NATO/US Military Build up in Eastern Europe-Russian borders

PhSt wrote:
This erosion in the balance of power between Russia and NATzO calls for the development of newer WMDs that are at minimum 100x more powerful than current nuclear weapons. A Planet Buster like weapon that even in small quantities is capable of obliterating entire continents will make NATzO warmongers think more than twice before instigating another aggression against Russia.

Anti-matter missiles anyone?

Anti-matter missiles anyone? I love you wrote:

Death Star

Hahaha... hilarious... the problem with Russia is not that the west is cornering and trying to contain them and blame them for everything bad in the world... the problem is that the west needs to spend more on "defence"...

I guess the next tranche of sanctions will target snow.

Because the problem with sanctions is that they were not hard enough so the next batch will turn them into simpering slaves of uncle sam... like the europeans... and their minions.... (NZ, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Canada)

GarryB wrote:Because the problem with sanctions is that they were not hard enough so the next batch will turn them into simpering slaves of uncle sam... like the europeans... and their minions....  (NZ, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Canada)

Even Russia should be careful with allies and friends. Russia's only useful ally is China. The other members of BRICS do not serve much purpose.

They have failed for hundreds of years. So much so that countries like India, South Africa etc have now Internalized Defeat. Even loosing territory isn't a big deal for them. Countries that can't even protect themselves or fight for their rights will not be of any value for Russia.

Russia is not trying to gather up its own gang to counter HATO... hopefully they are trying to show them they they neither have to join that western gang (that most have been rejected from anyway so that should be an easy sell), but also that they don't need to join a gang and be told what to do and how to behave by its leader the US.

Russia and China and India and Brazil and South Africa were not trying to create an equivalent to the west... there is no leader of BRICS.

The reason both China and Russia support BRICS is because no one is in charge... no one dictates rules or culture or ethics to anyone else.

It is about independent countries getting along and trading, without sanctions or threats.

Russia has not jumped into the circus surrounding the Chinese made islands, and China has not recognised the Crimea as being part of Russia... and neither side is beating up the other to get them to endorse their actions.

The point is that Russia will benefit from trade with other countries that are not trying to kill them like the west does.

Russia cannot force other countries to trade with them, but should not refuse to trade and have good relations with any country that is ready to openly and fairly trade with them... that means Iran and Pakistan and China and India and Japan and Brazil etc etc... it even means the EU and the US if they can get that huge stick out of their arses.

But Russia should not force countries to trade with them either... if Finland and Sweden want to join HATO then that is fine... that means Russia will trade in Rubles only... if that is not acceptable then there wont be any trade... the same with Germany, if they want gas then Russia can sell them some gas, but if they want to pay in Euros or US Dollars then no.

If the west wants to make things hard then Russia should not work hard to jump through the hoops they put in their way... no more pipelines should be built to bypass problems to getting gas to Europe.

Africa is full of countries that have been frustrated with trading with the west and want progress and growth for themselves rather than their european colonial oppressors... this is a chance for India and China and Russia and South Africa and Brazil and any country wanting to join BRICSA to create an economic block that is the equivalent of ethical coffee... except it is really ethical trade where the people at both ends of the deal make good money and can use that to improve their situation.

The Europeans will pay a miner in an African diamond mine 5 thousand Euros for a large diamond... that is sent to France and cut and sold for millions of dollars... that is why the French mine owners have yachts and mansions and the miners live in dirty shacks...

GarryB wrote:Russia is not trying to gather up its own gang to counter HATO... hopefully they are trying to show them they they neither have to join that western gang (that most have been rejected from anyway so that should be an easy sell), but also that they don't need to join a gang and be told what to do and how to behave by its leader the US.

Russia and China and India and Brazil and South Africa were not trying to create an equivalent to the west... there is no leader of BRICS.

The reason both China and Russia support BRICS is because no one is in charge... no one dictates rules or culture or ethics to anyone else.

It is about independent countries getting along and trading, without sanctions or threats.

Russia has not jumped into the circus surrounding the Chinese made islands, and China has not recognised the Crimea as being part of Russia... and neither side is beating up the other to get them to endorse their actions.

The point is that Russia will benefit from trade with other countries that are not trying to kill them like the west does.

Russia cannot force other countries to trade with them, but should not refuse to trade and have good relations with any country that is ready to openly and fairly trade with them... that means Iran and Pakistan and China and India and Japan and Brazil etc etc... it even means the EU and the US if they can get that huge stick out of their arses.

But Russia should not force countries to trade with them either... if Finland and Sweden want to join HATO then that is fine... that means Russia will trade in Rubles only... if that is not acceptable then there wont be any trade... the same with Germany, if they want gas then Russia can sell them some gas, but if they want to pay in Euros or US Dollars then no.

If the west wants to make things hard then Russia should not work hard to jump through the hoops they put in their way... no more pipelines should be built to bypass problems to getting gas to Europe.

Africa is full of countries that have been frustrated with trading with the west and want progress and growth for themselves rather than their european colonial oppressors... this is a chance for India and China and Russia and South Africa and Brazil and any country wanting to join BRICSA to create an economic block that is the equivalent of ethical coffee... except it is really ethical trade where the people at both ends of the deal make good money and can use that to improve their situation.

The Europeans will pay a miner in an African diamond mine 5 thousand Euros for a large diamond... that is sent to France and cut and sold for millions of dollars... that is why the French mine owners have yachts and mansions and the miners live in dirty shacks...

I always wondered what the West would do If Russia suddenly just subtracted herself from the UN, closed all NATO country's embassies in Russia, shutdown all trade ENTIRELY with NATO members and NATO friendly countries , repatriated Russians from around the world and began a strict make in Russia policy where absolutely nothing was to be imported. I think such a thing will grow the Russian economy as more machines and products are made in Russia with 0 cash going out but plenty coming in from Russia friendly countries in weapons sales. If I was the Russian president I would aim for this. By doing that I would have successfully beat out any Western sanctions. Hard to sanction someone who does 0 business with you because they are self sufficient. In this case Russia would still continue helping her allies against NATO without suffering any sanctions because of self sufficiency which should ultimately frustrate the Western Alliance into war.

I think that is largely what is happening now, though I don't think they would withdraw from the UN and give up their UNSC seat and veto powers, I do think there is no point in embassies in any western countries except the US because the US makes all their decisions so no point talking to the farm animals when you can talk to the farmer.

Russia needs to pivot away from the west and towards the rest of the world... which sounds bad but it is actually rejecting and isolating themselves from bitchy whiny nasty people with more money and power than they deserve and turning towards a world wanting to trade and grow and develop but not at the expense of others.

The west is abusing the rest of the world and holding them down... it is most obvious with Russia and China but it has been doing this to the rest of the world for centuries pretending it is because they are special because they are intelligent, rich, civilised, white people, and the rest of the world remains poor and backward because they are dumb and uncivilised.

We saw the Taliban refrain from slaughtering all those Afghans at the Kabul airport... essentially that was an occupying force and all the native Afghans who helped them trying to run away... if the roles were reversed and it was Iraqi soldiers withdrawing from Kuwaite... well we know what happened there...

Almost as if the things the west say are only true in opposite land... and then everything makes sense...

Russia and the rest of the world ignoring the west and trading with each other would be an enormous blow to the western ego who think the way forward for humanity is the path it has carved itself... pinching ideas and technologies from everywhere as they went pretending it was theirs... the Americans didn't even invent the language they speak for goodness sake.

Things are going to get much harder in the west as the US forces Europe to accept more expensive energy supplies which frees up cheaper Russian energy supplies to other nations to benefit from... have you noticed the US still buys Uranium from Russia for electricity generation... being two faced is a skill they have mastered long ago.

The west knows war with Russia is suicide for them so they wont do that, but they will do everything they can to sabotage Russia and China and any country who trades with them, which is going to be a challenge for Russia and will require a strong navy and for them to sell capable weapons to small weak countries so they can defend themselves.... the west has opened pandoras box right there... based on western support for Ukraine Russia is now free to sell MANPADS (and the have very good ones too) and other light SAMs (and they have excellent ones too), and ATGMs and anti armour weapons (again... they make very good anti armour weapons), and also portable light artillery (not a hugely strong area but they have some cool weapons in this category too), and of course land based anti ship missiles (they have some doozies...).

Start by selling Yakhonts to Iran perhaps and go from there... I do believe Iran already licence produces Kornet and Igla... which are excellent weapons in their class already.

Peek-a-boo, here I am

GarryB wrote:Peek-a-boo, here I am

That reminded me of an old joke.

Daddy shark teaches son shark, how to eat a surfer.

Well, son, you go like this: you make a round then throw him out of a board, and make another round. After that, you can eat him.

Dad, dad, but wouldn't that be faster and easier, if I would have just attacked straight ahead and eaten him?!?

Well son, if you prefer to eat shit too ...

Swgman_BK wrote:
I always wondered what the West would do If Russia suddenly just subtracted herself from the UN, closed all NATO country's embassies in Russia, shutdown all trade ENTIRELY with NATO members and NATO friendly countries , repatriated Russians from around the world and began a strict make in Russia policy where absolutely nothing was to be imported.

They would have unleashed World War III openly.

Swgman_BK wrote:

GarryB wrote:Russia is not trying to gather up its own gang to counter HATO... hopefully they are trying to show them they they neither have to join that western gang (that most have been rejected from anyway so that should be an easy sell), but also that they don't need to join a gang and be told what to do and how to behave by its leader the US.

Russia and China and India and Brazil and South Africa were not trying to create an equivalent to the west... there is no leader of BRICS.

The reason both China and Russia support BRICS is because no one is in charge... no one dictates rules or culture or ethics to anyone else.

It is about independent countries getting along and trading, without sanctions or threats.

Russia has not jumped into the circus surrounding the Chinese made islands, and China has not recognised the Crimea as being part of Russia... and neither side is beating up the other to get them to endorse their actions.

The point is that Russia will benefit from trade with other countries that are not trying to kill them like the west does.

Russia cannot force other countries to trade with them, but should not refuse to trade and have good relations with any country that is ready to openly and fairly trade with them... that means Iran and Pakistan and China and India and Japan and Brazil etc etc... it even means the EU and the US if they can get that huge stick out of their arses.

But Russia should not force countries to trade with them either... if Finland and Sweden want to join HATO then that is fine... that means Russia will trade in Rubles only... if that is not acceptable then there wont be any trade... the same with Germany, if they want gas then Russia can sell them some gas, but if they want to pay in Euros or US Dollars then no.

If the west wants to make things hard then Russia should not work hard to jump through the hoops they put in their way... no more pipelines should be built to bypass problems to getting gas to Europe.

Africa is full of countries that have been frustrated with trading with the west and want progress and growth for themselves rather than their european colonial oppressors... this is a chance for India and China and Russia and South Africa and Brazil and any country wanting to join BRICSA to create an economic block that is the equivalent of ethical coffee... except it is really ethical trade where the people at both ends of the deal make good money and can use that to improve their situation.

The Europeans will pay a miner in an African diamond mine 5 thousand Euros for a large diamond... that is sent to France and cut and sold for millions of dollars... that is why the French mine owners have yachts and mansions and the miners live in dirty shacks...

I always wondered what the West would do If Russia suddenly just subtracted herself from the UN, closed all NATO country's embassies in Russia, shutdown all trade ENTIRELY with NATO members and NATO friendly countries , repatriated Russians from around the world and began a strict make in Russia policy where absolutely nothing was to be imported. I think such a thing will grow the Russian economy as more machines and products are made in Russia with 0 cash going out but plenty coming in from Russia friendly countries in weapons sales. If I was the Russian president I would aim for this. By doing that I would have successfully beat out any Western sanctions. Hard to sanction someone who does 0 business with you because they are self sufficient. In this case Russia would still continue helping her allies against NATO without suffering any sanctions because of self sufficiency which should ultimately frustrate the Western Alliance into war.

Turn Russia into a giant North Korea and isolate itself from the rest of the world, give up any influence in the rest of the world willingly?

The West would be celebrating, that's what it would do

London falling: Britain's military decline exposes NATO's collapse in credibility and capability, by Scott Ritter for RTNews. 17.07.2022.

NATO’s plan to vastly increase its forward force is wishful thinking, and the UK’s struggle for military relevance is a perfect case in point.

The secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Jens Stoltenberg, recently announced the US-led military bloc’s goal of expanding its so-called ‘Response Force’ from its current strength of 40,000 to a force of more than 300,000 troops. “We will enhance our battlegroups in the eastern part of the Alliance up to brigade-levels,” Stoltenberg declared. “We will transform the NATO Response Force and increase the number of our high readiness forces to well over 300,000.”

The announcement, made at the end of NATO’s annual summit, held in Madrid, Spain, apparently took several defense officials from the NATO membership by surprise, with one such official calling Stoltenberg’s figures “number magic.” Stoltenberg appeared to be working from a concept that had been developed within NATO headquarters based upon assumptions made by his staffers, as opposed to anything resembling coordinated policy among the defense organizations of the 30 nations that make up the bloc.

Confusion is the name of the game at NATO these days, with the alliance still reeling from last year’s Afghan debacle and unable to adequately disguise the impotence shown in the face of Russia’s ongoing military operation in Ukraine. The bloc is but a shadow of its former self, a pathetic collection of under-funded military organizations more suited for the parade ground than the battlefield. No military organization more represents this colossal collapse in credibility and capability than the British Army.

Even before the current Ukraine crisis kicked off, the British military served more as an object of derision than a template of professionalism. Take, by way of example, the visit of UK Defense Secretary Ben Wallace to Zagreb, Croatia in early February 2022. Croatian President Zoran Milanovic accused the British of trying to incite Ukraine into a war with Russia, as opposed to trying to address Russia’s concerns over the existing European security framework. Wallace flew to Zagreb for consultations, only to be rebuked by Milanovic, who refused to meet with him, noting that he only met with the defense ministers of superpowers, adding that “the UK has left the EU, and this gives it less importance.”

But London keeps putting a brave face on a sorry reality. Take, for example, the offer of written security assurances to Sweden and Finland made by British Prime Minister Boris Johnson. These pledges were designed to bolster the resolve of the two Nordic nations as they considered their applications to join NATO.

But there was no substance to the British offer, if for no other reason than the British had nothing in the way of viable military capability to offer either the Swedes or the Finns. Even as Johnson proffered the proverbial hand of assistance to his newfound Nordic allies, the UK Ministry of Defense was wrestling with planned force reductions that would see the British Army cut from its current “established strength” of 82,000 to 72,500 by 2025 (the actual strength of the British Army is around 76,500, reflecting ongoing difficulties in recruitment and retention.)

Even these numbers are misleading – the British Army is only capable of generating one fully combat-ready maneuver brigade (3,500 to 4,000 men with all the necessary equipment and support). Given the reality that the UK is already on the hook for a reinforced battalion-sized “battlegroup” that is to be deployed to Estonia as part of NATO’s so-called enhanced Forward Presence (eFP) posture (joining three other similarly-sized “battlegroups” fielded by the US in Poland, Germany in Lithuania, and Canada in Latvia), it is questionable whether the British could even accomplish this limited task.

Last month’s deployment to Estonia of a battlegroup comprised of the 2 Rifles infantry regiment underscores the pathos that defines real British military capability. The 2 Rifles Battlegroup includes the three infantry companies and one fire support company integral to the unit, along with supporting artillery, engineering, logistic, and medical elements. France and Denmark provide a company-sized unit to the British-led battlegroup on an alternating basis. Altogether, the British battlegroup comprises some 1,600 soldiers, and is fully integrated within the Estonian 2nd Infantry Brigade.

Given what we now know about the reality of modern warfare, courtesy of the ongoing Russian operation in Ukraine, the British battlegroup would have a life expectancy on an actual European battlefield of less than a week. So, too, would its allies in the Estonian 2nd Infantry Brigade. First and foremost, the units lack any sustainability, both in terms of personnel and equipment losses that could be anticipated if subjected to combat, or the basic logistical support necessary to shoot, move, or communicate on the modern battlefield. Artillery is the king of battle, and the British and Estonians are lacking when it comes to generating anywhere near enough tubes to counter the overwhelming fire support expected to be generated by any hostile Russian force.

Stoltenberg’s hypothetical 300,000-strong Response Force envisions the existing battlegroups to be expanded to brigade-sized formations, ironically tasking the British to generate more combat power at a time when it is actively seeking to reduce its overall manpower levels. While the British may be able to scrape enough substance from the bottom of the barrel, so to speak, to accomplish this projected reinforcement, there would literally be nothing left to back up Boris Johnson’s bold offer of substantive military assistance to Sweden and Finland, leaving the British prime minister looking more like the captain of the Titanic after it hit the iceberg, issuing directives and acting as if his words had any impact, all while his ship is sinking.

https://www.rt.com/russia/558555-nato-uk-response-force/

Turn Russia into a giant North Korea and isolate itself from the rest of the world, give up any influence in the rest of the world willingly?

The West would be celebrating, that's what it would do

All of the wests efforts in regard to Russia have been to try to isolate and contain them and Russia closing up shop would have that exact effect.

The west regards itself as being the international community... when it talks about a rules based system it means the rules it chooses or chooses not to apply to its enemies as well as the rules it ignores itself.

When wars become illegal under international law they call it a humanitarian intervention instead... same bombs still people killed but not a war... which is what makes western claims about the Russian intervention in the Ukraine being a war so amusing... it seems it is different when the shoe is on the other foot.

The money the west will need to spend to create their new military force they say they need, not to mention increased energy costs and the costs of Covid which isn't over yet by the way as well as monkey pox too and of course what ever comes next, this is going to be a very expensive period of time for countries that can't just print more money.

Ironically such conditions are good for Russia at the moment.

U.S. Military to Deploy New Nuclear Weapons in Europe.


https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-b61-12-mini-nukes-made-in-america-to-be-used-in-a-nuclear-first-strike-coming-soon-to-italy-belgium-germany-netherlands/5786765



Described as "first strike" weapons.

Perhaps Venezuela needs some nukes to be safe from potential US aggression in the region too.

Those bombs are already in europe. Another dumb sensational article.

Germany and Lithuania Enhance Their Military Co-operation.

https://thediplomaticinsight.com/germany-lithuania-enhance-military-cooperation-under-nato/


Germany intends to retake Kaliningrad?

Odin of Ossetia wrote:


Germany and Lithuania Enhance Their Military Co-operation.

https://thediplomaticinsight.com/germany-lithuania-enhance-military-cooperation-under-nato/


Germany intends to retake Kaliningrad?

Germany wouldn't be able to take the Netherlands or Denmark.

Odin of Ossetia wrote:



U.S. Military to Deploy New Nuclear Weapons in Europe.


https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-b61-12-mini-nukes-made-in-america-to-be-used-in-a-nuclear-first-strike-coming-soon-to-italy-belgium-germany-netherlands/5786765



Described as "first strike" weapons.

   

...and this is ignoring international treaties on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons to countries that do not have nuclear status.

And what is the status quo change here?
Asking seriously?
NATO wanna play nukes on a tactical level?
Truly?!?
With Russkies, who have the biggest tactical nukes arsenal on the planet?
Who operates nuclear warheads even for anti-aircraft missiles?!?
For barrel artillery, not only 203mm caliber, but 152mm either??
For all the tactical missiles?
Who can place a nuke warhead at any moment on a waste array of high supersonic tactical missiles they operate on a daily basis now?
Soon will field a tactical level hypersonic missiles?
B-61-12 free fall bombs mini nukes as an answer?
Geee, the Russkie must be fuckin' devastated.
They will all collectively piss. From laught rather than fear, but hey, they made them pissing anyway, so counts as a victory!
Hurray!