US-led drills in Ukraine may threaten peace process: Moscow

originally posted by: notmyrealname
This gets too much play; If Russia wanted to invade Ukraine, it would be over in about 10 days.

Nuff said.

I agree,they crippled the Georgian army in 5 days

originally posted by: Xcathdra

Russia invades Ukraine and tells the world that military maneuvers in Russia are no ones concern but Russia yet Russia demands the opposite from surrounding nations.

NATO is a defensive alliance only.

If you believe NATO is a defensive organisation, SNIP

Whatever Moscow spits out in News papers is irrelevant. They are however correct, and that is the irony of it. Of course NATO is moving to the east. They have been for a long time, and want the access to the oil and gas lines, which have always been the focus. Even in Afghanistan.

Question is, what is Russia going to do about it?

SNIP That's how simple it is ... but Russia isn't.

In this period of time, Russia is playing the idiot game ... the "Saddam Hussein" game, the "Ghaddafi" game ... they're all boasts and statements, and nothing to back it up.

Russia will chicken out on this one, as they always.


Please remember that on ATS Manners Are Required, Not Requested - Courtesy Is Mandatory.

originally posted by: notmyrealname
a reply to: MrSpad
If you are talking about an occupation after invasion that is one thing. That one thing is not a reasonable or likely goal of Russia. Overall militarily, Ukraine is at a complete disadvantage and has no chance of winning. Again that one thing is not a reasonable or likely goal of Russia. I have said before that it is in Russia's best interest to have a non NATO buffer like Ukraine in place. This whole scenario would not be taking place right now if it were not for western intervention and agitation.

It is getting boring to explain that there was no "invasion" by Russia into Ukraine however all of the armchair intelligence agencies in ATS are sure that there is and was. I guess I am the one out of touch and as such I will do my best not to bother with these threads for a while until some time has passed and all the experts here can be proven correct….

bah.

It is hard to support the Russian side of things when half the time the Russian pull your argument from under you without even a warning. At a time when Russia has a problem even convincing its military that is telling the truth and almost no country on Earth even pretends to believe the Russian version of events I can see it not being much fun supporting them.

originally posted by: Whereismypassword

originally posted by: notmyrealname
This gets too much play; If Russia wanted to invade Ukraine, it would be over in about 10 days.

Nuff said.

I agree,they crippled the Georgian army in 5 days

The Georgian Armed forces total some 30,000 - the Ukraine Armed forces total some 1/4 million. Big difference.

As has been said in this thread, the only thing stopping the Ukraine from crushing the rebels is the Russian Army hovering on the border and the wish to avoid a larger, more costly conflict. That doesn't mean Russia could roll Ukraine though.

In fact, even with Russian soldiers and equipment, the "rebels" are finding it tough going to take ground and have been experiencing high casualties - in one village, close to 200 rebels/Russians were killed or wounded in the fight, which speaks volumes about the state of the Russian Army more than anything.

originally posted by: MrSpad

It is hard to support the Russian side of things when half the time the Russian pull your argument from under you without even a warning. At a time when Russia has a problem even convincing its military that is telling the truth and almost no country on Earth even pretends to believe the Russian version of events I can see it not being much fun supporting them.

Well, I'd say the same about western media ... it's hard to tell the truth from the bs there as well.

No, the reason I find it hard to support the Russians. Is that they just chicken out all the time. For the same reason, I do not support western military action in the middle east.

Putting it this way. If you believe, that a military action is THE solution to a problem. Then, in my opinion, every available fire power should be used, to make that military action as surgical as possible, as decisive as possible and as short as possible. Whatever it takes.

Western military powers, are and have been for the past decades. Prolonging military activity, in the same manner the colonial powers were doing in their time. It's not an action done to end a conflict, but an action done to obtain resources and power. It's an act of aggression.

The Russians, they just chicken out. They're always fighting Napoleon, retreating ... this is 2015, and nobody is going to die from the Russian winter. So, basically, the Russians don't have their heart where their mouth is.

If Putin had his heart where is mouth is, he could have ended the Ukrainian conflict in 24 hours. One decisive surgical strike, and it's over. In the end, he would have saved thousands of lives. But that idea, was never in their book. This US action, was to be foreseen ... the western alliance wants access to oil and gas lines, as well as oil and gas fields in the east. They consider the Russians to be an unreliable controlling source. In reality they have a point ... their actions are to conquer. Always have been. And the Russians? If they don't intend to fight, then they should pack their bags and leave, sooner than later ... for the benefit of all. IF they intend to fight ... then for christs sake ... fight!

originally posted by: Xcathdra
US-led drills in Ukraine may threaten peace process: Moscow

Moscow (Russia) (AFP) - Moscow said on Monday that US-led military exercises in western Ukraine that began this week may have "explosive" consequences and threaten to derail the peace process in the separatist east.

"The military drills involving NATO members and Ukraine's army that started in Lviv region under US command are a clear demonstration of NATO's provocative policy to unequivocally support the policies of current Kiev authorities in eastern Ukraine," the foreign ministry said in a statement.

Ukrainian and US troops on Monday launched fresh drills involving 1,800 soldiers from 18 countries, meant to bolster the morale of the armed forces amid an ongoing 15-month conflict with pro-Russian separatists.

Russia responded mere hours after the drills kicked off near Ukraine's border with Poland.

"Not only is NATO not ready to recognise the wrongness and possible explosive consequences of holding such drills but it is considerably increasing their scope," it said.

"These actions... may threaten to disrupt the visible progress in the peace process concerning the deep internal crisis in Ukraine," it said.

Kiev has been locked in a conflict since April 2014 with pro-Moscow rebels in parts of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions, accusing Russia of funnelling in troops and resources to sustain the insurgency -- charges Moscow denies.

A peace accord was struck in the Belarussian capital Minsk in February, but deadly clashes continue despite the truce.

Russia invades Ukraine and tells the world that military maneuvers in Russia are no ones concern but Russia yet Russia demands the opposite from surrounding nations.

NATO is a defensive alliance only.
NATO is NOT training Ukraine forces in west Ukraine near Poland (countries who are NATO members are acting on their own).
Its none of Russia's business, as Russia maintains when it comes to their own military in their own territory.


Putin needs to withdraw Russian forces from all Ukraine territory. Trying to lecture "NATO" while doing the exact same in E. Ukraine with Russian rebel forces is hilarious.

This post 'feels' like it was made by somemone who sits in an office and gets paid to make posts like this about subjects like this.

If this poster is not such a poster as I desccribe, how could they have not heard of the Wolfowitz doctrine.

Paul Wolfowitz said:

“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?

Link

a reply to: Azureblue

So any post which doesn't fit into your own narrow paradigm - and it is narrow - must therefore be made by paid agents in some Government office?

Change the record... Maybe, just maybe, someone has an opinion different to yours and instead of attacking the poster, you could go after the content instead?

As for your Wolfowitz comment - you are of course aware he never actually wrote that document? He didn't even see it until it was completed and it's a "doctrine" over 23 years old and is probably not even relevant anymore.

Nice to see you did your research there

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Azureblue

So any post which doesn't fit into your own narrow paradigm - and it is narrow - must therefore be made by paid agents in some Government office?

Change the record... Maybe, just maybe, someone has an opinion different to yours and instead of attacking the poster, you could go after the content instead?

As for your Wolfowitz comment - you are of course aware he never actually wrote that document? He didn't even see it until it was completed and it's a "doctrine" over 23 years old and is probably not even relevant anymore.

Nice to see you did your research there

why do I have a narrow paradigm?

why do write posts like someone who is paid to do it.

what do you use for evidence that the Russians are the bad guys here? Please educate me.

Did you read by the quote? .. perhaps you might like to pint out your claimed quote error to Paul Craig Roberts. After all he reaches many people than I do.

Russia didn't use their full forces in Georgia Stu,they sent I believe mainly the 58th brigade plus of course warplanes ect ect

5 days and they crippled them,without using the full potential of their army personnel at their disposal

Ukraine army can't win a war with rebels to the east of them and coal miners :-/

They are broken with morale running low,if Russia were to realy invade Ukraine they would win the war quick but like we have done in other places they would be tied down in guerrilla warfare and bled financially

That's why they havnt,they know it's a baited trap but.....

The might have to if Ukraine gets desperate and think NATO will back them if they decide to do some ethnic cleansing that their old leaders would want

Some of them wouldn't think twice about dropping atom bombs on the rebels,they are insane

originally posted by: notmyrealname
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul
No coup, just a pep rally in Maidan that led to a new government; Check.

Certain members around here are like machines on the fritz mate..they cannot seem to consider any other angle but their own..bigotry personified.

Yes, it was a coup...yes snipers were set up to antagonise and inflame by shooting both sides. Hundreds of 'US mercs' were discovered in the area after the coup, 26,000 Russian troops were, by agreement, completely legally stationed in Ukraine...and myriad other inconvenient truths that don't jive with member's rabid character assassination attempts.

a reply to: stumason

It's not necessary to wonder...just look at certain members post history and then claim it's all down to our suspicious, paranoid nature mate.

Good luck with making it stick, you'll need it.

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: stumason

It's not necessary to wonder...just look at certain members post history and then claim it's all down to our suspicious, paranoid nature mate.

Good luck with making it stick, you'll need it.

It's not for ATS membership. It's for the passer-by's.

originally posted by: Whereismypassword
Russia didn't use their full forces in Georgia Stu,they sent I believe mainly the 58th brigade plus of course warplanes ect ect

5 days and they crippled them,without using the full potential of their army personnel at their disposal

Mainly because - and this is borne out by Russia's own investigations into the War - they found that entire Brigades and even divisions barely existed except on a General's spreadsheet so he could pocket the money. They had massive problems mobilising even the small amount of troops they used and even when mobilised, it exposed serious deficiencies in communications and logistics.

originally posted by: Whereismypassword
Ukraine army can't win a war with rebels to the east of them and coal miners :-/

"Coal miners", Russian Special Forces, paratroopers and armoured forces...

originally posted by: Whereismypassword
They are broken with morale running low,if Russia were to realy invade Ukraine they would win the war quick but like we have done in other places they would be tied down in guerrilla warfare and bled financially

Russia is incapable of mobilising a force large enough to fully invade and occupy the Ukraine, however it has just enough troops on the border to make Kiev tread carefully. Ukraine has plenty of troops, but a good deal remain in the West as Kiev doesn't want to be seen to antagonise a Russian response which would be bloody for all.

originally posted by: Whereismypassword
The might have to if Ukraine gets desperate and think NATO will back them if they decide to do some ethnic cleansing that their old leaders would want

Some of them wouldn't think twice about dropping atom bombs on the rebels,they are insane

That old chestnut... What atom bombs, hey? The one's the Russians took in 1994 in return for guaranteeing Ukraine's Sovereignty?

originally posted by: Azureblue
why do I have a narrow paradigm?

why do write posts like someone who is paid to do it.

what do you use for evidence that the Russians are the bad guys here? Please educate me.

Did you read by the quote? .. perhaps you might like to pint out your claimed quote error to Paul Craig Roberts. After all he reaches many people than I do.

Because you read dodgy websites, rehashing tired old stories that aren't even true. Wolfowitz didn't author the doctrine and it is clear you've taken this website word at face value and haven't fact checked it, because it jives with your pre-conceived paradigm - hence the narrow view.

And the tired "paid shill" accusation is just pathetic - I'm sure you can do better...

Yeah thank fk they don't have have atom bombs now Stu as they would use them!

Did I say they had atom bombs?

No!

I mentioned that batty blonde lady who used to be in power till she was imprisoned for bribes ect ect who is on record saying she would drop the bomb on the rebels

She's crazy,like other in power in Ukraine now

Twist my words some more stu

originally posted by: MysterX
26,000 Russian troops were, by agreement, completely legally stationed in Ukraine..

Not the entire of Ukraine - Just Crimea and even then they had to remain in their base at Sevastopol. Any troop movements outside of the base had to be cleared with Kiev and any additional forces moved in also required clearance...

Not one part of the Treaty gave Russia permission to deploy to anywhere outside of their base and certainly not to barricade Ukraine forces into their bases, or organise a "vote" to split it away from the country.

A convenenient little fact you chose to ignore there.

a reply to: Whereismypassword

I was actually pointing out the glaringly obvious - the Ukraine surrendered them in return for Russia guaranteeing their Sovereignty... Something they have chosen to ignore now....

a reply to: MysterX

Certain members around here are like machines on the fritz mate..they cannot seem to consider any other angle but their own..bigotry personified.

You are illustrating what psychologists call "projection."

Yes, it was a coup...yes snipers were set up to antagonise and inflame by shooting both sides. Hundreds of 'US mercs' were discovered in the area after the coup, 26,000 Russian troops were, by agreement, completely legally stationed in Ukraine...and myriad other inconvenient truths that don't jive with member's rabid character assassination attempts.

It was not a coup, it was a protest movement that was hijacked by Russian agents provocateurs, and which led to a head of state publicly defecting to an enemy power. Who sent the snipers? The FSB. Your statement about mercenaries is fantasy. The Russian troops in Crimea violated their agreement when they took up arms against Ukraine. Sorry you can't face up to the truth; why don't you have your friend with the berkut avatar sooth you with some more lies.

a reply to: DJW001

You forget to add that the former President was being impeached by his own Parliament (full of his own party members) and decided to do a runner to Russia, with the aid of Russian Special Forces.....