Russia’s Defense Ministry has announced its intention to create three new military divisions for its westernmost territory in response to NATO’s announcement last week of another 4,000 ground troops to be deployed along the Russian border.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg insists that NATO’s deployments were a response to Russia’s “use of force against Ukraine in 2014,” which both happened two years ago and has been in a state of ceasefire for well over a year.
NATO has used Ukraine as an excuse for repeated buildups along the Russian border, and while Stoltenberg insists all those troops are purely “defensive,” Russia is clearly feeling the need to respond after half a dozen such major deployments.
Russia has not said where the new troops are to be deployed, but they will likely be in the exclave of Kaliningrad, at least in part, as much of the NATO deployment is along the Polish border with that territory.
Ah yes, the imaginary “use of force against Ukraine” just like the imaginary “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq and the imaginary “Iranian Nukes.” Let’s not forget the imaginary “Gulf of Tonkin incident.”
Do you want to include the “sneeky” attack on Pearl Harbor ? ref. DAY OF DECEIT by John Stennett that documents the DC provocative agenda developed and followed by FDR or INFAMY by John Toland among many other writers ? How about 9/11 attack by the CIA/Israeli engineers/architect’s analysis on the internet along with Rebecke Roth’s expose’ METHOLOGICAL ILLUSIONS ?
WW I was started over lies/the set up of HMS Lusitania with 500 tons of countra ban military explosives sent into a known submarine protrolled area at reduced speed.
The Spanish American war was started over lies about the USS Maine being blown up from an internal explosian in Havana harbor.
THE GLOBALIZATION OF WAR by Michel Chossudovsky.
War is profitable for Wall Street. German competitors were bombed by US planes while US owned German industries were not in WW II. Wall Street feared the economic competition Japan was developing economically and they had to be destroyed.
NATO/CIA has been used by the Wall Street to tighten oppression on nations around Putin. Putin is in the cross-hairs. It is surrender or fight for his regeime.
And when the Poles get antsy and “accidentally” instigate some cross-border “incident,” their “big brother” will step forward and protect them when those evil Russians react to the challenge – which is what NATO and the US warmongers want. I used to think that all this posturing by NATO was just to instill fear in the NATO countries so they will pay more for their own protection. Now I believe that it’s the conflict they want more than anything else.
Can’t be an heroic general and strategic genius sitting behind a desk. Ya gotta have a war in order to make that dream come true.
You know, Antiwar.com doesn’t HAVE to repeat the lies told by western governments without question. Russia DID NOT use force against Ukraine in 2014 – the US did by spending $5 billion to overthrow the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED government in Ukraine. THAT what the true use of force. Russia sat on the sidelines, only responding to Crimea’s plebicite where the enclave VOTED to secede from Ukraine and integrate back into Russia.
I expected better from you guys, seriously…
You might want to re-read the story. Antiwar.com didn’t “repeat the lies,” etc. Antiwar.com quoted a US government official’s attempt to justify something.
That quote was repeated WITHOUT contrasting it against the facts on the ground, essentially allowing the quote to stand as fact. Quit defending their government bootlicking…
You’re wrong and there’s no excuse for you to not understand what was said in the article. All you have done is put your own personal agenda in question.
If I wanted to hear a government parrot I would watch the evening news. Go peddle your BS elsewhere…
You first.
Absolutely. The USSA – under Obama and Victoria “F the EU” Nudelman – created the chaos in Ukraine by spending $5 Billion to oust the Democratically Elected govt in that country. Russia NEVER used force there; it sat on the sidelines, only responding to Crimea’s plebiscite wherein the enclave Voted to secede from Ukraine and reunite with Russia.
You’re 100% right; this website didn’t have to repeat the lies uttered by Western govts w/o question. It should be neutral .. and in events as this, should question these govts.
Read the headline.
Read the sub-headline.
There’s absolutely, positively no doubt whatsoever that Antiwar.com in general, and Jason Ditz in particular, “questions” the NATO line and then some.
But at the same time, Jason’s job is discovering and passing along interesting news in five-point lede format with such details as seem of interest, not just clicking his heels together and spitting out the slogans that readers want to hear over and over. On news articles, as opposed to commentaries, the foot-stomping and fist-shaking gets done here in comments. And it seems that that foot-stomping and fist-shaking should be directed at NATO, not at the guy who told you what NATO is doing.
I am curious over the use of quotes when it comes to the word defensive. Where is the need there?