Bill Maher, sticks out with a sore thumb of his criticism against US foreign policy. Jon Stewart too. And they are incredibly popular shows in the US which kinda defeats the point of thinking that those are marginalized out of society for not backing their federal government's foreign policy. In fact, they actually don't even care.

 

4) See 3)

 

5) Military support of repressive regimes but would you rather that the the West did not military support them and that we had no clue of the technology they used? Part of the reason why the UK were able to be at an operationally advantage during the Falklands War was because the French sold the Argentinians Exocet anti-ship missiles and were able to liaise with the French government as to how viable those weapons were in conflict, giving the UK an intelligence advantage. If you stop military support, these countries will find another patron and you'll be without the intelligence advantage you once had. Would you rather be in the dark when clashes blow for moral reasons or have an advantage on both strategic and tactical levels?

[sivispacem]

1) Comparing the US intelligence apparatus to that's of Russia is simply ridiculous. In the US, intelligence agencies have a political and legal framework in which to work. By and large, they do not actually interfere with the lives of citizens directly, even if they do collect and process vast amounts of intelligence on them. In Russia, the intelligence services run the judiciary, executive and most of the legislature. They also have direct or indirect control over most of the larger state-owned businesses and by proxy many of those run by oligarchs, most of whom are ex-intelligence services personnel. The FSB directly influences daily life, telling the media what to report and suggesting legislation designed to enable mass surveillance of the population which is rubber-stamped by the Duma. There's no independent oversight, no recompense and nothing to stop the state security services from framing citizens, particularly for economic crimes, merely for disagreeing with government policy. They also haven't as history of assassinating political dissidents both at home and abroad.

 

They're completely incomparable. Russian today is very similar to East Germany under the Stasi; it's run by the intelligence services for the benefit of a small clique of current or ex-intelligence service personnel.

 

2) Again, the two are absolutely incomparable. The US does hot have legislation specifically outlawing the public portrayal of homosexual relationships. The US does nor have legislation explicitly stating that violence targeting people with violence or discrimination because of their sexuality is not a hate crime. The US does not regularly see the murderers of people in homophobic attacks released without charge despite overwhelming evidence due to a silent policy of permitting violence against these "impure" people.

 

3) That's certainly not current government policy, though there was certainly an atmosphere of it during the Bush years. It's a product of the right wing press in the US but even then isn't comparable with Russia. You don't have American lawmakers claiming that Chechens are subhuman or that foreign immigration means that the survival of white Americans is at stake. You don't have politicians suggesting eugenics and forced birth control in regions that aren't ethnically white/European. You don't have the US state funding media publications about fabricated Jewish plots or reciting antisemitic hoaxes like the Elders of Zion.

 

4) The US state is considerably less racist towards Arabs or derogatory towards Muslims that Russia. All the independent studies conducted by Hunan rights groups put Russia well bells the US for tolerance of all kinds.

 

5) Again, not really the same as a stated policy to absurd neighbouring countries by force to rebuild the "empire" of the Soviet Union. Supporting questionable regimes for self-interest != invading, annexing and absorbing land belonging to other sovereign nations as part of a mediaeval land-grab policy for the purposes of creating a greater state.

 

6) Again, utterly incomparable to Russia. The mere fact the US media is at least bipartisan and arguably multipolar, especially in this day and age, is a stark contrast to a state where even internet blogs are shut down and their writers imprisoned for not towing the official government line.

 

Nice try, but you've either got a really, really warped view of just how "evil" the US is (clue: not particularly in the grand scheme of things), little comprehension of just how bad things in Russia are currently (clue: below Chad and Zimbabwe in press freedoms, below Nigeria, Pakistan and Libya in political freedoms and below Lebanon, Mali and Sierra Leone in freedom from corruption) or a combination of both. Which sadly makes your response sound more like an anti-American rant than a rational observation.

[Svip]

It would also be unfair to compare Russia an the United States on the same merits. There are plenty of valid criticism against the United States, but that's because we by and large consider them a prosperous democracy. We don't hold Russia to the same standards. But regardless, this is off topic. Even if the United States was that terrible, how does that make what Russia is doing right?

[Der_Don]

1) Comparing the US intelligence apparatus to that's of Russia is simply ridiculous. In the US, intelligence agencies have a political and legal framework in which to work. By and large, they do not actually interfere with the lives of citizens directly, even if they do collect and process vast amounts of intelligence on them. In Russia, the intelligence services run the judiciary, executive and most of the legislature. They also have direct or indirect control over most of the larger state-owned businesses and by proxy many of those run by oligarchs, most of whom are ex-intelligence services personnel. The FSB directly influences daily life, telling the media what to report and suggesting legislation designed to enable mass surveillance of the population which is rubber-stamped by the Duma. There's no independent oversight, no recompense and nothing to stop the state security services from framing citizens, particularly for economic crimes, merely for disagreeing with government policy. They also haven't as history of assassinating political dissidents both at home and abroad.

 

They're completely incomparable. Russian today is very similarly Germany under the Stasi; it's run by the intelligence services for the benefit of a small clique of current or ex-intelligence service personnel.

 

2) Again, the two area absolutely incomparable. The US does hot have legislation specifically outlawing the public portrayal of homosexual relationships. The US does nor have legislation explicitly stating that violence targeting people with violence or discrimination because of their sexuality is not a hate crime.

 

3) That's certainly not current government policy, though there was certainly an atmosphere of it during the Bush years. It's a product of the right wing press in the US but even then isn't comparable with Russia. You don't have American lawmakers claiming that Chechens are subhuman or that foreign immigration means that the survival of white Americans is at stake. You don't have politicians suggesting eugenics and forced birth control in regions that aren't ethnically white/European. You don't have the US state funding media publications about fabricated Jewish plots or reciting antisemitic hoaxes like the Elders of Zion.

 

4) The US state is considerably less racist towards Arabs or derogatory towards Muslims that Russia. All the independent studies conducted by Hunan rights groups put Russia well bells the US for tolerance of all kinds.

 

5) Again, not really the same as a stated policy to absurd neighbouring countries by force to rebuild the "empire" of the Soviet Union. Supporting questionable regimes for self-interest != invading, annexing and absorbing land belonging to other sovereign nations.

 

6) Again, utterly incomparable to Russia. The mere fact the US media is at least bipartisan and arguably multipolar, especially in this day and age, is a stark contrast to a state where even internet blogs are shut down and their writers imprisoned for not towing the official government line.

 

Nice try, but you've either got a really, really warped view of just how "evil" the US is (clue: not particularly in the grand scheme of things), little comprehension of just how bad things in Russia are currently (clue: below Chad and Zimbabwe in press freedoms, below Nigeria, Pakistan and Libya in political freedoms and below Lebanon, Mali and Sierra Leone in freedom from corruption) or a combination of both. Which sadly makes your response sound more like an anti-American rant than a rational observation.

You really come across as the Chief Justice of the United States. Have you actually ever levelled criticism against the US? Certainly not on GTAF, I suppose? Almost everything coming from you is either criticizing Russia or defending America's actions.

[sivispacem]

That's a case of your selective reading, I can assure you. I've levelled criticism against the US numerous times on this forum. Idiotic, reactionary responses to terrorism. Ridiculous firearm policies. A broken, utterly laughable healthcare system. Miserable intelligence failures over 9/11 and Iraq. Total ignorance's and lack of strategic direction in Iraq and Afghanistan. Absurd religious policies and religious influence in the political sphere for a nation with legally enshrined separation of church and state. How fundamentally flawed the separation of powers is. Idiotic policies on law and order, especially in relation to the death penalty. The broken patents system. Doesn't change the fact that, compared to Russia, the US is practically a utopia. Not least of all because actually having the freedom to discuss and complain about the rights of citizens in the US, and the actions of the government, without being framed for embezzlement or shot in the head outside your apartment already means it's in a better state than modern Russia.

 

Now, let's return to the topic at hand. Whilst I'm more than happy to discuss US policies or draw comparisons to other nations in terms of freedom and governance, that's not for this thread.

[Der_Don]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92kG2tMBR40

[Eutyphro]

1) Comparing the US intelligence apparatus to that's of Russia is simply ridiculous. In the US, intelligence agencies have a political and legal framework in which to work. By and large, they do not actually interfere with the lives of citizens directly, even if they do collect and process vast amounts of intelligence on them.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

2) Again, the two are absolutely incomparable. The US does not have legislation specifically outlawing the public portrayal of homosexual relationships. The US does nor have legislation explicitly stating that violence targeting people with violence or discrimination because of their sexuality is not a hate crime. The US does not regularly see the murderers of people in homophobic attacks released without charge despite overwhelming evidence due to a silent policy of permitting violence against these "impure" people.

They are incomparable, true. I stated that. But the United States is not a front runner for gay rights like my country is, and the US media is awkward about homosexuality.

3) That's certainly not current government policy, though there was certainly an atmosphere of it during the Bush years. It's a product of the right wing press in the US but even then isn't comparable with Russia. You don't have American lawmakers claiming that Chechens are subhuman or that foreign immigration means that the survival of white Americans is at stake.

It's not racially motivated in the US because the US is a nation of immigrants. It is popular in the media though, and though more limited under Obama than under most other US politicians, he still has some tendencies towards it.

In a speech on the Syria crisis on Sept. 10, 2013, Barack Obama said, "But when, with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death, and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act....That’s what makes America different. That’s what makes us exceptional."

4) The US state is considerably less racist towards Arabs or derogatory towards Muslims that Russia. All the independent studies conducted by Hunan rights groups put Russia well bells the US for tolerance of all kinds.

Could be worse in Russia than in the US, you may be right. Still, consider Michael Savage, he once said "They say, 'Oh, there's a billion of them.' I said, 'So, kill 100 million of them, then there'll be 900 million of them.' I mean, would you rather die—would you rather us die than them?". This is someone who has had tv shows and still has a radio show..

5) Again, not really the same as a stated policy to absorb neighbouring countries by force to rebuild the "empire" of the Soviet Union. Supporting questionable regimes for self-interest != invading, annexing and absorbing land belonging to other sovereign nations as part of a mediaeval land-grab policy for the purposes of creating a greater state.

The anexation of Crimea was a criminal act. It is related to the expansion of NATO towards Russia's borders though. Russia needs Crimea for a strategic naval base because Ukraine is being absorbed into NATO. But it is definitely a criminal act that should be condemned. If the United States cares so much about sovereignty of land, then why does it not return Guantanamo to Cuba? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban%E2%80%93American_Treaty

 

It would also be unfair to compare Russia an the United States on the same merits. There are plenty of valid criticism against the United States, but that's because we by and large consider them a prosperous democracy. We don't hold Russia to the same standards. But regardless, this is off topic. Even if the United States was that terrible, how does that make what Russia is doing right?

6) Again, utterly incomparable to Russia. The mere fact the US media is at least bipartisan and arguably multipolar, especially in this day and age, is a stark contrast to a state where even internet blogs are shut down and their writers imprisoned for not towing the official government line.

These two comments cover roughly the same subject so I paired them. I don't consider the United States a democracy. The United States is a Polyarchy, "a system where a small group actually rules on behalf of capital, and majority’s decision making is confined to choosing among selective number of elites within tightly controlled elective process. It is a form of consensual domination made possible by the structural domination of the global capital which allowed concentration of political powers." The United States has a one party system with two factions. The one party is the business party, and the two factions, Democrat and Republican.

Nice try, but you've either got a really, really warped view of just how "evil" the US is (clue: not particularly in the grand scheme of things), little comprehension of just how bad things in Russia are currently (clue: below Chad and Zimbabwe in press freedoms, below Nigeria, Pakistan and Libya in political freedoms and below Lebanon, Mali and Sierra Leone in freedom from corruption) or a combination of both. Which sadly makes your response sound more like an anti-American rant than a rational observation.

 

LOL, I'm 'anti-American'. Oke, I'll put that in perspective. I'm a great fan of American popular culture, but I am a big critic of American politics. Often I'm also critical of Dutch politics, which makes me anti Dutch. I'm kind of a self loathing Occidental I guess.

 

I see this is going awfully off topic though..

Edited July 24, 2014 by gtaxpert

[make total destroy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92kG2tMBR40

Wow, that was embarrassing to watch.

[sivispacem]

This had gone far off topic, but as a brief response:

 

 

You really need to understand that's the incredibly right wing US media don't really represent national policy. Lots of radio cranks have said stupid things, that's kind of what they do.

 

Your point about COINTELPRO is somewhat valid but hardly relevant in discussion of current political reality. That's ancient history in political terms and doesn't bring much to a legitimate comparison of current policy. Most European governments have done pretty vile things in there last 60 years or so too.

 

Your description of polyarchy is nothing like that put forward by Robert Dahl. In fact it's closer to corporate nationalism. Most representative democracies are technically polyarchic and the two are not mutually exclusive; additionally Dahl defines polyarchic administrations as reactive to the views and wills of their populace's whereas your comments suggest anything but.

 

Guantanamo Bay is leased, which is rather different from territory annexed. The question of whether it is leased under duress is an open debate but it's still an apples to oranges comparison.

 

I'm happy to split the thread off if you want to continue this discussion or you can PM me.

[Eutyphro]

@sivispacem: I've said what I wanted to say, so I'm happy to leave it and move back on topic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92kG2tMBR40

 

The RT guy says Russia released 'forensic evidence', but I think that's a lie. To my knowledge Russia has done no such thing. CNN dumbass doesn't even call him out on it. Unpleasant and embarassing to see people yell at each other though.

[Twilight Sky]

I like how he basically blamed the US for whats going on over there. That's right, when sh*t goes down, even on a different planet, solve all problems by blaming America.

 

I love this country.

[r0eladn]

Seems there is going to be a mission involving dutch military police, special forces of the marines or commandos, in the area of the crash site, to make sure the investigators are safe.

[Kampioen]

1) Comparing the US intelligence apparatus to that's of Russia is simply ridiculous. In the US, intelligence agencies have a political and legal framework in which to work. By and large, they do not actually interfere with the lives of citizens directly, even if they do collect and process vast amounts of intelligence on them. In Russia, the intelligence services run the judiciary, executive and most of the legislature. They also have direct or indirect control over most of the larger state-owned businesses and by proxy many of those run by oligarchs, most of whom are ex-intelligence services personnel. The FSB directly influences daily life, telling the media what to report and suggesting legislation designed to enable mass surveillance of the population which is rubber-stamped by the Duma. There's no independent oversight, no recompense and nothing to stop the state security services from framing citizens, particularly for economic crimes, merely for disagreeing with government policy. They also haven't as history of assassinating political dissidents both at home and abroad.

 

They're completely incomparable. Russian today is very similar to East Germany under the Stasi; it's run by the intelligence services for the benefit of a small clique of current or ex-intelligence service personnel.

 

2) Again, the two are absolutely incomparable. The US does hot have legislation specifically outlawing the public portrayal of homosexual relationships. The US does nor have legislation explicitly stating that violence targeting people with violence or discrimination because of their sexuality is not a hate crime. The US does not regularly see the murderers of people in homophobic attacks released without charge despite overwhelming evidence due to a silent policy of permitting violence against these "impure" people.

 

3) That's certainly not current government policy, though there was certainly an atmosphere of it during the Bush years. It's a product of the right wing press in the US but even then isn't comparable with Russia. You don't have American lawmakers claiming that Chechens are subhuman or that foreign immigration means that the survival of white Americans is at stake. You don't have politicians suggesting eugenics and forced birth control in regions that aren't ethnically white/European. You don't have the US state funding media publications about fabricated Jewish plots or reciting antisemitic hoaxes like the Elders of Zion.

 

4) The US state is considerably less racist towards Arabs or derogatory towards Muslims that Russia. All the independent studies conducted by Hunan rights groups put Russia well bells the US for tolerance of all kinds.

 

5) Again, not really the same as a stated policy to absurd neighbouring countries by force to rebuild the "empire" of the Soviet Union. Supporting questionable regimes for self-interest != invading, annexing and absorbing land belonging to other sovereign nations as part of a mediaeval land-grab policy for the purposes of creating a greater state.

 

6) Again, utterly incomparable to Russia. The mere fact the US media is at least bipartisan and arguably multipolar, especially in this day and age, is a stark contrast to a state where even internet blogs are shut down and their writers imprisoned for not towing the official government line.

 

Nice try, but you've either got a really, really warped view of just how "evil" the US is (clue: not particularly in the grand scheme of things), little comprehension of just how bad things in Russia are currently (clue: below Chad and Zimbabwe in press freedoms, below Nigeria, Pakistan and Libya in political freedoms and below Lebanon, Mali and Sierra Leone in freedom from corruption) or a combination of both. Which sadly makes your response sound more like an anti-American rant than a rational observation.

 

I don't think he meant to say that all of this is as bad in the US as it is in Russia, but rather that the same phenomena are present is the US, either to a lesser extent or in a different form. In any case, the US is pretty far behind to the rest of the western world on these issues.

[Raavi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92kG2tMBR40

 

And even after 10 minutes of spouting bullsh*t that RT wanker, (whom's idea of winning a debate is shouting the loudest), still didn't manage to answer Chris Cuomo's initial question.

[sivispacem]

What happened to having "said what you wanted to say" and moving back onto the topic?

Anyway, I've PMed you in response.

[ddyoung]

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92kG2tMBR40

 

And even after 10 minutes of spouting bullsh*t that RT wanker, (whom's idea of winning a debate is shouting the loudest), still didn't manage to answer Chris Cuomo's initial question.

 

Has Russia honestly taken out the part of his brain that thinks freely and acknowledges facts? My god, that was just pitiful what that RT reporter was doing.

[Spaghetti Cat]

 

 

Obama said that americans is an exceptional nation (why?)

Presumably because they're the sole remaining superpower. But you rather missed the point. It's the prerogative of national leaders to lend their backing to whomever they like regardless of whether we're talking a great power or a tiny microstate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Huh what?? Doubt he ever said that, much less believe it. For the hundredth time, American exceptionalism has to do with how our country was founded and, at the time, was exceptional to the norm in history. We had sovereign rights for the citizens and rule of law, not biased on force or the whim of whatever a monarch or despot was in power. Has nothing to do with thinking our people are better than another country.

 

 

Annnnnnnd rounding back to OT:

 

 

Interesting article: http://aviationweek.com/defense/buk-missile-system-lethal-undiscriminating

 

 

This feature may have been a crucial factor in the destruction of MH17. The Fire Dome radar’s main job was to permit simultaneous engagement of more targets – one per Telar – under control of the battery’s 9S18M Snow Drift. But the Soviet military and the designers installed a set of backup modes that would permit the Telars to detect and attack targets autonomously, in the event the Snow Drift was shut down or destroyed by NATO’s rapidly improving anti-radar missiles.

The autonomous modes are intended for last-ditch use by the Telar operators, not the more highly trained crews in the battery command vehicle. According to an experienced analyst of Russian-developed radar, the automatic radar modes display targets within range. The operator can then command the system to lock up the target, illuminate and shoot.

Critically, these backup modes also bypass two safety features built into the 9S18M Snow Drift radar: a full-function identification friend-or-foe (IFF) system and non-cooperative target recognition (NCTR) modes. The IFF system uses a separate interrogator located above the main radar antenna and most likely will have been upgraded to current civilian standards.

The 9S18M introduced new NCTR processing technology, according to a 1998 interview with Buk designer Ardalion Rastov. NCTR techniques are closely held, but one of the most basic – jet engine modulation, or the analysis of beats and harmonics in the radar return that are caused by engine fan or compressor blades – should easily discriminate among a 777 with high-bypass turbofans, a turboprop transport or an Su-25 attack fighter.

 

If they didn't have the trained crews to operate the buk, then it was probably left on this auto mode. Might explain why the rebels terrorists had proclaimed this region a no-fly zone, but in the end didn't have the trained personal to distinguish between a civilian airliner and a military transport. Still, "oops" doesn't excuse mass murder.

[Eutyphro]

That's interesting. Lots of sources claimed you needed months of training to fire one of these missiles at a plane. Interesting that you don't. That would further explain this disastrously stupid shoot down. It would also possibly exclude Russia from being involved in more than giving them the Buk. Russia wouldn't have needed to assist them with expertise on how to use this weapon to be able to shoot down MH17.

[Kampioen]

That's interesting. Lots of sources claimed you needed months of training to fire one of these missiles at a plane. Interesting that you don't. That would further explain this disastrously stupid shoot down. It would also possibly exclude Russia from being involved in more than giving them the Buk. Russia wouldn't have needed to assist them with expertise on how to use this weapon to be able to shoot down MH17.

 

I was surprised when they said you need lots of training to fire one of these things. Seemed weird to me because why would they make something overly complicated? As far as I know, even fighter jets could potentally be flown (unsafely) by people who have very little or no aviation experience. Maybe they meant that you need lots of training to fire it safely, so that you don't accidentally shoot down a civilian plane.

[sivispacem]

The training required isn't so much to operate the missile system itself but to properly use the radar, identify between friendly, hostile or unknown targets, et cetera. I wasn't aware Buk variants came with autonomous launch capability.

 

I doubt a modern fighter aircraft court be flown at all by an untrained pilot. Have you seen the inside of the cockpit for even a single-seat Gen 4/4.5 fighter?

 

 

The pre-HUD, pre-voice-activation, multi-display stuff must be even worse.

[Kampioen]

The training required isn't so much to operate the missile system itself but to properly use the radar, identify between friendly, hostile or unknown targets, et cetera. I wasn't aware Buk variants came with autonomous launch capability.

 

I doubt a modern fighter aircraft court be flown at all by an untrained pilot. Have you seen the inside of the cockpit for even a single-seat Gen 4/4.5 fighter?

 

 

The pre-HUD, pre-voice-activation, multi-display stuff must be even worse.

 

I don't know how much of this stuff is required to only fly the plane. I have a friend who is trying to become a fighter jet pilot and he told me that the controls are simple enough that you could actually take off and fly it by taking a look at what's around you and only figuring out the most basic things. That's what I'm going off, never been inside a fighter jet myself.

[Sir Michael]

^ Is that the cockpit of a Rafale?? Lol, that looks really fancy. 0_0

 

Such hatred for America in this thread, and I can understand why... our government is sooooo shady.

Edited July 24, 2014 by SirMichaelRocks23

[orbitalraindrops]

I wonder what's going through the head of the person/ people who shot down the airliner. DO you reckon they feel remorse?

Do you reckon they're superiors were pissed off with them?

[K^2]

I doubt a modern fighter aircraft court be flown at all by an untrained pilot. Have you seen the inside of the cockpit for even a single-seat Gen 4/4.5 fighter?

 

Cockpit

 

The pre-HUD, pre-voice-activation, multi-display stuff must be even worse.

If you know how to fly, it's not so bad. You can be walked through engine start-up procedures and basic targeting/weapons release in about an hour. Flying it efficiently in combat situation takes years of training. But if you simply need to know enough to take off, take a shot at a target, and come back to base, it's quite manageable. But like I said, you have to know how to fly to begin with.

 

Pre-HUD stuff is much easier, by the way. Sure, there are more toggles and switches, but they are all right in front of you and labeled. And you only need to know what a handful of them do to get a basic mission done. If you are flying glass, you have to know all the menus and options. It's a lot more work to learn.

[Kampioen]

I wonder what's going through the head of the person/ people who shot down the airliner. DO you reckon they feel remorse?

Do you reckon they're superiors were pissed off with them?

 

I think "yes" to both.

[Kampioen]

 

I doubt a modern fighter aircraft court be flown at all by an untrained pilot. Have you seen the inside of the cockpit for even a single-seat Gen 4/4.5 fighter?

 

Cockpit

 

The pre-HUD, pre-voice-activation, multi-display stuff must be even worse.

If you know how to fly, it's not so bad. You can be walked through engine start-up procedures and basic targeting/weapons release in about an hour. Flying it efficiently in combat situation takes years of training. But if you simply need to know enough to take off, take a shot at a target, and come back to base, it's quite manageable. But like I said, you have to know how to fly to begin with.

 

Pre-HUD stuff is much easier, by the way. Sure, there are more toggles and switches, but they are all right in front of you and labeled. And you only need to know what a handful of them do to get a basic mission done. If you are flying glass, you have to know all the menus and options. It's a lot more work to learn.

 

 

I asked my friend if I would be able to simply take off and fly. Even if I crashed within minutes that would still count. He was pretty confident that I could. I just looked at a high-res picture of a cockpit and I had at least a general clue of what most things could be for. I found the keyhole and what I think is the start switch. I would be scared to death trying to take off in one though.

 

edit: I don't know how to fly, never even played on a flight simulator. I do understand the general physics of flight and the basic controls of a plane. Have you ever flown a plane?

Edited July 24, 2014 by CenMan

[r0eladn]