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.
The Defense Ministry announced the purge in a terse statement late Wednesday. It said the fleet commander, Vice Adm. Viktor Kravchuk, his chief of staff, Rear Adm. Sergei Popov, and an undisclosed number of other senior officers of the fleets have been fired over serious flaws in combat training and their failure to take proper care of personnel.
It also reveals that Russia does not expect any trouble with the West anytime soon.
With its own Black Sea Fleet operating out of Sevastopol, Russia views these maneuvers as the latest example of NATO’s eastward expansion. The alliance plans to station four new battalions in the Baltics and Poland, and has installed a new missile defense system in the region.
Any permanent stationing of a US warship in the waterway would be a violation of the Montreal Convention, which states that countries without a Black Sea coastline cannot keep military ships in the region for more than 21 days.
originally posted by: intrptr
It also reveals that Russia does not expect any trouble with the West anytime soon.
The hell. He's focusing on the Back Sea Fleet for good reason. US is encroaching in that Russian lake, too.
That Putin is there personally taking charge and 'cleaning house' reveals that quite clearly.
originally posted by: intrptr
The hell. He's focusing on the Back Sea Fleet for good reason. US is encroaching in that Russian lake, too.
Should have read the whole thread!
The two gateways between the Black Sea and Mediterranean, the Dardanelles and Bosphorus, were very important as a trade route from the Black Sea into ports all over the world for Turkey and its other Black Sea neighbors: the USSR, Romania and Bulgaria, all three of which were militarily aligned.[3] The straits also served as an important component of military strategy; whoever wielded control of traffic through the straits could use them as an exit or entry point for naval forces to traverse to and from the Black Sea.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: one4all
Stalin purged his generals rank before hostilities broke in WWII. The US done it too...
wiping the slate
It most certainly presages an expectation of higher tensions and a "you're either with me or you're out". Look at where the US is today. I bet most of those officers resisted being tools in the bid for Global Imperialism.
If Putin is taking a personal interest there its for the same reasons, only in his case, he's defending his own backyard.
And you're right... its folly to go against a military superpower, thousands of miles from your own turf.
Like I keep saying, hell is the impossibility of reason.
originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: intrptr
And the USSR suffered greatly due to the Great Purge. Let's not forget the huge number of losses they experienced during the Winter War.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: one4all
Stalin purged his generals rank before hostilities broke in WWII. The US done it too...
wiping the slate
It most certainly presages an expectation of higher tensions and a "you're either with me or you're out". Look at where the US is today. I bet most of those officers resisted being tools in the bid for Global Imperialism.
If Putin is taking a personal interest there its for the same reasons, only in his case, he's defending his own backyard.
And you're right... its folly to go against a military superpower, thousands of miles from your own turf.
Like I keep saying, hell is the impossibility of reason.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: paraphi
Should have read the whole thread!
I read you well enough. Jumping in on the warmonger side, as usual. NATO expansion into the Black Sea is unwarranted and a violation of established law.
Permanently positioning a US destroyer in the straits is a blocking maneuver on the part of NATO to keep Russian Naval elements out of the Mediterranean. The reason for that is obvious enough. Any interference in the Mediterranean by the Russians would hinder NATO's ongoing efforts to subjugate nations states in the Middle East like Syria and Iran. The goal of conquering those two countries in succession hasn't changed, just the ongoing BS has.
Though the rhetoric in the western press has subdued slightly, the over all goal hasn't changed. Waiting for Hillary in the white house to kick it off again.
Meanwhile, another cold war chess move in the Turkish straits:
Strategic importance of the Straits
The two gateways between the Black Sea and Mediterranean, the Dardanelles and Bosphorus, were very important as a trade route from the Black Sea into ports all over the world for Turkey and its other Black Sea neighbors: the USSR, Romania and Bulgaria, all three of which were militarily aligned.[3] The straits also served as an important component of military strategy; whoever wielded control of traffic through the straits could use them as an exit or entry point for naval forces to traverse to and from the Black Sea.
Now play dumb about NATO expansion.
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: MrSpad
So whats the big deal your making from 'Putins Purge'?
More ridicule and discrediting the Russian military. You need to do that to justify war.
Hitler said once that Russia was teetering like a rotten barn, all he had to do was, 'kick in the front door and the whole rotten structure would cave in'. (paraphrased)
Isn't that what you just did in your OP?
History may not repeat but it does rhyme.
...rhetoric aside, the military preparations of the US and its allies are anything but defensive in nature.
In reality, the US and NATO forces massing on Russia’s border are part of preparations for a range of military and covert-intelligence operations directed against pro-Russian political factions and against the Putin government itself, aimed at destabilizing and overthrowing pro-Russian governments using the “hybrid warfare” methods employed by the Western powers during the 2014 coup in Ukraine and the 2011 US-backed insurgency in Syria.
NATOs increasing presence in Eastern Europe
As for your comment about NATO being the aggressor... Who is it that has actually taken land through force?