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's ongoing violations in Ukraine

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: smurfy




NATO, including the US has been in Poland and the Baltic since 2010, (pre Ukraine uprising) that was exposed by Wikileaks almost right away.


Poland has been with NATO since 1999 so wikileaks is telling us nothing new there.

The Baltics since the early 2000's so what do you think was exposed by wikileaks?

And the fact NATO has a plan to defend their member states really isn't something that wouldn't be done...do you think Russia doesn't have a plan to defend it's self and it's allies from NATO...of course they do.

What is the problem there?


Well strictly speaking, 'the plan' is not from the North Atlantic Council, it's from member states military, specifically 9 member states. You can have a read here from The Guardian 2010, and bear in mind there are far more troops there now.
Then you will see what I mean,

I like this extract, Patriot platforms in Poland, but no missiles for them...Polish minister, "they may as well send us potted plants"


www.theguardian.com...




posted on Feb, 14 2016 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok




. What I am saying is cut our losses with Ukraine. We lost there.



I see Ukraine as a loss for Russia that now they have no way of getting out and saving face from their earlier admissions of not having troops there.

Russia has a way out but refuses to do it, in fact I watched this today and it was very interesting...



I don't see Ukraine as being a loss for the west as we haven't done all we could do for Ukraine. The only thing keeping us from there is the threat of nukes being used against any country that sends troops in to help.

And the UN is no help while Russia vetoes anything the security council tries concerning Ukraine or Syria...until the UN can get involved in both countries I don't see things getting better, but I also don't see Ukraine as a lost cause.

Syria on the other hand is a different matter altogether.



posted on Feb, 14 2016 @ 01:47 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy




Well strictly speaking, 'the plan' is not from the North Atlantic Council, it's from member states military, specifically 9 member states. You can have a read here from The Guardian 2010, and bear in mind there are far more troops there now.


And any plan that has NATO troops involved have to have NATO approval. Member nations can't make the decision on their own.


In determining troop contributions, ACO engages with the Military Committee, the North Atlantic Council, and individual countries, all of which have critical roles to play in bringing Alliance operations and missions to reality.


www.nato.int...

Member countries can do things independently they still need NATO okay when it comes to anything involving NATO troops.

Now here's the funny thing...having contingency plans in place are nothing new, guarantee Russia has one for NATO and the US so this really isn't that big a deal as NATO has been refining plans against a Russian attack since probably it's inception.

The fact that Russia went into Georgia is the reason these plans were made, also know that most countries don't let their military planning become public knowledge for reasons.

As for Poland and the Patriot missile battery...


Repeated U.S. statements since August 2008 that the battery will not be operational are interpreted by the Poles to be part of a larger discussion of C4ISR and the inter-operability of Patriot in their overall air defense architecture. After months of back and forth, we think the Poles now understand that the rotation battery will not be fully operational and cannot be integrated immediately into the Polish system and that the battery will focus on training and exercises.


www.theguardian.com...

Seems the Poles misinterpreted what was being told to them concerning the Patriot Missile battery they were to receive.
edit on 14-2-2016 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2016 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

We have done all we can unless we want to trigger a hot war.

And nukes really should give one pause.


End of the days its just Ukraine. As sad as it is there country is hardly significant.
Not significant to risk a bloody hot war or worse nuclear war. As you have said its only made Russia weaker and not stronger anyway.

I make it a policy not to call for a war I would not be willing to fight myself if called up.
And sorry but I do not think my life is worth Ukraine.

Sorry ukraine. # happens and it happened to you.

I would only risk a hot war over Poland or the Baltic , Scandinavian states.



posted on Feb, 14 2016 @ 10:34 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

You are full of it as usual

I think it takes a new member a week to ignore your every "opinion"



posted on Feb, 14 2016 @ 11:36 PM
link   
a reply to: VanGcouverite

Full of what? He didn't write the article and he doesn't control Russia. Whats the issue?

Or are you, a new member, just sharing your "opinion"?
edit on 14-2-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 03:58 AM
link   
a reply to: VanGcouverite

Please prove whatever I said was wrong if I am so full of it?

Should be easy to do right?

Many before you have said the same thing and have not been able to back it up...feel free to try.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join