It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia launches war games in disputed territories

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2015 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad




The fact is you take away Russia's nukes and the are about equal to Turkey as a conventianl military power.


I hope NATO high command is working on this logic.

NATO's objective would be Air Superiority and Russian aim would be Air Denial. Same for Naval department.

It is true Russian variables are slow moving and even outdated in many areas. That has to do with Russian culture and mindset and they will have to live with it.

However, in Ukraine even the elite Russian spetsnaz were "on diet" when it comes to weapons at hand. Many more lethal weapons were left back home due to the fact projection that rebels were fighting with weapons stolen or captured from the Ukes. Same forces using all weapons in inventory would be much more efficient on the battlefield.




posted on Mar, 7 2015 @ 11:45 PM
link   

edit on 7-3-2015 by all2human because: (no reason given)

oops
edit on 7-3-2015 by all2human because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2015 @ 11:47 PM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

Currently 70% of the worlds military spending is from NATO countries, choosing between NATO and Russia a child could determine who's side is stronger.
But NATO was designed to take on the Warsaw pact and there it should have ended ,instead they took to the offensive as we saw in Yugoslavia.Libya etc
Just off the top of my head i don't see Turkey having and maintaining a space program, or designing and producing steath aircraft or nuclear submarines.
IMO you severely underestimate the Russian's.

edit on 7-3-2015 by all2human because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2015 @ 11:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: muSSang
a reply to: Patriotsrevenge



Before someone comes here saying the U.S. is doing the same in NATO countries bordering Russia, you would then be ignoring the fact that what the U.S. has sent over there is tiny and only show of commitment for NATO. They would simply observing the slaughter of what ever nation Russia wanted next as 600 troops isn't going to do anything


So 600 troops are observing, this is hypercritical at best.



Putin can throw over his border in a day.

Good point.But the Spartans didn't have to defend against tanks,heavy artillery,missiles and Airstrikes.What chance would the 600 have against that?

Key word "Can"


What, pray tell, will 600 troops do if full scale war breaks out?

The term "speed bump" seems appropriate, if probably generous.


I dont know...tell that to the guys who went up against 700 spartans and 1300 greeks(300 was more liek 2000 actually)
Depending on a few factors 600 can cause quite a ruckus before being defeated.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 12:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: all2human
a reply to: MrSpad

Currently 70% of the worlds military spending is from NATO countries, choosing between NATO and Russia a child could determine who's side is stronger.
But NATO was designed to take on the Warsaw pact and there it should have ended ,instead they took to the offensive as we saw in Yugoslavia.Libya etc
Just off the top of my head i don't see Turkey having and maintaining a space program, or designing and producing steath aircraft or nuclear submarines.
IMO you underestimate the Russian's.



Turkey is developing a stealth fighter the TAI TFX by the way Russia's is still in development also and there partner may pull out India has two d elopement deals going one with Russia and one they are working on its already in test phase further along than Russia is. Russia has one problem there industries need to be transformed they have been sorely neglected. That's why they bought engines for there aircraft from Ukraine.
edit on 3/8/15 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 12:47 AM
link   
a reply to: all2human




But NATO was designed to take on the Warsaw pact and there it should have ended


I would beg to differ here. I would like NATO to exist to thwart possibilities of other major powers like Russia, France, Germany etc. developing expansionist ambitions.

However, NATO expansion beyond the 1991 structure was a "stab in the back" and not needed. It has created tensions in Europe and aggravated situations like in Ukraine. Russia kept quiet till the time NATO started developing ambitions on its periphery and Russian reactions are very justified.

Those hiding behind the Sovereign nations logic, please be aware that anymore aggravation and encroachment by NATO will result in THERMONUCLEAR exchange resulting in humanity massively suffering and global development going back by atleast 100 years.

RUSSIA WILL NOT AND SHOULD NOT ALLOW NATO EXPANSION IN ITS NEAR ABROAD NATIONS. BALTIC WERE AN EXCEPTION. PERIOD!!



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 03:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Patriotsrevenge

Gee Americans are really two faced people who have no credibility left all. Crimea votes to join Russia and instead of the US saying 'no worries we respect the will of the Crimean people,' they display their anti democratic position by claiming Russia annexed the Crimea.

The US has so little honesty that they do the best they can to hide the fact that their dictator in Ukraine took control of the country through a coup d'état, by force. Their media refuses to mention the matter. just how can any country loose its credibility with such behavior

What integrity has the US media when it refuses to bring this to attention of America.

Perhaps this quote from Paul Wolfowitz spills the beans on American objectives for the Ukraine and on.

Paul Wolfowitz, the neoconservative who was Deputy Secretary of Defense under the Bush regime, declared:

“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”

Is Wolfowitz, when referring to “hostile power” referring to any power independent of Washington’s control?



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 02:09 PM
link   
oh but NATO holding exercises and military parades meters from Russia border was totally cool. hahahaha. dont make me laugh.



posted on Mar, 8 2015 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: victor7
This is how you pre-empt..........just one example!!

theaviationist.com...

U.S. aircraft carrier and part of its escort “sunk” by French submarine during drills off Florida


you do realize that is a exercise and not really taken seriously by the US navy right? Its to make the other guys feel good and give them practice. Had it been real and jamming and active defense were active the french would had been sunk instead. they do not use the same tactics when not on war footing.Even against allies.



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Patriotsrevenge

It's got nothing to do with Russia and everything to do with ridiculous propaganda. The ohh look out for the boogeyman gets kinda stale after 70 years. Must suck living with the constant fear of a country you've never been to and is half a world away.
But hey it let's your rich get rich and keeps your poor terrified of what's under the bed and in the closet instead of opening their eyes and seeing what is really going on.



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Patriotsrevenge

What Turkey isn't big enough to house Patriots? Missiles from the Middle East Nukes from Russia! Do you actually believe the crud you type? More likely you are part of the machine that needs to promote this insatiable profit for the MIC.

OMG the rhetoric is just so preposterous i don't even know why i bother. I guess "Honey Boo Boo is wearing off and you need a good fix of CNN's 24/7 on the battlefront.

Grow up and get out of the 50's



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Patriotsrevenge


Talk about wanting to start a war. Putin is playing with fire. Just when he signs a peace treaty for Ukraine he ignores it only to throw his military around, play more Games trying to Threaten everyone in the Region.

so i take it that you also believe that North Korea is also in the right complaining about US/South Korean war games and exercises? you know all that whining and screaming from little kimmy that they are threatening North Korea by doing so? or does this only apply to countries friendly to the US and the US?

this is a lot like all the bellyaching lately about Russian aircraft (a lot of times being in international airspace), getting too close to other countries. i mean it's not like the US actually overflies Russian territory or anything. both countries used to do that all the time to each other. like when the SSSR shot down the U-2 spy plane. not to mention aircraft like the SR-71, and U-2, are specifically designed to overfly other nations to spy on them. pot calling the kettle black as per norm.



posted on Mar, 10 2015 @ 10:13 AM
link   
After reading the article the following can be stated:

It is simply saber rattling and a message. That is all that is happening. What is the difference if Russia is doing war games in that area, and say the US and South Korea doing war games? Or the USA doing war games near Iran? All this is doing is sending a message to the boarding countries that it is a military power and is making sure that it can be seen. That way it lets all know that it has the military strength near by and to tread cautiously, not to cross the boarder.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join