...Pentagon Announces Plan To Deploy Troops Along Russian Border

a reply to: WCmutant

Really?

Wonder how we'd feel if Russian troops were deployed along our borders.

a reply to: WCmutant

Pentagon Announces Plan To Deploy Troops Along Russian Border

well damit, the ukraine hasn't worked for us, so we'll stack our missiles and tanks right up their nose. We'll force'm to attack us somewhere, sooner or later; you watch. This''ll teach them damn ruskis for showing us up in Syria, guard damm.

The ongoing expansion of EU and NATO has forced Russia to react in Ukraine and Syria. US forces now signalize that the expansion won't stop.

a reply to: MysticPearl

Russia is so far down my list of threats, probably between getting bit by my neighbors dog and slipping on a banana peel, that there clearly seems to be an ulterior motive here.

I must say...I subscribe equally to this thought. I fail to see why Russia is a threat. They keep telling me it is...but I dont get it. Like a dog that looks at you funny...not understanding your words.

a reply to: MrSpad

Russia thinks it can attack some of NATOs smallest members that their will be a reaction from the US.

how about we make a bet...right now. I'm 40...I hope I'll live to 60...that's 20 years. Ill put up 10,000 $ that in that timespan, Russia will never attempt to invade any country...anywhere.

How about it ?

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Putin is the reason NATO is doing this and the fact that Balkan states are asking for the added security.

Which Balkan states are those ?

Please do tell.

Serbia is pro Russia, Croatia not so much...but has huge trade deals with Russia, and was hurt pretty bad with sanctions on Russia. Romania, Bulgaria ?

Enlighten me...


edit:

I guess you meant to say Baltic, not Balkan...you should correct that in your post. It makes a difference.

The warmongering establishment is making World War III inevitable through their imperialistic aggression.

a reply to: WCmutant

First of all...

The other thread and article you quote suggesting the Obama administration has spent more on Nuclear weapons is a blatant lie. The Obama administration has spend more ON MANAGING, UPDATING AND DECOMMISSIONING.

You do understand the difference between building something and dismantling something, right?

Secondly, NATO is responding to the threat posed by a Russia which invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea, it then proceeded to threaten other nations by flying bombing runs across their borders. It then attempted to use propaganda in other nations and attempted to pay off journalists to start presenting pro-Russian and anti-Government stories. It then started moving the borders within Georgia and hoped no one would notice that it was slowly invading the country.

So, as for who is being the aggressor here, only a deliberately disingenuous poster could possibly claim that it's NATO.

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: WCmutant

Really?

Wonder how we'd feel if Russian troops were deployed along our borders.

We would then be at war defending Canada from an invasion.

You people don't seem to get that we're all a part of NATO, these nations are not being invaded, they are a part of a system of collective defence against an aggressor - WHICH RUSSIA HAS PROVEN TO BE.

It's really pretty simple, if Russia doesn't want to see NATO nations fortifying their borders with it, it should STOP INVADING AND THREATENING OTHER COUNTRIES.

Just some additional info to stoke the conspiracy fire:

The UK government has announced a deal where we swap, with the US, some of our "nuclear waste" for an alternate type of Uranium (sic) that can be used for medical research. Clearly sounds very odd never mind the in your face stupidity of shipping nuclear waste in both directions across the Atlantic!......except......the "waste" we are sending is enriched Uranium DA DA.

Medical research my rear end.

As an European country, I would not want any Russian OR US soldier on my ground. Russian invasion are scary, but that not the problem. The number of base US got in Europe are just impressing. Turkey, Spain, Italy, Germany, Portugal, Denmark and so on. Russian invasion? More like an US invasion! I just wonder if any of those state kick US troops out, how hard they will feel the reality.

EDIT: Most of those who are now "protected by NATO" sold their country. Russian are bad, US are bad, no one is good.

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: gladtobehere
a reply to: WCmutant

Really?

Wonder how we'd feel if Russian troops were deployed along our borders.

We would then be at war defending Canada from an invasion.

You people don't seem to get that we're all a part of NATO, these nations are not being invaded, they are a part of a system of collective defence against an aggressor - WHICH RUSSIA HAS PROVEN TO BE.

It's really pretty simple, if Russia doesn't want to see NATO nations fortifying their borders with it, it should STOP INVADING AND THREATENING OTHER COUNTRIES.

Yes! gotta watch them ruskies!

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Nato has been upping it's missile defence in eastern Europe for years, well before any Russian aggression such as Georgia. We claimed it's defence against rogue nations like Iran/Iraq. Totally acceptable I guess.

Russia was a superpower once, it's still armed as one and naturally wants it's own sphere of influence and financial security. We didn't much care when the USSR was dismantled and Russian money was hitting western banks.

The west is now engaged in a financial war with Russia, trying to hurt the upper tier in Russia. Russia isn't Iran.


Don't get wrong Russia is being aggressive but we should be working on solutions not fuelling the fire. How many times has the US military unofficially annexed nations or taken regimes for its own gain?

NATO supported the war on Libya, it had nothing to do with NATO and Libya was not a threat to any members of NATO. I suppose that was ok and legit too.

Man why cant the USAF ever get a good gig like that... get paid to live in Finland.. yea... that would be awesome..


We are not going to war with Russia... they are not going to war with us... nobody wants to see the world end. (not even tptb... need the plebeians to do the work.)

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Yes the Baltic states...was early when I posted, not fully awake.

a reply to: RAY1990

NATO involvement in Libya was because the UN asksd them to get involved.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

I bet that you are correct, but I also bet that within that timespan Russia will have to retaliate against some sort of BS.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Russia has made themselves the boogey man by trying to force themselves into nations that don't want to be part of the Russian world anymore.

If it werent for the Russians by now the none existent moderates would taken over Syria.

That's why they want more protection from the Russian aggression we have seen in the region.

No is asking for a prolong occupation its clear whose the aggressor and its not Russia.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h
Actually no. And NATO involvement in Libya was a complete failure Libya is a failed state.

a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

According to him it would be Serbia, Croatia but no one in Serbia is in favor of NATO in fact everyone in the Balkans are agaisnt NATO.

Kosovo is occupied by NATO but they cant do much.