This is the height of arrogance and geopolitical stupidity and I expected more from Obama. Who put him up to this madness?
The U.S. is playing with fire. There is ZERO chance Putin blinks if we provoke him. The Russian people already distrust the U.S. and now we are giving them a solid reason to fear us. They will unite in nationalistic unity like never before.
Russian soldiers would love nothing better than to take on the world bully. We are talking about the military that bore the brunt of the Nazis and took 30 million losses. They will plunge headfirst toward the fight, and our soldiers are weary from 14 years straight of fighting in the Middle East.
President Obama, is this how you honor your Nobel prize?
The U.S. is playing with fire. There is ZERO chance Putin blinks if we provoke him. The Russian people already distrust the U.S. and now we are giving them a solid reason to fear us. They will unite in nationalistic unity like never before.
Russian soldiers would love nothing better than to take on the world bully. We are talking about the military that bore the brunt of the Nazis and took 30 million losses. They will plunge headfirst toward the fight, and our soldiers are weary from 14 years straight of fighting in the Middle East.
President Obama, is this how you honor your Nobel prize?
5
There's still no evidence Russia intended or intends to threaten the Baltics, and still no evidence Crimeans did not and do not wish to be reunited with Russia.
These bare facts are inconvenient, I realize, for the apologists of the American Empire, but facts, a wise man once said, are stubborn things.
These bare facts are inconvenient, I realize, for the apologists of the American Empire, but facts, a wise man once said, are stubborn things.
6
"to deter possible Russian aggression in Europe"
What possible Russian aggression in Europe you are talking about?! Any constructive proofs of Russian aggression, please. So far, it looks like another anti-Russian propaganda and brainwashing.
What possible Russian aggression in Europe you are talking about?! Any constructive proofs of Russian aggression, please. So far, it looks like another anti-Russian propaganda and brainwashing.
6
Hello. I am from Riga, Latvia (it is one of the Baltic States).
First I want to thank American people for supporting us in this not very easy moment.
Of course in Latvia we have had some economical problems, but anyway Latvia is a part of so called "Democratic World" (we are a part of European Union, we have free election, EURO is our current currency (and so on)... ).
What I want to say is that the most people in my country ir truly worried about the situation in Ukraine and that this situation can be dangerous also to our country. I think this worry is not just ''empty air''.
Last Wednesday two Russian citizens were captured after sneaking into the military base in Latvia. Of course no connection between them and Rusiian Military forces is jet proved but it is suspected and believable.
If Russia does not want to have NATO regular troops into the Baltic States it is not because Russia would be afraid from NATO forces near it`s border. C`mon, what harm could done a few thousand soldiers to such a State as Russia?
No, I think, they does not want to have NATO forces in our territory because they want to have us (Baltic States) back into their impact zone.
For me this does not seems to be a very nice perspective if I see to what happens into ''Russian Friendly'' territories like Transnistria or Abkhazia.
I think there is no other way for Baltic states then just to be together with so called "Western Democratic World" and that is why we need NATO forces into our territory.
First I want to thank American people for supporting us in this not very easy moment.
Of course in Latvia we have had some economical problems, but anyway Latvia is a part of so called "Democratic World" (we are a part of European Union, we have free election, EURO is our current currency (and so on)... ).
What I want to say is that the most people in my country ir truly worried about the situation in Ukraine and that this situation can be dangerous also to our country. I think this worry is not just ''empty air''.
Last Wednesday two Russian citizens were captured after sneaking into the military base in Latvia. Of course no connection between them and Rusiian Military forces is jet proved but it is suspected and believable.
If Russia does not want to have NATO regular troops into the Baltic States it is not because Russia would be afraid from NATO forces near it`s border. C`mon, what harm could done a few thousand soldiers to such a State as Russia?
No, I think, they does not want to have NATO forces in our territory because they want to have us (Baltic States) back into their impact zone.
For me this does not seems to be a very nice perspective if I see to what happens into ''Russian Friendly'' territories like Transnistria or Abkhazia.
I think there is no other way for Baltic states then just to be together with so called "Western Democratic World" and that is why we need NATO forces into our territory.
9
The arms industry is US and we are it, regrettably, destabilizing the world so the top 1% can make more money, and we, the middle-class remains, remain impotent and or ignorant, and so it goes....
4
This is great.! After cleaning up all the deaths and war actions in the middle east, our military needs something to do. Our leader wants to keep high employment among our forces so we will put"boots on the ground" in Europe because he promised there would be no boots in all the countries ISIS is raping and terrorizing. Brilliant. What could possibly go wrong in Europe? Nothing ever has. Obama must have Putin quaking in his shoes and ready to give us western Russia.
3
Western meddling in Russia's backyard is little more than drumming up business for the future. Vast amounts of oil and gas under the Black Sea, armament contracts should the Ukraine be 'accepted' into NATO and yet more control.
I suggest any American baying for more war with Russia should watch this very helpful and informative film, 'Why We Fight':
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5jDi9WYsYs
I suggest any American baying for more war with Russia should watch this very helpful and informative film, 'Why We Fight':
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5jDi9WYsYs
4
Another commenter nails it:
"This has nothing to do with Russian "aggression" but in fact is simply an angry American response to the Russian refusal to recognize an illegitimate Kiev government installed by American treachery."
The Ukraine's elected president had indicated his intention to sign a deal with the EU, but Russia made him a better offer and he changed his mind. The US thereupon backed a group of his opponents who promised to sign with the EU if they got control of the Ukrainian government -- which, of course, they did, once the elected president was forced by the violence to flee the country.
To that point, the coup leaders and their US backers were having a good time -- it was all kinda fun. But Putin saw an opportunity. He'd long felt the Crimea should never have been given to the Ukraine. He wanted it back, and he knew the Crimean people would back him if asked. So he promptly pointed out that the Ukraine no longer had a legitimate government and opined that that was reason enough for the Crimean people to decide which country they wanted to be part of. The Crimeans voted overwhelmingly in favor of Russia and asked to be annexed by Russia. Russia was only too happy to oblige.
Many critics say Russia would have annexed the Crimea even if the Crimeans had voted to stay in the Ukraine. Maybe Russia would have -- I don't claim to know. The question is academic, though, since the vote was a foregone conclusion: the Crimeans have long preferred Russia.
"This has nothing to do with Russian "aggression" but in fact is simply an angry American response to the Russian refusal to recognize an illegitimate Kiev government installed by American treachery."
The Ukraine's elected president had indicated his intention to sign a deal with the EU, but Russia made him a better offer and he changed his mind. The US thereupon backed a group of his opponents who promised to sign with the EU if they got control of the Ukrainian government -- which, of course, they did, once the elected president was forced by the violence to flee the country.
To that point, the coup leaders and their US backers were having a good time -- it was all kinda fun. But Putin saw an opportunity. He'd long felt the Crimea should never have been given to the Ukraine. He wanted it back, and he knew the Crimean people would back him if asked. So he promptly pointed out that the Ukraine no longer had a legitimate government and opined that that was reason enough for the Crimean people to decide which country they wanted to be part of. The Crimeans voted overwhelmingly in favor of Russia and asked to be annexed by Russia. Russia was only too happy to oblige.
Many critics say Russia would have annexed the Crimea even if the Crimeans had voted to stay in the Ukraine. Maybe Russia would have -- I don't claim to know. The question is academic, though, since the vote was a foregone conclusion: the Crimeans have long preferred Russia.
5
Let's cut the US defense budget and let Europe pay for their own defense. After all we have been supporting them for a century: WWI, WWII, The Marshall Plan, and the cold war. Even today Europe spends next to nothing on defense. Of course they have such a high standard of living: 6 weeks of vacation, maternity & paternity leave of 6 months, no tuition higher education, high speed rail, healthcare, etc... . Socialism is great when you're always on the receiving end courtesy of the US taxpayer.
2
I suspect the commenter who write such things are aware they're misleading people, but many readers may not understand this.
By many accounts -- and Putin has never denied this -- many Russians living in Russia support the Russian rebels in the Ukraine. They send money, they send food, they send weapons, and they even cross the border and fight and die on the side of the rebels. Americans have done this in many wars. In the Spanish Civil War, an entire brigade -- the Lincoln Brigade -- consisted mostly of American volunteers, and many other Americans sent money and other forms of aid. Would anyone say the US fought in the Spanish Civil War because of that.
It's the same here. Putin is saying only that the Russian government isn't sending troops or weapons, and there's been no evidence to the contrary. Some say he's obligated to prevent Russians -- off-duty soldiers or non-soldiers -- from crossing the border to fight. He says he's not obligated, and he's correct: he's not, just as our government wasn't obligated to prevent Americans from fighting in the Spanish Civil War.
Let's be honest with readers who may not follow this closely.
By many accounts -- and Putin has never denied this -- many Russians living in Russia support the Russian rebels in the Ukraine. They send money, they send food, they send weapons, and they even cross the border and fight and die on the side of the rebels. Americans have done this in many wars. In the Spanish Civil War, an entire brigade -- the Lincoln Brigade -- consisted mostly of American volunteers, and many other Americans sent money and other forms of aid. Would anyone say the US fought in the Spanish Civil War because of that.
It's the same here. Putin is saying only that the Russian government isn't sending troops or weapons, and there's been no evidence to the contrary. Some say he's obligated to prevent Russians -- off-duty soldiers or non-soldiers -- from crossing the border to fight. He says he's not obligated, and he's correct: he's not, just as our government wasn't obligated to prevent Americans from fighting in the Spanish Civil War.
Let's be honest with readers who may not follow this closely.
6
"First the US reneges on its word not to move NATO eastward in Europe and now it is arming the new eastern NATO countries with heavy armaments."
I agree entirely with the sentiment. But let's not forget that we've all been commenting on this article as if this is actually happening. It's not. These photos aren't current -- they're photos of a "road trip" from a base in southern Germany through Eastern Europe that happened several months back. None of the military hardware you see in these photos is still there -- it's all back in Germany. Maybe Obama and the Defense Secretary will approve this reported Pentagon request; maybe they won't. Right now, we're all commenting on something that hasn't actually happened. Some of us think it would be a very bad idea. Others think it would be brilliant. Either way, we're all just commenting on something that hasn't actually happened.
I agree entirely with the sentiment. But let's not forget that we've all been commenting on this article as if this is actually happening. It's not. These photos aren't current -- they're photos of a "road trip" from a base in southern Germany through Eastern Europe that happened several months back. None of the military hardware you see in these photos is still there -- it's all back in Germany. Maybe Obama and the Defense Secretary will approve this reported Pentagon request; maybe they won't. Right now, we're all commenting on something that hasn't actually happened. Some of us think it would be a very bad idea. Others think it would be brilliant. Either way, we're all just commenting on something that hasn't actually happened.
2
As the son of a US Defense Contractor, I thank the US Government for this windfall to my inheritance.
As a sane international businessman, I can only tell fellow Americans that if you continue to sow the wind, you will ultimately reap the whirlwind. Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan are all economic, cultural and commercial wastelands. The only profits have been for defense contractors.
As a sane international businessman, I can only tell fellow Americans that if you continue to sow the wind, you will ultimately reap the whirlwind. Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan are all economic, cultural and commercial wastelands. The only profits have been for defense contractors.
6
Let's get enough firepower in there to flatten every city into rubble if that's what Putin wants and we'll never submit to blackmail. Let's start WW3 today! Those zippy Ukraine patriots are all about freedom to feel good abut ourselves at all costs. If Ukrainians can't be freedom then none of us are free. Webster's dictionary defines "aggressor" as that country which the user of that word gets to attack next. Putin is the aggressor because we used the word first, and he doesn't play fair. Russians won't kill like brave warriors, but sneak in and take Crimea like cowards with that brain-washer's bug spray. If only Hitler had followed my advice and imposed a trade embargo against Russia. Then they'd have surrendered at Stalingrad and General Paulus would have stopped this Russian quest to conquer the world in 1944 after Ukraine was liberated for the 19th time this week! Ask Charles Lindbergh and Ambassador Kennedy. Prescott Bush too. The Ukrainians have more freedom than any nation in history because of having been liberated by every country on earth except America, so it's our turn now. As long as America is governed by people smart enough to say "working families" and "aggressor" and "freedom", I can rest easy that it's only a matter of time.
1
"Why is NATO overthrowing democratically elected governments and murdering police to set up puppet governments.[?]"
To its credit, the US government prefers to deal with governments that are both:
1. Democratically elected.
2. Kindly disposed toward the US.
But if they can only get one of the two, they'll take #2 every time. Sometimes they get a bit over-zealous and help to bring about #2. That's what happened here.
Once the US installs a puppet government, though, the usual next step is to press that puppet government to hold an election so that that the puppet government can show the world that its people really like it. That's what happened here too. Some people (I, for example) think such "elections" are usually so suspect that they're hardly worth holding. Saddam Hussein used to hold elections too, and he got a much higher percentage of the vote than the new-government leaders in Kiev got in their post-coup election.
To its credit, the US government prefers to deal with governments that are both:
1. Democratically elected.
2. Kindly disposed toward the US.
But if they can only get one of the two, they'll take #2 every time. Sometimes they get a bit over-zealous and help to bring about #2. That's what happened here.
Once the US installs a puppet government, though, the usual next step is to press that puppet government to hold an election so that that the puppet government can show the world that its people really like it. That's what happened here too. Some people (I, for example) think such "elections" are usually so suspect that they're hardly worth holding. Saddam Hussein used to hold elections too, and he got a much higher percentage of the vote than the new-government leaders in Kiev got in their post-coup election.
6
Another commenter correctly notes:
" ... there is absolutely no evidence, and no reason to believe, that Russia intends to invade the Baltics. None."
Exactly. But when readers who don't follow this closely hear that NATO might "pre-position" military equipment in the Baltics, they naturally think -- mistakenly, but understandably -- that Russia has. NATO knows that. I suspect that's why they want to do this: to create the false impression that Russia has threatened to invade the Baltics. It seems to be working.
" ... there is absolutely no evidence, and no reason to believe, that Russia intends to invade the Baltics. None."
Exactly. But when readers who don't follow this closely hear that NATO might "pre-position" military equipment in the Baltics, they naturally think -- mistakenly, but understandably -- that Russia has. NATO knows that. I suspect that's why they want to do this: to create the false impression that Russia has threatened to invade the Baltics. It seems to be working.
8
You can suspect that as much as you like, but for all the basis you've presented for this, it may as well be a figment of your imagination.
6
Several commenters have mentioned "evidence" of Russian troops in the Ukraine. Putin has freely admitted that some Russians have voluntarily entered the Ukraine to fight on the rebel side. But he says that Russia is not sending troops, and there's been not a shred of evidence to the contrary.
Americans have done the same thing for many years, in many wars, starting at least as far back as the Spanish Civil War.
Americans have done the same thing for many years, in many wars, starting at least as far back as the Spanish Civil War.
7
"and there's been not a shred of evidence to the contrary."
And that is a pure falsehood. You may dispute the weight of the evidence but to argue that that has "been not a shred" is nonsense.
And that is a pure falsehood. You may dispute the weight of the evidence but to argue that that has "been not a shred" is nonsense.
7
And quietly without open congressional debate and congressional approval and no general public awareness the U.S. Military has changed its doctrine for use of nuclear weapons from a nuclear deterrent doctrine to a first strike capability. Remembering the Cuban missile crises the Russians might be understandable nervous.
3
Why is NATO overthrowing democratically elected governments and murdering police to set up puppet governments.
6
NATO has morphed into a dangerous vehicle, driven by the US which has itself morphed into a dangerous Warmongering Police State and could steer Europe into a War they do not want. Answer: Dissolve NATO today, now!
11
This move on the part of the US is a military provocation of Russia. First the US reneges on its word not to move NATO eastward in Europe and now it is arming the new eastern NATO countries with heavy armaments. This has nothing to do with Russian "aggression" but in fact is simply an angry American response to the Russian refusal to recognize an illegitimate Kiev government installed by American treachery. Imagine that, Russia will not sit idly by while the US destroys Russia's national security! Obama bit off more than he could chew when he went after Ukraine, destroyed its nascent democracy and putting a nazi associated gang of thugs in its place!
12
The United States never promised to not expand NATO. Further, this article is about the possibility of the US placing some of its own equipment in depots in the Baltics, not about providing weapons to their armed forces. The current government in Ukraine was brought in by a large segment of its own people, not by the US.
10
@Bill, oh there were legit protesters, Yanukovich was such a crook I don't think you'll even find Putin's fan boys arguing otherwise.
But the US piggybacked on this coup. Remember the recorded phone call - handpicking the next leader is the mark of a puppet regime.
One the Crimeans did not wish to be ruled by.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/06/nyt-still-pretends-no-coup-in-ukra...
But the US piggybacked on this coup. Remember the recorded phone call - handpicking the next leader is the mark of a puppet regime.
One the Crimeans did not wish to be ruled by.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/06/nyt-still-pretends-no-coup-in-ukra...
2
Call me when the Cold War become Hot.
2
Yes, lets just all gather around the campfire with gasoline cans, then wonder why they catch fire.
We can't be everywhere protecting everyone.........
We can't be everywhere protecting everyone.........
5
Does he really think that Putin will be impressed? Russia took over Crimea in days and put 70 thousand troupes on the Ukraine boarder. The European countries have told Oboma not to send weapons. When the heads of Germany and France went to the Ukraine to work on a answer to the hostilities, not only was Obama not asked to go, but the white house didn't even know they went there until until it was reported in the news. Putin has become more bold in his ignoring any proclamation we make. War planes are flying right up to the 50 mile boarder and buzzing NATO ships. Russia has started building a nuclear facility in Iran and promises them even more. Putin has ships in Cuban ports for the first time since before Bush. Putin can look to ISIS for a lesson on Obama's resolve. After months of relentless bombing, they continue to grow in number, power, and area controlled. Now they have spread to Yemen, Libya, and Afghanistan. Obama's answer to this is to send 450 more advisers. This action is futile and Putin's reply will only be a smile as he continues to proceed at his own pace. We don't have to get into these saber rattling actions with Russia. We can show what we are made of in other areas such as our confrontation of ISIS. That would be a lot more effective than sending a bunch of weapons to Europe.
2
Too many Sovietologist need job inn the US of A. And that are insane, as usual. Russia is not an enemy of USA - it just demands to be treated as equal... Supporting Saudi aggression, refusing to collaborate with Iran and Syria to desist ISIS and antagonizing Russia is perfect way of keep warmongers happy and, of cause, supplying money to military- industrial complex.
7
The race to the bottom never ends. Tip of the week, invest in more body bags.
7
Our Nobel Peace Prize winner president is opening up another warfront in his quest for something.
8
This headline might instead read "The Pentagon Is Poised to Put Heavy Weaponry in Eastern Europe" without any loss of meaning.
Except that Harry Truman noted that "The Buck Stops Here" - that is to say, with the president.
Probably it was President Obama who ultimately made this decision - unless, of course, the Pentagon makes decisions on its own and presents them to our country's chief executive as a fait accompli - as it is increasingly portrayed with doing - along with the CIA - by our nation's media.
Except that Harry Truman noted that "The Buck Stops Here" - that is to say, with the president.
Probably it was President Obama who ultimately made this decision - unless, of course, the Pentagon makes decisions on its own and presents them to our country's chief executive as a fait accompli - as it is increasingly portrayed with doing - along with the CIA - by our nation's media.
4
Here we go again, huffing and puffing. But the big bad wolf in the brick house is not worried. He's planning to have us for dinner. And the rest of NATO for dessert.
1
I know this is a small point, but - there is absolutely no evidence, and no reason to believe, that Russia intends to invade the Baltics.
None.
You know, Orwell's "1984" was meant as a warning, not as an instruction manual, but here we are, 12 years or do after being lied into Iraq by the same chicken hawk militarist crowd...
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2004/01/lie-factory
... which has lied over and over about Russian armor moving into eastern Ukraine, lied about the Malaysian jetliners shotdown almost certainly by Ukrainian jets, and, with the stunning absurd stupidity of people who don't understand how an internet image search works, have claimed that there were no neo-Nazi thugs at Maidan.
Look, maybe its time we re-read "1984" because its as if the neocons are using it as a playbook.
we should also, all of us, be very afraid of the rise of fascism. An important, and frankly frightening essay on the topic sheds a great deal of light on neocon tactics
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/27/why-the-rise-of-fascism-is-again-...
This is about those who profit from war, who wish to remake the world regardless of the cost in innocent blood, being willing to lie to the "common people" whom they view with naked, fierce disdain.
Do not follow them into the abyss.
None.
You know, Orwell's "1984" was meant as a warning, not as an instruction manual, but here we are, 12 years or do after being lied into Iraq by the same chicken hawk militarist crowd...
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2004/01/lie-factory
... which has lied over and over about Russian armor moving into eastern Ukraine, lied about the Malaysian jetliners shotdown almost certainly by Ukrainian jets, and, with the stunning absurd stupidity of people who don't understand how an internet image search works, have claimed that there were no neo-Nazi thugs at Maidan.
Look, maybe its time we re-read "1984" because its as if the neocons are using it as a playbook.
we should also, all of us, be very afraid of the rise of fascism. An important, and frankly frightening essay on the topic sheds a great deal of light on neocon tactics
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/02/27/why-the-rise-of-fascism-is-again-...
This is about those who profit from war, who wish to remake the world regardless of the cost in innocent blood, being willing to lie to the "common people" whom they view with naked, fierce disdain.
Do not follow them into the abyss.
8
I know it's a small point, but the only planes that the Russians claimed were near MH17 were SU-25s, which didn't have either the ceiling or the speed to have overtaken a passenger jet flying at 33,000 feet.
"have claimed that there were no neo-Nazi thugs at Maidan."
No, I haven't seen the claim. Rather, it is the pro-Putin partisans' claim that the overthrow of Yanukovich led to a neo-Nazi regime that is refuted, especially by the complete absence of Svoboda and Right Sektor in the government and their sliver of a representation in the Rada.
Your use of the word "fascism" is, in fact, evocative of Orwell; not of "1984" but of his statement--“The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies 'something not desirable'".
"have claimed that there were no neo-Nazi thugs at Maidan."
No, I haven't seen the claim. Rather, it is the pro-Putin partisans' claim that the overthrow of Yanukovich led to a neo-Nazi regime that is refuted, especially by the complete absence of Svoboda and Right Sektor in the government and their sliver of a representation in the Rada.
Your use of the word "fascism" is, in fact, evocative of Orwell; not of "1984" but of his statement--“The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies 'something not desirable'".
4
Eochaid mac Ivanov:
This may work on the Russian masses whom Putin saturates with his 24-7 propaganda. But do you expect us to follow you into your abyss?
You heard it here. This guy thinks he can sell us the story that Ukrainian fighters, not a Russian SAM operated by separatists (or maybe Russian soldiers), shot down the Malaysian airliner. This is lifted straight from Groucho Marx: "Who are you going to believe: me or your own eyes"?
Right, and the US deliberately created the AIDS virus, and ... what next, the CIA crashed the airliners into the Twin Towers?
What lies about the US won't Putin's apparatchiks tell?
the Malaysian jetliners shotdown almost certainly by Ukrainian jets,
This may work on the Russian masses whom Putin saturates with his 24-7 propaganda. But do you expect us to follow you into your abyss?
You heard it here. This guy thinks he can sell us the story that Ukrainian fighters, not a Russian SAM operated by separatists (or maybe Russian soldiers), shot down the Malaysian airliner. This is lifted straight from Groucho Marx: "Who are you going to believe: me or your own eyes"?
Right, and the US deliberately created the AIDS virus, and ... what next, the CIA crashed the airliners into the Twin Towers?
What lies about the US won't Putin's apparatchiks tell?
the Malaysian jetliners shotdown almost certainly by Ukrainian jets,
5
@Ian,
I think you're trying a little too hard.
That said, while I'm not aware of any evidence proving jets shot down the Malaysian airliner, I *am* aware that "the Russians" were convicted of the crime in the press, and by commenters like you, in the complete absence of any evidence.
I think you're trying a little too hard.
That said, while I'm not aware of any evidence proving jets shot down the Malaysian airliner, I *am* aware that "the Russians" were convicted of the crime in the press, and by commenters like you, in the complete absence of any evidence.
1
NATO has a treaty obligation to defend the Baltics if they are attacked by Russia. Certainly NATO need not wait until Russian troops are streaming across the border. It's common, and useful, when tensions are building, when aggressive troops are threatening a small country, to make a gesture like this -- symbolic or more -- that tells the aggressor you mean business.
But when a gesture is made WITHOUT any aggressive act having occurred, then the gesture will be misinterpreted by many to mean that some act of aggression has in fact occurred. That's what's objectionable about this "symbolic" gesture: those who don't know better mistakenly interpret it to mean that Russia has been behaving aggressively toward the Baltics. It hasn't, nor against any other NATO member. Various commenters allege this, but you'll notice that's all they do -- allege it. Ever wonder why we never see photographs of all those Russian troops that Putin is sending into the Ukraine? Simple: he's not -- or, if he is, he's certainly hiding it well.
But when a gesture is made WITHOUT any aggressive act having occurred, then the gesture will be misinterpreted by many to mean that some act of aggression has in fact occurred. That's what's objectionable about this "symbolic" gesture: those who don't know better mistakenly interpret it to mean that Russia has been behaving aggressively toward the Baltics. It hasn't, nor against any other NATO member. Various commenters allege this, but you'll notice that's all they do -- allege it. Ever wonder why we never see photographs of all those Russian troops that Putin is sending into the Ukraine? Simple: he's not -- or, if he is, he's certainly hiding it well.
2
Russia has already acted aggressively towards the Baltics via multiple violations of their airspace, the abduction of an Estonian intelligence office on Estonian soil, and intimidation of Baltic shipping.
8
Adding to Alex's point, this was likely prompted by Russian muscle-flexing in the area. Further, such pre-positioning of equipment will make exactly the type of deployment of which you speak easier.
As to Ukraine, I didn't realize that there would be all those people with nothing better to do in war zones then snap shots of unwilling Russian troops and send them to us. So I guess the OCSE observers and Russians who've claimed to have lost relatives in the military in Ukraine are part of a plot to make this stuff up.
As to Ukraine, I didn't realize that there would be all those people with nothing better to do in war zones then snap shots of unwilling Russian troops and send them to us. So I guess the OCSE observers and Russians who've claimed to have lost relatives in the military in Ukraine are part of a plot to make this stuff up.
4
Given that most Europeans are unwilling to defend the European Community, or even most the slightest sacrifices to help the other members of states of the European Community, what will this accomplish?
4
Too little too late
These weapons will never be used as by the time they get these weapons out of storage the war will be over.
So the question is this the beginning of something that can escalate in the future.
If not then this is being done for show.
I think if Obama is behind this he is doing it to see how Russia will respond.
He wants Russia to think he means business.
This shows you how naive Obama is.
Putin knows Obama will not commit the USA to the defense of these NATO allies and will ignore what he is doing.
Obama has a year and a half to go.
He most likely will be replaced by someone who will tale a much more active role in defending these countries from aggression from Russia.
He doesn't want it to look like he is content to pass this on to the next President.
I think this is Obama's attempt to look like he is doing something when in fact he has done nothing.
These weapons will never be used as by the time they get these weapons out of storage the war will be over.
So the question is this the beginning of something that can escalate in the future.
If not then this is being done for show.
I think if Obama is behind this he is doing it to see how Russia will respond.
He wants Russia to think he means business.
This shows you how naive Obama is.
Putin knows Obama will not commit the USA to the defense of these NATO allies and will ignore what he is doing.
Obama has a year and a half to go.
He most likely will be replaced by someone who will tale a much more active role in defending these countries from aggression from Russia.
He doesn't want it to look like he is content to pass this on to the next President.
I think this is Obama's attempt to look like he is doing something when in fact he has done nothing.
At the local reserve station, half the military vehicles were painted Europe green after the Russian seizure of Crimea. That communicates to me that the U.S. is at least thinking of the next war being in Europe.
1
The disdain so easily expressed for Russia, and China as well for that matter, are startling to me and discouraging and suggest we have created a new Cold War atmosphere and could easily be pointing to Cold War style conflicts. I have no idea how to counter this, since the language used against Russia is so severe and threatening.
4
What if America had more to contribute than weapons?
For a country that's unable to bring about peace, or win wars, isn't giving advice, cum weapons, rather arrogant?
For a country that's unable to bring about peace, or win wars, isn't giving advice, cum weapons, rather arrogant?
2
Civil war in the Ukraine is not enough? Now inflame ethnic war in the Baltic's.
3
For the past near century, (April 1917), the US is playing, yet again, the big brother to Europe. When will they take responsibility for themselves, including the ENORMOUS financial burden? How many times to they have to have their colletive butt saved? On my tax $. Only to give us hell.... Getting used to it, after 98 years. My whole life, plus.
Here we go again. Couldn't the military possibly be stripped of a teensy bit of its billions to repair some crucial parts of out ancient infrastructure so people (citizens of the U.S.) wouldn't go flying through holes in bridges and into rivers; trains flying off the decrepit tracks and killing folks, both passengers and those unlucky enough to be bystanders or local inhabitants; gas mains exploding in the middle of cities, destroying homes and small businesses alike (whilst killing and maiming the unlucky residents)? Just a suggestion, and silly I know - because the military is paramount, and we must protect Crimea no matter what happens here.
3
How many hungry Americans starved to make this foreign military escalation possible?
2
None
3
Several commenters have complained about the "chilling effect" of numerous claims that those who disagree with the Pentagon view on this are "paid trolls." I guess I must be one, just having received this comment:
"Because that is what your talking points from your masters at the Kremlin say..."
Frankly, I'm more impressed by a strong counter-arguments. A comment like the one just quoted usually means the commenter doesn't have a strong counter-argument to make (that commenter didn't: What I quoted here was about all he had to say.)
"Because that is what your talking points from your masters at the Kremlin say..."
Frankly, I'm more impressed by a strong counter-arguments. A comment like the one just quoted usually means the commenter doesn't have a strong counter-argument to make (that commenter didn't: What I quoted here was about all he had to say.)
4
Can we never get rid of George W. Bush and his "two-month" Iraq War boys? It seems not. Now they have seemingly cropped up again trying to get the U. S. into one of their endless "two-month" wars by shipping tanks and heavy weapons to Russia's neighbors. This group is great on feeling "humble" for our veterans when it comes to Memorial Day speeches but the same people are callously forgetful of the death and suffering they are responsible for when they get us into unnecessary wars for their own trumped up reasons. Bernie Sanders may be our only hope for some honesty and common sense.
2
Commenter Alex (who says he's from Russia) wonders this:
"I'm wondering why Russia and Vladimir Putin is called "aggressor."
A well-known US environmentalist, Bill McKibben, made an apt observation, albeit in a different setting (he was trying to mobilize support against the Keystone XL Pipeline):
"A movement requires enemies."
The US government can't whip us into a frenzy just to fight "terror" – they need to point to actual "terrorists" – preferably with long dark beards, turbans and dirty, ragged clothes. Nor can they whip us into a frenzy just to fight "expansion of Russia into Eastern Europe." Much too boring! They need to personify the enemy, and that's what Putin is for.
"I'm wondering why Russia and Vladimir Putin is called "aggressor."
A well-known US environmentalist, Bill McKibben, made an apt observation, albeit in a different setting (he was trying to mobilize support against the Keystone XL Pipeline):
"A movement requires enemies."
The US government can't whip us into a frenzy just to fight "terror" – they need to point to actual "terrorists" – preferably with long dark beards, turbans and dirty, ragged clothes. Nor can they whip us into a frenzy just to fight "expansion of Russia into Eastern Europe." Much too boring! They need to personify the enemy, and that's what Putin is for.
4
A common argument is that, while this step is largely "symbolic," it shows clear resolve by NATO to stand up to the Russians if they try to take over Eastern Europe.
Two problems with that argument:
1. I think Putin already "gets this." As he said, any Russian leader who attacks a NATO country would have to be "insane" and "dreaming." That's true, whether he thinks so or not, and I suspect he thinks so.
2. Even if we are correct to believe Putin needs to see some "symbolic" expression of our resolve to honor our NATO treaty obligations, this expression is awfully feeble. We risk having Putin reach the opposite conclusion. If there ever is an actual battle over the Baltic countries (which I doubt), the stuff we're seeing in these photos and reading about in this article would be so useless that I doubt we'd ever actually use it. And the Russians would just laugh at us if we did.
Two problems with that argument:
1. I think Putin already "gets this." As he said, any Russian leader who attacks a NATO country would have to be "insane" and "dreaming." That's true, whether he thinks so or not, and I suspect he thinks so.
2. Even if we are correct to believe Putin needs to see some "symbolic" expression of our resolve to honor our NATO treaty obligations, this expression is awfully feeble. We risk having Putin reach the opposite conclusion. If there ever is an actual battle over the Baltic countries (which I doubt), the stuff we're seeing in these photos and reading about in this article would be so useless that I doubt we'd ever actually use it. And the Russians would just laugh at us if we did.
3
It isn't at all useless as it allows the rapid deployment of a US force in the event of a Russian threat necessitating it. Further, there is nothing feeble about the symbol of a few thousand U.S. soldiers in the event of such a deployment.
Further, under certain circumstances, a Russian leader may gamble that he is dealing with a paper tiger if there is no tangible NATO commitment.
Further, under certain circumstances, a Russian leader may gamble that he is dealing with a paper tiger if there is no tangible NATO commitment.
3
"I think Putin already "gets this." "
Thinker, I am afraid that people like you, me and so many others who have made wonderful logical arguments as to why this is a bad idea are just being naïve by taking this move as a genuine one.
I am afraid the reality is a very cynical political move to pacify the domestic warmongers (McCain, Graham etc), and they needy, whiney Eastern European allies who always cry "The Russian Wolf is coming!"
and folks like you and me are just spectators in this theater. Until somebody makes the wrong move and starts a war, that is. Then you know what happens: body bags, atrocities, genocide, etc.
A really scary theater this "foreign politicking" has become - my question is: WHY? Why does it have to be so? To win votes? To win bonuses? Kudos? Contracts? Really scary.
Thinker, I am afraid that people like you, me and so many others who have made wonderful logical arguments as to why this is a bad idea are just being naïve by taking this move as a genuine one.
I am afraid the reality is a very cynical political move to pacify the domestic warmongers (McCain, Graham etc), and they needy, whiney Eastern European allies who always cry "The Russian Wolf is coming!"
and folks like you and me are just spectators in this theater. Until somebody makes the wrong move and starts a war, that is. Then you know what happens: body bags, atrocities, genocide, etc.
A really scary theater this "foreign politicking" has become - my question is: WHY? Why does it have to be so? To win votes? To win bonuses? Kudos? Contracts? Really scary.
2
Thinker
If you are not a troll, you do a mighty good job of imitating one.
Take your two points.
1. Why do you trust anything Putin says? He has an obvious motive for the statements you quote -- namely to project himself as a sane, peaceful leader and to ridicule the very real fears of Russia's neighbors. Yes, he will fool some Americans some of the time. Putin does not need to invade his neighbors. He can give little Lithuania. Latvia and Estonia the usual treatment -- send submarines into their territorial waters (like in Sweden), harass their airspace with his fighters, kidnap their officials (as in Estonia), and he can send his gangs to assassinate his opponents (as in England and in Russia).
2. I agree 50% with you that President ("we have no strategy") Obama's response has been feeble and risks sending Putin the wrong message. But Putin would be making a serious mistake if he thinks that what you call the "stuff" is useless. The purpose of the stuff will involve the US directly in any Baltic war. And if Putin attacks US forces, he will lose the resulting war. Remember Pearl Harbor.
If you are not a troll, you do a mighty good job of imitating one.
Take your two points.
1. Why do you trust anything Putin says? He has an obvious motive for the statements you quote -- namely to project himself as a sane, peaceful leader and to ridicule the very real fears of Russia's neighbors. Yes, he will fool some Americans some of the time. Putin does not need to invade his neighbors. He can give little Lithuania. Latvia and Estonia the usual treatment -- send submarines into their territorial waters (like in Sweden), harass their airspace with his fighters, kidnap their officials (as in Estonia), and he can send his gangs to assassinate his opponents (as in England and in Russia).
2. I agree 50% with you that President ("we have no strategy") Obama's response has been feeble and risks sending Putin the wrong message. But Putin would be making a serious mistake if he thinks that what you call the "stuff" is useless. The purpose of the stuff will involve the US directly in any Baltic war. And if Putin attacks US forces, he will lose the resulting war. Remember Pearl Harbor.
3
Dialogue between Neocon and inquisitive citizen:
Neocon (snapping fingers)
Citizen: What are you doing?
Neocon: Scaring away bears.
Citizen: There haven't been any bears round here for several decades
Neocon: See how effective this is!
Citizen: What?
Neocon (snapping fingers)
Citizen: What are you doing?
Neocon: Scaring away bears.
Citizen: There haven't been any bears round here for several decades
Neocon: See how effective this is!
Citizen: What?
8
I am really out of words now to explain how stupid this move is. This escalation will bring more escalation. The war in Ukraine will be even more protracted. Putin will NOT be deterred by this stupid move - for stupid he is not. Neither he is blind. It is obvious this move is done for domestic consumption, to pacify our own war-mongers such as McCain and the new crop of GOP Presidential candidates, because Obama hates to be called weak and "soft" in foreign policy.
The all-out war with Russia is still not going to be enough to "deter" Putin - just because it must be won first. History shows it's not quite that easy, and every invader of Russia lost some territory of their own when Russia beat them back.
Unless we are talking a nuclear war - then the original idea of "deterring Putin" will look even more stupid than it looks now, as blowing up the entire World is a really heavy price to pay for "deterring Putin".
And no, I am not a Putin/Kremlin troll. I am a Russian immigrant living in the US for the past 20 years, I am a child of the USSR and the Cold War, and I hate Putin for what he did to my mother country.
But I can see through the stupid politics of American warmongers, and all I can do is to shake my head in despair, as these people do not know that one stupid mistake just MIGHT trigger a World War, like it happened 100 years ago. Or they think it'd still be OK, b/c the war will be in Europe, and not the US?!
The all-out war with Russia is still not going to be enough to "deter" Putin - just because it must be won first. History shows it's not quite that easy, and every invader of Russia lost some territory of their own when Russia beat them back.
Unless we are talking a nuclear war - then the original idea of "deterring Putin" will look even more stupid than it looks now, as blowing up the entire World is a really heavy price to pay for "deterring Putin".
And no, I am not a Putin/Kremlin troll. I am a Russian immigrant living in the US for the past 20 years, I am a child of the USSR and the Cold War, and I hate Putin for what he did to my mother country.
But I can see through the stupid politics of American warmongers, and all I can do is to shake my head in despair, as these people do not know that one stupid mistake just MIGHT trigger a World War, like it happened 100 years ago. Or they think it'd still be OK, b/c the war will be in Europe, and not the US?!
6
The US increasing its military presence in Eastern Europe is a huge mistake. This sends the message that the US expects Russia to subordinate itself -- literally surrender part of its sovereignty -- to American hegemony.
Russia will have no choice except to respond will an equally menacing counter move. Worse could follow.
The US did not back down from nuclear confrontation against the USSR over Cuba. There is no reason to expect Russia to shy away from war with the US over Ukraine.
American imperialism is leading the world to the slaughterhouse.
Russia will have no choice except to respond will an equally menacing counter move. Worse could follow.
The US did not back down from nuclear confrontation against the USSR over Cuba. There is no reason to expect Russia to shy away from war with the US over Ukraine.
American imperialism is leading the world to the slaughterhouse.
4
Too little too late nothing but a speed bump with no one around willing to do anything about it what a joke for Putin to make fun of about the American's
The US Congress's first priority is to ensure care of its citizens, keep them employed. Among the top among citizens, are veterans who have risked all to keep us all safe. Is escalating tensions in another conflict a wise use of US resources and worth US lives?
1
Decisions like this one make me yearn for isolationism.
2
Look at the article's lead photo. That Latvian highway looks far better than our sad, beaten-to-hell, pothole ridden I-95 does . . . and those are OUR military vehicles rolling down it, to boot. I'm not sure whether that photo says it all, but it says something about our confused priorities.
7
Irrelevant stupidity. Irrelevant because no constellation of non-nuclear weapons used in concert by the little powers on the western borders of the Russian Federation pose a strategic challenge to Russian hegemony. The only challenge, that could, is tactical nuclear weapons; which, the United States withdrew (almost 30 years ago) and have dismantled or decommissioned. So they are not presently (or in the foreseeable future), in the cards for tactical deterrent deployment.
To the armchair neo-con imbeciles (and the ever present greedy defense contractors), the pretense of posing that this charade is “meeting the Russian challenge”, is useful in entertaining the ignorant press and public. But the whole act is a false one.
To the armchair neo-con imbeciles (and the ever present greedy defense contractors), the pretense of posing that this charade is “meeting the Russian challenge”, is useful in entertaining the ignorant press and public. But the whole act is a false one.
7
As someone who was stationed in Germany for 6 years and had a chance to visit some former eastern bloc countries in my free time. They hunger for our presence to stand shoulder to shoulder as Putin looks westward to expand his influence and tighten his iron fist around former Warsaw Pact countries. I had a chance in the early 2000s to visit Poland during a NATO exercise where we worked with partnership for peace countries[countries that were pending approval join NATO at the time]. Even though we are more focused on the Middle East and Asia we must not forget our traditional allies in Europe who can still benefit from our muscular diplomacy. Diplomacy best works when its backed by a credible use or show of force.
9
My first thoughts were that these 3 tiny nations would love to have us there. That said it's poor planning tactically spitznatz forces could easily capture these and defang the enemy very early and the close proximity only makes more likely!
When I was in the military we had a strategy where the border countries would fall while NATO could respond and recapture them later.
When I was in the military we had a strategy where the border countries would fall while NATO could respond and recapture them later.
" as Putin looks westward to expand his influence and tighten his iron fist around former Warsaw Pact countries."
You see - this, right here - based on what evidence?
This is just neocon propaganda.
Go ahead and tally the countries invaded, the regimes changes, the takfiri terorrists armed and supported, and the civilians slaughtered by the United States versus Russia since the end of the cold war.
It isn't even close.
The United States and NATO seek, as all bullies do, to create a "unipolar world."
One dreamed about in the book "The Grand Chessboard" by one of President Obama's advisors.
The US helped engender a coup on Russia's doorstep with the clear goal of ejecting Russia's black sea fleet from Crimea - a region that is majority Russian and which was part of Russia proper until a stroke of a pen by a Ukrainian leader of the USSR transferred it to Ukraine.
How odd that there is no doubt the clear majority of Crimeans voted to leave Kiev and its anti-Russian puppet regime, and Russia assented, and that yields sanctions...
but year after year of Occupation and war crimes by Israel gets US taxpayer subsidy.
The hypocrisy is nauseating.
You see - this, right here - based on what evidence?
This is just neocon propaganda.
Go ahead and tally the countries invaded, the regimes changes, the takfiri terorrists armed and supported, and the civilians slaughtered by the United States versus Russia since the end of the cold war.
It isn't even close.
The United States and NATO seek, as all bullies do, to create a "unipolar world."
One dreamed about in the book "The Grand Chessboard" by one of President Obama's advisors.
The US helped engender a coup on Russia's doorstep with the clear goal of ejecting Russia's black sea fleet from Crimea - a region that is majority Russian and which was part of Russia proper until a stroke of a pen by a Ukrainian leader of the USSR transferred it to Ukraine.
How odd that there is no doubt the clear majority of Crimeans voted to leave Kiev and its anti-Russian puppet regime, and Russia assented, and that yields sanctions...
but year after year of Occupation and war crimes by Israel gets US taxpayer subsidy.
The hypocrisy is nauseating.
2
Is this strategy just another slippery slope? Does this mean we carry on as a war culture? I don't really know anymore, perhaps the Hawks need to give us the truth for once so we as a nation can decide for ourselves.....sigh.
4
This and the South China sea are slippery very slippery indeed.
3
Those who advocate continuing to threaten Russia with NATO exercises miles of its coast would cry ceaselessly of "Russian aggression" if Russia parked its destroyers 50 miles off the coast of Florida as part of "exercises" with, say Venezuela.
Those who see in every opponent of unquestioned US/UK/Israeli hegemony are strangely blind to the death toll of their colonialist and imperial hubris.
It is almost as if they are sustained by their own cretinous hypocrisy.
Those calling for war over a still un-invaded Ukraine ought to be forced to be first to man the front lines.
Those who see in every opponent of unquestioned US/UK/Israeli hegemony are strangely blind to the death toll of their colonialist and imperial hubris.
It is almost as if they are sustained by their own cretinous hypocrisy.
Those calling for war over a still un-invaded Ukraine ought to be forced to be first to man the front lines.
3
As terribly frightened as I am of being accused of being a "paid troll" it seems clear to me that the Times has prevented a rather hawkish narrative. It also seems clear to me that the US government keeps upping the ante, and is and has been pushing for a war with Russia.
I am not the only one who thinks this way
http://www.thenation.com/article/209721/why-washington-still-pushing-war...
In a general sense, I think most decent, intelligent people can agree, at least in the abstract, that decent, intelligent people can differ in their assessment of some complex issue or other. Hence we should try to take competing narratives seriously enough to see if they contain truths which may be synthesized with our own current understanding, thereby making that understanding more complete.
However, I'm also not alone in noticing a deliberate and sustained effort in these comments, and across the media, to chill the speech of people - sober, intelligent people, who disagree with the facile neocon narrative of every opponent of US hegemony being the newest in a long line of Hitlers.
http://www.thenation.com/article/207689/neo-mccarthyism-and-us-media
I think the US government, whichever real powers behind the throne are calling the shots, are playing with fire. Americans ought to remember how they were lied into Iraq.
By, in large part, the same militarist ideologues who will not themselves risk harm to a single hair on their heads by advocating for yet more war.
I am not the only one who thinks this way
http://www.thenation.com/article/209721/why-washington-still-pushing-war...
In a general sense, I think most decent, intelligent people can agree, at least in the abstract, that decent, intelligent people can differ in their assessment of some complex issue or other. Hence we should try to take competing narratives seriously enough to see if they contain truths which may be synthesized with our own current understanding, thereby making that understanding more complete.
However, I'm also not alone in noticing a deliberate and sustained effort in these comments, and across the media, to chill the speech of people - sober, intelligent people, who disagree with the facile neocon narrative of every opponent of US hegemony being the newest in a long line of Hitlers.
http://www.thenation.com/article/207689/neo-mccarthyism-and-us-media
I think the US government, whichever real powers behind the throne are calling the shots, are playing with fire. Americans ought to remember how they were lied into Iraq.
By, in large part, the same militarist ideologues who will not themselves risk harm to a single hair on their heads by advocating for yet more war.
13
Many of those commenting here can't tell the difference between taking a symbolic defensive action and "aggression."
"Aggression" is when a nation either invades another country, or positions substantial offensive weaponry within range to inflict major damage on an opponent. Two examples of the former: Germany invading Poland in 1939, and Russia invading the Ukraine in 2014. An example of the latter: the then USSR positioning nuclear-armed intermediate range ballistic missiles in Cuba, just 90 miles from the U.S., with the potential to destroy Washington, D.C. or New York City, in 1962.
The proposed action is substantially different. It would not threaten Russia. Nobody in their right mind would even think of invading Russia with a force of only 5,000 troops and 100 tanks. A force that small would get stopped very quickly by the Russian Army, with heavy losses, and Russia knows that. There is not the slightest hint that the equipment to be prepositioned in the Baltics would include offensive weapons, such as missiles with nuclear warheads.
What this would be, instead, is a defensive tripwire -- putting Russia on notice that, if it invaded the Baltics, it would have to attack and destroy U.S. defensive forces, something which would trigger a strong military response by the U.S. The purpose is not to threaten Russia with any risk of being invaded, but rather to put Russia on notice that any Russian aggression against the Baltics will trigger a U.S. military response.
"Aggression" is when a nation either invades another country, or positions substantial offensive weaponry within range to inflict major damage on an opponent. Two examples of the former: Germany invading Poland in 1939, and Russia invading the Ukraine in 2014. An example of the latter: the then USSR positioning nuclear-armed intermediate range ballistic missiles in Cuba, just 90 miles from the U.S., with the potential to destroy Washington, D.C. or New York City, in 1962.
The proposed action is substantially different. It would not threaten Russia. Nobody in their right mind would even think of invading Russia with a force of only 5,000 troops and 100 tanks. A force that small would get stopped very quickly by the Russian Army, with heavy losses, and Russia knows that. There is not the slightest hint that the equipment to be prepositioned in the Baltics would include offensive weapons, such as missiles with nuclear warheads.
What this would be, instead, is a defensive tripwire -- putting Russia on notice that, if it invaded the Baltics, it would have to attack and destroy U.S. defensive forces, something which would trigger a strong military response by the U.S. The purpose is not to threaten Russia with any risk of being invaded, but rather to put Russia on notice that any Russian aggression against the Baltics will trigger a U.S. military response.
9
Reading so many comments here by Russian "little green men", I am glad to see that this policy shift got their attention. It took 50 years of sustained effort for the Iron Curtain to come down without war. Sadly, we are in for another long haul.
3
This continuing accusations that people who disagree are Russians, or traitors, or paid for their comments is getting to be frightening. It takes so little for people to believe absolute falsehoods, and to be willing to shut out and shout down dissent. It's the scariest part of all this, it may be, in terms of our own nation's welfare and future.
5
So often has this hue and cry about Russian trolls been raised that I must assume that this tactic was discussed over breakfast at a Beltway think tank.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-under-attack-neocon-ideologues-are-p...
But some of us, at least, are in fact Americans tired of neocon lies.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/russia-under-attack-neocon-ideologues-are-p...
But some of us, at least, are in fact Americans tired of neocon lies.
1
"As a person with close ties with the Baltics, I say: YES, PLEASE! And let the Baltic states catch up with their own military spending."
Of course you think it's a good idea! A commenter who says he's from Poland thinks it's a good idea. Hardly surprising. If someone offered to start making my monthly mortgage payments, I'd think that was a pretty good idea too.
You'll notice I've quoted your second sentence too -- suggesting the Baltic countries should "catch up with their own military spending." Don't hold your breath on that one. If they can get US taxpayers to foot the bill, they won't be "catching up" on their own military spending any time soon.
Of course you think it's a good idea! A commenter who says he's from Poland thinks it's a good idea. Hardly surprising. If someone offered to start making my monthly mortgage payments, I'd think that was a pretty good idea too.
You'll notice I've quoted your second sentence too -- suggesting the Baltic countries should "catch up with their own military spending." Don't hold your breath on that one. If they can get US taxpayers to foot the bill, they won't be "catching up" on their own military spending any time soon.
8
Thinker:
How thoughtful of you to propose that the Baltic states increase their own defense spending (btw they have and are). But you know perfectly well that even if they spend their entire GDPs on defense they are too tiny to resist a Russian invasion -- or even a threat of one.
So why would you make a suggestion that is completely beside the point? Because that is what your talking points from your masters at the Kremlin say: Do your utmost to stir up resentment in the EU and the US about the cost and risks of helping the Baltic states defend their independence.
How stupid does Putin think Americans are?
How thoughtful of you to propose that the Baltic states increase their own defense spending (btw they have and are). But you know perfectly well that even if they spend their entire GDPs on defense they are too tiny to resist a Russian invasion -- or even a threat of one.
So why would you make a suggestion that is completely beside the point? Because that is what your talking points from your masters at the Kremlin say: Do your utmost to stir up resentment in the EU and the US about the cost and risks of helping the Baltic states defend their independence.
How stupid does Putin think Americans are?
6
Why are we provoking.....the Russians....
Anyone...answer this....reasonably....
This is insane !!!
Anyone...answer this....reasonably....
This is insane !!!
8
After reading Adrian Chen's Article 'The Agency' in the NYT Magazine,
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
I have become very suspicious about some of the comments posted here. I think we have stepped through the looking glass where things are not as they seem. And after also reading that Russia is supplying us with rocket engines because we no longer manufacture them, and need them for our space program, I totally agree with one commenter who expressed the opinion that this is all just theater.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
I have become very suspicious about some of the comments posted here. I think we have stepped through the looking glass where things are not as they seem. And after also reading that Russia is supplying us with rocket engines because we no longer manufacture them, and need them for our space program, I totally agree with one commenter who expressed the opinion that this is all just theater.
5
This is maybe the 6th or 7th time I'm reading the same thing from people who just can't stand people questioning the mainstream media narrative.
I bet you were saying the same kind of thing in the months before we invaded Iraq, eh?
I bet you were saying the same kind of thing in the months before we invaded Iraq, eh?
4
Sorry, but I have no clue as to what you are talking about.
1
We simply have to stop electing belligerent Republican Presidents beholden to the military/industrial complex and switch to a pacifist Democrat worthy of winning a Nobel Peace Prize. Then this kind of madness will cease.
7
I presume you refer to Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama?
1
Not funny.
1
I am appalled. The aggression that is of concern in Eastern Europe is American supported aggression against Russia, such as with Georgia invading Ossetia or with a Ukrainian coup government threatening Russian in Ukraine, the possible aggression in Eastern Europe I worry about is American aggression.
13
Lets see if I understand this, first we get involved in a war in the middle east largely to benefit big oil and our allies Israel and the Saudi Monarchy, now some would like us to become involved in a potentially disastrous situation in Ukraine that resulted from a U.S. backed coup of their elected president and the insertion of an Israeli supported President Poroschenko {read Haaratz ,the excellent Israeli daily, about the secret meeting between Poroschenko and Avigdor Liebman shortly before it was decided that Mr. Poroschenko would be a splendid leader, of course the citizens of Ukraine were not consulted] add to this the fact that a half dozen or so Jewish oligarchs somehow became governors etc. [any elections? details shmetails] their names and positions easily pulled up on Reuters and if it is not enough that this country is now in a civil war but somehow U.S. taxpayers and major debt holders such as Franklin Templeton should take a haircut to pay for this despicable aggression, a better suggestion would be for Mr Kolomoisky or Taruta or one of the other billionaires involved write a check for their folly; either that or we should acknowledge to the American people that our foreign policy is no longer being dictated by Washington and our elected leaders but by the lobbyists for our allies in the middle east.
7
ted:
Ah, yes. Thanks for all the sleuthing. I knew the Elders of Zion had to be at the bottom of it all! I am surprised you didn't mention the role of the banks, Pentagon contractors and neocons. No good conspiracy theory is complete without them.
Ah, yes. Thanks for all the sleuthing. I knew the Elders of Zion had to be at the bottom of it all! I am surprised you didn't mention the role of the banks, Pentagon contractors and neocons. No good conspiracy theory is complete without them.
7
Though not much more than symbolic in increasing NATO's ability to respond to Russia suddenly attacking NATO's eastern members, it is a clear signal to Russia that America intends to respond to an attack with a full NATO opposed defense. Thus, this move acknowledges that the world has become a significantly more dangerous place, as two nations with sufficient nuclear arms to destroy the world, Russia and the United States of America, are in a situation where the possibilities for aggression and miscalculation have increased and the level of mutual animosity and distrust have also increased.
These developments also give the Brussels Group's negotiations with Greece over its debt more urgency and provides Greece with more bargaining leverage. Because, if Greece's creditors push it too far, they may push it into the waiting arms of Russia and/or China, both of which, especially Russia, would love Greece as an ally and, thus, have an outpost in Europe on NATO's southern flank, which, inter alia, would make it much easier for the Russian fleet and air force to breakout into the Mediterranean and Southern Europe. Greece's creditors had better be mindful, therefore, of doing anything which will make Greece desperate.
And, while the U.S. increases its forces to counter the Russian threat, I suppose that the Germany's army, with its broomsticks in place of machine guns, and the other hollow forces of our European NATO allies needn't do anything, other than play at being soldiers.
These developments also give the Brussels Group's negotiations with Greece over its debt more urgency and provides Greece with more bargaining leverage. Because, if Greece's creditors push it too far, they may push it into the waiting arms of Russia and/or China, both of which, especially Russia, would love Greece as an ally and, thus, have an outpost in Europe on NATO's southern flank, which, inter alia, would make it much easier for the Russian fleet and air force to breakout into the Mediterranean and Southern Europe. Greece's creditors had better be mindful, therefore, of doing anything which will make Greece desperate.
And, while the U.S. increases its forces to counter the Russian threat, I suppose that the Germany's army, with its broomsticks in place of machine guns, and the other hollow forces of our European NATO allies needn't do anything, other than play at being soldiers.
2
America militarism is completely and frighteningly out of control. This is a terrible idea, a belligerent imperialist idea that will only prove self-defeating in the end.
11
This is good news . The model far exceeds either the Arab Spring, or our Muslim coalition. Gaddafi, and Saddam are dead, and Murbark is in hospital, only after our cozing up to the Muslim Brotherhood. Eastern Europe is none of our concern, nor is the Ukraine.
An important step, yes, but not nearly the same as having people stationed there full time. The real reason there are more than 25,000 uniformed Americans in South Korea right now is NOT because they would make much of a difference in an invasion. Rather, their presence is a signal the North cannot ignore that the US would automatically be involved in any war right from the start.
Would Putin have dared grab Crimea if thousands of US soldiers had been on the ground there?
Would Putin have dared grab Crimea if thousands of US soldiers had been on the ground there?
5
"Would Putin have dared grab Crimea if thousands of US soldiers had been on the ground there?"
Yes, he would.
Yes, he would.
2
Mr. Obama won the Nobel Peace prize. It is obvious that the average person, be they Russian, American, Palestinian, Israeli, or, heck, even Canadian - do not want the wars their leaders so frequently crave.
So why doesn't Mr. Obama, perhaps working with religious leaders, call for a peace conference to settle Ukraine - Crimeans have voted and their wishes should be respected, but the Eastern provinces could likely live with some form of autonomy within Ukraine, and Putin would support it.
Why not use the moral authority of the US Presidency to declare war on war?
So why doesn't Mr. Obama, perhaps working with religious leaders, call for a peace conference to settle Ukraine - Crimeans have voted and their wishes should be respected, but the Eastern provinces could likely live with some form of autonomy within Ukraine, and Putin would support it.
Why not use the moral authority of the US Presidency to declare war on war?
10
The Russian reset. Mr. Putin must be disappointed at Mr. Obama's lack of flexibility.
2
Those who favor silly projections of “force” imagine it’s cost-free. It’s not. Even if we ignore domestic needs and our $18 trillion debt, every dollar we fritter away on goofy ideas like this is one less dollar we have to spend on what the military is supposed to do: defend us.
Ever since the “War Department” was ironically renamed the “Defense Department,” our military has been all offense. First it was the “domino theory:” Fight the Commies in Southeast Asia or else they’ll take over Australia, and then Hawaii, and before you know it they’ll be swimming ashore on California beaches. We got our butts kicked in Vietnam, yet neither Australia, nor Hawaii, nor California beaches, were taken over by the Commies; I own stock in a Vietnam corporation.
The Commies have given way to “terrorists” (and now Putin), but the argument really hasn’t changed: Now it’s “We have to fight them over there or we’ll have to fight them here.”
Always somewhere else, and our trillion-dollar military never seems to accomplish much – even “somewhere else.” We’re about to return for Round 3 in Iraq, for example (don’t worry, we’ll get it right this time). The moment we leave Afghanistan, the Taliban and/or the warlords will swoop in and fill the void. True, we whipped Qaddafi in Libya, but Libya is a small, very weak country – the only kind our military seems able to beat.
Rather than demonstrate this embarrassing truth yet again, why not just skip this dance and keep our military here at home?
Ever since the “War Department” was ironically renamed the “Defense Department,” our military has been all offense. First it was the “domino theory:” Fight the Commies in Southeast Asia or else they’ll take over Australia, and then Hawaii, and before you know it they’ll be swimming ashore on California beaches. We got our butts kicked in Vietnam, yet neither Australia, nor Hawaii, nor California beaches, were taken over by the Commies; I own stock in a Vietnam corporation.
The Commies have given way to “terrorists” (and now Putin), but the argument really hasn’t changed: Now it’s “We have to fight them over there or we’ll have to fight them here.”
Always somewhere else, and our trillion-dollar military never seems to accomplish much – even “somewhere else.” We’re about to return for Round 3 in Iraq, for example (don’t worry, we’ll get it right this time). The moment we leave Afghanistan, the Taliban and/or the warlords will swoop in and fill the void. True, we whipped Qaddafi in Libya, but Libya is a small, very weak country – the only kind our military seems able to beat.
Rather than demonstrate this embarrassing truth yet again, why not just skip this dance and keep our military here at home?
6
Actually, this is more akin to the multi-decade commitment the US made to NATO in the first place, which did defend us.
4
As a person with close ties with the Baltics, I say: YES, PLEASE! And let the Baltic states catch up with their own military spending.
There is a manner of dealing with other people (or countries), where you go on to pursue any advantage you possibly can until stopped in a stranglehold. Putin may well fit here.
There is a manner of dealing with other people (or countries), where you go on to pursue any advantage you possibly can until stopped in a stranglehold. Putin may well fit here.
3
The Kremlin bots are out in force over this story because their boss said to attack the idea of weapons in Eastern Europe with all their might because they are obviously quite insecure. Why feed the Russian trolls by allowing comments here? I say ditch the comments section. There is no need for the NY Times to help Putin's information war.
10
"Rusalka" is a Russian word for "mermaid". So, you are fresh from Russia, and your suggestion to deal with opposing views is what - "ditch the comment section"?
How Russian of you. Why did you leave Russia in the first place if you cannot tolerate opposition?
How Russian of you. Why did you leave Russia in the first place if you cannot tolerate opposition?
2
I noted immediately when this story was first posted by the NYT yesterday a veritable avalanche of "Americans" decrying American imperialism and aggression directed at Russia for having the temerity to provide indications that it will stand by its NATO alliance obligations. The lights were obviously burning bright and late in that little nondescript office building on the outskirts of St. Petersburg judging from the comments section responses.
1
While I understand the resistance of Americans to spend money defending Europe, this will actually save money because the equipment will not have to be moved in everytime there are exercises, which there will be - because the U.S. is now committed by treaty to defend the Baltics just as they, as all other NATO countries are committed to defend the U.S. if attacked. It is also very important to these small countries who share our democratic values and are making great efforts to ramp up their own defenses. This is different than sending troops to defend a Shi'ite government in Iraq.
6
Since when did the US honor treaties they have ratified? I can think of three right off the top of my head, the NPT, the UN Chaarter, and the Univ. Dec. of Human Rights. We do what we want when we want, treaties mean nothing unless we hold others to our standard. And I won't even mention the treaties we should sign but won't regarding children, land mines, cluster munitions, and we'll throw in the ICC to boot.
3
Or as in Russia's respecting the Budapest Memorandum to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty?
3
This is an excellent point, and it raises another. How is Russia sanctioned for protecting Russians on its border, but the US can bomb and invade and arrange coups all over the globe and not be sanctioned?
And what of Israel's decades long occupation and disregard for the conditions of its own UN membership, international law, and multiple UN resolutions?
Some animals, it seems, are more equal than others...
And what of Israel's decades long occupation and disregard for the conditions of its own UN membership, international law, and multiple UN resolutions?
Some animals, it seems, are more equal than others...
A working assumption by many here is that criticizing Putin implies that the critic is a rightwing neo-con blinded by patriotism to the US. No way to prove this charge, of course, but that never stopped posters from making it. However, what's more important than the implied insult is the corollary that Putin has a right to conduct an expansionist foreign policy because of US actions. I don't see anything comparable to annexation in current US policy, but let's by hypothesis grant the premise of American wrongdoing: why is the argument that Putin then has carte blanche supposed to be convincing on anything but "two wrongs make a right" grounds, and why are the people of countries bordering on Russia supposed to pay the price for supposed US perfidy, exactly as they paid the same price in the heyday of the Soviet empire?
7
For once I agree with Mike Halpern.
He has hit the nail on the head. He has exposed the logical flaw that lies at the heart of so many of the comments here: Even supposing the US has behaved abominably badly in all the ways that have been described, how does any of that justify Putin's harassment and invasion of the countries on Russia's borders?
He has hit the nail on the head. He has exposed the logical flaw that lies at the heart of so many of the comments here: Even supposing the US has behaved abominably badly in all the ways that have been described, how does any of that justify Putin's harassment and invasion of the countries on Russia's borders?
5
Most of us, including me, constantly comment on issues of national defense from the comfort of our air conditioned homes or offices, never having served in our armed forces and without any firsthand knowledge about the incredible complexity involved in analyzing international affairs. Rather, we gain our almighty omniscience from the internet ( which we know provides infallible information), newspapers, television, including MSNBC or Fox News and from other second, third hand or remote sources. Almost none of us have had any lifetime experience in the matters we so readily judge.
I recommend that everyone read Marek S's cooments provided by someone who lived through brutal Russian aggression in Poland. Read his ( or her) story in the comments provided below to gain a personal insight into Russian military practices. Lest anyone claim that the policies of Russia today are different from those of the Soviet Union, remember the Mr. Putin is a product of the Soviet KGB and has publicly claimed that the worst geopolitical event in history was the breakup of the Soviet Union. Never forget the leopard theory.
I recommend that everyone read Marek S's cooments provided by someone who lived through brutal Russian aggression in Poland. Read his ( or her) story in the comments provided below to gain a personal insight into Russian military practices. Lest anyone claim that the policies of Russia today are different from those of the Soviet Union, remember the Mr. Putin is a product of the Soviet KGB and has publicly claimed that the worst geopolitical event in history was the breakup of the Soviet Union. Never forget the leopard theory.
7
The only language Russians and Putin understand is the show of force and the willingness to use it. There is no other way to deal with Russia unless there is a change in their government which is unlikely.
The United States should keep a quick reaction force of a Division size permanently stationed in Poland roughly 4 Battalions or 3000 men. This Force should be able to act together with the NATO reaction force that is on the works.
I do not think this money is wasted and I do not think its better spent in schools or health care. The money spend in the military is money that safe guards the continuity of the United States and of western civilization. I am not sure why people have a hard time understanding that. If there is no safety or western civility and economic progress in your life what does it matter how much money you want to put in schools or healthcare?
Regarding military service as someone brought it up...Israel has a 2-3 year mandatory military service for EVERYONE. Because everyone needs to contribute for the success of society as a whole. We need a military draft, a voluntary army is not enough. But of course you don't want serve and you don't want your kids to serve.
There will be no reward or guarantee that our world will survive without personal sacrifice. The very existence of the US is in question without the willingness of personal sacrifice by every citizen and consistent committed effort by all.
The United States should keep a quick reaction force of a Division size permanently stationed in Poland roughly 4 Battalions or 3000 men. This Force should be able to act together with the NATO reaction force that is on the works.
I do not think this money is wasted and I do not think its better spent in schools or health care. The money spend in the military is money that safe guards the continuity of the United States and of western civilization. I am not sure why people have a hard time understanding that. If there is no safety or western civility and economic progress in your life what does it matter how much money you want to put in schools or healthcare?
Regarding military service as someone brought it up...Israel has a 2-3 year mandatory military service for EVERYONE. Because everyone needs to contribute for the success of society as a whole. We need a military draft, a voluntary army is not enough. But of course you don't want serve and you don't want your kids to serve.
There will be no reward or guarantee that our world will survive without personal sacrifice. The very existence of the US is in question without the willingness of personal sacrifice by every citizen and consistent committed effort by all.
6
"If someone can meaningfully distinguish between walking away from the Baltic states, and Germany's bloodless (to the outside) acquisition of Czechoslovakia in 1938, I'm listening."
You're listening? Good.
Hitler had his army waiting at the border to attack Czechoslovakia and take it over. Russia doesn't have its army at the border of the Baltic states, ready to take them over.
See the difference?
Many commenters SAY Russia has its army at the border of the Baltic states, ready to take them over, but that's not actually true. They just made that up.
See the difference?
Putin says Russian leaders would have to be "insane" and "dreaming" to try to attack a NATO country. I have no idea whether Putin really believes that, but I sure do. If that happened, the US would fire up its bombers in a heartbeat. And these silly little tanks you see in these photos, and the other military hardware described in this article, would be utterly irrelevant if that occurred. I seriously doubt their engines would even be started.
See the difference?
You're listening? Good.
Hitler had his army waiting at the border to attack Czechoslovakia and take it over. Russia doesn't have its army at the border of the Baltic states, ready to take them over.
See the difference?
Many commenters SAY Russia has its army at the border of the Baltic states, ready to take them over, but that's not actually true. They just made that up.
See the difference?
Putin says Russian leaders would have to be "insane" and "dreaming" to try to attack a NATO country. I have no idea whether Putin really believes that, but I sure do. If that happened, the US would fire up its bombers in a heartbeat. And these silly little tanks you see in these photos, and the other military hardware described in this article, would be utterly irrelevant if that occurred. I seriously doubt their engines would even be started.
See the difference?
6
No, we do not see the difference.
6
You perhaps need to expand your reading list, Professor.
How about "The Grand Chessboard" for a start?
How about "The Grand Chessboard" for a start?
3
Without doubt It would be the most prominent of a series of moves the United States and NATO have taken to send a clear message to Putin that the United States would "defend the alliance’s members" closest to the Russian frontier.
But is there a real threat for deploying all these troops?
ISIS seems to be a way more aggressive than Russia, but Obama plans to send only 450 new troops to Iraq in fight against ISIS. 10 times less than to the Baltic countries.
But is there a real threat for deploying all these troops?
ISIS seems to be a way more aggressive than Russia, but Obama plans to send only 450 new troops to Iraq in fight against ISIS. 10 times less than to the Baltic countries.
1
"ISIS seems to be a way more aggressive than Russia, but Obama plans to send only 450 new troops to Iraq in fight against ISIS. 10 times less than to the Baltic countries. "
You know why? Because Obama knows those 5,000 troops he sends to Europe will all come home alive - Putin is not a madman to start an all-out war, in spite of what the Baltics think.
Only 450 to fight Iraq - and only as "advisers" - is because ISIS will NOT hesitate to kill Americans or whoever, and Obama does not want any body bags in his name.
Putin is a vile, nasty critter, but he is no dumb. He will not attack Eastern Europe nor the Baltics - and THEY know it, too! But they still cry wolf because they want American military, American bases - in short, American dollars. As you may know, their economies are quite stagnant, and it's hard to make it when you do not produce or have anything worth of selling.
You know why? Because Obama knows those 5,000 troops he sends to Europe will all come home alive - Putin is not a madman to start an all-out war, in spite of what the Baltics think.
Only 450 to fight Iraq - and only as "advisers" - is because ISIS will NOT hesitate to kill Americans or whoever, and Obama does not want any body bags in his name.
Putin is a vile, nasty critter, but he is no dumb. He will not attack Eastern Europe nor the Baltics - and THEY know it, too! But they still cry wolf because they want American military, American bases - in short, American dollars. As you may know, their economies are quite stagnant, and it's hard to make it when you do not produce or have anything worth of selling.
1
Wow!
This comments section is a regular Putin Sock Puppet-Palooza!
Vlad must have upped the payouts to his trolls.
You people sicken me.
This comments section is a regular Putin Sock Puppet-Palooza!
Vlad must have upped the payouts to his trolls.
You people sicken me.
10
The vehement intolerance for honest dissent in some of these comments is troubling. You'd have to go back to the McCarthy era to find it this bad.
5
jb:
You (deliberately?) misunderstand what Kevin said. He is not against dissent. He is against dissent that is manufactured by troll farms acting on the instructions of a wicked foreign government.
To read more seen the recent article in the NYT Magazine titled "The Agency" about Putin's troll farm at 55 Savushkina Street. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
You (deliberately?) misunderstand what Kevin said. He is not against dissent. He is against dissent that is manufactured by troll farms acting on the instructions of a wicked foreign government.
To read more seen the recent article in the NYT Magazine titled "The Agency" about Putin's troll farm at 55 Savushkina Street. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
2
Hey, at least many of them are remembering to include article adjectives in these posts from "Midwest" and "Ohio" and "ok".
Usually the comments read like bad dialogue in a B-movie Cold War film from the 1950s.
Usually the comments read like bad dialogue in a B-movie Cold War film from the 1950s.
3
All political pros and cons aside, the cold war was good for the economy. It hasn't done as well since the last cold war ended. The players may be different, but the economic results are the same. What a hell of a note...
The accusation of non-conforming commenters being "paid trolls" has become so pervasive, it strongly suggests that paid *neocon* trolls have been told this would be an effective tactic.
In any event, I am mostly interested in avoiding situations in which a mistake or misjudgment could lead to war. From where I sit, the US, with its hundreds of bases thousands of miles from its own territory is an Empire, and that Empire has been poking at Russia since the end of the cold war.
I think this not because I love Putin and want him in my fantasy league next year, but simply because I read a lot, in a few different languages, and I also know how the neoconservatives who crave war operate.
Was there a US backed coup?
Absolutely - though the Times acts as if we all dreamed it:
http://newcoldwar.org/new-york-times-still-pretends-no-coup-ukraine/
Thenuance: there were legitimate protests against Yanukovich, but all in all Russia offered a better deal than the IMF/EU - as Ukrainians even in the west are waking up to.
Theres' no evidence of Russian regular troops in Eastern Ukraine, though the stories on this have gone full metal agitprop - just propaganda repeated often enough... and if there *were* - doesn't Russia have a more legitimate basis to protect russians on its own border than the US has in helping to kill them thousands of miles from its own shores?
You bet.
As to Crimea:
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/22/crimeans-keep-saying-no-to-ukraine/
They voted.
In any event, I am mostly interested in avoiding situations in which a mistake or misjudgment could lead to war. From where I sit, the US, with its hundreds of bases thousands of miles from its own territory is an Empire, and that Empire has been poking at Russia since the end of the cold war.
I think this not because I love Putin and want him in my fantasy league next year, but simply because I read a lot, in a few different languages, and I also know how the neoconservatives who crave war operate.
Was there a US backed coup?
Absolutely - though the Times acts as if we all dreamed it:
http://newcoldwar.org/new-york-times-still-pretends-no-coup-ukraine/
Thenuance: there were legitimate protests against Yanukovich, but all in all Russia offered a better deal than the IMF/EU - as Ukrainians even in the west are waking up to.
Theres' no evidence of Russian regular troops in Eastern Ukraine, though the stories on this have gone full metal agitprop - just propaganda repeated often enough... and if there *were* - doesn't Russia have a more legitimate basis to protect russians on its own border than the US has in helping to kill them thousands of miles from its own shores?
You bet.
As to Crimea:
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/22/crimeans-keep-saying-no-to-ukraine/
They voted.
10
Eochaid mac Ivanov:
The accusation of paid trolls is based on a recent NYT Magazine article by Adrian Chen about a "troll farm" at 55 Savushkina Street in St. Petersburg {"The Agency").
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
The accusation is strongly supported by the unidiomatic English of many commentators with American-sounding names, and the remarkably intimate knowledge of the war zone in Ukraine of many middle Americans who posted here.
I agree with you that a misjudgment could lead to war -- and the worst misjudgment would be doing little or nothing in face of Putin's provocations.
Where you go most terribly wrong is asserting a right for Putin to intervene in the affairs of neighboring countries if he believes that ethnic Russians are being badly treated. That was Hitler's pretext in the Sudetenland, and it is a formula for endless war. No one in Europe or the US wants ethnic Russians to be treated badly -- so Russia has many options other than the military one.
Borders are not the result of nature, and so they are always arbitrary. That provides endless opportunities for mischief by demagogues like Putin. You may not like the way Yanukovich was forced out, but that was -- and is -- a matter for the Ukrainians. The fact is that in the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 Russia promised not to use threats or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine. It brutally broke its word.
The accusation of paid trolls is based on a recent NYT Magazine article by Adrian Chen about a "troll farm" at 55 Savushkina Street in St. Petersburg {"The Agency").
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
The accusation is strongly supported by the unidiomatic English of many commentators with American-sounding names, and the remarkably intimate knowledge of the war zone in Ukraine of many middle Americans who posted here.
I agree with you that a misjudgment could lead to war -- and the worst misjudgment would be doing little or nothing in face of Putin's provocations.
Where you go most terribly wrong is asserting a right for Putin to intervene in the affairs of neighboring countries if he believes that ethnic Russians are being badly treated. That was Hitler's pretext in the Sudetenland, and it is a formula for endless war. No one in Europe or the US wants ethnic Russians to be treated badly -- so Russia has many options other than the military one.
Borders are not the result of nature, and so they are always arbitrary. That provides endless opportunities for mischief by demagogues like Putin. You may not like the way Yanukovich was forced out, but that was -- and is -- a matter for the Ukrainians. The fact is that in the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 Russia promised not to use threats or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine. It brutally broke its word.
5
@Ian
The first provocation was the United States backing a coup supported by ultra nationalist and neoifascist mobs.
The Crimeans voted for the guy the mobs deposed. After witnessing the anti-Russian rhetoric pouring out of Kiev, they voted for independence.
THEN - Russian troops sealed off Crimea from the rest of Ukraine, troops who were present already in Crimea, albeit on base mostly in support of the Black Sea Fleet, which the US *clearly* aimed to eject.
After a referendum, the people of Crimea voted to request to *re*join Russia.
Crimea was part of Russia until transferred, by stroke of a pen, in 1953.
Your assertion that it was provocation by Russia to support ethnic Russians on its own border against an anti-Russian coup regime is absurd.
What right did the US have to meddle, as it plainly did, in the internal affairs of a nation on Russia's border, thousands of miles away from its own shores.
Where you go wrong is ignoring the hundreds of thousands of dead civilians left in the wake of belligerent US foreign policy.
You also go wrong summoning Hitler in support of the frightening notion that the wishes of the people of Crimea don't matter.
The first provocation was the United States backing a coup supported by ultra nationalist and neoifascist mobs.
The Crimeans voted for the guy the mobs deposed. After witnessing the anti-Russian rhetoric pouring out of Kiev, they voted for independence.
THEN - Russian troops sealed off Crimea from the rest of Ukraine, troops who were present already in Crimea, albeit on base mostly in support of the Black Sea Fleet, which the US *clearly* aimed to eject.
After a referendum, the people of Crimea voted to request to *re*join Russia.
Crimea was part of Russia until transferred, by stroke of a pen, in 1953.
Your assertion that it was provocation by Russia to support ethnic Russians on its own border against an anti-Russian coup regime is absurd.
What right did the US have to meddle, as it plainly did, in the internal affairs of a nation on Russia's border, thousands of miles away from its own shores.
Where you go wrong is ignoring the hundreds of thousands of dead civilians left in the wake of belligerent US foreign policy.
You also go wrong summoning Hitler in support of the frightening notion that the wishes of the people of Crimea don't matter.
3
adam:
Of course you are free to disagree with me, but it is customary to give reasons for doing so. Instead you simply assert that Russia has a right to protect ethnic Russians even if that meant violating its solemn treaty obligations to respect Ukraine's independence.
You don't really mean that. No borders precisely correspond to the boundaries between ethnic groups, so the principle that countries have a right to militarily intervene in other countries to protect their ethnic minorities would lead to utter chaos.
All intelligent people see that, so you do too. But you would make a special exception for Russia. That is indefensible. No one in the EU or US supports, say, suppressing the use of Russian. Russia would have the West's support if it sought to pressure Ukraine to stop that outrageous behavior. That is why I conclude that the ethnic Russians in Ukraine were just a cynical pretext for Putin's invasion.
(You support Crimean self-determination. Would you equally support the right of ethnic groups in Russia to vote to secede from Russia? Why is Crimea different?).
You don't present any evidence for your absurd theory that the US somehow staged the maidan revolution. Just as absurd is your theory that the West intended to eject the Russian Black Sea fleet from Crimea. The West had lived with that arrangement since the fall of the Soviet Union. Why would that have changed?
In closing, I can only implore you not to swallow the Kremlin's conspiracy theories.
Of course you are free to disagree with me, but it is customary to give reasons for doing so. Instead you simply assert that Russia has a right to protect ethnic Russians even if that meant violating its solemn treaty obligations to respect Ukraine's independence.
You don't really mean that. No borders precisely correspond to the boundaries between ethnic groups, so the principle that countries have a right to militarily intervene in other countries to protect their ethnic minorities would lead to utter chaos.
All intelligent people see that, so you do too. But you would make a special exception for Russia. That is indefensible. No one in the EU or US supports, say, suppressing the use of Russian. Russia would have the West's support if it sought to pressure Ukraine to stop that outrageous behavior. That is why I conclude that the ethnic Russians in Ukraine were just a cynical pretext for Putin's invasion.
(You support Crimean self-determination. Would you equally support the right of ethnic groups in Russia to vote to secede from Russia? Why is Crimea different?).
You don't present any evidence for your absurd theory that the US somehow staged the maidan revolution. Just as absurd is your theory that the West intended to eject the Russian Black Sea fleet from Crimea. The West had lived with that arrangement since the fall of the Soviet Union. Why would that have changed?
In closing, I can only implore you not to swallow the Kremlin's conspiracy theories.
3
What about that "iron dome" that was supposed to be already put in place in Europe? (The one that Bush promised, and then Obama halted?) If that was already in place, Russian aggression in Crimea would not have occurred.
1
I am a man Russia's neighboring country Finland.
The Russian leadership has let out the wrong information on
everything issue. Wrong information adds to the excitement
and uncertainty in the world. The Polish people want security
of weapons help, because Europe is afraid and does not know,
what is coming to Europe.
I have been a sad man, when there is talk of evil matter of
Americans 50 years. Russia is able to spread false information.
For example, from the year 1980: Russian fans wrote: the
United States developed AIDS disease in Africa According to
the people. Terrorism is increasing, when false information is
disseminated in the United States.
Seppo Korpela NOKIA Finland, the novel writer
The Russian leadership has let out the wrong information on
everything issue. Wrong information adds to the excitement
and uncertainty in the world. The Polish people want security
of weapons help, because Europe is afraid and does not know,
what is coming to Europe.
I have been a sad man, when there is talk of evil matter of
Americans 50 years. Russia is able to spread false information.
For example, from the year 1980: Russian fans wrote: the
United States developed AIDS disease in Africa According to
the people. Terrorism is increasing, when false information is
disseminated in the United States.
Seppo Korpela NOKIA Finland, the novel writer
5
Riga, Latvia:
“ … poised … officials say …”
A proposal is just that.
A real line item in the president’s budget would be quite different. Presumably no one has written such an item since the annual February submission.
Whoever actually proposed this to the NYT appears at this moment to be of rank somewhat below the President and the SecDef. Wonder if those two are reading this for the first time.
Does the proposal have a cost estimate per year to accomplish its goal, along with presumably a ‘pay for’?
Interesting side comments: “ … nothing is as good as troops on the ground … “ and “ … taking NATO back to the future …”
So where does this idea stand? Inside the White House and elsewhere.
And a side question: does NATO membership mean exactly the same for each member regardless of stature and geography?
“ … poised … officials say …”
A proposal is just that.
A real line item in the president’s budget would be quite different. Presumably no one has written such an item since the annual February submission.
Whoever actually proposed this to the NYT appears at this moment to be of rank somewhat below the President and the SecDef. Wonder if those two are reading this for the first time.
Does the proposal have a cost estimate per year to accomplish its goal, along with presumably a ‘pay for’?
Interesting side comments: “ … nothing is as good as troops on the ground … “ and “ … taking NATO back to the future …”
So where does this idea stand? Inside the White House and elsewhere.
And a side question: does NATO membership mean exactly the same for each member regardless of stature and geography?
2
I love the martial euphemisms in this article:
"Material".... (meaning matériel)
"Pre-position"
"European Activity Set"
"A significant marker" .... (sounds like an animal marking it's territory)
"The best location to store these materiels ...."
"Grafenwöhr"
Are you expecting the Poles to say "Thank you" to us or to be grateful ?
"Material".... (meaning matériel)
"Pre-position"
"European Activity Set"
"A significant marker" .... (sounds like an animal marking it's territory)
"The best location to store these materiels ...."
"Grafenwöhr"
Are you expecting the Poles to say "Thank you" to us or to be grateful ?
1
I cannot believe it!
Which European country has asked for this? Which European country - other than Ukraine - feels threatened by Russia? And what is happening in the Ukraine, whether the US likes it or not, is self determination. Crimea and Eastern Ukraine have been part of Russia for hundreds of years; why should the US care if they want to go back to Russia?
Maybe the people at the Pentagon have too much time - and money - and need something to do!
Which European country has asked for this? Which European country - other than Ukraine - feels threatened by Russia? And what is happening in the Ukraine, whether the US likes it or not, is self determination. Crimea and Eastern Ukraine have been part of Russia for hundreds of years; why should the US care if they want to go back to Russia?
Maybe the people at the Pentagon have too much time - and money - and need something to do!
5
"Which European country has asked for this? "
Latvia, Lithuania, Estonai and Poland. They have asked repeatedly. They are begging NATO to honor its commitments.
It's been in the East European press for months. You might want to look beyond the San Francisco borders every once in a while.
Latvia, Lithuania, Estonai and Poland. They have asked repeatedly. They are begging NATO to honor its commitments.
It's been in the East European press for months. You might want to look beyond the San Francisco borders every once in a while.
3
Tanks, aren't they considered 'sitting ducks' in todays battle operations?
2
From what I hear there are numerous Russians of the non tourist variety in the south Slavic states, enough to cause the locals to question what is going on. So there is subtle Russian activity similar to the subs in the Baltic et al. Not a bad idea to have some U.S. ground presence.
That said, it is time the 1% got taxed enough to update our bridges, roads, trains, dams, electric grid and digital security. Of course, that would put a few people to work too. Oh wait, the 1% think it is a protective strategy since invaders couldn't use the infrastructure? Jeeze.
That said, it is time the 1% got taxed enough to update our bridges, roads, trains, dams, electric grid and digital security. Of course, that would put a few people to work too. Oh wait, the 1% think it is a protective strategy since invaders couldn't use the infrastructure? Jeeze.
To the people posting here about "restoring the Russian dignity by Putin" and "international conspiracy to bring Russia to it's knees".
I would advise you to talk to the people in Germany, about how it happened that 80 years ago a majority of people in Germany I think really honestly believed that their patriotic duty was to assert the assaulted pride of Germany as a nation, and to fight an international conspiracy against Germany.
Germany people recovered, but the process had been tragic for both them and the rest of the world.
I would advise you to talk to the people in Germany, about how it happened that 80 years ago a majority of people in Germany I think really honestly believed that their patriotic duty was to assert the assaulted pride of Germany as a nation, and to fight an international conspiracy against Germany.
Germany people recovered, but the process had been tragic for both them and the rest of the world.
9
And I'd remind *you* to consider that there was no Spanish mine that blew up the USS Maine, that the Lusitania *was* carrying arms, that the government lied about the Gulf of Tonkin, that it lied about babies taken from incubators before Iraq 1, and that it lied about yellowcake, al qaeda and nuclear wmds before Iraq 2.
The efforts to obfuscate the history of blatant aggression by the British and the Americans would be silly if they weren't employed to villify another victim of US imperialist hubris.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/all-out-war-in-ukraine-natos-final-offensiv...
The truth of the matter is the US has killed millions upon millions of civilians all around the world in the past 20, 30, 40 years. The British had an empire on which the sun never set - and the blood never dried.
The US is arming terrorists in Syria merely for yet another incidence of US-backed regime change. Some of us recall how the US overthrew Iran's government and supported its dictator and vile secret police in order to steal Iran's oil. The the US played innocent when the Islamists managed to eject the US puppet.
The truth is the US and NATO are closer to Hitler than the Russians are.
And more and more people know it.
The efforts to obfuscate the history of blatant aggression by the British and the Americans would be silly if they weren't employed to villify another victim of US imperialist hubris.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/all-out-war-in-ukraine-natos-final-offensiv...
The truth of the matter is the US has killed millions upon millions of civilians all around the world in the past 20, 30, 40 years. The British had an empire on which the sun never set - and the blood never dried.
The US is arming terrorists in Syria merely for yet another incidence of US-backed regime change. Some of us recall how the US overthrew Iran's government and supported its dictator and vile secret police in order to steal Iran's oil. The the US played innocent when the Islamists managed to eject the US puppet.
The truth is the US and NATO are closer to Hitler than the Russians are.
And more and more people know it.
5
Good grief, man - whose bases surround whose borders? Which nation has engaged in "regime change" and supported Islamic terrorists in support thereof?
I suggest you go read "The Grand Chessboard" and perhaps "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" to know what the American Deep State intends for Russia.
I suggest you go read "The Grand Chessboard" and perhaps "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" to know what the American Deep State intends for Russia.
3
It has been 70 years since WWII. It has been 25 years since the end of the Cold War. It has been 1000 years since Russia has had any reason to feel secure within its own borders from the aggression of others, mainly European and Western Threats including Napoleon and Hitler.
Fact of geography and economics: Eastern Europe whether in NATO or not is to Russia what Latin America is to the United States.
Fact of reality: Russia is now dependent on selling, not getting its oil in Europe whether Putin, Europe or our US Pentagon admits or not.
Fact: NATO was set up when Europe was down and out and Russia and the United States were the two gorillas left standing with Western Europe caught in the middle. It made sense for a NATO especially since most Americans had their roots in Europe, much like so many today in Crimea and Ukraine with roots in Russia.
Fact: Eurozone Europe is now as economically muscular as the United States when taken as a whole.
Question: Why is the US even thinking of doing what Europe should do if they think this Putin threat is real. Eurozone is a big boy now, not down and out.
Putin says: “I think that only an insane person and only in a dream can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO,”
I think he is right. He may be an egotistical and seem a bully, but he is not insane...at least not yet.
Ever hear of the Monroe Doctrine? Putin is doing in his backyard what we repeatedly have done here. It is not unexpected and not worth a US buildup.
Fact of geography and economics: Eastern Europe whether in NATO or not is to Russia what Latin America is to the United States.
Fact of reality: Russia is now dependent on selling, not getting its oil in Europe whether Putin, Europe or our US Pentagon admits or not.
Fact: NATO was set up when Europe was down and out and Russia and the United States were the two gorillas left standing with Western Europe caught in the middle. It made sense for a NATO especially since most Americans had their roots in Europe, much like so many today in Crimea and Ukraine with roots in Russia.
Fact: Eurozone Europe is now as economically muscular as the United States when taken as a whole.
Question: Why is the US even thinking of doing what Europe should do if they think this Putin threat is real. Eurozone is a big boy now, not down and out.
Putin says: “I think that only an insane person and only in a dream can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO,”
I think he is right. He may be an egotistical and seem a bully, but he is not insane...at least not yet.
Ever hear of the Monroe Doctrine? Putin is doing in his backyard what we repeatedly have done here. It is not unexpected and not worth a US buildup.
7
Bruce:
"It has been 1000 years since Russia has had any reason to feel secure within its own borders from the aggression of others ..."
You have got to be kidding! All the aggression was one way. For more than 500 years, Russia waged systematic aggression against its neighbors, in the process accumulating a vast land empire (rivaled in size only by Britain and the Mongols -- and Britain has handed back virtually all of its colonies). Russia is the largest country in the world, covering more than one-eighth of the Earth's inhabited land area.
And still it cannot stop bullying its little neighbors! What did the little Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia do to deserve Putin's endless stream of threats? Of course Putin's neighbors have every reason to be afraid of him.
What a wonderful, decent, prosperous country Russia could be if only Putin would let it. But he has calculated that he needs to pick fights to stay in power.
"It has been 1000 years since Russia has had any reason to feel secure within its own borders from the aggression of others ..."
You have got to be kidding! All the aggression was one way. For more than 500 years, Russia waged systematic aggression against its neighbors, in the process accumulating a vast land empire (rivaled in size only by Britain and the Mongols -- and Britain has handed back virtually all of its colonies). Russia is the largest country in the world, covering more than one-eighth of the Earth's inhabited land area.
And still it cannot stop bullying its little neighbors! What did the little Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia do to deserve Putin's endless stream of threats? Of course Putin's neighbors have every reason to be afraid of him.
What a wonderful, decent, prosperous country Russia could be if only Putin would let it. But he has calculated that he needs to pick fights to stay in power.
3
Sure they have handed back Australia and we have handed back the continent with the rest of the colonial rule now settled in? A euro-centric world order of multi-national corporate dominance. Bully's all and continuing still.
1
THANK YOU. Somebody remembers the despotism of the Monroe Doctrine!!! It's also the "John Kerry Doctrine."
Under its guise the United States has "intervened" in its "back yard" over 90 times since 1823, the year of its proclamation.
http://www.atelier-rc.com/Cuentos.html
Putin might be "crazy" but not stupid. He's doing quite well, actually.
But America loves the propaganda power of symbolic if insignificant, ineffective, wasteful, pointless "buildups" to sell policy to the American people – no one else is buying. Thus new bases and "advisers" for Iraq and "heavy weapons" in Eastern Europe, 'unproclaimed' back yards by extension.
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it.” ~ H.L. MENCKEN
Under its guise the United States has "intervened" in its "back yard" over 90 times since 1823, the year of its proclamation.
http://www.atelier-rc.com/Cuentos.html
Putin might be "crazy" but not stupid. He's doing quite well, actually.
But America loves the propaganda power of symbolic if insignificant, ineffective, wasteful, pointless "buildups" to sell policy to the American people – no one else is buying. Thus new bases and "advisers" for Iraq and "heavy weapons" in Eastern Europe, 'unproclaimed' back yards by extension.
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it.” ~ H.L. MENCKEN
2
Why are not the Central European's and all of Europe for that matter, beefing up their own forces and equipment?
Is it even necessary since we, the British and the French hold the nuclear card?
We went to war in Europe in WWI and WWII at great loss of life and treasure on both sides.
Then we gave them the Marshall Plan. Then we fed and supplied everything else to Berlin.
Haven't we done enough for Europe? Should not Europe stand up and meet it's own possible or potential threats?
Is it even necessary since we, the British and the French hold the nuclear card?
We went to war in Europe in WWI and WWII at great loss of life and treasure on both sides.
Then we gave them the Marshall Plan. Then we fed and supplied everything else to Berlin.
Haven't we done enough for Europe? Should not Europe stand up and meet it's own possible or potential threats?
4
@RetiredGuy
They are and the biggest military contracts being coveted by global arms manufacturers are in Eastern and Central Europe with Poland being the largest.
They are and the biggest military contracts being coveted by global arms manufacturers are in Eastern and Central Europe with Poland being the largest.
2
Sending more weapons, especially "heavy" expensive weapons, must warm the hearts of John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Their handlers love it, too.
6
Based on the volume and similar nature of so many of these comments, the New York Times article about the Russian "troll farms" was definitely on to something.
This small shift by NATO eastward is a small and measured step toward showing Russia that the members of NATO will defend its eastern members feeling insecure with Russia's new aggression toward Europe since invading Ukraine while not moving enough forces to ever be able to repel a Russian invasion. This is the first step by NATO in bolstering defenses that will probably continue to grow as Russia continues to move massive forces on its western borders and threatening and violating European air and sea space with military exercises.
Eventually NATO will have to come to terms with the new threat Russia poses to European security and move Western European NATO bases to where they are needed in the East, but it will happen in increments to counter Russia's growing military aggression toward Europe.
This small shift by NATO eastward is a small and measured step toward showing Russia that the members of NATO will defend its eastern members feeling insecure with Russia's new aggression toward Europe since invading Ukraine while not moving enough forces to ever be able to repel a Russian invasion. This is the first step by NATO in bolstering defenses that will probably continue to grow as Russia continues to move massive forces on its western borders and threatening and violating European air and sea space with military exercises.
Eventually NATO will have to come to terms with the new threat Russia poses to European security and move Western European NATO bases to where they are needed in the East, but it will happen in increments to counter Russia's growing military aggression toward Europe.
9
"The New York Times article about the Russian "troll farms" was definitely on to something."
And *I* have read iterations of *that* allegation so often, I have to assume it was handed out by some neocon state department underling to *their* "paid trolls."
In the alternative, Mr. Pardun, you might consider that many people read from a wider variety of news sources, which, for example, point out that Russia has not invade Ukraine, despite an absurd number of allegations by Kiev to the contrary, offered without proof.
If thousands of Russian regulars are fighting in Ukraine to protect ethnic Russians from the puppet regime in Kiev, odd how there is no evidence of it.
The threat to security seems to be from a NATO that has been struggling to justify its existence, and its budget, since the early 90s. Acting as Al Qaeda's air force in Libya, as the Us shipped weapons to takfiri terrorists in Syria via Benghazi and Turkey - was a new low.
Now, you might pretend there was no US backed coup in ukraine, but there was.
http://newcoldwar.org/new-york-times-still-pretends-no-coup-ukraine/
It is also the case that Crimea, after that coup, did not wish to be ruled by the neo-Nazi and oligarch lousy puppet regime in Kiev.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/22/crimeans-keep-saying-no-to-ukraine/
Is your notion to ignore their wishes and turn Crimea into another Donbass, complete with government shelling of civilian apartment buildings?
And *I* have read iterations of *that* allegation so often, I have to assume it was handed out by some neocon state department underling to *their* "paid trolls."
In the alternative, Mr. Pardun, you might consider that many people read from a wider variety of news sources, which, for example, point out that Russia has not invade Ukraine, despite an absurd number of allegations by Kiev to the contrary, offered without proof.
If thousands of Russian regulars are fighting in Ukraine to protect ethnic Russians from the puppet regime in Kiev, odd how there is no evidence of it.
The threat to security seems to be from a NATO that has been struggling to justify its existence, and its budget, since the early 90s. Acting as Al Qaeda's air force in Libya, as the Us shipped weapons to takfiri terrorists in Syria via Benghazi and Turkey - was a new low.
Now, you might pretend there was no US backed coup in ukraine, but there was.
http://newcoldwar.org/new-york-times-still-pretends-no-coup-ukraine/
It is also the case that Crimea, after that coup, did not wish to be ruled by the neo-Nazi and oligarch lousy puppet regime in Kiev.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/22/crimeans-keep-saying-no-to-ukraine/
Is your notion to ignore their wishes and turn Crimea into another Donbass, complete with government shelling of civilian apartment buildings?
4
I find it disturbing that opinions that dissent from yours (and the NYT's, which is clear even in its "straight news" articles, unfortunately) are labeled as near treason, as false-hearted or false-flagged, as preemption of their being taken seriously. This treatment of dissent is unacceptable in a nation with open discussion of serious matters like these, even if the NTY has apparently opened the door to it. My opinion of this paper has taken a hit, similar to that which it took in the lead-up to the Iraq debacle, for which it did apologize later. But that apology is worth little if the paper is going to repeat that performance, and this shocking maligning of dissent indicates that it may well do just that.
2
I think the Cold War never really ended. Not really.
Both sides just went to their respective corners to
lick their wounds and wait for the bell signalling
the start of the next round.
Both sides just went to their respective corners to
lick their wounds and wait for the bell signalling
the start of the next round.
2
I imagine the world invested $millions in this mobilization, how about invest the same amount in aiding Ukraine economy.
2
I saw tanks and soldier in Europe as a young girl travelling to Berlin (and onward to East Berlin). The Cold War was exactly that chilling in every way. Seeing that image of tanks travelling down the highway brings that journey back. Is this really necessary? Well, let's hope not. It's either a deterrent or a poke in the eye to just get on with it.
1
'...the United States would defend the alliance’s members closest to the Russian frontier...'
Sure thing, once a new President is elected, and 'a line in the sand' actually means something, anyway.
Sure thing, once a new President is elected, and 'a line in the sand' actually means something, anyway.
3
Funny how there is never any money to fix roads, or brink Detroit back from its near 3rd world decline - but there's always hundreds of billions to arm Israel and Ukraine, and always money to garrison one of the many hundreds of bases the US maintains all over the world.
Meanwhile, we would all do well to study the influence of private central banking prior to world war 2, and, especially, world war 1.
The truth of the matter is that warfare is a tremendous waste not only of human life, but of resources.
But bankers need more and more debt to keep trading little pieces of paper for real assets.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-14/cornering-earth-how-rothschilds...
War is the bankers' greatest harvest.
Do not be so quick to race into this war.
It could be the last, and neither Jesus, not Moshiach, nor any other denizen of humanity's fair tales are coming to save us from ourselves.
Meanwhile, we would all do well to study the influence of private central banking prior to world war 2, and, especially, world war 1.
The truth of the matter is that warfare is a tremendous waste not only of human life, but of resources.
But bankers need more and more debt to keep trading little pieces of paper for real assets.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-14/cornering-earth-how-rothschilds...
War is the bankers' greatest harvest.
Do not be so quick to race into this war.
It could be the last, and neither Jesus, not Moshiach, nor any other denizen of humanity's fair tales are coming to save us from ourselves.
15
Isn't it amazing? The evil bankers have even got Putin's Russia hooked on military spending.
The Huffington reports that "Most Russian economic sectors face a 10 percent cut this year as Russia heads into recession. The military budget, meanwhile, rose by 33 percent to about 3.3 trillion rubles (some $50 billion)." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/04/russia-military-modernization_n...
The Huffington reports that "Most Russian economic sectors face a 10 percent cut this year as Russia heads into recession. The military budget, meanwhile, rose by 33 percent to about 3.3 trillion rubles (some $50 billion)." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/04/russia-military-modernization_n...
4
The United States spends more on its military expenditures than the next top 20 countries COMBINED.
Of course, if Russia increases its own spending a bit, as US troops and missiles grow all around its western borders, it is a sign of Russian "aggression."
Of course, if Russia increases its own spending a bit, as US troops and missiles grow all around its western borders, it is a sign of Russian "aggression."
3
Delicate Genius:
Isn't it odd how a few US tanks -- and no missiles because Obama canceled their deployment -- and a handful of troops FOLLOWED Russian aggression and treaty violations in the Ukraine?
Oh, I get it! Russia moved preemptively because it knew that the neocons would force Obama to do this.
Isn't it odd how a few US tanks -- and no missiles because Obama canceled their deployment -- and a handful of troops FOLLOWED Russian aggression and treaty violations in the Ukraine?
Oh, I get it! Russia moved preemptively because it knew that the neocons would force Obama to do this.
1
I'm in Riga. Latvia. And on today, on every street in this lovely city and across this country there are Latvian flags flying from the front of buildings and houses. Why? To commemorate the day when 14,000 Latvians were sent to Siberia when the Soviet Union invaded at the beginning of WWII. A few short years before the Nazi's did so from the other side…a few short years before The Soviet Union did so again... I was speaking with a former Latvian senator the other day and he pointed out a fact that most Americans couldn't begin to fathom. Russia could take over Latvia in a matter of hours. Hours. Picture a watermelon and a grape. Like that. I can tell you that very few Latvians believe the US or NATO would actually come to their defense should there ever be a need. When I read bits of this article to Latvians that I live with they are amazed. "Really?"...they say. "Thank God." I used to be like most liberals who react to articles like this and cry warmongering…living in Vermont…with my big fat country around me. Not anymore. Come here. Really, do…it's one of the most beautiful places on earth with the loveliest people. Talk to them. You'll soon see…it's not warmongering. It's looking at history and standing behind a very delicate wall and offering to help hold it up.
11
Trouble is modern Russia, like most of the rest of us, have no interest in Latvia at all.
It is a neocon talking point, and little else.
It is a neocon talking point, and little else.
4
And lets leave it that way! Because I can say for sure that 50 years of Soviet occupation of Baltic states has done tremendous harm to all 3 of them. Baltics were litteraly locked by eavil kidnapper for 50 years. Guess what happens - we eventually got our freadom back (with help from our US, Western friends) but we still feel and deal consequences of that unlawful deed of Soviets.
4
Delicate Genius:
Yes, isn't it extraordinary that the neocons have convinced the Latvians that peace-loving Vladimir Putin is interested on Latvia.
Even more remarkable is the neocons' success in convincing the Estonians, Lithuanians, Swedes, Finns, Poles, Czechs, Hungarians, Georgians, Ukrainians .. in fact everyone who shares a border with Russia or lives in its neighborhood, that Russia is interested in dominating them.
How can so many people misunderstand Putin's peaceful intentions?
Yes, isn't it extraordinary that the neocons have convinced the Latvians that peace-loving Vladimir Putin is interested on Latvia.
Even more remarkable is the neocons' success in convincing the Estonians, Lithuanians, Swedes, Finns, Poles, Czechs, Hungarians, Georgians, Ukrainians .. in fact everyone who shares a border with Russia or lives in its neighborhood, that Russia is interested in dominating them.
How can so many people misunderstand Putin's peaceful intentions?
3
Obama another big step towards World War III. Dear Americans, the third world war will not be in Eastern Europe, it will be fought on the territory of America mainly!
3
Pentagon business as usual. What a surprise. If you believe that this country is run from the White House you're still living in the second grade. And taking the short bus to school.
5
@John B
If it was up to the Pentagon, there would be ten times more forces moving into Europe to be an effective deterrent against Russia and the U.S. would be arming Ukraine with highly effective modern weaponry.
NATO's actions are a result of Russia turning European security upside-down and this move is a 1/2 measure to not be unnecessarily provocative while still at least doing something to counter the Russian threat.
If it was up to the Pentagon, there would be ten times more forces moving into Europe to be an effective deterrent against Russia and the U.S. would be arming Ukraine with highly effective modern weaponry.
NATO's actions are a result of Russia turning European security upside-down and this move is a 1/2 measure to not be unnecessarily provocative while still at least doing something to counter the Russian threat.
3
The "creep" is not in the missions. The "creep" is the minds of whomever decided to do such a thing - more than likely the Generals who advise the President. If you can call that advice. Generals do not know statesmanship. Generals do not know politics of the world. Generals know war - that is what they do. Better Obama should ask a possum how to cross a busy road.
4
Putin's trying to do just what Hitler did before WWII, seeing how far he can push the West before we decide to push back. In 1939 we waited too long and the result was WWII. If we wait too long this time we could easily have another war, hopefully without nukes, but who knows when tempers flare.
Putin and his gang are just kleptocrats, they don't want a war, they just want to see how much they can steal before getting their hands slapped, and the sooner they're slapped the sooner they'll back off and the tensions will decrease.
We should have put troops in the Baltic states and Eastern Europe a year ago. If we had Putin would have already backed down and the crisis would already be over. But we hesitated, which by Putin was seen as cowardly, so he pushed harder as all bullies do when they detect fear. So now we have our present crisis. Let's just hope we haven't let the infection fester too long and that our present (small) efforts will stop it.
Putin and his gang are just kleptocrats, they don't want a war, they just want to see how much they can steal before getting their hands slapped, and the sooner they're slapped the sooner they'll back off and the tensions will decrease.
We should have put troops in the Baltic states and Eastern Europe a year ago. If we had Putin would have already backed down and the crisis would already be over. But we hesitated, which by Putin was seen as cowardly, so he pushed harder as all bullies do when they detect fear. So now we have our present crisis. Let's just hope we haven't let the infection fester too long and that our present (small) efforts will stop it.
7
If the US were to position offensive nuclear rockets in the Baltic, as the USSR did in Cuba, where a dictatorship rules 50 years later, I would object, but as that is not what is proposed, the comparison is nonsense.
5
What exactly is it that Russia fears from its neighboring countries? Invasion? Of course not. They certainly have had problems with their satellites desperately fleeing or trying to flee. That is what they are worried about; that their boot on the neck has weakened. We may have a military industrial complex, but so does Russia. In their case it is controlled by ex-KGB thugs. The US is far from perfect but there is simply no moral equivalence between NATO and the EU on one side, and the Russian Kleptocracy on the other. Sure the US has taken vile foreign policy steps in the past, but it is absurd to say this means the US is wrong when it takes foreign policy steps that are to defend our ideological allies. No number of wrongs negates a right decision. Of course this gesture of storing tanks is a small one, but the willingness to do so is a signal out of proportion to its actual military worth. The US got things seriously wrong in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc, because we had allies of convenience. When we have actual ideological allies we should not hesitate to support them unequivocally.
13
This isn't deterrence, it's provocation. It isn't defensive, it's aggressive. It's asking for a fight where all of no chance for a fight would otherwise exist.
This is the stuff of hawks, not doves. This is nothing but Snowden save-face. Impotent Putin posturing.
Yet, in the Middle East where a clearly inhumane enemy is debilitating freedom, actively oppressing peoples and committing human atrocities, we send almost no one. 400, a cowardly joke, a capital insult. I am ashamed to be American.
This is the stuff of hawks, not doves. This is nothing but Snowden save-face. Impotent Putin posturing.
Yet, in the Middle East where a clearly inhumane enemy is debilitating freedom, actively oppressing peoples and committing human atrocities, we send almost no one. 400, a cowardly joke, a capital insult. I am ashamed to be American.
2
The Times has not learned from Iraq
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/24/nyt-is-lost-in-its-ukraine-propaga...
I have to assume that this is deliberate.
Blessed are the warmongers, for they shall keep their jobs.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/24/nyt-is-lost-in-its-ukraine-propaga...
I have to assume that this is deliberate.
Blessed are the warmongers, for they shall keep their jobs.
8
“I think some countries are simply taking advantage of people’s fears with regard to Russia.” I think, Putin is referring to the way the US government used Russia as a scapegoat to get and keep Americans frightened, so the big corporations could control us.
7
Don't these Baltic countries and Poland have troops and equipment of their own? If they are truly scared of Russia, they should bolster their own military forces. The fact is that nobody of serious mind believes there is even a remote possibility that Russia would invade these countries. Something else is going on here and you can bet that the neocons are behind it.
6
On the contrary, Dharma101, the Balts are very serious, and they know that a Russian invasion is a real possibility. It's happened to them before. They are asking NATO to live up to its treaty obligations. They are also boosting their own military forces as you suggest--Lithuania has recently started conscription. But they are small, which is why they freely chose to ally with NATO, to have more weight behind their defense.
7
"The fact is that nobody of serious mind believes there is even a remote possibility that Russia would invade these countries."
You must have done an extensive survey to have concluded that those who don't believe as you do have a less than serious mind. What methodology did you follow in your survey, how large was the sample size, and was the measure of "seriousness" the extent to which someone agreed with you?
You must have done an extensive survey to have concluded that those who don't believe as you do have a less than serious mind. What methodology did you follow in your survey, how large was the sample size, and was the measure of "seriousness" the extent to which someone agreed with you?
4
That the US mainstream media would continue to engage in yellow journalism and neoconservative-driven Orwellization of the narrative was a given.
What is disappointing is how many otherwise intelligent people lack the capacity to be skeptical about the version of events they are getting in the press.
Fortunately, younger people supplement their reading with more independent/alternative/foreign news sources - hence the Russia bad/Putin new Hitler agitprop, replayed over and over, is losing its effect on people who read enough competing narratives to see how this one is mostly about US efforts to have no rivals.
One wishes the Putin bashers would read "The Grand Chessboard" and look at a map of US/NATO bases, then apply just a little nuance to their thinking.
What is disappointing is how many otherwise intelligent people lack the capacity to be skeptical about the version of events they are getting in the press.
Fortunately, younger people supplement their reading with more independent/alternative/foreign news sources - hence the Russia bad/Putin new Hitler agitprop, replayed over and over, is losing its effect on people who read enough competing narratives to see how this one is mostly about US efforts to have no rivals.
One wishes the Putin bashers would read "The Grand Chessboard" and look at a map of US/NATO bases, then apply just a little nuance to their thinking.
10
Putin is certainly right in saying that only an insane person would think Russia would attack NATO or one of its countries. Unfortunately, the US government has a lot of insane as well as duplicitous and manipulative people in it. Are they looking for the opportunity for a pretext, say a false flag attack of their own concoction, to start a war with Russia?
7
seriously? Russian attacks Georgia, Ukraine and the Balkans and it is the US that is insane.
5
@Dharma101
That is what worries Europe so much about Russia, the insane person in the
Kremlin that is turning Russia into a fascist militarist dictatorship who see's enemies everywhere.
That is what worries Europe so much about Russia, the insane person in the
Kremlin that is turning Russia into a fascist militarist dictatorship who see's enemies everywhere.
1
Russia is only a "fascist military dictatorship" in the rhetoric of globalists and Neocons, whose intent is to manipulate public opinion against Russia. Putin has restored a degree of independence, national pride and patriotism to Russia and therefore has an over 85% approval rating among Russians. Putin is definitely not insane. Learn Russian and listen to his speeches, which the US and EU media refuse to broadcast even as they demonize him. He is probably the sanest world leader alive today.
1
Just saber-rattling. Nothing bad can come of it, right?
I'm guessing that since the Ukraine is bankrupt and the head of their treasury has said that they will default on their loans, the only way Poroshenko can remain in power is to organize the country for war. The absurdity of naming former Georgian leader, Saakashivili, as governor of the Odessa region is too rich. He gets to lose two wars to Russia.
So expect some of these weapons to show up in the hands of Ukrainian fascists, despite Congress passing a motion to deny military support to the Nazi Azov Battalion. But Ukraine is too broken to fight a successful war against Donbass, much less Russia. The aid Russia has provided Donbass has been exaggerated here in the western media, but it's pretty clear that if the US is supplying "military trainers" (anyone remember Vietnam?) and heavy weaponry to the coup government in Kiev, Russia will supply enough to destroy it.
We know everyone is too sane not to get into a nuclear war on Russia's border, right?
I'm guessing that since the Ukraine is bankrupt and the head of their treasury has said that they will default on their loans, the only way Poroshenko can remain in power is to organize the country for war. The absurdity of naming former Georgian leader, Saakashivili, as governor of the Odessa region is too rich. He gets to lose two wars to Russia.
So expect some of these weapons to show up in the hands of Ukrainian fascists, despite Congress passing a motion to deny military support to the Nazi Azov Battalion. But Ukraine is too broken to fight a successful war against Donbass, much less Russia. The aid Russia has provided Donbass has been exaggerated here in the western media, but it's pretty clear that if the US is supplying "military trainers" (anyone remember Vietnam?) and heavy weaponry to the coup government in Kiev, Russia will supply enough to destroy it.
We know everyone is too sane not to get into a nuclear war on Russia's border, right?
3
Now we have mission creep in Eastern Europe, along with almost every other place on the globe. We've created a 10 billion pound gorilla military that keeps looking for a new place to sit down. Its appetite leaves the rest of us monkeys having to constantly scavenge for the scant leftovers. Seek ye first the kingdom of God, not the sword, share with your brothers and sisters, and all else you need will be given unto you--by the God of justice and mercy, the only One really in charge.
8
If you'd believe Republicans, we're bankrupt. Fortunately, there's always money for bombs.
10
What kind of strategists do we have in our leadership that see more heavy weapons in Europe as anything but playing roulette with a third World War as the winning number? This is apparently more of the rash wild west gambles with our armed forces lives and our financial resources that have made our war contractors wealth larger but only sunk us deeper in the ditch of failure as far as dealing with our enemies.. How is it that in what we like to refer to as our "democracy" we are "poised to put heavy weapons in Europe" with absolutely no discussion in Congress or the media that justifies such warlike steps? Who is the anonymous king that has moved our war machine to a "poise" for war solely by discussing it with himself? We had better get him tied into a restraining jacket before he decides to move us into World War III.
3
If any external force made any territorial demands in Russia, I would strenuously complain. No-one has made such demands of Russia. However, the tightly controlled Russian media is full of claims on territories they occupied by force in the past. Many of the territories now openly threatened are fully functioning or budding democracies. If, after so many bad self-serving actions throughout the world, we cannot support those that clearly have the same values as we do, against those that clearly do not, we will lose whatever credibility our ideals may still have.
4
To get involved in alliances of convenience is usually a mistake, as in the Middle East, but to fail to fully support our ideological allies is ALWAYS an even bigger mistake.
3
The narrative, which an unhealthy majority of commenters here seem to have accepted, apparently having learned nothing from the role of the media in the run up to the Iraq war, in which Russia is "aggressor" and the US and its allies, who have bombed and assassinated and fomented coups all over the world these past 25 years, is an Orwellization of the truth.
The truth is the Crimeans, mostly ethnic Russians, who voted for Yanukovich, did not wish to remain ruled by a vocally anti-Russian, US puppet regime in Kiev that used neo-fascist thugs to take over government offices, even as dual citizen oligarchs and technocrats took over much of Ukraine's governments and governorships - on behalf of the IMF and a new-debt-famished ECB and EU.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/22/crimeans-keep-saying-no-to-ukraine/
The Times presents the matter with considerable bias, and it is notable that Russia is sanctioned when an autonomous province, formerly part of Russia proper, votes to leave a post-coup state, and {re}join Russia - but DECADES of Israeli occupation and brutalization of Palestinians gets not only no sanctions, but diplomatic cover and US taxpayer subsidy.
The hypocrisy is nauseating.
The propaganda is obvious
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/24/nyt-is-lost-in-its-ukraine-propaga...
One need not entirely agree with the Russian narrative to at least appreciate the need for more nuance and truth than the neoconservatives are inclined to use in their war-mongering
The truth is the Crimeans, mostly ethnic Russians, who voted for Yanukovich, did not wish to remain ruled by a vocally anti-Russian, US puppet regime in Kiev that used neo-fascist thugs to take over government offices, even as dual citizen oligarchs and technocrats took over much of Ukraine's governments and governorships - on behalf of the IMF and a new-debt-famished ECB and EU.
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/03/22/crimeans-keep-saying-no-to-ukraine/
The Times presents the matter with considerable bias, and it is notable that Russia is sanctioned when an autonomous province, formerly part of Russia proper, votes to leave a post-coup state, and {re}join Russia - but DECADES of Israeli occupation and brutalization of Palestinians gets not only no sanctions, but diplomatic cover and US taxpayer subsidy.
The hypocrisy is nauseating.
The propaganda is obvious
https://consortiumnews.com/2015/01/24/nyt-is-lost-in-its-ukraine-propaga...
One need not entirely agree with the Russian narrative to at least appreciate the need for more nuance and truth than the neoconservatives are inclined to use in their war-mongering
7
OMG, please no! The path to hell is paved with good intentions.
3
And how many Americans are going to rush to volunteer to put on an American military uniform and join the .75% of Americans who have done so since September 11, 2001 to move to use this heavy weaponry if the Russian bear comes ambling, clawing, biting and roaring along?
None named Cheney, Cruz, Rubio, Walker, Santorum, Fiorina, Bush, Carson, Jindal, Christie, Limbaugh, Gingrich, Trump, Giuliani, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, Hume, Kristol, Paul, Gigot, Stephens, Kelly, Baier, Bush, Huckabee, Ryan etc.
Eastern European Slavs are a lot closer ethnically, linguistically, historically and geographically to the Kiev/ Moscow Rus than are Western European tribes and Germanic English America.
None named Cheney, Cruz, Rubio, Walker, Santorum, Fiorina, Bush, Carson, Jindal, Christie, Limbaugh, Gingrich, Trump, Giuliani, Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, Hume, Kristol, Paul, Gigot, Stephens, Kelly, Baier, Bush, Huckabee, Ryan etc.
Eastern European Slavs are a lot closer ethnically, linguistically, historically and geographically to the Kiev/ Moscow Rus than are Western European tribes and Germanic English America.
4
It is so true what they say. Once American military shows up, they never leave.
5
When the American military shows up, the local people beg them not to leave.
When the Soviet military showed up, the local people did not dare to beg them to leave.
When the Soviet military showed up, the local people did not dare to beg them to leave.
4
This a decision for the United Nations...not the USA...
1
According to the article, the US is making this decision "in consultation" with its "allies", which means NATO members. Why should the UN be involved?
5
Seems that US always takes the lead. ....and ...I think not
be see as the world police force...
be see as the world police force...
So let me see, The Europeans burned the Americans by joining China's AIIB, and their excuse is that maybe following a different path would be better for them. So here we are wasting tax payers money on a Continent that refuses to defend itself and is hoping the US will defend them,meanwhile spitting venom about the US.
Let them follow their own path, give them what they want and let them deal with a Communist China led system in Eurasia. If you take the U.S. out of the equation then Russia, China, ISIS, and Europe can focus on themselves and see who is going to be running Eurasia meanwhile we Americans are building a strong and prosperous Western Hemisphere.
Let them follow their own path, give them what they want and let them deal with a Communist China led system in Eurasia. If you take the U.S. out of the equation then Russia, China, ISIS, and Europe can focus on themselves and see who is going to be running Eurasia meanwhile we Americans are building a strong and prosperous Western Hemisphere.
2
I think it's as super important that we repeat as many of the mistakes of the lead-up to World War I as possible as a test case on what it would take to start another major world war in Eastern Europe.
We know so much more now than we knew then. What could go wrong?
We know so much more now than we knew then. What could go wrong?
7
USA is the international thug and terrorist state, a truly evil empire. The question is :where do the money come from to support this insanity and do tax payers care ?
7
Yes, we taxpayers care and would like for Europe and the rest of the world to defend itself from now on. We can take care of our business and would like the rest of the world to do the same. And since you think we are the international thugs and evil empire of the world, the next time you find yourselves in a jam, don't call us...the Yanks would prefer to let you deal with it all on your own.
And just why would we now expect our young people to man these weapons and put their lives at risk in order to protect the Baltic region of Eastern Europe? After thousands of lives were sacrificed in futile efforts in Iraq & Afghanistan, now we are going to send troops to confront Russian aggression? Really?
And after the 1st shots are fired and the casualties begin to mount how long will it be before our illustrious leaders change their minds and perform yet another hasty retreat?
When the Leaders in Washington have their own skin in the game......ie: either join up and do some of the fighting themselves or have the conviction to send their own family members into the fight... until then, the European Union will have to fend for themselves.
Why should American lives always be put on the line? For what? We are not the one & only exceptional Country anymore, here to protect the freedom and democracy of the world. We are told to not even proud to be Americans anymore...after all, aren't we are a very flawed Nation?.... so why should we defend the severely flawed Europe of all places?
Or any other place for that matter.
And after the 1st shots are fired and the casualties begin to mount how long will it be before our illustrious leaders change their minds and perform yet another hasty retreat?
When the Leaders in Washington have their own skin in the game......ie: either join up and do some of the fighting themselves or have the conviction to send their own family members into the fight... until then, the European Union will have to fend for themselves.
Why should American lives always be put on the line? For what? We are not the one & only exceptional Country anymore, here to protect the freedom and democracy of the world. We are told to not even proud to be Americans anymore...after all, aren't we are a very flawed Nation?.... so why should we defend the severely flawed Europe of all places?
Or any other place for that matter.
7
Necessary move caused by Russia's shortsighted foreign policy trying to play on fortress mentality. Now they are indeed surrounded by enemies including former allies. Eastern Europeans remember soviet domination and tanks on their streets and now formerly close Ukraine learned its lesson. As they say in Russia, you harvest what you saw. US unfortunately can't stay in isolation as a guarantor of peace in Europe and global economy.
7
This will only increase tensions in Eastern Europe with Russia. What an idiotic move - unless this is what the US and NATO wants. Like positioning "defensive missiles" in Russia's back yard, this will have the same effect. Perhaps Russia should move missiles and tanks into Cuba and Venezuela? The US shouldn’t complain since they think it’s ok to do this to Russia.
This will only serve to destabilize the region.
This will only serve to destabilize the region.
7
Are our armament manufacturers in a slump? Have they considered declaring war on the Vatican or San Marino or Luxembourg? Lots of mini-wars could be a much safer bet in the long run. Russia could be a very short run (along with the rest of the planet) should someone "wake up rogue" in the middle of a nightmare.
8
This is a small move. Nonetheless, it makes me nervous when the quantity of military equipment begins increasing on either side of a big fat line on the ground.
Even if this is a tactic for future negotiations, the US should stop isolating Russia. We have to understand that historically, for different reasons, the Baltic States and Eastern Europe have had no choice but to act as a buffer zone between great powers. We should help these countries thrive on their own and allow them to remain neutral. Was it really necessary for NATO to expand into the Baltic states, and is the region really more stable because of this? Ukraine was the last straw for Putin, he's actually been quite patient in my mind.
Besides, we need Russia as a friend, not our enemy. It seems to me that for the next few decades we'll be dealing with all the consequences from this modern day crusade we recently started in the Middle East.
Even if this is a tactic for future negotiations, the US should stop isolating Russia. We have to understand that historically, for different reasons, the Baltic States and Eastern Europe have had no choice but to act as a buffer zone between great powers. We should help these countries thrive on their own and allow them to remain neutral. Was it really necessary for NATO to expand into the Baltic states, and is the region really more stable because of this? Ukraine was the last straw for Putin, he's actually been quite patient in my mind.
Besides, we need Russia as a friend, not our enemy. It seems to me that for the next few decades we'll be dealing with all the consequences from this modern day crusade we recently started in the Middle East.
7
Russia is not looking westward for its future, nor should it. In many cases the country is acting out of a desire to be recognized as a global player, returning to a role it played as the old Soviet Union. Russia does not have the strength now, nor the resources, to play a dominant role in the world, outside its own sphere of influence which it sees as Crimea, and perhaps, Ukraine. Instead of the perceived Russian aggression, the US should be more concerned with China, a country which is making increasingly threatening moves in the islands of the Pacific and elsewhere around the world. This is a country with the economic and military might to cause major problems.
5
Putin has cast a dark shadow over Europe strangely reminiscent of the one Hitler cast in the 1930's. Whether this is the beginning of a strategy that will contain Putin or whether it simply a move that has no context, we shall see.
3
NATO contained the USSR until it collapsed from its internal contradictions. There is no reason NATO should not contain Putin until the Russians wake up to the appalling mess he has made of their economy and society.
3
Unfortunately, by the time we "see it", it will be much too late. As so many times in the past history of our country.....
1
What absolute rubbish. Look at the hundreds of thousands killed because of US/neocon intervention in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
Look how Russia is sanctioned after Crimea voted to rejoin it, but Israel is not sanctioned for an apartheid colonialism and illegal, decades-long brutal occupation.
For some, summoning Hitler is always a winning strategy.
But for those who have paid attention, the people who summon Hitler to argue for more war are far more Hitlerian in their militarism than the target of the week is.
Look how Russia is sanctioned after Crimea voted to rejoin it, but Israel is not sanctioned for an apartheid colonialism and illegal, decades-long brutal occupation.
For some, summoning Hitler is always a winning strategy.
But for those who have paid attention, the people who summon Hitler to argue for more war are far more Hitlerian in their militarism than the target of the week is.
1
This is relatively meaningless. Equipment this far forward in indefensible positions on the northern European plain, could not be brought into play under any scenario in which fighting breaks out. This approach, formerly the REFORGER (REturn of FORces to GERmany) approach, exists only to address rising tensions. Whether under a Crimea/Eastern Ukraine scenario or an out-and-out attack, the equipment would likely be captured or destroyed before US forces could man it.
This is not akin to the Berlin Brigade, which was a human tripwire. No one expected the Berlin Brigade to last more than a few days under a Soviet attack, but its presence prevented the Warsaw Pact from grabbing the low-hanging fruit that was West Berlin. Soldiers should be stationed in those NATO countries deemed at risk. Despite what some of the comments below say, placing a company or a battalion in a country on or near Russia's border poses no threat to Russia. It is difficult to invade a large country with 150 men.
This is not akin to the Berlin Brigade, which was a human tripwire. No one expected the Berlin Brigade to last more than a few days under a Soviet attack, but its presence prevented the Warsaw Pact from grabbing the low-hanging fruit that was West Berlin. Soldiers should be stationed in those NATO countries deemed at risk. Despite what some of the comments below say, placing a company or a battalion in a country on or near Russia's border poses no threat to Russia. It is difficult to invade a large country with 150 men.
2
We know that Putin wants to break up NATO. We know that he will put NATO to the test, to force it to disavow its commitments. We know that this will happen before Obama leaves office ("I'll be more flexible after my final election").
So the real question is, what steps can be taken to head off that action? Placing heavy equipment in those states is a minimal step. Placing troops there would be much better.
The people of the Baltic Nations and Poland have begged the U.S. and NATO to do more, they have begged for years. They have earned the right to NATO defense by providing their own troops to fight with the U.S. and NATO outside their home countries. The Balts and Poles know something that most NYTimes commenters do not know. Their prosperity depends entirely upon staying out of Russia's cruel grip.
I pray that Obama accepts the Pentagon recommendation.
So the real question is, what steps can be taken to head off that action? Placing heavy equipment in those states is a minimal step. Placing troops there would be much better.
The people of the Baltic Nations and Poland have begged the U.S. and NATO to do more, they have begged for years. They have earned the right to NATO defense by providing their own troops to fight with the U.S. and NATO outside their home countries. The Balts and Poles know something that most NYTimes commenters do not know. Their prosperity depends entirely upon staying out of Russia's cruel grip.
I pray that Obama accepts the Pentagon recommendation.
10
The population of the United States is 320 million and Canada's is 35 million. The GDP of the US is $17 trillion.
The population of Russia is 142 million. Russian GDP is between $2 to $3 trillion.
The population of the European Union is 507 million. EU GDP is about $17 trillion.
In other words, Russia's GDP is less than one tenth of combined US/EU GDP. Russia's population is less than one fifth of combined US/EU population.
Russia is a poor man with a gun who is robbing the corner convenience store. Armed and dangerous, Russia is stealing from its neighbors.
Armed robbery is a crime. Enforcement arrives by land, sea and air. Russia lacks the sea and air. In any real conflict, Russia will have no navy and no air force. Tanks without air cover are a poor strategy.
The population of Russia is 142 million. Russian GDP is between $2 to $3 trillion.
The population of the European Union is 507 million. EU GDP is about $17 trillion.
In other words, Russia's GDP is less than one tenth of combined US/EU GDP. Russia's population is less than one fifth of combined US/EU population.
Russia is a poor man with a gun who is robbing the corner convenience store. Armed and dangerous, Russia is stealing from its neighbors.
Armed robbery is a crime. Enforcement arrives by land, sea and air. Russia lacks the sea and air. In any real conflict, Russia will have no navy and no air force. Tanks without air cover are a poor strategy.
6
You know nothing of the geopolitical history or context.
3
There are two concepts here that pro-Putin US leftists don't understand: territorial sovereignty and democratic decision-making. Eastern members of NATO have every right join any international organization that would take them. So they have joined the democratic clubs, the EU and the NATO, rather than the totalitarian, xenophobic Russian regime that had been enslaving and killing them for half a century. They have as much right to put defensive weapons anywhere in their free, democratic lands, as does Russia in its own territory. The Putin loving American leftists don't want to recognize borders between democracy (EU, NATO) and totalitarian Russian Federation.
The Cuban crisis is a very bad analogy, unless you want to convince anyone that the point of putting NUCLEAR weapons to Cuba was to defend Cuba. The "Russian bases in Mexico" hypothetical is even more disingenuous. If for some reason Mexico wanted to have them in their territory, on there side of the Frontiera, they would indeed have every right to host them. That's why there are borders. It is becoming very obvious that American liberals want totalitarian USSR to come back and continue slaughtering democratic nations, with no regard to their territorial sovereignty. https://twitter.com/FluidEyes
The Cuban crisis is a very bad analogy, unless you want to convince anyone that the point of putting NUCLEAR weapons to Cuba was to defend Cuba. The "Russian bases in Mexico" hypothetical is even more disingenuous. If for some reason Mexico wanted to have them in their territory, on there side of the Frontiera, they would indeed have every right to host them. That's why there are borders. It is becoming very obvious that American liberals want totalitarian USSR to come back and continue slaughtering democratic nations, with no regard to their territorial sovereignty. https://twitter.com/FluidEyes
6
This development is the exact opposite of what Putin hoped to achieve with his effort to influence US/EU opinion through the use of internet propaganda. The strong response by his trolls and their fellow travelers here in this comments section confirms this. The positioning of heavy armaments in the Baltic & other Eastern European nations of NATO is rather late and small - more needs to be done with urgency in response to Putin's use of hybrid-warfare in Ukraine. The nations of Eastern Europe that have and are seeking to strengthen their governance by rule of law and democratic principles must be supported by the US and the other NATO/EU members.
5
Its about time. Talk about slow on the uptake. Someday America will learn that we can not postpone days of reckoning with the bad guys be it ISIS or the Russians and Chinese . Remember this and vote for NO democrats in 2016.
4
So, I assume you are now standing in line at your local army recruiter's. Oh, and that you have voluntarily paid your estimated increased share of tax increases to further fund our deprived arms factories. That you are comfortable with the fact that your grand-daughter can't get a decent education, that BOTH her mother and father must work to keep their heads above water, that the bridge leading into town dates back to WPA and hasn't been repaired since. But, of course, we must tough it out. After all, we can't consider ourselves patriotic Americans if we don't put up our dukes whenever the wind blows. Muslims, Chinese, Ruskies...Let's kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out!
2
The US couldn't pick a better way to bolster Putin's popularity with the Russian people. The threat of Western aggression is the best card he holds in legitimizing his autocratic regime and now we have given him the perfect justification for playing it. Doubtless, this ill-advised move of threatening Russia militarily will only serve to strengthen his hold on power.
7
Judy R:
Not so. The US couldn't pick a better way to bolster Putin's popularity with the Russian people than to leave a vacuum that will tempt Putin to believe that he can get away with more military adventures.
Not even the brainwashed and intimidated Russian masses believe that Russia is under threat of invasion from the West. The threat is entirely a fantasy of your own.
But Putin understands that his hold on power is threatened by his disastrous and corrupt mismanagement of the Russian economy. So he offers the Russian people military adventures in order to distract them from their empty stomachs and to brand his political enemies as traitors. He also needs to create scapegoats for his economic failures -- so he will blame the West's spineless policy of economic sanctions for the mess he made.
Hitler seduced the German people and entrenched himself in power by means of a string easy military victories, made possible by European appeasement. Never again.
Not so. The US couldn't pick a better way to bolster Putin's popularity with the Russian people than to leave a vacuum that will tempt Putin to believe that he can get away with more military adventures.
Not even the brainwashed and intimidated Russian masses believe that Russia is under threat of invasion from the West. The threat is entirely a fantasy of your own.
But Putin understands that his hold on power is threatened by his disastrous and corrupt mismanagement of the Russian economy. So he offers the Russian people military adventures in order to distract them from their empty stomachs and to brand his political enemies as traitors. He also needs to create scapegoats for his economic failures -- so he will blame the West's spineless policy of economic sanctions for the mess he made.
Hitler seduced the German people and entrenched himself in power by means of a string easy military victories, made possible by European appeasement. Never again.
3
Here's a unique idea: Why not allow European countries to handle perceived threats to their interests? Do they not have the money? Do they not have the political will? Do they not perceive a sufficient threat? Are they waiting for Uncle Sam to predictably pony up yet more treasure and blood because that is the knee-jerk reaction of a political system so thoroughly corrupted by the influence of military/corporate interests? BINGO! There it is.
6
Maybe NATO's push east will turn out to be the Western World's greatest mistake. We should have stopped at the borders of the old Soviet Union. History in 50 years will be like a documentary on TV today on how we survived the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis 50 years ago or it will be more like a documentary on how Europe's leaders dragged a too willing continent into WWI or how an Austrian front line soldier, named Schugelgruber before he changed his name, after the first world war, came to power in a belittled Germany and dragged a painfully unwilling continent into its second world war. War is not a game to be played with Paris, Moscow, London and New York all sitting at ground zero.
4
This move is one that will not result in checkmate. This is a provocative move that has not been thought through clearly. This is the type of strategy that could result in an all out war with Russia.
6
Russian disinformation plagues this commentary thread.
Countries have voluntarily joined NATO. They do not want Russian troops in their countries.
Countries have voluntarily joined NATO. They do not want Russian troops in their countries.
3
Have we gone mad?? Why are we making the weapon's manufacturers billionaires, while killing thousands of innocent people and animals? Why is the media not identifying the heads of these weapons manufacturers and the senators who are in their pockets?
7
"There are two things I know to be true. There's no difference between good flan and bad flan, and there is no war."
Why are we wagging the dog here? Need to keep some uniforms and their contractor friends employed? Maybe?
Why are we wagging the dog here? Need to keep some uniforms and their contractor friends employed? Maybe?
10
Some would say that it is more efficient to park this equipment in Europe than in the California desert. And there is only so much militarization you can do with a domestic police force.
It is pretty amazing how the USA still produces weapons for a WWII-like conflict. When foreign countries stop buying this stuff, you have to put it somewhere.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-end-of-the-tank-the-a...
It is pretty amazing how the USA still produces weapons for a WWII-like conflict. When foreign countries stop buying this stuff, you have to put it somewhere.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-end-of-the-tank-the-a...
2
Here how the largest TV station in Germany explains to their viewers how the Americans got involved in and have managed the Middle East. It`s with English subtitles. No wonder they are weary about US politics, especially so close to home. According to a recent poll in Germanx, the Germans would rather have closer ties with Russia and trust Putin more than Obama.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5P8ILFWlBzA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5P8ILFWlBzA
7
You are dead wrong on that one - Merkel & German people have had a wakeup call about who and what Putin is.
3
Your youtube video is a *satire*, not a news report. And you need to cite a source for your poll, if you intend to convince anyone of anything.
3
You probably have not been properly informed. Among the public in Germany Putin has so much support that they coined even a phrase for them, "Putin-Versteher", people who understand Putin.
However, just go into comment sections of German, French or Italian papers and read the comments on US, Ukraine, Putin and Russia. Papers like Spiegel, FAZ, SZ or even Europe`s biggest daily, BILD. Between 80 % and 90 % of the comments are rather pro Russian and anti American. That goes for British , French and Spanish papers as well.
However, just go into comment sections of German, French or Italian papers and read the comments on US, Ukraine, Putin and Russia. Papers like Spiegel, FAZ, SZ or even Europe`s biggest daily, BILD. Between 80 % and 90 % of the comments are rather pro Russian and anti American. That goes for British , French and Spanish papers as well.
3
Will Washington next assist its proxies and vassals in Europe on their attempts to militarily conquer the ethnic Russian populations on Russia's borders?
If that's in the cards, the Europeans should kiss their continent goodbye. They will have only themselves to blame for the devastation that follows.
If that's in the cards, the Europeans should kiss their continent goodbye. They will have only themselves to blame for the devastation that follows.
4
It would have been better not to deactivate the 170th Infantry Brigade in Baumholder, Germany in 2012. That combined arms team (tanks, artillery, soldiers) in Baumholder had some punch, but it got closed down just in time for Russia to take over part of Ukraine. It had been there for over 50 years. I was in that unit when Romania started to collapse and it looked as if the Berlin Wall might come down. It was a fixture of security in Europe. Those were dangerous times.
So are these. I doubt that anyone talking to President Obama has an inkling of understanding about Russia. If anyone did, then we would have to face photos of the bromance between Putin and Obama (think GW and Putin). Fighting Russians on their soil is not recommended; Russians regard Ukraine as theirs. The US Army today has gotten ready for cyberwar, and the Russians know that. Therefore the Russians are poised to fight the old school way because old school is going to bypass the technological advantages of Uncle Sam.
The President said that Russia is a regional power and that they are inconsequential: "they do not make anything." Well, they make tanks and nuclear weapons. Also, they have Snowden, who has given them a huge advantage.
The danger now is of an accident, a spark, a Sarajevo 1914 Part II.
So are these. I doubt that anyone talking to President Obama has an inkling of understanding about Russia. If anyone did, then we would have to face photos of the bromance between Putin and Obama (think GW and Putin). Fighting Russians on their soil is not recommended; Russians regard Ukraine as theirs. The US Army today has gotten ready for cyberwar, and the Russians know that. Therefore the Russians are poised to fight the old school way because old school is going to bypass the technological advantages of Uncle Sam.
The President said that Russia is a regional power and that they are inconsequential: "they do not make anything." Well, they make tanks and nuclear weapons. Also, they have Snowden, who has given them a huge advantage.
The danger now is of an accident, a spark, a Sarajevo 1914 Part II.
5
@Takenitez: "... the 170th Infantry Brigade in Baumholder, Germany in 2012. That combined arms team (tanks, artillery, soldiers) ..."
Did it have any air defense units?
Did it have any air defense units?
So,for once leave Europe alone to the europeans and mind your own country
1
Why? You think that the US is going to do what Napoleon and Hitler couldn't? No, the 170th will not conquer Russia. If they are sent into battle in Ukraine they will mostly destroy things and then die.
Maybe Russia will return the favor and sponsor some coups in our backyard.
Maybe Russia will return the favor and sponsor some coups in our backyard.
2
“I think some countries are simply taking advantage of people’s fears with regard to Russia.”
Why in the world would countries fear Russia? Didn't the Soviet Union extend the hand of friendship to all those countries in eastern Europe. The way some people go on here, you'd think ex KGB - colonels can't be trusted to always tell the truth. What kind of war-mongers wouldn't have implicit trust that grabbing Crimea had surely to be a one-off, especially if the Kremlin promises so "on its honor"?
Why in the world would countries fear Russia? Didn't the Soviet Union extend the hand of friendship to all those countries in eastern Europe. The way some people go on here, you'd think ex KGB - colonels can't be trusted to always tell the truth. What kind of war-mongers wouldn't have implicit trust that grabbing Crimea had surely to be a one-off, especially if the Kremlin promises so "on its honor"?
7
Just for the fun of it: Since you are so fond of terms like "war mongers", try to replace "Russia" with "US" and "Crimea" almost any country of your choice.
If you can't think of a country of your choice, check out Bloomberg for a complete list, titled "Undeclared wars and military deployments of the US".
See what I mean?
If you can't think of a country of your choice, check out Bloomberg for a complete list, titled "Undeclared wars and military deployments of the US".
See what I mean?
2
@Max
I do not know what you mean.
Which nation did the U.S. invade and annex territory from to increase the territorial size of the U.S.?
I do not know what you mean.
Which nation did the U.S. invade and annex territory from to increase the territorial size of the U.S.?
3
"See what I mean?"
Not really. Even aside form the consideration that two wrongs don't make a right, I can't quite grasp how "undeclared wars", however discreditable they are, equals the theft of some other country's territory.
" try to replace "Russia" with "US" and "Crimea" almost any country of your choice."
Okay, I choose Poland. Are you referring to the old days when the US and Nazi Germany divided Poland up between them?
- unless you're referring to the old days when the US and Nazi Germany divided Poland up between them.
Not really. Even aside form the consideration that two wrongs don't make a right, I can't quite grasp how "undeclared wars", however discreditable they are, equals the theft of some other country's territory.
" try to replace "Russia" with "US" and "Crimea" almost any country of your choice."
Okay, I choose Poland. Are you referring to the old days when the US and Nazi Germany divided Poland up between them?
- unless you're referring to the old days when the US and Nazi Germany divided Poland up between them.
3
Russia has already responded. According to Putin's earlier statements Russia was moving its military hardware to its borders of the most vulnerable eastern European nations. In Estonia they even kidnapped an Estonian man from and in Estonia. Putin has already threatened to move nuclear weapons along its Eastern European borders, as well.
Further, Russia has flown its military jets adjacent to our east and west US coasts to harass us here, without using transponders, contrary to international rules. Again, Russia, without transponders, has harassed military and non-military jets flying in European international air space. And either Russia, or its Ukrainian surrogates, shot down in cold blood, the civilian plane with an imported Russian missile system, Russians themselves brought into Ukraine, killing everyone aboard, yet to this day, denying same.
Putin started all of this in Georgia, and Crimea in Ukraine. He will not stop unless his moves are countered. We may not have been told all that we may have ascertained that Putin has already done. Based upon Obama's prior actions, it is doubtful that all of our actions are being done solely without cause.
Further, Russia has flown its military jets adjacent to our east and west US coasts to harass us here, without using transponders, contrary to international rules. Again, Russia, without transponders, has harassed military and non-military jets flying in European international air space. And either Russia, or its Ukrainian surrogates, shot down in cold blood, the civilian plane with an imported Russian missile system, Russians themselves brought into Ukraine, killing everyone aboard, yet to this day, denying same.
Putin started all of this in Georgia, and Crimea in Ukraine. He will not stop unless his moves are countered. We may not have been told all that we may have ascertained that Putin has already done. Based upon Obama's prior actions, it is doubtful that all of our actions are being done solely without cause.
6
All we are doing is making a alliance with Russia and China united against us Americans it is going to get ugly when that happens.
1
@Jesse
Why would China risk its vital relations with the U.S. and EU for Russia's self-inflicted problems in Europe?
China strikes me as far more pragmatic than you seem to feel.
Why would China risk its vital relations with the U.S. and EU for Russia's self-inflicted problems in Europe?
China strikes me as far more pragmatic than you seem to feel.
1
It's a good decision but, but (!), a parallel approach is absolutely necessary. Europe and North America have to put in place a (some kind of) 'Marshall Plan' for Eastern Europe. Otherwise the consequences can be quite dramatic for the whole Europe. Military, the real problems will happen along borders; for military be important it has to supplement a genuine will from populations.
This move should make it Chrystal clear that we are an aggressor nation A government driven by the military industrial complex and it's all about profit. When our founding fathers warned to never allow industry and Government to align for then Government would no longer represent the people it was the most important warning they gave. Why is it we are always involved war? Did the Iraqis ask us to invade their country overthrow their dictator and instill democracy? We keep sending our young men off to wars to die and be maimed wars we shouldn't even be involved in, Why? (Profit) The plan is simple create a false flag operation to gain support of the people to go to war and that's what we have been doing and constantly at war when we should be securing this country and sealing our borders against illegal drugs, Immigrants, gangs, etc.. We enflame a region by invading and instilling our democratic values on them. So now the Muslims are attempting to instill their values on America with Sharia law and customs. All the while the military industrial complex is reaping a harvest at Americas expense and the national debt is soaring past 18 trillion dollars a debt that cant possibly be repaid. We are watching the downfall of America because we didn't heed the warnings of the framers.
5
Russia has not only intervend in Ukraine, but also in Belarus, Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. While blaming the West, Putin has been engaged in an openly revanchist policy. See the CNN article of April 1914:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/12/opinion/ukraine-putin-niblett/index.html
It must be remembered that Poland and the Baltic states ASKED to join NATO. The wanted nothing more than self-determination, free of domination by the Russian Bear. We agreed, and made a commitment to them.
All the examples cited in this forum of American "meddling" in the Russian sphere of influence are small-bore, compared to the provocations of Putin and his corrupt cronies, both at home and in the near abroad.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/12/opinion/ukraine-putin-niblett/index.html
It must be remembered that Poland and the Baltic states ASKED to join NATO. The wanted nothing more than self-determination, free of domination by the Russian Bear. We agreed, and made a commitment to them.
All the examples cited in this forum of American "meddling" in the Russian sphere of influence are small-bore, compared to the provocations of Putin and his corrupt cronies, both at home and in the near abroad.
9
It must be remembered that Russia had done nothing while Poland and the Baltic States joined NATO!
It must be remembered that Russia decided to move all millitary out of east Germany.
At this Point sensitive actions with much communication should have been nessecary. But what NATO did since the 90´s was comlete opposite.
Its normal that some Eastern-Europe Countries ask for NATO Partnership. But the way this was implemented is the completly wrong way. And Russia said it long before. Watch your Step. Not the same way with Ukraine. Not later than at this point the actions has geting more sensitive.
Then a Regime Change with Neo-Nazi Groups involved had been supported/pleased. What do you all think has to happen then?
For me, the support of the western-ukraine is not better than the support of the eastern-ukraine. And getting Crimea is a break of international law like starting a war without an un-mandate. But with NO dead people.
And for all those who think i like Russia more than the US.
1. Thats not true
2. Thats not the Point
Every "normal" German like, i think i am one of, is thankful for what the Allied and Soviets done for our Country and the World.
My hint to the Gov: Dont stop talking, try to understand the oppsite.
It must be remembered that Russia decided to move all millitary out of east Germany.
At this Point sensitive actions with much communication should have been nessecary. But what NATO did since the 90´s was comlete opposite.
Its normal that some Eastern-Europe Countries ask for NATO Partnership. But the way this was implemented is the completly wrong way. And Russia said it long before. Watch your Step. Not the same way with Ukraine. Not later than at this point the actions has geting more sensitive.
Then a Regime Change with Neo-Nazi Groups involved had been supported/pleased. What do you all think has to happen then?
For me, the support of the western-ukraine is not better than the support of the eastern-ukraine. And getting Crimea is a break of international law like starting a war without an un-mandate. But with NO dead people.
And for all those who think i like Russia more than the US.
1. Thats not true
2. Thats not the Point
Every "normal" German like, i think i am one of, is thankful for what the Allied and Soviets done for our Country and the World.
My hint to the Gov: Dont stop talking, try to understand the oppsite.
1
Moving in troops is sword-waving. America has a military almost as large as ALL THE REST ON EARTH COMBINED while one in 5 American children will go to school hungry and have little chance of a higher education. It's past time for America to refuse to participate in ALL civil and/or religious conflicts. Let the locals settle it and let's begin caring for the Americans who are footing the 6 TRILLION TAXPAYER dollar bill from our last 2 decade-long wars.
8
@briteleaf: "Moving in troops is sword-waving."
Did you read the article? No troops will be "Moving in":
"The current proposal falls short of permanently assigning United States troops to the Baltics — something that senior officials of those countries recently requested in a letter to NATO."
Did you read the article? No troops will be "Moving in":
"The current proposal falls short of permanently assigning United States troops to the Baltics — something that senior officials of those countries recently requested in a letter to NATO."
2
Absolutely crazy. How much does this cost the American people. Obama must be consulting with Cheney and Bush, next we will have to go in because of weapons of mass destruction. All we need to do is put sanctions on Russia through all the NATO and EU countries and Putin will be driven out by his own people not by some threat of military action. The U.S. policy is the dumbest since the invasion of Iraq and the destabilization of the entire Middle East. Our country is becoming a third world country. Cops on the loose killing innocent people, kids being allowed to carry guns to school in Texas, crooked politicians, banks, Wall Street and financial institutions screwing people. Wake up America.
5
You may not have noticed it, but since 1963 US administrations have been consistently supportive of the oil industry's agenda. Bipartisan militarism around the world.
1
Our now fully in-control military / industrial complex, a behemoth unequaled in the history of the planet, knows no fear, and has no concern whatsoever that any alliance (China / Russia), will present any sustainable problem, as it expands and consolidates it's sphere of influence.
Democracy died, ignominiously, consumed with unbridled rapaciousness.
"January 17, 1961, Dwight D. Eisenhower ended his presidential term by warning the nation about the increasing power of the military-industrial complex.
His remarks, issued during a televised farewell address to the American people, were particularly significant since Ike had famously served the nation as military commander of the Allied forces during WWII. Eisenhower urged his successors to strike a balance between a strong national defense and diplomacy in dealing with the Soviet Union. He did not suggest arms reduction and in fact acknowledged that the bomb was an effective deterrent to nuclear war. However, cognizant that America’s peacetime defense policy had changed drastically since his military career, Eisenhower expressed concerns about the growing influence of what he termed the military-industrial complex."
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/eisenhower-warns-of-the-milit...
Democracy died, ignominiously, consumed with unbridled rapaciousness.
"January 17, 1961, Dwight D. Eisenhower ended his presidential term by warning the nation about the increasing power of the military-industrial complex.
His remarks, issued during a televised farewell address to the American people, were particularly significant since Ike had famously served the nation as military commander of the Allied forces during WWII. Eisenhower urged his successors to strike a balance between a strong national defense and diplomacy in dealing with the Soviet Union. He did not suggest arms reduction and in fact acknowledged that the bomb was an effective deterrent to nuclear war. However, cognizant that America’s peacetime defense policy had changed drastically since his military career, Eisenhower expressed concerns about the growing influence of what he termed the military-industrial complex."
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/eisenhower-warns-of-the-milit...
5
Putin is a tragic repeat of Kaiser Wilhelm II. The Kaiser outsmarted himself by making Germany so powerful that he created an alliance of powerful enemies which surrounded him. Even his two cousins, George and Nicolas, were against him. So here we are, 100 years after the start of World War I, on the verge of another global catastrophe created by another psycho dummy.
3
No, while American corporatists lust after that large pool of natural gas and oil in Central Asia to the north of Afghanistan, Russia is building pipelines to provide the Asian continent with its products. If the US and its puppets in Kiev renew the war in Donbass expect Europe to suddenly be without Russian natural gas. That's what the US wants, a market for all that excess fracked natural gas.
Understanding geography, the US will fail in any land war against Russia. The US may be able to destroy Russia, but Russia will be able to destroy the US.
Now try to ratchet back and remember why we have created a junta of oligarchs and fascists in Ukraine and whether the next world war is worth it.
Understanding geography, the US will fail in any land war against Russia. The US may be able to destroy Russia, but Russia will be able to destroy the US.
Now try to ratchet back and remember why we have created a junta of oligarchs and fascists in Ukraine and whether the next world war is worth it.
3
Now I know why NATO wants itys members to increase their contribution to 2% of their GDP, so USA can supply more weapons, rockets, tanks and let's not forget the outdated F 35 which will be available 2-3 years from now. It all contributes to the US arms industries to increase their sales and improve US economy.
It's obvious that US aggression in the world has ONLY ONE purpose and that is to support their own economy while murdering their way through Europe and Asia. This taxpayers money could be better used to fight poverty in America and fight air pollution. American taxpayers would be grateful for that but NOT the rich and neocons in Washington.
It's obvious that US aggression in the world has ONLY ONE purpose and that is to support their own economy while murdering their way through Europe and Asia. This taxpayers money could be better used to fight poverty in America and fight air pollution. American taxpayers would be grateful for that but NOT the rich and neocons in Washington.
7
There is more than a touch of madness in this story. "Heavy equipment?" No one has even tried to define it. A tank? A tank without a driver and support mechanics is useless.
And as many other comments have indicated: is this a way of saying we would go to war with Russia with enough provocation?
The only credible part of this story is an attempt to jaybone President Putin. He is likely to use it to beat us over the head metaphorically for the benefit of his many true believers in Russia.
Yes the USA is in a series of uncomfortable boxes of its own making among the NATO countries. But this unimaginative bit of "diplomacy by other means" is the reward for the Pentagon's ability to reach for a cudgel at every opportunity.
When a button can be pushed and destroy much or all of the world by both sides in this play, when the likelihood is that there are many more weapons already in place throughout Europe than we have been told, this manufactured tempest on both sides is ludicrous.
And as many other comments have indicated: is this a way of saying we would go to war with Russia with enough provocation?
The only credible part of this story is an attempt to jaybone President Putin. He is likely to use it to beat us over the head metaphorically for the benefit of his many true believers in Russia.
Yes the USA is in a series of uncomfortable boxes of its own making among the NATO countries. But this unimaginative bit of "diplomacy by other means" is the reward for the Pentagon's ability to reach for a cudgel at every opportunity.
When a button can be pushed and destroy much or all of the world by both sides in this play, when the likelihood is that there are many more weapons already in place throughout Europe than we have been told, this manufactured tempest on both sides is ludicrous.
2
'"Heavy equipment?" No one has even tried to define it.'
The article explicitly lists the types of heavy weaponry: "some 250 M1-A2 tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, and armored howitzers"
'A tank? A tank without a driver and support mechanics is useless.'
Did you read the article? The equipment is being prepositioned, because doing so "saves the United States Army time, money and resources, and avoids having to ship the equipment back and forth to the United States each time an Army unit travels to Europe to train."
The article explicitly lists the types of heavy weaponry: "some 250 M1-A2 tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, and armored howitzers"
'A tank? A tank without a driver and support mechanics is useless.'
Did you read the article? The equipment is being prepositioned, because doing so "saves the United States Army time, money and resources, and avoids having to ship the equipment back and forth to the United States each time an Army unit travels to Europe to train."
2
For those who have forgotten the lessons of history -
The biggest, baddest armies the world has ever known took on the Russians in their own backyard and all were defeated. Nazis once, Napoleon once, Ottomans three times for two defeats.
Messing around on Russia's borders can only end badly.
The biggest, baddest armies the world has ever known took on the Russians in their own backyard and all were defeated. Nazis once, Napoleon once, Ottomans three times for two defeats.
Messing around on Russia's borders can only end badly.
7
Baltic, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania are NOT Russian backyard. We live here, we are not Russians. And would really much rather not be, if possible.
6
@sav: "Messing around on Russia's borders can only end badly."
The historical French and German invasions were in no way "Messing around on Russia's borders". Please clarify your point.
The historical French and German invasions were in no way "Messing around on Russia's borders". Please clarify your point.
1
The First World War didn't turn out so well for Imperial Russia. Ask the Czar.
1
This country was formed by violence and we will end by violence. This nation, with its policy of never-ending war will someday meet its match.
8
If only Obama had a strong foreign policy, maybe none of this would be needed.
2
Define "strong foreign policy".
1
It would be nice to think that the Obama Administration is finally getting around to giving Poland and the Baltic States the support they need against Russia's increasingly aggressive moves in the region, but, it is equally likely that this is once again a case of domestic politics trumping foreign policy. Did anyone notice that this "proposal" surfaced at the exact time Jeb Bush was visiting Poland and Estonia? In domestic political terms, the timing is perfect for spiking any headlines Bush might have gotten for calling for more military support for our Eastern NATO allies. Too bad that Bush didn't take in Ukraine on this visit. If he had, we might be hearing about new White House "proposals" to increase military aid to that beleaguered country. I remain very, very skeptical of the White House on this one.
20
What Russian aggression are you talking about- I did not read anywhere that the Russian military interviened in the Ukraine, on the contrary it was a coup led by the U.S. that overthrew a democratically elected government in that country- now run by fascists. If you like playing with fire, you're going to get your hands burned- Since U.S troops on the ground haven't won a war since the end of the Second World War. (Oh, I forgot Grenada !!!!)
2
The only thing aggressive that Russia has done against Poland is to stop buying their apples as a response to their sanctions against Russia. That has resulted in Polish farmers asking for reparations from the EU.
2
Deterrence or justification? A brigade's worth of equipment would deter little. It could however be used by Russia as a justification for meddling in former satellite state's affairs. NATO is supposed to be a mutual defense organization not a means for European influence expansion at the expense of Russia. This makes about as much sense as the anti-missile defense system supposedly to defend Europe from Iranian missiles. Why are we so insistent on creating a Cuban Missile crisis in reverse?
5
John Warnock:
You really think that Putin cannot manufacture an excuse for meddling in his neighbors' affairs when he wants one?
Who exactly is threatening Russia and with what?
The real crime would be for NATO to leave a vacuum that would tempt Putin to engage in more adventurism.
You really think that Putin cannot manufacture an excuse for meddling in his neighbors' affairs when he wants one?
Who exactly is threatening Russia and with what?
The real crime would be for NATO to leave a vacuum that would tempt Putin to engage in more adventurism.
3
Too little too late.
This was essentially on the table before Obama and Hillary pulled that idiotic ReSet Button stunt. They withdrew the prior Administrstion's plan to militarize parts of Eastern Europe. And here's the stupid part - without extracting any concessions from Putin.
I wonder how Putin would have behaved these past few years if Mrs. Clinton had negotiated from a position of power.
And she wants to be our President?
This was essentially on the table before Obama and Hillary pulled that idiotic ReSet Button stunt. They withdrew the prior Administrstion's plan to militarize parts of Eastern Europe. And here's the stupid part - without extracting any concessions from Putin.
I wonder how Putin would have behaved these past few years if Mrs. Clinton had negotiated from a position of power.
And she wants to be our President?
1
Hopefully this is only a tentative suggestion but it looks very terrifying.
1. There was the European security order which was written down in the Helsinki Final Act of 1975.
2. On Feb 2 2009, former secretary of State, James Baker, promised very clearly in St. Catherine's Hall at the Kremlin: There would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east, provided the Soviets agreed to the NATO membership of a unified Germany.
Despite these promises, there was a relentless NATO expansion into Eastern Europe. And now, a new step will be taken: US forces could be stationed near the borders of Russia!
For the US, Ukraine seems to be very important. It is the new frontline of confrontation with Russia. It could be the Sarajevo of the third world war. In this endangered climate, Europe has only to execute the orders from Washington, even if Europe could be again the battlefield.
Putin is certainly not above criticism. But his new foreign policy has been used as an 'excuse' for the United States to seize Ukraine. Now, the sovereignty of Russia is at stake. Will the US only be satisfied with Russia as a vassal state?
There is only one way to get out of this nightmare: to debate with the other side, even if this other side is represented by Putin.
1. There was the European security order which was written down in the Helsinki Final Act of 1975.
2. On Feb 2 2009, former secretary of State, James Baker, promised very clearly in St. Catherine's Hall at the Kremlin: There would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east, provided the Soviets agreed to the NATO membership of a unified Germany.
Despite these promises, there was a relentless NATO expansion into Eastern Europe. And now, a new step will be taken: US forces could be stationed near the borders of Russia!
For the US, Ukraine seems to be very important. It is the new frontline of confrontation with Russia. It could be the Sarajevo of the third world war. In this endangered climate, Europe has only to execute the orders from Washington, even if Europe could be again the battlefield.
Putin is certainly not above criticism. But his new foreign policy has been used as an 'excuse' for the United States to seize Ukraine. Now, the sovereignty of Russia is at stake. Will the US only be satisfied with Russia as a vassal state?
There is only one way to get out of this nightmare: to debate with the other side, even if this other side is represented by Putin.
4
There was no promise to not expand NATO. Baker floated the idea but Gorbachev opted for a deal regarding West German assistance instead.https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-11/broken-pro...
3
The US an,d to a lesser extent, Britain are certainly largely responsible for the Russian fear of encirclement by 'the West', beginning with 1917. However, we can't redo history, and at this point Putin is a threat to the nations of Eastern Europe, and , ultimately, Western Europe. Considering the example of Hitler, we can expect that if we let one invasion stand, there will be others. Therefor, I can only approve of sending weapons and a limited number of troops to Eastern Europe. It's a good signal. It doesn't 'rock the boat'. Putin already did that. On the contrary, the current move by the US may restore balance.
4
After some years of off-loading it on to the local police departments (and the resulting fiascoes) I suppose you people need a new dumping ground. Good luck with this latest endeavor.
2
I'm from Italy. We in Italy don't understand why U.S. is so intrusive in European affairs. The defence of European territory is a problem of E.U.
9
Exactly correct, sir. Many of us here wonder the same thing.
1
Dario:
I am from England, and from the bottom of my heart I want to thank the United States for meddling in European affairs.
If it had not been for the United States, I would have grown up in a Nazi or communist country.
I am from England, and from the bottom of my heart I want to thank the United States for meddling in European affairs.
If it had not been for the United States, I would have grown up in a Nazi or communist country.
5
Unfortunately, these sorts of moves are necessary because Putin has made it clear that he is prepared to use military force as part of his foreign policy. We would be foolish not to do the same.
4
jpduffy, as a veteran of our Vietnam era adventures I want to be the first to congratulate you and your sons on your future heroic deaths on the Russian steppes. Maybe we'll remember you when we unfurl that big American flag at NFL games, or maybe we'll insert more patriotic songs between innings in baseball games. In any case, you get to die for the benefit of oil corporations and the rest of us get to wipe a tear from our eyes when the stealth bombers fly over pregame festivities.
You were going to volunteer to die in a war against Russia, right?
You were going to volunteer to die in a war against Russia, right?
1
Before the arms bonanza begins, I'd like to know the real story.
From snippets here and there, I have gathered the following:
1.Russia has a long history of military bases in Crimea, which I presume pre-dated the breakup of the USSR and then continued after in a series of agreements with Ukraine that permitted the bases to both stay and likely grow significantly while Russia provided fossil fuels to Ukraine through a very extensive network of pipelines from Russia to Ukraine, apparently at low rates.
2. In what SNL comedians might call a funny co-inkydinky, Angela Merkel & the US urged Ukraine to join the EU just as American interests nearly obtained major energy deals in the region just on the eve of a "sudden" discovery of "unknown" corruption in Ukraine which somehow could not await a scheduled election in 12 months but had to be remedied with an overthrow of the Russian-aligned leader, shortly legitimized with a rush election that many lacked confidence in.
3. Russia then mobilized and benefited from pro-Russian interests in Ukraine forcefully annex Crimea and nearby region it says supports Russia. Some citizens apparently do. Russia then secured its bases and military installations, followed quickly by outser from the G8 and heavy sanctions.
I'm not convinced that Russia has acted any differently than the US would have. There is no Hitler-like sweep here, although we would be naive not to watch the Russians closely. Still, why start up Cold War 2?
From snippets here and there, I have gathered the following:
1.Russia has a long history of military bases in Crimea, which I presume pre-dated the breakup of the USSR and then continued after in a series of agreements with Ukraine that permitted the bases to both stay and likely grow significantly while Russia provided fossil fuels to Ukraine through a very extensive network of pipelines from Russia to Ukraine, apparently at low rates.
2. In what SNL comedians might call a funny co-inkydinky, Angela Merkel & the US urged Ukraine to join the EU just as American interests nearly obtained major energy deals in the region just on the eve of a "sudden" discovery of "unknown" corruption in Ukraine which somehow could not await a scheduled election in 12 months but had to be remedied with an overthrow of the Russian-aligned leader, shortly legitimized with a rush election that many lacked confidence in.
3. Russia then mobilized and benefited from pro-Russian interests in Ukraine forcefully annex Crimea and nearby region it says supports Russia. Some citizens apparently do. Russia then secured its bases and military installations, followed quickly by outser from the G8 and heavy sanctions.
I'm not convinced that Russia has acted any differently than the US would have. There is no Hitler-like sweep here, although we would be naive not to watch the Russians closely. Still, why start up Cold War 2?
8
Why do we do this if these countries won't develop their own military to defend their own people? Other than having paved roads, how is this ultimately different than Iraq and its battle with ISIS? How would we feel if Russia decided to re-open its missile bases in Cuba? We seem to constantly be on the prowl to pick fights with people that are not threatening us at all. This doesn't mean you turn your back on a dangerous leader but, really, Putin's actions in the Crimea and Ukraine were in reaction to America's intrusion into his sphere and the attempt to get these areas into the European Union and NATO in direct violation of the agreements that were put in place when Gorbachev dissolved the old Soviet Empire. It seems that diplomacy has been relegated to the dust bin in favor of military intimidation as policy. As seems to be the case in so many areas of the world in which the U.S. has dealings currently, the weapons manufacturers are doing very well. There is an old saying, 'He who lives by the sword dies by the sword'. With all the communication technology available today it is disheartening that too often the first instrument of dialogue today is the tank.
4
Seems to me that trusting local security contractors, instead of U.S, troops, to guard this equipment would be a mistake. Seems like capturing this equipment would be easy and risk-free for Russian special forces troops. I also remember the last time we relied on others for a critical task . . . . Tora Bora.
3
We can always find money for so-called defense, but no longer, it seems, for much of anything else. Funny, that.
6
Dmitri:
Defense spending was cut by 10% between 2012 and 2013 at a time we were running a massive budget deficit. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States
Defense spending was cut by 10% between 2012 and 2013 at a time we were running a massive budget deficit. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States
2
This is Good they will Protect the Farmers so Russia will not be able to take Good Farm land. We need to move out Putin out of the land he took last year from the Farmers. This is about liberty that has been taken away and Farmers have been on this land for 600 years and we can not trust Putin he is not trust worthy.
2
The Arms guys are estatic! They have worked for years to get this market. The billions they will make!!! Lobby does work. I hope that the governments involved are paying the costs , or is it going to be the American taxpayer, again?
5
Tricky business. After suffering some 40 million casualities from two land invasions in the 20th century, one can certainly understand Russia's desire for a buffer zone and its skittishness about haing NATO on its doorstep. Ukraine is united technically but the east and west are quote distinct geographically, ethnically, demographically and politically. Hope we can find a solution that doesn't involve lasy century's military muscle-flexing, intimidation and peacocking.
6
Russia desires a buffer zone?
To protect it from what? Are you seriously claiming that there are foreign powers that are planning to invade Russia?
As the Romans used to say, "whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad."
To protect it from what? Are you seriously claiming that there are foreign powers that are planning to invade Russia?
As the Romans used to say, "whom the Gods would destroy, they first make mad."
3
This is a brilliant move. Counter the bear with it's own strategy
3
I'd be all for this if it involved the re-painting and shipping of heavy equipment already in the middle-east to the Baltic states. I fear, however, that American manufacturers will insist on new, state of the art equipment and the employment of several thousand American workers to produce the new stuff.
1
Moscow should understand that redrawing of borders works both ways. If Russia wants to redraw borders and makes up meaningless justifications for military invasion, some day its own borders may be redrawn in the same way. There enough countries who will be willing to take back some historical lands from Russia - China, Japan, Mongolia, Georgia, Chechens, Tatars, Kazakhstan, Ukraine (Kyban), Belarus, Baltic states, Germany, Finland. All these countries have equally strong claim to lands now part of Russian Federation. Welcome to Karma world.
5
The so called Cuba crisis was triggered by the US refusal to dismantle hundreds of missiles along the Russian border with Turkey, placed during the 50's. The USA is still surrounding the Russians with bases and (nuclear) missiles. Imagine the turmoil if the Russians would get Mexico to allow just one Russian misslie on the southern border of the USA... ! The US agenda is global domination. Not providing security.If the latter were the case the USA would understand that expansion of Nato is lowering Europe's security.
6
What about aircraft? This idea that sending in a wandering group
of a third of a division to watch the NATO border needs air cover
to be credible. If Russian units cross the NATO border, Putin needs
to understand that he has declared war on France, Britain, Germany,
Italy, Spain, and the United States. He will not dare to do it if he sees
real determination from NATO. In particular, If Ukraine falls, the Russians
could breeze past Lviv and go on to Warsaw. Better to avoid this ever
happening than to try and push back once it has happened.
of a third of a division to watch the NATO border needs air cover
to be credible. If Russian units cross the NATO border, Putin needs
to understand that he has declared war on France, Britain, Germany,
Italy, Spain, and the United States. He will not dare to do it if he sees
real determination from NATO. In particular, If Ukraine falls, the Russians
could breeze past Lviv and go on to Warsaw. Better to avoid this ever
happening than to try and push back once it has happened.
1
At the moment it looks like Washington is rattling the saber and not Moskow.
if shove comes to push: fortunately there is alway the Atlantic and the stupid
Europeans will gladly bear the brunt of a third WW. Only this time it is not the
good old fieldartillery but nuclear weaponry.And both sides have them.
if shove comes to push: fortunately there is alway the Atlantic and the stupid
Europeans will gladly bear the brunt of a third WW. Only this time it is not the
good old fieldartillery but nuclear weaponry.And both sides have them.
2
If further confirmatory evidence was needed, this article makes clear the US-NATO strategy of, not Kennan-type containment, but outright, dangerous confrontation with Russia, a geopolitical power move fraught with potential cataclysmic effects. Why this madness, unjustified to begin with? Obama has become far more menacing to world peace than his predecessors--and if not he personally, than in his supine willingness to allow the Pentagon and the bipartisan sentiment in Congress to run roughshod over the global system.
Prepositioning by definition is a first step toward the actuality of conflict. It is hardly defensive--as claimed by policy makers. Consider America's global military posture, vis-a-vis China, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the heavy placement of military "assets" in the region, as well as this encroachment on Russia, and the recipe for war is undeniable. The US is spiraling downward into a vortex of messianic, hubristic currents of self-aggrandizement, a nation which exhibits a death-wish (extended to all others, bringing down everyone with us) because of the hollowness of material strivings, the inurement to violence, the satiety of consumption--as many others of the world's population live at or below subsistence.
Prepositioning by definition is a first step toward the actuality of conflict. It is hardly defensive--as claimed by policy makers. Consider America's global military posture, vis-a-vis China, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the heavy placement of military "assets" in the region, as well as this encroachment on Russia, and the recipe for war is undeniable. The US is spiraling downward into a vortex of messianic, hubristic currents of self-aggrandizement, a nation which exhibits a death-wish (extended to all others, bringing down everyone with us) because of the hollowness of material strivings, the inurement to violence, the satiety of consumption--as many others of the world's population live at or below subsistence.
3
On the contrary, by enhancing the NATO guarantee to the Baltics, the U.S. is pursuing a policy of containment. By the logic that pre-positioning equipment can't be defensive, the POMCUS site in Germany were necessarily offensive, which is risible on the face of it.
2
More than a little ironic after President Obama canceled the missile defense shield and mocked Romney for calling Russia our geopolitical foe.
2
Actually, Romney called the Soviet Union our geopolitical foe - that was the error - the Soviet Union had been dissolved during the first Bush administration. And the dream of a missile defense shield was not technologically delivering as promised.
3
Hope is definitely the option they are playing. This administration hasn't been right about Ukraine, Georgia, Iraq, Afghanistan, ISIS, Libya......the list of failures continues to mount and take its toll on our reputation and resources. Let's hope that Putin doesn't call our bluff--and is a bluff and do something really crazy like invade the Baltics. Deterrence is the fine art of provocation. Let's hope we understand what we are doing.
2
"Deterrence is the fine art of provocation". Please explain.
1
We cannot appease Putin. He will take back the Baltic countries if we let him, and then Russia will be even more powerful. He might even move against the Eastern European NATO countries and that would bring us to the brink of war. US assets stationed in Eastern Europe provide a powerful deterrent to Russian aggression and to a tyrant who only understands the power of military might. In the long run Russia is only getting weaker. We need to play the long game, keep the Russian tiger contained, and wait for the Russian empire to crumble from within as its population and economy slowly collapse.
2
This is what you get when the profitability of the military contracting sector is the main driver of foreign policy.
5
I live in Europe (UK) and this would escalate the situation. Ukraine is not in NATO. The Balkans are not under threat. Russia would rightly view this as an act of aggression. At the moment Russians travel freely around Europe and those I've spoken to have felt that there has been a stealthy campaign within NATO - led by the U.S. - to expand the military dominance of the alliance to Russia's borders. The colour coded revolutions in former Soviet satellite states have all had assistance from Europe and the U.S. -Russia has consolidated it's borders and ceased the strategically vital asset of Crimea. They had widespread local backing to take Crimea. Fostering conflict between two formerly friendly states is an act of aggression which has already been committed - and NATO already has blood on its hands. The U.S. clearly has an agenda here. They would not bother with Europe if there was nothing in it for them. Maintaining the military economy is probably part of it. I wish the U.S. would find other ways to make money.
7
This strategy is like putting a fire hose at your local DQ when your house is on fire. If the U.S. is serious, then put the heavy weapons in Eastern Ukraine. Force is the only thing the Russians understand. Grand standing by putting heavy weapons in Eastern Europe makes for great headlines, but is absolutely meaningless to what is happening in Ukraine. That is a really lame dumb do nothing strategy.
Let's be clear, it was Obama himself who put an end to the proposed ballistic missile defense in Europe to deter the Russians...so let's not pretend that once again that Obama isn't late to the party...
3
Too much anchoring to news releases and media hype is extremely dangerous. Anchoring is whatever we have most recently thought about strongly influences what we perceive next, even when the next thing is entirely unrelated. The news reporting on Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and the spread of radical elements globally have played not only on US, but the world’s emotions, so that now the entire world has moved forward on the dooms-day-clock.
One of the most significant contributions is cognitive theory is the increased understanding of how our brains are like cars: they go incredibly fast, but they come with blind spots. We often know that people have biases. If we think about it, we also realize that we also use bias in our decisions, yet we still do not compensate sufficiently for our biases. The so-called bias blind spot arises when people report that thinking biases are more prevalent in others than in themselves. It is what Democrats or Republicans say about each other. It is what Americans say about Russia and the other way around.
One of the critical roles of the leaders of countries and their media should be to help people begin to see from the perspective of others anchored differently. However, the reality is that human beings are preyed on and played on to feel the emotional pain of losing something far more than they feel the pleasure of gaining the very same thing.
One of the most significant contributions is cognitive theory is the increased understanding of how our brains are like cars: they go incredibly fast, but they come with blind spots. We often know that people have biases. If we think about it, we also realize that we also use bias in our decisions, yet we still do not compensate sufficiently for our biases. The so-called bias blind spot arises when people report that thinking biases are more prevalent in others than in themselves. It is what Democrats or Republicans say about each other. It is what Americans say about Russia and the other way around.
One of the critical roles of the leaders of countries and their media should be to help people begin to see from the perspective of others anchored differently. However, the reality is that human beings are preyed on and played on to feel the emotional pain of losing something far more than they feel the pleasure of gaining the very same thing.
2
Great, so now we want to militarize the rest of the world, after seeing how well it works at home. To those out there licking their chops over the prospect of getting rich from all this, may I ask, can you please find some other way of getting rich that does not put the whole world at risk?
4
Amazing, such an adults and still are believing in fairytales! Now the discussion of Russia looks as if the whole world forgot about that for subversive struggle against the USSR in Afghanistan, the CIA created al-Qaeda, the result is well known, about the "tube with chemical weapons" from Iraq. Who under the contrived pretext bombed Yugoslavia with annexation Kosovo. Blatantly lied to the whole world about Saakashvili's attack 2008 on South Ossetia, trying to blame Russia. About Libya. About the creation the same CIA fighters in Syria, resulting in the world got ISIS. Now in Ukraine there are similar events with the creation of the Pro-fascist nationalist combat units. And what does mean the term "Russian aggression"? May be the Crimea? But there was held a referendum in which local residents with majority voted to secede from Ukraine and join Russia The reason for this was an armed coup and the revival of Nazism in Ukraine, what as said Victoria Nuland cost US 5 billion dollars. Residents of Crimea had feared for their lives that was fully confirmed by subsequent events in the South-East of Ukraine.
All this can only be regarded as very unfair competition USA against Russia with the use of all low-lying mechanisms, such as misinformation, provocation, and much more. Lies just off the charts! Currently the world have to afraid only US politicians who because of their immense greed is ready to destroy half of the world, but far from the borders of USA. Follow the money...
All this can only be regarded as very unfair competition USA against Russia with the use of all low-lying mechanisms, such as misinformation, provocation, and much more. Lies just off the charts! Currently the world have to afraid only US politicians who because of their immense greed is ready to destroy half of the world, but far from the borders of USA. Follow the money...
4
Your text on Ukraine simply raises the old fictions. There was no coup in Ukraine and the $5 billion was money spent over 22 years. Likewise, the absence of Svoboda from the government and its near-absence from the Rada make a mockery of the Nazism argument. This latter is particularly hypocritical from a country whose best friends in Europe are parties like Jobbik and the Front National. A country that's an authoritarian kleptocracy with nothing to offer but fossil fuels, weapons and the occasional space rocket.
2
War is the continuation of doing busines with other means.
1
It sounds like we are returning to the cold war. Is that what Putin really wants.
I would put it quite differently - Is that what our military / industrial complex wants, and the answer is - Of Course.
2
So it is primarily American troops again doing the heavy lifting - what else is new. The Europeans, as usual, are chickening out. Read the blogs from Dutch papers and see the nasty comments directed at the US and strong pro-Putin comments - a lot of brown-nosing there with zero empathy towards the Baltics.
1
Does he really think that Putin will be impressed? Russia took over Crimea in days and put 70 thousand troupes on the Ukraine boarder. The European countries have told him not to send weapons. When the heads of Germany and France went to the Ukraine to work on a answer to the hostilities, not only was Obama not asked to go, but the white house didn't even know they went there until until it was reported in the news. Putin has become more bold in his ignoring any proclamation we make. War planes are flying right up to the 50 mile boarder and buzzing NATO ships. Russia has started building a nuclear facility in Iran and promises them even more. Putin has ships in Cuban ports for the first time since before Bush. Putin can look to ISIS for a lesson on Obama's resolve. After months of relentless bombing, they continue to grow in number, power, and area controlled. Now they have spread to Yemen, Libya, and Afghanistan. Obama's answer to this is to send 450 more advisers. This action is futile and Putin's reply will only be a smile as he continues to proceed at his own pace. We don't have to get into these saber rattling actions with Russia.. We can show what we are made of in other areas such as our confrontation of ISIS. That would be a lot more effective than sending a bunch of weapons to Europe.
Looks like a provocation to me. What it could lead to? Increased chances of serious militarized conflict, if not out-right war. People, who advocated doing this in my view they are not only irresponsible, they are very close to be our enemies as much as paradoxically this sounds. Precisely, because move us all closer to war.
1
Some one has to correct the amateurs mistake....You don't bring the Russian bear a big red Atari game button as a symbol of resetting relations.
You don't stop a proposed missile defense system in Poland. You don't give the locations of Britains trident nuclear submarines. You don't sit with Russian number 2 under Putin and tell him "I can do more after being re-elected!
Do more what ? And yes Mr President ,the Russians aren't fighting with bayonets! How insulting a remark, not to Gov Romney but to the intelligence of the American people. Just who is this non vetted ,non qualified,non educated on foreign affairs individual! Don't blame Putin......
You don't stop a proposed missile defense system in Poland. You don't give the locations of Britains trident nuclear submarines. You don't sit with Russian number 2 under Putin and tell him "I can do more after being re-elected!
Do more what ? And yes Mr President ,the Russians aren't fighting with bayonets! How insulting a remark, not to Gov Romney but to the intelligence of the American people. Just who is this non vetted ,non qualified,non educated on foreign affairs individual! Don't blame Putin......
So, there is a "realization that tensions with Russian won"t diminish soon." Really! so we solve that by stationing equipment and troops so we can ease those tensions? This sounds like John McCain or another Republican warmonger or even our President who only listens to the military people who want more war for job security. Go to the wonderful World War 1 museum in KC, Kansas and war will be revealed in all it's horror and that war is the genesis of much we see today. Bad idea on bad idea ever since 9/11.
1
Putting 5000 US troops and heavy artillery in the Ukraine is a farce. How can the Ukraine with this pathetic help from the US hold against a powerful well-equipped Russian army in its own turf? Another meaningless attempt by the US to intervene in other country's business. The US forces are so overworked and spread so thin that they cannot possibly succeed in one more serious major conflict. We have no strategic interest in that specific region of the world. We are wasting human capital and vast amounts of money on conflicts we cannot resolve. However incompetent and corrupt these regimes are they have to deal with their problems sooner or later. Let them resolved their disputes. We should take care of our own first. I am not impressed with our falling policy.
1
More money for the corporations to build expensive equipment that is not needed.
2
What did George W Bush see in Putin's eye? what I am seeing here is bold moves by both Russia and China knowing our resources are stretched thin because of the conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan. Without new tax revenues from the top 10 percent and ending the loop holes in the tax code higher wages we become even more vulnerable their actions. The same with the EU has the same problem, Austerity isn't working, instead of helping Greece, Spain etc it is hurting the Union and those other countries.
5
We should make it clear to the Germams, French and the British that we are done defending them when they won't defend themselves. The EU has a bigger GDP and population, but they keep cutting defense spending, because they know America will rescue them. They don't need the U.S. to defend them from a declining Russia with a much smaller population and GDP, if they spend the money on a unified larger military.
3
Escalating war tensions is a bad idea in the era of nuclear weapons. Russian is not the same as the old USSR... The USA would be better off and the world would be better off by befriending Russia. Work it out.
3
How can American's be against a hostile take over of land? It is like being a Christian, and turning away 5 million children, in need of help.
2
Is Europe, like Iraq, willing to defend itself to the last American dollar and the last drop of American blood?
The French,British,German, and Italians make some mighty nice weapon systems.
The problems of Baltimore, 30 minutes away, are closer, and more pressing, than Belgium.
The French,British,German, and Italians make some mighty nice weapon systems.
The problems of Baltimore, 30 minutes away, are closer, and more pressing, than Belgium.
3
Most Americans do not have a grasp on what is taking place in Russia and China. World War III has already started. The ability of Russia to take control of Eastern EU is very real, with the support of China! China and Russia have already fired the first shots with the end goal of taking the world stage as super powers of the world. The cyber attack on the federal government last week clearly demonstrates China's ability to cut into Americas heart. Our Presidents reaction to all of this is muted at best.
3
Dumb idea, another step in going back on our promise to Russia at the Soviet Union breakup not to bring NATO to it's borders. Russia has a legitimate interest in Ukraine.Most of the people fleeing eastern Ukraine have fled into Russia. I we did not ferment unrest in Ukraine and cause the overthrow of a Legitimately elected governemt no matter how much we disliked it there would be no problem there now.
3
So nations like Poland should not have a right to form their own alliances as they see fit because Russia might suffer hurt feelings....
A better question to ask would be to figure out why so many of Russia's neighbors are so fearful that they will be invaded, what is Russia doing that makes them the neighborhood jerk.
A better question to ask would be to figure out why so many of Russia's neighbors are so fearful that they will be invaded, what is Russia doing that makes them the neighborhood jerk.
5
We made no such promise not to expand NATO.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-11/broken-pro...
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-11/broken-pro...
3
When Europe is concerned enough about its own security, it will draft its own young people and put billions into military preparedness. Let's allow them to do so, instead of rushing in with billions we don't have to spend on other rich countries' defenses.
3
And the Warmongering Police State intends to start another War. Yuk!
6
Why is it the world always conspires to derail liberal utopianism?
Don't the russians know if they just waited long enough the democrats et al would gut the US miltary?
Don't the russians know if they just waited long enough the democrats et al would gut the US miltary?
1
It occurs to me that we should remember that a lot of the weaponry Daesh is using is US weaponry pre-positioned or at a designated military depot and donated to the local forces we back. If it weren’t for capturing our weapons they would be a lot smaller and less troublesome to those we intended to protect with that macho largess.
Someone ought to think about what will happen if the Russians move so fast no one can get to the weapons or the local regiment turns out to be incompetent or as in Ukraine the Baltic States are infiltrated with Moles (you can bet the farm that is a fact) waiting for orders to undermine and sow strife, or as the Iraqi army turned out to be, spineless (least likely in the Baltic), then once again because of feel good ignorant machismo “action now!” our own weapons will be used to hurt us and those we intend to protect.
The lesson of the last 15 years more than anything else should make it clear that unless it is our own soldiers staying with, wielding and controlling them with the full support necessary to maintain and protect them from the DoD we should not be sending or leaving weapons anywhere.
Someone ought to think about what will happen if the Russians move so fast no one can get to the weapons or the local regiment turns out to be incompetent or as in Ukraine the Baltic States are infiltrated with Moles (you can bet the farm that is a fact) waiting for orders to undermine and sow strife, or as the Iraqi army turned out to be, spineless (least likely in the Baltic), then once again because of feel good ignorant machismo “action now!” our own weapons will be used to hurt us and those we intend to protect.
The lesson of the last 15 years more than anything else should make it clear that unless it is our own soldiers staying with, wielding and controlling them with the full support necessary to maintain and protect them from the DoD we should not be sending or leaving weapons anywhere.
28
The Ukraine is not a Baltic state, it is a Balkan state. They are two very different things. Although there are a good many Russians in the Baltic states (Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia) they were not native to these areas. After the Russians occupied the Baltics, a great many Russians were settled there.
1
If this happens, we are in World War III.
Russian thugs (like Vladdy Pontoon) acknowledge one strategy, "action." They respect one word "force."
The armaments manufacturers grow richer and--sooner or later--burning children are running screaming from collapsing buildings. At 50% of all "goods" and services, military-related production and related activity (nevermind the culture that goes with them) are arguably the dominant economic activity of our fading world. And guess who the world's biggest polluter happens to be? The US military.
5
And Israel, the 2nd largest arms dealer after the US
This is a race for world hegemony. US and Russia battle it out over who controls the Eurasion landmass - and thus who controls the world. Russia and China have the edge as they control the land conduits for energy and transportation, while the U.S. Controls the sea. But the land is where the action is at. (See Mackinder's Eurasian land mass thesis) .US style more aggressively militants, China - "peaceful rise."
It's important to note that U.S. heavy weapons could very well wind up a donation to the Russian military if Russia so chooses to become "aggressive," which is the propagandized term for exerting Russian influence. What were once soviet countries still have their share of Russian supporters. Russian expansion is more likely to play out in the political arena than on a battlefield, thus the weapons we are leaving there could very well become tokens to a pro-Russian government.
1
"What were once soviet countries still have their share of Russian supporters"
Strangely enough they are a vast minority in most of the Baltic states. There is good reason why the general public of most of these nations is quite happy for the U.S. to station troops in their countries.
Strangely enough they are a vast minority in most of the Baltic states. There is good reason why the general public of most of these nations is quite happy for the U.S. to station troops in their countries.
2
My father, who was an Air Force officer who survived three wars and five kids, said our next war will be with Russia. I psh toshed and told him he was living in the old days. Here we are. Latvia is a beautiful country, full of beautiful people who love fast cars and technology. They've moved on, why can't Russia?
1
"They've moved on, why can't Russia?"
Because to Russia, the disintegration of the Soviet Union was a giant slap in the face, that these nations exist apart from Russia is an even bigger slap in the face, they still see the Baltic states as their property, which is kind of like stealing someone's bike and then complaining when the bike is taken back, claiming that it should still be yours.
Because to Russia, the disintegration of the Soviet Union was a giant slap in the face, that these nations exist apart from Russia is an even bigger slap in the face, they still see the Baltic states as their property, which is kind of like stealing someone's bike and then complaining when the bike is taken back, claiming that it should still be yours.
3
Ah, Putin is threatening the NWO, and "he needs to be stopped". When will Americans wake up to the fact that our government is NOT working for our interests but for corporate and banking interests. Between this "free trade" deals, and "regime change", America and its masters is on a mission to push us into WW3. Is Crimea worth it? History keeps repeating itself and again, Americans are the stooges who will fight a war for the benefit of the powerful, NOT for the benefit of Americans.
5
So the mighty military industrial complex, loosing more and more of it's insatiable supply of cash to drone warfare, has decided Eastern Europe is the place to be, until the African Command, can ignite some war there. Of course, all of Washington will fall right inline behind John McCain, because, let's face it, the mighty MIC, has facilities in every state of the Union.
Tom Franzson. Brevard NC
Tom Franzson. Brevard NC
6
It worries me that when I worked in Riga twenty odd years ago, I was always conscious of the Russian speakers there who were regularly in the streets making their points. Many of my working colleagues' grandparents had been shipped off to Siberia by Stalin but had managed to fight their way back home. I used to ask friends back in the UK who would you have chosen to represent you - Hitler or Stalin? Didn't get much of a response to that question.
1
Why is it that our president must use the military in some way to be given credit for "doing something"? I'm not sure how much Americans are even capable of visualizing a path to peace that does not involve weapons.
2
Is the US administration intent on world domination, or do they never learn from the bloody noses they have received from previous foolhardy military enterprises?
At the time of the ending of the cold war and the removal of the Berlin the US and NATO gave an undertaking that they would not encroach on former Soviet territories.
That situation was altered somewhat by the Balkan states inviting NATO's presence, knowing it would help them financially.
But then the US started encouraging the EU to offer Ukraine membership and financial support, which started alarm bells ringing in the Kremlin, so they encouraged Crimea to return to the Soviet fold, and that population did so willingly.
With US support the government in Kiev was ousted and a bunch of gangsters were installed to do the bidding of the West, but the east of the country still regarded themselves as Russian, with inevitable consequences.
Now the US is apparently intent on taking direct action by building up military forces as close to Russia's borders as they dare. But if they think they can play a game of chicken with Putin they are either naive or stupid.
This can only result in serious escalation of problems from the Baltics to Sevastopol, and with the military might on both sides, one mistake will lead to unbelievable and unwanted consequences for world peace.
Is anyone selling tickets to see the beginning of World War III?
At the time of the ending of the cold war and the removal of the Berlin the US and NATO gave an undertaking that they would not encroach on former Soviet territories.
That situation was altered somewhat by the Balkan states inviting NATO's presence, knowing it would help them financially.
But then the US started encouraging the EU to offer Ukraine membership and financial support, which started alarm bells ringing in the Kremlin, so they encouraged Crimea to return to the Soviet fold, and that population did so willingly.
With US support the government in Kiev was ousted and a bunch of gangsters were installed to do the bidding of the West, but the east of the country still regarded themselves as Russian, with inevitable consequences.
Now the US is apparently intent on taking direct action by building up military forces as close to Russia's borders as they dare. But if they think they can play a game of chicken with Putin they are either naive or stupid.
This can only result in serious escalation of problems from the Baltics to Sevastopol, and with the military might on both sides, one mistake will lead to unbelievable and unwanted consequences for world peace.
Is anyone selling tickets to see the beginning of World War III?
4
IF "the Pentagon's proposal still needs approval by the Secretary of Defense and the White House" , what's this all about? How can the Pentagon go ahead with this plan without authorization? Who is in charge?
And the mention of improving the railroads and building warehouses in these countries is absurd. What about the crumbling railroad tracks in this country?
Let's stop flexing our muscles and trying to out-Putin Putin.
And the mention of improving the railroads and building warehouses in these countries is absurd. What about the crumbling railroad tracks in this country?
Let's stop flexing our muscles and trying to out-Putin Putin.
3
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Putin Derangement Syndrome (PDS) strikes again.
One would think that the USA national security military industrial complex is filled with joy due to the wars in Foreverstan; in this case 'Foreverstan' refers to the entire middle east and not just Afghanistan. These wars will literally go on forever, won't they? When the last Muslim is dead, we will declare victory.
Why use PDS to restart the Cold War? It must be that certain elements of the USA national security military industrial complex feel slighted with all the emphasis on air strikes, drones, and counterinsurgency warfare. I guess the main Army feels left out and so must shake the dust off its Cold War machinery?
And so the American public is to be assaulted with this newest threat to our existence? And the 70 years of constant war since WWII merrily roll along. What a great sadness.
One would think that the USA national security military industrial complex is filled with joy due to the wars in Foreverstan; in this case 'Foreverstan' refers to the entire middle east and not just Afghanistan. These wars will literally go on forever, won't they? When the last Muslim is dead, we will declare victory.
Why use PDS to restart the Cold War? It must be that certain elements of the USA national security military industrial complex feel slighted with all the emphasis on air strikes, drones, and counterinsurgency warfare. I guess the main Army feels left out and so must shake the dust off its Cold War machinery?
And so the American public is to be assaulted with this newest threat to our existence? And the 70 years of constant war since WWII merrily roll along. What a great sadness.
5
All this extra war-readiness is the result of Hillary Clinton's "reset button" policy with Russia while she was Sec. of State for Obama.
That miserably failed policy, as with Benghazi Libya, and their pre-mature withdrawal from Iraq that gave rise to ISIS, is what Mrs. Clinton says qualifies her to be President.
Those of us who know truth and prefer to live in peace, liberty and prosperity, recognize Hillary Clinton's long record of failure, deception and greed disqualify her from any leadership role.
That miserably failed policy, as with Benghazi Libya, and their pre-mature withdrawal from Iraq that gave rise to ISIS, is what Mrs. Clinton says qualifies her to be President.
Those of us who know truth and prefer to live in peace, liberty and prosperity, recognize Hillary Clinton's long record of failure, deception and greed disqualify her from any leadership role.
2
Just a way of delivering US weapons to Russia and their proxy armies. It worked so well in Iraq with ISIS.
2
The greatest mistake the United States can make is to be provocative. We have to remember that if pushed to armed conflict, we will not simply face Russia but all of those socialist/communist countries that resent containment. We have enough problems with China right now and her attempt at expansionism through the islands. We need to solve the Chinese issue before provoking another major power.
2
I'm simply wondering why the Pentagon making a recommendation to do this is front page news. It hasn't been approved and there is no indication in the story that the White House is interested in doing this.
1
This is dangerous saber rattling by the USA at a critical juncture in the Ukrainian Civil War. There is absolutely no prospect of Russia launching a surprise attack on NATO countries and those who suggest otherwise are eager for war.
6
The actions of the US continue to drive Russia-Iran-China together. Its hard to see how this is a good strategy for the next century.
The US continues to misunderstand Russia's position. Ukraine, for 200 years has been in Russia's orbit and Crimea was the sight of the Yalta Conference at the end of WWII. 30 MILLION Russians died! Its foolish and foolhardy to think US diplomacy or military pressure will change history, or fix Ukraine.
Russia has repeatedly offered to lower the temperature and Federalize Ukraine as a compromise. Instead now there are more troops and weapons on their borders. Would France and Germany really risk all out war to save Estonia??
The US continues to misunderstand Russia's position. Ukraine, for 200 years has been in Russia's orbit and Crimea was the sight of the Yalta Conference at the end of WWII. 30 MILLION Russians died! Its foolish and foolhardy to think US diplomacy or military pressure will change history, or fix Ukraine.
Russia has repeatedly offered to lower the temperature and Federalize Ukraine as a compromise. Instead now there are more troops and weapons on their borders. Would France and Germany really risk all out war to save Estonia??
5
If WW3 starts I will only blame the United States because EU doesn't want the war nor Russia wants the war.
U.S. Intention was to pull Ukraine as far away from Russia as possible, make Ukraine a member of NATO, kick Russians out of the Black Sea where they have a military base, and most importantly put nuclear weapons in Ukraine on the Russian border so they can kindly tell Russians what to do.
I don't justify Putin's annexation of Crimea but he had no choice just like America had no choice in the 1963 when Russians installed nuclear weapons in Cuba right next to America. U.S. Said," either you take them away or a war starts"
FYI Russia was at major war a couple of times with superpower Sweden back in 17th century, with napolian, and with Hitler. All of those times Russia was not the aggressor just like nowadays.
U.S. Intention was to pull Ukraine as far away from Russia as possible, make Ukraine a member of NATO, kick Russians out of the Black Sea where they have a military base, and most importantly put nuclear weapons in Ukraine on the Russian border so they can kindly tell Russians what to do.
I don't justify Putin's annexation of Crimea but he had no choice just like America had no choice in the 1963 when Russians installed nuclear weapons in Cuba right next to America. U.S. Said," either you take them away or a war starts"
FYI Russia was at major war a couple of times with superpower Sweden back in 17th century, with napolian, and with Hitler. All of those times Russia was not the aggressor just like nowadays.
4
Your extrapolations are fanciful at best. There was no offer to make Ukraine a member of NATO nor do you have basis for the position that the post-Yanukovich government was going to abrogate the basing agreement the Russians had. Likewise, there is no basis for the idea that the US was looking to establish nuclear weaponsin Ukraine.
Incidentally, Russia was the aggressor in the war with Sweden. The Great Northern War was a coalition by Denmark, Saxony-Poland and Russia to carve up the Swedish empire.
Incidentally, Russia was the aggressor in the war with Sweden. The Great Northern War was a coalition by Denmark, Saxony-Poland and Russia to carve up the Swedish empire.
3
Using heavy weapons to have peace and quietness is like to use flowers to make trouble and war. When would be the time where a better understanding between people will come ?
One thing about war: it leaves everyone who survives poorer, except arms merchants.
5
It's psychological projection: Clearly, we are the menace who bombs and invades everywhere, but the powers that be (whoever they are. ...) simply project that onto the Russians.
5
I can certainly understand the reluctance of many readers to support this move. I am also a baby boomer, grew up under the fear of the mushroom cloud, and have most strongly hated the last ten years of war we've been engaged in. Nevertheless... we must remember history. Read up on 20th century U.S. history; read about isolationism and its roots (NO MORE WAR - WE AREN'T THE WORLD'S POLICEMEN). Read about the roots of the Cold War, and how George Keenan's insightful 1947 white paper explained the only way to deal with Russia. Prepositioning equipment seems a completely rational and measured step in response to our allies' call for support. NATO exists for a reason. And this reason, plain and simple, is to thwart Russian aggression. I hope it will have the desired effect.
4
Like so many of your generation you have gone soft and drifted into irrelevance and conformism. You are SO wrong about your assumptions and misreading of history. You must have slept since the 1970's.
You talk about isolationism as though we have not been actively aggressive and warlike in the last decades and have not attempted to isolate Russia and punish it for not dying after the collapse of the USSR. AS though we don't support torture dictatorships, as though we don't start lie based wars and grow bases all around the world. AS though we don't lie about missile put into Poland, Estonia, Latvia etc to ''target Iran' back in 2007 (ie long before Ukraine).
Must be Putin's fault. just like OUR support to the home of jihad (Saudia Arabia) even while OUR weapons end up in the hands of ISIS (thanks John McCain) while we wreck whole nations (Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Columbia).
Go back to sleep!
You talk about isolationism as though we have not been actively aggressive and warlike in the last decades and have not attempted to isolate Russia and punish it for not dying after the collapse of the USSR. AS though we don't support torture dictatorships, as though we don't start lie based wars and grow bases all around the world. AS though we don't lie about missile put into Poland, Estonia, Latvia etc to ''target Iran' back in 2007 (ie long before Ukraine).
Must be Putin's fault. just like OUR support to the home of jihad (Saudia Arabia) even while OUR weapons end up in the hands of ISIS (thanks John McCain) while we wreck whole nations (Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Columbia).
Go back to sleep!
2
Hooray for current U.S. policy to learn from history. If only there had been a strategy to protect Hungary from Russia in 1945 or 1956.
A reminder to the NYTimes of your promise circa 1989 to describe and identify Hungary in Central Europe since its geographic location is not in Eastern Europe.
A reminder to the NYTimes of your promise circa 1989 to describe and identify Hungary in Central Europe since its geographic location is not in Eastern Europe.
3
Hooray for current U.S. policy to learn from history. If only there had been a strategy to protect Hungary from Russia in 1945 or 1956.
You mean a policy of 'mutual assured destruction'? Sure that would have worked great! Stupid Kennedy and Kruschev. they should have just finished our misery off in 1963 right???
You mean a policy of 'mutual assured destruction'? Sure that would have worked great! Stupid Kennedy and Kruschev. they should have just finished our misery off in 1963 right???
2
“I think that only an insane person and only in a dream can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO,” he told the newspaper Corriere Della Sera. “I think some countries are simply taking advantage of people’s fears with regard to Russia.”
The same was said about Ukraine, Georgia and Crimea. Fear is not imagined nor is the invasion by the Russians. Mr. Putin is quite sane. It would indeed be insane to directly attack NATO. Instead Mr. Putin attacks weak links and takes great advantage of Obama's fear and hesitation. Putin knows that Mr. Obama is afraid, if not just cowardly. Russia's sphere of influence is increasing. Putin is becoming bolder as is China in the Pacific.
At home, in America, Neville Chamberlain Obama agonizes on how to respond. If given the opportunity Mr. Obama will negotiate another Munich and believe its a victory. The naivete and arrogance of Mr. Obama has sealed the fate of Eastern Europe...and perhaps Western Europe too.
The same was said about Ukraine, Georgia and Crimea. Fear is not imagined nor is the invasion by the Russians. Mr. Putin is quite sane. It would indeed be insane to directly attack NATO. Instead Mr. Putin attacks weak links and takes great advantage of Obama's fear and hesitation. Putin knows that Mr. Obama is afraid, if not just cowardly. Russia's sphere of influence is increasing. Putin is becoming bolder as is China in the Pacific.
At home, in America, Neville Chamberlain Obama agonizes on how to respond. If given the opportunity Mr. Obama will negotiate another Munich and believe its a victory. The naivete and arrogance of Mr. Obama has sealed the fate of Eastern Europe...and perhaps Western Europe too.
2
Utter fear filled, hate filled paranoia and ignorance all in one cliche. Brilliant. Have you been asleep or are you just proud of noticing nothing actually going on around you.
We've been punishing Russia fo rgiving its empire up peacefully ever since we broke all our agreements with Russia (on missile defence agreements), on not surrounding Russia with missiles and not deliberately provoking Russia in their back yard (Georgia and Ukraine were once part of Russia and yet we meddle in a place no where near us and overthrow democracies all around the war and back coups against democracies and 'primitives' (Muslims, Africans who apparently must not be allowed to run themselves).
You unquestionably swallow any propaganda and ignore the evidence of our own behavior, You are the perfect 'subject'.
We've been punishing Russia fo rgiving its empire up peacefully ever since we broke all our agreements with Russia (on missile defence agreements), on not surrounding Russia with missiles and not deliberately provoking Russia in their back yard (Georgia and Ukraine were once part of Russia and yet we meddle in a place no where near us and overthrow democracies all around the war and back coups against democracies and 'primitives' (Muslims, Africans who apparently must not be allowed to run themselves).
You unquestionably swallow any propaganda and ignore the evidence of our own behavior, You are the perfect 'subject'.
2
To incite, not deter Russians aggression. Look at this world, haven't we done enough? Who's in charge of this out of control arsenal anyhow?
3
Putting heavy weaponry in Eastern Europe will only help Putin's propaganda machine and just about nothing else.
2
So, what's changed? Did the U.S. suddenly decide to rush in, like the proverbial bull in the china shop to "deter Russian aggression", even though it's a violation of the 1997 agreement between NATO and Russia? Has the U.S. determined they want to heat things up by flexing our heavy weapons muscles in Putin's face because we're no longer content to maintain the Cold War status, or have the U.S. military warmongers opted to start yet another feckless, unwinnable war?
2
"1997 agreement "
Like Russia has any use for such agreements. They've been massing troops on the borders of Baltic states for almost a year now.
Like Russia has any use for such agreements. They've been massing troops on the borders of Baltic states for almost a year now.
2
How about that "reset" in Russia, President Obama? This is not our war to fight. Let Europe pay its NATO dues and fight those on their borders. We're busy policing the rest of the world.
I've perused the comments here and I'd say that 95% are pro-Russia, pro-Putin, and certainly anti-American, many stridently so. I also note some odd phrasing, and slightly off grammar, as if the commenters are very fluent in English, but need some more work. Can the comment mills in Russia be working overtime? Wish we could check the IP addresses from which this missives originate. I notice the same phenomenon at the Wall Street Journal site when articles about Russia appear.
6
I find the entire concept now of alliances like NATO, which we would presumably be willing to destroy the world to defend, incredibly dangerous anachronisms.
2
Let us hope our (US) future enemies do not have the resolves of our latest. Thank goodness they didn't have modern mechanized-technological capabilities. If they ever do, hopefully, it will come down to being on the right side of good vs evil. Right now … someone said, “honesty is the best policy”. Which prompts, is it possible to be on the right side of good vs. evil, when your premise is purported?
This is nearly a totally symbolic move, even though it does reflect the certainty that NATO bill defend its newest members. The reason heavy weapons are not at the front line is because they can be brought there rapidly today and on the front line they are more vulnerable to capture by a potential enemy if not enough force is in place to defend a location. An invader with heavy weapons can also see those weapons rapidly destroyed with distant air to ground missiles and fighter plane attacks. This happened on the so called Road of Death for retreating forces in the first Gulf War trying to get back to their larger force in and near Baghdad. I have absolute faith in the superiority of NATO air power and missile technology.
This largely symbolic move is actually to reassure Eastern European nations to give them the resolved to delay a Russian advance long enough for NATO to bring more distant forces to the conflict. We have not seen this only because no NATO member nation has been attacked since the alliance's formation, even though Russia tries repeatedly to penetrate NATO defenses and maybe we should start destroying the submarines and aircraft that do that instead of making diplomatic protests.
This largely symbolic move is actually to reassure Eastern European nations to give them the resolved to delay a Russian advance long enough for NATO to bring more distant forces to the conflict. We have not seen this only because no NATO member nation has been attacked since the alliance's formation, even though Russia tries repeatedly to penetrate NATO defenses and maybe we should start destroying the submarines and aircraft that do that instead of making diplomatic protests.
3
The troops and equipment should never have been removed by Obama in the first place. The so-called pivot to Asia made it appear to Putin and China that America cannot stand up and face two fronts as it has done for more than 70 years. That encouraged Putin to invade Georgia, Ukraine and Crimea. It also encouraged Assad to ignore the threats of the red line. And it encouraged China to continue its military build up and the building of sand islands more than 600 miles from the Chinese mainland.
Obama created an atmosphere of fear and mistrust by our allies and an opportunity for adventurism and out-right aggression by our foes. And it's not just Obama. The Congress shares a great deal of responsibility for weakening American power and resolve. Slashing the military's strength and budget creates power vacuums that opponents of America will exploit.
There must be 2 heavy combat divisions or several heavy combat brigade teams stationed throughout Europe. Plus there must be supporting air wings and one carrier battle group with accompanying amphibious assault and support ships in the Mediterranean. And there should be plenty of back-up.
Mr. Obama believes, wrongly, that everything can be negotiated. Sometimes the only thing the other side understands is knowing that substantial American forces are just over the horizon ready to strike. Putin and China must clearly understand that America is not withdrawing from the world stage. They understand when America stands fast.
Obama created an atmosphere of fear and mistrust by our allies and an opportunity for adventurism and out-right aggression by our foes. And it's not just Obama. The Congress shares a great deal of responsibility for weakening American power and resolve. Slashing the military's strength and budget creates power vacuums that opponents of America will exploit.
There must be 2 heavy combat divisions or several heavy combat brigade teams stationed throughout Europe. Plus there must be supporting air wings and one carrier battle group with accompanying amphibious assault and support ships in the Mediterranean. And there should be plenty of back-up.
Mr. Obama believes, wrongly, that everything can be negotiated. Sometimes the only thing the other side understands is knowing that substantial American forces are just over the horizon ready to strike. Putin and China must clearly understand that America is not withdrawing from the world stage. They understand when America stands fast.
2
Many of the commenters here sound like Neville Chamberlain; naive. Why don't we just send some representatives to Yalta to meet with Putin and settle everything amicably over vodka? I'm sure the Polish won't mind if we sell them out again; they really enjoyed the decades following the last time we negotiated away the freedom of half of Europe. Eisenhower should have listened to Patton.
3
Yes indeed. We had great times, mass murder burial sites, rape, mass deportations to lovely locales such as Siberia and Kazakhstan, the decades went by way too fast.
Now I see the common ignorance that the U.S. should not involve themselves because Russia holds the right to control and dictate to nations such as Poland, solely on the basis of having invaded them decades ago.
Now I see the common ignorance that the U.S. should not involve themselves because Russia holds the right to control and dictate to nations such as Poland, solely on the basis of having invaded them decades ago.
2
Mr. Obama has learned a lot about the world in the last six years. The pacifist dream of sitting down and making friends with Russia and China and Iran didn't work out so well after all.
2
Meanwhile, the US space program relies on Russian rockets to carry astronauts to the space station, and on Russian-made engines to launch spy satellites -- and leading defense manufacturers lobby against sanctions. Strategy anyone? Another example of how our business's monomaniacal focus on quarterly profits is weakening our society.
1
Oh just great, this will solve the problem. Don't forget, and often under reported, we're also upgrading the Bush Defense Shield this year; which was the pivotal point when Russian began to go south. This will enable
Russia to continue its political propaganda with its own people and feed the Xenophobia. Of course we wouldn't feel threatened if Russia put missiles in Cuba
and started patrolling the Gulf of Mexico.
Russia to continue its political propaganda with its own people and feed the Xenophobia. Of course we wouldn't feel threatened if Russia put missiles in Cuba
and started patrolling the Gulf of Mexico.
1
"political propaganda with its own people and feed the Xenophobia. Of course we wouldn't feel threatened if Russia put missiles in Cuba"
When the U.S. puts nuclear missiles in Warsaw, let me know, otherwise this rhetoric is tired. The big difference is that these Baltic countries actually WANT the U.S. military within their borders, nobody wants Russian troops anywhere.
If you believe that Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are independent sovereign nations, then it is logical that they should be able to determine their own self-defense policies and if they bring in an ally to act as a deterrent from their overly hostile jerk of a neighbor, its fully well within their rights to do so, even if Russia has hurt feelings over it.
When the U.S. puts nuclear missiles in Warsaw, let me know, otherwise this rhetoric is tired. The big difference is that these Baltic countries actually WANT the U.S. military within their borders, nobody wants Russian troops anywhere.
If you believe that Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are independent sovereign nations, then it is logical that they should be able to determine their own self-defense policies and if they bring in an ally to act as a deterrent from their overly hostile jerk of a neighbor, its fully well within their rights to do so, even if Russia has hurt feelings over it.
3
Europe must be the US side to the defense and global security of peace
2
So the utterly corrupt US military, finding peace is not profitable, not having enough with it s failed wars in the Middle East has todo its best to start another one in Europe.
Time to dust down old 68 slogans: Yankees go home!!!
Time to dust down old 68 slogans: Yankees go home!!!
3
If this small amount of material is a threat to Russia, then Putin and Russia is even weaker than we think. I agree with Keith. It is a good, minimal chess move given Russia's inability to respect its neighbors borders or to understand why their immediate neighbors might be threatened by their actions.
3
"In a significant move to deter possible Russian aggression in Europe". And, if a country were to similarly stockpile military equipment on the borders of the United States for the way it treats its neighbours -you know, overthrow of democracy in Guatamala, Chile, Venezuala etc because the *elected* leaders were socialists who threatened US control of those countries - would US citizens view the country surrounding the US with weapons as the "aggressor"? Don't think too hard here on the hypocrisy coming from the self-declared defenders of freedom.
63
Let's be real, nobody wants Russian troops in their nation. These Baltic states are openly asking for American military support to act as a deterrent. All the strawman hypotheticals in the world don't change that.
3
I think the US has bowed out of that sort of interference after the disastrous outcomes of reagan's death squads, the drug cartels coming into being and other fiasco efforts at spreading is degenerate concept of "American Freedom".
I wouldn't get all kumbayah about it but since Clinton I think we have pretty much left the people of Southern North, Central and South America alone to have whatever government they like or could get for themselves.
BTW do you forget the Cuban Missile Crisis?
You miss the key concept in speaking about Nations it is actually individual people with Names that are being discussed when discussing actions taken by the named nations hired hands, and if you use the name of the nation instead of their names where they belong you give them cover and distort the conversation enough that it becomes extremely difficult to get to reasonable rational conclusions.
I wouldn't get all kumbayah about it but since Clinton I think we have pretty much left the people of Southern North, Central and South America alone to have whatever government they like or could get for themselves.
BTW do you forget the Cuban Missile Crisis?
You miss the key concept in speaking about Nations it is actually individual people with Names that are being discussed when discussing actions taken by the named nations hired hands, and if you use the name of the nation instead of their names where they belong you give them cover and distort the conversation enough that it becomes extremely difficult to get to reasonable rational conclusions.
2
Two of those three nations you mention aren't even on the same continent as the U.S., and none of them border the U.S. As for the U.S. overthrowing them. that's highly debatable.
2
What a strange world it is. One end it trying to figure out what to do with almost as many refugees as we saw at the end of WW2 while the other end finds boys playing with lethal toys in eastern Ukraine. Putting in heavy weapons in smaller NATO countries might make sense in the crazy, 19th Century-like world of Master Putin. But I fear that once the Military Industrial Complex gets wind of the "mullah" waiting to be collected in the construction of those big toys, more boys might be incited to use those toys. After all, these kinds of toys are big money and you can only make big money by replacing the toys that are destroyed.
2
Bad idea. How long will it be until we see Russian/Al Queda/radical islamists or some other rogue terrorist group get their hands on them? Stop the military action and negotiate with Mr. Putin but keep HIS feet, and those of his financial backers, to the fire.
2
" Stop the military action and negotiate with Mr. Putin but keep HIS feet, and those of his financial backers, to the fire"
Replace Putin with Hitler and we might as well be back in the mid 30's. Discussion with someone, who according to a close adviser views nations such as Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Finland and others as strictly Russian property is useless.
Putin understand only the threat of force. As long as the threat is real he will not act.
Replace Putin with Hitler and we might as well be back in the mid 30's. Discussion with someone, who according to a close adviser views nations such as Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Finland and others as strictly Russian property is useless.
Putin understand only the threat of force. As long as the threat is real he will not act.
1
A good defence is always your best offence. When dealing with Russia. History speaks for itself.
2
Foolish, US war hawks simply don't learn.
ISIS is the threat, one of the many things Russia can help with.
The US policy of 'containing Russia' is behind this whole Ukraine war and it's unnecessary; death and ruined lives.
The US is simply uniting the Russian people under Putin. This "us against the world" mentality is what rallies a nation behind an aggressive leader. Can we never learn?
ISIS is the threat, one of the many things Russia can help with.
The US policy of 'containing Russia' is behind this whole Ukraine war and it's unnecessary; death and ruined lives.
The US is simply uniting the Russian people under Putin. This "us against the world" mentality is what rallies a nation behind an aggressive leader. Can we never learn?
4
Yes, you are right (ISIS threat). It seems Russia is also too busy Posturing and occupied with the "US threat" to see the real enemy of us Both. Fools we both are.
1
Mindless pouring of oil on the fire. We never learn that more weapons just increases the likelihood of war. Our endless warmongering will be the end of us.
2
Beginning in the 1970s, the U.S. and USSR negotiated verifiable reductions in deployments of conventional forces and weaponry in Europe, because of the possibility that deployment by one side would always result in a dangerous escalation of reciprocal deployments, making the risk of war greater. It seems we have thrown away the wisdom and maturity that allowed us to live through the Cold War without war in Europe. NATO desperately needs quickly to enter talks with Russia to get restore some of the measures and agreements that helped avert war in the recent past.
2
I do not think wisdom and maturity are adjectives that could be applied to Putin's actions.
1
I deplore any aggression and have no sympathies for Putin, but let's paint both sides of the story, please. As Chomsky wrote ("In These Times" May 1st, 2014), Washington agreed NATO would expand not an inch east. What happened after that? How would the US tolerate Russian troops in Mexico? The NATO expansionist moves will only further provoke. What we need is a deescalation of military muscle flexing on both sides.
9
"Washington agreed NATO would expand not an inch east"
So nations like Poland have no right to determine their own future because it might upset Russia. Are they sovereign nations or simply satellites of Russia, because if it is the former, Russia's feelings are irrelevant.
If Mexico wanted to form an alliance with Russia, that is their sovereign right to do so, the U.S. might be upset over it, but too bad. Either we accept that Poland and other nations are free to move in whatever direction that they desire, or you bolster the argument for why the U.S. should tell Canada and Mexico exactly what they should do and who they should form alliances with, after all, it is their "backyard."
So nations like Poland have no right to determine their own future because it might upset Russia. Are they sovereign nations or simply satellites of Russia, because if it is the former, Russia's feelings are irrelevant.
If Mexico wanted to form an alliance with Russia, that is their sovereign right to do so, the U.S. might be upset over it, but too bad. Either we accept that Poland and other nations are free to move in whatever direction that they desire, or you bolster the argument for why the U.S. should tell Canada and Mexico exactly what they should do and who they should form alliances with, after all, it is their "backyard."
2
This is unbelievable, that picture--- It is so hard to know if the Neo-cons and warmongers are literally turning up the global heat or if this truly is a threat.
I don't want our allies to feel unsure of our support or unsafe.
But where is Germany and the rest of Europe, in their own backyard? Why only us?
We're the only ones in this scenario who have recently unilaterally invaded a nation halfway across the globe on a trumped up purpose, one with no relationship to us culturally or historically. And destabilized an entire region that it continues to engulf. And here we come again with our big guns.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss: Colonel Jack D. RIpper.
I don't want our allies to feel unsure of our support or unsafe.
But where is Germany and the rest of Europe, in their own backyard? Why only us?
We're the only ones in this scenario who have recently unilaterally invaded a nation halfway across the globe on a trumped up purpose, one with no relationship to us culturally or historically. And destabilized an entire region that it continues to engulf. And here we come again with our big guns.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss: Colonel Jack D. RIpper.
5
Because Germany and other nations are seemingly happy to look the other way as long as Russia keeps the gas flowing, much how European nations looked the other way when Hitler engaged in provocation after provocation.
The U.S. for all its warts is really the only guarantor of peace and freedom for a myriad of nations around the globe. Without the U.S. acting as a check against unrestrained aggression, you would see the true character of nations like Russia. Look into their own rhetoric that is emanating from various leaders, discussions about reunification of Soviet nations that were not theirs to begin with.
The U.S. for all its warts is really the only guarantor of peace and freedom for a myriad of nations around the globe. Without the U.S. acting as a check against unrestrained aggression, you would see the true character of nations like Russia. Look into their own rhetoric that is emanating from various leaders, discussions about reunification of Soviet nations that were not theirs to begin with.
2
How does putting troops and heavy weaponry near the borders of Russia constitute a move for deterrence?
4
The same way that having troops and heavy weaponry along the dmz separating the Korea's was a move for deterrence. Everyone has their cards out on the table, everyone knows what the stakes are and what the consequences of further aggression would be, thus nobody acts.
3
Obama is diverting the attention of the world about the escalating danger of ISIS by the meaningless shift in foreign policy by his decision to put heavy weaponry in East Europe. He is planning to store battle tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and other heavy weapons for as many as 5,000 American troops in several Baltic and Eastern European countries. Putin has categorically said that Moscow has no plan to attack Europe.And yet, Obama has been raising this bogey, while remaining silent over the expansion of ISIS caliphate. He is not prepared to order boots on the ground to halt the rapid expansion of ISIS caliphate. But he is prepared to send troops to Europe to attack Christian Russia. Probably he may try to weaken Russia so that ISIS could extend the caliphate to Russia in a future war. .
3
If it comes to a war with Russia, we can kiss every first-world capital goodbye, and NYC and Houston as well. This must be done carefully, and the intelligent people in every government must work to get Putin removed peacefully. The Little Man syndrome is toxic to civilization--vide Napoleon and Hitler.
1
Read, please read and deliver yourself of utter ignorance about the world at large. Your perception of Putin as the leader of a powerful nation is cut out of CNN and FOX News. I understand why the world constantly teeters into and flaunts with disaster.
Shouldn't America clean up the mess it has made of Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan? And we sure do not need to spend more on what will be seen as provocation. This proposal appears to be grounds for another spending spree by the military who are not yet able to truly care for the soldiers they have sent time after time to Iraq and Afghanistan.
This is so discouraging. Let's spend some of that money here at home. We have many areas that could use it.
This is so discouraging. Let's spend some of that money here at home. We have many areas that could use it.
10
"nothing is as good as troops stationed full-time on the ground, of course" Not since walk softly and carry a big stick have we had a more succinct description of U.S. foreign policy. Used U.S. armaments protecting against refurbished Russian tanks - a hobo's scuffle in the Caucuses.
2
Thank you for keeping us all safe President Obama. I will sleep better tonight.
2
So NATO, having picked off the Baltic states and ex-ASSRs one by one and absorbed them into NATO in a way that it had promised it wouldn't, and having provoked Russia continually with episodes like the silliness in Georgia, continues to beat the war-drum that its' arms corporations do so well out of..
And sending heavy weaponry into Eastern Europe is 'necessary' for 'defence', is it? At this rate the Azov battalion in Ukraine will be the most heavily armed, well-supplied and financed bunch of nazis since the Waffen SS..
An oppressive autocrat like Putin requires a bunch of useful fools like the NeoCons pushing for war in Europe, in just the same way that Osama bin Laden couldn't have achieved a fraction of what he set out to do without the dual klepto-idiocy of Bush and Cheney. So starting a war in Central/Eastern Europe just to provide NATO with a continuing raison d'etre is dumb even by NeoCon standards - except that they will be sitting on the sidelines making money from arms, supplies etc, just like the Cheney family did in Iraq, and they won't be doing any of the dying and suffering.
Putin got it half right when he said: “I think some countries are simply taking advantage of people’s fears with regard to Russia.” What he should have said is some plutocrats, arms companies and banks, rather than countries.
And sending heavy weaponry into Eastern Europe is 'necessary' for 'defence', is it? At this rate the Azov battalion in Ukraine will be the most heavily armed, well-supplied and financed bunch of nazis since the Waffen SS..
An oppressive autocrat like Putin requires a bunch of useful fools like the NeoCons pushing for war in Europe, in just the same way that Osama bin Laden couldn't have achieved a fraction of what he set out to do without the dual klepto-idiocy of Bush and Cheney. So starting a war in Central/Eastern Europe just to provide NATO with a continuing raison d'etre is dumb even by NeoCon standards - except that they will be sitting on the sidelines making money from arms, supplies etc, just like the Cheney family did in Iraq, and they won't be doing any of the dying and suffering.
Putin got it half right when he said: “I think some countries are simply taking advantage of people’s fears with regard to Russia.” What he should have said is some plutocrats, arms companies and banks, rather than countries.
3
"So NATO, having picked off the Baltic states "
Yes, Poland and the other nations had to have their arms twisted really hard to join NATO. Oh wait, no they didn't. A better question should be why almost all of Russia's European neighbors were so eager to join NATO in the first place.
If everyone in your neighborhood thinks that you are a jerk, there is probably something to it.
Yes, Poland and the other nations had to have their arms twisted really hard to join NATO. Oh wait, no they didn't. A better question should be why almost all of Russia's European neighbors were so eager to join NATO in the first place.
If everyone in your neighborhood thinks that you are a jerk, there is probably something to it.
2
NATO made no such promise not to expand. The idea was discussed but Gorbachev opted for West German aid instead.https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/russia-fsu/2014-08-11/broken-pro...
Since the pre-positioned equipment would be for US forces, the reference to the Azov Battalion is off-point and merely a rhetorical advice. The only war currently going on in Central/Eastern Europe is the one Putin started in Ukraine.
Since the pre-positioned equipment would be for US forces, the reference to the Azov Battalion is off-point and merely a rhetorical advice. The only war currently going on in Central/Eastern Europe is the one Putin started in Ukraine.
2
I hope this works as a deterrence, but I would have preferred that we had acted a lot more aggressively a lot sooner and set the stage for deescalation. Besides honoring our NATO commitments with a military force, we should make direct statements warning Putin of grave consequences should he attack a NATO member. We should also confiscate properties of Russian citizens here in the U.S. - like the Prokhorovs, the Sharapovas, the $88 million condo Ryboloviev bought his 22 year old daughter in NYC, etc. - as Russia has done to Americans in Russia - e.g.Bill Browder. Revoke their visas and send them back home to Russia. We can then drag out the court proceedings for 20 years just as Putin has done. Let these influential Russians feel first hand the consequences of his policies and redirect them to confront their own in their homeland. Then, if Putin begins a de facto retreat of his aggression, we can respond in kind. But, carefully titrated increments like this risk only to embolden Putin as I doubt he has much respect for our resolve.
7
Yes, the landscape within Eastern Europe, especially in the Baltic States, which border Russia, has definitely changed. Obviously, the winds can shift over time--and with each of the various leaders in Russia. While Gorbachev was a rational person, Putin clearly is not.
Today's Russian President seems to be lost-in-time, and trying to re-acquire lost greatness, which might never have actually existed--except, perhaps, in Vladdie's own mind. I believe that he surely has tilted at one too many windmills.
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
Today's Russian President seems to be lost-in-time, and trying to re-acquire lost greatness, which might never have actually existed--except, perhaps, in Vladdie's own mind. I believe that he surely has tilted at one too many windmills.
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
5
All we are now is pupits of eroupe when will the usa and the world look at it as we are bought and sold for eroupe in the usa , our proud military is a army that will not be sold as our goverment is.
Putin is smart and knows where he can make make his moves. That's why I don't think it's possible for him to invade a country such as Poland. It would be the start of WWIII, and I truly don't believe Putin wants that due to the fact that the negative would far outweigh the positive for Russia. (and the rest of the world) By going into Ukraine, he pushed Russian's limits and got slapped in the wrist. At this point, Europe and the US are dancing with Russia in modern war games. In a grand scale, the current political posturing seems comical due to the fact that sending a few tanks means nothing when you're talking about super powers with nukes.
At the end of the day, Europe wants Russia's gas, and Russia wants to make money by selling its gas to Europe. It would be a bad business move for Russia to further anger one of it's best clients. Therefore, in the end... we are witnessing the leaders of the world's most powerful countries acting like 7th graders playing with G.I Joe's. Unfortunately, since this is the real world and not the realm of plastic tanks, there are people whose real lives are affected by this.
At the end of the day, Europe wants Russia's gas, and Russia wants to make money by selling its gas to Europe. It would be a bad business move for Russia to further anger one of it's best clients. Therefore, in the end... we are witnessing the leaders of the world's most powerful countries acting like 7th graders playing with G.I Joe's. Unfortunately, since this is the real world and not the realm of plastic tanks, there are people whose real lives are affected by this.
1
Headline: U.S. Poised to Put Heavy Weaponry in East Europe
I think this headline and story drift is misleading -- but maybe, like past presidents and generals, I don't have any idea of what I'm talking about.
First graph: "as many as 5,000 troops"
How many troops do the Russians have?
3, 4, 5 million?
So what is the point, to show the flag and put a line down, which if crossed, will mean escalation to perhaps a full scale war?
What I do think I know about war:
*that those old guys who said there was nothing bad about peace and nothing good about war were more right than wrong.
*that freaky incidents and cowards acting tough started World War 1 and caused Vietnam to go on an unnecessary ten years.
*hat the public always loves war -- in the beginning
*and that, as Senator Norris said to his Nebraskan constituents prior to World War One: The only people who come out ahead in war are the ones selling weapons.
However, today, I don't hear many senators bellowing for war nor see many bumper stickers from 2003 still on cars, so maybe we've learned enough.
1
Oh, boy, who thought this move would deter Russia?! What I see is the escalation of the Ukraine war in the next 2-4 weeks. Putin will bring his Army in a short order, because Putin will not "lose face" in face of such "aggression". Now US and NATO gave him an excuse to do what he really wanted to do from the get-go: invade Eastern Ukraine, and annex it to Russia.
So, when Putin does this, what is US/NATO going to do? Go to war with Russia?! Puhleeze. I think they are going to scuttle back, and hope for the best, and the Dictator Putin will have even higher approval rating.
Sheesh! Don't they have anyone thinking in the Pentagon/NATO anymore???!!!
So, when Putin does this, what is US/NATO going to do? Go to war with Russia?! Puhleeze. I think they are going to scuttle back, and hope for the best, and the Dictator Putin will have even higher approval rating.
Sheesh! Don't they have anyone thinking in the Pentagon/NATO anymore???!!!
2
There are plenty of thinking people in the Pentagon. More wars = more money. More money = more wars. The Pentagonians think that is a Win-Win situation.
More cold-war era counter-productive policies emanating from non-elected Pentagon officials and "think tanks" made of Lockheed Martin Corp executives and defense contractors chills, creating tensions and arms buildup around the world is a renewed US past time, poking Russia's very own Monroe's doctrine supporting one side and an overthrown here, helping to resuscitate an unconcerned NATO and to shore up European defense spending in the process, sending an embedded CNN crew over one Chinese claimed bit of island to boost the "pivot to Asia" agenda there, as if US officials wanted to stay relevant and at the helm of the so-called international community tomorrow thru their dangerously bloated military, routinely misused. Dividing Europe against Russia, check, dividing Asia against China, in progress, with one purpose : continual hegemony. I guess that the same US won't cry bloody murder if any reciprocity comes along and that Russia or China preposition heavy weaponry along the US borders and coasts, just in case and in order to deter any aggression of course, hopefully nothing can go wrong with some nuclear ICBM in Cuba or daily interceptions of strategic bombers flights near your national airspace...
48
How true, and how sad....So much money going to the military industrial complex when so much is in dire state in our country. To me, the number one enemy of the American people's interests is their own government in D.C. No wonder surveys taken in Western Europe regard the US as the number one threat to global peace. The good old USA!
1
But the Commander-in-Chief had to approve. Obama can't find a strategy to rid ourselves of ISIS, but he can order troops and equipment to the Russian border. Talk about an illogical move, and a dangerous one at that.
Two sentences but no real sense. Sad to say, but our beloved NYT has become a sounding board not only for sophomoric cranks, but also for semi-professional flacks.
What?? Russia is in the Ukraine? You mean it now occupies another country? Why hasn't the world sided with the Ukrainians?
Where are the countless UN resolutions to have Russia return to its borders?
Why hasn't the UNHCR made it a permanant agenda item? Where are the left wing academics to side with the oppressed and downtrodden Ukrainians?
Why haven't Uni students governing councils demanded disinvestment from Russian companies? Will the EU demand all products from Russian occupied Eastern Ukraine be labelled as such? Why hasn't the Ukrainian government demanded people everywhere refuse to buy products made in Russia? Will people refuse to buy products from the occupied areas? Why aren't the world's press focussed on Ukrainian refugees?
The Russian/Ukrainian dispute kind of makes the liberal left-wing look like they're really only obsessed with just one country.
And where is Roger Waters when you need him?
Where are the countless UN resolutions to have Russia return to its borders?
Why hasn't the UNHCR made it a permanant agenda item? Where are the left wing academics to side with the oppressed and downtrodden Ukrainians?
Why haven't Uni students governing councils demanded disinvestment from Russian companies? Will the EU demand all products from Russian occupied Eastern Ukraine be labelled as such? Why hasn't the Ukrainian government demanded people everywhere refuse to buy products made in Russia? Will people refuse to buy products from the occupied areas? Why aren't the world's press focussed on Ukrainian refugees?
The Russian/Ukrainian dispute kind of makes the liberal left-wing look like they're really only obsessed with just one country.
And where is Roger Waters when you need him?
4
@ Les Brown
What?? You don't know about the heavy sanctions and product boycott imposed on Russia by the EU and USA for well over a year now? And the US barring prominent Russian citizens from entering the country (let alone speaking to Congress)?
Looks like the poor oppressed Ukrainians have the US on their side. And when the US have your back, you needn't worry about the rest of the world - as you know.
What?? You don't know about the heavy sanctions and product boycott imposed on Russia by the EU and USA for well over a year now? And the US barring prominent Russian citizens from entering the country (let alone speaking to Congress)?
Looks like the poor oppressed Ukrainians have the US on their side. And when the US have your back, you needn't worry about the rest of the world - as you know.
It beggars belief how the US tries everything to set this world on fire. Arenn`t they already involved in enough war and haven`t they initiated sufficient civil wars? Reading comment section of big European papers one is amazed how a mojority of Europeans obviously despise the US by now.
To bag the Ukraine has been one of the most important issues for the Bush as well as for the Obama administration.
One only has to read Brzezinski`s book, "The Grand Cheesboard". He made it already in the 90`s very clear that in order to slice Russia into pieces the US has to get control over Ukraine, by whatever means.
To bag the Ukraine has been one of the most important issues for the Bush as well as for the Obama administration.
One only has to read Brzezinski`s book, "The Grand Cheesboard". He made it already in the 90`s very clear that in order to slice Russia into pieces the US has to get control over Ukraine, by whatever means.
5
illampu, it would seem that it is Russia that has control of Ukraine "by whatever means". Add to that with recent Russian military provocations in the Baltics, one is amazed how a majority of Europeans (OR for that matter, Bolivians) DONT despise the Russians by now.
The proposal is to position military material, NOT send American troops to invade Russia such as Russia HAS done in Ukraine.
Yet you blame the US for trying "everything" to set the world on fire".
I can hear the criticism now about how, if/when Russia re-occupies (dont forget THAT sad, repulsive post1945 history) the Baltic Republics, the US will be criticized for "letting it happen" ... AGAIN. Deja vu all over again.
I am getting tired of the perception that the US is the problem. I am no fan of Rand Paul but the corollary to the previous sentence would be for us to stop pretending to be the solution to other countries problems which they cant or wont deal with.
Lets not forget this is being done within the NATO framework and at the request of the host countries. You know, preventative medicine at the request of the patient.
Slice Russia into pieces? Why would anyone want it? It isnt worth expending American lives. Too many Americans have died or been maimed over the last century, defending Europe from itself.
The proposal is to position military material, NOT send American troops to invade Russia such as Russia HAS done in Ukraine.
Yet you blame the US for trying "everything" to set the world on fire".
I can hear the criticism now about how, if/when Russia re-occupies (dont forget THAT sad, repulsive post1945 history) the Baltic Republics, the US will be criticized for "letting it happen" ... AGAIN. Deja vu all over again.
I am getting tired of the perception that the US is the problem. I am no fan of Rand Paul but the corollary to the previous sentence would be for us to stop pretending to be the solution to other countries problems which they cant or wont deal with.
Lets not forget this is being done within the NATO framework and at the request of the host countries. You know, preventative medicine at the request of the patient.
Slice Russia into pieces? Why would anyone want it? It isnt worth expending American lives. Too many Americans have died or been maimed over the last century, defending Europe from itself.
2
It would be such a mistake to commit real troops and military assets to this cause when Vladimir Putin is so vulnerable to exposure as an arch criminal who has so many skeletons in the closet that salvos of substantiated truths make more sense than throwing good people and assets at each other while he gets away with every crime in the book. He is literally responsible to the apartment complex bombings he blamed on Chechnians--often referred to as the Russian 9-11--which swept him to power. The man has killed thousands of Russians in ruses to create the appearance of enemies which he then committed Russian troops to fighting which took many of their lives as well as those he blamed for various assaults on Russia. He has defrauded the Russian people of over $40 Billion and has changed laws to give himself the power in perpetuity of a Czar. America would be just victims an an arch-criminal's means to retain power.
1
Speaking as a baby boomer this is very disappointing and pretty disheartening. Not the legacy of our youthful aspirations of peace I would have liked anyway. Is there some linkage to the paranoia and stress in society as a result of 9/11 and our subsequent reaction and then actions taken during the atrocity of permanent war?
Battle tanks? Infantry fighting vehicles? Will this macho posturing never end?
1
I remember a good slogan from the 1960's that applies to this move:
"US out of everywhere!"
"US out of everywhere!"
5
Reading many of these comments, I am reminded of Winston Churchill's reflections on the run-up to WWII:
"Delight in smooth sounding platitudes, refusal to face unpleasant facts, genuine love of peace and pathetic belief that love can be its sole foundation, the utter devotion of the Liberals to sentiment apart from reality--though free from wickedness or evil design, played a definite part in the unleashing upon the world of horrors and miseries."
Putin does not respect weakness.
"Delight in smooth sounding platitudes, refusal to face unpleasant facts, genuine love of peace and pathetic belief that love can be its sole foundation, the utter devotion of the Liberals to sentiment apart from reality--though free from wickedness or evil design, played a definite part in the unleashing upon the world of horrors and miseries."
Putin does not respect weakness.
6
Russians of all stipes sees Russia's actions in Crimea as defensive. After all, the US played a major role in the Ukrainian coup that immediately preceded this crisis; this coup raised the very serious question of Russian access to and control over major ports and petroleum reserves in the Black Sea, Russia's only access to the Atlantic other than through the North Sea. Of course they annexed Crimea, a totally predictable, although brutal move. Russian actions in the Black Sea/Ukrainian sphere don't portend their aggression in the Baltic. This is hype.
The U.S. abrogated the original NATO agreements, as is actually made clear in this article.
The U.S. abrogated the original NATO agreements, as is actually made clear in this article.
5
The overthrow of Yanukovich was no coup and the US didn't play anything likeca large part, if it played a part at all. The article indicates the agreement assumed no foreseeable changes in the security situation. Contrary to your 20-20 hindsight, the Russian annexation was not predictable (the Orange Revolution did not occasion it) and this is exactly the kind of change the agreement covers.
2
So we put equipment stashes (i.e. military bases) next to Russia ... and Putin just acquiesces? Wrong, Putin will escalate.
3
So let him escalate. He's already massed troops on the borders of Baltic nations. All a move like this does is reaffirm the U.S.'s commitment to its NATO allies. Now both sides have their cards on the table, as long as Putin thinks that the U.S. is willing to fight to protect those nations, he will never act and that is the entire point. Russia is like that little kid that keeps pushing the envelope, seeing how much they can get away with. You don't get them to behave better through appeasement, it only further emboldens them.
2
The Pentagon is counting on Putin escalating. Then it pushes for the end of sequestration and larger Department of Offense budgets to counter the threat of Putin's nuclear arsenal. When a Republican hawk is sworn in as President in 2017, the emerging Military Class - enabled by the MIC - will be in hog heaven. Hail Americana!
This article contains many opinions from people who think this strategy is a good idea. As is evident by the comments section, there are many thoughtful people who think this approach is folly. Why does the NYT not include any other perspectives? In the meantime, I am reminded of Brecht's Mother Courage. All this grotesque breast beating and power displays Reminds one of many species in the animal kingdom. As with Mother Courage, the humans who will pay for all this silly machismo will be the average citizens of the Balkans should the extremely unlikely occur and a war actually break out.
4
What gives us the right to police the world? The war industry is alive and well. Too bad they do not have the same dedication to education or our roads. This "tough guy" diplomacy can not end well.
4
(i) In the short run this will come to nothing.
(ii) Putin knows Obama will never deliver on a threat.
(iii) In the long it won't end well. See (ii) above.
(ii) Putin knows Obama will never deliver on a threat.
(iii) In the long it won't end well. See (ii) above.
1
Putin says, “I think that only an insane person and only in a dream can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO.” True. But SANE people know Putin took Crimea against the will of its people. And Putin is instigating the Ukrainian insurgency.
Putin has an evil desire to own the world. And he has a childs temperament to show the USA that he too has an Army. So now we have to warn him to stand down and give back that which isn't his.It's like we went back 50 years in politics with Russia. This one upmanship ought to have been finished.
I sure hope we get a hawkish president for the next 8 years. Putin would never have felt so emboldened.
Putin has an evil desire to own the world. And he has a childs temperament to show the USA that he too has an Army. So now we have to warn him to stand down and give back that which isn't his.It's like we went back 50 years in politics with Russia. This one upmanship ought to have been finished.
I sure hope we get a hawkish president for the next 8 years. Putin would never have felt so emboldened.
6
Putin will continue to do what he is doing and more, but the next "hawkish" president will sure put Americans in danger if do what you proposing.
When you get your hawkish President, I trust you will be first in line at the Marine Recruiting Office. Give Putin a swift kick when you roll into Moscow.
First, the Cold War did not end just because a wall came down. Russia still has thousands of nuclear warheads sitting on missiles pointed at us. Let us all debunk the Reagan-Won-The-Cold-War myth, once and for all. It was nice that the people of Eastern Europe won their independence, but that had nothing to do with Reagan or the term "Cold War", which was fashioned after WW2 to describe the nuclear stale mate between the US and the USSR. Pro military politicians in Washington used this term to re-arm America. Joe McCarthy used it to launch his Committee on unAmerican Activities, which was, in itself, unAmerican. All of this led to Vietnam. Or, if you like, unmatched stupidity.
Second, we shouldn't have to put US equipment anywhere to make a point with Putin. Such a move doesn't show strength, it shows weakness. It's childish. Call him. Tell him to get out of Ukraine now. If he says "no", cut Russia off from the rest of the world completely: banks, trade, food, travel, everything. Wham. Russians are the worst farmers on this planet. Putin will threaten to cutoff Europe's natural gas supply. Call his bluff. Let the Russian people rise up and oust that communist relic. Play poker instead of making war. He can't win at poker. Every scenario leaves him worse off.
Second, we shouldn't have to put US equipment anywhere to make a point with Putin. Such a move doesn't show strength, it shows weakness. It's childish. Call him. Tell him to get out of Ukraine now. If he says "no", cut Russia off from the rest of the world completely: banks, trade, food, travel, everything. Wham. Russians are the worst farmers on this planet. Putin will threaten to cutoff Europe's natural gas supply. Call his bluff. Let the Russian people rise up and oust that communist relic. Play poker instead of making war. He can't win at poker. Every scenario leaves him worse off.
2
I can only assume you are outraged at the unamerican activities this president is perpetrating on the American people.
Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Lebanon, Gaza, South Ossetia, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and more...
We have invaded, bombed/bombing, and supported war in all of the above and more and we are worried about someone else's "aggression"?!
Let us not leave out Ukraine. We were behind "the most blatant coup in history" (Google that phrase, why don't you) and immediately gave official recognition to the junta that had violently seized power. *Because* we had hand picked the leadership ourselves!
This junta, on its first day, as its first act and without debate voted to attack and lessen the rights of its Russian-speaking citizenry. Giddy with power and the success of that first vote, the most right-wing elements promised that completely removing the citizenship of Russian-speakers was now on the agenda.
Government buildings all over Ukraine were being seized by these right-wing militias in the first days after the coup.
In the regions where Russia-speakers were concentrated the violence and hatred of the junta did not go unnoticed. In the US State Department they were popping corks.
It was a wild-west situation and the *autonomous* region of Crimea, which had *its own Parliament*, certainly took notice!
The autonomous Parliament of Crimea conducted its business in the Russian language and passed its laws in Russian. The junta in Kiev had voted as its first act, on its first day in power, to remove the protected rights of the Russian language. Crimea voted Independence.
We have invaded, bombed/bombing, and supported war in all of the above and more and we are worried about someone else's "aggression"?!
Let us not leave out Ukraine. We were behind "the most blatant coup in history" (Google that phrase, why don't you) and immediately gave official recognition to the junta that had violently seized power. *Because* we had hand picked the leadership ourselves!
This junta, on its first day, as its first act and without debate voted to attack and lessen the rights of its Russian-speaking citizenry. Giddy with power and the success of that first vote, the most right-wing elements promised that completely removing the citizenship of Russian-speakers was now on the agenda.
Government buildings all over Ukraine were being seized by these right-wing militias in the first days after the coup.
In the regions where Russia-speakers were concentrated the violence and hatred of the junta did not go unnoticed. In the US State Department they were popping corks.
It was a wild-west situation and the *autonomous* region of Crimea, which had *its own Parliament*, certainly took notice!
The autonomous Parliament of Crimea conducted its business in the Russian language and passed its laws in Russian. The junta in Kiev had voted as its first act, on its first day in power, to remove the protected rights of the Russian language. Crimea voted Independence.
2
This morning, as I was reading this NYTimes article about the proposal to deploy 5,000 American troops along with battle tanks and infantry to the Baltics and Eastern Europe – a chilling memory crossed my mind. Today marks 74 years since the Soviets deported 15,545 totally innocent Latvian citizens to their cruel fates in Siberia and other concentration camps in Russia. Among them were my grandfather, Karlis August Buss, grandmother Minna and aunt Irma (Minna and Irma were allowed to return to Latvian in 1957 but Karlis died from starvation en route to Siberia) Under Stalin’s rule, a series of mass Soviet deportations of tens of thousands of people from the Baltic states, Ukraine, Belarus, Russian and Moldova started on June 14, 1941 following the occupation and annexation of the Baltic States. The Cold War followed the end of World War II and today Mr. Putin is the one terrorizing the free world—along with ISIS. WELCOME to Latvia – NATO and US troops.
9
Hopefully your post can educate the left wing American fellow travelers.
1
I am sorry but we have enough problems of our own like crumbling infrastructure and skyrocketing prices for education and healthcare. Why do we you have to pay for your defense?
It beggars belief how the US tries everything to set this world on fire. Arenn`t they already involved in enough war and haven`t they initiated sufficient civil wars? Reading comment section of big European papers one is amazed how a mojority of Europeans obviously despise the US by now.
To take over the Ukraine has been planned by the Pentagon and the powers that rule the US since a long time. One only has to read Brzezinski`s book, "The Grand Cheesboard". He made it already in the 90`s very clear that in order to slice Russia into pieces the US has to get control over Ukraine, by whatever means.
To take over the Ukraine has been planned by the Pentagon and the powers that rule the US since a long time. One only has to read Brzezinski`s book, "The Grand Cheesboard". He made it already in the 90`s very clear that in order to slice Russia into pieces the US has to get control over Ukraine, by whatever means.
2
Insane it is, putting military hardware in Russian backyard. It’s provocative, senseless, stupid and dangerous.
US needs over 5 trillion to overhaul aging infrastructure, more than 4 trillion to upgrade military hardware, 18.2 trillion debt to pay, healthcare, education, law and order everything needs improvement. These are the priorities everyone in Washington DC should be caring about not putting boots or equipment in Eastern or Western Europe.
To maintain US influence and its due place and respect in the world, it has to opt just polices with in and outside. Starting new cold or laying down the foundation of actual war is not in American or European interest. 60’s Cuba, 70’s Vietnam, 80 Afghanistan, 90’s Iraq, 2000’s Afghanistan again, is it enough to learn lessons from history. Its 21 centaury, priorities should be putting house and economy in order, what we see and experience, is opposite, it does not really matter which Govt is in Washington, Republicans or Desecrates. Its all about starting or laying down foundations for war, putting more Americans in harms way and accumulating more debt for generations to come, it’s simply insane.
US needs over 5 trillion to overhaul aging infrastructure, more than 4 trillion to upgrade military hardware, 18.2 trillion debt to pay, healthcare, education, law and order everything needs improvement. These are the priorities everyone in Washington DC should be caring about not putting boots or equipment in Eastern or Western Europe.
To maintain US influence and its due place and respect in the world, it has to opt just polices with in and outside. Starting new cold or laying down the foundation of actual war is not in American or European interest. 60’s Cuba, 70’s Vietnam, 80 Afghanistan, 90’s Iraq, 2000’s Afghanistan again, is it enough to learn lessons from history. Its 21 centaury, priorities should be putting house and economy in order, what we see and experience, is opposite, it does not really matter which Govt is in Washington, Republicans or Desecrates. Its all about starting or laying down foundations for war, putting more Americans in harms way and accumulating more debt for generations to come, it’s simply insane.
1
Here we go, another boondoggle for "defense" contractors.
2
The article speaks of "fears among the eastern NATO allies that they could face a Russian threat". This is rather misleading. Those fears are mostly restricted to Poland, the Baltic dwarfs and the US installed government in Ukraine.
One has to wonder how much of this is real fear and how much of it is hatred that wants to be protected from the consequences if it acts out.
One has to wonder how much of this is real fear and how much of it is hatred that wants to be protected from the consequences if it acts out.
1
From a european who has long benefitted from US largesse while his people enjoy comfortable, safe early retirements on MY tax dollar...you are despicable, and in NO POSITION whatsover to question what my government does or does not do. There are millions of hungry americans out there who could have easily been fed using the money wasted defending the likes of you; go ask the Ukrainians if their fears about a putin-led invasion are imaginary.
1
"Those fears are mostly restricted to Poland, the Baltic dwarfs "
Those are the eastern NATO allies, thus the characterization is accurate. By the way, no one from the Netherlands should be disparaging other countries as "dwarfs." The government in Ukraine wasn't U.S.-installed.
Those are the eastern NATO allies, thus the characterization is accurate. By the way, no one from the Netherlands should be disparaging other countries as "dwarfs." The government in Ukraine wasn't U.S.-installed.
2
This a true Alice in Wonderland article. The Russians have been endlessly provoked in their own backyard by NATO. The Ukraine gov't, after the 2/14 coup, makes noises as if they were going to turn Ukrainian Russians into second class citizens. They expect to get sovereignty over the whole country. Now NATO is propositioning equipment in Estonia and preparing for a military deployment. Dangerous is an understatement. Unnecessary is certainly the case. The endless efforts to demonize Putin and make him into a threat only bring some sort of confrontation close.
8
Do we never learn from history? Once a superpower, the U.S.S.R. falls apart. Russia is forced to face the music it created for itself. Its sphere of influence is crushed. Nonetheless, Russians are human beings and a proud people. After World War II, the Marshall Plan rebuilt Western Europe with amazing results. What did we do after the break-up of the U.S.S.R.? Nothing.
What if, then, we had invited Russia to join NATO? What if in 1993 Russia had been invited to join the EU? What a different world we would be living in.
So we don’t like what Putin has done in Crimea and against Ukraine. What else is news? Here we go poking Russia’s eye for doing the same things our own country does over and over. Does “American exceptionalism” make us any better in geo-politics? I think not.
Nor do I think it is too late to reset the relationship with Russia. Diplomacy is less expensive than war, or the threat of war. Invite Russia to join NATO. Encourage the EU to invite them to become a full member. Why aren’t we building bridges instead of weapons between the two largest nuclear arsenals?
Lest one thinks this is pie-in-the-sky thinking, remember without Russia, NASA would not be able to continue space missions. Without Russian technicians, scientists, and aviation designers, Boeing would not be able to design and create the next generation of jet aircraft.
Why are we resurrecting another Cold War when the obvious solution is working together?
What if, then, we had invited Russia to join NATO? What if in 1993 Russia had been invited to join the EU? What a different world we would be living in.
So we don’t like what Putin has done in Crimea and against Ukraine. What else is news? Here we go poking Russia’s eye for doing the same things our own country does over and over. Does “American exceptionalism” make us any better in geo-politics? I think not.
Nor do I think it is too late to reset the relationship with Russia. Diplomacy is less expensive than war, or the threat of war. Invite Russia to join NATO. Encourage the EU to invite them to become a full member. Why aren’t we building bridges instead of weapons between the two largest nuclear arsenals?
Lest one thinks this is pie-in-the-sky thinking, remember without Russia, NASA would not be able to continue space missions. Without Russian technicians, scientists, and aviation designers, Boeing would not be able to design and create the next generation of jet aircraft.
Why are we resurrecting another Cold War when the obvious solution is working together?
14
Putin/Russia had no active part in the initial coup and resulting violence that engulfed Ukraine and no one yet has publishe an account of who was responsible and what the objectives were.
Putin's reactions have been to carefully pick up prime pieces and strengthen his position as his opponents made mistakes. This is not aggression or invasion but good practice.
The reality,from Europe's perspective is that Russia's huge natural resource base will provide a steady flow of essential raw materials which will have,and indeed is having,a very important economic effect on employment and investment which will further develop in the future.
The vast majority of Europeans see Russia as an important trade partner and have no interest in paying more than lip service to confrontation politics.
Putin's reactions have been to carefully pick up prime pieces and strengthen his position as his opponents made mistakes. This is not aggression or invasion but good practice.
The reality,from Europe's perspective is that Russia's huge natural resource base will provide a steady flow of essential raw materials which will have,and indeed is having,a very important economic effect on employment and investment which will further develop in the future.
The vast majority of Europeans see Russia as an important trade partner and have no interest in paying more than lip service to confrontation politics.
13
Never thought that history would be repeating itself so quickly. It's Cold War all over again. And again the world is faced with mutually assured destruction. Only this time it would be more dangerous because of former Warsaw Pact countries are now members of NATO. And the US Congress is populated with so-called chicken hawks.
Have we not learned anything from 50 years of Cold War? Instead of reducing nuclear warheads, both the US and Russia have halted negotiation on reducing them. China is now making its nuclear warheads MIRVs. The Russians no doubt will see this shift in US policy as a provocation and will respond in kind. This is insane.
Have we not learned anything from 50 years of Cold War? Instead of reducing nuclear warheads, both the US and Russia have halted negotiation on reducing them. China is now making its nuclear warheads MIRVs. The Russians no doubt will see this shift in US policy as a provocation and will respond in kind. This is insane.
4
Cold war? No, go back a little further to 1933 and the fall of the Weimar Republic.
1
So, what are your proposals in reference to Central Europe, especially Poland?
J.I.
J.I.
Glad you've asked. My proposal is to make the former Warsaw Pact countries non-aligned and both the US and Russia will guarantee their independence and security. This, in my view, is the best possible outcome for Poland and one that Russia would readily accept. The only question is could the US unshackles itself from the past, recognizes the folly of power politics and war and accept it.
No one has made more international enemies in the last 400 days than the Russian President Vladimir Putin.
3
The threat of Russian aggression is real. Latvia itself prepares for Russian invasion with military drills simulating hybrid war. They've been watching the Russian invasion of Ukraine very closely.
Russia won't invade the Baltic states in open, conventional war but rather through separatists with "no association" to Russia, similar with Crimea. The EU countries bordering Russia are very concerned and opposed to Russia. This is their fear and they request for US support. In exchange, there's an improvement in relations, a demonstration of commitment to our friends.
Sure US isn't a great country or exemplary model. But I would much rather have the US be the world leader in terms of morals, behavior, stability than have Russia or China. The way their people act doesn't inspire confidence or a better world. The US, while not great, is still better.
Russia won't invade the Baltic states in open, conventional war but rather through separatists with "no association" to Russia, similar with Crimea. The EU countries bordering Russia are very concerned and opposed to Russia. This is their fear and they request for US support. In exchange, there's an improvement in relations, a demonstration of commitment to our friends.
Sure US isn't a great country or exemplary model. But I would much rather have the US be the world leader in terms of morals, behavior, stability than have Russia or China. The way their people act doesn't inspire confidence or a better world. The US, while not great, is still better.
7
Note: Poland is in Central Europe, not Eastern Europe. It is in fact the geographical center of the continent. I'm a little tired of giving geography lessons, as I am a Professor of Architecture, but this point never seems to sink in.
3
“If something happens, we can’t wait days or weeks for more equipment,” said Mr. Vejonis, who will become Latvia’s president in July. “We need to react immediately.”
"Something" apparently means "If we are attacked by Russia", which is not going to happen. But fanning these fears helps lay the foundation for the US to violate the 1997 NATO-Russian agreement by deploying troops and equipment to the Baltic States and Poland.
All this does is decrease trust and increase the momentum towards a complete collapse in all arms control agreements, something which only serves the interest of those who manufacture the weapons.
5,000 or 50,000 US/NATO troops will not defeat the Russian armed forces at the borders of Russia. But should such a war begin, it will inevitably lead one side or the other to use their nuclear weapons, in order to prevent defeat on the battlefield. Is anyone in Washington capable of thinking that far ahead?
"Something" apparently means "If we are attacked by Russia", which is not going to happen. But fanning these fears helps lay the foundation for the US to violate the 1997 NATO-Russian agreement by deploying troops and equipment to the Baltic States and Poland.
All this does is decrease trust and increase the momentum towards a complete collapse in all arms control agreements, something which only serves the interest of those who manufacture the weapons.
5,000 or 50,000 US/NATO troops will not defeat the Russian armed forces at the borders of Russia. But should such a war begin, it will inevitably lead one side or the other to use their nuclear weapons, in order to prevent defeat on the battlefield. Is anyone in Washington capable of thinking that far ahead?
5
This action will create new jobs to leaders. They or their representative will meet in Viana, talk about minimizing weapons in east Europe. There will be compromise to reduce it by 5 percent. To mark the success of dialogue, Champagne bottle will be opened. Reporter will ask questions.
1
What are these supposed aggressive actions by the Russians? Why cant the article be more specific about?
4
Invading a sovereign state and annexing a large chunk of territory. I guess you missed that part.
1
This is nothing but saber rattling and war mongering on the U.S. government's part; directly acting against both the interests and the wishes of the American people. 70 years after World War II ended why do we have military bases and troops anywhere in Europe at all? All these decades the American nation has allowed the major European nations such as Britain, France, Germany, and Italy a "free ride" on so called defense against the phantom threat from the old bogeyman of Russia. While the United States has thrown away literally trillions of dollars on military spending, much directed at a made up threat in Europe, the nations of the European Community laughed all the way to the bank as they took the money they saved by Uncle Sam picking up their military tab and instituted comprehensive, universal single payer health care, including dentistry and optical benefits, subsidized housing, low cost college education, high caliber grade school education, generous welfare and unemployment benefits, and other socialized "goodies" that we Americans have been denied because we are told by the politicians we "can't afford it". Our tax dollars have been squandered being the world's policemen for the White Collar Mafia of the big banks/ big business while our middle class is being liquidated, and poverty, unemployment, and social stratification grow worse by the day. But we must always remember that America is the world's number one nation! Indeed we are. Number one in military spending!
16
How much money did American companies make since 1945 by the US military providing stability in Europe? For Decades after WWII, America was the primary provider of goods to most Europeans.
1
That's one of the reasons the military financial complex insists on condeminng the mere idea of socialism: they don't want us "citizens" to become envious of the ways in which the taxes of the northern European countries go toward quality of life expeditures. They would much rather we toil away to pay for trillions of dollars of military contracts.
The action by the US is simply a statement for American voters.
If nothing else, and there is a lot, Putin is someone who calculates in an ice cold way.
There is nothing to be gained for Russia in starting a war, regardless under which reasoning, in Europe.
So Russia will not even consider this an option.
There is no Russian population that could be motived to call for intervention, not even in the Baltic states.
There nothing else Russia could want in Europe that could be obtained by military action.
So why does the US - again - play war games on foreign soil?
Because it easier to cry wolf when there certainly is no wolf to be fond when one has nothing else to offer.
The US has plenty issues at home to solve.
Time to start at the home front, the world is sick and tired of US intervention abroad when at home things run afoul.
So far, foreign countries have lost millions of people when the US needed to distract from it's own problems.
Not one of these dead are worth to be killed because of US domestic issues.
If nothing else, and there is a lot, Putin is someone who calculates in an ice cold way.
There is nothing to be gained for Russia in starting a war, regardless under which reasoning, in Europe.
So Russia will not even consider this an option.
There is no Russian population that could be motived to call for intervention, not even in the Baltic states.
There nothing else Russia could want in Europe that could be obtained by military action.
So why does the US - again - play war games on foreign soil?
Because it easier to cry wolf when there certainly is no wolf to be fond when one has nothing else to offer.
The US has plenty issues at home to solve.
Time to start at the home front, the world is sick and tired of US intervention abroad when at home things run afoul.
So far, foreign countries have lost millions of people when the US needed to distract from it's own problems.
Not one of these dead are worth to be killed because of US domestic issues.
4
The USA provoking and encroaching on Russia because Russia supports countries opposed to Israel in the Middle-East, is the way to World War III.
5
Who comes up with these very bad ideas. We want to calm the situation down not make it worse. Sounds like the sort of idea that comes from John Mccain or Lindsey Graham.
This will only worse then situation and cause Russia to station more troops and armor on it borders. This idea should get an immediate veto from anyone with common sense.
This will only worse then situation and cause Russia to station more troops and armor on it borders. This idea should get an immediate veto from anyone with common sense.
12
"This will only worse then situation and cause Russia to station more troops and armor on it border"
So what, there have been troops and equipment massed along the dmz for decades and war has not been broken out. All this move is reaffirm the U.S.'s commitment to its NATO allies. The more the U.S. seems willing to act to defend these nations, the less likely war becomes. Russia already has troops and equipment on the borders of these nations. The mistake that many Americans seem to make is acting as if Russia has a right to control these nations how they see fit.
If you woke up tomorrow and the U.S. was openly making threats toward Canada and deploying thousands of soldiers and tanks to the Canadian border, you would be right to criticize the unwarranted aggression so why does Russia get off with a free pass from folks like you.
So what, there have been troops and equipment massed along the dmz for decades and war has not been broken out. All this move is reaffirm the U.S.'s commitment to its NATO allies. The more the U.S. seems willing to act to defend these nations, the less likely war becomes. Russia already has troops and equipment on the borders of these nations. The mistake that many Americans seem to make is acting as if Russia has a right to control these nations how they see fit.
If you woke up tomorrow and the U.S. was openly making threats toward Canada and deploying thousands of soldiers and tanks to the Canadian border, you would be right to criticize the unwarranted aggression so why does Russia get off with a free pass from folks like you.
1
I think our whole foreign policy is wrong with respect to NATO. Why should we care about the Baltics when they don't care enough to spend 2% of their GDP on defense? If they don't want to spend money on defense why should we spend OUR TAXPAYER money to defend freeloaders.
Unless countries keep up their 2% dues in NATO they should either be kicked out or lose Article 5 Protection. We are too much in debt to pay76% of NATO bills. We have to stop being the policeman of the world - other nations have defense responsibility. They need to live up to them and not expect the US to do it for them. If they are too cheap to pay their bills, then I really don't think we should care what happens to them.
Unless countries keep up their 2% dues in NATO they should either be kicked out or lose Article 5 Protection. We are too much in debt to pay76% of NATO bills. We have to stop being the policeman of the world - other nations have defense responsibility. They need to live up to them and not expect the US to do it for them. If they are too cheap to pay their bills, then I really don't think we should care what happens to them.
History repeats itself. Napoleon and Hitler thought Russia would be a pushover. Lets skip the next Stalingrad and let Putin burn out naturally.
5
Prepositioning equipment for 150 troops in each of the Baltic States and for a "mighty" battalion of no more than 1000 in each of the other border countries, but none in the Ukraine, is not exactly similar to the more than one million troops Hitler deployed. It's more akin to the scenario in Peter Seller's wonderful comedy, "The mouse that roared". Were Putin to send volunteers and others into any of these countries, the US could simply abandon the minuscule equipment cache rather than commit troops and prestige.
No one is suggesting that we will invade Russia, no one is suggesting that we will use nuclear weapons to defend these countries or our troops. This equipment is no threat to Russia whatsoever nor should the people of these nations consider this deployment to be a sign of a commitment for unqualified, unlimited military support.
No one is suggesting that we will invade Russia, no one is suggesting that we will use nuclear weapons to defend these countries or our troops. This equipment is no threat to Russia whatsoever nor should the people of these nations consider this deployment to be a sign of a commitment for unqualified, unlimited military support.
1
The article says that the idea of positioning military equipment on Eastern European bases is only a proposal. The source for the story is left unnamed but no doubt either a supporter in the Pentagon or in the Republican Senate (like John McCain's office). At this time the proposal has yet to be formalized, vetted, or approved by the Defense Secretary, National Security advisers, President and allies. In other words, this story is a product of the pro-military rumor mill. Nuff said.
1
"Russia is already attacking civilian ships in the Baltic."
Hey, it's a lot worse than that! Haven't you heard? Putin ordered the shoot-down of the Malaysia Airlines plane. And there are columns of Russian troops rolling through the eastern Ukraine, heading straight for Kiev!
I am not making this up. I was just about to post some videos on YouTube -= for those skeptical types who insist on what they call "evidence." But then something went wrong with my camera and all the videos got erased. I'm sure Putin was behind that too.
And this isn't just recent. Remember how everyone used to blame everything on Qaddafi, and before him on the Ayatollah Khomeini? Well, Qaddafi's been dead for 4 years now, and Khomeini a lot longer than that. But this stuff is still happening.
Makes you stop and think, doesn't it?
Hey, it's a lot worse than that! Haven't you heard? Putin ordered the shoot-down of the Malaysia Airlines plane. And there are columns of Russian troops rolling through the eastern Ukraine, heading straight for Kiev!
I am not making this up. I was just about to post some videos on YouTube -= for those skeptical types who insist on what they call "evidence." But then something went wrong with my camera and all the videos got erased. I'm sure Putin was behind that too.
And this isn't just recent. Remember how everyone used to blame everything on Qaddafi, and before him on the Ayatollah Khomeini? Well, Qaddafi's been dead for 4 years now, and Khomeini a lot longer than that. But this stuff is still happening.
Makes you stop and think, doesn't it?
1
Sigh. Could we act any more slowly? Why wasn't this done as soon as there was trouble in Crimea?
1
Because after that the same thing was welcome from US when it happened in Kosovo, because it was pro US interests, there was no nerve enough to criticize that the same thing got done pro-Russia
This meaningless shift in foreign policy by Obama is to divert the attention of the world from the imminent danger of the escalating ISIS caliphate. Putin has categorically stated that Moscow has no plans to attack Europe. Obama is raising this bogey ( while allowing ISIS which started its career as a ragtag rampaging terrorists are now occupying vast swathes of Iraq, Syria, Libya and now Yemen plus thousands of American tanks, vehicles and large cache of American arms) so that the world can ignore the menacing expansion of caliphate and the barbaric atrocities of ISIS jihadists. Obama has deliberately been antagonizing Russia. At G7 summit hie bragged too much and referred to Russian aggression. Crimeans voted to be with Russia as the Scots voted to be with England, and it is foolish to call it 'aggression.' Obama is not prepared to order boots on the ground to halt the expanding ISIS caliphate. But he is planning to store battle tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and other heavy weapons for as many as 5,000 American troops in several Baltic and Eastern European countries, Probably Obama wants to weaken Christian Russia in a war so that ISIS could extend its caliphate to Russia in a future war.
4
Congratulations to the Pentagon and the war profiteers. Meanwhile, there's "no money" for Medicare, student grants, social security, or our electrical grid. But if tanks and other "heavy weaponry" are making a comeback, then it's all worth while. And against Russia, too, which might well provide a "war" that would last even longer than our endless thrashing around in the Middle East and drain us to penury.
Is this nation no more than a base for men who want power and wealth to extract our money and our children to further their aims in the world? Because it's sure looking that way.
Is this nation no more than a base for men who want power and wealth to extract our money and our children to further their aims in the world? Because it's sure looking that way.
6
Well, that's really smart. There are a lot of Russians who disapprove of Putin and support Western values. However, when threatened, their natural reaction would be defend their country, regardless whether they support the current government or not. NATO moves so far did nothing but brought Russian people together.
1
Russia should send troops to US border.
3
The difference is that nobody actually wants Russian troops, when they show up in your country, they tend to take over, kill anyone who opposes them, institute a puppet government and rule the country for decades.
In WW2, Germans fleeing generally made a beeline for American soldiers, not Russian, knowing that one would treat them humanly and the other with abject brutality.
In WW2, Germans fleeing generally made a beeline for American soldiers, not Russian, knowing that one would treat them humanly and the other with abject brutality.
1
Yes, to make them feel what actually feels the people of Russia
Better would be to cut trade ties and cut imports from Gazprom. Until Russia leaves Crimea Ukraine and other places, the west should add sanctions quarterly, ever increasing. The weapons deployment is ok but wont stop the Russians if they want to increase their war activity The only thing that will stop them is to cut off their cash
1
This is nuts. We need good relations with Russia and China.
4
And do we maintain these "good" relations even after Russia annexes Poland (again) and China takes over Japan?
No one forced the former Soviet bloc nations to join NATO. They did so because they are intimately familiar with Russian ambitions and capabilities. When the Baltic states joined NATO, naysayers accused them of hysteria and Russophobia because post-communist Russia was supposedly a friendly and peaceful nation. The Baltic nations knew better, and they were right.
If the West does not stand up to Putin, they will only encourage his aggression and the subjugation of Russia's neighbors.
If the West does not stand up to Putin, they will only encourage his aggression and the subjugation of Russia's neighbors.
6
You are SO right. They had first hand experience with the Russians for half a century.
1
NATO was made to protect Europe against Russian expansionism. This equipment is part of getting NATO back to its original purpose.
7
Can we really fight wars in three fronts-middle east, south China sea, Eastern Europe at the simultaneously? Is this nation USA being controlled by the suicidal neocon war hogs and military industries? Are we going to send our poor citizens who we call "volunteers" to be cannon fodder or are we ready to reinstitute military draft for every man and woman in this country? Are we just bluffing or are we serious?
Right now, EU is trying to save itself from disintegration, and this new development is much much more ominous.
Right now, EU is trying to save itself from disintegration, and this new development is much much more ominous.
1
"Is this nation USA being controlled by the suicidal neocon war hogs and military industries?"
Yes, and led by President Obama.
Yes, and led by President Obama.
1
We should disengage from all other theaters EXCEPT Eastern Europe. They are one of the few peoples' in the world who truly value freedom and democracy. Our interests there are the most altruistic of them all, uncomplicated by oil and other concerns.
Of I am very pro-American as a Brit. who lived there since the 60s but given the present volatile situation between Ukraine and Russia isn,t that like putting more coals on the fire ?
1
Tell that to Poles and Balts...
J.I.
J.I.
And what would Putin do if the Ukrainian government asked for the U.S. to base equipment and troops on their soil? They, the Ukrainians, are in their rights to ask for such help and assistance. There is one thing the Russians understand, and that is strength. Putin is playing chess, and the west is playing checkers. Time to realize the actual game that is being played.
As for the areas of Ukraine that are dominated by Russian speakers, how many years of russification have the Ukrainians suffered, and isn't Russia a large enough country to take in those Russian outside of its borders, without trying to gain more territory.
Yes, I know my last paragraph will gain me a lot of hateful comments, but so be it. Putin is a dictator, elected, yes, but still a dictator.
As for the areas of Ukraine that are dominated by Russian speakers, how many years of russification have the Ukrainians suffered, and isn't Russia a large enough country to take in those Russian outside of its borders, without trying to gain more territory.
Yes, I know my last paragraph will gain me a lot of hateful comments, but so be it. Putin is a dictator, elected, yes, but still a dictator.
2
Realistically, this is an old salesman's trick to put his foot in the door to gain access to make the sale. The long term Pentagon strategy appears to me to be containment of Russia within it's borders. What a shame that we were allies during World War II only to have some Generals decide that Russia was our enemy which led to the long term Cold War in which we started containment by organizing NATO, then concentrating on the southern flank of Russia by enterprises in Iran, Afghanistan in the 1980's and now, in Iraq all of which border Russia or their allies. Had McCain won the election, we would be everywhere on the Russian border and the objective is glaringly aparrent even today. The Pentagon is clearly insane and has been since the Cold War began as the select few military personnel and the C.I.A. has deliberately endangered hundreds of millions of American citizens with nuclear war. The campaign which included invasive propaganda for sixty odd years shows the mental defectiveness of military leaders bent on death and war. It really is an ongoing nightmare right there to see if you only consider history. We are doomed to war.
1
The containment of Russia was necessitated by its putting puppet regimes into power. NATO itself was preceded by both the Berlin blocked and the pro-Russian coup in Czechoslovakia. The idea that nuclear was is a threat at this point is pure hysterics.
1
"What a shame that we were allies during World War II "
Allies by necessity, not virtue. Being American it is easy for you to talk about "allies", meanwhile my country was overrun, mass murder and rape became widespread and we were subjugated to the will of the Soviets. In my family line, more people were murdered by Russians than Germans. In one incident, they took thousands of Polish soldiers, lined them up, put a bullet in the back of each of their heads and then lied about it for decades.
Stalin was an even bigger mass-murderer than Hitler and when Poland was invaded in 1939, it was a joint venture between the Germans and the Russians. Nobody in the West was under any misconception as to what the Soviets were all about, it was simply a bargain with the devil which had to be made but led to more murder and tragedy down the road.
Allies by necessity, not virtue. Being American it is easy for you to talk about "allies", meanwhile my country was overrun, mass murder and rape became widespread and we were subjugated to the will of the Soviets. In my family line, more people were murdered by Russians than Germans. In one incident, they took thousands of Polish soldiers, lined them up, put a bullet in the back of each of their heads and then lied about it for decades.
Stalin was an even bigger mass-murderer than Hitler and when Poland was invaded in 1939, it was a joint venture between the Germans and the Russians. Nobody in the West was under any misconception as to what the Soviets were all about, it was simply a bargain with the devil which had to be made but led to more murder and tragedy down the road.
This is a step backward. The Cold War ended under President Ronald Reagan and Russian Premier Gorbachev, and now President Obama and the U.S. military-industrial complex seem dead set on re-igniting it.
3
Absolutely, its much better to appease Russia and reward them for acting badly.
If tomorrow the U.S. started openly making threats toward Canada and then a few weeks later stationing troops and military equipment on their border, would you approve of that action, if not, then this is the equivalent of what Russia is doing currently. Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Lithuania, these are all independent nations, they do not belong to Russia anymore than Canada or Mexico belong to the U.S.
If tomorrow the U.S. started openly making threats toward Canada and then a few weeks later stationing troops and military equipment on their border, would you approve of that action, if not, then this is the equivalent of what Russia is doing currently. Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Lithuania, these are all independent nations, they do not belong to Russia anymore than Canada or Mexico belong to the U.S.
When war is your chief export, well, peace is bad for business.
1
The US has never been atacked by the North Pole through Canada. Canada has never been a part of the US whereas Ukraine has. The comparison between Canada and Ukraine is invalid.
The United States has again fallen sway to ethnic political pressures as NATO expansion as well as the latest move to send additional military assistance to Eastern European countries is based much more on long standing historical antagonism in this part of the world than on any realistic assessment of Russia in the post-Soviet era and of the fact that the Russian people as much as any others suffered under the communist regime. Just as Western Europe in the post World War Two era was able to form new political and economic relationships that have overcome centuries of mutual antagonism, so the United States should have sought to create the same economic and political relationships among the. countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. The situation in Ukraine, which has deep historical roots, is in some ways an extension the West's failure to create a cooperative framework for the countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union as was created in post World War Two Western Europe. Without this framework the region will remain locked in each country's historical perspective and each county's historical fears and antagonisms.
1
You really believe that contemporary Russia has changed? It is th same aggresive and imperialistic power like during Catherine the Great reign. Poles know that well.
J.I.
J.I.
Aww poor little Russia. It had no choice but to interfere in Ukraine, Transnistria and Georgia. It has the largest land mass of any country in the world and is building its armed forces up rapidly despite an anemic economy.
Those bully tiny ex Soviet states sitting next to Russia with their tiny armies. How dare they belong to a collective mutual defense alliance?
Trying to defend themselves is definitely anti-Russian. You would think that they would be nice and make it easier for Putin to do to them what he did to Ukraine.
NATO is the only thing stopping Putin. And that's why he hates NATO so much.
Those bully tiny ex Soviet states sitting next to Russia with their tiny armies. How dare they belong to a collective mutual defense alliance?
Trying to defend themselves is definitely anti-Russian. You would think that they would be nice and make it easier for Putin to do to them what he did to Ukraine.
NATO is the only thing stopping Putin. And that's why he hates NATO so much.
7
According to a Pew survey (NYT - June 10), “At least half of Germans, French and Italians say their country should not use military force to defend a NATO ally if attacked by Russia”
The chances of the US going to war with Russia over Ukraine or the Baltic states is close to zero.
The Russian economy is weak and they don't a war either.
This is just mindless posturing. The Pentagon believes that war is the solution to everything - Vietnam, Iraq & Afghanistan notwithstanding. That's their job; thankfully, there are saner minds in the US Government
The chances of the US going to war with Russia over Ukraine or the Baltic states is close to zero.
The Russian economy is weak and they don't a war either.
This is just mindless posturing. The Pentagon believes that war is the solution to everything - Vietnam, Iraq & Afghanistan notwithstanding. That's their job; thankfully, there are saner minds in the US Government
2
"According to a Pew survey (NYT - June 10), “At least half of Germans, French and Italians say their country should not use military force to defend a NATO ally if attacked by Russia”
Which is largely why the Baltic states regard promises by made these nations as worthless. America is the only currency that matters. Poland learned that the hard way in 1939 after the Germans and Russians marched in and the U.K. and France while making endless verbal threats, committed no military forces to defend their ally.
Which is largely why the Baltic states regard promises by made these nations as worthless. America is the only currency that matters. Poland learned that the hard way in 1939 after the Germans and Russians marched in and the U.K. and France while making endless verbal threats, committed no military forces to defend their ally.
There is a big difference between supporting freedom loving nations to which we are bound by treaty vs. countries with dictators and other tyrants who's people don't value democracy such as was the case in Vietnam and is currently the case in Mideastern countries today.
I agree that putting enough equipment on the ground to support a brigade will be taken by many people (and their governments) in Eastern Europe of the commitment if the United States to meet its obligations to defend against any attack on another NATO state. And that is good.
And even as a pacifist, I believe this is a time in which NATO must be prepared to use military force. Six years ago Putin went to Gdansk Poland and denounced the August, 1939 "Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact" - that led to the partition of Poland a week later - as "immoral," but as The Times reported on November 6th of last year, Putin's characterization on the Pact had evolved:"Serious research should show that those were the methods of foreign policy then." And the news hasn't gotten any better.
If someone can meaningfully distinguish between walking away from the Baltic states, and Germany's bloodless (to the outside) acquisition of Czechoslovakia in 1938, I'm listening.
But to compare the effect of positioning a brigade as a credible deterrent to Russian aggression borders on dark humor. It was one thing to bring a brigade into West Berlin in 1961, to be used if needed in the defense of a city. It is quite another to hold it out as a deterrent to aggression somewhere between the Baltic and the Balkans, to say nothing of the Ukraine, abutting Russia on two sides: it would in all likelihood fall before the first wave of U.S. troops even landed in Poland.
This isn't deterrence. It's theater.
And even as a pacifist, I believe this is a time in which NATO must be prepared to use military force. Six years ago Putin went to Gdansk Poland and denounced the August, 1939 "Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact" - that led to the partition of Poland a week later - as "immoral," but as The Times reported on November 6th of last year, Putin's characterization on the Pact had evolved:"Serious research should show that those were the methods of foreign policy then." And the news hasn't gotten any better.
If someone can meaningfully distinguish between walking away from the Baltic states, and Germany's bloodless (to the outside) acquisition of Czechoslovakia in 1938, I'm listening.
But to compare the effect of positioning a brigade as a credible deterrent to Russian aggression borders on dark humor. It was one thing to bring a brigade into West Berlin in 1961, to be used if needed in the defense of a city. It is quite another to hold it out as a deterrent to aggression somewhere between the Baltic and the Balkans, to say nothing of the Ukraine, abutting Russia on two sides: it would in all likelihood fall before the first wave of U.S. troops even landed in Poland.
This isn't deterrence. It's theater.
37
FMike says (and we have to assume with tongue in cheek), "And even as a pacifist,."
Nothing in his comments sounds like a pacifist. But if he were, his analysis is bogus. Comparing a capitalist Russia in 2015 with Nazi Germany of 1933 is beyond the pale.
Russia has always had its dark leaders. Russian humor is based on hundreds of years of Czars, commie overlords, a drunken American favorite and now Putin.
Russia has also had a fear of the outside and the many rather recent invasions of Russia by Japan (American ally), Britain (American ally), America, and twice by Germany (now an American ally) can only feel, touch and smell like America's final death plan for Russia.
Think about it: the USSR (actually Russia) gave up its desire for world conquest without firing a shot. It had the weapons to go down in flames and even as a last resort could have stated that unless (whatever its terms) it would take the world with it. But it didn't. Walls came down and the world was changed except for America's need to have an enemy and wars to keep its imperialist and colonial hegemony alive.
Instead of taking the high road, America took a low road and expanded the concept of military right trumps all our
slogans and propaganda about the Four Freedoms, the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the statement at the foot of the Statue of Liberty, and the Gettysburg Address. Instead it could be said that the Address of Gettysburg was changed to P.O. Box 1%, USA.
Nothing in his comments sounds like a pacifist. But if he were, his analysis is bogus. Comparing a capitalist Russia in 2015 with Nazi Germany of 1933 is beyond the pale.
Russia has always had its dark leaders. Russian humor is based on hundreds of years of Czars, commie overlords, a drunken American favorite and now Putin.
Russia has also had a fear of the outside and the many rather recent invasions of Russia by Japan (American ally), Britain (American ally), America, and twice by Germany (now an American ally) can only feel, touch and smell like America's final death plan for Russia.
Think about it: the USSR (actually Russia) gave up its desire for world conquest without firing a shot. It had the weapons to go down in flames and even as a last resort could have stated that unless (whatever its terms) it would take the world with it. But it didn't. Walls came down and the world was changed except for America's need to have an enemy and wars to keep its imperialist and colonial hegemony alive.
Instead of taking the high road, America took a low road and expanded the concept of military right trumps all our
slogans and propaganda about the Four Freedoms, the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the statement at the foot of the Statue of Liberty, and the Gettysburg Address. Instead it could be said that the Address of Gettysburg was changed to P.O. Box 1%, USA.
1
Your no pacifist, a pacifist would at least know the difference between Crimea's right to self determination, an illegal coup by pro-western forces in Kiev, and NATO aggression, vs Russian self-preservation. Your perception on this is more akin to neo-conservatives in Washington, period.
Canary in the coal mine.
All foreign affairs played on the public stage is theater. Canaries, soldiers, and kleptocrats ... actors all.
Enjoy the show because you will not get your money back.
All foreign affairs played on the public stage is theater. Canaries, soldiers, and kleptocrats ... actors all.
Enjoy the show because you will not get your money back.
In one simple sentence, it is about frickin time. Putin has been lying to the world for months and th west alas smiled politely back at him. He needs NATO tanks staring him squarely in the face. Many years ago I traded letters with a General in the Czech army about developing an EuTO, an Eastern Europe Treatoy Organization where the Baltic states and the newly freed states of Eastern Europe sign a mutual defense treaty.,somthwtbifmrussian troops March into one country like they are in the Ukraine today all the Eastern European states can join forces and defend themselves as one. Now I the time to put this into action. Lithuatian and Latvian troops need to,moe into the Ukraine and lush the Russians out. This war I eastern Urkarine is 80 pct Russian and 20 percent Ukrainean.
4
If America thinks it could ever win a land war against Russia, they are crazy
2
that is what they told the Afghans and Vietnamese.
It is not about war, it is about peace. Both sides are putting their cards on the table, both sides understand what the risks and potential consequences are, as long as both are playing the game, neither will act.
What would embolden Putin is appeasement by the U.S., sitting back and doing absolutely nothing while he masses troops and tanks on the borders of these Baltic states.
What would embolden Putin is appeasement by the U.S., sitting back and doing absolutely nothing while he masses troops and tanks on the borders of these Baltic states.
1
I hate that guns and weaponry are even manufactured, but given that they are and that they’ve become a part of everyday political life, and that Putin is an utterly corrupted human being with zero integrity even towards his own citizens, I think it's good that the US and NATO are looking ahead.
The extent to which Putin can be trusted is pretty well illustrated by his big friendship with Sepp Blatter. First Putin insisted that the exposure of FIFA's corruption was a US conspiracy then Blatter got on the bandwagon with him. Putin's not the smartest guy on the planet but he has the wiles of an over-entitled sociopath and I think the world needs to be wary of him.
The extent to which Putin can be trusted is pretty well illustrated by his big friendship with Sepp Blatter. First Putin insisted that the exposure of FIFA's corruption was a US conspiracy then Blatter got on the bandwagon with him. Putin's not the smartest guy on the planet but he has the wiles of an over-entitled sociopath and I think the world needs to be wary of him.
4
While I strongly disagree with pro Putin leftists who claim that the West has no right to put its armies to its own territory by the Russian border, I do agree with commentators saying that EU is not contributing enough to its defense. I agree that the US should not pay all the bills for the Baltic states. That's just unfair. But NATO must exercise its main duty - defense of all memberstates.
2
The Baltic states are building up their militaries and generally meeting their NATO obligations, it is other members of NATO that are not pulling their weight, which is largely why these Baltic states lean so heavily on the U.S.. America is the only currency that matters, they are seen as the defender of freedom for these nations. Nobody is looking for war, rather, it is to stand up to Putin and not allow him to keep pushing further. As long as both sides think that the other is willing to act, nobody will.
Poland is a good example that some countries in Europe can spend 2% GDP on military. You should keep in mind that Poland suffered great economic catastrophe before 1989 during the communist rule!
1
There seem to be some Kremlin trolls commenting here, and some isolationists as well. Isolationism is not a solution I lived in Finland for most of my life. Try to put yourself into the shoes of the 3 tiny Baltic States that watch nervously as Ukraine is attacked by Russia (yes, it is mostly Russia, the separatists without Russia's support would not last a week). Good move, Obama. Russia should not have anything to fear if it has nothing to hide.
4
This is a constructive policy shift. Economic sanctions have worked against Russia; but Putin is ignoring the hardship that sanctions are causing Russian citizens. As an ex-KGB colonel Putin only understands strength; and pre-positioning equipment allows allies who are eager to defend themselves if Russia attacks to defend themselves somewhat better. All GOP candidates except Rand Paul are eager to re-assert GW Bush like military power and these arms will give any of them some tools to get us back into war. Poland especially needs our pre-positioned equipment so that its citizens can calm down and know that the US will be their ally ,should Putin continue his Hitlerian practice of unwarranted expansion.
46
US military is the only threat! If you want us to calm down please stay where you are and fight your wars on your own territory!
I am very interested in "Economic sanctions have worked against Russia; but Putin is ignoring the hardship that sanctions are causing Russian citizens." So far, except for some predictable wishful thinking I have seen no evidence that the sanctions are having any detrimental effect on Russia. On the contrary they apear to be aiding Russia to make some internal economic changes that will be beneficial to the Russian economy and Russia turning East will strengthen the country.
1
And so the Cold War returns, it didn't take long.
3
Someone needs to put the US firmly back in it's place....Only Putin and Russia are the ones to do it......The rest will just fall in line.......
2
Spoken like someone who has no clue as to how oppressive life under Russian rule was. Why do you think most of Russia's neighbors are so eager to join in with the U.S.
America is not perfect, it makes a lot of mistakes but by far is the most benevolent hegemonic power that the world has seen. They are pretty much the only check on the designs of nations like Russia where the sentiment openly favors a reformation of the Soviet Union, whether by choice or by force.
America is not perfect, it makes a lot of mistakes but by far is the most benevolent hegemonic power that the world has seen. They are pretty much the only check on the designs of nations like Russia where the sentiment openly favors a reformation of the Soviet Union, whether by choice or by force.
2
SOFT POWER The current policy proposed for Eastern Europe and the Balkan countries can be seen as many things: a shot across the bow, a warning shot or drawing a line in the sand, all of which are the use of soft power. They differ in fundamental ways from the bluster, blunder and outright lies used to get us into Iraq. People feel impatient with Obama when he orders the use of such strategies, which is precisely the point. The moving of arms is intended to raise the pressure on Russia and to reassure allies. Such brinksmanship is a much more efficient way of sending a message because it allows all sides to maintain their dignity while responding to the shifting power balance. Has Dubya used such interventions rather than issuing threats and shaming Saddam, the invasion of Iraq might have been much more acceptable by taking half-measures first. But armchair history and hindsight are all 100% accurate. We won't know how well this will work until we try it.
1
I consider myself a liberal, but it's things like this that show how short-sighted American liberals and leftists can be. We all want peace, but sometimes you need to show strength in order to achieve it.
2
Si vis pacem, para bellum.
Its the only thing that tyrants understand, if you simply sit back and let them act unchecked, they will only progressively act worse. If you stand up to them, they usually back down. It is the mentality of all bullies.
As long as Russia is convinced that the U.S. will act to defend these nations, war will never happen.
Its the only thing that tyrants understand, if you simply sit back and let them act unchecked, they will only progressively act worse. If you stand up to them, they usually back down. It is the mentality of all bullies.
As long as Russia is convinced that the U.S. will act to defend these nations, war will never happen.
1
I think we should forget about ISIS and concentrate our efforts where the real threat lies, Eastern Europe.
1
Russia has been massively invaded from the West five times in the past 200 years. Napoleon, Anglo-French, German, Anglo-American, and German again. How many times has the West been invaded by Russian troops? Putin suffers from little man complex, but I think that if we had been invaded to the gates of Washington and NYC as many times since 1800, we'd be somewhat paranoid. In the meantime, Russia served as the wall that kept Muslim armies out of Europe for over 300 years, at considerable coast in Russian blood and treasure. Get a perspective.
US might be increasing its base using NATO, but will the NATO allies really come face to face with the Russians in the mind or the dollars in their mind.
Russia has also allies, don't forgot, an enemy to US does not mean enemy to everyone.
Russia has also allies, don't forgot, an enemy to US does not mean enemy to everyone.
This is absolutely crazy. It's a deliberate provocation of a nuclear power. Can you imagine what we would do if a nuclear power did something like this right on our borders? NATO is no longer a defense coalition. It's a threat to our national security.
4
u.s. and the nato gang, the coalition of the not so willing is a threat to world peace. afghanistan is a war torn country. Iraq? Libya? yemen, Syria, and isis?
it must've worked wonders for the people on the receiving end of 'freedom and democracy'.
it must've worked wonders for the people on the receiving end of 'freedom and democracy'.
Except nobody wants Russian troops in their country, these Baltic states do. The only part of the equation that changes is that it shows a U.S. commitment to defending its NATO allies.
What is Russia going to do, mass troops and tanks on the borders of these nations. Oh right, they've already been doing that. If the U.S. started openly making threats towards Canada and putting troops on the Canadian border, the criticism would be endless, but since it is Russia doing it to their neighbors, they get a pass, after all Russia is just defending their "backyard" and gets to control these sovereign nations just like the U.S. is entitled to control everything that Canada and Mexico do.
What is Russia going to do, mass troops and tanks on the borders of these nations. Oh right, they've already been doing that. If the U.S. started openly making threats towards Canada and putting troops on the Canadian border, the criticism would be endless, but since it is Russia doing it to their neighbors, they get a pass, after all Russia is just defending their "backyard" and gets to control these sovereign nations just like the U.S. is entitled to control everything that Canada and Mexico do.
1
So, you wold leave the whole Central Europe to Putin? Really?
J.I.
J.I.
Let's face it. Russia will have to be contained until its natural gas power is overcome by LNG plants and it folds under its its lack of investment and atrophying population. That will take another 30-50 years
1
I will be brief.
If you don't recognize we have done this dance before--a century ago--you're just not paying attention.
The "managers" of the planet have decided what "we" need next...the elixir to cure what ails us now is WWIII.
Hold on to your hat!
If you don't recognize we have done this dance before--a century ago--you're just not paying attention.
The "managers" of the planet have decided what "we" need next...the elixir to cure what ails us now is WWIII.
Hold on to your hat!
3
We have treaty obligations. NATO is the foundation stone of our national security. It won the Cold War. Our NATO allies have come to our help before. It would be dishonorable -- and a historic mistake -- do toss our treaty obligations aside. We made a PROMISE!
1
But some NYT readers or Russian trolls here obviously have forgot about US commitments in reference to Central Europe. Sad but true.
J.I.
J.I.
Just like the Made For TV lyric: "So afraid of the Russians/Afraid we've got to fight/They've got ships at sea/They've got missiles in the air/Tanks on the border of Europe/and spies everywhere," from Mark Galeotti, a professor at New York University who has written extensively on Russia’s military and security services, “Tanks on the ground, even if they haven’t people in them, make for a significant marker.”
1
So let me get this straight , Obama wants to confront Russia who has Hundreds, if not Thousands of Nuclear Weapons and the Missiles to use them against not only Europe, but also America - but Obama is afraid to confront Iran which is just a threshold Nuclear country...
Does this make sense ?
Q; If a conflict arises in Eastern Europe, will Obama commit American forces to fight Russian forces and thereby perhaps trigger WWIII or will Obama just walk away from another "Red Line" and tell the Europeans "you are on your own !"...
My bet is on the latter...
Does this make sense ?
Q; If a conflict arises in Eastern Europe, will Obama commit American forces to fight Russian forces and thereby perhaps trigger WWIII or will Obama just walk away from another "Red Line" and tell the Europeans "you are on your own !"...
My bet is on the latter...
4
"You are on your own !"...
The good old USA already did that in 1940 after supporting Hitler for ten years.
They (the financial masters of America), let WWII install itself on European land and then came as saviors to whom Europe owed everything since then.
A very old war mongering trick.
America lives off wars... In Total indignity...
Time for a change but they will not allow that and will use strength which is their only argument. Lamentable...
Stay home, thank you or we will send the Germans to stop you !!! Ha ha haaaa... Despair...
The good old USA already did that in 1940 after supporting Hitler for ten years.
They (the financial masters of America), let WWII install itself on European land and then came as saviors to whom Europe owed everything since then.
A very old war mongering trick.
America lives off wars... In Total indignity...
Time for a change but they will not allow that and will use strength which is their only argument. Lamentable...
Stay home, thank you or we will send the Germans to stop you !!! Ha ha haaaa... Despair...
More tax dollars for the military-industrial complex. The plan worked perfectly. We cannot find money to fund pre-school for disadvantaged kids, but there is unlimited funds for military toys.
5
Made For TV - "So afraid of the Russians/Afraid we've got to fight/They've got ships at sea/They've got missiles in the air/Tanks on the border of Europe/and spies everywhere."
So easy to be glib isn't it.
While the Pentagon is on a Democratic leash, they are putting their salesman foot in the door.
Herbert Bush........invaded Kuwait and Iraq......C.I.A......military.
Bush JR............invaded Iraq......Son of C.I.A.......military.
Putin.......invaded and annexed Crimea...........K.G.B.
Obama......made peace with Cuba.
Maybe I'll vote for Democrats for now on just to keep from getting melted in a nuclear war.
Herbert Bush........invaded Kuwait and Iraq......C.I.A......military.
Bush JR............invaded Iraq......Son of C.I.A.......military.
Putin.......invaded and annexed Crimea...........K.G.B.
Obama......made peace with Cuba.
Maybe I'll vote for Democrats for now on just to keep from getting melted in a nuclear war.
2
doesn't matter what coat you put on, you'll be on the same boat as everyone else.
Just when I thought our government had run out of ways to waste taxpayers money (see the continued strife we created in the Middle East) now we have to dump more weapons, men and money into eastern Europe.
When did it become our foreign policy to pay for everything, everywhere while we let our own country slide into 2nd-3rd world oblivion?
When did it become our foreign policy to pay for everything, everywhere while we let our own country slide into 2nd-3rd world oblivion?
4
A prelude to a new European based war ( shades of WWI build up) or a deterrent? Desperate people ( and nations ) do desperate things. The reptilian brain might just rule in this case.
2
I hold Putin directly responsible for the murder of 298 innocent passengers on Malaysia Airlines flight 17. Putin supplied the missiles to his thugs and they did his bidding.
It is amazing how many friends Putin has posting here, and his megalomaniac delusions of a return to Stalinist domination of eastern Europe fills their hearts with joy.
What WW I and II demonstrated is that when thugs are not opposed abruptly they will plunder and murder until they are stopped. Meanwhile Putin is murdering or imprisoning all his political opponents and making a merry sport of terrorizing homosexuals. What a guy!
It is amazing how many friends Putin has posting here, and his megalomaniac delusions of a return to Stalinist domination of eastern Europe fills their hearts with joy.
What WW I and II demonstrated is that when thugs are not opposed abruptly they will plunder and murder until they are stopped. Meanwhile Putin is murdering or imprisoning all his political opponents and making a merry sport of terrorizing homosexuals. What a guy!
6
if the u.s. or dutch has a shred of evidence the rebels/seperatists shot down the Malaysian airliner. we would've presented it to the international community long ago.
the inconvenient truth may be the evidence pointed in the other direction.
the inconvenient truth may be the evidence pointed in the other direction.
Who started the war? Putin. Everything in all directions flows outward from there. Putin has no legal or moral validation for invading Ukraine - a particularly inconvenient truth.
1
Ultimately greed and nationalism and desire for success and money results inevitably in War.
We in the Military know this - we just wait around for this moment when we are called to duty to defend the "wealthy" of OUR society against the "wealthy" of the OTHER society. We are sick - like the foosball player throwing up on the first day of practice, then dominant.
Let's put heavenly weaponry in East Europe.
Heavy Vomiting.
We in the Military know this - we just wait around for this moment when we are called to duty to defend the "wealthy" of OUR society against the "wealthy" of the OTHER society. We are sick - like the foosball player throwing up on the first day of practice, then dominant.
Let's put heavenly weaponry in East Europe.
Heavy Vomiting.
2
This is an interesting proposal, they may want to go back and look up some of the retired Commanders in charge of the 7th Army and the 3rd Division who had their headquarters in Wurzburg Germany in the early 60's which were essentially doing the same thing except at that time there were hundreds of thousands American troops stationed all over Europe at the time and even with that force and lots of tanks it was not clear we could stop the Russians. It was taken for granted it would take small battlefield nukes just to reach a standoff.
The White House may need to be prepared to see this equipment driven by Putin through Red Square just for the fun of it. Even with equipment in place, Putin can not be stopped from a surprise attack. In any case you may not want to leave the keys in the ignition, at least he will need to hot wire the tanks to drive them back to Russia.
The White House may need to be prepared to see this equipment driven by Putin through Red Square just for the fun of it. Even with equipment in place, Putin can not be stopped from a surprise attack. In any case you may not want to leave the keys in the ignition, at least he will need to hot wire the tanks to drive them back to Russia.
2
There's irony here that seems to be going unnoticed.
When the Soviet Union split up in 1990, the borders were drawn where the Soviet Union's leaders had drawn them. In the case of the Ukraine, the border had been drawn by Kruschev in 1953, purely for administrative convenience since both Russia and the Ukraine were, after all, just different districts in one big country. And so the Crimea and large chunks of what is today the Ukraine were "given" to the Ukraine even though mostly Russian-speaking people lived there. If Kruschev instead had assigned those areas to Russia, none of us would have cared.
The people who live in those areas do care, though, and most of them want to be part of Russia, not part of the Ukraine. In the Crimea, for example, the residents voted overwhelmingly for that, and no one seriously doubts the result would be the same in the "rebel" regions in the eastern Ukraine.
Yet here we are, insisting that the borders set by Soviet leaders 60 years ago must be respected, that Russians who never asked to be part of the Ukraine must be ruled over by a government in Kiev that seized power in an illegal coup and whose first official act was to ban the Russian language (though the government has since backed down on that one).
Why in the world should we be doing this? The people who live there don't want it. We can't afford it. The only people who want us to do it are (1) Ukrainian government leaders who seized power in a coup; and (2) military contractors.
When the Soviet Union split up in 1990, the borders were drawn where the Soviet Union's leaders had drawn them. In the case of the Ukraine, the border had been drawn by Kruschev in 1953, purely for administrative convenience since both Russia and the Ukraine were, after all, just different districts in one big country. And so the Crimea and large chunks of what is today the Ukraine were "given" to the Ukraine even though mostly Russian-speaking people lived there. If Kruschev instead had assigned those areas to Russia, none of us would have cared.
The people who live in those areas do care, though, and most of them want to be part of Russia, not part of the Ukraine. In the Crimea, for example, the residents voted overwhelmingly for that, and no one seriously doubts the result would be the same in the "rebel" regions in the eastern Ukraine.
Yet here we are, insisting that the borders set by Soviet leaders 60 years ago must be respected, that Russians who never asked to be part of the Ukraine must be ruled over by a government in Kiev that seized power in an illegal coup and whose first official act was to ban the Russian language (though the government has since backed down on that one).
Why in the world should we be doing this? The people who live there don't want it. We can't afford it. The only people who want us to do it are (1) Ukrainian government leaders who seized power in a coup; and (2) military contractors.
195
Excellent comment and something that needed to be pointed out.
As far I remember Poroshenko was elected in free and democratic elections in May last year. The same is with Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada (Parliament). Democratic parliamentary elections were held in October last year.
J.I.
J.I.
1
EXCELLENT review of important history! which will hopefully be widely read.
Comment to #1 above: We're also wanting to bolster that Ukrainian coup with a NATO military presence on Russia's border. It's a deliberate escalation of anti-Russian tension that can lead to no good, only to the benefit of #2 above.
Comment to #1 above: We're also wanting to bolster that Ukrainian coup with a NATO military presence on Russia's border. It's a deliberate escalation of anti-Russian tension that can lead to no good, only to the benefit of #2 above.
I think Russia is unnecessarily whipping up tension in the West with its Ukraine policy. Mr.Putin's ambition and dream of putting Russia back in world map as second super power is coming up with a very heavy price for all the players concerned. Russia is facing sanctions from the West. Europe is threatened by Russia with rise in gas prices. The U.S. is reacting with troop and weapons deployment. I think Cold War is crawling back to threaten the world. Also, in my view, the American government's response to move heavy weaponry and troops to Europe is an over reaction. Let both Russia and the U.S. sit across negotiating table and resolve this issue.
The world is faced with only one adversary now, viz., ISIS. Let us unite to destroy it.
The world is faced with only one adversary now, viz., ISIS. Let us unite to destroy it.
3
I think you'll find it's the other way round. There is clear evidence for renewed and unnecessary US belligerence and meddling in the affairs of Ukraine. By contrast Reagan and Bush senior advocated leafing a buffer zone of countries around Russia's border, and that inviting former soviet countries to join NATO would be an 'unnecessary provocation'. Look at a map now and you'll see Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania are in NATO and now potentially Ukraine will join. I doubt very much you'd be very comfortable with Russia forming military alliances with Canada and Mexico and then talk of positioning missiles aimed at Washington. Or do you know something that Reagan and Bush didn't?
I suggest you also read upwards to 'Thinker's' comment which is most informative. It's also worth noting that Crimea is 60% Russian and was annexed in 1768, longer than Texas has been annexed from Mexico – would you consider giving that back?
This again is unnecessary US intervention simply to drum up business for the future. There is a lot of oil and gas under the Black Sea. Weapons sales, as joining NATO requires your armed forces to be up to a certain standard. And control.
But go right ahead, set yourself and the US up for another war if you want and carry one perpetuating such boring hackneyed old propaganda.
I suggest you also read upwards to 'Thinker's' comment which is most informative. It's also worth noting that Crimea is 60% Russian and was annexed in 1768, longer than Texas has been annexed from Mexico – would you consider giving that back?
This again is unnecessary US intervention simply to drum up business for the future. There is a lot of oil and gas under the Black Sea. Weapons sales, as joining NATO requires your armed forces to be up to a certain standard. And control.
But go right ahead, set yourself and the US up for another war if you want and carry one perpetuating such boring hackneyed old propaganda.
"Putin is one of the largest hypocrites in the world" Absolutely true! He will give you a deal you cannot refuse.
Aha, there is finally a lucrative jobs market for Americans who graduate college with a degree in literature and the humanities. It is clear from many of the comments, that Russian internet trolls are sorely in need of instruction in written American English.
It's tempting to hit the REPLY button and simply write "TROLL", but though I think I would have 80% accuracy, that would still leave 20% defamed. That's simply not justifiable. Most are easy to spot. They have all the perspective and nuance of the style (sic) known as Soviet Realism.
I have thought from the inception of Russia's moves into the Ukraine, that Putin's role model was President Reagan. Reagan's announced policy was to spend the Soviet Union into oblivion. He knew their economy was not nearly as strong as America's, and by spending vast sums on weapons, he could force the U.S.S.R. to go broke trying to match us weapon for weapon.
Putin certainly does not think he can spend us into oblivion, but what he can do -- and apparently has succeeded in doing -- is getting us to either spend vast sums reentering the defense of a Europe -- from which we have been drawing down -- or shift vast sums from our other priorities, both domestic and geopolitical.
Unfortunately, Europe has lived and thrived under America's security umbrella for so long, that its people seem not to understand the need to be able to defend themselves.
It's tempting to hit the REPLY button and simply write "TROLL", but though I think I would have 80% accuracy, that would still leave 20% defamed. That's simply not justifiable. Most are easy to spot. They have all the perspective and nuance of the style (sic) known as Soviet Realism.
I have thought from the inception of Russia's moves into the Ukraine, that Putin's role model was President Reagan. Reagan's announced policy was to spend the Soviet Union into oblivion. He knew their economy was not nearly as strong as America's, and by spending vast sums on weapons, he could force the U.S.S.R. to go broke trying to match us weapon for weapon.
Putin certainly does not think he can spend us into oblivion, but what he can do -- and apparently has succeeded in doing -- is getting us to either spend vast sums reentering the defense of a Europe -- from which we have been drawing down -- or shift vast sums from our other priorities, both domestic and geopolitical.
Unfortunately, Europe has lived and thrived under America's security umbrella for so long, that its people seem not to understand the need to be able to defend themselves.
7
Absolutely provacatice and uncalled for. I can only hope the American public wakes up and shuts down our irrational, irresponsible government.
5
So what is your recommendation for the whole Central Europe? Another Munich or Yalta?
J.I.
J.I.
We're validating Gore Vidal's phrase, "The United States of Amnesia". Beat the war drums; send your tax money to the weapons manufacturers. Of the entire human race, the U.S. has 1/2 of all military expenditures. The Europeans don't want this fight, but the U.S. congressmen and senators know best, right? Picking this fight is dishonest, unethical and profane.
8
Maybe ISIS will sell us some of those tanks, strykers, and humvees back.
3
And the GOP agenda continues it's relentless march forward towards implementation of all its goals in pursuit of its hard right ideology.
Why should republicans give an inch on any issue when they can win by winning or win by losing?
Why should republicans give an inch on any issue when they can win by winning or win by losing?
3
From all recent bellicosity on part of POTUS, it's probably just an astute career move on Barack Obush's part - if he's to seek gainful employ in the military-industrial complex when he leaves office, NOW is the time to show his loyalty to the Masters of War.
2
A lot of folks here evidently don't understand we have a formal OBLIGATION, by treaty, to go to the defense of any NATO nation. Having equipment pre-positioned may help us be successful in that. If we are going to defend the Baltics, why not make it possible?
5
And maybe, with the "intractable indifference" of our European NATO allies to support the organization, we should review our membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, created in 1949. Then we wouldn't have an OBLIGATION. This is not a new suggestion. It has been implicitly referred to, in concern of European participation, by two past Secretaries of Defense- Secretary Gates in June of 2011 and Secretary Hagel in February of 2014.
Nearly all of us commenters -- I included -- have taken strong positions on this as if it's really happening. Let's keep in mind that it's not.
As the article makes clear (at least if you read it very carefully), this is merely some "proposal" from the Pentagon that still needs to be approved by the Secretary of Defense and the White House. in other words, it's a typical "end run" effort by the Pentagon, launched with the hope that publicity will force Obama's hand. A reader may be forgiven for mistakenly believing that the tanks and other military hardware shown in the photos are actually in Eastern Europe, but all of that stuff is "back home" in southern Germany. These are just file photos from a March "road trip."
As the article makes clear (at least if you read it very carefully), this is merely some "proposal" from the Pentagon that still needs to be approved by the Secretary of Defense and the White House. in other words, it's a typical "end run" effort by the Pentagon, launched with the hope that publicity will force Obama's hand. A reader may be forgiven for mistakenly believing that the tanks and other military hardware shown in the photos are actually in Eastern Europe, but all of that stuff is "back home" in southern Germany. These are just file photos from a March "road trip."
3
Maybe if the US contributes the hardware, the EU will go easy on American corporations, so that we can tax them to pay for the EU's defense...
Putin told the Italian "Corriere Della Sera" that Russia would not "suddenly attack NATO", by invading the former Soviet satellite states on its western border. But he could always stoke unrest among the Russian-speakers in the region, just as he is doing in Eastern Ukraine. Even if Russia would not "invade" the Baltic states, which have a sizeable Russian population, Putin would have his satisfaction, if the region became unstable and lived in fear. This would have an impact on the integration-efforts of the European Union as well.
6
The EU is a union of five hundred million people, an awful lot of them very well off, and an awful lot of them of military age. Why should the U.S. feel obliged to solve their problems, especially by warmongering? Have our military efforts in the Middle East been so successful?
BTW, one of the biggest reasons for Putin's rise was the disaster caused by Russia following our capitalist myths, rather than, oh say for example, Scandinavia's reality, in rebuilding their economy after the fall of the Soviets.
Depressing thought, but maybe we don't have all the answers.
BTW, one of the biggest reasons for Putin's rise was the disaster caused by Russia following our capitalist myths, rather than, oh say for example, Scandinavia's reality, in rebuilding their economy after the fall of the Soviets.
Depressing thought, but maybe we don't have all the answers.
34
I agree. Wealthy European nations such as Germany should raise massive armies and develop a nuclear arsenal. Wait a minute...
1
And think about the Fact, that we dont want the U.S. to solve our Problems!!!
If Putin's rise is caused by "capitalist myths" what is Putin's reality? You can buy anything or anyone in Russia. It is one of if not the most capitalist place on the planet.
Here we go again.
I am re-reading Barbara Tuchman's 'The March of Folly'. Nothing ever changes.
I am re-reading Barbara Tuchman's 'The March of Folly'. Nothing ever changes.
17
Your wishing it away won't deter Putin and our other enemies. Get used to it. It's the new normal per our fearless leader.
If you haven't yet, you should follow up with her "The Guns of August". It's eerily apropos.
1
All her books are wonderful. But it seems like the right people don't read that sort of thing.
I think it would be nice if they (...the NSA, CIA, FBI, or any agency that wants to give it a go...) would get "poised" to protect our government and our government held personal information from hackers.
5
The unstated question in this whole article is what assistance European NATO countries are providing. (Most likely nothing.) In a recent Pew Survey conducted over the last few months, and reported by the New York Times on June 10, 2015, a majority of Italians, Germans and French believe their countries should not defend a NATO ally if attacked. Makes one believe that the only NATO deterrent is the United States of America. Which brings forward the obvious. Why is the US so actively involved in an organization which refuses to protect its own interests? The European Union is the economic beneficiary of a stable Eastern Europe. In fact, in that Alliance there is also a provision for "mutual defense"-i.e. Treaty of Lisbon and the CSDP (Common Security and Defense Policy). Let the European Union defend their interests. Their collective GDP of the EU is equivalent to the US, and their collective population is even greater. Bring the American money expended on NATO, approximately 75% of the entire NATO budget, home to provide for domestic needs. Let the Europeans finally be responsible.
34
Agreed, R. I wonder if the USA purposely keeps our allies dependent on us. Probably so as a way to control political events. it's the price for being King of the hill.
" ... The unstated question in this whole article is what assistance European NATO countries are providing. (Most likely nothing.) ..."
Why should they, there is no real threat and this just another silly game of the US.
In fact, it would be nice if the US could finally stay home for good.
That would ease up on many war thorn regions and would immediately lead to less losses of life.
Why should they, there is no real threat and this just another silly game of the US.
In fact, it would be nice if the US could finally stay home for good.
That would ease up on many war thorn regions and would immediately lead to less losses of life.
Directly to the point and dead on target.
Europe, the EU is more than ready for the United States to continue to be the primary guarantor of its collective security. Why divert money and other resources while America predictably and reliably acts our the delusion that it is the only capable agent for peace and security?
The Pentagon and the administration are resetting the trip wire in Eastern Europe. Why not? Nothing else has worked to tamp down Putin’s bad-boy act in Ukraine. Besides, this is more small potatoes than substantive confrontation.
The far more pressing issue for America is the undeniable and inexorable mission creep in Iraq. It is inevitable that very soon the fiction of no American boots on the ground will be totally overcome by the need to stridently demonstrate that the U.S. will not be trifled with as the most powerful military entity on the planet.
Europe, the EU is more than ready for the United States to continue to be the primary guarantor of its collective security. Why divert money and other resources while America predictably and reliably acts our the delusion that it is the only capable agent for peace and security?
The Pentagon and the administration are resetting the trip wire in Eastern Europe. Why not? Nothing else has worked to tamp down Putin’s bad-boy act in Ukraine. Besides, this is more small potatoes than substantive confrontation.
The far more pressing issue for America is the undeniable and inexorable mission creep in Iraq. It is inevitable that very soon the fiction of no American boots on the ground will be totally overcome by the need to stridently demonstrate that the U.S. will not be trifled with as the most powerful military entity on the planet.
Look at the geopolitical bright side; Russia really commandeered Crimea and is trying win back the rest of Ukraine, presumably up to the defensible river on which lies Kiev while we in America have embarked on a warming of relations with Cuba in our own sphere of interest. Maybe we could call it an even swap and chill out. Then again, knowing the minds of the military, they want it all, both sides that is.
5
Yes..., and go swap your dog for a canary, and later, look a show on TV...or another virtual reality .
Are you seriously equating invading Ukraine with opening diplomatic relations with Cuba? Your example illustrates just how different our cultures, methods, and objectives are, not how similar.
What if Russia put "heavy weapons" in Mexico? We would probably start a war.... When will we, as Americans, start to ask, "What if the shoe was on the other foot?"
27
@ Less Bayless: The situation is a wee bit different. If we had reached the point in our relations with Mexico where the latter felt threatened by possible invasion there would have been a long an difficult deterioration in relations. The request to NATO came from the Baltic states because they feel threatened by a newly aggressive Russia which has retaken and/or fought in a number of its former Soviet Republics, most recently Ukraine. In order for the situation to compare at all, the USA would have to roll over Canada or Belize or the British Virgin Islands. Somehow in the interest of balance you are defending Russia's aggression by suggesting that our responding to worried NATO members request is 'similar,' but if Russia put heavy weapons in Mexico more than likely we would be into WWIII and Mexico would be begging for our help.
9
There would be another Bay of Pigs style attack. Only this one would be successful.
Russia is "aggressive" in the same way that an animal is aggressive if you poke it with a stick. The US interfered in Ukraine politics and brought about the downfall of its government. The US supported the demonstrators in Kiev with money and equipment and we wonder why Russia objected?
Why are we not considering sending troops into the Ukraine, in the company of others? And why does the Ukraine not get invited into NATO? That country was brazenly invaded by Russia and we sat on our heels and watched it, along with the rest of the west.
Perhaps now that Eastern Ukraine and the Crimea are part of Russia, they might consider it a done deal, and reconfigure the country with the remaining portion, and allow the people of the Ukraine to look west? If Poland, Romania, Albania and Bulgaria can be part of the EU and/or NATO, why not the Ukraine? The western border of the Ukraine is about equivalent to Romania and Bulgaria, though it goes farther to the East.
In the end the decision should be the Ukraine's regarding which direction they will face, but they deserve a better shake than the abuse they are currently enduring. Redrawing of the world maps is old news. This might be an opportunity for all.
Perhaps now that Eastern Ukraine and the Crimea are part of Russia, they might consider it a done deal, and reconfigure the country with the remaining portion, and allow the people of the Ukraine to look west? If Poland, Romania, Albania and Bulgaria can be part of the EU and/or NATO, why not the Ukraine? The western border of the Ukraine is about equivalent to Romania and Bulgaria, though it goes farther to the East.
In the end the decision should be the Ukraine's regarding which direction they will face, but they deserve a better shake than the abuse they are currently enduring. Redrawing of the world maps is old news. This might be an opportunity for all.
5
The Ukraine may or may not be part of Russia. However it is certainly not part of the US and it would behoove us if the US kept thier noses out.
We might be bluffing. Should Putin call in the bluff can we back it up? I don't care the President in the White House, none will confront the Russians in their neighborhood. Not a single American President would risk it.
Bush Jr did not in Georgia, and Russia was at its weakest. Even if the most hawkish American President is in the WH, he, or she, will stand down in the face of the Russians in Eastern Europe.
Except Germany and England, and maybe France, the US will not confront Russia over any European country. We need to think rationally, and not emotionally.
Bush Jr did not in Georgia, and Russia was at its weakest. Even if the most hawkish American President is in the WH, he, or she, will stand down in the face of the Russians in Eastern Europe.
Except Germany and England, and maybe France, the US will not confront Russia over any European country. We need to think rationally, and not emotionally.
9
Could you tell me waht is a difference between Warsaw plus Riga and Berlin plus Paris? As far as I konow, all this capital cities are part of the NATO! Why America shoud not come with the military assistance to defend Poland for example? Could you explain me that? Do you want another Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact or Yalta Agreemen to happen? Thank you in advance for your reply.
J.I.
P.S. Again, Poland, Czech and the Baltics are no longer part of "Russian backyard." The are full members of the West now!
J.I.
P.S. Again, Poland, Czech and the Baltics are no longer part of "Russian backyard." The are full members of the West now!
1
Is there any doubt that Obama and Hilary made the following mistakes:
1) the over-hyped "reset button" with Russia was the equivalent of "mission accomplished"
http://theweek.com/articles/460485/obamas-reset-russia-what-went-wrong
2) Obama failed when he withdrew missile defenses from Eastern Europe. Instead of creating a "stronger, swifter and smarter" defense, it revealed his weakness to Putin
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/17/missile-defence-shield-bara...
3) The press has been far to easy on Obama and Hilary, which is why it is absurd that Hilary is considered qualified to be President. When it comes to Russia, they both failed worse than GW Bush.
1) the over-hyped "reset button" with Russia was the equivalent of "mission accomplished"
http://theweek.com/articles/460485/obamas-reset-russia-what-went-wrong
2) Obama failed when he withdrew missile defenses from Eastern Europe. Instead of creating a "stronger, swifter and smarter" defense, it revealed his weakness to Putin
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/17/missile-defence-shield-bara...
3) The press has been far to easy on Obama and Hilary, which is why it is absurd that Hilary is considered qualified to be President. When it comes to Russia, they both failed worse than GW Bush.
9
Exactly...even these authors can't bring themselves to admit the obvious...a weak America is a threat to all free nations on earth...
“I think that only an insane person and only in a dream can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO,” Putin told the newspaper Corriere Della Sera.
But of course, it would not be Russia but instead Russian green men "on vacation" from the Russian army, led by Russian mercenaries from other conflicts and joined by nationalist fanatics and local criminal groups, who would begin armed insurrections in the Baltic states. At lease, this is the pattern we have seen in Ukraine.
But of course, it would not be Russia but instead Russian green men "on vacation" from the Russian army, led by Russian mercenaries from other conflicts and joined by nationalist fanatics and local criminal groups, who would begin armed insurrections in the Baltic states. At lease, this is the pattern we have seen in Ukraine.
10
The pattern I have seen in Ukraine is the USA using local fascists to overthrow an elected President. Once in power the fascists launched an attack on Eastern Ukraine because the people there did not accept the Kiev Coup. It was not green men who launched the Coup but one Victoria Nuland from the USA State Department handing out buns in Maidan.
1
It makes economic sense to sell heavy weaponry to East Europe. After all, the only way to continue financing the most expensive military in the world is creating new threats and selling weapons overseas.
17
The proper name for a storage facility for US weapons and war materiel is a"military base". There is simply no way around this fact. When the equipment is there it has to be guarded, and no matter what uniform the guard is wearing- be it a US Army, NATO, Ukrainian uniform, or even an non-uniformed mercenary under US contract, it is still US war materiel on a US military base.
Russia will treat these supply depots as US bases- correctly- and see them as military threats- again, correctly. That is what they would be there for- as staging areas for military operations against Russia.
It is ridiculous for the US to propose ringing Russia with US military bases and trying to claim that it is not engaging in an act of aggression. When Russia tried to do the same to us in the Cuban Missile Crisis, the result was very nearly WWIII.
Russia will treat these supply depots as US bases- correctly- and see them as military threats- again, correctly. That is what they would be there for- as staging areas for military operations against Russia.
It is ridiculous for the US to propose ringing Russia with US military bases and trying to claim that it is not engaging in an act of aggression. When Russia tried to do the same to us in the Cuban Missile Crisis, the result was very nearly WWIII.
22
"That is what they would be there for- as staging areas for military operations against Russia."
They are there for operations against Russia that would take place if Russia moved into the Baltic states. There is no basis for considering such facilities an act of aggression.
They are there for operations against Russia that would take place if Russia moved into the Baltic states. There is no basis for considering such facilities an act of aggression.
1
And what US and NATO did in the '80s? More or less the same but the border of the West had been on Elbe river...
J.I.
J.I.
The difference is that Cuba was a place Russia was putting missiles to threaten the US, while we are taking missiles *out* of countries surrounding Russia, and replacing them with more defense-oriented armaments.
To my eye, we are only "surrounding" Russia because many countries around Russia feel extremely threatened by Russia--and given recent history, I'm not sure I blame them.
To my eye, we are only "surrounding" Russia because many countries around Russia feel extremely threatened by Russia--and given recent history, I'm not sure I blame them.
1
Certainly putting this equipment in the Nato countries that border Russia would not hurt. Europeans Nato soldiers could quickly respond and use the equipment before we arrive - it appears that these are defensive weapons and equipment.
5
Thank you, but we don't need your bases and we don't need your wars.
With the defense spending most European nations have, fat chance.
Russian seize the depots, and now join ISIS in have huge American arsenals for free.
Russian seize the depots, and now join ISIS in have huge American arsenals for free.
Obama, the most right wing president in history, has ramped up US military presence everywhere, and now he will provoke Russia.
The very rich will profit mightily from this deployment, as they do with all military deployments. And the working class will pay for every penny of it with taxes on their earned incomes.
America has become a nation of war mongers, with almost the entire voting class, and 100% of democrats and republicans, supporting perpetual war around the globe againwt the poorest people in the world.
From Korea, to Latin America, to Viet Nam, Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Libya, etc, the American voting class has always supported the mass slaughter of other people's children.
And in 2016 they will again, voting to slaughter poor people before they can "threaten" the US.
The very rich will profit mightily from this deployment, as they do with all military deployments. And the working class will pay for every penny of it with taxes on their earned incomes.
America has become a nation of war mongers, with almost the entire voting class, and 100% of democrats and republicans, supporting perpetual war around the globe againwt the poorest people in the world.
From Korea, to Latin America, to Viet Nam, Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Libya, etc, the American voting class has always supported the mass slaughter of other people's children.
And in 2016 they will again, voting to slaughter poor people before they can "threaten" the US.
19
Sir,
I do not know whether you are troll or simply inhabit an alternate universe, because I can conceive of no other explanation for what you have written above.
I do not know whether you are troll or simply inhabit an alternate universe, because I can conceive of no other explanation for what you have written above.
The Left always sees defending against communist attacks as "provocations" -- just as it sees Israel defending itself from its genocidally-minded neighbors as "war crimes." Nothing new here.
You are spouting nonsense. Our country has done many immoral and disgusting things over our history, but if you really think we are that bad, look at the difference between North and South Korea. Yes, SK may have plenty of right-wing nitwits, but poor people there aren't suffering like they do in NK.
NOTICE TO READERS OF THE COMMENT SECTION
Before you read these comments, you are advised to look up the New York Times's exposure of Putin's troll farm at 55 Savushkina Street in St. Petersburg.
The article appeared on June 2, 2015. It is titled "The Agency" and was written by Adrian Chen.
It begins: "From a nondescript office building in St. Petersburg, Russia, an army of well-paid “trolls” has tried to wreak havoc all around the Internet — and in real-life American communities."
SEE: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
Before you read these comments, you are advised to look up the New York Times's exposure of Putin's troll farm at 55 Savushkina Street in St. Petersburg.
The article appeared on June 2, 2015. It is titled "The Agency" and was written by Adrian Chen.
It begins: "From a nondescript office building in St. Petersburg, Russia, an army of well-paid “trolls” has tried to wreak havoc all around the Internet — and in real-life American communities."
SEE: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
14
Read it, believe it. But don't you understand, Putin feels threatened by the US policy to "contain Russia"? First in Chechnya, then in Georgia and now Ukraine. Russia has had enough of being pushed around and demonized by the US. So naturally they pushed back with Crimea and east Ukraine. What do you expect?
The US has many unseemly working partners, China, Saudi Arabia to name two. Russia should be seen the same way, a working partner.
ISIS is the big threat, not Russia. In fact Russia could help with ISIS.
The US has many unseemly working partners, China, Saudi Arabia to name two. Russia should be seen the same way, a working partner.
ISIS is the big threat, not Russia. In fact Russia could help with ISIS.
Putin feels threatened? Then he is a dangerous paranoid who has no business being leader of a nuclear power.
No one of sound mind believes that NATO is a threat to Russia or harbors any fantasies of grabbing Russian territory.
OTOH, NATO is only a threat to Putin's imperial ambitions in the region. But that is exactly why it is needed.
I also acknowledge that, to stay in power, Putin needs to bribe the Russian people with military conquests in order to distract their attention from the appalling mess he has made of the Russian economy.
No one of sound mind believes that NATO is a threat to Russia or harbors any fantasies of grabbing Russian territory.
OTOH, NATO is only a threat to Putin's imperial ambitions in the region. But that is exactly why it is needed.
I also acknowledge that, to stay in power, Putin needs to bribe the Russian people with military conquests in order to distract their attention from the appalling mess he has made of the Russian economy.
"It is time to call Putin's military moves. He has no money. ... Good timing."
We, on the other hand, have gobs and gobs of money to spend on this.
Some people worry that this war will only add to our $18 trillion national debt (75 times as much as Russia's). Pssshaw! This war won't cost us a dime. None of our wars do. We just borrow the money from our grandchildren, who, of course, get no say in the decision. Their time will come, though: In 50 years or so, THEY can start wars and have THEIR grandchildren pay for them.
We, on the other hand, have gobs and gobs of money to spend on this.
Some people worry that this war will only add to our $18 trillion national debt (75 times as much as Russia's). Pssshaw! This war won't cost us a dime. None of our wars do. We just borrow the money from our grandchildren, who, of course, get no say in the decision. Their time will come, though: In 50 years or so, THEY can start wars and have THEIR grandchildren pay for them.
4
Because of the level of hysteria being generated there is a real danger that a military confrontation between the USA and Russia will turn nuclear - there may be no grandchildren.
1
Seems that the Russian government trolls (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html) may be out in force in the comments section.
6
So let me get this straight, we're going to escalate the situation in order to de-escalate it?
20
Did Reagan and Kohl escalate the conflict in '80 by putting Pershings/Cruises on NATO soil? It only speeded up the dissolution the USSR and the whole East Block!
J.I.
J.I.
Let's be sure to include Masha Gessen in the invasion.
This is Ill-considered, strategically flawed, and expensive. These turn-key weapons systems could prove a tempting prize and may one day be used against us and those we seek to protect. It's not like it hasn't happened before.
15
Nothing what you said will ever happen in the futute. In '80 NATO had put Pershings/Cruises in Western Europe (NATO countries) and the war did not broke out. The move only speeded up the collapse of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact!
J.I.
J.I.
Is this a sign that Clinton's reset with Russia worked or failed?
2
Please don't do this. Like or dislike the current administration, the Russian Reset was the right strategy at the time. To quote Reading Rainbow, don't take my word for it. Listen to that socialist Richard Pipes, from a few years ago, on American-Russian relations:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=684XEqVxv8M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=684XEqVxv8M
Do these people seriously contemplate a situation where tanks would be needed against Russian troops?? If that situation ever arises, it would be the beginning of the end of the world.
14
But who will be to blame. Obviously not Poland, the Baltics or America but the thugs from Kremlin! Don't you think the same?
J.I.
J.I.
Putin just called me and expressed disappointment. Sadly, he said he will position some nuclear weapons at the countries harboring Russia's enemy's stockpile. He said he was having toruble keeping his Russian friends lined up with him as they are all capitalists and just want to make money with their worldwide 1% friends. Now they are like Americans being bulldozed into war and nationalism. Remember Uncle 'Joe" had all of Russia behind him even after he was that country's most despised leader (and a commie too).
As for the Riga roads, a few logins over those roads by tanks and they will look like any road in America. All that machismo by Obama means the military and secret government have rerun Kennedy getting whacked in Dallas. Obama will need corporate board spots to continue to live like a
1%-er. And more importantly, it sets up Hilairy as the next warrior president. She has always supported the military and now she can pick and choose the war she wants to have your sons, daughters, spouses and granchildren fight. You can bet Chelsea will not be joing to fight, be in harm's way or anything else that would disrupt her 'Golden' spoon in mouth life.
It is not our war; never was. We agreed to many things but rarely kept our word. (See Native Americans, Iran, South and Central America, Afghanistan, etc.) where America interfered, exterminated or ruined democractic governments for the sake of ITT, GE, oil industry, Bush family, etc.).
Get out now.
As for the Riga roads, a few logins over those roads by tanks and they will look like any road in America. All that machismo by Obama means the military and secret government have rerun Kennedy getting whacked in Dallas. Obama will need corporate board spots to continue to live like a
1%-er. And more importantly, it sets up Hilairy as the next warrior president. She has always supported the military and now she can pick and choose the war she wants to have your sons, daughters, spouses and granchildren fight. You can bet Chelsea will not be joing to fight, be in harm's way or anything else that would disrupt her 'Golden' spoon in mouth life.
It is not our war; never was. We agreed to many things but rarely kept our word. (See Native Americans, Iran, South and Central America, Afghanistan, etc.) where America interfered, exterminated or ruined democractic governments for the sake of ITT, GE, oil industry, Bush family, etc.).
Get out now.
14
Without a doubt certain Eastern and Baltic states may rejoice at this decision -- Poland and Finland are the first ones that come to mind, but when looking at the bigger picture, one must also calculate the repercussions a move like this might have. It's no secret that Russia sees every military act that is not of its own making as a threat. So the question is, just how far are we willing to go should they decide to retaliate?
4
So, you suggest to capitulate before Kremlin? To leave Poles or Czechs behind? Why?
J.I.
J.I.
If the Germans are willing to bankroll it (they have no military to speak of anymore), we might be prepared to go pretty far. As strong as the Russian military is, their technology is a good 20 years behind ours...We could give them a quick slap with air superiority alone...
Now that we're wrapping things up with ISIS and the Middle East, why not the Russian Bear? Or is this a distraction from the TPP and what we're not going to do about climate change? Hillary Clinton: what are your thoughts? Specifics, please.
6
" ... Now that we're wrapping things up with ISIS and the Middle East ..."
Really, in which of many possible parallel universes does that happen.
Not in mine for certain as on the planet I live on IS is advancing.
Or is this just another FOX News reality?
Really, in which of many possible parallel universes does that happen.
Not in mine for certain as on the planet I live on IS is advancing.
Or is this just another FOX News reality?
Good idea. What could go wrong?
20
China will be very happy with Obama's new idea to counter Putin's ambition in Eastern Europe. Obama's pivot to Asia may have to slow down in Asia and Pacific region including South China Sea. China will have more freedom to do whatever they wanted to do in that region. General Fan Changlong, Vice-chairman of the Central Military Commission of the Chinese Communist Party just completed his visit to Washington so he could report this piece good news to chairman Xi Jinping in Beijing and preparing his state visit in September.
2
It is time for USA to stop being super power and dumping weapons all over the world with out proper control, making them available to terrorists.
8
Since when have the Baltic States, Poland and Romania had a problem with terrorism? Not nearly as much of a problem as America...
Yes, you may be right but weapons get diverted & stolen all the time by these groups, so do not be too sure for your safety.
Maybe some day when,,,,, Hillary,,,,, is asked a real question by a real reporter she will be questioned if she agrees with this.
5
Equipment for a regiment, spread across six or seven countries, for which we will furnish warehouses, upgrade railroads, and hire local security guards? If the Rooskies invade, our soldiers' best hope is that the bad guys get to the warehouses before they do.
As to the Russian reaction, maybe Putin will die laughing.
As to the Russian reaction, maybe Putin will die laughing.
3
So, what is your recommendation how to reassure for example Polad the imminent threat from Russia? Poland and the Baltics are NATO member, don't you remember?
J.I.
J.I.
I can assure you that Putin will not laugh. These actions are from a lexicon he understands. It's the only one he understands.
Yikes! Is there anyplace on earth that the U.S. is unwilling to go to war? If this wasn't so frightening it would be silly. Now we're going to stand up to the Russian army along a wide frontier. We're already at war in two or three countries (depending on how you count). When will it be enough? It might be good if we could demonstrate that we are capable of winning one of these wars, but let's remember that we haven't won one for 70 years, and the current ones aren't looking very good. And the Ukraine? The sensible thing would be to ceed it to Russia.
19
We haven't won a war in 70 years? Seriously?
Suurender is always the first option of the America haters.
I was not aware that Ukraine belonged to the USA - Crimea too?
1
That worked well in Iraq.
I guess all that hardware will end up in Russia's arsenal.
I guess all that hardware will end up in Russia's arsenal.
8
Great. The war profiteers continue their rape of the American taxpayer.
22
American military specialists? You mean the ones who did such a great job in Vietnam, and the middle east? Right.
1
Remember what Romney said a few short years ago about Russia and we all laughed at him. What an idiot the Dems said he was for even mentioning Russia as heaven forbid EVIL! What a joke...ha ha ha.
4
Now, didn't Romney allegedly own stock in Russian companies Gazprom and Yandex and soon after making his anti-Russian statement send his son to Moscow to basically say the statement was campaign rhetoric; don't worry.
Doesn't the US deal with China and Saudi Arabia, two oppressive societies without so much demonizing?
This "contain Russia" is policy is foolish and will bring unnecessary death and ruined lives as in Ukraine.
The US is being very foolish. The real threat is ISIS, something Russia can help with.
Doesn't the US deal with China and Saudi Arabia, two oppressive societies without so much demonizing?
This "contain Russia" is policy is foolish and will bring unnecessary death and ruined lives as in Ukraine.
The US is being very foolish. The real threat is ISIS, something Russia can help with.
1
I say it is a bit of a self fulfilling prophesy
What, you think the "reset" didn't work and was the idea of fools, if not worse?
Have we learn enough lessen from Afghanistan ? We are trapped there with depleted treasury. Interfere with other countries internal confllcts will only bring chickens come home to roost later on.
-
-
6
Internal? Russia has invaded Ukraine. Nothing internal, only eternal about that.
Strangely, Putin might prefer this kind of diplomacy. He's an old school Cold War era apparatchik. This might even be comforting.
3
"American military specialists have conducted site surveys in the countries under consideration, and the Pentagon is working on estimates about the costs to upgrade railways..."
So when is our military or government going to inspect American railways for upgrades? Or, is the recent rash of train crashes, rail accidents, deaths, injuries, etc. insufficient for such an inspection?
Maybe our Nobel Peace Prize winning President is simply satisfied with "leading" a so-called first world country with a third world infrastructure. Meanwhile, Western Europe well maintains its infrastructure and high speed trains and China continues to build them at a furious pace.
So when is our military or government going to inspect American railways for upgrades? Or, is the recent rash of train crashes, rail accidents, deaths, injuries, etc. insufficient for such an inspection?
Maybe our Nobel Peace Prize winning President is simply satisfied with "leading" a so-called first world country with a third world infrastructure. Meanwhile, Western Europe well maintains its infrastructure and high speed trains and China continues to build them at a furious pace.
20
Not to worry, Obama will find some way to weaken this program to ensure that America and its allies are not defended from the nicely "reset" Russians.
This is just a political gesture of support for the Baltic State's leaders. It's possible it was needed. Of course there's no actual deterrent without troops.
I believe the world has become a lot more dangerous lately.
The stance of both China and Russia v. the U.S. may have changed over time regardless but I think what they witnessed in Iraq has accelerated the time line. The failure in Iraq is not just about Iraq but about U.S. policy world-wide, to the extent that that policy relies upon conventional military deterrence.
I believe the world has become a lot more dangerous lately.
The stance of both China and Russia v. the U.S. may have changed over time regardless but I think what they witnessed in Iraq has accelerated the time line. The failure in Iraq is not just about Iraq but about U.S. policy world-wide, to the extent that that policy relies upon conventional military deterrence.
4
To my mind a much to do about nothing brinksmanship execercise a'la 1960's (sans Cuba) by both sides as long as we don't allow ourselves to be dragged into the Ukrianian conflict by Kiev directly or indirectly through NATO. I would be very much surprised if the Russians made any gestures beyond the East Ukraine region and very much surprised if they passively let it (East Ukraine) slip under the control of West Ukraine or NATO. Like us at some point they will fight.
trazmo
trazmo
2
A lot comments blaming "Republicans" without talking about Obama. If you paid attention in middle school, you should know the President is the commander-in-chief, and he has the final say in troop deployments.
3
It has been Republicans who have demonized Russia ever since the fall of the Soviet Union. I sometimes wonder if anti-Communism wasn't just a ploy for anti Russian sentiment. The west has gloated about 'winning the Cold War'. this is just going to annoy Russia. I think now it is clear that expending NATO was a bad idea after its raisson d'etre was gone. The Right really does seem as anti Russian as they ever were anti-Soviet
This actions is long overdue. US has stood by and ignored Russian aggression in Georgia, Moldova, Ossetia, Abkhazia, and now Ukraine. This doesnt involve direct threats against Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia. Anyone who keeps claiming that Russia threatens no one, is either working in Kremlin's propaganda department, or is simply uninformed. The West has cowered as Putin has used aggression to stir up Russian imperial nostalgia. He must be confronted economically and militarily. Alas, this dire need arises with the most action-averse occupant of the White house. Which likely has a whole lot to do with putin's willingness to annex Crimea and attack Eastern Ukraine.
6
I agree. Ukraine is only the latest in a long line of transgressions...
This is criminal idiocy of the highest order. NATO support for a fascist junta in Ukraine is not worth risking a nuclear exchange. We need a serious purge in our own government and deep state apparatus.
21
NATO is a cornerstone of US European defense hence the policies implemented are the same irrespective of the POTUS political ideologues. Why is Europe, ME, or SE Asia important to US strategic interests? Same reasons they are important in WW2, more so in an interdependent world. US gov intervenes in many places to protect US businesses interests, so we can drive Japanese cars, use Korean cellphones, eat that SAmerican banana. What hurts our allies directly hurt our pocketbooks. Economic turmoil in any of these regions drastically affect US markets and employment. Should have learned these in school but then US K-12 is a mess (many developed countries spend less than US on edu with better results so don't even go there!). Stationing of US equipments_personnel akin to placing 30,000 US servicemen in SKorea as a tripwire deterrence against an adversary. They're not intended to stop a Russian blitz as to impede the onslaught and buy time-pretext for US reinforcements.
2
Welcome to another episode of Security Theater - Retro-American Style. This will help defense contractors, a few politicians and no one else.
25
A foolish remark. Given the history of Russian annexation and occupation of the Baltic States in the last century it is scarcely surprising that as soon as they had thrown off the Soviet imperialist shackles they sought protection within the orbit of the NATO alliance. From Gorbachev to Yeltsin there was the beginning of a return of Russia to the European fold. Now Putin has come along and resolutely steered Russia back into backwardness, superstition and imperialism.
1
A day late and a pound short but a good move on the part of the United States. World War I started with less provocation than has occurred during the past year or two in Ukrainia.
5
This what America is best at — spending money on the military while the country falls apart.
Since we've succeeded in bringing democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan, can't we now take care of our schools, create jobs for the suffering poor, build a network of high speed trains (as the Chinese have done).
For some reason I don't loose sleep about Ukraine. If I was Putin I might well have taken back Sevastopol where my Black Sea fleet was stationed.
We can build incredibly sophisticated weapons, but can't improve our transportation systems or feed poor kids. Enough already!!!
Since we've succeeded in bringing democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan, can't we now take care of our schools, create jobs for the suffering poor, build a network of high speed trains (as the Chinese have done).
For some reason I don't loose sleep about Ukraine. If I was Putin I might well have taken back Sevastopol where my Black Sea fleet was stationed.
We can build incredibly sophisticated weapons, but can't improve our transportation systems or feed poor kids. Enough already!!!
29
Ah, but spending tax dollars on anything but corporate welfare and the military is socialism and we can't allow socialism to infect our political discourse, can we?
If Russia is planning more action against NATO, the real prize is Latvia with the best port on the Baltic sea with 40%+ of its people of Russian lineage.
The US placement of more equipment and potential manpower to the Southern European countries seems odd. Hungary already defends Russian actions in Ukraine. Bulgaria & Romania offer nothing so rich to Russia as Latvia & perhaps Estonia.
The US placement of more equipment and potential manpower to the Southern European countries seems odd. Hungary already defends Russian actions in Ukraine. Bulgaria & Romania offer nothing so rich to Russia as Latvia & perhaps Estonia.
5
Putin has been testing his boundaries for more than a decade now and has sought to exploit the wars in the Middle East to his advantage by invading Crimea and Ukraine, hoping the U.S. and its allies would either be distracted or unwilling to push back. As he inches forward slowly but surely, NATO allies have sought America’s assistance with tanks, weapons, and related defense components. At this point, Putin has forced NATO’s diplomatic hand and if fortifying the Baltic countries makes him think twice about making a future land grab, then this decision will be worth it.
4
However Russia didnt have to invade Crimea as you claim as the Crimeans were very happy to democratically re-join Russia and all of this US equipment would be evaporated within seconds if a real war ever broke out with Russia. So once again it is just a big waste of money and certainly doesnt scare Putin.l
@David
However Russia did invade Crimea and the vote took place under Russian occupation and other circumstances which made it meaningless.
However Russia did invade Crimea and the vote took place under Russian occupation and other circumstances which made it meaningless.
1
I have thought from the inception of Russia's moves into the Ukraine, that Putin's role model was President Reagan. Reagan's announced policy was to spend the Soviet Union into oblivion. He knew their economy was not nearly as strong as America's, and by spending vast sums on weapons, he could force the U.S.S.R. to go broke trying to match us.
Putin certainly does not think he can spend us into oblivion, but what he can do -- and apparently has succeeded in doing -- is getting us to either spend vast sums reentering the defense of a Europe -- from which we have been drawing down -- or shift vast sums from our other priorities, some of which compete with Russian interests.
Unfortunately, Europe has lived and thrived under America's security umbrella for so long, that its people seem not to understand the need to be able to defend themselves.
On the other hand, this situation is at last providing a lucrative jobs market for Americans who graduate college with a degree in literature and the humanities. It is clear from many of the comments to this and related articles, that Russian internet trolls are sorely in need of instruction in written American English.
Putin certainly does not think he can spend us into oblivion, but what he can do -- and apparently has succeeded in doing -- is getting us to either spend vast sums reentering the defense of a Europe -- from which we have been drawing down -- or shift vast sums from our other priorities, some of which compete with Russian interests.
Unfortunately, Europe has lived and thrived under America's security umbrella for so long, that its people seem not to understand the need to be able to defend themselves.
On the other hand, this situation is at last providing a lucrative jobs market for Americans who graduate college with a degree in literature and the humanities. It is clear from many of the comments to this and related articles, that Russian internet trolls are sorely in need of instruction in written American English.
5
This "swords or ploughshares" alternative is not that clear. Poland accelerated growth last year despite vast sums spent on military (after Crimea). Some of this money goes to the US (fighter planes, missiles, antiballistic missiles).
Clausewitz comes always into my mind:
"Kind-hearted people might of course think there was some ingenious way to disarm or defeat the enemy without too much bloodshed, and might imagine this is the true goal of the art of war. Pleasant as it sounds, it is a fallacy that must be exposed: War is such a dangerous business that mistakes that come from kindness are the very worst."
The US may sometimes be a little preconditioned on big guns, but sometimes this isn't all to bad.
"Kind-hearted people might of course think there was some ingenious way to disarm or defeat the enemy without too much bloodshed, and might imagine this is the true goal of the art of war. Pleasant as it sounds, it is a fallacy that must be exposed: War is such a dangerous business that mistakes that come from kindness are the very worst."
The US may sometimes be a little preconditioned on big guns, but sometimes this isn't all to bad.
7
This is a good thing. Russia of course will call it a provocation. But Putin is one of the largest hypocrites in the world continuously provoking its neighbors with words and air and naval trespassing into NATO countries space. Russia is becoming a very fascist country under Putin but they describe anyone who doesn't approve of Russian abuses/crimes as Fascist. Now Putin is even quieting possible dissent of dead Russian soldier families by making it a crime to discuss the location or circumstances of their death. Eastern Europe is all too familiar with this type of Russian abuses as they have experienced it in recent history. Feel sorry for the many Russians who are given false propaganda and have to fear severe punishment for wanting to know the circumstances of their son's deaths for Putin's adventurism/fascism/imperialism.
67
"Feel sorry for the many Russians who are given false propaganda and have to fear severe punishment for wanting to know"
Tell it to Snowden and Manning.
Tell it to Snowden and Manning.
5
I have said this many times in commentary here - the Russian people have access to the very same news sources that Westerners and Americans have via the internet. They can even read this very same NYT article and these very comments as they are being posted. How do I know this? By logging onto the International NYT website from my step daughters computer in Russia and posting comments to breaking stories when I was there last September. Also I logged onto the very same alternative news sources that I follow here in the States. Russians, like Americans can be as informed as they want to be via the world wide web. And like Americans, what they choose to do with that information is another issue altogether.
3
I'm wondering why Russia and Vladimir Putin is called "aggressor".. And I have the answer - when this person came to political arena in Russia we stopped being the political slaves of the U.S./Great Britain. Russia made her voice stronger on the world geopolitic arena. We started to defend our interests, our culture.
In U.S. It is used to say that "good" Russian politics were Eltsin and Gorbatchev. But these people destructed and solved our country. You even can't imagine how awful it was to live in Russia in the 1990-2000.
And now our children love our country, we feel ourselves a true nation and we want to live and be free.
And that's why U.S. politics hate Putin and make U.S. citizens believe he is an aggressor. And yes.. U.S. military forces in Europe - this is a real occupation and many common people understand this.
In U.S. It is used to say that "good" Russian politics were Eltsin and Gorbatchev. But these people destructed and solved our country. You even can't imagine how awful it was to live in Russia in the 1990-2000.
And now our children love our country, we feel ourselves a true nation and we want to live and be free.
And that's why U.S. politics hate Putin and make U.S. citizens believe he is an aggressor. And yes.. U.S. military forces in Europe - this is a real occupation and many common people understand this.
43
How about Russia backing off from its borders with NATO? Russia is already attacking civilian ships in the Baltic. NATO nations have every right to prepare themselves and put their arms wherever they want in THEIR territory. And yes, if Mexico wanted Russian bases in its territory there is nothing US should do about it. That is a stupid analogy too. Liberals supporting Putin don't understand the concept of suverenity. It is the Baltic states that get to decide about their own defense and membership. US liberals are nostalgic for USSR and totalitarianism. This is a good time for the Putin loving leftists to keep quiet.
21
Your comment is preposterous. I dare you to find a quote by an American "Putin loving leftist" politician supporting Putin actions in the Ukraine
According to some of the commenters, Poland, Latvia and Lithuania belong to Russia simply because the Soviets once invaded and enforced their will upon those nations.
2
Where are all of these liberals who support Putin? And which ones of them are longing for totalitarianism? This post just doesn't make sense. Glenn
. As someone who grew up in Poland, I know quite well the meaning of Russia and the sorts of atrocities that they are capable of. The U.S. is certainly not perfect but they are even in the same ballpark as Russia. When Russia came through in WW2, they wiped out a generation of Poles, all the top leaders, military, the best professors, politicians and more. They deported many others and ruled the country with an iron fist, with utter brutality.
For some Americans, it might be shocking, but people in Poland, other than a small minority of hardcore Communists and Russian sympathizers, actually WANT American military in the country. While people are complaining about U.S. military equipment possibly provoking Russia, Russia is holding troop exercises and movements right near the Polish border. Russian subs and planes are routinely violating sovereign air and sea space of various nations.
This isn't a case where the big bad American imperialist war machine is looking to throw their weight around. The people of Poland, Estonia and other nations overwhelmingly support U.S. presence as a deterrent. As is said, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. This is the prevention, to hopefully help prevent a bigger war.
For those who say "negotiate with Russia", you are dreaming, not when fanatics and fascists like Alexander Duguin have Putin's ear. Vile rhetoric about "reclaiming Soviet lands" is the norm. This is not the isolated rhetoric of nuts either.
For some Americans, it might be shocking, but people in Poland, other than a small minority of hardcore Communists and Russian sympathizers, actually WANT American military in the country. While people are complaining about U.S. military equipment possibly provoking Russia, Russia is holding troop exercises and movements right near the Polish border. Russian subs and planes are routinely violating sovereign air and sea space of various nations.
This isn't a case where the big bad American imperialist war machine is looking to throw their weight around. The people of Poland, Estonia and other nations overwhelmingly support U.S. presence as a deterrent. As is said, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. This is the prevention, to hopefully help prevent a bigger war.
For those who say "negotiate with Russia", you are dreaming, not when fanatics and fascists like Alexander Duguin have Putin's ear. Vile rhetoric about "reclaiming Soviet lands" is the norm. This is not the isolated rhetoric of nuts either.
160
Thank you for your comment. The people who trust Putin are fools.
2
Thank you, the average reader of the NYT thinks that if they play nice with Putin, Putin would play nice with US. They have no understanding of the evil in some people. You give a very good explanation of the real deal is with Russia and Putin.
1
@Marek S: Unfortunately too many people in the US never got over the fact the Soviet Union lost the Cold War. During the years just after the US pulled out of Vietnam the progressives in this country thought it was a major sin to speak out against the Soviet Union. They had no idea of how to react to Reagan calling the Soviet Union an Evil Empire (which it was). Many US citizens supported him and felt the same way. Even Carter fell in line.
Hopefully with Poland being a member of NATO the Russians can be kept off of Polish soil.
Hopefully with Poland being a member of NATO the Russians can be kept off of Polish soil.
2
I take it from the general tone of the top comments that many of us are busy pretending that Russia is not already incredibly aggressive and that their aggression has no effect on the world economy (and thus our economy). Russia stages an invasion of the Ukraine that has killed thousands of people, but we are to pretend they have done nothing.
The U.S. is not the "policeman of the world" because we love to get involved in conflicts that have nothing to do with us. Does anyone seriously entertain the idea that we will be safer or more economically secure if ISIS takes control of the Middle East and Russia re-establishes the Soviet Bloc?
The U.S. is not the "policeman of the world" because we love to get involved in conflicts that have nothing to do with us. Does anyone seriously entertain the idea that we will be safer or more economically secure if ISIS takes control of the Middle East and Russia re-establishes the Soviet Bloc?
62
No. And afterwards we will no longer have anything geopolitical to worry about.
The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 created the conditions for the rise of the Islamic State. You're just cleaning up your own mess.
you really have no idea what's going on, do you?
Putin has been testing his boundaries for more than a decade and a half now and has sought to exploit the wars in the Middle East to his advantage by invading Crimea and Ukraine, hoping the U.S. and its allies would either be distracted or unwilling to push back. As he inches forward slowly but surely, NATO allies have sought America’s assistance with tanks, weapons, and related defense components. At this point, Putin has forced NATO's diplomatic hand and if fortifying the Baltic countries makes him think twice about making a future land grab, then this decision will be worth it.
45
Yeltsin gave away Crimea, a Western puppet and now you call Russia the aggressor?
Remember Transnistria and Georgia and now Crimea nad Donbass? Yes, Russia is agressor now, more or less the same type of agressor like during Catherine the Great reign...
J.I.
J.I.
If anybody has a mind to use these weapons against the Russian Military, we might as well drape them in American flags right now because their only usefulness will be in serving as coffins for our boys.
They certainly are no match against Russian heavy artillery or actual tanks to say nothing of Russian attack jets and if the Russians had a mind to destroy them and all our boys inside them, they could do so on any given morning and not even miss breakfast. To claim that they are any kind of deterrent against the Russian military is ludicrous as is the excuse for deploying them.
No no, these particular types of weapons are instead designed to subjugate civilian populations and if it is they prove any effectiveness, it will be against the Ukrainian people themselves.
They certainly are no match against Russian heavy artillery or actual tanks to say nothing of Russian attack jets and if the Russians had a mind to destroy them and all our boys inside them, they could do so on any given morning and not even miss breakfast. To claim that they are any kind of deterrent against the Russian military is ludicrous as is the excuse for deploying them.
No no, these particular types of weapons are instead designed to subjugate civilian populations and if it is they prove any effectiveness, it will be against the Ukrainian people themselves.
20
seriously, you think Russian has a serious chance against the US? You know nothing about our relative strengths, where Russian can win is in resolve, since our current president has none and without we have nothing. Putin knows he can push Obama around, that is why he is, with a President with resolve he would be sitting in Russin, Putin that is, roasting his chestnuts.
1
Nice try but you are wrong on so many different levels.
1
This is quite true ... it is not the intent to use .... it is a subtle message. And, of course, subtle is not something the current Russian government is capable of understanding. So, it might be the wrong tool. Hmmmnnn? What tool is Putin able to understand?
look who's overtly the aggressor now. this is a followup to the disastrous policies begun by bill clinton to expand NATO eastward, defended by clinton and every president since, with the outright lie that it was "not about russia." ask the poles and lithuanians if it had anything to do with russia. haven't we seen this movie before? didn't we learn anything from 50 years of mutual misunderstanding and ugly proxy wars?
40
The Poles and Lithuanians are quite happy having the U.S. as an ally and more than happy to host the U.S. military in their nations. Maybe you should ask yourself why Russia's neighbors are so eager to take up with its main military rival, what could have Russia done to these nations to create so much disdain.
5
Joe Kaboey:
In American it's kablooey.
Yes, who is the aggressor now? I am sure Russia is trembling with fear at the threat of an imminent invasion by Lithuania or Poland.
In American it's kablooey.
Yes, who is the aggressor now? I am sure Russia is trembling with fear at the threat of an imminent invasion by Lithuania or Poland.
5
Clearly Vladimir Putin has ..
1
It isn't that Putin shouldn't be deterred. Make no mistake, this is done to provide deterrence for both Western Europe and Eastern Europe.
It's that Europeans should start paying the real costs of their defense. If they won't, why should we bother?
We spend gargantuan sums of money on the tools and trade of war. Meanwhile, European nations have free education, affordable health care and a quality of life that puts ours to shame.
And they aren't at all reluctant to remind us of that.
So tired of defending others who won't defend themselves. So tired of our jobs and welfare program called the Department of Defense.
It's that Europeans should start paying the real costs of their defense. If they won't, why should we bother?
We spend gargantuan sums of money on the tools and trade of war. Meanwhile, European nations have free education, affordable health care and a quality of life that puts ours to shame.
And they aren't at all reluctant to remind us of that.
So tired of defending others who won't defend themselves. So tired of our jobs and welfare program called the Department of Defense.
33
The only thing stopping us from defunding the DOD and investing instead in education, healthcare, infrastructure and myriad things that Europeans take for granted and that would benefit American society and improve the quality of Americans' lives is our world-renowned electoral system.
Change it, and you, and most Americans, will get what you want.
Change it, and you, and most Americans, will get what you want.
"Europeans should start paying the real costs of their defense"
Another who never bothered to read the actual NATO budget and its funding by countries, preferring to repeat that usual canard. Nations like Germany, France or the UK spends proportionally far more in NATO than the US, then this century NATO has been mostly used for the US Afghani quagmire and to de facto create a power vacuum in Libya, rapidly exploited by their terrorism funding Middle-east "allies", not sure that helped Europe's defense one bit...
Another who never bothered to read the actual NATO budget and its funding by countries, preferring to repeat that usual canard. Nations like Germany, France or the UK spends proportionally far more in NATO than the US, then this century NATO has been mostly used for the US Afghani quagmire and to de facto create a power vacuum in Libya, rapidly exploited by their terrorism funding Middle-east "allies", not sure that helped Europe's defense one bit...
2
"So tired of defending others who won't defend themselves." You mistake cannot for will not. How can you accuse people who stood up several times in the last 60 years to Russian tanks with rifles and Molotov-cocktails of not willing to defend themselves??
Most Americans accept that they are pretty ignorant about history etc but here are a few facts. Nearly all of the East European countries that were occupied by the Soviet Union at the end of WW2 had been allies of the Nazis and been enemies of America and Britain.
Poland caused problemsbecause Polish fighters had fought bravely with the British. . It was decided the Russians could ^look after Poland ^ if free elections were held. This happened and the Communist party won with forty percent of the vote
Unfortunately after this election the Russians made Poland a communist state
The occupation of East Europe could be considered the same as the occupation of Germany and Austria by America and Britain
When the USSR collapsed in 1990 it was fully accepted that the cold war had been a huge trick created for economic reasons. There had never ever been any possibility of the USSR invading the west.. But by threatening the USSR which benefitted the American and British arms industries it made the USSR divert a huge amount of its economy already crippled by huge destruction and loss of workers to arms production .
America is trying to do this again . It fears a Russia with a good standard of living because..there is the possibility that at some time in the future Russia might be ready to join the European Union
That really would destroy Americas position in the world.
America is thus doing all it can to cripple the Russian economy, and demonize Putin in every way possible
Poland caused problemsbecause Polish fighters had fought bravely with the British. . It was decided the Russians could ^look after Poland ^ if free elections were held. This happened and the Communist party won with forty percent of the vote
Unfortunately after this election the Russians made Poland a communist state
The occupation of East Europe could be considered the same as the occupation of Germany and Austria by America and Britain
When the USSR collapsed in 1990 it was fully accepted that the cold war had been a huge trick created for economic reasons. There had never ever been any possibility of the USSR invading the west.. But by threatening the USSR which benefitted the American and British arms industries it made the USSR divert a huge amount of its economy already crippled by huge destruction and loss of workers to arms production .
America is trying to do this again . It fears a Russia with a good standard of living because..there is the possibility that at some time in the future Russia might be ready to join the European Union
That really would destroy Americas position in the world.
America is thus doing all it can to cripple the Russian economy, and demonize Putin in every way possible
20
You are in no position to be calling other people "ignorant about history." The Baltic States were not allies of the Nazis; some people may have welcomed the Nazis because Stalin's oppression but quickly became disillusioned with them. The idea that the elections in Poland under Stalin's occupation were fair is ludicrous.
"There had never ever been any possibility of the USSR invading the west"
That isn't true, Warsaw Pact doctrine was based on making sure that any war was fought as far west as possible.
Russia is crippling itself by being a kleptocracy with little to offer economically except fossil fuels.
"There had never ever been any possibility of the USSR invading the west"
That isn't true, Warsaw Pact doctrine was based on making sure that any war was fought as far west as possible.
Russia is crippling itself by being a kleptocracy with little to offer economically except fossil fuels.
2
"if free elections were held. This happened and the Communist party won with forty percent of the vote"
"Free elections" were held, just like how Saddam always held "free elections" in Russia. Polish people had no love for their Soviet "liberators" who had conspired with Hitler to split the country in two before he turned on them. After the mass murders and deportations, elections held at the end of a gun were anything but "free."
"Free elections" were held, just like how Saddam always held "free elections" in Russia. Polish people had no love for their Soviet "liberators" who had conspired with Hitler to split the country in two before he turned on them. After the mass murders and deportations, elections held at the end of a gun were anything but "free."
2
I am ashamed about the nonsensical propaganda mumbo-jumbo of a variety of extremist ideologies you managed to regurgitate without any care how it effects Americans' views of people in Eastern Europe.
"Nearly all of the East European countries that were occupied by the Soviet Union at the end of WW2 had been allies of the Nazis and been enemies of America and Britain." You forgot to mention that these countries were duped by Hitler into believing that the extreme humiliation and economic annihilation suffered by them due to the 1919-20 Paris-Versailles peace dictates fueled by the zeal of the Entente Cordiale to wipe out "the German threat" can be undone. As for being enemies of Britain and the US, Governor (regent) Horthy's son has been kidnapped by the SS to prevent Hungary swapping sides.
"Nearly all of the East European countries that were occupied by the Soviet Union at the end of WW2 had been allies of the Nazis and been enemies of America and Britain." You forgot to mention that these countries were duped by Hitler into believing that the extreme humiliation and economic annihilation suffered by them due to the 1919-20 Paris-Versailles peace dictates fueled by the zeal of the Entente Cordiale to wipe out "the German threat" can be undone. As for being enemies of Britain and the US, Governor (regent) Horthy's son has been kidnapped by the SS to prevent Hungary swapping sides.
2
The U.S. government would put heavy weaponry in every American school if citizens don't hurry up and grow a backbone. Matter of fact some schools are armed already.
How much clearer does the picture have to become before Americans notice the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) runs the foreign policy of their country? How many more wars is the country going to start?
What do you want to bet that no sooner is this heavy weaponry in place then some incident will be created to validate its placement. Look up the Gulf of Tonkin- a ruse by the U.S. to get its citizens on board to go into Vietnam.
Americans wake up. D.C. is running the country like an empire. They spend money on arms and weaponry while schools and infrastructure fall apart. Does anybody out there recall Eisenhower's warning against the MIC? How about Smedley Butler, the most decorated Marine in U.S. history, doesn't anyone his book, "War is a Racket."
It is distressing that no one cares. It is distressing that more people don't see the path we have been put on by D.C. political prostitutes and the MIC is a guarantee disaster. Look at history. Look at the Roman Empire. The names and places have changed but human nature has not. Individuals driven by power and greed take once great nations to the poor house.
How much clearer does the picture have to become before Americans notice the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC) runs the foreign policy of their country? How many more wars is the country going to start?
What do you want to bet that no sooner is this heavy weaponry in place then some incident will be created to validate its placement. Look up the Gulf of Tonkin- a ruse by the U.S. to get its citizens on board to go into Vietnam.
Americans wake up. D.C. is running the country like an empire. They spend money on arms and weaponry while schools and infrastructure fall apart. Does anybody out there recall Eisenhower's warning against the MIC? How about Smedley Butler, the most decorated Marine in U.S. history, doesn't anyone his book, "War is a Racket."
It is distressing that no one cares. It is distressing that more people don't see the path we have been put on by D.C. political prostitutes and the MIC is a guarantee disaster. Look at history. Look at the Roman Empire. The names and places have changed but human nature has not. Individuals driven by power and greed take once great nations to the poor house.
35
You'd rather be controlled by billionaire oligarchs and corporations than the government? At least, you can vote for your government. Who died and made Charles Koch king?
"Americans wake up. D.C. is running the country like an empire. They spend money on arms and weaponry while schools and infrastructure fall apart. Does anybody out there recall Eisenhower's warning against the MIC? "
Have you ever read the entire speech?
Here's another nugget:
"The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded."
Now who wants the Federal government to take the lead in renewable energy? Be careful, Eisenhower warned against it.
Have you ever read the entire speech?
Here's another nugget:
"The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded."
Now who wants the Federal government to take the lead in renewable energy? Be careful, Eisenhower warned against it.
I think the dynamics of cause & effect re empires and corrupted leaders is more complex than you make it out to be. Leaders are just a symptom. The problem is that the electorate hasn't evolved psychologically enough to know they have collective power, or they’re lulled into non-participation by an easy life-style—created by the empire!
Leaders can’t effect change on their own. The citizens who've been negatively affected by empire building have to get angry enough and vote in a leader who either has integrity—e.g. of Nelson Mandela and Barack Obama, to name two—or seems to have it.
Then the electorate has to support them. But often they don’t understand what’s needed to effect real change. They get impatient and withdraw their support, then blame the leader. As with Obama. He’s a brilliant man of great integrity, wisdom and insight into cause & effect. He cares deeply about equality, the middle class, the environment, peace. And knows how to make it happen.
Yet the electorate gave the power back to the politicians who cause all the problems. But Obama is still expected to deliver. It’s mind-boggling. As for Russia, too many Russians buy into Putin’s PR. So he stays in power.
The world will change when people evolve to where they are prepared to educate themselves on what’s really required to root out the ill-effects of empire building. To where they want to fully participate and take responsibility for their own choices instead of seeking scapegoats.
Leaders can’t effect change on their own. The citizens who've been negatively affected by empire building have to get angry enough and vote in a leader who either has integrity—e.g. of Nelson Mandela and Barack Obama, to name two—or seems to have it.
Then the electorate has to support them. But often they don’t understand what’s needed to effect real change. They get impatient and withdraw their support, then blame the leader. As with Obama. He’s a brilliant man of great integrity, wisdom and insight into cause & effect. He cares deeply about equality, the middle class, the environment, peace. And knows how to make it happen.
Yet the electorate gave the power back to the politicians who cause all the problems. But Obama is still expected to deliver. It’s mind-boggling. As for Russia, too many Russians buy into Putin’s PR. So he stays in power.
The world will change when people evolve to where they are prepared to educate themselves on what’s really required to root out the ill-effects of empire building. To where they want to fully participate and take responsibility for their own choices instead of seeking scapegoats.
I really thought we were done with all this nonsense. Apparently not. When will we finally rid ourselves of these lunatics who call themselves leaders, presidents, and prime ministers? They don't keep us safe. They are all evil. One day we will do away with them.
20
"They don't keep us safe. They are all evil. One day we will do away with them."
Nice try. Sounds like the rhetoric heard during the Cold War. And just for the record, Putin is the evil one.
Nice try. Sounds like the rhetoric heard during the Cold War. And just for the record, Putin is the evil one.
So, would you suggest to sell the whole Central Europe to Putin? Pretty smart move...
J.I.
J.I.
Glad to see President Obama finally growing a spine. Putin and Xi Jinping perceive our President as weak. They will continue to push until America pushes back. This is a very small step, but it may help a bit. I'd also like to see our President have our Navy drop anchor as close as possible to China's artificial "sand islands." It's not their territory.
We're already in cyberwar with both countries. Cold-War?... You're kidding, right? Putin certainly never abandoned the Cold-War. Most of us have always lived under the concept of MAD (mutually assured destruction), and always will with both Russia and the United States having approximately 1700-1800 active nuclear warheads and approximately 8000 in reserve. Personally, I don't think the Human Race will survive the transition from a "Type 0" civilization to a "Type 1" civilization. Too many possible extinction events lurking over the next hundred years. Wonder why we don't detect signs of alien civilizations? Wonder why Elon Musk is working as fast as possible on super-heavy rockets to get to Mars and set up a colony?
We're already in cyberwar with both countries. Cold-War?... You're kidding, right? Putin certainly never abandoned the Cold-War. Most of us have always lived under the concept of MAD (mutually assured destruction), and always will with both Russia and the United States having approximately 1700-1800 active nuclear warheads and approximately 8000 in reserve. Personally, I don't think the Human Race will survive the transition from a "Type 0" civilization to a "Type 1" civilization. Too many possible extinction events lurking over the next hundred years. Wonder why we don't detect signs of alien civilizations? Wonder why Elon Musk is working as fast as possible on super-heavy rockets to get to Mars and set up a colony?
13
I believe the spine belongs to the Pentagon, and not da Prez
These American weapons and troops are for offense -- not "defense".
The "allies" (puppets) now find themselves on the front lines -- a very dangerous place. Were the people of these countries really "jittery" before? They have good reason to be now!
NATO is an offensive imperialist alliance aiming to win all Eurasian investment markets. War is the inevitable result of the capitalist drive for profit and markets. This is "essentially" about imperialism. The US and EU capitalist class wallows in riches they do not know what to do with. They want investment markets.
The "allies" (puppets) now find themselves on the front lines -- a very dangerous place. Were the people of these countries really "jittery" before? They have good reason to be now!
NATO is an offensive imperialist alliance aiming to win all Eurasian investment markets. War is the inevitable result of the capitalist drive for profit and markets. This is "essentially" about imperialism. The US and EU capitalist class wallows in riches they do not know what to do with. They want investment markets.
26
" Were the people of these countries really "jittery" before?"
Yes. Perhaps you should stop thinking for countries that you clearly know very little about.
Yes. Perhaps you should stop thinking for countries that you clearly know very little about.
1
Troll?? Not helpful. The Russian Government is breathtakingly corrupt. We, in the West, for all our evils (and there are plenty), pale in comparison to the depravity of the current Russian government. This has nothing to do with the Russian people but everything to do with Vladimir Putin and his quest to be the "Czar" with immense power and wealth. He and Napoleon have more than a few things in common.
Let's say I do not argue with your comment. Can you tell me though, how is suffering from Russian imperialism better than any other?
While Easter Europe has historical reasons not to trust Russia (and Germany ,for that matter,I would add), this move is nothing but another victory for the military-industrial complex.
It is ridiculous and ,yes, insane, to think that Putin will want to attack a NATO country. The man does not seem insane nor stupid, whatever else he might be.
As to the argument of "just in case"..we need Russia to solve more important and critical world problems. This is not helpful in this regard to say the least.
It is ridiculous and ,yes, insane, to think that Putin will want to attack a NATO country. The man does not seem insane nor stupid, whatever else he might be.
As to the argument of "just in case"..we need Russia to solve more important and critical world problems. This is not helpful in this regard to say the least.
21
Easy for you to say since you do not sit on a border with Russian; since Putin has been in power he has attacked Georgia (not a state of the US), the Ukraine, and the Baltins and took land from all. It is very easy for you to sit back to rationalize his behavior but to live there is a different matter.
2
Well, I take your point but, it is interesting that Putin is doing what he is doing in the Ukraine. He is attacking NATO in a low key way .... not waves of tanks ... that would be insane .... he is attacking it in a rather intelligent way ... but, attacking he is ... that being the case ... this tactic is an old tactic .... and, the result .... ?
2
But the same tactic succeded in '80s. Remember placing Pershing and Cruise missiles in the Western Europe? It worked out, and USSR collapsed...
J.I.
J.I.
Appeasement and accommodation of our enemies always results in unnecessary death and destruction of Americans.
23
Please define "always".
Appeasement, who arms these faction in this imaginary global conflict? The US! Who armed Russia and China, the US! Who armed the Islamic militants? The US! War is our game and death is our policy, so appeasement? A very hollow term once you turn the beast over.
You make it sound as if World War II was necessary. Then enjoy World War III.
1
Beyond the pale.
Let me at least move to the southern hemisphere
first please and I'll hope for the best.
16
It is very important for the US to support the Baltics in this instance. After WWII, we sold them to the Soviets. Massive deportations to Siberia, and an economy that was decimated. Putin will move forward, as history has proven. The move by the US is very much in line with our culture, policy, and morals. This is not a party issue, but a national issue. This is not meddling in a country's politics, but helping them face an aggressive force. Russia has no sympathy, and would send Latvians back to prison as soon as they could.
17
Let's have another Cold War. The last one worked out really well. Talk about the expansion of bald-face power politics over common sense. Just what this nation needs is more military expansion while domestic needs go unmet.
52
Actually Cold War worked real well. No war but Soviet dictatorship collapsed and all the vassal states were freed, Poland, East Germany, the Baltic States, Ukraine. Pretty much went by the script, all the US had to do was hold the line and the Soviet Union would collapse.
2
The last one did work out really well. Thanks to Reagan, we won.
3
But the Cold War kind of DID go well. There's no USSR anymore and Europe is free [of Communism] and brimming with allies. Basically the entire Western world is stable and united (excepting Russia, of course, and most notably, now Ukraine). Apart from their regrettable development for and detonation in Japan, no one is actually using nuclear weapons (and Japan is now an important ally). I'd say things are going spectacularly well in the Western world.
1
Perfect - a ground war in eastern europe. maybe after getting shellacked in vietnam, and now the quagmire in the middle east, the US can certainly spend more blood and treasure in an eastern european theatre. Such american exceptionalism. Is there any wonder why the US is almost universally despised?
43
Yes, it seems that many of Russia's closest neighbors appreciate the U.S. considerably more than some Americans do, I wonder why that is............
1
Armo - an RT blogger perhaps?
1
Universally - by everyone, in every case
Of course, this explains why millions of people from around the world line up to get themselves and their families admitted to the United States to seek better lives for themselves. Your logic is a bit like Yogi's "It 's so crowded, no one goes there anymore." Sure. Who is looking to move to China? Russia? In fact, many are looking to leave Russia: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32976294
The fact is, friend, for 5 decades, our presence in Western Europe not only halted the likelihood of the Soviets moving into Western Europe, as they did Eastern Europe, but also curbed their ability to influence Western Europe and allowed each of those economies to prosper for the benefit of their respective populations. What happened to the Soviet and Eastern European economies? Comments like yours display not a misinerpretation of facts but a lack of knowledge of facts.
Of course, this explains why millions of people from around the world line up to get themselves and their families admitted to the United States to seek better lives for themselves. Your logic is a bit like Yogi's "It 's so crowded, no one goes there anymore." Sure. Who is looking to move to China? Russia? In fact, many are looking to leave Russia: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32976294
The fact is, friend, for 5 decades, our presence in Western Europe not only halted the likelihood of the Soviets moving into Western Europe, as they did Eastern Europe, but also curbed their ability to influence Western Europe and allowed each of those economies to prosper for the benefit of their respective populations. What happened to the Soviet and Eastern European economies? Comments like yours display not a misinerpretation of facts but a lack of knowledge of facts.
And Europe can't defend itself because...?
27
"And Europe can't defend itself because...?"
They can, but they much prefer that we pay for it. I can afford my monthly mortgage payment, but if someone offered to make it for me, I'd probably see my way clear to let them.
They can, but they much prefer that we pay for it. I can afford my monthly mortgage payment, but if someone offered to make it for me, I'd probably see my way clear to let them.
The US is a NATO member. If you don't like that, say so.
1
Poland for example will already be paying 2% GDP on military since 2016. You should be satisfied.
J.I.
J.I.
1
I completely disagree that it will deter Russia. For it to work the Russian would have to see the West back up it's threats in places like Syria. There is nothing about the West and Obama that shows they are willing to fight. If Putin wants to move into Eastern Europe he will do so knowing the West for all their talk will never fight back or get the approval from their citizens to fight.
This is not Berlin 1961 and Putin is not the old Russian leaders. Instead I would advice them to get psychiatrists to predict Putin's possible moves. So far to my dismay, Putin like a chess Grandmaster has outmaneuvered the West at every turn, and will do so in Eastern Europe if he choose to. Any Eastern European nation that thinks American troops will show up to fight Russia need to make sure they have a Plan B.
This is not Berlin 1961 and Putin is not the old Russian leaders. Instead I would advice them to get psychiatrists to predict Putin's possible moves. So far to my dismay, Putin like a chess Grandmaster has outmaneuvered the West at every turn, and will do so in Eastern Europe if he choose to. Any Eastern European nation that thinks American troops will show up to fight Russia need to make sure they have a Plan B.
7
you are the one thinking in terms of WW2, try to catch up
I wonder whether people here actually consider the possibility that Eastern European nations prefer joining the EU, over joining ex-soviet Russia, which currently only exports oil and functions like a corrupt oligarchy where journalists are jailed and shot on the street, even at their own doorstep.
This has nothing to do with "American imperialism". Eastern European nations have been inviting US military back ever since Georgia, Crimea and UKraine events. They know full well that EU forces are not up to the task. EU is divided and refuses to stand behind any identity, even if it is human rights (why would we have the right to force the freedom of human rights upon anyone after our colonial adventures?). The moment EU soldiers are caught in harms way of Russian mercenaries, the European intelligentsia and politicians will start to blame themselves and make apologies for Putin. Just look at the letter that Schroeder and co wrote to that extend as an example. Gandhi would weep.
http://www.mkgandhi.org/nonviolence/phil8.htm
This has nothing to do with "American imperialism". Eastern European nations have been inviting US military back ever since Georgia, Crimea and UKraine events. They know full well that EU forces are not up to the task. EU is divided and refuses to stand behind any identity, even if it is human rights (why would we have the right to force the freedom of human rights upon anyone after our colonial adventures?). The moment EU soldiers are caught in harms way of Russian mercenaries, the European intelligentsia and politicians will start to blame themselves and make apologies for Putin. Just look at the letter that Schroeder and co wrote to that extend as an example. Gandhi would weep.
http://www.mkgandhi.org/nonviolence/phil8.htm
16
Plus a nation like Poland has good reason to not depend on the other European nations to come to their aid, much like what happened during WW2. I know complaining about the American military is what all the cool kids are doing, but in this case you have countries that legitimately want a U.S. military presence and are even willing to provide bases to house U.S. troops.
1
Putin is such an unbearable liar, I cannot even stomach looking at a picture or video of this absolute filth. If there were any justice in this world, putin and khameini would be hanging in the Hague gallows right now.
The amount of people putin has murdered in grozhny, ukraine and syria is in the hundreds of thousands, and one can only hope death finds him soon.
The amount of people putin has murdered in grozhny, ukraine and syria is in the hundreds of thousands, and one can only hope death finds him soon.
23
I feel exactly the same way about Dick Cheney, except I'm not in favor of hanging him.
Oh, and while you're on this murderous rampage why don't you just throw in George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, et al. and the current POTUS as murderous filth to be hung from the gallows of the Hague (the Hague has a gallows?).
1
So you agree that this proposal increases the likelihood of war between the US and Russia?
2
Surely the answer is significant economic and financial sanctions not military hardware. Putin has serious business interests to look after domestically not to mention the off-shore personal financial interests of Russia's political and financial elites. If a politician is not good for business and the various domestic elites, other politicians will be found.
Sadly, 'fortress' Europe struggles to see beyond its short term economic interests. Stealing the Crimea, invading Ukraine, what next, invading the Czech and Slovak Republics; been done before. And what better staging post to create the threat than Soviet East Ukraine. It can get very messy and difficult to unravel. Best the Europeans keep the US out of this one or we might have an Iraq/Yemen-like scenario on our hands. Drones delivering death over central Europe will happen if American geo-political interests go haywire again.
I can already hear it: Yes, Mr. President, we think Europe is 'doable'.
Sadly, 'fortress' Europe struggles to see beyond its short term economic interests. Stealing the Crimea, invading Ukraine, what next, invading the Czech and Slovak Republics; been done before. And what better staging post to create the threat than Soviet East Ukraine. It can get very messy and difficult to unravel. Best the Europeans keep the US out of this one or we might have an Iraq/Yemen-like scenario on our hands. Drones delivering death over central Europe will happen if American geo-political interests go haywire again.
I can already hear it: Yes, Mr. President, we think Europe is 'doable'.
4
This book said the same thing your are saying about the world as it existed before WW 1: Norman Angell, Europe’s Optical Illusion (London: Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent, 1909). Intertwined national economies upon which wealth and trade depended made war irrational. Irrational it may have been but those priorities did not override small minded national fervor and 10 million died within 10 years.
Confronting Putin is the right thing to do but the possibility of conflict is absolutely real.
Confronting Putin is the right thing to do but the possibility of conflict is absolutely real.
1
People shouldn't be naive about this. The reality is that if the US doesn't help, Russia and China will walk over everybody. There is no such thing as a guarantee when it comes to Russian and China.
24
"There is no such thing as a guarantee when it comes to Russian and China."
But there is with a USA the promised the USSR that it would not drive NATO up to the borders of Russia. Then immediately broke its word on the basis of the sort of sleazy legal argument that is so common in Manhattan.
'The "Promise" was made to the USSR which doesn't exist anymore so it doesn't have any relevance anymore.
That's the what the US guarantee is worth.
But there is with a USA the promised the USSR that it would not drive NATO up to the borders of Russia. Then immediately broke its word on the basis of the sort of sleazy legal argument that is so common in Manhattan.
'The "Promise" was made to the USSR which doesn't exist anymore so it doesn't have any relevance anymore.
That's the what the US guarantee is worth.
That sounds like something the pro-Russian separatists in the Baltics would much appreciate and enjoy taking over and using in any potential conflict even before help from Russia arrives. Nice going, Pentagon.
4
The geographically isolated Russian territory of Kaliningrad could be a useful bargaining chip with Putin over his Crimean takeover. Return the Crimea and exit all of eastern Ukraine, and you get to keep this Russian oblast for now.
7
Really? A bargaining chip used by whom? The Germans? The United States? The Germans have no desire to reclaim Kaliningrad and the United States could only do so with military force. Dream up another scenario there genius.
Eastern Europe belongs to the former Warsaw Pact, NATO (USA) has no business being there, period.
Why did I vote for Obama twice, so he can be taken over by the "pod" people (MDC) who have been wrong about every foreign policy matter since McClellan tried to invade Richmond (1862).
ENOUGH of the provocation get back to what matters, our people and our country let the Russians have theirs and let the European deal with Putin.
Why did I vote for Obama twice, so he can be taken over by the "pod" people (MDC) who have been wrong about every foreign policy matter since McClellan tried to invade Richmond (1862).
ENOUGH of the provocation get back to what matters, our people and our country let the Russians have theirs and let the European deal with Putin.
23
"Eastern Europe belongs to the former Warsaw Pact,"
What breathtaking ignorance.
What breathtaking ignorance.
1
This is the most offensive comment here. Who are you to tell Eastern Europeans where they belong? It is like saying Blacks belong to the old confederacy and they have no right to live in a democratic Union. Warsaw Pact was enslaving half of modern EU and you are telling the victims to just go back? This is racist against any person from the eastern EU states.
4
Eastern Europe belongs to the eastern Europeans, who chose to join NATO.
4
Putin knows that when it comes to a confrontation the Obama administration will not honor its NATO commitments and the Western European NATO countries will not go to war without the US. Putin is simply waiting for the right moment (the next international crises). Maybe it will be in the South China Sea or with Iran. Then Putin will act. He can overrun the Baltic States in 24-48 hours. Romania, Hungary, Slovakia in 3-4 days. Obama and NATO will fold like a beach chair.
1
Haha, Putin take over the Western world in a couple days!? I think you have an unrealistic view of Russia's actual military strength. Their military spending is less than 20% of US military spending alone, and that "enormous expansion" is just going towards modernizing their outdated equipment. Their economy is weak, anyway, and Putin's level of military spending is not sustainable. Their border is enormous and enormously expensive to defend. For the size of the place and the quality of the economic foundation underneath it all, it's absurd to be as concerned as that.
1
The NATO Treaty was signed by the United States in April 1945 and ratified by the Senate in June 1949. Under Article 5 of the Charter, and attack on one member is an attack on all. If you, or perhaps Putin, believe there a result other than a war would come about, you have let your talk radio listening hours supersede your hours spent reading history.
2
thanks for the laugh, you know nothing of our military capabliities
We spend hundreds of billions every year on defense and homeland security. All i can say is thank god our current enemies are 7,000 miles from our shores, otherwise this could get really expensive.
9
This is the military announcing plans straight to the people. Over the heads of the politicians. Good to see the military has the interests of the people in mind. As opposed to the politicians, who have only themselves in mind. We shall see what the White House has to say.
2
Polish politicans for example urged US officials for months to make such commitments in reference to Central Europe. Ask Tusk, Sikorski or Komorowski for example.
J.I.
J.I.
I guess Obama finally learned his lesson from that "flexibility" he promised Putin "after the election." Putin is the big Russian bear who would eat Obama's "flexibility" for lunch if given half a chance. So far, he's has had that half a chance - and has had a good meal (called Crimea and Eastern Ukraine). Obama's learning he better not give him the rest.
7
more totally- future fatally-- incorrect alignment activity by the current administration… the current Washington fool-dom simply cannot arrange a proper global alliance configuration….. coin toss allies .. hedged opponents..
should this be prep for nouveau cold war as an opt to pending economic collapse…
please …. we've been there..
should this be prep for nouveau cold war as an opt to pending economic collapse…
please …. we've been there..
2
What?
sorry you are so uninformed as to what is going on
At the end of the cold war (1989) there were six (6) Division Sets of American Equipment (with war stores) in Germany. One Brigade is One Third of a Division. This represents more or less 10% of the commitment in 1989; How about a real program to pre-position two Divisions worth, with a supplemental ta on the high earners to pay for it?
Of course, we would also have to maintain two fully manned and trained up divisions in this country to use them in any contingency, everyone is so busy trying to find a peace dividend in an increasingly fragmented world.
Of course, we would also have to maintain two fully manned and trained up divisions in this country to use them in any contingency, everyone is so busy trying to find a peace dividend in an increasingly fragmented world.
2
How many divisions can we form by gathering up all those gunned up militia members out there? Quick, get the NRA membership roster!
Our leftwing President has been acting like more like George Bush for years. Now he thinks he is Ronald Reagan.
13
You are probably thinking of Harry Truman, George C. Marshall and Dean Acheson, the architects of NATO which has delivered decades of peace and prosperity to Western Europe. This benefit has accrued to not only the Western Europeans but the United Staes as well.
1
Now it Bush's fault that our community Organizer has a problem with Russia. Please this is what america voted for . "Change ". This is what you got. Maybe next time around Bill Clinton and Hillary can get us out of this mess . Opps I mean Hillary and Bill.
Eastern and Central Europe is the proper place to store large weapons like tanks. This equipment is useless in the fight against terrorists but it may deter the Russians.
Cold War II seems to be upon us. Mutual Assured Destruction prevented Cold War I from becoming a hot war and, hopefully, will continue to do so. Putin is very nasty guy but a rational guy. He talks about 'nuclear war' but means probably a use of tactical rather than strategic (thermonuclear) weapons.
Amazing comments here from real 'peacenics'.
Cold War II seems to be upon us. Mutual Assured Destruction prevented Cold War I from becoming a hot war and, hopefully, will continue to do so. Putin is very nasty guy but a rational guy. He talks about 'nuclear war' but means probably a use of tactical rather than strategic (thermonuclear) weapons.
Amazing comments here from real 'peacenics'.
16
“I think that only an insane person and only in a dream can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO,” just ask the Ukrainians about Russian aggression! The only thing Putin respects is the barrel of a large caliber weapon pointed at him.
14
The notion that the United States has shed its militarism abroad under this Presidency is absurd. Obama may claim that there are fewer boots on the ground in active war, but this is more than compensated by the expansion of bases, drone attacks and covert warfare.
14
Here we go again. No one seems to remember: In 1990 Kissinger and Nixon I believe wanted to do a Marshall Plan for Russia and give them a soft landing after the wall came down. Bush-11 and his crowd -- the second gen cold warriors -- decided to let the SU collapse, destroy it from within, to nullify its status as a rival power. We had great good feeling after the wall came down. I embraced some Russians in Helsinki. They wanted peace. It was very moving. Now we have the worst of both worlds -- a rival power that owes us nothing. Bush-I and his neocons created this. Remember that.
6
Bush I was as horrendous a president as Bush II. Now we may very well get Bush III.
“In a significant move ... the Pentagon is poised to store [various] heavy weapons for 5,000 American troops in several Baltic and Eastern European countries, American and allied officials say.” To “deter”, the article explains, “Russian aggression”
The article doesn't tell us who these “officials” are but since its author, Eric Scmitt, has always been aa reliable source of whatever the White House and/or Pentagon wants us to know (but rarely if ever what it doesn't want us to know), we may assume President Obama has already signed off on this “move”.
But how does Obama expect the Russians to react to it? I say “the Russians", not just Putin but all the Russians, given their bitter experience as victims of aggression. By, as some of you here may remember, our chief NATO ally, Germany. How would anyone – including ourselves – react to this deliberate attempt to escalate tensions in an already tense confrontation?
Exactly what does Obama expect to gain by this move? Does he think it will persuade the Russians to abandon their fellow Russians in eastern Ukraine? I don't think he's that foolish. I think rather that he himself is being intimidated by Schmitt's usual sources, the old Cold War apparatchiks who still long for those good old days.
The article doesn't tell us who these “officials” are but since its author, Eric Scmitt, has always been aa reliable source of whatever the White House and/or Pentagon wants us to know (but rarely if ever what it doesn't want us to know), we may assume President Obama has already signed off on this “move”.
But how does Obama expect the Russians to react to it? I say “the Russians", not just Putin but all the Russians, given their bitter experience as victims of aggression. By, as some of you here may remember, our chief NATO ally, Germany. How would anyone – including ourselves – react to this deliberate attempt to escalate tensions in an already tense confrontation?
Exactly what does Obama expect to gain by this move? Does he think it will persuade the Russians to abandon their fellow Russians in eastern Ukraine? I don't think he's that foolish. I think rather that he himself is being intimidated by Schmitt's usual sources, the old Cold War apparatchiks who still long for those good old days.
8
Russians' "bitter experience as victims of aggression"? Excuse me, wasn't that Russia invading Ukraine, Georgia, Chechnya, and Moldova? How about Russia's decade-long invasion of Afghanistan? And Korean war fueled and supported by the Kremlin? Invasion of Poland in 1939 in Alliance with Hitler?
Let's hear Putin complain about how aggressive America is.
5
What baloney.
This is blatant aggression not on the part of our government, rather the arms manufacturers who have the ear of those who purport to represent us. We are not a government of the people, but a government of the special interests.
No one in his right mind on either side of any dispute would pull the trigger causing a major military dispute. This is a sham on behalf of the military industrial complex who have financed the hacks making this decision.
We do not have to match so called barbarous acts on the part of the Russians. We are being sold a bill without any goods behind the paper.
We have to vote out of office these who have no allegiance beyond their monetary benefactors before they bankrupt every one, but those who supply the guns used to suppress all of us.
Stop listening to the lies, stop living in fear and stop bullying.
If I read like an alarmist it is because the most greedy and frightened men among us are defining the terms.
This is blatant aggression not on the part of our government, rather the arms manufacturers who have the ear of those who purport to represent us. We are not a government of the people, but a government of the special interests.
No one in his right mind on either side of any dispute would pull the trigger causing a major military dispute. This is a sham on behalf of the military industrial complex who have financed the hacks making this decision.
We do not have to match so called barbarous acts on the part of the Russians. We are being sold a bill without any goods behind the paper.
We have to vote out of office these who have no allegiance beyond their monetary benefactors before they bankrupt every one, but those who supply the guns used to suppress all of us.
Stop listening to the lies, stop living in fear and stop bullying.
If I read like an alarmist it is because the most greedy and frightened men among us are defining the terms.
18
Well .... same thing is going on in Russia ....but, more so .... far more so .... See if you can write this in a Russian newspaper .....I think not ....
Let's face it, American fascism isn't much better than Russian fascism these days. We have an election between a few pre-determined elites (Clinton, Bush) and they have an election to confirm their pre-determined elite (Putin).
Sure, Putin has his opponents murdered, but our leaders send boys to war and spend a trillion dollars of our tax money to destabilize the whole Middle East.
Sure, the Russians have their secret police, but now that we have video cameras, ours commit murder and its not even secret.
Is income disparity any worse in Russia than it is here for the millions in poverty?
Let's face it, the fascists of today aren't committing the genocides of their older brothers. The Russians and the Chinese have learned from their American fascist counterparts. Communism is no longer an issue.
So what are we fighting over? Spheres of influence. Ukraine is in Russia's sphere of influence and Russia needs a secure southern border now that we've mucked up the Middle East so much. Remember, Russia's "Mexico" is the Islamic Middle East, where ISIS runs rampant. Meanwhile, the Baltic nations are also within Russia's sphere of influence and really have very little to do with the United States and its legitimate political interests.
This message brought to you by a middle-aged "1 percent" Ivy Leaguer who sees the writing on the wall.
Sure, Putin has his opponents murdered, but our leaders send boys to war and spend a trillion dollars of our tax money to destabilize the whole Middle East.
Sure, the Russians have their secret police, but now that we have video cameras, ours commit murder and its not even secret.
Is income disparity any worse in Russia than it is here for the millions in poverty?
Let's face it, the fascists of today aren't committing the genocides of their older brothers. The Russians and the Chinese have learned from their American fascist counterparts. Communism is no longer an issue.
So what are we fighting over? Spheres of influence. Ukraine is in Russia's sphere of influence and Russia needs a secure southern border now that we've mucked up the Middle East so much. Remember, Russia's "Mexico" is the Islamic Middle East, where ISIS runs rampant. Meanwhile, the Baltic nations are also within Russia's sphere of influence and really have very little to do with the United States and its legitimate political interests.
This message brought to you by a middle-aged "1 percent" Ivy Leaguer who sees the writing on the wall.
18
So trite and wrong. Go ask Snowden how it's like. As a 1 percent Ivy Leaguer you can make up your own reality, you're divorced from the real world. Quite jejeune.
If it's a push, the real estate is less expensive over in Russia.
Aha, there is finally a lucrative jobs market for Americans who graduate college with a degree in literature and the humanities. It is clear from many of the comments, that Russian internet trolls are sorely in need of instruction in written American English.
10
Labeling any dissidents as Russian trolls is ironic coming from someone born in the cradle of pluralism of opinions. Maybe you are in need of instruction in any language other than English to help you get a different perspective on foreign affairs and see better through the political bias.
1
Yeah, Steve, we're all college graduates with degrees in literature being paid by Russia to comment as powerful NYT commenter trolls. Because no real American could possibly disagree with you. (sigh)
1
in reply to Aly S. and jb:
Nowhere in my comment did I say all who criticize American policy or support Russian actions in the Ukraine are trolls. Nor did I comment on what I thought of American policy vis a vis Russia and the Ukraine. That said, I will stand by my statement that some of the comments are by trolls. And by the sarcasm in my initial comment.
Nowhere in my comment did I say all who criticize American policy or support Russian actions in the Ukraine are trolls. Nor did I comment on what I thought of American policy vis a vis Russia and the Ukraine. That said, I will stand by my statement that some of the comments are by trolls. And by the sarcasm in my initial comment.
1
POMCUS deja vous? I would have thought that stationing forces, even unarmed or lightly armed forces without organic transport so they wold be fixed in place and could not retreat, would have been the best tripwire to show U.S. commitment. But U.S. commitment without the support of allies may be too dangerous both to our forces and to politicians at home. Equipment can and has been abandoned and is not a very credible statement. Of course, if we want to create the belief that we are willing to risk military conflict after we have been shown to be unwilling and unable to impose credible economic sanctions, then we may be need to go back to something like the MAD doctrine that required leaving something to chance to be credible (we need to make adversaries believe we don't know what we are doing).
1
I am not sure that barking without being ready or even able to bite is going anywhere. It is getting us back into cold war and making earth a more dangerous place.
5000 troops and a couple of tanks are not going to frighten Alexander Putin. Do we want to invade Russia and try to do better than previous attempts that failed bitterly?
5000 troops and a couple of tanks are not going to frighten Alexander Putin. Do we want to invade Russia and try to do better than previous attempts that failed bitterly?
2
The point is not to frighten, the point is to deter. Any American equipment or personnel changes the equation significantly.
1
That's good news. Putin is as evil and vicious as Stalin. If Putin and his administration are left to do whatever they want unchecked, we will be right back where Eastern Europe was in September 1939, with the Soviets invading Poland, the former Austrian Crown province of Galicia, and the other countries to the south.
If left unchecked, there is no reason Putin would not implement Lenin & Stalin's old 1920 plan to invade and hold all of Germany and the smaller Germanic countries.
If left unchecked, there is no reason Putin would not invade Finland or block off the Baltic Sea. (Remember the scene from "Top Gun" where the Russian and U.S. fighter jets are close together? The Russians pulled the same stunt for real a day or so ago, over international waters of the Baltic Sea.)
If left unchecked, there is no reason Putin would not invade Alaska, which the U.S.A. bought from a Tsar.
If left unchecked, there is no reason Putin would not invade California, where between between 1812 to 1842 the Russians built, occupied and settled "Fortress Ross" (aka Fort Ross) on the coast of Sonoma County.
Understand that in Putin's warped mind, he is entitled to control every piece of real estate ever occupied by Russia whether peacefully or by force.
This is not funny stuff. Putin is mentally ill in a violent way. This is who America is dealing with, a person and a well-financed enemy regime far more dangerous-to-Americans than all of the Muslim terrorist groups combined.
If left unchecked, there is no reason Putin would not implement Lenin & Stalin's old 1920 plan to invade and hold all of Germany and the smaller Germanic countries.
If left unchecked, there is no reason Putin would not invade Finland or block off the Baltic Sea. (Remember the scene from "Top Gun" where the Russian and U.S. fighter jets are close together? The Russians pulled the same stunt for real a day or so ago, over international waters of the Baltic Sea.)
If left unchecked, there is no reason Putin would not invade Alaska, which the U.S.A. bought from a Tsar.
If left unchecked, there is no reason Putin would not invade California, where between between 1812 to 1842 the Russians built, occupied and settled "Fortress Ross" (aka Fort Ross) on the coast of Sonoma County.
Understand that in Putin's warped mind, he is entitled to control every piece of real estate ever occupied by Russia whether peacefully or by force.
This is not funny stuff. Putin is mentally ill in a violent way. This is who America is dealing with, a person and a well-financed enemy regime far more dangerous-to-Americans than all of the Muslim terrorist groups combined.
11
"If left unchecked, there is no reason Putin would not invade California." No tripping over that as an intellectual bar.
Before we get carried away, let's check the GDP charts to see the relative standings of these countries. The IMF chart shows that the U.S. GDP is nearly ten times bigger than that of Russia. Even Germany's GDP is now twice as large as Russia's.
Look around your house and diveway. What products do you see that are made in Russia?
Your analysis ignores how Putin is going to fund the invasion plans you attribute to him.
Look around your house and diveway. What products do you see that are made in Russia?
Your analysis ignores how Putin is going to fund the invasion plans you attribute to him.
This is a reaction to Putin's Russia. He started the new cold war by invading Ukraine because he wants to reunite all Russian-speaking people with Russia.
5
Well, ironically, majority of the people who fight against Russia's invading forces in East Ukraine speak Russian. Go figure.
Two points: (1) if Europe, including France, Austria and the United Kingdom (i.e., these and other countries we came to the aid of in WW II) have no interest in defending Europe, why should we engage?
(2) it is very important to follow the money trail here. Americans need to know much more about the recipients of defense contracts, and how much each has received/will receive. It is big businesses who are driving our so-called defense policies--not a justifiable need to increase military capacities in particular parts of the world.
(2) it is very important to follow the money trail here. Americans need to know much more about the recipients of defense contracts, and how much each has received/will receive. It is big businesses who are driving our so-called defense policies--not a justifiable need to increase military capacities in particular parts of the world.
15
I have thought from the inception of Russia's moves into the Ukraine, that Putin's role model was President Reagan.
Reagan's announced policy was to spend the Soviet Union into oblivion. He knew their economy was not nearly as strong as America's, and by spending vast sums on weapons, he could force the U.S.S.R. to go broke trying to match us.
Putin certainly does not think he can spend us into oblivion, but what he can do -- and apparently has succeeded in doing -- is getting us to either spend vast sums reentering the defense of a Europe from which we have been drawing down, or shift vast sums from our other priorities.
Unfortunately, Europe has lived and thrived under America's security umbrella for so long, that its people seem not to understand the need to be able to defend themselves.
Reagan's announced policy was to spend the Soviet Union into oblivion. He knew their economy was not nearly as strong as America's, and by spending vast sums on weapons, he could force the U.S.S.R. to go broke trying to match us.
Putin certainly does not think he can spend us into oblivion, but what he can do -- and apparently has succeeded in doing -- is getting us to either spend vast sums reentering the defense of a Europe from which we have been drawing down, or shift vast sums from our other priorities.
Unfortunately, Europe has lived and thrived under America's security umbrella for so long, that its people seem not to understand the need to be able to defend themselves.
5
I began to think of the reasons why such a move may be unwise and to offer a cogent argument that it is so.
Then it hit me: History proves the opposite.
WW2 proves this to be so. Bullying - if left unanswered, only begets more bullying and eventual catastrophe.
This is the lesson of WW2. We ignore it at our peril. And when I say "our"- I mean the WORLD.
Then it hit me: History proves the opposite.
WW2 proves this to be so. Bullying - if left unanswered, only begets more bullying and eventual catastrophe.
This is the lesson of WW2. We ignore it at our peril. And when I say "our"- I mean the WORLD.
13
Russia, Iran, ISIS, the Taliban, North Korea are all bullies whom the U.S. must stand up to.
If we do not, our world will be at peril.
But how come the rest of the world doesn't feel imperiled enough to stand up to them?
If we do not, our world will be at peril.
But how come the rest of the world doesn't feel imperiled enough to stand up to them?
1
"Who is paying for this?"
Your grandchildren? My grandchildren -- yet to be born?
That's the beauty of these cockamamie proposals. The people who make the decisions don't have to pay anything, and the people who will have to pay don't get to decide. Great system -- at least for the people who get to decide.
Your grandchildren? My grandchildren -- yet to be born?
That's the beauty of these cockamamie proposals. The people who make the decisions don't have to pay anything, and the people who will have to pay don't get to decide. Great system -- at least for the people who get to decide.
15
As a Ukrainian-American, I welcome any and all support the U.S. shows for Ukraine and eastern europe. Why should Russia be able to run roughshod over Ukraine? Why should we do nothing? Because it's in their backyard and we're afraid of Putin? No. As a superpower we have a duty to help these types of countries. Ukraine dismantled their nuclear arms in the Budapest memorandum that both Russia and the U.S. signed in return for their territorial sovereignty. Well, they lost Crimea. Putin can't be trusted and diplomacy doesn't work with that guy. Eastern Europe knows well what Russia is like. We didn't manufacture any coup in Ukraine. The people were tired of their country being run into the ground by Yanukowych and rightfully demonstrated against him. He fled, a new president was elected more in line with what the people wanted.
35
What is the meaning of "super power" in this context? We haven't been looking very "super" for some time. Perhaps we should counter Russia with the annexation of Canada, or perhaps Cuba?
"We didn't manufacture any coup in Ukraine. The people were tired of their country being run into the ground by Yanukowych and rightfully demonstrated against him. He fled, a new president was elected more in line with what the people wanted. "
Comedy hour?
Comedy hour?
The best way to "reason" is to start with your conclusion and then work your way backwards to the "facts" that you need to support it:
"This is the same man [Putin] who authorized the downing of Malaysia Flight 17 killing all 298 civilians and crew on board just over a year ago."
"This is the same man [Putin] who authorized the downing of Malaysia Flight 17 killing all 298 civilians and crew on board just over a year ago."
8
What good is a regiment or brigade against the Russian Army?
6
It's a trip-wire. The Russians could take out the brigade in a matter of hours but then there's no turning back as they will have started World War III.
2
Its not about the regiment or brigade, its about the soldiers coming behind them, which is why it makes for such a good deterrent. Russia will not openly engage the U.S. in combat and vice versa. Put U.S. equipment and personnel in these nations and Russia has a strong reason to reconsider their current path.
1
This is a foolish move. It is a response to the GOP's political criticism and will only encourage the Neo-Cons to insist on even more arms and troops be sent to Europe.
18
So, would you prefer that Obama not honor the USA's NATO Treaty obligations?
1
In reply to myself, I ask, perhaps Ike and Dulles had the correct idea: Massive Retaliation. Why, because the US and W Europe can never match the conventional ground forces that Putin has to deploy. Cold War II, yes. Otherwise what? And, that applies only to the Baltic states Poland, etc., but not to parts of Russia in modern history. Ukraine? Not NATO. They cast their lot w/ Russia eons ago. They didn't feature being an ethnic minority in the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth of early modern times. How many Ukrainian units fought for Germany on the Eastern Front? Why did Ukraine get a big part of old Galicia, known as Austrian Poland? They are the largest country in Europe, except for Russia itself. Let them deal with it. Let them buy weapons. Let them cut a deal. Perhaps Russia would lop off the eastern part? Don't care.
1
Tell that to Poles, and the Balts first.
J.I.
J.I.
1
"The people of former Warsaw Pact countries in Eastern and Central Europe joined NATO for a reason. ... The vast majority welcome the visible symbol of a United States lead NATO in their countries."
Of course – who WOULDN'T want someone else to foot the bill for their defense? If I could join some organization that promised to start making my mortgage payments, I'd sign up in a heartbeat.
Of course – who WOULDN'T want someone else to foot the bill for their defense? If I could join some organization that promised to start making my mortgage payments, I'd sign up in a heartbeat.
9
So tell me, what is the difference between Warsaw plus Riga and Berlin plus Paris? Why would you defend the latter and leave behind Warsaw and Riga? Could you explain that? Double standard in defining "the border of the West"?
J.I.
J.I.
2
"If I could join some organization that promised to start making my mortgage payments, I'd sign up in a heartbeat."
Its funny because a nation like Estonia is actually meeting their defense obligations per NATO conditions, something that Germany, the U.K. and many others aren't doing. Even Poland is right up against 2% of their total GDP. These nations are doing everything they can to build up their forces. Poland has the 2nd or 3rd most amount of tanks in NATO behind Greece and France.
The idea behind this move is to deter a war from ever happening.
Its funny because a nation like Estonia is actually meeting their defense obligations per NATO conditions, something that Germany, the U.K. and many others aren't doing. Even Poland is right up against 2% of their total GDP. These nations are doing everything they can to build up their forces. Poland has the 2nd or 3rd most amount of tanks in NATO behind Greece and France.
The idea behind this move is to deter a war from ever happening.
Except why even have to worry about anyone footing the bill for your defense unless you felt you needed to be defended against someone? In the case of Poland and the Baltic States, that's Russia.
1
A regiment here and a brigade there is not going to stop Russia from doing what it wants to do. When we start rebuilding and redeploying our armored divisions and corps sized units back to Germany, that’s when Russia will stop its wretched behavior. Remember, the cost of a cold war is far less than the cost of a hot one.
11
And the cost of any type of war is far higher than the cost of peace. The US as usual destabilizing the world for profit and subjugation of other nations.
1
The U.S. is finally drawing a true line in the sand. Not threats, movement. It is time to call Putin's military moves. He has no money. HE HAS NO MONEY. You cannot run an army on goose grease.
Good timing.
Good timing.
19
Do we have the MONEY? Our balance sheet isn't looking very robust either. And with our pathetically low taxes it's unlikely we'll ever pay down the wars we already have, let alone be able to finance new ones.
2
Look at the photo of the highway on Latvia. It's in better condition than ours in the US. Thank you, Republicans, for your bizarre priorities.
33
Just what the USA needs, a return to the cold war of the 1950s and 1960s with radiation shelters and kids ducking under their desks in anticipation of nukes. What a pathetic failure of American global leadership under the Bushes, Clintons and Obama. We don't always need to have a bogeyman, just the militarists like Jack D. Ripper do. How little we have learned since American exile Stanley Kubrick gave us Dr. Strangelove 50 years ago.
You mean the billions of dollars spent on entitlements , welfare, food stamps, and other free stuff that Liberals want to keep spending our future on?
Those priorities?
Those priorities?
2
Obama set the priority for this mission, not the Republicans.
2
Yeah, but who needs "rational reasons?"
"US currently outspends Russia 10:1 on military... EU alone currently outspends Russia 2:1 in weapons and military. There's no rational reason for the US, deep in debt due to military spending, should be spending money like this."
I just looked up the Russian national debt -- $242 billion, roughly 1/75 of the US' national debt (over $18 trillion, or roughly $57,000 per American, as compared to about $1,700 per Russian).
"US currently outspends Russia 10:1 on military... EU alone currently outspends Russia 2:1 in weapons and military. There's no rational reason for the US, deep in debt due to military spending, should be spending money like this."
I just looked up the Russian national debt -- $242 billion, roughly 1/75 of the US' national debt (over $18 trillion, or roughly $57,000 per American, as compared to about $1,700 per Russian).
15
Did you also happen to look up Russia's GDP, and notice that it is more than 8 times less than the US's. Or it's GDP per capita, which despite the oil wealth is more than 4 times less than the US. Or perhaps their corruption rating, which is one of the worst in the world. Russia can't have a serious national debt because no one in their right mind would buy Russian government bonds.
1
"The proposal, if approved, would represent the first time since the end of the Cold War that the United States has stationed heavy military equipment in the newer NATO member nations in Eastern Europe that had once been part of the Soviet sphere of influence. "
"Influence"?? Call it what it was - domination.
"Influence"?? Call it what it was - domination.
9
Complete and utter domination. Still surprised that few are asking why Russia's closest neighbors are so eager to "get away from her."
1
Is President Obama getting more deeply involved militarily in Eastern Europe because he is too weak to stop it? Or has he gotten carried away with his prowess as commander-in-chief and thinks he can control events? He has shown little indication in speech or writing of any deep knowledge of history, or of the historical contexts of the various disputes around the world. The staff he has chosen doesn't seem to have it, either. I think his intelligence in world affairs has been overestimated, dangerously so, both by his supporters and by the president himself.
26
Just another scam. We won Iraq, just imagine when we win Russia. They hate us because of our freedom. No, they hate us for our blood lust.
17
Make love, not war...Oh, wait! We said that before, I think. From Russia With Love? When will this ever end?
5
make love not war, sounds so absurd to me.
It seems that we are unlucky to have a President and many members of Congress who have never been in the military, let alone a war. Obama must be listening too closely to his Pentagon Generals rather than his State Department. If he needs good, sage knowledgeable advice from his military, he should talk to the long-time-service Master Sergeants and his been-on-the-fireline Captains, not the Generals. Generals do not fight in wars - they watch from a distant sideline, just as Congress does. It is time to come to our senses, America.......
1
When Putin dies... providing there is not another Putin waiting in the wings.
A far more effective message would be to station battlefield tactical nuclear weapons in these Eastern European nations. Reviving production and deployment of enhanced radiation antipersonnel ordinance (e.g. The neutron bomb). Any war in Eastern Europe is certain to be a nuclear one, and the decisive advantage goes to the side that uses nuclear weapons first. Welcome back to The Cold War.
11
That's spelled "ordnance."
2
Ingrid,
Think about your premise again. Firing nuclear weapons is not a return to the cold war, it's a hot nuclear war that kills all life. Nuclear weapons must never be used again.
Think about your premise again. Firing nuclear weapons is not a return to the cold war, it's a hot nuclear war that kills all life. Nuclear weapons must never be used again.
1
Very perceptive, Imdrid Cold. Many, many years ago when I was on active duty in the military I made a statement similar to yours in front of a group of people where I should have kept my mouth shut. I stated that: What is the use of being the most powerful country in the world, and having more tactical nuclear weapons than anybody else, if we are not going to use them to wage a war and defeat an enemy? True then. True now. I retired not long after, and obviously my advice was never followed......
As the father of a soldier, I fully and unreservedly support this move by President Obama. Positioning these weapons NOW in Eastern Europe means much less chance of war tomorrow, particularly a Russian war of aggression against its much smaller neighbors in the region.
People say: "How could 5,000 troops and heavy weapons deter the giant Red Army?"
That comment is a clear indication that they know nothing, or almost nothing, about modern military strategy. Such a force is not only a diplomatic signal, but also a viable and highly lethal deterrent to a ground invasion that would allow time for other NATO rapid response forces to deploy in the area if necessary. Putin's soldiers took Crimea with virtually no opposition. You will notice, however, that Putin's thinly veiled forces in eastern Ukraine aren't experiencing the same kind of "blitzkrieg" success -- despite the undermanned, under resourced Ukrainian Army resistance.
Those of you who have a knee jerk reaction to any and all things military should spend some time reading about, for example, the Fulda Gap. Defensive reinforcements can be a very powerful thing in the pursuit of peace. God bless our troops.
People say: "How could 5,000 troops and heavy weapons deter the giant Red Army?"
That comment is a clear indication that they know nothing, or almost nothing, about modern military strategy. Such a force is not only a diplomatic signal, but also a viable and highly lethal deterrent to a ground invasion that would allow time for other NATO rapid response forces to deploy in the area if necessary. Putin's soldiers took Crimea with virtually no opposition. You will notice, however, that Putin's thinly veiled forces in eastern Ukraine aren't experiencing the same kind of "blitzkrieg" success -- despite the undermanned, under resourced Ukrainian Army resistance.
Those of you who have a knee jerk reaction to any and all things military should spend some time reading about, for example, the Fulda Gap. Defensive reinforcements can be a very powerful thing in the pursuit of peace. God bless our troops.
50
Thank your son for his service for me.
1
If there is any blessing by God which I doubt, it is definitly not for an aggressor. There are worse things than the Fulda gap: the information gap of most U.S. Citizens.
2
" Putin's soldiers took Crimea with virtually no opposition"
Because that is what the people of Crimea wanted. I doubt that Warsaw would go nearly the same way.
What is needed here is not military strategy but a common sense understanding that military strategy is not needed and might be harmful.
By the West's own claims, Russian troops have been in Eastern Ukraine for months and they have not moved eastward. These are not acts of aggression. It is the US which is constantly committing aggression and leaving its own bridges in a state of disrepair,
Because that is what the people of Crimea wanted. I doubt that Warsaw would go nearly the same way.
What is needed here is not military strategy but a common sense understanding that military strategy is not needed and might be harmful.
By the West's own claims, Russian troops have been in Eastern Ukraine for months and they have not moved eastward. These are not acts of aggression. It is the US which is constantly committing aggression and leaving its own bridges in a state of disrepair,
2
The movement of this equipment would be yet another bad move on the part of our military complex. What exactly would be gained? Does anyone think that Putin would change his plans, whatever they are, for recovering the influence Russia once had in the Baltic countries because of a few tanks in storage? His likely response is to increase Russian equipment on his side of boarder and what good does that do for us? Is the United States ready to fight an all out ground war -- or worse -- to preserve what little influence we have in these countries which are directly on the Russian boarder? The proposal is so absurd that it should meet with a compete rejection from the Pentagon and the White House, but given recent military and diplomatic decisions on the part of both Democrats and Republicans it is hard to tell, so I add my voice to the chorus of 'don't do it!'. Find ways to make friends with the Russians if you are really looking out for America. We have far too few friends in the world today and that needs to change if American is going to flourish and regain its position in the world.
13
There is absolutely no evidence that Putin wants the Baltic countries or Poland.
The West has repeatedly painted Putin as a ruthless aggressor but why not look at what he says, “I think that only an insane person and only in a dream can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO.”
And what he does which is pretty much nothing since he achieved his two objectives. These objectives were control of Crimea which he needs for access to Sevastopol, and supply assistance to the rebels in East Ukraine.
There is zero evidence that he wants Russian troops in Warsaw.
The West has repeatedly painted Putin as a ruthless aggressor but why not look at what he says, “I think that only an insane person and only in a dream can imagine that Russia would suddenly attack NATO.”
And what he does which is pretty much nothing since he achieved his two objectives. These objectives were control of Crimea which he needs for access to Sevastopol, and supply assistance to the rebels in East Ukraine.
There is zero evidence that he wants Russian troops in Warsaw.
1
What friends does Russia have? N. Korea? All of Russia's former sphere of influence wants nothing to do with her for good reason. One needs to only look at history (though not a revised Russian version).
2
"His likely response is to increase Russian equipment on his side of boarder"
I got news for you, Russia is already doing that, so that is a very empty threat. Russia has been conducting war games and massing troops on the borders of these nations for awhile now. All this does is serve as a deterrent, emphasizes the U.S.'s commitment to the defense of these nations.
Certainly sitting back and doing nothing is not an option. You don't counter would-be tyrants by doing nothing. Being Polish, I would have hoped that we all could have learned that lesson after WW2.
If these minor moves can help prevent a large conflict or full blown war, they will be well worth it.
I got news for you, Russia is already doing that, so that is a very empty threat. Russia has been conducting war games and massing troops on the borders of these nations for awhile now. All this does is serve as a deterrent, emphasizes the U.S.'s commitment to the defense of these nations.
Certainly sitting back and doing nothing is not an option. You don't counter would-be tyrants by doing nothing. Being Polish, I would have hoped that we all could have learned that lesson after WW2.
If these minor moves can help prevent a large conflict or full blown war, they will be well worth it.
2
So we have a hotspot in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and the South China Sea and no one except the United States is willing to challenge these bullies there. So how about we give the World what it wants, a Communist China leading the Eastern Hemisphere. Let Russia, Europe and China have it at it, as to who will be the big dog running the huge Eurasian land mass and start building a more prosperous, powerful Western Hemisphere here where we belong.?
6
Good idea! Except South America -- Brazil, in particular -- won't be siding with the U.S. that treated them like dirt -- and installed dictatorships -- for the past 70 years, they'll be siding with the Eurasian landmass people. When an empire starts declining, you don't suddenly have a lot of sympathy for all of your past misdeeds.
Do you really want to leave Central Europe as Russian "sphere of influence"? Are you mad? Didn't you learn anything from Munich, Ribbentrop-Molotov and Yalta?
J.I.
J.I.
Why on earth is Russia our enemy now? We won the Cold War but we followed it with the biggest foreign policy mistake in our history. We should have had a Marshall Plan for the USSR when it collapsed to stabilize its economy and to ensure the security of its nuclear weapons. Russia suffered terribly in WW2 and is understandably worried by NATO on its borders. Every state that borders Russia should be a neutral nation with borders guaranteed by NATO and by Russia.
40
And what about Poland and the Baltics? Do you want to "sell" them to Moscow like in 1945 did Roosvelt in Yalta? Please, answer my question. Thank you.
J.I.
J.I.
3
Why Russia is worried about Nato? They say if you have evil plans you imply them in others.
Russia havee already guaranteed Ukraine borders before and look what happened.
Russia havee already guaranteed Ukraine borders before and look what happened.
1
" Every state that borders Russia should be a neutral nation with borders guaranteed by NATO and by Russia."
Unfortunately, as history has shown, Russian guarantees are meaningless. Just because a nation borders Russia doesn't mean that they should give up the right to determine the proper course for its future. Russia has no rights to the Baltic nations.
What people should be asking is why these nations are so strongly pro-American and so strongly opposed to their close neighbor. What has Russia done in the past to make this so and what could they change now in the future to create real change.
Unfortunately, as history has shown, Russian guarantees are meaningless. Just because a nation borders Russia doesn't mean that they should give up the right to determine the proper course for its future. Russia has no rights to the Baltic nations.
What people should be asking is why these nations are so strongly pro-American and so strongly opposed to their close neighbor. What has Russia done in the past to make this so and what could they change now in the future to create real change.
2
Had no idea that there were so many clones of Neville Chamberlain among those who comment here. So I guess we just suppose that Putin's demand are benevolent and that he has no further territorial demands. Really?
21
We will observe the reaction of this "discussion club" when Poland is attacked...
J.I.
J.I.
1
Chamberlain's ghost always walks among those who want every war. I remember the Viet Nam hawks, the Iraq war promoters, and the rest of the "kill 'em all" crowd dragging Chamberlain from the grave every time they wanted to justify whatever blood-letting they currently desired. There's an historical precedent for any outcome you want, sir or madam. That you choose this one merely indicates your own preference of action. If we'd said no to the Iraq war, we'd all be better off, and never mind Chamberlain.
1
Might as well do something with our superfluous industrial military complex (syndrome).
4
Down the home stretch, Obama is turning out to be a fine Republican in many ways.
33
... and then here (likely) comes that Republican-turned which-ever way the pc-tides turn Democrat Hellary "I'm no stand-by your [cheatin'] man" Clinton. Will the real Democrats please stand up.
As a Republican, I am deeply offended.
Reactivate the Draft, that should get their attention. The military is gonna need more than the volunteer army to take on the Russians on their home turf. We're gonna need more taxes to pay for this too. More taxes will solve everything.
17
How else do you plan to pay for it all?
1
Ridiculous. Does our government not ever take a look at our own country? Don't we need to rebuild failing bridges, roads, public transit systems,education etc ? I'm so tired of hearing about all the cuts being made to social services in the U.S. and afraid that my paltry social security is being threatened, while there is unlimited money for defense.While we're fighting the endless war on terror in the middle east, we're going to challenge Russia? Give me a break!
90
What about American and NATO allies in Central Europe, especially for Poland? Do you have any significant security solutions for them? I will really appreciate your honet answer.
J.I.
P.S. I want to assure any skeptics that from 2015 Poland will spend 2% GDP on mlitary. Appropriate bill was passed by Polish Sejm several weeks ago.
J.I.
P.S. I want to assure any skeptics that from 2015 Poland will spend 2% GDP on mlitary. Appropriate bill was passed by Polish Sejm several weeks ago.
What social service has been cut in the past 6 years?
1
You need to remember that internal expedintures are closely related to the extertal political climate. Russia invaded and has started a war with a state, whose borders were guaranted by UK, USA and Russia. if US will stay aside, any guarantees given and will be given by US as you understand, will be puff.
Our continuing arrogance in international affairs still astounds me. Since WWII we have taken it upon ourselves to intervene anywhere we can for reasons that don't make sense. We complain about "Russian aggression" but in reality our actions (expanding NATO almost to the eastern borders of Russia, installing/supporting an illegitimate government in Ukraine, and now expanding our military presence at their doorstep) are for more aggressive than Russia's support of proxy rebels in Ukraine. Other commentators are right to point out that our reaction would be FAR worse than Russia's if they had supported a coup in Mexico and started storing tanks in Canada and Central America. We can't keep acting as if the U.S. is the one nation on the planet that is the exception.
31
Why do you call the democratically elected Ukrainian govt ""illegitimate? How many terms Putin took presidency in violation of Russia's own Constitution?
1
Why is eastern europe, or the middle east/north Africa, strategic to our interest. ?
7
Because this is what decent people do for one another.
1
Ummm... 1944? Ring a bell?
1
Because most of Central Europe countries are American and NATO allies and you (the West) have plenty of investments there, especially in Poland, Czech and Hungary.
Because we (Poles) were fighting your (American) wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's time to repay your debt. It is called THE ALLIANCE!
By the way, do you know, that Skype is Estonian invention???
J.I.
Because we (Poles) were fighting your (American) wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's time to repay your debt. It is called THE ALLIANCE!
By the way, do you know, that Skype is Estonian invention???
J.I.
2
Let me get this straight. We are going to "store" heavy weapons in Eastern Europe??? So if Putin does something like invade those countries and take control of those heavy weapons all he'll need is for us to send him the troops to explain how to use them properly.
This has got to be another no-brain White House idea.
This has got to be another no-brain White House idea.
13
If Russia attacks Central Europe you will be obliged to defend those countries (especially Poland) according to Article V of NATO Treaty. It is called both CONTAINMENT and DETERRENCE of Russian agression.
J.I.
J.I.
1
This is a mad idea. Time to revive a us peace movement!
35
Is it mad to comply with Article V of Washington (NATO) Treaty and to defend American allies in need?
J.I.
J.I.
1
It is a mad idea to provoke a new cold war with all its dangers. It is a mad idea to pretend to the ukrainians that the us will fight in a battle between two unreasonable sides.
Poles could have learned from history a bit more than you have. You go and fight if you have learned nothing.
Poles could have learned from history a bit more than you have. You go and fight if you have learned nothing.
I'm calling my broker right now to take out some more call options on American heavy weapons manufacturers! Looks like a bet that can't fail!
10
It's about time that we flexed our muscles & called Putin's Bluff. We should have done this before the Russians took Crimea, & Eastern Ukraine.Like the Cuban Crises under Kennedy, the Russians will turn tail & run.
13
You call yourself ultraliberal? You're joking, right? How can you compare NATO's aggressive arming of countries bordering Russia with the Cuban Missile Crisis? The Russians are already backed up to their own border - where do they have to "turn tail and run" to?
2
Michael,
Putin is a bully , & when you stand up to a bully they stand down.You must be reading Pravda. What do you call the take over of Crimea, & the insurrection of Ukrainian Russians in Eastern Ukraine, which is helped & orchestrated by Putin., if this is not Russian Aggression, what would you call it.By putting Troops in countries like Latvia, Estonia, & Poland, we are finally putting a line in the sand, which Putin cannot afford to cross, & he knows it.Putin may be crazy but he's not stupid.The United States is by far the most powerful country on Earth, it's Russia & I'll include China, that must be
cautious as to how far they can push us , before we push back.
Putin is a bully , & when you stand up to a bully they stand down.You must be reading Pravda. What do you call the take over of Crimea, & the insurrection of Ukrainian Russians in Eastern Ukraine, which is helped & orchestrated by Putin., if this is not Russian Aggression, what would you call it.By putting Troops in countries like Latvia, Estonia, & Poland, we are finally putting a line in the sand, which Putin cannot afford to cross, & he knows it.Putin may be crazy but he's not stupid.The United States is by far the most powerful country on Earth, it's Russia & I'll include China, that must be
cautious as to how far they can push us , before we push back.
Michael,
I favor a progressive secular Democracy with Gay Rights , Woman's Choice,& the strict separation of Church & State, however, I don't walk in lock step with the Democratic Party on every issue & that goes for President Obama who I voted for, & has disappointed me with this Pacific Trade Act which thankfully, has been defeated.
I favor a progressive secular Democracy with Gay Rights , Woman's Choice,& the strict separation of Church & State, however, I don't walk in lock step with the Democratic Party on every issue & that goes for President Obama who I voted for, & has disappointed me with this Pacific Trade Act which thankfully, has been defeated.
1
I will not hurt to remind ourselves how this sordid affair started in the first place.Following the "natural" order of things, the victor (in this case the West, winning the Cold War), wanted a total victory or as close to it as it could get. One would hope that human understanding of history, politics and warfare have evolved to a point where hubris plays second fiddle to pragmatic achievement of long term objectives, but alas - no such luck.
The important issue in the development of this crisis is the fact that the NATO had been fast becoming an anachronistic and largely obsolete organisation. Now, hundreds of generals, commanders and bureaucrats will not take such development lightly and will (as they did) work towards demonstrating their usefulness and necessity. Inch by inch, against the better judgement and while the US was asleep at the wheel, they started encroaching on Russia more and more, until there was no more. Seriously, Russian Black Sea fleet with all the nuclear armour stationed in Crimea and someone thinks Russia will just let it go? Cuba had ballistic missiles on their territory for about 10 minutes and has been paying for that for the next 50 years!
Thank you Mr. Rasmussen, you can happily keep your job and in return the rest of us will keep paying for that through diminished security, ever increasing military expenditure and disrupted economies.