NATO Aims to Be 'More Responsive' in Wake of Russian Aggression

nbcnews.com ^ | December 14, 2014 | Andy Eckardt

[Tailgunner Joe]

On Monday, 28 Russian military planes including TU-95 and TU-22 strategic bombers were intercepted over the Baltic Sea near Latvia's border. On Tuesday, a Russian plane violated Estonia's airspace. Poland's defense minister later accused Putin of launching "unprecedented activity" around the Baltic Sea.

Gen. Philip Breedlove, NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe, said the recent Russian flights were "of a different nature than we've seen in a while." The warplanes were intercepted by NATO in international airspace.

"For the past 19 years, we have been trying to treat Russia as a partner, trying to bring the nations of Europe back together and now what we see is a very different kind of scenario," Breedlove told NBC News.

[Tailgunner Joe]

28th Infantry Division soldiers part of historic NATO exercise - December 14, 2014 - The two-week exercise tested how well a fully operational NATO land forces command could respond to an international crisis, using a fictitious invasion scenario of NATO member Estonia, which borders Russia at NATO’s northeastern corner.

The exercise involved roughly 3,700 soldiers in Turkey, Greece and seven other European locations. The exercise, which included computer-based and traditional training events, included everything from missile strikes to cyber attacks. Lessons learned from Trident Lance will be applied as NATO LANDCOM stands up its future rapid-reaction force.

[arthurus]

Russia could walk over the Baltic states pretty quickly and surely Putin thinks pretty easily. It would be no harder than Stalin taking Finland.

[Bettyprob]

NATO chirping about other countries’ “aggression” is a laugh. They’ve been responsible for most invasions and bombings in the 21st century. It wasn’t Russia that bombed Libya, after all.

[elhombrelibre]

Wow, you do realize Stalin didn't have an easy time with Finland? In fact, that was part of what led to Hitler's miscalculations about Stalin's Russia.

The Baltic States are preparing to defend themselves. They may have to because Putin won't leave them in peace.

Meanwhile, not all of Putin's allies are with him anymore.

http://www.interpretermag.com/russia-may-lose-belarus/

[dfwgator]

NATO, which has a mole in their midst, in the form of Turkey.

[dfwgator]

Lukashenko and Putin have never gotten along. Luka basically wants Putin’s job, and if Putin does fall, I expect Luka to make his move to try to rule a reunited Russia and Belarus.

[VanDeKoik]

“It would be no harder than Stalin taking Finland.”

Uh...

[ctdonath2]

Putin probably just can’t believe how weak Russia’s one time dominating adversary has become.

[dfwgator]

Russia is tough to beat in a defensive war.

But when they go on the offensive, they only win by sacrificing a lot of men.

[ansel12]

“Consider the situation today. East Germany no longer exists, while Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and every one of Russia’s other erstwhile Warsaw Pact partners are now members of NATO. So are Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which in 1989 were parts of the Soviet Union itself. In 1989, the Red Army had almost a half-million troops and 27 maneuver divisions (plus enormous quantities of artillery and other units) on the territory of its three main allies. Today, it has a total of seven divisions in its entire Western Military District, all of which are based on its own territory. Indeed, the entire Russian army today boasts about 25 divisions, fewer than it had forward deployed in its Eastern European allies during the waning days of the Cold War.

Today, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Germany alone field more divisions than Russia has in its Western Military District. These countries are backstopped by the rest of NATO, including, of course, the United States. And this raw count doesn’t take into account the general deterioration of Russian forces since 1991, a quarter-century that saw little equipment modernization. By the late 1980s, NATO already enjoyed a significant qualitative advantage over the Warsaw Pact, and that edge has only increased since then.”

[nomad]

Good point. Oligarchs criticizing oligarchs, what a joke.

[ansel12]

Putin probably just can’t believe how weak Russia’s one time dominating adversary has become.

Huh? Who was the dominating adversary who became so weak today that Putin thinks what? That he is the old Soviet Union powerful and NATO/U.S. is weak?

[jttpwalsh]

Russia could walk over the Baltic states pretty quickly and surely Putin thinks pretty easily. It would be no harder than Stalin taking Finland.

---

Respectfully, Finland was not taken by Stalin; further, Putin failed to take most of neighboring Georgia as recently as 2008. While they are great defenders of the Motherland, Russians do not project power very well. Without U.S. assistance in war materiel, they wouldn’t have overrun Eastern Europe in WWII. Thank you.

[dfwgator]

Without U.S. assistance in war materiel, they wouldn’t have overrun Eastern Europe in WWII. Thank you.

Exactly. What they do have is an extraordinary lack of belief in the sanctity of human life that they would throw enough bodies at the enemy to ultimately overcome the enemy, like ants overcoming an elephant, as one German General put it.

[ansel12]

Today they truly lack the ability to project power.

They lack the military structure and units of the Cold War that were built for large scale invasions, and their Army, which is largely poorly trained and equipped 1 year draftees, may be as small as 240,000 men.

They don’t have the force structure to supply an invasion, in manpower, or supplies, fuel, or air support, or anything.

In fact, their military would be wiped out and Russia would be left for the vultures internally, and externally to pick it apart, no Russian leader can afford to lose their entire Navy, Air Force, and Army against NATO/US.

[jttpwalsh]

Thanks to both, for the reply, I agree with you, on all points.

[realcleanguy]

Dear Russia,

Please listen to us. We will send a stern letter if you don’t listen to us.

Thank you in advance,
NATO

[arthurus]

Yes. I know. Finland was not a walk in the park. It was more like a flail in the snow. The Soviets “won” their war and took some real estate but their desire for the rest of Finland was muted. Sort of like the Chinese in Vietnam in 1979.

[arthurus]

“Backstopped by the United States.” Right now that doesn’t mean a helluva lot.

[ansel12]

It will be a heck of a letter, one that he will desperately avoid, in spite of his North Korean like blustering.

"According to the International Institute of Strategic Studies’ "Military Balance" publication — a widely-used and well-respected unclassified compendium of information about the world’s armed forces — in 1989, just before the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the Soviet Union deployed a total of 64 divisions in what was then known as its “Western Theater of Military Operations.” These are the Russian forces that would have been hurled at NATO in an attack on Western Europe. They would have been reinforced by another 700,000 troops from the USSR’s three frontline Warsaw Pact allies, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, and Poland. In all, more than 100 divisions would have been available for a drive into West Germany and beyond. The six countries committed to defending NATO’s front lines — West Germany, the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Belgium and the Netherlands — meanwhile deployed only 21 or so divisions in Germany. While NATO divisions were generally somewhat larger than their Warsaw Pact counterparts and reinforcement would have been forthcoming from the United States, the disparity along the East-West frontier was nonetheless huge.

Consider the situation today. East Germany no longer exists, while Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and every one of Russia’s other erstwhile Warsaw Pact partners are now members of NATO. So are Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, which in 1989 were parts of the Soviet Union itself."