Moscow To Set Up Military Base In Caribbean

| December 15, 2018

tu 160 blackjackTU-160 ‘Blackjack’
Image by Rob Schleiffert
Text by L Todd Wood

Vlad’s setting up shop in Venezuela, as if those poor folks didn’t have enough trouble already. Manning a base on an island in ‘our’ pond, the Caribbean, won’t set well at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. This is pretty obvious gamesmanship, with our excursions into the Black Sea, backing the Ukraine and stepping away from an antiquated nuclear arms treaty.

Russia has decided to develop a long-term military presence in the Caribbean in conjunction with the socialist nation of Venezuela, on one of its islands in the Caribbean Sea. The move seems to be a response to the Trump administration’s decision to pull out of the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. The recent flights of Russian Tu-160 long-range nuclear bombers are part of this effort.

“According to military envoys, Russian authorities have made a decision (and Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro did not object) to deploy strategic aircraft to one of Venezuela’s islands in the Caribbean Sea, which has a naval base and a military airfield. Ten years ago, Russian experts and Armed Forces commanders had already visited the island of La Orchila, located 200 kilometers northeast of Caracas. Venezuelan laws prohibit the setup of military bases in the country, but a temporary deployment of warplanes is possible,” reported Russian state news agency TASS.

“The arrival of Russia’s Tu-160 strategic bombers to Central America is kind of a signal to Trump to make him realize that abandoning nuclear disarmament treaties will have a boomerang effect,” added another Russian military expert.

Your move, Mr. President.

Read the entire article at: Tsarizm, tovarich.

Tip of the chapeau to Poetrooper for the link.

Category: Foreign Policy

Comments (90)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. The Other Whitey says:

    That Blackjack looks pretty haggard. Are they sure it’s airworthy?

    Anyway, how sad is it when your national currency (the bolivar) is so worthless that you’d kill somebody to get your hands on a one-ruble bill?

    • AW1Ed says:

      All the important bits seem to be holding up. A few rattle-cans of Krylon in Fatherland Blue Haze wouldn’t hurt, though.

    • 26Limabeans says:

      It’s still in primer as they sand out and feather the bondo around the seams.

    • mr.sharkman says:

      Not haggard IMO, just Operational – as opposed to being pictured all prettied up at an international airshow… 😉

  2. 2/17 Air Cav says:

    Recall. Red Line, through Kerry, repudiated the Monroe Doctrine. “Today, however, we have made a different choice. The era of the Monroe Doctrine is over. (Applause.) The relationship – that’s worth applauding. That’s not a bad thing. (Applause.) The relationship that we seek and that we have worked hard to foster is not about a United States declaration about how and when it will intervene in the affairs of other American states. It’s about all of our countries viewing one another as equals, sharing responsibilities, cooperating on security issues, and adhering not to doctrine, but to the decisions that we make as partners to advance the values and the interests that we share.” The Weekly Standard November 2013

    The author of the article in which that John “Jungle Stroll w/ Cameraman” Kerry’s quote appeared (He was speaking as Secretary of State in 2013) also guessed that now “maybe even the Russians will give Fidel those missiles he’s always wanted and the whole world will truly be that partnership of equal vulnerability Obama and Kerry so cherish.”

    Yes, today Venezuela, tomorrow Cuba. The shit is gonna get deep. Soon.

    • 5th/77th FA says:

      Nailed it A/C. Skeeeerrry did more damage as SOS than wide load BofB did, and was more stealthy about it. IMO his selling out began before he even took his oath of enlistment, and ever since then he has constantly violated said oath. This whole deep state immersion goes way further back than most people realize, and has only been talked about fairly recently. This is another reason why the professional politicians on both sides are so scared of dTrumpster.

      In spite of the US having been right up against the Russian Border for decades, we have enjoyed a buffer to our mainland. That is now changed and will rapidly get worse. The nose of the camel is now fixin’ to be under the tent. Not just bases in Cuba, but can expect bases in Mexico too. Others want to destroy the US of A because they are jealous of the standard of living we have provided to the whole world. “…gonna get deep. Soon.”

      • Mason says:

        The difference between Kerry and HRC was that Kerry knew he was never going any higher. He was trying to build his legacy. By selling out our interests.

        HRC meanwhile was aspiring for higher office, and so was making deals to further that goal.

  3. OldSoldier54 says:

    It’s amazing how similar to the B-1 it is.

    • Jus Bill says:

      We must remember: Russian stuff is made out of cast iron, runs on coal, and does only what it was designed to do and no more. It may look like crap, but it didn’t get to the island via FEDEX…

      • A Proud Infidel®™ says:

        Let’s not forget that the MiG 25 “Foxbat” was once thought to be the best and fastest Fighter Jet in the World until after a Soviet Pilot defected to Japan in one and we found out that it has a STEEL frame as well as engines that will eat themselves up when flown too fast.

        • OldSoldier54 says:

          Isn’t that when they found out the avionics were VACUUM tubes?

          • AW1Ed says:

            Those tubes are remarkably resistant to EMP, OS54. Also, the bird was steel where it needed to be, and for it’s intended mission of shooting down high altitude super-sonic US bombers, the jet engines only had to work once. Don’t scoff at Ivan, gents. He did pretty well with what he had.
            Except for the government part, of course.

            • OldSoldier54 says:

              I did not know that about the vacuum tubes. Makes sense, because Ivan ain’t stupid, so not a lot of scoffing from me.

              Years ago, IIRC, I was reading Aviation magazine in a doctors office. It had an interesting article about the design philosophy differences between the Soviets and the US wrt combat aircraft.

              The gist of what I recall is that while we designed for performance, performance, performance, they designed for performance and the ability to land in much rougher conditions than ours could.

              Our airstrips are constantly swept for any debris that could be sucked into the engines.

              The Soviets, on the other hand, designed their aircraft in such a way that this was much less of a concern for them. It had to do with the shape and placement of the intakes, I think. A subtle, but effective difference.

              • Mason says:

                They design everything to be more rugged. Landing gear, jets, intakes, etc.

                The MiG-29 has doors that cover the main jet intakes when maneuvering on the ground. The engines get air from slats that open on the top of the airframe.

                Here’s an article that has some video of MiG-21’s operating from a grass field, something you won’t see our aircraft doing (except helicopters and the C-130). The page also shows the doors/slats on the Fulcrum.

                https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/watch-these-migs-operate-from-a-grass-field-like-its-no-1697990135

                I also like the two seaters with the periscope for the rear seat. This is because the back seat (instructor) can’t see over/around the head of the pilot ahead, so they have a somewhat elaborate periscope that lines up a forward view with the pilot’s line of sight so it can be flown and landed from the back seat.

            • mr.sharkman says:

              ‘Don’t scoff at Ivan, gents’

              x2.

              The first thing Russian arms designers did when they entered into the realm of tactical accessories (NODs, reflex/red dot, lasers, lights, etc.) was to make certain all of them ran on re-chargeable AAs.

              No massive speed balls needed for resupply.

              Think about that…

            • USMC Steve says:

              AW1, cannot concur. Almost every piece of their gear including their aircraft were never put to the test in combat, and the items which were, pretty uniformly failed. Now, for a communist military, manpower was not a concern, because they could always pressgang more, but if each bird only makes one or two trips with that economy they had, they would not have been in the fight very long. They are finally learning that lesson now that they are a country with a population of less than 180 million and all on their own, with no friends other than the ones they have bought.

        • Hussar says:

          Ummm…a lot of early jet fighters had stained steel compartments.

          Should I list the US fighter jets that did and make you look even more the idiot?

    • Reverend Pointyhead says:

      Bone on a budget. I think Rubel General is their DIFM monitor.

    • Hussar says:

      The Myasishchev M-18, which turned into the Tu-160, was designed in ’72.

      2 years before the first B-1b rolled out.

      • 11B-Mailclerk says:

        Physics.

        Most airliners look pretty much alike, because the efficient shape is desired, and there are not two radically different efficient shapes for high-subsonic fixed-wing long range transports.

        Same works for “supersonic swing-wing bomber”.

  4. timactual says:

    Is anyone really surprised? When the Soviet Empire collapsed and Russian forces returned to Russia we moved East into the Baltic states and Poland. Why wouldn’t they return the favor? I wouldn’t be surprised if they reopened their base in Cuba.

    • Hussar says:

      Please don’t inject logic and reason on this forum.

      It is painful for the lowbrows.

    • 11B-Mailclerk says:

      We broke them in a spending duel.

      They are a bit better off now than when they had a fully Socialist economy, but they still can’t go very far on what little they have.

      The logistics bill for basing those ruble-incinerator birds in a catastrophic-collapse place like Venezuela, where they will likely have to import the fuel to fly them? And everything else?

      Oh please, Brer Bear! Not -that- there briar patch!

      • Hussar says:

        Ummm, no. Sorry, but the myth that St. Regan outspent the Soviets into defeat has been debunked.

        https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/06/20/everything-you-think-you-know-about-the-collapse-of-the-soviet-union-is-wrong/

        Per the article, Gorbachev’s Perestroika (Which to be fair was actually introduced by Brezhnev.) did more harm than the US support of radical Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan for example.

        • 11B-Mailclerk says:

          They went broke, hard.

          Thus the pride of the Soviet Fleet hauled up on various beaches, rusting to death.

          Broke. Busted. Collapsed economically, because Socialism kills, including economically.

          But do keep spewing foreign propaganda.

          • Hussar says:

            Of course they went broke. Who is denying that?

            But not to any notion of the US outspending them.

            And FP is now foreign propaganda? Lol.
            .ok

          • A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

            Not to mention that their ONLY Aircraft Carrier is an oil burning rust bucket that has Tugs accompanying her in anticipation of a breakdown!

            • Hussar says:

              Aircraft carriers are obsolete floating graveyards.

              Seems the Russians are one up on the US in that area.

              • Mason says:

                Da fuq you smoking? Must be some real nice California kush.

                • Hussar says:

                  Apparently I’m not smoking as much as the designers of the Zumwalt class destroyers or the F 35.

                  Both functioning marvels of technology, right?

              • The Other Whitey says:

                So that’s why the UK and Red Chinese are spending insane assloads of money to build new carriers, and why Russia and France keep theirs around, and why Japan built that giant “destroyer” with a full-length flight deck to get around their legal restrictions on carriers, and why Australia, Italy, and Spain maintain their expensive VSTOL flattops, and why Australia really REALLY wants to rejoin the CATOBAR carrier game?

                Sorry, dude, but an awful lot of people who know an awful lot more about naval warfare than you all say you’re full of shit.

                • Hussar says:

                  I kinda remember reading something about battleships once.

                  What was that dude’s who sunk (pun intended.) name?

                  Aircraft carriers are obsolete. Just because your buddies who probably have a vested financial interest in them, or are 40 years behind in their strategic and tactical think say otherwise say differently doesn’t make it so.

                  • The Other Whitey says:

                    No buddies of mine. Just navies who are expecting a major conflict in the foreseeable future. Nice try.

                    • Hussar says:

                      Hope they don’t attempt riding it out in an obsolete carrier or destroyer that can’t get underway by itself.

                    • The Other Whitey says:

                      Where do you come up with your shit? Seriously, you think I have “buddies” in the American, European, and Asian shipping industries, and seem to think you know more about naval warfare than just about all of the world’s significant navies. You’re almost funny.

                    • Mason says:

                      TOW, he’s just getting off now on saying the most asinine things to see what kind of rise it gets out of us.

                    • A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

                      IMHO “Hussar” is just pulling what he can out of his ass and throwing it at the wall to see how well it splatters and sticks!

        • USMC Steve says:

          Okay, gotta call bullshit on Hussar. I was a Marine Spook during that era, and can tell you that it DID happen just that way. Remember Starwars? Never actually existed. It was an intelligence operation specifically designed to get them to try to counter it, and in the process they simply ran out of funds. Look at the FSU after that happened. Notice the collapse of what economy they had? Notice the fact that they still have not fully recovered from it, because communism has forever fucked them up? That article is nifty, but a crock nonetheless. Written from a presupposed notion, thus not particularly informative.

  5. Roh-Dog says:

    Am I looking at the right island?
    The ‘airstrip’ looks about 7200’ with maybe 5000’ paved-ish.
    Now I’m not a zoomie or an engineer but I’m pretty sure this thing has a pretty high landing speed and is fat so a thick base layer on the pad in necessary.
    Also, since when did sand make a good lube for jet engines?
    Salt?
    I’m going to get way the f out on a limb here, if Ivan keeps this up one of those 160’s ain’t leaving Venezuela.

  6. Mason says:

    Two TU-160’s that look like they were making final flights for static display or mothballing? I’m not scared.

    Response? Have eight or so 52’s from Barksdale take a little FONOPS flight around the Caribbean. They could rattle some windows.

  7. Sparks says:

    Does anyone remember The Monroe Doctrine? I think it comes into play here.

  8. A Proud Infidel®™ says:

    Meh, Maduro is SO desperate for support that he’s willing to Blow Vladimir Putin to be one of his puppet Dictators, I wonder what he thinks he’ll get out of it, because the Ivans have never hesitated to use death and/or assassination to get their puppet Dictator of choice.

    • 26Limabeans says:

      He will be offered his old job back.

    • Hussar says:

      Kinda like the US in Iran, and Iraq, and Afghanistan, and well…every other country the US has ever brought “Democracy” to, eh?

      • Usafvet509 says:

        Ok, who invited this numbfuck peckerlips in here?

      • 11B-Mailclerk says:

        socialism killed over a hundred million helpless civilians.

        So they are way ahead on points.

        • Hussar says:

          Socialism absolutely did.

          But your defense is, “oh, we’re doing the same, just not as much.”?

          Okaaaay….

          • AW1Ed says:

            Hussar, adding nothing to the conversation here since 2014. But thanks for being consistent.

            • Hussar says:

              Sorry you’ve had to find out that the US has supported just as crappy dictators, and has done as much nastiness, as the Soviets use to do.

              • AW1Ed says:

                Don’t feel sorry on my account, Hussar. The US has its interests, and dealing with scum is occasionally part of the requirement. South America ring a bell?

                • Hussar says:

                  And other countries acted according to their interests.

                  So how, for example, would the former Soviet Union propping up dictator x be “bad”, while the US propping up Dictator Y be “good”?

                  I eagerly await your reply.

                  • 2/17 Air Cav says:

                    To the extent that US interests are served in the one instance and not in the other, one is bad and the other is good.

                  • AW1Ed says:

                    You are beginning to bore me Hussar- the US has no permanent friends, but does have permanent interests. Deals with the Devil are nothing new.

              • Hondo says:

                Sorry you’ve had to find out that the US has supported just as crappy dictators, and has done as much nastiness, as the Soviets use to do.

                Just as much nastiness? Would you like to cite a source detailing how the US murdered approximately 60M of its own citizens via various means for political reasons as a matter of government policy during the 20th Century?

                Go ahead, I’m waiting. I’m fully prepared to cite such a source dealing with the Soviet Union. And that source is a generally conservative estimate – the actual total could well be much higher.

                All nations have done things that in retrospect might be considered “wrong” while furthering their national interests. But I know of nothing in history remotely close to the industrial-scale murder of their own countrymen as a matter of policy by Communist regimes during the 20th Century.

                By the way: nice new email address, Hussar. And a nice long (3+ year) gap in posting under that screen name, too.

                Why, it’s almost as if Jonn had perhaps banned you (or placed you on moderation) about 3 years or so ago.

                • Hussar says:

                  Well, let’s keep it recent, and easy. The recent death of drug lord George Bush and his hand in supporting narco terrorism in LATAM, or his support for radical Islamic terrorism in the Middle East and Central Asia ring a bell?

                  And, do stay on topic. I didnt say it was comparable number wise. I did say something along the lines of “oh, the US does the same, just not as bad, so that makes it ok.”

                  Do try and pay attention.

                  • AW1Ed says:

                    Changing the parameters to better suit your argument won’t wash, and going snide doesn’t impress.
                    Care to answer Hondo, or just bag it and go away?

                  • Hondo says:

                    I didnt say it was comparable number wise.

                    Actually, you implied exactly that. To quote one of your previous comments:

                    . . . . and has done as much nastiness, as the Soviets use to do.

                    Doing “as much” implies both the acts and the numbers are comparable.

                    Please try to keep track of your actual comments, and quit trying to change what you said after the fact.

                    And lose the smug act. Your not competent enough to pull it off.

                    • Hussar says:

                      I explicitly stated in my original reply,that yes,the Soviets murdered many more peoples than the US ever has.

                      Doesn’t mean that the US, using the same tactics, although murdering fewer, is any better.

                      The,”but he did it too!” defense doesn’t work when trying to take the moral high ground.

                      And spare me the righteous indignation over being smug or whatnot. Insults are thrown around like candy here. You old fogies just can’t handle it when you are in the crosshairs.

                      Deal with it.

                    • A Proud Infidel®™️ says:

                      Hussar, you’re so fucked up and boring that even your imaginary friend told you to EABOD and take the next flying fuck to Timbuktu!

                    • Hondo says:

                      Since we’ve reached the maximum embed limit, see reply at end. Bottom line: your reply above is nothing but another attempt to sidestep the fact that you’ve been caught contradicting yourself.

  9. The Other Whitey says:

    Looks like Lars Taylor has a new sock puppet.

  10. Hussar says:

    Lots of butthurt from a bunch of supposed tough guys in this thread.

    All by me merely stating fact.

    • USMC Steve says:

      No, it might have something to do with the fact that you are a bitter fuckwit, and full of socialist shit, dude.

      Seriously, piss off.

  11. Hondo says:

    Directed to Hussar; continuation of previous comment chain.

    I explicitly stated in my original reply,that yes,the Soviets murdered many more peoples than the US ever has.

    That is true. It is also irrelevant to the point under discussion. To repeat myself, you later clearly stated (key portion emphasized):

    . . . the US . . . . . . . and has done as much nastiness, as the Soviets use to do.

    Ignoring the fact that your both of your quotes above are grammatically incorrect, the two quotes also are logically contradictory. Doing “as much” implies at a minimum rough equivalence in both type and number of acts. You first quote above states otherwise.

    I called you on the claim in the second quote above. You’re now trying to claim “I didn’t say that” – when you plainly did. Your own words above demonstrate that much.

    In short: you got caught trying to “have it both ways”. That’s a big “NO GO” here, amigo. It’s also the mark of someone who has no valid argument.

    Had you said “. . . and the US has done the same kinds of things in the past. . . “, you’d have arguably been correct. But as the quotes above demonstrate, that’s not what you said. So quit mendaciously trying to wriggle out of the fact that you were caught contradicting yourself. Either provide evidence that the US has murdered as many as the former USSR, or admit you were wrong in asserting that the two nations’ records in terms of acting “wrongly” are equivalent.

    Further: failing to own up to the fact that you were wrong when caught is the mark of an immature twit who can’t stand it when they’re proven wrong. Deal with that, dipstick.

    Because an immature dipstick is exactly what you are acting like above.

    • Hussar says:

      “As much nastiness” and “murdered the same amount” are two completely different things.

      But, ok…I get that most of you have barely a high school education, or are either so brainwashed that you can’t differentiate. I’ll take it on the chin for the sake of furthering the discussion.

      That being said…How do you personally feel about the US backing narco terrorists, and radical Islamic terrorists?

      • AW1Ed says:

        “You are beginning to bore me Hussar…”

        “Care to answer Hondo, or just bag it and go away?”

        Not real bright, are you Hussar. Two warnings.

        Since you’ve neither answered Hondo, nor bagged it, I get the final vote on who comments on my post.

        You’re through here.

      • Ex-PH2 says:

        What is it about these argumentative jerks that prompts them – EVERY TIME – to make pointless and incorrect presumptious comments like Hussar’s latest jab: “I get that most of you have barely a high school education…”

        The pattern is always the same: weak argument, attempts at belittling service and/or education and/or career choices, in addition to labels like “pogue”, (which is incorrect: should be POG).

        No idea where anyone has been or what anyone has done, no actual info on education or career choices – always the same lame things, but somehow, they always miss the point: that they are wrong, have a weak argument or none at all, and have to act as obnoxious as possible for the sole purpose of getting attention.

        Okay, moving on!

        • Ex-PH2 says:

          I particularly like this snotty remark:
          “And spare me the righteous indignation over being smug or whatnot. Insults are thrown around like candy here. You old fogies just can’t handle it when you are in the crosshairs.”

          Apparently, we’re either uneducated slugs or geezers barely able to breathe.

          I really did think it was Taylor, but he’s not this combative. I will never understand anyone who goes to so much trouble to pick a fight over nothing, and then doesn’t like it when he loses.

          • Hussar says:

            Deleted.

          • Ex-PH2 says:

            Unfortunately, Hussar, you ill-mannered, arrogant, uninformed, obnoxious roadtoad, your own behavior is driving you away.

            If you’re this desperate for attention, get some professional help – if you can find anyone who is willing to put up with your bad manners and ignorance.

          • AW1Ed says:

            No longer an issue, Ex.

            • Ex-PH2 says:

              All that anger, and for what reason? Doesn’t make any sense. I get that people dislike Trump, but there’s no need to be rude about it, and same thing here: a complete lack of understanding on how diplomacy is frequently accompanied by unpleasant sidereal actions.

  12. docduracoat says:

    Why do you guys feed the trolls?
    It is impossible to have a reasoned discussion with them.
    Ignoring them is the best strategy.

    As for Orchilla Island, it is in a remote and beautiful part of the Carribbean.
    The Russians are going to love it there!
    I sailed my boat from Margarita Island to Tortuga, then along the north coast of The Roques to the reefs of the Aves both Sotovento and Barlovento to Bonair.The wind is always from the east, can blow strong and the water is warm and filled with fish, lobster and sharks. The reefs all along the north coast of South America are untouched.The best sailing in the world is found there, along with phenomenal diving, windsurfing and kitesurfing.
    Its a hard place to get to, but if you can visit, you should go!
    Just not the Venezuelan parts.