NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said Tuesday that the alliance has no plans to send combat troops to Ukraine after French President Emmanuel Macron stirred an uproar by saying the idea of deploying troops should not be ruled out.
“NATO allies are providing unprecedented support to Ukraine. We have done that since 2014 and stepped up after the full-scale invasion. But there are no plans for NATO combat troops on the ground in Ukraine,” Stoltenberg told The Associated Press.
In response to Macron’s comments, the Kremlin said a deployment of Western troops to Ukraine would make a direct Russia-NATO war inevitable. “In this case, we need to talk not about probability, but about the inevitability (of conflict),” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.
For its part, Ukraine celebrated the discussion of NATO troops being sent to Ukraine despite the risk of nuclear war. “This shows, firstly, an absolute awareness of the risks posed to Europe by a militaristic, aggressive Russia,” said Ukrainian presidential advisor Mykhailo Podolyak.
Some leaders of NATO countries distanced themselves from the idea of sending combat troops to Ukraine. “Poland does not plan to send its troops to Ukraine,” said Polish Prime Minster Donald Tusk.
Macron made the provocative comments on Monday after European leaders held a meeting he hosted in Paris to discuss the Ukraine proxy war. Ahead of the summit, Slovakia Prime Minister Robert Fico, who opposes aid to Ukraine, warned that some NATO countries were thinking about sending troops to Ukraine on a “bilateral basis.”
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz insisted that European leaders agreed at the meeting “that there will be no ground troops, no soldiers on Ukrainian soil who are sent there by European states or NATO state.”
But the Discord leaks revealed last year that there are a small number of NATO special operations forces inside Ukraine. According to a leaked Pentagon document, there were 97 NATO special operations soldiers in Ukraine, including 14 Americans, as of March 2023.
At the moment, less than a quarter of French people are supporting the disastrous policy of micro-napoleon-macron. As everyone knows, he was brought to the politics by Rothschild. Zionist oligarchs are always promoting this kind of individuals to the governments.
Macron was put promptly in his place by the EU.
Too bad the EU can’t show the same resolve with the Empire.
“Macron was put promptly in his place by the EU.”
By NATO, but I agree that it sometime appears to be a distinction without a difference.
“Too bad the EU can’t show the same resolve with the Empire.”
Almost daily now, it becomes more apparent that Europe’s subservience to the hegemon is having devastating effects on Europeans and European economies. Will the quislings running the show in Brussels and the midgets in the national capitals wake up and grow some spine in time to avoid collapse? Stay tuned.
Remember, the Empire/UK don’t want a strong and assertive EU.
European instability, insurrection, conflict, etc. is big business for the Empire. Why would they ever want it to stop? The Atlantic Ocean is very comforting.
It would be nice if Brussels could overcome its bureaucratic hurdles (as well as its subjugation) and renew & revise resource/energy/trade agreements with the Russian Federation.
Interestingly, protectionism (division) is now presenting itself along the borders with farmers and truckers protesting at the Polish/Ukrainian border. Jordan Peterson did an interesting piece on this underlining that governments need to take heed.
True statesmanship needs to prevail to come to terms with Ukraine’s losses and to pave a way for peace and stop the further erosion of Ukraine.
NATO will need lots of body bags if they are stupid enough to send infantry into the US / UK proxy war in Ukraine , Stalin made it clear at the end of WW2 Russia will never be invaded again by a European country or America and that stands to day , who ever is stupid enough to take on the Russian population is in for a mauling they won`t forget , Germany in WW2 had the greatest military the world had ever seen the Stalin`s Red Army destroyed it and went on to win WW2 .
“Stalin made it clear at the end of WW2 Russia will never be invaded again by a European country or America”
Ukraine isn’t Russia.
1. Dieter and Političar are right.
2. Whether or not parts of the territory within the internationally-recognized boundaries of Ukraine “are Russia” is an open and disputed question. Some of those parts, in terms of history, local popular sentiment, and “facts on the ground,” certainly seem to be. For others, there is less clarity. We shall see.
I guess we can say that Putin made it clear that he’s not too keen on NATO expansion up to Russia’s borders. And this was kinda talked about since 1991.
But a global hegemon doesn’t have to play by the rules, right?
The Empire and it’s subjects, need to rethink this one.
Tick-tock, tick-tock……
Well, Putin TALKS about not being too keen on NATO expansion right up to Russia’s borders.
But then he acts to bring NATO right up to Russia’s borders, when he could have acted to not do so.
There was precisely zero chance of Ukraine becoming part of NATO if Putin just said no — any single NATO member state can veto any membership application, and Russia had good relations with several NATO member states. Dangling a trade concession or two would have prevented Ukraine from becoming a NATO member state. QED, he didn’t invade Ukraine to prevent it from becoming a NATO member state.
The result of the invasion was to add Finland (which borders Russia) and Sweden to NATO, while ensuring that Ukraine will remain in NATO’s orbit long-term.
Was Ukraine going to be stopped being used by the US/NATO? We’re the war games going to stop? I don’t see much of a difference of them being an official NATO country and what they are now other than Article 5 and we all know what a farce that is.
“Was Ukraine going to be stopped being used by the US/NATO?”
Probably not. But the invasion changed that to definitely not.
That’s why Russia resorted to other means so that Ukraine, or what’s left of it, won’t be as effectively used by US/NATO. Don’t be surprised if the countries west of Ukaine don’t make a push to get some the territories back that Stalin yanked from them and gave to the former Ukraine.
Just a guess on my part but I would think “definitely not” was going to be the outcome regardless of invasion.
Yes, but it will be a shrunken, bankrupt, ruined, possibly landlocked Ukraine of maybe 28 million people dependent on EU charity to survive, instead of a powerful, developed Ukraine integrated into the EU with 50 million people. The east, which I expect Russia to annex, has the mines, the industry, much of the power generation, and the fossil fuel deposits. Against that, Finland and Sweden, with less than 16 million people combined, isn’t that big of a deal. Finland “borders” Russia, but it’s an empty country full of lakes and swamps bordering an empty section of Russia full of lakes and swamps. And, should Russia prevail, as seems likely, any peace treaty is going to demand Ukrainian neutrality, with safeguards, as a condition.
Lack of humans doesn’t render an area “empty.” Humans aren’t the only ones living here. Different subject, but very important.
True; lots of fur bearing mammals. and trees. I don’t think Russia has any fear of them though.
Like I said, different subject matter. Russia fearing nonhumans is not the issue, it’s that we need to learn to respect all life equally.
Respectfully, no.
1991 – 16 NATO states and the U.S.S.R. is dissolved.
2022 – 30 NATO states
“…and Russia had good relations with several NATO member states. Dangling a trade concession or two would have prevented Ukraine from becoming a NATO member state.”
Please.
PS – to the best of my knowledge, Ukraine is not a member state, but a willing pawn for certain.
Come on, Tom … it is clear that to the powers that be in Nato, Russia was always more valuable as an enemy to justify the bureaucracy for the MIC than a friend.
I’m not sure what your “come on” (or “come one”) is supposed to mean.
You’re absolutely right that “it is clear that to the powers that be in Nato, Russia was always more valuable as an enemy to justify the bureaucracy for the MIC than a friend.”
I’ve said pretty much the same thing, in close to the same words, a bazillion times, and have never said otherwise.
I’m referring to this:
“There was precisely zero chance of Ukraine becoming part of NATO if Putin just said no — any single NATO member state can veto any membership application, and Russia had good relations with several NATO member states. Dangling a trade concession or two would have prevented Ukraine from becoming a NATO member state. ”
Putin held off on “action” pretty much as long as he could. He waited as CIA built bases in the country after 2014 … he waited as Ukraine’s military was beefed up and fortifications were created … he waited as thousands of ethnic Russians were bombed.
Once Ukraine started talking about nukes and Nato membership was not even rhetorically dismissed by the US (late 2021) and once it became crystal clear to him that Germany and France were not independent actors but stooges of US, he felt like he could not wait any longer. No independent Russian leader would have acted differently, though their war tactics may have been different.
After the coup and the installation of the Regime in Kiev, Ukraine became long-term in NATO’s orbit unless persuaded otherwise by Russia.
Yes, after the coup, Ukraine went from being an imperial Russian satrapy to being an imperial US/EU/NATO satrapy.
If not for the invasion, it might have swung back in the other direction in not too terribly long a time frame.
Putin’s error pretty much closed out that possibility. If he’s lucky, he can get out of the situation with the Donbas and a return to “frozen conflict” for the foreseeable future.
That’s not at all credible Thomas. The U.S. promised Russia/U.S.S.R. at least 3 times that it wouldn’t expand NATO east of the unified Germany, starting when the Berlin Wall was still standing, and it broke each of those agreements. Blaming Putin for NATO expansion is ludicrous.
I didn’t “blame Putin for NATO expansion” in general which I opposed and still oppose.
But he did manage to drive Sweden and Finland into NATO, and the “fear of Ukraine joining NATO” excuse is 99 /34% pur horseshit because he’d have only had to bribe one NATO member state to make that go away if it ever actually came up.
If it would have been so easy for Russia to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, why didn’t it just bribe a NATO country to prevent Finland and Sweden from joining? Your claim is pure speculation with no facts to support it.
All this is 99% the fault of the U.S. As I’ve made clear on this site, I’m no fan of nation/states, and the bigger they are, the more I dislike them. Therefore, I’m no fan of Russia either, but the U.S. is the evil empire on the planet, not Russia. The only thing I blame Russia for here is invading Ukraine instead of finding some other way to deal with U.S. aggression in their part of the world, and even then I only blame Russia because I’m unequivocally anti-war.
“If it would have been so easy for Russia to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, why didn’t it just bribe a NATO country to prevent Finland and Sweden from joining?”
Because by invading Ukraine it had created two conditions that changed the equation:
1) It pushed Finland and Sweden to want to join NATO, when they had declined to for 70 years; and
2) It put the NATO states with which it has good relations both in a bind (not wanting to piss off their NATO allies) and in the mood to demand a LOT more for their vetoes. Erdogan and Orban certainly auctioned their votes off, and the US/Swedish/Finnish bids were some combination of higher and safer to accept.
Putin bought the NATO expansion ticket, and now he’s taking the NATO expansion ride. It’s one of the few times in his long tenure that he apparently suffered a catastrophic brain fart.
We agree that invading Ukraine was a bad idea, but I don’t believe for a second that Sweden or Finland felt threatened by Russia for doing so. The invasion had nothing to do with them, and there’s no way they didn’t know that. It’s clear to me that the main if not only reason that they joined NATO was to go along with the U.S., just like that was the reason for the ridiculous European sanctions against Russia that hurt their own countries and basically did nothing to Russia. Even though we can see the U.S. empire’s power and money diminishing slowly, it’s still the ruling empire, and apparently the European countries don’t want to cross it.
Thomas. You must know that your comment is misleading. Stalin meant a Western invasion from Poland, Hungary and Romania into the territories to the East of these three countries and that places Ukraine into the invaded lands.
In 1914 Poland did not exist. The Kaiser’s invasion was directly from Germany.
Hitler needed to invade and occupy Poland because his tanks could not fly. That is no longer necessary. Poland will gladly allow a German invasion force to drive through Poland unhindered.
While a Western invasion of Russia is not feasible today, all Russian leaders, including Putin’s successors must consider such an invasion or regime changes without invasion a potential threat.
What’s misleading is pretending that any spot of land Putin’s eye happens to light on for a moment magically becomes “Russia.”
Little Medvedev, is that you?
You remind of Taser Face from Guardians of the Galaxy part 2
🤣
Another once-a-month Rant from Macron…!
Zelensky was encouraged by the US/EU not to talk peace with Russia before the war started. The EU has done nothing but destroy the cultures, history, economies, morality of it’s Members, all in the name of one big happy family and they wanted Ukraine to join. The EU goal, is to have a fighting force large enough to fight Russia, that means more Members, larger Military, more dependency on the EU to survive, so the Members will do as they are told. Isn’t that how Hitler started WW11? This is why the EU is all for the mass migration, they need bodies to fight Russia. Why would any Nation, People, allow someone to come into their country, to dictate their morality like Greece, Italy, France, etc., have allowed the EU to? Ever notice how these Leaders always succumb to whatever the EU Thugs want, WHY?
“Zelensky was
encouragedtold by the US/EU not to talk peace with Russia before the war started….”Note that the Norwegian nightmare said “combat troops” not just Nato troops … so spies, special ops, weapons trainers and advisers of various things would apparently be a–ok. Just no frontline infantry … that’s for the poor Ukies.
SIMPLICIUS Ѱ
@simpatico771
⚡️🇷🇺A little info on Russian Fab-500 ordnance power:
In total, bombs of about 500KG carry about 200KG of explosive, type ТГАФ-5М.
The efficiency of this type of explosive is 1.3 compared to TNT, so the equivalent is about 300kg.
Air shock wave impact zones in a ground explosion:
– radius of 100% lethal impact zone: 10.8 m (hereinafter – from the epicentre of the explosion).
– radius of the threshold kill zone: 38.2 m (slight contusion).
– Radius of the zone of minimal human exposure: 152.1 m (tinnitus).
– radius of the zone of total destruction: 21.9 m (collapse of all elements of buildings and structures, including basements).
– radius of severe destruction zone: 30.3 m (destruction of 50% of walls, floors, formation of cracks).
– radius of medium destruction zone: 43.6 m (damage to roofs, partitions and infills).
– radius of the weak damage zone: 68.6 m (weakening of load-bearing structures).
– Radius of 100% glazing damage zone: 115.4 m.
– radius of the glazing damage zone: 342,5 м.
Characteristics of the fragmentation field:
– maximum number of hazardous fragments: 81750 pieces (with ideal hull crushing).
– average mass of a fragment dangerous for a person: 2 grammes.
– initial velocity of fragments: 1127.3 m/s.
– max. relative killing effect of a fragment (mass 2 g): 0.9 (killing effect of a 9×18 mm PM bullet = 1).
– max. relative stopping power of a fragment (2 g mass): 2.8 (9×18 mm PM = 1).
– max. fragmentation range: 1470 metres.
– radius of continuous fragmentation zone (70% probability*): 100,2 м.
– radius of effective fragmentation zone (50% probability*): 118,5 м.
– radius of the zone of possible fragmentation damage (20% probability*): 187,4 м.
– radius of unlikely fragmentation damage zone (probability of 1%*): 838,2 м.
* – minimum percentage of people who will be hit by at least one fragment at the boundary of this impact zone.
In practice, when a bomb is detonated in an open area, the kill characteristics will be lower than calculated. In a confined space, the explosion is about 1.5 times more destructive, due to ricochets of fragments and overlapping of air shock waves reflected from the walls.
Duh…
I can’t speak for the politics of all the NATO allies, but in the USA it seems like overtly sending in American “boots on the ground” would not go over well. “Special forces,” spies, etc, can be gotten away with, unlike “regular,” above-board, ground troops.
Generally speaking, from the cynical view point of a great or “super” power, or, any power, really, it always better to have clients, “auxilaries,” puppets, or proxies, or whatever you want to call them, do the actual fighting, if you can. Dead Ukrainians don’t have dependent relatives in the USA. Injurred, maimed, PTSD, etc Ukrainian veterans won’t come back to be a burden in the USA.
I have seen, on various so called left liberal sites, honest to God calls (from fat-ass, lazy Americans, who wouldn’t fight for their own country under almost any circumstances, and certainly would never volunteer to do so) for the Ukrainian government to “crack down” on “draft dodgers,” and start sending young men to the front. And to drag “military age” men among the refugees back to the Ukraine for the same purpose. The only downside these armchair warriors see is that these actions might be “unpopular” in the Ukraine, which might undermine the puppet government. The gross immorality of their demands, not to mention the sheer chutzpah of it all, doesn’t even occur to them. That’s what Ukrainians are for: to fight Russia. That’s their duty, as determined definitively by Such and Such Ass Clown commenter on Daily Kos.
NATO does the buying, the Ukies do the dying. That’s their formula and they are sticking with it. Down to the last Ukie, if need be.
A recent lecture by Ukraine war critic retired German Air Force General Harald Kujat (NATO Military Committee Chair, 2002-2005) doesn’t speak to troop deployment but references a newly developed US Strategy extending the war for 10 years. (Through which who knows.)
The US strategy is predicated upon a formal 10-year military and economic commitment by NATO allies. The commitment guarantees rebuilding Ukraine’s defense forces and economy preventing a Trump presidency, or European country’s course change, from terminating support. The general suggests if it comes to pass it could backdoor Ukraine into NATO. The passage begins about 26:17
Well, that’s a good way to start WWIII. The reckless psychopathy of these people is astounding.
Martyanov comments: