Is the West gearing up to invade Russia once again?

[tee-rex]

and like I was saying:

Russia would also be disproportionately hurt by any tit-for-tat move from the European Union to close its own airspace to Aeroflot and peers, said Oliver Sleath, a Barclays Plc analyst in London.
“This is extremely unlikely to happen because the response would be more crippling to the Russian economy,” Sleath said. Russian flights cross EU airspace outnumber European carriers’ trips over Siberia, he said.

So it will end up as usual with Russian troops in Paris and Berlin!

Russian troops in Paris as usual? Please let me know the last time this happened..

In 1813. Do you think that it has been long time since?

In 1813 like in 1945 it wasn't Russia against the rest of Europe and the US.
In 1813 it was allied with prussia england and austria
in 1945 it was allied with the uk , france and us.

All of it's former allies are now on the opposite side.

Yes, friends come and go, but enemies accumulate!

[TaunSew]

You're also forgetting Russia doesn't have its' buffer zone.  It wasn't the Russian winter which burdened Napoleon or Hitler, most of it it was largely the Belorussian and Ukrainian winter and their winters are mild compared to what you'ld encounter in the American Midwest.

That being said even most Americans can't withstand the American midwest winter, the American troops were posted on exercise to the Baltic in spring and were complaining about the 8 Celsius cold and soldiers were getting sick from cold sickness due to improper gear (the American military predominately recruits from the South, Texas and California which is mediterranean or semi-tropical).

[tee-rex]

You're also forgetting Russia doesn't have its' buffer zone.  It wasn't the Russian winter which burdened Napoleon or Hitler, most of it it was largely the Belorussian and Ukrainian winter and their winters are mild compared to what you'ld encounter in the American Midwest.

Belorussian and Ukrainian winters in the summer and autumn of 1941?! Did I miss something?

[Nemo1024]

and like I was saying:

Russia would also be disproportionately hurt by any tit-for-tat move from the European Union to close its own airspace to Aeroflot and peers, said Oliver Sleath, a Barclays Plc analyst in London.
“This is extremely unlikely to happen because the response would be more crippling to the Russian economy,” Sleath said. Russian flights cross EU airspace outnumber European carriers’ trips over Siberia, he said.

So it will end up as usual with Russian troops in Paris and Berlin!

Russian troops in Paris as usual? Please let me know the last time this happened..

In 1813. Do you think that it has been long time since?

In 1813 like in 1945 it wasn't Russia against the rest of Europe and the US.
In 1813 it was allied with prussia england and austria
in 1945 it was allied with the uk , france and us.

All of it's former allies are now on the opposite side.

This time, French might yet end up being on the friends-side. In 1945 USSR could have done without such "friends" as US and UK.

[Nemo1024]

NATO officially stops cooperation with Russia (as if cooperation ever really existed):
http://itar-tass.com/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/1367135?utm_medium=rss20

[tee-rex]

and like I was saying:

Russia would also be disproportionately hurt by any tit-for-tat move from the European Union to close its own airspace to Aeroflot and peers, said Oliver Sleath, a Barclays Plc analyst in London.
“This is extremely unlikely to happen because the response would be more crippling to the Russian economy,” Sleath said. Russian flights cross EU airspace outnumber European carriers’ trips over Siberia, he said.

So it will end up as usual with Russian troops in Paris and Berlin!

Russian troops in Paris as usual? Please let me know the last time this happened..

In 1813. Do you think that it has been long time since?

In 1813 like in 1945 it wasn't Russia against the rest of Europe and the US.
In 1813 it was allied with prussia england and austria
in 1945 it was allied with the uk , france and us.

All of it's former allies are now on the opposite side.

This time, French might yet end up being on the friends-side. In 1945 USSR could have done without such "friends" as US and UK.

Yeah, there had been rumors of some intense hand fighting in a Turkish hotel between the Russian and Ukrainian tourists there, and the French tourists sided with the Russians and beat up the Ukrainians along with the German and English tourists who got on the Ukrainians' side.

[niothor]

NATO officially stops cooperation with Russia (as if cooperation ever really existed):
http://itar-tass.com/mezhdunarodnaya-panorama/1367135?utm_medium=rss20

old times:

http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=29294#.U-SnN_l_ut8

From an another article:

Nor was Putin aggressively anti-American in his first years in power. He craved membership in the world economy and its institutions. He was the first foreign leader to telephone George W. Bush on 9/11 and offer assistance in Afghanistan. He abhorred the influence of foreign N.G.O.s, thinking that they undermined Russian interests, but he wanted membership in the global club. He even talked about Russia joining NATO. “Russia is part of the European culture,” he told the BBC, in 2000. “And I cannot imagine my own country in isolation from Europe and what we often call the civilized world. So it is hard for me to visualize NATO as an enemy.” The spirit of relative amity did not last.

[Nemo1024]

Russia was referring to NATO and the West as "partners" until recently, even when NATO was behaving anything by as a partner, rebuffing repeated requests from Russia to participate in the European shield program (as one example). Russia had open sky for NATO/US warplanes flying from Afghanistan. Can you imagine USA allowing Russian military transport planes to fly over its territory?
Putin and Lavrov are acting based on the signals from the outside forces - you cannot repeatedly try to be friends with someone who insists on slapping you across the face.

[deisik]

Russia was referring to NATO and the West as "partners" until recently, even when NATO was behaving anything by as a partner, rebuffing repeated requests from Russia to participate in the European shield program (as one example). Russia had open sky for NATO/US warplanes flying from Afghanistan. Can you imagine USA allowing Russian military transport planes to fly over its territory?
Putin and Lavrov are acting based on the signals from the outside forces - yo cannot repeatedly try to be friends with someone who insists on slapping you across the face.

Not sure about cargo planes, but according to the Treaty on Open Skies, Russia has the right to perform unarmed aerial surveillance flights over the entire territory of the USA (just like the latter can fly over the territory of the former)...

[Nemo1024]

USA sends to Norway a large batch or military hardware, including M1A1 tanks. The shipment is done by seas. USA stated a goal of building a large NATO base right on the Russian border:
http://www.bfm.ru/news/268404

[kuusj98]

USA sends to Norway a large batch or military hardware, including M1A1 tanks. The shipment is done by seas. USA stated a goal of building a large NATO base right on the Russian border:
http://www.bfm.ru/news/268404

They are driving Russia in a corner, the stupidest thing they could possibly do, but that is the USA, they want to show off...

[Mobius]

Russia was referring to NATO and the West as "partners" until recently, even when NATO was behaving anything by as a partner, rebuffing repeated requests from Russia to participate in the European shield program (as one example). Russia had open sky for NATO/US warplanes flying from Afghanistan. Can you imagine USA allowing Russian military transport planes to fly over its territory?
Putin and Lavrov are acting based on the signals from the outside forces - yo cannot repeatedly try to be friends with someone who insists on slapping you across the face.

Not sure about cargo planes, but according to the Treaty on Open Skies, Russia has the right to perform unarmed aerial surveillance flights over the entire territory of the USA (just like the latter can fly over the territory of the former)...

Can you post a source on this? I don't think this is 100% true. There was a situation a few weeks ago when a US surveillance plane was caught by Russian radar and had to move quickly out of Russian airspace and actually went into Turkey's airspace (IIRC) without their permission (due to it was an emergency).

[Honeypot]

Russia's real enemy is to the east, not some hiccups from the west.

Nazis are gone. West always maintained a defensive attitude in regards to russia. No one is dreaming of lebraunsbum. If anything, west is suspicious as hell of russian motives and is trying to keep tabs on its movements by surrounding it with anti-russian aligned nations as proxy, like a trip wire. However, it has always been the aim of the west to maintain a very wary defensive posture. No one is dreaming about conquering russia. Russia is for russians.

However, the real key point is that no western politician or general is dreaming about goose step marching their armies down the red square. Even the post ww 2 plan to offensively strike and destroy USSR was 'operation unthinkable' - russians must understand that their behavior is antagonizing the wrong entity and driving away a potential partner that can do much to help them build up defense of their nation and secure their borders.

Russia must understand that its priorities have always lied to the east and the threats emerging from the middle east along the caucasian regions.

Paranoia is all well and good, but russia is making a very big mistake by antagonizing the west. Neither side has much to gain from such a confrontation.

Historically, with the exception of nazism, the threats which caused most misery on russian people have always been from the eastern direction.

Russian are honorable people with a deep history, one that has taken much damage while they soaked up the bulk of the invasion and aggression against the western world. Their paranoia and aggression is completely understandable if you just take one glance at their history.

However, their current nationalistic and antagonizing stance is counter productive, as is the west's constant attempts to belittle a potential partner, the attitude triggered by overwhelming degree of antagonism from the russian government. Russia has the potential to be the greatest partner and ally the west can have, both for their ability to fight and withstand hardships.

Day will soon come when priorities will align temporarily.

[onlyu]

Russia's real enemy is to the east, not some hiccups from the west.

Nazis are gone. West always maintained a defensive attitude in regards to russia. No one is dreaming of lebraunsbum. If anything, west is suspicious as hell of russian motives and is trying to keep tabs on its movements by surrounding it with anti-russian aligned nations as proxy, like a trip wire. However, it has always been the aim of the west to maintain a very wary defensive posture. No one is dreaming about conquering russia. Russia is for russians.

However, the real key point is that no western politician or general is dreaming about goose step marching their armies down the red square. Even the post ww 2 plan to offensively strike and destroy USSR was 'operation unthinkable' - russians must understand that their behavior is antagonizing the wrong entity and driving away a potential partner that can do much to help them build up defense of their nation and secure their borders.

Russia must understand that its priorities have always lied to the east and the threats emerging from the middle east along the caucasian regions.

Paranoia is all well and good, but russia is making a very big mistake by antagonizing the west. Neither side has much to gain from such a confrontation.

Historically, with the exception of nazism, the threats which caused most misery on russian people have always been from the eastern direction.

Russian are honorable people with a deep history, one that has taken much damage while they soaked up the bulk of the invasion and aggression against the western world. Their paranoia and aggression is completely understandable if you just take one glance at their history.

However, their current nationalistic and antagonizing stance is counter productive, as is the west's constant attempts to belittle a potential partner, the attitude triggered by overwhelming degree of antagonism from the russian government. Russia has the potential to be the greatest partner and ally the west can have, both for their ability to fight and withstand hardships.

Day will soon come when priorities will align temporarily.

I won't called putting up anti missile shield around Russia using American technology is defensive measure from US. This is a well known military textbook strategy called "containment".

[Balthazar]

There is only one issue, this so-called anti-missile shield simply won't work because at the current level of technology it's impossible to intercept even old soviet ICBM. Soviet missiles were made taking into account the possibility of such a system installation by suggested enemy, russian missiles have some additional technologies to make it even more difficult.

It's all nothing more than scam... Another attempt to steal some taxpayers money and get a place to deploy some middle-range missiles.

[deisik]

Russia was referring to NATO and the West as "partners" until recently, even when NATO was behaving anything by as a partner, rebuffing repeated requests from Russia to participate in the European shield program (as one example). Russia had open sky for NATO/US warplanes flying from Afghanistan. Can you imagine USA allowing Russian military transport planes to fly over its territory?
Putin and Lavrov are acting based on the signals from the outside forces - yo cannot repeatedly try to be friends with someone who insists on slapping you across the face.

Not sure about cargo planes, but according to the Treaty on Open Skies, Russia has the right to perform unarmed aerial surveillance flights over the entire territory of the USA (just like the latter can fly over the territory of the former)...

Can you post a source on this? I don't think this is 100% true. There was a situation a few weeks ago when a US surveillance plane was caught by Russian radar and had to move quickly out of Russian airspace and actually went into Turkey's airspace (IIRC) without their permission (due to it was an emergency).

It is not a secret at all. There are "planned" surveillance flights (which the other side gives its consent to) and "unplanned" ones (which the other side apparently doesn't give). So you guess which one was that you refer to...

[bryant.coleman]

There is only one issue, this so-called anti-missile shield symply won't work because at the current level of technology it's impossible to intercept even old soviet ICBM. Soviet missiles were made taking into account the possibility of such a system installation by suggested enemy, russian missiles have some additional technologies to make it even more difficult.

I remember reading a NATO explanation that the missile shield is intended to intercept any future ballistic missile attacks by rogue states such as Iran. The NATO chief himself has said that the shield is useless against the Russian ICBMs.

[deisik]

There is only one issue, this so-called anti-missile shield symply won't work because at the current level of technology it's impossible to intercept even old soviet ICBM. Soviet missiles were made taking into account the possibility of such a system installation by suggested enemy, russian missiles have some additional technologies to make it even more difficult.

I remember reading a NATO explanation that the missile shield is intended to intercept any future ballistic missile attacks by rogue states such as Iran. The NATO chief himself has said that the shield is useless against the Russian ICBMs.

The anti-missile shield may indeed be useless against the Russian ICBMs, but does anyone believe the NATO chief even if he says the utmost truth? Maybe, he is just not telling the whole truth?

[Cortex7]

In 1813 like in 1945 it wasn't Russia against the rest of Europe and the US.
In 1813 it was allied with prussia england and austria
in 1945 it was allied with the uk , france and us.

All of it's former allies are now on the opposite side.

So we are led to believe.

But strategically it would make a lot of sense to convince everyone that a cold war has started, Russia against the West. Russia and West both developing nukes and other systems, the whole world saying (hoho they're gonna kill eachother if they fight).

But of course as a joined force (Russia & West) they would be formidable.

Interestingly the Ukraine is atop the Black Sea, beneath which lies the middle east. What a perfect ruse to amass a large force just north of the Black Sea.

Of course this is all crazy conjecture, but crazy will probably "win" the global game.

The end stages of the global game will probably involve much double crossing and such, a very chaotic and risky game if you ask me, unless of course your safely controlling the game from a deep underground bunker, then it's great fun! like a multiplayer computer game!(sarcasm).

[Mobius]

There is only one issue, this so-called anti-missile shield symply won't work because at the current level of technology it's impossible to intercept even old soviet ICBM. Soviet missiles were made taking into account the possibility of such a system installation by suggested enemy, russian missiles have some additional technologies to make it even more difficult.

I remember reading a NATO explanation that the missile shield is intended to intercept any future ballistic missile attacks by rogue states such as Iran. The NATO chief himself has said that the shield is useless against the Russian ICBMs.

I don't think they would be useless, but they would likely be less effective as Russia likely has more advanced missiles then rogue states would likely have. These shields are also largely untested in real world situations making it hard to know how effective they are in any situation.