nonconformist
Miserable
Yet it happened all the time. Did you ever watch Hunt For Red October? While I'm not claiming that the movie was historically accurate by any means, the fact that the US and the Soviet Union regularly played "tag" with nuclear submarines is well-documented.
Furthermore, the US regularly used nuclear brinkmanship on numerous occasions. The Cuban Missile Crisis was merely one such time it did so.
Oh. My. God.
I've been reading your posts, but it just gets to the point of being so blatently cloud-****oo willful ignorance and incrimination of the US.
As one of these boards most whacko socialist liberals* I have to say:
a)Yes, US boats trailed Soviet boats and vice versa. You know why? Because hypothetically a war could break out at any time, and those subs would be launching nukes at targets, so would need to be killed ASAP
b)Of course, trailing an enemy vessel gives you an idea of its capabilities in terms of speed, navigation, depth abilities and countermeasures.
c) Yes, it was good practice to trail a boat stealthily, to practice for a forthcoming engagement, and to see how long one could last undetected within the midsts of the enemy. In fact it evolved into a game; a vessel of either nationality would sneak beind an enemy vessel, align itself perfectly for a kill-shot, and then "ping2 the enemy vessel with a high-amplitude sonar pulse to let the enemy know they'd been "killed2
d)Ever hear of the "Crazy Ivan"? It was a countermeasure instituted by the Soviet navy where the Soviet vessel being followed would attempt effectively an underwater "Immelmann" manoeuvre, where they loop back on themseles. This in fact caused more collisions than it prevented.
e)US commanders ramming soviet subs deliberately? What the hell? Really? whgat the Jesus Christ on a bike? This is absurd on so many levels:
i)Why woud the US commander risk war, or at the very least immediate retaliation?
ii)Why would the executive officer agree? Is he a crackhead too?
iii)Why would the US sub make its presence known to all and sundry?
iv)Why would the sub ram when the torpedo bow tubes are there, which would put them out of action, rendering the sub impotent submerged?
v)Finally, why the bloody hell would the sub commander risk millions of dollars, his life and the life of all aboard his vessel to get some cheap, presumably homo-erotic jollies by ramming a soviet sub?
In conclusion, you're wrong, and have been duely served. Good day to you sir.
*Sources:
1. Rik Meleet telling me over a pint of beer that I'm one of maybe 2 people on this board he finds more radical than him
2. Lucefearul giving me his tacit endorsement of being one of a mere handful of true socialists on this board, with a good understanding of the political spectrum