Re: All Things Russia & Ukraine
Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:22 pm
Same Party, Different House
https://fanlax.com/forum/
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukrai ... 7a645a9154
Georgia is not a NATO member (yet). Operations from there should not be considered NATO operations.Support increases for new US bases in Eastern Europe as Russian troops move into Ukraine
by JOHN VANDIVER• STARS AND STRIPES • FEBRUARY 22, 2022
STUTTGART, Germany — The establishment of permanent American military bases in allied countries near Russia has been a NATO taboo for 25 years.
But Russian President Vladimir Putin’s announcement Monday recognizing the independence of two self-proclaimed “people’s republics” in eastern Ukraine and subsequent movement of troops toward the breakaway territories could be the impetus to cast aside an agreement limiting how NATO members base troops on the alliance’s eastern flank.
“I believe the alliance and/or the U.S. are going to seriously reconsider our position on permanent basing in Poland, Romania and the Baltic countries,” said retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, who led the U.S. Army in Europe from 2014 to 2017.
In an effort to assuage Kremlin fears about NATO, the alliance signed an agreement with Russia in 1997 that aimed to promote transparency and trust.
The NATO-Russia Founding Act said that no permanent allied bases would be set up in new member countries in the east, and troop deployments would be limited in scope and duration.
“I think that act of good faith on our part has been rewarded with continuous Russian aggression,” Hodges said.
Now pressure is building in NATO to stake out a more formidable military presence in countries once dominated by the Soviet Union, the predecessor of today’s Russian Federation.
Critics of the NATO-Russia Founding Act say it became a relic following the 2008 war Russia waged against Georgia and its first invasion of Ukraine in 2014.
Russia’s aggressive moves against Ukraine could lead NATO allies to reexamine a 1997 deal that prevents permanent basing arrangements in countries near Russia.
Russia loyalists in the self-proclaimed Luhansk and Donetsk people’s republics, and nearby parts of the Donbas region, have since been at war with the Ukrainian central government for several years. At times, Russian military members have fought alongside them.
Following Putin’s announcement Monday, Russian forces moved toward the region openly as “peacekeepers.”
Putin’s recent actions may be swaying allies who were hesitant to pull the plug on the founding act until now.
Earlier this month, French diplomats indicated an inclination to discard the act should Russia launch a new invasion in Ukraine, the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine reported last week.
Other allies say it’s long past time for NATO to go bigger in the east. Poland and Romania have long sought permanently based U.S. troops on their territory.
Putin’s comments Monday about Ukraine, which he described as part of Russia’s “spiritual space,” were likely to heighten the sense of urgency among NATO allies Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, all of which have complicated histories with Russia and notable Russian-speaking communities.
On Saturday, during a joint news conference with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Lithuania’s foreign minister, Gabrielius Landsbergis, reaffirmed his country’s quest for permanent American troops.
Romania is one of the countries the U.S. has sent additional troops to on a deployment to reassure NATO allies wary of Russia.
“We need to make sure that (Putin) sees that his actions are creating a response in the Baltic region ... and we are reinforced, we are strengthened, and we do not allow him to even think about looking (in our direction),” he said.
So far, the U.S. has sent 5,000 extra troops to Europe in response to the crisis around Ukraine, where between 169,000 and 190,000 Russian military members are assembled along the border areas, according to U.S. estimates.
Some security analysts say Russia’s aggressive moves should force the Pentagon to reexamine its global defense posture writ large, especially the Army’s role in Europe, where troop numbers dwindled sharply after the Cold War.
Hodges said the Army in Europe needs more capability to maneuver faster in the east, along with added air defense weaponry. The Army’s recently reestablished V Corps headquarters in Kentucky, which manages maneuvers along the allied eastern flank, has a small forward element of rotational soldiers in Poland. Basing the full headquarters in Poland would make them more effective, Hodges said.
Barry Pavel, director of the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council, said in an op-ed published Thursday in Defense One that the U.S. Army now must prioritize Europe to counter Russia.
“Beyond the Korean Peninsula, there should be no other top priority for the Army,” he wrote. “Europe is where it’s needed the most, and it has very limited roles elsewhere.”
NattyBohChamps04 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:33 pm Yeah, it's an idiotic take. What kind of "golden bridge" did Putin build for Zelenskyy when he invaded?
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 9:02 am Everything seen through a partisan lens, now a fawning DeSantis lens. Just gross.
Thanks to those posting interesting, thoughtful articles from various serious sources. Salty, seacoaster, Geneva and others.
.. Kellyanne kissing any convenient ass.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 5:40 pmrunrussellrun wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 5:13 pmYup....even in the cartoons......they look like us. white, christians........
no, not the canuckers...........the Ukrainins. Like your media keeps on pointing out.
also, it looks like the trucker is there to HELP the Ukrainians, offering his spacious cab as temporary shelter.
But, certainly, losing access to your life savings isn't devasting. Go ahead, try it for 3 days. try buying something, when you can't. no cash, plastic only. go ahead.....see how long you will last. nope, no big deal. all, because the government was forcing you to take a shot , that clearly does not much, so why force people to take it? Should we make the US Navy Seals, that have legal action against the US govt. over getting the vaccines, ineligible to access their legal funds in their legal banks. Yes....that IS what you love.
+1
RRR knocking it out the park today.
The carefree attitude, of those who upon looking at a government seizing a persons accounts with no court order and no charges, is simply stunning, if not revolting.
I don't care who you claim you'd "take", the election isn't until 2024. We have a President right now who you pee on every way you can. Obama pee above as well. And you started pretending you hadn't supported Trump tooth and nail, hadn't supported Russian intervention in 2016, when you turned your fawning attention to DeSantis and his wife...Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 9:21 amMDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 9:02 am Everything seen through a partisan lens, now a fawning DeSantis lens. Just gross.
Thanks to those posting interesting, thoughtful articles from various serious sources. Salty, seacoaster, Geneva and others.
Are you accusing others of ‘seeing everything through a partisan lens? OMG.
Meanwhile my post is actually about leadership and brains. You wouldn’t think that, because you’re in fact seeing everything through a partisan lens.
I’d take Cory Booker in the office. I’d take Tulsi Gabbard. I’d take Abigail Spanberger. You know what these three people have in common, MD? I’ll let you guess. But the answer suggests only one of us here is looking at things through a partisan lens.
Translation: as usual, neither I nor my party has any clue as to what to do here. But if you put a guy with a R by his name in charge, no matter what he does, I'll come on here and tell you all it's awesome.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 8:39 am Elect a guy like Desantis, who has brains and leadership, and I think the world will see a much better outcome.
a fan wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 12:11 pmTranslation: as usual, neither I nor my party has any clue as to what to do here. But if you put a guy with a R by his name in charge, no matter what he does, I'll come on here and tell you all it's awesome.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 8:39 am Elect a guy like Desantis, who has brains and leadership, and I think the world will see a much better outcome.
Rinse. Repeat.
Exactly; boycott Dumb.a fan wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 12:11 pmTranslation: as usual, neither I nor my party has any clue as to what to do here. But if you put a guy with a R by his name in charge, no matter what he does, I'll come on here and tell you all it's awesome.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 8:39 am Elect a guy like Desantis, who has brains and leadership, and I think the world will see a much better outcome.
Rinse. Repeat.
Nope. I don't.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 12:16 pm Wrong. I already addressed this, I’d take Cory Booker, Abigail Spanberger, or Tulsi Gabbard. Today.
Do you know their party?
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 12:11 pmI don't care who you claim you'd "take", the election isn't until 2024. We have a President right now who you pee on every way you can. Obama pee above as well. And you started pretending you hadn't supported Trump tooth and nail, hadn't supported Russian intervention in 2016, when you turned your fawning attention to DeSantis and his wife...Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 9:21 amMDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 9:02 am Everything seen through a partisan lens, now a fawning DeSantis lens. Just gross.
Thanks to those posting interesting, thoughtful articles from various serious sources. Salty, seacoaster, Geneva and others.
Are you accusing others of ‘seeing everything through a partisan lens? OMG.
Meanwhile my post is actually about leadership and brains. You wouldn’t think that, because you’re in fact seeing everything through a partisan lens.
I’d take Cory Booker in the office. I’d take Tulsi Gabbard. I’d take Abigail Spanberger. You know what these three people have in common, MD? I’ll let you guess. But the answer suggests only one of us here is looking at things through a partisan lens.
We simply can't believe a word you write, Petey, because it's so often been outright lies and disinformation.
So, I don't care what you now claim.
Good lord, Tulsi...stop the trolling, this is a very serious topic thread.
Thank you to those who are participating seriously.
a fan wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 12:17 pmNope. I don't.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Mar 04, 2022 12:16 pm Wrong. I already addressed this, I’d take Cory Booker, Abigail Spanberger, or Tulsi Gabbard. Today.
Do you know their party?
You still can't tell us what Biden is supposed to do here, my man. Is thinking hard?