NATO beefs up forces near Ukraine

| April 16, 2014

In the Stars & Stripes, it’s reported that NATO is letting the world know that after weeks of diddling, they’re deploying more forces to the area around the eastern Ukraine.

“We will have more planes in the air, more ships on the water, and more readiness on the land,” NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told reporters after a meeting of the North Atlantic Council.

Among the measures to be taken include an intensification of NATO air policing missions over the Baltic region and more allied ships bound for the Baltic Sea, eastern Mediterranean and other regions as required, Rasmussen said. However, he made no mention of sending additional ships to the Black Sea, where Russia has the bulk of its fleet.

The good news is that they’re leaning forward with staff, too, so there will be enough cooks to ruin the broth. My only question is what exactl are they deploying, since the Pentagon, in another Stars & Stripes link claims that, because of sequestration, they can no longer guarantee our national security;

“If sequestration-level cuts persist, our forces will assume substantial additional risks in certain missions and will continue to face significant readiness and modernization challenges,” the report said.

“Overall, sequester-level cuts would result in a military that is too small to fully meet the requirements of our strategy, thereby significantly increasing national security risks both in the short- and long-term,” according to a Pentagon statement that accompanied the report’s release.

So, I’m sure the news of NATO taking this seriously has Vlad shaking in his boots. NBC News, in a link sent by Pinto Nag, reports that the Russians have rolled about 40,000 troops to it’s border with Ukraine, I wonder how many NATO will send. The Ukrainians are gearing up for an operation they’re calling “anti-terrorist” and they aren’t giving NBC full access with their cameras;

Category: Foreign Policy, Military issues

Comments (12)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. GunzRunner262 says:

    Without our forces to serve as the action arm of the UN, what country is willing to step up to fill the void? ……crickets …..If we ignore the problem it will go away right?

  2. Old Trooper says:

    That’s not what the Brits were saying. They said Germany nixed the idea of a NATO build up in the Baltic States. Maybe they came around? I don’t know what they intend to accomplish, since old Europe doesn’t have the will to draw a red line.

  3. Atkron says:

    Funny, I just looked at the NATO site and I didn’t see Ukraine listed as a member.

  4. Pinto Nag says:

    If NATO attempts a military action against the Russians without the US being involved, there’s a good chance they’ll get bronc stomped.

    It looks like the lead up to WWII all over again.

    • LebbenB says:

      US involvement is no guarantor of NATO success. Beyond air assets, a handful of Paratroopers, Special Operations and Marines are all that the US could offer. As marvelously capable as they are, they don’t have the staying power to go against heavy armored forces.

      The old NCO in me frets over these kids…I’d hate to see their lives thrown away over some ill-advised Black Sea adventure.

    • Climb to Glory says:

      I completely agree. They will get curb stomped into dust.

  5. Sparks says:

    “Overall, sequester-level cuts would result in a military that is too small to fully meet the requirements of our strategy, thereby significantly increasing national security risks both in the short- and long-term,” according to a Pentagon statement that accompanied the report’s release.”

    Just so we’re all on the same page with Putin, he knows the contents of these reports very well and sits back saying, “Da, Da, Goot, Goot, Goot for us! Plus we haves the whole Obamas thing goings for us!”

    So if the European nations are waiting for the US to join, they’ll be waiting a while. They are the ones ratcheting this up now so, okay boys, step up to the plate, clean your own rusty weapons and get ready to fight. Don’t wait for America to come to your rescue after Russia shoots down a couple of your planes or puts a ship out of commission.

    • Pinto Nag says:

      I don’t want to see the Europeans start a war with the Russians and drag us in for good measure then, once we’re committed, have our “allies” pull back and leave us holding the bag.

      I think we’d have to go on a war footing as a nation and reinstate the draft to handle any encounter with the Russians.

      • Sparks says:

        Pinto Nag I agree. The Europeans will start this shit and leave us with our pants down. I think we have the resources, all be they ugly choices to consider, to deal with Russia. I just don’t want to see that happen. I don’t want American blood shed for the Ukraine. We have no interests there. The Ukraine opted out of NATO membership after the 2010 elections. So they are not part of the club. Europe needs to go home, sit down, shut the fuck up about it and go back to being the do nothings they usually are. We need to have an Administration with the balls to say, “NATO or not, you guys start this shit, you’re on your own.” But sadly, we don’t.

    • Pinto Nag says:

      Sorry, Sparks, that reply was meant for LebbenB. I hit the wrong “reply” button.

  6. Ex-0PH2 says:

    The latest is that Ukrainian troops repelled an attack on a National Guard base in the Black Sea port of Mariupol.

    This really begins to look more and more like a split-up of Ukraine, one piece to be part of eastern Europe and the other to be part of Russia. There seem to be many people in the pro-Russian section who want a return to the ‘Soviets’, and have used the word ‘Soviet’.

  7. rb325th says:

    Targeting the Jews ? Sounds eerily familiar… something that happened a long time ago I think.