Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ansel12

“Russia is no match for NATO.”

Actually, they are. Without a major U.S. Army presence...NATO is weak. Without a future U.S. Army/military presence....NATO will become seriously outgunned by a resurgent “USSR.” Russia has been rebuilding their military for years, and making real progress.


28 posted on 02/15/2015 6:55:25 PM PST by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: Sola Veritas

Actually they are not, and why remove the United States from NATO to try and make the point?

Russia’s rebuilding has helped them in a few elite units that suffice for things like invading Ukraine, but their main military is incredibly weak.

The Navy is weak, the air is weak, and the Army still depends mostly on poorly trained, poorly equipped, 1 year draftees, and the structure and equipment is not geared for attack on a massive scale and sustained attack with long supply lines.

Some think that the Army may actually be more like 250,000 men, this is not the massive 6.4 million pointed spear of the old 1980s Russian military, that was designed around 7 Airborne divisions, great numbers of Airmobile and bridge building units and the swift overrunning of Europe.

“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. 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.”


34 posted on 02/15/2015 7:06:53 PM PST by ansel12 (Palin--Mr President, the only thing that stops a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Sola Veritas

The crash in oil prices should slow them up a bit but long term I’m not so sure.Look for them to start something like taking oilfields wherever they can.


134 posted on 02/15/2015 9:26:22 PM PST by HANG THE EXPENSE (Life's tough.It's tougher when you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Sola Veritas

See:

Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The original Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) was negotiated and concluded during the last years of the Cold War and established comprehensive limits on key categories of conventional military equipment in Europe (from the Atlantic to the Urals) and mandated the destruction of excess weaponry. The treaty proposed equal limits for the two “groups of states-parties”, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Warsaw Pact.

[....]

Suspension by Russia

After Russia was not willing to support the US missile defense plans in Europe, Putin warned a “moratorium” on the treaty in his April 26, 2007 address. Then he raised most of his points for rewriting the treaty during the Extraordinary Conference of States Parties to the Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe, held in Vienna on June 11–15 at Russia’s initiative.[13] As his requests were not met during this conference, Putin issued a decree intended to suspend the observance of its treaty obligations on July 14, 2007, effective 150 days later, stating that it was the result of “extraordinary circumstances (...) which affect the security of the Russian Federation and require immediate measures,” and notified NATO and its members.[14][15] The suspension applies to the original CFE treaty, as well as to the follow-up agreements.[13]


177 posted on 02/16/2015 6:37:10 AM PST by WhiskeyX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson