War with Russia next?
 

What the hell is Anders Fogh Rasmussen doing joining in with the war of words over Ukraine? I have never felt very happy with his political propaganda, as Secretary General of NATO he is NOT in political control!:=

OAP

No more comments from NATO?:oh:

OAP

Just two words Stay Out!

Probably something to do with the agreements we all signed up to.

I don't think the UK Plc would want to get involved, after all, we are already struggling with the Polish, Rumanian, Slovakian, Lithuania, Croatian, Czech, immigrants, where would we put several million Russian prisoners of war? :O

As said I think keeping out of it would be prudent, World War 2 more or less resulted from countries annexing others.

NATO, first and foremost, is a political organisation, with a Military wing. It's easy for us military types to get it the other way around.

Putin doesn't want a war, he's only doing what he is because he knows we in the west like the good life, and won't want to risk a real fight, another words where spineless.

He will get what he wants there, then in several years another, all the time we will just tuck our tail between our legs.

He like every other bully is a coward, when some one who can fight back stands up to him,he will back down. Its all well and good prancing around with your fancy hardware and high standards, but sooner or later you need to be prepared to get your hands dirty and the potential of a great loss.

if you don't you will have it forced on you one way or another.

The West is all mouth and no trousers.

There's nothing the West can do, or will do, and Putin knows it.

He'll take Crimea in the next couple of months, preferably via a puppet Government (which is what he tried with Yanakovich and the whole of Ukraine anyway)

Troops will be used, but no significant fighting will occur.

"NATO, first and foremost, is a political organisation, with a Military wing. It's easy for us military types to get it the other way around."


I recall a time when it was a defensive alliance.

It is interesting to hear the politicians weasling their words over this issue as we enter our year of commemorations for the start of WWI. After all, one of the reasons we entered was to guarantee Belgian neutrality, or WW2, Polish neutrality. The EU, perhaps in its eagerness to dismantle the Soviet Union, guaranteed Ukrainian 'independence' in 1994. Now, call me a cynic, or is it just because the chickens are coming home to roost, they are trying to say "oh, well, umm, of course, that wasn't legally binding or a real promise..."

Now, I have absolutely no interest in diving into another stupid 'intervention' or war with another country but isn't this yet another example of politicians promising the earth without fully appreciating the implications of what they are saying? And of politicians refusing to stand up and be counted when the time comes...

Don't worry, we couldn't afford to have one.

I reckon in the future, wars will be decided by who runs out of money first.

Usually have been !

Why not just partition the country and get on with it. It is not worth going to war over it.

Well if that's the plan, just as well Top Gear already did the economical vehicle programme.

So, does anyone think Anders Fogh Rasmussen could declare war on Russia on behalf of all NATO and we would have to be in breach of our obligations not to comply?:oh:

OAP

No, Ukraine is not a member of NATO!

Therefore, nothing to do with us. Of course, the Politicians are probably bricking it now. What happened to the Peace Dividend? Now we've cut our forces and have no money to re-arm and a massive welfare state to look after; not to mention Foreign Aid etc etc.

It seems the Russians can now afford to mount a Cold War II..

Although the The Budapest Memorandum is binding (by law), there is no mechanism to enforce it? This is the dilemma the West is facing - you have to sense this situation has the potential to trigger that 3am phone call?

No, NATO Sec Gen cannot declare war, per se. It has to be by consensus of the North Atlantic Council - ie PERMREPS from the 28 nations. That's not the same as unanimous, by the way. Member states can agree not to 'break silence' and then not participate in the action - as Germany did with the Libya conflict.

If my state is in Central or Eastern Europe, I would be very, very worried about Russian intentions. At what point is Putin stopped? I know that the Baltic States have urged Art IV measures (urgent consultations) of the NAC but in reality a lead nation would have to take over the military planning and execution given the rapidity of events, as NATO has publically declared for some time that it does not have conventional war plans relating to Russia and it would take time to develop plans, produce and populate a CJSOR and then deploy. The NRF, unfortunately, is not really configured for what would be a conventional force-on-force conflict.

I'm sure Mr Putin would point out that it's not Russia expanding but the west getting closer to his front door

I'm not surprised he's worried - especially when a good piece of his navy is down there.......

Russia has always wanted a buffer and, as you say, "we" are getting closer.................And it is not always just "territory", but "spheres of influence"