Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Russia Plans Arctic Army Brigades  
User currently offlineMortyman From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3846 posts, RR: 1
Posted (3 years 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2112 times:

Russia plans Arctic army brigades


The announcement comes days after Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said Russia would strongly defend its interests in the region.


Anatoly Serdyukov said Russia had studied the specialist Arctic troops in Finland, Norway and Sweden.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13997324



So things are starting to tighten regarding interests in the Arcitc... I hope they bring warm clothes ...  

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21415 posts, RR: 54
Reply 1, posted (3 years 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2008 times:

I'm surprised they didn't have any before. After all, they should be the nation with the largest arctic area.

User currently offlinedxing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (3 years 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1989 times:

Quoting Mortyman (Thread starter):
I hope they bring warm clothes

Global warming....Bermuda shorts and souvenir t-shirts featuring polar bears with "Kill'em All" written beneath!


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16822 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (3 years 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1976 times:

The US has two Army Combat Brigades in Alaska, one Airborne brigade at Fort Richardson and one Stryker brigade at Fort Wainwright (both of the 25th Infantry Division). Fort Wainwright is about 198 miles from the Arctic circle.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2038 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (3 years 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1870 times:

This is just the beginning. Russia is going to step up their game in a big way, and throw their weight around even more. That means Canada finally has to ante-up. If we don't assert our sovereignty in the north, Russia will take advantage of it. A small Inuit militia with surplus Lee-Enfields from WW2 is a total joke. We need to significantly increase defense spending, establish a 3rd fleet, and modernize the other 2 fleets. The CP-140 aircraft need to be replaced. New long-range submarines with full under-ice capabilities are a must too.

[Edited 2011-07-02 23:52:36]


No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29791 posts, RR: 58
Reply 5, posted (3 years 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1850 times:

The us is in desperate need of a naval prscence in the arctic. Only one icebreaker is in service and it is geared for scientific research not armed conflict. Having the uscg make a few sorties with hc-130's isn't going to cut it. The us needs year round navel presence in the arctic


OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3001 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (3 years 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 1799 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 5):
The us needs year round navel presence in the arctic

Just for future reference, navel means belly button (and unless global warming melts the ice up there, I don't think there will be any  ) . Naval refers to any navigation over water, specifically the Navy.

As far as an Arctic presence from both Canada and the US, I don't see the need. In my view, it's no different than the US having bases in the Middle East. As long as they recognize that four other countries also have claims to the Arctic circle (Norway, Denmark through Greenland, Canada, and the US) and that they also could have interests in the region (which due to the ice they can't really defend nor explore).

I wonder why people still treat Russia as an enemy. Russia is no longer an enemy. It's a rival, certainly not an ally, but to put the label of enemy is just wrong.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlinedl021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11446 posts, RR: 76
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1614 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

When it comes to competition for economic resources (which is the main reason Russian interest in their Arctic regions is increasing, same as Chinese interest in the Spratly and Paracel Islands) it's difficult to ignore the fact that competing nations are going to be economic competitors if not enemies in the drive to obtain the needed resources to run our economies. Russia is an aggressive nation as regards taking what they feel they need (as are many other nations) and have taken liberties with the sovereignty of others (as have other nations) so why ASSUME they'd play fair ball with the Arctic?


Canada, the US (and Denmark and Norway to some extent) need to spend more time and effort being pro-active in asserting our property and territorial rights, as well as developing the natural resources from those regions in a safe and productive way.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineJJJ From Spain, joined May 2006, 1794 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1546 times:

Someone had to post this http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_EfpBfLSGF5c/TAGfntAqtgI/AAAAAAAAAL4/0ZEhIFq3HTE/s1600/bear-cavalry.jpg

User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2038 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1420 times:

Quoting dl021 (Reply 7):
Canada, the US (and Denmark and Norway to some extent) need to spend more time and effort being pro-active in asserting our property and territorial rights, as well as developing the natural resources from those regions in a safe and productive way.

  

If we don't use it, we will lose it.



No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlineRonglimeng From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 625 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 weeks ago) and read 1367 times:

"Mr. President, we must not allow... a mine shaft gap!"


....General 'Buck' Turgidson


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
US Army-Marines; Bush War Plans 'optimistic' posted Wed Dec 18 2002 16:18:39 by Heavymetal
Army "Birther" Pleads Guilty posted Wed Dec 15 2010 11:29:10 by Aaron747
Army's New Weapon Against Terror - XM25 Rifle. posted Mon Nov 29 2010 09:26:00 by FXramper
Tax Break For Employer Health Plans A Target Again posted Sun Nov 28 2010 13:03:03 by Ken777
The Hashish Army posted Sat Nov 27 2010 05:23:46 by caliatenza
61-year-old Marathon Man Runs The Length Of Russia posted Wed Oct 27 2010 09:48:35 by Severnaya
Afghan Army Female Officers posted Thu Sep 30 2010 14:14:15 by AGM100
Russia In 1910... posted Sun Aug 22 2010 15:52:17 by waterpolodan
Malmbanen (Arctic Ore Railway) posted Sat Aug 7 2010 11:25:00 by aloges
LHR Occupied By Army In 1974? posted Fri Jul 23 2010 05:03:28 by faro