# Russia claims North Pole,sends sub to plant Flag at Poles bottom



## Exarecr (25 Jul 2007)

Canada as usual is probably going to lose it because we are behind the Russians,Danes, and Americans with respect to legally claiming it. We have until 2013 to have our challenge in to the World court to formally claim the territory. Though most of Russia's actions are of the symbolic nature it sure does stir the blood though!. Probably in cahoots with those pesky Dane,s.





Mod edit to correct thread title


----------



## Benny (29 Jul 2007)

Link?

This seems odd to say the least. A joke perhaps? Claiming a 'pole' is meaningless as it is merely a co-ordinate, and has zero actual area. Claiming a 'polar region' the way Antarctica was carved up is totally different.


----------



## Blakey (29 Jul 2007)

http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=959eb12e-1f9e-4839-826d-ee9da4110c04


----------



## Benny (30 Jul 2007)

Can you actually claim international water though? I assume the worry is that russia wants to claim the area on canada's side of the pole.


----------



## Steel Badger (30 Jul 2007)

In my humble opinion, the real question is HOW the Russians will put the sub on the bottom...

And will she be able to get back up again?    ;D


----------



## GK .Dundas (3 Aug 2007)

The real question is, how badly do we want to share a land border with Russians? Aside property values the Russians have always an imperial bent,and there are days when I swear the Motto of it's Government is   "What ever 's not nailed down is ours and whatever we can pry up is not nailed down!"


----------



## honestyrules (3 Aug 2007)

> And will she be able to get back up again?



Please, although I can recognize the sarcasm behing your sayings, don't underestimate them folks.Putin is pretty "cocky" now the their economy is getting better. After all, we (western world militaries) gave them a rest, believing that they were "calming down"...


----------



## TN2IC (3 Aug 2007)

Title States:



> Russia claims North Pole,sends sub to plant Flag at Poles bottom




Poles bottom? You mean they are claiming the South Pole then, right?  ;D

Just something I wanted to point out. I know the penguins will put up a fight.

Regards,
TN2IC


----------



## George Wallace (4 Aug 2007)

TN2IC said:
			
		

> Just something I wanted to point out. I know the penguins will put up a fight.
> 
> Regards,
> TN2IC



Just something I wanted to point out.  There are no penquins to put up a fight at the North Pole.  Perhaps you are talking about the South Pole.......but why would the Russians have a claim down there......guess we are back to the North Pole then......still no penquins......How about some friendly Polar Bears with bottles of Coke.  That should prove to the Russians that the Pole has already been claimed by Capitalists.  ;D


----------



## a_majoor (4 Aug 2007)

I wonder how much of a threat this "really" is in the medium to long term. While Russia has improved its balance sheets through the sale of resources (the same way we have), their economy is still fundimentally weak and flawed by the resurgence of oligarcies of ownership by government cronies and kleptocrats, hardly a recipie for an economic resurgence.

Russia is also under a great deal of demographic pressure, with rapidly declining birth rates and a decreasing life expectancy, while the Islamic regions of the near beyond are having a demographic surge and China is also pressing on the Siberian regions through illegal immigration (although China also suffers a distorted economy and a flawed demographic profile, it will take longer for the demographic problems to manifest themselves.)

Lets just say the gesture is largely symbolic for now, and keep a sharp watch on Russia's imperial pretensions.


----------



## exmil (4 Aug 2007)

way too funny lol hard vary hard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think that Russia has enough problems of there own at home, but if they want the north pole I think the real land claim is with Santa and the Reindeer!!!!!oh yes and
the Elves too oh crap I mean little people lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. ;D                                          

                                                                                                                   exmil


----------



## TN2IC (4 Aug 2007)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Just something I wanted to point out.  There are no penquins to put up a fight at the North Pole.  Perhaps you are talking about the South Pole.......but why would the Russians have a claim down there......guess we are back to the North Pole then......still no penquins......How about some friendly Polar Bears with bottles of Coke.  That should prove to the Russians that the Pole has already been claimed by Capitalists.  ;D



Okay you win. 

But in my defence, I was referring to the South Pole. Meh.. who cares. I got a new bottle of Jägermeister in front of me.

 ;D

Regards,
TN2IC


----------



## Greymatters (5 Aug 2007)

Unfortunately it is a threat that has to be treated seriously.  If we had a real submarine force, the obvious answer would be to send a sub up north to 'show the flag' (or submerge the flag in this case... is that legal?) so that when the Russians showed up they'd see our boys already there.  

Sadly I dont believe we have that capability, would like to hear it if we do...


----------



## TN2IC (5 Aug 2007)

Hey.. those Russians can have it. That just means that I can tell the kids.. that the Russians took over Santa Claus house.  

I say bring back the Cold War. RE-OPEN THOSE BASES IN GERMANY. ;D


----------



## JackD (5 Aug 2007)

The biggest problem with the Russian claim is that were they to  tap into any resources in the Arctic ocean area, the environmental damage will be intense. Already much of the pollution in the Arctic waters are due to Russia - it would be a bleak outlook for a delicate environment should industrialization proceed.  However, why does this so-called claim on the North-Pole negate all the previous journeys and flag-raisings on the North Pole - and isn't there a regular air-ferry service to the North-Pole for tourists (in season) from Resolute?


----------



## Mike Baker (5 Aug 2007)

GreyMatter said:
			
		

> Unfortunately it is a threat that has to be treated seriously.  If we had a real submarine force, the obvious answer would be to send a sub up north to 'show the flag' (or submerge the flag in this case... is that legal?) so that when the Russians showed up they'd see our boys already there.
> 
> Sadly I dont believe we have that capability, would like to hear it if we do...


It's sad but true. This is why we need those Arctic Patrol ships, now! And a few subs like you said  ;D


----------



## karl28 (5 Aug 2007)

It seems by the statement the Russians are making is that  if we don't look after our own back yard than some one else will .   Hopefully the Government of Canada will keep its promise to put in a northern port and build those new Arctic patrol ships .   Than hopefully in time the Government will also see the need for more attack subs


----------



## Greymatters (5 Aug 2007)

karl28 said:
			
		

> Than hopefully in time the Government will also see the need for more attack subs



Well... defence submarines at the very least...  wouldnt want to look _too_ aggressive...   ;D


----------



## Mike Baker (5 Aug 2007)

GreyMatter said:
			
		

> Well... defence submarines at the very least...  wouldnt want to look _too_ aggressive...   ;D


No, we should look aggressive, that way we scare the enemy. Like on Full Metal Jacket at the war scream part


----------



## adaminc (6 Aug 2007)

Russia wants the vast amounts of oil under the north pole, so does Denmark, and the USA, and I would assume Canada would also like it. 

The problem is that it is in International waters, and as of yet no one can officially claim it because inorder for it to become an economic zone it has to be within 200miles of land or part of the continental land mass, and thats what Russia is claiming, that the land under the North Pole (the Lomonosov Ridge) is part of continental Russia. 

Canada, Denmark(Greenland), and USA claim the same ridge is part of their territory, frankly I think only Canada and Denmark can make claims, based on how close both are, more so Canada since Canada Post has already assigned a postal code to the area (H0H 0H0). Take that Denmark!

Realistically, everyone should just leave it alone, all they want to do is strip it of resources like everywhere else.


----------



## karl28 (6 Aug 2007)

GreyMatter   Sorry about my lack of political correctness's should of stated  Ocean GeoGraphical submersibles  insted of using the term attack subs  ;D


----------



## JLeclerc (6 Aug 2007)

It should be left alone of course, but power and money hungry people won't leave it alone so we have to look towards the obvious fact that one of the countries will own it now, that's a fact. It's like people who wish war didn't exist in one form or another, it's a nice optimistic view on life realities but it will never happen.

That aside, we can either let a huge destructive brute in our backyard (who for now is playing the weak card, but I can rest assured knowing they are more powerful and have much more than we credit them with...) or stake a claim ourselves. That said again, I think the thought of "sharing" a claim for mutual protection and benefits here is more appealing in all aspects than having Russians in my backyard. Canada needs to assert itself on this one. No doubts about it.


----------



## adaminc (6 Aug 2007)

Yeah, those Russians are sneaky, according to their CiC Admiral Vladimir Masorin, they are going to have the 2nd largest navy in the world in 20 years.


----------



## Greymatters (6 Aug 2007)

karl28 said:
			
		

> GreyMatter   Sorry about my lack of political correctness's should of stated  Ocean GeoGraphical submersibles  insted of using the term attack subs  ;D



Just trying to beat the peacenik opposition parties to the punch... I 'm actually surprised the current PC atmosphere hasnt caused them to be renamed that already!


----------



## HardCore (7 Aug 2007)

Hey if we were to measure 200 meter out from the huge solid landmass that is Canada wouldn't the first Island be in that measurement? and if so couldn't you continuously measure out 200 meters and in the end wouldn't all the  islands legaly belong to canada? And if that were to happen then (if the government wasn't run by wimps) we could tell the Russians that an incursion into Canadian waters could be seen as an act of war?? And i'm willing to bet the Americans would love another shot at the Russians.


----------



## karl28 (7 Aug 2007)

GreyMatter  

Yeah I know its sad how far they have taking political correctness but it can be fun to tease them with  ;D ;


----------



## JackD (9 Aug 2007)

By the way this is being discussed on another website - an interesting map is shown  http://cominganarchy.com/2007/07/21/russias-arctic-claim/ It seems the biggest territorial loss from Canada - Denmark  and UN's proposal as compared to Russia - Norway's proposal is to the benefit - not of Russia - but to the USA.


----------



## Greymatters (9 Aug 2007)

Good map!  I note the Canadian / Denmark proposal is one of the more accepted versions that has been in practical use for many a year (following lines of longitude)...


----------



## adaminc (9 Aug 2007)

If you read the comments on that site with the map, you'll find out the map on the page is wrong, the longitudinal division is what Russia/Norway want, its better to look at the original source 

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2005/10/09/international/20051010_ARCTIC_GRAPHIC_2.html


----------



## Greymatters (9 Aug 2007)

adaminc said:
			
		

> If you read the comments on that site with the map, you'll find out the map on the page is wrong...



Good call!  It is wrong compared to your source.  

It would appear then that the Russia/Norway version is the one most refered to...


----------



## Gimpy (10 Aug 2007)

Another bit of interesting news on the topic.

http://newsroom.finland.fi/stt/showarticle.asp?intNWSAID=16424&group=General


> Finnish paper claims Reuters used Titanic film shot
> 
> 9.8.2007 at 13:00
> 
> ...



So it seems that a Russian television station used pictures from Titanic in lieu of any actual photographic evidence.


----------



## 3rd Herd (17 Aug 2007)

the usual disclaimer:
should/maybe covered by our MSM when they wake up( figuratively and literally)
http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=167216&version=1&template_id=43&parent_id=19

Canada troopers assert Arctic sovereigntyPublished: Friday, 17 August, 2007, 01:27 AM Doha Time  
By Michel Comte aboard the HMCS Fredericton

THE largest ever military exercise in the Arctic is underway this week to firm Canada’s disputed claim to this lonely region. “It’s a sovereignty operation” to counter grabs by Russia, Denmark, Norway and the US, Brigadier-General Chris Whitecross, commander of Joint Task Force North, told AFP.

Each nation is claiming flaps of Arctic seabed, believed to hold 25% of the world’s undiscovered oil and gas reserves. All of them, including its allies, deny Ottawa’s hold on the famed Northwest Passage.

Of late, the international rivalry has heated up, with Russia planting a flag at the North Pole and Denmark reportedly on its way, as melting polar ice caps make the region more accessible to economic activity and shipping.

As part of Canada’s “Operation Nanook”, Aurora surveillance aircraft track the wayward ship Rusty Bucket and its connecting flight smuggling narcotics from Mexico into Quebec, via an abandoned runway on Resolution Island in the Arctic.

In the Hudson Straight, the Navy submarine Cornerbrook shadows the vessel, waiting for the patrol frigate HMCS Fredericton and Coast Guard vessel Martha L Black to intercept it, while CF-18 Hornet fighter jets force the aircraft to land in nearby Iqaluit.

There, Inuit rangers and Royal Canadian Mounted Police pounce, while Navy seamen armed with automatic weapons zip across icy waters in inflatable Zodiacs and board the target ship, search it for contraband and arrest its Turkish captain.

“We’re here to show the world we’ll be watching if they trespass on Canada’s Arctic,” says Al Fry, HMCS Fredericton’s executive officer.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has vowed to “vigorously protect” Canada’s interests in the North, “as international interest in the region increases”.
Last week, he announced Canada’s first deep sea port and military base in the Arctic Circle, as well as six to eight new ice-breaking patrol ships to prevent encroachment on its northern frontier.

Arctic trespass is actually rare, even more so undetected. “There are vast uninhabited regions of the Arctic,” said Brigadier-General Whitecross. “But our (1,500 Inuit) rangers do notice passing ships or strange tracks in the snow.” Radar, and soon unmanned surveillance flights, would cover gaps, she added.

In 2006, a US submarine passed unannounced through Arctic waters claimed by Canada, causing a diplomatic row.
The same year, a Romanian man landed in Grise Fiord, Canada’s northernmost town, after a 1,000km trip from Greenland in a tiny motorboat, its propeller bent and windshield smashed by waves.

Two Turkish sailors also jumped ship in Churchill, Manitoba, claiming refugee status after being nabbed by a rail ticket clerk.
Meanwhile, US oil firms are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on exploration in the Beaufort Sea, and South Korea is dramatically expanding its ice-breaker-building capacity.

“There’s going to be a lot more people doing a lot more things in the Arctic,” said Robert Huebert, an Arctic geopolitics expert at Calgary University. “The world is coming to the Arctic.” “If push comes to shove, it all comes down to control,” he said. “We need to be ready to claim what we want to control and show that we can control what we claim.” “Nations could agree to co-operate in the Arctic, but increasingly, each is acting on their own. So Canada should prepare for unsettled weather ahead.”

“Operation Nanook”, the military’s first major push north, was plagued by equipment failures and storms causing delays.
Communications systems did not work as well in the Arctic Circle, fog cut visibility and travel, and frostbite and hypothermia were constant threats. “You have to do things in a very deliberate manner,” explained Whitecross.
At the southern tip of Baffin Island, commanders fretted about icebergs, 10m waves and predators such as polar bears.
“It’s much different operating in these parts because we’re dealing with severe weather,” said Whitecross. “The environment is far more fragile, far more hostile.”

“With temperatures of -50 (degrees Celsius) to -75 (degrees Celsius) in winter, you can’t just issue a parka and a really good pair of boots, mitts and a hat, and say (to troops), ‘Go north.’” Huebert suggested Canada would not be fully Arctic capable until 2025-2030.

Of note, HMCS Fredericton is usually tasked with securing Canada’s Atlantic Coast. Its 225 crew sailed here from the Caribbean, where it was training alongside the US Navy last week. “The 50-degree change in temperature was a bit of a shock,” said one sailor, tanned, looking out at the starkly quiet, cold shores of Baffin Island


----------



## Greymatters (17 Aug 2007)

While the exercise and display of sovereignty is a step in the right direction, you would think they could come up with a better scenario.  Drug-smuggling through an airfield in the Arctic?   :


----------



## Flanker (11 Sep 2007)

Benny said:
			
		

> Can you actually claim international water though? I assume the worry is that russia wants to claim the area on canada's side of the pole.



Yes, arctic countries have rights to claim extending their 200 mile zone during 10 years after ratifying the UN Sea Convention.

I do not understand all that media noise about Russians stealing the Santa-Claus.
Not even the North Pole. 
Let's put aside media speculations, Russia is invoking its legal right to claim these territories and is collecting necessary proof for this.
I think Canadian should be worry of American claims to north straits.
That is a real problem for Canada.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (11 Sep 2007)

Just out of curiousity, comrade,......why?


----------



## Flanker (11 Sep 2007)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Just out of curiousity, comrade,......why?


By definition, a sovereign country must be able to enforce rules on its own territory.
This is not the case of the north straits and it does not look so good...
It looks the US is just ignoring Canada's rights.

In 1985, the U.S. icebreaker Polar Sea passed through, and the U.S. Government made a point of not asking permission from the Canadians. They claimed that this was simply a cost-effective way to get the ship from Greenland to Alaska and that there was no need to ask permission to travel through an international strait. The Canadian government issued a declaration in 1986 reaffirming Canadian rights to the waters. However, the United States refused to recognize the Canadian claim.


In late 2005, it was alleged that U.S. nuclear submarines had traveled unannounced through Canadian Arctic waters, sparking outrage in Canada. In his first news conference after the federal election, then-Prime Minister-designate Stephen Harper contested an earlier statement made by the American ambassador that Arctic waters were international, stating the Canadian government's intention to enforce its sovereignty there.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (11 Sep 2007)

Ya just happened to miss the stuff in 2007, eh?...........................[cue the Church Lady]  Hoooow convenient!


----------



## Flanker (11 Sep 2007)

I do not see what is radically changed in 2007? (a part of some popular politician's declarations)


----------

