Poroshenko claims Ukraine is now being offered weapons by NATO.

[lordtiberius]

You'd enjoy life a lot better if you joined a winning team. Go Seahawks!

[JayH]

The problem is you guys are underestimating Russia's capabilities and overestimating Ukraine's and NATO's. WE don't have to speculate anymore. WE have facts. Ukraine, with numerical superiority and on home turf, can't secure their nation against a few thousand rebels and Russian troops.

No one is doing that-at least not me or BC in this thread(or others)
Your constant denigration of what the Ukrainian military achieved is wrong and misguided.There weapons have been inferior all along-you ignore that.They have been desperately short of even simple things,clothing and feeding troops for example. If vast numbers of overt Russian military had not reinforced the troops and mercenaries already there--they would have been swept out in July.They were on the verge of cutting off the lines to Russia itself back then.
 The Russians have used the civilian population to hide behind-leaving Ukraine with a difficult task to remove them-- so it was not a straight forward military operation to clear them.
You also keep failing to recognise that Ukraine has had a huge reorganisation during last year--getting patriots running the show and not traitors. All that took time -- so please-- stop talking about how they were--it is not how they are now.
To repeat something I have said previously-- with the support needed--Ukraine can beat Russia  here.For those that persist in misinterpreting my words--read them all!
Further-- what choice do they have but to fight?
 A few here seem to think they should drop their trousers and bend over for the Russians -it is not what Ukrainians would do..

[lordtiberius]

Thanks for your testimony. More veterans should come out and tell it like it is. Some people here have this funny idea that deployed American forces, no matter how small, will stop a full scale invasion.

Holy Strawmans Batman!  Billy, did FT steal your password?  Show he where anyone on this forum said that if you can  . . .

Politicians can pick whatever names they want for various American military deployments. They can call a $500 million in military savings in Europe the "European reassurance initiative". The only thing Europe can be reassured is that America will be spending less for their security this year than we did last year. They can call the 30,000 troops in South Korea the "Hold the line against North Korea, In Your Face Kim Jong Un,  Lightning Fast Spearhead" although American troops are outnumbered 30-1. They can call the 600 troops Obama sent to Poland and the Baltics the "F U Putin Package, NATO is Truly United, Really It Is!" but some of us know small deployments of American troops won't dominate a fight in event of a full invasion until the mainland troops show up.

Foot in mouth disease outbreak in Tacoma, Billy B?  Jay H is the most optimistic and supportive of NATO's role.  But even he would classify NATO's response as tentative and a good first step not a satisfactory response. 

The problem is you guys are underestimating Russia's capabilities and overestimating Ukraine's and NATO's.

Your characterization of this as a measure of Russia v. NATO force on force is not supported by any evidence and when I called BS and Brass told you why it was BS, you lashed out rather than support it with facts.  Now Russia will escalate this conflict to raise oil prices and save his increasingly sizzling bacon (who you regard as winning this conflict [win win]  btw).  But Moscow cannot win this and YOU KNOW THIS.

If you are an investment broker in Switzerland, the world is exploding around you.  You have a million dollar portfolio (in dollars Billy not rubles) and you have to stick with the West or invest in Russia, where are you going to stick it Billy?

WE don't have to speculate anymore. WE have facts. Ukraine, with numerical superiority and on home turf, can't secure their nation against a few thousand rebels and Russian troops.

Again wrong.  We don't know what Russian troop deployments are inside Ukraine.  Stop watching RT Billy.

We know the Russians have the latest equipment their military has been providing them and they are fighting a war of attrition - not blitzkrieg.

Our Secretary of Defense came out and publically humiliated our NATO allies by saying they aren't pulling their weight. Most NATO members do not and never did meet their obligations of spending 2% of their GDP on security. They figure someone else will come to their rescue in event their nation will be invaded. In Afghanistan and Libya, many NATO members failed to supply the NATO military units with munitions and funding. That's how much the politicians of member nations care about the military that's doing the dangerous work the politicians requested of them. If NATO was dysfunctional in those two campaigns with America doing the bulk of the work, how do you think they'd do under an invasion by Russia? NATO will be calling America's troops to get the job done.

Again no one disagrees with you here.  The fact that you would re-use this argument here is odd.  But what do you expect . . . .

Once you guys accept reality, then you can vote the proper people in and pressure them to spend more on security to preserve our and our friends lives.

Again no one is happy with NATO.  I credit the success the West's efforts against Russia to two forces - the Ukrainian fighting man and the Saudis.  THAT'S IT.

[lordtiberius]

No one is doing that-at least not me or BC in this thread(or others)
Your constant denigration of what the Ukrainian military achieved is wrong and misguided.There weapons have been inferior all along-you ignore that.They have been desperately short of even simple things,clothing and feeding troops for example. If vast numbers of overt Russian military had not reinforced the troops and mercenaries already there--they would have been swept out in July.They were on the verge of cutting off the lines to Russia itself back then.
 The Russians have used the civilian population to hide behind-leaving Ukraine with a difficult task to remove them-- so it was not a straight forward military operation to clear them.
You also keep failing to recognise that Ukraine has had a huge reorganisation during last year--getting patriots running the show and not traitors. All that took time -- so please-- stop talking about how they were--it is not how they are now.
To repeat something I have said previously-- with the support needed--Ukraine can beat Russia  here.For those that persist in misinterpreting my words--read them all!
Further-- what choice do they have but to fight?
 A few here seem to think they should drop their trousers and bend over for the Russians -it is not what Ukrainians would do..

That is a really brilliant point, Jay.

So Billy, if Russia is winning this war, why is the Donestk airport still in Cyborg hands?

[AC]

Besides being a Cardinal fan, aren't you also a Baltimore Ravens fan?  Tough year for you.

[lordtiberius]

 

Besides being a Cardinal fan, aren't you also a Baltimore Ravens fan?  Tough year for you.

I am going to Ukraine in a week.  How about you?

PS
A real fan hangs with a team in losses not just victories.  I know you are vet, but even vets, the really weak ones, loose their man card from time to time

[AC]

No one is doing that-at least not me or BC in this thread(or others)
Your constant denigration of what the Ukrainian military achieved is wrong and misguided.There weapons have been inferior all along-you ignore that.They have been desperately short of even simple things,clothing and feeding troops for example. If vast numbers of overt Russian military had not reinforced the troops and mercenaries already there--they would have been swept out in July.They were on the verge of cutting off the lines to Russia itself back then.

You have some serious reading comprehension problems.  He has not been denigrating the Ukrainian military.  He is just being honest and realistic about the fact that Russia has a larger better equipped and better trained one.

NATO is not going to insert itself so suddenly into Ukraine, that's a pipe dream.  So realizing that he's only been giving honest appraisals.

You and lordtiberious can go back to your cheerleading if you want to, but somebody's got to be honest here.  This is all speculation anyways.  Let's hope for the best.

[JayH]

You have some serious reading comprehension problems.  He has not been denigrating the Ukrainian military.  He is just being honest and realistic about the fact that Russia has a larger better equipped and better trained one.

NATO is not going to insert itself so suddenly into Ukraine, that's a pipe dream.  So realizing that he's only been giving honest appraisals.

You and lordtiberious can go back to your cheerleading if you want to, but somebody's got to be honest here.  This is all speculation anyways. Let's hope for the best.

 "Let's hope for the best"

At last--you said something sensible!!

[AC]

"Let's hope for the best"

At last--you said something sensible!!

I see you changed your post.  Good thinking.  I also hope to meet you face to face someday.  We'll see what a hot-air specialist you are then.

[lordtiberius]

You have some serious reading comprehension problems.  He has not been denigrating the Ukrainian military.  He is just being honest and realistic about the fact that Russia has a larger better equipped and better trained one.

NATO is not going to insert itself so suddenly into Ukraine, that's a pipe dream.  So realizing that he's only been giving honest appraisals.

You and lordtiberious can go back to your cheerleading if you want to, but somebody's got to be honest here.  This is all speculation anyways.  Let's hope for the best.

I am getting a little bored of your insults. 

[JayH]

Funny how things come up --pure coincidence but spot on comment--from

Peter Shuklinov - - Ukrainian artillery - tough guys .... | Facebook
www.facebook.com
- Ukrainian artillery - tough guys. Constantly in touch with the guys from different sectors. Daily beat the enemy. However, now they work exclusively ...
.facebook.com/Zlobyn/posts/762196367195986

Peter #Shuklinov

- Ukrainian artillery - tough guys. Constantly in touch with the guys from different sectors. Daily beat the enemy. However, now they work exclusively in response to the actions of terrorists and the Russian army. After all, "truce". But if we are attacked - the course is all that is required. Do not hesitate. And do not listen to the whiners and the generals of the couch. We even now win. Although no one talks about it. "Armistice". But I can say something. Who forbid me Every day, dozens of militants sent to the light thanks to the actions of the Ukrainian response gunners. Each day, the enemy suffers losses. Gods of war work. And will continue to be fun. Next will be hotter. Who finds itself in Ukraine - get on the head. Do not listen to the whiners. They have never been there. They had never seen that discuss. They're just losers who through life looking for the extreme. Their front nagging will not help. And we need to believe in and support the guys. After all, we still win. PS And even now, while you lie down to rest, artillery works. And tomorrow will be too. And the day after tomorrow will work too. And with these new pieces Western guys work very well. The Russians, however, do not like. But what can you do. Neher roam. Well, the last. Off topic post. A very illustrative example Borys Filatov, who got ... Difficult Kremlin bots. I hope he changes his mind. But I understand it. Only I were younger and nerves until okay because I will simply ban. A few idiots are not adequate thousands of people who really want to know more and are willing to do something. I am writing for those who are concerned Ukraine. Who is in those 10% of the population and a huge great state who truly need this country. I admire people who do not whine and do. Poor? Wrong? Take it and do better. Take it and do, . Everything will be fine.

[PBRstreetg]

best policy
We knew you'd win
Same stuff, be careful out there
oh yeah,
Sincerely 

[jone]

Who is this new Poster, this PBRstreetg?  Where is he from?  What is he all about? 

The world wants to know what's in your refrigerator!

[AkMike]

Jay H is the most optimistic and supportive of NATO's role.  But even he would classify NATO's response as tentative and a good first step not a satisfactory response. 


Again no one is happy with NATO. 

LT, try to get it in your mind that NATO CANNOT get into this scrap! Ukraine isn't a member nor an ally of NATO's. UA cannot join until certain rules are met. While Russia is controlling part of the border and there's a war it cannot join up.
 I do wish that would have 20 years ago though.

[lordtiberius]

NATO can't get involved in European security?  Like the Balkans?  If NATO doesn't stand for European security, what good is the Alliance?  Oh BTW, who penetrated NATO airspace 400 times?  Get it through your head, we are already involved.  We have to decide to finish it.

[AkMike]

Do you understand that NATO is a 'club'? It'll only help members of that 'club'.

 The Balkans are in the 'club'. Most of Europe is in the 'club'.

 Ukraine isn't!
 IF Russian steps on a members toes then it could have actions in Ukraine that might help in the long run.

[Brasscasing]

Do you understand that NATO is a 'club'? It'll only help members of that 'club'.

The Balkans are in the 'club'. Most of Europe is in the 'club'.

 Ukraine isn't!
 IF Russian steps on a members toes then it could have actions in Ukraine that might help in the long run.

The Balkans weren't originally in the club though Mike. NATO intervened and herein may lie the precedent.

Brass

[AkMike]

You're right! That may be the glitch that helps but I'm not holding my breath.

[Boethius]

No, none joined until after the wars in the Balkans.

[AkMike]

I just did a quick check at Wiki and got this right off the bat that explains it.

"NATO's first involvement in both the Bosnian War and the Yugoslav wars in general came in February 1992, . when the alliance issued a statement urging all the belligerents in the conflict to allow the deployment of United Nations peacekeepers. While primarily symbolic, this statement paved the way for later NATO actions."

Russia wouldn't allow this and neither would the terrorists.

[mendeleyev]

Were I Putin, I'd invite NATO into Ukraine, to Moldova, and into Georgia. Then join myself.

Checkmate.


PS...NATO is one of those "clubs" that if it isn't careful, will grow too large. At some point such a "club" becomes too big and unable to confront even small challenges due to internal bickering, lack of contributions, etc. It may be close to that already.

[AkMike]

PS...NATO is one of those "clubs" that if it isn't careful, will grow too large. At some point such a "club" becomes too big and unable to confront even small challenges due to internal bickering, lack of contributions, etc. It may be close to that already.

 Sort of like the UN has become? 

[PBRstreetg]

@AkMike agree
also I'm a little bit worried for this country

[lordtiberius]

Do you understand that NATO is a 'club'? It'll only help members of that 'club'.

 The Balkans are in the 'club'. Most of Europe is in the 'club'.

 Ukraine isn't!
 IF Russian steps on a members toes then it could have actions in Ukraine that might help in the long run.

I am not impressed with you either Mike and if you are not going to respond to my points, insult me and regurgitate your previous irrelevant points, I would just assume field questions to Doll.  Say what you want about perceptions, at least she is not an ass hat.

Good luck in your search

[Brasscasing]

Brass, I don't know why you're determined to prove Russia has no divisions. They still have units assigned as divisions and the divisions they split up into brigades can easily be reorganized into divisions again in the event of major war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_%28military%29

But not 'armored divisions' Billy which was my original comment responding to your 20 armored divisions statement.

They're still in the process of reorganizing/rebuilding as one of the articles indicated and I reiterate it would surprise me if they if they did reverse a process they've been working on for years but anything's possible.

The guy you're quoting seems to underestimate not only Russia's tank strength but troop strength too. Russia's active and inactive troop strength in the link below and a recent audit confirming how many troops are on Russia's payroll. It's a lot more than your man is claiming. If Russia can under claim the amount of nukes they own, they can do the same everywhere else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_military_and_paramilitary_personnel

http://russiandefpolicy.wordpress.com/2013/10/31/766055/

These links are referring to the entire Russian military establishment including everything from cadets to civilian contractors on the payroll in your one source, Billy.

Ground forces are estimated to be as below which is exactly what my original  links quoted...

"Russian Ground Forces
Size
285,000 personnel (2014), incl est 80,000 conscripts"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Ground_Forces

A division can have 10,000-30,000 troops. One, two, or three divisions could be stationed in Korea depending how the military wants to classify it. When I said it could be one division based on number of troops, I wasn't wrong. Does it really matter what you want to call it? 30,000 troops is 30,000 troops.

I suppose. Wasn't meant as a jab.

Do you think AC's CO was lying to him? Do you think the troops I've spoke to were lying to me? Brass, have you ever been in the military? Do you understand what the odds are of 30,000 troops beating a force of 1,000,000,000 troops? Government's criminal negligence? Everybody who signs up for the military realizes they could be placed in harms way. If 30,000 American troops could stop a million man army, why does South Korea need one of the largest armies in the world consisting of their own people working for them? A little American force has got them covered. Below is the mission of American soldiers in South Korea. Nowhere does it say it is designed to dominate a fight with North Korea. One of their missions is to assist in evacuating citizens. In other words, assist in a retreat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Forces_Korea

Based on Bag's, AC's and your comments, no I don't think you're lying. I just think it's a disheartening state of affairs that the general perception by the Americans who've served in Korea that they're considered or consider themselves speed bumps. I'll amend the word to read I maintain it's an 'unsafe' attitude for personnel to have when serving in an operational theatre.

Have I ever been in the military? Served 20 years, retired.

And you?

Who in Europe is better prepared than America for all out war? The facts are we know Europe has been closing it's weapons factories and America has been downsizing it's military the last few years while Russia's military has been growing and modernizing.  Maybe Putin isn't planning on using any of that equipment and increasing the size of his army? Maybe it's all to stroke his ego?

I don't equate one to the other, Billy.  Yes, there have been cutbacks, closures and downsizing but Russia itself has had a few cutbacks, closures and downsizing over the years (like the collapse of their entire military complex after the cold war) as well.

The media has perpetuated the fear and doom line that just because Russia says they're modernizing *poof*, they're modernized. Not so. Even the Russian estimates are 2020 before they feel capable of being on par with the West. Russia's military is not capable [edit: to include at this time] of taking on NATO in any meaningful way. 

I don't think Russia will win a world war either but until America's mainland army shows up in Europe, Russia can destroy the lives of a lot of people and economies of a lot of nations. There is no one nation in Europe that can take on Russia one on one. NATO is more disorganized and poorly led than you think. They couldn't do a good job against lowly Libya and don't meet commitments in other places of the world. Carefully read the article below. I don't know why you and LT are so intent on proving Russia is weak and they couldn't cause much damage and NATO is strong but I suspect Obama's main military advisor thinks more like you two than me. That is probably why Obama is proceeding with downsizing our military and reducing our role in Europe.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/11/world/europe/11gates.html

Again, fear mongering, Billy. No one nation is required to take on Russia one to one (although the UK would be more than capable). Even without NATO western Europe (or our two countries) wouldn't stand by while Russia gobbled up Europe one country at a time.

I see nothing to fundamentally disagree with in your article. However, it's nothing new. We saw this rhetoric with Iraq, Afghanistan and the myriad of smaller conflicts before and since. It still gets done.

The current American forces in South Korea are there to deter North Korea and assist South Korea in the event of a full invasion. I can assure you the commanders of the American units in South Korea aren't telling their men to be heroes and beat North Korea by themselves in the event of an invasion. Their role isn't to beat North Korea on their own and it has nothing to do about defeatist attitude.

In the ten minutes I took to look research Korea (learning curve so bear with me).

I note that the U.S. Commanding General is not only in command of 28,500 U.S. servicemen, he's the de facto operational commander of the ROK forces totaling 620,000 as well. Further, (which was news to me) the UN mandate is still active making him the UN force operational commander, a la Gen. MacArthur, as well with an Australian commander 2i/c ing that show from Japan.

The North Koreans are reported to have 1.2 million on their side of the fence, that's not a huge disparity in numbers for prepared, well fortified defenses.

So, it's not as though they're alone. That aside it has nothing to do with making heroes what it has to do with is moral, combat effectiveness, command and control, the firm conviction that what your doing is important and relevant and arguably most importantly that you're not being placed in a no win situation or thrown away. Even volunteers of a high risk mission understand there is a quantifiable chance of meeting the objective.

Brass
[/quote]