4 ms·

Why the S-400 and the F-35 Can’t Get Along

13 points by smacktoward 7y ago

dfeojm-zlib 7y ago
The bigger problem is NATINADS: how do you integrate NATO equipment (IFF especially) with Russan SAMs? And, removing Turkey from the F-35 program is both political retribution and to stymie intellectual property from finding its way to Russia/China. In the past, it would've been unthinkable to sour relations with Turkey because of its geostrategic importance for NATO/US land-based missiles and airbases.. but sub-launched ICBMs and other countries more than/almost make up the difference. It's sad Turkey-US relations are souring at present.
- banku_brougham 7y ago
  I’m not sad, I remember what Ergodan’s goons did on US soil.
- checktheorder 7y ago
  >It's sad Turkey-US relations are souring at present. Ain't that the truth. I find it quite disturbing to see a thin-skinned bully in charge, who is taking bad advice from a cohort of religious fundamentalists and warmongering chickenhawks, with little-to-no regard for the deadly serious real-world implications of acting on that bad advice.
  - a0-prw 7y ago
    Are you referring to Erdogan or Trump ?
    - checktheorder 7y ago
      Yes.
banku_brougham 7y ago
> “For some reason coverage tends not to ask the question of how are Russians planning to deal with the potential problem of U.S. intelligence being all over their system in Turkey.” Seems very weak, I’ll guess the cost of the two systems differ by an order or two of magnitude. If true this argument is naive or obfuscatory.
Bendingo 7y ago
This sounds like praise for the effectiveness of S-400; Gen. Tod Wolters, who leads U.S. European Command, offered this explanation: “You cannot operate an F-35 in the vicinity of an S-400..."
simonblack 7y ago
Seemingly lost in the hoo-hah surrounding the the loss of Turkey's participation in the F35 project is the very likely loss of all the F35 money ALREADY SPENT BY Turkey. "History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes." Way back in 1914, the Navy of Turkey had raised by public contribution the huge cost of two dreadnoughts which were to be built by Britain for the Turkish Navy. They had ALREADY PAID Britain for those two battleships. But Britain's Winston Churchill requisitioned those two ships without recompense to Turkey. Turkey was outraged, and the main result was that Turkey joined WW1 on the German side. Winston's smartass actions led to huge blowback less than six months later when his disastrous Dardanelles Campaign at Gallipoli caused the unnecessary deaths of about a hundred thousand Allied soldiers and the loss of about 10 warships as well as 8 submarines, for no benefit whatsoever. The West may have forgotten all about those two stolen Turkish battleships. I'll bet that the Turks haven't.

13 points by smacktoward 7y ago

The bigger problem is NATINADS: how do you integrate NATO equipment (IFF especially) with Russan SAMs? And, removing Turkey from the F-35 program is both political retribution and to stymie intellectual property from finding its way to Russia/China. In the past, it would've been unthinkable to sour relations with Turkey because of its geostrategic importance for NATO/US land-based missiles and airbases.. but sub-launched ICBMs and other countries more than/almost make up the difference. It's sad Turkey-US relations are souring at present.

banku_brougham 7y ago
I’m not sad, I remember what Ergodan’s goons did on US soil.
checktheorder 7y ago
>It's sad Turkey-US relations are souring at present. Ain't that the truth. I find it quite disturbing to see a thin-skinned bully in charge, who is taking bad advice from a cohort of religious fundamentalists and warmongering chickenhawks, with little-to-no regard for the deadly serious real-world implications of acting on that bad advice.
- a0-prw 7y ago
  Are you referring to Erdogan or Trump ?
  - checktheorder 7y ago
    Yes.

banku_brougham 7y ago

> “For some reason coverage tends not to ask the question of how are Russians planning to deal with the potential problem of U.S. intelligence being all over their system in Turkey.” Seems very weak, I’ll guess the cost of the two systems differ by an order or two of magnitude. If true this argument is naive or obfuscatory.

Bendingo 7y ago

This sounds like praise for the effectiveness of S-400; Gen. Tod Wolters, who leads U.S. European Command, offered this explanation: “You cannot operate an F-35 in the vicinity of an S-400..."

simonblack 7y ago

Seemingly lost in the hoo-hah surrounding the the loss of Turkey's participation in the F35 project is the very likely loss of all the F35 money ALREADY SPENT BY Turkey. "History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes." Way back in 1914, the Navy of Turkey had raised by public contribution the huge cost of two dreadnoughts which were to be built by Britain for the Turkish Navy. They had ALREADY PAID Britain for those two battleships. But Britain's Winston Churchill requisitioned those two ships without recompense to Turkey. Turkey was outraged, and the main result was that Turkey joined WW1 on the German side. Winston's smartass actions led to huge blowback less than six months later when his disastrous Dardanelles Campaign at Gallipoli caused the unnecessary deaths of about a hundred thousand Allied soldiers and the loss of about 10 warships as well as 8 submarines, for no benefit whatsoever. The West may have forgotten all about those two stolen Turkish battleships. I'll bet that the Turks haven't.