How and Why Russia Is Moving to a War Footing

[NAC4EV]

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/how-and-why-russia-is-moving-to-a-war-footing/ar-AAgUUje?li=AAggFp5

As NATO’s Warsaw summit looms, the rivalry between the alliance and Russia is intensifying. The summit’s agenda includes a lengthy list of points of tension, including NATO enlargement, ballistic missile defence, positioning of NATO equipment and forces in Eastern European member states and NATO’s partnerships with states such as Georgia. At the same time, NATO is conducting a series of substantial military exercises in Eastern Europe, such as Anakonda-2016, the largest such exercises since the end of the Cold War.
The Russian leadership has responded with a mix of vocal criticism threatening retaliatory measures, most notably President Putin’s statements that Romania would be targeted as a result of its hosting elements of the missile defense shield. Other officials have stated that Russia will also increase military and security exercises and other activities in response.

 

[blankslate]

Look at this this way if Canada suddenly went communist and allowed Russia to build bases on its soil we'd kind of lose our collective shit too.

At least one country bordering Russia has made moves to join NATO.

I haven't confirmed this on my own but I heard on one of those old timey AM radio shows that there was an unspoken agreement that NATO would not move much farther east if Russia didn't oppose German reunification...

if that's true then maybe Russia should've gotten that in writing.


__________

 

[Ventanni]

Look at this this way if Canada suddenly went communist and allowed Russia to build bases on its soil we'd kind of lose our collective shit too.

At least one country bordering Russia has made moves to join NATO.

I haven't confirmed this on my own but I heard on one of those old timey AM radio shows that there was an unspoken agreement that NATO would not move much farther east if Russia didn't oppose German reunification...

if that's true then maybe Russia should've gotten that in writing.


__________

That's not what this is about though. NATO is strengthening in those areas because former Soviet countries don't want to go the way of Ukraine and the Crimea. While they may not be a "superpower" in the sense that the United States is, Russia is a very strong world power and can easily rival European countries individually.

The reality is that these Eastern countries asked for NATO membership.

 

[Jaskalas]

Look at this this way if Canada suddenly went communist and allowed Russia to build bases on its soil we'd kind of lose our collective shit too.

I once held a similar view by taking a position of condemning our provocations. Missile defense should be a joint Russia / US venture. Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, a military build up is required to counter the realized threat of further Russian land grabs.

Russia cannot be allowed to kill any European nations.
If they aren't happy about that, too !@#$ bad.

 

[senseamp]

It's a complicated chicken and egg problem, but the root of it is neither Russia nor the West completely moved off Cold War mentality, and assumed that mentality would move to match reality, and not the other way around. Other countries explicitly dealt with their past, but Russia had a "fake it till you make it" approach to Democracy and market economy, and just swept a lot of issues under the rug. The West went along to get along. Russia crossed the Rubicon back to authoritarianism in Oct 1993 when Yeltsin shelled the Parliament during a Constitutional crisis. That was the time when the West still had influence with Russia but instead of condemning it, they went along because Yeltsin was "Democratic."

 

[Spungo]

It's a complicated chicken and egg problem, but the root of it is neither Russia nor the West completely moved off Cold War mentality

Because the cold war was never about communism versus capitalism or freedom versus not-freedom. It's always red team versus blue team. Iraq is on our team. Iran is on their team. Saudi Arabia is supposedly on our team (if you ignore all the terrorist bullshit), and Syria is on their team. Are America and Saudi Arabia alike in any way? Not really, but we're on the same team. Is Russia similar to Iran? Not really, but they're on the same team. America and Russia have more similarities than differences, yet we're on different teams. On paper, we should be great friends. We even share a border in Alaska, so trade between our two countries should be easy to do and happening in large volumes.

I don't know what the solution is. It seems like we should continue to encircle Russia, continue building defensive things like missile shields, and then try to establish friendly trade deals with Russia; hopefully build a strong relationship like the one we have with Canada. The libertarian approach of just backing off seems overly optimistic. That's not how power politics works. If we show any sign of weakness, Putin will use that as an opportunity to expand his own sphere of influence.

It might seem cold to suggest we encircle the "enemy" and break them like a horse before showing them love, but it seems like the best chance we have to build a long lasting and peaceful relationship.

 

[Knowing]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gAvZHMwrq94

I'd be concerned too if Victoria"fuck the EU" Kagan Nudelman Nuland was making speeches like this about my country. The Hawks aren't even trying to deescalate.

 

[Mai72]

Bring it on Russia!

 

[Aristotelian]

That's not what this is about though. NATO is strengthening in those areas because former Soviet countries don't want to go the way of Ukraine and the Crimea. While they may not be a "superpower" in the sense that the United States is, Russia is a very strong world power and can easily rival European countries individually.

The reality is that these Eastern countries asked for NATO membership.

The annexation of Crimea cannot possibly be considered as a starting point.

The EU: tried to establish a free trade zone up to Russia's border, despite having massive trade relations with Russia arguing that Russia's "protectionist economic policy prevents us from having a free trade agreement with them". Consider NAFTA - and Mexico's original exclusion.

Furthermore, when considering the Georgia-Russia war, it's interesting to see the way that Wikipedia portrays the timeline - basically, that Georgia (completely innocently) started suffering from attacks originating in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Any unbiased European would tell you that Georgia was chomping at the bit to fight with Russia because (drumroll) it thought that it would have USA/NATO backing in an eventual conflict. This is why Abkhazia and South Ossetia were converted into separatist areas (meaning with the territorial conflict in Georgia it will never be able to join NATO) and that's why this was done in Ukraine too.

There was indeed a principled agreement not to expand NATO towards Russia, but all of this started really when the USA excluded Russia from the Marshall Plan (by focusing so much of it on Germany - and look at Germany now, the biggest winner of the Cold War and one of the biggest economies in the world).

It's a difficult thing to explain in a short forum post but Foreign Affairs has some good articles which describe the perspective that Russia has as a failing world power and its need to try to exert force in order to: (i) protect its geopolitical interests and (ii) to be taken seriously.

The Eastern countries you refer to - let's just say as a hypothetical, do you think they would mind - given historical memories - an outright war with Russia? I don't think they'd mind, but that's not what either Russia or the USA want. I can't go into too much detail on some elements in here but what brainchild thought that you could sell a geographically based free trade zone that is extended exactly up to Russia's border, and includes historically important trade partners for Russia, and not include Russia in the negotiation of that process at all?

It's too easy to portray Russia as this big bad villain, but to do so (to me) misses the context of this entire conflict.

 

[UglyCasanova]

It's a complicated chicken and egg problem, but the root of it is neither Russia nor the West completely moved off Cold War mentality, and assumed that mentality would move to match reality, and not the other way around. Other countries explicitly dealt with their past, but Russia had a "fake it till you make it" approach to Democracy and market economy, and just swept a lot of issues under the rug. The West went along to get along. Russia crossed the Rubicon back to authoritarianism in Oct 1993 when Yeltsin shelled the Parliament during a Constitutional crisis. That was the time when the West still had influence with Russia but instead of condemning it, they went along because Yeltsin was "Democratic."

Weird, I agree with a senseamp post.

 

[blankslate]

The reality is that these Eastern countries asked for NATO membership.

that doesn't change the fact that having NATO forces so near them would make them nervous... as we would be if Canada suddenly became an ally of Russia and the prospect of Russian troops or weapons there became a real possibility.

I once held a similar view by taking a position of condemning our provocations. Missile defense should be a joint Russia / US venture. Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, a military build up is required to counter the realized threat of further Russian land grabs.

There's a difference between condemning something and stating what might be motivating Russia's actions.


___________

 

[sm625]

The ignorance and misinformation is stunning. The propaganda is so deep and multilayered. Russia invaded Ukraine? But not a mention of a US sponsored coup... The parroting of the notion that Crimea did not wish to be part of Russia... this sheer rank ignorance is what allows this corrupt governemnt to drive the sheeple into senseless war after senseless war. Good luck with your neocon pursuits.

 

[blankslate]

Russia nor the West completely moved off Cold War mentality, and assumed that mentality would move to match reality, and not the other way around.

there's a recent Vice episode (season 4 episode 14)on how the military is wanting to update it's nuclear weapons capability especially with the development B61-12 gravity bomb. It's very accurate and the warhead can be scaled down to a .3 megaton explosion.

This might tempt officials to use a nuke since it can be used in a smaller area since the blast radiusarea is estimated to be only .29 miles.

Of course a former Secretary of Defense William Perry who served in that position during the cold war believes such a weapon would increase the danger of a small nuclear exchange escalating into the unthinkable.

One nation modernizing its nuclear systems just will lead to other nations getting nervous and doing the same.


_______________

 

[hal2kilo]

The ignorance and misinformation is stunning. The propaganda is so deep and multilayered. Russia invaded Ukraine? But not a mention of a US sponsored coup... The parroting of the notion that Crimea did not wish to be part of Russia... this sheer rank ignorance is what allows this corrupt governemnt to drive the sheeple into senseless war after senseless war. Good luck with your neocon pursuits.

So how much does working on the Russian disinformation team pay?

 

[MongGrel]

The only answer is to build a wall around Russia.

It will be a HUGGGGGE wall, and we'll make Russia pay for it...

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles...4-more-battalions-to-baltic-region?int=a14709