LMCane said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Louis_Botha said:

---

He's right you know.

Putin says Ukraine joining NATO would make nuclear war more likely. - YouTube

---

Only because Vlad is crazy and he'd threaten offensive nuclear action. NATO is a defensive military alliance by its own definition and charter. Has never and will never pose an offensive military threat to Russia.

Vlad is full of carp. If he's not lying he's not talking. Lyin' Vlad. This is all based in his own political aspirations and cementing both his legacy and the rebirth of the territorial USSR (see Vlad's legacy).

---

that's not the way Putin, the Russians and an unbiased observer could view history

NATO pledged at the end of the Cold War not to move east into threatening Russia.

look at the last 20 years with numerous eastern bloc countries moving into NATO orbit.

now imagine you are a russian nationalist- that sure looks "offensive" rather than "defensive"

---

Correct. In addition you have to remember that the US has openly discussed first strike potential from our side against them. They can read history and saw how devastating that Israeli first strike was on Arab forces and how closely our defense groups are linked. Russia is, historically, always attacked first from the West through Europe. Finland and Turkey/Ottomans are different but through their West, they are generally on their heals. Then you have strategic and missile bases placed ever closer to their borders. it looks aggressive to them.

The tradition of NATO as a reactive, defensive force isn't a part of the way they think. You can also point to NATO or NATO member actions in Libya, the Balkans (particularly Serbia), etc.

If you put yourself in their shoes it's not unreasonable? I don't know.

LMCane said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Louis_Botha said:

---

He's right you know.

Putin says Ukraine joining NATO would make nuclear war more likely. - YouTube

---

Only because Vlad is crazy and he'd threaten offensive nuclear action. NATO is a defensive military alliance by its own definition and charter. Has never and will never pose an offensive military threat to Russia.

Vlad is full of carp. If he's not lying he's not talking. Lyin' Vlad. This is all based in his own political aspirations and cementing both his legacy and the rebirth of the territorial USSR (see Vlad's legacy).

---

that's not the way Putin, the Russians and an unbiased observer could view history

NATO pledged at the end of the Cold War not to move east into threatening Russia.

look at the last 20 years with numerous eastern bloc countries moving into NATO orbit.

now imagine you are a russian nationalist- that sure looks "offensive" rather than "defensive"

---

No. That looks like the Baltic states' affinity for western ideology and economic/political systems, and Europe's accommodation of those goals restricts Russia's sphere of control and influence, makes Russia look bad, and significantly constrains their ability to force them back into the fold (like they're trying to do to Ukraine).

This is all politics and power. It has nothing to do with a fear of offensive incursion by NATO.

Quote:

---

well from 1941-1945 the Russians and Chinese were allies.

time to bring the band back together!

---

And 1949-1956 and then they had the Sino-Soviet Split and which almost ended in nuclear war on multiple occasions. There is even some evidence that during one of their border battles, of which there were many, the Soviets popped off a low yield tactical nuke.

Deep down, neither one likes the other, but when it is to their benefit, they'll act all buddy-buddy. At the same time, they're both thinking about how to knife the other in the back when the opportunity arises.

Good article from BBC regarding potential points of negotiation.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60341966

TriAg2010 said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Maybe semantics; maybe not.

I do not admire Putin at all.

However, I can respect his strategies and tactics if I remove my personal beliefs from the situation. He's potentially executed a master class in politics against his foes here. Ultimate outcome will determine final opinion.

---

Putin's strategy is to undermine western powers starting with the EU and USA.

Putin's tactics are intimidation, extortion, and violence.

That's what you respect? Like I get the psychology of why some people yearn for the strongman, but there's pretty much no moral system by which you can ascribe anything "good" to Vladimir Putin.

---

Well, you've misinterpreted what I said then which I tried to really distinguish with my post.

I don't yearn for him as a strongman. He's a bad actor and a spoiler and I never said he was "good". Not even sure why you quoted that to me since that word is not in my post.

If I'm not mistaken, this is in Belarus within the Polesei State Radiological Preserve, the Belarusian version of the Chernobyl Exclusion

Nothing to look at here, just Russian and Belarusian troops building a pontoon bridge over the Pripyat river in the Chernobyl exclusion zone -- and coincidentally, just 4 km away from the Ukrainian borderhttps://t.co/3j1wZuIeQT

— Evgen Vorobiov 🇺🇦 (@vorobyov) February 16, 2022

I meant good in a general sense of ascribing any sort of positive descriptor to Putin, and I better understand the point you're making on re-read.

welp at least it is costing the Russkies at least a billion dollars to move all these forces around

Christopher Caldwell had a good speech at Hillsdale College in 2017 about Putin which I think is informative:

https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/how-to-think-about-vladimir-putin/

Quote:

---

Vladimir Putin is a powerful ideological symbol and a highly effective ideological litmus test. He is a hero to populist conservatives around the world and anathema to progressives. I don't want to compare him to our own president, but if you know enough about what a given American thinks of Putin, you can probably tell what he thinks of Donald Trump.

Let me stress at the outset that this is not going to be a talk about what to think about Putin, which is something you are all capable of making up your minds on, but rather how to think about him. And on this, there is one basic truth to remember, although it is often forgotten. Our globalist leaders may have deprecated sovereignty since the end of the Cold War, but that does not mean it has ceased for an instant to be the primary subject of politics.

Vladimir Vladimirovich is not the president of a feminist NGO. He is not a transgender-rights activist. He is not an ombudsman appointed by the United Nations to make and deliver slide shows about green energy. He is the elected leader of Russiaa rugged, relatively poor, militarily powerful country that in recent years has been frequently humiliated, robbed, and misled. His job has been to protect his country's prerogatives and its sovereignty in an international system that seeks to erode sovereignty in general and views Russia's sovereignty in particular as a threat.

---

Quote:

---

When Putin took power in the winter of 1999-2000, his country was defenseless. It was bankrupt. It was being carved up by its new kleptocratic elites, in collusion with its old imperial rivals, the Americans. Putin changed that. In the first decade of this century, he did what Kemal Atatrk had done in Turkey in the 1920s. Out of a crumbling empire, he rescued a nation-state, and gave it coherence and purpose. He disciplined his country's plutocrats. He restored its military strength. And he refused, with ever blunter rhetoric, to accept for Russia a subservient role in an American-run world system drawn up by foreign politicians and business leaders. His voters credit him with having saved his country.

---

That's in line with what current and former Russian diplomats have also been saying. With Putin, it's about maintaining regional influence and Russian sovereignty. He wants Russia to be respected as a power and have say over the region. It's also important for the survival of the Russian people group that their influence expands and their economy grow.

The regional influence aspect is what caused the US relationship with Russia to really decline during the early 2000s. Russia offered a lot of cooperation after 9/11. We talked to them about using airspace in some of their former Soviet territory, and there was tacit cooperation there for a while.

Somewhere along the way, at least according to the Russian side, the US began being more bullyish in making demands and not genuinely talking with Putin about issues in the region. We, according to them, got into a lot of their historical territorial influence, did not include them enough in the decision-making processes, and they felt insulted. This isn't just Eastern Europe, but the Middle East as well.

Russia has had their own problems with militant Islamic groups. Their borders are much closer to areas with heavy Islamic influence. Anything we did in the region to stir up trouble was going to bring those people closer to their doorstep. They were adamantly against the invasion of Iraq for that reason. They support the Syrian government because they don't want these Islamic groups gaining power so close to their borders. It isn't that far from Syria to southern Russia. They want and need stability in that area. Supporting governments in that area also offers economic benefits. Our actions in the Middle East basically threw a giant turd in their punch bowl.

They are working to exert power to regain influence and garner respect. From their perspective, they saw what the US was willing to do and feel they need to provide a counter.

Odd

BREAKING: Israel told Russia ahead of a possible invasion of Ukraine it will need help in evacuating its citizens & diplomats from the country. Israeli officials said the message was passed today in a phone call between foreign ministry DG @AlonUshpiz & Russian DFM Bogdanov

— Barak Ravid (@BarakRavid) February 16, 2022

Saw that, but considering that it's been reported that Israel did an air strike in Damascus tonight I think they're a little more concerned with things in the immediate vicinity.

Wasn't aware of Damascus. Explains why they're not focused on evac. Could also be doing us a solid and buying some time since Israel and Russia are cordial. Russia wouldn't want to piss them off by disrespecting the request. The fact that Israel would feel the need to ask further legitimizes the realistic possibility of some form of Russian incursion, IMO.

Russia is in Syria. Russia has been letting Israel hit targets in Syria without a word said. If Russia starts WW3 Russian units would be hit in Syria by Israel along with all Syria and Hezbollah sites. Plus Iran.
Basically annihilate the area.

You think Israel would involve themselves, essentially striking Russia in Syria as our proxy, as an opportunity to raze Israeli opposition targets as opposed to remaining neutral in order to keep the isht off their doorstep?

If crap hits the fan it will hit their doorstep. This will be the green light for all nations that hate Israel to hit them. I guarantee they have a what if plan.

The Fall Guy said:

---

Russia is in Syria. Russia has been letting Israel hit targets in Syria without a word said. If Russia starts WW3 Russian units would be hit in Syria by Israel along with all Syria and Hezbollah sites. Plus Iran.
Basically annihilate the area.

---

Not the smallest chance Israel gets into a fight with Russia because of some hegemonic contest between the US and Russia. Israel leverages the US military to its ends, not the other way around. Israel actually practices sound and realistic statesmanship based on their own national interests.

Another factor people are overlooking is Belarus.

1) Lukashenko is in the Kremlin's pocket.

2) There is a constitutional referendum at the end of this month that would:

a) Entrench Lukashenko until 2035
b) Rescind Belarus' mandate of military neutrality
c) Rescind their prohibition on nuclear weapons.

3) Russia and Belarus are currently conducting joint military exercises.

4) The Ukraine/Belarus border is, despite being in a geographically difficult area, militarily speaking, the weak link in Ukraine's perimeter.

Just something to keep in mind.

And some good points pertaining to activity in Belarus/Minsk since the beginning of the month.

https://ukraineworld.org/articles/belarus/BW-issue-20

RUSSIA HAS INCREASED TROOPS NEAR UKRAINE BY UP TO 7000: U.S.

*U.S. SAYS RUSSIAN CLAIMS ABOUT WITHDRAWING TROOPS WERE FALSE

— THE BIAS (@thebias_news) February 17, 2022

jabberwalkie09 said:

---

Rossticus said:

---

Embassy security personnel?

---

I mean maybe, but the staff was reportedly in Lviv. That's closer to Poland than to Romania I believe. The helicopter that landed at the Poland-Ukraine border was supposedly for a non-injury medical condition related to embassy staff.

---

Probably Florida Army National Guard who have been training Ukrainian soldiers

UKRAINE'S MILITARY FORCES HAVE FIRED MORTAR SHELLS AND GRENADES AT FOUR LPR LOCATIONS - SPUTNIK#BreakingNews

— First Squawk (@FirstSquawk) February 17, 2022

Here we go

Before isht hits the fan. Read this. Uniquely insightful and on the money as it pertains to Putin's worldview.

https://ukraineworld.org/articles/opinions/sado-putinism

YNWA_AG said:

---

UKRAINE'S MILITARY FORCES HAVE FIRED MORTAR SHELLS AND GRENADES AT FOUR LPR LOCATIONS - SPUTNIK#BreakingNews

— First Squawk (@FirstSquawk) February 17, 2022

---

They're quoting this based on a Russian source. Alleging Ukrainian shelling of Unarmed Russian civilians in Russian occupied eastern Ukraine. This is quite likely Russia's false flag if you start to see other rando unverified Twitter outlets reporting it with bulk of heavily pro-russian responses. From reading the anti-Ukrainian rooskie responses on this post, that appears to be the case.

Lots of people on Twitter saying this is normal and has been happening since 2014

Dan Scott said:

---

Lots of people on Twitter saying this is normal and has been happening since 2014

---

Lots of Russians (many bots if I guessed) saying that Ukrainians have been killing innocent Russians since 2014 which has been the Russian narrative since 2014 and their justification for taking Crimea. Disproven and discounted by by UN, NATO, etc. It's crap.

Unless they're saying this is on the Belarussian border or around Crimea or Moldova I wouldn't get excited about that. The Russians/Russian militias and Ukranians have been trading fire in the occupied/disputed areas for years.

Advice to war correspondents in Ukraine is interesting. Pretty standard and nothing earth shattering but interesting and thought others might like to read.

https://imi.org.ua/en/advices/advices-to-journalists-who-plan-to-work-in-the-combat-zone-in-ukraine-i43858

Four US C-17s over Europe right now, all on east/west tracks with the easternmost one showing some strange activity (dip to low altitude, loss of ADS-B signal over Poland as it approached the border with Ukraine, then signal resumed as it was headed back west and gaining altitude). Looks a lot like a possible paratrooper insertion or cargo air drop.

https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=ae1460

Also a Combat Sent inbound from Souda Bay. These are ELINT birds, meant for high-fidelity collection and mapping of radar sites.

https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=ae01d5

I think there's a base in Rzeszow(?), Poland that our forces are based at in country. That's in the area of where it drops and comes back.

You're right... based on the track that's likely where it was headed. If it landed, it wasn't on the ground long at all.

Lots of pictures of sv-300 and s-400 SAM batteries. Maybe looking for those? Do we still use the Wild Weasel F-16 variant for counter HARM missions? I wonder if we have any around?

For what it's worth, the tracking source on those 17s is MLAT not ADS-B. MLAT relies on multiple stations tracking to triangulate a location not the aircraft saying where it is.

Not uncommon for MLAT to have wonky read outs.

aezmvp said:

---

Lots of pictures of sv-300 and s-400 SAM batteries. Maybe looking for those? Do we still use the Wild Weasel F-16 variant for counter HARM missions? I wonder if we have any around?

---

The RQ-4 drone, forte 12, made a 180 and looks to be returning to base. Shortly after it made the turn Homer49 took off. Homer49 is apparently an RC-135U and per Wikipedia specializes in collecting intelligence on radar systems.

There's been F-16's over Romania off and on today. To the best of my knowledge, the airframe can fulfill the SEAD role with HARM missiles. I'm not sure on the range of the Russian systems though. I highly doubt any kind of involvement unless one of ours gets shot.

NM