Huge pro-EU rally grips Ukraine

[em2nought]

Originally Posted by yubba

,,,http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...reign-ships-d/ man it didn't take long to take that story down,,, well try here,,,http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...ious/28935549/ I hope Russia kicks our commie butts that will learn us for crying over an old battle flag,, while our cities burn.

It would help if your newest amphibs were built to carry landing craft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_America_%28LHA-6%29

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by yubba

.

Wondered when you'd show up again.

Originally Posted by Rockstar

I used to think it was NATO breaking some agreement not to enlarge that was poking at the Bear. But after reading this, it appears no such promises were made.


http://csis.org/files/publication/twq09aprilkramer.pdf

Can't say I'm wholly surprised, would have been an odd thing to agree to...officially at least.
That being said, putting yourself in Russias shoes, with a military that's falling apart, an economy based solely on oil and countless internal concerns, your rival for the past 60 years expanding to your border isn't exactly going to be received well. I mean, historically Russia likes to put at least half a country between itself and its enemies, preferably more.
The expansion of NATO could have been handled better than it was, but that's how it goes, the question now is how much involvement NATO and EUFOR should consider having in the Ukraine and surrounding territories. Particularly in a climate where most of the members of NATO cannot actually afford the militaries that they're fielding.

[ikalugin]

It is all about the cold war resolution and post cold war security system.

The later was inherently ubstable due to the rosy ideas it was built upon and last time global security system failed horribly was the WW2.

[HunterICX]

Originally Posted by Oberon

The expansion of NATO could have been handled better than it was, but that's how it goes, the question now is how much involvement NATO and EUFOR should consider having in the Ukraine and surrounding territories. Particularly in a climate where most of the members of NATO cannot actually afford the militaries that they're fielding.

Makes one wonder why we wish (well our politicians that is) to increase the NATO sphere of influence towards the Russian border whilst we did nothing but disarm ourselves not long after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by HunterICX

Makes one wonder why we wish (well our politicians that is) to increase the NATO sphere of influence towards the Russian border whilst we did nothing but disarm ourselves not long after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Since when is anything that is decided by NATO or EU based on logic?

[mapuc]

It not only the military build-up even the exercises are more frequently and more realistic than ever before.

In a recently released report-The Coming Storm from cepa.

http://www.cepa.org//sites/default/f...compressed.pdf

Said a huge Russian exercise in March was a an exercise on taking, Gotland, Åland, Bornholm and northern part of Sweden or Norway.

I didn't know that Russian exercises are more of a offensive role and a NATO exercise is more of a defensive role

Markus

[Oberon]

I'm still not convinced that Russia is going to go about invading the Baltic States, NATO members.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Oberon

I'm still not convinced that Russia is going to go about invading the Baltic States, NATO members.

First I heard about in the News then I read about it online in a Swedish News paper.

Here an expert said these exercise is nothing more than a psychological game and we should not overreacting. We should however take the threat to the Baltic States serious.

Markus

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Oberon

Can't be too much longer before one side or the other starts the much vaunted 'summer offensive'.

Arguably it'd already started, albeit in a limited/localized way. There have already been a couple of major spikes in the fighting.

As for the Baltic states, honestly I think the Russian regime knows better than to try and take a bite out of them - but it's to their advantage to play up the threat, so that they tie up NATO forces and manage tension effectively.

[ikalugin]

I heard Ukraine has passed the law legalising foreighn peacekeepers. Possible overt NATO intervention?

[ikalugin]

By the way, did anyone hear anything about the alternative channel route in Nicaragua and Russian/Chinese basing in there?

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Oberon

I'm still not convinced that Russia is going to go about invading the Baltic States, NATO members.

I'm still not convinced that Nato would respond in force if that ever happened. We see every day how much a signed piece of paper is worth when it becomes inconvenient *coughEuro/Greececough*. I can't see us going head on with Russia in full force even if they attacked one of the Baltic countries.

[Jimbuna]

Threads merged.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by CCIP

As for the Baltic states, honestly I think the Russian regime knows better than to try and take a bite out of them - but it's to their advantage to play up the threat, so that they tie up NATO forces and manage tension effectively.

Fully agree, it makes strategic sense to stretch NATO out as much as Russia can, in order to weaken the front.

[ikalugin]

In real terms however the opposite occured - we had to move units around as we had 0 military presense on the eastern Ukrainian border.

Same applies for the increased NATO presense in Baltics/Scandinavia - we would have to move units around yet again, probably form new ones (a difficult thing to do with the manpower shortage we have).