NATO will deploy a permanent full-scale military force on its border with Russia to combat a future invasion, alliance's chief says

[Rogue Valley]

NATO will deploy a permanent full-scale military force on its border with Russia to combat a future invasion, alliance's chief says

4.10.22
NATO will deploy a permanent full-scale military force on its border with Russia to defend its territory against a future Russian invasion, the alliance's chief said during an interview with The Telegraph. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg told the newspaper that the alliance was "in the midst of a very fundamental transformation" that will reflect "the long-term consequences" of Russian President Vladimir Putin's actions. "What we see now is a new reality, a new normal for European security," Stoltenberg said, per The Telegraph. "Therefore, we have now asked our military commanders to provide options for what we call a reset, a longer-term adaptation of NATO." The alliance currently has a small "tripwire" presence to the west of Russia. NATO troop numbers have increased tenfold to 40,000 since the invasion of Ukraine. The "reset" will involve deploying sufficient forces to repel any offensive on NATO nations by Russian troops, per The Telegraph. NATO members bordering Russia include Estonia and Latvia. NATO military commanders are currently discussing and developing their options, the newspaper said.

Stoltenberg will raise the issue of a bolstered military presence at a NATO summit in Madrid in June, according to Reuters. NATO has had to tread carefully during the war in Ukraine, working out how best to support the war-torn nation while avoiding an escalation and getting drawn into the conflict. Members of the alliance agreed on Friday to offer more military support to Ukraine. Slovakia Prime Minister Eduard Heger confirmed on Friday that it had sent its S-300 air defense system to Ukraine, becoming the first NATO country to answer the calls by President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to supply powerful missile weaponry. The S-300 is a Soviet-era long-range surface-to-air missile system that can shoot down cruise missiles and aircraft and has a range of up to 90 miles. The Czech Republic became the first NATO country to send tanks to Ukraine earlier this week, as a Czech defense source told Reuters.

Even though the Russian military has demonstrated its unprofessionalism, one must still be prepared for the Kremlin's tendency to make bad choices.

NATO chief: Alliance transforming to reflect ‘long-term consequences’ of Russian invasion

 

[Nomad4Ever]

It's funny how every day there is some piece of news that adds onto the pile of showing how badly Putin ****ed up.

 

[ttwtt78640]

That would not have prevented Putin from invading Ukraine, but will likely be very expensive. I doubt that the US will (significantly) relocate it’s forces from Germany, Italy and the UK into the other nations bordering Russia or Ukraine.

 

[Callen]

Looks like Putin got the exact opposite of what wanted. Thanks to his own action he will get a larger, stronger NATO camped right on his doorstep.I hope Findland and Sweden join this summer.

 

[Callen]

That would not have prevented Putin from invading Ukraine, but will likely be very expensive. I doubt that the US will (significantly) relocate it’s forces from Germany, Italy and the UK into the other nations bordering Russia or Ukraine.

The military has already announced new bases planned for Europe. Not the type you have now with families stationed for long periods of time but bases built and maintained by the home country with American troops doing temporary deployments on a rotational basis.

 

[ttwtt78640]

The military has already announced new bases planned for Europe. Not the type you have now with families stationed for long periods of time but bases built and maintained by the home country with American troops doing temporary deployments on a rotational basis.

OK, that would (potentially - since new bases are in addition to existing bases) save some money, but also means that (foreign) troops would spend more time separated from their families during peacetime deployments. That may not be a great idea while depending on a 100% volunteer force.

 

[WillyPete]

NATO will deploy a permanent full-scale military force on its border with Russia to combat a future invasion, alliance's chief says

Even though the Russian military has demonstrated its unprofessionalism, one must still be prepared for the Kremlin's tendency to make bad choices.

NATO chief: Alliance transforming to reflect ‘long-term consequences’ of Russian invasion

I think that's a good angle to take, since preventing exactly that is part of Putin's motivation with the invasion.

Now he doesn't get his wish, even if he takes all of Ukraine.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Looks like Putin got the exact opposite of what wanted. Thanks to his own action he will get a larger, stronger NATO camped right on his doorstep.I hope Findland and Sweden join this summer.

That may be what China wants - more US (and NATO) defense spending dedicated to defending Europe.

 

[Callen]

That may be what China wants - more US (and NATO) defense spending dedicated to defending Europe.

Could be given that China's economy is largely dependent on a peaceful, cohesive Europe. However, I am quite certain the US would not shrink it's SE Pacific presence.

 

[FreedomFromAll]

OK, that would (potentially - since new bases are in addition to existing bases) save some money, but also means that (foreign) troops would spend more time separated from their families during peacetime deployments. That may not be a great idea while depending on a 100% volunteer force.

As if they have not been doing that for the last 20 years already.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Could be given that China's economy is largely dependent on a peaceful, cohesive Europe. However, I am quite certain the US would not shrink it's SE Pacific presence.

The DoD “budget” is unlikely to keep pace with inflation, so I don‘t see a way to increase US defense spending dedicate to Europe without reducing that (in real dollar terms) allocated to other areas.

 

[FreedomFromAll]

NATO will deploy a permanent full-scale military force on its border with Russia to combat a future invasion, alliance's chief says

Even though the Russian military has demonstrated its unprofessionalism, one must still be prepared for the Kremlin's tendency to make bad choices.

NATO chief: Alliance transforming to reflect ‘long-term consequences’ of Russian invasion

This is actually worrisome news and shows that the threat is larger than just Ukraine. Not that we did not know that already but to see such dramatic actions is alarming.

 

[PoS]

The best way to thwart a future Russian invasion is to send all weapons to Ukraine and let them beat the Russians right now.

 

[ttwtt78640]

As if they have not been doing that for the last 20 years already.

Nope.

There were around 1.3 million total active-duty U.S. military personnel in 2016. Of these, 193,442 – or 15% – were deployed overseas. That’s the smallest number and share of active-duty members overseas since at least 1957, the earliest year with comparable data, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of information from the Defense Manpower Data Center, a statistical arm of the Department of Defense.

U.S. active-duty military presence overseas is at its smallest in decades

The number of active-duty U.S. military troops stationed overseas has dipped below 200,000 for the first time in at least 60 years.

www.pewresearch.org

 

[JANFU]

That would not have prevented Putin from invading Ukraine, but will likely be very expensive. I doubt that the US will (significantly) relocate it’s forces from Germany, Italy and the UK into the other nations bordering Russia or Ukraine.

NATO will increase the numbers of troops/kit in The Baltic's. My opinion, based on aftermath of Ukraine war, and strategic assessments, from trading space, to destroying Russian assets before they have a chance to close the gap to Kalinigrad.

 

[Callen]

The DoD “budget” is unlikely to keep pace with inflation, so I don‘t see a way to increase US defense spending dedicate to Europe without reducing that (in real dollar terms) allocated to other areas.

There is a ton of money in that budget even given inflation. There are thousands of soldiers stationed at home especially with the end to Adghanistan. If the host nation is paying for the barracks etc then the bulk of the money is salary. Pay them to sit at home or pay them to sit elsewhere. Given the size of the American defense budget any additional cost will get lost in the rounding.

 

[FreedomFromAll]

Nope.

U.S. active-duty military presence overseas is at its smallest in decades

The number of active-duty U.S. military troops stationed overseas has dipped below 200,000 for the first time in at least 60 years.

www.pewresearch.org

Yet youtube is full of videos of military personnel surprising families while on leave. Stories of fathers that have never seen their baby before you know because of deployment. I think that you forgot about a couple of wars...

"Since the beginning of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001, over 1.9 million US military personnel have been deployed in 3 million tours of duty lasting more than 30 days as part of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) or Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK220068/#:~:text=Since the beginning of the,OIF) (Table 2.1).

 

[ttwtt78640]

Yet youtube is full of videos of military personnel surprising families while on leave. Stories of fathers that have never seen their baby before you know because of deployment. I think that you forgot about a couple of wars...

"Since the beginning of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001, over 1.9 million US military personnel have been deployed in 3 million tours of duty lasting more than 30 days as part of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) or Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK220068/#:~:text=Since the beginning of the,OIF) (Table 2.1).

That (bolded above) is addressing cumulative deployments (over a 20 year period) - not the number deployed at any one time.

 

[FreedomFromAll]

That (bolded above) is addressing cumulative deployments (over a 20 year period) - not the number deployed at any one time.

That is what I said, do you understand now? The troops in the border nations will be rotated in the same manner. I never claimed at the same time, that is your argument, not mine. Mine simply asserted that they have already been dealing with such deployments for over 20 years. You assumed wrong that we would build and keep permanent personnel. So you were the only one making that argument the rest of us who were not ignorant of the facts never assumed what you asserted, so no one was taking that strawman.

 

[SkyChief]

This buildup of NATO forces along Russia's border is a profoundly stupid (and dangerous) move.

WW III just got a LOT closer.

What reckless fools these NATO leaders are.

The U.S. should leave NATO immediately - before the shit hits the fan.

 

[Juin]

Looks like Putin got the exact opposite of what wanted. Thanks to his own action he will get a larger, stronger NATO camped right on his doorstep.I hope Findland and Sweden join this summer.

Which doorstep? Nato was already camped on Russia's doorsteps at Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania. The question from the Russian perspective was whether Nato was gonna camp in Georgia and Ukrainia in addition

 

[ttwtt78640]

That is what I said, do you understand now? The troops in the border nations will be rotated in the same manner. I never claimed at the same time, that is your argument, not mine. Mine simply asserted that they have already been dealing with such deployments for over 20 years. You assumed wrong that we would build and keep permanent personnel. So you were the only one making that argument the rest of us who were not ignorant of the facts never assumed what you asserted, so no one was taking that strawman.

OK, but how does temporarily (vs. permanently) deploying more troops to eastern Europe (or anywhere else overseas) not result in an increase of troops deployed?

 

[FreedomFromAll]

OK, but how does temporarily (vs. permanently) deploying more troops to eastern Europe (or anywhere else overseas) not result in an increase of troops deployed?

Do you disagree that our troops and their families went through decades of hardships? Or are you here to just win a silly argument about numbers? I mean one could do the math I suppose but does it mean that the outcome is what you predicted?

Every career active-duty military person that I have personally known wanted to be deployed since it meant faster climbing through ranks. Not so much in the National Gaurd though. But then I have some fried the reenlisted to active duty when their tour ended whether in the guard or regular military. Right now they are really wanting to be deployed to Europe to be closer to the shit. So I really do not know what you are going on about.

 

[FreedomFromAll]

This buildup of NATO forces along Russia's border is a profoundly stupid (and dangerous) move.

WW III just got a LOT closer.

What reckless fools these NATO leaders are.

The U.S. should leave NATO immediately - before the shit hits the fan.

Come on Putin do not be so scared of NATO and the US.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Do you disagree that our troops and their families went through decades of hardships? Or are you here to just win a silly argument about numbers? I mean one could do the math I suppose but does it mean that the outcome is what you predicted?

Every career active-duty military person that I have personally known wanted to be deployed since it meant faster climbing through ranks. Not so much in the National Gaurd though. But then I have some fried the reenlisted to active duty when their tour ended whether in the guard or regular military. Right now they are really wanting to be deployed to Europe to be closer to the shit. So I really do not know what you are going on about.

You brought up the numbers, I simply responded with facts.