Russia 'danger' to Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia - Fallon

Apologies if this has been posted already, I did have a look but couldn't find anything. It did arrive on the BBC quite late last night.

There is a "real and present danger" of Russia trying to destabilise the Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, the UK defence secretary says.

Russia might use tactics there similar to those it used in Ukraine, he said.

He said Nato must be prepared for aggression from Russia "in whatever form it takes" - because Russia was likely to use covert tactics such as those he said it had used to annex Crimea and during the current Ukraine conflict.

Source - BBC

This is something I have been talking about since the Rebel advance from Crimea into East Ukraine. Back before this happened and it was being mentioned as a possibility and concern I suggested that this would prove intention. If it spread outside of Crimea, then it was suggestive of a larger plan, and not just about Ukraine.

If Putin had stopped with Crimea, then perhaps the damage could have been prevented and the situation normalized somewhat, over time. But the moment this spread into E Ukraine, the benefits were significantly reduced and the risks/damage to Russia significantly increased.

I've mentioned this a few times since, and suggested that Russian actions in Ukraine are not worth the damage done to Russia. In my opinion (and it seems in the opinion of the UK Defense Secretary too) the negatives significantly outweigh any positives. The payoff from invading Ukraine is just not worth the damage.

In addition, this action can only serve to increase the supposed threat to Russia from NATO. If Putin is so worried about NATO being so close, why would he act in a way which can only encourage NATO involvement in neighbouring nations?

The UK Joint Delegation to Nato tweeted that Russia had deployed the country's "most advanced anti-aircraft artillery system" in Ukraine.

It seems to me that we are seeing the preparation of a larger invasion of other former Soviet nations, and these are NATO members. Russia has lost a lot in this land-grab, and I don't think any rational observer can do anything but suggest that Putin has a larger plan here.

Are we seeing the preparations for a larger assault on former Soviet nations?
Is Putin maneuvering anti-aircraft weaponry into Ukraine to set the chess pieces for supporting similar land-grabs in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia? To later be blamed on "rebels"?

What are your thoughts on this.

NOTE: please, before you wade in, please try to keep this thread factual (based on the information we know, the evidence, the plausible) and do not engage the propagandists. There will be attempts to derail this thread and there will be blanket denials of any Russian aggression. Please try to ignore these distractions and focus only on the discussion of the potential plan for these three countries and what we might see happening this summer.

Russia has denied helping pro-Russian separatists, but it has been repeatedly accused of sending weapons and troops and using propaganda to inflame tensions.

"But it has been repeatedly accused of sending weapons and troops"


Why say this...

Instead of;
"But it has been definitively proven with solid & verifiable evidence that this is a lie"...


I know why...


Let's see if others can admit it...
Rather than push their speculation as a fact!

originally posted by: Rocker2013
It seems to me that we are seeing the preparation of a larger invasion of other former Soviet nations, and these are NATO members. Russia has lost a lot in this land-grab, and I don't think any rational observer can do anything but suggest that Putin has a larger plan here.

Of course he has a larger plan. First off, he is backed by China through the SCO:



Source: en.m.wikipedia.org...

Plus, Russia is allied with Iran:

Russian defense minister Sergei Shoigu and his Iranian counterpart, defense minister Hossein Dehghan, signed an agreement on "military cooperation" between the two countries

Source: www.businessinsider.com...

Russia gave Iran the nuclear technology, and is building 8 more nuclear plants in Iran (source source).

The bigger plan? Control the whole of Asia.

Putin knows that if NATO denies him Ukraine, he can call China, NK or Iran to retaliate - not necessarily with armies but with localized actions within the West.

Funny that the DDoS attacks which crippled USA internet systems came from China, and funny that it came right after the Ukraine crisis has begun.

originally posted by: Britguy
So you are asking only anti-Russia trolls to respond and back up the utter garbage and alternative reality spewed by the UK Defence Minister?

What sort of idiot starts a thread asking for only one side to participate?

No. I'm asking that we stick to the discussion and no derail the thread with the usual "but the US did this...!!!!" garbage.
But then I should have expected someone to make this accusation immediately.

Please, stick to the discussion, regardless of which side you are on.

This meme that Russia and Putin wanting to recreate the USSR is just foolish fear mongering . Putin Paranoia

By Patrick J. Buchanan is a good example of just how foolish it is if you stop to consider the reality of what is going on . "To restore the USSR, Putin would have to recapture Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, an area the size of the United States.

To resurrect the Soviet Empire, Putin would have to invade and occupy Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, and then overrun Germany to the Elbe River.

How far along is Putin in re-establishing the empire of the czars and commissars? He has reannexed Crimea, which is roughly the size of Vermont, and which the Romanovs acquired in the 18th century.

Yet almost daily we hear the din from Capitol Hill, "The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming!" "During the Cold War, Russia was in thrall to an ideology hostile to all we believed in. She had rulers who commanded a world empire.

Yet we had presidents who could do business with Moscow.

If we could negotiate with neo-Stalinists issues as grave as the the Berlin Wall, and ballistic missiles in Cuba, why cannot we sit down with Vladimir Putin and discuss less earthshaking matters, such as whose flag should fly over Luhansk and Donetsk?
www.informationclearinghouse.info...

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs

Russia has denied helping pro-Russian separatists, but it has been repeatedly accused of sending weapons and troops and using propaganda to inflame tensions.

"But it has been repeatedly accused of sending weapons and troops"


Why say this...

Instead of;
"But it has been definitively proven with solid & verifiable evidence that this is a lie"...


I know why...


Let's see if others can admit it...
Rather than push their speculation as a fact!

And this is exactly the kind of nonsense I wanted to prevent with that last statement.

This about the reality, the facts on the ground, supported by numerous sources all around the world. The evidence is out there for all to see, stop attempting to pretend that none has been produced when every concerned nation has show Russian tanks in Ukraine, Russian soldiers in Ukraine, Russian soldiers being buried in secret graves in Russian towns... the evidence is out there, you just refuse outright to accept it.

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I agree that the belief that he's going to stretch to such extremes seems extremely unlikely, but then the world has changed a lot since the fall of the USSR, and many of those nations might not actually be worth taking back. The fight to claim them might just be deemed too problematic.

However, this does not mean that Putin can't possibly have eyes on other regions.

I would agree with your assessment, I don't think Putin is attempting to recreate the USSR in a geographical sense, he's not attempting to reclaim all land once under Russian influence (and which period of history would that reflect?)

I do, however, believe that the UK Defense Secretary is right in his opinion, the value of Ukraine, even the entire country, does not justify the damage and risks to Russia. This means that there simply has to be a larger plan for which Ukraine was only one part.

This is why I believe there is a risk that Russia will now use the Rebels in Ukraine's East as the proxy for a similar move on other nations. The movement of anti-aircraft assets to E. Ukraine only supports the notion that Putin is putting his chess pieces in place to then be able to mirror the same thing in a NATO state, using those Rebels and weapons against NATO when it is forced to act in defense of a NATO member.

An Estonian border guard has already been abducted by the Russian state and held captive for many months now.

www.lsm.lv...

The Baltic countries know Russia very well. They were desperate to join NATO after being liberated from Russian control. There are already lots of laws being changed in the Baltics to de-Russify the countries after decades of occupation. Russian is being dumped as an official language and citizens are being forced to take a citizenship test in true native languages or not hold full citizenship if they refuse. This is very aggressive changes and some Baltics will remove the Russian influence faster than others because of it.

Sadly it all provides the pretext for Putin to act with his military to protect Russians. I don't think the NATO article 5 guarantee is really all that safe. Russia will wait to do anything provocative until NATO is wrapped up in some other conflict somewhere. Then Russia will strike and carve off yet another piece of a Baltic country. It's one thing about the Soviet mentality, they follow the same playbooks over and over until people stop them.

a reply to: Rocker2013

Well Putin has statd he could take Ukraine in 2 weeks if he wanted to.
He stated he could take 5 European capitals.

I also find Russia's increase of bomber flights and naval maneuvers interesting. Aside from training / going back to the way the USSR was there is another possibility. Doing these types of snap maneuvers of the Russian military, the bomber flights and the navy, coupled with the frequency they occur, could result in European countries eventually being less and less concerned about them.

If that would occur then an offensive by Russia on Europe would/would be extremely effective.

complacency..


As for Russian units / weapons support / manpower support I think the west should pull an Adlai Stevenson at the UN. Call a meeting and present all of the evidence to support the claims against Russia an go from there.

originally posted by: noeltrotsky
Russia will wait to do anything provocative until NATO is wrapped up in some other conflict somewhere. Then Russia will strike and carve off yet another piece of a Baltic country. It's one thing about the Soviet mentality, they follow the same playbooks over and over until people stop them.

I'm not so sure about this. I believe NATO would have little choice but to act, and I can't see any other potential issue which might distract them to the degree Russia would need.

I think Putin believes his method has worked, and I suppose it has, after all the Minsk agreement has basically just handed a large chunk of E Ukraine to Russia.

It seems to me that Putin is going to attempt a similar "Rebellion" in Estonia (it could be any of the three, to be honest) and the "Rebels" in E Ukraine will then use Russian weaponry moved into position to cover those Rebels, allowing Russia to continually attempt to deny all involvement. If all firing is coming out of Ukraine, Putin can just carry on denying any involvement no matter how much evidence there is, and no one can do anything about it other than fight those Rebels.

originally posted by: Rocker2013
NOTE: please, before you wade in, please try to keep this thread factual (based on the information we know, the evidence, the plausible) and do not engage the propagandists. There will be attempts to derail this thread and there will be blanket denials of any Russian aggression. Please try to ignore these distractions and focus only on the discussion of the potential plan for these three countries and what we might see happening this summer.

It's sad that people have to be reminded to stick to the topic of threads.
It's sadder that people will refuse to listen and pump out their BS anyway.
It's saddest that even massive post deletion by mods won't stop them.

originally posted by: swanne


Putin knows that if NATO denies him Ukraine, he can call China, NK or Iran to retaliate - not necessarily with armies but with localized actions within the West.

Why would those nations support Putin if Putin starts a war? Considering the fact China has remained neutral on Russia / Ukraine / Crimea I don't think China is wanting to be dragged into Putins mess.

Countries who recognize Crimea's annexation -
Afghanistan
Cuba
Nicaragua
North Korea
Russia
Syria
Venezuela


China and Iran apparently did not recognize Russia's actions.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
This meme that Russia and Putin wanting to recreate the USSR is just foolish fear mongering .

Perhaps it is less about "recreating the old empire" and more about "expanding in any direction possible".

Just a thought experiment: imagine Russia annexes Ukraine. USA reacts and augment intervention. This fuels anti-americanism since it strengthen the meme of the "big, bad US". Russia then gets a whistleblower to "leak" a comprising document about the US government. The potential energy stored in anti-americans turns to kinetic energy as the people of the West revolt against the US. This weakens USA defences against Russia. Russia comes in and proposes to help the people win against US government in this new American Revolution. Russia gains control over USA. Canada is too weak compared to Russia-China. In the end, Russia's territory expanded of about 200%, and spans across 2 continents.

Evaluating possible strategies is not fear mongering, it is necessary for survival.

a reply to: Rocker2013

Solid and verifiable evidence has been given?

Flacid and bias speculation and outright lies are not solid and verifiable evidence!!!



No matter how many people preach it repeatedly...

The hypnotic mantra is failing...


Explain this accusation of Russia in Ukraine...


When it is clearly from Georgia in 2008!!!



You're buying lies and then telling the people who don't believe them they're wrong...



Painfully gullible!

originally posted by: noeltrotsky
The Baltic countries know Russia very well.

Russia knows the Baltic countries well too. Complicit regimes in the holocaust of Soviet Russia. They know they lean to the tipping point of the right. Nazis if you will.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Countries who recognize Crimea's annexation -
Afghanistan
Cuba
Nicaragua
North Korea
Russia
Syria
Venezuela


China and Iran apparently did not recognize Russia's actions.

Simple answer: because otherwise everyone would realize that China and Iran are accomplices.

Always hide your best weapon. That way your enemy underestimates you.

Notice that China & Iran did not recognise Russia's annexation of Crimea, but they certainly did not speak against it neither.

a reply to: swanne

Interesting possibilities.

A possible flaw is present though.

The Russian government and media have been caught lying so trying to make a case will run into credibility issues.

While the US government and states are at odds I guarantee you those differences would go away in light of an extreme external threat. Secondly I very seriously doubt any state would want Russian assistance. Even more so seeing Russia's actions in those countries they have already helped.

Not to mention I am sure Posse Comitatus would come quickly into play since the revolution question has already been answered in the US back in the 1860's.

All US states have state military units under the command of the Governor.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Well Putin has statd he could take Ukraine in 2 weeks if he wanted to.
He stated he could take 5 European capitals.

That was fascinating to see, it was a perfect statement and I was actually quite impressed.
It bolstered his arrogant appeal and pandered to the hard-line, it propped up his public image of the "tough leader", and it lent some credibility with the feeble minded.

Of course, he could have attempted to take five European capitals (he would have faced NATO), but he would have also had to openly do it as a Russian invader and aggressor. That's not the game he's playing, so the notion that he could have is completely empty.

He wants to do it without taking responsibility for it openly, because he knows that would leave him looking like Hitler.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
I also find Russia's increase of bomber flights and naval maneuvers interesting. Aside from training / going back to the way the USSR was there is another possibility. Doing these types of snap maneuvers of the Russian military, the bomber flights and the navy, coupled with the frequency they occur, could result in European countries eventually being less and less concerned about them.

If that would occur then an offensive by Russia on Europe would/would be extremely effective.

complacency..

I've been watching this with interest too. I'm torn on the intent though. I think this is poking and prodding, perhaps hoping that someone might make a move and take out one of his, thereby justifying an open conflict.
It's also possible that Russia is just testing responses more routinely than it has done previously. When you're at a state of impending conflict all those strategies and game plays need to be updated to be as accurate as possible. One movement of a unit in another country can throw off several plans.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
As for Russian units / weapons support / manpower support I think the west should pull an Adlai Stevenson at the UN. Call a meeting and present all of the evidence to support the claims against Russia an go from there.

I'd like to see that too, there is a lot of evidence out there for all to see, but it hasn't really been collated and presented properly.

I do think the moment they do that we should perhaps prepare for the brown stuff to hit a rotating thing though. They usually "make the case" right before taking direct action, don't they? Perhaps that's why they've been reluctant to do so?

a reply to: Rocker2013

Yes, that's what I meant by Russia following the same Soviet playbook. Putin will follow the same playbook from Ukraine in one Baltic country. Find a small group of rebels, seize a few public buildings. Little Green Men start showing up with modern Soviet military equipment and body armor. Battles start with government forces and Russia ensures the 'rebels' have enough to fight and gain the critical territory but not too much Russian troops to let the West declare an invasion.

I don't think NATO will invoke article 5 in a scenario like that. With modern anti-air defenses backing up the rebels NATO can't simply bomb away like they enjoy doing. It will have to be NATO boots on the ground which most NATO members will refuse. The US will refuse because it's on the Russian border and could cause a World War by direct engagement.

Same playbook as Ukraine really. Within 5 years and probably Estonia as it is being the most anti-Russian of the Baltics.