UK to Send Five Ships to Baltic as Part of Nato Buildup Against Russia

Along with the Type-45 destroyer , Type 23 Frigate – HMS Iron Duke and three mine sweepers we will also be sending a sizeable contingent of British troops as part of the 6,000 NATO force to be stationed in Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

The move has been called provocative by some but NATO say they are bolstering their presence in the region as a response to Russian action in Ukraine and to support Russia's neighbors who fear the same fate could befall them.

Sounds like the drums of war to me.

Fallon said: “Increasing our Nato deployments sends a strong message to our enemies that we are ready to respond to any threat and defend our allies. 2016 will see a particular focus on the Baltic region.”

So Russia is our enemy now ?

Nato has an agreement with Russia not to deploy permanent troops along its border but it is getting around this by having troops training in eastern Europe on a rotational basis, which is almost the same as having them based there permanently.

The US ambassador to Nato, Douglas Lute, described the new American posture of prepositioning heavy equipment in western Europe as “modern deterrence” or “21st century deterrence”, a flexible, rapid-reaction force in contrast with the heavy, fixed force that existed during the cold war.
www.theguardian.com...

Given the choice of a cold war with Russia or a hot war I prefer the cold , far less radiation floating around.

Very old saying " Wise nations fight on others soil" Since 1066, most UK wars have been abroad, the UK has been invaded since 1066, but, obviously, the invaders have been defeated.

a reply to: gortex

My oh My! All at the British Tax payer's expense because cameron hates Putin because many russians think he's an OK guy and people here think his approach to the Syria situation is less hypocritical and makes him an OK guy also.

Who pays for the Hate Russia campaign going on in our ridiculous and lacking creditability media? We can all guess, those who scrounge off tax payers revenues but pay little themselves.

When on locates ` single brain cell in cameron's head perhaps they night inform the British public as this man clearly is merely an empty puppet of the 'money men' who start wars to make money out of our blood. Oh and rarely pay their taxes to boot.

I can't think of a more unnecessary and ludicrously deliberately provocative policy our politicians could have come up with. Its again 'not in my name' thank you very much.

There's a danger that people will think that this is war, but actually it's more about politics and keeping troops and sailors busy. Things like this do reassure allies and let's face it, Russia has acted belligerently to its neighbours and has demonstrated to be an unstable partner.

The naval deployment is interesting. A small flotilla of high class anti submarine, anti mine and anti air.

a reply to: gortex

Putin is being a dick.

I am 100% against starting any hot war, especially over backward nations like Turkey and Ukraine.

But I guess a message needs to be sent.

Putin does seem to be playing by old cold war tactics and if we just ignore him he will just do something else to provoke us until he does get a response.

So better to respond now.

Just wish the last few governments haven’t gutted our Navy. Still a Type 45 nothing to sneer at as it could probably turn most the Russian Black sea fleet into scrap metal.... actually forget that most the Russian navy is already scrap metal

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: gortex

My oh My! All at the British Tax payer's expense because cameron hates Putin because many russians think he's an OK guy and people here think his approach to the Syria situation is less hypocritical and makes him an OK guy also.

Who pays for the Hate Russia campaign going on in our ridiculous and lacking creditability media? We can all guess, those who scrounge off tax payers revenues but pay little themselves.

When on locates ` single brain cell in cameron's head perhaps they night inform the British public as this man clearly is merely an empty puppet of the 'money men' who start wars to make money out of our blood. Oh and rarely pay their taxes to boot.

I can't think of a more unnecessary and ludicrously deliberately provocative policy our politicians could have come up with. Its again 'not in my name' thank you very much.

What expense?

They would consume money sitting around doing nothing.

Better to keep them all active and trained. Honestly this deployment nothing really but a training exercise.

a reply to: paraphi

I am wondering what exactly do you call our behaviour when we marched into Iraq - which hadn't declared war on the UK, when we deliberately armed men against Libya's President etc etc what sort of a partner do you call the West if not as having acted belligerently, destructively and guilty of having killed a huge amount of innocent people trying to live in their own countries?

Is this all really to keep troops busy - I am sure one can look around and find other things for them to do that won't deliberately provoke a country quite capable of wiping us off the face of the planet which also has very strong allies?
You can't forget that our government agreed to house missile bases here purely to protect the USA - I suspect we would be gone literally in a flash were that empty headed puppet Obama to get his strings jerked enough to act against Russia.

"We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the Military Industrial Complex" - Eisenhower, 1961

I don't know about the rest of you but I'm sick and tired of war pigs keeping the planet in a perpetual state of war for their own selfish desires. No one that I know wants war but here we are, again, spending money we don't have to go to places we are not welcome so as to conquer for the few, at the expense of the many.

a reply to: crazyewok

Honestly this deployment nothing really but a training exercise.

A training exercise is the justification being given for permanently stationing NATO troops in Eastern Europe the actual reason for the deployment is to try to counter possible Russian actions against the counties mentioned.

Russia has always feared NATO expansion toward it's borders now that fear is being realised , the question is how will they deal with it.

a reply to: Shiloh7

Try to keep it to topic.

If you are a Eastern European nation that remembers Russian repression in the past, and sees a resurgent and belligerent Russia in the present, then you are right to be nervous. Two nations that are not members of NATO have been shafted by Russia - Ukraine and Georgia. Two nations who remember the good old days when they were oppressed by the Soviets and two nations that have been punished for attempting to forge closer ties with the developed World.

Turkey is the focus of Russian attention at the moment, but no chance Russia will risk a military confrontation on account of NATO.

"Russian Aggression" seems to be the new mantra, chanted over and over again by media talking heads and government spoke-idiots!
As yet, despite chanting this mantra endlessly, we are yet to be presented with any evidence of this "Russian Aggression", other than what is clearly Russian responses to more and more blatant provocation by the US and it's NATO puppet states.
This latest idea the US has now voiced, to create a four-fold increase in it's European military capability and spending is yet another idiotic move.
Oh, it's to counter "Russian Aggression" again and save all us Europeans from imminent Russian invasion and enslavement.

I think us Europeans would be a hell of a lot better off telling the US to close all it's bases and take a hike, then resuming diplomatic and trade relations with Russia, as many people are calling for, especially those in industry and agriculture who are collectively losing €Billions and laying people off as a result.

The problem is, those calling for more aggression towards Russia are compromised by the very people bankrolling it all, who need another big reset to recoup / cover up their losses due to their criminal schemes. War is ALWAYS good for business if you are a banker!

originally posted by: gortex

Russia has always feared NATO expansion toward it's borders now that fear is being realised , the question is how will they deal with it.

Russia's fear is not NATIO per se, but the fact that all the nations they once occupied have run Westward. They just don't have anyone left to repress and control. Ukraine today and one wonders when Belarus will jump - perhaps when the current incumbent (the last European dictator) pops his clogs.

Russia wanted compliant and dependent countries all around them These countries have said "sod off" and gone to the other side.

The expansion of NATO and the EU is a demonstration of the failure of Russian foreign policy. If Russia wants to gain influence then they need to change their operating model.

Basing troops in Poland is a way to improve inter-country working. Plus the Poles are nice people. Have no problems with them at all. My builder was a Pole and he did a damned good job.

a reply to: Britguy

As yet, despite chanting this mantra endlessly, we are yet to be presented with any evidence of this "Russian Aggression", other than what is clearly Russian responses to more and more blatant provocation by the US and it's NATO puppet states.

Other than Ukraine you mean , plenty of aggression there.
Not a Russian conflict ?
Here are some Russian prisoners of war captured by Ukrainian forces.


First you destabilize a region then send military aid and "trainers" to help achieve your goal , the west have been doing it for decades.

I think us Europeans would be a hell of a lot better off telling the US to close all it's bases and take a hike, then resuming diplomatic and trade relations with Russia

I'd rather stay with a flawed democracy than snuggle up to an unstable dictatorship thank you.
All hail Tsar Putin.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: crazyewok

Honestly this deployment nothing really but a training exercise.

A training exercise is the justification being given for permanently stationing NATO troops in Eastern Europe the actual reason for the deployment is to try to counter possible Russian actions against the counties mentioned.

Russia has always feared NATO expansion toward it's borders now that fear is being realised , the question is how will they deal with it.

But Putin only has himself to blame on that.

Plus we are damed if we do and damed if we dont because if we dont do anything Putin will take that as a sign of weakness and then push the boundrys more by doing something else.

I dont really give two F's about Ukraine or Turkey. But I would hate to see something happen to Poland, Finland or one of the nice baltic states.

Using the events in Ukraine as an example of Russian aggression is a bit lame really as the whole mess there was as a result of another US sponsored coup. Russia responded to that, as would any other country having a similar situation occurring in it's backyard.
Blaming Russia for destabilizing Ukraine is also untrue as this was also a result of the US sponsored coup, and look at the mess there now! Their senior finance guy and several of his staff just quit over the rampant corruption, cronyism and selling out of the country to foreign interests. That isn't Russia's doing, but the work of those who backed the coup, installed the puppets and started the rape of the place, all western, apart from the criminal oligarchs they put in charge.
Is it any wonder that the ethnic Russians there in the East declared early on they want nothing to do with the coup installed puppets government? Given the threats made to them by the right wing ultra-nationalists that the west supports, is it any wonder they want a breakaway republic?
Same goes for Crimea, the majority of whose population voted for Russian alliance rather than to be governed by Kiev.

Doesn't matter how you try to package or frame all this, it was a western backed play that caused the issues.

The reality is that Russia doesn't have the means, money or desire to invade anywhere! It has no need to and knows the cost of trying to do so, favouring trade and cooperation instead, but will not just stand idly by and watch while idiots try to muscle in like gangsters.

a reply to: Britguy

Before it was the communist aggression, and now it's Russian. I cannot believe there are people who still fall for this story. Like, come on, we've been seeing this kind of stuff for the past 70 years, have you not learned a thing?

This is a classic provocation.
First, you want to drag Ukraine into NATO, so you start a civil war so you can put your puppet government forcing Russia to react. And now you send your military to Baltics...What the $*%&#? I guess they want us to finish what the previous two world wars couldn't achieve...distinction of human race.

There was a show on bbc 2 the other nightwww.standard.co.uk... 6.html

It centred around the US and UK response to a Russian invasion of Latvia.
It was rather chilling, especially when the Russians popped a nuke over a couple of our ships.

Hope it wasn't one of those illuminati clues people often post on here.

fixed link

Why do some people look at Russia's activities in Syria and say they are bad? that they're some kind of trick?

The world has watched for a couple of years as a militant uprising walked across swathes of Iraq and Syria butchering people and arming/growing.


The worlds been told that in no way at all, not even the tenancy tiniest little slithering of a bit has anything at all to do with the UK and US's little itsy bitsy war of 2003....



..even though the militants are driving around in US hummers, jeeps, 4 wheeler's while using uniforms, radio's and ammunition.



The ruler of Syria is kicking the cr@p out of this militant group that is in no way - nah ahh.. tied to the US and UK's little war.

There's collateral damage everywhere, because the militant group is comprised of members of the entire middle Easts populace and they don't give a flying fart about civilian causalities or destruction.. Cities have been destroyed, Assad has matched the militants desire to win. If Assad didn't do that, this militant group would have taken over the entire nation and its military and starting knocking on the door of Lebanon.

While the UK and US sat back making accusations and saturating the media with it's corrupt point of view, Russia jumped in the middle, stood beside Assad and is brutally attacking this snot out of this militant group.



Never mind that according to the very same US and UK media outlets, the terrorist incidents all over the world these days where innocent civilians are being murdered is all an offspring of the very f***en militant group that Assad and Russia are fighting..

and after all that.. you can still sit here and say that Russia are the enemy and we are the righteous and this has nothing at all to do with our itsy bitsy little war.



It hurts... it really does!

Of course this is going to happen. Russia actions in the former Soviet states and the common belief among them that Russia is likely to use military force anytime they try and escape Moscow's dominance has proven true over and over. Belarus is looking for a way to escape Russia but, has the same problem.

The combination of threats against neutral states and some NATO members followed up by actions in the air and sea against those states of course is going to provoke a response. Even Sweden is returning its military to Gotland because of Russian threats.

And of course their comes the fear of Russian actions do to desperation. When your economy is wrecked, your people are upset, you have turned the world against you, your one great hope China has done nothing to support you and instead has gobbled up your markets and sold you out by making big trade and defense deals with your enemy Ukraine. And all the former Soviet Republics who were once loyal have been driven away to the West or China and are looking for ways to escape without you grabbing a chunk of territory. As the list of problems and failure for Russia continues to build the chance you Russia will see as having nothing to lose by military action becomes more likely. NATO is going to respond to that.

The Royal Navy deploys on group training exercises all the time, in various parts of the world. But particularly in and around the Baltic.

It's not unusual to have joint training exercises. Nor is it terribly unusual for RN deployments to areas where allies or potential allies feel threatened.