Posted on 05/11/2022 9:44:22 AM PDT by MercyFlush
Reports are surfacing of military equipment of the United States and other NATO countries on the Russia-Finland border. U.S. and NATO armored vehicles were spotted on the border, along with Finnish tanks and armored personnel vehicles, according to a translation of a Shraibikus News report. There have been reports of military exercises in Finland, but Russian intelligence reportedly suspects the military buildup will remain until Finland joins NATO. The report also indicates Finnish authorities are anticipating Finland joining NATO within a few months. Russian analysts consider the military presence on the Russia-Finland border to be a threat, particularly as NATO allies are supplying lethal aid to Ukraine amid the Russian invasion. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko told RIANovosti that Russia is watching the situation and will consider a potential response. "It is clear that from the point of view of security we will not remain indifferent," Grushko said. "Our military will consider all the necessary measures that may be required to ensure the legitimate interests of defense." While the forces conducting the exercises are likely doing so to defend Finland against an invasion by Russia, Grushko added it represents a dangerous escalation that makes neither Finland nor NATO more safe. "This will not strengthen the security of either Finland or NATO itself," Grushko told RIA Novosti.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Im glad I put it what seem to be such affecting terms, I dont often manage that!
Anyway, point is the utter lack of positive Public Relations efforts on the part of this Russian government, to win friends and influence people. It seems it is incapable of any gracious, generous, or noble expressions or acts. Its default is nearly always some sort of threat, veiled or open. No smiles, only growls.
It could have done a very great deal over the last 20 years, it had the capacity and opportunity to have put itself in a positive light - without going “globohomo”, such as, as I mentioned, providing resettlement for persecuted Christian communities in the Middle East or Pakistan, a decidedly non-globohomo gesture. But it didnt.
“Russia has captured British POWs and our State Dept has taken credit for killing Russian generals and sinking ships. That enough for start?”
British civilians who went to Ukraine to join the fight. Non-NATO.
As for our DOS and the Russian generals, do you have a source for the DOS saying the US is taking credit for those deaths?
You never had an actual, non sexual friend?
You have led a very sad life.
Its not a country club, it is a lecture forum, mostly.
They host public events, mainly lectures on public affairs and other intellectual topics.
It is quite famous, and a talk there has often been the first airing of a new idea. Lately it has seemingly succumbed to intellectual rot, but in its day it was great.
God-bless you my friend for the humor!
We were closer in ‘85 or so when we [Reagan] implemented neutron bombs in Germany.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_bomb
It helped break the back of soviet aggression.
Having bases is the same as INVADING other countries?
Bullshiite.
We should implement my emBASEee Strategee... from my home page
I have been advocating for several years a policy I call ‘embaseees’. Embassy + AirBase —> EmBASEeees. We go into a terrorist country, clear out their taliban equivalent, then withdraw to very large Embassies, perhaps 3 of them. Have them big enough to encompass a military airbase where we can use it for decades on end to conduct anti-terrorism operations. As long as the ‘host’ country aint killing Americans then we let them have self-sovereignty. Kind of like how we operated in the Phillipines for decades. We could even have an intermediate zone that we patrol but it would be autonomous. Let them have their taste of freedom. A referendum every 10 years to see how large the boundaries of the intermediate autonomous zone should be.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4043681/posts
___________________________________________________________________
2014. Do you mean pre Crimea takeover borders, or post Putin Crimea borders by that date?
I frame it differently: It's a Russia problem.
The world's Russia problem.
And the Ukrainians are solving it for us.
E.g.: Every time the Russians aim a rocket at a Ukrainian residential area, school, or orphanage, and possibly suffer a misfire - there's one less rocket the Russians have in their arsenal.
Every Russian tank that gets bogged down in the rasputitsa and has to be abandoned - that's one less Russian tank that we, the Free World, have to worry about.
The Russians are currently undergoing the biggest unilateral disarmament program since WW II. Their armies are being eviscerated. Their tank divisions are being emasculated. Their stockpiles of high-tech weaponry are being depleted. Their capital ships are being sunk. Their soldiers and sailors are being demoralized. The Russian leadership is being humiliated on the world stage.
The aid we're giving the Ukrainians to keep that process of disarmament and demilitarization going is money well spent. It is costing us chump change. And it would be madness for us to interrupt that process prematurely.
Do you dispute that?
Regards,
I do not understand your question. 1994 borders are signed by Ukraine, US, Russia, United Kingdom, and Ireland.
And the Ukrainians are solving it for us....
Their armies are being eviscerated. Their tank divisions are being emasculated. Their stockpiles of high-tech weaponry are being depleted. Their capital ships are being sunk. Their soldiers and sailors are being demoralized. The Russian leadership is being humiliated on the world stage. The aid we’re giving the Ukrainians to keep that process of disarmament and demilitarization going is money well spent. It is costing us chump change. And it would be madness for us to interrupt that process prematurely.
***I really hate to agree with Biden but... money well spent.
toad: “Well, we do have 750 military bases across 80 nations.”
06: Because they want us there. We are not there as aggressors or conquerors. If the don’t want us there, we leave (as we did in the Philippines several years ago). And we have a permanent lease for Guantanamo, and it can only be broken if both the US and Cuba agree.
***Yup. My emBASEee Strategee. from my home page
I have been advocating for several years a policy I call ‘embaseees’. Embassy + AirBase —> EmBASEeees. We go into a terrorist country, clear out their taliban equivalent, then withdraw to very large Embassies, perhaps 3 of them. Have them big enough to encompass a military airbase where we can use it for decades on end to conduct anti-terrorism operations. As long as the ‘host’ country aint killing Americans then we let them have self-sovereignty. Kind of like how we operated in the Phillipines for decades. We could even have an intermediate zone that we patrol but it would be autonomous. Let them have their taste of freedom. A referendum every 10 years to see how large the boundaries of the intermediate autonomous zone should be.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4043681/posts
___________________________________________________________________
“...the Biden folks will reconsider their position once the Ukrainians go past the obambam borders of 2014”
Ukraine had one set of borders at the beginning of 2014, and a different set of borders at the end of 2014. I was trying to clarify if you meant the original borders, or the ones revised by Putin that year. In other words are you saying that Biden will not be willing to spend that money to get the Russians out of Crimea?
Ukraine had one set of borders at the beginning of 2014,
***They had an IMPOSED set of borders by an INVADER in 2014.
and a different set of borders at the end of 2014.
***Do ya see the difference?
I was trying to clarify if you meant the original borders,
***those 1994 AGREED borders?
or the ones revised by Putin that year.
***20 years from now after those borders are reinvoked, people will ask who Putin was.
In other words are you saying
***why do you ask what I’m saying when I said what I said?
that Biden will not be willing
***Did I talk about Biden willingness to spend? Nope. Did I talk about Biden’s obvious obsequious willingness to follow obambam’s willingness to bend the knee towards anyone who would challenge AmericaFirstNess? Nope, but I sure am willing to talk about that, and how it led to this current weakness-projection problem in our foreign policy.
to spend that money to get the Russians out of Crimea?
***Wait, are you DEFENDING the projection-of-weakness policy of obambam-then-obiden?
Yes. Who’s “us?” The US is ponying the $40B. It’s chump change to the folks spending US taxpayer money, I guess, but not to me.
If Russia is the world’s problem, it’d be a refreshing change if the rest of the world took the lead in solving it. I don’t see any states stepping up. Not without committing the US front and center, too.
The US alone spent trillions further into debt in a fruitless effort to stop Covid. And we were in staggering debt before that for other reasons. I don’t trust our leadership to spend $40B in “chump change” (that we don’t really have) to arm anyone without graft, mismanagement, and waste.
Seriously: That's your beef?
Yeah, in a perfect world, scores of other countries would join us in ponying up the dough to fund Ukraine's dismantling of the Russian War Machine.
I don't quite know how to characterize your faulty argument: Is it the "Tu Quoque" Fallacy, or the "Demand for Perfection" Fallacy?
Yeah: Let's sit here idly, with hands folded in our laps, because not every d*mn govt. on the d*mn planet is chipping in to support the Ukrainians! /sarcasm
Regards,
Finland will formally announce their application today, and Sweden within days. Both the US and UK have given assurances that they will defend them if Russia attacks while their applications are being processed.
ponying up the dough to fund Ukraine’s dismantling of the Russian War Machine.
***well said. This money is spent in advance of Americans getting killed doing the same thing 10 years later on some other shore. Cheap Sudetenland 1938 lessons well applied.
I don’t quite know how to characterize your faulty argument: Is it the “Tu Quoque” Fallacy, or the “Demand for Perfection” Fallacy?
***Don’t forget the “a priori” fallacy: We shouldn’t get involved in foreign entanglements therefore we shouldn’t be involved in this one. [regardless of the obvious nuclear nonproliferation consequences]
You are responding to something different than what was said...
Glee: A lot will depend on how this $40 billion is designed to be spent.
Kevmo: ***I perceive it is designed to be spent until there is some kind of backlash. That means the Biden folks will reconsider their position once the Ukrainians go past the obambam borders of 2014 towards the borders of 1994.
No, I’m saying the US has taken the lead, spent the money, and spilt the blood to the tune of $30+ trillion in the red for thirty years. No minds were changed in Afghanistan or Iraq. The War on Covid wrecked the US economy and that was largely self-inflicted with the lockdowns. If we were doing it right, we wouldn’t be in the fiscal and societal straits we’re in. I can’t imagine getting involved in another war (even a proxy one) when I think there are more pressing issues at home.
I don’t trust our leadership to suddenly get on the ball and do things right. Especially overseas. Obama wasn’t kidding when he said “Biden will find a way to eff things up.” It’ll be more trouble than it’s worth, IMO.
But if Europe wants to broker a peace between Russia and Ukraine, I’m all for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.