Wednesday 25 March 2015

Putin Can Play Silly-B*****s, Too

The writers and visitors of this blog have long inveighed against the juvenile neocon policy of conducting hostile operations against Russia on the cheap by stirring up the various nests of hornets on the Bear's borders.  You can certainly get a rise out of Putin by baiting him thus, but it's not clever.

Doubly so when you realise how easy it is for little Volodya to reply in kind.   And yes, he's going to arm Argentina*; and just in case we hadn't noticed, a stooge makes the connection for us.  So now we must rush around and spend money in the South Atlantic again.  Such an easy game to play.

That post-election military review had better be a thorough one, if we need to consider every potential trouble-spot near and far where a few hundred thou of Russian gold could be put to mischievous use.  We could each come up with our own list of weak-points, I'm sure, and contemplating it won't make for sweet dreams.

* The SU-24 (NATO codename Fencer) mentioned in these reports is somewhat venerable, and likewise vulnerable; but it's a nasty turn of events all the same.  A wittier Russian riposte would be to supply Argentina with TU-22s  -  NATO codename Backfire ...


Anonymous said...

Its certainly 'venerable'.
Ancient might be a better description.

But its better than what they have.

Doubt any typhoons would have much trouble with them.

Anyone know what AA weapons are deployed on the Falklands?

Sebastian Weetabix said...

If they attack after 10pm on a friday, all the aircrew will be pissed as newts in the Upland Goose...

E-K said...

How does Cameron get away without scrutiny for his incompentence ?

MyMischeviousName said...

C'mon peeps!

This is just 'dont cut my budget' guff from the Army, just like the police stuff in the earlier post!!!!

Daily Mail readers will inevitably be 'fuming' about the 'betrayal' etc..etc...etc....

If we sold spitfires to Chad I'm sure some canny general in a bordering state would be ramping up concerns about 'colonialism' and the like.

Now the ding-dong about unfunded election promises is where its at... property ('mansion') tax anyone?

I know the good burghers of C@W despise an LVT as 'communist' and musch prefer the current Euro-handout to land owners... a curious position, youd have to admit.

Isnt the CAP the biggest budget item in the EU? Whats the Kipper view on land subsidy for the uber-wealthy anyway?

Electro-Kevin said...

Is the Kipper the same as the Daily Mailer ?

The Daily Mail hates the Kipper and features at least one smear story a day.

Nick Drew said...

Anon - just Rapier, AFAIK - so air defence really relies on interception (and a small force of non-dispersed Typhoons on the ground is thus very vulnerable to a quick attack by area-denial munitions)

remind us when those aircraft carriers actually get any, *ahem* aircraft ?

SW - but we've both seen aircrew take to the skies with major hangovers, yes?

wonder how good the EW radar is?

EK - because he comes across as 'prime ministerial' (which, I think we will find, is rather important to the voter)

Mischevious - maybe a happy coincidence for t'military but I don't think they set this particular hare running (unlike the police, see CU's post)

don't assume the C@W-ers are monolithic: I for one do not equate LVT to communism - though I can never quite follow MW and his enthusiasms. But more high-end Council Tax banding is a no-brainer to me

(and I'm not voting UKIP either)

I am however very sure the CAP is an outrage, ditto the windfarm windfall: and if you think the CAP is a monster, watch out for the C.Energy Policy, aka 'Energy Union' - which is potentially as bad or even worse

CityUnslicker said...

The bit that had me was that the Ariges have 40 planes that can fly and shoot. The Brits, 4.

No matter how shit the Argies are they would overwhlem the Brit defence in one attack if they planned it remotely well.

There are only one or 2 rapiers, they would run out of missiles even if they did a good job.

The submarine is the greater deterent, given the Argies could not sink it if they tried and it has enough weaponary to sink most of the fleet single handedly.

More worrying is the Yanks have long since stopped being on our side here and back the Argies. However, I sort of think if the Argies invaded they would soon swap sides as before.

dearieme said...

Nuke BA and be done with it.

DJK said...

CU: The Sceptics were on the Argies's side last time too --- at least in the beginning. The one country that gave unequivocal support right from the start of the conflict --- not tha they get any credit for it --- was France.

Demetrius said...

Is Putin bank rolling Salmond or is Alex too far to the Left for him?

rwendland said...

If the "Argies have 40 planes that can fly and shoot", then our allies, the U.S., supplied about 36 of them in the mid to late 1990s. They sold Argentina 36 A-4AR Fightinghawks, low flight hour A-4 Skyhawks (ex-USAF I think) refurbished and upgraded with F-16-ish technology I think.

Seems a bit harsh criticising the Russians now for offering to lease them refurbished vintage planes, when the U.S. have already done that 20 odd years ago. Don't think the U.S. supplied the latest missiles the A-4AR could use though.

hovis said...

@rwendland - indeed - part of the Putin the bogeyman hysteria being whipped up in the media. After all the sources reporting the "fears" are the BBC and the Sun - both establishment if from different angles.