Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Baltics undefended?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Baltics undefended?

    http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/03/...d-lose-quickly
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  • #2
    US 'to quadruple defence budget for Europe'

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
      So...how's that "pivot to Asia" turning out for us?
      "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

      Comment


      • #4
        Should work well.East Europe can easily detter a Russian agression.Keep in mind we're talking of a USA Bde spread over 5 countries,plus a few AD batteries.
        Also,keep in mind that Russia will not challenge NATO alone.As for China doing it alone,maybe is possible.But they will still like Russian support and a diversionary effort.

        Putting pressure on Russia in EE helps indirectly the US in Asia.And the cost benefit ratio is very favourable to US.

        As fo the idea that the Baltics are indefensible,it is good hoopla in the budgetary battle.We have seen what the Russian army cannot do in Ukraine.

        I am not saying the current dispositions are great.Many things can and will be improved.But that is a far cry from the Baltics being certain victims of the Russians.
        Those who know don't speak
        He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gunnut View Post
          So...how's that "pivot to Asia" turning out for us?
          Russia knows that violating NATO borders would bring a significant portion of the most technologically-advanced militaries (many of them nuclear-armed) in the world down on it's head.

          To say nothing of the catastrophic damage to Russia's economy. The sanctions would stretch from here to the moon.

          And I wouldn't count on a "Little Green Men" strategy working in the Baltics either.
          Supporting or defending Donald Trump is such an unforgivable moral failing that it calls every bit of your judgement and character into question. Nothing about you should be trusted if you can look at this man and find redeemable value

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
            Russia knows that violating NATO borders would bring a significant portion of the most technologically-advanced militaries (many of them nuclear-armed) in the world down on it's head.

            To say nothing of the catastrophic damage to Russia's economy. The sanctions would stretch from here to the moon.

            And I wouldn't count on a "Little Green Men" strategy working in the Baltics either.
            And despite what many Putinites might give the impression of, Russians as a whole also generally would rather not have another gigantic land war in Europe.
            "Draft beer, not people."

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Red Team View Post
              And despite what many Putinites might give the impression of, Russians as a whole also generally would rather not have another gigantic land war in Europe.
              Agreed. Putin is taking on exactly as much as he knows he can get away with. (for the most part)
              Supporting or defending Donald Trump is such an unforgivable moral failing that it calls every bit of your judgement and character into question. Nothing about you should be trusted if you can look at this man and find redeemable value

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                Agreed. Putin is taking on exactly as much as he knows he can get away with. (for the most part)
                Its noticeable that the ramping up of activity in Syria has only come as Ukraine has gone quiet. I suspect that is no coincidence. Russia can probably manage one Chechenya sized war on its own borders during passably decent economic times....just. At the moment it probably couldn't even do that. The US managed Iraq & Afghanistan simultaneously & with minimal assistance. Anything that even looks like a high intensity modern war, especially against something as big & well equipped as NATO, would shatter the Russian military & economy in short order. Europe would hurt, but nowhere near as much.
                sigpic

                Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                  Its noticeable that the ramping up of activity in Syria has only come as Ukraine has gone quiet.
                  It hasn't "gone quiet" it is just less mentioned in the reports you appear to read. Just yesterday El Chocky aka Poroshenko said the risk of all out war with Russia is higher than ever.

                  The Baltics are basically indefensible due to the 'Suwałki gap' problem - that is the narrow stretch of border between Poland and Lithuania with Kaliningrad on the north western side and Belarus on the southern and eastern side. To defend the Baltics you either have bash through Kaliningrad (which means war with Russia) or Belarus (which may also involve war with Russia) - or both of course. Otherwise the first thing they do is close the 'Suwałki gap' prior to any Latvian or Estonian 'little green men' or if we seek to send support following the little green men maskirovka. The key to maintaining the Baltic countries is to 'win' (by persuasive and if necessary financial/gas incentive means) Belarus to 'our side'. Everyone in this part of the world understands this and is eager to 'do a deal' with the tyrant of Belarus that would also encourage him along the reform path. Only Obama can spout rhetoric at a military problem and hope to win from half a world away.

                  Interestingly Belarus has issued a new military doctrine apparently (http://belarusdigest.com/story/new-b...CPmkLc.twitter) which seeks to deter threats from the west and the east, clearly Lukashenka intends to stay in power if possible. My solution would be to guarantee him for a short period of time on condition of reform and coming over to our side. Colleagues and friends who have visited or are in Belarus now report many officials would be open to this if certain conditions were met, notably no retrospective prosecutions in any new regime etc. I would say we have a chance in Belarus and should take it and so solve the Baltic defence problem, though even winning Belarus peacefully may not avoid the Muscovite 'little green men' and 'separatists'.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by snapper View Post
                    It hasn't "gone quiet" it is just less mentioned in the reports you appear to read. Just yesterday El Chocky aka Poroshenko said the risk of all out war with Russia is higher than ever.
                    It is considerably more quiet than it was when Russia was invading Crimea & sending in thousands of troops. If front lines are moving it is at a glacial pace by comparison. All of that qualifies as 'quiet'. Doesn't mean it can't ramp up again.
                    sigpic

                    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The problem is NATO's Eastern borders are only sustainable with US defense commitments. Again, I bring up this point again and again, but everything we've seen in the past 10 years suggests European unity is greatly overrated and Europe will fall apart. The US defense commitment is not sustainable and we are eventually going home.

                      It won't happen now, it won't happen tomorrow, it probably won't happen in 5 years, but eventually Russia is coming for the Eastern European states and France is going to shrug.

                      My uneducated guess is that if Russia suffers humiliating defeats TODAY in Syria and Ukraine, that won't happen. A Russia that gets its butt whooped by a bunch of angry Arabs and unruly Ukrainians will NEVER take an aggressive military posture against a Baltic nation and run the risk of yet another humiliating defeat.


                      EDIT: I should add that's out of a sense for US security, not European security. I don't want my kids heading into a world where Western Civilization suffers humiliation at the hands of some dipshit backwater nation we were supposed to have been finished with. Not a good signal to our other Civilization enemies, whoever they are in 2045.
                      Last edited by GVChamp; 05 Feb 16,, 01:53.
                      "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by GVChamp View Post
                        The problem is NATO's Eastern borders are only sustainable with US defense commitments. Again, I bring up this point again and again, but everything we've seen in the past 10 years suggests European unity is greatly overrated and Europe will fall apart. The US defense commitment is not sustainable and we are eventually going home.
                        Well, ABCA looks pretty strong and as long as Europe got the Brits and Canada, they got the US ... which does not good long term at the moment. No one is begging Canada to stay in the ISIL fight and in fact told us to fuck off.

                        Originally posted by GVChamp View Post
                        It won't happen now, it won't happen tomorrow, it probably won't happen in 5 years, but eventually Russia is coming for the Eastern European states and France is going to shrug.
                        Russia was trampled before by other European powers, Sweden and Poland comes to mind and Mongols for that matter. Hell, Chechnya beat them twice in the last century.
                        Chimo

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          You have to go pretty far back for Sweden and Poland to have a consistent upper hand. Essentially before modern Russia (Peter the Great).

                          Eventually Russia is going to be the perennial red-headed step child...but it should be today, and the Poland/Sweden of today should be the European Union.
                          "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Absent nukes, the Poles are more than capable of repelling any Russian thrust and their defences have not been reduced. For the foreseeable future, for Russia to conquer Poland, it would have to be a do-or-die situation for Moscow. Yes, Moscow can take Poland but it would be a Phyric victory.
                            Chimo

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by GVChamp View Post
                              You have to go pretty far back for Sweden and Poland to have a consistent upper hand. Essentially before modern Russia (Peter the Great).

                              Eventually Russia is going to be the perennial red-headed step child...but it should be today, and the Poland/Sweden of today should be the European Union.
                              Poland beat the Soviets in 1920.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X