US Troops deploy to Eastern Europe, 1st time since end of Cold War
33456 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Online
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/17/17
This is the largest US troop deployment in Europe since the end of the Cold War.

4000 US troops is to be permanently stationed in Poland, Estonia, Bulgaria, Romania, and other countries along with 87 tanks and 144 armoured vehicles.


What the heck is this? Trying to get the last escalation in?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/12/doubts-over-biggest-us-deployment-in-europe-since-cold-war-under-trump

Apparently so.


Deployment was originally scheduled for later in the month but a decision was made last month to bring it forward, possibly a move by Barack Obama before he leaves office to try to lock the president-elect into the strategy.



The deployment, intended to counter what Nato portrays as Russian aggression in eastern Europe, will see US troops permanently stationed along Russia’s western border for the first time.

About 1,000 of a promised 4,000 troops arrived in Poland at the start of the week, and a formal ceremony to welcome them is to be held on Saturday. Some people waved and held up American flags as the troops, tanks and heavy armoured vehicles crossed into south-western Poland from Germany, according to Associated Press.


Which is funny, since both sides have already been building up in an arms race:


Few at Nato seriously believe that war with Russia is likely but there have been dangerous developments, with escalation on both sides, including a buildup of Russian troops. Russia alarmed Poland and other eastern European states by moving nuclear-capable Iskander-M missiles to its naval base at Kaliningrad in the autumn. At the time Nato regarded the move as a response to its own deployments.


Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/17/17
Glad I live in the Caribbean
6062 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / Classified locati...
Offline
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/17/17
So, as an active duty soldier who has been stationed in Europe for the past 5 years, i can say there is one particular event which likely sparked this "deployment" if it can even be called that, more like strongly worded retaliation.

As a military Personnel, i'm privy to more un-classified information than a citizen such as most of you are.
There was recently an attack made by Russia, during their "invasion" of Ukraine mid-late of 2016. A single Ukrainian battalion was on the move to it's border to secure a particular route into their nation, so as to deprive the Russian military from using it. Russia on the otherhand, was expecting such a move as they had prepared more than quite a few Katyusha Rocket Trucks at the border. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Katyusha_launcher_rear.jpg

The entire Ukrainian battalion was destroyed in under 4 minuets. Now, you may be asking, "where are your sources?" "can you provide any evidence through articles or links so i can read about it?" The very simple answer is, no. i can't. why? honestly, if you have to ask, than you dont understand the geo-political concepts & consequences of what i've just told you.

Imagine, if you will. Canada, invading the US. And we send a battalion up to our northern border to protect a vital route into our country. That battalion get absolutely obliterated and wiped from existence. Would you think our government would want any form of rumor or story about that incident being leaked to ANY press? NO! It would be a fiasco, the united states would loose all credibility as a military power. The same holds true for Ukraine. The only reason why the american military knows about it, is because we have one of the most well informed military intelligence agencies on the planet.

Now, as i said before, this knowledge is un-classified. Dig deep enough through the internet and you WILL find the story on this. but surface diggers will only find stories on the attacks against Ukraine by Russia from 2014. i can tell you, this is not the one you're looking for.

It is true both the U.S. and Russia, have been building up their military forces in Eastern Europe. However, more so can be said of Russia than the U.S. The U.S. has been taking a rather standoff-ish approach to the mounting hostilities with our Russian Counterparts. The other NATO nations have been getting training in more advanced tactics and movements rather than the U.S. Military stepping in and doing all the work. ...Call it a buffer zone if nothing else. cause when the metal meets the meat, and when it is truly needed, the obvious showdown will be between the U.S and Russia, no one else.


Be it known, our President-Elect Donald Trump, soon to be Commander-in-Chief Donald Trump, is not friends with Vladimir Putin, the Russian President of State, in any other manner than niceties or proper manners goes when dealing with a foreign nations leader. Nor are we allies with the Russian State due to our cooperation in NATO. They are very much still our #1 Rival as far as military power goes. And, i might add, they are the only known force the american military has not face in open combat. and...no one really seems to understand that, were we to be "deploying" against Russia, it would spell war. A War with Russia, would be devastating, not just for those two nations involved, i.e. United States & Russia; But for all neighboring nations and non-neighboring nations as well. It would Be World War 3 and the planet would literally be split in half, whoever won, would control the world. (so to speak, obviously allied nations would retain their independence on the premise of being inferior military powers)


Ah, i failed to bring to light one MAJOR factor.

These troop deployments to Eastern Europe, have not in any way been a last minuet decision. These movements were planned quite some time ago from my understanding of the information available to us soldiers. We were hearing about this movement 2 and a half years ago, LONG before any sort of large movements by the Russian military were seen.
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/17/17
Obama doesn't have long. Like 3 more days and he is history.
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/19/17
Obama trying his hardest to kick off WWIII before he leaves. I sure hope that they already took the nuke codes from him already.
23411 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
53 / M / In
Online
Posted 1/17/17 , edited 1/17/17
So the US can't deploy troops inside fellow NATO countries when invited?
21965 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Leanbox, Gameindu...
Offline
Posted 1/18/17 , edited 1/19/17
Well, we have to send a message to Russia that we will defend our NATO allies. Remember Russia looks at non-NATO bordering states as free territory up for grabs (Crimea, parts of Georgia).

That being said, there is a difference with showing our commitment to NATO allies, by sending additional troops vs threatening to shoot down Russian planes over Syria. Russia and the US do not want a war with each other for obvious reasons, and I suspect that as long as NATO is a credible deterrent. Russia will not attempt to extend its territory that far westward and will be forced to flex its influence and to continue to keep its territory grabbing isolated to outside of NATO and the EU countries.
23260 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 1/18/17 , edited 1/19/17


Interesting. I'm amazed they are still using those rocket trucks they've had since WW2.
17714 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 1/18/17 , edited 1/19/17
Our soldiers are brave and are fighting for your freedumb
25798 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Atlanta, GA, USA
Offline
Posted 1/18/17 , edited 1/19/17
Well, you either ally with Russia or the USA, or you get smashed. Is that about how it works? I wonder.

It makes sense to do some military posturing to remind countries they're in danger of being smashed, I suppose. I'm guessing that direct confrontation between Russia and USA will be avoided, however.
18866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M / outer wall, level...
Offline
Posted 1/18/17 , edited 1/19/17

Rujikin wrote:



Interesting. I'm amazed they are still using those rocket trucks they've had since WW2.


the idea is still the same. just newer trucks and rockets.
6062 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / Classified locati...
Offline
Posted 1/19/17 , edited 1/19/17
I can't honestly, say. posturing being what it is, just that. but it can always lead to tensions rising and breaking into stupid amount of violence. if history has taught me anything -.- that's usually how it goes.
runec 
40078 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 1/19/17 , edited 1/19/17

Blitznbitz wrote:
I can't honestly, say. posturing being what it is, just that. but it can always lead to tensions rising and breaking into stupid amount of violence. if history has taught me anything -.- that's usually how it goes.


Everyone needs to line up and wave their dicks at each other to compare sizes every now and then. An actual shooting war between Russia and NATO is unlikely. Despite its posturing, Russia's military is a disjointed husk of modern units and rusting junk and its economy is really suffering under the sanctions. Putin has kept pouring money into modernizing its forces but the money is running dry. Their interference in Syria has nothing to do with morality and everything to do with trying to preserve their arms exports to Syria as a major revenue source.

They do have the equipment and capability to threaten their neighbours and stage invasions like Crimea. But they don't have the capability to fight toe to toe with US military hardware. Hence Putin really, REALLY does not want US forces standing in front of his Baltic buffet table. A strong, US led NATO is a dead stop for whatever weird dreams of Soviet reunification Putin has.

Hence using hybrid warfare to disrupt politics in western countries and hopefully weaken NATO.

6062 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / Classified locati...
Offline
Posted 1/19/17 , edited 1/19/17

runec wrote:


Blitznbitz wrote:
I can't honestly, say. posturing being what it is, just that. but it can always lead to tensions rising and breaking into stupid amount of violence. if history has taught me anything -.- that's usually how it goes.


Everyone needs to line up and wave their dicks at each other to compare sizes every now and then. An actual shooting war between Russia and NATO is unlikely. Despite its posturing, Russia's military is a disjointed husk of modern units and rusting junk and its economy is really suffering under the sanctions. Putin has kept pouring money into modernizing its forces but the money is running dry. Their interference in Syria has nothing to do with morality and everything to do with trying to preserve their arms exports to Syria as a major revenue source.

They do have the equipment and capability to threaten their neighbours and stage invasions like Crimea. But they don't have the capability to fight toe to toe with US military hardware. Hence Putin really, REALLY does not want US forces standing in front of his Baltic buffet table. A strong, US led NATO is a dead stop for whatever weird dreams of Soviet reunification Putin has.

Hence using hybrid warfare to disrupt politics in western countries and hopefully weaken NATO.



of course that's really nothing new though
Sailor Candy Moderator
221192 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29
Offline
Posted 2/3/18 , edited 2/3/18
Forum clean up ^,^ removing posts from over a year ago!
You must be logged in to post.