Defense Secretary James Mattis today issued a statement loudly condemning Russia for its military deployments within Russian territory, saying such moves were necessarily destabilizing, even though the deployments are part of a planned, upcoming wargames.
Russia will be hosting wargames with ally Belarus in September, and it will involve troops being around western Russia, which despite being Russia, and therefore a place Russia can definitely station troops, is too close to NATO territory for the taste of US officials.
Though Mattis denied any planned retaliation, officials say that the US is considering deployments of Patriot missile systems into the Baltic states for their own military exercises, though they say it’s conceivable the missiles would be withdrawn before Russia’s own operation since they would not be a permanent deployment.
The Pentagon has, of course, already thrown thousands of US troops at a buildup on the Russian border in the past year, and officials are playing up additional naval deployments in the region in August and September as being designed specifically to respond to Russian wargames.
The fact that German Waffen SS (again, and same as they always was) together with other NATO states are marching up and down Russia’s borders and are setting up US offensive missile bases, in US aggressive policy to contain Russia is clearly destabilizing and not very helpful to say the least
Russian reaction against yet another western “Drang Nach Osten” in this regard is performed WITHIN its own borders, that’s hardly “destabilizing” what are US doing in Russia’s borders again?
There are Waffen SS? I thought german politicial parties could no longer deploy armed sections since around ’45?
The armed section of the NAZI party was the SA, not the SS which was originally only a security guard for Hitler. The SS units which fought in the Soviet Union were known as Waffen SS.
The saying in Germany both in 1914 and 1939 was “Drang Nach dem Osten, Pang Nach dem Westen”.
NATO has so strengthened its forces along the Russian border that Russia would be remiss not to prepare in response. Such action/reaction is a well understood part of “defense” and military preparation.
If Mattis was a Russian general, he’d so the same or more.
the usa now thinks the globe is theirs and anyone who doesn’t agree,no doesn’t succumb and bow are aggressive and must be confronted…
It’s all fun and games, until someone blows up the world.
The US military now thinks it can control and demand how other nations deploy their military within their own borders. But see’s no problem with positioning of its forces on another nations’s borders and well outside its own territory.
If you listen closely, the US military makes statements that say that Russia is a ‘threat’ because the do not act in the interests of the United States. Or that, horror of horrors, that the Russians might even act in their own interests. You regularly hear statements along the lines of “disruptive to US interests” or that Russia opposses US interests.
This of course is very aggressive behavior. It borders on the psychotic. It basically tells the whole world to drop to its knees and obey every command from Imperial Rome/DC.
It is very likely to lead to war. The US military is basically saying it will fight wars against any country that does not swear fealty to it.
It is also a very expensive policy that will likely bankrupt this country. We are constantly told that a $Trillion a year for the military and intelligence budgets is not nearly enough and that we need more, more, more. And the same “Russian threat” is given as the reason why more and more and more of the national treasure must flow to the military.
Neither outcome is good for America. Fighting a nuclear war with other nuclear powers will of course destroy America. Maybe the Pentagon generals survive at the bottom of some mine shaft, but the rest of us are condemned to death and horrible suffering.
And bankrupting America in the name of a fool’s quest of world domination will likewise destroy America and inflict greater and greater suffering on the American people.
It seems we are no longer a democracy. The American voters have now twice elected Presidents who said during their campaigns that they oppose this. Obviously the fact that the American people don’t want to die nor be bankrupted by an insane policy doesn’t matter to our self-annoited leaders.
I hate to say it but,I agree it’s in Russia’s interests to prepare for the eventual conflict it will have with NATO forces.I hope they understand the price they’re paying for taking the Crimea from Ukraine.I understand someone will come back and respond how the people voted to join Russia but,who printed out the ballots,who came up with the idea,who would benefit from Crimea leaving the Ukraine? Russia right?So understand Russia is a powerful nation and it’s adventurism into Syria was to showcase it’s militaries capabilities although it’s impressive it won’t be enough to defeat the world.Putin must not overplay his hand,don’t give the people who are ready to destroy you’re nation a reason to do it…USA
Russia reacted over Crimea mainly because their Blacksea fleet would be almost destroyed not having the home base(port). This base they took from Tatars and Turks 200 years ago, after 3-4 bloody wars, fulfilling Peter the Great doctrine to get acces to the sea, by any means. After the coup in Kiev, it was obvious that new government of Ukraine will cancel the contract about the military bases. Then Putin reacted, saying : I dont want to make visits to Sevastopol, and
to be received by Americans there. The best proof that it is just and fair that Crimea became part of Russia, is the fact that not one shot was made in its defence, although there were thousands of Ukrainian soldiers.
Crimea declared independence in 1992 along with the other Republics http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/03/28/so-who-annexed-crimea-peninsular-then.html
Ukraine nullified their constitution in 1995, basically saying, ‘nahh … you are really just a province of Ukraine’. In 2014, the Russian Federation gave them a choice to revert to choose their 1992 constitution or join the Russian Federat which is more choice than Ukraine ever gave them.
Let’s not forget Ukraine also gave up it’s nuclear arsenal in exchange for an agreement from Russia that it wouldn’t invade they’re territory.So how did that work out?Did Russia honor it’s treaty?No,they didn’t.Where’s all the people on this site that are advocating for Iran and North Korea to obtain nukes as a deterrent to bigger more powerful nations.I guess the same argument could be made about Ukraine right?If they wouldn’t have gave up they’re nukes to appease Russia a bigger more powerful nation maybe Russia wouldn’t have invaded and encroached on it’s territory.You can’t trust the Russians to honor it’s treaties,the Ukraine learned that the hard way.USA
The next picture I see of an invading Russian soldier on Ukrainian territory since Ukraine’s independence will be the first picture I see of an invading Russian soldier on Ukrainian territory since Ukraine’s independence. Areas which have seceded from Ukraine are, by definition, no longer part of Ukraine.
So called Anti-War sites that have seceded from the anti-war mantra but are pro Russia war in all forms are no longer truly a Anti-war site because war and is war and death from bombs,gas or missiles shot from submarines delivered from Russia equals death,suffering,&war.Anti-war right???USA
If I ever run across any such sites I’ll let you know about them.
I guess Mad Dog wants the Russians to be defenseless against the rapid military build-up of NATO forces on their border.
mattis is such an incredible liar.. a pure sociopathic psychopath!