Russian Nuclear Bombers Intercepted Over West Coast on Fourth of July

By Gary P Jackson

It is being reported that two Russian Bear bombers were intercepted while flying near the west coast of the United States on the 4th of July, an obvious taunt from the Russians on our nation’s most important day.

This is the second incident in the past two weeks, where Russian nuclear capable bombers have entered, or come near U.S. air space.

This is nothing new, as the Russians are known to violate American air space often. On Sarah Palin’s watch, as Governor of Alaska, and Commander-in-Chief, the Alaska Air National Guard’s 176th Wing routinely escorted the Russians out of Alaskan air space. In fact, the 176th received the Air Force’s Outstanding Unit Award for its service to the nation . Part of the citation noted:

The 176th Air Control Squadron maintained North American air sovereignty by detecting, monitoring and escorting 22 Russian bombers from within its area of operations.

While it’s troubling that Russian nuclear bombers were routinely violating Alaskan air space, one has to realize how close Alaska and Russia are. The west coast of the United States is another matter altogether.

How were these nuclear capable bombers allowed to get so close to the continental United States?

From Bill Gertz at the Washington Free Beacon:

Putin’s July 4th Message

Russian nuclear-capable bombers intercepted near West Coast in second U.S. air defense zone intrusion in two weeks

Two Russian strategic nuclear bombers entered the U.S. air defense zone near the Pacific coast on Wednesday and were met by U.S. interceptor jets, defense officials told the Free Beacon.

It was the second time Moscow dispatched nuclear-capable bombers into the 200-mile zone surrounding U.S. territory in the past two weeks.

An earlier intrusion by two Tu-95 Bear H bombers took place near Alaska as part of arctic war games that a Russian military spokesman said included simulated attacks on “enemy” air defenses and strategic facilities.

A defense official said the Pacific coast intrusion came close to the U.S. coast but did not enter the 12-mile area that the U.S. military considers sovereign airspace.

The bomber flights near the Pacific and earlier flights near Alaska appear to be signs Moscow is practicing the targeting of its long-range air-launched cruise missiles on two strategic missile defense sites, one at Fort Greely, Alaska and a second site at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif.

In May, Russian Gen. Nikolai Makarov, the chief of the Russian General Staff, said during a Moscow conference that because missile defense systems are destabilizing, “A decision on pre-emptive use of the attack weapons available will be made when the situation worsens.” The comments highlighted Russian opposition to planned deployments of U.S. missile defense interceptors and sensors in Europe.

The U.S. defense official called the latest Bear H incident near the U.S. West Coast “Putin’s Fourth of July Bear greeting to Obama.

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney, a former Alaska commander for the North American Aerospace Defense Command, said the latest Bear H intrusion appears to be Russian military testing.

It’s becoming very obvious that Putin is testing Obama and his national security team,” McInerney told the Free Beacon. “These long-range aviation excursions are duplicating exercises I experienced during the height of the Cold War when I command the Alaska NORAD region.

McInerney said the Bear H flights are an effort by the Russians to challenge U.S. resolve, something he noted is “somewhat surprising as Obama is about to make a unilateral reduction of our nuclear forces as well as major reductions in our air defense forces.

Actions by Russia in Syria and Iran demonstrate that Cold War strategy may be resurrected,” he said.

These are not good indications of future U.S. Russian relations.”

Pentagon spokesman Capt. John Kirby said the incident occurred July 4. He said the “out-of-area patrol by two Russian long range bombers … entered the outer [Air Defense Identification Zone]” and the bombers “were visually identified by NORAD fighters.

Kirby said the bombers did not enter “sovereign airspace.” He declined to identify the specific distance the aircraft flew from the United States due to operational security concerns. He also declined to identify the types of aircraft used to intercept the bombers.

In last month’s intercept of two Russian Tu-95 bombers, U.S. F-15s and Canadian CF-18s were used. The most likely aircraft used in Wednesday’s intercept were U.S. F-15 jets based at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska.

Kirby and U.S. Northern Command spokesmen, apparently in line with the Obama administration’s conciliatory reset policy toward Russia, sought to play down both bomber intrusions.

The Pentagon spokesman said the latest Pacific intrusion was “assessed as another training activity.”

Rather than using traditional military terminology common during the Cold War to describe the meeting of the violating bombers as an “intercept,” Kirby said that the bombers were “visually identified” by jets described only as joint U.S.-Canadian North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) jets.

NORAD is postured to ensure air warning and control for the continental United States, Canada, and Alaska,” Kirby said. “NORAD maintains an extensive radar system around North America and has aircraft located throughout the United States and Canada that can respond quickly to any unidentified flights approaching the Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ).”

Kirby said the ADIZ is extends about 200 miles from the coast and is “mainly within international airspace.”

The outer limits of the ADIZ goes well beyond U.S. sovereign air space which only extends 12 nautical miles from land,” he said. “As part of its mission, NORAD tracks and identifies all aircraft flying in the ADIZ in advance of any aircraft entering sovereign airspace.”

Read more here.

It’s very troubling to see the Obama regime downplaying these overflights by nuclear capable bombers. It’s highly unlikely these aircraft actually had nuclear weapons aboard, but it’s obvious that Russia is testing President Obama’s resolve to protect the nation from her enemies. And make no mistake, Russia is our enemy.

As noted, these bombers may have been testing their ability to launch cruise missiles and take out our early warning systems as well as our defense capabilities.

It would seem Obama doesn’t much care about protecting the homeland from what could have just as well have been a full scale nuclear attack, or an attack on our defenses in preparation for such an attack.

The Russians, on the other hand, would have never been so tolerant of such activities. Remember, in September of 1983 the Soviets shot down a civilian passenger jet, Korean Airlines flight number 007, killing all 289 passengers and crew. The plane was simply off course, and clearly identifiable as a commercial airliner, and yet, it was blown out of the sky.

I’m not saying our Air Force should be blowing Russian nuclear bombers out of the sky [unless they fail to comply with orders to leave U.S. airspace] but allowing them to get in sight of our west coast is completely unacceptable.

The entire response by the Obama regime is unacceptable.

If you’re still looking for a reason to vote for Mitt Romney, in order defeat Barack Obama, this might be your answer. We simply cannot have nuclear capable bombers overflying our nation. And it’s obvious that Barack Obama doesn’t care.

We need new leadership in this country.

About these ads

29 Comments

Filed under In The News, Politics, sarah palin

29 responses to “Russian Nuclear Bombers Intercepted Over West Coast on Fourth of July

  1. Hope The Best Prepare For Worse

    “As noted, these bombers may have been testing their ability to launch cruise missiles and take out our early warning systems as well as out defense capabilities.”GP
    Well, I see it two ways myself~ The reason could be that if Russia can create false flags they will know anytime after that they can strike without quick enough reaction from US~ Second, the reason can be because they have an active destructile on board and if we shoot them down it would cause an EMP~ Let’s pray it isn’t because they were testing to see what was supposed to be weakened~ What is going on in Syria, Russia, Israel and Iran right now is common knowledge to a degree but the severities maybe be five times higher than we know~ Wasn’t too long ago Allen West mentioned on Greta Fox news that Dfcn 1 is where we are at but I would imagine it has went up a couple degrees~ We aren’t supposed to know privi-intel but in a fashion “We The People” should know the general aspect and have say in the matters ( a vote, Congress, etc..). Cause if we have men like children playing games with fingers on the buttons billions of lives maybe at stake and opposite those lives may find out after~
    Note: We don’t want a made up reason to lock US all down either~

  2. Aaron Allen

    Hi Gary: When I was in the Air Force [’57-65], Bear overflights were a more
    frequent occurrence: As long as they stayed at very high altitudes and flew
    in a straight ‘patrol’ or ‘monitoring’ manner, we just flew along side of them
    and waved [they wud wave back]…The Tu-95 evolved into an AWACS-like
    airborne radar station and the Tu-114, the fastest turboprop airliner. While
    a bit noisy inside [4-14,000 HP engines!] it carried between 120 and 200-
    someodd passengers and a crew of 5 [2 pilots, 3 cabincrewfolk, 2 cooks].
    Unlike some other Soviet birds, the -114 had a good safety record and
    made the very long flights from Russia to distant points quite pleasant–if
    you brought along your earplugs…This family of aircraft delivered jetlike
    performance with its big 8-blader contra-props…Aaron Allen…

    • Gary P Jackson

      The old Bear has been around a long time. It’s interesting that you had so many encounters. I bet you got stories to tell!

      You wonder why they chose turbo-props instead instead of jet engines like the B-52, which is about as old.

      Again, they overfly Alaskan air space frequently, but are always intercepted and shown the way home. Pretty unnerving to see one get all of the way to the west coast though!

      I don’t trust the Russians, and trust Obama even less!

  3. Eric Vaughan

    They’ve been testing us like that ever since a war game on September 11, 2001 seemed to be used as a cover to kick off major wars

  4. bobhamiltonchicago

    The US and Russia have been playing that exact same cat and mouse game for over 50 years! They should let the Bear bombers fly over any part of the United States that they care to. The Russians wouldn’t let them for fear they would defect. We have nothing to fear from the Russians, except for the fact that we are mis-handling our relationship with them so badly. They could be, make that, we could be so much better for each other if the relationship were prioritized. What I’d actually like to see is a merging of our two countries into one new one. It makes so much sense yet it seems that I am the only one pushing that idea. The new country could be called Amersia, or Russica or 7. It does not matter what it’s called.

    • Gary P Jackson

      You may possibly be the stupidest human being that ever breathed. You’re most certainly in the Top 5.

      • bobhamiltonchicago

        No Gary, I think that you’re just not able to adjust to new ideas. What I wrote makes perfect sense and is long overdue. Let me prove my first sentence to you. I don’t know you, never met you and did not look you up on the internet but I can tell you that you are dealing with some challenging health issues right now. How do I know? Your attitude. If you want to get healthier, open your mind!

      • Gary P Jackson

        Wait, it’s taken you since July 8, 2012 to come up with this?

        My health has nothing to do with the fact you are bat-shit crazy and a danger to yourself and others.

  5. Pingback: The Conservative Monster | Russian Nuclear Bombers Intercepted Over West Coast on Fourth of July

  6. Aaron Allen

    Hi Gary: I think the reason the Soviets chose turboprops was that they were powerful, yet reliable. Our B-36 was 6-piston engines and a buncha smaller turbojets for extra boost. It cud be that Russia didn’t trust its lar-
    gest jet engines and wud have been in constant maint. and repair if they
    had similar recip. engines. Perhaps the big turboprops were the best ans- wer? The Tu-95 and its ‘offspring’ logged many happy–yet noisy–hours and zillions of kilometers. They managed to avoid the problems experi –
    enced by our ‘Electra’ and a few other long range airliners…Ooops! I
    forgot a few of the flightcrew [airline version]: Navigator, Radio Opr, and
    Flight Engineer. Added to 2 Pilots, 3 Cabin Atts, 2 Cooks and we have 10
    total Aeroflotters at ur service!..Aaron Allen…

    • Gary P Jackson

      Could be. Jets are great but they do use a lot more fuel and may need more maintenance. It’s just interesting that they stuck with older technology.

      • Aaron Allen

        Hi Gary: Yes, while large, more economical [and environmentally better]
        turbofans finally arrived, the Bears and Tu-114 [airliners] worked so well
        that ‘they’ left them alone–perhaps just upping the HP a bit [15,000+ on
        takeoff]…Our B-52s finally got turbofans and such updates and improv-
        ments that they will likely see a total ‘type-age’ of 80-90 years. Our B-61
        [H-bomb] is small and light enuf to comfortably carry several in compari-
        son to the older bombs that were the size of round hay bales you see on
        farms! Add a few cruise missiles and some ‘hitch-hiking’ drones and you
        have a real bag of tricks!.The B-1s [ground-hugging] and B-2s [stealth,
        flying wing] are neat, too….Aaron Allen…

      • Gary P Jackson

        The B-52 will likely end up being the longest serving war plane in history. I understand the sons of the original pilots are now flying the things.

        Good return on investment!

      • Eric Vaughan

        I hate to see brave, patriotic kids being led into danger through the Valley of Darkness so I consider it my duty before God to post this.

        How manny B-52 bomers were shot down in Vietnam war?And how many of them by North Vietnamese air force?
        5 years ago
        Report Abuse
        .

        SnowWebs…

        Best Answer – Chosen by Voters

        I’ve done this before. From memory, and I will have to check this later for you, but I was in Vietnam during the Operation Linebacker I and II.

        We lost 10% of the B-52 fleet, and I think that translated into a total of 22 at the time.

        Okay, here is what I found out on the net: I wasn’t too far off for an old guy’s memory.

        In the wake of Operation Linebacker, the U.S. had a force of 207 B-52 Stratofortress bombers available for use in Southeast Asia. During operation Linebacker II a total of 741 B-52 sorties had been dispatched to bomb North Vietna and 729 had actually completed their missions. Ten B-52s had been shot down over the North and five others had been damaged and crashed in Laos or Thailand. 33 B-52 crew members were killed or missing in action, another 33 became prisoners of war, and 26 more were rescued.[77] North Vietnamese air defense forces claimed that 34 B-52s and four F-111s had been shot down during the campaign.[

        Source(s):

        From Memory, but will check for you later. Checked and provided above.

    • Aaron Allen

      [Aaron again] Hi Gary: Some people may wonder why Aeroflot [the USSR/
      Russian national air carrier] had navigators, radio operators, and flight
      engineers aboard scheduled domestic flights. Crossing eleven timezones,
      the USSR/Russian Federation was too vast for ordinary aviation VHF ra-
      dio to cover–hence the HF radio aboard the planes. As there was no
      GPS in the early years, older techniques of dead-reckoning, charts, and
      radio beacons were necessary. Having an experienced aviation engineer/
      mechanic at the engine and systems instruments and control-consoles
      was good assurance, also…US carriers on long range routes [CA to HI,
      for example] carried Radio Operators and Navigators until GPS, and
      satellite voice and data communications came into common use. Today,
      Pilots enter their flight plans into the main, onboard computer and it does
      much of the rest. Our B-1, 2, and 52 bombers and long-range military
      airlift planes do this also–best-way ‘there’ and back…Aaron Allen…

  7. No one thinks that maybe they’re using older planes so there’s less of a loss when we shoot one down? Why risk a new plane if you’re going to start a war? Just send in the “junk” from yesteryear with a terminally ill pilot or no pilot at all.

  8. Eric Vaughan

    My computer’s a little wonky, so this part didn’t take, but here goes nothing again. – If the B-52 was that kind of death trap when facing Chinese coached opposition back when the Beatles were still making albums, you can guess what it’d be like today against the Russians and/or Chinese.

    • Gary P Jackson

      Yeah the VC had Russian anti-aircraft missiles that killed a whole lot of good men. Not sure how we’d fair against them today. The B-52 is a solid aircraft, but going up against ground to air and air to air missiles, there are better options for sure.

      Vietnam was a clusterfark. You had LBJ and McNamara running things out of the Oval Office, and no one in charge on the ground. No way to fight a war.

  9. Pingback: Eight Legit Reasons Why Sarah Palin is the Only Logical Choice to be Our Nation’s Next Vice President | A Time For Choosing

  10. Aaron Allen

    Hi Gary and Eric: The B-52s have been seriously upgraded with electronic
    countermeasurers to deal with Commie-style Ground-to-Air missiles and
    are now probably used when enemy defenses are asleep or being crump-
    ed by other aircraft and missiles. I think the 52s can still ‘crab’ their landing
    gear to allow taking off and landing at several degrees of ‘sideways’. Other
    improvements help keep it safe and less-visible–while it takes trucjloads
    of bombs, cruise missiles and other weapons to’ plunk–plunk–plunk’ down
    upom every fraction of a mile of roads, railways,canals, etc.’BUFF’ lives!
    ..Aaron Allen….

    • Eric Vaughan

      Thank you for your time and research, Aaron. I’ve always wondered if the B-52 Stratofortress was chosen for defence strategies to back up standard American nuclear missiles because those of the Russians lacked accuracy and were compensated for in brute volume. In theory, there could be a contest in rapid sheer destruction. I guess I’ll be left to ponder that because cooler heads prevailed.

      • Aaron Allen

        Hi Eric: Your idea that the B-52 was able to be upgraded and changed to
        meet newer missions is correct. Thanks to GPS and satellite communica-
        tions, it can go just about anywhere and drop a variety of bombs and mis-
        siles which then guide themselves to just where they must go–a big chan-
        ge from ‘The War’, Korea, Vietnam…No longer do we need to plaster an
        entire county to hit a few critical targets–just enter the targets’ lat/long
        and swish!–right down an airshaft or into the front door…Able to deliver
        conventional or TN ordinance, BUFF still has a useful place in our bag of
        tricks. If they are properly and carefully flown, they shud last many more
        years. I wonder if it wud be possible to make a new variant with some me-
        tal parts but the rest of carbon fiber [composite]. It wud be as large but
        weigh only a fraction of the current ‘H’…It cud be made ‘stealthy’ also
        with the anti-radar-reflecting surfaces, finish/tape/paint, etc. and cud take
        off and land at typical, midsized airports and be hangared in ‘factory-like’
        industrial buildings next door? Like some of our other missions, these new
        ‘plastic BUFFs’ cud be kept and flown/maintained by AF Reserve or ANG
        folk? Sort of like a suburban Fire Dept?..The horn blows–BUFF goes!..
        Aaron Allen…

  11. Pingback: Russia Circles US Military Base: Simulates Nuclear Attack on US | Independent Sentinel

  12. Pingback: Palin Haters - Page 2

  13. Pingback: Russia Tests US Resolve and Obama’s Weakness as President » The Right State

  14. Pingback: Russia Circles US Military Base: Simulates Nuclear Attack on US | www.independentsentinel.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s