- Joined
- Dec 2, 2012
- Messages
- 7,362
- Reaction score
- 1,342
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
A government who clearly only had themselves to blame. Even Yanukovych's own cabinet abandoned him at the end due to his corruption.
That will be really reassuring for its allies given the current circumstances and the major draw down of US forces
I said they were the lowest military personnel numbers in over 100 years. The British army of the Rhine was disbanded just last year after maintaining a permanent garrison in Germany since WW2
Far easier for the Russians to do with the same sort of modernized forces coupled their 850,000 men under arms. The US currently has only 28,000 personnel currently stationed in Europe
The Russians are talking up the NATO threat simply as an excuse to try and re constitute the old USSR. If we ignore this we only have ourselves to blame for what happens next given some of Putins threatening public statements and actions
Still doesn't matter. If you call for the rule of law, you have to accept the whole rule of law and the current Government in Ukraine is illegal by Ukrainian law. But pay no mind to those facts.
Outside of the US, US largest deployments are in (by size) South Korea, Germany, Japan, Kuwait, Italy, UK, and Spain.
And you would be wrong. British Army of the Rhine was disbanded years ago (in 1994), the British created the British Forces of Germany in 1994 which was about half in size. What you keep ignoring is the West is going through a model change (US is doing it as well). British Government/Military has Army 2020 plan (PDF) and is taking shape similar to the US's idea of BCTs (Brigade Combat Teams).
It's actually harder for Russia. Russia has conscription in which only 1 year of service is required. So they rotate through a portion of military forces in the form of yearly conscription. As seen in Ukraine conscription is not the most effective fighting force. So while Russia modernizes it's forces (similar to the UK/US model) they are limited in professional career soldiers as of right now. Those in the Russian military with careers are officers and officers don't create a good fighting force. Rather it's the NCOs that do. Russia doesn't have a solid career NCO core. So as part of this modernization the Russians created a professional NCO corp and it's only a few years old and still far from being complete.
Last I check NATO is on Russia's border.
Must be that new Math, don't ya' know. Poroshenko is in with 18% of eligible voters of Ukraine. Pretty simple.
This is a well done posting.
Euromaidan overthrew a democratically elected Government.
Memorandums aren't treaties, it's a note of record (political agreement), and that is all. EU even defines a political agreement expressed in principle, not as binding until vote. US could have pushed for a treaty and didn't because it wouldn't have passed the US Senate and US never gives explicit help (military) to anybody outside of NATO. That's what the word assurances are used and not guarantee.
In 100 years? Pretty sure WW2 was less then 100 years ago.
Cause the mechanism in which the UK's military is used? Western militaries have moved more and more away from "traditional" combat to asymmetric warfare and dynamic warfare where smaller is better in theory. For example.. today with the use of an Air Force that didn't really exist in WW2, the outcome of a battle can be decided with a squad size force. A battalion can do what it would take a division to do in WW2 with a few Apaches.
Welcome to modernized forces.
Because Russia is going through a modernization process? From 1991-1997 Russian spending fell by 8 fold and it's equipment became outdated and broken down. It's launched two programs to reequip it's military and modernize it. The programs started in 2007 and 2011 and will end in 2020. New tank such Armata and increase use of BMD-4 as part of that. Russia is reducing the size of it's personal, right now it's down to 850,000 in all branches.
This is a well done posting.
It has the basic facts along with the truth in detail and that is that.
:bravo:
Your "rebuttal" based on your opinionated facts are just rubbish.Where given I comprehensively rebutted each assertion made here ?
Instead of gleefully indulging the myths about NATO perhaps you should check out the facts instead. Though I know of course that you won't
http://www.nato.int/cps/eu/natohq/topics_111767.htm
Your "rebuttal" based on your opinionated facts are just rubbish.
That link is no more credible then are your petty denials of the obvious.
And we know that the USA including its puppet NATO have always lied to us (lied to the American public and to the entire world) so it would be up to the USA to give some kind of realistic proof as the only "facts" for us to believe. It takes real actions and NOT pompous words.
I bet you cheered on the bullies at school too didn't you ? :roll:The Republic of Russian is taking the real actions and their actions are the facts which speak the loudest, while you and the USA are just preaching denials and empty words.
The USA does not participate in the Ukrainian peace talks - why? the actions speak louder then any words, as it is the USA who does not want the peace because we are the instigators of the hostilities.
In this particular case then it is not so much of lies as it is the failure to tell the truth.Please highlight the lies contained in the linked info
Yes of course - how dare I mention a peace process!And a partridge in a pear tree ..... You sir are a complete and utter waste of my time :roll:
In this particular case then it is not so much of lies as it is the failure to tell the truth.
It is mostly lies by omission, and lies by half-truths, and lies by subversion.
Yes of course - how dare I mention a peace process!
The US has no interests in peace. It pays it lip service, and some are gullible enough to believe the cheap talk. Actions speak louder than words.
The USA does not participate in the Ukrainian peace talks - why? the actions speak louder then any words, as it is the USA who does not want the peace because we are the instigators of the hostilities.
Right now it seems that Russia is the one that has no interest in peace.
We illegally annexed Crimea and invaded Eastern Ukraine? I did not know that!
Hot ****! Ya learn something new everyday!
Except that Russia participated in the peace talks,Right now it seems that Russia is the one that has no interest in peace.
Except that Russia participated in the peace talks,
and Russia made agreements to help bring peace to the area,
while the USA refused to participate in any such talk of peace.
You refer to your own rant as the facts, and it is not.Refused ?
The US not being asked to mediate nor actually being invoved in the conflict in any way might have had more to do with it which explains why the likes of China and India weren't involved in them either. Russia's participation is predicated upon creating pauses in the conflict that will allow her to fully rearm her proxies for the next round of fighting
Don't let the facts get in the way of another good old anti US rant though :lol:
No problems with that but you have been talking as if Putin HAD the right to do what he did.
Not really Scandinavia was never part of the Roman Empire and France/Spain/Great Britain weren't part of the Holy Roman Empire (totally different entity).
Are you nuts?
How would Ukraine have not honored it? Would they have stopped Russia militarily? Obviously that is out. Economically? Yeah they have the economic power to bring Russia down :roll:
So you are now saying that since it is possibly one side may not honor its obligations decades into the future it is OK to invade and annex part of that country?
Sorry your fist paragraph in this post was OK then you went into crazy land.
And Russia is on NATO's ..... unfortunately. Given whats happening in Ukraine you can understand now why many Eastern European states were so keen to join. A re emergent and vengeful Russia was what they feared and their fears were clearly warranted
NATO CHOSE to expand to Russian border.
You refer to your own rant as the facts, and it is not.
If the USA is not involved in the Ukrainian conflict then I would like to see the USA pull out of it and shut their damned lies too, but no.
One of many pieces of evidence is here at # 369 =
Or see here = John J. Mearsheimer | How the West Caused the Ukraine Crisis | Foreign Affairs
Published by the COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
NATO CHOSE to expand to Russian border.
No, I said I understood why.
So you are telling me.. Ukraine gets EU membership, NATO membership and you think they would have honored the deal?
Once you get membership you are golden and can tell Russia to bugger off.
No those countries asked to join NATO due clearly very legitimate security concerns. The alliance was not imposed upon them. Theres a difference
Why wouldn't they given they already had for nearly two decades and were making good money out of it ?
NATO CHOSE to expand to Russian border.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?