Politics Forum.org | The international political discussion forum.
Your PostsActive Topics  | Display:DesktopMobile
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Russian nuke submarine was in Gulf of Mexico undetected

POST REPLY
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Political cogitations: 9674
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 12:14 am
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Post Tue Aug 14, 2012 4:53 pm
Quote:
A Russian nuclear-powered attack submarine armed with long-range cruise missiles operated undetected in the Gulf of Mexico for several weeks and its travel in strategic U.S. waters was only confirmed after it left the region, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

It is only the second time since 2009 that a Russian attack submarine has patrolled so close to U.S. shores.

The stealth underwater incursion in the Gulf took place at the same time Russian strategic bombers made incursions into restricted U.S. airspace near Alaska and California in June and July, and highlights a growing military assertiveness by Moscow.

The submarine patrol also exposed what U.S. officials said were deficiencies in U.S. anti-submarine warfare capabilities—forces that are facing cuts under the Obama administration’s plan to reduce defense spending by $487 billion over the next 10 years.

The Navy is in charge of detecting submarines, especially those that sail near U.S. nuclear missile submarines, and uses undersea sensors and satellites to locate and track them.

The fact that the Akula was not detected in the Gulf is cause for concern, U.S. officials said.

The officials who are familiar with reports of the submarine patrol in the Gulf of Mexico said the vessel was a nuclear-powered Akula-class attack submarine, one of Russia’s quietest submarines.

A Navy spokeswoman declined to comment.

One official said the Akula operated without being detected for a month.

“The Akula was built for one reason and one reason only: To kill U.S. Navy ballistic missile submarines and their crews,” said a second U.S. official.

“It’s a very stealthy boat so it can sneak around and avoid detection and hope to get past any protective screen a boomer might have in place,” the official said, referring to the Navy nickname for strategic missile submarines.

The U.S. Navy operates a strategic nuclear submarine base at Kings Bay, Georgia. The base is homeport to eight missile-firing submarines, six of them equipped with nuclear-tipped missiles, and two armed with conventional warhead missiles.

“Sending a nuclear-propelled submarine into the Gulf of Mexico-Caribbean region is another manifestation of President Putin demonstrating that Russia is still a player on the world’s political-military stage,” said naval analyst and submarine warfare specialist Norman Polmar.

“Like the recent deployment of a task force led by a nuclear cruiser into the Caribbean, the Russian Navy provides him with a means of ‘showing the flag’ that is not possible with Russian air and ground forces,” Polmar said in an email.

The last time an Akula submarine was known to be close to U.S. shores was 2009, when two Akulas were spotted patrolling off the east coast of the United States.

Those submarine patrols raised concerns at the time about a new Russian military assertiveness toward the United States, according to the New York Times, which first reported the 2009 Akula submarine activity.

The latest submarine incursion in the Gulf further highlights the failure of the Obama administration’s “reset” policy of conciliatory actions designed to develop closer ties with Moscow.

Instead of closer ties, Russia under President Vladimir Putin, an ex-KGB intelligence officer who has said he wants to restore elements of Russia’s Soviet communist past, has adopted growing hardline policies against the United States.

Of the submarine activity, Sen. John Cornyn (R., Texas), member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said, “It’s a confounding situation arising from a lack of leadership in our dealings with Moscow. While the president is touting our supposed ‘reset’ in relations with Russia, Vladimir Putin is actively working against American interests, whether it’s in Syria or here in our own backyard.”

The Navy is facing sharp cuts in forces needed to detect and counter such submarine activity.

The Obama administration’s defense budget proposal in February cut $1.3 billion from Navy shipbuilding projects, which will result in scrapping plans to build 16 new warships through 2017.

The budget also called for cutting plans to buy 10 advanced P-8 anti-submarine warfare jets needed for submarine detection.

In June, Russian strategic nuclear bombers and support aircraft conducted a large-scale nuclear bomber exercise in the arctic. The exercise included simulated strikes on “enemy” strategic sites that defense officials say likely included notional attacks on U.S. missile defenses in Alaska.

Under the terms of the 2010 New START arms accord, such exercises require 14-day advanced notice of strategic bomber drills, and notification after the drills end. No such notification was given.

A second, alarming air incursion took place July 4 on the West Coast when a Bear H strategic bomber flew into U.S. airspace near California and was met by U.S. interceptor jets.

That incursion was said to have been a bomber incursion that has not been seen since before the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.

It could not be learned whether the submarine in the Gulf of Mexico was an Akula 1 type submarine or a more advanced Akula 2.

It is also not known why the submarine conducted the operation. Theories among U.S. analysts include the notion that submarine incursion was designed to further signal Russian displeasure at U.S. and NATO plans to deploy missile defenses in Europe.

Russia’s chief of the general staff, Gen. Nikolai Makarov, said in May that Russian forces would consider preemptive attacks on U.S. and allied missile defenses in Europe, and claimed the defenses are destabilizing in a crisis.

Makarov met with Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in July. Dempsey questioned him about the Russian strategic bomber flights near U.S. territory.

The voyage of the submarine also could be part of Russian efforts to export the Akula.

Russia delivered one of its Akula-2 submarines to India in 2009. The submarine is distinctive for its large tail fin.

Brazil’s O Estado de Sao Paoli reported Aug. 2 that Russia plans to sell Venezuela up to 11 new submarines, including one Akula.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow’s military is working to set up naval replenishment facilities in Vietnam and Cuba, but denied there were plans to base naval forces in those states.

Asked if Russia planned a naval base in Cuba, Lavrov said July 28: “We are not speaking of any bases. The Russian navy ships serve exercise cruises and training in the same regions. To harbor, resupply, and enable the crew to rest are absolutely natural needs. We have spoken of such opportunities with our Cuban friends.” The comment was posted in the Russian Foreign Ministry website.

Russian warships and support vessels were sent to Venezuela in 2008 to take part in naval exercises in a show of Russian support for the leftist regime of Hugo Chavez. The ships also stopped in Cuba.

Russian Deputy Premier Dmitri Rogozin announced in February that Russia was working on a plan to build 10 new attack submarines and 10 new missile submarines through 2030, along with new aircraft carriers.

Submarine warfare specialists say the Akula remains the core of the Russian attack submarine force.

The submarines can fire both cruise missiles and torpedoes, and are equipped with the SSN-21 and SSN-27 submarine-launched cruise missiles, as well as SSN-15 anti-submarine-warfare missiles. The submarines also can lay mines.

The SSN-21 has a range of up to 1,860 miles.

http://freebeacon.com/silent-running/

This must be an embarrassment for the almighty US Navy. You had a nuclear Submarine operating in US Waters for weeks undetected. I'm disappointed that the Russian NAvy didn't take the opportunity and sunk a few battleships or carriers.
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Political cogitations: 9331
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:59 pm
Ideology: Other
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Post Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:13 pm
An honest question: Where did it say the submarine was inside US waters? Although the Gulf of Mexico is now considered a US pond, it's not technically their waters. Also, it's a pretty big area which means it's not too difficult to sneak in there.

Do you think the US are not able to do the same? My father was in RN and they would often trail Russian boomers who were oblivious to their presence. The instant that wore broke out, that Russian sub would have gone to the bottom without even having the opportunity to OPEN the missile hatches.

That is submarine warfare! Sneaking your subs is up to another nations shores is not the hard part, it's having them there at the right time that is the tricky bit.
Image
[+-]
Absolutely Corrupt (x3)
Political cogitations: 6879
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:30 pm
Absolutely Corrupt (x3)
Post Tue Aug 14, 2012 5:24 pm
Thompson_NCL wrote:
Do you think the US are not able to do the same? My father was in RN and they would often trail Russian boomers who were oblivious to their presence. The instant that wore broke out, that Russian sub would have gone to the bottom without even having the opportunity to OPEN the missile hatches.
.

Assuming none was trailing you fathers, to whom's presence he was oblivious too.


But essentially I agree with the core of your sentiments.
Russians subs have been operating undetected in US waters for as long as Russia has had subs.
(I think they sent their first longrange spyplane over the US in the 30's).

That said, US ASW is well overdue an upgrade and to the best of my knowledge has no budget for this. And they aren't the only ones either.

Image


Sub warfare has gone off the boil since the end of the Cold War.
Where previously it was the single most important part of defence, since those days it's been too low on the list of priorities to see any money.
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Political cogitations: 9331
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:59 pm
Ideology: Other
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Post Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:29 pm
Baff wrote:
Assuming none was trailing you fathers, to whom's presence he was oblivious too.


Boomers tend to operate alone, so the chances they were being followed ALSO is slim. But it's possible, yes.
Image
User avatar
Absolutely Corrupt (x2)
Political cogitations: 4452
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:12 am
Ideology: Libertarian
Absolutely Corrupt (x2)
Post Tue Aug 14, 2012 6:44 pm
Why would anyone consider Russia to be a nonfactor in global military presence in the first place? They have enough nukes to ruin everybody's shit ten times over, just like we do... and they have em on near undetectable unstoppable submarines just like we do.

If you think that a russian SLBM sub in the Gulf is no big deal..... you are one foolish man. They can reach the entire CONUS from there.
Called to obey God rather than Man
Image

Tu Ne Cede Malis Sed Contra Audentior Ito
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Political cogitations: 9331
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2007 4:59 pm
Ideology: Other
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Post Tue Aug 14, 2012 7:29 pm
They can reach the entire CONUS with them positioned in the middle of the Atlantic. The only advantage of being in the Gulf is that obviously they have a shorter distance to travel to most targets and this therefore reduces the amount of time the US have to react. Unless you're expecting Russia to launch a first strike then the fact they are in the Gulf is pretty much a non issue. If they are there during a period of high tensions, THEN it might be worth worrying about. But Russia is a rational player and wouldn't launch a first strike.

Now if IRAN were in the Guld, then I'd worry.
Image
User avatar
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Political cogitations: 8437
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 7:13 pm
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Post Tue Aug 14, 2012 9:20 pm
Quote:
Why would anyone consider Russia to be a nonfactor in global military presence in the first place? They have enough nukes to ruin everybody's shit ten times over, just like we do...
Nukes dont make much of a difference in modern warfare, they're mostly there for the show.
Russia was seen as weak because for the past 20 years or more it was all talk and no walk. And its economy and military were collapsing. Hence why even such tiny countries as Georgia though they could easily challange Russia and get away with it. Now Rusia is trying to compensate for those humiliating decades by showing everyone how supposedly powerful it still is.
Image
Your ad here.
User avatar
Absolutely Corrupt (x15)
Political cogitations: 31202
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 7:31 pm
Ideology: Anarchist
Absolutely Corrupt (x15)
Post Tue Aug 14, 2012 9:26 pm
This should be considered an act of war. We need a CIA action to find and silence russkie...
Image
User avatar
Absolutely Corrupt
Political cogitations: 3131
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 12:32 am
Ideology: Other
Absolutely Corrupt
Post Tue Aug 14, 2012 10:26 pm
Delete.
"Politics is the art of the possible." - Otto von Bismarck
LIBERATE ROBOTICS
User avatar
Absolutely Corrupt (x16)
Political cogitations: 32284
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 2:37 am
Ideology: Other
Absolutely Corrupt (x16)
Post Wed Aug 15, 2012 3:03 am
That's what subs are for, lurking around undetected, hence the submersible part.
Last edited by Igor Antunov on Wed Aug 15, 2012 4:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Absolutely Corrupt
Political cogitations: 2097
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 4:08 pm
Ideology: Fascist
Absolutely Corrupt
Post Wed Aug 15, 2012 3:17 am
You think US and British subs don't do the same thing in the Barents sea?
User avatar
Political cogitations: 6066
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 1:30 am
Ideology: Conservative
Unperson
Post Wed Aug 15, 2012 4:11 am
I don't see how its that big of an achievement.

I mean its a big expanse of water.
My name refers to the film by Tarkovsky. See Wikipedia link in profile.
[+-]
User avatar
37% Corrupt
Political cogitations: 755
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:52 pm
37% Corrupt
Post Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:23 pm
Russkie wrote:

This must be an embarrassment for the almighty US Navy. You had a nuclear Submarine operating in US Waters for weeks undetected. I'm disappointed that the Russian NAvy didn't take the opportunity and sunk a few battleships or carriers.


You obviously don't realize that the US no longer has active battleships, but you do realize that the US has nuclear submarines within striking range of all of Russia including Putin's house right?
"I don't know how to explain it other than what I said was totally out of context for what I meant"...Hillary Clinton.
[+-]
Absolutely Corrupt (x3)
Political cogitations: 6879
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:30 pm
Absolutely Corrupt (x3)
Post Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:36 pm
And you do realise that Putin is perfectly able to swim down there and fuck them up, don't you?
[+-]
User avatar
Absolutely Corrupt (x3)
Political cogitations: 7123
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 12:57 am
Ideology: Other
Absolutely Corrupt (x3)
Post Mon Aug 27, 2012 3:11 pm
This is a bit of a storm in a tea cup. Russian and American subs have been conducting undetected patrols around each others sea ways for the last generation or more. So this is really, nothing new or even, out of the ordinary. We are more than likely hearing about it because some American nationalist patriot is miffed the "commies" we're just offshore. Or maybe the Russian media is playing up to their nationalist rhetoric.

But really, with the technology on subs today, the subs don't need to be in your aquatic backyard in order to launch missiles at you.
Image

"Netanyahu is like a man who, while negotiating the division of a pizza, continues to eat it." - Avi Shlaim, British-Israeli historian.
User avatar
Absolutely Corrupt
Political cogitations: 2097
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 4:08 pm
Ideology: Fascist
Absolutely Corrupt
Post Mon Aug 27, 2012 3:58 pm
The missiles can hit any point on earth, the submarine could be in the South Atlantic or off Vladivostok and they would still be able to hit Washington DC. or New York City if the balloon went up.
[+-]
Absolutely Corrupt (x3)
Political cogitations: 6879
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:30 pm
Absolutely Corrupt (x3)
Post Mon Aug 27, 2012 4:02 pm
The closer they are, the less time you have to launch your retaliation.
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Political cogitations: 9674
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 12:14 am
Absolutely Corrupt (x4)
Post Mon Aug 27, 2012 4:05 pm
Baff wrote:
The closer they are, the less time you have to launch your retaliation.


Yep, its called First Strike capability.
[+-]
User avatar
Absolutely Corrupt (x3)
Political cogitations: 7123
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 12:57 am
Ideology: Other
Absolutely Corrupt (x3)
Post Tue Aug 28, 2012 12:55 am
Baff wrote:
The closer they are, the less time you have to launch your retaliation.

Russkie wrote:
Yep, its called First Strike capability.

Which is meaningless. Regardless of a missile launch being a sneak attack first strike or a long range launch that you can see coming, there will be retaliation because both Russia and America always have subs on station somewhere out there. This is the principle of the Nuclear Deterrent and Mutually Assured Destruction: nether can prevent a launch, nether can stop incoming missiles effectively, so nether will engage in a launch because the retaliatory strike will be just as destructive that both will be completely destroyed by the initial strike and subsequent counter strikes...
Image

"Netanyahu is like a man who, while negotiating the division of a pizza, continues to eat it." - Avi Shlaim, British-Israeli historian.
POST REPLY
Log-in to submit your comments.
More Political Forums: The Politics Forum UK. Historical Forums: The U.S.S.R. Forum, The History Forum.
© 2003-2016 Siberian Fox network. Privacy.