Russia Halts Military Co-operation

#1
Just breaking on Sky News that the Russkies are halting military co-operation with NATO. The Russians are upping the anti with NATO now that they've realised that they haven't got much to worry about as the main fighting forces are tied up else where. What will they do next?
 
#2
Franco-German bde rolling east? What about the Belgians - they're not busy at the moment?

Mind you, the Finns were pretty handy at stopping the Russian bear - and there's no love lost between those two countries!
 
#3
This has got totally out of hand, through simple bloody-minded pettiness. So much to gain by having Russia on board, so much to lose if they are not.

Did anyone think to offer Russia the ABM? Did anyone think to bring Russia in closer to NATO? Make a mighty fine buffer between us and the truly voracious expansionists , the PRC.

If we all live long enough, people will remember the Bush Presidency as the single greatest disaster of foreign policy in the history of the USA.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#4
I fear that no matter how much we cosy up to Russia, it still has very a unpleasant foreign policy towards its neighbours.

If we kiss Russia's arrse, and they expand into some of their old territories, as they are trying in Georgia, what position does that put us in? We are supposed to be the guardians of the 'free' world, and Russia has its own ideas about that.

Almost all of Eastern Europe has 50 years of crushing soviet policies that it cannot and will not forget, and they look to the West and NATO to stop that happening again.

What's the point of offering Russia the ABM's anyway? They have enough economic might and technical know-how to make their own bl00dy ABMs.
 
#5
Biped said:
I fear that no matter how much we cosy up to Russia, it still has very a unpleasant foreign policy towards its neighbours.

If we kiss Russia's arrse, and they expand into some of their old territories, as they are trying in Georgia, what position does that put us in? We are supposed to be the guardians of the 'free' world, and Russia has its own ideas about that.

Almost all of Eastern Europe has 50 years of crushing soviet policies that it cannot and will not forget, and they look to the West and NATO to stop that happening again.

What's the point of offering Russia the ABM's anyway? They have enough economic might and technical know-how to make their own bl00dy ABMs.
Free world? The last time I looked, Russia was a democracy. China isn't.

Soviet....... NOT . Russian. A lot of Europe had years of German oppression from Bismarck onwards, they seem to have got over that. Even Germany razing large parts of Europe. Do they trust the Germans now, or is it because the Germans are part of NATO, and unlikely to kick it off again as they have over the last 200 years preceding 1945?

Didn't Russia herself get screwed over numerous times from Napoleon onwards? Russia surrendered in 1917 , they damn near had to do it again in 1941 , and they have no intention of running that close again.

So offer Russia NATO membership? Or do we need to create an enemy , because Muslims/Al-Madeup aren't the enemy we hoped they would be, and the Industrial-Military-Petro complex, so despised by Eisenhower isn't making enough money?

The point of offering Russia the ABM system, is MAND (Think about it).

The point of offering Russia the ABM, is that the reasons offered for the system by that shitehawk diplomacy retard Condispellingmistake Korea/Iran other rogue states getting missiles , would then make sense, and Russia would be covering America's Far Northwestern landmass, in addition to their own.

Don't offer the Russians co-operation in ABM, but ring their territory with it, and what are the Russians going to think?

Maybe they don't have the technology in hypersonics and railguns to do it? My, they'd free up a lot of oil to be able to have that too.

But no, we have fcuking idiot Dinosaurs in the top seats, that refuse to acknowledge the world has changed.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#6
That's a very valid point - but the questions remain:

Has Russia changed to be a constructive and useful member of NATO?

Does it WANT to be part of NATO?

Will it do so on euqal terms with everyone else, or will it push its weight around?

Will it try and stop countries in the 'Near Abroad' from joining?

Will it push its weight around?

Is there a likelyhood of Russia throwing its teddy out of the pram if it doesn't get its own way and steal the technology of the West?

It's easy to forget that pretty much all Eastern European countries WANT to join NATO and are willing to jump through hoops to achieve that goal, whereas as Russia seems ambivalent at best.


Yes, it would be very nice if Russia wanted what we in the WEST wanted, yes it would be marvelous if Russia was to work with us in terms of making this landmass of ours nicely defended, but, let's be honest, Russia wants to go its own way, it cares not for the borders of its nearest neighbours, it's happy to bomb the sh!t out of civilian cities with thermobaric bombs and if it was part of NATO, or allied to NATO, it would, in its current form, reflect VERY poorly indeed on our alliance.

Also, you talk of it being a 'democracy'. Perhaps you should tell that fact to millions of Russians who think otherwise, some of whom (reporters and all) who have been murdered by radioactive poisons or simply shot.
 
#7
To be honest it just seems like a bit of old saber rattling to me.
 
#8
A sterling analysis and food for thought should our political masters ever take a blind bit of fukcing notice.
 
#9
This unfortunately is the culmination of years of hard assed work to fight over control of Europe.

Observe thusly:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/library/news/2001/space-010222-wwwh1f22.htm

Initially America did offer Russia full partnership and participation, however Russia simply saw this as "Russia being requested to protect Europe from Russia". Putin put in a counter proposal which was essentially, "stop cooperation with America, prevent further countries joining NATO, and Russia will protect you from Russian missile technology sold to Pariah states".

To my mind the most interesting development is the Merkel U-Turn on Ukrainian & Georgian application to MAP. Initially this was based on the, "don't pi$$ off Moscow", line but it transpires that after the visit to the Kremlin this no longer holds true. I wonder what exactly Putin, Medved & the other Siloviki cooked up in her recent visit to make the German Chancellery (once a virtual proxy seat for them on the NATO council) let rip?

And then of course Neutral neighbours feel the need to express themselves strongly over this matter as well.

http://www.forbes.com/afxnewslimited/feeds/afx/2008/08/18/afx5333893.html
 
#10
PartTimePongo said:
Free world? The last time I looked, Russia was a democracy. China isn't.
Several, now dead, journalists, TV stations, newspapers who depend on gov't monopoly of newsprint and oblast/provinces who now are no longer allowed to elect their local leaders but instead get them 'appointed' by Moscow might quibble with you.

Soviet....... NOT . Russian. A lot of Europe had years of German oppression from Bismarck onwards, they seem to have got over that. Even Germany razing large parts of Europe. Do they trust the Germans now, or is it because the Germans are part of NATO, and unlikely to kick it off again as they have over the last 200 years preceding 1945?
There's a strong argument that the Germans have gone above and beyond in their recognition of culpability, in WWII especially, further than the Japanese certainly.

And I don't recall the Germans lining up their tanks on the French or Czech border in the last few decades.

Didn't Russia herself get screwed over numerous times from Napoleon onwards? Russia surrendered in 1917 , they damn near had to do it again in 1941 , and they have no intention of running that close again.
In the same manner they let the Poles, Latvians, Lithuanina, Estonians, Ukrainians and name that ethnic group, surrender to them?

We could fill fifty pages of thread with details of Russian (and by extension Soviet) oppression of other countries and peoples.

No intentions of running that close again, other people's be damned. Russian paranoia is fighting to prevail.

So offer Russia NATO membership? Or do we need to create an enemy , because Muslims/Al-Madeup aren't the enemy we hoped they would be, and the Industrial-Military-Petro complex, so despised by Eisenhower isn't making enough money?
I'd argue the Russians are doing more of the enemy creating then anyone else. It plays well at home, makes up for a decade and a half of being the sick-man-of-Europe, etc.

Very clever of the Military Industrial complex to trick Russia into reverting to the Cold War defense textbook. Diabolical.

I'm more willing to offer the Russia two years of psychotherapy per-person. Someone--damn sure not me--might want to convince them that excessive sabre-rattling and bullying of neighbors doesn't make up for penis-size.


The point of offering Russia the ABM, is that the reasons offered for the system by that shitehawk diplomacy retard Condispellingmistake Korea/Iran other rogue states getting missiles , would then make sense, and Russia would be covering America's Far Northwestern landmass, in addition to their own
There you go hitting us at our weak spot. Isn't teasing the mentally handicapped looked down on in England?

...Dinosaurs in the top seats, that refuse to acknowledge the world has changed.
Putin's 'great game' strategy isn't exactly cutting edge in either it's application or it's end-state. Ask the Baltics, Poland or Ukraine the last century's experience with the same.
 
#11
PartTimePongo said:
If we all live long enough, people will remember the Bush Presidency as the single greatest disaster of foreign policy in the history of the USA.
That's a given.

But it'll have little to do with Russia. Sometimes everything isn't America's fault, sometimes peoples are responsible for their own actions.

Keep saying that and spread it around. :twisted:

I'm going back to the smoke-filled-room just outside of DC and help decide the fate of Uruguay (slow week on the US hegemony front). :wink:
 
#12
PartTimePongo said:
Biped said:
I fear that no matter how much we cosy up to Russia, it still has very a unpleasant foreign policy towards its neighbours.

If we kiss Russia's arrse, and they expand into some of their old territories, as they are trying in Georgia, what position does that put us in? We are supposed to be the guardians of the 'free' world, and Russia has its own ideas about that.

Almost all of Eastern Europe has 50 years of crushing soviet policies that it cannot and will not forget, and they look to the West and NATO to stop that happening again.

What's the point of offering Russia the ABM's anyway? They have enough economic might and technical know-how to make their own bl00dy ABMs.
Free world? The last time I looked, Russia was a democracy. China isn't.

Soviet....... NOT . Russian. A lot of Europe had years of German oppression from Bismarck onwards, they seem to have got over that. Even Germany razing large parts of Europe. Do they trust the Germans now, or is it because the Germans are part of NATO, and unlikely to kick it off again as they have over the last 200 years preceding 1945?

Didn't Russia herself get screwed over numerous times from Napoleon onwards? Russia surrendered in 1917 , they damn near had to do it again in 1941 , and they have no intention of running that close again.

So offer Russia NATO membership? Or do we need to create an enemy , because Muslims/Al-Madeup aren't the enemy we hoped they would be, and the Industrial-Military-Petro complex, so despised by Eisenhower isn't making enough money?

The point of offering Russia the ABM system, is MAND (Think about it).

The point of offering Russia the ABM, is that the reasons offered for the system by that shitehawk diplomacy retard Condispellingmistake Korea/Iran other rogue states getting missiles , would then make sense, and Russia would be covering America's Far Northwestern landmass, in addition to their own.

Don't offer the Russians co-operation in ABM, but ring their territory with it, and what are the Russians going to think?

Maybe they don't have the technology in hypersonics and railguns to do it? My, they'd free up a lot of oil to be able to have that too.

But no, we have fcuking idiot Dinosaurs in the top seats, that refuse to acknowledge the world has changed.

Russia has an ABM system, this being a point that isn't mentioned by people who should know better:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-135_anti-ballistic_missile_system

The ABM Treaty allowed both the USA and USSR to set up an ABM system to defend one location. For the Soviets this was a no-brainer as everything was built around Moscow, but being a free country dedicated to defend all its citizens, this clause was next to useless to the US.

Of course, none of this matters to those who want to blame the US.

And, as I've said before, all you need to prove how how empty the Russia's objections are is to get a globe, and draw a line from the Russian ICBM silos to the targets in North America. You'll find that Poland, despit the name, is nowhere near the flightpath over the North Pole, and indeed the missile are flying away from Poland as soon as they launch.
 
#13
Free world? The last time I looked, Russia was a democracy. China isn't.

Soviet....... NOT . Russian. A lot of Europe had years of German oppression from Bismarck onwards, they seem to have got over that. Even Germany razing large parts of Europe. Do they trust the Germans now, or is it because the Germans are part of NATO, and unlikely to kick it off again as they have over the last 200 years preceding 1945?
No-one fears Germany because they were reduced to ashes, occupied and re-built in our own image after having fought to the last person who wanted to fight. Total defeat is paradoxically a great healer, as there is no scope for the 'if only' sob stories that came about in Germany after WW1, and are now taking hold in the Russian mind.
 
#14
"Russia has an ABM system, this being a point that isn't mentioned by people who should know better:"

The Russian system was deployed in the 1970's, under treaty (since abrogated by the USA), to Cover Moscow ONLY.

It would seem that the Russians see this system "Missile defense shield", as a possible element to a US "first Strike" Policy. While this may seem strange, it is Part of NeoCon theory, that Nuke's ARE a option for the USA in a possible military confrontation.

So the Russians MAY be Paranoid, but Baby Doc Bush and his Minions have done nothing to allay that Paranoia.

While it may be reprehensible, that Russia has invaded Georgia and seeks to over awe its neighbours, I certainly think so.

However, in the real World of motives, it does play to their geopolitical desire to create a "Glacis" from possible aggressors.
At the same time, it brings the fact that Western Europe is being held by the short hairs in respexct to natural gas supplies in to sharp focus
 
#15
tommyhutch said:
Why are russia using T-72's in Georgia, maybe are the T-80's unservicable or just being used elsewhere?
The Soviets/Russians have a long tradition of not throwing old gear away. It gets stored somewhere for a rainy day. Furthermore Georgia is not exactly a fearsome opponent. Of course serviceability was a problem in the Soviet era, so they may well be conserving the more modern and valuable equipment.

Why use a sledge hammer to crack a nut?
 
#16
Russia has alot of reservists, all trained on older kit, which the Russkies still keep so the reservists come in when needed, mount up on the tanks, SP's, Hinds etc they were trained on and trundle off to war when and if required.

Meanwhile our reservists gallantly try to see off the Russian reservists in their T55's, from their cut down 110's with GPMG's.

Well that was the old plan anyway :)

Quantity has a quality all of its own and any tank is better than no tank. Old Russian proverb.
 
#18
AndyPipkin said:
I think I've just worked out that PTP is, in fact, Sergey. :twisted:

At least they keep coming out with the same anti-US conspiracy theories!
I am sergy and so is my wife... :roll:

good to see that once again your finger is on the pulse of geo politics and the modern world.

As IndianaDel mentions things havent been helped by 'Baby Doc Bush and his Minions' hopefully once he is gone then the US can start to repair some of the burnt bridges.
Without understanding the Russian mindset properly we cannot hope to maintain any kind of stability. And while we can bandy about our visions of democracy, with regards to both Russia and the PRC they are moving somewhat closer slowly to greater freedoms of sorts, ironically while the we and the US seem to be moving closer to totalitarianism.

Patriot Act, Gitmo, biomentric scans, CCTV, DNA datebases, etc. all are of course valid in degrees but it how one views and uses them could be said defines freedom!

PS pipkin isnt it time to go and empty some waste paper bin in chambers :roll:
 
#19
Pipkin, the last thinng I am is anti-US.

Coming from someone who has in the past accused my of being a Jihadist sympathiser , I'll treat that with the contempt it deserves. The problem I have with the US , is exclusively the administration that currently occupies the White House, it has been an unmitigated disaster. Nothing would make me happier , than a series of court appearances, and a spell of rock-breaking for the main players.

They have tarnished and sullied the reputation of a fine country, they have reduced everything that America stands for in the eyes of the world. The current head of the DoS has an amazing ability to reverse-midas everything she touches and gets involved with. The slavish devotion to Israel has been astonishing to see, and has put progress in the Middle East back a decade

Now they want to re-ignite the Cold War

This is not America
 
#20
No-one fears Germany because they were reduced to ashes, occupied and re-built in our own image after having fought to the last person who wanted to fight. Total defeat is paradoxically a great healer, as there is no scope for the 'if only' sob stories that came about in Germany after WW1, and are now taking hold in the Russian mind.
Too many parallels for my peice of mind.

Sudetenland 1938

South Ossetia 2008

Poland 1939

?????? 2009

WW2 1939 - 1945

??? 2009 - ?

And when you take into account the build up to this since the break up of the USSR the parallels become even more disturbing.

That said there is the added nuclear dimension and you can look at that one of two ways. It will either prevent or make worse the possibility of open warfare.
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top